alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 121 (Friday, June 22, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 37730]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-15355]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 7928]

Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition 
Determinations: ``Nomads and Networks: The Ancient Art and Culture of 
Kazakhstan''

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: 
Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 
(79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 
1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 
Stat. 2681, et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, et seq.), Delegation of 
Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, and Delegation of Authority No. 
236-3 of August 28, 2000 (and, as appropriate, Delegation of Authority 
No. 257 of April 15, 2003), I hereby determine that the objects to be 
included in the exhibition ``Nomads and Networks: The Ancient Art and 
Culture of Kazakhstan,'' imported from abroad for temporary exhibition 
within the United States, are of cultural significance. The objects are 
imported pursuant to loan agreements with the foreign owners or 
custodians. I also determine that the exhibition or display of the 
exhibit objects at the Freer and Sackler Galleries, Smithsonian 
Institution, Washington, DC, from on or about August 11, 2012, until on 
or about November 12, 2012, and at possible additional exhibitions or 
venues yet to be determined, is in the national interest. I have 
ordered that Public Notice of these Determinations be published in the 
Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, including a 
list of the exhibit objects, contact Paul W. Manning, Attorney-Adviser, 
Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-
632-6469). The mailing address is U.S. Department of State, SA-5, L/PD, 
Fifth Floor (Suite 5H03), Washington, DC 20522-0505.

    Dated: June 14, 2012.
J. Adam Ereli,
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Educational and 
Cultural Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2012-15355 Filed 6-21-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-05-P
```
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 13**  **- 7336** 

MILTON LEON TERRY , Petitioner

- Appellant ,
v. HAROLD CLARKE, Director of the Virginia Department of Corrections , Respondent

- Appellee
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Norfolk
. Raymond A. Jackson , District Judge. ( 2:12

- cv - 00456

- RAJ

- TEM )

Submitted : February 20, 2014 Decided: February 25, 2014

Before DUNCAN, DIAZ, and FLOYD , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion
. Milton Leon Terry, Appellant Pro Se. Steven Andrew Witmer, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this cir cuit.2 PER CURIAM: Milton Leon Terry seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (A) (2012) . A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012)
. When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Terry has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, an d dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately3 presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
##### 



PREMIUM STANDARD FARMS, INC.
RESTRICTED STOCK AWARD AGREEMENT
 THIS
RESTRICTED STOCK AWARD AGREEMENT
 W I T N E S S E T H:
 WHEREAS
 WHEREAS
 WHEREAS
 WHEREAS
 NOW, THEREFORE
 Definitions
 Restricted Stock Award
 Restrictions
 Applicable Restriction Period
 
 - 1 -




---



##### 



Shareholder Rights
 Escrow of Restricted Stock
 Other Conditions
 Termination of Employment
 Termination due to Change in Control
 Government Regulations, Registration and Listing of Stock
 Agreement Respecting Taxes
 Code Section 83(b) Election
 - 2 -




---



##### 



No Other Rights Created
 Binding Effect
 Notices
 Amendment
 Miscellaneous
 Legend on Stock Certificates
 THE SECURITIES REPRESENTED BY THIS CERTIFICATE ARE SUBJECT TO A RESTRICTED STOCK
AWARD AGREEMENT AMONG PREMIUM STANDARD FARMS, INC. (THE CORPORATION ) AND THE
HOLDER OF THE STOCK REPRESENTED BY THIS CERTIFICATE. COPIES OF THE AGREEMENT WILL
BE FURNISHED BY THE CORPORATION TO THE HOLDER HEREOF UPON WRITTEN REQUEST.
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF
 PREMIUM STANDARD FARMS, INC.By:Name:Title:Participant:
 - 3 -




---



##### 



Name:Address:
 - 4 -




---



##### 



EXHIBIT A
 ACKNOWLEDGMENT AND STATEMENT  OF DECISION REGARDING ELECTION  PURSUANT TO SECTION 83(b)  of  THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE
 Restricted Stock Company  Agreement
   Code
 
    Date:
    
    Participant:(Sign Name)(Print Name)Date:
    
    Participant Spouse(Sign Name)(Print Name)




---



##### 



EXHIBIT B
 ELECTION PURSUANT TO SECTION 83(b) OF THE  INTERNAL REVENUE CODE TO INCLUDE IN GROSS INCOME  THE EXCESS OVER THE PURCHASE PRICE, IF ANY,  OF THE VALUE OF PROPERTY TRANSFERRED  IN CONNECTION WITH SERVICES
   
 
  Company
 
  
 
  Date:
    
    Participant:(Sign Name)(Print Name)Date:
    
    Participant Spouse(Sign Name)(Print Name)
#### SAMUEL NUSSBAUM, COMPLAINANT-RESPONDENT, v. JOSEPH HETZER AND MARY HETZER, HIS WIFE, DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.

Argued September 20, 1948

Decided October 4, 1948.

*30
      *Mr. Albert S. Gross*argued the cause for defendants-appellants.

*Mr. Jack Rinsler*argued the cause for-complainant-respond-dent *(Mr. Aubrey J. Elias*on the brief).

Per Curtam.

The decree appealed from is affirmed for the reasons expressed in the opinion filed in the court below by Vice Chancellor Grimshaw.

*For affirmance:*Chief Justice Vanderbilt and Justices Case, Heher, Waoheneeld and Burling—5.

*For reversal:*None.
SAT Report

PMN Number: P-15-0252

SAT Date: 2/10/2015

Print Date: 5/8/2015

Related cases: Yes

Health related cases: 

Ecotox related cases: 

Concern levels:

Type of Concern: Health Eco Comments

Level of Concern: 1-2 1

 Persistence Bioaccum Toxicity Comments

3 11

Exposure Based Review:

Health:

Ecotox: No

Routes of exposure: Health: Inhalation 

Ecotox: No releases to water

Fate: ;

Keywords:

 Keywords: 

Summary of Assessment:

 Fate:

Fate Summary: P-15-0252

FATE: 

Solid 

S < 0.001 mg/L at 25 °C (E)

VP < 1.0E-6 torr at 25 °C (E)

BP > 400 °C (E)

H < 1.00E-8 (E)

POTW removal (%) = 90 via sorption

Time for complete ultimate aerobic biodeg > mo

Sorption to soils/sediments = v.strong

PBT Potential: P3B1
*CEB FATE: Migration to ground water = negl

 Health:

 Health Summary: Absorption is nil all routes (pchem). Concern for lung 

toxicity if inhaled based on for 

 Ecotox:

Test Organism Test 

Type

Test End 

Point

Predicted Measured Comments

fish 96-h LC50 *

daphnid 48-h LC50 *

green algal 96-h EC50 *

fish _ chronic value *

daphnid _ chronic 

value

*

algal _ chronic 

value

*

Sewage Sludge 3-h EC50

Sewage Sludge _ Chronic 

Value

_

Ecotox Values Comments: Predictions are based on SARs for

; SAR chemical class = ; MW solid; S < 0.001 mg/L at 25 C, 

pH 7 (P); pH7; effective concentrations based on 100% active ingredients and nominal 

concentrations; hardness <150.0 mg/L as CaCO3; and TOC <2.0 mg/L;

Factors Values Comments

Assessment Factor 10

Concentration of Concern 

(ppb) 

Acute 

Concentration of Concern 

(ppb) Chronic

*

SARs

SAR Class

New Chemcial Category None

Ecotox Factors Comments: 

 SAT Chair:
##### Table of Contents



UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
 Washington, D.C. 20549
 
 FORM 8-K
 
 CURRENT REPORT
Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
 Date
of Report (Date of earliest event reported): April 16, 2009
 
 Endocare, Inc.
 (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
 
 Delaware
    
    001-15063
    
    33-0618093(State or other jurisdiction of incorporation)
    
    (Commission File Number)
    
    (IRS Employer Identification No.)
 201 Technology Drive
Irvine, California 92618
(Address of principal executive offices)
 949-450-5400
(Registrants telephone number, including area code)
 Not Applicable
(Former name or former address, if changed since last report)
 
  þ
 o
 o
 o




---



TABLE OF CONTENTS  Item 8.01 Other Events.SIGNATURE    Table of Contents  
 Item 8.01 Other Events.
    Forward-Looking Statements
  Additional Information




---



##### Table of Contents



www.sec.gov www.endocare.com
 Proxy Solicitation




---



##### Table of Contents



SIGNATURE
  ENDOCARE, INC.Date:  April 20, 2009
    By:
    /s/ Michael R. RodriguezMichael R. RodriguezSenior Vice President, Finance and Chief
Financial Officer
FBL Financial Group, Inc.
Exhibit 12  Statement Re: Computation of Ratios
Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
 For the year ended December 31,2008
    
    
    2007
    
    
    2006
    
    
    2005
    
    
    2004(Dollars in thousands)EarningsPre-tax income (loss) from continuing
operations
    
    $
    (31,878
    )
    
    $
    125,806
    
    
    $
    133,488
    
    
    $
    108,563
    
    
    $
    92,492Less: Minority interest
    
    
    71
    
    
    
    49
    
    
    
    (126
    )
    
    
    (159
    )
    
    
    (105
    )Add: Distributed income from equity
investees
    
    
    337
    
    
    
    438
    
    
    
    2,021
    
    
    
    1,107
    
    
    
    2,035(31,470
    )
    
    
    126,293
    
    
    
    135,383
    
    
    
    109,511
    
    
    
    94,422Fixed charges
    
    
    353,209
    
    
    
    422,951
    
    
    
    296,074
    
    
    
    253,607
    
    
    
    286,154Less: Capitalized bonus interest
    
    
    (7,095
    )
    
    
    (9,636
    )
    
    
    (3,886
    )
    
    
    (1,233
    )
    
    
    (48,951
    )Less: Tax gross up on preferred stock
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    (805
    )
    
    
    (766
    )Add: Amortization of capitalized interest
    
    
    4,141
    
    
    
    6,255
    
    
    
    5,985
    
    
    
    5,461
    
    
    
    6,792Total earnings
    
    $
    318,785
    
    
    $
    545,863
    
    
    $
    433,556
    
    
    $
    366,541
    
    
    $
    337,651Fixed chargesInterest credited to contract holders
    
    $
    325,313
    
    
    $
    395,392
    
    
    $
    279,257
    
    
    $
    236,561
    
    
    $
    223,543Capitalized bonus interest credited to
contract holders
    
    
    7,095
    
    
    
    9,636
    
    
    
    3,886
    
    
    
    1,233
    
    
    
    48,951Interest expense on debt
    
    
    19,567
    
    
    
    16,666
    
    
    
    11,744
    
    
    
    13,590
    
    
    
    11,397Tax gross up on preferred stock
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    805
    
    
    
    766Estimate of interest within rent expense
    
    
    1,234
    
    
    
    1,257
    
    
    
    1,187
    
    
    
    1,418
    
    
    
    1,497Total fixed charges
    
    $
    353,209
    
    
    $
    422,951
    
    
    $
    296,074
    
    
    $
    253,607
    
    
    $
    286,154Ratio of earnings to fixed charges
    
    
    0.90
    
    
    
    1.29
    
    
    
    1.46
    
    
    
    1.45
    
    
    
    1.18Earnings deficiency
    
    
    (34,424
    )
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
### NEI32855 Formaldehyde REL 35 30 Examined results for maximum off-site impact (Figure 2) 

### NEI32855 Formaldehyde AEGL1 2 2 Examined results for maximum off-site impact (Extrapolated from Figure 2) 

### NEI32855 Formaldehyde EPRG1 2 1 Examined results for maximum off-site impact (Extrapolated from Figure 2) 

### NEI12037 Formaldehyde REL 20 11 Examined results for maximum off-site impact (Figure 3) 

### NEI25015 Formaldehyde REL 15 12 Examined results for maximum off-site impact (Figure 3) 

### NEI11393 Formaldehyde REL 6 6 Examined results for maximum off-site impact (Figure 4) 

### NEIGA1210021 Formaldehyde REL 4 3 Examined results for maximum off-site impact (Figure 5) 

### NEI11202 Formaldehyde REL 4 3 Examined results for maximum off-site impact (Figure 6) 

### NEI11431 Formaldehyde REL 4 3 Examined results for maximum off-site impact (Figure 7) 1 

### Facilities with a HEM-3 screening acute value greater than 1 were refined. 2

### See Appendix 7 for figures depicting off-site impacts. Table 4b – Maximum Predicted Acute Risks Greater than 1 (Refined Approach) Wool Fiberglass Manufacturing

Facility NEI ID Pollutant Criteria HEM-3 (Screening) Refined Results 1 

### Refined Modeling Approach 2



### 1 of 1
I n c o r p o r a t i o n b y R e f e r e n c e D o c k e t I D N o
. E P A

- HQ

- O AR

- 2011

- 002 8

F e b r u a r y 6 , 201 2

T h e c o n t e n t s o f t h e f

o l l o w i n g d o c k e t a r e h e r e b y i n c o r p o r a t e d b y r e f e r e n c e i n t o a n d a r e

c o n s i d e r e d t o b e i n c l ud e d i n , c o n t a i n e d i n a n d t o h a v e b e e n p l ace d i n D o c k e t E P A

- HQ

- O A R2011

- 0028 ( P r o p o s e d C o n f i d e n t i a l i t y D e t e r mi n a t i o n s f o r D a t a E l e m e n t s U n d e r t h e M a n d a t o r y R e p o r t i n g o f G r e e n h o u s e G a s e s R u l e ) :

1) E P A

- HQ

- O A R

- 2009

- 0927 ( A d d it i o n a l S o u r ce s o f F l u o r i n a t e d G a s e s ) 2) E P A

- HQ

- O A R

- 2009

- 0923 ( P e t r o l e u m a n d N a t u r a l G a s S y s t e m; F i n a l R u l e ) 3) E P A

- HQ

- O A R

- 2011

- 0512 ( T ec hn i c a l R e v i s i o n s t o t h e P e t r o l e u m a n d N a t u r a l G a s S y s t e m s C a t e go r y o f t h e G r ee n h o u s e g a s R e p o r t i ng R u l e ) 4) E P A

- HQ

- O A R

- 2011

- 0417 ( P e t r o l e u m a n d N a t u r a l G a s S y s t e m s : R e v i s i o n t o B e s t A v a i l a b l e M o n i t o r i n g M e t h o d P r o v i s i o n s )

A c c e ss i n g d o c k e t s : P ub l i c l y a v a il a b l e d o c k e t m a t e r i a l s a r e a v a i l a b l e e i t h e r e l e c t r o n i c a ll y t h r o ug h

www

. r e g u l a t i o n s

. g ov o r i n h a r d c o p y a t E P A ’ s D o c k e t C e n t e r , P ub li c R ea d i ng R oo m , E P A W e s t B u il d i ng , R o o m 3334

, 1301 C o n s t i t u t i o n A v e n u e , N W

, Wa s h i ng t o n , D C 2000 4

. T h i s D o c k e t F a c il i t y i s o p e n f

r o m 8 : 30 a

. m

. t o 4 : 3 0 p

. m ., M o n d a y t h r o ug h F r i d a y , e x c l

u d i ng l e g a l h o li d a y s

. T h e t e l e p h o n e n u m

b e r f o r t h e P ub li c R e a d i n g R o o m i s ( 202 ) 566

- 1744

, a n d t h e t e l e p h o n e

n u m b e r f o r t h e A i r D o c k e t i s ( 202 ) 566

- 174 2

.
**Exhibit
      32.1**





**CERTIFICATION
      OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**


**LEV
      PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.**


**PURSUANT
      TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED**


**PURSUANT
      TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**





In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of Lev Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2008 as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Joshua
      D. Schein, Ph.D., Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
      to
      18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act,
      that:





(1)
          The report fully complies with the requirements of Section
      13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and




(2)
          The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
      all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
      the
      Company.




Date:August
                8,
                2008
            By:
            /s/
                Joshua D. ScheinJoshua
                D. Schein, Ph.D.Chief
                Executive Officer




*This
      Certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to
      18
      U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and shall not be deemed “filed” by the Company for
      purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, whether made before or after the
      date of this Report, irrespective of any general incorporation language
      contained in such filing. A signed original of this written statement required
      by Section 906 has been provided to Lev Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and will be
      retained by Lev Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and
      Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.*
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

GROUP ALMAX, LLC,

Appellant,

v.

2500 RECEIVER, INC.,

Appellee.

No. 4D2023-0873

[May 16, 2024]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, 

Broward County; Michael A. Robinson, Judge; L.T. Case No. CACE16-

20240. 

Michael J. Schlesinger of Schlesinger Law Group, Miami, and Geoffrey 

B. Marks of the Law Offices of Geoffrey B. Marks, Coral Gables, for 

appellant.

Steven H. Osber of Conrad & Scherer, LLP, Fort Lauderdale, for 

appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

KLINGENSMITH, C.J., WARNER and KUNTZ, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

1020 CA 11-02536 PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., SMITH, LINDLEY, AND MARTOCHE, JJ.

JOHN MAZZARELLA, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS FATHER OF FOUR MINOR CHILDREN OF AGES 5, 7, 9, AND 11, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

SYRACUSE DIOCESE, BISHOP JAMES M. MOYNIHAN, BISHOP THOMAS J. COSTELLO AND FR. JOHN W. BRODERICK, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS. (APPEAL NO. 3.)

JEFF ANDERSON & ASSOCIATES PA, ST. PAUL, MINNESOTA, THE ABBATOY LAW FIRM, PLLC, ROCHESTER (DAVID M. ABBATOY, JR., OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT.
HANCOCK ESTABROOK, LLP, SYRACUSE (MAUREEN E. MANEY OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS SYRACUSE DIOCESE, BISHOP JAMES M. MOYNIHAN AND BISHOP THOMAS J. COSTELLO.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Onondaga County (Brian F. DeJoseph, J.), entered July 18, 2011. The order directed the disclosure to plaintiff of certain documents after an in camera review.
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Same Memorandum as in Mazzarella v Syracuse Diocese ([appeal No. 2] ___ AD3d ___ [Nov. 9, 2012]).

Entered: November 9, 2012 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
II

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 1964

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide for coverage

under part B of the medicare program of medical nutrition therapy

services of registered dietitians and nutrition professionals.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JULY 17, 1996

Mr. BINGAMAN (for himself and Mr. HOLLINGS) introduced the following bill;

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

A BILL

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide

for coverage under part B of the medicare program

of medical nutrition therapy services of registered dietitians and nutrition professionals.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Medical Nutrition

5 Therapy Act of 1996’’.
2

•S 1964 IS

1 SEC. 2. MEDICARE COVERAGE OF MEDICAL NUTRITION

2 THERAPY SERVICES.

3 (a) COVERAGE.—Section 1861(s)(2) of the Social Se4 curity Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x(s)(2)) is amended—

5 (1) by striking ‘‘and’’ at the end of subpara6 graph (N); and

7 (2) by inserting after subparagraph (O) the fol8 lowing new subparagraph:

9 ‘‘(P) medical nutrition therapy services (as de10 fined in subsection (oo));’’.

11 (b) SERVICES DESCRIBED.—Section 1861 of such

12 Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x) is amended by adding at the end

13 the following new subsection:

14 ‘‘Medical Nutrition Therapy Services

15 ‘‘(oo) The term ‘medical nutrition therapy services’

16 means nutritional diagnostic, therapy, and counseling

17 services which are furnished by or under the supervision

18 of a registered dietitian or nutrition professional who is

19 legally authorized to furnish such services under State law

20 (or the State regulatory mechanism provided by State law)

21 of the State in which the services are furnished, as would

22 otherwise be covered if furnished by a physician or as an

23 incident to a physician’s professional service.’’.

24 (c) PAYMENT.—Section 1833(a)(1) of such Act (42

25 U.S.C. 1395l(a)(1)) is amended—
3

•S 1964 IS

1 (1) by striking ‘‘and (P)’’ and inserting ‘‘(P)’’;

2 and

3 (2) by striking the semicolon at the end and in4 serting the following: ‘‘, and (Q) with respect to

5 medical nutrition therapy services (as defined in sec6 tion 1861(oo)), the amount paid shall be 80 percent

7 of the lesser of the actual charge for the services or

8 the amount determined by a fee schedule established

9 by the Secretary for the purposes of this subpara10 graph;’’.

11 SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE.

12 The amendments made by section 2 shall apply to

13 services furnished on or after January 1, 1997.

Æ
### THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13

- 13

- 00209

- CV

THE DAVIS LAW FIRM

v. JAMES BATES AND CONSUMERS COUNTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No 2 of Cameron County , Texas

Trial Cause No. 2011

- CCL

- 00202

JUDGMENT
THE THIRTEE NTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be AFFIRMED . The Court orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED

. We further order this decision certified below for observance.
Febr uary 13, 2014