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

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal Service  TM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         October 31, 2024.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on October 22, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage® Contract 514 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2025-135, K2025-133.                

Sean C. Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2024-25267 Filed 10-30-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
II

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 85

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to reduce the tax on vaccines

to 25 cents per dose.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JANUARY 19, 1999

Mr. BUNNING introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on Finance

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to reduce

the tax on vaccines to 25 cents per dose.

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 ‘‘Vaccinate America’s

5 Children Now Act’’.

6 SEC. 2. REDUCTION IN TAX ON VACCINES.

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Paragraph (1) of section 4131(b)

8 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to amount

9 of tax) is amended by striking ‘‘75 cents’’ and inserting

10 ‘‘25 cents’’.
2

•S 85 IS

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

2 subsection (a) shall take effect on the date of the enact3 ment of this Act.

4 (c) LIMITATION ON CERTAIN CREDITS OR RE5 FUNDS.—For purposes of applying section 4132(b) of the

6 Internal Revenue Code of 1986 with respect to any claim

7 for credit or refund filed before January 1, 2000, the

8 amount of tax taken into account shall not exceed the tax

9 computed under the rate in effect on the day after the

10 date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
<PAGE>   1


                                                                      EXHIBIT 23


               CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration
statements of Energen Corporation on Form S-3 (File No. 333-00395), Form S-3
(File No. 333-43245) and Forms S-8 (File No. 33-27869, File No. 33-46641, File
No. 33-48504, File No. 33-48505, File No. 33-26111, and File No. 33-45107) of
our report dated October 27, 1999 relating to the consolidated financial
statements, which appear in the Annual Report to Shareholders, which is
incorporated in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. We also consent to the
incorporation by reference of our report dated October 27, 1999 relating to the
financial statement schedule of Energen Corporation, which appears in this
Annual Report on Form 10-K.




PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Birmingham, Alabama
December 17, 1999
attestationh1657.htm



Back to Form 8-K


Exhibit 10.11


 


Medicare Advantage Attestation of Benefit Plan


 





HARMONY HEALTH PLANS OF ILLINOIS, INC.


 





H1657







 


I attest that I have examined the Plan Benefit Packages (PBPs) identified below and that the benefits identified in the PBPs are those that the above-stated organization will make available to eligible beneficiaries in the approved service area during program year 2011.1 further attest that we have reviewed the bid pricing tools (BPTs) with the certifying actuary and have determined them to be consistent with the PBPs being attested to here.







 


I further attest that these benefits will be offered in accordance with all applicable Medicare program authorizing statutes and regulations and program guidance that CMS has issued to date and will issue during the remainder of 2010 and 2011, including but not limited to, the 2011 Call Letter, the 2011 Solicitations for New Contract Applicants, the Medicare Prescription Drug Benefit Manual, the Medicare Managed Care Manual, and the CMS memoranda issued through the Health Plan Management System (HPMS).


 




	
Plan


ID

	
Segment


ID

	
Version

	
Plan Name

	
Plan


Type

	
Transaction


Type

	
MA


Premium

	
Part D


Premium

	
  CMS


Approval


Date

	
Effective


Date


	
002

	
0

	
8

	
WellCare Value (HMO 


-POS)

	
HMOPOS

	
Renewal

	
0.00

	
0

	
9/3/2010

	
01/01/2011









 


H1657











  





  











  
















	
Thomas Tran

	  	
9/2/2010 7:57:32 AM


	  	  	 	  
	  	  	  
	
Contracting Official Name

	
Date


	  	  	  
	  	  	  
	  	  	  
	
 

	
8735 Henderson Rd., Ren 2


	 
HARMONY HEALTH PLANS OF ILLINOIS, INC.

	  	
Tampa, FL 33634


	  	  	 	  
	  	  	 	  
	
Organization

	
Address


	  	  	  







H1657
EXHIBIT 10(c)22

 

**BASE SALARIES OF NAMED EXECUTIVE OFFICERS**

 

**GEORGIA POWER COMPANY**

 

Effective as of March 1, 2008 the following are the annual base salaries of the Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer and certain other executive officers of Georgia Power Company (the “Company”).

 

| Michael D. Garrett

President and Chief Executive Officer                          | $695,402 |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------|
| Cliff S. Thrasher

Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer | $282,366 |
| Christopher C. Womack

Senior Vice President                                       | $336,616 |
| James H. Miller, III

Senior Vice President and General Counsel                    | $336,137 |
| Mickey A. Brown

Executive Vice President                                          | $363,253 |
```

[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 177 (Thursday, November 20, 2008)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E2295]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

          HONORING AND REMEMBERING THE LIFE OF JOSEPH R. BURNS

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. CHARLES B. RANGEL

                              of new york

                    in the house of representatives

                      Wednesday, November 19, 2008

  Mr. RANGEL. Madam Speaker, I rise today to honor and remember the 
life of an exemplary American citizen, a friend, a comrade in arms 
during our service together on the frontlines of the Korean war, and a 
true hero--Joseph R. Burns, who passed away on November 9, 2008.
  Joseph R. Burns was born on August 21, 1930, in Charity Hospital, New 
Orleans, LA. Joe dedicated his life to protecting the freedom of this 
great country through his many years of public service. Joe served in 
the U.S. Army during the Korean war conflict and underwent extreme 
hardships as a prisoner of war for 33 months and 11 days.
  After his service in the U.S. Army, Joe continued to build his career 
in public service by obtaining a position as El Paso's Deputy Sheriff 
and creating programs to help children. Joe's faith in his religion and 
love for service manifested itself when he performed his duties and 
responsibilities of a deacon at the Unity Missionary Baptist Church, 
and when he served as a senior usher for the church.
  Although Joseph R. Burns has passed, his legacy in public service 
will not go unnoticed. His calm demeanor and quiet spirit will never be 
forgotten. He was a great influence to his family, his community, and 
our country. Joseph R. Burns is a national hero who will be greatly 
missed.
  He is succeeded by his beloved son Tyronne J. Burns, his family, and 
friends.

                          ____________________
```
#### FRANCIS M. MULLEN v. THE NORFOLK AND NORTH CAROLINA CANAL COMPANY.

*Practice*— Motion *to Dismiss*— Appeal—Amendment.

1. An appeal does not lie from the refusal of a motion to dismiss an action upon the allegation of defective service, or on any other ground. When such motion is refused, the defendant should make his exception and cause it to he noted, and then proceed regularly to answer or demur.

2. Where the affidavit for publication of summons was defective, it was proper for the Judge to permit amendment and grant an *alian*order of publication instead of dismissing the action.

At the Fall Term, 1892, of CajxdeN Superior Court, before *Hoke,*/., the defendant entered special appearance and moved to dismiss the action on the ground that the affidavit on which order of publication was based was defective. *110The Court refused the motion and allowed the plaintiff to amend his affidavit and granted an *alias*order of publication. Defendant appealed.

*Messrs. Pruclen & Vann*and *L. C.*Latham, for defendant (appellant).

No counsel *contra.*

Claiik, J.:

The defendant, appearing by counsel who entered a special appearance, moved to dismiss the action. This motion was refused and the defendant did not enter its exception and proceed to answer, but at once appealed. It has been often pointed out that such an appeal is premature and will be dismissed. *Guilford*v. *Georgia Co.,*109 N. C., 310; *Sheldon*v. *Kivett,*110 N. C., 408, and other cases which are cited in Clark’s Code (2d Ed.), p. 559. If a defendant, by simply appearing specialty and moving to dismiss the action upon the allegation of defective service, or on any other ground, can appeal from a refusal of the motion, it will add several months to the time required for the disposition of any cause which the defendant may wish to delay, and we know that a delay of justice is often a denial of justice. The presumption is always that the ruling below is correct. The proper course, therefore, when the motion to dismiss has been refused, is for the defendant to cause his exception to be noted in the record and to proceed regularly to file his answer or demurrer. If the final decision below is in favor of the defendant, he will not desire to appeal; if it is against him, his exception in the record for refusal-to dismiss is not waived, and he will have the benefit of it on the appeal from the final judgment. The disadvantage, if any, is not with the appellant but with the appellee, since, if he wrongfully insists on the refusal of such motion, instead of *111talcing ail amendment or *alms*summons, lie will liave his pains for his trouble and hare the costs to pay besides.

If the affidavit for publication was defective, the Court properly refused to dismiss on that ground and granted leave to plaintiff to amend the affidavit and for an *alias*order of' publication. *Branch*v. *Frank,*81 N. C., 180; *Price*v. *Cox,*83 N. C., 261. Besides, an appeal from the amendment did not lie. *Sinclair*v. *Railroad,*111 N. C., 507.

Appeal Dismissed.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.2

AMENDMENT TO LOAN AND SECURITY AGREEMENT                   COAST BUSINESS CREDIT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                                     COAST



                                AMENDMENT #1 TO



                          LOAN AND SECURITY AGREEMENT



BORROWER:         CYBERGUARD CORPORATION,
                  A FLORIDA CORPORATION
ADDRESS:          2000 WEST COMMERCIAL BOULEVARD
                  SUITE 200
                  FORT LAUDERDALE, FLORIDA 33309


BORROWER:         TRADEWAVE CORPORATION,
                  A FLORIDA CORPORATION
ADDRESS:          3636 EXECUTIVE CENTER DRIVE
                  SUITE 100
                  AUSTIN, TEXAS  78731


DATE:             DECEMBER __, 1997


Section 5.2 of the Schedule to the Loan and Security Agreement of even date
herewith is amended to read as follows:

"Section 5.2 - Minimum
                    Availability:      BORROWER SHALL HAVE MINIMUM BORROWING 
                                       AVAILABILITY IMMEDIATELY FOLLOWING THE 
                                       INITIAL FUNDING IN AN AMOUNT OF NOT LESS
                                       THAN ONE MILLION NINE HUNDRED THOUSAND
                                       DOLLARS ($1,900,000.00)"

Except as expressly modified herein, all other terms and conditions of the
Schedule remain unchanged. 
[SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE]





                                       1

<PAGE>   2

COAST:

COAST BUSINESS CREDIT(R),
a division of Southern Pacific Bank,
a California corporation

By
  ----------------------------------
Title:
      ------------------------------

BORROWERS:

CYBERGUARD CORPORATION,
A FLORIDA CORPORATION

By
  ----------------------------------
Title:
      ------------------------------

TRADEWAVE CORPORATION,
A FLORIDA CORPORATION

By
  ----------------------------------
Title:
      ------------------------------













                                       2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
10-Q FOR THE PERIOD ENDED MARCH 31, 1997 FOR JUNO ACQUISITIONS, INC. AND
IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                    3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                          30,018
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                30,018
<PP&E>                                              82
<DEPRECIATION>                                   3,394
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  33,494
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,457
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           814
<OTHER-SE>                                      30,223
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    33,494
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 9,506
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (9,506)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (9,506)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.01)

</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 211 (Thursday, October 31, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 86856]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-25262]


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

POSTAL SERVICE


Product Change--Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, and USPS 
Ground Advantage[supreg] Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal Service <SUP>TM</SUP>.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: October 31, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
October 22, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a USPS 
Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground 
Advantage[supreg] Contract 509 to Competitive Product List. Documents 
are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2025-126, K2025-124.

Sean C. Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2024-25262 Filed 10-30-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
#### STATE v. MARTIN LILES and others.

*Indictment*— Disqualification *of Juror.*

Where an indictment was quashed upon the ground that one of the grand jurors who found the bill was a party to an action pending and at issue in the Superior Court; Held, not to be error. (Bat. Rev. ch. 17, § 229 (g))

*(State*v. *Griffice,*74 N. 0. 316, cited and approved.)

INDICTMENT ’for Larceny tried at Spring Term,' 1877, of Anson Superior Court, before *McKoy, J.*

The defendants moved to quash the indictment on the ground that one of the grand jurors who found the bill *497¡against them was disqualified by Bat. Rev. ch. 17, § 229 (g) which is as follows; “If any of the jurors drawn have a suit pending and at issue in the Supefior Court, the scrolls with their names must be returned into partition No. 1 of the jury box.”

His Honor allowed the motion and *Pemberton,*Solicitor for the State, appealed.

*Attorney General,*for the State.

No counsel for the defendants.

EaiRCLOTH, J.

The defendants were indicted and on being ■called to answer the charge, moved to quash the indictment •on the ground that one of the grand jurors who presented the bill, at the time he was drawn as juror, had a suit pending and at issue in the Superior Court of the same County. 'The motion was allowed and the Solicitor appealed. We .-sustain the order of His Honor, and hold.that the juror was ■disqualified simply because the law is so written. Bat. Rev. uh. 17, § 229, (g).

In such cases the objection must be taken in apt time as was done in the present instance. *State*v. *Griffice,*74 N. C. 316.

There is no error. Let this be certified, &c. '

PjerCubiam. Judgment affirmed.
<PAGE>
 
                          A.S.V., INC. AND SUBSIDIARY
                EXHIBIT 11 - COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE
                  THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 1997 AND 1996
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                  1997        1996
                                               ----------  ----------
<S>                                            <C>         <C>
PRIMARY AND FULLY DILUTED

 Earnings
  Net income                                   $  315,542  $  152,996

  Add after tax interest expense applicable
   to 6.5% convertible debentures                  50,374           -
                                               ----------  ----------
  Net income applicable to common stock        $  365,916  $  152,996
                                               ==========  ==========

 Shares
  Weighted average number of common
   shares outstanding                           4,826,398   4,763,859
 Assuming exercise of options and warrants
  reduced by the number of shares which could
  have been purchased with the proceeds from
  the exercise of such options and warrants       682,667     327,462

 Assuming conversion of 6.5% convertible
  debentures                                      454,545           -
                                               ----------  ----------
 Weighted average number of common and
  common equivalent shares outstanding          5,963,610   5,091,321
                                               ==========  ==========

Earnings per common share                            $.06  $      .03
                                               ==========  ==========

</TABLE>
#### HANNAH LOCKE *vs.*ROBERT GIBBS.

One may recover damages in an action on the case for a malicious prosecution of his slave.

Appeal from the Superior Court of Law of Brunswick county, at Fall Term, 1843, his Honor Judge Battle presiding.

This was an action on the case, brought by.the plaintiff against the defendant to recover damages, which she alleged that she had sustained by the malicious prosecution of her negro slaves, in consequence of which she had been deprived of their services, and put to costs in paying their jail fees. The defendant objected that the action could not be sustained, but the court held differently. The jury, under the charge of the court, found a verdict for the plaintiff, and from the judgment rendered thereon the defendant appealed.

*Strange*for the plaintiff.

No counsel for the defendant in this court.

Daniel, J.

We must take the case to mean, that the defendant prosecuted the plaintiff’s slaves, without having any probable cause or reason to do so ; for, if he had probable cause, he would not be liable to this action, although lie acted ever so maliciously. The defendant does not contend that he had probable cause. The inquiry, therefore, which the plaintiff sustained/was the consequence of the defendant’s doing a wrongful act, and an action on the case was her rightful remedy. This action lies against a person, for ma*43liciously and without probable cause suing out a sion of bankruptcy, in consequence whereof the plaintiff was damaged in his trade and business. So it lies at the suit of the husband, for the expenses incurred in consequence of the malicious prosecution of his wife — the wife in law being the servant of the husband — and he was injured in defending her against the defendant’s improper prosecution. *Smith v Hixon, 2*Stra. 977. Bul. N. P. 13. — .

The case now before us is in principle the same as the one last cited. The judgment must be affirmed.

Per Curiam. Judgment affirmed.'