alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 114 (Monday, June 15, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32637-32638]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-15760]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE


Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

    The Department of Commerce (DOC) has submitted to the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) for clearance the following proposal for 
collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork 
Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).
    Agency: Technology Administration.
    Title: National Medal of Technology Nomination Applications.
    Agency Form Number: None.
    OMB Approval Number: 0692-0001.
    Type of Request: Reinstatement, with change.
    Burden: 2,500 hours.
    Number of Respondents: 100.
    Avg. Hours Per Response: 25.
    Needs and Uses: The Stevenson-Wydler Technology Innovation Act 
established an annual National Medal of

[[Page 32638]]

Technology Award. This Award is the highest honor bestowed by the 
President to America's leading innovators who have made considerable 
contributions to enhancing America's competitiveness and standard of 
living. The information provided through the nomination process is used 
by the Evaluation Committee to determine eligibility and merit 
according to specified criteria.
    Affected Public: Individuals, Business or other for-profit 
organizations, not-for-profit institutions, and the Federal Government.
    Frequency: Annually.
    Respondent's Obligation: Required to obtain or retain benefits, 
voluntary.
    OMB Desk Officer: Maya Bernstein, (202) 395-4816.
    Copies of the above information collection proposal can be obtained 
by calling or writing Linda Engelmeier, DOC Forms Clearance Officer, 
(202) 482-3272, Department of Commerce, Room 5327, 14th and 
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230.
    Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information 
collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice 
to Maya Bernstein, OMB Desk Officer, Room 10235, New Executive Office 
Building, 725 17th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20503.

    Dated: June 9, 1998.
Linda Engelmeier,
Departmental Forms Clearance Officer, Office of Management and 
Organization.
[FR Doc. 98-15760 Filed 6-12-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-18-P
# DLA flu vaccine program attributes success to battle rhythm, partnerships

/ Published March 15, 2022
PHILADELPHIA, 
Thanks to early action and teamwork between Defense Logistics Agency partners, three contracts totaling 3.4 million doses of the influenza vaccine were awarded Feb. 25, meaning DLA will start receiving shipments of the inoculations in August, well ahead of the 2022-2023 flu season.

The awards went to three vendors with a total maximum value of $70.4 million and will satisfy the needs of warfighters and eligible dependents around the globe.

This year’s award timeline is similar to the 2021-2022 season, including an earlier contract award date that prior years and a steady “battle rhythm” of communication and collaboration with distribution partners, said DLA Troop Support Pharmaceutical Manufacturer and Distributor Division Chief Alex Quinones.

Quinones attributed a large part of the success to an earlier timeline for the acquisition process, also used last year, to produce what he called “the most successful season” he’s seen.

“The key to all of it was teamwork,” Quinones said. “All the feedback that I got from the [DLA Troop Support Medical] team and the comments from the customers – DHA and the [military] services ... they all called it a successful season.”

The contracts guarantee a total minimum value of $35.3 million across three vendors – Sanofi, GlaxoSmithKline and Seqirus – to ensure Defense Health Agency facilities around the world will have the vaccines in-hand prior to the onset of the flu season. It also gives DLA the flexibility to support emerging requirements such as the 2021 Afghan Medical support mission, Quinones said.

“When the Afghan [support] mission came up, we were able to ‘piggyback’ off [the 2021-2022 flu contracts] thanks to the early, multiple awards,” he said. “It allowed a much faster response than a new contract solicitation would have taken by several weeks and stayed within the contracts’ maximum values.”.

The other big key to success was good communication and collaboration with DLA Distribution and commercial carriers in making sure the vaccines got to their destinations safely and on time despite COVID-19 impacts on the nation’s distribution networks.

“The COVID-19 mission was going on simultaneously with the flu mission ... and tied into the Christmas season. They call it the Santa Rush – [commercial carriers] just got bombarded,” DLA Distribution Seasonal Influenza Program Manager Domon Barr said.

Taking that into consideration, the DLA team was able to work together to manage orders from the military services within a constrained shipping timeline and keep the mission going, alleviating strain on partners.

“By giving [the commercial carrier] that extra day to be able to process other shipments ... I think it increased the strength of our partnership,” Barr said.

Quinones expressed appreciation to all the partners involved and thinks DLA’s support will continue to improve.

“I think knowing how well it went this past year, it’ll be a little easier,” he said. “This is now our regular, routine battle rhythm ... the proof is in the pudding.”
No. 09-11105.

#### Thomas L. Finley, Petitioner v. Jeremiah Nixon, Governor of Missouri.

562 U.S. 862, 131 S. Ct. 142,

178 L. Ed. 2d 85,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6021.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
Exhibit 31.2


                                  CERTIFICATION

     I, Scott E. Willkomm, President of Scottish Annuity & Life Holdings, Ltd.,
certify that:

     1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of Scottish Annuity & Life
Holdings, Ltd. (the "registrant");

     2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

     4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as
defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15(d)-15(f)) for the registrant and
have:

          a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
     disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
     ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its
     consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
     entities, particularly during the period in which this annual report is
     being prepared;

          b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
     and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
     effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of
     the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

          c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal
     control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most
     recent fiscal quarter) that has materially affected, or is reasonably
     likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over
     financial reporting; and


     5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based
on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to
the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

          a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design
     or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are
     reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record,
     process, summarize and report financial information; and



<PAGE>

          b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
     other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
     control over financial reporting.

Date: August 12, 2003

/s/ Scott E. Willkomm
Scott E. Willkomm
President


                                       2
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16

- 41546 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.
JUAN ISMAEL OROZCO

- VAZQUEZ , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 5:16

- CR

- 133

- 1

Before STEWART, Chief Judge, and OWEN and HAYNES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: *
Juan Ismael Or ozco
- Vazquez appeals his conditional guilty plea conviction of conspiring to possess with intent to distribute cocaine for which he was sentenced to 27 months of imprisonment and three years of supervised release. In reviewing a district court’s suppr ession ruling, we review factual findings for clear error and questions of law de novo. United States v. Jaime ,

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED November 22, 2017 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 16-41546 Document: 00514246822 Page: 1 Date Filed: 11/22/2017No. 16

- 41546

2 473 F.3d 178, 181 (5th Cir. 2006). A factual finding is not clearly erroneous so long as it is plausible in light of the record as a whole. U nited States v.
McKinnon , 681 F.3d 203, 207 (5th Cir. 2012). Facts are construed in the light most favorable to the Government as the prevailing party on the motion to

suppress. United States v. Macias , 658 F.3d 509, 517 (5th Cir. 2011). The district court did not clearly err in denying Orozco

- Vazquez’s motion to suppress. See Jaime , 473 F.3d at 181

. Orozco

- Vazquez’s detention in the primary inspection lane was within the permissible duration of an immigration checkpoint stop. See United States v. M achuca

- Barrera , 261 F.3d 425, 431

- 35 (5th Cir. 2001). The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. Case: 16-41546 Document: 00514246822 Page: 2 Date Filed: 11/22/2017
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 18

- 3904

_____________________________
T IMOTHY M YERS , Appellant,

v.

V ICKI L. M YERS , Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Escambia County

. Amy P. Brodersen , Judge

. July 2, 2019

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

.
W ETHERELL , B ILBREY , and M.K. T HOMAS , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________2 Timothy Myers
, pro se, Appellant.

Vicki L. Myers
, pro se , Appellee.
No. 10-102.

#### Tina Conder, Petitioner v. RDI/Caesars Riverboat Casino, Inc., et al.

562 U.S. 893, 131 S. Ct. 297,

178 L. Ed. 2d 142,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6123.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Indiana, First District, denied.

Same case below, 918 N.E.2d 759.
No. 10-5226.

#### Johnny Barrera, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 910, 131 S. Ct. 261,

178 L. Ed. 2d 173,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7414.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Petition for Writ of Mandamus Denied and Memorandum Opinion filed October 10 , 2023.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14

- 23

- 00207

- CV

IN RE SURINDER SINGH , Relator

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

WRIT OF MANDAMUS 152nd District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2020

- 59451



### MEMORANDUM OPINION

On March 29, 2023 , relator Surinder Singh filed a petition for writ of

m andamus in this court

. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. § 22.221; see also Tex. R. App.
P. 52. In the petition, relator asks this court to compel the Honorable Robert
S chaffer, presiding judge of the 152nd District Court of Harris County , to vacate his March 29, 2023 order granting real party in interest’s request for emergency temporary relief.2 R elator has not established that he is entitled to mandamus relief. Accordingly, we deny relator’s petition for writ of mandamus. We lift our April 4, 2023 stay.

PER CURIAM

Panel c onsists of Chief Justice Christopher and Justices Jewell and Spain.
RECEr-VEDnlnm·o-FEB1A.ANGELLESLCRrTARYofJLouistanaDEPARTMENTOFNATURALRESOURClO\VQ-A.............6WQ-C..•••••••..••..OFFICEOFCOASTAL..6WQ-P..............6WQ-S.............···•<-·••••···••February8,2012WilliamK.Honker,P.E.ActingDirector,WaterQualityProtectionDivisionUSEPA,Region61445RossAvenue,Suite1200Dallas,TX75202-2733RE:C20110559,CoastalZoneConsistencyUSEPADirectFederalAction.............NPDESVesselGeneralPermitandSmallVesselGeneralPermitfordischargesincidentaltothenormaloperationofvessels,OffshoreLouisiana.DearMr.Honker:...............TheabovereferencedprojecthasbeenreviewedforconsistencywiththeapprovedLouisianaCoastalResourceProgram(LCRP)asrequiredbySection307oftheCoastalZoneManagementActof1972,asamended.Theproject,asproposedintheapplication,isconsistentwiththeLCRP.Ifyouhaveanyquestionsconcerningthisdetermination,pleasecontactBrianMarcksoftheConsistencySectionat(225)342-7939or1-800-267-4019.Sincerely,KeithLovellAdministratorInteragencyAffairs/FieldServicesDivisionKOUJDH/bgmcc:PeteSerio,COE-NODJamiePhillippe,LDEQDaveButler,LDWFMickTamara,USEPA,DallasPostOfficeBox44487•BatonRouge,Louisiana70804-4487617NorthThirdStreet•1OthFloor•Suite1078•BatonRouge,Louisiana70802(225)342-7591•Fax(225)342-9439•AnEqualOpportunityEmployer
SUPERIOR COURT OF NEW JERSEY

APPELLATE DIVISION

DOCKET NO. A-4475-18T2

LEVINE DESANTIS, LLC,

a New Jersey Limited Liability

Company,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

LAURIE GALITSIS, Executrix of the

the Estate of Nicholas Bovino, and 

LAURIE GALITSIS, an Individual,

Defendants-Respondents.

Submitted May 7, 2020 – Decided May 20, 2020

Before Judges Alvarez and Suter.

On appeal from the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law 

Division, Bergen County, Docket No. L-1163-18.

Levine DeSantis, LLC, appellant pro se (Peter Nichols, 

on the briefs).

Beattie Padovano, LLC, attorneys for respondents 

(James V. Zarrillo, of counsel and on the brief).

PER CURIAM

NOT FOR PUBLICATION WITHOUT THE

APPROVAL OF THE APPELLATE DIVISION

This opinion shall not "constitute precedent or be binding upon any court." Although it is posted on the 

internet, this opinion is binding only on the parties in the case and its use in other cases is limited. R. 1:36-3.
2

A-4475-18T2

The matter having been amicably settled by the parties, it is hereby 

ordered that the appeal is dismissed with prejudice and without costs.
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Form S-8 (Commission file Nos. 333-27199 and 333-58847) of our
report dated February 7, 2000, except for Note 4, as to which the date is March
9, 2000, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Mercury Waste
Solutions, Inc. and Subsidiaries, appearing in the Company's Annual Report on
Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 1999.


                                                     /s/ McGLADREY & PULLEN, LLP


Minneapolis, Minnesota
March 28, 2000
No. 10-3.

#### Edward H. Flint, Petitioner v. Target Corporation.

562 U.S. 889, 131 S. Ct. 227,

178 L. Ed. 2d 135,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7051.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 362 Fed. Appx. 446.
#### The State of Florida, ex rel. Otto C. Stegemann, *Relator,*vs. C. W. Tomlinson, as City Clerk, etc., *Respondent.*

144 So. 881.

Opinion filed December 17, 1932.

Petition for rehearing denied January 16, 1933.

*Waller & Pepper*and *Herbert 8. 8epler,*fo'r Relator;

*J. Harvey Robillard,*for Respondent.

Per Curiam.

An alternative writ of mandamus herein was issued by this Court which in effect commanded the City Clerk acting as supervisor of registration of the City of Miami Beach, Florida, to note or to show cause for not noting *an*the registration books for a municipal election of city officers to be held on December 20, 1932, the names of all registered electors who shall have paid on or before November 26, 1932, said day being the fourth Saturday preceding the day of election, their poll or capitation taxes for the years 1930 and 1931, which it is asserted would accord with the general election laws of the State applicable to municipal elections and which general laws it is asserted are applicable notwithstanding charter provisions and ordinances authorizing the notation on • the registration books of poll taxes paid to within six days of the election. A motion to quash the writ and a motion for a peremptory *431writ were filed on December 17,1932, and the Court having given the questions raised by the motions such consideration as the limited time will permit, it is ordered by the Court that the motion to quash the alternative writ be granted upon the following considerations: (1) It appears upon the argument of counsel that there is an apparent inconsistency between the Charter Act and the general election laws that are applicable to municipalities, relative to the time within which assessable poll taxes must be paid by otherwise qualified electors, and if inconsistent the charter provisions if valid would control under Section 24, Article III of the Constitution; and (2) it is stated by counsel that the relator had previously obtained from a Circuit Judge an alternative writ of mandamus in the same controversy, which alternative writ was quashed. The election being only three days off and the right to a peremptory writ of mandamus not being clear, the alternative writ is quashed.

It is so ordered.

Buford C.J. and Whitfield, Terrell and Brown, J.J., concur.
No. 10-5413.

#### Amin A. Rashid, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 920, 131 S. Ct. 293,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7363.

178 L. Ed. 2d 192,

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.

Same case below, 375 Fed. Appx. 199.
II

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 226

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide that certain cash

rentals of farmland will not cause recapture of special estate tax valuation.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JANUARY 27 (legislative day, JANUARY 5), 1993

Mr. DASCHLE (for himself, Mr. DORGAN, Mr. CONRAD, and Mrs. KASSEBAUM) 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 provide

that certain cash rentals of farmland will not cause recapture of special estate tax valuation.

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

3 SECTION 1. CERTAIN CASH RENTALS OF FARMLAND NOT

4 TO CAUSE RECAPTURE OF SPECIAL ESTATE

5 TAX VALUATION.

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subsection (c) of section 2032A

7 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to tax

8 treatment of dispositions and failures to use for qualified
2

•S 226 IS

1 use) is amended by adding at the end thereof the following

2 new paragraph:

3 ‘‘(8) CERTAIN CASH RENTAL NOT TO CAUSE

4 RECAPTURE.—For purposes of this subsection, a

5 qualified heir shall not be treated as failing to use

6 property in a qualified use solely because such heir

7 rents such property on a net cash basis to a member

8 of the decedent’s family, but only if, during the pe9 riod of the lease, such member of the decedent’s

10 family uses such property in a qualified use.’’

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

12 subsection (a) shall apply with respect to rentals occurring

13 after December 31, 1976.

Æ
No. 10-5348.

#### Rodriguez Samuel Da Matha De Santanna, Petitioner v. Uhaul Company of Metro DC.

562 U.S. 916, 131 S. Ct. 281,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6867.

178 L. Ed. 2d 185,

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
2017-0126.

#### State v. Barnes.

Muskingum App. No. CT2016-0024, 2016-Ohio-8247. On appellee’s motion to strike for failure to provide service pursuant to S.CtPrac.R. 3.11(E)(1). Motion denied.

Appellee may file a memorandum in response within 30 days of the date of this entry.
*June 20,*2017

2017-Ohio-4394.]

2015-1309.

#### State v. Ford.

Summit Cty. C.P. CR 2013 04 1008(A). On motion for extraordinary fees and interim billing. Motion for extraordinary fees denied. Motion for interim billing granted.
No. 09-11465.

#### Rodriguez Samuel Da Matha De Santanna, Petitioner v. Maryland, et al.

562 U.S. 882, 131 S. Ct. 204,

178 L. Ed. 2d 123,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7054.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 372 Fed. Appx. 426.
II

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2274

To provide for the application of a 6-year statute of limitations to certain

claims filed by Federal employees under the Fair Labor Standards Act

of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 201 et seq.).

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JULY 1 (legislative day, JUNE 7), 1994

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

referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs

A BILL

To provide for the application of a 6-year statute of limitations to certain claims filed by Federal employees under

the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 201

et seq.).

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

3 SECTION 1. APPLICATION OF 6-YEAR STATUTE OF LIMITA4 TIONS TO CERTAIN CLAIMS FILED BY FED5 ERAL EMPLOYEES.

6 In the administration of section 3702 of title 31,

7 United States Code, the Comptroller General of the

8 United States shall apply a 6-year statute of limitations
2

•S 2274 IS

1 to any claim of a Federal employee under the Fair Labor

2 Standards Act of 1938 (29 U.S.C. 201 et seq.) arising

3 before or filed before the date of enactment of this Act.

Æ