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

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2511 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2511

    To specifically exclude certain programs from provisions of the 
                     Electronic Funds Transfer Act.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

            October 6 (legislative day, September 12), 1994

 Mr. Lieberman introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
    referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To specifically exclude certain programs from provisions of the 
                     Electronic Funds Transfer Act.

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

SECTION 1. ELECTRONIC BENEFIT TRANSFERS.

    Section 904 of the Electronic Fund Transfer Act (15 U.S.C. 1693b) 
is amended--
            (1) by inserting ``(1)'' after ``(d)''; and
            (2) by adding at the end the following new paragraphs:
    ``(2)(A) The Board may not, under paragraph (1), make the 
disclosures, protections, responsibilities, and remedies created by 
this title apply to an electronic benefit transfer program established 
under State or local law, or administered by a State or local 
government, unless the payment under such programs is made directly 
into a consumer's account held by the recipient.
    ``(B) Subparagraph (A) does not apply to employment related 
payments including salaries, pension, retirement, or unemployment 
benefits established by Federal, State, or local governments.
    ``(C) Nothing in subparagraph (A) alters the protections of 
benefits established by Federal, State, or local statute.
    ``(D) For purposes of subparagraph (A), an electronic benefit 
transfer program is a program under which a government agency 
distributes needs-tested benefits by establishing accounts to be 
accessed by recipients electronically, such as through automated teller 
machines, or point-of-sale terminals. A program established for the 
purpose of enforcing the support obligations owed by absent parents to 
their children and the custodial parents with whom the children are 
living is not an electronic benefit transfer program.''.
                                 <all>
```
IN THE SUPRE ME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 21 - 346 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. WILLIAM DEAN GRUSSING ,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s moti on for extension of time, and good cause appearing therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including September 24 , 20 21 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Bowen Greenwood Clerk of the Supreme Court August 24 2021

08/24/2021
Case Number: DA 21-0346
No. 10-5227.

#### Brinson Allen, Petitioner v. United States.

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

178 L. Ed. 2d 173,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7413.

October 4, 2010.

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

Same case below, 374 Fed. Appx. 944.
# C_2013344EN.01004402.xml

| 23.11.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 344/44 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.11.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 344/44

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Consiglio di Stato (Italy) lodged on 23 August 2013 — Stanley International Betting Ltd and Stanleybet Malta Ltd v Ministero dell’Economia e delle Finanze and Agenzia delle Dogane e dei Monopoli di Stato

(Case C-463/13)

2013/C 344/76

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Referring court

Consiglio di Stato

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellants: Stanley International Betting Ltd, Stanleybet Malta Ltd

Appellants:

Respondents: Ministero dell’Economia e delle Finanze, Agenzia delle Dogane e dei Monopoli di Stato

Respondents:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | Are Article 49 et seq. TFEU and Article 56 et seq. TFEU and the principles laid down by the Court of Justice of the European Union in [Joined Cases C-72/10 and C-77/10 Costa and Cifone [2012] ECR I-0000] to be interpreted as precluding a call for tenders for the award of licences with a period of validity shorter than that of licences awarded in the past, where that tendering procedure has been launched in order to remedy the consequences of the unlawful exclusion of a certain number of operators from earlier tendering procedures? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Are Article 49 et seq. TFEU and Article 56 et seq. TFEU and the principles laid down by the Court of Justice of the European Union in [Joined Cases C-72/10 and C-77/10 Costa and Cifone [2012] ECR I-0000] to be interpreted as precluding a call for tenders for the award of licences with a period of validity shorter than that of licences awarded in the past, where that tendering procedure has been launched in order to remedy the consequences of the unlawful exclusion of a certain number of operators from earlier tendering procedures?

Costa and Cifone

| 2. | Are Article 49 et seq. TFEU and Article 56 et seq. TFEU and the principles laid down by the Court of Justice of the European Union in Costa and Cifone to be interpreted as precluding the possibility that sufficient justification for the shorter period of validity of licences offered for tender, as compared with licences awarded in the past, can be found in the requirement for the licensing system to be reorganised through the alignment of licence expiry dates? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Are Article 49 et seq. TFEU and Article 56 et seq. TFEU and the principles laid down by the Court of Justice of the European Union in Costa and Cifone to be interpreted as precluding the possibility that sufficient justification for the shorter period of validity of licences offered for tender, as compared with licences awarded in the past, can be found in the requirement for the licensing system to be reorganised through the alignment of licence expiry dates?

Costa and Cifone

---
# Practice makes perfect: DLA personnel conduct emergency training exercise on DSCR 

/ Published Nov. 9, 2021
RICHMOND, Va, 
Key personnel within Defense Logistics Agency Installation Management Richmond, including representatives from Security and Emergency Services, Environmental Management, and DLA Aviation Public Affairs Office, gathered in Conference Room One of Bldg. 34 on Defense Supply Center Richmond, Virginia, Nov. 4 for a tabletop exercise. The fictitious exercise scenario was based on a hazardous material incident occurring on DSCR.

Bill Bullock, the installation emergency manager for Security and Emergency Services, said the exercise was to evaluate all decision-making processes and execute actions that would occur during a real-life HAZMAT situation. Bullock conducts emergency training throughout the year and holds emergency exercises on various scenarios annually to make sure employees are prepared to handle a multitude of emergency situations on DSCR.
#### In the Matter of Catherine M., a Child Alleged to be Neglected. Catherine L., Appellant; Administration for Children’s Services, Respondent.

[56 NYS3d 97]

Order of disposition, Family Court, New York County (Clark V. Richardson, J.), entered on or about May 17, 2016, to the extent it brings up for review a fact-finding order, same court and Judge, entered on or about April 15, 2015, which found that respondent mother had neglected the subject child, unanimously affirmed, and the appeal from the order of disposition otherwise dismissed, without costs, as moot.

The evidence amply supports Family Court’s neglect finding on account of the mother’s untreated mental illness, which both harmed the child and put her at imminent risk of further harm (Family Ct Act § 1012 [f] [i] [B]; *Matter of Skye C. [Monica S.],*127 AD3d 603 [1st Dept 2015]; *Matter of Zariyasta S.,*158 *518AD2d 45, 48 [1st Dept 1990]). As a result of her mental illness, the mother, among other things, removed the child from school and kept her socially isolated *(Skye C.,*127 AD3d at 604). In addition, the mother’s unfounded fear of radioactive contamination in her home caused dozens of emergency personnel to enter the home and transport the child to the hospital for an unnecessary medical evaluation, which the child told caseworkers made her nervous *(see Matter of Salvatore M. [Nicole M.],*104 AD3d 769, 769 [2d Dept 2013], *lv denied*21 NY3d 858 [2013]). The mother’s delusion also caused her to throw away the child’s toys, clothing, furniture items, and all of the family’s food, leading both the mother and the child to refrain from eating.

The nine-month period of supervised visitation has now lapsed, which render the mother’s arguments regarding the disposition moot *(Matter of Daleena T. [Wanda W.],*145 AD3d 628, 628, 629 [1st Dept 2016]).

We have considered the mother’s remaining contentions and find them unavailing.

Concur — Acosta, P.J., Renwick, Richter, Feinman and Webber, JJ.
# CFC countdown: $100K needed to meet goal by Saturday

/ Published Jan. 9, 2023
FORT BELVOIR, Va., 
Almost $100,000 stands between Defense Logistics Agency employees in the national capital region and their $300,000 goal for the 2022 Combined Federal Campaign, which ends Jan. 14.

Just 148 of the region’s 2,302 potential donors had contributed $194,000 by Jan. 5.

                Employees get information on charitable organizations during a Charity Fair at the McNamara Headquarters Complex in December 2022. Courtesy photo                            230109-D-D0441-002                            Employees get information on charitable organizations during a Charity Fair at the McNamara Headquarters Complex in December 2022. Courtesy photo            SHARE IMAGE:Download ImageImage DetailsPhoto By: Courtesy photoVIRIN: 230109-D-D0441-002“We usually have over 200 donors by the end of each campaign,” said Deputy Campaign Manager Daniel Tedesco, adding that employees still have a week to donate money or volunteer hours through what’s regarded as the world’s largest and most successful workplace charity campaign.

DLA Energy leads donations with $52,555 followed by DLA Information Operations and DLA Logistics Operations with $34,247 and $32,198 respectively.

Tedesco said employees don’t have to give a lot, or even as much as they gave in previous years, to make a difference. He and campaign managers throughout the federal government are ending the final week by encouraging others to pledge $5 a pay period or 5 volunteer hours.

“Even small contributions can make differences that have lasting impacts on people’s lives,” he said.

CFC gives employees access to over 20,000 nonprofit charitable organizations throughout the world. They include small community organizations with such causes as homelessness and animal welfare to well-known establishments like Catholic Charities and Children International. Federal employees have raised over $8.6 billion for 8,000 charities since the campaign began in 1961.

DLA Director Navy Vice Adm. Michelle Skubic described Americans as generous during the annual kickoff.

“The act of giving is a hallmark of our society and our nation. Whether your donation goes to help your local community or a worldwide cause, you are creating positive, meaningful change for others,” she said.

Employees can donate by credit card or payroll deduction on a one-time or recurring basis at GiveCFC.org or the CFC Giving Mobile App on their cell phone. Both options are secure and allow users to renew previous years’ pledges, create new pledges, search for specific charities by name or cause, and view local organizations. A hand icon appears next to charities needing volunteers.

For more information about donating, contact a keyworker or coordinator.
Exhibit 32.1

Certification of Principal Executive Officer
Required by Rule 13a-14(b) or 15d-14(b)
of the Exchange Act

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Advanstar, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the three months ended September 30,
2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Robert L. Krakoff, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §
1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge,:



|By: |  | /s/ROBERT L. KRAKOFFRobert L. Krakoff
Chief Executive Officer | 
|--- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------- | 
|    |  | Date: November 14, 2003                                       | 

---

QuickLinks
EXHIBIT 31.1
RULE 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) CERTIFICATIONS, ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACTOF 2002
I, Sheldon C. Fenton certify that:
1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Veridien Corporation;
2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
4. The small business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have:
 a)  designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is madeknown to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;  b)  evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and  c)  disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer’s internal controlover financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer’s most recentfiscal quarter (the small business issuer’s fourth physical quarter in the case of anannual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect,the small business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting.
5. The small business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small businessissuer’s auditors and the audit committee of small business issuer’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions):
 a)  all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe small business issuer’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and
     b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the small business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting.
Date: May 31, 2005     /s/ Sheldon C. Fenton   Sheldon C. Fenton, Chief Executive Officer
26
#### People v Baugh

2d Dept: 145 AD3d 794 (Queens)

denied 3/13/17 (Abdus-Salaam, J.)
No. 10-5819.

#### Wallace C. Jones, Jr., Petitioner v. Walter A. McNeil, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections.

562 U.S. 968, 131 S. Ct. 470,

178 L. Ed. 2d 299,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 7928.

October 12, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
Page 2 of 3

modeling. The exponential models contained in the EPA BMDS was developed in 

conjunction with the Netherlands' National Institute for Public Health and the 

Environment (RIVM) to be consistent with the exponential models contained in the 

RIVM's Proast software. 

The EPA BMDS exponential model includes a family of nested exponential models from 

which an optimal model (based on statistical and model criteria) can be determined. The 

exponential models provide flexibility and permit dose raised to a power and allowing for

asymptotic values. The flexibility of the nested models is reflected by the number of 

parameters considered in the models. The models also have the feature to model

lognormally distributed data. The nested exponential models therefore provide improved 

model fitting for all kinds of datasets. Because of the flexibility and advantages of the 

EPA BMDS exponential models, the formetanate data were reanalyzed with this 

software. A comparison of the EPA BMDS and the R-based program is summarized in 

the table below.

Table 1. Results of BMD Exponential Modeling for Brain & RBC ChE in PND17 

Males Treated with Formetanate (Ginger Moser Data)

Model Compartment

BMD Resultsa

(mg/kg/day)

BMD10 BMDL10

EPA BMDS Brain

0.097

0.097

0.059

0.059

0.085 Model 2 (AIC = -4.44)b

0.085 Model 3 (AIC = -4.44)b

0.051 Model 4 (AIC = -27.7)c

0.051 Model 5 (AIC = -27.7)c

R-based 

Program Brain 0.0309(0.017; 0.056)c 0.0188

EPA BMDS RBC

0.078

0.078

0.047

0.047

0.062 Model 2 (AIC = -164)

b

0.062 Model 3 (AIC = -164)

b

0.037 Model 4 (AIC = -178)

c

0.037 Model 5 (AIC = -178)

c

R-based 

Program RBC 0.0134(0.005; 0.034)d 0.0060

a Benchmark response (BMR) = 10%. 

b Unacceptable p value (<0.1) 

c Best fitting model selected based on AIC, p values and residual analyses.

d Lower and upper confidence interval on the BMD.
Page 3 of 3

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the analyses, there is less uncertainty associated with the results of the EPA 

BMDS model as reflected by the smaller BMD10/BMDL10 ratios (1.3x) compared with 

the R-based program (2.2x). The upper confidence interval (0.034 mg/kg) of the BMD10 

estimates from the R-based program was comparable to the BMD10 estimate obtained 

from the EPA BMDS runs (0.047 mg/kg), which provides support for the BMD10 

estimates from the EPA BMDS runs. Although the R-based programs BMDL10 of 0.006 

mg/kg for RBC is a conservative estimate, the EPA BMDS software provides a more 

precise estimate for this lower limit and is therefore the more appropriate estimate for use 

in risk assessment.
#### In the Matter of Omar Krubally, Appellant, v Fatou Jobe, Respondent.

[55 NYS3d 914]

Appeal by the father from an order of the Family Court, Rings County (Emily M. Martinez, Ct. Atty. Ref.), dated June 8, 2016. The order, insofar as appealed from, after a hearing, denied the father’s petition for joint legal custody of the parties’ children and awarded the mother sole legal custody of the children.

Ordered that the order is affirmed insofar as appealed from, without costs or disbursements.

The mother and the father, who were never married, have two children together. In March 2016, the father filed a petition for joint legal custody of the children. After a hearing, the Family Court found that joint legal custody was not a viable option given the parties’ relationship. Insofar as relevant here, the Family Court denied the father’s petition and awarded the mother sole legal custody of the children. The father appeals.

Contrary to the father’s contention, the Family Court properly determined that joint legal custody was not a viable option *(see Matter of Lee v Fitts,*147 AD3d 1058 [2017]; *Matter of Feliccia v Spahn,*108 AD3d 702 [2013]). Moreover, there is a sound and substantial basis in the record for the court’s determination that it is in the children’s best interests to award sole legal custody to the mother *(Matter of Lee v Fitts,*147 AD3d at 1058).

Chambers, J.P., Miller, Barros and Connolly, JJ., concur.
No. 09-10753.

#### Wayne C. Barnes, Petitioner v. Royal Health Care LLC.

562 U.S. 851, 131 S. Ct. 106,

178 L. Ed. 2d 65,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6090.

October 4, 2010.

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

Same case below, 357 Fed. Appx. 375.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Kelly Colesone, Appellant.

[66 NYS3d 435]

An appeal having been taken to this Court by the above-named appellant from a *476judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County (Michael Obús, J.), rendered September 29, 2016, said appeal having been argued by counsel for the respective parties, due deliberation having been had thereon, and finding the sentence not excessive, it is unanimously ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same is hereby affirmed.

Concur—Tom, J.P., Kapnick, Webber and Oing, JJ.
#### Com. v. Lopez 30

03/03/2016

570 EAL (2015)

30

. Justice EAKIN did not participate in the consideration or decision of this matter.

Denied

Pa.Super., 131 A.3d 104
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 113 (Friday, June 12, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32243-32244]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-15613]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management
[OR-014-6332-00: GP8-0212]


Notice of Prohibited Acts in the Klamath Falls Resource Area

AGENCY: Lakeview District, Klamath Falls Resource Area, Bureau of Land 
Management.

SUMMARY: The Lakeview District is republishing certain closures and 
restrictions at Topsy Campground. Personnel that are exempt from the 
closures and restrictions include any Federal, State, or local officer, 
or member of any organized rescue or fire-fighting force in performance 
of an official duty, or any person authorized by the Bureau of Land 
Management. These restrictions and closures had previously been 
published in the Federal Register, but had been written incorrectly. 
This notice remedies the mistake. Pursuant to 43 CFR 8365.1-6, the 
following restrictions are in effect at Topsy Campground:

    --No entry between 9pm and 6am, except as an occupant.
    --Campsites are limited to no more than 12 people and 2 vehicles.
    --Horses are prohibited.
    --No discharge or use of firearms, other weapons or fireworks 
between Topsy Road and the J.C. Boyle Reservoir from one eighth mile 
above to one eighth mile below the campground.

DATES: These restrictions are in effect immediately and shall remain in 
effect until rescinded or modified by the authorized officer.

PENALTIES: The authority for this supplemental rule is found in 43 CFR 
8365.1-6. Violation of this rule is punishable by a fine not to exceed 
$100,000 and/or imprisonment not to exceed 12 months.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT: Barron Bail, Klamath Falls Resource 
Area Manager, 2795 Anderson Ave., Bldg. 25, Klamath Falls, OR 97603, or 
telephone (541) 883-6916.


[[Page 32244]]


    Dated: June 3, 1998.
Bob Hopper,
Acting Lakeview District Manager.
[FR Doc. 98-15613 Filed 6-11-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-33-P