alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
(June 17, 1985)

#### German Colon, Individually and as Administrator of the Estate of Susanna Colon, Also Known as Susanna M. Arroyo, Deceased, Respondent, v Beekman Downtown Hospital et al., Defendants, and Jean E. Moise, Appellant.

In an action to recover damages for medical malpractice and wrongful death, defendant Moise appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Jones, J.), dated January 3, 1984, as denied that branch of his motion as sought dismissal of plaintiff’s cause of action to recover damages for wrongful death as to him due to improper service of process and the expiration of the Statute of Limitations.

Order affirmed, insofar as appealed from, with costs.

This action arose out of the death of the plaintiff’s decedent following surgery at Beekman Downtown Hospital. Service upon defendant Moise was accomplished by delivery of the summons and complaint to an administrator at the hospital where Moise was a staff anesthesiologist, followed by mailing of a copy of the summons and complaint to his residence. Defendant Moise concedes he received the summons and complaint the day following delivery from a secretary in the Department of Anesthesiology but he argues that such service was not in compliance with CPLR 308 (2) because his “actual place of business” was the Department of Anesthesiology and not the hospital administration office. Since defendant had shown no actual place of business other than Beekman Downtown Hospital, service upon a person of suitable age and discretion in the administration office comported with the requirements of CPLR 308 (2). As all other conditions for delivery and mail service have been met, service upon appellant was proper. *(See, Chalk v Catholic Med. Center,*58 AD2d 822.) The mere sworn denial of receipt of the copy of the summons and complaint at his home, without further probative facts, is insufficient to overcome the presumption of delivery which attaches to a properly mailed letter *(Engel v Lichterman,*95 AD2d 536, *affd*62 NY2d 943). Since the appellant’s affidavit raised no issue of fact in conflict with the affidavit of service, Special Term properly denied his *842motion without conducting a traverse hearing. Lazer, J. P., Gibbons, O’Connor and Brown, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.3

                            CERTIFICATION 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 Annual Report of Communications & Power Industries, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-K for the period ending September 27, 2002 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, O. Joe Caldarelli, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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.



/s/ O. Joe Caldarelli


O. Joe Caldarelli
Chief Executive Officer
December 12, 2002
Case: 1:02-cv-03055 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/30/02 Page 1 of 10 PageID #:1
Case: 1:02-cv-03055 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/30/02 Page 2 of 10 PageID #:2
Case: 1:02-cv-03055 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/30/02 Page 3 of 10 PageID #:3
Case: 1:02-cv-03055 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/30/02 Page 4 of 10 PageID #:4
Case: 1:02-cv-03055 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/30/02 Page 5 of 10 PageID #:5
Case: 1:02-cv-03055 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/30/02 Page 6 of 10 PageID #:6
Case: 1:02-cv-03055 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/30/02 Page 7 of 10 PageID #:7
Case: 1:02-cv-03055 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/30/02 Page 8 of 10 PageID #:8
Case: 1:02-cv-03055 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/30/02 Page 9 of 10 PageID #:9
Case: 1:02-cv-03055 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/30/02 Page 10 of 10 PageID #:10
Case: 1:01-cv-01364 Document #: 5 Filed: 07/20/01 Page 1 of 3 PageID #:13
Case: 1:01-cv-01364 Document #: 5 Filed: 07/20/01 Page 2 of 3 PageID #:14
Case: 1:01-cv-01364 Document #: 5 Filed: 07/20/01 Page 3 of 3 PageID #:15
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 141 (Tuesday, July 27, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 40225]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-15964]



[[Page 40225]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice: 11480]


Notice of Determinations; Culturally Significant Objects Being 
Imported for Conservation and Display in ``Lives of the Gods: Divinity 
in Maya Art'' Exhibition

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: I 
hereby determine that certain objects being imported from abroad 
pursuant to agreements with their foreign owners or custodians for 
temporary conservation and display in the exhibition ``Lives of the 
Gods: Divinity in Maya Art'' at The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New 
York, New York; the Kimbell Art Museum, Fort Worth, Texas; and at 
possible additional exhibitions or venues yet to be determined, are of 
cultural significance, and, further, that their temporary conservation 
and exhibition or display within the United States as aforementioned is 
in the national interest. I have ordered that Public Notice of these 
determinations be published in the Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chi D. Tran, Program Administrator, 
Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-
632-6471; email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#ff8c9a9c8b969091cdcbcac6bf8c8b9e8b9ad1989089"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="8cffe9eff8e5e3e2beb8b9b5ccfff8edf8e9a2ebe3fa">[email protected]</span></a>). The mailing address is U.S. 
Department of State, L/PD, 2200 C Street NW (SA-5), Suite 5H03, 
Washington, DC 20522-0505.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The foregoing determinations were made 
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.

Matthew R. Lussenhop,
Acting Assistant Secretary, Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, 
Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2021-15964 Filed 7-26-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-05-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
# Official Journal L 253/20 S

| | ISSN 1725-2555 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 253 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 5120 September 2008 |

ISSN 1725-2555

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 253

English edition

Legislation

Volume 5120 September 2008

---

| Contents | | I   Acts adopted under the EC Treaty/Euratom Treaty whose publication is obligatory | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | DIRECTIVES |
| | * | Commission Directive 2008/84/EC of 27 August 2008 laying down specific purity criteria on food additives other than colours and sweeteners (Codified version) (1) | 1 |

Contents

I   Acts adopted under the EC Treaty/Euratom Treaty whose publication is obligatory

page

DIRECTIVES

*

Commission Directive 2008/84/EC of 27 August 2008 laying down specific purity criteria on food additives other than colours and sweeteners (Codified version) (1)

1

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | * | Note to the reader (see page 3 of the cover) | s3 |

*

Note to the reader (see page 3 of the cover)

s3

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                       4,519,242
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               43,708,378
<ALLOWANCES>                                (8,949,673)
<INVENTORY>                                  3,056,292
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            44,305,746
<PP&E>                                      32,709,079
<DEPRECIATION>                              (4,982,867)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             198,752,334
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       53,650,110
<BONDS>                                    165,409,957
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                         59
<COMMON>                                           162
<OTHER-SE>                                 (21,546,979)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               198,752,334
<SALES>                                    103,604,748
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           103,604,748
<CGS>                                      104,807,585
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              104,807,585
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               158,955
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           9,763,635
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (10,807,517)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   482,596
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (11,290,113)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (11,290,113)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
# Official Journal C 278/2006

| | ISSN 1725-2423 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 278 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 4916 November 2006 |

ISSN 1725-2423

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 278

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 4916 November 2006

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | I   Information |
| | Commission |
| 2006/C 278/1 | Euro exchange rates | 1 |
| 2006/C 278/2 | Information communicated by Member States regarding State aid granted under Commission Regulation (EC) No 2204/2002 of 12 December 2002 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to State aid for employment (1) | 2 |
| 2006/C 278/3 | Information communicated by Member States regarding State aid granted under Commission Regulation (EC) No 68/2001 of 12 January 2001 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to training aid (1) | 4 |
| 2006/C 278/4 | Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.4451 — Alcatel/Nortel Networks) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (1) | 8 |
| 2006/C 278/5 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.4396 — Apollo Group/TNT Logistics) (1) | 9 |
| 2006/C 278/6 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.4378 — Providence/Caudwell Group) (1) | 9 |
| 2006/C 278/7 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.4399 — LBO France/Vinci Airport Services) (1) | 10 |
| 2006/C 278/8 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.4377 — Doughty Hanson/Caudwell Group Mobile Distribution Business) (1) | 10 |

Notice No

Contents

page

I   Information

Commission

2006/C 278/1

Euro exchange rates

1

2006/C 278/2

Information communicated by Member States regarding State aid granted under Commission Regulation (EC) No 2204/2002 of 12 December 2002 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to State aid for employment (1)

2

2006/C 278/3

Information communicated by Member States regarding State aid granted under Commission Regulation (EC) No 68/2001 of 12 January 2001 on the application of Articles 87 and 88 of the EC Treaty to training aid (1)

4

2006/C 278/4

Prior notification of a concentration (Case COMP/M.4451 — Alcatel/Nortel Networks) — Candidate case for simplified procedure (1)

8

2006/C 278/5

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.4396 — Apollo Group/TNT Logistics) (1)

9

2006/C 278/6

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.4378 — Providence/Caudwell Group) (1)

9

2006/C 278/7

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.4399 — LBO France/Vinci Airport Services) (1)

10

2006/C 278/8

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.4377 — Doughty Hanson/Caudwell Group Mobile Distribution Business) (1)

10

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
FILED

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

 APRIL 2, 2012

JOHN LEY

CLERK

 [DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 11-15437

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D. C. Docket No. 1:10-cv-20046-JAL

ISRAEL RODRIGUEZ VELAZQUEZ,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

BETH WEINMAN,

JOHN BAXTER,

HARLEY LAPPIN,

all in their individual capacities, 

Defendants-Appellees.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Florida 

________________________

(April 2, 2012)

Before TJOFLAT, BARKETT and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:
Israel Rodriguez Velazquez brought this action under Bivins v. Six Unknown

Narcotics Agents, 403 U.S. 388 (1971), against Federal Bureau of Prisons

personnel claiming that they denied him the equal protection of the laws in

violation of the Due Process Clause of the Fifth Amendment when they eliminated

the Spanish language from the Residential Drug Abuse Program so that the

Program would be delivered only in English. He also claimed that they denied

him his First Amendment right to speak the official language of Puerto Rico. 

(Valazquez, who lived and resided in Puerto Rico until his arrest and conviction

for trafficking narcotics, speaks only Spanish.) 

The district court referred Valazquez’s complaint to a magistrate judge who

issued a Report & Recommendation recommending that the district court dismiss

the complaint for failure to state a claim for relief. Over Valazquez’s objection,

the district court adopted the recommendation and dismissed the complaint,

agreeing with the magistrate judge that Valazquez “has no constitutional right to

vocational, rehabilitative or educational programs. Franklin v. District of

Columbia, 960 F. Supp. 394, [431] (D.D.C. 1997) (vacated in part on other

grounds, [163 F.3d 625 (D.C. Cir. 1998)]) (“The plaintiffs [,i.e., prison inmates,]

clearly have no constitutional right to vocational, rehabilitative or educational

programs. See, e.g., Women Prisoners [of the D.C. Department of Corrections v.

2
District of Columbia], 93 F.3d [910], 927 [(D.C. Cir. 1996]; Inmates of Occoquan

v. Barry, 844 F.2d 828, 836 (D.C. Cir.1988); Garza v. Miller, 688 F.2d 480, 485

(7th Cir.1982); Hoptowit [v. Ray], 682 F.2d [1237,] 1255 [9 Cir. 1982]. See

th

generally Palmer, [Constitutional Rights of Prisoners § 10.3, at 188 (5th

ed.1996)], supra § 10.2, at 178.”) 

Valazquez appeals the district court’s dismissal of his complaint. For the

reasons stated in the cases and authorities relied on by the district court and quoted

in the above parenthetical, we agree with the district court that Valazquez failed to

state a case for the denial of equal protection under the Due Process Clause or the

denial of his First Amendment right to speak. 

AFFIRMED.

3
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 621 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 621

  To amend the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 to 
provide for use of excess funds available under that Act to provide for 
               certain benefits, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 17, 2011

Mr. Rockefeller introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
       referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act of 1977 to 
provide for use of excess funds available under that Act to provide for 
               certain benefits, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Coal Accountability and Retired 
Employee Act of 2011'' or the ``CARE Act''.

SEC. 2. AMENDMENT OF SURFACE MINING CONTROL AND RECLAMATION ACT OF 
              1977.

    Section 402(i)(2) of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act 
of 1977 (30 U.S.C. 1232(i)(2)) is amended--
            (1) by striking ``Subject to'' and inserting the following:
                    ``(A) In general.--Subject to''; and
            (2) by adding at the end the following:
                    ``(B) Excess amounts.--
                            ``(i) In general.--Subject to paragraph 
                        (3), and after all transfers referred to in 
                        paragraph (1) and subparagraph (A) of this 
                        paragraph have been made, any amounts remaining 
                        after the application of paragraph (3)(A) 
                        (without regard to this subparagraph) shall be 
                        transferred to the trustees of the 1974 UMWA 
                        Pension Plan and used solely to pay pension 
                        benefits required under such plan.
                            ``(ii) 1974 umwa pension plan.--In this 
                        subparagraph, the term `1974 UMWA Pension Plan' 
                        means a pension plan referred to in section 
                        9701(a)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 
                        but without regard to whether participation in 
                        such plan is limited to individuals who retired 
                        in 1976 and thereafter.''.
                                 <all>
```
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 21.1

                     SUBSIDIARIES OF PEREGRINE SYSTEMS, INC.


Peregrine Systems GmbH (a German corporation)
Peregrine Systems Limited (an English corporation)
Peregrine Systems BV (a Netherlands corporation)
Peregrine Bridge Subsidiary (a Delaware corporation)
Peregrine Systems International Inc. (a Barbados corporation)
Peregrine Asset Management Corporation (a Delaware corporation)
Apsylog S.A. (a French corporation)
Apsylog, Inc. (a California corporation)
Apsylog GmbH (a German corporation)
AGDS S.A. (a French corporation)
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                          5
                                                    
<S>                                                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                      YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                  SEP-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                       SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                               5,571,431
<SECURITIES>                                                 0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       13,327,974
<ALLOWANCES>                                           (66,000)
<INVENTORY>                                                  0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     2,358,498
<PP&E>                                              73,103,929
<DEPRECIATION>                                     (16,390,209)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                      78,223,268
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               14,463,696
<BONDS>                                                      0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                        0
<PREFERRED>                                                  0
<COMMON>                                                47,427
<OTHER-SE>                                          29,056,054
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                        78,223,268
<SALES>                                                      0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   101,089,530
<CGS>                                                        0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        9,160,619
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                             0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                             0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   2,849,549
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      6,403,095
<INCOME-TAX>                                         5,454,170
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                    948,925
<DISCONTINUED>                                               0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                              0
<CHANGES>                                                    0
<NET-INCOME>                                           948,925
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                              .88
<EPS-DILUTED>                                              .88
        




</TABLE>
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Clifford Nash, Appellant.

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Counsel’s application to withdraw granted *(see, People v Crawford, 71*AD2d 38). (Appeal from judgment of Erie County Court, Dillon, J.—petit larceny.) Present—Denman, J. P., Boomer, Green, O’Donnell and Schnepp, JJ.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-6379
BOBBY R. EDWARDS, Plaintiff - Appellant, versusVIRGINIA PAROLE BOARD MEMBERS, in their official and individual capacities; SANDRA L. COMBS, in her official and individual capacity; WINNIE L. DIXON, in her official and individual capacity; JOSEPH F. LEWIS, in his official and individual capacity; JOHN B. METZGER, III, in his o fficial and individual capacity; LINDA R. PITMAN, in her official and individual capacity, Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Robert G. Doumar, District Judge. (CA-96-128-2) Submitted: July 23, 1996 Decided: August 5, 1996 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Bobby R. Edwards, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).23 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Edwards v. Virginia Parole Bd. Members , No. CA-96-128-2 (E.D. Va. Feb. 22, 1996). We dispense with oral argument becausethe facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED