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

Federal Register / Vol. 75, No. 196 / Tuesday, October 12, 2010 / Presidential Documents 62453 

Proclamation 8580 of October 6, 2010 

German-American Day, 2010 

By the President of the United States of America 

A Proclamation 

The American story has been written by those who have come to our 

shores in search of freedom, opportunity, and the chance at a better life. 

The German men and women who braved numerous perils to cross the 

Atlantic long ago left a legacy of millions of Americans of German ancestry 

who have been an integral part of our national life. On German-American 

Day, we pay tribute to the role this community has played in shaping 

America and contributing to our progress and prosperity. 

On October 6, 1683, 13 courageous German families arrived in Pennsylvania 

to start a new life. They began a chapter in the American narrative that 

has influenced our country in all walks of life, and their resolve lives 

on in the men, women, and families of German descent who enhance civic 

engagement, steer our industries, and fortify our Nation’s character. With 

their dedication and determination, the United States has been a leader 

in ingenuity and entrepreneurship, and has delivered a message of hope 

and opportunity that resonates around the world. Today, German Americans 

innovate and excel as leaders in all sectors of our society. 

On this occasion, we honor not only the countless achievements and rich 

heritage of German Americans, but also the strong ties between Germany 

and the United States. Our two nations share unbreakable bonds as allies 

with solemn obligations to one another’s security; values that inspired those 

brave settlers four centuries ago; and a vision for a safer, freer, more peaceful, 

more prosperous world. 

NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States 

of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution 

and the laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim October 6, 2010, 

as German-American Day. I encourage all Americans to learn more about 

the history of German Americans and reflect on the many contributions 

they have made to our Nation. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this sixth day of 

October, in the year of our Lord two thousand ten, and of the Independence 

of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-fifth. 

[FR Doc. 2010–25721 

Filed 10–8–10; 8:45 am] 

Billing code 3195–W1–P 


rfrederick on DSKD9S0YB1PROD with NOTICESOB#1.EPS</GPH>
#### In the Matter of Ephraim Frenkel (Admitted as Ephraim Zwi Frenkel), a Disbarred Attorney.

[777 NYS2d 905]

Petitioner's motion to confirm determination of the Hearing Panel granted and application for reinstatement held in abeyance, pursuant to 22 NYCRR 603.14 (i), as indicated. Concur—Nardelli, J.P., Tom, Mazzarelli, Sullivan and Ellerin, JJ.
#### B. R. Davis & Bro. et al. v. McComack & Co.

(No. 1766.)

Appeal from Galveston County.

Opinion by

Hurt, J.

§ 628. *Garnishment; formal pleadings in, not required; case stated.*McComack & Co., upon a judgment in their *552favor against one Moore, sued out a writ of garnishment against B. E. Davis & Bro. The writ was served upon J. P. Davis. He answered for the firm of B. E. D. & Bro., denying indebtedness to Moore, and denying that said firm had any of Moore’s effects in their possession, etc. J. P. Davis answered as a member of said firm, and in the name of said firm. Appellees controverted the answer, alleging that B. E. D. & Bro., at the time of the service of said writ, had, and now have, a large amount of valuable furniture, carpets and other personal property in their possession, belonging to said Moore, who had abandoned the state, etc. Appellees recovered judgment that said firm be required to deliver said property to the proper officer, etc., and that execution issue, etc., against the property of said firm of B. E. D. & Bro., and against the property of J. P. D., individually, etc. The first error assigned is, that “the court erred in going into the trial of this cause without having issues framed as required by the statute.” *Held:*Formal pleadings are not required. No demand for issues to be framed was made by appellants, nor was any exception made to the issues as presented by appellees. The answer, and the controversion thereof by the appellees, presented issues which could be legally tried and determined by the jury. If these issues were not sufficiently specific, appellants should have excepted thereto, and requested the court to cause proper issues to be framed. [Adkins v. Watson, 12 Tex. 200; Speak v. Kinsey, *11*Tex. 303.]

§ 6 2 9. *Garnishee may plead that property is exempt; such defense cannot he proved unless pleaded.*The second assignment of error is, that “the court erred in ruling out evidence offered by garnishees to show that the property in controversy was household furniture of Mooi’e and wife, and not subject to garnishment.” *Held:*That a garnishee has the right to set up the defense, that the property in his possession belonging to the defendant is exempt, is not an open question. He may make such defense. But such defense cannot be entertained unless *553it is pleaded. There is no such plea in this case, but on the contrary the answer of the garnishees denies their having any effects whatever belonging to Moore. It was not error to exclude the evidence.

February 11, 1885.

§ 630. *Description of property sufficient, token.*When property in controversy is in the possession of one of the parties litigant, the other party, when required to describe it, is not held bound to give a completely accurate description of it, but such reasonably accurate description as could, under the circumstances, be expected, will be sufficient.

Affirmed.
585 A.2d 411

#### DAVID BOCHICCHIO v. TOWNSHIP OF WEST ORANGE AND ROBERT A. SPINA. CARL C. STETZ v. DAVID BOCHICCHIO AND TOWNSHIP OF WEST ORANGE.

October 30, 1990.

Petition for certification denied.
Exhibit 32.1

Certification of Chief Executive Officer

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of CV Therapeutics, Inc. (the Company) hereby certifies, to such officers knowledge, that:

(i) the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended September 30, 2007, (the Report)
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

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



|                        |  |  |  |                                
|----------------------- |  |  |  | -------------------------------
|                        |  | 
|Dated: November 8, 2007 |  |  |  | /s/ LOUIS G. LANGE, M.D., PH.D.
|                        |  |  |  | Louis G. Lange, M.D., Ph.D.    
|                        |  |  |  | Chief Executive Officer
In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS 

No. 15-771V 

Filed: October 26, 2015 

UNPUBLISHED 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

CARRIE PAYNE, * 

 * 

 Petitioner, * Ruling on Entitlement; Concession; 

 * Influenza (Flu) Vaccine; Left Shoulder 

 * Injury; Shoulder Injury Related to 

SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Vaccine Administration (SIRVA); 

AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Special Processing Unit (SPU). 

 * 

 Respondent. * 

 * 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Lawrence R. Cohan, Anapol, Schwartz, et al., Philadelphia, PA, for petitioner. 

Christine Mary Becer, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

Dorsey, Chief Special Master: 

 On June 23, 2015, Carrie Payne (“petitioner”) filed a petition for compensation 

under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et 

seq.,

2 [the “Vaccine Act” or “Program”]. Petitioner alleges that as a result of receiving 

the influenza (“flu”) vaccine on October 14, 2014, she suffered a left rotator cuff injury 

that was caused in fact by her flu vaccination. Petition at 3. The case was assigned to 

the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters. 

On October 26, 2015, respondent filed her Rule 4(c) report in which she 

concedes that petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Respondent’s Rule 

4(c) Report at 3. Specifically, respondent states “that a preponderance of the medical 

evidence establishes that the injury to petitioner’s left shoulder was caused-in-fact by 

the administration of her October 14, 2014 flu vaccine, and that petitioner’s injury is not 

 

1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I intend to 

post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, in accordance with the E-Government Act 

of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-347, § 205, 116 Stat. 2899, 2913 (codified as amended at 44 U.S.C. § 3501 

note (2006)). In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to 

redact medical or other information, the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of 

privacy. If, upon review, I agree that the identified material fits within this definition, I will redact such 

material from public access. 

2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755. Hereinafter, for 

ease of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 

300aa (2012). 
2

due to factors unrelated to the administration of the flu vaccine.” Id. at 3. Respondent 

further states that the records show that petitioner suffered the sequela of her injury for 

more than six months. Id. Thus, respondent states that she “has concluded that 

[petitioner’s] left shoulder injury is compensable as a ‘caused-in-fact’ injury under the 

Act.” Id. 

 In view of respondent’s concession and the evidence presented, the 

undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to compensation. 

 s/Nora Beth Dorsey 

 Nora Beth Dorsey 

 Chief Special Master
585 A.2d 350

#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. CAROL J. MUNIZ.

July 17, 1990.

Petition for certification denied.
Exhibit 15.6

LOGO

Somekh Chaikin

KPMG Millennium Tower

17
Haarbaa Street, PO Box 609

Tel Aviv 61006, Israel

+972 3 684 8000

Securities and Exchange
Commission

Washington, D.C. 20549

Ladies and Gentlemen:

We were previously principal accountants for Kenon Holdings Ltd. and, under the date of March 31, 2015, we reported on the combined carve-out
financial statements of the carved-out operations of certain holdings of Israel Corporation Ltd. (Kenon Holdings, Carve-out) as of December 31, 2014 and 2013 and for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31,
2014.

On May 19, 2015, we were dismissed. We have read Kenon Holdings Ltd.s statements included under Item 16F of Kenon Holdings Ltd.s
Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2015, and we agree with such statements, except that we are not in a position to agree or disagree with Kenon Holdings Ltd.s statement that, on May 29, 2014, KPMG Singapore
had been engaged to serve as Kenon Holdings Ltd.s statutory auditor or with the statement that KPMG Singapore was not engaged regarding the application of accounting principles to a specified transaction or the type of audit opinion that might
be rendered on Kenon Holdings Ltd.s financial statements.

Very truly yours,

/s/ Somekh Chaikin

A member firm of KPMG International

Tel Aviv, Israel

April 20, 2016



Somekh Chaikin, an Israeli partnership and a member firm of the KPMG network of
independent member firms affiliated with KPMG International Cooperative (KPMG International), a Swiss entity.
EXHIBIT 32.2

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 Quarterly Report of Consolidated Graphics, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ending
September 30, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, G. Christopher Colville, Executive Vice President, Chief Financial and Accounting
Officer and Secretary 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:



Dated:
October 31, 2003

| | /s/G. CHRISTOPHER COLVILLEG. Christopher Colville
Executive Vice President, Chief Financial and Accounting Officer and Secretary
| | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---

QuickLinks
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

February 9, 2021

No. 04-21-00010-CV

Marcos MORALES,

Appellant

v.

EGZ, LLC,

Appellee

From the County Court, Guadalupe County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2020-CV-0298

Honorable Bill Squires, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

Appellant, Marcos Morales, filed his pro se notice of appeal on January 8, 2021. On 

January 12, 2021, this court notified appellant that the following were due no later than January 

22, 2021: (1) a docketing statement, (2) the filing fee of $205.00, and (3) an amended notice of 

appeal with a certificate of service showing the court reporter was served.

On January 21, 2021, appellant filed a motion requesting an extension of time to file the 

docketing statement, an affidavit of indigence, and an amended notice of appeal. On that same 

date, appellant filed of “Statement of Inability to Afford Payment of Court Costs or an Appeal 

Bond.”

Appellant’s request for an extension of time is GRANTED. The docketing statement and 

amended notice of appeal with a certificate of service showing the court reporter was served are 

due no later than February 24, 2021.

_________________________________

Lori I. Valenzuela, Justice
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 9th day of February, 2021.

___________________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 24 (Friday, February 5, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 6043]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-2563]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Notice of 
Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious 
Diseases Special Emphasis Panel RFA-AI-09-040 Protection of Human 
Health by Immunology and Vaccines U01.
    Date: March 1-3, 2010.
    Time: 8 a.m. to 6 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Hyatt Regency Bethesda, One Bethesda Metro Center, 7400 
Wisconsin Avenue, Lalique, Bethesda, MD 20814.
    Contact Person: Quirijn Vos, PhD, Scientific Review Officer, 
Scientific Review Program, Division of Extramural Activities, NIH/
NIAID/DHHS, 6700B Rockledge Drive, MSC 7616, Bethesda, MD 20892, 
301-451-2666, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#49383f263a09272028202d67272021672e263f"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="5120273e22113f383038357f3f38397f363e27">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.855, 
Allergy, Immunology, and Transplantation Research; 93.856, 
Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Research, National Institutes 
of Health, HHS)

    Dated: February 1, 2010.
Jennifer Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2010-2563 Filed 2-4-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 7390 

To extend the various programs authorized under the Violence Against 

Women Reauthorization Act of 2013, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 21, 2018 

Ms. JACKSON LEE introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committees on Energy and Commerce, Education and the Workforce, Financial Services, 

Natural Resources, and Foreign Affairs, for a period to be subsequently 

determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To extend the various programs authorized under the Violence Against Women Reauthorization Act of 2013, and 

for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Violence Against 

5 Women Extension Act of 2018’’. 

6 SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF PROGRAMS. 

7 The authorization of appropriations for any program, 

8 authority, or provision, including any pilot program, auVerDate Sep 11 2014 00:22 Dec 27, 2018 Jkt 089200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H7390.IH H7390

pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 7390 IH

1 thorized under the Violence Against Women Reauthoriza2 tion Act of 2013, or under any amendments made by that 

3 Act, shall continue in effect until February 8, 2019, in 

4 an amount proportional to the amount authorized for such 

5 program, authority, or provision for fiscal year 2018. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
585 A.2d 371

#### RITA HINDIN v. ALFRED I. NEUGUT.

September 10, 1990.

Petition for certification denied.
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

CURTIS HAMPTON and LINDA HAMPTON, his wife,

Appellants,

v.

FLORIDA MUNICIPAL INSURANCE TRUST,

Appellee.

No. 4D13-3659

[December 17, 2014]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, 

Broward County; Mily Rodriguez-Powell, Judge; L.T. Case No. 12010607 

(03).

Nancy Little Hoffmann of Nancy Little Hoffmann, P.A., and Robert J. 

McFann of McFann and Beavers, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellants.

E. Bruce Johnson and Scott D. Alexander of Johnson, Anselmo, 

Murdoch, Burke, Piper & Hochman, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

We affirm the final declaratory judgment determining that the Florida 

Municipal Insurance Trust (“FMIT”) agreement with its member, City of 

Plantation, provided excess insurance and not primary insurance for 

automobile accidents. Thus, it was not required to include uninsured 

motorist protection as part of its provisions. See § 627.727(2), Fla. Stat

(2011). The insuring agreement was modified by a “Specific Excess 

Endorsement Self-Retention Members – Automobile Liability,” which 

provided for a retention limit of $200,000 by the member. The terms of 

the endorsement provided that the member would not only cover claims 

within that limit but would provide for its own defense of such matters, 

although it could contract with FMIT to provide a defense and reimburse 

it for its expense. This self-retained limit is not like a deductible but is in 

fact self-insurance to the extent of the retained limit of $200,000.1 Thus, 

1 For this reason, the reference in a footnote in Vigilant Insurance Co. v. 

Continental Casualty Co., 33 So. 3d 734, 735 n.1 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010), that a self-
2

it becomes the primary layer of exposure, with the FMIT policy providing 

excess coverage over the self-retained limit. As an excess policy, FMIT’s 

obligation under section 627.727(2), Florida Statutes (2011), was to offer 

UM coverage at the time the trust was initially created, which it did.

Affirmed.

WARNER, LEVINE and CONNER, JJ., concur. 

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

retained limit is comparable to a deductible, although merely dicta, is not a good 

comparison and certainly not accurate as applied to the policy in this case.
584 A.2d 237

#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. ALPHONSUS J. JASINSKAS.

May 30, 1990.

Petition for certification denied.
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 196 (Tuesday, October 12, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 62591]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-25471]


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

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

[Notice (10-121)]


Performance Review Board, Senior Executive Service (SES)

AGENCY: National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA).

ACTION: Notice of Membership of SES Performance Review Board.

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

SUMMARY: The Civil Service Reform Act of 1978, Public Law 95-454 
(Section 405) requires that appointments of individual members to a 
Performance Review Board (PRB) be published in the Federal Register.
    The performance review function for the SES in NASA is being 
performed by the NASA PRB and the NASA Senior Executive Committee. The 
latter performs this function for senior executives who report directly 
to the Administrator or the Deputy Administrator and members of the 
PRB. The following individuals are serving on the Board and the 
Committee:

Performance Review Board

Chairperson, Chief of Staff, NASA Headquarters;
Executive Secretary, Director, Workforce Management and Development 
Division, NASA Headquarters;
Associate Administrator, NASA Headquarters;
Associate Deputy Administrator, NASA Headquarters;
Associate Administrator for Exploration Systems Mission Directorate, 
NASA Headquarters;
Associate Administrator for Space Operations Mission Directorate, NASA 
Headquarters;
Associate Administrator for Science Mission Directorate, NASA 
Headquarters;
Associate Administrator for Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate, 
NASA Headquarters;
Associate Administrator for Mission Support Directorate, NASA 
Headquarters;
Associate Administrator for Diversity and Equal Opportunity, NASA 
Headquarters;
Assistant Administrator for Human Capital Management, NASA 
Headquarters;
Chief Engineer, NASA Headquarters;
General Counsel, NASA Headquarters;
Chief Technologist, NASA Headquarters;
Chief Scientist, NASA Headquarters;
Chief Information Officer, NASA Headquarters;
Chief, Safety and Mission Assurance, NASA Headquarters;
Director, Ames Research Center;
Director, Dryden Flight Research Center;
Director, Glenn Research Center ;
Director, Goddard Space Flight Center;
Director, Johnson Space Center;
Director, Kennedy Space Center;
Director, Langley Research Center;
Director, Marshall Space Flight Center;
Director, Stennis Space Center.

Senior Executive Committee

Chairperson, Deputy Administrator, NASA Headquarters;
Chair, Executive Resources Board, NASA Headquarters;
Chair, NASA Performance Review Board, NASA Headquarters;
Associate Administrator, NASA Headquarters;
Associate Deputy Administrator, NASA Headquarters;
Chief Information Officer, NASA Headquarters.

Charles F. Bolden, Jr.,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2010-25471 Filed 10-8-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P