§ 9-2 Prohibition on awarding public contracts to certain contributors.
§ 9-3 Contributions made prior to effective date.
§ 9-5 Contribution statement by business entity.
§ 9-6 Return of excess contributions.
§ 9-8 Violations and penalties.
§ 9-9 Citizens' private right of action.
Claims procedures — See Ch. 7.
All persons who are an affiliate of a business entity as defined in Subsections A, B and E above, as such term is used in 11 U.S.C. § 101(2).
Every political committee, continuing political committee, or other form of association or organization that regularly engages in the support of candidates for the Township of Kingwood municipal elective offices or Township of Kingwood municipal political parties or political party committees.
The terms in the foregoing subsections have the meanings prescribed in N.J.A.C. 19:25-1.7.
Has the meaning prescribed in N.J.A.C. 19:25-1.7. By way of illustration, and not limitation, this definition includes pledges, loans, and in-kind contributions.
All contracts for professional services and extraordinary unspecifiable services as such term is used in N.J.S.A. 40A:11-5.
To any continuing political committee or political action committee that regularly engages in the support of Township of Kingwood municipal elections and/or Township of Kingwood municipal candidates, candidate committees, joint candidate committees, political committees, political parties, political party committees, (hereinafter "PAC"), in excess of the thresholds specified in Subsection C within one calendar year immediately preceding the date of the contract or agreement.
To any Township of Kingwood political committee or political party committee, between the time of first communication between that business entity and the municipality regarding a specific agreement for professional services or extraordinary unspecified services, and the later of the termination of negotiations or rejection of any proposal, or the completion of the performance or specified time period of that contract or agreement.
The monetary thresholds of this article are a maximum of $300 per calendar year each for any purpose to any candidate or candidate committee for governing body, or $500 per calendar year to any joint candidates' committee for governing body, or $300 per calendar year to a political committee or political party committee of the Township of Kingwood. However, for each business entity party to a contract for professional or extraordinary unspecified services as defined in Subsection A, or engaged in negotiations for a contract defined in Subsection A, when such business entity's contribution is aggregated with all persons defined in § 9-1, Definitions, above, by virtue of their affiliation to that business entity party, a maximum of $2,500 to all Township of Kingwood candidates, candidate committees, joint candidate committees, and holders of public office having ultimate responsibility for the award of a contract, all Township of Kingwood political committees and political party committees as described herein combined, without violating Subsection A of this section.
The Mayor of the Township of Kingwood, if the contract requires approval of the Mayor, or if a public officer who is responsible for the award of a contract is appointed by the Mayor.
Rules regarding subcontractors. No person may be awarded a subcontract to perform under a contract subject to this article if the subcontractor would be disqualified by Subsection A from receiving the contract at the time that the subcontract is awarded. Nor may any person who would be disqualified by Subsection A from receiving the contract perform substantially all of the obligations described in a contract for professional or extraordinary services that is subject to this article.
No contribution or solicitation of contributions made prior to the effective date of this article shall be deemed to give rise to a violation of this article.
No contract subject to this article may be renewed, extended, or materially modified unless the resulting renewal, extension, or modification would be allowable under the provisions of this article if it were an initial contract.
Prior to awarding any contract or agreement to procure professional services or extraordinary unspecified services from any business entity, the Township of Kingwood or its purchasing agents and departments, as the case may be, shall receive a sworn statement from said business entity which is the intended recipient of said contract that he/she/it has not made a contribution in violation of § 9-2 of this article. The Township of Kingwood, its purchasing agents and departments shall be responsible for informing the Township Committee that the aforementioned sworn statement has been received and that the business entity is not in violation of this article, prior to awarding the contract or agreement.
A business entity shall have a continuing duty to report to the Township of Kingwood any contributions that constitute a violation of this act that are made during the negotiation, proposal process or the duration of a contract. The Township of Kingwood, its purchasing agents and departments shall be responsible for informing the governing body within 10 business days after receipt of said report from the business entity, or at the next Township Committee meeting following receipt of said report from the business entity, or whichever comes first.
The certification required under this section shall be made prior to entry into the contract or agreement with the Township of Kingwood, or prior to the provision of services or goods, as the case may be, and shall be in addition to any other certifications that may be required by any other provision of law.
A business entity that is a party to a contract for professional services or extraordinary unspecified services may cure a violation of § 9-2 of this article if, within 30 days after the date on which the applicable ELEC report is published, said business entity notifies the municipality in writing and seeks and receives reimbursement of the contribution from the recipient of such contribution.
The contribution limitations prior to entering into a contract in § 9-2A do not apply to contracts which are awarded to the lowest responsible bidder after public advertising for bids and bidding therefor within the meaning of N.J.S.A. 40A:11-4; or are awarded in the case of emergency under N.J.S.A. 40A:11-6. There is no exemption for contracts awarded pursuant to a fair and open process under N.J.S.A. 19:44A-20 et seq.
Directly or indirectly, through or by any other person or means, done any act which if done directly would subject that entity to the restrictions of this article.
Furthermore, any business entity that violates § 8A(1) through (8) shall be disqualified from eligibility for future Township of Kingwood contracts for a period of four calendar years from the date of the violation.
Any person who knowingly, purposely, or recklessly violates any provision of this article, or who conspires with another person to violate any provision of this article, or who, with the purpose of promoting or facilitating a violation of this article, solicits another person to commit it, or aids or agrees, or attempts to aid another person in planning or committing it, shall be subject to punishment, including fines and/or imprisonment as fixed by law for violations of the Ordinances of the Township of Kingwood.
In addition to any rights that were heretofore available, or which may hereafter be available, to citizens, taxpayers, or associations, to challenge violations of this article, every person aggrieved by a violation of this article, or any taxpayer or resident of the Township of Kingwood has the right, consistent with the Rules of Court, to file charges in a court of competent jurisdiction, and/or to pursue a civil action for a violation of this article in a court of competent jurisdiction, and to seek and obtain declaratory, injunctive, or other legal or equitable relief, including but not limited to, attorneys' fees and costs, arising from or related to a violation of this article.
The monetary thresholds of the definition of "business entity" in § 9-1, Definitions, and § 9-2C of this article shall be increased effective March 1 of each calendar year by the percentage increase, in the prior calendar year, of the consumer price index for all urban consumers (CPI-U) for the Philadelphia region, rounded to the nearest $10.


text:
Resumo: Este trabalho buscou investigar se as estruturas logofóricas são aceitáveis ou não para os falantes do português brasileiro (PB). Diversas abordagens sintáticas e semânticas têm sido usadas para explicar a logoforicidade, e uma forte discussão teórica é sobre qual tipo de abordagem melhor dá conta do fenômeno. Autores como Reinhart e Reuland (1993) apontam que a anáfora logofórica existe separadamente das anáforas sintáticas na Gramática Universal. As anáforas sintáticas são guiadas por fatores sintáticos como localidade e c-comando. Já a logófora pode ou não observar essas condições sintáticas. Esses estudos também demonstram que, nos casos em que há logoforicidade, a anáfora e o pronome são intercambiáveis, ou seja, tanto um quanto o outro podem ser usados na mesma posição na frase. Com base nesses pressupostos teóricos, examinamos a aceitabilidade de construções logofóricas em PB com a finalidade de saber se elas estão presentes na gramática dos falantes dessa língua. Foi realizado um experimento off-line de julgamento de aceitabilidade, visto que, segundo Gibson e Fedorenko (2013), a intuição do linguista não é suficiente para averiguar tal aceitabilidade. O presente experimento mostrou que a anáfora logofórica é licenciada em PB, o que aponta que os sujeitos veem a anáfora logofórica e o pronome logofórico como diferentes. Não houve resultado significativo para o pronome, o que não nos permite apontar que não são licenciados em PB.
Palavras-chave: julgamento de aceitabilidade; logoforicidade; anáfora; pronome.
Abstract: This study sought to investigate whether these structures are acceptable or not for the speakers of Brazilian Portuguese. Both syntactic and semantic approaches have been used to explain the logophoricity and a strong theoretical discussion is about what kind of best approach to account for the phenomenon. Much of the literature on the subject Reinhart and Reuland (1993) points out that logophoric anaphora exists separately from syntactic anaphora in Universal Grammar. The syntactic anaphora is guided by syntactic factors such as location and c-command. Already logophor may or may not notice these syntactic conditions. These studies also demonstrate that where there logophoricity, the pronoun and anaphora are interchangeable, so, either one or the other can be used in the same position in the sentence. Based on these theoretical assumptions, we examine the acceptability of logophorics buildings in PB in order to know if they are present in the grammar of the speakers of that language. An offline experiment judgment of acceptability since that according to Gibson and Fedorenko (2013) the linguistics intuition is not enough to verify such acceptability. The following experiment showed the results were significant for logophoric anaphora, which shows that a degree I anaphora and logophoric pronoun as different. There was no significant result for the pronoun, which does not allow us to point out that are not licensed in PB.
Keywords: judgment of acceptability; logophoricity; anaphora; pronoun.
judgment of acceptability; logophoricity; anaphora; pronoun.
ARIEL, M. Accessing Noun Phrase antecedents. London: Routledge, 1990.
BADECKER, W.; STRAUB, K. The Processing Role of Structural Constraints on the Interpretation of Pronouns and Anaphors. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition, American Psychological Association, v. 28, n. 4, p. 748-769, 2002. https://doi.org/10.1037/0278-7393.28.4.748.
BRITO, D. B. S. O se reflexivo no português brasileiro. 2009. Tese (Doutorado em Linguística) – Faculdade de Letras, UFAL, Maceió, 2009.
BURKHARDT, P. Logophors: Looking Outside of Syntax; Evidence from Real-Time entence Comprehension. In: THRIFT, E. et al. (Ed.). Proceedings of Console IX, 2002. Disponível em: http://www.hum2.leidenuniv.nl/pdf/lucl/sole/console9/console9-burkhard.pdf. Acesso em: 10 abr. 2015.
CANTRALL, W. R. On the nature of the reflexive in English. 1969. Dissertação (PhD) - Universidade de Illinois, Urbana-Champaign, 1969.
CANTRALL, W. Viewpoint, Reflexives, and the Nature of Noun Phrases. The Hague: Mouton, 1974.
CHOMSKY, N. Lectures on government and binding. Dordrecht: Foris, 1981.
CHOMSKY, N. Knowledge of language. New York: Praeger, 1986.
v. 10, p. 141-177, 1975.
FORAKER, S. The processing of logophoric reflexives shows discourse and locality constraints. Procedings from the Annual Meeting of the Chicago Linguistic Society, Chicago Linguistic Society, n. 2, p. 295-309, 2003.
GALVES, C. C. Ensaios sobre gramática do português. Campinas, SP: Editora UNICAMP, 2001.
GIBSON, E.; FEDORENKO, E. The need for quantitative methods in syntax and semantics research. Languagem and Cognitive Processes, Taylor & Francis Online, v. 28, p. 88-124, 2013.
HARRIS, T.; WEXLER, K.; HOLCOMB, P. J. An ERP investigation of binding and coreference. Brain and Language, Elsevier, v. 75, p. 313-346, 2000. https://doi.org/10.1006/brln.2000.2318.
KENNISON, S. Comprehending the pronouns her, him, and his: implications for theories ofreferential processing. Journal of Memory and Language, Elsevier, v. 49, p. 335-352, 2003. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-596X(03)00071-8.
KUNO, S. Functional sentence perspective. A case study from Japanese and English. Linguistic Inquiry, MIT Press, v. 3, p. 269-320, 1987.
KUNO, S. Three perspectives in the functional approach to syntax. In: Grossman, Robin E.; JAMES SAN, L.; VANCE, Timothy J. (Ed.). Papers from the parasession on functionalism. Chicago: Chicago Linguistic Society, 1975. p. 276-336.
KURODA, S. Where epistemology, grammar and style meet: A case study from Japanese. In: ANDERSON, S.; KIPARSKY, P. (Ed.). A Festschrift for Morris Halle. New York: Holt; Rinehart & Winston, 1973.
LEITÃO, M. M. Psicolinguística experimental: focalizando o processamento da linguagem. In: MARTELOTTA, M. E. Manual de Linguística. São Paulo: Editora Contexto, 2011.
LEITÃO, M. M.; PEIXOTO, P.; SANTOS, S. Processamento da co-referência intra-sentencial em português brasileiro. Veredas on-line, Juiz de Fora, UFJF, v. 2, p. 50-61, 2008.
MENUZZI, S. Binding Theoryand Pronominal Anaphora in Brazilian Portuguese. 1997. Tese (Doutorado) - Universidade de Leiden, 1997.
NICOL, J.; SWINNEY, D. The role of structure in coreference assignment during sentence comprehension. Journal of Psycholinguistic Research, Spring Link, v. 18, n. 1, p. 5-19, 1989.
POLLARD, C.; SAG,I. A. Anaphors in English and scope of Binding Theory. Linguistic Inquiry, MIT Press, 23:2, p. 261–303, 1992.
REINHART, T.; REULAND, E. Reflexivity. Linguistic Inquiry, MIT Press, v. 24, n. 4, p. 657-720, 1993.
ROSS, J. R. On declarative sentences. In: JACOBS, R. A.; ROSENBAUM, P. S. (Ed.). Readings in English transformational grammar. Washington: Georgetown University Press, 1970. p. 222-272.
v. 18, n. 3, p. 445-479, 1987.
STURT, P. The time-course of the application of binding constraints in reference resolution. Journal of Memory and Language, Elsevier, v. 48, p. 542-562, 2003. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0749-596X(02)00536-3.
WARSHAWSKY, F. Reflexivization I & II. Indiana University Linguistics Club, 1965. [Reproduzido em notas de linguistic underground (Syntax and Semantics, v. 7), editado por James D. McCawley. New York: Academic Press, 1976, p. 63-84].
ZRIBI-HERTZ, A. Anaphor binding and narrative point of view: English reflexive pronouns in sentence and discourse. Language, Washington, v. 65, n. 4, p. 695-727, 1989. https://doi.org/10.2307/414931.

matches: v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v.


text:
GS-Fleetcontrol GmbH is very pleased by your visit to this website. The protection of your personal data is very important to us. That is why we always handle your personal data confidentially.
In the following we will inform you about data protection in our company. Your personal data is used exclusively according to the legal data protection regulations of, for example, the German Federal Data Protection Act (BDSG) or the EU General Data Protection Regulation (GDPR).
By using this website you are agreeing to the collection and use of your personal data as declared in this data protection declaration.
Every time you visit our website our system collects automated data and information. While still ensuring your anonymity, data such as internet browser, operating system, user’s IP address, referrer URL, and data and time of the server request is transmitted when our website is accessed.
This data cannot be assigned to any certain person(s) by GS-Fleetcontrol .This data is not merged with any other data sources. After being statistically evaluated, the data shall then be deleted. It shall be used exclusively for the purpose of improving the attractiveness, contents and functionality of our website. Art. 6 S. 1 lit f GDPR is the legal basis for the temporary storage of the data and log files, as well as our entitled interest in the data processing.
Furthermore, personal data is only collected by us if you communicate it to us yourself, for example via contact form or email. If we obtain consent from the data subject for the processing of personal data, Art. 6 S. 1 lit a GDPR is the valid legal basis for the processing of personal data.
If the processing is necessary for the protection of a legitimate interest of our company or of a third party and the interests, basic rights, and basic freedoms of the data subject do not outweigh the interest of the former, then Art. 6 S. 1 lit f GDPR serves as the legal basis for the processing.
If you apply at one of our companies electronically, your information shall be exclusively used for the processing of your application and shall not be divulged to third parties. Please be aware that any applications sent to us by email are transmitted unencrypted.
Personal data is deleted or blocked as soon as the purpose of its storage no longer applies. It can be stored beyond that if provisions in Union regulations, laws or other provisions that the controllers are subject to are made for this by the European or national legislators. The data is also then blocked or deleted when the storage period stipulated by the listed standards expires unless there is a necessity to continue storing the data for a contract completion or fulfilment.
Cookies are text information files which your internet browser saves on your computer when you open one of our web pages. This is not personal data.
If you deactivate cookies, this can affect your usage possibilities of our website. The functional life of cookies is limited to a maximum of one year.
This website uses Google Analytics, a web analysis service of Google Inc. (“Google”). The usage includes the “Universal Analytics” mode. This makes it possible to assign data, sessions, and interactions across several devices to one pseudonym and therefore to analyze the activities of a user across devices and platforms. Google uses this information to analyze the use of the website, compile reports about the website activities, and to provide for us additional services connected to the use of the website and internet.
Please be advised that Google Analytics was expanded by the code “gat._anonymizeIp();” on this website in order to ensure an anonymized collection of IP addresses (so-called IP masking). The data sent by us and linked to cookies, user name (e.g. user ID) or advertising IDs is automatically deleted after 14 months.
You can prevent the collection of the data (including your IP address) to Google about your use of the website by the cookie, as well as the processing of this data by Google by clicking on the following link and downloading and installing the browser plugin: https://tools.google.com/dlpage/gaoptout?hl=en.
Art. 6 S. 1 lit a GDPR is the legal basis for the processing of personal data using cookies for the purposes of analysis with the obtained consent of the user.
Our web pages are hosted on our behalf by a service provider located in Germany. They provide for us the technical support of the website and in this connection also process personal data. A transmission of your data to third parties shall absolutely not take place unless we are legally required to do so or the data transfer is necessary in order to fulfill the contractual relationship. Through legal, technical, and organizational measures, as well as through regular inspections, we ensure that personal data is processed on the basis of our instructions in accordance with this data protection declaration and therefore with the GDPR.
GS-Fleetcontrol employs technical and organizational safety measures in order to protect the data that you have made available in the best possible way from unintentional or intentional manipulation, loss, destruction or access by unauthorized persons.
For the purposes of GDPR, you are the data subject if your personal data is processed, and you have the following rights vis-à-vis the controller.
You have the right to obtain from the controller confirmation as to whether or not personal data concerning you is being processed by us. If this is the case, you can request disclosure about the information according to Art. 15 GDPR.
According to Art. 16 GDPR, you have the right to obtain rectification and/or completion from the controller if the processed personal data concerning you is inaccurate or incomplete. The controller has to carry out the rectification without undue delay.
You can demand that the controller deletes personal data related to you without undue delay and the controller has the obligation to delete this data without undue delay provided that one of the grounds according to Art. 17 GDPR applies.
According to Art. 20 GDPR, you have the right to receive the personal data that you have provided to the controller in a structured, commonly used and machine-readable format. Furthermore, you have the right to transmit this data to another controller without the hindrance from the controller to which the personal data has been provided. According to Art. 21 GDPR, you have the right to object, on grounds relating to your particular situation, at any time to the processing of personal data concerning you that is done on the basis of Art. 6 S. 1 lit e or f GDPR. This also applies to profiling based on these provisions.
Without prejudice to other administrative or judicial legal remedy, you have the right to lodge a complaint to a supervisory authority, especially in the member state of your residence, employment, or the location of the supposed infringement if you believe that the processing of personal data concerning you violates Art. 57 S. 1 lit f GDPR.
If you have any questions regarding the processing of your personal data, you can contact our Data Protection Officer, who is also available to you for information requests, suggestions or complaints.
If you have questions, suggestions or requests and would like to contact us via our contact form, we require your name, email address, and message text in order to improve the processing, preparation and subsequent contact.

matches:
Art. 6
Art. 6
Art. 6
Art. 6
Art. 15
Art. 16
Art. 17
Art. 20
Art. 21
Art. 6
Art. 57


text:
[242 U.S. 171, 172] Messrs. O. E. Holman and William W. Fry for plaintiff in error.
[242 U.S. 171, 173] Messrs. George S. Grimes and Jesse Van Valkenburg for defendant in error.
This case comes here on writ of error to the supreme court of North Dakota to review a decree quieting title in the defendant in error-the plaintiff below-to land situated in that state. The plaintiff in error, a resident of Minnesota, claimed under an executory contract for [242 U.S. 171, 174] the purchase of the land in controversy, and the rights of the parties turned upon whether this contract was outstanding or had been duly canceled. Both Minnesota, where the contract was made and to be performed, and North Dakota, had statutes providing that a vendor in a contract for the sale of land may not cancel and terminate the same upon default, except after written notice to the vendee, giving him at least thirty days within which to make good his nonperformance. Minn. Rev. Stat. 1905, 4442; N. D. Rev. Codes 1905, chap. 30, art. 3, N. D. Comp. Laws 1913, chap. 30, art. 4. The material provisions of the latter statute are copied in the margin. 1 The vendor in this case (grantor of defendant [242 U.S. 171, 175] in error) had given to the sheriff of the county where the land lay a written notice of cancellation to be served upon the plaintiff in error if found within the said county, and upon return of not found, caused the same to be published in a county newspaper, and later filed for record affidavits of publication and of nonredemption,-all in conformity with the North Dakota statute, if it applied.
When the present action was brought to quiet title, plaintiff in error defended, and asked for counter relief, contending that his contract was still valid and subsisting, as the action prescribed by the Minnesota statute to entitle a vendor to cancel had not been taken. The trial court held that the North Dakota law governed; that under it the contract had been 'duly and legally canceled;' that the plaintiff in error having shown no right in the land, title should be forever quieted in the defendant in error. This decree was affirmed by the supreme court on appeal. Wilson v. Kryger, 29 N. D. 28, 149 N. W. 721. We are asked to review the case on the ground that the state court deprived the plaintiff in error of property without [242 U.S. 171, 176] due process of law and impaired the obligation of his contract, in holding that the cancelation proceeding, of which the plaintiff in error had no actual notice, effectively terminated his rights under the contract.
It is apparent from the above statement that there has been no lack of due process. The court below, having jurisdiction of the suit to quiet title, was called upon to determine the conflicting claims to the land. The plaintiff in error voluntarily appeared, and he availed himself of the opportunity to urge his claims to equitable ownership under the contract of sale. The court decided against him, holding the contract no longer outstanding. The most that the plaintiff in error can say is that the state court made a mistaken application of doctrines of the conflict of laws in deciding that the cancellation of a land contract is governed by the law of the situs instead of the place of making and performance. But that, being purely a question of local common law, is a matter with which this court is not concerned. Pennsylvania R. Co. v. Hughes, 191 U.S. 477 , 48 L. ed. 268, 24 Sup. Ct. Rep. 132; Finney v. Guy, 189 U.S. 335, 346 , 47 S. L. ed. 839, 845, 23 Sup. Ct. Rep. 558; Allen v. Alleghany Co. 196 U.S. 458 , 49 L. ed. 551, 25 Sup. Ct. Rep. 311; Marrow v. Brinkley, 129 U.S. 178 , 32 L. ed. 654, 9 Sup. Ct. Rep. 267.
The argument of the plaintiff in error is seemingly based upon the erroneous theory that his rights were foreclosed by the cancellation proceeding, which, lacking the requisite notice, deprived him of property without due process. But the action under the cancellation statute was in no sense a judicial proceeding. It was simply a statutory condition with which vendors were required to comply before they could take advantage of a default by the vendee. If the contract, properly interpreted, or the law, properly applied, required that this condition be performed in Minnesota, steps taken by him under the North Dakota statute would be ineffective. Whether or not proper proceedings had been taken to secure cancelation could be determined only by a court having [242 U.S. 171, 177] jurisdiction; and the North Dakota court had jurisdiction not only over the land, but, through the voluntary appearance of plaintiff in error, also over him. His rights have been foreclosed, not by the cancellation proceeding under the statute, but by a due and regular judicial decree which was based upon the finding that a default had occurred, of which the vendor was entitled to take advantage, having complied with the proper law. If the plaintiff in error had not submitted himself to the jurisdiction of the court, the decree could have determined only the title to the land, and would have left him free to assert any personal rights he may have had under the contract. But, having come into court and specifically asked in his cross bill that he be declared entitled to the 'possession and control of the real estate described in the complaint herein under a contract of sale,' he cannot now complain if he has been concluded altogether in the premises. The plaintiff in error relies upon Selover, B. & Co. v. Walsh, 226 U.S. 112 , 57 L. ed. 146, 33 Sup. Ct. Rep. 69. That was a personal action for breach of contract, and not, like the present case, an action merely to determine the title to land; and, as the court found on the facts there involved, that the proper law as to cancellation had been applied, the case cannot be construed as holding that an erroneous application thereof would raise a question of due process.
The contention based on the contract clause is equally devoid of merit, for there has been no subsequent legislation impairing the obligation of the contract. Impairment by judicial decision does not raise a Federal question. Cross Lake Shooting & Fishing Club v. Louisiana, 224 U.S. 632 , 56 L. ed. 924, 32 Sup. Ct. Rep. 577.
'Par. 7494. Owner must give written notice to vendee or purchaser.-No owner of real estate, or owner of any equity therein, [who] shall hereafter make or execute a contract for deed, bond for deed, or other instrument for the future conveyance of any such real estate or equity therein, shall have the right to declare a cancellation, termination or forfeiture thereof or thereunder, except upon written notice to the vendee or purchaser, or his assigns, as hereinafter provided; and such notice shall be given to such vendee or purchaser or his assigns, notwithstanding any provision or condition in any such instrument to the contrary.
'Par. 7495. In case of default. Contents of notice.-Whenever any default shall have been made in the terms or conditions of any such instrument hereinafter made, and the owner or vendor shall desire to cancel or terminate the same, [he] shall, within a reasonable time after such default, cause a written notice to be served upon the vendee or purchaser, or his assigns, stating that such default occurred, and that said contract will be canceled or terminated, and shall recite in said notice the time when said cancelation or termination shall take effect, which shall not be less than thirty days after the service of such notice.
'Par. 7496. Notice, how served.-Such notice shall be served upon the vendee or purchaser, or his assigns, in the manner now provided for the service of summons in the district court of this state, if such person to be served resides within the state. If such vendee or purchaser, or his assigns, as the case may be, resides without the state or cannot be found therein, of which fact, the return of the sheriff of the county in which said real estate is situated, that such person to be served cannot be found in his county, shall be prima facie evidence, then such notice shall be served by the publication thereof in a weekly newspaper within said county; or, if there is no weekly newspaper within said county, then in a newspaper published at the capital of this state for a period of three successive weeks.

matches:
art. 3
art. 4
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.
v.


§3513.10 What does this part do?
§3513.20 Does this part apply to me?
§3513.30 What policies and procedures must I follow?
§3513.137 Who in Ex-Im Bank may grant an exception to let an excluded person participate in a covered transaction?
§3513.220 What contracts and subcontracts, in addition to those listed in 2 CFR 180.220, are covered transactions?
§3513.332 What methods must I use to pass requirements down to participants at lower tiers with whom I intend to do business?
§3513.437 What method do I use to communicate to a participant the requirements described in the OMB guidance at 2 CFR 180.435?
Source: 72 FR 30244, May 31, 2007, unless otherwise noted.
This part adopts the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) guidance in subparts A through I of 2 CFR part 180, as supplemented by this part, as the Export Import Bank of the United States (Ex-Im Bank) policies and procedures for nonprocurement debarment and suspension. It thereby gives regulatory effect for Ex-Im Bank to the OMB guidance as supplemented by this part. This part satisfies the requirements in section 3 of Executive Order 12549, “Debarment and Suspension” (3 CFR 1986 Comp., p. 189), Executive Order 12689, “Debarment and Suspension” (3 CFR 1989 Comp., p. 235) and 31 U.S.C. 6101 note (Section 2455, Pub. L. 103-355, 108 Stat. 3327).
(a) Participant or principal in a “covered transaction” (see subpart B of 2 CFR part 180 and the definition of “nonprocurement transaction” at 2 CFR 180.970, as supplemented by subpart B of this part).
(b) Respondent in an Ex-Im Bank suspension or debarment action.
Ex-Im Bank policies and procedures that you must follow are the policies and procedures specified in each applicable section of the OMB guidance in subparts A through I of 2 CFR part 180, as that section is supplemented by the section in this part with the same section number. The contracts that are covered transactions, for example, are specified by section 220 of the OMB guidance (i.e., 2 CFR 180.220) as supplemented by section 220 in this pat (i.e., §3513.220). For any section of OMB guidance in subparts A through I of 2 CFR 180 that has no corresponding section in this part, Ex-Im Bank policies and procedures are those in the OMB guidance.
(a) The Ex-Im Bank agency head or designee may grant an exception permitting an excluded person to participate in a particular covered transacting. If the Ex-Im Bank agency head or designee grants an exception, the exception must be in writing and state the reason(s) for deviating from the government wide policy in Executive Order 12549.
Although the OMB guidance at 2 CFR 180.220(c) allows a Federal agency to do so (also see optional lower tier coverage in the figure in the appendix to 2 CFR part 180), Ex-Im Bank does not extend coverage of nonprocurement suspension and debarment requirements beyond first-tier procurement under a covered nonprocurement transaction.
To communicate the requirements, you must include a term or condition in the transaction requiring the participants' compliance with subpart C of this part and requiring them to include a similar term or condition in lower-tiered covered transactions.


Earlier this month, Transmittals to the State Operations Manual for ASCs (Appendix L) implemented certain clarifications/changes to the anesthetic risk assessment, H&P and pre-surgical evaluation Conditions of Participation at ASCs, effective 5.13.11. The new standards from the Transmittal are set forth below, followed by the provisions in which these new standards of Appendix L have been incorporated.
1.	Anesthetic Risk Assessment: When the comprehensive H&P assessment is performed in the ASC on the same day as the surgical procedure, the Transmittal indicates that the assessment of the patient’s procedure/anesthesia risk must be conducted separately from the history and physical, including any update assessment incorporated into that history and physical.
a.	The H&P (conducted within 30 days of the scheduled surgery) must be comprehensive in order to allow assessment of the patient’s readiness for surgery and, as clarified by the Transmittal, is required regardless of the type of surgical procedure.
b.	While the comprehensive H&P may be performed in the ASC on the same day as the surgical procedure (provided that it is conducted by qualified personnel, is comprehensive, and the results of the H&P are placed in the patient’s medical record prior to the surgical procedure), according to the Transmittal, it is not acceptable to conduct the H&P after the patient has been prepped and brought into the operating or procedure room. The rationale for this requirement is that the purpose of the H&P is to determine, prior to surgery, whether there is anything in the patient’s overall condition that would affect the conduct of, or possibly require cancellation of, the planned procedure.
a.	Independent of the H&P requirement discussed above, upon admission to the ASC each ASC patient must have a pre-surgical assessment by a physician to evaluate the risk of the anesthesia and of the procedure for that patient. The Transmittal notes that this component must be conducted by a physician, immediately prior to surgery, and must be performed in a manner consistent with the anesthetic risk assessment requirements discussed in paragraph 1 above.
b.	In accordance with the Transmittal, if the H&P is performed on the day of the surgical procedure in the ASC, some, but not all, elements of the pre-surgical assessment may be incorporated into the H&P. However, the assessment of the patient’s risk for the procedure and anesthesia (as discussed in paragraph 1 above) must still be conducted separately, by a physician and immediately prior to surgery.
Below are the sections from the Transmittal in which each of the foregoing is discussed. The new clarification language is highlighted in red.
(1) A physician must examine the patient immediately before surgery to evaluate the risk of anesthesia and of the procedure to be performed.
The purpose of the exam immediately before surgery is to evaluate, based on the patient’s current condition, whether the risks associated with the anesthesia that will be administered and with the surgical procedure that will be performed fall within an acceptable range for a patient having that procedure in an ASC, given that the ASC does not provide services to patients requiring hospitalization. The assessment must be specific to each patient; it is not acceptable for an ASC to assume, for example, that coverage of a specific procedure by Medicare or an insurance company in an ASC setting is a sufficient basis to conclude that the risks of the anesthesia and surgery are acceptable generically for every ASC patient. The requirement for a physician to examine the patient immediately before surgery is not to be confused with the separate requirement at 42 CFR 416.52(a)(1) for a history and physical assessment performed by a physician, although it is expected that the physician will review the materials from such pre-admission examination as part of the evaluation. Nevertheless, this requirement does constitute one component of the requirement at 42 CFR 416.52(a)(2) for a pre-surgical assessment upon admission. In those cases, however, where the comprehensive history and physical assessment is performed in the ASC on the same day as the surgical procedure, the assessment of the patient’s procedure/anesthesia risk must be conducted separately from the history and physical, including any update assessment incorporated into that history and physical. See the interpretive guidelines for§§416.52(a)(1) & (2).
The ASC‟s policies must address the basis or criteria used within the ASC in conducting these risk assessments, and must assure consistency among assessments.
ASA PS VI – Declared brain-dead patient whose organs are being removed for donor purposes.
As the ASA PS level of a patient increases, the range of acceptable risk associated with a specific procedure or type of anesthesia in an ambulatory setting may narrow. An ASC that employed this classification system in its assessment of its patients might then consider, taking into account the nature of the procedures it performs and the anesthesia used, whether it will accept for admission patients who would have a classification of ASA PS IV or higher. For many patients classified as ASA PS level III, an ASC may also not be an appropriate setting, depending upon the procedure and anesthesia.
If a State establishes licensure limitations on the types of procedures an ASC may perform that are based on patient classifications and would permit ASCs to perform fewer procedures than they would under the CfCs, then the ASC must conform to those State requirements. However, State requirements that would expand the types of procedures an ASC may offer beyond what is permitted under the CfCs are superseded by the Federal CfC requirements.
(1) Not more than 30 days before the date of the scheduled surgery, each patient must have a comprehensive medical history and physical assessment completed by a physician (as defined in section 1861(r) of the Act) or other qualified practitioner in accordance with applicable State health and safety laws, standards of practice, and ASC policy.
should specifically indicate that the patient is cleared for surgery in an ambulatory setting.
The H&P must be completed and documented for each ASC patient no more than 30 calendar days prior to date the patient is scheduled for surgery in the ASC.
In cases where the patient is scheduled for two surgeries in the ASC within a short period of time, the same H&P may be used so long it is completed no more than 30 calendar days before each surgery. For example, if a patient has two surgeries for cataracts scheduled, one eye on May 3rd, and the other eye on May 18th, and H&P performed on April 20th could be used for both surgeries.
The H&P is still required in those cases where the patient is referred to the ASC for surgery on the same day as the referral and the referring physician has indicated it is medically necessary for the patient to have the surgery on the same date. The H&P may be performed by the referring physician, if the ASC‟s policies permit this, or qualified personnel in the ASC. If there are elements of the H&P that are essential to the performance of the physician assessment required under §416.42(a) or under this requirement at §416.52(a)(1), based on the type of procedure to be performed as well as applicable State health and safety laws, standards of practice, or ASC policy, and those elements cannot be completed prior to the scheduled time of the surgical procedure, then it is questionable whether the case is suitable for that ASC.
The H&P may be performed on the same day as the surgical procedure, and may be performed in the ASC, as long as it is conducted by qualified personnel, is comprehensive, and the results of the H&P are placed in the patient’s medical record prior to the surgical procedure (see §416.52(a)(3). It is not acceptable to conduct the H&P after the patient has been prepped and brought into the operating or procedure room, since the purpose of the H&P is to determine before the surgery whether there is anything in the patient’s overall condition that would affect the conduct of the planned procedure, or which may even require cancellation of the procedure.
The medical history and physical examination must be completed and documented by a physician (as defined in Section 1861(r) of the Act) or other qualified licensed individual practitioner in accordance with State law, generally accepted standards of practice, and ASC policy.
In all cases the practitioners included in the definition of a physician must be legally authorized to practice within the State where the ASC is located and providing services within their authorized scope of practice.
Other qualified licensed individuals are those licensed practitioners who are authorized in accordance with their State scope of practice laws or regulations to perform an H&P and who are also formally authorized by the ASC to conduct an H&P. Other qualified licensed practitioners could include nurse practitioners and physician assistants.
More than one qualified practitioner can participate in performing, documenting, and authenticating an H&P for a single patient. When performance, documentation, and authentication are split among qualified practitioners, the practitioner who authenticates the H&P will be held responsible for its contents.
In the case of an ASC the H&P is typically completed by the patient’s primary care practitioner rather than a member of the ASC‟s medical staff. The ASC‟s policy on H&Ps should address submission of an H&P prior to the patient’s scheduled surgery date by a physician who is not a member of the ASC‟s medical staff and should indicate whether it will accept H&Ps performed by a qualified licensed individual who does not practice at the ASC but is acting within his/her scope of practice under State law or regulations.
(2) Upon admission, each patient must have a pre-surgical assessment completed by a physician or other qualified practitioner in accordance with applicable State health and safety laws, standards of practice, and ASC policy that includes, at a minimum, an updated medical record entry documenting an examination for any changes in the patient’s condition since completion of the most recently documented medical history and physical assessment, including documentation of any allergies to drugs and biologicals.
Each ASC patient upon admission to the ASC must have a pre-surgical assessment. The requirement at §416.42(a)(1) for a physician to examine the patient immediately before surgery to evaluate the risk of the anesthesia and of the procedure for that patient is one component of the requirement at 42 CFR 416.52(a)(2). This component must be conducted by a physician, immediately prior to surgery, and must be performed in a manner consistent with the requirements at §416.42(a)(1). (See the interpretive guidelines for §416.42(a)(1). Other elements of the assessment may be conducted by a licensed practitioner who is credentialed and privileged by the ASC to perform an H&P. In all cases, the update must take place prior to the surgery.
If the H&P required under §416.52(a)(1)is performed on the day of the surgical procedure in the ASC, some, but not all, elements of the pre-surgical assessment may be incorporated into the H&P. However, the assessment of the patient’s risk for the procedure and anesthesia required under §416.42(a)(1) must still be conducted separately, by a physician and immediately prior to surgery.
The patient must be assessed for any changes in his/her condition since the patient’s H&P was performed that might be significant for the planned surgery. Patients may have had a change in health status after the H&P, but may not recognize the significance for their planned surgery. Any changes in health and medication can have an impact on the patient’s ability to tolerate the surgery or anesthesia, and the post-admission pre-surgical assessment is designed to identify these changes and take appropriate action, up to and including postponing or cancellation of the surgery. In addition, the pre-surgical assessment must identify and document any allergies the patient may have to drugs and biologicals, or indicate that the patient has no known allergies to drugs and biologicals.
Further, if the practitioner finds that the H&P done before admission is incomplete, inaccurate, or otherwise unacceptable, the practitioner reviewing the H&P, examining the patient, and completing the update may disregard the existing H&P, and conduct and document in the medical record a new H&P prior to the surgery.
The patient’s medical record must include documentation that the patient was examined prior to the commencement of surgery for changes since the H&P. The physician or qualified licensed individual uses his/her clinical judgment, based upon his/her assessment of the patient’s condition and co-morbidities, if any, in relation to the patient’s planned surgery to decide the extent of the update assessment needed as well as the information to be included in the update note in the patient’s medical record.
If, upon examination, the licensed practitioner finds no change in the patient’s condition since the H&P was completed, he/she may indicate in the patient’s medical record that the H&P was reviewed, the patient was examined, and that “no change” has occurred in the patient’s condition since the H&P was completed. Likewise, any changes in the patient’s condition must be documented by the practitioner in the update note prior to the start of surgery.
For more information, please contact Abby Pendleton, Esq. or Carey F. Kalmowitz, Esq. at (248) 996-8510 or (212) 734-0128 or visit the Anesthesia specialty page on the HLP website.


text:
RCRS can model open (input-output), non-deterministic, and non-input-receptive systems. Non-deterministic means for a given input, many outputs may be possible. Non-input-receptive means some inputs may be declared as illegal.
Components can be specified as symbolic transition systems or as temporal logic (LTL) formulas.
Components can be composed using three primitive operators: serial, parallel, and feedback composition.
RCRS supports checking compatibility of components during composition.
RCRS supports refinement, which allows to reason about component substitutability.
RCRS supports both safety and liveness properties.
RCRS has been fully formalized in the Isabelle theorem prover. This formalization is included in the publicly available RCRS Toolset (see below).
The RCRS Toolset comes with a Translator of Hierarchical Block Diagrams (Simulink).
The RCRS Toolset has been used on non-trivial examples, including a Fuel Control System benchmark provided by Toyota.
TACAS 2018 Distinguished Artifact Award!
TACAS 2018 Artifact Evaluation Badge!
The RCRS TACAS 2018 Artifact is available for download on figshare.
The implementation of the RCRS theory in Isabelle. You can browse the RCRS Isabelle theories.
A Formal Analyzer, implemented on top of Isabelle, which allows to perform compatibility checks on a model, to flatten and simplify a hierarchical model into a single monolithic symbolic transition system without internal variables ("wires"), and to generate simulation code.
The simulink2isabelle Translator, which translates Simulink models into RCRS Isabelle theories that can be processed by the Formal Analyzer. We support a decent subset of Simulink's basic blocks, including continuous-time blocks like Integrators.
A set of examples, including some toy Simulink models, and the theories generated by simulink2isabelle from the Fuel Control System benchmark. This benchmark is not included in our distribution (as it has been developed by a third party, Toyota) but it can be obtained from Benchmarks for Model Transformations and Conformance Checking.
To install, download the distribution (zip file) and read the README file. The simulink2isabelle Translator is written in Python and requires the third-party component pyparsing.
I. Dragomir, V. Preoteasa, S.Tripakis. The Refinement Calculus of Reactive Systems Toolset. TACAS 2018. Extended version in arXiv 2018. Distinguished Artifact Award.
V. Preoteasa, I. Dragomir, S.Tripakis. Mechanically Proving Determinacy of Hierarchical Block Diagram Translations. arXiv 2018.
V. Preoteasa, I. Dragomir, S.Tripakis. The Refinement Calculus of Reactive Systems. arXiv 2017.
V. Preoteasa, I. Dragomir, S.Tripakis. Type Inference of Simulink Hierarchical Block Diagrams in Isabelle. FORTE 2017.
V. Preoteasa, S.Tripakis. Towards Compositional Feedback in Non-Deterministic and Non-Input-Receptive Systems. LICS 2016.
S.Tripakis. Compositionality in the Science of System Design. Proceedings of the IEEE 2016.
I. Dragomir, V. Preoteasa, S.Tripakis. Compositional Semantics and Analysis of Hierarchical Block Diagrams. SPIN 2016.
V. Preoteasa, S.Tripakis. Refinement Calculus of Reactive Systems. EMSOFT 2014.
V. Preoteasa. Formalization of Refinement Calculus for Reactive Systems. Archive of Formal Proofs 2014.
S. Tripakis, C. Stergiou, M. Broy, E. A. Lee. Error-Completion in Interface Theories. SPIN 2013.
S. Tripakis, B. Lickly, T. A. Henzinger, E. A. Lee. A Theory of Synchronous Relational Interfaces. ACM TOPLAS 2011.
S. Tripakis, B. Lickly, T. A. Henzinger, E. A. Lee. On Relational Interfaces. EMSOFT 2009.
Academy of Finland research project 265939.
NSF CPS Breakthrough award CNS-1329759.
For any enquiries, you can contact us by email.

matches: V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V.


On April 6, 2012, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) issued Transmittal 17, which revises and creates new procedures for the review of quality of care concerns by Quality Improvement Organizations (QIOs). Effective May 7, 2012, the new procedures apply to QIO review of the quality of services "among different cases and settings (including post-acute-care settings, ambulatory settings, and health maintenance organizations)." In addition, CMS recently issued a Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM) which discusses and, for the most part, incorporates the content of Transmittal 17. This Alert focuses on the procedures created by Transmittal 17.
The procedures discussed below are complicated, but it is hoped that they will become more streamlined going forward. It is expected, for instance, that there will be refinements made as a result of the above mentioned NRPM. However, despite the complexity of the procedures, it is good that a structure for providing beneficiaries with more information about the resolution of quality of care complaints has been created.
Transmittal 17 lays out new procedures for Quality of Care Reviews. It differentiates between Concurrent Reviews (reviews conducted while a beneficiary remains in care or continues to receive services), and Retrospective Reviews (reviews that take place after the beneficiary has left care or is no longer receiving services). Designed to resolve quality concerns quickly, Concurrent Reviews have an accelerated timeline.
Transmittal 17 also differentiates between "Beneficiary Complaint Reviews," which stem from complaints made directly by beneficiaries, and "General Quality of Care Reviews," which are problems that are brought to the attention of the QIO through other means. While beneficiary reviews must come from a beneficiary complaint, the QIO Manual identifies three sources of information for general reviews: 1) concerns identified during other, non-QIO, review activities; 2) referrals from other agencies; and 3) tracking and trending data.
There are only a few differences in the processes for the several types of reviews. First, Beneficiary Complaint Reviews have additional rules on how information from the complainant is initially collected and processed. Second, since beneficiaries are involved directly in Beneficiary Complaint Reviews, the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) is required to communicate the outcome of the case to the involved beneficiaries. This is a statutory requirement, but has not been part of official HHS procedure until now. Third, the two new alternative dispute resolution procedures created by Transmittal 17, Immediate and Direct Advocacy, are only available for Beneficiary Complaint Reviews.
The new complaint structure begins with the written complaint or separately identified issue being assigned to an intake specialist (IS), who collects the relevant medical information. If a provider does not provide medical information within a reasonable amount of time, the QIO is authorized to deny the provider's claim for Medicare coverage until the provider submits the requested records. Once the records are submitted, the QIO will complete the review. Throughout the process, the beneficiary must be kept informedof review developments.
Once the medical information has been collected, the IS turns the complaint over to a Review Analyst (RA) who provides an analysis of the situation(s) – not a decision – and then passes the complaint and analysis on to an Initial Determination Peer Reviewer (IDPR). The IDPR reviews the RA's analysis and comes to an Interim Initial Determination (IID). The IDPR then returns the complaint and IID to the RA for his or her review. If it is determined that the standard of care was not met, the RA contacts the provider/practitioner for discussion of the concerns identified. The provider/practitioner can respond and argue against the findings but cannot introduce new medical information. The IDPR and the RA consider the provider/practitioner's argument and issue a Final Initial Determination Letter.
Upon receipt of the Final Initial Determination Letter, the provider/practitioner may request a Re-Review procedure, during which additional evidence may be submitted. Re-Reviews are conducted by a Re-Review Peer Reviewer and are procedurally the same as the Initial Determination Review. After that review, a Final Decision Letter is sent to the beneficiary informing him or her of the QIO's final decision.
A final decision letter for the beneficiary has been part of QIO procedure for many years, but until Transmission 17, the letter did not have to include information about what the QIO had discovered during the review procedure. While the Peer Review Improvement Act required QIOs to ''inform the individual…of the organization's final disposition of the complaint,'' HHS manuals specified that if physicians or providers refused to consent to the release of information, then the letter could only specify that the QIO had conducted "a thorough review." This limitation should have been removed in 2003, following the decision in Public Citizen, Inc. v. HHS.
In 2002, Public Citizen, a citizens' rights advocacy group, brought a case against HHS, challenging the QIO Manual rules that require provider and practitioner consent. The District Court granted summary judgment for the plaintiff and ordered HHS to inform QIOs that they "are required to disclose the results of [QIO] investigations to beneficiary complainants." In upholding the ruling, the DC Circuit clarified that the QIO statute only requires that the QIO communicate the "final judgment" to the beneficiary and does not specifically require the QIO to tell beneficiaries what action was taken.
Transmittal 17 finally institutes the notification required by the Public Citizen decision. It requires that when the QIO conducts a Beneficiary Complaint Review it must send a letter to the beneficiary detailing: 1) a definitive statement that the quality of care in each instance did or did not meet the standard of care, 2) a statement of the proper standard of care in each instance, and 3) a statement that this is the final decision and that no further rights are available. It also requires the letter to include "a specific statement conveying facts describing how the practitioner and/or provider did or did not meet specific criteria within the standard [of care]."
While not as thorough as it could be, this letter follows Public Citizen and provides some details to beneficiaries about the results of their complaints. However, it should be noted that these letters are not sent to all beneficiaries who submit complaints. These letters are not required in General Quality of Care Review, even if a beneficiary complaint is the cause of such a review. The NPRM also specifies that if a beneficiary contacts the QIO about a potential complaint, but does not follow up with a written complaint, the beneficiary will "not receive any results of the QIO's review."
Immediate Advocacy is intended as an initial attempt to address the beneficiary's complaint without going through the full complaint procedure. Immediate Advocacy can only be used in limited circumstances. First, the complaint must be made orally for issues that do not rise to the levels of "gross and flagrant," "substantial," or "serious or urgent." "[G]ross and flagrant" issues result in "imminent danger" to the health, safety, or well-being of a beneficiary or unnecessarily place the beneficiary in high-risk situations. "[S]erious or urgent" issues occur when a "beneficiary has been exposed to serious harm" or a "beneficiary may potentially be exposed to imminent future harm."
In addition, both the beneficiary and the provider must consent to the use of Immediate Advocacy and consent can be withdrawn at any time.  If the provider does not consent or if the beneficiary withdraws consent, the QIO must contact the beneficiary immediately and provide an opportunity to file a written complaint.
Immediate Advocacy is conducted in one of two ways. The first possibility is a three-way call between the beneficiary, provider, and the QIO; the second is for the QIO to call the provider on behalf of the beneficiary. If the call cannot be scheduled within 10 days of the initial complaint, Immediate Advocacy cannot be used. If additional information about the complaint arises that raises the level of the complaint to "gross and flagrant," "substantial," or "serious or urgent," the Immediate Advocacy is discontinued. If the QIO "becomes aware of additional information that would render the complaint ineligible for Immediate Advocacy," the QIO must discontinue Immediate Advocacy and may (but does not have to) suggest that the beneficiary submit a written complaint. Early reviews of the Immediate Advocacy procedure, as reported in the NPRM, have been positive.
Direct Advocacy is the second new procedural tool. It may occur following a full complaint review where no significant quality of care concern has been identified, yet the beneficiary has a continuing concern about the quality of care received. In order to use "Direct Advocacy," there can be no issues that are of a "gross and flagrant," "substantial," "serious or urgent" or even "significant" nature. Both the beneficiary and provider/practitioner must consent to Direct Advocacy. Moreover, the beneficiary can revoke consent at any time. As with Immediate Advocacy, the QIO can either conduct a three-way call or can speak directly to the provider or practitioner without the beneficiary's presence.
The new instructions for QIO review provide complex but important information for beneficiaries. It is hoped that the complaint resolution process will be faster and more reliable, and provide more thorough information to beneficiaries.
 For purposes of Transmittal 17, quality of care concerns relate to a range of matters from how one is or was treated by provider staff, whether one is receiving or received the treatment or services requested or expected, and/or whether the services in question are or were provided in a way that meets accepted standards of care, See 42 U.S.C §1320c-3. Matters of premature discharge from a Medicare-covered care settings may often start with a QIO complaint. Even so, with respect to matters of premature discharge or where there has been a denial of a continuing stay in a Medicare-participating hospital, skilled nursing facility, home health agency, or hospice, advocates should use the standard or expedited appeals process. See 42 USC §1395ff, 42 C.F.R. §405.900 et seq. (Traditional Medicare), and §422.560 et seq. (Medicare Advantage).
 CMS, Transmittal 17: QIO Manual Chapter 5 – “Quality of Care Review,” (April 6, 2012), available at http://www.cms.gov/Regulations-and-Guidance/Guidance/Transmittals/Downloads/R17QIO.pdf .
 See §1154(a)(4)(A) of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. 1320c–3(a)(4)(A); Transmittal 17, §5020. QIOs are entities comprising health care professionals – physicians, nurses, and other allied health care professionals – who contract with the Medicare agency to review quality of care concerns, including beneficiary-generated complaints.
 See 77 Fed. Reg. 45061, 45196ff (July 30, 2012), http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2012-07-30/pdf/2012-16813.pdf. On September 4, 2012, the Center, along with the Medicare Rights Center and California Health Advocates, filed comments on several aspects of this large NPRM.
 See 77 Fed. Reg. 45061, 45196ff.
 Transmittal 17, Id. at §5300 et seq. and §5600 et seq.
 Id. at §5200 et seq. (Retrospective Beneficiary Complaint Review) and §5540 et seq. (Retrospective General Quality of Care Review).
 For example, compare §5220.2 – Retrospective Beneficiary Complaint: Requesting Medical Information – (the QIO expects “the requested information within ten (10) calendar days) with §5320.2 – Concurrent Beneficiary Complaint: Requesting Medical Information – (the QIO expects “the requested information by the close of business the next business day”); §5220.4 – Retrospective Beneficiary Complaint: Review and Preparation of Medical Information – (five days) with §5320.4 – Concurrent Beneficiary Complaint: Review and Preparation of Medical Information – (one day) ; §5230.2 – Retrospective Beneficiary Complaint: Preparation of Quality Review Decision (QRD) Form – (three days) with §5330.2 – Concurrent Beneficiary Complaint: Preparation of Quality Review Decision (QRD) Form – (one day).
 Id. at §5030 (Definitions Related to Quality of Care Reviews).
 Id. at §5500 (General Quality of Care Reviews).
 Id. at §5120 (Immediate Advocacy), §5400 (Direct Advocacy).
 Id. at §§5220, 5320, 5550, 5610.
 Id. at §§5220.2, 5320.2, 5550.2, 5610.2.
 Id. at §§5220.3, 5320.3, 5550.3, 5610.3.
Id. at §§ 5240.6, 5340.6 (The letter must contain the language that the QIO will include in its letter to the beneficiary about the outcome of the review. For practitioners, the letter must also request the consent of the practitioner to disclose the specific findings of the review to the beneficiary.).
 See Public Citizen, Inc. v. Dep’t of Health & Human Servs., 332 F.3d 654 (D.C. Cir. 2003), aff’d, 151 F. Supp.2d 64 (D.D.C. 20001). The Public Citizen case sought to provide beneficiaries with more direct and specific information about the resolution of quality of care complaints. For a detailed discussion of the need for reforming the QIO review process, including the need to provide better information to beneficiaries, see Diane E. Hoffmann and Virginia Rowthorn, Achieving Quality and Responding to Consumers, The Medicare Beneficiary Complaint Process: Who Should Respond? 5 Indiana Health Law Review 9 (2008). See also the proceedings of the Center for Medicare Advocacy’s conference, “Beyond QIO: Modeling a Medicare Beneficiary Complaint Process for Quality of Care” (January 19, 2007), available at https://www.medicareadvocacy.org/2007/04/26/center-for-medicare-advocacy-conference-develops-medicare-beneficiary-complaint-process/.
 Immediate Advocacy is discussed in the new manual at §5120 et seq. and in the NPRM at pp.45197-45198.
 Id. at §5120.4 (The manual and the NPRM are not clear about who selects the procedure used).
 Transmittal 17 at §5400 – 5400.5.


D.C. Law Library - § 29–1112. Approval by members.
↪ § 29–1112. Approval by members.
§ 29–1111. Member has no agency power.
§ 29–1113. Procedural requirements for member meetings.
§ 29–1112. Approval by members.
(b) An unincorporated nonprofit association shall have the approval of the members to do any other act or exercise a right that the governing principles require to be approved by members.
This section is referenced in § 29-1118.
Uniform Law: This section is based on § 16 of the Uniform Unincorporated Nonprofit Association Act (2008 Act).


text:
DOBEŠ, J., et al. Reliable procedure for electrical characterization of MOS-based devices. Solid-State Electronics. 2010, 54(10), 1173-1184. ISSN 0038-1101. DOI 10.1016/j.sse.2010.05.034.
NOVÁK, A., et al. Nonlinear System Identification Using Exponential Swept-Sine Signal. IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement. 2010, 59(8), 2220-2229. ISSN 0018-9456.
FAUVAUD, S., et al. The field high-amplitude SX Phe variable BL Cam: results from a multisite photometric campaign. Astronomy & Astrophysics. 2010, 515 ISSN 0004-6361. DOI 10.1051/0004-6361/201014243.
VALTONEN, M. J., et al. Measuring the Spin of the Primary Black Hole in OJ287. Astrophysical Journal. 2010, 709(2), 725-732. ISSN 0004-637X. DOI 10.1088/0004-637X/709/2/725.
UŘIČÁŘ, T. and J. SÝKORA. Design Criteria for Hierarchical Exclusive Code with Parameter-Invariant Decision Regions for Wireless 2-Way Relay Channel. EURASIP Journal on Wireless Communications and Networking. 2010, 2010(si9), 1-14. ISSN 1687-1499. DOI 10.1155/2010/921427.
JAKUBOV, O., et al. The Witch Navigator - A Low Cost GNSS Software Receiver for Advanced Processing Techniques. Radioengineering. 2010, 19(4), 536-543. ISSN 1210-2512.
VALTONEN, M. J., et al. Measuring Black Hole Spin in OJ287. Celestial Mechanics and Dynamical Astronomy. 2010, 106(3), 235-243. ISSN 0923-2958. DOI 10.1007/s10569-009-9252-z.
HUDEC, R. The Role of Ground-Based Robotic Observatories in Satellite Projects. Advances in Astronomy. 2010, 2010(si2), 1-11. ISSN 1687-7969. DOI 10.1155/2010/594854.
VEJRAŽKA, F., P. KOVÁŘ, and P. KAČMAŘÍK. Galileo AltBOC E5 Signal Characteristics for Optimal Tracking Algorithms. The International Journal on Marine Navigation and Safety of Sea Transportation. 2010, 4(1), 37-40. ISSN 2083-6473.
VALÁŠEK, M., et al. Hexasphere-Redundantly Actuated Parallel Spherical Mechanism as a New Concept of Agile Telescope. Advances in Astronomy. 2010, 2010(si2), 1-6. ISSN 1687-7969. DOI 10.1155/2010/348286.
HUDEC, R. and M. KLÍMA. Identification and Analyses in Optical Light of Gamma-Ray Sources with Astronomical Archival Plates. Advances in Astronomy. 2010, 2010(si2), 1-6. ISSN 1687-7969. DOI 10.1155/2010/618975.
JELÍNEK, M., et al. Four Years of Real-Time GRB Followup by BOOTES-1B (2005-2008). Advances in Astronomy. 2010, 2010(si2), 1-10. ISSN 1687-7969. DOI 10.1155/2010/432172.
UŘIČÁŘ, T. Parameter-Invariant Hierarchical Exclusive Alphabet Design for 2-WRC with HDF Strategy. Acta Polytechnica. 2010, 50(4/2010), 79-86. ISSN 1210-2709.
HUDEC, R. Kirkpatrick-Baez (KB) and Lobster Eye (LE) Optics for Astronomical and Laboratory Applications. X-ray Optics and Instrumentation. 2010, 2010(2010), ISSN 1687-7632. DOI 10.1155/2010/139148.
HUDEC, R., et al. Detection of GRBs and OTs by All-Sky Optical and SID Monitors. Advances in Astronomy. 2010, 2010(si2), 1-8. ISSN 1687-7969. DOI 10.1155/2010/428943.
HUSNÍK, L. Czechs hold combined meeting. Journal of the Audio Engineering Society. 2010, 58(1/2), 85. ISSN 0004-7554.
RIVA, A., et al. Design, Manufacturing, and Commissioning of BIRCAM (Bootes InfraRed CAMera). Advances in Astronomy. 2010, 2010(si2), 1-8. ISSN 1687-7969. DOI 10.1155/2010/760416.
KOVÁŘ, P., P. KAČMAŘÍK, and F. VEJRAŽKA. Programmnyj GPS/GLONASS/GALILEO priemnik. Giroskopiya i Navigatsiya. 2010, 71(4), 32-41. ISSN 0869-7035.
FIKEJZ, F. Subjective Evaluation of Audiovisual Signals. Acta Polytechnica. 2010, 50(4/2010), 35-40. ISSN 1210-2709.
VÍTEK, S., et al. Double-Station Automatic Video Observation of the Meteors. Advances in Astronomy. 2010, 2010(si2), 1-4. ISSN 1687-7969. DOI 10.1155/2010/943145.
ŠAFÁŘ, J., P. WILLIAMS, and C.K. LEBEKWE. Accuracy Performance of eLoran for Maritime Applications. Annual of Navigation. 2010,(16), 109-122. ISSN 1640-8632.
PÁTA, P. Nobelova cena za fyziku 2009. Pokroky matematiky, fyziky a astronomie. 2010, 55 12-18. ISSN 0032-2423.
BLAŽEK, M. Roboti a družice. Akademický bulletin. 2010,(7-8), 15. ISSN 1210-9525.
BLAŽEK, M. Rentgenový pohled do vesmíru. Akademický bulletin. 2010,(2), 14-15. ISSN 1210-9525.
HUDEC, R., V. ŠIMON, and L. HUDEC. Photometry and Low Dispersion Spectroscopy with ESA Gaia. Advances in Astronomy. 2010, 2010(si2), 1-7. ISSN 1687-7969. DOI 10.1155/2010/781421.
KLÍMA, M., ed. Optické komunikace 2010. Praha, 2010-10-21/2010-10-22. Praha: Agentura Action M, 2010. ISBN 978-80-86742-29-8.
KOVÁŘ, P. Systém EGNOS a jeho použití pro pozemní navigaci. In: Referáty přednesené na 32. semináři Pravidelné setkání zájemců o mikrovlnnou techniku. Pravidelné setkání zájemců o mikrovlnnou techniku, 32. seminář, Praha, 2010-05-26. Praha: Česká elektrotechnická společnost, 2010. p. 1-4. ISBN 978-80-02-02235-0.
FLIEGEL, K. Prostorové zobrazování a 3DTV. In: Radiokomunikace 2010. Pardubice, 2010-11-03/2010-11-05. Pardubice: UNIT, 2010. p. 33-44.
ŽALUD, V. Moderní způsoby ochrany rádiového přenosu. In: Radiokomunikace 2010. Pardubice, 2010-11-03/2010-11-05. Pardubice: UNIT, 2010. p. 135-154.
PROCHÁZKA, P. Practical compress and forward latency reducing implementation as an example of distributive decoding. In: HUSNÍK, L., ed. POSTER 2010 - Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Electrical Engineering. POSTER 2010 - 14th International Conference on Electrical Engineering, Praha, 2010-05-06. Praha: ČVUT v Praze, FEL, 2010. p. 1-7. ISBN 978-80-01-04544-2.
PFLEGER, M. and J. ŠPAČEK. Real-time EGNOS Monitoring. In: Proceedings 52nd International Symposium ELMAR-2010. 52nd International Symposium ELMAR-2010, Zadar, 2010-09-15/2010-09-17. Zadar: Croatian Society Electronics in Marine - ELMAR, 2010. p. 425-428. ISSN 1334-2630. ISBN 978-953-7044-11-4.
KOLKA, Z., et al. Formula Simplification using Two-Graph Method. In: Proceedings of 2010 IEEE Latin American Symposium on Circuits and Systems. 2010 IEEE Latin American Symposium on Circuits and Systems, Iguassu Falls, 2010-02-24/2010-02-26. Piscataway: IEEE, 2010. p. 260-263.
ŠIMON, V., et al. Cycles and their instability in the cataclysmic variable V795 Her. In: X-Ray Astronomy 2009; Present Status, Multi-wavelength Approach and Future Perspectives: Proceedings of the International Conference. X-Ray Astronomy 2009; Present Status, Multi-wavelength Approach and Future Perspectives, Lucia - Bologna, 2009-09-07/2009-09-11. Melville, New York: American Institute of Physics, 2010. p. 207-208. AIP Conference Proceedings. ISSN 0094-243X. ISBN 978-0-7354-0795-4. DOI 10.1063/1.3475208.
JORSWIECK, E.A., et al. Resource sharing in wireless networks: The SAPHYRE approach. In: Future Network & MobileSummit 2010 Conference Proceedings. Future Network & Mobile Summit 2010, Florence, 2010-06-16/2010-06-18. Dublin: IIMC International Information Management Corporation Ltd, 2010. p. 1-8. ISBN 978-1-905824-18-2.
WILLIAMS, P., et al. Resilient PNT in e-Navigation. In: Proceedings of the NAV10 Navigation Conference & Exhibition. NAV10 Navigation Conference & Exhibition, London, 2010-11-30/2010-12-02. London: Royal Institute of Navigation, 2010.
HUDEC, R., R. GÁLIS, and M. KOCKA. Lessons learned from ESA INTEGRAL: cataclysmic variables and blazars. In: 8th International Workshop on Multifrequency Behaviour of High Energy Cosmic Sources. Vulcano, 2009-05-25/2009-05-30. Roma: Societa Astronomica Italiana, 2010. p. 220-225. Memorie della Societa Astronomica Italiana, Supplementi. ISSN 1824-0178.
FLIEGEL, K., M. KLÍMA, and P. PÁTA. New open source image database for testing and optimization of image processing algorithms. In: SCHELKENS, P., et al., eds. Optics, Photonics, and Digital Technologies for Multimedia Applications. SPIE Photonics Europe, Brusel, 2010-04-12/2010-04-16. Bellingham (stát Washington): SPIE, 2010. p. 77231P-1-77231P-8. Proceedings of SPIE. ISSN 0277-786X. ISBN 978-0-8194-8196-2. DOI 10.1117/12.854465.
MÍCHAL, J., J. DOBEŠ, and D. ČERNÝ. Multiobjective Optimization With an Asymptotically Uniform Coverage of Pareto Front. In: Proceedings of 2010 IEEE International Symposium on Circuits and Systems. 2010 IEEE International Symposium on Circuits and Systems, Paris, 2010-05-30/2010-06-02. Piscataway: IEEE, 2010. p. 2912-2915. ISSN 0271-4302. ISBN 978-1-4244-5309-2. DOI 10.1109/ISCAS.2010.5538044.
STRAŇÁK, P. and J. DOBEŠ. Controlling Peaks of the Audio Signal by Dynamically Allocated Scale Factor for Lossy Psychoacoustic Encoder. In: Proceedings of the 53rd IEEE International Midwest Symposium on Circuits and Systems. 53rd IEEE International Midwest Symposium on Circuits and Systems, Seattle, Washington, 2010-08-01/2010-08-04. Piscataway: IEEE, 2010. p. 388-391. ISSN 1548-3746. ISBN 978-1-4244-7773-9. DOI 10.1109/MWSCAS.2010.5548874.
ŽALUD, V. Moderní technika mobilních a bezdrátových systémů. In: NoTeS 10 - Nová technika a služby v telekomunikáciách SR a ČR. Banská Bystrica, 2010-06-10/2010-06-11. Bratislava: Slovenská elektrotechnická spoločnosť, 2010. p. 1-58.
ŽALUD, V. Moderní rádiové sítě pro veřejnou mobilní komunikaci. In: Optické komunikace 2010 - Podklady pro vzdělávací sekci. Optické komunikace 2010, Praha, 2010-10-21/2010-10-22. Praha: Agentura Action M, 2010. p. 1-24.
HEKRDLA, M. On Design of Channel Parameter Invariant FSK in Two-Way Relay Channel. In: HUSNÍK, L., ed. POSTER 2010 - Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Electrical Engineering. POSTER 2010 - 14th International Conference on Electrical Engineering, Praha, 2010-05-06. Praha: ČVUT v Praze, FEL, 2010. p. 1-7. ISBN 978-80-01-04544-2.
VENCOVSKÝ, V. Auditory model for objective quality assessment of coded audio. In: Workshop 2010. Praha, 2010-02-22/2010-02-26. Praha: Czech Technical University in Prague, 2010. p. 104-105. CTU Reports. ISBN 978-80-01-04513-8.
HUDEC, R. and V. ŠIMON. Identification and Investigation of High Energy Sources on Astronomical Archival Plates. In: X-Ray Astronomy 2009; Present Status, Multi-wavelength Approach and Future Perspectives: Proceedings of the International Conference. X-Ray Astronomy 2009; Present Status, Multi-wavelength Approach and Future Perspectives, Lucia - Bologna, 2009-09-07/2009-09-11. Melville, New York: American Institute of Physics, 2010. p. 161-162. AIP Conference Proceedings. ISSN 0094-243X. ISBN 978-0-7354-0795-4. DOI 10.1063/1.3475182.
HEKRDLA, M. and J. SÝKORA. Channel Parameter Invariant Network Coded FSK Modulation for Hierarchical Decode and Forward Strategy in Wireless 2-Way Relay Channel. In: COST 2100 - 11th MCM Aalborg. Aalborg, 2010-06-02/2010-06-04. Brussels: COST Office, 2010. p. 1-8.
ČERNÝ, D. and J. DOBEŠ. New Approach for Enhancing Efficiency of Computer Aided Design in Circuit Simulation. In: Proceedings of the 17th IEEE International Conference on Electronics, Circuits, and Systems. 17th IEEE International Conference on Electronics, Circuits, and Systems, Athens, 2010-12-12/2010-12-15. Piscataway: IEEE, 2010. p. 641-644. ISBN 978-1-4244-8157-6.
KADLEC, F., K. ULOVEC, and A. NOVÁK. Application of SWT and MISO Methods for Measurement and Analysis of Electro-Acoustic and Audio Systems. In: Seventeenth International Congress on Sound and Vibration (ICSV17). CAIRO, 2010-07-18/2010-07-22. Cairo: IIAV - International Institute of Acoustics and Vibration, 2010. p. 2218-2225. ISBN 978-1-61782-255-1.
KOVÁŘ, P., P. KAČMAŘÍK, and F. VEJRAŽKA. Low Complex Interoperable GNSS Signal Processor and its Performance. In: Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE/ION Position, Location and Navigation Symposium. 2010 IEEE/ION Position, Location and Navigation Symposium, Indian Wells, CA, 2010-05-04/2010-05-06. Piscataway: IEEE, 2010. p. 947-951. ISSN 2153-358X. ISBN 978-1-4244-5037-4. DOI 10.1109/PLANS.2010.5507229.
UŘIČÁŘ, T., J. SÝKORA, and M. HEKRDLA. Example Design of Multi-Dimensional Parameter-Invariant Hierarchical Exclusive Alphabet for Layered HXC Design in 2-WRC. In: COST 2100 - 10th MCM Athens. Athens, 2010-02-03/2010-02-05. Brussels: COST Office, 2010. p. 1-8.
FLIEGEL, K., et al. Open source database of images DEIMOS: high dynamic range images. In: TESCHER, A.G., ed. Applications of Digital Image Processing XXXIII. Optics + Photonics 2010, San Diego, California, 2010-08-01/2010-08-05. Bellingham (stát Washington): SPIE, 2010. p. 77981G-1-77981G-7. ISSN 0277-786X. ISBN 978-0-8194-8294-5. DOI 10.1117/12.859940.
FLIEGEL, K., et al. Meteor automatic imager and analyzer: system design and its parameters. In: TESCHER, A.G., ed. Applications of Digital Image Processing XXXIII. Optics + Photonics 2010, San Diego, California, 2010-08-01/2010-08-05. Bellingham (stát Washington): SPIE, 2010. p. 77982B-1-77982B-11. ISSN 0277-786X. ISBN 978-0-8194-8294-5. DOI 10.1117/12.859935.
SÝKORA, J. and A. BURR. Hierarchical Alphabet and Parametric Channel Constrained Capacity Regions for HDF Strategy in Parametric Wireless 2-WRC. In: Proceedings of IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference. IEEE Wireless Communications and Networking Conference, Sydney, 2010-04-18/2010-04-21. Piscataway: IEEE, 2010. p. 1-6. ISSN 1525-3511. ISBN 978-1-4244-6398-5. DOI 10.1109/WCNC.2010.5506416.
MÍCHAL, J. and J. DOBEŠ. Multiobjective Optimization for RF Low Noise Amplifier Design. In: Proceedings of 2010 IEEE International Conference on Wireless Information Technology and Systems. 2010 IEEE International Conference on Wireless Information Technology and Systems, Honolulu, HI, 2010-08-28/2010-09-03. Piscataway: IEEE, 2010. p. 1-4. ISBN 978-1-4244-7091-4. DOI 10.1109/ICWITS.2010.5611858.
DOBEŠ, J., L. POSPÍŠIL, and V. PAŇKO. Selecting an Optimal Structure of Artificial Neural Networks for Characterizing RF Semiconductor Devices. In: Proceedings of the 53rd IEEE International Midwest Symposium on Circuits and Systems. 53rd IEEE International Midwest Symposium on Circuits and Systems, Seattle, Washington, 2010-08-01/2010-08-04. Piscataway: IEEE, 2010. p. 1206-1209. ISSN 1548-3746. ISBN 978-1-4244-7773-9.
SÝKORA, J. and A. BURR. Wireless network coding: the network aware PHY layer. In: Proceedings of the Seventh International Symposium on Wireless Communication Systems - Tutorials. The Seventh International Symposium on Wireless Communication Systems, York, 2010-09-19/2010-09-22. York: University of York, 2010. p. 1-128.
KEKRT, D., et al. Digital Interpolator Implementation in VHDL. In: VOZŇÁK, M. and J. SKAPA, eds. RTT 2010 Proceedings. 12th International Conference Research in Telecommunication Technologies 2010, Velké Losiny, 2010-09-08/2010-09-10. Ostrava: VŠB - TUO, FEI, Katedra elektroniky a telekomunikační techniky, 2010. p. 168-173. ISBN 978-80-248-2261-7.
VÍTEK, S. and M. KLÍMA. PERSEUS - Personal Help for Blind User. In: Applied Electronic 2010. Applied Electronics 2010, Plzeň, 2010-09-08/2010-09-09. Pilsen: University of West Bohemia, 2010. p. 367-370. ISSN 1803-7232. ISBN 978-80-7043-865-7.
VALTONEN, M. J., et al. Black Holes in Active Galactic Nuclei. In: Relativity in Fundamental Astronomy (IAU S261): Dynamics, Reference Frames, and Data Analysis (Proceedings of the International Astronomical Union Symposia and Colloquia). IAUS 261: Relativity in Fundamental Astronomy - Dynamics, Reference Frames and Data Analysis, Virginia Beach, VA, 2009-04-27/2009-05-01. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010. p. 260-268. ISSN 1743-9213. ISBN 978-0-521-76481-0. DOI 10.1017/S1743921309990482.
HUDEC, R., et al. New Technologies for Future Space X-ray Telescopes. In: X-Ray Astronomy 2009; Present Status, Multi-wavelength Approach and Future Perspectives: Proceedings of the International Conference. X-Ray Astronomy 2009; Present Status, Multi-wavelength Approach and Future Perspectives, Lucia - Bologna, 2009-09-07/2009-09-11. Melville, New York: American Institute of Physics, 2010. p. 587-588. AIP Conference Proceedings. ISSN 0094-243X. ISBN 978-0-7354-0795-4. DOI 10.1063/1.3475347.
DOBEŠ, J., et al. A Comparison of Steady-State Procedures Based on Epsilon-Algorithm and Sensitivity Analysis. In: Proceedings of 2010 IEEE Latin American Symposium on Circuits and Systems. 2010 IEEE Latin American Symposium on Circuits and Systems, Iguassu Falls, 2010-02-24/2010-02-26. Piscataway: IEEE, 2010. p. 292-295.
UŘIČÁŘ, T. and J. SÝKORA. Hierarchical eXclusive Alphabet in Parametric 2-WRC - Euclidean Distance Analysis and Alphabet Construction Algorithm. In: COST 2100 - 11th MCM Aalborg. Aalborg, 2010-06-02/2010-06-04. Brussels: COST Office, 2010. p. 1-9.
ŠVIHLÍK, J., et al. Meteor automatic imager and analyzer: analysis of noise characteristics and possible noise suppression. In: TESCHER, A.G., ed. Applications of Digital Image Processing XXXIII. Optics + Photonics 2010, San Diego, California, 2010-08-01/2010-08-05. Bellingham (stát Washington): SPIE, 2010. p. 779821-1-779821-9. ISSN 0277-786X. ISBN 978-0-8194-8294-5. DOI 10.1117/12.859685.
KEKRT, D., et al. Direct Quadrature Frequency Synthesizer Implementation in VHDL. In: VOZŇÁK, M. and J. SKAPA, eds. Knowledge in Telecommunication Technologies and Optics - KTTO 2010. Knowledge in Telecommunication Technologies and Optics 2010, Ostrava, 2010-12-09/2010-12-10. Ostrava: VŠB - TUO, FEI, Katedra elektroniky a telekomunikační techniky, 2010. p. 69-74. ISBN 978-80-248-2330-0.
FIKEJZ, F. Sonification of EEG. In: Králíky 2010. Králíky, 2010-08-30/2010-09-01. Brno: Brno University of Technology, 2010. p. 44-47. ISBN 978-80-214-4139-2.
RUND, F. and V. VENCOVSKÝ. HRTF Analysis by means of an Auditory Model. In: Technical Computing Bratislava 2010. Bratislava, 2010-10-20. Bratislava: RT systems, s.r.o, 2010. p. 1-10. 18th Annual Conference Proceedings. ISBN 978-80-970519-0-7.
PÁTA, P., et al. Utilization of consumer level digital cameras in astronomy. In: TESCHER, A.G., ed. Applications of Digital Image Processing XXXIII. Optics + Photonics 2010, San Diego, California, 2010-08-01/2010-08-05. Bellingham (stát Washington): SPIE, 2010. p. 77982H-1-77982H-12. ISSN 0277-786X. ISBN 978-0-8194-8294-5. DOI 10.1117/12.860981.
SÝKORA, J. and A. BURR. Network Coded Modulation with partial side-information and hierarchical decode and forward relay sharing in multi-source wireless network. In: Proceedings of European Wireless Conference. European Wireless 2010, Lucca, 2010-04-12/2010-04-15. Piscataway: IEEE, 2010. p. 639-645. ISBN 978-1-4244-5999-5. DOI 10.1109/EW.2010.5483476.
SÝKORA, J. and A. BURR. Physical Network Coding with Partial Side-Information and Hierarchical Decode and Forward Relay Sharing in Multi-Source Wireless Network. In: COST 2100 - 10th MCM Athens. Athens, 2010-02-03/2010-02-05. Brussels: COST Office, 2010. p. 1-8.
SÝKORA, J. and A. BURR. Wireless network coding. In: Invited research talk. London, 2010-09-23. London: Imperial College Press, 2010. p. 1-140.
RUND, F. and V. VENCOVSKÝ. Analysis of the head related impulse response by means of an auditory model. In: 47th Inner Ear Biology Workshop. Praha, 2010-08-29/2010-09-01. Praha: Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic, 2010. p. 107.
MATĚJKA, Š. Performance of interpolation algorithms for PWM driven power amplifiers. In: FEDRA, Z., et al., eds. Proceedings of 20th International Conference Radioelektronika 2010. 20th International Conference Radioelektronika 2010, VUT Brno, FEKT, ÚREL, 2010-04-19/2010-04-21. Brno: VUT v Brně, FEKT, Ústav radioelektroniky, 2010. p. 1-4. ISBN 978-1-4244-6319-0.
FIKEJZ, F. Subjective Evaluation of Audiovisual Signal. In: HUSNÍK, L., ed. POSTER 2010 - Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Electrical Engineering. POSTER 2010 - 14th International Conference on Electrical Engineering, Praha, 2010-05-06. Praha: ČVUT v Praze, FEL, 2010. p. 1-6. ISBN 978-80-01-04544-2.
HUDEC, R., V. ŠIMON, and V. HUDCOVÁ. Analyses of High-Energy Sources with ESA Gaia. In: X-Ray Astronomy 2009; Present Status, Multi-wavelength Approach and Future Perspectives: Proceedings of the International Conference. X-Ray Astronomy 2009; Present Status, Multi-wavelength Approach and Future Perspectives, Lucia - Bologna, 2009-09-07/2009-09-11. Melville, New York: American Institute of Physics, 2010. p. 583-584. AIP Conference Proceedings. ISSN 0094-243X. ISBN 978-0-7354-0795-4. DOI 10.1063/1.3475345.
RUND, F., D. ŠTOREK, and O. GLASER. GUI for Comparing Perception of Sound Adjusted by Measured or Modeled HRTF. In: Technical Computing Bratislava 2010. Bratislava, 2010-10-20. Bratislava: RT systems, s.r.o, 2010. p. 1-5. 18th Annual Conference Proceedings. ISBN 978-80-970519-0-7.
RUND, F. Audio Pointer - Joystick & Camera in Matlab. In: Technical Computing Bratislava 2010. Bratislava, 2010-10-20. Bratislava: RT systems, s.r.o, 2010. p. 1-3. 18th Annual Conference Proceedings. ISBN 978-80-970519-0-7.
DOSTÁL, P. and M. KLÍMA. Advanced Color Image Demosaicing In Security Imaging Technology. In: Proceedings 44th IEEE International Carnahan Conference on Security Technology. 44th IEEE International Carnahan Conference on Security Technology, San Jose, 2010-09-05/2010-09-08. Piscataway: IEEE, 2010. p. 434-442. ISSN 1071-6572. ISBN 978-1-4244-7400-4.
HUDEC, R., et al. INTEGRAL and Cataclysmic Variables. In: X-Ray Astronomy 2009; Present Status, Multi-wavelength Approach and Future Perspectives: Proceedings of the International Conference. X-Ray Astronomy 2009; Present Status, Multi-wavelength Approach and Future Perspectives, Lucia - Bologna, 2009-09-07/2009-09-11. Melville, New York: American Institute of Physics, 2010. p. 159-160. AIP Conference Proceedings. ISSN 0094-243X. ISBN 978-0-7354-0795-4. DOI 10.1063/1.3475180.
ŽALUD, V. Komunikační technologie LTE. In: PRAHEX 2010. Praha, 2010-03-30. Praha: ROHDE & SCHWARZ - Praha, s.r.o., 2010. p. 1-30.
VENCOVSKÝ, V. Objective Audio Quality Assessment Using a Model of Auditory Perception. In: HUSNÍK, L., ed. POSTER 2010 - Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Electrical Engineering. POSTER 2010 - 14th International Conference on Electrical Engineering, Praha, 2010-05-06. Praha: ČVUT v Praze, FEL, 2010. p. 1-4. ISBN 978-80-01-04544-2.
ULOVEC, K. and M. VYŠÍN. DVB-T and DVB-H Measuring Software for PC Connected with Spectral Analyzer. In: FEDRA, Z., et al., eds. Proceedings of 20th International Conference Radioelektronika 2010. 20th International Conference Radioelektronika 2010, VUT Brno, FEKT, ÚREL, 2010-04-19/2010-04-21. Brno: VUT v Brně, FEKT, Ústav radioelektroniky, 2010. p. 39-42. ISBN 978-1-4244-6319-0. DOI 10.1109/RADIOELEK.2010.5478595.
DOSTÁL, P. and M. KLÍMA. Comparing of Several State-of-the-Art Interpolation Techniques. In: Applied Electronic 2010. Applied Electronics 2010, Plzeň, 2010-09-08/2010-09-09. Pilsen: University of West Bohemia, 2010. p. 69-74. ISSN 1803-7232. ISBN 978-80-7043-865-7.
HUDEC, R. and R. SLOŠIAR. Indirect detections and analyses of GRBs by ionospheric response. In: X-Ray Astronomy 2009; Present Status, Multi-wavelength Approach and Future Perspectives: Proceedings of the International Conference. X-Ray Astronomy 2009; Present Status, Multi-wavelength Approach and Future Perspectives, Lucia - Bologna, 2009-09-07/2009-09-11. Melville, New York: American Institute of Physics, 2010. p. 59-60. AIP Conference Proceedings. ISSN 0094-243X. ISBN 978-0-7354-0795-4. DOI 10.1063/1.3475352.
KUBÁNEK, P., et al. Operating a global network of autonomous observatories. In: Proceedings of SPIE Vol. 7740 - Software and Cyberinfrastructure for Astronomy. Software and Cyberinfrastructure for Astronomy, San Diego, 2010-06-27/2010-06-30. Washington: SPIE, 2010. p. 77400U-00-77400U-12. ISSN 0277-786X. ISBN 978-0-8194-8230-3. DOI 10.1117/12.857222.
HUDEC, R., et al. Investigation of high-energy sources in optical light by ESA Gaia. In: 8th International Workshop on Multifrequency Behaviour of High Energy Cosmic Sources. Vulcano, 2009-05-25/2009-05-30. Roma: Societa Astronomica Italiana, 2010. p. 476-481. Memorie della Societa Astronomica Italiana, Supplementi. ISSN 1824-0178.
KOVÁŘ, P., P. KAČMAŘÍK, and F. VEJRAŽKA. Interoperable GPS, GLONASS and Galileo Software Receiver. In: 17th Saint Petersburg International Conference on Integrated Navigation Systems. Saint Petersburg, 2010-05-31/2010-06-02. St. Petersburg: State Research Center of Russia Elektropribor, 2010. p. 430-435. ISBN 978-5-900780-85-6.
UŘIČÁŘ, T. Parameter-Invariant Hierarchical Exclusive Alphabet Design for 2-WRC with HDF Strategy. In: HUSNÍK, L., ed. POSTER 2010 - Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Electrical Engineering. POSTER 2010 - 14th International Conference on Electrical Engineering, Praha, 2010-05-06. Praha: ČVUT v Praze, FEL, 2010. p. 1-8. ISBN 978-80-01-04544-2.
ŽALUD, V. Rádiové lokální sítě WLAN a personální sítě WPAN. In: Radiokomunikace 2010. Pardubice, 2010-11-03/2010-11-05. Pardubice: UNIT, 2010. p. 191-217.
KEKRT, D., et al. Quadrature Linear Digital Modulator Implementation in VHDL. In: Applied Electronic 2010. Applied Electronics 2010, Plzeň, 2010-09-08/2010-09-09. Pilsen: University of West Bohemia, 2010. p. 153-158. ISSN 1803-7232. ISBN 978-80-7043-865-7.
KEKRT, D., et al. Poly-phase Decimation Filter Implementation in VHDL. In: VOZŇÁK, M. and J. SKAPA, eds. RTT 2010 Proceedings. 12th International Conference Research in Telecommunication Technologies 2010, Velké Losiny, 2010-09-08/2010-09-10. Ostrava: VŠB - TUO, FEI, Katedra elektroniky a telekomunikační techniky, 2010. p. 155-160. ISBN 978-80-248-2261-7.
HUDEC, R., et al. Lobster-Eye X-Ray Astronomy. In: X-Ray Astronomy 2009; Present Status, Multi-wavelength Approach and Future Perspectives: Proceedings of the International Conference. X-Ray Astronomy 2009; Present Status, Multi-wavelength Approach and Future Perspectives, Lucia - Bologna, 2009-09-07/2009-09-11. Melville, New York: American Institute of Physics, 2010. p. 585-586. AIP Conference Proceedings. ISSN 0094-243X. ISBN 978-0-7354-0795-4. DOI 10.1063/1.3475346.
DOBEŠ, J., et al. New Methods for Improving the Pole-Zero Analysis Accuracy. In: Mathematical Models for Engineering Science. Puerto De La Cruz, Tenerife, 2010-11-30/2010-12-02. Berlin: Institute for Environment, Engineering, Economics and Applied Mathematics, 2010. p. 155-158. ISSN 1792-6734. ISBN 978-960-474-252-3.
RUND, F., et al. Orientation in Simple Virtual Auditory Space Created with Measured HRTF. In: Technical Computing Bratislava 2010. Bratislava, 2010-10-20. Bratislava: RT systems, s.r.o, 2010. p. 1-7. 18th Annual Conference Proceedings. ISBN 978-80-970519-0-7.
PROCHÁZKA, P. and J. SÝKORA. Per-symbol representation of sufficient statistics for FSM decoder metric used in BC phase of 2WRC with HDF strategy. In: COST 2100 - 10th MCM Athens. Athens, 2010-02-03/2010-02-05. Brussels: COST Office, 2010. p. 1-8.
FLIEGEL, K. Advances in 3D imaging systems: Are you ready to buy a new 3D TV set?. In: FEDRA, Z., et al., eds. Proceedings of 20th International Conference Radioelektronika 2010. 20th International Conference Radioelektronika 2010, VUT Brno, FEKT, ÚREL, 2010-04-19/2010-04-21. Brno: VUT v Brně, FEKT, Ústav radioelektroniky, 2010. p. 3-8. ISBN 978-1-4244-6319-0.
PURIČER, P., et al. Systémy SBAS a GBAS a jejich použití pro určování polohy pozemního mobilního uživatele. [Research Report] Praha: České vysoké učení technické v Praze, Fakulta elektrotechnická, 2010.
KADLEC, F. Measurement and analysis of electro-acoustic and audio systems, multimedia applications in assistive technologies. [Unpublished Lecture] Laboratoire d'Acoustique de l'Université du Maine. 2010-11-10.
LHOTSKÁ, L., et al. Centre of Assistive Technologies: New Opportunity for Interdisciplinary Education. [Unpublished Lecture] VDI/VDE Innovation + Technik GmbH. 2010-03-11.

matches: V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V. V.