alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                                        <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                              YEAR                    9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998             DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998             SEP-26-1999
<CASH>                                           7,476                   8,349
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   89,053                 122,766
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,435                   1,578
<INVENTORY>                                     41,247                  51,747
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               150,928                 195,996
<PP&E>                                         751,588                 848,585
<DEPRECIATION>                                 364,896                 388,562
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 596,747                 715,434
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          160,845                 174,752
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                             0                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                   (438,794)               (455,378)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   596,747                 715,434
<SALES>                                        588,131                 513,593
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               588,131                 513,593
<CGS>                                          472,731                 410,138
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  472,731                 410,138
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                73,285                  36,279
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              68,379                  64,425
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (26,264)                   2,751
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,092                     896
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (27,356)                   1,855
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    675                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (28,031)                   1,855
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0                       0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0                       0


</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 39 (Monday, February 28, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10943-10944]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-4325]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Internal Revenue Service


Open Meeting of the Area 4 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel (Including the 
States of Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Michigan, Ohio, and Wisconsin)

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: An open meeting of the Area 4 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be 
conducted. The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is soliciting public comments, 
ideas, and suggestions on improving customer service at the Internal 
Revenue Service.

DATES: The meeting will be held Tuesday, April 19, 2011.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ellen Smiley at 1-888-912-1227 or 414-
231-2360.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given pursuant to Section 
10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) 
that a meeting of the Area 4 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be held 
Tuesday, April 19, 2011, at 1 p.m. Central Time via telephone 
conference. The public is invited to make oral comments or submit 
written statements for consideration. Due to limited conference lines, 
notification of intent to participate must be made with Ellen Smiley. 
For more information please contact Ms. Smiley at 1-888-912-1227

[[Page 10944]]

or 414-231-2360, or write TAP Office Stop 1006MIL, 211 West Wisconsin 
Avenue, Milwaukee, WI 53203-2221, or post comments to the Web site: 
http://www.improveirs.org.
    The agenda will include various IRS issues.

    Dated: February 18, 2011.
Shawn Collins,
Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.
[FR Doc. 2011-4325 Filed 2-25-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
#### NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner, v. KING’S ROYAL, INC. and Will Sales, Inc., Respondents.

No. 77-1112.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

Feb. 15, 1979.

Elliott Moore, Deputy Associate Gen. Counsel, Robert Sewell, Lynne E. Deitch, Eric G. Moskowitz, N.L.R.B., Washington, D. C., for petitioner.

Sidney S. Wolchok, Jon David Sherry, New York City, for respondents.

Before EDWARDS, Chief Judge, and CELEBREZZE and KEITH, Circuit Judges.

ORDER

On receipt and consideration of a petition from the National Labor Relations Board for enforcement of its bargaining order; and

Noting that on uncontested facts the Board found that respondents had failed and refused to bargain with the union after it had been certified as representative of respondents’ employees; and

Further taking cognizance of the fact that respondents’ refusal to bargain is based upon their challenge to the validity of the election by which the Retail Clerks Union 1 won a representation election by a 24-20 vote, which election was subsequently contested by respondents on ground of five separate alleged occurrences which respondents urge either singly or collectively served to warrant invalidation of the election results; and

On review of the evidence pertaining to these five episodes or events, being unable to say that either singly or collectively they destroyed the laboratory conditions essential to a fair election or that the Regional Director and the Board’s findings in relation to said charges were unsupported by substantial evidence on the. whole record,

Now, therefore, the Board’s petition for enforcement of its bargaining order is granted.

1

. Retail Clerks Union, Local 298, affiliated wit Retail Clerks International Association, AFL-CIO.
IV

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 28

Recognizing the success of Crime Stoppers International in stopping crimes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 19, 1999

Mrs. MINK of Hawaii submitted the following resolution; which was referred

to the Committee on the Judiciary

RESOLUTION

Recognizing the success of Crime Stoppers International in

stopping crimes.

Whereas Crime Stoppers International began in Albuquerque,

New Mexico, in 1976 and has grown to over 1,000 chapters throughout the world;

Whereas since its beginning Crime Stoppers tips have resulted in the solving of over 655,000 cases, the recovery

of $3,800,000,000 in narcotics and stolen property, and

rewards totaling over $45,000,000;

Whereas Crime Stoppers provides a forum for leadership and

training, fosters cooperation, and encourages information

exchange between local Crime Stoppers programs worldwide;

Whereas Crime Stoppers success can be attributed to media

reports on crime and requests for information, to the
2

•HRES 28 IH

public providing tips to the police, and to police follow up

of such leads; and

Whereas Crime Stoppers has declared January, 1999, as

Crime Stoppers Month around the world: Now, therefore,

be it

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives recog2 nizes the success of Crime Stoppers International and en3 courages community-based efforts to solve crimes around

4 the world.

Æ
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 37 (Thursday, February 24, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10328-10329]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-4185]


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

 DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Foreign-Trade Zones Board

[Order No. 1743]


Grant of Authority for Subzone Status; Vestas Nacelles America, 
Inc. (Wind Turbine Nacelles, Hubs, Blades and Towers), Brighton, 
Denver, Pueblo, and Windsor, CO

    Pursuant to its authority under the Foreign-Trade Zones Act of 
June 18, 1934, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u), the Foreign-Trade 
Zones Board (the Board) adopts the following Order:

    Whereas, the Foreign-Trade Zones Act provides for ``* * * the 
establishment * * * of foreign-trade zones in ports of entry of the 
United States, to expedite and encourage foreign commerce, and for 
other purposes,'' and authorizes the Foreign-Trade Zones Board to grant 
to qualified corporations the privilege of establishing foreign-trade 
zones in or adjacent to U.S. Customs and Border Protection ports of 
entry;
    Whereas, the Board's regulations (15 CFR part 400) provide for the 
establishment of special-purpose subzones when existing zone facilities 
cannot serve the specific use involved, and when the activity results 
in a significant public benefit and is in the public interest;
    Whereas, the City and County of Denver, grantee of Foreign-Trade 
Zone 123, has made application to the Board for authority to establish 
a special-purpose subzone at the wind turbine nacelle, hub, blade and 
tower manufacturing and warehousing facilities of Vestas Nacelles 
America, Inc., located in Brighton, Denver, Pueblo, and Windsor, 
Colorado (FTZ Docket 7-2010, filed 1-25-2010);
    Whereas, notice inviting public comment has been given in the 
Federal Register (75 FR 5283, 2-2-2010) and the application has been 
processed pursuant to the FTZ Act and the Board's regulations; and,
    Whereas, the Board adopts the findings and recommendations of the 
examiner's report, and finds that the requirements of the FTZ Act and 
Board's regulations are satisfied, and that the proposal is in the 
public interest;
    Now, therefore, the Board hereby grants authority for subzone 
status for activity related to the manufacturing and warehousing of 
wind turbine nacelles, hubs, blades and towers at the Vestas Nacelles 
America, Inc., facilities located in Brighton, Denver, Pueblo, and 
Windsor, Colorado (Subzone 123E), as described in the application and 
Federal Register notice, subject to the

[[Page 10329]]

FTZ Act and the Board's regulations, including Section 400.28.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 4th day of February 2011.
Ronald K. Lorentzen,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Import Administration, Alternate 
Chairman, Foreign-Trade Zones Board.
Andrew McGilvray,
Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2011-4185 Filed 2-23-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
EXHIBIT 32(b)



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report of Overnite Corporation (the Corporation) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31,
2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Patrick D. Hanley, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Corporation, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



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



|    |  |                                                  
|--- |  | -------------------------------------------------
|By: |  | /s/ PATRICK D. HANLEY                            
|    |  | Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer



May
9, 2005
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of the Treasury

###### Internal Revenue Service

# AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting.

# SUMMARY:

An open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Tax Forms and Publications Project Committee will be conducted. The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is soliciting public comments, ideas and suggestions on improving customer service at the Internal Revenue Service.

# DATES:

The meeting will be held Tuesday, April 12, 2011.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Marisa Knispel at 1-888-912-1227 or 718-488-3557.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Notice is hereby given pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) that an open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Tax Forms and Publications Project Committee will be held Tuesday, April 12, 2011, at 2 p.m., Eastern Time via telephone conference. The public is invited to make oral comments or submit written statements for consideration. Due to limited conference lines, notification of intent to participate must be made with Marisa Knispel. For more information, please contact Ms. Knispel at 1-888-912-1227 or 718-488-3557, or write TAP Office, 10 MetroTech Center, 625 Fulton Street, Brooklyn, NY 11201, or post comments to the Web site:                     *http://www.improveirs.org.*

The agenda will include various IRS issues.

Dated: February 18, 2011.

Shawn Collins,

Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.

[FR Doc. 2011-4320 Filed 2-25-11; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
# C_2006178EN.01002602.xml

| 29.7.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 178/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.7.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 178/26

---

Action brought on 2 June 2006 — Commission of the European Communities v Kingdom of Spain

(Case C-248/06)

(2006/C 178/42)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: R. Lyal and L. Escobar Guerrero, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Kingdom of Spain

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| — | declare that, by maintaining in force rules for the deduction of costs in respect of research and development and technological innovation carried out abroad which is more onerous than the rules applicable to costs incurred in Spain, as amended by Article 35 of the Law on corporation tax, approved by Royal Legislative Decree 4/2004 of 5 March, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 43 and 49 of the EC Treaty on freedom of establishment and freedom to provide services, and the corresponding articles in the Agreement on the European Economic Area; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare that, by maintaining in force rules for the deduction of costs in respect of research and development and technological innovation carried out abroad which is more onerous than the rules applicable to costs incurred in Spain, as amended by Article 35 of the Law on corporation tax, approved by Royal Legislative Decree 4/2004 of 5 March, the Kingdom of Spain has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 43 and 49 of the EC Treaty on freedom of establishment and freedom to provide services, and the corresponding articles in the Agreement on the European Economic Area;

| — | order the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Infringement of freedom of establishment (Articles 43 and 48 EC and Article 31 EEA): the territorial restriction, which consists of the fact that only expenses incurred in respect of R& D and IT activities actually carried out in Spain may benefit from the deduction of the corporation tax allowance, is a factor which restricts the freedom of establishment of Spanish companies which invest in R&D and IT outside Spain, benefiting companies making the same investment in Spain, in particular, undertakings which have their main office in another Member State and which operate in Spain via a secondary establishment.

Infringement of the freedom to provide services (Articles 49 EC and 36 EEA): the costs of R&D and IT activities subcontracted outside Spain are not eligible for the deduction of the corporation tax allowance. That limitation constitutes an obstacle to the freedom to provide services, provided for in the EC Treaty.

---
# C_2006224EN.01004202.xml

| 16.9.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 224/42 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.9.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 224/42

---

Order of the Court of First Instance of 29 June 2006 — Nürburgring v Parliament and Council

(Case T-311/03) (1)

1

(Action for annulment - Directive 2003/33/CE - Advertising and sponsorship of tobacco products - Ban on sponsorship of events or activities concerning more than one Member State - Locus standi - Inadmissibility)

(2006/C 224/91)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Nürburgring GmbH (Nürburg/Eifel, Germany) (represented by : H. J. Rabe, lawyer, assisted by M. Dauses, Professor)

Applicant:

Defendants: European Parliament (represented by : E.Waldherr and U. Rösslein, Agents) and Council of the European Union (represented by E. Karlsson and J.-P. Hix, Agents)

Defendants:

Interveners in support of the applicant: Hockenheim-Ring GmbH (Hockenheim, Germany) and Exploitatie Circuit Park Zandvoort BV (Zandvoort, Netherlands) (represented by: M. Dauses, Professor)

Interveners in support of the applicant:

Interveners in support of the defendants: Republic of Finland (represented by: T. Pynnä, A. Guimaraes-Purokoski and E. Bygglin, Agents), Commission of the European Communities (represented by: M.-J. Jonczy, L. Pignataro-Nolin and F. Hoffmeister, Agents) and Kingdom of Spain (Represented by: L. Fraguas Gadea, Agents)

Interveners in support of the defendants:

Re:

Application for annulment of Directive 2003/33/CE of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 May 2003, on the approximation of the laws, regulations and administrative provisions of the Member States relating to the advertising and sponsorship of tobacco products (OJ 2003 L 152, p. 16), in particular Article 5(1) thereof.

Operative part of the order

| (1) | The action is dismissed as being inadmissible. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

The action is dismissed as being inadmissible.

| (2) | The applicant shall bear its own costs, as well as those of the Parliament and the Council. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

The applicant shall bear its own costs, as well as those of the Parliament and the Council.

| (3) | The Kingdom of Spain, the Republic of Finland and the Commission, as well as Hockenheim-Ring GmbH and Exploitatie Circuit Park Zandvoort BV, shall bear their own respective costs. |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The Kingdom of Spain, the Republic of Finland and the Commission, as well as Hockenheim-Ring GmbH and Exploitatie Circuit Park Zandvoort BV, shall bear their own respective costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 275 of 15.11.2003.

1

---
#### In the Matter of Jennifer Amorosi, Respondent, v South Colonie Independent Central School District et al., Appellants.

[825 NYS2d 561]

Lahtinen, J.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court (Stein, J.), entered January 11, 2006 in Albany County, which granted petitioner’s application pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50-e (5) for leave to serve a late notice of claim.

Petitioner commenced this proceeding in September 2005 seeking leave to serve a late notice of claim *(see*Education Law § 3813 [1]) for alleged discrimination under Executive Law § 296 which occurred no later than January 2004. Supreme Court granted petitioner’s application, prompting this appeal by respondents, and we now reverse.

Since Supreme Court had no discretion to extend the time in which to serve the notice of claim beyond the time limit for commencement of the action *(see Kingsley Arms, Inc. v Copake-Taconic Hills Cent. School Dist.,*9 AD3d 696, 697-698 [2004], *lv dismissed*3 NY3d 767 [2004]; *Matter of Stevens v Board of Educ. of McGraw Cent. School Dist.,*261 AD2d 698, 699 [1999], *lv denied*93 NY2d 816 [1999]), the question on appeal is whether the one-year statute of limitations set forth in Education Law § 3813 (2-b) is applicable to this discrimination claim which is normally governed by a three-year limitation period *(see*CPLR 214 [2]). Education Law § 3813 (2-b) states in relevant part: “Except as provided in subdivision two of this section and, notwithstanding any other provision of law providing a longer period of time in which to commence an action or special proceeding, *no action or special proceeding shall he commenced*
      *1074
      *against any entity specified in subdivision one of this section more than one year after the cause of action arose”*(emphasis added). We read the statute as applying to all actions, including Executive Law § 296 discrimination claims. Supreme Court’s conclusion that the three-year statute of limitations was applicable and, consequently, it had the discretion to grant petitioner’s application for leave to serve a late notice of claim was supported by two decisions from the Second Department *(see Lane-Weber v Plainedge Union Free School Dist.,*213 AD2d 515, 516 [1995], *lv dismissed*87 NY2d 968 [1996]; *Stoetzel v Wappingers Cent. School Dist.,*166 AD2d 643, 643 [1990]), since this Department has not previously ruled on this issue. However, we reject the Second Department case authority in favor of the clear language of the statute *(see Ximines v George Wingate High School,*2006 WL 2086483, 2006 US Dist LEXIS 50756 [ED NY July 25, 2006]; *Bucalo v East Hampton Union Free School Dist.,*351 F Supp 2d 33, 35-36 [ED NY 2005]), and accordingly reverse the order of Supreme Court and deny petitioner’s application for leave to serve a late notice of claim since petitioner commenced this proceeding more than one year after her cause of action arose *(see Kingsley Arms, Inc. v Copake-Taconic Hills Cent. School Dist., supra*at 698). The remaining issues are academic.

Mercure, J.E, Crew III, Carpinello and Kane, JJ, concur. Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, without costs, and motion denied.