alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §720i. Sense of Congress concerning use of steel manufactured in North America and negotiation of a project labor agreement

It is the sense of Congress that—

(1) an Alaska natural gas transportation project would provide significant economic benefits to the United States and Canada; and

(2) to maximize those benefits, the sponsors of the Alaska natural gas transportation project should make every effort to—

(A) use steel that is manufactured in North America; and

(B) negotiate a project labor agreement to expedite construction of the pipeline.

(Pub. L. 108–324, div. C, §111, Oct. 13, 2004, 118 Stat. 1263.)
§ 401.40 Informal conferences and emergencies. ( a ) Whenever the Executive Director shall deem necessary, or upon request of the applicant, an informal conference may be scheduled to explain, supplement or review an application.
( b ) In the event of an emergency requiring immediate action to protect the public interest or to avoid substantial and irreparable injury to any private person or property, and the circumstances do not permit a review, hearing and determination in the regular course of the regulations in this part, the Executive Director with the approval of the chairman of the Commission may issue an emergency certificate authorizing an applicant to take such action as the Executive Director may deem necessary and proper in the circumstances, pending review, hearing and determination by the Commission as otherwise required in this part.
II 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 816 

To amend the Natural Gas Act to expedite approval of exports of small 

volumes of natural gas, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 14, 2019 

Mr. CASSIDY (for himself, Mr. KENNEDY, and Mr. RUBIO) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To amend the Natural Gas Act to expedite approval of 

exports of small volumes of natural gas, and for other 

purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Small Scale LNG Ac5 cess Act of 2019’’. 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 816 IS

1 SEC. 2. EXPEDITED APPROVAL OF EXPORT OF CERTAIN 

2 VOLUMES OF NATURAL GAS. 

3 Section 3 of the Natural Gas Act (15 U.S.C. 717b) 

4 is amended by striking subsection (c) and inserting the 

5 following: 

6 ‘‘(c) EXPEDITED APPLICATION AND APPROVAL

7 PROCESS.— 

8 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—For purposes of subsection 

9 (a), the following shall be deemed to be consistent 

10 with the public interest, and applications for such 

11 importation or exportation shall be granted without 

12 modification or delay: 

13 ‘‘(A) The importation of the natural gas 

14 referred to in subsection (b). 

15 ‘‘(B) The exportation of natural gas in a 

16 volume up to and including 51,750,000,000 

17 cubic feet per year. 

18 ‘‘(C) The exportation of natural gas to a 

19 nation with which there is in effect a free trade 

20 agreement requiring national treatment for 

21 trade in natural gas. 

22 ‘‘(2) EXCLUSION.—Subparagraphs (B) and (C) 

23 of paragraph (1) shall not apply to any nation sub24 ject to sanctions imposed by the United States.’’. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
### §7110. Authorization of appropriations

#### (a) In general

There is authorized to be appropriated to carry out this chapter $1,000,000, for each of fiscal years 2001 through 2003, of which $550,000 shall be available in each such fiscal year to carry out section 7109 of this title.

#### (b) Budget review

No amount made available under this section for any fiscal year may be obligated or expended by the Council before the date on which the Council reviews and approves the operating budget of the Council to carry out the responsibilities of the Council for that fiscal year.

(Pub. L. 100–533, title IV, §410, formerly §409, as added Pub. L. 103–403, title IV, §413, Oct. 22, 1994, 108 Stat. 4197; renumbered §411 and amended Pub. L. 105–135, title III, §305, Dec. 2, 1997, 111 Stat. 2610; renumbered §410 and amended Pub. L. 106–554, §1(a)(9) [title VII, §705], Dec. 21, 2000, 114 Stat. 2763, 2763A–702.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 410 of Pub. L. 100–533 was renumbered section 409 and is classified to section 7109 of this title.

#### Amendments

2000—Pub. L. 106–554 amended section catchline and text generally. Prior to amendment, text authorized appropriations to carry out this chapter for fiscal years 1998 through 2000 and limited obligation or expenditure of those funds prior to the budget review by the Council for that fiscal year.

1997—Pub. L. 105–135 amended section catchline and text generally. Prior to amendment, text read as follows: "There are authorized to be appropriated for each of fiscal years 1995 through 1997, to carry out this chapter, $350,000."

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date of 1997 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 105–135 effective Oct. 1, 1997, see section 3 of Pub. L. 105–135, set out as a note under section 631 of this title.
December 24, 2015 

Attn: U. S. Department of Transportation

Docket Operations West Building Ground Floor, Room w12-140 1200

New Jersey Ave, SE Washington, DC 20590 

BRIAN SHAW A LICENSED AIRLINE TRANSPORT PILOT RATED IN B787 B737 AND EMB 145 REQUEST AN 

EXEMPTION FROM THE REQUIREMENTS OF TITLE 14 OF THE CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS SECTIONS 

61.113(a) & (b), 91.7(a), 91.121, 91.151(b), 91.405(a), 91.407(a)(1), 91.409(a)(1) & (a)(2), AND 91.417(a) 

& (b) CONCERNING COMMERCIAL OPERATION OF DJI Phantom 2 UNMANNED AIRCRAFT SYSTEMS 

PURSUANT TO SECTION 333 OF THE FAA MODERNIZATION AND REFORM ACT OF 2012 (PUBLIC LAW 

112-95) 

BRIAN SHAW 9110 CARRIAGE POINT DR SUGAR LAND TX 77479 713-446-7324
# C_2012258EN.01000701.xml

| 25.8.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 258/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.8.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 258/7

---

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 28 June 2012 — XXXLutz Marken GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), Natura Selection, SL

(Case C-306/11 P) (1)

1

(Appeals - Community trade mark - Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Figurative mark Linea Natura Natur hat immer Stil - Opposition by the proprietor of the Community figurative mark natura selection - Relative grounds for refusal - Likelihood of confusion)

2012/C 258/10

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Appellant: XXXLutz Marken GmbH (represented by: H. Pannen, Rechtsanwalt)

Appellant:

Other parties to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: K. Klüpfel, acting as Agent), Natura Selection, SL

Other parties to the proceedings:

Re:

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 24 March 2011 in Case T-54/09 XXXLutz Marken v OHIM — Natura Selection (Linea Natura Natur hat immer Stil) dismissing the action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 28 November 2008 (Case R 1787/2007-2) relating to opposition proceedings between Natura Selection, SL and XXXLutz Marken GmbH — Likelihood of confusion between the figurative signs ‘natura selection’ and ‘Linea Natura Natur hat immer Stil’ — Erroneous assessment of the similarity of those signs — Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94

XXXLutz Marken

OHIM — Natura Selection (Linea Natura Natur hat immer Stil)

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the appeal; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the appeal;

| 2. | Orders XXXLutz Marken GmbH to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders XXXLutz Marken GmbH to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 238, 13.8.2011.

1

---
### JUDGMENT 

## Court of Appeals First District of Texas

NO. 01

- 13

- 00777

- CR

KENNETH COOPER MCAFE E , Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee
Appeal from the 339th District Court of Harris County. (Tr. Ct. No. 1262341 ).

This case is an appeal from the final judgment signed by the trial court on August 28, 2013. After submitting the case on the appellate record and the arguments properly raised by the parties, the Court holds th at the trial court’s judgment contains no reversible error. Accordingly, the Court affirms the trial court’s judgment.

The Court orders that this decision be certified below for observance.

Judgment rendered May 1 2 , 2015.

Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Higley, and Brown. Opinion delivered by Justice Keyes.
Schedule of Stock Based Compensation



 

 

 

	 
	EXHIBIT 10.16

	OMEGA FLEX, INC.
	 

	Phantom Stock Agreements
	 

	Schedule of Directors and Officers
	 

	As of December 31, 2015
	 

	Director/Officer 
	Type 
	Number 
	Grant Date 
	Grant Price 
	Maturity Date 
	Vesting Schedule 

	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 

	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 

	Dean W. Rivest
	Full
	1,500 
	02/16/2012 
	$16.68
	02/16/2016
	3 years

	 
	Full
	1,500
	04/03/2013
	$15.01
	03/03/2017
	3 years

	 
	Full
	1,800
	02/19/2014
	$20.20
	02/19/2018
	3 years

	 
	Full
	1,800
	02/16/2015
	$31.26
	02/16/2019
	3 years

	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 

	Paul J. Kane
	Full
	1,500 
	02/16/2012 
	$16.68
	02/16/2016
	3 years

	 
	Full
	1,500
	04/03/2013
	$15.01
	03/03/2017
	3 years

	 
	Full
	1,800
	02/19/2014
	$20.20
	02/19/2018
	3 years

	 
	Full
	1,800
	02/16/2015
	$31.26
	02/16/2019
	3 years

	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 

	Edwin B. Moran
	Full
	1,500 
	02/16/2012 
	$16.68
	02/16/2016
	3 years

	 
	Full
	1,500
	04/03/2013
	$15.01
	03/03/2017
	3 years

	 
	Full
	1,800
	02/19/2014
	$20.20
	02/19/2018
	3 years

	 
	Full
	1,800
	02/16/2015
	$31.26
	02/16/2019
	3 years

	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 

	Steven A. Treichel
	Full
	2,100
	02/16/2012 
	$16.68
	02/16/2016
	3 years

	 
	Full
	2,100
	04/03/2013
	$15.01
	03/03/2017
	3 years

	 
	Full
	2,550
	02/19/2014
	$20.20
	02/19/2018
	3 years

	 
	Full
	2,550
	02/16/2015
	$31.26
	02/16/2019
	3 years

	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 

	Timothy P. Scanlan
	Full
	1,500 
	02/16/2012 
	$16.68
	02/16/2016
	3 years

	 
	Full
	1,500
	04/03/2013
	$15.01
	03/03/2017
	3 years

	 
	Full
	1,800
	02/19/2014
	$20.20
	02/19/2018
	3 years

	 
	Full
	1,800
	02/16/2015
	$31.26
	02/16/2019
	3 years

	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 

	Steven Hockenberry
	Full
	590
	02/16/2012
	$16.68
	02/16/2016
	3 years

	 
	Full
	590
	04/03/2013
	$15.01
	03/03/2017
	3 years

	 
	Full
	710
	02/19/2014
	$20.20
	02/19/2018
	3 years

	 
	Full
	710
	02/16/2015
	$31.26
	02/16/2019
	3 years
#### § 806.20 Purpose of this subpart.

The purpose of this subpart is to set forth general standards that shall be used by the Commission to evaluate all projects subject to review and approval by the Commission pursuant to §§ 806.4, 806.5 and 806.6, and to establish special standards applicable to certain water withdrawals, consumptive uses and diversions. This subpart shall not be construed to limit the Commission's authority and scope of review. These standards are authorized under Sections 3.4(2), 3.4(8), 3.4(9), and 3.10 of the compact and are based upon, but not limited to, the goals, objectives, guidelines and criteria of the comprehensive plan.
#### § 1304.7 Conditions of approvals.

Approvals of applications shall contain such conditions as are required by law and may contain such other general and special conditions as TVA deems necessary or desirable.
# C_2011030EN.01004302.xml

| 29.1.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 30/43 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.1.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 30/43

---

Action brought on 13 November 2010 — Cosepuri v EFSA

(Case T-532/10)

()

2011/C 30/79

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Cosepuri Soc. coop. p.a. (Bologna, Italy) (represented by: F. Fiorenza, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Food Safety Authority (EFSA)

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the refusal dated 15 September 2010 denying Cosepuri access to the documents; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the refusal dated 15 September 2010 denying Cosepuri access to the documents;

| — | Order EFSA to produce the classified documents; |
| --- | --- |

—

Order EFSA to produce the classified documents;

| — | Order EFSA to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order EFSA to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant in the present proceedings, also the applicant in Case T-339/10 Cosepuri v EFSA, (1) challenges the decision of the European Food Safety Authority (EFSA) of 15 September 2010 relating to tendering procedure CFT/EFSA/FIN/2010/01 (contract notice 2010/S 51-074689) for the award of a shuttle service contract in Italy and Europe, in which the contract was awarded to another company.

Cosepuri

EFSA

1

By the contested decision, EFSA refused access to certain documents in the tendering procedure and in particular to documents concerning the requirements for admission and the selection of the most economically advantageous tender.

In support of its claims, the applicant alleges infringement of the relevant provisions of Council Regulation (EC) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 (2) and of Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001, (3) as well as breach of the duty to state reasons, the principle of transparency and the right of access to documents. Lastly, the applicant alleges misuse of powers.

2

3

The applicant complains, in particular, that the defendant failed to state the actual damage that the successful tenderer would suffer if access were granted to the documents requested, and that adequate reasons were not given for the partial refusal of the request, since, in the context of the tendering procedure, the information in question was comparative, included in the documents made available by the tenderers for that procedure, and accordingly outside the scope of confidential business information. In addition, the applicant requests that the present proceedings be joined with Case T-339/10 currently pending before the General Court.

---

(1)  OJ 2010 C 288, p. 47.

1

(2)  Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 1605/2002 of 25 June 2002 on the Financial Regulation applicable to the general budget of the European Communities (OJ 2002 L 248, p. 1).

2

(3)  Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 30 May 2001 regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents (OJ 2001 L 145, p. 43).

3

---
STATE OF LOUISIANA

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

GERALD TAYLOR

VERSUS

LTAC HOSPITAL OF FELICIANA, 

LLC D/ B/ A AMG SPECIALTY

HOSPITAL

NO. 2021 CW 1232

MARCH 4, 2022

In Re: LTAC Hospital of Feliciana, LLC D/ B/ A AMC Specialty

Hospital, applying for supervisory writs, 19th

Judicial District Court, Parish of East Baton Rouge, 

No. 698791. 

BEFORE: GUIDRY, HOLDRIDGE, AND CHUTZ, JJ. 

WRIT GRANTED. The judgment of the district court dated

September 20, 2021, denying the motion for summary judgment

filed by defendant, LTAC Hospital of Feliciana, LLC D/ B/ A AMC

Specialty Hospital, is reversed. As to his medical malpractice

claims, the plaintiff, Gerald Taylor, failed to produce factual

support sufficient to establish the existence of a genuine issue

of material fact as to a causal link between the defendant' s

alleged negligent action and the plaintiff' s injury, which is a

necessary element of his claim. See La. R. S. 9: 2794( A); Samaha

v. Rau, 2007- 1726 ( La. 2/ 26/ 08), 977 So. 2d 880, 883- 4. Further, 

regarding the plaintiff' s negligent infliction of emotional

distress claims, he failed to produce factual support sufficient

to establish a genuine issue of material fact regarding the

emotional severity of his damages, which is an essential element

of his claim. See Moresi v. State Through Department of Wildlife

and Fisheries, 567 So. 2d 1081, 1095 ( La. 1990). Therefore, the

motion for summary judgment filed by the defendant is granted, 

and the plaintiff' s claims are dismissed. 

JMG

GH

WRC

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

DEPUTY CLERK OF COURT

FOR THE COURT
EXHIBIT 11


                             TOTAL CONTAINMENT, INC.
                 STATEMENT RE: COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE
                                   (Unaudited)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                           Twelve Months Ended     Twelve Months Ended     Twelve Months Ended
                                                            December 31, 1997       December 31, 1998       December 31, 1999
                                                           -------------------     --------------------    --------------------
<S>                                                        <C>                     <C>                     <C>
Basic:

Average shares outstanding                                         4,642                    4,646                  4,668
                                                                ========                   ======                =======
  Net income applicable to common shareholders                  $(12,356)                  $4,323                $(6,476)
                                                                ========                   ======                =======
    Net income per share amount                                 $  (2.66)                  $ 0.93                $ (1.39)
                                                                ========                   ======                =======


Assuming dilution:
Average shares outstanding                                                                 4,646
Effect of dilutive options                                                                   214
                                                                                          ------
    Totals                                                                                 4,860
                                                                                          ======
 Net income applicable to common shareholders                                             $4,323
                                                                                          ======
 Net income per share amount                                                              $ 0.89
                                                                                          ======
The calculation for the twelve month period
  for 1997 is not presented as the effect of
  the options would be anti dilutive.
</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 50 (Tuesday, March 15, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14114-14115]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-5988]


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

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION


Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements Under OMB Review

AGENCY: Small Business Administration.

ACTION: Notice of reporting requirements submitted for OMB review.

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

SUMMARY: Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 
Chapter 35), agencies are required to submit proposed reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements to OMB for review and approval, and to 
publish a notice in the Federal Register notifying the public that the 
agency has made such a submission.

DATES: Submit comments on or before April 14, 2011. If you intend to 
comment but cannot prepare comments promptly, please advise the OMB 
Reviewer and the Agency Clearance Officer before the deadline.
    Copies: Request for clearance (OMB 83-1), supporting statement, and 
other documents submitted to OMB for review may be obtained from the 
Agency Clearance Officer.

ADDRESSES: Address all comments concerning this notice to: Agency 
Clearance Officer, Jacqueline White, Small Business Administration, 409 
3rd Street, SW., 5th Floor, Washington, DC

[[Page 14115]]

20416; and OMB Reviewer, Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs, 
Office of Management and Budget, New Executive Office Building, 
Washington, DC 20503.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jacqueline White, Agency Clearance 
Officer, (202) 205-7044.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Title: Small Business Administration (a) Business Development 
Program Web Survey.
    Frequency: On Occasion.
    SBA Form Number: N/A.
    Description of Respondents: Eligible Small Disadvantaged 
Businesses.
    Responses: 1,000.
    Annual Burden: 500.

Jacqueline White,
Chief, Administrative Information Branch.
[FR Doc. 2011-5988 Filed 3-14-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
#### § 806.8 Waiver/modification.

The Commission may, in its discretion, waive or modify any of the requirements of this or any other part of its regulations if the essential purposes set forth in § 806.2 continue to be served.
# C_2013114EN.01001002.xml

| 20.4.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 114/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.4.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 114/10

---

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 28 February 2013 — Portuguese Republic v European Commission

(Case C-246/11 P) (1)

1

(Appeal - European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) - Regulation (EEC) No 2052/88 - Article 13(3) - Regulation (EEC) No 4253/88 - Article 21(1) - Global grant for local development in Portugal - Reduction in financing)

2013/C 114/13

Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Portuguese Republic (represented by: L. Inez Fernandes, S. Rodrigues and A. Gattini, acting as Agents)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: L. Flynn, A. Steiblytė and P. Guerra e Andrade, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings:

Re:

Re:

Appeal against the judgment of the General Court (Eighth Chamber) of 3 March 2011 in Case T-387/07 Portugal v Commission by which that court dismissed the application for annulment in part of Commission Decision C(2007) 3772 of 31 July 2007 reducing the final assistance granted by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) towards the global grant for local development in Portugal pursuant to Commission Decision C(95) 1769 of 28 July 1995

Portugal

Commission

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Sets aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 3 March 2011 in Case T-387/07; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Sets aside the judgment of the General Court of the European Union of 3 March 2011 in Case T-387/07;

| 2. | Annuls Commission Decision C(2007) 3772 of 31 July 2007 reducing the final assistance granted by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) towards the global grant for local development in Portugal pursuant to Commission Decision C(95) 1769 of 28 July 1995; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Annuls Commission Decision C(2007) 3772 of 31 July 2007 reducing the final assistance granted by the European Regional Development Fund (ERDF) towards the global grant for local development in Portugal pursuant to Commission Decision C(95) 1769 of 28 July 1995;

| 3. | Orders the European Commission to pay the costs at first instance and on appeal. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the European Commission to pay the costs at first instance and on appeal.

---

(1)  OJ C 219, 23.7.2011.

1

---