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

<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S.DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1996
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          23,526
<SECURITIES>                                     5,924
<RECEIVABLES>                                   14,271
<ALLOWANCES>                                       251
<INVENTORY>                                      8,800
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                53,663
<PP&E>                                          23,750
<DEPRECIATION>                                  16,384
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  73,853
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           15,090
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        55,936
<OTHER-SE>                                       2,567
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    73,853
<SALES>                                         28,724
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                28,724
<CGS>                                           11,336
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   11,336
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                22,857
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  70
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (4,691)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       689
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (5,380)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (5,380)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.23)<F1><F2>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.23)<F1><F3>
<FN>
<F1>On August 22, 1997, the Company effected a two-for-one split of its
outstanding shares of Common Stock. This Restated Financial Data Schedule reflects the
stock split.
<F2>Data listed for "EPS-PRIMARY" is the newly defined "BASIC EPS".
<F3>Data listed for "EPS-DILUTED" is the newly defined "DILUTED EPS".
</FN>


</TABLE>
#### Maud E. THOMAS, Petitioner, v. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Respondent.

No. 05-3357.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

July 25, 2006.

Before NEWMAN, MAYER, and LINN, Circuit Judges.

JUDGMENT

PER CURIAM

This CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED: *AFFIRMED. See*Fed. Cir. R. 36
###### Editorial Note on Part 40

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 40 appear by T.D. ATF-460, 66 FR 39094-39096, July 27, 2001; T.D. ATF-464, 66 FR 43479, Aug. 20, 2001; and T.D. TTB-91, 76 FR 5479, Feb. 1, 2011.

#### § 40.435 General.

All records and reports required to be kept or maintained under this subpart, including copies of authorizations, inventories, reports, returns, and claims filed with verified supporting schedules, shall be retained by the manufacturer for three years following the close of the calendar year in which filed or made, or in the case of an authorization, for three years following the close of the calendar year in which the operation under such authorization is concluded. Such records shall be made available for inspection by the appropriate TTB officer upon request.

(72 Stat. 1423; 26 U.S.C. 5741)

Packages
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

DAY ELEV

 1,048.86

 1,048.87

 1,048.98

 1,049.12

 1,049.16

 1,049.18

 1,049.12

 1,049.16

 1,049.23

 1,049.37

 1,049.50

 1,049.53

 1,049.46

 1,049.46

 1,049.49

 1,049.51

 1,049.67

 1,049.82

 1,049.82

 1,049.84

 1,049.86

 1,049.87

 1,049.91

 1,049.93

 1,049.97

 1,050.01

 1,049.97

 1,049.98

 1,049.98

 1,049.95

 1,049.97

 1,962.5

 1,962.6

 1,963.8

 1,965.3

 1,965.8

 1,966.0

 1,965.3

 1,965.8

 1,966.5

 1,968.1

 1,969.5

 1,969.8

 1,969.1

 1,969.1

 1,969.4

 1,969.6

 1,971.4

 1,973.0

 1,973.0

 1,973.2

 1,973.5

 1,973.6

 1,974.0

 1,974.2

 1,974.7

 1,975.1

 1,974.7

 1,974.8

 1,974.8

 1,974.4

 1,974.7

STORAGE

-0.1

+0.1

+1.2

+1.5

+0.4

+0.2

-0.7

+0.4

+0.8

+1.5

+1.4

+0.3

-0.8

+0.0

+0.3

+0.2

+1.8

+1.6

+0.0

+0.2

+0.2

+0.1

+0.4

+0.2

+0.4

+0.4

-0.4

+0.1

+0.0

-0.3

+0.2

CHANGE

650

825

635

832

908

841

807

900

985

827

784

865

847

769

914

719

916

869

773

813

832

767

807

668

696

668

413

695

514

563

643

INFLOW

 677

 696

 16

 16

 652

 703

 1,107

 654

 584

 35

 16

 688

 1,209

 751

 749

 583

 25

 15

 748

 692

 708

 712

 568

 546

 429

 426

 620

 619

 486

 711

 526

POWER

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

SPILL

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

OUTLET

 28

 74

 14

 43

 35

 28

 32

 25

 14

 18

 50

 11

 25

 18

 0

 25

 7

 25

 25

 11

 14

 0

 18

 11

 46

 21

 14

 21

 28

 18

 7

C.F.S.

 .08

 .21

 .04

 .12

 .10

 .08

 .09

 .07

 .04

 .05

 .14

 .03

 .07

 .05

 .00

 .07

 .02

 .07

 .07

 .03

 .04

 .00

 .05

 .03

 .13

 .06

 .04

 .06

 .08

 .05

 .02

INCHES

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .05

 .03

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

PRECIP

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

DECEMBER 2011 NEW MELONES LAKE DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: February 7, 2012

IN LAKE

EVAPORATION

INCHES

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

1000 ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S.

TOTALS +11.6 23,745 16,967 0 0 706 1.99 .08

ACRE-FEET +11,600 47,098 33,654 0 0 1,400

COMMENTS:

* COMPUTED INFLOW IS THE SUM OF CHANGE IN STORAGE, RELEASES AND EVAPORATION.

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

POWER 33,654

SPILL 0

OUTLET

TOTAL

 0

 33,654

PRECIPITATION

THIS MONTH =

TO DATE =

 .08

JULY 1, 2011 5.70

 1,962.6

Table 13
§ 31.32 Wholesale dealer in liquors. ( a ) *General.* Except as otherwise provided in paragraph (b) of this section, every person who sells or offers for sale distilled spirits, wines, or beer to another dealer is a wholesale dealer in liquors for purposes of this part. Every wholesale dealer in liquors must comply with the registration and other requirements of this part, unless the dealer is covered by an applicable exemption under subpart D of this part.
( b ) *Persons not deemed to be wholesale dealers in liquors.* The following persons are not wholesale dealers in liquors within the meaning of this part: ( 1 ) A wholesale dealer in beer as described in § 31.34(a);
( 2 ) A person who sells or offers for sale distilled spirits, wines, or beer only as provided in §§ 31.61 through 31.64, § 31.65(a), or § 31.66; or
( 3 ) A person returning liquors for credit, refund, or exchange as provided in § 31.67.
(26 U.S.C. 5121)
###### Editorial Note on Part 22

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 22 appear by T.D. ATF-435, 66 FR 5476, Jan. 19, 2001 and T.D. ATF-463 and T.D. ATF-462, 66 FR 42733, 42736, Aug. 15, 2001.

#### § 22.36 Filing of qualifying documents.

All documents returned to a permittee or other person as evidence of compliance with requirements of this part, or as authorization, shall except as otherwise provided, be kept readily available for inspection by an appropriate TTB officer during business hours.
WATSON WYATT WORLDWIDE, INC.
2000 LONG-TERM INCENTIVE PLAN
 FORM OF NONQUALIFIED STOCK OPTION AGREEMENT
 AGREEMENT Watson Wyatt Worldwide, Inc.
 Watson Wyatt & Company Holdings 2000 Long-Term Incentive Plan
  IN WITNESS WHEREOF,
 Watson Wyatt Worldwide, Inc.By:John J. HaleyPresident and Chief Executive OfficerEmployee[ADDRESS]
[ADDRESS]




---



##### 



WATSON WYATT WORLDWIDE, INC.
2000 LONG-TERM INCENTIVE PLAN
 TERMS AND CONDITIONS OF
NONQUALIFIED STOCK OPTION AGREEMENT
 Watson Wyatt & Company Holdings 2000 Long-Term Incentive Plan
 Grant of Option
 Purchase Price
 Exercise of Option
 Percentage of SharesNumber of Full Years
    
    That May be PurchasedLess than
    
    1 year
    
    
    0
    %1 year
    
    
    33
    %2 years
    
    
    66
    %3 years
    
    
    100
    %




---



##### 



Termination of Employment
 Effect of a Change in Control
 Withholding Tax .
 Foreign Exchange Control Approval.
 3




---



##### 



Liquidation of Investments.
 Non-Transferability of Option
 Limitation of Rights .
 Binding Effect
 The Plan .
 Headings
 Severability
 Notices
 4




---



##### 



Interpretation
 Governing Law
 5
###### Editorial Note on Part 479

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 479 appear by T.D. ATF-487, 68 FR 3752, Jan. 24, 2003.

#### § 479.163 Reuse of stamps prohibited.

A stamp once affixed to one document cannot lawfully be removed and affixed to another. Any person willfully reusing such a stamp shall be subject to the penalty prescribed by 26 U.S.C. 7208.

[36 FR 14256, Aug. 3, 1971. Redesignated by 40 FR 16835, Apr. 15, 1975, and amended by T.D. ATF-48, 44 FR 55843, Sept. 28, 1979]
#### Julianna AGARDI, Plaintiff — Appellant, v. MANCHESTER GRAND HYATT; et al., Defendants — Appellees.

No. 05-15891.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 13, 2006.*

Decided Feb. 22, 2006.

*771Julianna Agardi, San Francisco, CA, pro se.

Lisa McCabe van Krieken, Esq., Folger Levin & Kahn, LLP, San Francisco, CA, Nancy Yaffe, Esq., Jennifer M. Roggenkamp, Esq., Folger, Levin & Kahn, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendants-Appellees.

Before: FERNANDEZ, RYMER, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Julianna Agardi appeals pro se from the district court’s order granting summary judgment in favor of her former employer, Hyatt Corporation (“Hyatt”), in her action alleging retaliation and hostile work environment in response to her claim of sexual harassment. Agardi contends she did not raise a disparate treatment claim based on her sex, so the district court erred in dismissing this claim. Because Agardi agrees she did not raise this claim, we affirm its dismissal. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review the district court’s grant of summary judgment de novo, *Porter v. California Dep’t of Corrections,*419 F.3d 885, 891 (9th Cir. 2005), and we affirm.

Agardi’s hostile work environment claim fails because she did not allege conduct by her supervisor that was “sufficiently severe or pervasive to alter the conditions of [her] employment and create an abusive working environment.” *Brooks v. City of San Mateo,*229 F.3d 917, 923 (9th Cir.2000) (citations omitted).

Agardi’s retaliation claim fails because she did not identify any genuine issue of material fact in opposition to Hyatt’s motion for summary judgment on this claim — indeed, Agardi failed to file any response to Hyatt’s motion. *See Carmen v. San Francisco Unified School District,*237 F.3d 1026, 1031 (9th Cir.2001).

Agardi’s remaining contentions lack merit.

Agardi’s motion to bar appellees and the district court from introducing evidence on remand is denied.

AFFIRMED

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
###### Editorial Note on Part 46

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 46 appear by T.D. ATF-457, 66 FR 32220, 32221, June 14, 2001.

#### § 46.9 Time for filing claim.

No credit or refund of any amount of tax to which the provisions of this subpart apply shall be made unless the claimant files a claim therefor within the time prescribed by law and in accordance with the provisions of this subpart.

[T.D. ATF-42, 42 FR 8373, Feb. 10, 1977]
Exhibit 23
   
 17
§ 19.389 Filling containers from tanks. ( a ) *Filling portable containers.* A proprietor may fill portable containers with denatured spirits from tanks on the bonded premises.
( b ) *Accounting for denatured spirits in filling operations.* In performing filling operations under paragraph (a) of this section, a proprietor must: ( 1 ) Gauge the denatured spirits remaining in the tanks at the end of each filling operation;
( 2 ) Maintain a record of each gauge and document the quantity of denatured spirits drawn from the tank during each filling operation; and
( 3 ) Make a record of any spirits lost during the filling operation.
( c ) *Gauging requirements.* The provisions of § 19.289(a) and (c) apply to the filling and gauging of portable containers. In addition, a proprietor may withdraw denatured spirits from the bonded premises in portable containers based on the filling gauge.
(26 U.S.C. 5201)
###### Editorial Note on Part 40

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 40 appear by T.D. ATF-460, 66 FR 39094-39096, July 27, 2001; T.D. ATF-464, 66 FR 43479, Aug. 20, 2001; and T.D. TTB-91, 76 FR 5479, Feb. 1, 2011.

#### § 40.103 Change in officers, directors, or stockholders of a corporation.

Upon election or appointment (excluding successive reelection or reappointment) of any officer or director of a corporation operating the business of a manufacturer of tobacco products, or upon any occurrence which results in a person acquiring ownership or control of more than ten percent in aggregate of the outstanding stock of such corporation, the manufacturer shall, within 30 days of such action, so notify the appropriate TTB officer in writing, giving the identity of such person. When there is any change in the authority furnished under § 40.63 for officers to act in behalf of the corporation the manufacturer shall immediately so notify the appropriate TTB officer in writing.

(72 Stat. 1421; 26 U.S.C. 5712)

[T.D. 6840, 30 FR 9311, July 27, 1965. Redesignated at 40 FR 16835, Apr. 15, 1975]
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

DAY ELEV

 503.76

 503.95

 503.97

 503.99

 503.83

 503.92

 504.12

 504.42

 504.47

 504.66

 504.53

 504.34

 504.27

 504.24

 504.17

 503.59

 503.28

 502.69

 502.31

 502.13

 502.13

 502.51

 502.41

 502.37

 502.14

 501.90

 501.82

 501.92

 502.06

 501.85

 226.9

 227.5

 227.5

 227.6

 227.1

 227.4

 228.0

 228.9

 229.0

 229.6

 229.2

 228.6

 228.4

 228.3

 228.1

 226.4

 225.4

 223.6

 222.5

 222.0

 222.0

 223.1

 222.8

 222.7

 222.0

 221.3

 221.0

 221.3

 221.8

 221.1

STORAGE

+1.2

+0.6

+0.1

+0.1

-0.5

+0.3

+0.6

+0.9

+0.2

+0.6

-0.4

-0.6

-0.2

-0.1

-0.2

-1.8

-0.9

-1.8

-1.1

-0.5

+0.0

+1.1

-0.3

-0.1

-0.7

-0.7

-0.2

+0.3

+0.4

-0.6

CHANGE

2,077

1,914

1,751

1,776

1,445

1,683

1,501

1,821

1,690

2,026

1,619

1,585

1,611

1,437

1,418

905

1,446

1,036

1,263

1,324

1,403

1,979

1,427

1,677

1,371

1,297

1,283

1,164

1,225

831

INFLOW

 240

 241

 241

 241

 241

 241

 241

 242

 242

 242

 242

 242

 242

 242

 242

 241

 240

 239

 238

 237

 237

 238

 238

 238

 238

 237

 133

 0

 0

 0

MADERA

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

 0

SPILL

 1,003

 1,143

 1,243

 1,256

 1,213

 1,077

 727

 887

 1,136

 1,258

 1,330

 1,390

 1,235

 993

 1,045

 1,301

 1,442

 1,462

 1,361

 1,120

 919

 919

 1,110

 1,257

 1,244

 1,174

 1,027

 789

 795

 931

FRIANT-KERN

 33

 33

 30

 41

 29

 20

 19

 24

 28

 27

 40

 38

 34

 41

 31

 43

 31

 21

 29

 29

 37

 37

 21

 32

 27

 38

 33

 15

 9

 6

C.F.S.

 .34

 .34

 .31

 .42

 .30

 .20

 .19

 .24

 .28

 .27

 .41

 .39

 .35

 .42

 .31

 .44

 .32

 .22

 .30

 .30

 .38

 .38

 .22

 .33

 .28

 .39

 .34

 .16

 .09

 .06

INCHES

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

 .00

PRECIP

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

U.S. BUREAU OF RECLAMATION-CENTRAL VALLEY PROJECT-CALIFORNIA

SEPTEMBER 2002 MILLERTON LAKE DAILY OPERATIONS RUN DATE: October 21, 2002

IN LAKE

EVAPORATION

INCHES

C.F.S.

COMPUTED*

1000 ACRE-FEET

RELEASE - C.F.S. 

TOTALS -4.6 44,985 6,376 33,787 0 876 8.98 .00

ACRE-FEET -4,568 89,228 12,647 67,017 0 1,738

COMMENTS:

* COMPUTED INFLOW IS THE SUM OF CHANGE IN STORAGE, RELEASES, PUMPING AND EVAPORATION.

SUMMARY

RELEASE (ACRE-FEET)

CANALS

FRIANT-KERN

MADERA

 67,017

 12,647 92,055

PRECIPITATION

THIS MONTH =

JULY 1, 2002 TO DATE = 0.00

 225.7

 12,391 0.00

CANALS

AT FRIANT

TOTAL RELEASES

OUTLET

 206

 207

 207

 207

 207

 207

 207

 207

 207

 207

 207

 207

 207

 207

 207

 207

 206

 210

 210

 210

 210

 210

 210

 210

 210

 210

 210

 210

 210

 210

RIVER

 6,247

 12,391

RIVER

Table 15
§ 5.90 Terms related to Scotland. ( a ) The words “Scotch,” “Scots,” “Highland,” or “Highlands,” and similar words connoting, indicating, or commonly associated with Scotland, may be used to designate only distilled spirits wholly manufactured in Scotland, except that the term “Scotch whisky” may appear in the designation for a flavored spirit (“Flavored Scotch Whisky”) or in a truthful statement of composition (“Scotch whisky with natural flavors”) where the base distilled spirit meets the requirements for a Scotch whisky designation, regardless of where the finished product is manufactured.
( b ) In accordance with § 5.127, statements relating to government supervision may appear on Scotch whisky containers only if such labeling statements are required or specifically authorized by the applicable regulations of the United Kingdom.
#### Xiomara ALMANZAR, Appellant v. ATTORNEY GENERAL OF the UNITED STATES.

No. 06-3060.

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.

Submitted For Possible Summary-Action Under Third Circuit LAR 27.4 and I.O.P. 10.6 July 20, 2006.

Filed Aug. 15, 2006.

Xiomara Amanzar, Passaic, NJ, pro se.

Edward J. Duffy, United States Department of Justice, Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, for Attorney General of the United States.

Before SLOVITER, McKEE and FISHER, Circuit Judges.

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

Xiomara Amanzar, a native and citizen of the Dominican Republic, appeals an order of the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey, dismissing her petition filed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2241 for lack of jurisdiction. We will affirm.

In her petition, Amanzar sought review of decisions of the Immigration Judge (IJ) and Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) in her removal proceedings, and sought review of a prior District Court decision docketed at 04-cv-03827. The Court noted that the latest agency decision was the BIA’s denial of Amanzar’s second appeal (deemed a motion to reopen), on November 30, 2004. The Court noted that the denial of a motion to reopen may only be reviewed in the appropriate court of appeals, but declined to transfer the petition to this Court because it was untimely. The Court further noted that Amanzar had previously raised the same issues in the matter docketed at 04-cv-03827.

We agree with the District Court that it lacked jurisdiction both because the petition was untimely, and because it should have been filed in this Court. 8 U.S.C. §§ 1252(a)(5); 1252(b)(1) (petition for re*211view filed in court of appeals is exclusive means of review; petition must be filed within 30 days after the date of the final order of removal). We further note that any challenge to the decision made in 04-cv-03827 could only have been made by way of a timely appeal; filing a second habeas petition was not a proper means to challenge the decision.1 We have considered Almanzar’s response to this Court’s order of June 16, 2006, but find that her arguments do not address the District Court’s proper holding that it lacked jurisdiction.

For the foregoing reasons, we will grant the Government’s motion for summary affirmance.

1

. Almanzar appealed the decision in that case, but the appeal was dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because it was untimely filed. *Almamar v. Attorney General,*No. 05-2075 (3d Cir., June 15, 2005).
IIB 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5567 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 22, 2020 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, 

and Transportation 

AN ACT 

To amend the Communications Act of 1934 to require the 

Federal Communications Commission to consider market 

entry barriers for socially disadvantaged individuals in 

the communications marketplace report under section 13 

of such Act. 

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


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 5567 RFS

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Measuring the Eco3 nomics Driving Investments and Access for Diversity Act 

4 of 2020’’ or the ‘‘MEDIA Diversity Act of 2020’’. 

5 SEC. 2. CONSIDERING MARKET ENTRY BARRIERS FOR SO6 CIALLY DISADVANTAGED INDIVIDUALS. 

7 Section 13(d) of the Communications Act of 1934 

8 (47 U.S.C. 163(d)) is amended by adding at the end the 

9 following: 

10 ‘‘(4) CONSIDERING SOCIALLY DISADVANTAGED

11 INDIVIDUALS.—In assessing the state of competition 

12 under subsection (b)(1) and regulatory barriers 

13 under subsection (b)(3), the Commission, with the 

14 input of the Office of Communications Business Op15 portunities of the Commission, shall consider market 

16 entry barriers for socially disadvantaged individuals 

17 in the communications marketplace in accordance 

18 with the national policy under section 257(b).’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives September 21, 

2020. 

Attest: CHERYL L. JOHNSON, 

Clerk. 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
_____________

No. 95-4073NE

_____________

Victor Day, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the District

* of Nebraska.

Board of Regents of the *

University of Nebraska; * [PUBLISHED]

Pill Soon Song, *

*

Appellees. *

_____________

Submitted: May 13, 1996

 Filed: May 22, 1996

_____________

Before McMILLIAN, FAGG, and LOKEN, Circuit Judges.

_____________

PER CURIAM.

Victor Day appeals the district court's grant of summary judgment in

Day's civil rights action. Day v. Board of Regents, 911 F. Supp. 1228 (D.

Neb. 1995). Day contends the University of Nebraska's decision to pay him

less than other professors in his department was age-based and deprived him

of an array of constitutional rights. Having carefully reviewed the record

and the parties' briefs, we conclude Day is not entitled to relief.

Because the controlling law is clear, our review satisfies us that an

opinion would have no precedential value. Accordingly, we affirm without

further discussion. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
§ 24.203 Honey wine. ( a ) Subject to paragraph (b) of this section, a winemaker, in the production of wine from honey, may add the following: ( 1 ) Water to facilitate fermentation, provided the density of the honey and water mixture is not reduced below 13 degrees Brix;
( 2 ) Hops in quantities not to exceed one pound for each 1,000 pounds of honey; and
( 3 ) Pure, dry sugar or honey for sweetening. Sugar may be added only after fermentation is completed.
( b ) After complete fermentation or complete fermentation and sweetening, the wine may not have an alcohol content of more than 14 percent by volume or a total solids content that exceeds 35 degrees Brix.
(26 U.S.C. 5387)
[T.D. TTB-23, 70 FR 2801, Jan. 18, 2005]