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

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3861 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend the exclusion for 

employer-provided educational assistance to employer payments of qualified education loans. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 29, 2015 

Mr. RODNEY DAVIS of Illinois (for himself, Ms. GRAHAM, Mr. COFFMAN, Mr. 

ROUZER, Mr. NOLAN, Ms. MCSALLY, Mr. GARAMENDI, Mr. MURPHY of 

Florida, and Mr. BLUM) introduced the following bill; which was referred 

to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend 

the exclusion for employer-provided educational assistance to employer payments of qualified education loans. 

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 ‘‘Employer Participation 

5 in Student Loan Assistance Act’’. 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3861 IH

1 SEC. 2. EXCLUSION FOR EMPLOYER PAYMENT OF QUALI2 FIED EDUCATION LOANS. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 127(c)(1) of the Internal 

4 Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ‘‘and’’ at 

5 the end of subparagraph (A), by redesignating subpara6 graph (B) as subparagraph (C), and by inserting after 

7 subparagraph (A) the following new subparagraph: 

8 ‘‘(B) the payment by an employer, whether 

9 paid to the employee or to a lender, of principal 

10 or interest on any qualified education loan (as 

11 defined in section 221(d)(1)) incurred by the 

12 employee, and’’. 

13 (b) DENIAL OF DOUBLE BENEFIT.—Section 

14 221(e)(1) of such Code is amended by inserting before the 

15 period at the end the following: ‘‘, or for any amount 

16 which is excludable from gross income under section 

17 127(c)(1)(B)’’. 

18 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

19 this section shall apply to payments made by employers 

20 after December 31, 2015. 

Æ 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Editorial Note on Part 478
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 478 appear by T.D. ATF-411, 64 FR 17291, Apr. 9, 1999, T.D. ATF-487, 68 FR 3750, Jan. 24, 2003, and ATF-11F, 73 FR 57240, Oct. 2, 2008.

§ 478.126 Furnishing transaction information. ( a ) Each licensee shall, when required by letter issued by the Director of Industry Operations, and until notified to the contrary in writing by such officer, submit on Form 5300.5, Report of Firearms Transactions, for the periods and at the times specified in the letter issued by the Director of Industry Operations, all record information required by this subpart, or such lesser record information as the Director of Industry Operations in his letter may specify.
( b ) The Director of Industry Operations may authorize the information to be submitted in a manner other than that prescribed in paragraph (a) of this section when it is shown by a licensee that an alternate method of reporting is reasonably necessary and will not unduly hinder the effective administration of this part. A licensee who proposes to use an alternate method of reporting shall submit a letter application, in duplicate, to the Director of Industry Operations and shall describe the proposed alternate method of reporting and the need therefor. An alternate method of reporting shall not be employed by the licensee until approval in such regard is received from the Director of Industry Operations.
(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 1140-0032) [33 FR 18555, Dec. 14, 1968. Redesignated at 40 FR 16835, Apr. 15, 1975, and amended by T.D. ATF-172, 49 FR 14942, Apr. 16, 1984; ATF-11F, 73 FR 57242, Oct. 2, 2008; ATF 2013R-9F, 79 FR 46692, Aug. 11, 2014]
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE MATTHEW HICKEN, § § No. 498, 2017 Petitioner Below, § Appellant, § Court Below—Superior Court § of the State of Delaware v. § § C.A. No. N17M-05-331 DELAWARE DEPARTMENT OF § CORRECTIONS, § § Respondent Below, § Appellee. § Submitted: February 14, 2018 Decided: February 15, 2018 ORDER This 15 th day of February 2018, it appears to the Court that the Clerk issued a notice to show cause directing the appella nt to show cause w hy the above-captioned appeal should not be dismissed for the appella nt’s failure to file a motion to proceed in forma pauperis or to pay the filing fee associated with the appeal. The appellant has not responded to the notice to show cau se within the require d ten-day period. Accordingly, dismissal of the appeal is deemed to be unopposed. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, unde r Supreme Court Rules 3(b)(2) and 29(b), that the appeal is DISMISSED.

BY THE COURT: /s/ Collins J. Seitz, Jr. Justice
#### Sidney Reische, Appellant, v. Florence Montgomery, as Executrix of Henry E. Montgomery, Deceased, et al., Respondents, and Edward Reische, Impleaded Defendant.

Motion for reargument denied, with $10 costs. Present— Lewis, P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Adel and Wenzel, JJ. [See *ante,*p. 824.]
EXHIBIT 11a


                              AMERITECH CORPORATION
                    COMPUTATION OF PRIMARY EARNINGS PER SHARE
                                   (Unaudited)
                                        
                                        
                                           Three Months Ended
                                                June 30
                                             -------------
                                          1997              1996
                                          ----              ----
Net income                           $536,868,000      $566,639,000
                                     ============      ============


Weighted average number of
shares outstanding                    549,974,160       553,172,522

Additional dilutive effect of
outstanding options (as determined
by the application of the treasury
stock method)                           2,511,523         2,592,752
                                     ------------      ------------

Weighted average shares outstanding
on which primary earnings per share
are based                             552,485,683       555,765,274
                                     ============      ============
Primary earnings per share                  $0.97             $1.02
                                     ============      ============


We submit this calculation in accordance with Regulation S-K,Item 601(b)11.
It is not required by footnote 2 to paragraph 14 of Accounting Principles
Board Opinion No. 15 because it results in dilution of less than three
percent.


We have restated amounts for the prior year to include the windfall tax
benefit in our determination of the dilutive effect of outstanding options.
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 HIGH

 15,481

 17,628

 17,478

 19,004

 17,379

 15,041

 12,610

 13,014

 16,769

 17,725

 19,905

 20,620

 21,285

 22,086

 22,089

 21,937

 26,318

 25,144

 24,343

 24,078

 22,196

 21,888

 21,852

 21,790

 22,482

 24,888

 24,896

 24,937

 25,105

 24,259

 24,039

 5,023

 5,546

 6,558

 7,089

 7,051

 6,166

 5,469

 6,402

 6,164

 5,791

 8,377

 8,447

 9,019

 7,981

 7,753

 8,874

 8,895

 9,146

 9,519

 9,364

 8,960

 10,007

 10,835

 10,091

 10,502

 9,975

 9,497

 8,486

 7,715

 7,443

 7,445

 9,715

 11,592

 12,292

 12,763

 12,242

 10,584

 9,124

 9,461

 11,130

 11,012

 12,582

 13,687

 14,256

 14,543

 14,711

 16,447

 17,379

 16,935

 16,778

 16,398

 15,763

 16,005

 16,210

 15,389

 14,927

 14,938

 15,397

 15,750

 15,394

 15,227

 15,318

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

JULY 2012 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: August 3, 2012

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

PORT CHICAGO BOTTOM IN SUISUN BAY
### §78. Cooperation of Smithsonian Institution with State institutions for continuing paleontological investigations

The Secretary of the Smithsonian Institution is authorized to cooperate with any State, educational institution, or scientific organization in the United States for continuing paleontological investigations, and the excavation and preservation of fossil remains, in areas which will be flooded by the construction of Government dams or otherwise be made unavailable for such investigations because of such construction: Provided, That such investigations and activities shall not duplicate nor affect adversely similar operations being conducted by the Department of Interior in cooperation with the Smithsonian Institution.

(Aug. 15, 1949, ch. 427, §1, 63 Stat. 606.)
First Department,

February, 1948.

(February 2, 1948.)

#### Stephen J. Kwisty, Appellant, *v.*Marie Kwisty, Respondent.

*Per Curiam.*

Ample evidence is contained in the record to sustain the finding of tile trial court that the defendant committed adultery with the corespondent named. However, the proof relied upon as establishing condonation of the offense falls far short of the requirements which are to be found in the cases *(Betz*v. *Betz,*2 Robt. 694; *Merrill*v. *Merrill,*41 App. Div. 347; *Harris*v. *Harris,*83 App. Div. 123). Under the circumstances the court should not have granted the defendant a judgment of separation against the plaintiff. The judgment appealed from should therefore be reversed, without costs, the counterclaim dismissed and judgment directed in favor of the plaintiff for an absolute divorce.

Peck, P. J., Hlennon, Dore, Van Yoorhis and Shientag, JJ., concur.

Judgment unanimously reversed, without costs, the counterclaim dismissed and judgment directed in favor of plaintiff for an absolute divorce. The findings inconsistent with this determination should be reversed and such new findings made of facts proved on the trial as are necessary to sustain the judgment hereby awarded. Settle order on notice.
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 72 (Thursday, April 14, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Pages 21072-21073]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-9035]


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

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

[Notice: (11-039)]


NASA Advisory Council; Meeting

AGENCY: National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Public 
Law 92-463, as amended, the National Aeronautics and Space 
Administration announces a meeting of the NASA Advisory Council.

DATES: Thursday, May 5, 2011, 8 a.m.-5 p.m., Local Time
    Friday, May 6, 2011, 8 a.m.-12 p.m., Local Time.

[[Page 21073]]


ADDRESSES: Ohio Aerospace Institute, The President's Room, 22800 Cedar 
Point Road, Cleveland, OH 44142.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Marla King, NAC Administrative 
Officer, National Aeronautics and Space Administration Headquarters, 
Washington, DC 20546, 202/358-1148.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The agenda for the meeting will include 
reports from the NAC Committees:

--Aeronautics
--Audit, Finance and Analysis
--Commercial Space
--Education and Public Outreach
--Exploration
--Information Technology Infrastructure
--Science
--Space Operations
--Technology and Innovation

The meeting will be open to the public up to the seating capacity of 
the room. It is imperative that the meeting be held on this date to 
accommodate the scheduling priorities of the key participants.

    Dated: April 8, 2011.
P. Diane Rausch,
Advisory Committee Management Officer, National Aeronautics and Space 
Administration.
[FR Doc. 2011-9035 Filed 4-13-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7510-13-P
CONTACT:
    
    Lewis J. Derbes, Jr.
Stewart Enterprises, Inc.
1333 S. Clearview Parkway
Jefferson, LA 70121
504-729-1400
    
    FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
 STEWART ENTERPRISES INCREASES DIVIDEND AND STOCK REPURCHASE PROGRAM
###### Editorial Note on Part 478

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 478 appear by T.D. ATF-411, 64 FR 17291, Apr. 9, 1999, T.D. ATF-487, 68 FR 3750, Jan. 24, 2003, and ATF-11F, 73 FR 57240, Oct. 2, 2008.

#### § 478.133 Records of transactions in semiautomatic assault weapons.

The evidence specified in § 478.40(c), relating to transactions in semiautomatic assault weapons, shall be retained in the permanent records of the manufacturer or dealer and in the records of the licensee to whom the weapons are transferred.

(Approved by the Office of Management and Budget under control number 1140-0041)

[T.D. ATF-363, 60 FR 17455, Apr. 6, 1995, as amended by ATF-11F, 73 FR 57242, Oct. 2, 2008]
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3864 

To prevent certain monitoring and interception by Federal authorities of 

Federal prisoner communications that are subject to attorney-client privilege. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 29, 2015 

Mr. JEFFRIES (for himself and Mr. COLLINS of Georgia) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To prevent certain monitoring and interception by Federal 

authorities of Federal prisoner communications that are 

subject to attorney-client privilege. 

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 ‘‘Effective Assistance 

5 of Counsel in the Digital Era Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. PRISONER COMMUNICATIONS THAT ARE SUBJECT 

7 TO ATTORNEY-CLIENT PRIVILEGE. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Except as provided in subsection 

9 (b) it shall be unlawful for any person acting under the 

10 authority of the United States to monitor any electronic 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3864 IH

1 communication (as defined in section 2510 of title 18, 

2 United States Code) to which a prisoner in a Bureau of 

3 Prisons correctional facility is a party, if that communica4 tion is subject to attorney-client privilege. 

5 (b) EXCEPTION.—Subsection (a) does not apply to a 

6 communication the Attorney General has reason to believe 

7 poses a threat to national security. 

8 (c) RULES BY ATTORNEY GENERAL.—The Attorney 

9 General shall prescribe rules to carry out this section. 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
(No. 6787

#### Standard Oil Division of American Oil Company, Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Department of Transportation, Respondent.

*Opinion filed October 11, 1973.*

Standard Oil Division of American Oil Company, Claimant, pro se.

William J. Scott, Attorney General; Saul R. Wexler, Assistant Attorney General, for Respondent.

Per Curiam.
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Anna Adams, Respondent, against Max Solomon Company, Appellant. State Industrial Board, Respondent.

All concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5712 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5712

  To repeal the authority under the National Labor Relations Act for 
 States to enact laws prohibiting agreements requiring membership in a 
    labor organization as a condition of employment, and for other 
                               purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 29, 2020

  Mr. Sherman (for himself, Mr. Brendan F. Boyle of Pennsylvania, Ms. 
    Brownley of California, Mr. Cardenas, Mr. Clay, Mr. Cohen, Mr. 
  Espaillat, Mr. Garamendi, Mr. Johnson of Georgia, Ms. Jayapal, Ms. 
Kaptur, Mr. Khanna, Mr. Kildee, Mr. Lynch, Mr. McGovern, Ms. Moore, Mr. 
 Moulton, Ms. Norton, Ms. Omar, Mr. Pallone, Mr. Panetta, Mr. Raskin, 
    Ms. Roybal-Allard, Ms. Sanchez, Ms. Schakowsky, Ms. Speier, Mr. 
  Swalwell of California, Mr. Visclosky, Ms. Clarke of New York, Mr. 
    Veasey, and Mr. Meeks) introduced the following bill; which was 
            referred to the Committee on Education and Labor

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To repeal the authority under the National Labor Relations Act for 
 States to enact laws prohibiting agreements requiring membership in a 
    labor organization as a condition of employment, and for other 
                               purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Nationwide Right to Unionize Act''.

SEC. 2. PREEMPTING STATE RIGHT-TO-WORK LAWS.

    Subsection (b) of section 14 of the National Labor Relations Act 
(29 U.S.C. 164) is repealed.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT
32.1





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the Annual Report of RadNet, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K
for the twelve month period ended December 31, 2009, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on March __, 2010 (the “Report”), I, Howard
G. Berger, M.D., Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:




1. The
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and





2. The
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of, and for
the periods presented in the Report.





/s/
                  Howard G. Berger, M.D.Howard
      G. Berger, M.D.Chairman,
      President and Chief Executive Officer(Principal
      Executive Officer)March
      15, 2010





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
the Company and will be furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.
###### Editorial Note on Part 71

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 71 appear by T.D. ATF-414, 64 FR 49084, Sept. 10, 1999and T.D. ATF-463, 66 FR 42734, 42735, Aug. 15, 2001.

#### § 71.115 Appeal on petition to the Administrator.

An appeal to the Administrator is required prior to application to the Federal courts for review. An appeal may be taken by the applicant or respondent or by the appropriate TTB officer. Such appeal shall be taken by filing a petition for review on appeal with the Administrator within 15 days of the service of the order disapproving an application for a permit or the initial decision suspending, revoking or annulling a permit. The petition must set forth facts tending to show action of an arbitrary nature, or action without reasonable warrant in fact, or action contrary to law and regulations. A copy of the petition shall be filed with the appropriate TTB officer or served on the respondent or applicant as the case may be. In the event of such appeal, the appropriate TTB officer shall immediately certify and forward the complete original record, by certified mail, to the Administrator, for his consideration and review.

[T.D. ATF-244, 51 FR 45764, Dec. 22, 1986, as amended by T.D. ATF-374, 61 FR 29957, June 13, 1996]
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 HIGH

 423

 383

 450

 434

 434

 447

 480

 509

 534

 512

 479

 548

 505

 499

 438

 453

 414

 415

 391

 474

 501

 472

 496

 474

 392

 396

 458

 444

 463

 436

 502

 331

 329

 319

 325

 322

 322

 320

 315

 310

 303

 300

 299

 305

 315

 321

 325

 324

 325

 327

 312

 311

 302

 303

 307

 304

 309

 325

 335

 327

 348

 330

 351

 345

 345

 346

 341

 346

 344

 344

 343

 332

 330

 344

 341

 358

 345

 346

 350

 351

 345

 341

 335

 348

 345

 343

 339

 343

 359

 366

 375

 385

 402

LOW MEAN

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

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

JULY 2001 WATER QUALITY REPORT RUN DATE: August 7, 2001

ELECTRICAL CONDUCTIVITY, UMHOS 

Comments:

0 reading indicates that the station was out of service.

DELTA MENDOTA CANAL AT CHECK 13 (O'NEILL)
#### Vincenzo Bellanca, Respondent, v. Guiseppina Catalano Cianciolo, Appellant.

Judgment reversed and new trial granted before another referee or before a jury, in ease either party is or becomes entitled to a jury trial, with costs to. appellant to abide event. Held, that as it was not shown that the defendant had made any purchases or deposits indicating that she had received the $4,000 or any part thereof, and plaintiff’s testimony as to advances or loans to defendant of other large sums of money is found by the referee to have been false, and material testimony of at least one of plaintiff’s witnesses was clearly false, we think the evidence is insufficient to support the finding of the referee that plaintiff did, in fact, pay or deliver to the defendant the sum of $4,000 as and for a contribution to the capital of the alleged partnership between the parties.

All concurred.
###### Editorial Note on Part 44

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 44 appear by T.D. ATF-464, 66 FR 43480, Aug. 20, 2001, and T.D. ATF-480, 67 FR 30801-30803, May 8, 2002.

#### § 44.226 Delivery of tobacco products, and cigarette papers and tubes for export by parcel post.

Where the tobacco products, and cigarette papers and tubes are to be shipped by parcel post to a destination in a foreign country, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, or a possession of the United States, a waiver of his right to withdraw such articles from the mails shall be stamped or written on each shipping container and be signed by the claimant, after which the claimant shall present the shipment to the post office. The claimant shall request the postmaster or his agent to execute the certificate of mailing on the copy of the claim, Form 5620.7, returned to the claimant by the appropriate TTB officer in accordance with § 44.224. When so executed by the postal authorities, the Form 5620.7 shall be transmitted at once to the appropriate TTB officer with whom the form was previously filed.

(72 Stat. 1419; 26 U.S.C. 5706)

[T.D. 6871, 31 FR 55, Jan. 4, 1966. Redesignated at 40 FR 16835, Apr. 15, 1975, and amended by T.D. ATF-232, 51 FR 28089, Aug. 5, 1986; T.D. ATF-243, 51 FR 43194, Dec. 1, 1986; T.D. ATF-424, 64 FR 71933, Dec. 22, 1999]
SCPR-19-0000825

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI # I

IN RE PAMELA MACER, Petitioner.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

ORDER GRANTING PETITION TO RESIGN AND SURRENDER LICENSE (By Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson JJ.)

Upon consideration of Petitioner Pamela Macer’s petition to resign and surrender her license to practice law in the State of Hawai # i, filed pursuant to Rule 1.10 of the Rules of the Supreme Court of the State of Hawai # i(RSCH), and the affidavits submitted in support thereof, we conclude that Petitioner Macer has fully complied with the requirements of RSCH Rule 1.10. Therefore,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the petition is granted. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, pursuant to RSCH Rule 1.10(g), that the Petitioner shall comply with the notice, affidavit, and record requirements of RSCH Rules 2.16(a), (b), (d), and (g).

IT IS FINALLY ORDERED that the Clerk shall remove the name of Petitioner Pamela Macer, attorney number 9127, from the roll of attorneys of the State of Hawai # i , effective with the filing of this order.

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai # i, December 17, 2019. /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald /s/ Paula A. Nakayama /s/ Sabrina S. McKenna /s/ Richard W. Pollack /s/ Michael D. Wilson Electronically Filed Supreme Court SCPR-19-0000825 17-DEC-2019 09:14 AM