alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### [§242. Repealed. Pub. L. 94–455, title XIX, §1901(a)(33), Oct. 4, 1976, 90 Stat. 1769]

Section, acts Aug. 16, 1954, ch. 736, 68A Stat. 72; Feb. 26, 1964, Pub. L. 88–272, title I, §123(c), 78 Stat. 30, allowed to corporations as a deduction the amount received as interest on obligations of the United States or on obligations of corporations organized under Acts of Congress which are instrumentalities of the United States under certain conditions.

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

#### Effective Date of Repeal

Repeal effective for taxable years beginning after Dec. 31, 1976, see section 1901(d) of Pub. L. 94–455, set out as an Effective Date of 1976 Amendment note under section 2 of this title.
### **CHAPTER 97—JURISDICTIONAL IMMUNITIES OF FOREIGN STATES**

Sec.
1602.
Findings and declaration of purpose.
1603.
Definitions.
1604.
Immunity of a foreign state from jurisdiction.
1605.
General exceptions to the jurisdictional immunity of a foreign state.
1605A.
Terrorism exception to the jurisdictional immunity of a foreign state.
1605B.
Responsibility of foreign states for international terrorism against the United States.
1606.
Extent of liability.
1607.
Counterclaims.
1608.
Service; time to answer default. 1

1609.
Immunity from attachment and execution of property of a foreign state.
1610.
Exceptions to the immunity from attachment or execution.
1611.
Certain types of property immune from execution.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

**2016**—Pub. L. 114–222, §3(b)(1), Sept. 28, 2016, 130 Stat. 853, added item 1605B.

**2008**—Pub. L. 110–181, div. A, title X, §1083(a)(2), Jan. 28, 2008, 122 Stat. 341, added item 1605A.

1  So in original. Does not conform to section catchline.
EPA SANITIZED Page 1 of 8
 

 

 

EPA SANITIZED Page 2 of 8
 

EPA SANITIZED Page 3 of 8
EPA SANITIZED Page 4 of 8
EPA SANITIZED Page 5 of 8
EPA SANITIZED Page 6 of 8
EPA SANITIZED Page 7 of 8
EPA SANITIZED Page 8 of 8
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     This  schedule  contains  summary  financial  information  extracted  from 
     BONITO INDUSTRIES, INC. September 30, 1996 financial  statements and  is
     qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<CIK>                         0000894530
<NAME>                        BONITO INDUSTRIES, INC.

       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1996

<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1996

<CASH>                                                   0
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                            0
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                         0
<PP&E>                                                   0
<DEPRECIATION>                                           0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                           0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                    0
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                             1,000
<OTHER-SE>                                          (1,000)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                             0
<SALES>                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                         0
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                            0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                          0
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                      0
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                             0
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                            0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                            0
        


</TABLE>
#### § 3921.50 Determining the geographic area for receiving applications to lease.

After analyzing expressions of leasing interest received under § 3921.30 and complying with the procedures at § 3921.40 of this chapter, the State Director may determine a geographic area for receiving applications to lease. The BLM may also include additional geographic areas available for lease in addition to lands identified in expressions of interest to lease.
§ 106.201 Who may be a Cosponsor? ( a ) Except as specified in paragraph (b) of this section, SBA may enter into a Cosponsorship Agreement with an Eligible Entity as defined in § 106.101(e).
( b ) SBA may not enter into a Cosponsorship Agreement with an Eligible Entity if the Administrator (or designee), after consultation with the General Counsel (or designee), determines that such agreement would create a conflict of interest.
National Park Service 

U.S. Department of the Interior 

Resource Stewardship Scout Ranger Program

Individual Activity Tracking Sheet

Scout’s Name:

Council:

Unit:

Date Park Park Contact Activity I Did What I Learned Hours

Total Hours

 I, the Scout, certify that I personally worked on 

these projects or programs for the provided hours. 

I certify that these hours accurately represent the work 

the participant conducted on the listed projects or 

programs. 

Scout’s Signature: Unit Leader Signature:

Date: Date:
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 02-6550
NATHANIEL JOHN LITTLE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Newport News. Rebecca B. Smith, District Judge. (CR-97-41, CA-01-84) Submitted: July 25, 2002 Decided: August 1, 2002 Before WILKINS, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Nathaniel John Little, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Nathaniel John Little seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2002). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Little v. United States , Nos. CR-97-41; CA-01- 84 (E.D. Va. filed Jan. 30, 2002 & entered Jan. 31, 2002). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
(No. 1030

Claimant awarded $154.11.)

#### American Bosch Magneto Corporation, Claimant, *vs.*State of Illinois, Respondent.

*Opinion filed January 19, 1927.*

Franchise *tax*— when *claimant entitled to refund.*This case is controlled by the decision of the court in *Federal Match Oorp.*y. *State, supra.*

Benj. F. Cassiday, for claimant.

Oscar E. Carlstrom, Attorney General ; Frank R. Eagleton, Assistant Attorney General, for respondent.

Mr. Justice Thomas

delivered the opinion of the court:

This is a claim of American Bosch Magneto Corporation for a refund of $154.11 franchise tax erroneously paid to the *266Secretary of State for the period beginning July 1, 1925, and ending June 30, 1926, in excess of the amount legally due under the provisions of the General Corporation Act.

The Attorney General first filed a demurrer on behalf of the State and afterward filed a statement, attached to which is a copy of a letter from the Secretary of State admitting that claimant is entitled to a refund of $154.11, and the Attorney General consents to an award in favor of claimant for that sum.

As the State was overpaid that amount, the demurrer will be overruled and claimant awarded the sum of $154.11.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                           6,813
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 6,813
<PP&E>                                     138,556,663
<DEPRECIATION>                             100,920,881
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              37,652,595
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          145,132
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                  37,507,463
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                37,652,595
<SALES>                                      3,927,382
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,942,709
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  204,428
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              3,728,281
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 3,728,281
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .39
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .39


</TABLE>
#### § 702.224 Claims; notification of employer of filing by employee.

Within 10 days after the filing of a claim for compensation for injury or death under the Act, the district director must give written notice thereof to the employer or carrier.

[80 FR 12929, Mar. 12, 2015]
Editorial Note on Part 120
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 120 appear at 72 FR 50039, Aug. 30, 2007.

§ 120.331 What devices or techniques are eligible for a loan? Eligible energy conservation devices or techniques include: ( a ) Solar thermal equipment;
( b ) Photovoltaic cells and related equipment;
( c ) A product or service which increases the energy efficiency of existing equipment, methods of operation or systems which use fossil fuels, and which is on the Energy Conservation Measures list of the Secretary of Energy;
( d ) Equipment producing energy from wood, biological waste, grain or other biomass energy sources;
( e ) Equipment for cogeneration of energy, district heating or production of energy from industrial waste;
( f ) Hydroelectric power equipment;
( g ) Wind energy conversion equipment; and
( h ) Engineering, architectural, consulting, or other professional services necessary or appropriate for any of the devices or techniques in paragraphs (a) through (g) of this section.
II 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4882 

To amend the Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974 to authorize 

appropriations for the United States Fire Administration and firefighter 

assistance grant programs. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 19, 2022 

Mr. PETERS (for himself and Mr. PORTMAN) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend the Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act 

of 1974 to authorize appropriations for the United States 

Fire Administration and firefighter assistance grant programs. 

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 ‘‘Fire Grants and Safety 

5 Act’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 4882 IS

1 SEC. 2. REAUTHORIZATION OF THE UNITED STATES FIRE 

2 ADMINISTRATION. 

3 Section 17(g)(1) of the Federal Fire Prevention and 

4 Control Act of 1974 (15 U.S.C. 2216(g)(1)) is amended— 

5 (1) in subparagraph (L), by striking ‘‘and’’; 

6 (2) in subparagraph (M), by striking the period 

7 and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and 

8 (3) by adding at the end the following: 

9 ‘‘(N) $95,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2024 

10 through 2030, of which $3,420,000 for each such 

11 fiscal year shall be used to carry out section 8(f).’’. 

12 SEC. 3. REAUTHORIZATION OF ASSISTANCE TO FIRE13 FIGHTERS GRANTS PROGRAM AND THE FIRE 

14 PREVENTION AND SAFETY GRANTS PRO15 GRAM. 

16 (a) REPEAL OF SUNSET.—Section 33 of the Federal 

17 Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974 (15 U.S.C. 

18 2229) is amended by striking subsection (r). 

19 (b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—Section 

20 33(q)(1)(B) of the Federal Fire Prevention and Control 

21 Act of 1974 (15 U.S.C. 2229(q)(1)(B)) is amended, in the 

22 matter preceding clause (i), by striking ‘‘2023’’ and insert23 ing ‘‘2030’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 4882 IS

1 SEC. 4. REAUTHORIZATION OF STAFFING FOR ADEQUATE 

2 FIRE AND EMERGENCY RESPONSE GRANT 

3 PROGRAM. 

4 (a) REPEAL OF SUNSET.—Section 34 of the Federal 

5 Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974 (15 U.S.C. 

6 2229a) is amended by striking subsection (k). 

7 (b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—Section 

8 34(j)(1)(I) of the Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act 

9 of 1974 (15 U.S.C. 2229a(j)(1)(I)) is amended, in the 

10 matter preceding clause (i), by striking ‘‘2023’’ and insert11 ing ‘‘2030’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                             DEC-28-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                DEC-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                  SEP-28-1997

<CASH>                                           303,221
<SECURITIES>                                           0
<RECEIVABLES>                                          0
<ALLOWANCES>                                           0
<INVENTORY>                                      251,568
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               1,601,693
<PP&E>                                        10,256,685
<DEPRECIATION>                                 4,009,524
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 8,944,084
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          2,667,961
<BONDS>                                          767,476
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                  0
<PREFERRED>                                            3
<COMMON>                                             157
<OTHER-SE>                                     5,508,487
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   8,944,084
<SALES>                                       21,514,492
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              21,514,492
<CGS>                                          5,892,371
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  5,892,371
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              15,767,300
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                95,684
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (147,863)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         800
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (148,663)
<DISCONTINUED>                                         0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                        0
<CHANGES>                                              0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (148,663)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                       (.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       (.01)
        


</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-1403

LUTHER C. EDMONDS, Plaintiff - Appellant, and ELITE CHILD, INCORPORATED; SHERRY D. BATTLE, Plaintiffs, versus E. PRESTON GRISSOM, individually and in hiscapacity of Judge, Judicial Circuit of Virginia, Circuit Court of the City of Chesapeake, Defendant - Appellee, andSCHRODER CHESAPEAKE, INCORPORATED, t/a Greenbrier Mall, Defendant.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge. (CA-98-488-2) Submitted: May 31, 2001 Decided: June 8, 2001 Before WILKINS, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges.2 Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Luther C. Edmonds, Appellant Pro Se. Mark L. Earley, Attorney General, Gregory E. Lucyk, Edward Meade Macon, Mary Elizabeth Shea, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Luther C. Edmonds appeals the district court’s order denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion to set aside a prior order. Our review of the record and the district court’s opinion discloses no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Edmonds v. Grissom , No. CA-98-488-2 (E.D. Va. Feb. 14, 2001). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
#### § 429.16 How much is the application fee and when should it be paid?

You must remit a nonrefundable application fee of $100 to cover costs associated with our initial review of your application, unless the payment is waived pursuant to subpart F of this part. This initial review will determine if your requested use is appropriate for consideration and not likely to interfere with Reclamation project purposes or operations.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                  EXHIBIT 10.7.1

                             AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO THE
                                    LEVIATHAN
                            1998 UNIT OPTION PLAN FOR
                             NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTORS

         Pursuant to Section 9.1 of the Leviathan 1998 Unit Option Plan for
Non-Employee Directors, effective as of August 14, 1998 (the "Plan"), the Plan
is hereby amended as follows, effective December 1, 1999:

         WHEREAS, effective as of December 1, 1999, the name of the General
Partner and the Partnership changed to El Paso Energy Partners Company and El
Paso Energy Partners, L.P., respectively.

         NOW, THEREFORE, the name of the Plan is hereby changed to "El Paso
Energy Partners, L.P. 1998 Unit Option Plan for Non-Employee Directors."

         All references in the Plan to "Leviathan Gas Pipeline Company" or the
"Company" shall mean "El Paso Energy Partners Company" and all references to
"Leviathan Gas Pipeline Partners, L.P." or the "Partnership" shall mean "El Paso
Energy Partners, L.P."

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the General Partner has caused this amendment to be
duly executed on behalf of the Partnership on this 1st day of December, 1999.

                                       EL PASO ENERGY PARTNERS, L.P.
                                       By: El Paso Energy Partners Company
                                           The General Partner

                                       By      /s/ H. Brent Austin
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                       Title:  Executive Vice President

ATTEST:

By     /s/ David L. Siddall
-----------------------------
Title:  Corporate Secretary
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 20-61107-CIV-DIMITROULEAS

AMERICAN CONTRACTORS

INDENMITY COMPANY

A foreign corporation,

Plaintiff,

vs.

ARRIAGA STEEL, INC., a Florida

corporation, ANTONIO ARRIAGA,

MARISOL ARRIAGA and

GEOVANNI ARRIAGA,

Defendants.

___________________________________/

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE

THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs 

(the “Motion”) [DE 39], and the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Lurana S. 

Snow (the “Report”) [DE 46]. The Court notes that no objections to the Report [DE 46] have 

been filed, and the time for filing such objections has passed. See Notice of Service at [DE 50]. 

As no timely objections were filed, the Magistrate Judge’s factual findings in the Report [DE 46] 

are hereby adopted and deemed incorporated into this opinion. LoConte v. Dugger, 847 F.2d 

745, 749-50 (11th Cir. 1988), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 958 (1988); RTC v. Hallmark Builders, Inc., 

996 F.2d 1144, 1149 (11th Cir. 1993). 

 Although no timely objections were filed, the Court has conducted a de novo review of the 

Report [DE 46] and record and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. The Court agrees with 

the Magistrate Judge’s reasoning and conclusions. 

Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:

Case 0:20-cv-61107-WPD Document 53 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/04/2022 Page 1 of 2
1. The Report [DE 46] is hereby ADOPTED and APPROVED; 

2. Plaintiff’s Motion [DE 39] is hereby GRANTED; 

3. Plaintiff is hereby awarded attorneys' fees in the amount of $33,990.00 and costs in 

the amount of $421.96; and

4. The Clerk is DIRECTED to mail a copy of this Order to Defendants at the addresses 

below.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Fort Lauderdale, Broward County, Florida, 

this 4th day of February, 2022.

Copies furnished to:

Counsel of Record

Magistrate Judge Lurana Snow

Arriaga Steel, Inc. 

c/o Joseph K. Nofil 

8217 West Atlantic Blvd. 

Coral Springs, FL 33071

Antonio Arriaga 

1530 SW 61st Ave 

North Lauderdale, FL 33068

Marisol Arriaga 

1530 SW 61st Ave 

North Lauderdale, FL 33068

Geovanni Arriaga 

1530 SW 61st Ave 

North Lauderdale, FL 33068

Case 0:20-cv-61107-WPD Document 53 Entered on FLSD Docket 02/04/2022 Page 2 of 2
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

September 28, 2009 

d0921 

Order 

 

September 28, 2009 

138979 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 138979 

 COA: 291149 

Saginaw CC: 08-030475-FH; 

WILLIE LONELL FRAZIER, 08-030481-FH 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the April 28, 2009 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded 

that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

 KELLY, C.J., would grant leave to appeal for the reasons set forth in her opinion in 

People v Idziak, 484 Mich 549 (2009). 

 CAVANAGH, J., would grant leave to appeal to reconsider People v Idziak, 484 

Mich 549 (2009).