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

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 658 

To treat all controlled substance analogues, other than chemical substances 

subject to the Toxic Substances Control Act, as controlled substances 

in schedule I regardless of whether they are intended for human consumption. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 15, 2017 

Mr. HOEVEN (for himself and Mr. COONS) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To treat all controlled substance analogues, other than chemical substances subject to the Toxic Substances Control 

Act, as controlled substances in schedule I regardless 

of whether they are intended for human consumption. 

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 ‘‘Illegal Synthetic Drug 

5 Safety Act of 2017’’. 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 658 IS

1 SEC. 2. TREATMENT OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE ANA2 LOGUES. 

3 Section 203 of the Controlled Substances Act (21 

4 U.S.C. 813) is amended by striking ‘‘shall, to the extent 

5 intended for human consumption,’’ and inserting the fol6 lowing: ‘‘that is not a chemical substance subject to the 

7 Toxic Substances Control Act (15 U.S.C. 2601 et seq.) 

8 shall’’. 

Æ 


asabaliauskas on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### State of Connecticut *v.*Edward Yorczyk

*Richard E. Grushin,*for the .appellant (defendant).

*Walter H. Prescott,*assistant state prosecutor, for the appellee (state).

Argued October 10

decided October 10, 1974

The defendant’s motion to set aside the verdict of the trial court and to direct an entry of a judgment of not guilty in the appeal from the Appellate Division of the Circuit Court is denied.
### §7812. Regulations

The Secretary may issue such regulations as are necessary to carry out this chapter and the powers vested in the Secretary by this chapter, including regulations relating to the assessment of late payment charges and interest.

(Pub. L. 106–387, §1(a) [title XII, §1213], Oct. 28, 2000, 114 Stat. 1549, 1549A–97.)
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 649 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 649

         To permit the televising of Supreme Court proceedings.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 15, 2017

Mr. Durbin (for himself, Mr. Grassley, Mr. Franken, Mr. Blumenthal, and 
Ms. Klobuchar) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
         To permit the televising of Supreme Court proceedings.

    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 ``Cameras in the Courtroom Act''.

SEC. 2. AMENDMENT TO TITLE 28.

    (a) In General.--Chapter 45 of title 28, United States Code, is 
amended by inserting at the end the following:
``Sec. 678. Televising Supreme Court proceedings
    ``The Supreme Court shall permit television coverage of all open 
sessions of the Court unless the Court decides, by a vote of the 
majority of justices, that allowing such coverage in a particular case 
would constitute a violation of the due process rights of 1 or more of 
the parties before the Court.''.
    (b) Clerical Amendment.--The chapter analysis for chapter 45 of 
title 28, United States Code, is amended by inserting at the end the 
following:

``678. Televising Supreme Court proceedings.''.
                                 <all>
```
#### 1349.106 Fraud or other criminal conduct.

If the terminating contracting officer (TCO) suspects fraud or other criminal conduct related to the settlement of a terminated contract, the TCO shall immediately discontinue negotiations and prepare a written report concerning the matter. The report shall be submitted to the Bureau Procurement Official, the Office of Inspector General, and the DOC suspension and debarring official. An informational copy shall be provided to Procurement Counsel.
### §446. Repealed. Pub. L. 86–133, Aug. 4, 1959, 73 Stat. 279

Section, act July 3, 1956, ch. 512, §5, 70 Stat. 492, prescribed three years following July 3, 1956, as expiration date for availability of grain under sections 667f to 667f–3 of Title 16, Conservation.
#### 14.201-3 Part II—Contract clauses.

*Section I, Contract clauses.* The contracting officer shall include in this section the clauses required by law or by this regulation and any additional clauses expected to apply to any resulting contract, if these clauses are not required to be included in any other section of the uniform contract format.

[48 FR 42171, Sept. 19, 1983, as amended at 53 FR 17857, May 18, 1988]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM SECOND
QUARTER ENDED OCTOBER 31, 1997 SYNTHETIC BLOOD INTERNATIONAL, INC.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             MAY-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1997
<CASH>                                          99,619
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               109,264
<PP&E>                                         303,518
<DEPRECIATION>                                 192,497
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 333,273
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          676,373
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       458,739
<OTHER-SE>                                   (801,839)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   333,273
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   893
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               595,481
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,497
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (594,588)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (594,588)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  ($0.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  ($0.01)
        

</TABLE>
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-17-00316-CV

LAREDO JET CENTER, LLC,

Appellant

v.

CITY OF LAREDO,

Appellee

From the 341st Judicial District Court, Webb County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2016CVF003042D3

Honorable Rebecca Ramirez Palomo, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE ALVAREZ, JUSTICE CHAPA, AND JUSTICE RIOS

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s order that appellant 

Laredo Jet Center, LLC vacate the premises is VACATED. We REVERSE the portion of the trial 

court’s judgment that dismisses appellant Laredo Jet Center, LLC’s claim and cause of action for 

quantum meruit and REMAND that claim and cause of action to the trial court for further 

proceedings. All other portions of the trial court’s judgment are AFFIRMED. 

SIGNED July 25, 2018.

_____________________________

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice
Document Headings

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

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Election Assistance Commission

# AGENCY:

U.S. Election Assistance Commission.

# ACTION:

Notice; corrections.

# SUMMARY:

                        The U.S. Election Assistance Commission published a document in the                         **Federal Register**                         regarding the scheduled Roundtable Discussion: 2020 Elections Lessons Learned. The Roundtable Discussion scheduled for 1:30 p.m.-3:30 p.m. Eastern on Wednesday, January 27, 2021 is cancelled. The Notice appeared in the                         **Federal Register**                         of January 8, 2021, in FR Doc. 2021-0269, on page 1486 in the third column and page 1487 in the first column.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Kristen Muthig, Telephone: (202) 897-9285, Email:                         *kmuthig@eac.gov.*

Amanda Joiner,

Associate Counsel, U.S. Election Assistance Commission.

[FR Doc. 2021-00546 Filed 1-12-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE P
#### Joseph Harris, Appellant, v. Justine L. Lambert, Respondent, et al., Defendants.

Motion by respondent Lambert to dismiss the appeal on the ground that the record previously filed by appellant is improperly certified and incomplete, or in the alternative, to permit said respondent to file a supplemental record on appeal. The motion is granted to the extent of the alternative relief requested. Nolan, P. J., Beldoek, Ughetta, Kleinfeld and Christ, JJ., concur.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

July 21, 2017

No. 04-17-00118-CR

Roxanne Y. CHAVEZ,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 290th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2016CR0769

Honorable Melisa Skinner, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

The court reporter in this case filed Volumes 1 through 3 and Volume 5 with State’s 

Exhibit 1 (Parts 1-18) of the reporter’s record on June 16, 2017. The court reporter submitted 

Volume 4, but it is not considered filed because it lacks the court reporter’s signature. The clerk 

of this court informed the court reporter of the need to resubmit Volume 4 of the reporter’s 

record with a signature via phone voice mail.

Volume 4 of the reporter’s record has not been resubmitted with a signature. 

Accordingly, we ORDER court reporter Mary Beth Sasala to file Volume 4 of the reporter’s 

record on or by July 31, 2017.

_________________________________

Irene Rios, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 21st day of July, 2017.
___________________________________

Luz Estrada

Chief Deputy Clerk
Exhibit 12(b)
                  ELIZABETHTOWN WATER COMPANY AND SUBSIDIARY
              Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
                             and Preferred Dividends
                          (In Thousands Except Ratios)

                                                       Three Months Ended
                                                             March 31,
                                                      1999            1998
EARNINGS:

Net income                                        $     4,283     $    4,645
Federal income taxes                                    2,261          2,456
Interest charges                                        3,865          3,836
                                                  ---------------------------
 Earnings available to cover fixed charges             10,409         10,937
                                                  ---------------------------


FIXED CHARGES AND PREFERRED DIVIDENDS:

Interest on long-term debt                              3,757          3,624
Preferred dividend requirement (1)                        310            310
Other interest                                             63            206
Amortization of debt discount - net                        98             97
                                                  ---------------------------
Total fixed charges                               $     4,228     $    4,237
                                                  ---------------------------
Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
 and Preferred Dividends                                 2.46           2.58
                                                  ===========================


(1) Preferred Dividend Requirement:

Preferred dividends                                       203            203
Effective tax rate                                     34.55%         34.59%
                                                  ---------------------------
Preferred dividend requirement                    $       310     $      310
                                                  ===========================



Earnings to Fixed Charges and Preferred Dividends represents the sum of
Net Income, Federal income taxes and Interest
Charges (which is reduced by Allowance for Debt Funds Used During
Construction), divided by Fixed Charges.  Fixed Charges and Preferred
Dividends consist of interest on long and short-term debt (which is not
reduced by Allowance for Debt Funds Used During Construction), dividends
on Preferred Stock on a pre-tax basis and Amortization of debt discount.
#### In the Matter of Tucson Realty Corp., Appellant, v. Temporary State Housing Rent Commission, Respondent.

Order, entered on December 11, 1962, unanimously affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements to respondent. The proceeding is dismissed on the merits. Chapter 21 of the Laws of 1962 was effective to cancel the rent increases which were granted on September 1, 1961 to petitioner by the local rent office on basis of 1961 equalization rates. We reject, as inconsistent with the terms of the statute, construed as a whole and in light of legislative background, the petitioner’s contention that the statute should be restricted in its application to cancel increases in those cases where no increases would have been due if the 1954 equalization rate had been used. ('See L. 1962, eh. 21, §§ 4, 5; *Matter of Solmar Realty Corp.*v. *Temporary*
      *517
      *State Sousing Rent Comm.,*18 A D 2d 705; *Capway Realty Corp.*V. *Temporary State Sousing Rent Comm.,*18 A D 2d 687; *Matter of Feinbart Realty Corp.*v. *Serman,*18 A D 2d 837.) The statute is constitutional in its application here. (See *Capway Realty Corp.*v. *Temporary State Sousing Rent Comm.,*supra; *Teeval Co.*v. *Stern,*301 N. Y. 346; *I. L. F. T. Co.*v. *Temporary State Sousing Rent Comm.,*11 N Y 2d 259; *Bucho Solding Co.*V. *Temporary State Sousing Rent Comm.,*11 N Y 2d 469.) Concur — ■ McNally, J. P., Stevens, Eager, Steuer and Bergan, JJ.
### Marc h12 , 201 0 i--P 1 O r llimOm m Th e Honorabl e Ra

yLaHoo d Secretary-] , Unite d State s Departmen t o fTransportatio n 120 0 Ne wJerseyAvenue , S E Washington , D.C

. 

### 2059 0 Subject : Haned a Combinatio n Service s Allocatio n Proceedin g DOT-OST-2010-001 8 Dea rSecretaryLaHood : A s a dedicate d trave l partne ro fAmerica n Airlines , I a m writin g i n suppor to fAmerican' s applicatio n t o provid e ne wservic e fro m Ne wYork' s Joh n F

. Kenned yInternationa l Airpor t an d Los Angele s Internationa l Airpor tt o Toky o Internationa l Airpor ta tHaneda

. I recogniz e an d applau d yo u an d th e Obam a administratio n fo ryou rsucces s las t Decembe ri n reachin g a landmar k Ope n Skie s agreemen t wit h Japan , whic h open s u p Haned a t o servic e b yU.S

. airlines

. I encourag e you rselectio n o fAmerica n Airline s t o provid e nonsto p servic e fro m Ne w Yor k an d Los Angele s t o Haned a i n orde rt o provid e a n essentia l connectio n betwee n thre e o fth e world' s larges tfinancia l an d commerc e centers

. Recen t events , includin g th e successfu l preservatio n o fJapa n Airlines ' oneworl d Allianc e membership , hav e underscore d American' s stron g commitmen tt o th e trans-Pacifi c market

. America n i s likewis e committe d t o Ne wYor k an d Los Angele s - bot h vita l foca l point s o fbusiness , trade , entertainment , technolog yan d educatio n - providin g unsurpasse d ai rservic e sinc e th e mid-1900 s Bot h th e Ne wYor k

an d Los Angele s metr o area s wil l gai n significan teconomi cbenefit s fro m thes e propose d ne wflights , a s wil l American' s customer s an d employees

. However , w e nee d you rhel p t o mak e th e JF K& LAX/Haned a connectio n a reality

. Therefore , I strongl yurg e yo u t o sa yye s t o America n Airline s an d it s reques t fo rslot s t o fl yfro m Kenned yan d Los Angele s t o Haneda ! Sincerely , Joa n Goodwin , CT

C Dalla s Travel , Inc

. 972-503-444 6
#### PEOPLE ex rel. CONEY ISLAND & B. R. CO., Appellant, v. PRIEST et al., Respondents.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Third Department.

January 23, 1903.)

Proceeding by the people of the state of New York, on the relation of the Coney Island & Brooklyn Railroad Company against George E. Priest and others, constituting the State Tax Board.

No opinion. Crder appealed from affirmed on the facts and reversed on the law, and assessment vacated, upon opinions in People ex rel. Metropolitan St. Ry. Co. v. State Board of Tax Com’rs (decided this term) 80 N. Y. Supp. 85. Form of order, if not agreed upon, to be settled by CHASE, J.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                           5,816
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    6,422
<ALLOWANCES>                                       150
<INVENTORY>                                     15,686
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                28,112
<PP&E>                                          77,111
<DEPRECIATION>                                  52,428
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  63,577
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            6,506
<BONDS>                                         19,833
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                        442
<COMMON>                                         1,026
<OTHER-SE>                                      31,296
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    63,577
<SALES>                                         13,534
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                13,534
<CGS>                                           11,175
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    2,008
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   173
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 323
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (145)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       (9)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (136)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (136)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.15)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.15)


</TABLE>
### §2354. Subpoenas; witnesses

(a) The clerk of any United States court for the district wherein testimony is to be taken in accordance with regulations established by the Secretary for use in any contested case in the Plant Variety Protection Office shall, upon the application of any party thereof, issue a subpoena for any witness residing or being within such district or within one hundred miles of the stated place in such district, commanding the witness to appear and testify before an officer in such district authorized to take depositions and affidavits, at the time and place stated in the subpoena. The provisions of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure relating to the attendance of witnesses and the production of documents and things shall apply to contested cases in the Plant Variety Protection Office insofar as consistent with such regulations.

(b) Every witness subpoenaed or testifying shall be allowed the fees and traveling expenses allowed to witnesses attending the United States district courts.

(c) A judge of a court whose clerk issued a subpoena may enforce obedience to the process or punish disobedience as in other like cases, on proof that a witness, served with such subpoena, neglected or refused to appear or to testify. No witness shall be deemed guilty of contempt for disobeying such subpoena unless the fees and traveling expenses of the witness in going to, and returning from, one day's attendance at the place of examination, are paid or tendered the witness at the time of the service of the subpoena; nor for refusing to disclose any secret matter except upon appropriate order of the court which issued the subpoena or of the Secretary.

(Pub. L. 91–577, title I, §24, Dec. 24, 1970, 84 Stat. 1544; Pub. L. 103–349, §13(d), Oct. 6, 1994, 108 Stat. 3143.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1994—Subsec. (a). Pub. L. 103–349, §13(d)(1), substituted "the witness" for "him" in first sentence.

Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 103–349, §13(d)(2)(B), substituted "the witness" for "him" after "paid or tendered" in second sentence.

Pub. L. 103–349, §13(d)(2)(A), which directed that second sentence be amended by substituting "the fees and traveling expenses of the witness" for "this fees and traveling expenses", was executed by making the substitution for "his fees and traveling expenses", to reflect the probable intent of Congress.

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

#### Effective Date of 1994 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 103–349 effective 180 days after Oct. 6, 1994, see section 15 of Pub. L. 103–349, set out as a note under section 2401 of this title.