alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
###### Editorial Note on Part 1962

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 1962 appear at 80 FR 9902, Feb. 24, 2015.

#### §§ 1962.31-1962.33 [Reserved]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> UT
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF INCOME, THE CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND THE
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                        1,617
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                        115
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                             330
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                             0
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                     158
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   2,220
<COMMON>                                           119
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                            0
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                                633
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                     752
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                6
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                               521
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                   0
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                           29
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                     114
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                        1
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                          0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                     0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                     797
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                    2,220
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                        1,037
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                                45
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                         884
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                         929
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                            108
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                                  11
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                     119
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            34
<NET-INCOME>                                        85
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                          0
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                       85
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                            53
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                            0
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                             386
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.78
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.77
        


</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2046 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2046

  To protect the right of individuals to bear arms at water resources 
development projects administered by the Secretary of the Army, and for 
                            other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 17, 2013

  Mr. Gibbs (for himself and Mr. Schweikert) introduced the following 
    bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and 
                             Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To protect the right of individuals to bear arms at water resources 
development projects administered by the Secretary of the Army, 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 ``Recreational Lands Self-Defense Act 
of 2013''.

SEC. 2. PROTECTING AMERICANS FROM VIOLENT CRIME.

    (a) Findings.--Congress finds the following:
            (1) The Second Amendment to the Constitution provides that 
        ``the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be 
        infringed''.
            (2) Section 327.13 of title 36, Code of Federal 
        Regulations, provides that, except in special circumstances, 
        ``possession of loaded firearms, ammunition, loaded projectile 
        firing devices, bows and arrows, crossbows, or other weapons is 
        prohibited'' at water resources development projects 
        administered by the Secretary of the Army.
            (3) The regulations described in paragraph (2) prevent 
        individuals complying with Federal and State laws from 
        exercising the second amendment rights of the individuals while 
        at such water resources development projects.
            (4) The Federal laws should make it clear that the second 
        amendment rights of an individual at a water resources 
        development project should not be infringed.
    (b) Protecting the Right of Individuals To Bear Arms at Water 
Resources Development Projects.--The Secretary of the Army shall not 
promulgate or enforce any regulation that prohibits an individual from 
possessing a firearm including an assembled or functional firearm at a 
water resources development project covered under section 327.0 of 
title 36, Code of Federal Regulations (as in effect on the date of 
enactment of this Act), if--
            (1) the individual is not otherwise prohibited by law from 
        possessing the firearm; and
            (2) the possession of the firearm is in compliance with the 
        law of the State in which the water resources development 
        project is located.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 12-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>             Dec-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                  Dec-31-1996
<CASH>                        2,479,000
<SECURITIES>                  000
<RECEIVABLES>                 44,000
<ALLOWANCES>                  000
<INVENTORY>                   000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>              2,523,000
<PP&E>                        000
<DEPRECIATION>                000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                2,629,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>         2,229,000
<BONDS>                       000
<COMMON>                      000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>         000
<PREFERRED>                   000
<OTHER-SE>                    400,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>  2,629,000
<SALES>                       000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>              1,797,000
<CGS>                         000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                 97,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>              249,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>              000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>            000
<INCOME-PRETAX>               1,451,000
<INCOME-TAX>                  000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>           1,451,000
<DISCONTINUED>                000
<EXTRAORDINARY>               000
<CHANGES>                     000
<NET-INCOME>                  1,451,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                 22.45
<EPS-DILUTED>                 22.45
        

</TABLE>
###### Editorial Note on Part 1962

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 1962 appear at 80 FR 9902, Feb. 24, 2015.

#### §§ 1962.35-1962.39 [Reserved]
# C_2014213EN.01000802.xml

| 8.7.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 213/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.7.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 213/8

---

Call for proposals under the work programme of the ECSEL Joint Undertaking

2014/C 213/04

Notice is hereby given of the launch of a call for proposals under the work programme of the ECSEL Joint Undertaking.

Proposals are invited for the following call: ECSEL-2014-2.

ECSEL-2014-2

Call documentation including deadline and budget is given in the call text, which is published on the following website:

http://ec.europa.eu/research/participants/portal (funding opportunities — calls)

http://www.ecsel.eu/Call2014.html

---
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2167 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.2167

                     One Hundred Thirteenth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE FIRST SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Thursday,
           the third day of January, two thousand and thirteen

                                 An Act

 
To authorize the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development to establish 
 additional requirements to improve the fiscal safety and soundness of 
         the home equity conversion mortgage insurance program.

    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 ``Reverse Mortgage Stabilization Act 
of 2013''.
SEC. 2. ADDITIONAL SAFETY AND SOUNDNESS REQUIREMENTS FOR HOME EQUITY 
CONVERSION MORTGAGE INSURANCE PROGRAM.
    Subsection (h) of section 255 of the National Housing Act (12 
U.S.C. 1715z-20(h)) is amended--
        (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``and'' at the end;
        (2) in paragraph (2), by striking the period at the end and 
    inserting ``; and''; and
        (3) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
        ``(3) establish, by notice or mortgagee letter, any additional 
    or alternative requirements that the Secretary, in the Secretary's 
    discretion, determines are necessary to improve the fiscal safety 
    and soundness of the program authorized by this section, which 
    requirements shall take effect upon issuance.''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
#### § 201.64 Pure live seed.

The tolerance for pure live seed shall be determined by applying the respective tolerances to the germination plus the hard seed and dormant seed, and the pure seed.

[![](https://img.federalregister.gov/ER07JY20.002/ER07JY20.002_large.png)](https://img.federalregister.gov/ER07JY20.002/ER07JY20.002_original_size.png)

[[85 FR 40583](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/85-FR-40583), July 7, 2020]
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**Certificationof Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to Section 906**

 

Inconnection with the quarterly report of Orchids Paper Products Company (the“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2009 asfiled with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the“Report”), I, Robert A. Snyder, Chief Executive Officer and President of theCompany, certify, to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) andSection 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code, asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1)                                  TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)                                  Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
|   | /s/ Robert A. Snyder                   |
|--------|----------------------------------------|
|   | Robert A. Snyder                       |
|   | Chief Executive Officer  and President |
|   | November 4,  2009                 |

 

1

----
DANIEL P. HOWE

,

Petitioner,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

, et al.,

Respondent.

___________________________/ IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF I F FILED

CASE NO. 1D 1 6

- 0797

Opinion filed March 21, 2016.

Petition for Writ of Mandamus

-- Original Jurisdiction

.

Daniel P. Howe, pro se , for Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee , for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

The petit ion for writ of mandamus is denied as premature. See Ritter v. McNeil

,

41 So. 3d 366 (Fla. 1st DCA 2010).2 LEWIS

, SWANSON , and WINOKUR , JJ., CONCUR.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF

THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Ruths Hospitality Group, Inc. (the Company) for the quarter ended
March 29, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, the President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as
adopted 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; and

(2) The information contained
in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date: May 8, 2009



By

/s/ MICHAEL P. ODONNELLMichael P. ODonnellDirector, President and Chief Executive Officer ofRuths Hospitality Group, Inc.
Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

NEWTERRA, INC.,

Plaintiff/Counterclaim-Defendant,

v. 4:20cv77–WS/MAF

FOLEY CELLULOSE LLC,

Defendant/Counterclaim-Plaintiff.

 

NEWTERRA, INC.,

Third-Party Plaintiff,

v.

UNIVERSAL TANK & FABRICATION, LLC,

Third-Party Defendant.

 

ORDER

By stipulation (ECF No. 44) submitted by Plaintiff/Third-Party Plaintiff,

Newterra, Inc., and Third-Party Defendant, Universal Tank & Fabrication, LLC,

Newterra’s claims against Universal were dismissed, effective on the date of filing,

Case 4:20-cv-00077-WS-MAF Document 47 Filed 12/15/20 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

December 14, 2020. All claims having now been dismissed by stipulation, it is

ORDERED:

The clerk shall close the case.

DONE AND ORDERED this 15th day of December , 2020.

s/ William Stafford 

WILLIAM STAFFORD

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 4:20-cv-00077-WS-MAF Document 47 Filed 12/15/20 Page 2 of 2
EX-10(XXX)



 






Exhibit 10 (xxx)




AMENDMENT NO. 5

TO THE NACCO INDUSTRIES, INC. UNFUNDED BENEFIT PLAN

(Effective September 1, 2000)




     The North American Coal Corporation hereby adopts this Amendment No. 5 to the NACCO
Industries, Inc. Unfunded Benefit Plan (Effective September 1, 2000) (the “Plan”), to be effective
as of January 1, 2004. Words used herein with initial capital letters which are defined in the
Plan are used herein as so defined.



Section 1





     Section 2.2(a) of the Plan is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows:



     “(a) ROTCE means the Company’s consolidated return on total capital employed of
(excluding NMHG Retail Adjustments and HB/PS Adjustments) for the applicable time period calculated
as follows:



     Earnings Before Interest After-Tax (after NMHG Retail Adjustments and HB/PS
Adjustments)


                                                                divided by




     Total Capital Employed (after NMHG Retail Adjustments and HB/PS Adjustments)”



Section 2




     Section 2.2(b)(vi) of the Plan is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows:



     “(vi) ‘NMHG Retail Adjustments’ is defined as adjustments to consolidated net income
before extraordinary items and cumulative effect of accounting changes, Consolidated Interest
Expense, consolidated shareholder’s equity and Consolidated Debt to exclude: the sum of (A) the
results of the retail division of NACCO Materials Handling Group, Inc. (“NMHG”) as determined under
US GAAP plus (B) the corresponding consolidated eliminations related to the inclusions of
NMHG’s retail division as determined by US GAAP, plus (C) the debt and related interest
expense recorded by NMHG related to loans to NMHG’s retail division.”



Section 3




     Section 2.2(b)(vii) of the Plan is hereby amended in its entirety to read as follows:



     “(vii) ‘HB/PS Adjustments’ is defined as adjustments to consolidated net income to
exclude the manufacturing change program and CPSC charges at Hamilton Beach/Proctor-Silex, Inc., if
any.”



     EXECUTED this 24th  day of March, 2004.



	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 	 	NACCO INDUSTRIES, INC.
	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	

	 	 	 	By:
	 	/s/ Charles A. Bittenbender
	

	 	 	 	 	 	 
	

	 	 	 	Title:
	 	Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary






1

- -
<PAGE>

                                  Exhibit 32.2

                  Certification of Principal Financial Officer
                           Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350
                 (Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)

In connection with the Annual Report of News Communications, Inc. ("NCI") on
Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2003, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, E. Paul Leishman,
Chief Financial Officer of NCI, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted 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 Registrant.


/s/ E. Paul Leishman
--------------------
E. Paul Leishman

Chief Financial Officer

Date: April 13, 2004
§ 1710.506 Loan approval. ( a ) A loan is approved when the Administrator signs the administrative findings.
( b ) If the loan is not approved, RUS will notify the borrower of the reason.
[60 FR 3731, Jan. 19, 1995. Redesignated at 78 FR 73366, Dec. 5, 2013]
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

February 23, 2006

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 05-40474

Summary Calendar

 

IN THE MATTER OF: MARGARET FRATILA,

C/O MARGARET’S GREENHOUSE & EUROPEAN

FLORAL DESIGN, M.G. & E.D., L.L.C.,

Debtor,

MARGARET FRATILA, C/O MARGARET’S 

GREENHOUSE & EUROPEAN FLORAL DESIGN, 

M.G. & E.D., L.L.C.,

Appellant,

versus

MIKE BOUDLOCHE, TRUSTEE,

Appellee.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

(2:04-CV-503)

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

Before KING, WIENER, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges 

PER CURIAM:*

Appellant Margaret Fratila is a Bankruptcy Chapter 7 debtor

who appeals the Bankruptcy Court’s refusal to remove the bankruptcy

trustee, based on Fratila’s dissatisfaction with various specified
acts of the trustee. On appeal to the district court, the ruling

of the Bankruptcy Court was affirmed. We too affirm.

Our careful review of the record on appeal, including the

briefs of the parties, and our analysis of the full and legally

correct opinion of the district court on appeal of the Bankruptcy

Court’s decision, convinces us beyond cavil that the acts of the

trustee complained of by Fratila were consistent with or required

by law or were taken pursuant to the Bankruptcy Court’s orders.

Inasmuch as the district court correctly disposed of the debtor’s

complaints against the trustee, and well and fully explained the

reasons for so doing, no useful purpose would be served by our

reiterating the facts and applicable law. Rather, for the reasons

set forth in the careful and complete opinion of the district

court, the rulings of the Bankruptcy Court from which the debtor

appeals are 

AFFIRMED.
§ 28.15 Classification and comparison; requests. All requests for classification and comparison shall be in writing on a form supplied by the Division and shall contain such information as the Director may require. For each lot or mark of cotton which the applicant desires classified or compared separately he shall specify which of the following forms of service is desired: ( a ) *Form A determination.* The classification or comparison of samples freshly drawn and submitted to a Classing Office direct from a licensed warehouseman, at the request of the owner of the cotton or the owner's agent. Such classification or comparison shall be evidenced by a Form A memorandum which shall be subject to review as provided in § 28.66.
( b ) *Form C determination.* The classification of bales of cotton inspected and sampled under the supervision of an employee of the Division. The classification in such cases shall be evidenced by a Form C certificate which shall be subject to review as provided in § 28.66.
( c ) *Form D determination.* The classification or comparison of samples submitted by the owner of the cotton or the owner's agent. Such classification or comparison shall be evidenced by a Form D memorandum which shall be subject to review as provided in § 28.66.
( d ) *Micronaire reading service.* Micronaire (mike) reading service is available under Forms A, C, and D determinations upon request from the applicant and subject to the fees specified in § 28.116 of this part 28.
[22 FR 10932, Dec. 28, 1957, as amended at 31 FR 7734, June 1, 1966; 52 FR 30881, Aug. 18, 1987]
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 00-7307
LAWRENCE MICHAEL HARRISON, SR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Defendant - Appellee, and UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE; FEDERAL BUREAU OF INVESTIGATION; INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE; BUREAU OF PRISONS, Defendants.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, Senior District Judge. (CA-99-513-BR) Submitted: April 27, 2001 Decided: May 21, 2001 Before WILLIAMS, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.2 Lawrence Michael Harrison, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Fenita Morris Shepard, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Lawrence Michael Harrison, Sr., appeals the district court’sorder denying his claim for damages under the FTCA. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Harrison v. United States , No. CA-99-513-BR (E.D.N.C. Aug. 15, 2000). 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