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

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2471 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2471

          To suspend temporarily the duty on Basic Red 1 Dye.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 29, 2006

  Mr. DeWine introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
          To suspend temporarily the duty on Basic Red 1 Dye.

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

SECTION 1. BASIC RED 1 DYE.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by striking subheading 
9902.70.03 and inserting in numerical sequence the following new 
heading:

``      9902.32.08       Basic Red 1 Dye    Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                         (CAS No. 989-38-                                                   31/2009
                         8) (provided for
                         in subheading
                         3204.13.60)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for 
consumption, on or after the 15th day after the date of the enactment 
of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.4
[LOGO]
Baldwin Piano & Organ Company
422 Wards Corner Road
Loveland, Ohio 45140-8390

(513) 576-4500


                      BALDWIN PIANO & ORGAN COMPANY NAMES
                            CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

LOVELAND, OHIO, DECEMBER 5, 1996 - Baldwin Piano & Organ Company (NASDAQ:BPAO)
announced that Perry Schwartz, age 57, has joined the Company as Executive Vice
President and Chief Financial Officer.

Previously, Mr. Schwartz was Senior Vice President - Chief Financial Officer
and a member of the Board of Directors of Heekin Can, Inc., a manufacturer of
metal food and aerosol containers; then Executive Vice President - Chief
Financial Officer of Brockway Standard Holdings Corp., a metal general line
container manufacturer; and, most recently, Vice President - Chief Financial
Officer of Richwood Pharmaceutical, a manufacturer and distributor of ethical
drugs.

"I am delighted that Perry Schwartz is joining the Baldwin team," stated Karen
L. Hendricks, President and Chief Executive Officer of Baldwin. "His extensive
background in finance and accounting will help as we focus our energies on
improving the profit performance of our core businesses .... music, finance and
contract electronics. Perry will be a key player on our management team which
is dedicated to building shareholder value."

Baldwin Piano & Organ Company has manufactured and marketed keyboard musical
products for more than 130 years and has been providing consumer financing for
its instruments for nearly a century. The market leader of acoustic pianos in
the United States, Baldwin also manufactures electronic and electro-mechanical
components for Original Equipment Manufacturers.

                                     # # #

CONTACT: Karen L. Hendricks (513) 576-4693
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED
FROM THE COMPANY'S YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1997 CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF
OPERATIONS (SEE ANNUAL REPORT PAGE 45) AND THE CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET (SEE
ANNUAL REPORT PAGE 44). THIS INFORMATION IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000796370
<NAME>UNITED ASSET MANAGEMENT CORP. 
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                         173,638
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  180,921
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               366,422
<PP&E>                                          89,841
<DEPRECIATION>                                  48,731
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,513,500<F1>
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          262,019
<BONDS>                                        773,255<F2>
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           703
<OTHER-SE>                                     457,449
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,513,500
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               941,621
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  634,299
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               276,224<F3>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              38,321
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (7,223)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (3,090)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (4,133)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (4,133)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.06)
<FN>
<F1>INCLUDES $1,018,172 OF COST ASSIGNED TO CONTRACTS ACQUIRED, NET.
<F2>INCLUDES $514,843 IN SENIOR NOTES PAYABLE AND $258,412 IN SUBORDINATED NOTES
PAYABLE.
<F3>INCLUDES $105,242 OF AMORTIZATION OF COST ASSIGNED TO CONTRACTS ACQUIRED AND
$170,982 OF REDUCTION IN VALUE OF INTANGIBLE ASSETS.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
Certificate of Membership

was admitted to the State Bar of Montana on October 04, 2007 and that their name currently appears on the

Roll of Attorneys in this office as a/an Active Attorney member in good standing*.

Tanis M. Holm 

I, JILL DIVELEY, OF THE STATE BAR OF MONTANA, DO HEREBY CERTIFY

*This does not represent the records of the Office of Disciplinary Counsel, the agency in charge of discipline. To obtain verification or

a statement of discipline please contact their office at P.O. Box 1099, Helena, MT 59624 or (406) 442-1648.

Dated this day of March 17, 2023

Case 3:19-md-02885-MCR-HTC Document 3704-1 Filed 03/20/23 Page 1 of 1
# CI2021380EN.01000301.xml

| 20.9.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CI 380/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.9.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CI 380/3

---

Statement of the European Parliament on the names of beneficiaries

(2021/C 380 I/03)

The European Parliament notes that Annex I of Regulation (EU) 2021/1529 establishing the Instrument for Pre-accession Assistance (IPA III) refers to beneficiaries eligible for funding under this Instrument. The European Parliament considers that constitutional names shall be used for the beneficiaries listed, and Kosovo should be referred to as Republic of Kosovo.

---
2005-2420.

#### State v. Batchili.

Lucas App. No. L-04AL039, 2005-Ohio-6001.

Pfeifer, Lundberg Stratton and O’Donnell, JJ., dissent.
§ 3570.272 Grant processing. ( a ) - ( c ) [Reserved]
( d ) Applications that are not selected for funding due to low rating will be notified by the Agency. Applications that cannot be funded in the fiscal year that the application was received will not be retained for consideration in the following fiscal year.
( e ) Applicants selected for funding will need to accept the conditions set forth in the Letter of Conditions, meet all such conditions, and complete a grant agreement which outlines the terms and conditions of the grant award before grant funds will be disbursed.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 3:96cr80/LAC

STEVEN ANTHONY GRAHAM,

Defendant.

_______________________________/

ORDER

This cause is before the Court on remand from the Eleventh Circuit Court of Appeals

for the determination of whether a Certificate of Appealability should issue from this Court’s

denial of Defendant’s pleading entitled “Defendant Gives Judicial Notice,” construed as a

motion under Rule 60(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. 

Defendant’s assertion in his motion that the Court failed to address his section 2255

claim that counsel was ineffective for allowing his right to confrontation to be violated is

inaccurate since this issue was already considered and denied, as explained in the Court’s

Order of April 5, 2006 (doc. 142). 

Case 3:96-cr-00080-LC-CJK Document 179 Filed 10/15/07 Page 1 of 2
Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

1. Because the court finds that the defendant has not made a substantial showing of

the denial of a constitutional right, a certificate of appealability is DENIED. 

ORDERED on this 15th day of October, 2007.

 s/L.A. Collier 

Lacey A. Collier

Senior United States District Judge

Case 3:96-cr-00080-LC-CJK Document 179 Filed 10/15/07 Page 2 of 2
149 So.2d 768

#### Mrs. Leon A. WHITE v. J. W. HUDSPETH et al

No. 46594.

Feb. 18, 1963.

Writ refused. On the facts found by the Court of Appeal, there is no error of law-in its judgment.
§ 4284.951 Obligate and award funds. ( a ) *Letter of conditions.* When an application is selected subject to conditions established by the Agency, the Agency will notify the Applicant using a Letter of Conditions, which defines the conditions under which the grant will be made. Each grantee will be required to meet all terms and conditions of the award within 90 days of receiving a Letter of Conditions unless otherwise specified by the Agency at the time of the award. If the Applicant agrees with the conditions, the Applicant must complete, an applicable Letter of Intent to Meet Conditions. If the Applicant believes that certain conditions cannot be met, the Applicant may propose alternate conditions to the Agency. The Agency must concur with any proposed changes to the Letter of Conditions by the Applicant before the application will be further processed. If the Agency agrees to any proposed changes, the Agency will issue a revised or amended Letter of Conditions that defines the final conditions under which the grant will be made.
( b ) *Grant agreement and conditions.* Each grantee will be required to sign a grant agreement that outlines the approved use of funds and actions under the award, as well as the restrictions and applicable laws and regulations that pertain to the award.
( c ) *Other documentation.* The grantee will execute additional documentation in order to obligate the award of funds; including, but not limited to: ( 1 ) “Request for Obligation of Funds;”
( 2 ) “Certification Regarding Debarment, Suspension, and Other Responsibility Matters-Primary Covered Transaction;”
( 3 ) “Certification Regarding Drug-Free Workplace Requirements;”
( 4 ) “Assurance Agreement (under Title VI, Civil Rights Act of 1964);”
( 5 ) “ACH Vendor/Miscellaneous Payment Enrollment Form;” or
( 6 ) “Disclosure of Lobbying Activities.”
( d ) *Grant disbursements.* Grant disbursements will be made in accordance with the Letter of Conditions, and/or the grant agreement, as applicable.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2331 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2331

  To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend the period for 
 which the designation of an area as an empowerment zone is in effect.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           February 17, 2006

Ms. Snowe (for herself and Ms. Collins) introduced the following bill; 
     which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend the period for 
 which the designation of an area as an empowerment zone is in effect.

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

SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF ROUND II AND ROUND III EMPOWERMENT ZONES.

    (a) In General.--Clause (i) of section 1391(d)(1)(A) of the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to period for which designation 
is in effect) is amended by inserting ``(December 31, 2016, in the case 
of any empowerment zone designated under subsection (g) or (h))'' after 
``2009''.
    (b) Conforming Amendment.--Paragraph (2) of section 1391(h) of the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to additional designations 
permitted) is amended by striking ``2009'' and inserting ``2016''.
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Case 3:20-cv-05462-MCR-HTC Document 51 Filed 08/13/21 Page 1 of 41
Case 3:20-cv-05462-MCR-HTC Document 51 Filed 08/13/21 Page 2 of 41
Case 3:20-cv-05462-MCR-HTC Document 51 Filed 08/13/21 Page 3 of 41
Case 3:20-cv-05462-MCR-HTC Document 51 Filed 08/13/21 Page 4 of 41
Case 3:20-cv-05462-MCR-HTC Document 51 Filed 08/13/21 Page 5 of 41
Case 3:20-cv-05462-MCR-HTC Document 51 Filed 08/13/21 Page 6 of 41
Case 3:20-cv-05462-MCR-HTC Document 51 Filed 08/13/21 Page 7 of 41
Case 3:20-cv-05462-MCR-HTC Document 51 Filed 08/13/21 Page 8 of 41
Case 3:20-cv-05462-MCR-HTC Document 51 Filed 08/13/21 Page 9 of 41
Case 3:20-cv-05462-MCR-HTC Document 51 Filed 08/13/21 Page 10 of 41
Case 3:20-cv-05462-MCR-HTC Document 51 Filed 08/13/21 Page 11 of 41
Case 3:20-cv-05462-MCR-HTC Document 51 Filed 08/13/21 Page 12 of 41
Case 3:20-cv-05462-MCR-HTC Document 51 Filed 08/13/21 Page 13 of 41
Case 3:20-cv-05462-MCR-HTC Document 51 Filed 08/13/21 Page 14 of 41
Case 3:20-cv-05462-MCR-HTC Document 51 Filed 08/13/21 Page 15 of 41
Case 3:20-cv-05462-MCR-HTC Document 51 Filed 08/13/21 Page 16 of 41
Case 3:20-cv-05462-MCR-HTC Document 51 Filed 08/13/21 Page 17 of 41
Case 3:20-cv-05462-MCR-HTC Document 51 Filed 08/13/21 Page 18 of 41
Case 3:20-cv-05462-MCR-HTC Document 51 Filed 08/13/21 Page 19 of 41
Case 3:20-cv-05462-MCR-HTC Document 51 Filed 08/13/21 Page 20 of 41
Case 3:20-cv-05462-MCR-HTC Document 51 Filed 08/13/21 Page 21 of 41
Case 3:20-cv-05462-MCR-HTC Document 51 Filed 08/13/21 Page 22 of 41
Case 3:20-cv-05462-MCR-HTC Document 51 Filed 08/13/21 Page 23 of 41
Case 3:20-cv-05462-MCR-HTC Document 51 Filed 08/13/21 Page 24 of 41
Case 3:20-cv-05462-MCR-HTC Document 51 Filed 08/13/21 Page 25 of 41
Case 3:20-cv-05462-MCR-HTC Document 51 Filed 08/13/21 Page 26 of 41
Case 3:20-cv-05462-MCR-HTC Document 51 Filed 08/13/21 Page 27 of 41
Case 3:20-cv-05462-MCR-HTC Document 51 Filed 08/13/21 Page 28 of 41
Case 3:20-cv-05462-MCR-HTC Document 51 Filed 08/13/21 Page 29 of 41
Case 3:20-cv-05462-MCR-HTC Document 51 Filed 08/13/21 Page 30 of 41
Case 3:20-cv-05462-MCR-HTC Document 51 Filed 08/13/21 Page 31 of 41
Case 3:20-cv-05462-MCR-HTC Document 51 Filed 08/13/21 Page 32 of 41
Case 3:20-cv-05462-MCR-HTC Document 51 Filed 08/13/21 Page 33 of 41
Case 3:20-cv-05462-MCR-HTC Document 51 Filed 08/13/21 Page 34 of 41
Case 3:20-cv-05462-MCR-HTC Document 51 Filed 08/13/21 Page 35 of 41
Case 3:20-cv-05462-MCR-HTC Document 51 Filed 08/13/21 Page 36 of 41
Case 3:20-cv-05462-MCR-HTC Document 51 Filed 08/13/21 Page 37 of 41
Case 3:20-cv-05462-MCR-HTC Document 51 Filed 08/13/21 Page 38 of 41
Case 3:20-cv-05462-MCR-HTC Document 51 Filed 08/13/21 Page 39 of 41
Case 3:20-cv-05462-MCR-HTC Document 51 Filed 08/13/21 Page 40 of 41
Case 3:20-cv-05462-MCR-HTC Document 51 Filed 08/13/21 Page 41 of 41
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

v. 4:95cr4027-WS

TRAVIS THURSTON,

Defendant.

 

ORDER ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Before the court is the magistrate judge's report and recommendation (doc. 356)

docketed October 21, 2005. The magistrate judge recommends that the defendant's

Rule 60(b)(4) motion to vacate judgment be summarily denied. The defendant has filed

objections (doc. 357) to the report and recommendation.

Upon review of the record in light of the defendant’s objections, the court has

determined that the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation must be adopted.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

1. The magistrate judge's report and recommendation (doc. 356) is adopted and

incorporated by reference in this order of the court.

2. The defendant’s Rule 60(b)(4) motion to vacate judgment (doc. 355) is

DENIED.

Case 4:95-cr-04027-WS-CAS Document 358 Filed 12/01/05 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

Case No. 4:92cr4013-WS

3. The clerk shall enter judgment accordingly.

DONE AND ORDERED this December 1, 2005.

 /s William Stafford 

WILLIAM STAFFORD

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 4:95-cr-04027-WS-CAS Document 358 Filed 12/01/05 Page 2 of 2
#### Milton Seaman, Appellant, v. Helen Seaman, Respondent.

Order entered December 27, 1968, allowing defendant wife counsel fees to defend against appeal from order dismissing complaint unanimously affirmed, without costs or disbursements. The action for divorce brought by plaintiff husband, an attorney, is grounded on alleged cruel and inhuman treatment and abandonment. Since, in spite of the long and tortuous litigation preceding this motion, it appeared defendant might still have a meritorious defense, at least sufficient to bar the specific relief sought by plaintiff, the modest award at $375, and printing costs, by Special Term, does not constitute an abuse of discretion. Concur — Capozzoli, J. P., Tilzer, McGivern, Markewich and Nunez, JJ.
```

[108th Congress Public Law 329]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

[DOCID: f:publ329.108]

[[Page 118 STAT. 1274]]

Public Law 108-329
108th Congress

                                 An Act

 
 To amend the Act of November 2, 1966 (80 Stat. 1112), to allow binding 
 arbitration clauses to be included in all contracts affecting the land 
within the Salt River Pima-Maricopa Indian Reservation. <<NOTE: Oct. 16, 
                         2004 -  [H.R. 4115]>> 

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

SECTION 1. BINDING ARBITRATION FOR SALT RIVER PIMA-MARICOPA INDIAN 
            RESERVATION CONTRACTS.

    (a) In General.--Section 2(c) of the Act of November 2, 1966 (25 
U.S.C. 416a(c)), is amended--
            (1) in the first sentence--
                    (A) by striking ``Any lease'' and all that follows 
                through ``affecting land'' and inserting ``Any contract, 
                including a lease, affecting land''; and
                    (B) by striking ``such lease or contract'' and 
                inserting ``such contract''; and
            (2) in the second sentence, by striking ``Such leases or 
        contracts entered into pursuant to such Acts'' and inserting 
        ``Such contracts''.

    (b) <<NOTE: 25 USC 416a note.>> Effective Date.--The amendments made 
by this section shall take effect as if included in the Indian Tribal 
Economic Development and Contract Encouragement Act of 2000 (Public Law 
106-179).

    Approved October 16, 2004.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 4115 (S. 2277):
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

HOUSE REPORTS: No. 108-535 (Comm. on Resources).
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 150 (2004):
            July 19, considered and passed House.
            Sept. 29, considered and passed Senate.

                                  <all>
```
#### In the Matter of Anthony Harrison, Appellant, v Division of Parole, Chairman, Respondent.

[817 NYS2d 161]

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Lament, J.), entered August 24, 2005 in Albany County, which, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, granted respondent’s motion to dismiss the petition for lack of personal jurisdiction.

Petitioner sought to challenge a determination revoking his parole by bringing a CPLR article 78 proceeding. In the order to show cause commencing the proceeding, Supreme Court directed petitioner to serve the “[o]rder to [s]how [c]ause, petition, exhibits and any supporting affidavits, by ordinary [flirst [c]lass [m]ail, upon each named respondent and upon the Attorney General . . . on or before June 17, 2005.” As a result of petitioner’s failure to serve respondent with the papers as directed in the order to show cause, respondent moved to dismiss the petition. Supreme Court granted the motion, and this appeal ensued.

We affirm. It is well settled that the “[fjailure of an inmate to satisfy the service requirements set forth in an order to show cause requires dismissal for lack of jurisdiction absent a showing that imprisonment presented obstacles beyond his control which prevented compliance” *(Matter of Gittens v Selsky,*193 AD2d 986, 987 [1993]; *see Matter of Frederick v Goord,*20 AD3d 652, 653 [2005], *lv denied*5 NY3d 712 [2005]). Respondent submitted an affidavit in support of the motion to dismiss estabhshing that the papers specified in the order to show cause were not served upon either the Division of Parole or respondent. Petitioner’s affidavit of service predates the signing of the order to show cause and does not encompass the papers enumerated therein. Moreover, he has not maintained that his imprison*1243ment precluded him from effectuating proper service. Under these circumstances, Supreme Court properly dismissed the petition.

Cardona, P.J., Crew III, Carpinello, Rose and Lahtinen, JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs.
#### §§ 3560.262-3560.299 [Reserved]
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

IN RE: 3M COMBAT ARMS 

EARPLUG PRODUCTS

Case No. 3:19md2885

LIABILITY LITIGATION

This Document Relates to:

Estes, 7:20cv137

Hacker, 7:20cv131

Keefer, 7:20cv104

Judge M. Casey Rodgers

Magistrate Judge Gary R. Jones

DEPOSITION DESIGNATIONS ORDER NO. 5

This Order addresses Defendants’ objections and counter-designations to 

Plaintiffs’ affirmative deposition designations and Plaintiffs’ objections to 

Defendants’ counter-designations thereto for the following witness depositions: 

1. Lorraine Babeu, 2020.03.10

2. Eileen Hacker, 2020.09.25

3. Ted Madison, 2019.12.10

The Court’s rulings with respect to the above depositions are set forth in the 

attached Exhibit 1. 

SO ORDERED, on this 22nd day of March, 2021.

M. Casey Rodgers

M. CASEY RODGERS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE