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

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2790 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2790

To repeal the fossil fuel energy tax incentives contained in the Energy 
                          Policy Act of 2005.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 11, 2006

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

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To repeal the fossil fuel energy tax incentives contained in the Energy 
                          Policy Act of 2005.

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

SECTION 1. REPEAL OF 2005 ENERGY ACT FOSSIL FUEL ENERGY TAX INCENTIVES.

    (a) Repeal.--The provisions of, and the amendments made by, 
subtitle B of title XIII of the Energy Policy Act of 2005 are repealed 
and the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 shall be applied and administered 
as if such provisions and amendments had never been enacted.
    (b) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect as if the 
provisions described in subsection (a) had never been included in the 
Energy Policy Act of 2005.
                                 <all>
```
#### § 763.4 Authorized land contract purpose.

The Agency will only guarantee the Contract installments, real estate taxes and insurance; or outstanding principal balance for an eligible seller of a family farm, through a land contract sale to an eligible beginning or socially disadvantaged farmer.
§ 654.20 Violations of operation and maintenance agreement. ( a ) The State Conservationist shall investigate alleged sponsor violations of the O&M agreement. If the State Conservationist determines that a violation has occurred that may prevent the project measure from functioning as intended, create a health or safety hazard, or prevent the accrual of project benefits, he shall provide sponsor(s) written notification.
( b ) If the sponsor(s) fail to comply with the O&M agreement or fail to take corrective action, NRCS may notify authorities having appropriate jurisdiction, withhold further assistance to the project, require the sponsor(s) to reimburse the government for the NRCS share of the cost of the project, and/or pursue other action authorized by the O&M agreement or law.
Exhibit 23.1  LAKE & ASSOCIATES, CPAs LLC  CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM  We consent to the use, in the report on Form
10-K of Anasazi Capital Corp. (A Development Stage Company), of our report dated August 27, 2009 on our audit of the financial
statements of Anasazi Capital Corp. (A Development Stage Company) as of December 31, 2008 and December 31, 2007, and the related
statements of operations, shareholders deficit and cash flows for the years ended December 31, 2008 and December 31, 2007 and
from inception on July 17, 2006 through December 31, 2008, and the reference to us under the caption Experts.  /s/ Lake & Associates, CPAs LLC  Lake & Associates, CPAs LLC Shaumburg, Illinois September 1, 2009
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000757545
<NAME> 84A
<MULTIPLIER> 1

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                         194,171
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  338,232
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               532,403
<PP&E>                                      18,258,923
<DEPRECIATION>                              16,364,956
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,426,370
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           69,940
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,356,430
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,426,370
<SALES>                                      1,698,194
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,710,304
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  829,499
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                880,805
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            880,805
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   880,805
<EPS-BASIC>                                      33.30
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
| 1. | I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-K of FitLife Brands, Inc.; and |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2. | Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report. |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date: April 29, 2016 | FitLife Brands, Inc. By: /s/ Michael Abrams                    |   |
|----------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                 | Michael Abrams                                                      |   |
|                 | Chief Financial Officer(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer) |   |
# L_2014125EN.01005101.xml

| 26.4.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 125/51 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.4.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 125/51

---

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) No 424/2014

of 22 April 2014

entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (Prekmurska šunka (PGI))

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular Article 52(2) thereof,

1

Whereas:

| (1) | Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Slovenia's application to register the name ‘Prekmurska šunka’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union
   (2). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Slovenia's application to register the name ‘Prekmurska šunka’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union
   (2).

Official Journal of the European Union

2

| (2) | As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Prekmurska šunka’ should therefore be entered in the register, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Prekmurska šunka’ should therefore be entered in the register,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The name contained in the Annex to this Regulation is hereby entered in the register.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

Official Journal of the European Union

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 22 April 2014.

For the Commission,

On behalf of the President,

Dacian CIOLOȘ

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.

1

(2)  OJ C 361, 11.12.2013, p. 13.

2

---

ANNEX

Agricultural products intended for human consumption listed in Annex I to the Treaty:

Class 1.2. Meat products (cooked, salted, smoked, etc.)

SLOVENIA

Prekmurska šunka (PGI)

---
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

April 28, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh
Elizabeth A. Weaver 135371 Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Justices Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 135371 COA: 277287 Wayne CC: 02-005335 ARTHUR B. CHERRY, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the October 23, 2007 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).

d0421 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

April 28, 2008

Clerk
Case 3:20-cv-05935-HTC Document 143 Filed 04/26/23 Page 1 of 1
Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

MITCHELL HOLLAND,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 5:20-cv-340-TKW/MJF

STATE OF FLORIDA, et al.,

Defendants.

/

O R D E R

This case is before the Court based on the magistrate judge’s Report and 

Recommendation (Doc. 8). Plaintiff filed objections to the Report and 

Recommendation (Doc. 9) along with two documents titled “additional statement of 

fact” (Docs. 10, 11). The Court reviewed the issues raised in Plaintiff’s filings de 

novo as required by 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3), and based on 

that review, the Court agrees with the magistrate judge’s determination that this case 

should be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that:

1. The magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation is adopted and 

incorporated by reference in this order.

Case 5:20-cv-00340-TKW-MJF Document 12 Filed 06/14/21 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

2. This case is DISMISSED with prejudice pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

§§1915(e)(2) and 1915A based on Plaintiff’s failure to state a claim upon which 

relief can be granted.

3. The Clerk shall close the case file.

DONE AND ORDERED this 14th day of June, 2021.

T. Kent Wetherell, II 

T. KENT WETHERELL, II

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 5:20-cv-00340-TKW-MJF Document 12 Filed 06/14/21 Page 2 of 2
#### §§ 701.38-701.40 [Reserved]
---

EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CEO AND CHAIRPERSON NORTHPORT CAPITAL,
INCORPORATEDFORM 10-K FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2007
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I am the CEO and Chairperson of the Board of Northport Capital,
Inc., a Colorado corporation (the Company). I am delivering this certificate
in connection with the Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December 31,
2007 and filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (Form 10-K).

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I hereby certify that the Form
10-K fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the
Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.

Date: March 28, 2008

| | BY: | /s/ Yan Zhao       
| | --- | -------------------
| |     | Yan Zhao           
| |     | CEO and Chairperson

---
#### MacDONALD, Respondent, v. DREAMLAND, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second Department.

July 24, 1906.)

Action by Charles H. MacDonald against Dreamland.

No opinion. Judgment affirmed, with costs.
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 229 (Tuesday, November 30, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 74052]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-29998]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank 
or Bank Holding Company

    The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank 
Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and Sec.  225.41 of the Board's 
Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire shares of a bank or bank 
holding company. The factors that are considered in acting on the 
notices are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).
    The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal 
Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for 
inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons 
may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for 
that notice or to the offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must 
be received not later than December 13, 2010.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco (Kenneth Binning, Vice 
President, Applications and Enforcement) 101 Market Street, San 
Francisco, California 94105-1579:
    1. Marc Jonathan Foulkrod, Moorpark, California; to acquire 
additional voting shares of Mission Valley Bancorp, Sun Valley, 
California, and thereby indirectly acquire shares of Mission Valley 
Bank, Sun Valley, California.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, November 23, 
2010.
Robert deV. Frierson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 2010-29998 Filed 11-29-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
SAT Report

PMN Number: P-14-0364

SAT Date: 3/7/2014

Print Date: 9/2/2014

Related cases:

Concern levels:

Type of Concern: Health Eco Comments

Level of Concern: 2 2

 Persistence Bioaccum Toxicity Comments

1 11

Exposure Based Review:

Health: No

Ecotox: No

Routes of exposure: Health: Inhalation 

Ecotox: All releases to water

Fate: ;

P2Rec Comments:

Comment: No Comment

Keywords:

 Keywords: SEVER IRR/POSS CORR-E; AQUATOX-A,C

Summary of Assessment:

 Fate:

Fate Summary: P-14-0364

FATE: MW = 1093 with 0.69% < 500 and 16.98 % < 1000

Liquid with MP < 25 C (E)

S = Disp.

VP < 1.0E-6 torr at 25 C (E)

BP > 400 C (E)

H < 1.00E-8 (E)
POTW removal (%) = 50-90 via sorption and biodeg

Time for complete ultimate aerobic biodeg = wk-mo

Sorption to soils/sediments = strong

PBT Potential: P1B1

*CEB FATE: Migration to ground water = slow

 Health:

 Health Summary: Absorption is nil through the skin, poor through the GI 

tract, and moderate through the lung, based on physical/chemical properties. There is concern 

for severe irritation/possible corrosin to the eye, based on the surfactant properties of the PMN 

substance.

 Test Data: Submitted with Negative in Salmonella with 

and without activation; Negative in E. coli with and without activation

 Ecotox:

Test Organism Test 

Type

Test End 

Point

Predicted Measured Comments

fish 96-h LC50 5.4

daphnid 48-h LC50 4.6

green algal 96-h EC50 5.1

fish _ chronic value 2.3

daphnid _ chronic 

value

2.8

algal _ chronic 

value

1.7

Sewage Sludge 3-h EC50 _

Sewage Sludge _ Chronic 

Value

_

Ecotox Values Comments: Predictions are based on SARs for nonionic surfactants; SAR 

chemical class = surfactant-nonionics-C15-EO15; MW 1093; S = dispersible at 20 C (P); pH7; 

effective concentrations based on 100% active ingredients and mean measured concentrations; 

hardness <180.0 mg/L as CaCO3; and TOC <2.0 mg/L;

Factors Values Comments

Assessment Factor 10

Concentration of Concern 

(ppb)

170

SARs Nonionic Surfactants

SAR Class Nonionic Surfactants

Ecotox Category Nonionic Surfactants

Ecotox Factors Comments: 
 SAT Chair: L Keifer 564-8916
December 16, 2010

Luis Alberto Valencia Quality Director

Avianca

Avenida El dorado #106-74 Hangar 2 Piso 2 Bogotá

Colombia

Dear Mr. Valencia:

This letter is to inform you that we have received and begun processing your petition for exemption. It acknowledges receipt of the petition and describes how we will process it.

We Have the Petition

We’ve received your November 23, 2010, petition on behalf of Aerovias del Continente Americano, Avianca Airlines (Avianca) for an exemption from § 121.359(k) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). This exemption, if granted, would allow Avianca to operate its Airbus A330-243 aircraft (MSNs 1208, 1224, and 1279) without Cockpit Voice Recorder (CVR) datalink communication recording capability as required by § 121.359(k).

We’ve added your petition to the public docket (No. FAA-2010-1196) and we are processing it. We will contact you if we need additional information.

How We’ll Process the Petition

A petition for an exem ption, according to 14 CFR 11.63(d), must be sent to the FAA at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption. In addition, we publish a summary of the petition in the Federal Register for public comment unless, according to 14 CFR 11.87, we determine that good cause exists for not publishing it.2

We will advise you of the agency's final decision on your petition as soon as possible. If you have any questions in the meantime, you may contact me at (202) 267-4059.

Sincerely,

/s/

Frances Shaver Program Analyst Aircraft and Airport Rules Division
Exhibit 21.1
 Subsidiaries of the Company
 
    
    Synthesis Energy Holdings, Inc. (Florida corporation)
 
    
    Owns 100% of:
 
    
    Synthesis Energy Systems, Inc. (British Virgin Islands corporation)
 
    
    Owns 100% of:
 
    
    Synthesis Energy Systems Investments, Inc. (Mauritius corporation)
    
    Synthesis Energy Investment Holdings, Inc. (Mauritius corporation)
    
    Synthesis Energy Technology Holdings, Inc. (Mauritius corporation)
    
    SES New Energy Technologies, (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. (Chinese corporation)
 
    
    Synthesis Energy Systems Technologies, LLC (Delaware limited liability company)
    
    SES Resources, LLC (Delaware limited liability company)
  
    
    SES Resource Solutions, Ltd. (British Virgin Islands corporation)
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v. CASE NO. 5:03-cr-05-MCR-GRJ

HERBERT D. BROWN,

Petitioner.

____________________________/

O R D E R

This matter is before the Court on Doc. 110, a motion to vacate under 28 U.S.C.

§ 2255; Doc. 111, a motion for leave to file a § 2255 motion; Doc. 112, motion for

appointment of counsel; and Doc. 113, motion for leave to proceed as a pauper.

Petitioner did not use the Court’s form for § 2255 petitions and must amend on

the form. Petitioner does not need to seek leave to file his § 2255 motion and his

motion for leave to file a § 2255 motion is essentially an explanation of why he

considers the motion timely. Petitioner is advised that he may include such argument

as a memorandum of law attached to the § 2255 habeas corpus form. Appointment of

counsel in a habeas case such as this is generally only necessary when the Court

determines that an evidentiary hearing is required to resolve the petition. At this

juncture there does not appear to be any need for an evidentiary hearing and therefore

no necessity for the appointment of counsel. Finally, there is no filing fee to file a

§ 2255 motion and therefore Petitioner’s motion for leave to proceed as a pauper is

moot. 

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

1. The Clerk shall send Petitioner a blank § 2255 habeas corpus form and

instructions. Petitioner shall mark the form “Amended Petition,” complete the
Page 2 of 2

form in its entirety, and return the signed original and two identical service copies

to the Court on or before July 19, 2012.

2. Petitioner’s motion for leave to file § 2255 motion, Doc. 111, is DENIED AS

MOOT.

3. Petitioner’s motion for appointment of counsel, Doc. 112, is DENIED.

4. Petitioner’s motion for leave to proceed as a pauper, Doc. 113, is DENIED AS

MOOT.

5. Failure to comply with this Order within the allotted time will result in a

recommendation to the District Judge that this case be dismissed.

DONE AND ORDERED this 19 day of June 2012.

th

s/ Gary R. Jones 

GARY R. JONES

United States Magistrate Judge

Case No: 5:03-cr-05-MCR-GRJ
1

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO

Docket No. 38782

STATE OF IDAHO,

Plaintiff-Respondent,

v.

THOMAS EDWARD PINZ,

Defendant-Appellant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

2011 Unpublished Opinion No. 717

Filed: November 21, 2011

Stephen W. Kenyon, Clerk

THIS IS AN UNPUBLISHED 

OPINION AND SHALL NOT 

BE CITED AS AUTHORITY

Appeal from the District Court of the Fourth Judicial District, State of Idaho, Ada

County. Hon. Cheri C. Copsey, District Judge. 

Judgment of conviction and determinate sentence of ten years for failure to 

register as a sex offender, affirmed.

Molly J. Huskey, State Appellate Public Defender; Jason C. Pintler, Deputy 

Appellate Public Defender, Boise, for appellant. 

Hon. Lawrence G. Wasden, Attorney General; Lori A. Fleming, Deputy Attorney 

General, Boise, for respondent. 

________________________________________________

LANSING, Judge; GUTIERREZ, Judge;

and MELANSON, Judge

PER CURIAM

Thomas Edward Pinz pled guilty to failure to register as a sex offender. Idaho Code §§ 

18-8309, 18-8311. The district court sentenced Pinz to a ten-year determinate term. Pinz 

appeals.

Sentencing is a matter for the trial court’s discretion. Both our standard of review and the 

factors to be considered in evaluating the reasonableness of the sentence are well established and 

need not be repeated here. See State v. Hernandez, 121 Idaho 114, 117-18, 822 P.2d 1011, 1014-

15 (Ct. App. 1991); State v. Lopez, 106 Idaho 447, 449-51, 680 P.2d 869, 871-73 (Ct. App. 

1984); State v. Toohill, 103 Idaho 565, 568, 650 P.2d 707, 710 (Ct. App. 1982). When reviewing 

the length of a sentence, we consider the defendant’s entire sentence. State v. Oliver, 144 Idaho 
2

722, 726, 170 P.3d 387, 391 (2007). Applying these standards, and having reviewed the record 

in this case, we cannot say that the district court abused its discretion.

Therefore, Pinz’s judgment of conviction and sentence are affirmed.