alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from R.P. Scherer
Corporation's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 31,
1995, and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such Form 10-Q filing.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                          26,601
<SECURITIES>                                     4,843
<RECEIVABLES>                                  116,541
<ALLOWANCES>                                     4,500
<INVENTORY>                                     62,602
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               213,552
<PP&E>                                         401,108
<DEPRECIATION>                                 106,890
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 712,388
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           86,525
<BONDS>                                        194,177
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           234
<OTHER-SE>                                     303,958
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   712,388
<SALES>                                        419,471
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               419,471
<CGS>                                          273,203
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  343,715
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               9,938
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 67,292
<INCOME-TAX>                                    20,222
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             35,273
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    35,273
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.43
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.43
        

</TABLE>
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 8120 

To amend the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 

to prohibit cordon pricing in the Central Business District Tolling Program for New York City, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 23, 2024 

Ms. MALLIOTAKIS (for herself and Mr. GOTTHEIMER) introduced the following 

bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To amend the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency 

Act of 1991 to prohibit cordon pricing in the Central 

Business District Tolling Program for New York City, 

and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Motorist Tax Abuse 

5 Act’’. 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 8120 IH

1 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON CONGESTION PRICING. 

2 Section 1012(b) of the Intermodal Surface Transpor3 tation Efficiency Act of 1991 (23 U.S.C. 149 note) is 

4 amended by adding at the end the following: 

5 ‘‘(9) PROHIBITION ON CONGESTION PRICING.— 

6 Notwithstanding any other provision of this sub7 section, the Secretary may not establish or maintain 

8 cordon pricing under the value pricing pilot program 

9 under this section for the Central Business District 

10 Tolling Program for New York City.’’. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
December 1, 2015

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

JACOB BRENT SMITH, Appellant

NO. 14-14-00681-CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

________________________________

This cause was heard on the transcript of the record of the court below. 

Having considered the record, this Court holds that there was no error in the 

judgment. The Court orders the judgment AFFIRMED.

We further order appellant pay all costs expended in the appeal.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
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.                  

###### Commodity Futures Trading Commission

# Time and Date:

 11 a.m., Friday, August 7, 2009.

# Place:

 1155 21st St., NW., Washington, DC, 9th Floor Commission Conference Room.

# Status:

 Closed.

# Matters to be Considered:

 Surveillance Matters.

# Contact Person for More Information:

 Sauntia S. Warfield, 202-418-5084.

Sauntia S. Warfield,

Assistant Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. E9-18340 Filed 7-28-09; 4:15 pm]

BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
Editorial Note on Part 890
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 890 appear at 73 FR 35341, June 23, 2008.

§ 890.3890 Stair-climbing wheelchair. ( a ) *Identification.* A stair-climbing wheelchair is a device with wheels that is intended for medical purposes to provide mobility to persons restricted to a sitting position. The device is intended to climb stairs.
( b ) *Classification.* Class II (special controls). The special controls for this device are: ( 1 ) The design characteristics of the device must ensure that the geometry and material composition are consistent with the intended use.
( 2 ) Performance testing must demonstrate adequate mechanical performance under simulated use conditions and environments. Performance testing must include the following: ( i ) Fatigue testing;
( ii ) Resistance to dynamic loads (impact testing);
( iii ) Effective use of the braking mechanism and how the device stops in case of an electrical brake failure;
( iv ) Demonstration of adequate stability of the device on inclined planes (forward, backward, and lateral);
( v ) Demonstration of the ability of the device to safely ascend and descend obstacles (i.e., stairs, curb); and
( vi ) Demonstration of ability to effectively use the device during adverse temperatures and following storage in adverse temperatures and humidity conditions.
( 3 ) The skin-contacting components of the device must be demonstrated to be biocompatible.
( 4 ) Software design, verification, and validation must demonstrate that the device controls, alarms, and user interfaces function as intended.
( 5 ) Appropriate analysis and performance testing must be conducted to verify electrical safety and electromagnetic compatibility of the device.
( 6 ) Performance testing must demonstrate battery safety and evaluate longevity.
( 7 ) Performance testing must evaluate the flammability of device components.
( 8 ) Patient labeling must bear all information required for the safe and effective use of the device, specifically including the following: ( i ) A clear description of the technological features of the device and the principles of how the device works;
( ii ) A clear description of the appropriate use environments/conditions, including prohibited environments;
( iii ) Preventive maintenance recommendations;
( iv ) Operating specifications for proper use of the device such as patient weight limitations, device width, and clearance for maneuverability; and
( v ) A detailed summary of the device-related adverse events and how to report any complications.
( 9 ) Clinician labeling must include all the information in the Patient labeling noted in paragraph (b)(8) of this section but must also include the following: ( i ) Identification of patients who can effectively operate the device; and
( ii ) Instructions on how to fit, modify, or calibrate the device.
( 10 ) Usability studies of the device must demonstrate that the device can be used by the patient in the intended use environment with the instructions for use and user training.
[79 FR 20782, Apr. 14, 2014]
§ 1.264-1 Premiums on life insurance taken out in a trade or business. ( a ) *When premiums are not deductible.* Premiums paid by a taxpayer on a life insurance policy are not deductible from the taxpayer's gross income, even though they would otherwise be deductible as trade or business expenses, if they are paid on a life insurance policy covering the life of any officer or employee of the taxpayer, or any person (including the taxpayer) who is financially interested in any trade or business carried on by the taxpayer, when the taxpayer is directly or indirectly a beneficiary of the policy. For additional provisions relating to the nondeductibility of premiums paid on life insurance policies (whether under section 162 or any other section of the Code), see section 262, relating to personal, living, and family expenses, and section 265, relating to expenses allocable to tax-exempt income.
( b ) *When taxpayer is a beneficiary.* If a taxpayer takes out a policy for the purpose of protecting himself from loss in the event of the death of the insured, the taxpayer is considered a beneficiary directly or indirectly under the policy. However, if the taxpayer is not a beneficiary under the policy, the premiums so paid will not be disallowed as deductions merely because the taxpayer may derive a benefit from the increased efficiency of the officer or employee insured. See section 162 and the regulations thereunder. A taxpayer is considered a beneficiary under a policy where, for example, he, as a principal member of a partnership, takes out an insurance policy on his own life irrevocably designating his partner as the sole beneficiary in order to induce his partner to retain his investment in the partnership. Whether or not the taxpayer is a beneficiary under a policy, the proceeds of the policy paid by reason of the death of the insured may be excluded from gross income whether the beneficiary is an individual or a corporation, except in the case of ( 1 ) certain transferees, as provided in section 101(a)(2);
( 2 ) portions of amounts of life insurance proceeds received at a date later than death under the provisions of section 101(d); and
( 3 ) life insurance policy proceeds which are includible in the gross income of a husband or wife under section 71 (relating to alimony) or section 682 (relating to income of an estate or trust in case of divorce, etc.). (See section 101(e).) For further reference, see, generally, section 101 and the regulations thereunder.
### IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10

- 10

- 00247

- CV

CITY OF MILFORD

, Appellant

v.

NESTOR CALDERON, JR.

, Appellee

From the 40th District Court

Ellis County, Texas

Trial Court No. 79,293

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, City of Milford, filed a n otice of appeal from an adverse judgment

issued by the trial court. Now, City of Milford has filed an unopposed motion to

dismiss the appeal. In the motion, City of Milford requests that we dismiss the appeal

and remand the case back to the trial court f or completion of the dismissal process.

We are not permitted by the Rules of Appellate Procedure to dismiss the appeal

and remand the case. Accordingly, we grant City of Milford’s motion in part, set aside

the trial court’s judgment without regard to the merits, and remand the case to the trial

court for further proceedings. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.1(a)(2)(B).City of Milford v. Calderon Page 2 TOM GRAY

Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Reyna, and

Justice Davis

Judgment set aside and remanded

Opinion delivere d and filed Dec ember 8 , 2010

[CV06]
III

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. RES. 67

To remove ‘‘Select’’ from the title of the Select Committee on Indian Affairs

and to designate room 485 in the Richard Brevard Russell Senate

Office Building as the ‘‘Room of the First Americans’’.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

FEBRUARY 4 (legislative day, JANUARY 5), 1993

Mr. INOUYE (for himself and Mr. MCCAIN) submitted the following resolution;

which was referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration

RESOLUTION

To remove ‘‘Select’’ from the title of the Select Committee

on Indian Affairs and to designate room 485 in the

Richard Brevard Russell Senate Office Building as the

‘‘Room of the First Americans’’.

1 Resolved,

2 SECTION 1. COMMITTEE NAME.

3 The Select Committee on Indian Affairs is hereby re4 designated as the ‘‘Committee on Indian Affairs’’.

5 SEC. 2. ROOM OF THE FIRST AMERICANS.

6 The room in the Richard Brevard Russell Senate Of7 fice Building currently designated as room 485 is hereby

8 redesignated as the ‘‘Room of the First Americans’’.
2

•SRES 67 IS

Æ
1 In The



### Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

____________________

NO. 09

- 1 8

- 00 292

- CV

____________________

PATRICK THOMAS ZAGAR SR. , Appella nt

V.

CANDY LYN ZAGAR , Appellee

__________________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 418th District Court

Montgomery County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 17

- 07

- 08877

- CV

_________________________________________________ _________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant Patrick Thomas Zagar Sr. and appellee, Candy Lyn Zagar, filed a

joint motion to dismiss the appeal to effectuate their irrevocable settlement

agreement. The motion is voluntarily made by agreement of the parties prior to any

decision of this Cour t. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1. We grant the motion and dismiss

the appeal.

APPEAL DISMISS ED.2 ______________________________ HOLLIS HORTON

Justice

Submitted on February 6, 2019

Opinion Delivered February 7, 2019

Before McKeithen, C.J., Kreger and Horton , JJ.
Exhibit 10.2


 


EXHIBIT A


 


Form of Letter to be Used to Exercise Nonqualified Stock Option


 


Date





	
            
 
 
 	
             
 
	
            
 
 
 	
             
 
	
            
 
 
 	
             
 





 


Attention:                                               


 


I wish to exercise the stock option granted on                         and evidenced by a Stock Option Agreement dated as of                        , to acquire                         shares of Common Stock of                        , at an option
price of $                per share. In accordance with the provisions of paragraph 1 of the Stock Option Agreement, I wish to make payment of the exercise price (please check all that apply):





	
            :o
 	
            in cash
 
	
            :o
 	
            by delivery of shares of Common Stock held by me
 
	
            :o
 	
            by simultaneous sale through a broker of Option Shares
 
	
            :o
 	
            by authorizing the Company to withhold Option Shares
 






 


Please issue a certificate for these shares in the following name:





	
            
 
 
 	
             
 
	
            Name
 	
             
 
	
            
 
 
 	
             
 
	
            Address
 	
             
 
	
            
 
 
 	
             
 





 





	
             
 	
            Very truly yours,
 
	
             
 	
             
 
	
             
 	
            Signature
 
	
             
 	
             
 
	
             
 	
            Typed or Printed Name
 
	
             
 	
             
 
	
             
 	
            Social Security Number
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

September 10, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

133727 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 133727 

 COA: 266809 

Oakland CC: 2005-202766-FH 

STANLEY EARL DAVIS,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the March 15, 2007 

judgment order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are 

not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

s0830 

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

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

September 10, 2007 

 Clerk
#### State of Connecticut *v.*John Zaleski

*Julius Watstein,*in support of the petition.

*Robert P. Sneideman,*prosecuting attorney, in opposition.

Submitted September 25

decided October 1, 1963

The petition by the defendant for certification for appeal from the Appellate Division of the Circuit Court is denied.
#### § 1.507-8 Liability in case of transfers.

For purposes of determining liability for the tax imposed under section 507(c) in the case of assets transferred by the private foundation, such tax shall be deemed to have been imposed on the first day on which action is taken by the organization which culminates in its ceasing to be a private foundation. If an organization's private foundation status is terminated under section 507(a)(2), the first day on which action is taken which culminates in its ceasing to be a private foundation (within the meaning of section 507(f)) shall be the date described in § 1.507-7(b)(2). If an organization terminates its private foundation status under section 507(a)(1), the first day on which action is taken which culminates in its ceasing to be a private foundation (within the meaning of section 507(f)) shall be the date described in § 1.507-7(b)(1).

[T.D. 7233, 37 FR 28161, Dec. 21, 1972]
§ 1.528-10 Special rules for computation of homeowners association taxable income and tax. ( a ) *In general.* Homeowners association taxable income shall be determined according to the provisions of section 528(d) and the rules set forth in this section.
( b ) *Limitation on capital losses.* If for any taxable year a homeowners association has a net capital loss, the rules of sections 1211(a) and 1212(a) shall apply.
( c ) *Allowable deductions* — ( 1 ) *In general.* To be deductible in computing the unrelated business taxable income of a homeowners association, expenses, depreciation and similar items must not only qualify as items of deduction allowed by chapter 1 of the Code but must also be directly connected with the production of gross income (excluding exempt function income). To be *directly connected with* the production of gross income (excluding exempt function income), an item of deduction must have both proximate and primary relationship to the production of such income and have been incurred in the production of such income. Items of deduction attributable solely to items of gross income (excluding exempt function income) are proximately and primarily related to such income. Whether an item of deduction is incurred in the production of gross income (excluding exempt function income) is determined on the basis of all the facts and circumstances involved in each case.
( 2 ) *Dual use of facilities or personnel.* Where facilities are used both for exempt functions of the organization and for the production of gross income (excluding exempt function income), expenses, depreciation and similar items attributable to such facilities (for example, items of overhead) shall be allocated between the two uses on a reasonable basis. Similarly where personnel are employed both for exempt functions and for the production of gross income (excluding exempt function income), expenses and similar items attributable to such personnel (for example, items of salary) shall be allocated between the two activities on a reasonable basis. The portion of any such item so allocated to the production of gross income (excluding exempt function income) is directly connected with such income and shall be allowable as a deduction in computing homeowners association taxable income to the extent that it qualifies as an item of deduction allowed by chapter 1 of the Code. Thus, for example, assume that X, a homeowners association, pays its manager a salary of $10,000 a year and that it derives gross income other than exempt function income. If 10 percent of the manager's time during the year is devoted to deriving X's gross income (other than exempt function income), a deduction of $1,000 (10 percent of $10,000) would generally be allowable for purposes of computing X's homeowners association taxable income.
( d ) *Investment credit.* A homeowners association is not entitled to an investment credit.
( e ) *Cross reference.* For the definition of exempt function income, see § 1.528-9.
[T.D. 7692, 45 FR 26324, Apr. 18, 1980]
III

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. RES. 108

To refer S. 974 entitled ‘‘A bill for the relief of Richard Kanehl of Mobile,

Alabama.’’ to the chief judge of the United States Court of Federal

Claims for a report thereon.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MAY 18 (legislative day, APRIL 19), 1993

Mr. MITCHELL (for Mr. HEFLIN) submitted the following resolution; which

was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

RESOLUTION

To refer S. 974 entitled ‘‘A bill for the relief of Richard

Kanehl of Mobile, Alabama.’’ to the chief judge of the

United States Court of Federal Claims for a report

thereon.

1 Resolved, That the bill S. 974 entitled ‘‘A bill for the

2 relief of Richard Kanehl of Mobile, Alabama.’’ now pend3 ing in the Senate, together with all the accompanying pa4 pers, is referred to the chief judge of the United States

5 Court of Federal Claims. The chief judge shall proceed

6 with the same in accordance with the provisions of sections

7 1492 and 2509 of title 28, United States Code, and report

8 thereon to the Senate, at the earliest practicable date, giv-
2

•SRES 108 IS

1 ing such findings of fact and conclusions thereon as shall

2 be sufficient to inform the Congress of the nature and

3 character of the demand as a claim, legal or equitable,

4 against the United States or a gratuity and the amount,

5 if any, legally or equitably due to the claimants from the

6 United States.

Æ
Exhibit 32.1

                          CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                           18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                            AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 In connection with the Quarterly Report of American HealthChoice, Inc.  (the
 "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2006 as filed  with
 the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
 Dr. J. W. Stucki, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,  pursuant
 to 18 U.S.C. S 1350, as adopted pursuant to S 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley  Act
 of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge and belief:

           (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  result  of
           operations of the Company.



 /s/ Dr. J. W. Stucki


 Dr. J. W. Stucki

 Chief Executive Officer

 August 21, 2006