alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
39733.

#### SPADLO, INC. v. LISENBY.

Bell, Judge.

The defendant has moved to dismiss the writ of error.

The record shows that although the trial judge returned the bill of exceptions to the plaintiff on April 13, 1962, for the corree*531tion of errors specified, the plaintiff did not retender its corrected bill of exceptions until May 15, 1962. This retender was made on the 32nd day.

Decided September 11, 1962.

*Albert B. Wallace,*for plaintiff in error.

*Hansell, Post, Brandon ■& Dorsey, Hugh E. Wright,*contra.

A party retendering a bill of exceptions returned to him for correction or completion must retender it within the same period of time, 30 days, as is allowed by law for the'tender of the original bill of exceptions unless a longer period is given for providential cause or imperative necessity. When a delay of more than 30 days intervenes, the providential cause or imperative necessity which occasions the delay must affirmatively appear in the judge’s certificate. *White v. Griggs,*214 Ga. 392 (104 SE2d 890).

The judge’s certificate to the present bill of exceptions did not state any providential cause or imperative necessity for the delay beyond 30 days in the retendering by the plaintiff of the corrected bill of exceptions.

As the record shows that the 30th day for retendering fell on a Sunday, the last day a valid retender could have been made was on Monday, May 14, 1962, but the bill of exceptions was not retendered until the following day, May 15, 1962. This being so, the motion to dismiss the writ of error must be sustained. The defect is jurisdictional, and we have no choice. *White v. Griggs,*214 Ga. 392, supra, and *Spivey v. Nalley,*212 Ga. 810 (96 SE2d 260).

*Writ of error dismissed.*

*Felton, C. J., and Hall, J., concur.*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Gehl
Company's condensed consolidated balance sheet at April 3, 1999 and condensed
consolidated statements of income for the three-month period ended April 3,
1999 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial 
statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                    3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                              JAN-1-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-03-1999
<CASH>                                            3688
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    88284
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0<F1>
<INVENTORY>                                      36015
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                136449
<PP&E>                                           76364
<DEPRECIATION>                                   42454
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  199429
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            57508
<BONDS>                                          34774<F2>
<COMMON>                                           647
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                       97185
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    199429
<SALES>                                          68963
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 68963
<CGS>                                            50187
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    50187
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 777
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   5433
<INCOME-TAX>                                      1929
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               3504
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      3504
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .54<F3>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .52
<FN>
<F1>The Company presents receivables on a net basis in compliance with Article
10 of Regulation S-X.
<F2>Includes all non-current portion of debt obligations
<F3>The EPS under the "EPS-Primary" tag represents Basic Earnings Per Share.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
# Eiropas Savienības C 301A/2006

| | ISSN 1725-5201 |
| --- | --- |
| Eiropas Savienības
  Oficiālais Vēstnesis | C 301A |
| | |
| Izdevums latviešu valodā | Informācija un paziņojumi | 49. sējums2006. gada 12. decembris |

ISSN 1725-5201

Eiropas Savienības

Oficiālais Vēstnesis

C 301A

Izdevums latviešu valodā

Informācija un paziņojumi

49. sējums2006. gada 12. decembris

---

| Paziņojums Nr. | Saturs | Lappuse |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | III   Paziņojumi |
| | Komisija |
| 2006/C 301A/1 | Kopienas Augu šķirņu birojs – Uzaicinājums izteikt ieinteresētību par iecelšanu Apelācijas padomes priekšsēdētāja un priekšsēdētāja vietnieka amatā | 1 |

Paziņojums Nr.

Saturs

Lappuse

III   Paziņojumi

Komisija

2006/C 301A/1

Kopienas Augu šķirņu birojs – Uzaicinājums izteikt ieinteresētību par iecelšanu Apelācijas padomes priekšsēdētāja un priekšsēdētāja vietnieka amatā

1

| LV | |
| --- | --- |

LV

---

III Paziņojumi

Komisija

| 12.12.2006 | LV | Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis | CA 301/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.12.2006

LV

Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis

CA 301/1

---

KOPIENAS AUGU ŠĶIRŅU BIROJS

Uzaicinājums izteikt ieinteresētību par iecelšanu Apelācijas padomes priekšsēdētāja un priekšsēdētāja vietnieka amatā

(2006/C 301 A/01)

Kopienas Augu šķirņu birojs meklē kandidātus Apelācijas padomes priekšsēdētāja un priekšsēdētāja vietnieka vakancei.

Pretendentiem ir jābūt Eiropas Savienības dalībvalsts pilsoņiem.

Priekšsēdētāju un priekšsēdētāja vietnieku iecels Padome, to izraugoties no kandidātu saraksta, ko pēc Biroja administratīvās padomes atzinuma saņemšanas piedāvās Komisija. Ziņas par atalgojumu var saņemt, sūtot pieprasījumu Apelācijas padomes sekretariātam (Kopienas Augu šķirņu birojs, 3, boulevard Maréchal Foch, BP 10121, F-49101 Angers Cedex 02). Kopienas Augu šķirņu birojs un Komisija savā praksē īsteno iespēju vienlīdzības politiku.

Darba aprakstu, pieteikuma anketas un norādījumus, kā šie pieteikumi jānosūta, var lejupielādēt no šādas interneta adreses:

http://ec.europa.eu/food/plant/propertyrights/index_en.htm

vai

http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/personnel_administration/working_senior_mgt_en.htm

Pieteikumu iesniegšanas termiņš ir 2007. gada 31. janvāris (sīkāku informāciju sk. pieteikumu nosūtīšanas norādījumos).

---
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Larry Thomas REMINGTON, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 02-6536.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted June 13, 2002.

Decided June 19, 2002.

Larry Thomas Remington, Appellant Pro Se. Felice McConnell Corpening, Office of the United States of Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

PER CURIAM.

Larry Thomas Remington seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2001). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. *United States v. Remington,*Nos. CR-00-25-BR; CA-01-801-5BR (E.D.N.C. Jan. 17, 2002). 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.

*DISMISSED.*
Searched for **http://www.fec.gov/**

 

19961997199819992000200120022003200420052006200720082009201020112012201320142015201620172018201920202021202220232024

*Note:* This calendar view maps the number of captures of **http://www.fec.gov/**, *not* how many times the site was actually updated.

Look Up URL in general Internet Archive web collection.
#### § 1.181-5 Examples.

The following examples illustrate the application of §§ 1.181-1 through 1.181-4:

# Example 1.

X, a corporation that uses an accrual method of accounting and files Federal income tax returns on a calendar-year basis, is a producer of films. X is the owner (within the meaning of § 1.181-1(a)(2)) of film ABC. X incurs production costs in year 1, but does not commence principal photography for film ABC until year 2. In year 1, X reasonably expects, based on all of the facts and circumstances, that film ABC will be set for production and will be a qualified film or television production. Provided that X satisfies all other requirements of §§ 1.181-1 through 1.181-4 and § 1.181-6, X may deduct in year 1 the production costs for film ABC that X incurred in year 1.

# Example 2.

The facts are the same as in *Example 1.* In year 2, X begins, but does not complete, principal photography for film ABC. Most of the scenes that X films in year 2 are shot outside the United States and, as of December 31, year 2, less than 75 percent of the total compensation paid for film ABC is qualified compensation. Nevertheless, X still reasonably expects, based on all of the facts and circumstances, that film ABC will be a qualified film or television production. Provided that X satisfies all other requirements of §§ 1.181-1 through 1.181-4 and § 1.181-6, X may deduct in year 2 the production costs for film ABC that X incurred in year 2.

# Example 3.

The facts are the same as in *Example 2.* In year 3, X continues, but does not complete, production of film ABC. Due to changes in the expected production costs of film ABC, X no longer expects film ABC to qualify under section 181. X files a statement with its return for year 3 identifying the film and stating that X revokes its election under section 181. X includes in income in year 3 the deductions claimed in year 1 and in year 2 as provided for in § 1.181-4(a)(3). X has successfully revoked its election pursuant to § 1.181-2(d).

[T.D. 9551, 76 FR 60729, Sept. 30, 2011]
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 7964 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 7964

   To prohibit the use of Federal funds to establish, implement, or 
                   enforce any COVID-19 mask mandate.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 11, 2024

  Mr. Ogles (for himself, Mr. Steube, Mr. Rosendale, Mr. Tiffany, Mr. 
    Duncan, Mr. Perry, Mr. Norman, and Mrs. Spartz) introduced the 
   following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and 
                                Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To prohibit the use of Federal funds to establish, implement, or 
                   enforce any COVID-19 mask mandate.

    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 ``Defunding Unscientific Mask Mandates 
Act of 2024''.

SEC. 2. NO FEDERAL FUNDS TO ENFORCE COVID-19 MASK MANDATES.

    No Federal funds may be used to establish, implement, or enforce 
any requirement to wear a facial covering to prevent the spread of 
COVID-19.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 141 Agreed to House (ATH)]

104th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 141

            Providing for the adjournment of the two Houses.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 1, 1996

 Mr. Solomon submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
                        considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
            Providing for the adjournment of the two Houses.

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That when the House adjourns on the legislative day of Thursday, 
February 1, 1996, it stand adjourned until 12:30 p.m. on Monday, 
February 26, 1996, or until noon on the second day after Members are 
notified to reassemble pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent 
resolution, whichever occurs first; and that when the Senate recesses 
or adjourns at the close of business on Thursday, February 1, 1996, 
Tuesday, February 6, 1996, Wednesday, February, 7, 1996, Thursday, 
February 8, 1996, Tuesday, February 13, 1996, Wednesday, February 14, 
1996, or Thursday, February 15, 1996, pursuant to a motion made by the 
Majority Leader or his designee in accordance with this resolution, it 
stand recessed or adjourned until 3 p.m. on Monday, February 26, 1996, 
or until noon on the second day after Members are notified to 
reassemble pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent resolution, 
whichever occurs first.
    Sec. 2. The Speaker of the House and the Majority Leader of the 
Senate, acting jointly after consultation with the Minority Leader of 
the House and the Minority Leader of the Senate, shall notify the 
Members of the House and Senate, respectively, to reassemble whenever, 
in their opinion, the public interest shall warrant it.
                                 <all>
```
Part. F HF Part. F HF

23

9-Feb B 6 63.13 48.82 10.82

22-Feb B 35 43.16 41.27 8.16

Averages 53.1 45.0 9.5 0.00

Averages #DIV/0! #DIV/0! 8.94 6.49 #DIV/0! #DIV/0!

Potline B Total 9.489

Feb. 2011 Total Fluoride Emission Rate Fluoride Mass Emission Rate Production Rate

Kg/day lb/ton (tons/day)

C Line Total

B Line

Wet System Dry System

Wet System Dry System Aline Bline
#### Dominic J. Carilli *v.*Pension Commission of the City of Hartford

*Elihu H. Berman,*for the plaintiff.

*Joseph J. Burns,*for the defendant.

Argued June 2

decided June 4, 1964

The parties, by their counsel, having appeared before this court in response to the order of May 20, 1964, directing them to show cause why the reservation should be entertained and having been fully heard, the court finds no good cause for answering the question reserved. Accordingly, the court refuses to entertain the reservation.
§ 1.706-3 Items attributable to interest in lower-tier partnership. ( a ) through ( c ) [Reserved]
( d ) *Conservation contributions.* For purposes of section 706(d)(3), in the case of a qualified conservation contribution (as defined in section 170(h)(1) and § 1.170A-14(a) without regard to whether such contribution is a disallowed qualified conservation contribution within the meaning of § 1.170A-14(j)(3)(vii)) by a partnership that is allocated to an upper-tier partnership, the upper-tier partnership must allocate the contribution among its partners in accordance with their interests in the qualified conservation contribution at the time of day at which the qualified conservation contribution was made, regardless of the general rule of section 706(d)(3). Pursuant to § 1.706-4(a)(2), the rules of § 1.706-4 do not apply to allocations subject to this section.
( e ) *Applicability date.* Paragraph (d) of this section applies to qualified conservation contributions made after December 29, 2022, and in partnership taxable years ending after December 29, 2022.
[TD 9999, 89 FR 54327, June 28, 2024]
PRE‐FLIGHT CHECKLIST

1 Charge Batteries, Transmitter, iPads

2 Clean Camera Lens & iPad Screens

3 Pack Case, Check for Completeness

4 Load Case, Table, Traffic Cones & First‐Aid

FLIGHT CHECKLIST

1 Set‐up Transmitter(s) w/Hood and iPad

2 Set iPad(s) to Airplane Mode

3 Turn on Pilot Transmitter

4 Power Up Drone, Exit Travel Mode

5 Power Down Drone/Pilot Transmitter

6 Install Camera w/ SD Memory Card

7 Install Propellers w/Prop Locks

8 Inspect Drone

9 Power Up Drone/Transmitter(s)

10 Check IMU.  Recalibrate if not 1.00 +/‐ .01

11 Check/Calibrate Compass

12 Check/Set RTH Elevation

13 Check/Set Distance/Height Limitations

14 Set Camera Settings

15 Set Gimbal Mode

16 Set Control Mode

17 Visually Check and Clear Area

18 Verbally Announce Take‐Off

POST‐FLIGHT CHECKLIST

1 Remove Camera & Propellers

2 Enter into Travel Mode

3 Disassemble Transmitters

4 Turn Off iPad Airplane Mode

5 Pack Case, Check for Completeness

6 Load Truck

7 Check Area
----

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de grande instance de Nanterre (France) lodged on 21 November 2006 — Société Roquette Frères SA v Direction générale des douanes et des droits indirects and Recette principale de Gennevilliers de la Direction générale des douanes et des droits indirects

(Case C-466/06)

(2006/C 326/96)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Tribunal de grande instance, Nanterre

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Société Roquette Frères SA

Defendants: Direction générale des douanes et des droits indirects and Recette principale de Gennevilliers de la Direction générale des douanes et des droits indirects

Questions referred

----

(1)  Council Regulation (EEC) No 1785/81 of 30 June 1981 on the common organisation of the markets in the sugar sector (OJ 1981 L 177, p. 4).

(2)  Council Regulation (EC) No 2038/1999 of 13 September 1999 on the common organisation of the markets in the sugar sector (OJ 1999 L 252, p. 1).

(3)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 2073/2000 of 29 September 2000 reducing, for the 2000/2001 marketing year, the guaranteed quantity under the production quotas scheme for the sugar sector and the presumed maximum supply needs of sugar refineries under the preferential import arrangements (OJ 2000 L 246, p. 38).

(4)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 1745/2002 of 30 September 2002 reducing, for the 2002/2003 marketing year, the guaranteed quantity under the production quotas scheme for the sugar sector and the presumed maximum supply needs of sugar refineries under the preferential import arrangements (OJ 2002 L 263, p. 31).

(5)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 1739/2003 of 30 September 2003 reducing, for the 2003/2004 marketing year, the guaranteed quantity under the production quotas for the sugar sector and the presumed maximum supply needs of sugar refineries under preferential imports (OJ 2003 L 249, p. 38).

(6)  Commission Regulation (EEC) No 1443/82 of 8 June 1982 laying down detailed rules for the application of the quota system in the sugar sector (OJ 1982 L 158, p. 17).

(7)  Commission Regulation (EC) No 314/2002 of 20 February 2002 laying down detailed rules for the application of the quota system in the sugar sector (OJ 2002 L 50, p. 40).

(8)  Council Regulation (EC) No 1260/2001 on the common organisation of the markets in the sugar sector (OJ 2001 L 178, p.1).

----
#### § 1.662(a)-4 Amounts used in discharge of a legal obligation.

Any amount which, pursuant to the terms of a will or trust instrument, is used in full or partial discharge or satisfaction of a legal obligation of any person is included in the gross income of such person under section 662(a) (1) or (2), whichever is applicable, as though directly distributed to him as a beneficiary, except in cases to which section 71 (relating to alimony payments) or section 682 (relating to income of a trust in case of divorce, etc.) applies. The term *legal obligation* includes a legal obligation to support another person if, and only if, the obligation is not affected by the adequacy of the dependent's own resources. For example, a parent has a “legal obligation” within the meaning of the preceding sentence to support his minor child if under local law property or income from property owned by the child cannot be used for his support so long as his parent is able to support him. On the other hand, if under local law a mother may use the resources of a child for the child's support in lieu of supporting him herself, no obligation of support exists within the meaning of this paragraph, whether or not income is actually used for support. Similarly, since under local law a child ordinarily is obligated to support his parent only if the parent's earnings and resources are insufficient for the purpose, no obligation exists whether or not the parent's earnings and resources are sufficient. In any event the amount of trust income which is included in the gross income of a person obligated to support a dependent is limited by the extent of his legal obligation under local law. In the case of a parent's obligation to support his child, to the extent that the parent's legal obligation of support, including education, is determined under local law by the family's station in life and by the means of the parent, it is to be determined without consideration of the trust income in question.
1 From: Susan Fairchild [Fairchild.Susan@epamail.epa.gov] Sent: Tuesday, July 05, 2011 11:13 AM To: Reeves, David; Hancy, Cindy Wang Subject: Fw: Isolatek International Additional Comments to SBAR Panel
Attachments: Isolatek International Additional Comments to SBAR Panel 1 July.pdf

Categories: Blue Category

add to the docket ----- Forwarded by Susan Fairchild/RTP/USEPA/US on 07/05/2011 11:12 AM -----

From: Tom Lund < tlund@isolatek.com >

To: Madeline Barch/DC/USEPA/US@EPA

Cc: christofaro.alexander@epa.gov , Susan Fairchild/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA, cortney_higgins@omb.gov

, david.rostker@sba.gov

Date: 07/01/2011 03:37 PM
Subject: Isolatek International Addi tional Comments to SBAR Panel

Ms. Madeline Barch,

Isolatek International has attached additional comments to augment those you have received from NAIMA on June 30, 2011. NAIMA is aware that we are submitting additional information directly to you.

(See attached file: Isolatek International Additional Comments to SBAR Panel 1 July.pdf)

With regard,

Tom Lund Operations Manager

260-356-2040 x328
260-356-2337 fax

CONFIDENTIALITY NOTE: The documents accompanying this telecopy transmission contain information which may be confidential and/or legally privileged. The information is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named on this transmission sheet. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of this telecopied information is strictly prohibited, and that the documents should be returned to the Company immediately. In this regard, if you have received this telecopy in error, please notify us.
**Exhibit 32.01**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

**REQUIRED BY RULE 13a-14(b) or RULE 15d-14(b)**

**AND SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT**

**OF 2002, 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Williams Controls, Inc (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended

December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Patrick W. Cavanagh, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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 result of operations of the Company. |
|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

 

/s/ PATRICK W. CAVANAGH

Patrick W. Cavanagh

Chief Executive Officer

Williams Controls, Inc.

February 13, 2006