alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Editorial Note on Part 10
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 10 appear by T.D. 9359, 72 FR 54544, Sept. 26, 2007.

§ 10.1 Offices. ( a ) *Establishment of office(s).* The Commissioner shall establish the Office of Professional Responsibility and any other office(s) within the Internal Revenue Service necessary to administer and enforce this part. The Commissioner shall appoint the Director of the Office of Professional Responsibility and any other Internal Revenue official(s) to manage and direct any office(s) established to administer or enforce this part. Offices established under this part include, but are not limited to: ( 1 ) The Office of Professional Responsibility, which shall generally have responsibility for matters related to practitioner conduct and shall have exclusive responsibility for discipline, including disciplinary proceedings and sanctions; and
( 2 ) An office with responsibility for matters related to authority to practice before the Internal Revenue Service, including acting on applications for enrollment to practice before the Internal Revenue Service and administering competency testing and continuing education.
( b ) Officers and employees within any office established under this part may perform acts necessary or appropriate to carry out the responsibilities of their office(s) under this part or as otherwise prescribed by the Commissioner.
( c ) *Acting.* The Commissioner will designate an officer or employee of the Internal Revenue Service to perform the duties of an individual appointed under paragraph (a) of this section in the absence of that officer or employee or during a vacancy in that office.
( d ) *Effective/applicability date.* This section is applicable beginning August 2, 2011, except that paragraph (a)(1) is applicable beginning June 12, 2014.
[T.D. 9527, 76 FR 32300, June 3, 2011, as amended by T.D. 9668, 79 FR 33692, June 12, 2014]
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of American Biogenetic Sciences, Inc. (the“Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2006 (the“Report”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the datehereof, I, Richard Rubin, CEO, CFO and Chairman of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that:

1. TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

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

 

/s/ Richard Rubin

CEO, CFO and ChairmanDated: August 14, 2006

A signed original of this writtenstatement required by Section 906 has been provided to American Biogenetic Sciences, Inc.and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission or its staff upon request.
Editorial Note on Part 301
Editorial Note: In the text of this part, integral section references are to sections of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954; decimal section references are to the Code of Federal Regulations. References in the text to the “Code” are references to sections of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954.

§ 301.6511(b)-1 Limitations on allowance of credits and refunds. ( a ) *Effect of filing claim.* Unless a claim for credit or refund of an overpayment is filed within the period of limitation prescribed in section 6511(a), no credit or refund shall be allowed or made after the expiration of such period.
( b ) *Limit on amount to be credited or refunded.* ( 1 ) In the case of any tax (other than a tax payable by stamp): ( i ) If a return was filed, and a claim is filed within 3 years from the time the return was filed, the amount of the credit or refund shall not exceed the portion of the tax paid within the period, immediately preceding the filing of the claim, equal to 3 years plus the period of any extension of time for filing the return.
( ii ) If a return was filed, and a claim is filed after the 3-year period described in subdivision (i) of this subparagraph but within 2 years from the time the tax was paid, the amount of the credit or refund shall not exceed the portion of the tax paid within the 2 years immediately preceding the filing of the claim.
( iii ) If no return was filed, but a claim is filed, the amount of the credit or refund shall not exceed the portion of the tax paid within the 2 years immediately preceding the filing of the claim.
( iv ) If no claim is filed, the amount of the credit or refund allowed or made by the district director or the director of the regional service center shall not exceed the amount that would have been allowable under the preceding subdivisions of this subparagraph if a claim had been filed on the date the credit or refund is allowed.
( 2 ) In the case of a tax payable by stamp: ( i ) If a claim is filed, the amount of the credit or refund shall not exceed the portion of the tax paid within the 3 years immediately preceding the filing of the claim.
( ii ) If no claim is filed, the amount of the credit or refund allowed or made by the district director or the director of the regional service center shall not exceed the portion of the tax paid within the 3 years immediately preceding the allowance of the credit or refund.
For provisions relating to redemption of unused stamps, see section 6805.
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 22 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 22

 Affirming the purpose and value of senior nutrition programs created 
                     under the Older Americans Act.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 3, 1995

Mr. Kennedy of Rhode Island (for himself and Mr. Schumer) submitted the 
following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on 
                 Economic and Educational Opportunities

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
 Affirming the purpose and value of senior nutrition programs created 
                     under the Older Americans Act.

Whereas senior nutrition programs are low cost, locally managed, and enjoy 
        widespread community and volunteer support;
Whereas an essential the key to the success of senior nutrition programs is 
        their openness. A means-test, if established, would discourage 
        participation;
Whereas the nutritional needs of more than 2.5 million senior citizens are met 
        by congregate meal programs which serve more than 1.3 million meals a 
        year in churches, senior centers, and community locations;
Whereas more than 820,000 shut-in senior citizens receive meals delivered to 
        their homes each year;
Whereas lunch can be delivered to a senior citizen at home for a full year for 
        less than the cost of one day in a hospital;
Whereas senior nutrition programs are a method of preventive care for senior 
        citizens;
Whereas senior nutrition programs are a key link in the network of senior 
        support programs, often providing the opportunity to coordinate the 
        services senior citizens need to lead independent and rewarding lives;
Whereas senior nutrition programs connect senior citizens to social activities 
        which significantly add to their quality of life; and
Whereas without senior nutrition programs, senior citizens would face a greater 
        risk of nutritional deficiency, poor health, and isolation: Now, 
        therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That it is the sense of the Congress that the nutritional programs 
created under the Older Americans Act provide essential assistance to 
senior citizens, that their effectiveness would be severely compromised 
by removing the programs from the Act, and that their viability would 
be threatened by reducing the total funds available and combining 
senior nutrition with means-tested public assistance programs.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                                      <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                 9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                        DEC-30-1995
<PERIOD-START>                           JAN-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                             SEP-30-1995
<CASH>                                           424
<SECURITIES>                                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                 20,205      
<ALLOWANCES>                                     476   
<INVENTORY>                                   22,131      
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              44,971      
<PP&E>                                        67,230      
<DEPRECIATION>                                26,971      
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                87,432      
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         17,910      
<BONDS>                                            0  
<COMMON>                                       5,297     
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              0 
<PREFERRED>                                        0 
<OTHER-SE>                                    29,735
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  87,432      
<SALES>                                       98,556      
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              98,556      
<CGS>                                         83,505      
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 94,812      
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                (524)    
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 200    
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             1,697     
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                2,371     
<INCOME-TAX>                                     852   
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            1,519     
<DISCONTINUED>                                     0 
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    0 
<CHANGES>                                          0 
<NET-INCOME>                                   1,519     
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   0.28 
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   0.28
        


</TABLE>
#### 426-428 West 46th St. Owners, Inc., et al., Respondents, v Greater New York Mutual Insurance Company, Appellant.

[804 NYS2d 61]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Bernard J. Fried, J.), entered July 12, 2004, which denied defendant’s motion to dismiss plaintiffs’ declaratory judgment action challenging defendant insurer’s disclaimer of coverage on the ground that plaintiffs’ notice of claim was untimely, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

There was uncontradicted evidence presented by plaintiffs that although they knew on August 27, 2002 that their tenant had been found lying incapacitated inside her apartment and was brought by ambulance to the hospital, they lacked knowledge that she had sustained severe injuries from falling down stairs inside her apartment, and that the tenant provided no information which would lead plaintiffs to believe she held them responsible for her condition. In these circumstances, the IAS court properly concluded that defendant had not shown that plaintiffs’ delay in notifying defendant of the incident until June 18, 2003, shortly after the tenant commenced the underlying action, was unreasonable as a matter of law *(Argentina v Otsego Mut. Fire Ins. Co.,*86 NY2d 748 [1995]). Furthermore, taking all the circumstances into consideration, plaintiffs’ apparent failure to conduct any inquiry into the tenant’s condition did not render their excuse unreasonable as a matter of *208law. Concur—Buckley, P.J., Tom, Andrias, Sullivan and Malone, JJ.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 18 (Thursday, January 29, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 5160]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-1954]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES


National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health; 
Designation of a Class of Employees for Addition to the Special 
Exposure Cohort

AGENCY: National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), 
Department of Health and Human Services (HHS).

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: HHS gives notice of a decision to designate a class of 
employees at Vitro Manufacturing in Canonsburg, Pennsylvania, as an 
addition to the Special Exposure Cohort (SEC) under the Energy 
Employees Occupational Illness Compensation Program Act of 2000. On 
January 16, 2009, the Secretary of HHS designated the following class 
of employees as an addition to the SEC:

    All AWE employees who worked at Vitro Manufacturing in Canonsburg, 
Pennsylvania, from August 13, 1942 through December 31, 1957, for a 
number of work days aggregating at least 250 work days, occurring 
either solely under this employment or in combination with work days 
within the parameters established for one or more other classes of 
employees in the Special Exposure Cohort.

This designation will become effective on February 15, 2009, unless 
Congress provides otherwise prior to the effective date. After this 
effective date, HHS will publish a notice in the Federal Register 
reporting the addition of this class to the SEC or the result of any 
provision by Congress regarding the decision by HHS to add the class to 
the SEC.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Larry Elliott, Director, Office of 
Compensation Analysis and Support, National Institute for Occupational 
Safety and Health (NIOSH), 4676 Columbia Parkway, MS C-46, Cincinnati, 
OH 45226, Telephone 513-533-6800 (this is not a toll-free number). 
Information requests can also be submitted by e-mail to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#501f131103101314137e171f06"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="86c9c5c7d5c6c5c2c5a8c1c9d0">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Dated: January 26, 2009.
Christine M. Branche,
Acting Director, National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health.
[FR Doc. E9-1954 Filed 1-28-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-17-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
39490.

#### BURNS v. McLUCAS et al.

Nichols, Presiding Judge.

Mrs. Rachel K Burns sued A. C. McLucas and J. C. Harrison, a partnership engaged in the business of selling fuel oil, to recover for damages allegedly sustained when the defendants, in delivering fuel oil to the plaintiff’s residence, failed to follow instructions as to such delivery and placed the fuel oil in a storage tank which *103was disconnected from the oil heater which it had previously served. The oil so placed drained onto the floor of the building causing the damages sued for. The jury returned a verdict for the defendants, and the plaintiff now assigns error on the judgment overruling her motion for new trial as amended. *Held:*

Decided May 23, 1962.

*A. A. Roberts,*for plaintiff in error.

*Marvin G. Russell, Turner Paschal,*contra.

1. “Special grounds of a motion for new trial complaining that the court failed to charge on certain controlling issues in the case, but which neither set forth in substance any pleadings or evidence raising such issues, nor refer to- and identify the same by page number in the record, are too incomplete for consideration by this court. *Maxwell v. Hollis,*214 Ga. 358 (104 SE2d 893); *Kirby v. Whitlock-Dobbs, Inc.,*97 Ga. App. 159 (3) (102 SE2d 631); *Brewer v. Henson,*96 Ga. App. 501 (100 SE2d 661); *Hartsfield v. Hartsfield,*87 Ga. App. 707 (2) (75 SE2d 276).” *Hodges v. Gay,*100 Ga. App. 210 (1) (110 SE2d 570). Accordingly, the two special grounds of the amended motion for new trial which complained that the trial court erred in failing to charge quoted principles of law but which failed to quote, or refer by page number to, the pleadings and evidence requiring such instructions are incomplete and cannot be considered.

2. The evidence adduced on the trial did not demand a verdict for the plaintiff, and the trial court did not err in overruling her motion for new trial.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Frankum and Jordan, JJ., concur.*
§ 31.3306(b)-1T Question and answer relating to the definition of wages in section 3306(b) (Temporary). The following question and answer relates to the definition of wages in section 3306(b) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954, as amended by section 531(d)(3) of the Tax Reform Act of 1984 (98 Stat. 885): Q-1: Are fringe benefits included in the definition of wages under section 3306(b)? *A-1:* Yes, unless specifically excluded from the definition of “wages” pursuant to section 3306(b) ( 1 ) through ( 16 ) . For example, a fringe benefit provided to or on behalf of an employee is excluded from the definition of “wages” if at the time such benefit is provided it is reasonable to believe that the employee will be able to exclude such benefit from income under section 117 or 132.
[T.D. 8004, 50 FR 755, Jan. 7, 1985]
§ 56.4911-6 Records of lobbying and grass roots expenditures. ( a ) *Records of lobbying expenditures.* An electing public charity must keep a record of its lobbying expenditures for the taxable year. Lobbying expenditures of which an organization must keep a record include the following: ( 1 ) Expenditures for grass roots lobbying, as described in paragraph (b) of this section;
( 2 ) Amounts directly paid or incurred for direct lobbying, including payments to another organization earmarked for direct lobbying, fees and expenses paid to individuals or organizations for direct lobbying, and printing, mailing, and other direct costs of reproducing and distributing materials used in direct lobbying;
( 3 ) The portion of amounts paid or incurred as current or deferred compensation for an employee's services for direct lobbying;
( 4 ) Amounts paid for out-of-pocket expenditures incurred on behalf of the organization and for direct lobbying, whether or not incurred by an employee;
( 5 ) The allocable portion of administrative, overhead, and other general expenditures attributable to direct lobbying;
( 6 ) Expenditures for publications or for communications with members to the extent the expenditures are treated as expenditures for direct lobbying under § 56.4911-5; and
( 7 ) Expenditures for direct lobbying of a controlled organization (within the meaning of § 56.4911-10(c)) to the extent included by a controlling organization (within the meaning of § 56.4911-10(c)) in its lobbying expenditures.
( b ) *Records of grass roots expenditures.* An electing public charity must keep a record of its grass roots expenditures for the taxable year. Grass roots expenditures of which an organization must keep a record include the following: ( 1 ) Amounts directly paid or incurred for grass roots lobbying, including payments to other organizations earmarked for grass roots lobbying, fees and expenses paid to individuals or organizations for grass roots lobbying, and the printing, mailing, and other direct costs of reproducing and distributing materials used in grass roots lobbying;
( 2 ) The portion of amounts paid or incurred as current or deferred compensation for an employee's services for grass roots lobbying;
( 3 ) Amounts paid for out-of-pocket expenditures incurred on behalf of the organization and for grass roots lobbying, whether or not incurred by an employee;
( 4 ) The allocable portion of administrative, overhead and other general expenditures attributable to grass roots lobbying;
( 5 ) Expenditures for publication or communications that are treated as expenditures for grass roots lobbying under § 56.4911-5; and
( 6 ) Expenditures for grass roots lobbying of a controlled organization (within the meaning of § 56.4911-10(c)) to the extent included by a controlling organization (within the meaning of § 56.4911-10(c)) in its grass roots expenditures.
104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. J. RES. 163

JOINT RESOLUTION

Making further continuing appropriations for the

fiscal year 1996, and for other purposes.
104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. J. RES. 163

JOINT RESOLUTION

Making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year

1996, and for other purposes.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That Public Law 104–99 is amended by striking out

4 ‘‘March 15, 1996’’ in sections 106(c), 112, 126(c), 202(c)
2

•HJ 163 EH

1 and 214 and inserting in lieu thereof ‘‘March 22, 1996’’,

2 and by inserting in section 101(a) after ‘‘The Department

3 of the Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Act,

4 1996’’ the following ‘‘, H.R. 1977’’, and by inserting in

5 section 101(a) after ‘‘The Departments of Labor, Health

6 and Human Services, and Education and Related

7 Agencies Appropriations Act, 1996’’ the following

8 ‘‘, H.R. 2127’’, and that Public Law 104–92 is amended

9 by striking out ‘‘March 15, 1996’’ in section 106(c) and

10 inserting in lieu thereof ‘‘March 22, 1996’’.

Passed the House of Representatives March 14,

1996.

Attest:

Clerk.
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 99.1


                           GTECH HOLDINGS CORPORATION

                            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 GTECH Holdings Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending August 24, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the Date hereof (the "Report"), I, W.
Bruce Turner, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C section 1350, as adopted pursuant to sections 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.


                                           GTECH HOLDINGS CORPORATION


Date:    October 8, 2002                   By /s/ W. Bruce Turner
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           W. Bruce Turner
                                           President and Chief Executive Officer