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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S FORM 10-Q FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1999 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                       3,454,104
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   63,333
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    111,901
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,918,484
<PP&E>                                         711,532
<DEPRECIATION>                                 524,006
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,113,343
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,251,400
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    65,767,490
<OTHER-SE>                                (64,007,149)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,113,342
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 8,037
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,737,562
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             107,602
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,837,127)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,837,127)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,837,127)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (0.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.04)


</TABLE>
HomeCases Filed Against the United Mexican States...Carlos Sastre v. United Mexican States

# 									Carlos Sastre v. United Mexican States							

Office of the Assistant Legal Adviser for International Claims and Investment Disputes

Claimants brought claims arising under the NAFTA alleging that Mexico breached, among others, its obligation to provide fair and equitable treatment, the prohibition against unlawful expropriation, and the obligation to provide most-favored-nation treatment. Claimants have also asserted claims against Mexico under other of its investment treaties.

Find further information and documents concerning this claim

07/13/2021 U.S. Article 1128 Submission [210 KB] (Accessible Version [1 MB])

Tags

ArbitrationFree Trade AgreementsMexico

Back to Top
**Docket Numbers: FA**  **A -**  **2012 -**  **1230**
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2731 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2731

To require the United States to oppose and vote against any proposal to 
   create any financing mechanism designed to prevent or resolve the 
                    insolvency of sovereign nations.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            December 6, 1995

     Mr. Solomon (for himself, Mr. Rohrabacher, and Mr. Traficant) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                     Banking and Financial Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To require the United States to oppose and vote against any proposal to 
   create any financing mechanism designed to prevent or resolve the 
                    insolvency of sovereign nations.

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

SECTION 1. OPPOSITION OF UNITED STATES TO INTERNATIONAL BAILOUT FUND.

    Title XV of the International Financial Institutions Act (22 U.S.C. 
262o) is amended by inserting after section 1501 the following:

``SEC. 1502. OPPOSITION TO CREATION OF AN INTERNATIONAL BAILOUT FUND.

    ``The Secretary of the Treasury shall instruct the United States 
Executive Director of each international financial institution (as 
defined in section 1701(c)(2)) to use the voice and vote of the United 
States to oppose the creation of any financing mechanism designed to 
prevent or resolve the insolvency of sovereign nations.''.
                                 <all>
```
#### Joseph K. OKOR, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SEGA OF AMERICA, INC., Defendant-Appellee, and Nintendo of America, Inc., Defendant-Appellee.

No. 00-1484.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

Feb. 13, 2001.

*940Before PAULINE NEWMAN, MICHEL, and RADER, Circuit Judges.

JUDGMENT

PER CURIAM.

This CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

*AFFIRMED. See*Fed. Cir. R. 36
www.gpo.gov

### §206. Noncontiguous coal or phosphate tracts in single lease

Where coal or phosphate lands aggregating two thousand five hundred and sixty acres and subject to lease hereunder do not exist as contiguous areas, the Secretary of the Interior is authorized, if, in his opinion, the interests of the public and of the lessee will be thereby subserved, to embrace in a single lease noncontiguous tracts which can be operated as a single mine or unit.

(Feb. 25, 1920, ch. 85, §6, 41 Stat. 439.)

#### Cross References

Surrender of leases, see section 188a of this title.

#### Section Referred to in Other Sections

This section is referred to in section 208 of this title; title 10 sections 7421, 7435.
40594.

#### LAW v. HULSEY.

Decided March 17, 1964.

*C. Winfred Smith,*for plaintiff in error.

*Stowe & Andrews, Robert E. Andrews,*contra.

Felton, Chief Judge.

The only question in this case is whether a verdict was demanded for the defendant since it is never error to refuse to direct a verdict unless the exception is to the overruling of a judgment n.o.v. Even if a refusal to direct a verdict could be the ground of exception such an exception cannot be the ground of a motion for a new trial. The real heart of the plaintiff in error’s contention is that where the plaintiff makes out a prima facie case by proving that his property was injured by the bull’s being on the highway and the resulting injuries, and the defendant introduces evidence from which the jury could infer that the defendant was not negligent, the plaintiff must introduce additional evidence of the negligence of the defendant in order to carry his original and continuing burden of proving the defendant’s negligence. It is true that *380where a prima facie case is made in such a case and a defendant introduces evidence from which a jury could absolve the defendant from negligence and liability the plaintiff cannot recover on the permissible inference or presumption by which he gets his case to the jury. The question of the plaintiff’s right to recover depends on the evidence in the case and not on the prima facie proof made by the plaintiff. See *Porier v. Spivey,*97 Ga. App. 209 (102 SE2d 706); *Richter Bros. v. Atlantic Co.,*59 Ga. App. 137, 142 (200 SE 462); *Gibson v. Gibson,*54 Ga. App. 187, 188 (187 SE 155). The defendant’s evidence in this case does not demand a finding that the defendant was not negligent. While the jury might have been authorized to so find, it could have found that the defendant’s explanation of what care was exercised was not enough to exculpate him. The defendant’s evidence had contradictions, discrepancies and hiatuses which authorized a finding that the defendant, and the tenant whose duty it was as agent of the defendant to keep the bull fenced in, were guilty of negligence in allowing the bull to get from the back pasture into the pasture next to the road and in not building the fence next to the road high enough to prevent the bull and the cows, which sometimes got into the pasture near the road, from jumping the fence as the jury could have found that the animals had done on other occasions. The evidence did not demand a finding for the defendant, and the court properly overruled the defendant’s motion for a new trial. *Dodd v. Callaway,*76 Ga. App. 629 (2) (46 SE2d 740); *Central of Ga. R. Co. v. Grace,*46 Ga. App. 101 (166 SE 684); *Parish v. Southwestern R. Co.,*57 Ga. App. 847 (1) (197 SE 66); *Callison v. Savannah & A. R. Co.,*82 Ga. App. 666 (1) (62 SE2d 408); *Atlantic C. L. R. Co. v. Rowe,*83 Ga. App. 540 (64 SE2d 216).

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Frankum and Pannell, JJ., concur.*
Order entered April 11, 2022

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-22-00098-CV

AL M. WILLIAMS, Appellant

V.

ECOM/WILLMAX BELLAGIO, L.P. D/B/A LADERA, Appellee

On Appeal from the 14th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-19-17458

ORDER

Before the Court is appellant’s April 7, 2022 “Emergency Motion to 

Withdraw or Hold Appeal in Abeyance.” Appellant asserts in his motion that the 

trial court has not yet rendered a final judgment. In his seventh amended petition, 

appellant asserted claims against appellee Ecom/Willmax Bellagio, L.P. d/b/a 

Ladera and WHW Transport, Inc. d/b/a CWS Recovery. The record before this 

Court reflects the trial court has rendered a final judgment with respect to 

appellant’s claims against appellee. 
On November 9, 2021, the trial court signed a judgment granting appellee’s 

motion to dismiss and dismissed all of appellant’s claims against appellee with 

prejudice. On November 11, appellant filed a motion to set aside the judgment of 

dismissal. Appellee then filed a motion for severance which the trial court granted 

by order signed on December 13, 2021. Appellant filed his notice of appeal on 

December 20.

The trial court’s interlocutory dismissal order signed on November 9 became 

a final judgment on December 13, the date of the severance order. See McRoberts

v. Ryals, 863 S.W.2d 450, 453 (Tex. 1993) (order granting severance is effective 

when signed). Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal on December 20. 

Although appellant stated in the notice of appeal that he was appealing the trial 

court’s order denying his motion to set aside the dismissal order, the Court 

construes his notice of appeal as challenging the dismissal order as that is the 

appealable order. Accordingly, we DENY appellant’s motion. Appellant’s brief 

on the merits remains due on or before May 4, 2022.

/s/ KEN MOLBERG

JUSTICE
I

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2629

To require Members of the House of Representatives to keep a public record

of visits by lobbyists.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

NOVEMBER 14, 1995

Mr. DEFAZIO introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on House Oversight

A BILL

To require Members of the House of Representatives to

keep a public record of visits by lobbyists.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. RECORD OF VISITS BY LOBBYISTS.—

4 Each Member of the House of the House of Representa5 tives and the Senate shall keep a record available to any

6 member of the public, in which shall be recorded each visit

7 to such Member by an individual who is registered under

8 section 308 of the Federal Regulation of Lobbying Act (2

9 U.S.C. 267). Such record shall include the date of the visit

10 recorded, the name and affiliation of the individual who
2

HR 2629 IH

1 made the visit, and the subject of the visit to such Mem2 ber. At the end of each calendar quarter, such record shall

3 be transmitted to the Clerk of the House of Representa4 tives.

5 SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.—Section 1 shall take ef6 fect on January 1, 1996.

Æ
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2603 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2603

         To restore the traditional observance of Memorial Day.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            November 9, 1995

  Mr. Frisa introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
 Committee on Government Reform and Oversight, and in addition to the 
Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined 
 by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as 
        fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
         To restore the traditional observance of Memorial Day.

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

SECTION 1. RESTORING TRADITIONAL OBSERVANCE OF MEMORIAL DAY.

    (a) Section 6103(a) of title 5, United States Code, is amended by 
striking ``Memorial Day, the last Monday in May.'', and inserting 
``Memorial Day, May 30.'';
    (b) Section 174(d) of title 36, United States Code, is amended by 
striking ``Memorial Day (half-staff until noon), the last Monday in 
May'', and inserting ``Memorial Day (half-staff until noon), May 30''.

SEC. 2. PROCLAMATION AUTHORIZED.

    The President is authorized and requested to issue a proclamation 
calling on the people of the United States to observe Memorial Day with 
appropriate ceremonies and activities showing respect for American 
veterans of wars and other military conflicts who have made the 
ultimate sacrifice in service to their Nation.
                                 <all>
```
#### § 515.410 Dealing abroad in Cuban-origin commodities.

Section 515.204 prohibits, unless licensed, the importation of commodities of Cuban origin. It also prohibits, unless licensed, persons subject to the jurisdiction of the United States from purchasing, transporting or otherwise dealing in commodities of Cuban origin which are outside the United States. Attention is directed to § 515.585, which authorizes certain dealings in commodities of Cuban origin outside the United States.

[81 FR 13991, Mar. 16, 2016]
- Office Home
- About Us

HomeBureaus & Offices > Bureau of International Narcotics and Law Enforcement Affairs...Office of the Coordinator on Global Anti-Corruption

# Office of the Coordinator on Global Anti-Corruption

## 				Our Mission			

					As articulated in the U.S. Strategy on Countering Corruption, the Biden-Harris Administration has elevated anti-corruption as a key national security and foreign policy priority.  As a result, Secretary of State Blinken announced the creation of a Coordinator on Global Anti-Corruption (CGAC) in December 2021.  CGAC serves to elevate and integrate efforts underway across the Department to prevent and combat corruption. CGAC also leads the Department’s senior engagement on anti-corruption issues within the U.S. government and with key stakeholders in foreign governments, international organizations, and non-governmental partners such as civil society and the private sector.  				

Coordinator on Global Anti-Corruption

Richard Nephew

							Follow Us: Coordinator Richard Nephew (@StateCGAC)																			Twitter

							Foreign Press Center briefing with U.S. Coordinator on Global Anti-Corruption Richard Nephew						

Back to Top
#### § 553.304 Entity.

The term *entity* means a partnership, association, trust, joint venture, corporation, group, subgroup, or other organization.
#### § 34.308 Audits—Direct Component.

Treasury, including the Treasury Inspector General, may conduct audits and reviews of recipient's accounts and activities relating to the Act as deemed appropriate by Treasury.
§ 515.554 Transfers of abandoned property under State laws. ( a ) Except as stated in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, specific licenses are not issued authorizing the transfer of blocked property to State agencies under State laws governing abandoned property.
( b ) Specific licenses are issued authorizing the transfer of blocked property, pursuant to the laws of the State governing abandoned property, to the appropriate State agency: *Provided,* That the State's laws are custodial in nature, i.e., there is no permanent transfer of beneficial interest to the State. Licenses require the property to be held by the State in accounts which are identified as blocked under the regulations. A separate index of these blocked assets is required to be maintained by the State agency. The requirements of this section for identification and separate indexing of blocked assets apply to all blocked assets held by State agencies and any licenses issued prior to the effective date of this section hereby are amended by the incorporation of such requirements.
( c ) To be eligible for a specific license under this section, the state agency must demonstrate that it has the statutory authority under appropriate state law to comply with the requirements of § 515.205. Such a showing shall include an opinion of the State Attorney General that such statutory authority exists.
[44 FR 11771, Mar. 2, 1979]
HomeOffice of the SpokespersonPress Releases...Annual GDI-OBO Resilience Innovation Grant Recipients Announced

# 									Annual GDI-OBO Resilience Innovation Grant Recipients Announced							

Media Note

Office of the Spokesperson

June 28, 2022

The U.S. Department of State is pleased to announce the recipients of the fourth annual Resilience Innovation Grant, a part of the Greening Diplomacy Initiative (GDI) Awards.  Sponsored by the Bureau of Overseas Buildings Operations (OBO), the grant provides up to $1 million to help U.S. embassies and consulates address emerging environmental risks for their operations with innovative solutions.  Several projects were also supported by the Bureau of Western Hemisphere Affairs.  Selected projects positively impact the communities the Department operates in and provide tangible examples of sustainable and adaptive interventions.  The Resilience Innovation Grant is a key way the Department strives to meet the White House’s goals on combating the climate crisis, mitigating the financial and operational risks of climate change, and highlights U.S. commitment to climate leadership.

Incorporating a variety of technologies and spanning every region, the nineteen winning projects ranged in size from $3,050 to $187,000.  Energy emerged as a theme, with several winning projects focusing on solar water heaters, LED retrofits, and building infrastructure to support electric vehicles (EVs) at our diplomatic posts.  The winning posts will receive implementation guidance from OBO and the Office of Management Strategy and Solutions (M/SS).

Winning diplomatic posts include Embassy Lusaka, Embassy Mbabane, Embassy Kuala Lumpur, Embassy Manila, Consulate General Surabaya, Embassy Bern, Embassy Singapore, and Embassy Bridgetown which received grants for projects to improve their energy efficiency.  Embassy Dar es Salaam, Embassy Riga, Embassy Manama, Embassy Valletta, and Embassy Tunis received grants to improve their water consumption and implement sustainable gardening practices.  Embassy Singapore, Embassy Oslo, Embassy The Hague, and Consulate General Sao Paulo received grants to build EV infrastructure for charging stations.  Embassy Bishkek received a grant aimed at improving its cycling infrastructure.  Embassy Lima will reduce their waste by installing composting systems.

For further information on the Greening Diplomacy Initiative, please contact Stephanie Christel at ChristelSM@state.gov, or visit www.state.gov/eco-diplomacy.

Tags

Climate ChangeEnvironmentOffice of the SpokespersonBureau of Overseas Buildings Operations

Back to Top
BATHYMETRIC FISHING MAP

WASHINGTON COAST
FORKS

Ea

1

N :G@ Tt O' IN

“|

*
pater

ao ne ee

a a

Pbddhet ot Wenhongren, OC
US DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

NATIONAL OCEANIC AMD ATHOMPHERIC ADWHESTAATION,

NATIONAL OCEAN SEIVICE

ins
MIWA DEI SPR EMENTED HOG ba TERA
DAT MEAN LOWER LOW WATE

Penoeivteit wOnCarC® mecLACTON
we

———s
ame SH soe Mieiaaaes ell sae

[NOT TO BE USED FOR NAVIGATION]

vooae
4

tear Wnt Heh
ew
I

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2732

To authorize an agreement between the Secretary of the Interior and a

State providing for the continued operation by State employees of national parks in the State during any period in which the National

Park Service is unable to maintain the normal level of park operations,

and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

DECEMBER 6, 1995

Mr. STUMP (for himself, Mr. KOLBE, Mr. PASTOR, Mr. HAYWORTH, Mr.

SALMON, and Mr. SHADEGG) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Resources

A BILL

To authorize an agreement between the Secretary of the

Interior and a State providing for the continued operation by State employees of national parks in the State

during any period in which the National Park Service

is unable to maintain the normal level of park operations,

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,
2

HR 2732 IH

1 SECTION 1. CONTINGENCY AGREEMENT TO KEEP NA2 TIONAL PARKS OPEN.

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of the Interior, act4 ing through the Director of the National Park Service,

5 may enter into an agreement with a State and political

6 subdivisions of the State under which—

7 (1) employees of the State and political subdivi8 sions of the State, identified by the Secretary and

9 State officials as having the requisite expertise and

10 background, will operate components of the National

11 Park System in the State during any period in a fis12 cal year in which the National Park Service is un13 able to maintain the normal level of park operations;

14 (2) prior to the time when their services may be

15 required, the Secretary, using available appropria16 tions, will provide any training that employees of the

17 State or political subdivisions of the State may need

18 to perform operations; and

19 (3) the Secretary of the Interior may accept a

20 monetary donation from a State or political subdivi21 sion of a State to enable the Secretary to operate

22 components of the National Park System in the

23 State during any period in a fiscal year in which the

24 National Park Service is unable to maintain the nor25 mal level of park operations.
3

HR 2732 IH

1 (b) REIMBURSEMENT.—The Secretary may, subject

2 to the availability of appropriations, reimburse the State

3 and political subdivisions for costs incurred in perform4 ance of the agreement.

5 (c) LIABILITY.—A State or a political subdivision of

6 the State shall be liable to the United States in indem7 nification for any liability imposed on the United States

8 for an act or omission by an employee of the State or polit9 ical subdivision providing services under an agreement

10 under subsection (a).

Æ