alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
In the Senate of the United States,

July 16, 1996.

Resolved, That the bill from the House of Representatives (H.R. 3107) entitled ‘‘An Act to impose sanctions on

persons making certain investments directly and significantly

contributing to the enhancement of the ability of Iran or

Libya to develop its petroleum resources, and on persons exporting certain items that enhance Libya’s weapons or aviation capabilities or enhance Libya’s ability to develop its petroleum resources, and for other purposes’’, do pass with the

following

AMENDMENT:

1 Page 7, strike out all after line 7, over to and includ2 ing line 20 on page 8 and insert:

3 (b) MANDATORY SANCTIONS WITH RESPECT TO

4 LIBYA.—

5 (1) VIOLATIONS OF PROHIBITED TRANS6 ACTIONS.—Except as provided in subsection (f), the

7 President shall impose 2 or more of the sanctions de8 scribed in paragraphs (1) through (6) of section 6 if
2

HR 3107 EAS

1 the President determines that a person has, with ac2 tual knowledge, on or after the date of the enactment

3 of this Act, exported, transferred, or otherwise pro4 vided to Libya any goods, services, technology, or

5 other items the provision of which is prohibited under

6 paragraph 4(b) or 5 of Resolution 748 of the Security

7 Council of the United Nations, adopted March 31,

8 1992, or under paragraph 5 or 6 of Resolution 883

9 of the Security Council of the United Nations, adopt10 ed November 11, 1993, if the provision of such items

11 significantly and materially—

12 (A) contributed to Libya’s ability to acquire

13 chemical, biological, or nuclear weapons or de14 stabilizing numbers and types of advanced con15 ventional weapons or enhanced Libya’s military

16 or paramilitary capabilities;

17 (B) contributed to Libya’s ability to develop

18 its petroleum resources; or

19 (C) contributed to Libya’s ability to main20 tain its aviation capabilities.

21 (2) INVESTMENTS THAT CONTRIBUTE TO THE

22 DEVELOPMENT OF PETROLEUM RESOURCES.—Except

23 as provided in subsection (f), the President shall im24 pose 2 or more of the sanctions described in para25 graphs (1) through (6) of section 6 if the President
3

HR 3107 EAS

1 determines that a person has, with actual knowledge,

2 on or after the date of the enactment of this Act, made

3 an investment of $40,000,000 or more (or any com4 bination of investments of at least $10,000,000 each,

5 which in the aggregate equals or exceeds $40,000,000

6 in any 12-month period), that directly and signifi7 cantly contributed to the enhancement of Libya’s abil8 ity to develop its petroleum resources.

Attest:

Secretary.
104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 3107

AMENDMENT
#### AMERICAN BANKERS LIFE ASSURANCE COMPANY, Petitioner, v. Peter J. MORLOCK, etc., Respondents.

No. 46197.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Jan. 10, 1975.

Certiorari dismissed.
§ 136.373 Scholarship and tuition. ( a ) Scholarship grant awards under this subdivision shall consist of: ( 1 ) A stipend of $400 per month adjusted in accordance with paragraph (c) of this section; and
( 2 ) An amount determined by the Secretary for transportation, tuition, fees, books, laboratory expenses and other necessary educational expenses.
( b ) The portion of the scholarship for the costs of tuition and fees as indicated in the grant award will be paid directly to the school upon receipt of an invoice from the school. The stipend and remainder of the scholarship grant award will be paid monthly to the grantee under the conditions specified in the grant award.
( c ) The amount of the monthly stipend specified in paragraph (a)(1) of this section shall be adjusted by the Secretary for each academic year ending in a fiscal year beginning after September 30, 1978, by an amount (rounded down to the next lowest multiple of $1) equal to the amount of such stipend multiplied by the overall percentage (as set forth in the report transmitted to the Congress under section 5305 of title 5, United States Code) of the adjustment in the rates of pay under the General Schedule made effective in the fiscal year in which such academic year ends.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                           1,602
<SECURITIES>                                     3,612
<RECEIVABLES>                                   37,214
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (19,992)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                32,945
<PP&E>                                          10,141
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (3,991)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  80,800
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           25,085
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        21,509
<OTHER-SE>                                       1,404
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    80,800
<SALES>                                         24,755
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                26,307
<CGS>                                           16,442
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   24,154
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 947
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,207
<INCOME-TAX>                                       422
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                785
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       785
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .17
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .17
        

</TABLE>
§ 408.45 Deduction from age 72 special payments. ( a ) *Deduction of premiums.* SMI premiums are deducted from age 72 special payments made under section 228 of the Act or the payments are withheld under procedures that correspond to the rules set forth in §§ 408.40 and 408.43.
( b ) *Collection of premiums while age 72 special payments are suspended.* If the age 72 special payments are suspended, CMS or its agent notifies the enrollee to pay premiums by direct remittance, in accordance with the rules set forth in § 408.60.
( c ) *Grace period.* The grace period ends with the last day of the third month after the billing month.
( d ) *Resumption of age 72 special payments.* ( 1 ) If age 72 special payments are resumed before the end of the grace period and all premium arrears can be deducted from those special payments, SMI coverage continues and the enrollee need not pay by direct remittance.
( 2 ) Subsequent special payments are reduced by the amount of the premium for as long as the enrollee receives special payments.
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3055 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.3055

                       One Hundred Fourth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

         Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,
   the third day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-six

                                 An Act

 
   To amend section 326 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 to permit 
  continued participation by Historically Black Graduate Professional 
        Schools in the grant program authorized by that section.

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

SECTION 1. FINDINGS.

    The Congress finds the following:
        (1) The Historically Black Graduate Professional Schools 
    identified under section 326 of the Higher Education Act may 
    receive grant funds if the Secretary of Education determines that 
    such institutions make a substantial contribution to the legal, 
    medical, dental, veterinary, or other graduate opportunity for 
    African Americans.
        (2) The health professions schools which participate under 
    section 326 train 50 percent of the Nation's African American 
    physicians, 50 percent of the Nation's African American dentists, 
    50 percent of the Nation's African American pharmacists, and 75 
    percent of the Nation's African American veterinarians.
        (3) A majority of the graduates of these schools practice in 
    poor urban and rural areas of the country providing care to many 
    disadvantaged Americans.
        (4) The survival of these schools will contribute to the 
    improved health status of disadvantaged persons, and of all 
    Americans.

SEC. 2. ELIMINATION OF GRANT RENEWAL LIMITATION.

    Section 326(b) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
1063b(b)) is amended by striking the second sentence.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
----

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 23 March 2006 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale civile e penale di Cagliari) — Enirisorse SpA v Sotacarbo SpA

(Case C-237/04) (1)

(State aid - Articles 87 EC and 88 EC - Definition of aid - Shareholding of a public undertaking in the capital of a private undertaking - Right of withdrawal subject to a prior relinquishment of all claims over a company's assets)

(2006/C 131/26)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale civile e penale di Cagliari

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Enirisorse SpA

Defendant: Sotacarbo SpA

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Tribunale di Cagliari — Interpretation of Articles 87 and 88(3) EC — Meaning of State aid — Public undertaking holding shares in the capital of a private undertaking — Compatibility of national rules authorising such a shareholding with Articles 43 and 49 EC

Operative part of the judgment

National provisions such as those at issue in the main proceedings, whereby members of a company controlled by the State may, in derogation from the general law, withdraw from that company on condition that they relinquish all claims over that company's assets, are not liable to be considered to be State aid for the purposes of Article 87 EC.

----

(1)OJ C 201, 07.08.2004.

----
§ 403.732 Condition of participation: Quality assessment and performance improvement. The RNHCI must develop, implement, and maintain a quality assessment and performance improvement program. ( a ) *Standard: Program scope.* ( 1 ) The quality assessment and performance improvement program must include, but is not limited to, measures to evaluate: ( i ) Access to care.
( ii ) Patient satisfaction.
( iii ) Staff performance.
( iv ) Complaints and grievances.
( v ) Discharge planning activities.
( vi ) Safety issues, including physical environment.
( 2 ) In each of the areas listed in paragraph (a)(1) of this section, and any other areas the RNHCI includes, the RNHCI must do the following: ( i ) Define quality assessment and performance improvement measures.
( ii ) Describe and outline quality assessment and performance improvement activities appropriate for the services furnished by or in the RNHCI.
( iii ) Measure, analyze, and track performance that reflect care and RNHCI processes.
( iv ) Inform all patients, in writing, of the scope and responsibilities of the quality assessment and performance improvement program.
( 3 ) The RNHCI must set priorities for performance improvement, considering the prevalence of and severity of identified problems.
( 4 ) The RNHCI must act to make performance improvements and must track performance to assure that improvements are sustained.
( b ) *Standard: Program responsibilities.* ( 1 ) The governing body, administration, and staff are responsible for ensuring that the quality assessment and performance improvement program addresses identified priorities in the RNHCI and are responsible for the development, implementation, maintenance, and performance improvement of assessment actions.
( 2 ) The RNHCI must include all programs, departments, functions, and contracted services when developing, implementing, maintaining, and evaluating the program of quality assessment and performance improvement.
Exhibit 23.1



                          Independent Auditors' Consent



The Board of Directors
Alfacell Corporation:


We consent to  incorporation  by reference in the  registration  statements (No.
33-81308) on Form S-8 and (Nos. 333-29313 and 333-48975) on Form S-3 of Alfacell
Corporation of our report dated November 2, 1999, relating to the balance sheets
of Alfacell Corporation as of July 31, 1999 and 1998, and the related statements
of operations, stockholders' equity (deficiency), and cash flows for each of the
years in the  three-year  period  ended July 31, 1999 and the period from August
24, 1981 (date of inception) to July 31, 1999,  which report appears in the July
31, 1999 annual  report on Form 10-K of Alfacell  Corporation.  Our report dated
November 2, 1999, as it relates to the financial  statements for the period from
August 24, 1981 (date of  inception) to July 31, 1999, is based on the report of
other auditors as to the amounts included therein for the period from August 24,
1981 (date of inception) to July 31, 1992.

Our report dated November 2, 1999 contains an explanatory  paragraph that states
that the Company has suffered  recurring  losses from operations and has limited
liquid resources which raise  substantial doubt about its ability to continue as
a going concern.  The financial  statements do not include any adjustments  that
might result from the outcome of that uncertainty.



/s/ KPMG LLP
KPMG LLP

Short Hills, New Jersey
November 15, 1999
40838.

#### BEAVERS v. JUDGES OF FULTON SUPERIOR COURT et al.

Eberhardt, Judge.

This court is without jurisdiction to issue a mandamus nisi seeking to require the judge of a trial court or the members of the State Board of Pardons and Paroles *842“to answer, or demur, as the case may be” to a petition or motion brought by petitioner to remove a detainer placed against him by the State Board of Pardons and Paroles with the authorities presently holding him. *Belt v. Usher,*105 Ga. App. 294 (124 SE2d 453).

Decided June 18, 1964.

Charles T. Beavers, *pro se.*

*Application for mandamus nisi denied for lack of jurisdiction.*

*Bell, P. J., and Jordan, J., concur.*
#### Harry I. KOFFLER, Appellant, v. NEW YORK LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee.

Nos. 78-1159, 78-1467.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

March 20, 1979.

Gladson & Sullivan and Daniel J. Sullivan, Miami, for appellant.

Shutts & Bowen and Richard M. Leslie, Miami, for appellee.

Before HENDRY, HUBBART and KE-HOE, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See, *Garwood v. Equitable Life Assurance Society of the United States,*299 So.2d 163 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974); *New York Life Insurance v. Nespereira,*366 So.2d 859 (Fla. 3d DCA, 1979); and Section 57.041, Florida Statutes (1967).
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO TITLE 18,

UNITED STATES CODE, SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

I, Dennis J. Curtin, Senior Vice President - Chief Financial Officer of E-Z-EM, Inc. (the “Company”), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

 
|   | 1. | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended September 3, 2005 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and |
|--------|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 
|   | 2. | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. |
|--------|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 
|   | Date:          October 13, 2005 | /s/        Dennis J. Curtin                         

        Dennis J. Curtin, Senior Vice        President - Chief Financial Officer |
|--------|-------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

-51-

 

----
# C_2006086EN.01003101.xml

| 8.4.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 86/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.4.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 86/31

---

Action brought on 12 January 2006 — FAB Fernsehen aus Berlin v Commission

(Case T-8/06)

(2006/C 86/62)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: FAB Fernsehen aus Berlin GmbH (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: A. Böken, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities

Defendant:

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the decision of the Commission of the European Communities (C(2005) 3903 final) of 9 November 2005 (State aid which the Federal Republic of Germany has implemented for the introduction of digital terrestrial television (DVB-T) in Berlin-Brandenburg). |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of the Commission of the European Communities (C(2005) 3903 final) of 9 November 2005 (State aid which the Federal Republic of Germany has implemented for the introduction of digital terrestrial television (DVB-T) in Berlin-Brandenburg).

Pleas in law and main arguments

The applicant is challenging Commission Decision C(2005) 3903 final of 9 November 2005 on the State aid for the introduction of digital terrestrial television (DVB-T) in Berlin-Brandenburg. In the contested decision the Commission stated that the aid granted to the commercial broadcasters participating in DVB-T was incompatible with the common market and ordered the Federal Republic of Germany to recover from the beneficiaries, and thus also from the applicant, the aid which was unlawfully made available to them.

In support of its action the applicant submits that the subsidy granted does not amount to State aid under Article 87(1) EC. Furthermore, there is no aid, since the conditions laid down in Article 86(2) EC are not met. The applicant also submits that the measure in dispute does not affect trade between Member States and, consequently, the contested decision is unlawful in that respect.

In support of its action the applicant also submits that, if the subsidy were to be regarded as aid within the meaning of Article 87(1) EC, it would be compatible with the common market pursuant to Article 87(3) EC. In that regard, the applicant alleges that the defendant exceeded the discretion which it has when deciding whether a subsidy may be regarded as compatible with the common market under Article 87(3)(c) and (d) EC.

---
§ 423.2100 Medicare Appeals Council review: general. ( a ) An enrollee who is dissatisfied with an ALJ's or attorney adjudicator's decision or dismissal may request that the Council review the ALJ's or attorney adjudicator's decision or dismissal.
( b ) When the Council reviews an ALJ's or attorney adjudicator's written decision, it undertakes a de novo review.
( c ) The Council issues a final decision, dismissal order, or remands a case to the ALJ or attorney adjudicator no later than the end of the 90 calendar day period beginning on the date the request for review is received (by the entity specified in the ALJ's or attorney adjudicator's written notice of decision), unless the 90 calendar day period is extended as provided in this subpart or the enrollee requests expedited Council review.
( d ) If an enrollee requests expedited Council review, the Council issues a final decision, dismissal order or remand as expeditiously as the enrollee's health condition requires, but no later than the end of the 10 calendar day period beginning on the date the request for review is received (by the entity specified in the ALJ's or attorney adjudicator's written notice of decision), unless the 10 calendar day period is extended as provided in this subpart.
[82 FR 5137, Jan. 17, 2017, as amended at 84 FR 19874, May 7, 2019]
§ 419.40 Payment concepts. ( a ) In addition to the payment rate described in § 419.32, for each APC group there is a predetermined beneficiary copayment amount as described in § 419.41(a). The Medicare program payment amount for each APC group is calculated by applying the program payment percentage as described in § 419.41(b).
( b ) For purposes of this section— ( 1 ) Coinsurance percentage is calculated as the difference between the program payment percentage and 100 percent. The coinsurance percentage in any year is thus defined for each APC group as the greater of the following: the ratio of the APC group unadjusted copayment amount to the annual APC group payment rate, or 20 percent.
( 2 ) Program payment percentage is calculated as the lower of the following: the ratio of the APC group payment rate minus the APC group unadjusted copayment amount, to the APC group payment rate, or 80 percent.
( 3 ) Unadjusted copayment amount is calculated as 20 percent of the wage-adjusted national median of charges for services within an APC group furnished during 1996, updated to 1999 using an actuarial projection of charge increases for hospital outpatient department services during the period 1996 to 1999.
( c ) *Limitation of copayment amount to inpatient hospital deductible amount.* The copayment amount for a procedure performed in a year cannot exceed the amount of the inpatient hospital deductible established under section 1813(b) of the Act for that year.
[66 FR 59922, Nov. 30, 2001]
#### Luis GURIDI, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 77-475.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Dec. 5, 1978.

Bennett H. Brummer, Public Defender, Warren S. Schwartz, Asst. Public Defender, and Andrew Rosén, Legal Intern, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and Paul Mendelson, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before HENDRY, J., and CHARLES CARROLL (Ret.), and TYSON, ROBERT W., Jr., Associate Judges.

PER CURIAM.

The defendant was convicted of second degree murder, a felony in the first degree. This conviction is affirmed. Nevertheless, the defendant was sentenced to life imprisonment under Section 775.082(1), Florida Statutes (1975): the penalty for a capital felony which mandates a twenty-five year minimum sentence. The defendant should have been sentenced under Section 775.-082(3)(b), Florida Statutes (1975), which contains the proper sentences for felonies in the first degree. The sentence, here, was improper and contrary to the law. This court directs the trial court to correct the defendant’s sentence in accordance with Sections 775.082(3)(b) and 782.04(2), Florida Statutes (1975), which will effectively delete the twenty-five year mandatory minimum sentence.

Affirmed.