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

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2599

To direct the Secretary of the Interior to quitclaim to Yuba River Properties 

certain land in Yuba County, California, so as to extinguish a claim 

of title asserted by the Department of the Interior. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 25, 2003

Mr. DOOLITTLE (for himself and Mr. HERGER) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Resources 

A BILL

To direct the Secretary of the Interior to quitclaim to Yuba 

River Properties certain land in Yuba County, California, 

so as to extinguish a claim of title asserted by the 

Department of the Interior.

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

3 SECTION 1. QUITCLAIM OF LAND OF YUBA RIVER PROP4 ERTIES. 

5 (a) QUITCLAIM.—The Secretary of Interior is di6 rected to execute and deliver, without consideration, a 

7 quitclaim deed to Yuba River Properties, a California 

8 partnership, conveying all right, title, and interest of the 
2

•HR 2599 IH 

1 United States in and to the land described in subsection 

2 (b), including all minerals underlying said land. 

3 (b) LAND DESCRIPTION.—The land referred to in 

4 subsection (a) is Lot 5 of Section 26, Township 16 North, 

5 Range 5 East, Mount Diablo Base and Meridian, State 

6 of California.

Æ
#### Morris J. Brockman, Respondent, *v.*The Metropolitan Street Railway Co., Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment in favor of the plaintiff, rendered in the Municipal Court of the city of New York, tenth district, borough of Manhattan.

Henry A. Robinson (John T. Little, of counsel), for appellant.

Abraham Wielar (Jacob Marks, of counsel), for respondent.

*Per Curiam.*

This is an action brought to recover damages for personal injuries alleged to have been caused by the negligence of the defendant. The jury found a verdict in favor of the plaintiff, and from the judgment entered thereon this appeal has been taken. *729There was a clear-cut issue of fact between the parties, with respect to the way in which the accident happened and who was responsible for it. The trial justice at the close of his colloquial charge was requested by the counsel for the defendant to charge the following proposition: “ That if upon the whole case the evidence is equally balanced, either upon the question of the defendant’s negligence, or of the plaintiff’s freedom from contributory negligence, it must find a verdict for the defendant.” This the court refused to do, and the counsel for appellant duly excepted. The proposition embodied in the request was a sound one, and should have been charged by the court. Its refusal to do so was error, for which the judgment must be reversed. It is idle to say that the court had elsewhere in its charge, in effect, covered this point. We have examined the charge with care, and find nothing in it which fairly supports any such claim. It was an instruction of importance, pointing out to the jury what must be the inevitable result, if they should find the evidence to be evenly balanced, and we cannot say that their verdict was not affected by the refusal of the court to charge as requested. In view of the conclusion to which we have come upon this point, it is unnecessary for us to consider the other exceptions in the case which were discussed by counsel upon the appeal.

Judgment reversed and a new trial ordered, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

Present: Beekman, P. J., Giegerich and O’Gorman, JJ.

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with costs to appellant to abide event.
# C_2008297EN.01001201.xml

| 20.11.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 297/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.11.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 297/12

---

Notification from the Norwegian authorities concerning an exemption from CO2 tax and a reduction in the heating oil tax rate

2

(2008/C 297/06)

The EFTA Surveillance Authority has decided not to raise objections to the notified measures consisting of (i) an exemption from CO2 tax on mineral oil in favour of undertakings covered by the Norwegian Emission Trading Scheme; and (ii) applying a reduced heating oil tax rate in favour of the pulp and paper sector.

2

| Date of adoption of the decision: | 16 July 2008 |
| --- | --- |
| Case number: | 63030 |
| EFTA State: | Norway |
| Region: | — |
| Title (and/or name of the beneficiary): | CO2 tax exemption in favour of undertakings covered by the Norwegian Emission Trading Scheme and reduction of the heating oil tax rate in favour of the pulp and paper sector |
| Legal basis: | Article 61(1) and (3)(c) of the EEA Agreement |
| Type of measure: | — |
| Objective: | Protection of the environment |
| Form of aid: | Tax relief |
| Budget: | NOK 140 million; EUR 17,9 million |
| Intensity: | — |
| Duration: | 10 years |
| Economic sectors: | Sectors covered by the Emission Trading Scheme (energy production, ferrous metal, mineral industry and pulp and paper) |
| Name and address of the granting authority: | Finance Ministry |
| Akersgata 40 |
| Postboks 8008 Dep. |
| N-0030 Oslo |

Date of adoption of the decision:

Date of adoption of the decision:

16 July 2008

Case number:

Case number:

63030

EFTA State:

EFTA State:

Norway

Region:

Region:

—

Title (and/or name of the beneficiary):

Title (and/or name of the beneficiary):

CO2 tax exemption in favour of undertakings covered by the Norwegian Emission Trading Scheme and reduction of the heating oil tax rate in favour of the pulp and paper sector

2

Legal basis:

Legal basis:

Article 61(1) and (3)(c) of the EEA Agreement

Type of measure:

Type of measure:

—

Objective:

Objective:

Protection of the environment

Form of aid:

Form of aid:

Tax relief

Budget:

Budget:

NOK 140 million; EUR 17,9 million

Intensity:

Intensity:

—

Duration:

Duration:

10 years

Economic sectors:

Economic sectors:

Sectors covered by the Emission Trading Scheme (energy production, ferrous metal, mineral industry and pulp and paper)

Name and address of the granting authority:

Name and address of the granting authority:

Finance Ministry

Akersgata 40

Postboks 8008 Dep.

N-0030 Oslo

Other information:

Other information:

—

The authentic text of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found on the EFTA Surveillance Authority's website:

http://www.eftasurv.int/fieldsofwork/fieldstateaid/stateaidregistry/

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This Schedule contains summary financial information taken from the balance
sheet as of March 31, 1997 (unaudited) and the statement of operations for the
nine-month period ended March 31, 1997 (unaudited) and is qualified in its
entirety by reference to the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the
fiscal year ended June 30, 1996.
       
<S>                                 <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                             9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                   JUN-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                        MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                7,209,985
<SECURITIES>                            (0)
<RECEIVABLES>                         2,413,687
<ALLOWANCES>                             (0)
<INVENTORY>                               4,746
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                      9,858,418
<PP&E>                                  744,552
<DEPRECIATION>                          724,942
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                       15,239,314
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                 1,493,426
<BONDS>                                  (0)
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                    (0)
<PREFERRED>                              (0)
<COMMON>                              8,885,103
<OTHER-SE>                            2,734,785
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>         15,239,314
<SALES>                                 484,245
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                     16,150,991
<CGS>                                   254,278
<TOTAL-COSTS>                           254,278
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                      1,103,578
<LOSS-PROVISION>                         (0)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                       (0)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                      14,793,135
<INCOME-TAX>                          2,573,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                      (0)
<DISCONTINUED>                           (0)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                          (0)
<CHANGES>                                (0)
<NET-INCOME>                         12,220,135
<EPS-PRIMARY>                           0.45
<EPS-DILUTED>                           0.42
        

</TABLE>
Editorial Note on Part 225
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 225 appear at 69 FR 77618, Dec. 28, 2004.

§ 225.21 Prohibited nonbanking activities and acquisitions; exempt bank holding companies. ( a ) *Prohibited nonbanking activities and acquisitions.* Except as provided in § 225.22 of this subpart, a bank holding company or a subsidiary may not engage in, or acquire or control, directly or indirectly, voting securities or assets of a company engaged in, any activity other than: ( 1 ) Banking or managing or controlling banks and other subsidiaries authorized under the BHC Act; and
( 2 ) An activity that the Board determines to be so closely related to banking, or managing or controlling banks as to be a proper incident thereto, including any incidental activities that are necessary to carry on such an activity, if the bank holding company has obtained the prior approval of the Board for that activity in accordance with the requirements of this regulation.
( b ) *Exempt bank holding companies.* The following bank holding companies are exempt from the provisions of this subpart: ( 1 ) *Family-owned companies.* Any company that is a “company covered in 1970” (as defined in section 2(b) of the BHC Act), more than 85 percent of the voting securities of which was collectively owned on June 30, 1968, and continuously thereafter, by members of the same family (or their spouses) who are lineal descendants of common ancestors.
( 2 ) *Labor, agricultural, and horticultural organizations.* Any company that was on January 4, 1977, both a bank holding company and a labor, agricultural, or horticultural organization exempt from taxation under section 501 of the Internal Revenue Code (26 U.S.C. 501(c)).
( 3 ) *Companies granted hardship exemption.* Any bank holding company that has controlled only one bank since before July 1, 1968, and that has been granted an exemption by the Board under section 4(d) of the BHC Act, subject to any conditions imposed by the Board.
( 4 ) *Companies granted exemption on other grounds.* Any company that acquired control of a bank before December 10, 1982, without the Board's prior approval under section 3 of the BHC Act, on the basis of a narrow interpretation of the term *demand deposit* or *commercial loan,* if the Board has determined that: ( i ) Coverage of the company as a bank holding company under this subpart would be unfair or represent an unreasonable hardship; and
( ii ) Exclusion of the company from coverage under this part is consistent with the purposes of the BHC Act and section 106 of the Bank Holding Company Act Amendments of 1970 (12 U.S.C. 1971, 1972(1)). The provisions of § 225.4 of subpart A of this part do not apply to a company exempt under this paragraph.
IN THE SUPREME COURT, STATE OF WYOMING

2016 WY 94

 April Term, A.D. 2016

September 28, 2016

DAGOBERTO ONTIVEROS,

Appellant

(Defendant),

v.

THE STATE OF WYOMING,

Appellee

(Plaintiff).

S-16-0127

ORDER AFFIRMING THE DISTRICT COURT’S JUDGMENT AND SENTENCE

[¶1] This matter came before the Court upon its own motion following notification 

that Appellant has not filed a pro se brief within the time allotted by this Court. Pursuant 

to a plea agreement, Appellant entered an unconditional “no contest” plea to second 

degree murder. Wyo. Stat. Ann. § 6-2-104. The district court imposed a sentence of 20 

to 24 years. Appellant filed this appeal to challenge the district court’s March 11, 2016, 

“Judgment and Sentence.”

[¶2] On June 27, 2016, Appellant’s court-appointed appellate counsel e-filed a “Motion 

to Withdraw as Counsel,” pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S.Ct. 

1396, 1400, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). The next day, this Court entered an “Order Granting 

Motion for Extension of Time to File Pro Se Brief.” This Court ordered that, on or 

before August 11, 2016, Appellant “may file with this Court a pro se brief specifying the 

issues he would like this Court to consider in this appeal.” This Court also provided 

notice that, after the time for filing a pro se brief expired, this Court would “make its 

ruling on counsel’s motion to withdraw and, if appropriate, make a final decision on this 

appeal.” This Court later extended the time to file a pro se brief until September 12, 

2016. The Court notes that Appellant did not timely file a pro se brief.
[¶3] Now, following a careful review of the record and the “Anders brief” submitted by 

appellate counsel, this Court finds that appellate counsel’s motion to withdraw should be 

granted and the district court’s “Judgment and Sentence” should be affirmed. It is, 

therefore, 

[¶4] ORDERED that the Wyoming Public Defender’s Office, court-appointed counsel 

for Appellant, Dagoberto Ontiveros, is hereby permitted to withdraw as counsel of record 

for Appellant; and it is further

[¶5] ORDERED that the district court’s March 11, 2016, “Judgment and Sentence” be, 

and the same hereby is, affirmed.

[¶6] DATED this 28th day of September, 2016.

BY THE COURT:

/s/

E. JAMES BURKE

Chief Justice
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 10.1


                   CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS


As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the inclusion in the
Amendment No. 1 to this Registration Statement Form 20-F of our report dated
February 2, 1999, included in the Scotsman Industries, Inc. and subsidiaries'
Form 10-K for the year ended January 3, 1999. It should be noted that we have
not audited any financial statements of the company subsequent to January 3,
1999 or performed any audit procedures subsequent to the date of our report.

/s/ ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP

ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP
Chicago, Illinois
June 27, 2000
# Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas October 5, 2021 No. 04-21-00111-CV Lisa FLORES , Appellant
v. Mario DE LA OSSA and Navy Federal Credit Union,

Appellees From the 150th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2020-CI-24502 Honorable David A. Canales, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R After we granted two motions for extension of time to file Appellant’s brief, the brief was due on September 7, 2021. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 38.6(a), (d). On September 15, 2021, after the deadline passed and no brief was filed, we ordered Appellant to file the brief and a motion for extension of time to file the brief by September 27, 2021, or we would dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. On September 27, 2021, Appellant filed the brief and a motion for extension of time to file the brief. Appellant’s motion is GRANTED. Appellant’s brief is deemed timely filed.

_________________________________ Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 5th day of October, 2021.

___________________________________ MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This  schedule  contains  summary  financial   information  extracted  from  the
Statement  of  Financial  Condition  at January  31,  2000  (Unaudited)  and the
Statement of Income for the Quarter  Ended January 31, 2000  (Unaudited).  It is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.

</LEGEND>

<S>                                       <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       Oct-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                            Jan-31-2000
<CASH>                                       28,132
<SECURITIES>                                      0
<RECEIVABLES>                               242,792
<ALLOWANCES>                                      0
<INVENTORY>                                 188,267
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            515,567
<PP&E>                                      219,838
<DEPRECIATION>                              149,529
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              736,550
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       215,061
<BONDS>                                           0
<COMMON>                                    283,036
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                             0
<PREFERRED>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                        0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                736,549
<SALES>                                     269,242
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            269,242
<CGS>                                       163,434
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               142,759
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            309,324
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                          (3,062,091)
<INCOME-TAX>                                      0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               0
<DISCONTINUED>                                    0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   0
<CHANGES>                                         0
<NET-INCOME>                             (3,062,091)
<EPS-BASIC>                                  (.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0.03



</TABLE>
§ 1208.47 Requests for administrative offset to other Federal agencies. ( a ) FHFA may request that a debt owed to FHFA be collected by administrative offset against funds due and payable to a debtor by another agency.
( b ) In requesting administrative offset, FHFA, as creditor, shall certify in writing to the agency holding funds of the debtor: ( 1 ) That the debtor owes the debt;
( 2 ) The amount and basis of the debt; and
( 3 ) That FHFA has complied with the requirements of its own administrative offset regulations and the applicable provisions of the FCCS with respect to providing the debtor with due process, unless otherwise provided.
# C_2021507EN.01000901.xml

| 16.12.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 507/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.12.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 507/9

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

15 December 2021

(2021/C 507/04)

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,1262 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 128,25 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4362 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,84980 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 10,2565 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,0416 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 146,80 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 10,2278 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 25,271 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 369,09 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,6272 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,9493 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 16,5612 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,5763 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4496 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,7861 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,6689 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5405 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 335,40 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 18,1976 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,1691 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,5208 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 16 165,75 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,7638 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 56,574 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 83,0838 |
| THB | Thai baht | 37,615 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 6,4354 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 23,8856 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 86,0345 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,1262

JPY

Japanese yen

128,25

DKK

Danish krone

7,4362

GBP

Pound sterling

0,84980

SEK

Swedish krona

10,2565

CHF

Swiss franc

1,0416

ISK

Iceland króna

146,80

NOK

Norwegian krone

10,2278

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

25,271

HUF

Hungarian forint

369,09

PLN

Polish zloty

4,6272

RON

Romanian leu

4,9493

TRY

Turkish lira

16,5612

AUD

Australian dollar

1,5763

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4496

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,7861

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,6689

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5405

KRW

South Korean won

1 335,40

ZAR

South African rand

18,1976

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,1691

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,5208

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

16 165,75

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,7638

PHP

Philippine peso

56,574

RUB

Russian rouble

83,0838

THB

Thai baht

37,615

BRL

Brazilian real

6,4354

MXN

Mexican peso

23,8856

INR

Indian rupee

86,0345

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

---
EXHIBIT 32.1



Certification



Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.§ 1350, as adopted), Richard B. Hollis, Chief Executive Officer of Hollis-Eden
Pharmaceuticals, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the Company), and Daniel D. Burgess, Chief Operating Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certify that, to the best of their knowledge:



1.The Companys Annual Report on Form
10-K for the period ended December 31, 2003, to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32.1 (the Periodic Report) fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, and



2.The
information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition of the Company at the end of the period covered by the Periodic Report and the results of operations of the Company for the period
covered by the Periodic Report.



By:

/s/    RICHARD B. HOLLISRichard B. HollisChairman and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)




Dated: March 1, 2005



By:

/s/    DANIEL D. BURGESSDaniel D. BurgessChief Operating Officer/Chief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)




Dated: March 1, 2005
§ 223.15 May a member bank purchase a low-quality asset from an affiliate? ( a ) *In general.* A member bank may not purchase a low-quality asset from an affiliate unless, pursuant to an independent credit evaluation, the member bank had committed itself to purchase the asset before the time the asset was acquired by the affiliate.
( b ) *Exemption for renewals of loan participations involving problem loans.* The prohibition contained in paragraph (a) of this section does not apply to the renewal of, or extension of additional credit with respect to, a member bank's participation in a loan to a nonaffiliate that was originated by an affiliate if: ( 1 ) The loan was not a low-quality asset at the time the member bank purchased its participation;
( 2 ) The renewal or extension of additional credit is approved, as necessary to protect the participating member bank's investment by enhancing the ultimate collection of the original indebtedness, by the board of directors of the participating member bank or, if the originating affiliate is a depository institution, by: ( i ) An executive committee of the board of directors of the participating member bank; or
( ii ) One or more senior management officials of the participating member bank, if: ( A ) The board of directors of the member bank approves standards for the member bank's renewals or extensions of additional credit described in this paragraph (b), based on the determination set forth in paragraph (b)(2) of this section;
( B ) Each renewal or extension of additional credit described in this paragraph (b) meets the standards; and
( C ) The board of directors of the member bank periodically reviews renewals and extensions of additional credit described in this paragraph (b) to ensure that they meet the standards and periodically reviews the standards to ensure that they continue to meet the criterion set forth in paragraph (b)(2) of this section;
( 3 ) The participating member bank's share of the renewal or extension of additional credit does not exceed its proportional share of the original transaction by more than 5 percent, unless the member bank obtains the prior written approval of its appropriate Federal banking agency; and
( 4 ) The participating member bank provides its appropriate Federal banking agency with written notice of the renewal or extension of additional credit not later than 20 days after consummation.