alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
U.S. Fish and 

Wildlife 

Service

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

Business Utilization and Development Specialist

Directory

Servicewide Business Utilization & Development

Specialist

James "Jim" W. McKoy, Jr.

U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service

Division of Contracting & General Services 

Mail Stop 212-Arlington Square 4401 N. Fairfax Drive

Arlington, VA 22203 

Telephone: (703) 358-2225

Email: Jim_McKoy@fws.gov

Region 1 

Service Area: California, Hawaii, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Washington, and

Trust Territories of the Pacific

Kathy Halyschak 

Division of Contracting and General Services 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

911 NE 11th Avenue

Portland, OR 97232-4181

Telephone: (503) 231-6188

Facsimile: (503) 231-6259

Region 2 

Service Area: New Mexico, Texas, Oklahoma, and Arizona
Reymundo Aragon 

Division of Contracting and General Services 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

500 Gold Avenue, S.W.

P.O. Box 1306

Albuquerque, NM 87103

Telephone: (505) 248-6792

Facsimile: (505) 248-6791

Region 3 

Service Area: Indiana, Michigan, Illinois, Minnesota, Ohio,

Wisconsin, Iowa, and Missouri

John Mullins, Chief, 

Division of Contracting and General Services 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

Bishop Henry Whipple Federal Building

One Federal Drive

Fort Snelling, MN 55111-4056

Telephone: (612) 713-5212

Facsimile: (612) 725-1717

Region 4 

Service Area: Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North

Carolina, Arkansas, Louisiana, South Carolina, Tennessee, Puerto Rico, and the

Virgin Islands

Don Calder 

Division of Contracting and General Services 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

1875 Century Boulevard (3rd Floor) 

Atlanta, GA 30345

Telephone: (404) 679-4058

Facsimile: (404) 679-4057

Region 5 

Service Area: Connecticut, West Virginia, Maryland, Delaware, Maine,

Massachusetts, Virginia, New Jersey, New Hampshire, Vermont, Rhode

Island, New York, and Pennsylvania

Gary Dupuis 

Division of Contracting and General Services 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

300 Westgate Center Drive 

Hadley, MA 01035-9589 

 
Telephone: (413) 253-8240

Facsimile: (413) 253-8450

Region 6 

Service Area: Colorado, Kansas, Montana, North Dakota, Nebraska,

South Dakota, Utah, and Wyoming

Dianne G. Hall 

Division of Contracting and General Services 

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 

P.O. Box 25486, Denver Federal Center 

Denver, CO 80225

Telephone: (303) 236-5412 ext. 232

Facsimile: (303) 236-4791

Region 7 

Service Area: Alaska

Sheri Della Silva 

Division of Contracting and General Services

U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service

1011 E. Tudor Road

Anchorage, AK 99503-6199

Telephone: (907) 786-3436

Facsimile: (907) 786-3923

Region 9

Service Area: Washington, DC Metropolitan Area

James "Jim" W. McKoy, Jr.

Division of Contracting and General Services

4401 N. Fairfax Drive, Suite 212

Arlington, VA 22203

Telephone: (703) 358-2225

Facsimile: (703) 358-2264

Return to Division of Contracing and General Services Page
# EUR-Lex - 11997E228 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 11997E228

**Treaty establishing the European Community (Amsterdam consolidated version) - Part Five: Institutions of the Community - Title I: Provisions governing the institutions - Chapter 1: The institutions - Section 4: The Court of Justice - Article 228 - Article 171 - EC Treaty (Maastricht consolidated version) - Article 171 - EEC Treaty **

*
Official Journal C 340 , 10/11/1997 P. 0271 - Consolidated version Official Journal C 224 , 31/08/1992 P. 0061 - Consolidated version (EEC Treaty - no official publication available) *

Treaty establishing the European Community (Amsterdam consolidated version)

Article 228

1. If the Court of Justice finds that a Member State has failed to fulfil an obligation under this Treaty, the State shall be required to take the necessary measures to comply with the judgment of the Court of Justice.

2. If the Commission considers that the Member State concerned has not taken such measures it shall, after giving that State the opportunity to submit its observations, issue a reasoned opinion specifying the points on which the Member State concerned has not complied with the judgment of the Court of Justice.

If the Member State concerned fails to take the necessary measures to comply with the Court's judgment within the time-limit laid down by the Commission, the latter may bring the case before the Court of Justice. In so doing it shall specify the amount of the lump sum or penalty payment to be paid by the Member State concerned which it considers appropriate in the circumstances.

If the Court of Justice finds that the Member State concerned has not complied with its judgment it may impose a lump sum or penalty payment on it.

This procedure shall be without prejudice to Article 227.
I

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 5286

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide that the burden

of proof shall be on the Secretary of the Treasury in all tax cases,

and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

OCTOBER 7, 1994

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

Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide

that the burden of proof shall be on the Secretary of

the Treasury in all tax cases, 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,

3 SECTION 1. BURDEN OF PROOF.

4 (a) GENERAL RULE.—Chapter 77 of the Internal

5 Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to miscellaneous provi6 sions) is amended by adding at the end thereof the follow7 ing new section:
2

•HR 5286 IH

1 ‘‘SEC. 7524. BURDEN OF PROOF.

2 ‘‘Notwithstanding any other provision of this title, in

3 the case of any court proceeding, the burden of proof with

4 respect to all issues shall be upon the Secretary.’’

5 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The table of sections

6 for chapter 77 of such Code is amended by adding at the

7 end thereof the following new item:

‘‘Sec. 7524. Burden of proof.’’

8 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by

9 this section shall take effect on the date of the enactment

10 of this Act.

11 SEC. 2. SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY REQUIRED TO

12 SPECIFY, ON REQUEST, REGULATIONS IMPLE13 MENTING SPECIFIC TAXES.

14 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 6001 of the Internal Rev15 enue Code of 1986 (relating to notice or regulations re16 quiring records, statements, and specific returns) is

17 amended by inserting ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—’’ at the begin18 ning of the first sentence and by adding at the end the

19 following new subsection:

20 ‘‘(b) REQUESTS FOR IDENTIFICATION OF IMPLE21 MENTING REGULATIONS.—The Secretary shall identify in

22 writing the specific kind or type of tax, and its specific

23 implementing regulations within 14 days, upon the written

24 request from any person made liable for the payment of

25 any tax under this title.’’
3

•HR 5286 IH

1 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Subsection (a) of

2 section 6001 of such Code, as redesignated by subsection

3 (a), is amended—

4 (1) by striking ‘‘any tax’’ in the first sentence

5 and inserting ‘‘any kind or type of tax’’, and

6 (2) by striking ‘‘he may require’’ in the second

7 sentence and inserting ‘‘he shall require’’.

8 SEC. 3. INCREASE IN LIMIT ON RECOVERY OF CIVIL DAM9 AGES FOR UNAUTHORIZED COLLECTION AC10 TIONS.

11 (a) GENERAL RULE.—Subsection (b) of section 7433

12 of such Code (relating to damages) is amended by striking

13 ‘‘$100,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$1,000,000’’.

14 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

15 subsection (a) shall apply to actions by officers or employ16 ees of the Internal Revenue Service after the date of the

17 enactment of this Act.

Æ
Request of House of Representatives,

No. 4598.

#### Opinion of the Justices.

Submitted June 19, 1957.

Answer returned July 9, 1957.

*540The following answer was returned:

*To the House of Representatives:*

The undersigned Justices of the Supreme Court submit the following opinion with respect to the constitutionality of House Bill No. 402, entitled, “An Act relative to exemptions from the stock-in-trade tax.”

House Bill No. 402 would exclude from the category of taxable stock-in-trade: “personal property in transit through this state as manufactured goods, wares, seed, feed, fertilizer, tools, supplies and merchandise which is consigned to a warehouse within the state from outside the state for storage or assembly in transit to a final destination outside the state, whether such destination is specified before or after the transportation thereof begins . . . provided that said property in transit shall not remain in the state for more than nine months.”

Over one hundred years ago Chief Justice *Parker*speaking for this court said, “There is no doubt that the Legislature may provide, by general laws, for exemption of certain classes of property from taxation, as well as exempt it, in fact, by omitting it in the description of property required to be taxed.” *Brewster*v. *Hough,*10 N. H. 138, 142. See *Canaan*v. *District,*74 N. H. 517; *Opinion of the Justices,*76 N. H. 609.

The problem of the Legislature in selecting the proper subjects for taxation is a difficult one *(Opinion of the Justices,*82 N. H. 561, 570, 575) since such selection produces an unequal distribution of the tax burden. But this inequality does not defeat that power since it is the result of every classification. *Id.*“In the selective process of classifying certain property for taxation and exempting other property the Legislature has a wide discretion which will be sustained ‘provided just reasons exist for the selection made.’ ” *Opinion of the Justices,*95 N. H. 548, 550.

Just reason for excluding the personal property described by the bill from the classification of taxable stock-in-trade may be thought to exist because the excluded property includes goods in interstate commerce and goods temporarily warehoused within the state for not more than nine months which are types of property frequently *541classified in other states as nontaxable. See *Opinion of the Justices,*95 N. H. 548, 551; *Opinion of the Justices,*97 N. H. 533, 536.

In our opinion House Bill No. 402 does not conflict with our Constitution.

Frank R. Kenison,

Laurence I. Duncan,

Amos N. Blandin, Jr.,

Edward J. Lampron,

Stephen M. Wheeler.

July 9, 1957.

*E. Harold Young,*Representative of Pittsfield, for the bill.
### PART 2



## INCORPORATED TEST PROCEDURE

( 200 5

– 2012 Model Years )

Small Off

- Road EnginesState of California

AIR RESOURCES BOARD

CALIFORNIA EXHAUST EMISSION STANDARDS AND TEST PROCEDURES

FOR 2005

- 2012 AND LATER SMALL OFF

- ROAD ENGINES

Adopted: July 26, 2004

Amended: February 24, 2010

Amended: October 25, 2012

Note: All existing language is indicated by plain type. All additions to the existing language are indicated by underlined type . All deletions to the existing language are indicated by strikeout . All other portions of this test procedure remain unchanged and are The symbols “* * * * * ” mean that the remainder text is unchanged.

.CALIFORNIA EXHAUST EMISSION STANDARDS AND TEST PROCEDURES FOR 2005

- 2012 AND LATER SMALL OFF

- R OAD ENGINES

The following provisions of Part 90, Title 40, Code of Federal Regulations, as adopted or amended by the United State Environmental Protection Agency on the date listed, are adopted and incorporated herein by this reference for 2005

– 2012 mod el year and later small off

- road engines as the California Exhaust Emission Standards and Test Procedures for 2005

- 2012 and Later Small Off

- Road Engines, except as altered or replaced by the provisions set forth below.

PART 90

– CONTROL OF EMISSIONS FROM NONROAD SPARK

- IGNITION ENGINES

SOURCE: 65 FR 24306, April 25, 2000, unless otherwise noted.

Subpart A

– General

§ 90.1 Applicability.

DELETE, REPLACE WITH: (a) These provisions apply to 2005

- 2012 and later model year spark

- ignition
small off

- road engines , and any equipment that use such engines. These provisions do not apply to all engines and equipment that fall within the scope of the preemption of Section 209(e)(1)(A) of the Federal Clean Air Act, as amended, and as defined by regulation of the Enviro nmental Protection Agency

.

* * * * *
# Fourth Court of Appeals
**San Antonio, Texas**

November 2, 2017

No. 04

- 17

- 00340

- CR

Jacob HERNANDEZ

, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas, Appellee

From the 290th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2015CR3748 Honorable Melisa Skinner, Judge Presiding



### ORDER

A ppellant’s brief wa s originally due on August 31 , 2017

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 38.6(a). We granted Appellant’s first motion for an extension of time to file the brief until October 2

, 2017 , and we granted Appellant’s second motion for an extension of time to file the brief until
Novem ber 1 , 2017 . In granting the second motion, we warned Appellant as follows:

NO FURTHER EXTENSIONS OF TIME TO FILE APPELLANT’S BRIEF WILL BE GRANTED.

Despite t his specific warning, Appellant failed to timely file the brief. O n October 31

, 2017, Appellant filed a third motion for another thirty

- day extension of time to file the brief

. Appellant’s third request for an extension of time to file the brief is GRANT ED IN
PART. We ORDER Robert F. Gebbia, counsel for Appellant , to file the brief not later than
Novem ber 16, 2017

. If Appellant fails to file the brief as ordered, we will immediately abate this appeal and remand it to the trial court for an abandonment hearing WITHOUT FURTHER NOTICE

. See
id. R. 38.8(b); Samaniego v. State , 952 S.W.2d 50, 52

– 53 (Tex. App.

— San Antonio 1997, no pet.). We will order the trial court to ensure that Appellant’s counsel personally appears at the hearing. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 38.8(b)(3).We remind Appellant’s counsel that this “court may act appropriately to ensure that the appellant’s rights are protected, including initiating contempt proceedi ngs against appellant’s
counsel.” See i d. R. 38.8(b)(4).

_________________________________ Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 2nd day of November, 2017

.

___________________________________ KEITH E. HOTTLE

, Clerk of Court
# EUR-Lex - 11957A177 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 11957A177

**TREATY ESTABLISHING THE EUROPEAN ATOMIC ENERGY COMMUNITY ( E.A.E.C. - EURATOM ), TITLE FOUR - FINANCIAL PROVISIONS, ARTICLE 177 **

*

*

++++

ARTICLE 177

1 . THE FINANCIAL YEAR SHALL RUN FROM 1 JANUARY TO 31 DECEMBER .

2 . EACH INSTITUTION OF THE COMMUNITY SHALL DRAW UP ESTIMATES OF ITS ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENDITURE . THE COMMISSION SHALL CONSOLIDATE THESE ESTIMATES IN A PRELIMINARY DRAFT OPERATING BUDGET . IT SHALL ATTACH THERETO AN OPINION WHICH MAY CONTAIN DIFFERENT ESTIMATES . IT SHALL ALSO PREPARE A PRELIMINARY DRAFT RESEARCH AND INVESTMENT BUDGET .

THE COMMISSION SHALL PLACE THE PRELIMINARY DRAFT BUDGETS BEFORE THE COUNCIL NOT LATER THAN 30 SEPTEMBER OF THE YEAR PRECEDING THAT IN WHICH THESE BUDGETS ARE TO BE IMPLEMENTED .

THE COUNCIL SHALL CONSULT THE COMMISSION AND , WHERE APPROPRIATE , THE OTHER INSTITUTIONS CONCERNED , WHENEVER IT INTENDS TO DEPART FROM THE PRELIMINARY DRAFT BUDGETS .

3 . THE COUNCIL SHALL , ACTING BY A QUALIFIED MAJORITY , ESTABLISH THE DRAFT BUDGETS AND FORWARD THEM TO THE ASSEMBLY .

THE DRAFT BUDGETS SHALL BE PLACED BEFORE THE ASSEMBLY NOT LATER THAN 31 OCTOBER OF THE YEAR PRECEDING THAT IN WHICH THESE BUDGETS ARE TO BE IMPLEMENTED .

THE ASSEMBLY SHALL HAVE THE RIGHT TO PROPOSE TO THE COUNCIL MODIFICATIONS TO THE DRAFT BUDGETS .

4 . IF , WITHIN ONE MONTH OF THE DRAFT BUDGETS BEING PLACED BEFORE IT , THE ASSEMBLY HAS GIVEN ITS APPROVAL OR HAS NOT FORWARDED ITS OPINION TO THE COUNCIL , THE DRAFT BUDGETS SHALL BE DEEMED TO BE FINALLY ADOPTED .

IF WITHIN THIS PERIOD THE ASSEMBLY HAS PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS , THE DRAFT BUDGETS SO MODIFIED SHALL BE FORWARDED TO THE COUNCIL . THE COUNCIL SHALL DISCUSS THEM WITH THE COMMISSION , AND , WHERE APPROPRIATE , WITH THE OTHER INSTITUTIONS CONCERNED , AND SHALL THEN FINALLY ADOPT THE BUDGETS , ACTING BY A QUALIFIED MAJORITY , SUBJECT TO THE LIMITS RESULTING FROM PROGRAMMES OR DECISIONS INVOLVING EXPENDITURE WHICH , BY VIRTUE OF THIS TREATY , REQUIRE THE UNANIMOUS APPROVAL OF THE COUNCIL .

5 . FOR THE ADOPTION OF THE RESEARCH AND INVESTMENT BUDGET THE VOTES OF THE MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL SHALL BE WEIGHTED AS FOLLOWS :

BELGIUM : 9

GERMANY : 30

FRANCE : 30

ITALY : 23

LUXEMBOURG : 1

NETHERLANDS : 7

FOR THEIR ADOPTION , ACTS OF THE COUNCIL SHALL REQUIRE AT LEAST 67 VOTES CAST IN THEIR FAVOUR .
<TABLE> <S> <C>


        <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
BALANCE SHEET, THE STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS, AND THE STATEMENT OF CASH
FLOWS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                              29
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    29
<PP&E>                                          27,420
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  27,449
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        15,081
<OTHER-SE>                                      12,368
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    27,449
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  313,271
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (348,927)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (313,271)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (0.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.04)



</TABLE>
* Pursuant to 5 TH CIR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion

should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited ci rcumstances set forth in 5 TH CIR . R. 47.5.4 United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED January 5, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________ No. 06-51365 Summary Calendar

_____________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff - Appellee v. HERMILO LEON-GARCIA

Defendant - Appellant

--------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas

--------------------- Before SMITH, WIENER, and OWEN, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * IT IS ORDERED that appellant’s unopposed motion to vacate sentence is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that appellant’s unopposed motion to remand the case to district court for resentencing in light of Lopez v. Gomez is GRANTED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that appellant’s unopposed motion to issue the mandateimmediately upon entry of the court’s opinion is GRANTED.
**Read more of the March Dispatch**
    - March Photo Contest Winner: The Seattle Police Department: Cooperating and Coordinating with the Community
    - Director's Corner: Supporting Our Nation’s Youth and Our Communities’ Safety
    - SchoolSafety.gov Clearinghouse: A Resource for Law Enforcement, Educators, and Communities
    - New COPS Office Video on Minimizing the Effects of PTSD
    - Five Reasons to Start a PAL Chapter in Your Community
    - Police Youth Programs: Much More than Fun and Games
    - Keeping the Peace at Student Protests And Rallies: Advice from the Experts
    - The Law and Your Community: Building Bridges to Increase Public Safety
Editorial Note on Part 622
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 622 appear at 79 FR 57837, Sept. 26, 2014 and at 81 FR 32253, May 23, 2016.

§ 622.203 Recordkeeping and reporting. ( a ) *Commercial vessel owners and operators* — ( 1 ) *Reporting requirement.* The owner or operator of a vessel that fishes for shrimp in the South Atlantic EEZ or in adjoining state waters, or that lands shrimp in an adjoining state, must provide information for any fishing trip, as requested by the SRD, including, but not limited to, vessel identification, gear, effort, amount of shrimp caught by species, shrimp condition (heads on/heads off), fishing areas and depths, and person to whom sold.
( 2 ) *Reporting deadline.* Completed fishing records required by paragraphs (a)(1) of this section must be submitted to the SRD postmarked not later than 7 days after the end of each fishing trip. If no fishing occurred during a calendar month, a report so stating must be submitted on one of the forms postmarked not later than 7 days after the end of that month. Information to be reported is indicated on the form and its accompanying instructions.
( b ) *South Atlantic rock shrimp dealers.* ( 1 ) A dealer who first receives South Atlantic rock shrimp must maintain records and submit information as specified in § 622.5(c).
( 2 ) On demand, a dealer who has been issued a Gulf and South Atlantic dealer permit, as required under § 622.200(c)(1), must make available to an authorized officer all records of offloadings, purchases, or sales of rock shrimp.
[78 FR 22952, Apr. 17, 2013, as amended at 79 FR 19495, Apr. 9, 2014]