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

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 239 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.Con. Res.239
                                     Agreed to November 19, 1999        

                       One Hundred Sixth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE FIRST SESSION

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

                          Concurrent Resolution

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That in the enrollment of the bill (H.R. 3194), making appropriations 
for the government of the District of Columbia and other activities 
chargeable in whole or in part against revenues of said District for 
the fiscal year ending September 30, 2000, and for other purposes, the 
Clerk of the House of Representatives shall insert before the comma at 
the end of section 1000(a)(7) of division B the following: ``, except 
that subsection (c) of section 912 of H.R. 3427 shall be deemed to read 
as follows:
    `(c) Advance Congressional Notification.--
        `(1) Fiscal year 1998.--Funds made available pursuant to 
    section 911(a)(1) may be obligated and expended beginning on or 
    after December 15, 1999, provided that the appropriate 
    certification has been submitted to the appropriate congressional 
    committees.
        `(2) Fiscal years 1999 and 2000.--Funds made available pursuant 
    to paragraph (2) or (3) of section 911(a) may be obligated and 
    expended only if the appropriate certification has been submitted 
    to the appropriate congressional committees 30 days prior to the 
    payment of the funds'''.
  Attest:

                                 Clerk of the House of Representatives.

  Attest:

                                               Secretary of the Senate.
```
No. 61657.

#### Wool Distributing Corporation *v.*United States,

protest 303730-K (Boston).

Wilson, Judge:

The merchandise at bar consists of 50 bales scoured combing wool which was assessed with duty on the basis of clean content at the rate of 27% cents per pound under paragraph 1102 (b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as modified by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, T. D. 51802.

At the trial, the case was submitted on the following stipulation entered into between counsel for the respective parties:

> Me. Ziegel: It is stipulated and agreed that the sworn weights covered by the weight certificate of T. McDonough, sworn weigher, represent the individual bale weights as detailed therein of the 50 bales herein, with a total gross weight of 10,659 pounds, and represent the normal increase in weight at the time of importation over the shipped weight.

> Further, that the tare of said 50 bales is 400 pounds, and that the weight return of the sworn weigher, said McDonough, may be received in evidence, and the weight of 10,659 pounds may be used as the basis of reliquidation.

> Me. Sklaeoff: So stipulated, * * *.

Accepting this stipulation as a statement of fact, we hold the merchandise in question properly dutiable under paragraph 1102 (b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as modified by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, T. D. 51802, at the rate of 27% cents per pound of clean content on the basis of a total gross weight of 10,659 pounds with an allowance for tare.

The protest is sustained to the extent indicated. In all other respects and as to all other merchandise, all the claims are overruled.

Judgment will issue accordingly.
No. 56233.

protests 158822-K and 164210-K (New York).

#### Robinson-Wagner Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Cole, J.

The protests were dismissed.
I	would	like	an	exemption under	333 to	fly	a	DJI	phantom	2	vision+	below	200	feet	

for	the	purpose	of	real	estate	aerial	video	and	also	home/	building	and	or	jobsite	

inspection.

Thank	you,

Thomas	A	Tolnai

5133	Elm	St.

Skokie,	IL.

60077

Cell#	312-513-0065

Email	Fishysquirrel@yahoo.com
Case No. 8,908.

#### In re McNAIR.

[2 N. B. R. 343 (Quarto, 109).]1

District Court, D. North Carolina.

1868.

Bankruptcy — Tapers Fired — Right to Withdraw.

Original papers referred to in bankrupt’s deposition, and annexed thereto, cannot be withdrawn from the files at the option of the bankrupt. The court may order a withdrawal for good reason shown by party interested.

John F. McNair, a witness summoned on behalf of the bankrupt, was on his examination before the register, Wm. A. Guthrie. He produced certain papers which were marked as a part of the deposition and filed with it. Whereupon application being made by J. D. Shaw, Esq., bankrupt’s attorney, for the return of said paper, which was opposed by John W. Hinsdale, Esq., attorney for J. J. Gilchrist, creditor; the following question was certified to the judge for decision: Whether the original papers which have been exhibited to the court and annexed to the deposition of John F. McNair, being marked and referred to in said deposition as exhibits A, B, C, D, E, F, and G, have not thereby became a part and parcel of the deposition, and whether they should not remain with the deposition, and should copies of these be delivered to the assignee, or shall copies be retained and the original returned?

1

 [Reprinted by permission.]

BROOKS, District Judge.

The question presented by the certificate of the register in this case is — whether original papers, which have been exhibited to the court and annexed to depositions, being marked and referred to in deposition, have not thereby become so much a part of the deposition, that they cannot be withdrawn and a copy substituted? *316After full consideration of tliis question, I am not able to concur with the register in the opinion expressed. The papers in question were exhibited, referred to, and stated as exhibits in the deposition, and annexed to the deposition. The court passed upon the deposition as it was, exhibits and all. In further progress of the case, if objections should be made to any reference to the exhibits. upon the ground that in the deposition they are referred to as original papers, but upon inspection they appear to be copies substituted — such objections might be good. The deposition as it is must be complete. It would not be so complete with copies, for it must then be established that the papers substituted are copies. That the court may, upon cause shown, order the withdrawal of the original exhibits, to be used as evidence in behalf of any one having an interest in them, I have no doubt. But the court as clearly will not order or allow them withdrawn. unless upon the application of some party who can show the proper use for which he desires them. The original papers referred to in, and annexed . to, the deposition, should be retained by the register with the deposition, against this demand of the bankrupt.

[See Case Mo. S,907.]
No.53867.

#### Lep Transport, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 147777-K (New York).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

Government counsel moved to dismiss the protest upon the ground that it was filed more than 60 days after liquidation. From an examination of the papers it was held that the motion of Government counsel was well founded. The protest was therefore dismissed.
##### 



Exhibit 31.2
 LEGACY BANCORP, INC.
 CERTIFICATION
Pursuant to Rule 13a  14(a) / 15d14(a)
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Legacy Bancorp, Inc.;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material
fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of
the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the
period covered by this report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,
results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods
presented in this report;4.
    
    The companys other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)
and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
 a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure
that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this report is being prepared;b)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of
the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this
report based on such evaluation; andc)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent
fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual
report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect,
the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and
 5.
    
    The companys other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the companys auditors and the
audit committee of the companys board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
function):
 a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely
to adversely affect the companys ability to record, process, summarize and report
financial information; andb)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the companys internal control over
financial reporting.Date: March 22, 2006
 /s/ Stephen M. ConleyStephen M. ConleySenior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer
and Treasurer
## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 13

- 00577

- CR

ROBERT ALLEN BRUNSON APPELLANT

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE

----------

FROM COUNTY CRIMINAL COURT NO. 6 OF TARRA NT COUNTY

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



### MEMORANDUM OPINION 1 

### AND JUDGMENT

-- --------

We have considered A ppellant ’ s “ Motion To Dismiss Appeal. ” The motion

complies with rule 42.2(a) of the rules of appellate procedure. Tex. R. App. P.

42.2(a). No decision of this court having been delivered before we received this

motion, we g rant the motion and dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P.

42.2(a), 43.2(f).

1 See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.2 PER CURIAM

PANEL: MCCOY, MEIER, and GABRIEL, JJ.

DO NOT PUBLISH

Tex. R. App

. P. 47.2(b)

DELIVERED: December 19, 2013
No. 55747.

protests 164440-K, etc. (New York).

#### Asche Bandor Corp. et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

At the trial it was stipulated that the facts and issues herein are similar in all material respects to those involved in *United States*v. *Browne Vintners Co., Inc.*(34 C. C. P. A. 112, C. A. D. 351) and that the quantities reported by the inspector as manifested not found were not in fact received by the importers. In accordance with stipulation of counsel and following the decision cited it was held that duty and internal revenue tax are not assessable upon such portions of the merchandise as were reported by the inspector as manifested not found. The protests were sustained to this extent.
EXHIBIT 14.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

The
Supervisory Board

Fresenius
Medical Care AG & Co. KGaA:

We
consent to the incorporation by reference in registration statement (No. 333-189721) on Form S-8 of Fresenius Medical Care AG & Co. KGaA of our reports dated
February 20, 2019, except for the restatement as to the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting for the material weakness related to revenue recognition specific to
estimating the transaction price on certain fee-for-service revenue arrangements, as to which the date is October 31, 2019, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Fresenius Medical
Care AG & Co. KGaA and its subsidiaries (the Company) as of December 31, 2018 and 2017, and the related consolidated statements of income, comprehensive income, cash flows and
shareholders' equity for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2018, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2018,
which reports appear in the December 31, 2018 annual report on Form 20-F/A of Fresenius Medical Care AG & Co. KGaA.

Our
report dated February 20, 2019, except for the restatement as to the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting for the material weaknesses related to revenue recognition
specific to estimating the transaction price on certain fee-for-service revenue arrangements, as to which the date is October 31, 2019, on the effectiveness of internal control over financial
reporting as of December 31, 2018, expresses our opinion that the Company did not maintain effective internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2018 because of the
effect of material weaknesses on the achievement of control objectives of the control criteria and contains an explanatory paragraph that states that a material weakness was identified related to
revenue recognition specific to estimating the transaction price on certain fee-for-service revenue arrangements.

Our
report with respect to the 2018 consolidated financial statements dated February 20, 2019, except for the restatement as to the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting
for the material weakness related to revenue recognition specific to estimating the transaction price on certain fee-for-service revenue arrangements, as to which the date is October 31, 2019,
contains an explanatory paragraph that states the Company adopted IFRS 15,Revenue From Contracts With Customers,and IFRS 9, Financial Instruments.

/s/
KPMG AG Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft

Frankfurt
am Main, Germany

October 31,
2019

---



QuickLinks
Before the First Division,

July 10, 1951

No. 55753.

petition 6796-R (Buffalo).

#### C. J. Tower & Sons *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

The petition was dismissed.
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 198 (Monday, October 16, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 71397]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-22726]



[[Page 71397]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Internal Revenue Service


Open Meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel's Notices and 
Correspondence Project Committee

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: An open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel's Notices and 
Correspondence Project Committee will be conducted. The Taxpayer 
Advocacy Panel is soliciting public comments, ideas, and suggestions on 
improving customer service at the Internal Revenue Service. This 
meeting will be held via teleconference.

DATES: The meeting will be held Thursday, November 9, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kelvin Johnson at 1-888-912-1227 or 
(504) 202-9679.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given pursuant to Section 
10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) 
that an open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel's Notices and 
Correspondence Project Committee will be held Thursday, November 9, 
2023, at 3 p.m. Eastern Time. The public is invited to make oral 
comments or submit written statements for consideration. Due to limited 
time and structure of meeting, notification of intent to participate 
must be made with Kelvin Johnson. For more information, please contact 
Kelvin Johnson at 1-888-912-1227 or (504) 202-9679, or write TAP 
Office, 1555 Poydras Street, 2nd floor, MS 12, New Orleans, LA 70112 or 
contact us at the website: http://www.improveirs.org. The agenda will 
include a committee discussion about the CP 2000 (Proposed Changes to 
Your Tax Return). There will be a discussion of the Difficult/
Challenging Letters/Notices, and a Review of Letter 5071C.

    Dated: October 10, 2023.
Kevin Brown,
Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.
[FR Doc. 2023-22726 Filed 10-13-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
PUBLIC LAW 111–94—NOV. 6, 2009 123 STAT. 2999 

Public Law 111–94 

111th Congress 

Joint Resolution 

Proclaiming Casimir Pulaski to be an honorary citizen of the United States posthumously. 

Whereas Casimir Pulaski was a Polish military officer who fought 

on the side of the American colonists against the British in 

the American Revolutionary War; 

Whereas Benjamin Franklin recommended that General George 

Washington accept Casimir Pulaski as a volunteer in the American Cavalry and said that Pulaski was ‘‘renowned throughout 

Europe for the courage and bravery he displayed in defense 

of his country’s freedom’’; 

Whereas, after arriving in America, Casimir Pulaski wrote to General Washington, ‘‘I came here, where freedom is being defended, 

to serve it, and to live or die for it.’’; 

Whereas the first military engagement of Casimir Pulaski with 

the British was on September 11, 1777, at the Battle of Brandywine, and his courageous charge in this engagement averted 

a disastrous defeat of the American Cavalry and saved the life 

of George Washington; 

Whereas, on September 15, 1777, George Washington elevated 

Casimir Pulaski to the rank of Brigadier General of the American 

Cavalry; 

Whereas Casimir Pulaski formed the Pulaski Cavalry Legion, and 

in February 1779, this legion ejected the British occupiers from 

Charleston, South Carolina; 

Whereas, in October 1779, Casimir Pulaski mounted an assault 

against British forces in Savannah, Georgia; 

Whereas, on the morning of October 9, 1779, Casimir Pulaski was 

mortally wounded and was taken aboard the American ship USS 

Wasp, where he died at sea on October 11, 1779; 

Whereas, before the end of 1779, the Continental Congress resolved 

that a monument should be erected in honor of Casimir Pulaski; 

Whereas, in 1825, General Lafayette laid the cornerstone for the 

Casimir Pulaski monument in Savannah, Georgia; and 

Whereas, in 1929, Congress passed a resolution recognizing October 

11 of each year as Pulaski Day in the United States: Now, 

therefore, be it 

Nov. 6, 2009 

[H.J. Res. 26] 


dkrause on GSDDPC29 with PUBLIC LAWS
123 STAT. 3000 PUBLIC LAW 111–94—NOV. 6, 2009 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.J. Res. 26 (S.J. Res. 12): 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 155 (2009): 

Oct. 7, 8, considered and passed House. 

Oct. 22, considered and passed Senate. 

Æ 

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the

United States of America in Congress assembled, That Casimir 

Pulaski is proclaimed to be an honorary citizen of the United 

States posthumously. 

Approved November 6, 2009. 


dkrause on GSDDPC29 with PUBLIC LAWS
EPA Registration 1677-226 Vol.1
IV

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 171

Congratulating the American Public Transit Association for 25 years of

commendable service to the transit industry and the Nation.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

AUGUST 3, 1999

Mr. SHUSTER (for himself, Mr. OBERSTAR, Mr. PETRI, and Mr. RAHALL)

submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Congratulating the American Public Transit Association for

25 years of commendable service to the transit industry

and the Nation.

Whereas public transportation is a fundamental public service

and an integral component of the Nation’s surface transportation infrastructure;

Whereas public transportation service results in productive

jobs for the Nation’s workers and provides broad support

for business and economic growth;

Whereas public transportation provides safe and efficient mobility for millions of people in the United States each

day;
2

• HCON 171 IH

Whereas the American Public Transit Association was established in 1974 to promote and advance knowledge in all

matters relating to public transportation; and

Whereas, during a period of remarkable resurgence in pubic

transportation, the American Public Transit Association

has provided a quarter of a century of service to the Nation as the professional association representing the transit industry: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That Congress congratulates the American

3 Public Transit Association for 25 years of commendable

4 service to the transit industry and the Nation.

Æ
No. 51509.

#### Protests 127062-K, etc., of Allied Purchasing Corp. et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Kincheloe, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
No. 53301.

protest 145027-K (A) (New York).

#### W. J. Byrnes and Company of New York, Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Cole, J.

The protest was dismissed.
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.1


                           AMERICA SERVICE GROUP INC.

                      (IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT PER SHARE DATA)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                            QUARTER ENDED
                                                                               MARCH 31,

                                                                            2000        1999
                                                                            ----        ----
<S>                                                                        <C>        <C>
Net income                                                                 $1,695     $   480
Preferred stock dividends                                                     163       1,989
                                                                         -----------------------
Numerator for basic earnings per share - income
   (loss) available to common stockholders                                 $1,532     $(1,509)
                                                                         =======================
Denominator for basic earnings per share -
   weighted average shares                                                  3,726       3,575

Effect of dilutive securities                                               1,620          --
                                                                         -----------------------
Weighted average common shares outstanding -
   diluted                                                                  5,346       3,575
                                                                         =======================
Basic earnings (loss) per share                                            $ 0.41     $ (0.42)
                                                                         =======================
Diluted earnings (loss) per share                                          $ 0.32     $ (0.42)
                                                                         =======================
</TABLE>




                                       12