alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Skip to main content

Main menu          - Environmental Topics
          - Laws & Regulations
          - About EPA

          - Environmental Topics
          - Laws & Regulations
          - About EPA

            - 
            - Login for EPA & Partners
            - Contact Us
            - Contact Us
            - Contact Us
            - Contact Us
            - Contact Us
            - Contact Us

You are here:
EPA Home > 		System of Registries > 		Terminology Services  >		Search	>		Terms & Acronyms									

# Terminology Services

-  Search 
-  About 
-  FAQ 

## Terms & Acronyms													

							Users may search on all approved terms and acronyms stored in Terminology Services. Users may: 						
                    - Enter a term to search for and select a search mode (Contains is the default).
                    - Select a Search by Type (Terms and Acronyms is the default).
                    - Browse by a numerical range or alphabetical letter.

### Search By

**Search By Type**

### Browse By Acronym

## Alphabetically

0-9ABCDEFGHIJKLMNOPQRSTUVWXYZ

## Search

                  - Vocabulary Catalog
                  - Terms & Acronyms
                  - EPA Enterprise Vocabulary
                  - Taxonomies
                  - Linking to Glossaries in Terminology Services

Contact Us to ask a question, provide feedback, or report a problem.

Contact Us to ask a question, provide feedback, or report a problem.

Contact Us to ask a question, provide feedback, or report a problem.

Contact Us to ask a question, provide feedback, or report a problem.

Contact Us to ask a question, provide feedback, or report a problem.

Contact Us to ask a question, provide feedback, or report a problem.

                  - Accessibility
                  - EPA Administrator
                  - Budget & Performance
                  - Contracting
                  - Grants
                  - January 19, 2017 Web Snapshot
                  - No FEAR Act Data
                  - Privacy

                  - Data.gov
                  - Inspector General
                  - Jobs
                  - Newsroom
                  - Open Government
                  - Regulations.gov
                  - Subscribe
                  - USA.gov
                  - White House

                  - Contact Us
                  - Hotlines
                  - FOIA Requests
                  - Frequent Questions
                  - Facebook
                  - Twitter
                  - YouTube
                  - Flickr
                  - Instagram

Last updated on January 17, 2024

Version:
**Exhibit 32.1**

**Certification of Nevada ClassicThoroughbreds, Inc.pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002regarding Annual Report on Form 10-Kfor the year ended June 30, 2016**

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a)and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), theundersigned officer of Nevada Classic Thoroughbreds, Inc., a Nevada corporation(the "Company"), does hereby certify that, based upon his knowledge:

1. The Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended June 30,2016 (the "Form 10-K") fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

2. Information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

> 
Dated: October 10, 2016

By: /s/ Brad Brimhall 

 

________________________________________

 
Brad BrimhallPrincipal Executive OfficerChief Executive Officer
**CH** IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 2 2 - 0717 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee , v. DARRELL DEAN SHARP ,

Defendant and Appellant .

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellee’s motion for a 30 - day extension of time, and good cause appearing therefor, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellee is granted an extension of time to and including August 1 9 , 2024 , within which to prepare, file, and serve the State’s response brie f.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

July 12 2024

07/12/2024

Case Number: DA 22-0717
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5


<LEGEND>

EXHIBIT 27 - Financial Data Schedule

THIS  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL   INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM  THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS INCLUDED IN
THE  REGISTRANT'S  FORM  10-QSB  FOR THE 3 MONTHS  ENDED  MARCH 31,  2000 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.

</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               dec-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                    mar-31-2000
<CASH>                                  1,754,444
<SECURITIES>                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                           5,470,239
<ALLOWANCES>                            450,933
<INVENTORY>                             6,714,489
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                        14,155,465
<PP&E>                                  6,578,308
<DEPRECIATION>                          3,630,895
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                          18,181,707
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                   9,134,617
<BONDS>                                 0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                   0
<PREFERRED>                             0
<COMMON>                                5,204,270
<OTHER-SE>                              1,915,457
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>            18,181,707
<SALES>                                 5,923,396
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                        5,923,396
<CGS>                                   3,783,792
<TOTAL-COSTS>                           1,774,621
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                        0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                      91,085
<INCOME-PRETAX>                         273,898
<INCOME-TAX>                            68,799
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                     205,099
<DISCONTINUED>                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                         0
<CHANGES>                               0
<NET-INCOME>                            205,099
<EPS-BASIC>                             0.07
<EPS-DILUTED>                           0.07



</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1283 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1283

 To authorize the award of a military service medal to members of the 
  Armed Forces who were exposed to ionizing radiation as a result of 
    participation in the testing of nuclear weapons or under other 
                             circumstances.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 25, 2017

  Mr. Markey introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
              referred to the Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To authorize the award of a military service medal to members of the 
  Armed Forces who were exposed to ionizing radiation as a result of 
    participation in the testing of nuclear weapons or under other 
                             circumstances.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Atomic Veterans Service Medal Act''.

SEC. 2. ATOMIC VETERANS SERVICE MEDAL.

    (a) Service Medal Required.--The Secretary of Defense shall design 
and produce a military service medal, to be known as the ``Atomic 
Veterans Service Medal'', to honor retired and former members of the 
Armed Forces who are radiation-exposed veterans.
    (b) Distribution of Medal.--
            (1) Issuance to retired and former members.--At the request 
        of a radiation-exposed veteran, the Secretary of Defense shall 
        issue the Atomic Veterans Service Medal to the veteran.
            (2) Issuance to next-of-kin.--In the case of a radiation-
        exposed veteran who is deceased, the Secretary may provide for 
        issuance of the Atomic Veterans Service Medal to the next-of-
        kin of the person.
            (3) Application.--The Secretary shall prepare and 
        disseminate as appropriate an application by which radiation-
        exposed veterans and their next-of-kin may apply to receive the 
        Atomic Veterans Service Medal.
    (c) Radiation Exposed Veteran Defined.--In this section, the term 
``radiation-exposed veteran'' has the meaning given such term in 
section 1112(c)(3) of title 38, United States Code.
                                 <all>
```
No. 56959.

#### William V. Schmidt Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 187352-K (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of synthetic stones the same in all material respects as those the subject of *S. Nathan & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(37 C. C. P. A. 99, C. A. D. 426), the claim at 10 percent under paragraph 1528 was sustained.
# C_2017382EN.01002402.xml

| 13.11.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 382/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.11.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 382/24

---

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 13 September 2017 — Salvatore Aniello Pappalardo and Others v European Commission

(Case C-350/16 P) (1)

1

((Appeal - Common fisheries policy - Non-contractual liability of the European Union - Claim for compensation - Regulation (EC) No 530/2008 - Emergency measures adopted by the European Commission - Sufficiently serious breach of a rule of law - Whether possible to rely on that breach - Principle of non-discrimination - Res judicata))

(2017/C 382/28)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Parties

Appellants: Salvatore Aniello Pappalardo, Pescatori La Tonnara Soc. coop., Fedemar Srl, Testa Giuseppe & C. Snc, Pescatori San Pietro Apostolo Srl, Camplone Arnaldo & C. Snc di Camplone Arnaldo & C., Valentino Pesca Sas di Camplone Arnaldo & C. (represented by: V. Cannizzaro and L. Caroli, avvocati)

Appellants:

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: A. Bouquet and D. Nardi, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the appeal; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the appeal;

| 2. | Orders Mr Salvatore Aniello Pappalardo, Pescatori La Tonnara Soc. coop., Fedemar Srl, Testa Giuseppe & C. Snc, Pescatori San Pietro Apostolo Srl, Camplone Arnaldo & C. Snc di Camplone Arnaldo & C. and Valentino Pesca Sas di Camplone Arnaldo & C. to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Mr Salvatore Aniello Pappalardo, Pescatori La Tonnara Soc. coop., Fedemar Srl, Testa Giuseppe & C. Snc, Pescatori San Pietro Apostolo Srl, Camplone Arnaldo & C. Snc di Camplone Arnaldo & C. and Valentino Pesca Sas di Camplone Arnaldo & C. to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 343, 19.9.2016.

1

---
# C_2016118EN.01001001.xml

| 4.4.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 118/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.4.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 118/10

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesfinanzhof (Germany) lodged on 15 January 2016 — Wolfram Bechtel and Marie-Laure Bechtel v Finanzamt Offenburg

(Case C-20/16)

(2016/C 118/12)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Bundesfinanzhof

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: Wolfram Bechtel, Marie-Laure Bechtel

Applicants:

Defendant: Finanzamt Offenburg

Defendant:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | Does Article 39 EC (now Article 45 TFEU) preclude a provision of German law according to which contributions to the French pension and health insurance fund paid by an employee living in Germany but working for the French civil service — in contrast to comparable contributions paid by an employee working in Germany to the German social security fund — do not reduce the income tax basis of assessment, if, under the Convention between Germany and France for the avoidance of double taxation, the salary may not be taxed in Germany and only increases the tax rate to be applied to other income? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Does Article 39 EC (now Article 45 TFEU) preclude a provision of German law according to which contributions to the French pension and health insurance fund paid by an employee living in Germany but working for the French civil service — in contrast to comparable contributions paid by an employee working in Germany to the German social security fund — do not reduce the income tax basis of assessment, if, under the Convention between Germany and France for the avoidance of double taxation, the salary may not be taxed in Germany and only increases the tax rate to be applied to other income?

| 2. | Is question 1 to be answered in the affirmative even if, within the framework of the taxation of the salary by France, the insurance contributions in question — whether specifically or at a flat rate —






  a) | are taken into account as reducing tax, or |
| --- | --- | --- |

2.

Is question 1 to be answered in the affirmative even if, within the framework of the taxation of the salary by France, the insurance contributions in question — whether specifically or at a flat rate —

a)

are taken into account as reducing tax, or

| b) | could have been taken into account in reducing tax, but were not the subject of a claim to that effect and therefore were not actually taken into account? |
| --- | --- |

b)

could have been taken into account in reducing tax, but were not the subject of a claim to that effect and therefore were not actually taken into account?

---
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

SYDNEY BRADSHAW

02-4268

District Court Docket Number

vs.

INS

Notice of Appeal Filed 2/20/03

Court Reporter(s)/ESR Operator(s) N/A

Filing Fee:

 Notice of Appeal Paid X Not Paid Seaman

 Docket Fee Paid X Not Paid USA/VI

CJA Appointment (Attach Copy of Order)

 Private Attorney

 Defender Association or Federal Public Defender

 Motion Pending

Leave to Proceed In Forma Pauperis status, if applicable: (Attach copy of the Order)

 X Motion Granted

 Motion Denied

 Motion pending before district judge

Certificate of probable cause (state habeas corpus): (Attach copy of the Order)

 Granted

 Denied

 X Pending

CC: JUDGE GREEN

 APPEALS CLERK

 USCA

 

Defendant's Address (for criminal appeals)

Prepared by : 

 LINDA V .JERRY,Deputy Clerk Signature/Date

PLEASE APPEND TO THE NOTICE OF APPEAL AND FORWARD TO

THE OFFICE OF THE CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

notapp.frm

Case 2:02-cv-04268-CG Document 14 Filed 02/20/2003 Page 1 of 1
Federal Depository Library ProgramPersistent URL Home Page      

# Target for /GPO/LPS4672 lost

The target resource for this PURL can no longer be traced. The following is a list of the targets this PURL was previously assigned to.

Powered by the Federal Depository Library Program.                A service of the U.S. Government Publishing Office.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0001051285
<NAME> PRECEPT BUSINESS SERVICES, INC.

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               24,277,822<F1>
<ALLOWANCES>                                   764,000
<INVENTORY>                                  5,965,415
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            29,724,989
<PP&E>                                      11,351,305
<DEPRECIATION>                               8,209,696
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              96,050,534
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       20,597,886
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                        3,241,000
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        99,025
<OTHER-SE>                                  29,596,522<F2>
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                96,050,534
<SALES>                                     41,405,644
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            41,405,644
<CGS>                                       26,782,467
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               38,896,125
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,119,189
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,388,330
<INCOME-TAX>                                   624,749
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            763,581
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   763,581
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.08
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.08
<FN>
<F1>AMOUNT REPRESENTS NET ACCOUNTS RECEIVABLE.
<F2>AMOUNT INCLUDES ADDITIONAL PAID-IN CAPITAL, RETAINED EARNINGS, AND TREASURY
STOCK.
</FN>


</TABLE>
#### RICHARDSON v. NORCROSS et al.

C. A. No. 36291.

United States District Court District of Columbia.

June 21, 1948.

*800Bernard F. Garvey and Joseph A. O’Connell, both of Washington, D. C., for plaintiff.

W. W. Cochran, Sol., United States Patent Office, of Washington, D. G, for defendant Casper W. Ooms.

Philip V. W. Peck, of Washington, D. G, for defendant Norcross.

McGUIRE, District Judge.

I cannot conclude that the alleged mark “Susie Cucumber” is confusingly similar to the co-defendant Norcross’ registered trade-mark, as one is for letters and the other for greeting cards which are purchased over the counter, while the letters have to be ordered.

However, plaintiff’s suit must be dismissed for the reason that the name ■“Susie Cucumber” is incapable of registration as a trade-mark, since it is used as plaintiff’s pseudonym and signature and not as a true trade-mark. This case is disposed of it seems to me by In re Page Co., 47 App.D.C. 195.

The words Susie Cucumber being the title of a book and a series of letters is descriptive, and as a consequence unregistrable.

Counsel will prepare proper papers.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

CHESTER COUNTY HOSPITAL : CIVIL ACTION

:

v. :

:

INDEPENDENCE BLUE CROSS, ET AL : NO. 02-2746

NOTICE

AND NOW, this 26th day of February, 2003, please take

note that a

[ ] preliminary pretrial conference 

[ ] final pretrial conference

[ ] settlement conference

[x] telephone conference re discovery disputes

 

in the above-captioned case will be held on February 28, 2003 

at 10:00 a.m. before the Honorable John R. Padova. This

conference will be held

[ ] in chambers, Room 6614

[x] by telephone* 

*Counsel for the plaintiff will be responsible for

contacting all parties, at which time you may

contact Judge Padova's chambers at 215/597-1178.

If trial counsel is on trial in a court of record prior

to the time of the conference, the Judge and opposing counsel

should be advised of this in writing at the earliest possible

date. Another attorney in such trial counsel's office, who

should be as familiar as is feasible with the case, have

authority from the client, and an evaluation of the case for

settlement purposes, should appear at the conference.

Failure to comply with this directive may result in the

imposition of sanctions. The conference will be continued to

another date only under exceptional circumstances. 

ATTEST: or BY THE COURT:

BY: 

 Gerrie M. Keane JOHN R. PADOVA, J.

 Deputy Clerk

cc: ALL COUNSEL OF RECORD

Case 2:02-cv-02746-JP Document 44 Filed 02/26/2003 Page 1 of 1
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

v.

ENRIQUE IGLESIAS

CRIMINAL ACTION

NO. 04-00647

ORDER

AND NOW, this 5th day of March 2021, upon consideration of Enrique Iglesias’s

Second Motion for Release (ECF 145), it is ORDERED that the Motion is DENIED.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Gerald J. Pappert 

GERALD J. PAPPERT, J.

Case 2:04-cr-00647-GJP Document 148 Filed 03/05/21 Page 1 of 1
# C_2017022EN.01000702.xml

| 23.1.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 22/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.1.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 22/7

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Corte suprema di cassazione (Italy) lodged on 24 October 2016 — Garlsson Real Estate SA, in liquidation, and Others v Commissione Nazionale per le Società e la Borsa (Consob)

(Case C-537/16)

(2017/C 022/11)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Referring court

Corte suprema di cassazione

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellants: Garlsson Real Estate SA, in liquidation, Stefano Ricucci, Magiste International SA

Appellants:

Cross-appellant: Commissione Nazionale per le Società e la Borsa (Consob)

Cross-appellant:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | Does Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, interpreted in the light of Article 4 of Protocol No 7 to the European Convention on Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the relevant case-law of the European Court of Human Rights and national law, preclude the possibility of conducting administrative proceedings in respect of an act (unlawful conduct consisting in market manipulation) for which the same person has been convicted by a decision that has the force or res judicata? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Does Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, interpreted in the light of Article 4 of Protocol No 7 to the European Convention on Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the relevant case-law of the European Court of Human Rights and national law, preclude the possibility of conducting administrative proceedings in respect of an act (unlawful conduct consisting in market manipulation) for which the same person has been convicted by a decision that has the force or res judicata?

res judicata

| 2. | May the national court directly apply EU principles in connection with the ne bis in idem principle, on the basis of Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, interpreted in the light of Article 4 of Protocol No 7 to the European Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the relevant case-law of the European Court of Human Rights and national law? |
| --- | --- |

2.

May the national court directly apply EU principles in connection with the ne bis in idem principle, on the basis of Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, interpreted in the light of Article 4 of Protocol No 7 to the European Convention on the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, the relevant case-law of the European Court of Human Rights and national law?

ne bis in idem

---
# C_2016326EN.01000801.xml

| 5.9.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 326/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.9.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 326/8

---

Appeal brought on 21 January 2016 by Copernicus-Trademarks Ltd against the judgment of the General Court (Ninth Chamber) delivered on 25 June 2015 in Case T-186/12: Copernicus-Trademarks v EUIPO

(Case C-43/16 P)

(2016/C 326/14)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Copernicus-Trademarks Ltd (represented by: C. Röhl, Rechtsanwalt)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings:

By order of 14 June 2016 the Court of Justice (Eight Chamber) held that the appeal was inadmissible.

---