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

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 4335 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 4335

To ensure funds are available under the aviation workforce development 
grant program for technical assistance and to require consideration for 
                          certain applicants.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 14, 2024

  Mr. Peters introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
   referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To ensure funds are available under the aviation workforce development 
grant program for technical assistance and to require consideration for 
                          certain applicants.

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

SECTION 1. AVIATION WORKFORCE DEVELOPMENT GRANTS.

    Section 625(b) of the FAA Reauthorization Act of 2018 (49 U.S.C. 
40101 note) is amended by adding at the end the following:
            ``(3) Set aside for technical assistance.--The Secretary 
        may set aside up to 2 percent of the funds appropriated to 
        carry out this subsection for each of fiscal years 2025 through 
        2028 to provide technical assistance to eligible applicants for 
        a grant under this subsection.
            ``(4) Consideration for certain applicants.--In reviewing 
        and selecting applications for grants under the programs 
        established under subsection (a), the Secretary may give 
        consideration to applicants that provide an assurance--
                    ``(A) to use grant funds to encourage the 
                participation of populations that are underrepresented 
                in the aviation industry, including in economically 
                disadvantaged geographic areas and rural communities;
                    ``(B) to address the workforce needs of rural and 
                regional airports; or
                    ``(C) to strengthen aviation programs at a 
                minority-serving institution (as described in section 
                371(a) of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 
                1067q(a)), a public institution of higher education, or 
                a public postsecondary vocational institution.''.
                                 <all>
```
Federal Depository Library ProgramPersistent URL Home Page      

# Target for /GPO/LPS3853 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.
No. 6648.

#### C. S. JACKSON & CO., LTD., vs. AHRENS & OTT MNFG. CO.

Syllabus.

1. Where the writings passed between the parties constitute the entire contract between them, parol evidence is inadmigai. ble to vary its terms.

2. Where a party is charged with the cost of supplying a deficiency in the quantity called for by a contract, it would *332be a double charge to condemn him also to refund the value of that same deficiency.

Appeal from the 'Civil District Court for the Parish of, Orleans, Division “E,” No. 111,483. Honorable G-. H. Theard, Judge.

J. Zach. Spearing and E. A. Mabry, for plaintiff and ■appellee.

Sol, Wolff, for defendant and appellant.

His Honor, JOHN ST. PAUL,

rendered the opinion and decree of the Court, as follows:

The case, briefly, is this: Plaintiff.bought, received and paid for, by weight, certain cast iron pipes. Owing to- the pipes exceeding the wéight per foot called for by the contract there was a deficiency in lineal measurement, which plaintiff was obliged to supply at a cost of ninety-five and 13/100 dollars ($95.13). This claim is admittedly subject to a credit of seventy-seven and 85/ 100 dollars ($77.85), leaving a balance due plaintiff of sixteen dollars and 78/100 dollars ($16.78).

*II.*

We are of opinion that the writings which passed between the parties constituted the entire contract between thém. The trial Judge therefore correctly excluded all parol evidence to vary its terms.

III.

•' There was also a claim for certain demurrage charges, which the trial Judge disallowed. Plaintiff has asked no amendment of the judgment in that respect nor mentioned it in any way. We, therefore, do not notice it.

*333Opinion and decree, May 15, 1916.

Eehearing refused, June 12th, 1916.

IV.

in addition to the cost of supplying the deficiency in lienar measurement, plaintiff also' claims a refund for that same deficiency. This is a manifest, double charge. If defendant is not to be paid for the whole quantity of pipe called for, it is under no obligation to supply the deficiency; and vice versa, if defendant makes good the deficiency it is entitled to payment for the whole quantity contracted for. The allowance of this double charge by the trial Judge was error, and the judgment must bé amended accordingly.

V.

As the only error in the judgment below was the double allowance above stated, to which the attention of the trial Judge was not called, and of which no mention was made here until we ourselves directed attention thereto, we shall exercise cur discretion in taxing costs.

It is therefore ordered that the judgment appealed from be amended' by reducing the amount allowed plaintiff from one hundred and twenty-two and 12/100 dollars ($121.12) to sixteen and 78/100 dollars ($16.78)' with legal interest from judicial demand until paid; and as thus amended the judgment is affirmed; defendant to pay costs of both 'Courts.

Amended and affirmed.
EXHIBIT 32.2   SUNCOAST NATURALS, INC.

   Certification of Principal Executive Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350
         (Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)

I, Thomas  Hagan,  Chief  Financial  Officer of  Suncoast  Naturals,  Inc.  (the
"Registrant"),  certify that to the best of my knowledge, based upon a review of
the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2004 of the
Registrant (the "Report"):

      (1)  The  Report  fully   complies  with  the   requirements   of  Section
      13(a)[15(d)] of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

      (2) The  information  contained  in the  Report  fairly  presents,  in all
      material  respects,  the financial  condition and results of operations of
      the Registrant.


Dated: 12/13/04                /s/ THOMAS HAGAN
                              -----------------------
                              Thomas Hagan
                              Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 23

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Form S-8 (Nos.333-78709, 33-60443 and 33-60449) of Katy
Industries, Inc. of our report dated April 11, 2003 relating to the consolidated
financial statements of Katy Industries, Inc., which appears in this Form 10-K.
We also consent to the incorporation be reference of our report dated April 11,
2003 relating to the financial statement schedule, which appears in this Form
10-K.


s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

St. Louis, Missouri
April 11, 2003


                                       93
Document headings vary by document type but may contain
                    the following: the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
the number of the CFR title and the number of each part
                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly
                      related to
the agency docket number / agency internal file number
the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in
                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory
                      Actions See the
                    Document Drafting Handbook
                    for more details.
 Department of Justice Drug Enforcement Administration
 By Notice dated October 11, 2006, and published in the 
                    **Federal Register**
                     on October 18, 2006, (71 FR 61511), Varian, Inc., Lake Forest, 25200 Commercentre Drive, Lake Forest, California 92630-8810, made application by renewal to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to be registered as a bulk manufacturer of the basic classes of controlled substances listed in schedule II: Drug
SchedulePhencyclidine (7471)
II1-Piperidinocyclohexane-carbonitrile (8603)
IIBenzoylecgonine (9180)
II
 The company plans to manufacture small quantities of the listed controlled substances for use in diagnostic products. No comments or objections have been received. DEA has considered the factors in 21 U.S.C. 823(a) and determined that the registration of Varian, Inc., Lake Forest to manufacture the listed basic classes of controlled substances is consistent with the public interest at this time. DEA has investigated Varian, Inc., Lake Forest to ensure that the company's registration is consistent with the public interest. The investigation has included inspection and testing of the company's physical security systems, verification of the company's compliance with state and local laws, and a review of the company's background and history. Therefore, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 823, and in accordance with 21 CFR 1301.33, the above named company is granted registration as a bulk manufacturer of the basic classes of controlled substances listed. Dated: February 26, 2007. Joseph T. Rannazzisi, Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration.


[FR Doc. E7-3919 Filed 3-5-07; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
AMENDMENT
      TO

    CORPORATE
      GUARANTY

     

    This
      Amendment to Corporate Guaranty (the “Subsidiary Amendment”) is made and entered
      into on July 3, 2008, by and between Charles Hill Drilling, Inc. (the
“Guarantor”) and HD Special-Situations, LP (the “Lender”). 

     

    A.
      the
      Guarantor and the Lender have previously entered into a Subsidiary Guaranty
      dated May 20, 2008 (the “Guaranty”), in connection with an aggregate of
      $1,500,000 in loans from the Lender to Knight Energy Corp. (the “Debtor”).


     

    B.
      Pursuant to Section 3(c) of the Guaranty, the Guarantor and the Lender now
      desire to amend the Guaranty as set forth herein in order for it to also apply
      to an additional $2,500,000 which is being loaned by the Lender to the Debtor
      concurrently herewith. 

     

    NOW,
      THEREFORE, in consideration of their respective promises contained herein and
      other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which
      are
      hereby acknowledged by the parties, the parties hereby agree as follows:


     

    1. Amendment
      to Recital A.
      Recital
      A of the Guaranty is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the
      following: 

    


    “A.
      The
      Lender has advanced an aggregate of $4,000,000 (the “Loan”) to Knight Energy
      Corp. (the “Debtor”), to be repaid pursuant to four of the Debtor’s 15% Senior
      Secured Promissory Notes (individually, a “Note;” collectively, the “Notes”).”


    


    2. Amended
      Reference to Certain Documents. All
      references in the Guaranty to “Security Agreement,” “Guaranty” and “Deed of
      Trust, Security Agreement, Assignment of Production and Financing Statement”
shall include all amendments to those documents. 

    


    3. Ratification
      of Remaining Terms.
      Except
      as expressly set forth in this Amendment, all of the terms and provisions of
      the
      Guaranty shall remain in full force and effect. 

    


    IN
      WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Subsidiary Amendment to
      be
      duly executed by their respective authorized persons on the date first written
      above. 

     

    
      	 	
              CHARLES
                HILL DRILLING, INC. 

            
	 	 
	 	
              By:

            	 
	 	
              Title:

            	 
	 	 	 
	 	
              By:

            	 
	 	
              Title:

            	 


    


    
      
         

      

      
         

        
          

        

      

      
         

      

    

    


    
      	 	
              HD
                SPECIAL-SITUATIONS, LP

            
	 	 
	 	
              By:

            	 
	 	
              Title:
EXHIBIT 99
                           ==========

        Certification of Chief Executive Officer Pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350
----------------------------------------------------------------------

In connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Bliss
Essentials Corp. (Registrant), as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Thomas Gelfand,
Chief Executive Officer of Registrant, hereby certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and
belief:

   (1)  the quarterly report fully complies with the requirements
        of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
        1934; and

   (2)  the information contained in the quarterly report fairly
        presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
        results of operations of Registrant.


Date: August 23, 2003        /s/ Thomas Gelfand
                              ----------------------------------
                              Chief Executive Officer of
                              Bliss Essentials Corp., Registrant
No. 51684.

#### Protests 990370-G, etc., of J. T. Steeb & Co., Inc. (Seattle).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

It was stipulated that, certain items of the merchandise consist of kelp the same as that the subject of *United States*v. *Nippon Co.*(32 C. C. P. A. 164, C. A. D. 303). In accordance therewith the claim for free entry under paragraph 1705 was sustained. Other items of the merchandise stipulated to be onions, pickled or packed in brine, the same as those involved in *Mutual Supply Co.*v. *United States*(12 Cust. Ct. 136, C. D. 842)*,*were held dutiable at 25 percent under paragraph 775, as modified by the trade -agreement with the Netherlands (T. D. 48075).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           57,494
<BONDS>                                        180,263
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     3,133,151
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,113,395
<SALES>                                         98,119
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             (137,500)
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,039,100)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.33)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.33)
        

</TABLE>
**Exhibit 23.1**

 

**CONSENT OFINDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS**

 

We have issued our reportdated August 24, 2009, with respect to the consolidated financialstatements and schedules incorporated by reference in the Annual Report of KOSSCORPORATION on Form 10-K for the years ended June 30, 2009 and2008.  We hereby consent to theincorporation by reference of said reports in the Registration Statement ofKOSS CORPORATION on Forms S-8 (File No. 333-89872 (effectiveJune 5, 2002), 333-37986 (effective May 26, 2000) and 333-20405 (effectiveJanuary 24, 1997)).

 

GRANT THORNTON LLP

Milwaukee, Wisconsin

August 24, 2009

 

----
Table 1: National EP-TIN File Description

TIN SIZE # of TINs % of Total TINs

(column %) # of EP-TINs* % of Total EP-TINs

(column %) # of Physicians % of Total

Physicians (column

%)

Total 307,825 100% 1,170,094 100% 840,777 100%

1 EP 222,097 72.2% 222,097 19.0% 175,115 20.8%

2-9 EPs 68,702 22.3% 241,732 20.7% 174,758 20.8%

10-19 EPs 8,653 2.8% 116,379 9.9% 81,829 9.7%

20-24 EPs 1,890 0.6% 41,334 3.5% 28,756 3.4%

25-49 EPs 3,729 1.2% 126,596 10.8% 88,065 10.5%

50-99 EPs 1,622 0.5% 110,862 9.5% 76,318 9.1%

100+ EPs 1,132 0.4% 311,094 26.6% 215,936 25.7%

*An EPI-TIN means an eligible professional (NPI) linked to a given TIN; EPs can be linked to more than one TIN if they bill

under more than one TIN
Meeting with Representatives from the American Home Furnishings Alliance (AHFA) and 

Ashley Furniture (July 16, 2013)

Attendees:

Brian J. Adams (Ashley Furniture)

Chris Andresen (AHFA)

Robert Courtnage (EPA)

Rebecca Edelstein (EPA)

Sara Kemme (EPA)

Barbara Nuckles (Ashley Furniture)

Bill Purdue (VP Regulatory Affairs, AHFA)

Lynn Vendinello (EPA)

Eric Winchester (EPA)

At the request of the American Home Furnishings Alliance (AHFA), EPA met with 

representatives from AHFA and Ashley Furniture on July 16, 2013 to discuss the proposed rule 

on Formaldehyde Emissions Standards for Composite Wood Products. AHFA and Ashley 

Furniture expressed concerns about the impact on furniture manufactures of including laminated 

products in the definition of hardwood plywood. They specifically mentioned concerns about 

proposed testing and certification requirements and the economic impact this would have on 

their industry. AHFA and Ashley also provided emission test data on furniture, which EPA has 

placed in the docket.

EPA encouraged AHFA and Ashley Furniture to submit their comments and recommendations to 

the public docket in regulations.gov so that EPA can carefully consider and respond to them in 

the final rule.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JEFFREY MARSHALL,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-1657 DFL PAN P

vs.

DEPUTY CASTRO, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

On May 2, 2006, defendant Joseph Headley filed a motion for judgment on the

pleadings pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(c). Plaintiff has not opposed the

motion. 

Local Rule 78-230(m) provides in part: “Failure of the responding party to file

written opposition or to file a statement of no opposition may be deemed a waiver of any

opposition to the granting of the motion . . . .” On April 13, 2005, plaintiff was advised of the

requirements for filing an opposition to the motion and that failure to oppose such a motion may

be deemed a waiver of opposition to the motion. 

Local Rule 11-110 provides that failure to comply with the Local Rules “may be

grounds for imposition of any and all sanctions authorized by statute or Rule or within the 

/////

Case 2:04-cv-01657-AK Document 100 Filed 06/01/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

inherent power of the Court.” In the order filed April 13, 2005, plaintiff was advised that failure

to comply with the Local Rules may result in a recommendation that the action be dismissed.

Good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, within thirty days of the

date of this order, plaintiff shall file an opposition, if any he has, to the motion to dismiss or a

statement of non-opposition. Failure to comply with this order will result in a recommendation

that this action be dismissed pursuant Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

DATED: May 31, 2006.

12

mars1657.46osc

Case 2:04-cv-01657-AK Document 100 Filed 06/01/06 Page 2 of 2
No. 56418.

protests 622658-G, etc. (New York).

#### Hallett & Chard *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Rao, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that certain items of the merchandise consist of umbrella cloth similar in all material respects to that the subject of *H. A. Caeser & Co. at al.*v. *United States*(6 Cust. Ct. 455, C. D. 515) and Abstract 45323, the claims of the plaintiff were sustained.
Case 2:04-cv-00924-LKK-CHS   Document 26    Filed 12/23/05   Page 1 of 1

    -       - Superintendent of Documents
      - 2012-07-27T23:02:17-0400
      - US GPO, Washington, DC 20401
      - Superintendent of Documents
      - GPO attests that this document has not been altered since it was disseminated by GPO
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DIRECTV, INC., a California ) NO. CV S-04-1026 GEB KJM

)

Plaintiff, )

)

) ORDER RE SETTLEMENT

v. ) AND DISPOSITION

)

GAETANO TAIBI, )

) 

Defendant . )

)

On May 17, 2005, Plaintiff’s counsel filed a Notice of

Settlement. The parties have until 4:00 p.m. on July 29, 2005, to

either file a document dismissing this action or to lodge a proposed

order which could effect dismissal. See L.R. 16-160(b). Failure to

respond by this deadline may be construed as consent to dismissal of

this action without prejudice and a dismissal order may be filed. See

L.R. 16-160(b) (“A failure to file dispositional papers on the date

prescribed by the Court may be grounds for sanctions.”).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 18, 2005

/s/ Garland E. Burrell, Jr.

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.

United States District Judge

Case 2:04-cv-01026-GEB -KJM Document 13 Filed 05/18/05 Page 1 of 1