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

                    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 the Interior

###### Bureau of Indian Affairs 

# AGENCY:

Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior. 

# ACTION:

Notice of amendment to Approved Tribal-State Compact. 

# SUMMARY:

This notice publishes the Approval of the Tribal-State Compact for Class III Gaming between the Spokane Tribe and the State of Washington. 

# EFFECTIVE DATE:

April 30, 2007. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        George T. Skibine, Director, Office of Indian Gaming, Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary—Policy and Economic Development, Washington, DC 20240, (202) 219-4066.                               ( print page 21285)    

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Pursuant to Section 11 of the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act of 1988 (IGRA), Public Law 100-497, 25 U.S.C. 2710, the Secretary of the Interior shall publish in the                     **Federal Register**                     notice of the approved Tribal-State compacts for the purpose of engaging in Class III gaming activities on Indian lands. This Compact effective today authorizes Class III gaming, sets limits for the size and scope of gaming for the Spokane Tribe and clarifies the state's regulatory role.                 

Dated: April 19, 2007. 

Carl J. Artman, 

Assistant Secretary—Indian Affairs.

 [FR Doc. E7-8136 Filed 4-27-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4310-4N-P
BEFORE THE 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

WASHINGTON, D. C. 

Motion of 

EXECUTIVE AIRLINES, INC. d/b/a 

AMERICAN EAGLE 

for confidential treatment under Rule 

12 (Form 41, Schedule B-43) 

DOT-OST-1996-1587 

MOTION OF EXECUTIVE AIRLINES, INC. 

d/b/a AMERICAN EAGLE FOR CONFIDENTIAL 

TREATMENT UNDER RULE 12 

Communications with respect to this document should be sent to; 

PETER M. BOWLER 

President 

American Eagle Airlines, Inc. 

P.O. Box 619616, MD 5494 

DFW Airport, Texas 75261 

KATHLEEN SOLED 

Vice President & General Counsel 

7\merican Eagle Airlines, Inc. 

P.O. Box 619616, MD 5494 

DFW Airport, Texas 75261 

(817) 967-1574 

kate.soledSaa.com 

CARL B. NELSON, JR. 

Associate General Counsel 

American Airlines, Inc. 

1101 17th Street, N.W. 

Suite 600 

Washington, D.C. 20036 

(202) 496-5647 

carl. nelson(3aa . com 

March 30, 2010 
BEFORE THE 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

WASHINGTON, D. C. 

Motion of 

EXECUTIVE AIRLINES, INC. d/b/a 

AMERICAN EAGLE 

for confidential treatment under Rule 

12 (Form 41, Schedule B-43) 

DOT-OST-1996-1587 

MOTION OF EXECUTIVE AIRLINES, INC. 

d/b/a AMERICAN EAGLE FOR CONFIDENTIAL 

TREATMENT UNDER RULE 12 

Executive Airlines, Inc. d/b/a/7\merican Eagle, under 

14 CFR 302.12, hereby moves that the enclosed Form 41 Schedule 

B-43 for YE09 be accorded confidential treatment and be 

withheld from public disclosure. The information for which 

confidential treatment is requested pertains to Executive's 

airframes and aircraft engine acquisitions and retirements. As 

provided in Rule 12, this information is in a sealed envelope 

marked "Confidential Treatment Requested Under Rule 12. 
- 2 -

On June 5, 1995, by letter of James W. Mitchell, 

Director, Office of Airline Statistics, the Department granted 

confidential treatment for a 10-year period to similar data 

filed by American Airlines, Inc. For the reasons stated in Mr. 

Mitchell's letter, the Department should also grant confidential treatment for 10 years to Executive's data. 

WHEREFORE, Executive Airlines moves that the 

schedules submitted under seal with this motion be withheld 

from public disclosure under Rule 12 for a period of 10 years. 

Respectfully submitted. 

W6ni^ 

CARL B. NELSON, JR. 

Associate General Counsel 

American Airlines, Inc. 

On behalf of Executive Airlines, 

Inc. d/b/a /American Eagle 

March 30, 2010
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yf i nds thi s c a s e s ui t abl e f

orde c i s i on w i thout ** o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). / R es ear ch NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON

UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T F AB I AN VA KS MAN, P la in tif

f - A p p e llan t, v. M IC H A E L B . D O N L E Y , S ecret ary, D epartm entof the A i r F orce , D ef

endant- A pp el l ee . N o. 08- 35771 D. C . No . 2 : 0 7 - c v - 0 0 2 2 5 - F VS ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe E a s t e rn D i s tr i c tof W a s hi ngt on F r e d L . V a n S i c kl e , D i s tr i c tJudge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d N ove m be r17, 2009 ** B efo re: A L A R C Ó N , T R O T T , an dT A S H IM A , C i rcu i tJu d g es. F abi a n V a ks m a n appe a l s pr o s e f r om the di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s s um m aryj udgm e nt f o rd e f e n d a n t in h is a c tio n u n d e rth e R e h ab ilita tio n A c t, 2 9 U .S .C . § 7 9 1 , e t s e q. , 

# FI LED DE C 14 2009 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS/ Res ea r ch 08- 35771 2 a l l e gi ng tha the w a s unl a w f ul l yt e rm i na t e d ba s e d on hi s di s abi l i ty . W e ha ve ju r is d ic tio n u n d e r2 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 9 1 . W e r e v ie w d e n o v o . W a lto n v . U

.S. M a rs h a ls Serv . , 4 9 2 F. 3 d9 9 8 , 1 0 0 5 ( 9 th Ci r . 2 0 0 7 ) . W e a f f i rm. T h e d is tr ic t c o u rt p r o p e r lyc o n c lu d e dth a t V a k s m an f a ile dto d e m o n s tr a te th a t h e w a s “o th e rw is e q u a lif ie d ” f o rh is jo b b e c au s e th e r e c o r ds h o w s th a t h e d id notr e c e i ve apa s s i ng s c or e i n ar e qui r e d c our s e , a nd he di d notr e que s ta ny a c c o m m o d a tio n u n til a f te rh is e m p lo y m e n t w a s te rm in a te d . Se e i d. (“ T o st at e a pr i m af a c i e c a s e unde rthe R e habi l i t a t i on A c t , apl a i nt i f f m us tde m ons tr a t e tha t( 1) [ h e ] is ap e r s o n w ith ad is ab ility , ( 2 ) w h o is o th e rw is e q u a lif ie df o re m p lo y m e n t, a n d( 3 ) s u f

f e r e dd is c r im in a tio n b e c au s e o f [ h is ] d is ab ility .” ) ; L u cero v. H a rt , 915 F . 2d 13 67 , 13 72 (9th C i r. 19 90 ) ( “ A n i nd i vi du ali s not‘ otherw i se qu al i fi ed’ i f [ he] c a n n o t p e r f

o rm th e e s s e n tia l f

u n c tio n s o f

[ h is ] jo b .” ) ; B row n v. L uckyStores , Inc. , 246 F . 3d 1182, 1188 ( 9th C i r . 2001) ( c onc l udi ng tha te m pl oy e rw a s unde rno af fi rm at i ve ob l i gat i on t o p rovi de an acc om m od at i on for e m pl oyee w ho never r e q u e s te da n a c c o m m o d a tio n ) . V aksm an’ s r em ai ni ng cont ent i on s are un pers uasi ve. V a k s m a n ’s m o tio n to e x p e d ite is d e n ie da s m o o t. AF F I RME D.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>      5
<MULTIPLIER>   1
       
<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                        DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                             MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                                       419,000
<SECURITIES>                                                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                             14,506,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                                       0
<INVENTORY>                                                3,629,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                           1,795,000
<PP&E>                                                     5,526,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                             4,307,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                            40,210,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                      7,939,000
<BONDS>                                                   18,378,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                              0
<PREFERRED>                                                        0
<COMMON>                                                     119,000
<OTHER-SE>                                                13,774,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                              40,210,000
<SALES>                                                   14,447,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                          14,447,000
<CGS>                                                      9,780,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                              9,780,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                           5,064,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                   0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                           457,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                             (854,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                   8,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                         (862,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                     0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                    0
<CHANGES>                                                          0
<NET-INCOME>                                                (862,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                  (0.07)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                  (0.07)
        

</TABLE>
# C_2017121EN.01000301.xml

| 18.4.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 121/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.4.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 121/3

---

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 1 March 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Court of Appeal (England & Wales) (Civil Division) — United Kingdom) — ITV Broadcasting Limited, ITV2 Limited, ITV Digital Channels Limited, Channel Four Television Corporation, 4 Ventures Limited, Channel 5 Broadcasting Limited, ITV Studios Limited v TVCatchup Limited, TVCatchup (UK) Limited, Media Resources Limited

(Case C-275/15) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Directive 2001/29/EC - Harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society - Article 9 - Access to cable of broadcasting services - Concept of ‘cable’ - Retransmission of broadcasts of commercial television broadcasters by a third party via the internet - ‘Live streaming’))

(2017/C 121/03)

Language of the case: English

Referring court

Referring court

Court of Appeal (England & Wales) (Civil Division)

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellants: ITV Broadcasting Limited, ITV2 Limited, ITV Digital Channels Limited, Channel Four Television Corporation, 4 Ventures Limited, Channel 5 Broadcasting Limited, ITV Studios Limited

Appellants:

Respondents: TVCatchup Limited, TVCatchup (UK) Limited, Media Resources Limited

Respondents:

Interveners: The Secretary of State for Business, Innovation and Skills, Virgin Media Limited

Interveners:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Article 9 of Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society, and specifically the concept of ‘access to cable of broadcasting services’, must be interpreted as not covering, and not permitting, national legislation which provides that copyright is not infringed in the case of the immediate retransmission by cable, including, where relevant, via the internet, in the area of initial broadcast, of works broadcast on television channels subject to public service obligations.

---

(1)  OJ C 279, 24.8.2015.

1

---
# C_2016402EN.01000501.xml

| 31.10.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 402/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.10.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 402/5

---

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 7 September 2016 — Pilkington Group Ltd, Pilkington Automotive Ltd, Pilkington Automotive Deutschland GmbH, Pilkington Holding GmbH, Pilkington Italia SpA v European Commission

(Case C-101/15 P) (1)

1

((Appeal - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Article 101 TFEU - Article 53 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area of 2 May 1992 - European market for automotive glass - Market-sharing agreements and exchanges of commercially sensitive information - Fines - 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines - Point 13 - Value of sales - Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 - Second subparagraph of Article 23(2) - Statutory ceiling of the fine - Exchange rate for the calculation of the ceiling of the fine - Amount of the fine - Unlimited jurisdiction - Mono-product undertakings - Proportionality - Equal treatment))

(2016/C 402/06)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Appellants: Pilkington Group Ltd, Pilkington Automotive Ltd, Pilkington Automotive Deutschland GmbH, Pilkington Holding GmbH, Pilkington Italia SpA (represented by: S. Wisking and K. Fountoukakos-Kyriakakos, Solicitors, and by C. Puech Baron, avocat)

Appellants:

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: A. Biolan, M. Kellerbauer and H. Leupold, 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 Pilkington Group Ltd, Pilkington Automotive Ltd, Pilkington Automotive Deutschland GmbH, Pilkington Holding GmbH and Pilkington Italia SpA to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Pilkington Group Ltd, Pilkington Automotive Ltd, Pilkington Automotive Deutschland GmbH, Pilkington Holding GmbH and Pilkington Italia SpA to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 81, 9.3.2015.

1

---
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN 

'r;onorable Ciao. Ii. Sheppard 

Coz.ptroiler of ;‘ubllc AOOOlUlts 

Austin, Texan 

Sir; 

, aA 8ttEQmey, 

x08 in the ma 

Dollar* (#lmzwJc) 

6QAal property Qn 

1988, all 

ale 7SS5, Beriaod,Citil Statutea, rabasprovision ror the cororisafonerr * Court of any county after 

thirty day6 netiae to the aouaty or diattiot attoollri~ t0~ 

file delinquent t8x suits snd him failure to do 110, to a~- 

ploy another attarae~ for the parpose of oolloat~ dolinqUOAt State and OaWtty tax06 $Or a QOXQOAt6SO theWOOf~ 

Axtlole TSSSa, Revlned civil Statuten, provides 

that aald oontraotl~ met be approved by both the OasrptXQiler 
BOA. -0. Ii. Sheppard. April 26, 1939, S-age 2 

and the kttorney Caneral of the Xate of Texas, both as 

to substanoe and to form and further provides thet any 

oontraot made in violation of such aot shall be void. 

As said by the Supreme Court in the case of 

Xhite v. bloCill, 114 9. 7:. (2d) 860, a contraot for the 

collection of taxes on personal projxrty must rind the 

support in some article of the statute to be valid. And, 

as held in that ease, and sasterwood v. ifenderson County, 

62 S. ';:. (Cd) C5, as well as Zplvan Sanders Cor,pany v. 

Sourxy County, 77 2. PI'. (2d) 709, oontraots for the ool1OOtiOA Or deliAqUOAt tax08 made betWWA OOmAias~OA~l'a' 

oourta And attorneys must be approved by the Comptroller 

and the Attorney General, otherwise they are void. Then, 

ia no provlalo~ in the atatuto r0r the comptroller to 

ratify auoh oontraote artier they have been perf.onaed~ 

A8 said by the Supreme Court iA Eaatemood V. EIeAdOrMA 

county, mppn: 

*The pomr to provide ior the oolleotlon 

oi delinqt&ent&a and preaaribe the oompena&ion to'be paid for the 6enlo66 rendered 5.~ 

that respect reeldes eroluslvely in the leglalature.* 

Slnoe Artlolea 7935 6nd 7W5-a embody the only 

prwlaioa6 r0r a oolleotlng attorney to x-weirs a part o? 

the rbare oolleeoted for the State aa oompensatloa for &la 

senloes, he'muat brm hlmaelf ulthln the terms of those 

statotee to be entit&d to be uompearrated by the State. 

Then 1s no statute whioh dlreotly or indlreotly olother 

the Comptroller with l thorlty to oompensate‘am attorney 

?or renlaw rendered by hla la oolleoting taxes. 

our aA6wer to your que6tlon, therefoxe, 18 in 

the negative. 

Your6 very truly 

ATTQRlQY t2WERAL OF TEXAS 

Glenn R. Lowi 

Aeolatant 

GRL:LM
EXHIBIT 32.1
------------

                              UNITED-GUARDIAN, INC.
                CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                    AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
                           SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

        In  connection  with the Annual  Report of  United-Guardian,  Inc.  (the
"Registrant") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2003, as filed with
the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I,
Alfred R. Globus,  Chief Executive  Officer of the  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:

      (1) the 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  Report  fairly  presents,  in all
material  respects,  the  financial  condition  and result of  operations of the
Company.

Date:  May 7, 2004                       /s/ Alfred R. Globus
                                         --------------------------
                                         Alfred R. Globus
                                         Chief Executive Officer
<Page>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


     In connection with the Annual Report of Torotel, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the period ending July 31, 2002, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, H. James Serrone,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:

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

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


/s/  H. James Serrone


H. James Serrone
Chief Financial Officer
September 12, 2002
(Reap. Dec. 8827)

#### S. S. Kresge Co. *v.*United States

Entry Nos. 755641; 759046.

(Decided June 12, 1957)

*Sharretts, Paley & Carter*for the plaintiff.

*George Cochran Doub,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

LawrbNCE, Judge;

The above-enumerated appeals for a reap-praisement present the question of the proper dutiable value of certain hurricane lanterns.

The parties hereto have entered into a stipulation of fact whereby it has been agreed that, at the times of exportation of the involved articles, such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal markets of Germany in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade for exportation to the United States, packed in bulk at $6.30 per dozen, less inland freight and f. o. b. charges. It was further agreed that there was no higher foreign value, as defined in section 402 (c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Administrative Act of 1938 (19 U. S. C. § 1402 (c)), for such or similar merchandise at the times of exportation herein involved.

Upon the agreed statement of facts, I find and hold that export value, as that value is defined in section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U. S. C. § 1402 (d)), is the proper basis for determination of the value of the merchandise before the court and that such value is $6.30 per dozen packed in bulk, less inland freight and f. o. b. charges.

Judgment will issue accordingly.
## SEER Program Coding and Staging Manual 2024

- SEER Program Coding and Staging Manual 2024(PDF, 1.8 MB)  (released September 2023)
- Appendix A  - County Codes(PDF, 504 KB)
- Appendix B - Country and State Codes(PDF, 425 KB)
- Appendix C - Site Specific Coding Modules
- Appendix D  - Race and Nationality Descriptions(PDF, 227 KB)
- Appendix E - Reportable and Non-reportable Examples:  PDF  (PDF, 196 KB)  or  Excel  (XLSX, 25 KB)
- Summary of Changes (September 2023)(PDF, 314 KB)  - provides the list of changes included in this release. 

## SEER Program Coding and Staging Manual 2025

The 2025 manual is to be used for cases diagnosed January 1, 2025 and forward. 

- SEER Program Coding and Staging Manual 2025(PDF, 1.8 MB)  (released September 2024)
- Appendix A  - County Codes(PDF, 488 KB)
- Appendix B - Country and State Codes(PDF, 442 KB)
- Appendix C - Site Specific Coding Modules
- Appendix D  - Race and Nationality Descriptions(PDF, 212 KB)
- Appendix E - Reportable and Non-reportable Examples:  PDF  (PDF, 281 KB)  or  Excel  (XLSX, 27 KB)
- Summary of Changes (September 2024)(PDF, 436 KB)  - provides the list of changes included in this release. 

## Other Manuals

- Staging Resources 
- Historical Staging and Coding Manuals

See the SEER Research Data pages to find out how to access the SEER data.