alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> UT
<CIK> 0000941138
<NAME> UNISOURCE ENERGY CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                    1,905,572
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                    128,268
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                         269,764
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                       300,717
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,604,321
<COMMON>                                       641,225
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                            0
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                          (395,814)
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                 245,411
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                         1,136,320
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                   0
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                       0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                   48,603
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                    867,302
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                18,444
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                 288,241
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                2,604,321
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                      350,480
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                             1,399
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     292,795
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     294,194
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                         56,286
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                             (2,158)
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                  54,128
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                        55,948
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,820)
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                          0
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                  (1,820)
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                             0
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                            0
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                          27,331
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.06)



</TABLE>
N E W JEESK Y SENAX E CONTRO L N O

NICHOLA S P . SCUTAR I

SENATOR . DISTRIC T 2 2 151 4 E . SAIN T GEOHGE S AVENU E LINDEN . N J 0703 6 TEU- . I908 1 587-040 4 FAX : I908 I 587-931 2 COMMITTEES : STAT E GOVERNMEN T - CHAIHMA N SPAC E UTILIZATIO N - CHAIRMA N COMMERC E - MEMBE R JUDICIAR Y - MEMBE R Marc h4 , 201 0 Th e Honorabl e Ra

y LaHood , Secretary Unite dState s Departmen t o f Transportatio n 120 0 Ne w Jerse y Avenue , S E Washington , D.C . 2059 0 Subject : Haned aCombinatio n Service s Allocatio n Proceedin g DOT-OST-2010-001 8 Dea r Secretary LaHood : I support th e Continenta l Airline s applicatio n t o provid e dail y nonsto p servic e betwee n Ne w York/Newark

an dToky o Haned aairport . Ne w ai r servic e t o Haneda , whic hi s schedule dt o begi n late r thi s year , i s mad e possibl e by th e wid e rangin g ope n skie s agreement wit hJapan achieve dby you r P^partment.. ' I respectfull y reques t tha t yo u selec t

Continenta l t o provid e servic e connectin g th e U.S.' s financial an dcommercia l cente r a t Ne w York/Newark

withTokyo' s central/downtow n airport . Continental' s Liberty - Haned aservic e woul dprovid e acritica l link betwee n tw o o f

th e world' s larges t economie s an dwil l hel p boos t trad e an dcommerc e acros s th e Ne w York/Newark regio n an dsecondaril y acros s th e entir e northeaster n regio n o f th e U.S . Liberty airport i s surrounde db y th e larges t populatio n pe r squar e mil e in th e country , whic hinclude s million s o f Asian-Americans . Additionally , flight s adde d wil l translat e int o local economy benefits . A s employmen t i s sustained , regiona l income s ar e enhance d an dtrad e expands . Continenta l operate s th e larges t hu b i n th e regio n tha t

connect s Ne w York/Newark an dmuc ho f

th e U.S . t o th e world . Hopefully , thi s wil l b e take n int o accoun t whe n awardin g an y rout e t o Haneda . I urg e yo u t o awar dToky o Haned aright s t o Continenta l Airline s an dm y regio n o f

th e U.S . If

yo u hav e any further

qiwstion s o r

concerns , pleas e feel free t o contac t m y office . Wit h bes/wishes .

a s P . Sc i _ , 22"' ' District : NPS/fa s
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

R & D FILM 1, LLC, 

Plaintiff,

 Civil Action 2:12-cv-1113

v. Judge Michael H. Watson

 Magistrate Judge Elizabeth P. Deavers

DOES 85-133,

Defendants.

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

 Plaintiff filed its Complaint in this action on December 4, 2012. On July 12, 2013, the

Court ordered Plaintiff to amend its Complaint within thirty days to substitute in the real names

for its Doe Defendants and to perfect service on those named partes as required under Federal

Rule of Civil Procedure 4(m) or to alternatively show cause why the Court should not dismiss

this action pursuant to Rule 4(m). (ECF No. 6.) To date, Plaintiff has not moved to amend its

Complaint to substitute in the real names for its Doe Defendants. Nor has Plaintiff responded to

the Court’s Show Cause Order. It is therefore RECOMMENDED that the Court dismiss this

action without prejudice pursuant to Rule 4(m) for failure to timely effect service of process. 

PROCEDURE ON OBJECTIONS

If any party seeks review by the District Judge of this Report and Recommendation, that

party may, within fourteen (14) days, file and serve on all parties objections to the Report and

Recommendation, specifically designating this Report and Recommendation, and the part in

question, as well as the basis for objection. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).

Case: 2:12-cv-01113-MHW-EPD Doc #: 7 Filed: 08/21/13 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>
Response to objections must be filed within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy.

Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).

The parties are specifically advised that the failure to object to the Report and

Recommendation will result in a waiver of the right to de novo review by the District Judge and

waiver of the right to appeal the judgment of the District Court. See, e.g., Pfahler v. Nat’l Latex

Prod. Co., 517 F.3d 816, 829 (6th Cir. 2007) (holding that “failure to object to the magistrate

judge’s recommendations constituted a waiver of [the defendant’s] ability to appeal the district

court’s ruling”); United States v. Sullivan, 431 F.3d 976, 984 (6th Cir. 2005) (holding that

defendant waived appeal of district court’s denial of pretrial motion by failing to timely object to

magistrate judge’s report and recommendation). Even when timely objections are filed,

appellate review of issues not raised in those objections is waived. Robert v. Tesson, 507 F.3d

981, 994 (6th Cir. 2007) (“[A] general objection to a magistrate judge’s report, which fails to

specify the issues of contention, does not suffice to preserve an issue for appeal . . . .”) (citation

omitted)).

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Date: August 20, 2013 /s/ Elizabeth A. Preston Deavers 

 Elizabeth A. Preston Deavers

 United States Magistrate Judge 

2

Case: 2:12-cv-01113-MHW-EPD Doc #: 7 Filed: 08/21/13 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: <pageID>
# C_2017168EN.01001301.xml

| 29.5.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 168/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.5.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 168/13

---

Judgment of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 6 April 2017 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Nejvyšší správní soud — Czech Republic) — Eko-Tabak s. r. o. v Generální ředitelství cel

(Case C-638/15) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Directive 2011/64/EU - Article 2(1)(c) - Article 5(1)(a) - Definitions of ‘smoking tobacco’, ‘tobacco which has been cut or otherwise split’ and ‘industrial processing’))

(2017/C 168/15)

Language of the case: Czech

Referring court

Referring court

Nejvyšší správní soud

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Eko-Tabak s. r. o.

Applicant:

Defendant: Generální ředitelství cel

Defendant:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Article 2(1)(c) and Article 5(1) of Council Directive 2011/64/EU of 21 June 2011 on the structure and rates of excise duty applied to manufactured tobacco must be interpreted as meaning that dried, flat, irregular, partly stripped leaf tobacco and/or parts thereof which have undergone primary drying and controlled dampening, which contain glycerine and which are capable of being smoked after simple processing by means of crushing or hand-cutting, fall within the definition of ‘smoking tobacco’ for the purpose of those provisions.

---

(1)  OJ C 98, 14.3.2016.

1

---
(Reap. Dec. 9376)

#### Leslie B. Canion a/c Andrew Fisher Cycle Co. *v.*United States

Entry No. 98.

(Decided April 7, 1959)

*Broohs & Broohs*for the plaintiff.

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

Oliver, Chief Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement relates to certain bicycles exported from Germany and entered at the port of Galveston, Tex.

Stipulated facts, upon which the case has been submitted, establish that the proper basis for appraisement of the bicycles in question is cost of production, as defined in section 402 (f) of the Tariff Act of *5891930, and that such statutory value for the articles is $22.04 (United States) each, less nondutiable charges, and I so hold. Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
<TABLE> <S> <C>




<ARTICLE> UT
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED
FROM UNISOURCE ENERGY FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD ENDED
MARCH 31, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000941138
<NAME> UNISOURCE ENERGY CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<BOOK-VALUE>                                  PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                    1,723,629
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                    128,025
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                         272,791
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                       474,229
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,598,674
<COMMON>                                       641,975
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                            0
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                          (317,237)
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                 324,738
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                         1,134,595
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                   0
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                            0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                       0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                   48,603
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                            0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                    866,986
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                29,085
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                 194,667
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                2,598,674
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                      176,547
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                           (1,062)
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     138,241
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                     137,179
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                         39,368
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                               3,323
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                  42,691
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                        42,449
<NET-INCOME>                                       242
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                          0
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                      242
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                             0
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                            0
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                          16,256
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .01





</TABLE>
#### American Express Co., for a/c of Finchley, Inc., et al. *v.*United States

No. 6420.

Entry Nos. 731376; 718729.

Invoices dated London, England, October 31, 1945, etc.

Certified October 31, 1945, etc.

Entered at New York, N. Y., January 5, 1946, etc.

(Decided October 4, 1946)

*Eugene R. Pickrell*for the plaintiffs.

*Paul P. Rao,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Tilson, Judge:

Counsel for the respective parties have submitted for decision the appeals listed in schedule A, hereto attached and made a part hereof, upon a stipulation to the effect that the issues involved in these appeals are the same in all material respects as the issues decided in *United States*v. *Pitcairn,*C. A. D. 334, and the record in that case has been admitted in evidence herein.

Accepting this stipulation as a statement of fact, and following the cited authority, I find and hold the proper dutiable export .value of the merchandise covered by said appeals to be the value found by the appraiser, less any amounts added under duress to meet advances made by the appraiser in similar cases then pending on appeal. Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
I N THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA WESTERN DISTRICT
**COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,**

**Respondent**

**v.**
**RICARDO ALPHONSO PEOPLES,**

**Petitioner :**  **: :**  **: :**  **: :**  **: :**  **: :**  **No. 118 WAL 2015 Petition for Allowance of Appeal from**  **the** Unpublished Memorandum and Order **of the Superior Court at No. 424 WDA 2014 exited December 19, 2014,**  affirming **the Order of the Allegheny County Court of Common Pleas at No.**  **CP-02-CR-0008708-1997 exited January 17, 2014** 

ORDER

PER CURIAM AND NOW **, this 17 th**  **day of February, 2016, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is**  GRANTED **on the issue of whether Petitioner’s sentence violates the prohibition against mandatory life sentences for juvenile offenders announced by the Supreme**  **Court of the United States in** Miller v. Alabama **, 567 U.S. ___, 132 S. Ct. 2455 (2012). As a result of the recent holding by that Court that**  Miller **must be applied retroactively by the States,**  see Montgomery v. Louisiana **, 2016 WL 280758 (U.S. Jan. 25, 2016), the Superior Court’s order is**  VACATED **, and the case is** REMANDED **for further proceedings consistent with**  Montgomery. **To the extent necessary, leave is to be granted to amend the post-conviction petition to assert the jurisdictional provision of the Post Conviction Relief Act extending**  **to the recognition of constitutional rights by the Supreme Court of the United States which it deems to be retroactive.**  See **42 Pa.C.S. §9545(b)(1)(iii).**

Mr. Justice Eakin did not participate in the decision of this matter
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 70 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 70

          Commemorating the 40th anniversary of Bloody Sunday.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 3, 2005

 Mr. Frist (for himself, Mr. Corzine, Mr. McConnell, Mr. Kennedy, Mr. 
Allen, Mr. Reid, and Mr. Alexander) submitted the following resolution; 
                   which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
          Commemorating the 40th anniversary of Bloody Sunday.

Whereas March 7, 2005, marks the 40th anniversary of Bloody Sunday, the day on 
        which some 600 civil rights marchers were demonstrating for African 
        American voting rights;
Whereas Jimmy Lee Jackson was killed February 26, 1965, 2 weeks prior to Bloody 
        Sunday, at a civil rights demonstration while trying to protect his 
        mother and grandfather from a law enforcement officer;
Whereas Congressman John Lewis and the late Hosea Williams led these marchers 
        across the Edmund Pettus Bridge in Selma, Alabama where they were 
        attacked with billy clubs and tear gas by State and local lawmen;
Whereas the circumstances leading to Selma's Bloody Sunday represented a set of 
        grave injustices for African Americans which included--

    (1) the murder of Herbert Lee of Liberty, Mississippi for attending 
voter education classes;

    (2) the cutting off of Federal food relief by State authorities in 2 of 
the poorest counties in Mississippi in order to intimidate residents from 
registering to vote; and

    (3) the loss of jobs or refusal of credit to registered black voters at 
local banks and stores;

Whereas during the march on Bloody Sunday Congressman Lewis was beaten 
        unconscious, leaving him with a concussion and countless other injuries;
Whereas footage of the events on Bloody Sunday was broadcast on national 
        television that night and burned its way into the Nation's conscience;
Whereas the courage, discipline, and sacrifice of these marchers caused the 
        Nation to respond quickly and positively; and
Whereas the citizens of the United States must not only remember this historic 
        event, but also commemorate its role in the creation of a more just 
        society and appreciate the ways in which it has inspired other movements 
        around the world: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved,  That Congress commemorates the 40th anniversary of 
Bloody Sunday.
                                 <all>
```
Final Listing of Questionnaire Files for Steam Electric Rulemaking Record

Plant ID 06149

Removed 

from Public 

(Non-CBI) 

Docket1

Copyright 

Flag2File Name3

Description

06149\06149_ CERTIFICATION LETTER.pdf Plant certification statement

x 06149\06149_Checklist.xls EPA Technical Review Checklist Workbook

06149\06149_Completeness_Checklist.xls EPA Completeness Review Checklist

x 06149\06149_PART A.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 06149\06149_PART E.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 06149\06149_PART H.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 06149\SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS\06149_ Figure 1 Site Map.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 06149\SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS\06149_ Item 5 - Process Flow Diagram (2).ppt Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

1

 Final reviewed survey responses are located in the Steam Electric Technical Questionnaire Database . 

2

 Copyright documents are available from the docket. 

3

 No hardcopy log is included for this plant as no hardcopy materials were received.
#### Cobb *versus*Wood.

An award of referees upon a parole submission is of no binding eifeet *against*a party, if he had no notice of the time or place of their meeting or of the decision which they made.

Even *that*party, when sued for the cause of action which had been so submitted to such referees, cannot avail himself of such an award, as to the amount of damages.

Assumpsit, for the use of the plaintiff’s land, by carting and cutting rocks upon it.

The defendant had, occupied the plaintiff’s land for said purposes.

The plaintiff demanded compensation, and there was evidence tending to show, *that*the defendant authorized him to refer the amount to thee of the plaintiff’s neighbors, of the plaintiff’s own selection; and *that*the plaintiff accordingly selected thee of the neighbors, who met and examined the land and agreed in estimating the damage at $15, but made no written award. The defendant was not present at their meeting, nor did it appear, that he was notified of the time or place of holding it, or of the amount at which they estimated the damage.

The defendant requested the Judge to instruct the jury, that, if the defendant offered to refer the amount of damage to thee of the plaintiff’s neighbors,' and if the plaintiff accepted the offer and accordingly procured thee- of his neighbors to examine the premises and appraise the damage, and they thereupon made their award in good faith, this would constitute such a reference as would be binding on the parties, and they should return a verdict only for the amount of such award.

The Judge refused to comply with this request, and instructed the jury that there was no evidence of such a reference of the matter in dispute as would bind the parties, and that they must assess the damage, as if no reference had been made. The verdict was for the plaintiff for $25,00. The defendant excepted.

*Adams,*for the defendant.

*4561. This is a submission and award at common law. Courts will go far to give effect to such arrangements. *Brady*v. Mayor,' 1 Barb. 584. It was binding upon the plaintiff. 8 Mass. 398; 6 Mass. 49; 17 Maine, 54; 12 Mass. 134; 18 Maine, 255.

2. If the Judge was not satisfied that the facts proved a binding award, it was his duty to submit them to the jury, with appropriate instructions. *Hill*v. *Hobart,*16 Maine, 164; *Homans*v. *Lambard,*21 Maine, 308; *Greene*v. *Dingley,*24 Maine, 131.

*Deblois,*for the plaintiff.

Howard, J.,

orally.—The supposed award was of no binding effect. It does not appear that the defendant had any knowledge that the matter was ever submitted, nor who were the referees, nor was he notified of the time or place of their meeting, that he might appear and protect his right; nor of the conclusion at which the referees arrived. On that award the plaintiff could have maintained no action against the defendant. Indeed there was no completed award.

*Exceptions overruled.*
Exhibit 15





May 6, 2005

Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20549

Commissioners:

We are aware that our reports dated May 6, 2005 on our review of interim
financial information of UniSource Energy Corporation (the Company) and Tucson
Electric Power Company (TEP) for the three month period ended March 31, 2005 and
included in the Company's and TEP's quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the
quarter ended March 31, 2005 is incorporated by reference in the Company's
Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-43765, 333-43767, 333-43769,
333-53309, 333-53333, 333-53337, and 333-99317), and on Form S-3 (Nos.
333-31043, 333-93769, and 333-103392).

Very truly yours,


/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
------------------------------
    PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
    Los Angeles, California
|   | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 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 Company. |
|--------|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date: November 4, 2011 |   | /s/ WILLIAM L. JASPER                        |   |
|------------------------|--------|---------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                   |   | William L. Jasper                                 |   |
|                   |   | Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer |   |
|                   |   |                                              |   |