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 Treasury

###### Internal Revenue Service

          - 26 CFR Part 1
          - [REG-125632-06]
          - RIN 1545-BF83

# AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

# ACTION:

Notice of proposed rulemaking by cross-reference to temporary regulations; correction notice.

# SUMMARY:

                        This document contains corrections to notice of proposed rulemaking by cross-reference to temporary regulations that was published in the                         **Federal Register**                         on Tuesday, December 19, 2006 (71 FR 75898) providing guidance regarding the qualification of certain transactions as reorganizations described in section 368(a)(1)(D) where no stock and/or securities of the acquiring corporation are issued and distributed in the transaction.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Bruce A. Decker at (202) 622-7550 (not a toll-free number).

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

## Background

The notice of proposed rulemaking by cross-reference to temporary regulations (REG-125632-06) that is the subject of these corrections are under sections 368 and 354 of the Internal Revenue Code.

## Need for Correction

As published, notice of proposed rulemaking by cross-reference to temporary regulations (REG-125632-06) contains errors that may prove to be misleading and are in need of clarification.

## Correction of Publication

                    Accordingly, the notice of proposed rulemaking by cross-reference to                           ( print page 3088)                        temporary regulations (REG-125632-06) that was the subject of FR Doc. E6-21572, is corrected as follows:                

On page 75898, column 3, in the preamble, under the caption, line 9, the language “acquiring corporation is issued and” is corrected to read “acquiring corporation are issued and.”

LaNita Van Dyke,

Chief, Publications and Regulations Branch, Legal Processing Division, Office of Associate Chief Counsel (Procedure and Administration).

[FR Doc. E7-860 Filed 1-23-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
#### Osaki Shoten, Ltd. *v.*United States

No. 8029.

Entered at Honolulu, T. H.

Entry No. 1526.

(Decided July 19, 1951)

*Lawrence & Tuttle (Patrick J. Donohue*of counsel) for the plaintiff.

*David N. Edelstein,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

OliveR, Chief Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement has been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

> It is hereby stipulated as follows between counsel for plaintiff and the Assistant Attorney General for the United States, concerning the merchandise referred to herein:

> 1) That the merchandise covered by the appeal .enumerated above, marked “A” on the invoice and initialed E. E. B. by Customs Examiner Eeslie E. Brewer, consists of rubber-soled shoes of the same character and description as those covered by Samura v. US, Reap. Dec. 4437, and appraised on the same basis, and that the record in said decision may be incorporated herein.

> 2) That the unit invoiced values of said shoes, plus packing and cases as invoiced, represent the foreign and export values as defined in section 402, Tariff Act of 1930.

> 3) That the appeal herein be submitted on this stipulation, it being limited to-items marked “A” as aforesaid.

On the agreed facts I find the foreign and export values, as those-values are defined in section 402 (c) and (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930,. to be the proper bases for the determination of the value of the merchandise represented on the invoice by the items marked “A” and. initialed L. F. B. by Examiner Leslie F. Brewer, and that such values were the unit invoiced values, plus packing and cases as invoiced.

Insofar as the appeal relates to all other merchandise it is hereby-dismissed.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
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 Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Project No. 2219-020—Utah]

In accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 and the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (Commission) regulations, 18 CFR Part 380 (Order No. 486, 52 FR 47897), the Office of Energy Projects has reviewed the application for new license for the Boulder Creek Hydroelectric Project, located on Boulder Creek in Garfield County, Utah, and has prepared a final Environmental Assessment (EA) for the project. The project occupies 29.59 acres of Federal land, administered by the U.S. Forest Service as part of the Dixie National Forest.

The final EA contains the staff's analysis of the potential environmental impacts of the project and concludes that issuing a new license for the project, with appropriate environmental protective measures, would not constitute a major federal action that would significantly affect the quality of the human environment.

                    A copy of the final EA is available for review at the Commission in the Public Reference Room or may be viewed on the Commission's Web site at                     *http://www.ferc.gov*                     using the “eLibrary” link. Enter the docket number excluding the last three digits in the docket number field to access the document. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support at                     *FERCOnlineSupport@ferc.gov*                     or toll-free at 1-866-208-3676, or for TTY, (202) 502-8659.                

                    You may also register online at                     *http://www.ferc.gov/​docs-filing/​esubscription.asp*                     to be notified via e-mail of new filings and issuances related to this or other pending projects. For assistance, contact FERC Online Support.                

For further information, contact Dianne Rodman at (202) 502-6077.

Kimberly D. Bose,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. E7-8972 Filed 5-9-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
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 Defense

###### Department of the Navy 

# AGENCY:

Department of the Navy, DoD. 

# ACTION:

Notice of Revised Deadline for Scoping Comments for the Environmental Impact Statement (EIS)/Overseas Environmental Impact Statement (OEIS) for the relocation of U.S. Marine Corps forces to Guam, enhancement of infrastructure and logistic capabilities, improvement of pier/waterfront infrastructure for transient U.S. Navy Nuclear Aircraft Carrier (CVN) at Naval Base Guam, and placement of a U.S. Army Ballistic Missile Defense (BMD) Task Force in Guam. 

# SUMMARY:

                        The Department of the Navy is revising the deadline for Scoping Comments. The Notice of Intent establishing the original scoping period was published in the                         **Federal Register**                         on March 07, 2007 (Vol. 72, No. 44, p. 10186). The impacts of Typhoon Kong-Rey necessitates extension of the written public scoping comment deadline. The written public scoping comment deadline, originally scheduled for May 01, 2007 is extended until May 21, 2007.                     

# Dates And Addresses:

The Department of the Navy will accept written comments on the EIS scope postmarked by May 21, 2007. Comments should be mailed to: JGPO, c/o NAVFAC Pacific, 258 Makalapa Drive, Suite 100, Pearl Harbor, HI 96860-3134, Attention: EV2. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Captain Robert Lee, Commander, Navy Region Marianas, PSC 455 Box 152, FPO AP, Guam 96540, telephone 671-339-6156, E-mail at:                         *Robert.Lee@guam.navy.mil.*

Dated: 1 May 2007. 

M.A. Harvison, 

Lieutenant Commander,  Judge Advocate General's Corps, U.S. Navy, Federal Register Liaison Officer.

 [FR Doc. E7-8571 Filed 5-3-07; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 3810-FF-P
No. 65762.

#### Fabry Associates, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 60/24278 (New York).

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of wall-hung furniture similar in all material respects to that the subject of *Fabry Associates, Inc.*v. *United States*(45 Cust. Ct. 88, C.D. 2203), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Exhibit 10.11

|   | Susan B.    Kilgannon |                             |
|--------|-----------------------|----------------------------------|
|   |                  |                             |   |
|   | By:                   | /s/ Susan      B. Kilgannon |   |
|   |                  | Susan      B. Kilgannon     |   |
|   |                  |                             |   |
|   |                  |                             |   |

|   | URS      Corporation,a Delaware    corporation |                                           |
|--------|------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------|
|   |                                           |                                           |   |
|   | By:                                            | /s/ H.      Thomas Hicks                  |   |
|   |                                           | Name:      H. Thomas Hicks                |   |
|   |                                           | Title: Chief      Financial Officer  |   |
|   |                                           |                                           |   |

----
### Geology of the northern part of the Iron River district, Iron County, Michigan

By: Harold Lloyd JamesCarl E. Dutton

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/cir120

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report** 
- Plates:                               - **Plate 1**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 2**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 3**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 4**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 5**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 6**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 7**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 8**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 9**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 10**                            (pdf) 
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
No. 46964.

#### Protest 45076-K of Draeger Shipping Co. (New York).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

From an examination of the papers the court was unable to find anything sufficient to overcome the presumption of correctness attaching to the collector's action. The protest was therefore overruled.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
Financial Data Schedule for Form 10-Q for October 31, 2000
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000102198
<NAME> COMPETITIVE TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-31-2001
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-2000
<CASH>                                       1,235,485
<SECURITIES>                                 6,329,373
<RECEIVABLES>                                  409,470
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             8,096,192
<PP&E>                                         296,413
<DEPRECIATION>                                 181,056
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              10,869,236
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,493,215
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     60,675
<COMMON>                                        61,907
<OTHER-SE>                                   9,253,439
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                10,869,236
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               463,578
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  768,423
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (185,140)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (185,140)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (185,140)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.03)


</TABLE>
Before the First Division,

May 2, 1950

No. 54290.

#### Eitinger Bead Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 918327-G, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of white beads similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Eitinger Bead Co.*v. *United States*(13 Cust. Ct. 50, C. D. 867), certain items were held dutiable at 35 percent under paragraph 1503 and other items at 20 percent under said paragraph, as modified by T. D. 49458.
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit 

___________________________

No. 19-1725

___________________________ 

United States of America

 Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

Cody Kinzie Dittmar

 Defendant - Appellant

____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Northern District of Iowa - Dubuque

____________ 

Submitted: April 13, 2020

 Filed: April 28, 2020 

[Unpublished]

____________ 

Before COLLOTON, GRUENDER, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges. 

____________

PER CURIAM.

Cody Dittmar pleaded guilty to being a felon in possession of a firearm in 

violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). The district court found that Dittmar qualified 

for a sentencing enhancement under the Armed Career Criminal Act (“ACCA”), see

18 U.S.C. § 924(e), based on two prior Iowa convictions for arson and one prior 

Wisconsin conviction for burglary. Dittmar previously appealed his designation as 
-2- 

an armed career criminal, we vacated his sentence on grounds not relevant to this 

appeal, and we remanded the matter for resentencing. United States v. Dittmar, 897 

F.3d 958, 959, 961 (8th Cir. 2018). On remand, the district court once again 

concluded Dittmar qualified as an armed career criminal on the basis of the same 

state convictions. Dittmar again appeals, once more challenging his designation as 

an armed career criminal.

In light of United States v. Franklin, 2019 WI 64, 928 N.W.2d 545, which 

was decided after Dittmar’s resentencing, the Government now concedes that 

Dittmar does not qualify as an armed career criminal because his Wisconsin burglary 

conviction is not an ACCA predicate offense. See United States v. Webster, 784 F. 

App’x 975 (8th Cir. 2019) (per curiam). As such, in accordance with the parties’

request, we again vacate Dittmar’s sentence and remand this matter to the district 

court for resentencing without the ACCA enhancement.

______________________________
Proposed Rule: Mandatory Reporting of Greenhouse Gas Emissions 

Meeting Documentation for 13 November 2009 Telephone Call with DuPont Fluoropolymer RepRegarding Fluorinated Gas ProductionDate: 13 November 2009Staff Contact Information (Name, email, phone #): Deborah Ottinger, EPA, 343-9149, Ottinger.deborah@epa.gov; Karen Schaffner, RTI, ksschaffner@rti.orgName of Organization (Attach list of all attendees names and emails if possible):

Michael Parr, John Wehner, Suhas Mahuli, Jeremy Blanks (Fluoropolymers), Pat McGee, DuPont 

Summary of Discussion (e.g., applicability, reporting requirements, etc.):The purpose of the conference call was to discuss emissions of fluorinated GHG from processes not making GHG. The Dunoted the following: DuPont makes fluoropolymer products at its Parkersburg, West Virginia facility (Washington Works) and at the Fayettevilfacility (Fayetteville Works). Some of these fluoropolymer processes make products that are not considered fluorinated GH

fluorinated GHG as raw materials, and emit fluorinated GHG. The majority of the processes at these sites do not use or em

DuPont maintains and meets corporate goals on GHG reductions, and these facilities make emissions calculations and repo

corporate GHG effort. The emissions calculations are not done on a daily basis. In general, facilities conduct monthly data Most fluoropolymer processes are fairly capital intensive and facilities across the industry are typically larger (i.e., no smal

fluoropolymer processes are batch processes. During the fluoropolymer production processes, byproducts are made. The faor analyzes the amount of byproducts generated by using a form of the mass balance approach. Staff look at the process on 

analyzing the yields; when yields are high, a low percentage is emitted. All process vents at the Parkersburg facility are sen

oxidizer, although there will be some fugitive emissions. There is no thermal oxidizer at the Fayetteville facility; that site d

and process vents are controlled by the scrubber. Fluorochemical facilities may do an emission calculation based on mass balance, i.e., look at input and outputs and what cawould be emitted. These emissions calculations would be conducted based on monthly inventories and reported on an annuhazardous compounds, the company has a zero leaks philosophy, so equipment leak emissions are small. The facilities havsystems that measure specific fluorinated compounds, however these are area or ambient monitors. Field inspections by opon equipment pieces, including visual inspection of equipment. Staff use a handheld detector, with an infrared analytical tean FID) to check for fluorinated GHG leaks, however there are limits on the detection limit. Process equipment is leak chebefore process startup. 
Written Comments Provided?

Did they also submit to Docket?No Date sent to EPA- CC

D

None
OFFICEOFTHEA'TTORNEY GENERAL OFTEXAS AUSTIN

HonorableBrady Oentry, Chal&n Texas Highway Co~~~~lsalon Austin, Texas Dear Sir:

a. part 0r zhez

syhteh &xlooneidihtion 

### or

Caii@lreloner*e

Court, aotlng elthor f or a dtiflned

road dietriat,authorlead faion, o odntraotwith the State Highway Coma&swhereby it agrees to relinquishand nrqive any iand all rights, pramit or rutrue, tbat'it or the road diatriothas or may 

### rave to hate auOhbonded 'indebtedness

beooma eligible ior partioipatlonin ,the County and Road Diafriot Highway Fund, in mnslderation of the direot benefits@Wing to the Conntr or road dlstriot by reason of the dleignatitin &xl maintermnoeof the road bjr the State Highway CommtaeiOn?SHonorable Brady Gentry, Chairman Page 2

Articles 6674q-l-6674q-14 of Vernon*6Annotated OiYil Statute6 are generally known a8 the Road Bond AsswnptionLaw. the As you are aware;the law provides for establishment

and malntenanoeof a County and Road DlsfriotHighway Fund to be administered **by** the Board of County and Road District Indebtedness therein provided. The purpose of this fund is to servioeand retire road Indebtedness

of oountlesand road dlatrloteeligible under the terms of the act.

Section (a) of Artiole 0674qc7provides in part:

. -In addition to and regardlessof the other pro- ~lsiods of this AOt all bonds, warrants or other legal evidencesor kdebtedness vote8 or Issued dthout being voted by a oounty, road'dlatriot or d@'ined.roaa

dlstrlotprior to January 8, 1999~, In 80 far ae amounts of same were or may'be iskued and the prooeede aotually, mended or ioada whioh are aar.a fn the oonatxuouo$~n t .,of the '.des~

It is elamoatarythat ootanty o~eeiwrew* courts, road dlstriOt, and. all other polltloal aubdwfsioafa Of the Stat6 are dependant entirelyupon the 1egielatiVe word fn regard to %helr authorityto maKe'~oontraots. shoe -the Leg%s~attare

has pla&nly apokea to the oontxax+the~ can **be** no doubt that wither the S&way Departmeat,the Board oi County ana Road Distrlot fndebtedness, a oommls(lioners* .court, nor s road dlbtrio+may bF ,oontraot or othenieo waive the right or eligible indebtednessto partloipateHoao~able Brady Gentry, Chairman Page 8

in th&Gounty and Road Distrlcit Highway Fund. To hold that &oh authorityexisted,would be tantamountto permlttlpg by o-ontraot a ohange In the expressed latent of the Legislature.

Eaoh of your questions is aooordinglyanswered in the ~tiegativa. Very truly your5, ATTOENZY GEHEEIAL

OFTEXAS 

# .BY /a/
. James D. Smullen

Assistant

APPRWlCDOPl3lIOlfC~ BY BWB OHAIRUW -...