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

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 214 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 214

To amend the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 to require oil polluters to pay 
          the full cost of oil spills, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 27, 2011

 Mr. Menendez introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
       referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 to require oil polluters to pay 
          the full cost of oil spills, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Big Oil Bailout Prevention Unlimited 
Liability Act of 2011''.

SEC. 2. REMOVAL OF LIMITS ON LIABILITY FOR OFFSHORE FACILITIES.

    (a) In General.--Section 1004(a)(3) of the Oil Pollution Act of 
1990 (33 U.S.C. 2704(a)(3)) is amended by striking ``plus $75,000,000'' 
and inserting ``and the liability of the responsible party under 
section 1002''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section takes 
effect on April 15, 2010.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
consolidated financial statements of XCL Ltd. and Subsidiaries for the fiscal
year ended December 31, 1997, and is qualified in its entirety by reference to
such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                          32,215
<SECURITIES>                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                      101
<ALLOWANCES>                         0
<INVENTORY>                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                33,967
<PP&E>                          55,467
<DEPRECIATION>                   1,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                 119,089
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>           11,568
<BONDS>                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                0
<PREFERRED>                      1,196
<COMMON>                           217
<OTHER-SE>                      39,412
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>   119,089
<SALES>                            236
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                   236
<CGS>                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                    8,294
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                (3,065)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>               8,450
<INCOME-PRETAX>                (13,443)
<INCOME-TAX>                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                   (551)
<CHANGES>                            0
<NET-INCOME>                   (13,994)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                    (1.36)
<EPS-DILUTED>                    (1.36)
        

</TABLE>
February 24, 1940

No. 43283.

Suit 4238.

#### Union *Brokerage Co., Inc.*v. *United States.*

Abstract 40421 affirmed. C. A. D. 92.
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

JENNIFER DICOSTANZO
, Appellant,

v.

WALMART, INC.
, Appellee

.

No. 4D 21

- 1657

[ September 1, 2022 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County ; Paige Hardy Gillman , Judge; L.T. Case No.

502019CA015145

.

Bard D. Rockenbach of Burlington and Rockenbach, P.A., West Palm Beach, and Maaz Quraishi of Law Office of Maaz Quraishi, P.A., West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Nicholas J. Christopolis, Daniel S. Weinger, and James M. Keleman of Luks, Santaniello, Petrillo, Cohen & Peterfriend, Jacksonville, for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

K LINGENSMITH

, C.J., G ROSS and D AMOORGIAN

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Before the First Division,

February 10, 1941

No. 45366.

#### Protest 980787-G of Pacific Trading Co. (San Francisco).

*538Opinion by

Brown, J.

In accordance with the report of the appraiser the bonito in question was held dutiable at 1J4 cents per pound under paragraph 717 (c) as claimed.
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 208 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend the 100 percent 

exclusion for gain on certain small business stock. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 26, 2011 

Mr. KERRY (for himself and Ms. SNOWE) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend 

the 100 percent exclusion for gain on certain small business stock. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF TEMPORARY EXCLUSION OF 100 

4 PERCENT OF GAIN ON CERTAIN SMALL BUSI5 NESS STOCK. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Paragraph (4) of section 1202(a) 

7 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended by the 

8 Tax Relief, Unemployment Insurance Reauthorization, 

9 and Job Creation Act of 2010, is amended— 


rfrederick on DSKD9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 208 IS

1 (1) by striking ‘‘January 1, 2012’’ and insert2 ing ‘‘January 1, 2013’’, and 

3 (2) by striking ‘‘AND 2011’’ and inserting ‘‘2011, 

4 AND 2012’’ in the heading thereof. 

5 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

6 this section shall apply to stock acquired after December 

7 31, 2010. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSKD9S0YB1PROD with BILLS
#### W. X. Huber Co. *v.*United States

No. 7654.

Invoices dated Kobe, Japan, November 9, 1937, etc.

Certified November 10, 1937, etc.

Entered at Los Angeles, Calif., December 29, 1937, etc.

Entry No. 4322, etc.

(Decided February 2, 1949)

*Philip Stein*for the plaintiff.

*David N. Edelstein,*Assistant Attorney General *(Charles J. Miville,*special attorney), for the defendant.

Oliver, Chief Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement listed in schedule *“A”,*hereto attached and made a part hereof, have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulations of counsel for the parties hereto:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between counsel for the respective parties hereto, subject to the approval of the Court,

> (1) That the merchandise involved in the appeals listed in the attached schedule consists of rayon articles, made of rayon which in all material respects is such or similar to the rayon in the articles the subject of decision in *United States v. Nippon Dry Goods Co.,*Reap. Dec. 5006, affirming Reap. Dec. 4704; and that the issue herein and conditions as to the market value are the same as the issue and conditions as to market value in the cited cases, and the record in said cases is hereby incorporated herein.

> (2) That the appraised values of the rayon articles covered by these appeals, less any additions made by the importer by reason of the so-called Japanese consumption tax, to meet advances made by the Appraiser in similar cases, represent the prices at the time of exportation of such merchandise to the United States at which such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal markets of the country from which exported, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade, for exportation to the United States, and represent the export values of such merchandise and that there were no higher foreign values at the time of exportation thereof.

> (3) That the appeals herein are abandoned as to all merchandise except the rayon articles.

> (4) That this stipulation may be filed and made a part of the record herein, * * *

> *******

> *392IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between counsel for the respective parties hereto, subject to the approval of the Court, that the appeals to reappraisement listed in the schedule of cases attached hereto may be submitted on the stipulation dated February 22, 1944, heretofore filed herein and on this stipulation and the record as made.

On the agreed facts I find the export value, as-that value is defined in section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the rayon articles here involved, and that such values are the appraised values, less any additions made by the importer by reason of the so-called Japanese consumption tax to meet advances made by the appraiser in similar cases.

The appeals having been abandoned insofar as they relate to all other merchandise, to that extent the appeals are hereby dismissed.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
1 Updates To NEEDS v

. 5.1 4 incremental to v.5.13 based on External Engagement March 25, 2015

This document provides a user

- friendly reference to identify unit level updates made in NEEDS v.5.14.

EPA Base Case v.5.13 and NEEDS v.5.13 were released in November 2013

. Since that time we have obtained comments through Notices of Data Availability (NODAs), on EPA’s 2011 and 2018 air quality modeling platforms, issued in November 2013 and January 2014, respectively. In addition, we have received comments a nd feedback on NEEDS through our power sector modeling website
at http://www.epa.gov/powersectormodeling

.

We have reviewed and researched all comments for reliability and consistency to de termine their applicability in NEEDS v.5.14 to be used as input to EPA Base Case v.5.14 . The spreadsheet titled ‘Updates to NEEDS’ lists those comments with the following fields of information:

- Source of the comments (commenter/affiliation)

- Unit identifie rs (unique ID, plant name, unit number, state)

- Data field of interest (a single unit might have more than one entry for different parameter specifications)

- Value in NEEDS v.5.13

- Suggested/updated value

- Documentation of comments (summary of the comment)

- EPA review ( whether/how to revise a data parameter )

- Notes (explanation for the cases where EPA does not make a revision )

EPA has also made updates as described in ‘EPA Base Case v.5.14 Using IPM Incremental Documentation’ that is summarized below:

- Committed units with online year of 2015 or earlier were reviewed and updated

.

- For fossil units in California that are not assigned NO x rates from 2011 ETS, default NO x rates that assume the presence of a SCR are assigned.

- Nuclear unit capacity and projected up rates are based on AEO 2014.

- Retirement related information from EPA research (in addition to above NEEDS comments) was researched, reviewed and incorporated.
**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

**AS      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF      2002**

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

|   | 2. | To                my knowledge, the information contained in the Report fairly presents,                in                all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations                of Atlantic BancGroup, Inc., as of and for the period covered by                the                report. |
|--------|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:  August                10, 2007 | /s/                David L. Young           |
|-------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------------|
|                                            | David                L. Young               |
|                                            | Executive                Vice President,    |
|                                            | Chief                Financial Officer, and |
|                                            | Corporate                Secretary          |
# C_2013189EN.01000201.xml

| 29.6.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 189/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.6.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 189/2

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht Düsseldorf (Germany) lodged on 26 March 2013 — Holger Forstmann Transporte GmbH & Co. KG v Hauptzollamt Münster

(Case C-152/13)

2013/C 189/02

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Finanzgericht Düsseldorf

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Holger Forstmann Transporte GmbH & Co. KG

Applicant:

Defendant: Hauptzollamt Münster

Defendant:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | Is the term ‘manufacturer’, within the meaning of the first indent of Article 24(2) of Council Directive 2003/96/EC (1) of 27 October 2003 restructuring the Community framework for the taxation of energy products and electricity, OJ 2003 L 283, p. 51, to be interpreted as also including coachbuilders or dealers, when they have fitted the fuel tank as part of a process of producing the vehicle, and the production process was, for technical and/or economic reasons, carried out through division of labour by various independent businesses? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Is the term ‘manufacturer’, within the meaning of the first indent of Article 24(2) of Council Directive 2003/96/EC (1) of 27 October 2003 restructuring the Community framework for the taxation of energy products and electricity, OJ 2003 L 283, p. 51, to be interpreted as also including coachbuilders or dealers, when they have fitted the fuel tank as part of a process of producing the vehicle, and the production process was, for technical and/or economic reasons, carried out through division of labour by various independent businesses?

1

| 2. | If the first question should be answered in the affirmative: What interpretation is to be given, in such cases, to the factual criterion, in the first indent of Article 24(2) of Council Directive 2003/96/EC of 27 October 2003 restructuring the Community framework for the taxation of energy products and electricity, OJ 2003 L 283, p. 51, whereby the vehicles in question must be ‘of the same type’? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If the first question should be answered in the affirmative: What interpretation is to be given, in such cases, to the factual criterion, in the first indent of Article 24(2) of Council Directive 2003/96/EC of 27 October 2003 restructuring the Community framework for the taxation of energy products and electricity, OJ 2003 L 283, p. 51, whereby the vehicles in question must be ‘of the same type’?

---

(1)  OJ L 283, p. 51.

1

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                           2,005
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  173,500
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               390,568
<PP&E>                                         202,672
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (74,170)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 526,349
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          503,514
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        14,325
<OTHER-SE>                                    (135,380)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   526,349
<SALES>                                        432,713
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               432,713
<CGS>                                          238,658
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  238,658
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             3,954,519
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,260
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (3,764,724)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (3,764,724)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     (.29) 
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.29)
        

</TABLE>
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 222 

To limit investor and homeowner losses in foreclosures, and for other 

purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 27, 2011 

Mr. WHITEHOUSE introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To limit investor and homeowner losses in foreclosures, and 

for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Limiting Investor and 

5 Homeowner Loss in Foreclosure Act of 2010’’. 

6 SEC. 2. LOSS MITIGATION PROGRAMS. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 105 of title 11, United 

8 States Code, is amended by adding at the end the fol9 lowing: 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 222 IS

1 ‘‘(e) Without limiting the court’s authority under 

2 subsection (d) or under any other statute or rule, the 

3 court, by local rule or order, may establish and maintain 

4 a loss mitigation program for the consideration and nego5 tiation of consensual alternatives to avoid foreclosure be6 tween an individual debtor and the holder of a claim se7 cured by a security interest in real property that is the 

8 debtor’s principal residence.’’. 

9 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 362(e) of 

10 title 11, United States Code, is amended by adding at the 

11 end the following: 

12 ‘‘(3) If the party in interest requesting relief from 

13 the stay under subsection (d) of this section participates 

14 in a loss mitigation program maintained pursuant to sec15 tion 105(e) of this title, the time periods specified in para16 graphs (1) and (2) of this subsection shall be tolled during 

17 the time period commencing on the date on which such 

18 participation began and ending on the date on which no19 tice of such termination is filed and served on the debt20 or.’’. 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with BILLS
No. 00-714.

#### SL Service, Inc., fka Sea-Land Service, Inc., et al. *v.*Office & Professional Employees International Union, AFL-CIO, et al.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
Class I Areas for NPRM on three power plants, Arizona Regional Haze FIP

Apache, Cholla, Coronado

AEPCO Apache (9 areas)
chir	Chiricahua NM
chrw	Chiricahua Wilderness
gali	Galiuro
gila	Gila
maza	Mazatzal
moba	Mount Baldy
sagu	Saguaro
sian	Sierra Ancha
supe	Superstition

APS Cholla (13 areas)
care	Capitol Reef
gali	Galiuro
gila	Gila
grca	Grand Canyon
maza	Mazatzal
meve	Mesa Verde
moba	Mount Baldy
pefo	Petrified Forest
pimo	Pine Mountain
sagu	Saguaro
sian	Sierra Ancha
supe	Superstition
syca	Sycamore Canyon

SRP Coronado (16 areas; Bosque del Apache omitted)
band	Bandelier
chir	Chiricahua NM
chrw	Chiricahua Wilderness
gali	Galiuro
gila	Gila
grca	Grand Canyon
maza	Mazatzal
meve	Mesa Verde
moba	Mount Baldy
pefo	Petrified Forest
pimo	Pine Mountain
sagu	Saguaro
sape	San Pedro Parks
sian	Sierra Ancha
supe	Superstition
syca	Sycamore Canyon

Full list for the three power plants (17 areas; Bosque del Apache omitted)
band	Bandelier
care	Capitol Reef
chir	Chiricahua NM
chrw	Chiricahua Wilderness
gali	Galiuro
gila	Gila
grca	Grand Canyon
maza	Mazatzal
meve	Mesa Verde
moba	Mount Baldy
pefo	Petrified Forest
pimo	Pine Mountain
sagu	Saguaro
sape	San Pedro Parks
sian	Sierra Ancha
supe	Superstition
syca	Sycamore Canyon

bosq	Bosque del Apache
Exhibit 23

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT AND REPORT ON SCHEDULES

We consent to the use in Registration Statement No. 333-33903 of Investors Title
Company (the "Company") and Subsidiaries on Form S-8 of our report dated March
25, 2004, incorporated by reference in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of the
Company for the year ended December 31, 2003.

Our audits of the consolidated financial statements referred to in our
aforementioned report also included the financial statement schedules of the
Company, listed in Item 15. These financial statement schedules are the
responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express an
opinion based on our audits. In our opinion, such financial statements
schedules, when considered in relation to the basic consolidated financial
statements taken as a whole, present fairly in all material respects, the
information set forth therein.


/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP
Raleigh, North Carolina
March 25, 2004
Exhibit 32.1







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
Amendment No. 1 to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB/A of Media and Entertainment.com, Inc. (the Company) for the period ended March 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Winston Johnson, principal executive and financial officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, 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 results of operations of the Company.



Date:
May 28, 2004

By:  /s/ Winston Johnson

Winston Johnson

Principal executive and financial officer