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

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2340 

To suspend temporarily the duty on chime melody rod assemblies. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 24 (legislative day, APRIL 23), 2012 

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

to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on chime melody rod 

assemblies. 

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

3 SECTION 1. CHIME MELODY ROD ASSEMBLIES. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.01.00 Chime melody rod assemblies 

(provided for in subheading 

9114.90.50) for the production of grandfather clocks, 

wall clocks, and mantel clocks Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2015 ’’. 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2340 IS

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies with respect to goods entered, or 

3 withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 

4 the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
II 

109TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1115 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow Indian tribes to 

receive charitable contributions of inventory. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 24, 2005 

Ms. MURKOWSKI (for herself and Mr. JOHNSON) 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 allow Indian 

tribes to receive charitable contributions of inventory.

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

3 SECTION 1. CHARITABLE CONTRIBUTIONS OF INVENTORY 

4 TO INDIAN TRIBES . 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 170(e)(3) of the Internal 

6 Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to special rule for con7 tributions of inventory and other property) is amended by 

8 adding at the end the following new subparagraph: 

9 ‘‘(D) SPECIAL RULE FOR INDIAN

10 TRIBES.— 
2

•S 1115 IS

1 ‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—For purposes of 

2 this paragraph, an Indian tribe (as defined 

3 in section 7871(c)(3)(E)(ii)) shall be treat4 ed as an organization eligible to be a donee 

5 under subparagraph (A). 

6 ‘‘(ii) USE OF PROPERTY.—For pur7 poses of subparagraph (A)(i), if the use of 

8 the property donated is related to the exer9 cise of an essential governmental function 

10 of the Indian tribal government (within the 

11 meaning of section 7871), such use shall 

12 be treated as related to the purpose or 

13 function constituting the basis for the or14 ganization’s exemption.’’. 

15 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

16 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after 

17 December 31, 2005.

Æ
EXHIBIT 10.50

                              U-HAUL/ECHO AGREEMENT
                                    ADDENDUM

     THIS  ADDENDUM  ("Addendum")  is  hereby  incorporated into the U-HAUL/ECHO
AGREEMENT  ("Agreement")  made  effective  on  December  12, 1996 by and between
Electronic  Clearing  House,  Inc.  (ECHO)  and  U-Haul  International  (UHI).


EXHIBIT D, ARTICLE 3 - PROCESSING SERVICES IS HEREBY AMENDED AS FOLLOWS:
     DEALER TRANSACTION FEES PER MONTH

     1/97 through 6/98:
     7/98 through 12/99
     1/00 through 9/01:
     10/01 through 12/02:
     1/03 through 12/05:

EXHIBIT D, ARTICLE 5 - DATA DISTRIBUTION:

     Dealer and Tax Adds
     Dealer and Tax Changes
     Local Rate Changes



PARTS  OF  Agreement  NOT  REVISED  BY  THIS  Addendum  REMAIN  IN  FULL  FORCE.

     This Addendum is executed by or on behalf of the parties by duly authorized
representatives  as  of  October  01,  2001.

U-HAUL INTERNATIONAL (UHI)


By: _________________________
     Layton Baker, Vice President-
     Marketing

ELECTRONIC CLEARING HOUSE, INC. (ECHO)


By: _________________________
     Joel M. Barry, CEO and
     Chairman of the Board


                                      S 5
<PAGE>
EXHIBIT
      10.1

    


    Term
      Loan
      Agreement

     


    Party
      A
      (hereinafter referred to as the “Lender”): Tianjin Tianshi Biological
      Development Co., Ltd.

    


    Party
      B
      (hereinafter referred to as the “Borrower”): Tianjin Tianshi Biological
      Engineering Co., Ltd.

    


    The
      Lender and the Borrower have reached and signed a loan agreement which should
      be
      observed by both parties. 

    


    In
      order
      to support the business development of the Borrower, the Lender agrees to extend
      the loan agreement that was signed on December 22, 2006, and makes the following
      according amendments:

     

    
      	 	1.	
              The
                amount of the loan: RMB 200 million ( ¥
                200,000,000);

            


      	 	
              2.

            	
              The
                term of the loan agreement: from October 1, 2007 to December 31,
                2007;

            


    

    
      	 	
              3.

            	
              The
                type of the loan: short-term loan;

            


    

    
      	 	
              4.

            	
              The
                interest of the loan: at a rate that is equal to the contemporary
                interest
                rate for the same level of the loan published by the People’s Bank Of
                China;

            


    

    
      	 	
              5.

            	
              The
                Borrower guarantees to repay the principal and interest of the loan
                by
                December 31, 2007, and the terms of the loan agreement shall not
                be
                breached. 

            


    

    
      	 	
              6.

            	
              With
                approval from the Lender the Borrower can pay off the loan before
                December
                31, 2007. The interest of the loan shall be calculated until the
                day on
                which the principal of the loan is repaid, and no fine shall be imposed
                on
                the Borrower for advancing the repayment of the
                loan.

            


    

    


    


    
      	 	 	 	 
	
              The
                Lender:

            	 	 	
              The
                Borrower:

            
	Tianjin Tianshi Biological Development
Co.,
              Ltd	 	 	
              Tianjin
                Tianshi Biological Engineering Co., Ltd

            
	 	 	 	 
	/s/ Jinyuan
              Li	 	 	/s/ Baolan
              Li
	
              

            	 	 	
              

            
	Title:General
              Manager 	 	 	Title:
              Director
              
	 	 	 	 
	September 27, 2007 	 	 	September 27,
              2007



     

     

     

    
      
         

      

      
        1
Martin, Michael (OST) 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Cc: 

Subject: 

Attachments: 

Martin, Michael (OST) 

^Wednesday, April 11, 2012 11:50 AM 

'Joshua Abramson'; barry griffith; mayor@hiwaay.net; steveh@shoalschamber.conn; Tom 

Bilanue; lrodgers@www.greenville.ms.us; mayor@hattiesburgms.com; 

cstork@airchoiceone.com; shane@airchoiceone.com; mbowman@gosilver.com 

Devany, Dennis (OST) 

EAS proposals for MSL, TUP, PIB, GLH 

Silver Airways bid for GLH LWB MSL PIB TUP APR 2012 - corrected.doc; Air Choice One 

proposal for 3rd RFP April 2012.pdf 

Everyone: 

I would like to update you on the Essential Air Service (EAS) situation at Muscle Shoals, Alabama, and Greenville, 

Hattiesburg/Laurel, and Tupelo, Mississippi, and give you an opportunity to offer any comments on the record before we 

submit a recommendation to the Assistant Secretary for Aviation and International Affairs. We issued Order 2012-3-4, 

March 6, 2012, soliciting a third round of proposals from carriers interested in providing replacement EAS for a new 

term. In response to our request, two airlines. Air Choice One and Silver Airways, have submitted proposals to serve all 

four communities. (Silver Airways included in their bid a proposal to provide EAS at Greenbrier, WV, which is under a 

separate EAS contract than the four communities above.) 

I have attached each airline's bid for your review. Please forward this e-mail to all relevant parities that I have not have 

included on the distribution list. I expect that each carrier's proposal should be uploaded on www.regulations.gov by 

COB today. We request that you review the proposals and submit any comments you may have soon as possible, but no 

later than Thursday. May 10. Please send your comments via e-mail to EAS@dot.gov. If you have any questions, feel 

free to contact me. 

Regards, 

Michael Martin 

United States Department of Transportation 

Office of Aviation Analysis 

Essential Air Service (EAS) and Small Community Air Service Development Program (SCASDP) 

(202) 366-6494
EXHIBIT 3.1.2




                           CERTIFICATION OF AMENDMENT
                                       OF
                            ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION
                                       OF
                         ELECTRONIC CLEARING HOUSE, INC.


ELECTRONIC CLEARING HOUSE, INC., a corporation organized under the laws of the
State of Nevada, by its President and Corporate Secretary does hereby certify:

That the board of directors of said corporation by Unanimous Written Consent
dated October 28, 1987, passed a resolution declaring that the following change
and amendment in the Articles of Incorporation is advisable:

RESOLVED, that Article "Second" of the Company articles of Incorporation be
amended to read as follows:

"SECOND: Its principal office in the State of Nevada is located at 1209 South
Casino Center Boulevard, Las Vegas, Nevada 89104."

That the board of directors of said corporation at a meeting duly convened and
held on the 30th day of August, 1991,  passed a resolution declaring that the
following change and amendment in the Articles of Incorporation is advisable:

RESOLVED, that Article "Fourth" of the Company's Articles of Incorporation be
amended to read as follows:

"FOURTH: The amount of the total authorized capital stock of the Corporation is
One Hundred Seventy-Five Thousand dollars ($175,000), which shall consist of
twelve million five hundred thousand (12,500,000) shares of Common stock of the
par value of One Cent ($.01) each and five million (5,000,000) shares of
Preferred stock having a par value of One Cent ($.01) each."

That the board of directors of said corporation at a meeting duly convened and
held on the 19th day of February, 1988, passed a resolution declaring that the
following change and amendment in the Articles of Incorporation is advisable:

RESOLVED, that the following provision be added to the end of Article "Fifth" of
the Company's Articles of Incorporation:

"The Directors and Officers of this corporation shall be protected by the
provisions of Nevada State Bill SB6 which eliminates or limits the liability of
Directors and Officers except in those instances of intentional misconduct,
fraud or a knowing violation of law."

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the said ELECTRONIC CLEARING HOUSE, INC., has caused this
certificate to be signed by its President and its Corporate Secretary and its
corporate seal to be hereto affixed this 23rd day of September, 1991.

ELECTRONIC CLEARING HOUSE, INC.

Donald R. Anderson, President
Donna L. Camras, Corporate Secretary
Certification of CEO and CFO 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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of CoreComm Limited (the
"Company") for the quarterly period ended June 30, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Thomas
Gravina, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Michael A. Peterson, as
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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 results of operations of the
Company.

By:  /s/ Thomas Gravina
     ---------------------------------
     Name: Thomas Gravina
     Title:   Chief Executive Officer
     Date:   August 14, 2002

By:  /s/ Michael A. Peterson
     ---------------------------------
     Name: Michael A. Peterson
     Title:   Chief Financial Officer
     Date:   August 14, 2002

This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of ss.18
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
No. 5996.

#### MARIE CECELIA LACROIX, ADM. vs. JOHN HOFFMAN.

Syllabus.

Remanded for further evidence.

Appeal from the 29th, Judicial District Court, for the Parish of St. Bernard, No. 796. Hon. R. E. Hingle, Judge.

*138Opinion and decree, May 18th, 1914.

W. W. "Wall, O. S. Livaudais, for plaintiff and appellant.

Ahrens & Nunez, for defendant and appellee.

His Honor, JOHN ST. PAUL,

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

An examination of the record in this case led ns to believe that there is evidence available, but not adduced, which might have a material bearing on the controversy.

Of the nature of that evidence we have advised all counsel; and being of opinion that the case should be remanded to allow the introduction of that or any other relevant evidence.

It is ordered that the judgment appealed from be set aside and that the case be remanded for a new trial according to law; appellee to pay costs of appeal, and the costs of suit to await the final result.

Remanded.
#### John Henry LEE v. STATE.

7 Div. 417.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

March 1, 1977.

Earl F. Hilliard, Birmingham, for appellant.

William J. Baxley, Atty. Gen., and Joseph G. L. Marston, III, Asst. Atty. Gen., for the State, appellee.

BOWEN W. SIMMONS, Retired Circuit Judge.

It appears from the record here on file that appellant was indicted for an unlawful homicide and convicted therefor.

It further appears that within the time provided by law that he appealed from the judgment of conviction and certificate of appeal was filed with this court.

Subsequently thereto, and before the present transcript was mailed or sent to this court, he moved the trial court to withdraw his appeal. The motion was granted, inter alia, by judgment on May 3, 1976, T. 15, Section 381, Recompiled Code 1958, authorizes this procedure.

Thereafter, on June 24, 1976, this court, as an incident to the trial court’s dismissal *1391of the appeal, dismissed the appeal, thereby terminating this court’s jurisdiction.

Thereafter, on August 10,1976, appellant, through his attorneys, filed in the circuit court his motion in writing to vacate and set aside its order granting petitioner’s motion for withdrawal of appeal dated May 3, 1976, and to reinstate petitioner’s notice of appeal.

The trial court, on August 13, 1976, ordered and adjudged that the motion to vacate the order of dismissal be granted and that the appeal be reinstated.

We do not know of any statutory or other authority for the trial court to reinstate the appeal as it undertook to do in this case. Dismissal of the appeal at nisi prius level is authorized by statute, supra, but a subsequent reinstatement is not authorized.

This court dismissed the appeal at the time and in the manner provided by law and so far as this court is concerned the appeal is not now pending.

The motion of the State to strike the record here filed as an incident to the dismissed appeal has merit. The record is stricken.

The foregoing opinion was prepared by the Honorable BOWEN W. SIMMONS, a retired Circuit Judge, serving as a Judge of this Court, under the provisions of Section 6.10 of the new Judicial Article (Constitutional Amendment No. 328); his opinion is hereby adopted as that of the Court.

MOTION GRANTED; RECORD STRICKEN:

Order of June 24, 1976, dismissing the appeal remains in effect.

TYSON, P. J., and HARRIS, DeCARLO, and BOWEN, JJ., concur.

BOOKOUT, J., concurs specially.

BOOKOUT, Judge,

concurring specially:

I concur in the result of this opinion, however, I do not concur with any implication that an appeal cannot be reinstated after dismissal if the reinstatement is within the time for filing an original appeal. That is, within six months pursuant to Title 15, § 368, Code of Alabama 1940 in the instant case, or within forty-two days after judgment pursuant to Rules 3 and 4, Alabama Rules of Appellate Procedure (effective December 1, 1975).

Since the attempted reinstatement in this case took place more than six months after rendition of judgment, the trial court had no jurisdiction over the appeal and neither do we.
# C_2015046EN.01000302.xml

| 9.2.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 46/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.2.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 46/3

---

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 11 December 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal da Relação de Lisboa — Portugal) — Cruz & Companhia Lda v Instituto de Financiamento da Agricultura e Pescas, IP (IFAP), Caixa Central — Caixa Central de Crédito Agrícola Mútuo, CRL

(Case C-128/13) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Agriculture - Regulation (EEC) No 3665/87 - Articles 4(1) and 13 - Regulation (EEC) No 2220/85 - Article 19(1)(a) - Export refunds - Advance payments on refunds - Conditions for the release of the guarantee furnished to ensure the repayment of the advance))

(2015/C 046/04)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Referring court

Tribunal da Relação de Lisboa

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Cruz & Companhia Lda

Applicant:

Defendants: Instituto de Financiamento da Agricultura e Pescas, IP (IFAP), Caixa Central — Caixa Central de Crédito Agrícola Mútuo, CRL

Defendants:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Article 19(1)(a) of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 2220/85 of 22 July 1985 laying down common detailed rules for the application of the system of securities for agricultural products, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 3403/93 of 10 December 1993, must be interpreted as meaning that the guarantee furnished by an exporter to ensure the repayment of the advance received by way of export refund must not be considered to be extinguished even where it is established that the exporter submitted the acceptance of the export declaration, proof that the goods left the customs territory of the European Union within a maximum period of 60 days after that acceptance, and the proof of clearance of those products through customs in the importing third country, if the other conditions for the grant of the refund, in particular the condition of sound and fair marketable quality of the products exported, provided for in Article 13 of Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3665/87 of 27 November 1987 laying down common detailed rules for the application of the system of export refunds on agricultural products, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1829/94 of 26 July 1994, are not satisfied.

---

(1)  OJ C 171, 15.6.2013.

1

---
S TEVE M ORRISSEY M ANAGING D IRECTOR —R EGULATORY AND P OLICY (202) 296-2733 (202) 296-2873 FAX

STEVE

. MORRISSEY @ UNITED

. COM

January 19, 2011

Esta Rosenberg, Chief U.S. Carrier Licensing Division U.S. Department of Transportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. Washington, D.C. 20590

Re: Blanket Statement of Authorization of Continental Airlines, Inc. and Air New Zealand Limited (Docket DOT-OST-2009-0340)

Dear Ms. Rosenberg:

Pursuant to the blanket Statement of Au thorization granted by the Department to Continental Airlines, Inc. (“C ontinental”) and Air New Zealand Limited (“ANZ”) on January 26, 2010 (Docket DOT-OST-2009-0340), this notice is to advise the Department that ANZ’s “NZ” designator code will be placed on Continental- operated flights between Los Angeles, CAGuadalajara, Mexico.

The proposed code-share services are fully consistent with ap plicable bilateral agreements. The carriers intend to implement these services on or after February 18, 2011.

Respectfully submitted,

Steve Morrisse y Managing Director, Regulatory & Policy
UNITED AIR LINES, INC. AND

CONTINENTAL AIRLINES, INC.

cc: George Wellington Linda Lundell Dan Weiss Brian Hedberg Charles Hunnicutt Brett Kruger Susan GotbetterCERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that I have this date se rved a copy of the foregoing document on all

persons named below by causing a copy to be sent via email:

barbara.russell@virginamerica.com

carl.nelson@aa.com dkirstein@yklaw.com jeff.morgan@delta.com jyoung@yklaw.com (Spirit) donna.kooperstein@usdoj.gov dwight.moore@ustranscom.mil efaberman@wileyrein.com (Air Tran/Frontier) howard.kass@usairways.com jhill@dowlohnes.com (Hawaiian/Jet Blue) john.allen@faa.gov john.fredericksen@suncountry.com

msinick@ssd.com (Alaska) pmurphy@lopmurphy.com (USA 3000) sascha.vanderbellen@delta.com urskr@state.gov william.stallings@usdoj.gov

Annalei Avanceña

Dated: January 19, 2011
No. 99-874.

#### Nguyen *v.*Inova Alexandria Hospital.

C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 23
- 0366 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. NINA ANGELINA AUGUSTA HUFF,

Defendant and Appellant
.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including July 22 , 2024, within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

June 14 2024

06/14/2024

Case Number: DA 23-0366