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

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 609 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 609

Relating to the period during which certain retail dealer occupational 
                         taxes may be assessed.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 26, 1993

Mr. Kanjorski introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
Relating to the period during which certain retail dealer occupational 
                         taxes may be assessed.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled, That in the case of any 
tax imposed by section 5121 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, with 
respect to any taxable period beginning before July 1, 1985--
            (1) no assessment of any underpayment of such tax may be 
        made after the date of the enactment of this Act;
            (2) if such tax was assessed after December 31, 1987, and 
        on or before such date of enactment, such assessment shall be 
        abated; and
            (3) if such tax was collected after December 31, 1987, and 
        on or before such date of enactment, the amount so collected be 
        credited or refunded as an overpayment.

                                 <all>
```
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

TRAVIS STAMBAUGH,

Petitioner

v.

MIFFLIN COUNTY DISTRICT ATTORNEYS [SIC] OFFICE; MAYORS [SIC] OFFICE FOR BOROUGH OF (LEWISTOWN); OFFICE OF

ATTORNEY GENERALS [SIC] ; MIFFLIN

COUNTY & PENNSYLVANIA STATE

OFFICIALS IN THEIR OFFICIAL

CAPACITIES,

Respondents :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 54 MM 2022

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 10 th day of August , 2022, the Application for Leave to File Original

Process is GRANTED, and the Petition for Writ of Mandamus is DISMISSED.
FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

WASHINGTON, DC 20580 NOTICE OF APPEARANCE 

CASE NAME 

Ardagh Group S.A., et al. 

FILE/DOCKET NUMBER 

009356 

Pursuant to Section 4.1 of the Commission's Rules of Practice, I (we) am (are) entering in 

proceeding the appearance of 

D counsel supporting the complaint (Complete Items 1, 3, 4, and 5 below) 

D counsel or representative for the respondent (Complete Items 1, 2, 4, and 5 below) 

1:81 counsel or representative for a third party (Complete Items 1, 2, 4, and 5 below) 

1. COUNSEL OR REPRESENTATIVE 

Include the name, address, email address, and telephone 

number of each counsel or representative entering an 

appearance in the above proceeding, 

Andrea Agathoklis Murino (Of Counsel) 

amurino@wsgr.com 

Elyse Dorsey (Associate) 

edorsey@wsgr.com 

Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati, P.C. 

1700 K Street, NW 

Fifth Floor 

Washington, DC 20006 

Phone Number: 202-973-8800 

Fax Number: 202-973-8899 

3. ASSOCIATE/ASSISTANT DIRECTOR 

4. SIGNATURE OF SENIOR COUNSEL 

(Andrea Agathoklis Murine) 

2. RESPONDENT(S) OR THIRD PARTY(IES) 

Include the address and telephone numbers of all persons, 

partnerships, corporations, or associations on whose behalf 

this Notice of Appearance is being fi led. 

Fevisa Industrial, S.A. de C.V. 

Blvd Adolfo Lopez Mateos 2170 I Planta Baja Uno I Colonia 

Sanchez Taboada 

Mexicali, Baja California, 21360 Mexico 

US Mailing Address do PO Box 54 

Calexico, CA 92232 

Phone Number: 202-973-8832 

5. DATE SIGNED 

12/5/2013 

Return this form to: Federal Trade Commission 

Room H-113 

FTC Form 232 (rev 7111) 

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20580
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    Exhibit 21.1

                             LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES
                               OF THE REGISTRANT

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                              Jurisdiction of Incorporation
      Subsidiary                                     or Organization
-------------------                       -------------------------------------
<S>                                       <C>
    1.  P-Com United Kingdom, Inc.                      Delaware         
    2.  P-Com (BARBADOS) FSC Limited                    Barbados   
    3.  P-Com Finance Corporation                       Delaware   
    4.  Geritel S.p.A.                                   Italy     
    5.  P-Com Network Services, Inc.                    Delaware   
    6.  P-Com GmbH                                      Germany    
    7.  Technosystem S.p.A.                              Italy     
    8.  Control Resources Corporation                   Delaware   
    9.  Telematics, Inc.                                Virginia   
   10.  P-Com Services (UK) Limited                     England    
   11.  RT Masts Limited                                England    
   12.  RT Limited                                      England
   13.  Sky Masts Limited                               England     
   14.  Cemetel S.p.A.                                   Italy    
   15.  P-Com Corp., Int'l (Cayman) Ltd.             Cayman Islands 
</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 10.2
                             SUBSCRIPTION AGREEMENT

This SUBSCRIPTION AGREEMENT when signed by_____________________________ located
______________________________________________ hereafter referred to as the
"PARTICIPANT" and RAVEN MOON INTERNATIONAL, INC. a public reporting Florida
corporation located at 120 International Parkway, Suite 220, Heathrow, Florida
32746 hereafter referred to as RMOO shall constitute a binding agreement.

THEREFORE FOR VALUABLE CONSIDERATION the parties agree as follows:

The PARTICIPANT desires to make an additional corporate loan in the form of cash
to RMOO in the amount of _________, so that RMOO can use the funds at its sole
discretion as stated in the Use of Proceeds for television pilot production,
legal, SEC audit accounting and filings, Broker syndication, travel and
entertainment, marketing, consultants, accounts payable, and general operating
administration costs or any other expenses deemed necessary by RMOO.

THEREFORE BOTH PARTIES HAVE AGREED THAT by the transfer of funds to RMOO and the
execution of this SUBSCRIPTION AGREEMENT, RMOO shall give the PARTICIPANT
________ Shares of Preferred RMOO stock and irrevocably pay the PARTICIPANT a
FULL REPAYMENT of $________ from the first funds received from RMOO's planned
Public Offering plus 9,700 Tradable Common Shares of Stock plus a Gross Revenue
Royalty of ______% of Gross Revenues received by RMOO for TEN (10) Years. The
REPAYMENT shall be paid on a pro rata basis with other PARTICIPANTS until a
total of $800,000 is paid back.

It is understood that the transfer of the corporate advance to RMOO by the
PARTICIPANT and the execution of this agreement acknowledges that the
PARTICIPANT is an accredited investor who can bare the risk of losing part or
all of his/her corporate advance made to RMOO. Furthermore the PARTICIPANT
acknowledges that he/she has sought the advise of either his/her legal or
financial advisor and is making this corporate advance of his/her own free will
and that this is a high risk venture and undertaking with no guarantee
whatsoever of success.

The PARTICIPANT shall have three (3) days from the date of this agreement to
rescind the agreement and ask for his/her funds to be returned. However, it is
understood and agreed to that if the funds remain with RMOO beyond the three (3)
day period, RMOO shall have the right to use such funds at it sole discretion as
state above.

Both parties acknowledge that this is a complete agreement that cannot be
amended or change without written approval by both parties.

Both parties agree that any dispute that may arise between them shall be settled
in arbitration in Seminole County, Florida according to the laws of Florida.

THIS AGREEMENT IS ACCEPTED AND AGREED TO ON THIS _____ DAY OF
___________________ 2000


_______________________________             __________________________________
Raven Moon International, Inc.              Participant
fAJ\-LOIO-OY14

Contacts. With whom outside the FAA has this proposal been discussed?

Organization PersonContacted

National Business Aircl":lft Association E.1iCotli

Regional Airline- Association

Aircraft Owners & PilolS Association

ATA

Dave Lotterer

Robert Hackman

Craig Fabian

Response
#### Alton C. ROBINSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 2485.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

June 12, 1970.

Appeal from Criminal Court of Record, Orange County; Warren H. Edwards, Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
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 Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute of General Medical Sciences Special Emphasis Panel; Review of IPERT Applications.                    

*Date:*                         July 26, 2018.                    

*Time:*                         8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         Washington Marriott at Metro Center, 775 12th Street NW, Washington, DC 20005.                    

*Contact Person:*                         Lisa A. Dunbar, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Office of Scientific Review, National Institute of General Medical Sciences, National Institutes of Health, 45 Center Drive, Room 3AN12, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-594-2849,                         *dunbarl@mail.nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.375, Minority Biomedical Research Support; 93.821, Cell Biology and Biophysics Research; 93.859, Pharmacology, Physiology, and Biological Chemistry Research; 93.862, Genetics and Developmental Biology Research; 93.88, Minority Access to Research Careers; 93.96, Special Minority Initiatives; 93.859, Biomedical Research and Research Training, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: June 14, 2018.

David D. Clary,

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2018-13265 Filed 6-19-18; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
#### In re FLORIDA APPELLATE RULES.

No. 44107.

Supreme Court of Florida.

July 18, 1973.

PER CURIAM.

The Florida Appellate Rules, 32 F.S.A., 1962 Revision, as amended, are hereby amended in the following respects, viz:

Rule 1.3, eighth paragraph, is amended to read as follows:

> “ *‘Legal Holiday’*means:

> “(a) New Year’s Day, January 1;

> “(b) Washington’s Birthday, the third Monday in February;

> “(c) Good Friday;

> “(d) Memorial Day, the last Monday in May;

> “(e) Independence Day, July 4;

> “(f) Labor Day, the first Monday in September ;

> “(g) Columbus Day, the second Monday in October;

> “(h) Veterans’ Day, November 11;

> “(i) General Election Day;

> “(j) Any state-wide primary election day;

> “(k) Thanksgiving Day, the fourth Thursday in November;

> “(1) Christmas Day, December 25;

> “(m) Any other day that, pursuant to order of court, the clerk’s office of such court is officially closed;

> “(n) Any Monday immediately following a Sunday upon which one of the foregoing holidays falls,”

Rule 3.18 is amended to read as follows:

> “In computing any period of time prescribed or allowed by these rules, by order of court, or by any applicable statute, the day of the act, event or default from which the designated period of time begins to run is not to be included. The last day of the period so computed shall be counted, unless it is a Saturday, Sunday, legal holiday, or any other day that, pursuant to order of court, the clerk’s office of such court is officially closed, in which event the period shall run until the end of a next day which is neither a Saturday, Sunday, legal holiday, nor any other day that, pursuant to order of court, the clerk’s office of such court is officially closed. When the period of time prescribed or allowed shall be less than seven days, intermediate Saturdays, Sundays, legal holidays, and any other day that, pursuant to order of court, the clerk’s office of such court is officially closed shall be excluded in the computation. A half holiday shall be considered as any other day and not as a holiday. If an act be required to be performed on a day certain and such day falls on a Saturday, Sunday, legal holiday, or any other day that, pursuant to order of court, the clerk’s office of such court is officially closed, the act shall be performed on the next day which is neither a Saturday, Sunday, legal holiday, nor any other day that, pursuant to order of court, the clerk’s office of such court is officially closed.”

This amendment shall become effective immediately upon filing of this order. Proceedings commenced prior to the date of this order shall be governed by the rule as herein amended, unless prejudice be shown.

It is so ordered.

CARLTON, C. J., and ROBERTS, ERVIN, ADKINS, BOYD and McCAIN, JJ., concur.
#### Clifford MONROE, an Individual, Appellant, v. Samuel BADANES, an Individual and Sam Nurenberg, an Individual, Appellees.

No. 76-2306.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

June 20, 1978.

Schweitzer & Kosdan and Brian W. Paris-er, Miami, for appellant.

Pyszka, Kessler, Adams & Solomon, Richard M. Gale, Miami, for appellees.

Before PEARSON, HENDRY and KE-HOE, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from a summary final judgment entered in favor of the appellees in a slip and fall action for damages suffered by appellant when he slipped and fell on an unlighted outside stairway of an apartment house owned by the appellees.

*914The record on appeal discloses that there are genuine issues of material fact which have not been eliminated by the movants for summary judgment. *Fletcher v. Petman Enterprises, Inc.,*324 So.2d 135 (Fla. 3d DCA 1975); *Robinson v. Kiwanis Club of Delray Beach, 265*So.2d 387 (Fla. 4th DCA 1972); and *Carter v. Parker,*183 So.2d 3 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966).

The judgment appealed is reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings.

Reversed and remanded.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                    UT
<MULTIPLIER>                                 1,000,000
<CIK>                                        0000037637
<NAME>                                       FLORIDA POWER CORPORATION
       
<S>                                                    <C>
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                      DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                           MAR-31-1996
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                          3-MOS
<BOOK-VALUE>                                           PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                                  3,598
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                                  193
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                                       376
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                                       0
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                               104
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                             4,271
<COMMON>                                                   1,005
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                                      0
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                                          757
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                             1,762
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                         25
<PREFERRED>                                                  114
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                                       1,179
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                             0
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                                      0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                                 0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                                 51
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                                      0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                                    0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                               0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                             1,140
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                              4,271
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                                    547
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                                          25
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                                   453
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                                   478
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                                       69
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                                             0
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                                69
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                      24
<NET-INCOME>                                                  45
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                                    2
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                                 43
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                                      47
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                                      0
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                                       190
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                               0.00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                               0.00
        

</TABLE>
#### ZURICH INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Larry D. CROWE et al., Defendants-Appellants.

No. 11588.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Second Circuit.

March 2, 1971.

En Banc. Rehearing Denied March 30, 1971.

Theus, Grisham, Davis & Leigh, by J. C. Theus, Monroe, for Larry D. Crowe and United States Fidelity and Guaranty Co., defendants-appellees-appellants.

Davenport, Files & Kelly, by Thomas W. Davenport, Monroe, for Miller Car Washes, Inc., American Employers Ins. Co. and Home Ins. Co., defendants-appellees-appel-lants.

Hayes, Harkey, Smith & Cascio, by Thomas M. Hayes, Jr., Monroe, for The Travelers Ins. Co. and Warren H. Bancroft, individually and d.b.a. Bancroft Butane Gas Co., defendants-third party plaintiffs-third party defendants-appellees-appel-lants.

John P. Jordan, Monroe, for Zurich Ins. Co., plaintiff-appellee.

Before AYRES, PRICE, and HALL, JJ.

AYRES, Judge.

The questions of liability were resolved in the companion case of Miller Car Washes, Inc., v. Larry D. Crowe et al, this day decided, 245 So.2d 485. No issue is presented on the appeal with respect to the quantum of the award of damages sustained to plaintiff’s assured’s automobile. Hence, the judgment appealed is affirmed at defendants-appellants’ costs.

Affirmed.

Rehearing denied.

Heard, J., recused.
#### William R. HEIDTMAN, individually, and William R. Heidtman, as Sheriff of Palm Beach County, Florida, Appellants, v. E. R. BRADY and Marcella C. Brady, his wife, Appellees.

No. 70-408.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Oct. 21, 1970.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
EPA SANITIZED Page 1 of 14
 

 

 

 

 

EPA SANITIZED Page 2 of 14
 

 

 

 

EPA SANITIZED Page 3 of 14
 

EPA SANITIZED Page 4 of 14
EPA SANITIZED Page 5 of 14
EPA SANITIZED Page 6 of 14
EPA SANITIZED Page 7 of 14
EPA SANITIZED Page 8 of 14
EPA SANITIZED Page 9 of 14
EPA SANITIZED Page 10 of 14
EPA SANITIZED Page 11 of 14
 

EPA SANITIZED Page 12 of 14
EPA SANITIZED Page 13 of 14
 

 

 

EPA SANITIZED Page 14 of 14
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>   5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              NOV-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                 DEC-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   NOV-30-1997
<CASH>                                             412,353
<SECURITIES>                                       462,625
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,492,004
<ALLOWANCES>                                       254,500
<INVENTORY>                                      1,947,440
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 5,251,991
<PP&E>                                          15,269,412
<DEPRECIATION>                                   5,558,589
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  15,224,075
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,817,912
<BONDS>                                          4,776,666
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                         5,530,566
<OTHER-SE>                                       2,098,931
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    15,224,075
<SALES>                                         11,660,251
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                12,007,663
<CGS>                                            9,332,494
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   12,269,653
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 421,337
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (611,500)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       (38,016)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (573,484)
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (573,484)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                         (.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         (.06)
        


</TABLE>
#### STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. Keel KILKER and Donald J. Huffmaster, Appellees.

No. 72-728.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

March 9, 1973.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Charles Corees, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellant.

W. B. Hunter, Tavares, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed on authority of Rutskin v. State, Fla.App.1972, 260 So.2d 525.

LILES, A. C. J., and HOBSON and McNULTY, JJ., concur.
#### Succession of L. J. ALEXANDER, Deceased v. J. Earl ALEXANDER.

No. 60876.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Nov. 11, 1977.

In re: J. Earl Alexander, applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, Parish of Jackson.

Writ denied.