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

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 813 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 813

    To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide for 
   temporary stabilization of Medicare Advantage payments following 
                            Hurricane Maria.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 28, 2019

   Miss Gonzalez-Colon of Puerto Rico (for herself, Mr. Serrano, Mr. 
 Fitzpatrick, Mr. Soto, Ms. Velazquez, Mrs. Radewagen, and Mr. King of 
  New York) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
Committee on Ways and Means, and in addition to the Committee on Energy 
    and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the 
  Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall 
           within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to provide for 
   temporary stabilization of Medicare Advantage payments following 
                            Hurricane Maria.

    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 ``Puerto Rico Integrity in Medicare 
Advantage Act''.

SEC. 2. TEMPORARY STABILIZATION OF MEDICARE ADVANTAGE PAYMENTS 
              FOLLOWING HURRICANE MARIA.

    (a) In General.--Section 1853(n) of the Social Security Act (42 
U.S.C. 1395w-23(n)) is amended--
            (1) in paragraph (1)(B), by striking ``subsequent year'' 
        and inserting ``subsequent year, subject to paragraph (6),''; 
        and
            (2) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
            ``(6) Average geographic adjustment floor.--For each of 
        2020, 2021, and 2022, when calculating the adjusted average per 
        capita cost under section 1876(a)(4) for the purposes of 
        establishing the base payment amount specified in paragraph 
        (2)(E), the average geographic adjustment shall not be less 
        than 0.70 for any area. For purposes of the previous sentence, 
        the Secretary may define the term `average geographic 
        adjustment' by program instruction or otherwise.''.
    (b) Ensuring Payments Flow to Puerto Rico Providers and Patients.--
Section 1854(a)(6) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w-
24(a)(6)) is amended by adding at the end the following new 
subparagraph:
                    ``(C) Strengthening support to health care 
                providers in puerto rico.--With respect to plans 
                serving areas in Puerto Rico, of the increase in 
                blended benchmark amount attributable to section 
                1853(n)(6), no less than 50 percent is directed toward 
                provider compensation.''.
                                 <all>
```
APPENDIX “B7”

 User Manual: FreeFly ALTA
#### FOOD FAIR STORES OF FLORIDA, INC., a Florida corporation, d/b/a Food Fair Stores, Petitioner, v. Iris MARLOWE and Howard Marlowe, Respondents.

No. 44770.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Feb. 27, 1974.

ROBERTS, Acting C. J., and ERVIN, ADKINS and BOYD, JJ., concur.

McCAIN, J., dissents.
A NOT E FRO M



### Ms . Margare t Gan/e r

A prou dsu ^ Worh t Wildlif e Fun d
#### McKENZIE TANK LINES, INC., a corporation, Appellant, v. Steve G. GILL, d/b/a Service Oil Corporation, Appellee.

No. Q-228.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

July 31, 1973.

Rehearing Denied Sept. 7, 1973.

Roger M. Sherman, of Beggs, Lane, Daniel, Gaines & Davis, Pensacola, for appellant.

A. L. Johnson, Milton, and Robert D. Bell, of Fisher, Hertz & Bell, Pensacola, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

See Ellison & Port Carriers, Inc. v. Cribb, 271 So.2d 174 (1 Fla.App. 1972); and 1661 Corporation v. Snyder, 267 So.2d 362 (1 Fla.App. 1972).

RAWLS, C. J., and SPECTOR and CARROLL, DONALD K., JJ., concur.
**EXHIBIT 99.18**

 

**CONSENT OF DOUGLAS RAMSEY**

** **

March 26, 2012

 

Brigus Gold Corp.

United States Securities and Exchange Commission

 

**Re: Brigus Gold Corp.**

 

Ladies and Gentlemen:

 

I hereby consent to (i) the use of my name in connection withthe following documents and reports, which are either referenced in or filed as exhibits with the Annual Report on Form 40-F forthe year ended December 31, 2011 (the “Form 40-F”) of Brigus Gold Corp. (the “Company”) to which this consentrelates: (A) the technical report entitled “Black Fox Project National Instrument 43-101 Technical Report” dated January6, 2011 (the “Report”), (B) the Company’s Annual Information Form for the year ended December 31, 2011 and (C)the Company’s Management’s Discussion and Analysis for the year ended December 31, 2011, (ii) the inclusion or incorporationby reference of information derived from the Report in the Registration Statements on Forms S-8 (File Nos. 333-113889, 333-162558and 333-167757), as amended, or any related abbreviated registration statement filed by the Company with the Securities and ExchangeCommission pursuant to Rule 462(b) under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or in any amendment to any of the foregoing, orto any prospectuses or amendments or supplements thereto and (iii) all other references to the undersigned included or incorporatedby reference in the above-referenced Registration Statements and in any prospectuses or amendments or supplements thereto.

 

Sincerely,
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                    5
<PERIOD-TYPE>                            6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                     DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                          JUN-30-1996
<CASH>                                    1,981
<SECURITIES>                                  0
<RECEIVABLES>                                 0
<ALLOWANCES>                                  0
<INVENTORY>                                   0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              0
<PP&E>                                1,950,691
<DEPRECIATION>                                0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                        1,952,672
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         0
<BONDS>                                       0
<COMMON>                                165,218
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                         0
<PREFERRED>                                   0
<OTHER-SE>                            1,065,086
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>          1,952,672
<SALES>                                       0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                        181,376
<CGS>                                         0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                           153,131
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                              0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                          28,245
<INCOME-TAX>                              8,200
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                      20,045
<DISCONTINUED>                                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                               0
<CHANGES>                                     0
<NET-INCOME>                             20,045
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                 0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                 0

</TABLE>
# Official Journal L 192/2017

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 192 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 6024 July 2017 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 192

English edition

Legislation

Volume 6024 July 2017

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | * | Commission Regulation (EU) 2017/1347 of 13 July 2017 correcting Directive 2007/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, Commission Regulation (EU) No 582/2011 and Commission Regulation (EU) 2017/1151 supplementing Regulation (EC) No 715/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council on type-approval of motor vehicles with respect to emissions from light passenger and commercial vehicles (Euro 5 and Euro 6) and on access to vehicle repair and maintenance information, amending Directive 2007/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, Commission Regulation (EC) No 692/2008 and Commission Regulation (EU) No 1230/2012 and repealing Regulation (EC) No 692/2008 (
  1
  ) | 1 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

REGULATIONS

*

Commission Regulation (EU) 2017/1347 of 13 July 2017 correcting Directive 2007/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, Commission Regulation (EU) No 582/2011 and Commission Regulation (EU) 2017/1151 supplementing Regulation (EC) No 715/2007 of the European Parliament and of the Council on type-approval of motor vehicles with respect to emissions from light passenger and commercial vehicles (Euro 5 and Euro 6) and on access to vehicle repair and maintenance information, amending Directive 2007/46/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council, Commission Regulation (EC) No 692/2008 and Commission Regulation (EU) No 1230/2012 and repealing Regulation (EC) No 692/2008 (
  1
  )

1

1

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance. |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance.

1

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
#### PAN AMERICAN BANCSHARES, INC., Appellant, v. David L. TRASK, Appellee.

No. 72-1154.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

June 5, 1973.

*314Roman & Roman, Miami, for appellant.

Herman Grayson, Miami Beach, for ap-pellee.

Before PEARSON, CHARLES CARROLL and HAVERFIELD, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

The appellant was the defendant in the trial court. It appeals a final judgment entered upon a jury verdict. Five points are presented for our consideration. The thrust of appellant’s primary argument contends that the evidence was insufficient to support an oral contract because the evidence demonstrated a difference of understanding pertaining to the terms of the contract, and therefore there was no “meeting of the minds.” Our review of the record convinces us that the question of the exact terms of the contract was properly submitted to the jury. Each party testified to the creation of a contract, the only disagreement being related to a variance in understanding as to certain terms. Therefore the cause was properly submitted to the jury. See Miami Coin-O-Wash, Inc. v. McGough, Fla.App.1967, 195 So.2d 227.

Appellant’s second point urges error as a result of the court’s ruling upon the admissibility of certain testimony, while the third point urges error upon the court’s denial of a motion for new trial. Neither one of these points presents reversible error because no violation of an established rule of law has been shown, and the rulings made were within the special province of the trial judge.

The fourth point urges error in the assessment of costs, but we find that the allowance of the items noted was within the court’s discretion. Cf. Cohn v. Florida National Bank at Orlando, Fla.App. 1969, 223 So.2d 767.

Appellant’s fifth and final point claims that the jury verdict was a compromise verdict and that the court erred in failing to set aside the verdict. Appellant has failed to show any fact indicating a compromise verdict except that the verdict was in round figures. Such an argument is not sufficient.

Affirmed.
Delaware Department of Transportation (DelDOT)

Action Plan

D emonstration of Compliance with Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)
Revenue Use Policy
Delaware Code; Title 30, Chapter 51, Subchapter 1: Gasoline , grants the authority to collect state excise tax on Aviation G asoline (AvGas) to the Delaware Department of Transportation (DelDOT)

. Retailers of AvGas are requi red to obtain a license from DelDOT to engage in retail sale of gasoline. The excise tax assessed per gallon of AvGas is 23 cen ts and the license distributors are required to provide DelDOT a monthly report and remit the Delaware excise tax charged to the customer for AvGas sales

. Also , t here is a refund provision under this state code provided an applicant shows a receipt for the AvGas used by airplanes or aircraft

. All applications for refunds must be filed with the Department of Transportation within 12 calendar months from the date of the purchase or invoice of the AvGas with respect to which a tax refund is claimed. DelDOT doe s not tax Jet Fuel. For additional information on how to obtain a refund on state excise tax for aviation gasoline purchase s, please contact (302) 744

- 2711 . Also, you may visit the Delaware Motor Vehicle website for refund forms, instructions, and additional detail on the Delaware gasoline refund program. You may access the website by clicking on the following link: http://www.dmv.de.gov/services/TransServ/MFSF/Gas Refund/index.shtml

. In compliance with the FAA’s Revenue Use Policy, DelDOT will publish annually a report of AvGas taxes collected. In conjunction with this report, DelDOT , through it’s Capital Transportation Program (CTP) , can show how the AvGas tax co llected is spent on Aviation System Planning for all general aviation airports within Delaware and also on state matches to FAA grants for the National Program for Integrated Airport System ( NPIAS ) airports. This information will also be published on the D elDOT website.
#### Andre Lee SHELLMAN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 68-641.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Second District.

May 21, 1969.

Rehearing Denied June 11, 1969.

Robert E. Jagger, Public Defender, and Edwin I. Ford, Asst. Public Defender, Clearwater, for appellant.

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and William D. Roth, Asst. Atty. Gen., Lakeland, for appellee.

PIERCE, Judge.

This is an appeal by appellant Andre Lee Shellman from an adjudication of guilt and sentence by the Court upon a plea of guilty to an information charging breaking and entering an automobile with intent to commit petit larceny.

The only contention urged in behalf of Shellman in this Court is that the trial Judge was in error in sentencing the defendant to the statutory maximum sentence of ten years in the State Prison. But the rule was definitely laid down by the Florida Supreme Court in Brown v. State, 1943, 152 Fla. 853, 13 So.2d 458, that—

> “* * * jn cases where the objection is to the particular sentence, and not to the statute under which it has been imposed, a sentence which is within the limit fixed by statute is not cruel and unusual and is therefore valid, no matter how harsh and severe it may appear to be in a particular case, because the constitutional prohibition has reference to the statute fixing the punishment, and not to the punishment assessed by the jury or court within the limits fixed by statute. If the statute is not in violation of the Constitution, then any punishment assessed by a court or jury within the limits fixed thereby cannot be adjudged excessive, for the reason that the power to declare what punishment may be assessed against those convicted of crime is not a judicial power, but a legislative power, controlled only by the provisions of the Constitution.”

The above holding in *Brown*was followed in Walker v. State, Fla.1950, 44 So.2d 814. See also Rohdin v. State, Fla.App.1958, 105 So.2d 371; Infante v. State, Fla.App.1967, 197 So.2d 542; and Dickin*790son v. State, Fla.App.1965, 170 So.2d 594. See also Green v. State, 1935, 121 Fla. 307, 163 So. 712.

F.S. Section 810.051, F.S.A. provides that “Whoever breaks and enters any automobile * * * with intent to commit any crime * * * shall be guilty of a felony and shall be punished by * * * imprisonment * * * for not more than ten years in the state prison * * ”. Concededly, this may be a harsh maximum punishment, considering that the breaking and entering the dwelling of another with intent to commit a misdemeanor is punishable by imprisonment in the state prison not exceeding five years, F.S. § 810.05 F.S.A. But the fixing of minimum and maximum terms of imprisonment for criminal convictions is exclusively the province of the legislature, and the imposition of punishment within such limitations is a matter for the trial Court in the exercise of its discretion, which cannot be inquired into upon the appellate level.

The judgment appealed from is therefore affirmed.

LILES, C. J., concurs.

MANN, J., concurs in the judgment.
EX-10.27





 Exhibit 10.27 

IOGEN D3 BIOFUEL PARTNERS LLC 

2200 Wilson Boulevard, Suite 310 

Arlington, Virginia 22202 
 May 20,
2016 
 GSF Energy, L.L.C. 
 680 Andersen Drive 

Foster Plaza 10, 5th Floor 

Pittsburg, PA 15220 
 Attention: Dave Herman 

Dear Dave: 
  

	Re:	 Transaction Confirmation dated May 9, 2016 between Iogen D3 Biofuel Partners LLC and GSF Energy, LLC
(the “Transaction Confirmation”) 


 Reference is made to the Transaction Confirmation defined above. This will confirm
that the Sales Meter Numbers referenced in the following section: 
 “Delivery Point(s): The Delivery Point shall be Sales Meter Numbers: [***] at the
Project.” 
 shall be amended to read as follows: 

“Delivery Point(s): The Delivery Point shall be Sales Meter Numbers: [***] at the Project.” 

Except as expressly provided herein, the Transaction Confirmation shall remain in full force and effect in accordance with its terms. 

Please acknowledge your acceptance of and agreement to the foregoing by signing a copy of this letter where indicated below. 

 

			
	Very truly yours,
	IOGEN D3 BIOFUEL PARTNERS LLC
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Claire Dumville

	Title:	 	VP, Finance

  

			
	ACCEPTED AND AGREED
	GSF ENERGY, L.L.C.
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Martin L. Ryan

		
	Title:	 	 Vice President

		
	Date:	 	 5-20-16
#### Bert RAFFIELD, Petitioner, v. GEORGE W. DAVIS & SONS, INC., etc. and Joe Ed Davis, Respondents.

No. 43169.

Supreme Court of Florida.

March 12, 1973.

Certiorari denied. 269 So.2d 383.

CARLTON, C. J., and ROBERTS, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.

ERVIN, ADKINS and BOYD, JJ., dissent.
Exhibit 32
                    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 the Quarterly Report of Gold Standard, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending July 31, 2006, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Quarterly
Report"), We, Scott L. Smith, President and director and Bret C. Decker,
Secretary of our Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

     (1) The Quarterly 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 Quarterly Report fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of
the Company.

Dated: 9/19/06                           /s/Scott L. Smith
      --------------                     ---------------------------
                                         Scott L. Smith
                                         President and director


Dated: 9/19/06                           /s/Bret C. Decker
      --------------                     ---------------------------
                                         Bret C. Decker
                                         Secretary and director
**EXHIBIT 99.26**

 

**CONSENT OFKyle Krushelniski**

** **

March 15, 2012

 

Brigus Gold Corp.

United States Securities and Exchange Commission

 

**Re: Brigus Gold Corp.**

 

Ladies and Gentlemen:

 

I hereby consent to (i) the use of my name in connection withthe following documents and reports, which are either referenced in or filed as exhibits with the Annual Report on Form 40-F forthe year ended December 31, 2011 (the “Form 40-F”) of Brigus Gold Corp. (the “Company”) to which this consentrelates: (A) the technical report entitled “NI 43-101 Technical Report, Pre-feasibility Study, Brigus Gold Corp., GoldfieldsProject, Saskatchewan, Canada” dated effective October 6, 2011 (the “Report”), (B) the Company’s AnnualInformation Form for the year ended December 31, 2011 and (C) the Company’s Management’s Discussion and Analysis forthe year ended December 31, 2011, (ii) the inclusion or incorporation by reference of information derived from the Report in theRegistration Statements on Forms S-8 (File Nos. 333-113889, 333-162558 and 333-167757), as amended, and Form F-10 (File No. 333-174604),as amended, or any related abbreviated registration statement filed by the Company with the Securities and Exchange Commissionpursuant to Rule 462(b) under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or in any amendment to any of the foregoing, or to any prospectusesor amendments or supplements thereto and (iii) all other references to the undersigned included or incorporated by reference inthe above-referenced Registration Statements and in any prospectuses or amendments or supplements thereto.

 

Sincerely,
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information internally prepared for
nine months ended June 30, 1998 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to
such Form 10-Q for period ended June 30, 1998.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                       1,090,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                5,452,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                   423,000
<INVENTORY>                                  3,551,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            10,672,000
<PP&E>                                       5,390,000
<DEPRECIATION>                               3,292,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              21,649,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       19,446,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       933,000
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                21,649,000
<SALES>                                      8,029,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            23,546,000
<CGS>                                        6,791,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               16,296,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            10,639,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               609,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             376,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (4,374,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    61,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (4,435,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (4,435,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.48)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.48)
        

</TABLE>