alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
September 30, 2010

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: CH4 Data from 2010 and 2011 Heavy-Duty Vehicle Certification Tests 

FROM: Antonio Fernandez, Engineer

Assessment and Standards Division

TO: Docket EPA-HQ-OAR-2010-0162

This memorandum contains the results of 9 tests of various manufacturers’ heavy-duty certified 

models in 2010 and 2011. They were all tested over the FTP city and highway fuel economy

cycles. Two of the tests represent gasoline fueled vehicles while the remaining seven represent 

diesel vehicles. The emission levels reflect the composite result with the city cycle accounting 

for 55% and the highway accounting for 45% of the result. 

Eight of the tests resulted in levels at or below half of the proposed cap standard of 0.05 g/mile.

Only one of the vehicles, a diesel, exceeded the proposed cap of 0.05 g/mile. Since methane is 

not currently a regulated emission in heavy-duty, there has been little effort at controlling 

methane. We believe that with some concentrated effort by the manufacturer at controlling the 

methane emissions, this diesel vehicle should be able to meet the proposed methane cap.
Methane Levels for 2010 and 2011 Gasoline and Diesel Heavy Duty Vehicles

Composite of FTP City and HWFE tests (55/45) 

0

0.05

0.1

0.15

0.2

0.25

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Test Points

grams/mile
#### William G. JOHNSON, Appellant, v. Frank S. IACINO, Appellee.

No. 2042.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Fourth District.

April 21, 1969.

Rehearing Denied June 9, 1969.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
#### Schneider *v.*Berry.

(Division B.

Oct. 22, 1934.)

[157 So. 91.

No. 31240.]

Elliott Parker, of Houston, for appellant.

*90C. A. Bratton, of Pontotoc, for appellee.

Ethridge, P. J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

The appellant was plaintiff in the court below and sued out a writ of replevin for certain property sold by him to the appellee for the conduct of a beauty shop in Houston, Mississippi. The affidavit of replevin alleged that the property was wrongfully detained by Miss Pearl Berry in district No. 1 for the election of justices of the peace in Chickasaw county, and gave the items of property and the value of each item separately.

There was proof that demand was made for the property, and the writ of replevin appears to have been introduced as well as the bond given for the forthcoming of the property.

It was also proven in the evidence that the supervisors’ district No. 1 was the district in which Houston is situated, and the value of the property was proven.

*91At tlie conclusion of tlie appellant’s evidence, the defendant (appellee here) moved to exclude the evidence and to direct a verdict for the defendant, first, because the proof failed to show that the defendant refused to surrender the property, and, second, because there was no proof that the property was taken in the first supervisors’ district of Chickasaw county.

This motion was sustained by the court below, which we think was error. The giving of the bond was an admission of the possession of the property and was equivalent to an admission that the property was in district No. 1 in which the writ issued and was returned. Fitzgerald v. Williams, 136 Miss. 250, 101 So. 370; Furst v. Pease, 97 Miss. 468, 52 So. 257.

There was no motion in the court below to dismiss the writ of replevin on the ground that the property seized was found in any other district than that in which the writ was directed and the trial had.

For the errors indicated, the judgment will he reversed and the cause remanded for a new trial.

Reversed and remanded.
#### Gully, Tax Collector, *v.*Alexander.

(Division B.

Dec. 17, 1934.)

[158 So. 201.

No. 31484.]

Creekmore *&*Creekmpre, of Jackson, for appellant.

*568Lotterhos *&*Travis, of Jackson, and Leonard Katzenmeyer, of Vicksburg, for appellee.

*569Argued orally hy Wade H. Creekmore, for appellant, and by Cecil Travis, for appellee.

Griffith, J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

Collins Bakery owns and operates a bakery in the city of Jackson, and has paid the privilege tax imposed by section 24, chapter 118, Laws 1934. The concluding sentence of that section provides that “the payment of the above tax shall entitle the licensee to the privilege of •selling and distributing the products manufactured by him, either at his place of business or from trucks, in the county in which license is issued.” Let it be noted that this privilege is to sell at wholesale or retail, to dealers and consumers — it is a privilege without restriction, so long as within the county in which the license is issued.

The bakery owns a truck and employs appellee as its servant to make deliveries of its bakery products in neighboring counties, but only to dealers for resale, not to consumers nor to any person other than to the regular dealers, which dealers have themselves paid the necessary privilege taxes on their business. Section 233 of the said chapter imposes a privilege tax “upon each transient vendor, or dealer, of bread, rolls, cakes, pies, and other bakery products;” but the same section expressly provides that this tax shall not be required of a transient vendor or dealer of bakery products “when *570sold or distributed from a balcery which has paid the privilege tax imposed by this act, to dealers for resale.”

Construing all these provisions together and harmonizing them, we have the result that the bakery, when it has paid the privilege tax first above mentioned, has the right to sell its products in any manner and to any person or persons within the county wherein the bakery is located, and, in addition, has the privilege to send its servants into other counties so long as its' servants sell and deliver only to dealers for resale, and no such servant is liable for the transient vendors’ tax when his sales and deliveries are solely as last above stated. But when any such servant sells or delivers in another county any of the bakery products to consumers or to any other person than a dealer for resale, the servant becomes liable for the transient vendors ’ license tax in the county and in. each county where such sale or deliveries are made, not including the home county of the bakery.

Affirmed.
# C_2022303EN.01000901.xml

| 8.8.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 303/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.8.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 303/9

---

Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 28 June 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Supremo Tribunal Administrativo — Portugal) — OF v Instituto de Financiamento da Agricultura e Pescas IP (IFAP)

(Case C-728/21) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2988/95 - Protection of the European Union’s financial interests - Irregularities with regard to EU law - Proceedings - Limitation period - Interruption - Act relating to investigation or legal proceedings concerning an irregularity - Concept - Control report identifying the existence of an irregularity)

(2022/C 303/11)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Supremo Tribunal Administrativo

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: OF

Defendant: Instituto de Financiamento da Agricultura e Pescas IP (IFAP)

Operative part of the order

The third subparagraph of Article 3(1) of Council Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 2988/95 of 18 December 1995 on the protection of the European Communities financial interests must be interpreted as meaning that an on-the-spot check report, which merely reveals the existence of an irregularity and does not mention any intention to investigate or institute legal proceedings in respect of that irregularity, can nevertheless be considered to be an ‘act relating to investigation or legal proceedings’, within the meaning of that provision, such as to interrupt the limitation period of the proceedings, referred to in the first subparagraph of Article 3(1) of that regulation, if it sets out with sufficient precision the transactions to which the suspicions of irregularities relate.

---

(1)  Date lodged: 30.11.2021.

---
On-board	Circulation	and	Seating	Subcommittee (Meeting	#4)

U.S.	Access	Board:	Rail	Vehicles Access	Advisory	Committee

Subcommittee	on	On-board	Circulation	and	Seating

April	11,	2014

9:30	– 12:00	Eastern

1.		Introductions

2.		Approval	of	the	Agenda (continued	from	March	26th call)

3.		Review	of	major	points	from	March	20	meeting

3.1		Revised	Draft	vertical	access	document

4.		Vertical	Access	Discussion:	The	goal	for	this	part	of	the	meeting	is	to	establish	proposed	physical	

requirements	that	will allow	for	the	creation	of	basic	floor	plans	and	options	that	will	facilitate	

more	concrete	discussion	and	help	us	formulate	recommendations.	

4.1		Determine	Car	types	to	be	addressed

4.2		Lift	platform	size		X”	x	Y”

4.3		Seating	requirements	- scoping

4.3.1		Upper	level

4.3.2		Lower	level

4.4		Restroom	requirements	- scoping

4.4.1		Upper	level

4.4.2		Lower	level

4.5		Other	spatial	considerations

5.		On- Board	Circulation:	We	should	gather	all	the	known	shortcomings	of	what	has	been	done	under	

the	current	requirements.	Assume	that	we	have	arrived	through	the	side	door	and	are	moving	to	

the	accessible	area	of	the	vehicle.	Obviously	some	elements	listed	are	not	relevant	to	all modes	

while	others	are	basic	regardless	of	mode.	The	goal	of	this	exercise	is	to	create	a	list	of	known	

issues	including	mode	first	and	then	go	back	through	and	propose	recommendations	by	mode.	

With	these	proposals,	dimensional	plans	should	be	developed	so	impact	and	benefit	can	be	

discussed	

5.1		Discuss	known	shortcomings	of	the	current	requirements	- technical	specifics

5.1.1		Car	entrance

5.1.2		Vestibule,	including	thresholds

5.1.3		Inter-car	passage

5.1.4		Path	to	accessible	seating	area

5.1.5		Wheelchair	Space

5.1.6		Wheelchair	storage

5.1.7		Priority	Seating

5.1.8		Seating	area	amenities	(window,	surfaces,	lighting,	power,	controls	etc)

5.1.9		Path	from	seating	area	to	the	restroom
5.1.10		Doors	and	doorways,	including	operation

5.2		Identify	circulation	and	seating	issues	new	to	the	requirements

5.2.1		Space	for	service	animals	including	size	and	placement	relative	to	the	owner

5.2.2		Securement	devices

5.2.3		Emergency	Egress

5.2.3	Other	

6.		Next	Steps

7.		Action	Items

8.		Assignments

9.		Deadlines

10.		Next	Meeting

Meeting	material	in	two	attachments
Document

Exhibit 10.5

EXHIBIT A
BONUS


						
		
	A.	Bonus Opportunity. For each Performance Period, as defined in paragraph B below, Executive shall be entitled to a Bonus based on his Target Bonus, as set forth in paragraph C below, subject to the achievement of certain performance goals.





						
		
	B.	Performance Period. For purposes of this Exhibit A, the Performance Period shall be the 12 month period beginning on January 1 of each calendar year during the Agreement Term and any Renewal Term.





						
		
	C.	Target Bonus and Bonus. Executive’s Target Bonus shall be the amount as set forth in the incentive plan applicable to Executive that the Committee adopts for a particular Performance Period (“Incentive Plan”) but which shall not be less than $610,909 . Executive’s Bonus that is payable for any Performance Period, if any, shall be an amount ranging from 0% to 200% of the Target Bonus, contingent upon the achievement of one or more performance goals established by the Committee for such Performance Period, as set forth in paragraph D. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Bonus payable to the Executive shall not exceed the maximum bonus that could be payable under the Incentive Plan.





						
		
	D.	Performance Goals. No later than 90 days after the commencement of each Performance Period, the Committee shall, in its sole discretion, establish in writing one or more preestablished, objective performance goals for such Performance Period. Such performance goal(s) shall state, in terms of an objective formula or standard, the amount of the Target Bonus payable to Executive upon achievement of each such performance goal (or any specified threshold, intermediate, target, maximum or other level with respect thereto).













						
		
	E.	Incentive Plan. This Exhibit A, subject to any action taken by the Committee pursuant thereto, shall be subject to the terms and conditions of, the relevant  Incentive Plan. If there is any conflict between the provisions of the Agreement or this Exhibit A and the relevant Incentive Plan, or any award agreement, the Agreement or this Exhibit A (as applicable) shall control.





						
		
	F.	Pro Rata Bonus. A pro rata Bonus, where applicable, shall be an amount equal to (1) the Bonus otherwise determined by the Committee based upon actual performance for the Performance Period in accordance with the foregoing provisions of this Exhibit A, multiplied by (2) a fraction, the numerator of which is the number of days that Executive is employed by the Company during the Performance Period, and the denominator of which is the total number of days in the Performance Period.





						
		
	G.	Payment. Except as otherwise provided in the Agreement, any Bonus payable under this Exhibit A (including any pro rata Bonus determined under paragraph F) shall be paid in cash to Executive at the time(s) determined by the Committee in its reasonable discretion, provided that the Bonus shall be paid in its entirety no later than March 15 of the calendar year following the calendar year to which the payment relates.
House Calendar No. 75

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 233

[Report No. 103–211]

RESOLUTION

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2401)

for fiscal year 1994, and for other purposes.fense, to prescribe military personnel strengthsfor military activities of the Department of Deto authorize appropriations for fiscal year 1994

AUGUST 3, 1993

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be

printed
IV

House Calendar No. 75

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 233

[Report No. 103–211]

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2401) to authorize appropriations

for fiscal year 1994 for military activities of the Department of Defense,

to prescribe military personnel strengths for fiscal year 1994, and for

other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

AUGUST 3, 1993

Mr. FROST, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following resolution;

which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

RESOLUTION

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 2401) to authorize appropriations for fiscal year 1994 for military activities of the Department of Defense, to prescribe military

personnel strengths for fiscal year 1994, and for other

purposes.

1 Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this

2 resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 1(b) of

3 rule XXIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee

4 of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consider5 ation of the bill (H.R. 2401) to authorize appropriations
2

HRES 233 RH

1 for fiscal year 1994 for military activities of the Depart2 ment of Defense, to prescribe military personnel strengths

3 for fiscal year 1994, and for other purposes. The first

4 reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points of

5 order against consideration of the bill are waived. General

6 debate shall be confined to the bill and the amendment

7 in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Commit8 tee on Armed Services now printed in the bill and shall

9 not exceed two hours equally divided and controlled by the

10 chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee

11 on Armed Services. After general debate the Committee

12 shall rise without motion. No further consideration of the

13 bill shall be in order except pursuant to a subsequent order

14 of the House.
# C_2023015EN.01003204.xml

| 16.1.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 15/32 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.1.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 15/32

---

Order of the President of the Fifth Chamber of the Court of 7 September 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Judicial da Comarca do Porto — Juízo Central Cível — Portugal) — Portugália — Administração de Patrimónios, SGPS, SA v Banco BPI

(Case C-448/21) (1)

(2023/C 15/38)

Language of the case: Portuguese

The President of the Fifth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 452, 8.11.2021.

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

<ARTICLE>                 5
<MULTIPLIER>           1000
       
<S>                          <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>            FEB-28-1999
<PERIOD-START>               MAR-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                 MAY-30-1998
<CASH>                              3646
<SECURITIES>                           0
<RECEIVABLES>                       4043
<ALLOWANCES>                          46
<INVENTORY>                         4679
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                   13445
<PP&E>                             14363
<DEPRECIATION>                      8664
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                     19966
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>               3758
<BONDS>                                0
<COMMON>                              17
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                  0
<PREFERRED>                            0
<OTHER-SE>                         14865
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>       19966
<SALES>                             5926
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                    5926
<CGS>                               3759
<TOTAL-COSTS>                       1553
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                     (33)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                    17
<INCOME-PRETAX>                      630
<INCOME-TAX>                         190
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                  440
<DISCONTINUED>                         0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                        0
<CHANGES>                              0
<NET-INCOME>                         440
<EPS-PRIMARY>                       0.36
<EPS-DILUTED>                       0.36
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 261 Reported in House (RH)]

                                                  House Calendar No. 91

103d CONGRESS

  1st Session

                              H. RES. 261

                          [Report No. 103-261]

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

Waiving points of order against the conference report to accompany the 
bill (H.R. 2403) making appropriations for the Treasury Department, the 
 United States Postal Service, the Executive Office of the President, 
and certain Independent Agencies, for the fiscal year ending September 
                   30, 1994, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                           September 28, 1993

        Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

                                                  House Calendar No. 91
103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 261

                          [Report No. 103-261]

Waiving points of order against the conference report to accompany the 
bill (H.R. 2403) making appropriations for the Treasury Department, the 
 United States Postal Service, the Executive Office of the President, 
and certain Independent Agencies, for the fiscal year ending September 
                   30, 1994, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 28, 1993

  Mr. Beilenson, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following 
resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 
                                printed

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Waiving points of order against the conference report to accompany the 
bill (H.R. 2403) making appropriations for the Treasury Department, the 
 United States Postal Service, the Executive Office of the President, 
and certain Independent Agencies, for the fiscal year ending September 
                   30, 1994, and for other purposes.

    Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in 
order to consider the conference report to accompany the bill (H.R. 
2403) making appropriations for the Treasury Department, the United 
States Postal Service, the Executive Office of the President, and 
certain Independent Agencies, for the fiscal year ending September 30, 
1994, and for other purposes. All points of order against the 
conference report and against its consideration are waived.
```
#### Welford Dean BARNETT et al., Appellants, v. Doris G. ROBERTS, Appellee.

No. R-335.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

April 5, 1973.

Rehearing Denied May 8, 1973.

Frank M. Gafford, Gafford & Willis, Lake City, for appellants.

Martin S. Page, Jopling, Darby, Peele, & Page, Lake City, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed on authority of Policastro v. Rudt, 180 So.2d 472 (Fla.App.1965).

SPECTOR, C. J., and WIGGINTON and CARROLL, DONALD K., JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 99.1





CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER





I, Michael P. Mack, Chief Executive Officer of Garden Fresh Restaurant Corp. (the Registrant), do hereby certify in accordance with 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that, based on my knowledge:





| | (1) |  | the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Registrant, to which this certification is attached as an exhibit (the Report), fully complies with the
requirements of section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); and
| | --- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




| | (2) |  | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.
| | --- |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




Dated: December 18, 2002

/s/    MICHAEL P.
MACKMichael P. Mack Chief
Executive Officer