alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
H. Res. 200

In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

June 17, 1993.

Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule

XXIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the

Whole House on the State of the Union for consideration of

the bill (H.R. 2295) making appropriations for foreign operations, export financing, and related programs for the fiscal

year ending September 30, 1994, and making supplemental

appropriations for such programs for the fiscal year ending

September 30, 1993, and for other purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points of order

against consideration of the bill are waived. After general debate, which shall be confined to the bill and the amendment

in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee

on Appropriations and which shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations, the pending

question shall be the adoption of the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Ap-
2

HRES 200 EH

propriations now printed in the bill. The committee amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be designated and

shall be debatable for twenty minutes equally divided and

controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of

the Committee on Appropriations. All points of order against

the committee amendment in the nature of a substitute, and

against provisions in the bill if so amended, are waived. If the

committee amendment in the nature of a substitute is adopted, then the bill as so amended shall be considered as the

original bill for the purpose of further amendment under the

five-minute rule and shall be considered as read. No further

amendment shall be in order except those printed in the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution.

Each amendment may be offered only in the order printed,

may be offered only by the named proponent or a designee,

shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time

specified in the report equally divided and controlled by the

proponent and an opponent, shall not be subject to amendment except as specified in the report, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the House

or in the Committee of the Whole. At the conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee shall rise

and report the bill to the House with such amendments as

may have been finally adopted. Any Member may demand a

separate vote in the House on any amendment adopted in the
3

HRES 200 EH

Committee of the Whole to the bill or to the committee

amendment in the nature of a substitute. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without instructions.

Attest:

Clerk.
4.A Office of Administrative Law Form 400 (contains OAL 

approval of regulation) with attachments.
II

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 1018

To amend the War Powers Resolution to require a cost assessment with

respect to certain commitments of United States Armed Forces abroad.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MAY 25 (legislative day, APRIL 19), 1993

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

to the Committee on Foreign Relations

A BILL

To amend the War Powers Resolution to require a cost

assessment with respect to certain commitments of United States Armed Forces abroad.

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

3 That (a) section 4(b) of the Water Powers Resolution (50

4 U.S.C. 1543(b)) is amended—

5 (1) by inserting ‘‘(1)’’ immediately after ‘‘(b)’’;

6 and

7 (2) by adding at the end the following new

8 clause:

9 ‘‘(2) Within sixty calendar days after a report is sub10 mitted or is required to be submitted pursuant to section
2

•S 1018 IS

1 4(a), the President shall submit to the Speaker of the

2 House of Representatives and the President pro tempore

3 of the Senate a report setting forth a cost assessment of

4 the continued involvement of the United States Armed

5 Forces in the circumstances necessitating their introduc6 tion.’’.

7 (b) The amendments made by subsection (a) shall

8 apply with respect to introductions of United States

9 Armed Forces occurring on or after the date of enactment

10 of this Act.

Æ
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 47 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 47

    To amend the Rules of the House of Representatives to require a 
   rollcall vote on passage of any measure making appropriations or 
                           providing revenue.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 26, 1993

Mr. Sam Johnson of Texas submitted the following resolution; which was 
                   referred to the Committee on Rules

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
    To amend the Rules of the House of Representatives to require a 
   rollcall vote on passage of any measure making appropriations or 
                           providing revenue.

    Resolved, That rule XV of the Rules of the House of Representatives 
is amended by inserting at the end thereof the following new clause:
    ``7. The House shall not pass or adopt, as the case may be, any 
bill or joint resolution, or conference report thereon, making 
appropriations or providing revenue except by a rollcall vote, and the 
yeas and nays shall be considered as ordered.''.

                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 32.2

                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 Golden  Enterprises,  Inc. (the
"Company")  on Form 10-Q for the first  quarter  ended August 31, 2007, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),
I, Patty Townsend, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,  certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

     (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.

Dated: October 9, 2007


/s/ Patty Townsend
------------------
Patty Townsend
Vice-President and Chief Financial Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Golden Enterprises, Inc. and will be retained by Golden Enterprises,
Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission, or its staff, upon
request.

                                       22
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS



The Board of Directors
Smithway Motor Xpress Corp.:


We consent to incorporation by reference in the Registration  Statements  (No.'s
333-10249,  333-10251,  333-21253,  333-81855,  and  333-97195)  on Form  S-8 of
Smithway Motor Xpress Corp. of our report dated February 14, 2003,  except as to
note 1 - liquidity  and note 4, which are as of April 15, 2003,  relating to the
consolidated  balance sheets of Smithway Motor Xpress Corp. and  subsidiaries as
of  December  31,  2002 and 2001,  and the related  consolidated  statements  of
earnings,  stockholders'  equity,  and cash  flows  for each of the years in the
three-year  period ended  December 31, 2002.  Our report,  which  appears in the
December  31, 2002 Annual  Report on Form 10-K of Smithway  Motor  Xpress  Corp.
includes an  explanatory  paragraph  describing  the  adoption of  Statement  of
Financial Accounting Standard No. 142, Goodwill and Other Intangible Assets.







/s/ KPMG LLP


Des Moines, Iowa
April 15, 2003
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                                          UT
<CIK> 0000077227
<NAME> PENNSYLVANIA ELECTRIC COMPANY
<MULTIPLIER>                                    1,000
<CURRENCY>                                 US DOLLARS


<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                            JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                              JUN-30-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                     1
<BOOK-VALUE>                                 PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                   1,218,386
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                   324,088
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                        272,817
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                    1,881,169
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                      0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              3,696,460
<COMMON>                                      105,812
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                     285,486
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                            45,288  <F1>
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                436,586
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                         100,000  <F2>
<PREFERRED>                                         0
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                          474,734
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                              4,600
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                           0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                 99,800
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                      13
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                           0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                     1,917
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                  462
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>              2,578,348
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>               3,696,460
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                     426,894
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                                0
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                    358,584
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                    358,584
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                        68,310
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                              4,705
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                 73,015
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                       20,179  <F3>
<NET-INCOME>                                   31,481  <F4>
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                         0
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                  31,481
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                       55,000  <F5>
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                      30,192
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                        (94,849)
<EPS-BASIC>                                         0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       0
<FN>

<F1> INCLUDES ACCUMULATED OTHER COMPREHENSIVE INCOME OF $9,542.
<F2> REPRESENTS TRUST PREFERRED SECURITIES OF $100,000.
<F3> INCLUDES AMOUNT FOR TRUST PREFERRED SECURITIES OF $3,670.
<F4> AMOUNT IS NET OF INCOME TAX EXPENSE OF $21,355.
<F5> REPRESENTS COMMON STOCK DIVIDENDS PAID TO PARENT CORPORATION.
</FN>


</TABLE>
#### Joseph D. BETHEL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 73-889.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Jan. 25, 1974.

James A. Gardner, Public Defender, and Mary Jo M. Gallay, Asst. Public Defender, Brandenton, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Richard G. Pippinger, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Davis v. State, Fla.App. 2d, 1973, 277 So.2d 300, and Kelly v. State, Fla.App. 1st, 1971, 254 So.2d 22.

HOBSON, Acting C. J., and McNULTY and GRIMES, JJ., concur.
H. Res. 7

In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

January 5, 1993.

Resolved, That unless otherwise ordered, the hour of

meeting of the House shall be noon on Mondays and Tuesdays; 2 o’clock post meridiem on Wednesdays; 11 o’clock ante

meridiem on all other days of the week up to and including

May 14, 1993; and that from May 15, 1993, until the end

of the first session, the hour of daily meeting of the House

shall be noon on Mondays and Tuesdays and 10 o’clock ante

meridiem on all other days of the week.

Attest:

Clerk.
#### Anthony CASSATA, Appellant, v. SHELL OIL COMPANY, a Delaware corporation, and Joel Bruce Eubanks, Appellees.

No. 69-322.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

March 18, 1970.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
#### STATE of Florida ex rel. Earl B. ALLEN, Relator, v. Honorable Paul BAKER, as Judge of the Circuit Court of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit in and for Dade County, Florida, Respondent.

No. 73-1128.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Sept. 19, 1973.

PER CURIAM.

Prohibition dismissed.
# C_2022359EN.01006003.xml

| 19.9.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 359/60 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.9.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 359/60

---

Order of the President of the Court of 7 April 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel Piteşti — Romania) — Proceedings brought by MK

(Case C-709/21) (1)

(2022/C 359/70)

Language of the case: Romanian

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

---

(1)  OJ C 51, 31.1.2022.

---
#### VALET PARKING CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. Cesaro VENTRIERI, Eden Roc Hotel, et al., Respondents.

No. 40640.

Supreme Court of Florida.

March 4, 1971.

Certiorari denied.

ERVIN, Acting C. J., CARLTON, ADKINS, BOYD and McCAIN, JJ., concur.
N OTE : This disposition is nonprecedential. 

# United States Court of Appeals **for the Federal Circuit**

______________________
NCLN20, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee.

____________________

2012-5001

______________________
Appeal from the United States Court of Federal Claims in Case No. 02-CV- 1282, Judge Susan G. Braden.

______________________

JUDGMENT

______________________

G EORGE E LLIOTT E LLIS , The Ellis Law Firm, of Brooklyn, New York, argued for plaintiff-appellant.

D OUGLAS K. M ICKLE , Senior Trial Counsel, Commercial Litigation Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of Justice, of Washington, DC, argued for defendant-appellee. With him on the brief were S TUART F. D ELERY , Acting Assistant Attorney General,
J EANNE E. D AVIDSON , Director, and S TEVEN J. G ILLINGHAM , Assistant Director. Of counsel on the brief
was D IANNE F OOSE , Office of the Principal Legal Advisor, United States Department of Homeland Security, of Washington, DC.

______________________T HIS C AUSE having been heard and considered, it is

O RDERED and A DJUDGED :

P ER C URIAM (B RYSON
, R EYNA , and W ALLACH , C ircuit Judges ).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

E NTERED BY O RDER OF THE C OURT

November 7, 2012 /s/ Jan Horbaly
Date Jan Horbaly Clerk
#### J. P. CARMICHAEL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 71-279.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

May 29, 1973.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
#### Elizabeth Avellanet, as Administratrix of the Estate of Hiram Hueca, Jr., et al., Appellants, v R-JO Trucking Corp., Respondent, et al., Defendants.

[655 NYS2d 368]

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Barry Salman, J.), entered April 4, 1996, which granted defendant-respondent’s motion to modify a prior order, entered on default, conditionally striking respondent’s answer unless it served a bill of particulars and responses to plaintiff’s discovery demands within 30 days after service of the order with notice of entry, to the extent of deeming the bill of particulars and discovery responses that respondent served in response to such conditional order to have been timely, upon condition that respondent pay to plaintiff’s attorneys $250, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

*194Although the conditional order was served on respondent’s attorney, such service was without notice of entry, and thus the 30-day limitation never began to run *(cf., O’Brien v City of New York,*6 AD2d 63), and it cannot be said that respondent was in default of that order. Respondent’s motion to "amend” the conditional order was really nothing more than an effort to inform the motion court of the reasons for the two or three-month delay in complying therewith. We see no reason to disturb the court’s finding of "substantial” compliance and exercise of discretion in favor of determining the matter on the merits, on the condition that plaintiffs attorneys be compensated in the amount of $250 *(see, Damselle, Ltd. v 500-512 Seventh Ave. Assocs.,*184 AD2d 367). Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Wallach, Williams and Andrias, JJ.
# C_2020433EN.01005901.xml

| 14.12.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 433/59 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.12.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 433/59

---

Action brought on 5 October 2020 — FZ and Others v Commission

(Case T-618/20)

(2020/C 433/73)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicants: FZ and 17 other applicants (represented by: J.-N. Louis, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicants claim that the General Court should:

| — | annul the decision of the Commission establishing the applicants’ pay slip for the month of December 2019 in so far as it applies, for the first time, correction coefficients, which were prescribed with retroactive effect from 1 April and 1 July 2019; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of the Commission establishing the applicants’ pay slip for the month of December 2019 in so far as it applies, for the first time, correction coefficients, which were prescribed with retroactive effect from 1 April and 1 July 2019;

| — | order the Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicants rely on pleas in law, alleging infringement of Articles 64 and 65 of the Staff Regulations of Officials of the European Union (‘the Staff Regulations’), infringement of the principle of equal treatment in terms of equivalence of purchasing power, and manifest error of assessment.

The applicants claim that, in order to set the correction coefficient applicable to the salary of the applicants posted outside the European Union, EUROSTAT should collect data specific to their place of employment, in accordance with the rules for application of Articles 64 and 65 of the Staff Regulations, as laid down in Annex XI thereto.

They also argue that the coefficients, which were laid down in the context of an international collaboration agreement between EUROSTAT, the OECD and the UN, fell from January 2018 to January 2019 from 239,7 to 94,0 whereas, for that same period, the coefficients applied to the salaries of UN personnel were increased to take account of inflation. In 2017, the Congolese franc (CDF) underwent a sharp devaluation as against the dollar (USD) and the euro, which, coupled with substantial inflation, resulted in a significant increase in prices in USD, according to the analysis of the IMF.

The applicants take the view that the defendant has not explained how the coefficients applied take account of those essential elements.

---
#### Nathaniel MOSES, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 71-52.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Oct. 8, 1971.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
# C_2022222EN.01002601.xml

| 7.6.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 222/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.6.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 222/26

---

Order of the President of the Court of 11 March 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Landesgericht Salzburg — Austria) — PJ v Eurowings GmbH

(Case C-751/21) (1)

(2022/C 222/41)

Language of the case: German

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

---

(1)  OJ C 95, 28.2.2022.

---
# C_2023063EN.01000801.xml

| 20.2.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 63/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.2.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 63/8

---

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 22 December 2022 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Arbitral Tributário (Centro de Arbitragem Administrativa — CAAD) — Portugal) — IM Gestão de Ativos (IMGA) — Sociedade Gestora de Organismos de Investimento Coletivo SA and Others v Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira

(Case C-656/21) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Directive 2008/7/EC - Article 5(2)(a) - Indirect taxes on the raising of capital - Stamp duty on services relating to the marketing of shares in undertakings for collective investment in transferable securities)

(2023/C 63/10)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Tribunal Arbitral Tributário (Centro de Arbitragem Administrativa — CAAD)

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicants: IM Gestão de Ativos (IMGA) — Sociedade Gestora de Organismos de Investimento Coletivo SA, IMGA Rendimento Semestral, IMGA Ações Portugal Cat A, IMGA Ações América Cat A, IMGA Mercados Emergentes, IMGA Eurofinanceiras, IMGA Eurocarteira, IMGA Rendimento Mais, IMGA Investimento PPR, IMGA Alocação Moderada Cat A, IMGA Alocação Dinâmica Cat A, IMGA Global Equities Selection Cat A, IMGA Liquidez Cat A, IMGA Money Market Cat A, IMGA Euro Taxa Variável Cat A, IMGA Dívida Pública Europeia, IMGA Retorno Global Cat A, IMGA Poupança PPR, IMGA Alocação Conservadora Cat A, IMGA Iberia Equities ESG Cat A, IMGA Iberia Fixed Income ESG Cat A, IMGA Alternativo, CA Curto Prazo, IMGA Ações Europa, IMGA Flexível Cat A, CA Monetário, CA Rendimento, Eurobic PPR/OICVM Ciclo Vida 35-44, Eurobic PPR/OICVM Ciclo Vida 45-54, Eurobic PPR/OICVM Ciclo Vida + 55, Eurobic Seleção Top, IMGA European Equities Cat A

Defendant: Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira

Operative part of the judgment

Article 5(2)(a) of Council Directive 2008/7/EC of 12 February 2008 concerning indirect taxes on the raising of capital

must be interpreted as precluding national legislation which provides for the imposition of stamp duty on, first, the remuneration received by a financial institution from a common fund management company for the supply of marketing services for the purposes of new capital contributions aimed at the subscription of newly issued shares in funds and, second, the amounts which that management company receives from common funds in so far as those amounts include the remuneration which that management company has paid to financial institutions in respect of those marketing services.

---

(1)  OJ C 37, 24.1.2022.

---