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

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1187 

To prevent homeowners from being forced to pay taxes on forgiven mortgage 

loan debt. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 19, 2013 

Ms. STABENOW (for herself, Mr. HELLER, Mr. MENENDEZ, and Mr. ISAKSON) 

introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the 

Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To prevent homeowners from being forced to pay taxes on 

forgiven mortgage loan debt. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Mortgage Forgiveness 

5 Tax Relief Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF EXCLUSION FROM GROSS INCOME 

7 OF DISCHARGE OF QUALIFIED PRINCIPAL 

8 RESIDENCE INDEBTEDNESS. 

9 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subparagraph (E) of section 

10 108(a)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amendVerDate Mar 15 2010 02:31 Jun 22, 2013 Jkt 029200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\S1187.IS S1187

pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1187 IS

1 ed by striking ‘‘January 1, 2014’’ and inserting ‘‘January 

2 1, 2016’’. 

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

4 this section shall apply to indebtedness discharged after 

5 December 31, 2013. 

Æ 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### COPLAN PIPE & SUPPLY CO., Inc., a Florida corporation, Appellant, v. BEN-FRIEDA CORPORATION, a Florida corporation, Appellee.

No. 70-500.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Oct. 27, 1970.

Ralph & Boyd, Miami, for appellant.

Caidin, Rothenberg, Kogen, Kornblum & Rothenberg, Miami, for appellee.

Before PEARSON, C. J., and BARK-DULL and SWANN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See: Peppercorn v. Bencini, 101 Fla. 446, 134 So. 490; 22 Fla.Jur., Mortgages, §§ 244, 248.
David Carl Williams (Pro Se) 

1 Global Arms and Ammunition 

28-37th Street N.E., Suite A 

2 Auburn, Washington 98002 

Telephone: (206) 325-9400 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

In the Matter of 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 

) DOCKET NUMBER F AA-20 14-0320 

GLOBAL ARMS AND AMMUNITION 

) FAA CASE NUMBER2012NM710034 

) 

) 

) RESPONDENT'S ANSWER 

) 

) 

_________________________ ) 

To: Your Honor: 

Respondent Global Arms and Ammunition answers Complainant FAA's Complaint: 

Admit. 

1. Admit. 

2. Deny. 

3. Admit. 

4. Admit. 

5. Admit. 

6. Admit. 

7. Admit. 

8. Deny. 

Respondent's Answer 

Global Arms and Ammunition- 20 l2NM71 0034 

DMS No. FAA-2014-0320. 

Page I of3. 

FACTS 

I. 

II. 

Tel: 206-325-9400 

Global Arms and Ammunition 

David Carl Williams (ProSe) 
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

9. Admit. 

10. Deny. 

III. 

I. a. Deny. 

b. Deny. 

c. Deny. 

d. Deny. 

e. Deny. 

f. Deny. 

g. Deny. 

h. Deny. 

1. Deny. 

J. Deny. 

2. Deny. 

3. Deny. 

AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES 

By way of affirmative defenses, Respondent Global Arms and Ammunition (hereon Global 

Arms) alleges as follows: 

I. Complainant's Complaint may fail, in whole or in part, to state claims upon which relief 

can be granted. 

2. Complainant's claims may be barred, in whole or in part, by the acts or omissions of 

FedEx Corporation over whom Global Arms had no control or right to control. 

3. Complainant's claims may be barred, in whole or in part, by the acts or omissions of 

other third parties over whom Global Arms had no control or right to control. 

4. Complainant may have failed to join necessary and indispensable parties. 

Respondent's Answer 

Global Anns and Ammunition- 2012NM710034 

DMS No. FAA-2014-0320. 

Page 2 of3. 

Tel: 206-325-9400 

Global Arms and Ammunition 

David Carl Williarus (ProSe) 
1 PRAYERFORRELIEF 

2 WHEREFORE, Global Arms and Ammunition respectfully request: 

3 I. That the Complaint be dismissed with prejudice and without cost; 

4 2. That Global Arms and Ammunition be awarded reasonable fees and cost incurred in 

5 defending this action; 

6 3. For such other and further relief this Court deems just and equitable under the 

7 circumstances. 

8 DATED this 14'h day of October, 2014. 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 Respondent's Answer 

Global Arms and Ammunition- 20 12NM71 0034 

DMS No. FAA-2014-0320. 

Page 3 of3. 

David Carl Williams (Pro Se) 

Global Arms and Ammunition 

Tel: 206-325-9400 

Global Arms and Ammunition 

David Carl Williams (Pro Se)
#### Willie MITCHELL, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 71-316.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Jan. 7, 1972.

Walter R. Talley, Public Defender, and D. Turner Matthews, Asst. Public Defender, Bradenton, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Warren H. Petersen, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.

PIERCE, Chief Judge.

In this case, appellant Willie Mitchell brings to this Court for review upon appeal the judgment of conviction entered against him in the Criminal Court of Record for Hillsborough County.

On December 15, 1970, Mitchell was charged by direct information with the offense of armed robbery of one Charles Al-bano. Upon trial of the case before a jury upon the merits he was found guilty, was accordingly adjudged guilty by the Court, and was sentenced to serve a term of twenty years imprisonment. Motion for new trial being denied, he has appealed to this Court from the judgment and sentence so entered and assigns as error that the State “failed to prove a prima facie case”, that the evidence “was insufficient to support a verdict of guilty”, and that his “Constitutional rights * * * were violated.”

The local Public Defender, duly appointed by the Court to represent him on this appeal, states in his brief filed here on behalf of Mitchell, that he “has carefully examined the Record on Appeal and can find no error which would arguably support an appeal. The evidence appears to be sufficient for a jury to convict, based upon the testimony of the victim.” His said counsel thereupon “respectfully requests to be relieved as Attorney of Record”, citing as authority the so-called *Anders*case, Anders v. State of Cal., 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493. Upon the filing of said brief, this Court, on August 18, 1971, entered order reciting that a copy of the brief had been served upon Mitchell, and thereupon giving Mitchell thirty days therefrom to file any additional brief he might desire as to any other matters he feels this Court should consider in disposing of the appeal. No such additional brief has been filed.

*243Nevertheless we have carefully considered the entire record filed here. We fail to find any colorable error.

The judgment of conviction so appealed is therefore—

Affirmed.

HOBSON and McNULTY, JJ., concur.
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

     I, Craig J. Kaufmann, Controller and Treasurer of SkyTerra Communications,
Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my
knowledge:

     (1)      The Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
              December 31, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
              Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), fully complies
              with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
              Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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


                             By:   /s/ CRAIG J. KAUFMANN
                                   ----------------------------------
                                   Name:  Craig J. Kaufmann
                                   Title: Controller and Treasurer
                                          (Principal Accounting Officer)
                                   Date:  March 29, 2004


     This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

     A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or
other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the
signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this
written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company
and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
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 Justice Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. DEA-392]
 ACTION: Notice of registration.
 SUMMARY: The registrant listed below has applied for and been granted registration by the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) as an importer of various classes of schedule I or II controlled substances.


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:  The company listed below applied to be registered as an importer of various basic classes of controlled substances. Information on the previously published notice is listed in the table below. No comments or objections were submitted 
                    ( print page 34880)
                    and no requests for hearing were submitted for this notice. Company
FR Docket
PublishedUnited States Pharmacopeial Convention
83 FR 15175
April 9, 2018.
 The Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) has considered the factors in 21 U.S.C. 823, 952(a) and 958(a) and determined that the registration of the listed registrant to import the applicable basic classes of schedule I or II controlled substances is consistent with the public interest and with United States obligations under international treaties, conventions, or protocols in effect on May 1, 1971. The DEA investigated this company's maintenance of effective controls against diversion by inspecting and testing the company's physical security systems, verifying the company's compliance with state and local laws, and reviewing the company's background and history. Therefore, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 952(a) and 958(a), and in accordance with 21 CFR 1301.34, the DEA has granted a registration as an importer for schedule I or II controlled substances to the above listed company. Dated: July 12, 2018. John J. Martin, Assistant Administrator.


[FR Doc. 2018-15665 Filed 7-20-18; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
July 2, 2013

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

GREEN DIESEL, LLC AND FUEL STREAMERS, INC, Appellants

NO. 14-13-00017-CV V.

VICNRG, LLC, Appellee

________________________________

This cause, an appeal from the orders in favor of appellee, VicNRG, LLC, 

signed September 4, 2012, was heard on the transcript of the record. We have 

inspected the record and find no error in the orders. We order the orders of the 

court below AFFIRMED.

We order appellants, Green Diesel, LLC and Fuel Streamers, Inc, to pay all 

costs incurred in this appeal. 

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                         0000754813
<NAME>                        MICROFRAME, INC.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                   MAR-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                      APR-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                        MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                539,214
<SECURITIES>                                0
<RECEIVABLES>                       1,998,810
<ALLOWANCES>                         (100,000)
<INVENTORY>                         1,030,343
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                    3,903,599
<PP&E>                              1,081,759
<DEPRECIATION>                       (738,636)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                      4,682,373
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>               1,208,179
<BONDS>                                     0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                       0
<PREFERRED>                                 0
<COMMON>                                4,839
<OTHER-SE>                          3,265,880
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>        4,682,373
<SALES>                             7,343,624
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                    7,343,624
<CGS>                               2,903,705
<TOTAL-COSTS>                       7,153,518
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                            0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                     24,380
<INCOME-PRETAX>                       201,286
<INCOME-TAX>                         (141,165)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                   342,451
<DISCONTINUED>                              0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                             0
<CHANGES>                                   0
<NET-INCOME>                          342,451
<EPS-PRIMARY>                            0.07
<EPS-DILUTED>                            0.07
        


</TABLE>
II 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1078 

To direct the Secretary of Defense to provide certain TRICARE beneficiaries 

with the opportunity to retain access to TRICARE Prime. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 23, 2013 

Ms. KLOBUCHAR (for herself and Ms. HIRONO) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Armed Services 

A BILL 

To direct the Secretary of Defense to provide certain 

TRICARE beneficiaries with the opportunity to retain 

access to TRICARE Prime. 

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

3 SECTION 1. FUTURE AVAILABILITY OF TRICARE PRIME 

4 FOR CERTAIN BENEFICIARIES ENROLLED IN 

5 TRICARE PRIME. 

6 Section 732 of the National Defense Authorization 

7 Act for Fiscal Year 2013 (Public Law 112–239; 126 Stat. 

8 1816) is amended— 

9 (1) by redesignating subsection (b) as sub10 section (c); and 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1078 IS

1 (2) by inserting after subsection (a) the fol2 lowing new subsection (b): 

3 ‘‘(b) ACCESS TO TRICARE PRIME.— 

4 ‘‘(1) ONE-TIME ELECTION.—Subject to para5 graph (3), the Secretary shall ensure that each af6 fected eligible beneficiary who is enrolled in 

7 TRICARE Prime as of September 30, 2013, may 

8 make a one-time election to continue such enroll9 ment in TRICARE Prime, notwithstanding that a 

10 contract described in subsection (a)(2)(A) does not 

11 allow for such enrollment based on the location in 

12 which such beneficiary resides. The beneficiary may 

13 continue such enrollment in TRICARE Prime so 

14 long as the beneficiary resides in the same ZIP code 

15 as the ZIP code in which the beneficiary resided at 

16 the time of such election. 

17 ‘‘(2) ENROLLMENT IN TRICARE STANDARD.—If 

18 an affected eligible beneficiary makes the one-time 

19 election under paragraph (1), the beneficiary may 

20 thereafter elect to enroll in TRICARE Standard at 

21 any time in accordance with a contract described in 

22 subsection (a)(2)(A). 

23 ‘‘(3) RESIDENCE AT TIME OF ELECTION.—An 

24 affected eligible beneficiary may not make the one25 time election under paragraph (1) if, at the time of 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 1078 IS

1 such election, the beneficiary does not reside in a 

2 ZIP code that is in a region described in subsection 

3 (c)(1)(B).’’. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Leroy SMITH.

No. 60705.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Feb. 10, 1978.

Rena M. Price, Orleans Indigent Defender Program, New Orleans, for defendant-appellant.

William J. Guste, Jr., Atty. Gen., Barbara Rutledge, Asst. Atty. Gen., Harry F. Con-nick, Dist. Atty., William L. Brockman, Asst. Dist. Atty., for plaintiff-appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
# C_2020175EN.01003501.xml

| 25.5.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 175/35 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.5.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 175/35

---

Action brought on 31 March 2020 — Laboratorios Ern v EUIPO — Sanolie (SANOLIE)

(Case T-175/20)

(2020/C 175/46)

Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Laboratorios Ern, SA (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: R. Guerras Mazón, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Sanolie (Istanbul, Turkey)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Applicant for the trade mark at issue: Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union word mark SANOLIE — Application for registration No 17 042 292

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 22 January 2020 in Case R 2405/2018-4

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision in relation to the grant for the goods sought: ‘body cream; face cream; body oils; facial oils; oils for cosmetic use’ in Class 3; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision in relation to the grant for the goods sought: ‘body cream; face cream; body oils; facial oils; oils for cosmetic use’ in Class 3;

| — | reject the application for European Union trade mark No 17 042 292 ‘SANOLIE’ with regard to the aforementioned goods, ‘body cream; face cream; body oils; facial oils; oils for cosmetic use’ in Class 3; |
| --- | --- |

—

reject the application for European Union trade mark No 17 042 292 ‘SANOLIE’ with regard to the aforementioned goods, ‘body cream; face cream; body oils; facial oils; oils for cosmetic use’ in Class 3;

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

—

order the defendant to pay the costs.

Plea in law

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) No 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
# C_2022119EN.01004001.xml

| 14.3.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 119/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.3.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 119/40

---

Judgment of the General Court of 19 January 2022 — Estetica Group Iwona Michalak v EUIPO (PURE BEAUTY)

(Case T-270/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Application for the EU figurative mark PURE BEAUTY - Absolute ground for refusal - No distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2022/C 119/54)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Estetica Group Iwona Michalak (Warsaw, Poland) (represented by: P. Gutowski, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Walicka, acting as Agent)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 March 2021 (Case R 1456/2020-5) concerning an application for registration of the figurative sign PURE BEAUTY as an EU trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Estetica Group Iwona Michalak to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Estetica Group Iwona Michalak to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 278, 12.7.2021.

---
-82 -80 -78 -76 -74 -72

38 40 42 44



### ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲



### ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ 500 1000 1500 1000 18 12 06 00 07/31 

### NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL 

## Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 31 Jul 07

EDAS Meteorological DataSource★at 38.81 N 76.74 WMeters AGL
| |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 
| |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 
| |  |  |  |  |  | 
| |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 
| |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  | 



Exhibit 7.1

Financial and operational
statistics

Financial ratios



|                                                   |  |  |      |  |  |  |      |   |  |  |      |   |  |  |      |   |  |  |      |  
|-------------------------------------------------- |  |  | ---- |  |  |  | ---- | - |  |  | ---- | - |  |  | ---- | - |  |  | ---- | -
|Year ended 31 March                                |  |  | 2017 |  |  |  | 2016 | a |  |  | 2015 | a |  |  | 2014 | b |  |  | 2013 | b
|Return on capital employed  %c                    |  |  | 11.2 |  |  |  | 12.7 |   |  |  | 23.3 |   |  |  | 21.1 |   |  |  | 20.6 |  
|Adjustedd %                                       |  |  | 14.6 |  |  |  | 13.5 |   |  |  | 24.9 |   |  |  | 22.9 |   |  |  | 22.1 |  
|Interest cover  timese                            |  |  | 3.9  |  |  |  | 5.1  |   |  |  | 4.0  |   |  |  | 3.8  |   |  |  | 3.8  |  
|Adjustedd times                                   |  |  | 7.0  |  |  |  | 7.9  |   |  |  | 6.5  |   |  |  | 5.8  |   |  |  | 5.1  |  
|Net debt to adjusted EBITDAd
times                |  |  | 1.2  |  |  |  | 1.5  |   |  |  | 0.8  |   |  |  | 1.1  |   |  |  | 1.3  |  
|Capital expenditure as a percentage of revenued % |  |  | 14.3 |  |  |  | 13.9 |   |  |  | 13.0 |   |  |  | 12.8 |   |  |  | 13.3 |  



|a | Revised, see note 1.
|- | --------------------

|b | As previously reported.
|- | -----------------------

|c | The ratio is based on profit before taxation and net finance expense to capital employed. Capital employed is represented by total assets less current liabilities (excluding corporation tax, current borrowings,
derivative financial liabilities and finance lease creditors) less deferred and current tax assets, retirement benefit asset, cash and cash equivalents, derivative financial assets and investments.
|- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|d | Before specific items.
|- | ----------------------

|e | The number of times net finance expense is covered by operating profit.
|- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------