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

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1045 

To amend title 5, United States Code, to provide that persons having seriously 

delinquent tax debts shall be ineligible for Federal employment. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 23, 2013 

Mr. COBURN (for himself and Mr. PRYOR) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend title 5, United States Code, to provide that persons having seriously delinquent tax debts shall be ineligible for Federal employment. 

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

3 SECTION 1. INELIGIBILITY OF PERSONS HAVING SERI4 OUSLY DELINQUENT TAX DEBTS FOR FED5 ERAL EMPLOYMENT. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Chapter 73 of title 5, United 

7 States Code, is amended by adding at the end the fol8 lowing: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1045 IS

1 ‘‘SUBCHAPTER VIII—INELIGIBILITY OF PER2 SONS HAVING SERIOUSLY DELINQUENT 

3 TAX DEBTS FOR FEDERAL EMPLOYMENT 

4 ‘‘§ 7381. Ineligibility of persons having seriously de5 linquent tax debts for Federal employ6 ment 

7 ‘‘(a) DEFINITIONS.—For purposes of this section— 

8 ‘‘(1) the term ‘seriously delinquent tax debt’ 

9 means an outstanding debt under the Internal Rev10 enue Code of 1986 for which a notice of lien has 

11 been filed in public records pursuant to section 6323 

12 of such Code, except that such term does not in13 clude— 

14 ‘‘(A) a debt that is being paid in a timely 

15 manner pursuant to an agreement under sec16 tion 6159 or section 7122 of such Code; and 

17 ‘‘(B) a debt with respect to which a collec18 tion due process hearing under section 6330 of 

19 such Code, or relief under subsection (a), (b), 

20 or (f) of section 6015 of such Code, is re21 quested or pending; and 

22 ‘‘(2) the term ‘Federal employee’ means— 

23 ‘‘(A) an employee, as defined by section 

24 2105; and 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 1045 IS

1 ‘‘(B) an employee of the United States 

2 Postal Service or of the Postal Regulatory Com3 mission. 

4 ‘‘(b) INELIGIBILITY FOR FEDERAL EMPLOYMENT.— 

5 An individual who has a seriously delinquent tax debt shall 

6 be ineligible to be appointed, or to continue serving, as 

7 a Federal employee. 

8 ‘‘(c) REGULATIONS.—The Office of Personnel Man9 agement shall, for purposes of carrying out this section 

10 with respect to the executive branch, prescribe any regula11 tions which the Office considers necessary, which shall in12 clude regulations authorizing each agency to establish an 

13 appeal process for affected individuals.’’. 

14 (b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.—The analysis for chap15 ter 73 of title 5, United States Code, is amended by add16 ing at the end the following: 

‘‘SUBCHAPTER VIII—INELIGIBILITY OF PERSONS HAVING SERIOUSLY

DELINQUENT TAX DEBTS FOR FEDERAL EMPLOYMENT

‘‘7381. Ineligibility of persons having seriously delinquent tax debts for Federal 

employment.’’. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 139 (Thursday, July 19, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 34145]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-15388]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

[Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-4366-DR; Docket ID FEMA-2018-0001]


Hawaii; Amendment No. 1 to Notice of a Major Disaster Declaration

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: This notice amends the notice of a major disaster declaration 
for the State of Hawaii (FEMA-4366-DR), dated May 11, 2018, and related 
determinations.

DATES: This amendment was issued June 14, 2018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Dean Webster, Office of Response and 
Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, 
Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-2833.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of a major disaster declaration 
for the State of Hawaii is hereby amended to include Individual 
Assistance for the following area among those areas determined to have 
been adversely affected by the event declared a major disaster by the 
President in his declaration of May 11, 2018.

    Hawaii County for Individual Assistance (already designated for 
Public Assistance, including direct Federal assistance).

    The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 
(CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 97.030, 
Community Disaster Loans; 97.031, Cora Brown Fund; 97.032, Crisis 
Counseling; 97.033, Disaster Legal Services; 97.034, Disaster 
Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 97.046, Fire Management Assistance 
Grant; 97.048, Disaster Housing Assistance to Individuals and 
Households In Presidentially Declared Disaster Areas; 97.049, 
Presidentially Declared Disaster Assistance--Disaster Housing 
Operations for Individuals and Households; 97.050 Presidentially 
Declared Disaster Assistance to Individuals and Households--Other 
Needs; 97.036, Disaster Grants--Public Assistance (Presidentially 
Declared Disasters); 97.039, Hazard Mitigation Grant.

Brock Long,
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2018-15388 Filed 7-18-18; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
# C_2023104EN.01002701.xml

| 20.3.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 104/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.3.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 104/27

---

Judgment of the General Court of 1 February 2023 — Foundation for the Protection of the Traditional Cheese of Cyprus named Halloumi v EUIPO — Papouis Dairies (fino)

(Case T-558/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark fino Cyprus Halloumi Cheese - Earlier EU collective word mark HALLOUMI - Relative ground for refusal - Similarity of the signs - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001))

(2023/C 104/41)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Foundation for the Protection of the Traditional Cheese of Cyprus named Halloumi (Nicosia, Cyprus) (represented by: C. Milbradt, lawyer, and S. Malynicz, Barrister)

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

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Papouis Dairies Ltd (Nicosia) (represented by: A. Pomares Caballero and M. Pomares Caballero, lawyers)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 29 April 2021 (Case R 578/2019-2).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Foundation for the Protection of the Traditional Cheese of Cyprus named Halloumi to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by Papouis Dairies Ltd. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Foundation for the Protection of the Traditional Cheese of Cyprus named Halloumi to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) and by Papouis Dairies Ltd.

---

(1)  
  OJ C 452, 8.11.2021.

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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF HARBINGER CORPORATION FOR THE QUARTER END 
MAR-31-98 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH CONSOLIDATED 
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS. ALL AMOUNTS HAVE BEEN RETROACTIVELY RESTATED TO REFLECT A
THREE-FOR-TWO STOCK SPLIT IN THE FORM OF A STOCK DIVIDEND PAYABLE ON MAY-15-98.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                          75,254
<SECURITIES>                                    31,050
<RECEIVABLES>                                   32,988
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,773
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               149,862
<PP&E>                                          34,944
<DEPRECIATION>                                  16,164
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 186,421
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           51,070
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             4
<OTHER-SE>                                     135,347
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   186,421
<SALES>                                         10,426
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                31,100
<CGS>                                              980
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    8,639
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                24,974
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  27
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (1,202)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       136
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (1,338)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (1,338)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (0.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.03)
        

</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 139 (Thursday, July 19, 2018)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 34042]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-15438]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Coast Guard

33 CFR Part 165

[Docket Number USCG-2018-0578]
RIN 1625-AA00


Safety Zone; Alaska Marine Highway System Port Valdez Ferry 
Terminal, Port Valdez; Valdez, AK; Correction

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS.

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is correcting a final rule that appeared in 
the Federal Register on July 12, 2018. The Coast Guard issued a final 
rule republishing its 2014 rule that established a permanent safety 
zone on the navigable waters of Port Valdez within a 200-yard radius of 
the Alaska Marine Highway System (AMHS) Port Valdez Ferry Terminal.

DATES: Effective July 19, 2018.

ADDRESSES: To view documents mentioned in this preamble as being 
available in the docket, go to http://www.regulations.gov, type USCG-
2018-0578 in the ``SEARCH'' box and click ``SEARCH.'' Click on Open 
Docket Folder on the line associated with this rule.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: If you have questions about this 
rulemaking, call or email LTJG, Carlos M. Quintero, MSU Valdez, U.S. 
Coast Guard; telephone 907-835-7209, email <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#622103100e0d114c2f4c33170b0c1607100d22171101054c0f0b0e"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="2e6d4f5c42415d0063007f5b47405a4b5c416e5b5d4d4900434742">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In FR 2018-14863 appearing on page 32208 in 
the Federal Register of Thursday, July 12, 2018, the following 
correction is made:


Sec.  165.1712a  [Corrected]

0
1. On page 32209, in the second column, in part 165, in amendment 2, 
the section heading ``Sec.  165.1712a Safety Zone; Alaska Marine 
Highway System Port Valdez Ferry Terminal, Port Valdez, Valdez, AK.'' 
is corrected to read ``Sec.  165.1714 Safety Zone; Alaska Marine 
Highway System Port Valdez Ferry Terminal, Port Valdez, Valdez, AK.''.

    Date: July 16, 2018.
Katia Kroutil,
Chief, Office of Regulations and Administrative Law.
[FR Doc. 2018-15438 Filed 7-18-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-04-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### Jerome Kleckley, Respondent, v Trump Management, Inc., et al., Appellants.

[655 NYS2d 556]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the defendants appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (I. Aronin, J.), dated February 20, 1996, which denied their motion for summary judgment.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the defendants’ motion is granted, and the complaint is dismissed.

On June 11, 1991, the plaintiff, a quadriplegic with limited use of his arms and hands, was cooking steaks on the stove in the apartment where he had resided for five years. Although the stove-top was at the level of the plaintiff’s shoulders as he sat in his wheelchair, he was browning the meat in a 10-inch-deep pot. This last fact made it impossible for him to see into the pot, and obliged him to raise his hands above his head in order to deposit the meat slices inside. During one of these maneuvers, the plaintiff’s hand struck the pot’s metal rim and went into spasm, knocking the pot of scalding oil over and causing him serious burns.

The plaintiff sued the owners and managers of his apartment building on the theory that they should have installed in his apartment a stove more suitable for handicapped persons, or have permitted him to make such a "structural change” himself. The court denied the defendants’ motion for summary judgment, finding that there were issues of fact as to whether the defendants had denied a request from the plaintiff for a "handicapped stove”. We now reverse.

The defendants were under no duty to provide a special stove for the plaintiff *(see, e.g., Martinez v Lazaroff,*48 NY2d 819; *Gonzalez v Pius,*138 AD2d 453, 454; *see also, Pulka v Edelman,*40 NY2d 781). Moreover, the record is devoid of evidence *412that the plaintiff ever asked the defendants for permission to install a different stove, or that the defendants ever refused such a request.

The plaintiff did not oppose the defendants’ prima facie showing of entitlement to summary judgment by presenting evidence in admissible form sufficient to establish the existence of a triable issue of fact *(see, e.g., Zuckerman v City of New York,*49 NY2d 557; *Franklyn Folding Box Co. v Grinnell Mfg.,*234 AD2d 505; *Detko v McDonald’s Rests.,*198 AD2d 208, 209). Friedmann, J. P., Florio, McGinity and Luciano, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S JUNE 30, 1998 CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                          65,662
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   51,482
<ALLOWANCES>                                     5,076
<INVENTORY>                                      6,063
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               128,131
<PP&E>                                         295,501
<DEPRECIATION>                                  92,548
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 477,767
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          118,070
<BONDS>                                        426,547
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             4
<OTHER-SE>                                    (66,850)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   477,767
<SALES>                                         29,490
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               153,899
<CGS>                                           36,533
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   62,710
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                17,779
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              21,923
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (17,897)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (17,897)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                               (17,606)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (35,503)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.88)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.88)
        

</TABLE>
**Exhibit23.1**

**Consent of IndependentRegistered Public Accounting Firm**

We consent to theuse of our report dated December 20, 2006, relating to the consolidatedfinancial statements of Analytical Surveys, Inc. and Subsidiaries (the “Company”)as of and for the years ended September 30, 2006 and 2005, appearing in theAnnual Report on Form 10-KSB of Analytical Surveys, Inc. as of September 30,2006.

Our reportcontains an explanatory paragraph that states that the Company has sufferedsignificant operating losses in 2006 and prior years and does not currentlyhave external financing in place to fund working capital requirements, whichraises substantial doubt about the Company’s ability to continue as a goingconcern.  The consolidated financialstatements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome ofthis uncertainty.
| /s/ PANNELL KERR FORSTER OF TEXAS, P.C. |   |
|-----------------------------------------|--------|
|                                    |
| Houston, Texas                          |
| December 22, 2006                       |

 

----
#### Bill AUTEN, Vernon Molusky, Sam Dobbins and James Vernon, Appellants, v. Hoyal D. A. CONWAY, Appellee.

No. 70-118.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Oct. 27, 1970.

*503Richard H. W. Maloy, Coral Gables, for appellants.

Jack G. Admire and Albert Tarabour, Miami, for appellee.

Before PEARSON, C. J., and CHARLES CARROLL and SWANN, JJ.

SWANN, Judge.

Adele B. Crabtree executed a will on November 4, 1968, prepared by her attorney. She was 83 years old when she passed away on September 29, 1969.

The will of November 4, 1968 was admitted to probate. Hoyal A. Conway, also known as D. Conway, thereafter filed a petition for revocation of that will and for the probate of an instrument dated July 23, 1969 alleged to be her last will and testament. The instrument was on a page in a memorandum book belonging to Adele B. Crabtree. The part of the will which is pertinent to this appeal is reproduced below:



*504Issues were joined by the pleadings and a final hearing was held at which testimony was introduced to prove, among other things, the testamentary intent of the deceased, Adele B. Crabtree.

The trial judge ruled, in part, that the writing of July 23, 1969 was a testamentary instrument as far as it related to the disposition of the property of Adele Crabtree. This appeal is from that order.

The sole and only point as framed and argued by appellant on this appeal is:

> “Whether the lower court erred in finding testamentary intent in a fact situation where the decedent merely wrote a handwritten memorandum in a memo book concerning intentions of changing her formal will, which changes were never accomplished and where she later affirmed her formal will.”

No question is raised as to the proper execution and attestation of the will.

Essentially, this argument is whether there was sufficient substantial, competent evidence to support a finding by the trial court of testamentary intent on the part of Adele B. Crabtree.

Although there was conflicting and inconsistent testimony, we find there was sufficient substantial, competent evidence in the record to sustain the finding of the trial judge as to the testamentary intent of Adele B. Crabtree even though she used preca-tory words in the instrument. See In re Thompson’s Estate, Fla.1955, 84 So.2d 911; In re Estate of Perez, Fla.App.1968, 206 So.2d 58; In re Estate of Coles, Fla.App.1968, 205 So.2d 554; and In re Reid’s Estate, Fla.App.1962, 138 So.2d 342.

Affirmed.

CARROLL, J., dissents.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF HARBINGER CORPORATION FOR THE SIX MONTHS
ENDED JUNE 30, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                          30,203
<SECURITIES>                                    38,085
<RECEIVABLES>                                   47,161
<ALLOWANCES>                                     5,445
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               117,649
<PP&E>                                          51,747
<DEPRECIATION>                                  25,262
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 160,812
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           49,778
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             4
<OTHER-SE>                                     111,030
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   160,812
<SALES>                                         20,423
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                72,229
<CGS>                                            2,487
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   24,734
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                41,169
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  7,984
<INCOME-TAX>                                       367
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              7,617
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     7,617
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .19
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .19


</TABLE>
#### John L. HUTCHINS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 70-832.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Nov. 24, 1971.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.