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

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2360 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2360

  To suspend temporarily the duty on certain fire retardant materials 
                        used to make mattresses.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            October 29, 2009

  Mr. Voinovich (for himself and Mr. Brown) introduced the following 
  bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To suspend temporarily the duty on certain fire retardant materials 
                        used to make mattresses.

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

SECTION 1. CERTAIN FIRE RETARDANT MATERIALS USED TO MAKE MATTRESSES.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``     9902.01.00      Nonwoven fabric     Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                        consisting of two                                                  31/2011.......
                        layers of
                        needleloom felt,
                        the fabric
                        weighing less
                        than 250 g/m2, of
                        a thickness not
                        exceeding 3.7 mm,
                        of a blend of all
                        of the following
                        staple fibers
                        each with
                        filament decitex
                        measuring 3.5 or
                        less: fire
                        retardant rayon
                        staple fibers,
                        fire retardant
                        modacrylic staple
                        fibers, fire
                        retardant para-
                        aramid staple
                        fibers and
                        polyester staple
                        fibers (provided
                        for in subheading
                        5602.10.90)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Document Headings

                    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 Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Project Nos. 12863-002 and 14074-000]

                    The Commission has received two preliminary permit applications deemed filed on February 1, 2011, at 8:30 a.m.,[1]                                          for proposed projects to be located on the Mississippi River, near the town of Donaldsonville, in Ascension Parish, Louisiana. The applications were filed by FFP Project 21, LLC for Project No. 12863-002, and Northland Power Mississippi River LLC for Project No. 14074-000.                

                    On January 17, 2012, at 9 a.m. (eastern time), the Secretary of the Commission, or her designee, will conduct a random drawing to determine the filing priority of the applicants identified in this notice. The Commission will select among competing permit applications as provided in section 4.37 of its regulations.[2]                                          The priority established by this drawing will be used to determine which applicant, among those with identical filing times, will be considered to have the first-filed application.                

The drawing is open to the public and will be held in room 2C, the Commission Meeting Room, located at 888 First St. NE., Washington, DC 20426. A subsequent notice will be issued by the Secretary announcing the results of the drawing.

Dated: January 10, 2012.

Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,

Deputy Secretary. 

# Footnotes

1.                             Under the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, any document received after regular business hours is considered filed at 8:30 a.m. on the next regular business day. 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(2) (2011).                    
        Back to Citation      

2.                             18 CFR 4.37 (2011).                    
        Back to Citation      

[FR Doc. 2012-694 Filed 1-13-12; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 43 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        S.Con.Res.43
                                          Agreed to July 1, 1999        

                       One Hundred Sixth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE FIRST SESSION

         Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,
   the sixth day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-nine

                          Concurrent Resolution

    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), 
That when the Senate recesses or adjourns at the close of business on 
Thursday, July 1, 1999, Friday, July 2, 1999, or Saturday, July 3, 
1999, on a motion offered pursuant to this concurrent resolution by its 
Majority Leader or his designee, it stand recessed or adjourned until 
noon on Monday, July 12, 1999, or until such time on that day as may be 
specified by its Majority Leader or his designee in the motion to 
recess or adjourn, or until noon on the second day after Members are 
notified to reassemble pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent 
resolution, whichever occurs first; and that when the House adjourns on 
the legislative day of Thursday, July 1, 1999, or Friday, July 2, 1999, 
on a motion offered pursuant to this concurrent resolution by its 
Majority Leader or his designee, it stand adjourned until 12:30 p.m. on 
Monday, July 12, 1999, for morning-hour debate, or until noon on the 
second day after Members are notified to reassemble pursuant to section 
2 of this concurrent resolution, whichever occurs first.
    Sec. 2. The Majority Leader of the Senate and the Speaker of the 
House, acting jointly after consultation with the Minority Leader of 
the Senate and the Minority Leader of the House, shall notify the 
Members of the Senate and House, respectively, to reassemble whenever, 
in their opinion, the public interest shall warrant it.
  Attest:

                                               Secretary of the Senate.

  Attest:

                                 Clerk of the House of Representatives.
```
S. Con. Res. 125 Agreed to June 30, 2000

One Hundred Sixth Congress

of the

United States of America

AT THE SECOND SESSION

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Monday,

the twenty-fourth day of January, two thousand

Concurrent Resolution

Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), That when the Senate recesses or adjourns at the close

of business on Thursday, June 29, 2000, Friday, June 30, 2000,

or on Saturday, July 1, 2000, on a motion offered pursuant to

this concurrent resolution by its Majority Leader or his designee,

it stand recessed or adjourned until noon on Monday, July 10,

2000, or until such time on that day as may be specified by its

Majority Leader or his designee in the motion to recess or adjourn,

or until noon on the second day after Members are notified to

reassemble pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent resolution,

whichever occurs first; and that when the House adjourns on the

legislative day of Thursday, June 29, 2000, or Friday, June 30,

2000, on a motion offered pursuant to this concurrent resolution

by its Majority Leader or his designee, it stand adjourned until

12:30 p.m. on Monday, July 10, 2000, for morning-hour debate,

or until noon on the second day after Members are notified to

reassemble pursuant to section 2 of this concurrent resolution,

whichever occurs first.

SEC. 2. The Majority Leader of the Senate and the Speaker

of the House, acting jointly after consultation with the Minority

Leader of the Senate and the Minority Leader of the House, shall

notify the Members of the Senate and House, respectively, to
S. Con. Res. 125—2

reassemble whenever, in their opinion, the public interest shall

warrant it.

Attest:

Secretary of the Senate.

Attest:

Clerk of the House of Representatives.
#### E.L. HENDRIX v. STATE of Mississippi.

No. 91-KA-0805.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Dec. 23, 1993.

John S. Knowles, III, Brantley & Knowles, Jackson, for appellant.

Michael C. Moore, Atty. Gen., Jean Smith Vaughan, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee.

Appeal No. 7153 from Judgment dated July 30, 1991, William F. Coleman, Ruling Judge, Yazoo County Circuit Court.

Before PRATHER, P.J., and PITTMAN and McRAE, JJ.

Affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            8,300
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,705
<OTHER-SE>                                    (12,005)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                96,323
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (96,323)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (96,323)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (96,323)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.03)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.03)






</TABLE>
#### Christine Ropollo MONCUS v. James D. MONCUS.

No. 87-C—2154.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Nov. 13, 1987.

In re Moncus, James D.; applying for writ of certiorari and/or review: to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. CA85-0753; Parish of Lafayette, 15th Judicial District Court, Div. “D”, No. 824113-D.

Prior report: La.App., 510 So.2d 1271.

Denied.

CALOGERO and LEMMON, JJ., would grant the writ.
#### Frank L. SHERMAN and Bertha J. Sherman, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, INC., Defendant-Appellee.

No. 84CA0010.

Colorado Court of Appeals, Div. III.

Jan. 2, 1986.

Rehearing Denied Feb. 20, 1986.

*476Ott, Kirkwood, and Cronan, Edward L. Kirkwood, Denver, for plaintiffs-appellants.

Hall & Evans, Michael W. Jones, Alan Epstein, Denver, for defendant-appellee.

TURSI, Judge.

Frank and Bertha Sherman appeal a judgment of the trial court in which it found that the damage to their house consists only of settling and cracking and is, therefore, not covered by their insurance policy. We reverse.

In a previous appeal in this action, *Sherman v. Safeco Insurance Co. of America,*670 P.2d 16 (Colo.App.1983), we held that the “collapse” of a building need not be total to come within the meaning of that term set forth in *Higgins v. Connecticut Fire Insurance Co.,*163 Colo. 292, 430 P.2d 479 (1967).

The Shermans’ insurance policy allows recovery “for the collapse of a building or any part thereof” but not for damage consisting only of “settling, cracking, shrinkage, bulging, or expansion.” In *Sherman, supra,*we directed that on remand “the trial court must resolve any remaining factual issues concerning whether these conditions constituted the sole damage to the structure or its parts.” The trial court found on rehearing that these excluded conditions constituted the sole damage to the house. We conclude the record does not support this finding.

In *Higgins, supra,*it was noted:

> “The walls of Higgins’ building had small cracks in them as did portions of the concrete foundation in the lower floor, but there had been no falling in or loss of shape of the building_ Plaintiff’s entire family continued to live in the house safely and comfortably.”

Here, according to undisputed testimony, the masonry work supporting the sill plate had cracked, which allowed for the complete release of the sill plate. The roof had fallen more than two and one-half feet, producing a marked sag in the roof line. The upper tiers of bricks on the two supporting walls had fallen out, and the walls were bowed out. This condition was, as a matter of law, a “collapse” within the meaning of that term in Shermans’ insurance policy. *See Higgins, supra.*

The judgment is reversed and the cause is remanded for determination of damage and entry of judgment consistent with this opinion.

KELLY and METZGER, JJ., concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2421 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2421

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Chloroacetic acid, sodium 
                                 salt.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            October 29, 2009

  Mrs. Hagan introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Chloroacetic acid, sodium 
                                 salt.

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

SECTION 1. CHLOROACETIC ACID, SODIUM SALT.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.12.34 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to Chloroacetic acid, sodium 
salt) is amended by striking ``12/31/2009'' and inserting ``12/31/
2011''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
#### HURWITZ-MINTZ FURNITURE COMPANY v. Robert G. JACKSON.

No. 87-C—2146.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Nov. 13, 1987.

In re Jackson, Robert G.; applying for writ of certiorari and/or review; to the Court of Appeal, First Circuit, No. CA86 0734; Parish of East Baton Rouge, 19th Judicial District Court, Div. “I”, No. 284-628.

Prior report: La.App., 513 So.2d 560.

Denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                         380,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 582,326
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          114,164
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    180,000
<COMMON>                                        51,813
<OTHER-SE>                                     236,399
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   682,326
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               205,875
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (205,875)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (70,000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (135,875)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (135,875)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (.015)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF JPS INDUSTRIES, INC. CONTAINED IN THE BODY OF THE
ACCOMPANYING FORM 10-K AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-30-1999
<CASH>                                           1,343
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   57,094
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,565
<INVENTORY>                                     36,250
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                98,337
<PP&E>                                         102,244
<DEPRECIATION>                                  16,452
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 226,856
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           34,326
<BONDS>                                         79,806
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           100
<OTHER-SE>                                      94,553
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   226,856
<SALES>                                        292,193
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               292,193
<CGS>                                          246,996
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  246,996
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 4,041
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               7,546
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (1,879)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       569
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (2,448)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 (18,994)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (21,442)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (2.14)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (2.14)


</TABLE>
#### STATE INSURANCE FUND, Plaintiff, v. Albert G. PERKES, Defendant.

No. 19071.

Supreme Court of Utah.

Oct. 27, 1983.

*102Fred R. Silvester, Salt Lake City, for plaintiff.

Nolan J. Olsen, Midvale, for defendant.

OAKS, Justice:

This case concerns the time limits for reporting an injury and filing a claim by a self-employed worker covered by workmen’s compensation.

Perkes is a self-employed operator of a service station. In November 1980, he suffered a hernia in the course of his employment. He sought no medical help and filed no claim or report of injury. On March 3, 1982, the preexisting hernia strangulated, and he was hospitalized for corrective surgery. Medical expenses totalled $2,013.40. The Industrial Commission ordered the State Insurance Fund to pay this amount, plus $22.72 for lost time. On this petition for review, the Fund argues that the award should be set aside because Perkes’ claim was not filed in time.

Utah Code Annotated, 1953, § 35-1-99 provides that an employee’s right to compensation is barred if he does not give his *employer*notice of his accident and injury within one year. That section does not bar Perkes since, being his own employer, he automatically fulfilled its requirement. Section 35-1-97 requires an employer to report an accident to the Commission within a week. That section does not provide any defense for the Fund since it does not bar an injured employee because of his employer’s failure to report.

Our statutes make no provision for the special circumstance of nonreporting by a self-employed/covered employee. The Fund urges that we fashion a reasonable period of limitations by construing these two sections to bar claims a self-employed person has not reported to the Commission within the one year § 35-1-99 allows an employee, plus the one week § 35-1-97 allows an employer. Although conscious of the desirability of timely asserted claims, we are unable to read the Fund’s proposed limitation into the existing statutes, and we are unwilling to fashion a limitation of our own. If a bar is to be imposed on a self-employed person’s delays in reporting his own injuries to the Commission, the Legislature must impose it.

In the meantime, insurance carriers are not without some protection from stale claims. Section 35-1-99 provides (subject to exceptions not pertinent here) that the right to compensation is wholly barred if no claim is filed with the Commission within three years from the date of the accident.

The award is affirmed.

HALL, C.J., and STEWART, HOWE and DURHAM, JJ., concur.