alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 245 (Friday, December 22, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 88533]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-27940]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Defense Acquisition Regulations System

48 CFR Parts 205 and 225

[Docket DARS-2023-0001]


Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation Supplement; Technical 
Amendments

AGENCY: Defense Acquisition Regulations System, Department of Defense 
(DoD).

ACTION: Final rule; technical amendment.

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

SUMMARY: DoD is amending the Defense Federal Acquisition Regulation 
Supplement (DFARS) to make needed editorial changes.

DATES: Effective December 22, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Jennifer D. Johnson, Defense 
Acquisition Regulations System, telephone 703-717-8226.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This final rule amends the DFARS to make 
needed editorial changes to update the references to the Governmentwide 
point of entry (https://www.sam.gov) at DFARS 205.205-70, 205.301, 
225.7003-3 and 225.7018-4.

List of Subjects in 48 CFR Parts 205 and 225

    Government procurement.

Jennifer D. Johnson,
Editor/Publisher, Defense Acquisition Regulations System.

    Therefore, 48 CFR parts 205 and 225 are amended as follows:

0
1. The authority citation for 48 CFR parts 205 and 225 continues to 
read as follows:

    Authority:  41 U.S.C. 1303 and 48 CFR chapter 1.

PART 205--PUBLICIZING CONTRACT ACTIONS


205.205-70  [Amended]

0
2. Amend section 205.205-70 in paragraph (a) by removing 
``FedBizOpps.gov (or any successor site)'' and adding ``the 
Governmentwide point of entry (https://www.sam.gov)'' in its place.


205.301  [Amended]

0
3. Amend section 205.301 in paragraph (S-70)(i) by removing ``GPE'' and 
adding ``Governmentwide point of entry (https://www.sam.gov)'' in its 
place.

PART 225--FOREIGN ACQUISITION

0
4. Amend section 225.7003-3 by revising paragraph (b)(5)(ii)(A)(1) to 
read as follows:


225.7003-3  Exceptions.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (5) * * *
    (ii) * * *
    (A) * * *
    (1) Publish a notice in the Governmentwide point of entry (GPE) 
(https://www.sam.gov) of the intent to make the domestic 
nonavailability determination; and
* * * * *

0
5. Amend section 225.7018-4 by revising paragraph (b)(1)(i) to read as 
follows:


225.7018-4  Nonavailability determination.

* * * * *
    (b) * * *
    (1) * * *
    (i) Publish a notice in the GPE (https://www.sam.gov) of the intent 
to make the nonavailability determination; and
* * * * *
[FR Doc. 2023-27940 Filed 12-21-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6001-FR-P
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-19-00158-CV

In re The Commitment of Randall Mark Driggers

On Appeal from the

144th District Court of Bexar County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 2018CI02134

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed. The Court 

orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED. Costs of the appeal are adjudged 

against appellant, Randall Mark Driggers, although he is exempt from payment due to 

his inability to pay costs.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

December 12, 2019
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S. Dollars
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                  JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                    MAR-31-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                           1
<CASH>                               15,665
<SECURITIES>                              0
<RECEIVABLES>                             0
<ALLOWANCES>                              0
<INVENTORY>                               0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                     79,727
<PP&E>                              376,111
<DEPRECIATION>                      185,330
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                    3,097,002
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>             3,036,220
<BONDS>                                   0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                     0
<PREFERRED>                               0
<COMMON>                         16,308,438
<OTHER-SE>                          229,082
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>      3,097,002
<SALES>                                   0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                          0
<CGS>                                     0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                             0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                          0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                  172,652
<INCOME-PRETAX>                  (2,068,438)
<INCOME-TAX>                              0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>              (2,068,438)
<DISCONTINUED>                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                           0
<CHANGES>                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                     (2,068,438)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                          (.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                          (.04)
        


</TABLE>
# C_2019025EN.01002802.xml

| 21.1.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 25/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.1.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 25/28

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Dioikitiko Protodikeio Patron (Greece) lodged on 5 November 2018 — XT v Elliniko Dimosio

(Case C-689/18)

(2019/C 25/36)

Language of the case: Greek

Referring court

Dioikitiko Protodikeio Patron (Greece)

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: XT

Defendant: Elliniko Dimosio

Questions referred

| 1. | Does the rule in Article 44(1)(b) of Law 4111/2013, as in force in the 2013 tax year (2012 financial year), under which owners or keepers of private cars (with a cylinder capacity of 1 929 cc or more) more than ten years old by reference to the year when they were first put into circulation in Greece and not to the year of any prior (first) putting into circulation in a Member State of the European Union are exempt from wealthy lifestyle tax, constitute a charge having equivalent effect to a customs duty between the Member States of the European Union, within the meaning of Articles 28 to 30 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Does the rule in Article 44(1)(b) of Law 4111/2013, as in force in the 2013 tax year (2012 financial year), under which owners or keepers of private cars (with a cylinder capacity of 1 929 cc or more) more than ten years old by reference to the year when they were first put into circulation in Greece and not to the year of any prior (first) putting into circulation in a Member State of the European Union are exempt from wealthy lifestyle tax, constitute a charge having equivalent effect to a customs duty between the Member States of the European Union, within the meaning of Articles 28 to 30 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union?

| 2. | If the answer to the above question is in the negative, does that rule constitute an (indirect) internal tax on products imported from other Member States of the European Union in excess of the taxes imposed on similar domestic products, within the meaning of Article 110 of that Treaty? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If the answer to the above question is in the negative, does that rule constitute an (indirect) internal tax on products imported from other Member States of the European Union in excess of the taxes imposed on similar domestic products, within the meaning of Article 110 of that Treaty?

---
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 426 

To prohibit any regulation, rule, guidance, recommendation, or policy issued 

after May 15, 2015, that limits the sale or donation of excess property 

of the Federal Government to State and local agencies for law enforcement activities, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 10, 2017 

Mr. RATCLIFFE (for himself, Mr. OLSON, Mr. HENSARLING, Mr. BRADY of 

Texas, Mr. BARLETTA, Mr. CRAMER, Mr. JOHNSON of Ohio, Mr. 

HUIZENGA, Mr. MEEHAN, Mr. BYRNE, and Mr. MOOLENAAR) introduced 

the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, 

and in addition to the Committee on Armed Services, for a period to be 

subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration 

of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To prohibit any regulation, rule, guidance, recommendation, 

or policy issued after May 15, 2015, that limits the 

sale or donation of excess property of the Federal Government to State and local agencies for law enforcement 

activities, and for other purposes. 

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


smartinez on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 426 IH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Protecting Lives Using 

3 Surplus Equipment Act of 2017’’. 

4 SEC. 2. GENERAL PROHIBITION. 

5 No regulation, rule, guidance, recommendation, or 

6 policy issued after May 15, 2015, that limits the sale or 

7 donation of excess property of the Federal Government, 

8 including excess property of the Department of Defense, 

9 to State and local agencies for law enforcement activities 

10 (whether pursuant to section 2576a of title 10, United 

11 States Code, or any other provision of law, or as a condi12 tion on the use of Federal funds) shall have any force or 

13 effect unless enacted into law by Congress. 

14 SEC. 3. LIMITATION ON FEDERAL FUNDS. 

15 No agency or instrumentality of the Federal Govern16 ment may use any Federal funds, fees, or resources to im17 plement such regulation, rule, guidance, recommendation, 

18 or policy. 

19 SEC. 4. RETURN OR REISSUE OF EQUIPMENT RECALLED 

20 OR SEIZED. 

21 Any property recalled or seized on or after May 15, 

22 2015, pursuant to a regulation, rule, guidance, rec23 ommendation, or policy described in section 1 shall be re24 turned, replaced, or reissued to the State or local agency 

25 from which it was recalled or seized, at no cost to such 


smartinez on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 426 IH

1 agency, as soon as practicable after the date of the enact2 ment of this Act. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
<PAGE>
                                                                   Exhibit 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

The Board of Directors
MicroTel International, Inc.

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements (Nos. 33-22518, 33-72926 and 333-12567) on Form S-8 of our report
dated March 20, 1998, except as to Note 17, which is as of April 9, 1998,
relating to the consolidated financial statements and financial statement
schedule of MicroTel International, Inc. appearing in the Company's Annual
Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1997.  Our report contains
an explanatory paragraph regarding the Company's ability to continue as a going
concern.


                                                               BDO Seidman, LLP


Costa Mesa, California
April 14, 1998
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND> This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from 
the year ended March 30, 1998 Form 10-K Balance Sheets and Statements of 
Operations and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial 
statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>          0000856135
<NAME>         American Tax Credit Properties III
<MULTIPLIER>   1,000
<CURRENCY>     US Dollars
       
<S>                                               <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                            MAR-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                               APR-1-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                 MAR-30-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                              1.00
<CASH>                                       504
<SECURITIES>                                 3,065
<RECEIVABLES>                                22
<ALLOWANCES>                                 0
<INVENTORY>                                  0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             0
<PP&E>                                       0
<DEPRECIATION>                               0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               12,106
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,029
<BONDS>                                      0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                        0
<PREFERRED>                                  0
<COMMON>                                     0
<OTHER-SE>                                   0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 12,106
<SALES>                                      0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             258
<CGS>                                        0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             549
<LOSS-PROVISION>                             0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (2,649)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (2,649)
<DISCONTINUED>                               0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                              0
<CHANGES>                                    0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (2,649)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                (73.09)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                0
        


</TABLE>
No. 07

- 15

- 00012

- CR

Mark Hoff

Appellant

v.

The State of Texas

Appellee §

§

§

§ From the County Court at Law

of Navarro County

February 13, 2017

Opinion by Justice Pirtle

Concurring Opinion

by Chief Justice Quinn

Concurring and Dissenting Opinion

by Justice Campbell

J U D G M E N T

Pursuant to the opinion of the Court dated February 13, 2017

, it is ordered,

adjudged and decreed that the judgment of the trial court be affirmed.

Inasmuch as this is an appeal in forma pauperis , no costs beyond those that

have been paid are adjudged.

It is further ordered that this decision be certified below for observance.

o O o
**IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS**

((((((((((((((((

No. 08-0846

((((((((((((((((

Peter Hardsteen, Et Al., Petitioner

v.

Dean’s Campin’ Co., Respondent

((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((

On Petition for Review

((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((((

**ORDER**

1.Pursuant to the notice of bankruptcy of *Rexhall Industries, Inc.,*filed with this Court on March 16, 2009, this case is **ABATED** effective February 18, 2009.

2.This case is abated pursuant to Tex. R. App. P. 8.2 until further order of this Court and is removed from the Court's active docket, subject to reinstatement upon proper motion.  Tex. R. App. P. 8.3.  All motions and other documents pending or filed are abated subject to being reurged in the event the case is reinstated.  Tex. R. App. P. 8.2 and 8.3.  It is the parties' responsibility to immediately notify this Court once the automatic bankruptcy stay is lifted.

Done at the City of Austin, this 16th day of March, 2009.

Blake A. Hawthorne, Clerk

Supreme Court of Texas

By Claudia Jenks, Chief Deputy Clerk
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000854398
<NAME> XATA CORPORATION
       
<S>                                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                        12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                    SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                                    0
<SECURITIES>                                              0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     3,088,390
<ALLOWANCES>                                      1,047,000
<INVENTORY>                                         474,011
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  2,565,445
<PP&E>                                            2,560,124
<DEPRECIATION>                                    1,331,571
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    6,985,969
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             3,556,950
<BONDS>                                             461,491
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                     0
<PREFERRED>                                               0
<COMMON>                                             44,306
<OTHER-SE>                                        2,923,222
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      6,985,969
<SALES>                                           9,214,893
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  9,214,893
<CGS>                                             4,707,375
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     8,231,032
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                          0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   36,997
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (3,676,025)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        573,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               4,249,025
<DISCONTINUED>                                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                           0
<CHANGES>                                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                                      4,249,025
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                         (0.97)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         (0.97)
        


</TABLE>
# C_2009256EN.01000602.xml

| 24.10.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 256/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.10.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 256/6

---

Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 3 September 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Republic of Estonia

(Case C-464/08) (1)

1

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 2005/65/EC - Transport policy - Security of ports - Failure to transpose within the prescribed period)

2009/C 256/11

Language of the case: Estonian

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by K. Simonsson and K. Saaremäel-Stoilov, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Republic of Estonia (represented by L. Uibo, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Failure to take within the prescribed period the necessary measures to comply with Directive 2005/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 October 2005 on enhancing port security (OJ 2005 L 310, p. 28)

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Declares that, by failing to adopt within the prescribed period all the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2005/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 October 2005 on enhancing port security, the Republic of Estonia has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Declares that, by failing to adopt within the prescribed period all the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to comply with Directive 2005/65/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 October 2005 on enhancing port security, the Republic of Estonia has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

| 2. | Orders the Republic of Estonia to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Republic of Estonia to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 327 of 20.12.2008.

1

---
# C_2021110EN.01001101.xml

| 29.3.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 110/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.3.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 110/11

---

Judgment of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 4 February 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber) — United Kingdom) — JCM Europe (UK) Ltd v Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs

(Case C-760/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Customs union - Common Customs Tariff - Combined Nomenclature - Tariff classification - Headings 8472 and 9031 - Bank note validator and cash boxes - Device intended to be integrated in a host device and connected to an external control centre - Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/1760 - Validity)

(2021/C 110/09)

Language of the case: English

Referring court

First-tier Tribunal (Tax Chamber)

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: JCM Europe (UK) Ltd

Defendant: Commissioners for Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs

Operative part of the judgment

The examination of the questions referred has disclosed no factor capable of affecting the validity of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/1760 of 28 September 2016 concerning the classification of certain goods in the Combined Nomenclature.

---

(1)  OJ C 19, 20.1.2020.

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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AS OF JULY 31, 1999 AND CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENT OF INCOME FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED JULY 31, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             MAY-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-31-1999
<CASH>                                           8,993
<SECURITIES>                                     3,663
<RECEIVABLES>                                   10,274
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (1,638)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                21,955
<PP&E>                                           6,691
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (5,401)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  23,613
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            7,917
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        54,448
<OTHER-SE>                                    (39,065)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    23,613
<SALES>                                          8,708
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 8,708
<CGS>                                            1,372
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    6,969
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 (171)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  36
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,874
<INCOME-TAX>                                       128
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,746
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,746
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.20
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.18


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 23


                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

        We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the
Registration Statements listed below of Gehl Company of our report dated
February 10, 1999 appearing in the 1998 Annual Report to Shareholders which 
is incorporated in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.  We also consent to the 
incorporation by reference of our report on the Financial Statement Schedule,
which appears in this Form 10-K.

        1.  Registration Statement on Form S-8 (Registration No. 33-38392)

        2.  Registration Statement on Form S-8 (Registration No. 33-39150)

        3.  Registration Statement on Form S-8 (Registration No. 333-02195)

        4.  Registration Statement on Form S-8 (Registration No. 333-04017)

        5.  Registration Statement on Form S-3 (Registration No. 333-9173)
        
        6.  Registration Statement on Form S-3 (Registration No. 333-51723)


PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
March 8, 1999