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

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 4358 

To require the Commissioner of Internal Revenue to report on applications 

for tax credits under the low-income housing tax credit program that, 

in the preceding fiscal year, were approved but not allocated. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

NOVEMBER 9, 2017 

Mr. LEWIS of Georgia introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To require the Commissioner of Internal Revenue to report 

on applications for tax credits under the low-income 

housing tax credit program that, in the preceding fiscal 

year, were approved but not allocated. 

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 ‘‘Missed Opportunities 

5 in Low Income Housing Act of 2017’’. 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4358 IH

1 SEC. 2. REPORT ON APPLICATIONS FOR LOW-INCOME 

2 HOUSING TAX CREDIT PROGRAM THAT WERE 

3 APPROVED BUT NOT ALLOCATED. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than December 31 of 

5 each fiscal year, the Commissioner of the Internal Rev6 enue Service shall submit a report to the Congress on ap7 plications for tax credits under the low-income housing tax 

8 credit program that, in the preceding fiscal year, were ap9 proved but not allocated credits. 

10 (b) CONTENTS.—Each report required by subsection 

11 (a) shall specify each of the following: 

12 (1) The number of applications for tax credits 

13 under the low-income housing tax credit program 

14 that were approved by State Housing Finance Agen15 cies but not allocated credits. 

16 (2) The total number of apartment buildings, 

17 apartment units, single family dwellings, duplexes, 

18 and townhouses proposed in applications that were 

19 approved by State Housing Finance Agencies but 

20 did not receive an allocation of low-income housing 

21 tax credit program credits. 

22 (3) The total number of people who could have 

23 taken residency in units proposed by approved appli24 cations that did not receive tax credits. 

25 (c) DEFINITIONS.—In this Act: 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 4358 IH

1 (1) The term ‘‘low-income housing tax credit 

2 program’’ means the low-income housing tax credit 

3 program as authorized under section 252 of the Tax 

4 Reform Act of 1986 to provide an incentive for the 

5 development and rehabilitation of affordable rental 

6 housing. 

Æ 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
# C_2009032EN.01001801.xml

| 7.2.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 32/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.2.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 32/18

---

Action brought on 20 November 2008 — Commission of the European Communities v Republic of Malta

(Case C-508/08)

(2009/C 32/28)

Language of the case: Maltese

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: J. Aquilina, K. Simonsson, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Republic of Malta

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| — | declare that, by signing an exclusive public service contract with ‘Gozo Channel Company Ltd’ (GCCL) on 16 April 2004, without having undertaken a prior call for tenders, the Republic of Malta has failed to fulfil its obligations, in particular under Articles 1 and 4 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 3577/92 of 7 December 1992 applying the principle of freedom to provide services to maritime transport within Member States (maritime cabotage) (1); |
| --- | --- |

—

declare that, by signing an exclusive public service contract with ‘Gozo Channel Company Ltd’ (GCCL) on 16 April 2004, without having undertaken a prior call for tenders, the Republic of Malta has failed to fulfil its obligations, in particular under Articles 1 and 4 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 3577/92 of 7 December 1992 applying the principle of freedom to provide services to maritime transport within Member States (maritime cabotage) (1);

1

| — | order the Republic of Malta to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Republic of Malta to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

So as to be able to conclude a public service contract for the provision of cabotage services between Malta and Gozo, the Maltese authorities have to demonstrate that such a contract is necessary so as to impose those public service obligations that it deems necessary to ensure an appropriate service for the abovementioned route, and that the contract is adequate in the light of its aims.

While the Commission readily acknowledges that a satisfactory service is paramount for the Malta-Gozo route, it states on the other hand that the Maltese authorities have in no manner provided this proof; in this sense, they have not even sought to establish if one or more private operators were capable of providing this service on the same conditions on a purely commercial basis. In addition, they have not shown that the exclusivity given to GCCL is an appropriate and adequate means to achieve this end.

In addition, the fact that this contract was concluded without a prior open call for Community tenders, so as to ensure access on a non-discriminatory basis in respect of all Community shipowners, runs counter to the requirements of Regulation No 3577/92.

---

(1)  OJ 1992 L 364, p. 7.

1

---
# Bell - Appalachian Regional Commission

- Cumberland Valley Area Development District Executive Director Whitney Chesnut Email wchestnut&#64;cv&#97;&#100;&#100;&#46;&#111;&#114;&#103;The post Cumberland Valley Area Development District appeared first on Appalachian Regional Commission.
# C_2014039EN.01001501.xml

| 8.2.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 39/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.2.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 39/15

---

Judgment of the General Court of 12 December 2013 — Berliner Institut für Vergleichende Sozialforschung v Commission

(Case T-171/08) (1)

1

(European Refugee Fund - Action to raise awareness and disseminate information concerning refugees who are victims of psychological trauma - ‘Traumatised refugees in the European Union: institutions, protection mechanisms and good practice’ project - Payment of the balance - Obligation to state reasons - Principle of sound administration - Error of assessment)

2014/C 39/24

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Berliner Institut für Vergleichende Sozialforschung eV (Berlin, Germany) (represented by: initially U. Claus, then C. Otto, S. Reichmann and L.-J. Schmidt, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: initially S. Grünheid and B. Simon, then S. Grünheid, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of the Commission decision, enclosed in the letter of 7 March 2008, concerning the Commission’s partial non-recognition of the costs incurred by the applicant in the context of Grant Agreement JAI/2004/ERF/073 relating to Community financing of an action to raise awareness and disseminate information concerning refugees who are victims of psychological trauma.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismissses the application; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismissses the application;

| 2. | Orders the Berliner Institut für Vergleichende Sozialforschung eV to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Berliner Institut für Vergleichende Sozialforschung eV to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 171, 5.7.2008.

1

---
# C_2009055EN.01005102.xml

| 7.3.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 55/51 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.3.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 55/51

---

Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 20 January 2009 — Klein v Commission

(Case F-32/08) (1)

1

(Staff case - Officials - Pensions - Invalidity pension - Death - Definition of dependent child - Article 2 of Annex VII to the Staff Regulations - Death allowance - Death grant - Orphans' pension)

(2009/C 55/93)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Marie-Claude Klein (Grasse, France) (represented by: S. Rodrigues and C. Bernard-Glanz, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: D. Martin and K. Herrmann, Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Annulment of the Appointing Authority's decision of 4 May 2007 refusing to grant the applicant entitlement to a death grant, a death allowance and an orphans' pension.

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Ms Klein to pay all the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Ms Klein to pay all the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 116, 9.5.2008, p. 36.

1

---
# C_2008223EN.01005806.xml

| 30.8.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 223/58 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.8.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 223/58

---

Order of the Court of First Instance of 16 June 2008 — Cyprus v Commission

(Case T-91/08) (1)

1

(2008/C 223/107)

Language of the case: Greek

Language of the case: Greek

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

---

(1)  OJ C 142, 7.6.2008.

1

---
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 99.1

                                CERTIFICATION OF
                           PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                                   PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Temporary  Financial  Services,  Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2003
as filed with the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof (the
"Report"),  I, John R.  Coghlan,  Principal  Executive  Officer of the  Company,
certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

         (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
         15(d) of the Securities  Exchange Act of 1934; and

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


/s/ John R. Coghlan
--------------------------------
John R. Coghlan
Principal Executive Officer
November 7, 2003
**Exhibit 32.1**
Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
     In connection with the Quarterly Report ofiPayment, Inc. (“the Company”) on Form 10-Q forthe period ended March 31, 2004 (the “Report”),I, Gregory S. Daily, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, dohereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Actof 2002, that:
     (a) The Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934 as amended; and
     (b) the information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company.
     This Certification is executed as of May 13,2004.
 /s/ GREGORY S. DAILY      Gregory S. Daily     *Chairman and Chief Executive Officer*
22
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 117 (Thursday, August 2, 2012)]
[Senate]
[Page S6014]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                     ACKNOWLEDGING THE SENATE PAGES

  Mr. REID. Mr. President, we have had a wonderful group of summer 
pages. I am so glad we have these young men and women. As I have said a 
number of times and I repeat tonight, two of my grandchildren have been 
pages. It was a wonderful, life-altering experience for them. I now 
have had another--my grandson--as one of the summer pages, and he has 
had a great time. So I am glad we have the page program. They are 
helpful to us, and I wish them the very best. I hope their experiences 
are as good as my three grandchildrens' experiences.

                          ____________________
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

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

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                           4,757
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   11,794
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,125
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                       1,474,758
<DEPRECIATION>                                 205,400
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,710,796
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                        748,359
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           561
<OTHER-SE>                                     903,071
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,710,796
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               218,475
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    1,884
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              57,312
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                148,727
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            148,727
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   148,727
<EPS-BASIC>                                       2.69
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     2.68


</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 120 (Monday, September 10, 2012)]
[House]
[Page H5729]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                              THE JOURNAL

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair has examined the Journal of the 
last day's proceedings and announces to the House his approval thereof.
  Pursuant to clause 1, rule I, the Journal stands approved.

                          ____________________
```
# C_2008247EN.01000702.xml

| 27.9.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 247/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.9.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 247/7

---

Action brought on 11 July 2008 — Commission of the European Communities v Republic of Poland

(Case C-309/08)

(2008/C 247/12)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: A. Nijenhuis and K. Mojzesowicz, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Republic of Poland

Defendant:

Form of order sought

| — | declare that, by failing to ensure the proper implementation in national law of Directive 2002/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on a common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services (Framework Directive) (1), in particular Article 3(2) and (3) concerning the requirements that national regulatory authorities be independent and that they exercise their powers impartially and transparently, the Republic of Poland has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare that, by failing to ensure the proper implementation in national law of Directive 2002/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 7 March 2002 on a common regulatory framework for electronic communications networks and services (Framework Directive) (1), in particular Article 3(2) and (3) concerning the requirements that national regulatory authorities be independent and that they exercise their powers impartially and transparently, the Republic of Poland has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

1

| — | order the Republic of Poland to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Republic of Poland to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Poland has failed to ensure an effective separation of regulatory functions from activities linked to the exercise of rights of property or control.

The Polish State has extensive shareholdings in numerous telecommunications undertakings. At the same time, the national regulatory authority in Poland is appointed by the Prime Minister, who is entitled freely to dismiss it at any time without providing reasons and on whom the Minister for Finance and the Minister for Infrastructures are also fully dependent.

The absence of provisions defining the duration of the term of the national regulatory authority and the lack of an exhaustive list of conditions allowing for its dismissal results in its being dependent to a significant extent on the Prime Minister and fails to guarantee that those market participants in which the State holds shares will be treated in the same way as other market participants.

---

(1)  OJ L 108, 24.4.2002, p. 33-50.

1

---
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.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         December 21, 2023.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on December 14, 2023, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage® Contract 147 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2024-123, CP2024-129.                

Sean Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2023-28062 Filed 12-20-23; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
#### Willett Jackson et al., Respondents, v Endo Laboratories, Appellant, and Jack Kaltman et al., Respondents. (And a Third-Party Action.)

— In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant Endo Laboratories appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Murphy, J.), entered December 13, 1989, as denied its motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and any cross claims insofar as asserted against it.

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, the motion for summary judgment is granted, and the complaint and any cross claims are dismissed insofar as asserted against the appellant.

In this case, any interest which Endo Laboratories (hereinafter Endo) had in the property upon which the plaintiff fell ended in 1979 when it sold that property to Hina Realty Company (hereinafter Hina) and surrendered all possession and control of the premises thereto. Further, because Hina took possession and control of the property, and simultaneously leased it to Continental Extrusion Company for a 20-year term, six years before the plaintiff’s injuries were sustained, Hina, thus, had a reasonable opportunity to discover the allegedly dangerous condition by making prompt inspection and necessary repairs *(see, Camillery v Getty Ref. & Mktg. Co.,*170 AD2d 567). Therefore, summary judgment should have been granted in favor of Endo. The plaintiffs’ unsubstantiated allegations regarding Endo’s concealment of a dangerous condition are insufficient to raise a material triable issue of fact and, as a matter of law, cannot defeat Endo’s motion for summary judgment *(see, Zuckerman v City of New York,*49 NY2d 557; *Camillery v Getty Ref. & Mktg. Co., supra; see also, Mazurick v Chalos,*172 AD2d 805).

We have considered the plaintiffs’ remaining contention and find it to be without merit *(see, Ebanks v New York City Tr.*
      *799
      *Auth.,*70 NY2d 621). Mangano, P. J., Bracken, Sullivan and Harwood, JJ., concur.
D ismissed w.o.j. and Opinion Filed February 16 , 2018

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 18
- 00120
- CV IN RE CHARLES ANTHON Y ALLEN, SR. , Relator Original Proceeding from the 291st Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. F00
- 51709
- HJU 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Lang, Myers, and Whitehill Opinion by Justice Lang Relator’s article 11.07 petition for writ of habeas corpus is p ending in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals. In a September 20, 2017 order, the court of c riminal a ppeals ordered the trial court to take certain actions, make certain findings, and file a supplemental transcript and supplemental findings of fact and co nclusions of law with 120 days of the date of the order. In this original proceeding, relator contends the trial court has not complied with the order and seeks a writ of mandamus directing the trial court to comply

. The Court of Criminal Appeals has excl usive jurisdiction to grant relief in a post

- conviction habeas corpus proceeding where there is a final felony conviction. Padieu v. Court of Appeals of Texas, Fifth District , 392 S.W.3d 115, 117 (Tex. Crim. App. 2013); Ex parte Alexander , 685 S.W.2d 57, 60 (Tex. Crim. App. 1985); T EX
. C ODE C RIM
. P ROC
. A NN
. art. 11.07 § 5 (West Supp. 2013). An intermediate appellate court has no jurisdiction to rule on matters pertaining to a pending Article 11.07 application. Padieu , 392 S.W.3d at 117

– 18. The September 20, 2017 order– 2

–

pertains to relator’s pending Article 11.07 application. We, therefore, have no jurisdiction to enforce that order. Accordingly, we dismiss this proceeding for want of jurisdiction.

180120F.P05 /Douglas S. Lang/ DOUGLAS S. LANG JUSTICE