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

----

III Pranešimai

Europos vaistų agentūrą

----

DARBUOTOJŲ ATRANKA Į EUROPOS VAISTŲ AGENTŪRĄ (LONDONE)

(2006/C 155 A/01)

Agentūra yra atsakinga už žmonių ir veterinariniams poreikiams reikalingų vaistų vertinimo ir priežiūros koordinavimą Europos Sąjungoje (žr. 2004 m. kovo 31 d. Europos Parlamento ir Tarybos reglamentą (EB) Nr. 726/2004, 2004 m . balandžio 30 d.Europos Sąjungos oficialusis leidinys L 136). Europos vaistų agentūra buvo įkurta 1995 m. saus. Ji palaiko glaudžius ryšius su Europos Komisija, ES 25 valstybėmis narėmis, EEE.ELA šalimis ir daugeliu kitų vyriausybinių ir privataus sektoriaus grupių.

Kitą informaciją apie Europos vaistų agentūrą ir jos veiklą galima rasti internete, mūsų tinklalapyje http://www.emea.europa.eu/

Europos vaistų agentūra organizuoja darbuotojų atranką siekiant sudaryti šių pareigybių darbuotojų rezervinį sąrašą:

Atrinkti kandidatai bus įtraukti į rezervinį sąrašą ir atsižvelgiant į biudžeto galimybes, jiems gali būti pasiūlyta penkerių metų trukmės pratęsiama sutartis vadovaujantis Kitų Europos Bendrijų tarnautojų įdarbinimo sąlygomis (1968 m. kovo 4 d.Europos Bendrijų oficialusis leidinys L 56).

Darbo vieta – Londonas.

Kandidatai turi būti vienos iš Europos Sąjungos valstybių narių arba Islandijos, Norvegijos ar Lichtenšteino piliečiai, su sąlyga, kad jie naudojasi visomis piliečių teisėmis.

Išsamias sąlygas, pareigybių aprašymus bei reikalingą paraiškos formą galima atsisiųsti iš Europos vaistų agentūros tinklalapiohttp://www.emea.europa.eu/htms/general/admin/recruit/recruitnew.htmParaiškos formą reikia tinkamai pasirašyti, nurodyti datą ir kartu su patvirtinamaisiais dokumentais grąžinti ne vėliau kaip iki2006 m. rugpjūčio 15 d.(pašto antspaudo data) šiuo adresu:EMEA – Head of Personnel, 7 Westferry Circus, Canary Wharf, UK London E14 4HB (tel. (44-207) 41 88 400; faks (44-207) 41 88 416).

Ateityje Oficialusis leidinys nebebus automatiškai siunčiamas gavėjų sąrašams. Jei pageidaujate gauti pranešimą apie publikacijas, prašome užsiregistruoti internete adresuhttp://www.emea.europa.eu„Online Mailing Service“

----
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5353 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Etoxazole. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 7, 2012 

Mr. DOLD introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To extend the temporary suspension of duty on Etoxazole. 

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

3 SECTION 1. ETOXAZOLE. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Heading 9902.24.31 of the Har5 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (relating to 

6 Etoxazole) is amended by striking the date in the effective 

7 period column and inserting ‘‘12/31/2015’’. 

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

9 subsection (a) applies with respect to goods entered, or 

10 withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after 

11 the 15th day after the date of enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### Bessie Ainbinder, Doing Business as Meadowbrook Amusement Co., Plaintiff, *v.*Steve Singler, Sr., et al., Defendants.

Supreme Court, Nassau County,

October 3, 1957.

*140
      *Alims on & Gersof*for plaintiff.

*Dranitske $ LecMrecker*for defendants.

Howard T. Hogan, J.

This is an action for damages arising from the alleged breach of a written lease. Plaintiff conducts a business of renting cigarette machines, music boxes and game machines to restaurant and tavern owners. She alleges that she entered into a written agreement with the defendants (said agreement being made a part of her complaint) that she installed a game machine in defendants’ restaurant, and that defendants disconnected said machine from the electric current and installed another in its place, in breach of said agreement. She asks damages in the amount of $8,112, based, apparently, upon a provision for liquidated damages of $20 per week for the unexpired term of the lease.

The written instrument is a printed form prepared and supplied by the plaintiff. Paragraph “ 2 ” thereof reads as follows: “The Operator leases to the Proprietor one coin operated cigarette machine and music box * * * and the Proprietor agrees to keep the machine connected to an electric outlet in his premises ”.

Paragraph “ 3 ” reads as follows: *‘ ‘*The proceeds from the weekly collections from the operation of said machines music and game [inserted by hand] shall be divided as follows: the Operator is to receive first ten Dollars per week and 50-50 split thereafter.”

Paragraph “ 5 ” reads as follows: “ The Proprietor agrees that during the term of this agreement the Operator shall have the exclusive right to maintain all coin operated cigarette machine and music box, and that the Proprietor shall not permit anyone to install or maintain any other equipment or device which may be constituted as a *coin operated cigarette machine or music box.*Proprietor to receive one cent on each pack cigarettes.” (Emphasis supplied.)

Nowhere in the instrument is any provision made for a game machine except by the aforesaid insertion in paragraph “ 3 ” above. Accordingly, the lease (par. “ 2 ”) does not provide for the rental of a game machine to the defendants, nor does it obligate the defendants to do, or to refrain from doing, anything in regard to game machines. The most that *141can be said for the agreement is that it provides for a distribution of the weekly collections from any of plaintiff’s game machines which may be on the premises. Accordingly, it furnishes no basis for this action.

Even if the lease had covered this game machine, the proof offered by the plaintiff does not establish that defendants had intentionally disconnected it, or that they permitted it to remain disconnected for an appreciable time.

The foregoing are the facts found by the court and constitute its decision as required by section 440 of the Civil Practice Act.
#### Commonwealth *v.*St. Clair Coal Co., Appellant.

Argued July 2, 1915.

October 28, 1915:

Appeal, No. 21, May T., 1915, by defendant, from judgment of C. P. Dauphin Co., Commonwealth Docket, 1914, No. 104, for plaintiff on appeal from tax settlement of an account by the Auditor General and State Treasurer, in case of Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. St. Clair Coal Company.

Before Brown, C. J., Mestrezat, Potter, Elkin, Stewart, Moschzisker and Frazer, JJ.

Reversed.

Appeal from tax settlement-by the Auditor General and State Treasurer. Before Kunkel, P. J.

The facts appear in Commonwealth v. Alden Coal Company, 251 Pa. 134.

The court entered judgment for the Commonwealth for the amount of its claim. Defendant appealed.

*Error assigned,*among others, was the judgment of the court.

*F. W. Wheaton*and *J ohn Cf. Johnson,*with them *Everett Warren, E. W. Fleitz*and *J. U. Torrey,*for appellant.

*William M. Eargest,*Deputy Attorney General, and *Francis Shunk Brown,*Attorney General, for appellee.

Opinion by

Mr. Justice Stewart,

This case was argued in connection with appeal to No. 20 of same term, in which the Alden Coal Company was appellant, and in which the opinion has just been handed down. The two cases present the same governing facts, and give rise to the same questions of law. In the present case the appeal was to the Common Pleas Court of Dauphin County from a settlement made by the auditor general and State treasurer under the Act of June 27, *1601913, P. L. 639, charging the appellant company with tax amounting to $7,769.81, being two and one-half per centum on coal prepared for market by appellant company between 28th June, 1913, and 31st December, 1913, of the value of $310,792.75. The contention made by appellant in the court below was that the Act of June 27, 1913, under the provisions of which the tax was assessed was unconstitutional and void. The court ruled otherwise and judgment was accordingly rendered against appellant for the tax assessed. The appeal to this court was a renewal of the contention made in the court below. The merits of the contention are fully discussed in the opinion handed down in the case of Commonwealth v. The Aldem Coal Company above referred to. A like conclusion must be reached here. For the reasons there stated the judgment in this case is reversed, and judgment is now entered in favor of the appellant.
#### Zone Oil Trucking Corp., Plaintiff, *v.*Anthony Grace & Sons, Inc., Defendant.

Supreme Court, Special Term, Kings County,

October 16, 1957.

*296
      *John P. Wourms*for defendant.

*George Halpern*for plaintiff.

Jacob J. Schwartzwald, J.

In this action to recover for property damage sustained as a result of a collision between two trucks owned by the parties, defendant moves to vacate plaintiff’s demand for a bill of particulars. Plaintiff makes a cross motion for an order directing the service of a bill or in the alternative (1) to produce an officer or other employee familiar with the facts at issue, for an oral examination upon the same matters, or (2) directing a discovery and inspection of defendant’s truck and trailer involved in the accident.

It appears that heretofore plaintiff took the deposition of defendant’s chauffeur. The latter did not have knowledge as to the specifications of the defendant’s truck and trailer now demanded in the bill of particulars. Instead of moving for a continuation of the deposition by having the defendant supply an officer or other person having knowledge of the facts sought to be elicited, plaintiff has served a demand for a bill of particulars, as being the most convenient method of securing the information with least trouble to both parties.

The court entertains no doubt that the information sought is necessary and material to the prosecution of plaintiff’s action. However, plaintiff has, in the guise of expediency, changed its course of procedure in the middle of the stream, as it were. In doing so it has apparently lost sight of the relative function of a bill of particulars and of an examination before trial. Defendant’s objection that it may not be required to give particulars of matters which do not constitute a part of its affirmative claim is well taken (Rules Civ. Prac., rule 115; see *Silberfeld*v. *Swiss Bank Corp.,*263 App. Div. 1017). Therefore, in the interest of regularity defendant’s motion to vacate plaintiff’s demand for a bill is granted and plaintiff’s motion is granted to the extent of ordering a further examination; otherwise denied.

Settle order on notice.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 192 (Tuesday, October 3, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 58990]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-25331]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Project Nos. 2232-381, 2331-014, 2332-021, 2503-048, 2740-041 North 
and South Carolina]


Duke Energy Corporation; Notice of Availability of Environmental 
Assessment

September 27, 2000.
    An environmental assessment (EA) is available for public review. 
The EA analyzes the environmental impacts of approving Duke Energy 
Corporation's (Duke) excavation programmatic agreement (PA) for the 
above five projects located in North and South Carolina. These projects 
include the following 16 reservoirs: Lake James, Rodhiss, Hickory, 
Lookout Shoals, Norman, Mountain Island, Wylie, Fishing Creek, Great 
Falls, Rocky Creek, Wateree, Ninety-Nine Islands, Gaston Shoals, 
Jocassee, Keowee and Bad Creek.
    In its PA, Duke requests authority to grant permits to excavate up 
to 2,000 cubic yards (cy) of lakebottom sediments without obtaining 
prior Commission approval. Duke also asks for authority to grant 
permits for maintenance excavations involving any amount of sediment. 
Maintenance excavations are defined in the PA. Applicants would still 
have to obtain all other necessary local, state and federal permits and 
many other restrictions apply.
    The EA was written by staff in the Office of Energy Projects, 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. In the EA, Commission staff 
conclude that approving the PA and granting Duke the requested 
authority would not constitute a major federal action significantly 
affecting the quality of the human environment. Copies of the EA can be 
viewed on the web at www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm. Call (202) 208-
2222 for assistance. Copies are also available for inspection and 
reproduction at the Commission's Public Reference Room, located at 888 
First Street, NE, Room 2A, Washington, DC 20426, or by calling (202) 
208-1371.

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 00-25331 Filed 10-2-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5122 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5122

   To suspend temporarily the duty on lanthanum phosphate phosphor, 
                    activated by cerium and terbium.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 27, 2012

Mr. Huelskamp introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To suspend temporarily the duty on lanthanum phosphate phosphor, 
                    activated by cerium and terbium.

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

SECTION 1. LANTHANUM PHOSPHATE PHOSPHOR, ACTIVATED BY CERIUM AND 
              TERBIUM.

    (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        Lanthanum           Free            No change      No change      On or before     ''.
                          phosphate                                                         12/31/2015
                          phosphor,
                          activated by
                          cerium and
                          terbium,
                          inorganic used as
                          luminophores (CAS
                          Nos. 13778-59-1,
                          13454-71-2 and
                          13863-48-4 or
                          95823-34-0)
                          (provided for in
                          subheading
                          3206.50.00)......

    (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>
```
|                                                                                                    
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                    
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                      
|View History: Annual                                                                                
|View History: Annual                                                                                
|View History:                                                                                       
|                                                                                                    
|Gulf of Mexico Federal Offshore (Western) Dry Natural Gas Reserves Divestitures (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                    
|                                                                                                    
|Gulf of Mexico Federal Offshore (Western) Dry Natural Gas Reserves Divestitures (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                    

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            | 533    | 256    | 316    | 478    | 264    | 147    | 1,186  | 93     | 84     | 34    
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 139    | 23     | 75     | 170    | 36     | 9      | 15     | 80     | 0      | 159   
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 3      | 0      |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
1 Mears, Gilbert

From: Kimberly Donovan <kimberlox@hotmail.com>

Sent: Tuesday, November 11, 2014 2:04 PM

To: Mears, Gilbert

Subject: EPA-HQ-TRI-2013-0281

Mr. Gilbert Mears

Docket#: EPA

‐ HQ

‐ TRI

‐ 2013

‐ 0281

Toxics Release Inventory Program Division

Environmental Protection Agency

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20460

Dear Mr. Mears: I am deeply concerned about the lack of regulation the shale gas industry receives in the

State of Pennsylvania. It is unbelievable to me that this industry is exempt from the safe water drinking act.

This industry uses toxic chemicals in their process but the general public who lives in the communities

containing theses wells have no right to know what these chemicals are. It is critically important that this

industry not be exempt from the Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) reporting. I live in Lawrence County, Western

Pennsylvania, where gas drilling is beginning. We drink well water. I feel like I have a 50/50 chance of my

water being contaminated when drilling starts in our township. Then what do we do when we don't

have water? Have you tried to live without clean water? Communities have clean water ... drilling

begins ... their water is contaminated and they are told it is not due to the dr illing. These people are

not rich Mr. Mears. What are t hey supposed to do? Few families have the resources to start over

somewhere else. Alot of people are elderly in thes e areas. They have no options when their land, air

and water are contaminated.

It is my understanding that injection fluids can c ontain benzene (a carcinogen) and ethylbenzene (a

probable carcinogen). Yet the drilling companies do not have to provide any safeguards for

underground water supplies.

Do you understand my concern? We n eed these companies to do chemical r eporting so the people living in these

communities know what their potential contami nation may be.

Sincerely,

Kimberly Donovan

771 Davis Road

Ellwood City, PA 16117
Unopposed Motion for Withdrawal Page | 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

WACO DIVISION

WSOU INVESTMENTS, LLC D/B/A 

BRAZOS LICENSING AND 

DEVELOPMENT,

Plaintiff,

v. 

MICROSOFT CORPORATION,

Defendant.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-cv-00454-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-cv-00455-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-cv-00456-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-cv-00457-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-cv-00458-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-cv-00459-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-cv-00460-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-cv-00461-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-cv-00462-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-cv-00463-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-cv-00464-ADA

CIVIL ACTION 6:20-cv-00465-ADA

UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR WITHDRAWAL OF 

COUNSEL FROM CASE

TO THE HONORABLE COURT:

Counsel for Plaintiff WSOU Investments, LLC (“WSOU”), James L. Etheridge, Ryan S. 

Loveless, Travis L. Richins, Brett A. Mangrum, Jeffrey Huang, Brian M. Koide, and Nathan K. 

Cummings, and their firm Etheridge Law Group, PPLC, hereby move to withdraw as counsel of 

record for Plaintiff.

The lawyers with Sussman Godfrey, LLP and Mark Siegmund with Steckler Wayne 

Cochran Cherry will remain as counsel for Plaintiff.

This withdrawal will not cause a continuance or delay and will not prejudice WSOU or any 

other party to this action.

Defense counsel is not opposed to this motion. Accordingly, Plaintiff respectfully requests 

the Court enter an order reflecting this withdrawal and that all necessary changes be made to the 

Court’s records and ECF.

Case 6:20-cv-00461-ADA Document 94 Filed 11/30/21 Page 1 of 3
Unopposed Motion for Withdrawal Page | 2

DATED: November 30, 2021 Respectfully submitted,

By: /s/James L. Etheridge

James L. Etheridge

Texas State Bar No. 24059147

Ryan S. Loveless

Texas State Bar No. 24036997

Travis L. Richins

Texas State Bar No. 24061296

Brett A. Mangrum

Texas State Bar No. 24065671

Jeffrey Huang

Brian M. Koide

Nathan K. Cummings 

ETHERIDGE LAW GROUP, PLLC

2600 E. Southlake Blvd., Suite 120 / 324

Southlake, Texas 76092

Telephone: (817) 470-7249

Facsimile: (817) 887-5950

Jim@EtheridgeLaw.com

Ryan@EtheridgeLaw.com

Travis@EtheridgeLaw.com

Brett@EtheridgeLaw.com

JeffH@EtheridgeLaw.com

Brian@EtheridgeLaw.com

Nathan@EtheridgeLaw.com

Counsel for Plaintiff WSOU Investments, LLC

Certificate of Conference

I hereby certify that on November 30, 2021, I, James Etheridge, conferred with 

Defendant regarding Etheridge Law Group’s withdrawal from the case. Defendants are 

unopposed to this motion.

By: /s/James L. Etheridge

James L. Etheridge

Case 6:20-cv-00461-ADA Document 94 Filed 11/30/21 Page 2 of 3
Unopposed Motion for Withdrawal Page | 3

Certificate of Service

I hereby certify that on November 30, 2021, I electronically filed the foregoing using the 

Court’s Case Management and Electronic Case Filing system, which will send notification of 

such filing to counsel of record as registered in the Court’s system. 

By: /s/James L. Etheridge

James L. Etheridge

Case 6:20-cv-00461-ADA Document 94 Filed 11/30/21 Page 3 of 3