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

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2689 Introduced in House (IH)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2689

  To clarify the scope of eligible water resources projects under the 
Water Resources Development Act of 1986 and the Water Resources Reform 
          and Development Act of 2014, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              June 9, 2015

     Mrs. Mimi Walters of California (for herself and Mr. Huffman) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                   Transportation and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To clarify the scope of eligible water resources projects under the 
Water Resources Development Act of 1986 and the Water Resources Reform 
          and Development Act of 2014, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. CLARIFICATION OF SCOPE OF ELIGIBLE WATER RESOURCES PROJECTS.

    For purposes of sections 105, 203, and 905 of the Water Resources 
Development Act of 1986 (33 U.S.C. 2215, 2231, 2282) and section 7001 
of the Water Resources Reform and Development Act of 2014 (33 U.S.C. 
2282d), the terms ``water resources project'' and ``water resources 
development project'' include water supply and environmental 
infrastructure projects, including projects designed to reclaim or 
reuse municipal wastewater or impaired surface or groundwater.
                                 <all>
```
# Gazzetta ufficiale C 273/2015

| | ISSN 1977-0944 |
| --- | --- |
| Gazzetta ufficiale
  dell'Unione europea | C 273 |
| | |
| Edizione in lingua italiana | Comunicazioni e informazioni | 58° anno18 agosto 2015 |

ISSN 1977-0944

Gazzetta ufficiale

dell'Unione europea

C 273

Edizione in lingua italiana

Comunicazioni e informazioni

58° anno18 agosto 2015

---

| Numero d'informazione | Sommario | pagina |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | Rettifiche |
| 2015/C 273/01 | Rettifica della Posizione (UE) n. 10/2015 del Consiglio in prima lettura in vista dell'adozione del regolamento del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio che modifica il regolamento (CE) n. 515/97 del Consiglio relativo alla mutua assistenza tra le autorità amministrative degli Stati membri e alla collaborazione tra queste e la Commissione per assicurare la corretta applicazione delle normative doganale e agricola — Adottata dal Consiglio il 15 giugno 2015( GU C 239 del 21.7.2015 ) | 1 |

Numero d'informazione

Sommario

pagina

Rettifiche

2015/C 273/01

Rettifica della Posizione (UE) n. 10/2015 del Consiglio in prima lettura in vista dell'adozione del regolamento del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio che modifica il regolamento (CE) n. 515/97 del Consiglio relativo alla mutua assistenza tra le autorità amministrative degli Stati membri e alla collaborazione tra queste e la Commissione per assicurare la corretta applicazione delle normative doganale e agricola — Adottata dal Consiglio il 15 giugno 2015( GU C 239 del 21.7.2015 )

( GU C 239 del 21.7.2015 )

1

---

| IT | |
| --- | --- |

IT

---

Rettifiche

| 18.8.2015 | IT | Gazzetta ufficiale dell'Unione europea | C 273/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.8.2015

IT

Gazzetta ufficiale dell'Unione europea

C 273/1

---

Rettifica della Posizione (UE) n. 10/2015 del Consiglio in prima lettura in vista dell'adozione del regolamento del Parlamento europeo e del Consiglio che modifica il regolamento (CE) n. 515/97 del Consiglio relativo alla mutua assistenza tra le autorità amministrative degli Stati membri e alla collaborazione tra queste e la Commissione per assicurare la corretta applicazione delle normative doganale e agricola — Adottata dal Consiglio il 15 giugno 2015

(

  Gazzetta ufficiale dell'Unione europea C 239 del 21 luglio 2015
  )

(2015/C 273/01)

A pagina 10, articolo 1, punto 15 è aggiunto il punto seguente:

| «c) | il paragrafo 3 è soppresso;». |
| --- | --- |

«c)

il paragrafo 3 è soppresso;».

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

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                              JAN-1-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                          39,632
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    5,562
<ALLOWANCES>                                       780
<INVENTORY>                                      4,889
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                61,509
<PP&E>                                         429,275
<DEPRECIATION>                                 114,684
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 390,361
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           49,783
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             1
<OTHER-SE>                                      90,436
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   390,361
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               267,005
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  162,602
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                65,556
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              16,948
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 21,889
<INCOME-TAX>                                     7,373
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             14,526
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                               (27,007)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (12,481)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0



</TABLE>
# C_2022471EN.01001401.xml

| 12.12.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 471/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.12.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 471/14

---

Special report 25/2022 ‘Verification of Gross National Income for financing the EU budget’

(2022/C 471/09)

The European Court of Auditors has published its special report 25/2022: ‘Verification of Gross National Income for financing the EU budget - risks in data compilation well covered overall, but scope for increased prioritisation of actions’.

The report can be consulted directly or downloaded at the European Court of Auditors’ website: https://www.eca.europa.eu/en/Pages/DocItem.aspx?did=62634

---
#### HILBURN v. STATE.

No. 19966.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Oct. 19, 1938.

Joe Bailey Morris, of Dallas, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., -of Austin, for the State.

GRAVES, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of the offense oí robbery, his punishment being assessed at twenty-five years confinement in the penitentiary.

The record is before us without a statement of facts or bills of exception. The indictment and' all matters of procedure appearing to be in proper form, the judgment is affirmed.
Skip to main content

Be n & Je rr y’ s

•

•

•

• Home

• Values

• How We Do Business

• Cleaner Greener Freezers

C le an er , G re en er Fr ee ze rs

A cool solution to reducing the climate impacts of refrigeration.

Same Freezability, Friendlier Refrigerants

At Ben & Jerry’s we’re always looking for ways to reduce our 

environmental impact -- including the climate impact from the 

many thousands of freezer cabinets you’ll find stocked with Ben 

& Jerry’s in stores everywhere.

In December 2011, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

(EPA) approved our petition for the commercial use of 

hydrocarbon (HC) freezers in the U.S.

HC freezers are significantly more energy-efficient and use a 

natural hydrocarbon refrigerant with lower global warming 

potential than the hydrofluorocarbon (HFC) refrigerants 

commonly used in US freezers, so the EPA approval is good 

news for the environment. A side benefit: HC freezers are 

cheaper to run than standard freezers, so we have high hopes that 

other companies will come to realize our subversive plot to save 

the environment includes some pretty nifty cost-savings, too. In 

Europe, HC freezers are already in widespread use, including 

many that contain Ben & Jerry's ice cream.

Cleaner Greener Freezers | Ben & Jerry’s Page 1 of 1

http://www.benjerry.com/values/how-we-do-business/cleaner-greener-freezers 7/9/2014
# C_2022072EN.01000401.xml

| 14.2.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 72/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.2.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 72/4

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.10542 – MITSUBISHI / CHUBU ELECTRIC POWER MIRAIZ / MCRE)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2022/C 72/04)

On 14 January 2022, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the ‘Competition policy’ website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the ‘Competition policy’ website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32022M10542. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32022M10542. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

---
Exhibit 32.1



Certification Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



In connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of MeriStar Hospitality
Corporation (the Registrant) for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned hereby certifies, in the capacity as indicated
below and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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, as amended, and
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



|                  |  |  |  |                                                                          
|----------------- |  |  |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: May 9, 2005 |  |  |  | /s/    PAUL W. WHETSELL                                                  
|                  |  |  |  | Paul W. Whetsell Chief Executive Officer MeriStar Hospitality Corporation
**RemedyTemp, Inc.****Exhibit 31.1****CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**I, Greg Palmer, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of RemedyTemp, Inc.;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;  b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions): a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;and  b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.Date: August 9, 2005/s/ Greg D. Palmer                              Greg D. Palmer
Order entered November 15, 2018

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05 - 18 - 00223 - CV IN THE INTEREST OF S .G.C.G., A CHILD On Appeal from the 330th Judicial District Court

D allas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DF - 10 - 21940



### O RDER On the Court’s own motion, we REMOVE this appeal from submission on December 12, 2018. The appeal will be resubmitted in the first quarter of 2019.

/s/ ELIZABETH LANG

- MIERS PRESIDING JUSTICE
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2765 

To prohibit the National Science Foundation from obligating amounts for 

the Polar Learning and Responding Climate Change Educational Partnership. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 12, 2015 

Mr. SALMON introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Science, Space, and Technology 

A BILL 

To prohibit the National Science Foundation from obligating 

amounts for the Polar Learning and Responding Climate 

Change Educational Partnership. 

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

3 SECTION 1. FUNDING PROHIBITION. 

4 The National Science Foundation may not obligate 

5 any amounts on or after the date of enactment of this 

6 Act for the Polar Learning and Responding Climate 

7 Change Educational Partnership. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### COFFMAN v. COFFMAN.

No. 2769.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Beaumont.

May 23, 1935.

W. R. Blain, of Beaumont, for appellant.

Howth, Adams & Hart, of Beaumont, for appellee.

COMBS, Justice.

This is the second appeal of this case. See Coffman v. Coffman (Tex. Civ. App.) 71 S.W. (2d) 331.

Appellee, as plaintiff, sued appellant for divorce. On a trial to the court without a jury the divorce was granted, and the defendant has appealed.

Only two issues are presented by this appeal; the first being the sufficiency of the plaintiff’s petition to state a cause of action for divorce, and the second being the sufficiency of the evidence to support the judgment.

Plaintiff’s petition alleged in general terms a course of “excesses, cruel treatment and outrages” of such a nature as to render the further living together of plaintiff and defendant insupportable. It is now the rule in this state that a petition for divorce which alleges in general terms the statutory grounds under subdivision 1 of article 4629, Vernon’s Ann. Civil Statutes, is good as against a general demurrer. And where a district court has heard evidence and awarded a judgment of divorce upon such a petition the decree is valid. McCullough v. McCullough, 120 Tex. 209, 36 S.W. (2d) 459.

*417Plaintiff’s proposition complaining of the insufficiency of the evidence to sustain the judgment is also overruled. No good purpose would be served by reviewing the evidence. Suffice it to say that ap-pellee’s testimony, if believed by the trial court, showed certain specific instances of cruel treatment, as well as a continued course of bickering and quarreling, indicating the impossibility of appellant and appellee ever living together again in domestic harmony. The trial judge had the parties before him and listened to their testimony. He twice tried the case and each time granted the divorce. He having deemed the evidence sufficiently full and satisfactory to meet the requirements of the statute, we cannot say, on the record before us, that his judgment is without support.

The judgment of the trial court is in all things affirmed.
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

**676 KA 14-02142**  PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., SMITH, CENTRA, PERADOTTO, AND CARNI, JJ.

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT,

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

BETTY M. COLLETTE, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

TIMOTHY P. DONAHER, PUBLIC DEFENDER, ROCHESTER (JAMES ECKERT OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

SANDRA DOORLEY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (NANCY GILLIGAN OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Monroe County (Daniel J. Doyle, J.), entered September 23, 2014. The order determined that defendant is a level three risk pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act.
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.
Memorandum: On appeal from an order determining that she is a level three risk pursuant to the Sex Offender Registration Act (Correction Law § 168 et seq. ), defendant contends that Supreme Court abused its discretion in denying her request for a downward departure from the presumptive level three risk. We reject that contention. “A defendant seeking a downward departure has the initial burden of . . . identifying, as a matter of law, an appropriate mitigating factor, namely, a factor which tends to establish a lower likelihood of reoffense or danger to the community and is of a kind, or to a degree, that is otherwise not adequately taken into account by the risk assessment guidelines” ( People v Clark , 126 AD3d 1540, 1540, lv denied 25 NY3d 910 [internal quotation marks omitted]; see People v Gillotti , 23 NY3d 841, 861), and defendant failed to make that showing ( see Clark , 126 AD3d at 1540; People v Johnson , 120 AD3d 1542, 1542, lv denied 24 NY3d 910).

Entered: September 30, 2016 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
<PAGE>   1
 
                                                                   EXHIBIT 23(a)
 
                   CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
 
     As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation
of our report dated February 27, 1998, included herein, into Pennzoil Company's
previously filed Registration Statements on Form S-8 Nos. 2-76935, 2-95869,
33-24261, 33-40192, 33-51473, 33-53783, 33-63384, 333-26019, 333-26021, and
333-31257 and on Form S-3 Nos. 33-50029 and 33-50953 and on Form S-4 No.
333-43003.
 
                                          ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP
 
Houston, Texas
March 5, 1998
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-4516

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

GREGORY PRESTON COKER, JR.,

 Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at 

Spartanburg. Donald C. Coggins, Jr., District Judge. (7:18-cr-00477-DCC-1)

Submitted: February 20, 2020 Decided: February 24, 2020

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, RUSHING, Circuit Judge, and TRAXLER, Senior 

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

William G. Yarborough, III, Lauren C. Hobbis, WILLIAM G. YARBOROUGH III, 

ATTORNEY AT LAW, LLC, Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellant. Sherri A. Lydon, 

United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, Maxwell B. Cauthen, III, Assistant 

United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenville, 

South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Gregory Coker, Jr., appeals the 72-month sentence imposed following his guilty 

plea to possession with intent to distribute cocaine base, in violation of 21 U.S.C. 

§§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(C) (2018). We have reviewed the record and conclude that the district 

court properly sentenced Coker as a career offender. South Carolina Code § 44-53-375

and § 44-53-445 are subject to the modified categorical approach, see United States v. 

Furlow, 928 F.3d 311, 320-22 (4th Cir. 2019); United States v. Marshall, 747 F. 

App’x 139, 149-50 (4th Cir. 2018) (argued but unpublished), so the district court correctly 

considered Coker’s prior indictments and sentencing sheets pursuant to Shepard v. United 

States, 544 U.S. 13, 26 (2005). Based on those documents, the district court did not clearly 

err in its conclusion that Coker had two prior controlled substance convictions pursuant to 

U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual §§ 4B1.1, 4B1.2 (2018). 

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s criminal judgment. We dispense with 

oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 

materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED