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

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 223 (Tuesday, November 19, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 91472]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-26851]

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

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Disaster Declaration #20543 and #20544; GEORGIA Disaster Number GA-
20010]

Presidential Declaration Amendment of a Major Disaster for the 
State of Georgia

AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.

ACTION: Amendment 1.

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

SUMMARY: This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a 
major disaster for the State of Georgia (FEMA-4821-DR), dated September 
24, 2024.
    Incident: Tropical Storm Debby.

DATES: Issued on November 13, 2024.
    Incident Period: August 4, 2024 through August 20, 2024.
    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: January 7, 2025.
    Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date: June 24, 
2025.

ADDRESSES: Visit the MySBA Loan Portal at https://lending.sba.gov to 
apply for a disaster assistance loan.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Alan Escobar, Office of Disaster 
Recovery & Resilience, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd 
Street SW, Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205-6734.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The notice of the President's major disaster 
declaration for the State of GEORGIA, dated September 24, 2024, is 
hereby amended to extend the deadline for filing applications for 
physical damages as a result of this disaster to January 7, 2025.
    All other information in the original declaration remains 
unchanged.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008)

Alejandro Contreras,
Acting Deputy Associate Administrator, Office of Disaster Recovery & 
Resilience.
[FR Doc. 2024-26851 Filed 11-18-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8026-09-P
```
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 37 Engrossed in House (EH)]

<DOC>
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. J. RES. 37

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
   Disapproving the rule submitted by the Department of Defense, the 
General Services Administration, and the National Aeronautics and Space 
     Administration relating to the Federal Acquisition Regulation.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That Congress disapproves the 
rule submitted by the

              

 Department of Defense, the General Services Administration, and the 
National Aeronautics and Space Administration relating to the Federal 
Acquisition Regulation (published at 81 Fed. Reg. 58562 (August 25, 
2016)), and such rule shall have no force or effect.

            Passed the House of Representatives February 2, 2017.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
115th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                             H. J. RES. 37

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

   Disapproving the rule submitted by the Department of Defense, the 
General Services Administration, and the National Aeronautics and Space 
     Administration relating to the Federal Acquisition Regulation.
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from
Form 10-Q for quarterly period ended October 30, 1996 and is qualified in
its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-29-1997             JAN-29-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-30-1996             OCT-30-1996
<CASH>                                          44,794                       0
<SECURITIES>                                    38,984                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    4,975                       0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                    100,460                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               198,187                       0
<PP&E>                                          84,776                       0
<DEPRECIATION>                                (18,613)                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 268,707                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           61,563                       0
<BONDS>                                        115,000                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                        71,310                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                      18,342                       0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   268,707                       0
<SALES>                                        111,254                 320,588
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               111,254                 320,588
<CGS>                                           81,040                 251,039
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   30,686                  82,799
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  (102)                    (94)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,563                   4,683
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (825)                (14,507)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       173                  (5,102)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (998)                 (9,405)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (998)                 (9,405)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (0.05)                  (0.49)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0                       0
        

</TABLE>
### SAT Report PMN Number: P-11-0332 SAT Date: 5/17/2011 Print Date: 8/3/2012

Related cases : Health related cases : Ecotox related cases:

Concern levels : Type of Concern: Health Eco Comments Level of Concern: 1-2 1

Persistence Bioaccum Toxicity Comments 2 21

Exposure Based Review : Health: Yes Exposure based testing (health): N o testing desired for toxicity but material should be tested to identify Ecotox: N o Routes of exposure : Health: Dermal Inhalation Ecotox: N o releases to water Fate: ;

P 2 Rec Comments : Comment: Forward
Keywords : Keywords: UNCERT-MUTA/LUNG Summary of Assessment :
Fate : Fate Summary: P-11-0332 FATE: Estimations for low weight MW 266 Liquid with MP = 10 C (M, Pour Point) log Kow = 7.91 (E) S = 0.005 mg/L at 25 C (E) VP = 6.3E-6 torr at 25 C (E)BP = 363 C (E) H = 5.87E-4 (E) log Koc = 5.62 (E) log Fish BCF = 3.68 (E) log Fish BAF = 4.33(E) POTW removal (%) = 90 via sorption and possible partial biodeg Time for complete ultimate aerobic biodeg ≥ mo Sorption to soils/sediments = v.strong Volatilization half-life from a standard river = 3 hrs Volatilization half-life from a standard lake = 7 da Atmospheric Oxidation Half-life = 3.7 hr via OH radical PBT Potential: P2B2 *CEB FATE: Migration to ground water = negl

Health : Health Summary: Absorption of the low molecular weight species is poor all routes based on analogs. There is uncertain concern for mutagenicity based on the MSDS and by analogy to which gave a weak positive response when tested at 20% concentration in other petroleum distillates in strain TA98 (only strain tested). There is also a p otential as an aspiration hazard if handled at elevated temperatures when the material is a less viscous material. The MSDS states that are present that are animal carcinogens but specific chemicals were not identified. Low moderate concern.
Ecotox : Test Organism Test Type Test End Point Predicted Measured Comments

fish 96-h LC50 * daphnid 48-h LC50 * green algal 96-h EC50 * fish

_ chronic value * daphnid

_ chronic value *
algal

_ chronic value *
Sewage Sludge 3-h EC50

_ Sewage Sludge

_ Chronic Value _

Ecotox Values Comments: Predictions are based on SARs for neutral organic chemicals; SAR chemical class = hydrocarbon; MW 421 (low-weight); log Kow = 7.91 (EPI low-weight); p H7; effective concentrations based on 100% active ingredients and nominal concentrations; hardness <180.0 mg/L as CaCO3; and TOC <2.0 mg/L;
Factors Values CommentsAssessment Factor 10 Concentration of Concern ( p pb) *

SARs neutral organic chemicals SAR Class hydrocarbon Ecotox Category
Ecotox Factors Comments:
SAT Chair: Becky Jones
Order entered May 9 , 2022

In The 

### Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**

No. 05

- 21

- 00321

- CR

MICHAEL FOY WALLING , Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

On Appeal from the 296th Ju dicial District Court Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 296

- 83626

- 2017

O RDER

In accordance with the parties’ request in this appeal , we ORDER the trial

court to recalculat e proper court costs in this case (1) employing the statutory

framework in place on the date of appellant’s offense, December 27, 2016, and (2)

deleting any time payment fee assessed.

We ORDER Lynne Finley, Collin County District Clerk , to file

— within

t hree weeks of the date of this order

— a supplemental clerk’s record including the

trial court’s order assessing the recalculated court costs

.We DIRECT the Clerk of this Court to send a copy of this order to the

Honorable John Roach, Jr., Judge of Collin County’s 296 th District Court, to Lynne

Finley, and to the parties.

We ABATE this appeal to allow the trial court an opportunity to comply

with this order. The appeal will be reinstated t hree weeks after the date of th is

order or when the supplemental clerk’s record is filed, whichever occurs sooner.

/Erin A. Nowell/ ERIN A. NOWELL PRESIDING JUSTICE
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                         736,021
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,659,021
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    144,592
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,539,752
<PP&E>                                      24,469,434
<DEPRECIATION>                               7,677,692
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              21,426,083
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,186,159
<BONDS>                                      1,360,954
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     46,428
<COMMON>                                     4,630,491
<OTHER-SE>                                  13,202,051
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                21,426,083
<SALES>                                      2,259,880
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,384,769
<CGS>                                        1,274,524
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               513,300
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                596,945
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            596,945
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   596,945
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.16
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.15


</TABLE>
#### Fauerbach and wife, Respondents, vs. Dane County, Appellant.

*September 12*

October *10, 1939.*

*438For the appellant there was a brief by *Norris E. Maloney,*district attorney, and *Walter M. Bjork,*assistant district attorney, and oral argument by *Mr. Bjork.*

For the respondents there was a brief by *C. F. Lamb,*attorney, and *Wilkie, Toebaas, Hart, Kraege & Jackman*of counsel, all of Madison, and oral argument by *Mr. Lamb*and *Mr. F. Flalsey Kraege.*

Fairchild, J.

The respondents allege that by reason of certain stipulations in conveyances by Bryngelsen to Bischoff and by deeds to Philip Fauerbach they are entitled to lands the title to which is in controversy. The supposed defect in respondents’ title pointed out by appellant rests on an uncertainty arising out of the Circumstance that in deeding the lake-shore lots adjacent to the premises now claimed by respondents, there was inserted in the deeds the provision that in case a road was laid out on the northeast of said premises *439then the land conveyed is to extend back from the shore line on the side lines projected or extended to such road. The land referred to- in that provision, being the shore lots and concededly conveyed by the deeds, was described; and the bounds from which the projected side lines were to run back to the road when laid out were fixed, thus leaving only the laying out of the road to- complete and make definite the boundaries of the land now involved. So- the issue presented relates to respondents’ rights as owners and their compensa-ble interest in land within the boundaries as now completed by the building of the highway. It is conceded that a highway was subsequently laid out on the northeast of said premises.

It is considered that the pleading challenged presents a situation surrounding the parties at the time of execution of the deeds which discloses with reasonable certainty the meaning intended by the parties. The complaint shows the instruments were recorded; that everyone interested had notice thereof; and in its present form the pleading sets forth the terms of a contract not too- indefinite for specific enforcement.

The trial court in passing upon the demurrer referred to the fact that in the complaint the pertinent parts of the deeds fixing the highway -as a boundary constitute contracts to- convey upon the happening of a contingency which has now become a fact and ruled that respondents have stated a cause of action for specific performance. This ruling is consistent with the rights of the parties as pleaded. *Proprietors of the Kennebec Purchase v. Tiffany,*1 Me. 219; *Lerned v. Morrill,*2 N. H. 197; Restatement, Contracts, p. 675, § 370; *Whitmore v. Hay,*85 Wis. 240, 55 N. W. 708; 2 Tiffany, Real Property, p. 1652, § 444; *Felin v. Philadelphia,*241 Pa. 164, 88 Atl. 421; *Manchester v. Hodge,*74 N. H. 468, 69 Atl. 527; *Makepeace v. Bancroft,*12 Mass. *469; and sec. 230.26, Stats.

*By the Court.*— Order affirmed. Cause remanded for further proceedings. ,
Appendix A

Stage II VRS 

Incremental Benefit 

Analysis
Document headings vary by document type but may contain
                    the following: the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
the number of the CFR title and the number of each part
                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly
                      related to
the agency docket number / agency internal file number
the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in
                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory
                      Actions See the
                    Document Drafting Handbook
                    for more details.
 Department of Justice
 On November 15, 2024, the Department of Justice lodged a proposed first material modification to the Consent Decree with the United States District Court for the Western District of Washington in the lawsuit entitled 
                    *United States and State of Washington*
                     v. 
                    *King County,*
                     Civil Action No. 2:13-cv-00677-JCC. The proposed modification revises provisions in a Consent Decree between the parties that was entered by the Court on July 3, 2013. The proposed modification would revise certain sewer control measures, design criteria, deadlines, and adaptive management procedures in the Consent Decree to address changed circumstances since the Decree was first entered, and would update and clarify a number of related provisions. The publication of this notice opens a period for public comment on the modification. Comments should be addressed to the Assistant Attorney General, Environment and Natural Resources Division, and should refer to 
                    *United States and State of Washington*
                     v. 
                    *King County,*
                     D.J. Ref. No. 90-5-1-1-10030. All comments must be submitted no later than thirty (30) days after the publication date of this notice. Comments may be submitted either by email or by mail: *To submit comments:*
*Send them to:*By email
*pubcomment-ees.enrd@usdoj.gov.*By mail
Assistant Attorney General, U.S. DOJ—ENRD, P.O. Box 7611, Washington, DC 20044-7611.
 Any comments submitted in writing may be filed by the United States in whole or in part on the public court docket without notice to the commenter. During the public comment period, the modification may be examined and downloaded at this Justice Department website: 
                    *https://www.justice.gov/​enrd/​consent-decrees.*
                     If you require assistance accessing the modification, you may request assistance by email or by mail to the addresses provided above for submitting comments. Kathryn C. Macdonald, Assistant Section Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, Environment and Natural Resources Division.


[FR Doc. 2024-27168 Filed 11-20-24; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4410-15-P
<partyblock><br><br><div align="center"><b><font size="+1">James Pettus, Plaintiff-Appellant, <br><br>against<br><br>Bryan Mazzola, Brett Carrick, and Boyd, Richards, Parker, Colonnelli, P.L., Defendants-Respondents.</font></b></div><br><br><p>Plaintiff appeals from an order of the Small Claims Part of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Bronx County (Brenda Rivera, J.), entered November 8, 2018, which granted defendant's motion to dismiss the action and enjoined plaintiff from initiating any further litigation without prior approval of the Court.</p><p>Per Curiam.</p><p>Order (Brenda Rivera, J.), entered November 8, 2018, affirmed, without costs.</p><p>This small claims action was properly dismissed, since it was an improper collateral attack upon the June 16, 2015 vexatious litigation order of the Supreme Court, Bronx County (<i>see Matter of Pettus v Board of Directors</i>, 2018 NY Slip Op 78019[U], [1st Dept 2018]; <i>see also Vinokur v Penny Lane Owners Corp., </i>269 AD2d 226 [2000]). Insofar as plaintiff contends that defendants, the attorneys for the defendant in the Bronx County action, falsely procured said order, plaintiff's remedy lies exclusively in that prior lawsuit itself, i.e., by moving to vacate the order due to its fraudulent procurement, not in a second plenary action collaterally attacking the order (<i>see Yalkowsky v Century Apts. Assoc</i>., 215 AD2d 214, 215 [1995]).</p><p>We also reject plaintiff's challenge to that portion of the order on appeal barring him from initiating further litigation in the Civil Court without prior court approval (<i>see Pettus v Board of Directors</i>, appeal numbered 19-061, decided herewith.)</p><p>THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.</p><br>I concur I concur I concur <br>Decision Date: March 22, 2019<br><br><div align="center"><form method="LINK" action="../../slipidx/at_1_idxtable.shtml"><input type="submit" value="Return to Decision List"></form></div></partyblock>
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 5 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 5

 Notifying the House of Representatives of the election of a President 
                              pro tempore.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 6, 2015

Mr. McConnell submitted the following resolution; which was considered 
                             and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Notifying the House of Representatives of the election of a President 
                              pro tempore.

    Resolved, That the House of Representatives be notified of the 
election of the Honorable Orrin G. Hatch as President of the Senate pro 
tempore.
                                 <all>
```