alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET OF TRESCOM INTERNATIONAL, INC. AT SEPTEMBER 30, 
1996, AND THE CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED 
SEPTEMBER 30, 1996, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH 
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                           6,069
<SECURITIES>                                     1,007
<RECEIVABLES>                                   33,804
<ALLOWANCES>                                     5,748
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                37,631
<PP&E>                                          26,361
<DEPRECIATION>                                   4,633
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  95,254
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           24,469
<BONDS>                                          3,671
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           487
<OTHER-SE>                                      66,627
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    95,254
<SALES>                                        101,859
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               101,859
<CGS>                                           77,446
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   22,289
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 3,493
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               (1,369)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 808
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (2,177)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (2,177)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  1,956
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (4,133)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.36)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.36)
        

</TABLE>
# C_2005132EN.01000401.xml

| 28.5.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 132/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.5.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 132/4

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Second Chamber)

of 17 March 2005

in Case C-91/03: Kingdom of Spain v Council of the European Union (1)

1

(Conservation and exploitation of fisheries resources - Regulation (EC) No 2371/2002)

(2005/C 132/07)

Language of the case: Spanish

In Case C-91/03, action for annulment under Article 230 EC, brought on 28 February 2003, Kingdom of Spain (Agent: N. Díaz Abad) v Council of the European Union (Agents: J. Carbery, F. Florindo Gijón and M. Balta), supported by the Commission of the European Communities (Agents: T. van Rijn and S. Pardo Quintillàn), and the French Republic (Agents: G. de Bergues and A. Colomb) — the Court (Second Chamber), composed of C.W.A. Timmermans, President of the Chamber, C. Gulmann, R. Schintgen, P. Kūris (Rapporteur) and J. Klučka, Judges; A. Tizzano, Advocate General; K. Sztranc, Administrator, for the Registrar, has given a judgment on 17 March 2005, in which it:

Kingdom of Spain

Council of the European Union

Commission of the European Communities

French Republic

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders the Kingdom of Spain to bear its own costs and those incurred by the Council of the European Union; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Kingdom of Spain to bear its own costs and those incurred by the Council of the European Union;

| 3. | Orders the French Republic and the Commission of the European Communities to bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the French Republic and the Commission of the European Communities to bear their own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 135 of 07.06.2003.

1

---
II 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1142 

To clarify that noncommercial species found entirely within the borders of 

a single State are not in interstate commerce or subject to regulation 

under the Endangered Species Act of 1973 or any other provision of 

law enacted as an exercise of the power of Congress to regulate interstate 

commerce. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 30, 2015 

Mr. LEE (for himself, Mr. HATCH, and Mr. VITTER) introduced the following 

bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment 

and Public Works 

A BILL 

To clarify that noncommercial species found entirely within 

the borders of a single State are not in interstate commerce or subject to regulation under the Endangered 

Species Act of 1973 or any other provision of law enacted as an exercise of the power of Congress to regulate 

interstate commerce. 

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 ‘‘Native Species Protec5 tion Act’’. 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1142 IS

1 SEC. 2. TREATMENT OF INTRASTATE SPECIES. 

2 (a) DEFINITION OF INTRASTATE SPECIES.—In this 

3 Act, the term ‘‘intrastate species’’ means any species of 

4 plant or fish or wildlife (as those terms are defined in sec5 tion 3 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 

6 1532)) that is— 

7 (1) found entirely within the borders of a single 

8 State; and 

9 (2) not part of a national market for any com10 modity. 

11 (b) TREATMENT.—An intrastate species shall not 

12 be— 

13 (1) considered to be in interstate commerce; 

14 and 

15 (2) subject to regulation under— 

16 (A) the Endangered Species Act of 1973 

17 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.); or 

18 (B) any other provision of law under which 

19 regulatory authority is based on the power of 

20 Congress to regulate interstate commerce as 

21 enumerated in article I, section 8, clause 3 of 

22 the Constitution of the United States. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
# C_2005079EN.01001301.xml

| 1.4.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 79/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.4.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 79/13

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

31 March 2005

(2005/C 79/07)

1 euro=

1 euro

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,2964 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 138,44 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4495 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,68850 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,1430 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,5486 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 78,64 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 8,2060 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9559 |
| CYP | Cyprus pound | 0,5846 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 29,955 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 247,20 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,6960 |
| MTL | Maltese lira | 0,4306 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,0807 |
| ROL | Romanian leu | 36 767 |
| SIT | Slovenian tolar | 239,73 |
| SKK | Slovak koruna | 38,672 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 1,7572 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,6763 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,5737 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 10,1110 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,8237 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 2,1377 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 316,49 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 8,0898 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,2964

JPY

Japanese yen

138,44

DKK

Danish krone

7,4495

GBP

Pound sterling

0,68850

SEK

Swedish krona

9,1430

CHF

Swiss franc

1,5486

ISK

Iceland króna

78,64

NOK

Norwegian krone

8,2060

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9559

CYP

Cyprus pound

0,5846

CZK

Czech koruna

29,955

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

247,20

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,6960

MTL

Maltese lira

0,4306

PLN

Polish zloty

4,0807

ROL

Romanian leu

36 767

SIT

Slovenian tolar

239,73

SKK

Slovak koruna

38,672

TRY

Turkish lira

1,7572

AUD

Australian dollar

1,6763

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,5737

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

10,1110

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,8237

SGD

Singapore dollar

2,1377

KRW

South Korean won

1 316,49

ZAR

South African rand

8,0898

---

(1)

1

Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

Source:

---
# C_2004300EN.01001702.xml

| 4.12.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 300/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.12.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 300/17

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

(Fifth Chamber)

of 19 October 2004

in Case C-31/03 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesgerichtshof): Pharmacia Italia SpA (1)

1

(Regulation (EEC) No 1768/92 - Medicinal products - Supplementary protection certificate - Transitional arrangements - Successive authorisations as a veterinary medicinal product and a medicinal product for human use)

(2004/C 300/34)

Language of the case: German

In Case C-31/03: reference for a preliminary ruling under Article 234 EC from the Bundesgerichtshof (Germany), made by decision of 17 December 2002, received at the Court on 27 January 2003, in the proceedings brought by Pharmacia Italia SpA, formerly Pharmacia & Upjohn SpA — the Court (Fifth Chamber), composed of: R. Silva de Lapuerta, President of the Chamber, C. Gulmann (Rapporteur) and S. von Bahr, Judges; F.G. Jacobs, Advocate General; R. Grass, Registrar, has given a judgment on 19 October 2004, in which it has ruled:

The grant of a supplementary protection certificate in a Member State of the Community on the basis of a medicinal product for human use authorised in that Member State is precluded by an authorisation to place the product on the market as a veterinary medicinal product granted in another Member State of the Community before the date specified in Article 19(1) of Council Regulation No 1768/92 of 18 June 1992 concerning the creation of a supplementary protection certificate for medicinal products.

---

(1)  OJ C 101 of 26.4.2003.

1

---
#### De Witt, by Guardian *ad litem,*and another, Respondents, vs. Pulchin and another, Appellants: Bultman and another, Impleaded Defendants and Respondents.

For the appellants: *Chadek, Cornelisen & Denissen*of Green Bay.

For the respondents: *Evrard & Evrard*and *North, Bie, Duquaine, Welsh & Trowbridge,*all of Green Bay.

*By the Court.*— Judgment affirmed.
----

Action brought on 4 January 2005 by ReckittBenckiser N.V. against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

(Case T-2/05)

(2005/C 69/40)

Language of the case: English

An action against the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 4 January 2005 by ReckittBenckiser N.V., established in Hoofddorp (The Netherlands) represented by G.S.P. Vos, lawyer.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

Pleas in law and main arguments

----
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1943 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1943

  To amend title 38, United States Code, to require the Secretary of 
Veterans Affairs to ensure that each wheelchair, furnished to a veteran 
    because of a service-connected disability, restores the maximum 
 achievable mobility in the activities of daily life, employment, and 
                  recreation, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 5, 2017

    Mr. King of Iowa (for himself and Mr. Grothman) introduced the 
   following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Veterans' 
                                Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend title 38, United States Code, to require the Secretary of 
Veterans Affairs to ensure that each wheelchair, furnished to a veteran 
    because of a service-connected disability, restores the maximum 
 achievable mobility in the activities of daily life, employment, and 
                  recreation, 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. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Restoring Maximum Mobility to Our 
Nation's Veterans Act of 2017''.

SEC. 2. WHEELCHAIRS FOR VETERANS WITH SERVICE-CONNECTED DISABILITIES.

    (a) Definition.--Section 1701 of title 38, United States Code, is 
amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
    ``(11) The term `wheelchair' includes enhanced power wheelchairs, 
multi-environmental wheelchairs, track wheelchairs, stair-climbing 
wheelchairs, and other power-driven mobility devices.''.
    (b) Enhanced Wheelchairs.--Section 1712(c) of title 38, United 
States Code, is amended--
            (1) by striking ``Dental'' and inserting ``(1) Dental'';
            (2) by striking ``section'' and inserting ``title''; and
            (3) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
    ``(2) The Secretary shall ensure that each wheelchair, furnished 
under this title to a veteran because of a service-connected 
disability, restores the maximum achievable mobility and function in 
the activities of daily life, employment, and recreation. The Secretary 
may furnish a wheelchair to a veteran because the wheelchair restores 
an ability that relates exclusively to participation in a recreational 
activity.''.
                                 <all>
```
# C_2005139EN.01003701.xml

| 8.6.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 139/37 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.6.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 139/37

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.3595 — Sony/MGM)

(2005/C 139/13)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 30 March 2005, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. 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:

| — | from the Europa competition web site (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This web site provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

from the Europa competition web site (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This web site 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 under document number 32005M3595. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex) |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32005M3595. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex)

---
#### THE ATLANTIC, TENNESSEE & OHIO RAILROAD CO., WM. JOHNSON and others v. S. A. SHARPE and others.

A Justice of the Peace has no jurisdiction of proceedings of Forcible Entry and Detainer under Rev. Code, chap. 49.

*{Perry*v. *Tv.pyer*and *State*v. *Tojrborough,*at this term, cited and approved.)

Civil proceeding, under chap. 49, Rev. Code, commenced before a J ns tice of the Peace, and carried by appeal to the Superior Court of Iredell county, where it was tried before *Mitchell, J.,*at Fall Term, 1873, of the Superior Court.

The action is in the nature of a Forcible Entry and Detainer, to recover the possession of the property of the plaintiff corporation, alleged to be in the hands of Sharpe, the defendant. It was tried before the Justice and a jury, and the plaintiff’put into possession. From this judgment defendants appealed. At the heai’ing in the Superior Court, the plaintiffs moved to dismiss the appeal, and the defendants moved to dismiss the action. His Honor refused the latter motion of defendants, and allowed the plaintiff’s, dismissing the appeal; whereupon defendants appealed to this Court.

*Jones c& Johnston, MeOorMe & Bailey*and R. *Barringer,*for appellants.

*Armfield*and *Oaldwell,*contra.

RodmáN, J.

Without going into any of the questions *510attempted to be raised in this case, it will be sufficient to say, that we have considered, that as the statute at present stands, a Justice of the Peace has no jurisdiction of proceeding of Forcible Entry and Detainer, under. Rev. Code, chap. 49. *Perry v. Tupper*and *Slate*v. *Yarborough,*at this term. The reason is, that a Justice has no jurisdiction where the title to land comes in question, and by that act the defendants may always raise a question of title under sec. 5, and in such case the Justice could only dismiss the complaint. As the jurisdiction is a very useful one, the necessity for such a construction is to be regretted. The Legislature may remedy the difficulty if they shall think fit, by providing that no plea of title shall be putin, except under oath; and that in such case the Justice, instead of dismissing the action, shall bind the parties over to the Superior Court, and return his proceedings to that Court.

As the defendants were put out of possession under the invalid proceedings, a writ of restitution would be granted, as in *Perry*v. Tupper, but if it appears lhat all the property of the plaintiff corporation has been putin the hands of a receiver, and the order therefor is unnecessary.

Pee Cueiah. Action dismissed.
# Agrichemical Handling Facility (No.) (309) Conservation Practice Standard

## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-  Resources 
-  Agrichemical Handling Facility (No.) (309) Conservation Practice Standard 

Download the national Agrichemical Handling Facility (No.) (309) conservation practice standard and supporting documents.

## National Standard Document

NOTICE - National conservation practice standards should not be used to plan, design or install a conservation practice. To find these documents at the local level, visit our FOTG website.

Conservation Practice Name (Units) (Code) (Date Issued)

Agrichemical Handling Facility Conservation Practice Standard (No.) (309) (7/2021) Standard Document(154.87 KB)

###   Supporting Documents

Agrichemical Handling Facility Conservation Practice Overview(178.01 KB)

Agrichemical Handling Facility Conservation Practice Physical Effects Worksheet(24.2 KB)

Agrichemical Handling Facility Network Effects Diagram(88.44 KB)

##   Additional Information

### Conservation Practice Standards

On this page find links to national conservation practice standards and supporting documents.
Learn More

### Conservation Practice Standards Information

Learn about the information provided in conservation practice standards and supporting documents, such as overviews, worksheets, and network effects diagrams.
Learn More
#### Badger Floral Manufacturing Company, Respondent, vs. Miller, Appellant.

For the appellant: *A. W. Schuts*of Milwaukee.

For the respondent: *Rubin & Zabel*of Milwaukee.

*By the Court.*

Judgment affirmed.
*March 5, 1935.*

#### Sorensen and wife, Appellants, vs. Vyvyan and wife, Respondents.

For the appellants : *Beck, Smith & Heft*of Racine.

For the respondents : *Wilbershide & Baumblatt*of Racine.

*By the Court.*

Judgment affirmed.
Exhibit 24.1
 POWER OF ATTORNEY
  Name
    
    Title
    
    Date/s/ SCOTT J. ROBINSON
    
    Corporate Controller and
    
    January 28, 2009Scott J. Robinson
    
    Chief Accounting Officer
(Principal Accounting Officer)/s/ MICHAEL S. FIELDS

Michael S. Fields
    
    Director
    
    January 28, 2009/s/ CHARLES A. HAGGERTY
    
    Director
    
    January 28, 2009Charles A. Haggerty/s/ LINDA W. HART
    
    Director
    
    January 28, 2009Linda W. Hart/s/ RONALD T. LEMAY
    
    Director
    
    January 28, 2009Ronald T. LeMay/s/ RAYMOND LEUNG

Raymond Leung
    
    Director
    
    January 28, 2009/s/ L. WHITE MATTHEWS, III
    
    Director
    
    January 28, 2009L. White Matthews, III/s/ CHARLES REICH
    
    Director
    
    January 28, 2009Charles Reich/s/ GLEN A. TAYLOR
    
    Director
    
    January 28, 2009Glen A. Taylor/s/ DARYL J. WHITE
    
    Director
    
    January 28, 2009Daryl J. White
 99
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           8,007
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,675
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                        426
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                10,501
<PP&E>                                             653
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  27,350
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            6,425
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            57
<OTHER-SE>                                      20,707
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    27,350
<SALES>                                          2,007
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 2,007
<CGS>                                              841
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,475
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  32
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  8,387
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              8,384
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     8,384
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.48
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.46


</TABLE>
**Conservation Practice Effects**

**Commonly Associated Practices:**Access Control, Critical Area Planting, Irrigation Water Management, Livestock Pipeline, Watering Facility.

**Note:**This worksheet contains general talking points for the conservation planner to discuss with the land user.  It is the first step towards an economic or financial analysis.  The second step would include identifying a specific site for analysis at the farm or field level, editing the template for local conditions, adding units and quantities of farm inputs and outputs.  The third step in the economic analysis is to place a dollar value on as many variables as possible, put all units in the same time frame, using amortization ($/Acres/Year) or net present value ($/Acre), so benefits and costs can be compared.  The fourth and final step would be to combine several conservation practices into a conservation system, which is how most conservation practices are applied at the field level. Data for the worksheet comes from the land user, conservation planner, technical specialist and local agricultural supply vendors and contractors.  See Economics Technical Note: TN 200-ECN-1, Basic Economic Analysis Using T-Charts (August 2013) for more information.