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

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Commerce

###### National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

          - RIN 0648-XK54

# AGENCY:

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

# ACTION:

Notice; issuance of permit amendment.

# SUMMARY:

Notice is hereby given that Dr. Terrie Williams, Long Marine Laboratory, Institute of Marine Sciences, University of California at Santa Cruz, 100 Shaffer Road, Santa Cruz, CA has been issued a minor amendment to Permit No. 13602-01.

# ADDRESSES:

The amendment and related documents are available for review upon written request or by appointment in the Permits and Conservation Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, 1315 East-West Highway, Room 13705, Silver Spring, MD 20910; phone: (301) 427-8401; fax: (301) 713-0376.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Jennifer Skidmore or Amy Sloan; phone: (301) 427-8401.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The requested amendment has been granted under the authority of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1361*et seq.*) and the regulations governing the taking and importing of marine mammals (50 CFR part 216).                

Permit No. 13602-01 (76 FR 7823) authorizes the permit holder to conduct energetic and physiological research on captive odontocetes and pinnipeds (including threatened and endangered species) to determine key physiological factors required for survival. Research may occur at Long Marine Laboratory and other institutions in the U.S. and includes permanently captive marine mammals and those undergoing rehabilitation. This minor amendment (No. 13602-02) extends the duration of the permit one year, through September 7, 2015, but does not change any other terms or conditions of the permit.

Dated: February 4, 2015.

Perry F. Gayaldo,

Deputy Director, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 2015-02610 Filed 2-9-15; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
# C_2005114EN.01000101.xml

| 14.5.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 114/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.5.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 114/1

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

13 May 2005

(2005/C 114/01)

1 euro=

1 euro

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,2635 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 135,20 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4427 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,68015 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,2067 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,5449 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 84,25 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 8,0960 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9559 |
| CYP | Cyprus pound | 0,5775 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 30,000 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 250,56 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,6961 |
| MTL | Maltese lira | 0,4293 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,1656 |
| ROL | Romanian leu | 36 168 |
| SIT | Slovenian tolar | 239,50 |
| SKK | Slovak koruna | 38,888 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 1,7298 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,6581 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,5840 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 9,8538 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,7712 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 2,0939 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 265,52 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 8,0115 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 10,4574 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,3090 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 11 971,66 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,801 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 68,513 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 35,2900 |
| THB | Thai baht | 49,948 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,2635

JPY

Japanese yen

135,20

DKK

Danish krone

7,4427

GBP

Pound sterling

0,68015

SEK

Swedish krona

9,2067

CHF

Swiss franc

1,5449

ISK

Iceland króna

84,25

NOK

Norwegian krone

8,0960

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9559

CYP

Cyprus pound

0,5775

CZK

Czech koruna

30,000

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

250,56

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,6961

MTL

Maltese lira

0,4293

PLN

Polish zloty

4,1656

ROL

Romanian leu

36 168

SIT

Slovenian tolar

239,50

SKK

Slovak koruna

38,888

TRY

Turkish lira

1,7298

AUD

Australian dollar

1,6581

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,5840

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

9,8538

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,7712

SGD

Singapore dollar

2,0939

KRW

South Korean won

1 265,52

ZAR

South African rand

8,0115

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

10,4574

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,3090

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

11 971,66

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,801

PHP

Philippine peso

68,513

RUB

Russian rouble

35,2900

THB

Thai baht

49,948

---

(1)

1

Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

Source:

---
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2172 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2172

To amend the Federal Reserve Act to remove the mandate on the Board of 
  Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal Open Market 
               Committee to focus on maximum employment.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 26, 2017

  Mrs. Love introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                    Committee on Financial Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Federal Reserve Act to remove the mandate on the Board of 
  Governors of the Federal Reserve System and the Federal Open Market 
               Committee to focus on maximum employment.

    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 ``Focusing the Fed on the Currency of 
the United States Act of 2017'' or the ``FFOCUS Act of 2017''.

SEC. 2. REMOVAL OF DUAL MANDATE.

    Section 2A of the Federal Reserve Act (12 U.S.C. 225a) is amended 
by striking ``maximum employment, stable prices,'' and inserting 
``stable prices''.
                                 <all>
```
#### John, Respondent, vs. Haering, Appellant.

For the appellant: *Bendinger & Hayes*of Milwaukee.

For the respondent: *John H. S Mint a*of Milwaukee.

*By the Court.*— Judgment affirmed.
# C_2004228EN.01002403.xml

| 11.9.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 228/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.9.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 228/24

---

Action brought on 29 June 2004 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Federal Republic of Germany

(Case C-278/04)

(2004/C 228/49)

An action against the Federal Republic of Germany was brought before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 29 June 2004 by the Commission of the European Communities, represented by Gerald Braun and Arnaud Bordes of its Legal Service, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| 1. | declare that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to transpose Council Directive 2001/88/EC of 23 October 2001 and Commission Directive 2001/93/EC of 9 November 2001, both amending Directive 91/630/EEC laying down minimum standards for the protection of pigs (1) into national law within the prescribed period, the Federal Republic of Germany has failed to fulfil its obligations under the EC Treaty and under that directive; |
| --- | --- |

1.

declare that, by failing to adopt the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to transpose Council Directive 2001/88/EC of 23 October 2001 and Commission Directive 2001/93/EC of 9 November 2001, both amending Directive 91/630/EEC laying down minimum standards for the protection of pigs (1) into national law within the prescribed period, the Federal Republic of Germany has failed to fulfil its obligations under the EC Treaty and under that directive;

1

| 2. | order the Federal Republic of Germany to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

order the Federal Republic of Germany to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments:

The period for transposition of Directives 2001/88/EC and 2001/93/EC expired on 1 January 2003.

---

(1)  OJ 2001 L 316, pp. 1 and 36

1

---
#### Roy E. CARVER, Appellant, v. The PARTLOW CORPORATION et al., Appellee.

No. 21942.

United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit.

May 6, 1965.

Allan Milledge, Neal Rutledge, Rutledge & Milledge, Miami, Fla., for appellant.

William C. Norwood, Miami, Fla., Fowler, White, Gillen, Humkey & Tren-am, Miami, Fla., of counsel, for appellee.

Before TUTTLE, Chief Judge, and RIVES and BELL, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

This suit was brought by appellant, a seaman, to recover damages for personal injuries allegedly resulting from negligence and unseaworthiness. Appellant served as the chef-steward aboard the yacht “Mercury”. Prior to the injury in suit, appellant suffered a slight sprain to his left arm which required him to carry the arm in a sling. Appellant continued to perform his housekeeping duties on the yacht, and the injury in suit occurred when he slipped on the gangway while carrying a garbage pail, causing serious aggravation to the original sprain. The theory of the present suit was that the yacht was unseaworthy by virtue of being undermanned, whereby appellant was required to perform duties in a partially disabled condition which resulted in his injury. Alternatively, it was contended that the Captain of the “Mercury” was negligent in requiring appellant to perform duties while partially disabled.

In a trial without a jury, the District Court concluded that neither negligence nor unseaworthiness had been shown and-entered judgment for the shipowner. On this appeal, appellant contends that the evidence and undisputed facts compelled a judgment in his favor. The District Court concluded that the yacht was not undermanned, and hence not unsea-worthy, because the vessel was in port, requiring only routine housekeeping duties of appellant, and because appellant’s original sprain was not of sufficient gravity to prevent him from performing such duties. For the same reasons, he concluded that there was no negligence in requiring appellant to perform these duties. A careful review of the record demonstrates that these conclusions are immune from reversal. There being no error, the judgment appealed from is

Affirmed.
1 In The 

### Court of Appeals Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

__________________ NO. 09-22-00098-CR

__________________ DYLAN GAUVIN, Appellant
V.
THE STATE OF TE XAS, Appellee

________________________ ______________________ ____________________ On Appeal from the 435th District Court Montgomery County, Texas Trial Cause No. 20-03-03475-CR

________________________ ______________________ ____________________ MEMORANDUM OPINION Dylan Gauvin filed a motion to dismiss his appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.2. Gauvin and Gauvin’s attorney signed the motion. See id

. We grant the motion and dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f).
APPEAL DISMSSED. PER CURIAM Submitted on April 19, 2022 Opinion Delivered April 20, 2022 Do Not Publish Before Golemon, C.J., Horton and Johnson, JJ.
('I 

I. l . 

i 

; 

l 

.• i 

.-----

Approved for Release: 2020/02/07 C05111434"'\. 

...J lU.t' ~tbtir I . ..1 . ~ 

27 March 1969 .· 

.. ~ ~{.~'"/ .. ~-~:/--•~~_/~ r-<., 

/.i. _, ·... ti . I 

HANDl,.E VIA. BYEMAN 

CONTROL SYSTEM ONL.V 

MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD 

/Y(L</L-, 

llllllllRllllllllll\ltlllillllllllllllllllllllllllllll!IIIIIIU 14 00080436D 

SUBJECT: 

PRESENT: 

Minutes of the Meeting of the 303 Committee, 25 March 1969. 

Mr. Kissinger, Mr. Mitchell, Mr. Elliot U. Richardson, 

Mr. Packard, and Mr. Helms. 

Colonel Alexander Haig and Mr. William Trueheart were 

present for all items. 

1. U-2 Photographic Reconnaissance of China (BYE 8666-69) 

a. The Chairman asked for comrrients on the proposed U-2 mission 

in the light of the COMIREX intelligence ratioqale and the State 

Department's paper, plus Ambassador Green's message, opposing the 

mission for political reasons. 

b. A spirited discussion followed. Mr. Helms, supported by 

Mr: Packard, felt that the intelligence to be gained was of consider~ 

able value. He believed the State paper was overweighted on the 

possible reactions of the Chinese Communists to the overflight, but 

in view of the strong State Department position he could not say the 

situation was so critical that he should insist on the mission at 

this time. 

c. In further discussion, the Chairman cautioned that no one 

should adopt a position for or against this type of operation in 

general. Each individual mission proposal should be considered on 

a case by case basis balancing the intelligence value against the 

'political implications. Wbere necessary, options can be presented 

to higher authority. 

d. The Chairman suggested that this mission proposal be held in 

abeyance for three months while an effort is made to fulfill the 

intelligence requirements via satellites and any other means available. 

At the end of this period, Mr. Helms would report back on what requirements had been satisfied and what gaps still remained. The U-2 mission 

would be reconsidered at that time if it still seemed desirable. The 

members unanimously endorsed this approach. 

Approved for Release: 2020/02/07 C05111434 
.......--.-3:--

1 

I 

I 

I 

I 

j 

' . : 

-.)1 

Approved for Release: 2020/02/07 C05111434 

3. Aerial Reconnaissance o.f South China (see minutes dated 

13 March 1969, BYE 12,126-69--Item 2) 

On 22 ~~rch 1969, higher authority approved the recommendation 

forwarded by the 303 Committee that aerial reconnaissance of South 

China be resumed but limited at this time to overflights by the 

147 H/T drone. All such missions will be subject to approval by 

the 303 Committee on a monthly basis in ac,cordance with current 

procedures governing reconnaissance operations. 

Distribution 

Mr. Mitchell 

Mr. Packard 

Mr. Johnson 

~,~- '"~':)--... ~.,,. Mr. Helms 

~~JA M. QQ~;_ 

Frank M. Chapin \ 

Approved for Release: 2020/02/07 C05111434
**EXHIBIT 21.1**

**LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES**

The following is a list of all subsidiaries of the Company, jurisdiction of incorporation or organization and the percentage of shares owned, directly or indirectly, by the Company, as of December 31, 2002.

  

| **Name******               |  **** | **State or Other****Jurisdiction of****Incorporation****** |  **** | **Percentage of****Shares Owned****** |   |
|----------------------------|------------|------------------------------------------------------------|------------|---------------------------------------|--------|
|                            |       |                                                            |       |                                       |   |
|                       |       |                                                       |       |                                  |   |
| Princeton eCom Corporation |       | Delaware                                                   |       | 38.0%                                 |   |
| Tanisys Technology, Inc.   |       | Wyoming                                                    |       | 36.2%                                 |   |
| Microbilt Corporation      |       | Delaware                                                   |       | 9.0%                                  |   |
| Sharps Compliance Corp.    |       | Delaware                                                   |       | 7.1%                                  |   |

 

----
# C_2005093EN.01000501.xml

| 16.4.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 93/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.4.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 93/5

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Commissione Tributaria Provinciale di Napoli by order of that court of 15 July 2004 in Salus S.p.A v Agenzia Entrate Ufficio Napoli 4

(Case C-18/05)

(2005/C 93/09)

Language of the case: Italian

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the European Communities by order of the Commissione Tributaria Provinciale di Napoli (Italy) of 15 July 2004, received at the Court Registry on 20 January 2005, for a preliminary ruling in the proceedings between Salus S.p.A and Agenzia Entrate Ufficio Napoli 4 on the following questions:

| 1. | Does the exemption under Article 13B(c) of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC (1) of 17 May 1977 refer to input VAT paid on the acquisition of goods or services used for exempted activities or rather to cases in which a taxable person who has acquired goods intended for such activities subsequently sells those goods to other taxable persons? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Does the exemption under Article 13B(c) of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC (1) of 17 May 1977 refer to input VAT paid on the acquisition of goods or services used for exempted activities or rather to cases in which a taxable person who has acquired goods intended for such activities subsequently sells those goods to other taxable persons?

1

| 2. | Is that provision sufficiently precise and unconditional to be directly effective in the national legal system? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Is that provision sufficiently precise and unconditional to be directly effective in the national legal system?

| 3. | For the purposes of the direct applicability of the directive, what is the effect of the requirement in the first paragraph of Article 13B whereby, in implementing Article 13B(c), Member States are to lay down conditions for 'preventing any possible evasion, avoidance or abuse? |
| --- | --- |

3.

For the purposes of the direct applicability of the directive, what is the effect of the requirement in the first paragraph of Article 13B whereby, in implementing Article 13B(c), Member States are to lay down conditions for 'preventing any possible evasion, avoidance or abuse?

---

(1)  OJ 1977 L 145 of 13.06.1977, p. 1.

1

---
#### In NEWSOM v. WILLIAMS, from Davidson.

MerrimoN, J.

This case is in all material respects like that of *Gross*v. *Williams,*and must be governed by it. The motion to dismiss the appeal is allowed.

Appeal dismissed. '
EXHIBIT 32.2


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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Online Gaming Systems, Ltd. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Richard
Dunning, Acting Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

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

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


Date:   June 30, 2007                       By: /s/ Richard Dunning
                                                ---------------------------
                                                Richard Dunning
                                                Chief Executive Officer and
                                                Acting Chief Financial Officer
# C_2005115EN.01001202.xml

| 14.5.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 115/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.5.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 115/12

---

Action brought on 4 March 2005 by the Commission of the European Communities against the Italian Republic

(Case C-110/05)

(2005/C 115/23)

Language of the case: Italian

An action against the Italian Republic was brought before the Court of Justice of the European Communities on 4 March 2005 by the Commission of the European Communities, represented by D. Recchia and F. Amato, acting as Agents, with an address for service in Luxembourg.

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| 1. | declare that by prohibiting the towing of trailers by motor vehicles the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 28 EC; |
| --- | --- |

1.

declare that by prohibiting the towing of trailers by motor vehicles the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 28 EC;

| 2. | order the Italian Republic to pay the costs incurred by the Commission of the European Communities. |
| --- | --- |

2.

order the Italian Republic to pay the costs incurred by the Commission of the European Communities.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Under Article 56 of the Codice della strada (Italian highway code) the towing of trailers by any motor vehicle other than a tractor unit is prohibited in Italy.

According to the Commission there can be no doubt that the effect of that prohibition is to restrict the use of trailers lawfully produced and sold in Members States where there is no such prohibition, thereby establishing an obstacle to their importation and sale in Italy.

Consequently, the Commission submits that the Italian Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 28 EC.

---
IIB 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1988 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 12, 2017 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 1730 18th Street in Bakersfield, California, 

as the ‘‘Merle Haggard Post Office Building’’. 

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


rfrederick on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 1988 RFS

1 SECTION 1. MERLE HAGGARD POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

2 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

3 Postal Service located at 1730 18th Street in Bakersfield, 

4 California, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Merle 

5 Haggard Post Office Building’’. 

6 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg7 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

8 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

9 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Merle Haggard Post 

10 Office Building’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives July 11, 2017. 

Attest: KAREN L. HAAS, 

Clerk. 


rfrederick on DSK3GLQ082PROD with BILLS