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

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                           5,620
<SECURITIES>                                   264,807
<RECEIVABLES>                                   82,368
<ALLOWANCES>                                     8,329
<INVENTORY>                                     91,820
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               209,990
<PP&E>                                         142,401
<DEPRECIATION>                                  83,196
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 563,072
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           93,426
<BONDS>                                        107,222
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           175
<OTHER-SE>                                     272,658
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   563,072
<SALES>                                         65,532
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                85,598
<CGS>                                           46,961
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   58,893
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                41,023
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 1,157
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,669
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (15,441)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (5,250)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (10,191)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (10,191)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.58)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.58)


</TABLE>
II 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2432 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exclude from gross income 

amounts received from State-based catastrophe loss mitigation programs. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 22, 2021 

Mrs. FEINSTEIN (for herself, Mr. BURR, Mr. PADILLA, and Mr. TILLIS) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to exclude 

from gross income amounts received from State-based 

catastrophe loss mitigation programs. 

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 ‘‘Disaster Mitigation 

5 and Tax Parity Act of 2021’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2432 IS

1 SEC. 2. EXCLUSION OF AMOUNTS RECEIVED FROM STATE2 BASED CATASTROPHE LOSS MITIGATION 

3 PROGRAMS. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 139 of the Internal Rev5 enue Code of 1986 is amended by redesignating subsection 

6 (h) as subsection (i) and by inserting after subsection (g) 

7 the following new subsection: 

8 ‘‘(h) STATE-BASED CATASTROPHE LOSS MITIGATION

9 PROGRAMS.— 

10 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Gross income shall not in11 clude any amount received by an individual as a 

12 qualified catastrophe mitigation payment under a 

13 program established by— 

14 ‘‘(A) a State, 

15 ‘‘(B) a political subdivision or instrumen16 tality thereof, or 

17 ‘‘(C) an entity established under State 

18 charter, 

19 for the purpose of making such payments. 

20 ‘‘(2) QUALIFIED CATASTROPHE MITIGATION

21 PAYMENT.—For purposes of this section, the term 

22 ‘qualified catastrophe mitigation payment’ means 

23 any amount which is received by an individual to 

24 make improvements to such individual’s residence 

25 for the sole purpose of reducing the damage that 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 2432 IS

1 would be done to such residence by a windstorm, 

2 earthquake, or wildfire. 

3 ‘‘(3) NO INCREASE IN BASIS.—Rules similar to 

4 the rules of subsection (g)(3) shall apply in the case 

5 of this subsection.’’. 

6 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.— 

7 (1) Section 139(d) is amended by striking ‘‘and 

8 qualified’’ and inserting ‘‘, qualified catastrophe 

9 mitigation payments, and qualified’’. 

10 (2) Section 139(i) (as redesignated by sub11 section (a)) is amended by striking ‘‘or qualified’’ 

12 and inserting ‘‘, qualified catastrophe mitigation 

13 payment, or qualified’’. 

14 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

15 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after 

16 December 31, 2021. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
#### Office of Disciplinary Counsel *v.*Rothermel.

[Cite as *Disciplinary Counsel v. Rothermel*(1999), 86 Ohio St.3d 1215.]

(No. DD 84-20

Submitted and decided September 9, 1999.)

For earlier case, see *Disciplinary Counsel v. Rothermel*(1984), 15 Ohio St.3d 121, 15 OBR 272, 472 N.E.2d 1072.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.
cc: Hon. Rob Bare, District Judge Lillian Gonzalez Attorney General/Carson City North Las Vegas City Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT

OF NEVADA
(0) 1947A 2
**EXHIBIT
      32.1**




**Certification
      Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350,**


**As
      Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
      2002**




In
      connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Global Matrechs, Inc. (the
      “Registrant”) for the year ended December 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities
      and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned
      President, Chief Executive Officer, and acting Chief Financial Officer of the
      Registrant, certifies, to his best knowledge and belief, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
      Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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:March
                31, 2006
              By:
              /s/ Michael
                SheppardName:Michael
                SheppardTitle:President,
                CEO and acting
                CFO
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.                  

###### Federal Reserve System

                    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 1841*et se.*) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR part 225), and all other applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, including the companies listed below.                

The applications listed below, as well as other related filings required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The applications will also be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise noted, nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States.

Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than April 16, 2015.

                    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas (Robert L. Triplett III, Senior Vice                           ( print page 15009)                        President) 2200 North Pearl Street, Dallas, Texas 75201-2272:                

                    1.                     *First Bank Lubbock Bancshares, Inc.,*                     Lubbock, Texas; to acquire voting shares of First National Bank of Colorado City, Colorado City, Texas.                

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, March 17, 2015.

Michael J. Lewandowski,

Associate Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 2015-06398 Filed 3-19-15; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
November 6, 2015

U.S. Department of Transportation Docket Management System 1200 New Jersey Ave., SE Wa shington, DC 20590 Re: Exemption Request under Section 333 of the FAA Reform Act and Part 11 of the Federal Aviation Regulations. Exemption sought for regulations including: 14 CFR Part 21, 14 CFR 91.203, 14 CFR 45.23 1, 45.29, 14 CFR 91.9, 14 CFR 61.113 1, 61.133, 14 CFR 91.1095 91.119, 14 CFR 91.121 1, 91.151, 14 CFR Subpart E(91.401
- 91.417), 14 CFR 91.103 (b) Dear Sir or Madam: Pursuant to Section 333 of the FAA Modernization and Reform Act of 2012 and 14 C.F.R. Part 11, vcYES Productions (VCYES), seeks an exemption from Federal Aviation Regulations (FARs) detailed above for the DJI Phantom 2 Vision, DJI P hantom 2 Vision + and DJI Phantom 3. VCYES will utilize these unmanned aircraft sy stems (UAS) to provide aerial still and moving images for its clients which include educational, environmental, non
- profit and commercial organizations and businesses. Many of the projects for these clients pertain to matters of land and water conservation and are therefore in the public interest. These UAS will be flown by an operator with over two years of flying experience specific to these aircraft which all comply with weight requirements (less than 55 pounds) and have been demonstrated to be safe, non - polluting multi
- rotor devices. They will be operated within FAA required parameters: Less than 400 feet in altitude, under 87 knots and alway s within line of sight of th e Pilot in Command (PIC) and Visual Observer (VO), and radio
- controlled through FCC
- complaint frequencies using DJI’s industry
- leading flight control software systems. All UAS are periodically inspected and maintained for air worthiness and each flight cyc les is preceded by a pre
-flight inspection. All overflights and visual recordings over private property are done with the explicit verbal or written consent of owners or duly authorized representatives/managers. Aircraft are only operated during daylight hours and never operated within 5 miles of airports or helicopter landing pads. Signed,

Robert Currie vcYES Productions 250 W im berley Hills Dr. Wi mberley, TX 78676
# C_2015070EN.01000102.xml

| 27.2.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 70/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.2.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 70/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.7497 — Daimler/Kamaz/JV)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2015/C 70/02)

On 23 February 2015, 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:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition 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 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 32015M7497. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32015M7497. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

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

1

---
# C_2014211EN.01000102.xml

| 5.7.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 211/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.7.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 211/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.7232 — Charterhouse/Nuova Castelli)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2014/C 211/02)

On 21 May 2014, 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 the English language and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition 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 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 32014M7232. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32014M7232. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

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

1

---
EXHIBIT 10.4

 

ENDORSEMENT TO 10% SENIOR SECURED CONVERTIBLE NOTE

 

Precision Optics Corporation, Inc.
 New York, New York
 July 20, 2011

 

The 10% Senior Secured Convertible Note dated June 25, 2008 and amended December 11, 2008, June 25, 2010, July 26, 2010, September 15, 2010, October 15, 2010, November 15, 2010, November 30, 2010, December 1, 2010, December 3, 2010, December 17, 2010, January 10, 2011, January 24, 2011, February 7, 2011,  February 25, 2011,  March 11, 2011, March 31, 2011, April 15, 2011, April 29, 2011, May 13, 2011, June 3, 2011, June 28, 2011 and July 6, 2011  (the “Note”) of Precision Optics Corporation, Inc., a Massachusetts corporation (the “Company”), payable to the order of Arnold Schumsky (the “Holder”) in an aggregate principal amount of $50,000 and to which this Endorsement is affixed is hereby amended in the following respects:

 

1.             The term “Stated Maturity Date” is hereby restated to be “July 25, 2011.”

 

2.             Except as expressly amended by this Endorsement, the Note remains in full force and effect and the Company hereby reconfirms its obligations thereunder.

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this Endorsement to be duly executed, and the Holder has caused this Endorsement to be duly accepted, by their respective duly authorized representatives as of the day and year first above written.

 

 

	
 
    	
PRECISION   OPTICS CORPORATION, INC.
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
By
    	
/s/   Joseph N. Forkey
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
Name:   Joseph N. Forkey
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
Title:   Chief Executive Officer
    


 

	
Accepted:
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
/s/   Arnold Schumsky 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
Arnold   Schumsky
**CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

**PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

I, Robert E. Wolfe, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of Advanced Oxygen Technologies, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended Sep 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSBSB fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date: November 5, 2006

/s/Robert E. Wolfe

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

                                                       Robert E. Wolfe

                                                       Chief Executive Officer

A signed original of this written statement  required by Section 906 is retained by Advanced Oxygen Technologies, Inc. and will be furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission upon request.

**CERTIFICATION OF TREASURER**

**PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

I, Robert E. Wolfe, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of Advanced Oxygen Technologies, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended Sep 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSBSB fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date: November 5, 2006

/s/ Robert E. Wolfe

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

                                                         Robert E. Wolfe

                                                         Treasurer

A signed original of this written statement  required by Section 906 is retained by Advanced Oxygen Technologies, Inc. and will be furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission upon request.
AD Economic Evaluation

Docket No. FAA-2013-0446 Directorate ID: 2010-SW-007-AD

Helicopter Model: Eurocopter Deutschland GmbH Model EC135 P1, P2, P2+,T1, and T2+

Helicopters

Number of Helicopters (U.S. Operators): 214 Helicopters in the US Registry.

Reason: The actions of this AD are intended to detect and replace each bearing subject to 

binding, which could lead to subsequent loss of control of the helicopter.

Costs:

Parts per Helicopter (if 

necessary to replace the 

bearing)

$50

Labor per Helicopter

(10 work-hours x $85/workhour for the inspection)

$850

Other – 3 additional work 

hours to replace a bearing and 

3 additional work hours to 

repair the floor at a minimal 

cost for materials

Total Cost per Helicopter $850

Total US Fleet Cost $181,900 for the inspection assuming no bearings 

are replaced.

Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action?” Yes ( ) No ()

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant? Yes ( ) Explain Below No ()

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities?

Yes ( ) No ()

Project Engineer: Matt Fuller
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 98-50259

Summary Calendar

 

SERGIO HIRAM ALVIDREZ,

Petitioner-Appellant,

versus

GARY L. JOHNSON, DIRECTOR,

TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE,

INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION,

Respondent-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. EP-96-CA-432-H

- - - - - - - - - -

November 2, 1998

Before DAVIS, WIENER and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Sergio Hiram Alvidrez, Texas prisoner No. 512255, has filed

an appeal of the district court’s denial of his § 2254 habeas

corpus petition. The notice of appeal is treated as an

application for a certificate of appealability (COA) and to

proceed IFP. See Fed. R. App. P. 22(b). Alvidrez’s request to

proceed IFP is granted, and his motion to correct his appellate

brief is denied as moot. The district court dismissed the case

based upon the running of the statute of limitations. COA is 
No. 98-50259

-2-

granted, and the case is vacated and remanded for reconsideration

in light of our opinion in United States v. Flores, 135 F.3d

1000, 1005 (5th Cir. 1998).

COA GRANTED; MOTION TO PROCEED IFP GRANTED; MOTION TO

CORRECT BRIEF DENIED AS MOOT; VACATED AND REMANDED.
MISCELLANEOUS DISMISSALS

99-1166.

#### State v. Turner.

Franklin App. No. 97APA05-709. This cause is pending before the court as an appeal from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County. On June 21, 1999, appellant filed a memorandum in support of jurisdiction that exceeds the page limitation prescribed by S.Ct.Prac.R. III(1)(C). Whereas appellant has not filed a memorandum in support of jurisdiction in compliance with S.Ct.Prac.R. Ill within the time for perfecting his appeal, and whereas, pursuant to S.Ct.Prac.R. II(2)(A)(1), appellant’s failure to file a memorandum in support of jurisdiction within the prescribed time period divests this court of jurisdiction to hear the appeal,

IT IS ORDERED by the court, *sua sponte,*that appellant’s memorandum in support of jurisdiction be, and hereby is, stricken.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED by the court, *sua sponte,*that this cause be, and hereby is, dismissed.