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

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 921 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 921

To establish a Minerals Management Service within the Department of the 
                   Interior; and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                June 14 (legislative day, June 5), 1995

Mr. Murkowski (for himself, Mr. Brown, and Mr. Johnston) introduced the 
 following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
                      Energy and Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To establish a Minerals Management Service within the Department of the 
                   Interior; and for other purposes.
    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 101. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Minerals Management Service Organic 
Act''.

SEC. 102. ESTABLISHMENT OF MINERALS MANAGEMENT SERVICE.

    There is established in the Department of the Interior a service to 
be called the Minerals Management Service, which shall be under the 
charge of a Director who shall report to the Assistant Secretary for 
Land and Minerals Management. The Director shall be appointed by the 
President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, and shall 
be compensated at the rate provided for level V of the executive 
schedule under section 5315 of title 5 of the United States Code. The 
Director shall be appointed on the basis of professional competence and 
capacity to administer the provisions of this title. There shall also 
be in said service such subordinate officers, clerks, and employees as 
may be appropriated for by Congress. The service thus established shall 
promote and regulate the use of lands on the Outer Continental Shelf 
for purposes of energy and mineral resources exploration, production 
and development, and shall administer a program responsible for the 
timely and accurate collection, distribution, accounting for and 
auditing of revenues owed by holders of mineral leases on Federal and 
offshore and Indian lands. The service shall administer its functions 
by such means as are reasonably necessary to carry out the purposes of 
this Act, the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (43 U.S.C. 1301 et 
seq.), the Mineral Leasing Act (30 U.S.C. 181-287), and the Federal Oil 
and Gas Royalty Management Act (30 U.S.C. 1701 et seq.), and all other 
applicable Federal laws.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                         0001006030
<NAME>                        APPLIED GRAPHICS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
<MULTIPLIER>                                  1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                        3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                         2,540
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  31,938
<ALLOWANCES>                                   456
<INVENTORY>                                    4,454
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               44,047
<PP&E>                                         42,814
<DEPRECIATION>                                 23,070
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 74,404
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          25,247
<BONDS>                                        7,688
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       143
<OTHER-SE>                                     38,338
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   74,404
<SALES>                                        39,761
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               39,761
<CGS>                                          26,821
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  26,821
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             210
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                4,259
<INCOME-TAX>                                   1,661
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            2,598
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   2,598
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  0.17
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0.17
        


</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 977 Reported in Senate (RS)]

                                                       Calendar No. 190
104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 977

         To correct certain references in the Bankruptcy Code.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                June 28 (legislative day, June 19), 1995

   Mr. Hatch introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

           September 18 (legislative day, September 5), 1995

                Reported by Mr. Hatch, without amendment

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
         To correct certain references in the Bankruptcy Code.
    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. REFERENCE.

    Section 1228 of title 11, United States Code, is amended by 
striking ``section 1222(b)(10)'' each place it appears and inserting 
``section 1222(b)(9)''.
                                                       Calendar No. 190

104th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                                 S. 977

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

         To correct certain references in the Bankruptcy Code.

_______________________________________________________________________

           September 18 (legislative day, September 5), 1995

                       Reported without amendment
```
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 801 Introduced in House (IH)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 801

  To waive and repay certain debts relating to assistance provided to 
                      individuals and households.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 5, 2015

Mr. Pallone (for himself, Mr. Meeks, Mr. Nadler, Mr. Sires, Ms. Clarke 
  of New York, Mr. Engel, Mr. Rangel, Mr. LoBiondo, Mr. Pascrell, Mr. 
 King of New York, Mr. Norcross, Miss Rice of New York, Mr. Payne, and 
Mrs. Watson Coleman) introduced the following bill; which was referred 
         to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To waive and repay certain debts relating to assistance provided to 
                      individuals and households.

    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 ``Disaster Assistance Recoupment 
Fairness Act of 2015''.

SEC. 2. DEBTS ARISING SINCE 2012.

    (a) Definition.--In this section, the term ``covered assistance'' 
means assistance provided--
            (1) under section 408 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster 
        Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5174); and
            (2) in relation to a major disaster declared by the 
        President under section 401 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster 
        Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5170) during the 
        period beginning on January 1, 2012, and ending on the date of 
        enactment of this Act.
    (b) Waiver Authority.--The Administrator of the Federal Emergency 
Management Agency shall waive a debt owed to the United States related 
to covered assistance provided to an individual or household, unless 
the debt involves fraud, the intentional presentation of a false claim, 
or intentional misrepresentation by the debtor or any party having an 
interest in the claim.
    (c) Repayment Authority.--The Administrator of the Federal 
Emergency Management Agency shall reimburse a debtor for any payments 
made by the debtor on a debt owed to the United States related to 
covered assistance, if the Administrator would have otherwise been 
required to waive the debt under subsection (b).
                                 <all>
```
II

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. J. RES. 56

Disapproving the extension of nondiscriminatory treatment (most-favorednation treatment) to the products of the People’s Republic of China.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JUNE 6, 1996

Mr. HELMS (for himself, Mr. FEINGOLD, Mr. MACK, and Mr. SMITH) introduced the following joint resolution; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on Finance

JOINT RESOLUTION

Disapproving the extension of nondiscriminatory treatment

(most-favored-nation treatment) to the products of the

People’s Republic of China.

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 That the Congress does not approve the extension of the

4 authority contained in section 402(c) of the Trade Act of

5 1974 recommended by the President to the Congress on

6 May 31, 1996, with respect to the People’s Republic of

7 China.

Æ
EXHIBIT 32.1

          CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO 8 U.S.C.
                 SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
                       OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


                                  CERTIFICATION

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Euro Group of Companies, Inc.
(formerly ICT Technologies, Inc.), a Delaware corporation (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, Chief
Executive Officer, hereby certifies, pursuant to 8 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my
knowledge:

     (1)  The Report of the Company fully complies with the requirements of
          section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act; and

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


                                            /s/  Vasilios Koutsobinas
                                            -----------------------------------
                                                 Vasilios Koutsobinas
                                                 Chief Executive Officer

August 19, 2008
**                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               Exhibit    34.3**
**Ernst      & Young LLP**

**Report      of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

| /s/              Ernst & Young LLP  |
|----------------------------------------------|
|                                         |
|                                         |
| March              1, 2007              |
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. David LEWIS, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 16-7133

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: December 16, 2016

Decided: June 8, 2017

David Lewis, Appellant Pro Se. Shailika S. Kotiya, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, and MOTZ and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

David Lewis seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or *724judge issues a certifícate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(e)(1)(B) (2012). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); see Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack, 529 U.S. at 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595.

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Lewis has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny Lewis’ motion to appoint counsel, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
THE STATE OF TEXAS

M A N D A T E

*********************************************

TO THE 159TH DISTRICT COURT OF ANGELINA COUNTY, GREETING:

Before our Court of Appeals for the 12th Court of Appeals District of Texas, on the 21st 

day of June, 2017, the cause upon appeal to revise or reverse your judgment between

RICKY DALE BRIMER, Appellant

NO. 12-16-00292-CR; Trial Court No. 2016-0214

Opinion by Brian Hoyle, Justice.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

was determined; and therein our said Court made its order in these words:

“THIS CAUSE came to be heard on the appellate record and briefs filed herein, and the 

same being considered, it is the opinion of this court that there was no error in the judgment.

It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that the judgment of the court 

below be in all things affirmed, and that this decision be certified to the court below for 

observance.”

WHEREAS, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court of Appeals 

for the Twelfth Court of Appeals District of Texas in this behalf, and in all things have it duly 

recognized, obeyed, and executed.

WITNESS, THE HONORABLE JAMES T. WORTHEN, Chief Justice of our Court 

of Appeals for the Twelfth Court of Appeals District, with the Seal thereof affixed, at the City of 

Tyler, this the 27th day of November, 2017.

PAM ESTES, CLERK

By: _______________________________

Chief Deputy Clerk
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 750 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase the amount excluded 

from gross income for employer-provided dependent care assistance. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 5, 2015 

Mr. MCHENRY (for himself and Ms. MENG) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase 

the amount excluded from gross income for employerprovided dependent care assistance. 

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 ‘‘Family Care Savings 

5 Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. INCREASE IN EXCLUSION FROM GROSS INCOME 

7 FOR EMPLOYER-PROVIDED DEPENDENT 

8 CARE ASSISTANCE. 

9 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 129(a)(2)(A) of the Inter10 nal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ‘‘$5,000 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 750 IH

1 ($2,500’’ and inserting ‘‘$10,000 (50 percent of such 

2 amount’’. 

3 (b) INFLATION ADJUSTMENT.—Section 129(a)(2) of 

4 the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding 

5 at the end the following: 

6 ‘‘(D) INFLATION ADJUSTMENT.—In the 

7 case of any taxable year beginning in a calendar 

8 year after 2015, the $10,000 amount contained 

9 in subparagraph (A) shall be increased by an 

10 amount equal to— 

11 ‘‘(i) such dollar amount, multiplied by 

12 ‘‘(ii) the cost-of-living adjustment de13 termined under section 1(f)(3) for the cal14 endar year in which the taxable year be15 gins, determined by substituting ‘calendar 

16 year 2014’ for ‘calendar year 1992’ in sub17 paragraph (B) thereof. 

18 Any increase determined under the preceding 

19 sentence shall be rounded to the nearest mul20 tiple of $50.’’. 

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

22 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after 

23 December 31, 2014. 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### IN RE: Larry TEVIS; Nancy Tevis, Debtors. Larry Tevis; Nancy Tevis, Appellants, v. California Department of Veterans Affairs; Jan P. Johnson, Chapter 13 Trustee, Appellees.

No. 16-60063

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted November 15, 2017 *

Filed November 21, 2017

Larry Tevis, Pro Se

Nancy Tevis, Pro Se

Vasilios Stylianos Spyridakis, California Department of Veterans Affairs, Sacramento, CA, for Appellee California Department of Veterans Affairs

Jan P. Johnson, Pro Se

Before: CANBY, TROTT, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.

*

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2),

MEMORANDUM **

Larry Tevis and Nancy Tevis appeal pro se from a judgment of the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel (“BAP”) affirming the bankruptcy court’s judgment dismissing them adversary proceeding for failure to prosecute. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d). We review de novo BAP decisions, and apply the same standard of review that the BAP applied to the bankruptcy court’s ruling. *Boyajian v. New Falls Corp. (In re Boyajian),*564 F.3d 1088, 1090 (9th Cir. 2009). We affirm.

*601The bankruptcy court did not abuse its discretion by dismissing appellants’ adversary proceeding because the bankruptcy court properly applied the factors for determining whether to dismiss a case for failure to prosecute, and its findings are supported by the record. *See Moneymaker v. CoBen (In re Eisen),*31 F.3d 1447, 1451 (9th Cir. 1994) (setting forth standard of review and five factors considered when determining whether to dismiss a bankruptcy proceeding for failure to prosecute).

We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued in the opening brief. *See Padgett v. Wright,*587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

We reject as without merit appellants’ contention that the BAP violated due process,

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3,
# EUR-Lex - 32003R2320 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 32003R2320

**Council Regulation (EC) No 2320/2003 of 17 December 2003 amending Regulation (EEC) No 1696/71 on the common organisation of the market in hops **

*
Official Journal L 345 , 31/12/2003 P. 0018 - 0018 *

Council Regulation (EC) No 2320/2003

of 17 December 2003

amending Regulation (EEC) No 1696/71 on the common organisation of the market in hops

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular the third subparagraph of Article 37(2),

Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,

Having regard to the opinion of the European Parliament(1),

Having regard to the opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee(2),

Having regard to the opinion of the Committee of the Regions,

Whereas:

(1) Article 12(5)(a) of Regulation (EEC) No 1696/71(3) fixes the aid per hectare for hops produced in the Community for a period of eight years, from the 1996 to the 2003 harvests.

(2) The assessment report that the Commission is obliged to present to the Council by 31 December 2003 pursuant to the second paragraph of Article 18 of Regulation (EEC) No 1696/71, will cover all provisions relating to the common organisation of the market, in particular the production aid scheme. That assessment can be accompanied by proposals. It is advisable in this context to provide for a detailed debate of the entire sector. In order to ensure a thorough debate, the period for which the aid has been fixed should be extended by one year.

(3) A producer group can withhold up to 20 % of the aid to finance special measures for adjusting to the market and the amounts withheld can accumulate for a period of three years. As it is proposed to extend the aid scheme for a year, the maximum accumulation period should also be extended for a year.

(4) Regulation (EEC) No 1696/71 should be amended as a result,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Article 12(5) of Regulation (EEC) No 1696/71 is hereby amended as follows:

1. point (a) is replaced by the following:

"(a) The aid per hectare shall be the same for all groups of varieties. For nine years from the 1996 harvest it shall amount to EUR 480/ha."

2. point (d) is replaced by the following:

"(d) The aid withheld may be accumulated for a maximum period of four years; at the end of that period all aid withheld must have been spent."

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the seventh day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 17 December 2003.

For the Council

The President

G. Alemanno

(1) Opinion delivered on 18 November 2003 (not yet published in the Official Journal).

(2) Opinion of 10 December 2003 (not yet published in the Official Journal).

(3) OJ L 175, 4.8.1971, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1514/2001 (OJ L 201, 26.7.2001, p. 8).