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

   Schedule of Year-To-Date Principal and Interest Distributions
                           to
                  Certificateholders
                                                                              Ending
Class                   Interest             Principal      Losses           Balance
<S>                     <C>                  <C>            <C>              <C>
B1                       164,109.47          59,267.60         0.00          3,329,732.39
B2                        82,030.53          29,625.06         0.00          1,664,374.94
B3                        50,506.39          18,240.23         0.00          1,024,759.78
B4                        37,819.25          13,658.30         0.00            767,341.69
B5                        18,982.27           6,855.39         0.00            385,144.61
B6                        25,272.01           4,502.48     4,624.43            512,761.73
IA1                    3,591,567.81       5,635,766.88         0.00         66,587,233.12
IA2                      373,227.90         415,980.43         0.00          6,988,019.57
IA3                      372,723.36               0.00         0.00          7,214,000.00
IA4                      568,333.36               0.00         0.00         11,000,000.00
IA5                      415,980.43        (415,980.43)        0.00          8,286,980.43
IAP                            0.00          28,439.84         0.00          1,197,192.04
IAR                        4,252.57             200.00         0.00                  0.00
IIA1                   6,549,541.14      10,469,660.08         0.00        134,122,339.93
IIAP                           0.00         100,394.55         0.00          1,205,534.09

</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 219 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 219

  Amending the Standing Rules of the Senate to authorize the Majority 
   Leader to move to proceed to the en bloc consideration of certain 
                              nominations.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 18, 2023

  Ms. Klobuchar (for herself, Mr. King, and Mr. Cardin) submitted the 
following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Rules and 
                             Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
  Amending the Standing Rules of the Senate to authorize the Majority 
   Leader to move to proceed to the en bloc consideration of certain 
                              nominations.

    Resolved,

SECTION 1. EN BLOC CONSIDERATION OF CERTAIN NOMINATIONS.

    Rule XXXI of the Standing Rules of the Senate is amended by adding 
at the end the following:
    ``8.(a) In this paragraph, the term `covered nomination' means a 
nomination to a position that is not a position--
            ``(1) at level I of the Executive Schedule under section 
        5312 of title 5, United States Code;
            ``(2) as a judge of a court of appeals of the United 
        States; or
            ``(3) as Chief Justice of the United States or as an 
        Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States.
    ``(b) It shall be in order for the Majority Leader to move to 
proceed to the en bloc consideration of not more than 10 covered 
nominations that were reported to the Senate by the same committee of 
the Senate and placed on the calendar.
    ``(c) Consideration of a motion to proceed under subparagraph (b), 
and the en bloc consideration of the nominations that are the subject 
of the motion, shall be conducted in the same manner as if it were a 
motion to proceed to the consideration of a single nomination.''.
                                 <all>
```
#### NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD, Petitioner, v. JOHN H. BARR MARKETING COMPANY, Respondent.

No. 13465.

United States Court of Appeals Ninth Circuit.

June 2, 1953.

George J. Bott, General Counsel, David P. Findling, Associate General Counsel, A. Norman Somers, Asst. General Counsel, Frederick U. Reel, Marshall J. Seidman, Attorneys, National Labor Relations Board, Washington, D. C., Howard F. LeBaron, Director, NLRB, Los Angeles, Cal., Frederick U. Reel, Attorney, NLRB, Washington, D. C., for petitioner.

Jerman & Jerman, Phoenix, Ariz., for respondent.

Before DENMAN, Chief Judge, and ORR and POPE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

The National Labor Relations Board petitions the enforcement of an order against the John H. Barr Marketing Company and has filed its brief in support thereof. ' The Marketing Company has not replied to the brief and failed to appear at the hearing of the motion. The petition is well founded and the enforcement of its order is granted.'
Kenneth Ray SENN, II, Petitioner, v. STATE of Florida, Respondent.

No. 1D18-5107

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

March 29, 2019

Charlie Cofer, Public Defender, and Elizabeth Hogan Webb, Assistant Public Defender, Jacksonville, for Petitioner.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Sharon S. Traxler, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.

Per Curiam.

DENIED .

Wolf, Bilbrey, and Winsor, JJ., concur.
Rose IRONS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-3968

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed February 26, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
# C_2021019EN.01001801.xml

| 18.1.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 19/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.1.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 19/18

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Bundesarbeitsgericht (Germany) lodged on 13 October 2020 — DS v Koch Personaldienstleistungen GmbH

(Case C-514/20)

(2021/C 19/23)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Bundesarbeitsgericht

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant on a point of law: DS

Respondent in the appeal on a point of law: Koch Personaldienstleistungen GmbH

Question referred

Do Article 31(2) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union and Article 7 of Directive 2003/88/EC (1) preclude a provision in a collective labour agreement which, for the purpose of calculating whether an employee is entitled to overtime pay and for how many hours, takes account only of the hours actually worked and not also of the hours during which the employee takes his paid minimum annual leave?

---

(1)  Directive 2003/88/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 4 November 2003 concerning certain aspects of the organisation of working time (OJ 2003 L 299, p. 9).

---
J.C.S. v. STATE

CR-15-1393

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

September 1, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
EX PARTE B.J.S.

CR-16-1112

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

September 27, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Mand. pet. dismissed.
15.1 15.2 15.3 15.4 16.1 16.2 16.3 16.4 17.1 17.2 

National Income and Product Accounts (Chained 2009$)Percent Change: Quarterly SAAR, Annual Q4/Q4 Gross Domestic Product 2.0 2.6 2.0 0.9 0.8 1.2 2.6 2.5 2.3 2.1  Personal Consumption Expenditures 2.4 2.9 2.7 2.3 1.6 4.2 2.7 2.4 2.2 2.0  Residential Fixed Investment 13.3 14.9 12.6 11.5 7.8 -6.1 1.0 5.0 4.6 4.5  Business Fixed Investment 1.3 1.6 3.9 -3.3 -3.4 -2.2 1.6 1.6 1.5 1.3  Government Consumption & Investment 2.6 3.2 1.9 1.0 1.6 -0.9 1.3 0.7 0.9 0.6 Billions of Chained 2009$ Net Exports -521 -525 -547 -567 -566 -556 -575 -582 -571 -574  Change in Business Inventories 114 94 71 57 41 -8 23 43 45 58 Price IndicesPercent Change: Quarterly SAAR, Annual Q4/Q4GDP Price Index -0.1 2.3 1.3 0.8 0.5 2.2 2.2 1.0 2.0 2.1 

Consumer Price Index -2.9 2.4 1.4 0.8 -0.3 2.5 2.0 1.6 2.4 2.4 Consumer Price Index (Quarterly and Annual YOY % Change) -0.1 0.0 0.1 0.4 1.1 1.1 1.2 1.5 2.1 2.1 Consumer Price Index excl. Food & Energy 1.7 2.3 1.8 2.2 2.7 2.1 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.2 Consumer Price Index excl. Food & Energy (Quarterly and Annual YOY % Change) 1.7 1.8 1.8 2.0 2.3 2.2 2.2 2.2 2.0 2.0 EmploymentUnemployment Rate (Percent) 5.5 5.4 5.1 5.0 4.9 4.9 4.8 4.8 4.7 4.7 Employment, Total Nonfarm (% Change: Quarterly SAAR, Annual Q4/Q4) 2.1 1.9 1.9 2.0 1.9 1.3 1.5 1.4 1.3 1.3 

Interest Rates (Percent)Federal Funds Rate 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 1-Year Treasury Note Yield 0.2 0.3 0.3 0.5 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.5 0.6 0.7 10-Year Treasury Bond Yield 2.0 2.2 2.2 2.2 1.9 1.8 1.8 1.5 1.5 1.5 

August 10, 2016Note: Interest rate forecasts are based on rates from July 29, 2016.Note: Unshaded areas denote actuals. Shaded areas denote forecasts.Sources: Actuals: Bureau of Economic Analysis, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Federal Reserve Board. Forecasts: Fannie Mae Economic & Strategic Research Group

Opinions, analyses, estimates, forecasts, and other views of Fannie Mae's Economic & Strategic Research (ESR) Group included in these materials should not be construed as indicating Fannie Mae's business prospects or expected results, 

are based on a number of assumptions, and are subject to change without notice. How this information affects Fannie Mae will depend on many factors. Although the ESR group bases its opinions, analyses, estimates, forecasts, and other 

views on information it considers reliable, it does not guarantee that the information provided in these materials is accurate, current or suitable for any particular purpose. Changes in the assumptions or the information underlying these views 

could produce materially different results. The analyses, opinions, estimates, forecasts, and other views published by the ESR group represent the views of that group as of the date indicated and do not necessarily represent the views of Fannie 

Mae or its management.

 Economic Forecast: August 2016

 --------------- 2015 --------------- --------------- 2016 --------------- --------------- 201
Stefan ARMSTRONG, Petitioner, v. DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, Respondent.

No. 1D17-4847

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

January 25, 2019

Stefan Armstrong, pro se, Petitioner.

Ashley B. Moody, Attorney General, and Kristen J. Lonergan, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.

Per Curiam.

The petition for writ of certiorari is denied on the merits.

B.L. Thomas, C.J., and Bilbrey and Jay, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 32.1

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 Annual Report of Acusphere, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2004 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), we, Sherri C. Oberg, Chief Executive Officer of the Company and John F. Thero, Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to our knowledge, that:



|/s/SHERRI C. OBERGSherri C. Oberg
Chief Executive Officer |  | 
|--------------------------------------------------------- |  | 
|                                                          |  | 
|/s/JOHN F. THEROJohn F. Thero
Chief Financial Officer     |  | 

March 15,
2005

---
# C_2020313EN.01002802.xml

| 21.9.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 313/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.9.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 313/28

---

Order of the President of the General Court of 24 June 2020 — Price v Council

(Case T-231/20 R)

(Interim measures - Area of freedom, security and justice - Decision (EU) 2020/135 - Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom from the European Union and from Euratom - Loss of EU citizenship - Application for suspension of operation - Manifest inadmissibility of the main action - Inadmissibility - Referral to the Court of Justice - Not competent)

(2020/C 313/41)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: David Price (Dorat, France) (represented by: J. Fouchet, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bauer, R. Meyer and M.-M. Joséphidès, acting as Agents)

Re:

First, application based on Articles 278 and 279 TFEU seeking partial suspension of the operation of Council Decision (EU) 2020/135 of 30 January 2020 on the conclusion of the Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community (OJ 2020 L 29, p. 1), and of the Agreement on the withdrawal of the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland from the European Union and the European Atomic Energy Community (OJ 2020 L 29, p. 7), in so far as those acts do not permit the applicant to retain his EU citizenship, or, at the very least, partial suspension of the operation of Article 127(1)(b) of that agreement, and, second, application based on the second subparagraph of Article 256(3) TFEU seeking a stay of the proceedings and a referral to the Court of Justice in order to put questions to it for a preliminary ruling.

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The application for interim measures is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The application for interim measures is dismissed.

| 2. | The costs are reserved. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The costs are reserved.

---
# C_2022165EN.01002201.xml

| 19.4.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 165/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.4.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 165/22

---

Order of the Court (Ninth Chamber) of 10 January 2022 — (Request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Parma — Italy) — Criminal proceedings against ZI, TQ

(Case C-437/20) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 53(2) Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Games of chance - Licences for the activity of collecting bets - Extension of existing licences - Regularisation of data transmission centres (DTC) engaged in collecting bets without the necessary licence and police authorisation - Short deadline - Manifest inadmissibility of the request for a preliminary ruling)

(2022/C 165/26)

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Tribunale di Parma

Parties in the main criminal proceedings

ZI, TQ

Operative part of the order

The request for a preliminary ruling made by the Tribunale di Parma (Parma District Court, Italy), by decision of 8 November 2019, is manifestly inadmissible.

---

(1)  Date lodged: 17/09/2020.

---
The State of Florida, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, Appellant, v. In re: Deborah Claudia EZETA vs. Gregory Francois Frederic De La Begassiere, Appellee.

No. 3D18-296

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed December 5, 2018.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Toni C. Bernstein (Tallahassee), Senior Assistant Attorney General, for appellant.

Deborah Marks, PLLC, and Deborah B. Marks, Cutler Bay, for appellee Gregory Francois Frederic de La Begassiere.

Before SCALES, LUCK and LINDSEY, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Gregory Francois Frederic de La Begassiere, the father, petitioned the trial court for a modification of monthly child support for his two minor children. After a hearing on January 10, 2018, the trial court ordered a downward modification from $1028.88 to $800.00 per month. Because de La Begassiere had left his job as a high school teacher in South Florida and returned to his native France to continue his own schooling, the trial court found that he was underemployed and imputed income to him to arrive at the $800.00 figure. The State of Florida Department of Revenue (Department), an intervenor below, appeals. Department maintains that the trial court did not comply or make findings consistent with section 61.30 of the Florida Statutes.

The record of the January 10, 2018 hearing reveals that the trial court and the parties converted the hearing into a de facto settlement conference, during which Department was represented by counsel who did not object to the downward modification amount or the procedure the trial court employed to ascertain this amount. We affirm the trial court's order of January 10, 2018, because any alleged error was not preserved. *Chaiken v. Lewis*, 754 So.2d 118, 118 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000) (holding that a party that acquiesced to a trial court determination did not preserve the issue for appellate review); *Kitchens By Design v. Confino*, 687 So.2d 364, 365 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997) ("We affirm the final judgment under review as the record does not reflect that the specific claim of error made on appeal was argued and presented to the lower court.").

Affirmed.
# C_2023083EN.01001701.xml

| 6.3.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 83/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.3.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 83/17

---

Judgment of the General Court of 21 December 2022 — Grünig v Commission

(Case T-746/20) (1)

(Dumping - Imports of certain polyvinyl alcohols originating in China - Definitive anti-dumping duties - Exemption of imports for a particular end-use - Action for annulment - Severability - Regulatory act entailing implementing measures - Direct concern - Actionable measure - Admissibility - First subparagraph of Article 9(5) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 - Duty imposed on a non-discriminatory basis - Equal treatment)

(2023/C 83/19)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Grünig KG (Bad Kissingen, Germany) (represented by: Y. Melin and I. Fressynet, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: K. Blanck, G. Luengo and M. Gustafsson, acting as Agents)

Re:

By its action under Article 263 TFEU, the applicant seeks the annulment of Article 1(4) of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2020/1336 of 25 September 2020 imposing definitive anti-dumping duties on imports of certain polyvinyl alcohols originating in the People’s Republic of China (OJ 2020 L 315, p. 1).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Grünig KG to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Grünig KG to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 53, 15.2.2021.

---
EX PARTE Hasani WALKER

CR-16-0696

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

September 20, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Mand. pet. dismissed.
Yusuf SHABAZZ, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-4676

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

March 11, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Mario M. BRINSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-2100

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

January 3, 2019

Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Danielle Jorden, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Sharon Traxler, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

AFFIRMED .

Rowe, Kelsey, and M.K. Thomas, JJ., concur.
STATE of Louisiana v. Ronald ADAMS

NO. 2018-KH-2076

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

February 18, 2019

*769WRIT NOT CONSIDERED. Untimely filed pursuant to La.S.Ct.R. X § 5.
Michael PRENDERGAST, as Sheriff of Citrus County, Florida, Appellant, v. Randy Hubert CLESTER, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-1751

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed January 29, 2019 Rehearing Denied March 7, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
# 2.1

Page 2 - &P	

# 2.2

Page 2 - &P	

# 2.3

Page 2 - &P	

# 2.4

Page 2 - &P	

# 2.5

Page 2 - &P	

# 2.6

Page 2 - &P
Exhibit 23.2





BDO — Pazos, López de Romaña, Rodriguez  S. Civil de R.L.





CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM





We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Form S-3 (No. 333-188355) and in the Registration Statements on Forms S-8 (No. 333-58298, No. 333-129152, No. 333-147448, No. 333-161459, No. 333-168588 and No. 333-183142), of our report dated June 16, 2014, relating to the financial statements of Perurail S.A., which appears in this Form 10-K/A Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Orient-Express Hotels Ltd. and subsidiaries for the year ended December 31, 2013.





Pazos, López de Romaña, Rodriguez S. Civil de R.L.


Lima, Peru


June 16, 2014








Countersigned by:/s/ Manuel Pazos VélezManuel Pazos VélezCertified Chartered Public AccountantRegister No. 01-05095
# C_2021217EN.01004201.xml

| 7.6.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 217/42 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.6.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 217/42

---

Judgment of the General Court of 24 March 2021 — Creaton South-East Europe v EUIPO — Henkel (CREATHERM)

(Case T-168/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark CREATHERM - Earlier international word mark CERETHERM - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001)

(2021/C 217/55)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Creaton South-East Europe Kft. (Lenti, Hungary) (represented by: J. Muyldermans and P. Maeyaert, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: E. Markakis and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Henkel AG & Co. KGaA (Düsseldorf, Germany)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 15 January 2020 (Case R 1090/2019-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Henkel and Creaton South-East Europe.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Creaton South-East Europe Kft. to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Creaton South-East Europe Kft. to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 191, 8.6.2020.

---
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.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         January 6, 2025.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on December 20, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage® Contract 1191 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2025-986, K2025-985.                

Sean C. Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2024-31746 Filed 1-3-25; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P