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

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1379 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to allow certain hospitals 

in Puerto Rico to qualify for incentives for adoption and meaningful 

use of certified EHR Technology under the Medicare program. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 21, 2013 

Mr. PIERLUISI (for himself, Mr. MICA, Mr. SERRANO, Ms. ROS-LEHTINEN, 

Mr. GRIJALVA, Mr. KING of New York, Mr. CONYERS, Mr. DIAZBALART, Mr. GRAYSON, Mr. YOUNG of Alaska, Mr. FALEOMAVAEGA, 

Mrs. CHRISTENSEN, and Ms. BORDALLO) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to allow 

certain hospitals in Puerto Rico to qualify for incentives 

for adoption and meaningful use of certified EHR Technology under the Medicare program. 

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 ‘‘Puerto Rico Hospital 

5 HITECH Amendments Act of 2013’’. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1379 IH

1 SEC. 2. APPLICATION OF MEDICARE HITECH PAYMENTS TO 

2 HOSPITALS IN PUERTO RICO. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subsection (n)(6)(B) of section 

4 1886 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395ww) is 

5 amended by striking ‘‘subsection (d) hospital’’ and insert6 ing ‘‘hospital that is a subsection (d) hospital or a sub7 section (d) Puerto Rico hospital’’. 

8 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.— 

9 (1) Subsection (b)(3)(B)(ix) of section 1886 of 

10 the Social Security Act is amended— 

11 (A) in subclause (I), by striking 

12 ‘‘(n)(6)(A)’’ and inserting ‘‘(n)(6)(B)’’; and 

13 (B) in subclause (II), by striking ‘‘a sub14 section (d) hospital’’ and inserting ‘‘an eligible 

15 hospital’’. 

16 (2) Paragraphs (2) and (4)(A) of section 

17 1853(m) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 

18 1395w–23(m)) are each amended by striking 

19 ‘‘1886(n)(6)(A)’’ and inserting ‘‘1886(n)(6)(B)’’. 

20 (c) IMPLEMENTATION.—Notwithstanding any other 

21 provision of law, the Secretary of Health and Human 

22 Services may implement the amendments made by this 

23 section by program instruction or otherwise. 

24 (d) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

25 this section shall apply as if included in the enactment 

26 of the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 1379 IH

1 (Public Law 111–3), except that, in order to take into ac2 count delays in the implementation of this section, in ap3 plying subsections (b)(3)(B)(ix), (n)(2)(E)(ii), and 

4 (n)(2)(G)(i) of section 1886 of the Social Security Act as 

5 amended by this section, any reference in such subsections 

6 to a particular year shall be treated with respect to a sub7 section (d) Puerto Rico hospital as a reference to the year 

8 that is 2 years after such particular year. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
```
 
 
MSCI EAFE MINI INDEX - NYSE LIFFE                                    Code-244041
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 04/01/14                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(MSCI EAFE INDEX X $50)                              OPEN INTEREST:      102,622
COMMITMENTS
  19,891    8,476    4,084   72,034   86,449   96,009   99,009    6,613    3,613

CHANGES FROM 03/25/14 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:        -12)
  -1,443   -2,946      101      820    2,232     -522     -613      510      601

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
    19.4      8.3      4.0     70.2     84.2     93.6     96.5      6.4      3.5

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:       91)
      14        5        2       54       35       68       42
 
 
MSCI EMERGING MKTS MINI INDEX - NYSE LIFFE                           Code-244042
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 04/01/14                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(MSCI EAFE INDEX X $50)                              OPEN INTEREST:      253,385
COMMITMENTS
  81,455   38,891    1,465  157,299  204,364  240,219  244,720   13,166    8,665

CHANGES FROM 03/25/14 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:     15,496)
   3,917    4,125   -1,059   10,092   12,762   12,950   15,828    2,546     -332

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
    32.1     15.3      0.6     62.1     80.7     94.8     96.6      5.2      3.4

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      192)
      60       25        9       76       58      140       88
```

----

Updated April 4, 2014
June 19, 1998


Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C. 20549

RE:	Smith Barney Equity Funds (the "Registrant")
	File No. 33-2627


Dear Sirs:

Pursuant to Rule 497(j) under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, please 
accept this letter as certification that the supplement to the prospectus of
the Smith Barney Large Cap Blend Fund a series of the Registrant, does not
differ from that contained in Post-Effective Amendment No. 45 filed on June
9, 1998.

Please return an electronic transmittal as evidence of your receipt of this 
filing.

Very truly yours,


/s/David Barnett
David Barnett
Assistant Secretary
David Lee SMITH, Petitioner v. NORTH CAROLINA, et al.

No. 19-6579

Supreme Court of the United States.

January 13, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
To the Shareholders and Board of Trustees of the
Smith Barney High Income Fund:

In planning and performing our audit of the financial statements of the Smith
Barney High Income Fund (the "Fund") for the year ended July 31, 2000, we
considered its internal control, including control activities for safeguarding
securities, in order to determine our auditing procedures for the purpose of
expressing our opinion on the financial statements and to comply with the
requirements of Form N-SAR, not to provide assurance on the internal control.

The management of the Fund is responsible for establishing and maintaining
internal control.  In fulfilling this responsibility, estimates and judgments
by management are required to assess the expected benefits and related costs
of controls.  Generally, controls that are relevant to an audit pertain to the
entity's objective of preparing financial statements for external purposes
that are fairly presented in conformity with generally accepted accounting
principles. Those controls include the safeguarding of assets against
unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition.

Because of inherent limitations in internal control, errors or fraud may occur
and not be detected.  Also, projection of any evaluation of internal control
to future periods is subject to the risk that it may become inadequate because
of changes in conditions or that the effectiveness of the design and operation
may deteriorate.

Our consideration of the internal control would not necessarily disclose all
matters in the internal control that might be material weaknesses under
standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public
Accountants.  A material weakness is a condition in which the design or
operation of one or more of the internal control components does not reduce to
a relatively low level the risk that misstatements caused by error or fraud in
amounts that would be material in relation to the financial statements being
audited may occur and not be detected within a timely period by employees in
the normal course of performing their assigned functions.  However, we noted
no matters involving the internal control and its operation, including
controls for safeguarding securities that we consider to be material
weaknesses as defined above.

This report is intended solely for the information and use of management, the
Trustees of the Fund, and the Securities and Exchange Commission.



New York, New York
September 11, 2000
UNITED STATES, Petitioner v. Michael J.D. BRIGGS

No. 19-108

Supreme Court of the United States.

January 13, 2020

Motion of petitioner to dispense with printing the joint appendix granted.
IN RE Stephen Daniel LEONARD, Petitioner

No. 19-6874

Supreme Court of the United States.

January 21, 2020

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis* denied, and petition for *949writ of mandamus dismissed. See Rule 39.8.
Gary R. TOMEY, II, Petitioner v. UNITED STATES

No. 19-7070

Supreme Court of the United States.

January 27, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
----

Opinion of the European Economic and Social Committee on the ‘proposal for a Council Directive amending Directive 90/434/EEC of 23 July 1990 on the common system of taxation applicable to mergers, divisions, transfers of assets and exchanges of shares concerning companies of different Member States’

(COM(2003) 613 final – 2003/0239 COD)

(2004/C 110/09)

On 28 October 2003 the Council decided to consult the European Economic and Social Committee, under Article 262 of the Treaty establishing the European Community, on the above-mentioned proposal.

The Section for Economic and Monetary Union and Economic and Social Cohesion, which was responsible for preparing the Committee's work on the subject, adopted its opinion on 9 February 2004. The rapporteur was Mr Ravoet.

At its 406th plenary session (meeting of 25 February 2004), the European Economic and Social Committee adopted the following opinion by 114 votes to one with two abstentions.

1.   The Commission's strategy on company taxation

2.   Targeted short-term measures in the Commission strategy

3.   Proposal modernising the directive on the common system of taxation applicable to mergers, divisions, transfers of assets and exchanges of shares

4.   General comments

5.   Specific comments

6.   Conclusions

Brussels, 25 February 2004

The President

of the European Economic and Social Committee

Roger BRIESCH

----

(1)  Commission Communication of 23 October 2001 Towards an Internal Market without tax obstacles: A strategy for providing companies with a consolidated corporate tax base for their EU-wide activities, COM(2001) 582 final

(2)OJ C 241, 7.10.2002

(3)  Communication of 24 November 2003, An Internal Market without company tax obstacles - achievements, ongoing initiatives and remaining challenges, COM(2003) 726 final.

(4)  See: www.europa.eu.int/comm/taxation_customs/taxation/company_tax/conference_rome.htm

(5)  Council Directive 2003/123/EC of 22 December 2003 amending Directive 90/435/EEC on the common system of taxation applicable in the case of parent companies and subsidiaries of different Member States, OJ L 7, 13.1.2004.

(6)  Council Directive 2003/49/EC of 3 June 2003 on a common system of taxation applicable to interest and royalty payments made between associated companies of different Member States, OJ L 157, 26.6.2003, p.49.

(7)  COM(2003) 841 final

(8)  Case no. C 212/97 of 9 March 1999.

----
xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?


C\_2018353EN.01000401.xml


| | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 2.10.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 353/4 |

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.8915 — DS Smith/Europac)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2018/C 353/03)

1.

On 24 September 2018, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 [(1)](#ntr1-C_2018353EN.01000401-E0001).

This notification concerns the following undertakings:

| | |
| --- | --- |
| — | DS Smith plc (‘DS Smith’, United Kingdom), |

| | |
| --- | --- |
| — | Papeles y Cartones de Europa, S.A. (‘Europac’, Spain). |

DS Smith acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of Europac. The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.

2.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

—   for DS Smith: active mainly in the manufacture and sale of corrugated packaging in the EEA, and plastic packaging worldwide. DS Smith also collects used paper and corrugated cardboard, to produce recycled paper for corrugated packaging,

—   for Europac: paper and packaging company. It is primarily active in the manufacture and sale of paper, corrugated board and corrugated packaging. For its production of paper and corrugated board, it has forestry operations in Spain, France and Portugal.

3.

On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.

4.

The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:

M.8915 — DS Smith/Europac

Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:

| |
| --- |
| E-mail: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu |
| Fax +32 22964301 |
| Postal address: |
| European Commission |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

---

[(1)](#ntc1-C_2018353EN.01000401-E0001)  [OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1](http://publications.europa.eu/resource/oj/JOL_2004_024_R_TOC) (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

---
A. Richard MONTEITH d/b/a ARM Enterprises, Plaintiff, v. William John KOVAS, Defendant.

No. COA02-1493.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

February 3, 2004.

Coward Hicks & Siler, P.A., by William H. Coward, Cashiers, for the plaintiff-appellee.

Philo & Spivey, P.A., by David C. Spivey, Franklin, for the defendant-appellant.

ELMORE, Judge.

This case arose out of an oral contract for the installation of a septic system and plumbing work on a cottage. The work was done but never paid for. The company that performed the work sued defendant cottage-owner William John Kovas for payment. Default judgment was entered against the defendant in the sum of $8,809.66, with interest at the legal rate of 8%. Defendant appeals from the order of the trial court striking defendant's Motion for Removal and defendant's Answer.

After the complaint was filed, defendant obtained a thirty-day extension of time to answer. At the expiration of the thirty days, the parties stipulated to another extension of time to file an answer or other responsive pleading. On the date the extension was set to expire, 8 November 2001, the defendant filed a motion to remove the case. On 18 March 2002, plaintiff filed a motion to strike the motion to remove and a motion for entry of default judgment. Plaintiff served notice of hearing for 6 May 2002 on 21 March 2002. On 6 May 2002, defendant filed an answer and the hearing was held. The trial court ordered that the motion to remove and the answer be stricken as untimely filed, and entered a default judgment for the plaintiff. Defendant appeals.

Defendant first assigns error to the trial court's granting of a default judgment in light of the fact that defendant had filed an answer prior to entry of default judgment. We agree.

This case directly parallels the case of *Moore v. Sullivan,*123 N.C.App. 647, 473 S.E.2d 659 (1996), in which the defendants filed a late answer on the very morning of the hearing on the default judgment motion against them. The trial court in that case, as in this one, struck their answer and filed an entry of default against them, retaining jurisdiction to later determine damages. In the case at bar, the trial court entered a default judgment, a final order disposing of the case. Regardless of that distinction, the outcome is the same. "After an answer has been filed, even if the answer is untimely filed, a default may not be entered." *Id.* at 649, 473 S.E.2d *788at 660 (citations omitted). In accord with that decision, we reverse.

Because this issue is dispositive, we do not reach the defendant's other assignments of error.

Reversed and remanded.

Judges TIMMONS-GOODSON and HUNTER concur.
| 1. | the report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 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 Company’s financial condition and results of operations as of the dates and for the periods presented in the financial                statements included in such report. |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| /s/Alexander G. Babey                                   | /s/Erica B. Schmidt                            |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Alexander G. Babey                                                                                                                      | Erica B. Schmidt                                                                                                     |
| Chief Executive Officer                                                                                                                 | Chief Financial Officer                                                                                              |
|                                                                                                                                         |                                                                                                                 |
| Dated: September 10, 2019                                                                                                               | Dated: September 10, 2019                                                                                            |
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 122 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. J. RES. 122

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to end 
  the practice of including more than one subject in a single law by 
  requiring that each law enacted by Congress be limited to only one 
subject and that the subject be clearly and descriptively expressed in 
                         the title of the law.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 31, 2014

    Mr. Marino introduced the following joint resolution; which was 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States to end 
  the practice of including more than one subject in a single law by 
  requiring that each law enacted by Congress be limited to only one 
subject and that the subject be clearly and descriptively expressed in 
                         the title of the law.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled   (two-thirds of each House 
concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an 
amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be 
valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when 
ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States 
within seven years after the date of its submission for ratification:

                              ``Article--

    ``Each bill, order, resolution, or vote which must be submitted to 
the President under section 7 of article I of this Constitution shall 
embrace no more than one subject and that subject shall be clearly and 
descriptively expressed in the title of the bill, order, resolution or 
vote.''.
                                 <all>
```
---

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 

I, Clive Barwin, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:

|(1) | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Melt Inc. for the
      period ended June 30, 2008 (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 results of
      operations of Melt Inc.                                                                

Dated: August 19, 2008

| | /s/
      Clive Barwin                                         
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------
| | Clive Barwin                                                   
| | President, CEO, Chief Financial Officer,
      Secretary and   
| | Director                                                       
| | (Principal Executive Officer, Principal
      Financial Officer
| | and Principal Accounting Officer)                              
| | Melt Inc.                                                      

A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the
signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this
written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Melt Inc. and
will be retained by Melt Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.

---