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

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5499 

To amend the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 to authorize advances from Oil 

Spill Liability Trust Fund for the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 10, 2010 

Mr. MICA (for himself, Mr. YOUNG of Alaska, Mr. PETRI, Mr. COBLE, Mr. 

DUNCAN, Mr. EHLERS, Mrs. CAPITO, Mr. WESTMORELAND, Mrs. MILLER of Michigan, Mr. CAO, Mr. PUTNAM, Mr. GRAVES, Mr. SHUSTER, 

and Mr. FLEMING) introduced the following bill; which was referred to 

the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to 

the Committee on the Budget, for a period to be subsequently determined 

by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall 

within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To amend the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 to authorize advances from Oil Spill Liability Trust Fund for the Deepwater Horizon oil spill. 

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

3 SECTION 1. ADVANCES FROM OIL SPILL LIABILITY TRUST 

4 FUND FOR ‘‘DEEPWATER HORIZON’’ OIL 

5 SPILL. 

6 Section 6002(b) of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (33 

7 U.S.C. 2752) is amended in the second sentence— 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5499 IH

1 (1) by inserting ‘‘(1)’’ after ‘‘Coast Guard’’; 

2 and 

3 (2) by inserting before the period at the end the 

4 following: ‘‘and (2) in the case of the discharge of 

5 oil that began in 2010 in connection with the explo6 sion on, and sinking of, the mobile offshore drilling 

7 unit Deepwater Horizon, may, without further ap8 propriation, obtain 1 or more advances from the 

9 Fund as needed, up to a maximum of $100,000,000 

10 for each advance, with the total amount of all ad11 vances not to exceed the amounts available under 

12 section 9509(c)(2) of the Internal Revenue Code of 

13 1986, and within 7 days of each advance, shall no14 tify Congress of the amount advanced and the facts 

15 and circumstances necessitating the advance’’. 

16 SEC. 2. BUDGETARY EFFECTS. 

17 The budgetary effects of this Act, for the purpose of 

18 complying with the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go-Act of 2010, 

19 shall be determined by reference to the latest statement 

20 titled ‘‘Budgetary Effects of PAYGO Legislation’’ for this 

21 Act, submitted for printing in the Congressional Record 

22 by the Chairman of the House Budget Committee, pro23 vided that such statement has been submitted prior to the 

24 vote on passage. 

Æ 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
# L_2007110EN.01001701.xml

| 27.4.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 110/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.4.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 110/17

---

COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 466/2007

of 26 April 2007

fixing the maximum export refund for white sugar in the framework of the standing invitation to tender provided for in Regulation (EC) No 958/2006

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 318/2006 of 20 February 2006 on the common organisation of the markets in the sugar sector (1), and in particular the second subparagraph and point (b) of the third subparagraph of Article 33(2) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Commission Regulation (EC) No 958/2006 of 28 June 2006 on a standing invitation to tender to determine refunds on exports of white sugar for the 2006/2007 marketing year (2) requires the issuing of partial invitations to tender. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Regulation (EC) No 958/2006 of 28 June 2006 on a standing invitation to tender to determine refunds on exports of white sugar for the 2006/2007 marketing year (2) requires the issuing of partial invitations to tender.

| (2) | Pursuant to Article 8(1) of Regulation (EC) No 958/2006 and following an examination of the tenders submitted in response to the partial invitation to tender ending on 26 April 2007, it is appropriate to fix a maximum export refund for that partial invitation to tender. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Pursuant to Article 8(1) of Regulation (EC) No 958/2006 and following an examination of the tenders submitted in response to the partial invitation to tender ending on 26 April 2007, it is appropriate to fix a maximum export refund for that partial invitation to tender.

| (3) | The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Sugar, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Sugar,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

For the partial invitation to tender ending on 26 April 2007, the maximum export refund for the product referred to in Article 1(1) of Regulation (EC) No 958/2006 shall be 35,093 EUR/100 kg.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 27 April 2007.

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

Done at Brussels, 26 April 2007.

For the Commission

Jean-Luc DEMARTY

Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

---

(1)  
  OJ L 58, 28.2.2006, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 247/2007 (OJ L 69, 9.3.2007, p. 3).

1

(2)  
  OJ L 175, 29.6.2006, p. 49. Regulation as amended by Regulation (EC) No 203/2007 (OJ L 61, 28.2.2007, p. 3).

2

---
SPA CREST MANUFACTURING, 

INC., a Georgia corporation,

Petitioner,

v.

DARRYL WATERS, DARIAN 

WATERS, and KHAYLA 

WATERS,

Respondents.

___________________________/

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D16-4379

Opinion filed April 25, 2017.

Petition for Writ of Certiorari – original jurisdiction.

Kathryn L. Ender of Cole Scott & Kissane, P.A., Miami, for Petitioner.

Rebecca Bowen Creed and Meredith A. Ross of Creed & Gowdy, P.A., Jacksonville; 

Howard C. Coker and Daniel A. Iracki of Coker, Schickel, Sorenson, Posgay, 

Camerlengo & Iracki, Jacksonville, for Respondents.

PER CURIAM.

DENIED. 

ROBERTS, C.J., WOLF and B.L. THOMAS, JJ., CONCUR.
* 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. 07-50039

Summary Calendar

JOHN E GOREE

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

TRAVIS COUNTY STATE JAIL; DEPARTMENT OF 

CORRECTIONS; NATHANIEL QUARTERMAN

Defendants-Appellees

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 1:06-CV-618

Before REAVLEY, SMITH, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

John E. Goree, Texas prisoner # 1334846, appeals the dismissal without

prejudice of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action for failure to exhaust administrative

remedies. Goree argues that the Texas Department of Criminal Justice’s (TDCJ)

grievance procedure was not the proper means to address his complaints and

thatthe I-60 complaint procedure was an appropriate alternative which satisfied

the exhaustion requirement. He also argues that the unsanitary conditions at

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

November 21, 2007

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
No. 07-50039

2

the Travis County jail and the absence of durable utensils and drinking cups

violated his Eighth Amendment rights.

After the district court’s judgment, the Supreme Court held “that failure

to exhaust is an affirmative defense under the PLRA, and that inmates are not

required to specially plead or demonstrate exhaustion in their complaints.”

Jones v. Bock, 127 S. Ct. 910, 921 (2007). As this action was dismissed prior to

service on the defendants, and it is not clear from the complaint that Goree

exhausted his administrative remedies, the district court erred by sua sponte

dismissing Goree’s suit. See Carbe v. Lappin, 492 F.3d 325, 328 (5th Cir. 2007).

The district court’s judgment is VACATED and the case is REMANDED

for further proceedings consistent with Jones.
EXHIBIT 21



SUBSIDIARIES OF WMS INDUSTRIES INC.



The following is a list of all direct and indirect subsidiaries of the Company and their jurisdictions of incorporation as of June 30, 2008. The name
of each indirect subsidiary is indented under the name of its parent company.



|                                  |  |                                        
|--------------------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------
|Subsidiary                        |  | Jurisdiction of Incorporation/Formation
|                                  | 
|WMS Gaming Inc.                   |  | Delaware                               
|WMS Gaming (Canada) Ltd.          |  | New Brunswick, Canada                  
|WMS Gaming International, S.L.    |  | Spain                                  
|WMS Gaming Australia PTY Ltd.     |  | Australia                              
|WMS Gaming Africa (Pty) Ltd.      |  | South Africa                           
|WMS Gaming (UK) Limited           |  | United Kingdom                         
|WMS Gaming Slovakia, s.r.o.       |  | Slovakia                               
|Lenc-Smith Inc.                   |  | Delaware                               
|Williams Electronics Games, Inc.  |  | Delaware                               
|WMS Finance Inc.                  |  | Delaware                               
|WMS International Holdings Inc.   |  | Delaware                               
|Orion Financement Company B.V.    |  | Netherlands                            
|Orion Real Estate B.V.            |  | Netherlands                            
|Orion Assembly B.V.               |  | Netherlands                            
|Mercur Holland B.V.               |  | Netherlands                            
|Orion Gaming B.V.                 |  | Netherlands                            
|Systems In Progress Holding GmbH  |  | Austria                                
|WMS Asia Holdings Inc.            |  | Delaware                               
|WMS International (Macau) Limited |  | Macau
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 212 (Thursday, November 3, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 66850]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-21951]


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

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[Investigation No. 731-TA-718 (Second Review)]


Glycine From China

Determination

    On the basis of the record \1\ developed in the subject five-year 
review, the United States International Trade Commission (Commission) 
determines, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 
U.S.C. 1675(c)) (the Act), that revocation of the antidumping duty 
order on glycine from China would be likely to lead to continuation or 
recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United States 
within a reasonably foreseeable time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ The record is defined in sec. 207.2(f) of the Commission's 
Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 207.2(f)).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

Background

    The Commission instituted this review on June 1, 2005 (70 FR 31534) 
and determined on September 7, 2005 that it would conduct an expedited 
review (70 FR 55625, September 22, 2005).
    The Commission transmitted its determination in this review to the 
Secretary of Commerce on October 31, 2005. The views of the Commission 
are contained in USITC Publication 3810 (October 2005), entitled 
Glycine from China: Investigation No. 731-TA-718 (Second Review).

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: October 31, 2005.
Marilyn R. Abbott,
Secretary to the Commission.
[FR Doc. 05-21951 Filed 11-2-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
EXHIBIT 99.2
                                  ------------


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


In connection with the Annual Report of BSD Medical Corporation (the "Company")
on Form 10-KSB for the period ended August 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Dennis Bradley,
Controller of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.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; 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/  Dennis Bradley
                                                -------------------
                                                Dennis Bradley
                                                Controller
                                                (principal financial and
                                                   accounting officer)
                                                December 13, 2002
#### McKELLAR DEVELOPMENT OF NEVADA, INC., McKELLAR DEVELOPMENT GROUP, INC., f/k/a McKELLAR HOLDING COMPANY, INC.; McKELLAR & ASSOCIATES, INC.; and JAMES A. McKELLAR, JR., Appellants, v. NORTHERN INSURANCE COMPANY OF NEW YORK, and MARYLAND CASUALTY COMPANY, Respondents.

No. 21258

October 28, 1991

816 P.2d 456

Young, J., dissented.

ORDER GRANTING REHEARING

*Per Curiam:*

On August 27, 1991, this court issued an opinion in this matter affirming the decision of the district court. Appellants have petitioned for rehearing.

Cause appearing, we grant appellants’ petition for rehearing. Accordingly, although we express no opinion as to the merits of the arguments presented in this appeal, we deem it necessary to withdraw the opinion previously issued in this matter. Accordingly, we direct the clerk of this court to publish this order in place of the withdrawn opinion.

The Associated General Contractors of America, Inc., Las Vegas Chapter, and Northern Nevada Chapter, and the Nevada Association of Mechanical Contractors, Inc., have moved for leave to file a brief as amici curiae in support of the position of appellants. The proposed amici have submitted for filing such a brief. Cause appearing, we grant this motion. Accordingly, the clerk of this court shall file the proposed brief of the amici, received by this court on September 23, 1991, forthwith. Respondents shall have thirty (30) days from the date of this *563order within which to file a supplemental brief in response to the brief of the amici. Upon receipt of the supplemental brief, this matter shall stand submitted for decision without further briefing or oral argument. We deny all remaining pending motions.

It is so ORDERED.

Young, J.,

dissenting:

I would deny rehearing.
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5513 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5513

 To amend the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to require payment of 
royalty on all oil and gas saved, removed, sold, or discharged under a 
             lease under that Act, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 10, 2010

Ms. Pingree of Maine introduced the following bill; which was referred 
                 to the Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to require payment of 
royalty on all oil and gas saved, removed, sold, or discharged under a 
             lease under that Act, and for other purposes.

    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 ``Spilled Oil Royalty Collection 
Act''.

SEC. 2. APPLICATION OF ROYALTY TO OIL THAT IS SAVED, REMOVED, SOLD, OR 
              DISCHARGED UNDER OFFSHORE OIL AND GAS LEASES.

    (a) In General.--Section 8(a) of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands 
Act (43 U.S.C. 1337(a)) is amended by adding at the end the following 
new paragraph:
    ``(9)(A) Notwithstanding the terms of any bidding otherwise 
authorized by paragraph (1) and the authority of the Secretary to 
reduce or eliminate royalty or net profit share under paragraph (3), 
any royalty under a lease under this section, other than a deepwater 
lease, shall apply to all oil that is saved, removed, sold, or 
discharged, without regard to whether any of the oil is unavoidably 
lost or used on, or for the benefit of, the lease.
    ``(B) Notwithstanding paragraphs (1) and (3)--
            ``(i) royalty shall apply to all oil that is discharged 
        under a deepwater lease, at a rate of not less than 12\1/2\ 
        percent fixed by the Secretary in amount or value of any oil 
        that is discharged; and
            ``(ii) such royalty shall apply without regard to whether 
        any of the oil is thereafter unavoidably lost.
    ``(C) In this paragraph--
            ``(i) the term `deepwater lease' means a lease for a tract 
        in water depths of 200 meters or greater; and
            ``(ii) the term `discharged' means any emission (other than 
        natural seepage), intentional or unintentional, and includes, 
        but is not limited to, spilling, leaking, pumping, pouring, 
        emitting, emptying, or dumping.''.
    (b) Effective Date.--This section shall take effect April 15, 2010.
                                 <all>
```
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5358 

To amend the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to prohibit oil and gas 

preleasing, leasing, and related activities in certain areas of the Outer 

Continental Shelf off the coast of Florida, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 20, 2010 

Ms. CASTOR of Florida introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To amend the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act to prohibit 

oil and gas preleasing, leasing, and related activities in 

certain areas of the Outer Continental Shelf off the 

coast of Florida, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Florida Coastal Protec5 tion Act’’. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5358 IH

1 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION OF OIL AND NATURAL GAS 

2 PRELEASING, LEASING, AND RELATED AC3 TIVITIES IN CERTAIN AREAS OFF THE COAST 

4 OF FLORIDA. 

5 Section 18 of the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act 

6 (43 U.S.C. 1344) is amended by adding at the end the 

7 following: 

8 ‘‘(i) PROHIBITION OF OIL AND NATURAL GAS

9 PRELEASING, LEASING, AND RELATED ACTIVITIES IN

10 CERTAIN AREAS OFF THE COAST OF FLORIDA.— 

11 ‘‘(1) PROHIBITION.—Notwithstanding any other 

12 provision of this section or any other law, the Sec13 retary may not offer for oil and gas leasing or 

14 preleasing or any related activity, any tract located 

15 in— 

16 ‘‘(A) any area of the Eastern Gulf of Mex17 ico that is referred to in section 104(a) of the 

18 Gulf of Mexico Energy Security Act of 2006; 

19 ‘‘(B) the South Atlantic Planning Area; or 

20 ‘‘(C) the Straits of Florida Planning Area. 

21 ‘‘(2) LIMITATION ON EFFECT.—Nothing in this 

22 subsection affects any right under any lease issued 

23 under this Act before the date of enactment of this 

24 subsection.’’. 

Æ 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 21

List of Subsidiaries

Active subsidiaries of the
Company as of December 31, 2009:



|                                                        |  |                               
|------------------------------------------------------- |  | ------------------------------
|Name of Subsidiary                                      |  | State/Country of Incorporation
|                                                        | 
|Ubiquity.com, Inc.                                      |  | Delaware                      
|Xacta Corporation                                       |  | Delaware                      
|Telos Delaware, Inc.                                    |  | Delaware                      
|Teloworks, Inc.                                         |  | Delaware                      
|Telos Identity Management Solutions, LLC (DBA Telos ID) |  | Delaware                      
|Teloworks Philippines, Inc.                             |  | Philippines                   
|Teloworks BPO Solutions Philippines, Inc.               |  | Philippines                   



82
Document

SECOND AMENDMENT
TO
JONES LANG LASALLE INCORPORATED
DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN
(As Amended and Restated Effective January 1, 2009)
WHEREAS, Jones Lang LaSalle Incorporated (the “Company”), maintains the Jones Lang LaSalle Incorporated Deferred Compensation Plan (the “Plan”) for the benefit of its eligible employees and Directors, which Plan was amended and restated in its entirety effective January 1, 2009; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 12.2 of the Plan, the Company retains the authority to amend the Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Company’s Board of Directors has delegated its authority to amend the Plan to the Jones Lang LaSalle Incorporated Compensation Committee; and
WHEREAS, the Compensation Committee has authorized the Chief Human Resources Officer and Executive Vice President, Human Resources, to amend the employee benefit plans sponsored by the Company or a member of its controlled group; and
WHEREAS, the Company desires to amend the Plan to provide for Scheduled Distributions for Outperformance Plan contributions.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that Section 3.11(g) of Plan is hereby amended, effective as of March 25, 2014, to provide as follows:
“(g)     Scheduled Distributions. Notwithstanding anything else in the Plan to contrary, a Participant may elect a Scheduled Distribution in accordance with the provisions of Sections 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3, which are incorporated by reference herein, for any portion of his OP Account; provided, however that any election of a Schedule Distribution under this Section 3.11(g) must occur on or after the date the Participant becomes vested in the OP Amount subject to such election. If,  however, a Participant could become vested in an OP Amount within 12 months after the date on which the OP Amount is credited to his Account, the Participant shall not be eligible to elect a Scheduled Distribution under this Section 3.11(g).”
* * * 












IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Second Amendment has been executed by a duly authorized representative of Jones Lang LaSalle Incorporated this 25th day of March, 2014.


JONES LANG LASALLE INCORPORATED


By: /s/ Trish Maxson                                     
Trish Maxson
Chief Human Resources Officer