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

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4700 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase the limitation 

on the deduction for student loan interest. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 21, 2014 

Mr. GARDNER 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 limitation on the deduction for student loan interest. 

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

3 SECTION 1. INCREASE IN LIMITATION ON DEDUCTION FOR 

4 STUDENT LOAN INTEREST. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 221(b)(1) of the Internal 

6 Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by striking ‘‘the 

7 amount determined’’ and all that follows and inserting 

8 ‘‘$5,000.’’. 

9 (b) INFLATION ADJUSTMENT.—Subsection (f) of sec10 tion 221 of such Code is amended by— 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4700 IH

1 (1) redesignating paragraphs (1) and (2) as 

2 paragraphs (2) and (3), respectively, and inserting 

3 before paragraph (2) (as so redesignated) the fol4 lowing new paragraph: 

5 ‘‘(1) DOLLAR LIMITATION.—In the case of any 

6 taxable year beginning after 2015, the $5,000 

7 amount in subsection (b)(1) shall be increased by an 

8 amount equal to— 

9 ‘‘(A) such dollar amount, multiplied by 

10 ‘‘(B) the cost-of-living adjustment deter11 mined under section 1(f)(3) for the calendar 

12 year in which the taxable year begins, deter13 mined by substituting ‘calendar year 2014’ for 

14 ‘calendar year 1992’ in subparagraph (B) 

15 thereof.’’, 

16 (2) in paragraph (2) (as so redesignated), by 

17 striking ‘‘IN GENERAL’’ in the heading thereof and 

18 inserting ‘‘LIMITATION BASED ON MODIFIED AD19 JUSTED GROSS INCOME’’, and 

20 (3) in paragraph (3) (as so redesignated)— 

21 (A) by striking ‘‘paragraph (1)’’ and in22 serting ‘‘paragraph (1) or (2)’’, and 

23 (B) by inserting ‘‘($100 in the case of any 

24 adjustment under paragraph (1))’’ after 

25 ‘‘$5,000’’ both places it appears. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 4700 IH

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

2 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after 

3 December 31, 2014. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4982 

To simplify the application used for the estimation and determination of 

financial aid eligibility for postsecondary education. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 26, 2014 

Mr. BUCSHON (for himself, Mr. KELLY of Pennsylvania, Mr. KLINE, Mr. 

GEORGE MILLER of California, Mr. TIERNEY, Mr. BISHOP of New York, 

Mr. POLIS, and Mr. ROYCE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce 

A BILL 

To simplify the application used for the estimation and determination of financial aid eligibility for postsecondary education. 

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 ‘‘Simplifying the Appli5 cation for Student Aid Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. USING DATA FROM SECOND PRECEDING YEAR. 

7 Section 480(a)(1)(B) of the Higher Education Act of 

8 1965 (20 U.S.C. 1087vv(a)(1)(B)) is amended to read as 

9 follows: 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4982 IH

1 ‘‘(B) Notwithstanding section 478(a) and 

2 beginning not later than the second January 1 

3 after the date of enactment of the Simplifying 

4 the Application for Student Aid Act, the Sec5 retary shall provide for the use of data from the 

6 second preceding tax year to carry out the sim7 plification of applications (including simplifica8 tion for a subset of applications) used for the 

9 estimation and determination of financial aid 

10 eligibility. Such simplification shall include the 

11 sharing of data between the Internal Revenue 

12 Service and the Department, pursuant to the 

13 consent of the taxpayer.’’. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
TROUTMAN SANDERS LLP

875 TH IRD AV E NUE

NEW YORK, NY 10022

39117793v2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN FRANCISCO DIVISION

In re:

PG&E CORPORATION

 -andPACIFIC GAS AND ELECTRIC

COMPANY,

Debtors.

Affects PG&E Corporation

Affects Pacific Gas and Electric 

Company

Affects both Debtors

* All papers shall be filed in the Lead, Case, 

No. 19-30088 (DM).

Bankruptcy Case No. 19-30088 (DM)

Chapter 11 (Lead Case) (Jointly Administered)

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING 

CONSOLIDATED EDISON’S MOTION FOR 

RELIEF FROM THE AUTOMATIC STAY 

TO INTERVENE AND PARTICIPATE IN 

APPEAL OF FERC ORDERS

Upon the Motion, dated June 5, 2019 [Doc. No. __ ] (the “Motion”),1of Consolidated 

Edison Development, Inc. (“Con Edison”), pursuant to section 362(d)(1) of title 11 of the United 

States Code (the “Bankruptcy Code”), all as more fully set forth in the Motion; and this Court 

having jurisdiction to consider the Motion and the relief requested therein pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 

157 and 1334, Order Referring Bankruptcy Cases and Proceedings to Bankruptcy Judges, General 

Order 24 (N.D. Cal.), and Rule 5011-1(a) of the Bankruptcy Local Rules for the United States 

District Court for the Northern District of California (the “Bankruptcy Local Rules”); and 

consideration of the Motion and the requested relief being a core proceeding pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

§ 157(b); and venue being proper before this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1408 and 1409; and 

the Court having found and determined that notice of the Motion was reasonable and sufficient 

 

1 Capitalized terms used but not otherwise defined in this Order shall have the meanings ascribed to such terms in the 

Motion. 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2403-1 Filed: 06/05/19 Entered: 06/05/19 14:35:11 Page 1

of 2
TROUTMAN SANDERS LLP

875 TH IRD AV E NUE

NEW YORK, NY 10022

39117793v2 - 2 -

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

under the circumstances, and it appearing that no other or further notice need be provided; and this 

Court having held a hearing on the Motion; and this Court having determined that the legal and 

factual bases set forth in the Motion and the Dixon Declaration incorporated therein establish just 

cause for the relief sought; and upon all of the proceedings had before this Court and after due 

deliberation and sufficient cause appearing therefor,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT:

1. The Motion is granted as provided herein. 

2. The Court grants Con Edison relief from the automatic stay to the extent necessary

to permit Con Edison to file a motion to intervene in any appeal by a Debtor of the FERC Orders 

and otherwise participate in all respects in that appeal or any subsequent review or remand 

proceedings. 

3. The Court shall retain jurisdiction to hear and determine all matters arising from or 

related to the implementation, interpretation, or enforcement of this Order. 

** END OF ORDER **

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2403-1 Filed: 06/05/19 Entered: 06/05/19 14:35:11 Page 2

of 2
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________

SIEMENS GAMESA RENEWABLE ENERGY A/S, 

GAMESA ELECTRIC, S.A.U., 

Appellants

v.

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION, 

Appellee

GENERAL ELECTRIC COMPANY, 

Intervenor

______________________

2022-1794

______________________

Appeal from the United States International Trade 

Commission in Investigation No. 337-TA-1218.

______________________

O R D E R

The parties having so agreed, it is ordered that:

(1) The proceeding is DISMISSED under Fed. R. App. 

P. 42 (b).

Case: 22-1794 Document: 46 Page: 1 Filed: 04/12/2023
2 SIEMENS GAMESA RENEWABLE ENERGY A/S V. ITC

(2) Each side shall bear their own costs.

FOR THE COURT

April 12, 2023 /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner

Date Peter R. Marksteiner 

Clerk of Court

ISSUED AS A MANDATE: April 12, 2023

Case: 22-1794 Document: 46 Page: 2 Filed: 04/12/2023
# Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas

June 29, 2022

No. 04

- 22

- 00348

- CV

Isabel Carolina VAZQUEZ

, Appellant

v.

SACATAR PROPERTIES

,

Appellee

From the County Court At Law No 2

, Guadalupe County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2022

- CV

- 0071 Honorable Kirsten Legore , Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

Appellant attempts to appeal the trial court’s judgment awarding possession of real property to appellee Sacatar Properties in a forcible detainer action

. The trial court signed the judgment on May 4, 2022

. T he notice of appeal was due June 3, 2022

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 26.1. Although the appellant filed a notice of appeal within the fifteen

- day grace period allowed by

r ule 26.3, she did not file a motion for extension of time. See id. 26.3.

A motion for exten sion of time is necessarily implied when an appellant, acting in good faith, files a notice of appeal beyond the time allowed by r ule 26.1 but within the fifteen

- day grace period provided by r ule 26.3 for filing a motion for extension of time. See Verburgt v. Dorner , 959 S.W.2d 615, 617 (Tex. 1997) (construing the predecessor to r ule 26). However, the appellant must offer a reasonable explanation for failing to file the notice of appeal in a timely

manner. See id. ; T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 26.3, 10.5(b)(1)(C).

W e therefore ORDER the appellant to file, on or before July 14, 2022

, a response presenting a reasonable explanation for failing to file the notice of appeal in a timely manner. If the appellant fails to respond within the time provided, the appeal will be dismissed. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.3( c).

_________________________________ Irene Rios , JusticeIN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 29th day of June, 2022

.

___________________________________ M ichael A. C ruz , Clerk of Court
I

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2069

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

OCTOBER 6, 2000

Referred to the Committee on Resources

AN ACT

To permit the conveyance of certain land in Powell,

Wyoming.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

S 2069 RFH

1 SECTION 1. ELIMINATION OF PUBLIC PURPOSE CONDI2 TION.

3 (a) FINDINGS.—Congress finds that—

4 (1) the parcel of land described in subsection

5 (c) was patented to the town (now City) of Powell,

6 Wyoming, by the United States General Land Office

7 on October 17, 1934, to help establish a town near

8 the Shoshone Irrigation Project;

9 (2) the land was patented with the condition

10 that it be used forever for a public purpose, as re11 quired by section 3 of the Act of April 16, 1906 (43

12 U.S.C. 566);

13 (3) the land has been used to house the Powell

14 Volunteer Fire Department, which serves the fire15 fighting and rescue needs of a 577 square mile area

16 in northwestern Wyoming;

17 (4) the land is located at the corner of U.S.

18 Highway 14 and the main street of the business dis19 trict of the City;

20 (5) because of the high traffic flow in the area,

21 the location is no longer safe for the public or for

22 the fire department;

23 (6) in response to population growth in the area

24 and to National Fire Protection Association regula25 tions, the fire department has purchased new fire-
3

S 2069 RFH

1 fighting equipment that is much larger than the ex2 isting fire hall can accommodate;

3 (7) accordingly, the fire department must con4 struct a new fire department facility at a new and

5 safe location;

6 (8) in order to relocate and construct a new fa7 cility, the City must sell the land to assist in financ8 ing the new fire department facility; and

9 (9) the Secretary of the Interior concurs that it

10 is in the public interest to eliminate the public pur11 pose condition to enable the land to be sold for that

12 purpose.

13 (b) ELIMINATION OF CONDITION.—

14 (1) WAIVER.—The condition stated in section 3

15 of the Act of April 16, 1906 (43 U.S.C. 566), that

16 land conveyed under that Act be used forever for a

17 public purpose is waived insofar as the condition ap18 plies to the land described in subsection (c).

19 (2) INSTRUMENTS.—The Secretary of the Inte20 rior shall execute and cause to be recorded in the

21 appropriate land records any instruments necessary

22 to evidence the waiver made by paragraph (1).

23 (c) LAND DESCRIPTION.—The parcel of land de24 scribed in this subsection is a parcel of land located in
4

S 2069 RFH

1 Powell, Park County, Wyoming, the legal description of

2 which is as follows:

3 Lot 23, Block 54, in the original town of Pow4 ell, according to the plat recorded in Book 82 of

5 plats, Page 252, according to the records of the

6 County Clerk and Recorder of Park County, State of

7 Wyoming.

Passed the Senate October 5 (legislative day, September 22), 2000.

Attest: GARY SISCO,

Secretary.
1

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

__________________

NO. 09-22-00365-CV

__________________

CHRISTOPHER STAEBLER, Appellant

V.

FREEDOM MORTGAGE CORPORATION, Appellee

__________________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the County Court

Hardin County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 7732

__________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Christopher Staebler, Appellant, and Freedom Mortgage Corporation, 

Appellee, filed a Joint Motion to Dismiss Appeal and Enter Judgment. See Tex. R. 

App. P. 42.1(a)(2). The parties inform the Court that Appellee no longer desires to 

pursue enforcement of the trial court’s judgment for possession that is the basis for 

this appeal. In accordance with the agreement of the parties, we grant the motion, 

vacate the trial court’s judgment without prejudice and without reference to the 

merits, and dismiss the case as moot. See Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(e).
2

JUDGMENT VACATED; CASE DISMISSED.

PER CURIAM

Submitted on July 27, 2023

Opinion Delivered October 12, 2023

Before Horton, Johnson and Wright, JJ.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

July 17, 2018

No. 04-18-00296-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF I. J. P., a Child,

From the 37th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2017-PA-00001

Honorable Martha B. Tanner, Judge Presiding

ORDER

The Appellant’s Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief is GRANTED. 

_________________________________

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 17th day of July, 2018.

___________________________________

KEITH E. HOTTLE,

Clerk of Court
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
The following information is being submitted to update previously disclosed 
earnings per share amounts.  The amounts shown below represent Basic and Diluted
Earnings Per Share under SFAS 128.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                         <C>           <C>          <C>         <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>               YEAR          9-MOS        6-MOS       3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>           AUG-31-1997   AUG-31-1997  AUG-31-1997 AUG-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                AUG-31-1997   MAY-31-1997  FEB-28-1997 NOV-30-1996
<CASH>                          110,393       7,528        5,751      28,188
<SECURITIES>                          0           0            0           0
<RECEIVABLES>                    10,894      70,490       39,134      12,366
<ALLOWANCES>                      1,834       2,984        2,135       2,630
<INVENTORY>                      62,887     173,754      133,721      95,772
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                 12,987       8,125        7,441       6,572
<PP&E>                          124,341     121,508      121,722     123,003
<DEPRECIATION>                   60,347      58,237       57,664      59,605
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  329,014     305,275      316,949     272,036
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>            53,591     101,942      114,032      57,319
<BONDS>                         113,489      37,286       37,817      38,101
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                 0           0            0           0
<PREFERRED>                       6,809       7,514        7,517       7,517
<COMMON>                         41,331      41,202       40,909      40,887
<OTHER-SE>                       60,523      65,091       74,785      87,501
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    329,014     305,275      316,949     272,036
<SALES>                         314,100     237,456       93,680      33,087
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                314,100     237,456       93,680      33,087
<CGS>                           244,024     185,158       72,224      25,908
<TOTAL-COSTS>                    38,347      28,904       18,683       9,358
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                      0           0            0           0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                      0           0            0           0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                3,430       2,782        1,314          (3)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                  28,867      21,069        1,916      (1,668)
<INCOME-TAX>                     10,103       7,164          651        (422)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>              18,764      13,905        1,265      (1,246)
<DISCONTINUED>                        0           0            0           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                       0           0            0           0
<CHANGES>                             0           0            0           0
<NET-INCOME>                     18,764      13,905        1,265      (1,246)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                       0.42        0.30         0.00        (0.05)
<EPS-DILUTED>                      0.39        0.29         0.00       (0.05)
        

</TABLE>
#### In the Matter of the Voluntary Dissolution of the Rateau Sales Company. Thomas W. Stephens and Charles B. Ludwig, Composing the Firm of T. W. Stephens & Company and Signono C. Munoz, Appellants; Leonce Battu and Others, Petitioners, Respondents.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. No opinion.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

BAKER 

&

HOSTE TL E R L LP ATTOR NE YS AT LAW

SAN FRANCISCO

 

EXHIBIT E 

TARGET MEDIA OUTLETS 

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2304-5 Filed: 05/31/19 Entered: 05/31/19 13:13:57 Page 1

of 4
List of Target Media Outlets: 

Local/CaliforniaLOCAL & CALIFORNIA MEDIA

TV

Chico-Redding KRCR-TV 7 (ABC)

Chico-Redding KHSL-TV 12 (CBS)

Chico-Redding KHSL-DT2 12.2 (CW)

Chico-Redding KCVU 20 (FOX)

Chico-Redding KNVN 24 (NBC)

SF KTVU (FOX)

SF KPIX-TV (CBS)

SF KGO-TV (ABC)

SF KTNC-TV

SF KNTV (NBC)

SF KDTV-DT (Univision)

LA KCBS-TV 

LA KCBS-TV 

LA KCBS-TV 

LA KCBS-TV 

LA KNBC

LA KABC-TV

LA KTLA (CW)

LA KMEX-DT

LA KTTV

RADIO

Chico-Redding The Morning News (KPAY-AM)

Chico-Redding KZFR-FM

Chico-Redding KMYC-AM

Chico-Redding KESR-FM

Chico-Redding KVXX-FM

SF KQED (NPR- 88.5FM)

SF KGO (810 AM)

SF KFRC-FM 106.9 FM

SF KBCS 740 AM

Sacramento KFBK 1530 AM

Sacramento KTKZ 1380 AM

Sacramento KYMX 96.1 FM

LA KFI 640 AM

LA KNX 1070 AM

LA KPFK 90.7 FM 

NEWSPAPER

Chico-Redding Record Searchlight

Chico-Redding Chico Enterprise-Record

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2304-5 Filed: 05/31/19 Entered: 05/31/19 13:13:57 Page 2

of 4
Chico-Redding Daily News

Napa Napa Valley Register

Oakland Oakland Tribune

LA Los Angeles Times

LA Investor's Business Daily

SF/NorCal San Francisco Business Times

San Francisco Chronicle

San Francisco Examiner

San Fransisco Weekly

San Francisco Daily

San Francisco Herland

San Francisco Call 

East Bay Times

San Francisco Daily Journal

Westside Reporter

Fresno Fresno Bee

The Press-Enterprise 

MAGAZINE

LA Los Angeles Magazine

Los Angeles Magazine

Los Angeles Magazine

LALA Magazine

Los Angeles Business Journal

Los Angeles Business Journal

Daily Commerce

LA Area Chamber Voice

LA Area Chamber Voice

Metropolitan News-Enterprise

San Francisco Business Times

San Francisco Business Times

Oakland Independent Review

DIGITAL

LA LAObserved

LA Cultural Weekly

Oakland Oakland Local

Oakland Oakland North

Oakland Oakland Rising

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2304-5 Filed: 05/31/19 Entered: 05/31/19 13:13:57 Page 3

of 4
NATIONAL OUTLETS

TV

CNN

MSNBC

Fox News

BBC World News

CNBC

Fox Business Network

RADIO

NPR

BBC World Service

NEWSPAPER

NYT

Washington Post

Wall Street Journal

USA Today

Newsday

Daily News

Chicago Tribune

MAGAZINE

TIME Magazine

The New Yorker

US Weekly

The Economist

The Atlantic

Fortune

DIGITAL

Business Insider

HuffPost

NowThis

Vice

Vox

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2304-5 Filed: 05/31/19 Entered: 05/31/19 13:13:57 Page 4

of 4
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 14**  **- 6932** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. LANTIS JETON YOUNG , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina , at Charlotte

. Graham C. Mullen , Senior District Judge. ( 3:00

- cr - 00131

- GCM

- 1 )

Submitted : October 31, 2014 Decided: November 14, 2014

Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and HARRIS , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

. Lantis Jeton Young, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Ray, Assistant United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Lantis Jeton Young seek s to appeal his life sentence imposed in 2003. At the time Young’s judgment of conviction was entered on the docket, the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure required a defendant in a criminal case to file his notice of appeal within ten days of the en try of judgment. Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(1)(A)(i). With or without a motion, upon a showing of excusable neglect or good cause, the district court may grant an extension of up to thirty days to file a notice of appeal. Fed. R. App. P. 4(b)(4); United Sta tes v. Reyes , 759 F.2d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 1985). The district court entered judgment on September 3, 2003. Young filed his notice of appeal, at the earliest, June 10, 2014. Because Young failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extensio n of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal as untimely. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court.
DISMISSED