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

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5419 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide for a right to 

an administrative appeal relating to adverse determinations of tax-exempt 

status of certain organizations. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 9, 2014 

Mr. BOUSTANY 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 provide 

for a right to an administrative appeal relating to adverse determinations of tax-exempt status of certain organizations. 

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

3 SECTION 1. ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL RELATING TO AD4 VERSE DETERMINATIONS OF TAX-EXEMPT 

5 STATUS OF CERTAIN ORGANIZATIONS. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 7123 of the Internal Rev7 enue Code of 1986 is amended by adding at the end the 

8 following: 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5419 IH

1 ‘‘(c) ADMINISTRATIVE APPEAL RELATING TO AD2 VERSE DETERMINATION OF TAX-EXEMPT STATUS OF

3 CERTAIN ORGANIZATIONS.— 

4 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary shall pre5 scribe procedures under which an organization de6 scribed in section 501(c) may request an administra7 tive appeal (including a conference relating to such 

8 appeal if requested by the organization) to the Inter9 nal Revenue Service Office of Appeals of an adverse 

10 determination described in paragraph (2). 

11 ‘‘(2) ADVERSE DETERMINATIONS.—For pur12 poses of paragraph (1), an adverse determination is 

13 described in this paragraph if such determination is 

14 adverse to an organization with respect to— 

15 ‘‘(A) the initial qualification or continuing 

16 qualification of the organization as exempt from 

17 tax under section 501(a) or as an organization 

18 described in section 170(c)(2), 

19 ‘‘(B) the initial classification or continuing 

20 classification of the organization as a private 

21 foundation under 509(a), or 

22 ‘‘(C) the initial classification or continuing 

23 classification of the organization as a private 

24 operating foundation under section 

25 4942(j)(3).’’. 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 5419 IH

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) shall apply to determinations made after 

3 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5465 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5465

  To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to expand health savings 
                               accounts.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 15, 2014

    Mr. Bera of California 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 expand health savings 
                               accounts.

    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 ``Middle Class Family Savings Act of 
2014''.

SEC. 2. HEALTH SAVINGS ACCOUNTS.

    (a) Increase in Maximum Deductible Amounts.--Section 223(b)(2) of 
the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended--
            (1) in subparagraph (A) by striking ``$2,250'' and 
        inserting ``the amount in effect under subsection 
        (c)(2)(A)(ii)(I) for the taxable year'', and
            (2) in subparagraph (B) by striking ``$4,500'' and 
        inserting ``the amount in effect under subsection 
        (c)(2)(A)(ii)(II) for the taxable year''.
    (b) Conforming Amendments to COLA.--Section 223(g)(1) of the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended--
            (1) by striking ``subsections (b)(2) and'' both places it 
        appears and inserting ``subsection'', and
            (2) in the first sentence by striking ``substituting for'' 
        and all that follows and inserting ``substituting `calendar 
        year 2003' for `calendar year 1992' in subparagraph (B) 
        thereof.''.
    (c) Medical Expenses of Young Adult Children.--The first sentence 
of section 223(d)(2)(A) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended 
by inserting ``and any child (as defined in section 152(f)(1)) of such 
individual who as of the end of the taxable year has not attained age 
27''.
    (d) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2014.
                                 <all>
```
Bar Docket No. 07708

#### In the Matter of Cortland E. Berry, Respondent.

68 P.3d 134

In a letter received April 30, 2003, by the Clerk of the Appellate Courts, respondent Cortland E. Berry, of Wichita, an attorney admitted to practice of law in the state of Kansas, voluntarily surrendered his license to practice law in Kansas, pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 217 (2002 Kan. Ct. Annot. 275).

At the time the respondent surrendered his license, review was pending before the Kansas Supreme Court on the Final Hearing Report in accordance with Supreme Court Rule 212 (2002 Kan. Ct. R. Annot. 266). The Final Hearing Report concerned allegations of misconduct contained in 11 complaints. The complaints alleged respondent lacked competence and diligence, failed to expedite litigation, failed to comply with a legally proper discovery request, engaged in the unauthorized practice of law under this court’s order of suspension, made unrestrained and intemperate statements about certain members of the judiciary, failed to provide written responses to initial complaints, failed to file a written Answer to the Formal Complaint, and engaged in other conduct that adversely reflected on the respondent’s fitness to practice law.

In previous attorney disciplinary proceedings, the respondent received an 18-month suspension from the practice of law. *In re Berry,*274 Kan. 336, 50 P.3d 20 (2002).

This court, having examined the files of the office of the Disciplinary Administrator, finds that the surrender of the respondent’s license should be accepted and that the respondent should be disbarred.

It Is Therefore Ordered that Cortland E. Berry be and is hereby disbarred from the practice of law in Kansas and his license and privilege to practice law are hereby revoked.

It Is Further Ordered that the Clerk of the Appellate Courts strike the name of Cortland E. Berry from the roll of attorneys licensed to practice law in Kansas.

*630Dated this 1st day of May, 2003.

It Is Further Ordered that this order shall be published in the Kansas Reports, that the costs herein shall be assessed to the respondent, and that the respondent forthwith shall comply with Supreme Court Rule 218 (2002 Kan. Ct. R. Annot. 279).
## United States Court of App eals F O R T H E E I G H T H C I R C U I T

__ __ __ __ __ _ No. 1 1- 33 10

__ __ __ __ __ _ Mark Hen de rs on , * * App el la nt , * * v. * * Ray H ob bs , Direc to r, Arka ns as * App eal fro m th e Uni te d S ta te s Dep art m en t o f Co rrec ti on ; Larry May, * Dis tri ctCo ur t fo r th e Dep ut y Ass is ta nt Dire ct or , Arka ns as * East ern Dis tri ctof Ark an sa s. Dep art m en t o f Co rrec ti on ; Will ia m * St rau gh n, Warde n, M ax im um Secu rit y * [UNPUBLISHED] Uni t, ADC; Ste ve Out la w, Ass is ta nt * W ard en , Max im

um Secu rit y Uni t, * ADC; Terry

Mu rp hy, Main te na nc e * Supe rv is or , Max im

um Secu rit y Uni t, * ADC; Dav idWhi te , For m er Warde n, * Max im um Secu rit y Uni t, ADC, *

* App el le es . *

__ __ __ __ __ _ Subm it te d: Marc h 2 2, 2 01 2 Fi le d: Marc h 2 3, 2 01 2

__ __ __ __ __ _ Befo re MUR PHY, ARNOLD, an d S HEPHERD, Circ ui t J ud ge s.

__ __ __ __ __ _PER CURI AM.

M a r k Hen de rs on ap pe al s th e di st ric t co urt’s ad ve rs e gr an t of su m mar y 1 jud gm en t in hi s 4 2 U.S.C. § 19 83 act io n. Up on care fu l d e n ov o re vi ew, se e Mas on v. Co rr. Med

. Serv s., In c., 55 9 F.3 d 88 0 , 8 8 4

- 8 5 (8 th Ci r. 20 09 ), we co nc lu de th at su m m ary jud gm en t was pro pe rly gran te d b y th e d is tri ctco ur t.
Acco rd in gl y , we affi rm

th e jud gm en t. See 8t h C ir. R . 47 B.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

The Hon or ab le Su sa n We b b er Wrig ht , Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e 1 East ern Dis tri ct of Ark an sa s, ad op ti ng th e rep or t an d reco mm e n d a t i on s of th e Hon or ab le Jo e J. Vol pe , Uni te d St at es Mag is tra te J u d g e f o r th e East ern Dis tri ct of Ark an sa s. -2

-
#### Nathan Corwith, Jr., and Others, Appellants, v. Frederick M. Stetler and Another, Respondents.

Judgment affirmed, with-costs.—

Per Curiam:

October 5, 1888, the five carloads of lead in question reached the station. of the Delaware, Lackawanna and Western Railroad Company at Hoboken, which corporation had brought it from the west. It is conceded that when the load arrived it was owned by Nathan Corwith & Co. The only question presented on this appeal is one-of fact. Was Gurden Corwith authorized by Nathan Corwith & Co. to sell the lead ? The learned trial court found this issue of fact in favor of the defendants and upon evidence which permits no other answer to the question. The senior member of the firm of Nathan Corwith & Co. was in the city of New York. The firm received the usual notice of the arrival of the lead and turned that notice over to Gurden Corwith, who had long acted as the broker of the firm. The evidence shows that he had on many occasions stored lead and received warehouse receipts in his *613own name and sold the lead. In regard to this particular shipment the evidence justifies the conclusion that Nathan Corwith & Co. authorized this very disposition to he made of this lead. None of the appellants established any legal or equitable claim to the property. None of the rulings of the learned trial judge upon the admission or exclusion of evidence are challenged, and no question was argued at the bar of this court or upon the briefs of counsel, except this single question of fact which was well decided. The judgment should be affirmed, with costs.

Present — Van Brunt), P. J., Follett and Parker, JJ.
Converted by EDGARwiz














Loan agreement and Promissory Note

April 1, 2009




I, Jody Ray Hanley, agree to loan National Automation Services, Inc. (NAS) located at 2470 St. Rose Parkway Suite 311, Henderson, Nevada the sum of $77,000 according to the following terms and conditions: 




The $72,000 is being loaned to NAS with a flat fee of $5,000, and an interest rate of 10% (annual) as of April 1, 2009. That the interest rate replaces the $250 penalty fee per diem and that interest will be computed at the principle balance of $77,000.







NAS agrees that if any interest payments are due on the loan that NAS is responsible for making these payments in addition to the fees stated above as the money being loaned to NAS.




The loan in principle and interest is payable on demand.













/s/ Jody R. Hanley

_________________________

Jody R. Hanley




/s/ Robert Chance

__________________________

Robert Chance

CEO National Automation Services, Inc.
Exhibit
32.1








CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2004


(18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350)





In connection with the Annual Report
ofRosewind Corporation(the "Company") on Form
10-K as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report'), I, James B. Wiegand, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial
Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 USC ss. 1350, as adopted
pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2004, that to the best of my
knowledge and belief:





(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.











Date: November
10, 2008








By:
            /s/ James
      B. WiegandJames
      B. Wiegand
              President
              Chief
      Financial Officer
12 

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

EXHIBIT F 

DISBURSEMENT SUMMARY 

EXPENSES AMOUNT 

Court Fees $70.00

In-City Transportation $315.43

Outside Printing Services $906.98

Travel $19,984.88

UPS $120.78

Messenger Service $38.49

TOTAL DISBURSEMENT $21,436.56

Case: 19-30088 Doc# 3465-6 Filed: 08/08/19 Entered: 08/08/19 12:10:33 Page 1

of 1
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 238 (Tuesday, December 12, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 63708]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-30196]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. RP-96-61-000]


Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company; Notice of Change Pursuant to 
Tariff Adjustment Provisions

December 6, 1995.
    Take notice that on November 30, 1995, Tennessee Gas Pipeline 
Company (Tennessee) filed to revise its recovery of take-or-pay 
transition costs pursuant to Article XXV of the General Terms and 
Conditions of its FERC Gas Tariff, Fifth Revised Volume No. 1. 
Tennessee states that the purpose of the filing is to reflect the 
recovery of an additional $5,141,642 of new take-or-pay transition 
costs, including interest, incurred by Tennessee pursuant to 
settlements predating July 1, 1992. Tennessee states that the new costs 
of $5,141,642 have been allocated under an equitable sharing formula of 
50% absorption and 50% recovery (41.78% demand, 8.22% volumetric) in 
conformance with the Stipulation and Agreement filed on June 25, 1991, 
as amended, in Docket No. RP86-119, et al.
    Tennessee also submitted the following revised tariff sheet to be 
effective October 1, 1995:

Fifth Revised Volume No. 1
Third Revised Sheet No. 38

    Tennessee states that the purpose of this tariff sheet is to 
terminate the previously effective demand surcharge to Alabama-
Tennessee Natural Gas Company.
    Tennessee states that copies of the filing have been mailed to 
affected customers and state regulatory commissions.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest such filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426 
in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure. Pursuant to Section 154.210 of the Commission's 
Regulations, all such motions or protests must be filed not later than 
12 days after the date of the filing noted above. Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to 
intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and 
are available for public inspection.
Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-30196 Filed 12-11-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 107 (Friday, June 4, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 31818]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-13583]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NATIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BOARD


Sunshine Act Meetings

Time and Dates: All meetings are held at 2:30 p.m., with the exception 
of the meeting on June 2, which begins at 1:30 p.m. Wednesday, June 2; 
Wednesday, June 9; Wednesday, June 16; Wednesday, June 23; Wednesday, 
June 30, 2010.

Place: Board Agenda Room, No. 11820, 1099 14th St., NW., Washington, DC 
20570.

Status: Closed.

Matters To Be Considered: Pursuant to Sec.  102.139(a) of the Board's 
Rules and Regulations, the Board or a panel thereof will consider ``the 
issuance of a subpoena, the Board's participation in a civil action or 
proceeding or an arbitration, or the initiation, conduct, or 
disposition * * * of particular representation or unfair labor practice 
proceedings under section 8, 9, or 10 of the [National Labor Relations] 
Act, or any court proceedings collateral or ancillary thereto.'' See 
also 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(10).

Contact Person for More Information: Lester A. Heltzer, Executive 
Secretary, (202) 273-1067.

    Dated: June 2, 2010.
Lester A. Heltzer,
Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-13583 Filed 6-2-10; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 7545-01-P
EX-10.1



 Exhibit 10.1 

EXTENSION OF CONVERTIBLE PROMISSORY NOTE 

THIS EXTENSION OF CONVERTIBLE PROMISSORY NOTE (this “Extension”) is entered into as of June 30, 2016 among TRANSATLANTIC
PETROLUEM LTD. (“Maker”) and ANBE HOLDINGS, L.P. (“Holder”). Maker and Holder may be referred to individually as “Party” and collectively as the “Parties”. All capitalized terms used herein but not otherwise
defined shall have the meaning set forth in the Note (as defined below). 
 WHEREAS, the Parties entered into that certain convertible
promissory note on December 30, 2015, in the principal amount of Five Million Dollars and No/100 ($5,000,000.00), a copy of which is attached to this Extension (the “Note”); and 

WHEREAS, the Parties desire to extend (i) the latest date on which Maker may request a Subsequent Advance, and (ii) the Maturity
Date. 
 NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants set forth herein and the benefits to be derived hereby, the Parties agree to
amend the Note with the following: 
  

	 	1.	The latest date on which Maker may request a Subsequent Advance shall be extended from June 15, 2016 to August 15, 2016. Holder reserves the right to deny the Subsequent Advance request from Maker.


  

	 	2.	The Maturity Date shall be extended from June 30, 2016 to August 31, 2016. 

 Except
as expressly modified or amended hereby, The Parties agree that the terms and rights contained in the Note, as amended by this Extension, shall remain unchanged and in full force and effect. 

[remainder of page intentionally left blank] 

  
 Page 1 








 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused this Extension to be duly executed as of the date set out above. 

 

			
	TransAtlantic Petroleum Ltd.
		
	By	 	/s/ Chad Burkhardt


 
			
		
	Name:	 	Chad Burkhardt


 
			
		
	Title:	 	Vice President and General Counsel


 
			
	
	ANBE Holdings, L.P.
	
	By: ANBE, LLC, its General Partner
		
	By	 	/s/ N. Malone Mitchell, 3rd


 
			
		
	Name:	 	N. Malone Mitchell, 3rd


 
			
		
	Title:	 	Manager


 [Signature Page to Extension of Convertible Promissory Note] 

  
 Page 2
Schedule 2.1 to the Deferred Compensation and Benefits Trust Agt



 Exhibit 10.2 
 Schedule 2.1 to the 
 Deferred Compensation and Benefits Trust Agreement 
 Benefit Plans and Other Arrangements Subject to Trust 
 (1) Sunoco, Inc. Executive Retirement
Plan (“SERP”); 
 (2) Sunoco, Inc. Deferred Compensation Plan; 
 (3) Sunoco, Inc. Pension Restoration Plan; 
 (4) Sunoco, Inc. Savings Restoration Plan. 
 (5) Sunoco, Inc. Special Executive Severance Plan; 
 (6) The
funding of the Sunoco, Inc. Special Employee Severance Plan necessary to provide benefits in accordance with the terms of such Plan to only those employees then in grades 11 through 13. 
 (7) The entire funding for all the Indemnification Agreements with the executives set forth below shall be Five Million Dollars ($5,000,000) in the aggregate:

  

			
	 (a) Michael J. Colavita
	  	(m) Joel H. Maness 2
	 (b) Terence P. Delaney
	  	(n) Michael J. McGoldrick
	 (c) Michael H. R. Dingus 1
	  	(o) Christopher J. Minnich
	 (d) John G. Drosdick 3
	  	(p) Ann C. Mulé
	 (e) Lynn L. Elsenhans
	  	(q) Paul A. Mulholland 6
	 (f)  Bruce G. Fischer
	  	(r)  Rolf D. Naku 7
	 (g) Peter J. Gvazdauskas
	  	(s) Marie A. Natoli
	 (h) Michael J. Hennigan 8
	  	(t)  Robert W. Owens
	 (i)  Thomas W. Hofmann 5
	  	(u) Bruce D. Rubin
	 (j)  Vincent J. Kelley
	  	(v) Michael J. Thomson
	 (k) Joseph P. Krott
	  	(w) Charles K. Valutas 4
	 (l)  Michael S. Kuritzkes
	  	(x) Dennis Zeleny

 NOTES: 

	 	1.	Mr. Dingus retired as a Senior Vice President of Sunoco, Inc., effective June 1, 2008. 


	 	2.	Mr. Maness stepped down as an Executive Vice President of Sunoco, Inc., effective July 9, 2007. He continued on a part-time basis as Strategic Advisor on refining and supply issues
reporting directly to the Company’s President, until his retirement from the Company, effective January 1, 2008. 


	 	3.	Mr. Drosdick retired as Chief Executive Officer and President of Sunoco, Inc., effective August 8, 2008. 


	 	4.	Mr. Valutas retired as a Senior Vice President of Sunoco, Inc., effective September 1, 2008. 


	 	5.	Mr. Hofmann retired as Chief Financial Officer and Senior Vice President of Sunoco, Inc., effective December 1, 2008. 


	 	6.	Mr. Mulholland retired as Treasurer of Sunoco, Inc., effective December 1, 2008. 


	 	7.	Mr. Naku ceased being a Senior Vice President of Sunoco, Inc., effective December 1, 2008. 


	 	8.	Mr. Hennigan stepped down as a Senior Vice President of Sunoco, Inc., effective May 15, 2009, at which time he accepted an executive officer position with a Sunoco, Inc. subsidiary.
|   | 1. | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act; and |
|--------|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 2. | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Cellcom Israel Ltd.. |
|--------|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | /s/ Nir Sztern                                                                    |
|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | Name:           Nir Sztern |
|   | Chief Executive Officer                                                           |

|   | /s/ Yaacov Heen                                                                    |
|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | Name:           Yaacov Heen |
|   | Chief Financial Officer                                                            |
Exhibit 32.1



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 Quarterly report of PSPP Holdings, Inc. on Form 10-QSB, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Cherish Adams, Chief Executive Officer (or equivalent thereof) and Chief Financial Officer (or equivalent thereof) 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, to the best of my knowledge and belief:



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 result of operations of the Company.





/s/ Cherish Adams

Cherish Adams

Chief Financial Officer (or equivalent thereof)

November 30, 2007