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

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5331 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 

73839 Gorgonio Drive in Twentynine Palms, California, as the ‘‘Colonel 

M.J. ‘Mac’ Dube, USMC Post Office Building’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 31, 2014 

Mr. COOK (for himself, Ms. BASS, Mr. BECERRA, Mr. BERA of California, Ms. 

BROWNLEY of California, Mr. CALVERT, Mr. CAMPBELL, Mrs. CAPPS, 

Mr. CA ́RDENAS, Ms. CHU, Mr. COSTA, Mrs. DAVIS of California, Mr. 

DENHAM, Ms. ESHOO, Mr. FARR, Mr. GARAMENDI, Ms. HAHN, Mr. 

HONDA, Mr. HUFFMAN, Mr. HUNTER, Mr. LAMALFA, Ms. LEE of California, Ms. LOFGREN, Mr. LOWENTHAL, Ms. MATSUI, Mr. MCCARTHY of 

California, Mr. MCCLINTOCK, Mr. MCKEON, Mrs. NEGRETE MCLEOD, 

Mr. MCNERNEY, Mr. GARY G. MILLER of California, Mr. GEORGE MILLER of California, Mrs. NAPOLITANO, Mr. NUNES, Ms. PELOSI, Mr. 

PETERS of California, Mr. ROHRABACHER, Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD, Mr. 

ROYCE, Mr. RUIZ, Ms. LINDA T. SA ́NCHEZ of California, Ms. LORETTA

SANCHEZ of California, Mr. SCHIFF, Mr. SHERMAN, Ms. SPEIER, Mr. 

SWALWELL of California, Mr. TAKANO, Mr. THOMPSON of California, Mr. 

VALADAO, Mr. VARGAS, Ms. WATERS, and Mr. WAXMAN) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and 

Government Reform 

A BILL 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 73839 Gorgonio Drive in Twentynine Palms, 

California, as the ‘‘Colonel M.J. ‘Mac’ Dube, USMC 

Post Office Building’’. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS

2 

•HR 5331 IH

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

3 SECTION 1. COLONEL M.J. ‘‘MAC’’ DUBE, USMC POST OF4 FICE BUILDING. 

5 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

6 Postal Service located at 73839 Gorgonio Drive in 

7 Twentynine Palms, California, shall be known and des8 ignated as the ‘‘Colonel M.J. ‘Mac’ Dube, USMC Post Of9 fice Building’’. 

10 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg11 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

12 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

13 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Colonel M.J. ‘Mac’ 

14 Dube, USMC Post Office Building’’. 

Æ 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5688 

To impose special limitations on the issuance of visas to, and the admission 

into the United States of, aliens having certain associations with countries with widespread and intense transmissions of Ebola Virus Disease. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

NOVEMBER 12, 2014 

Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas (for himself and Mr. MARCHANT) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To impose special limitations on the issuance of visas to, 

and the admission into the United States of, aliens having certain associations with countries with widespread 

and intense transmissions of Ebola Virus Disease. 

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 ‘‘Stop Ebola Act’’. 

5 SEC. 2. SPECIAL IMMIGRATION LIMITATIONS RELATING TO 

6 EBOLA VIRUS DISEASE. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.— 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5688 IH

1 (1) VISA RESTRICTIONS.—Beginning on the 

2 date of the enactment of this Act, no consular officer 

3 may issue an immigrant or nonimmigrant visa to 

4 any alien who is a citizen or national of any affected 

5 country. 

6 (2) ADMISSION RESTRICTIONS.—Beginning on 

7 the date of the enactment of this Act, an alien is in8 eligible to be admitted into the United States if the 

9 alien’s journey to the United States originated in, or 

10 included transit through, any affected country. 

11 (b) AFFECTED COUNTRY DEFINED.—For purposes 

12 of this section, the term ‘‘affected country’’ means a coun13 try that has been designated by the World Health Organi14 zation as having ‘‘widespread and intense transmissions’’ 

15 under the World Health Organization Ebola Response 

16 Roadmap. 

17 (c) OTHER DEFINITIONS.—Except as provided in 

18 subsection (b), the terms used in this section shall have 

19 the meaning given such terms in section 101(a) of the Im20 migration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101(a)). 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 239 (Wednesday, December 13, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 64094]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-30397]



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

SELECTIVE SERVICE SYSTEM


Agency Forms Submitted to the Office of Management and Budget for 
Extension of Clearance

    The following forms have been submitted to the Office of Management 
and Budget (OMB) for extension of clearance in compliance with the 
Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S. chapter 35): SSS Form No. and Title:

SSS Form 152, Alternative Service Employment Agreement
SSS Form 153, Employer Data Sheet
SSS Form 156, Skills Questionnaire
SSS Form 157, Alternative Service Job Data Form
SSS Form 160, Request for Overseas Job Assignment
SSS Form 163, Employment Verification Form
SSS Form 164, Alternative Service Worker Travel Reimbursement 
Request
SSS Form 166, Claim for Reimbursement for Emergency Medical Care

    Copies of the above identified forms can be obtained upon written 
request to the Selective Service System, Reports Clearance Officer, 
1515 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia, 22209-2425.
    No changes have been made to the above identified forms. OMB 
clearance is limited to requesting a three-year extension of the 
current expiration dates.
    Written comments should be sent within 60 days after the 
publication of this notice, to: Selective Service System, Reports 
Clearance Officer, 1515 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, Virginia, 22209-
2425.
    A copy of the comments should be sent to Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs, Attention: Desk Officer, Selective Service System, 
Office of Management and Budget, New Executive Office Building, room 
3235, Washington, DC 20435.

    Dated: December 5, 1995.
Gil Coronado,
Director.
[FR Doc. 95-30397 Filed 12-12-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8015-01-M
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 246 (Friday, December 22, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 66548]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-31138]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. TM96-6-29-000]


Transcontinental Gas Pipe Line Corporation; Notice of Proposed 
Changes in FERC Gas Tariff

December 18, 1995.
    Take notice that on December 8, 1995, Transcontinental Gas Pipe 
Line Corporation (Transco) tendered for filing certain revised tariff 
sheets to its FERC Gas Tariff, Third Revised Volume No. 1, which tariff 
sheets are enumerated in Appendix A attached to the filing. The tariff 
sheets are proposed to be effective as indicated on Appendix A.
    Transco states that the purpose of the instant filing is to track 
rate and fuel changes attributable to storage service purchased from 
Texas Eastern Transmission Corporation (TETCO) under its Rate Schedule 
X-28 the costs of which are included in the rates and charges payable 
under Transco's Rate Schedule S-2. The tracking filing is being made 
pursuant to Section 26 of the General Terms and Conditions of Transco's 
Volume No. 1 Tariff.
    Included in Appendix B attached to the filing is an explanation of 
the rate change and details regarding the computation of the revised 
Rate Schedule S-2 rates.
    Also included therein for filing is a substitute tariff sheet which 
incorporates the Rate Schedule S-2 changes proposed therein into 
Transco's November 15, 1995 filing in Docket No. RP96-44-000 which is 
currently pending Commission acceptance to become effective December 
15, 1995.
    Transco states that copies of the filing are being mailed to each 
of its S-2 customers and interested State Commissions.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with Secs. 385.214 and 385.211 of the Commission's Rules and 
Regulations. Pursuant to Sec. 154.210 of the Commission's regulations, 
all such motions or protests 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 in the Public Reference Room.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
FR Doc. 95-31138 Filed 12-21-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
#### CHARLES F. DUNN v. FRANK McKNIGHT.

(Filed 7 October, 1925.)

Appeal by plaintiff from *Barnhill, J.,*at August Term, 1925, of LeNOIb.

Affirmed.

*Charles F. Durm for plaintiff.*

*Ely J. Perry and F. E. Wallace for defendant.*

Pee CuRiam.

This was an action in ejectment to recover real property, brought by plaintiff against defendant. Tbe summons and complaint were duly served on defendant, who filed answer and defense bond. Plaintiff made motion before tbe clerk to strike out answer and for judgment by default final. This motion was denied by tbe clerk, and plaintiff appealed to tbe Superior Court. Tbe cause was duly transferred to tbe civil issue docket of tbe Superior Court at term for trial upon tbe issues raised by tbe pleadings.'

Tbe matters in controversy were beard after notice by defendant to plaintiff, at August Term, 1925, by bis Honor, Barnhill, J., who found *861all the facts entitling defendant to the judgment rendered. The presumption of law is that the finding of facts by the court below is based on competent evidence, and, ordinarily, this Court is bound by the findings.

We think, under all the facts and circumstances of this case, that the judgment of the court below should be

Affirmed.
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5760 

To amend title 10, United States Code, to authorize the Secretary of Defense 

to provide seven person firing parties in the funeral honors details for 

World War II veterans. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

NOVEMBER 20, 2014 

Mr. BARBER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Armed Services 

A BILL 

To amend title 10, United States Code, to authorize the 

Secretary of Defense to provide seven person firing parties in the funeral honors details for World War II 

veterans. 

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 ‘‘Funeral Honors for 

5 World War II Veterans Act’’. 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS

2 

•HR 5760 IH

1 SEC. 2. AUTHORITY FOR INCLUSION OF SEVEN PERSON 

2 FIRING PARTIES IN FUNERAL HONORS DE3 TAILS PROVIDED BY SECRETARY OF DE4 FENSE FOR WORLD WAR II VETERANS. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1491(c) of title 10, 

6 United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 

7 following new sentence: ‘‘In the case of a veteran who 

8 served on active duty in the armed forces during World 

9 War II, the funeral honors detail may include a seven per10 son firing party.’’. 

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

12 subsection (a) shall apply with respect to deaths occurring 

13 after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>



                                                                      Exhibit 27
<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>

This  schedule  contains  summary  financial   information  extracted  from  the
condensed consolidated balance sheet and the condensed consolidated statement of
operations of DTI Holdings,  Inc. filed as part of the quarterly  report on Form
10-Q and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such  quarterly  report on
Form 10-Q.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                  1

<S>                              <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                          3-Mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                Jun-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                    Jul-1-1999
<PERIOD-END>                     Sep-30-1999
<CASH>                            94,464,515
<SECURITIES>                               0
<RECEIVABLES>                        379,716
<ALLOWANCES>                         139,625
<INVENTORY>                                0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                  95,504,909
<PP&E>                           266,085,934
<DEPRECIATION>                    11,000,771
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                   367,144,921
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>             20,787,550
<BONDS>                          324,478,907
<PREFERRED>                              300
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                      0
<COMMON>                             300,000
<OTHER-SE>                        (4,090,059)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>     367,144,921
<SALES>                                    0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                   1,959,450
<CGS>                                      0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                      7,112,581
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                           0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                           0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                (8,532,692)
[INTEREST-INCOME]                  1,376,500
<INCOME-PRETAX>                  (12,309,323)
<INCOME-TAX>                               0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>              (12,309,323)
<DISCONTINUED>                             0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                            0
<CHANGES>                                  0
<NET-INCOME>                     (12,309,323)
<EPS-BASIC>                              0
<EPS-DILUTED>                              0



</TABLE>
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.1


                            ALLEGIANCE TELECOM, INC.

                    COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS (LOSS)

                       THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2000

                    (In thousands, except per share amounts)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                    Number of Shares    Percent Outstanding    Equivalent Shares
                                                                    ----------------    -------------------    -----------------
<S>                                                                 <C>                 <C>                    <C>
Prior to Initial Public Offering                                                639                 100.00%                  639
     1997 Common Stock Offering

After Initial Public Offering
     1998 Common Stock Offering                                          15,000,000                 100.00%           15,000,000
     Preferred Stock Converted to Common Stock                           60,511,692                 100.00%           60,511,692
     1999 Common Stock Offering                                          21,041,100                 100.00%           21,041,100
     2000 Common Stock Offering                                          10,703,109                  62.61%            6,701,093
     Treasury Shares                                                       (327,495)                 53.37%             (174,777)
     Warrants Exercised                                                     588,891                  96.83%              570,230
     Stock Options Exercised                                                435,386                  62.12%              270,445
     Cash in Lieu of Stock Split                                               (577)                 35.18%                 (203)
     Employee Stock Discount Purchase Plan Shares Issued                    177,509                  98.81%              175,403
                                                                                                               -----------------

WEIGHTED AVERAGE SHARES OUTSTANDING                                                                                  104,095,622

NET LOSS APPLICABLE TO COMMON STOCK                                                                            $     (61,270,000)

NET LOSS PER SHARE, BASIC AND DILUTED                                                                          $           (0.59)
                                                                                                               =================

</TABLE>
#### THE VESTRY AND LEGAL TRUSTEES OF THE PROPERTY OF ST. PETER'S PROTESTANT EPISCOPAL CHURCH OF WASHINGTON, N. C., Comprising T. HARVEY MYERS, Senior Warden, and J. D. GRIMES, Junior Warden, and Ten Others, v. C. C. DUKE.

(Filed 20 September, 1939.)

Appeal by defendant from *Thompson, J.,*at June Term, 1939, of Beaufort.

Affirmed.

Controversy without action to determine the validity of the title of a tract of land which the plaintiffs contracted to convey to the defendant and the defendant agreed to purchase. The defendant declined to comply with the contract by reason of alleged defects in the title. The graveyard, about which there are certain stipulations in the will of Thomas A. McNair, Sr., is not located on the property plaintiffs propose to convey. Judgment for the plaintiffs, and the defendant appealed.

*H. S. Ward for plaintiffs, appellees.*

*A. E. Daniel for defendant, appellant.*

Per Curiam.

The questions involved on this appeal are controlled by the decision of this Court in *Church v. Bragaw,*144 N. C., 126. The judgment below is

Affirmed.
#### IN THE MATTER OF A FILING MADE BY THE NORTH GASOLINA FIRE INSURANCE RATING BUREAU SEEKING A RECOMMENDED RULE AND ORDER.

(Filed 28 January, 1959.)

Appeal by Commissioner of Insurance and intervenors from *Sharp, S. J.,*February Assigned Civil Term, 1958, of Wake.

North Carolina Fire Insurance Rating Bureau, created by G.S. 58-125, filed with the Commissioner of Insurance a proposed rule prescribing the method of handling the additional charge for insurance required by c. 1420, S. L. 1957, codified as G.S. 118-18 et seq. The proposed rule would require the statutory additional charge to be shown as an addition to and separate from the premiums. The Commissioner thereupon gave notice of a public hearing as required by G.S. 58-27.2. The North Carolina Association of Insurance Agents, Inc. and the North Carolina Association of Mutual Insurance Agents opposed the proposed rule. A hearing was had. The Commissioner rejected the proposed rule, holding the insurance companies were authorized to increase the pate and thereby increase the premium to meet *467the mandate of the statute. The Rating Bureau sought a judicial review of the Commissioner's ruling as permitted by G.S. 58-9.3. The record was certified to the Superior Court of Wake. The associations of insurance agents were permitted to intervene. Judge Sharp held that the Commissioner erred in concluding and holding that the statute required the increased charges to be passed to the insured by an increase in rate rather than by an addition to the premium. Judgment was entered vacating the Commissioner’s order and remanding the cause for further consideration. The Commissioner and the associations appealed.

*Attorney General Seawell and Staff Attorney Pullen, for Commissioner of Insurance.*

*Fletcher & Lake for North Carolina Association of Insurance Agents, Inc. and North Carolina Association of Mutual Insurance Agents.*

*Joyner and Howison and James H. Pou Bailey for North Carolina Fire Insurance Rating Burea.*

PeR CuRiam.

We have held the requirements of c. 1429, S. L. 1957, imposing an additional charge on the purchasers of insurance from some but not all insurance companies, are prohibited by constitutional restrictions. *Assurance Co. v. Gold, ante,*page 461. Since the charge cannot be legally collected, no rule with respect thereto is required. There is no subsisting controversy. The appeal is

Dismissed.

WinboRNE, C.J., took no part in the consideration or decision of this case.
Opinion filed March 10 , 2011



## In The 

# Eleventh Court of Appeals

__________



### No. 11

- 09

- 00129

- C V

__________

HELLAS CONSTRUCTION, INC.

V.

EAGLE CONSTRUCTION AND ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES, L.P.

On Appeal from the 9 1st District Court

Eastland County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. CV

- 06

- 40613

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Appellant, Hellas Construction, Inc., and a ppellee, Eagle Construction and

Environmental Services, L.P., have filed a joint motion to dismiss this appeal pursuant to T EX

. R.

A PP

. P. 42.1(a)( 2 ). In t he motion, the parties state that they “have reached an agreement to settle

and compromise their differences” arising from the underlying litigation. The parties further

request the court to set aside the trial court’s judgment without regard to the merits and remand

the case to the trial court for rendition of judgment in accordance with the parties’ agreement

pursuant to Rule 42.1( a)(2)( B )

.2

Therefore, in accorda nce with the parties ’ request, the trial court’s judgment is set aside

,

and this case is remand ed to the trial court for further proceedings in accordance with the parties’

agreement.

The joint motion to dismiss is granted, and the appeal is dismissed.

PER CURIAM

March 10 , 2011

Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,
McCall, J., and Strange, J.
Skip to main content

# Social Security

Search
Menu
Español
Sign in

## 2018 OASDI Trustees Report

Office of the Chief Actuary
Actuarial Publications
2018 Trustees Report
ContentsTablesFigures

LIST OF FIGURES

   II.D1	Short-Range OASI and DI Combined Trust Fund Ratio

   II.D2	OASDI Income, Cost, and Expenditures as Percentages of Taxable Payroll

   II.D3	Number of Covered Workers Per OASDI Beneficiary

   II.D4	OASDI Cost and Non-interest Income as a Percentage of GDP

   II.D5	Cumulative Scheduled OASDI Income Less Cost, From Program Inception Through Years 2017-2092

   II.D6	Long-Range OASI and DI Combined Trust Fund Ratios Under Alternative Scenarios

   II.D7	Long-Range OASI and DI Combined Trust Fund Ratios From Stochastic Modeling

   II.D8	OASDI Annual Balances: 2017 and 2018 Trustees Reports

   IV.A1	Short-Range OASI and DI Trust Fund Ratios

   IV.B1	Long-Range OASI and DI Annual Income Rates and Cost Rates

   IV.B2	Number of OASDI Beneficiaries Per 100 Covered Workers

   IV.B3	Long-Range OASI and DI Trust Fund Ratios

   IV.B4	OASDI Annual Balances: 2017 and 2018 Trustees Reports

   V.C1	Primary-Insurance-Amount Formula for Those Newly Eligible in 2018

   V.C2	OASI Maximum-Family-Benefit Formula for Those Newly Eligible in 2018

   V.C3	DI Disability Incidence Rates, 1970-2095

   V.C4	DI Disability Termination Rates, 1970-2095

   V.C5	Comparison of DI Disability Incidence Rates, Termination Rates and Conversion Ratios Under ntermediate Assumptions, 1970-2095

   V.C6	DI Disability Prevalence Rates, 1970-2095

   VI.E1	Long-Range OASDI Cost Rates From Stochastic Modeling

   VI.E2	Long-Range OASDI Trust Fund Ratios From Stochastic Modeling

   VI.E3	OASDI Cost Rates: Comparison of Stochastic to Low-Cost, Intermediate, and High-Cost Alternatives

   VI.E4	OASDI Trust Fund (Unfunded Obligation) Ratios: Comparison of Stochastic to Low-Cost, Intermediate, and High-Cost Alternatives

   VI.G1	Estimated OASDI Income and Cost in CPI-indexed 2018 Dollars, Based on Intermediate Assumptions

Footer menu