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

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 667

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide an inflation adjustment of the dollar limitation on the exclusion of gain on the sale of 

a principal residence. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 11, 2003

Mr. ANDREWS 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 

an inflation adjustment of the dollar limitation on the 

exclusion of gain on the sale of a principal residence.

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 ‘‘Homeowners’ Benefit 

5 Protection Act of 2003’’. 
2

•HR 667 IH 

1 SEC. 2. INFLATION ADJUSTMENT OF LIMITATION ON EX2 CLUSION OF GAIN ON SALE OF PRINCIPAL 

3 RESIDENCE. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subsection (b) of section 121 of 

5 the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to exclusion 

6 of gain from sale of principal residence) is amended by 

7 adding at the end the following new paragraph: 

8 ‘‘(4) EXCLUSION LIMITATION.—

9 ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—For purposes of this 

10 subsection, the exclusion limitation is $250,000. 

11 ‘‘(B) INFLATION ADJUSTMENT.—In the 

12 case of any sale or exchange during any cal13 endar year after 2002, the dollar amount con14 tained in subparagraph (A) shall be increased 

15 by an amount equal to—

16 ‘‘(i) such dollar amount, multiplied by 

17 ‘‘(ii) the cost-of-living adjustment de18 termined under section 1(f)(3) for such 

19 calendar year by substituting ‘calendar 

20 year 2001’ for ‘calendar year 1992’ in sub21 paragraph (B) thereof. 

22 If any increase under the preceding sentence is 

23 not a multiple of $1,000, such increase shall be 

24 rounded to the nearest multiple of $1,000.’’

25 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—
3

•HR 667 IH 

1 (1) Paragraph (1) of section 121(b) of such 

2 Code is amended by striking ‘‘$250,000’’ and insert3 ing ‘‘the exclusion limitation’’. 

4 (2) Paragraph (2) of section 121(b) of such 

5 Code is amended by striking so much of such para6 graph as precedes subparagraph (A) and inserting 

7 the following: 

8 ‘‘(2) LIMITATION FOR JOINT RETURNS.—Para9 graph (1) shall be applied by substituting ‘twice the 

10 exclusion limitation’ for ‘the exclusion limitation’ 

11 if—’’. 

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

13 this section shall apply to sales and exchanges after De14 cember 31, 2002.

Æ
# cpsaat44
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                          75,898
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               10,267,480
<ALLOWANCES>                                   135,000
<INVENTORY>                                    623,038
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            11,115,969
<PP&E>                                          61,009
<DEPRECIATION>                                  26,982
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              11,225,554
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        7,582,900
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         7,243
<OTHER-SE>                                   3,303,514
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                11,225,554
<SALES>                                     12,577,744
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            12,577,744
<CGS>                                       11,373,611
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               12,201,545
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             151,233
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                243,737
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (80,944)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            324,681
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   324,681
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.06
        

</TABLE>
y

2. Said individual will be required at the United States District Court, Newark, New Jersey, onTuesday, November 22, 2011 at a.m, for a plea hearing before the Honorable William H.

Walls.

A Writ of Habeas Corpus should issue for that j

SHANAW. CHEN

ASSISTANT U.S. ATTORNEY

ORDER

Let the Writ Issue.

DATED: Novembej/2 2011

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

The United States of America to Warden of the South Woods State Prison, Bridgeton, New

Jersey. WE COMMAND that you have the body of

ROY CASTRO,

now confined in the South Woods State Prison, brought before the Honorable William H. Walls,United States District Judge, on November 22, 2011, at 9:30 a.m., at the United States District

Court, Martin Luther King, Jr. Federal Building and U.S. Courthouse, 50 Walnut Street, Newark,New Jersey, so that he may appear in the above-captioned matter.

WITNESS the Honorable William H. Walls

United States District Judge

Newark, New Jersey

DATED: WILLIAM T. WALSH

j L ‘‘ Clerk of the U.S. District Court

for the District of New Jersey

,rk
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

____________________________________ 

:

MICHAEL ALEXANDER, :

:

Plaintiff, :

:

v. :

:

NEW JERSEY DEPARTMENT OF :

TRANSPORATION and JOHN DOES :

1-10 :

 :

 Defendants. :

____________________________________:

 

Civil Action No. 11-3348 (PGS)

 

ORDER

A Report and Recommendation was filed on August 26, 2013 recommending that 

Defendant, New Jersey Department of Transportation’s motion to enforce settlement be granted. 

The parties were given notice that they had fourteen days from receipt thereof to file and serve 

objections pursuant to Local Civil Rule 72.1(c)(2). One objection was received from Herbert 

McDuffy, Jr., Esq. on behalf of Plaintiff. The Court finds that the recommendation by Magistrate 

Judge Goodman sets forth compelling rationale for demonstrating that a settlement was reached; 

and that both parties had knowledge of all of the terms of the settlement including Plaintiff’s 

resignation from the Department of Transportation.

It is, on this 12th day of September, 2013,

ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Lois H. Goodman 

at docket entry 33 is hereby adopted as the opinion of the Court; and it is further

ORDERED that Defendant’s motion to enforce settlement (ECF No. 25) is granted. 

s/Peter G. Sheridan 

PETER G. SHERIDAN, U.S.D.J. 

Case 3:11-cv-03348-PGS-LHG Document 35 Filed 09/13/13 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 264
Exhibit 31.1

                                 CERTIFICATIONS

I, J. Thomas Johnson, President and Chief Executive Officer, of DutchFork
Bancshares, Inc., certify that:

      (1)   I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB/A of DutchFork
            Bancshares, Inc.,and

      (2)   Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any
            untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact
            necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances
            under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect
            to the period covered by this annual report.


Date: January 8, 2004

                                      /s/ J. Thomas Johnson
                                      ----------------------------------------
                                      J. Thomas Johnson
                                      President and Chief Executive Officer
                                      (principal executive officer)
|   | 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/ John Quandahl                                                |   |
|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | John      Quandahl                                               |   |
|   | Chief      Executive Officer and Interim Chief Financial Officer |   |
|   | May      13, 2010                                                |   |

----
# File information

# Occupational group

# Work and bargaining status

# Average wage

# Industry group

# Establishment size

# Census area
<TABLE> <S> <C>
                                                   
<ARTICLE>                                               5
<MULTIPLIER>                                                           1
                                                         
<S>                                                       <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                           3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                                 Dec-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                                                    Jan-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                                      Sep-30-1996
<CASH>                                                        26,612,298
<SECURITIES>                                                   1,973,793
<RECEIVABLES>                                                 29,179,758
<ALLOWANCES>                                                           0
<INVENTORY>                                                    1,831,084
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                              76,935,971
<PP&E>                                                        66,242,173
<DEPRECIATION>                                                 9,167,581
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                               160,580,363
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                         79,881,228
<BONDS>                                                       50,486,652
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                  0
<PREFERRED>                                                            0
<COMMON>                                                         103,267
<OTHER-SE>                                                    18,287,090
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                 160,580,363
<SALES>                                                      264,456,401
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                             264,456,401
<CGS>                                                        256,107,244
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                256,107,244
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                (900,278)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                             2,842,636
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                8,634,618
<INCOME-TAX>                                                     336,776
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                            8,634,618
<DISCONTINUED>                                                         0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                        0
<CHANGES>                                                              0
<NET-INCOME>                                                   8,297,842
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                          0.76
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                          0.74
        
 

</TABLE>
0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

Chart 1-13. The number of mass layoff events spiked in 

September 2005 after the Gulf Coast hurricanes

NOTE: Shaded area represents recession. Data are seasonally adjusted.

SOURCE: Bureau of Labor Statistics

Number of mass layoff events

Chart 1-13. The number of mass layoff events spiked in 

September 2005 after the Gulf Coast hurricanes

• A mass layoff event occurs when fifty or more initial claims for unemployment 

insurance benefits are filed against an establishment during a 5-week period.

• The number of mass layoff events spiked in September 2005 in the aftermath 

of the Gulf Coast hurricanes, with 2,217 layoff actions affecting about 292,000 

workers. The number of layoff actions had been on a declining trend since 

September 2001.

• During 2006, 13,998 total mass layoff events occurred in the nation, resulting 

in 1,484,391 initial claims filings for unemployment insurance. In 2005, there 

were 16,466 events and 1,795,341 initial claimants. The total number of initial 

claims for 2006 was the lowest reported for any January-December period 

since 1996.
EX-23
      CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS



Board of Directors
World Am Communications, Inc.

We consent to the incorporation by reference of our independent
auditors' report dated March 29, 2004 on the consolidated balance
sheets as of December 31, 2003 and 2002, and the related consolidated
statements of operations, stockholders' equity and cash flows the
years then ended, included in World Am Communications, Inc.'s Form 10-
KSB, into the Company's previously filed registration statements on
Form S-8 (File No. 333-102146) and Form S-8 (File No. 333-108153)


/s/ Michael Johnson & Co., LLC
Michael Johnson & Co., LLC
Denver, Colorado
April 19, 2004
Bureau of Labor Statistics 

Current Population Survey (CPS) 

Technical Documentation 

February 2014

Update to Veteran Weighting Methodology 

in January 2014 

 Beginning with data for January 2014, estimates for veterans incorporate updated weighting 

procedures. The new weighting methodology more accurately reflects the current demographic 

composition of the veteran population. The primary impact of the change was an increase in the 

“Gulf War-era I” veteran population and a decrease in the number of veterans in the “Other 

service periods” category. The updated methodology had little effect on unemployment rates for 

veterans, regardless of gender or period of service. 

 To show the impact on the labor force data, the Bureau of Labor Statistics used special 

tabulations of December data that incorporate the updated veteran weighting procedures. When 

applied to December 2013, the updated weighting procedures increased the size of several 

veteran estimates: civilian noninstitutional population 18 years and over by 105,000, the civilian 

labor force by 63,000, employment by 59,000, unemployment by 4,000, and the number of 

persons not in the labor force by 42,000. The unemployment rate, the labor force participation 

rate, and the employment-population ratio for veterans were not affected. The table below shows 

the effect of the updated weighting procedures on labor force series for selected groups. 

 The table also reflects changes due to the annual adjustments to the population controls. For 

more information about the population control adjustments, see www.bls.gov/cps/cps14adj.pdf. 

(Numbers in thousands)

Veterans

Total Men Women Gulf

War II

Gulf

War I

World War II, 

Korean War, 

and Vietnamera

Other 

service 

periods

Civilian noninstitutional population ................................................................................ 105 101 4 63 242 -26 -175 -94

Civilian labor force ................................................................................. 63 67 - 4 50 192 16 -194 -38

Participation rate ........................................................................... 0.0 0.1 -0.3 -0.1 -0.4 0.2 -1.9 0.0

Employed ................................................................................... 59 64 - 4 47 183 15 -186 -36

Employment-population ratio .................................................. 0.0 0.1 -0.3 0 -0.4 0.2 -1.8 0.0

Unemployed .......................................................................... 4 3 1 3 8 1 - 8 - 2

Unemployment rate ......................................................... 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0

Not in labor force ................................................................. 42 34 8 13 51 -42 20 -56

Effect of the updated veteran weights on December 2013 estimates by veteran status, sex, and period of 

service, not seasonally adjusted

Employment status

Nonveterans

 Note: The estimates reflect updated weighting procedures and updated population controls, not separately identified. Data refer to 

persons 18 years and over. Detail may not sum to totals because of rounding.
(March 18, 2008)

#### Christopher Alvino, Respondent, v City of New York, Appellant.

[853 NYS2d 666]

The plaintiff commenced this action to recover damages from the defendant City of New York for injuries allegedly sustained when he stepped on a loose metal plate on the sidewalk and fell into a hole. The City cannot be held liable for a defect in a sidewalk unless, inter alia, it received written notice of the defect, or made a written acknowledgment of the condition, and failed to remedy the condition within 15 days after the notification or acknowledgment *(see*Administrative Code of City of NY § 7-201 [c] [2]; *Bruni v City of New York, 2*NY3d 319, 324-326 [2004]). Here, while there was a written acknowledgment of the defect from the City, the accident occurred within the 15-day grace period *(see Kruszka v City of New York,*29 AD3d 742, 743 [2006]; *Silva v City of New York,*17 AD3d 566, 567 [2005]).

*677In opposition to the City’s prima facie showing of entitlement to judgment as a matter of law, the plaintiff failed to raise a triable issue of fact as to whether one of the exceptions to the prior notice requirement was applicable *(see Amabile v City of Buffalo,*93 NY2d 471 [1999]). There is no evidence that the City either created the defective condition or made special use of the area *(see Oboler v City of New York,*8 NY3d 888, 889-890 [2007]; *Kruszka v City of New York,*29 AD3d at 743; *Silva v City of New York,*17 AD3d at 567).

Consequently, the Supreme Court should have granted the City’s cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint *(see Kruszka v City of New York,*29 AD3d at 743; *Silva v City of New York,*17 AD3d at 567). Mastro, J.P., Covello, Eng and Belen, JJ., concur.
**Exhibit 32.2**

**Certification of Principal Financial Officer**

**Pursuantto 18 U.S.C. of Section 1350, as Created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002**

The undersigned officerof Watson Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the “Company”), hereby certifies, to such officer’sknowledge, that:

 (i)                                  the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company forthe quarter ended March 31, 2007 (the “Report”) fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 (ii)                               the information contained in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.

Date:    May 9, 2007
|        | By:                                                       | **/s/ R.  Todd Joyce** |
|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------|------------------------|
|   | R. Todd Joyce                                             |
|   | Vice President –  Corporate Controller and Treasurer |
|   | (Principal Financial  Officer)                            |

 

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely toaccompany the Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, and is not being filed forpurposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, andis not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whethermade before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporationlanguage in such filing.

----
I, Andrew D. Hyder, certify that:
 
 1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2003 of Subjex Corporation;
 
 2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this annual report;
 
 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report;
 
 4. The registrants other certifying officers, and I, are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:
 
 a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this annual report is being prepared;
 
 b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures as of the date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this annual report (the Evaluation Date); and
 
 c) Presented in this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;
 
 5. The registrants other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
 
 a) All significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrants auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and
 
 b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal controls; and
 
 6. The registrants other certifying officers and I have indicated in this annual report whether there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.
 
 
 Date:April 13, 2004

By:

/s/Andrew D. HyderChairman, President