alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                      14,584,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               23,521,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                (1,920,000)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            47,075,000
<PP&E>                                       3,688,000
<DEPRECIATION>                              (2,075,000)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              54,645,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       26,638,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        92,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  26,157,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                54,645,000
<SALES>                                     12,988,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            12,988,000
<CGS>                                        7,926,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                7,926,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             4,804,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               727,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            (163,000)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                126,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (59,000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             67,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                 (49,000)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    18,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.00
        

</TABLE>
CERTIFICATION


Pursuant To Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
(subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title
18,United States Code), each of the undersigned officers of
Churchill Tax-Free Trust, do hereby certify to such officer's
knowledge, that:

The report on Form N-CSR of Churchill Tax-Free Trust for the
period ended June 30, 2005, (the "Form N-CSR") fully complies
with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Form N-CSR
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
and results of operations of Churchill Tax-Free Trust.


Dated:  September 9, 2005		/s/  Diana P. Herrmann
						----------------------------------
						President and Trustee
						Churchill Tax-Free Trust

Dated:  September 9, 2005		/s/  Joseph P. DiMaggio
						----------------------------------
       Chief Financial Officer and
       Treasurer
						Churchill Tax-Free Trust



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906,
or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting
the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version
of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to
 Churchill Tax-Free Trust and will be retained by Churchill Tax-Free
Trust and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.

This certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
ss. 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate
disclosure document.
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 967

To extend for 3 additional years a temporary increase in payment for skilled 

nursing facility services under the Medicare Program. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 27, 2003

Mr. ALLEN (for himself, Mrs. CAPITO, Mr. FROST, Mr. TOWNS, Ms. BALDWIN, Mr. GOODE, Ms. WOOLSEY, Mr. MCHUGH, Mr. ABERCROMBIE, Mr. 

KILDEE, Mr. MORAN of Virginia, Mr. WOLF, Mr. LANGEVIN, Ms. 

MCCOLLUM, Mr. HOLDEN, Mr. SANDERS, Mr. VAN HOLLEN, Ms. 

SCHAKOWSKY, Mr. COSTELLO, Mr. ORTIZ, Ms. DELAURO, Mrs. 

NAPOLITANO, Mr. CARDOZA, Mr. HINCHEY, Mr. KIND, Ms. JACKSONLEE of Texas, Mrs. EMERSON, Mr. MCINTYRE, Mr. MCNULTY, Mr. INSLEE, Mr. BERRY, and Mr. LUCAS of Kentucky) introduced the following 

bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means, and in 

addition to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, for a period to be 

subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration 

of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL

To extend for 3 additional years a temporary increase in 

payment for skilled nursing facility services under the 

Medicare Program.

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

•HR 967 IH 

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Medicare Beneficiary 

3 Skilled Nursing Protection Act of 2003’’.

4 SEC. 2. 3-YEAR EXTENSION OF CERTAIN PAYMENT PROVI5 SIONS FOR SKILLED NURSING FACILITY 

6 SERVICES UNDER THE MEDICARE PROGRAM. 

7 (a) 3-YEAR EXTENSION OF TEMPORARY INCREASE

8 IN NURSING COMPONENT OF PPS FEDERAL RATE.—Sec9 tion 312(a) of Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP Benefits 

10 Improvement and Protection Act of 2000 (114 Stat. 

11 2763A–498), as enacted into law by section 1(a)(6) of 

12 Public Law 106–554, is amended by striking ‘‘, and before 

13 October 1, 2002’’ and inserting ‘‘and before October 1, 

14 2005’’. 

15 (b) 3-YEAR EXTENSION OF INCREASE FOR SKILLED

16 NURSING FACILITY ADJUSTED FEDERAL PER DIEM

17 RATE THROUGH FISCAL YEAR 2005.—Section 101(d) of 

18 the Medicare, Medicaid, and SCHIP Balanced Budget Re19 finement Act of 1999 (113 Stat. 1501A–325), as enacted 

20 into law by section 1000(a)(6) of Public Law 106–113, 

21 is amended—

22 (1) in the heading, by striking ‘‘AND 2002’’ and 

23 inserting ‘‘THROUGH 2005’’; and 

24 (2) in paragraph (1), by striking ‘‘and 2002’’ 

25 and inserting ‘‘through 2005’’. 
3

•HR 967 IH 

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

2 this section shall be effective as if this section had been 

3 enacted before October 1, 2002. The Secretary of Health 

4 and Human Services shall promptly provide for such ad5 justments in payments as may be required based on such 

6 amendments for services furnished during periods before 

7 the date of implementation of such amendments.

Æ
EXHIBIT 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements Forms S-8 No. 333-87060, 333-36070, 333-26379, 33-77968 and 33-40414 of our report dated November 7, 2003, except for Note 20 as to which the date is November 21, 2003 with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Woodhead Industries, Inc. included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended September 27, 2003.

| | /s/ Ernst & Young LLP                              
| | ---------------------------------------------------
| |                                                    
| | Ernst & Young LLPChicago, IllinoisDecember 17, 2003

55

---
##### 



Exhibit 10.3
 THE WASHINGTON POST COMPANY
SUPPLEMENTAL EXECUTIVE RETIREMENT PLAN
 (Originally Effective as of January 1, 1989)
Amended and Restated December, 2007 Effective as of January 1, 2005




---



##### 



Purpose
    1




---



##### 



Definitions
    2




---



##### 



3




---



##### 



4




---



##### 



5




---



##### 



Supplemental Retirement Benefits
  6




---



##### 



7




---



##### 



provided that provided further that
 8




---



##### 



9




---



##### 



Supplemental Savings Plan Benefits
 provided that
 10




---



##### 



11




---



##### 



Special provisions for participants who are suspended in the Savings Plans
 Funding
 12




---



##### 



Administration
 Claims Procedure
   
    
    The specific reasons for the denial,
 13




---



##### 




    
    The provisions of the Plan on which the denial is based,
    
    The procedures for having the request reviewed, and
    
    Additional information needed to process the request and an explanation of why
this information is necessary.
   
    
    The reasons that support the claim,
    
    The reasons the claim should not have been denied,
    
    All written evidence that supports the claim, and
    
    Any other appropriate issues or comments.
   14




---



##### 



Loss of Benefits
 Nonassignability
 Limitation of Liability
 15




---



##### 



Special Grandfathering Rules for Certain Participants
 Use of Masculine and Feminine; Singular and Plural
 
 THE WASHINGTON POST COMPANYBy:Title:
 16
May 7, 2015



### JUDGMENT 

## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NATHAN HILTON, M.D , Appellant

NO. 14

- 14

- 00697

- CV V.

NEVILLYN WETTERMARK , Appellee

________________ ________________ This cause, an appeal from the order in favor of appellee, Nevillyn Wettermark, signed August 5, 2014, was heard on the transcript of the record. We have inspected the record and find no error in the order . We order the order of the
court below AFFIRMED

. We order appellant, Nathan Hilton, M.D, to pay all costs incurred in this appeal.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
IV 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 328

Requesting the World Trade Organization (WTO) to investigate the cause 

of the WTO’s confidential interim report with respect to the March 

2002 United States steel safeguard measure being widely leaked to 

the media. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 21, 2003

Mr. ENGLISH (for himself and Mr. VISCLOSKY) submitted the following 

resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

RESOLUTION

Requesting the World Trade Organization (WTO) to investigate the cause of the WTO’s confidential interim report 

with respect to the March 2002 United States steel safeguard measure being widely leaked to the media.

Whereas on March 5, 2002, the United States implemented 

a safeguard measure with respect to the importation of 

certain steel products; 

Whereas a proceeding was subsequently initiated in the 

World Trade Organization (WTO) with respect to the 

United States safeguard measure; 

Whereas in March 2003 a WTO panel’s confidential interim 

report with respect to the United States safeguard action 

was leaked to the media after being circulated to the 
2

•HRES 328 IH 

United States and the eight co-complainants: the European Union, Brazil, China, Japan, New Zealand, Norway, South Korea and Switzerland; and 

Whereas the United States subsequently submitted, as part 

of its comments on the WTO panel’s interim report, a request to the WTO that the WTO panel investigate the 

cause of the report being widely leaked to the media: 

Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives—

2 (1) commends the request made by the United 

3 States to the World Trade Organization (WTO) that 

4 the WTO panel investigate the cause of the panel’s 

5 confidential interim report with respect to the March 

6 2002 United States steel safeguard measure being 

7 widely leaked to the media; and 

8 (2) strongly encourages the WTO panel to expe9 diently investigate breaches of confidentiality by the 

10 co-complainants.

Æ
Amendment to the MPEG-4 Visual Patent Portfolio License dated October 1, 2007



 Exhibit 10.19 
  

	 MPEG-4 VISUAL PATENT PORTFOLIO LICENSE 
	 JANUARY 1, 2009 


 ATTACHMENT 
 ADDENDUM REGARDING 01 JANUARY 2009 LICENSE RENEWAL 
 AMENDMENT 
 The renewed MPEG-4 Visual Patent Portfolio License, effective January 1, 2009, is
amended pursuant to Section 6.1 as follows: 
 For the period commencing January 1, 2009 and ending December 31, 2009, the maximum royalty payable in:

  

	 	•	 	 Section 3.1.1(ii) shall be $1,100,000; 


  

	 	•	 	 Section 3.1.2(ii) shall be $1,100,000; 


  

	 	•	 	 Sections 3.1.3, 3.l.4, 3.1.5 and 3.1.6 shall be $3,300,000; and 


  

	 	•	 	 Section 3.1.7(a) or (b) shall be $3,300,000 ($6,600,000 if both options (a) and (b) are elected). 


 For the period commencing January 1, 2010 and ending December 31, 2010, the maximum royalty payable in: 
  

	 	•	 	 Section 3.1.1(ii) shall be $1,200,000; 


  

	 	•	 	 Section 3.1.2(ii) shall be $1,200,000; 


  

	 	•	 	 Sections 3.l.3, 3.1.4, 3.1.5 and 3.1.6 shall be $3,600,000; and 


  

	 	•	 	 Section 3.1.7(a) or (b) shall be $3,600,000 ($7,200,000 if both options (a) and (b) are elected). 


 For the period commencing January 1, 2011 through the term of the License ending December 31, 2013, the maximum royalty payable per year in: 
  

	 	•	 	 Section 3.1.1(ii) shall be $1,250,000; 


  

	 	•	 	 Section 3.1.2(ii) shall be $1,250,000; 


  

	 	•	 	 Sections 3.l.3, 3.1.4, 3.1.5 and 3.1.6 shall be $3,750,000; and 


  

	 	•	 	 Section 3.1.7(a) or (b) shall be $3,750,000 ($7,500,000 if both options (a) and (b) are elected).
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

August 17, 2016

d0816 

# Order

Clerk August 17, 2016

153021

SPENCER B. GUPPY, a minor, by his

Next Friend PAULA J. GUPPY,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 153021

COA: 328889

Kent CC: 14

- 003811

- NO

WYOMING COMMUNITY CHURCH,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On the Court’s own motion, we ORDER that trial court proceedings are stayed

pending the completion of this appeal.
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

HOTEL SAINT GEORGE LLC

,

Appellant

,

v.

ACADIA INSURANCE COMPANY,

UNION STANDARD INSURANCE

GROUP, and JAMES AMATO,

Appellee s

. §

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 23

- 00063

- CV

Appeal from the

39 4th Judicial D istrict Court

o f Presidio County, Texas

(TC# 2021

- 8054 )

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Hotel Saint George LLC, filed a notice of appeal on February 24, 2023. On June

29, 2023, Appellant filed an unopposed motion for voluntary dismissal of appeal

.

The motion is granted

, and the appeal is dismissed. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.1(a)(1). Costs

of the appeal are taxed against Appellant. See T EX

. R. A P P

. P. 42.1(d).

G INA M. PALAFOX

, Justice

July 6 , 2023

Before Rodriguez , C.J., Palafox, and Soto

, JJ.
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 981 Reported in Senate (RS)]

                                                       Calendar No. 156
108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 981

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 27, 2003

  Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Governmental 
                                Affairs

                             June 20, 2003

               Reported by Ms. Collins, without amendment

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 141 Erie Street in Linesville, Pennsylvania, as the ``James R. Merry 
                             Post Office''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The facility of the United States Postal Service located at 141 
Erie Street in Linesville, Pennsylvania, shall be known and designated 
as the ``James R. Merry Post Office''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the facility referred to in section 1 
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``James R. Merry Post 
Office''.

                                                       Calendar No. 156

108th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                               H. R. 981

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 141 Erie Street in Linesville, Pennsylvania, as the ``James R. Merry 
                             Post Office''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                             June 20, 2003

                       Reported without amendment
```
```

[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 155 (Monday, August 14, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37975-37976]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-17134]

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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Delegation of Authority: 245-2]

Delegation From the Secretary to the Deputy Secretary of 
Authorities of the Secretary of State

    By virtue of the authority vested in the Secretary of State by the 
laws of the United States, including 22 U.S.C. 2651a, I hereby delegate 
to the Deputy Secretary, to the extent authorized by law, all 
authorities and functions vested in the Secretary of State or the head 
of agency by any act, order, determination, delegation of authority, 
regulation, or executive order, now or hereafter issued.
    This Delegation includes all authorities and functions that have 
been or may be delegated or re-delegated to

[[Page 37976]]

other Department officials but does not repeal delegations to such 
officials.
    Notwithstanding this delegation of authority, the Secretary of 
State may exercise any function or authority delegated by this 
delegation.
    This Delegation of Authority supersedes Delegation of Authority 
245-1, dated February 13, 2009.
    This memorandum shall be published in the Federal Register.

    Dated: July 31, 2017.
Rex W. Tillerson,
Secretary of State.
[FR Doc. 2017-17134 Filed 8-11-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 4710-08-P
```
#### CENTRAL DISTRICT & PRINTING TEL. CO. v. MIZER.

(Circuit Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

July 22, 1903.)

No. 1,203.

In Error from the Circuit Court of the United States for the Northern District of Ohio.

Gilbert, Hills & Van Derveer, for plaintiff in error. Lynch, Day & Day and W. L. Handley, for defendant in error.

Dismissed.
#### In re: PFIZER INC. MARKETING AND SALES PRACTICES LITIGATION. Michael Alan Caltieri, etc. v. Pfizer Inc., et al., D. Massachusetts, C.A. No. 1:09-11480 Kathleen Zafarana v. Pfizer Inc., et al., E.D. Pennsylvania, C.A. No. 2:09-4026.

MDL No. 2115.

United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation.

Dec. 1, 2009.

Before ROBERT L. MILLER, JR., Acting Chairman, JOHN G. HEYBURN II, Chairman *, KATHRYN H. VRATIL, DAVID R. HANSEN, W. ROYAL FURGESON, JR., FRANK C. DAMRELL, JR., DAVID G. TRAGER, Judges of the Panel.

*

 Judge Heyburn took no part in the disposition of this matter.

ORDER DENYING TRANSFER

ROBERT L. MILLER, JR., Acting Chairman.

Before the entire Panel *: Plaintiff in an action pending in the Eastern District of Pennsylvania (Zafarana) has moved, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, to centralize this litigation in that district. The litigation currently consists of that action and an action pending in the District of Massachusetts.

Plaintiff in the District of Massachusetts action (Caltieri) supports centralization, but advocates selection of the District of Massachusetts as transferee district. Common defendants Pfizer Inc. and its subsidiary Pharmacia & Upjohn Co. oppose centralization. If the Panel nevertheless orders centralization over their objections, then defendants favor selection of the Eastern District of Pennsylvania as transferee district.

On the basis of the papers filed and hearing session held, we will deny the Section 1407 motion. These two actions do, on their face, share allegations that defendants engaged in a fraudulent scheme and conspiracy to promote eleven different prescription drugs Geodon, Zyvox, Lyrica, Aricept, Lipitor, Norvasc, Relpax, Viagra, Zithromax, Zoloft, and Zyrtec. According to plaintiffs in both actions, defendants, *inter alia,*(1) promoted the drugs to physicians by offering them bribes or other inducements, (2) promoted the drugs at doses or for durations of use that were not medically safe or efficacious, (3) made false representations about the safety and efficacy of the drugs, and (4) promoted certain of the drugs for non-indicated “off-label” uses. As a review of the respective complaints reveals, however, the named plaintiffs allege that they themselves each took only one of those *1368eleven drugs, and that neither took the same drug as the other. The *Zafarana*plaintiff alleges that she took Lyrica, while the *Caltieri*plaintiff alleges that he took Geodon. Given that each of the eleven drugs necessarily has a different clinical, regulatory, medical, and promotional history, and that it is at least questionable whether either plaintiff can prosecute claims regarding drugs that he or she never actually took, we are not convinced that centralization under Section 1407 would serve the convenience of the parties and witnesses or further the just and efficient conduct of the litigation at the present time.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1407, the motion for centralization is denied.
* Pursuant to 5 TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. 

### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-50551 Conference Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee v. VALENTE CEBALLOS-MAESE, also known as Edwardo Salcido Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:06-CR-2230-1 Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Valente Ceballos-Maese raises arguments that are foreclosed by Al mendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), whic h held that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate criminal offense. U nited States v. Pineda-Arrellano, 492 F.3d 624, 625 (5th Cir. 2007), petition for cert. filed (Aug. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D December 5, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III ClerkNo. 07-50551

2 28, 2007) (No. 07-6202). The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.