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

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                          75,365
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                             510
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    720,177
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                         395,411
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                           402,423
<LOANS>                                      1,904,344
<ALLOWANCE>                                     34,517
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,757,362
<DEPOSITS>                                   1,937,816
<SHORT-TERM>                                   422,858
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                            568,213
<LONG-TERM>                                    456,373
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        26,256
<OTHER-SE>                                     315,196
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>               3,757,362
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                140,478
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               56,682
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                 5,228
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                               202,388
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              80,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             118,690
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           83,698
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                    9,196
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                               2,103
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                181,566
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 53,742
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                      26,709
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    26,709
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.01
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.53
<LOANS-NON>                                     21,686
<LOANS-PAST>                                       830
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                40,211
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                   17,373
<RECOVERIES>                                     3,170
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                               34,517
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                            34,517
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
#### § 903.14 Consultation and comment period.

All interested persons will have the opportunity to consult with and obtain information from the PMA, to examine backup data, and to make suggestions for modification of the Proposed Rates for a period ending (a) 90 days in the case of major rate adjustments, or 30 days in the case of minor rate adjustments, after the Notice of Proposed Rates is published in the Federal Register, except that such periods may be shortened for good cause shown; (b) 15 days after any answer which may be provided pursuant to § 903.15(b) hereof; (c) 15 days after the close of the last public forum; or (d) such other time as the Administrator may designate; whichever is later. At anytime during this period, interested persons may submit written comments to the PMA regarding the Proposed Rates. The Administrator may also provide additional time for the submission of written rebuttal comments. All written comments shall be available at a designated location for inspection, and copies also will be furnished on request for which the Administrator may assess a fee. Prior to the action described in § 903.21, the Administrator may, by appropriate announcement postpone any procedural date or make other procedural changes for good cause shown at the request of any party or on the Administrator's own motion. The Administrator shall maintain, and distribute on request, a list of interested persons.
§ 626.8 Deferrals of contractually scheduled deliveries. ( a ) *General.* ( 1 ) DOE prefers to take deliveries of petroleum products for the SPR at times scheduled under applicable contracts. However, in the event the market is distorted by disruption to supply or other factors, DOE may defer scheduled deliveries or consider deferral requests from awardees.
( 2 ) An awardee seeking to defer scheduled deliveries of petroleum products to the SPR may submit a deferral request to DOE.
( b ) *Deferral criteria.* DOE shall only grant a deferral request for negotiation under paragraph (c) of this section if it determines that DOE can receive a premium for the deferral and, based on DOE's deferral analysis, that at least one of the following conditions exists: ( 1 ) DOE can reduce the cost of its petroleum products acquisition per barrel and increase the volume of petroleum products being delivered to the SPR by means of the premium barrels required by the deferral process;
( 2 ) DOE anticipates private inventories are approaching a point where unscheduled outages may occur;
( 3 ) There is evidence that refineries are reducing their run rates for lack of feedstock; or
( 4 ) There is an unanticipated disruption to petroleum product supply.
( c ) *Negotiating terms.* ( 1 ) If DOE decides to negotiate a deferral of deliveries, DOE shall estimate the market value of the deferral and establish a strategy for negotiating with suppliers the minimum percentage of the market value to be taken by the Government. During these negotiations, if the deferral request was initiated by DOE, DOE may consider any reasonable, customary, and applicable costs already incurred by the supplier in the performance of a valid contract for delivery. In no event shall such consideration account for any consequential damages or lost profits suffered by the supplier as a result of such deferral.
( 2 ) DOE shall only agree to amend the contract if the negotiation results in an agreement to give the Government a fair and reasonable share of the market value.
CASE ANNOUNCEMENTS

*December 7, 2007*

[Cite as *12/07/2007 Case Announcements,*2007-Ohio-6496.]

MISCELLANEOUS DISMISSALS

2007-1705.

#### State ex rel. Sauder Woodworking Co. v. Indus. Comm.

Franklin App. No. 05AP-24, 2007-Ohio-3993. This cause is pending before the court as an appeal from the Court of Appeals for Franklin County. Upon consideration of appellant’s application for dismissal,

It is ordered by the court that the application for dismissal is granted. Accordingly, this cause is dismissed.
[882 NE2d 872, 853 NYS2d 260]

#### In the Matter of Myron Duncan, Appellant, v Raymond W. Kelly, as Police Commissioner of the City of New York, et al., Respondents.

Decided January 15, 2008

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

*Worth, Longworth & London, LLP,*New York City *(Howard B. Sterinbach*of counsel), for appellant.

*Michael A. Cardozo, Corporation Counsel,*New York City *(Marta Ross*of counsel), for respondents.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed with costs. The certified question should not be answered upon the ground that it is unnecessary.

*1025The Police Commissioner has the authority to discharge a probationary police officer for conduct committed while serving as a member of the force *(see*Administrative Code of City of NY § 14-115). A probationary police officer may be discharged for “almost any reason, or for no reason at all” as long as it is not “in bad faith or for an improper or impermissible reason” *(Matter of Swinton v Safir,*93 NY2d 758, 762, 763 [1999]; *see Matter of Berenhaus v Ward,*70 NY2d 436 [1987]; *Matter of York v McGuire,*63 NY2d 760 [1984]). We reject petitioner’s argument that he was dismissed solely due to prehiring conduct; rather, in terminating petitioner, the Commissioner relied upon his posthiring conduct of giving false and misleading statements to members of the Internal Affairs Bureau.

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Ciparick, Graffeo, Read, Smith, Pigott and Jones concur in memorandum.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.11 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.11), order affirmed, etc.
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h Marilyn Kell y Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathawa y Mary Beth Kell y Brian K. Zahra,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk September 26, 2011

h0919 

# Order

September 26, 2011

143102 & (23)

BAHRI M. NAKASH, a/k/a Ben Nakash, and OAKMAN INVESTMENT, LLC, Plaintiffs-Appellees,

v SC: 143102 COA: 299802 NASIR KHAN, d/b/a Complete Physical Oakland CC: 2009-101195-CK Therapy and Rehab and SEEMAB KHAN, Defendants-Appellants.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the motion fo r miscellaneous relief is GRANTED. The application for leave to appe al the April 7, 2011 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that th e questions presented
should be reviewed by this Court.
#### TRAVIS v. KNOX TERPEZONE CO. et al.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

February 11, 1915.)

Action by Frank H. Travis against the Knox Terpezone Company and others.

No opinion. Motion granted. Questions certified. Order filed. See, also, 150 N. Y. Supp. 621.
_____________

No. 96-1783ND

_____________

John B. Fredericks, Jr.; *

Judy Fredericks, *

*

Appellants, *

*

v. *

*

United States Department of *

Agriculture; agent Dan Glickman;*

Farmers Home Administration; *

Odell O. Ottmar, in his *

capacity as employee of the * Appeal from the United States

Farmers Home Administration; * District Court for the District

Lorace Hakanson, in his * of North Dakota.

capacity as employee of the *

Farmers Home Administration; * [UNPUBLISHED]

Robert Zimmerman, in his *

capacity as employee of the *

Farmers Home Administration; *

David Hilleren, in his capacity *

as employee of the Farmers Home *

Administration; Frederick R. *

Young, director national *

appeals staff, Farmers Home *

Administration, *

*

Appellees. *

_____________

Submitted: October 3, 1996

 Filed: October 9, 1996

_____________

Before FAGG, WOLLMAN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

_____________

PER CURIAM.

John B. Fredericks, Jr. and Judy Fredericks appeal the district

court's order denying their request for attorney's fees and expenses. The

parties' briefs discuss the merits of the underlying litigation, and we

need not repeat what they have said
-2-

to decide whether there was substantial justification for the Government's

position. Having considered the record and the parties' briefs, we

conclude the Government's position was substantially justified within the

meaning of the Equal Access to Justice Act, 28 U.S.C. § 2412(d). We thus

affirm the district court. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
#### Leo Grossman et al., Appellants, v. Myron Gordon, Respondent.

Appeal by plaintiffs, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of Supreme Court, Kings County, dated October 24, 1968, as, on resettlement of a prior order dated June 3, 1968, denied their application for a preference. Order affirmed insofar as appealed from. No opinion. Appeal from order of the same court dated June 3,1968 dismissed as academic. That order was superseded by the order of resettlement, dated October 24, 1968. One bill of $10 costs and disbursements is allowed to respondent to cover both appeals. Beldock, P. J., Christ, Rabin, Munder and Martuseello, JJ., concur.
#### Peerless Insurance Company, Appellant, v. Frank L. Sears, Jr., Also Known as Donald P. Jones, et al., Respondents. (And Two Other Actions.)

— Order unanimously reversed, without costs, and motion for summary judgment granted declaring that plaintiff is not obligated to defend, and motion for order permitting defendant’s attorneys to withdraw granted. Memorandum: In this action for a declaratory judgment that Peerless was not required to defend two actions brought against its assured the president of the assured was charged by the insurer with giving fraudulent information to the police, the Motor Vehicle Department and itself. The president of the assured, in an affidavit, admits the false information. The insurer disclaimed two days after receiving this information. The act of the president was the act of the corporation. *(Diamond*v. *Oreamuno,*29 A D 2d 285, 287, affd. 24 N Y 2d 494; *People*v. *Rochester Ry. & Light Co.,*195 N. Y. 102, 105.) The failure to make fair and truthful disclosures was a breach of the insurance contract as a matter of law. *(National Grange Mut. Ins. Co.*v. *Austin,*23 A D 2d 776; *State Farm Mut. Auto. Ins. Co.*v. *Brown,*21 A D 2d 742.) There was no waiver or estoppel on the part of the insurer as it had no knowledge of the facts until two days before the disclaimer *(S. & E. Motor Hire Corp.*v. *New York Ind. Co.,*255 N. Y. 69, 72) and its notice to disclaim was timely *(National Grange Mut. Liab. Co.*v. *Fino,*13 A D 2d 10, 13). (Appeal from order of Cayuga Special Term denying motion for summary judgment and other relief.) Present—Del Vecehio, J. P., Marsh, Witmer, Moule and Henry, JJ.
Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm





To the Board of Directors
Situs Holdings, LLC





We have examined management’s assertion, included in the accompanying Management’s
Report on Assessment of Compliance with Applicable Regulation AB Servicing Criteria (Management’s Assertion), that Situs
Holdings, LLC (the Company) complied with the servicing criteria set forth in Items 1122(d)(3)(i) and 1122(d)(4)(vii) of the Securities
and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) Regulation AB (the applicable servicing criteria) for services by the Company that are encompassed
by contractual obligations to perform Regulation AB reporting for the Operating or Trust Advisor Services Platform (the “Platform”),
including only those asset-backed securities transactions defined below, as of and for the year ended December 31, 2017. Appendix
B to management’s assertion identifies the individual asset-backed transactions defined by management as constituting the
Platform. Management is responsible for Situs Holdings, LLC’s compliance with the applicable servicing criteria. Our responsibility
is to express an opinion on management’s assertion about the Company’s compliance with the applicable servicing criteria
based on our examination.



Our examination was conducted in accordance with attestation standards of the
Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidence about
the Company’s compliance with the applicable servicing criteria, including tests on a sample basis of the servicing activities
related to the Platform, determining whether the Company performed those activities in compliance with the servicing criteria during
the specified period and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. Our procedures were
limited to selected servicing activities performed by the Company during the period covered by this report and, accordingly, such
samples may not have included servicing activities related to each asset- backed transaction in the Platform. Further, an examination
is not designed to detect noncompliance arising from errors that may have occurred prior to the period specified above that may
have affected the balances or amounts calculated or reported by the Company during the period covered by this report. We believe
that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination does not provide a legal determination on the
Company’s compliance with the servicing criteria.



In our opinion, management’s assertion that Situs Holdings, LLC complied
with the aforementioned applicable servicing criteria as of and for the year ended December 31, 2017, for the Platform is fairly
stated, in all material respects.









Duluth, Minnesota

February 28, 2018
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 248 (Tuesday, December 28, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 81611]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-32593]


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

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding 
Companies; Correction

    This notice corrects a notice (FR Doc. 2010-32092) published on 
page 80501 of the issue for Wednesday, December 22, 2010.
    Under the Federal Reserve Bank of New York heading, the entry for 
Chuo Mitsui Trust Holding, Inc., Tokyo, Japan, is revised to read as 
follows:
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of New York (Ivan Hurwitz, Vice President) 
33 Liberty Street, New York, New York 10045-0001:
    1. Chuo Mitsui Trust Holdings, Inc., Tokyo, Japan; to become a bank 
holding Company by acquiring The Sumitomo Trust and Banking Co., Ltd, 
Osaka, Japan, and thereby acquire Sumitomo Trust and Banking Co. (USA), 
Hoboken, New Jersey.
    In connection with this application, Applicant also has applied to 
acquire Nikko Americas Holding Co., Inc., Nikko Asset Management 
Americas, Inc., and Chuo Mitsui Investments, all in New York, New York, 
and thereby engage in investment advisory activities, pursuant to 
section 225.24(b)(6) of Regulation Y.
    Comments on this application must be received by January 18, 2011.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, December 22, 
2010.
Robert deV. Frierson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 2010-32593 Filed 12-27-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
§ 609.1 Purpose and scope. ( a ) This part sets forth the policies and procedures that DOE uses for receiving, evaluating, and approving applications for loan guarantees to support Eligible Projects under Title XVII, including sections 1703 and 1706, of the Energy Policy Act of 2005.
( b ) This part applies to all Applications, Conditional Commitments, and Loan Guarantee Agreements.
( c ) Section 600.22 of title 10 of the Code of Federal Regulations shall not apply to actions taken under this part.
§ 300.13 Incorporation by reference. The Technical Guidelines for the Voluntary Reporting of Greenhouse Gases (1605(b)) Program (January 2007), referred to throughout this part as the “Technical Guidelines,” have been approved for incorporation by reference by the Director of the Federal Register in accordance with 5 U.S.C. 552(a) and 1 CFR part 51. You may obtain a copy of the Technical Guidelines from the Office of Policy and International Affairs, U.S. Department of Energy, 1000 Independence Ave., SW., Washington, DC 20585, or by visiting the following Web site: *http://www.policy.energy.gov/enhancingGHGregistry/technicalguidelines/ .* The Technical Guidelines also are available for inspection at the National Archives and Record Administration (NARA). For more information on the availability of this material at NARA, call 202-741-6030, or go to: *http://www.archives.gov/federal_register/code_of_federal_regulations/ibr_locations.html .* [71 FR 20805, Apr. 21, 2006, as amended at 72 FR 4413, Jan. 31, 2007]
§ 503.20 Purpose and scope. ( a ) This subpart implements the provisions contained in section 211 of the Act with regard to temporary exemptions for new facilities.
( b ) This subpart establishes the criteria and standards which owners or operators of new powerplants who petition for a temporary exemption must meet to sustain their burden of proof under the Act.
( c ) All petitions for temporary exemptions shall be submitted in accordance with the procedures set out in part 501 of this chapter and the applicable requirements of part 503 of these regulations.
( d ) The duration of any temporary exemption granted under this subpart shall be measured from the date that the facility is placed in service using petroleum or natural gas.
[46 FR 59903, Dec. 7, 1981, as amended at 54 FR 52894, Dec. 22, 1989]
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                           9,930
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  333,947
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  4,806,155
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                          21,843
<DEPRECIATION>                                  19,038
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,191,694
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          798,225
<BONDS>                                      1,698,753
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,694,716
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,191,694
<SALES>                                        484,500
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               489,037
<CGS>                                          377,719
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  555,056
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (66,019)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (66,019)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (66,019)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
          

</TABLE>