alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 252.12 Definitions. For purposes of this subpart, the following definitions apply: *Advanced approaches* means the regulatory capital requirements at 12 CFR 217, subpart E, as applicable, and any successor regulation.
*Asset threshold* means average total consolidated assets of greater than $250 billion.
*Baseline scenario* means a set of conditions that affect the U.S. economy or the financial condition of a state member bank, and that reflect the consensus views of the economic and financial outlook.
*Capital action* has the same meaning as in 12 CFR 225.8(d)).
*Covered company subsidiary* means a state member bank that is a subsidiary of a covered company as defined in subpart F of this part.
*Planning horizon* means the period of at least nine consecutive quarters, beginning on the first day of a stress test cycle over which the relevant projections extend.
*Pre-provision net revenue* means the sum of net interest income and non-interest income less expenses before adjusting for loss provisions.
*Provision for credit losses* means: ( 1 ) With respect to a state member bank that has adopted the current expected credit losses methodology under GAAP, the provision for credit losses, as would be reported by the state member bank on the Call Report in the current stress test cycle; and
( 2 ) With respect to a state member bank that has not adopted the current expected credit losses methodology under GAAP, the provision for loan and lease losses as would be reported by the state member bank on the Call Report in the current stress test cycle.
*Regulatory capital ratio* means a capital ratio for which the Board has established minimum requirements for the state member bank by regulation or order, including, as applicable, the state member bank's regulatory capital ratios calculated under 12 CFR part 217 and the deductions required under 12 CFR 248.12; except that the state member bank shall not use the advanced approaches to calculate its regulatory capital ratios.
*Scenarios* are those sets of conditions that affect the U.S. economy or the financial condition of a state member bank that the Board determines are appropriate for use in the company-run stress tests, including, but not limited to baseline and severely adverse scenarios.
*Severely adverse scenario* means a set of conditions that affect the U.S. economy or the financial condition of a state member bank and that overall are significantly more severe than those associated with the baseline scenario and may include trading or other additional components.
*Stress test* means a process to assess the potential impact of scenarios on the consolidated earnings, losses, and capital of a state member bank over the planning horizon, taking into account the current condition, risks, exposures, strategies, and activities.
*Stress test cycle* means the period beginning on January 1 of a calendar year and ending on December 31 of that year.
*Subsidiary* has the same meaning as in 12 CFR 225.2(o).
[84 FR 59100, Nov. 1, 2019]
O p e r a t o r :

D y l a n L o g g a i n s

1 5 0 7 S

. M c K e n n a S t

.

P o t e a u

, O K 7 4 9 5 3

9 1 8

­ 6 4 7

­ 1 3 6 3

d l o g g a i n s @ c a r l a l b e r t

. e d u

O p e r a t o r :

J e r r y E l l i s

1 5 0 7 S

. M c K e n n a S t

.

P o t e a u

, O K 7 4 9 5 3

9 1 8

­ 6 4 7

­ 1 3 6 5

j w e l l i s @ c a r l a l b e r t

. e d u

S e c t i o n 3 3 3 E x e m p t i o n

A i r c r a f t M a k e / M o d e l :

D J I P h a n t o m 3 S t a n d a r d

T h e o p e r a t o r s w i l l m a i n t a i n a l e v e l o f s a f e t y b y f l y i n g u n d e r 4 0 0 ’ a l t i t u d e

, k e e p i n g t h e U A S i n

v i s u a l l i n e o f s i g h t

, a n d b y n o t f l y i n g n e a r p e o p l e

.

G r a n t i n g t h e e x e m p t i o n w o u l d b e i n t h e p u b l i c i n t e r e s t b e c a u s e w e w i l l u s e t h e U A S f o o t a g e f o r

p r o m o t i o n o f C a r l A l b e r t S t a t e C o l l e g e

.

P r o p o s e d O p e r a t i o n s :

​

T h e U A S w i l l b e f l o w n o v e r o u r P o t e a u C a m p u s ( 1 5 0 7 S

. M c K e n n a S t

. )

a n d o u r S a l l i s a w C a m p u s ( 1 6 0 1 S

. O p D y k e S t

. ) f o r p r o m o t i o n a l p u r p o s e s

. T h e s e

v i d e o s / p i c t u r e s t a k e n b y t h e U A S w i l l h e l p d r a w i n p o t e n t i a l s t u d e n t s

.
1

Daniels, Nia (FAA)

From: Pippin, Sheri (FAA)

Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2016 7:28 PM

To: Schramek, Chuck

Subject: Docket FAA 2016-4676 Use Outside U.S.

Mr. Schramek,

In accordance with Title 14 CFR § 11.81(h), if Delta Air Lines wants to exercise the privileges of an exemption, if granted,

outside the United States, “the reason why you need to do so” must be included in the petition for exemption.

Otherwise, in accordance with § 11.83, the FAA will limit the exemption, if granted, to use within the United States.

The Delta Air Lines petition for exemption from Title 14 CFR §§ 121.438 and 121.652, dated February 29, 2016, did not

specifically request use of the petition outside of the United States. However, the FAA is aware that Delta Air Lines

conducts international operations with the Boeing 767. Therefore, the FAA requests clarification on whether Delta Air

Lines wants to exercise the privileges of this exemption, if granted, outside the United States.

Please submit the clarification directly to the docket ID FAA‐2016‐4676. If Delta Air Lines wants to exercise the privileges

of this exemption, if granted, outside the United States, please also include the information required by § 11.81(h).

Thanks,

Sheri Pippin

Air Transportation Division

Air Carrier Training Systems and Voluntary Safety Programs Branch, AFS‐280

800 Independence Avenue SW, Washington, DC 20591

(310) 725‐7342

Remote Sited Address: Los Angeles IFO, 15000 Aviation Blvd. Lawndale, CA 90261

This message is intended solely for the person or entity to whom it is addressed and may contain information that is

privileged, confidential, or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. If you have received this communication in

error, please notify the sender immediately and delete this email.  Thank you
# C_2013270EN.01001001.xml

| 19.9.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 270/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.9.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 270/10

---

JUDGMENT OF THE COURT

of 11 December 2012

in Case E-1/12

Den norske Forleggerforening v EFTA Surveillance Authority

v

(Action for annulment of a decision of the EFTA Surveillance Authority — State aid — Alleged aid granted to Nasjonal digital læringsarena (NDLA) — Decision not to open the formal investigation procedure — Notion of economic activity — Notion of doubts — Obligation to state reasons)

2013/C 270/08

In Case E-1/12, Den norske Forleggerforening v EFTA Surveillance Authority — APPLICATION for the annulment of Decision No 311/11/COL of 12 October 2011 on alleged aid granted to Nasjonal digital læringsarena, the Court, composed of Carl Baudenbacher, President, Per Christiansen and Páll Hreinsson (Judge-Rapporteur), Judges, gave judgment on 11 December 2012, the operative part of which is as follows:

The Court hereby:

| 1. | Annuls ESA’s Decision No 311/11/COL of 12 October 2011 on alleged aid granted to Nasjonal digital læringsarena. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls ESA’s Decision No 311/11/COL of 12 October 2011 on alleged aid granted to Nasjonal digital læringsarena.

| 2. | Orders ESA to pay the costs of the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders ESA to pay the costs of the proceedings.

---
# C_2023208EN.01006301.xml

| 15.6.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 208/63 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.6.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 208/63

---

Request for an Advisory Opinion from the EFTA Court by Héraðsdómur Reykjaness dated 1 February 2023 in the case of Elva Dögg Sverrisdóttir and Ólafur Viggó Sigurðsson v Íslandsbanki hf.

(Case E-1/23)

(2023/C 208/08)

A request has been made to the EFTA Court, dated 1 February 2023, from Héraðsdómur Reykjaness (Reykjanes District Court), which was received at the Court Registry on 22 February 2023, for an Advisory Opinion in the case of Elva Dögg Sverrisdóttir and Ólafur Viggó Sigurðsson v Íslandsbanki hf., on the following question:

Is it compatible with Directive 2014/17/EU (see, in particular, Article 24 thereof) and, as appropriate, with Article 10(2)(f) of Directive 2008/48/EC (cf. recital 19 of Directive 2014/17/EU), that the terms of a consumer property mortgage with variable interest state that adjustments of the borrowing rate will take account of factors including operating costs and other unforeseen costs?

---
JUDGMENT

Court of Appeals 

 

First District of Texas 

NO. 01-14-00874-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF R.H., M.D.J., AND M.K., CHILDREN

Appeal from the 300th District Court of Brazoria County. (Tr. Ct. No. No. 74587).

This case is an appeal from the final judgment signed by the trial court on October 

17, 2014. After submitting the case on the appellate record and the arguments properly 

raised by the parties, the Court holds that the trial court’s judgment contains no reversible 

error. Accordingly, the Court affirms the trial court’s judgment.

The Court orders that the appellant, D.K., pay all appellate costs.

The Court orders that this decision be certified below for observance.

Judgment rendered July 28, 2015.

Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Higley and Massengale. Opinion 

delivered by Chief Justice Radack.
**EXHIBIT 23.2**
**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLICACCOUNTING FIRM**
The Board of DirectorsMTI Technology Corporation:
     We consent to incorporation by reference in theregistration statements No. 333-85410 on Form S-3 andthe registration statements (Nos. 333-109060, 333-103065,333-85410, 333-76972, 333-69030, 333-66716, 333-95915,333-92623, 333-85579, 333-61957, 333-46363, 333-50377,333-18501, 33-75180 and 33-80438) on Form S-8 of MTITechnology Corporation of our report dated May 23, 2003,except as to the second paragraph of note 7, which is as ofJune 30, 2003, relating to the consolidated balance sheetof MTI Technology Corporation and subsidiaries as ofApril 5, 2003 and the related consolidated statements ofoperations, stockholders’ equity and cash flows for each ofthe years in the two-year period ended April 5, 2003, andrelated schedule, which report appears in the April 3, 2004annual report on Form 10-K of MTI Technology Corporation.Our report refers to a change in the method of accounting forgoodwill and intangible assets effective April 8, 2001.
 /s/ KPMG LLP    
Costa Mesa, CaliforniaJuly 1, 2004
<PAGE>   1
                                   EXHIBIT 11


                                   ECCS, INC.
             SCHEDULE OF COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME (LOSS) PER SHARE

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                       YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31
                                     ----------------------------
                                     1996         1995       1994
                                     ----         ----       ----
<S>                                 <C>         <C>         <C>  
Primary

  Average shares outstanding ...      4,346       4,232       4,160
                                    -------     -------     -------

  Net loss .....................    $  (769)    $(3,659)    $(6,790)
  Less preferred stock dividends       (248)        (79)         --
                                    -------     -------     -------
                                    $(1,017)    $(3,738)    $(6,790)
                                    =======     =======     =======
  Per share amount .............    $ (0.23)    $ (0.88)    $ (1.63)
                                    =======     =======     =======

</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                                                October 22, 1999

Condev Land Growth Fund '86, Ltd.
Third Quarter 1999

Dear Limited Partner:

The financial statements of the Partnership for the third quarter of 1999 are on
the reverse side hereof. There were no sales of property and no distributions to
limited partners during the quarter. As of September 30, 1999, the net asset
value (book value) per unit of limited partner interest was $250.24. As of this
date, the Partnership owned or had an interest in two properties:

NASA Causeway, Titusville. This property continues to be under contract with an
-------------------------
investor who is developing the site for retail users. The buyer has made a
$30,000 non-refundable deposit on the contract, and is proceeding with
applications for development permits. The contract provides that the closing may
be extended by the buyer for up to six months upon payment of an agreed monthly
extension fee. If all extensions are requested, closing would be February 1,
2000.

West Hwy 50, Lake County. On September 17, 1999, West 50 Joint Venture, which is
------------------------
59% owned by Condev Land Growth Fund `86, Ltd. and 41% by Condev West 50, Ltd.,
entered into a contract for the sale of this entire property. Terms of the
contract include an inspection period until November 18, and closing on or
before December 5, 1999. The prospective buyer is currently conducting its due
diligence investigation of the property. Because of the short inspection period
and closing under this contract, the Partnership has suspended the improvements
to the property which include the extension of sewer and water service to the
site, and construction of both on site and off site access improvements. Permits
for these improvements will be assigned to the buyer at closing, or construction
will be reactivated if closing does not occur.

Please feel free to contact the Investor Relations office if you have any
questions or would like additional information concerning your investment.

Sincerely yours,


CONDEV ASSOCIATES
§ 313.80 Scope and purpose. ( a ) These administrative wage garnishment regulations are issued in compliance with 31 U.S.C. 3720D and 31 CFR 285.11(f). The subpart provides procedures for the FDIC to collect money from a debtor's disposable pay by means of administrative wage garnishment. The receipt of payments pursuant to this subpart does not preclude the FDIC from pursuing other debt collection remedies, including the offset of federal payments. The FDIC may pursue such debt collection remedies separately or in conjunction with administrative wage garnishment. This subpart does not apply to the collection of delinquent debts from the wages of federal employees from their federal employment. Federal pay is subject to the federal salary offset procedures set forth in 5 U.S.C. 5514 and other applicable laws.
#### Harry D. Hanson et al., Respondents, *v.*Joseph Kaplan, Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment in favor of the plaintiffs, rendered in the Municipal Court of the city of New York, sixth district, borough of Manhattan.

H. Levor, for appellant.

/ Da Fetra & Glaze, for respondents.

Per *Curiam.*

There is a direct conflict of evidence here. This conflict has been decided by the "justice who tried the case, and with his decision, we shall not interfere.

The exceptions on pages 51, 52, 53, 58, *11*and *11*of the stenographer^ minutes are not well taken. If the defendant employed the plaintiffs and jpromised to pay them it is immaterial to whom the horses belonged.

Present: Truax, P. J., Scott and Dttgro, JJ.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF MARK VII, INC. FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 29, 1997
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-03-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-28-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-29-1997
<CASH>                                           7,680
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   64,243
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,736
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                75,771
<PP&E>                                           8,514
<DEPRECIATION>                                   4,119
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  86,265
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           54,275
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           497
<OTHER-SE>                                      85,768
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    86,265
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               145,914
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  127,379
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                16,408
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  43
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,127
<INCOME-TAX>                                       893
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,234
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,234
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .25
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
§ 380.26 Effect of transfer of assets and obligations to a bridge financial company. ( a ) The purchase of any asset or assumption of any asset or liability of a covered financial company by a bridge financial company, through the express agreement of such bridge financial company, constitutes assumption of any contract or agreement giving rise to such asset or liability. Such contracts or agreements, together with any contract the bridge financial company may through its express agreement enter into with any other party, shall become the obligation of the bridge financial company from and after the effective date of the purchase, assumption or agreement, and the bridge financial company shall have the right and obligation to observe, perform and enforce their terms and provisions. In the event that the Corporation shall act as receiver of the bridge financial company any allowed claim arising out of any breach of such contract or agreement by the bridge financial company shall be paid as an administrative expense of the receiver of the bridge financial company.
( b ) In the event that the Corporation as receiver of a bridge financial company shall act to dissolve the bridge financial company, it shall wind up the affairs of the bridge financial company in conformity with the laws, rules and regulations relating to the liquidation of covered financial companies, including the laws, rules and regulations governing priorities of claims, subject however to the authority of the Corporation to authorize the bridge financial company to obtain unsecured credit or issue unsecured debt with priority over any or all of the other unsecured obligations of the bridge financial company, provided that unsecured debt is not otherwise generally available to the bridge financial company.
( c ) Upon the final dissolution or termination of the bridge financial company whether following a merger or consolidation, a stock sale, a sale of assets, or dissolution and liquidation at the end of the term of existence of such bridge financial company, any proceeds that remain after payment of all administrative expenses of the bridge financial company and all other claims against such bridge financial company will be distributed to the receiver for the related covered financial company.
[if !vml]>[endif]>
[if !vml]>[endif]>
Youhave reached the Federal Depository Library Program Electronic Collection(FDLP/EC) Archive. This archive assures ongoing access to publications in theFDLP/EC. Access to publications in the archive is available through GPO's suiteof cataloging and locator services, including the Catalog of U.S. GovernmentPublications.
**Title:****Information quality report [electronicresource].
 
2003| 2004 | 2005 | 2006
 
SuDoc Number:EP 1.135:
Item Number:0431-J-43 (online)
CGP System Numbers: 000605557 | 00606847
 
 
** 
**Permanent Public Access
** 
Title 44 of  the United States Code (44 U.S.C. Section 1911) stipulates that public access  to official Government information products disseminated through the Federal  Depository Library Program (FDLP) must be maintained permanently in regional  depository libraries and by depository libraries not served by a regional  library. Since online products are not physically distributed to depository  libraries for retention, GPO has assumed responsibility for the provision of  permanent access to Government information products residing on FDsys  servers.
GPO's  permanent public access commitment is also met by bringing  agency-disseminated Internet resources under the purview of GPO and  incorporating them into a digital archive. GPO captures copies of agency  electronic information products, and creates PURLs so that users will be  automatically redirected to the archived products if the information is no  longer accessible on the agency Web site. Please refer to the report Managing  the FDLP Electronic Collection: A Policy and Planning Document for more  information.
 
July 13, 2017********
§ 324.161 Qualification requirements for incorporation of operational risk mitigants. ( a ) *Qualification to use operational risk mitigants.* An FDIC-supervised institution may adjust its estimate of operational risk exposure to reflect qualifying operational risk mitigants if: ( 1 ) The FDIC-supervised institution's operational risk quantification system is able to generate an estimate of the FDIC-supervised institution's operational risk exposure (which does not incorporate qualifying operational risk mitigants) and an estimate of the FDIC-supervised institution's operational risk exposure adjusted to incorporate qualifying operational risk mitigants; and
( 2 ) The FDIC-supervised institution's methodology for incorporating the effects of insurance, if the FDIC-supervised institution uses insurance as an operational risk mitigant, captures through appropriate discounts to the amount of risk mitigation: ( i ) The residual term of the policy, where less than one year;
( ii ) The cancellation terms of the policy, where less than one year;
( iii ) The policy's timeliness of payment;
( iv ) The uncertainty of payment by the provider of the policy; and
( v ) Mismatches in coverage between the policy and the hedged operational loss event.
( b ) *Qualifying operational risk mitigants.* Qualifying operational risk mitigants are: ( 1 ) Insurance that: ( i ) Is provided by an unaffiliated company that the FDIC-supervised institution deems to have strong capacity to meet its claims payment obligations and the obligor rating category to which the FDIC-supervised institution assigns the company is assigned a PD equal to or less than 10 basis points;
( ii ) Has an initial term of at least one year and a residual term of more than 90 days;
( iii ) Has a minimum notice period for cancellation by the provider of 90 days;
( iv ) Has no exclusions or limitations based upon regulatory action or for the receiver or liquidator of a failed depository institution; and
( v ) Is explicitly mapped to a potential operational loss event;
( 2 ) Operational risk mitigants other than insurance for which the FDIC has given prior written approval. In evaluating an operational risk mitigant other than insurance, the FDIC will consider whether the operational risk mitigant covers potential operational losses in a manner equivalent to holding total capital.