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

[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 130 (Thursday, July 6, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 41625]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-17053]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

    The Department of Commerce has submitted to the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) for clearance the following proposal for 
collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork 
Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). It has been submitted to OMB 
under emergency clearance procedures. The Department is requesting OMB 
approval by no later than July 7, 2000.
    Agency: National Telecommunications and Information Administration.
    Title: Survey Instrument to Support the Annual Minority Broadcast 
Ownership Report.
    Agency Form Number(s): None.
    OMB Approval Number: None.
    Type of Request: New collection--Emergency Submission.
    Burden: Approximately 400 hours.
    Number of Respondents: 400 persons.
    Average Hours per Response: 1 hour.
    Needs and Uses: The Minority Telecommunications Development Program 
(MTDP), National Telecommunications and Information Administration has 
developed a survey instrument that it intends to use to collect 
information for its annual minority broadcast ownership report. The 
instrument will be the principle method for systematically gathering 
detailed information about the challenges confronting minority 
entrepreneurs entering the broadcast industry or expanding operations. 
The report will provide a basis for major national policies to increase 
minority participation in this arena, as well as Administration 
initiatives to promote economic opportunity for minority-owned 
businesses generally.
    Affected Public: Businesses or other for-profit organizations.
    Frequency: On Occasion.
    Respondent's Obligation: Voluntary.
    OMB Desk Officer: David Rostker, (202) 395-3897.
    Copies of the above information collection proposal can be obtained 
by calling or writing Linda Engelmeier, DOC Forms Clearance Officer, 
(202) 482-3272, Department of Commerce, Room 6086, 14th and 
Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20230.
    Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information 
collection should be sent to David Rostker, OMB Desk officer, Room 
10202, New Executive Office Building, 725 17th Street, N.W., 
Washington, D.C. 20503 by no later than July 7, 2000.

    Dated: June 30, 2000.
Madeleine Clayton,
Management Analyst, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 00-17053 Filed 7-5-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-60-P
```
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","provider_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov","author_name":"25005pwpadmin","author_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/author\/25005pwpadmin\/","title":"20-1037: IMMUNEX CORPORATION v. SANDOZ INC. [OPINION], Precedential - U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"bziI6bYVEY\"><a href=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/7-01-2020-20-1037-immunex-corporation-v-sandoz-inc-opinion-20-1037-opinion-7-1-2020_1612593\/\">20-1037: IMMUNEX CORPORATION v. SANDOZ INC. [OPINION], Precedential<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/7-01-2020-20-1037-immunex-corporation-v-sandoz-inc-opinion-20-1037-opinion-7-1-2020_1612593\/embed\/#?secret=bziI6bYVEY\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“20-1037: IMMUNEX CORPORATION v. SANDOZ INC. [OPINION], Precedential” — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit\" data-secret=\"bziI6bYVEY\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","description":"Opinions\/Orders posted: IMMUNEX CORPORATION v. SANDOZ INC. [OPINION](pdf) Appeal Number: 20-1037 Origin: DCT Precedential To see more opinions and orders, follow this link: Opinions and Orders."}
**EXHIBIT 21.1**

 

SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT 

 

Bank of Florida N.A. f/k/a Citizens National Bank of Southwest Florida, Naples, Collier County, Florida. 

Organized under the laws of the State of Florida. 

 

Bank of Florida Trust Company f/k/a Citizens Capital Management, Inc., Naples, Collier County, Florida. 

Organized under the laws of the State ofFlorida. 

 

Bank of Florida, Ft. Lauderdale, Broward County, Florida. 

Organized under the laws of the State of Florida. 

 

Bank of Florida, Tampa Bay, Hillsborough County, Florida. 

Organized underthe laws of the State of Florida 

 

32
FILED

August 25, 1999

Cecil Crowson,

Jr.

Appellate

Court Clerk

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT KNOXVILLE 

JUNE 1999 SESSION

THOMAS COOK * C.C.A. # 03C01-9808-CR-00281

Appellant, * HAMILTON COUNTY

VS. * Honorable Douglas A. Meyer,

Judge

STATE OF TENNESSEE, * (PostConviction/Possession of Cocaine

For Resale)

Appellee. *

FOR THE APPELLANT: FOR THE APPELLEE:

THOMAS COOK PAUL G. SUMMERS

Pro Se Attorney General & Reporter

P.O. Box PMB

Atlanta, GA 30315 ERIK W. DAAB

Assistant Attorney General

425 Fifth Avenue North

Nashville, TN 37243

OPINION FILED: _______________
1

 This record is void of any judgm ent or plea agreem ent.

-2-

AFFIRMED - RULE 20

JOHN EVERETT WILLIAMS,

Judge

OPINION

The petitioner, Thomas Cook, alleges that on January 8,

1993, he pled guilty to attempt to possess cocaine for resale and

received an eight-year sentence.1 On December 18, 1998, the

petitioner filed a petition for post-conviction relief. The trial

court dismissed the petition as time barred, and it is from that

decision that the petitioner now appeals. We AFFIRM the

judgment of the trial court. 

Pursuant to Tennessee Code Annotated § 40-30-202(a), a

petitioner must petition for post-conviction relief within one year

of the date of the final action of the highest state appellate court

to which an appeal was taken. A court does not have jurisdiction

to consider a petition for post-conviction relief if it is outside of

the one-year statute of limitations unless:
-3-

(1) The claim in the petition is based upon a final

ruling of an appellate court establishing a

constitutional right that was not recognized as

existing at the time of the trial, if retrospective

application of that right is required . . . ;

(2) The claim in the petition is based upon new

scientific evidence establishing that such petitioner is

actually innocent of the offense or offenses for which

the petitioner was convicted; or 

(3) The claim asserted in the petition seeks relief

from a sentence that was enhanced because of a

previous conviction and such conviction in the case in

which the claim is asserted was not a guilty plea with

an agreed sentence, and the previous conviction has

subsequently been held to be invalid . . . . 

 

Tenn. Code Ann. § 40-30-202(b).

The petitioner has filed his petition for post-conviction relief

outside of the statute of limitations set forth in Tennessee Code

Annotated § 40-30-202(a), and he does not submit that any of his

claims fall within one of the exceptions set forth above. 

Accordingly, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED

pursuant to Rule 20, Tennessee Court of Criminal Appeals Rules.

 

________________________________

JOHN EVERETT WILLIAMS,

Judge
-4-

CONCUR:

_____________________________

JOHN H. PEAY, Judge

_____________________________

DAVID G. HAYES, Judge
1966 

    -       - Superintendent of Documents
      - 2010-12-23T16:23:12-0500
      - US GPO, Washington, DC 20401
      - Superintendent of Documents
      - GPO attests that this document has not been altered since it was disseminated by GPO
Exhibit 32.1

Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350,

As Adopted Pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of E-LOAN, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended March 31, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Christian
A. Larsen, as Chief Executive Officer, President and Chairman of the Board of the Company,
hereby
certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
15(d), as applicable 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/ Christian A. Larsen Christian A. Larsen
Chief Executive Officer, President and Chairman

May 7, 2004



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to E-LOAN, Inc. and will be retained by E-LOAN, Inc. and furnished to
the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---
EX-10.8



 EXHIBIT 10.8 

Description of Non-Employee Director Compensation Program 

Regional Management Corp. (the “Company”) maintains a non-employee director compensation program pursuant to which: 

 

	 	•	 	each non-employee director receives an annual cash retainer of $30,000 payable in quarterly installments ($50,000 in the case of the chairman or lead independent director of the Board of Directors); 


 

	 	•	 	each member of the Audit Committee, Compensation Committee, and Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee receives an additional annual cash retainer of $10,000 payable in quarterly installments ($20,000 in the case
of the chairman of each committee); 

  

	 	•	 	each member of the Audit Committee, Compensation Committee, and Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee receives a $1,500 meeting fee for each committee meeting attended; 


 

	 	•	 	each non-employee director receives an annual equity-based award with a value equal to $90,000 ($110,000 in the case of the chairman or lead independent director of the Board of Directors); and 


 

	 	•	 	each member of the Audit Committee, Compensation Committee, and Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee receives an additional annual equity-based award with a value equal to $10,000 ($20,000 in the case of the
chairman of each committee). 

 The equity-based awards are granted on the fifth business day following the date of the annual
stockholders’ meeting at which directors are elected. The value of each director’s equity-based award is split evenly between nonqualified stock options and restricted stock. The number of shares subject to the nonqualified stock option
award is determined by dividing the value of the award by the fair value per share of common stock on the grant date calculated using the Black-Scholes valuation model. The number of shares subject to the restricted stock award is determined by
dividing the value of the award by the closing price per share of common stock on the grant date. 
 The nonqualified stock options are
fully vested on the grant date and expire ten years following the grant date. The restricted stock award vests and becomes non-forfeitable as to 100% of the underlying shares on the earlier of the first anniversary of the grant date or the date of
the next annual stockholders’ meeting, subject to the director’s continued service from the grant date until the vesting date, or upon the earlier occurrence of the director’s termination of service as a director by reason of death or
disability or upon a change in control of the Company. In the event of the director’s termination of service for any other reason, the director forfeits the restricted stock award immediately. Each equity-based award is subject to the terms and
conditions of the Regional Management Corp. 2015 Long-Term Incentive Plan, a nonqualified stock option agreement, and a restricted stock award agreement, the forms of which were previously approved by the Compensation Committee and the Board of
Directors and filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
Editorial Note on Part 2
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 2 appear at 63 FR 54077, Oct. 8, 1998.

§ 2.1053 Measurements required: Field strength of spurious radiation. ( a ) Measurements shall be made to detect spurious emissions that may be radiated directly from the cabinet, control circuits, power leads, or intermediate circuit elements under normal conditions of installation and operation. Curves or equivalent data shall be supplied showing the magnitude of each harmonic and other spurious emission. For this test, single sideband, independent sideband, and controlled carrier transmitters shall be modulated under the conditions specified in paragraph (c) of § 2.1049, as appropriate. For equipment operating on frequencies below 890 MHz, an open field test is normally required, with the measuring instrument antenna located in the far-field at all test frequencies. In the event it is either impractical or impossible to make open field measurements (e.g. a broadcast transmitter installed in a building) measurements will be accepted of the equipment as installed. Such measurements must be accompanied by a description of the site where the measurements were made showing the location of any possible source of reflections which might distort the field strength measurements. Information submitted shall include the relative radiated power of each spurious emission with reference to the rated power output of the transmitter, assuming all emissions are radiated from halfwave dipole antennas.
( b ) The measurements specified in paragraph (a) of this section shall be made for the following equipment: ( 1 ) Those in which the spurious emissions are required to be 60 dB or more below the mean power of the transmitter.
( 2 ) All equipment operating on frequencies higher than 25 MHz.
( 3 ) All equipment where the antenna is an integral part of, and attached directly to the transmitter.
( 4 ) Other types of equipment as required, when deemed necessary by the Commission.
[39 FR 5919, Feb. 15, 1974. Redesignated and amended at 63 FR 36599, July 7, 1998]
Appendix D: 

Final Rule and Record of Decision on the Translocation of Southern Sea 

Otters [52 FR 29754] 
This page intentionally left blank.
§ 14.35 Procedure; designation of agents for service. ( a ) The Commission shall forward any informal complaint meeting the requirements of § 14.34 of this subpart to each manufacturer and service provider named in or determined by the staff to be implicated by the complaint.
( b ) To ensure prompt and effective service of informal and formal complaints filed under this subpart, every manufacturer and service provider subject to the requirements of section 255, 716, or 718 of the Act and parts 6, 7, or 14 of this chapter shall designate an agent, and may designate additional agents if it so chooses, upon whom service may be made of all notices, inquiries, orders, decisions, and other pronouncements of the Commission in any matter before the Commission. The agent shall be designated in the manufacturer or service provider's annual certification pursuant to § 14.31.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                               5
<MULTIPLIER>                            1000
<CURRENCY>                              U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                          JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                            MAR-31-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                   1
<CASH>                                           22
<SECURITIES>                                      0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     0
<ALLOWANCES>                                      0
<INVENTORY>                                   1,320
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              1,628
<PP&E>                                       43,806
<DEPRECIATION>                               10,167
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               35,608
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           690
<BONDS>                                           0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                             0
<PREFERRED>                                       0
<COMMON>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                    3,539
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 35,608
<SALES>                                           0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              2,424
<CGS>                                             0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 1,094
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              443
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  83
<INCOME-TAX>                                      0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              83
<DISCONTINUED>                                    0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   0
<CHANGES>                                         0
<NET-INCOME>                                     83
<EPS-BASIC>                                     0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0


</TABLE>
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","provider_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov","author_name":"25005pwpadmin","author_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/author\/25005pwpadmin\/","title":"Updated Federal Circuit Rules of Practice - U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"eyr1AjbIVj\"><a href=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/updated-federal-circuit-rules-of-practice\/\">Updated Federal Circuit Rules of Practice<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/updated-federal-circuit-rules-of-practice\/embed\/#?secret=eyr1AjbIVj\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Updated Federal Circuit Rules of Practice” — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit\" data-secret=\"eyr1AjbIVj\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","description":"Pursuant to the court’s\u00a0December 9, 2020 public notice (pdf), an updated edition of the Federal Circuit Rules is now available on the court’s\u00a0website (pdf). This edition incorporates the emergency amendment to Federal Circuit Rule 15(f)."}
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             FEB-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-31-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          54,333
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   29,306
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,636
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                          12,896
<DEPRECIATION>                                   5,219
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 103,962
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,498
<OTHER-SE>                                      82,381
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   103,962
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 7,476
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                33,220
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               (6,118)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (2,284)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (17,342)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (3,286)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (14,056)
<DISCONTINUED>                                     741
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (13,315)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.47)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.47)


</TABLE>
17 March 2016

254P08-3

#### State v. Michael Orlando Cook

1. Def’s *Pro Se*Motion for PDR (COA16-963)

1. Dismissed

2. Def’s *Pro Se*Motion to Appoint Counsel

2. Dismissed as moot

3. Def’s *Pro Se*Motion for Subpoena *Duces Tecum*

3. Dismissed as moot

4. Def’s *Pro Se*Motion to Amend

4. Dismissed

5. Def’s *Pro Se*Motion to Amend PDR

5. Allowed
No. 11-8347.

#### Bakarr *v.*Holder, Attorney General.

C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.