alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

# District: 6
Federal Reserve Bank of: Atlanta

## Filings received during the week ending January 6, 2007

|Filer                                | Filing Type   | Filing Proposal                                                                                                                                                                                                            | End of Comment Period                             
|------------------------------------ | ------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------
|First Citizens Financial Corporation | * 3A1         | First Citizens Financial Corporation, Dawsonville, Georgia, to become a bank holding company by acquiring 100 percent of the outstanding shares of First Citizens Bank of Georgia, Dawsonville, Georgia (in organization). | Newspaper:01/29/2007Federal Register:Not available
|Newspaper:                           | 01/29/2007   
|Federal Register:                    | Not available

## Availability of CRA Public Evaluations

|Institution / Location | RSSDID | Exam Date | CRAPublic Date | CRARating | Exam Method
|---------------------- | ------ | --------- | -------------- | --------- | -----------
|NONE                  

## CRA Examinations scheduled for     Quarter of

|Institution | Location
|----------- | --------
|NONE       

Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions 
  under delegated authority
  Applications and reports:Boston
 |
New York
 |
Philadelphia
 |
Cleveland
 |
Richmond
 |
Atlanta
Chicago
 |
St. Louis
 |
Minneapolis
 |
Kansas City
 |
Dallas
 |
San Francisco

---

Home Banking information and regulation  Accessibility Contact 
  us
# C_2012331EN.01002101.xml

| 27.10.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 331/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.10.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 331/21

---

Judgment of the General Court of 19 September 2012 — Fraas v OHIM (Tartan pattern in dark grey, light grey, black, beige, dark red and light red)

(Case T-50/11) (1)

(Community trade mark - Application for a figurative Community trade mark representing a tartan pattern in dark grey, light grey, black, beige, dark red and light red - Absolute ground for refusal - Lack of distinctive character - Article 7(1)(b), Article 75 and Article 76(1) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

(2012/C 331/36)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: V. Fraas GmbH (Helmbrechts-Wüstenselbitz, Germany) (represented by: R. Kunze and G. Würtenberger, lawyers)

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented: initially by B. Schmidt then D. Walicka, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 15 November 2010 (Case R 1316/2010-4) concerning an application for registration of a figurative sign representing a tartan pattern in dark grey, light grey, black, beige, dark red and light red as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders V. Fraas GmbH to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders V. Fraas GmbH to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 89, 19.3.2011.

---
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2544 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2544

     To require the intelligence community to use only methods of 
  interrogation authorized by the United States Army Field Manual on 
                Human Intelligence Collector Operations.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 21, 2009

Ms. Schakowsky introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
          Select Committee on Intelligence (Permanent Select)

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To require the intelligence community to use only methods of 
  interrogation authorized by the United States Army Field Manual on 
                Human Intelligence Collector Operations.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Legal Interrogation Procedures 
Act''.

SEC. 2. LIMITATION ON USE OF INTERROGATION TECHNIQUES BY THE 
              INTELLIGENCE COMMUNITY.

    (a) Limitation.--Title XI of the National Security Act of 1947 (50 
U.S.C. 442 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the following new 
section:

  ``limitation on use of interrogation techniques by the intelligence 
                               community

    ``Sec. 1103.  No person in the custody or under the effective 
control of an element of the intelligence community, or a contractor or 
subcontractor of such element, regardless of nationality or physical 
location, shall be subject to any treatment or technique of 
interrogation not authorized by the United States Army Field Manual on 
Human Intelligence Collector Operations.''.
    (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents in the first section 
of such Act (50 U.S.C. 401 note) is amended by adding at the end the 
following new item:

``Sec. 1103. Limitation on use of interrogation techniques by the 
                            intelligence community.''.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2498 Engrossed in House (EH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2498

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the Federal building located at 844 North Rush Street in 
  Chicago, Illinois, as the ``William O. Lipinski Federal Building''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The Federal building located at 844 North Rush Street in Chicago, 
Illinois, shall be known and designated as the ``William O. Lipinski 
Federal Building''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the Federal building referred to in 
section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``William O. 
Lipinski Federal Building''.

            Passed the House of Representatives September 9, 2009.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
111th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                               H. R. 2498

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To designate the Federal building located at 844 North Rush Street in 
  Chicago, Illinois, as the ``William O. Lipinski Federal Building''.
```
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2434 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend the deduction for 

qualified tuition and related expenses. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 14, 2009 

Ms. KOSMAS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to extend 

the deduction for qualified tuition and related expenses. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘College Tuition Tax 

5 Relief Act’’. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
2 

•HR 2434 IH

1 SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF DEDUCTION FOR QUALIFIED TUI2 TION AND RELATED EXPENSES. 

3 Subsection (e) of section 222 of the Internal Revenue 

4 Code of 1986 is amended by striking ‘‘December 31, 

5 2009’’ and inserting ‘‘December 31, 2010’’. 

Æ 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
#### CLIFTON JORDAN, PROSECUTOR, v. BOROUGH OF DUMONT ET AL., RESPONDENTS.

Submitted January term, 1929

Decided May 7, 1929.

Before Justices Black, Campbell and Case.

Eor the prosecutor, *J. Emil Walscheid.*

Eor the respondents, *William M. Seufert.*

Per Curiam.

This proceeding brings up for review proceedings culminating in the award of a contract to I. B. Miller, Incorporated, for the improvement of New Milford avenue, in the borough of Dumont, in Bergen county.

The proceedings and award are attacked in two directions, viz.:

*4771. Because the proposals and bidding sheets left open to each bidder to designate the number of working days in which he would perform the work.

This is violation of section 5, article 11 of the Home Rule act *(Pamph L.*1917, *ch.*152) and of the principle enunciated by *Armitage*v. *Newark,*86 *N. J. L.*5. For this reason alone the proceedings under review must be set aside.

2. Because the bidders were required to bid upon certain quantities and sizes of cement pipe for subdrainage and the specifications and contract contained no requirement therefor, and such items constituted a part of the basis of estimating the standing of the bidders.

This is not denied by the respondents but they attempt to urge that it is immaterial because they say it is well known that in all such improvements subdrainage is necessary, and, no doubt, it will be necessary here.

We think it is but proper to note that the successful bidder, I. B. Miller, Incorporated, bid extremely low on these items and that excluding its bid upon these items it would not have been the lowest bidder. This places the *bona fides*of these items in serious doubt and dispute and would incline us to the conclusion that the bidding was not open to equal opportunity by all bidders.

The proceedings under review will be set aside, with costs.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-2701

In Re: JIM BECK, INCORPORATED,

Debtor.

_________________________

JOHN WESLEY OWNBY, JR.,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

JIM BECK, INCORPORATED,

Debtor - Appellee,

and

US TRUSTEE,

Party in Interest.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of Virginia, at Charlottesville. James H. Michael, Jr.,

Senior District Judge. (CA-97-59-C, BK-96-687-WA3-11)

Submitted: July 21, 1998 Decided: August 24, 1998

Before MURNAGHAN, ERVIN, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
2

John Wesley Ownby, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. William Stephen Scott,

SCOTT & KRONER, P.C., Charlottesville, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

John Ownby appeals the district court’s order affirming a

decision and order of the bankruptcy court confirming and approving

the Plan of Reorganization of Jim Beck, Inc. over Ownby’s objections. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion

and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Ownby v. Jim Beck, Inc., Nos. CA-97-59-

C; BK-96-687-WA3-11 (W.D. Va. Nov. 21, 1997). We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
#### Doctor F. Jackson, *Respondent, v.*Anthony H. Kasseal, *Appellant.*

Motion for leave to appeal to the Court of Appeals denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                             1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                               FEB-1-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   NOV-09-1996
<CASH>                                              42,834
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       34,579
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                        679,430
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   804,564
<PP&E>                                           1,542,501
<DEPRECIATION>                                   (605,919)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   1,762,377
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              554,890
<BONDS>                                            576,891
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                  270
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                                 0
<OTHER-SE>                                         533,220
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     1,762,377
<SALES>                                          2,729,084
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 2,729,084
<CGS>                                            1,927,199
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      721,426
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  30,606
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     49,853
<INCOME-TAX>                                        18,944
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 30,909
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                        30,909
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                         1.09
<EPS-DILUTED>                                         1.09
        

</TABLE>
#### Jordan Thomas and Lou Muckleroy v. The State.

*No. 3311.*

*Decided December 7.*

1. Fornication may be committed (both parties being unmarried) in one of two modes: 1. By living together and carnal intercourse with each other. 3. By habitual carnal intercourse with each other without living together.

2. Same—Terms *Defined.—“*Living Together means that the parties dwell or reside together; abide together in the same habitation as a comm mi or joint residing place.” Mitten’s Case, 34 Texas, Ct. App., 346, and Bird’s Case, 37 Texas Ct. App., 635, approved.

3. Same—Fact Case.—See the opinion for the substance of evidence *held*insufficient to support a conviction for fornication by *living together*in carnal intercourse.

Appeal from the County Court of Smith. Tried below before Hon. B. B. Beaird, County Judge.

The opinion discloses the case. The penalty assessed against each of "the defendants was a fine of fifty dollars.

Ho brief for appellant.

*W. L. Davidson,*Assistant Attorney-General, for the State.

White, Presiding Judge.

Appellants were both convicted in the court below upon a joint indictment charging them with fornication, by living together and having carnal intercourse with each other.

As in adultery, so, under our statute, fornication may be committed in one of two modes: 1. By living together and having carnal intercourse with each other. 2. By habitual carnal intercourse with each other without living together. The only distinction between the two offenses being that the offense of adultery is where either of the parties is married, whilst in fornication both are unmarried. Penal Code, arts. 333, 337.

In construing the statute with regard to adultery, this court has had occasion to interpret the meaning of the term “ living together,” and the interpretation given was that “the parties must dwell or reside together; abide together in the same habitation as a common or joint residing place.” Bird v. The State, 27 Texas Ct. App., 635; Mitten v. The State, 24 Texas Ct. App., 346.

The evidence showed that the defendant Thomas was a porter on the railroad passenger train from Mineola to Troupe; that he lived in Mineola, where he rented a room, kept his clothes, and had his washing done; that he boarded at a hotel in Mineola—that is, took his meals there—and paid a street tax at Mineola. He only staid in Troupe during the time his train laid over there, which was from 9:20 p. m. to 6 a. m. «each night.

It is shown abundantly by the evidence, we think, that the parties had *301“habitual carnal intercourse with each other without living together at Troupe, and if such had been the charge against them in the indictment, it would have been fully sustained by the evidence. But the evidence is not sufficient to sustain the charge that the parties “lived together”—that is, resided and abided together in the same habitation at Troupe.

The judgment is reversed and cause remanded.

*Reversed and*remanded*

Judges all present and concurring.
# C_2013129EN.01001301.xml

| 4.5.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 129/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.5.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 129/13

---

Order of the President of the Court of 8 March 2013 — European Commission v Grand Duchy of Luxembourg

(Case C-532/12) (1)

1

2013/C 129/24

Language of the case: French

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 26, 26.1.2013.

1

---
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 86 (Friday, May 4, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 25304]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-2242]


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

FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE BOARD


Sunshine Act Meeting Notice; Announcing a Partially Open Meeting 
of the Board of Directors

Time and Date: The open meeting of the Board of Directors is scheduled 
to begin at 10 a.m. on Wednesday, May 9, 2007. The closed portion of 
the meeting will follow immediately the open portion of the meeting.

Place: Board Room, First Floor, Federal Housing Finance Board, 1625 Eye 
Street NW, Washington DC 20006.

STATUS: The first portion of the meeting will be open to the public. 
The final portion of the meeting will be closed to the public.

Matters to Be Considered at the Open Portion: 
    2007 Designation of Directorships.
    New Business Activity Notice: Federal Home Loan Bank of Atlanta.

Matter to Be Considered at the Closed Portion: Periodic Update of 
Examination Program Development and Supervisory Findings.

Contact Person for More Information: Shelia Willis, Paralegal 
Specialist, Office of General Counsel, at 202-408-2876 or 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#27504e4b4b4e545467414f414509404851"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="fe89979292978d8dbe9896989cd0999188">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Dated: May 2, 2007.
    By the Federal Housing Finance Board.
Neil R. Crowley,
Acting General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 07-2242 Filed 5-2-07; 3:47 pm]
BILLING CODE 6725-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
EXHIBIT 99.21

CONSENT OF EXPERT

Reference is made to the Annual Report on Form 40-F
(the Form 40-F) of Cameco Corporation (the Corporation) to be filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to the United States Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

I hereby consent to reference to my name and my involvement in the preparation of, or supervision of the preparation of, scientific and
technical information in the following instances:



| | (a) | under the headings Operations and Development Projects  Uranium Operating Properties  McArthur River/Key Lake, Mineral Reserves and
Resources and Governance  Interest of Experts in the Corporations Annual Information Form for the year ended December 31, 2012 dated February 22, 2013 for the McArthur River/Key Lake properties; and
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (b) | under the headings Our Operations and Development Projects  Uranium Operating Properties  McArthur River/Key Lake and Mineral Reserves and
Resources in Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operation for the year ended December 31, 2012 dated February 11, 2013 for the McArthur River/Key Lake properties,
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(collectively the Technical Information) in the Form 40-F, and to the inclusion and incorporation by reference of information derived from
the Technical Information in the Form 40-F.

I also hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of such Technical
Information in the registration statements (Nos. 333-11736, 333-6180 and 333-139165) on Form S-8 for the Cameco Corporation Stock Option Plan, registration statement (No. 333-139324) on Form S-8 for the Cameco Corporation Employee Share Ownership
Plan and registration statement (No. 333-181577) on Form F-10.

Sincerely,



|                           |  |                                                         
|-------------------------- |  | --------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Leslie (Les) D. Yesnik
|Name:                      |  | Leslie (Les) D. Yesnik, P. Eng.                         
|Title:                     |  | General Manager, Key Lake operations, Cameco Corporation
|                           | 
|Date:                      |  | February 22, 2013
MAURICE NESBITT ,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA ,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D14-4797

_____________________________/

Opinion filed October 20, 2015.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Leon County.

Frank E. Sheffield, Judge.

Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender, Steven L. Seliger, Assistant Public Defender, 

for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Trisha Meggs Pate, Assistant Attorney General, 

for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

SWANSON, OSTERHAUS, and KELSEY, JJ., CONCUR.