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: 1
Federal Reserve Bank of: Boston

## Filings received during the week ending March 14, 2009

|Filer                  | Filing Type     | Filing Proposal                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       | End of Comment Period                          
|---------------------- | --------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | -----------------------------------------------
|MIDDLESEX SAVINGS BANK | * 3A5* 3A1* 3A3 | Application filed by Middlesex Bancorp, MHC, Natick, Massachusetts to become a mutual bank holding company through the acquisition of 100% of the voting shares of Middlesex Savings Bank, Natick, Massachusetts, pursuant to section 3(a)(1) of the BHC Act and to acquire through merger Service Bancorp, MHC, Service Bancorp Inc., and Strata Bank, all located in Medway, Massachusetts, pursuant to sections 3(a)(3) and 3(a)(5) of the BHC Act | Newspaper:03/19/2009Federal Register:03/20/2009
|Newspaper:             | 03/19/2009     
|Federal Register:      | 03/20/2009     

## 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       

* Subject to the provisions of the Community Reinvestment Act

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
#### Antonio Carrero v. The State.

*No. 17.*

*Decided April 29.*

New Trial — Absent Witness. — On the calling of his case for trial, defendant notified the court that he desired the testimony of an absent witness, for whom the court ordered process, and defendant was returned to jail to await its execution; and subsequently, on the same day, defendant at his own request announced to the court that he was ready for and demanded a trial of his cause. *Held,*that his motion for a new trial, based upon the ground that he was deprived of the testimony of the witness, for whom process had been issued by the court, and who had not appeared at the trial, was properly overruled.

Appeal from the District Court of Guadalupe. Tried below before Hon. George McCormick.

Appellant was indicted for assault with intent to murder one Jesusa Ortez, and at his trial was convicted of this offense and sentenced to five years in the penitentiary.

There is no statement of facts or bill of exceptions contained in the record.

*W. H. Brooher,*for appellant.

*B. L.*Henry, Assistant Attorney-General, for the State.

DAVIDSON, Judge.

This appeal is prosecuted from a conviction of assault with intent to murder, in which appellant’s punishment was assessed at a term of five years in the penitentiary.

The record contains neither a bill of exceptions nor a statement of facts, and the sole ground of the motion for a new trial urged in the court below and presented here for revision is, that defendant was deprived of a fair and impartial trial, in that he was denied the right to have a certain witness present at his trial to testify in his behalf. He did not in writing or formally apply for a continuance or postponement of his cause to obtain the testimony of the absent witness. In this connection, it is shown by the record that when, on the morning of November 21, defendant was brought into open court for the purpose of being placed upon his trial, he informed the court of his desire to have the absent witness present to testify in his behalf, and would not be ready until his attendance was procured. The court at once ordered issuance of necessary process for the witness, and defendant was returned to jail to await the execution of the process. At noon defendant informed the sheriff “ that he had two witnesses present, and wanted a trial, and would not wait for the absent witness.” At his request he was, after the noon recess, brought into the court, and announced to the court that his two witnesses were present, and he was ready for and demanded a trial of his cause. His request *92being granted, he was placed upon his trial. The motion for a new trial was overruled, and we are of opinion that the ruling was correct. The judgment is affirmed.

*Affirmed.*

Judges all present and concurring.
AMENDMENT


TO ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION

OF

PREMIER BRANDS, INC.



	In accordance with Sections 16-10s-1003 and 16-10s-1006 of the Utah Revised
Business Corporation act Premier Erands  Inc . a Utah Corporation
(the Corporation), does hereby adopt the following amendment
(the Amendment) to the articles of Incorporation.

1. The corporation's Articles of incorporation are hereby amended to add a new
articles
2. XIII, which shall be and read as follows:


ARTICLE XIII

SHAREHOLDER ACTION WITHOUT A MEETING

	       Pursuant to Sections 16-10s and 16-10s-1704(4) of the Utah Revised
Business Corporation Act, any section which may be taken at any annual or
special meeting of shareholders may me taken without a meeting and without
prior notice, if one or more contents in writing setting fourth the action so
taken, shall be signed by the  holders of contanting  shares having not less
than the minimum number of votes that would be necessary to authorize or
takes action at a meeting at which all shares entitled to vote
thereon was present and voted.

3. Except as specified provided hereas the provisions of the Corporation's
Articles of incorporation shall remain .
unamended and shall continue in full force and effect.


 By extension of this Amendment to the Articles o Incorporation, the President
and Secretary
4. of the Corporation do hereby certify that the foregoing Amendment to the
Articles of Incorporation was adopted as an Amendment to the original
Articles of Incorporation of the Corporation by the shareholders of the
Corporation at a Special meeting of the shareholders held on September 16,
1998, pursuant to proper notice, as of August  26,1998,
the record date for the Shareholders action there were 1,641.254
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: 5
Federal Reserve Bank of: Richmond

## Filings received during the week ending September 6, 2008

|Filer                                   | Filing Type    | Filing Proposal                                                                                                                                                                               | End of Comment Period                              
|--------------------------------------- | -------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------
|COMMUNITY BANK INVESTORS OF AMERICA, LP | * 3A3          | FA Capital, LLC, Richmond, Virginia, and Community Bank Investors of America, L.P., Richmond, Virginia, to acquire up to 58.01% of the voting securities of Freedom Bank, Bradenton, Florida. | Newspaper:Not availableFederal Register:09/26/2008 
|Newspaper:                              | Not available 
|Federal Register:                       | 09/26/2008    
|FAUQUIER BANK, THE                      | * Branch       | The Fauquier Bank, Warrenton, Virginia, proposes to establish a branch at 10250 Bristow Center Drive, Bristow, Virginia.                                                                      | Newspaper:09/05/2008Federal Register:Not applicable
|Newspaper:                              | 09/05/2008    
|Federal Register:                       | Not applicable

## 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       

* Subject to the provisions of the Community Reinvestment Act

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
§ 56.97-40 Installation tests. ( a ) The following piping systems must be hydrostatically leak tested in the presence of a marine inspector at a pressure of 1.5 times the maximum allowable working pressure of the system: ( 1 ) Class I steam, feedwater, and blowoff piping. Where piping is attached to boilers by welding without practical means of blanking off for testing, the piping must be subjected to the same hydrostatic pressure to which the boiler is tested. The maximum allowable working pressures of boiler feedwater and blowoff piping must be the design pressures specified in §§ 56.50-30(a)(3) and 56.50-40(b) of this subpart, respectively.
( 2 ) Fuel oil discharge piping between the pumps and the burners.
( 3 ) Flammable or corrosive liquids and compressed gas cargo piping, but not less than 150 psig.
( 4 ) Any Class I, I-L, II-L piping.
( 5 ) Cargo oil piping.
( 6 ) Firemains.
( 7 ) Fuel oil transfer and filling piping.
( 8 ) Class I compressed air piping.
( 9 ) Fixed oxygen-acetylene system piping.
( b ) Installation testing requirements for refrigeration, fluid power, and liquefied petroleum gas cooking and heating systems may be found in part 58 of this subchapter.
( c ) Class II piping systems must be tested under working conditions as specified in the section on initial service leak test, § 56.97-38.
[CGFR 68-82, 33 FR 18843, Dec. 18, 1968, as amended by CGFR 69-127, 35 FR 9980, June 17, 1970; CGD 72-206R, 38 FR 17229, June 29, 1973 CGD 73-254, 40 FR 40168, Sept. 2, 1975; CGD 95-028, 62 FR 51202, Sept. 30, 1997]
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 103 (Wednesday, May 30, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 30019-30020]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-2665]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of General Medical Sciences; Notice of Closed 
Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C.,

[[Page 30020]]

as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose 
confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable 
material, and personal information concerning individuals associated 
with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a 
clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of General Medical 
Sciences Special Emphasis Panel; MBRS Support of Competitive 
Research.
    Date: June 19, 2007.
    Time: 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Bethesda Marriott Suites, 6711 Democracy Boulevard, 
Bethesda, MD 20817.
    Contact Person: Margaret J. Weidman, PhD, Office of Scientific 
Review, National Institute of General Medical Sciences, National 
Institutes of Health, 45 Center Drive, Room 3AN18B, Bethesda, MD 
20892, 301-594-3663, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#fe899b979a939f90939fbe909799938dd0909796d0999188"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="2f584a464b424e41424e6f414648425c0141464701484059">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.375, 
Minority Biomedical Research Support; 93.821, Cell Biology and 
Biophysics Research; 93.859, Pharmacology, Physiology, and 
Biological Chemistry Research; 93.862, Genetics and Developmental 
Biology Research; 93.88, Minority Access to Research Careers; 93.96, 
Special Minority Initiatives, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: May 22, 2007.
Jennifer Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 07-2665 Filed 5-29-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
§ 39.5001 General requirements for multi-breasted loading—B/CLBR. ( a ) Each barge must be owned or operated by the same entity and must have an approved vapor control system (VCS).
( b ) There must be only one crossover vapor hose and it must— ( 1 ) Comply with 46 CFR 39.2001(h) and (i);
( 2 ) Have a diameter at least as that of the largest pipe in the outboard barge's VCS, and
( 3 ) If it extends more than 25 feet (7.62 meters) between the two barges during the transfer operation, it must be as short as is practicable, safe for the conditions, supported off the vessels' decks, and its pressure drop calculations must be approved for its length by the Marine Safety Center (MSC), or reapproved by the MSC if existing approval was based on a 25-foot hose.
( c ) The hazards associated with barge-to-barge or barge-to-shore electric currents must be controlled in accordance with sections 11.9 or 17.5 of OCIMF ISGOTT (incorporated by reference, see 46 CFR 39.1005).
( d ) The cargo transfer procedures must reflect the procedures to align and disconnect a facility VCS to and from an inboard barge, and alternately, to and from an outboard barge through the vapor cross-over hose and the inboard barge's vapor header, or “dummy” header. This must include proper connections for the facility VCS's alarm/shutdown system to the alarm/shutdown system of the barge being loaded at the time.
( e ) Calculations for multi-breasted loading must consider additional pressure drops across the barges' vapor collection systems and the cross vapor hose and must be reviewed and approved by the MSC per 46 CFR 39.1017(a).
( f ) Barge owners and operators must comply with any additional operational requirements imposed by the local Captain of the Port (COTP) in whose zone the shore facility is located. These facilities' VCSs must be certified for conducting such an operation.
#### § 550.402 Filing of petitions.

All requests for relief from conditions unfavorable to shipping in the foreign trade must be by written petition. An original and fifteen copies of a petition for relief under the provisions of this part must be filed with the Secretary, Federal Maritime Commission, Washington, DC 20573. The petition must be accompanied by remittance of a $450 filing fee.

[88 FR 16898, Mar. 21, 2023]
§ 501.14 Delegation to and redelegation by the Managing Director. ( a ) Authority to adjudicate, with the concurrence of the General Counsel, and authorize payment of, employee claims for not more than $10,000.00, arising under the Military and Civilian Personnel Property Act of 1964 (31 U.S.C. 3721) and the Federal Tort Claims Act (28 U.S.C. 1346(b), 2671-2680).
( b ) Authority to determine that an exigency of the public business is of such importance that annual leave may not be used by employees to avoid forfeiture before annual leave may be restored under 5 U.S.C. 6304.
( c ) ( 1 ) Authority to classify all positions GS-1 through GS-15 and wage grade positions.
( 2 ) The authority under paragraph (c)(1) of this section is redelegated to the Director, Office of Human Resources.
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: 12
Federal Reserve Bank of: San Francisco

## Filings received during the week ending March 28, 2009

|Filer                    | Filing Type    | Filing Proposal                                                                                         | End of Comment Period                                 
|------------------------ | -------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------
|COMMUNITY BANK OF NEVADA | * 18C          | Community Bank of Nevada, Las Vegas, Nevada, to merge with Community Bank of Arizona, Phoenix, Arizona. | Newspaper:Not availableFederal Register:Not applicable
|Newspaper:               | Not available 
|Federal Register:        | Not applicable

## 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       

* Subject to the provisions of the Community Reinvestment Act

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_2012194EN.01001001.xml

| 30.6.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 194/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.6.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 194/10

---

Appeal brought on 5 April 2012 by EI du Pont de Nemours and Company against the judgment of the General Court (Seventh Chamber) delivered on 2 February 2012 in Case T-76/08: EI du Pont de Nemours and Company and others v European Commission

(Case C-172/12 P)

2012/C 194/16

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Appellant: EI du Pont de Nemours and Company (represented by: J. Boyce, A. Lyle-Smythe, Solicitors)

Appellant:

Other parties to the proceedings: DuPont Performance Elastomers LLC, DuPont Performance Elastomers SA, European Commission

Other parties to the proceedings:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The appellant claims that the Court should:

| — | set aside the judgment of the General Court in Case T-76/08 insofar as it upheld the Commission's finding that the Appellant was a party to the infringement and liable to pay a fine; |
| --- | --- |

—

set aside the judgment of the General Court in Case T-76/08 insofar as it upheld the Commission's finding that the Appellant was a party to the infringement and liable to pay a fine;

| — | order the Commission to pay the costs of the present proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to pay the costs of the present proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

The appellant’s grounds of appeal are that the General Court erred in law in finding that the appellant was liable for infringements by DuPont Dow Elastomers (‘DDE’). Insofar as the appellant is successful on this ground of appeal, it follows that:

| — | as regards the period prior to the establishment of DDE (when the chloroprene rubber business had been owned by the appellant) the General Court erred in law in not ruling that the Commission was time-barred from imposing a fine on the appellant in respect of participation by its subsidiaries, and |
| --- | --- |

—

as regards the period prior to the establishment of DDE (when the chloroprene rubber business had been owned by the appellant) the General Court erred in law in not ruling that the Commission was time-barred from imposing a fine on the appellant in respect of participation by its subsidiaries, and

| — | in circumstances where the Commission was time-barred from imposing a fine and failed to demonstrate a legitimate interest for issuing a decision against the appellant, the General Court erred in law in ruling that the appellant was liable for participation by its subsidiaries in the period prior to the establishment of DDE. |
| --- | --- |

—

in circumstances where the Commission was time-barred from imposing a fine and failed to demonstrate a legitimate interest for issuing a decision against the appellant, the General Court erred in law in ruling that the appellant was liable for participation by its subsidiaries in the period prior to the establishment of DDE.

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

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

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                         451,615
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,787,531
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,395,568
<PP&E>                                         186,115
<DEPRECIATION>                                (10,766)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,749,222
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,524,301
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     8,892,497
<OTHER-SE>                                 (8,667,576)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,749,222
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               151,276
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                7,467,757
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              13,019
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (7,329,280)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (7,329,280)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (7,329,280)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.57)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.57)


</TABLE>