alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

TIMOTHY D. GREER,

Plaintiff, Case no. 5:15-cv-12305-JCO-EAS

v. Honorable John Corbett O’Meara

MERCANTILE ADJUSTMENTS

BUREAU, INC.,

Defendant.

_________________________/

STIPULATION AND ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

Pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 

Plaintiff TIMOTHY D. GREER and Defendant MERCANTILE ADJUSTMENTS 

BUREAU, INC., through their counsel, hereby stipulate and agree, that the abovecaptioned action be dismissed with prejudice. Each party shall bear their own 

attorney’s fees and costs.

Respectfully Submitted,

By:/s/ Stephen A. Thomas

Stephen A. Thomas (P43260)

Attorney for Plaintiff

645 Griswold St., Suite 1360

Detroit, MI 48226

Phone: (313) 965-2265

sthomas@313965bank.com

By: /s/ Deborah A. Lujan

Deborah A. Lujan (P46990)

Attorney for Defendant

4000 Town Center, 9th Floor

Southfield, Michigan 48075

(248) 355-4141

deborah.lujan@ceflawyers.com

 

Case 5:15-cv-12305-JCO-EAS ECF No. 7 filed 10/28/15 PageID.25 Page 1 of 2
2 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

TIMOTHY D. GREER,

Plaintiff, Case no. 5:15-cv-12305-JCO-EAS

v. Honorable John Corbett O’Meara

MERCANTILE ADJUSTMENTS

BUREAU, INC.,

Defendant.

_________________________/

ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

Pursuant to the parties’ stipulation, this matter is hereby DISMISSED with 

prejudice and with no award of costs or attorney’s fees to either party.

SO ORDERED. 

Date: October 28, 2015 s/John Corbett O’Meara 

 United States District Judge

Case 5:15-cv-12305-JCO-EAS ECF No. 7 filed 10/28/15 PageID.26 Page 2 of 2
# C_2013108EN.01001202.xml

| 13.4.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 108/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.4.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 108/12

---

Order of the Court of 15 November 2012 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel, Brașov — Romania) — Corpul Național al Polițiștilor — Biroul Executiv Central, reprezentant al reclamanților Chițea Constantin și alții v Ministerul Administrației și Internelor, Inspectoratul General al Poliției Române, Inspectoratul de Poliție al Județului Brașov

(Case C-369/12) (1)

1

(Request for a preliminary ruling - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Validity of national legislation imposing salary reductions on a number of categories of civil servants - Failure to implement European Union law - Clear lack of jurisdiction of the Court of Justice)

2013/C 108/24

Language of the case: Romanian

Referring court

Referring court

Curtea de Apel Brașov

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Corpul Național al Polițiștilor — Biroul Executiv Central

Applicant:

Defendant: Ministerul Administrației și Internelor, Inspectoratul General al Poliției Române, Inspectoratul de Poliție al Județului Brașov

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Curtea de Apel, Brașov — Interpretation of Articles 17(1), 20, 21(1) and 51(1) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union — Admissibility of national legislation imposing salary reductions on a number of categories of civil servants — Infringement of the principles of equal treatment and non-discrimination and of the right of property

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

The Court of Justice of the European Union clearly has no jurisdiction with regard to the request for a preliminary ruling from the Curtea de Apel, Brașov (Romania), made by decision of 27 June 2012.

---

(1)  OJ C 343, 10.11.2012.

1

---
p. 1 

# OAR Box 

# 1828 Prepped by Ollie Stewart



### Document

Number: 

# 243 ) ll-K - (I ) -5 6 Docket Number: 

# A-83-2 7

Printed 11/12/200811:12:56

AM Sheet 243 of 325P. 2 

# A \ 

# Pl

II-K-(I)-5 6 DISCUSSIO N

PAPE R O

N TH E SELECTE D ENERGY SCENARIO S T O EVALUAT E TH E INDUSTRIAL BOILE R NSPS . EEA , Inc . Marc h28 , 1979 . THI S INFORMATION

CA N B E FOUND I

N DOCKE T A-79-02 , ITE

M II-K-(I)-5 6
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 November 25, 2006

|Filer                | Filing Type    | Filing Proposal                                                                                  | End of Comment Period                                 
|-------------------- | -------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | ------------------------------------------------------
|UNITED SECURITY BANK | * 18C          | United Security Bank, Fresno, California, to merge with Legacy Bank, N.A., Campbell, California. | 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 First Quarter of 2007 (January 1, 2007 - March 31, 2007)

|Institution | Location
|----------- | --------

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
**Order of the General Court (Fifth Chamber) of 13 July 2011 – Boni-Claverie v Council**

**(Case T-350/11)**

Common Foreign and Security Policy – Restrictive measures taken in view of the situation in Côte d’Ivoire – Action for annulment – Time-limit for bringing an action – Out of time – Clear inadmissibility

1.                     *Actions for annulment – Time-limits – Matter of public policy – Examination by the EU judicature of its own motion (Art. 263,
sixth para., TFEU; Rules of Procedure of the General Court, Art. 102(1) and (2)) (see paras 11-12)*

2.                     *Actions for annulment – Time-limits – Starting point – Publication date of the measure in question (Arts 263, fourth and sixth
paras, TFEU and 275, second para., TFEU; Council Regulation No 560/2005; Council Decision 2010/656) (see para. 16)*

**Re:**

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | APPLICATION for annulment, first, of Council Decision 2011/18/CFSP of 14 January 2011 amending Decision 2010/656 renewing the restrictive measures against Côte d’Ivoire (OJ 2011 L 11, p. 36), and, secondly, of Council Regulation (EU) No 25/2011 of 14 January 2011 amending Regulation (EC) No 560/2005 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Côte d’Ivoire (OJ 2011 L 11, p. 1) and of Council Regulation (EU) No 330/2011 of 6 April 2011 amending Regulation No 560/2005 (OJ 2011 L 93, p. 10), in so far as they concern the applicant. |

**Operative part**

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 1. | | The action is dismissed. |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 2. | | Mrs Akisi Danièle Boni-Claverie is ordered to bear her own costs. |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 3. | | There is no need to adjudicate on the applications for accelerated procedure and priority judgment. |
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19
- 6224

TERON H. JACKSON , Petitioner

- Appellant ,

v. WARDEN LEWIS , Respondent

- Appellee

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Orangeburg

. Mary G. Lewis , District Judge. ( 5:18

- cv
- 03469

- MGL )

Submitted : June 20, 2019 Decided: June 25, 2019

Before NIEMEYER, AGEE, and RICHARDSON , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.
Teron H. Jackson, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Teron H. Jackson appeal s the district court’s order dismissing without pre judice
his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition for failure to comply with a court order directing him to pay the required filing fee or file an in forma pauperis application

. * We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, although w e grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Jackson
v. Lewis , No. 5:18

- cv
- 03469

- MGL (D.S.C. Jan. 22, 2019). We deny a certificate of appealability as unnecessary. See Harbison v. Bell , 556 U.S. 180 (2009). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED

* We conclude that the district court’s order is final and appealable because the defect identified by the district court must be cured by something more than an amendment to the allegations in the § 2254 pe tition. See Goode v. Cent. Va. Legal Aid Soc’y, Inc. , 807 F.3d 619, 623

- 24 (4th Cir. 2015).
IIB 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 2480 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JULY 29, 2010 

Received 

AUGUST 5, 2010 

Read twice and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and 

Transportation 

AN ACT 

To improve the accuracy of fur product labeling, and for 

other purposes. 

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


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 2480 RFS

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Truth in Fur Labeling 

3 Act of 2010’’. 

4 SEC. 2. ELIMINATION OF EXEMPTION TO FUR PRODUCT LA5 BELING REQUIREMENTS FOR PRODUCTS 

6 CONTAINING RELATIVELY SMALL QUAN7 TITIES OR VALUES OF FUR. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 2(d) of the Fur Products 

9 Labeling Act (15 U.S.C. 69(d)) is amended by striking 

10 ‘‘; except that’’ and all that follows through ‘‘contained 

11 therein’’. 

12 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

13 subsection (a) shall take effect on the date that is 90 days 

14 after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

15 SEC. 3. EXEMPTION FOR DISCRETE SALES BY NON-RETAIL16 ERS. 

17 Section 3 of the Fur Products Labeling Act (15 

18 U.S.C. 69a) is amended by adding at the end the fol19 lowing: 

20 ‘‘(g) No provision of this Act shall apply to a fur 

21 product— 

22 ‘‘(1) the fur of which was obtained from an ani23 mal through trapping or hunting; and 

24 ‘‘(2) when sold in a face to face transaction at 

25 a place such as a residence, craft fair, or other loca26 tion used on a temporary or short term basis, by the 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
3 

HR 2480 RFS

1 person who trapped or hunted the animal, where the 

2 revenue from the sale of apparel or fur products is 

3 not the primary source of income of such person.’’. 

4 SEC. 4. FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION REVIEW OF FUR 

5 PRODUCTS NAME GUIDE. 

6 Not later than 90 days after the date of the enact7 ment of this Act, the Federal Trade Commission shall 

8 publish in the Federal Register notice of, and an oppor9 tunity to comment on, a review of the Fur Products Name 

10 Guide (16 CFR. 301.0). 

11 SEC. 5. PAYGO COMPLIANCE. 

12 The budgetary effects of this Act, for the purpose of 

13 complying with the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010, 

14 shall be determined by reference to the latest statement 

15 titled ‘‘Budgetary Effects of PAYGO Legislation’’ for this 

16 Act, submitted for printing in the Congressional Record 

17 by the Chairman of the House Budget Committee, pro18 vided that such statement has been submitted prior to the 

19 vote on passage. 

Passed the House of Representatives July 28, 2010. 

Attest: LORRAINE C. MILLER, 

Clerk. 


srobinson on DSKHWCL6B1PROD with BILLS
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: 8
Federal Reserve Bank of: St. Louis

## Filings received during the week ending May 3, 2008

|Filer              | Filing Type | Filing Proposal                                                                                                                                                                                           | End of Comment Period                          
|------------------ | ----------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | -----------------------------------------------
|CENTRAL BANCOMPANY | * 3A3       | Central Bancompany, Inc., Jefferson City, Missouri, to acquire 100 percent of Holden Bankshares, Inc., Holden, Missouri, and thereby indirectly acquire Bank of Holden, Holden, Missouri.                 | Newspaper:05/27/2008Federal Register:05/26/2008
|Newspaper:         | 05/27/2008 
|Federal Register:  | 05/26/2008 
|CENTRAL BANCOMPANY | * 3A3       | Central Bancompany, Inc., Jefferson City, Missouri, to acquire 100 percent of Guaranty Bancshares, Inc., Strafford, Missouri, and thereby indirectly acquire The Greene County Bank, Strafford, Missouri. | Newspaper:06/02/2008Federal Register:06/02/2008
|Newspaper:         | 06/02/2008 
|Federal Register:  | 06/02/2008 

## 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
Exhibit
      32








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 Victory Capital Holdings Corporation
      (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2005 (the
“Report”), Jon Fullenkamp, Principal Executive Officer of the Company,
      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 requirement of Section 13(a) or 15 (d) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





2)  The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the Company’s financial position and results of operations.











Date:
      November 14,
      2005 /s/
      Jon Fullenkamp


Jon
      Fullenkamp


Principal
      Executive Officer


Principal
      Financial and


Accounting
      Officer
#### § 53.05-5 Discharge capacities and valve markings.

The discharge capacities and valve markings must be as indicated in HG-402 of Section IV of the ASME BPVC (incorporated by reference; see § 53.01-1). The discharge capacities must be certified by the National Board of Boiler and Pressure Vessel Inspectors.

[USCG-2003-16630, 73 FR 65164, Oct. 31, 2008]
#### § 307.1 Purpose.

This part establishes that operators of U.S.-flag oceangoing vessels in U.S. foreign trade and certain foreign-flag vessels as described in 46 U.S.C. 1283 must report on their locations according to the provisions of this regulation to enhance the safety of vessel operations at sea and provide a contingency for events of national emergency.
§ 140.705 Charts and nautical publications. ( a ) This section applies to a towing vessel not subject to the requirements of 33 CFR 164.72.
( b ) A towing vessel must carry adequate and up-to-date charts, maps, and nautical publications for the intended voyage, including: ( 1 ) Charts, including electronic charts acceptable to the Coast Guard, of appropriate scale to make safe navigation possible. Towing vessels operating on the Western Rivers must have maps of appropriate scale issued by the Army Corps of Engineers or a river authority;
( 2 ) “U.S. Coast Pilot” or similar publication;
( 3 ) Coast Guard light list; and
( 4 ) Towing vessels that operate the Western Rivers must have river stage(s) or Water Surface Elevations as appropriate to the trip or route, as published by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers or a river authority, must be available to the person in charge of the navigation watch.
( c ) Extracts or copies from the publications listed in paragraph (b) of this section may be carried, so long as they are applicable to the route.
104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1574

AN ACT

To amend the Federal Deposit Insurance Act to exof a deposit. clude certain bank products from the definition
104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1574

AN ACT

To amend the Federal Deposit Insurance Act to exclude

certain bank products from the definition of a deposit.

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 ‘‘Bank Insurance Fund

5 and Depositor Protection Act of 1995’’.
2

•HR 1574 EH

1 SEC. 2. DEFINITION OF DEPOSIT.

2 Section 3(l)(5) of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act

3 (12 U.S. C. 1813(l)(5) is amended—

4 (1) in subparagraph (A), by striking ‘‘and’’ at

5 the end;

6 (2) in subparagraph (B), by striking the period

7 at the end and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and

8 (3) by adding at the end the following new sub9 paragraph:

10 ‘‘(C) any liability of an insured depository

11 institution that arises under an annuity con12 tract, the income of which is tax deferred under

13 section 72 of the Internal Revenue Code of

14 1986.’’.

15 SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE.

16 The amendments made by section 2 shall apply to

17 any liability of an insured depository that arises under an

18 annuity contract issued on or after the date of enactment

19 of this Act.

Passed the House of Representatives December 12,

1995.

Attest:

Clerk.
# C_2012065EN.01002501.xml

| 3.3.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 65/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.3.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 65/25

---

Action brought on 22 December 2011 — ZZ v Commission

(Case F-139/11)

2012/C 65/48

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: Ph.-E. Partsch and E. Raimond, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment, first, of the decision of OLAF’s Director-General containing a final invitation to a hearing of the applicant in the framework of an internal investigation and stating that a final report on the investigation would be adopted on the basis only of the information collected and analysed unilaterally by OLAF, if the applicant did not accept the invitation and, second, of the letter rejecting his complaint.

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decision of 28 October 2011; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of 28 October 2011;

| — | Annul the letter of 2 December 2011 ruling on the complaint of 21 November 2011; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the letter of 2 December 2011 ruling on the complaint of 21 November 2011;

| — | Award the applicant compensation in the sum of EUR 6000 in damages with interest; |
| --- | --- |

—

Award the applicant compensation in the sum of EUR 6000 in damages with interest;

| — | Order the European Commission to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the European Commission to pay the costs.

---
# C_2011282EN.01002103.xml

| 24.9.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 282/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.9.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 282/21

---

Order of the General Court of 6 July 2011 — SIR v Council

(Case T-142/11) (1)

1

(Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken in view of the situation in Côte d’Ivoire - Withdrawal of the list of persons concerned - Action for annulment - No need to adjudicate)

2011/C 282/44

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Société ivoirienne de raffinage (SIR) (Abidjan, Côte d’Ivoire) (represented by: M. Ceccaldi, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: B. Driessen and A. Vitro, Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of Council Decision 2011/18/CFSP of 14 January 2011 amending Council Decision 2010/656/CFSP renewing the restrictive measures against Côte d’Ivoire (OJ 2011 L 11, p. 36) and, secondly, of Council Regulation (EU) No 25/2011 of 14 January 2011 amending Regulation (EC) No 560/2005 imposing certain specific restrictive measures directed against certain persons and entities in view of the situation in Côte d’Ivoire (OJ 2011 L 11, p. 1), on the ground that those measures establish restrictive measures which cause the applicant harm

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action. |
| --- | --- |

1.

There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.

| 2. | The Council of the European Union shall pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The Council of the European Union shall pay the costs.

| 3. | There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the European Commission’s application for leave to intervene. |
| --- | --- |

3.

There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the European Commission’s application for leave to intervene.

---

(1)  OJ C 130, of 30.4.2011.

1

---