alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Dolan Chemical Laboratory 4001 Bixby Road Groveport, OH 43125 T: 614-836-4221, Audinet 210-4221 F: 614-836-4168, Audinet 210-4168 http://aepenv/labs 

## Water Analysis
Location: Mountaineer Plant Report Date: 3/29/2012 Sample Number: 121379-001 Date Collected:03/23/2012 07:30 Date Received:3/23/2012 

### Bioreactor Effluent Units Parameter Result RL Analysis By Analysis Date/Time Method MDL ug/L Selenium, Se 1.0 0.5 DPC EPA 200.8 0.1 03/27/2012 15:37

THIS TEST REPORT RELATES ONLY TO THE ITEMS TESTED AND SHALL NOT BE REPRODUCED EXCEPT IN FULL WITHOUT WRITTEN APPROVAL OF THE LABORATORY. ALL TEST RESULTS MEET ALL OF THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE ACCREDITING AUTHORITY, UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED.

Brian Snyder, Chemist II Email bssnyder@aep.com Tel. 614-836-4224 Fax 614-836-4168 Audinet 210-4224

Mountaineer Plant, 121379 Page 1 of 1
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 April 5, 2008

|Filer                     | Filing Type   | Filing Proposal                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     | End of Comment Period                                
|------------------------- | ------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | -----------------------------------------------------
|Green Valley Bancorp, MHC | * 3A1* 3A3    | Application by Green Valley Bancorp, MHC, and Green Valley Bancorp, Inc, both of Southbridge, Massachusetts, to become a mutual bank holding company and stock bank holding company, respectively, by acquiring Southbridge Savings Bank, Southbridge, Massachusetts, pursuant to sections 3(a)(1) and 3(a)(3) of the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956, as amended. | Newspaper:Not availableFederal Register:Not available
|Newspaper:                | Not available
|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       

* 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
#### Stone *v.*Sleeper.

A receiptor of property attached, which is exempt from attachment, is not liable on his receipt when the debtor’s possession of the property has not been disturbed, and the creditor has ’not been prevented from attaching other property or obtaining other security.

Troyer, lor a horse. Facts found by a referee. The plaintiff, as deputy sheriff, attached the horse on a writ against C., as his property,' and 0. procured the defendant to receipt for it. Neither the plaintiff nor the defendant saw the horse • at the time of the attachment The action in which it was attached went to judgment, on which execution issued, which was placed in the plaintiff’s hands, who made a demand on the defendant for it, which was refused. The defendant defends because the horse was exempt from attachment. The horse was exempt from attachment, and remained in C.’s possession after the -receipt was given.

*Barnard, $*Leach, for the plaintiff.

Bling, for the defendant.

Stanley, J.

The horse was exempt from attachment. It was never in the plaintiff’s possession. It has, since the receipt was given, remained „in the debtor’s possession. The plaintiff is not answerable to the debtor, and he is only answerable to the creditor when the property is subject to attachment. The liability of the defendant to the creditor is no greater than that of the plaintiff. Tbe defendant is merely the bailee of tbe plaintiff. He is responsible for tbe safe-keeping and return of the property to the officer upon demand, and upon default in damages to the amount of the judgment, not exceeding the attachable interest of tbe debtor in the property. *Hill*v. *Wiggin,*31 N. H. 292, 300; *Webster*v. *Harper,*7 N. H. 594, 597; *Scott*v. Whittemore, 27 N. H. 310, 321.

It is claimed that wlien C. procured tbe defendant to receipt, be waived his right of exemption, and that the defendant cannot now bo allowed to object tbat tlie liorse was not attachable. It is open to tbe receiptor to show, under some circumstances, that the property receipted for was liis own, and his title will constitute a good defence. *Clement*v. *Little,*42 N. H. 564. If the receiptor is not estopped by liis receipt to claim the property as his *own*— Hills v. *Buffum,*cited in 42 N H. 570, *Barron*v. *Cobleigh,*11 N. H. 557, and *Morse*v. *Hurd,*17 N. H. 246, 250- — or that it lias gone to a person having a paramount *title*— Webster v. *Harper, Hill*v. *Wiggin,*and *Scott*v. *Whittemore, supra*— there is no reason apparent why, in the absence of any evidence that the officer or the creditor has *206been prejudiced by tbe procurement of tbe receiptor by tbe debtor, it should be held that the debtor has waived his right to claim that the property receipted for was exempt from attachment, or that the receiptor was estopped to make the same defence. *Thayer*v. *Hunt,*2 Allen 449; *Bacon*v. *Daniels,*116 Mass. 474.

*Judgment for the defendant.*

Allen and Smith, JJ., did not sit: the others concurred.
Summary of Compensation for Named Executive Officers



 Exhibit 10.2 
  
 Summary of Compensation for Named Executive Officers 
  

							
	 Recipient

	  	2005 Base Salary

	  	2004 Short-Term Incentive
Award


	 Thomas A. Carr
 Chairman of the Board and
 Chief Executive Officer
	  	$	495,000	  	$	550,000
			
	 Philip L. Hawkins
 President and Chief
 Operating Officer
	  	$	440,000	  	$	440,000
			
	 Stephen E. Riffee
 Chief Financial Officer
	  	$	320,000	  	$	190,000
			
	 Karen B. Dorigan
 Chief Investment Officer
	  	$	312,000	  	$	185,000
			
	 Linda A. Madrid
 Managing Director,
 General Counsel and
 Corporate Secretary
	  	$	293,500	  	$	165,000
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

ANGELA DAVIS-LEE, LUE 

BANKS and TERRY 

PROSS, 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

AMERICAN NATIONAL 

RED CROSS and 

AMERICAN NATIONAL 

RED CROSS 

SOUTHEASTERN 

MICHIGAN CHAPTER, 

 Defendants. 

 

Case No. 2:15-cv-12525 

Judge Avern Cohn 

Magistrate Judge Anthony P. Patti 

_________________________/ 

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION TO VACATE AND 

RESCHEDULE CONTINUATION OF SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE 

(DE 25) 

In this lawsuit, Plaintiffs allege (I) race discrimination under Title VII of the 

1964 Civil Rights Act as amended and (II) violation of the Elliott-Larsen Civil 

Rights Act. (DE 1.) This case has been referred to me to conduct a settlement 

conference. (DE 16.)1

 I conducted an initial settlement conference on April 21, 

2016, and it was continued by telephone on May 19, 2016. (See DEs 17, 22 & 23.) 

                                                            

1

 Although the case was originally assigned to Judge Parker and the Undersigned, 

it was later reassigned to Judge Cohn and Magistrate Judge Stafford. (See DE 18.) 

2:15-cv-12525-AC-EAS Doc # 29 Filed 06/23/16 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 97
2

On May 20, 2016, I noticed the in-person continuation of the settlement conference 

for June 27, 2016. (DE 24.) 

Currently before the Court is Defendants’ June 21, 2016 motion to vacate 

and reschedule the continuation of the settlement conference “for a time after all 

discovery issues have been resolved.” (See DE 25.) Plaintiffs have filed a 

response, and Judge Cohn has referred this motion to me for hearing and 

determination. (DEs 27, 28.) 

Upon consideration, Defendants’ motion (DE 25) is DENIED for the reasons 

stated in Plaintiff’s response, the Court believing that if Plaintiffs are comfortable 

proceeding without completion of the remaining depositions, then the delay sought 

by Defendants is unnecessary. Furthermore, the Court is persuaded that an earlier 

settlement conference could help to avoid additional litigation costs. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: June 23, 2016 s/Anthony P. Patti 

 Anthony P. Patti 

 U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was sent to parties of record 

on June 23, 2016, electronically and/or by U.S. Mail. 

 s/Michael Williams 

 Case Manager for the 

 Honorable Anthony P. Patti 

2:15-cv-12525-AC-EAS Doc # 29 Filed 06/23/16 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 98
#### § 196.12-1 Posting.

If a stability letter is issued in accordance with the requirements in § 170.120 of this chapter, it must be posted under glass or other suitable transparent material in the pilothouse of the vessel.

[CGD 79-023, 48 FR 51053, Nov. 4, 1983]
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 250 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 250

To require the Surface Transportation Board to consider certain issues 
when deciding whether to authorize the construction of a railroad line.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 7, 2009

   Mr. Gene Green of Texas introduced the following bill; which was 
     referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To require the Surface Transportation Board to consider certain issues 
when deciding whether to authorize the construction of a railroad line.

    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 ``Neighborhood Rail Accountability 
Act''.

SEC. 2. AMENDMENT.

    Section 10901 of title 49, United States Code, is amended by adding 
at the end the following new subsections:
    ``(e) In determining whether to issue a certificate authorizing the 
construction of an additional railroad line, or the construction of an 
extension to any railroad line, the Board shall give greater weight to 
local official statements and public comments in opposition to the 
proposed construction, especially with respect to construction in a 
residential area, if there is an unusually high level of such public 
opposition.
    ``(f) Before issuing a certificate under this section authorizing 
the construction of an additional railroad line, or the construction of 
an extension to any railroad line, the Board shall identify any 
disproportionate negative impacts on any socioeconomic population, and 
shall include a discussion of alternatives that were considered that 
would have avoided such disproportionate negative impacts.
    ``(g) If the Board receives information indicating that an 
applicant for a certificate under this section has provided to the 
Board false information that could materially affect the Board's 
determination, the process of considering the application shall be 
halted until the Board has determined whether such information has been 
provided, and whether the information was knowingly provided. If the 
Board determines that such information has been provided unknowingly, 
the Board shall require the applicant to provide correct information 
before the process may resume. If the Board determines that such 
information has been provided knowingly, the Board shall not issue a 
certificate pursuant to that application.''.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Thursday, March 16, 1995 (46), Para 46.22 Leave of Absence]
[Page 414]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.46.22  leave of absence

  By unanimous consent, leave of absence was granted to Ms. Eddie 
Bernice JOHNSON of Texas, for today.
  And then,
```
98-2002.

#### State ex rel. Gonzalez v. McGough.

In Mandamus. On answer of respondent and on motion to dismiss. *Sua sponte,*cause dismissed.

Moyer, C.J., Douglas, Resnick, F.E. Sweeney, Pfeifer, Cook and Lundberg Stratton, JJ., concur.
§ 58.25-65 Feeder circuits. ( a ) Each vessel with one or more electric-driven steering-gear power units must have at least two feeder circuits, which must be separated as widely as practicable. One or more of these circuits must be supplied from the vessel's main service switchboard. On a vessel where the rudder stock is over 23 centimeters (9 inches) in diameter in way of the tiller, excluding strengthening for navigation in ice, and where a final source of emergency power is required by § 112.05-5(a) of this chapter, one or more of these circuits must be supplied from the emergency switchboard, or from an alternative source of power that— ( 1 ) Is available automatically within 45 seconds of loss of power from the vessel's service switchboard;
( 2 ) Comes from an independent source of power in the steering-gear compartment;
( 3 ) Is used for no other purpose; and
( 4 ) Has a capacity for one half-hour of continuous operation, to move the rudder from 15° on either side to 15° on the other in not more than 60 seconds with the vessel at its deepest loadline draft and running at one-half maximum ahead service speed or 7 knots, whichever is greater.
( b ) Each vessel that has a steering gear with multiple electric-driven power units must be arranged so that each power unit is supplied by a separate feeder.
( c ) Each feeder circuit must have a disconnect switch in the steering-gear compartment.
( d ) Each feeder circuit must have a current-carrying capacity of— ( 1 ) 125% of the rated full-load current rating of the electric steering-gear motor or power unit; and
( 2 ) 100% of the normal current of one steering-gear control system including all associated motors.
[CGD 83-043, 60 FR 24776, May 10, 1995, as amended by USCG-2020-0634, 89 FR 50178, June 12, 2024]
89–008

107TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session 107–114

PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 2311, ENERGY

AND WATER DEVELOPMENT APPROPRIATIONS BILL, 2002

JUNE 26, 2001.—Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

Mr. SESSIONS, from the Committee on Rules,

submitted the following

REPORT

[To accompany H. Res. 180]

The Committee on Rules, having had under consideration House

Resolution 180, by a nonrecord vote, report the same to the House

with the recommendation that the resolution be adopted.

SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS OF THE RESOLUTION

The resolution provides for consideration of H.R. 2311, the Energy and Water Development Appropriations Bill, 2002, under an

open rule. The rule provides one hour of general debate equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations. The rule waives all points

of order against consideration of the bill.

The rule provides that the amendment printed in this report

shall be considered as adopted. The rule further provides that the

bill shall be considered for amendment by paragraph. The rule

waives points of order against provisions in the bill, as amended,

for failure to comply with clause 2 of rule XXI (prohibiting unauthorized or legislative provisions in a general appropriations bill),

except as specified in the rule. The rule allows the Chairman of the

Committee of the Whole to accord priority in recognition to Members who have preprinted their amendments in the Congressional

Record. Finally, the rule provides one motion to recommit with or

without instructions.

SUMMARY OF AMENDMENT CONSIDERED AS ADOPTED UPON ADOPTION

OF THE RULE

Callahan—Strikes Title I, section 103.

2

TEXT OF AMENDMENT CONSIDERED AS ADOPTED

In Title I, General Provisions, Corps of Engineers—Civil, strike

Section 103.

Æ
# C_2012184EN.01000501.xml

| 23.6.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 184/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.6.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 184/5

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Cour de cassation (France) lodged on 16 April 2012 — Association de médiation sociale v Union locale des syndicats CGT, Hichem Laboubi, Union départementale CGT des Bouche-du-Rhône, Confédération générale du travail (CGT)

(Case C-176/12)

2012/C 184/08

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Referring court

Cour de cassation

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Association de médiation sociale

Applicant:

Defendants: Union locale des syndicats CGT, Hichem Laboubi, Union départementale CGT des Bouche-du-Rhône, Confédération générale du travail (CGT)

Defendants:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | May the fundamental right of workers to information and consultation, recognised by Article 27 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, and as specified in the provisions of Directive 2002/14/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2002 establishing a general framework for informing and consulting employees in the European Community, (1) be invoked in a dispute between private individuals in order to assess the compliance of a national measure implementing the directive? |
| --- | --- |

1.

May the fundamental right of workers to information and consultation, recognised by Article 27 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union, and as specified in the provisions of Directive 2002/14/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2002 establishing a general framework for informing and consulting employees in the European Community, (1) be invoked in a dispute between private individuals in order to assess the compliance of a national measure implementing the directive?

1

| 2. | In the affirmative, may those same provisions be interpreted as precluding a national legislative provision which excludes from the calculation of staff numbers in the undertaking, in particular to determine the legal thresholds for putting into place bodies representing staff, workers with the following contracts: apprentice, contrat initiative-emploi, contrat d’accompagnement dans l’emploi and contrat de professionnalisation? |
| --- | --- |

2.

In the affirmative, may those same provisions be interpreted as precluding a national legislative provision which excludes from the calculation of staff numbers in the undertaking, in particular to determine the legal thresholds for putting into place bodies representing staff, workers with the following contracts: apprentice, contrat initiative-emploi, contrat d’accompagnement dans l’emploi and contrat de professionnalisation?

---

(1)  Directive 2002/14/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 March 2002 establishing a general framework for informing and consulting employees in the European Community — Joint declaration of the European Parliament, the Council and the Commission on employee representation (OJ 2002 L 80, p. 29).

1

---
§ 64.9 Maintenance, repair, and alteration of MPTs. ( a ) Each MPT must be maintained in accordance with the approved plans, this part, and subpart 98.30 of this chapter.
( b ) Repair of an MPT is authorized, provided that each repair is in accordance with the approved plans.
( c ) No MPT may be altered, except with the written approval of the Commanding Officer, U.S. Coast Guard Marine Safety Center.
( d ) After each welded repair or alteration, an MPT must be hydrostatically pressure-tested in accordance with § 64.83(a).
[CGD 84-043, 55 FR 37409, Sept. 11, 1990, as amended by USCG-2020-0634, 89 FR 50199, June 12, 2024]
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 July 5, 2008

|Filer                    | Filing Type    | Filing Proposal                                                                                                                                                                                    | End of Comment Period                                  
|------------------------ | -------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------
|FIRST SECURITY BANCORP   | * 3A3          | First Security Bancorp, Searcy, Arkansas, to acquire 100 percent of Union Bancshares of Benton, Inc., Benton, Arkansas, and thereby indirectly acquire The Union Bank of Benton, Benton, Arkansas. | Newspaper:07/17/2008Federal Register:07/14/2008        
|Newspaper:               | 07/17/2008    
|Federal Register:        | 07/14/2008    
|HEARTLAND COMMUNITY BANK | Member         | Heartland Community Bank, Bryant, Arkansas, to become a member of the Federal Reserve System.                                                                                                      | Newspaper:Not applicableFederal Register:Not applicable
|Newspaper:               | Not applicable
|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