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 May 28, 2011

|Filer              | Filing Type    | Filing Proposal                                                                                                                                                                 | End of Comment Period                              
|------------------ | -------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------
|UNITED LEGACY BANK | * Branch       | United Legacy Bank, Winter Park, Florida, to establish a branch located at 425 US Highway 17-92 South, Longwood, Florida, to be know as the United Legacy Bank-Longwood Office. | Newspaper:06/09/2011Federal Register:Not applicable
|Newspaper:         | 06/09/2011    
|Federal Register:  | Not applicable

## Availability of CRA Public Evaluations

|Institution / Location           | RSSDID | Exam Date  | CRAPublic Date | CRARating | Exam Method
|-------------------------------- | ------ | ---------- | -------------- | --------- | -----------
|CITIZENS TR BK, ATLANTA, GEORGIA | 680130 | 01/24/2011 | 05/15/2011     | O         | Int Sm Bank

## 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
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A16A0099. NOAH S. ROSNER v. BARBARA JO CALL.

Noah S. Rosner filed an application for discretionary appeal, seeking review

of the trial court’s order denying his motion to set aside a judgment under OCGA §

9-11-60 (g). Such orders are generally directly appealable, so we granted the

application under OCGA § 5-6-35 (j). Case Number A15D0501 (Aug. 11, 2015).

Rosner filed a notice of appeal following our grant of his discretionary application,

and that notice of appeal is now before us. It appears, however, that Rosner had

previously filed a notice of appeal from the same order in the trial court, and that

appeal has been docketed in thisCourt asCase Number A16A0007. Because this case

is duplicative of Case Number A16A0007, we hereby DISMISS this case as

superfluous. Case Number A16A0007 remains pending for disposition.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

09/22/2015

September 22, 2015
# C_2012080EN.01001202.xml

| 17.3.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 80/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.3.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 80/12

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale Amministrativo per la Sardegna (Italy) lodged on 2 January 2012 — Danilo Tola v Ministero della Difesa

(Case C-4/12)

2012/C 80/17

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Referring court

Tribunale Amministrativo per la Sardegna

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Danilo Tola

Applicant:

Defendant: Ministero della Difesa

Defendant:

Following the withdrawal of the reference for a preliminary ruling on 5 January 2012, by order of 18 January 2012 the Court of Justice removed the case from the register.

---
§ 68.19 Application by an 883-1 corporation to document a vessel. ( a ) An application by an 883-1 corporation to document a vessel must comply with the applicable requirements in subparts A, D, E, F, G, H, I, K, and L of part 67 of this chapter.
( b ) An application by an 883-1 corporation to document a vessel must include a copy of the Certificate of Compliance issued under § 68.7.
[CGD 95-014, 60 FR 31606, June 15, 1995. Redesignated and amended by USCG-2005-20258, 71 FR 61418, Oct. 18, 2006]
Amendment to Deferred Compensation Agmt. by and btwn Reg. and Thomas K. Barton



 Exhibit 10.21 
  
 AMENDMENT TO 
 DEFERRED COMPENSATION AGREEMENT 
  
 This
AMENDMENT TO DEFERRED COMPENSATION AGREEMENT (the “Amendment”) is entered into as of September 30, 2004, by and among
RACKABLE SYSTEMS, INC., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”) and Tom Barton (the “Executive”). 
  
 WHEREAS, the Company and Executive are
parties to that certain Deferred Compensation Agreement, dated December 23, 2002 (the “Deferred Compensation Agreement”); 
  
 WHEREAS, the Company and Executive hereby desire to amend the Deferred Compensation Agreement to provide for the
immediate payment of the compensation benefits as described in Section 1 below; and 
  
 WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 7 of the Deferred Compensation Agreement, the Deferred Compensation Agreement may be amended by an instrument in writing executed by the Company and
Executive. 
  
 AGREEMENT 
  
 NOW THEREFORE, in
consideration of the amendment of the Deferred Compensation Agreement and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the undersigned hereby agree as follows: 
  
 1. Section 1 of the Deferred Compensation Agreement is amended to read in its
entirety as follows: 
  
 “1. Deferred Compensation
Benefit. The Company shall pay to the Executive on September 30, 2004, a single, lump-sum payment of five hundred forty eight thousand nine hundred fifty nine dollars ($548,959.00).” 
  
 2. Other than as set forth in Section 1 hereof, all provisions of the Deferred
Compensation Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. 
  
 3. This
Amendment may not be waived, amended or modified without the prior mutual written consent of the Company and Executive. 
  
 4. This Amendment shall be governed construed in accordance with the substantive laws of the State of Delaware, without application of its conflict or choice of
law provision. The Company and the Executive agree that this Amendment is not an ERISA plan or part of an ERISA plan. 
  
 5. This Amendment may be executed in one or more counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but such counterparts shall together constitute one and
the same instrument. 







 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned
have executed this AMENDMENT as of the date set first set forth above. 
  

					
	RACKABLE SYSTEMS, INC.	 	 	 	EXECUTIVE
			
	    /s/ Todd Ford	 	 	 	    /s/ Tom Barton
	 Todd Ford
	 	 	 	 Tom Barton

	 Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of MYR Group Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended
June 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, William A. Koertner, Chief Executive Officer and President of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

September 16,
2008

/s/WILLIAM A. KOERTNER Chief Executive Officer
President


---



QuickLinks
Argued and submitted July 13,

reversed and remanded for reconsideration October 18, 1995

#### EMPLOYMENT DEPARTMENT, *Petitioner, v.*ROBERT F. WUNSCH and Salem-Keizer School District #24J, *Respondents.*

(94-AB-1432, 94-AB-978, 94-AB-2418; CA A84916)

904 P2d 1085

Michael C. Livingston, Assistant Attorney General, argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the briefs were Theodore R. Kulongoski, Attorney General, and Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General.

Conrad E. Yunker argued the cause for respondent SalemKeizer School District #24J. With him on the briefs was Kevin L. Mannix, P.C.

Respondent Robert F. Wunsch, pro *se,*waived appearance.

Before Deits, Presiding Judge, and De Muniz and Haselton, Judges.

PER CURIAM

Reversed and remanded for reconsideration. *SalemKeizer School Dist. #24J v. Employment Dept.,*137 Or App 320, 904 P2d 1082 (1995).
Release dates | 
    Full version (25 KB PDF)Board Actions | 
    Actions under delegated authority
    
    Applications and reports received:Boston | New York | Philadelphia 
  | Cleveland | Richmond 
  | AtlantaChicago | St. Louis | Minneapolis 
  | Kansas City | Dallas 
  | San Francisco

# Actions under delegated authority

## Actions taken during the week ending February 27, 2010

---





## Bank Branches, Domestic

|
|
|

## 

|
|
|

## 

|
|
|

## Bank Holding Companies

|
|
|

## 

|
|
|

## 

|
|
|

## Bank Mergers

|
|
|

## 

|
|
|

## Banks, Foreign

|
|
|

## Change in Bank Control

|
|
|

## 

|
|
|

## Extensions of Time

|
|
|

## 

|
|
|

## 

|
|
|

## 

|
|
|

## 

|
|
|

## International Operations

|
|
|

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

---

Home Banking information and regulation  Accessibility Contact us
§ 72.20-10 Location of crew spaces. ( a ) Crew quarters must not be located farther forward in the vessel than a vertical plane located at 5 percent of the vessel's length abaft the forward side of the stem at the designed summer load water line. However, for vessels in other than ocean or coastwise service, this distance need not exceed 8.5 meters (28 feet). For the purpose of this paragraph, the vessel's length must be as defined in § 43.15-1 of subchapter E (Load Lines) of this chapter. Unless approved by the Commandant, no section of the deck head of the crew spaces may be below the deepest load line.
( b ) There must be no direct communication, except through solid, close fitted doors or hatches between crew spaces and chain lockers, or machinery spaces.
Exhibit32.1

** **

** **

**Certificationof CEO and CFO**

**Pursuantto 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,**

**AsAdopted Pursuant to**

**Section906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

 

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Shelter Properties IV (the"Partnership"), for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2008 as filed withthe Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), MarthaL. Long, as the equivalent of the chief executive officer of the Partnership,and Stephen B. Waters, as the equivalent of the chief financial officer of thePartnership, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to thebest of his knowledge:

 

(1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of thePartnership.

 

 

 

 

Thiscertification is furnished with this Report pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Partnership forpurposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, asamended.
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 4, 2010

|Filer | Filing Type | Filing Proposal | End of Comment Period
|----- | ----------- | --------------- | ---------------------
|NONE 

## 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
§ 1005.3 Acknowledgment of claims. ( a ) Each carrier shall, upon receipt in writing or by electronic transmission of a proper claim in the manner and form described in the regulations, acknowledge the receipt of such claim in writing or electronically to the claimant within 30 days after the date of its receipt by the carrier unless the carrier shall have paid or declined such claim in writing or electronically within 30 days of the receipt thereof. The carrier shall indicate in its acknowledgment to the claimant what, if any, additional documentary evidence or other pertinent information may be required by it further to process the claim as its preliminary examination of the claim, as filed, may have revealed.
( b ) The carrier shall at the time each claim is received create a separate file and assign thereto a successive claim file number and note that number on all documents filed in support of the claim and all records and correspondence with respect to the claim, including the acknowledgment of receipt. At the time such claim is received the carrier shall cause the date of receipt to be recorded on the face of the claim document, and the date of receipt shall also appear in the carrier's acknowledgment of receipt to the claimant. The carrier shall also cause the claim file number to be noted on the shipping order, if in its possession, and the delivery receipt, if any, covering such shipment, unless the carrier has established an orderly and consistent internal procedure for assuring: ( 1 ) That all information contained in shipping orders, delivery receipts, tally sheets, and all other pertinent records made with respect to the transportation of the shipment on which claim is made, is available for examination upon receipt of a claim;
( 2 ) that all such records and documents (or true and complete reproductions thereof) are in fact examined in the course of the investigation of the claim (and an appropriate record is made that such examination has in fact taken place); and
( 3 ) that such procedures prevent the duplicate or otherwise unlawful payment of claims.
[37 FR 4258, Mar. 1, 1972, as amended at 37 FR 20943, Oct. 10, 1972; 47 FR 12803, Mar. 25, 1982]
#### Lenora Morenus, *Respondent, v.*Ira Crawford, *Appellant, Impleaded, etc.*

— Judgment and order reversed, new trial granted, costs to abide event. Opinion by

Bockes, J.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

November 1, 2018

No. 04-17-00356-CR

Ex Parte Juan ENRIQUEZ,

Appellant

From the 81st Judicial District Court, Karnes County, Texas

Trial Court No. 3862-G

Honorable Donna S. Rayes, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

Karen Angelini, Justice

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

Irene Rios, Justice

The court has considered the appellant’s motion for en banc reconsideration, and the 

motion is DENIED.

_________________________________

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 1st day of November, 2018.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
§ 32.60-1 Scantlings, material, and workmanship—TB/ALL. ( a ) All tank vessels, the construction or conversion of which is started on or after July 1, 1951, shall conform to the requirements in this subpart in construction of hulls. The hull and deckhouses shall be of steel or iron construction except that the pilothouse and decks over quarters may be constructed of wood. Scantlings, material, and workmanship, subdivision of cargo spaces, fitting of cofferdams, and testing of tanks shall be at least equivalent to the requirements of the American Bureau of Shipping or other recognized classification society.
( b ) See subpart 32.57 for structural fire protection requirements for tank vessels contracted for on or after January 1, 1963.
§ 1104.12 Service of pleadings, papers, and decisions. ( a ) *Generally.* Every document filed with the Board should include a certificate showing simultaneous service upon all parties to the proceeding. Service on the parties should be by the same method and class of service used in serving the Board, with charges, if any, prepaid. One copy should be served on each party. If service is made on the Board in person, and personal service on other parties is not feasible, service should be made by first-class or express mail. If a document is filed with the Board through the e-filing process, a copy of the e-filed document should be emailed to other parties if that means of service is acceptable to those other parties, or a paper copy of the document should be personally served on the other parties, but if email is not acceptable to the receiving party and personal service is not feasible, service of a paper copy should be by first-class or express mail. When a party is represented by a practitioner or attorney, service upon the practitioner is deemed to be service upon the party. If a document is filed with the Board through the e-filing process, a copy of the e-filed document should be emailed to other parties, or a paper copy of the document should be personally served on the other parties, but if neither email nor personal service is feasible, service of a paper copy should be by first-class or express mail.
( b ) *Exceptions.* Copies of letters to the Board relating to oral argument under part 1116, and subpoenas under § 1113.2, need not be served on other parties of the proceeding. Service of comments in rulemaking proceedings is not required, unless specifically directed by the Board.
( c ) *Sample Certificate of Service.* I certify that I have this day served copies of document upon all parties of record in this proceeding, by (here state the method of making service which must be consistent with this part). Signature Date
(49 U.S.C. 721, 5 U.S.C. 553)
( d ) *Service by the Board.* Service of decisions and other Board issuances as appropriate generally will be made by electronic means (e-service), except in the case of paper filers that have not consented to e-service, in which case service upon that recipient will be made by first-class mail. Paper filers that include email contact information on their filing and do not opt out of e-service via written notification will be deemed to have consented to e-service.
[47 FR 49554, Nov. 1, 1982, as amended at 48 FR 44827, Sept. 30, 1983; 61 FR 52711, Oct. 8, 1996; 69 FR 18499, Apr. 8, 2004; 81 FR 8853, Feb. 23, 2016; 84 FR 12944, Apr. 3, 2019]
##### 



EXHIBIT 4.9
 Contract on Investment Project
  th
 Zastron Electronic (Shenzhen). Co. Ltd.  Zhuao Industrial Village, Gushu, Xinan Town, Baoan District, Shenzhen City  Lei Lai Fong
 Regulations on High and New Technology Industrial Park of
Shenzhen Special Economic Zone Zastron
Electronic Product Production Base Guangming High and New Technology Industrial
Park
 1.
    
    Project Name: Zastron Electronic Product Production Base.2.
    
    Project Location: Guangming High and New Technology Industrial Park, Baoan District,
Shenzhen City, Guangdong Province.3.
    
    Investment Amount: the total investment of the project amounts to 2,597,000,000 RMB
Yuan.4.
    
    Scope of Operations: production and operation of color LCD display modules, mobile phones
and RF (Radio Frequency) modules, digital audio modules and multi-media broadcasting
receivers, and other products.5.
    
    Rights and Obligations of Party A:
 Shen Chan Ye Dai Ban Han [2006] No. 6 Guangming High and New Technology Industrial Park 120,000




---



##### 



6.
    
    Rights and Obligations of Party B:
  Regulations on High and New Technology Industrial Park of Shenzhen Special Economic Zone
 2
years The Contract on Transfer of Land Use Rights 12
 100
 12,000,000 120,000




---



##### 



Contract on Transfer of Land Use Rights Contract on Transfer
of Land Use Rights
 Regulations on High and New
Technology Industrial Park of Shenzhen Special Economic Zone Rules and Regulations on Transfer of Land Use Rights of Shenzhen Special Economic Zone
   Rules and Regulations on Transfer of Land Use Rights of Shenzhen Special
Economic Zone
 Rules and
Regulations on Transfer of Land Use Rights of Shenzhen Special Economic Zone




---



##### 



8.
    
    Method of Dispute Settlement:
  9.
    
    Validity:
   Party A (Stamp): Shezhen Baoan District High and New Technology Industrial Park Development and
Investment Co., Ltd.Legal Representative or its Authorized Representative (Signature): Long Yaoting
Date: Mar. 14, 2006
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: 4
Federal Reserve Bank of: Cleveland

## Filings received during the week ending February 19, 2011

|Filer | Filing Type | Filing Proposal | End of Comment Period
|----- | ----------- | --------------- | ---------------------
|NONE 

## Availability of CRA Public Evaluations

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

## CRA Examinations scheduled for Second Quarter of 2011 (April 1, 2011 - June 30, 2011)

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

* 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