alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                          20,463
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               9
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                16,700
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     95,733
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                         118,161
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                           119,486
<LOANS>                                        320,844
<ALLOWANCE>                                    (4,342)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 593,482
<DEPOSITS>                                     517,362
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              6,078
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        29,200
<OTHER-SE>                                      40,842
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 593,482
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  6,914
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                2,924
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   114
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 9,952
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               4,217
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,225
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            5,727
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      650
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  4,412
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,396
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,765
<EPS-BASIC>                                      .60
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.55
<LOANS-NON>                                      3,316
<LOANS-PAST>                                       646
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                   248
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                 20,039
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 3,852
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      436
<RECOVERIES>                                        58
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                4,342
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
I

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1513

To amend title 38, United States Code, to change the date for the beginning

of the Vietnam era for the purpose of veterans benefits from August

5, 1964, to December 22, 1961.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

APRIL 7, 1995

Mr. SOLOMON introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Veterans’ Affairs

A BILL

To amend title 38, United States Code, to change the date

for the beginning of the Vietnam era for the purpose

of veterans benefits from August 5, 1964, to December

22, 1961.

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

3 That section 101(29) of title 38, United States Code, is

4 amended by striking out ‘‘August 5, 1964’’ and inserting

5 in lieu thereof ‘‘December 22, 1961’’.

Æ
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Thursday, June 15, 1995 (80), Para 80.19 Leave of Absence]
[Page 1008]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.80.19  leave of absence

  By unanimous consent, leave of absence was granted--
  To Mr. DICKEY, for today;
  To Mr. McNULTY, for today after 2 p.m.; and
  To Mr. YATES, for today.
  And then,
```
#### In re Disqualificaton of McDonnell. Chess Development Company et al. *v.*Commerce Title Agency, Inc. et al.

[Cite as *In re Disqualification of McDonnell*(1998), 84 Ohio St.3d 1229.]

(No. 98-AP-038

Decided May 5, 1998.)

Moyer, C.J.

This affidavit of disqualification was filed by Joseph A. Farchione, counsel for plaintiffs, seeking the disqualification of Judge Nancy R. McDonnell from further proceedings regarding the above-captioned case.

The record contains several affidavits that offer conflicting versions of events that occurred on March 25, 1998 when a legal secretary for affiant’s law firm attempted to deliver documents in the underlying case to Judge McDonnell’s chambers. Affiant contends that Judge McDonnell personally accepted the pleadings from the secretary and made a prejudicial statement indicating that regardless of what documents affiant was filing, the case would proceed as scheduled. Affiant has submitted two affidavits from the secretary in support of his version of the events. Judge McDonnell denies personally receiving any documents from the secretary or making any statements to her. Her affidavit is supported by affidavits from her bailiff and a law clerk for another judge. The supporting affidavits state that the documents were delivered to Judge McDonnell’s bailiff and that the judge was not present when the delivery was made.

Having reviewed these affidavits in a light most favorable to the affiant, I cannot conclude that the statement allegedly made by Judge McDonnell demonstrates bias or prejudice against affiant. If true, the alleged comment appears simply to state the judge’s opinion that she previously had ruled on affiant’s *1230motion for a continuance and other matters raised in affiant’s pleadings and that the underlying trial would proceed as scheduled.

The balance of affiant’s contentions express disagreement with Judge McDonnell’s procedural rulings. Disagreement or dissatisfaction with a judge’s rulings of law does not constitute bias or prejudice that mandates that judge’s disqualification. *In re Disqualification of Murphy*(1988), 36 Ohio St.3d 605, 522 N.E.2d 459.

For these reasons, the affidavit is found not well taken and is denied. The case shall proceed before Judge McDonnell.
Exhibit  32.2



                    Certification of Chief Financial Officer

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                 SECTIONS 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
                                (18 U.S.C. 1350)



     In  connection  with the  Quarterly  Report of DGSE  Companies,  Inc.  (the
"Company")  on Form 10-QSB for the Period ended March 31, 2004 as filed with the
Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof (the  "Report"),  the
undersigned certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:

     1)   The Report fully  complies with the  requirements  of Section 13(a) or
          15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
     2)   The  information  contained  in the  Report  fairly  presents,  in all
          material respects,  the financial  condition and results of operations
          of the Company.



Dated: April 26, 2004                     By  /s/ John Benson
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            John Benson, Chief Financial Officer
                                            and Director
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-7683
PETER LENOX ALLEN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus CORRECTIONAL MEDICAL SYSTEMS; MICHAEL MURRAY; DOCTOR ROSAREIO; DOCTOR BRAVES; PHILLIP ADJEI, Doctor; DOCTOR GETACHEW; JOHN DOE, Doctor; DOCTOR ALLEN; PHYSICIAN ASSISTANT MYLES; PHYSICIAN ASSISTANT BENNETT; RICHARD LANHAM, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District ofMaryland, at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, District Judge. (CA97-1652-S) Submitted: February 12, 1998 Decided: March 4, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.2 Peter Lenox Allen, Appellant Pro Se. Philip Melton Andrews, Karl Joseph Nelson, KRAMON & GRAHAM, P.A., Baltimore, Maryland; John Joseph Curran, Jr., Attorney General, Gloria Selena Wilson-Shelton, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's order denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1994) complaint. We have reviewed the recordand the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Allen v. Correctional Med. Sys. , No. CA-97-1652-S (D. Md. Oct. 16, 1997).We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
fs1101_x102-hisp.htm


Exhibit 10.2 - Termination Letter





HISPÁNICA INTERNATIONAL DELIGHTS OF AMERICA








	
 

	
October 3, 2013












GRAN NEVADA Beverage, Inc.


Olympic Beverage, LLC


6402 Bardu Ave


Springfield, VA 22152


 


Jose Fidel Cabrera Escobar


Principle


 


This letter is to inform you that our Board of Directors has elected to terminate the Licensing Agreement with GRAN NEVADA Beverage, Inc. (GN) due to the fact that you will not provide our company with the additional information we requested. We understand your position and we hope to find common ground in other opportunities in the near future. We wish you and your organization well and we look forward to working together in a different capacity in the near future. Your acknowledgment below will confirm the dissolution of our previous agreement.



























HISPANICA INTERNATIONAL DELIGHTS


of AMERICA, Inc.


 


By: /s/ Fernando O. Leonzo                                                               


Fernando “Oswaldo” Leonzo, Chairman & CEO


 


 


We agree to the terms specified above.


Olympic Beverage, LLC on behalf of


GRAN NEVADA Beverage, Inc.


 


By: /s/ Jose Fidel Cabrera Escobar                                                                


Jose Fidel Cabrera Escobar
§ 72.05-90 Vessels contracted for prior to May 26, 1965. ( a ) Vessels of 100 gross tons and over, contracted for prior to May 26, 1965, on an international voyage; and vessels of 100 gross tons and over, contracted for on or after May 28, 1936, and prior to May 26, 1965, not on an international voyage; shall meet the following requirements: ( 1 ) Existing structure, arrangements, and materials previously approved will be considered satisfactory so long as they meet the minimum requirements of this paragraph and are maintained in good condition to the satisfaction of the Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection. Minor repairs and alterations may be made to the same standards as the original construction.
( 2 ) The details shall be in general agreement with §§ 72.05-5 through 72.05-60.
( b ) Vessels of 100 gross tons and over, contracted for prior to May 28, 1936, not on an international voyage, shall meet the following requirements: ( 1 ) Existing structure, arrangements, and materials previously approved will be considered satisfactory so long as they meet the minimum requirements of this paragraph and are maintained in good condition to the satisfaction of the Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection. Minor repairs and alterations may be made to the same standards as the original construction.
( 2 ) All vessels in ocean or coastwise service shall be fitted above the bulkhead deck with fire-resisting bulkheads and doors spaced not more than 131 feet apart which are capable of resisting the passage of flame for a period of at least 1 hour.
( 3 ) All vessels with berth or stateroom accommodations for 50 or more passengers shall be fitted with an approved automatic sprinkling system unless deemed unnecessary by the Commandant. This system shall be so installed as to protect all enclosed parts of the vessel accessible to passengers or crew while the vessel is being navigated, except cargo holds, machinery spaces, and when of fire-resisting construction, toilets, bathrooms, and spaces of similar construction. Where, in the case of a particular vessel, the Commandant does not consider the installation of an automatic water-sprinkling system necessary, such vessel shall be protected in such enclosed parts of the vessel as the Commandant shall deem necessary, with an automatic electric or pneumatic fire-detecting and alarm system, used singly or in combination, of a type approved by the Commandant.
( c ) Vessels of less than 100 gross tons, contracted for prior to May 26, 1965, which carry more than 150 passengers, shall meet the following requirements: ( 1 ) Existing structure, arrangements, and materials previously approved will be considered satisfactory so long as they meet the minimum requirements of this paragraph and are maintained in good condition to the satisfaction of the Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection. Minor repairs and alterations may be made to the same standards as the original construction.
( 2 ) For such vessels, contracted for on or after November 19, 1952, and prior to May 26, 1965, on an international voyage, the details shall be in general agreement with §§ 72.05-5 through 72.05-60.
[CGFR 67-87, 32 FR 19180, Dec. 20, 1967]
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: 11
Federal Reserve Bank of: Dallas

## Filings received during the week ending January 1, 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     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
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: 3
Federal Reserve Bank of: Philadelphia

## Filings received during the week ending August 15, 2009

|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
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Tuesday, June 27, 1995 (87), Para 87.26 Recorded Vote]
[Page 1047]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.87.26  recorded vote

  A recorded vote by electronic device was ordered in the Committee of 
the Whole on the foregoing amendment, as amended, submitted by Mr. 
DeLAY.

It was decided in the

Yeas

273

affirmative

Nays

146
```
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: 3
Federal Reserve Bank of: Philadelphia

## Filings received during the week ending August 1, 2009

|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
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Monday, June 26, 1995 (86), Para 86.9 Additional Sponsors]
[Page 1041]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.86.9  additional sponsors

  Under clause 4 of rule XXII, sponsors were added to public bills and 
resolutions as follows:

       H.R. 359: Mr. Ney and Mr. Lewis of California.
       H.R. 899: Mr. Bass.
       H.R. 927: Mr. Burr and Mr. Andrews.
       H.R. 972: Mr. Spratt and Mr. Ackerman.
       H.R. 995: Mr. Solomon.
       H.R. 996: Mr. Solomon.
       H.R. 1006: Mr. Filner and Mr. Flake.
       H.R. 1073: Mr. Linder, Mr. Wynn, Mr. Baldacci, Mr. Studds, 
     Mr. Clay, Mr. Pomeroy, Mr. Traficant, and Mr. Yates.
       H.R. 1074: Mr. Hastings of Florida, Mr. Dicks, Mr. Wynn, 
     and Mr. Traficant.
       H.R. 1100: Ms. Lofgren.
       H.R. 1299: Mr. Luther.
       H.R. 1482: Mr. Sanders.
       H.R. 1483. Mr. Sanders.
       H.R. 1608: Mr. Waxman.
       H.R. 1749: Mr. Shays, Mr. Jacobs, Mr. Goss, Mr. Neumann, 
     Mr. Deutsch, and Mr. Visclosky.
       H.R. 1802: Ms. Lofgren.
       H.R. 1834: Mr. Barton of Texas, Mr. Bono, Mr. Cox, Mr. 
     Crapo, Mr. Dreier, Mr. Latham, Mr. Livingston, Mr. McCrery, 
     Mr. Miller of Florida, Mr. Parker, and Mr. Taylor of North 
     Carolina.
```
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Tuesday, May 2, 1995 (60), Para 60.9 Motion to Instruct Conferees--H.R. 1158]
[Page 624]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.60.9  motion to instruct conferees--h.r. 1158

  Mr. OBEY moved that the managers on the part of the House at the 
conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on H.R. 1158 be 
instructed to agree to the Senate amendment numbered 1 except for Senate 
action under title IV deleting the ``Deficit Reduction Lock-Box'', 
Senate language rescinding $100,000,000 from Veterans Administration 
medical care and construction and except for Senate action under Chapter 
IV related to ``Debt Relief for Jordan''.
  After debate,
  By unanimous consent, the previous question was ordered on the motion 
to instruct the managers on the part of the House.
  The question being put, viva voce,
  Will the House now agree to said motion?
  The SPEAKER pro tempore, Mr. COMBEST, announced that the nays had it.
  Mr. OBEY objected to the vote on the ground that a quorum was not 
present and not voting.
  A quorum not being present,
  The roll was called under clause 4, rule XV, and the call was taken by 
electronic device.

Yeas

187

When there appeared

Nays

207
```
Argued and submitted October 31,

reversed and remanded for reconsideration November 29, 1995

#### JOHNNY TAYLOR, *Petitioner, v.*BOARD OF PAROLE AND POST-PRISON SUPERVISION, *Respondent.*

(CA A86298)

905 P2d 1188

Alan H. Biedermann, Deputy Public Defender, argued the cause for petitioner. With him on the brief was Sally L. Avera, Public Defender.

Robert K. Lau, Assistant Attorney General, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief were Theodore R. Kulongoski, Attorney General, and Virginia L. Linder, Solicitor General.

Before Deits, Presiding Judge, and De Muniz and Hasel-ton, Judges.

PER CURIAM

Reversed and remanded for reconsideration. *Fernandez v. Board of Parole,*137 Or App 247, 904 P2d 1071 (1995).
#### § 1115.7 Petitions for judicial review; mailing address.

Petitions for judicial review of final agency orders may be served on the Board pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 2112(a) and be addressed to “General Counsel, Office of the General Counsel, Surface Transportation Board, Washington, DC 20423.”

[53 FR 20854, June 7, 1988, as amended at 61 FR 52714, Oct. 8, 1996]
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 126 (Monday, July 2, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Pages 36095-36096]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-3216]


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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 5829]


Announcement of Meetings of the International Telecommunication 
Advisory Committee

SUMMARY: This notice announces meetings of the International 
Telecommunication Advisory Committee (ITAC) to prepare advice on U.S. 
positions for a meeting of the Advisory and Study Groups of the 
International Telecommunication Union--Development Sector (ITU-D), to 
prepare advice on U.S. positions for a meeting of the Radio Assembly of 
the International Telecommunication Union--Radiocommunication Sector 
(ITU-R), and to prepare advice on U.S. positions for a meeting of the 
Advisory Group of the International Telecommunication Union--
Telecommunication Standardization Sector (ITU-T).
    The ITAC will meet as the ITAC-D to prepare for the ITU-D September 
2007

[[Page 36096]]

Advisory and Study Group meeting on July 19 and 26, and August 2 and 9, 
2007, in the Washington, DC metro area. All meetings are from 2 p.m.-4 
p.m. EDT.
    The ITAC will meet as the ITAC-R to prepare for the next ITU-R 
Radio Assembly weekly on Thursdays from July 26 through October 11, 
2007 from 10 a.m.-noon, in the Washington, DC metro area.
    The ITAC will meet as the ITAC-T to prepare for the ITU-T December 
2007 Advisory Group meeting, in particular addressing restructuring the 
ITU-T Study Group structure, from 2 p.m.-4 p.m. EDT on July 18, 2007, 
in the Washington, DC metro area.
    The actual locations and other meeting particulars will be 
announced on the ITAC-D and ITAC-T reflectors or may be obtained from 
the secretariat, (<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#167b7f787764727c7356656277627338717960"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="d0bdb9beb1a2b4bab590a3a4b1a4b5feb7bfa6">[email protected]</span></a>). The meetings are open to the 
public.

    June 21, 2007.
Doreen McGirr,
Foreign Affairs Officer, EEB/CIP/MA, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 07-3216 Filed 6-29-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-07-M


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