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

# Board Actions

## Actions taken during the week ending October 23, 2010

----

Personnel            Management Division -- appointment of Charles O'Malley as associate director and Billy Sauls as senior adviser, effective October 24, 2010.            -Announced, October 21, 2010            Regulations and Policies            College Credit Card Agreements -- annual report to Congress under the Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act regarding agreements between credit card issuers and institutions of higher education or certain affiliated organizations that provide for the issuance of credit cards to college students.            -Approved, October 15, 2010            (A/C)                      Credit Risk Retention -- report to Congress under the Dodd-Frank Act on the potential impact of credit risk retention requirements on securitization markets.            -Approved, October 18, 2010                        Regulation E (Electronic Fund Transfers) -- final rule to implement legislation modifying the effective date of certain disclosure requirements applicable to gift cards under the Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act.            -Approved, October 18, 2010                        Regulation Z (Truth in Lending) -- publication for comment of amendments to clarify certain aspects of the rules implementing the Credit Card Accountability Responsibility and Disclosure Act in order to enhance protections for consumers who use credit cards.            -Approved, October 18, 2010                        Regulation Z (Truth in Lending) -- interim final rule with request for comment under the Dodd-Frank Act to ensure that real estate appraisers are free to use their independent professional judgment in assigning home values without influence or pressure from those with interests in the transactions.            -Approved, October 18, 2010            Enforcement            1st Financial Services Corporation, Hendersonville, North Carolina -- written agreement with the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond.            -Announced, October 19, 2010                        Highlands Bankshares, Inc., Abingdon, Virginia, and Highlands Union Bank -- written agreement with the Federal Reserve Bank of Richmond.            -Announced, October 19, 2010                        Persons Banking Company, Inc., Macon, Georgia -- written agreement with the Federal Reserve Bank of Atlanta and the Banking Commissioner of the State of Georgia.            -Announced, October 19, 2010            
Release dates |     Full version (300 KB PDF)Board Actions |     Actions under delegated authority    Applications and reports received:
```

[House Document 107-94]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

107th Congress, 1st Session - - - - - - - - - - - House Document 107-94 

 
    DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA'S FY 2002 BUDGET REQUEST ACT AND FY 2001 
                      SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET REQUEST

                               __________

                             COMMUNICATION

                                  from

                   THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES

                              transmitting

THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FISCAL YEAR 2002 BUDGET REQUEST ACT AND FISCAL 
  YEAR 2001 SUPPLEMENTAL BUDGET REQUEST, PURSUANT TO PUB. L. 105-33 SEC. 
  11701(a)(1) (111 STAT. 780)

July 10, 2001.--Referred to the Committee on Appropriations and ordered 
                             to be printed
                               __________

                    U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
89-012                     WASHINGTON : 2001

                                           The White House,
                                          Washington, July 2, 2001.
Hon. J. Dennis Hastert, 
Speaker of the House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Speaker: Pursuant to my constitutional authority 
and consistent with sections 202 (c) and (e) of The District of 
Columbia Financial Management and Responsibility Assistance Act 
of 1995 and section 446 of The District of Columbia Self-
Governmental Reorganization Act as amended in 1989, I am 
transmitting the District of Columbia's Fiscal Year 2002 Budget 
Request Act and Fiscal Year 2001 Supplemental Budget Request.
    The proposed FY 2002 Budget Request Act reflects the major 
programmatic objectives of the Mayor and the Council of the 
District of Columbia. For FY 2002, the District estimates total 
revenues and expenditures of $5.3 billion, resulting in an 
adjusted surplus of $85.8 million.
    The FY 2001 Supplemental Budget Request seeks approval for 
the District to use $92.5 million in surplus local revenues to 
address FY 2001 budget pressures, and approval for the Water 
and Sewer Authority (an enterprise fund) to spend $2.2 million 
of its own revenue.
            Sincerely,
                                                    George W. Bush.


```
#### Tennis H. Haulenbeck, *Appellant, v.*Alfred Van Nortrand, and others, Respondents.—

Judgment reversed, with costs, and judgment ordered for plaintiff on demurrer, with leave to defendant to answer on payment of costs of demurrer and of appeal. Opinion by

Bocees, J.
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 September 4, 2010

|Filer                         | Filing Type   | Filing Proposal                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                         | End of Comment Period                             
|----------------------------- | ------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------
|PATRIOT FINANCIAL PARTNERS LP | CIC           | Patriot Financial Partners, GP, L.P., Patriot Financial Partners, L.P., Patriot Financial Partners Parallel, L.P., Patriot Financial Partners, GP, LLC, Patriot Financial Managers, L.P., and Messrs. Ira M. Lubert, W. Kirk Wycoff and James J. Lynch, all of Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, to purchase up to 19.2 percent of Palmetto Bancshares, Inc., Greenville, SC. | Newspaper:Not availableFederal Register:07/20/2010
|Newspaper:                    | Not available
|Federal Register:             | 07/20/2010   

## 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
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                            5
<LEGEND>
     THIS SCHEDULE  CONTAINS SUMMARY  FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED FROM THE
     AUDITED  BALANCE  SHEET AS OF  DECEMBER  31,  1997,  AND THE  STATEMENT  OF
     OPERATIONS  FOR THE YEAR ENDED  DECEMBER 31, 1997,  AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
     ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                                        1,000

<S>                                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                        YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                             Dec-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                                  Dec-31-1997
<CASH>                                                                133
<SECURITIES>                                                        7,181
<RECEIVABLES>                                                           0
<ALLOWANCES>                                                            0
<INVENTORY>                                                             0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                    7,314
<PP&E>                                                                  0
<DEPRECIATION>                                                          0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                     77,436
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                                 162
<BONDS>                                                                 0
<COMMON>                                                                0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                   0
<PREFERRED>                                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                                         77,274
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                       77,436
<SALES>                                                            14,717
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                   14,973
<CGS>                                                                   0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                           0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                      467
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                      0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                    14,506
<INCOME-TAX>                                                            0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                                14,506
<DISCONTINUED>                                                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                         0
<CHANGES>                                                               0
<NET-INCOME>                                                       14,506
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                          16.32
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                           0




</TABLE>
#### Thomas Brown, *Respondent, v.*The First Methodist Protestant Church of the City of New York, *Appellant.*

— Judgment reversed, new trial ordered before another referee, with costs to* abide event. Opinion by

Daniels, J.
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 August 21, 2010

|Filer               | Filing Type   | Filing Proposal                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               | End of Comment Period                             
|------------------- | ------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------
|WVS FINANCIAL CORP. | CIC           | Interagency Notice of Change in Control by WVS Financial Corp. Employee Stock Ownerhsip Plan ("ESOP") and Jonathan D. Hoover, sole trustee, Pittsburgh, PA to retain 12.2% and eventually acquire up to 24.9% of the outstanding common voting shares of WVS Financial Corp., Pittsburgh, PA. | Newspaper:Not availableFederal Register:08/31/2010
|Newspaper:          | Not available
|Federal Register:   | 08/31/2010   

## Availability of CRA Public Evaluations

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

## CRA Examinations scheduled for Forth Quarter of 2010 (October 1, 2010 - December 31, 2010)

|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 32.1 AXONYX INC. SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATIONS In connection with the periodic report of AXONYX INC., a Nevada corporation (the Company), on Form 10-Q for
the period ended March 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, GOSSE B. BRUINSMA, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify as of the
date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code, that to the best of my knowledge: (1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, and (2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company at the dates and for the periods indicated. This Certification has not been, and shall not be deemed, filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission.  Date: May 10, 2006By:

        /s/ GOSSE B. BRUINSMA, MDGosse B. Bruinsma
  A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging or
otherwise adopting the signatures that appear in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Axonyx Inc. and will be retained by
Axonyx Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### § 1152.37 Financial status reports.

Within 30 days after the end of each quarter of the subsidy year, each carrier which is party to the financial assistance agreement shall submit to the subsidizer a Financial Status Report for each line operated under subsidy. Such Financial Status Report shall be in the form prescribed below. Significant deviations from the negotiated estimates must be explained. All data shall be developed in accordance with the methodology set forth in §§ 1152.31 through 1152.35. In the quarterly reports, the actual data for the year to date and a projection to the end of the subsidy year shall be shown for each item.

| | Actual | Projected |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Revenues for: | | |
| 1. Freight originated and/or terminated on branch | | |
| 2. Bridge traffic | | |
| 3. All other revenue and income | | |
| 4. Total revenues (lines 1 through 3) | | |
| Avoidable costs for: | | |
| 5. On-branch costs (lines 5a through 5j) | | |
| a. Maintenance of way and structures | | |
| b. Maintenance of equipment | | |
| c. Transportation | | |
| d. General administrative | | |
| e. Deadheading, taxi, and hotel | | |
| f. Overhead movement | | |
| g. Freight car costs | | |
| h. Return on investment—locomotives | | |
| i. Revenue taxes | | |
| j. Property taxes | | |
| 6. Off-branch costs | | |
| 7. Total avoidable costs (line 5 plus line 6) | | |
| Subsidization costs for: | | |
| 8. Rehabilitation | | |
| 9. Administrative costs | | |
| 10. Casualty | | |
| 11. Total subsidization costs (lines 8 through 10) | | |
| Return on value: | | |
| 12. Valuation of property (lines 12a through 12c) | | |
| a. Working capital | | |
| b. Income tax consequences | | |
| c. Net liquidation value | | |
| 13. Rate of return | | |
| 14. Total return on value (line 12 times line 13) | | |
| Subsidy payment: | | |
| 15. Subsidy payment (line 4 minus lines 7, 11, and 14) | | |
#### § 1016.102 When the Act applies.

The Act applies to any adversary adjudication pending before the Board after October 1, 1981. This includes proceedings begun before October 1, 1981, if final Board action has not been taken before that date, regardless of when they were initiated or when final Board action occurs. These rules incorporate the changes made in Pub. L. No. 99-80, 99 Stat. 183, which applies generally to cases instituted after October 1, 1984. If awards are sought for cases pending on October 1, 1981 or filed between that date and September 30, 1984, the prior statutory provisions (to the extent they differ from the existing ones, and our implementing rules) apply.

[54 FR 26379, June 23, 1989]
[Crim. No. 576.

Fourth Dist.

July 10, 1946.]

#### THE PEOPLE, Respondent, v. EDISON R. HIGHTOWER, Appellant.

Edison R. Hightower, in pro. per., for Appellant.

Robert W. Kenny, Attorney General, and L. G. Campbell, Deputy Attorney General, for Respondent.

MARKS, J.

This is an appeal from an order denying defendant’s petition for a writ of error *coram nobis.*

Petitioner is appearing here in propria persona. The petition prepared by him is confused and confusing. If we have analyzed it correctly it presents three grounds on which he hopes to obtain the relief asked. They are: (1) Alleged errors in admitting in evidence a pistol supposed to have been used by petitioner in perpetrating the armed robbery of which he was convicted; (2) Failure of his counsel to object to the introduction of certain evidence during his trial and to move to strike out other evidence; (3) Failure to compel the attendance at his trial of three witnesses who he seems to believe would have supported his defense of an alibi.

*299The trial judge was most considerate of petitioner and very patient at the hearings on the petition. He ordered him returned from the penitentiary to present his arguments.

When petitioner first appeared at the hearing the trial judge appointed counsel for him who had represented him in other matters and then continued the hearing. When the petitioner with this attorney again was before the court it appeared that this attorney thought it best not to represent him. The reason for this may have been suggested in the following remarks of petitioner: “To be honest with you, Your Honor, I was in hopes after talking to me, that you could get somebody to represent me properly who believed that I had a chance, as I believe that I have. ’ ’

Another attorney was appointed, the hearing was continued. At the next hearing it appeared that this attorney was not satisfactory to petitioner and that he hoped to be able to secure the services of a third attorney. The hearing was again continued with the statement of petitioner concerning the third attorney, that “If he fails to represent me, I will submit my case without argument. ’ ’

Petitioner again appeared, without counsel, and submitted the matter for decision. The trial judge stated that the shorthand notes of the trial had been read to him by the reporter; that he was satisfied that the trial of petitioner had been fair and impartial; that there was nothing to be done except to deny the petition.

The petition for a writ of error *coram nobis*cannot ' be used as a substitute for a motion for new trial or an appeal,  All questions presented by the petition were reviewable on a motion for new trial, or on appeal, so there was nothing before the trial court, and there is nothing before us to justify the issuance of the writ. *(People*v. *Knight,*73 Cal.App.2d 532 [166 P.2d 899].)

The order denying the writ is affirmed.

Barnard, P. J., concurred.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED April 20, 2005 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-50993 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus MARIA ANDREA CHAVEZ-GALINDO, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 2:04-CR-161-1-WWJ

-------------------- Before SMITH, CLEMENT, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Maria Andrea Chavez-Galindo raises arguments that are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), which held that a prior conviction is a sentencing factor under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) and not a separate criminal offense. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
-77.6 -77.4 -77.2 -77.0 -76.8 -76.6 -76.4 -76.2

 38.6

 38.8

 39.0

 39.2

★

▲

▲

▲

▲

★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲

 500

 1000

 1500

 100

18 12 06 00

08/24

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 24 Aug 06

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 38.77 N 77.11 W Meters AGL

★

■

■

■

★

■ ■ ■ ■

★

●

★

● ●

● ●