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: 8
Federal Reserve Bank of: St. Louis

## Filings received during the week ending October 12, 2013

|Filer                   | Filing Type    | Filing Proposal                                                                                                                                                                                                                            | End of Comment Period                              
|----------------------- | -------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | ---------------------------------------------------
|ARVEST BANK             | * 18C* Branch  | Arvest Bank, Fayetteville, Arkansas, to merge with National Bank of Arkansas in North Little Rock, North Little Rock, Arkansas, and to retain the acquired facilities as branch offices.                                                   | Newspaper:11/07/2013Federal Register:Not applicable
|Newspaper:              | 11/07/2013    
|Federal Register:       | Not applicable
|ARVEST BANK GROUP, INC. | * 3A5          | Arvest Bank Group, Inc., Bentonville, Arkansas, to acquire 100 percent of National Banking Corp., North Little Rock, Arkansas, and thereby indirectly acquire National Bank of Arkansas in North Little Rock, North Little Rock, Arkansas. | Newspaper:11/07/2013Federal Register:11/08/2013    
|Newspaper:              | 11/07/2013    
|Federal Register:       | 11/08/2013    

## 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
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                             370
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 1,886
<PP&E>                                          30,598
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (11,683)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  20,801
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            8,556
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      12,245
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    20,801
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                17,834
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   16,258
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 550
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,576
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,576
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
#### Wright *v.*Aldrich.

Money paid in satisfaction of a judgment, to the attorney of the judgment creditor, cannot, on a reversal of the judgment with an order for restitution, be recovered of the attorney in an action at law against him by the judgment debtor.

Assumpsit. Arthur II. Aldrich, in a suit against the plaintiff, recovered judgment, which the plaintiff satisfied by payment to the defendant, Arthur’s attorney. The defendant, in good faith, applied a part of the money in the payment of costs and of other claims against Arthur, by his direction, and gave him credit for the balance on his own account against him, amounting to a larger sum. Subsequently, on a rehearing, the judgment against the plaintiff was reversed, with an order for a writ of restitution in his favor against Arthur, and for his costs. The plaintiff in this action seeks to recover the amount paid to the defendant in satisfaction of the judgment.

*Ray, Drew Jordan,*for the plaintiff.

*F. Aldrich, pro se.*

Allen, J.

In *Little*v. *Bunce,*7 N. H. 485, it was decided that when a judgment in favor of one party is reversed upon error or review, the only remedy for restitution is against a party to the record. The defendant here was neither party of record nor in interest in the case of *Arthur R. Aldrich*v. *Wright,*but only attorney for the plaintiff in that action. When he collected the avails of the original judgment and applied them to his own claim and the claims of others under the direction of his client, he was acting in good faith, in the ordinary course of business, under a judgment not then vacated, and which he could have had no reason to suppose would be vacated. The title to chattels purchased at an execution *162sale is not affected by a subsequent reversal of tbe judgment, and the voluntary assignment of a note, or the payment of money by the execution debtor to the plaintiff’s attorney, in satisfaction of the debt, cannot, for reasons equally good, be impeached, when afterwards the judgment may have been vacated. *Little*v. *Bunce, supra,*citing *Soe's Case,*8 Coke (London, 1826) 181; *Drury's Case,*4 *id.*418; 2 Tidd Prac. 1138. Even if the application of the money by the defendant to the payment of a part of his own claim had not been made, but remained in his hands as a collector for Arthur R. Aldrich, it could not be recovered in this action, for the defendant was not a party to the original suit. *Rex*v. *Leaver,*2 Salk. 587. In such a case it would be necessary for the plaintiff to proceed by trustee process, or some other equitable form of action.

*Judgment for the defendant.*

Bingham and Smith, JJ., did not sit: the others concurred.
Exhibit 99.1


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


In connection with the Annual Report of Safe Technologies International, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2002, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Michael Posner, President of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

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

         (2)      the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
                  all material respects, the financial condition and result of
                  operations of the Company.


/s/ Michael Posner
-------------------------
Michael Posner, President


March 28, 2003
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 November 23, 2013

|Filer             | Filing Type    | Filing Proposal                                                                                                                                                                                 | End of Comment Period                              
|----------------- | -------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------
|METUCHEN, MHC     | MHC Activity   | Metuchen, MHC, and Metuchen Bancorp, Inc., both of Metuchen, NJ, propose to engage indirectly in real estate investment activities through a subsidiary of Metuchen Savings Bank, Metuchen, NJ. | Newspaper:Not applicableFederal Register:12/13/2013
|Newspaper:        | Not applicable
|Federal Register: | 12/13/2013    

## Availability of CRA Public Evaluations

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

## CRA Examinations scheduled for First Quarter of 2014 (January 1, 2014 - March 31, 2014)

|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: 8
Federal Reserve Bank of: St. Louis

## Filings received during the week ending November 12, 2011

|Filer                                  | Filing Type    | Filing Proposal                                                                                                                                                             | End of Comment Period                              
|-------------------------------------- | -------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ---------------------------------------------------
|FINANCIAL SERVICES HOLDING CORPORATION | * 3A1          | Financial Services Holding Corporation, Henderson, Kentucky, to become a bank holding company by acquiring 100 percent of The Bank of Henderson, Inc., Henderson, Kentucky. | Newspaper:12/02/2011Federal Register:12/09/2011    
|Newspaper:                             | 12/02/2011    
|Federal Register:                      | 12/09/2011    
|MIDWEST INDEPENDENT BANK               | * 18C* Branch  | Midwest Independent Bank, Jefferson City, Missouri, to merge with Nebraska Bankers' Bank, Lincoln, Nebraska, and to retain the acquired facility as a branch office.        | Newspaper:12/05/2011Federal Register:Not applicable
|Newspaper:                             | 12/05/2011    
|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
#### Henry H. Nellis, *Appellant, v.*George H. Nellis, *Respondent.*

Judgment affirmed, with costs, on opinion of Special Term» Mem. by

Bocees, J., and Learned, P. J.
#### National Bank of Kinderhook, *Respondent, v.*John M. Conway, *Appellant.*

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.
RECONSIDERATION DOCKET

98-1824.

#### State v. Vidu.

Cuyahoga App. Nos. 71703 and 71704. Reported at 84 Ohio St.3d 1434, 702 N.E.2d 1213. This cause came on for further consideration upon appellant’s motion for reconsideration and emergency motion for continuance of court’s 9/25/98 order granting stay and bail pending appeal. Upon consideration thereof,

*1460IT IS ORDERED by the court that the motions be, and hereby are, denied.

Moyer, C.J., and Resnick, J., dissent.

Lundberg Stratton, J., would grant reconsideration as to Proposition of Law No. I in appellant’s jurisdictional memorandum.
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: 2
Federal Reserve Bank of: New York

## Filings received during the week ending November 24, 2012

|Filer                           | Filing Type    | Filing Proposal                                                                                                                                                                                                                             | End of Comment Period                                 
|------------------------------- | -------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------
|RBC Investor Services Bank S.A. | FBSEA          | RBC Investor Services Bank S.A., Esch-sur-Alzette, Luxembourg, to establish a representative office in New York, New York, pursuant to Section 10(a) of the International Banking Act, as amended, and Section 211.4(a)(1) of Regulation K. | Newspaper:Not availableFederal Register:Not applicable
|Newspaper:                      | Not available 
|Federal Register:               | Not applicable

## Availability of CRA Public Evaluations

|Institution / Location           | RSSDID | Exam Date  | CRAPublic Date | CRARating | Exam Method
|-------------------------------- | ------ | ---------- | -------------- | --------- | -----------
|AMBOY BK, OLD BRIDGE, NEW JERSEY | 9807   | 03/21/2011 | 11/13/2012     | S         | Large Bank 

## CRA Examinations scheduled for First Quarter of 2013 (January 1, 2013 - March 31, 2013)

|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
###### Editorial Note on Part 173

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 173 appear at 70 FR 56098, Sept. 23, 2005.

#### § 173.214 Packagings which require approval by the Associate Administrator.

When § 172.101 of this subchapter specifies that a hazardous material be packaged under this section, packagings and method of shipment must be approved by the Associate Administrator prior to the first shipment.

[Amdt. 173-224, 55 FR 52643, Dec. 21, 1990, as amended at 66 FR 45379, Aug. 28, 2001]
# Orange Book: Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations

            -  Share 
            -  Tweet 
            -  Linkedin 
            -  Email 
            -  Print 

## Footer Links

            - FDA Archive
            - About FDA
            - Accessibility

            - Visitor Information 
            - Website Policies / Privacy
            - No FEAR Act
            - Vulnerability Disclosure Policy

            - FOIA
            - HHS.gov
            - USA.gov

Contact FDAFollow FDA on FacebookFollow FDA on TwitterView FDA videos on YouTubeSubscribe to FDA RSS feeds
FDA Homepage
Contact Number

Back to Top
Editorial Note on Part 173
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 173 appear at 70 FR 56098, Sept. 23, 2005.

§ 173.410 General design requirements. In addition to the requirements of subparts A and B of this part, each package used for the shipment of Class 7 (radioactive) materials must be designed so that— ( a ) The package can be easily handled and properly secured in or on a conveyance during transport.
( b ) Each lifting attachment that is a structural part of the package must be designed with a minimum safety factor of three against yielding when used to lift the package in the intended manner, and it must be designed so that failure of any lifting attachment under excessive load would not impair the ability of the package to meet other requirements of this subpart. Any other structural part of the package which could be used to lift the package must be capable of being rendered inoperable for lifting the package during transport or must be designed with strength equivalent to that required for lifting attachments.
( c ) The external surface, as far as practicable, will be free from protruding features and will be easily decontaminated.
( d ) The outer layer of packaging will avoid, as far as practicable, pockets or crevices where water might collect.
( e ) Each feature that is added to the package will not reduce the safety of the package.
( f ) The package will be capable of withstanding the effects of any acceleration, vibration or vibration resonance that may arise under normal conditions of transport without any deterioration in the effectiveness of the closing devices on the various receptacles or in the integrity of the package as a whole and without loosening or unintentionally releasing the nuts, bolts, or other securing devices even after repeated use (see §§ 173.24, 173.24a, and 173.24b).
( g ) The materials of construction of the packaging and any components or structure will be physically and chemically compatible with each other and with the package contents. The behavior of the packaging and the package contents under irradiation will be taken into account.
( h ) All valves through which the package contents could escape will be protected against unauthorized operation.
( i ) For transport by air— ( 1 ) The temperature of the accessible surfaces of the package will not exceed 50 °C (122 °F) at an ambient temperature of 38 °C (100 °F) with no account taken for insulation;
( 2 ) The integrity of containment will not be impaired if the package is exposed to ambient temperatures ranging from −40 °C (−40 °F) to + 55 °C (131 °F); and
( 3 ) A package containing liquid contents must be capable of withstanding, without leakage, an internal pressure that produces a pressure differential of not less than the maximum normal operating pressure plus 95 kPa (13.8 psi).
[Amdt. 173-244, 60 FR 50307, Sept. 28, 1995, as amended by Amdt. 173-244, 61 FR 20750, May 8, 1996; 64 FR 51919, Sept. 27, 1999; 79 FR 40611, July 11, 2014]
# C_2012006EN.01002301.xml

| 7.1.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 6/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.1.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 6/23

---

Action brought on 31 October 2011 — Unipol Banca v OHIM — Union Investment Privatfonds (unicard)

(Case T-574/11)

2012/C 6/42

Language in which the application was lodged: Italian

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Unipol Banca SpA (Bologna, Italy) (represented by: P. Costa and P. Creta, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Union Investment Privatfonds GmbH (Frankfut am Main, Germany)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decision of 13 July 2011 of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM in Case R 0597/2010-2 brought on 14 April 2010 by Union Investment Privatfonds GmbH and, accordingly |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of 13 July 2011 of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM in Case R 0597/2010-2 brought on 14 April 2010 by Union Investment Privatfonds GmbH and, accordingly

| — | Grant Community trade mark application No 005240080 filed on 18 July 2006 concerning the sign unicard also in respect of the services referred to in Class 36 of the Nice Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

—

Grant Community trade mark application No 005240080 filed on 18 July 2006 concerning the sign unicard also in respect of the services referred to in Class 36 of the Nice Agreement.

unicard

| — | Order OHIM to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order OHIM to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: Unipol Banca SpA

Applicant for a Community trade mark:

Community trade mark concerned: Figurative mark ‘unicard’ (application for registration No 5.240.080) for services in Class 36

Community trade mark concerned:

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Union Investment Privatfonds GmbH

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:

Mark or sign cited in opposition: German word marks ‘UNIFONDS’ (No 991.995), ‘UNIGLOBAL’ (No 991.996) and ‘UniGarant’ (No 30 138 306,5) for services in Class 36

Mark or sign cited in opposition:

Decision of the Opposition Division: Rejected the opposition

Decision of the Opposition Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Annulled the decision of the Opposition Division and rejected the application for registration of the mark in question

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Misapplication and misinterpretation of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 on the Community trade mark.

Pleas in law:

---