alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
From: Gregg Griffin [mailto:gregg@unkefermail.com] 

Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 4:40 PM

To: EBSA, E-ORI - EBSA

Subject: RIN 1210-AB32

To Whom It May Concern,

Please be advised that this proposed rule while well intentioned is damaging in it's ambiguity and 

onerous requirements to both the people who make their living providing retirement planning 

and those consumers who now enjoy access to a broad range of products and services. For those 

non-security insurance product sales there already exists an entire bureaucratic agency to address 

malfeasance and consumer complaints, namely the NAIC. The NAIC has made our industry a 

much safer place for consumers and provides arbitration between the carriers and consumers. At 

it's direction carriers routinely make policy holders whole when a sale was deemed to be 

inappropriate. This CANNOT be said of investment advisers who oversaw the loss of scores of 

Americans retirement savings in 2008. Insurance products are a contract between the carrier and 

the consumer and are governed by statuary requirements already in place.

I would ask that you shelf this line of action while truly examining where mechanisms currently 

exist and where they are actually lacking along with the impact this will have on industry and 

choice withing this marketplace. 

Respectfully,

--

Gregg Griffin

Vice President

Unkefer & Associates

gregg@unkefermail.com

800.523.5851

623.847.9101

fax 623.463.2336

7029 N. 55th Drive

Glendale, AZ 85301

***DISCLAIMER***

This communication and any attachments may contain confidential/privileged information.

If you are not the intended recipient of this message or have been forwarded this message by 

persons unauthorized to do so, delete it immediately and notify the original sender. Continuing to 

disseminate or participate in unauthorized use of this communication may result in legal 

penalties.
EXHIBIT 10.27

                                 FIRST AMENDMENT
                                     TO THE
                                SERVICE 1ST BANK
                          SALARY CONTINUATION AGREEMENT
                            DATED SEPTEMBER 10, 2003
                                       FOR
                                 ROBERT E. BLOCH


         THIS AMENDMENT is adopted this 8th day of August, 2005, by and between
SERVICE 1ST BANK, a state-chartered commercial bank located in Stockton,
California (the "Company") and ROBERT E. BLOCH (the "Executive").

         The Company and the Executive executed the Salary Continuation
Agreement on September 10, 2003 (the "Agreement").

         The undersigned hereby amends, in part, said Agreement for the purpose
of changing the Plan Year and increasing the Normal Retirement Benefit.
Therefore, the following change shall be made:

         Article 1.18 of the Agreement shall be deleted in its entirety and
         replaced by Article 1.18 below.

1.20     Plan Year" means each twelve-month period commencing on January 1 and
         ending on December 31 of each year.

         Article 2.1.1 of the Agreement shall be deleted in its entirety and
         replaced by Article 2.1.1 below.

         2.1.1    Amount of Benefit. The annual Normal Retirement Benefit under
                  this Section 2.1 is Seventy-One Thousand Dollar ($71,000).


         The Schedule A attached to the Agreement shall also be amended in its
entirety and replaced with the new Schedule A attached to this Amendment.

         IN WITNESS OF THE ABOVE, the Executive and the Company hereby consent
to this First Amendment.


Executive:                                  SERVICE 1ST BANK

/s/ ROBERT E. BLOCH                         By     /s/ JOHN O. BROOKS
----------------------------------                 -----------------------------
Robert E. Bloch                                    John O. Brooks

                                            Title  Chairman
                                                   -----------------------------



                                      103
July 14, 2015

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

HSIN-CHI-SU AKA NOBU SU, Appellant

NO. 14-14-00461-CV V.

VANTAGE DRILLING COMPANY, Appellee

________________________________

This cause, an appeal from the Temporary Injunction Order in favor of 

appellee, Vantage Drilling Company, signed June 11, 2014, was heard on the 

transcript of the record. We have inspected the record and find no error in the 

order. We order the Temporary Injunction Order of the court below AFFIRMED.

We order appellant, Hsin-Chi-Su aka Nobu Su, to pay all costs incurred in 

this appeal. 

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
exv10w9



 







Exhibit 10.9




	 	 	 
	$50,000

	 	Annual retainer for director
	 
	 	 
	$  2,000

	 	Director’s fee for attendance in person or by phone at a Board Meeting
	 
	 	 
	$10,000

	 	Annual fee for Chairman of Audit Committee
	 
	 	 
	$  2,000

	 	Director’s fee for attendance in person or by phone at a Committee meeting (unless on
same day as Board meeting)





All reasonable out of pocket expenses, including, without limitation, travel expenses will be
reimbursed upon submission of support documentation.



Any annual retainer or annual fee is to be payable in four equal installments, quarterly in
advance, on or before the first day of each calendar quarter and shall accrue and be fully earned
for any calendar quarter upon the director serving any portion of such calendar quarter as a
director, chairman, committee member or committee chairman, as applicable.



Any committee member attending two committee meetings on the same day shall be entitled to receive
only one attendance or telephone participation fee for both meetings, together with any additional
amount that may be approved by the Board of Directors upon request of the Chairman in appropriate
circumstances.
#### Daniel T. Enyart et al. *v.*The Trustees of Hanover, Township.

Where an act of the legislature authorized the trustees of a township to. levy a special tax, with a proviso “ that said trustees shall not causa said levy to he made until a majority of the electors of said township, at some regular election, shall vote in favor of said levy,” it required a majority of all the votes cast at such regular election, and not simply a. majority of those voting for or against the levy.

Motion for leave to file petition in error to reverse the-judgment of the District Court of Licking county.

Daniel T. Enyart was elected treasurer of Hanover township, Licking county, on the 3d day of April, 1871; and on the eighth day of the same month gave bond and took the required oath. He was his own successor in the office. On the 14th day of April, 1871, his house was burglarized,, and $1,580 of the funds in his hands belonging to the township were stolen. On the 27th of April, 1872, the legislature passed an act for the relief of Enyart as township treasurer (69 Ohio L. 269), which authorized the trustees of Hanover township to levy a tax to refund to Enyart the *619amount of money so stolen from him, with a proviso “ that, said trustees shall not cause said levy to he made until *a.*majority of the electors of said township, at some regular-election, shall vote in favor of said levy.”

The question was submitted to the electors at the Presidential election, in November, 1872; at which 242 votes-were cast for electors of President and Vice-President.. There were 118 votes cast in favor of levying the tax; 99 were cast against it, and 25 of those voting for electors for President, did not vote for or against the tax. The votes-cast in favor of levying the tax were a majority of those-voting on that question, but not a majority of all the votes-cast for electors of President and Vice-President. The question presented is: Were the township trustees authorized to levy the tax ?

*J. Buckingham,*for the motion.

6r. *Atherton and Charles II. Kebler,*contra.

By the Court.

The trustees of Hanover township were-not authorized to levy a tax to refund to Enyart the amount' of money stolen from him, until a majority of the electors of the township, *voting*at some regular election, “ shall vote in favor of such levy.” In this case the entire number of votes cast for President and Vice-President furnished the basis by which it is to be determined whether or not the-levy was authorized. The record shows that, although the-number of votes in favor of levying the tax was a majority of the votes cast on that question, they were not a majority of all the votes cast for electors of President and Vice-President, and hence the levy was never authorized.

*Motion overruled.*
EXHIBIT 31.1











CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER








I, W. Page Ogden, certify that:









1.  I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Britton & Koontz Capital Corporation;




2.  Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;




3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;




4.  The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:




a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;





b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and





c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and





5.  The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):





a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and





b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

















Date: May 14, 2010                                                                                             /s/ W. Page Ogden


W. Page Ogden


Chief Executive Officer
EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-1089.html[7/22/2015 7:42:36 AM]

PUBLIC SUBMISSION

As of: July 16, 2015

Received: July 08, 2015

Status: Pending_Post

Tracking No. 1jz-8jvc-b83c

Comments Due: July 21, 2015

Submission Type: Web

Docket: EBSA-2010-0050

Definition of the Term ‘‘Fiduciary’’; Conflict of Interest Rule—Retirement Investment Advice; Notice of

 proposed rulemaking and withdrawal of previous proposed rule.

Comment On: EBSA-2010-0050-0205

Definition of Fiduciary; Conflict of Interest Rule-Retirement Investment Advice and Related Proposed

 Prohibited Transaction Exemptions; Hearing and Comment Period Extension

Document: EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-1089

Comment on FR Doc # 2015-14921

Submitter Information

Name: Anonymous Anonymous

General Comment

We,the people, do no want or need more government regulations in our lives. We have worked for our retirement

 and will decide how we need to retire. Hands off our retirement, Mr. Obama.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsExperimental parametric study of jet vortex generators for flow separation controlA parametric wind-tunnel study was performed with jet vortex generators to determine their effectiveness in controlling flow separation associated with low-speed turbulence flow over a two-dimensional rearward-facing ramp. Results indicate that flow-separation control can be accomplished, with the level of control achieved being a function of jet speed, jet orientation (with respect to the free-stream direction), and orifice pattern (double row of jets vs. single row). Compared to slot blowing, jet vortex generators can provide an equivalent level of flow control over a larger spanwise region (for constant jet flow area and speed). Dye flow visualization tests in a water tunnel indicated that the most effective jet vortex generator configurations produced streamwise co-rotating vortices.Document ID19910006983Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeContractor Report (CR)AuthorsSelby, Gregory*(Old Dominion Univ. Norfolk, VA, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateJanuary 1, 1991Subject CategoryFluid Mechanics And Heat TransferReport/Patent NumberNASA-CR-187836NAS 1.26:187836Accession Number91N16296Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: NAG1-1071Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19910006983.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
H. Res. 238

In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

September 14, 2001.

Whereas the retail price of motor fuels reportedly rose by as

much as 300 percent in several locations in the United

States during the hours and days after the terrorist acts

of September 11, 2001;

Whereas reliable reports suggest that the inventory of motor

fuels in the United States was adequate during that period;

Whereas no significant disruptions in the availability of motor

fuels were reported as a result of the terrorist acts of

September 11, 2001;

Whereas several of the Nation’s oil companies pledged to hold

their fuel prices steady during the period immediately following the terrorist acts;

Whereas the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries

(OPEC) has announced that all of its member countries

‘‘remain committed to continuing their policy of strengthening market stability and ensuring that sufficient supplies are available to satisfy market needs’’ and ‘‘are prepared to use their spare capacity, if deemed necessary, to

achieve those goals’’;

Whereas some vendors of motor fuels in the United States

may have taken advantage of the uncertainty created by
2

•HRES 238 EH

the terrorist acts of September 11, 2001, by knowingly

charging in excess of a reasonable price for motor fuels,

a practice commonly known as ‘‘price gouging’’; and

Whereas price gouging is detrimental to consumer confidence

and the economy of the United States, and was particularly detrimental during the hours and days after the terrorist acts of September 11, 2001: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That the House of Representatives—

(1) condemns any price gouging with respect to

motor fuels during the hours and days after the terrorist

acts of September 11, 2001; and

(2) urges the appropriate Federal and State agencies to investigate any incidents of price gouging with respect to motor fuels during the hours and days after the

terrorist acts of September 11, 2001, and to prosecute

any violations of law discovered as a result of the investigations.

Attest:

Clerk.
Editorial Note on Part 192
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 192 appear at 71 FR 33406, June 9, 2006.

§ 192.127 Records: Pipe design. ( a ) For steel transmission pipelines installed after July 1, 2020], an operator must collect or make, and retain for the life of the pipeline, records documenting that the pipe is designed to withstand anticipated external pressures and loads in accordance with § 192.103 and documenting that the determination of design pressure for the pipe is made in accordance with § 192.105.
( b ) For steel transmission pipelines installed on or before July 1, 2020, if operators have records documenting pipe design and the determination of design pressure in accordance with §§ 192.103 and 192.105, operators must retain such records for the life of the pipeline.
( c ) For steel transmission pipeline segments installed on or before July 1, 2020, if an operator does not have records necessary to establish the MAOP of a pipeline segment, the operator may be subject to the requirements of § 192.624 according to the terms of that section.
[Amdt. 192-125, 84 FR 52244, Oct. 1, 2019]
###### Editorial Note on Part 391

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 391 appear at 66 FR 49874, Oct. 1, 2001.

#### § 391.71 [Reserved]
1210-AB32-2-1213.html[7/24/2015 8:30:04 PM]

PUBLIC SUBMISSION

As of: July 16, 2015

Received: July 09, 2015

Status: Pending_Post

Tracking No. 1jz-8jvs-21be

Comments Due: July 21, 2015

Submission Type: Web

Docket: EBSA-2010-0050

Definition of the Term ‘‘Fiduciary’’; Conflict of Interest Rule—Retirement Investment Advice; Notice of

 proposed rulemaking and withdrawal of previous proposed rule.

Comment On: EBSA-2010-0050-0205

Definition of Fiduciary; Conflict of Interest Rule-Retirement Investment Advice and Related Proposed

 Prohibited Transaction Exemptions; Hearing and Comment Period Extension

Document: EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-1708

Comment on FR Doc # 2015-14921

Submitter Information

Name: Anonymous Anonymous

General Comment

Stay out of my 401k. The money in my 401K was saved by me. It belongs to me. Government is way out of line

 if rules are imposed on how I spend it at the time of my retirement.
###### Editorial Note on Part 365

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 365 appear at 66 FR 49870, Oct. 1, 2001.

#### § 365.119T Opposed applications.

If the application is opposed, opposing parties are required to send a copy of their protest to the applicant

[82 FR 5300, Jan. 17, 2017]
```

[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 183 (Friday, September 21, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 54048]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-4670]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health

National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; Notice 
of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Child Health and Human 
Development Initial Review Group, Reproduction, Andrology, and 
Gynecology Subcommittee.
    Date: October 18, 2007.
    Time: 8 a.m. to 5 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Double Tree, 8120 Wisconsin Ave., Bethesda, MD 20814.
    Contact Person: Dennis Leszczynski, PhD, Scientific Review 
Administrator, Division of Scientific Review, National Institute of 
Child Health and Human Development, NIH, 6100 Executive Boulevard, 
Room 5B01, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435-2717, 
[email protected].

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.864, 
Population Research; 93.865, Research for Mothers and Children; 
93.929, Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research; 93.209, 
Contraception and Infertility Loan Repayment Program, National 
Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: September 13, 2007.
Jennifer Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 07-4670 Filed 9-20-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
```