alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 164 (Friday, August 25, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58268-58269]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-18421]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION


Sunshine Act Meetings

TIME AND DATE: 10:00 a.m. on August 29, 2023.

PLACE: This Board meeting will be open to public observation only by 
webcast. Visit https://www.fdic.gov/news/board-matters/video.html for a 
link to the webcast. FDIC Board Members and staff will participate from 
FDIC Headquarters, 550 17th Street NW, Washington, DC.
    Observers requiring auxiliary aids (e.g., sign language 
interpretation) for this meeting should email 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#cc88a5bfadaea5a0a5b8b59cbea3abbeada18caaa8a5afe2aba3ba"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="8fcbe6fceeede6e3e6fbf6dffde0e8fdeee2cfe9ebe6eca1e8e0f9">[email protected]</span></a> to make necessary arrangements.

STATUS: Open to public observation via webcast.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: The Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation's 
Board of Directors will meet to consider the following matters:

Discussion Agenda

    Memorandum and resolution re: Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on 
Long-term Debt Requirements for Large Bank Holding Companies, Certain 
Intermediate Holding Companies of Foreign Banking Organizations, and 
Large Insured Depository Institutions.
    Memorandum and resolution re: Resolution Plans Required for Insured 
Depository Institutions with $100 Billion or More in Total Assets; 
Informational Filings Required for Insured Depository Institutions with 
At Least $50 Billion, but Less Than $100 Billion in Total Assets.
    Memorandum and resolution re: Publication of Proposed Guidance for 
Dodd-Frank Act Resolution Plan Submissions of Triennial Full Filers.
    Memorandum and resolution re: Conditions to Certain Receivership 
Delegations of Authority and Procedures.
    Memorandum and resolution re: Board Approval of Midsized and Large 
Failed Bank Sales.

Summary Agenda

    No substantive discussion of the following items is anticipated. 
The Board will resolve these matters with a single vote unless a member 
of the Board of Directors requests that an item be moved to the 
discussion agenda.
    Disposition of Minutes of a Board of Directors' Meeting Previously 
Distributed.
    Summary reports, status reports, and reports of actions taken 
pursuant to authority delegated by the Board of Directors.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Direct requests for further 
information concerning the meeting to Debra A. Decker, Executive 
Secretary of the Corporation, at 202-898-8748.
    Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552b.

    Dated at Washington, DC, on August 22, 2023.


[[Page 58269]]


Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
James P. Sheesley,
Assistant Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-18421 Filed 8-23-23; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 6714-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 161 (Tuesday, August 22, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 57130]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-18060]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--Utility Broadband Alliance, Inc.

    Notice is hereby given that, on May 30, 2023, pursuant to section 
6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 
15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), Utility Broadband Alliance, Inc. 
(``UBBA'') has filed written notifications simultaneously with the 
Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in 
its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose of 
extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust 
plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. 
Specifically, ATT Business, Dallas, TX; and Aetheros Inc., San 
Francisco, CA, have been added as parties to this venture.
    Also, Thales, Bellevue, WA; Cambridge Consultants, Boston, MA; 
Tilson, Portland, ME; and CrescoNet, San Francisco, CA, have withdrawn 
as parties to this venture.
    No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned 
activity of the group research project. Membership in this group 
research project remains open, and UBBA intends to file additional 
written notifications disclosing all changes in membership.
    On May 4, 2021, UBBA filed its original notification pursuant to 
section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice 
in the Federal Register pursuant to section 6(b) of the Act on June 10, 
2021 (86 FR 30981).
    The last notification was filed with the Department on March 8, 
2023. A notice was published in the Federal Register pursuant to 
section 6(b) of the Act on March 27, 2023 (88 FR 18184).

Suzanne Morris,
Deputy Director Civil Enforcement Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 2023-18060 Filed 8-21-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-11-P
Editorial Note on Part 801
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 801 appear at 86 FR 54641, Oct. 4, 2021.

§ 801.3 Definitions. The following definitions apply in this part: *Chairman* means the Chairman or Acting Chairman of the NTSB.
*FOIA Public Liaison* means a supervisory official, designated by the Chief FOIA Officer, who is responsible for assisting in reducing delays, increasing transparency and understanding of the status of requests, and assisting in resolving disputes.
*Managing Director* means the Managing Director of the NTSB.
*Non-docket items* include records from an accident that are not directly pertinent to the investigation, and are not in the public docket.
*Public Docket* includes a collection of records from an accident investigation that the agency deemed pertinent to the investigation.
*Record, document,* or any other term used to reference information includes: ( 1 ) Any writing, drawing, map, recording, tape, film, photo, or other documentary material by which information is preserved. In this part, “document” and “record” have the same meaning;
( 2 ) Any information that would be an agency record subject to the requirements of this section when maintained by the NTSB in any format, including an electronic format; and
( 3 ) Any information described under subparagraphs (1) or (2) that is maintained for the NTSB by an entity under Government contract, for the purposes of records management.
*Redact* refers to the act of making a portion of text illegible by placing a black mark on top of the text.
*Requester* means any person, as defined in 5 U.S.C. 551(2), who submits a request pursuant to the FOIA.
* 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 August 25, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-20520 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus CARLOS ANDRES GUZMAN-SUAREZ, also known as Roberto Benarrivo Mendoza, also known as Nelson Fonseca, also known as Carlos Guzman, also known as Carlos Andreas Guzman, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:04-CR-73-2

-------------------- Before DAVIS, SMITH, and WIENER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: * Larry Chris Iles, the attorney appointed to represent Carlos Andres Guzman-Suarez (Guzman), has requested leave to withdraw and has filed a brief as required by Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Guzman has not filed a response. Our independent review of the record and counsel’s brief discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR . R. 42.2.
LRGAL PROCESSING DIGI
FUCA

PROCESSING DIVISION. EE - T4868 1 -OF Page 1 of 1

FEB 1 9 20%

As of: February 19, 2010
Stotusr Posted
PUBLIC SUBMISSION Peostes: Febuary 19, 2010
Comments Due: May 03, 2010
Submission Type: Web

Docket: IRS-2010-0006
Request for Information Regarding Lifetime Income Options for Participants & Beneficiaries in

Retirement Plans

Comment On: IRS-2010-0006-0001
Request for Information Regarding Lifetime Income Options for Participants and Beneficiaries in
Retirement Plans

Document: IRS-2010-0006-0030
Comment on FR Doc # 2010-02028

SS

Submitter Information

Name: Clinton W. Cole
Address:
3102 Buffaio Court
Grove, OK, 74344
Email: ccole-grove@att.net
Phone: 918-786-5553
Organization: Taxpayer

General Comment

Iam opposed to any change in retirement arrangements that would require any participant to
accept a lifetime annuity payout, or in any way alter the participant's ability to manage his
retirement arrangements.

https://fdms.erulemaking.net/fdms-web-agency/component/submitterInfoCoverPage?Call=... 2/19/2010 -
§ 234.227 Train detection apparatus. ( a ) Train detection apparatus shall be maintained to detect a train or railcar in any part of a train detection circuit, in accordance with the design of the warning system.
( b ) If the presence of sand, rust, dirt, grease, or other foreign matter is known to prevent effective shunting, a railroad shall take appropriate action under § 234.105, “Activation failure,” to safeguard highway users.
From: DON LANDEK [mailto:dscc@wowway.com] 

Sent: Saturday, April 17, 2010 7:48 PM 

To: EBSA, E-ORI - EBSA 

Subject: RIN 1210-AB33

There are several concerns I have with this proposal; 

The proposal does not seem to address what happens to the assets in the annuities should the holder die 

prior to the assets being depleted. 

It is not clear if this will be a mandatory program. Language suggest this but it is not clearly delineated. 

This would now put the federal government into an active role in stocks, bonds and mutual funds. This is 

not attractive to me as a citizen. 

Thank you for allowing me to comment.
H. Res. 395

In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

April 24, 2002.

Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule

XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the

Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of

the bill (H.R. 3763) to protect investors by improving the accuracy and reliability of corporate disclosures made pursuant

to the securities laws, and for other purposes. The first reading of the bill shall be dispensed with. All points of order

against consideration of the bill are waived. General debate

shall be confined to the bill and shall not exceed one hour

equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking

minority member of the Committee on Financial Services.

After general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute rule. It shall be in order to consider as an original bill for the purpose of amendment under

the five-minute rule the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Financial Services

now printed in the bill. The committee amendment in the na-
2

•HRES 395 EH

ture of a substitute shall be considered as read. All points of

order against the committee amendment in the nature of a

substitute are waived. No amendment to the committee

amendment in the nature of a substitute shall be in order except those printed in the report of the Committee on Rules

accompanying this resolution. Each such amendment may be

offered only in the order printed in the report, may be offered

only by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the

report equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an

opponent, shall not be subject to amendment, and shall not

be subject to a demand for division of the question in the

House or in the Committee of the Whole. All points of order

against such amendments are waived. At the conclusion of

consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee shall

rise and report the bill to the House with such amendments

as may have been adopted. Any Member may demand a separate vote in the House on any amendment adopted in the

Committee of the Whole to the bill or to the committee

amendment in the nature of a substitute. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amend-
3

•HRES 395 EH

ments thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or without instructions.

Attest:

Clerk.
EPA SANITIZED Page 1 of 13
 

EPA SANITIZED Page 2 of 13
 

 

EPA SANITIZED Page 3 of 13
EPA SANITIZED Page 4 of 13
EPA SANITIZED Page 5 of 13
EPA SANITIZED Page 6 of 13
EPA SANITIZED Page 7 of 13
EPA SANITIZED Page 8 of 13
 

EPA SANITIZED Page 9 of 13
EPA SANITIZED Page 10 of 13
EPA SANITIZED Page 11 of 13
 

 

EPA SANITIZED Page 12 of 13
 

 

EPA SANITIZED Page 13 of 13
#### JAMES PETRELLA, PROSECUTOR-DEFENDANT, v. THE COURT OF COMMON PLEAS IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF HUDSON, RESPONDENT-COMPLAINANT.

Submitted May 12, 1933

Decided September 27, 1933.

Before Justices Case, Bodine and Donges.

For the prosecutor-defendant, *Jacob J. Singer (Abraham Levitan).*

For the respondent-complainant, *James A. LLamill.*

Per Curiam.

The writ brings up the conviction of the defendant, Petrella, under section 6 of the Disorderly Persons act. 2 *Oomp. Stat.,*p. 1928. There is nothing in the record to show that he was a common thief, burglar or pickpocket — the characterization of the statute. The defendant does not appear to ever have been convicted of picking pockets, burglary or thieving. He does appear to have been a bad sort and was previously convicted of two assaults and a violation of the Mann White Slave act. He was looking around, he says, for dope when he was arrested. We regret we cannot sustain the conviction, but he does not come within the purview of the statute.

The conviction is reversed.
Exhibit 11


                           MERRIMAC INDUSTRIES, INC.
                       COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE
                       ---------------------------------
                                  (Unaudited)
                                  -----------

                                                        Quarter      Six Months
                                                      -------------------------
                                                          Ended July 1, 2000
                                                      -------------------------


Numerator:
Net income (loss) available to common shareholders....  $  39,705     $(124,682)
                                                        =========     =========

Basic earnings per share
------------------------
Weighted average number of shares outstanding for
basic net income per share
Common stock..........................................  2,130,009     1,938,578
                                                        =========     =========
Net income (loss) per common share - basic............      $ .02         $(.06)
                                                            =====         =====

Diluted earnings per share
--------------------------
Weighted average number of shares outstanding for
diluted net income per share
Common stock .........................................  2,130,009     1,938,578
Effect of dilutive securities - stock options (1) ....    175,920       144,592
                                                        ---------     ---------
Weighted average number of shares outstanding for
diluted net income per share..........................  2,305,929     2,083,170
                                                        =========     =========
Net income (loss) per common share - diluted..........      $ .02         $(.06)
                                                            =====         =====


(1) Represents additional shares resulting from assumed conversion of
      stock options less shares purchased with the proceeds therefrom.
Docket: HHS-OS-2010-0012 

Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Issuers Relating to Dependent Coverage of Children to 

Age 26, etc. 

Comment On: HHS-OS-2010-0012-0001 

Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Issuers Relating to Dependent Coverage of Children to 

Age 26, etc. 

Document: HHS-OS-2010-0012-0003 

Comment on FR Doc # 2010-11391 

Submitter Information 

Name: Gary Goff 

Organization: Oklahoma State & Education Employees Group Insurance Board 

General Comment 

We are a self-insured state health plan and we currently allow members to cover children who are 

not their own natural, adopted, or step children if the member shows that they are living with the 

child in a normal parent-child relationship. While natural, adopted, or step children do not have 

residency or financial support requirements, we know of no other way to demonstrate the parentchild relationship for the other children that members are allowed to cover. Is it permissible to use 

residency and financial support criteria for determining eligibility for these dependents that are not 

the member’s child? If no support criteria are allowed, there may be no alternative but to restrict 

eligibility to the member’s own child.

PUBLIC SUBMISSION 

As of: August 12, 2010 

Received: May 28, 2010 

Status: Posted 

Posted: June 09, 2010 

Tracking No. 80af6013 

Comments Due: August 11, 2010

Submission Type: Unknown

Page 1 of 1

https://fdms.erulemaking.net/fdms-web-agency/ContentViewer?objectId=0900006480af60... 8/12/2010
§ 633.11 Covered projects. ( a ) The recipient is using funds made available under Chapter 53 of Title 49, United States Code, or any other provision of Federal law; and
( b ) The project is a major capital project.
PUBLIC SUBMISSION

Received: October 27, 2017

Status: Pending_Post

Tracking No. 1k1-8zgd-tkz4

Comments Due: December 11, 2017

Submission Type: Web

Docket: EBSA-2015-0017

Claims Procedure for Plans Providing Disability Benefits; Extension of Applicability 

Date

Comment On: EBSA-2015-0017-0291

Claims Procedure: Plans Providing Disability Benefits

Document: EBSA-2015-0017-DRAFT-0400

Comment on FR Doc # 2017-22082

Submitter Information

Name: Socorra DeCelle

General Comment

Dear Deputy Assistant Secretary Houser,

I am an attorney in a firm whose focus is to represent claimants in disability claims 

under ERISA.

The Department finalized rules after the required notice and comment period and gave 

all stakeholders the chance to respond. I am requesting that the Secretary of Labor not 

delay the effective date of the Final ERISA claims regulations adopted on December 

19, 2016. Suddenly, we are being told that additional input would be allowed--

information which was submitted and vetted during the proper notice and comment 

period. Further, ERISA participants and those that represent them, have no chance to 

respond to these comments (as they had the chance to respond to ours), because the 

input is not being made available.

The Industry references a "confidential" study that predicts an increase in premiums, 

however this information was not shared during the proper comment and notice 

period, nor is there ample time to respond to this information as the time it would take 
to uncover what is influencing this process would span beyond the mere 15-day notice 

which is currently being made available. To grant these parties an extension to submit 

this information shows bias towards these parties and makes for an unfair procedural 

process, allowing the industry to collect data in a way that will be hidden from the 

public, and then be used to make a decision on how to protect participants' rights in 

the adjudication of disability benefits. To allow this to occur in unfair to ERISA 

participants and suggests violations of the APA.

I ask that the effective date of the regulations not be delayed, since the reason for 

doing so lacks the necessary transparency and undermines the sense of trust and 

fairness that should inhere in this rule-making process.
Cheshire,

Dec., 1899.

#### The Young Men’s Christian Association *v.*Keene.

The rented real estate of a corporation formed solely for benevolent and charitable purposes is not exempted from taxation as property “used for the purposes of the association.”

Bill in Equity, for an abatement of taxes. Facts found by the court. Tbe plaintiffs were organized as a corporation under the General Laws, and own a three-story brick building on West street, the principal part of which is used for the purposes of the organization. They rent two stores on the first floor, one for a crockery store and the other for a restaurant. The primary object in renting the stores is to obtain revenue, for use in carrying on the work of the organization. An incidental object is to draw people to the vicinity of the building, so that they may become interested in the work of the association. It is desirable that there should be a restaurant near by, where meals may be furnished to members and those whom the association assists. The tax was assessed upon that part of the building which is rented. The plaintiffs claim an exemption under chapter 259, Laws 1893.

*Joseph Madden,*for the plaintiffs.

*John T. Abbott,*for the defendants.

Peaslee, J.

The plaintiffs’ property on West street is exempt from taxation “ so long as and to the extent that it is used for the purposes of the association.” Laws 1893, *c.*259. The preamble to the act declares that those purposes are solely benevolent and charitable. That portion of the building which is let to tenants is not used for the purposes of the association, but to obtain an income, or, in the language of the preamble, “for the purpose of profit or gain.” The use made of the income does not entitle the plaintiffs to an exemption of the property from which the income is derived. Nor is the fact that the use incidentally promotes the objects of the association of controlling effect. The use must be exclusively for those objects, or there is no exemption. The reason for this conclusion has been fully stated in recent cases, and the question cannot now be considered to be open in this state. *Phillips Exeter Academy*v. *Exeter,*58 N. H. 306; *Alton etc. Association*v. *Alton,*69 N. H. 311; *New London*v. *Academy,*69 N. H. 443. The tax was rightfully assessed.

*224This conclusion renders it unnecessary to consider whether the plaintiffs’ misconception of the form of their remedy is a sufficient defence. P. S., *c.*59, s. 11; *Perley*v. *Dolloff,*60 N. H. 504; *Rockingham Ten Cent Savings Bank*v. *Portsmouth,*52 N. H. 17, 29.

*Bill dismissed.*

Pike, J., did not sit: the others concurred.
Date: May 2 7 , 20 1 5

To: Docket , EPA - HQ - OAR - 201 4 - 0738 From: Andrew Bouchard Subject: Meeting Record for May 27, 2015, Meeting Between the U.S. EPA and ExxonMobil Chemical Company On May 27 , 2015 , representatives of the U.S. Environmental Protection A gency (EPA) participated in a meeting with ExxonMobil Chemical Company . The purpose of the meeting was to discuss ExxonMobil’ s comments that were submitted to the docket on the initial MPGF AMEL notice . See **Attachment 1** for the names and affiliations of th e meeting participants .**Attachment 1 Participants in**  **May 27 , 2015**  **EPA/ ExxonMobil**  **Meeting** ExxonMobil Chemical Company Representatives Ben jamin Hurst Gary Robbins Erin Tullos Margaret Bass U.S. EPA Representatives Andrew Bouchard Brenda Shine Penny L as siter
#### § 538.1 Scope.

This part establishes minimum driving range criteria to aid in identifying passenger automobiles that are dual-fueled automobiles. It also establishes gallon equivalent measurements for gaseous fuels other than natural gas.

[75 FR 25728, May 7, 2010]