alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
DIVISION OF CONSUMER AND

COMMUNITY AFFAIRS

CA 18-3

 

April 11, 2018 

TO THE OFFICERS AND MANAGERS IN CHARGE OF CONSUMER AFFAIRS 

SECTIONS:

Applicability to Community Banking Organizations: This guidance applies to institutions 

supervised by the Federal Reserve with total consolidated assets of $10 billion or less. 

SUBJECT: Revised Interagency Examination Procedures for Regulation X and 

Regulation Z

 The Task Force on Consumer Compliance of the Federal Financial Institutions 

Examination Council recently developed the attached interagency examination procedures for 

Regulation X – Real Estate Settlement Procedures Act (RESPA) and Regulation Z – Truth in 

Lending (TILA). These revised examination procedures supersede the examination procedures

transmitted with CA Letter 15-6. 

The attached procedures reflect the following amendments to Regulation Z and 

Regulation X published by the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB): 

• Amendments to Regulation Z and Regulation X1 related to mortgage servicing 

that were effective in October 2017, unless otherwise specified; and

• Other amendments to Regulation Z published through April 2016, including rules 

related to mortgage lending by small creditors serving rural and underserved 

areas.

2

These procedures do not incorporate amendments to Regulation Z regarding the CFPB’s

TILA-RESPA integrated disclosure rule or regarding prepaid accounts. Those amendments will 

be addressed in a future update. 

 

1 Published by the CFPB in October 2016, July 2017, and October 2017

2 Published by the CFPB in October 2015 and March 2016.
Page 2 of 2

If you have any questions concerning this guidance, please contact Dana Miller, Counsel, 

at (202) 452-2751, or Amy Henderson, Managing Counsel, at (202) 452-3140. In addition, 

questions may be sent via the Board’s public website.3

Sincerely, 

Carol Evans 

Associate Director

Attachments: 

• Revised Interagency Examination Procedures for Regulation Z 

• Revised Interagency Examination Procedures for Regulation X 

Supersedes: 

• CA 15-6, “Revised Interagency Examination Procedures for Regulation Z and Regulation 

X” (Sept. 22, 2015) 

 

3 See http://www.federalreserve.gov/apps/contactus/feedback.aspx.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

DETENTION ORDER

Page - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT W. D. OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff,

v.

EARL MORRISHOW JR,

 Defendant.

Case No. 06-5117M

DETENTION ORDER

THE COURT, having conducted a detention hearing pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §3142, finds that no condition or combination

of conditions which defendant can meet will reasonably assure the appearance of the defendant as required and/or the safety of any

other person and the community.

This finding is based on 1) the nature and circumstances of the offense(s) charged, including whether the offense is a

crime of violence or involves a narcotic drug; 2) the weight of the evidence against the person; 3) the history and characteristics of

the person including those set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 3142(g)(3)(A)(B); and 4) the nature and seriousness of the danger release would

impose to any person or the community.

Findings of Fact/ Statement of Reasons for Detention

Presumptive Reasons/Unrebutted:

 ( ) Conviction of a Federal offense involving a crime of violence. 18 U.S.C.§3142(f)(A)

 ( ) Potential maximum sentence of life imprisonment or death. 18 U.S.C.§3142(f)(B)

 ( ) Potential maximum sentence of 10+ years as prescribed in the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C.§801 et seq.), the

Controlled Substances Import and Export Act (21 U.S.C.§951 et seq.) Or the Maritime Drug Law Enforcement Act (46

U.S.C. App. 1901 et seq.)

 ( x ) Convictions of two or more offenses described in subparagraphs (A) through (C) of 18 U.S.C.§3142(f)(1) of two or more

State or local offenses that would have been offenses described in said subparagraphs if a circumstance giving rise to

Federal jurisdiction had existed, or a combination of such offenses.

Safety Reasons:

 ( ) Defendant is currently on probation/supervision resulting from a prior offense.

 ( X ) Multiple prior warrants for failure to appear for other court hearings..

 ( X ) Defendant’s prior criminal history.

 ( ) 

Flight Risk/Appearance Reasons:

 ( ) Defendant’s lack of community ties and resources..

 ( ) Immigration and Customs Enforcement detainer.

 ( ) Detainer(s)/Warrant(s) from other jurisdictions.

 ( ) Failures to appear for past court proceedings.

 ( ) Past conviction for escape.

Order of Detention

< The defendant shall be committed to the custody of the Attorney General for confinement in a corrections facility

separate, to the extent practicable, from persons awaiting or serving sentences or being held in custody pending appeal,

without prejudice to review..

< The defendant shall be afforded reasonable opportunity for private consultation with counsel.

< The defendant shall on order of a court of the United States or on request of an attorney for the Government, be delivered

to a United States marshal for the purpose of an appearance in connection with a court proceeding.

 July 5, 2006.

s/ J. Kelley Arnold 

J. Kelley Arnold, U.S. Magistrate Judge

Case 3:06-mj-05117-JKA Document 9 Filed 07/05/06 Page 1 of 1
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 151 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 151

     Expressing the sense of the Congress that Federal funding for 
elementary and secondary teacher training be used first for activities 
    to advance science, mathematics, and engineering education for 
                   elementary and secondary teachers.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 13, 1999

   Mr. Cook submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
        referred to the Committee on Education and the Workforce

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
     Expressing the sense of the Congress that Federal funding for 
elementary and secondary teacher training be used first for activities 
    to advance science, mathematics, and engineering education for 
                   elementary and secondary teachers.

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That it is the sense of the Congress that all local educational 
agencies receiving Federal funding for elementary and secondary teacher 
training or certification are encouraged to use such funding first for 
activities to advance science, mathematics, and engineering education 
for teachers.
                                 <all>
```
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 194 (Tuesday, October 10, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 69981]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-22358]


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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice: 12211]


Notice of Determinations; Culturally Significant Objects Being 
Imported for Exhibition--Determinations: Exhibition of Two Works of Art 
From the Klesch Collection, London

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: I 
hereby determine that certain objects being imported from abroad 
pursuant to an agreement with their foreign owner or custodian for 
temporary exhibition or display in the Department of European Paintings 
of The Metropolitan Museum of Art, New York, New York, and at possible 
additional exhibitions or venues yet to be determined, are of cultural 
significance, and, further, that their temporary exhibition or display 
within the United States as aforementioned is in the national interest. 
I have ordered that Public Notice of these determinations be published 
in the Federal Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Reed Liriano, Program Coordinator, 
Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202-
632-6471; email: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#07746264736e68693533323e47747366736229606871"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="186b7d7b6c7177762a2c2d21586b6c796c7d367f776e">[email protected]</span></a>). The mailing address is U.S. 
Department of State, L/PD, 2200 C Street NW (SA-5), Suite 5H03, 
Washington, DC 20522-0505.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The foregoing determinations were made 
pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 
(79 Stat. 985; 22 U.S.C. 2459), Executive Order 12047 of March 27, 
1978, the Foreign Affairs Reform and Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 
Stat. 2681, et seq.; 22 U.S.C. 6501 note, et seq.), Delegation of 
Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, Delegation of Authority No. 236-3 
of August 28, 2000, and Delegation of Authority No. 523 of December 22, 
2021.

Nicole L. Elkon,
Deputy Assistant Secretary for Professional and Cultural Exchanges, 
Bureau of Educational and Cultural Affairs, Department of State.
[FR Doc. 2023-22358 Filed 10-6-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-05-P


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

September 19, 1961

No. 66076.

#### Service Cycle Supply Corporation *v.*United States,

protest 60/11340 (A) (New York).

Opinion by

Lawrence, *J.*

Prom a review of the record in this case, the court found nothing tending in any way to overcome the presumption of correctness attaching to the classification by the collector. The protest was, therefore, overruled.
# C_2021208EN.01000101.xml

| 1.6.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 208/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.6.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 208/1

---

EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

2019-2020 SESSION

Sittings of 13 and 14 November 2019

The Minutes of this session have been published in OJ C 174, 7.5.2021.

TEXTS ADOPTED

---
No. 54438.

#### Butler Bros. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 145319-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
No. 57809.

protests 214797-K, etc. (New York).

#### Motty Eitington, Inc., and W. J. Byrnes & Co. of N. Y., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the kidskin plates are similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Kung Chen Fur Corpn.*v. *United States*(29 Cust. Ct. 266, C. D. 1480), the claim for free entry under paragraph 1681 was sustained.

Ford, J., concurred.

i Mollison, J., dissented for the reasons set forth in his dissenting opinion in C. D. 1480, *supra.*
Case 2:06-cr-00230-RSL Document 23 Filed 10/24/06 Page 1 of 2
Case 2:06-cr-00230-RSL Document 23 Filed 10/24/06 Page 2 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

 ORDER

Page - 1

HONORABLE RONALD B. LEIGHTON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

 Plaintiff,

v.

THEODORE RAYMOND VICKERS,

Defendant.

Case No. CR06-5057 RBL

ORDER

THIS MATTER comes on before the above-entitled Court upon Defendant’s Motion for Final

Probation Revocation Hearing [Dkt. #12].

Having considered the entirety of the records and file herein, the Court finds and rules as follows:

On November 6, 2006 this Court entered an Order denying Defendant’s “Motion for Order

Transporting Defendant for Final Probation Revocation Hearing” [Dkt. #11]. The instant motion is, in

essence, a motion for reconsideration of that Order. The Court’s previous Order will not be disturbed upon

reconsideration. Defendant has no right to a federal supervised release hearing while he is in custody serving

a state sentence. See United States v. Bartholdi, 453 F.2d 1225 (9th Cir. 1972). Therefore, it is hereby

ORDERED that Defendant’s Motion for Final Probation Revocation Hearing [Dkt. #12] is DENIED.

The Clerk shall send uncertified copies of this order to all counsel of record, and to any party appearing

pro se.

Dated this 9th day of April, 2007.

ARONALD B. LEIGHTON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:06-cr-05057-RBL Document 13 Filed 04/09/07 Page 1 of 1
No. 57074.

protest 184939-K (New York).

#### Metro Medical Distributors, Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

An examination of the official papers failing to disclose anything which would warrant disturbing the decision of the collector, which was presumptively correct, the protest was dismissed.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                     Exhibit 5.1

                                October 23, 1997




Outdoor Systems, Inc.
2502 North Black Canyon Highway
Phoenix, Arizona 85009

      Re:   Registration Statement on Form S-8

Ladies and Gentlemen:

      We have served as counsel for Outdoor Systems, Inc., a Delaware
corporation (the "Company"), in connection with the registration under the
Securities Act of 1933, as amended, pursuant to a Registration Statement on Form
S-8 (the "Registration Statement") of an aggregate of 6,395,556 shares (the
"Shares") of common stock, $.01 par value, of the Company, to be offered and
sold by the Company pursuant to the 1996 Non-Employee Director Stock Option Plan
(the "Director Plan"), the Agreement and Grant of Option dated as of April 3,
1989, between the Company and Arturo R. Moreno, as amended by the First
Amendment to the Agreement and Grant of an Option dated as of January 1, 1991
(the "Moreno Agreement") and the Agreement and Grant of Option dated as of
January 1, 1991, between the Company and Wally C. Kelly (the "Kelly Agreement"
and, together with the Director Plan and the Moreno Agreement, the "Plans").

      We have examined and are familiar with originals or copies (certified,
photostatic or otherwise identified to our satisfaction) of such documents,
corporate records and other instruments relating to the incorporation of the
Company and the adoption of the Plans as we have deemed necessary and advisable.

      In all such examinations, we have assumed the genuineness of all
signatures on all originals and copies of documents we have examined, the
authenticity of all documents submitted to us as originals and the conformity to
original documents of all certified, conformed or photostatic copies. As to
questions of fact material and relevant to our opinion, we have relied upon
certificates or representations of Company officials and of appropriate state,
local and federal officials.

      We express no opinion as to matters under or involving laws other than the
laws of the State of Georgia and the Delaware General Corporation Law.
<PAGE>   2
Outdoor Systems, Inc.
October 20, 1997
Page 2




      Based upon and subject to the foregoing and having regard for such legal
considerations as we have deemed relevant, it is our opinion that:

      1.    The Shares have been duly authorized; and

      2.    Upon the issuance and delivery of the Shares upon receipt of lawful
            consideration therefor pursuant to the Plans, such Shares will be
            validly issued, fully paid and non-assessable.

      We hereby consent to the filing of this opinion as Exhibit 5.1 to the
Registration Statement.

                                          Very truly yours,



                         POWELL, GOLDSTEIN, FRAZER & MURPHY LLP
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

March 23, 2009 

d0316 

Order 

 

March 23, 2009 

137932 

NATHANIEL LIVINGSTON, JR., 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v SC: 137932 

 COA: 288273 

Washtenaw CC: 08-002301-PP 

WASHTENAW CIRCUIT JUDGE, 

Defendant-Appellee. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the December 4, 2008 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Con. Res. 81 Engrossed in Senate (ES)]

  2d Session
S. CON. RES. 81

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Whereas the date of June 26, 1998, marks the 50th anniversary of the 
        commencement of the Allied effort to supply the people of Berlin, 
        Germany, with food, fuel, and supplies in the face of the illegal Soviet 
        blockade that divided the city;
Whereas this 15 month Allied effort became known throughout the free world as 
        the ``Berlin Airlift'' and ultimately cost the lives of 78 Allied 
        airmen, of whom 31 were United States fliers;
Whereas this heroic humanitarian undertaking was universally regarded as an 
        unambiguous statement of Western resolve to thwart further Soviet 
        expansion;
Whereas the Berlin Airlift was an unqualified success, both as an instrument of 
        diplomacy and as a life saving rescue of the 2,000,000 inhabitants of 
        West Berlin, with 2,326,205 tons of supplies delivered by 277,728 
        flights over a 462-day period;
Whereas historians and citizens the world over view the success of this 
        courageous action as pivotal to the ultimate defeat of international 
        tyranny, symbolized today by the fall of the Berlin Wall; and
Whereas this inspiring act of resolve must be preserved in the memory of future 
        generations in a positive and dramatic manner: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), 
That it is the sense of Congress that--
            (1) the Berlin Airlift, which marks its 50th anniversary of 
        commencement in June 1998, is one of the most significant 
        events in post-war European history; and
            (2) the Berlin Sculpture Fund should be commended for 
        commemorating the 50th anniversary of the Berlin Airlift by 
        presenting to the citizens of the Federal Republic of Germany a 
        gift of representational art, funded by private subscriptions 
        from citizens of the United States.

            Passed the Senate June 26, 1998.

            Attest:

                                                             Secretary.
105th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                            S. CON. RES. 81

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 Honoring the Berlin Airlift and commending the Berlin Sculpture Fund.
```
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v.

JESUS ROSARIO FAVELA

- ASTORGA, AKA Fabela Astorga, AKA Jesus Rosario Fabela Astorga, AKA Jesus Rosario,

Defendant

- Appellant. No. 23

- 10014

D.C. No.

4:11

- cr

- 00150

- DCB

- BGM

- 2

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Arizona David C. Bury, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted November 14, 2023 * *

Before: SILVERMAN, WARDLAW

, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.

Jesus Rosario Favela

- Astorga appeals from the district court’s judgment and

challenges his guilty

- plea conviction and 600

- month sentence for second degree

murder, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1111 and 1114. Pursuant to Anders v.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

NOV 21 2023

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 23

- 10014

California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Favela

- Astorga ’s counsel has filed a brief stating

that there are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of

record. We have provided Favela

- Astorga the opportunity to file a pro se

supplemental brief. No pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been

filed.

Favela

- Astorga waived his right to appeal his conviction and sentence. Our

independent review of the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio , 488 U.S. 75, 80

(1988), discloses no arguable issue as to the validity of the waiver. See United

States v. Watson , 582 F.3d 974, 986

- 88 (9th Cir. 2009). We accordingly dismiss

the appeal. See id. at 988.

Counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

Favela

- Astorga’s pro se motion to appoint new counsel is DENIED

.

DISMISSED.
OPINION I IS A CONFERENCE OPINION 

AND IS NOT ACCESSIBLE THROUGH THE ARCHIVES AND RECORDS 

OFFICE.
# Official Journal C 176/29 M

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 176 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5829 May 2015 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 176

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5829 May 2015

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | IV   Notices |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2015/C 176/01 | Summary of European Union decisions on marketing authorisations in respect of medicinal products from 1 February 2015 to 28 February 2015(Published pursuant to Article 13 or Article 38 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council) | 1 |
| 2015/C 176/02 | Summary of European Union decisions on marketing authorisations in respect of medicinal products from 1 April 2015 to 30 April 2015(Published pursuant to Article 13 or Article 38 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council) | 4 |
| 2015/C 176/03 | Summary of European Union decisions on marketing authorisations in respect of medicinal products from 1 April 2015 to 30 April 2015(Decisions taken pursuant to Article 34 of Directive 2001/83/EC or Article 38 of Directive 2001/82/EC) | 11 |

Notice No

Contents

page

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2015/C 176/01

Summary of European Union decisions on marketing authorisations in respect of medicinal products from 1 February 2015 to 28 February 2015(Published pursuant to Article 13 or Article 38 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council)

(Published pursuant to Article 13 or Article 38 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council)

1

2015/C 176/02

Summary of European Union decisions on marketing authorisations in respect of medicinal products from 1 April 2015 to 30 April 2015(Published pursuant to Article 13 or Article 38 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council)

(Published pursuant to Article 13 or Article 38 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council)

4

2015/C 176/03

Summary of European Union decisions on marketing authorisations in respect of medicinal products from 1 April 2015 to 30 April 2015(Decisions taken pursuant to Article 34 of Directive 2001/83/EC or Article 38 of Directive 2001/82/EC)

(Decisions taken pursuant to Article 34 of Directive 2001/83/EC or Article 38 of Directive 2001/82/EC)

11

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN