alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
BOARD OF GOVERNORS
OF THE

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM
WASHINGTON, D.C. 2055)

March 28, 2019 ADORESS OFFICIAL CORRESPONDENCE
TO THE BOARD

Mr. Ronald Brian Murphy
774 Park Boulevard
Wylie, Texas 75098

Dear Mr. Murphy:

The General Counsel, acting pursuant to delegated authority, and after
consultation with the Director of the Division of Supervision and Regulation, has
approved your request pursuant to section 19 of the Federal Deposit Insurance Act! to
become an institution-affiliated party of State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance
Company (“State Farm”), Bloomington, Illinois, a savings and loan holding company
(“SLHC”). This approval is limited to your being an institution-affiliated party of State
Farm, including by working for State Farm or working for an independently owned
agency that sells State Farm insurance products and products for State Farm’s wholly
owned subsidiary, State Farm Bank, f.s.b. (“State Farm Bank”), Bloomington, Illinois. If
you seek to work for another SLHC or bank holding company (“BHC”), or to work for an
independently owned agency that sells products for another SLHC or BHC, you must
obtain the Board’s approval prior to working for such SLHC, BHC, or agency.

This action is based on all the facts of record and the representations made
by you to the Board in connection with your request. Any change in the facts presented
could result in a different conclusion and should be reported immediately to Board staff.
This action is also based on all commitments provided by you in support of your request.
These commitments are conditions imposed in writing in connection with the Board’s
decision and, as such, may be enforced in proceedings under applicable law. This action
is conditioned specifically on your receipt of all necessary regulatory approvals related to
your proposal and compliance with any terms and conditions that may be imposed in
connection with such approvals. This action is also conditioned specifically on you
obtaining any necessary licenses, including any insurance license, prior to beginning your
proposed position; maintaining such licenses; and disclosing your criminal history that
requires a section 19 application to the relevant authorities that issue such licenses.
Additionally, if you are convicted of, or enter into a pretrial diversion program for, a
crime involving dishonesty, breach of trust, or money laundering in the future, you must

' 12 U.S.C. § 1829.


2

again seek approval to work for any SLHC or BHC, or to work for any independently
owned agency that sells products for an SLHC or a BHC, including any agency that sells
State Farm and State Farm Bank products.

Sincerely yours,

ant, MN. Serta

Margaret MeCloskey Shanks

Deputy Secretary of the Board
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 25 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 25

  Expressing the sense of the Congress that a postage stamp should be 
     issued in honor of the United States Masters Swimming program.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 4, 1999

 Mr. English submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
             referred to the Committee on Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
  Expressing the sense of the Congress that a postage stamp should be 
     issued in honor of the United States Masters Swimming program.

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That it is the sense of the Congress that--
            (1) a postage stamp should be issued in honor of the United 
        States Masters Swimming program; and
            (2) the Citizens' Stamp Advisory Committee should recommend 
        to the Postmaster General that such a stamp be issued.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 279 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  2d Session

                            H. CON. RES. 279

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

   Authorizing the use of the Capitol Grounds for the 200th birthday 
                celebration of the Library of Congress.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
106th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 279

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring),

SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION OF EVENT TO CELEBRATE THE 200TH BIRTHDAY OF 
              THE LIBRARY OF CONGRESS.

    The Library of Congress (in this resolution referred to as the 
``sponsor'') shall be permitted to sponsor a public event, the 200th 
birthday celebration of the Library of Congress (in this resolution 
referred to as the ``event''), on the Capitol Grounds on April 24, 
2000, or on such other date as the Speaker of the House of 
Representatives and the Committee on Rules and Administration of the 
Senate may jointly designate.

SEC. 2. TERMS AND CONDITIONS.

    (a) In General.--The event shall be free of admission charge to the 
public and arranged not to interfere with the needs of Congress, under 
conditions to be prescribed by the Architect of the Capitol and the 
Capitol Police Board.
    (b) Expenses and Liabilities.--The sponsor shall assume full 
responsibility for all expenses and liabilities incident to all 
activities associated with the event.

SEC. 3. STRUCTURES AND EQUIPMENT.

    (a) Structures and Equipment.--Subject to the approval of the 
Architect of the Capitol, the sponsor may erect upon the Capitol 
Grounds such stage, sound amplification devices, and other related 
structures and equipment as may be required for the event.
    (b) Additional Arrangements.--The Architect of the Capitol and the 
Capitol Police Board are authorized to make any such additional 
arrangements as may be required to carry out the event, except that no 
arrangements may be made to limit access to any public road on the 
Capitol Grounds.

SEC. 4. ENFORCEMENT OF RESTRICTIONS.

    The Capitol Police Board shall provide for enforcement of the 
restrictions contained in section 4 of the Act of July 31, 1946 (40 
U.S.C. 193d; 60 Stat. 718), concerning sales, advertisements, displays, 
and solicitations on the Capitol Grounds, as well as other restrictions 
applicable to the Capitol Grounds, with respect to the event.

            Passed the House of Representatives April 3, 2000.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
```
Regulatory Evaluation 

Docket No. fAA- Directorate Identifier: 

111<'1' 

I! t'o/1 rnak,· c ·!rung,'.\ tu tlw rulrr.•, in the tahlc hei/J\r. _I'(I II JIIII~ l'll\111"1' till· !olul.' llflclclle oc ·c,.r.!iuglt· (I 

c/11 JltJ/. c·/i, k trJ/' 'fuh) ill/11 ttJid then 11/11 ()/!lie' I'IUIII,'.!.r.!cl Ct'/1. 

Estimated Costs: 

Action Costs per Product (e.g., aircraft. engine. 

(e.g .. Inspection, propeller, appliance) 

Work-hours Labor Parts Cost Total Costs Number of Total Cost replacement) (include cost (labor + u.s. for U.S. Fleet Do no/ include 011-

condition costs here access. testing, (@$85/h parts) Registered 

and close-up) our) Products 

Pressure Decay 2.0 $0 Test 6.000 

Check two 

temperature 1.0 $0 6.000 

switches 

Check solenoid 

valve and fuel 2.0 $0 6.000 

pump 

The known number of products in compliance: 

Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet : $2,550,000 

Costs covered under warranty (if known) $ 

On-Condition Costs: ~ --

Action Work-hours Labor cost Parts Cost Cost per Product 

(e.g .. Inspection, (include access, (@$85/hour) 

testing. and close- replacement) 

~ 

up) 

(,U) ~ ¥:!-d •1': 

dN ~f<.(Y) \ 

7 
Special considerations for Economic Analysis (Use this field 10 explain anything in the Estimated Custs table 

that was assumed or might not he ohviou.~. This field cw1 also he used to explain II'CifTWlfJ' costs): 

Executive Order 12866: 

Could the AD be considered a .. significant regulatory action .. ?@ 

YES* 0 NO~ 

*Explanation: 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures: 

Is the AD significant? @ 

YES* 0 NO !8] 

*Explanation: 

Regulatory Flexibility Act: 

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? Explain for 

either a Yes or No answer. G 

YES 0 NO !8] 

Explanation: 

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska: 

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for 

aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode of transportation? 0 

YES*0 NO~ 

*Explanation: 

8
# Cover Sheet

Using the Provided Shocks Risk factor shocks are provided here in a format that is analogous to that of the FR Y-14Q schedule for Trading, Private Equity and Other Fair Value Assets. It is expected that firms will apply these risk factor shocks to produce the profit and loss (P/L) estimates for the trading and counterparty credit (CCR) portfolios.  In cases in which the specified shocks are not directly compatible with the firm’s internal systems, the firm is expected to interpolate or extrapolate around the given points to determine the appropriate shock.   Supporting documentation should include a description of the methods used to interpolate or extrapolate. In cases where there are nonlinearities, firms should not simply multiply their exposures by the corresponding shocks to arrive at a purely linear P/L estimate, but should instead use full-revaluation methods to compute their loss estimates.   Using Other Shocks If firms require a shock that has not been provided, then firms should use their best judgment to generate the missing shock so that it is sensible  given shocks for related instruments and the scenario narrative.   Any such cases must be described thoroughly in supplemental documentation to be submitted with firm’s loss estimates.  

# Equity by Geography

# Dividends

# FX Spot

# FX Vega

# Rates DV01

# Rates Vega-Normal & Relative

# Rates Vega-Normal & Absolute

# Other Rates

# Energy

# Metals

# Ags & Softs

# Commodity Indices

# Securitized Products

# Agencies

# Munis

# ARS

# Corporate Credit-Advanced

# Corporate Credit-EM

# Sovereign Credit

# Credit Correlation

# Private Equity

&"Calibri"&11&K000000RESTRICTED FR // SECURE EXTERNAL&1#		

# Other Fair Value Assets

&"Calibri"&11&K000000RESTRICTED FR // SECURE EXTERNAL&1#
96-153

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. 96-153

_______________

MISCHELLE SCHELSKE and RICK SCHELSKE, ) ) Plaintiffs and Appellants, ) ) v. ) ) CREATIVE NAIL DESIGN, INC., a foreign ) corporation; OPI PRODUCTS, INC., ) a foreign corporation; CLAIROL, INC., ) a foreign corporation, HELENE CURTIS, ) INC., a foreign corporation; NEXXUS ) PRODUCTS COMPANY, a foreign corporation; ) THE ADU COMPANY, a foreign corporation; ) REVLON PROFESSIONAL PRODUCTS, INC., ) a foreign corporation; COSMETIC ARTS, ) a foreign corporation; AMERICAN ) O R D E R INTERNATIONAL, a foreign corporation; ) SEBASTIAN INTERNATIONAL, a foreign ) corporation; UNIT CHEMICAL CORPORATION, ) a foreign corporation; PAUL MITCHELL ) (BOCCHI LABORATORIES); MATRIX ESSENTIALS, ) INC., a foreign corporation; MALIBU 2000, ) a foreign corporation; HIGHLAND CORPORATION, ) a foreign corporation; CAPITAL HILL MALL ) PARTNERSHIP, a Utah limited partnership; ) JC PENNEY COMPANY, INC., a foreign ) corporation; PALMER DUNCAN CONSTRUCTION ) COMPANY, a Montana corporation; and DOES ) and ROES ONE THROUGH TEN, ) ) Defendants and Respondents. )

_______________
On January 2, 1997, this Court issued its opinion in the above case. The opinion is presently reported at 54 St.Rep. 21. On January 10, 1997, Appellants petitioned for rehearing and Respondents filed their brief in opposition thereto. Appellants

file:///C|/Documents%20and%20Settings/cu1046/Desktop/opinions/96-153%20(04-01-97)%20Order.htm (1 of 2)4/11/2007 2:39:50 PM96-153 objected to Respondents' brief. Because Justice Charles E. Erdmann, the author of the opinion, was no longer a sitting justice on this Court and because there were, otherwise, insufficient votes from the original 5-member panel to either grant or deny the petition for rehearing, this case was placed back on the classification agenda and was reconsidered by the Court en banc with District Judge John Warner sitting for Justice W. William Leaphart, who had originally recused himself. Upon careful reconsideration of the record, briefs on appeal, petition for rehearing and the briefs filed in support of and in opposition to the petition for rehearing, IT IS ORDERED that this Court's opinion as filed January 2, 1997, is reaffirmed and shall continue as the decision of this Court in this case and cause. Appellants' petition for rehearing is DENIED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Clerk of this Court give notice of this order by mail to counsel of record and that this order be published with the Court's January 2, 1997 opinion. Dated this 1st day of April, 1997.

/S/ J. A. TURNAGE

/S/ JAMES C. NELSON

/S/ KARLA M. GRAY

/S/ JOHN WARNER, District Court Judge

Justice Terry N. Trieweiler continues to dissent to the Court's January 2, 1997 opinion in this case and cause and Justices William E. Hunt and James M. Regnier join that dissent.

/S/ TERRY N. TRIEWEILER

/S/ JIM REGNIER

/S/ WILLIAM E. HUNT, SR.

file:///C|/Documents%20and%20Settings/cu1046/Desktop/opinions/96-153%20(04-01-97)%20Order.htm (2 of 2)4/11/2007 2:39:50 PM
# Official Journal L 273/2021

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 273 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 6430 July 2021 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 273

English edition

Legislation

Volume 6430 July 2021

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | * | Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/1228 of 16 July 2021 amending Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/799 as regards the requirements for the construction, testing, installation, operation and repair of smart tachographs and their components (
  1
  ) | 1 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

REGULATIONS

*

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2021/1228 of 16 July 2021 amending Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/799 as regards the requirements for the construction, testing, installation, operation and repair of smart tachographs and their components (
  1
  )

1

1

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance. |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance.

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
<PAGE>   1
                                  EXHIBIT 11.1

                             ADFLEX SOLUTIONS, INC.

                   COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME (LOSS) PER SHARE

                    (in thousands, except per share amounts)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                      Three Months Ended 
                                                                           March 31,
                                                                     1998            1997
                                                                     ----            ----
<S>                                                                 <C>             <C>
Net income                                                          $2,631          $  873

Computation of shares used in net income (loss) per share:


Weighted average common shares outstanding                           8,805           8,666

Incremental common equivalent shares representing
shares issuable upon exercise of stock options (1)                     118             101
                                                                    ----------------------


Total weighted average shares - diluted                              8,923           8,767
                                                                    ======================

Total weighted average shares - basic
                                                                     8,805           8,666
                                                                    ======================

Net income per diluted common and
common equivalent share                                             $  .30          $  .10
                                                                    ======================

Net income per basic common and
common equivalent share                                             $  .30          $  .10
                                                                    ======================
</TABLE>






--------
(1) Amount calculated using the treasury stock method and fair market values for
stock.
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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

JONAS DAVID SMITH,

Petitioner,

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Respondent.

 No. CV06-844RSL

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR

RECONSIDERATION

This matter comes before the Court on Petitioner Smith’s “Motion for Reconsideration”

(Dkt. #37). Smith asks the Court to reconsider its April 23, 2007 Order Denying Smith’s

original motions for reconsideration. As the Court noted in its April 23, 2007 Order, “[m]otions

for reconsideration are disfavored. The court will ordinarily deny such motions in the absence

of a showing of manifest error in the prior ruling or a showing of new facts or legal authority

which could not have been brought to its attention earlier with reasonable diligence.” Local

Civil Rule 7(h)(1). Petitioner has failed to demonstrate any manifest error in the Court’s prior

ruling or to produce any new facts or legal authority that would change the Court’s original

analysis. As such, his motion for reconsideration (Dkt. #37) is denied.

DATED this 30th day of May, 2007.

A

Robert S. Lasnik

United States District Judge

Case 2:06-cv-00844-RSL Document 39 Filed 05/30/07 Page 1 of 1
| Skip to Content*Release Date: December 11, 2014*Release dates |  Announcements |   Coded tables |  Historical data | Technical Q&AsCurrent release |  Screen reader |  PDF (450 KB) |  Data Download Program (DDP)**F.104 State and Local Governments 1** |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Homeland Security

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency

          - [Docket ID FEMA-2023-0001]

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

FEMA gives notice of an adjustment to the threshold for Small Project subgrants made to State, Tribal, and local governments and private nonprofit facilities for disasters declared on or after October 1, 2023.

# DATES:

This adjustment applies to major disasters and emergencies declared on or after October 1, 2023.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Tod Wells, Recovery Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, 500 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-3834.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 42 U.S.C. 5121-5207, as amended by the Sandy Recovery Improvement Act, Public Law 113-2, provides that FEMA will annually adjust the threshold for assistance provided under section 422, Simplified Procedures, relating to the Public Assistance program, to reflect changes in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers published by the Department of Labor.

FEMA gives notice that $1,037,000 is the threshold for any Small Project subgrant made to State, Tribal, and local governments or to the owner or operator of an eligible private nonprofit facility under section 422 of the Stafford Act for all major disasters or emergencies declared on or after October 1, 2023.

FEMA bases the adjustment on an increase in the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers of 3.7 percent for the 12-month period that ended in August 2023. This is based on information released by the Bureau of Labor Statistics at the U.S. Department of Labor on September 13, 2023.

Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance No. 97.036, Disaster Grants—Public Assistance (Presidentially Declared Disasters).

Deanne Criswell,

Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency.

[FR Doc. 2023-23165 Filed 10-19-23; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 9111-23-P
Exhibit 32.1
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (1)
    
    the Annual Report of the Company on Form 10-K for the period ended March 28, 2008 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Annual Report) fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended; and(2)
    
    the information contained in the Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 /s/
William L. BallhausWilliam L. BallhausPresident and Chief Executive Officer
Date: June 10, 2008
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 19 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.Con. Res.19
                                     Agreed to February 12, 1999        

                       One Hundred Sixth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE FIRST SESSION

         Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,
   the sixth day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-nine

                          Concurrent Resolution

 

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That the Rotunda of the Capitol is authorized to be used from 8 o'clock 
ante meridian until 3 o'clock post meridian on April 13, 1999, for a 
ceremony as part of the commemoration of the days of remembrance of 
victims of the Holocaust. Physical preparations for the ceremony shall 
be carried out in accordance with such conditions as the Architect of 
the Capitol may prescribe.
  Attest:

                                 Clerk of the House of Representatives.

  Attest:

                                               Secretary of the Senate.
```