alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
• The Federal Home Loan Bank Act (Bank Act) requires that boards of directors of the FHLBanks

comprise member directors and independent directors (with independent directors comprising

less than half, but no fewer than 2/5 of the board), establishes eligibility and qualification criteria

for directors, and sets forth the duties of FHLBank directors. The Bank Act also includes rules

governing director nominations and elections.

o What is the appropriate size, composition, and proportion of independent directors on a

FHLBank’s board of directors? Do members, via their board representation, have too much

control over the selection of independent directors?

o Do the statutory qualifications for serving as a public interest independent director ensure

representation of consumer and community interests? If not, how should they be changed?

o Are the interests of the various types of FHLBank members and differently-sized FHLBank

members adequately represented? If not, how can this be accomplished?

o How can the FHLBanks increase diversity on their boards?

o Should the range of expertise required to be covered by a FHLBank’s independent directors

be expanded? (Areas currently required to be covered are financial management, auditing

and accounting, risk management practices, derivatives, project development, organizational

management, and the law.)

• How effective are the FHLBanks’ boards in ensuring their FHLBank operates in a safe and

sound manner? How effective are they in ensuring the public policy mission of the FHLBank is

carried out? Do the boards exercise appropriate oversight of FHLBank management?

• What changes could be made to the statutory or regulatory requirements to incentivize directors

and executives to ensure the FHLBanks’ safety and soundness and mission achievement?

• Should there be restrictions or limits on the compensation executives and board members

receive—or should FHFA be given the authority to impose such limits?

• Are there changes that could be made to the structure of the FHLBank System, including

consolidation, that would strengthen the organizational and operational efficiency of the

FHLBanks? If so, please describe them. If not, please explain why.

To submit in advance: 

• What is the single most important change you would recommend to the statutory or regulatory

requirements pertaining to FHLBank governance? If you believe no changes are needed, explain

why not. What public policy purpose would be served by your recommendation? How would it

affect the safety and soundness and mission achievement of the FHLBanks?

• If you could start from a blank slate, what would governance of the FHLBanks look like?

• Other bullet points outlining the issues you would like to discuss.

Federal Housing Finance Agency

Constitution Center

400 7th Street, S.W. 

Washington, D.C. 20219 

Telephone: (202) 649-3800 

Facsimile: (202) 649-1071 

www.fhfa.gov 

FHLBank System at 100 Roundtable: Corporate Governance and System Structure 

March 13, 2023 | 1:00 – 4:00 p.m. E.T.
No. 49950.

#### Protests 899840-G, etc., of Howatt Brokerage Co. (Los Angeles).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

It was stipulated and agreed that the merchandise is similar in all material respects to that the subject of Abstracts 36724 and 38185, which records were incorporated herein. In accordance with stipulation and *190following the decisions cited the court held that the collector should compute the duty at the 35 percent rate under paragraph 710 upon the dutiable value obtained by multiplying the appraised unit of value, plus packing when not included, by the net weight of the cheese as shown by the weigher, loss 1 ounce per loaf for‘tare of foil or paper covering, or both. The protests were sustained to this extent.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-502
In Re: RICHARD L. WRIGHT; EDNA E. WRIGHT, Petitioners.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CA-97-3167-L) Submitted: March 17, 1998 Decided: June 23, 1998 Before MURNAGHAN, WILKINS, and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Richard L. Wright, Edna E. Wright, Petitioners Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Petitioners filed this petition for a writ of mandamus seeking to have this court direct the district court to act on their complaint. Because there has been no undue delay in the district court, we deny the petition. We grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and we deny Petitioners’ motions for a temporary restraining order, an interlocutory injunction, and to expand the record. We note that the motion to expedite is moot. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 14**  **- 6788** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,
v. SERGIO ESTUPINAN ESTUPINAN, a/k/a Robert Julio Zavala, a/k/a The Lawyer , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina , at Greenville
. Malcolm J. Howard , Senior District Judge. ( 4:09

- cr - 00074

- H

- 1 ; 4:13

- cv - 00195

- H )

Submitted : September 19, 2014 Decided: October 2, 2014

Before KEENAN and DIAZ , Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion
. Sergio Estupinan Estupinan , Appellant Pro Se. Jennifer P. May

Parker, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Ap pellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Sergio Estupinan Estupinan seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C.
§ 2255 (2012) motion. The order is not appealable unless a ci rcuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (B) (2012) . A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012)
. When th e district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently review ed the record and conclude that Estupinan has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the app eal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal3 contentions are adequately presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
Dear Card Servicing Agency, 

Effective October 1, 2022, agencies using credit cards to process an Intra-governmental Card 

Transaction (IGT), will be expected to limit their credit card collections so that individual IGTs 

paid with a credit card do not exceed $10,000.00. The general limit on credit card payments to 

federal agencies remains $24,999.99. The government’s card acceptance policies can be 

found in Treasury Financial Manual (TFM) Vol. I, Part 5, Chapter 7000 at 

https://tfm.fiscal.treasury.gov/v1/p5/c700.html. addresses limitations on credit card transactions. 

An IGT is defined as the sale of goods or services or collection of other obligations, by one 

government agency from another government agency using a government-issued card. 

Agencies may accept cards issued under the U.S. General Services Administration’s SmartPay 

contract for intra-governmental collections, if indicated on the agency application and approved 

in writing or via email by the Fiscal Service.

Agencies are encouraged to use another electronic collection alternative to government-issued 

credit cards for those IGT transactions that would exceed $10,000.00, such as IntraGovernmental Payment and Collection (IPAC) or G-Invoicing. 

• G-Invoicing - G-Invoicing (treasury.gov)

• IPAC - Intra-Governmental Payment and Collection (IPAC) (treasury.gov)

IPAC is a way for federal program agencies to transfer funds from one agency to another, using 

standardized descriptive data. Other electronic alternatives include debit cards, Automated 

Clearing House (ACH) debits or credits and Fedwire transactions. 

G-Invoicing is the long-term solution for Federal Program Agencies (FPAs) to manage their 

intragovernmental (IGT) Buy/Sell transactions. G-Invoicing helps (or will help) agencies and 

their trading partners: negotiate and accept General Terms and Conditions (GT&C) agreements, 

broker orders, exchange performance information, validate settlement requests through IPAC

Agencies pay any interchange fees associated with processing IGT credit card transactions. 

Agencies receive a direct bill from our Financial Agent (Comerica) and are solely responsible for 

the payment. 

Agencies are responsible to ensure that their points of contact (POC) are up to date, particularly 

the billing point of contact, and it is agencies’ obligation to report changes in all POCs to Card 

Acquiring Service by email at CardAcquiringService@fiscal.treasury.gov. 

Regards,

Card Acquiring Service – Agency Outreach

U.S. Department of the Treasury – Bureau of the Fiscal Service 

Settlement Services Division
# Map            Serbia and Montenegro.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

Berle M. Schiller 5614 United States Courthouse

 JUDGE Independence Mall West

 Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19106

 

 267-299-7620

 

March 10, 2003 

Re: Richard Keck v. PPL, Inc.

Docket No. 02-cv-4071

Dear Counsel:

Judge Schiller has scheduled the above-referenced case for a Rule 16 conference for

Monday, March 24, 2003 at 8:30 A.M. in his chambers, Room 5614.

Counsel are directed to obtain copies of Judge Schiller’s “Scheduling Policy Statement”

and “Conference Information Report” from the Court’s website at http:www.paed.uscourts.gov. 

You should review the Scheduling Policy Statement before completing the Conference

Information Report. Please bring the completed Conference Information Report with you to the

Rule 16 Conference.

At the close of the conference, you will receive an Order from Judge Schiller that will list

firm dates for the completion of discovery, other pretrial submissions and trial that will be set at

the conference

Very truly yours,

Patricia A. Callahan

Deputy Clerk to

Hon. Berle M. Schiller

(267)299-7621

Case 2:02-cv-04071-BMS Document 8 Filed 03/10/2003 Page 1 of 1
<Page>

                                                                        EX. 99.2

                      CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER CERTIFICATION
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

     In connection with the annual report of General Maritime Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the period ending December 21, 2002, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350 that:

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

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

     This certification is made solely for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, and not for any other purpose.


/s/ James C. Christodoulou
--------------------------
James C. Christodoulou

Vice President, Secretary and
Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 13.2



Certification of Chief Financial Officer

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,

as adopted pursuant to Section 906

of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



In connection with this Annual Report for Fiscal 2015 Ended August 31, 2015 of Golden Goliath Resources Ltd., a company organized under the British Columbia Corporations Act(the Company) on Form 20-F as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, Stephen Pearce, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. (S) 1350, as adopted pursuant to (S) 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



(1)

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



(2)

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



/s/Stephen Pearce

Stephen Pearce, Chief Financial Officer





Date: January 15, 2016
No. 67730.

Appeal 5101.

#### The Barbizon Corporation *v.*United States.

C.D. 2309 affirmed January 16, 1963. C.A.D. 814.
Before the First Division,

January 31, 1952

No. 56319.

protests 72280-K, etc. (New York).

#### Royal Bead Novelty Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of white beads similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Eitinger Bead Co.*v. *United States*(13 Cust. Ct. 50, C. D. 867), the claims of the plaintiffs were sustained.
EXHIBIT 23.3
                                                                    ------------

                   CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PETROLEUM ENGINEERS


                                 March 24, 2005




The Board of Directors
GMX Resources Inc.
One Benham Place, Suite 600
9400 North Broadway
Oklahoma City, OK 73114

Re:  Consent of Independent Petroleum Engineers

To whom it may concern:

Sproule Associates Inc. hereby consents to the incorporation by reference in the
registration statement (No. 333-106311) on Form S-8 of GMX Resources Inc. and
registration statements (Nos. 333-123209, 333-117256, and 333-115571) on Form
S-3 of the references to our report relating to the proved oil and gas reserves
of GMX Resources Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2004, and to the reference
to our firm as experts in such registration statements with respect to such
report.

Very truly yours,

SPROULE ASSOCIATES, INC.


/s/ Leslie S. O'Connor
U.S. Manager
# Map            Iraq summary map
Exhibit 23.2

INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRMS CONSENT

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement of American Apparel, Inc. on Form S-8 File Nos. 333-163322 and 333-150293of our report dated March 16, 2009, except for the restatement described in Note 20
(not presented herein) to the consolidated financial statements appearing under Item 8 of the Companys 2008 Annual Report on Form 10-K/A filed on August 13, 2009, as to which the date is August 12, 2009, with respect to our audits of the
consolidated financial statements and related consolidated financial statement schedule of American Apparel, Inc. as of December 31, 2008 and 2007 and for the years then ended appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of American Apparel, Inc.
for the year ended December 31, 2009.

|                                                                            
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                            
|/s/ Marcum LLP                                                              
|Marcum LLP (Formerly Marcum
& Kliegman LLP) New York,New York March 31, 2010
EXHIBIT 32  CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  In connection with the Annual Report of Wataire International, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Richard Jordan, Chief Financial Officer of the  Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:  (1) The Report fully complies with the  requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and  (2) The  information  contained in the Report  fairly  presents,  in all material  respects,  the  financial  condition  and result of  operations of the Company.  /s/ Richard Jordan ---------------------- Richard Jordan Chief Financial Officer  July 14, 2008
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

KEITH ALLEN TYLER :

 : CIVIL ACTION

:

:

v. :

: NO. 03-CV-6491

:

DAVID VIGUGLIELMO, ET AL. :

ORDER

AND NOW, this 30 day of March, 2006, upon consideration of the Report and th

Recommendation filed by the Magistrate Judge and the Objections To The Report And

Recommendation filed by Keith Allen Tyler pro se, and it appearing that the Objections simply

state that “Petitioner has made a prima facie showing that Petitioner’s rights have been violated

in the state courts” and that “ Petitioner will rely on the submissions in his Application for a Writ

of Habeas Corpus under §2254 and accompanying Memorandum of Law”, and the Court having

reviewed de novo the issues addressed by the Magistrate Judge in the Report and

Recommendation, it is ORDERED as follows:

1. The Objections to the Report and Recommendations are OVERRULED.

2. The Report and Recommendation is APPROVED and ADOPTED.

3. The Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus is DENIED. 

4. No certificate of appealability shall issue

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

BY THE COURT:

/s R. Barclay Surrick

_____________________

R. Barclay Surrick, Judge

Case 2:03-cv-06491-RBS Document 14 Filed 03/30/06 Page 1 of 1
Before the First Division,

November 25, 1958

No. 62468.

#### Mayork Corporation and H. W. Ebert Co. *v.*United States,

protests 326792-K and 326918-K (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

The protests were dismissed for lack of prosecution.
No. P68/182.

protests 65/12922, etc. (New York).

#### Torch Manufacturing Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of batteries, classified as entireties with flashlights, similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Torch Mfg.*Co., *Inc.*v. *United States*(57 Cust. Ct. 521, C.D. 2863), wherein said batteries were held to be separately dutiable, and that no separate value for each of said items had been returned by the appraiser, the protests were dismissed and the matter remanded to a single judge to determine the separate value of the flashlights and batteries in the manner provided by law (28 U.S.C. § 2636(d).)
!

!

!

! !

!!

!

!

!

2011 NSDI CAP Awards

Ames

Arlington

March 17, 2010

Flagstaff

Augusta

Blacksburg

University Park

Oviedo

Portland

Albany

IDAHO

CALIFORNIA

WEST

VIRGINIA

MINNESOTA

WISCONSIN

FLORIDA

UTAH

New

Philadelphia

Base data courtesy of the National Atlas of the United States®

NEW JERSEY

TENNESSEE

LOUISIANA

Project Categories

! Return on Investment (ROI) Methodology and Business Case Development

for Multi-agency (3)

! FGDC Standards Development Assistance (1)

! Metadata Trainer and Outreach Assistance (3)

! FGDC-Endorsed Standards Implementation Training and Outreach (3)

Fifty States Initiative: Strategic and Business Plan Development (2)

Fifty States Initiative: Business Plan Development and Implementation (8)

MONTANA
In-Person Attendees: Test Procedures for Microwave Ovens (Active Mode)Meeting Date: Tuesday, March 5, 2013Name Title Organization Street City State Zip Phone Fax EmailArmstrong, Ashley General Engineer U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) 1000 IndependenceAvenue, SWWashington DC 20585-0121 202-586-6590 202-586-4617 Ashley.Armstrong@ee.doe.govBattaglia, James Consultant Navigant Consulting, Inc. 77 S. Bedford StreetSuite 400Burlington MA 01803-5154 781-270-8321 781-270-0418 james.battaglia@navigantconsulting.comBrookman, Douglas Facilitator Public Solutions, Inc.108 Newburg Avenue Baltimore MD 21228 410-719-0580 410-719-0581 publicsolutions@earthlink.netCase, David Trial Attorney General Counsel 1000 IndependenceAvenue, S.W.Washington DC 20585 202-287-6998 N/A david.case@hq.doe.govCleary, Jennifer Director, Regulatory Affairs Association of Home ApplianceManufacturers (AHAM)1111 19th Street, NW,Suite 402Washington DC 20036 202-872-5955x314202-872-9354 jcleary@aham.orgCymbalsky, John Supervisory OperationsResearch AnalystU.S. Department of Energy (DOE) 1000 IndependenceAvenue, SWWashington DC 20585 202-287-1692 202-586-4617 john.cymbalsky@ee.doe.govEdwards, Brenda J. Program SupportSpecialistU.S. Department of Energy (DOE) 1000 IndependenceAvenue, SWWashington DC 20585 202-596-2945 202-586-4617 brenda.edwards@ee.doe.govLeybourn, Stephen B. Regulatory/ProductEngineerAssociation of Home ApplianceManufacturers (AHAM)1111 19th Street NW, Suite402Washington DC 20036 202-872-5955x 331202-872-9354 sleybourn@aham.orgMauer, Joanna Technical AdvocacyCoordinatorAppliance Standards AwarenessProject (ASAP)529 14th Street NW,Suite 600Washington DC 20045 202-507-4034 N/A jmauer@appliance-standards.orgReich, Judith Project Employee /ConsultantNavigant Consulting, Inc. 77 S. Bedford StreetSuite 400Burlington MA 01803 781-270-8313 781-270-0418 jreich@navigantconsulting.comReis, Callie Consultant Navigant Consulting, Inc. 77 S. Bedford Street, Suite400Burlington MA 01803 781-270-8326 N/A callie.reis@navigant.comSharp, Mark J. Group ManagerCorporate EnvironmentalDepartmentPanasonic Corporation of NorthAmerica1130 Connecticut Avenue,NW,Suite 1100Washington DC 20036 202-912-3800x 116202-912-3810 mark.sharp@us.panasonic.comStas, Eric A. Attorney-Advisor(General)U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) 1000 IndependenceAvenue, S.W.Washington DC 20585 202-586-5827 202-586-4116 eric.stas@hq.doe.govYamauchi, Masa(Masato)Manager of MicrowaveTechnical Lab.Panasonic Corporation 5201 Tollview Dr, E2J-16 RollingMeadowsIL 60008 847-637-4672 847-637-4677 masa.yamauchi@us.panasonic.com
No. 62972.

#### Darlington Pearl Works *v.*United States,

protest 58/11355 (New York).

Opinion by

Donlon, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of mother-of-pearl disks similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Paramount Import Export Co. et al.*v. *United States*(45 C.C.P.A. 82, C.A.D. 677), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
EXHIBIT 32.2

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


The undersigned  hereby certifies in his capacity as Chief Financial  Officer of
Belair Capital Fund LLC (the Fund), that based on his knowledgde:

(a)  the  Quarterly  Report of the Fund on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March
     31, 2005 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
     of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

(b)  the information  contained in the Report fairly  presents,  in all material
     respects, the financial condition and the results of operations of the Fund
     for such period.

Date:  May 10, 2005

                                  /s/ James L. O'Connor
                                  ---------------------
                                  James L. O'Connor
                                  Chief Financial Officer




A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided  to the Fund  and will be  retained  by the Fund and  furnished  to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.