alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
October 18, 2021

Treasury Sees Robust Demand for Emergency Capital 

Investment

Treasury reports that 204 credit unions, banks, and bank and savings and loan 

holding companies requested total investments of over $12.88 billion under the 

Emergency Capital Investment Program (ECIP). This demand exceeds the amount 

available for investment by $4.13 billion.

Under the program, Treasury will provide up to $8.75 billion in capital directly to 

depository institutions that are certified Community Development Financial 

Institutions (CDFIs) or minority depository institutions (MDIs) to, among other 

things, provide loans, grants, and forbearance for small businesses, minorityowned businesses, and consumers, especially in low-income and underserved 

communities, that may be disproportionately impacted by the economic effects 

of the COVID-19 pandemic. 

Established by the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, the Emergency Capital 

Investment Program (ECIP) was created to encourage low- and moderate-income 

community financial institutions to augment their efforts to support small 

businesses and consumers in their communities.

By the Numbers

Total Investment Requested: $12,882,639,000

Total amount of investment requested from banks, savings and loans and holding 

companies: $9,648,306,000

Total amount of investment requested from credit unions: $ 3,234,333,000

Total amount requested by CDFIs: $10,364,234,000

Total amount requested by MDIs: $4,199,016,000
Total Applications: 204

Total applications from banks, savings and loans, and holding companies: 113

Total applications from credit unions: 91

Total applications from Low Income Credit Unions: 91

Number of States Represented: 36 + the District of Columbia and Guam
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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 Local Rule

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 96-10410

Summary Calendar

 

REX SULLIVAN,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

SHIRLEY S. CHATER,

Commissioner of Social Security,

Defendant-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 7:95-CV-006-X

- - - - - - - - - -

November 11, 1996

Before JONES, DeMOSS and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Rex Sullivan appeals from the district court's decision in

favor of the Commissioner which denied disability insurance

benefits and supplemental security income benefits to Sullivan. 

Sullivan argues that the Commissioner’s decision is not supported

by substantial evidence and that the Commissioner failed to apply

the correct legal standards. 
No. 96-10410

- 2 -

 We have reviewed the record and the briefs of the parties

and find no error in the decision of the district court. 

Accordingly, we affirm for essentially the same reasons set forth

by the district court. Sullivan v. Chater, No. 7:95-CV-0006-X 

(N.D. Tx. Mar. 18, 1996). 

 AFFIRMED.
Exhibit 12.1





CERTIFICATION





I, Efraim Argaman, certify that:





1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F/A of D. Medical Industries Ltd.





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





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





4. The company’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-115(e) for the company and have:





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





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





(c)     Disclosed in this report any change in the company’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the company’s internal control over financial reporting; and





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





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





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





Date: October 26, 2011





/s/ Efraim Argaman


Efraim Argaman


Chief Executive Officer
Western Massachusetts Electric CompanyExhibit 12Ratio of Earnings to Fixed ChargesThree Months(Thousands of Dollars)EndedMarch 31, 2009For the Years Ended December 31,(unaudited)20082007200620052004Earnings, as defined:Net income$6,146$18,330$23,604$15,644$15,085$12,373Income tax expense3,78910,54514,5867,7669,2947,187Equity in (earnings)/losses of regional nucleargenerating companies(23)(101)(526)241(311)(149)Dividends received from regional equity investees419-701372103687Fixed charges, as below5,67921,91022,16221,08719,80117,156Less: Interest capitalized (including AFUDC)(124)(1,010)(983)(853)(455)(220)Total earnings, as defined$15,886$49,674$59,544$44,257$43,517$37,034Fixed charges, as defined:Interest on long-term debt (a)$3,443$13,244$11,577$10,671$9,535$6,655Interest on rate reduction bonds1,1685,1335,8396,7237,5708,332Other interest (b)6271,2562,4301,5071,041782Rental interest factor3171,2671,3331,3331,2001,167Interest capitalized (including AFUDC)1241,010983853455220Total fixed charges, as defined$5,679$21,910$22,162$21,087$19,801$17,156Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges2.802.272.692.102.202.16(a)
Interest on long-term debt amounts include amortized premiums, discounts and capitalized expenses related to indebtedness.(b)
For the three months ended March 31, 2009 and for the year ended December 31, 2008, other interest includes interest related to Financial Accounting Standards Board Interpretation No. 48, "Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxes - an Interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109."
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FORM 10-QSB
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                              0000021828
<NAME>                             COLONIAL COMMERCIAL CORP.
       
<S>                                <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                      6-MOS
<PERIOD-START>                     JAN-01-1998
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                  DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                       JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                               3,998,385
<SECURITIES>                                 0 
<RECEIVABLES>                        8,119,445
<ALLOWANCES>                           453,906
<INVENTORY>                            994,573
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                    13,442,167
<PP&E>                                 633,048
<DEPRECIATION>                         235,242
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                      14,368,810
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                4,410,892
<BONDS>                                      0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                        0
<PREFERRED>                             80,957
<COMMON>                                73,324
<OTHER-SE>                           9,022,560
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>        14,368,810
<SALES>                             12,146,210
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                    12,146,210
<CGS>                                8,984,229
<TOTAL-COSTS>                        8,984,229
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                       140,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                     119,415
<INCOME-PRETAX>                      2,359,266
<INCOME-TAX>                           175,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                  2,184,266
<DISCONTINUED>                               0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                              0
<CHANGES>                                    0
<NET-INCOME>                         2,184,266
<EPS-PRIMARY>                            1.52
<EPS-DILUTED>                             .69

        

</TABLE>
#### STATE FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY, Appellant, v. Joseph PURPURA, Appellee.

No. 68-824.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

May 13, 1969.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
### UNPUBLISHED



# UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT



#  G RAHAM G EORGE C ULLIFORD ,

Plaintiff-Appellant,
v. No. 02-1698



# 
G LEN Q UEEN , Defendant-Appellee. 

# 

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Bryson City.

Lacy H. Thornburg, District Judge. (CA-01-221-2-T) Submitted: October 17, 2002 Decided: November 6, 2002 Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.

COUNSEL Graham George Culliford, Appellant Pro Se. Fred Henry Moody, Jr., MCKEEVER, EDWARDS, DAVIS & HAYS, P.A., Bryson City, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).OPINION
PER CURIAM:Graham George Culliford appeals the district court’s order dismissing his slander of title action without prejudice under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6). We vacate the district court’s order and remand for further proceedings. Generally, a dismissal without prejudice is not an appealable order. See Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392 , 10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir. 1993). However, because no amendment of Culliford’s complaint would permit his action to proceed, we find the order of dismissal appealable. Id.The district court dismissed Culliford’s complaint for lack of diversity jurisdiction. The court found that Culliford is an alien admitted to the United States as a permanent resident. It accordingly concluded that Culliford is a citizen of North Carolina for diversity purposes. We have reviewed the record and find inadequate support for the district court’s finding that Culliford is a permanent resident of the United States. See 28 U.S.C. § 1332(a); Foy v. Schantz, Schatzman & Aaronson, P.A. , 108 F.3d 1347, 1349 (11th Cir. 1997). We therefore vacate the district court’s order and remand for reconsideration of whether diversity jurisdiction exists.*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.
VACATED AND REMANDED *We express no opinion as to whether diversity jurisdiction is present or, if so, whether the district court may decline to exercise jurisdiction on abstention grounds. 2 C ULLIFORD v. Q UEEN
#### L. A. SLOAN v. Frances L. SLOAN.

No. 38305.

Supreme Court of Florida.

April 1969.

Certiorari denied without opinion. 221 So.2d 248.
Page 1 of 3

Disposition Comments

Docket No: FAA-2013-0013 These comments are in

Directorate ID: 2012-CE-046-AD response to an SNPRM

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

Next Step: FRAN SNPRM

 No Comments/Only Supportive Comments Received – If this box is checked, no signatures are 

required.

No Has the referenced service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? If yes, 

list latest revision and attach a copy. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously 

published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance.

Instructions: Summarize all comments by issue (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of 

each issue. All comments relating to the same issue should be discussed together. Do not list all of the issues 

from one commenter together. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and 

describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA-IR-M-8040.1C Chapter 9.

ISSUE 1: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD: 

If NO, we don’t agree because 

ISSUE 2: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD:
Page 2 of 3

If NO, we don’t agree because 

For additional issues, double-click here
Page 3 of 3

Signature Section

Signature indicates concurrence with this action.

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

ASE Printed Name: Date

Branch Manager Date
1 This memorandum opinion was not selected for publication in the New Mexico Reports. Please see

2 Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished memorandum opinions. Please

3 also note that this electronic memorandum opinion may contain computer-generated errors or other

4 deviations from the official paper version filed by the Court of Appeals and does not include the

5 filing date. 

6 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO

7 ERNEST GUTIERREZ,

8 Plaintiff-Appellant,

9 v. NO. 30,212 

10 GLORIA GARLY,

11 Defendant-Appellee.

12 APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF VALENCIA COUNTY

13 John W. Pope, District Judge

14 Ernest Gutierrez

15 Los Lunas, NM

16 Pro Se Appellant

17 Gloria Garly

18 Los Lunas, NM

19 Pro Se Appellee

20 MEMORANDUM OPINION

21 FRY, Chief Judge.

22 Plaintiff appeals an order dismissing his complaint with prejudice. In this

23 Court’s second notice of proposed summary disposition, we proposed to reverse.

24 Defendant has not filed a memorandum in opposition, and the time to do so has

25 passed. Plaintiff has filed a memorandum in support, with the caveat that he wishes
2

1 to clarify that his complaint alleged that Plaintiff’s attorney telephoned Defendant and

2 Plaintiff’s daughter, informing them that they should pick up Plaintiff’s equipment

3 and personal belongings from the motel. [RP 8] Because no party opposes our

4 second proposed summary disposition, we reverse for the reasons provided in our

5 second notice.

6 IT IS SO ORDERED.

7 

8 CYNTHIA A. FRY, Chief Judge

9 WE CONCUR:

10 

11 JONATHAN B. SUTIN, Judge

12 

13 MICHAEL E. VIGIL, Judge
#### Jack E. WRIGHT, Appellant, v. William deCARPENTIER, Wright Development Corporation, a Florida corporation, Robert E. Wright, Appellees.

No. 70-720.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

April 28, 1971.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel., Craig S. COCO, juvenile.

No. 62990.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 5, 1978.

In re: Craig S. Coco applying for writ of habeas corpus and stay order. Jefferson Parish.

Granted with Stay Order. The case is assigned for argument on September 12, 1978 at 10:00 a. m.
Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development | Partners for Better Communities

Main Street Centre | 600 East Main Street, Suite 300 Richmond, VA 23219

www.dhcd.virginia.gov | Phone (804) 371-7000 | Fax (804) 371-7090 | Virginia Relay 7-1-1

Roommate Certification

Virginia Rent Relief Program

I, ____________________ (applicant name), hereby attest under penalty of perjury that I am 

currently residing at ______________________________ (physical property address) where I 

have entered into an agreement with ________________________ (leaseholder or landlord 

name) to pay a share of the monthly rent in the amount of $________, beginning 

_____________ (month/day/year) until _______________ (month/day/year). Additionally, I 

certify that my rental arrangement during this time period is best described as:

______ Roommate: The Rent Relief Program (RRP) defines roommate as an adult 

applicant who has a written agreement with the landlord. The applicant may or may not have 

dependent children and is not a family member of the other adult(s) listed on the lease.

As a Virginia Rent Relief Program (RRP) applicant, I certify that I meet the program’s criteria and 

am unable to pay my monthly rent. Additionally, I certify that I have not received any other 

form of federal, state, or local subsidy or financial assistance for rent during the same time 

period with the requested RRP and that I will repay any RRP assistance determined to be 

duplicative. I understand that any misrepresentation of information or failure to disclose 

information requested on this form may disqualify me from participation in RRP, and may be 

grounds for termination of assistance. 
Virginia Department of Housing and Community Development | Partners for Better Communities

Main Street Centre | 600 East Main Street, Suite 300 Richmond, VA 23219

www.dhcd.virginia.gov | Phone (804) 371-7000 | Fax (804) 371-7090 | Virginia Relay 7-1-1

I understand that any misrepresentation of information or failure to disclose information 

requested on this form may disqualify me from participation in RRP, and may be grounds for 

termination of assistance. WARNING: It is unlawful to provide false information to the 

government when applying for federal public or benefit programs per the Program Fraud Civil 

Remedies Act of 1986, 31 U.S.C. §§ 3801-3812. I certify that the above information is true and 

correct.

______________________________ ______________________________

Applicant Printed Name Applicant Signature

______________________________ ______________________________

Leaseholder Printed Name Leaseholder Signature

______________________________ ______________________________

Landlord Printed Name (if applicable) Landlord Signature (if applicable)

_____________

Date
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 235 (Monday, December 8, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 64598]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-32152]


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

FOREIGN CLAIMS SETTLEMENT COMMISSION

[F.C.S.C. Meeting Notice No. 25-97]


Sunshine Act Meeting

    The Foreign Claims Settlement Commission, pursuant to its 
regulations (45 CFR Part 504) and the Government in the Sunshine Act (5 
U.S.C. 552b), hereby gives notice in regard to the scheduling of 
meetings and oral hearings for the transaction of Commission business 
and other matters specified, as follows:

Date and Time

    Monday, December 15, 1997, 9:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
    Wednesday, December 17, 1997, 9:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
    Monday, December 22, 1997, 9:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
    Monday, December 29, 1997, 9:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.
    Wednesday, December 31, 1997, 9:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.

Subject Matter: (1) Oral Hearings and Hearings on the Record on 
Objections to Individual Proposed Decisions on Claims of Holocaust 
Survivors Against Germany; (2) Issuance of Individual Final Decisions 
on Claims of Holocaust Survivors Against Germany.

Status: Closed.
    All meetings are held at the Foreign Claims Settlement Commission, 
600 E Street, N.W., Washington, DC. Requests for information, or 
advance notices of intention to observe an open meeting, may be 
directed to: Administrative Officer, Foreign Claims Settlement 
Commission, 600 E Street, NW., Room 6002, Washington, DC 20579. 
Telephone: (202) 616-6988.

    Dated at Washington, DC, December 3, 1997.
Judith H. Lock,
Administrative Officer.
[FR Doc. 97-32152 Filed 12-4-97; 9:18 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-01-P
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

JUDGMENT

No. 04

- 23

- 00105

- CV

IN THE INTEREST OF C.D.L.

From the 285th Judicial District Court

, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2021

- PA

- 01955 Honorable Christine Vasquez

- Hortick , Judge Presiding

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE MARTINEZ

, JUSTICE RODRIGUEZ , AND CHIEF JUSTICE MARION (RET.) 1

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s order terminating appellants’ parental rights is AFFIRMED. No costs of appeal are taxed against ap pellants.

SIGNED July 10, 2024.

_____________________________ Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice

1 Sitting by assignment pursuant to section 74.003(b) of the Texas Government Code
Sanitized Consolidated Chemical Substance 1: Manufacturing 

Process Flow Diagram
#### James Alvin ROGERS, Appellant, v. Lloyd SPARKS, as Justice of the Peace in and for the Fourteenth Justice of the Peace District of Volusia County, Florida, Appellee.

No. N-152.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Dec. 15, 1970.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.