alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
United States of America 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

Washington, D.C. 20580 

Division of Advertising Practices

 October 22, 2020 

Via Electronic Mail (lbrett@bbbnp.org) 

Laura Brett, Esq. 

Vice President 

National Advertising Division 

112 Madison Avenue, 3rd Floor 

New York, NY 10016 

Re: Advertising by Hypernaturals LLC for Optimmuner Plus dietary supplement 

Dear Ms. Brett: 

We have reviewed the National Advertising Division’s referral of Hypernaturals LLC 

(“Hypernaturals”) regarding advertising claims for its Optimmuner Plus dietary supplement. 

This referral arose out of an NAD Challenge filed against Hypernaturals by the Council for 

Responsible Nutrition (“CRN”). CRN challenged, among other things, claims that Optimmuner 

Plus treats, cures, or prevents cancer. We understand that Hypernaturals failed to provide a 

substantive response to the NAD Challenge and ultimately declined to comply with all of the 

recommendations set forth in NAD’s Decision. Accordingly, you referred this matter to the 

Federal Trade Commission for our review. 

Following several communications with the advertiser, we received confirmation that 

Hypernaturals has agreed to discontinue all claims, made expressly or by implication, that 

Optimmuner treats, cures, or prevents cancer. Accordingly, we have determined not to take 

additional action at this time. In reaching this conclusion, we considered a number of factors 

including resource allocation and enforcement priorities, the nature of any FTC Act violation, 

and the type and severity of any consumer injury. 
Laura Brett, Esq. 

October 22, 2020 

Page 2 

The staff’s decision is not to be construed as a determination that a violation may not 

have occurred, just as the pendency of an investigation should not be construed as a 

determination that a violation has occurred. The Commission reserves the right to take such 

further action as the public interest may require. The FTC appreciates your referral and the 

opportunity to assist in supporting the NAD.

Very Truly Yours, 

Carolyn L. Hann 

Chief of Staff for Advertising Practices 

s/ Carolyn L. Hann
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-2299
ROBERT W. RIFE, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus RICHMOND TECHNICAL CENTER; J. AUSTIN BROWN, Principal; DAVID NETTLES, Assistant Principal; JOSEPH FRICHTEL, Assistant Principal; JOHNNIE RICH, Principal (retired), Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richm ond. Robert R. Merhige, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-94-909) Submitted: April 15, 1996 Decided: April 22, 1996 Before ERVIN and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and CHAPMAN, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Robert W. Rife, Appellant Pro Se. Cynthia Eppes Hudson, Kimberly Stewart Hugo, MCGUIRE, WOODS, BATTLE & BOOTHE, L.L.P., Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals from the district court's orders granting summary judgment to Defendants on his employment discrimination complaint and denying his Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e) motion. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no abuse of discretion and no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Rife v. Richmond Technical Ctr. , No. CA-94-909 (E.D. Va. May 3 & 23, 1995). We dispense withoral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 7854 

To amend title VI of the Social Security Act to extend the period with 

respect to which amounts under the Coronavirus Relief Fund may be 

expended. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 29, 2020 

Mr. THOMPSON of Pennsylvania (for himself and Ms. DEAN) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Reform 

A BILL 

To amend title VI of the Social Security Act to extend 

the period with respect to which amounts under the 

Coronavirus Relief Fund may be expended. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Leveraging Options 

5 for Counties And Localities Act’’ or the ‘‘LOCAL Act’’. 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 7854 IH

1 SEC. 2. EXTENSION. 

2 Section 601(d)(3) of the Social Security Act (42 

3 U.S.C. 801(d)(3)) is amended by striking ‘‘December 30, 

4 2020’’ and inserting ‘‘December 31, 2021’’. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
#### Alice M. ROUNTREE, as widow of Harvey M. Rountree, deceased, and Alice M. Rountree, individually, Appellant, v. SPRINGER MOTOR CO., a Florida corporation and Stanley L. Portnow, Appellees. Alice M. ROUNTREE, as Administratrix of the estate of Harvey M. Rountree, deceased, Appellant, v. SPRINGER MOTOR CO., a Florida corporation and Stanley L. Portnow, Appellees.

Nos. 69-88, 69-89.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Third District.

Sept. 9, 1969.

Rehearing Denied Oct. 13, 1969.

Quinton, Leib, Parks & Aurell, Miami, for appellant.

Fowler, White, Collins, Gillen, Humkey & Trenam and Henry Burnett, Miami, for appellees.

Before BARKDULL, HENDRY and SWANN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed on the authority of Perdue v. Copeland, Fla.1969, 220 So.2d 617.
Exhibit 1015


		
			EXHIBIT 10.15
		

		
			 
		

		
			INTERNATIONAL SHIPHOLDING CORPORATION
Director Compensation Program

		

		
			 
		

		
			The following is a summary of the annual director compensation program for independent directors of International Shipholding Corporation (the “Company”), as most recently revised by the Compensation Committee (the “Committee”) and the Board of Directors (the “Board”) on October 27, 2010.  This director compensation program is in effect until such time as the Board and Committee take action to revise it. 
		

		
			 
		

		
			Independent directors receive a mix of cash compensation and equity compensation.  Compensation for partial year service will be determined by the Committee and Board on a case-by-case basis.
		

		
			 
		

		
			Cash Compensation.  Each independent director receives a cash retainer of $47,500 per year.  
		

		
			 
		

		
			Equity Compensation.  On January 15 of each year in which this program is in place, each independent director will receive an annual common stock grant valued at $20,000 for board service for the current year.  If January 15 is not a trading day for the Company’s common stock, then the grant will occur on the next trading day.  The number of shares granted is determined by the closing price of the Company’s common stock on the previous trading day, rounded up to the next whole share.  The shares are unrestricted but are subject to the Company’s stock ownership guidelines for directors, which are included in the Company’s Corporate Governance Guidelines.  
		

		
			 
		

		
			 
		

		
			Summary Approved by the Compensation Committee – October 29, 2013
		

		
			 
		

		
			Summary Approved by the Board – October 30, 2013
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Sandra K. TATE.

No. 60779.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Oct. 21, 1977.

In re: Motion to withdraw petition for supervisory writ.

Petition dismissed.
#### Ramon Jimenez, Appellant, v City of New York et al., Respondents.

[736 NYS2d 219]

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Stanley Green, J.), entered October 25, 2000, which granted defendant City’s motion insofar as to extend its time to comply with the same court’s December 9, 1999 conditional discovery order, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

In light of the reasonable excuse provided by defendant City for failing timely to comply with court-ordered discovery, the strong public policy favoring resolution of disputes on their merits, the lack of prejudice to plaintiff, and the absence of any willful or contumacious conduct on the City’s part, the motion court properly exercised its discretion by extending the City’s time for compliance *(see, Green v Mohamed,*275 AD2d 599). Concur — Williams, J.P., Tom, Rosenberger, Wallach and Mar-low, JJ.
December 10, 2019 | Washington, DC

8:30 am Registration

9:00 am Introductory Remarks

Tiffany George

Division of Privacy and Identity Protection, FTC

9:05 am Opening Remarks

Noah Joshua Phillips

Commissioner, FTC

9:15 am Presentation: Setting the Stage – A Decade of Developments in 

Consumer Reporting

Peggy Twohig

Assistant Director for Supervision Policy, CFPB

9:30 am Panel 1: Furnisher Practices and Compliance with Accuracy Requirements

Moderators:

Susan Stocks

Office of Enforcement, CFPB

David Wake

Office of Supervision Policy, CFPB

Panelists:

Leslie Bender

Chief Strategy Officer and General Counsel, BCA Financial Services

Francis Creighton

President and Chief Executive Officer, Consumer Data Industry Association

Syed Ejaz

Policy Analyst, Consumer Reports

Nessa Feddis

Senior Counsel and Vice President, American Bankers Association

Elisabeth Johnson-Crawford

Chief Technical Officer, Credit Builders Alliance

10:45 am Break
11:00 am Panel 2: Current Accuracy Topics for Traditional Credit Reporting

Moderators:

Tony Rodriguez

Office of Supervision Policy, CFPB

Kiren Gopal

Office of Supervision Policy, CFPB

Panelists:

Roberto Cera

Senior Manager, Data Acquisitions, TransUnion

E. Michelle Drake

Shareholder, BergerMontague, PC

Troy Kubes

Vice President and Deputy Chief Compliance Officer, Equifax

Ed Mierzwinski

Senior Director, Federal Consumer Programs, U.S. Public Interest Research Group

Donna Smith

Chief Data Officer, Consumer Information Services, Experian North America

Michael A. Turner

President and Chief Executive Officer, Policy and Economic Research Council

12:30 pm Lunch Break

1:30 pm Remarks

Brian Johnson

Deputy Director, CFPB

1:40 pm Remarks

Andrew Stivers

Deputy Director, Bureau of Economics, FTC

1:50 pm Panel 3: Accuracy Considerations for Background Screening

Moderators:

Tiffany George

Division of Privacy and Identity Protection, FTC

Amanda Koulousias

Division of Privacy and Identity Protection, FTC

Panelists:

Terry W. Clemans

Executive Director, National Consumer Reporting Association

Eric Dunn

Director of Litigation, National Housing Law Project

Jamie Gullen

Supervising Attorney, Community Legal Services
Ariel Nelson

Staff Attorney, National Consumer Law Center

Melissa L. Sorenson

Executive Director, Professional Background Screening Association

Matt Visser

Chief Executive Officer, VICTIG Screening Solutions 

3:00 pm Break

3:15 pm Panel 4: Navigating the Dispute Process

Moderators:

Amanda Koulousias

Division of Privacy and Identity Protection, FTC

Beth Freeborn

Bureau of Economics, FTC

Panelists:

LaDonna Bohling

Chief Compliance Officer, Receivable Solutions

Eric J. Ellman

Senior Vice President, Public Policy and Legal Affairs, Consumer Data Industry 

Association

Stephanie Froelich

Chief Executive Officer, True Hire

Kristi C. Kelly

Attorney, Kelly & Guzzo

Rebecca Kuehn

Partner, Hudson Cook 

Chi Chi Wu

Staff Attorney, National Consumer Law Center

4:30 pm Closing Remarks

Maneesha Mithal

Associate Director, Division of Privacy and Identity Protection, FTC
EXHIBIT
10.3.12


AMENDMENT TO PROMISSORY
NOTE


-AND-


PLEDGE AND SECURITY
AGREEMENT





THIS AMENDMENTto Promissory
Note and Pledge and Security Agreement made as of the 30 day of April, 2008, by
and between Bryan Hekemian, (hereinafter the “Borrower” or “Pledgor”)and FIRST REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUST of
NEW JERSEY, its successors and/or assigns, (hereinafter the “FREIT” or
“Pledgee”).





W
I T N E S S E T H:




WHEREAS, Borrower borrowed the
sum of $506,000.00 from FREIT pursuant to a Promissory Note dated July 19, 2005
in the principal amount of $506,000.00  (the “Note”) and Borrower
secured the Note by entering into a Pledge and Security Agreement of even date
with the Note (the “Pledge Agreement”); and




WHEREAS, Borrower has
requested FREIT increase the principal amount under the Note and to modify the
Pledge Agreement accordingly; and




NOW, THEREFORE,inconsideration of the
payment of One and 00/100 Dollar ($1.00) and other good and valuable
consideration as set forth herein, the Borrower hereto agrees as
follows:




1.           The
Note is hereby increased from $506,000.00 to $1,222,000.00 as of the date hereof
and in all respects the terms and conditions of the Note shall remain the same,
except for the increase in the principal amount thereof to the extent of the
amount actually advanced there under, which advances may be made from time to
time by FREIT in the same manner as if Borrower had executed a new or
replacement to include the amount advanced pursuant to this Amendment
Agreement.  Interest shall be payable in accordance with the Note on
the unpaid principal balance.




2.           The
Pledge Agreement is hereby amended to provide that all references therein to the
Note shall be deemed to be amended hereby as well as any and all future
modifications of the Note and any increases therein.  Except as set
forth herein, the terms and conditions of the Pledge Agreement shall remain in
full force and effect.


Page
85




IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties have
executed this Amendment Agreement as of the day and year first above
written.








WITNESS:
            
            BORROWER
      / PLEDGOR:/s/ Carolyn
      Jacob
            
            /s/Bryan
      HekemianBorrower
      or PledgorBryan
      HekemianPrintedFIRST
      REAL ESTATE INVESTMENT TRUST OF NEW JERSEY/s/ Carolyn
      Jacob
            
            By:
            /s/ Donald
      BarneyDonald Barney,
  President







Page 86
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED APRIL 3, 2015

NO. 03-15-00133-CR

Jerry Alexander, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

APPEAL FROM 403RD DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE ROSE, JUSTICES GOODWIN AND FIELD

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION-- OPINION BY JUSTICE FIELD

This is an appeal from the judgment of conviction entered by the trial court. Having reviewed 

the record, it appears that the Court lacks jurisdiction over this appeal. Therefore, the Court 

dismisses the appeal for want of jurisdiction. Because appellant is indigent and unable to pay 

costs, no adjudication of costs is made.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED APRIL 3, 2015

NO. 03-15-00134-CR

Jerry Alexander, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

APPEAL FROM 403RD DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE ROSE, JUSTICES GOODWIN AND FIELD

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION-- OPINION BY JUSTICE FIELD

This is an appeal from the judgment of conviction entered by the trial court. Having reviewed 

the record, it appears that the Court lacks jurisdiction over this appeal. Therefore, the Court 

dismisses the appeal for want of jurisdiction. Because appellant is indigent and unable to pay 

costs, no adjudication of costs is made.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED APRIL 3, 2015

NO. 03-15-00135-CR

Jerry Alexander, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

APPEAL FROM 403RD DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE ROSE, JUSTICES GOODWIN AND FIELD

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION-- OPINION BY JUSTICE FIELD

This is an appeal from the judgment of conviction entered by the trial court. Having reviewed 

the record, it appears that the Court lacks jurisdiction over this appeal. Therefore, the Court 

dismisses the appeal for want of jurisdiction. Because appellant is indigent and unable to pay 

costs, no adjudication of costs is made.
261 La. 222

#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Melvin J. BONNER v. C. Murray HENDERSON, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary, et al.

No. 52256.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 22, 1972.

In re: Melvin J. Bonner applying for writs of mandamus, prohibition and habeas corpus.

Application denied. The showing made does not warrant the exercise of our original or supervisory jurisdiction.
EXHIBIT 10.3
 

                  Financial Services Corporation of the Midwest

                     Directors and Officers Liability Policy
                            Summary of Material Terms



Insured:                   Financial Services Corporation of the Midwest and/or
                           THE Rock Island Bank, N.A.

Underwriter:               Cincinnati Insurance Company

Policy Period:             October 18, 1997 to October 18, 2000

Policy Number:             DO-8563130       (Coverage on claims-made basis)

Limit of Liability:        $5,000,000 Aggregate Each Policy Year

Retention:                 Per Director:                         $0
                           Aggregate:                       $50,000
                           Corporate Reimbursement          $50,000

Endorsements:              ERISA Exclusion
                           IRA/Keogh Extension
                           Outside Non-Profit Board Extension
                           Marital Status Extension
                           Trust Department Errors & Omissions
                                  $3,000,000         Limit
                                     $25,000         Retention
                           Additional Insureds
                                   Employees
                           Broad Securities Exclusion
                           Allocation
Exhibit
23.1














CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED


PUBLIC
ACCOUNTING FIRM








We
consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement
(Form S-8) pertaining to the Cascade Bancorp 2008 Performance Incentive
Plan of our report dated March 12, 2010, except for Note 23 and the
effects of the restatement described therein, as to which the date is August 20,
2010, (which report expresses an unqualified opinion and includes explanatory
paragraphs relating to Cascade Bancorp’s ability to continue as a going concern
and the restatement described in Note 23), with respect to the consolidated
financial statements of Cascade Bancorp and subsidiary (collectively, “Cascade
Bancorp”) and our report dated March 12, 2010, except for the effects of the
material weakness described in the sixth paragraph therein, as to which the date
is August 20, 2010, relating to the effectiveness of internal control over
financial reporting of Cascade Bancorp (which report expresses an adverse
opinion on the effectiveness of Cascade Bancorp’s internal control over
financial reporting due to a material weakness), both of which are included in
Cascade Bancorp’s Annual Report (Form 10-K/A) for the year ended
December 31, 2009.





/s/ Delap
LLP





Lake
Oswego, Oregon


August
20, 2010
263 La. 796

#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Carl D. McQUILLION v. C. Murray HENDERSON, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary.

No. 52995.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Dec. 5, 1972.

In re: Carl D. McQuillion applying for writs of mandamus, certiorari and habeas corpus.

Writ granted. An evidentiary hearing is ordered.
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 115 (Thursday, June 14, 2018)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 27746]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-12640]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Federal Emergency Management Agency

44 CFR Part 67

[Docket ID FEMA-2018-0002; Internal Agency Docket No. FEMA-B-1100]


Proposed Flood Elevation Determinations for Iron County, Utah and 
Incorporated Areas

AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency, DHS.

ACTION: Proposed rule; withdrawal.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is withdrawing 
its proposed rule concerning proposed flood elevation determinations 
for Iron County, Utah and Incorporated Areas.

DATES: The proposed rule is withdrawn as of June 14, 2018.

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments, identified by Docket No. FEMA-B-
1100 to Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering Services Branch, Federal 
Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 400 C Street SW, 
Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-7659, or (email) 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#deaebfaaacb7bdb5f0adbfbdbcb7bcb7aa9eb8bbb3bff0bab6adf0b9b1a8"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="05756471776c666e2b766466676c676c7145636068642b616d762b626a73">[email protected]</span></a>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Rick Sacbibit, Chief, Engineering 
Services Branch, Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration, FEMA, 
400 C Street SW, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-7659, or (email) 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#80f0e1f4f2e9e3ebaef3e1e3e2e9e2e9f4c0e6e5ede1aee4e8f3aee7eff6"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="52223326203b31397c213331303b303b261234373f337c363a217c353d24">[email protected]</span></a>;

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On May 25, 2010, FEMA published a proposed 
rule at 75 FR 29245, proposing flood elevation determinations along one 
or more flooding sources in Iron County, Utah and Incorporated Areas. 
FEMA is withdrawing the proposed rule.

    Authority:  42 U.S.C. 4104; 44 CFR 67.4.

David I. Maurstad,
Deputy Associate Administrator for Insurance and Mitigation (Acting), 
Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management Agency.
[FR Doc. 2018-12640 Filed 6-13-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 9110-12-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                          10,631
<SECURITIES>                                    78,185
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                91,759
<PP&E>                                          31,362
<DEPRECIATION>                                  17,547
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 106,887
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           39,955
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           19,817
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       199,523
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   106,887
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                23,806
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               148,835
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,453
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (123,529)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (123,529)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (123,529)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (5.33)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (5.33)


</TABLE>