alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2001
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                         237,116
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                         374,906
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                          0
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                       9,396,952
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                         9,216,373
<LOANS>                                     22,433,272
<ALLOWANCE>                                    142,907
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              33,394,197
<DEPOSITS>                                  25,520,350
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                            385,462
<LONG-TERM>                                    497,221
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     4,399,494
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,591,670
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>              33,394,197
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                498,922
<INTEREST-INVEST>                              164,518
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                 5,857
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                               619,297
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                             357,606
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             364,725
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                          254,572
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                        0
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                205,851
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 62,906
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                      62,906
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    41,008
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .09
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .09
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    7.40
<LOANS-NON>                                     73,040
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                 73,040
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                               142,907
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        0
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                              142,907
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                           142,907
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                        142,907


</TABLE>
# C_2022327EN.01000101.xml

| 30.8.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 327/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.8.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 327/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.10341 – PRINCE / FERRO)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2022/C 327/01)

On 25 January 2022, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) in conjunction with Article 6(2) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the ‘Competition policy’ website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the ‘Competition policy’ website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32022M10341. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32022M10341. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 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 Defense

###### Department of the Army

          - [Docket ID: USA-2024-HQ-0007]

# AGENCY:

Department of the Army, Department of Defense (DoD).

# ACTION:

30-Day information collection notice; correction.

# SUMMARY:

On August 16, 2024, the DoD published a notice titled Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request. Subsequent to publication of the notice, DoD discovered that the docket identifier in the published notice was not correct. All other information in the August 16, 2024 notice remains the same.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Patricia Toppings, 571-372-0485.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

## Correction

                    The docket identifier DoD-2024-OS-0064 in the notice that published in the                     **Federal Register**                     on August 16, 2024 (89 FR 66700) is changed to read as follows:                

In FR Doc. 2024-18358, on page 66700, in the second column, correct the docket identifier to read: Docket ID: USA-2024-HQ-0007.

Dated: September 17, 2024.

Aaron T. Siegel,

Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense. 

[FR Doc. 2024-21553 Filed 9-19-24; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 6001-FR-P
[No. 44493-0-I.

Division One.

December 11, 2000.]

#### The State of Washington, *Respondent,*v. Adolfo Alvarez-Torres, *Appellant.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Superior Court for King County, No. 98-1-09134-3, Jeanette R. Burrage, J., entered March 26, 1999. *Affirmed*by unpublished per curiam opinion.
#### CARRELL v. LAIRD.

No. 11036.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Dallas.

Sept. 17, 1932.

Rehearing Denied Oct. 15, 1932.

J. E. Newberry and J. J. Fagan, both of Dallas, for appellant.

E. G. Senter, of Dallas, for appellee.

JONES, O. J.

In a suit in a district court of Dallas county, appellee A. S. Laird, for himself and as assignee of the claims of others, recovered judgment against appellant J. T. Carrell and others, who made *no*answer to the suit in the lower court, and have not complained of the judgment in this court, for the breach of two rental contracts. The verdict was the result of peremptory instruction by the court. The verdict and judgment based thereon is for the sum of $1,408.80, with interest at the rate of 6 per cent, per annum from January 1, 1928. The appeal is duly perfected to this court.

The lease contracts for the rent of a building on Jackson street, used as a garage, were made between the owners and Jess Hassell, who was a defendant in the case below, and was for the space of three years, running from May 15, 1925 to May 15, 1928. On May 27, 1926, Jess Hassell assigned this lease, under a provision of the contract in reference to assignment, to appellant, who assumed the outstanding obligations in the lease contracts. After operating the garage for some seven months appellant assigned the lease to R. L. Smith, also a defendant in the court below, who made a like assumption of the lease contracts. The breach of the contracts for the nonpayment of rentals occurred under Smith. In the assignment of the lease from Hassell to appellant, it is specifically stated in the written agreement by the owners to such assignment that Hassell would not be released from his liability under the contracts, and it was also stated in the same manner in the assignment by appellant to Smith that Hassell and appellant would not be released from their obligation.

The amount of rent due under these contracts is not in dispute, and the only defense that raises a question about appellant’s right to have) any issue submitted to the jury is on appellant’s allegation that, unknown to him, Hassell, during his possession of the property, had turned the premises into a bootlegging joint for the illicit sale of intoxicating liquor, and that this was known to the owners of the building when they executed the leases in question. There is ample evidence in the record that bootlegging was carried on at the garage during the incumbency of Hassell, but there is not any evidence raising the issue that this fact was known to the owners of the building. In fact, the evidence conclusively shows that it was not so known.

We are therefore of the conclusion that the court did not err in giving the peremptory instruction. Because .of the evidence in reference to the illicit sale of intoxicating liquors at this place during the time that Has-sell operated the garage, though we hold appellant is mistaken in its potency, we are of the opinion that this court would not be authorized to assess the 10 per cent, damages insisted upon by appellee, and we overrule this contention.

The judgment of the lower court is affirmed.

Affirmed.
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 31.2

                                  CERTIFICATION
I, Thomas C. Chesterman, certify that:

      1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Aradigm
Corporation;

      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 registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

      4. The registrant'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-15(e)) for the registrant 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 registrant, 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 registrant'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 registrant's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most
recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting;
and

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

      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 registrant'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 registrant's internal controls over
financial reporting.



                                        /s/ THOMAS C. CHESTERMAN
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        Thomas C. Chesterman
                                        Senior Vice President and
                                        Chief Financial Officer

Dated: August 11, 2003
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998             DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998             JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                           5,735                   9,372
<SECURITIES>                                     3,425                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    5,717                   6,593
<ALLOWANCES>                                      (781)                    (46)
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                14,744                  16,841
<PP&E>                                           2,357                   1,718
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,704                   1,089
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  15,397                  17,470
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            4,559                   2,861
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                           116                     112
<OTHER-SE>                                      10,722                  14,497
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    15,397                  17,470
<SALES>                                          8,052                  10,446
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 8,052                  10,446
<CGS>                                            5,748                   4,692
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    5,748                   4,692
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 7,583                   6,221
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                (221)                   (266)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (5,058)                   (201)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (5,058)                   (201)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (5,058)                   (201)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (0.42)                  (0.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.42)                  (0.02)
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>
                                                                  EXHIBIT 99.1

                                  CERTIFICATION



Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.ss. 1350, as
adopted), Richard P. Thompson, Chief Executive Officer of Aradigm Corporation
(the "Company"), and Thomas C. Chesterman, Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, each hereby certify that, to the best of their knowledge:

1. The Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31,
2003, to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 99.1 (the "PERIODIC
REPORT") fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or section 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and

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

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have set their hands hereto as of the 9th
day of May 2003.


/s/ RICHARD P. THOMPSON                  /s/ THOMAS C. CHESTERMAN
---------------------------------        -----------------------------------
Chief Executive Officer                  Chief Financial Officer
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

RICARDO FIGUEROA LEMUS, 

Petitioner, 

 v. 

JEFFERSON B. SESSIONS III, Attorney 

General, 

Respondent.

No. 16-71063 

Agency No. A200-150-214 

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted August 9, 2017**

Before: SCHROEDER, TASHIMA, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Ricardo Figueroa Lemus, a native and citizen of El Salvador, petitions for 

review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to 

reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We 

review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, Najmabadi v. 

 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

AUG 14 2017

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 16-71063 

Holder, 597 F.3d 983, 986 (9th Cir. 2010), and we deny the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Figueroa Lemus’s motion to 

reopen because the motion was filed more than two years after the BIA’s final 

decision, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and Figueroa Lemus failed to demonstrate 

materially changed circumstances in El Salvador to qualify for an exception to the 

time limitations for filing a motion to reopen, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii); 

Najmabadi, 597 F.3d at 991-92 (BIA did not abuse its discretion where petitioner 

failed to introduce material evidence); see also Cano-Merida v. INS, 311 F.3d 960, 

965-66 (9th Cir. 2002) (no abuse of discretion in denying motion to reopen where 

petitioner did not establish prima facie eligibility for CAT relief).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
IIB 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2786 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 29, 2015 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

AN ACT 

To require the Commissioner of U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection to submit a report on cross-border rail security, and for other purposes. 

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


srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 2786 RFS 

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Cross-Border Rail Se3 curity Act of 2015’’. 

4 SEC. 2. CROSS-BORDER RAIL SECURITY. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 180 days after the 

6 date of the enactment of this Act, the Commissioner of 

7 U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) shall submit 

8 to the Committee on Homeland Security of the House of 

9 Representatives and the Committee on Homeland Security 

10 and Governmental Affairs of the Senate a report on the 

11 following: 

12 (1) The number of shipments entering the 

13 United States by rail annually that are determined 

14 to be high-risk by the Commissioner. 

15 (2) Specific details on the status of radiation 

16 detection units, by type, at each rail crossing on the 

17 northern and southern land borders as of such date 

18 of enactment. 

19 (3) An assessment of whether additional radi20 ation detection equipment is necessary to ensure 

21 that all such high-risk cross-border rail shipments 

22 are examined with appropriate equipment. 

23 (4) A plan for ensuring that all relevant CBP 

24 personnel receive adequate training and guidance on 

25 the proper use of CBP’s Automated Targeting Sys26 tem for such high-risk cross-border rail shipments, 


srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

HR 2786 RFS 

1 the use of appropriate radiation detection equipment 

2 for examination of such high-risk cross-border rail 

3 shipments, and requirements for recording examina4 tion results. 

5 (b) GAO AUDIT.—The Comptroller General of the 

6 United States shall periodically audit U.S. Customs and 

7 Border Protection operations at rail crossings on the 

8 northern and southern international borders to ensure rail 

9 shipments are targeted, examined, and the results of such 

10 examinations properly documented. 

Passed the House of Representatives September 28, 

2015. 

Attest: KAREN L. HAAS, 

Clerk. 


srobinson on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
SUBSIDIARIES OF REGISTRANT

     The following entities are subsidiaries of the Registrant, First Merchants
Corporation, as of the date hereof:



   Name of Registrant's Subsidiary                 State of Incorporation or
                                                    Organization

   First Merchants Bank, National Association      Under the laws of the United
     (also doing business as First Merchants        States
     Bank of  Hamilton County)
   200 East Jackson Street
   Muncie, Indiana  47305

   First United Bank                              Indiana
   709 Mill Street
   Middletown, Indiana  47356

   The Madison Community Bank                     Indiana
   19 West 10th Street
   Anderson, Indiana 46016

   First Merchants Insurance Services, Inc.       Indiana
   200 East Jackson Street
   Muncie, Indiana  47305
     (a wholly-owned subsidiary of Pendleton
     Banking Company)

   The First National Bank of Portland            Under the laws of the United
   112 West Main Street                            States
   Portland, Indiana  47371

   The Randolph County Bank                       Indiana
   122 West Washington Street
   Winchester, Indiana  47394

   The Union County National Bank                 Under the laws of the United
     of Liberty                                    States
   107 West Union, Box 217
   Liberty, Indiana  47353


                                    Ex.21-1