alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 65 (Tuesday, April 5, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 19687]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-07164]


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

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding 
Companies

    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for 
approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 
1841 et seq.) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR part 225), and all other 
applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company 
and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the 
power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the 
banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, 
including the companies listed below.
    The public portions of the applications listed below, as well as 
other related filings required by the Board, if any, are available for 
immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank(s) indicated below and 
at the offices of the Board of Governors. This information may also be 
obtained on an expedited basis, upon request, by contacting the 
appropriate Federal Reserve Bank and from the Board's Freedom of 
Information Office at https://www.federalreserve.gov/foia/request.htm. 
Interested persons may express their views in writing on the standards 
enumerated in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)).
    Comments regarding each of these applications must be received at 
the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors, 
Ann E. Misback, Secretary of the Board, 20th Street and Constitution 
Avenue NW, Washington DC 20551-0001, not later than May 5, 2022.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago (Colette A. Fried, Assistant 
Vice President) 230 South LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois 60690-1414:
    1. Bank First Corporation, Manitowoc, Wisconsin; to acquire Denmark 
Bancshares, Inc., and thereby indirectly acquire Denmark State Bank, 
both of Denmark, Wisconsin.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis (Holly A. Rieser, Manager) 
P.O. Box 442, St. Louis, Missouri 63166-2034. Comments can also be sent 
electronically to <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#51123e3c3c343f25227f3021213d38323025383e3f221122253d227f3723337f3e2336"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="6c2f0301010902181f420d1c1c00050f0d180503021f2c1f18001f420a1e0e42031e0b">[email protected]</span></a>:
    1. Omni Bank Group, Inc., Little Rock, Arkansas; to become a bank 
holding company by acquiring Community State Bank, Bradley, Arkansas.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, March 31, 
2022.
Michele Taylor Fennell,
Deputy Associate Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 2022-07164 Filed 4-4-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
# C_2021310EN.01003702.xml

| 2.8.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 310/37 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.8.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 310/37

---

Action brought on 11 June 2021 — Wizz Air Hungary v Commission

(Case T-332/21)

(2021/C 310/50)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Wizz Air Hungary Légiközlekedési Zrt. (Wizz Air Hungary Zrt.) (Budapest, Hungary) (represented by: E. Vahida, S. Rating and I.-G. Metaxas-Maranghidis, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the defendant’s decision of 2 October 2020 on State aid SA.56810 (2020/N) — Romania — COVID-19: Aid to TAROM (1); and |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the defendant’s decision of 2 October 2020 on State aid SA.56810 (2020/N) — Romania — COVID-19: Aid to TAROM (1); and

| — | order the defendant to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on four pleas in law.

| 1. | First plea in law, alleging that the defendant misapplied Article 107(2)(b) TFEU and committed manifest errors of assessment in its review of the proportionality of the aid to the damage caused by the COVID-19 crisis. |
| --- | --- |

1.

First plea in law, alleging that the defendant misapplied Article 107(2)(b) TFEU and committed manifest errors of assessment in its review of the proportionality of the aid to the damage caused by the COVID-19 crisis.

| 2. | Second plea in law, alleging that the defendant violated specific provisions of the TFEU and the general principles of European law that have underpinned the liberalisation of air transport in the EU since the late 1980s (i.e., non-discrimination, the free provision of services — applied to air transport through Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 (2) — and free establishment). |
| --- | --- |

2.

Second plea in law, alleging that the defendant violated specific provisions of the TFEU and the general principles of European law that have underpinned the liberalisation of air transport in the EU since the late 1980s (i.e., non-discrimination, the free provision of services — applied to air transport through Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 (2) — and free establishment).

| 3. | Third plea in law, alleging that the defendant failed to initiate a formal investigation procedure despite serious difficulties and violated the applicant’s procedural rights. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Third plea in law, alleging that the defendant failed to initiate a formal investigation procedure despite serious difficulties and violated the applicant’s procedural rights.

| 4. | Fourth plea in law, alleging that the defendant violated its duty to state reasons. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Fourth plea in law, alleging that the defendant violated its duty to state reasons.

---

(1)  OJ 2021 C 94, p. 1.

(2)  Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 24 September 2008 on common rules for the operation of air services in the Community (Recast) (Text with EEA relevance) (OJ 2008 L 293, p. 3–20).

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from
the first quarter 1999 Report on Form 10-Q for LabOne, Inc. and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>
<CIK> 0000816151
<NAME> LABONE, INC.

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                       6,918,256
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               22,560,318
<ALLOWANCES>                                 2,863,670
<INVENTORY>                                  1,360,762
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            35,719,002
<PP&E>                                      76,360,991
<DEPRECIATION>                              34,652,381
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              84,922,277
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       14,640,325
<BONDS>                                     18,094,181
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       150,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  51,868,394
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                84,922,277
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            27,328,085
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               15,651,339
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               604,749
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             289,673
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,910,663
<INCOME-TAX>                                 1,057,263
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,853,400
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,853,400
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.14
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.14


</TABLE>
116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 829 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 1450 Montauk Highway in Mastic, New York, 

as the ‘‘Army Specialist Thomas J. Wilwerth Post Office 

Building’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 829 EH

1 SECTION 1. ARMY SPECIALIST THOMAS J. WILWERTH POST 

2 OFFICE BUILDING. 

3 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

4 Postal Service located at 1450 Montauk Highway in Mas5 tic, New York, shall be known and designated as the 

6 ‘‘Army Specialist Thomas J. Wilwerth Post Office Build7 ing’’. 

8 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg9 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

10 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

11 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Army Specialist 

12 Thomas J. Wilwerth Post Office Building’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives April 4, 2019. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 829 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States PostThomas J. Wilwerth Post Office Building’’. Mastic, New York, as the ‘‘Army Specialist al Service located at 1450 Montauk Highway in
No. 11-9995.

#### Sturdivant *v.*Illinois.

App. Ct. Ill., 1st Dist. Certiorari denied.
EXHIBIT 32

                        CERTIFICATION OF 10-QSB/A REPORT
                                       OF
                         CHADMOORE WIRELESS GROUP, INC.
                      FOR THE QUARTER ENDED MARCH 31, 2002



1.       The undersigned are the Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial
         Officer of Chadmoore Wireless Group, Inc. This Certification is made
         pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. This
         Certification accompanies the 10-QSB/A Report of Chadmoore Wireless
         Group, Inc. for the quarter ended March 31, 2002.


2.       We certify that such 10-QSB/A Report fully complies with the
         requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
         of 1934 and that the information contained in such 10-QSB/A Report
         fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
         results of operations of Chadmoore Wireless Group, Inc.



This Certification is executed as of March 16, 2004.


                                /s/ ROBERT W. MOORE
                                ------------------------------------------
                                Robert W. Moore, Chief Executive Officer


                                /s/ STEPHEN K. RADUSCH
                                ------------------------------------------
                                Stephen K. Radusch, Chief Financial Officer



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

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 100 Introduced in House (IH)]

105th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. J. RES. 100

 Commending the personnel who served in the United States Navy Asiatic 
                     Fleet, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            November 6, 1997

Mr. Jones introduced the following joint resolution; which was referred 
                 to the Committee on National Security

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
 Commending the personnel who served in the United States Navy Asiatic 
                     Fleet, and for other purposes.

Whereas the United States established the Asiatic Fleet of the Navy in 1910 to 
        protect American nationals, policies, and possessions in the Far East;
Whereas the sailors and Marines of the Asiatic Fleet ensured the safety of 
        United States citizens and foreign nationals, and provided humanitarian 
        assistance in that region during the Chinese civil war, the Yangtze 
        Flood of 1931, and the outbreak of Sino-Japanese hostilities;
Whereas in 1940, due to deteriorating political relations and increasing 
        tensions between the United States and Japan, a reinforced Asiatic Fleet 
        began concentrating on the defense of the Philippines and engaged in 
        extensive training to ensure maximum operational readiness for any 
        eventuality;
Whereas following the declaration of war against Japan, the warships, 
        submarines, and aircraft of the Asiatic Fleet singly or in task forces 
        courageously fought many naval battles against a superior Japanese 
        armada;
Whereas the Asiatic Fleet directly suffered the loss of 22 ships, 1,826 men 
        killed or missing in action, and 518 men captured and imprisoned under 
        the worst of conditions with many of them dying while held as prisoners 
        of war; and
Whereas supporters of the personnel who served in the Asiatic Fleet are 
        attempting to establish March 1, 1998, as ``United States Navy Asiatic 
        Fleet Memorial Day'': Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. CONGRESSIONAL COMMENDATION.

    The Congress--
            (1) commends the personnel who served in the Asiatic Fleet 
        of the United States Navy between 1910 and 1942; and
            (2) honors those who gave their lives in the line of duty 
        while serving in the Asiatic Fleet.

SEC. 2. CELEBRATORY ACTIVITIES.

    (a) Expression of Support.--The Congress supports the goals of 
United States Navy Asiatic Fleet Memorial Day.
    (b) Proclamation.--The President is authorized and requested to 
issue a proclamation calling upon the people of the United States to 
honor the United States Navy Asiatic Fleet with appropriate programs, 
ceremonies, and activities.
                                 <all>
```
#### Juan Simeri CRUZ, a/k/a Juan Simeri Pineda Cruz, Petitioner, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 17-1749

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: November 16, 2017

Decided: January 2, 2018

Juan Simeri Cruz, Petitioner Pro Se. Madeline Henley, Office of Immigration Litigation, UNITED STATES DEPART-, MENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Before WILKINSON, TRAXLER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Juan Simeri Cruz, a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) dismissing his appeal from the immigration judge’s decision denying his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture, Cruz has waived review of his applications for relief because he fails to challenge the Board’s decisions denying those applications in his informal brief. *See*4th Cir. R. 34(b); *Suarez-Valenzuela v. Holder,*714 F.3d 241, 248-49 (4th Cir. 2013) (deeming issues not raised in opening brief waived). We also conclude that the Board did not abuse its discretion by not remanding the proceedings to consider Cruz’s application for cancellation of removal. *See Hussain v. Gonzales,*477 F.3d 153, 155 (4th Cir. 2007) (stating standard of review). Finally, we conclude that Cruz failed to establish a due process violation. *See Anim v. Mukasey,*535 F.3d 243, 256 (4th Cir. 2008) (noting that burden is on applicant to show that defect in proceedings prejudiced outcome).

Accordingly, while we grant Cruz leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny the petition for review. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal con*780tentions .are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*PETITION DENIED*
#### Ray Santiago GOOPIO, Petitioner, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 14-72863

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted December 18, 2017 *

Filed December 21, 2017

*922Louie A. Ramirez, Attorney, Law Offices of Louie A Ramirez, Glendale, CA, for Petitioner

Christina P.. Greer, OIL, DOJ — U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division/Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel ICE, Office of the Chief Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco,. CA, for Respondent

Before: WALLACE, SILVERMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Ray Santiago Goopio, a native and citizen of the Philippines, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying cancellation of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s factual findings, and we review de novo questions of law. *Najmabadi v.*Holder, 597 F.3d 983, 986 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny the petition for review.

The agency did not err in determining that Goopio was statutorily barred from establishing the good moral character required for cancellation of removal, where substantial evidence supports the agency’s finding that he provided false testimony in order to obtain immigration benefits when he applied for special rule cancellation of removal under the Nicaraguan Adjustment and Central American Relief Act in 2008. *See*8 U.S.C. §§ 1229b(b)(l)(B), 1101(f)(6); *Ramos v. INS,*246 F.3d 1264, 1266 (9th Cir. 2001) (“For a witness’s false testimony to preclude a finding of good moral character, the testimony must have been made orally and under oath, and the witness must have had a subjective intent to deceive for the purpose of obtaining immigration benefits.”); *Bernal v. INS,*154 F.3d 1020, 1023 (9th Cir. 1998) (“An applicant’s false oral statements made under oath in a question-and-answer statement before an INS officer in connection with any stage of the processing of a visa constitute false testimony within the meaning of 8 U.S.C. § 1101(f)(6)" (citation omitted)).

Goopio’s contention that the BIA erred in failing to address hardship is without merit. *See Simeonov v. Ashcroft,*371 F.3d 532, 538 (9th Cir. 2004) (courts and agencies are not required to decide issues unnecessary to the results they reach).

We do not reach Goopio’s contentions regarding his testimony at his removal hearing in 2012, *see id.,*nor his contentions regarding hardship, credibility, and the denial of relief as a matter of discretion, *see Najmabadi,*597 F.3d at 986 (review is limited to the actual grounds relied upon by the BIA).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
No. 11-1328.

#### Cunningham *v.*McCluskey et al.

C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 44 (Thursday, March 6, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 10297]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-5484]


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


RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD

Determination of Quarterly Rate of Excise Tax for Railroad 
Retirement Supplemental Annuity Program

    In accordance with directions in Section 3221(c) of the Railroad 
Retirement Tax Act (16 U.S.C., Section 3221(c)), the Railroad 
Retirement Board has determined that the excise tax imposed by such 
Section 3221(c) on every employer, with respect to having individuals 
in his employ, for each work-hour for which compensation is paid by 
such employer for services rendered to him during the quarter beginning 
April 1, 1997, shall be at the rate of 35 cents.
    In accordance with directions in Section 15(a) of the Railroad 
Retirement Act of 1974, the Railroad Retirement Board has determined 
that for the quarter beginning April 1, 1997, 31.5 percent of the taxes 
collected under Sections 3211(b) and 3221(c) of the Railroad Retirement 
Tax Act shall be credited to the Railroad Retirement Account and 68.5 
percent of the taxes collected under such Sections 3211(b) and 3221(c) 
plus 100 percent of the taxes collected under Section 3221(d) of the 
Railroad Retirement Tax Act shall be credited to the Railroad 
Retirement Supplemental Account.

    Dated: February 25, 1997.

    By Authority of the Board.
Beatrice Ezerski,
Secretary to the Board.
[FR Doc. 97-5484 Filed 3-5-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7905-01-M
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 41 (Monday, March 3, 1997)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 9374]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-5183]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[MM Docket No. 96-50; RM-8768]


Radio Broadcasting Services; Nikiski, AK

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: This document allots Channel 227C2 to Nikiski, Alaska, as that 
community's first local aural transmission service, in response to a 
petition filed by Willliam J. Glynn, Jr. See 61 FR 14042, March 29, 
1996. Coordinates used for Channel 227C2 at Nikiski are 60-35-40 and 
151-20-00. With this action, the proceeding is terminated.

DATES: Effective April 7, 1997. The window period for filing 
applications on Channel 227C2 at Nikiski, Alaska, will open on April 7, 
1997, and close on May 8, 1997.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Nancy Joyner, Mass Media Bureau, (202) 
418-2180. Questions related to the window application filing process 
for Channel 227C2 at Nikiski, Alaska, should be addressed to the Audio 
Services Division, (202) 418-2700.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's 
Report and Order, MM Docket No. 96-50, adopted February 14, 1997, and 
released February 21, 1997. The full text of this Commission decision 
is available for inspection and copying during normal business hours in 
the FCC's Reference Center (Room 239), 1919 M Street, NW., Washington, 
DC. The complete text of this decision may also be purchased from the 
Commission's copy contractors, International Transcription Services, 
Inc., 2100 M Street, NW., Suite 140, Washington, DC 20037, (202) 857-
3800.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

    Radio broadcasting.

    Part 73 of title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended 
as follows:

PART 73--[AMENDED]

    1. The authority citation for Part 73 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: Secs. 303, 48 Stat., as amended, 1082; 47 U.S.C. 154, 
as amended.

Sec. 73.202  [Amended]

    2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under Alaska is 
amended by adding Nikiski, Channel 227C2.

Federal Communications Commission.
John A. Karousos,
Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules Division, Mass Media 
Bureau.
[FR Doc. 97-5183 Filed 2-28-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P