alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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 the Treasury

###### Internal Revenue Service

# AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting.

# SUMMARY:

An open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel's Toll-Free Phone Lines Project Committee will be conducted. The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is soliciting public comments, ideas, and suggestions on improving customer service at the Internal Revenue Service.

# DATES:

The meeting will be held Tuesday, August 10, 2021.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Rosalind Matherne at 1-888-912-1227 or 202-317-4115.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Notice is hereby given pursuant to Section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) that an open meeting of the Taxpayer Advocacy Panel Toll-Free Phone Lines Project Committee will be held Tuesday, August 10, 2021 at 11:00 a.m. Eastern Time. The public is invited to make oral comments or submit written statements for consideration. Due to limited time and structure of meeting, notification of intent to participate must be made with Rosalind Matherne. For more information please contact Rosalind Matherne at 1-888-912-1227 or 202-317-4115, or write TAP Office, 1111 Constitution Ave. NW, Room 1509, Washington, DC 20224 or contact us at the website:                     *http://www.improveirs.org.*                     The agenda will include various IRS issues.                

Dated: July 1, 2021.

Kevin Brown,

Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.

[FR Doc. 2021-14507 Filed 7-7-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                          65,174
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                             236
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    403,867
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                           2,000
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                             1,988
<LOANS>                                      1,540,623
<ALLOWANCE>                                     16,253
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,071,014
<DEPOSITS>                                   1,645,739
<SHORT-TERM>                                    62,690
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             15,124
<LONG-TERM>                                    150,900
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        83,416
<OTHER-SE>                                     113,145
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>               2,071,014
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 91,094
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               17,971
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                 1,451
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                               110,516
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              42,337
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              51,475
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           59,041
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                    3,785
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                  71
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 42,051
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 25,291
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                      25,291
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    17,839
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.07
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.07
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.27
<LOANS-NON>                                     13,194
<LOANS-PAST>                                       926
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                   211
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                15,654
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                    3,907
<RECOVERIES>                                       720
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                               16,253
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                            16,253
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
#### John Oliphant, Appellant, v County of Suffolk et al., Respondents.

—In a proceeding pursuant to General Municipal Law § 50-e for leave to serve a late notice of claim, the petitioner appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Campbell, J.), dated May 8, 1984, which denied the application.

Order affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

*726On the record presented, Special Term properly exercised its discretion in denying the application. Lazer, J. P., Thompson, Rubin and Kunzeman, JJ., concur.
**Exhibit 32.2**

**CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICERPURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

The undersigned, being the Chief Financial Officer of Kinetek, Inc., an Illinois corporation (the “Registrant”), hereby certifies that the Annual Report on Form 10-K (the “Annual Report”) of the Registrant for the year ended December 31, 2004, which accompanies this certification, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. §78m (a)) and that the information contained in the Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.

Date: November 2, 2005

 /s/ Daniel D. Drury           Daniel D. DruryChief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 32.1


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


The undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant  to  Section  906  of  the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that this Annual
Report  on  Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2003 fully complies with
the  requirements  of  Section  13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934,  as amended, and the information contained in such report fairly presents,
in  all  material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
West  Metro  Financial  Services,  Inc.


This 31st day of March, 2004.



                              /s/ John H. Ketner, Jr.
                              -------------------------------
                              John H. Ketner, Jr.
                              Chief Executive Officer


<PAGE>
Exhibit
      32.1 Section
      906 Certification




CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED


PURSUANT
      TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




In
      connection with the Annual Report of Optigenex Inc. (the “Company”) on Form
      10-KSB/Amendment Number 2 for the period ending December 31, 2007, as filed
      with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,
      Daniel Zwiren, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the
      Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
      to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(1)
      The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and




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








/s/ Daniel
                ZwirenDaniel
                ZwirenChief
                Executive Officer and Chief Financial OfficerDate:
                October 14, 2008
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 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 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED

September 9, 2003

Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

____________________

No. 02-51411

Summary Calendar

____________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

IRMA VERONICA SALVATIERRA,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

(EP-02-CR-933-1)

_________________________________________________________________

Before BARKSDALE, EMILIO M. GARZA, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Irma Veronica Salvatierra appeals her convictions for:

conspiracy to import, and importation of, 100 kilograms or more of

marijuana; and conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute, and

possession with intent to distribute, 100 kilograms or more of

marijuana. She contends: (1) her conviction should be reversed

because the prosecutor made an improper remark during closing2

argument (concerning jury’s doing something about drug use in

community); and (2) her sentence should be vacated because the

district court erred by not granting her a two-level reduction in

her total offense level due to her minor role in the offense.

The claimed prosecutorial misconduct is reviewed under a twostep process by which we determine : (1) whether the comment was

improper; and (2) whether it prejudiced Salvatierra’s substantive

rights. S ee, e.g., United States v. Lankford

, 196 F.3d 5 63, 574

(1999), cert. denied

, 529 U.S. 1119 (2000). Assuming a rguendo that

the comment was improper, there was ample evidence for the jury to

convict Salvatierra in the a bsence of the prosecutor’s comment;

therefore, she has not demonstra ted that it prejudiced her

substantial rights. S ee United States v. Duffaut

, 314 F.3d 203,

210-11 (5th Cir. 2002); see also United States v. Casilla

, 20 F.3d

600, 606 (5th Cir.), cert. denied , 513 U.S. 892 (1994).

A district court’s determination that a defendant played more

than a “minor” role for purposes of U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2 is reviewed

only for clear error. E .g.

, United States v. Garcia

, 242 F.3d 593,

598 (5th Cir. 2001). Salvatierra’s sentence was based on the

cond uct in which she was directly involved, namely the

transportation of drugs across the border. Because her role in the

offense was co-extensive with the conduct for which she was held

accountable, the district court did not clearly err in denying the

reduction. Id . at 598-99.3 AFFIRMED
#### DES ALLEMANDS LUMBER CO., Respondent, v. HITCHINGS, Appellant.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Second De*p*artment.

October 4, 1907.)

Action by the ' Des Allemands Lumber Company against Benjamin G. Hitchings.

No opinion. Order af- *,*firmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. ;
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Adam Crowley, Appellant. Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, LLC, Respondent; Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.

[942 NYS2d 292]

Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed February 17, 2011, which ruled, among other things, that claimant’s request for a hearing was untimely.

Substantial evidence supports the decision of the Unemploy*1324ment Insurance Appeal Board that claimant did not timely request a hearing challenging the April 2, 2009 initial determination ruling that he was disqualified from receiving unemployment insurance benefits on the ground that he voluntarily left his employment as a legal assistant without good cause. Claimant acknowledged receiving the initial determination shortly after it was mailed on April 2, 2009 and was aware that he had 30 days to request a hearing. According to claimant, he did not request a hearing until September 2009 because he was searching for employment and the issue fell by the wayside. Under these circumstances, claimant did not provide a reasonable excuse for the delay and, therefore, the Board’s decision in that regard will not be disturbed *(see*Labor Law § 620 [1] [a]; *see also Matter of Hettinger [Onondaga County*—Commissioner *of Labor],*47 AD3d 1153, 1154 [2008]). Accordingly, the April 2, 2008 initial determination remains in effect.

Finally, inasmuch as the record demonstrates that claimant has been unemployed since his initial application for unemployment insurance benefits, we will not disturb the Board’s decision finding that claimant did not have sufficient weeks of remuneration to establish a second, subsequent claim for unemployment insurance benefits.

Rose, J.E, Spain, Kavanagh, McCarthy and Egan Jr., JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.
#### William BROWNSBERGER, Andrew Smillie, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. NEXTERA ENERGY, INC., Nextera Energy Resources, LLC, Gexa Energy, LP, Gexa Energy Holdings, LLC, Gexa Energy, GP, LLC, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 11-10836

Non-Argument Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

Aug. 5, 2011.

Christopher Craig Casper, John A. Yan-chunis, James, Hoyer, Newcomer, Smilja-nich & Yanchunis, P.A., Tampa, FL, Mark D. Cronenwett, Lindsay L. Stansberry, Hi-gier, Allen & Lautin, PC, Addison, TX, David R. Upham, Irving, TX, for Plaintiffs-Appellants.

Stuart H. Singer, Lauren Fleischer, Boies, Schiller & Flexner, LLP, Fort Lauderdale, FL, Gary K. Harris, Boies, Schiller & Flexner, LLP, Orlando, FL, for Defendants-Appellees.

Before TJOFLAT, MARTIN and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

The plaintiffs appeal the January 19, 2011 order of the district court dismissing without prejudice defendant Gexa Texas for lack of personal jurisdiction, and, in the exercise of the discretion afforded the court under 28 U.S.C. § 1406(a), declining to transfer the case against the remaining defendants to the Northern District of Texas. Instead, as § 1406(a) provides, the court dismissed plaintiffs’ claims against those defendants without prejudice to their right to refile the claims in an appropriate forum.

We find no error in the district court’s determination that it lacked personal jurisdiction over the claims against Gexa Texas and no abuse of discretion in the court’s decision to dismiss the claims against the remaining defendants under § 1406(a).

AFFIRMED.
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.67


                                AMENDMENT TO THE
                        BENCHMARK CORPORATION OF DELAWARE
                              EQUITY INCENTIVE PLAN


         WHEREAS, Benchmark Corporation of Delaware, a Delaware corporation (the
"Company"), maintains the Benchmark Corporation of Delaware Equity Incentive
Plan (the "Plan"); and

         WHEREAS, the Board of Directors has approved the amending of the Plan
in order to increase the flexibility of the administration of the Plan by
altering the required number of members of the Stock Option Plan Committee (the
"Committee").

         NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan shall be hereby amended as follows:

         1.       The first sentence of Section 2(a) of the Plan is
hereby amended to read in its entirety as follows:

                           "The administrative functions required by the Plan
                  shall be performed by the Stock Option Plan Committee (the
                  "Committee") which shall consist of the Company's Board of
                  Directors ("Board") or any committee designated by the Board,
                  which designated committee shall consist of not less than
                  three (3) nor more than five (5) members, at least one of whom
                  shall be a Director of the Company."

         2.       This Amendment shall be effective as of April 28, 1992.
Except as expressly modified herein, all of the terms and
conditions of the Plan shall continue in full force and effect.

         TO RECORD the adoption of this Amendment, the Company has caused its
duly authorized officers to affix its corporate name and seal hereto as of the
28th day of April, 1992.

ATTEST:                                         BENCHMARK CORPORATION OF
                                                DELAWARE



 /s/ John P. McNiff                             By:/s/ Michael T. Kennedy
 -------------------------------                ----------------------------
Secretary                                            President
Pursuant to 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinionsho uld not * be publishe d an d is not precede nt except und er the limit ed circu mstance s set forth in 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 .4. 

### INTHE UNI TED S TATESCOU RT OFAPPEALS

FORTHE FIFTH CIRCU IT

N o. 09- 40689 Su m m ar y C al endar UN I TE D S TA TE S OF AM ERI CA, P l ai n t i f f

- A pp el l ee v. R A F A E L L U N A -U R B IN A , D e fe nda nt - Appe l l ant

A pp ealf

rom t h e U n i t ed S t ates D i st ri ctC ou rt f or t h e S ou t h ern D i st ri ctof T exas U SD C N o. 7: 08- C R
- 1315- 1 B ef ore JO L L Y , W IE N E R , an d E L R O D , C i rcui t Ju dg es. P E R C U R I A M: * R afaelL u n a- U rbi n a pl ead ed gui l t y t o one coun t of att em pti n g t o reenter th e U n i ted S tates after h a vin g pre viou sly b ee n de p orted . H e w a s sen ten ced to 77 m on t h s of

i m pri sonm en tan d a tw o- year t erm of sup ervi sed rel ease. M ore th a n 4 0 d a y s a fte rth e e n tr y o f ju d g m e n t, L u n a -U r b in a file d a n o tic e o f a p p e a l. T h e d i s t r i c tc o u r tc o n s t r u e d t h e n o t i c e o f a p p e a l a s a r e q u e s t f o r a n o u t - o f

- t i me ap pea lan d d en i ed i tpu rsuan tt o F ED . R. A PP . P. 4 (b ). United States Court of App eals Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D Ma rc h 30, 2010 Cha rl es R. F ulb ru g e II I Clerk Case: 09-40689 Document: 00511066073 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/30/2010N o. 09- 40689

2 L u n a- U rbi n a did n otfi l e a noti ce of app ealw i t h i n 10 da ys af t er t h e entry o f th e c r im in a l ju d g m e n t. S ee F ED . R. A PP . P. 4(b) ( 1) (A ) ( I ) . H i s appealal so w as n ot i ced beyon d t h e 30-day t i m e l i m i t f or extend i n g t h e ap pea lperi od u n der F ED . R. A PP . P . 4 (b ) ( 4 ) . T h u s , t h e d i s t r i c t c o u r t d i d n o t e r r i n e n f o r c i n gt h e t i me l i m i t at i o ns s e tf

o r t h i n F ED . R. A PP . P. 4(b) , and t hi s c our t m ay not r ever se it s d e c is io n to d o s o . Se e Uni t e d St at e s v . Le i j ano - Cruz , 473 F . 3d 571 , 574 ( 5th C i r. 2006) . H i s appeali s di sm i ss ed as unt i m el y. AP P EA L DI S M I S S ED . Case: 09-40689 Document: 00511066073 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/30/2010
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

-- -- -- --

denied

NO. 14-0818

MINH TRAN

v.

HONG KONG CORPORATION

A/K/A HONG KONG CITY MALL

§

§

§

§

§

§

Harris County,

1st District.

November 21, 2014

Petitioner's petition for review, filed herein in the above numbered and styled case,

having been duly considered, is ordered, and hereby is, denied.

January 9, 2015

Petitioner's motion for rehearing of petition for review, filed herein in the above

numbered and styled case, having been duly considered, is ordered, and hereby is, denied.



I, BLAKE A. HAWTHORNE, Clerk of the Supreme Court of Texas, do hereby certify

that the above and attached is a true and correct copy of the orders of the Supreme Court of

Texas in the case numbered and styled as above, as the same appear of record in the minutes of

said Court under the date shown.

It is further ordered that petitioner, MINH TRAN, pay all costs incurred on this petition.

WITNESS my hand and seal of the Supreme Court of Texas, at the City of Austin, this

the 21st day of January, 2015.

Blake A. Hawthorne, Clerk

By Monica Zamarripa, Deputy Clerk

FILE COPY
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 131 (Tuesday, July 13, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 36747]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-14876]


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

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 August 11, 2021.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas (Karen Smith, Director, 
Applications) 2200 North Pearl Street, Dallas, Texas 75201-2272:
    1. Plains Bancorp, Inc., Dimmit, Texas; to acquire Childress 
Bancshares, Inc., and thereby indirectly acquire First Bank & Trust 
Company, both of Childress, Texas.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, July 8, 2021.
Michele Taylor Fennell,
Deputy Associate Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 2021-14876 Filed 7-12-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
#### POPPENBERG, Appellant, v. R. M. OWEN & CO., Respondent.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

March 13,1912.)

Action by Gustav H. Poppenberg against R. M. Owen & Co. No opinion. Order, so far as appealed from, affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements.