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.                  

###### Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council

          - [Docket No. AS16-01]

# AGENCY:

Appraisal Subcommittee of the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council.

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting.

Description: In accordance with Section 1104(b) of Title XI of the Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989, as amended, notice is hereby given that the Appraisal Subcommittee (ASC) will meet in open session for its regular meeting:

*Location:*                     Federal Reserve Board—International Square location, 1850 K Street NW., Washington, DC 20006.                

*Date:*                     February 16, 2016.                

*Time:*                     10:00 a.m.                

*Status:*                     Open.                

## Reports

Chairman

Executive Director

Delegated State Compliance Reviews

Financial

## Action and Discussion Items

November 4, 2015 Open Session Minutes

Appraisal Foundation Reprogramming Request

Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on AMC Fees

### How To Attend and Observe an ASC Meeting:

                    If you plan to attend the ASC Meeting in person, we ask that you send an email to                     *meetings@asc.gov.*                     You may register until close of business three business days before the meeting date. You will be contacted by the Federal Reserve Law Enforcement Unit on security requirements. You will also be asked to provide a valid government-issued ID before being admitted to the Meeting. The meeting space is intended to accommodate public attendees. However, if the space will not accommodate all requests, the ASC may refuse attendance on that reasonable basis. The use of any video or audio tape recording device, photographing device, or any other electronic or mechanical device designed for similar purposes is prohibited at ASC meetings.                

Dated: February 4, 2016.

James R. Park,

Executive Director.

[FR Doc. 2016-02626 Filed 2-9-16; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE 6700-01-P
Exhibit 99.2





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 Quarterly Report of SmartDisk Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Peter J. Quinn, 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) 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/    PETER J. QUINN


---

Peter J. Quinn


Chief Financial Officer





August 14, 2002
#### The People of the State of New York, Plaintiff, v Richard T. Guernsey et al., Defendants-Appellants.

County Court, Schoharie County,

September 4, 1987

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

*Michael A. West, District Attorney,*for plaintiff. *Roger H. Mallery*for defendants-appellants.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Dan Lamont, J.

These six cases involve "appeals” to the County Court by each defendant-appellant from judgments of conviction of the Village Court, Village of Cobleskill *(Guernsey, Higgins, Lodes, Schrader);*Town Court, Town of Schoharie *(Twedt);*and Town Court, Town of Fulton *(Culoso).*In each case, the District Attorney moves that the defendant-appellant’s appeal or affidavit of errors be dismissed, or in the alternative that each defendant-appellant be granted a conditional order fixing a designated time within which each defendant may properly perfect his appeal. No papers in opposition to the People’s *792motion have been submitted by any of the defendants-appellants.

The instant applications by the District Attorney constitute the very first and only papers on file with the County Court relative to *any*of the above-entitled criminal appeals. Attorney for defendants-appellants has failed to comply with CPL 460.10 (2) or 22 NYCRR 200.33 (a) both of which *require*appellant to file a copy of the notice of appeal with the clerk of the appellate court or County Clerk.

The taking and perfection of criminal appeals from a local criminal court is governed by CPL 460.10, 460.70, and 22 NYCRR 200.33. The procedures set forth in CPL 460.10 (3) provide an appeal mechanism from local criminal courts which are not courts of record. The taking of an appeal by filing and serving an affidavit of errors is authorized *only*in a case in which the underlying proceedings were *not*recorded by a court stenographer.

Accordingly, the *Guernsey, Higgins, Lodes, Schrader,*and *Twedt*appeals have not been properly taken, much less properly perfected. The County Court therefore could not and would not grant any application by any defendant-appellant pursuant to CPL 460.10 (3) (e) directing the local criminal court to file a return to the affidavit of errors.

Since the underlying proceedings in the *Culoso*case were electronically tape recorded *(not*recorded by a "court stenographer”), it would at first blush appear that defendant Culoso may proceed by affidavit of errors (CPL 460.10 [3]). However, where the underlying proceedings are electronically tape recorded, such record becomes the functional equivalent of a court stenographer, and this court holds and determines that defendant-appellant should be required to obtain a transcript thereof, rather than being permitted to file and serve an affidavit of errors.

At this juncture, each of the People’s applications to dismiss the above-entitled appeals must be denied. However, such denial is without prejudice to future applications by the People to dismiss such appeals for continued failure by defendants-appellants to properly take and perfect such appeals pursuant to the applicable provisions of the Criminal Procedure Law (CPL 460.10, 460.70) and the Uniform Rules for Trial Courts (22 NYCRR 200.33).
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-14-00241-CV

BLAKENERGY, LTD., A TEXAS 

LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

APPELLANT

V.

ONCOR ELECTRIC DELIVERY 

COMPANY, LLC

APPELLEE

----------

FROM THE 97TH DISTRICT COURT OF CLAY COUNTY

TRIAL COURT NO. 2012-0033C-CV

----------

MEMORANDUM OPINION1

----------

Blakenergy, Ltd., a Texas Limited Partnership, has filed a petition for 

permissive appeal asking this court to review interlocutory orders of the trial court 

regarding Blakenergy’s expert witness Steve D. Goolsby and the related denials

of Blakenergy’s motion for continuance and motion to reconsider. We have

 1

See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
2

considered the petition, response, and reply. Given the requirement that we 

construe section 51.014 strictly,

2 we decline to entertain this appeal, and we 

hereby dismiss it.3

PER CURIAM

PANEL: DAUPHINOT, GARDNER, and GABRIEL, JJ.

DELIVERED: September 25, 2014

 2

See Rogers v. Orr, 408 S.W.3d 640, 642 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth 2013, 

pet. denied) (“We strictly construe a statute authorizing an interlocutory appeal 

because it is an exception to the general rule that only final judgments are 

appealable.”).

3

See Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code Ann. § 51.014(d)–(f) (West Supp. 

2014); Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f).
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3567 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3567

To modify the limitation on military-to-military exchanges and contacts 
 with the People's Liberation Army to cover all logistical operations 
    and remove the exception for search-and-rescue and humanitarian 
                       operations and exercises.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            February 2, 2022

Mr. Rubio (for himself, Mr. Scott of Florida, Mr. Braun, Mr. Cruz, Mr. 
Hagerty, and Mr. Hawley) introduced the following bill; which was read 
        twice and referred to the Committee on Foreign Relations

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To modify the limitation on military-to-military exchanges and contacts 
 with the People's Liberation Army to cover all logistical operations 
    and remove the exception for search-and-rescue and humanitarian 
                       operations and exercises.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``No People's Liberation Army in 
Logistical Operations and Other Pertinent Humanitarian Operations 
Leading to Endangered Security Act'' or the ``No PLA LOOPHOLES Act''.

SEC. 2. MODIFICATION OF LIMITATION ON MILITARY-TO-MILITARY EXCHANGES 
              AND CONTACTS WITH CHINESE PEOPLE'S LIBERATION ARMY.

    Section 1201 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal 
Year 2000 (Public Law 106-65; 10 U.S.C. 168 note) is amended--
            (1) in subsection (b)(4), by striking ``Advanced logistical 
        operations'' and inserting ``Logistical operations''; and
            (2) by striking subsection (c).
                                 <all>
```
#### STATE v. ANNIE RAY GLENN.

(Filed 4 November, 1959.)

Í. Criminal law § 136—

When an order putting into effect a suspended sentence is based upon a conviction of defendant which is reversed on appeal to the Supreme Court for insufficiency of the evidence of guilt, the order putting into effect the suspended sentence must be reversed on defendant’s appeal from such order.

Higgins, J., not sitting.

Appeal by defendant from *Gambill, J.,*at April 1959 Mixed Term, of DAVIDSON. ■ ••

Criminal posecution upon a warrant charging defendant Annie Ray Gleam with the offense of assault with ia deadly weapon, heard in Superior Court of Davidson County at the April 27, 1959' Mixed Term, when and where the following occurred: The presiding judge, finding <as a fact that in Recorder's Count of Thomasville on 13 September 1958, defendant was convicted of assault with a deadly weapon and sentenced to two years in -the Women’s Division of the State Prison,— the 'sentence being suspended for a period of five years with the express consent of defendant upon certain conditions, one of which was that she not violate any law during the period of suspension; that on *16113 October 1958, defendant was convicted of violating the liquor laws of the State of North Carolina and the aforesaid two-year sentence was placed into effect in the Recorder’s Court; that defendant appealed to Superior Court therefrom, and from the conviction of violating the liquor laws; that in Superior Court defendant was found guilty by a jury of possessing four gallons of illicit liquor for the purpose of sale; and the court finding that the violation of the liquor laws by defendant was willful and in violation of one of the terms of the said suspended sentence, adjudged that there has been a violation of the conditions of the suspended 'sentence, and ordered that the two-year sentence to the Women’s Division of State Prison, which was theretofore suspended, be placed into immediate effect by the issuance of a commitment.

And defendant having appealed to Supreme Court from the conviction in the said liquor case, also appealed from the order placing into effect the suspended sentence .above described; and it now appears that the judgment in the liquor case, No. 370, has been reversed. Therefore defendant appeals to Supreme Court andi assigns error.

*Attorney General Seawell, Assistant Attorney General Claude L. Love for the State.*

*Walser & Brinkley for defendant, appellant.*

WiNBORNE, C. J.

The ruling of the court putting into effect the suspended sentence against defendant, as hereinabove described, being predicated upon finding that the verdict of guilty in the liquor case above described, is violative of the conditions on which the two-year sentence was suspended is in error. Hence defendant is entitled to have the judgment by which suspended sentence was put into effect reversed and stricken from the record— and it is so ordered. *S. v. Harrelson,*245 N.C. 604, 96 S.E. 2d 867.

Reversed.

Higgiks, J., not sitting.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 28 (Friday, February 10, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 8138]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-3311]




[[Page 8137]]

_______________________________________________________________________

Part IX





Department of the Interior





_______________________________________________________________________



Bureau of Indian Affairs



_______________________________________________________________________



The Chicora-Waccamaw Indian People; Receipt for Federal Acknowledgment 
of Existence as an Indian Tribe; Notice

Federal Register / Vol. 60, No. 28 / Friday, February 10, 1995 / 
Notices 
[[Page 8138]] 

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR


The Chicora-Waccamaw Indian People; Receipt of Petition for 
Federal Acknowledgment of Existence as an Indian Tribe

    This is published in the exercise of authority delegated by the 
Secretary of the Interior to the Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs by 
209 DM 8.
    Pursuant to 25 CFR 83.8(a) (formerly 25 CFR 54.8(a)) notice is 
hereby given that the Chicora-Waccamaw Indian People, 1903 Oak Street 
Extension, Conway, South Carolina 29526, has filed a petition for 
acknowledgment by the Secretary of the Interior that the group exists 
as an Indian tribe. The petition was received by the Bureau of Indian 
Affairs (BIA) on October 5, 1994, and was signed by members of the 
group's governing body.
    This is a notice of receipt of petition and does not constitute 
notice that the petition is under active consideration. Notice of 
active consideration will be sent by mail to the petitioner and other 
interested parties at the appropriate time.
    Under Section 83.8(d) (formerly 54.8(d)) of the Federal 
regulations, interested parties may submit factual and/or legal 
arguments in support of or in opposition to the group's petition. Any 
information submitted will be made available on the same basis as other 
information in the BIA's files. Such submissions will be provided to 
the petitioner upon receipt by the BIA. The petitioner will be provided 
an opportunity to respond to such submissions prior to a final 
determination regarding the petitioner's status.
    The petition may be examined, by appointment, in the Department of 
the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Branch of Acknowledgment and 
Research, Room 1362-MIB, 1849 C Street, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20240, 
Phone: (202) 208-3592.

    Dated: January 24, 1995.
Ada E. Deer,
Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs.
[FR Doc. 95-3311 Filed 2-9-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-02-P
EXHIBIT 23.2



[LETTERHEAD OF MILLER AND LENTS, LTD. APPEARS HERE]



March 14, 2005



Cross Timbers Royalty Trust

P.O. Box 830650

Dallas, TX 75283-0650



| | Re: | Cross Timbers Royalty Trust
| | --- | ---------------------------

2004 Annual
Report on Form 10-K



Gentlemen:



The firm of Miller and Lents, Ltd., consents to the use of its name and to
the use of its report dated February 14, 2005, regarding the Cross Timbers Royalty Trust Proved Reserves and Future Net Revenues as of December 31, 2004, in the 2004 Annual Report on Form 10-K.



Miller and Lents, Ltd., has no interests in Cross Timbers Royalty Trust or in
any affiliated companies or subsidiaries and is not to receive any such interest as payment for such reports and has no director, officer, or employee otherwise connected with Cross Timbers Royalty Trust. We are not employed by Cross Timbers Royalty
Trust on a contingent basis.



Yours very truly,MILLER AND LENTS, LTD.By

/S/ JAMES C. PEARSONJames C. Pearson Chairman
#### James P. Saverios, Respondent, v. David Levy, Appellant.

Order reversed and motion denied, upon execution by defendants of the undertaking mentioned in opinion, and if that be not order affirmed, costs to abide event,

Opinion by

Daniels. J.
| Skip to contentSocial Security Online | Actuarial Publications |
|---------------------------------------|------------------------|

| www.socialsecurity.gov | Home  FAQs  Contact Us  Search | **Search**  |
|------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------|------------------|

| Solvency provisions | Summary Measures and Graphs |
|---------------------|-----------------------------|

| Level of Monthly Benefits (PIA) | Description of Proposed Provision:      For each year from 2010-2040, multiply the 32 and 15 percent formula factors by 0.987, reducing the factors to 21 percent and 10 percent respectively, for new eligibles in 2040 and later. |
|---------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                 |

*Estimates based on the intermediate assumptions        of the 2009 Trustees Report*

|  |  |
|--|--|

|        |
|--------|
|   | Privacy Policy      | Website Policies        & Other Important Information      | Site Map     Last reviewed or modified August 26, 2009 |
II 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3753 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 

301 East Congress Parkway in Crystal Lake, Illinois, as the ‘‘Ryan 

J. Cummings Post Office’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 3, 2022 

Ms. DUCKWORTH (for herself and Mr. DURBIN) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

A BILL 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 301 East Congress Parkway in Crystal Lake, 

Illinois, as the ‘‘Ryan J. Cummings Post Office’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. RYAN J. CUMMINGS POST OFFICE. 

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

5 Postal Service located at 301 East Congress Parkway in 

6 Crystal Lake, Illinois, shall be known and designated as 

7 the ‘‘Ryan J. Cummings Post Office’’. 

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


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 3753 IS

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

2 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Ryan J. Cummings 

3 Post Office’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
#### STATE v. BEN GOLDSTON.

(Filed 15 June, 1931.)

Criminal Law L a — Appeal in capital case not prosecuted according to rules will be dismissed, no error appealing on record.

Where in a capital case the defendant’s appeal in *forma, pauperis*is not prosecuted according to the Rules.of Oourt, and his motion for *cer-tiorari*is not resisted, but return thereto is not made for about four months, when, as the only possible return, the clerk of the Superior Court sends up defendant’s statement of case on appeal, which had not been served on the solicitor because of the expiration of time therefor: *Held,,*although the statement of case on appeal is subject to the plea of *“nul tiel*record,” the Supreme Court will examine it, and upon the absence of reversible error appearing therein or on the face of the' record proper, the judgment will be affirmed and the appeal dismissed.

Appeal by defendant from *Sinclair, J.,*at January Term, 1931, of CHATHAM.

Motion by tbe State to affirm judgment and dismiss appeal.

*Attorney-General Brummitt and Assistant Attorney-General Nash for. the State.*

*R. F. Paschal for defendant.*

Stacy, C. J.

At tbe January Term, 1931, Cbatbam Superior Court, tbe defendant herein, Ben Goldston, was tried upon an indictment charging him with tbe murder of one Jobn Headen, .which resulted in a conviction and sentence of death. Tbe prisoner gave notice of appeal to tbe Supreme Court, but tbis has not been prosecuted as required by tbe rules, albeit be was allowed to appeal *in forma pauperis,*and was given sixty days from 17 January within which to make out and serve statement of case on appeal, and tbe solicitor was allowed thirty days thereafter to prepare and file exceptions or countercase.

*90Application for *certiorari*was filed with the clerk of the Supreme Court 19 February, which was not resisted by the Attorney-General. Nothing was done in behalf of the prisoner, however, until 5 June, when his statement of case on appeal, without being served on the solicitor, as the time had expired for this *(S. v. Humphrey,*186 N. C., 533, 120 S. E., 85), was filed in the oifice of the clerk of the Superior Court of Chatham County, and forwarded by him to the clerk of the Supreme Court as the only return he could make to the writ of *certiorari.*In the meantime, 19 May, the Attorney-General had lodged a motion to dismiss the appeal.

Notwithstanding the prisoner’s statement of case on appeal is subject to a plea of *"nul tiel*record,” we have examined it and find no reversible error appearing therein or on the face of the record proper. *S. v. Massey,*199 N. C., 601.

Judgment affirmed. Appeal dismissed.
**EXHIBIT32.2**

** **

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C.§1350,**

**AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

** **

In connection with the AnnualReport on Form 10-K of HF Financial Corp. (the “Company”) for the fiscal yearended June 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commissionon the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Darrel L. Posegate, Executive VicePresident, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of the Company, certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

 

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

 

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

 

 
|   | /s/ Darrel L. Posegate                        |                           |
|--------|-----------------------------------------------|--------------------------------|
|   | Darrel L. Posegate, Executive Vice President, |
|   | Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer         |
|   |                                          |
|   | Date:                                         |   September 28, 2007 |   |
|        |                                               |                                |  |

 

 

----

*              Asigned original of this written statement required by Section 906 has beenprovided to HF Financial Corp. and will be retained by HF Financial Corp. andfurnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

1

----