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

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3532 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3532

 To require the imposition of sanctions with respect to Ansarallah and 
    its officials, agents, or affiliates for acts of international 
                               terrorism.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 20, 2022

   Mr. Cruz (for himself, Mr. Barrasso, Mr. Hagerty, Mr. Rubio, Mr. 
Marshall, Mr. Tillis, Mr. Inhofe, Mr. Sasse, and Mr. Cotton) introduced 
the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee 
                          on Foreign Relations

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To require the imposition of sanctions with respect to Ansarallah and 
    its officials, agents, or affiliates for acts of international 
                               terrorism.

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

SECTION 1. IMPOSITION OF SANCTIONS WITH RESPECT TO ANSARALLAH.

    (a) In General.--Not later than 30 days after the date of the 
enactment of this Act, the President shall--
            (1) designate Ansarallah as a foreign terrorist 
        organization pursuant to section 219 of the Immigration and 
        Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1189); and
            (2) impose, with respect to Ansarallah and any foreign 
        person the President determines is an official, agent, or 
        affiliate of Ansarallah, the sanctions applicable with respect 
        to a foreign person pursuant to Executive Order 13224 (50 
        U.S.C. 1701 note; relating to blocking property and prohibiting 
        transactions with persons who commit, threaten to commit, or 
        support terrorism).
    (b) Determination Required.--Not later than 30 days after the 
President makes the designation required by paragraph (1) of subsection 
(a) and imposes the sanctions required by paragraph (2) of that 
subsection, the President shall submit to the Committee on Foreign 
Relations of the Senate and the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the 
House of Representatives a determination regarding whether the 
following foreign persons are officials, agents, or affiliates of 
Ansarallah:
            (1) Abdul Malik al-Houthi.
            (2) Abd al-Khaliq Badr al-Din al-Houthi.
            (3) Abdullah Yahya al-Hakim.
    (c) Ansarallah Defined.--In this section, the term ``Ansarallah'' 
means the movement known as Ansarallah, the Houthi movement, or any 
other alias.
                                 <all>
```
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 35 (Wednesday, February 22, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9840-9841]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-4224]



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


FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

First Community Bancshares, Inc.; Notice of Application to Engage 
de novo in Permissible Nonbanking Activities

    The company listed in this notice has filed an application under 
Sec.  225.23(a)(1) of the Board's Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.23(a)(1)) 
for the Board's approval under section 4(c)(8) of the Bank 
[[Page 9841]] Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1843(c)(8)) and Sec.  
225.21(a) of Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.21(a)) to commence or to engage 
de novo, either directly or through a subsidiary, in a nonbanking 
activity that is listed in Sec.  225.25 of Regulation Y as closely 
related to banking and permissible for bank holding companies. Unless 
otherwise noted, such activities will be conducted throughout the 
United States.
    The application is available for immediate inspection at the 
Federal Reserve Bank indicated. Once the application has been accepted 
for processing, it will also be available for inspection at the offices 
of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views 
in writing on the question whether consummation of the proposal can 
``reasonably be expected to produce benefits to the public, such as 
greater convenience, increased competition, or gains in efficiency, 
that outweigh possible adverse effects, such as undue concentration of 
resources, decreased or unfair competition, conflicts of interests, or 
unsound banking practices.'' Any request for a hearing on this question 
must be accompanied by a statement of the reasons a written 
presentation would not suffice in lieu of a hearing, identifying 
specifically any questions of fact that are in dispute, summarizing the 
evidence that would be presented at a hearing, and indicating how the 
party commenting would be aggrieved by approval of the proposal.
    Comments regarding the application must be received at the Reserve 
Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than 
March 7, 1995.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas (Genie D. Short, Vice President) 
2200 North Pearl Street, Dallas, Texas 75201-2272:
    1. First Community Bancshares, Inc., Houston, Texas; to engage de 
novo in providing economic information and advice, statistical 
forecasting services, and industry studies, conducting financial 
feasibility studies, providing advice regarding swaps, caps, and 
similar transactions related to interest rates or prices and economic 
indices, pursuant to Sec.  225.25(b)(4) of the Board's Regulation Y. 
The geographic scope will be limited to employees, shareholders, 
directors, and their family members, affiliated companies and trusts.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, February 15, 
1995.
William W. Wiles,
Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 95-4224 Filed 2-21-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-F
#### In the Matter of Lenore Cox, Petitioner, v David Axelrod, as Commissioner of the New York State Department of Health, et al., Respondents.

Supreme Court, Queens County,

June 15, 1987

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

*Joseph Lipofsky*and *Valerie A. Hawkins*for petitioner. *Robert Abrams, Attorney-General (Randolph Volkell*of counsel), for respondents.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Edwin Kassoff, J.

Petitioner brings this CPLR article 78 proceeding to annul and reverse a determination by respondents. Respondents cross-move for an order dismissing the petition on the ground of improper service.

CPLR 7804 (c) requires in a proceeding commenced pursuant to CPLR article 78 that service of a notice of petition and petition be made upon the respondent. CPLR 307 provides that where personal service upon a specified officer of a State *919agency is required to effect service on the agency, personal service shall be made upon such officer, the chief executive officer of such agency or to a person designated by him.

Pursuant to CPLR 307 the respondent, Department of Health, designated certain Department attorneys located in the Division of Legal Affairs in Albany to accept service.

Petitioner’s attorney served the notice of petition at respondent’s New York City office, located at 10 East 40th Street. While conceding that the applicable statutes and regulations require that service be made in Albany, petitioner’s attorney argues that an attorney in respondent’s Albany office authorized service on the New York City office and that respondents are therefore estopped from raising the defense of improper service.

The doctrine of estoppel is generally not available against the State when acting within its statutory or regulatory authority, irrespective of any representations made by a State employee or official *(Matter of Hamptons Hosp. & Med. Center v Moore,*52 NY2d 88; *Matter of Gavigan v McCoy,*37 NY2d 548). Estoppel should be allowed against the State only if failure to do so would defeat a right legally and rightfully obtained; it cannot be used to create a right *(Matter of Leizer v Ambach,*91 AD2d 1117; *Matter of McLaughlin v Berle,*71 AD2d 707, *affd*51 NY2d 917).

In this case petitioner’s attorney chose to make service on respondent’s New York City office instead of the proper office in Albany. Petitioner cannot rely on an alleged representation by an attorney in respondent’s Albany office to create a right to make service in a manner not provided for by statute or department regulation.

Accordingly, the petition is dismissed.
#### STATE v. NATALLIE DOBBS.

(Filed 28 November, 1951.)

Criminal Daw § 77a—

Where the record contains no warrant or indictment the appeal will be dismissed for want of essential parts of the record.

Appeal by defendant from *Sink, J.,*June Term, 1951, of GastoN.

The defendant was tried in Superior Court and found guilty of having in her possession three pints of nontax-paid liquor.

From the judgment entered on the verdict, the defendant appeals, and assigns error.

*Attorney-General McMullan, Assistant Attorney-General Moody, and Robert B. Broughton, Member of Staff, for the State.*

*Frank P. Cooke for defendant, appellant.*

Pee Curiam.

While the assignments of error appear to be without merit, they are not properly before us for consideration.

The record filed in this Court is fatally defective for the reason that no warrant or bill of indictment appears therein.

The appeal is dismissed on authority of *S. v. Dry,*224 N.C. 234, 29 S.E. 2d 698; *S. v. Currie,*206 N.C. 598, 174 S.E. 447; *Pruitt v. Wood,*199 N.C. 788, 156 S.E. 126.

Appeal dismissed.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 30 (Tuesday, February 14, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 8417]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-3640]



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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
[TA-W-30,652]


The Coach Factory, Carlstadt, New Jersey; Termination of 
Investigation

    Pursuant to Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, an investigation 
was initiated on January 17, 1995, in response to a worker petition 
which was filed on January 17, 1995, on behalf of workers at The Coach 
Factory, Carlstadt, New Jersey.
    The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. 
Consequently, further investigation in this case would serve no 
purpose, and the investigation has been terminated.

    Signed in Washington, DC this 3rd day of February, 1995.
Victor J. Trunzo,
Program Manager, Policy and Reemployment Services, Office of Trade 
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 95-3640 Filed 2-13-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 248 (Wednesday, December 27, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 66967]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-31285]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. RP96-83-000]


Columbia Gas Transmission Corp.; Notice of Filing

December 20, 1995.
    Take notice that on December 14, 1995, Columbia Gas Transmission 
Corporation (Columbia) tendered for filing the following report.
    Pursuant to Section 37 (Crediting of Excess Revenues) of the 
General Terms and Conditions (GTC) of Columbia's FERC Gas Tariff, 
Second Revised Volume No. 1, Columbia calculated Excess Revenues 
applicable to Rate Schedules ITS and SIT (Applicable Rate Schedules) 
for the twelve-month period ended October 31, 1995. In accordance with 
GTC Section 37, Columbia is returning such Excess Revenues through 
dollar credits to applicable Firm Transportation Customers' bills 
concurrently with the filing of this report in the total amount of 
$1,681,204.35. Columbia collected no Excess Revenues under Rate 
Schedule ISS during this time period.
    Columbia is also filing a negative adjustment applicable to the 
Excess Revenues previously calculated and credited to customers' bills 
for the twelve-month period ended October 31, 1994, for which Columbia 
filed its report pursuant to Section 37 on December 14, 1994, in Docket 
No. RP95-91. This adjustment which reduces the amount of Excess 
Revenues credited in 1994, reflects billing adjustments applicable to 
the services under the Applicable Rate Schedules for that period, which 
adjustments were made during the twelve-month period ended October 31, 
1995. The total adjustment reduces 1994 Excess Revenues by a total of 
$132,476.52, and Columbia is reflecting the effect of this adjustments 
on customers' bills concurrently with the filing of this report.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest this filing should 
file a motion to inter even or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with Sections 385.214 and 385.211 of the Commission's Rules 
and Regulations. Pursuant to Section 154.210 of the Commission's 
Regulations, all such motions or protests must be filed not later than 
12 days after the date of the filing noted above. Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to 
intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and 
are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-31285 Filed 12-26-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
### TRIAL COURT OFFICIAL’S

REQUEST FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE RECORD

Court of Appeals No. (If known) : 12-

Trial Court Style: STATE OF TEXAS VS. JUSTIN MEREDITH

Trial Court & County: 87 TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

Trial Court No.: 87CR16-32863

Date Trial Clerk’s Record Originally Due: 10.16.2017

Date Court Reporter’s/ Recorder’s Record Originally Due:

Anticipated Number of Pages of Record:

I am responsible for preparing a record in this appeal but I am unable to file the record by the original due

date for the following reason/s: (Check all that apply

- attach additional pages if necessary.)

___ to the best of my knowledge, the Appellant has made no claim of indigence and has failed to

either pay the required fee or to make arrangements to pay the fee for preparing the record.

___ my duties listed below preclude working on this record:

_X__ Other. (Explain): I was unaware of this appeal until today 11.27.2017 when asked about it by

court reporter Ellen Earles.

I anticipate this record wi ll be completed and forwarded to the 12 th Court of Appeals by 12.11.2017 and I

hereby request and additional 55 days within which to prepare it. TEX.R.APP.P.37.3.

In compliance with TEX.R.APP.P.9.5(e), I certify that a copy of this notice has been served on counsel

for all parties to the trial Court’s judgment or order being appealed. I further certify by my signature

below that the information contained in this notice is true and within my personal knowledge.

November 27, 2017

___________________________________ Date Signature

903-723-7823 Teresa Woodall

Office Phone Number Printed Name

Deputy Clerk

Official TitleTEXAS RULE OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE 9.5(e) reads:

Certificate requirements . A certificate o f service must be signed by the person who made the

service and must state:

(1) the date and manner of service;

(2) the name and address of each person served; and

(3) if the person served is a party’s attorney, the name of the party represented by that

attorney.

The following parties have been served with a copy of this document:

(Information may be either printed or typed.)

Lead Counsel for APPELLANT(S): Lead Counsel for APPELLEE(S):

Name: MARK CARGILL Name: ALLYSON MITCHELL

Address: 701 N. ELM STREET Addre ss: 500 N CHURCH RM 38

PALESTINE, TX 75801 Palestine, TX 75 801

Phone No.: 903

- 729

- 8011 Phone No: 903

- 723

- 7400

Attorney For: JUSTIN MEREDITH Attorney For: STATE OF TEXAS

Additional information, if any:
EXHIBIT 32.2

       CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 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 NASB Financial, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2006, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), I, Rhonda Nyhus, 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 result of operations of
the Company.


August 9, 2006              By:  /s/ Rhonda Nyhus
                                 Rhonda Nyhus
                                 Vice President and Treasurer


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



This certification is made solely for purpose of 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, subject to the knowledge standard contained therein , and not for
any other purpose.

<Page>
#### STATE v. MACK FARMER.

(Filed 22 September, 1937.)

Appeal by defendant from *Sink, J.,*at March Term, 1937, of Burr-combe. No error.

Defendant was charged with tbe unlawful possession of intoxicating liquor. Tbe evidence tended to show that defendant and bis wife operated a cafe in Asheville, North Carolina, known as Mack’s Cafe, and that on tbe occasion when tbe officers visited tbe place they found in tbe kitchen one-balf gallon of whiskey, another half-gallon partly filled, and a cream pitcher full of whiskey. There were several pint bottles, crocks, several half-gallon fruit jars, and a funnel. Tbe defendant was behind tbe counter in tbe front room waiting on customers, about five steps from tbe kitchen. One woman was lying on a bed. There was a man in tbe kitchen apparently intoxicated. Defendant and bis wife said they owned and operated tbe place. Mrs. Farmer claimed tbe whiskey. A witness for tbe State testified: “Mack wanted to come over first and claim tbe whiskey and she would not permit him. She said it was her whiskey, so I brought botb over (arrested both).”

*832Defendant’s wife was charged in a separate warrant with the unlawful possession of intoxicating liquor and was tried at same time as her husband, and convicted, but did not appeal. She testified that the whiskey was hers. Defendant Mack Farmer did not go upon the stand.

Verdict: Guilty as,to Mack Farmer, and from judgment imposing sentence he appealed.

*Attorney-General Seawell and Assistant Attorney-General McMullan for the State.*

*Pritchard <& J ames for defendants.*

Peb Oubiam.

The only exceptions noted by the defendant relate to the judge’s charge. The charge, while not elaborate, was in substantial accord with the rule laid down in *S. v. Rigsbee,*211 N. C., 128, and *S. v. Hardy,*209 N. C., 83, and considered in connection with the evidence offered, gave the appellant no just ground for complaint.

No error.
Long-Range 

Actuarial 

Balance

Annual 

Balance in 

75th Year

Long-Range 

Actuarial 

Balance

Annual Balance 

in 75th Year

Long-Range 

Actuarial 

Balance

B

7

-1.70% -4.20% 1.13% 3.55% -0.57% 

Estimates based on the intermediate assumptions of the 2008 Trustees Report Office of the Chief A

July 16, 2008

Summary Measures and Graphs

Category of Change: Level of Monthly Benefits (PIA)

Proposed Provision: Progressive price indexing of PIA formula factors beginning with indivieligible for OASI benefits in 2016. Create new bend point at the 30th percentile of earners. law benefits for earners at the 30th percentile and below and reduce upper 2 formula factorsuch that maximum worker benefit grows by inflation rather than the growth in average wagbenefits are not affected by the proposal. Disabled worker beneficiaries, upon attaining norage, would be subject to a proportional reduction in benefits based on the worker's years o

Present Law Change From Present Law in Results with this 

OASDI Cost Rates and Income Rates

(as a percentage of taxable payroll)

0.02.04.06.08.0

10.012.014.016.018.020.0

2008 2018 2028 2038 2048 2058 2068 2078

Year

Percent

Cost rates with this provisionCost rates under present lawIncome rates with this provisionIncome rates under present law

OASDI Trust Fund Ratio

 (assets as a percentage of annual expe

0

100200300400500600700800900

1000

2008 2018 2028 2038 2048 2058 

Year

Percent

Present law With this p
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-8174

LARRY ARNOLD YOUNG,

Petitioner – Appellant,

v.

PATRICIA R. STANSBERRY, Warden,

Respondent – Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Anthony John Trenga, 

District Judge. (1:09-cv-01276-AJT-TCB)

Submitted: March 16, 2010 Decided: March 23, 2010

Before NIEMEYER, MOTZ, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Larry Arnold Young, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Larry Arnold Young seeks to appeal the district 

court’s order directing Young to provide evidence that he 

exhausted his administrative remedies and to pay the filing fee 

or his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2006) petition would be dismissed. 

This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 

U.S.C. § 1291 (2006), and certain interlocutory and collateral 

orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2006); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. 

Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541 (1949). The order 

Young seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable 

interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we deny leave 

to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal for lack of 

jurisdiction. We dispense with oral argument because the facts 

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 

before the court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process.

DISMISSED
**EXHIBIT23.1**

 

# ** **

# **INDEPENDENTAUDITOR’S CONSENT**

#  

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the RegistrationStatements on Form S-8 of HF Financial Corp., pertaining to the HF FinancialCorp. 2002 Stock Option and Incentive Plan, the 1991 Stock Option and IncentivePlan, the 1996 Director Restricted Stock Plan, and the Retirement Savings Planof our report dated August 13, 2003, accompanying the consolidatedfinancial statements included in the Form 10-K Annual Report of HF FinancialCorp. for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2003.

 
|                      | /s/ McGladrey & Pullen, LLP |
|---------------------------|---------------------------------|
|                      |
|                      |
| Sioux Falls, South Dakota |
| September 22, 2003   |

 

1

----