alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
B.9. Number of Agricultural Bank Failures
______________________________________________________________________________________

Year                       Q1           Q2            Q3            Q4           Total
______________________________________________________________________________________

1983......    |             1             1             2             3              7
1984......    |             3             7            10            12             32
1985......    |            12            21            17            18             68
1986......    |            14            14            21            16             65
1987......    |            22            19            12            16             69
1988......    |            11             6            12             7             36
1989......    |             5             7             5             5             22
1990......    |             3             5             6             3             17
1991......    |             2             2             3             1              8
1992......    |             1             1             1             4              7
1993......    |             1             2             2             0              5
1994......    |             0             0             0             0              0
1995......    |             0             0             0             0              0
1996......    |             0             2             0             0              2
1997......    |             0             0             0             1              1
1998......    |             0             0             1             0              1
1999......    |             0             1             0             0              1
2000......    |             0             0             0             0              0
2001......    |             0             0             0             0              0
2002......    |             1             0             0             1              2
2003......    |             0             1             0             0              1
2004......    |             0          n.a.          n.a.          n.a.           n.a.
______________________________________________________________________________________
   Note. Data exclude banks assisted to prevent failure.  Industrial banks and
mutual savings banks also are excluded.  Agricultural banks are defined in the
introduction to section B.
   n.a. Not available.

29
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 188 (Friday, September 26, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55844-55845]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-22643]


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

GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION


Federal Management Regulation (FMR); Motor Vehicle Management; 
Notice of GSA Bulletin FMR B-22

AGENCY: Office of Governmentwide Policy, General Services 
Administration (GSA).

ACTION: Notice of a bulletin.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces Federal Management Regulation (FMR) 
Bulletin B-22. Bulletin B-22 provides a deviation from the FMR to allow 
executive agencies to purchase premium fuel for Government owned and 
leased vehicles when lower grade fuels are not available due to 
possible nationwide market shortages due to refinery damage caused by 
Hurricane Ike. GSA Bulletin FMR B-22 may be found at www.gsa.gov/bulletin.

DATES: The bulletin announced in this notice became effective on 
September 13, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For clarification of content, contact 
General Services Administration, Office of Governmentwide Policy, 
Office of Travel, Transportation and Asset Management, at (202) 501-
1777. Please cite Bulletin FMR B-22.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

A. Background

    The Federal Management Regulation (FMR), Subpart B, section 102-
34.335 (41 CFR 102-34.335), requires drivers to use the grade (octane 
rating) of fuel recommended by the motor vehicle manufacturer when 
fueling motor vehicles owned or leased by the Government. Present 
restrictions prohibit the use of premium grade fuel in motor vehicles 
owned or leased by the Government that will operate on a lower grade of 
fuel.
    As a result of Hurricane Ike, executive agencies may encounter 
nationwide fuel shortages and may not be able to acquire lower grade 
fuel for their vehicles to complete their missions. The original intent 
of FMR section 102-34.335 was to reduce fuel costs and the unnecessary 
use of premium fuel in vehicles capable of being operated on lower 
grade fuel. FMR Bulletin, B-22, provides a deviation for executive 
agencies to purchase premium fuel for Government owned and leased 
vehicles when lower grade fuels are not available due to market 
shortages due to Hurricane Ike.

[[Page 55845]]

B. Procedures

    Bulletins regarding motor vehicle management are located on the 
Internet at www.gsa.gov/bulletin as Federal Management Regulation 
bulletins.

    Dated: September 16, 2008.
Becky Rhodes,
Deputy Associate Administrator.
[FR Doc. E8-22643 Filed 9-25-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6820-14-S
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>

  
     This schedule  contains summary  financial  information  extracted from the
unaudited interim consolidated  financial  statements of Prime Succession,  Inc.
and subsidiaries,  for the nine months ended September 30, 1998 and is qualified
in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<CIK>                    0001023294                         
<NAME>                   Prime Succession, Inc.   


multiplier 1,000
       

<S>                                         <C>  
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                   9-MOS         
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                  JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                    Sep-30-1998
<CASH>                                           1,642
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   33,966
<ALLOWANCES>                                     5,876
<INVENTORY>                                     50,637
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                20,677
<PP&E>                                          74,058
<DEPRECIATION>                                   5,151
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 391,025
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           11,723
<BONDS>                                        222,125
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     122,652
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   391,025
<SALES>                                         75,389
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                75,389
<CGS>                                           49,642
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   49,642
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                10,947
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   514
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              18,189
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (3,389)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        70
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (3,459)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (3,459)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        


</TABLE>
#### NATIONAL ENAMELING & STAMPING COMPANY, Appellant, v. George WHITE, Doing Business under the Style and Name of Whitebestos Co., (Not Incorporated), Appellee.

No. 164.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Jan. 17, 1938.

Chadbourne, Wallace, Parke & White-side, of New York City, and Casanave Young, of Washington, D. C., for appeh lant.

Gilbert & Gilbert, of New York City (Godfrey Cohen, Jerome E. Malino, and Herbert A. Malino, all- of New York City, of counsel), for appellee.

Before MANTON, AUGUSTUS N. HAND, and CHASE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Decree, 19 F.Supp. 108, affirmed on opinion below.
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03

- 22

- 00477

- CV

In re N.H.

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM TRAVIS COUNTY

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

The petition for writ of mandamus is dismiss ed as moot

.

___________ ____________ _______ __ __________

Melissa Goodwin , Justice

Before Justices Goodwin, Baker, and Kelly

Filed: November 10, 2022
#### COTTONPORT BANK v. LEE et al.

No. 2656.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. First Circuit.

Nov. 9, 1944.

Rehearing Granted Dec. 13, 1944.

M. T. Hewes, of New Roads, and Blanche & Wilson, of Baton Rouge, for appellant.

Parker, Seale & Kelton, of Baton Rouge, for appellees.

DORE, Judge.

The issues in this case are identical as (hose in the case of Cottonport Bank v. Dunn et al., La.App., 19 So.2d 654, save and except the allegation is made that on August 2, 1942, William Lee, after having defaulted on the monthly 'installments as called for by the n.otes, the basis of this suit, entered into an agreement whereby he acknowledged his indebtedness to the plaintiff to the amount of $222.48, with interest and attorney’s fees. In this agreement, it is stated: “This indebtedness represents the consideration given for one Butane Gas System and equipment sold and delivered April 12, 1940, described and itemized as follows: Size System No. 155 Nabuco, one Range Roper, two outlets and one space heater No. 2210. ' The vendors’ lien and privilege on same is recognized on the Butane system and equipment as described and located on premises of William Lee.”

The facts are that William Lee and his wife purchased from the Butane Gas. & Plumbing Co., Inc., of Cottonport, La., a butane gas system. The system was installed on the premises of Lee for his benefit and that of the property. In payment therefor, William Lee and his wife executed three notes, all bearing date of April 19, 1940, payable in 35 installments of $9.-27, beginning on June 1, 1940, and one installment of $8.99 thereafter, bearing interest- at 8% per annum from installment due dates, the said notes being payable to the order of the Cottonport Bank, plaintiff herein. The notes are ordinary notes with no mention of any vendor’s lien or privilege securing them. They were not made payable to the vendor of the gas system. Like the Cottonport-Dunn case, the purchaser did not grant a chattel mortgage, nor was there any written transfer of a vendor’s lien to the plaintiff bank.

For the reasons assigned in the case of Cottonport Bank v. Dunn et al., La.App., 19 So.2d 654, the plaintiff did not have a vendor’s lien and privilege on the gas system unless the agreement heretofore referred to created a vendor’s lien. We think not. The vendor’s, lien can only be created when a vendor sells an object to a purchaser on a credit basis. The plaintiff was not the seller of the system. It had merely loaned the money to the purchaser to pay the vendor.

For these reasons, and the reasons set forth in the case of Cottonport Bank v. Dunn et al., La.App., 19 So.2d 654, the judgment appealed from is affirmed.
#### DADE COUNTY, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, v. Mae Frances HOUK et al., Appellees.

Supreme Court of Florida. Special Division A.

May 23, 1956.

On Rehearing en Banc Sept. 14, 1956.

Francis G. Rearick and Hudson, McNutt, Campbell, Isom & Rearick, Miami, and Ross H. Stanton, Jr., Tallahassee, for appellant.

Jepeway & Dauber, Walter J. Migoski, Brigham, Black, Niles & Wright and Leon D. Black, Jr., Evans, Mershon, Sawyer, Johnston & Simmons, Miami, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

This cause came on to be heard on the motion of appellees to affirm the judgment appealed from pursuant tó 31 F.S.A. Rule 38 of the rules of this court and it appearing to the court from an examination of the record that said motion is appropriate and seasonably made and that it is manifest that the questions raised on appeal are without substantial merit and need no further argument ;

It is accordingly Ordered, Adjudged and Decreed that the motion to affirm the judgment appealed from be, and the same is, hereby granted, and the judgment is

Affirmed.

DREW, C. J., and TERRELL, THOMAS and THORNAL, JJ., concur.

On Rehearing Granted

PER CURIAM.

On rehearing granted and after oral argu-. ment before the Court en banc, it is Ordered that the per curiam opinion and judgment of this Court affirming the judgment of the Circuit Court of Dade County appealed, from, be and the same is hereby adhered to on the authority of Dade County v. Brigham, Fla., 47 So.2d 602, 18 A.L.R.2d 1221, which case is hereby, in all respects approved and confirmed.

DREW, C. J., and TERRELL, THOMAS, HOBSON, ROBERTS, THORNAL and O’CONNELL, JJ., concur.
UNITED STAT ES DIS TRICT COURT F OR THE DIS TRICT OF COLUM BIA

MOHAMM ED NAZ IR BIN LEP, P etitioner , v. Civil Action No. 09-0031 (JD B) BARACK

OBAMA, et

al., Respondents.

O R D E R G R A N T I N G S T A Y O F C A S E M A N A G E M E N T S C H E D U L E Upon consider ation of [86] Petitioner' s Unopposed Motion to Conti nue the Stay of Dea dlines Established in the Case Mana g ement Or der, a nd finding g ood cause there for, it is here by ORDERED that said motion is gra nted and that the de adlines established in the Case Manag ement Or der f

iled April 30, 2010 (" CMO") are stay ed; it is F URTHER ORDERED that by no later tha

n Fe bruar y 1, 2013, Petitioner shall submitto the Court a propose d schedule to gove rn fur ther proc eeding s in this case and/or a joint st atus repor t on the schedulingof fur ther proc eeding s in this case; it is F URTHER ORDERED that duringthe pende ncy of this stay , Petitioner may confe r with Respondents reg ardingpotential discovery pursuant to CMO § I .E.2 or, if ne cessa ry , file a sing le I .E.2 motion on a schedule to be proposed at the time the motion, if any , is filed; and it is F URTHER ORDERED that aside fr om the stay of the de adlines in the CMO, all other aspec ts of the CMO shall remain in full for ce a nd eff ect. SO ORDERED. /s/ J OHN D. B ATES United States District J udg e Dated: De cembe r 6, 2012
KATHY BLACKMON

,
Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent. Chief Special Master Corcoran

Filed: June 22, 2022

Special Processing Unit (SPU) ; Rul ing on Entitlement; Concession; Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine; Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA)

Maximillian J. Muller, Muller Brazil, LLP, Dresher, PA , for Petitioner.

Lynn Christina Schlie , U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1

On January 8, 2021

, Kathy Blackmon filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa

- 10, et seq. 2 (the “Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleges that she suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine admi nistration (“SIRVA”) which meets the Table definition for SIRVA related to the influenza vaccine she received on Octo ber 9 , 201 9 . Petition at 1, ¶ 1

. She further alleged that she received the vaccine in the United States, that she suffered the residual effects of her SIRVA for more than six months, and that neither she nor any other party has filed a civil action or received compensation for her SIRVA

. Petition at ¶¶ 1, 6

- 8

. T he case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

1 Because this unpublished R uling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in accordance with the E

- Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of Electronic Government Services). This means the R uling will be available to anyone with access to the internet. In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), Petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to redact medical or other information, the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, I agree that the identified material fits within this definition, I wil l redact such material from public access.

2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99

- 660, 100 Stat. 3755

. Hereinafter, for ease of citation, all section references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subpara graph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa (2012 ). 

# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE O F SPECIAL MASTERS

No

. 21-0140V UNPUBLISHED2

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Brian H. Corcoran Brian H. Corcoran Chief Special Master On June 21, 2022

, Respondent filed his Rule 4(c) report in which he concedes that P etitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report at 1. Specifically, Respondent has concluded “ that [P]etitioner has satisfied the criteria set forth in the Vaccine Injury Table ( “ Tab le ” ) and the Qualifications and Aids to Interpretation ( “ QAI ” ). ” Id. at 5.

In vie w of R espondent’s position a nd the evidence of record, I find that Petitioner is e ntitled to compensation.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

December 15, 2017

No. 04-17-00332-CV

AME & FE INVESTMENTS, LTD.,

Appellant

v.

NEC NETWORKS, LLC, dba CaptureRX,

Appellees

From the 73rd Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2012-CI-11952

Honorable David A. Canales, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

The appellee’s motion to reconsider or clarify is DENIED. 

_________________________________

Irene Rios, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 15th day of December, 2017.

___________________________________

KEITH E. HOTTLE,

Clerk of Court
I

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1732

To require the Securities and Exchange Commission to review the annual

reports of accounting standards-setting bodies.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MAY 3, 2001

Mr. SHERMAN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Financial Services

A BILL

To require the Securities and Exchange Commission to review the annual reports of accounting standards-setting

bodies.

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

3 SECTION 1. REVIEW OF ANNUAL REPORTS REQUIRED.

4 The Securities and Exchange Commission shall annu5 ally review the annual reports of any independent account6 ing standards-setting entity on whose standards issuers of

7 securities and other regulated persons are permitted to

8 rely for purposes of complying with generally accepted ac9 counting principles in the preparation of periodic reports
2

•HR 1732 IH

1 and other statements required to be submitted under the

2 Federal securities laws.

Æ
B.3. Net Charge-offs of Non-real-estate Farm Loans Held by Insured Commercial Banks
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
                                                                                                              
                                 Estimated volume                  Share of total non-real-estate farm loans
                               (millions of dollars)                               (percent)
                      _______________________________________     ____________________________________________

Year                  Total     Q1      Q2       Q3       Q4      Total      Q1        Q2        Q3       Q4
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
                                                                                                              
1993......    |          54       7      16        5       26      .155      .020      .049     .014      .069
1994......    |          69      10      11       15       33      .187      .026      .032     .037      .082
1995......    |          51      -2      14       13       25      .131     -.004      .039     .032      .061
1996......    |          95      16      27       24       30      .240      .039      .070     .058      .071
1997......    |          93       6      19       19       50      .230      .014      .049     .045      .112
1998......    |          87       4      15       24       45      .198      .008      .036     .051      .095
1999......    |         126      18      37       35       36      .280      .040      .086     .078      .080
2000......    |         108      11      17       34       45      .259      .027      .041     .075      .098
2001......    |         308      67      53      140       48      .656      .142      .118     .294      .101
2002......    |         221      40      50       58       73      .471      .085      .114     .124      .157
2003......    |         175      34      35       48       58      .382      .074      .080     .108      .128
2004......    |        n.a.      28      17     n.a.     n.a.      n.a.      .062      .039     n.a.      n.a.
______________________________________________________________________________________________________________
   Note. Components might not sum to totals because of rounding. Reported amounts are adjusted to exclude
foreign results for large banks that report farm net charge-offs on a consolidated basis and for small banks
that are allowed to report net charge-offs according to their internal definition of agricultural loans.
Quarterly data are as of end of quarter.
   n.a. Not available.

23
AMENDMENT No. 10 TO LICENSE No. 14709 (series A 014122) dated April 7, 2000



 Exhibit 4.4.10 
  
 Ministry of the Russian Federation for Communication and Information 
  
 Amendment No. 10 
 To License No. 14709 (series A 014122) 
 dated April 7, 2000 
  
 To add an additional clause to the
Conditions For Carrying Out Activities Under License No. 14709: 
  
 “In the
territory of the Republic of Ingushetia and Chechen Republic services to be rendered as of (no later than) December 31, 2004.” 
  

					
	 First Deputy Minister
 of the Russian
Federation for
 Communications and Information
	  	 [Signature]
	 	B.D. Antoniouk
	 	  	 	 	  
 December 11, 2003


  

					
	 Deputy Head of the Department
 of the
Organization
 of Licensing Activity
	  	 [Signature]
	 	B.V. Vorobiev
	 	  	 [Seal]
Exhibit
32.2





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 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Northwest Oil
& Gas Trading Company, Inc. (the “Company”) for the
fiscal year ended May 31, 2019 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
I, Thomas Hoeder, 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.





Date:
September 16, 2019


/s/
Thomas HoederThomas
HoederChief
Financial Officer(Principal
Financial Officer)