alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
17

A.12. Characteristics of Bank Loans to Farmers -- Large Farm Lenders, by Risk Rating, May 2-6, 2005Percent except as notedLoan characteristic All Minimal Low Moderate Acceptable Special Not rateVolume of loans (thousands of dollars) 1,333,963 16,596 87,197 587,968 540,236 51,331 7,26Number of loans 23,081 833 2,373 11,709 5,541 1,069 15Weighted average maturity (months)1 23.10 19.54 9.71 17.08 28.08 28.00 61.3

Weighted average repricing interval (months)2 3.85 14.00 2.45 2.64 4.01 4.24 38.8

Weighted average risk rating3 3.41 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 n.

Weighted average interest rate 4 6.41 6.60 6.55 6.26 6.46 7.26 7.1

 Standard error5 .16 .28 .24 .23 .25 .32 .4

 Interquartile range6 75th percentile 7.08 7.25 7.25 7.00 7.00 8.12 7.7 25th percentile 5.86 6.01 5.39 5.38 6.01 6.32 6.7 Purpose of loan Feeder livestock 6.37 7.72 6.01 6.47 6.43 9.18 7.2 Other livestock 6.43 5.25 6.67 6.10 6.26 8.62 7.2 Other current operating expenses7 6.58 6.54 7.17 6.34 6.74 6.93 5.0

 Farm machinery and equipment 6.77 6.25 7.23 6.74 6.80 6.65 12.0 Farm real estate 6.77 6.18 5.73 6.58 6.90 6.25 8.1 Other8 6.05 5.29 6.14 5.79 6.12 7.72 7.4

Share of total loan volume Features of loan Floating rates 89.75 50.64 63.13 88.72 97.88 90.81 60.9 Under commitment 81.68 80.32 89.98 82.69 79.84 79.66 50.8 Callable 22.31 57.29 37.11 15.05 23.07 45.21 2.4 Purpose of loan Feeder livestock 9.25 17.32 44.27 11.53 2.32 .30 2.9 Other livestock 3.77 3.42 6.80 3.27 3.49 6.23 31.3 Other current operating expenses7 32.00 47.88 39.43 35.73 24.65 56.30 14.7 Farm machinery and equipment 14.63 20.72 2.64 17.57 14.28 7.38 .6 Farm real estate 5.96 10.27 .33 2.94 9.95 .02 11.9 Other8 34.39 .39 6.54 28.95 45.30 29.77 38.3

 Type of collateral Farm real estate 8.22 4.73 .98 6.11 9.32 18.31 76.9 Other 81.39 93.04 97.66 85.30 75.45 79.86 22.3 Note. Most large farm lenders that reported loans to farmers had more than $25 million in farm loans. For explanation of footnotes, see table A.8. n.a. Not available.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

M.A. AND H.A. H/W

v.

DIOCESE OF SCRANTON, BISHOP 

JAMES TIMLIN AND BISHOP JOSEPH 

BAMBERA

PETITION OF: DIOCESE OF 

SCRANTON AND BISHOP JOSEPH 

BAMBERA

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 122 MM 2019

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 15th day of November, 2019, the Application for Extraordinary 

Relief is DENIED.
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 181 (Wednesday, September 17, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Pages 53879-53880]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-21754]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Health Resources and Services Administration


Part C Early Intervention Services Grant

AGENCY: Health Resources and Services Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice of Non-competitive Program Expansion Supplemental Award.

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

SUMMARY: The Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA) will 
be providing temporary critical HIV medical care and treatment services 
through GLH Magnolia Medical Clinic to avoid a disruption of HIV 
clinical care to clients in Bolivar, Sunflower and Washington counties 
in Mississippi.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Intended recipient of the award: GLH Magnolia Medical Clinic, 
Greenwood, Mississippi.
    Amount of the award: $97,500 to ensure ongoing clinical services to 
the target population.
    Authority: Section 2651 of the Public Health Service Act, 42 U.S.C. 
300ff-51.
    CFDA Number: 93.918.
    Project period: The period of supplemental support is from 
September 1, 2008, to December 31, 2008.
    Justification for the Exception to Competition: Critical funding 
for HIV medical care and treatment services to clients in Bolivar, 
Sunflower and Washington Counties in Mississippi will be continued 
through a noncompetitive program expansion supplement to an existing 
grant award to GLH Magnolia Medical Clinic in Greenwood, Mississippi. 
This is a

[[Page 53880]]

temporary award because the previous grant recipient serving this 
population notified HRSA that it would not continue in the program 
after the fiscal year (FY) 2008 award was made. GLH Magnolia Medical 
clinic is the best qualified grantee for this supplement, since it 
serves many of the former grantee's patients and is the closest Part C 
Program to the former grantee. Further funding beyond December 31, 
2008, for this service area will be competitively awarded during the 
next Part C HIV Early Intervention Service (EIS) competing application 
process for FY 2009.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kathleen Treat, via e-mail 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#412a353324203501293332206f262e37"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="c9a2bdbbaca8bd89a1bbbaa8e7aea6bf">[email protected]</span></a>, or via telephone, 301-443-0493.

    Dated: September 10, 2008.
Elizabeth M. Duke,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. E8-21754 Filed 9-16-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4165-15-P


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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Western Pennsylvania Adventure Capital Fund, LLC on Form 10-Q for the period ended
June 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, G. Richard Patton, President, Chief Executive Officer of Western Pennsylvania Adventure Capital Fund, LLC certify to the best of
my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. (S) 1350, as adopted pursuant to (S) 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 Western Pennsylvania Adventure Capital Fund,
LLC.
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                               
|-----------------------------------------------
|/s/ G. Richard Patton                          
|G. Richard Patton                              
|President, Chief Executive Officer and Director

July 22, 2008

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Western Pennsylvania Adventure Capital Fund, LLC and will retained by Western Pennsylvania Adventure Capital Fund, LLC and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-2828

ELITE CHILD, INCORPORATED,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

SCHRODER CHESAPEAKE, INCORPORATED, t/a Greenbrier Mall; E. PRESTON GRISSOM, Individually

and in his capacity of Judge, Judicial Circuit

of Virginia, Circuit Court of the City of

Chesapeake,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Richard L. Williams, Senior District

Judge. (CA-98-488-2)

Submitted: June 17, 1999 Decided: June 24, 1999

Before MURNAGHAN and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Luther C. Edmonds, LUTHER C. EDMONDS, ESQUIRE, Virginia Beach,

Virginia, for Appellant. Mark L. Earley, Attorney General, Gregory

E. Lucyk, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Mary E. Shea,

Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia; Alan B. Rashkind,

FURNISS, DAVIS, RASHKIND & SAUNDERS, Norfolk, Virginia, for

Appellees.
2

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court’s order denying relief in

this action alleging racial discrimination in the termination of a

lease. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the

reasoning of the district court. See Elite Child, Inc. v. Schroder

Chesapeake, Inc., No. CA-98-488-2 (E.D. Va. Nov. 10, 1999). 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.

AFFIRMED
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Charles Murphy

v. Civil No. 08-cv-224-JD

United States of America

PROCEDURAL ORDER

The movant has filed a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to

vacate, set aside, or correct the sentence ordered by the court

in United States v. Charles Murphy, Cr. 05-cr-251-01-JD on May

30, 2007. The court has reviewed the motion.

The court orders the United States Attorney to file an

answer within sixty (60) days of the date of this order, which

answer shall provide a detailed response, with appropriate

references to the record when necessary, to each claim asserted

by the movant.

In the event that the United States Attorney contends that

the motion is not timely filed under the limitations provided for

in 28 U.S.C. § 2255 or that it is a second or successive motion,

Case 1:08-cv-00224-JD Document 4 Filed 06/11/08 Page 1 of 2
2

a motion to dismiss in lieu of a response shall be filed within

thirty (30) days of the date of this order.

 SO ORDERED.

____________________________

Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr.

District Judge

June 11, 2008

cc: Aixa Maldonado-Quinones, Esquire

Charles Murphy 03817-049, pro se

Case 1:08-cv-00224-JD Document 4 Filed 06/11/08 Page 2 of 2
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


          In connection with the Annual Report of The Dress Barn Inc. ("the
Company") on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ending July 31, 2004 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof ("the Report"), I,
David R. Jaffe, President and Chief Executive 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, to the best of my knowledge that:

          (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and

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

     The foregoing certification is provided solely for purposes of complying
with the provisions of Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and is not
intended to be used for any other purpose.




/S/ DAVID R. JAFFE
David R. Jaffe
President and Chief Executive Officer
October 13, 2004
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Daniel E. Ayer, Sr.

v. Civil No. 07-cv-304-SM

NH State Prison, Warden

NOTICE OF RULING

Re: Document No. 12. 

Ruling: Granted. Accordingly, the petition shall be served

upon the New Hampshire State Prison, which shall file an answer

or other pleading in response to the allegations made therein. 

See Rule 4 of the Rules Governing § 2254 Cases in the United

States District Court (“2254 Rule”) (requiring reviewing judge to

order a response to the petition). The Clerk’s office is

directed to serve the New Hampshire Office of the Attorney

General, as provided in the Agreement on Acceptance of Service,

copies of this Order, my November 7, 2007 Report and

Recommendation and Order (Document nos. 8 and 9) and the original

habeas petition (Document nos. 1 and 12). Respondent shall

answer or otherwise plead within thirty (30) days of the date of

this Order. The answer shall comply with the requirements of §

2254 Rule 5 (setting forth contents of the answer). 

Case 1:07-cv-00304-SM Document 13 Filed 12/07/07 Page 1 of 2
Upon receipt of the response, the Court will determine

whether a hearing is warranted. See § 2254 Rule 8 (providing

circumstances under which a hearing is appropriate). 

Petitioner is referred to Fed. R. Civ. P. 5, which requires

that every pleading, written motion, notice, and similar paper,

after the petition, shall be served on all parties. Such service

is to be made by mailing the material to the parties’

attorney(s).

James R. Muirhead

U.S. Magistrate Judge

Date: December 7, 2007

cc: Daniel E. Ayer, Sr., pro se

 Stephen Fuller, Esq.

 John Vinson, Esq.

 

Case 1:07-cv-00304-SM Document 13 Filed 12/07/07 Page 2 of 2
International Monetary Fund (IMF) in July 1974. Values are based on a weighted average of

exchange rates for the currencies of member countries. From July 1974 through December

1980, sixteen currencies were used; since January 1981, five currencies have been used. U.S.

$1,139 million; 1980$1,152 million; 1981$1,093 million; plus net transactions in SDRs.

4. Valued at current market exchange rates.

3.13 FOREIGN OFFICIAL ASSETS HELD AT FEDERAL RESERVE BANKS1

Millions of dollars, end of period

Asset 1998 1999 2000

2001

May June July Aug. Sept. Oct. Nov. Dec.p

1 Deposits .............................. 167 71 215 86 102 84 80 608 75 528 61

Held in custody

2 U.S. Treasury securities2 ................. 607,574 632,482 594,094 583,655 586,607 578,573 590,820 587,566 599,043 600,129 592,630

3 Earmarked gold3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,343 9,933 9,451 9,154 9,100 9,100 9,100 9,100 9,099 9,099 9,099

1. Excludes deposits and U.S. Treasury securities held for international and regional

organizations

2. Marketable U.S. Treasury bills, notes, and bonds and nonmarketable U.S. Treasury

securities, in each case measured at face (not market) value.

3. Held in foreign and international accounts and valued at $42.22 per fine troy ounce; not

included in the gold stock of the United States.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

 v. Case No. 07-cr-130-01-04-SM

Corey Donovan, Micah Donovan

Ian Burns, and Jay Lawrence

O R D E R

Defendant Ian Burn's assented-to motion to continue the trial (document no. 45)

is granted. Trial has been rescheduled for the January 2008 trial period. Defendant

Burns shall file a Waiver of Speedy Trial Rights not later than October 2, 2007. On the

filing of the waivers, his continuance shall be effective.

The court finds that the ends of justice served by granting a continuance outweigh

the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial, 18 U.S.C. §

3161(h)(8)(B)(iv), in that failure to grant a continuance would unreasonably deny the

defendant the reasonable time necessary for effective preparation taking into account

Case 1:07-cr-00130-SM Document 46 Filed 09/26/07 Page 1 of 2
2

the exercise of due diligence under the circumstances.

Final Pretrial Conference: December 17, 2007 at 9:30 AM

Jury Selection: January 8, 2008 at 9:30 AM

SO ORDERED.

September 26, 2007 _________________________

Steven J. McAuliffe

Chief Judge

cc: Terry Ollila, Esq.

 Liam D. Scully, Esq.

 Mark Sisti, Esq.

 Paul Garrity, Esq.

 Sven Wiberg, Esq.

 U. S. Probation

 U. S. Marshal

Case 1:07-cr-00130-SM Document 46 Filed 09/26/07 Page 2 of 2
Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed February 7, 2019.

In The 

Fourteenth Court of Appeals 

NO. 14-18-00532-CV

PEGGIE STOKES, PEGI JOHNSON, TONIECE WHITE, MADDISON 

WHITE, Appellants 

V.

STAR REALTY INC., ALAN GIRARD, AND MUZA GARARD, Appellees 

On Appeal from the 215th District Court 

Harris County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. 2017-19064 

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

This is an appeal from a judgment signed April 9, 2018. The reporter’s record 

was filed August 8, 2018. The clerk’s record was filed October 18, 2018. No brief 

was filed.

On December 6, 2018, this court issued an order stating that unless appellants

filed a brief on or before January 3, 2019, the court would dismiss the appeal for 
2

want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b). 

Appellants filed no brief or other response. Accordingly, the appeal is ordered 

dismissed.

 PER CURIAM 

Panel consists of Chief Justice Frost and Justices Jewell and Bourliot.
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1913 Introduced in House (IH)]

107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1913

To require the valuation of nontribal interest ownership of subsurface 
 rights within the boundaries of the Acoma Indian Reservation, and for 
                            other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 17, 2001

  Mr. Skeen introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                         Committee on Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To require the valuation of nontribal interest ownership of subsurface 
 rights within the boundaries of the Acoma Indian Reservation, and for 
                            other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. PUEBLO OF ACOMA LAND AND MINERAL CONSOLIDATION.

    (a) Valuation.--Not later than 6 months after the date of the 
enactment of this section, the Secretary of the Interior shall 
determine the extent and the value of the nontribal interest ownership 
of the subsurface rights, including mineral rights, within the 
boundaries of the Acoma Indian Reservation.
    (b) Land Exchanges.--Upon completion of the valuation required by 
subsection (a), the Secretary shall negotiate an exchange with any 
willing sellers of interests in nontribal land (including interests in 
mineral or other surface or subsurface rights) within the boundaries of 
the Acoma Indian Reservation for interests in Federal land that is--
            (1) located within the boundaries of the State of New 
        Mexico;
            (2) identified by the Bureau of Land Management as 
        available for disposal; and
            (3) of approximately the same value as the interest in land 
        for which it is being exchanged.
    (c) Timeline; Land Taken Into Trust.--The Secretary shall complete 
such negotiations and exchanges not later than 2 years after the date 
of the enactment of this section and shall place interests in land 
within the boundaries of the Acoma Indian Reservation that are acquired 
under this section into trust for the Pueblo of Acoma.
                                 <all>
```
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v.

IVORY CROW,

Defendant

- Appellant. No. 18

- 10066

D.C. No. 2:11

- cr

- 00285

- RJB

- 1

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Arizona

Robert J. Bryan, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted October 15, 2019 **

Before: FARRIS, LEAVY, and RAWLINSON, Circuit Judges.

Ivory Crow appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying his m otion

for r econsideration. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we vacate

and remand.

In his motion for reconsideration , Crow argued that he was denied his

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

OCT 21 2019

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 18

- 10066

constitutional right to be present at a critical stage of his criminal proceedings

when the district court amended his judgment and sentence in his absence, eight

days after the sentencing hearing

, 1 and that his federal sentences should not have

been aggre gated. The se arguments challenge the legality of Crow’s detention, and

would need to be raised in a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. See United States v.

Washington , 653 F.3d 1057, 1059 (9th Cir. 2011) (“ A federal prisoner who is

‘ claiming the right to be released upon the ground that the sentence was imposed in

violation of the Constitution or laws of the United States, ’ 28 U.S.C. § 2255(a),

may file a § 2255 motion with the district court that imposed the sentence. ”). At

the time Crow filed his motion for reconsideration, his first section 2255 motion

had already been adjudicated on the merits . Because Crow did not obtain this

court’s authorization to file another section 2255 motion, his m otion for

r econsideration should have been treated as a disgui sed second or successive

section 2255 motion over which the district court lacked jurisdiction. See 28

U.S.C. § 2255(h); Washington , 653 F.3d at 1065. Because the district court denied

Crow’s motion on the merits, we remand with instructions that the dis trict court

d eny the motion as an unauthorized second or successive section 2255 motion.

Crow’s motion to recuse the Honorable Robert J. Bryan on remand is

1 The j udgment and sentence was amended only to reflect the amount of restitution

to be paid.3 18

- 10066

denied, as Crow has made no showing that Judge Bryan’s impartiality might

reasonably be questioned o r that he has a personal bias or prejudice concerning

Crow. See Liteky v. United States , 510 U.S. 540, 547, 555 (1994).

Crow’s “ Motion in Arrest of Judgment ” is denied.

VACATED and REMANDED with instructions.
**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

 

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of BPZ Energy, Inc. (the “Company”) for the quarter ended March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Manuel Pablo Zuniga - Pflucker, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to and solely for the purpose of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:

 

(1)          The Report fully complies with the requirements of sections 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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/ Manuel Pablo Zuniga - Pflucker* |
|--------------------------------------|
| Manuel Pablo Zuniga - Pflucker       |
| Chief Executive Officer              |
| May 16, 2005                         |

 

 

 

----
|Structure Data for U.S. Banking Offices of Foreign Entities

Structure and Share | 
About




March 2019


By Country
  By Type
  ASCIIHome | 
Banking Information and RegulationAccessibility | 
Contact us
Last update: August 13, 2019
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------