alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
*Release Date: September 30, 2005*

*Other formats:*
ASCII (4 KB)
PDF (3 KB)
CSV (1 KB)

----

```
C.5. Average Variable Interest Rates on Farm Loans
Percent
```

| Quarter | Other operating loans1 | Intermediate non-real-estate loans | Long-term real estate loans |
|---------|------------------------|------------------------------------|-----------------------------|
||
| 6.3     | 6.2                    | 5.9                                |
| 6.2     | 6.1                    | 5.7                                |
| 6.1     | 6.1                    | 5.7                                |
| 6.3     | 6.3                    | 5.8                                |
| 6.4     | 6.3                    | 6.0                                |
| 6.6     | 6.5                    | 6.2                                |
| 6.8     | 6.8                    | 6.4                                |
| 7.1     | 7.1                    | 6.7                                |
| 7.4     | 7.3                    | 6.9                                |
||
| 6.9     | 6.8                    | 6.3                                |
| 6.7     | 6.6                    | 6.1                                |
| 6.7     | 6.6                    | 6.2                                |
| 6.7     | 6.6                    | 6.1                                |
| 6.7     | 6.6                    | 6.1                                |
| 7.3     | 6.8                    | 6.4                                |
| 7.3     | 7.1                    | 6.6                                |
| 7.5     | 7.3                    | 6.8                                |
| 7.7     | 7.5                    | 7.0                                |
||
| 5.2     | 5.3                    | 5.2                                |
| 5.1     | 5.3                    | 5.6                                |
| 4.6     | 4.9                    | 5.7                                |
| 5.8     | 6.2                    | 6.3                                |
| 6.0     | 6.2                    | 6.6                                |
| 6.2     | 6.6                    | 6.8                                |
| 6.7     | 7.0                    | 6.9                                |
| 7.1     | 7.3                    | 7.3                                |
| 7.4     | 7.7                    | 7.5                                |
```
1. Loans used primarily to finance such items as current crop production expenses
and the care and feeding of livestock (including poultry). Return to table
   * State falls only partly within the indicated Reserve District.
   n.a. Not available.
   Source. Federal Reserve Bank quarterly surveys of agricultural credit conditions at
commercial banks.
```

*Other formats:*
ASCII (4 KB)
PDF (3 KB)
CSV (1 KB)

Statistical releases

----

HomeEconomic research and dataAccessibilityContact Us
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2048 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

  1st Session
                                H. R. 2048

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 6, 2001

  Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To require a report on the operations of the State Justice Institute.

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

SECTION 1. REPORT BY ATTORNEY GENERAL ON STATE JUSTICE INSTITUTE.

    Section 213 of the State Justice Institute Act of 1984 (42 U.S.C. 
10712) is amended by striking ``On October 1, 1987'' and inserting 
``Not later than October 1, 2002''.

            Passed the House of Representatives September 5, 2001.

            Attest:

                                                 JEFF TRANDAHL,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
Exhibit 21.1
                                                      Jurisdiction of
                                                      Incorporation
                                                      ------------------
First Tier Subsidiaries of Registrant:

Financial Trust Services Company                        Pennsylvania
Keystone Financial Bank, N.A.                           United States
Keystone Financial Unlimited, Inc.                      Pennsylvania
Key Trust Company                                       Pennsylvania
Keystone CDC, Inc.                                      Pennsylvania
Keystone Financial Community Development Corporation I  Pennsylvania
Keystone Financial Life Insurance Company               Arizona
Keystone Financial Mid-Atlantic Funding Corporation     Pennsylvania
Keystone Investment Services, Inc.                      Delaware
Martindale Andres & Company                             Pennsylvania
MMC&P Retirement Benefit Services, Inc.                 Pennsylvania

Second Tier Subsidiaries of Registrant:

Keystone Financial Mortgage Corporation                 Pennsylvania
Keystone Brokerage, Inc.                                Pennsylvania
ATB Holding Company, Inc.                               Delaware
ATB Real Estate Investment Trust, Inc.                  Maryland

                                      
<PAGE>
<PAGE>   1
                         INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

The Board of Directors
Jefferies Group, Inc.:

We consent to incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements No.
2-94727 dated December 6, 1984; No. 33-17065 dated September 8, 1987; No.
33-19741 dated January 21, 1988; No. 33-64318 dated May 27, 1993; No. 33-64490
dated June 15, 1993; No. 33-52139 dated February 3, 1994; No. 33-54373 dated
June 30, 1994, and No. 333-02489, all on Form S-8, and No. 33-54265 dated July
14, 1994 on Form S-4 of Jefferies Group, Inc. of our report dated January 24,
1997, relating to the consolidated statements of financial condition of
Jefferies Group, Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 1996 and 1995, and
the related consolidated statements of operations, changes in stockholders'
equity and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended
December 31, 1996, which report appears in the December 31, 1996 annual report
on Form 10-K of Jefferies Group, Inc.


                                        KPMG PEAT MARWICK, LLP
                                        ------------------------
                                        KPMG Peat Marwick, LLP

Los Angeles, California
March 27, 1997
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>               5
<LEGEND>
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                   0001023877
<NAME>                  Goung Hei Investment Co., Ltd.
<MULTIPLIER>                                                1
<CURRENCY>                                         US Dollars

<S>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>           3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                 DEC-31-1992
<PERIOD-START>                                    JAN-01-1992
<PERIOD-END>                                      JUN-30-1992
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                             1
<CASH>                                                      0
<SECURITIES>                                                0
<RECEIVABLES>                                               0
<ALLOWANCES>                                                0
<INVENTORY>                                                 0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                            0
<PP&E>                                                      0
<DEPRECIATION>                                              0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                             30
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                       0
<BONDS>                                                     0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                       0
<PREFERRED>                                                 0
<COMMON>                                                   17
<OTHER-SE>                                                 13
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                               30
<SALES>                                                     0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                            0
<CGS>                                                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                              14
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                            0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                            0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                          0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                          (14)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                      (14)
<DISCONTINUED>                                              0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                             0
<CHANGES>                                                   0
<NET-INCOME>                                             (14)
<EPS-BASIC>                                               0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                               0



</TABLE>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Karen S. Bartlett, et al.

v. Civil No. 08-cv-00358-JL

Mutual Pharmaceutical

Company, Inc., et al.

O R D E R

Defendants having moved the court for an Order to Show Cause

as to why plaintiffs’ experts should not be stricken; and the

court having considered said motion and the parties’ positions

set forth during an October 9, 2009, telephonic hearing, and

being otherwise sufficiently advised; the court hereby enters

this amended scheduling order, as proposed by the parties:

• Fact Discovery Completion: November 15, 2009

• Defendant’s Expert Reports: October 22, 2009

• Plaintiffs’ Expert Depositions

Complete: November 18, 2009

• “DiBenedetto” Disclosure: November 18, 2009

• Defendants’ Expert Report

Supplementation: January 5, 2010

• Defendants’ Expert Depositions

Completed: January 15, 2010

• Expert Discovery Completion: January 15, 2010

Case 1:08-cv-00358-JL Document 95 Filed 10/23/09 Page 1 of 3
2

• Completion of All

Discovery: January 15, 2010

• Challenges to Expert

Testimony: January 25, 2010

• Summary Judgment: February 1, 2010

• Motions in Limine: 20 days prior to Final

Pretrial Conference. 

Response/Objections due 10

days prior to Final Pretrial

Conference.

Discovery disputes. As is the court’s practice, discovery

disputes will continue to be handled by the undersigned judge, as

opposed to the Magistrate Judge, in the normal course. Motions

to compel are disfavored. The party or counsel seeking

discovery-related relief should confer with adverse counsel to

choose mutually available dates, and then contact the Deputy

Clerk to schedule a conference call with the court. The court

will inform counsel and parties what written materials, if any,

should be submitted in advance of the conference call.

Customary motions to compel discovery, while disfavored by

the undersigned judge, are nonetheless permissible. If counsel

prefer traditional discovery litigation to the conference call

procedure set forth above, any such motion to compel should

expressly request, in the title of the motion, a referral to the

United States Magistrate Judge. Such referral requests will

normally be granted.

Case 1:08-cv-00358-JL Document 95 Filed 10/23/09 Page 2 of 3
3

SO ORDERED.

____________________________

Joseph N. Laplante

United States District Judge

Dated: October 23, 2009

cc: Bryan Ballew, Esq.

Keith M. Jensen, Esq.

Patrick J. O’Neal, Esq.

Christine M. Craig, Esq.

Timothy B. Beaupre, Esq.

Jeffrey D. Geoppinger, Esq.

Joseph P. Thomas, Esq.

Paul J. Cosgrove, Esq.

Linda E. Maichl, Esq.

Stephen J. Judge, Esq.

Case 1:08-cv-00358-JL Document 95 Filed 10/23/09 Page 3 of 3
1

The Honorable Ralph R. Erickson, United States District Judge for the District

of North Dakota.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 06-1836

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* District of North Dakota.

Tyler Joseph Berglund, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: June 6, 2007

Filed: June 22, 2007

___________

Before RILEY, MAGILL, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Tyler Joseph Berglund (Berglund) appeals the 282-month prison sentence the

district court1

 imposed after Berglund pled guilty to drug conspiracy and firearms

charges. In a brief filed under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), his counsel

argues that the district court’s sentence was “[e]rroneously [e]xaggerated by a

[m]isapplication of the Sentencing Guidelines” and that the court erred in failing to

grant a greater downward departure at sentencing.
-2-

We enforce the broad appeal waiver included in Berglund’s plea agreement

because (1) the plea colloquy reflects that Berglund understood and voluntarily

accepted the terms of the plea agreement, including the waiver; (2) this appeal falls

within the scope of the waiver; and (3) no injustice would result. See United States

v. Andis, 333 F.3d 886, 889-92 (8th Cir. 2003) (en banc) (discussing enforceability

of appeal waiver); see also United States v. Estrada-Bahena, 201 F.3d 1070, 1071 (8th

Cir. 2000) (per curiam) (enforcing appeal waiver in Anders case).

Having reviewed the record independently pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488

U.S. 75, 80 (1988), for any nonfrivolous issue not covered by the waiver, we find

none. Therefore, we enforce the waiver and dismiss the appeal. We also grant

counsel’s motion to withdraw.

______________________________
<PAGE>

                                                                 (Exhibit (23.2)

                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form
S-8 No. 33-82800) pertaining to First Oak Brook Bancshares, Inc. 1987 Stock
Option Plan, the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-75025) pertaining to
First Oak Brook Bancshares, Inc. Amended and Restated 1987 Stock Option Plan and
the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-89647) pertaining to First Oak
Brook Bancshares, Inc. Directors Stock Plan of our report dated January 20,
1998, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of First Oak Brook
Bancshares, Inc. included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended
December 31, 1999.



/s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Chicago, Illinois
March 27, 2000
---

All files contain data as of the current quarter. Files in comma-separated variable 
(CSV) format contain all available historical data.

|Summary Charts                                                        
|----------------------------------------------------------------------
|PDF (11 KB)                                                           
|                                                                      
|
|                                                                      
|A.1. Number of Non-real-estate Bank Loans                             
|ASCII (5 KB)                                                          
|A.2. Average Size of Non-real-estate Bank Loans                       
|ASCII (6 KB)                                                          
|A.3. Volume of Non-real-estate Bank Loans                             
|ASCII (5 KB)                                                          
|A.4. Average Maturity of Non-real-estate Bank Loans                   
|ASCII (5 KB)                                                          
|A.5. Average Effective Interest Rate on Non-real-estate Bank          
|ASCII (5 KB)                                                          
|A.6. Share of Non-real-estate Bank Loans with a Floating Interest Rate
|ASCII (5 KB)                                                          
|A.7. Distribution of Dollar Amount of Non-real-estate Farm Loans      
|ASCII (5 KB)                                                          
|A.8. All Banks, by Size of Loan                                       
|ASCII (7 KB)                                                          
|A.9. Large Farm Lenders, by Size of Loan                              
|ASCII (4 KB)                                                          
|A.10. Small and Mid-sized Farm Lenders                                
|ASCII (4 KB)                                                          
|A.11. All Banks, by Risk Rating                                       
|ASCII (4 KB)                                                          
|A.12. Large Farm Lenders                                              
|ASCII (5 KB)                                                          
|A.13. Small and Mid-sized Farm Lenders                                
|ASCII (5 KB)                                                          
|A.14. Regional Disaggregation of Survey Results                       
|ASCII (5 KB)                                                          

Statistical releases

---

Home Economic research and data  Accessibility Contact Us  Last update: March 26, 2008
Case 1:08-cv-00406-JL   Document 25   Filed 09/29/10   Page 1 of 2

Case 1:08-cv-00406-JL   Document 25   Filed 09/29/10   Page 2 of 2
# U ni te d S ta te s Co ur t of A pp ea ls For the Eig hth Circu it

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ No. 1 6- 37 31

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ _ Uni te d S ta te s o f Am eri ca
ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Pla in ti

ff - App el le e

v.
Aaro n B y rd
ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll ll l Defe nd

an t - Ap pe ll an t

__ __ __ __ __ __ App eal fro m

Uni te d S ta te s Di st ric t Co ur t fo r th e Weste rn Dis tri ct of M is so ur i - Kan sa s C it y

__ __ __ __ __ __ Su bm it te d: May 17, 2 01 7 Fi le d: Ju ne 2, 2 01 7 [Un pu bl is he d]

__ __ __ __ __ __ Befo re LOKEN, MURPHY, and BENTON, Circu it Ju dg es
.

__ __ __ __ __ __ PER CURI AM.

Aaro n By rd di rect ly ap pe al s th e wit hi n- Sen te nc in g Gui de li ne s se nt en ce im po se d by th e di st ric t co ur t aft er he pl ead ed gu il ty to a dr ug co ns pi racy of fen se , 1

The Hon or ab le Gary A. Fen ne r, Uni te d St at es Dis tri ct Ju dg e fo r th e W es te rn 1 Dis tri ct of M is so ur i.pu rs ua nt to a writ te n pl ea ag reem en t th at co nt ai ne d a waiv er of th e rig ht to ap pe al hi s

co nv ic ti on an d se nt en ce ex cep t on en um erat ed gr ou nd s. By rd ’s co un se l ha s m ov ed to wit hd raw, a nd in a br ie f fil ed un de r And ers v. Cal ifo rn ia , 38 6 U.S. 73 8 (1 96 7) , co un se l ch al le ng es th e se nt en ce as su bs ta nt iv el y un reas on ab le an d co nt es ts th e ap pl ic at io n o f cer ta in Gui de li ne s en ha nc em en ts

.
We wil l en fo rce th e ap pe al waiv er in th is cas e, be cau se ou r rev ie w of th e
reco rd de m on st rat es th at By rd en te red in to th e pl ea ag reem en t an d th e ap pe al waiv er kn owi ng ly an d vo lu nt ari ly; th e arg um en ts pr es en te d fal l wit hi n th e sc op e of th e ap pe al waiv er; an d no m is carr ia ge of jus ti ce wou ld res ul t fro m en fo rci ng th e waiv er. See Uni te d St at es v. And is , 33 3 F.3 d 88 6, 88 9- 92 (8 th Ci r. 20 03 ) (en ba nc ). Hav in g in de pe nd en tl y rev ie wed th e reco rd un de r Pen so n v. Ohi o, 48 8 U.S. 75 (1 98 8) , we fin d

no no nf riv ol ou s i ss ue s fo r ap pe al fal li ng ou ts id e th e sc op e o f th e ap pe al waiv er.

Acco rd in gl y , w e g r a nt co un se l’s m ot io n to wit hd raw, an d we di sm is s th is ap pe al

.

__ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __ __

-2

-
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Vaughn Jones, Appellant.

[807 NYS2d 653]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme *810Court, Queens County (Eng, J.), rendered May 20, 2003, convicting him of robbery in the first degree (two counts), robbery in the second degree, and criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The Supreme Court’s determination that the defendant was fit to proceed must be accorded great deference (see *People v Marino,*13 AD3d 556 [2004]; *People v Abreu,*303 AD2d 685 [2003]). Contrary to the defendant’s contentions, the Supreme Court, which was entitled to rely, inter alia, on the numerous pretrial examination reports finding the defendant fit to proceed, including one dated less than two weeks before the commencement of trial, as well as its own observations of, and interactions with, the defendant, providently exercised its discretion in denying the defendant’s repeated applications for additional competency examinations *(see*CPL 730.10, 730.30; *People v Morgan,*87 NY2d 878, 879-880 [1995]; *People v Jordan,*21 AD3d 1039 [2005]; *People v King,*12 AD3d 532, 533 [2004]; *People v Sinclair,*268 AD2d 540 [2000]). The People sustained their burden of proving, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the defendant was not an incapacitated person *(see*CPL 730.10 [1]; *People v Mendez,*1 NY3d 15, 19 [2003]; *People v Marino, supra*at 556). Schmidt, J.P., Krausman, Luciano and Covello, JJ., concur.
38

C.5. Average Variable Interest Rates on Farm Loans

Percent

Other operating Intermediate non-real- Long-term real

Quarter loans1estate loans estate loans

 Ninth (Minneapolis) Federal Reserve District (MI*, MN, MT, ND, SD, WI*)

2003: Q4... 6.1 6.1 5.7

2004: Q1... 6.3 6.3 5.8

 Q2... 6.4 6.3 6.0

 Q3... 6.6 6.5 6.2

 Q4... 6.8 6.8 6.4

2005: Q1... 7.1 7.1 6.7

 Q2... 7.4 7.3 6.9

 Q3... 7.7 7.7 7.2

 Q4... 8.1 8.0 7.6

 Tenth (Kansas City) Federal Reserve District (CO, KS, MO*, NE, NM*, OK, WY)

2003: Q4... 6.7 6.6 6.2

2004: Q1... 6.7 6.6 6.1

 Q2... 6.7 6.6 6.1

 Q3... 7.3 6.8 6.4

 Q4... 7.3 7.1 6.6

2005: Q1... 7.5 7.3 6.8

 Q2... 7.7 7.5 7.0

 Q3... 8.1 7.9 7.3

 Q4... 8.4 8.2 7.6

 Twelfth (San Francisco) Federal Reserve District (AL, AZ, CA, HI, ID, NV, OR, UT, WA)

2003: Q4... 4.6 4.9 5.7

2004: Q1... 5.7 6.1 6.2

 Q2... 6.0 6.2 6.6

 Q3... 6.2 6.6 6.8

 Q4... 6.7 7.0 6.9

2005: Q1... 7.1 7.3 7.3

 Q2... 7.4 7.7 7.5

 Q3... 7.9 8.0 7.8

 Q4... 8.8 8.8 8.5

 1. Loans used primarily to finance such items as current crop production expenses and the care and

feeding of livestock (including poultry).

 * State falls only partly within the indicated Reserve District.

 n.a. Not available.

 Source. Federal Reserve Bank quarterly surveys of agricultural credit conditions at commercial banks.
1The objection appears to be an amateurish pro se effort

unworthy of counsel.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Robert Benjamin

DLC Services Corp.

v. Civil No. 08-cv-422-SM

Riley More & More Enterprises, LLC, et al

O R D E R

Defendant Riley, More & More Enterprises, (“Riley”) seeks to

compel answers to interrogatories and requests for production

directed to DLC Services Corp. (“DLC”) and requests for documents

directed to Robert benjamin (“Benjamin”). DLC provided no

responses to either. Benjamin provided no responses to the

document requests.

Plaintiffs did not respond to the discovery requests and the

“objection” to the motion is too little, too late.1 Plaintiffs

were required to respond to the Fed. R. Civ. P. Rule 33 and 34

discovery within thirty (30) days and in accordance with these

rules. Failure to do so waives any objections.

The motion (doc. no. 88) is granted and is to be complied

Case 1:08-cv-00422-SM Document 102 Filed 12/10/09 Page 1 of 2
with within fourteen (14) calendar days.

SO ORDERED.

____________________________________

James R. Muirhead

United States Magistrate Judge

Date: December 10, 2009

cc: All Counsel of Record

 

Case 1:08-cv-00422-SM Document 102 Filed 12/10/09 Page 2 of 2