alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Release dates |     Full version (300 KB PDF)Board Actions |     Actions under delegated authority        Applications and reports received:Boston | New York | Philadelphia   | Cleveland | Richmond   | AtlantaChicago | St. Louis | Minneapolis   | Kansas City | Dallas   | San Francisco

# Board Actions

## Actions taken during the week ending November 6, 2021

----

Personnel            Legal Division -- appointment of Reena Agrawal Sahni as associate general counsel and Asad Kudiya, Jay Schwarz, and Dafina Stewart as assistant general counsels.            -Approved, October 29, 2021            (A/C)                      Division of Research and Statistics -- appointment of Celso Brunetti, Marco Cagetti, and Kevin Moore as assistant directors.            -Approved, November 1, 2021            
Release dates |     Full version (300 KB PDF)Board Actions |     Actions under delegated authority    Applications and reports received:
14

A.9. Characteristics of Bank Loans to Farmers -- Large Farm Lenders, by Size of Loan, August 4-8, 2Percent except as noted

$1,000 to $10,000 to $25,000 to $50,000 to $100,000 

Loan characteristic All sizes $9,999 $24,999 $49,999 $99,999 $249,999 Volume of loans (thousands of dollars) 1,333,060 30,786 65,258 78,206 116,905 234,1Number of loans 16,401 5,566 4,349 2,304 1,776 1,5Weighted average maturity (months)1 23.12 9.20 10.21 10.13 12.99 20.

Weighted average repricing interval (months)2 3.70 1.70 3.46 3.54 4.61 4.4

Weighted average risk rating3 3.24 3.10 3.09 3.13 3.13 3.

Weighted average interest rate4 4.97 6.07 5.99 5.76 5.57 5. Standard error5 .27 .19 .17 .16 .17 .

 Interquartile range6 75th percentile 5.65 6.81 6.70 6.59 6.18 6.0 25th percentile 4.03 5.12 5.12 5.04 4.72 4. Purpose of loan Feeder livestock 5.36 6.25 6.07 5.12 5.61 5. Other livestock 4.86 5.75 5.74 4.99 5.07 4. Other current operating expenses7 5.14 6.08 6.01 5.85 5.69 5.

 Farm machinery and equipment 5.82 7.79 6.60 5.98 6.16 5. Farm real estate 5.91 6.38 5.93 6.81 6.11 6.4 Other8 4.51 5.51 5.54 5.38 5.00 4.

Share of total loan volume Features of loan Floating rates 86.99 85.77 79.45 80.72 79.01 83. Under commitment 76.87 84.90 83.45 78.55 78.56 72. Callable 16.26 27.83 26.85 25.25 25.55 20.4 Purpose of loan Feeder livestock 3.65 1.10 2.38 2.22 5.25 7.0 Other livestock 7.41 3.97 4.75 5.27 7.54 5. Other current operating expenses7 44.88 79.93 70.75 71.58 60.87 53.4 Farm machinery and equipment 3.76 2.59 7.41 5.16 6.19 7. Farm real estate 4.78 3.39 2.84 2.42 4.02 6. Other8 35.53 9.01 11.86 13.35 16.13 19.

 Type of collateral Farm real estate 19.57 6.84 5.75 8.14 9.71 13.4 Other 75.80 87.60 89.34 83.52 84.77 76. 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.
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 99.2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

            In connection with the Quarterly Report of FIRSTFED AMERICA BANCORP,
INC. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2002 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Edward A. Hjerpe, III, Chief Financial Officer, certify to the
best of my knowledge and belief, 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 as of and for the period covered by
                  the Report.

                                  /s/ Edward A. Hjerpe, III
                                  -----------------------------------------
                                  Executive Vice President, Chief Operating
                                  Officer and Chief Financial Officer
                                  November 14, 2002

                                       1
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-12-00025-CR

and

No. 10-13-00189-CR

GLEN DAVIS,

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

From the 13th District Court

Navarro County, Texas

Trial Court No. 22622-CR

and 

No. 10-13-00189-CR

IN RE GLEN DAVIS

______________

Original Proceeding

MEMORANDUM OPINION

We affirmed Glen Davis’s conviction on December 20, 2012, and the Court of 

Criminal Appeals refused his petition for discretionary review on March 27, 2013. See Davis 
Davis v. State Page 2

v. State, No. 10-12-00025-CR, 2012 Tex. App. LEXIS 10578 (Tex. App.—Waco, Dec. 20, 2012, 

pet. ref’d) (not designated for publication). In an attempt to obtain a free copy of the 

complete reporter’s record of his underlying criminal trial and conviction, Davis filed a 

motion with this Court on April 1, 2013. In that motion, he asked this Court ‚to order the 

District Court Clerk...to provide the defendant with a ‘complete’ copy of the court trial 

transcripts....‛ We denied the motion on April 18, 2013, and Davis filed a motion for 

rehearing on April 25, 2013. On reconsideration, we determined that the motion was more 

appropriately characterized as a petition for writ of mandamus and, after explanation, 

dismissed the petition for want of jurisdiction on May 9, 2013. See In re Davis, No. 10-13-

00154-CR, 2013 Tex. App. LEXIS 5737 (Tex. App.—Waco, May 9, 2013, orig. proceeding) 

(not designated for publication).

Davis has now filed another ‚Motion for Court Ordered Copy of Trial Transcripts‛ 

asking this Court ‚to order the District Court Clerk...to provide movant with a ‘complete’ 

copy of the court trial transcripts....‛ We again determine that this motion is more 

appropriately characterized as a petition for writ of mandamus.

As we informed Davis before, we have jurisdiction of a trial court clerk for purposes 

of issuing a writ of mandamus only when necessary to enforce our jurisdiction. TEX. GOV’T 

CODE ANN. § 22.221(a) (West 2004). However, by his express averments, Davis does not 

need the records sought to invoke this Court’s jurisdiction. Accordingly, ordering the clerk 

to provide the records sought is not for the purpose of protecting this Court’s jurisdiction. 
Davis v. State Page 3

We do not have jurisdiction to compel the district court clerk to provide the records 

sought. Therefore, the petition for writ of mandamus is dismissed.1

TOM GRAY

Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Davis, and

Justice Scoggins

Petition dismissed

Opinion issued and filed June 13, 2013

Do not publish

OT06

 

1 We direct the appellate court clerk to move Davis’s original motion filed on June 5, 2013, to a new 

mandamus proceeding styled In re Davis.
H. Res. 893 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

December 19, 2007. 

Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall 

be in order to take from the Speaker’s table the bill (H.R. 

2764) making appropriations for the Department of State, 

foreign operations, and related programs for the fiscal year 

ending September 30, 2008, and for other purposes, with the 

Senate amendment to the House amendments to the Senate 

amendment thereto, and to consider in the House, without 

intervention of any point of order except those arising under 

clause 10 of rule XXI, a motion offered by the chairman of 

the Committee on Appropriations or his designee that the 

House concur in the Senate amendment. The Senate amendment and the motion shall be considered as read. The motion 

shall be debatable for one hour equally divided and controlled 

by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the motion to its adoption without intervening motion. 
2 

•HRES 893 EH 

SEC. 2. Upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be 

in order to consider in the House the joint resolution (H.J. 

Res. 72) making further continuing appropriations for the 

fiscal year 2008, and for other purposes. All points of order 

against consideration of the joint resolution are waived except 

those arising under clause 9 or 10 of rule XXI. The joint resolution shall be considered as read. All points of order 

against provisions of the joint resolution are waived. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the joint resolution to final passage without intervening motion except: 

(1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the 

chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on 

Appropriations; and (2) one motion to recommit. 

SEC. 3. During consideration of House Joint Resolution 

72 or the motion to concur pursuant to this resolution, notwithstanding the operation of the previous question, the 

Chair may postpone further consideration of either measure 

to such time as may be designated by the Speaker. 

SEC. 4. House Resolution 849 is laid upon the table. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
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 of Burlington Coat Factory Investments
Holdings, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ending May 31, 2008,
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
“Report”), I, Todd Weyhrich, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial
Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted
pursuant to §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 position and results of operations of the
      Company.














Date:
August 29, 2008





/s/
      Todd WeyhrichTodd
      WeyhrichExecutive
      Vice President - Chief Financial Officer(Principal
      Financial Officer)
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

___________________________________

)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

V. ) No. 09-Cr-30-02-GZS 

)

ELAINE BROWN )

____________________________________)

UNOPPOSED MOTION TO CONTINUE SENTENCING HEARING

Defendant Elaine Brown through counsel respectfully moves that the sentencing hearing

be continued from September 3, 2009 to on or after October 2, 2009, so that she and counsel can

review pertinent portions of the trial transcript, which should be completed by then, and so that

counsel can keep her timely advised about his efforts to get a new trial.

Neither the government nor counsel for Edward Brown opposes the relief sought herein.

No memorandum accompanies this motion because it is unopposed.

WHEREFORE, it is respectfully moved that the Court grant said relief and such other and

further relief as may be just.

Respectfully submitted,

ELAINE BROWN 

By Her Attorney,

Date: August 18, 2009 /s/ Bjorn Lange 

Bjorn Lange (NHBA: 1426)

Assistant Federal Public Defender

Federal Defender Office

22 Bridge Street

Concord, NH 03301

 Tel. 603-226-7360

Bjorn_Lange@fd.org

Case 1:09-cr-00030-GZS Document 194 Filed 08/18/2009 Page 1 of 2
 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I Bjorn Lange hereby certify that on August 18, 2009, a copy of the foregoing was sent

via ECF to AUSA Terry L. Ollila, AUSA Arnold H. Huftalen, and Attorney Michael J. Iacopino

and that a copy will be hand-delivered to Elaine Brown at the Strafford County Department of

Corrections.

/s/ Bjorn Lange

 

Case 1:09-cr-00030-GZS Document 194 Filed 08/18/2009 Page 2 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Richard L. Duncan

v. Civil No. 08-cv-477-SM

Andrew Newcome, et al

O R D E R

Plaintiff’s request to proceed in forma pauperis is granted,

but pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915, as amended, the filing fee must

be paid as follows: the sum of $2.40 is due no later than January

9, 2009. In addition, 20% of each preceding month’s income

credited to plaintiff’s account to be remitted by the NH State

Prison for Men when the amount in the account exceeds $10.00

until the sum of $350.00 has been paid. Failure to pay the fee

as ordered will result in dismissal of the action without

prejudice. In all other respects plaintiff’s request for in

forma pauperis has been granted. 

SO ORDERED.

____________________________________

James R. Muirhead

United States Magistrate Judge

Date: December 9, 2008

cc: Richard L. Duncan, pro se

 Bonnie S. Reed, Financial Administrator

 NH State Prison for Men, Inmate Accounts

Case 1:08-cv-00477-SM Document 7 Filed 12/09/08 Page 1 of 1
10

A.6. Share of Non-real-estate Bank Loans with a Floating Interest Rate Made to FarmersPercent

Size of loan Si

Purpose of loan (thousands of dollars) 

Other Farm 

current machinery 3 10 25 100

All Feeder Other operating and to to to and Sma

Period loans livestock livestock expenses1 equipment Other2 9 24 99 over mid-

1998...... 54.4 55.0 59.4 68.5 46.7 42.0 57.6 54.8 62.7 51.1 1999...... 60.7 45.6 66.0 68.6 58.2 52.0 52.6 54.6 60.2 63.1 2000...... 66.9 57.3 60.7 67.0 62.2 76.7 53.4 54.6 61.8 74.5 2001...... 74.5 72.9 65.6 75.0 61.0 80.5 58.8 60.9 69.4 81.5 2002...... 75.1 64.6 65.4 75.8 60.9 84.1 67.8 64.5 68.4 81.2 2003...... 74.3 68.7 59.6 74.6 69.5 86.5 67.6 65.1 63.0 82.1 2004...... 74.3 67.2 47.5 73.4 71.2 91.3 65.8 63.7 63.1 79.9 2005...... 77.1 62.7 71.4 73.0 83.9 90.6 67.6 62.9 65.4 83.2 2006...... 75.3 56.9 68.0 70.4 84.1 91.8 68.7 66.1 65.5 79.8 2007...... 69.6 62.0 62.0 63.5 68.8 88.1 64.3 63.3 66.1 72.0 2008...... 75.9 69.0 71.2 72.1 59.2 90.2 66.2 63.3 68.7 79.7 2009...... 73.3 66.7 83.3 69.1 58.2 88.8 72.0 70.9 68.7 75.1 2006: Q2... 75.9 68.7 69.8 66.0 85.6 90.8 68.8 64.4 70.3 79.4  Q3... 78.3 43.0 64.3 81.2 78.5 96.6 76.9 72.9 62.9 83.5  Q4... 76.6 62.7 67.4 74.9 91.4 87.1 65.4 62.3 65.3 82.9 2007: Q1... 64.6 71.8 68.1 55.8 50.0 87.4 62.6 64.9 70.9 62.9  Q2... 71.4 55.6 75.2 65.5 70.8 90.0 63.9 65.3 71.3 73.3  Q3... 74.8 41.5 75.5 71.7 70.2 89.8 66.2 64.0 61.1 82.8  Q4... 69.1 65.5 43.5 64.6 77.1 86.1 64.6 59.1 61.3 73.1 2008: Q1... 68.7 71.7 48.9 62.6 47.5 91.4 56.9 53.5 64.3 71.5  Q2... 74.7 70.5 56.6 72.5 69.0 86.7 65.2 68.7 71.2 76.9  Q3... 82.1 57.8 81.5 82.6 54.6 91.3 70.2 63.9 70.8 87.7  Q4... 79.4 70.4 86.3 73.8 58.9 91.2 71.7 66.9 68.4 84.5 2009: Q1... 61.1 63.8 83.6 52.8 45.6 89.4 71.9 69.4 64.7 59.4  Q2... 77.8 49.0 84.1 77.2 39.6 94.5 68.8 71.4 70.4 82.2  Q3... 76.6 67.1 87.2 76.2 52.6 81.7 77.0 73.3 70.9 79.3  Q4... 83.8 74.7 77.9 85.6 79.0 89.4 69.7 69.4 69.4 90.6  Note. Data are estimates from the Federal Reserve System’s Survey of the Terms of Bank Lending to Farmers. Quarterly estimates annual rate and are based on loans made during the first full week of the second month of the quarter. 1. Loans used primarily to finance such items as current crop production expenses and the care and feeding of livestock (including p 2. Typically loans for which the lender does not know the purpose. 3. Portfolios with $25 million or less in farm loans. 4. Portfolios with more than $25 million in farm loans.
Release dates | Full version (300 KB PDF)Actions by the Board | Actions   under delegated authority  Applications and reports:Boston |New York |Philadelphia |Cleveland |Richmond |AtlantaChicago |St. Louis |Minneapolis |Kansas City |Dallas |San FranciscoDistrict: 1Federal Reserve Bank of: BostonFilings received during the week ending October 3, 2015FilerFiling TypeFiling ProposalEnd of Comment PeriodMAINE COMMUNITY BANCORP, MHC                                                                                            * 3A1
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v David Anderson, Appellant.

[808 NYS2d 638]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Bernard J. Fried, J, on dismissal motion; Charles J. Tejada, J., at jury trial and sentence), rendered December 16, 2003, convicting defendant of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third and fourth degrees, and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent terms of 7 to 14, 7 to 14 and 6 to 12 years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

Counsel’s failure to effectuate defendant’s right to testify before the grand jury did not constitute ineffective assistance *(People v Wiggins,*89 NY2d 872 [1996]).

The court properly denied defendant’s application pursuant to *Batson v Kentucky*(476 US 79 [1986]). The record supports the court’s finding that the nondiscriminatory reasons provided by the prosecutor for the peremptory challenges in question were not pretextual. This finding is entitled to great deference *(see People v Hernandez,*75 NY2d 350 [1990], *affd*500 US 352 [1991]). While defendant also attacks certain challenges for cause made by the prosecutor to other panelists, *Batson*and its progeny address peremptory challenges, not challenges for cause *(see e.g. United States v Elliott,*89 F3d 1360, 1364-1365 [8th Cir 1996], *cert denied*519 US 1118 [1997]). In any event, these challenges were made in good faith and were properly granted by the court. We find nothing in the challenges for cause that suggests racial discrimination or provides any support for defendant’s *Batson*claim.

Defendant’s challenges to the People’s summation are unpreserved and we decline to review them in the interest of justice. Were we to review these claims, we would find that the challenged remarks generally constituted fair comment on the *339evidence made in response to defense arguments, and that the summation did not deprive defendant of a fair trial *(see People v Overlee,*236 AD2d 133 [1997], *lv denied*91 NY2d 976 [1998]; *People v D'Alessandro,*184 AD2d 114, 118-119 [1992], *lv denied*81 NY2d 884 [1993]).

We perceive no basis for reducing the sentence. Concur— Tom, J.P., Andrias, Gonzalez and Sweeny, JJ.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

                                  CALTON, INC.
     CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
                            (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)


        In connection with the annual report of Calton, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ended November 30, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Laura
A. Camisa, 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 in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
        the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated:  February 24, 2005         By:  /s/ Laura A. Camisa
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                       Laura A. Camisa
                                       CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                                       (PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL AND ACCOUNTING
                                        OFFICER)
**Exhibit
        32.01**
 
 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 Westside Energy Corporation (the
        "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended June 30, 2006 as filed with
        the
        Securities and Exchange Commission on or about the date hereof ("Report"),
        the
        undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby
        certifies pursuant 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
        906 of
        the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to knowledge:
 
 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.
  Dated:November
                  20,2006
              
              /s/
                  Douglas G. MannerDouglas
                  G. Manner,Chief
                  Executive
                  Officer
#### In the Matter of Kristin Nilsen, Respondent, v Robert Slowey, Appellant.

[806 NYS2d 882]

In a family offense proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 8, Robert Slowey appeals from an order of protection of the Family Court, Suffolk County (Lynaugh, J.), dated September 8, 2004, which, upon a finding made after a hearing that he had committed acts which would constitute the offense of harassment in the second degree, inter alia, directed him to stay away from petitioner’s home and place of,employment until September 8, 2006. Assigned counsel has submitted a brief in accordance with *Anders v California*(386 US 738 [1967]) in which he moves to be relieved as assigned counsel.

Ordered that the order of protection is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

We have reviewed the record and agree with the appellant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted *(see Anders v California, supra; Lara v Vasquez,*103 AD2d 681 [1984]; *cf. Matter of Kotzker v Bonafilia,*284 AD2d 535 [2001]). Florio, J.P., Krausman, Lifson and Lunn, JJ, concur.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 13.2

                                  CERTIFICATION
                                       of
                            Periodic Financial Report
      Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C.
                                  Section 1350

I, Andre Y. Fortier, acting as Chief Financial Officer of Campbell Resources
Inc., hereby certify that the Annual Report on Form 20-F for the Fiscal Year
ended December 31, 2005 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained
in the periodic report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of Campbell Resources Inc.

Date: March 31, 2006.


                                        By: /s/ Andre Y. Fortier
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Andre Y. Fortier
                                            Acting as Chief Financial Officer

This certification is made solely for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
subject to the knowledge standard set forth therein, and not for any other
purpose. It is not being filed as part of the Annual Report or as a separate
disclosure document.