alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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: 6Federal Reserve Bank of: AtlantaFilings received during the week ending September 18, 2010FilerFiling TypeFiling ProposalEnd of Comment PeriodPALM BEACH COMMUNITY BANK                                                                                               * BranchPalm Beach Community Bank, Boynton Beach, Florida, to establish a branch located at 8101 Okeechobee Boulevard, West Palm Beach, Florida.Newspaper: 09/22/2010Federal Register: Not applicable
IV 

House Calendar No. 3 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 86 

[Report No. 110–3] 

Providing for consideration of the resolution (H. Res. 78) amending the 

Rules of the House of Representatives to permit Delegates and the 

Resident Commissioner to the Congress to cast votes in the Committee 

of the Whole House on the state of the Union. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 23, 2007 

Mr. HASTINGS of Florida, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered 

to be printed 

RESOLUTION 

Providing for consideration of the resolution (H. Res. 78) 

amending the Rules of the House of Representatives 

to permit Delegates and the Resident Commissioner to 

the Congress to cast votes in the Committee of the 

Whole House on the state of the Union. 

1 Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution 

2 it shall be in order without intervention of any point of 

3 order to consider in the House the resolution (H. Res. 78) 

4 amending the Rules of the House of Representatives to 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMBILLS
2 

HRES 86 RH 

1 permit Delegates and the Resident Commissioner to the 

2 Congress to cast votes in the Committee of the Whole 

3 House on the state of the Union. The resolution shall be 

4 considered as read. The previous question shall be consid5 ered as ordered on the resolution and on any amendment 

6 thereto to final adoption without intervening motion or de7 mand for division of the question except: (1) one hour of 

8 debate on the resolution equally divided and controlled by 

9 the chairman and ranking minority member of the Com10 mittee on Rules; (2) the amendment printed in the report 

11 of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution, 

12 if offered by Representative Kirk of Illinois or his des13 ignee, which shall be in order without intervention of any 

14 point of order or demand for division of the question, shall 

15 be considered as read, and shall be separately debatable 

16 for 20 minutes equally divided and controlled by the pro17 ponent and an opponent; and (3) one motion to recommit 

18 which may not contain instructions. 

19 SEC. 2. During consideration of H. Res. 78 pursuant 

20 to this resolution, notwithstanding the operation of the 

21 previous question, the Chair may postpone further consid22 eration of the bill to a time designated by the Speaker. 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMBILLS

hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMBILLS
House Calendar No. 3 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 86 

[Report No. 110

–3] 

RESOLUTION 

Providing for consideration of the resolution (H. 

the state of the Union. votes in the Committee of the Whole House on Resident Commissioner to the Congress to cast Representatives to permit Delegates and the Res. 78) amending the Rules of the House of 

JANUARY 23, 2007 

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 

printed 


hmoore on PROD1PC68 with HMBILLS
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 189 (Monday, September 29, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 56611]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-22661]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--Digital Entertainment Content Ecosystem (DECE) 
LLC

    Notice is hereby given that, on August 25, 2008, pursuant to 
Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 
1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), Digital Entertainment 
Content Ecosystem (DECE) LLC (``DECE'') has filed written notifications 
simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade 
Commission disclosing (1) the name and principal place of business of 
the standards development organization and (2) the nature and scope of 
its standards development activities. The notifications were filed for 
the purpose of invoking the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of 
antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances.
    Pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act, the name and principal place 
of business of the standards development organization is: Digital 
Entertainment Content Ecosystem (DECE) LLC, Culver City, CA. The nature 
and scope of DECE's standards development activities are: (1) To enable 
the delivery of digital entertainment content in a manner that allows 
for interoperability among digital formats and digital rights 
management systems; and (2) to develop specifications accordingly.

Patricia A. Brink,
Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. E8-22661 Filed 9-26-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Industrial Tower

and Wireless, LLC

v. Civil No. 08-cv-00122-JL

Town of Epping

O R D E R

The Preliminary Pretrial Conference currently scheduled for

June 17, 2008 at 11:00 a.m. will include a substantive,

meaningful discussion of the parties’ claims and defenses. 

Counsel are expected to be prepared to engage in an open,

cooperative discussion in good faith. Counsel are reminded of

the obligations imposed by Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(b)(3) and (4), and

should be prepared to explain the factual basis underlying any

claims or defenses they have pleaded.

Each party shall be represented at the Preliminary Pretrial

Conference by counsel authorized to bind the party on all

matters.

To the extent that the substance of this order constitutes a

departure from the customary Preliminary Pretrial practice to

Case 1:08-cv-00122-JL Document 10 Filed 06/12/08 Page 1 of 2
2

which counsel are accustomed, the court apologizes for the short

notice, and will bear this in mind at the conference.

SO ORDERED.

____________________________

Joseph N. Laplante

United States District Judge

Dated: June 12, 2008

cc: Lawrence M. Edelman, Esq.

Robert M. Derosier, Esq.

John J. Ratigan, Esq.

Case 1:08-cv-00122-JL Document 10 Filed 06/12/08 Page 2 of 2
##### 



EXHIBIT 32 INTERWEST MEDICAL CORPORATION
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2003 (18 USC 1350) The undersigned, Arch B. Gilbert, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of
InterWest Medical Corporation (the Company), has executed this Certification in connection with the
filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission of the Companys current report on Form 10-K
(the Report). The undersigned hereby certifies that:  
    
    the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
    
    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
of the Company. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the
undersigned has executed this Certification as of the 28th day
of December 2004. /s/ Arch B. GilbertArch B. GilbertPresident, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
Order entered January 20, 2023

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 21

- 01172

- CV

VETRI VENTURES, LLC , Appellant

V.

WESTRIDGE EAGLES NEST OWNERS ASSOCIATION , Appellee

O n Appeal from the 429th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 429

- 02865

- 2019

O RDER

Before the Court is appellee’s January 18, 2023 unopposed third motion for

an extension of time to file its brief. We GRANT the motion and ex tend the time

to February 1, 2023 . We again caution appellee that further extension requests

will be disfavored.

/s/ BONNIE LEE GOLDSTEIN JUSTICE
IV 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 91 

Demanding the return of the U.S.S. Pueblo to the United States Navy 

from North Korea. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 23, 2007 

Mr. SALAZAR submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Foreign Affairs 

RESOLUTION 

Demanding the return of the U.S.S. Pueblo to the United 

States Navy from North Korea. 

Whereas the U.S.S. Pueblo, which was attacked and captured 

by the North Korean Navy on January 23, 1968, was the 

first United States Navy ship in over 150 years to be hijacked on the high seas by a foreign military force; 

Whereas one member of the U.S.S. Pueblo crew, Duane 

Hodges, was killed in the assault while the other 82 crew 

members were held in captivity, often under inhumane 

conditions, for 11 months; 

Whereas the U.S.S. Pueblo, an intelligence collection auxiliary vessel, was operating in international waters at the 

time of the capture, and therefore did not violate North 

Korean territorial waters; 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with BILLS
2 

•HRES 91 IH 

Whereas the capture of the U.S.S. Pueblo resulted in no reprisals against the Government or people of North Korea 

and no military action at any time; and 

Whereas the U.S.S. Pueblo, though still the property of the 

United States Navy, has been retained by North Korea 

for more than 30 years, was subjected to exhibition in 

the North Korean cities of Wonsan and Hungham, and 

is now on display in Pyongyang, the capital city: Now, 

therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) demands the return of the U.S.S. Pueblo to 

3 the United States Navy from North Korea; and 

4 (2) directs the Clerk of the House of Represent5 atives to transmit copies of this resolution to the 

6 President, the Secretary of Defense, and the Sec7 retary of State. 

Æ 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with BILLS
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 190 (Tuesday, September 30, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 56854]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-22999]



[[Page 56854]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Office of the Secretary


Privacy Act of 1974; Retirement of System of Records

AGENCY:  Privacy Office, DHS.

ACTION:  Notice of the retirement of one Privacy Act systems of records 
notice.

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

SUMMARY:  In accordance with the Privacy Act of 1974, the Department of 
Homeland Security is giving notice that it proposes to retire the 
following Privacy Act system of records notice, DOE-33 Personnel 
Medical Records System (60 FR 33510 June 28, 1995), from its inventory 
of record systems and rely upon the Government-wide system of records 
notice issued by the Office of Personnel Management, OPM/GOV-10 
Employee Medical File System Records (71 FR 35360 June 19, 2006), which 
is written to cover all Federal employee medical file records.

DATES: These changes will take effect on October 30, 2008.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:  Hugo Teufel III, Chief Privacy 
Officer, Department of Homeland Security, Washington, DC 20528, by 
telephone (703) 235-0780 or facsimile (703) 235-0442.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:  Pursuant to the provisions of the Privacy 
Act of 1974, 5 U.S.C. 552a, and as part of its ongoing integration and 
management efforts, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is 
retiring the system of records notice, DOE-33 Personnel Medical Records 
System (60 FR 33510 June 28, 1995), that had been issued by the 
Department of Energy prior to the creation of the Department of 
Homeland Security.
    DHS will continue to collect and maintain records regarding Federal 
employees medical files and will rely upon the existing Federal 
Government-wide system of records titled OPM/GOV-10 Employee Medical 
File System Records (71 FR 35360 June 19, 2006), which is written to 
cover all Federal employee medical file records.
    Eliminating this system notice will have no adverse impacts on 
individuals, but will promote the overall streamlining and management 
of DHS Privacy Act record systems.

Hugo Teufel III,
Chief Privacy Officer, Department of Homeland Security.
[FR Doc. E8-22999 Filed 9-29-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-10-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AS OF MARCH 31, 2000 AND DECEMBER 31, 1999 AND
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31, 2000 AND
1999, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                            4989
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    80717<F5>
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 23268<F1>
<PP&E>                                          373028
<DEPRECIATION>                                   47661
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  434341
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            10045<F2>
<BONDS>                                         225003
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            71846<F6>
<PREFERRED>                                     20,000
<COMMON>                                            81
<OTHER-SE>                                      179212
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    434341
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 14438
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     6326
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 (797)<F3>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                4354
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   2867
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               2867
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      2404<F4>
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .30
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .30
<FN>
<F1>AS A REIT, WE DO NOT HAVE A CLASSIFIED BALANCE SHEET
<F2>AS A REIT, WE DO NOT HAVE A CLASSIFIED BALANCE SHEET
<F3>OTHER INCOME AND INTEREST INCOME
<F4>NET INCOME AFTER MINORITY INTEREST ALLOCATION AND PREFERRED DIVIDENDS
<F5>INCLUDES MORTGAGE NOTE RECEIVABLE
<F6>REPRESENTS MINORITY INTEREST
</FN>


</TABLE>
IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10-19-00062-CR

EX PARTE NIYAH LAVONNE WILLIAMS

From the 443rd District Court

Ellis County, Texas

Trial Court No. 19-011 HC

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Niyah Lavonne Williams appeals the denial of her application for writ of habeas 

corpus seeking a pretrial bail reduction. Williams has filed a motion to dismiss her appeal 

stating that the appeal is now moot. The motion is signed by both Williams and her 

attorney.

Williams’s motion is granted, and this appeal is dismissed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 

42.2(a).

TOM GRAY

Chief Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Davis, and

Justice Neill

Appeal dismissed

Opinion delivered and filed March 20, 2019

Do not publish 

[CR25]
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

 DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE 

DANIEL J. RILEY, ) 

) 

Petitioner ) 

v. ) 

) 

STAFFORD COUNTY DEPART- ) 

MENT OF CORRECTIONS, ) 

SUPERINTENDENT, ) Civil No. 1:08-cv-73-GZS 

 ) 

 Respondent ) 

 ) 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) 

 ) 

 Intervenor ) 

 

ORDER AFFIRMING THE 

RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE

No objections having been filed to the Magistrate Judge's Recommended 

Decision (Docket No. 12) filed April 29, 2008, the Recommended Decision is 

AFFIRMED. 

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Petitioner’s Writ of Habeas Corpus 

(Docket No. 1, Ex. A) is DENIED, Therefore, this case is DISMISSED. 

_/s/ George Z. Singal __ 

Chief United States District Judge 

Dated this 27th day of May, 2008. 

Case 1:08-cv-00073-GZS Document 13 Filed 05/27/08 Page 1 of 1
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 July 24, 2021

----

Forms            Forms -- final Board review to extend with revision the Reporting and Disclosure Requirements Associated with Emergency Lending Under Section 13(3) (FR A).            -Approved, July 23, 2021                        Forms -- final Board review to extend with revision the Bank Holding Company Application and Notifications (FR Y-3, FR Y-3N, and FR Y-4) and the International Applications and Prior Notifications under Subparts A and C of Regulation K(FR K-1).            -Approved, July 23, 2021            Regulations and Policies            Community Reinvestment Act (CRA) -- interagency statement on joint action to modernize and strengthen CRA regulations.            -Announced, July 20, 2021            Enforcement            Texico Bancshares Corporation and Texico State Bank, both of Texico, Illinois -- issuance of a consent cease-and-desist order.            -Announced, July 22, 2021            
Release dates |     Full version (300 KB PDF)Board Actions |     Actions under delegated authority    Applications and reports received:
J-S05036-20

NON-PRECEDENTIAL DECISION - SEE SUPERIOR COURT I.O.P. 65.37

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA

v.

FREUD LABARRIERE 

Appellant

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

 IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF

 PENNSYLVANIA

 No. 1392 MDA 2019

Appeal from the Judgment of Sentence Entered March 13, 2019

In the Court of Common Pleas of Lancaster County Criminal Division at 

No(s): CP-36-CR-0004555-2018

BEFORE: SHOGAN, J., KUNSELMAN, J., and MUSMANNO, J.

CONCURRING MEMORANDUM BY SHOGAN, J.: FILED: MAY 13, 2020

I agree with the learned Majority that appellate counsel has failed to 

present for direct review an issue of arguable merit and that remand is 

required. The Majority frames the issue as: “Whether [Appellant] knowingly 

refused breath testing, where the record does not reflect whether [Appellant] 

was informed of the [mandatory] criminal penalties.” Majority Memorandum

at 6. As framed, the issue to be addressed on remand could be interpreted 

as a non-waivable challenge to the legality of Appellant’s sentence, i.e., the 

proper application of a mandatory minimum sentence. See Commonwealth 

v. Diamond, 945 A.2d 252, 256 (Pa. Super. 2008) (stating, generally, that a 

challenge to the application of a mandatory minimum sentence is a nonwaivable challenge to the legality of sentence).
J-S05036-20

- 2 -

However, to the extent that the issue is interpreted as an evidentiary 

challenge pursuant to Birchfield v. North Dakota, ___ U.S. ___ , 136 S.Ct. 

2160 (2016), I must observe that Appellant attempted to have a motion to 

suppress evidence presented to the trial court by trial counsel. N.T., 3/13/19, 

at 3-4. Without any indication as to the basis of the request to suppress, trial 

counsel refused Appellant’s request stating to the court: “We spoke about the 

issues with [Appellant] and let him know why it was a bad idea and that there 

were no issues to consider for suppression.” Id. at 4 (emphasis added). 

Hence, I write separately to further alert Appellant of the possibility of a 

challenge to the effective assistance of trial counsel, which must be presented 

in a timely PCRA petition. See Commonwealth v. Holmes, 79 A.3d 562, 

576 (Pa. 2013) (reaffirming the general rule that “claims of ineffective 

assistance of counsel are to be deferred to PCRA review; trial courts should 

not entertain claims of ineffectiveness upon post-verdict motions; and such 

claims should not be reviewed upon direct appeal”).

Regardless, I agree with the Majority that remand at this juncture is 

critical so that the issue may be properly developed and vital points in the 

record amplified.

Judge Kunselman joins this Concurring Memorandum.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.1


                             CAMPBELL RESOURCES INC.
                            SIGNIFICANT SUBSIDIARIES
                                December 31, 1996


The following signficant subsidiaries are consolidated in the financial
statements submitted as a part of this report:







                                            Jurisdiction of        Percentage of
                                             Incorporation         Voting
                                                                   Securities
                                                                   Owned
Controlled by Campbell:
    Meston Resources Inc.                        Quebec                100%
    Sotula Gold Corp.                            Canada                100%

Controlled by Campbell & Sotula Gold Corp.       Mexico                100%
    Oro de Sotula, S.A. de C.V.

Controlled by Meston Resources Inc.
    Minera Cerro Quema, S.A.                     Panama                100%