alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
B.1. Farm Debt Outstanding at Commercial Banks

Loan volume Percent change from Percent change from

(billions of dollars) previous quarter previous year

Real Non-real- Real Non-real- Real Non-realTotal estate estate Total estate estate Total estate estate

Quarter loans loans loans loans loans loans loans loans loans

1997: Q1... 63.8 25.4 38.4 -2.6 1.4 -5.1 3.4 5.5 2.0

 Q2... 69.0 26.2 42.8 8.2 3.3 11.5 5.1 6.2 4.4

 Q3... 71.1 27.0 44.2 3.0 2.9 3.1 6.8 8.1 6.0

 Q4... 71.3 27.1 44.2 .3 .7 .0 8.9 8.5 9.1

1998: Q1... 70.1 27.6 42.4 -1.7 1.8 -3.9 9.8 9.0 10.4

 Q2... 75.0 28.5 46.5 7.1 3.2 9.6 8.6 8.8 8.5

 Q3... 76.3 28.9 47.4 1.7 1.3 1.9 7.2 7.2 7.3

 Q4... 74.7 29.3 45.5 -2.0 1.3 -4.0 4.8 7.8 3.0

1999: Q1... 72.7 29.7 42.9 -2.8 1.7 -5.6 3.7 7.6 1.1

 Q2... 75.8 30.8 45.1 4.4 3.5 5.0 1.1 8.0 -3.1

 Q3... 76.8 31.4 45.5 1.3 1.9 .9 .7 8.6 -4.1

 Q4... 76.0 31.8 44.2 -1.0 1.5 -2.8 1.7 8.8 -2.8

2000: Q1... 71.5 31.4 40.1 -5.9 -1.4 -9.2 -1.6 5.5 -6.5

 Q2... 79.7 33.7 45.9 11.4 7.5 14.4 5.0 9.6 1.9

 Q3... 80.1 33.9 46.2 .6 .5 .6 4.3 8.1 1.6

 Q4... 80.9 34.0 46.9 1.0 .3 1.5 6.4 6.8 6.1

2001: Q1... 79.4 34.3 45.1 -1.9 .8 -3.9 11.0 9.2 12.4

 Q2... 82.9 35.1 47.7 4.4 2.5 5.8 4.0 4.2 3.9

 Q3... 82.5 35.4 47.1 -.4 .8 -1.3 3.0 4.5 2.0

 Q4... 82.2 35.6 46.7 -.3 .4 -.9 1.6 4.6 -.5

2002: Q1... 80.1 36.0 44.1 -2.6 1.2 -5.5 .9 4.9 -2.2

 Q2... 83.7 37.0 46.7 4.4 2.7 5.9 1.0 5.1 -2.1

 Q3... 84.4 37.7 46.7 .9 2.1 -.1 2.3 6.5 -.9

 Q4... 83.9 38.0 45.9 -.6 .6 -1.6 2.0 6.8 -1.7

2003: Q1... 82.0 38.7 43.3 -2.3 1.9 -5.7 2.4 7.5 -1.9

 Q2... 84.5 39.6 44.9 3.1 2.5 3.7 1.1 7.3 -3.9

 Q3... 85.5 40.2 45.4 1.2 1.4 1.0 1.4 6.5 -2.8

 Q4... 86.1 40.6 45.5 .6 1.1 .2 2.7 7.0 -.9

2004: Q1... 84.3 41.4 42.9 -2.1 1.9 -5.7 2.8 7.0 -.9

 Q2... 88.9 42.9 46.0 5.4 3.6 7.2 5.2 8.3 2.4

 Q3... 91.5 43.9 47.6 2.9 2.3 3.5 6.9 9.2 4.9

 Q4... 92.3 44.5 47.7 .8 1.5 .2 7.1 9.6 4.9

2005: Q1... 89.3 45.0 44.3 -3.2 1.1 -7.2 5.9 8.7 3.3

 Q2... 93.5 46.2 47.3 4.7 2.7 6.6 5.1 7.7 2.7

 Q3... 96.7 47.1 49.5 3.4 2.0 4.8 5.7 7.4 4.0

 Q4... 97.5 47.6 49.9 .9 1.0 .8 5.7 6.9 4.6

2006: Q1... 96.2 48.4 47.7 -1.4 1.8 -4.4 7.7 7.6 7.7

 Q2... 101.0 49.8 51.2 5.1 2.9 7.2 8.1 7.8 8.3

 Q3... 104.2 51.1 53.0 3.1 2.5 3.6 7.8 8.4 7.1

 Q4... 105.4 52.2 53.2 1.2 2.1 .3 8.1 9.7 6.5

2007: Q1... 105.0 53.4 51.6 -.4 2.3 -3.0 9.2 10.2 8.1

 Q2... 109.3 54.8 54.5 4.1 2.7 5.6 8.2 9.9 6.5

 Q3... 110.8 56.0 54.9 1.4 2.2 .6 6.4 9.5 3.4

 Q4... 112.3 56.8 55.5 1.3 1.5 1.2 6.6 8.9 4.3

2008: Q1... 110.4 57.9 52.5 -1.7 1.9 -5.3 5.2 8.5 1.8

 Q2... 117.4 60.4 57.0 6.3 4.4 8.5 7.4 10.3 4.5

 Q3... 119.9 61.6 58.3 2.1 1.9 2.4 8.2 10.0 6.3

 Q4... 121.6 63.0 58.6 1.4 2.3 .4 8.3 10.9 5.6

2009: Q1... 118.8 63.9 54.9 -2.3 1.3 -6.2 7.6 10.3 4.6

 Q2... 122.0 64.9 57.2 2.7 1.6 4.0 3.9 7.3 .3

 Note. Data are as of end of quarter.

21
```

[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 191 (Wednesday, October 1, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 57073]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-23028]

[[Page 57073]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Air Force

[Docket ID: USAF-2008-0019]

Privacy Act of 1974; System of Records

AGENCY: Department of the Air Force, DOD.

ACTION: Notice to Delete Three Systems of Records.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of the Air Force is proposing to delete three 
systems of records in its inventory of record systems subject to the 
Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended.

DATES: The changes will be effective on October 31, 2008 unless 
comments are received that would result in a contrary determination.

ADDRESSES: Send comments to the Air Force Privacy Act Officer, Office 
of Warfighting Integration and Chief Information Officer, SAF/XCX, 1800 
Air Force Pentagon, Suite 220, Washington, DC 20330-1800.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Tommy Lee at (703) 696-6253.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Department of the Air Force notices for 
systems of records subject to the Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), 
as amended, have been published in the Federal Register and are 
available from the address above.
    The Department of the Air Force proposes to delete three system of 
records notices from its inventory of record systems subject to the 
Privacy Act of 1974 (5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended. The proposed deletions 
are not within the purview of subsection (r) of the Privacy Act of 1974 
(5 U.S.C. 552a), as amended, which requires the submission of a new or 
altered system report.

    Dated: September 23, 2008.
Patricia L. Toppings,
OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
F051 AF JA G

System name:
    Air Force Claims Information Management System (AFCIMS) (June 11, 
1997, 62 FR 31793).

Reason:
    The records collected for this system are covered by system of 
records notice F051 AF JA H, Claims Records, published on June 11, 
1997. Accordingly, this Privacy Act system of records notice will be 
deleted.
F051 AF JA E

System name:
    Automated Military Justice Analysis and Management System (AMJAMS) 
(June 11, 1997, 62 FR 31793).

Reason:
    The records collected for this system are covered by system of 
records notice F051 AF JA F, Courts-Martial and Article 15 Records, 
published on November 23, 2005. Accordingly, this Privacy Act system of 
records notice will be deleted.
F051 AFJA E

System name:
    Air Force Reserve Judge Advocate Personal Data (June 11, 1997, 62 
FR 31793).

Reason:
    The records collected for this system are covered by system of 
records notice F051 AFJA C, Judge Advocate Personnel Records, published 
on June 11, 1997. Accordingly, this Privacy Act system of records 
notice will be deleted.

[FR Doc. E8-23028 Filed 9-30-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-P
```
### IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10

- 15

- 00148

- CV

HOUSE OF PRAISE MINI STRIES, INC.

, Appellant

v.

CITY OF RED OAK, TEX AS

, Appellee

From the 40th District Court

Ellis County, Texas

Trial Court No. 87580

ORDER

This appeal was referred to mediation by order dated January 28, 2016

. Mediation

was ordered to occur within 30 days, but by order of the Court, that time was extended

to April 29, 2016. We have received a Joint Agreed Motion to Stay the Appeal from the

parties requesting a stay so that the parties could investigate and c onfirm facts and

reconvene for mediation scheduled for May 23, 2016.House of Praise Ministries, Inc. v. City of Red Oak, Texas Page 2

The parties’ joint motion is granted. The time for mediation is extended and is

ordered to occur by May 31, 2016.

PER CURIAM

Before Chief Justice Gray,

Justice Davis, and

Just ice Scoggins

Motion granted

Order issued and filed April 14, 2016
II 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1092 

To temporarily increase the number of visas which may be issued to certain 

highly skilled workers. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 11, 2007 

Mr. HAGEL introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To temporarily increase the number of visas which may be 

issued to certain highly skilled workers. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘High-Tech Worker Re5 lief Act of 2007’’. 

6 SEC. 2. IMMEDIATE INCREASE OF H–1B VISAS. 

7 Section 214(g)(1)(A) of the Immigration and Nation8 ality Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(g)(1)(A)) is amended to read as 

9 follows: 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

2 

•S 1092 IS

1 ‘‘(A) under section 101(a)(15)(H)(i)(b) may not 

2 exceed— 

3 ‘‘(i) 65,000 in each of the fiscal years 

4 2004 through 2006; 

5 ‘‘(ii) 115,000 in fiscal year 2007; 

6 ‘‘(iii) 195,000 in fiscal year 2008; and 

7 ‘‘(iv) 65,000 in fiscal year 2009 and each 

8 succeeding fiscal year; and’’. 

9 SEC. 3. EXEMPTION FROM NUMERICAL LIMITS. 

10 (a) NONIMMIGRANTS WITH ADVANCED DEGREES.— 

11 Section 214(g)(5)(C) of the Immigration and Nationality 

12 Act (8 U.S.C. 1184(g)(5)(C)) is amended by striking ‘‘, 

13 until the number of aliens who are exempted from such 

14 numerical limitation during such year exceeds 20,000’’. 

15 (b) EMPLOYMENT-BASED IMMIGRANTS.— 

16 (1) IN GENERAL.—Section 201(b)(1) of the Im17 migration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1151(b)(1)) 

18 is amended by adding at the end the following: 

19 ‘‘(F) Aliens who have earned an advanced de20 gree in science, technology, engineering, or math and 

21 have been working in a related field in the United 

22 States under a nonimmigrant visa during the 3-year 

23 period preceding their application for an immigrant 

24 visa under section 203(b). 

25 ‘‘(G) Aliens who— 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

3 

•S 1092 IS

1 ‘‘(i) are described in subparagraph (A) or 

2 (B) of section 203(b)(1); or 

3 ‘‘(ii) have received a national interest waiv4 er under section 203(b)(2)(B). 

5 ‘‘(H) The immediate relatives of an alien who 

6 is admitted as an employment-based immigrant 

7 under section 203(b).’’. 

8 (2) APPLICABILITY.—The amendments made 

9 by paragraph (1) shall apply to any visa applica10 tion— 

11 (A) pending on the date of the enactment 

12 of this Act; or 

13 (B) filed on or after such date of enact14 ment. 

Æ 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS
|   | 1. | Amendment No.1 to the Quarterly      Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended June 30, 2010      (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or      15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (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 theCompany. |
|--------|----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| BY:    | /s/ Steven Strasser                |
|--------|------------------------------------|
|   | Steven      Strasser               |
|   | Chief      Executive Officer       |
|   | (principal      executive officer) |

----
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 March 12, 2022

----

Bank Holding Companies            TBB Investments LLC and TBB Intermediate LLC, both of New York, New York -- commenter's request for review of the delegated approval of the application by TBB Investments LLC and TBB Intermediate LLC to become bank holding companies by acquiring voting shares of Berkshire Bancorp, Inc., and thereby indirectly acquiring The Berkshire Bank, both of New York, New York, and for TBB Intermediate LLC to merge with and into Berkshire Bancorp.            -Denied, March 9, 2022            Enforcement            Community FSB Holding Company, Woodhaven, New York -- cease-and-desist order issued by the Office of Thrift Supervision dated February 17, 2011, terminated March 8, 2022.            -Announced, March 10, 2022            
Release dates |     Full version (300 KB PDF)Board Actions |     Actions under delegated authority    Applications and reports received:
UNITED Sel. [ol
DENVER, COLORADO ouRT

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO SEP 13 201
GREGORY C. LANGHAM
Civil Action No. 11-cv-01937-BNB — CLERK
MICHAEL ANDERSON,
Plaintiff,

Vv.

COLORADO COURTS, and
LA PLATA COUNTY DISTRICT COURT,

Defendants.

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

Plaintiff, Michael Anderson, is a prisoner in the custody of the Colorado
Department of Corrections who currently is incarcerated at the Bent County Correctional
Facility in Las Animas, Colorado. He attempted to initiate the instant action by
submitting to and filing with the Court pro se a document titled “Summons.” The Court
reviewed the document and determined it was deficient. Therefore, on August 2, 2011,
Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland directed Mr. Anderson to cure certain deficiencies in
the case within thirty days if he wished to pursue his claims.

The August 2 order pointed out that Mr. Anderson failed to submit either the
$350.00 filing fee or a Prisoner's Motion and Affidavit for Leave to Proceed Pursuant to
28 U.S.C. § 1915 together with a certified copy of his trust fund account statement for
the six-month period immediately preceding this filing. The order also pointed out that
Mr. Anderson failed to submit a Prisoner Complaint. The order directed the clerk of the

Court to mail to Mr. Anderson the proper, Court-approved forms for filing a complaint


and for seeking leave to proceed pursuant to § 1915, and warned him that if he failed to
cure the designated deficiencies within the time allowed the action would be dismissed
without prejudice and without further notice.

On August 25, Mr. Anderson submitted a Prisoner's Motion and Affidavit for
Leave to Proceed Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 together with a certified copy of his
trust fund account statement. However, he failed to submit a complaint on the proper,
Court-approved form.

Mr. Anderson has failed, within the time allowed, to cure all the deficiencies listed
in the August 2 order. Therefore, the action will be dismissed without prejudice
pursuant to Rule 41(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for failure to comply with
a Court order and cure the designated deficiencies as directed within the time allowed
and for failure to prosecute.

Accordingly, it is

ORDERED that the action is dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(b)
of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for the failure of Plaintiff, Michael Anderson,
within the time allowed, to cure the deficiencies designated in the order to cure of
August 2, 2011, and for his failure to prosecute.

DATED at Denver, Colorado, this _13"__ day of __September , 2011.

BY THE COURT:

s/Lewis T. Babcock
LEWIS T. BABCOCK
Senior Judge, United States District Court



IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
CERTIFICATE OF MAILING
Civil Action No. 11-cv-01937-BNB
Michael Anderson
Prisoner No. 136336
Bent County Correctional Facility
11560 Road FF75
Las Animas, CO 81054

| hereby certify that | have mailed a copy of the ORDER and JUDGMENT to the
above-named individuals on September 13, 2011.

GREGORY C. LANGHAM, CLERK

By:

Deputy Clerk
#### Carlene Cavanaugh, Respondent, v Board of Education of Huntington Union Free School District, Appellant.

[745 NYS2d 433]

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for employment discrimination in violation of Executive Law § 296, the defendant appeals from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Burke, J.), entered July 24, 2001, as denied those branches of its motion which were for summary judgment dismissing the second and third causes of action.

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, those branches of the motion which were for summary judgment dismissing the second and third causes of action are granted, and the complaint is dismissed in its entirety.

The Supreme Court erred in denying those branches of the defendant’s motion which were for summary judgment dismissing the second and third causes of action on the ground that the plaintiff failed to timely file a notice of claim. The second and third causes of action alleged that the plaintiff was forced to resign as a result of the defendant’s refusal to reasonably accommodate her disability and age discrimination in violation of Executive Law § 296, respectively. Where, as here, a plaintiff seeks private relief for employment discrimination in violation of the Executive Law, the timely filing of a notice of claim is a condition precedent to suit *(see*Education Law § 3813 [1]; *Mills v County of Monroe,*59 NY2d 307, *cert denied*464 US 1018; *Sangermano v Board of Coop. Educ. Servs. of Nassau County,*290 AD2d 498).

In light of this determination, it is unnecessary to address *370the defendant’s remaining contentions. Altman, J.P., Krausman, Schmidt and Crane, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 32.1

# CERTIFICATION
                       PURSUANT TO SECTION 13a-14(b) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
AND 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the Quarterly
Report of Media Sciences International, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for
the quarterly period ended March 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date therein specified (the Report), the undersigned,
Michael W. Levin, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, 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.
|--- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

/s/ Michael W. Levin 
Michael W. Levin
Chief Executive Officer
Date: May 15, 2007

A signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by
the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
II 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 105 

To prohibit the spouse of a Member of Congress previously employed as 

a lobbyist from lobbying the Member after the Member is elected. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 4, 2007 

Mr. VITTER introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To prohibit the spouse of a Member of Congress previously 

employed as a lobbyist from lobbying the Member after 

the Member is elected. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SPOUSE LOBBYING MEMBER. 

4 Section 207(e) of title 18, United States Code, is 

5 amended by adding at the end the following: 

6 ‘‘(8) SPOUSES.—Any person who is the spouse 

7 of a Member of Congress and who was not serving 

8 as a registered lobbyist at least 1 year prior to the 

9 election of that Member of Congress to office and 

10 who, after the election of such Member, knowingly 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with BILLS
2 

•S 105 IS

1 lobbies on behalf of a client for compensation any 

2 Member of Congress or is associated with any such 

3 lobbying activity by an employer of that spouse shall 

4 be punished as provided in section 216 of this 

5 title.’’. 

Æ 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with BILLS
<PAGE>   1


Exhibit 10.4
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                      Schedule to Form of First Amended and
                      Restated Shortfall Funding Agreement

Project                            Lessee                   Management Firm              Maximum Amount
                                                                                           of Advance

<S>                            <C>                          <C>                          <C>

Hagerstown, Maryland            C&G Healthcare at            Balanced Care at               $829,000.00
                                Hagerstown, L.L.C.           Hagerstown, Inc.

Johnson City, Tennessee         C&G Healthcare at Johnson    Balanced Care at Johnson       $926,000.00
                                City, L.L.C.                 City, Inc.

Pensacola, Florida              C&G Healthcare at            Balanced Care at             $1,198,000.00
                                Pensacola, L.L.C.            Pensacola, Inc.

Tallahassee, Florida            C&G Healthcare at            Balanced Care at             $1,489,000.00
                                Tallahassee, L.L.C.          Tallahassee, Inc.

Teay's Valley, West Virginia    C&G Healthcare at Teay's     Balanced Care at Teay's        $814,000.00
                                Valley, L.L.C.               Valley, Inc.
</TABLE>


                                       1
<PAGE>   2
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
           Project                       Property                                  Leasehold Mortgage

<S>                             <C>                         <C>
Hagerstown, Maryland            Washington Township,         Leasehold Deed of Trust and Security Agreement
                                Maryland
Johnson City, Tennessee         Washington Township,         Revolving Credit/Future Advances Leasehold Deed of Trust,
                                Tennessee                    Security Agreement and Fixture Filing
Pensacola, Florida              Escambia County, Florida     Leasehold Mortgage and Security Agreement
Tallahassee, Florida            Leo County, Florida          Corrective Leasehold Mortgage and Security Agreement
Teay's Valley, West Virginia    Putnam County, West          Credit Line Deed of Trust of Leasehold Interest, Security
                                Virginia                     Agreement and Fixture Financing Statement
</TABLE>


                                       2