alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 189 (Thursday, September 30, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 60459]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-24546]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Notice of Proposals to Engage in Permissible Nonbanking 
Activities or to Acquire Companies that are Engaged in Permissible 
Nonbanking Activities

    The companies listed in this notice have given notice under section 
4 of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1843) (BHC Act) and 
Regulation Y (12 CFR Part 225) to engage de novo, or to acquire or 
control voting securities or assets of a company, including the 
companies listed below, that engages either directly or through a 
subsidiary or other company, in a nonbanking activity that is listed in 
Sec. [thinsp]225.28 of Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.28) or that the Board 
has determined by Order to be closely related to banking and 
permissible for bank holding companies. Unless otherwise noted, these 
activities will be conducted throughout the United States.
    Each notice is available for inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank 
indicated. The notice also will be available for inspection at the 
offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their 
views in writing on the question whether the proposal complies with the 
standards of section 4 of the BHC Act. Additional information on all 
bank holding companies may be obtained from the National Information 
Center website at www.ffiec.gov/nic/.
    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding the applications must be 
received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of 
Governors not later than October 15, 2010.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago (Colette A. Fried, Assistant 
Vice President) 230 South LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois 60690-1414:
    1. Taylor Capital Group, Inc., Rosemont, Illinois; to engage de 
novo in extending credit and servicing loans, pursuant to section 
225.28(b)(1) of Regulation Y.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, September 27, 
2010.
Robert deV. Frierson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 2010-24546 Filed 9-29-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-S
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 31.1

                                 CERTIFICATIONS

I, Michael McNeil, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of HMN Financial, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and we have:

      a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

      b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered
by this report based on such evaluation; and

      c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal
control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and
15d-15(f)) that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter that
has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors
(or persons performing the equivalent functions):

      a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and

      b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over
financial reporting.


Date: August 10, 2004              By   /s/ Michael McNeil
                                        President/Chief Executive Officer
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 15**  **- 2114** 

I n Re : ROBERT PADULA; DEBORAH PADULA , Debtors
.

-------- ------------------------------ VPSI, INC., Plaintiff

– Appellant,

v. DEBORAH PADULA , Defendant

- Appellee
.

-------------------------------------- NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF CONSUMER BANKRUPTCY ATTORNEYS, Amicus Supporting Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Alexandria
. Anthony J
. Trenga , District Judge. ( 1:15

- cv - 00612

- AJT

- IDD ; 11

- 12985

- BFK ; 11

- 01456

- BFK )

Submitted : April 28, 2016 Decided: June 9, 2016

Before DIAZ and THACKER , Circuit Judges , and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge
.
Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion
.2 Heather S
. Deane , Adam D
. Michel , BONNER, KIERNAN, TREBACH & CROCIATA, LLP , Washington, D.C., for Appellant. John T. Donelan , LAW OFFICE OF JOHN T. DONELAN , Alexandria, Virginia , for Appellee. Ta ra Twomey , NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF CONSUMER BANKRUPTCY ATTORNEYS , J. Erick Heath, On Brief, San Jose, California, for Amicus Curiae
. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.3 PER CURIAM: VPSI, Inc. , appeals the district court ’ s order affirming the bankruptcy court ’ s order granting the debtor ’ s motion for authorization to pursue a state court personal injury suit. We have reviewed the record included on appeal, as well as the parties’ briefs, and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the courts below
. See VPSI, Inc. v. Padula , No. 1:15

- cv - 00612

- AJT

- IDD (E.D. Va. Aug. 21, 2015) ; No. 11

- 12985

- BFK (E.D. Va. Apr. 28, 2015 ) . We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before th is c ourt and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED
Order entered March 25, 2021

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-21-00068-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF P.J.H. AND M.J.H., CHILDREN

On Appeal from the 354th Judicial District Court

Hunt County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 85368

ORDER

The reporter’s record is past due. On March 17, 2021, we ordered the 

reporter’s record be filed by April 16, 2021 after counsel for appellant notified the 

Court that he had requested the record and was in the process of paying the 

reporter’s fee. 

Shannon Sudderth, Official Court Reporter for the 354th Judicial District 

Court, filed a letter on March 24, 2021 informing the Court that counsel for 

appellant has not communicated with her regarding the record. She states that 

counsel contacted her predecessor but has not provided the dates for the hearings 

he wants transcribed or made payment arrangements.
In light of these circumstances, we ORDER appellant to file, by April 1, 

2021, written verification that he has requested that Ms. Sudderth prepare the 

reporter’s record and has paid or made arrangement to pay her fee. Should 

appellant file the required written verification, the Court will set a new deadline for 

the reporter’s record. Should appellant fail to comply, the Court will order the 

appeal be submitted without the reporter’s record. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(c). 

We DIRECT the Clerk of this Court to send a copy of this order to Ms. 

Sudderth and all parties.

/s/ CRAIG SMITH

JUSTICE
Deny and Opinion Filed August 31, 2015 

# S

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-15-00861-CV IN RE ROGER ARASH FARAHMAND, Relator Original Proceeding from the 417th Judicial District Court Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 417-56531-2013



### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Wright, Justi ce Bridges, and Justice Stoddart Opinion by Chief Justice Wright Relator filed this petition for writ of mandamus requesting that the Court order the trial court to declare that his marriag e to real party in interest, Ma ryam Farahmand, is void, that the parties’ relationship is meretric ious, that Roger is not liable for any attorney’s fees based on Section 6.502(a)(4) of the Texas Family Code, and that the parties are only entitled to the property acquired during the rela tionship in proportion to the va lue that his or her labor contributed to its acquisition. In addition, relator requested that the Court vacate the trial court’s May 19, 2015 order awarding interim attorney’s fees. In the alternative, relator requested that the Court declare that the putative marriage of the parties ended when relator first put real party in interest on notice that he contended an impe diment to their marriage existed and vacate the trial court’s May 19, 2015 order aw arding interim attorney’s f ees. Ordinarily, to obtain mandamus relief, a relator must show both that th e trial court has clearly abused its discretion and that relator has no adequate appellate remedy. In re Prudential Ins. Co., 148 S.W.3d 124,–2– 135–36 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding). We conclude relator has failed to establish his right to mandamus relief. We deny the petition.

150861F.P05 /Carolyn Wright/ CAROLYN WRIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                        9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                               NOV-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                    AUG-31-1998
<CASH>                                            2,810,000
<SECURITIES>                                      6,125,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                     2,353,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                        163,000
<INVENTORY>                                         335,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 12,358,000
<PP&E>                                            1,487,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                      899,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   17,149,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             1,340,000
<BONDS>                                                   0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                     0
<PREFERRED>                                               0
<COMMON>                                             47,000
<OTHER-SE>                                       15,697,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     17,149,000
<SALES>                                           2,926,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  7,245,000
<CGS>                                             2,279,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     4,865,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                          0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                        0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   2,380,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                        881,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               1,499,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                           0
<CHANGES>                                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                                      1,499,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                           .32
<EPS-DILUTED>                                           .32
        


</TABLE>
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD

SPECIAL COUNSEL,

Petitioner,

v.

JAMES N. HEYEL,

Respondent.

DOCKET NUMBER

KQ120&8710003

DATE :

^ °

Rruce IX JFong , Esquire, for the petitioner,

Richard D. McCurdy, Esquire, for the respondent.

Daniel ft. Levinson, Chairman

Maria L, Johnson, Vice Chairman

Dennis M. Devaney , Merr.ber

FINAL DECISION AND ORDER

This case is before the Board on a disciplinary

action filed by petitioner agciinst respondent charging him

'with violating 5 U.S.C. § 2302 (b) and 5 C.F.R. §§ 4.3 and

330.601. Specifically, respondent, an auditor with the

Defense Contract Audit Agency, was charged with influencing

a candidate for a position to withdraw from competition in

order to improve the prospects of another candidate for

employment. The matter was assigned to Chief Administrative

Law Judge Edward J, Reidy for disposition and the issuance

of a Recommended Decision.
On May 18, 1987, the parties filed a Joint Motion for

Approval of Settlement, That submission u:,-ged approval of a

settlement agreement reached by the parties, in which

respondent waived his right to a hearing and admitted to

certain f^cts as alleged by petitioner. In the agreement,

respondent also admitted that these facts, as stipulated,

constituted a violation of 5 U.S.C. § 2302(b)(5 ) as charged.

In exchange for these admissions and respondent's agreement

to pay a $1000.00 civil fine , petitioner agreed to drop the

charges based on alleged violations of 5 C.F.R. §§ 4.3 and

330.601. On flay 22, 1987, Judge Reidy issued a Recommended

Decision recommending that the Board accept, and approve the

settlement agreement. Neither party filed exceptions to the

Recommended Decision.

The Beard, as a matter of policy,, favors the settlement

of disputes. Judge Reidy has found that acceptance of ti>,

settlement would serve justice as well as the interest of

judicial economy. Judge Reidy has also examined the penalty

the parties have agreed, upon in light of the factors set out

in Douglas v. Veterans Administration, 5 M.S.P.R. 280

(1981), and found it reasonable under the circumstances.

Accordingly, we hereby ADOPT the Recommended Decision,

by which we APPROVE the settlement agreement which is

incorporated by reference into this Final Decision and

Order. The parties are hereby ordered to comply with the

tenr.s of the settlement agreement. The parties shall submit

evidence of such compliance within 60 days of the date of
this decision. This is the final decision of the Merit

Systems Protection Board in this case.

NOTICE TO RES EONDENT

You may obtain judicial review of this Final Decision

and Order in an appropriate Court of Appeals, See 5 U.S.C.

§ 1207(c).

FOR THE BOARD:

J'^^f •• " Jl«""—*•• , -f

/Robert E. Taylor/

r Clerk of the Boatd

Washington, D.C.
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of Blyth, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Qfor the period ending April 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Robert B. Goergen,Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1)             TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 

 
|   | /s/ Robert B.  Goergen                |   |
|--------|---------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Robert B. Goergen                     |
|   | Chairman and Chief  Executive Officer |
|   | June 9, 2005                     |

 

This certification ismade solely for the purpose of 18 U.S.C. § 1350, subject to the knowledgestandard contained therein, and not for any other purpose.

 

----
**Exhibit31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Robert B. Goergen,Chairman, Chief Executive Officer of Blyth, Inc., certify that:

 

1.                 I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form10-Q of Blyth, Inc.;

 

2.                 Based on my knowledge, this report does notcontain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a materialfact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;

 

3.                 Based on my knowledge, the financialstatements, and other financial information included in this report, fairlypresent in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;

 

4.                The registrant’s other certifying officer(s)and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for theregistrant and have:

 

(a)  Designed such disclosurecontrols and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures tobe designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to usby others within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;

 

(b)  Evaluated the effectivenessof the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in thisreport our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and

 

(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s mostrecent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of anannual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting;and

 

5.                 The registrant’s other certifying officer(s)and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal controlover financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committeeof the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):

 

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the designor operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarizeand report financial information; and

 

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting.

 

Date: December 16, 2004

 

 
| /s/ Robert B. Goergen             |   |
|-----------------------------------|--------|
| Robert B. Goergen                 |
| Chairman, Chief Executive Officer |

 

----
J. A16027/17

2018 PA Super 203

IN RE: G.M.S., A MINOR :

:

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF

PENNSYLVANIA

:

APPEAL OF: L.N.C., NATURAL MOTHER : No. 299 WDA 2017

Appeal from the Order, January 30, 2017,

in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County

Orphans’ Court Division at No. CP-02-AP-0000173-2016

IN RE: B.D.C., A MINOR :

:

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF

PENNSYLVANIA

:

APPEAL OF: L.N.C., NATURAL MOTHER : No. 300 WDA 2017

Appeal from the Order Dated January 30, 2017,

in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County

Orphans’ Court Division at No. CP-02-AP-0000174-2016

IN RE: L.A.C., A MINOR :

:

IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF

PENNSYLVANIA

:

APPEAL OF: L.N.C., NATURAL MOTHER : No. 301 WDA 2017

Appeal from the Order, January 30, 2017,

in the Court of Common Pleas of Allegheny County

Orphans’ Court Division at No. CP-02-AP-0000175-2016

BEFORE: STABILE, J., FORD ELLIOTT, P.J.E., AND STRASSBURGER, J.*

CONCURRING STATEMENT BY FORD ELLIOTT, P.J.E.: FILED: July 11, 2018

I join in the Majority Opinion except as to footnote 6.

 

* Retired Senior Judge assigned to the Superior Court.
J. A16027/17

- 2 -

Judge Stabile joins the concurring statement.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Labor

###### Employment and Training Administration

          - [TA-W-71,291]

                    In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended (“Act”), 19 U.S.C. 2273, the Department of Labor issued a Notice of Revised Determination on Reconsideration on July 30, 2010. The Notice of revised determination was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     on August 13, 2010 (75 FR 49538).                

At the request of the State agency, the Department reviewed the revised determination applicable to workers and former workers of Modine Manufacturing Company, Pemberville, Ohio (subject firm). The workers are engaged in employment related to the production of radiators and service parts.

The company reports that workers leased from Securitas, Aerotek, and Accountemps were employed on-site at the Pemberville, Ohio location of Modine Manufacturing Company. The Department has determined that these workers were sufficiently under the control of the subject firm to be considered leased workers.

Based on these findings, the Department is amending this certification to include workers leased from Securitas, Aerotek, and Accountemps working on-site at the Pemberville, Ohio location of Modine Manufacturing Company.

The amended notice applicable to TA-W-71,291 is hereby issued as follows:

All workers of Modine Manufacturing Company, including on-site leased workers from Securitas, Aerotek, and Accountemps, Pemberville, Ohio, who became totally or partially separated from employment on or after June 12, 2008, through July 30, 2012, and all workers in the group threatened with total or partial separation from employment on the date of certification through two years from the date of certification, are eligible to apply for adjustment assistance under Chapter 2 of Title II of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended.

Signed at Washington, DC this 6th day of October 2010.

Del Min Amy Chen,

Certifying Officer, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance.

[FR Doc. 2010-26015 Filed 10-14-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P