alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 166 (Tuesday, August 29, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 41023]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-18318]


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

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank 
or Bank Holding Company

    The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank 
Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and Sec.  225.41 of the Board's 
Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire shares of a bank or bank 
holding company. The factors that are considered in acting on the 
notices are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).
    The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal 
Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for 
inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested persons 
may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for 
that notice or to the offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must 
be received not later than September 13, 2017.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City (Dennis Denney, Assistant 
Vice President) 1 Memorial Drive, Kansas City, Missouri 64198-0001:
    1. Bradley J. Swan and Frank R. Swan, III, as trustees of multiple 
Swan family trusts, each to retain voting shares of Tuttle Bancshares, 
Inc. (Tuttle), and thereby indirectly retain voting shares of Sooner 
State Bank, both in Tuttle, Oklahoma; and the following persons to 
retain voting shares of Tuttle as members of the Swan Family Group as a 
group acting in concert: The Bradley J. Swan Revocable Trust dated 12-
8-2015, and Bradley J. Swan and Cathy Swan, as co-trustees, all of 
Kingston, Oklahoma; the Frank Rudell Swan Jr. Family Trust and Frank R. 
Swan, III, as trustee, both of Harrah, Oklahoma; the Frank R. Swan, III 
Trust of the 1992 Swan GST Exemption Trusts and Christy L. Slama, as 
trustee, both of Harrah, Oklahoma; the Christy Lee Slama Trust of the 
1992 Swan GST Exemption Trusts and Frank R. Swan, III, as trustee, both 
of Harrah, Oklahoma; the Ashley Diane Swan Trust of the 1992 GST 
Exemption Trust, and Christy L. Slama and Frank R. Swan, III, as co-
trustees, all of Harrah, Oklahoma; the Nancy L. Cuff Revocable Living 
Trust uad 3-23-2017, and Nancy Lynn Cuff, as trustee, both of Oklahoma 
City, Oklahoma; the Frank R. Swan, III Revocable Trust dated 9-19-2001, 
and Frank R. Swan, III and Mysti D. Swan, as co-trustees, all of 
Harrah, Oklahoma; the Christy L. Slama Revocable Trust dated 2-28-2003, 
and Steven Slama and Christy L. Slama, as co-trustees, all of Harrah, 
Oklahoma; the Ashley Diane Swan 2016 Estate Trust, and Christy L. 
Slama, as trustee, both of Harrah, Oklahoma; Bradley J. Swan, II, 
Harrah, Oklahoma; and the Esther Martin Swan QTIP Trust, and Gregg L. 
Vandaveer, as trustee, both of Oklahoma City, Oklahoma.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, August 24, 
2017.
Yao-Chin Chao,
Assistant Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 2017-18318 Filed 8-28-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
CERTIFICATION OF DAVID W. JOOS
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of CMS Energy Corporation;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)), and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d15(f)) for the registrant and have:
     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):
   Dated: February 25, 2009
    
    By:
    
    /s/ David W. JoosDavid W. JoosPresident andChief Executive Officer
Exhibit
      32.2











CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO


18
      U.S.C.
§1350,


AS
      ADOPTED
      PURSUANT TO


SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002








In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of Universal Hospital Services, Inc. (the
      "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2007, as filed with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Rex T. Clevenger,
      Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §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.







/s/
      Rex
      T. Clevenger


Rex
      T. Clevenger


Executive
      Vice President and


Chief
      Financial Officer


November
      12, 2007




59
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 733 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 733

 To exempt children of certain Filipino World War II veterans from the 
    numerical limitations on immigrant visas and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 12, 2015

 Ms. Hirono (for herself, Ms. Murkowski, Mr. Reid, Mrs. Boxer, and Mr. 
    Schatz) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To exempt children of certain Filipino World War II veterans from the 
    numerical limitations on immigrant visas and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Filipino Veterans Family 
Reunification Act of 2015''.

SEC. 2. EXEMPTION FROM IMMIGRANT VISA LIMIT.

    Section 201(b)(1) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 
1151(b)(1)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
            ``(F) Aliens who--
                    ``(i) are eligible for a visa under paragraph (1) 
                or (3) of section 203(a); and
                    ``(ii) have a parent (regardless of whether the 
                parent is living or dead) who was naturalized pursuant 
                to--
                            ``(I) section 405 of the Immigration Act of 
                        1990 (Public Law 101-649; 8 U.S.C. 1440 note); 
                        or
                            ``(II) title III of the Act of October 14, 
                        1940 (54 Stat. 1137, chapter 876), as added by 
                        section 1001 of the Second War Powers Act, 1942 
                        (56 Stat. 182, chapter 199).''.
                                 <all>
```
U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS COMPENSATION AND WORKING CONDITIONS

Page 1

Percent of Nonfatal Occupational Injuries and Illnesses Involving Days Away

from Work by Hours on the Job before Event Occurred, 2003

by William J. Wiatrowski

Bureau of Labor Statistics

Originally Posted: April 25, 2005

• In 2002, the BLS Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses began capturing expanded data on those injuries and

illnesses that resulted in days away from work. New data elements include the time of the event, the day of the week,

and the number of hours on the job before the event occurred. • The chart indicates the percent of cases involving days away from work that occurred within certain 1- and 2-hour

intervals. Using these intervals, the largest group of cases occurred after the employee had been on the job for at

least 2 hours, but less than 4 hours. • Although relatively small as a percentage of total cases involving days away from work (0.4 percent), 5,160 injuries

and illnesses occurred before employees began their shift. • Most of the injuries and illnesses occurred within the first 10 hours on the job, reflecting standard hours worked on a

given day. Further research is needed to relate these data to the amount of time individuals actually work in a given

day.

NOTE: For more information on these data, see the news release Lost-Worktime Injuries and Illnesses: Characteristics and

Resulting Days Away From Work, 2003 (USDL 05-521), available on the Internet at http://www.bls.gov/iif/oshwc/osh/case/

osnr0022.pdf.

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Survey of Occupational Injuries and Illnesses

William J. Wiatrowski

Economist, Office of Safety, Health, and Working Conditions, Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Telephone: (202) 691-6305; E-mail: Wiatrowski.William@bls.gov
U.S. BUREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS COMPENSATION AND WORKING CONDITIONS

Page 2

Data for Chart. Percent of Nonfatal Occupational Injuries and Illnesses Involving Days Away from Work by Hours on

the Job before Event Occurred, 2003

Duration Percent

Pre-shift 0.4

Less than 1 hour 8.6

1-2 hours 9.9

2-4 hours 21.5

4-6 hours 16

6-8 hours 14.7

8-10 hours 7.1

10-12 hours 1.8

12 hours or more 0.8

Note: Chart excludes 19 percent of cases for which the hours on the job before the event occurred could not be determined.

U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics | Division of Information and Marketing Services, PSB Suite 2850, 2 Massachusetts Avenue, NE Washington, DC

20212-0001 | www.bls.gov/OPUB | Telephone: 1-202-691-5200 | Contact Us
<PAGE>

                                                                 Exhibit (23)(d)

                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on
Forms S-8 (Nos. 333-32229, 333-58686), S-3 (Nos. 333-125553, 333-52560,
333-27849, 333-37241, 333-74958, 333-45556) and S-4 (No. 33-60007, 33-55805) of
CMS Energy Corporation of our report dated February 11, 2005 relating to the
2004 financial statements of Jorf Lasfar Energy Company S.C.A., which appear in
the CMS Energy Corporation Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006.

/s/ Price Waterhouse

Casablanca, Morocco
February 21, 2007
```

[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 162 (Wednesday, August 23, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 40025]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-17870]

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

POSTAL SERVICE

Product Change--Priority Mail Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of notice required under 39 U.S.C. 3642(d)(1): August 23, 
2017.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elizabeth A. Reed, 202-268-3179.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
August 17, 2017, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a 
Request of the United States Postal Service to Add Priority Mail 
Contract 341 to Competitive Product List. Documents are available at 
www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2017-171, CP2017-272.

Stanley F. Mires,
Attorney, Federal Compliance.
[FR Doc. 2017-17870 Filed 8-22-17; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
```
Submitted April 4,

reversed May 28, 2008

#### In the Matter of J. D. G., Alleged to be a Mentally Ill Person. STATE OF OREGON, *Respondent, v.*J. D. G., *Appellant.*

Multnomah County Circuit Court

070160378; A134835

185 P3d 555

Liza Langford filed the brief for appellant.

Hardy Myers, Attorney General, Mary H. Williams, Solicitor General, and Stacie F. Beckerman, Assistant Attorney General, filed the brief for respondent.

Before Edmonds, Presiding Judge, and Wollheim, Judge, and Sercombe, Judge.

PER CURIAM

*304PER CURIAM

Appellant seeks reversal of a judgment committing him as a mentally ill person for a period not to exceed 180 days. ORS 426.130. Appellant argues that the record does not establish by clear and convincing evidence that he is unable to provide for his basic needs because of a mental disorder. *See*ORS 426.005(l)(d). The state concedes that the evidence is insufficient for involuntary commitment and that the judgment should be reversed. On *de novo*review of the record, we accept the state’s concession and reverse.

Reversed.
| (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 UMED Holdings, Inc. is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; |
|-----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| (b) | Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles; |
|-----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| (c) | Disclosed in this report any change in UMED Holdings, Inc.'s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during UMED Holdings, Inc.'s most recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, UMED Holdings, Inc.'s internal control over financial reporting; and |
|-----|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| (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 UMED Holdings, Inc.'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 UMED Holdings, Inc.'s internal control over financial reporting. |
|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion

should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited

circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-40728

Summary Calendar

SAMUEL PASQUAL EDMONDSON

Petitioner-Appellant

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Respondent-Appellee

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:07-CV-261

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, BARKSDALE, and ELROD, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Samuel Pasqual Edmondson, federal prisoner # 05102-010, has filed a pro

se application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal, following

the district court’s dismissal, for lack of jurisdiction, of his pro se 28 U.S.C. §

2241 habeas petition. That petition challenged the validity of his convictions for:

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

February 10, 2009

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk
2

conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine; and

possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine. 

A movant for IFP on appeal must show: he is a pauper; and he will present

a nonfrivolous appellate issue. E.g., Jackson v. Dallas Police Dep’t, 811F.2d 260,

261 (5th Cir. 1986). Edmondson cannot establish that he would raise a

nonfrivolous appellate issue. 

Edmondson essentially maintains his claims fall within the savings clause

of 28 U.S.C. § 2255 because Zedner v. United States, 547 U.S. 489 (2006), should

apply retroactively to cases on collateral review. We may, however, consider a

§ 2241 petition attacking custody resulting from a federally-imposed sentence

only when the petitioner establishes that § 2255 is “inadequate or ineffective to

test the legality of his detention”. 28 U.S.C. § 2255(e); Jeffers v. Chandler, 253

F.3d 827, 830 (5th Cir. 2001). To show § 2255 was rendered inadequate or

ineffective in his case, Edmondson must show that his claim: (1) “is based on a

retroactively applicable Supreme Court decision which establishes that the

petitioner may have been convicted of a nonexistent offense”; and (2) “was

foreclosed by circuit law at the time when the claim should have been raised in

the petitioner’s trial, appeal, or first § 2255 motion”. Reyes-Requena v. United

States, 243 F.3d 893, 904 (5th Cir. 2001) (emphasis added).

Zedner dealt with issues relating to the Speedy Trial Act. See Zedner, 547

U.S. at 500-09; Speedy Trial Act of 1974, 18 U.S.C. §§ 3161-3174. Because

Zedner does not establish that Edmondson was convicted of a nonexistent

offense, we need not determine whether Zedner is retroactive or whether his

claim was foreclosed when he filed his direct appeal or prior § 2255 motion. 

Because Edmondson has not met the requirements for proceeding under

the savings clause, he has not established that he will raise a nonfrivolous

appellate issue. See Jackson, 811F.2d at 261. Accordingly, Edmondson’s motion

to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal is DENIED; and his appeal is
3

DISMISSED as frivolous. See Baugh v. Taylor, 117 F.3d 197, 202 n.24 (5th Cir.

1997); 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.
II 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 639 

To require the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to 

include in any proposed rule that limits greenhouse gas emissions and 

imposes increased costs on other Federal agencies an offset from funds 

available to the Administrator for all projected increased costs that 

the proposed rule would impose on other Federal agencies. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 3, 2015 

Mr. FLAKE (for himself, Mr. MCCAIN, Mr. INHOFE, Mr. CRAPO, Mr. LEE, Mr. 

COATS, and Mr. CORNYN) introduced the following bill; which was read 

twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works 

A BILL 

To require the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to include in any proposed rule that limits 

greenhouse gas emissions and imposes increased costs 

on other Federal agencies an offset from funds available 

to the Administrator for all projected increased costs 

that the proposed rule would impose on other Federal 

agencies. 

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


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 639 IS

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Agency PAYGO for 

3 Greenhouse Gases Act’’. 

4 SEC. 2. OFFSETS FOR INCREASED COSTS TO FEDERAL 

5 AGENCIES FOR REGULATIONS LIMITING 

6 GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—If the Administrator of the Envi8 ronmental Protection Agency proposes a rule that limits 

9 greenhouse gas emissions and imposes increased costs on 

10 1 or more other Federal agencies, the Administrator shall 

11 include in the proposed rule an offset from funds available 

12 to the Administrator for all projected increased costs that 

13 the proposed rule would impose on other Federal agencies. 

14 (b) NO OFFSETS.—If the Administrator proposes a 

15 rule that limits greenhouse gas emissions and imposes in16 creased costs on 1 or more other Federal agencies but does 

17 not provide an offset in accordance with paragraph (1), 

18 the Administrator may not finalize the rule until the pro19 mulgation of the final rule is approved by law. 

20 (c) RESTRICTION.—Notwithstanding any other provi21 sion of law, if the Administrator of the Environmental 

22 Protection Agency proposes a rule described in subsection 

23 (a)— 

24 (1) a Federal agency on which the rule imposes 

25 increased costs may not pass the costs imposed by 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 639 IS

1 the rule on to any rate payer of the Federal agency; 

2 and 

3 (2) the proposed rule— 

4 (A) shall be considered to be a rule that 

5 imposes increased costs on a Federal agency; 

6 and 

7 (B) shall be subject to this section. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK4TPTVN1PROD with BILLS