alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.13


 


AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO
TRANSFER AGENT SERVICING AGREEMENT


 


THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into
as of this 26th day of January, 2018, by and between ETF
MANAGERS GROUP COMMODITY TRUST I, a Delaware statutory trust (the “Trust”), ETF MANAGERS CAPITAL LLC, the
Sponsor of the Trust (the “Sponsor”), and U.S. BANCORP FUND SERVICES, LLC, a Wisconsin limited liability company
("Fund Services”).


 


WHEREAS, the Trust is authorized to issue
shares of beneficial interest in separate series, with each such series representing interests in a separate portfolio of securities
and other assets;


 


WHEREAS, Fund Services is engaged in transfer
agent, dividend disbursing agent and other services to funds; and


 


WHEREAS, the Trust and Fund Services have
entered into an agreement dated January 2, 2015 (the "Agreement") whereby Fund Services has agreed to provide certain
services to each series of the Trust listed on Exhibit A (as amended from time to time) (each a “Fund” and collectively,
the “Funds”); and


 


WHEREAS, the parties wish to amend Exhibit
A of the Agreement to include a new separate series of the Trust, the Breakwave Dry Bulk Shipping ETF;


 


NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the
promises and mutual covenants herein contained, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged,
the parties hereto, intending to be legally bound, do hereby agree as follows:


 


Exhibit A is hereby amended to include the
following fund: Breakwave Dry Bulk Shipping ETF.


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment
to be executed by a duly authorized officer on one or more counterparts as of the date first above written.


 


ETF MANAGERS GROUP COMMODITY


TRUST I





	 	 	 	 	 
	By:	/s/ Samuel Masucci, III	 
		
	Name:	Samuel Masucci, III 	 
	Title:	 	CEO	 





 






     


     


    

 


U.S. BANCORP FUND SERVICES, LLC





	 	 	 	 	 
	By:	/s/ Anita Zagrodnik	 
		
	Name:	Anita Zagrodnik	 
	Title:	 	Senior Vice President	 





 


ETF MANAGERS CAPITAL LLC





	 	 	 	 	 
	By:	/s/ Samuel Masucci, III	 
		
	Name:	Samuel Masucci, III 	 
	Title:	 	CEO
Editorial Note on Part 762
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 762 appear at 72 FR 63297, Nov. 8, 2007.

§ 762.127 Appraisal requirements. ( a ) *General.* The general requirements for an appraisal are: ( 1 ) *Value of collateral.* The lender is responsible for ensuring that the value of chattel and real estate pledged as collateral is sufficient to fully secure the guaranteed loan.
( 2 ) *Additional security.* The lender is not required to complete an appraisal or evaluation of collateral that will serve as additional security, but the lender must provide an estimated value.
( 3 ) *Appraisal cost.* Except for authorized liquidation expenses, the lender is responsible for all appraisal costs, which may be passed on to the borrower or transferee in the case of a transfer and assumption.
( b ) *Chattel security.* The requirements for chattel appraisals are: ( 1 ) *Need for chattel appraisal.* A current appraisal (not more than 12 months old) of primary chattel security is required on all loans except loans or lines of credit for annual production purposes secured by crops, which require an appraisal only when the guarantee is requested late in the current production year and actual yields can be reasonably estimated. An appraisal is not required for loans of $50,000 or less if a strong equity position exists.
( 2 ) *Basis of value.* The appraised value of chattel property will be based on public sales of the same or similar property in the market area. In the absence of such public sales, reputable publications reflecting market values may be used.
( 3 ) *Appraisal form.* Appraisal reports may be on the Agency's appraisal of chattel property form or on any other appraisal form containing at least the same information.
( 4 ) *Experience and training.* Chattel appraisals will be performed by appraisers who possess sufficient experience or training to establish market (not retail) values as determined by the Agency.
( c ) *Real estate security.* The requirements for real estate appraisals are: ( 1 ) *Loans of $250,000 or less.* The lender must document the value of the real estate by applying the same policies and procedures as their non-guaranteed loans.
( 2 ) *Loans greater than $250,000.* The lender must document the value of real estate using a current appraisal (not more than 18 months old) completed by a State Certified General Appraiser. Real estate appraisals must be completed in accordance with USPAP. Restricted reports as defined in USPAP are not acceptable. The Agency may allow an appraisal more than 18 months old to be used only if documentation provided by the lender reflects each of the following: ( i ) Market conditions have remained stable or improved based on sales of similar properties,
( ii ) The property in question remains in the same or better condition, and
( iii ) The value of the property has remained the same or increased.
( 3 ) Agency determinations under paragraph (c)(2) of this section to permit appraisals more than 18 months old are not appealable.
[78 FR 65529, Nov. 1, 2013, as amended at 86 FR 43391, Aug. 9, 2021]
# THE STATE OF TEXAS

M A N D A T E

*********************************************

TO THE 217TH DISTRIC T COURT OF ANGELINA COUNTY, GREETING:

Before our Court of Appeals for the 12th Court of Appeals District of Texas, on the 21st

day of January, 2015 , the cause upon appeal to revise or reverse your judgment between

CODY WAYNE PENICK , Appellant

NO. 12

- 14

- 00128

- CR; Trial Court No. 2013

- 0132

Opinion by Brian Hoyle, Justice.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

was determined; and therein our said Court made its o rder in these words:

“ THIS CAUSE came to be heard on the appellate record and briefs filed herein, and the

same being considered, it is the opinion of this court that there was no error in the judgment.

It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED tha t the judgment of the court

below be in all things affirmed , and that this decision be certified to the court below for

observance. ”

WHEREAS, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court of Appeals

for the Twelfth Court of Appeals District of Tex as in this behalf, and in all things have it duly

recognized, obeyed, and executed.

WITNESS, THE HONORABLE JAMES T. WORTHEN , Chief Justice of our Court

of Appeals for the Twelfth Court of Appeals District, with the Seal thereof affixed, at the City of

Tyle r, this the 17 th day of March , 2015.

CATHY S. LUSK, CLERK

By:

_______________________________ Chief Deputy Clerk
#### Joseph Pedri, Appellant, v Jeanne Pedri, Respondent.

Submitted August 20, 2007;

decided October 16, 2007

Reported below, 2007 NY Slip Op 72805(U).

Motion for leave to appeal dismissed upon the ground that the order sought to be appealed from does not finally determine the action within the meaning of the Constitution.
Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter VIII
Authority: 7 U.S.C. 71-87K, 1621-1627.

Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter VIII
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to subchapter A appear at 84 FR 45645, Aug. 30, 2019.

§ 868.103 Public notification of grade standards action. ( a ) After developing a standardization proposal, AMS will publish a notice in the Federal Register proposing new or revised standards or suspending or terminating existing standards. The notice will provide a sufficient comment period for interested parties to submit comments.
( b ) AMS will simultaneously issue a news release about these actions, notifying the affected industry and general public. AMS will also distribute copies of proposals to anyone requesting a copy or to anyone it believes may be interested, including other Federal, State, or local government agencies.
( c ) All comments received within the comment period will be made part of the public record maintained by AMS, will be available to the public for review, and will be considered by AMS before final action is taken on the proposal.
( d ) Based on the comments received, AMS's knowledge of standards, grading, marketing, and other technical factors, and any other relevant information, AMS will decide whether the proposed actions should be implemented.
( e ) If AMS concludes that the changes as proposed or with appropriate modifications should be adopted, AMS will publish the final changes in the Federal Register as a final notice. AMS will make the grade standards and related information available in printed form and electronic media.
( f ) If AMS determines that proposed changes are not warranted, or otherwise are not in the public interest, AMS will either publish in the Federal Register a notice withdrawing the proposal, or will revise the proposal and again seek public input.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Paul Grosz and Linda Rock, Appellants.

Appeals by defendants from two judgments (one as to each of them) of the Supreme Court, Kings County, both rendered February 15, 1979, convicting each of them of robbery in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentences. Judgments reversed, on the law, and new trial ordered. The facts have been considered and are determined to have been established. Defendants were accused of robbing their victim in a parking lot, from which they fled in an automobile purportedly followed by the victim. As he followed the defendants, the victim signalled a traffic police officer, who was driving in the same direction. The victim informed the officer of the occurrence and the officer stopped the suspects. This was about 10 to 15 minutes after the robbery took place. Although the stopped vehicle contained a male and two females, only the male occupant was frisked upon the victim’s informing the officer that he believed they might have a gun. The victim’s belief was founded upon his feeling a "hard object” pressed against his back when one of his assailants had told him to keep quiet because he had a gun. Notwithstanding the closeness of the sole issue of identity in this one eyewitness case, two folding knives recovered in the frisk were admitted into evidence as relevant to the existence of such a hard object. This was reversible error. The possibility that the jury would draw an inference from their existence relevant to some improper issue, such as defendants’ propensity to commit crime, was not great; nevertheless, this potential prejudice substantially outweighed the probative value of the evidence as it related to the victim’s testimony that he had felt something hard pressed against his back. This was a very minor element of the People’s proof, easily inferrable from the facts that defendants could have used a finger or car keys to the same effect. Moreover, the People’s argument that the knives were offered solely for this purpose is belied by the fact that they did not seek additionally to offer any other hard objects doubtlessly recovered from defendants when they underwent a full search at the police station. Therefore, even though the prosecutor refrained from highlighting this evidence, the possibility that the knives exerted a poisonous influence as they lay on the exhibit table is too great in this case to be considered harmless error, and a new trial is required. (See *People*v *Henry,*31 AD2d 943.) Hopkins, J. P., Titone and Mangano, JJ., concur. Damiani, J., dissents and votes to affirm the judgments (see *People v Crimmins,*36 NY2d 230).
Case 3:06-cv-00622-WKW-SRW Document 3 Filed 07/26/2006 Page 1 of 1
# Subpart 5236.2 - SPECIAL ASPECTS OF CONTRACTING FOR CONSTRUCTION

**Parent topic:**Part 5236 - CONSTRUCTION AND ARCHITECT-ENGINEER CONTRACTS

## 5236.270 Expediting construction contracts.

   (a) Where additional costs are to be incurred, NAVFACENGCOM is responsible for obtaining required agency head approval and certification.
§ 900.82 Stipulation procedures. The Administrator, or the Administrator's representative, may, at any time before the issuance of a complaint seeking a civil penalty under the Act, enter into a stipulation with any handler or importer in accordance with the following procedures: ( a ) The Administrator, or the Administrator's representative, shall give the handler or importer notice of the alleged violation of the applicable marketing order or marketing agreement, or the requirements issued pursuant to 7 U.S.C. 608b(b) and 7 U.S.C. 608e, and an opportunity for a hearing thereon as provided by the Act;
( b ) In agreeing to the proposed stipulation, the handler or importer expressly waives the opportunity for a hearing and agrees to pay a specified civil penalty within a designated time;
( c ) The Administrator, or the Administrator's representative, agrees to accept the specified civil penalty in settlement of the particular matter involved if it is paid within the designated time;
( d ) In cases where the handler or importer does not pay the specified civil penalty within the designated time, or the handler or importer does not agree to the stipulation, the Administrator may issue an administrative complaint; and
( e ) The civil penalty that the Administrator may have proposed in a stipulation agreement shall have no bearing on the civil penalty amount that the Department may seek in a formal administrative proceeding against the same handler or importer for the same alleged violation.
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3041 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3041

          To suspend temporarily the duty on Benzoyl Chloride.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 25, 2006

  Mr. Graham introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
          To suspend temporarily the duty on Benzoyl Chloride.

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

SECTION 1. REDUCTION OF DUTY ON BENZOYL CHLORIDE.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

      

``      9902.29.12        Benzoyl Chloride (CAS   Free      No change       No change       On or before 12/
                           No. 98-88-4)                                                      31/2009          ''
                           (provided for in                                                                    .
                           subheading
                           2916.32.20)..........

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall apply 
with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for 
consumption, on or after the 15th day after the date of enactment of 
this Act.
                                 <all>
```
# 5209.570-2 Policy.

(c)(2**)** Submit the required written determination for approval with a copy of the approved AS, STRAP, or MOPAS-S by the SECDEF/USD(AT&L) via DASN(P) by email at RDAJ&As.fct@navy.mil with the subject “[Activity Name] DFARS 209.570-2 - D&F to Use a Contractor to Perform Lead System Integrator Functions.”

**Parent topic:**Subpart 5209.5 - ORGANIZATIONAL AND CONSULTANT CONFLICTS OF INTEREST
215.404-72 Modified weighted guidelines method for nonprofit organizations other than FFRDCs.       (a)  *Definition*.  As used in this subpart, a nonprofit organization is a business entity—          (1)  That operates exclusively for charitable, scientific, or educational purposes;          (2)  Whose earnings do not benefit any private shareholder or individual;          (3)  Whose activities do not involve influencing legislation or political campaigning for any candidate for public office; and          (4)  That is exempted from Federal income taxation under section 501 of the Internal Revenue Code.          (b)  For nonprofit organizations that are entities that have been identified by the Secretary of Defense or a Secretary of a Department as receiving sustaining support on a cost-plus-fixed-fee basis from a particular DoD department or agency, compute a fee objective for covered actions using the weighted guidelines method in                 215.404-71             , with the following modifications:          (1)  *Modifications to performance risk (Blocks 21-23 of the DD Form 1547).*          (i)  If the contracting officer assigns a value from the standard designated range (see                 215.404-71             -2(c)), reduce the fee objective by an amount equal to 1 percent of the costs in Block 20 of the DD Form 1547.  Show the net (reduced) amount on the DD Form 1547.          (ii)  Do not assign a value from the technology incentive designated range.          (2)  *Modifications to contract type risk (Block 24 of the DD Form 1547).*  Use a designated range of –1 percent to 0 percent instead of the values in                 215.404-71             -3.  There is no normal value.          (c)  For all other nonprofit organizations except FFRDCs, compute a fee objective for covered actions using the weighted guidelines method in                 215.404-71             , modified as described in paragraph (b)(1) of this subsection.    **Parent topic:** 215.404 Proposal analysis.
###### Editorial Note on Part 94

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 94 appear at 61 FR 51352, Oct. 2 1996.

#### § 94.101 Definitions.

Words used in the regulations in this subpart in the singular form will import the plural, and vice versa, as the case may demand. As used throughout the regulations in this part, unless the context requires otherwise, the following terms will be construed to mean:

*Certification sample.* An egg product sample submitted by an applicant for chemical, physical, or microbiological analyses and tests at a Science and Technology Division laboratory. This voluntary sample is analyzed or tested by the Division's analyst or scientist to certify that an egg product lot meets applicable specifications for identity, quality, and wholesomeness.

*Surveillance sample.* This is a 100 gram sample for *Salmonella* analysis that is drawn by the USDA egg product inspector from each lot of egg product processed at an official plant. This sample may be analyzed by a Science and Technology Division laboratory, or by a laboratory approved and recognized by the Division to analyze for *Salmonella* in egg products.

*Unofficial sample.* These samples of egg products are drawn by plant personnel upon the request of plant management. Analyses of these samples are usually conducted for the plant's refractometer correlation, bacteriological evaluation of production techniques, or quality control of procedures. Official plant or Science and Technology Division laboratories can analyze these samples.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-6173

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus HAROLD STEVEN JACKSON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Greenbelt. Peter J. Messitte, District Judge. (8:02- cr-00396; 8:06-cv-01372-PJM) Submitted: June 21, 2007 Decided: June 27, 2007 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Harold Steven Jackson, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.- 2 - PER CURIAM: Harold Steven Jackson seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion as untimely. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the notice of appeal was not timely filed. When the United States or its officer or agency is a party, the notice of appeal must be filed no more than sixty days after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or order, Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B), unless the district court extends the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(5), or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). This appeal period is “mandatory and jurisdictional.” Browder v. Dir., Dep’t of Corr. , 434 U.S. 257, 264 (1978) (quoting United States v. Robinson , 361 U.S. 220, 229 (1960)). The district court’s order was entered on the docket on July 25, 2006. The notice of appeal was dated October 24, 2006, and filed on November 29, 2006. Because Jackson failed to file a timely notice of appeal or to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. DISMISSED
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-6939

JOSHUA BERNARD JOHNS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

NANCY MATTHEW; M. LOVE; MR. TREND; SERGEANT

TUCKER; SERGEANT BARNETT; CAPTAIN HILL; E. B.

WALKER; MAJOR VAUGHN,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District

Judge. (CA-02-342-AM)

Submitted: August 15, 2002 Decided: August 26, 2002

Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Joshua Bernard Johns, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Joshua Bernard Johns appeals the district court’s order

dismissing his 42 U.S.C.A. § 1983 (West Supp. 2001) complaint for

failure to state a claim. We have reviewed the record and the

district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly,

we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See Johns v.

Matthew, No. CA-02-342-AM (E.D. Va. May 30, 2002). We dispense

with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are

adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument

would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
# L_2014124EN.01003203.xml

| 25.4.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 124/32 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.4.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 124/32

---

Corrigendum to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 396/2014 of 16 April 2014 amending Regulation (EC) No 1484/95 as regards representative prices in the poultrymeat and egg sectors

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 115 of 17 April 2014
  )

On the cover, in the table of contents, and on page 24, in the title:

for:

‘(EU) No 396/2014’,

read:

‘(EU) No 395/2014’.

---