alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
United States


Securities and Exchange Commission


Washington, D.C. 20549





FORM 8-K








CURRENT REPORT


Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the


Securities Exchange Act of 1934





Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported): January 6, 2015














DIAMOND HILL INVESTMENT GROUP, INC.





(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)








Ohio000-2449865-0190407(State or other jurisdiction ofincorporation)(Commission File Number)(I.R.S. EmployerIdentification No.)


325 John H. McConnell Blvd., Suite 200, Columbus, Ohio43215(Address of Principal Executive Offices)(Zip Code)





Registrant's Telephone Number, Including Area Code:   (614) 255-3333








Check the appropriate box below if the Form 8-K filing is intended to simultaneously satisfy the filing obligation of the registrant under any of the following provisions:





 ̈ Written communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425)





 ̈ Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12)





 ̈ Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b))





 ̈ Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e-4(c))








---




Item 8.01   Other Events





The following is a summary of assets under management as of December 31, 2014 of Diamond Hill Capital Management, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Diamond Hill Investment Group, Inc. (in millions):





By Investment VehicleProprietary funds$9,863Sub-advised funds665Institutional accounts5,128Total$15,656





By Investment StrategySmall Cap$1,575Small-Mid Cap1,295Large Cap7,926Select (All Cap)432Long-Short4,179Strategic Income249Total$15,656








SIGNATURES





Pursuant to the  requirements  of the Securities  Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant  has duly  caused  this  report  to be  signed on its behalf by the undersigned hereunto duly authorized.





DIAMOND HILL INVESTMENT GROUP, INC.Date:January 6, 2015By:/s/ Thomas E. LineThomas E. Line, Chief Financial Officer
United States


Securities and Exchange Commission


Washington, D.C. 20549





FORM 8-K








CURRENT REPORT


Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the


Securities Exchange Act of 1934





Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported): September 3, 2014














DIAMOND HILL INVESTMENT GROUP, INC.





(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)








Ohio000-2449865-0190407(State or other jurisdiction ofincorporation)(Commission File Number)(I.R.S. EmployerIdentification No.)


325 John H. McConnell Blvd., Suite 200, Columbus, Ohio43215(Address of Principal Executive Offices)(Zip Code)





Registrant's Telephone Number, Including Area Code:   (614) 255-3333








Check the appropriate box below if the Form 8-K filing is intended to simultaneously satisfy the filing obligation of the registrant under any of the following provisions:





 ̈ Written communications pursuant to Rule 425 under the Securities Act (17 CFR 230.425)





 ̈ Soliciting material pursuant to Rule 14a-12 under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14a-12)





 ̈ Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 14d-2(b) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.14d-2(b))





 ̈ Pre-commencement communications pursuant to Rule 13e-4(c) under the Exchange Act (17 CFR 240.13e-4(c))








---




Item 8.01   Other Events





The following is a summary of assets under management as of August 31, 2014 of Diamond Hill Capital Management, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Diamond Hill Investment Group, Inc. (in millions):





By Investment VehicleProprietary funds$9,413Sub-advised funds641Institutional Accounts4,642Total$14,696





By Investment StrategySmall Cap$1,554Small-Mid Cap1,210Large Cap7,293Select (All Cap)414Long-Short3,986Strategic Income239Total$14,696








SIGNATURES





Pursuant to the  requirements  of the Securities  Exchange Act of 1934, the registrant  has duly  caused  this  report  to be  signed  on its  behalf by the undersigned hereunto duly authorized.





DIAMOND HILL INVESTMENT GROUP, INC.Date:September 3, 2014By:/s/ James F. LairdJames F. Laird, Chief Financial Officer and Secretary
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 7926 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to allow for the electronic request 

of certain records, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

AUGUST 4, 2020 

Mr. COX of California (for himself and Mr. ROY) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to allow for the 

electronic request of certain records, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Ensuring Veterans Ac5 cess Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. ELECTRONIC REQUEST OF CERTAIN RECORDS 

7 MAINTAINED BY THE SECRETARY OF VET8 ERANS AFFAIRS. 

9 (a) ELECTRONIC RECORD REQUESTS.—Section 5702 

10 of title 38, United States Code, is amended— 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 7926 IH

1 (1) by redesignating subsection (b) as sub2 section (c); and 

3 (2) by inserting after subsection (a) the fol4 lowing: 

5 ‘‘(b)(1) The Secretary shall establish and maintain 

6 a secure, internet-based portal to ensure that a person or 

7 a duly authorized agent or representative of that person 

8 may submit an electronic request for such records. 

9 ‘‘(2) The Secretary, upon receipt of a valid request 

10 made through the portal established under paragraph (1), 

11 shall provide to the requestor— 

12 ‘‘(A) not later than 10 days after receipt, con13 firmation of such receipt; and 

14 ‘‘(B) not later than 120 days after receipt, such 

15 records requested in the form selected by the re16 questor.’’. 

17 (b) CONFORMING AMENDMENTS.—Section 5702(a) 

18 of title 38, United States Code, is amended— 

19 (1) in the matter preceding paragraph (1), by 

20 striking ‘‘in writing’’ and inserting ‘‘in writing, in21 cluding an electronic request submitted through the 

22 portal established under subsection (b),’’; 

23 (2) in paragraph (1), by striking ‘‘and’’ at the 

24 end; 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 7926 IH

1 (3) in paragraph (2), by striking the period at 

2 the end and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and 

3 (4) by adding at the end the following: 

4 ‘‘(3) the format in which such copy is desired, 

5 including whether in printed form or by download6 able file.’’. 

7 (c) DEADLINE; ESTABLISHMENT OF ELECTRONIC

8 PORTAL.—Not later than 180 days after the date of the 

9 enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Veterans Affairs 

10 shall establish the portal required under section 

11 5702(b)(1) of title 38, United States Code, as added by 

12 this Act, and, to the extent practicable, the Secretary shall 

13 utilize existing online resources of the Department of Vet14 erans Affairs for the purposes of such establishment. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
Division        of Advertising Practices

United States of America 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

Washington, D.C. 20580 

 October 27, 2020 

Via Electronic Mail (lbrett@bbbnp.org) 

Laura Brett, Esq. 

Vice President 

National Advertising Division 

112 Madison Avenue, 3rd Floor 

New York, NY 10016 

Re: Advertising by MASK, LLC for Spotless Blemishes & Oily Skin Soothing CBD 

Sheet Mask 

Dear Ms. Brett: 

We have reviewed the National Advertising Division’s referral of MASK, LLC (the 

“advertiser”) regarding advertising claims for Spotless Blemishes & Oily Skin Soothing CBD 

Sheet Mask. This referral arose out of NAD’s monitoring program. We understand that when 

NAD opened its case, the advertiser had made claims that its cosmetic product would treat acne 

and psoriasis; in fact, the original brand name of the mask at issue was “Spotless & Acne 

Psoriasis Sheet.” After being contacted by NAD, the advertiser voluntarily modified certain 

claims, including changing the brand name of its mask to “Spotless Blemishes & Oily Skin 

Soothing CBD Sheet Mask.” However, NAD referred the matter to the Federal Trade 

Commission after the advertiser declined to confirm that it would comply with other 

recommendations set forth in NAD’s Decision. 

Upon careful review of this referral, we have determined not to take additional action at 

this time. In reaching this conclusion, we considered a number of factors including enforcement 

priorities, resource allocation, the nature of any FTC Act violation, and the type and severity of 

any consumer injury. 
Laura Brett, Esq. 

October 27, 2020 

Page 2 

The staff’s decision to forego a formal investigation at this time is not to be construed as 

a determination that a violation may not have occurred, just as the pendency of an investigation 

should not be construed as a determination that a violation has occurred. The Commission 

reserves the right to take such further action as the public interest may require. The FTC 

appreciates your referral and the opportunity to continue to assist in supporting the NAD. 

Very Truly Yours, 

s/ Carolyn L. Hann

Carolyn L. Hann 

Chief of Staff for Advertising Practices
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 7840 

To reauthorize the Blue Ridge National Heritage Area, and for other 

purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 29, 2020 

Mr. MCHENRY introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To reauthorize the Blue Ridge National Heritage Area, and 

for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Blue Ridge National 

5 Heritage Area Reauthorization Act of 2020’’. 

6 SEC. 2. REAUTHORIZATION OF THE BLUE RIDGE NATIONAL 

7 HERITAGE AREA. 

8 The Blue Ridge National Heritage Area Act of 2003 

9 (54 U.S.C. 320101 note; Public Law 108–108; 117 Stat. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 7840 IH

1 1274; 131 Stat. 461; 132 Stat. 661; 133 Stat. 778) is 

2 amended— 

3 (1) in subsection (i)— 

4 (A) by striking paragraph (1) and insert5 ing the following: 

6 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—There is authorized to be 

7 appropriated to carry out this section $1,000,000 for 

8 each fiscal year.’’; and 

9 (B) in paragraph (2), by striking ‘‘sub10 section (a)’’ and inserting ‘‘paragraph (1)’’; and 

11 (2) in subsection (j), by striking ‘‘2021’’ and 

12 inserting ‘‘2036’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
## U NITED 

## S TATES 

## A IR 

## F ORCE 

## C OURT OF 

## C RIMINAL 

## A PPEALS

_______ _______ __________ No. ACM S32337 (f rev)

_______ _______ __________ UNITED STATES Appellee

v. Zachary A. GOODING Staff Sergeant (E

- 5 ) , U.S. Air Force, Appellant

_______ _______ __________ Appeal from the United S tates Air Force Trial Judiciary

Decided 24 April 2017

_______ _______ __________ Military Judge: Donald R. Eller

. Approved sentence: Bad

- conduct di scharge, confinement for 8 months , and r eduction to E

- 1 . Sentence adjudged 22 May 2015 by SpCM convened at Aviano Air Base, Italy

. For Appellant: Major Isaac C. Kennen, USAF; Major Virginia M. Bare, USAF. For Appellee: M ajor Colin F. Delaney , USAF; Captain Matthew L. Tusing, USAF ; Gerald R. Bruce , Esquire

. Before MAYBERRY, JOHNSON, and SPERANZA , Appellate Military Judges

.

_______ _______ __________ This is an unpublished opinion and, as such, does not serve as precedent under AFCCA Rule of Practice and Procedure 18.4.

_______ _______ __ ________

PE R CURIAM :The approved findings and sentence are correct in law and fact, and no error materially prejudicial to Appellant ’ s substantial rights occurred. Articles 59(a) and 66(c), UCMJ, 10 U.S.C. §§ 859(a), 866(c).United States v

. Gooding , No. ACM S32337 (f rev)

2 Accordingly, the approved findings and sentence are AFFIRMED

.

FOR THE COURT

MICAH L. SMITH Deputy Clerk of the Court
### Served : June 1 6 , 2011

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

OFFICE OF THE SECRETARY

WASHINGTON, D.C.

Issued by the Department of Transportation

on the 1 6 th of June , 2011

INTRA

- ALASKA BUSH

SERVICE MAIL RATES DOCKET OST

- 200 3

- 14694

N OTICE OF EXTENSION

On June 10 , 2010, we directed parties to show cause why we should not make final the rates

tentatively set by Order 2010

- 6

- 14 , with objections due no later than 10 days (J une 20 ) after

the issuance of the order. On J une 14 Peninsula Ai rways, Inc. (PenAir) request ed that we

extend the deadline for objections by 1 6 days, i.e., through J uly 7

.

W e have decided to grant the request . All parties should file their comments no later than

July 7 , 20 11.

Dennis DeVany, Chief,

EAS and Dom estic Analysis

An electronic version of this document is available on the World Wide Web at

http://www.regulations.gov
#### Elias GANEM, Petitioner, v. Herlinda Ganem de ISSA, et al., Respondents.

No. 43312.

Supreme Court of Florida.

April 11, 1973.

Rehearing Denied May 23, 1973.

Certiorari denied. 269 So.2d 740.

CARLTON, C. J., and ERVIN, ADKINS, BOYD and McCAIN, JJ„ concur.
#### W. Ora COOK, Jr., Appellant, v. J. I. CREWS, Appellee.

No. 71-338.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Sept. 7, 1971.

Appeal dismissed.
**Exhibit 31.1**

**CERTIFICATIONS**

I,Jerome E. Ball, certify that:

1.                    I have reviewed this quarterlyreport on Form 10‐QSB of Forward Industries, Inc. for the three monthsended December 31, 2003;

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

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

4.                   The registrant's other certifyingofficers and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosurecontrols and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a‐14 and 15d‐14)for the registrant and we have:

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

b)                  evaluated the effectiveness of theregistrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this reportour conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this quarterly report basedon such evaluation  ; and

c)                  disclosed in this report anychange in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting thatoccurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant'sinternal control over financial reporting;;

5.                   The registrant's other certifyingofficer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internalcontrol over financial reporting,, to the registrant's auditors and the auditcommittee of registrant's board of directors (or persons performing theequivalent functions):

d)                  all significant deficiencies andmaterial weaknesses in the design or operation of internal controls overfinancial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and

e)                  any fraud, whether or notmaterial, that involves management or other employees who have a significantrole in the registrant's internal controls over financial reporting.

Date: January 21, 2004

/s/JeromeE. BallJerome E. BallChairman of the Boardand Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer)
#### Johnnie H. WHEELER v. STATE of Mississippi.

No. 46369.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

June 14, 1971.

Richard E. Stratton, III, Brookhaven, for appellant.

A. F. Summer, Atty. Gen., by Velia Ann Mayer, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Jackson, for appellee.

GILLESPIE, Presiding Justice:

ON MOTION TO DISMISS APPEAL

Johnnie H. Wheeler was convicted of murder and sentenced to life imprisonment. He perfected an appeal to this Court and the case was briefed by the attorneys. While his appeal was pending, he escaped from the county jail. His case was called at the time it was set for hearing on the merits, and he was still a fugitive. His attorney was present and prepared to orally argue the case on the merits, but the appeal is dismissed under the authority of Jones v. State, 218 So.2d 70S (Miss.1969), wherein this Court said:

The new rule is that where a person is convicted of a felony and perfects an appeal to this Court and escapes from custody pending his appeal and is still a fugitive when his case is called for hearing on the merits such action shall be deemed an abandonment of the appeal and will be subject to a motion by the State to dismiss such appeal. (218 So.2d at 706).

Appeal dismissed.

RODGERS, JONES, BRADY and IN-ZER, JJ., concur.
#### MANCHAC LANDSCAPING & PAVING, INC., a Florida corporation, and Zack Williams, Appellants, v. Avery REYNOLDS, by and through his father and guardian ad litem, Julius Reynolds, Appellee.

No. 2637.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

April 8, 1970.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
### NUMBER 13

- 1 6

- 00 013

- C R



## COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI

- EDINBURG

JESUS GONZALEZ

, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

On a ppeal from the 4 0 4 th District Court

of Cameron County, Texas.



## ORDER TO FILE APPELLATE BRIEF

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Rodriguez and Benavides

Order Per Curiam

This cause is currently before the Court on appellant's third motion for extension of

time to file the brief. The reporter’s record was filed on May 5, 2016 , and a ppellant ’ s brief

was originally due to be filed thirty days thereafter. See Tex. R. App. P. 38.6(a). T his

Court has previously granted appellant two extension s of time totaling 120 days to file the2

bri ef, and appellant now seeks an additional 60 days, until December 2, 2016 , to file the

brief.

The Co urt GRANTS appellant’s third motion for extension to file the brief and

ORDERS the Honorable Alfredo Padilla to file the brief on or before December 2, 2016

.

The Court looks with disfavor on the delay caused by counsel’s failure to timely file a brief

in this matter. No further extensions will be granted absent exigent circumstances. If

counsel fails to file the brief within the specified period of time, the Court will act

appropriately to ensure that appellant's rights are protected. See id. R. 38.8(b)(4).

PER CURIAM

Do not publish.

T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 47.2(b).

Delivered and filed the

6th day of October

, 201 6

.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ELMER ALEXANDER LEIVA-DE

LEON,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 11-70282

Agency No. A095-120-777

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted July 17, 2012** 

Before: SCHROEDER, THOMAS, and SILVERMAN, Circuit Judges.

Elmer Alexander Leiva-De Leon, a native and citizen of Guatemala,

petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order

dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s decision denying his motion to

FILED

JUL 24 2012

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 11-70282

reopen removal proceedings conducted in absentia. Our jurisdiction is governed

by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We dismiss in part and deny in part the petition for review. 

We lack jurisdiction to consider Leiva-De Leon’s sole contention, regarding

the practicability of personal service, because it was not exhausted before the

agency. See Barron v. Ashcroft, 358 F.3d 674, 678 (9th Cir. 2004).

Leiva-De Leon has waived any challenge to the BIA’s determinations

regarding delivery of his hearing notice and changed country conditions. See

Martinez-Serrano v. INS, 94 F.3d 1256, 1259-60 (9th Cir. 1996). 

PETITION FOR REVIEW DISMISSED in part; DENIED in part.
Division of Advertising Practices 

Mary K. Engle 

Associate Director 

Chong S. Park, Esq. 

Ropes & Gray LLP 

United States of America 

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

Washington, D.C. 20580 

June 17, 2019 

2099 Pennsylvania A venue, NW 

Washington, DC 20006-6807 

Re: Canada Goose Inc.; FTC Matter No. 182-3146 

Dear Mr. Park: 

As you know, the staff of the Federal Trade Commission's Division of Advertising 

Practices has conducted an investigation into the advertising practices of your client, Canada 

Goose Inc. ("Canada Goose"), for possible violations of Section 5 of the Federal Trade 

Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45. Section 5 of the FTC Act requires that advertising claims be 

truthful and non-misleading. We were concerned that Canada Goose may have made false or 

misleading representations about the treatment of geese whose down is used in Canada Goose's 

apparel. 

Upon careful review of this matter, including non-public information Canada Goose 

provided during our investigation, we have determined not to recommend enforcement action at 

this time. In corning to this conclusion, we considered a number of factors, including the prompt 

corrective action taken by Canada Goose, such as removing the advertising claims at issue from 

the marketplace and clarifying its business practices in marketing materials, among other things. 

Thus, it appears that no further action is warranted at this time and the investigation is closed. 

This action is not to be construed as a determination that a violation of law did not occur, 

just as the pendency of an investigation should not be construed as a determination that a 

violation has occurred. The Commission reserves the right to take further action as the public 

interest may warrant. 

Very truly yours, 

~~ ~~ Associate Director for Advertising Practices