alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
COMMERCIAL PRINTING REPORT 

JCP FORM �O. Z (Rev. 3-71) 

Department headquarters shall submit two copies to the JOINT COMMITTEE ON PRINTING within 30 days after the close 

of each fiscal quarter. Report all composition, printing, binding, and blank-book work procured from commercial sources through 

department contracts during such period. Do not include work procured through GPO sources in this report. Do not include 

tabulating cards or printed envelopes ordered through GSA contracts, or rebinding publications of any description. Use additional 

sheets if necessary. 

NAME OF DEPARTMENT OR AGENCY 

DESCRIPTION 

(List each job separately) 

NAME OF SERVICE 

JCP or GPO 

waiver number and date 

(if applicable) 

CITY AND STATE 

Total number 

of copies 

Number 

of pages 

per copy 

Style of binding 

(If any) 

FOR PERIOD 

ENDED 

Total cost, 

Including 

paper 

$ _________ ------

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

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

ToT AL Cos T __________________________________________________________________________________ ---------------------------------------------------------- ____ ___ _ _ __ _ ____ _ 

SIGNATURE TITLE DATE SUBMITTED 

, GPO : 1976 0 - 76-027
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 131 (Monday, July 9, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 31748]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-14560]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL18-184-000]


Meldahl, LLC; Notice of Filing

    Take notice that on June 27, 2018, Meldahl, LLC submitted a filing 
of proposed revenue requirement for reactive supply and voltage control 
from generation or other sources service under Schedule 2 of the PJM 
Interconnection, L.L.C. Tariff (Meldahl, Hydroelectric Facility).
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must 
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of 
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. Such notices, 
motions, or protests must be filed on or before the comment date. On or 
before the comment date, it is not necessary to serve motions to 
intervene or protests on persons other than the Applicant.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper using the eFiling link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an 
original and 5 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal 
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street NE, Washington, DC 
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the 
eLibrary link and is available for review in the Commission's Public 
Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link on the 
website that enables subscribers to receive email notification when a 
document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For assistance with any 
FERC Online service, please email <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#12545740515d7c7e7b7c77416762627d606652747760713c757d64"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="387e7d6a7b77565451565d6b4d4848574a4c785e5d4a5b165f574e">[email protected]</span></a>, or call 
(866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.
    Comment Date: 5:00 p.m. Eastern Time on July 18, 2018.

    Dated: June 28, 2018.
Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2018-14560 Filed 7-6-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Exhibit 4.1


 


		CAPELOGIC INCORPORATED

Providing Technology Solutions for Financial Services


1 Windhaven Court, Monroe
Twp, NJ 08831 


Telephone: (609) 448-7930 Fax:
(973) 206-9430 


Web: www.capelogic.com


 


January 14, 2021


 


Advisors Asset Management, Inc.


8100 E. 22nd St. North, Building 800


Suite 102


Wichita, KS 67226


 


Re: Advisors Disciplined Trust 2053 (the “Fund”)


Ladies and Gentlemen:


We have examined
the Registration Statement File No. 333-249496 for the above captioned Fund and acknowledge that Capelogic, Inc. is currently acting
as the independent pricing agent for the Fund. Subsequently, we hereby consent to the reference of Capelogic, Inc. as independent
pricing agent.


You are hereby authorized
to file a copy of this letter with the Securities and Exchange Commission.


 


	 	Sincerely,
	 	 	 
	 	Capelogic, Inc.
	 	 	 
	 	 	 
	 	By	/s/ SALMAN AHMAD
	 	 	Salman Ahmad
	 	 	Treasurer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>      5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AS OF SEPTEMBER 27, 1997 AND THE CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS FOR THE PERIOD ENDED SEPTEMBER 27, 1997 FOR GENRAD, INC.
AND SUBSIDIARIES AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CURRENCY>     U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                              3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                          SEP-27-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                               SEP-27-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                                      1
<CASH>                                                          22,617
<SECURITIES>                                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                   64,740
<ALLOWANCES>                                                     1,158
<INVENTORY>                                                     23,884
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                               114,848
<PP&E>                                                          78,818
<DEPRECIATION>                                                  47,716
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                 162,917
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                           32,523
<BONDS>                                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                0
<PREFERRED>                                                          0
<COMMON>                                                        27,278
<OTHER-SE>                                                      73,015
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                   162,917
<SALES>                                                         47,474
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                58,870
<CGS>                                                           19,263
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                   26,039
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                21,848
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                 315
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                 10,668
<INCOME-TAX>                                                     1,063
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                              9,605
<DISCONTINUED>                                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                      0
<CHANGES>                                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                                     9,605
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                      .33
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                      .33
        

</TABLE>
# C_2020329EN.01002501.xml

| 5.10.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 329/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.10.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 329/25

---

Action brought on 19 August 2020 — Aldi v EUIPO (CUCINA)

(Case T-527/20)

(2020/C 329/45)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Aldi GmbH & Co. KG (Mülheim an der Ruhr, Germany) (represented by: N. Lützenrath, C. Fürsen and M. Minkner, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Trade mark at issue: Application for EU figurative mark CUCINA — Application for registration No 18 135 080

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 19 June 2020 in Case R 463/2020-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order EUIPO to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs.

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council;

| — | Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
EXHIBIT 31.1



CERTIFICATION



I, Frank Khulusi, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A of PC Mall, Inc.; and



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.



|                  |  |                        
|----------------- |  | -----------------------
|Date: May 2, 2005 |  | /s/ Frank Khulusi      
|                  |  | Frank Khulusi          
|                  |  | Chief Executive Officer
COMMONWEALTH OF KENTUCKY 

### Matthew G . Bevin Governor Dec ember 16 , 2015

Mr. Byron 

### K. Huffman, Acting Direc tor Office of Airport Compliance and Management Analysis Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence A venue, SW Washington, DC 20591 Re: Revenue Use Policy Dear Mr. Huffman: This i s in response to yo u r letter of November 24, 2015 , reg ardi ng th e abovereferenced matter. The Commo n wea lth of K e n tucky i s exempt from comp li ance with the FAA Aviation Fuel Tax policy . The collection of Ke ntu cky's sales tax on aviatio n fue l was levi e d in 19 6 0 w hen the sta t e sales tax statute (KRS 1 39 .200) was first enacted. The Kentucky Department of Revenue , as well as the Office of the State Budget Director, has co nfirmed that sai d tax on aviation fuel ha s been co ll ected long before the December 31, 1987 fede r al exempt ion date and this qual ifie s for its "gra ndfat hered " status .

c: Office of the Governo r**~-rl :""dlflCOC** **,** 

### P .E .**._~~tm g**  S ecr etary

Winn Turney, Commissio n er of Aviation

An Equal Opportunity Emp l oyer M/F/D
No. 35.

#### Frank L. Smith et al. *v.*Illinois Bell Telephone Company.

Appeal from the District Court df the United States for the Northern District of Illinois.

Argued October 13, 1925.

Decided October 19, 1925.

*Mr. 'Stephen A. Foster,*with whom *Messrs.- E. Barrett Pretty-man, Oscar E. Carlstrom*and *Karl D. Loos*were on the brief, for appellants.

*Messrs. John W. Davis*and *Charles M. Bfacelen,*with whom *Messrs. N. T.. Guernsey*and *Philip B. Warren*were on the brief, for respondent. .

*Per Curiam.*

Affirmed upon the authority of *Chicago & Great Western Ry. Co.*v. *Kendall,*266 U. S. 96, 100.
**EXHIBIT      32.1**

**FROZEN      FOOD EXPRESS INDUSTRIES, INC.**

**CERTIFICATION      OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

**PURSUANT      TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

|                                   |   |                                                                                                       |   |
|----------------------------------------|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Dated:                November 9, 2006 |   | /s/                Stoney M. Stubbs, Jr.                                                                   |   |
|                                   |   | Stoney                M. Stubbs, Jr.Chairman                of the Board and Chief Executive Officer  |   |
Exhibit 4.1


 





0000001 SEE REVERSE FOR IMPORTANT NOTICE REGARDING OWNERSHIP AND
TRANSFER RESTRICTIONS AND CERTAIN OTHER INFORMATION FULLY PAID AND NON-ASSESSABLE SHARES OF THE COMMON STOCK, $0.0001 PAR VALUE,
OF Butterfly Network, Inc. transferable on the books of the Company in Person or by duly a uthorized attorney, upon surrender
of this Certificate properly endorsed. This Certificate and the shares represented hereby, are issued and shall be held subject
to all of the provisions of the Certificate of Incorporation, as amended, and the Bylaws, as amended, of the Company (copies of
which are on file with the Company and with the Transfer Agent), to all of which each holder, by acceptance hereof, assents. This
Certificate is not valid unless countersigned and registered by the Transfer Agent and Registrar. WITNESS the facsimile seal of
the Company and the facsimile signatures of its duly authorized officers. INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE
COMMON STOCK SEE REVERSE FOR CERTAIN DEFINITIONS Chief Financial Officer CUSIP 124155 10 2 Chief Executive Officer BUTTERFLY NETWORK,
INC. 2020 DELAWARE






     


     


    




Continental Stock T Stock T Continental Stock T T Continental
Stock T Stock T Continental Stock T Stock T Continental Stock T Continental Stock T Continental Stock T Stock T Continental Stock
T Stock T T Stock T T Stock T JT TEN Attorney, to transfer the said stock on the books of the within-named Corporation with full
power of substitution in the p remises. Shares of the common stock represented by this certificate and do hereby irrevocably constitutes
and appoint THE CORPORATION WILL FURNISH TO ANY STOCKHOLDER, UPON REQUEST AND WITHOUT CHARGE, A FULL STATEMENT OF THE DESIGNATIONS,
RELATIVE RIGHTS, PREFERENCES AND LIMITATIONS OF THE SHARES OF EACH CLASS AND SERIES AUTHORIZED TO BE ISSUED, SO FAR AS THE SAME
HAVE BEEN DETERMINED, AND OF THE AUTHORITY, IF ANY, OF THE BOARD TO DIVIDE THE SHARES INTO CLASSES OR SERIES AND TO DETERMINE
AND CHANGE THE RELATIVE RIGHTS, PREFERENCES AND LIMITATIONS OF ANY CLASS OR SERIES. SUCH REQUEST MAY BE MADE TO THE SECRETARY
OF THE CORPORATION OR TO THE TRANSFER AGENT NAMED ON THIS CERTIFICATE.
# Transportation and logistics services

We offer various solutions for all transportation and fleet management needs.

## Fleet management

We provide comprehensive fleet management services to the federal government. The suite of offerings includes options to purchase, lease, and rent vehicles as well as the online tools for easy acquisitions.
                        - Vehicle leasing
                        - Vehicle purchasing
                        - Short-term rentals

## Federal Fleet Management Certification Program

The FFMCP is a comprehensive training for federal fleet management at all levels.

## FedFleet

FedFleet is a unique, educational experience that assembles fleet management professionals for a week of training.

## Transportation programs

                        - The Freight Management Program
                        - Transportation & Logistics Services
                        - TMSS 2.0

## Transportation audits

Audit and recover transportation service provider overcharges and other debts relating to paid transportation bills by federal agencies.

Print PageEmail Page

Top

-  Transportation and logistics services-  Overview 
-  Transportation Audits 
-  Transportation programs 
-  Fleet management
#### Amos JACKSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 7429.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Second District.

Oct. 13, 1967.

Walter R. Talley, Public Defender, and William H. Namack, III, Asst. Public Defender, Bradenton, for appellant.

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Robert R. Crittenden, Asst. Atty. Gen., Lakeland, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Amos Jackson was found guilty by a jury of second-degree murder and was sentenced to a thirty year prison term. The judgment and sentence were affirmed by this court in Jackson v. State, Fla.App.1966, 188 So.2d 857 (per curiam). He sub*30sequently filed a motion for post-conviction relief pursuant to Fla.R.Crim.P. 1, F.S.A. ch. 924 Appendix, and this appeal is from the order denying said motion.

The record indicates that appellant’s contention of denial of fair trial is without merit. Accordingly, we affirm the order denying his post-conviction motion.

Affirmed.

SHANNON, Acting C. J., and PIERCE and HOBSON, JJ., concur.
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.                  

###### Federal Reserve System

                    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 § 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.

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 July 17, 2018.

*A. Federal Reserve Bank of Boston*                     (Prabal Chakrabarti, Senior Vice President) 600 Atlantic Avenue, Boston, Massachusetts 02210-2204. Comments can also be sent electronically to                     *BOS.SRC.Applications.Comments@bos.frb.org:*

                    1.                     *Cape Cod Five Mutual Company, Harwich Port, Massachusetts;*                     to indirectly acquire voting shares of Summit Technology Consulting Group, LLC, Lancaster, Pennsylvania, and thereby engage in management consulting and data processing activities pursuant to section 225.28(b)(9) and 225.28(b)(14) of Regulation Y.                

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, June 27, 2018.

Ann Misback,

Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 2018-14184 Filed 6-29-18; 8:45 am]

 BILLING CODE P
#### Abraham Thomas OLIVA, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 76-2062.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Feb. 14, 1978.

Albert L. Carnearte, Miami, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen. and Margarita Esquiroz, Asst. Atty. Gen. and Edwin D. Davis, II, Legal Intern, for appellee.

Before HAVERFIELD, C. J., and HEN-DRY and NATHAN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal by Abraham Thomas Oliva, from a judgment of conviction for conspiracy to sell cocaine, and sentence thereon to 5 years in the state penitentiary. Oliva has raised two points on appeal. No error is shown with respect to Oliva’s first contention, that he was denied his right to fully cross examine one of the State’s witnesses, a paid confidential informant. See *Crespo v. State,*344 So.2d 598 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977); *Oliva v. State,*346 So.2d 1066, 1068 (Fla. 3d DCA 1977).

The second point on appeal is that the trial court erred in failing to discharge Oliva after he was denied a speedy trial since he was not tried within the time speci*1265fied in Rule 3.191, Fla.R.Crim.P. While the record reflects that a timely motion for discharge on speedy trial grounds was made, it fails to reflect that the motion was ever heard, considered or ruled on by the trial court. Generally, an appellate court must confine its review to questions which were before the trial court and upon which a ruling adverse to the appealing party was made. See *Yost v. State,*243 So.2d 469, 471 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971). If we were to consider the question, however, no error is shown as Oliva’s argument is based on “tacking” procedures which do not apply under Florida law. See *King v. State,*303 So.2d 389, 391 (Fla. 3d DCA 1974); *State v. Kurtz,*354 So.2d 890 (Fla. 4th DCA 1978).

Affirmed.
#### JOSEPH MORRIS *vs.*JOSEPH R. BARKER.

In the action of slander the defendant’s circumstances as to property cannot be given in evidence.

Under the general issue the defendant may prove previous reports of plaintiffs guilt, to reduce the damages, and disprove the malice.

Malice is the gist of the action.

The law implies malice from charges of an indictable character.

October term, 1847.

This was an action of slander for words. Plea, not guilty.

Plaintiff proved the slander and offered evidence of the defendant’s circumstances. This was objected to, and insisted on; and, after *521argument, was ruled out by the court. (2 *Greenl. Evid.*222, § 2(59.) ' •

*Robinson, Bayard, jr.,*and *Layton,*for plaintiff.

*Cullen*and *Saulsbury,*for defendant.

*Mr. Cullen,*for the defendant,

proposed to prove that there were general rumors in the neighborhood that plaintiff had done the act with which he was charged, and that the defendant repeated the rumor innocently, without malice. (3 *Steph. N. P.*2579; 7 *Com. Law Rep.*220; 1 *Camp. Rep.*267-8; 10 *Com. Law Rep.*321, 2 *Camp. N. P.*251; 1 *M. & Selw.*284.)

*Robinson, Layton*and *Bayard, jr.,*

contended that no matter of extenuation or justification could be given in evidence undér the plea of not guilty, which puts in issue only the speaking' of the words. If words be spoken on a justifiable occasion, it must be pleaded specially. (3 *Com. Law Rep.*177; 21 *Ibid*69, 72; 3 *Harr. Rep.*377; *Ros. Ev.*293.)

But the court admitted the evidence, in mitigation of damages, on the authority of Leicester *vs.*Walter, 2 *Camp.*251; *and - vs.*Moore, 1 *M. & S.*284; and it seemed to them reasonable, that although a man may not *justify*the uttering a slander, nor attempt to prove its *truth*upon a plea of not guilty, yet with a view to mitigate the damages and disprove malice, he might show that before the uttering the slander by the defendant, it was generally reported and spoken of by others.’ Verdict for plaintiff $200.
256 La. 914

#### Hollis BERRY, Jr. v. AETNA CASUALTY & SURETY COMPANY et al.

No. 50941.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Nov. 9, 1970.

In re: Hollis Berry, Jr. applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, Parish of Caddo. 240 So.2d 243.

Writ refused. On the facts found by the Court of Appeal, the result is correct.
Docket No: FAA-2015-3146 Dir ID: 2014-NM-249-AD