alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
November 18, 2005 OFC. GF VRE

ECRETARIAT

Ms. Jean A. Webb
Secretary

Commodity Futures Trading Commission

Three Lafayette Centre

1155 21" Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20581
Reference File #2602.01
Rule Certification

Dear Ms. Webb:

Pursuant to Commission Regulation 40.6(a), the Chicago Board of Trade (CBOT®) hereby
submits the following:

- Establishment of an Open Auction Primary Market Maker (PMM) Program for
CBOT Two Year Treasury Note Options. (Summary of program’s salient features
is attached).

There were no opposing views in connection with this program.

The CBOT intends to implement this program no sooner than one day after the Commission’s
receipt of this filing.

The CBOT certifies that this program complies with the Commodity Exchange Act and the rules
thereunder.

Sincerely,

Paul J. Draths
Vice President and Secretary

b111505


CBOT® Two Year US Treasury Note Futures Options
Open Auction Primary Market Maker (PMM) Program

PMM Obligations

Participants in the PMM program will provide two-sided markets in CBOT Two Year Treasury
Note Options in the CBOT’s open auction market, on a continuous basis and in response to
requests-for-quote (“RFQs”) during regular open auction market hours (7:20. a.m. to 2:00 p.m.,
Chicago time) for such options, unless prevented from doing so as a result of extraordinary
circumstances beyond the EMM’s reasonable control.

PMM participants agree that they will respond to RFQs for CBOT Two Year Treasury Note
Options at agreed upon minimum size and maximum bid/offer spread levels for specified options
series.

PMM Incentives

Waiver of transaction fees: CBOT open auction transaction fees (excluding clearing fees) will
be rebated for PMM proprietary transactions in CBOT Two Year Treasury Note Options during
the market hours of their assignment. The fee waiver period will coincide with each PMM’s
period of participation in this program.

Preferencing/Entitlements: PMMs will be entitled to a percentage of each transaction in CBOT
Two Year Treasury Note Options, in a percentage to be determined, where PMMs have matched
the bid or offer prior to trade completion, during the hours of their assignment. Total
preferencing to all PMMs will be limited to 40%. Preferencing will be allocated among PMMs
based upon the number of participants, their respective market making commitments,
capitalization and market performance. CBOT will evaluate participant performance on a
quarterly basis, and reserves the right to reallocate entitlement percentages among PMMs based
upon these evaluations.

Term
The program will have a maximum initial term of 13 months.
Termination

PMM Agreements may be terminated for uncorrected material breach, upon specified advance
notice, or by mutual consent.
Case 1:07-cv-01514-AKH Document 7 Filed 10/15/2007 Page 1 of 7Case 1:07-cv-01514-AKH Document 7 Filed 10/15/2007 Page 2 of 7Case 1:07-cv-01514-AKH Document 7 Filed 10/15/2007 Page 3 of 7Case 1:07-cv-01514-AKH Document 7 Filed 10/15/2007 Page 4 of 7Case 1:07-cv-01514-AKH Document 7 Filed 10/15/2007 Page 5 of 7Case 1:07-cv-01514-AKH Document 7 Filed 10/15/2007 Page 6 of 7Case 1:07-cv-01514-AKH Document 7 Filed 10/15/2007 Page 7 of 7
Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH Document 27 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 1 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH Document 27 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 2 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH Document 27 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 3 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH Document 27 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 4 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH Document 27 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 5 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH Document 27 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 6 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH Document 27 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 7 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH Document 27 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 8 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH Document 27 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 9 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH Document 27 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 10 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH Document 27 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 11 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH Document 27 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 12 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-01538-AKH Document 27 Filed 11/26/2007 Page 13 of 13
Clear All

        13 December 2023    

                    Navy Seabee Jessica Smith’s Artwork Recalls U.S. Navy History                 
                Camp Lemonnier’s quarterdeck is getting a makeover, thanks to U.S. Navy Builder 2nd Class Jessica Smith, a performance assessment representative for CLDJ’s Public Works Department.            

        08 September 2023    

                    USS Gerald R. Ford "Beach Det" at NSA Souda Bay                 
                Naval Support Activity Souda Bay, Greece, hosted Sailors assigned to a remotely located logistics detachment of USS Gerald R. Ford (CVN 78), in support of the ship’s forward operations in the Mediterranean Sea, Aug. 16 to Sept. 6, 2023.            

        03 May 2023    

                    “So Others May Live:” Rota Sailor performs life-saving care to local man                 
                Petty Officer 2nd Class Eleodoro Perez, a Naval Aircrewman assigned to Helicopter Maritime Strike Squadron (HSM) 79, was driving home when he saw a commotion on the side of the road, April 1, 2023. He quickly pulled over his car and approached the group.            

#####  

##### Navy.mil  |  Navy.com  |  Navy FOIA  |  DoD Accessibility/Section 508  |  No Fear Act  |  Open Government  |  Plain Writing Act USA.gov  |  Veterans Crisis Line  |  VA Vet Center  |  FVAP  |   DoD Safe Helpline  |  Navy SAPR  |  NCIS Tips  |  Privacy Policy  |  Site Map  |  Contact US

###### Commander, U.S. Fleet Forces Command   |   1562 Mitscher Ave., Suite 250   |   Norfolk, Virginia 23551-2487

###### Official U.S. Navy Website
## NUMBER 13 - 21 - 00 3 1 2 - C V COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI

– EDINBURG

IN RE FRED T. PHILIPS AND MERCEDES PHILIPS

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus

.


## ORDER

Before Justices Benavides, Longoria, and Tijerina Order Per Curiam
On October 1 , 2021, relator s Fred T. Philips and Mercedes Philips filed a petition for writ of mandamus seeking to compel the trial court to vacate its order enforcing a Rule 11 agreemen t. See T EX

. R. C IV

. P . 11. Relators assert that the trial court abused its discretion (1) by granting a motion to enforce a Rule 11 agreement against parties that raised fact issues and revoked consent to the terms of the Rule 11 agreement , and (2)
because the order granting the motion to enforce a Rule 11 agreement c ontains “ material terms outside and beyond the Rule 11 agreement. ” By previous order, this Court2 requested that the real part ies in interest, Thomas D. Stikeleather and Lea Ann Stikeleather , or any others whose interest would be directly affected by the relief sought , file a response to the petition for writ of mandamus

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P

. 52.2, 52.4, 52.8. Relators have now filed a motion for temporary relief requesting that we stay the trial court’s September 28, 2021 order , and any enforcement action pertaining to that
order , pending the resolution of this original proceeding. The Court, having examined and fully considered the motion for temporary relief, is of the opinion that it should be granted.
Acc o rdingly, we g rant the motion for temporary relief and we order the trial court’s September 28, 2021 order and any enforcement action related to that order to be stayed pending further order of this Court.

PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed on the 7 th day of October, 2021.
#### In the Matter of Douglas A. McHoul, Respondent, v Robert A. Sellick, Jr., et al., Appellants.

In a proceeding, *inter alia,*to invalidate a certificate of authorization designating Robert A. Sellick, Jr., as a Democratic Party candidate for the public office of Member of the Dutchess County Legislature, District No. 20, the appeal is from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Dutchess County (Beisner, J.), entered August 15, 1989, which granted the application.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, without costs or disbursements.

The trial court correctly determined that the petitioner had standing to bring this proceeding. The Court of Appeals has recently observed that nonparty voters are aggrieved parties and may maintain judicial proceedings to challenge candidates for failure to follow statutory procedures, as is alleged herein *(see, Scoville v Cicoria,*65 NY2d 972, 974; *Matter of Nowik v Jablonski,*133 AD2d 874; *Matter of Martin v Tutunjian,*89 AD2d 1034). The Court of Appeals has also determined that a candidate is an "aggrieved candidate” even if not a member of the party whose designation is challenged *(see, Matter of Liepshutz v Palmateer,*65 NY2d 963, *affg*112 AD2d 1098).

The issue of the timeliness of the filing of the petitioner’s objection and specifications was not asserted as an affirmative defense in the answer. Such a failure results in a waiver of that defense *(see,*CPLR 3211 [a] [5]; [e]; *Dougherty v City of Rye,*63 NY2d 989). In any event, the objection and specifications were timely filed. The plain language of Election Law § 6-154 (2) provides that an objection as to "any certificate of designation or nomination or to a nominating * * * petition * * * shall be filed * * * within three days after the filing of the petition or certificate to which objection is made” and "specifications of the grounds of the objections shall be filed *722within six days thereafter”. The designating petitions were filed on July 13, 1989. The petitioner’s general objection was filed July 17, 1989, and the specifications were filed on July 24, 1989.

In computing the time for filing the objection, the day from which the time is reckoned is excluded from the reckoning *(see,*General Construction Law § 20). The last day of each period therefore fell on a Sunday (July 16 and July 23), which similarly was to be excluded from the reckoning *(see,*General Construction Law § 20). Accordingly, both the objection and the specifications were timely filed on the following Monday.

As there has been no compliance with the statutory requirements for the opportunity to ballot *(see,*Election Law §§ 6-154, 6-166), the appellants’ request for that form of alternate relief was properly denied. Kunzeman, J. P., Eiber, Spatt, Harwood and Balletta, JJ., concur.
# C_2004271EN.01000201.xml

| 5.11.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 271/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.11.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 271/2

---

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION

concerning the amendment of Decision C(2004) 959 appointing the five members of the Steering Committee of the Intelligent Energy Executive Agency

(2004/C 271/02)

On 4 October 2004, the Commission of the European Communities amended Decision C(2004) 959 concerning the appointment of the five members of the Steering Committee of the Intelligent Energy Executive Agency, as follows:

In the Sole Article,

| | ‘Ms. Catherine DAY, Director-General, Directorate-General Environment’

  is replaced by

  ‘Mr. Jos DELBEKE, Director in charge of Air and Chemicals, Directorate-General Environment’,

  and |
| --- | --- |

‘Ms. Catherine DAY, Director-General, Directorate-General Environment’

is replaced by

‘Mr. Jos DELBEKE, Director in charge of Air and Chemicals, Directorate-General Environment’,

and

| | ‘Mr. Günther HANREICH, Director in charge of the New Energies and Demand Management, Directorate-General Energy and Transport’

  is replaced by

  ‘Mr. Alfonso GONZALEZ FINAT, Director in charge of New Sources of Energy, Demand Management and Sustainable Development, Directorate-General Energy and Transport’. |
| --- | --- |

‘Mr. Günther HANREICH, Director in charge of the New Energies and Demand Management, Directorate-General Energy and Transport’

is replaced by

‘Mr. Alfonso GONZALEZ FINAT, Director in charge of New Sources of Energy, Demand Management and Sustainable Development, Directorate-General Energy and Transport’.

---
Case 1:07-cv-05432-AKH Document 10 Filed 09/04/2008 Page 1 of 2Case 1:07-cv-05432-AKH Document 10 Filed 09/04/2008 Page 2 of 2
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-6450

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee,

v. STEPHEN L. RUSSELL, Defendant – Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Catherine C. Blake, District Judge. (1:08-cv-02037-CCB; 1:07-cr-00361-CCB-1)

Submitted: August 20, 2009 Decided: August 26, 2009

Before WILKINSON and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Stephen L. Russell, Appellant Pro Se. Gregory Welsh, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Stephen L. Russell seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 2008) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district

court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000);

Rose v. Lee , 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Russell has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and 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
| 2.   | Employment. |
|----------------|-------------|

| (ii)   | The      voluntary termination of Employee's employment by Employee other than for      Good Reason. |
|------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| (v)   | Full      compliance by Company with the provisions of Paragraph 7(e) below, if      Employee's employment shall have been terminated by Company during the      Term for any reason other than      Cause, or if Employee's employment shall have been terminated by reason of      Employee's Disability, or if Employee shall have voluntarily terminated      Employee's employment during the Term for Good  Reason. |
|-----------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Name:             |   |   |   |
|-------------------|--------|--------|--------|
| Signature:        |   | Date:  |   |
| Received      by: |   | Date:  |   |

| THE      CONNECTICUT WATER COMPANY   |   | EMPLOYEE |
|--------------------------------------|--------|----------|
| By                                   |   |     |   |
|    Its                |   |     |   |
| CONNECTICUT      WATER SERVICE, INC. |   |     |
| By                                   |   |     |   |
|    Its                |   |     |   |
<PAGE>
                                  EXHIBIT 99.2



PACER TECHNOLOGY

Annual Report on Form 10-K
for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2002



                        CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT

I, Laurence R. Huff, Chief Financial Officer of Pacer Technology (the
"Company"), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
18 U.S.C. Sections 1350, that:

    (1)    the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the fiscal year
           ended June 30, 2002, as filed by the Company with the Securities and
           Exchange Commission (the "Annual Report"), fully complies with the
           applicable requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
           Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

    (2)    the information contained in the Annual Report fairly presents, in
           all material respects, the financial condition and results of
           operations for the Company.

September 25, 2002



                                        /s/  LAURENCE R. HUFF
                                        ----------------------------
                                        Laurence R. Huff
                                        Chief Financial Officer
(83 South. 927)

#### MOBILE & O. R. CO. v. BELL.

(6 Div. 219.)

(Supreme Court of Alabama.

Nov. 13, 1919.)

Appeal from Circuit Court, Pickens County; Bernard Harwood, Judge.

Foster, Verner & Rice, of Tuscaloosa, for appellant.

Patton & Patton, of Livingston, and H. A. & D. K. Jones, of Tuscaloosa, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed on written agreement of parties.
#### People v John Koberstein, Defendant.

Motion to change venue from Oneida County denied. Memorandum: We conclude that defendant has not on this application met his burden of demonstrating that there is "reasonable cause to believe that a fair and impartial trial cannot be had” in Oneida County (CPL 230.20 [2]). If it develops during the voir dire that a fair and impartial jury cannot be drawn, an appropriate application may then be made. The relief requested in the application before us now is premature *(see, People v DiPiazza,*24 NY2d 342; *People v Kroemer,*151 AD2d 1049, and cases cited therein). Present — Doerr, J. P., Denman, Boomer, Pine and Davis, JJ.
# C_2004180EN.01001101.xml

| 13.7.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 180/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.7.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 180/11

---

Appointment of members of the Group of Experts to advise the Commission on a strategy for dealing with accidents in the transport sector

(2004/C 180/10)

Pursuant to Article 3 of Commission Decision 2003/425/EC of 11 June 2003, setting up a group of experts to advise the Commission on a strategy for dealing with accidents in the transport sector (1) and to the call for applications published in the Official Journal of the European Union
   (2), the Commission appointed the following members to the Group of Experts on 15 June 2004, with a two-year renewable mandate, starting on the 1 July 2004.

1

Official Journal of the European Union

2

ARSLANIAN Paul-Louis

DOMINGUEZ CHALA Antonio

FURNARI Salvatore

LANG John Stewart

LÖWENADLER Lars-Göran

MAIER Reinhold

MONCLUS Jesús

RISOTA Victor

SIMONS Servatius Johannes Maria

SMART Ken

VAN VOLLENHOVEN Pieter

VALKAMA-JOUTSEN Pirjo

---

(1)  OJ L 144, 12.6.2003, p. 10.

1

(2)  OJ C 172, 22.7.2003, p. 20.

2

---
[Exhibit 32.2]

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
   AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

    In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Med
Gen, Inc. (the "Company") for the quarter ended June 30, 2005
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, Jack Chien, Chief Financial
Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, that:

    (1)  the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
         or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

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

Date: July 30, 2005

                                       /s/ JACK CHIEN
                                       -----------------------
                                       Jack Chien
                                       Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                     YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                           3,595
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   27,268
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,692
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                         745,115
<DEPRECIATION>                               (224,893)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,371,371
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          118,121
<BONDS>                                      1,024,732
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           407
<OTHER-SE>                                     228,111
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,371,371
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               362,588
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  203,906
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               113,682
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              86,764
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (41,764)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     3,275
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (38,489)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                               (13,459)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (51,948)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.50)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.50)
        

</TABLE>