alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
U.S. COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION
Three Lafayette Centre
1155 21st Street, NW, Washington, DC 20581
Telephone: (202) 418-5000
Facsimile: (202) 418-5521
www.cftc.gov

August 31, 2020

Mr. Christian Martin

Chief Executive Officer
TeraExchange, LLC

1971 NJ-34

Wall Township, New Jersey 07719

Re: Application of TeraExchange, LLC for reinstatement of swap execution facility registration
Dear Mr. Martin:

By submissions dated December 2, 2019 through May 27, 2020, TeraExchange, LLC
(Tera) applied to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (Commission), pursuant to
section 5h of the Commodity Exchange Act (“CEA”) and Commission Regulation 37.3(b), for
reinstatement of Tera’s swap execution facility registration. The Commission has reviewed the
materials submitted and has determined to reinstate Tera’s registration as a swap execution
facility pursuant to sections 5h and 6(a) of the Act and part 37 of the Commission’s regulations.

The Commission’s reinstatement of Tera’s registration is based upon written
submissions, explanations and representations provided by Tera describing the manner in which
it will operate. Tera’s registration as a swap execution facility is subject to the terms of the
Order granting its reinstatement. On an ongoing basis, Tera must inform the Commission’s
Division of Market Oversight of any material modification to Tera’s operations, its regulatory
program or its trading system. Tera must submit any new or amended rule (as defined in
Commission regulation 40.1) to the Commission pursuant to Commission regulations 40.5 or
40.6. Moreover, the Commission reminds Tera that prior to listing any contract for trading, Tera
must first submit any such contract to the Commission pursuant to regulations 40.2 or 40.3.

Sincerely,

Date | Ppl

Christopher J. Kirkpatrick
Secretary of the Commission
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

MALIK ALSTON,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 419 EAL 2018

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 13th day of February, 2019

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED

.
October 18, 2005

Ms. Jean A. Webb

Secretary

Commodity Futures Trading Commission

Three Lafayette Centre

1155 21% Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20581
Reference File #2588.01
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 Electronic Market Maker (EMM) 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

B081605


CBOT® Two Year US Treasury Note Futures Options
Electronic Market Maker (EMM) Program

EMM Obligations

Participants in the EMM program will provide two-sided markets in CBOT Two Year Treasury
Note Options on the CBOT’s electronic platform (e-cbot®), on a continuous basis and in
response to requests-for-quote (“RFQs”) during regular U. S. market hours (7:00 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.

Market Maker Classes: There are two classes of EMM participants, the Primary Market Maker
Group (PMM), and the Competitive Market Maker Group (CMM).

EMM 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.

Market Maker Incentive

Both PMMs and CMMs will be entitled to the following incentive:

Waiver of transaction fees: All CBOT electronic transaction fees will be rebated for EMM
proprietary transactions in CBOT Two Year Treasury Note Options during the market hours of

their assignment.

Further Incentive Available for PMMs

Entitlements: After the allocation of any priority order, 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. The CBOT reserves the right to periodically review and reallocate entitlement
percentages among the PMMs.

Term
The program will have a maximum initial term of two years.
Termination

EMM Agreements may be terminated for uncorrected material breach, upon specified advance
notice, or by mutual consent.
Birmingham, Alabama
                                                             October 20, 2005

                                  ADDENDUM III

This Addendum III ("Addendum III") is an addendum to the Real Estate Note
("Note") executed by D. W. Grimsley, Jr., on behalf of Automotive Services
Group, LLC ("ASG") (the "Undersigned") the manager of Automotive Services Group,
LLC, on July 27, 2005, the Future Advance Mortgage Assignment of Rents and
Leases and Security Agreement ("Security Agreement") executed by the Undersigned
on July 27, 2005, Addendum I ("Addendum I") dated August 10, 2005 and Addendum
II dated September 23, 2005 ("Addendum II"). The Note, Security Agreement and
Addendum I and II are fully incorporated by reference in this Addendum III.

The Undersigned, for value received, promise to pay to the order of AULT GLAZER
BODNAR ACQUISITION FUND, LLC, the sum of two hundred forty seven thousand four
hundred sixty two dollars ($253,075.25) ("Advance") together with interest upon
the unpaid portion thereof from the date at the rate of three percent (3%) above
the "Prime Rate" as published in The Wall Street Journal. This advance was to
fund construction costs. This note is secured by mortgage on real estate,
executed to the payee herein.

This Addendum III fully incorporates by reference the Note, Security Agreement
and Addendum I and II for an aggregate Advance to date in the amount of
$910,838.00.

This Addendum II is given, executed and delivered under the seal of the
Undersigned.

                              Automotive Services Group, LLC



                              /s/ D. W. Grimsley, Jr.
                              -------------------------------------------
                              By:      D. W. Grimsley, Jr.
                              Its:     Manager
Exhibit 32.1









Certification of Principal Executive 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 of Steele Recording Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, A. Scott Dockter, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





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





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





/s/ A. Scott DockterA. Scott DockterPrincipal Executive OfficerAugust 12, 2010
Exhibit 32.2









CERTIFICATION 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 of Sinobiopharma, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended August 31, 2010,  as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Xinjie Mu, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(1)
The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





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





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.





The foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350 and is not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.








Date: October 15, 2010
By:
/s/ Xinjie MuXinjie Mu

Chief Financial Officer and Director

(principal financial and accounting officer)
#### Laura T. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. LOS ANGELES JOB CORPS; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 12-55015.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted May 14, 2013.*

Filed May 22, 2013.

Laura T. Williams, Los Angeles, CA, pro se.

Leslie E. Wallis, Ogletree, Deakins, Nash, Smoak & Stewart, P.C., Los Ange-les, CA, Robin Dale Wiener, Esquire, Davis, CA, for Defendants-Appellee.

Before: LEAVY, THOMAS, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Laura T. Williams appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing her employment action alleging violations of federal and state law. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. *Pareto v. FDIC,*139 F.3d 696, 699 (9th Cir.1998). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Williams’s action alleging breach of contract, harassment, discrimination, defamation, and wrongful termination because Williams alleged so few facts that the court could infer only the possibility of misconduct. *See Ashcroft v. Iqbal,*556 U.S. 662, 678, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 173 L.Ed.2d 868 (2009) (to survive a motion to dismiss, a plaintiff must allege facts that “allow[ ] the court to draw the reasonable inference that the defendant is liable for the misconduct alleged”); *Pareto,*139 F.3d at 699 (“[C]on-clusory allegations of law and unwarranted inferences are not sufficient to defeat a motion to dismiss.”).

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Williams’s motion for default judgment because defendants promptly re-filed their motion to dismiss without the original clerical error and the delay did not prejudice Williams. *See Ei-*
      *552
      *tel v. McCook*782 F.2d 1470, 1471-72 (9th Cir.1986) (setting forth standard of review and factors the court may consider in deciding whether to enter default judgment under Fed.R.Civ.P. 55).

Williams’s contention that the district court treated her unfairly is unsupported by the record.

AFFIRMED.

**This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 95 (Wednesday, May 16, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 27195-27196]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-12236]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration


RTCA Special Committee 181/EUROCAE Working Group 13: Standards of 
Navigation Performance

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of RTCA Special Committee 181/EUROCAE Working Group 13 
meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of a 
meeting of RTCA Special Committee 181/EUROCAE Working Group 13: 
Standards of Navigation Performance.

DATES: The meeting will be held May 21-25, 2001 starting at 9 a.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at RTCA, Inc., Colson Board Room 
and Rohde & Schwartz Room, 1140 Connecticut Avenue, NW., Suite 1020, 
Washington, DC, 20036.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: RTCA Secretariat, 1140 Connecticut 
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC, 20036; telephone (202) 833-9339; fax (202) 
833-9434; web site http://www.rtca.org.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal 
Advisory Committee Act (P.L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., Appendix 2), notice is 
hereby given for a Special Committee 181/EUROCAE Working Group 13 meet. 
Note: Working Groups 1 and 4 will meet separately each day of the 
meeting. The agenda will include:

<bullet> May 22:
    <bullet> Opening Session (Chairman Remarks, Working Group Reports, 
Plenary Review)
<bullet> May 24:
    <bullet> Closing Session (Plenary Review, New Business, Future 
Meeting Schedule, Adjourn)

    Attendance is open to the interested public but limited to space 
availability. With the approval of the chairmen, members of the public 
may present oral statements at the meeting. Persons wishing to present 
statements or obtain information should contact the person listed in 
the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT section. Members of the public may 
present a written statement to the committee at any time.


[[Page 27196]]


    Issued in Washington, DC, on May 9, 2001.
Janice L. Peters,
FAA Special Assistant, RTCA Advisory Committee.
[FR Doc. 01-12236 Filed 5-15-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
## Breadcrumb

-  News 

Breadcrumb-  News 

##   FORT research economist Aaron Enriquez invited to present work on nonmarket valuation of wildlife and recreation to the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife

      By Fort Collins Science Center      November 2, 2023    

USGS Research Economist Aaron Enriquez was invited to be a guest speaker at the Washington Department of Fish & Wildlife's lunchtime seminar series on Monday, November 6th. Aaron's talk is titled "Pricing Wildlife and Outdoor Recreation: An Introduction to Nonmarket Valuation."

View Media Details

###  

### Abstract

Outside of commercial fishing, what’s the value of sockeye salmon to Alaskans? Do Greater Yellowstone Ecosystem locals and non-locals differ in how they value grizzly bears? Are national park visitors willing to foot the bill for conserving wide-ranging wildlife that migrate out of the parks?

Many things in nature don’t have market prices, but economists "put a dollar" on them anyway. This presentation provides a broad overview of nonmarket valuation, including the what, why, and how, with a particular focus on wildlife and outdoor recreation applications.

The talk will be hosted virtually on Teams from 1–2 pm Mountain Time on Monday, November 6th.

View Media Details

## Related Content

                -              Science           

link

October 25, 2019

####                 Economics and Ecosystem Services              

Ecosystems Mission Area, Water Resources Mission Area, Land Management Research Program, Fort Collins Science Center

link

October 25, 2019

####   Economics and Ecosystem Services

Learn More

## Related Content

link

October 25, 2019

####                 Economics and Ecosystem Services              

Ecosystems Mission Area, Water Resources Mission Area, Land Management Research Program, Fort Collins Science Center

link

October 25, 2019

####   Economics and Ecosystem Services

Learn More

### Get Our News

These items are in the RSS feed format (Really Simple Syndication) based on categories such as topics, locations, and more. You can install and RSS reader browser extension, software, or use a third-party service to receive immediate news updates depending on the feed that you have added. If you click the feed links below, they may look strange because they are simply XML code. An RSS reader can easily read this code and push out a notification to you when something new is posted to our site.

RSS Icon**

Ecosystems Mission Area News

RSS Icon**

Ecosystems News

RSS Icon**

Fort Collins Science Center News

RSS Icon**

Rocky Mountain Region News

### Contacts

#### Aaron J Enriquez, PhD

##### Research Economist

Fort Collins Science Center

aenriquez@usgs.gov

970-226-9371
A92A1076.

#### CARNES v. ADEL STEEL, INC.

(424 SE2d 902)

Carley, Presiding Judge.

Appellee-plaintiff brought suit against appellant-defendant for breach of contract. Appellant answered and counterclaimed against appellee for breach of contract. After a jury trial, a verdict in favor of appellee was returned. Thereafter, the trial court entered judgment on the jury’s verdict and, sua sponte, awarded attorney’s fees to appellee. Appellant appeals.

1. Appellant enumerates the general grounds.

The evidence was not without conflict. However, “[w]e have ex*874amined the transcript and find evidence to support the verdict of the jury and the judgment of the [court]. There being some evidence to support the judgment, we must and will affirm. [Cit.]” *Franks v. Reese,*151 Ga. App. 670, 672 (261 SE2d 420) (1979).

Decided October 21, 1992.

*B. Dean Grindle, Jr.,*for appellant.

*Moser & Aeree, Gary L. Moser, Randall S. Aeree,*for appellee.

2. The trial court’s sua sponte award of attorney’s fees was presumably based upon OCGA § 9-15-14 (b). However, the trial court did not make the requisite finding so as to authorize an award thereunder. *Market Ins. Corp. v. IHM, Inc.,*192 Ga. App. 441, 442 (3) (385 SE2d 307) (1989), overruled on other grounds, *Fowler v. Vineyard,*261 Ga. 454, 456 (2) (405 SE2d 678) (1991). Accordingly, that portion of the judgment must be reversed.

*Judgment affirmed in part and reversed in part.*

*Pope and Johnson, JJ., concur.*
## Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

MANDATE

TO THE CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT NO. 4 OF DALLAS COUNTY, GREETINGS:

Before the Court of Appeals for the Fifth District of Texas, on the 21 st day of October

, 2014 , the

cause on appeal to revise or reverse the judgment between

ERRINGTON CHARLES HATCH, JR.,

Appellant

No. 05

- 13

- 00895

- CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the Criminal Distri ct Court

No. 4, Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F08

- 60670

- K.

Opinion delivered by Justice Stoddart.

Justices FitzGerald and Fillmore

participating.

was determined; and this Court made its order in these words:

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is

MODIFIED as follows:

We STRIKE Justin Lord as the “Attorney for State” and MODIFY the judgment by

adding George B. Lewis, II as the attorney for the State.

We STRIKE “TRUE” a s being appellant Errington Charles Hatch, Jr.’s “Plea to Motion

to Adjudicate” and MODIFY the judgment by adding “NOT TRUE” as Hatch’s “Plea to Motion

to Adjudicate.”

We STRIKE “OPEN PLEA” as the “Terms of Plea Bargain” and MODIFY the

judgment by addin g “NONE” as the “Terms of Plea Bargain.”

As modified, the judgment is AFFIRMED

.

WHEREFORE, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of the Court of Appeals

for the Fifth District of Texas, in this behalf, and have it duly obeyed and executed.WITNESS the HON. CAROLYN WRIGHT, Chief Justice of the Court of Appeals, with

the Seal thereof affixed, at the City of Dallas, this 31 st day of December, 2014.

LISA MATZ, Clerk
Case 1:07-cv-05866-LTS Document 13 Filed 09/25/2007 Page 1 of 7
Case 1:07-cv-05866-LTS Document 13 Filed 09/25/2007 Page 2 of 7
Case 1:07-cv-05866-LTS Document 13 Filed 09/25/2007 Page 3 of 7
Case 1:07-cv-05866-LTS Document 13 Filed 09/25/2007 Page 4 of 7
Case 1:07-cv-05866-LTS Document 13 Filed 09/25/2007 Page 5 of 7
Case 1:07-cv-05866-LTS Document 13 Filed 09/25/2007 Page 6 of 7
Case 1:07-cv-05866-LTS Document 13 Filed 09/25/2007 Page 7 of 7
#### Jeffery Allen NALLY, Jr., Petitioner-Appellant, v. Warden Evelyn SEIFERT, Respondent-Appellee, and James T. Carey; Larry Roberts; James Davis, Jr.; Judge Fred Fox, II; Scott Swan, Respondents.

No. 13-6301.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: April 25, 2013.

Decided: April 30, 2013.

Jeffery Allen Nally, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Robert David Goldberg, Assistant Attorney General, Silas B. Taylor, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF WEST VIRGINIA, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Before AGEE and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Jeffery Allen Nally, Jr., seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2006) petition. The order is not appeal-able unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2006). A certificate of ap-pealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *see Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. *Slack,*529 U.S. at 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595.

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Nally 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 this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED.*
ICE Swap Trade LLC

55 East 52nd Street

New York, NY 10055

May 14, 2021

Submitted via the CFTC Portal Submission 21-07

Melissa Jurgens

Office of the Secretariat

U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission

Three Lafayette Centre

1155 21st Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20581

via email: submissions@cftc.gov

Re: ICE Swap Trade, LLC – Regulation §40.6(d) Weekly Notification of Rule Amendments 

Ladies and Gentlemen:

Pursuant to Section 5c(c) of the Commodity Exchange Act (the “Act”) and Section 40.6(d) of the 

regulations of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (the “Commission”), ICE Swap Trade, 

LLC (“IST” or the “SEF”) hereby notifies the Commission of an amendment that was made to a

rule during the week of May10, 2021. 

A concise explanation of the amendment to the Rulebook is attached hereto as Exhibit A. A copy 

of the revised Rulebook marked to show changes against the previous Rulebook with an effective 

date of May 14, 2021, is attached hereto as Exhibit B. A clean copy of the revised Rulebook is 

attached hereto as Exhibit C. 

IST certifies that the rule amendment complies with the requirements of the Commodity Exchange 

Act and the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder. IST is not aware of any substantive 

opposing views expressed with respect to this filing and certifies that, concurrent with this filing, 

a copy of this submission was posted on the IST’s website and may be accessed at: 

https://www.theice.com/swap-trade/regulation#rule-filings. 

Please contact the undersigned at (212) 323-8500 with any questions regarding this matter.

Very truly yours,

Robert J. Laorno

General Counsel

Enclosure
Exhibit A

Summary of Rulebook Changes

Change Description

Administrative changes to Governance and 

Definitions

Updates to Governance: Rules 202, 203, 205, 

210, 307

Updates to Definitions: Chapter 1, Rule 1302