alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
300 Vesey Street New York, NY 10282 T 212 299 2200 F 212 301 4645 christopher.bowen@cmegroup.com cmegroup.com

Christopher Bowen

Managing Director and Chief Regulatory Counsel

Legal Department

March 8, 2022

VIA ELECTRONIC PORTAL

Assistant Secretary of the Commission for

FOI, Privacy and Sunshine Acts Compliance

Commodity Futures Trading Commission

Three Lafayette Centre

1155 21st Street, N.W.

Washington, DC 20581

Re: FOIA Confidential Treatment Request 

To Whom It May Concern:

By electronic portal dated today, March 8, 2022, NEX SEF Limited (“NEX SEF”) submitted a 

supplemental rule certification filing (Submission No. 22-066s) to the Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission (“CFTC” or “Commission”) pursuant to Commission Regulation 40.6(a) to certify 

amendments to the following NEX SEF Form SEF Exhibits and related Market Regulation Advisory 

Notices (“MRANs”) (collectively, the “Rule Amendments”). This supplemental filing includes an 

Appendices G through JJ.

NEX SEF requests confidential treatment of Appendices G through JJ (“Confidential Information”), on the 

grounds that Appendices G through JJ contain confidential commercial information of the submitter (NEX 

SEF). NEX SEF requests that confidential treatment be maintained for Appendices G through JJ until 

further notice from NEX SEF. We also request that the Commission notify the undersigned immediately 

after receiving any FOIA request for said Appendices G through JJ or any other court order, subpoena, or 

summons for same. Finally, we request that we be notified in the event the Commission intends to 

disclose such Appendices G through JJ to Congress or to any other governmental agency or unit 

pursuant to Section 8 of the CEA. NEX SEF does not waive its notification rights under Section 8(f) of the 

CEA with respect to any subpoena or summons for such Appendices G through JJ.

Please contact the undersigned at (212) 299-2200 should you have any questions concerning this matter.

Sincerely,

/s/ Christopher Bowen

Managing Director and Chief Regulatory Counsel
# C_2019103EN.01003501.xml

| 18.3.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 103/35 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.3.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 103/35

---

Judgment of the General Court of 7 February 2019 — Eglo Leuchten v EUIPO — Briloner Leuchten (Lamp)

(Case T-767/17) (1)

((Community design - Invalidity proceedings - Registered Community design representing a light fitting - Ground for invalidity - Earlier design - Individual character - Informed user - Degree of freedom of the designer - Article 6 of Regulation (EC) No 6/2002))

(2019/C 103/45)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Eglo Leuchten GmbH (Pill, Austria) (represented by H. Lauf, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by A. Söder, acting as Agent)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Briloner Leuchten GmbH & Co. KG, formerly Briloner Leuchten GmbH (Brilon, Germany) (represented by M.-H. Hoffmann, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 26 September 2017(Case R 746/2016-3) relating to invalidity proceedings between Eglo Leuchten and Briloner Leuchten

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Eglo Leuchten GmbH to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Eglo Leuchten GmbH to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 22, 22.1.18.

---
Case 1:07-cv-05862-RJH Document 25 Filed 08/06/2007 Page 1 of 6Case 1:07-cv-05862-RJH Document 25 Filed 08/06/2007 Page 2 of 6Case 1:07-cv-05862-RJH Document 25 Filed 08/06/2007 Page 3 of 6Case 1:07-cv-05862-RJH Document 25 Filed 08/06/2007 Page 4 of 6Case 1:07-cv-05862-RJH Document 25 Filed 08/06/2007 Page 5 of 6Case 1:07-cv-05862-RJH Document 25 Filed 08/06/2007 Page 6 of 6
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2073 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2073

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to permanently extend the 
    7.5 percent adjusted gross income floor for the medical expense 
                               deduction.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 3, 2019

  Ms. Porter (for herself and Mr. Marchant) introduced the following 
      bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to permanently extend the 
    7.5 percent adjusted gross income floor for the medical expense 
                               deduction.

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

SECTION 1. PERMANENT EXTENSION OF REDUCTION IN MEDICAL EXPENSE 
              DEDUCTION FLOOR.

    (a) In General.--Section 213(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 
1986 is amended by striking ``10 percent'' and inserting ``7.5 
percent''.
    (b) Conforming Amendments.--
            (1) Section 213 of such Code is amended by striking 
        subsection (f).
            (2) Section 56(b)(1) of such Code is amended by striking 
        subparagraph (B) and by redesignating subparagraphs (C), (D), 
        (E), and (F), as subparagraphs (B), (C), (D), and (E), 
        respectively.
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall apply 
to taxable years ending after December 31, 2018.
                                 <all>
```
1177 Avenue of Americas

New York, New York 10036

Via CFTC Portal

March 20, 2020

Mr. Christopher J. Kirkpatrick

Office of the Secretariat

Commodity Futures Trading Commission

Three Lafayette Centre

1155 21st Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20581

Re: Commission Regulations 40.6(a)(6): Emergency Self-Certification of Market Regulation 

Advisory Notice (COVID-19 Emergency Notice)

Dear Mr. Kirkpatrick:

TW SEF LLC (“TW SEF”) hereby notifies the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (the 

“Commission”), pursuant to Section 5c(c) of the Commodity Exchange Act (the “Act”) and 

Commission Regulation 40.6(a)(6)(ii), that it is self-certifying a Market Regulation Advisory 

Notice entitled COVID-19 Emergency Notice (the “COVID-19 Notice”).

The COVID-19 Notice is an Emergency Rule and will be effective on March 20, 2020. The 

COVID-19 Notice was implemented under TW SEF Rule 412 (Emergencies) and its issuance 

was approved by the Board of TW SEF.

In connection with its submission, TW SEF hereby notifies the Commission that:

1. TW SEF certifies that it has posted the COVID-10 Notice on TW SEF’s website and has 

provided this notification to the Commission;

2. TW SEF certifies that the COVID-19 Notice complies with the TW SEF Rulebook, the 

Act and the Commission’s regulations, thereunder, specifically Core Principle 8 

(Emergency Authority); and

3. No substantive opposing views with respect to the COVID-19 Notice were expressed to 

TW SEF by its governing board or committee members, or market participants.

This submission letter contains the following attachments:

Attached as Exhibit A is the COVID-19 Notice, which provides a concise explanation and 

analysis of the operation, purpose, and effect of the emergency rule and its compliance 

with applicable provisions of the Act, including core principles, and the Commission's 

regulations thereunder.
Mr. Christopher J. Kirkpatrick

Commodity Futures Trading Commission

March 20, 2020

2

304591963 v1

In the event that you have questions, please contact the undersigned at (646) 560-7223 or 

Gregory.Compa@tradeweb.com.

Very truly yours,

Gregory Compa

Chief Compliance Officer

TW SEF LLC
Mr. Christopher J. Kirkpatrick

Commodity Futures Trading Commission

March 20, 2020

3

304591963 v1

EXHIBIT A

TW SEF COVID-19 EMERGENCY NOTICE
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Victor Hodges, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Lawrence, J.), rendered September 20, 1985, convicting him of manslaughter *638in the first degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no meritorious issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted *(see, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Paige,*54 AD2d 631; *cf., People v Gonzalez,*47 NY2d 606). Thompson, J. P., Kunzeman, Eiber, Spatt and Balletta, JJ., concur.
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 on Form 10-Q of Oaktree Capital Group,
LLC (the Company) for the quarter ended June 30, 2012 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, David M. Kirchheimer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 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, 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 at the dates and for the
periods presented.
|--- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: August 10, 2012



/s/ David M. KirchheimerDavid M. KirchheimerChief Financial Officer, Chief AdministrativeOfficer and Principal(Principal Financial Officer and PrincipalAccounting Officer)


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.

This Certification
is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made
before or after the date of the Report), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.
Case 1:07-cv-05830-CM Document 10 Filed 07/12/2007 Page 1 of 1
Case 1:07-cv-05861-RMB-GWG Document 37-5 Filed 01/11/2008 Page 1 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-05861-RMB-GWG Document 37-5 Filed 01/11/2008 Page 2 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-05861-RMB-GWG Document 37-5 Filed 01/11/2008 Page 3 of 3
Via Portal Submission				          	        	          	                         August 18, 2022

							     	                 MGEX Submission No. 22-35 

Mr. Christopher J. Kirkpatrick

Secretary of the Commission

Commodity Futures Trading Commission

Three Lafayette Centre

1155 21st Street NW

Washington, DC  20581

**RE:  Weekly Notification of Rule Amendments Pursuant to Regulation 40.6(d)**

Dear Secretary Kirkpatrick:

Pursuant to Commodity Exchange Act Section 5c and Commodity Futures Trading Commission Regulation 40.6(d), the Minneapolis Grain Exchange, LLC (“MGEX”) submits this Weekly Notification of the following rule amendments made effective the preceding week:

· August 5, 2022 Memo to MGEX Clearing Members advising of approved changes to clearing and exchange margin requirements for the Hard Red Spring Wheat spread margin rates.  These changes were effective for positions held at the close of business on Monday, August 8, 2022.

A copy of the above-referenced memo is available at http://www.mgex.com under the “Announcements” tab. If there are any questions regarding this submission, please contact me at (612) 321-7143 or lhopkins@mgex.com. 

Sincerely, 

Lindsay Hopkins

Chief Corporate Counsel, Clearing

**MINNEAPOLIS GRAIN EXCHANGE, LLC**

400 South 4th Street  |  130 Grain Exchange Building  |  Minneapolis, MN 55415

612-321-7101

mgex.com

# image1.jpeg

# image2.png
# C_2019295EN.01002301.xml

| 2.9.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 295/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.9.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 295/23

---

Judgment of the General Court of 3 July 2019 — Spain v Commission

(Case T-602/17) (1)

(EAGF and EAFRD - Expenditure excluded from financing - Expenditure made by Spain - Key checks - Criteria for recognition of producers’ bodies - Approval of operational programmes - Transfer of investments within the same operation programme - Legitimate expectations)

(2019/C 295/29)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Kingdom of Spain (represented initially by: M. Sampol Pucurull and A. Gavela Llopis, then by: A. Gavela Llopis and finally by: S. Jiménez García, acting as Agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: F. Castillo de la Torre, W. Farrell and M. Morales Puerta, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application on the basis of Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment in part of Commission Implementing Decision (EU) 2017/1144 of 26 June 2017 excluding from European Union financing certain expenditure incurred by the Member States under the European Agricultural Guarantee Fund (EAGF) and under the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development (EAFRD) (OJ 2017 L 165, p. 37), in so far as it excludes, as regards the Kingdom of Spain, the sum of EUR 7 097 397,27 from that financing.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 357, 23.10.2017.

---
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE

F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON



### O RDER 

### W ITHDRAWING 

### M EDIATION 

### O RDER

Cause number: 01

- 14

- 00351

- CV

Style: James W. Paulsen v. Ellen A. Y arrell

Date motion filed: October 10, 2014

Type of Motion: Objection to Mediation

Pa rty filing motion: Appellee



### Appellee has object ed to mediation. The Mediation Order dated October 9, 2014

is withdrawn.

Judge's signature: /s/ Michael Massengale

Justice Michael Massengale

x Acting individually

Date: October 15, 2014

* Absent emergency or a statement that the motion is unopposed, must wait ten days before acting on motion except for

motion to extend time to file a brief. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 10.3(a).

Note : Single justice may grant or deny any request for relief properly sought by motion, except in a civil case a single justice

should not: (1) act on a petition for an extraordinary writ or (2) dismiss or otherwise determine an a ppeal or a motion

for rehearing. T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 10.4(a).
# EUR-Lex - 52005IP0174 - EN

Important legal notice

*|*

# 52005IP0174

**European Parliament resolution on the simplification of the common market organisation in fruit and vegetables (2004/2193(INI)) **

*
Official Journal 092 E , 20/04/2006 P. 0284 - 0292 *

P6_TA(2005)0173

Recognition of professional qualifications ***II

European Parliament legislative resolution on the Council common position for adopting a directive of the European Parliament and of the Council on the recognition of professional qualifications (13781/2/2004 — C6-0008/2005 — 2002/0061(COD))

(Codecision procedure: second reading)

The European Parliament,

- having regard to the Council common position (13781/2/2004 — C6-0008/2005) [1],

- having regard to its position at first reading [2] on the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2002)0119) [3],

- having regard to the amended Commission proposal (COM(2004)0317),

- having regard to Article 251 (2) of the EC Treaty,

- having regard to Rule 62 of its Rules of Procedure,

- having regard to the recommendation for second reading of the Committee on the Internal Market and Consumer Protection (A6-0119/2005),

1. Approves the common position as amended;

2. Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and Commission.

[1] OJ C 58 E, 8.3.2005, p. 1.

[2] OJ C 97 E, 22.4.2004, p. 231.

[3] OJ C 181 E, 30.7.2002, p. 183.

--------------------------------------------------
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK

----------------------------------------------------------------x

Flora Davila

Plaintiffs,

- against -

NOMURA HOLDING AMERICA INC. and

NOMURA SECURITIES INTERNATIONAL, INC.

et al. (see Defendants’ List)

Defendants.

Index No.: 07CV4463 (AKH)

NOTICE OF THE NOMURA

PARTIES’ ADOPTION OF

ANSWER TO MASTER

COMPLAINT

_________________________

1:21-MC-00102

----------------------------------------------------------------x

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT Defendants NOMURA PARTIES (Nomura

Holding America Inc., Nomura Securities International Inc.) as and for their responses to

the allegations set forth in the Complaint by Adoption (Check-Off Complaint) related to

the Master Complaint filed herein and applicable to the above captioned matter hereby

adopts all of the responses and all of the affirmative defenses contained in the Answer

to the Master Complaint dated, filed and served July 31, 2007, In re World Trade Center

Lower Manhattan Disaster Site Litigation, 21 MC102 (AKH). The responses to all of the

allegations in the Master Complaint are adopted herein and are applicable to the CheckOff Complaint served and filed herein.

Case 1:07-cv-04463-AKH Document 30 Filed 10/19/2007 Page 1 of 3
PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that Defendant, NOMURA PARTIES,

reserves the right to serve and file an amended answer and specifically reserves the

right to interpose a cross claim against any and all co-defendants.

PLAEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that Defendant, NOMURA PARTIES, also

adopts all affirmative defenses and the jury demand therein.

WHEREFORE, Defendant, NOMURA PARTIES, demands judgment dismissing

the above captioned action against it along with the costs and disbursements of this

action.

Case 1:07-cv-04463-AKH Document 30 Filed 10/19/2007 Page 2 of 3
Dated: September 12, 2007

New York, New York

Yours, etc.

STRONGIN ROTHMAN & ABRAMS, LLP

Dror M. Bikel

________________________________

Dror M. Bikel, ESQ.

Attorneys for Defendant

NOMURA HOLDING AMERICA, INC.

50 Broadway, Suite 2003

New York, NY 10004

(212) 931-8300

Case 1:07-cv-04463-AKH Document 30 Filed 10/19/2007 Page 3 of 3
Sean Downey

Clearing Chief Compliance Officer & Head of Policy

CME Clearing

20 S. Wacker Drive Chicago, IL 60606 T 312 930 8167 Sean.Downey@cmegroup.com cmegroup.com

August 16, 2022

VIA Electronic Portal

CFTC FOIA Compliance Office

CommodityFuturesTradingCommission

Three Lafayette Centre

1155 21st Street, N.W

Washington, D.C. 20581

 RE: FOIAConfidentialTreatment Request – Amendments to CME’s Collateral Policy

To Whom it May Concern:

On August 16, 2022, the Chicago Mercantile Exchange Inc. (“CME Clearing”) submitted amendments 

to its Collateral Policy to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC” or “Commission”) via the

CFTC Portal under 40.6(a). The submission consisted of the submission cover sheet and letter and the 

amended Collateral Policy, (the “Confidential Information”).

Pursuant to Sections 8 and 8(a) of the Commodity Exchange Act (“CEA”), as amended, and Commission

Regulation 145.9(d), CME Clearing requests confidential treatment for the Confidential Information on

the grounds that disclosure of its contents would reveal confidential commercial information of the CME

Clearing. Pursuant to Commission Regulation 145.9(d)(5), CME Clearing requests that confidential

treatment be maintained until further notice from CME Clearing. We also request that the Commission

notify the undersigned immediately after receiving any FOIA request or any other court order, subpoena

or summons for same. Finally, we request that we be notified in the event the Commission intends

to disclose the C o n f i d e n t i a l I n f o r m a t i o n to Congress or to any other governmental

agency or unit pursuant to Section 8 of the CEA. CME Clearing does not waive its notification rights

under Section 8(f) of the CEA with respect to any subpoena or summons for the Confidential Information.

If you have any questions, please contact the undersigned at 312-930-8167 or via email at

sean.downey@cmegroup.com.

Sincerely,

/s/Sean Downey

Clearing Chief Compliance Officer & Head of Policy

CME Clearing
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Daniel Watkins, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant (1) from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Mclnerney, J.), rendered January 29, 1987, convicting him of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence, and (2), by permission, from an order of the same court, dated February 23, 1988, which denied the defendant’s motion pursuant to CPL 440.10 to vacate the judgment of conviction.

Ordered that the judgment and the order are affirmed.

For the reasons identified in *People v Legette*(153 AD2d 760 [decided herewith]), the defendant’s motion to set aside the verdict pursuant to CPL 440.10 was properly denied. Since the defendant failed to object to the closure of the courtroom, the issue is unpreserved for appellate review *(see, People v Gonzalez,*135 AD2d 829, *lv denied*71 NY2d 969). In any event, and for reasons enunciated in *People v Legette (supra),*the court properly ordered the closure of the courtroom during the testimony of the two undercover officers and the civilian informant involved in the case.

Contrary to the defendant’s contentions, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution *(see, People v Contes,*60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally *768sufficient to support a finding of the defendant’s guilt of the crimes charged beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence *(see,*CPL 470.15 [5]).

We have reviewed the defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be lacking in merit. Kooper, J. P., Spatt, Harwood and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.
Case 1:07-cv-05866-LTS Document 17 Filed 12/06/2007 Page 1 of 1