alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

GARY V. JENKINS, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) Civil Action No. 23-1906 (UNA)

)

UNITED STATES, et al., )

)

Defendants. )

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This matter is before the Court on review of plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma 

pauperis and pro se complaint. The Court GRANTS plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma 

pauperis (ECF No. 2) and for the reasons discussed below, DISMISSES the complaint (ECF No. 

1) and this civil action without prejudice. 

A pro se litigant’s pleading is held to less stringent standards than would be applied to a 

formal pleading drafted by lawyer. See Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972). Even pro 

se litigants, however, must comply with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Jarrell v. Tisch, 

656 F. Supp. 237, 239 (D.D.C. 1987). Rule 8 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires 

that a complaint contain a short and plain statement of the grounds upon which the Court’s 

jurisdiction depends, a short and plain statement of the claim showing that the pleader is entitled 

to relief, and a demand for judgment for the relief the pleader seeks. Fed. R. Civ. P. 8(a). The 

purpose of the minimum standard of Rule 8 is to give fair notice to the defendants of the claim 

being asserted, sufficient to prepare a responsive answer, to prepare an adequate defense, and to 

determine whether the doctrine of res judicata applies. Brown v. Califano, 75 F.R.D. 497, 498 

(D.D.C. 1977). 
2

This complaint merely demands a writ of mandamus without setting forth a basis for this 

Court’s jurisdiction or alleging facts showing plaintiff is entitled to relief from any defendant. 

And it is unclear whether or how the instant complaint differs from that filed in a previous 

action, the appeal of which is pending before the United States Court of Appeals for the District 

of Columbia Circuit. See Jenkins v. United States, No. 23-5018 (D.C. Cir. Jan. 25, 2023). As 

drafted, plaintiff’s complaint fails to meet the minimal pleading standard set forth in Rule 8(a). 

An Order is issued separately.

DATE: July 6, 2023 TREVOR N. McFADDEN

United States District Judge
#### SHAW *v.*UNITED STATES.

APPPEAL FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE UNITED STATES FOR ■ THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK.

No. 426.

Motion to dismiss or affirm. —

Submitted November 16, 1908.

Decided November 30, 1908.

*American Sugar Refining Co.*v. *United States,*211 U. S. 155, which held that a direct appeal from the- Circuit Court would not lie in a case *560where the only real substantial point was whether an officer of the United States had misconstrued the tariff act of 1897, followed, and appeal dismissed.

Writ of error to reverse 141 Fed. Rep. 469, dismissed.

*The Attorney General*and *The Solicitor General*for the appellee in support of the motion.

*Mr. Edward S. Hatch,*for the appellant, in opposition to the motion.

*Per Curiam:*

Appeal dismissed for want of jurisdiction. *Shaw*v. *United States,*141 Fed. Rep. 469; *United States*v. *Shaw,*144 Fed. Rep. 329, and opinion of Board of General Appraisers, *Shaw*v. *United States,*203 U. S. 591; *American Sugar Refining Company*v. *United States,*decided to-day, 211 U. S. 155.
# C_2017121EN.01004201.xml

| 18.4.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 121/42 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.4.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 121/42

---

Action brought on 21 February 2017 — FCA US v EUIPO — Busbridge (VIPER)

(Case T-109/17)

(2017/C 121/62)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: FCA US LLC (City of Auburn Hills, Michigan, United States) (represented by: C. Morcom, QC)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Robert Dennis Busbridge (Hookwood, United Kingdom)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Proprietor of the trade mark at issue:

Trade mark at issue: EU word mark ‘VIPER’ — EU trade mark No 3 871 101

Trade mark at issue:

Procedure before EUIPO: Proceedings for a declaration of invalidity

Procedure before EUIPO

Contested decision: Decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 1 December 2016 in Case R 554/2016-1

Contested decision

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the decisions of the Cancellation Division and of the First Board of Appeal and that the application by Mr. Busbridge be remitted to the Cancellation Division for the appropriate action; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decisions of the Cancellation Division and of the First Board of Appeal and that the application by Mr. Busbridge be remitted to the Cancellation Division for the appropriate action;

| — | the Applicant also seeks an order for costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

the Applicant also seeks an order for costs.

Pleas in law

Pleas in law

| — | The Board of appeal was wrong in concluding that Mr Busbridge had proved use in relation to the goods covered by the UK registration (namely ‘Sports cars’); |
| --- | --- |

—

The Board of appeal was wrong in concluding that Mr Busbridge had proved use in relation to the goods covered by the UK registration (namely ‘Sports cars’);

| — | The evidence submitted by Mr Busbridge was wholly inadequate to prove use that was ‘genuine’ as required by Art. 57 (2) and (3) of Regulation no 207/2009. |
| --- | --- |

—

The evidence submitted by Mr Busbridge was wholly inadequate to prove use that was ‘genuine’ as required by Art. 57 (2) and (3) of Regulation no 207/2009.

o

---
**Exhibit 7.1**

**Quebecor Media Inc.**

**Statement Regarding Calculation of Ratio ofEarnings to Fixed Charges as Disclosed in**

**Quebecor Media Inc.’s Annual Report on Form 20-F for the Year EndedDecember 31, 2010**

For the purpose of calculating the ratio of earnings to fixed charges disclosed in QuebecorMedia Inc.’s Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2010, (i) earnings consist of net income (loss) plus non-controlling interest in subsidiary, income taxes, fixed charges, amortized capitalized interest, lessinterest capitalized and (ii) fixed charges consist of interest expensed and capitalized, plus amortized premiums, discounts and capitalized expenses relating to indebtedness and an estimate of the interest within rental expense.
NEX SEF LIMITED 

2 Broadgate

London 

EC2M 7UR

United Kingdom

April 17, 2018

Via Email

Assistant Secretary of the Commission for

FOI, Privacy and Sunshine Acts

Compliance

Commodity Futures Trading Commission

Three Lafayette Centre

1155 21st Street, NW

Washington, D.C. 20581

Via email: FOIAsubmissions@cftc.gov

Re: FOIA Confidential Treatment Request

Ladies and Gentlemen:

NEX SEF Limited (“NEX SEF”) (Applicant) has submitted to the Commodity Futures Trading 

Commission (Commission) a rule certification in NEX SEF-2018-R-3 pursuant to CFTC Reg. 

40.6 in order to issue a Market Regulation Advisory Notice and to amend its Rulebook

(Certification). Attached as Exhibit E is Confidential Chapter 9 of the Rulebook and attached 

as Exhibit F is a marked version of Confidential Chapter 9.

The Applicant hereby requests that Chapter 9 of the Rulebook as set forth in Exhibit E and 

Exhibit F to the Certification (Confidential Information) be treated as confidential in order to 

prevent disclosure of Applicant’s trade secrets and confidential commercial and financial 

information upon a request under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). We request the 

Confidential Information be provided confidential treatment for an indefinite period.

Please promptly inform the following of any request for the Confidential Information or its 

contents made pursuant to FOIA or the Commission’s rules so that we may substantiate the 

foregoing request for confidential treatment in accordance with Section 145.9 of the 

Commission’s Regulations: Attention: General Counsel, NEX SEF LIMITED, 2 Broadgate, 

London EC2M 7UR, United Kingdom.

Pursuant to Part 145.9(d)(4) of the Commission’s regulations, we have marked each page of the 

Confidential Information with the words “Confidential Treatment Requested by NEX SEF

LIMITED” and have identified each portion of the Confidential Information with the following 

identifying numbers and codes, as applicable: NEX SEF-2018-R-3-Exhibit E and NEX SEF2018-R-3-Exhibit F. 
2

Please contact the undersigned at (212) 704-5491 with any questions regarding this matter.

Very truly yours,

Elisa Hirschmann, Chief Compliance Officer

NEX SEF LIMITED

2 Broadgate

London EC2M 7UR

United Kingdom

cc by email: Division of Market Oversight, Commodity Futures 

Trading Commission 

ACTIVE 230978827
February 2, 2006

Via E-Mail

Office of the Secretariat

Commodity Futures Trading Commission

Three Lafayette Centre

1155 21* Street, N.W. :
Washington, D.C. 20581 o

Re: Rule Certification. NYMEX Submission 06.18 — Notification of
Amendments to Exchange Rule 3.03, Disqualification from Board + fs
and Committee Service. E

Dear Ms. Jean Webb:

The New York Mercantile Exchange, Inc. (“NYMEX” or the “Exchange”) hereby notifies
the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (“CFTC”) of amendments to Exchange Rule 3.03,
Disqualification from Board and Committee Service.

Pursuant to new amendments to the CFTC’s regulations, the Exchange is required to
reinstate the prohibition on Board or committee service for Members who had accumulated fines
in excess of $5,000 for recordkeeping offenses within one year. The CFTC has also specifically
exempted from the prohibition on service those Exchange Members currently serving on the
Board of a disciplinary committee who were appointed to their positions during the time that the
Exchange’s prohibition on service was not in effect. The Exchange will implement the
prohibition to coincide with the CFTC’s effective date of February 13, 2006. Pursuant to Section
5c(c) of the Commodity Exchange Act (“Act”) and CFTC Rule 40.6, the Exchange hereby
certifies that the new amendments comply with the Act, including regulations under the Act.

Should you have any questions concerning the above, please feel free to contact Adam
Wermow, Compliance Counsel, at (212) 299-2851, or me at (212) 299-2897,

Very truly yours,

Thomas F. LaSala
Senior Vice President
Compliance and Risk Management
Attachments
ce: Brian Regan
Nancy Minett


(Additions are in bold/underlined; deletions in bold/strikethrough.)
Rule 3.03, Disqualification from Board and Committee Service

The following provisions of this Rule 3.03 shall apply with regard to the Class A Member of
New York Mercantile Exchange Inc.

(A) Definitions:
[(1) through (4) remain unchanged.]
(5) "Disciplinary offense" means:

(i) Any violation of the rules of a self-regulatory organization except those rules related to:
(A) Decorum or attire,
(B) Financial requirements, or
(C) Reporting or recordkeeping unless resulting in fines aggregating more than $5,000
within any calendar year.

[Sections (ii) through (v)(B) remain unchanged.]

(C) Recordkeeping or Reporting-NYMEX Rules 6.07, 6.07A, 6.08A, 6.08B, 6.10, 6.11, 6.18,
6.19, 6.20, 6.21, 6.24, 6.90, 8.50, 9.04, 9.22, 9.26, 9.27, 9.32, 9.33, 9.34, 9.35, 9.36, 11.27, 11.36,
11.58, 90.08, 90.13, 100.08, 100.13, 140.15, 140.19, 140.20, 150.09, 150.13, 150.14, 150.14A,
190,09, 190.13, 190.14, 190.14A, 200.11, 200.15, 200.17, 200.20, 200.20A, 220.11, 220.14,
220.17, 220.17A, 230.12, 230.17, 230.18, 300.08, 300.11, 300.13 and 300.15 (only to the extent
that such rules relate to recordkeeping and/or reporting and do not result in aggregate
fines exceeding $5,000 in a calendar year) and COMEX Rules 4.80, 4.81, 4.82, 4.84, 4.85,
4.86, 4.87 or 3.11(b).

[The remainder of the rule is unchanged.]
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 98 (Monday, May 21, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 27976]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-12684]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Administration for Children and Families


Notice of Award of Non-Competitive Grant

AGENCY: Administration on Children, Youth and Families (ACYF) 
Administration for Children and Families (ACF), Department of Health 
and Human Services.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that ACYF will award grant funds 
without competition to Western Kentucky University Head Start Quality 
Improvement Center (QIC) in the amount of $300,000. This award is made 
to the QIC to further the provision of technical assistance services 
nationally to grantees and regional offices when they undertake the 
purchase, construction or major renovation of Head Start program 
facilities. The award will be made for the budget period beginning 
September 1, 2001 for a twelve month period, under existing grant award 
90YQ0016.

    Authority: This award will be made pursuant to the Head Start 
Act, amended, 42 U.S.C. 9801 et seq. (CFDA 93.600)


FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Douglas Klafehn, Acting Associate 
Commissioner, Head Start Bureau, Administration for Children, Youth and 
Families, 330 C Street SW, Washington, D.C. 20447; (202) 205-8572.

    Dated: May 15, 2001.
James A. Harrell,
Acting Commissioner, Administration on Children, Youth and Families.
[FR Doc. 01-12684 Filed 5-18-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4184-01-M
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 of Sterling Exploration Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending December 31, 2007 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Lynn Wigen, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.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 result of operations of
          the Company.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the
12th day of February, 2008.


/s/ Lynn Wigen
-----------------------------
Chief Financial Officer
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 96 (Thursday, May 17, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 27493]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-12444]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Air Force


Notice of Intent To Grant an Exclusive Patent License

    Pursuant to the provisions of Part 404 of Title 37, Code of Federal 
Regulations, which implements Public Law 96-517, as amended, the 
Department of the Air Force announces its intention to grant Ohio 
University, Athens, Ohio, an exclusive license in U.S. Provisional 
Patent Application Serial Number 60/220,768, entitled ``Object 
Identification System and Method,'' and any subsequently filed patent 
applications related to this provisional application. The invention 
described in this application is a joint invention between Ohio 
University and the Air Force.
    A license for this invention will be granted unless a written 
objection is received within 60 days from the date of publication of 
this Notice. Information concerning this Notice may be obtained from 
Mr. William H. Anderson, Associate General Counsel (Acquisition), SAF/
GCQ, 1500 Wilson Blvd., Suite 304, Arlington, VA 22209-2310. Mr. 
Anderson can be reached at 703-588-5090 or by fax at 703-588-8037.

Janet A. Long,
Air Force Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 01-12444 Filed 5-16-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-05-P
Exhibit
32.2




CERTIFICATION
OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER


PURSUANT
TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO




SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, Harvey
Judkowitz, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of
Photovoltaic Solar Cells, Inc.  on Form 10-Q, for the quarter ended
November 30, 2009 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such
Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and
results of operations of Photovoltaic Solar Cells, Inc.





Dated:
      January 13, 2010
                /s/
      Harvey JudkowitzHarvey
      Judkowitz, Principal
  Accounting Officer
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19
- 6687

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. DARNELL BARNES, a/k/a Imani , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Newport News

. Robert G. Doumar , Senior District Judge. ( 4:10

- cr - 00074

- DEM

- 1 )

Submitted : July 18, 2019 Decided: July 23, 2019

Before WILKINSON, AGEE, and THACKER , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

. Darnell Barnes, Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Darnell Barnes appeals the district court’s order denying his pro se motion seeking a sentence reduction under the First Step Act of 2018, Pub. L. No. 115

- 391, 132 Stat. 5194

. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court

. See United State s v. Barnes , No. 4:10

- cr 00074

- DEM

- 1 ( E.D. Va. Apr. 29, 2019 ). 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.
AFFIRMED
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 99 (Tuesday, May 22, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 28196]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-12830]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Fish and Wildlife Service


Issuance of Permit for Marine Mammals

    On March 6, 2001, a notice was published in the Federal Register, 
Vol. 66, No. 44, Page 13566, that an application had been filed with 
the Fish and Wildlife Service by Circo Hermanos Suarez S.A., San Juan, 
PR, for a permit (PRT-036843) to import for the purpose of public 
display seven polar bears (Ursus maritimus) obtain from captive and 
wild sources.
    Notice is hereby given that on May 5, 2001, as authorized by the 
provisions of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (16 
U.S.C. 1361 et seq.) the Fish and Wildlife Service authorized the 
requested permit subject to certain conditions set forth therein.
    Documents and other information submitted for these applications 
are available for review by any party who submits a written request to 
the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, Division of Management Authority, 
4401 North Fairfax Drive, Room 700, Arlington, Virginia 22203. Phone 
(703) 358-2104 or Fax (703) 358-2281.

    Date: May 11, 2001.
Anna Barry,
Senior Permit Biologist, Branch of Permits, Division of Management 
Authority.
[FR Doc. 01-12830 Filed 5-21-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-55-P
FILED

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

AUGUST 13, 2010

JOHN LEY

CLERK

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 09-16163

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D. C. Docket No. 09-01194-CV-T-30-TGW

TERRY WOODARD,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

CHANDRA W. DASRAT,

Assistant Attorney General,

ATTORNEY GENERAL, STATE OF FLORIDA,

Defendants-Appellees.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Florida

_________________________

(August 13, 2010)

Before TJOFLAT, CARNES and MARCUS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:
This action stems from a District Court of Appeal of Florida ruling denying

Terry Woodward’s request for DNA testing. Woodward claims that the court

denied his request on the basis of Assistant Attorney General Chandra Dasrat’s

false representation that post-sentencing DNA testing would be of no avail because

no evidence existed that could be tested. The district court below, acting pursuant

to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A, dismissed Woodward’s complaint against Dasrat, and

Attorney General Bill McCollum, her supervisor, for damages under 42 U.S.C. §

1983 for allegedly depriving him of his federal constitutional rights to due process

and the equal protection of the law. Woodward now appeals.

1

Section 1915A of the Prison Litigation Reform Act (“PLRA”) provides that

“[t]he court shall review, . . . a complaint in a civil action in which a prisoner seeks

redress from a governmental entity or officer or employee of a governmental

entity.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a). A complaint is due to be dismissed if it is

“frivolous, malicious, or fails to state a claim upon which relief may be granted.” §

1915A(b). That is the case here.

Woodward could not recover damages against Dasrat because, as a

prosecutor, she is entitled to absolute immunity for all actions before the district

court of appeal. Hart v. Hodges, 587 F.3d 1288, 1295 (11th Cir. 2009), cert.

 The court also denied Woodward’s motion to alter or amend its judgment of dismissal. 1

2
denied, (U.S. June 7, 2010) (No. 09-1237). Woodward could not recover damages

against McCollum simply because Dasrat happened to be his assistant. The

doctrine of respondeat superior does not apply in § 1983 actions, Goebert v. Lee

County, 510 F.3d 1312 (11 Cir. 2007), and the complaint does not allege that

th

McCollum instituted a custom or policy that resulted in Dasrat’s deliberate

indifference to Woodward’s constitutional rights or directed Dasrat falsely to

represent to the Florida court that the evidence for DNA testing no longer existed.

AFFIRMED.

3
EXHIBIT 32.2

**CERTIFICATION OF CFO PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OFTHE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

****

            In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Vanguard Health Systems, Inc. (the “Company”) for the quarterly period ended December 31, 2006 (the “Report”), I,Joseph D. Moore, Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of the Company, certify, for the purpose of complying with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “ExchangeAct”), as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

            (1)      The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)                       of the Exchange Act; 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/ Joseph D. Moore                             Joseph D. MooreExecutive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and TreasurerFebruary 13, 2007