alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 96 (Thursday, May 17, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 27532]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-12405]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

[NV-020-1430-EU; N-27917, N-58996]


Opening of Public Lands; Nevada

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION: Correction of the legal Description of the notice of 
termination of Desert Land Entry Classification and Segregation; 
Nevada.

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

SUMMARY: This action corrects the legal description for a notice to 
terminate the desert-land classification N-58996, dated April 8, 1982, 
also to terminate the segregation of Desert Land Entry Application N-
27917, published in the Federal Register on pages 18498-18499, Volume 
66, Number 68, Document ID: fr09ap01-77, on April 9, 2001.

EFFECTIVE DATE: May 17, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Martha P. Smith, Bureau of Land 
Management, Winnemucca Field Office, 5100 East Winnemucca Boulevard, 
Winnemucca NV 89445 at (775) 623-1500.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The legal land description in the Notice of 
Termination of Desert Land Entry Classification and Segregation; 
Nevada, published on April 9, 2001, is hereby corrected as follows: The 
legal description was cited as: T. 40 N., R. 39 E., Sec. 36: NE\1/
4\SE\1/4\, N\1/2\SE\1/4\SE\1/4\, but it should have read: T. 40 N., R. 
38 E., Sec. 36: NE\1/4\SE\1/4\, N\1/2\SE\1/4\SE\1/4\. Mount Diablo 
Meridian, Nevada.

    Dated: May 1, 2001.
Terry A. Reed,
Field Manager.
[FR Doc. 01-12405 Filed 5-16-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-HC-P
24-003

January 23, 2024

VIA PORTAL

Commodity Futures Trading Commission

Attention: Christopher Kirkpatrick, Secretary

Three Lafayette Centre

1155 21st Street, NW

Washington, DC 20581

Re: CFTC Regulation 40.6(a) Certification: Submission of Amendments to the 

Nodal Exchange Rulebook

Dear Mr. Kirkpatrick:

Nodal Exchange, LLC (“Nodal Exchange” or “Exchange”) is notifying the Commodity Futures 

Trading Commission (“CFTC” or “Commission”) that it is self-certifying amendments to the 

Nodal Exchange Rulebook (“Rules”) pursuant to Commission Regulation 40.6(a). The

Exchange is amending the Exchange and Clearing Transaction Fee Schedule to clarify the 

fees associated with EFS/EFR transactions. The amended Rules are attached hereto and 

indicate the specific text in red that is being amended. 

Exchange management has assessed the amendments, and their compliance with 

applicable provisions of the Act, including the Commissions Regulations and the Core 

Principles. Nodal Exchange has identified that the amendments may affect the following 

Core Principles as follows:

Core Principle 2 - Compliance with the Rules: The amendments to the Rules provide clarity 

and consistency with the Act for compliance with the Rules. The Exchange and Clearing 

Transaction Fee Schedule is applicable to all Nodal Exchange Participants.

Core Principle 4 - Prevention of Market Disruption: All activity performed on Nodal is subject 

to the Nodal Exchange Rulebook Section VI, which prohibits disruptive trading behavior and 

manipulation, subject to monitoring and surveillance by the Exchange’s Division of Market 

Surveillance.

Core Principle 7 – Availability of General Information: The amendments to the Rules 

provide clarity to Exchange Participants. The amended Rules are available to market 

authorities, Participants, Authorized Brokers and the public on the Exchange website.
24-003

Core Principle 12 - Protection of Markets and Market Participants: Section VI of the Nodal 

Exchange Rulebook protects the market and market participants from abusive, disruptive, 

fraudulent, noncompetitive and unfair conduct and trade practices. 

Core Principle 13 - Disciplinary Procedures: Section VII of the Nodal Exchange Rulebook 

describes the disciplinary procedures of the Exchange that authorize the Exchange to 

discipline, suspend, or expel anyone on the Exchange that violates these rules. 

Pursuant to Section 5c(c) of the Act and the Commission’s Regulation 40.6, the Exchange 

certifies that amended Rules comply with the Act and the Commission’s Regulations 

thereunder. There have not been any opposing views expressed regarding the amendments 

to the Rules.

Nodal Exchange certifies that this submission has been concurrently posted on the Nodal 

Exchange website at www.nodalexchange.com.

If you have any question or need additional information regarding this submission, please 

contact me at 703-962-9853 or Markotic@nodalexchange.com.

Sincerely,

/s/ Max Markotic

Managing Director Compliance

Attachment:

Redline of the Exchange and Clearing Transaction Fee Schedule
Case 1:07-cv-05898-RJS Document 9-5 Filed 02/01/2008 Page 1 of 2Case 1:07-cv-05898-RJS Document 9-5 Filed 02/01/2008 Page 2 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-04464-AKH Document 31 Filed 11/06/2007 Page 1 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-04464-AKH Document 31 Filed 11/06/2007 Page 2 of 3
Case 1:07-cv-04464-AKH Document 31 Filed 11/06/2007 Page 3 of 3
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

LISA VARGAS,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

 v.

NIKOLIS PEREZ, an individual;

JONATHAN ROJAS, an individual,

Defendants-Appellants,

 and

COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES, a

governmental entity; DOES, 1 to 10,

inclusive,

Defendants.

No. 21-55054

D.C. No. 

2:19-cv-03279-PSG-AS

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

Philip S. Gutierrez, Chief District Judge, Presiding

Submitted November 18, 2021** 

Pasadena, California

FILED

NOV 30 2021

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Before: LINN,*** BYBEE, and BENNETT, Circuit Judges. 

When an interlocutory appeal challenges the district court’s determination

that there is sufficient evidence to create a genuine dispute as to material fact, we

lack appellate jurisdiction. Estate of Anderson v. Marsh, 985 F.3d 726 (9th Cir.

2021). Because appellants’ appeal amounts to a challenge to the district court’s

decision on the facts, we lack jurisdiction. 

DISMISSED.

*** The Honorable Richard Linn, United States Circuit Judge for the U.S.

Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, sitting by designation.

2
MINNEAPOLIS GRAIN EXCHANGE, LLC

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

612-321-7101

mgex.com

Via Portal Submission September 30, 2022

 MGEX Submission No. 22-40

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:

• September 21, 2022 Memo to MGEX Clearing Members advising of approved changes to clearing 

and exchange margin requirements for the Hard Red Spring Wheat outright and spread margin 

rates. These changes were effective for positions held at the close of business on September 22, 

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
EXHIBIT 99(B)

                           SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION



         In connection with the Annual Report of  eFoodSafety.com,  Inc. on Form
10-KSB for the period  ending April 30, 2006, as filed with the  Securities  and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Patricia Ross-Gruden,
President and Chief Executive  Officer of the Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18
U.S.C.  Section 1350, as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

         (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.


By:/s/Patricia Ross-Gruden
Patricia Ross-Gruden, Director, Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer


August 14, 2006










                                       19
# fcmdata0306
##### 



Exhibit 13.1
 Certification of the Principal Executive Officer of
Quebecor Media Inc.
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  (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:  February 8, 2008
    /s/ Pierre Karl PéladeauName:
    Pierre Karl PéladeauTitle:
    Vice Chairman and Chief Executive Officer The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code)
and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-7662

ROBERT KITHER RUSSELL,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

GUILFORD COUNTY MUNICIPALITY; HIGH POINT COURT HOUSE; JUDGE 

HENRY FRYE; JAMES GREEN,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle 

District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Thomas D. Schroeder, 

District Judge. (1:14-cv-00831-TDS-LPA)

Submitted: March 24, 2015 Decided: March 31, 2015

Before SHEDD, FLOYD, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed as modified by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Robert Kither Russell, Appellant Pro Se. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Robert Kither Russell appeals the district court’s order 

adopting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and 

dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint as frivolous 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(b)(1) (2012). We have reviewed 

the record and find no reversible error. We conclude that 

Russell’s claim is not cognizable because his state conviction 

has not been overturned or called into question. See Heck v. 

Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 486-87 (1994); see also Wilkinson v. 

Dotson, 544 U.S. 74, 81-82 (2005) (applying Heck to claims of 

equitable relief). Accordingly, we affirm substantially for the 

reasons stated by the district court, see Russell v. Guilford 

Cnty. Mun., No. 1:14-cv-00831-TDS-LPA (M.D.N.C. Oct. 31, 2014), 

but we modify the dismissal to be without prejudice because 

Russell may refile his claims should his conviction ever be 

invalidated by the appropriate court. 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 AS MODIFIED
Case 1:07-cv-04462-AKH     Document 15      Filed 09/05/2007     Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 8.1

Main Subsidiaries of Quebecor Media Inc.



|                                                 |  |                                               |  |                                
|------------------------------------------------ |  | --------------------------------------------- |  | -------------------------------
|Name of Subsidiary                               |  | Jurisdiction of Incorporation or
Organization |  | Equity Interest/Voting Interest
|Videotron Ltd / Vidéotron ltée                   |  | Québec                                        |  | 100% /100%                     
|Videotron G.P.                                   |  | Québec                                        |  | 100% /100%                     
|Le SuperClub Vidéotron ltée                      |  | Québec                                        |  | 100% / 100%                    
|Sun Media Corporation / Corporation Sun Media    |  | British Columbia                              |  | 100% / 100%                    
|Imprimerie Quebecor Media Inc.                   |  | Canada                                        |  | 100% / 100%                    
|Groupe TVA Inc. / TVA Group Inc.                 |  | Québec                                        |  | 51.4% / 99.9%                  
|TVA Publications Inc.                            |  | Canada                                        |  | 51.4% / 99.9%                  
|Groupe Archambault Inc. / Archambault Group Inc. |  | Canada                                        |  | 100% / 100%                    
|Les Éditions CEC inc.                            |  | Québec                                        |  | 100% / 100%                    
|Groupe Sogides Inc.                              |  | Canada                                        |  | 100% / 100%                    
|Canoë inc. / Canoe inc.                          |  | Québec                                        |  | 100% / 100%                    
|Nurun Inc.                                       |  | Canada                                        |  | 100% / 100%
January 24, 2006 Urt.e ind

Ms. Jean A. Webb

Secretary

Commodity Futures Trading Commission
Three Lafayette Center

1155 21" Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20581

Reference File # 2623.01
Rule Certification
Dear Ms. Webb:

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

- Early listing of May 2006 U.S. Treasury Bond Options.
This option contract ordinarily would be authorized for trading as of January 30, 2006. Due to
customer demand, the Exchange intends to list this contract earlier than usual (i.e., the business
day after the Commission’s receipt of this filing).
This is a one-time change, rather than a permanent revision, in the Exchange’s listing cycle.

There were no opposing views with respect to this action.

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

Sincerely,

Paul J. Draths
Vice President and Secretary
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack

, Chief Justice

David F. Viviano,

Chief Justice Pro Tem

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

February 1 , 2019 

# Order

Clerk February 1 , 2019

15 9002 ( 7 0 )

ROBERT F. BROZ and KIMBERLY BROZ,

Plaintiffs

- Appellants,

SC: 159002

v COA: 340381

Otsego CC: 12

- 014346

- NM

PLANTE & MORAN, PLLC,

Defendant

- Appellee

. _________________________________________/

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion of defendant

- appell ee to extend the time

for filing its answer is GRANTED

. The answer will be accepted as timely filed if submitted

on or before March 5 , 2019.
**EXHIBIT21.**

** **

**SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT**

 
| **NAME OF  SUBSIDIARY**                     |   | **STATE OF INCORPORATION** |
|---------------------------------------------|--------|----------------------------|
|                                        |   |                       |
| InSight Health Services Corp.               |   | Delaware                   |
| InSight Health  Corp.                       |   | Delaware                   |
| Radiosurgery  Centers, Inc.                 |   | Delaware                   |
| Maxum Health  Corp.                         |   | Delaware                   |
| Maxum Health  Services Corp.                |   | Delaware                   |
| Diagnostic  Solutions Corp.                 |   | Delaware                   |
| Maxum Health  Services of North Texas, Inc. |   | Texas                      |
| Maxum Health  Services of Dallas, Inc,      |   | Texas                      |
| NDDC, Inc.                                  |   | Texas                      |
| Open MRI, Inc.                              |   | Delaware                   |
| Signal Medical  Services, Inc.              |   | Delaware                   |

 

----
Exhibit 4.3


VICTORIA LAKE PROPERTY SECOND AMENDING AGREEMENT




THIS SECOND AMENDING AGREEMENT made the 16th of November 2004.




BETWEEN:

RUBICON MINERALS CORPORATION, of Suite 1540, 800 West Pender Street, Vancouver, British Columbia, V6C 2V6




(“Rubicon”)




AND:

CROSSHAIR EXPLORATION & MINING CORP., of Suite 2300, 1066 West Hastings Street, Vancouver, British Columbia, V6E 3X2




(“Crosshair”)




WHEREAS:




1.

Rubicon and Crosshair entered into an Agreement on the Victoria Lake Property dated February 14, 2003 and into a first Amending Agreement dated April 29, 2004 (together, the “Original Agreement”).




2.

Rubicon and Crosshair desire to add a new clause under Section 4 of the Original Agreement – Covenants of Lima (now Crosshair) by including the following:




“Section 4 




During the currency of this Agreement, Lima shall:




(h)

provide the Optionor with technical reports on the Property within 15 days following the end of each fiscal quarter and financial expenditure reports within 30 days following the end of each fiscal quarter.”




IN WITNESS WHEREOF the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the date first set forth above.




	 	)

	 
	THE COMMON SEAL OF

RUBICON MINERALS CORPORATION

was hereunto affixed in the presence of:
















__________________________________________________

Authorized Signatory

	)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

	

















C/S


	 	 	 





	 	)

	 
	THE COMMON SEAL OF

CROSSHAIR EXPLORATION & MINING CORP.

was hereunto affixed in the presence of:
















__________________________________________________

Authorized Signatory

	)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

	

















C/S
EXHIBIT 99.1
                                  ------------
                                 PRESS RELEASE




October 16, 2003



FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE......................Photo Control Corporation, 4800
Quebec Avenue North, Minneapolis, MN (NASDAQ Small Cap-PHOC) reports earnings
for the third quarter ending September 30, 2003.


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
SUMMARY OF EARNINGS                                      THREE MONTHS ENDED                 NINE MONTHS ENDED
                                                           SEPTEMBER 30                       SEPTEMBER 30
                                                           ------------                       ------------
                                                       2003              2002             2003              2002
                                                       ----              ----             ----              ----
<S>                                                  <C>               <C>              <C>               <C>
Sales                                                $1,851,939        $2,497,561       $5,023,658        $6,228,216

Income(Loss) Before Income Tax *                         47,305           181,503        (573,758)            33,237

Net Income(Loss)                                         29,305           119,503        (477,758)            21,237

Net Income(Loss) Per Common Share-Basic                     .02               .07            (.30)               .01

Net Income(Loss) Per Common Share-Diluted                   .02               .07            (.30)               .01
</TABLE>


* Includes a $90,055 gain on Sale of Land and Building for the three month and
nine month periods ended September 30, 2002.

Contact Person:
Curtis R. Jackels
President and C.E.O.
Photo Control Corporation
# C_2017239EN.01005101.xml

| 24.7.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 239/51 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.7.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 239/51

---

Action brought on 15 May 2017 — Buck-Chemie v EUIPO — Henkel (Representation of flushing systems for water closets)

(Case T-296/17)

(2017/C 239/64)

Language in which the application was lodged: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Buck-Chemie GmbH (Herrenberg, Germany) (represented by: C. Schultze, J. Ossing, R.-D. Härer, C. Weber, H. Ranzinger, C. Brockmann and C. Gehweiler, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Henkel AG & Co. KGaA (Düsseldorf, Germany)

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 design at issue: other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Proprietor of the design at issue:

Design at issue: Community design No 1663618-0003

Design at issue:

Contested decision: Decision of the Third Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 8 March 2017 in Case R 2113/2015-3

Contested decision

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

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

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order the defendant and the other party to pay the costs incurred by the applicant in the proceedings before the Court and before the Board of Appeal. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant and the other party to pay the costs incurred by the applicant in the proceedings before the Court and before the Board of Appeal.

Pleas in law

Pleas in law

| — | Infringement of Article 62 and Article 63 of Regulation No 6/2002; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 62 and Article 63 of Regulation No 6/2002;

| — | Infringement of Article 25(1)(a) and (b) of Regulation No 6/2002; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 25(1)(a) and (b) of Regulation No 6/2002;

| — | Infringement of Article 3(a) of Regulation No 6/2002; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 3(a) of Regulation No 6/2002;

| — | Infringement of Article 4(1) of Regulation No 6/2002; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 4(1) of Regulation No 6/2002;

| — | Infringement of Article 5 and Article 6 of Regulation No 6/2002. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 5 and Article 6 of Regulation No 6/2002.

---