alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
300 Vesey Street New York, NY 10282 T 212 521 4609 nirup.ramalingam@cmegroup.com cmegroup.com

Nirup Ramalingam

Chief Operating Officer

NEX SEF LIMITED

September 9, 2020

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, September 9, 2020, NEX SEF Limited (“NEX SEF”) submitted a 

supplemental rule certification filing (Submission No. 20-386) to the Commodity Futures Trading 

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

NEX SEF’s Limited Form SEF to reflect changes arising from NEX SEF’s integration with CME Group 

Inc., as well as non-substantive changes related to the change in Regulatory Service Provider, which 

change was previously notified to the Commission through a submission made on August 17, 2020.

(“Revisions”). This supplemental filing includes Appendices A through Q.

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

grounds that Appendices A through Q contain confidential commercial information of the submitter (NEX 

SEF). NEX SEF requests that confidential treatment be maintained for Appendices A through Q until 

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

after receiving any FOIA request for said Appendices A through Q 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 A through Q 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 A through Q.

Please contact the undersigned at (212) 521-4609 should you have any questions concerning this matter.

Sincerely,

/s/ Nirup Ramalingam

Chief Operating Officer
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-1695

MAUREEN A. TRAFT, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus AMERICAN THRESHOLD INDUSTRIES, INCORPORATED,Defendant - Appellee.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Asheville. Lacy H. Thornburg, District Judge. (CA-97-162-1-T) Submitted: October 8, 1998 Decided: October 22, 1998 Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Maureen A. Traft, Appellant Pro Se. Grant Beecher Osborne, MCGUIRE, WOOD & BISSETTE, P.A., Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).* See United States v. Williams , 674 F.2d 310, 312 (4th Cir. 1982). 2 PER CURIAM:Maureen A. Traft appeals from the district court's order denying her motion for reconsideration filed pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e). Our review of the record discloses that this appeal iswithout merit. Traft’s motion for reconsideration does not demonstrate that her action was improperly dismissed. We therefore find that the district court’s denial of her Rule 59(e) motion was not an abuse of discretion, * and affirm the district court’s order on the reasoning of the district court. Traft v. American Threshold Indus., Inc. , No. CA-97-162-1-T (W.D.N.C. Apr. 7, 1998). To the extent Traft raises issues in her informal brief not previously raised in the district court, including her attempt to raise claims relating to documents not part of the district court’s record, we decline to consider such claims or documents on appeal. We deny Traft’s motion to vacate this court’s order allowing the Appellee leave to supplement its informal brief and deny as moot Traft’s petition for order of lis pendens. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented inthe materials before the Court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED
# C_2023252EN.01008101.xml

| 17.7.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 252/81 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.7.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 252/81

---

Order of the General Court of 8 June 2023 — Kraftpojkarna v Commission

(Case T-781/17) (1)

(2023/C 252/98)

Language of the case: English

The President of the Second Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 42, 5.2.2018.

---
EXHIBIT 32.1

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

I, Simone Anderson, hereby 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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Sterling Exploration, Inc. for
          the period ended March 31, 2009 (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 Sterling Exploration, Inc.

Dated: May 19, 2009

                               /s/ Simone Anderson
                               ------------------------------------------------
                               Simone Anderson
                               President, Secretary, Treasurer and Director
                               Principal Executive Officer, Principal Financial
                               Officer and Principal Accounting Officer
                               Sterling Exploration, Inc.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
required by Section 906, has been provided to Sterling Exploration, Inc. and
will be retained by Sterling Exploration, Inc. and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 99.2

               CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

                                 AS ENACTED BY

                 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 20-F of Companhia Energetica de
Minas Gerais--CEMIG (the "Company") for the period ended December 31, 2001, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I Flavio Decat de Moura, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; 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/ Flavio Decat de Moura
                                     -------------------------------------
                                     Name:   Flavio Decat de Moura
                                     Title:  Chief Financial Officer

Date: March 25, 2003
Exhibit 32.1

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

In connection with the Annual Report
of Orphan Medical, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the period ended
December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the Report), I, John H. Bullion, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.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/   John H. Bullion | 
| | ---------------------------------------------------- |  |  | --------------------- | 
| |                                                     
| | John H. BullionChief Executive Officer July 20, 2004

---
**EXHIBIT 21.1**

 

**SUBSIDIARIES OF INVESTOOLS INC.**

 

**Direct subsidiaries of INVESTools Inc.:**

 

Telescan, Inc., a Delaware corporation (100% owned)

 

ZiaSun Technologies, Inc., a Nevada corporation (100% owned)

 

Service Enhancement Systems, Inc., dba 360 Group, a California corporation (100% owned)

 

Prophet Financial Systems, Inc., a California corporation (100% owned)

 

**Direct subsidiaries of Telescan, Inc.:**

 

INVESTools Inc., a California corporation (100% owned)

 

Entrepreneurs Online, a Delaware corporation (100% owned)

 

**Direct subsidiaries of ZiaSun Technologies, Inc.:**

 

Online Investors Advantage, Inc., a Utah corporation (100% owned)

 

**Direct subsidiaries of Online Investors Advantage, Inc.:**

 

Investor Education LLC, a Utah limited liability company (100% owned)

 

Memory Improvement Systems, Inc., a Utah corporation (100% owned)

 

Seminar Marketing Group, Inc., a Utah corporation (100% owned)

 

INVESTools Asia Pacific Pte., Limited, a Singapore company (100% owned)

 

INVESTools Hong Kong Ltd., a Hong Kong company (100% owned)

 

----
exv10w14






Exhibit 10.14




AGREEMENT AND PLAN OF REORGANIZATION




     This is an Agreement and Plan of Reorganization dated as of _____________, 2010, by Bravo
Development Holdings LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (“BDH”), and Bravo Brio Restaurant
Group, Inc., an Ohio corporation (“BBRG”).



     The parties, intending to accomplish reorganizations under section 368(a)(1) of the Internal
Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, agree as follows:



     1. BBRG, BDH and the other shareholders of BBRG (such other shareholders, the “Individual
Shareholders”) shall enter into an exchange agreement substantially in the form attached as Exhibit
1 hereto (the “Agreement”), pursuant to which BDH will exchange (the “BDH Exchange”) all of its
assets, which consist solely of shares of BBRG’s Common Stock,
par value $.001 per share, and shares of BBRG’s Series A 14%
Cumulative Compounding Preferred Stock, par value $.001 per share,
for new Common Shares, no par value per share, of BBRG
(the “BDH Shares”). Other than as set forth in the Agreement, BBRG shall assume no liabilities of
BDH in connection with the BDH Exchange.



     2. In addition, pursuant to the Agreement, the Individual Shareholders will exchange all of
their shares of BBRG’s Common Stock,
par value $.001 per share, and shares of BBRG’s Series A 14%
Cumulative Compounding Preferred Stock, par value $.001 per share,
for new Common Shares, no par value per share, of BBRG (the
“Recapitalization”).



     3. Immediately following the effectiveness of the BDH Exchange, BDH will distribute the BDH
Shares to its members as a liquidating distribution (the “Distribution”).



     4. BDH will, after the BDH Exchange and Distribution, take all additional steps necessary to
wind up and dissolve (the “Dissolution”) under the laws of Delaware on or before June 30, 2011. If
the Dissolution cannot be completed prior to December 31, 2010, BDH may make an “entity
classification election” and as a result be deemed to liquidate for U.S. federal income tax
purposes prior to the date on which the Dissolution is complete.



     5. As a result of the transactions contemplated in paragraphs 1, 3 and 4 above (the “BDH
Reorganization”), BBRG will receive all of the assets of BDH. The effect of the transactions will
be to transfer all assets of BDH to BBRG in exchange for the BDH Shares, followed by the
distribution of the BDH Shares in liquidation of BDH.



 









 





     This Agreement and Plan of Reorganization is adopted as a plan of reorganization for purposes
of section 368(a)(1) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, and Treasury Regulation
Section 1.368-2(g), with respect to each of the BDH Reorganization and the Recapitalization.



	 	 	 	 	 
	 	BRAVO BRIO RESTAURANT GROUP, INC.

 	 
	 	 	 
	 	By:  	 	 
	 	Title: 	 	 
	 
	 
	 	BRAVO DEVELOPMENT HOLDINGS, LLC

 	 
	 	 	 
	 	By:  	 	 
	 	Title: 	 	 
	 




2
** **

**Exhibit 32.2**

 

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

 

Inconnection with the annual report on Form 10-K of Lake Area CornProcessors, LLC (the “Company”) for the three months ended December 31,2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”), I, Robbi Buchholtz, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

1.                                       The Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

2.                                       The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company.

 
|   | /s/ Robbi Buchholtz         |
|--------|-----------------------------|
|   | Robbi Buchholtz             |
|   | Chief Financial Officer     |
|   | Dated: March 28,  2008 |

 

----
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 98 (Monday, May 21, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28015-28016]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-12723]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration


RTCA Future Flight Data Collection Committee

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of RTCA Future Flight Data Collection Committee meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public of a 
meeting of the RTCA Flight Data Collection Committee.

DATES: The meeting will be held May 31, 2001 starting at 1 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at RTCA, Inc., 1140 Connecticut 
Avenue,

[[Page 28016]]

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 (Pub. L. 92-463, 5 U.S.C., Appendix 2), notice 
is hereby given for a Future Flight Data Collection Committee meeting. 
The agenda will include:

May 31

<bullet> Opening Session (Welcome, Introductory, and Administrative 
Remarks, Agenda Review, Review/Approve Summary of Previous Meeting.)
<bullet> Receive Reports on the deliberations of Working Groups 1, 2 
and 3
<bullet> Discuss Timeline for Deliverables from the Working Groups
<bullet> Review progress on the Final Report
<bullet> Receive Presentations
<bullet> Closing Session (Other Business, Establish Agenda for Next 
Meeting, Date and Place of Next Meeting, 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.

    Issued in Washington, DC on May 15, 2001.
Janice L. Peters,
FAA Special Assistant, RTCA Advisory Committee.
[FR Doc. 01-12723 Filed 5-18-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
Case 7:07-cv-05784-KMK-LMS Document 1 Filed 06/19/2007 Page 1 of 14
Case 7:07-cv-05784-KMK-LMS Document 1 Filed 06/19/2007 Page 2 of 14
Case 7:07-cv-05784-KMK-LMS Document 1 Filed 06/19/2007 Page 3 of 14
Case 7:07-cv-05784-KMK-LMS Document 1 Filed 06/19/2007 Page 4 of 14
Case 7:07-cv-05784-KMK-LMS Document 1 Filed 06/19/2007 Page 5 of 14
Case 7:07-cv-05784-KMK-LMS Document 1 Filed 06/19/2007 Page 6 of 14
Case 7:07-cv-05784-KMK-LMS Document 1 Filed 06/19/2007 Page 7 of 14
Case 7:07-cv-05784-KMK-LMS Document 1 Filed 06/19/2007 Page 8 of 14
Case 7:07-cv-05784-KMK-LMS Document 1 Filed 06/19/2007 Page 9 of 14
Case 7:07-cv-05784-KMK-LMS Document 1 Filed 06/19/2007 Page 10 of 14
Case 7:07-cv-05784-KMK-LMS Document 1 Filed 06/19/2007 Page 11 of 14
Case 7:07-cv-05784-KMK-LMS Document 1 Filed 06/19/2007 Page 12 of 14
Case 7:07-cv-05784-KMK-LMS Document 1 Filed 06/19/2007 Page 13 of 14
Case 7:07-cv-05784-KMK-LMS Document 1 Filed 06/19/2007 Page 14 of 14
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

KENNETH HIBBLER,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 v.

JULIE REXWINKEL; et al.,

 Defendants - Appellees.

No. 13-16552

D.C. No. 3:11-cv-00067-LRHVPC

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Nevada

Larry R. Hicks, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted August 25, 2015** 

Before: McKEOWN, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

Former Nevada state prisoner Kenneth Hibbler appeals pro se from the

district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging

retaliation and deliberate indifference to his serious medical needs. We have

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion

FILED

SEP 09 2015

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

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

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

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

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
discovery rulings, Hallett v. Morgan, 296 F.3d 732, 751 (9th Cir. 2002), and we

affirm.

The district court did not abuse its discretion in partially denying Hibbler’s

motion for the Inspector General’s report because Hibbler did not demonstrate

“actual and substantial prejudice,” where the record showed that this report did not

exist. Id. at 751 (citation and internal quotation marks omitted) (explaining a

district court’s broad discretion to permit or deny discovery). Moreover, the

district court ordered production of, and Rexwinkle produced, a copy of an

incident report, which did exist.

The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Hibbler’s motion

for a final discovery extension because Hibbler failed to demonstrate good cause. 

See Johnson v. Mammoth Recreations, Inc., 975 F.2d 604, 607, 609 (9th Cir. 1992)

(setting forth standard of review and “good cause” requirement to modify a

scheduling order). Additionally, Hibbler failed to show what material facts would

have been discovered that would have precluded summary judgment. See Klingele

v. Eikenberry, 849 F.2d 409, 412 (9th Cir. 1988) (“The burden is on the

nonmoving party . . . to show what material facts would be discovered that would

preclude summary judgment.”).

We reject Hibbler’s contentions regarding the district court’s alleged bias

2 13-16552
and prejudice.

We do not consider Hibbler’s arguments relating to his deliberate

indifference claim because Hibbler does not challenge the basis for the district

court’s dismissal of his deliberate indifference claim. See Padgett v. Wright, 587

F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009) (per curiam). 

We do not consider Hibbler’s arguments as to why he did not properly

exhaust his retaliation claims because they were raised for the first time in his reply

brief. See id. Moreover, Hibbler concedes that he did not file second level

grievances. 

We do not consider any arguments and allegations raised for the first time on

appeal. See id.

Appellees’ motion to strike, filed on July 30, 2015, is denied. 

Hibbler’s request, filed on August 10, 2015, is denied.

AFFIRMED.

3 13-16552
DOCSNY-271726v01 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK 

----------------------------------------------------------------X 

IN RE WORLD TRADE CENTER LOWER 

MANHATTAN DISASTER SITE LITIGATION 

: 

: 

: 

: 

21 MC 102 (AKH) 

----------------------------------------------------------------X 

ANTWI SAMUEL, 

 Plaintiff, 

 - against - 

ALAN KASMAN DBA KASCO, et al.,

 Defendants. 

: 

: 

: 

: 

: 

: 

: 

: 

: 

07-CV-5399-AKH 

APPEARANCE 

ELECTRONICALLY FILED 

----------------------------------------------------------------X 

To the Clerk of this Court and all parties of record: 

Enter my appearance as counsel in this case for: 

MERRILL LYNCH & CO., INC. 

I certify that I am admitted to practice in this court.

Dated: New York, New York 

 October 3, 2007 

 By:

DICKSTEIN SHAPIRO LLP 

 /s/ Judith R. Cohen___ 

Judith R. Cohen (JC-8614) 

1177 Avenue of the Americas 

New York, New York 10036 

Phone: (212) 277-6500 

Fax: (212) 277-6501 

Attorney for Defendant 

MERRILL LYNCH & CO., INC. 

Case 1:07-cv-05399-AKH Document 13 Filed 10/03/2007 Page 1 of 1