alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18
- 6624

REGINALD FULLARD , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. TWANDA STALEY , Defendant

- Appellee

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina , at Greensboro

. Loretta C. Biggs , District Judge. ( 1:18

- cv
- 00300

- LCB

- JLW )

Submitted : September 18, 2018 Decided: September 21, 2018

Before NIEMEYER and AGEE , Circuit Judges , and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.
Reginald U. Fullard, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Reginald U. Fullard appeals the distr ict court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint without prejudice . We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Fullard v. Staley , No.
1:18

- cv
- 00300

- LCB

- JLW (M.D.N.C. May 14, 2018) . 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 decisi onal process.
AFFIRMED
# C_2017374EN.01003902.xml

| 6.11.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 374/39 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.11.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 374/39

---

Action brought on 21 August 2017 — Molina García v SRB

(Case T-566/17)

(2017/C 374/59)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Jerónimo Molina García (Puente Genil, Spain) (represented by: A. Velasco Albalá, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Single Resolution Board

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that General Court should:

| — | Annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the contested decision;

| — | Accept the consequences of the decision of the Single Resolution Board which was adopted erroneously, either because of lack of transparency or because of failure to take prior preventive measures which would have avoided the loss of shareholders’ capital through its depreciation and, consequently, order the payment of compensation to the applicant in the amount of the loss resulting from the erroneous procedure and decision, namely EUR 7 805,29. |
| --- | --- |

—

Accept the consequences of the decision of the Single Resolution Board which was adopted erroneously, either because of lack of transparency or because of failure to take prior preventive measures which would have avoided the loss of shareholders’ capital through its depreciation and, consequently, order the payment of compensation to the applicant in the amount of the loss resulting from the erroneous procedure and decision, namely EUR 7 805,29.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

The pleas in law and main arguments are similar to those put forward in Cases T-478/17, Mutualidad de la Abogacía and Hermandad Nacional de Arquitectos Superiores y Químicos v Single Resolution Board, T-481/17, Fundación Tatiana Pérez de Guzmán el Bueno and SFL v Single Resolution Board, T-482/17, Comercial Vascongada Recalde v Commission and Single Resolution Board, T-483/17, García Suárez and Others v Commission and Single Resolution Board, T-484/17, Fidesban and Others v Single Resolution Board, T-497/17, Sáchez del Valle and Calatrava Real State 2015 v Commission and Single Resolution Board, and T-498/17, Pablo Álvarez de Linera Granda v Commission and Single Resolution Board.

Mutualidad de la Abogacía and Hermandad Nacional de Arquitectos Superiores y Químicos

Single Resolution Board

Fundación Tatiana Pérez de Guzmán el Bueno and SFL

Single Resolution Board

Comercial Vascongada Recalde

Commission and Single Resolution Board

García Suárez and Others

Commission and Single Resolution Board

Fidesban and Others

Single Resolution Board

Sáchez del Valle and Calatrava Real State 2015

Commission and Single Resolution Board

Pablo Álvarez de Linera Granda

Commission and Single Resolution Board

---
55 WATER STREET

DTCC Data Repository aaa

October 24, 2018

By Electronic Submission

Mr. Chris Kirkpatrick

Secretary

Commodity Futures Trading Commission
1155 21* Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20581

DDR Rule Filing: DDR15

Re: Amendments to DTCC Data Repository (U.S.) LLC Rulebook Pursuant to Section 5c(c)
(1) of the Commodity Exchange Act and Commission Regulation § 40.6

Dear Mr. Kirkpatrick:

Pursuant to Section 5c(c)(1) of the Commodity Exchange Act, as amended, and Commodity Futures
Trading Commission (the “Commission” or “CFTC”) Regulation § 40.6, DTCC Data Repository
(U.S.) LLC (“DDR”) submits, by written certification, amendments to the DTCC Data Repository
(U.S.) LLC Rulebook (“DDR Rulebook”), including, but not limited to, the changes enumerated
below.

I. DDR has amended the cover page of the DDR Rulebook to update the effective date.
Il. | DDR has deleted the User Agreement examples from DDR Rulebook Annex A.

Ill. DDR has amended various sections of the DDR Rulebook to reflect the deletion the User
Agreement examples from DDR Rulebook Annex A.

In addition to the changes described above, additional minor edits have been made throughout the
DDR Rulebook. Any material modifications to the DDR Rulebook, including the DDR Operating
Procedures, outlined in this letter have been approved by the DDR Board pursuant to DDR Operating
Procedures Important Legal Information Section 3 Notices.

DDR certifies that these amendments comply with the Commodity Exchange Act and the rules and
regulations promulgated by the Commission thereunder. No substantive opposing views have been
expressed with respect to the amendments. DDR further certifies that, concurrent with this filing today,


DDR Rule Filing: DDR15
October 24, 2018
2

a copy of this submission was posted on its website and may be accessed at:
http://www.dtcc.com/legal/important-notices.

Enclosed with this letter is a marked version of the DDR Rulebook. If you have any questions or need
further information, please contact me at 813 470-1447.

Sincerely,

yle Romig
Director and Assistant General Counsel

Enclosures
### NUMBER 13 - 20 - 00 030 - C V 

## COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

ADOLFO GARCIA YBARRA JR. , A ppellant ,

v. WARDEN STRONG, ET AL. , A ppellee s .

On a ppeal from the 278 th District Court of Walker County, Texas.



## ORDER OF ABATEMENT
Before Chief Justice Contreras and Justices Longoria and Hinojosa Order Per Curiam Appellant, Adlolfo Garcia Ybarra Jr. , appeals from a final judgment made in cause number 1828995 entered by the 278th District Court in Walker County, Texas

. He proceeds pro se and is incarcerated. A ppellant filed several letter motions indicating he has been previously found indigent and m ay proceed in forma pauperis

.2 The Texas Legislature provide s for the possibility of appointed counsel in civil matters by conferring upon a district court judge the discretion to “appoint counsel to attend to the cause of a party who makes an affidavit that he is too poor to employ counsel to attend to the cause.” T EX

. G OV ’ T C ODE A NN . §24.016 (West, Westlaw through 2013 C.S.); see Gibson , 102 S.W.3d at 712. Under exceptional circumstances, “the public and private interests at stake [may be] such that the administration of justice may best be served by appointing a lawyer to represent an indigent civil litigant.” Travelers Indem. Co. v. Mayfield , 923 S.W.2d 590, 594 (Tex. 1996). This sequence of events requires us to effectuate our responsibility to avoid further delay and to preserve the parties' rights. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 37.3(a)( 2 ). Accordingly, this appeal is ABATED and the cause REMANDED to the trial court. Upon remand, the judge of the trial court shall immediately cause notice to be given and conduct a hearing to determine the following: 1) whether appellant is indigent; 2) if appellant is indigent, whether counsel should be appointed to represent appellant on appeal; 3) whether appellant is entitled to have the clerk’s and/or reporter’s record furnished without charge; 4) if appellant is not entitled to have the clerk’s and/or reporter’s record furnished at no charge, the date appellant will request prepara tion and make acceptable payment arrangements for the reporter’s record; and 5 ) what orders, if any, should be entered to assure the filing of appropriate notices and documentation to dismiss appellant’s appeal if appellant does not desire to prosecute thi s appeal, or if appellant desires to prosecute the appeal, to assure that the clerk’s and reporter’s record will be filed promptly and that the appeal will be diligently pursued.3 The trial court shall prepare and file its findings and orders and cause them to be included in a supplemental clerk's record which should be submitted to the Clerk of this Court within sixty days from the date of this order.

IT IS SO ORDERED. PER CURIA M
D elivered and filed the 17th day of April, 2020.
(105 So. 222)

#### H. H. GARDNER v. CITY OF MONTGOMERY.

(3 Div. 701.)

(Supreme Court of Alabama.

May 14, 1925.

Rehearing Denied June 25, 1925.)

Appeal from Circuit Court, Montgomery County; Leon McCord, Judge. •

London, Yancey & Brower, of Birmingham, for appellant.

Ludlow Elmore, of Montgomery, and Reese & Reese, of Selma, for appellee.

THOMAS, J.

The judgment of the circuit court is affirmed on authority of Woco Pep Co. of Montgomery v. City of Montgomery ante, p. 452, 105 So. 214.

All the Justices concur.
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2030 

To direct the Secretary of the Interior to execute and carry out agreements 

concerning Colorado River Drought Contingency Management and Operations, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 2, 2019 

Mr. GRIJALVA (for himself, Mr. HUFFMAN, Mrs. NAPOLITANO, Mr. BIGGS, 

Mr. BISHOP of Utah, Mr. CALVERT, Ms. CHENEY, Mr. CURTIS, Ms. 

DEGETTE, Mr. GALLEGO, Mr. GOSAR, Ms. HAALAND, Mr. HORSFORD, 

Mrs. KIRKPATRICK, Mr. LAMBORN, Mr. LEVIN of California, Mrs. 

LESKO, Mr. LOWENTHAL, Mr. LUJA ́N, Mr. MCADAMS, Mr. O’HALLERAN, 

Mr. PERLMUTTER, Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD, Mr. SCHIFF, Mr. SCHWEIKERT, 

Mr. STANTON, Mr. STEWART, and Ms. TITUS) introduced the following 

bill; which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To direct the Secretary of the Interior to execute and carry 

out agreements concerning Colorado River Drought Contingency Management and Operations, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Colorado River 

5 Drought Contingency Plan Authorization Act’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•HR 2030 IH

1 SEC. 2. COLORADO RIVER BASIN DROUGHT CONTINGENCY 

2 PLANS. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provi4 sion of law expressly addressing the operation of the appli5 cable Colorado River System reservoirs, immediately upon 

6 execution of the March 19, 2019, versions of the Agree7 ment Concerning Colorado River Drought Contingency 

8 Management and Operations and the agreements attached 

9 thereto as Attachments A1, A2, and B, by all of the non10 Federal parties thereto, the Secretary of the Interior shall, 

11 without delay, execute such agreements, and is directed 

12 and authorized to carry out the provisions of such agree13 ments and operate applicable Colorado River System res14 ervoirs accordingly. 

15 (b) EFFECT.—Nothing in this section shall— 

16 (1) be construed or interpreted as precedent for 

17 the litigation of, or as altering, affecting, or being 

18 deemed as a congressional determination regarding, 

19 the water rights of the United States, any Indian 

20 Tribe, band, or community, any State or political 

21 subdivision or district of a State, or any person; or 

22 (2) exempt the implementation of such agree23 ments and the operation of applicable Colorado 

24 River System reservoirs from any requirements of 

25 applicable Federal environmental laws. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
Exhibit 32.1
 
 Certification
of Chief Executive Officer and 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 ZST Digital Networks, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending March 31, 2009, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
each of the undersigned, in the capacities and on the date indicated below,
hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his
knowledge:
 
 (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/
      Zhong BoZhong
      BoChief
      Executive Officer(Principal
      Executive Officer)June
      12, 2009/s/
      Zeng Yun SuZeng
      Yun SuChief
      Financial Officer and Corporate Secretary(Principal
      Financial and Accounting Officer)June
      12, 2009
 
 The
foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and is not filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission as part of the Form 10-Q or as a separate disclosure
document and is not incorporated by reference into any filing of ZST Digital
Networks, Inc. (the “Company”) under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, irrespective of any general
incorporation language contained in such filing. 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.
Exhibit 32.1





CERTIFICATION


Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350


(Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)





In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Xsovt Brands, Inc. (the “Company”) for the quarter ended March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Avi M Koschitzki, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §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.




Date: May 23, 2011
By:
/s/ Avi M KoschitzkiName: Avi M KoschitzkiTitle:   President and Chief Executive Officer(principal executive officer)
#### Rodney L. BURR, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Douglas F. GANSLER; Marcus L. Brown, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 13-1147.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: May 16, 2013.

Decided: May 30, 2013.

Rodney L. Burr, Appellant Pro Se.

Before SHEDD, DAVIS, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed in part; affirmed in part by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Rodney L. Burr appeals the district court’s order remanding the State’s prosecution of Burr for a traffic violation to state court and dismissing Burr’s federal complaint alleging that the state regulation requiring that he wear a seat belt while driving violates the Constitution. As this court may not ordinarily review a district court’s remand order by reason of 28 U.S.C. § 1447(d) (2006), and we reject Burr’s argument that there was supplemental jurisdiction over the state prosecution by virtue of his complaint, we dismiss Burr’s appeal to the extent he seeks review of that portion of the order. *See Borneman v. United States,*213 F.3d 819, 824 (4th Cir.2000); *see also Franchise Tax Bd. of Cal. v. Constr. Laborers Vacation Trust for S. Cal.,*463 U.S. 1, 10, 103 S.Ct. 2841, 77 L.Ed.2d 420 (1983) (“[A] federal court does not have original jurisdiction over a case in which the complaint presents a state-law cause of action, but also asserts that federal law deprives the defendant of a defense he may raise ... or that a federal defense the defendant may raise is not sufficient to defeat the claim.”) (citation omitted).

With respect to Burr’s complaint, we agree with the district court that it is without merit and therefore affirm the portion of the court’s order dismissing the complaint.

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 IN PART; AFFIRMED IN PART.*
MINNEAPOLIS GRAIN EXCHANGE, LLC

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

612-321-7101

mgex.com

Via Portal Submission December 30, 2022

 MGEX Submission No. 22-52

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 during the week of November 21, 2022:

• December 22, 2022 Memo to MGEX Clearing Members reminding them of the 7:30 a.m. Thursday, 

December 29, 2022 deadline to report offsets of January 2023 SPIKES Volatility Index futures, and 

Hard Red Spring Wheat Index, Hard Red Winter Wheat Index, Soft Red Winter Wheat Index, 

National Corn Index, and National Soybean Index futures and options, effective for the Wednesday, 

December 28, 2022 trade date.

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) 321-7140 or 

asmith@mgex.com. 

Sincerely, 

Alex Smith

Assistant Corporate Counsel
#### Bennett v. Townsend.

1. Practice : If a suit be brought against three parties jointly and severally liable, two of whom only are served, it is not error to enter judgment against those served and omit therefrom the other.

Townsend filed his petition in the District Court for Otoe county, against John P. Bennett, H. P. Bennett and Elisha Bennett, upon a joint and several promissory note made by them to him. John P. Bennett and Elisha Bennett, were duly served with summons, but II. P. Bennett was not served. Judgment by default was entered against the defendants who were served only. The defendants brought the case here by petition in error.

*O. P. Mason,*for plaintiff in error, contended that it was necessary to enter judgment against all or none of the defendants in the writ, and citéd *Russell*v. *Hogan,*1 *Scam.*552 ; *Owen*v. *Bond, Breese*91; *Ladd*v. *Edwards, Breese*139 ; *Robertson*v. *Smith,*18 *Johnson ; Hosey*v. *Oouniy of Macoupin,*2 *Scam.*36 ; *Wright*v. *Meredith,*4 *Scam.*361; *Freeman's Illinois, Dig. 2,*975.

*II. H. Harding,*contra.

The court,

by Streeter, J.

The judgment was rightly entered against the defendants served. It was not error not to make it in form against the defendant who was not served.

Judgment affirmed.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2016 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2016

   To modify the authorized uses of certain property conveyed by the 
               United States in Los Angeles, California.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 1, 2019

  Mr. Ted Lieu of California introduced the following bill; which was 
  referred to the Committee on Armed Services, and in addition to the 
   Committee on Financial Services, for a period to be subsequently 
   determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such 
 provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To modify the authorized uses of certain property conveyed by the 
               United States in Los Angeles, California.

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

SECTION 1. MODIFICATION OF AUTHORIZED USES OF CERTAIN PROPERTY CONVEYED 
              BY THE UNITED STATES IN LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA.

    (a) In General.--Section 2 of Public Law 85-236 (71 Stat. 517) is 
amended in the first sentence by inserting after ``for other military 
purposes'' the following: ``and for purposes of meeting the needs of 
the homeless (as that term is defined in section 103 of the McKinney-
Vento Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11302))''.
    (b) Modification of Use.--
            (1) Application.--The State of California shall submit to 
        the Administrator of General Services an application for use of 
        the property conveyed by section 2 of Public Law 85-236 for 
        purposes of meeting the needs of the homeless in accordance 
        with the amendment made by subsection (a).
            (2) Review of application.--Not later than 60 days after 
        the date of receipt of an application pursuant to paragraph 
        (1), the Administrator and the Secretary of Health and Human 
        Services shall jointly determine whether the use of the 
        property described in the application is a use for purposes of 
        meeting the needs of the homeless.
            (3) Modification of instrument of conveyance.--If the 
        Administrator and the Secretary jointly determine that the use 
        of the property described in the application is for purposes of 
        meeting the needs of the homeless, the Administrator shall 
        execute and record in the appropriate office an instrument of 
        modification of the deed of conveyance executed pursuant to 
        Public Law 85-236 in order to authorize such use of the 
        property. The instrument shall include such additional terms 
        and conditions as the Administrator considers appropriate to 
        protect the interests of the United States.
                                 <all>
```