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

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Office of the United States Trade Representative

# AGENCY:

Office of the United States Trade Representative.

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting. 

# SUMMARY:

The Industry Sector Advisory Committee on Small and Minority Business (ISAC-14) will hold a meeting on June 11, 2001, from 12 noon to 5 p.m. The meeting will be opened to the public from 12 noon to 5 p.m.

# DATES:

The meeting is scheduled for June 11, 2001, unless otherwise notified.

# ADDRESSES:

The meeting will be held at the Delta Centre-Ville Hotel, VIP Boardroom #522, 777 University Street, Montreal, Quebec, Canada.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Millie Sjoberg, Pam Wilbur, or Kelly Parsons (202) 482-4792, Department of Commerce, 14th Street and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20230 (principal contacts), or myself on (202) 395-6120.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

During the meeting the following topics will be addressed:
    - Presentation by USFCS officer in Montreal;
    - Presentation by Canadian SME Task Force on SME trade policy issues in Canada;
    - Discussion with Canadian Sectoral Advisory Groups on International Trade (SAGITs) on SME trade policy issues;
    - Discussion on Dispute Resolution;
    - Presentation on SME programs by the Royal Bank of Canada; and Committee business.

Heather K. Wingate,

Assistant United States Trade Representative for Intergovernmental Affairs and Public Liaison.

[FR Doc. 01-13133  Filed 5-23-01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3190-01-M
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 214 

To authorize an additional district judgeship for the district of Idaho. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 3, 2019 

Mr. SIMPSON introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To authorize an additional district judgeship for the district 

of Idaho. 

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

3 SECTION 1. DISTRICT JUDGESHIP FOR THE DISTRICT OF 

4 IDAHO. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—The President shall appoint, by 

6 and with the advice and consent of the Senate, 1 addi7 tional district judge for the district of Idaho. 

8 (b) TECHNICAL AND CONFORMING AMENDMENT.— 

9 In order that the table contained in section 133(a) of title 

10 28, United States Code, will reflect the change in the num11 ber of judgeships authorized by subsection (a), such table 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 214 IH

1 is amended by striking the item relating to Idaho and in2 serting the following: 

‘‘Idaho ............................................................................................. 3’’. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 32



CERTIFICATION



The undersigned certify
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, that:



|(1) | The accompanying
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2006 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 accompanying report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.
|--- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|Date:August 9, 2006 |  |  | /s/   Bernard P. Aldrich            
|------------------- |  |  | ------------------------------------
|                    |  |  | President and ChiefExecutive Officer





|Date:August 9, 2006 |  |  | /s/   Robert M. Wolf   
|------------------- |  |  | -----------------------
|                    |  |  | Chief Financial Officer

---
# C_2017249EN.01004101.xml

| 31.7.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 249/41 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.7.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 249/41

---

Action brought on 6 June 2017 — Genomic Health v EUIPO (ONCOTYPE DX GENOMIC PROSTATE SCORE)

(Case T-354/17)

(2017/C 249/55)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Genomic Health, Inc. (Redwood City, California, United States) (represented by: A. Reid, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Trade mark at issue: EU word mark ‘ONCOTYPE DX GENOMIC PROSTATE SCORE’ — Application for registration No 15 214 257

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 14 February 2017 in Case R 1682/2016-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

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

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order EUIPO to pay the Applicant’s costs of and occasioned by this appeal. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay the Applicant’s costs of and occasioned by this appeal.

Pleas in law

The Applicant submits that the Contested Decision is incorrect and constitutes an:

| — | Infringement of the general principles of equal treatment, good administration and legal certainty; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of the general principles of equal treatment, good administration and legal certainty;

| — | Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) in conjunction with Article 7(2) of Regulation No 207/2009; |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) in conjunction with Article 7(2) of Regulation No 207/2009;

| — | Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) in conjunction with Article 7(2) of Regulation No. 207/2009. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 7(1)(c) in conjunction with Article 7(2) of Regulation No. 207/2009.

---
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Lloyd Anthonie WILLIAMS, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 13-6180.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: April 25, 2013.

Decided: April 30, 2013.

Lloyd Anthonie Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Melissa Louise Rikard, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina; Corey F. Ellis, Office of the United States Attorney, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appehee.

Before AGEE and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Lloyd Anthonie Williams seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying, as successive, his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2012). The order, which also denied Williams a writ of error coram nobis as an alternative basis for relief, is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of ap-pealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B) (2006). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *see Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). When the district court denies *175relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. *Slack,*529 U.S. at 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595.

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Williams has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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.*
Exhibit 31.1
CERTIFICATION
I, Michael J. Paxton, certify that:
1.            I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Transport Corporation of America, Inc.;
2.            Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;
3.            Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;
4.            The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: a)
designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;b)
evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; andc)
disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting. 5.            The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): a)
all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; andb)
any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting. Date: March 3, 2005/s/ Michael J. PaxtonMichael J. PaxtonChairman, President and Chief Executive Officer


---
ex10-2.htm





 







Stoecklein Law Group, a Professional Corporation




Practice Limited to Federal Securities













	
Emerald Plaza

	
Telephone:  (619) 704-1310


	
402 West Broadway

	
Facsimile:  (619) 704-1325


	
Suite 690

	
email:  djs@slgseclaw.com


	
San Diego, California  92101

	
web:  www.slgseclaw.com


	  	  
	  	  
	  	  
	  	  










June 17, 2010


Steven A. Subick


President


41738 W. Hillman Dr.


Maricopa, AZ 85239







Re: Offering on a Best Efforts All or None Basis- Waiver of Rights as a Creditor


 


Dear Mr. Subick:


 


We understand that you are filing Form S-1 Registration and plan on raising money on an best efforts, all or none basis. The money raised from this offering will be put into an account that will not bar attachment from creditors. We know we may be one of those creditors and we agree to waive any rights and claims we have to funds in that account, other than any amount you pay us voluntarily pursuant to our agreement.


 







 


Sincerely


 







 


/s/Donald Stoecklein
**Exhibit 31.2**
**CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER**
**Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**
I, Mark A. Holmes, certify that:
(1)  I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Gateway Financial Holdings, Inc., aNorth Carolina corporation (the “registrant”); (2)  Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; (3)  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; (4)  The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
 (a)  Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, is made known to us by others within those entities,particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;  (b)  Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and proceduresand presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  (c)  Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and
(5)  The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors:
 (a)  All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;and  (b)  Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.       Date: March 29, 2005 By: */s/ Mark A. Holmes*           Mark A. Holmes     Senior Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
Delaware

The First State

Page 1

 

6766096 8100 Authentication: 202988420

SR# 20195308069 Date: 06-10-19

You may verify this certificate online at corp.delaware.gov/authver.shtml

I, JEFFREY W. BULLOCK, SECRETARY OF STATE OF THE STATE OF

DELAWARE, DO HEREBY CERTIFY THE ATTACHED IS A TRUE AND CORRECT

COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT OF “TRUECLEAR LLC”,

CHANGING ITS NAME FROM "TRUECLEAR LLC" TO "TRUEDIGITAL

DERIVATIVES LLC", FILED IN THIS OFFICE ON THE SEVENTH DAY OF

JUNE, A.D. 2019, AT 11:01 O`CLOCK A.M.
Exhibit
      32.1





CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO


SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT








I,
      Nicholas Gerber, Chief Executive Officer of Victoria Bay Asset Management,
      LLC,
      the general partner of United States 12 Month Oil Fund, LP (the "Registrant"),
      certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
      906
      of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:





1.
      The
      quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the Registrant for the fiscal quarter ended
      September 30, 2007 as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
      on
      the date hereof (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
      Registrant.











Date:  March
      5, 2008














/s/
      Nicholas D. Gerber


Nicholas
      D. Gerber


Chief
      Executive Officer
Exhibit 99.1



|Automatic Data Processing, Inc.
Claims Services Group
6111 Bollinger Canyon Road, Suite 200
PO Box 5122
San Ramon, California 94583-5122
(925) 866-1100 | 
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | 



CONSENT TO ASSIGNMENT



April 5, 2006



eAutoClaims, Inc.

10 East Douglas Road

Oldsmar, Florida 34677

Attn: Eric Seidel, President/CEO, Reed Matingly, Executive Vice President

Fax: (813) 749-1040



Dear Sir or Madam:



Re: ADP Claims Services Group, Inc.



Reference is made to the Agreement, dated March 9, 2004, by and between
eAutoclaims, Inc. and ADP Claim Services Group, Inc. (the
Agreement).



Automatic Data Processing, Inc. has entered into a definitive agreement to sell
its Claims Services business to Solera, Inc. (the Sale Transaction).
The provisions of the Agreement may be construed to require your consent as a
result of the Sale Transaction.



Please indicate your consent by signing where indicated and returning to us the
enclosed copy of this letter. Your consent will be effective as of, but not
until, the closing of the Sale Transaction. If you have any questions, or need
additional information, please contact Raymond J. Suberlak at ADP Claims
Services Group, 6111 Bollinger Canyon Rd. Ste. 200, San Ramon CA 94583,
Tel (925) 866-4817, Fax: (925) 866-4834.



| | Sincerely,

Raymond J. Suberlak
Assistant General Counsel
ADP Claim Services Group, Inc.
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





The undersigned consents to the Sale Transaction and any assignment or deemed assignment of the Agreement pursuant to the Sale Transaction.



Approved by eAutoClaims, Inc. Representative



|By:    |  |  | Date: | 
|------ |  |  | ----- | 
|Title: |  |  |       | 

---
# C_2019295EN.01002101.xml

| 2.9.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 295/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.9.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 295/21

---

Judgment of the General Court of 26 June 2019 — Portugal v Commission

(Case T-474/17) (1)

(EAGF and EAFRD - Expenditure excluded from financing - Expenditure incurred by Portugal - Late payments - Overshooting of ceilings - Article 11 of Regulation (EC) No 885/2006 - Double financial correction - Proportionality - Payment deadlines)

(2019/C 295/26)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties

Applicant: Portuguese Republic (represented by L. Inez Fernandes, M, Figueiredo, J. Saraiva de Almeida and P. Estêvão, acting as Agents)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by B. Rechena and A. Sauka, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU seeking annulment 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 from European Union financing, for the 2011 financial year, expenditure declared by the Portuguese Republic for late payments and the overshooting of ceilings.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 357, 23.10.2017.

---
Case 1:07-cv-05884-CM Document 5 Filed 09/27/2007 Page 1 of 2
Case 1:07-cv-05884-CM Document 5 Filed 09/27/2007 Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT 1

SPIKES Customer Volume Incentive Program

Program Purpose

The purpose of the SPIKES Customer Volume Incentive Program (the “Program”) is to enhance liquidity in

the products listed below. The resulting increase in liquidity on central limit order book liquidity benefits all 

participant segments in the market.

Product Scope

SPIKES Volatility Index Futures that are traded on MGEX via the CME Globex® trading platform 

(“Product”).

Eligible Participants

There is no limit to the number of participants in the Program. There are no member requirements for 

participants. Participants must complete an application with the Exchange to be eligible for the Program. 

An application can be received by contacting MGEX at mgex@mgex.com.

Program participants must not be Proprietary Trading Groups, which are defined by the CFTC as an 

organization whose owners, employees, and/or contractors trade in the name of accounts owned by the 

group and exclusively use the funds of the group for all of their trading activity. The Exchange, in its sole 

determination and based on a variety of factors, will have the final decision regarding disputes of eligibility.

Program Term

Start date is March 1, 2023. End date is May 31, 2023June 30, 2023.

Obligations

Upon meeting certain volume thresholds in the Product, participants will be eligible to receive 

predetermined incentives.

Incentives

Upon meeting all obligations, as determined by the Exchange, participants will be eligible to receive 

predetermined incentives.

Monitoring and Termination of Status

The Exchange will monitor trading activity and participants’ performance and retain the right to revoke 

participant status if it concludes from review that a participant no longer meets the eligibility requirements, 

fails to meet the obligations of the Program, or fails to comply with Exchange rules (including, but not limited 

to, rules relating to market manipulation, wash trades, etc.) or any applicable law.