alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

561 

KA 15-00166 

PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., CARNI, NEMOYER, CURRAN, AND TROUTMAN, JJ. 

 

THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK, RESPONDENT, 

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

ROBERT L. JONES, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. 

 

TIMOTHY P. DONAHER, PUBLIC DEFENDER, ROCHESTER (DAVID R. JUERGENS OF

COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. 

SANDRA DOORLEY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (STEPHEN X. O’BRIEN OF

COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT. 

 

Appeal from a judgment of the Monroe County Court (James J.

Piampiano, J.), rendered October 2, 2014. The judgment convicted

defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a weapon

in the second degree. 

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is

unanimously affirmed. 

Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him,

upon his plea of guilty, of criminal possession of a weapon in the

second degree (Penal Law § 265.03 [3]). Contrary to defendant’s

contention, the record establishes that defendant knowingly,

voluntarily and intelligently waived the right to appeal (see People v

Taggart, 124 AD3d 1362, 1362; see generally People v Lopez, 6 NY3d

248, 256), and that valid waiver by its terms forecloses any challenge

by defendant to the severity of the sentence (see Lopez, 6 NY3d at

255; see generally People v Hidalgo, 91 NY2d 733, 737). Although

County Court failed to apprise defendant of the maximum sentence he

could receive upon his conviction, “ ‘the requirement that a defendant

be apprised of [the] maximum sentence in order for a waiver to be

valid does not apply in a situation such as this[,] where there is a

specific sentence promise at the time of the waiver’ ” (People v

Semple, 23 AD3d 1058, 1059, lv denied 6 NY3d 852; see People v Brown,

115 AD3d 1204, 1206, lv denied 23 NY3d 1060).

Entered: April 28, 2017 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
December 9, 2005

EarlyBirdCapital, Inc.
275 Madison Avenue
Suite 1203
New York, New York 10016

                  Re: Jaguar Acquisition Corporation.
                      -------------------------------
Gentlemen:

                  This letter will confirm the agreement of the undersigned to
purchase warrants ("Warrants") of Jaguar Acquisition Corporation ("Company")
included in the units ("Units") being sold in the Company's initial public
offering ("IPO") upon the terms and conditions set forth herein. Each Unit is
comprised of one share of Common Stock and two Warrants. The shares of Common
Stock and Warrants will not be separately tradable until 90 days after the
effective date of the Company's IPO unless EarlyBirdCapital, Inc. ("EBC")
informs the Company of its decision to allow earlier separate trading.

                  The undersigned agrees that this letter agreement constitutes
an irrevocable order for EBC or an independent broker/dealer designated by EBC
(in either case, the "Broker") to purchase for the undersigned's account within
the six month period commencing on the date separate trading of the Warrants
commences ("Separation Date") up to $_______ of Warrants at market prices not to
exceed $0.50 per Warrant ("Maximum Warrant Purchase"). The Broker agrees to fill
such order in such amounts and at such times as it may determine, in its sole
discretion, during the six month period commencing on the Separation Date (such
period is hereinafter referred to as the "Purchase Period"). EBC further agrees
that it will not charge the undersigned any fees and/or commissions with respect
to such purchase obligation.

                  The Broker will promptly notify the undersigned of any
purchase of Warrants hereunder so that the undersigned can comply with
applicable reporting requirements on a timely basis.

                  The undersigned agrees that he shall not sell or transfer the
Warrants until after the consummation of a merger, capital stock exchange, asset
acquisition or other similar business combination with an operating business and
acknowledges that, at the option of EBC, the certificates for such Warrants
shall contain a legend indicating such restriction on transferability.













                                           Very truly yours,



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







ACKNOWLEDGED AND AGREED:

EarlyBirdCapital Inc.


By:____________________________

[Independent Broker]


By:____________________________
# C_2017318EN.01002001.xml

| 25.9.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 318/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.9.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 318/20

---

Action brought on 2 August 2017 — Foodterapia v EUIPO — Cloetta Italia (DIETOX)

(Case T-486/17)

(2017/C 318/26)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Foodterapia, SL (Barcelona, Spain) (represented by: J. Erdozain López and J. Galán López, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Cloetta Italia Srl (Cremona, Italy)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Applicant of the trade mark at issue:

Trade mark at issue: EU figurative mark containing the word element ‘DIETOX’ — Application for registration No 13 072 798

Trade mark at issue:

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Procedure before EUIPO

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 12 May 2017 in Case R 1611/2016-5

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 EUIPO to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs.

Plea in law

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Art. 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Art. 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009.

---
RTX FINTECH & RESEARCH LLC

Swap Execution Facility

RTX Fintech & Research LLC, 90 Broad St, Ste 402, New York, NY 10004

By Email

Assistant Secretary of the Commission

for FOI, Privacy and Sunshine Acts Compliance

Three Lafayette Centre

1155 21st Street, NW

Washington, DC 20581

foiasubmissions@cftc.gov

October 19, 2023

FOIA Confidential Treatment Request for 17 CFR 40.6(a) Submission re 

Amended Fee Schedule (Version 1.2)

Dear Assistant Secretary:

Under 17 CFR 40.6(a), RTX Fintech & Research LLC (RTX SEF) filed a 

submission with the Commission today self-certifying an amendment to its fee 

schedule (now version 1.2).

We (i.e., RTX SEF) request that the Commission afford confidential treatment 

under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) to the liquidity-provided program.

The grounds for this request are that disclosure would reveal our trade secrets or 

confidential commercial or financial information. And we request the confidential 

treatment for an indefinite period.

In accordance with 17 CFR 145.9(d)(4), we have marked the appropriate records for 

which we seek confidential treatment with “Confidential Treatment Requested by 

RTX Fintech & Research LLC.” We have also used an identifying number and code 

to individually mark each portion of these records.
RTX FINTECH & RESEARCH LLC

Page 2

If a FOIA request seeks the material for which we are seeking confidential 

treatment, please let us know so that we can file a detailed written justification of 

our request. Please send any such notice or justification request to:

Chief Compliance Officer

RTX Fintech & Research LLC

90 Broad St, Ste 402

New York, NY 10004

and

glenn@rtxfintech.com

If you have any questions about this request, please let me know at either (917) 694-

4856 or glenn@rtxfintech.com.

Thank you.

Sincerely yours,

Glenn Chaleff

Chief Compliance Officer

RTX Fintech & Research LLC

Cc by email:

Commission: secretary@cftc.gov

Commission, Division of Market Oversight: dmosubmissions@cftc.gov
Exhibit 32.2

CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the
Quarterly Report of New Ulm Telecom, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2005, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Nancy Blankenhagen, Chief
Financial 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:

| | 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.
| | -- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

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.

|Dated:   May 13, 2005 |  |  | By |  |  | /s/   Nancy Blankenhagen                  |  | 
|--------------------- |  |  | -- |  |  | ----------------------------------------- |  | 
|                      |  | 
|                      |  |  |    |  |  | Nancy BlankenhagenChief Financial Officer |  | 

33

---
151 So. 887

#### SOUTHERN BUILDING & LOAN ASSOCIATION v. Emma WEAVER.

3 Div. 82.

Supreme Court of Alabama.

Dec. 7, 1933.

Rehearing Denied Jan. 18, 1934.

Lange, Simpson & Brantley, of Birmingham, for petitioner.

J. R. Bell, of Hayneville, and Powell & Hamilton, of Greenville, opposed.

PER CURIAM.

Petition of the Southern Building & Loan Association for certiorari to the Court of Appeals to review and revise the judgment and decision of that Court in Southern Building & Loan Ass’n v. Weaver, 151 So. 882.

Writ denied.

ANDERSON, C. J., and GARDNER, BOULDIN, and POSTER, JJ., concur.
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.                  

###### Federal Reserve System

The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and § 225.41 of the Board’s Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire a bank or bank holding company.  The factors that are considered in acting on the notices are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).

The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated.  The notices also will be available for inspection at the office of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for that notice or to the offices of the Board of Governors.  Comments must be received not later than June 6, 2001.

**A.  Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis**                     (Randall C. Sumner, Vice President) 411 Locust Street, St. Louis, Missouri 63166-2034:                

*1.  Robert Shaw Owen, Alan Craig Owen, and Eric Lyle Owen*, all of Gleason, Tennessee; to acquire additional voting shares of Bancshares of Gleason, Inc., Gleason, Tennessee, and thereby indirectly acquire additional voting shares of Bank of Gleason, Gleason, Tennessee.                

      ( print page 28493)    
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, May 17, 2001.

Robert deV. Frierson,

Associate Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 01-12970 Filed 5-22-01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6210-01-S
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2288 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2288

  To increase the total authorization of appropriations for the Erie 
                  Canalway National Heritage Corridor.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 10, 2019

  Mr. Tonko (for himself, Mr. Higgins of New York, Mr. Collins of New 
York, Mr. Morelle, and Mr. Nadler) introduced the following bill; which 
           was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To increase the total authorization of appropriations for the Erie 
                  Canalway National Heritage Corridor.

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

SECTION 1. ERIE CANALWAY NATIONAL HERITAGE CORRIDOR REAUTHORIZATION 
              ACT.

    (a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Erie Canalway 
National Heritage Corridor Reauthorization Act''.
    (b) Reauthorization.--Section 810(a)(1) of the Erie Canalway 
National Heritage Corridor Act (title VIII of division B of appendix D 
of Public Law 106-554; 54 U.S.C. 320101 note) is amended by striking 
``$12,000,000'' and inserting ``$14,000,000''.
                                 <all>
```
## Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

Greg Jacobson, Appellant
No. 06

- 19

- 00011

- CV v.
Arnaud Prodel and Laurence Michelle Prodel, Appellee s Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 1 of Travis County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. C

- 1

- CV

- 1 8

- 004591 ). Memorandum Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Morriss, Justice Burgess and Justice Stevens participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find no error in the judgment of the court below

. We affirm the judgment of the trial court

. We further order that the appellant, Greg Jacobson, pay all costs of this app eal.

RENDERED AUGUST 8, 2019 BY ORDER OF THE COURT JOSH R. MORRISS, III CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST: Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
Exhibit 32.1

Certification  Pursuant  to Section  906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002 (18
U.S.C. ss.1350)

I, Beaufort J.B.  Clarke,  Chairman and Chief Executive  Officer of ICON Capital
Corp.,  the Manager of the  Registrant in  connection  with the Annual Report of
ICON Income Fund Nine,  LLC (the "LLC") on Form 10-K for the year ended December
31,  2004,  as filed with the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission  on the date
hereof  (the  "Annual  Report")   certify,   pursuant  to  Section  906  of  the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

1.   The Annual Report fully complies with the  requirements of Section 13(a) or
     15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. ss.78m); and

2.   The  information  contained in the Annual  Report fairly  presents,  in all
     material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
     LLC.


Dated:   July 19, 2006

 /s/ Beaufort J.B. Clarke
---------------------------------------------------
Beaufort J.B. Clarke
Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
ICON Capital Corp.
Manager of ICON Income Fund Nine, LLC
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v. JAVIER VARGAS CONTRERAS,

Defendant

- Appellant. No. 22

- 30190
D.C. No. 2:16

- cr - 00204

- RMP

- 1

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Washington Rosanna Malouf Peterson, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted August 15, 2023 * *
Before: TASHIMA, S.R. THOMAS, and FORREST, Circuit Judges. Javier Vargas Contreras appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges the 11

- month sentence imposed following the revocation of his supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
Cont reras contends that the district court procedurally erred by relying on a

* 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). 

# FILED

AUG 30 2023
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 22

- 30190

clearly erroneous finding of fact related to his minor son. This argument is not supported by the record, which reflects that the court expressed reasonable skepticism

—

based on othe r evidence in the record

— about counsel’s representations regarding Contreras’s relationship with his son. Contrary to Contreras’s argument, t he court did not make any findings as to the veracity of a witness’s testimony regarding the son’s suicidal ideati on, n or did it overlook or
mischaracterize that witness ’s testimony

. Contreras also contends that the sentence is substantively unreasonable in light of his mitigating circumstances, including parental obligations, travel
difficulties , poverty, and substance abuse issues

. The district court did not abuse its discretion by concluding that these circumstances did not warrant a lesser

sentence. See Gall v. United States , 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007) . The sentence at the high end of the Guidelines, imposed after the district court held Contreras’s violations in abeyance on three occasions to permit him to come into compliance with the terms of his supervised release and following his admission to 17 violations, is substantively reasonable under the 18 U.S.C. § 3583(e) factors and the totality of the circumstances. See Gall , 552 U.S. at 51 ; United States v. Simtob , 485 F.3d 1058, 1062 (9th Cir. 2007) (purpose of revocation sentence is to sanction the defendant’s breach of the court’s trust) . We do not consider Contreras’s policy

- based challenge to the Guidelines , which he did not raise in the district3 22

- 30190

court

. See Padgett v. Wright , 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th C ir. 2009).
AFFIRM ED
.
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.                  

###### Postal Service

# Times and Dates:

12:30 p.m., Monday, June 4, 2001; 8:30 a.m., Tuesday, June 5, 2001.

# Place:

Washington, DC, at U.S. Postal Service Headquarters, 475 L'Enfant Plaza, SW, in the Benjamin Franklin Room.

# Status:

June 4 (Closed); June 5 (Open).

# Matters To Be Considered:

 

Monday, June 4—12:30 p.m. (Closed)

1. Financial Performance.

2. Rate Case Briefing.

3. Facilities Update.

4. Leveraging Assets.

5. Strategic Planning.

6. Compensation Issues.

7. Personnel Matters.

Tuesday, June 5—8:30 a.m. (Open)

1. Minutes of the Previous Meetings, May 1, May 7-8, and May 15, 2001.

2. Remarks of the Postmaster General/Chief Executive Officer.

3. Quarterly Report on Financial Results.

4. Capital Investments.

a. Surface Air Support System.

b. Teterboro, New Jersey, Processing and Distribution Center.

5. Tentative Agenda for the July 9-10, 2001, meeting in Evansville, Indiana.

# CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

David G. Hunter, Secretary of the Board, U.S. Postal Service, 475 L'Enfant Plaza, SW., Washington, DC 20260-1000. Telephone (202) 268-4800.

David G. Hunter,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 01-13253  Filed 5-22-01; 2:50 pm]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-M
##### 



EXHIBIT 31.1
 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Global Consumer
Acquisition Corp.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 Quarterly 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.
    
    I am 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 my supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,
is made known to me 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 my 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.
    
    I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal control
over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the
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; and
 b.
    
    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.
 /s/ Scott LaPorta

Scott LaPortaPresident and Chief Executive OfficerDecember 27, 2007