alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Allen Z. WOLFSON, Petitioner-Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 04-12484

Non-Argument Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.

June 14, 2006.

Allen Z. Wolfson, Brooklyn, NY, pro se.

Patricia Ann McCarthy, Office of Atty. Gen./Dept. of Legal Affairs, Tampa, FL, for Respondent-Appellee.

Before TJOFLAT, DUBINA and WILSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Allen Z. Wolfson, a federal prisoner serving a federal sentence for securities fraud in New York, appeals the district court’s denial of his pro se application for a writ of error *coram nobis,*under the All Writs Statute, 28 U.S.C. 1651, against the State of Florida. Wolfson challenges convictions entered against him in Florida state court in 1978 for bank fraud and conspiracy to commit bank fraud, for which he eventually served twenty-five months in state prison. He requested that the district court vacate and set aside the 1978 state convictions because they are having “a significant effect” on his “current legal status.” Wolfson does not attack the federal conviction for which he is currently imprisoned, but only the 1978 state convictions.

A writ of error *coram nobis*is not available in federal court to directly attack a state criminal judgment. *See Theriault v. State of Mississippi,*390 F.2d 657 (5th Cir.1968) (per curiam).1 Since Wolfson may not attack his 1978 state convictions in federal district court, the district court committed no error in denying his application for a writ of error *coram nobis.**2*

AFFIRMED.

1

. Decisions of the Fifth Circuit rendered on or before September 30, 1981, are binding precedent in the Eleventh Circuit. *Bonner v. City of Prichard, 661*F.2d 1206, 1209 (11th Cir. 1981) (en banc).

2

. The district court suggests that Wolfson's *coram nobis*petition resembles an ill-fated *867effort to bring a collateral claim under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 or § 2255 long after the time limitations for bringing such attacks are available, and alternatively held that if Wolfson is attempting to challenge his 1978 convictions under §§ 2254 or 2255, he may not do so now. Wolfson asserts that he does not seek habeas relief. Because Wolfson does not challenge this ruling by the district court on appeal, we deem the issue abandoned. *See United States v. Scott,*426 F.3d 1324, 1328 (11th Cir.2005).
# C_2020010EN.01001802.xml

| 13.1.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 10/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.1.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 10/18

---

Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 25 June 2019 — Fred Olsen, SA v Naviera Armas, SA, European Commission

(Case C-319/18 P) (1)

(Appeal - State aid - Article 181 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court - Exclusive right of use of the port infrastructure at Puerto de Las Nieves (Spain) granted to a shipping company - Decision finding no State aid at the end of the preliminary investigation procedure - Advantage granted by means of State resources - Test of a private investor acting in a market economy)

(2020/C 10/22)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Appellant: Fred Olsen, SA (represented by: J.M. Rodríguez Cárcamo and A.M. Rodríguez Conde, abogados)

Other parties to the proceedings: Naviera Armas, SA (represented by: J.L. Buendía Sierra and Á. Givaja Sanz, abogados), European Commission (represented by: A. Bouchagiar, S. Noë and G. Luengo, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The appeal is dismissed as being manifestly unfounded. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The appeal is dismissed as being manifestly unfounded.

| 2. | Fred Olsen SA is ordered to bear its own costs incurred in the appeal proceedings and to pay those incurred by Naviera Armas SA. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Fred Olsen SA is ordered to bear its own costs incurred in the appeal proceedings and to pay those incurred by Naviera Armas SA.

| 3. | The European Commission shall bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

The European Commission shall bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 268, 30.7.2018.

---
# C_2020423EN.01000301.xml

| 7.12.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 423/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.12.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 423/3

---

Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 17 September 2020 — Rosneft Oil Company PAO, formerly NK Rosneft OAO, RN-Shelf-Arctic OOO, RN-Shelf-Far East, formerly RN-Shelf-Dalniy Vostok ZAO, RN-Exploration OOO, Tagulskoe OOO v Council of the European Union, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, European Commission

(Case C-732/18 P) (1)

(Appeal - Restrictive measures adopted in view of the actions of the Russian Federation destabilising the situation in Ukraine - List of persons, entities and bodies subject to freezing of funds and economic resources - Listing of the appellants in the list of the entities to which restrictive measures apply)

(2020/C 423/03)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Appellants: Rosneft Oil Company PAO, formerly NK Rosneft OAO, RN-Shelf-Arctic OOO, RN-Shelf-Far East, formerly RN-Shelf-Dalniy Vostok ZAO, RN-Exploration OOO, Tagulskoe OOO (represented by: L. Van den Hende, advocaat)

Other parties to the proceedings: Council of the European Union (represented by: M.-M. Joséphidès and B. Driessen, acting as Agents), United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, European Commission (represented initially by: L. Havas, J. Norris and A. Tizzano, and subsequently by L. Havas and J. Norris, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the appeal; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the appeal;

| 2. | Orders Rosneft Oil Company PAO, RN-Shelf-Arctic OOO, RN-Shelf-Far East AO, RN-Exploration OOO and Tagulskoe OOO to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Rosneft Oil Company PAO, RN-Shelf-Arctic OOO, RN-Shelf-Far East AO, RN-Exploration OOO and Tagulskoe OOO to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union;

| 3. | Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 93, 11.3.2019.

---
ICAP Global Derivatives Limited

2 Broadgate

London

United Kingdom

EC2M 7UR

June 16, 2022

Submitted via CFTC Portal

Mr. Christopher J. Kirkpatrick 

Office of the Secretariat

Commodity Futures Trading Commission

Three Lafayette Centre

1155 21st Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20581

Re: ICAP Global Derivatives Limited – Regulation 40.6(a) Rule Certification –

Notification of Amendments to IGDL Fee Schedule (IGDL-2022-R-2)

Dear Mr. Kirkpatrick: 

Pursuant to Section 5c(c) of the Commodity Exchange Act, as amended (the “Act”), and Section 

40.6(a) of the regulations of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (the “Commission”), 

ICAP Global Derivatives Limited (“IGDL”), a registered swap execution facility, hereby notifies 

the Commission that it wishes to amend its fee schedule (the “Fee Schedule”), as described more 

fully in the Exhibits attached hereto. The amended Fee Schedule will become effective on July 1, 

2022.

Pursuant to Commission Regulation 40.6, this submission includes:

(i) A concise explanation and analysis of the amended Fee Schedule and its compliance 

with applicable provisions of the Act, attached as Exhibit A;

(ii) A clean copy of the amended Fee Schedule, attached as Exhibit B; and

(iii) A copy of the amended Fee Schedule marked to show changes to the currently 

effective version, attached as Exhibit C.

IGDL hereby certifies that the amendment complies with the requirements of the Act and 

Commission regulations thereunder. IGDL is not aware of any substantive opposing views 

expressed with respect to this filing and certifies that, concurrent with this filing, a copy of this 
Mr. Christopher J. Kirkpatrick

June 16, 2022

Page 2

submission was posted on IGDL’s website.

Please contact Brian D. Donnelly, Chief Compliance Officer, at (201) 984-6956 or by email at 

bddonnelly@tullettprebon.com with any questions regarding this matter.

Very truly yours,

ICAP Global Derivatives Limited

By: __________________________

Name: Brian D. Donnelly

Title: Chief Compliance Officer

Date: June 16, 2022

Enclosures

cc: CFTC Division of Market Oversight (dmosubmissions@cftc.gov)

Nancy Markowitz, CFTC (nmarkowitz@cftc.gov) 
Mr. Christopher J. Kirkpatrick

June 16, 2022

EXHIBIT A

Explanation of Amendments to IGDL Fee Schedule

[FOIA Confidential Treatment Requested]
Mr. Christopher J. Kirkpatrick

June 16, 2022

EXHIBIT B

Amended IGDL Fee Schedule

(Clean Version)

[FOIA Confidential Treatment Requested]
Mr. Christopher J. Kirkpatrick

June 16, 2022

EXHIBIT C

Amended IGDL Fee Schedule

(Marked Version)

[FOIA Confidential Treatment Requested]
##### 



Exhibit 99.2

CERTIFICATION 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 annual report of GameStop Corp. (the Company) on
Form 10-K for the period ending February 1, 2003 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, David W. Carlson,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, to the best of my knowledge,
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.

| |                                                                                                                       
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | /s/ David W. Carlson

David W. Carlson
Executive Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer
GameStop Corp.
May 2, 2003

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
      32.2




SECTION
      1350 CERTIFICATION (CFO)




CHINA
      AUTOMOTIVE SYSTEMS, INC.




CERTIFICATION
      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 Annual Report of China Automotive Systems, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006, as filed with the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Daming
      Hu, 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.




Date:
      April 2 ,
      2007




/s/
                Daming HuDaming
                HuChief
                Financial Officer
141 So. 923

#### Ex parte H. H. MONTGOMERY, as Supt. of Banks, etc.

6 Div. 142.

Supreme Court of Alabama.

April 28, 1932.

PER CURIAM.

Petition dismissed.
#### Barbara ZINNAMON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. NYC DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION/Board of Education, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 08-5209-cv.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

May 13, 2010.

Barbara Zinnamon, Brooklyn, N.Y., pro se.

Julie Steiner, City of New York Law Department, New York, N.Y., for Appel-lees.

*43PRESENT: DENNIS JACOBS, Chief Judge, ROSEMARY S. POOLER, ROBERT A. KATZMANN, Circuit Judges.

*SUMMARY ORDER*

Plaintiff-appellant Barbara Zinnamon argues that the district court erred in dismissing her complaint pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). We assume the parties’ familiarity with the underlying facts, the procedural history, and the issues presented for review.

We affirm for substantially the reasons stated in the district court’s opinion. *See Zinnamon v. N.Y.C. Dep’t of Educ.,*No. 08-CV-1399 (E.D.N.Y. Oct.8, 2008).

Finding no merit in Zinnamon’s remaining arguments, we hereby AFFIRM the judgment of the district court.
Appeal of-- ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS ) ) ManTech Advanced Systems International, Inc.) ) Under ContractNo. NOO 178-04-D-4080 ) APPEARANCES FORTHE APPELLANT:

APPEARANCES FORTHE GOVERNMENT: ASBCA No. 61740

Nicole J. Owren-Wiest, Esq. Skye Mathieson, Esq.

Crowell & Moring, LLP Washington, DC Craig D. Jensen, Esq.

Navy ChiefTrial Attorney DebraE. Rubin, Esq.

Associate Counsel Naval Surface Warfare Center Carderock Division OPINION BYADMINISTRATIVE JUDGE THRASHER By correspondence dated September 14, 2018, appellantrescinded and withdrew its claim which forms the basis for this appeal. Appellant has moved to dismiss the appeal as moot and the government does not object. When a claim is unequivocally rescinded, the action moots the appeal, leaving the Board without jurisdictionto entertainthe appeal further. Combat SupportAssociates, ASBCA Nos. 58945, 58946, 16-1 BCA 136,288 at 176,973; Management ResourceAssociates, Inc., ASBCANo. 49620, 96-2 BCA 128,588 at 142,736. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed as moot. Dated: October 1, 2018

(Signatures continued) J J. T Mministra ve Judge Armed Services Board ofContract AppealsI concur



# ~-- RICHARD SHACKLEFORD Administrative Judge Vice Chairman Armed Services Board ofContractAppeals I concur

J. REID PROUTY Administrative Judge Vice Chairman Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals

I certify that the foregoing is a true copy ofthe Opinion and Decision ofthe Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals in ASBCA No. 61740, Appeal of ManTechAdvanced Systems International, Inc., rendered in conformance with the Board's Charter. Dated:

2 JEFFREY D. GARDIN Recorder, Armed Services Board ofContract Appeals
EXHIBIT 32.2

SARBANES-OXLEY SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION



In connection with the Quarterly Report of New Ulm Telecom, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2007, 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, to my 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.






Date:  May 10, 2007
        
        By
        /s/
        Nancy BlankenhagenNancy BlankenhagenChief Financial Officer






---
Exhibit 23.2

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

The Board of
Directors
IntriCon Corporation:

We consent to
the incorporation by reference in the registration statement No. 33-33712 on
Form S-3, and in the registration statements (No. 333-16377, 333-66433,
333-59694 and 333-129104) on Form S-8 of IntriCon Corporation (formerly Selas
Corporation of America) and subsidiaries of our reports dated March 18, 2005,
except as to notes 3, 4, 8 and 18, which is as of March 31, 2005 and note 2 which
is as of June 24, 2005, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of IntriCon
Corporation and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2004 and the related
consolidated statements of operations, shareholders equity and comprehensive
income (loss), and cash flows and related financial statement schedule for each
of the years in the two-year period ended December 31, 2004, which reports are
included in the December 31, 2005 annual report on Form 10-K of IntriCon
Corporation.

Our reports
refer to the Companys restatement of the consolidated financial statements as
of December 31, 2004 and for each of the years in the two-year period ended
December 31, 2004.

/s/ KPMG LLP

Minneapolis,
Minnesota
March 17, 2006

---
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Eric L. MACK, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 13-2069.

United States Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Submitted: Oct. 25, 2013.

Filed: Nov. 12, 2013.

Laine Cardarella, Asst. Fed. Public Defender, Kansas City, MO (Stephen C. Moss, Acting Fed. Public Defender, on the brief), for appellant.

David DeTar Newbert, Asst. U.S. Atty., Kansas City, MO, for appellee.

Before LOKEN, BYE, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

After Eric Mack pleaded guilty to a charge of escaping from custody, the district court1 varied upward from the applicable Guidelines range and sentenced him to 16 months in prison. Seeking leave to withdraw, his counsel has filed a brief under *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), arguing that Mack’s sentence was excessive in light of the statutory goals of sentencing.

Mack pleaded guilty pursuant to a plea agreement that contained a waiver of his right to appeal his conviction and sentence, and we will enforce the appeal waiver. This appeal falls within the scope of the waiver, which, by its terms, applies in a direct criminal appeal unless the grounds of appeal include ineffective assistance of counsel, prosecutorial misconduct, or an “illegal sentence.” Further, the record reflects that Mack entered into the plea agreement and the appeal waiver knowingly and voluntarily, and we find that no miscarriage of justice would result from enforcing the waiver in this case. *See United States v. Andis,*333 F.3d 886, 889-92 (8th Cir.2003) (en banc); *United States v. Estradar-Bahena,*201 F.3d 1070, 1071 (8th Cir.2000) (per curiam) (enforcing appeal waiver in *Anders*case).

*717Finally, having independently reviewed the record under *Penson v. Ohio,*488 U.S. 75, 109 S.Ct. 346, 102 L.Ed.2d 300 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues outside the scope of the appeal waiver. Therefore, we dismiss the appeal, and we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.

1

. The Honorable Gary A. Fenner, United States District Judge for the Western District of Missouri.
**Exhibit 32.1**

SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION (CEO)

CHINA AUTOMOTIVE SYSTEMS, INC.

CERTIFICATION 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 Annual Report of China Automotive Systems, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Hanlin Chen, Chief Executive Officer, Chairman and President 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.

Date: March 31, 2006

|   | /s/ Hanlin Chen                       |
|--------|---------------------------------------|
|   |                                       |
|   | Hanlin Chen                           |
|   | Chief Executive Officer, Chairman and |
|   | President                             |
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 companies listed in this notice have given notice under section 4 of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 1843) (BHC Act) and Regulation Y (12 CFR Part 225) to engage                     *de novo*, or to acquire or control voting securities or assets of a company, including the companies listed below, that engages either directly or through a subsidiary or other company, in a nonbanking activity that is listed in § 225.28 of Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.28) or that the Board has determined by Order to be closely related to banking and permissible for bank holding companies.  Unless otherwise noted, these activities will be conducted throughout the United States.                

                    Each notice is available for inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank indicated.  The notice also will be available for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors.  Interested persons may express their views in writing on the question whether the proposal complies with the standards of section 4 of the                           ( print page 29327)                        BHC Act.  Additional information on all bank holding companies may be obtained from the National Information Center website at www.ffiec.gov/​nic/​.                

Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding the applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors not later than June 12, 2001.

**A.  Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City**                     (D. Michael Manies, Assistant Vice President) 925 Grand Avenue, Kansas City, Missouri 64198-0001:                

*1.  Guaranty Corporation*, Denver, Colorado; to acquire AMG/Guaranty Corporation, Englewood, Colorado, and thereby engage in trust company activities, pursuant to § 225.28(b)(5) of Regulation Y.                

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, May 23, 2001.

Robert deV. Frierson

Associate Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 01-13477 Filed 5-29-01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6210-01-S