alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
ICE Swap Trade LLC

55 East 52nd Street

New York, NY 10055

January 5, 2021

Submitted via the CFTC Portal Submission 21-01

Melissa Jurgens

Office of the Secretariat

U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission

Three Lafayette Centre

1155 21st Street, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20581

via email: submissions@cftc.gov

Re: ICE Swap Trade, LLC – Regulation §40.6(d) Weekly Notification of Amendments Related to 

Product Terms and Conditions

Ladies and Gentlemen:

Pursuant to Section 5c(c) of the Commodity Exchange Act (the “Act”) and Section 40.6(d) of the 

regulations of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (the “Commission”), ICE Swap Trade, 

LLC (“IST” or the “SEF”) hereby notifies the Commission of amendments that were made to 

certain of its rules during the week of January 4, 2021. 

A concise explanation of the amendments to the Rulebook is attached hereto as Exhibit A. A 

copy of the revised Rulebook marked to show changes against the previous Rulebook with an 

effective date of January 6, 2021, is attached hereto as Exhibit B. A clean copy of the revised 

Rulebook is attached hereto as Exhibit C. 

IST certifies that the rule amendment complies with the requirements of the Commodity Exchange 

Act and the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder. IST 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 submission was posted on the IST’s website and may be accessed at: 

https://www.theice.com/swap-trade/regulation#rule-filings. 

Please contact the undersigned at (212) 323-8543 with any questions regarding this matter.

Very truly yours,

Robert J. Laorno

General Counsel

Enclosure
Exhibit A

Summary of Rulebook Changes

Rule Contract Name Changes

13165

USAC HSFO vs USGC HSFO Fuel Oil Swap Name and settlement language changes to 

remain consistent with updates in price 

assessment methodology terminology
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  SKTF  Enterprises, Inc. (the
"Company")  on  Form  10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2002, as filed with
the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Carl  M.  Berg,  Chief  Executive  Officer  and  Chief  Financial Officer of the
Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec.
906  of  the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act  of  2002,  that:

(1)  The  Report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a) or 15(d)
     of  the  Securities  Exchange  Act  of  1934;  and

(2)  Information  contained  in  the  Report  fairly  presents,  in all material
     respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date:  March  27,  2003


                                   /s/  Carl  M.  Berg
                                   ---------------------------
                                   Carl  M.  Berg
                                   Chief Executive Officer and
                                   Chief Financial  Officer



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.
CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 USC, SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906


OF
THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002








In connection with the Annual Report of
China Agro Sciences Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended
September 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on or
about the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Zhengquan Wang, Chief Executive Officer
of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Sec. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(1)           
The Report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





(2)           
Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.








Dated:  January
      13, 2009
              /s/ Zhengquan WangZhengquan WangPresident, Director, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial
      Officer
#### In the Matter of Troy SS., Respondent, v Judy UU., Appellant. (And Two Other Related Proceedings.)

Submitted April 26, 2010;

decided June 8, 2010

Motion, insofar as it seeks leave to appeal from that portion of the Appellate Division order that affirmed Family Court’s order denying appellant’s motion to vacate a prior order of that court, dismissed upon the ground that such portion of the order does not finally determine the proceeding within the meaning of the Constitution; motion for leave to appeal otherwise denied.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 22-0147

IN THE MATTER OF:

R.S.,

Respondent and Appellant. 

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and 

good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including December 7, 2022, within which to prepare, 

file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

October 27 2022

10/27/2022

Case Number: DA 22-0147
Exhibit 12.1



I, George Whatley, Chief Executive Officer, certify that:



1.

I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 20-F of

Alpha Gold Corporation;



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 Annual 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 company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;



4.

The Companys other certifying officer(s) 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 company 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 company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in that this report is being prepared;

(b)

Evaluated the effectiveness of the company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; and

(c)

Evaluated the effectiveness of the company'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; and

(d)

Disclosed in this report any change in the companys internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the companys internal control over financial reporting; and



5.

The Companys other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the companys auditors and the audit committee of the company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 company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 companys internal control over financial reporting.





Date:

July 30, 2008



/s/

George Whatley

George Whatley, President/Chief Executive Officer/Director



#
ex10-2.htm


CONSULTING AGREEMENT AMENDMENT







This Amendment Agreement is made and entered into effective as of the 1st day of February, 2010, between ZENITECH CORPORATION, a US company, (the "Company") and Jiyong Yang (the “Consultant”).







WHEREAS:









	
1. 

	
The parties entered into an agreement dated February 1, 2009, that both parties agree to amend.














THIS AGREEMENT WITNESSES THAT in consideration of the premises and mutual covenants contained in this Agreement and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties, intending to be legally bound hereby, agree as follows:









	
1. 

	
The term of the February 1, 2009, consulting agreement is hereby extended for an additional one year term.














IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have duly executed and delivered this Agreement as of the date first written above.









	
ZENITECH CORPORATION

	
THE CONSULTANT


	  	  
	
/s/ Hong Yang

	
/s/ Jiyong Yang


	
Hong Yang, 

	
Jiyong Yang


	 President & Director
This memorandum opinion was not selected for publication in the New Mexico Reports. Please 1 see Rule 12-405 NMRA for restrictions on the citation of unpublished memorandum opinions. 2 Please also note that this electronic memorandum opinion may contain computer-generated 3 errors or other deviations from the official paper version filed by the Court of Appeals and does 4 not include the filing date. 5 IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF NEW MEXICO 6 FRED WINTER, 7 Petitioner-Appellant, 8
v. NO. 31,101 9 JUDITH MARIE WINTER, 10 Respondent-Appellee. 11 APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF BERNALILLO COUNTY 12 Gerard J. Lavelle, District Judge 13 Border Law Office, P.A. 14 Dean E. Border 15 Albuquerque, NM 16 for Appellant 17 Little, Gilman-Tepper & Batley, P.A. 18 Roberta S. Batley 19 Albuquerque, NM 20 for Appellee 21 MEMORANDUM OPINION 22 VANZI, Judge. 232 Summary affirmance was proposed for the reasons stated in the notice of 1 proposed summary disposition. No memorandum opposing summary affirmance has 2 been filed and the time for doing so has expired. 3 AFFIRMED. 4 IT IS SO ORDERED. 5

__________________________________ 6 LINDA M. VANZI, Judge 7
WE CONCUR: 8

_________________________________ 9 MICHAEL E. VIGIL, Judge 10

_________________________________ 11 TIMOTHY L. GARCIA, Judge 12
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T UN I T E D S T AT E S OF AME R I C A, P l ai nt i ff

- A pp el l ee , v. WYAT T AN T HO NY B I R D, D e f

e n d a n t - A p p e lla n t. N o. 11- 30115 D . C. N o . 3 : 1 0 - c r - 0 5 6 3 0 - RSM ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe W e s t e rn D i s tr i c tof W a s hi ngt on R i c a r do S . M a rt i ne z , D i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d F e brua ry21, 2012 ** B efo re: F E RN A N D E Z , M cK E O W N , an dB Y B E E , C i rcu i tJu d g es. W y a tt B ir d ap p e a ls f

r o m th e 9 6 - m o n th s e n te n c e im p o s e df o llo w in g h is gui l ty - pl e ac onvi c t i on f orbe i ng af

e l on i n pos s e s s i on of

af i r e a rm , i n vi ol a t i on of 1 8 U . S. C. § § 9 2 2 ( g ) ( 1 ) a n d 9 2 4 ( a ) ( 2 ) . W e h a v e j u r i s d i c t i o n u n d e r2 8 U . S. C. 

# FI LED FEB 24 2 012 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS11- 30115 2 § 1 2 9 1 , a n d w e a f

f i rm. B i r d f i r s tc ont e nds tha tthe di s tr i c tc ourtc om m i tt e d pr oc e dur a l e rr orby f a i l i ng t o c ons i de rhi s m i t i ga t i on a r gum e nt s a nd f a i l i ng a de qua t e l yt o e xpl a i n the re as on s f or the se nt ence se l ec t ed. T hese cont ent i on s f ai l because the di stri ct co u rt ’ s ex p l an at i o n w as su ffi ci en tt o co m m u n i cat e th ati t“ co n si d ered th e p art i es’ a r gum e nt s a nd ha [ d] ar e a s one d ba s i s f ore xe r c i s i ng [ i t s ] ow n l e ga l de c i s i onm a ki ng autho ri ty. ” R i ta v. U

ni ted States , 55 1 U . S . 33 8, 35 6 (20 07 ). B i r d a l s o c ont e nds tha thi s s e nt e nc e i s s ubs t a nt i ve l yunr e a s onabl e . I n l i ght of the t ot al i ty of the ci rc um st ance s, i ncl ud i ng B i rd’ s s i gn i fi cantcr i m i nal hi st ory, as w el l as the 18 U . S . C . § 3 55 3(a) se nt enci ng fa ct ors, the abov e- G ui del i nes s ent ence is s u b s ta n tiv e lyr e a s o n ab le . See G al l v. U ni ted States , 55 2 U . S . 38 , 51 (200 7). AF F I RME D.
# C_2018112EN.01002601.xml

| 26.3.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 112/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.3.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 112/26

---

Action brought on 6 February 2018 — European Commission v Republic of Austria

(Case C-76/18)

(2018/C 112/34)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: G. von Rintelen, P. Ondrůšek and M. Noll-Ehlers, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Republic of Austria

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | declare that, by failing to adopt all the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to transpose Directive 2014/25/EU (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on procurement by entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors and repealing Directive 2004/17/EC into national law, or by failing to notify the Commission of those provisions, the defendant has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare that, by failing to adopt all the laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to transpose Directive 2014/25/EU (1) of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on procurement by entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors and repealing Directive 2004/17/EC into national law, or by failing to notify the Commission of those provisions, the defendant has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

1

| — | impose on the defendant, pursuant to Article 260(3) TFEU, by reason of the infringement of the obligation to notify the transposition measures, a penalty payment in the amount of EUR 42 377 per day; |
| --- | --- |

—

impose on the defendant, pursuant to Article 260(3) TFEU, by reason of the infringement of the obligation to notify the transposition measures, a penalty payment in the amount of EUR 42 377 per day;

| — | order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

The Member States were required, under Article 106(1) of Directive 2014/25/EU, to adopt the national measures necessary to transpose the obligations under that directive into national law by 18 April 2016 at the latest. Since the Republic of Austria failed to adopt all the required laws, regulations and administrative provisions necessary to transpose that directive, or failed to give notification of those provisions to the Commission, the Commission decided to refer the matter to the Court of Justice.

By its application, the Commission asks the Court to impose a penalty payment in the amount of EUR 42 377 per day on the Republic of Austria. The amount of that penalty payment has been calculated taking into account the gravity and duration of the infringement and the deterrent effect based on that Member State’s ability to pay.

---

(1)  OJ 2014 L 94, p. 243.

1

---
#### STATE v. CONWAY

No. 389A92-2

Case below: Richmond County Superior Court

Petition by defendant for writ of certiorari to review the order of the Superior Court, Richmond County denied 5 November 1998.
NO. ______________ 

IN THE 

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

PAUL HENRI WAGNER ) APPELLANT

v. ) 

THE STATE OF TEXAS ) APPELLEE

MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO

FILE PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

TO THE HONORABLE JUDGES OF SAID COURT:

Now comes, Paul Henri Wagner, Appellant in the above styled and numbered cause, by 

and through his attorneys of record, Vincent W. Perini and Dan Wood, Jr., and pursuant to Texas 

Rules of Appellate Procedure 68.2(c), moves for an extension of time of 30 days to file a petition 

for discretionary review, and for good cause shows the following: 

 1. The Court of Appeals below affirmed appellant’s conviction in its opinion and 

judgment in Paul Henri Wagner v. The State of Texas, Case No. 05-13-01329-CR, (Tex.App. – 

Dallas, decided May 5, 2015); no motion for rehearing was filed and the petition for 

discretionary review is therefore due on June 4, 2015. 

 2. Appellant requests an additional forty-five (45) days from the deadline stated 

above and Appellant asks this Court to order the petition to be due on or before July 19, 2015.

 3. No previous extensions have been requested. 

 4. The facts relied upon to reasonably explain the need for an extension of time are 

as follows: On May 28, 2015, Dan Wood, Jr., became associated as co-counsel to represent 

Appellant in regarding a petition for discretionary review. New counsel needs additional time to 

MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW, Page 1 

PD-0659-15

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

Transmitted 5/29/2015 12:21:46 PM

Accepted 6/1/2015 2:29:26 PM

ABEL ACOSTA

CLERK
read the record and research grounds for the petition. Appellant does wish to pursue his right to 

file a petition for discretionary review and requests this court to allow additional time for new 

counsel to adequately prepare same

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, Appellant respectfully requests an 

extension of 45 days, i.e. until July 19, 2015, to file a petition for discretionary review.

Respectfully submitted,

VINCENT W. PERINI

DAN WOOD, JR

ATTORNEY AT LAW

4303 N. Central Expressway

Dallas, TX 75205

(214) 559-8815 Office tel.

(214) 696-0867 Fax

/Dan Wood, Jr./

By:

Dan Wood, Jr.

State Bar No. 21887050

Email: danwoodjr@sbcglobal.net

ATTORNEY FOR APPELLANT

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

This is to certify that on May 29, 2015, a true and correct copy of the above and 

foregoing document was served upon the State of Texas by U.S. Mail addressed to: Hon. Susan 

Hawk, Criminal District Attorney, Attn: Appellant Division, 133 N. Riverfront Blvd., LB 19, 

Dallas, TX 75207.

/Dan Wood, Jr./

Dan Wood, Jr.

MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW, Page 2
EX-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 accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of SunSi Energies
Inc. for the quarter ended August 31, 2010 (“Report”), we certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, to our knowledge, 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 SunSi Energies
Inc.




Date:      October
12, 2010





By:
            /s/ Michel Laporte
            
            By:
            /s/ David NatanName:
            Michel
      Laporte
            
            Name:
            David
      NatanTitle:
            Principal
      Executive Officer
            
            Title:
            Principal
      Financial Officer
Exhibit 10.1

[Date]

[Name]
[Address]

Dear _______________:

I am pleased to inform you that on
_______________ the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of IntriCon
Corporation (the Company) granted you options to purchase _________ Common
Shares of the Company under the Companys Non-Employee Directors Stock Option
Plan (the Plan) at an exercise price of $_____ per share.

These options will become exercisable
as follows:

|Date First Exercisable               | Number of Shares          
|------------------------------------ | --------------------------
|                                    
|[                                  ] | [                        ]
|[                                  ] | [                        ]
|[                                  ] | [                        ]

The exercise price for your options
shall be payable in cash or its equivalent.

Once options become exercisable, they
will remain exercisable until they are exercised or until they terminate. Unless earlier
terminated pursuant to the terms of the Plan, all options granted hereby shall terminate
on ____________. While the specific terms of the Plan will govern, generally upon
termination of your service as a director for any reason the options will terminate to the
extent of options that you could not have exercised on the date of such termination.
Options that could have been exercised on the date of termination of service as director
for reasons other than retirement, death or disability (as defined in the Plan) may be
exercised only prior to the expiration date of such options. Options that could have been
exercised on the date of termination of service as a director due to disability may be
exercised only prior to the expiration date of such options. Options that could have been
exercised on the date of termination of service as a director due to death may be
exercised only prior to the earlier of (i) five years following the date of your death or
(ii) the expiration date of such options.

Further terms governing the options
granted to you are set forth in the Plan; a copy is available in the Human Resources
Department.

If you wish to accept the grant of
the options as provided above and in the Plan, please so indicate by signing and returning
the enclosed copy of this letter, whereupon you and the Company shall be legally bound
hereby under Pennsylvania law.

| | Very truly yours,INTRICON CORPORATION
| | -------------------------------------

| | By: |       
| | --- | ------
| |     |       
| |     | Name: 
| |     | Title:

Accepted and Agreed:

---

---
AFH Holding III, Inc. 10-Q







Exhibit 32.1







CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 
 In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of AFH Holding III, Inc. (the “Company”) for the quarter ending March 31, 2010, I, Amir F. Heshmatpour, the Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial and Accounting Officer of the Company hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:
 
 1.           Such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending March 31, 2010, 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 such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending March 31, 2010, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 
 Dated: May 17, 2010
 
 /s/ Amir F. HeshmatpourAmir F. HeshmatpourPresident, Secretary and Sole Director(Principal Executive Officer)

(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)