alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

**CERTIFICATION**

          Pursuant to the requirement set forth in Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code (18 U.S.C. §1350), Kenneth Chahine, Chief Executive Officer of Avigen, Inc. (the “Company”), and Thomas J. Paulson, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certify that, to the best of his knowledge:

**          1.**The Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2004, and to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32.1, (the “Periodic Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Exchange Act, and

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

**          In Witness Whereof,** the undersigned have set their hands hereto as of the 10th day of March, 2005.

|   | /s/ KENNETH G. CHAHINE                             |
|--------|----------------------------------------------------|
|   |                                                    |
|   | **Kenneth G.   Chahine   Chief Executive Officer** |
|   |                                               |
|   | /s/ THOMAS J. PAULSON                              |
|   |                                                    |
|   | **Thomas J.   Paulson   Chief Financial Officer**  |
```

[Federal Register: November 17, 2005 (Volume 70, Number 221)]
[Notices]
[Page 69745-69746]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr17no05-44]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

TIME AND DATE: 11 a.m., Friday, December 23, 2005.

PLACE: 1155 21st St., NW., Washington, DC, 9th Floor Commission
Conference Room.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:
Surveillance matters.

[[Page 69746]]


FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jean A. Webb, 202-418-5100.

Jean A. Webb,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 05-22882 Filed 11-15-05; 12:20 pm]

BILLING CODE 6351-01-M
```
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 115 (Thursday, June 14, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 32335-32336]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-14979]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary of Defense


Meeting of the DOD Advisory Group on Electron Devices

AGENCY: Department of Defense, Advisory Group on Electron Devices.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Working Group A (Microwave Devices) of the DOD Advisory Group 
on Electron Devices (AGED) announces a closed session meeting.

DATES: The meeting will be held at 0900, Thursday, June 28, 2001.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at Palisades Institute for Research 
Services, Inc., 1745 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 500, Arlington, VA 
22202.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: David Cox, AGED Secretariat, 1745 
Jefferson Davis Highway, Crystal Square Four, Suite 500, Arlington, 
Virginia 22202.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The mission of the Advisory Group is to 
provide advice to the Under Secretary of Defense for Acquisition and 
Technology, to the Director of Defense Research and Engineering 
(DDR&E), and through the DDR&E to the Director, Defense Advanced 
Research Projects Agency (ARPA) and the Military Departments in 
planning and managing an effective and economical research and 
development program in the ara of electron devices.
    The Working Group A meeting will be limited to review of research 
and development programs which the Military Departments propose to 
initiate with industry, universities or in their laboratories. This 
microwave device area includes programs on developments and research 
related to microwave tubes, solid state microwave devices, electronic 
warfare devices, millimeter wave devices, and passive devices. The 
review ill include details of classified defense programs throughout.
    In accordance with section 10(d) of Pub. L. No. 92-463, as amended, 
(5. U.S.C. App. 10(d)(1994), it has been determined that this Advisory 
Group meeting concerns matters listed in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(1)(1994), and 
that accordingly, this meeting will be closed to the public.


[[Page 32336]]


    June 5, 2001.
Patricia L. Toppings,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 01-14979 Filed 6-13-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-08-M
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED June 4, 2003 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-40924 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus MIGUEL ANGEL ALFARO-LOPEZ, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. L-01-CR-1280-ALL

-------------------- Before BARKSDALE, DEMOSS, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Miguel Angel Alfaro-Lopez (“Alfaro”) appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction for illegal reentry into the United States after deportation following the commission of an aggravated felony. He argues that the district court erred by applying the 16-level enhancement for a prior conviction for a crime of violence pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2(b)(1)(A)(ii) on the basis of his prior state felony convictions for battery on aNo. 02-40924 -2- law enforcement officer. Alfaro maintains that these convictions were not aggravated felonies because he received a sentence of less than one year confinement for each offense. While Alfaro concedes that the literal language of the guideline does not require a prior conviction to be an aggravated felony to qualify as a crime of violence, he contends that the clear intent of the Sentencing Commission was for the crime of violence enhancement not to apply to crimes that were not aggravated felonies. Because Alfaro did not raise this issue below, we review for plain error. See United States v. Hull , 160 F.3d 265, 271 (5th Cir. 1998). As Alfaro is raising an issue of apparent first impression and the district court’s ruling was consistent with the plain language of the guideline, the district court’s application of the crime of violence enhancement was not plain

error. See id. at 272 (extension of precedent cannot be the basis of plain error). Alfaro additionally argues, for the first time on appeal, that the sentence enhancing provisions contained in 8 U.S.C. §§ 1326(b)(1) and 1326(b)(2) are unconstitutional. Alfaro concedes that this argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), but asserts that the decision has been cast into doubt by Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000). He seeks to preserve his argument for further review.No. 02-40924 -3- Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres

. See Apprendi , 530 U.S. at 489-90; United States v. Dabeit , 231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir. 2000). As Alfaro acknowledges, this court must follow Almendarez-Torres “unless and until the Supreme Court itself determines to overrule it.” Dabeit , 231 F.3d at 984 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). For the foregoing reasons, Alfaro’s sentence is AFFIRMED.
# FCM Data January 2014

SELECTED FCM FINANCIAL DATA AS OF January 31,&KFF0000 &K0000002014FROM REPORTS FILED BY March 06,&KFF0000 &K0000002014	&P of &N
{"agency":"CFTC","generated":"2019-04-26 11:05:46","items":[{"id":"1","parent":null,"text":"Reporting Quarter","due":null,"due_date":"2012\/10\/15","fields":[{"type":"select","name":"2-1-year","label":"Reporting Year","options":[{"label":"2011","value":"2011"},{"label":"2012","value":"2012"},{"label":"2013","value":"2013"},{"label":"2014","value":"2014"},{"label":"2015","value":"2015"},{"label":"2016","value":"2016"},{"label":"2017","value":"2017"},{"label":"2018","value":"2018"}],"value":"2019"},{"type":"select","name":"2-1-quarter","label":"Reporting Quarter","options":[{"label":"Q1","value":"Q1"},{"label":"Q2","value":"Q2"},{"label":"Q3","value":"Q3"},{"label":"Q4","value":"Q4"}],"value":"Q2"}],"multiple":false},{"id":"1-1","parent":"1","text":"Ten Oldest Requests","due":null,"due_date":"2012\/10\/15","fields":[{"type":"select","name":"2-1-1-oldest","label":"Ten Oldest","options":[{"label":"0","value":"0"},{"label":"1","value":"1"},{"label":"2","value":"2"},{"label":"3","value":"3"},{"label":"4","value":"4"},{"label":"5","value":"5"},{"label":"6","value":"6"},{"label":"7","value":"7"},{"label":"8","value":"8"},{"label":"9","value":"9"},{"label":"10","value":"10"}],"value":"10"}],"multiple":false},{"id":"1-3","parent":"1","text":"","due":null,"due_date":"2012\/10\/15","fields":[{"type":"select","name":"2-1-3-closed","label":"Ten Oldest Closed","options":[{"label":"0","value":"0"},{"label":"1","value":"1"},{"label":"2","value":"2"},{"label":"3","value":"3"},{"label":"4","value":"4"},{"label":"5","value":"5"},{"label":"6","value":"6"},{"label":"7","value":"7"},{"label":"8","value":"8"},{"label":"9","value":"9"},{"label":"10","value":"10"}],"value":"1"}],"multiple":false},{"id":"1-2","parent":"1","text":"FOIA Requests Information","due":null,"due_date":"2012\/08\/21","fields":[{"type":"text","name":"2-1-2-component","label":"Component","options":[],"value":["CFTC"]},{"type":"text","name":"2-1-2-received","label":"Received","options":[],"value":["31"]},{"type":"text","name":"2-1-2-processed","label":"Processed","options":[],"value":["9"]},{"type":"text","name":"2-1-2-backlog","label":"Backlog","options":[],"value":["53"]}],"multiple":true}],"year":"2019","quarter":"Q2"}
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 113 (Tuesday, June 12, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31629-31630]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-14708]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. EL01-86-000]


Indeck Main Energy, L.L.C., Complainant, v. ISO New England Inc., 
Respondent; Notice of Complaint

June 6, 2001.
    Take notice that on June 5, 2001, Indeck Maine Energy, L.L.C. 
(Indeck Maine) tendered for filing a Complaint Requesting Fast Track 
Processing of its request that the Commission issue an order requiring 
ISO New England Inc. (ISO-NE) to dispatch all available generation 
before ISO-NE may impose bid caps in the ISO-NE administered markets. 
In addition, Indeck Maine requests that the Commission issue a 
preliminary order that requires ISO-NE to dispatch all units before 
declaring a capacity shortage until such time as the Commission issues 
a final order.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest this filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with Rules 211 and 214

[[Page 31630]]

of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 
385.214). All such motions or protests must be filed on or before June 
15, 2001. Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining 
the appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make 
protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a 
party must file a motion to intervene. Copies for this filing are on 
file with the Commission and are available for public inspection in the 
Public Reference Room. This filing may also be viewed on the Internet 
at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202-208-2222) for 
assistance. Answers to the complaint shall also be due on or before 
June 15, 2001.
    Comments, protests and interventions may be filed electronically 
via the internet in lieu of paper. See, 18 CFR 385.2001(a)(1)(iii) and 
the instructions on the Commission's web site at http://www.ferc.fed.us/efi/doorbell.htm.

David P. Boergers,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 01-14708 Filed 6-11-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
```

[Federal Register: September 23, 1999 (Volume 64, Number 184)]
[Notices]
[Page 51520]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr23se99-56]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

TIME AND DATE: 11:00 a.m., Friday, October 29, 1999.

PLACE:  1155 21st St., NW, Washington, DC, 9th Floor Conference Room.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE DISCUSSED: Surveillance Matters.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Jean A. Webb, 202-418-5100.
Jean A. Webb,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 99-24929 Filed 9-21-99; 2:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-M
```

----

**======== RETURN TO INDEX    ========**

----
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-7061

CHARLES D. IZAC,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

PAUL T. CAMILLETTI,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at 

Elkins. John Preston Bailey, District Judge. (2:17-cv-00009-JPB-MJA)

Submitted: November 19, 2019 Decided: November 22, 2019

Before WILKINSON and RICHARDSON, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit 

Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Charles D. Izac, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Charles D. Izac seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 

complaint filed pursuant to Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Fed. Bureau of 

Narcotics, 403 U.S. 388 (1971). We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction because the 

notice of appeal was not timely filed. 

When the United States or its officer or agency is a party, the notice of appeal must 

be filed no more than 60 days after the entry of the district court’s final judgment or order, 

Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(B), unless the district court extends the appeal period under Fed. 

R. App. P. 4(a)(5), or reopens the appeal period under Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6). “[T]he 

timely filing of a notice of appeal in a civil case is a jurisdictional requirement.” Bowles 

v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205, 214 (2007).

The district court’s order was entered on the docket on April 4, 2019. The notice of 

appeal was filed on July 18, 2019. Because Izac failed to file a timely notice of appeal or 

to obtain an extension or reopening of the appeal period, we deny leave to proceed in forma 

pauperis 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
Page 1 

Commodity Futures Trading Commission 

CEA CASES 

NAME: SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE V. CLARENCE J. BURNS COMPANY, INC., CLARENCE J. 

BURNS, PHILLIP T. BURNS, DOROTHEA BURNS, AND ROY L. MORGAN 

DOCKET NUMBER: 27 

DATE: OCTOBER 31, 1941 

DOCUMENT TYPE: SUPPLEMENTAL ORDER 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

BEFORE THE SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE 

CE-A Docket No. 27 

Secretary of Agriculture, Complainant v. Clarence J. Burns Company, Inc., 

Clarence J. Burns, Phillip T. Burns, Dorothea Burns, and Roy L. Morgan, 

Respondents 

Supplemental Order 

By a document filed on June 26, 1941, respondents waived hearing in this 

proceeding "in accordance with Paragraph C, Page 10 of the complaint requesting 

opportunity to submit arguments that facts alleged do not constitute violation 

of the Commodity Exchange Act nor warrant disciplinary action by the Secretary 

of Agriculture." The paragraph mentioned provides for admission of the facts 

alleged and for presentment of respondents' contentions regarding legal 

conclusions to be drawn therefrom. 

An order, dated September 30, 1941, was served upon respondents as a 

tentative order. To this order they have filed 

no exceptions in which the conclusions to be drawn from the facts are mentioned. 

They have filed "Exceptions to Findings of Fact" in which they allege that seven 

of the ten findings "are not supported by competent and sufficient testimony or 

evidence adequate to support said findings." 

The findings of fact are based upon admissions by the respondents, and not 

upon testimony or other evidence adduced at a hearing. Respondents have not 

alleged that the findings contain matters not admitted. By choosing to proceed 

as they did, respondents retained only the right to question conclusions drawn 

from admitted facts. They have not questioned those conclusions, and they may 

not question admitted facts by excepting to them. As no issues have been 

properly raised, there is nothing to be argued, and there will be no oral 

argument. The exceptions are overruled, and the order of September 30, 1941, 

may be served upon contract markets. 

ORDER 

IT IS ORDERED that the Proceedings, Findings of Fact, Conclusions, and Order 

in this proceeding, dated September 30, 1941, signed by Robert H. Shields, 

Assistant to the Secretary of Agriculture, be sent by registered mail from the 

Hearing Clerk to each contract market, and be effective in accordance with its 

terms. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that a copy hereof be served by registered mail upon 

Robert B. Love, 205 Newberry Building, Aberdeen, South Dakota, respondents' 

counsel. 
Page 2 

Done at Washington, D.C., this 31st day of October 1941. Witness my hand and 

the seal of the Department of Agriculture. 

Secretary's File Room 

(Signed) 

[SEE SIGNATURE IN ORIGINAL] 

Assistant to the Secretary of Agriculture 

LOAD-DATE: December 15, 2008 
Page 3
Page 1 

Commodity Futures Trading Commission 

CEA CASES 

NAME: HARRY BREECKER AND SAMUEL ALAMA 

DOCKET NUMBER: 233; 75-12 

DOCUMENT TYPE: ISSUANCE OF COMPLAINT 

NOTE: LATER BECAME CFTC DOCKET # 75-12 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Commodity Exchange Authority 

Washington, D.C. 20250 

ISSUANCE OF COMPLAINT - CEA DOCKET NO. 233 

(Administrative Hearing Under the Commodity Exchange Act) 

A complaint and notice of hearing has been signed by the Assistant Secretary 

of Agriculture charging violation of the Commodity Exchange Act by: 

Harry Breecker and Samuel Alama 

(Honolulu and Kailua, Hawaii) 

The complaint charges that Harry Breecker bucketed customers' orders, acted 

as a futures commission merchant without being so registered, mishandled 

customers' funds, and cheated, defrauded, and deceived his customers. The 

complaint alleges that Samuel Alama also acted as a futures commission merchant 

without being so registered and that he mishandled customers' funds. All of the 

above charges covered the period from on or about April 7, 1970, through on or 

about September 15, 1972. 

The issuance of a complaint under the Commodity Exchange Act does not 

constitute proof of violation of the Law. Such violation is established only 

when there has been a determination that the evidence substantiates allegations 

in the complaint. A determination is considered as having been made when a 

decision of the Administrative Law Judge becomes final or, after appeal, a 

decision is made by the Judicial Officer of the Department. Complaints are 

filed in the Office of the Hearing Clerk of the Department of Agriculture and 

are a matter of public record. Pending disposition of a complaint, it is the 

policy of the CEA not to comment or elaborate on charges contained therin or to 

discuss evidence on which it is based. 

A public hearing on the complaint will be held before the Administrative Law 

Judge in Honolulu, Hawaii, at a date and time to be specified at a later date. 

LOAD-DATE: August 6, 2008 
Page 2
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 113 (Tuesday, June 12, 2001)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 31561]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-14805]


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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[DA 01-1291; MM Docket No. 01-38; RM-10064]


Radio Broadcasting Services; Macon, MS.

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission

ACTION: Final rule.

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

SUMMARY: At the request of Radio South, Inc., this document removes 
Channel 263A from Macon, Mississippi. This will enable Station WLXY, 
Northport, Alabama, to upgrade to a Class C1 allotmnent. See 66 FR 
14513, published March 13, 2001.

DATES: Effective July 10, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert Hayne, Mass Media Bureau, (202) 
418-2177.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's 
Report and Order in MM Docket No. 01-38, adopted May 16, 2001, and 
released May 25, 2001. The full text of this decision is available for 
inspection and copying during normal business hours in the FCC's 
Reference Information Center at Portals II, CY-A257, 445 12th Street, 
SW., Washington, DC. The complete text of this decision may also be 
purchased from the Commission's copy contractor, International 
Transcription Service, Inc., (202) 857-3800, 1231 20th Street, NW., 
Washington, DC 20036.

List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 73

    Radio Broadcasting.
    Part 73 of Title 47 of the Code of Federal Regulations is amended 
as follows:

PART 73--RADIO BROADCAST SERVICES

    1. The authority citation for Part 73 continues to read as follows:

    Authority: 47 U.S.C. 154, 303, 334 and 336.


Sec. 73.202  [Amended]

    2. Section 73.202(b), the Table of FM Allotments under Mississippi, 
is amended by removing Macon, Channel 263A.

Federal Communications Commission.
John A. Karousos,
Chief, Allocations Branch, Policy and Rules Division, Mass Media 
Bureau.
[FR Doc. 01-14805 Filed 6-11-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-U
Page 1 

Commodity Futures Trading Commission 

CEA CASES 

NAME: CARGILL INCORPORATED AND ERWIN E. KELM 

DOCKET NUMBER: 58 

DATE: JUNE 15, 1953 

DOCUMENT TYPE: ISSUANCE OF COMPLAINT 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Commodity Exchange Authority 

Washington 26, D. C. 

June 15, 1953 

ISSUANCE OF COMPLAINT - CE-A DOCKET NO. 68 

(Administrative Hearing under the Commodity Exchange Act) 

A complaint and notice of hearing was signed by the Acting Secretary of 

Agriculture on June 11, 1953, charging 

Cargill, Incorporated, and Edwin E. Kelm 

with violation of the Commodity Exchange Act. 

Complaints are issued under the Commodity Exchange Act for the purpose of 

notifying respondents that the Secretary of Agriculture has reason to believe 

that respondents have violated the Act and to advise them of the time and place 

of hearings to be held to determine whether the charge are correct. The 

issuance of a complaint does not, of course, constitute proof of violation of 

the law. Such violation is established only when the Judicial Officer of the 

Department has made a determination that the evidence substantiates allegations 

in the complaint. 

Complaints are filed in the office of the hearing clerk of the Solicitor of 

the Department of Agriculture and are thereupon a matter of public record. 

Copies are filed in the Washington office and the field offices of the Commodity 

Exchange Authority. 

In cases where the Judicial Officer determines that a violation has occurred 

the resulting order will be served upon all contract markets and circularized 

among all registered futures commission merchants for their information and 

guidance. Pending disposition by the Judicial Officer it is the policy of the 

Commodity Exchange Authority not to comment or elaborate upon the charges 

contained in complaints or discuss the evidence upon which they are based. 

LOAD-DATE: August 6, 2008 
Page 2