alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[Federal Register: February 9, 1999 (Volume 64, Number 26)]
[Notices]
[Page 6327]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr09fe99-43]


[[Page 6327]]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

agency holding the meeting: Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

time and date: 2:00 p.m., Wednesday, February 24, 1999.

place: 1155 21st St., N.W., Washington, D.C., 9th Floor Conference
Room.

status: Closed.

matters to be considered: Enforcement Matters.

contact person for more information: Jean A. Webb, 202-418-5100.
Jean A. Webb,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 99-3191 Filed 2-5-99; 10:32 am]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-M
```

----

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

----
Page 1 

Commodity Futures Trading Commission 

CEA CASES 

NAME: CHARLES HAAG 

DOCKET NUMBER: 116 

DOCUMENT TYPE: ISSUANCE OF COMPLAINT 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Commodity Exchange Authority 

Washington 25, D. C. 

ISSUANCE OF COMPLAINT -- CEA DOCKET NO. 116 

(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: 

Charles Haag 

(Upper Saddle River, New Jersey) 

The complaint charges that the respondent exceeded the limits on speculative 

trading and positions in egg futures during the period from October 30, 1962, 

through January 14, 1963. The complaint also charges that the respondent failed 

to file reports and filed false reports with the Commodity Exchange Authority 

concerning his trades and positions in egg and soybean futures on certain days 

during the period from October 18, 1962, through February 6, 1963. 

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 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 Department of Agriculture and are a 

matter of public record. Pending disposition by the Judicial Officer, it is the 

policy of the Commodity Exchange Authority not to comment or elaborate on 

charges contained in complaints or to discuss evidence on which they are based. 

A public hearing on the complaint is scheduled to be held before a referee at 

10:00 a.m., local time, March 26, 1964, in New York, New York. 

LOAD-DATE: June 12, 2008 
Page 2
```
      [NOT FOR PUBLICATION--NOT TO BE CITED AS PRECEDENT]
                 United States Court of Appeals
                     For the First Circuit





No. 98-1386

                          ANINA RASTEN,

                      Plaintiff, Appellant,

                                v.

                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF LABOR,

                       Defendant, Appellee.



           APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

                FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS

         [Hon. Edward F. Harrington, U.S. District Judge]



                              Before

                     Selya, Stahl and Lynch,
                        Circuit Judges.
                                
                                


     Anina Rasten on brief pro se.
     





DECEMBER 22, 1998




                                
                                




                                               Per Curiam.  After carefully considering the
    appellant's brief and the record on appeal, we affirm the
    judgment of the district court.  The appellant's complaint did
    not set forth sufficient facts to support an action in federal
    court.  The district court had discretion under 28 U.S.C. �
    1915(e)(2) to dismiss the suit without giving the appellant an
    opportunity to amend the complaint.
              Affirmed.  Loc. R. 27.1.
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                             1282255
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     17087038
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                         726853
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  22537551
<PP&E>                                            48265324
<DEPRECIATION>                                    26399259
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    79475694
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             45968619
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                              4240
<OTHER-SE>                                        17506776
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      79475694
<SALES>                                          143737430
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 143737430
<CGS>                                            143797530
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    143797530
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   (105441)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 4359888
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (4314547)
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (4314547)
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (4314547)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        (1.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        (1.02)
        


</TABLE>
No. 463.

#### Bell-Dowlen Mills *v.*Draper.

October 28, 1935.

*Mr. Albert Lee Dorsey*for petitioner.

No appearance for respondent.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Tennessee denied.
exv10w17



 






Exhibit 10.17




Fairfax Inc. and Crum & Forster Holding Inc.

Addendum to Tax Sharing Agreement



In order to align the Fairfax, Inc. Tax Allocation Agreement, effective January 1, 2000, (the
“Tax Sharing Agreement” ), with tax planning strategy, and ensure that the net operating losses of
Crum & Forster Holding Inc. (“CFHI”) are reimbursed by Fairfax, Inc. before their expiration, in
the event CFHI implements the tax planning strategy in which they elect to file a consolidated tax
return with their subsidiaries for financial tax accounting purposes under the Tax Sharing
Agreement, Fairfax Inc. agrees to reimburse CFHI for net operating losses utilized in
consolidation.



IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by duly authorized
officers to be effective January 1, 2005.




	 	 	 	 	 
	 
FAIRFAX, INC

 

 	 	 
	By:  	/s/   John Cassil
 	 	 
	 	Name:  	John Cassil 	 	 
	 	Title:  	Vice President 	 	 
	 
 
	Crum & Forster Holding Inc.

 

 	 	 
	By:  	/s/   Mary Jane Robertson
 	 	 
	 	Name:  	Mary Jane Robertson 	 	 
	 	Title:  	Sr. Executive Vice President
**SEF EXHIBIT M**

**A copy of the Applicant’s rules (as defined in § 40.1 of the Commission’s regulations) and any technical manuals, other guides, or instructions for users of, or participants in, the market, including minimum financial standards for members or market participants. Include rules citing applicable federal position limits and aggregation standards in part 151 of the Commission’s regulations and any facility set position limit rules. Include rules on publication of daily trading information with regards to the requirements of part 16 of the Commission’s regulations. The Applicant should include an explanation and any other form of documentation that the Applicant thinks will be helpful to its explanation, demonstrating how its rules, technical manuals, other guides, or instructions for users of, or participants in, the market, or minimum financial standards for members or market participants as provided in this Exhibit M help support the swap execution facility’s compliance with the core principles.**

Please see LedgerX’s Rules and Contract Specifications, attached hereto.

124102983
EXHIBIT 32.2


                           SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION


     In connection with the Quarterly Report of Palmdale  Executive Homes, Corp.
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending  September 30, 2008 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),
I, Tricia A. Nickson,  Secretary and Treasurer 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: November 5, 2008



                                        By: /s/ TRICIA A. NICKSON
                                            ________________________________
                                                Tricia A. Nickson
                                                Secretary and Treasurer
EXHIBIT

                             THIRD AMENDMENT TO THE
                              ENGLOBAL 401(K) PLAN


WHEREAS, ENGlobal Engineering, Inc. (the "Employer") adopted a restatement of
the ENGlobal 401(k) Plan (the "Plan"), effective as of January 1, 2002, and
subsequently amended;

WHEREAS, the Employer has the ability to amend the Plan pursuant to Section 11.2
thereof; and

WHEREAS, the Employer now desires to amend the Plan to change the ADP/ACP
testing election;

NOW, THEREFORE, the Employer hereby amends the Plan in the following respects,
effective as of January 1, 2004:

1.   Section D(12)a. on page 18 of the Adoption Agreement is amended to provide
     as follows:

     "D(12) SPECIAL TESTING ELECTIONS (Plan Sections 3.7, 3.8 and 1.53)

          a.   ADP/ACP Testing Election

               Indicate which method of ADP/ACP testing will be used.

               1.   [ ] Not applicable. The Plan does not provide for 401(k)
                        elective deferrals or Voluntary After-Tax Contributions.

               2.   [ ] Prior Year Testing.

               3.   [X] Current Year Testing.

               Note: If the Employer elects to use current year testing the
               Employer must satisfy the requirements contained in Plan Section
               3.7(h) to change to prior year testing from current year
               testing."

2.   In all other respects, the terms of this Plan are hereby ratified and
     confirmed.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Employer has caused this Third Amendment to be executed
in duplicate counterparts, each of which shall be considered as an original, as
of the date indicated below.


                                        ENGLOBAL ENGINEERING, INC.


/s/ Lori Benson                         By: /s/ William A. Coskey
-------------------------------         ----------------------------------------
Witness
                                        Title: Chief Executive Officer
                                        ----------------------------------------

                                        Date: March 9, 2005
                                        ----------------------------------------
<PAGE>   1




                                                                      EXHIBIT 11


COMPUTATION OF NET EARNINGS PER SHARE
(IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT PER SHARE DATA)



<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                          1996       1995     1994
                                                        --------    -------   -----
<S>                                                     <C>         <C>       <C>

PRIMARY EARNINGS PER SHARE
Weighted average common shares outstanding...........     86,681    77,650     70,624
Additional shares assuming exercise of all options                            
    outstanding......................................     12,619    15,737     15,176
Shares repurchased...................................     (4,368)   (8,084)    (9,432)
                                                        --------   -------    -------
Shares used in per share calculations................     94,932    85,304     76,368
                                                        ========   =======    =======
Net earnings.........................................   $170,020   $65,951    $36,121
                                                        ========   =======    =======
Net earnings per share...............................   $   1.79   $   .77    $   .47
                                                        ========   =======    =======
FULLY DILUTED EARNINGS PER SHARE                                              
Weighted average common shares outstanding...........     86,681    77,650     70,624
Additional shares assuming exercise of all options                            
    outstanding .....................................     13,148    16,022     15,112
Shares repurchased...................................     (4,561)   (6,994)    (9,216)
                                                        --------   -------    -------
Shares used in per share calculations................     95,268    86,678     76,520
                                                        ========   =======    =======
Net earnings.........................................   $170,020   $65,951    $36,121
                                                        ========   =======    =======
Net earnings per share...............................   $   1.78   $   .76    $   .47
                                                        ========   =======    =======
</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 12 (Thursday, January 18, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4827-4828]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-1512]


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

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION


Ocean Transportation Intermediary License; Revocations

    The Federal Maritime Commission hereby gives notice that the 
following ocean transportation intermediary licenses have been revoked 
pursuant to section 19 of the Shipping Act of 1984 (46 U.S.C. app. 
1718) and the regulations of the Commission pertaining to the licensing 
of Ocean Transportation Intermediaries, effective on the corresponding 
dates shown below:
    License Number: 7404N.
    Name: Apollo Forwarders, Inc.
    Address: 509 First Street, Rodeo, CA 94572.
    Date Revoked: November 15, 2000.
    Reason: Failed to maintain a valid bond.

    License Number: 4061F.
    Name: Caribwrap Inc. d/b/a Five Star Forwarding.
    Address: 8140 N.W. 74th Avenue, Suite #18, Miami, FL 33166.
    Date Revoked: November 15, 2000.
    Reason: Failed to maintain a valid bond.

    License Number: 4550F.
    Name: Cynthia A. Keefe d/b/a 'Round The World Exports.
    Address: 213 Lynnhaven Drive, North Syracuse, NY 13212.
    Date Revoked: November 19, 2000.
    Reason: Failed to maintain a valid bond.

    License Number: 7394N.
    Name: Gateways International, Inc. 
d/b/a Bekins Wide World.
    Address: 2030 First Avenue, Suite 200, Seattle, WA 98121-2112.
    Date Revoked: November 18, 2000.
    Reason: Failed to maintain a valid bond.

    License Number: 2062N and 2062F.
    Name: N. Abbe International, Inc.
    Address: 2 World Trade Center, Suite 2844, New York, NY 10048
    Date Revoked: October 18, 2000 and November 22, 2000.
    Reason: Failed to maintain valid bonds.

    License Number: 798R.
    Name: Mary Morris Reid d/b/a Reid & Company.
    Address: 150 Marine Street, Lake Charles, LA 70601.
    Date Revoked: December 4, 2000.
    Reason: Failed to maintain a valid bond.


[[Page 4828]]


    License Number: 4292F.
    Name: Satt International Forwarding Inc.
    Address: 147-35 Farmers Blvd., Suite 202, Jamaica, NY 11434-5217.
    Date Revoked: November 15, 2000.
    Reason: Failed to maintain a valid bond.

    License Number: 4351F.
    Name: Shin Wha Park d/b/a Grand Bell Maritime, U.S.A.
    Address: 623 E. Artesia Blvd., Carson, CA 90746.
    Date Revoked: November 15, 2000.
    Reason: Failed to maintain a valid bond.

    License Number: 4574F.
    Name: Zaky Transportation Services, Inc.
    Address: 8600 N.W. 66th Street, Miami, FL 33166.
    Date Revoked: November 18, 2000.
    Reason: Failed to maintain a valid bond.


Sandra L. Kusumoto,
Director, Bureau of Consumer Complaints and Licensing.
[FR Doc. 01-1512 Filed 1-17-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6730-01-P
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 115 (Thursday, June 14, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 32396]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-15017]


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

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

[Notice 01-074]


Government-Owned Inventions, Available for Licensing

AGENCY: National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

ACTION: Notice of availability of inventions for licensing.

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

SUMMARY: The inventions listed below are assigned to the National 
Aeronautics and Space Administration, have been filed in the United 
States Patent and Trademark Office, and are available for licensing.

DATES: June 14, 2001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Kent N. Stone, Patent Counsel, Glenn 
Research Center at Lewis Field, Mail Code 500-118, Cleveland, Ohio 
44135; telephone (216) 433-8855, fax (216) 433-6790.

NASA Case No. LEW-17110-1: MEMS-Based Spinning Nozzle
    With Pre-Mix Chamber;
NASA Case No. LEW-17116-1: Method for Growth of Step-Free SiC Crystal 
Surfaces and Fabrication of Electronic Device Structures Thereon.

    Dated: June 4, 2001.
Edward A. Frankle,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 01-15017 Filed 6-13-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7510-01-P
#### Mario Gonzalez MORENO; et al., Petitioners, v. Alberto R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 06-70967.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 4, 2006 *.

Filed Dec. 8, 2006.

Mario Gonzalez Moreno, Huntington Park, CA, pro se.

Mirna Gonzalez, Huntington Park, CA, pro se.

CAC-District Counsel, Esq., Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, Los Angeles, CA, Ronald E. LeFevre, Chief Counsel, Office of the District Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, William C. Minick, Esq., DOJ — U.S. Department of Justice Civil Div./Office of Immigration Lit., Washington, DC, for Respondent.

Before: GOODWIN, LEAVY, and FISHER, Circuit Judges.

*

 This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Mario Gonzalez Moreno and Mirna Gonzalez, natives and citizens of Mexico, petition pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) decision affirming an immigration judge’s denial of their application for cancellation of removal. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence, *Lopez-Alvarado v. Ashcroft,*381 F.3d 847, 850-51 (9th Cir.2004), and deny the petition for review.

*648Gonzalez Moreno and Gonzalez each contend the immigration judge erred in finding they lacked 10 years of continuous physical presence.

Gonzalez was served with her notice to appear on June 5, 2001; accordingly, Gonzalez was required to demonstrate her physical presence beginning from June 5, 1991. *See*8 U.S.C. §§ 1229b(b)(l)(A), (d)(1). Gonzalez, Gonzalez’s sister, and Gonzalez’s mother each testified differently as to Gonzalez’s arrival in the United States, with both Gonzalez and her sister specifying dates after June 5, 1991. Gonzalez’s documentary evidence likewise failed to demonstrate her presence in the United States on or before June 5, 1991. Substantial evidence therefore supports the agency’s conclusion that Gonzalez failed to maintain continuous physical presence for the requisite period. *See id.*

As to Gonzalez Moreno, he testified that he entered the United States in May 1996. Even assuming Gonzalez Moreno’s 1998 administrative order of voluntary departure did not break his continuous physical presence, he has still failed to demonstrate the requisite 10 years of continuous physical presence. Substantial evidence therefore supports the agency’s conclusion that Gonzalez Moreno also failed to maintain continuous physical presence for the requisite period. *See id.*

Finally, Gonzalez Moreno and Gonzalez’s challenge to BIA’s streamlined decision is foreclosed by *Falcon Carriche v. Ashcroft,*850 F.3d 845 (9th Cir.2003).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
Page 1 

Commodity Futures Trading Commission 

CEA CASES 

NAME: DUNBEATH-HAGEN CORP., AND CHRISTIAN S. MORANTE 

DOCKET NUMBER: 134 

DOCUMENT TYPE: ISSUANCE OF COMPLAINT 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Commodity Exchange Authority 

Washington, D. C. 20250 

ISSUANCE OF COMPLAINT -- CEA DOCKET NO. 134 

(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: 

Dunbeath-Hagen Corp., and 

Christian S. Morante 

(New York, New York) 

The complaint charges that Dunbeath-Hagen Corp. and Christian S. Morante, its 

president, furnished false information in connection with the corporation's 

application for registration as futures commission merchant under the Commodity 

Exchange Act for the year 1966. 

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 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 Department of Agriculture and are a 

matter of public record. Pending disposition by the Judicial Officer, it is the 

policy of the Commodity Exchange Authority not to comment or elaborate on 

charges contained in complaints or to discuss evidence on which they are based. 

A public hearing on the complaint is scheduled to be held before a referee at 

10:00 a.m., local time, February 15, 1966, in New York, New York. 

LOAD-DATE: June 12, 2008 
Page 2