alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Page 1 

Commodity Futures Trading Commission 

CEA CASES 

NAME: JAY H. SCHMIDT 

DOCKET NUMBER: 107 

DOCUMENT TYPE: ISSUANCE OF COMPLAINT 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Commodity Exchange Authority 

Washington 25, D. C. 

ISSUANCE OF COMPLAINT -- CEA DOCKET NO. 107 

(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: 

Jay H. Schmidt 

(Chicago, Illinois) 

The complaint charges that the respondent exceeded the limits on speculative 

trading and positions in egg futures in January 1962. The complaint also 

charges that the respondent failed to file a report and filed false reports with 

the Commodity Exchange Authority on certain days during January 1962. 

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, September 25, 1962, in Chicago, Illinois. 

LOAD-DATE: June 12, 2008 
Page 2
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Darrell Eugene DIGSBY, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 10-6110.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Oct. 19, 2010.

Decided: Oct. 26, 2010.

Darrell Eugene Digsby, Appellant Pro Se.

Before DUNCAN, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Darrell Eugene Digsby seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2010) motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). A certificate of appeal-ability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *see Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. *Slack,*529 U.S. at 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Digsby has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED.*
Edward Vincent RAY, Jr., petitioner, v. Scott KERNAN, Secretary, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

No. 16-6016.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 7, 2016.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 119 (Wednesday, June 20, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 33063]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-15507]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket Nos. RP96-312-055 and CP00-65-004]


Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company; Notice of Negotiated Rate and 
Compliance Filing

June 14, 2001.
    Take notice that on June 11, 2001, pursuant to Section 4 of the 
Natural Gas Act, Part 154 of the Regulations of the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 18 CFR Part 154 and the Commission's February 
23, 2001 Order Issuing Certificates and Authorizing Abandonment in 
Docket No. CP00-65, Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company (Tennessee), 
tendered for filing and approval (1) a Gas Transportation Agreement 
between Tennessee and eCORP Marketing, L.L.C. (eCORP) pursuant to 
Tennessee's Rate Schedule FT-A for service on Tennessee's mainline 
system (Mainline Service Agreement); and (2) a Gas Transportation 
Agreement between Tennessee and eCorp pursuant to Tennessee's Rate 
Schedule FT-A for service on Tennessee's Stagecoach Lateral (Lateral 
Service Agreement). Tennessee requests that the Commission accept and 
approve on an expedited basis the negotiated rates in the Mainline 
Service Agreement and the Lateral Service Agreement to be effective on 
their respective commencement dates. Tennessee also requests that the 
Commission find that a June 5, 2001 Gas Transportation Agreement, 
between eCORP and Tennessee (``eCORP Agreement'') does not contain any 
material deviation from Tennessee's pro forma FT-A Service Agreement. 
Alternatively, if the Commission finds that the eCORP Agreement 
contains a material deviation, Tennessee requests that the Commission 
approve the eCORP Agreement.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with sections 385.214 or 385.211 of the Commission's Rules 
and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed in 
accordance with section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. 
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 proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must 
file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the 
Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public 
Reference Room. This filing may be viewed on the web at http://www.ferc.fed.us/online/rims.htm (call 202-208-2222 for assistance). 
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.

Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 01-15507 Filed 6-19-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
Exhibit 13.1





CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE 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 Annual Report on Form 20-F/A of IRSA
Inversiones y Representaciones S.A. (the “Company”) for
the fiscal year ended June 30, 2021 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (as amended by Amendment
No. 1, the “Report”), Eduardo S. Elsztain, as Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, 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 and 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.





IRSA Inversiones y Representaciones Sociedad
AnónimaDate:
June 29, 2022
By:
/s/
Eduardo S. ElsztainName:Eduardo
S. ElsztainTitle:
Chief Executive Officer








This
certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except as to the extent
required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the
Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities and Exchange
Act of 1934, as amended.
```

[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 119 (Wednesday, June 20, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 33122]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-15539]

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

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 3700]

Culturally Significant Objects Imported for Exhibition 
Determinations: ``Gifts to the Tsars 1500--1700, Treasures from the 
Kremlin''

AGENCY: Department of State.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given of the following determinations: 
Pursuant to the authority vested in me by the Act of October 19, 1965 
(79 Stat. 985, 22 U.S.C. 2459), the Foreign Affairs Reform and 
Restructuring Act of 1998 (112 Stat. 2681, et seq.), Delegation of 
Authority No. 234 of October 1, 1999, and Delegation of Authority No. 
236 of October 19, 1999, as amended, I hereby determine that the 
objects to be included in the exhibition ``Gifts to the Tsars 1500-
1700, Treasures from the Kremlin,'' imported from abroad for the 
temporary exhibition without profit within the United States, are of 
cultural significance. The objects are imported pursuant to loan 
agreements with the foreign lender. I also determine that the 
exhibition or display of the exhibit objects at the Indianapolis Museum 
of Art, Indianapolis, IN from on or about September 23, 2001 to on or 
about January 13, 2002, is in the national interest. Public Notice of 
these Determinations is ordered to be published in the Federal 
Register.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For further information, including a 
list of the exhibit objects, contact Paul W. Manning, Attorney-Adviser, 
Office of the Legal Adviser, U.S. Department of State (telephone: 202/
619-5997). The address is U.S. Department of State, SA-44, 301 4th 
Street, SW., Room 700, Washington, DC 20547-0001.

    Dated: June 12, 2001.
Helena Kane Finn,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Educational and Cultural Affairs, 
Department of State.
[FR Doc. 01-15539 Filed 6-19-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-08-U
```
----

            COUNCIL REGULATION (EC, Euratom) No 1292/2004

of 30 April 2004         

amending Regulations No 422/67/EEC and No 5/67/Euratom determining the emoluments of the President and Members of the Commission and of the President, Judges, Advocates General and Registrar of the Court of Justice and of the President, Members and Registrar of the Court of First Instance

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 210 thereof,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Atomic Energy Community, and in particular Article 123 thereof,

Having regard to the draft Regulation presented by the Commission on 2 April 2004,

Whereas:

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

Regulations No 422/67/EEC and No 5/67/Euratom shall be amended as follows:

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

It shall apply from 1 May 2004.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 30 April 2004.

For the Council

The President

B. COWEN            

----

(1)OJ L 124, 27.4.2004, p. 1.

(2)OJ L 56, 4.3.1968, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC, Euratom) No 723/2004.

(3)OJ 187, 8.8.1967, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC, ECSC, Euratom) No 2778/98 (OJ L 347, 23.12.1998, p. 1).

----
EXHIBIT
31.A






CERTIFICATION
 
 I, James
C. Yardley, certify that:
 
 1.           I
have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of El Paso Pipeline Partners,
L.P.;
 
 2.           Based
on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material
fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in
light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading
with respect to the period covered by this report;
 
 3.           Based
on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information
included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial
condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and
for, the periods presented in this report;
 
 4.           The
registrant'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 registrant 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 registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this report is being prepared; and
 
 (b)
Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant'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)
Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over
financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f))
that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the
registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the
registrant's internal control over financial reporting.
 
 5.           The
registrant's other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most
recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
 
 (a) All
significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of
internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to
adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and
report financial information; and
 
 (b) Any
fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who
have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial
reporting.
 
  
 Date:  November
      7, 2008
                By:
                /s/ James C. YardleyJames
      C. YardleyPresident
      and Chief Executive Officer(Principal
      Executive Officer)El
      Paso Pipeline GP Comany, L.L.C., theGeneral Partner of El Paso Pipeline Partners, L.P.
#### Efrain Suarez, Appellant, v State of New York, Respondent.

[876 NYS2d 195]-

Malone Jr., J.

Appeal from an order of the Court of Claims (Ferreira, J.), entered December 21, 2006, which denied claimant’s motion to strike defendant’s affirmative defenses and granted defendant’s cross motion to partially dismiss the claim.

Claimant, an inmate, allegedly fell out of bed and sustained injuries. Claimant thereafter commenced this action in the Court of Claims, alleging that prison personnel acted negligently and that his civil rights were violated by those employees’ failure to correct known deficiencies with the bed and their deliberate indifference to the medical needs arising from his injuries. Defendant answered and asserted four affirmative defenses, which claimant moved to strike. Defendant withdrew one of the defenses and cross-moved to dismiss claimant’s constitutional claims. The Court of Claims denied claimant’s motion and granted defendant’s cross motion. Claimant appeals.*

We affirm. As is relevant here, defendant alleged contributory and third-party negligence defenses in its answer, and those allegations must be accepted as true on a motion to strike (see *Capital Tel. Co. v Motorola Communications & Elecs.,*208 AD2d 1150, 1150 [1994]). Claimant’s motion papers are devoid of any evidence showing that neither he nor a third party was to some degree responsible for his alleged injuries and/or damages. As claimant failed to conclusively show that the defenses lacked merit, the Court of Claims appropriately denied his motion *(see Pellegrino v Millard Fillmore Hosp.,*140 AD2d 954, 955 [1988]; *compare Thy Tran v Avis Rent A Car,*289 AD2d 731, 732 [2001]).

Cardona, P.J., Peters, Stein and McCarthy, JJ., concur. Ordered that the order is affirmed, without costs. *[See*14 Misc 3d 1230(A), 2006 NY Slip Op 52566(U).]

*

 Inasmuch as claimant has failed to brief any issue regarding defendant’s successful cro ss motion, we deem any argument in that regard to be waived *(see Custer v Cortland Hous. Auth.,*266 AD2d 619, 620 n 1 [1999], *Iv denied*94 NY2d 761 [2000]).
### TEXA S C OU R T OF A PPEAL S, THIR D DIST R ICT , AT AU STIN NO. 03-0 9- 00646 -CR Jo se ph U r ta do , A ppe lla nt

v. The State of Texas, App ellee F ROM THE DISTRICT CO URT OF TRAVIS COUNTY , 403RD JUDICI AL DISTRICT NO. D-1- DC-09 -90 4068 , HO NORAB LE B RENDA KENNEDY , JUDGE PRESIDI NG

M E M O R

A N D U M O P I N I O N P ER CURIAM

J oseph Urta do appea ls from his conviction for a g g ravated assault. The cler k’s rec ord, which was due to be filed on Dec ember 21, 2009, has not be en filed. Urtad o ’s re t ained counsel ha s filed a motion seekingto withdraw as attorney of re cord. The motion further states that Urtado is indig ent and require s appointed counse l at this ti me. I t appea rs that no re quest for a

fre e rec ord has be en filed a

nd no finding of indig ency has bee n made by

the trial cour

t. See Tex. R. App. P. 20.2. To avoid fur ther de lay s and protec t the rig hts of the parties, the appea l is a bated a nd the tr ia l c ourt

is i ns tr uct ed to dete rm ine , f

oll ow inga

he ari ngif

ne c e ssa ry , w he the r Urt a do is prese ntly indige nt. I f the c ou rt finds that Urtado is indig ent, it shall order the prepa ration of the re c o r d a tn o c o s tt o U rt a d o , an d t ak e a l l n e c e s s ar

y s t e p s t o a s s u r e t h a tU rt a d o i s e f f e c tiv e lyAt this ti me, we ta ke no ac tion on counsel’s motion to withdraw. 1 2 repr esente d by

counsel, including appointi ng new counsel for the a ppeal if ne cessa

ry . Unless and u n ti l n e w c o u n s e l is a

p p o inte d , Jo d i Ca ll aw ay Co le r e ma in s c o u n s e l of rec ord. Cop ie s o f a ll 1 finding s, conclusions, and orde rs, as we ll as a transc ription of t he reporter ’s not es if a he aringis held, shall be tende red f

or filing in this C ourt no later tha n Fe bruar y 8, 2010.

Be fore Chief J ustice Jones, J ustices Waldrop and He nson Filed: January

8, 2010 Do No t Pu

bli sh
<TABLE> <S> <C>



<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                         211,095
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   45,993
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               375,020
<PP&E>                                         386,769
<DEPRECIATION>                                 259,263
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 761,668
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          278,351
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               50
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        24,517
<OTHER-SE>                                     458,750
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   761,668
<SALES>                                        195,461      
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               195,461
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,140,518
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (59,272)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,100
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (887,885)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (887,885)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 (90,712)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   418,140
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.17
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.17
EXHIBIT 32.2

CYBERSOURCE CORPORATION

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 CyberSource Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
therein specified (the Report), I, Steven D. Pellizzer, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to the best of 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 at the dates and for the periods
indicated.
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This Certification has not been, and shall not be deemed, filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission.



|                     |  |  |  |                        
|-------------------- |  |  |  | -----------------------
|Date: March 10, 2006 |  |  |  | /s/ Steven D. Pellizzer
|                     |  |  |  | Steven D. Pellizzer    
|                     |  |  |  | Chief Financial Officer
No. 644, Misc.

#### Cordts *v.*Ragen, Warden, et al.

Circuit Court of St. Clair County, Illinois.

Certiorari denied.