alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
II-00377

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Jeffry OBrien <gittothepoint@yahoo.com>

Thursday, December 2, 2010 10:23 PM

dfadefinitions <dfadefinitions@CFTC.gov>

Re: No loopholes in Dodd-Frank

1) Securities and Exchange Commission/Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Commercial Risk (CFTC RIN

3235-AK65, SEC File Ntunber $7-12-10)

Dear Commissioners Shapiro and Gensler: Don’t let the American Bankers Association (ABA) redefine important terms like

"commercial risk" to keep banks that engage in risky derivatives trading from complying with transparency and business

conduct requirements. Commercial risk should not be expanded to include financial risk. Accepting the ABA argument

would open the door for exemptions for risky hedge funds and insurance companies.

2) Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Position Limits (RIN 3038-AD 17 )

Dear Commissioner Gensler: The CFTC needs to set strong position limits to crack down on the energy and food commodity

speculation that serves no productive purpose. I urge the Commission to define limits that will address not only manipulation,

but also excessive speculation, which will require a stricter approach.

3) U.S. Department of the Treasury, Re: FX Swaps (75 FR 66426 Document Number 2010-27274)

Dear Secretary Geithner: Just say "no" to foreign exchange traders who want to exempt foreign currency derivatives from the

clearing and transparency requirements of the

Dodd-Frank Act. $4 trillion dollars a day is traded in these highly-leveraged swaps and this number may increase to over $10

trillion in a decade. As the head of the Financial

Stability Oversight Board your job is to decrease risk in the system, not encourage off-book trading and opaque markets.

Jeffry OBrien

5867 Sailing Hawk Ave

Santa Rosa, CA 95409
# C_2009090EN.01004002.xml

| 18.4.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 90/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.4.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 90/40

---

Action brought on 19 February 2009 — Peláez Jimeno v Parliament

(Case F-13/09)

2009/C 90/65

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Josefina Peláez Jimeno (Relegem — Asse, Belgium) (represented by: M. Casado García-Hirschfeld, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Parliament

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the appointing authority’s decision to classify the applicant, as a probationary official, at a grade and step lower than that which she occupied as a member of the temporary staff.

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Tribunal should:

| — | Annul the appointing authority’s decision of 8 February 2008 by which the applicant was classified in the new ‘AST’ category, grade 1, step 5, as a probationary official, confirmed by the decision rejecting the complaint of the Secretary General of the European Parliament of 12 November 2008; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the appointing authority’s decision of 8 February 2008 by which the applicant was classified in the new ‘AST’ category, grade 1, step 5, as a probationary official, confirmed by the decision rejecting the complaint of the Secretary General of the European Parliament of 12 November 2008;

| — | Order the European Parliament to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the European Parliament to pay the costs.

---
# C_2012025EN.01000301.xml

| 28.1.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 25/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.1.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 25/3

---

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 10 November 2011 — European Commission v Portuguese Republic

(Case C-212/09) (1)

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Articles 43 EC and 56 EC - Free movement of capital - Golden shares held by the Portuguese State in GALP Energia SGPS SA - Participation in the management of a privatised company)

(2012/C 25/03)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: G. Braun, M. Teles Romão and P. Guerra e Andrade, Agents)

Defendant: Portuguese Republic (represented by: L. Inez Fernandes, Agent, and by C. Botelho Moniz, M. Rosado da Fonseca and P. Gouveia e Melo, advogados)

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Infringement of Articles 43 EC and 56 EC — Special rights of the State and other public bodies in the company GALP Energia, SGPS SA (‘golden shares’)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court (First Chamber):

| 1. | Declares that, by maintaining in favour of the Portuguese State and other public bodies special rights in GALP Energia SGPS SA, such as those provided for in the present case by Law No 11/90 of 5 April 1990 concerning the Framework Law on Privatisations (Lei no 11/90, Lei Quadro das Privatizações), by Decree-Law No 261-A/99 of 7 July 1999 approving the first phase of the privatisation of the share capital of GALP — Petróleos e Gás de Portugal SGPS SA (Decreto-Lei no 261-A/99 aprova a 1.a fase do processo de privatização do capital social da GALP — Petróleos e Gás de Portugal, SGPS, SA), and by the articles of association of that company, granted in connection with the Portuguese State’s golden shares in the share capital of that company, the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 56 EC; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Declares that, by maintaining in favour of the Portuguese State and other public bodies special rights in GALP Energia SGPS SA, such as those provided for in the present case by Law No 11/90 of 5 April 1990 concerning the Framework Law on Privatisations (Lei no 11/90, Lei Quadro das Privatizações), by Decree-Law No 261-A/99 of 7 July 1999 approving the first phase of the privatisation of the share capital of GALP — Petróleos e Gás de Portugal SGPS SA (Decreto-Lei no 261-A/99 aprova a 1.a fase do processo de privatização do capital social da GALP — Petróleos e Gás de Portugal, SGPS, SA), and by the articles of association of that company, granted in connection with the Portuguese State’s golden shares in the share capital of that company, the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Article 56 EC;

| 2. | Orders the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 180, 1.8.2009.

---
#### Tyrone HURT, Appellant, v. CLERKS, SUPERIOR COURT OF the DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, et al., Appellees.

No. 06-5308.

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.

Dec. 22, 2006.

Tyrone Hurt, Washington, DC, pro se.

Edward Eugene Schwab, Deputy Attorney General, Office of Attorney General for the District of Columbia, Office of the Solicitor General, R. Craig Lawrence, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Washington, DC, for Appellees.

BEFORE: GINSBURG, Chief Judge, and RANDOLPH and GARLAND, Circuit Judges.

*JUDGMENT*

PER CURIAM.

This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia and on the brief filed by appellant. It is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court’s order filed September 15, 2006 be affirmed. The district court properly dismissed this action as frivolous pursuant to § 1915(e). *See*28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i); *Neitzke v. Williams,*490 U.S. 319, 325, 109 S.Ct. 1827, 104 L.Ed.2d 338 (1989) (a complaint is frivolous if it “lacks an arguable basis either in law or fact” or asserts claims against which it is clear the defendants are immune from suit); *Sindram v. Suda,*986 F.2d 1459 (D.C.Cir.1993) (applying doctrine of absolute judicial immunity to judicial clerks).

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after resolution of any timely petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc. See Fed. R.App. P. 41(b); D.C.Cir. Rule 41.
Emmanuel PATTERSON, petitioner, v. Michael GRAZIANO, et al.

No. 16-5925.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 31, 2016.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Appellate Division, Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Judicial Department denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS OF THE REGISTRANT AT AUGUST 31, 1997 AND
FEBRUARY 28,1997 AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS OF THE REGISTRANT 
FOR THE THREE AND SIX MONTH PERIOD ENDED AUGUST 31, 1997 AND 1996 AND IS 
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH STATEMENTS IN THE FORM 10-Q 
FOR THE QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED AUGUST 31, 1997.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-28-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             MAR-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               AUG-31-1997
<CASH>                                       3,481,000
<SECURITIES>                                 3,452,000
<RECEIVABLES>                               12,679,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            28,661,000
<PP&E>                                       5,262,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              34,850,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       10,449,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        40,000
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                34,850,000
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            28,239,000
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               27,303,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,077,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                   431,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            646,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   646,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .16
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Thomas BURGESS, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 16-6906.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 9, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
##### 



Exhibit 32.2
 
  (1)
    
    The Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December 30,
2006 (the Form 10-K) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Act); and(2)
    
    The information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial conditions and results of operations of the Company as of the
dates and for the periods referred to in the Form 10-K.
 /s/ Alfred H. Drewes

Alfred H. Drewes 

Senior Vice President andChief Financial OfficerFebruary 27, 2007
II-00584

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Marvin Kaphan <mnk22@columbia.edu>

Thursday, December 2, 2010 1:59 PM

dfadefinitions <dfadefinitions@CFTC.gov>

Re: No loopholes in Dodd-Frank

1) Securities and Exchange Commission/Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Commercial Risk (CFTC RIN

3235-AK65, SEC File Number $7-12-10)

Dear Commissioners Shapiro and Gensler: Don’t let the American Bankers Association (ABA) redefine important terms like

"commercial risk" to keep banks that engage in risky derivatives trading from complying with transparency and business

conduct requirements. Commercial risk should not be expanded to include financial risk. Accepting the ABA argument

would open the door for exemptions for risky hedge funds and insurance companies.

2) Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Position Limits (RIN 3038-AD 17 )

Dear Commissioner Gensler: The CFTC needs to set strong position limits to crack down on the energy and food commodity

speculation that serves no productive purpose. I urge the Commission to define limits that will address not only manipulation,

but also excessive speculation, which will require a stricter approach.

3) U.S. Department of the Treasury, Re: FX Swaps (75 FR 66426 Document Number 2010-27274)

Dear Secretary Geithner: Just say "no" to foreign exchange traders who want to exempt foreign currency derivatives from the

clearing and transparency requirements of the

Dodd-Frank Act. $4 trillion dollars a day is traded in these highly-leveraged swaps and this number may increase to over $10

trillion in a decade. As the head of the Financial

Stability Oversight Board your job is to decrease risk in the system, not encourage off-book trading and opaque markets.

Marvin Kaphan

500 Ocampo Drive

Pacific Palisades, CA 90272
985.

#### Laurens Banking Company *v.*Bales.

Trover, from city court of Dublin — Judge Burch. December 20, 1907.

Argued March 11,

Decided March 30, 1908.

*Davis & Adams,*for plaintiff. *Peyton L. Wade,*for defendant.

Powell, J.

“An unconditional assignment of a note given for the purchase of personalty, wherein the seller retains title to the property sold until the pm-chase-money is paid, does not extinguish the security, but carries it along, and the title retained by the seller becomes vested in the assignee until the purchase debt is paid.” *Townsend*v. *Southern Product Co.,*127 *Ga.*342 (56 S. E. 436). *Judgment reversed.*
EXHIBIT
24.1




GENVEC,
INC.


Power
of Attorney




KNOW ALL
MEN BY THESE PRESENTS that each of the undersigned officers and directors of
GenVec, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Corporation”), hereby constitutes and
appoints Paul H. Fischer and Douglas J. Swirsky, and each of them, the true and
lawful agents and attorneys-in-fact of the undersigned with full power and
authority in said agents and attorneys-in-fact, and any one or more of them, in
connection with the Corporation’s Annual Report on Form 10-K (the “Form 10-K”)
for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009 under the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended, including, without limitation, to sign the Form 10-K in the
name and on behalf of the Corporation or on behalf of the undersigned, and in
their respective names as officers and as directors of the Corporation, and any
amendments to the Form 10-K and any instrument, contract, document or other
writing, of or in connection with the Form 10-K or amendments thereto, and to
file the same, with all exhibits thereto, and other documents in connection
therewith, including this power of attorney, with the Securities and Exchange
Commission and any applicable securities exchange or securities self-regulatory
body, and the undersigned hereby ratifies and confirms all that said
attorneys-in-fact and agents, each acting alone, or his substitute or
substitutes, may lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue hereof. Each of the
undersigned hereby represents and warrants that he has not executed this Power
of Attorney within the State of New York.




Name and Title
                                      
                                      Date/s/
      Paul
      H. Fischer, Ph.D.
                                      
                                      March
      12, 2010Paul
      H. Fischer, Ph.D.President,
      Chief Executive Officer and Director/s/
      Douglas
      J. Swirsky
                                      
                                      March
      12, 2010Douglas
      J. SwirskySenior
      Vice President, Chief Financial Officer,Treasurer
      and Corporate Secretary/s/
      Wayne
      T. Hockmeyer, Ph.D.
                                      
                                      March
      12, 2010Wayne
      T. Hockmeyer, Ph.D.Director/s/
      Zola
      P. Horovitz, Ph.D.
                                      
                                      March
      5, 2010Zola
      P. Horovitz, Ph.D.Director/s/
      William
      N. Kelley, M.D.
                                      
                                      March
      5, 2010William
      N. Kelley, M.D.Director/s/
      Kevin
      M. Rooney
                                      
                                      March
      7, 2010Kevin
      M. RooneyDirector/s/
      Joshua
      Ruch
                                      
                                      March
      11, 2010Joshua
      RuchDirector/s/
      Marc
      R. Schneebaum
                                      
                                      March
      10, 2010Marc
      R. SchneebaumDirector
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                                    FEB-29-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                                       MAR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                                         FEB-29-2000
<CASH>                                                                  222,266
<SECURITIES>                                                                  0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                           212,909
<ALLOWANCES>                                                             64,750
<INVENTORY>                                                                   0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                        541,865
<PP&E>                                                                   96,353
<DEPRECIATION>                                                           13,510
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                        2,030,962
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                                 1,652,703
<BONDS>                                                                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                         0
<PREFERRED>                                                                   0
<COMMON>                                                                 20,132
<OTHER-SE>                                                              358,127
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                          2,030,962
<SALES>                                                               1,909,297
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                      1,909,297
<CGS>                                                                 1,197,820
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                         1,197,820
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                      5,890,183
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                              0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                       55,836
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                      (5,234,542)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                                  0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                                  (5,234,542)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                               0
<CHANGES>                                                                     0
<NET-INCOME>                                                         (5,234,542)
<EPS-BASIC>                                                                (.27)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                              (.27)



</TABLE>
# C_2010051EN.01001901.xml

| 27.2.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 51/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.2.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 51/19

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Collège d’autorisation et de contrôle du Conseil supérieur de l'audiovisuel (Belgium) lodged on 11 December 2009 — RTL Belgium SA (formerly TVI SA) v Conseil supérieur de l’audiovisuel

(Case C-517/09)

2010/C 51/30

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Referring court

Collège d’autorisation et de contrôle du Conseil supérieur de l'audiovisuel

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: RTL Belgium SA (formerly TVI SA)

Applicant:

Defendant: Conseil supérieur de l’audiovisuel

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

Can the notion of ‘effective control both over the selection of the programmes and over their organisation’ in Article 1(c) of the Directive of 3 October 1989 on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by law, regulation or administrative action in Member States concerning the pursuit of television broadcasting activities (1) [as amended by Directive 2007/65/EC] (the Audiovisual Media Services Directive) be interpreted as meaning that a company established in a Member State and licensed by the government of that Member State to provide an audiovisual media service does in fact exercise such control, even though it delegates, with an option to further delegate, to a third company established in another Member State, against payment of an indeterminate sum equal to the total advertising revenue generated by the broadcasting of that service, the actual production of all the programmes specific to that service, the communication to the public of programme scheduling information and the provision of financial and legal services, human resources, the management of infrastructure and other personnel-related services, and even though it is apparent that it is at the head offices of that third company that decisions are taken and implemented concerning the putting together of programmes and any deletions from or changes to the programming schedule in response to current events?

1

---

(1)  Council Directive 89/552/EEC of 3 October 1989 on the coordination of certain provisions laid down by Law, Regulation or Administrative Action in Member States concerning the pursuit of television broadcasting activities (OJ 1989 L 298 p. 23)

1

---
Exhibit 32.2


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


         In connection with the quarterly report of SiriCOMM, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending December 31, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on February 19, 2004 (the "Report"), I,
J. Richard Iler, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

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

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



/s/ J. Richard Iler
--------------------------
J. Richard Iler
Chief Financial Officer
February 19, 2004


A signed original of this certification 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.