alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Before the
COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION

2:39 pm, J ul 31, 2015

ROSEMARY GIACOMAZZA, and
SALVATORE GIACOMAZZA,
Complainants
CFTC Docket No. 12-R30
ve
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
GLOBAL ASSET MANAGEMENT ALLIANCE, LLC,
and JOSEPH TSALIK,
Respondents

Upon review of the record and the parties’ appellate submissions, we have determined
that the Giacomazzas’ claims are barred by the two-year statute of limitations, and that the
Giacomazzas have not demonstrated that equitable tolling was warranted. ' None of the
Giacomazzas’ arguments on appeal raise any important questions of law or policy, and we
therefore affirm the initial decision without opinion.”

IT IS SO ORDERED.*

By the Commission (Chairman MASSAD and Commissioners WETJEN, BOWEN, and

GIANCARLO.)
Christopher J. Kitkpatr k

Secretary of the Commission
Commodity Futures Trading Commission
Dated: July 31, 2015

See McGough v. Bradford, et al., [1998-99 Transfer Binder] Comm. Fut. L. Rep. (CCH) $28,265 at 50,601-50,603
(CFTC Sept. 28, 2000) (the statute of limitations begins to run when the complainant could have discovered the
illegal activity through the exercise of reasonable diligence).

? Pursuant to Commission Regulation 12.406(b), 17 C.F.R. § 12.406(b) (2014), neither the initial decision nor the
Commission's order of summary affirmance shall serve as a Commission precedent in other proceedings.

* Under the Commodity Exchange Act, a party may appeal a reparation order of the Commission to the United
States Court of Appeals for only the circuit in which a hearing was held; if no hearing was held, the appeal may be
filed in any circuit in which the appellee is located. 7 U.S.C. §§ 9(11)(B), 18(e) (2012). Such an appeal must be
filed within 15 days afler notice of the order and that any appeal is not effective unless, within 30 days of the date of
the Commission order, the appealing party files with the court a bond equal to double the amount of any reparation
award. /d.
Exhibit 23.3

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We have issued our reports dated January 28, 2009, on the
consolidated financial statements of Motorsports Authentics, LLCfor the years ended November 30, 2008 and 2007, and for each of the three years in the period ended November 30, 2008, which are included in the Annual Report of
Speedway Motorsports, Inc. on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2008. We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of said reports in the Registration Statements of Speedway Motorsports, Inc. on Forms S-8 (File
No. 333-69616, effective October 9, 2001; File No. 333-49027, effective April 24, 2008; File No. 333-69618, effective October 9, 2001; File No. 333-89496, effective April 24, 2008; File No. 333-114965,
effective April 24, 2008; File No. 333-114969, effective April 24, 2008; File No. 333-150418, effective April 24, 2008).



|                         
|-------------------------
|                         
|/s/    Grant Thornton LLP
|Charlotte, North Carolina
|March 13, 2009
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

December 14, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

130484 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

BONNIE AMON, Successor Personal Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, Representative of the Estate of Ann Marie Justices Samodell, Deceased,

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v SC: 130484 

 COA: 260252 

Oakland CC: 2002-046057-NH 

BOTSFORD GENERAL HOSPITAL, 

and ROBERT F. SCHIRMER, D.O., 

 Defendants-Appellants/ 

Cross-Appellees. 

_________________________________________/ 

By order of April 13, 2007, the application for leave to appeal the December 27, 

2005 judgment of the Court of Appeals was held in abeyance pending the decision in 

Mullins v St Joseph Mercy Hosp (Docket No. 131879). On order of the Court, the case 

having been decided on November 28, 2007, ___ Mich ___ (2007), the application is 

again considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(G)(1), in lieu of granting leave to appeal, 

we REVERSE the judgment of the Court of Appeals, REINSTATE the order of the 

Oakland Circuit Court denying the defendants' motion for summary disposition, and 

REMAND this case to the Oakland Circuit Court for further proceedings not inconsistent 

with this order and the order in Mullins. In all other respects, leave to appeal is DENIED, 

because we are not persuaded that the remaining question presented should be reviewed 

by this Court. 

l1211 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

December 14, 2007 

Clerk
##### 



Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report of Laserscope on Form
10-Q for the six months ended June 30, 2003, I, Eric M. Reuter, President and
Chief Executive Officer of Laserscope, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:



| | (1) |  | such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the six months ended
June 30, 2003 fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and                             
| | --- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
| | (2) |  | the information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
for the six months ended June 30,2003 fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
of Laserscope.

|                     |  |     |  |                                                                         
|-------------------- |  | --- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: August 7, 2003 |  | By: |  | /s/ Eric M. Reuter

Eric M. Reuter
President and Chief Executive Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature
that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written
statement required by section 906, has been provided to Laserscope and will be
retained by Laserscope and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
or its staff upon request.
Frederick James FILLINGHAM, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-7473.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 20, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
II-00178

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Carolyn A. Kidder <kiddermus@yahoo.com>

Friday, December 3, 2010 11:46 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.

Carolyn A. Kidder

42 Main Street

Wayne, PA 19087
EXHIBIT 32.1






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




In
connection with the Quarterly Report of PLX Technology, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2008 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Michael J. Salameh, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely
for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code,
that to the best of my knowledge:
  1.
              the
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as
      applicable, 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: October
30, 2008
  By: /s/ Michael J.
Salameh
 Michael J.
Salameh
 Chief
Executive Officer
  35
PALDO SIGN AND DISPLAY COMPANY, Individually and on Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, petitioner, v. WAGENER EQUITIES, INC., et al.

No. 16-528.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 9, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.
II-00265

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Ted Radamaker <tedrad@uia.net>

Thursday, December 2, 2010 7:25 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.

Ted Radamaker

3837 Shelter Grove Drive

Claremont, CA 91711
Cynthia N. ALMOND, et al., petitioners, v. SINGING RIVER HEALTH SYSTEM, et al.

No. 17-846.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 20, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Phillip HANCOCK, petitioner, v. Kevin DUCKWORTH, Interim Warden.

No. 15-9190.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 3, 2016.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denied.
II-00959

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Theodore Wirth <twirth5 @hotmail.com>

Thursday, December 2, 2010 9:40 AM

dfadefinitions <dfadefinitions@CFTC.gov>

Re: No loopholes in Dodd-Frank

Dear Madams and Sirs,

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.

Theodore Wirth

2101 Middlefield Court

Denville, NJ 07834
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_______________________

Consolidated Cases Nos. 02-60404, 02-60411,

02-60419, 02-60457, 02-60458, 02-60481,

02-60517, 02-60536

Summary Calendar

_______________________

Case No. 02-60404

BANK ONE NA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

JESSE WILLIAMS,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________

Case No. 02-60411

 

BANK ONE NA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

SUSIE GEORGE,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________

Case No. 02-60419

BANK ONE NA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

LINDA HAWKINS,

Defendant-Appellant.
2

_________________________

Case No. 02-60457

 

BANK ONE NA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

CURRY JOE ATTERBURY,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________

Case No. 02-60458

BANK ONE NA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

RUBIN ASHFORD,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________

Case No. 02-60481

 

BANK ONE NA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

MARY BURT,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________

Case No. 02-60517

 

BANK ONE NA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

L.D. TAYLOR, JR., 

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________

Case No. 02-60536

BANK ONE NA,
*Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be

published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstancesset forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

1

288 F.3d 181 (5th Cir. 2002).

2No. 01-60051 (5th Cir. April 5, 2002) (unpublished).

3

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

MARY McMORRIS,

Defendant-Appellant.

_____________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Mississippi

(3:01-CV-24-D)

_____________________________________________

January 29, 2003

Before JONES, STEWART and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Appellants challenge the district court’s rulings

granting Bank One’s motions to compel arbitration and to stay the

Appellants’ pending state law claims. This case is

indistinguishable from those that we reviewed and ruled on in the

related cases of Bank One, N.A. v. Boyd1 and Bank One, N.A. v.

Lake.

2 For essentially the same reasons that are set forth in our

opinion in Boyd and in the district court’s opinion in Bank One,
3

125 F. Supp. 2d 819 (S.D. Miss. 2001).

4No. 4:01CV15-D-B (N.D. Miss. May 7, 2002) (order granting petition to compel

arbitration).

4

N.A. v. Coates,

3 and Bank One, N.A. v. Taylor,4 the judgment of the

district court in this case is, in all respects, AFFIRMED.
# C_2009129EN.01000601.xml

| 6.6.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 129/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.6.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 129/6

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunale di Trani (Italy) lodged on 6 March 2009 — Francesca Sorge v Poste Italiane SpA

(Case C-98/09)

2009/C 129/09

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Referring court

Tribunale di Trani

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Francesca Sorge

Applicant:

Defendant: Poste Italiane SpA

Defendant:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | Must Clause 8 of the Framework Agreement put into effect by Directive 1990/70/EEC (1) be interpreted as precluding domestic rules (such as those laid down by Articles 11 and 1 of Legislative Decree No 368/2001) which, in implementation of Council Directive 1999/70/EC of 28 June 1999 concerning the framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP, repealed Article 1(2)(b) of Law 230/1962, according to which it was ‘permitted to impose a time-limit on the duration of the contract ... when the recruitment’ took ‘place in order to replace absent workers’ who ‘retained the right to their post, provided that in the fixed-term contract’‘an indication was given of the name of the replaced worker and the reasons for his replacement’, substituting for it a provision which no longer imposes that obligation to give details? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Must Clause 8 of the Framework Agreement put into effect by Directive 1990/70/EEC (1) be interpreted as precluding domestic rules (such as those laid down by Articles 11 and 1 of Legislative Decree No 368/2001) which, in implementation of Council Directive 1999/70/EC of 28 June 1999 concerning the framework agreement on fixed-term work concluded by ETUC, UNICE and CEEP, repealed Article 1(2)(b) of Law 230/1962, according to which it was ‘permitted to impose a time-limit on the duration of the contract ... when the recruitment’ took ‘place in order to replace absent workers’ who ‘retained the right to their post, provided that in the fixed-term contract’‘an indication was given of the name of the replaced worker and the reasons for his replacement’, substituting for it a provision which no longer imposes that obligation to give details?

1

| 2. | If the answer to the foregoing question is yes, is the national court required to disapply the national legislation that conflicts with Community law? |
| --- | --- |

2.

If the answer to the foregoing question is yes, is the national court required to disapply the national legislation that conflicts with Community law?

---

(1)  OJ 1999 L 175, p. 43.

1

---
Bartolomeo VERNACE, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 16-6951.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 9, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.
Nicholas Jay WILSON, petitioner, v. Department of the NAVY.

No. 16-1400.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied.
Greg ABBOTT, Governor of Texas, et al., Applicants v. Shannon PEREZ, et al.

No. 17A225.

Supreme Court of the United States

Aug. 28, 2017.

**ORDER**

SAMUEL A. ALITO, JR., Associate Justice.

UPON CONSIDERATION of the application of counsel for the applicants,

IT IS ORDERED that the order of the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas, case No. SA-11-CV-360, entered August 15, 2017, is hereby stayed pending receipt of a response, due on or before Tuesday, September 5, 2017, by 3 p.m., and further order of the undersigned or of the Court.
IV 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 1758 

Expressing the Nation’s sincerest appreciation for the service of Muslim 

American veterans. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 9, 2010 

Mr. CARSON of Indiana (for himself, Mr. FILNER, Mr. CONYERS, Mr. 

ELLISON, Mr. HONDA, and Ms. JACKSON LEE of Texas) submitted the 

following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Veterans’ 

Affairs 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing the Nation’s sincerest appreciation for the service 

of Muslim American veterans. 

Whereas Muslim American veterans comprise an important 

population of the Nation’s estimated 9,000,000 citizens 

who embrace the Islamic faith; 

Whereas the record of service of Muslim Americans in the 

United States military dates back to the mid-1800s; 

Whereas Muslim Americans have participated for over 200 

years in United States military actions including in the 

War of 1812, the Civil War, and the Spanish-American 

War; 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 1758 IH 

Whereas Muslim Americans served in the United States 

Armed Forces during World Wars I and II, the Korean 

War, and the Vietnam War; 

Whereas Muslim Americans have also provided considerable 

contributions in military operations in the Persian Gulf 

in the 1990s and continue to serve in the Armed Forces 

in the ongoing conflicts around the world; 

Whereas there are an estimated 10,000 Muslim Americans 

currently serving in the Nation’s armed services; 

Whereas Muslim Americans, after departing from the armed 

services, have continued their service to the Nation as 

scientists, physicians, nurses, police officers, firefighters, 

lawyers, social workers, engineers, entrepreneurs, and 

educators; 

Whereas the Muslim American Veterans Association (MAVA) 

was established in 1997 to represent all Muslim American veterans; 

Whereas MAVA is a national veteran service organization 

supporting the needs of all veterans across America; 

Whereas MAVA Post 1 was established in Washington, DC, 

as the first of seven MAVA posts within the United 

States; 

Whereas MAVA has a growing list of seven posts, with several hundred members; and 

Whereas Muslim American veterans represent a rich thread 

of the Nation’s diverse and strong social economic fabric: 

Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, that the House of Representatives— 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
3 

•HRES 1758 IH 

1 (1) recognizes all Muslim American veterans 

2 who have served the Nation with honor, pride, devo3 tion, wisdom, and courage for their sacrifices; and 

4 (2) calls upon the President to issue a procla5 mation urging the people of the United States to ob6 serve a day honoring Muslim American veterans 

7 with appropriate ceremonies and activities. 

Æ 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
Bobby THOMPSON, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-7285.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 20, 2018.

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