alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
II-00337

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Patricia Chang <tpc 1133 @aol.com>

Friday, December 3, 2010 12:31 AM

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.

Patricia Chang

1133 Stockton St.

Indianapolis, IN 46260-2860
Antonio FONTANA, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-7300.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 20, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 124 (Wednesday, June 27, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 34264]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-16160]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[NAFTA-4707]


General Automotive Manufacturing, LLC Franklin, Wisconsin; Notice 
of Termination of Investigation

    Pursuant to Title V of the North American Free Trade Agreement 
Implementation Act (Public Law 103-182) concerning transitional 
adjustment assistance, hereinafter called NAFTA-TAA and in accordance 
with Section 250(a), Subchapter D, Chapter 2, Title II, of the Trade 
Act of 1974, as amended (19 U.S.C. 2331), an investigation was 
initiated on March 30, 2001, in response to a worker petition which was 
filed on behalf of workers at General Automotive Manufacturing, LLC, 
Franklin, Wisconsin.
    The petitioner has requested that he petition be withdrawn. 
Consequently further investigation in this case would serve no purpose, 
and the investigation has been terminated.

    Signed in Washington, DC, this 13th day of June, 2001.
Linda G. Poole,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 01-16160 Filed 6-26-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
Exhibit No. 32.1



              CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
               AND CHIEF FINANCIAL 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 filing of American Asset Management Corporation
(the Company) Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended
March 31, 2005 with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the Report), I,  Richard G. Gagliardi, the Chief Executive Officer
and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify, to the best of
my knowledge and belief, 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 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.



                                 _/s/ Richard G. Gagliardi____________
                                 Richard G. Gagliardi
                                 Chief Executive and Financial Officer


Date:  May 23, 2005
#### The People of the State of New York ex rel. Howard Engel, Appellant, v Darwin LaClair, as Superintendent of Franklin Correctional Facility, et al., Respondents.

[878 NYS2d 463] —

Peters, J.P Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court (Feldstein, J.), entered August 6, 2008 in Franklin County, which denied petitioner’s application for a writ of habeas corpus, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 70, without a hearing.

In 2003, petitioner was convicted of assault in the second degree and sentenced to a prison term of three years with two years of postrelease supervision. In January 2008, petitioner was charged with various violations of his postrelease conditions. He pleaded guilty to one of the charges and, as a result, he was ordered held until the expiration date of his period of supervision. The Administrative Law Judge directed, however, that if petitioner completed the Willard Drug Treatment Program his postrelease supervision would be restored. Petitioner commenced this proceeding challenging the timeliness of his transfer to that program. Supreme Court dismissed his petition, prompting this appeal.

Petitioner has already been released from custody due to the expiration of his period of postrelease supervision. As such, “habeas corpus relief is no longer available and the proceeding must be dismissed as moot” *(People ex rel. McAdoo v Taylor,*31 AD3d 847, 848 [2006]; *see Matter of Horton v Travis,*18 AD3d 922, 923 [2005]).

Rose, Lahtinen, Kane and Stein, JJ., concur. Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, as moot, without costs.
N OTE : This order is nonprecedential. 

# United States Court of Appeals **for the Federal Circuit**

__________________________ DONALD W. ANDREWS, J R. , Plaintiff

- Appellant , v. UNITED STATES , Defendant

- Appellee

.

__________________________ 2013

- 5113

__________________________ Appeal from the United States Court of Federal Claims in No. 12

- CV

- 0856, Chief Judge Emily C. Hewitt

.

__________________________ ON MOTION

__________________________ P ER C URIAM
.

O R D E R Donald W. Andrews, Jr. moves for sanctions against the United States

. The United States opposes

. An drews also submit s a supplemental brief , which the court co nstrue s as his reply brief

. Upon consideration thereof, I T I S O RDERED T HAT : Case: 13-5113 Document: 17 Page: 1 Filed: 10/30/2013ANDREWS v. U S 2 (1) The motion for sanctions is denied. (2) Andrews’ “supplemental” brief is accepted for fil ling as his reply brief. (3) All other pending motions are denied. F OR T HE C OURT
/s/ Daniel E. O’Toole Daniel E. O’Toole Cl erk

s 26 Case: 13-5113 Document: 17 Page: 2 Filed: 10/30/2013
II-00279

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

george lewis <george_lewis33 @yahoo.com>

Thursday, December 2, 2010 2:52 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.

george lewis

1318 meadowlane

corpus christi, TX 78412
Joseph Michael RECTOR, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 16-9383.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
Sontay T. SMOTHERMAN, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 16-6290.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 5, 2016.

Petition for rehearing denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS OF THE REGISTRANT AT MAY 31, 2000 AND FEBRUARY 29,
2000 AND THE CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS AND COMPREHENSIVE INCOME OF
THE REGISTRANT FOR THE THREE MONTH PERIOD ENDED MAY 31, 2000 AND 1999.

AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH STATEMENTS IN THE FORM
10-Q FOR THE QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED MAY 31, 2000.
</LEGEND>


<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-28-2001
<PERIOD-START>                             MAR-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAY-31-2000
<CASH>                                       3,806,000
<SECURITIES>                                 3,237,000
<RECEIVABLES>                               15,747,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            30,587,000
<PP&E>                                       6,043,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              37,993,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       11,628,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        42,000
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                37,993,000
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            17,679,000
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               17,425,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                357,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                   143,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            214,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   214,000
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .06

<FN>
(A) Identify specific financial statements.
(B) Identify filing.
</FN>


</TABLE>
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 PW Eagle, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Jerry A. Dukes, Chief Executive Officer, of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §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 results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated: May 12, 2006



/s/ Jerry A. DukesJerry A. Dukes Chief Executive
Officer
II-Oll09

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

David Miller <dmill3 @sbcglobal.net>

Thursday, December 2, 2010 8:11 AM

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.

David Miller

7234 Lakewood Blvd.

Dallas, TX 75214
Raymond ALCORTA, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-7709.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 19, 2018.

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

Justice GORSUCH took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
II-00363

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

David Carr <dpcmadcty@hotmail.com>

Thursday, December 2, 2010 11:00 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.

David Carr

606 S. Dickinson St.

Madison, WI 53703
Philip Michael SEBOLT, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 16-7153.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 17, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7190

KENNETH DELANO BOBBITT, Petitioner - Appellant, versus DEAN WALKER, Respondent - Appellee.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at Statesville. Graham C. Mullen, Chief District Judge. (CA-01-36-5-1-MU) Submitted: September 6, 2001 Decided: October 15, 2001 Before WIDENER, WILKINS, and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kenneth Delano Bobbitt, Appellant Pro Se. Clarence Joe DelForge, III, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NORTH CAROLINA, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Kenneth Delano Bobbitt appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 2001). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Bobbitt v. Walker , No. CA-01-36-5- 1-MU (W.D.N.C. filed July 11, 2001; entered July 17, 2001). 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
Eric Donald ANDERSON, petitioner, v. Lorie DAVIS, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division.

No. 16-6740.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 9, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
# C_2011139EN.01001602.xml

| 7.5.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 139/16 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.5.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 139/16

---

Judgment of the General Court of 22 March 2011 — Access Info Europe v Council

(Case T-233/09) (1)

1

(Access to documents - Regulation (EC) No 1049/2001 - Document concerning an ongoing legislative procedure - Partial refusal of access - Action for annulment - Period allowed for bringing proceedings - Admissibility - Disclosure by a third party - Interest in bringing proceedings not lost - Identification of the Member State delegations which made proposals - Exception relating to the protection of the decision-making process)

2011/C 139/31

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Access Info Europe (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: O.W. Brouwer and J. Blockx, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: C. Fekete and M. Bauer, Agents)

Defendant:

Interveners in support of the defendant: Hellenic Republic (represented by E.-M. Mamouna and K. Boskovits, Agents) and by United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (represented by E. Jenkinson and S. Ossowski, Agents, and by L.J. Stratford, Barrister)

Interveners in support of the defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of the decision of the Council of 26 February 2009 refusing in part to grant the applicant access to a note from the General Secretariat of the Council to the Working Party on Information (Document No 16338/08) concerning the Proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and the Council regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the Council’s decision of 26 February 2009 refusing access to certain information, contained in a note of 26 November 2008, concerning a proposal for a regulation regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the Council’s decision of 26 February 2009 refusing access to certain information, contained in a note of 26 November 2008, concerning a proposal for a regulation regarding public access to European Parliament, Council and Commission documents;

| 2. | Orders the Council to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Access Info Europe; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Council to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Access Info Europe;

| 3. | Orders the Hellenic Republic and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the Hellenic Republic and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to bear their own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 205, 29.8.2009

1

---
Max FREIDZON, petitioner, v. OAO LUKOIL, et al.

No. 16-433.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 12, 2016.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.
# C_2010024EN.01008102.xml

| 30.1.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 24/81 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.1.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 24/81

---

Action brought on 16 November 2009 — Taillard v Parliament

(Case F-97/09)

2010/C 24/156

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Christine Taillard (Thionville, France) (represented by: N. Camboine and C. Lelievre, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Parliament

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

First, annulment of the decision of the European Parliament declaring inadmissible a medical certificate certifying the applicant’s incapacity to work and the resulting decision to deduct a day’s leave. Second, compensation for the loss suffered by the applicant.

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | declare the present action admissible; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare the present action admissible;

| — | annul the decision of the European Parliament of 15 January 2009 declaring inadmissible a medical certificate certifying an incapacity to work and the resulting decision to deduct a day’s leave and, in so far as it is necessary, the confirmatory decision of 14 August 2009; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of the European Parliament of 15 January 2009 declaring inadmissible a medical certificate certifying an incapacity to work and the resulting decision to deduct a day’s leave and, in so far as it is necessary, the confirmatory decision of 14 August 2009;

| — | declare the European Parliament responsible for the loss suffered by the applicant, accordingly award the applicant damages in the sum of EUR 12 000 or any other sum including a higher one to be determined by the Tribunal; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare the European Parliament responsible for the loss suffered by the applicant, accordingly award the applicant damages in the sum of EUR 12 000 or any other sum including a higher one to be determined by the Tribunal;

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

—

order the European Parliament to pay the costs.

---