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




I,
      Michael J. Loiacono, the Chief Financial Officer and Chief Accounting Officer
      of
      Global Axcess Corp (the "Company"), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to the best of my
      knowledge:




(1)
      the
      Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the third quarter ended
      September 30, 2008 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of
      Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C.
      78m
      or 78o(d)); 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:
      November 4, 2008




*/s/
                Michael J. Loiacono*Name:
                Michael J. LoiaconoTitle:
                Chief Financial Officer and Chief Accounting
                Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-7056

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

GLENN D. HERRON,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. Frank W. Bullock, Jr.,

Chief District Judge. (CR-93-44, CA-97-629-2)

Submitted: November 19, 1998 Decided: December 2, 1998

Before HAMILTON and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Aaron Peter Buda, Cincinnati, Ohio, for Appellant. Lisa Blue Boggs,

Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Glenn D. Herron seeks to appeal the district court’s order

denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 &

Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s

opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and

find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Herron’s motion for

a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Herron, Nos. CR-93-

44; CA-97-629-2 (M.D.N.C. May 18, 1998). 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
Katherine THOMAS, Individually and as the Administrator of the Estate of Christopher Jerome Thomas, petitioner, v. Darren MOODY, et al.

No. 16-382.

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.
Richard Byron KORSCHGEN, petitioner, v. Jim McKINNEY, Warden.

No. 15-9514.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 9, 2017.

Petition for rehearing denied.
# Quarterly Pool Filing
James KERRIGAN, petitioner, v. OTSUKA AMERICA PHARMACEUTICAL, INC., et al.

No. 17-927.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 20, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied
Phillip SPECTOR, petitioner, v. Ralph M. DIAZ, Warden.

No. 16-716.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 9, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
Duane PHILLIPS, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-5981.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 20, 2018.

Petition for rehearing denied.
Aaron HERNANDEZ, petitioner, v. Lori GIDLEY, Warden.

No. 16-6718.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 9, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
II-00821

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

gerald gouge <ggouge2001 @yahoo.com>

Thursday, December 2, 2010 11:05 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.

gerald gouge

110 segrest circle

athens, GA 30605
II 

Calendar No. 485 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3675 

[Report No. 116–237] 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 15, 2019 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

JUNE 25, 2020 

Reported by Mr. JOHNSON, without amendment 

AN ACT 

To require a review of Department of Homeland Security 

trusted traveler programs, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Trusted Traveler Re5 consideration and Restoration Act of 2019’’. 

6 SEC. 2. COMPTROLLER GENERAL REVIEW. 

7 Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment 

8 of this Act, the Comptroller General of the United States 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3675 RS

1 shall conduct a review of Department of Homeland Secu2 rity trusted traveler programs. Such review shall examine 

3 the following: 

4 (1) The extent to which the Department of 

5 Homeland Security tracks data and monitors trends 

6 related to trusted traveler programs, including root 

7 causes for identity-matching errors resulting in an 

8 individual’s enrollment in a trusted traveler program 

9 being reinstated. 

10 (2) Whether the Department coordinates with 

11 the heads of other relevant Federal, State, local, 

12 Tribal, or territorial entities regarding redress proce13 dures for disqualifying offenses not covered by the 

14 Department’s own redress processes but which of15 fenses impact an individual’s enrollment in a trusted 

16 traveler program. 

17 (3) How the Department may improve individ18 uals’ access to reconsideration procedures regarding 

19 a disqualifying offense for enrollment in a trusted 

20 traveler program that requires the involvement of 

21 any other Federal, State, local, Tribal, or territorial 

22 entity. 

23 (4) The extent to which travelers are informed 

24 about reconsideration procedures regarding enroll25 ment in a trusted traveler program. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 3675 RS

1 SEC. 3. ENROLLMENT REDRESS. 

2 Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Sec3 retary of Homeland Security shall, with respect to an indi4 vidual whose enrollment in a trusted traveler program was 

5 revoked in error extend by an amount of time equal to 

6 the period of revocation the period of active enrollment 

7 in such a program upon re-enrollment in such a program 

8 by such an individual. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
Calendar No. 485 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3675 

[Report No. 116–237] 

AN ACT 

To require a review of Department of Homeland 

purposes. Security trusted traveler programs, and for other 

JUNE 25, 2020 

Reported without amendment 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
# C_2010024EN.01002601.xml

| 30.1.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 24/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.1.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 24/26

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Bundes verwaltungsgericht (Germany) lodged on 9 November 2009 — Attila Belkiran v Lord Mayor of Krefeld — Other party to the proceedings: The representative for federal interests at the Bundesverwaltungsgericht

(Case C-436/09)

2010/C 24/47

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Bundesverwaltungsgericht

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Attila Belkiran

Applicant:

Defendant: Lord Mayor of Krefeld

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings: The representative for federal interests at the Bundesverwaltungsgericht

Other party to the proceedings:

Question referred

Question referred

Is the protection against expulsion provided for in Article 14(1) of Decision No 1/80 (of the EEC-Turkey Association Council) and enjoyed by a Turkish national, whose legal status derives from Article 7 of Decision No 1/80 and who has resided for the previous ten years in the Member State in respect of which this legal status applies, to be determined in accordance with Article 28(3)(a) of Directive 2004/38/EC (1), with the result that expulsion is permitted only on imperative grounds of public security, as defined by Member States?

1

---

(1)  Directive 2004/38/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 on the right of citizens of the Union and their family members to move and reside freely within the territory of the Member States amending Regulation (EEC) No 1612/68 and repealing Directives 64/221/EEC, 68/360/EEC, 72/194/EEC, 73/148/EEC, 75/34/EEC, 75/35/EEC, 90/364/EEC, 90/365/EEC and 93/96/EEC (OJ 2004 L 158, p. 77)

1

---
**Judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 24 March 2011 – XXXLutz Marken v OHIM – Natura Selection (Linea Natura Natur
hat immer Stil)**

**(Case T-54/09)**

Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for Community figurative mark Linea Natura Natur hat immer Stil – Earlier Community figurative mark natura selection – Relative ground for refusal – Likelihood of confusion – Similarity of signs – Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009)

1.                     *Community trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition
by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services – Similarity
of the marks concerned – Criteria for assessment – Complex mark (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 38,
41, 43-44)*

2.                     *Community trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition
by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood
of confusion with the earlier mark – Similarity of the marks concerned – Whether conceptual differences may neutralise visual
or aural similarities – Conditions (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see para. 61)*

3.                     *Community trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition
by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services – Likelihood
of confusion with the earlier mark (Council Regulation No 40/94, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see paras 71-74)*

**Re:**

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | ACTION brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 28 November 2008 (Case R 1787/2007-2) relating to opposition proceedings between Natura Selection, SL and XXXLutz Marken GmbH. |

**Information relating to the case**

| | |
| --- | --- |
| Applicant for the Community trade mark: | XXXLutz Marken GmbH |
| Community trade mark sought: | Figurative mark Linea Natura Natur hat immer Stil for goods in Classes 8, 14, 16, 20, 21, 24, 25 and 27 – Registration No 4626693 |
| Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: | Natura Selection, SL |
| Mark or sign cited in opposition: | Figurative mark natura selection for goods and services in Classes 3, 14, 16, 20, 25, 35, 38, 39 and 42, and further Community trade marks and Spanish marks containing the word ‘natura’, for goods and services in Classes 3, 14, 16, 20, 21, 24, 25, 27, 28, 35, 39 and 42 |
| Decision of the Opposition Division: | Opposition upheld |
| Decision of the Board of Appeal: | Appeal dismissed |

**Operative part**

The Court:

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 1. | | Dismisses the action; |

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | | 2.Orders XXXLutz Marken GmbH to pay the costs. |
H. Res. 1751 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

December 7, 2010. 

Whereas, on December 2, 2010, a forest fire began in the 

Carmel region of Israel; 

Whereas the fire quickly spread and became the worst fire in 

Israel’s history; 

Whereas over 40 people have been killed by the blaze; 

Whereas more than 17,000 people have been displaced by the 

fire; 

Whereas more than 4,000,000 trees have already burned in 

the fire; 

Whereas Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared December 2, 2010, a national day of mourning in 

Israel; 

Whereas Israel has exhausted its supplies and equipment necessary to sustain the firefighting effort; 

Whereas United States Ambassador to Israel James 

Cunningham rapidly issued a disaster declaration, 

prompting significant coordination within the United 

States Government to identify and provide Israel with 

firefighting assistance; 
2 

•HRES 1751 EH 

Whereas President Barack Obama and Secretary of State 

Hillary Rodham Clinton have pledged significant United 

States assistance to address this disaster; 

Whereas the United States has already provided Israel with 

technical assistance, over 110 metric tons of fire suppressant, 3,800 gallons of fire retardant concentrate, and 

other needed assistance to fight this fire; 

Whereas State and local governments in the United States 

have mobilized to send firefighting supplies to Israel; and 

Whereas Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Canada, 

Croatia, Cyprus, Egypt, France, Germany, Greece, Italy, 

Jordan, the Netherlands, Norway, Romania, Russia, 

Spain, Switzerland, Turkey, the United Kingdom, and 

the Ukraine are among the other nations that have provided assistance or offered assistance to Israel to fight 

this fire: Now, therefore, be it 

Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

(1) mourns the loss of life and extends condolences 

to the families affected by the fire in northern Israel 

that began on December 2, 2010; 

(2) supports the Obama Administration’s offer of, 

and rapid efforts to provide, United States firefighting 

assistance to Israel in response to this disaster; 

(3) recognizes the efforts of foreign governments 

that have provided assistance or offered assistance to 

Israel; 
3 

•HRES 1751 EH 

(4) commends State and local governments in the 

United States that have offered and provided assistance 

to Israel; and 

(5) reaffirms United States support for the people 

and State of Israel in their time of need. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
# C_2010134EN.01003302.xml

| 22.5.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 134/33 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.5.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 134/33

---

Judgment of the General Court of 24 March 2010 — Eliza v OHIM — Went Computing Consultancy Group (eliza)

(Case T-130/09) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark incorporating the word eliza - Earlier Community word mark ELISE - Relative grounds for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Refusal of registration - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

2010/C 134/56

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Eliza Corporation (Beverly, United States) (represented by: R. Köbbing, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM) (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral, Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the Court: Went Computing Consultancy Group BV (Utrecht, Netherlands) (represented by: A. Meijboom, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the Court:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 28 July 2008 (Case R 1244/2008-4) relating to opposition proceedings between Went Computing Consultancy Group BV and Eliza Corp.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Eliza Corporation to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) and by Went Computing Consultancy Group BV. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Eliza Corporation to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) and by Went Computing Consultancy Group BV.

---

(1)  OJ C 153, 4.7.2009.

1

---
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3638 

To revise postaward explanations for unsuccessful offerors for certain 

contracts in the Federal Acquisition Regulation, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 9, 2019 

Ms. HOULAHAN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Oversight and Reform 

A BILL 

To revise postaward explanations for unsuccessful offerors 

for certain contracts in the Federal Acquisition Regulation, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Small Business Acqui5 sition Transparency Act of 2019’’. 

6 SEC. 2. POSTAWARD EXPLANATIONS FOR UNSUCCESSFUL 

7 OFFERORS FOR CERTAIN CONTRACTS. 

8 Not later than 180 days after the date of the enact9 ment of this Act, the Federal Acquisition Regulation shall 

10 be revised to require that with respect to an offer for a 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3638 IH

1 task order or delivery order in an amount greater than 

2 the simplified acquisition threshold (as defined in section 

3 134 of title 41, United States Code) and less than or equal 

4 to $5,500,000 issued under an indefinite delivery-indefi5 nite quantity contract, the contracting officer for such 

6 contract shall, upon written request from an unsuccessful 

7 offeror, provide a brief explanation as to why such offeror 

8 was unsuccessful that includes a summary of the rationale 

9 for the award and an evaluation of the significant weak 

10 or deficient factors in the offeror’s offer. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBFK8HB2PROD with BILLS
II-00925

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Scott Baker <ssbaker305@yahoo.com>

Thursday, December 2, 2010 9:59 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.

Scott Baker

305 east 40 street

New York City, NY 10016
II-00496

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Adina Parsley <dickandpat3@gmail.com>

Thursday, December 2, 2010 4:37 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.

Adina Parsley

709 W Wiser Lake Rd

Ferndale, WA 98248