alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
CFTC OIG Investigations Closed in Calendar Year 2020 

Date of 

Case allegation Open Open Open Open Open Date 

No. or referral Summary of allegation Status 3/31/18 9/30/18 9/30/19 3/31/20 9/30/20 closed 

17-I- Allegation of Time and 

1 12 7/11/2017 Attendance Fraud Closed YES YES YES NO NO 1/19/2020 

Joint investigation/assistance 

18-I- regarding alleged criminal activity 

2 05 2/14/2018 by contractor unrelated to CFTC Closed YES YES YES NO NO 2/21/2020 

18-I- Alleged WB retaliation against a 

3 08 5/23/2018 contractor. Closed NA YES YES NO NO 1/20/2020 

18-I- Alleged suspicious access to 

4 09 08/29/2018 CFTC market data by contractor. Closed NA YES YES NO NO 1/29/2020 

19-I- Allegations regarding missing 

5 01 3/14/2019 CFTC equipment. Closed NA NA YES NO NO 3/31/2020 

19-I- Allegation of potential 

6 04 4/8/2019 procurement violation. Closed NA NA YES NO NO 3/30/2020 

19-I- Allegation of underpayment from 

7 05 4/9/2019 a 2012 CFTC enforcement matter Closed NA NA YES NO NO 3/16/2020 

Allegation was that the CFTC's 

Whistleblower Office improperly 

19-I- appropriated whistleblower 

8 06 4/10/2019 awards between whistleblowers. Closed NA NA YES NO NO 2/25/2020 

Allegation that 2014 NF A 

19-I- election of board of directors was 

9 07 4/16/2019 noncompliant Closed NA NA YES NO NO 9/2/2019 

19-I- Allegation of potential hiring 

10 08 5/3/2019 misconduct. Closed NA NA YES NO NO 3/30/2020 

Allegation of potential travel and 

20-I- hiring and time/attendance 

11 01 5/19/2020 misconduct Closed NA NA NA NA YES 12/27/2020
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

mtniteb ~tate~ (!Court of ~eaI~

for !be jfeberaI (!Circuit

AMBASE CORPORATION

AND CARTERET BANCORP, INC.,

Plaintiffs-Cross Appellants,

AND

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION,

Plaintiff-Cross Appellant,

v.

UNITED STATES,

Defendant-Appellant.

2012-5047, -5048, -5049

Appeals from the United States Court of Federal

Claims in case no. 93-CV-531, Senior Judge Loren A.

Smith.

ON MOTION

ORDER

The parties move to dismiss these appeals due to settlement.

Upon consideration thereof,
AMBASE CORP v. US 2

IT Is ORDERED THAT:

(1) The motion is granted. The appeals are dismissed.

(2) Each side shall bear its own costs.

FOR THE COURT

NOV 092012

Date

/s/ Jan Horbaly

Jan Horbaly

Clerk

cc: Charles J. Cooper, Esq.

John M. Dorsey, III, Esq.

Jeanne E. Davidson, Esq.

s21

Issued As A Mandate: __NO_V_O_9_2_01_2__

u.s. couRf~Ifl~PeALS fOR

THE fEDERAL CIRCUIT

NOV U92012

JAN HORBALY

ClERK
Lindolfo THIBES, petitioner, v. CALIFORNIA.

No. 16M61.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 5, 2016.

Motion to direct the Clerk to file a petition for writ of certiorari out of time denied.
Joey Darrell FAUST and Ramon Marroquin, petitioners, v. TEXAS.

No. 16-203.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 9, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas denied.
Jose Miguel MADRIGALES-RODRIGUEZ, petitioner, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS, III, Attorney General.

No. 17-741.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 5, 2018.

Petition for rehearing denied.
(LOGO)

KPMG
12 Fountain Plaza, Suite 601 Buffalo, NY 14202


                         Independent Accountants' Report

The Board of Directors Marine Midland Bank:

We  have  examined   management's   assertion  about  Marine  Midland   Mortgage
Corporation's  compliance with the minimum servicing  standards set forth in the
Mortgage Bankers Association of America's Uniform Single Attestation Program for
Mortgage Bankers (USAP) as of and for the year ended December 3 l, 1998 included
in the accompanying  management assertion.  Management is responsible for Marine
Midland  Mortgage   Corporation's   compliance  with  those  minimum   servicing
standards. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management's assertion
about the Company's compliance based on our examination.

Our  examination  was  made in  accordance  with  standards  established  by the
American  Institute of Certified Public Accountants and,  accordingly,  included
examining, on a test basis, evidence about Marine Midland Mortgage Corporation's
compliance  with the  minimum  servicing  standards  and  performing  such other
procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances.  We believe that our
examination  provides a reasonable  basis for our opinion.  Our examination does
not  provide a legal  determination  on Marine  Midland  Mortgage  Corporation's
compliance with the minimum servicing standards.

In our opinion,  management's assertion that Marine Midland Mortgage Corporation
has complied in all material respects with the aforementioned  minimum servicing
standards as of and for the year ended  December 31, 1998 is fairly  stated,  in
all material respects.

KPMG LLP

Buffalo, New York
March 12, 1999
# C_2014315EN.01007101.xml

| 15.9.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 315/71 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.9.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 315/71

---

Order of the General Court of 22 May 2014 — BSA v OHIM — Loblaws (PRÉSIDENT)

(Case T-420/09) (1)

1

2014/C 315/116

Language of the case: French

The President of the Sixth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 312, 19.12.2009.

1

---
II-00885

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

David and Caryl Browne <david-caryl.browne@worldnet. att.net>

Thursday, December 2, 2010 10:20 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 and Caryl Browne

101 Lombard St

San Francisco, CA 94111
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIIBT 99.1


                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 Form 10-Q of Security Associates International, Inc.,
(the "COMPANY") for the period ended September 30, 2002, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "REPORT"), I, Raymond
A. Gross, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:

              1)    the Report fully complies with the requirements of Sections
                    13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934,
                    as amended; 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/ Raymond A. Gross
                                       --------------------
                                       Name:    Raymond A. Gross
                                       Title:   Chief Executive Officer
                                       Date:    November 14, 2002
U.S. COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION 

ENERGY AND ENVIRONMENTAL MARKETS ADVISORY COMMITTEE

MARCH 24, 2020

Public Access to WebEx (Listen Only Mode)

• Dial: 1-877-951-7311 (Audio dial-in)

• Enter password when prompted: 1090611#

• Connect to WebEx by clicking here: 

https://www.mymeetings.com/nc/join.php?i=PWXW1014044&p=1090611&t=c 

(Participants should run the Temporary Application to enter the meeting if 

prompted)

• Enter Conference /Meeting Number: PWXW1014044

• Enter Conference/ Meeting Passcode: 1090611

• Enter First Name: 

• Enter Last Name: 

• Enter Email: 

• Enter Company: 

• Check box you have read and agree to the Conferencing Privacy Policy. 

• Click on Proceed
# C_2012025EN.01001402.xml

| 28.1.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 25/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.1.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 25/14

---

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 10 November 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Amtsgericht Bruchsal — Germany) — Criminal proceedings against  QB (*1)

(Case C-405/10) (1)

(Protection of the environment - Regulations (EC) Nos 1013/2006 and 1418/2007 - Control of shipments of waste - Prohibition on the shipment of spent catalysts to Lebanon)

(2012/C 25/22)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Amtsgericht Bruchsal

Party in the main proceedings

QB (*1)

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Amtsgericht Bruchsal — Interpretation of Article 37 of Regulation (EC) No 1013/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 June 2006 on shipments of waste (OJ 2006 L 190, p. 1), read in conjunction with Commission Regulation (EC) No 1418/2007 of 29 November 2007 concerning the export for recovery of certain waste listed in Annex III or IIIA to Regulation (EC) No 1013/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council to certain countries to which the OECD Decision on the control of transboundary movements of wastes does not apply (OJ 2007 L 316, p. 6) — Prohibition on the shipment of waste which falls within waste category B 1120 (catalysts) to Lebanon

Operative part of the judgment

Articles 36(1)(f) and 37 of Regulation (EC) No 1013/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 14 June 2006 on shipments of waste, read in conjunction with Commission Regulation (EC) No 1418/2007 of 29 November 2007 concerning the export for recovery of certain waste listed in Annex III or IIIA to Regulation No 1013/2006 to certain countries to which the OECD Decision on the control of transboundary movements of wastes does not apply, as amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 740/2008 of 29 July 2008, must be interpreted as meaning that the export from the European Union to Lebanon of waste, intended for recovery, which falls within category B1120 in List B in Part 1 of Annex V to Regulation No 1013/2006 is prohibited.

---

(*1)  Information erased or replaced within the framework of protection of personal data and/or confidentiality.

(1)  OJ C 288, 23.10.2010.

---
Kimberly CREPEA, petitioner, v. COCHISE COUNTY, ARIZONA, et al.

No. 16-634.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 17, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY
ACT OF 2002



In connection with the annual report of Ravenwood
Bourne, Ltd. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ending October 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the “Report”), I, Fotis Georgiadis, Chief Executive Officer (Principal 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, as amended, 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.



|Date: January 27, 2012 | /s/ Fotis Georgiadis         
|---------------------- | -----------------------------
|                       | Fotis Georgiadis             
|                       | Chief Executive Officer      
|                       | (Principal Executive Officer)
In Re Carlton WEST, II, petitioner.

No. 17-7818.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 19, 2018.

Petition for writ of habeas corpus denied.
# C_2009129EN.01001002.xml

| 6.6.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 129/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.6.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 129/10

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Finanzgericht München (Germany), lodged on 3 April 2009 — Roeckl Sporthandschuhe GmbH & Co. KG v Hauptzollamt München

(Case C-123/09)

2009/C 129/17

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Finanzgericht München

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Claimant: Roeckl Sporthandschuhe GmbH & Co. KG

Claimant:

Defendant: Hauptzollamt München

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

Must subheading 3926 20 00 of the Combined Nomenclature, in the version set out in Commission Regulation (EC) No 1789/2003 of 11 September 2003 amending Annex I to Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff, (1) be interpreted as meaning that it covers also textile articles that have been roughened on one side and covered with a layer of plastic, but which do not have a function beyond that of mere reinforcement, where the roughening serves only to improve the adhesion of the layer of plastic and is no longer discernible to the user once the manufacture of the article has been completed (cf. also Harmonised System explanatory note 56.6 on Chapter 39 of the Combined Nomenclature)?

1

---

(1)  OJ 2003 L 281, p. 1; OJ 1987 L 256, p. 1.

1

---
Michael Martin CLARK, petitioner, v. COLORADO.

No. 17-7350.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 20, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Colorado denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               13,414,651
<ALLOWANCES>                                   299,000
<INVENTORY>                                 12,635,971
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            26,350,671
<PP&E>                                      15,115,270
<DEPRECIATION>                               3,375,068
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              44,931,851
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       25,570,908
<BONDS>                                     10,778,092
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           37,500
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        65,082
<OTHER-SE>                                   8,311,919
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                44,931,851
<SALES>                                     17,212,229
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            17,212,229
<CGS>                                       13,363,313
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               13,363,313
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             2,648,052
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                (3,991)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             686,985
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                527,268
<INCOME-TAX>                                    23,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            504,268
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   504,268
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .07
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .07
        


</TABLE>
Celestine G. THOMPSON, petitioner, v. Charles TEEBAGY, et al.

No. 17-7434.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 19, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the accompanying annual report on Form 10-KSB of Roanoke
Technology Corp. for the period ended October 31, 2003, David L. Smith, Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Roanoke Technology Corp. hereby
certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:

1. Such amended Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the period ended October 31,
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 Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the period
ended October 31, 2003, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of Roanoke Technology Corp..

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Roanoke Technology Corp. and will be retained by it and furnished to
the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.


ROANOKE TECHNOLOGY CORP.

Dated:  February 13, 2004

/s/ David L. Smith
----------------------------------------
David L. Smith Chief Executive Officer,
Chief Financial Officer
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We consent to the incorporationby reference in the Registration Statements (Form S-3, number 333-154157, and Form S-8, numbers 333-118320, 333-43080, 333-76849, 333-73666 and 333-171260) of our report dated March 30, 2011, with respect to the consolidated financialstatements of GSI Group Inc., included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2010. 

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP 

Boston, Massachusetts 

March 30, 2011
H. Res. 190 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

February 26, 2009. 

Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker may, pursuant to clause 2(b) of rule 

XVIII, declare the House resolved into the Committee of the 

Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of 

the bill (H.R. 1106) to prevent mortgage foreclosures and enhance mortgage credit availability. The first reading of the 

bill shall be dispensed with. All points of order against consideration of the bill are waived except those arising under 

clause 9 of rule XXI. General debate shall be confined to the 

bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided among and 

controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the 

Committee on Financial Services and the chair and ranking 

minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary. After 

general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment 

under the five-minute rule. The bill shall be considered as 

read. All points of order against provisions in the bill are 

waived. Notwithstanding clause 11 of rule XVIII, no amendment to the bill shall be in order except those printed in the 
2 

•HRES 190 EH 

report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution. Each such amendment may be offered only in the order 

printed in the report, may be offered only by a Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read, shall be debatable for the time specified in the report equally divided 

and controlled by the proponent and an opponent, shall not 

be subject to amendment, and shall not be subject to a demand for division of the question in the House or in the 

Committee of the Whole. All points of order against such 

amendments are waived except those arising under clause 9 

or 10 of rule XXI. At the conclusion of consideration of the 

bill for amendment the Committee shall rise and report the 

bill to the House with such amendments as may have been 

adopted. The previous question shall be considered as ordered 

on the bill and amendments thereto to final passage without 

intervening motion except one motion to recommit with or 

without instructions. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
# C_2013046EN.01000201.xml

| 16.2.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 46/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.2.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 46/2

---

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 19 December 2012 — Brookfield New Zealand Ltd, Elaris SNC v Community Plant Variety Office (CPVO), Schniga GmbH

(Case C-534/10 P) (1)

1

(Appeal - Community plant variety rights - Regulation (EC) No 2100/94 - Article 73(2) - Decision of the Board of Appeal of the CPVO refusing an application for a Community plant variety right - Discretion - Review by the General Court - Article 55(4) read in conjunction with Article 61(1)(b) - Right of the CPVO to make a new request for the submission of plant material)

2013/C 46/02

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Appellants: Brookfield New Zealand Ltd, Elaris SNC (represented by: M. Eller, avvocato)

Appellants:

Other parties to the proceedings: Community Plant Variety Office (CPVO) (represented by: M. Ekvad and M. Lightbourne, acting as Agents), Schniga GmbH, (represented by: G. Würtenberger, Rechtsanwalt)

Other parties to the proceedings:

Re:

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 13 September 2010 in Case T-135/08 Schniga v CPVO — Elaris and Brookfield New Zealand, by which that Court annulled the decision of the Board of Appeal of the Community Plant Variety Office (CPVO) of 21 November 2007 annulling the decision granting Schniga GmbH a Community plant variety right for the ‘Gala Schnitzer’ apple variety and the decisions dismissing the objections lodged by SNC Elaris and by Brookfield New Zealand

Schniga

CPVO — Elaris and Brookfield New Zealand

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the appeal; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the appeal;

| 2. | Orders Brookfield New Zealand Ltd and Elaris SNC to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Brookfield New Zealand Ltd and Elaris SNC to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 38, 5.2.2011.

1

---