alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
FR Doc E9-2189[Federal Register: January 30, 2009 (Volume 74, Number 19)]
[Notices]               
[Page 5645]
From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr30ja09-33]                         


[[Page 5645]]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION

 
Sunshine Act Meetings

Agency Holding the Meeting: Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

Time and Date: 11 a.m., Friday, February 20, 2009.

Place: 1155 21st St., NW., Washington, DC, 9th Floor Commission 
Conference Room.

Status: Closed.

Matters to be Considered: Surveillance matters.

Contact Person for More Information: Sauntia S. Warfield, 202-418-5084.

Sauntia S. Warfield,
Staff Assistant.
 [FR Doc. E9-2189 Filed 1-28-09; 4:15 pm]

BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
In Re Michael J. ROTONDO, petitioner.

No. 17-7393.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 19, 2018.

Petition for writ of mandamus denied.
##### 



Exhibit 32.1
 
  (1)
    
    The Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December 29,
2007 (the Form 10-K) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the Act); and(2)
    
    The information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial conditions and results of operations of the Company as of the
dates and for the periods referred to in the Form 10-K.
 /s/ Eric J. FossEric J. FossPresident andChief Executive OfficerFebruary 27, 2008
Kimothy RANDALL, petitioner, v. Nicholas LAMB, Warden.

No. 16-9500.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.
**EXHIBT      21**

**SUBSIDIARIES**

|   | 1. | Innocom                Technology Holdings Limited |
|--------|----|----------------------------------------------------|

|   |   |   |
|--------|--------|--------|
|   | 2. | Chinarise                Capital (International) Ltd. |
|--------|----|-------------------------------------------------------|
|   |   |   |
|--------|--------|--------|

|   | 3. | Sky                Talent Development Limited |
|--------|----|-----------------------------------------------|

|   |   |   |
|--------|--------|--------|
|   | 4. | Innocom                Mobile Technology Limited |
|--------|----|--------------------------------------------------|
|   |   |   |
|--------|--------|--------|

|   | 5. | Pender                Holdings Limited |
|--------|----|----------------------------------------|

|   |   |   |
|--------|--------|--------|
|   | 6. | Favor                Will International Limited |
|--------|----|-------------------------------------------------|

----
Momolu SIRLEAF, et al., petitioners, v. David ROBINSON, et al.

No. 16-9333.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari before judgment to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
# C_2013252EN.01000502.xml

| 31.8.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 252/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.8.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 252/5

---

Judgment of the Court (Second Chamber) of 11 July 2013 — European Commission v Kingdom of the Netherlands

(Case C-576/10) (1)

1

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Directive 2004/18/EC - Scope ratione temporis - Public works concession - Sale of land by a public body - Construction project established by that body for the redevelopment of public spaces)

2013/C 252/07

Language of the case: Dutch

Parties

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: M. van Beek, A. Tokár and C. Zadra, Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Kingdom of the Netherlands (represented by: C. Wissels and J. Langer, Agents)

Defendant:

Intervener in support of the defendant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: T. Henze, J. Möller, and A. Wiedmann, Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant:

Re:

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Breach of Article 2 and Title III of Directive 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 31 March 2004 on the coordination of procedures for the award of public works contracts, public supply contracts and public service contracts (OJ 2004 L 134, p. 114) — Public works concession — Rules — Municipality of Eindhoven

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders the European Commission to pay the costs; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the European Commission to pay the costs;

| 3. | Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 55, 19.2.2011.

1

---
Robert F. BATSCH, et al., petitioners, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE.

No. 17-1053.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 5, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
Exhibit 99.2


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



In connection with the Annual Report of AlphaTrade.com (the "Company") on Form
10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Brooke Styba,
Principal Accounting Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.
1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:


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

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





         /s/  Brooke Styba
         -------------------------------
         Principal Accounting Officer

         Date:  March 26, 2003


         The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18
         U.S.C. ss.1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a
         separate disclosure document.



















                                       1
Exhibit 32.2
------------
                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Annual Report of AlphaTrade.com (the "Company") on Form
10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Katharine Johnston,
Principal Accounting Officer of the Company, certify, 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 result of
              operations of the Company.



         /s/  Katharine Johnston
         -------------------------------
         Principal Accounting Officer

         Date:  March 31, 2006



         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 has been provided to the Company and will be
         retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
         Commission or its staff upon request. The foregoing certifications are
         accompanying the Company's Form 10-QSB solely pursuant to section 906
         of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section
         1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code) and is not being
         filed as part of the Form 10-QSB or as a separate disclosure document.












                                Exhibit 32.2 - 1
John MUNN, In His Official Capacity as Director of the Nebraska Department of Banking and Finance, et al., petitioners, v. Robert R. BENNIE, Jr.

No. 16-623.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 17, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
## In T he Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

No. 07 - 23 - 00070 - CV MUNSON SEED COMPANY, LLC , A PPELLANT V. LEGEND SEEDS, INC. , APPELLEE On Appeal from the 72nd District Court Lubbock County, Texas Trial Court No . DC - 2022 - CV - 0903 , Honorable Ann - Marie Carruth , Presiding 

### April 21 , 2023 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before QUINN, C.J., and DOSS and YARBROUGH, JJ. Appellant, Munson Seed Company, LLC, appeal s from the trial court’s Default Judgment . Appellant’s brief was originally due March 27, 2023 , but was not filed. By letter of April 3, 2023 , we notified Appellant that the appeal was subject to dismissal for want of prosecution, without further notice, if a brief was not received by April 13. To date, Appellant ha s n either filed a brief nor had any further communication with this Court . Accordingly, we dismiss th is appeal for want of prosecution. See T EX . R. A PP . P . 38.8(a)(1), 42.3(b). Per Curiam
# C_2010148EN.01002203.xml

| 5.6.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 148/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.6.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 148/22

---

Order of the President of the Third Chamber of the Court of 5 March 2010 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Court of Appeal — United Kingdom) — The Motor Insurers’ Bureau v Helphire (UK) Limited, Angel Assistance Limited

(Case C-26/09) (1)

1

2010/C 148/36

Language of the case: English.

Language of the case: English.

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

---

(1)  OJ C 282, 21.11.2009

1

---
II-00328

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Suzanne Nicks <sjn972@yahoo.com>

Friday, December 3, 2010 1:51 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.

Suzanne Nicks

8733 N. Endicott Ave

Portland, OR 97217
# C_2009220EN.01003402.xml

| 12.9.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 220/34 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.9.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 220/34

---

Action brought on 7 July 2009 — Commission v Arci Nuova Associazione Comitato di Cagliari and Gessa

(Case T-259/09)

2009/C 220/73

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by M. Moretto, lawyer, and A.M. Rouchaud-Joët and N. Bambara, Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Arci Nuova Associazione Comitato di Cagliari (Cagliari, Italy), Alberto Gessa (Cagliari, Italy)

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | An order that Arci Nuova Associazione Comitato di Cagliari and Alberto Gessa should, in their personal capacities and jointly and severally, repay the principal sum of EUR 15 675,00 owing, together with default interest at the rate of 7,32 %, running from 20 May 2007 until full and final payment of the sum owed; |
| --- | --- |

—

An order that Arci Nuova Associazione Comitato di Cagliari and Alberto Gessa should, in their personal capacities and jointly and severally, repay the principal sum of EUR 15 675,00 owing, together with default interest at the rate of 7,32 %, running from 20 May 2007 until full and final payment of the sum owed;

| — | an order that Arci Nuova Associazione Comitato di Cagliari and Alberto Gessa should, in their personal capacities and jointly and severally, pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

an order that Arci Nuova Associazione Comitato di Cagliari and Alberto Gessa should, in their personal capacities and jointly and severally, pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

By this action the applicant seeks an order that the abovementioned association and, jointly, its chairman, should pay a sum equivalent to the advance paid by the applicant for performance of the action ‘ONG-2003-204-Cagliari-ARCI-l’Europa dei Migranti’. That action consists of a series of IT and documentation activities in the languages of the various countries of provenance, relating to the European institutions, the decision-making process, the stages in building and enlarging Europe, for the purpose of making the integration of migrants easier.

The agreement imposed an obligation to send, within a certain period, the final report regarding the performance of the action, the final financial accounts of the eligible costs actually incurred, and the full statement of the income and expenditure relating to the action.

That obligation not having been fulfilled, the Commission has decided to bring this action.

---
Todd McDUFFIE, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-7670.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 5, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                           1,639
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   14,198
<ALLOWANCES>                                       800
<INVENTORY>                                     18,194
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                34,106
<PP&E>                                          17,293
<DEPRECIATION>                                  11,839
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  45,085
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           15,126
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        51,019
<OTHER-SE>                                    (25,053)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    45,085
<SALES>                                         26,724
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                26,724
<CGS>                                           14,642
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   14,642
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                13,751
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               (316)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,985)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       133
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (2,207)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (2,207)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.18)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.18)
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>   1
                                   EXHIBIT 11

                COMMUNITY FINANCIAL GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
             STATEMENT REGARDING: COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                              Three Months Ended        Six Months Ended
                                                    June 30,                June 30,
                                             ---------------------   ----------------------
                                               2000        1999        2000         1999
                                             ---------   ---------   ---------   ----------
<S>                                          <C>         <C>         <C>         <C>
Basic Income Per Common Share (1)

Net income (in thousands)                    $     851   $     810   $   1,683   $    1,615
                                             =========   =========   =========   ==========
Net income per share                         $     .23   $     .20   $     .45   $      .39
                                             =========   =========   =========   ==========
Weighted average common shares outstanding   3,632,421   4,126,769   3,753,737    4,172,282
                                             =========   =========   =========   ==========
Diluted Income Per Common Share (2)

Net income (in thousands)                    $     851         810   $   1,683   $    1,615
                                             =========   =========   =========   ==========
Net income per share                         $     .23   $     .19   $     .44   $      .38
                                             =========   =========   =========   ==========
Weighted average common shares outstanding   3,649,111   4,178,208   3,784,693    4,214,723
                                             =========   =========   =========   ==========
</TABLE>

(1)      Basic net income per share has been computed using the weighted average
         number of common shares outstanding during each period presented.

(2)      Diluted net income per share has been computed using the weighted
         average number of common shares outstanding and the dilutive effect of
         stock options outstanding during the periods presented.
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 124 (Wednesday, June 27, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 34310]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-16180]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Office of the Secretary


Aviation Proceedings, Agreements Filed During Week Ending June 
15, 2001

    The following Agreements were filed with the Department of 
Transportation under provisions of 49 U.S.C. 412 and 414. Answers may 
be filed within 21 days after the filing of the applications.
    Docket Number: OST-2001-9941.
    Date Filed: June 14, 2001.
    Parties: Members of the International Air Transport Association.
    Subject: PTC31 South 0111 dated 15 June 2001 r1-r5; PTC31 South 
0110 dated 8 June 2001 (Report); PTC31 South Fares 0027 dated 15 June 
2001 (Tables); Intended effective date: October 1, 2001.

Andrea M. Jenkins,
Federal Register Liaison.
[FR Doc. 01-16180 Filed 6-26-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-62-P
II-00786

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Cara Rosson <carayogamama@gmail.com>

Thursday, December 2, 2010 11:23 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.

Cara Rosson

901 E Mossville Rd

Peoria, IL 61615
Vanessa CAMERON, petitioner, v. TEXAS.

No. 15-1452.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 3, 2016.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas denied.
II-00823

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Stephen Church <churchsh@gmail.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.

Stephen Church

PO Box 96, 3 Prince Ave

Eastport, ME 4631