alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
II-00073

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Mark Lundholm <mtlundholm@yahoo.com>

Monday, December 6, 2010 6:26 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.

Mark Ltmdholm

2014 N. Old Hicks Road

Palatine, IL 60074
Jose Eduardo Farach FARACH, petitioner, v. Elizabeth JARUFE.

No. 16-1448.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Texas, Fourteenth District denied.
# C_2010301EN.01001901.xml

| 6.11.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 301/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.11.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 301/19

---

Order of the President of the Court of 3 September 2010 — European Commission v Italian Republic

(Case C-366/09) (1)

1

()

2010/C 301/28

Language of the case: Italian

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

---

(1)  OJ C 256, 24.10.2009.

1

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                           2,711
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    5,041
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (199)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 8,101
<PP&E>                                           4,128
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (2,579)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  11,286
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            4,081
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            94
<OTHER-SE>                                       7,111
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    11,286
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                11,429
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      840
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                11,443
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   109
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 122
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (841)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       214
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,055)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,055)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.11)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.11)


</TABLE>
# C_2010148EN.01002301.xml

| 5.6.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 148/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.6.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 148/23

---

Order of the President of the Sixth Chamber of the Court of 10 March 2010 — European Commission v Republic of Poland

(Case C-172/09) (1)

1

2010/C 148/37

Language of the case: Polish

Language of the case: Polish

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

---

(1)  OJ C 167, 18.07.2009.

1

---
----

DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT

of 21 April 2004

concerning discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the 2002 financial year — Section VI — European Economic and Social Committee

(2004/726/EC)

THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,

having regard to the revenue and expenditure account and balance sheet for the 2002 financial year (I5-0034/2003 — C5-0088/2004),

having regard to the annual report of the European Court of Auditors for the 2002 financial year, together with the replies of the institutions (C5-0583/2003) (1),

having regard to the statement of assurance by the European Court of Auditors, pursuant to Article 248 of the EC Treaty, as to the reliability of the accounts and the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions (C5-0583/2003),

having regard to the Council's recommendation of 9 March 2004 (C5-0145/2004),

having regard to Article 272(10) and Article 275 of the EC Treaty,

having regard to Article 22(2) and (3) of the Financial Regulation of 21 December 1977 (2) and Article 50 of the Financial Regulation of 25 June 2002 (3),

having regard to Rule 93a of and Annex V to its Rules of Procedure,

having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A5-0228/2004),

The Secretary-General

Julian PRIESTLEY

The President

Pat COX

----

(1)OJ C 286, 28.11.2003, p. 1.

(2)OJ L 356, 31.12.1977, p. 1.

(3)OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.

----

RESOLUTION

of the European Parliament containing the comments accompanying the decision concerning discharge in respect of the implementation of the general budget of the European Union for the 2002 financial year — Section VI — European Economic and Social Committee

THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT,

having regard to the revenue and expenditure account and balance sheet for the 2002 financial year (I5-0034/2003 — C5-0088/2004),

having regard to the annual report of the European Court of Auditors for the 2002 financial year, together with the replies of the institutions (C5-0583/2003) (1),

having regard to the statement of assurance by the European Court of Auditors, pursuant to Article 248 of the EC Treaty, as to the reliability of the accounts and the legality and regularity of the underlying transactions (C5-0583/2003),

having regard to the Council's recommendation of 9 March 2004 (C5-0145/2004),

having regard to Article 272(10) and Article 275 of the EC Treaty,

having regard to Article 22(2) and (3) of the Financial Regulation of 21 December 1977 (2) and Article 50 of the Financial Regulation of 25 June 2002 (3),

having regard to Rule 93 a of and Annex V to its Rules of Procedure,

having regard to the report of the Committee on Budgetary Control (A5-0228/2004),

----

(1)OJ C 286, 28.11.2003, p. 1.

(2)OJ L 356, 31.12.1977, p. 1.

(3)OJ L 248, 16.9.2002, p. 1.

(4)  The EESC Secretariat's activities in the 1998-2002 period. Report presented to the Bureau on 17 September 2002.

(5)  Note to the Committee on Budgetary Control, Belliard building progress report, 26 June 2003.

(6)  Reply to questionnaire, question 4, general section.

(7)  Resolution of 8 April 2003, paragraph 8 (OJ L 148, 16.6.2003, p. 55).

----
Exhibit 32.1   Certification of CEO
      and CFOPursuant to 18 U.S.C.
      Section 1350,As Adopted Pursuant
      toSection 906 of the
      Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
   In connection with the
Annual Report on Form 10-K ofGolden Spirit Enterprises, Ltd.for the
fiscal year ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Christopher Scheive, as the
equivalent of the chief executive officer of the Company,  hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of his
knowledge:  (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/Christopher ScheiveName: Christopher ScheiveDate: April 12,
2010  This
certification is furnished with this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Partnership for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-20196

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ISRAEL LARA AVILA, also known as Jorge Camacho Guiterrez, also known 

as Misael Lara-Avila, also known as Ismael Daniel Medina, also known as 

Juan Daniel Lara Avila,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:15-CR-24-2

Before JOLLY, OWEN, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The attorney appointed to represent Israel Lara Avila has moved for 

leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 

386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011).

Avila has filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant 

portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Avila’s response. We agree

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

February 27, 2018

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 17-20196 Document: 00514364860 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/27/2018
No. 17-20196

2

with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for 

appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is 

GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the 

APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

 Case: 17-20196 Document: 00514364860 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/27/2018
# C_2011139EN.01000702.xml

| 7.5.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 139/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.5.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 139/7

---

Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 10 March 2011 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Oberster Gerichtshof — Austria) — Tanja Borger v Tiroler Gebietskrankenkasse

(Case C-516/09) (1)

1

(Social security for workers - Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 - Scope ratione personae - Interpretation of the term ‘employed person’ - Benefits for a dependent child - Extension of unpaid leave)

2011/C 139/11

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Referring court

Oberster Gerichtshof

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Claimant: Tanja Borger

Claimant:

Defendant: Tiroler Gebietskrankenkasse

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Oberster Gerichtshof — Interpretation of Article 1(a) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of 14 June 1971 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons and their families moving within the Community (OJ, English Special Edition 1971(II), p. 416) — Childcare allowance — Scope ratione personae — Interpretation of the term ‘employed person’ — Person residing in Switzerland and agreeing with her employer, established in a Member State, a suspension of their employment relationship by reason of the birth of her child (‘Karenz’) for a period exceeding the two-year period provided for by the law of that Member State

ratione personae

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The status of an ‘employed person’, within the meaning of Article 1(a) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 1408/71 of 14 June 1971 on the application of social security schemes to employed persons, to self-employed persons and to members of their families moving within the Community, in the version amended and updated by Council Regulation (EC) No 118/97 of 2 December 1996, as amended by Council Regulation (EC) No 1606/98 of 29 June 1998, must be attributed to a person in a situation such as that of the claimant in the main proceedings during the six-month period of extended unpaid leave following the birth of her child, on condition that, during that period, that person is covered, even if only in respect of a single risk, on a compulsory or optional basis, by a general or special social security scheme mentioned in Article 1(a) of that regulation. It is for the national court to determine whether that condition is satisfied in the dispute before it.

---

(1)  OJ C 63, 13.3.2010.

1

---
Samuel Louis FULLER, petitioner, v. Ryan MEGHEAN.

No. 17-7362.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 19, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
# C_2010037EN.01000302.xml

| 13.2.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 37/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.2.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 37/3

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de première instance de Liège (Belgium) lodged on 23 November 2009 — Claude Chartry v État belge

(Case C-457/09)

2010/C 37/05

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Referring court

Tribunal de première instance de Liège

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Claude Chartry

Applicant:

Defendant: État belge

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

‘Do Article 6 [EU] and Article 234 [EC] preclude national legislation, such as the Law of 12 July 2009 amending Article 26 of the Law [on the Constitutional Court], from requiring the national court to make a reference to the Constitutional Court for a preliminary ruling, if it finds that a citizen taxpayer has been deprived of the effective judicial protection guaranteed by Article 6 of the European Convention for the Protection of Human Rights and Fundamental Freedoms, as incorporated into Community law, by another national law, [namely] Article 49 of the Law ... of 9 July 2004, without that national court being able to ensure immediately the direct [effect] of Community law [in the] proceedings before it and without being able also to carry out a review of its compliance with the Convention where the Constitutional Court has recognised the compatibility of the national legislation with the fundamental rights guaranteed by Title II of the [Belgian] Constitution?’

---
# C_2011226EN.01002602.xml

| 30.7.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 226/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.7.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 226/26

---

Order of the General Court of 24 May 2011 — Sanyō Denki v OHIM — Telefónica 02 Germany (eneloop)

(Case T-309/09) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Opposition - Withdrawal of the opposition - No need to adjudicate)

2011/C 226/53

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Sanyō Denki Kabushiki Kaisha (Osaka, Japan) (represented by: initially, M. De Zorti, M. Koch and T. Grimm, and subsequently V. Schmitz-Fohrmann, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: initially, M. Ahlgren, and subsequently M. Ahlgren and J.F. Crespo Carillo, Agents)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Telefónica 02 Germany GmbH & Co. OHG (Munich, Germany) (represented by: A. Fottner and M. Müller, lawyers)

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

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 6 May 2009 (Case R 794/2008-2), relating to opposition proceedings between Telefónica O2 Germany GmbH & Co. OHG and Sanyō Denki Kabushiki Kaisha

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | There is no need to adjudicate on the action. |
| --- | --- |

1.

There is no need to adjudicate on the action.

| 2. | The applicant and the intervener are ordered to bear their own costs and those incurred by the defendant. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The applicant and the intervener are ordered to bear their own costs and those incurred by the defendant.

---

(1)  OJ C 267, 7.11.2009.

1

---
II-00027

From:

Sent:

To:

Cc:

Subject:

Attach:

Jon Hixson@cargill.com

Wednesday, December 1, 2010 10:14 AM

OTCDefinitions <OTCDefinitions@CFTC.gov>

Sue_Cochran@cargill. com

Guidance for Definitions Rulemaking Team

CFTC Definitions Activities Language Final Nov 17 2010.pdf

Thanks,

-Jon

Jon Hixson

Cargill

1030 15th Street, Ste 650 West

Washington, DC 20005

202-530-8166 direct

202-641-6564 cell
November 17, 2010

Commodity Futures Trading Commission

1155 21st Street, NW

Washington, DC 20581

RE: Definitions

Dear Chairman Gensler:

As the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) determines regulatory "Definitions," as

outlined in Section 721 ofP.L 111-203 (Dodd-Frank Act), we would like to call your attention to

provision (49) swap dealer, paragraph (B) inclusion.

Under this provision, Congress granted the Commission the flexibility to designate a person: (i)

as a swap dealer for certain activities; and (ii) as a non-swap dealer under the exceptions

provided to non-financial end-users when not engaging in swap dealer activities. This dual

activity-based designation is of great importance to Cargill due to the variety of its businesses

and activities.

Cargill routinely acts as an end-user, hedging commodity, interest rate, and foreign currency

risks based on the company’s global business of shipping, merchandising and processing a wide

range of commodities. Cargill also has a business unit that offers customized risk management

products to external customers. This particular activity may warrant the designation as swap

dealer, subject to compliance requirements like: 1) the obligation to report customer transactions

(Section 729) and 2) the obligation to register with the Commission (Section 731).

The above obligations will allow the Commission to differentiate between the swap dealer

activities in which Cargill engages, from the activities transacted under the exception provided to

non-financial end-users. Furthermore, when Cargill executes hedging transactions under the

exemption afforded to non-financial end-users, those transactions will be reported to the

Commission by the financial counterparty who is acting as the dealer.

Law

Linda L. Cutler

Vice President, Assistant Secretary and

Deputy General Counsel

15407 McGinty Road West

Wayzata, MN 55391-2399

P.O. Box 5624

Minneapolis, MN 55440-5624

Tel: (952) 742-6377

Fax: (952) 404-6334

Linda_Cutler@cargill.corn
Commodity Futures Trading Commission

November 17, 2010

Page 2

We appreciate your attention to this important provision and look forward to working with you

as the implementing regulations are developed.

Sincerely,

L. CutlelL/¢/’~’~’~~’/

Vice President, Assistant Secretary and

Deputy General Counsel

LLCiilb

(#308I 174)

Senator Amy Klobuchar

CFTC Rulemaking Area I: Definitions

CFTC Rulemaking Area V: Capital and Margin for Non-Banks

CFTC Rulemaking Area XI: End User Exception
##### 



Exhibit 12
  Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
 Fiscal Year2006
    
    
    2005
    
    
    2004
    
    
    2003
    
    
    2002Net income before taxes, minority interest and
cumulative effect of change in accounting principle
    
    $
    740
    
    
    $
    772
    
    
    $
    745
    
    
    $
    710
    
    
    $
    700Undistributed (income) loss from equity
investments
    
    
    2
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    (1
    )
    
    
    (1
    )
    
    
    Fixed charges excluding capitalized interest
    
    $
    331
    
    
    $
    288
    
    
    $
    261
    
    
    $
    270
    
    
    
    221Earnings as adjusted
    
    $
    1,073
    
    
    $
    1,060
    
    
    $
    1,005
    
    
    $
    979
    
    
    $
    921Fixed charges:Interest expense
    
    $
    298
    
    
    $
    258
    
    
    $
    236
    
    
    $
    247
    
    
    $
    200Capitalized interest
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    Interest portion of rental expense
    
    
    33
    
    
    
    30
    
    
    
    25
    
    
    
    23
    
    
    
    21Total fixed charges
    
    $
    331
    
    
    $
    288
    
    
    $
    261
    
    
    $
    270
    
    
    $
    221Ratio of earnings to fixed charges
    
    
    3.24
    
    
    
    3.68
    
    
    
    3.85
    
    
    
    3.63
    
    
    
    4.17
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

TYVONN M. SCOTT,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D18-2687

[February 14, 2019]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.800 motion from the Circuit Court for 

the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Dennis D. Bailey, 

Judge; L.T. Case No. 99-17848CF10A.

Tyvonn M. Scott, Arcadia, pro se.

No appearance required for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

GERBER, C.J., MAY and CONNER, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.