alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2009069EN.01002401.xml

| 21.3.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 69/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.3.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 69/24

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d'État (France) lodged on 2 January 2009 — Centre d'Exportation du Livre Français (CELF), Ministre de la Culture et de la Communication v Société Internationale de Diffusion et d'Édition

(Case C-1/09)

(2009/C 69/42)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Conseil d'État

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellants: Centre d'Exportation du Livre Français (CELF), Ministre de la Culture et de la Communication

Appellants:

Respondent: Société Internationale de Diffusion et d'Édition

Respondent:

Questions referred

| 1. | May the national court stay proceedings concerning the obligation to recover State aid until the Commission of the European Communities has ruled, by way of a final decision, on the compatibility of the aid with the rules of the common market, where a first decision of the Commission declaring that aid to be compatible has been annulled by the Community judicature? |
| --- | --- |

1.

May the national court stay proceedings concerning the obligation to recover State aid until the Commission of the European Communities has ruled, by way of a final decision, on the compatibility of the aid with the rules of the common market, where a first decision of the Commission declaring that aid to be compatible has been annulled by the Community judicature?

| 2. | Where the Commission has on three occasions declared the aid to be compatible with the common market, before those decisions were annulled by the Court of First Instance of the European Communities, is such a situation capable of being an exceptional circumstance which may lead the national court to limit the obligation to recover the aid? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Where the Commission has on three occasions declared the aid to be compatible with the common market, before those decisions were annulled by the Court of First Instance of the European Communities, is such a situation capable of being an exceptional circumstance which may lead the national court to limit the obligation to recover the aid?

---
Christopher HANNIGAN, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 16-6109.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 31, 2016.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 125 (Thursday, June 28, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34520-34521]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-16208]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY


Submission for OMB Review; Comment Request

June 21, 2001.
    The Department of Treasury has submitted the following public 
information collection requirement(s) to OMB for review and clearance 
under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, Public Law 104-13. Copies of 
the submission(s) may be obtained by calling the Treasury Bureau 
Clearance

[[Page 34521]]

Officer listed. Comments regarding this information collection should 
be addressed to the OMB reviewer listed and to the Treasury Department 
Clearance Officer, Department of the Treasury, Room 2110, 1425 New York 
Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20220.

DATES: Written comments should be received on or before July 30, 2001 
to be assured of consideration.

U.S. Customs Service (CUS)

    OMB Number: 1515-0225.
    Form Number: None.
    Type of Review: Reinstatement.
    Title: African Growth and Opportunity Act Certificate of Origin.
    Description: The collection of information is required to implement 
the duty preference provisions of The African Growth and Opportunity 
Act (AGOA) to provide for extension of duty-free treatment under the 
Generalized System of Preferences (GSP) to not-import sensitive 
articles normally excluded from GSP duty treatment, and to provide for 
the entry of specific textile and apparel articles free of duty and 
free of any quantitative limits to the countries of sub-Saharan Africa.
    Respondents: Business or other for-profit, Individuals or 
households, not-for-profit institutions.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 440.
    Estimated Burden Hours Per Respondent: 1 hour, 5 minutes.
    Frequency of Response: On occasion.
    Estimated Total Reporting Burden: 10,400 hours.

    OMB Number: 1515-0226.
    Form Number: Customs Form 450.
    Type of Review: Reinstatement.
    Title: United States-Caribbean Basin Trade Partnership Act.
    Description: The collection of information is required to implement 
the duty preference provisions of The United States-Caribbean Basin 
Trade Partnership Act of 2000 (CBTPA), to expand trade benefits to 
countries in the Caribbean Basin.
    Respondents: Business or other for-profit, Individuals or 
households, not-for-profit institutions.
    Estimated Number of Respondents: 440.
    Estimated Burden Hours Per Respondent: 1 hours, 5 minutes.
    Frequency of Response: On occasion.
    Estimated Total Reporting Burden: 18,720 hours.
    Clearance Officer: Tracey Denning, (202) 927-1429, U.S. Customs 
Service, Information Services Branch, Ronald Reagan Building, 1300 
Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Room 3.2.C, Washington, DC 20229.
    OMB Reviewer: Alexander T. Hunt, (202) 395-7860, Office of 
Management and Budget, Room 10202, New Executive Office Building, 
Washington, DC 20503.

Lois K. Holland,
Departmental Reports Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 01-16208 Filed 6-27-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4820-02-P
Brian J. JUANICO, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 16-6787.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 9, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denied.
Oscar O. OZFIDAN, petitioner, v. Pamela L. OZFIDAN.

No. 17-974.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 19, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Virginia denied.
EX-10.2



 Exhibit 10.2 

AMENDMENT 
 TO THE

 BLACKROCK, INC. 

SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED 

1999 STOCK AWARD AND INCENTIVE PLAN 

THIS AMENDMENT (this “Amendment”) is made as of May 23, 2018 to the BlackRock, Inc. Second Amended and Restated
1999 Stock Award and Incentive Plan, as amended from time to time (the “Plan”). Any capitalized terms used and not defined herein shall have the meanings set forth in the Plan. 

WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 8(f) of the Plan, the Board may at any time and from time to time alter, amend, suspend or terminate
the Plan in whole or in part, provided that (i) no amendment shall adversely affect any of the rights of any Grantee, without such Grantee’s consent, under any Award theretofore granted under the Plan and (ii) any amendment shall be
approved by the stockholders (unless otherwise determined by the Board) if necessary to comply with state law, stock listing requirements or other applicable law; and 

WHEREAS, the Board has determined to amend the Plan in the manner set forth below, subject to approval by the stockholders. 

NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby amended as follows, subject to approval by the stockholders: 

1. The first sentence of Section 5(a) of the Plan is hereby amended and restated in its entirety as follows: 

“Subject to adjustment as provided in Section 5(d), 41,500,000 shares of Stock shall be reserved for the grant or settlement of
Awards under the Plan.” 
 2. This Amendment and all determinations made and actions taken pursuant hereto shall be governed by the laws
of the State of Delaware without giving effect to the conflict of laws principles thereof. 
 3. Except as amended above, the Plan shall
remain in full force and effect.
##### 



Exhibit 99.2

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report of Laserscope on Form
10-Q for the three months ended March 31, 2003, I, Dennis LaLumandiere, Vice
President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer of Laserscope, hereby certify
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) |  | such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three months ended
March 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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
for the three months ended March 31, 2003 fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
of Laserscope.

|                   |     |  |                                                                                                
|------------------ | --- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date: May 13, 2003 | By: |  | /s/  Dennis LaLumandiereDennis LaLumandiere
Vice President, Finance and
Chief Financial Officer
II-00414

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Tina Desmarais <Tinadesmarais@aol.com>

Thursday, December 2, 2010 8:33 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.

Tina Desmarais

Gray Rd

Plainfield, VT 05667
Exhibit 32.1

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


In connection  with the Form 10-QKB of Finao Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB
for the year ending December 31, 2002, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Arnold Salinas, Chief Executive
and 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, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

         (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/Arnold Salinas
----------------------------
Arnold Salinas
Chief Executive and
Principal Accounting Officer
July 26, 2004

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.
# C_2011103EN.01002101.xml

| 2.4.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 103/21 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.4.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 103/21

---

Judgment of the General Court of 17 February 2011 — Formula One Licensing v OHIM — Global Sports Media (FI-LIVE)

(Case T-10/09) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community figurative mark F1-LIVE - Earlier Community figurative marks, and national and international word marks, F1 and F1 Formula 1 - Opposition rejected by the Board of Appeal - Relative grounds for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) and (5) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) and (5) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

2011/C 103/36

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Formula One Licensing BV (Rotterdam, Netherlands) (represented by: B. Klingberg and K. Sandberg, lawyers)

Applicant:

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

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: Global Sports Media Ltd (Hamilton, Bermuda) (represented by: T. de Haan and J.-J. Evrard, and subsequently by T. de Haan, lawyer)

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 First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 16 October 2008 (Case R 7/2008-1) concerning opposition proceedings between Racing-Live SAS and Formula One Licensing BV.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Formula One Licensing BV to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Formula One Licensing BV to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 55, 7.3.2009.

1

---
# C_2010134EN.01002804.xml

| 22.5.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 134/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.5.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 134/28

---

Order of the President of the Court of 10 February 2010 — Mineralbrunnen Rhöne-Sprudel Egon Schindel GmbH v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), Schwarzbräu GmbH

(Joined Cases C-364/09 P and 365/09 P) (1)

1

2010/C 134/46

Language of the case: German

Language of the case: German

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

---

(1)  OJ C 267, 7.11.2009.

1

---
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3798 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3798

 To amend title 38, United States Code, to provide for limitations on 
 copayments for contraception furnished by the Department of Veterans 
                    Affairs, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 17, 2019

  Ms. Brownley of California introduced the following bill; which was 
             referred to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title 38, United States Code, to provide for limitations on 
 copayments for contraception furnished by the Department of Veterans 
                    Affairs, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Equal Access to Contraception for 
Veterans Act''.

SEC. 2. LIMITATION ON COPAYMENTS FOR CONTRACEPTION.

    Section 1722A(a)(2) of title 38, United States Code, is amended--
            (1) by striking ``to pay'' and all that follows through the 
        period and inserting ``to pay--''; and
            (2) by adding at the end the following new subparagraphs:
            ``(A) an amount in excess of the cost to the Secretary for 
        medication described in paragraph (1); or
            ``(B) an amount for any contraceptive item or service for 
        which coverage under health insurance coverage is required 
        without the imposition of any cost-sharing requirement pursuant 
        to section 2713(a)(4) of the Public Health Service Act (42 USC 
        300gg-13(a)(4)).''.
                                 <all>
```
Brian A. STARKS, petitioner, v. Joe EASTERLING, Warden.

No. 16-6994.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 17, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
Rahman J. HERRILL, petitioner, v. Steven JOHNSON, Administrator, New Jersey State Prison, et al.

No. 16-9479.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
II-00203

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Lynn Wolf <ra17780@aol.com>

Friday, December 3, 2010 6:15 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.

Lynn Wolf

28151 Bobwhite Circle #79

Saugus, CA 91350
Michael A. GURNETT, petitioner, v. James F. BARGNESI, Acting Judge, Niagara County Court, New York.

No. 17-1049.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 19, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Appellate Division, Supreme Court of New York, Fourth Judicial Department denied.
Corey Allan DONALDSON, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 16-6241.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 12, 2016.

Petition for rehearing denied.
Error! Unknown document property name.

Northland Energy Trading LLC 

Meeting on Swap Dealer Definition

Meeting Date: March 21, 2011 

Meeting Attendees: Richard Larkin, Founding Member – Northland 

Kirk Blanchard, Chief Financial Officer – Northland

Michael Brooks – Sutherland (on behalf of Northland) 

Discussion Topics: I. Introductions 

II. Overview of Northland’s Business 

III. Discussion of Swap Dealer Definition 

A. De Minimis Exemption 

B. Treatment of Aggregators 

C. Proposed Exemption: 

Aggregator exclusion – A person shall not be 

deemed to be a “swap dealer” as a result of activity 

with bilateral counterparties for whom swaps are 

entered into to establish a bona fide hedging 

transaction or position for the counterparty as 

defined in §151.5; provided such person (i) enters 

into such swaps predominantly in one direction 

(long or short) and (ii) offsets the risks associated 

with such swaps using regulated futures 

transactions or cleared, over-the-counter 

derivatives. For purposes of this exclusion, a 

person shall be deemed to enter into swaps 

“predominantly” in one direction if its swaps in the 

opposite direction considered independently would 

qualify for the de minimis exception defined in 

§1.3(ppp)(4).
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 20
- 058 9 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. RYAN PATRICK SULLIVAN ,

Defendant and Appellant
.

**O RDER**  Upon consideration of Appellant’s notice of intent to file reply brief and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant’s reply brief is due on or before October 3, 2022
.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

September 2 2022

09/02/2022

Case Number: DA 20-0589
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of The Bank of Kentucky Financial Corporation
(BKFC) on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Robert W. Zapp, Chief Executive Officer and President of BKFC,
certify, 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) 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 conditions and results of operations of BKFC.



/s/ Robert W. ZappRobert W. ZappChief Executive Officer and PresidentMarch 14, 2008
UPPER SKAGIT INDIAN TRIBE, petitioner, v. Sharline LUNDGREN, et vir.

No. 17-387.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 16, 2018.

Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as *amicus curiae* and for divided argument granted.