alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2012089EN.01002202.xml

| 24.3.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 89/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.3.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 89/22

---

Order of the General Court of 26 January 2012 — Mojo Concerts and Amsterdam Music Dome Exploitatie v Commission

(Case T-90/09) (1)

1

(State aid - Action for annulment - Investment of the Gemeente Rotterdam in the Ahoy’ complex - Decision finding that there was no State aid - Applicants not individually concerned - Inadmissibility)

2012/C 89/36

Language of the case: Dutch

Parties

Parties

Applicants: Mojo Concerts BV (Delft, Netherlands) and Amsterdam Music Dome Exploitatie BV (Delft, Netherlands) (represented by: S. Beeston, Solicitor)

Applicants:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: H. van Vliet and K. Gross, Agents)

Defendant:

Interveners in support of the defendant: Kingdom of the Netherlands (represented by: M. Noort, C. Wissels, M. de Grave, Y. de Vries and J. Langer, agents); Gemeente Rotterdam (Netherlands) (represented by: J. Feenstra and J. Fanoy, lawyers); and Ahoy’ Rotterdam NV (Rotterdam) (represented initially by M. van der Woude and E. Offers, and subsequently by M. Maas-Cooymans, lawyers)

Interveners in support of the defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision C(2008) 6018 final of 21 October 2008 on the investment made by the Gemeente Rotterdam in the Ahoy’ complex (State aid C 4/2008 (ex N 97/2007, ex CP 91/2007)).

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action as inadmissible;

| 2. | Orders Mojo Concerts BV and Amsterdam Music Dome Exploitatie BV to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission, the Gemeente Rotterdam and Ahoy’ Rotterdam NV; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Mojo Concerts BV and Amsterdam Music Dome Exploitatie BV to bear their own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission, the Gemeente Rotterdam and Ahoy’ Rotterdam NV;

| 3. | Orders the Kingdom of the Netherlands to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the Kingdom of the Netherlands to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 102, 1.5.2009.

1

---
Robert WILLIAMS, petitioner, v. VICTORIA'S SECRET.

No. 17-7284.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 26, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.
II-00373

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Susan Canning <iamgodsjoy@yahoo.com>

Thursday, December 2, 2010 10:34 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.

Susan Canning

2249 Via Guadalana

Palos Verdes, CA 90274
# C_2010317EN.01001202.xml

| 20.11.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 317/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.11.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 317/12

---

Judgment of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 30 September 2010 — European Commission v Kingdom of Belgium

(Case C-36/10) (1)

1

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations - Directives 96/82/EC and 2003/105/EC - Control of major-accident hazards involving dangerous substances - Second subparagraph of Article 12(1) - Incorrect transposition)

2010/C 317/23

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: A. Sipos and J.-B. Laignelot, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Kingdom of Belgium (represented by: T. Materne, acting as Agent.)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil its obligations — Failure to adopt all the measures to comply with Council Directive 96/82/EC of 9 December 1996 on the control of major-accident hazards involving dangerous substances (OJ 1997, L 10, p. 13), as amended by Directive 2003/105/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2003 (OJ 2003 L 345, p. 97)

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Declares that by failing to adopt within the prescribed period all the measures to correctly transpose the second subparagraph of Article 12(1) of Council Directive 96/82/EC of 9 December 1996 on the control of major-accident hazards involving dangerous substances, as amended by Directive 2003/105/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2003, the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Declares that by failing to adopt within the prescribed period all the measures to correctly transpose the second subparagraph of Article 12(1) of Council Directive 96/82/EC of 9 December 1996 on the control of major-accident hazards involving dangerous substances, as amended by Directive 2003/105/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 16 December 2003, the Kingdom of Belgium has failed to fulfil its obligations under that directive;

| 2. | Orders the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Kingdom of Belgium to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 80, 27.03.2010.

1

---
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The contract proposals and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such a patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the contract proposals, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Special Emphasis Panel, The Framingham Heart Study RFP-NHLBI-HC-01-02.                    

*Date:*                         July 10, 2001.                    

*Time:*                         9 am to 11:30 am.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate contract proposals.                    

*Place:*                         Chevy Chase Holiday Inn, Chevy Chase, MD 20815.                    

*Contact Person:*                         Louise P. Corman, Scientific Review Administrator, Review Branch, Room 7180, Division of Extramural Affairs, National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, MD 20892-7924.                    

This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and funding cycle.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.233, National Center for Sleep Disorders Research; 93.837, Heart and Vascular Diseases Research; 93.838, Lung Diseases Research; 93.839, Blood Diseases and Resources Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS) 

Dated: June 22, 2001.

LaVerne Y. Stringfield,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 01-16336  Filed 6-28-01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
Exhibit 13.1







EXHIBIT
13.1
 CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
 PURSUANT
TO
 18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
 AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
 SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
   I,
Dr. Kenneth W. Powell, President, Chief Executive Officer and Acting Chief
Financial Officer of Titan Trading Analytics Inc. (the “Company”) , hereby
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:
  a.
              the
      Annual Report on Form 20-F/A Amendment No. 1 of the Company for the fiscal
      year ended October 31, 2008 (the “Annual Report”) fully complies with the
      requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
      1934, as amended; and
 
 b.
              the
      information contained in the Annual Report fairly presents in all material
      respects the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Company.
  By:
                /s/ Dr. Kenneth W.
      PowellDr.
      Kenneth W. PowellPresident,
      Chief Executive Officer andActing Chief Financial
      OfficerJune
      26, 2009
  This
written statement is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
as an exhibit to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 20-F/A Amendment No. 1. A
signed original of this 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.
  This
certification accompanies this Annual Report on Form 20-F/A Amendment No. 1
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except
to the extent required by such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes
of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange
Act"). Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference
into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange
Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by
reference.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>	6

<CIK>	0000744822

<NAME>	Fidelity Investment Trust

<SERIES>

	<NUMBER>	71

	<NAME>	Fidelity Canada Fund

<MULTIPLIER>	1,000



<S>

<C>

<PERIOD-TYPE>
year
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>
oct-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>
oct-31-1999
<INVESTMENTS-AT-COST>
42,384
<INVESTMENTS-AT-VALUE>
48,507
<RECEIVABLES>
1,165
<ASSETS-OTHER>
25
<OTHER-ITEMS-ASSETS>
0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>
49,697
<PAYABLE-FOR-SECURITIES>
1,034
<SENIOR-LONG-TERM-DEBT>
0
<OTHER-ITEMS-LIABILITIES>
4,893
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES>
5,927
<SENIOR-EQUITY>
0
<PAID-IN-CAPITAL-COMMON>
42,290
<SHARES-COMMON-STOCK>
2,751
<SHARES-COMMON-PRIOR>
3,608
<ACCUMULATED-NII-CURRENT>
66
<OVERDISTRIBUTION-NII>
0
<ACCUMULATED-NET-GAINS>
(4,708)
<OVERDISTRIBUTION-GAINS>
0
<ACCUM-APPREC-OR-DEPREC>
6,122
<NET-ASSETS>
43,770
<DIVIDEND-INCOME>
413
<INTEREST-INCOME>
180
<OTHER-INCOME>
4
<EXPENSES-NET>
480
<NET-INVESTMENT-INCOME>
117
<REALIZED-GAINS-CURRENT>
3,321
<APPREC-INCREASE-CURRENT>
5,467
<NET-CHANGE-FROM-OPS>
8,905
<EQUALIZATION>
0
<DISTRIBUTIONS-OF-INCOME>
248
<DISTRIBUTIONS-OF-GAINS>
0
<DISTRIBUTIONS-OTHER>
0
<NUMBER-OF-SHARES-SOLD>
744
<NUMBER-OF-SHARES-REDEEMED>
1,619
<SHARES-REINVESTED>
18
<NET-CHANGE-IN-ASSETS>
(3,652)
<ACCUMULATED-NII-PRIOR>
352
<ACCUMULATED-GAINS-PRIOR>
(7,996)
<OVERDISTRIB-NII-PRIOR>
0
<OVERDIST-NET-GAINS-PRIOR>
0
<GROSS-ADVISORY-FEES>
143
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>
0
<GROSS-EXPENSE>
551
<AVERAGE-NET-ASSETS>
45,329
<PER-SHARE-NAV-BEGIN>
13.140
<PER-SHARE-NII>
 .040
<PER-SHARE-GAIN-APPREC>
2.780
<PER-SHARE-DIVIDEND>
 .070
<PER-SHARE-DISTRIBUTIONS>
0
<RETURNS-OF-CAPITAL>
0
<PER-SHARE-NAV-END>
15.910
<EXPENSE-RATIO>
122





</TABLE>
Attorney for AppellantAttorneys for Appellee

David W. Stone, IVSteve Carter

Anderson, IndianaAttorney General of Indiana

George P. Sherman

Deputy Attorney General of Indiana

______________________________________________________________________________

# In the

# Indiana Supreme Court 

_________________________________

No. 48S02-0412-CR-533

Sandy Diane Pugh,

*Appellant (Defendant below),*

v.

State of Indiana,

*Appellee (Plaintiff below)*.

_________________________________

Appeal from the Madison Superior Court, No. 48D01-0007-CF-00269

The Honorable Dennis D. Carroll, Judge

_________________________________

On Petition To Transfer from the Indiana Court of Appeals, No. 48A02-0310-CR-00934

_________________________________

**December 21, 2004**

**Sullivan, Justice.**

The Court of Appeals held that the trial court lacked authority to order less than the entire amount of the sentence originally suspended when it revoked Defendant Sandy Diane Pugh’s probation.  Following our opinion in Stephens v. State, we hold that when a trial court revokes a defendant’s probation, it may order less than the entire amount of the sentence originally suspended.

On August 28, 2000, Defendant Sandy Diane Pugh pled guilty to public intoxication, resisting law enforcement, and escape.  The trial court sentenced Defendant to five years imprisonment and ordered three-and-a-half of those years suspended to probation.  On May 14, 2003, the State filed a Notice of Probation Violation alleging that Pugh had been charged with battery and public intoxication, and that she violated curfew and used alcoholic beverages or illicit drugs.  The trial court found that Defendant violated probation by consuming alcohol, revoked Defendant’s probation, and ordered her to serve two years of executed time.

Defendant appealed the trial court’s revocation of her probation.  The Court of Appeals held that the trial court did not abuse its discretion in revoking Defendant’s probation, and, reasoning from an earlier case, Stephens v. State, 801 N.E.2d 1288 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004), rev’d, No. 49S02-0404-CR-152, ___ N.E.2d ___ (Ind. 2004), the court held *sua sponte* that the trial court lacked authority to order less than the amount of the sentence originally suspended.  Pugh v. State, 804 N.E.2d 202, 204-05 (Ind. Ct. App. 2004).  We grant transfer and now affirm the trial court.

We summarily affirm the part of the Court of Appeals’ opinion upholding the trial court’s decision to revoke Defendant’s probation.  Ind. Appellate Rule 58(A)(2).

Based on our opinion in Stephens v. State, we vacate that part of the Court of Appeals’ opinion holding that a trial court must order the entire amount of the sentence originally suspended if it revokes a defendant’s probation.

The judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

Shepard, C.J., and Dickson, Boehm, and Rucker, JJ., concur.

PAGE  

2
IN T:HE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

IN THE MATTER OF THE ESTATE OF FRANK JOE GONZALEZ, A/K/A FRANK J. GONZALEZ, DECEASED. MARK GONZALEZ, Appellant, vs. LORENA CARRILLO-ARELLANO, Respondent. No. 85146 

# HLE AUG 3 0 2022 ELIZADETHA. BROWN CLERK OF S PRES

,AE COURT BY DEPUTY CLERK
ORDER DISMISSINGAPPEAL ThisappealwasdocketedonAugust 10, 2022, without payment ofthe requisite filingfee and without the case appeal statement. SeeNRAP 3(e), (f). That same day, this court issued notices directing appellant to file the case appeal statement and topay the required filingfee or demonstrate compliance with NRAP 24 within 7 days. The notices advised that failure to pay the filingfee would result in the dismissal ofthis appeal and failure to :file the case appeal statement could result in sanctions, including dismissal ofthis appeal. To date, appellant has not paid the filing fee, filed the case appeal statement, or otherwise responded to this court's notices. Accordingly, this appeal is dismissed. See NRAP 3(a)(2).

It is so ORDERED.
CLERK OFTHE SUPREME COURT ELIZABETH A. BROWN

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA CLERK'S ORDER
I()) 1917

### cc: Hon. Veronica Barisich, District Judge Aspire Law Group, Ltd. Law Offices ofBri.an H. Nelson Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA CLERK'S ORDER 

### 2
Gerald Allen HARPER, petitioner, v. CALIFORNIA.

No. 16-9470.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
II-Olll8

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Sam F. Broughton, Ph.D. <samb@sc.rr.com>

Thursday, December 2, 2010 8:07 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: Do not 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.

Sam F. Broughton, Ph. D.

1039 Wrenwood

Florence, SC 29505
Michael C. TURZAI, Speaker of the Pennsylvania House of Representatives, et al., applicants, v. LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS OF PENNSYLVANIA, et al.

No. 17A909.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 19, 2018.

Application for stay presented to Justice ALITO and by him referred to the Court denied.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 383 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 383

To amend the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act to ensure that 
 preexisting condition exclusions with respect to enrollment in health 
  insurance coverage and group health plans continue to be prohibited.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 9, 2019

Mr. Joyce of Ohio (for himself, Mr. Turner, Mr. Katko, Mr. Gonzalez of 
Ohio, and Ms. Herrera Beutler) introduced the following bill; which was 
            referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act to ensure that 
 preexisting condition exclusions with respect to enrollment in health 
  insurance coverage and group health plans continue to be prohibited.

    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 ``Continuing Coverage for Preexisting 
Conditions Act of 2019''.

SEC. 2. ENSURING THE PROHIBITION OF PREEXISTING CONDITION EXCLUSIONS 
              WITH RESPECT TO ENROLLMENT IN HEALTH INSURANCE COVERAGE 
              AND GROUP HEALTH PLANS.

    Part I of subtitle F of title I of the Patient Protection and 
Affordable Care Act is amended by adding at the end the following 
section:

``SEC. 1503. SEVERABILITY.

    ``If subsection (a) of section 5000A of the Internal Revenue Code 
of 1986, as added by section 1501(b), is to any extent illegal, 
unconstitutional, otherwise invalid, or incapable of being enforced, 
the validity and enforceability of sections 2701 through 2705 of the 
Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300gg through 300gg-4), as added 
by section 1201, shall not be affected.''.
                                 <all>
```
II-O0121

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Ted Van wert <Tedvanwert@pattwhite.com>

Sunday, December 5, 2010 8:03 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.

Ted Van wert

5925 tilghman st

Allentown, PA 18104