alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NOTICE REGARDING LEIs THAT MAY BE USED TO 

COMPLY WITH CFTC LEI REQUIREMENTS

October 30, 2013

The Commission’s Amended Order Designating The Provider Of Legal Entity Identifiers To Be 

Used In Recordkeeping And Swap Data Reporting Pursuant To the Commission’s Regulations, 

issued on June 7, 2013 (Amended Order), available at www.cftc.gov/LawRegulation/

FederalRegister/FinalRules/2013-15477, provides in pertinent part the following. After the 

Regulatory Oversight Committee (ROC) of the global Legal Identifier (LEI) system has adopted 

standards for approval of pre-Local Operating Units (pre-LOUs) and the LEIs issued by them as 

globally acceptable, and has also approved the CICI Utility operated by DTCC-SWIFT as a 

globally acceptable pre-LOU and the LEIs issued by the CICI Utility as globally acceptable 

LEIs, registered entities and swap counterparties subject to the Commission’s jurisdiction may 

comply with the Commission’s swap data recordkeeping and reporting requirements with respect 

to LEIs by using LEIs provided by any pre-LOU approved by the ROC as globally acceptable 

and as issuing globally acceptable LEIs. Under the terms of the Amended Order, this 

authorization becomes effective upon publication on the Commission’s website of a Notice from 

the Commission’s Chief Information Officer that such LEIs and such pre-LOUs have been 

approved by the ROC as globally acceptable.

The ROC has now adopted the standards referenced in the Amended Order, and has approved the 

CICI Utility as a globally acceptable part of the interim global LEI system, and approved the 

LEIs issued by the CICI Utility as globally acceptable LEIs. The Endorsement Note issued by 

the ROC to this effect can be found at www.leiroc.org/publications/gls/lou_20131003.pdf.

Accordingly, as provided in the Amended Order, from October 30, 2013, forward, registered 

entities and swap counterparties subject to the Commission’s jurisdiction can comply with the 

LEI requirements of Part 451and Part 462of the Commission’s swap data recordkeeping and 

reporting regulations by using any LEI endorsed by the ROC as globally acceptable.3

John Rogers, Chief Information Officer

Office of Data and Technology

 

1

17 CFR § 45.6, 77 Fed. Reg. 2136, 2204 (Jan. 13, 2012).

2

17 CFR § 46.4, 77 Fed. Reg. 35200, 35228 (June 12, 2012).

3 The list of LEIs currently endorsed by the ROC as globally acceptable can be found at www.leiroc.org/ 

publications/gls/lou_20131003.pdf.
# C_2013313EN.01002001.xml

| 26.10.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 313/20 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.10.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 313/20

---

Judgment of the General Court of 12 September 2013 — Germany v Commission

(Case T-347/09) (1)

1

(State aid - Transfer free of charge of certain areas of natural national heritage - Measures for the financial support of large-scale environmental protection projects - Decision declaring aid compatible with the common market - Concept of undertaking - Obligation to state reasons)

2013/C 313/36

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented: initially by M. Lumma and B. Klein, then A. Wiedmann and T. Henze, acting as Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented: initially by K. Gross, then F. Erlbacher, A. Stobiecka-Kuik and P. Loewenthal, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Interveners in support of the applicant: French Republic (represented by: G. de Bergues and J. Gstalter, acting as Agents); Kingdom of the Netherlands (represented: initally by C. Wissels, Y. de Vries and M. de Ree, then C. Wissels, M. de Ree, J. Langer and M. Noort, acting as Agents); and Republic of Finland (represented by: J. Heliskoski, acting as Agent)

Interveners in support of the applicant:

Re:

Re:

Application for the annulment of Commission Decision C(2009) 5080 final of 2 July 2009 relating to State aid NN 8/2009 granted by the Federal Republic of Germany and concerning the State aid scheme consisting of the transfer, free of charge, of certain areas of natural national heritage, and of measures for the financial support of large-scale environmental protection projects (OJ 2009 C 230, p. 1).

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to bear its own costs and to pay those of the European Commission; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the Federal Republic of Germany to bear its own costs and to pay those of the European Commission;

| 3. | Orders the French Republic, the Kingdom of the Netherlands and the Republic of Finland to bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the French Republic, the Kingdom of the Netherlands and the Republic of Finland to bear their own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 267, 7.11.2009.

1

---
Exhibit
32.1





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


RULE
13a-14(b) OF THE SECURITIES


EXCHANGE
ACT OF 1934 AND 18 U.S.C. 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, Robert
M. Van Patten, Chief Executive Officer of YTB International, Inc., a Delaware
corporation (the “Registrant”), in
connection with the Registrant’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period
ended March 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
the date hereof (the “Report”), do hereby
represent, warrant and certify, in compliance with Rule 13a-14(b) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and 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, as amended;
  and





2.
            The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Registrant.





/s/ Robert M. Van PattenName:  Robert
      M. Van PattenTitle:    Chief
      Executive OfficerDate:    May
      17, 2010
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. 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 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-21061 Summary Calendar

SUSAN CALELLY,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

VERSUS

CONROE INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT; FRANCIS GATES; DEBRA WILT; DAVID LUSK; DORIS LIKE DENIO; TOBY YORK,

Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-98-CV-1129

- - - - - - - - - - August 17, 1999

Before DAVIS, EMILIO M. GARZA, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Susan Calelly appeals the district court’ s grant of summary

judgment dismissing with prejudice her federal claims pursuant to

the Individuals with Di sabilities in Education Act (“IDEA”),

Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, and the Americans

with Disabilities Act. She argues that these federal claims were

not time-barred, were not barred by her failure to exhaust her

administrative remedies, and were not moot.No. 98-21061 -2-

A plaintiff must first exhau st the state administrative

remedies before bringing an action in federal court pursuant to the

IDEA. Gardner v. School Bd. Caddo Parish , 958 F.2d 108, 110 (5th

Cir. 1992). A plaintiff may bypass the administrative process by

demonstrating that exhaustion would be futile or inadequate. Id.

at 111-12.

Calelly concedes that she did not exhaust her administrative

remedies, but she argues that she was not aware of her

administrative remedies. The record reflects that Calelly’s

parents, who sought relief on her behalf, understood the applicable

administrative review process: Within one day of the appellees’

refusal to allow Calelly to graduate with her class, Calelly’s

parents requested a due process hearing on her behalf with the

Texas Education Agency. Her parents also acknowledged in this

request that they understood that they could file suit if they were

not satisfied with the conclusion of the due process hearing.

R ather than pursue the due process hearing, however, Calelly’s

parents participated in a mediation session and agreed to dismiss

the pending due process hearing. Because Calelly was aware of the

applicable administrative procedures but chose not to pursue them,

she has failed to exhaust her administrative remedies. H amilton v.

Board of Sch. Comm'rs of Mobile County, Ala.

, 993 F. Supp. 884, 889

(S.D. Ala. 1996). The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
FIDELITY (LOGO) INVESTMENTS(registered trademark)   FMR Corp.               
                                                    82 Devonshire Street    
                                                    Boston MA  02109-3614   
                                                    617 563 7000            
 
                        January 4, 1996   
                                          
                                          
                                          
                                          
 
Securities and Exchange Commission
Judiciary Plaza
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, DC  20549
 
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
<S>          <C>                                                                   
Attention:   File Room                                                             
 
Re:          Fidelity Investment Trust (the trust):                                
 
             Fidelity International Growth & Income Fund, Fidelity                 
             Diversified International Fund, Fidelity International Value Fund,    
             Fidelity Overseas Fund, Fidelity Worldwide Fund, Fidelity             
             Canada Fund, Fidelity Europe Fund, Fidelity Europe Capital            
             Appreciation Fund, Fidelity Japan Fund, Fidelity Pacific Basin        
             Fund, Fidelity Emerging Markets Fund, Fidelity Latin America          
             Fund, Fidelity Southeast Asia Fund, Fidelity France Fund,             
             Fidelity Germany Fund, Fidelity Japan Small Companies Fund,           
             Fidelity Nordic Fund, Fidelity United Kingdom Fund, and               
             Fidelity Hong Kong and China Fund (the funds)                         
 
             File No. 2-90649 and 811-4008                                         
 
</TABLE>
 
__________________________________________________________________________
Ladies and Gentlemen:
 Transmitted herewith pursuant to Rule 497(j) under the Securities Act of
1933 is certification that the Prospectuses and Statements of Additional
Information with respect to the above referenced funds do not differ from
those filed in the most recent post-effective amendment, which was filed
electronically.
                        Very truly yours,     
 
                                              
 
                                              
 
                                              
 
                                              
 
                        /s/Arthur S. Loring   
                           Arthur S. Loring   
                           Secretary
Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida 

Opinion filed July 7, 2021.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D20-0866

Lower Tribunal No. 11-23514

________________

Jesus G. Joubert Rodriguez, etc., et al.,

Appellants,

vs.

Central Florida Equipment Rentals, Inc.,

Appellee.

An Appeal from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Alan Fine, 

Judge.

Deehl PLLC and David L. Deehl; Kula & Associates, P.A., and Elliot B. 

Kula and William D. Mueller, for appellants.

Boyd Richards Parker & Colonnelli, PL and Elaine D. Walter and 

Yvette R. Lavelle and Maria E. Dalmanieras, for appellee.

Before LOGUE, SCALES and LOBREE, JJ. 

PER CURIAM.

In this wrongful-death action, Jesus G. Joubert Rodriguez, the 
2

personal representative of the estate of his deceased wife, Ivon Arbesun 

Nunez, challenges a final summary judgment entered in favor of Central 

Florida Equipment Rentals, Inc. (the “contractor”). He contends that, in 

moving for summary judgment on the issues of legal duty and legal 

causation, the contractor failed to meet its preliminary burden to show that 

there were no genuine issues of material fact entitling it to judgment as a 

matter of law.

We review the trial court’s entry of summary judgment de novo, viewing 

the evidence in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party. See

Luckman v. Wills, 306 So. 3d 990, 993 n.2 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020); Sierra v. 

Shevin, 767 So. 2d 524, 525 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000). Upon our thorough 

examination of the record, we agree that the trial court erred in granting 

summary judgment, because genuine issues of material fact remain in 

dispute regarding the existence of legal duty and legal causation.

Reversed and remanded for further proceedings.
II-00314

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Donna Mummery <donna.mummery@gmail.com>

Friday, December 3, 2010 3:16 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.

Donna Mummery

67 Village Trail

Honeoye Falls, NY 14472
OF
NC I
Received CFTC Futures Industry Association
Records Section 2001 Pennsylvania Ave. NW 202.466.5460
A 3 lo 7 Suite 600 202.296.3184 fax

Washington, DC 20006-1823 waww futuresindustry.org

May 12, 2009

Mr. David Stawick ‘

Secretary COMMENT

Commodity Futures Trading Commission ,

°
Three Lafayette Centre 3
1155 21" Street, NW r
Washington,-DC 20681
Re:

Concept release on Whether to Eliminate the Bona Fide Hedge Exemption for
Certain Swap Dealers and Create a New Limited Risk Management Exemption
From Speculative Limits 74 FR 12282 (March 24, 2009)

h2 h Ud BT AULD 602

Lvluyiauoas 3HL 30 301s30

Dear Mr. Stawick,

I am writing to request an extension of time until June 16, 2009 to file comments on the
CFTC concept release cited above. The Futures Industry Association is requesting the exemption
in order to give the industry more time to address the complicated and important issues raised by
the CFTC in the release. Our goal is to make our comments as useful too the Commission as

possible as it continues to address the policy questions surrounding bone fide hedging and risk
management.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely yours,

Barbara Wierzynski
General Counsel
Eric C. BURGIE, petitioner, v. ARKANSAS.

No. 16-6706.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 9, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Arkansas denied.
```

                                                                    Exhibit 32.2

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

   Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. ss.1350)

In connection  with the Annual Report of Form 10-K for the period ended December
31, 2005 (the "Report") filed by Everlast Worldwide Inc., a Delaware corporation
(the "Company") with the Securities and Exchange  Commission,  the  undersigned,
Gary J.  Dailey,  Chief  Financial  Officer  of,  does  hereby  certify,  to his
knowledge,  that pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities  Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,  and the information  contained in
the Report fairly presents,  in all material respects,  the financial  condition
and results of operations of the Company.

                                                /s/ Gary J. Dailey
                                                --------------------------------
                                                Gary J. Dailey
                                                Chief Financial Officer
                                                March 24, 2006

A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided to Everlast  Worldwide Inc. and will be retained by Everlast  Worldwide
Inc and furnished to the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission or its staff upon
request.
```
II-00682

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Jesse Derouen <number4940@gmail.com>

Thursday, December 2, 2010 12:36 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.

Jesse Derouen

311 Kirk St

New Iberia, LA 70563
Johnny Lee JOHNSON, petitioner, v. IOWA.

No. 16-9511.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Iowa denied.
Michael Leslie LAKE, petitioner, v. Michael SKELTON.

No. 17-1089.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 16, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
# C_2009180EN.01005102.xml

| 1.8.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 180/51 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.8.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 180/51

---

Order of the President of the Court of First Instance of 8 June 2009 — Dover v Parliament

(Case T-149/09 R)

(Application for interim measures - Recovery of allowances paid by way of reimbursement of parliamentary assistance expenses - Application for suspension of operation of a measure - Inadmissibility - No urgency)

2009/C 180/96

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Densmore Ronald Dover, (Borehamwood, Hertfordshire, United Kingdom) (represented by: D. Vaughan QC, M. Lester, Barrister, and M. French, Solicitor)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Parliament (represented by: H. Krück, D. Moore and M. Windisch, Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for suspension of the operation of Decision D (2009) 4639 of the Secretary General of the European Parliament of 29 January 2009 concerning the recovery of allowances unduly paid to the applicant by way of reimbursement of his parliamentary assistance expenses, of the debit note based on that decision and of any decision taken with a view to offsetting the amount claimed against payment of other parliamentary allowances due to the applicant.

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The application for interim measures is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The application for interim measures is dismissed.

| 2. | Costs are reserved. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Costs are reserved.

---
Alvin GLASGOW, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-7471.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 20, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
MATTHEW PHILLIP ALEXANDER

,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

,

Appellee

. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D 15

- 5186

_____________________________/

Opinion filed November 2, 2017.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Clay County

. Don H. Lester , Judge

.

Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Steven L. Seliger, Assistant Public Defender,

Tallahassee , for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee , for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

LEWIS

, KELSEY, and M.K. THOMAS

, J J

. , CONCUR.
SANDOZ INC., petitioner, v. AMGEN INC., et al.

No. 15-1039.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 25, 2017.

The following briefing schedule is adopted:

Petitioner in No. 15-1039 will file an opening brief limited to the question presented in its petition, not to exceed 15,000 words, on or before Friday, February 10, 2017. Petitioner in No. 15-1195 will file a consolidated opening brief on the question presented in their petition and response brief, not to exceed 19,000 words, on or before Friday, March 10, 2017. Petitioner in No. 15-1039 will file a consolidated response brief and reply brief, not to exceed 10,000 words, on or before Friday, March 31, 2017. Petitioner in No. 15-1195 will file a reply brief, not to exceed 6,000 words, on or before Friday, April 14, 2017.

Any brief of an *amicus curiae* in support of petitioner in No. 15-1039 or in support of neither party is to be filed on or before Friday, February 17, 2017, and the brief should bear a light green cover. Any brief of an *amicus curiae* in support of petitioner in No. 15-1195 is to be filed on or before Friday, March 17, 2017, and the brief should bear a dark green cover. An *amicus curiae* may file only a single brief in this case.