alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Justin WILLIAMS, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 16-9375.

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.
Michael Lamar PERRY, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-7875.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 26, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
Kyle E. McCLAMMA, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-1109.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 19, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
II-00535

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Peggy Messent <pegmessent@yahoo.com>

Thursday, December 2, 2010 3:21 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-AD17 )

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.

Peggy Messent

10441 Paradise Bay Court

Clermont, FL 34711
Roy Red JOEY, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 16-9403.

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.
In Re Roosevelt JEANLOUIS, petitioner.

No. 17-7931.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 26, 2018.

Petition for writ of habeas corpus denied.
No. 521.

#### Heard et al. *v.*Houston Gulf Gas Co. et al.

November 18, 1935.

*Mr. Samuel B. Dabney*for petitioners.

*Mr. W. A. Vinson*for respondents.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Circuit Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-6986

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

GEORGE BENNETT,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle

District of North Carolina, at Winston-Salem. William L. Osteen,

District Judge. (CR-94-189-6; CA-04-300-1)

Submitted: July 29, 2004 Decided: August 12, 2004

Before LUTTIG, MICHAEL, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

George Bennett, Appellant Pro Se. Benjamin H. White, Jr., OFFICE OF

THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greensboro, North Carolina, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

George Bennett seeks to appeal the district court’s order

denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) as

successive. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice

or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue

absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional

right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this

standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that

his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive

procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or

wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003);

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d

676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently reviewed the

record and conclude that Bennett has not made the requisite

showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability. 

To the extent Bennett’s notice of appeal and informal

brief could be construed as a motion for authorization to file a

successive § 2255 motion, we deny such authorization. United

States v. Winestock, 340 F.3d 200, 208 (4th Cir.), cert. denied,

124 S. Ct. 496 (2003). We dispense with oral argument because the

facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the

materials before the court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

DISMISSED
[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 126 (Friday, June 29, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Page 34733]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-16416]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of the Secretary


List of Countries Requiring Cooperation With an International 
Boycott

    In order to comply with the mandate of section 999(a)(3) of the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986, the Department of the Treasury is 
publishing a current list of countries which may require participation 
in, or cooperation with, an international boycott (within the meaning 
of section 999(b)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986).
    On the basis of the best information currently available to the 
Department of the Treasury, the following countries may require 
participation in, or cooperation with, an international boycott (within 
the meaning of section 999(b)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986):

Bahrain,
Iraq,
Kuwait,
Lebanon,
Libya,
Oman,
Qatar,
Saudi Arabia,
Syria,
United Arab Emirates,
Yemen, Republic of.

    Dated: June 22, 2001.
Barbara Angus,
International Tax Counsel, (Tax Policy).
[FR Doc. 01-16416 Filed 6-28-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-25-M
In re William M. WINDSOR, petitioner.

No. 16-6369 (R46-003).

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 20, 2016.

The petition for writ of mandamus and the motion for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis* were dismissed today pursuant to Rule 46.2 of the Rules of this Court.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2001
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                       2,754,974
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,149,498
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,904,472
<PP&E>                                       9,040,723
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              12,945,195
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          534,055
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        59,784
<OTHER-SE>                                  12,351,356
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                12,945,195
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                65,512
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               963,055
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (897,543)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (897,543)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (897,543)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
II-00759

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Rachel Linstead <rachelelinstead@hotmail.com>

Thursday, December 2, 2010 11:38 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.

Rachel Linstead

1620 Federal St

Philadelphia, PA 1914/
Thomas D. NOONAN, petitioner, v. COUNTY OF OAKLAND, MICHIGAN, et al.

No. 17-473.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 19, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
David Benoit MECH, petitioner, v. SCHOOL BOARD OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA.

No. 15-1412.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 3, 2016.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
# C_2011252EN.01005703.xml

| 27.8.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 252/57 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.8.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 252/57

---

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (Third Chamber) of 11 January 2011 — Dekker v Europol

(Case F-87/09) (1)

1

2011/C 252/128

Language of the case: Dutch

The President of the Third Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register, following amicable settlement.

---

(1)  OJ C 24, 30.1.2010, p. 80.

1

---
William Michael JORDAN, petitioner, v. MISSISSIPPI.

No. 16-9533.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Mississippi denied.
# C_2010179EN.01002702.xml

| 3.7.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 179/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.7.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 179/27

---

Order of the President of the Court of 25 March 2010 — European Commission v Kingdom of Belgium

(Case C-315/09) (1)

(2010/C 179/44)

Language of the case: French

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

---

(1)  OJ C 256, 24.10.2009.

---
**Judgment of the General Court (First Chamber) of 9 September 2011 – Omnicare v OHIM – Astellas Pharma (OMNICARE)**

**(Case T-290/09)**

Community trade mark – Opposition proceedings – Application for Community word mark OMNICARE – Earlier national figurative mark OMNICARE – Likelihood of confusion – Similarity of the signs – Similarity of the services – Genuine use of the earlier mark

Community trade mark – Definition and acquisition of the Community trade mark – Relative grounds for refusal – Opposition by the proprietor of an earlier identical or similar mark registered for identical or similar goods or services
– Likelihood of confusion with the earlier mark (Council Regulation No 207/2009, Art. 8(1)(b)) (see para. 95)

**Re:**

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | ACTION against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 14 May 2009 (Case R 402/2008-4), concerning opposition proceedings between Yamanouchi Pharma GmbH and Omnicare, Inc. |

**Operative part**

The Court:

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

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 2. | | Orders Omnicare, Inc. to pay the costs. |
II-00762

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Nick Berezansky <nick@acereprographic.com>

Thursday, December 2, 2010 11:36 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.

Nick Berezansky

123 Washingotn P1.

Ridgewood, NJ 7450
COMMONWEALTH ELECTION COMMISSION, et al., petitioners, v. John H. DAVIS, Jr.

No. 16-1437.

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.
Adrian LACEY, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 16-9382.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
Charles Dereck ADAMS, petitioner, v. MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD, et al.

No. 16-6845.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 9, 2017.

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis* denied. Petitioner allowed until January 30, 2017, within which to pay the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) and to submit a petition in compliance with Rule 33.1 of the Rules of this Court.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                          17,387
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    5,410
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (212)
<INVENTORY>                                      1,667
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                40,253
<PP&E>                                           3,772
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (2,191)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  49,256
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            5,406
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            22
<OTHER-SE>                                      43,828
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    49,256
<SALES>                                         28,918
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                28,918
<CGS>                                            9,480
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    9,480
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                13,026
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  7,382
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,587
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              4,795
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,795
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.24
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.22


</TABLE>
II-00028

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

gary bennett <garyeunicebennett@msn.com>

Sunday, December 12, 2010 11:03 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.

gary bennett

1436 toledo st

bellingham, WA 98229
II-00914

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Constance Waters <ecwaters3@msn.com>

Thursday, December 2, 2010 10:04 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.

Constance Waters

104 Gate House Lane

Edison, NJ 8820
Keith HARRIS, petitioner, v. Harold HAHN, et al.

No. 16-575.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 9, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.