alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

DEVORIS NEWSON,

Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee.

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-24-00115-CR

Appeal from the

County Court of Law 4

of El Paso County, Texas

(TC#2019DCO2154)

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes the appeal should be 

dismissed for want of jurisdiction. We therefore dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. We 

further order that this decision be certified below for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 29TH DAY OF MAY 2024.

LISA J. SOTO, Justice

Before Palafox, J., Soto, J., and Barajas, C.J. (Senior Judge)

Barajas, C.J. (Senior Judge) (sitting by assignment)
Emerencio ROSA, Jr., petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-7309.

Supreme Court of the United States

Feb. 20, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
II-00627

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Mercedes Barnek <mcbarnek@msn.com>

Thursday, December 2, 2010 1:13 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.

Mercedes Barnek

38 Cooper Blvd.

Red Bank, NJ 07701
EXHIBIT
      32.2





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 Quarterly Report of Cost-U-Less, Inc. (the “Company”) on
      Form 10-Q for the period ended October 1, 2006, as filed with the Securities
      and
      Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Martin P. Moore, Chief
      Financial 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:





(1)  The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and





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








Date:
      November 13, 2006








/s/
                Martin P. MooreMartin
                P. MooreChief
                Financial Officer
II-00462

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Judith Abel <mohawkwoman2@juno.com>

Thursday, December 2, 2010 6:13 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.

Judith Abel

4183 Wellman Road

McLouth, KS 66054
# C_2011355EN.01001701.xml

| 3.12.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 355/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.12.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 355/17

---

Judgment of the General Court of 20 October 2011 — COR Sitzmöbel Helmut Lübke v OHIM — El Corte Inglés (COR)

(Case T-214/09) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for territorial extension of the protection of an international registration - Word mark COR - Earlier Community word mark CADENACOR - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 (now Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009) - Similarity of the signs - Similarity of the goods)

2011/C 355/28

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: COR Sitzmöbel Helmut Lübke GmbH & Co. KG (Rheda-Wiedenbrück, Germany) (represented by: Y.-G. von Amsberg and A.-S. Loesenbeck, lawyers)

Applicant:

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

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM, intervener before the General Court: El Corte Inglés, SA (Madrid, Spain) (represented by: J.L. Rivas Zurdo, M.E. López Camba and Seijo Veiguela, lawyers)

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

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 4 March 2009 (Case R 376/2008-2) concerning opposition proceedings between El Corte Inglés, SA, and COR Sitzmöbel Helmut Lübke GmbH & Co. KG.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders COR Sitzmöbel Helmut Lübke GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders COR Sitzmöbel Helmut Lübke GmbH & Co. KG to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 180, 1.8.2009.

1

---
# C_2012109EN.01003401.xml

| 14.4.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 109/34 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.4.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 109/34

---

Order of the General Court of 16 February 2012 — Escola Superior Agrária de Coimbra v Commission

(Case T-446/09) (1)

1

2012/C 109/67

Language of the case: Portuguese

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

---

(1)  OJ C 37, 13.2.2010.

1

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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FORM 10-QSB
FOR FIRST QUARTER ENDED MARCH 31, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                          628433
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  2502908
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               3181982
<PP&E>                                           50641
<DEPRECIATION>                                    6464
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 3851192
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          2348555
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       3852825
<OTHER-SE>                                      231207
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   3851192
<SALES>                                         349974
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                349974
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   364745
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (5999)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (5999)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (5999)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (0.005)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
# C_2012118EN.01002301.xml

| 21.4.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 118/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.4.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 118/23

---

Judgment of the General Court of 6 March 2012 — Commission v Liotti

(Case T-167/09 P) (1)

1

(Appeal - Civil service - Officials - Reports procedure - Career Development Report - 2006 appraisal procedure - General Implementing Provisions - Application of the appraisal standards consistently and through consultation)

2012/C 118/37

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Appellant: European Commission (represented by: B. Eggers and K. Herrmann, Agents)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: Amerigo Liotti (Senningerberg, Luxembourg) (represented by: F. Frabetti, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings:

Re:

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the European Union Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 17 February 2009 in Case F-38/08 Liotti v Commission [2009] ECR-SC I-A-I-0000 and II-A-1-0000 and for that judgment to be set aside.

Liotti

Commission

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the appeal; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the appeal;

| 2. | Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Mr Amerigo Liotti in the present proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders the European Commission to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by Mr Amerigo Liotti in the present proceedings.

---

(1)  OJ C 167, 18.7.2009.

1

---
EXHIBIT
32.2





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED


PURSUANT
TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I,
Michael J. Loiacono, the Chief Financial Officer and Chief Accounting Officer of
Global Axcess Corp (the "Company"), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to the best of my
knowledge:





(1) the
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the second quarter ended June
30, 2010 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13 (a)
or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d));
and





(2) the
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Dated:
August 11, 2010





/s/ Michael J.
      LoiaconoName:
      Michael J. LoiaconoTitle:
      Chief Financial Officer and Chief Accounting
  Officer
II-00257

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

luis david saraiva grivol <luis52.dsg@gmail.com>

Friday, December 3, 2010 7:57 AM

dfadefinitions <dfadefinitions@CFTC.gov>

Re: No loopholes in Dodd-Frank

1) Securities and Exchange Commission/Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Commercial Risk (CFTC PIN

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 (PIN 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.

luis david saraiva grivol

138 Jeronima Dias St flat64

sgo paulo - brazil, ot 02407000
1219.

#### Patterson *v.*The State.

Indictment for assault with intent to rape, from Franklin superior court — Judge Brand. April 21, 1908.

Submitted June 30,

Decided. July 8, 1908.

*A. G. & Julian McCurry,*for plaintiff in error.

*S. J. Tribble, solicitor-general,*contra.

Powell, J.

The evidence is not insufficient to support the verdict. The exceptions to the charge of the court are not meritorious.

*Judgment affirmed.*
# C_2009167EN.01002602.xml

| 18.7.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 167/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.7.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 167/26

---

Action brought on 2 April 2009 — Armitage-Wilson v Europol

(Case F-36/09)

2009/C 167/50

Language of the case: Dutch

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Kate Armitage-Wilson (the Hague, the Netherlands) (represented by: W. J. Dammingh)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Police Office (Europol)

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the decision of 12 June 2008 informing the applicant that it was impossible to offer her a permanent post, and the decision of 7 January 2009 rejecting the complaint brought against the first decision.

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Tribunal should:

| — | annul the decision of 12 June 2008 by which the defendant informed the applicant that it could not offer her a permanent post and the decision of 7 January 2009 in response to a complaint, stating that the objections which the applicant had raised to the decision of 12 June 2008 were unfounded; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of 12 June 2008 by which the defendant informed the applicant that it could not offer her a permanent post and the decision of 7 January 2009 in response to a complaint, stating that the objections which the applicant had raised to the decision of 12 June 2008 were unfounded;

| — | order Europol to pay the costs |
| --- | --- |

—

order Europol to pay the costs

---
# C_2009167EN.01002604.xml

| 18.7.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 167/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.7.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 167/26

---

Action brought on 2 April 2009 — Martin v Europol

(Case F-38/09)

2009/C 167/52

Language of the case: Dutch

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Breige Martin (Dublin, Ireland) (represented by: P. de Casparis)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Police Office (Europol)

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the decision of 12 June 2008 informing the applicant that it was impossible to offer her a permanent post, and the decision of 7 January 2009 rejecting the complaint brought against the first decision.

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Tribunal should:

| — | annul the decision of 12 June 2008 by which the defendant informed the applicant that it could not offer her a permanent post and the decision of 7 January 2009 in response to a complaint, stating that the objections which the applicant had raised to the decision of 12 June 2008 were unfounded; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of 12 June 2008 by which the defendant informed the applicant that it could not offer her a permanent post and the decision of 7 January 2009 in response to a complaint, stating that the objections which the applicant had raised to the decision of 12 June 2008 were unfounded;

| — | order Europol to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order Europol to pay the costs.

---
Page 1 

Commodity Futures Trading Commission 

CEA CASES 

NAME: BENEDICT K. GOODMAN 

CITATION: 19 Agric. Dec. 6 

DOCKET NUMBER: 81 

DATE: JANUARY 20, 1962 

DOCUMENT TYPE: ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION 

(No. 6321) 

In re BENEDICT K. GOODMAN. CEA Docket No. 81. Decided January 20, 1960. 

Petition for Reconsideration -- Dismissal

The decision and order of October 12, 1959 (18 Agric. Dec. 1121 (18 A.D. 

1121)), are reinstated and the order shall become effective March 1, 1960. 

Decision by Thomas J. Flavin, Judicial Officer 

ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR RECONSIDERATION

In this proceeding under the Commodity Exchange Act. (7 U.S.C. Chapter 1) a 

decision and order were entered October 12, 1959, to the effect that respondent 

had violated the Commodity Exchange Act and contract markets were directed to 

refuse all trading privileges to respondent for a period of 20 days. Respondent 

filed a petition for reconsideration November 12, 1959, after an order staying 

the effectiveness of the sanction had been entered October 27, 1959. 

Complainant filed an answer to the petition for reconsideration December 7, 

1959. 

Respondent's petition for reconsideration does not persuade us that any 

further procedures should be employed in the proceeding or that any change 

should be made in the decision and order of October 12, 1959. Moreover, we 

cannot accede to respondent's request that if the decision upon reconsideration 

be adverse to him, there be no publicity or service upon contract markets until 

respondent has decided whether or not he will seek court review. The act 

requires that notice of any order to contract markets to refuse trading 

privileges ". . . shall be sent forthwith by registered mail to the offending 

person and to the governing boards of said contract markets" (7 U.S.C. 9). 

Accordingly the decision and order of October 12, 1959, are reinstated and 

the order shall become effective March 1, 1960. 

LOAD-DATE: June 8, 2008 
Page 2
# C_2012273EN.01000801.xml

| 8.9.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 273/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.9.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 273/8

---

Order of the General Court of 4 July 2012 — ICO Satellite v Commission

(Case T-350/09) (1)

1

(Actions for annulment - Period allowed for commencing proceedings - Point from which time starts to run - Absence of excusable error - Manifest inadmissibility)

2012/C 273/12

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: ICO Satellite Ltd (Slough, United Kingdom) (represented by: S. Tupper, Solicitor, D. Anderson QC, and D. Scannell, Barrister)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: G. Braun and A. Nijenhuis, acting as Agents, assisted by D. Van Liedekerke and K. Platteau, lawyers)

Defendant:

Interveners in support of the defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: F. Florindo Gijón and G. Kimberley, acting as Agents), and Solaris Mobile Ltd (Dublin, Ireland) (represented by: J. Wheeler, Solicitor, and A. Robertson, Barrister)

Interveners in support of the defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision 2009/449/EC of 13 May 2009 on the selection of operators of pan-European systems providing mobile satellite services (MSS) (OJ 2009 L 149, p. 65).

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible.

| 2. | ICO Satellite Ltd shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission. |
| --- | --- |

2.

ICO Satellite Ltd shall bear its own costs and pay those incurred by the European Commission.

| 3. | The Council of the European Union and Solaris Mobile Ltd shall bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

The Council of the European Union and Solaris Mobile Ltd shall bear their own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 267, 7.11.2009.

1

---
# C_2010024EN.01002602.xml

| 30.1.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 24/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.1.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 24/26

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal de Grande Instance de Périgueux (France) lodged on 9 November 2009 — AG2R Prévoyance v Beaudout Père et Fils SARL

(Case C-437/09)

2010/C 24/48

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Referring court

Tribunal de Grande Instance de Périgueux

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: AG2R Prévoyance

Applicant:

Defendant: Beaudout Père et Fils SARL

Defendant:

Question referred

Question referred

Are a provision making affiliation to a supplementary healthcare scheme compulsory, as provided for under Article L 912-1 of the Social Security Code, and the addendum, made compulsory by the public authorities at the request of organisations representing employers and workers in a given sector, which provides for affiliation to a single body, designated to manage a supplementary healthcare scheme, without any possibility for undertakings in that sector to be granted a waiver of the affiliation obligation, in compliance with Articles 81 EC and 82 EC, or are they such as to place the designated body in a dominant position constituting an abuse?

---