alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Release: #4042-97 (CFTC Docket #97-13)

For Release: August 7, 1997CFTC CHARGES GLOBAL CURRENCIES LTD., LEON LEVITIS, ILYA LEVITIS, ALEX
    EFROSMAN, AND PAUL MANFRE WITH FRAUD IN THE SALE OF ILLEGAL FOREIGN
    CURRENCY FUTURES CONTRACTSRespondents Are Also Charged With Bucketing Customer Orders, Issuing
    False Reports, Converting Customer Funds, and With Registration
    Violations WASHINGTON -- The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) today
    announced the filing of an eight-count administrative complaint charging
    Global Currencies Ltd., of New York, New York, and its three
    co-founders: Leon Levitis of Brooklyn, New York; Ilya Levitis
    of Brooklyn, New York; and Alex Efrosman of New York, New York; and
    Global's sales manager and chief trader, Paul Manfre, of Brooklyn,
    New York, with, among other things, fraudulently selling illegal foreign
    currency futures contracts to the general public.

With the exception of Ilya Levitis, none of the respondents has ever
    been registered with the CFTC in any capacity. Ilya Levitis was registered
    with the CFTC between July 1993 and September 1995 as an associated person
    of I&L Global Consultants, Ltd., a commodity trading adviser.

The CFTC complaint charges that, between October 1994 and October 1995,
    Leon and Ilya Levitis, who are brothers, and Global Currencies offered and
    sold illegal foreign currency futures contracts; cheated and defrauded
    customers in connection with the offer and sale of such contracts; issued
    false reports and statements to customers; bucketed customer orders;
    commingled and converted customer funds; and violated the CFTC's
    registration requirements -- all in violation of the Commodity Exchange Act
    (CEA) and CFTC regulations. Efrosman and Manfre are charged with committing
    fraud, offering and selling illegal futures contracts, and with
    registration violations.

Specifically, the CFTC complaint alleges that the respondents cheated
    and defrauded customers through false claims and misrepresentations
    concerning the likelihood of profit and the risk of loss, the placement of
    customer orders with foreign exchange dealers, the profitability of
    previous investments made by customers at Global, the safety associated
    with an investment at Global, and the experience and expertise of Global
    and its traders. The respondents are also charged with misrepresenting that
    customers' money would be held in segregated accounts and be returned upon
    demand.

A public hearing is to be held to determine whether the allegations
    against the Respondents are true and to determine what sanctions should be
    imposed. Possible CFTC sanctions include: cease and desist orders
    prohibiting the respondents from violating provisions of the CEA and CFTC
    regulations; trading prohibitions; restitution of customer losses; and
    civil penalties of not more than the higher of $100,000 or triple the
    monetary gain to the respondents for each violation of the CEA and CFTC
    regulations.
# L_2007209EN.01001001.xml

| 9.8.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 209/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.8.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 209/10

---

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE

No 5/2007

of 27 April 2007

amending Annex II (Technical regulations, standards, testing and certification) to the EEA Agreement

THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area, as amended by the Protocol adjusting the Agreement on the European Economic Area, hereinafter referred to as ‘the Agreement’, and in particular Article 98 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Annex II to the Agreement was amended by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 144/2006 of 8 December 2006 (1). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Annex II to the Agreement was amended by Decision of the EEA Joint Committee No 144/2006 of 8 December 2006 (1).

| (2) | Commission Directive 2006/72/EC of 18 August 2006 amending for the purposes of adapting to technical progress Directive 97/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on certain components and characteristics of two or three-wheel motor vehicles (2) is to be incorporated into the Agreement, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Commission Directive 2006/72/EC of 18 August 2006 amending for the purposes of adapting to technical progress Directive 97/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on certain components and characteristics of two or three-wheel motor vehicles (2) is to be incorporated into the Agreement,

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

Article 1

The following indent shall be added in point 45x (Directive 97/24/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council) of Chapter I of Annex II to the Agreement:

| ‘— | 32006 L 0072: Commission Directive 2006/72/EC of 18 August 2006 (OJ L 227, 19.8.2006, p. 43).’ |
| --- | --- |

‘—

32006 L 0072: Commission Directive 2006/72/EC of 18 August 2006 (OJ L 227, 19.8.2006, p. 43).’

Article 2

The text of Directive 2006/72/EC in the Icelandic and Norwegian languages, to be published in the EEA Supplement to the Official Journal of the European Union, shall be authentic.

Article 3

This Decision shall enter into force on 28 April 2007, provided that all the notifications under Article 103(1) of the Agreement have been made to the EEA Joint Committee (*1).

Article 4

This Decision shall be published in the EEA Section of, and in the EEA Supplement to, the Official Journal of the European Union.

Done at Brussels, 27 April 2007.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

Alan SEATTER

---

(1)  
  OJ L 89, 29.3.2007, p. 11.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 227, 19.8.2006, p. 43.

2

(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.

*1

---
Release: #4014-97 (CFTC Docket No. 93-5)

For Release:April 29, 1997

CFTC ACCEPTS SETTLEMENT OFFER OF CHRISTOPHER ENGEL

Settlement Agreement Revokes Engel's Registration with the CFTC and
    Orders Him to Pay a $75,000 Civil Penalty, Among Other Sanctions

WASHINGTON -- The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) announced
    today that it issued an order accepting an offer of settlement from Christopher Engel, a floor broker on the Commodity Exchange Inc., in
    connection with a complaint filed by the CFTC on March 2, 1993. Engel is
    registered with the CFTC as a floor broker.

The CFTC order finds that Engel violated provisions of the Commodity
    Exchange Act (CEA) and CFTC regulations prohibiting wash sales, fictitious
    sales, accommodation trading, causing the reporting of non bona fide
    prices, and noncompetitive trading.

In addition, the CFTC order finds that Engel participated in
    noncompetitive trades with floor brokers and local traders. According to
    the CFTC order, Engel's noncompetitive trading enabled another broker to
    bucket indirectly or trade indirectly opposite his orders. The CFTC order
    further finds that Engel engaged in prearranged trades in which money was
    passed between Engel and another broker.

Engel, without admitting or denying the findings in the CFTC's order,
    consented to the entry of a CFTC order:

--finding that Engel engaged in noncompetitive trading and fictitious
    sales, wash sales and accommodation trading (section 4c(a)(A) of the CEA,
    and CFTC regulation 1.38(a); and caused prices to be reported which were
    not true and bona fide (section 4c(a)(B) of the CEA);

--directing Engel to cease and desist from further violations;

--prohibiting Engel from trading on a contract market for nine
    months;

--revoking Engel's registration with the Commission; and

--directing Engel to pay a $75,000 civil monetary penalty.

Under the settlement, Engel also agreed not to seek registration with
    the Commission in any capacity for three years except that after one year
    he may seek to be registered as a floor trader, and, if such registration
    is granted, he shall be subject to conditional registration with a sponsor
    for two years. Engel further agreed to cooperate with the CFTC in any
    ongoing proceeding relating to this matter.

CFTC Commissioner John E. Tull, Jr. dissented from the Commission's
    acceptance of the offer of settlement of Mr. Engel.
# C_2012379EN.01000501.xml

| 8.12.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 379/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.12.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 379/5

---

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 18 October 2012 (reference for a preliminary ruling from the Court of Appeal (England and Wales) (Civil Division) — United Kingdom) — United States of America v Christine Nolan

(Case C-583/10) (1)

1

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Directive 98/59/EC - Protection of workers - Collective redundancies - Scope - Closure of an American military base - Information and consultation of workers - Time at which the consultation obligation arises - Lack of jurisdiction of the Court)

2012/C 379/07

Language of the case: English

Referring court

Referring court

Court of Appeal (England and Wales) (Civil Division)

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: United States of America

Applicant:

Defendant: Christine Nolan

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Reference for a preliminary ruling — Court of Appeal (England & Wales) (Civil Division) — Interpretation of Articles 2 and 5 of Council Directive 98/59/EC of 20 July 1998 on the approximation of the laws of the Member States relating to collective redundancies (OJ 1998 L 225, p. 16) — Employer’s obligation to inform and consult the workers’ representatives — Determination of the time at which that obligation arises

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court of Justice of the European Union does not have jurisdiction to reply to the question referred by the Court of Appeal (England & Wales) (Civil Division) (United Kingdom), by decision of 6 December 2010.

---

(1)  OJ C 89, 19.3.2011.

1

---
Ann Ellen DUNLAP, petitioner, v. Steven T. MNUCHIN, Secretary of the Treasury, et al.

No. 17-1523.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 11, 2018.

*2637Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court for the Sixth Circuit denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FORM 10-Q
FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                           4,163
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   35,149
<ALLOWANCES>                                       668
<INVENTORY>                                     11,692
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                54,356
<PP&E>                                          23,872
<DEPRECIATION>                                  11,068
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  69,005
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           18,482
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        37,851
<OTHER-SE>                                      12,672
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    69,005
<SALES>                                         44,357
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                79,871
<CGS>                                           19,210
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   70,975
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 (136)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  9,032
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,496
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              6,536
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     6,536
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.54
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.3

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

         In connection with the Annual Report of IA Global, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Mark E. Scott,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350,
as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of
my knowledge, that:

         (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

                                        /s/ Mark E. Scott
                                        Mark E. Scott
                                        Chief Financial Officer
                                        February 3, 2004
Gregory Francis AUSTIN, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-5600.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

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

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3859 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3859

To authorize the Attorney General to appoint 100 additional immigration 
                    judges, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 19, 2019

  Mrs. Lesko introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To authorize the Attorney General to appoint 100 additional immigration 
                    judges, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. IMMIGRATION JUDGES.

    (a) In General.--The Attorney General may appoint 100 additional 
immigration judges in addition to immigration judges currently serving 
as of the date of enactment of this Act.
    (b) Authorization of Appropriations.--There is authorized to be 
appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out this section.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 23.1

Consent of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Auditors

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Form S-8 Nos. 333-61036 and 333-89943)
pertaining to the InsWeb Corporation 1995 Stock Option Plan, 1997 Stock Option Plan, Senior Executive Nonstatutory Stock Option Plan and 1999 Employee Stock Purchase Plan of our report dated
January 24, 2003, except for the first paragraph of Note 16, as to which the date is February 20, 2003, and except for the second paragraph of Note 16, as to which the date
is March 24, 2003, with respect to the 2002 and 2001 consolidated financial statements and schedule of InsWeb Corporation included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year
ended December 31, 2002.

/s/ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Sacramento,
California
March 26, 2003

---

QuickLinks
Leonard L. BEST, et al., petitioners, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE.

No. 17-1577.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 25, 2018.

*2692Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
Rebecca WINGO, petitioner, v. KANSAS.

No. 17-6790.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 25, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Kansas denied.
CAUSE NUMBER 03

— 15

— 00318

— CR

JAMAAL BRADLEY X IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

X

V. X THIRD COURT OF APPEALS

X

STATE OF TEXAS X STATE OF TEXAS

APPELLANT ’S MOTION TO EXTEND TIME FOR FILING OF

APPELLANT’S BRIEF

TO THE HONORABLE COURT OF APPEALS:

COMES NOW THE APPELLANT, by and through his appointed

attorney of record, Paul M. Evans, in the above entitled and numbered

cause, and moves this Court, to grant the Appellant’s Motion to Extend

Time for Filing Appellant’s Brief, and, in support thereof, would show the

Court as follows:

I.

Appellant ’s Brief was due before this Court on September 7, 2015

.

No previous Motions to Extend Time have been sought.

II.

The undersigned counsel needs additional time to examine the record

and complete the research necessary to complete the Appellant’s Brief

. At

this juncture, counsel has made a full review of the record on appeal and has ACCEPTED

03-15-00318-CR

6969454

THIRD COURT OF APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

9/17/2015 11:23:58 AM

JEFFREY D. KYLE

CLERKidentified all potential issues therein. However, counsel requires more time

to draft the brief and research said issues. Counsel w ould hereby

respectfully request the deadline be extended to November 1, 2015. In the

meantime, counsel will endeavor to complete and fi le the Appellant’s Brief

at the earliest opportunity.

III.

This Motion is not made for purposes of delay, but so that justice

might be served.

WHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED, the Defendant respectfully

prays that this Court, upon good cause shown, grant the Appellant’s Motion

to Extend Time for Filing Appellant’s Brief.

Respectfully submitted,

Law Office of Paul M. Evans

811 Nueces Street

Austin, Texas 78701

(512) 569

- 1418

(512) 6 92

- 8002 FAX

_/s/ Paul M. Evans

________ PAUL M. EVANS

SBN 24038885

Attorney for DefendantCERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of t he above and foregoing

was delivered by facsimile unto the office of the prosecuting attorney for the

State of Texas

— the Travis County District Attorney, mailing address P.O.

Box 1748, Austin, TX, 78767, physical address 509 W. 11 th Street, Austin,

TX, 787 01

— on this the 1 7 th day of September , 201 5

.

_/s/ Paul M. Evans

________ PAUL M. EVANS

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE

I hereby certify that the present document contains 3 6 5 words, all

contents included.

_/s/ Paul M. Evans

________ PAUL M. EVANS
Fredrick Lynn CAIN, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-8125.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 16, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Jose Hernando RODRIGUEZ, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-5582.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

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

Justice SOTOMAYOR and Justice KAGAN took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
Ashlei Renee ROBINSON, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-8287.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 30, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-10543

(Summary Calendar)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

TOMMY HOWARD STRICKLIN,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

(7:93-CR-012-Y-1)

February 26, 1996

Before JOLLY, JONES, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Tommy Howard Stricklin appeals his convictions and sentence for possession with intent to

manufacture a compound and mixture containing phenylacetone and possession of a listed chemical,

phenylacetic acid, with intent to manufacture methamphetamine. Stricklin contends that the district

court reversibly erred in calculating the drug quantity used to est ablish his base offense level, in

refusing to provide the jury with an “intent” instruction that he requested, and in denying his motion

to suppress evidence seized during the search of his property

. Stricklin also contends that he received

ineffective assistance of counsel because his attorney had a conflict of interest.2

We have reviewed the record and the briefs and perceive no reversible error. The record is

not sufficiently developed to properly evaluate Stricklin’s claims of ineffective assistance of counsel.

Accordingly, we affirm Stricklin’s convictions and sentence without prejudice to Stricklin’s right to

assert his ineffective assistance of counsel claims in a 28 U.S.C. § 2255 proceeding.
Exhibit 4.2

 

UXIN LIMITED

 

	
Number
    	
Class A   Ordinary Shares
    


 

Incorporated under the laws of the Cayman Islands

 

Share capital is US$1,000,000 divided into

(a) 9,600,000,000 Class A Ordinary Shares of a par value of US$0.0001 each;

(b) 100,000,000 Class B Ordinary Shares of a par value of US$0.0001 each; and

(c) 300,000,000 shares of a par value of US$0.0001 each

 

THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT                                                                is the registered holder of                                                 Class  A Ordinary Shares in the above-named Company subject to the Memorandum and Articles of Association thereof.

 

GIVEN UNDER the common seal of the said Company on                                  2018.

 

THE COMMON SEAL of the said Company was hereunto affixed in the presence of:

 

 

	
DIRECTOR
    	
 
    	
 
    


 











 

UXIN LIMITED

 

	
Number
    	
Class B   Ordinary Shares
    


 

Incorporated under the laws of the Cayman Islands

 

Share capital is US$1,000,000 divided into

(a) 9,600,000,000 Class A Ordinary Shares of a par value of US$0.0001 each;

(b) 100,000,000 Class B Ordinary Shares of a par value of US$0.0001 each; and

(c) 300,000,000 shares of a par value of US$0.0001 each

 

THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT                                                               is the registered holder of                                                 Class  B Ordinary Shares in the above-named Company subject to the Memorandum and Articles of Association thereof.

 

GIVEN UNDER the common seal of the said Company on                                  2018.

 

THE COMMON SEAL of the said Company was hereunto affixed in the presence of:

 

 

	
DIRECTOR
### THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13

- 21

- 00209

- CV

PROGRESSIVE COUNTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY v. ANSELMO M. CALTZONSING
On Appeal from the 377th District Court of Victoria County , Texas Trial Court Cause No. 19

- 08

- 84864

- D

JUDGMENT THE THIRTEENTH COUR T OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed . The Court orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED . Costs of the appeal are adjudged against appellant. We further order this de cision certified below for observance. November 17, 2022
Luis Angel GARCIA, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-8763.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 11, 2018.

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