alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
II-00686

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

James JOHNSON <campsurff@yahoo.com>

Thursday, December 2, 2010 12:29 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.

James JOHNSON

2704 Otis St SE

Olympia, WA 98501
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 15-7573

ROBERT COOPER,

Plaintiff - appellant,

v.

BRAD BRINEGAR; C. or F. DAVIS, B. PAYTON; CPL. LOGSDON; CPL. 

WILBURN; CPL. BARB; CPL. HENDRICKS; CHIEF MICHAEL P. THOMAS;

CPL. S. A. WILSON; CPL. R. CONNER; CPL. J. FONTAIN; CPL. HETZ; 

CPL. M. DAVIS; OFFICER HENDRICKS; S. DILLEY; RONALD SHANE 

WEBER; FRANK BISHOP, JR.,

Defendants – Appellees,

and

SECRETARY GREGG HERSHBERGER; SERGEANT CRUMPAC,

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, Senior District Judge. 

(1:13-cv-03692-JFM)

Submitted: February 25, 2016 Decided: March 1, 2016

Before SHEDD and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and DAVIS, Senior Circuit 

Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
2

Robert Cooper, Appellant Pro Se. Stephanie Judith Lane-Weber, 

Assistant Attorney General, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
3

PER CURIAM:

Robert Cooper seeks to appeal the district court’s order 

granting in part and denying in part Defendants’ motion for summary 

judgment. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final 

orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2012), and certain interlocutory and 

collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2012); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); 

Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541, 545-46 (1949). 

The order Cooper seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an 

appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we 

dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We dispense with 

oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are 

adequately presented in the materials before this court and 

argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
1 The Honorable Joan N. Ericksen, United St ates District Judge for the District of Minnesota, adopting the report and r ecommendations of the Honorable Jonathan G. Lebedoff, United States Magistrate J udge for the District of Minnesota, now retired. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 05-3197

___________ Paul Stefanyshyn, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * District of Minnesota. Shafer Contracting Co., Inc., * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellee. *

___________ Submitted: August 3, 2006 Filed: August 9, 2006

___________ Before MURPHY, BYE, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Paul Stefanyshyn appeals the district court’s 1 dismissal of his complaint under the Age Discrimination in Employment Ac t and the Missouri Human Rights Act. Following de novo review, see Meyer v. City of Joplin , 281 F.3d 759, 760 (8th Cir. 2002) (per curiam) (standard of review), we agree with the district court that Stefanyshyn failed to state a claim under either statute, see29 U.S.C. § 623(a)-(c)-2- (defining types of prohibited age discrimination); Minn. Stat. § 363A.08(2) (2004) (defining types of prohibited discrimination). Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

______________________________
Aric W. HALL, petitioner, v. TEXAS COMMISSION ON LAW ENFORCEMENT, et al.

No. 17-6014.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 30, 2017.

*420Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Harold L. WILBORN, petitioner, v. MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD.

No. 16-1469.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit denied.
EXHIBIT 32.2


Certification


Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002


(Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code)


Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), the undersigned officer of Nautilus, Inc., a Washington corporation (the “Company”), does hereby certify that:


To my knowledge, the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009 (the “Form 10-K”) of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





March 8, 2011By:/s/ Kenneth L. FishDateKenneth L. Fish,Chief Financial Officer


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
```
  
 
VIX FUTURES - CBOE FUTURES EXCHANGE                                  Code-1170E1
OPTION AND FUTURES COMBINED POSITIONS AS OF 07/14/09          |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  Long  | Short  |Spreads |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
($1000 X INDEX)                                      OPEN INTEREST:       32,894
COMMITMENTS
  14,394    7,618    4,908    4,057   15,352   23,359   27,878    9,535    5,016

CHANGES FROM 07/07/09 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:      3,975)
   2,555    1,438     -666       21    1,742    1,910    2,514    2,065    1,461

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADER
    43.8     23.2     14.9     12.3     46.7     71.0     84.8     29.0     15.2

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:       22)
       9        5        6        7        5       20       12
```

----

Updated July 17, 2009
Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas

JUDGMENT

Clister Ray Thomas, Appellant

No. 06-13-00046-CR v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

Appeal from the 188th District Court of 

Gregg County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 41776-

A). Opinion delivered by Justice Carter, 

Chief Justice Morriss and Justice Moseley

participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find reversible error in the judgment of 

the court below. Therefore, we reverse the judgment of the trial court and remand the cause for a 

new trial.

We further order that the appellee, The State of Texas, pay all costs of this appeal.

RENDERED DECEMBER 30, 2014

BY ORDER OF THE COURT

JOSH R. MORRISS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST:

Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
Sadat EL-AMIN, petitioner, v. Darrel VANNOY, Warden.

No. 17-6108.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 13, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Maggae Jo JACKSON, petitioner, v. Sara E. LIOI, Judge, United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio.

No. 17-5212.

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.
<PAGE>   1
         SUBSIDIARIES ORGANIZED UNDER THE LAWS OF GERMANY:
         -------------------------------------------------
         PrimaCom Management GmbH
         PrimaTV broadcasting GmbH
         PrimaCom Sudwest II Gmbh
         PrimaCom Region Wiesbaden Gmbh & Co. KG
         PrimaCom Mettlach GmbH & Co. KG
         PrimaCom Maintal GmbH & Co. KG
         PrimaCom Stormarn GmbH & Co. KG
         PrimaCom Verl GmbH & Co. KG
         PrimaCom Nettetal GmbH & Co. KG
         PrimaCom Kabelbetriebsges. mbH & Co. KG Region Berlin
         PrimaCom Kabelbetriebsges. mbH & Co. KG Region Leipzig
         PrimaCom Kabelbetriebsges. mbH & Co. KG Region Sudwest
         Kabelcom Aachen Gesellschaft fur Kabelkommunikation mbH & Co. KG
         TELEVIS Grimma GmbH
         PrimaCom Network & Operations GmbH
         PrimaCom Marketing & Development GmbH
         PrimaCom Region Schwerin GmbH & Co. KG
         PrimaCom Projektmanagement GmbH& Co. KG
         PrimaCom Region Leipzig GmbH & Co. KG
         PrimaCom Region Magdeburg GmbH & Co. KG
         PrimaCom Region Dresden GmbH & Co. KG
         Zweite Kabelvision Management Beteiligungs GmbH & Co. KG
         PrimaCom Region Angelbachtal GmbH & Co. KG
         PrimaCom Region Berlin GmbH & Co. KG
         PrimaCom Nord GmbH
         Antennentechnik Busler GmbH
         Nexus Kabelfernsehservice GmbH
         Ad-media GmbH & Co. Local TV KG
         Kabelcom Halberstadt Ges. F. BreitbandkabelKommunikations mbH
         PKG Kabelbetriebsgesellschaft mbH
         Komco GmbH
         PrimaCom Sudwest I GmbH & Co. KG
         MKM Sonderhein Hordt GmbH & Co. KG
         PrimaCom Osnabruck mbH & Co. KG
         PrimaCom Projektmanagement GmbH
         Kutz-Kabel Service GmbH

         SUBSIDIARIES ORGANIZED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE NETHERLANDS:
         ---------------------------------------------------------
         Multikabel N.V.
         Communikabel N.V
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 4287 

To amend the Commodity Exchange Act to provide greater protection of 

proprietary information of other registered entities, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 11, 2019 

Mr. COX of California introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Agriculture 

A BILL 

To amend the Commodity Exchange Act to provide greater 

protection of proprietary information of other registered 

entities, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. PUBLIC INTEREST EXEMPTIONS. 

4 Section 4(c)(6) of the Commodity Exchange Act (7 

5 U.S.C. 6(c)(6)) is amended in the matter preceding sub6 paragraph (A) by inserting ‘‘, on the condition that an 

7 exemption pursuant to this paragraph shall include an ex8 emption from section 22,’’ after ‘‘requirements of this 

9 Act’’. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
Paul VIRIYAPANTHU, petitioner, v. Tani Gorre CANTIL-SAKAUYE, et al.

No. 17-377.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 27, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
doc1.htm

EXHIBIT 10.1
  
 WRITTEN CONSENT TO ACTION WITHOUT A MEETTING
 BY THE 
 BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF 
 WRIT MEDIA GROUP, INC.
  
 WHEREAS, in furtherance of the business strategy of Writ Media Group, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), the Board of Directors has deemed it appropriate for the Company, pursuant to the Delaware General Corporation Law § 141 (2017), to take the corporate action described herein without holding a meeting, the waiver and notice of which is unanimously acknowledged and agreed to by the Directors through their execution of this Written Consent to Action Without a Meeting (the “Written Consent”).
  
 WHEREAS, the Board of Directors has determined that it is in the best interests of the Company to adopt and approve the resolution as follows: 
  
 1. To amend the Articles of Incorporation to designate Twenty Million (20,000,000) shares of Series C Preferred stock as a newly-created “Series C Preferred Stock” (“Amendment”); and 
  
 RESOLVED, that the Board of Directors hereby approves to amend the Articles of Incorporation to designate Twenty Million (20,000,000) shares of Series C Preferred stock as a newly-created “Series C Preferred Stock” (attached as Exhibit A), with such approval to be conclusively evidenced by the Board of Directors’ execution of this Written Consent, as well as the preparation and execution of any and all other documents necessary to facilitate the Amendment.
  
 RESOLVED, that the Chairman of the Board, President/Chief Executive Officer, Treasurer, and Secretary of the Company hereby are, and each of them with the full authority to act without the others hereby is, authorized, in the name and on behalf of the Company and with the advice of counsel, to take all such actions necessary to facilitate the Amendment.
  
 Dated to be effective as of June 21, 2018.
  
  	 	 	 	 
	/s/: Patrick Arbor	 	/s/: Eric Mitchell 	 
	Patrick Arbor, Director	 	Eric Mitchell, Director
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 4139 

To provide for the boundary of the Palo Alto Battlefield National Historic 

Park to be adjusted, to authorize the donation of land to the United 

States for addition to that historic park, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 30, 2019 

Mr. VELA introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To provide for the boundary of the Palo Alto Battlefield 

National Historic Park to be adjusted, to authorize the 

donation of land to the United States for addition to 

that historic park, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. BOUNDARY; LEGAL DESCRIPTION. 

4 (a) BOUNDARY.—Section 3(b)(2) of the Palo Alto 

5 Battlefield National Historic Site Act of 1991 (16 U.S.C. 

6 410nnn–1(b)(2)) is amended— 

7 (1) in subparagraph (A)— 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•HR 4139 IH

1 (A) by striking ‘‘consist of approximately’’ 

2 and inserting the following: ‘‘consist of— 

3 ‘‘(i) the approximately’’; 

4 (B) by striking the period at the end and 

5 inserting ‘‘; and’’; and 

6 (C) by adding at the end the following: 

7 ‘‘(ii) on the date that such land is do8 nated to the United States, the approxi9 mately 166.44 acres of land generally de10 picted on the map entitled ‘PALO ALTO 

11 BATTLEFIELD NATIONAL HISTOR12 ICAL PARK Proposed Boundary Addition, 

13 Fort Brown Unit’, numbered 469/143,589, 

14 and dated April 2018.’’; and 

15 (2) in subparagraph (B), by striking ‘‘map’’ 

16 and inserting ‘‘maps’’. 

17 (b) LEGAL DESCRIPTION.—Section 3(b)(3) of the 

18 Palo Alto Battlefield National Historic Site Act of 1991 

19 (16 U.S.C. 410nnn–1(b)(3)) is amended by striking 

20 ‘‘after’’ and all that follows through ‘‘Secretary of the In21 terior’’ and inserting ‘‘after the addition of lands to the 

22 historic park boundary, the Secretary of the Interior’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
Craig ROSS, et al., petitioners, v. BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF CALIFORNIA STATE UNIVERSITY.

No. 16-1452.

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.
Anselmo SOLANO-CRUZ, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 16-6288.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 14, 2018.

On petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis* and petition for writ of certiorari granted. Judgment vacated, and case remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit for further consideration in light of *Sessions v. Dimaya,* 584 U.S. ----, 138 S.Ct. 1204, 200 L.Ed.2d 549 (2018).
#### Archibald Hardware. Company, *Plaintiff in Error,*v. Hutting Sash & Door Company, *Defendant in Error.*

Division A.

Decision filed March 29, 1929.

Petition for rehearing denied April 25, 1929.

*384
      *Will O. Murrell*and *Sam E. Murrell,*for Plaintiff in Error;

P. *A. Willcox,*for Defendant in Error.

Per Curiam.

This cause having heretofore been submitted to the court upon the transcript of the record of the judgment herein and briefs and argument of counsel for the respective parties, and the record having been seen and inspected, and the court being now advised of its judgment to be given in the premises, it seems to the court that there is no error in the said judgment; it is, therefore, considered, ordered and adjudged by the court that the said judgment of the Circuit Court be, and the same is hereby affirmed.

Terrell, C. J., and Ellis and Brown, J. J., concur.
David James CARLSON, petitioner, v. COUNTY OF RAMSEY, MINNESOTA, et al.

No. 17M20.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 2, 2017.

Motion to direct the Clerk to file a petition for writ of certiorari out of time denied.
# L_2014211EN.01003301.xml

| 17.7.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 211/33 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.7.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 211/33

---

DECISION OF THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE

No 24/2014

of 14 February 2014

amending Annex XIII (Transport) to the EEA Agreement

THE EEA JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on the European Economic Area (‘the EEA Agreement’), and in particular Article 98 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1082/2012 of 9 November 2012 amending Regulation (EU) No 185/2010 in respect of EU aviation security validation (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1082/2012 of 9 November 2012 amending Regulation (EU) No 185/2010 in respect of EU aviation security validation (1) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement.

| (2) | Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 654/2013 of 10 July 2013 amending Regulation (EU) No 185/2010 in respect of EU aviation security validation checklists for third country entities (2) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 654/2013 of 10 July 2013 amending Regulation (EU) No 185/2010 in respect of EU aviation security validation checklists for third country entities (2) is to be incorporated into the EEA Agreement.

| (3) | Annex XIII to the EEA Agreement should therefore be amended accordingly, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

Annex XIII to the EEA Agreement should therefore be amended accordingly,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The following indents are added in point 66he (Commission Regulation (EU) No 185/2010) of Annex XIII to the EEA Agreement:

| ‘— | 32012 R 1082: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1082/2012 of 9 November 2012 (OJ L 324, 22.11.2012, p. 25), |
| --- | --- |

‘—

32012 R 1082: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 1082/2012 of 9 November 2012 (OJ L 324, 22.11.2012, p. 25),

| — | 32013 R 0654: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 654/2013 of 10 July 2013 (OJ L 190, 11.7.2013, p. 1).’ |
| --- | --- |

—

32013 R 0654: Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 654/2013 of 10 July 2013 (OJ L 190, 11.7.2013, p. 1).’

Article 2

The texts of Implementing Regulations (EU) No 1082/2012 and (EU) No 654/2013 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 15 February 2014, provided that all the notifications under Article 103(1) of the EEA Agreement have been made (*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, 14 February 2014.

For the EEA Joint Committee

The President

Gianluca GRIPPA

---

(1)  
  OJ L 324, 22.11.2012, p. 25.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 190, 11.7.2013, p. 1.

2

(*1)  No constitutional requirements indicated.

*1

---
Philip Andra GRIGSBY, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 16-8977.

Supreme Court of the United States

Aug. 7, 2017.

Petition for rehearing denied.

Justice GORSUCH took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
# L_2004319EN.01001701.xml

| 20.10.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 319/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.10.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 319/17

---

DECISION No 28/2004 OF THE JOINT COMMITTEE ESTABLISHED UNDER THE AGREEMENT ON MUTUAL RECOGNITION BETWEEN THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITY AND THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

of 19 July 2004

related to the listing of a Conformity Assessment Body under the Sectoral Annex on Electromagnetic Compatibility

(2004/702/EC)

THE JOINT COMMITTEE,

Having regard to the Agreement on Mutual Recognition between the European Community and the United States of America and in particular Article 7 and 14,

| | |
| --- | --- |

HAS DECIDED AS FOLLOWS:

| 1. | The Conformity Assessment Body in Attachment A is added to the list of Conformity Assessment Bodies under the column ‘EC access to the US market’ in Section V of the Sectoral Annex on Electromagnetic Compatibility. |
| --- | --- |

1.

| 2. | The specific scope of listing, in terms of products and conformity assessment procedures, of the Conformity Assessment Body indicated in Attachment A has been agreed by the Parties and will be maintained by them. |
| --- | --- |

2.

This Decision, done in duplicate, shall be signed by representatives of the Joint Committee who are authorised to act on behalf of the Parties for purposes of amending the Agreement. This Decision shall be effective from the date of the later of these signatures.

Signed in Washington DC, 7 July 2004.

On behalf of the United States of America

James C. SANFORD

Signed in Brussels, 19 July 2004.

On behalf of the European Community

Joanna KIOUSSI

---

Appendix A

EC Conformity Assessment Body added to the list of Conformity Assessment Bodies under the column ‘EC access to the US market’ in Section V of the Sectoral Annex on Electromagnetic Compatibility

| GYL Technologies |
| --- |
| Parc d’activités de Lanserre |
| 21, rue de la Fuye |
| F-49610 Juigné-sur-Loire |
| Tel: (33 2) 41 57 57 40 |
| Fax: (33 2) 41 45 25 77 |

GYL Technologies

Parc d’activités de Lanserre

21, rue de la Fuye

F-49610 Juigné-sur-Loire

Tel: (33 2) 41 57 57 40

Fax: (33 2) 41 45 25 77

---