alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Created with Sketch.Menu Transparency
	Contact Us Search
Search
 Main navigation

      
      About the CFTC
                          The Commission
                        Chairman & Commissioners
                        CFTC Organization
                        Advisory Committees
                        Budget & Performance
                        Privacy at the CFTC
                        Careers
                        Diversity and Inclusion at the CFTC
                        Industry Oversight
                          Industry Filings
                        Trading Organizations
                        Clearing Organizations
                        Data Repositories
                        Intermediaries
                        Market Surveillance
                        Contracts & Products
                        Rules & Rule Amendments
                        Anti-Money Laundering
                        Law & Regulation
                          Commodity Exchange Act & Regulations
                        How Rules Are Made
                        Holding Wrongdoers Accountable
                        Federal Register
                        Public Comments
                        CFTC Staff Letters
                        Office of Technology Innovation
                        Market Data & Economic Analysis
                          Data at CFTC
                        Commitments of Traders
                        Bank Participation Reports
                        Cotton On-Call
                        Financial Data for FCMS
                        Net Position Changes Data
                        Staff Reports
                        Weekly Swaps Report
                        Cleared Margin Reports
                        Office of the Chief Economist
                        Forms & Submissions
                        Learn & Protect
                          Check Registration & Disciplinary History
                        Submit a Tip
                        Reparations Program
                        RED List
                        Advisories & Articles
                        Videos
                        Publications
                        News & Events
                          Press Releases
                        Public Statements & Remarks
                        Events Carousel Rotation On
              On


External Meetings: Meeting w/Peabody Energy (via phone)
  
    



  When
              11/23/2010

  Rulemaking(s)
              II. Definitions

  CFTC Staff
              Chris Iacovella

  Visitor(s)
              Walter L. Hawkins

  Organization(s)
              Peabody


Resources

CFTC Regulations
	Commodity Exchange Act
	Privacy Policy
	Web Policy
	FOIA
	EEO Statement
	No Fear Act
	Accessibility Statement
	Procurement
	USA.gov
	Glossary

Actions

Search Public Comments
	Submit Tips & Complaints
	Search Industry FilingsWhistleblower.gov
	Office of Technology InnovationInspector GeneralSitemap

HomeCFTC Headquarters
Three Lafayette Centre
1155 21st Street, NW
Washington, DC 20581
202.418.5000
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 72 (Thursday, April 14, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 22284]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-07968]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

Office of Foreign Assets Control


Notice of OFAC Sanctions Action

AGENCY: Office of Foreign Assets Control, Treasury.

ACTION: Notice.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The U.S. Department of the Treasury's Office of Foreign Assets 
Control (``OFAC'') is updating the identifying information on its 
Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons List (``SDN List'') 
for a person whose property and interests in property are blocked 
pursuant to Executive Order 13224 of September 23, 2001, ``Blocking 
Property and Prohibiting Transactions With Persons Who Commit, Threaten 
To Commit, or Support Terrorism.''

DATES: See Supplementary Information section for applicable date(s).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: OFAC: Andrea Gacki, Director, tel.: 
202-622-2490; Associate Director for Global Targeting, tel.: 202-622-
2420; Assistant Director for Licensing, tel.: 202-622-2480; Assistant 
Director for Regulatory Affairs, tel.: 202-622-4855; or the Assistant 
Director for Sanctions Compliance & Evaluation, tel.: 202-622-2490.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Electronic Availability

    The SDN List and additional information concerning OFAC sanctions 
programs are available on OFAC's website (https://www.treasury.gov/ofac).

Notice of OFAC Action

    On April 7, 2022, OFAC published the following revised information 
for the following person on OFAC's SDN List whose property and 
interests in property are blocked pursuant to Executive Order 13224.

Individual

    1. CHATAYEV, Akhmed (a.k.a. CHATAEV, Ahmed; a.k.a. CHATAEV, 
Akhmed Rajapovich; a.k.a. CHATAEV, Akhmet; a.k.a. CHATAYEV, Akhmad; 
a.k.a. CHATAYEV, Akhmet; a.k.a. SENE, Elmir; a.k.a. TSCHATAJEV, 
Achmed Radschapovitsch; a.k.a. TSCHATAJEV, Ahmed Radschapovitsch; 
a.k.a. TSCHATAYEV, Achmed Radschapovitsch; a.k.a. TSCHATAYEV, Ahmed 
Radschapovitsch; a.k.a. ``Akhmed Odnorukiy''; a.k.a. ``Akhmed the 
One-Armed''; a.k.a. ``AL-SHISHANI, Akhmed''; a.k.a. ``CHATAEV, 
A.R.''; a.k.a. ``Odnorukiy''; a.k.a. ``SHISHANI, Akhmad''); DOB 14 
Jul 1980; POB Vedeno Village, Vedenskiy District, the Republic of 
Chechnya, Russia; citizen Russia; Passport 96001331958 (Russia) 
(individual) [SDGT] (Linked To: ISLAMIC STATE OF IRAQ AND THE 
LEVANT).

    Dated: April 7, 2022.
Bradley T. Smith,
Deputy Director, Office of Foreign Assets Control, U.S. Department of 
the Treasury.
[FR Doc. 2022-07968 Filed 4-13-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4810-AL-P
Release: #4049-97
    For Release: September 4, 1997CFTC FILES ANTI-FRAUD ENFORCEMENT ACTION AGAINST WILLY KERZINGER OF
    MICHIGAN AND SIMULTANEOUSLY ACCEPTS SETTLEMENT BARRING HIM FROM THE
    INDUSTRY AND REQUIRING HIM TO PAY DISGORGEMENTKerzinger Received About $798,700 from 22 Pool Investors As a Result
    of

His Fraudulent Misrepresentations

WASHINGTON -- The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) announced
    today that it has instituted administrative proceedings against Willy
    Kerzinger of Wyoming, Michigan, and simultaneously accepted Kerzinger's
    offer of settlement.

The order permanently prohibits Kerzinger from engaging in business
    activities related to futures trading, among other remedial actions. The
    CFTC's action is the result of a joint investigation by the CFTC and the
    Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) of Kerzinger, who became
    registered with the SEC as an investment adviser in August 1989.

The CFTC's order finds that from August 1989 through June 1994,
    Kerzinger, doing business as Commodity Pool Service, acted as an
    unregistered commodity pool operator and engaged in a fraudulent scheme.
    According to the complaint, Kerzinger received approximately $798,700 from
    22 investors in his pool as a result of his fraudulent misrepresentations,
    and returned approximately $630,000 to his investors in the form of cash,
    real estate, goods, and services, but used funds received from some
    investors to pay purported profits to other investors in furtherance of his
    fraudulent scheme. The order finds also that Kerzinger converted and
    misappropriated investors' funds to his own use.

Under the terms of the settlement, Kerzinger is permanently prohibited
    from trading commodity futures or options and agrees to:

-- pay $15,000 to defrauded investors in disgorgement;

-- never seek registration with the Commission in any capacity and never
    to engage in any activity requiring such registration; and

-- never accept any money, or solicit or accept orders from others for
    the purpose of trading commodity futures or options.

The CFTC agreed to the payment of $15,000 in lieu of full disgorgement
    in light of Kerzinger's financial circumstances.

Also today, the SEC filed a separate administrative proceeding alleging
    federal securities violations against Kerzinger in connection with the same
    investment scheme. The SEC also has accepted Kerzinger's offer of
    settlement.
Tanya Marie MORREO, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-9003.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 18, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
# C_2013026EN.01000302.xml

| 26.1.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 26/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.1.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 26/3

---

Judgment of the Court (Fourth Chamber) of 22 November 2012 — Commission v Federal Republic of Germany

(Case C-600/10) (1)

1

(Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations - Free movement of capital - Taxation of dividends and interest paid to pension funds and pension insurance schemes - Treatment of dividends and interest paid to non-resident institutions - Deduction of operating costs directly linked to the receipt of income in the form of dividends and interest - Burden of proof)

2013/C 26/05

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: European Commission (represented by: R. Lyal and W. Mölls, Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Federal Republic of Germany (represented by: T. Henze and J. Möller, Agents)

Defendant:

Interveners in support of the defendant: French Republic (represented by: G. de Bergues and N. Rouam, Agents), Kingdom of the Netherlands (represented by: C. Wissels and C. Schillemans, Agents), Republic of Finland (represented by: M. Pere, Agent), Kingdom of Sweden (represented by: A. Falk and S. Johannesson, Agents), United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland (represented by: H. Walker, Agent, and by G. Facenna, Barrister)

Interveners in support of the defendant:

Re:

Re:

Failure of a Member State to fulfil obligations — Infringement of Article 63 TFEU and of Article 40 of the EEA Agreement — National legal provisions on the taxation of dividends and interest paid to pension funds and pension insurance schemes, granting certain fiscal advantages only in respect of dividends and interest paid to resident institutions

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

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

2.

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

| 3. | Orders the French Republic, the Kingdom of the Netherlands, the Republic of Finland, the Kingdom of Sweden and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the French Republic, the Kingdom of the Netherlands, the Republic of Finland, the Kingdom of Sweden and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland to bear their own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 80, 12.3.2011.

1

---
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 1 7

- 4727

_____________________________
B OBBY B ULLOCK , Appellant,

v.

S TATE OF F LORIDA , Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Franklin County

. Terry Lewis , Judge

. September 18, 2019

P ER C URIAM

.
Pursuant to Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967)
, Appellant’s counsel filed a brief informing the court that she cannot make an argument for reversal of the judgment and sentence or order revoking Appellant’s probation. However, after Appellant’s motion to correct sentencing error was denied, counsel

ar gues that the order revoking probation must be corrected to specify the condition of probation Appellant admitted to violating. We agree and remand for entry of a corrected order revoking probation. See Lee v. State , 826 So. 2d 457 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). App ellant need not be present.

A FFIRMED and R EMANDED

.2 W OLF , K ELSEY , and W INOKUR , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________

Candice K. Brower, General Counsel, Office of Criminal Conflict and Civil Regional Counsel, Region One, Gainesville, and Melissa J. Ford , Assistant Regional Conflict Counsel, Office of Criminal Conflict and Civil Regional Counsel, Region One, Tallahassee
, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody
, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
Angel RUIZ-RIVERA, petitioner, v. COMMONWEALTH OF PUERTO RICO, et al.

No. 17-8440.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 11, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit denied.
Moses JACKSON, petitioner, v. ALABAMA BOARD OF PARDON AND PAROLES.

No. 17-8754.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 11, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama denied.
##### 



Exhibit 4.9
 CERTIFICATE OF DESIGNATION
OF
SERIES J CONVERTIBLE PREFERRED STOCK
OF
DIGITAL RECORDERS, INC.
   Section 1.
    
    Designation and Amount. The shares of this series shall be
designated as Series J Convertible Preferred Stock (the
Series J Preferred Stock) and the number of shares
constituting the Series J Preferred Stock shall be 250 shares.
Such number of shares may be increased or decreased by
resolution of the Board of Directors; provided, that no
decrease shall reduce the number of shares of Series J
Preferred Stock to a number less than the number of shares then
outstanding plus the number of shares reserved for issuance
upon the exercise of outstanding options, rights or warrants or
upon the conversion of any outstanding securities issued by the
Corporation convertible into Series J Preferred Stock.Section 2.
    
    Dividends and Distributions.
 provided however
 1




---



##### 



provided however pari passu
  2




---



##### 



Section 3.
    
    Voting Rights. In addition to any voting rights provided by
law, the holders of Series J Preferred Stock shall be entitled
to vote with the holders of Common Stock, voting together as a
single class, on any matters on which holders of Common Stock
are entitled to vote, and the holder of each outstanding whole
or fractional share of Series J Preferred Stock shall be
entitled to a number of votes equal to the quotient obtained by
dividing the Liquidation Preference thereof by $2.26.
Fractional votes shall not, however, be permitted and any
fractional voting rights resulting from the above formula
(after aggregating all whole and fractional shares of Series J
Preferred Stock held by each holder) shall be adjusted downward
to the nearest whole number.Section 4.
    
    Liquidation.
 pari passu
  3




---



##### 



4




---



##### 



Section 5.
    
    Redemption.
     5




---



##### 



Section 6.
    
    Conversion of Series J Preferred Stock. Each holder of shares of Series J
Preferred Stock shall have the right to convert all or any portion of such shares as such
holder desires to convert, and in certain circumstances such shares shall be automatically
converted, into shares of the Common Stock of the Corporation, as follows:
 Optional Conversion
 6




---



##### 



provided however
 Automatic Conversion
 provided
 Mechanics of Conversion.
 7




---



##### 



Adjustments to Conversion Price
 Adjustments for Subdivisions, Common Stock Dividends,
Combinations or Consolidations of Common Stock.
 Adjustments for Reclassification, Exchange and
Substitution.
 Certificate as to Adjustments.
 8




---



##### 



No Impairment.
 Reservation of Stock.
 Cancellation of Series J Preferred Stock
 9
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-50286

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JOSE GABINO AGUILAR-RIVERA,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 3:13-CR-2416-1

Before KING, DENNIS, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Jose Gabino 

Aguilar-Rivera has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in 

accordance with Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States 

v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Aguilar-Rivera has not filed a response. 

We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record 

reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not 

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

March 12, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 

 Case: 14-50286 Document: 00512966391 Page: 1 Date Filed: 03/12/2015
No. 14-50286

presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s 

motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further 

responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

2

 Case: 14-50286 Document: 00512966391 Page: 2 Date Filed: 03/12/2015
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 Pamrapo Bancorp, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the
period ending September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Kenneth D. Walter, 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; 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/ KENNETH D. WALTERKenneth D. WalterChief Financial Officer


November 7, 2006
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ROXANNE CORINNE PERDIGONE,

 Petitioner - Appellant,

 v.

RON DAVIS,

 Respondent - Appellee.

No. 12-17650

D.C. No. 2:11-cv-03454-WBS

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

William B. Shubb, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted September 23, 2014** 

Before: W. FLETCHER, RAWLINSON, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges.

California state prisoner Roxanne Corinne Perdigone appeals from the

district court’s judgment dismissing her 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition as untimely. We

have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 2253. We review de novo a district court’s

dismissal of a federal habeas petition on statute of limitations grounds, see

FILED

SEP 30 2014

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Mendoza v. Carey, 449 F.3d 1065, 1068 (9th Cir. 2006), and we affirm. 

Perdigone contends that she is entitled to equitable tolling because of the

unavailability of two witnesses and because her incarceration made it difficult for

her to complete her investigation until February 9, 2010. Perdigone has not shown

that she diligently pursued her rights, or that an extraordinary circumstance beyond

her control prevented her from timely filing her habeas petition. See Holland v.

Florida, 560 U.S. 631, 649 (2010); Chaffer v. Prosper, 592 F.3d 1046, 1048 (9th

Cir. 2010) (per curiam) (petitioner bears the “heavy burden” of showing that she

diligently pursued her rights and that an extraordinary circumstance stood in her

way).

We construe Perdigone’s additional arguments as a motion to expand the

certificate of appealability. So construed, the motion is denied. See 9th Cir. R. 22-

1(e); Hiivala v. Wood, 195 F.3d 1098, 1104-05 (9th Cir. 1999) (per curiam).

AFFIRMED. 

2 12-17650
----

**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

|   | (1) | the                Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Oconee Financial Corporation (the                “Company”) for the annual period ended December 31, 2006 (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/                Jerry K. WagesJerry                K. WagesSr.                Executive Vice President and Chief Financial                Officer |
|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-6554

DAVEY JAMES REEDY,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

RONALD J. ANGELONE, Director of the Virginia

Department of Corrections,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Claude M. Hilton, District

Judge. (CA-96-227-AM)

Submitted: June 20, 1996 Decided: July 9, 1996

Before HALL, WILKINS, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Davey James Reedy, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the dismissal without prejudice of his 42

U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. The district court dismissed Appellant's complaint because he failed to allege that he suffered a

deprivation of a constitutional right. We dismiss the appeal for

lack of jurisdiction because the order is not appealable. This

court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C.

§ 1291 (1988), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28

U.S.C. § 1292 (1988); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial

Industrial Loan Corp., 337 U.S. 541 (1949). The order here appealed

is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. See Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union

392, 10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir. 1993).

We dismiss the appeal as interlocutory. 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