alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```
 
 
VIX FUTURES - CBOE FUTURES EXCHANGE                                  Code-1170E1
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 04/08/14                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
($1000 X INDEX)                                      OPEN INTEREST:      359,952
COMMITMENTS
 105,096  136,842   90,082  144,046  106,211  339,224  333,135   20,728   26,817

CHANGES FROM 04/01/14 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:      2,906)
  -9,743   -8,570    2,653    6,105    6,239     -985      322    3,891    2,584

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
    29.2     38.0     25.0     40.0     29.5     94.2     92.5      5.8      7.5

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      177)
      57       65       74       38       38      135      147
```

----

Updated April 11, 2014
Eric Christopher BARRASS, Petitioner v. Mark S. INCH, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections, et al.

No. 19-6203

Supreme Court of the United States.

December 9, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
Sharvelt MISTER, Petitioner v. Wendy KELLEY, Director, Arkansas Department of Correction

No. 19-5902

Supreme Court of the United States.

November 12, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Arkansas denied.
# C_2018199EN.01000101.xml

| 11.6.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 199/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.6.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 199/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.8913 — HPS/MDP/Capita)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2018/C 199/01)

On 29 May 2018, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32018M8913. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32018M8913. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
T. A., et al., Petitioners v. Howard B. LEFF, et al.;

Temmi Kramer, et al., Petitioner v. Edmund Dane, et al.

No. 19-5632

Supreme Court of the United States.

December 9, 2019

Motion for reconsideration of order denying leave to proceed *in forma pauperis* denied.
xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?


C\_2018185EN.01000901.xml


| | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 30.5.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 185/9 |

---

Prior notification of a concentration

(Case M.8877 — LyondellBasell Industries/A. Schulman)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2018/C 185/10)

1.

On 23 May 2018, the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 [(1)](#ntr1-C_2018185EN.01000901-E0001).

This notification concerns the following undertakings:

| | |
| --- | --- |
| — | LyondellBasell Industries N.V. (‘LyondellBasell’) (Netherlands), |

| | |
| --- | --- |
| — | A. Schulman, Inc (‘A. Schulman’) (United States) |

LyondellBasell acquires within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation sole control of the whole of A. Schulman.

The concentration is accomplished by way of purchase of shares.

2.

The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

—   LyondellBasell: a global plastics, chemicals and refining company.

—   A. Schulman: an international supplier of high performance plastic compounds, composites and resins.

3.

On preliminary examination, the Commission finds that the notified transaction could fall within the scope of the Merger Regulation. However, the final decision on this point is reserved.

4.

The Commission invites interested third parties to submit their possible observations on the proposed operation to the Commission.

Observations must reach the Commission not later than 10 days following the date of this publication. The following reference should always be specified:

M.8877 — LyondellBasell Industries/A. Schulman

Observations can be sent to the Commission by email, by fax, or by post. Please use the contact details below:

| |
| --- |
| Email: COMP-MERGER-REGISTRY@ec.europa.eu |
| Fax +32 22964301 |
| Postal address: |
| European Commission |
| Directorate-General for Competition |
| Merger Registry |
| 1049 Bruxelles/Brussel |
| BELGIQUE/BELGIË |

---

[(1)](#ntc1-C_2018185EN.01000901-E0001)  [OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1](http://publications.europa.eu/resource/oj/JOL_2004_024_R_TOC) (the ‘Merger Regulation’).

---
SSB CITI FUNDS, INC.
               	THE HUMANE EQUITY FUND


RESULTS OF SPECIAL MEETING OF STOCKHOLDERS HELD ON SEPTEMBER
19, 2002


Items Voted On:    Votes For      Votes Against	Abstentions

ITEM 1:  Plan of Liquidation and Dissolution

                    927,460.6      21,461.58      9,360.76
Ricardo IRIVE, Petitioner v. Jo GENTRY, Warden, et al.

No. 19-5954

Supreme Court of the United States.

November 4, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
Robert MCKINNON, III, Petitioner, v. FLORIDA; and

Robert McKinnon, III, Petitioner, v. Florida.

No. 19-7606.

Supreme Court of the United States.

May 4, 2020

Petition for rehearing denied.
**CERTIFICATION**

|   | (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 results of operations of the                Company. |
|--------|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | /s/                Abraham Havron      |   |
|--------|----------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Abraham                Havron          |   |
|   | Chief                Executive Officer |   |
|   | Modigene                Inc.           |   |

----
Subsidiaries of J. B. Poindexter & Co., Inc.

1.   EFP Corporation, a Delaware corporation

     a.   EFP Corporation also operates under the following names:

          i.   Astro Pattern Corporation
          ii.  Engineered Foam Plastics

2.   Lowy Group, Inc., a Delaware corporation

     a.   Tile By Design,  Inc.,  a  Delaware  corporation,  is a wholly-  owned
          subsidiary of Lowy Group, Inc.

     b.   Lowy Group, Inc. also operates under the following names:

          i.   Fred T. Lowy Distributors Division
          ii.  Lowy Enterprises of Minnesota
          iii.   Fred Lowy Linoleum & Rug
          iv.  Flooring Distributors
          v. Lowy Distributors

3.   Magnetic Instruments Corp., a Delaware corporation

     a.   Magnetic Instruments Corp. also operates under the following names:

          i.   Electrospec Corporation
          ii.  MIC Group
          iii. Manufacturing Innovations

4.   Morgan Trailer Mfg. Co., a New Jersey corporation

     a.   Acero-Tec S.A. de C.V., a Monterry, Nuevo Leon, Mexico corporation, is
          a subsidiary of Morgan Trailer Mfg. Co.

     b.   Morgan   Trailer  Mfg.  Co.  also  operates  under  the  names  Morgan
          Corporation and Gem Top Mfg.


5.   Truck Accessories  Group, Inc., a Delaware  corporation,  f/w/a Leer, Inc.,
     f/w/a Leer Holdings Inc.

     a.   Subsidiaries of Truck Accessories Group, Inc. include:

          i     Raider Industries, Inc.,  a Saskatchewan, Canada corporation, is
                a wholly- owned subsidiary of Truck Accessories Group, Inc.

                    (a)  Raider   Industries,  Inc.  also  operates   under  the
                         following names:
                              1)   Lo Rider
                              2)   Raider

          ii.   Leer  Acquisition  Company, Inc., a Delaware  corporation,  is a
                wholly-owned subsidiary of Truck Accessories Group, Inc.

                    (a)  Welshman  Industires,  Inc.,  f/w/a  Radco  Industries,
                         Inc.,  a  Minnesota  corporation,  is  a  wholly-owned 
                         subsidiary  of  Leer  Acquisition  Company, Inc.,  and
                         operates  under  the  following  names:
                              1)   Midwest Truck Aftermarket

  
     b.   Truck Accessories Group, Inc. also operates under the following names:

          i.    20th Century Fiberglass
          ii.   Century Fiberglass
          iii.  Century
          iv.   Leer
          v.    Leer Corporate
          vi.   Leer East
          vii.  Leer Midwest
          viii. Leer Retail
          ix.   Leer Southeast
          x.    Leer Specialty Products
          xi.   Leer Truck Accessory Centers
          xii.  Leer West
          xiii. National Truck Accessories
          xiv.  National Truck Accessories Headquarters
          xv.   National Truck Accessories Midwest
          xvi.  National Truck Accessories Southeast
          xvii. National Truck Accessories West
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

April 30, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice

135117 Michael F. Cavanagh
Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 135117 COA: 270430 Wayne CC: 04-422587-CB ALUMI-BUNK, INC., and ERIC JAIN, Defendants-Appellants.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the July 24, 2007 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is GRANTED. The parties shall address: (1) whether there is an excepti on to the economic loss doctrine – which provides that parties to a pu rely commercial dispute are lim ited to the remedies of the Uniform Commercial Code, MCL 440.1101 et seq .; see Neibarger v Universal Cooperatives, Inc , 439 Mich 512, 520, 528 (1992) – for claims of fraud in the inducement, see Huron Tool & Engine ering Co v Precision Consulting Services , 209 Mich App 365 (1995); and if so , (2) whether the fraud claims in this case are sufficiently distinguishable from the contract claims for purposes of applying the fraudulent inducement exception.

p0423 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

April 30, 2008

Clerk
(logo)Rialto

         CAPITAL

 

 

**2018 Annual Statement of ServicerCompliance (Item 1123)**

 

 

Poolingand Servicing Agreement (the "Pooling and Servicing Agreement") datedas of March 1, 2018 by and among UBS Commercial Mortgage Securitization Corp. asDepositor, Midland Loan Services, a Division of PNC Bank, National Associationas Master Servicer, Rialto Capital Advisors, LLC as Special Servicer, AEGON USAREALTY ADVISORS, LLC, as Dreamworks Campus Special Servicer, PentalphaSurveillance LLC as Operating Advisor and as Asset Representations Reviewer,and Wells Fargo Bank, National Association as Certificate Administrator and asTrustee relating to the UBS Commercial Mortgage Trust 2018-C9, CommercialMortgage Pass-Through Certificates, Series 2018-C9 **(UBS 2018-C9)**

 

Theundersigned, a duly authorized officer of Rialto Capital Advisors, LLC, asspecial servicer (the "Special Servicer") herein certifies to thefollowing:

 

1.      All servicingactivities and performance of such servicing activities under the Pooling andServicing Agreement are performed on behalf of the Special Servicer.

 

2.      A review of theservicing activities and performance by the Special Servicer for the period ofMarch 29, 2018 to December 31, 2018 (the "Reporting Period") inaccordance with the Pooling and Servicing Agreement has been conducted under mysupervision.

 

3.      To the best ofmy knowledge, based on such review, the Special Servicer has fulfilled all ofits obligations under the terms of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement, in allmaterial respects for the Reporting Period and if there has been a failure tofulfill any such obligations in any material respect, each failure and thenature and status thereof has been specifically identified herein.

 

 

Certifiedby: /s/ Adam Singer

Adamsinger, Managing Director

 

Date:March 1, 2019
Neil Timothy AHO, Petitioner v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-6551

Supreme Court of the United States.

December 9, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
Janice SMYTH, Petitioner v. CONSERVATION COMMISSION OF FALMOUTH, et al.

No. 19-223

Supreme Court of the United States.

December 16, 2019

Motion of NFIB Small Business Legal Center, et al. for leave to file a brief as *amici curiae* granted. Petition for writ of certiorari to the Appeals Court of Massachusetts denied.
Crystal BITON, Petitioner v. William P. BARR, Attorney General, et al.

No. 19M58

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 21, 2019

Motion to direct the Clerk to file a petition for writ of certiorari out of time denied.
QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document




EXHIBIT 10.2


 




 
 





CONSENT OF GORDON, HUGHES & BANKS, LLP
  INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

    
    







        We consent to the inclusion in the Amendment No. 1 to the registration statement on Form SB-1 of Clinical Intelligence, Inc. (a
Development Stage Company), relating to the registration of 1,125,000 shares of common stock, of our report, dated August 29, 2003, on the balance sheets of Clinical Intelligence, Inc.
as of December 31, 2002 and 2001, and the related statements of operations, stockholders' equity, and cash flows for the years then ended and for the cumulative period from May 18, 2000
(inception) to December 31, 2002.



















Gordon, Hughes & Banks, LLP



















Greenwood
Village, Colorado

February 2, 2004

 










QuickLinks


CONSENT OF GORDON, HUGHES & BANKS, LLP INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS
# C_2018043EN.01000201.xml

| 6.2.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 43/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.2.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 43/2

---

Summary of European Commission Decisions on authorisations for the placing on the market for the use and/or for use of substances listed in Annex XIV to Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006 of the European Parliament and of the Council concerning the Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction of Chemicals (REACH)

(Published pursuant to Article 64(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006
   (1)
  )

(Published pursuant to Article 64(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006

1

)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2018/C 43/02)

Decisions granting an authorisation

Decisions granting an authorisation

| Reference of the decision (2) | Date of decision | Substance name | Holder of the authorisation | Authorisation number | Authorised use | Date of expiry of review period | Reasons for the decision |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| C(2018) 440 | 29 January 2018 | Sodium dichromate
  EC No 234-190-3
  CAS No 7789-12-0/10588-01-9 | Arkema France, 420 rue d’Estienne d’Orves, 92705 Colombes, France | REACH/17/30/0 | Use of sodium dichromate as an additive for suppressing parasitic reactions and oxygen evolution, pH buffering and cathode corrosion protection in the electrolytic manufacture of sodium chlorate with or without subsequent production of chlorine dioxide or sodium chlorite | 21 September 2029 | In accordance with Article 60(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006, the socioeconomic benefits outweigh the risk to human health arising from the use of the substance and there are no suitable alternative substances or technologies in terms of their technical and economic feasibility for the applicant before the sunset date. |

Reference of the decision (2)

2

Date of decision

Substance name

Holder of the authorisation

Authorisation number

Authorised use

Date of expiry of review period

Reasons for the decision

C(2018) 440

29 January 2018

Sodium dichromate

EC No 234-190-3

CAS No 7789-12-0/10588-01-9

Arkema France, 420 rue d’Estienne d’Orves, 92705 Colombes, France

REACH/17/30/0

Use of sodium dichromate as an additive for suppressing parasitic reactions and oxygen evolution, pH buffering and cathode corrosion protection in the electrolytic manufacture of sodium chlorate with or without subsequent production of chlorine dioxide or sodium chlorite

21 September 2029

In accordance with Article 60(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1907/2006, the socioeconomic benefits outweigh the risk to human health arising from the use of the substance and there are no suitable alternative substances or technologies in terms of their technical and economic feasibility for the applicant before the sunset date.

---

(1)  OJ L 396, 30.12.2006, p. 1.

1

(2)  The decision is available on the European Commission website at: http://ec.europa.eu/growth/sectors/chemicals/reach/about/index_en.htm

2

---
Exhibit 32.1





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 Physicians Formula Holdings, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Ingrid Jackel, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §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 results of operations of the Company.





The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.





Date: November 5, 2010





By:
/s/ Ingrid JackelName:
Ingrid JackelTitle:
Chief Executive Officer








A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Physicians Formula Holdings, Inc. and will be retained by Physicians Formula Holdings, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Sean DANIELS, Petitioner, v. Shane JACKSON, Warden.

No. 19-5375

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

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

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                       1,406,141
<SECURITIES>                                   286,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                  240,444
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,508,876
<PP&E>                                       1,633,171
<DEPRECIATION>                               (884,435)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,714,709
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,222,370
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     5,079,505
<OTHER-SE>                                 (2,587,175)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,714,709
<SALES>                                      4,230,842
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,230,842
<CGS>                                          976,335
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  976,335
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             5,272,863
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,958,033)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,390
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,960,423)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,960,423)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.67)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.67)
        

</TABLE>
Alejandro LLAMAS-DELGADO, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-5983

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 15, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
Exhibit 10.2



  
 Exhibit 10.2 
  
 December 31, 2003 
  
 Mr. George W. Vieth, Jr. 
 3365 Greenhill Lane 
 Louisville, KY 40207 
  

	 	Re:	Second Amendment 

  
 Dear George: 
  
 This letter
amends the Employment Agreement dated as of December 6, 2002, as amended November 18, 2003 (the “Agreement”) between you and AMF Bowling Worldwide, Inc. The defined terms in the Agreement have the same meaning herein. You and the Company
hereby agree as follows: 
  
 1. Section 2 of the Agreement is
amended by deleting the date “December 31, 2003” in the second line of the Section and replacing it with “January 31, 2004”. 
  
 2. Section 3.(c)i of the Agreement is amended by deleting the words “prior to December 31, 2003” in the first line thereof and substituting in
their place “prior to January 31, 2004”. 
  
 3. The
current Section 3.(f) is renumbered as Section 3.(h). 
  
 4. A new
Section 3.(f) Extension Bonus is added to read as follows: 
  
 In consideration of the Executive agreeing to extend the term of the Agreement until January 31, 2004, the Company will pay to the Executive $100,000 on December 31, 2003. 
  
 Please acknowledge your agreement by signing a copy of this letter and returning it to me. 
  

	
	 Sincerely,

	
	 /s/ Christopher F. Caesar

	

	 Christopher F. Caesar
 Senior Vice President/Chief Financial Officer



  

	
	 AGREED:

	
	 /s/ George W. Vieth, Jr.

	

	 George W. Vieth, Jr.

	 Date: December 31, 2003