Task: Wrong Candidate Generation
Input (English): to meet his burden of bringing up a proper record and, therefore, dismiss his appeal. Appeal dismissed. Glaze, J., would remand with directions to dismiss. 1 As of April 6,2006, L.B. had been living outside of the home for twelve months. 2 After reviewing the record before us, it appears that the circuit court assumed it was operating under the old rules at the hearing on June 15,2006; however, the final order was filed on July 13,2006, and the record on appeal was lodged September 25,2006. Therefore, the new court rules regarding dependency-neglect cases, which were adopted on July 1,2006, apply to the instant appeal. See In Re: Adoption of Rules 6-9 & 6-10 of the Supreme Court & Court of Appeals (Rulesfor Appeals in Dependency-Neglect Cases), 366 Ark. App’x 628 (2006) (per curiam) (<HOLDING>). Regardless, our conclusion would be the same 
 Holding statements: (A) holding that evidence in an inadmissible form may be considered at the summary judgment stage as long as the evidence is submitted in an admissible form at trial (B) holding that the filing of an opening brief within the time period for filing a notice of appeal could constitute notice of appeal (C) holding time for filing notice of appeal under rule 8002 is jurisdictional (D) holding that tjhese rules are effective july 12006 at which time appeals shall be commenced by filing the notice ofappeal and designation of record form 1 as set out in rule 69 (E) holding that in order for a defendant to remove a case to federal court based upon diversity jurisdiction there must be complete diversity of citizenship both at the time that the case is commenced and at the time that the notice of removal is filed
Output (English): holding that in order for a defendant to remove a case to federal court based upon diversity jurisdiction there must be complete diversity of citizenship both at the time that the case is commenced and at the time that the notice of removal is filed