alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA

Alexandria Division

In re: *

*

YEON HEE BURGOS * Case No. 16-12949-KHK

*

Debtor * CHAPTER 7

YING YU XUAN *

*

Plaintiff * Adv. Pro 16-01213-KHK

*

v. *

*

YEON HEE BURGOS, et al. *

*

Defendant(s) *

MOTION FOR CONTINUANCE

COMES NOW Plaintiff Ying Yu Xuan, by and through her attorney of record, and 

respectfully moves the for a continuance of the current scheduled trial date of October 6, 2017, 

and in support hereof alleges and say that:

1. The Adversary Complaint was filed on or about December 6, 2016 and the Defendant

was properly served with the Complaint. 

2. At the June 5, 2017 Pretrial Conference, the Parties agreed to an October 6, 2017 trial 

date. 

3. Unfortunately, undersigned counsel now has a scheduling conflict that requires him to be 

out of the country from October 4, 2017 to October 9, 2017.

4. Accordingly, undersigned counsel is seeking a continuance of the existing trial date.

5. If granted, this would be the first continuance of trial, and Defendants would not be 

prejudiced as this motion is being filed more than 2 months before trial.

6. All discovery has been completed, and there are no other pending matters currently 

before this court.

Case 16-01213-KHK Doc 24 Filed 08/01/17 Entered 08/01/17 11:49:38 Desc Main

 Document Page 1 of 2
WHEREFORE, the Plaintiff prays of this Court for the following:

A. That this Court continue the trial date; and 

B. For such other and further relief as to the Court may seem just and proper.

/s/ Jeremy C. Huang

Jeremy C. Huang, VSB No. 76861 

WOEHRLE DAHLBERG JONES YAO, PLLC

10615 Judicial Dr., Suite 102

Fairfax, VA 22030

(P) 703-755-0214 / (F) 571-285-0065

jhuang@lawfirmvirginia.com

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I HEREBY CERTIFY that on this 1

st day of August, 2017, a copy of the foregoing 

Motion for Continuance was served via first class mail postage prepaid and/or the Court’s 

Electronic Filing System to the following persons:

Yeon Hee Burgos

13628 Jefferson Davis Highway

Second Floor

Woodbridge VA 22191

Michael W. Kim 

Michael W. Kim & Associates, P.C. 

4600-H Pinecrest Office Park Drive 

Alexandria, VA 22312 

/s/ Jeremy C. Huang

Case 16-01213-KHK Doc 24 Filed 08/01/17 Entered 08/01/17 11:49:38 Desc Main

 Document Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>     5


<CAPTION>

Article 5 Fin. Data Schedule for 2nd Qtr 10-Q

<S>                               <C>

<PERIOD-TYPE>                     6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                 DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                    JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                      JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                 2,307
<SECURITIES>                               0
<RECEIVABLES>                              0
<ALLOWANCES>                               0
<INVENTORY>                                0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                       2,307
<PP&E>                                     0
<DEPRECIATION>                             0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                         2,307
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      0
<BONDS>                                    0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                      0
<PREFERRED>                                0
<COMMON>                              51,900
<OTHER-SE>                                 0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               0
<SALES>                                    0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           0
<CGS>                                      0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                           0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                           0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            0
<INCOME-TAX>                               0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        0
<DISCONTINUED>                             0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                            0
<CHANGES>                                  0
<NET-INCOME>                         (49,593)
<EPS-BASIC>                           (.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                           (.02)




</TABLE>
Case 16-03105-KLP Doc 422 Filed 10/15/18 Entered 10/15/18 14:30:26 Desc Main

 Document Page 1 of 3
Case 16-03105-KLP Doc 422 Filed 10/15/18 Entered 10/15/18 14:30:26 Desc Main

 Document Page 2 of 3
Case 16-03105-KLP Doc 422 Filed 10/15/18 Entered 10/15/18 14:30:26 Desc Main

 Document Page 3 of 3
### §5204. Relationship to State and local law and civil actions

This chapter does not preempt a State law or local ordinance that provides for civil or criminal penalties for conduct that violates this chapter.

(Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXII, §320805, Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2122.)
|   | (i) | The Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three months ended March 31, 2012, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and |
|--------|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (ii) | The information contained in the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three months ended March 31, 2012, fairly presents in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company, at and for the periods indicated. |
|--------|------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                |   |                                                                                            |
|---------------------|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Dated: May 15, 2012 |   | /s/ Daniel J. Moos                                                                              |
|                |   | Daniel J. MoosPresident and Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer) |

|                |   |                                                                                              |
|---------------------|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| Dated: May 15, 2012 |   | /s/ Gene S. Bertcher                                                                              |
|                |   | Gene S. BertcherExecutive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer) |
**Exhibit 23**

**CONSENTOF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

Weconsent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (FileNos. 2-99967, 33-35951, 333-04273, 333-10415, 333-107159, 333-17155, 333-18523,333-38047, 333-41447, 333-89437, 333-72906, 333-36252, 333-92531, 333-122019and 333-115922) of Hilton Hotels Corporation and subsidiaries of our reportsdated February 26, 2007, with respect to the consolidated financial statementsof Hilton Hotels Corporation and subsidiaries, Hilton Hotels Corporation andsubsidiaries management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal controlover financial reporting, and the effectiveness of internal control overfinancial reporting of Hilton Hotels Corporation and subsidiaries included inthis Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2006.
|   | Ernst & Young LLP |   |
|--------|-----------------------|--------|

 

 

Los Angeles, CaliforniaFebruary 26, 2007

----
### §469e. Plan for continental glaciation

#### (a) Federal funds

To implement the purpose of sections 469d to 469i of this title, the Secretary of the Interior (hereinafter called the "Secretary"), in cooperation with State and local governmental authorities of Wisconsin, may formulate within two years after October 13, 1964, a comprehensive plan for the protection, preservation, and interpretation of outstanding examples of continental glaciation in Wisconsin; but he shall not spend more than $50,000 of Federal funds thereon.

#### (b) Copies to Congress; establishment; boundaries

When the comprehensive plan is completed and the Secretary is satisfied that State legislation exists for the preservation of the nationally significant features of the reserve, open to the people of the entire Nation, he shall transmit copies thereof to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives and may, ninety days thereafter and after consulting with the Governor of the State of Wisconsin, publish notice in the Federal Register of the establishment of the Ice Age National Scientific Reserve and of the boundaries thereof, which boundaries shall comprise lands owned or to be acquired by the State and local governments of Wisconsin in the following areas:

(1) Eastern area (portions of the northern unit of the Kettle Moraine State Forest and Campbellsport drumlin area);

(2) Central area (portions of Devil's Lake State Park);

(3) Northwestern area (portions of Chippewa County);

(4) Related areas (other areas in the State of Wisconsin which the Secretary and the Governor of Wisconsin agree upon as significant examples of continental glaciation).

#### (c) Inclusion and exclusion of other areas

Any area outside of the national forests that the Secretary and the Governor of Wisconsin agree has significant examples of continental glaciation but is not described in the original notice may be included in the reserve by the Secretary after notice to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives and publication in the Federal Register, as hereinbefore provided, and any area that they consider to be no longer desirable as a part of the reserve may be excluded from it by the Secretary in the same manner.

(Pub. L. 88–655, §2, Oct. 13, 1964, 78 Stat. 1087.)
### §583j–7. Activities of Foundation and United States Forest Service

The activities of the Foundation authorized under the provisions of this Act shall be supplemental to and shall not preempt any authority or responsibility of the United States Forest Service under any other provision of law.

(Pub. L. 101–593, title IV, §409, Nov. 16, 1990, 104 Stat. 2973.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### References in Text

This Act, referred to in text, is Pub. L. 101–593, Nov. 16, 1990, 104 Stat. 2954, which enacted this subchapter, chapter 32A of this title, and section 777e–1 of this title, amended sections 2910, 3702, 3709, 4403, and 4404 of this title, and enacted provisions listed in a table of National Environmental Centers set out under section 668dd of this title and provisions set out in notes under section 3701 of this title and section 4321 of Title 42, The Public Health and Welfare. For complete classification of this Act to the Code, see Tables.
### §2501. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, Pub. L. 95–625, title X, §1002, Nov. 10, 1978, 92 Stat. 3538, which related to congressional findings, was omitted from the Code following the enactment of Title 54, National Park Service and Related Programs, by Pub. L. 113–287.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 September 5, 2014

d0825

Order 

Clerk

September 5, 2014

148284(59)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 148284

COA: 310325

Oakland CC: 2011-236105-FH

MARCUS MANDELLE KELLEY,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court’s February 28, 

2014 order is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does not appear that the order was 

entered erroneously.
### §459h–9. Gulf Islands National Seashore Advisory Commission; establishment; termination; membership; term; Chairman; compensation and payment of expenses; consultation by Secretary

There is hereby established a Gulf Islands National Seashore Advisory Commission. The Commission shall terminate ten years after the date the seashore is established pursuant to sections 459h to 459h–10 of this title. The Commission shall be composed of three members from each county in which the seashore is located, each appointed for a term of two years by the Secretary as follows:

(1) one member to be appointed from recommendations made by the county commissioners in the respective counties;

(2) one member to be appointed from recommendations made by the Governor of the State from each county; and

(3) one member to be designated by the Secretary from each county.

Provided, That two members shall be appointed to the Advisory Commission in each instance in counties whose population exceeds one hundred thousand.

The Secretary shall designate one member to be Chairman. Any vacancy in the Commission shall be filled in the same manner in which the original appointment was made.

Members of the Commission shall serve without compensation as such. The Secretary is authorized to pay the expenses reasonably incurred by the Commission in carrying out its responsibilities under sections 459h to 459h–10 of this title on vouchers signed by the Chairman.

The Secretary or his designee shall, from time to time, consult with the Commission with respect to the matters relating to the development of the Gulf Islands National Seashore.

(Pub. L. 91–660, §10, Jan. 8, 1971, 84 Stat. 1969.)

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Termination of Advisory Commissions

Advisory commissions in existence on Jan. 5, 1973, to terminate not later than the expiration of the 2-year period following Jan. 5, 1973, unless, in the case of a commission established by the President or an officer of the Federal Government, such commission is renewed by appropriate action prior to the expiration of such 2-year period, or in the case of a commission established by the Congress, its duration is otherwise provided by law. See sections 1001(2) and 1013 of Title 5, Government Organization and Employees.
###### Editorial Note on Part 1208

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 1208 appear at 68 FR 9846, Feb. 28, 2003, and at 68 FR 10352, Mar. 5, 2003.

#### § 1208.10 Failure to appear at a scheduled hearing before an immigration judge; failure to follow requirements for biometrics and other biographical information processing.

Failure to appear for a scheduled immigration hearing without prior authorization may result in dismissal of the application and the entry of an order of deportation or removal *in absentia.* Failure to comply with processing requirements for biometrics and other biographical information within the time allowed will result in dismissal of the application, unless the applicant demonstrates that such failure was the result of good cause. DHS is responsible for obtaining biometrics and other biographical information with respect to any alien in custody.

[70 FR 4754, Jan. 31, 2005]
#### Al Plopper, Appellee, v. The St. Louis & Northeastern Railway Company, Appellant.

*Instructions—ignoring defense.*An instruction which, directs a verdict for plaintiff if certain specified facts are found is erroneous if it excludes any material issue.

Action in case. Appeal from the City Court of Litchfield; the Hon. Paul McWilliams, Judge, presiding.

Heard in this court at the May term, 1910.

Reversed and remanded.

Opinion filed October 18, 1910.

Amos Miller and George W. Black, for appellant.

T. A. Gasaway, for appellee.

Mr. Presiding Justice Puterbaugh

delivered the opinion of the court.

*197This is an action on the case by appellee against appellant, the trial of which resulted in a judgment in favor of the plaintiff for the sum of $150. The first count of the declaration alleges that appellee was a passenger on the ear of appellant, having paid his fare to be conveyed from Staunton to Litchfield; that it. was the duty of appellant to so convey him; that the servants of appellant, while within the scope of their duty, wilfully and maliciously caused him to be ejected from said car, by reason whereof he was obliged to procure other conveyance and to incur additional expense to reach his destination. The second count alleges that the servants of appellant wilfully and maliciously and with force and violence pushed arid shoved appellee from the car. Appellant filed a plea of not guilty.

The evidence shows that appellee, who lived in Litchfield, purchased of the agent of appellant at Litchfield, a ticket to Staunton and return; that he boarded the car of appellant at Staunton on his return home; that two of his brothers, John and Ben, were on the car with him, and that a dispute arose between them and the conductor as to the payment of the fare of Ben, and that the conductor ordered the latter to pay his fare or get off the car; that a controversy then arose between the conductor, appellee and his brother as to the details of which the evidence was in irreconcilable conflict, but which resulted in the conductor compelling appellee to leave the car. The evidence fails to show, however, that force and violence were used, as alleged in the second count of the declaration.

By the second instruction given at the request of appellee, the court instructed the jury that if they believed from a preponderance of the evidence that the plaintiff was a passenger on the defendant’s car and that its agents or servants having in charge the management of said car, ordered and commanded the plaintiff to leave said car, in consequence of which order and command the plaintiff without any resist*198anee left the car in a peaceable manner, he was entitled to recover. The instruction was palpably bad. It directed a verdict in case appellee left the car peaceably upon the command of appellant’s servants, regardless of whether or not any actions of appellee necessitated or justified such command. The instruction being mandatory in form, the error in giving the same was not cured by other instructions given.

The judgment of the City Court will be reversed and the cause remanded.

*Reversed and remanded.*
### §460aaa–8. Authorization of appropriations

#### (a) Acquisition of lands

There are hereby authorized to be appropriated an amount not to exceed $5,000,000 for the acquisition of land, interests in land, or structures within the national recreation area and on the mainland as needed for access and administrative facilities.

#### (b) Other purposes

In addition to the amounts authorized to be appropriated under subsection (a), there are authorized to be appropriated not more than $5,000,000 for development to carry out the other purposes of this subchapter.

(Pub. L. 101–292, §9, May 17, 1990, 104 Stat. 190.)
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 22-1307

JACK SUPINGER,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States Tax Court. (Tax Ct. No. 10957-20)

Submitted: November 17, 2022 Decided: November 22, 2022

Before KING, QUATTLEBAUM, and RUSHING, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jack Supinger, Appellant Pro Se. Bethany B. Hauser, Joan Iris Oppenheimer, UNITED 

STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 22-1307 Doc: 16 Filed: 11/22/2022 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Jack Supinger appeals from the tax court’s order finding a deficiency in his 2017 

income taxes and assessing an underpayment penalty and a penalty for presenting and 

persisting in the frivolous argument that his wages were not subject to income tax. We 

have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the 

reasons stated by the tax court. Supinger v. Comm’r of Internal Rev., Tax Ct. No. 10957-

20 (U.S. Tax Ct. Dec. 14, 2021). 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.

AFFIRMED

USCA4 Appeal: 22-1307 Doc: 16 Filed: 11/22/2022 Pg: 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-28-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             MAR-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               FEB-28-1999
<CASH>                                               2
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,417
<ALLOWANCES>                                       244
<INVENTORY>                                      3,947
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 6,532
<PP&E>                                           1,128
<DEPRECIATION>                                     710
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  15,285
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            5,275
<BONDS>                                          3,029
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                         19
<COMMON>                                            32
<OTHER-SE>                                       6,930
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    15,285
<SALES>                                         18,092
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                18,830
<CGS>                                           14,754
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   14,754
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    26
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 290
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    161
<INCOME-TAX>                                         8
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                153
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       153
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (0.27)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.27)


</TABLE>
### §5203. Other relief

Injunctive relief against a violation of section 5201 of this title may be sought by—

(1) the head of a State agency with jurisdiction over fish or wildlife management;

(2) the Attorney General of the United States; or

(3) any person who is or would be adversely affected by the violation.

(Pub. L. 103–322, title XXXII, §320804, Sept. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 2122.)