alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1301 MCKINNEY SUITE 3700 HOUSTON, TEXAS 77010

PHONE: 713.650.9700 FAX: 713.650.9701

www.bakerdonelson.com

4834-0546-2886 v1 2939561-000001 05/25/2018

ALABAMA Ć FLORIDA GEORGIA Ć LOUISIANA Ć MISSISSIPPI Ć TENNESSEE Ć TEXAS Ć WASHINGTON, D.C. B OBBIE L. S TRATTON , O F C OUNSEL Direct Dial : 713.286.7168 E-Mail Address : bstratton@bakerdonelson.com 

# May 25, 2018 Mr. Christopher A. Pine Clerk, First Court of Appeals First Court of Appeals 301 Fannin Street Houston, Texas 77002

Re: 01-18-00340-CV; First Court of Appeals, Houston, Texas; Sundance Energy, Inc. v. NRP Oil and Gas LLC



# Dear Mr. Pine: Please accept this online payment of $205 .00 to cover the appellate filing fee for the above-referenced matter. Thank you for your atten tion to this matter. Sincerely,

/s/ Bobbie L. Stratton

Bobbie L. Stratton

BLS/cel ACCEPTED 01-18-00340-CV FIRST COURT OF APPEALS

HOUSTON, TEXAS 5/25/2018 11:22 AM CHRISTOPHER PRINE

CLERK
No. 64044.

protests 59/7810, etc. (New York).

#### Gimbel Bros., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

It was stipulated that the principles herein are similar in all material respects to those involved in *United States*v. *Browne Vintners Co., Inc.*(34 C.C.P.A. 112, C.A.D. 351), and that the cases, reported by the inspector as manifested, not found, were not in fact received by the importers. In accordance with stipulation of counsel and following the decision cited, it was held that duty is not assessable upon the cases of merchandise, which were reported by the inspector as manifested, not found. The protests were sustained to this extent.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

_____________________________________________________________________________

B.E. BINFORD, JACKIE BINFORD and

HENRY WYNDEL, on Behalf of Themselves

and All Others Similarly Situated,

Plaintiffs, 

v.

JOHN J. BRENNAN, CHARLES D. ELLIS,

RAJIV L. GUPTA, JOANN HEFFERNAN,

BURTON G. MALKIEL, ALFRED M.

RANKIN, JR., J. LAWRENCE WILSON, THE

VANGUARD CORPORATION, VANGUARD

ADVISERS, INC., MELLON CAPITAL

MANAGEMENT COMPANY, WELLINGTON

MANAGEMENT COMPANY, LLP, JOHN A.

LEVIN & COMPANY, FRANKLIN

PORTFOLIO ASSOCIATES, LLC,

PROVIDENT INVESTMENT COUNCIL, INC.,

TURNER INVESTMENT PARTNERS, INC.,

GRANAHAN INVESTMENT

MANAGEMENT, INC., CHARTWELL

INVESTMENT PARTNERS, BARROW,

HANLEY, MEWHINNEY & STRAUSS, INC.,

GRANTHAM MAYO VAN OTTERLOO &

COMPANY, LLC, BERNSTEIN

INVESTMENT RESEARCH AND

MANAGEMENT, EQUINOX CAPITAL

MANAGEMENT, LLC, HOTCHKIS & WILEY

CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, LLC, TUKMAN

CAPITAL MANAGEMENT, INC., and JOHN

DOES NO. 1 through 100,

Defendants. 

§

§

§

§

§

§ Case No. 2:05-cv-00112-PBT

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

______________________________________________________________________________

NOTICE OF DISMISSAL

_________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________

Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. 41(a), plaintiffs hereby dismiss this action, which has not been 

certified as a class action, without prejudice.

Dated: February 14, 2005

Case 2:05-cv-00112-PBT Document 7 Filed 02/14/05 Page 1 of 3
RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,

/s/ Marc L. Ackerman

Marc L. Ackerman

Brodsky & Smith LLC

Two Bala Plaza

Suite 602

Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004

(610) 667-6200

Randall K. Pulliam

BARON & BUDD, P.C.

3102 Oak Lawn Ave.

Suite 1100

Dallas, Texas 75219-4281

(214) 521-3605

(214) 520-1181 fax

J. Allen Carney

Hank Bates

CAULEY BOWMAN CARNEY & WILLIAMS,

LLP

11311 Arcade Dr.

Suite 200

Little Rock, Arkansas 72212

(501) 312-8500

(501) 312-8505 fax

Case 2:05-cv-00112-PBT Document 7 Filed 02/14/05 Page 2 of 3
PROOF OF ELECTRONIC FILING

I, Marc L. Ackerman, Esquire, hereby certify that I have electronically filed this document

in accordance with the Court rules:

Brian H. Polovoy, Esquire

Sherman & Sterling, LLP

599 Lexington Avenue

New York, New York 10022-6069

Dated: February 14, 2005 BRODSKY & SMITH, LLC

By: /s/ Marc L. Ackerman, Esquire

Marc L. Ackerman, Esquire 

BRODSKY & SMITH, LLC

Two Bala Plaza, Suite 602

Bala Cynwyd, PA 19004

Tel: (610) 667 - 6200

Fax: (610) 667-9029

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

Case 2:05-cv-00112-PBT Document 7 Filed 02/14/05 Page 3 of 3
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL   INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM  THE
COMPANY'S FINANCIAL STATEMENTS IN THIS REPORT ON FORM 10-QSB AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                                  1,394,640
<SECURITIES>                                                    0
<RECEIVABLES>                                              93,145
<ALLOWANCES>                                                    0
<INVENTORY>                                                20,090
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                        2,872,836
<PP&E>                                                    611,735
<DEPRECIATION>                                            149,099
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                          3,365,472
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                     348,003
<BONDS>                                                         0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                           0
<PREFERRED>                                                     0
<COMMON>                                                   20,821
<OTHER-SE>                                              2,697,288
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                            3,365,472
<SALES>                                                    51,070
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                           52,939
<CGS>                                                      45,073
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                           1,179,092
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                        3,772,054
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                              0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                 0
<INCOME-TAX>                                                    0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                    (4,820,065)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                 0
<CHANGES>                                                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                           (4,820,065)
<EPS-BASIC>                                               (2.32)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                               (2.32)



</TABLE>
Case No. 7,833.

#### In re KINTZING.

[3 N. B. R. 217 (Quarto, 52).] 1

District Court, E. D. Missouri.

1869.

Bankruptcy, Act of — Injunction.

1. A general assignment by a debtor of all his estate and effects is not of itself merely an net of bankruptcy, but when the debtor, is for other causes adjudged bankrupt, his assets will be administered under the provisions of the court in bankruptcy.

2. When a petition for an injunction against other parties than the debtor is united with a- petition in involuntary bankruptcy, the injunction will be only provisional, until the court can act upon the petition to adjudge the debtor a bankrupt, and a bill must then be filed to secure the relief sought against parties other than the bankrupt.

[Cited in Re Moses, Case No. 9,869.]

Petitioning creditors filed their petition to adjudge Kintzing a bankrupt, alleging as acts of bankruptcy, that, being a merchant, he had suspended payment of his commercial paper and had not resumed within fourteen days; that he had made payments to divers creditors with a view to give them a preference, and that he had made a general assignment of all his estate to John W. Pritchard for the benefit of all his creditors under the statute of the state, with a view to avoid the effect of the bankrupt act [of 1867 (14 Stat. 517)], and prayed for an injunction against any disposition of the property by Pritchard.

1

 [Reprinted by permission.]

THE COURT

issued a rule upon the debtor to show cause on September 30, why he should not be adjudged a bankrupt, but holding that the assignment being for the benefit of all the creditors generally was not an act of bankruptcy.

THE COURT issued an order upon Pritch-ard restraining him from making any payments, even for expenses, until the further order of the court, but permitting him to go on and make sales of the stock of goods assigned.

THE COURT called the attention of the counsel to the fact, that the petition for an injunction was combined with a petition to adjudge the debtor a bankrupt, and that the injunction must fall, when the debtor is adjudged bankrupt; and that if it was intended to take any action against the assignee a separate bill must then be filed, as the injunction issued upon the present petition would be only provisional. That when the debtor shall be adjudged bankrupt, his assets must then be administered under the provisions of the bankrupt law.

[For other eases in the same litigation, see note to Case No. 7,831.]
Case 2:02-cv-20135-HB     Document 17      Filed 12/28/2004     Page 1 of 5

Case 2:02-cv-20135-HB     Document 17      Filed 12/28/2004     Page 2 of 5

Case 2:02-cv-20135-HB     Document 17      Filed 12/28/2004     Page 3 of 5

Case 2:02-cv-20135-HB     Document 17      Filed 12/28/2004     Page 4 of 5

Case 2:02-cv-20135-HB     Document 17      Filed 12/28/2004     Page 5 of 5
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

NUCH TOMPUNU NGANTUNG,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 12-73764

Agency No. A078-020-285

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted February 18, 2014** 

Before: ALARCÓN, O’SCANNLAIN, and FERNANDEZ, Circuit Judges.

Nuch Tompunu Ngantung, a native and citizen of Indonesia, petitions for

review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to

reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We

FILED

MAR 3 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).
review for abuse of discretion the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen. Najmabadi

v. Holder, 597 F.3d 983, 986 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny the petition for review. 

The BIA did not abuse its discretion by denying Ngantung’s motion to

reopen as untimely because the motion was filed more than four years after the

BIA’s final order, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and Ngantung did not demonstrate

materially changed conditions in Indonesia to qualify for the regulatory exception

to the time limit for filing motions to reopen, see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(ii);

Najmabadi, 597 F.3d at 987 (evidence must be “qualitatively different” from the

evidence presented at the previous hearing). In light of this conclusion, we do not

need to address Ngantung’s remaining contentions. 

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

2 12-73764
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

SHEET METAL WORKERS :

LOCAL 441 HEALTH & WELFARE :

PLAN, et al, :

Plaintiffs : CIVIL ACTION

:

v. : NO. 04-5898

:

GLAXOSMITHKLINE, PLC, et al, :

Defendants :

O R D E R

STENGEL, J.

AND NOW, this 15th day of November, 2010, upon consideration of the

indirect purchaser plaintiffs’ motion for leave to file a reply (Document No. 297), IT IS

HEREBY ORDERED that the motion is GRANTED. The Clerk of Court is directed to

file plaintiffs’ reply, attached as Exhibit A to its motion.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Lawrence F. Stengel 

LAWRENCE F. STENGEL, J.

Case 2:04-cv-05898-LS Document 302 Filed 11/15/10 Page 1 of 1
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 Annual Report of Bio Solutions Manufacturing, Inc., a Nevada
corporation (the “Company”), on Form 10-KSB for the year ended October 31, 2008,
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
“Report”), I, David S. Bennett, President 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.




Dated:
February 12, 2009




/s/  David S.
    BennettDavid
      S. Bennett, President, Chief Executive Officer
                              and
      Director
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS OF THE COMPANY FOR THE FISCAL YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1997 AND JUNE
30, 1998 AND FOR THE THREE AND SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 1997 AND 1998, AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0
<SALES>                                      1,303,616
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,469,326
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,583,453
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,418
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (114,127)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (39,944)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (74,183)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (74,183)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.03
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.03
        

</TABLE>
(V. D. 39)

Entry No. 822580, etc.

#### Lansen-Naeve Corp. et al. *v.*United States

(Decided September 26, 1956)

*Jordan & Klingaman (Jacob L. Klingaman*of counsel) for the plaintiffs.

*George Cochran Doub,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

WilsoN, Judge:

These matters are presently before me on a remand from a classification proceeding decided by the first division of this court in *Tanross Supply Co. et al.*v. *United States,*34 Cust. Ct. 260, Abstract 58687. The judgment entered therein stated: *“* *** that the matters be remanded to a single judge in reappraisement pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 U. S. C. § 2636 (d).”

The matters have been submitted for decision upon an agreed statement of facts entered into by and between counsel for the respective parties hereto.

Upon the agreed facts, I find the export value, as that value is defined in section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U. S. C. § 1402 (d)), to he the proper basis for determining the values of the involved merchandise and that such values for the leather cases were as follows:

> Entry No. Item Price for each

> 822580 Prism Binocular — 7 x 50 “Clearsite”- $1. 25

> Prism Binocular — 7 x 18 “Clearsite”- 0. 60

> 827450 Binoculars “Rocket” 7 x 50_ 1. 25

> Binoculars “Clearsite” 7 x 50_ 1. 25

> 852871 Prism Binocular 7 x 50 “Rocket”- 1. 25

> 880887 Prism Binocular “clearsite” 7 x 50- 1. 25

> Prism Binocular 7 x 18 clearsite- 0. 60

*458and such values for the binoculars, without cases, were the appraised figures less the values of the cases as set forth above.

I further find such values to be the dutiable values of said merchandise.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
No. P68/210.

protest 64/1596 (Portland, Oreg.).

No. P68/211.

protest 64/25412 (Portland, Oreg.).

#### Amalgamated Sugar Company *v.*United States, Amalgamated Sugar Company *v.*United States,

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of Weibull sugar blending and conditioning machinery and parts similar in all material respects to those the subject of *United States*v. *Union Sugar Div., Consolidated Foods Corp.*(54 CCPA 1, C.A.D. 892), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Case 2:02-cv-20135-HB     Document 7-3      Filed 02/23/2004     Page 1 of 3

Case 2:02-cv-20135-HB     Document 7-3      Filed 02/23/2004     Page 2 of 3

Case 2:02-cv-20135-HB     Document 7-3      Filed 02/23/2004     Page 3 of 3
II 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1379 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to permit fellowship and 

stipend compensation to be saved in an individual retirement account. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 19, 2017 

Ms. WARREN (for herself, Mr. LEE, Mr. WYDEN, and Mr. SCOTT) introduced 

the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee 

on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to permit 

fellowship and stipend compensation to be saved in an 

individual retirement account. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Graduate Student Sav5 ings Act of 2017’’. 

6 SEC. 2. CERTAIN NON-TUITION FELLOWSHIP AND STIPEND 

7 PAYMENTS TREATED AS COMPENSATION. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Paragraph (1) of section 219(f) 

9 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by addVerDate Sep 11 2014 00:15 Jun 23, 2017 Jkt 069200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\S1379.IS S1379

lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1379 IS

1 ing at the end the following: ‘‘Such term includes any 

2 amount paid to an individual to aid the individual in the 

3 pursuit of graduate or postdoctoral study or research.’’. 

4 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

5 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after 

6 December 31, 2017. 

Æ 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
  THE FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM ITEM 1
OF FORM 1O-QSB FOR THE QUARTER ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                                        0001051902
<NAME>                                       JVWeb, Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>                                 1
<CURRENCY>                                   U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                                               <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 JUL-1-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         25925
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  72166
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               116227
<PP&E>                                         4390
<DEPRECIATION>                                 2041
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 278576
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          372562
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       96406
<OTHER-SE>                                     (190392)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   278576
<SALES>                                        22833
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               22833
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               251319
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             4534
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (232020)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (232020)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (232020)
<EPS-BASIC>                                  (0.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.02)



</TABLE>
No. 51322.

#### Protest 118305-K of M. Pressner & Co. (New York).

*187Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

The uncontradicted evidence disclosed that the pencil sharpeners are composed in chief value of lead, but not plated with platinum, gold, or silver, or colored with gold lacquer, and are similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 48152. On the established facts and following the cited decision the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-13-0001285 29-FEB-2016 09:35 AM
1. Plaintiff must get a certified account statement from any

prison in which he was incarcerated during the six-month period

from December 28, 2001 to June 28, 2002. To give plaintiff a

clear picture of what the law requires, we attach an outline of

filing information.

 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

JOHN FLAMER : CIVIL ACTION

:

v. :

:

C/O MRS. STACY, et al. : NO. 02-4345

O R D E R

AND NOW, this day of July, 2002, plaintiff

having failed to submit a certified copy of his inmate trust fund

account statement for the entire six-month period preceding the

receipt of his complaint in this Court on June 28, 2002, as

required by 28 U.S.C. § 1915,1 it is hereby ORDERED that:

1. Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis is

DENIED without prejudice; and 

2. The Clerk shall CLOSE this case statistically. 

BY THE COURT:

 

 

CLIFFORD SCOTT GREEN, J. 

Case 2:02-cv-04345-CG Document 2 Filed 07/15/2002 Page 1 of 2
Case 2:02-cv-04345-CG Document 2 Filed 07/15/2002 Page 2 of 2