alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
|                                                                                                                                       
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                                                       
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                                                                         
|View History: Annual                                                                                                                   
|View History: Annual                                                                                                                   
|View History:                                                                                                                          
|                                                                                                                                       
|California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Reserves Extensions and Discoveries (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                                                       
|                                                                                                                                       
|California - San Joaquin Basin Onshore Natural Gas, Wet After Lease Separation Reserves Extensions and Discoveries (Billion Cubic Feet)
|                                                                                                                                       

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2010's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        | 32     | 74     | 36     | 82    
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 42     | 9      |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
Docket  No.:

                                   ASSIGNMENT

WHEREAS  International Medical Associates, Inc., of Miami, Florida, is the owner
of  the  entire  right, title and interest in and to the following United States
Letters  Patent:

     Patent  No:                                Patent  Date
     -----------                                ------------
     5,405,614                                  April  11,  1995

and  the  inventions  therein  described;

AND  WHEREAS,  Americare  Technologies,  Inc.,  doing  business at 20 N.W. 181st
Street,  Miami,  Florida  33169, is desirous of acquiring the entire interest in
said  invention,  and  in  said  United  States  Letters  Patent;

NOW  THEREFORE,  be it known that for and in consideration of a contract between
International  Medical  Associates,  Inc.  and Americare Technologies, Inc., and
other  valuable  consideration,  the  receipt and sufficiency whereof are hereby
acknowledged;  International  Medical  Associates,  Inc.  has sold, assigned and
transferred, and by these presence does sell, assign and transfer unto Americare
Technologies,  Inc., its legal representatives~ successors and assigns, the full
and  exclusive  rights to the said invention as fully set forth and described in
the  above-mentioned  Letters  Patent  of  the  United  States,  and any and all
reissues  of  said  Letters Patent, the same to be held and enjoyed by Americare
Technologies,  Inc.,  its  legal representatives, successors and assigns, to the
full  end  of  the term for which said Letters Patent has been granted or may be
reissued  or  extended,  as  fully and entirely the same would have been held by
International  Medical  Associates,  Inc.  had this Assignment and sale not been
made.

IN  TESTIMONY  WHEREOF,  we have hereunto set our hands and seals this 23 day of
June,  1997.


                                         INTERNATIONAL  MEDICAL ASSOCIATES, INC.


                                         By:  /s/  Joseph  P.  D'Angelo     (LS)
                                            --------------------------------
                                         Name:   Dr. Joseph  P.  D'Angelo
                                         Title:  President


<PAGE>
|                                                                                      
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                      
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                        
|View History: Annual                                                                  
|View History: Annual                                                                  
|View History:                                                                         
|                                                                                      
|Louisiana - North Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves Acquisitions (Million Barrels)
|                                                                                      
|                                                                                      
|Louisiana - North Crude Oil + Lease Condensate Reserves Acquisitions (Million Barrels)
|                                                                                      

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2000's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        | 1     
|2010's                                                                                                                            | 12     | 31     | 1      | 6      | 27     | 3      | 0      | 9      | 4      | 0     
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 5      | 1      |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 12/30/2022                                                                                                         
|Next Release Date: 12/29/2023
#### CAPITOL IDEA ET AL. *v.*GERALD SCIARRA

(14274)

Foti, Landau and Hennessy, Js.

Argued January 18

decision released February 13, 1996

*Steven H. Meyer,*with whom, on the brief, was *R. Bartley Halloran,*for the appellants (plaintiffs).

*Louis B. Blumenfeld,*with whom, on the brief, was *Eileen Mohan Flaherty,*for the appellee (defendant).

PER CURIAM.

The judgment is affirmed.
#### Solovieff Gallery Co., Appellant, v C. Raymond Langston, Respondent. (And 16 Other Actions.)

Orders, Supreme Court, New York County (David H. Edwards, Jr., J.), entered August 7, September 18 and September 25, 1989, which, *inter*alia, stayed these actions pending determination of related proceedings in Housing Court pursuant to CPLR 2201, unanimously affirmed. Defendants-respondents shall each recover of appellant $250 costs and disbursements of their respective appeals.

In response to a rent strike by residential tenants, plaintiff landlord commenced approximately 65 nonpayment proceedings in Civil Court, New York County, seeking rents for the period from October 1987 to May 1988. The various tenants alleged breach of the warranty of habitability. After extensive motion practice, trial began in December 1988. The plaintiff intentionally refrained from amending its petition to seek rent accruing subsequent to May 1988, and indeed opposed tenants’ January 1989 motion seeking to compel landlord to make such amendments to its petitions. Shortly thereafter, plaintiff commenced these actions in Supreme Court, New York County, seeking rent for the period from June 1988 to February 1989.

The IAS court’s issuance of a stay pursuant to CPLR 2201 in light of these circumstances was entirely appropriate. Plaintiff had ample opportunity to assert the present claims in Housing Court, the preferred forum for resolution of such disputes *(Cohen v Goldfein,*100 AD2d 795), but undertook instead a course of action designed to produce delay and duplicative litigation. Although plaintiff’s claims in these Supreme Court cases are technically distinct from those raised in the Housing Court litigation, the disputed issues are so closely interrelated as to be virtually identical. There simply is no reason why the Supreme Court should involve itself in matters pending before the Civil Court for more than two years. *(Zonghetti v Jeromack,*150 AD2d 561.) Concur—Kupferman, J. P., Carro, Kassal, Ellerin and Smith, JJ.
|                                                                                
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                
|View History: Annual Download Data (XLS File)                                  
|View History: Annual                                                            
|View History: Annual                                                            
|View History:                                                                   
|                                                                                
|Idaho Number of Gas and Gas Condensate Wells of Natural Gas (Number of Elements)
|                                                                                
|                                                                                
|Idaho Number of Gas and Gas Condensate Wells of Natural Gas (Number of Elements)
|                                                                                

|Decade                                                                                                                            | Year-0 | Year-1 | Year-2 | Year-3 | Year-4 | Year-5 | Year-6 | Year-7 | Year-8 | Year-9
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------ | ------
|2010's                                                                                                                            |        |        |        |        |        | 6      | 6      | 8      | 8      | 6     
|2020's                                                                                                                            | 5      |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |        |       
|- = No Data Reported;  -- = Not Applicable;  NA = Not Available;  W = Withheld to avoid disclosure of individual company data.
|                                                                                                                                 
|Release Date: 5/31/2024                                                                                                          
|Next Release Date: 6/28/2024
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

LOGAN THOMAS GEBHART,

Appellant,

v.

LIZETTE MARTHA JACQUEZ,

Appellee. §

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 21

- 00137

- CV

Appeal from the

65th District Court

of El Paso County, Texas

(TC# 2021DCM2159)

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes the appeal should be

dismissed for want of prosecution , in accordance with the opinion of this Court. We therefore

dismiss the appeal. We further order Appellant pay all costs of this appeal, and this decision be

certified below for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 28TH OF SEPTEMBER, 2021.

YVONNE T. RODRIGUEZ, Chief Justice

Before Rodriguez, C.J., Palafox, and Alley, JJ.
Exhibit 4.395

 

FEDERAL SERVICE FOR SUPERVISION IN THE SPHERE OF TELECOM, 
 INFORMATION TECHNOLOGIES AND MASS COMMUNICATIONS

 

LICENSE

 

No. 172368 dated February 26, 2019

 

To render

 

mobile radio telephone services

 

This license has been granted to

 

Public Joint Stock Company

 

“Mobile TeleSystems”

 

Legal Entity (Individual Entrepreneur) 
 Primary State Registration Number 
 (PSRN/OGRN, OGRNIP)

 

1027700149124

 

Tax Identification Number (TIN/INN)

 

7740000076

 











 

Principal place of business (residence):

 

109147, Moscow, Marksistskaya St., 4

 

The territory of the services is specified in appendix hereto.

 

This license is valid through:

 

February 26, 2024

 

This license is issued based on the decision of the licensing authority - Order No. 111-рчс dated February 26, 2019

 

This license has an appendix as an integral part, which is executed on two sheets

 

	
Deputy Head

 
    	
/signature/ A.A. Pankov
    
	
Stamp here

Official   seal:

MINISTRY OF TELECOM AND   MASS COMMUNICATIONS
   OF THE RUSSIAN FEDERATION
   FEDERAL SERVICE FOR SUPERVISION
   IN THE SPHERE
   OF COMMUNICATIONS, INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY
   AND MASS MEDIA
   PSRN 1087746736296
#### MACK v. RESERVE LIFE INS. CO.

No. 11922.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. San Antonio.

Nov. 17, 1948.

Rehearing Denied Dec. 15, 1948.

*40George Cannon, of San Antonio, for appellant.

Birkhead, Beckman, Stanard, Vance & Wood, of San Antonio, and Margaret A. Brand, of Dallas, for appellee.

MURRAY, Justice.

This suit tvas instituted on January 22, 1948, by Reserve Life Insurance Company, in the District Court of Bexar County, Texas, against Howard Mack and others, seeking to recover damages for the unlawful use by the defendants of certain “leads” belonging to plaintiff. Howard Mack was served with citation in said cause on January 28, 1948, and filed his answer therein January 30, 1948. Plaintiff filed its amended petition on May 3, 1948, for the first time bringing into the case the question of an accounting between it and Howard Mack by reason of the fact that Mack had been a former employee of plaintiff and was entitled to certain commissions and compensation which had not been paid in full.

On May 21, 1948, Howard Mack filed a suit in the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division thereof, being cause No. 48C, 717, in which suit Mack sought a recovery from Reserve Life Insurance Company of certain commissions and compensation allegedly owing to him by said company.

The Judge of the 73d District Court of Bexar County, Texas, took the position that his court had already acquired jurisdiction Of this matter and issued a permanent injunction prohibiting Mack from prosecuting the cause of action he had filed in the United States Court of Illinois. Howard Mack has appealed from that order.

There are a great many matters raised by appellant’s brief which we do not believe can properly be passed upon in this appeal. We are of the opinion, however, that the order granting the injunction should be reversed and the injunction dissolved, for the reason that the District Court of Bexar County, Texas, and the United States District Court of Illinois have concurrent jurisdiction to hear and determine this controversy, and it being an action strictly in personam, regardless of which court first took jurisdiction of the case, neither should be enjoined from proceeding with the trial, but when one court has rendered a final judgment in the cause such judgment may be pleaded as res judi-cata in the other coprt. The rule is different if the cause is one in rem or quasi in rem. Penn General Casualty Co. v. Commonwealth of Pennsylvania ex rel. Schnader, Atty. Gen’l., 294 U.S. 189, SS S.Ct. 386, 79 L.Ed. 850; Princess Lida of Thurn and Taxis et al. v. Thompson, 305 U.S. 456, 59 S.Ct. 275, 83 L.Ed. 285; Mandeville v. Canterbury, 318 U.S. 47, 63 S.Ct. 472, 87 L.Ed. 605.

Accordingly, the judgment granting the injunction will be reversed and the injunction set aside and held for naught.
#### DUNN et al. v. STATE.

No. 26908.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

April 21, 1954.

No attorneys on appeal for appellants.

'Wesley Dice,- State’s Atty., Austin, for the State. *■■ ■ ■ '*

*GRAVES,*Presiding Judge.

The appellants, Hugh R. Dunn, W. E. Martin, and J. J. ^hown were sued upon the forfeiture of an appearance bond entered into by them on .the 15th day of August, 1952, whereby they undertook to bind themselves for the appearance of the said Hugh -R. Dunn'before the County'Coiirt at Law No. 3 of Harris County, Texas, to answer upon a charge of misdemeanor duly filed therein.

On the call of such case it appears that the said Hugh R. Dunn failed to make his appearance at the time set forth in said undertaking as his name was called, and not having appeared within a reasonable time after, such call was made, this bail bond was declared forfeited, and the two sureties thereon were ordered to show cause why the forfeiture of said bond should not be made final. This they seem to have failed to do and eventually this judgment was made final ' in the full -amount of $400 set forth in said bond, together with all costs incurred. From said judgment of the court this appeal has been taken.

Notice of appeal was given herein and the appeal bond made on the 3rd day of December, 1953, and the appeal was filed in this court on February ll, 1954.

No brief was filed in'this court by the appellants.

In the case of Taylor v. State, 152 Tex. Cr.R. 625, 216 S.W.2d 206, this court said:

> “There - are no briefs filed in this court by appellants, 'and' it does not appear -from the record' that any were filed in the court below. Under the record as it appears in this case, this court is required to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. It is the uniform holding, of this court..that in cases of this nature, briefs’must be filed in the trial court and in this court, as in civil cases. See Art. 866, C.C.P.; Rules 414, 415, Texas Rules of Civil Procedure; Hooper v. State, 127 Tex. Cr.R. 117, 75 S.W.2d 724; Orr v. State, 143 Tex.Cr.R. 526, 158 S.W.2d 533; and Franklin v. State, 133 Tex. Cr.R. 179, 109 S.W.2d 482.

> “From what we have said here .it follows that the appeal in this case should be dismissed, and it is so ordered.”

See also Gaither v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 244 S.W.2d 209.

For the foregoing reason, this cause is ordered dismissed.
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 17

- 41207 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

− Appellee
,

v ersus

RAUDY MANUEL MENDEZ

- DIAZ,

A lso K nown as Raudy Manuel Mendez, A lso K nown as Raudy Mendez Diaz
,
Defendant

− Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas No. 5:17

- CR

- 314

- 1

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *

The attorney appointed to represent Raudy Mendez

- Diaz has moved for

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. 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 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED June 28, 2018 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 17-41207 Document: 00514533472 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/28/2018No. 17

- 41207

2 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).
Mendez

- Diaz h a s not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no non

- frivolous issue for appellate r eview. Accordingly,
the motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the appeal is DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR

. R. 42.2. Case: 17-41207 Document: 00514533472 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/28/2018
<TABLE> <S> <C>
 
<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                  3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>              APR-03-1999
<PERIOD-END>                   JUL-04-1998
<CASH>                         408,600
<SECURITIES>                 1,615,738
<RECEIVABLES>                  858,699
<ALLOWANCES>                   322,263
<INVENTORY>                  2,547,167
<CURRENT-ASSETS>             6,016,242
<PP&E>                       7,275,209
<DEPRECIATION>               6,760,005
<TOTAL-ASSETS>               7,173,090
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>        2,096,204
<BONDS>                              0
<COMMON>                     2,801,288
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                0
<PREFERRED>                          0
<OTHER-SE>                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY> 7,173,090
<SALES>                      3,341,917
<TOTAL-REVENUES>             3,341,917
<CGS>                        1,491,907
<TOTAL-COSTS>                1,929,448
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                (36,378)
<INCOME-TAX>                   (12,624)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>            (23,754)
<DISCONTINUED>                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                      0
<CHANGES>                            0
<NET-INCOME>                   (23,754)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                     (.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                     (.01)

        

</TABLE>