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

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

BRIAN RATCLIFF, 

Plaintiff,

v. Civil Action 2:18-cv-745

Judge Algenon L. Marbley

Magistrate Judge Jolson

MOUNT CARMEL HEALTH SYSTEM,

Defendant.

ORDER

This matter is before the Court on the parties Joint Motion to Extend Remaining Case 

Deadlines. (Doc. 13). The parties seek a sixty-day extension of the discovery and dispositive 

motion deadlines “because the parties need additional time to conduct depositions.” (Id. at 1). 

There have been no prior extensions to the case schedule. (Id. at 2). For good cause shown, the 

motion is GRANTED. The discovery deadline is extended to May 31, 2019, and the dispositive 

motion deadline is extended to June 28, 2019. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Date: March 13, 2019 /s/ Kimberly A. Jolson

KIMBERLY A. JOLSON

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Case: 2:18-cv-00745-ALM-KAJ Doc #: 14 Filed: 03/13/19 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: 55
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION

NICHOLAS ALSTON, et a/.,

Plaintiffs,
Case No. 3:18-cv-247
v.
JUDGE WALTER H. RICE
PHIL PLUMMER,
Defendant.

DECISION AND ENTRY SUSTAINING PLAINTIFFS’ UNOPPOSED
MOTION IN LIMINE TO ADMIT THE REPORT OF CGL COMPANIES
AS AN EXCEPTION TO THE HEARSAY RULE PURSUANT TO
FEDERAL RULE OF EVIDENCE 803(8)(A)(iii) (DOC. #40)

As discussed during the conference call held on November 26, 2018, the
Court SUSTAINS Plaintiffs’ Motion in Limine to Admit the Report of CGL
Companies as an Exception to the Hearsay Rule Pursuant to Fed. R. Evid.
803(8)(A)(iii), the public records exception. Doc. #40.

During the conference call, counsel for Defendant stipulated to the
authenticity of this Report and indicated that she had no objections to Plaintiffs’
use of the Report at the Preliminary Injunction Hearing. She did, however, reserve
the right to object with respect to its relevancy. In addition, she noted that
Defendant did not stipulate to the authenticity or admissibility of the slides and

email messages related to the Report. This was to be the subject of further


discussions between counsel and will be revisited during the conference call

scheduled for 4:00 p.m. on November 29, 2018.

. ee
Date: November 28, 2018 Lud

WALTER H. RICE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 31.2

CERTIFICATION

I, Edward C. Hall, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-QSB of Aethlon Medical, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report.

4. The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

         a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

         b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the
period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

         c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most
recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting;
and;

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors
(or persons performing the equivalent functions):

         a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design
or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and

         b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control
over financial reporting.

Date: August 16, 2004
                                             /s/ Edward C. Hall
                                             -----------------------------------
                                             Edward C. Hall
                                             Chief Financial Officer
Case: 1:18-cv-00450-MRB-KLL Doc #: 25 Filed: 08/04/21 Page: 1 of 2  PAGEID #: 99

Case: 1:18-cv-00450-MRB-KLL Doc #: 25 Filed: 08/04/21 Page: 2 of 2  PAGEID #: 100
1 

THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT 

COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN 

DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION 

STEVE SNYDER-HILL, et al., ) Case No. 2:18-cv-00736-MHW-EPD 

) 

Plaintiffs, ) Judge Michael H. Watson 

) 

v. ) Chief Magistrate Judge Elizabeth P. 

) Deavers 

THE OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY, ) 

) 

Defendant. ) 

 ) 

STIPULATION OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE 

Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. Pro. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), Plaintiffs Hugh Dyer, John Doe 24, John 

Doe 26, John Doe 38, John Doe 48, John Doe 51, John Doe 53, John Doe 55, John Doe 61 and 

Defendant The Ohio State University (“OSU”) hereby stipulate to the DISMISSAL WITH 

PREJUDICE of any and all claims which have been, could have been, or should have been 

asserted against OSU in the Second Amended Complaint. The parties will bear their own 

attorneys’ fees, costs and expenses. 

Stipulated And Agreed To By: 

Attorney for Plaintiffs: Attorney for Defendant: 

SCOTT ELLIOT SMITH, LPA 

/s/ Scott E. Smith 

 DAVID A. YOST 

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF OHIO 

/s/ (signature affixed by Plaintiffs’ counsel on consent)

Scott E. Smith 

Michael L. Dillard, Jr. 

5003 Horizons Drive, Suite 100 

Columbus, Ohio 43220 

Phone: (614) 846-1700 

Fax: (614) 486-4987 

Michael H. Carpenter (0015733) (Trial Attorney) 

Timothy R. Bricker (0061872) 

David J. Barthel (0079307) 

Carpenter Lipps & Leland LLP 

280 Plaza, Suite 1300 

280 North High Street 

Case: 2:18-cv-00736-MHW-EPD Doc #: 163 Filed: 12/13/21 Page: 1 of 3 PAGEID #: 2790
2 

ses@sestriallaw.com 

mld@sestriallaw.com 

EMERY CELLI BRINCKERHOFF 

ABADY WARD & MAAZEL LLP 

Ilann M. Maazel 

Debra L. Greenberger 

Marissa R. Benavides 

600 Fifth Avenue, 10th Floor 

New York, New York 10020 

Phone: (212) 763-5000 

Fax: (212) 763-5001 

imaazel@ecbawm.com 

dgreenberger@ecbawm.com 

mbenavides@ecbawm.com 

PUBLIC JUSTICE, P.C. 

Adele P. Kimmel 

Alexandra Z. Brodsky 

1620 L Street, NW, Suite 630 

Washington, DC 20036 

Phone: (202) 797-8600 

Fax: (202) 232-7203 

akimmel@publicjustice.net 

Columbus, OH 43215 

Phone: (614) 365-4100 

Fax: (614) 365-9145 

carpenter@carpenterlipps.com 

bricker@carpenterlipps.com 

barthel@carpenterlipps.com 

Special Counsel for Defendant The Ohio State 

University 

 

Case: 2:18-cv-00736-MHW-EPD Doc #: 163 Filed: 12/13/21 Page: 2 of 3 PAGEID #: 2791
3 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I certify that a copy of the foregoing was filed electronically on December 13, 2021. 

Notice was sent by operation of the Court’s electronic filing system to all other counsel who 

have entered an appearance and any parties who have entered an appearance through counsel. 

The parties may access this filing through the Court’s ECF system. 

 /s/ Scott E. Smith 

Trial Attorney for Plaintiffs 

Case: 2:18-cv-00736-MHW-EPD Doc #: 163 Filed: 12/13/21 Page: 3 of 3 PAGEID #: 2792
AO 456 (Rev. 5/85) Notice

United States District Court

 SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

V.

SETH NEZAT

 CORRECTED NOTICE

CASE NUMBER: 1:18cr109

( J. Black ; Litkovitz, MJ )

TYPE OF CASE

CIVIL CRIMINAL 

TAKE NOTICE that a proceeding in this case has been set for the place, date, and time set forth below:

PLACE

Potter Stewart U.S. Courthouse

100 East Fifth Street

Cincinnati, Ohio 45202

ROOM NO.

708

DATE AND TIME

TYPE OF PROCEEDING

Detention Hearing and Arraignment on Indictment before the Honorable Karen L. Litkovitz, U.S. 

Magistrate Judge

TAKENOTICE that the proceeding in this case has been continued as indicated below:

PLACE

Potter Stewart U.S. Courthouse

100 East Fifth Street

Cincinnati, Ohio 45202

DATE AND TIME PREVIOUSLY SCHEDULED

April 4, 2019 at 1:30 pm

RESET TO, DATE AND TIME

April 8, 2019 at 2:00 pm

April 3, 2019 RICHARD W. NAGEL 

Date U.S. Magistrate or Clerk of Court

s/Arthur Hill 

(BY) DEPUTY CLERK

To: Ravert J. Clark, Esq.

 

 CC: U.S. Pretrial Services

 U.S. Probation

 U.S. Marshal’s Office

 U.S. Attorney’s Office (Matthew Singer, AUSA)

 NOTE: It is the responsibility of Counsel to notify their clients.

Case: 1:18-cr-00109-TSB Doc #: 95 Filed: 04/03/19 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: 562
DC6473.pdf -- Converted by SEC Publisher 4.2, created by BCL Technologies Inc., for SEC Filing








	
EXHIBIT 10.2







	
AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT







     THIS AMENDMENT dated as of March 26, 2009 by and between Evercore Partners, Inc. (the “Company”), Evercore, L.P. (the “Partnership”) (Company and Partnership, each and
collectively, the “Employer”) and Pedro Carlos Aspe Armella (“Executive”).


     WHEREAS, the Employer and Executive are parties to an Employment Agreement dated August 10, 2006, as amended, as of November 7, 2008 (collectively, the “Employment Agreement;” capitalized
terms used herein and not otherwise defined shall have the meaning ascribed to them in the Employment Agreement) which provides for the payment of a Guaranteed Annual Bonus as well as a Profit Annual Bonus; provided, that such Profit Annual Bonus
may be determined by the Compensation Committee of the Board in its sole discretion; and


     WHEREAS, the Employer and Executive desire to amend the Employment Agreement to remove the concept of a Guaranteed Annual Bonus.


     NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the sufficiency and receipt of which is acknowledged by the parties hereto and the parties hereto intending to be legally bound hereby, the
Employment Agreement is hereby amended as follows, effective on the date first above written:


     1. The Employment Agreement shall continue in full force and effect in accordance with the provisions thereof, except that, effective as of the date hereof, the Employment Agreement is amend as
follows: section 4(a) is hereby deleted and any subsequent reference to the term “Guaranteed Annual Bonus” or “guaranteed bonus” is hereby deleted.


     2. The Employment Agreement, as amended by the foregoing changes, is hereby ratified and confirmed in all respects.


     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have duly executed this Amendment on the day and year first above written.


	
EVERCORE PARTNERS INC.



By: /s/ Adam Frankel

Name: Adam Frankel

Title: General Counsel



EVERCORE L.P.



By: /s/ Adam Frankel 

Name: Adam Frankel

Title: General Counsel



PEDRO CARLOS ASPE ARMELLA

/s/ Pedro Carlos Aspe Armella
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

Steve Snyder-HIII, et a/.,

Plaintiffs, Case No. 2:18-cv-736

V. Judge Michael H. Watson

The Ohio State University, Magistrate Judge Deavers

Defendant.

OPINION AND ORDER

Nine plaintiffs and Defendant filed a joint motion to dismiss with prejudice all

claims of those nine plaintiffs, representing that the parties had reached a settlement,

ECF No. 164. Although the Court commends the settlement success, it is unable to

grant this motion because Plaintiffs have already filed a notice of appeal. "The filing of a

notice of appeal is an event of jurisdictional significance—it confers jurisdiction on the

court of appeals and divests the district court of its control over those aspects of the

case involved in the appeal." Griggs v. Provident Consumer Disc. Co., 459 U.S. 56, 58

(1982) (citing cases); see alsoAdkins v. Jeffreys, 327 F. App'x 537, 539 (6th Gir. 2009)

("It is clear that the filing of a notice of appeal operates to transfer jurisdiction of the

case to the court of appeals, and the district court is thereafter without jurisdiction

except to act in aid of the appeal." (intemal citations omitted)). So, the joint motion is

DENIED, and the parties are encouraged to re-file their motion in the court of appeals.

The Clerk is DIRECTED to terminate ECF No. 164.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

MICHAEL H. WATSON, JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

Case: 2:18-cv-00736-MHW-EPD Doc #: 165 Filed: 12/14/21 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: 2798
N OTE : This disposition is nonprecedential. 

# United States **Court of Appeals**  **for the Federal Circuit**

______________________ CLAUDE SEARS, DONALD E. BRACY, ANNA L.

BRACY, O. BERNICE DICKKUT RESIDUARY TRUST, FIRST UNION L LC, CHARLES E. LAKIN

REVOCABLE TRUST, DER RICK NEDERHOFF, ROGER L. OSGOOD, GLENDA L. OSGOOD, PROSSER FARMS, INC., WILLIAM L. ROBINSON,

CORY J. SCHURMAN, DE ANNA L. SCHURMAN, CHARLES WILLIAM STEI NFELDT, FOR THEMSELVES AND AS REPRESENTATIVES OF A CLASS OF SIMILARLY S ITUATED PERSONS, Plaintiffs

DENZIL J. GOULD, JOHN E. BRADLEY, JUNE A

.

BRADLEY, NORVAL K. M OSHER, ESTHER M. MOSHER, CHARLES S. H EENE, RICHARD K. RICHARDS ESTATE,

Plaintiffs

- Appellants

v.

UNITED STATES, Defend ant

- Appellee

______________________

2017

- 2172

______________________ Appeal from the United States Court of Federal Claims in No. 1:12

- cv

- 00889

- CFL, Judge Charles F. Lettow.______________________

JUDGMENT

______________________

T HOMAS S COTT S TEWART , Stewart Wald & McCulley, LLC, Kansas City, MO, argued for plaintiffs

- appellants.

E LIZABETH A NN P ETERSON , Environment and Natural Resources Division, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, argued for defendant

- appellee. Also represented by J EFFREY H. W OOD , E RIC G RANT

.

______________________

T HIS C AUSE having been heard and considered, it is

O RDERED and A DJUDGED :

P ER C URIAM (D YK , M OORE , and O’M ALLEY , Circuit Judges ).

AFFIRMED

. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

E NTERED BY O RDER OF THE C OURT

June 12, 2018 /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner Date Peter R. Marksteiner Clerk of Court
Tony BRINSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-4574

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

February 9, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of General Electric CapitalServices, Inc. (the "registrant") on Form 10-K/A for the year ending December31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the "report"), we, Dennis D. Dammerman and James A. Parke, Chairman of theBoard and Vice Chairman and Chief Financial Officer, respectively, of theregistrant, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to our knowledge:

     (1) The report fully complies with the requirements ofsection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

     (2) The information contained in the report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the registrant.

**
March 5, 2004 
 

 

/s/ 
Dennis D. Dammerman 
 
Dennis D. Dammerman 
Chairman of the Board 
 

/s/ 
James A. Parke 
 
James A. Parke 
Vice Chairman and Chief Financial Officer
 

**
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                         166,641
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  318,320
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (186,005)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               648,404
<PP&E>                                       6,835,025
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,844,040
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              31,457,099
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       33,068,357
<BONDS>                                     28,114,668
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                  2,312,439
<COMMON>                                       134,380
<OTHER-SE>                                  (6,311,484)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                31,457,099
<SALES>                                      1,971,248
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,971,248
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,443,814
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            10,781,475
<LOSS-PROVISION>                              (186,005)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           3,414,533
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (11,711,744)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (11,711,744)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (11,711,744)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (1.83)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AT OCTOBER 31, 1997 AND STATEMENT OF INCOME FOR THE
YEAR ENDED OCTOBER 31, 1997 AS FILED ON FORM 10-K AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FORM 10-K
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             NOV-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1997
<CASH>                                         224,437
<SECURITIES>                                    30,464
<RECEIVABLES>                                  184,332
<ALLOWANCES>                                     9,800
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               450,869
<PP&E>                                          99,557
<DEPRECIATION>                                  43,852
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 643,037
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          212,584
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            93
<OTHER-SE>                                     396,768
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   643,037
<SALES>                                        248,707
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               647,812
<CGS>                                           36,444
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  281,084
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               306,472
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 8,434
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 829
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 59,326
<INCOME-TAX>                                    22,098
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             37,228
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    37,228
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .39
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .38
        

</TABLE>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 

WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

HEATHER LYNN JOHNSON, 

Defendant. 

: 

: 

: 

: 

: 

: 

: 

: 

:

Case No. 3:17-mj-00544 

Magistrate Judge Sharon L. Ovington 

REMOVAL AND COMMITMENT ORDER 

This case came to be heard pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 5(c)(3). Defendant herein 

was arrested in this District on a warrant issued upon an Indictment in the United States 

District Court FOR New Mexico in Case No. 1:17-cr-01368-JCH-2. Defendant appeared 

in open Court on November 28, 2017, and after being advised of her rights, waived her 

right to an identity hearing. Defendant requested that a hearing be held in the United 

States District Court on the Petition for Action on Conditions of Pretrial Release. 

IT IS ORDERED THAT THE DEFENDANT BE REMOVED TO THE 

United States District Court for New Mexico, where the charges are pending against her, 

for any other proceedings, as ordered by that court. 

TO THE UNITED STATES MARSHAL: 

You are hereby commanded to take custody of the above-named Defendant and to 

transport that Defendant with a copy of this commitment forthwith to the district of 

offense as specified above and there deliver the Defendant to the Unites States Marshal 

Case: 3:18-cr-00080-WHR Doc #: 3 Filed: 11/28/17 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: 23
2 

for that District or to some other officer authorized to receive the Defendant, all 

proceedings required by Fed. R. Crim. P. 5 having been completed. 

November 28, 2017 s/Sharon L. Ovington 

 Sharon L. Ovington 

 United States Magistrate Judge 

Case: 3:18-cr-00080-WHR Doc #: 3 Filed: 11/28/17 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: 24
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth ___________________________

No. 02-19-00304-CV

___________________________

On Appeal from the 96th District Court

Tarrant County, Texas

Trial Court No. 096-291366-17

Before Bassel, Womack, and Wallach, JJ.

Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion

SCOTT’S BIG TRUCK SALES, LLC; DON’S BIG TRUCK SALES, LLC;

DONALD R. SCOTT; AND JOHNNY A. SCOTT, Appellants

V.

AUTOMOTIVE FINANCE CORPORATION, Appellee
2

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND JUDGMENT

On September 17, 2019, we notified appellants that the trial-court clerk 

responsible for preparing the record in this appeal has informed us that appellants 

have not arranged to pay for the clerk’s record as the appellate rules require. See Tex. 

R. App. P. 35.3(a)(2). In our notice, we warned that we would dismiss the appeal for 

want of prosecution unless, within ten days, appellants arranged to pay for the clerk’s 

record and provided us with proof of payment. See Tex. R. App. P. 35.3(c), 37.3(b), 

44.3.

Because appellants have not made payment arrangements for the clerk’s record, 

we now dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(b), 

42.3(b), 43.2(f).

Appellants must pay all costs of this appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 43.4.

Per Curiam

Delivered: October 3, 2019