alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Case: 1:02-cv-05631 Document #: 45 Filed: 07/22/04 Page 1 of 22 PageID #:525
Case: 1:02-cv-05631 Document #: 45 Filed: 07/22/04 Page 2 of 22 PageID #:526
Case: 1:02-cv-05631 Document #: 45 Filed: 07/22/04 Page 3 of 22 PageID #:527
Case: 1:02-cv-05631 Document #: 45 Filed: 07/22/04 Page 4 of 22 PageID #:528
Case: 1:02-cv-05631 Document #: 45 Filed: 07/22/04 Page 5 of 22 PageID #:529
Case: 1:02-cv-05631 Document #: 45 Filed: 07/22/04 Page 6 of 22 PageID #:530
Case: 1:02-cv-05631 Document #: 45 Filed: 07/22/04 Page 7 of 22 PageID #:531
Case: 1:02-cv-05631 Document #: 45 Filed: 07/22/04 Page 8 of 22 PageID #:532
Case: 1:02-cv-05631 Document #: 45 Filed: 07/22/04 Page 9 of 22 PageID #:533
Case: 1:02-cv-05631 Document #: 45 Filed: 07/22/04 Page 10 of 22 PageID #:534
Case: 1:02-cv-05631 Document #: 45 Filed: 07/22/04 Page 11 of 22 PageID #:535
Case: 1:02-cv-05631 Document #: 45 Filed: 07/22/04 Page 12 of 22 PageID #:536
Case: 1:02-cv-05631 Document #: 45 Filed: 07/22/04 Page 13 of 22 PageID #:537
Case: 1:02-cv-05631 Document #: 45 Filed: 07/22/04 Page 14 of 22 PageID #:538
Case: 1:02-cv-05631 Document #: 45 Filed: 07/22/04 Page 15 of 22 PageID #:539
Case: 1:02-cv-05631 Document #: 45 Filed: 07/22/04 Page 16 of 22 PageID #:540
Case: 1:02-cv-05631 Document #: 45 Filed: 07/22/04 Page 17 of 22 PageID #:541
Case: 1:02-cv-05631 Document #: 45 Filed: 07/22/04 Page 18 of 22 PageID #:542
Case: 1:02-cv-05631 Document #: 45 Filed: 07/22/04 Page 19 of 22 PageID #:543
Case: 1:02-cv-05631 Document #: 45 Filed: 07/22/04 Page 20 of 22 PageID #:544
Case: 1:02-cv-05631 Document #: 45 Filed: 07/22/04 Page 21 of 22 PageID #:545
Case: 1:02-cv-05631 Document #: 45 Filed: 07/22/04 Page 22 of 22 PageID #:546
# Official Journal C 27A/27 J

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 27A |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5827 January 2015 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 27A

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5827 January 2015

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | Corrigenda |
| 2015/C 027A/01 | Corrigendum to Call for Expressions of Interest — contract staff — researchers (function group IV) in the field of parliamentary research — (OJ C 55 A, 26.2.2014 ) | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

Corrigenda

2015/C 027A/01

Corrigendum to Call for Expressions of Interest — contract staff — researchers (function group IV) in the field of parliamentary research — (OJ C 55 A, 26.2.2014 )

(OJ C 55 A, 26.2.2014 )

1

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN

---

Corrigenda

| 27.1.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CA 27/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.1.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CA 27/1

---

Corrigendum to Call for Expressions of Interest — contract staff — researchers (function group IV) in the field of parliamentary research

(Official Journal of the European Union
  C 55 A of 26 February 2014
  )

(2015/C 027 A/01)

On page 4, Section VIII, last sentence:

for:

‘The contract will be drawn up in accordance with Articles 3a, 84 and 85 of the CEOS.’,

read:

‘The contract will be drawn up in accordance with Articles 3b, 84 and 88 of the CEOS.’.

---
#### Elisabeth LENES; Steven Lenes, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Loral LANGEMEIER, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 11-1012.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: July 25, 2011.

Decided: July 29, 2011.

G. Mark Phillips, William C. Wood, Jr., Erin R. Stuckey, Nelson, Mullins, Riley & Scarborough, LLP, Columbia, South Carolina; J. Mitchell Little, Scheef & Stone, LLP, Frisco, Texas, for Appellant. Guy M. Burns, Jonathan S. Coleman, Johnson, Pope, Bokor, Ruppel & Burns, LLP, Tampa, Florida; James C. Bradley, Nina H. Fields, Richardson, Patrick, Westbrook & Brickman, LLC, Mount Pleasant, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Before KING and DAVIS, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Loral Langemeier appeals the district court’s order denying her motion to compel arbitration in the underlying diversity action. We have reviewed the record included on appeal, as well as the parties’ briefs, and find no error in the district court’s ruling. Accordingly, we affirm. *See Am. Recovery Corp. v. Computerized Thermal Imaging,*96 F.3d 88, 92 (4th Cir.1996) (noting that “whether a party has agreed to arbitrate an issue is a matter of contract interpretation: ‘[A] party cannot be required to submit to arbitration any dispute which he has not agreed so to submit.’ ”) (citations omitted). We deny the Appellees’ motion to file a sur-reply brief and to schedule oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED.*
Consent of Independent
Registered Public Accounting Firm
 
 The Board
of Directors and Stockholders
 Young
Innovations, Inc.:
  We
consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements (No.
333-138323, 333-61572, 333-65673, and 333-57742) on Form S-8 of Young
Innovations, Inc. of our report dated March 12, 2008, with respect to the
consolidated statements of income, stockholders’ equity and cash flows of Young
Innovations, Inc. and subsidiaries for the year ended December 31, 2007, and the
related financial statement schedule for 2007, which report appears in the
December 31, 2009 annual report on Form 10-K of Young Innovations,
Inc.
  
  /s/ KPMG
LLP
 Chicago,
Illinois
  March 12,
2010
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v David M. Scott, Appellant.

[942 NYS2d 382]

Appeal from a judgment of the County Court of Saratoga County (Scarano, J.), rendered January 28, 2011, convicting defendant upon his plea of guilty of the crime of grand larceny in the third degree.

Defendant pleaded guilty to grand larceny in the third degree and executed a written waiver of the right to appeal. In accordance with the plea agreement, defendant was sentenced to time served and ordered to pay restitution. Defendant now appeals.

Appellate counsel seeks to be relieved of his assignment of representing defendant upon the ground that there are no nonfrivolous issues to be raised on appeal. Based upon our review of the record and counsel’s brief, we agree. Therefore, the judgment is affirmed and counsel’s application for leave to withdraw is granted *(see People*v *Cruwys,*113 AD2d 979, 980 [1985], *lv denied*67 NY2d 650 [1986]; *see generally People v Stokes,*95 NY2d 633 [2001]).

Lahtinen, J.P., Spain, McCarthy, Garry and Egan Jr., JJ., concur. Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, and application to be relieved of assignment granted.
### T E X A S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S , T H I R D D I S T R I C T , A T A U S T I N

NO. 03-16-00316- CV

In re Don Bonif

ay, Ind ividu ally and d/b /a Bon if ay & Associate s

ORI GINAL P ROCEEDI NG F ROM B LANCO CO UNTY

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
Relator Don Bonifa

y , individually and d/b/a Bonifa y & Associates, filed his petition for writ of mandamus, asking the Court to direc t the trial court to vacate its order deny ing his motion to transfe r venue. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.1. Having revie wed the petition, the rec ord, the response , and the reply , we d en y the petition for writ of mandamus and lift the stay of the underly ing proce eding s. See id. R. 52.8(a).

__________________________________________ Cindy Olson Bour land, J ustice Be fore Chief J ustice Rose, Jus tices Goodwin a nd Bour land Filed: September

14, 2016
Exhibit 11.1
<TABLE>
                                    CALCULATION OF PRIMARY NET INCOME PER SHARE
<CAPTION>

                                       Three Months         Three Months        Nine Months Ended     Nine Months Ended
                                          Ended                 Ended            March 31, 1996        March 31, 1997
                                      March 31, 1996       March 31, 1997
                                     -----------------    ------------------    ------------------    ------------------
<S>                                  <C>                  <C>                   <C>                   <C>

Net income                                 $1,229,250            $1,506,443            $3,125,110            $3,435,187
Pro forma income taxes                        491,700               602,577             1,250,044             1,374,075
                                     -----------------    ------------------    ------------------    ------------------

Pro forma net income                       $  737,550            $  903,866            $1,875,066            $2,061,113

Weighted average shares
  outstanding during the period             7,000,000             7,000,000             7,000,000             7,000,000

Shares issuable under
  consulting agreement                         96,366                96,366                96,366                96,366

Shares issuable under
  compensation agreement                      170,708               170,708               170,708               170,708

Shares assumed outstanding to
  support S Corporation distribution              ---             1,068,208                  ---              1,068,208
                                     -----------------    ------------------    ------------------    ------------------

Weighted average common
  and common equivalent
  shares outstanding during the
  period                                    7,267,074             8,335,282             7,267,074             8,335,282
                                     =================    ==================    ==================    ==================

Pro forma net income per
  share                                         $0.10                 $.011                 $0.26                 $0.25
                                     =================    ==================    ==================    ==================


</TABLE>
Notice of Payment of Final Mortgage Cure Amount

02/07/2012

BAC HOME LOANS SERVI

7105 CORPORATE DR

PYMT PROCESSING PTX B 209

PLANO TX 75024-1319

Re: CARMELO ARZUAGA

 Case # 10 B 01040

 Account # 29493464

 Arrears Amount 17,265.78

 According to our records the above debtor has paid the listed arrearage

 in full, satisfying all prepetition mortgage obligations. You are now

 required to treat the mortgage as reinstated and fully current unless

 the debtor has failed to make timely payments of postpetition obligations

 to you. If the debtor has failed to make timely payments of any post-

 petition obligations, you are required to itemize all outstanding payment

 obligations as of the date of this notice and file a statement of those

 obligations with the United States Bankruptcy Court for the Northern

 District of Illinois, giving notice of the same to our office, the debtor,

 and the attorney for the debtor within sixty (60) days of service of this

 notice.

If you fail to file and serve a statement of outstanding obligations

within the required time, you are required to treat the mortgage as

reinstated according to its original terms, fully current as of the date

of this notice.

If you serve a statement of outstanding obligations within the required

time, the debtor may (i) within 30 days of service of the statement,

challenge the accuracy of the statement by motion filed with the court

on notice to the holder and the standing trustee, with the court

resolving the challenge as a contested matter, or (ii) propose a modified

plan to provide for payment of additional amounts that the debtor

acknowledges or the court determines to be due. To the extent that amounts

set forth on a timely filed statement of outstanding obligations are not

determined by the court to be invalid or are not paid by the debtor through

a modified plan, your right to collect these amounts will be unaffected.

Tom Vaughn

Chapter 13 Trustee

55 E. Monroe St. Suite 3850

Chicago, Illinois 60603

(312) 294-5900

(312) 341-7168 (FAX)

Case 10-01040 Doc 32 Filed 02/07/12 Entered 02/07/12 08:55:06 Desc Main

 Document Page 1 of 2
 SERVICE LIST

CARMELO ARZUAGA

1324 S 58TH CT

CICERO IL

60804-1118

BAC HOME LOANS SERVI

7105 CORPORATE DR

PYMT PROCESSING PTX B 209

PLANO TX

75024-1319

TIMOTHY K LIOU

900 W WASHINGTON BLVD

CHICAGO IL

60607-2298

BAC HOME LOANS SERVCING LP

% PIERCE & ASSOCIATES PC

1 N DEARBORN #1300

CHICAGO IL

606020000

Case 10-01040 Doc 32 Filed 02/07/12 Entered 02/07/12 08:55:06 Desc Main

 Document Page 2 of 2
##### 



Exhibit 21

SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT

|                                              |  |                                                |  |            |     |                  |  |            
|--------------------------------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------- |  | ---------- | --- | ---------------- |  | -----------
|                                              |  |                                                |  | Percentage |     | State of        
|                                              |  |                                                |  | of         |     | Incorporation or
|Parent                                        |  | Subsidiary                                     |  | Ownership  |     | Organization    
|                                              |  |                                                |  |            |     |                 
|ITLA Capital Corporation                      |  | Imperial Capital Bank                          |  |            | 100 | %                |  | California 
|ITLA Capital Corporation                      |  | ITLA Funding Corporation                       |  |            | 100 | %                |  | Delaware   
|ITLA Funding Corporation                      |  | ITLA Servicing Corporation                     |  |            | 100 | %                |  | Delaware   
|ITLA Funding Corporation                      |  | ITLA Commercial Warehouse Corporation          |  |            | 100 | %                |  | Delaware   
|ITLA Capital Corporation                      |  | ITLA Management Corporation                    |  |            | 100 | %                |  | Delaware   
|ITLA Management Corporation                   |  | ITLA Commercial Investment
Corporation         |  |            | 100 | %                |  | Maryland   
|ITLA Capital Corporation                      |  | Imperial Capital Real Estate
Investment Trust  |  |            | 100 | %                |  | Delaware   
|Imperial Capital Real Estate
Investment Trust |  | ICCMAC Multifamily and
Commercial Trust 1999-I |  |            | 100 | %                |  | Delaware   
|ITLA Capital Corporation                      |  | ITLA Capital Statutory Trust I                 |  |            | 100 | %(1)             |  | Connecticut
|ITLA Capital Corporation                      |  | ITLA Capital Statutory Trust II                |  |            | 100 | %(1)             |  | Connecticut
|ITLA Capital Corporation                      |  | ITLA Capital Statutory Trust III               |  |            | 100 | %(1)             |  | Delaware   
|ITLA Capital Corporation                      |  | ITLA Capital Statutory Trust IV                |  |            | 100 | %(1)             |  | Delaware   
|ITLA Capital Corporation                      |  | ITLA Capital Statutory Trust V                 |  |            | 100 | %(1)             |  | Connecticut



---

|(1) |  | Represents ownership of the common securities of the trust.
|--- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------

79
#### In re SCOTT’S ESTATE.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

November 8, 1907.)

In the matter of the estate of Rebecca B. Scott, deceased.

No opinion. Decree affirmed, with costs. Order filed.
# C_2019182EN.01003301.xml

| 27.5.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 182/33 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.5.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 182/33

---

Action brought on 22 February 2019 — Hemp Foods Australia v EUIPO — Cabrejos (Sativa)

(Case T-128/19)

(2019/C 182/37)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Hemp Foods Australia Pty Ltd (Sydney, Australia) (represented by: M. Holah and P. Brownlow, Solicitors)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: César Raúl Dávila Cabrejos (Lima, Peru)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant before the General Court

Trade mark at issue: International registration designating the European Union in respect of the mark Sativa — International registration designating the European Union No 1 259 974

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 16 November 2018 in Case R 1041/2018-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order that the costs of the proceedings be borne by the defendant. |
| --- | --- |

—

order that the costs of the proceedings be borne by the defendant.

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
#### State of Minnesota *vs.*Peter Thompson.

June 8, 1891.

Location of Highway — Departure from Line Specified in Petition.— In fixing the definite line of a highway the supervisors may exercise a reasonable discretion in making such variations from the general course stated in the petition as public interests require, and this discretion is not taken away or limited by the fact that the petition describes a definite and particular line.

Case certified from the district court for Faribault county, *Severance,*J., presiding, where the defendant was tried and convicted on an indictment for building and maintaining a fence across a highway in the town of Brush Creek, and was sentenced to pay a fine of $15.

*J. H. Quinn*and *Frank E. Putnam,*for the State.

*C. N. Andrews,*for defendant.

Mitchell, J.

The question certified by the trial judge for our decision is whether the order laying out a certain highway was void because the road as laid out did not conform to the description contained in the petition. The petition was for a road commencing at a section corner, and running thence on the section line one mile to another section corner. The road, as laid, began and ended at the termini named in the petition, and ran the same general course, being for most of the way laid on the section line; but at one place, for a distance of some 25 rods, it deflected from that line about 4 rods, in order to pass by and avoid some farm buildings which stood on the section line. The statute does not require that the exact route of the proposed road shall be stated in the petitiom All that it requires is that its termini and *general course*shall be stated. Gen. St. 1878, *c.*13, § 33. The supervisors are-to fix the definite line of *303location, and in doing so may exercise a reasonable discretion, adopting, of course, the proposed route as far as practicable, but with such reasonable variations from it, between the termini, as public interests require. *Neis v. Franzen,*18 Wis. 537. Counsel for the defendant concedes that this would have been so if the petition in this case had merely stated the general course of the proposed road; but his contention is that, as the petitioners saw fit to give a definite and exact description, and to ask for a road on the section line and nowhere else, the supervisors had no discretion but either to lay the road on that line or to deny the prayer of the petition altogether. We do not think that the discretion of the supervisors in fixing the definite line of the road is either taken away or limited by the degree of particularity with which the petition describes the course of the road. The petition must be read in connection with the statute, and, as the statute requires only the general course to be stated, the description contained in the petition, however specific and definite in terms, must be deemed as merely the “general Course” of the proposed highway. The order is valid even against a direct attack, and, *a fortiori,*is so against the collateral attack in this case.

Judgment affirmed.
Order entered April 5, 2021

In The 

### Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas No. 05 - 20 - 01085 - CV IN THE INTEREST OF T.C.N., A CHILD On Appeal from the 255th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DF - 17 - 15940

O RDER By motion filed April 2, 2021, appellee seeks to withdraw a s improvidently filed his April 1, 2021 m otion to dismiss the appeal. We GRANT the motion
. The April 1 motion to dismiss is WITHDRAWN
. /s/ BONNIE LEE GOLDSTEIN JUSTICE
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Darryl Heppard, Appellant.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Goldstein, J.), rendered March 9, 1982, convicting him of attempted robbery in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Judgment affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no meritorious issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted *(see, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Paige,*54 AD2d 631; *cf. People v Gonzalez,*47 NY2d 606). Mangano, J. P., Bracken, Weinstein, Lawrence and Kooper, JJ., concur.
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

GONZALO VAZQUEZ PEREZ

, Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

, Appellee

.

No. 4D 22

- 112

[ February 16, 2023 ]

Appeal from the C ounty Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit,

Broward County ; Melinda K. Brown , Judge; L.T. Case No. 19

-

007671MU10A

.

Fred Haddad of Fred Haddad, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Alexandra A. Folley,

Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appell ee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

K LINGENSMITH , C.J., W ARNER and C IKLIN , JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
EXHIBIT 32.1





CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER



PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350





In connection with this Quarterly Report of Premier Holding Corp. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Jack Gregory, the Chief Executive Officer 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 to my knowledge:





1.   Such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2010, 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 such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2010, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.







|Date:  November 2, 2010 | Jack Gregory
Chief Executive Officer and Director
|----------------------- | -------------------------------------------------