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

In re: § Case No.

§

CHAPTER 13 STANDING TRUSTEE'S FINAL REPORT AND ACCOUNT

Carr, Heggie D 10 B 00912

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

§

§

Debtor

Marilyn O. Marshall, chapter 13 trustee, submits the following Final Report and Account of the

administration of the estate pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 1302(b)(1). The trustee declares as follows:

 1) The case was filed on 01/12/2010.

 2) The plan was confirmed on (NA).

 3) The plan was modified by order after confirmation pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 1329 

on (NA).

 4) The trustee filed action to remedy default by the debtor in performance under the

plan on (NA).

 5) The case was dismissed on 03/15/2010.

 6) Number of months from filing or conversion to last payment: 0.

 7) Number of months case was pending: 6.

 8) Total value of assets abandoned by court order: (NA).

 9) Total value of assets exempted: $800.00.

 10) Amount of unsecured claims discharged without full payment: $0.

 11) All checks distributed by the trustee relating to this case have not cleared the bank. 

EASTERN DIVISION

UST Form 101-13-FR-S (09/01/2009)

Case 10-00912 Doc 33 Filed 07/20/10 Entered 07/20/10 15:32:16 Desc Page 1

 of 4
Total paid by or on behalf of the debtor

Receipts:

$50.00

Less amount refunded to debtor $50.00

NET RECEIPTS: $0

Attorney's Fees Paid Through the Plan

Expenses of Administration:

$0

Court Costs $0

TOTAL EXPENSES OF ADMINISTRATION: $0

Trustee Expenses & Compensation $0

Other $0

Attorney fees paid and disclosed by debtor: $0

Scheduled Creditors:

Creditor

Name Class

Claim

Scheduled

Int.

Paid

Claim

Asserted

Claim

Allowed

Principal

Paid

UST Form 101-13-FR-S (09/01/2009)

Case 10-00912 Doc 33 Filed 07/20/10 Entered 07/20/10 15:32:16 Desc Page 2

 of 4
Mortgage Ongoing

Summary of Disbursements to Creditors:

$0

Interest

Paid

Claim

Allowed

Principal

Paid

Secured Payments:

$0 $0

Mortgage Arrearage $0 $0 $0

Debt Secured by Vehicle $0 $0 $0

All Other Secured $0 $0 $0

TOTAL SECURED: $0 $0 $0

Domestic Support Arrearage $0

Priority Unsecured Payments:

$0 $0

Domestic Support Ongoing $0 $0 $0

All Other Priority $0 $0 $0

TOTAL PRIORITY: $0 $0 $0

GENERAL UNSECURED PAYMENTS: $0 $0 $0

Expenses of Administration

Disbursements:

$0

Disbursements to Creditors $0

TOTAL DISBURSEMENTS: $0

UST Form 101-13-FR-S (09/01/2009)

Case 10-00912 Doc 33 Filed 07/20/10 Entered 07/20/10 15:32:16 Desc Page 3

 of 4
 This Uniform Form is associated with an open bankruptcy case, therefore, Paperwork 

Reduction Act exemption 5 C.F.R. § 1320.4(a)(2) applies. 

STATEMENT:

 12) The trustee certifies that, pursuant to Federal Rule of Bankruptcy Procedure 5009, the

estate has been fully administered, the foregoing summary is true and complete, and all administrative

matters for which the trustee is responsible have been completed. The trustee requests a final decree

be entered that discharges the trustee and grants such other relief as may be just and proper. 

Date: July 20, 2010

Trustee

By:

/s/ MARILYN O. MARSHALL

UST Form 101-13-FR-S (09/01/2009)

Case 10-00912 Doc 33 Filed 07/20/10 Entered 07/20/10 15:32:16 Desc Page 4

 of 4
## I N T H E C O U R T O F C R I M I N A L A P P E A L S O F T E X A S NO. WR-30,849-05
IN RE JOHN CLIFTON WILBANK S, Relator
ON AP P LICATION FOR A WRIT OF M ANDAM US CAUSE NO. 1576594-A IN THE 262ND DISTRICT COURT

F ROM HARRIS COUNTY
Per curiam . O R D E R Relator has filed a motion for leave to file an application for a writ of mandamus under this Court’s orig inal jurisdiction. Relator filed an application for a writ of habea s corpus in Har ris County on Aug ust 1, 2019, but the habea s application has not been forwa rded to this Court. See T E X . C O D E C R I M . P R O C . art. 11.07; T E X . R. A P P . P. 73.4(b)( 5). Respondent, the District Clerk of Har ris County , s h al l fo rw ard Relator’s habea s application to this Court. This motion for leave to file will be held
. R espondent shall comply

with this order within thirty day s from the da

te of this order
. Filed: January

13, 2021 Do not publish
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Lee R. SNIDER, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 11-5113.

United States Court of Appeals, Tenth Circuit.

Nov. 8, 2011.

Allen J. Litchfield, Phil E. Pinnell, Esq., Office of the United States Attorney, Tulsa, OK, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

William Dixon Lunn, Jr., Esq., William D. Lunn Attorney at Law, Tulsa, OK, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before BRISCOE, Chief Judge, MURPHY and GORSUCH, Circuit Judges.

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

PER CURIAM.

Lee R. Snider pleaded guilty, pursuant to a plea agreement, to conspiracy to launder money in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1956(h). The district court sentenced him to fifty-seven months of imprisonment. Although the plea agreement stated that Mr. Snider waived his right to appeal his conviction and sentence, he nonetheless filed a notice of appeal seeking to appeal his sentence.

Relying on our decision in *United, States v. Hahn,*359 F.3d 1315 (10th Cir.2004) (en banc) (per curiam), the government has moved to enforce the plea agreement’s appeal waiver. Mr. Snider concedes that the plea agreement waived his right to appeal his sentence and that the appeal therefore *399must be dismissed. More specifically, he concedes, and upon our independent review we agree, that (1) his “appeal falls within the scope of the waiver of appellate rights”; (2) he “knowingly and voluntarily waived his appellate rights”; and (3) “enforcing the waiver would [not] result in a miscarriage of justice.” *Id.*at 1325.

Accordingly, we GRANT the motion to enforce and DISMISS this appeal.1

*

 This panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument. This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R.App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.

1

. We remind the government that its motion to enforce "must include copies of the plea agreement and copies of transcripts for both the plea hearing and the sentencing hearing.” 10th Cir. R. 27.2(A)(2).
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Raul RAMIREZ, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 10-10329.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted July 12, 2011.*

Filed July 19, 2011.

Daniel Gerard Bogden, Esquire, U.S., Robert Lawrence Ellman, Esquire, Assistant U.S., Daniel D. Hollingsworth, Esquire, Kishan Nair, Esquire, USLV-Office of the U.S. Attorney, Las Vegas, NV, for Defendant-Appellant.

Raul Ramirez, Washington, MS, pro se.

Before: SCHROEDER, ALARCÓN, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Raul Ramirez appeals pro se from the district court’s order dismissing his Fed. R.Crim.P. 41(g) motion to return $4,527 seized from him on May 4, 1999. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.

Ramirez contends that the district court erred in dismissing his Rule 41(g) motion as barred by the statute of limitations. The district court did not clearly err in finding that Ramirez’s motion was filed on May 8, 2008, and the motion was therefore untimely. *See*28 U.S.C. § 2401(a).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
EXHIBIT 32.1



CEO/CFO Certification Pursuant to § 906 of the

Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. §1350)



The undersigned, as the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Pinnacle Bankshares Corporation, respectively, certify that, to the best of their
knowledge, the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2005, which accompanies this certification, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the
information contained in the periodic report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Pinnacle Bankshares Corporation and subsidiary at the dates and for the periods indicated.



The foregoing certification is made pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
(18 U.S.C. § 1350) and shall not be relied upon for any other purpose. The undersigned expressly disclaim any obligation to update the foregoing certification except as required by law.



|                |  |                                                                  
|--------------- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------
|August 12, 2005 |  | /s/ Robert H. Gilliam, Jr.                                       
|Date            |  | Robert H. Gilliam, Jr., President and Chief Executive
Officer    
|                | 
|August 12, 2005 |  | /s/ Bryan M. Lemley                                              
|Date            |  | Bryan M. Lemley, Secretary, Treasurer and Chief
Financial Officer
/s

Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

September 25, 2014

No. 04-14-00190-CV

ONEWEST BANK, FSB,

Appellant

v.

THE ESTATE OF EDITH H. FRAHM,

Appellee

From the Probate Court No 1, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2012PC0915

Honorable Polly Jackson Spencer, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

The parties have found a joint motion to extend the briefing schedule, explaining that 

they “have agreed in principle to a settlement that will obviate the need for this appeal” but need 

more time to seek approval from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development. We 

GRANT the motion and ORDER appellant’s brief to be filed on or before November 17, 2014. 

Appellee’s brief will be due sixty days after appellant files its brief. 

_________________________________

Karen Angelini, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 25th day of September, 2014.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
### MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04

- 11

- 00044

- CV Cynthia L. LAFONTAINE , Appellant

v. HENDRICKS PROPERTY MANAGEMENT LLC , Appellee From the County Court at Law No. 3 , Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 364,498 Honorable Irene Rios , Judge Presiding
PER CURIAM Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice Steven C. Hilbig, Justice Marialyn Barnard, Justice Delivered and Filed: March 30, 2011
DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION The justice court rendered judgment against Cynthia LaFontaine for past

- due rent and ordered that Hendricks Property Management, LLC recover possession of the real property. LaFontaine appealed the judgment to the county court at law and filed an affidavit of inability to pay costs. On December 17, 2010, the county court at law found that LaFontaine had not paid rent into the registry of the court, and issued an order for a writ of possession pursuant to section 24.0054 of the Property Code and Rule 749(b) of the Texas Rules of Civil Procedure.04

- 11

- 00044

- CV

- 2

- LaFontaine filed a notice of appeal of the trial court’s December 17, 2010 order, and a clerk’s record was filed. The clerk’s recor d did not indicate that the case had been tried or that a final judgment has been rendered. We therefore ordered La F ontaine to show cause why the appeal should not be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. La F ontaine did not respond to our order. This court has jurisdiction only over final judgments and interlocutory orders where the appeal is authorized by statute. The trial court’s order for a writ of possession in this case is neither a final judgment nor an appealable interlocutory order. See T EX
. R. C IV
. P. 749(b) (addressing entitlement to possession of premises while appeal from justice court is pending); Frank v. Brittany Square Apartments , No. 14

- 09

- 00423

- CV, 2010 WL 1544098, at 1 (Tex. App.

— Houston [14th Dist.] Apr. 20, 2010, no pet.) (mem. op.); Simmons v. Hollyview Apartments , No. 01

- 08

- 00231

- CV, 2009 WL 3050832, at *2 (Tex. App.

— Houston [1st Dist.] Sept. 24, 2009, pet. dism’d w.o.j.) (mem. op.). Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal for want of jurisdiction.

PER CURIAM
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Wheat, Sorghum and Forage Research: Lincoln, NE
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    CareersSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Plains Area Lincoln, Nebraska Wheat, Sorghum and Forage Research People & Locations





- Find a person
- Find a location
- ARS Organizational Chart
- People
- Contact Information
- Research Projects
- Publications
- ARS News Articles

Robert B Mitchell

(Rob)
                     

                     Research Agronomist
                     


                        ProjectsResilient Plants and Production Systems in a Changing Climate for the Central Plains Bioeconomy
                                       In-House Appropriated

                                                   (D)Accession Number: 445727Enhance the Agronomic, Economic, Social, and Environmental Sustainability of Agricultural Production Systems
                                       Non-Funded Cooperative Agreement

                                                   (N)Accession Number: 439252Next-Generation Feedstocks for the Emerging Bioeconomy
                                       Reimbursable Cooperative Agreement

                                                   (R)Accession Number: 435967


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
#### Samuel Benolol, Appellant, v City of New York et al., Respondents.

[941 NYS2d 489]

Order, Supreme Court, New York *415County (Cynthia S. Kern, J.), entered February 10, 2011, which granted defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, unanimously affirmed, without costs, and the motion denied.

Plaintiff was injured while playing soccer when he tripped over an uneven portion of the artificial turf field. Plaintiff testified that prior to his fall, he had not noticed the allegedly defective condition over which he fell.

While “the doctrine of assumption of the risk does not exculpate a landowner from liability for ordinary negligence in maintaining a premises” *(Sykes v County of Erie,*94 NY2d 912, 913 [2000]), here defendants established as a matter of law that the uneven condition of the artificial turf was open and obvious, and was not the result of their negligence in maintaining the field *(see Ashbourne v City of New York,*82 AD3d 461, 463 [2011]; *Simmons v Saugerties Cent. School Dist.,*82 AD3d 1407, 1409-1410 [2011]; *Maddox v City of New York,*66 NY2d 270 [1985]). Concur — Friedman, J.P., DeGrasse, Freedman and Abdus-Salaam, JJ.
III 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 318 

To authorize the printing of a revised edition of the Senate Rules and 

Manual. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

NOVEMBER 9, 2011 

Mr. SCHUMER submitted the following resolution; which was considered and 

agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

To authorize the printing of a revised edition of the Senate 

Rules and Manual. 

1 Resolved, That— 

2 (1) the Committee on Rules and Administration 

3 shall prepare a revised edition of the Senate Rules 

4 and Manual for the use of the 112th Congress; 

5 (2) the manual shall be printed as a Senate 

6 document; and 

7 (3) in addition to the usual number of copies, 

8 1,500 copies of the manual shall be bound, of 

9 which— 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•SRES 318 ATS 

1 (A) 500 paperbound copies shall be for the 

2 use of the Senate; and 

3 (B) 1,000 copies shall be bound (550 

4 paperbound; 250 nontabbed black skiver; 200 

5 tabbed black skiver) and delivered as may be di6 rected by the Committee on Rules and Adminis7 tration. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
# Official Journal C 17/2010

| | ISSN 1725-2423
  doi:10.3000/17252423.C_2010.017.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 17 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5322 January 2010 |

ISSN 1725-2423

doi:10.3000/17252423.C_2010.017.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 17

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5322 January 2010

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2010/C 017/01 | Communication from the Commission — Guideline on the details of the various categories of variations to the terms of marketing authorisations for medicinal products for human use and veterinary medicinal products | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2010/C 017/01

Communication from the Commission — Guideline on the details of the various categories of variations to the terms of marketing authorisations for medicinal products for human use and veterinary medicinal products

1

---

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

EN
#### Tanya Isaacs, Respondent, v Prospect Park, LLC, Appellant.

[943 NYS2d 911] —

In an action, inter alia, to recover damages for breach of contract, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Solomon, J.), dated September 21, 2010, which denied its motion pursuant to CPLR 7503 (a) to compel arbitration.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

The defendant is not entitled to arbitration, as the parties did *1177not agree that the arbitration clause in the contract at issue was to survive the delivery of title *(see 527 Smith St. Brooklyn Corp. v Bayside Fuel Oil Depot Corp.,*262 AD2d 278 [1999]; *cf. Matter of Praetorian Realty Corp. [Presidential Towers Residence],*40 NY2d 897 [1976]).

In light of our conclusion, we need not reach the parties’ remaining contentions. Mastro, A.P.J., Florio, Chambers and Roman, JJ., concur.
# C_2019155EN.01005701.xml

| 6.5.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 155/57 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.5.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 155/57

---

Action brought on 20 March 2019 — Sherpa Europe v EUIPO — Núcleo de comunicaciones y control (SHERPA NEXT)

(Case T-170/19)

(2019/C 155/67)

Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties

Applicant: Sherpa Europe, SL (Erandio, Spain) (represented by: M. Esteve Sanz, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Núcleo de comunicaciones y control, SL (Tres Cantos, Spain)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

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

Trade mark at issue: Application for EU word mark SHERPA NEXT — Application for registration No 12 891 495

Procedure before EUIPO: Opposition proceedings

Contested decision: Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 10 December 2018 in Case R 523/2017-2

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:

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

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order the defendant and, if appropriate, the intervener, to bear the costs of the proceedings before the General Court, and the costs incurred in the appeal before the Board of Appeal. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant and, if appropriate, the intervener, to bear the costs of the proceedings before the General Court, and the costs incurred in the appeal before the Board of Appeal.

Pleas in law

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) and of Article 47(2) and (3) of Regulation (EU) No 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 97-4205

___________ Bobby Mobley, * Plaintiff-Appellant, *

v. * City of Town and Country, a municipal * Appeal from the United States corporation; John Copeland, * District Court for the individually and in his capacity as a * Eastern District of Missouri. high-ranking supervisory employee of * the City of Town and Country’s police * [UNPUBLISHED] department; Salvadore Del Mar, * individually and in his official capacity * as the Chief of Police for the City of * Town and Country; James Robinson, * individually and in his official capacity * as the City Administrator for the City * of Town and Country, * Defendants-Appellees. *

*

*

___________ Submitted: May 13, 1998 Filed: June 2, 1998

___________ Before BEAM, LOKEN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM.The Hon orable George F. Gunn, United States District Judge for the Eastern 1 District of Missouri. -2- Bobby Mobley filed this action alleging that his demotion was a retaliatory employment action in violation of the Americans with Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq., and Title VII of the Civil Rights Act, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et seq., and also brought state law claims under the Missouri Human Rights Act, R.S.Mo. § 213.010, and for w rongful termination and intentional infliction of emotional distress. Th e district court granted summary judgment on the federal claims, finding that Moble y

1 had not engage d in a protected activity under the ADA, West v. Marion Merell Dow, Inc. , 54 F.3 d 493, 496-97 (8th Cir. 1995), and was not a member of a protected class under Title VII, Barge v. Anheuser- Busch, Inc. , 87 F.3d 256, 258 (8th Cir. 1996), and declined jur isdiction over the state law claims. After fully reviewing the record, w e find no error in the judgment of the district court and affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. A true copy.
ATTEST: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
**Exhibit 32.1****Certification of Periodic Report**     Pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. §1350, the undersigned officerof Renaissance Learning, Inc. (the “Company”), hereby certifies that, to the undersigned’sknowledge: (1) the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30,2005 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), asapplicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and (2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.   Dated:November 8, 2005       /s/ John R. Hickey     Name: John R. Hickey