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

EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

TYLER DIVISION 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v. 

JOSE CARMELO AVELAR 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

CASE NUMBER 6:23-CR-00038-JDK 

ORDER ADOPTING UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S 

REPORT AND FINDING DEFENDANT GUILTY 

The Court referred this matter to the Honorable John D. Love, United States 

Magistrate Judge, for administration of a guilty plea under Federal Rule of Criminal 

Procedure 11. The Magistrate Judge conducted a hearing in the form and manner prescribed 

by Rule 11 and issued Findings of Fact and Recommendation on Guilty Plea. The Magistrate 

Judge recommended that the Court accept Defendant’s guilty plea and adjudge Defendant 

guilty on Count Two of the Indictment. 

The parties have not objected to the Magistrate Judge’s findings. 

The Court hereby ADOPTS the Findings of Fact and Recommendation on Guilty Plea 

of the United States Magistrate Judge. The Court also accepts Defendant’s plea but defers 

acceptance of the plea agreement until after review of the presentence report. 

In accordance with Defendant’s guilty plea, the Court finds Defendant Jose Carmelo 

Avelar GUILTY of Count Two of the Indictment, charging a violation of Title 21 U.S.C. § 

841(a)(1) - Possession with the Intent to Distribute and Distribution of Methamphetamine. 

So ORDERED and SIGNED this day of

___________________________________

JEREMY D. KERNODLE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 17th June, 2024.

Case 6:23-cr-00038-JDK-JDL Document 99 Filed 06/17/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 470
George WALLACE, petitioner, v. Ron E. BARNES, Warden.

No. 18-5596.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 15, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
Noe MACHADO-ERAZO and Jose Martinez-Amaya, petitioners, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-8738.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 13, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit denied.

Justice KAVANAUGH took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
Michael John TARVIN, petitioner, v. MISSISSIPPI.

No. 18-5511.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Mississippi denied.
```
 
 
WHEAT - KANSAS CITY BOARD OF TRADE                                   Code-001612
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 10/02/12                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF 5,000 BUSHELS)                         OPEN INTEREST:      159,279
COMMITMENTS
  53,528   10,206   14,128   72,336  114,073  139,992  138,407   19,287   20,872

CHANGES FROM 09/25/12 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:       -956)
  -3,556     -455      327    1,430   -1,209   -1,799   -1,337      843      381

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
    33.6      6.4      8.9     45.4     71.6     87.9     86.9     12.1     13.1

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      181)
      58       21       26       60       81      129      119
```

----

Updated October 5, 2012
Exhibit 32.1

           Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
            pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002


In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of First American Capital
Corporation (the "Company") for the period ended December 31, 2003 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), I, John F. Van Engelen, President and 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:

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

     2)   the information contained in the Report presents fairly, in all
          material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
          of the Company.



Date 03/29/04 		/s/ John F. Van Engelen
                            John F. Van Engelen,
	          President and Chief Executive Officer
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 98 (Friday, May 20, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 30953]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-10796]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisitions of Shares of a Bank 
or Bank Holding Company

    The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank 
Control Act (Act) (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and Sec.  225.41 of the Board's 
Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire shares of a bank or bank 
holding company. The factors that are considered in acting on the 
applications are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 
1817(j)(7)).
    The public portions of the applications listed below, as well as 
other related filings required by the Board, if any, are available for 
immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank(s) indicated below and 
at the offices of the Board of Governors. This information may also be 
obtained on an expedited basis, upon request, by contacting the 
appropriate Federal Reserve Bank and from the Board's Freedom of 
Information Office at https://www.federalreserve.gov/foia/request.htm. 
Interested persons may express their views in writing on the standards 
enumerated in paragraph 7 of the Act.
    Comments regarding each of these applications must be received at 
the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors, 
Ann E. Misback, Secretary of the Board, 20th Street and Constitution 
Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20551-0001, not later than June 6, 2022.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City (Jeffrey Imgarten, Assistant 
Vice President) 1 Memorial Drive, Kansas City, Missouri 64198-0001:
    1. The Berry Leaf Sewell Revocable Trust, Berry L. Sewell and 
Adrienne M. Sewell, as co-trustees, all of Clinton, Oklahoma; to become 
members of the Sewell Family Control Group, a group acting in concert, 
to acquire voting shares of Clinton Bancshares, Inc., and thereby 
indirectly acquire voting shares of First Bank and Trust Company, both 
of Clinton, Oklahoma.
    Additionally, the Frank A. Sewell IV 1998 Irrevocable Trust, First 
Bank and Trust Company, as trustee; the Frank A. Sewell III 2012 
Revocable Trust, Lucie K. Sewell and First Bank and Trust Company, co-
trustees; the Lucie K. Sewell 2012 Revocable Trust, Lucie K. Sewell, 
trustee; and the Lucie K. Sewell 2012 Irrevocable Trust, Berry L. 
Sewell and First Bank and Trust Company, co-trustees, all of Clinton, 
Oklahoma; to become members of the Sewell Family Control Group, a group 
acting in concert, to retain voting shares of Clinton Bancshares, Inc., 
and thereby indirectly retain voting shares of First Bank and Trust 
Company.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.
Michele Taylor Fennell,
Deputy Associate Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 2022-10796 Filed 5-19-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

BEAUMONT DIVISION

TANYA RENEE HENDERSON,

Plaintiff,

v.

JASPER CITY POLICE DEPARTMENT, 

FNU GRAY, and FNU AVERHART,

Defendants.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:23-CV-136-MJT-CLS

MEMORANDUM ORDER OVERRULING 

PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS AND ADOPTING THE REPORT AND 

RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE [Dkt. 29]

Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 and the Local Rules of Court for the Assignment of Duties to 

United States Magistrate Judges, the District Court referred this proceeding to the Honorable 

Christine L. Stetson to conduct all pretrial proceedings, to enter findings of fact and recommend 

disposition on case-dispositive matters, and to determine non-dispositive matters. See 28 U.S.C. 

§ 636(b)(1); E.D. TEX. LOC. R. CV-72. Pending before the Court is the Motion to Set Aside Entry

of Default filed by Defendants Gray and Jasper City. [Dkt. 21].

On December 6, 2023, Judge Stetson issued a Report and Recommendation [Dkt. 29] 

advising the Court to (1) set aside entry of default against Defendant Gray because Plaintiff failed 

to properly serve him, and (2) set aside entry of default against Defendant Jasper City, as it presents 

meritorious defenses and Plaintiff will experience little prejudice in reaching the merits of her 

claims. FED.R.CIV. P. 55(c). On January 10, 2024, Plaintiff filed late objections. [Dkt. 29]. These 

objections do not address Judge Stetson’s legal analysis. Instead, Plaintiff states that (1) she 

disagrees with setting aside entry of default as unfair, and (2) she never intended to seek 

Case 1:23-cv-00136-MJT-CLS Document 37 Filed 01/17/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 121
compensatory damages. Id. After careful review, the Court finds that the findings of fact and 

conclusions of law of the United States Magistrate Judge are correct.

Accordingly, Plaintiff’s objections are OVERRULED, and the Report and 

Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge [Dkt. 29] is ADOPTED. The Motion to 

Set Aside Entry of Default [Dkt. 21] filed by Defendants Gray and Jasper City is GRANTED. 

Furthermore, Plaintiff’s motion for compensatory damages [Dkt. 22] is DENIED AS MOOT.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

____________________________

Michael J. Truncale

United States District Judge SIGNED this 17th day of January, 2024.

Case 1:23-cv-00136-MJT-CLS Document 37 Filed 01/17/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 122
### Appeal Ordered Withdrawn and Opinion issued February 22,1999

In The 

## Court of Appeals 

## Jfftftlf district of utexas at Dallas
No. 05-98-00955-CR

EX PARTE ROBERT PETER PIAZZA 

### On Appeal from the 199th District Court Collin County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 199-80229-97 

# ?S/9^

OPINION PER CURIAM 

### Before ChiefJustice Thomas andJustices Kinkeade and O'Neill 

# Appellanthas filed amotionto withdrawthe appeal. Appellant's counselhas approved

the motion. 

## This Courthereby GRANTSthemotion and ORDERSthe appeal withdrawn andthat this decisionbe certifiedbelow for observance. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.2(a).
PER CURIAM Do Not Publish Tex. R. App. P. 47

### Fifth Court ofAppeals Case Party & Attorney Address List Page: 1 Date Printed: 02/22/1999 Case Number: 05-98-00955-CR Date Filed: 05/05/1998 

### Style: Ex Parte: Piazza, Robert Peter

v. APP Thomas G. Pappas ATT 015455300 Burleson Pate & Gibson, LLP P. O. Box 190623, LB-10 2414 North Akard Street, Suite 700 Dallas, TX 75201 Phone 214/871-4900 

### CLK Collin County District Clerk DCK 000000199 199th Judicial District Court 

### Collin County Courthouse 210 S. McDonald Street 

### McKinney, TX 75069 JDG Judge JDG 000000199 199th Judicial District Court 

### Collin County Courthouse 210 S. McDonald Street 

### McKinney, TX 75069 STA Lauri J. Walthall- Blake ATT 000788613 Assistant Criminal District Attorney 

### Collin County Courthouse 210 South McDonald Street 

### McKinney, TX 75069 Phone 214/548-432305-98-955-CR CC: Clerk

- 

### CC: Judge

- 

### Author ofopinion ChiefJustice Thomas Trial Court Judge Stephens Rehear denied **THIS OPINION IS RELEASED FOR PUBLICATION YES / NO
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSHALL DIVISION

HEADWATER RESEARCH LLC,

Plaintiff,

 v.

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., 

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, 

INC.,

Defendants.

Civil Action No. 2:23-cv-00103-JRG-RSP

JURY DEMANDED

ORDER GRANTING JOINT MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE 

PROPOSED DISCOVERY ORDER AND PROTECTIVE ORDER

Pending before the Court is Plaintiff Headwater Research, LLC (“Headwater”) and 

Defendants Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., and Samsung Electronics America, Inc.’s(collectively, 

“Defendants” or “Samsung”), (collectively, the “Parties”) Joint Motion for Extension of Time to 

File Proposed Discovery Order and Protective Order. The Court, having considered the joint

motion, and for good cause shown, finds that the motion should be GRANTED.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the deadline for filing the proposed discovery order and 

protective order is extended to October 27, 2023. All other deadlines shall remain in place absent 

further leave of Court.

Case 2:23-cv-00103-JRG-RSP Document 55-1 Filed 10/26/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 1884
Jerome Aristedes MARTINEZ, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-5036.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 9, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
**Exhibit 32.1**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the Annual Report of DURECT Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Kfor the year ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, James E. Brown, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, asadopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and 

(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company. 

March 10, 2009
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

DARRELL TODD MCCRAE,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D2023-2029

[June 5, 2024]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, St. 

Lucie County; Steven J. Levin, Judge; L.T. Case No. 562022CF000805A.

Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Robert Porter, Assistant Public 

Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Kimberly T. Acuña, 

Senior Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

MAY, J.

The defendant appeals the revocation of his probation and consequent 

sentence. The defendant argues the trial court erred in revoking his 

probation and imposing the minimum prison sentence. He also argues 

the trial court erred in adjudicating him guilty a second time. We find no 

merit in the first argument and affirm without further comment. The State 

agrees the trial court erred in adjudicating the defendant a second time for 

the probation violation, and we agree. We reverse on the second issue.

“An appellate court reviews a trial court decision on violations of 

probation under an abuse of discretion standard.” Davis v. State, 48 So. 

3d 176, 179 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010) (quoting Ubiles v. State, 23 So. 3d 1288, 

1291 (Fla. 4th DCA 2010)).

Because the defendant failed to object contemporaneously and raise 

fundamental error in his initial brief, the defendant’s sentencing error 

arguments are unpreserved on appeal. Regardless, they also lacked merit,

as the trial court had discretion to sentence the defendant as it did.
2

However, “[d]uplicative adjudications of guilt after revocation of 

probation or community control are superfluous, are unauthorized, and 

can cause undue confusion in future proceedings.” Butler v. State, 195 

So. 3d 1147, 1148 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016). In Butler, the Second District held 

the trial court erred in adjudicating the defendant a second time because 

the trial court had already adjudicated the defendant guilty of the 

underlying offense. Id. at 1149. The same result is dictated here. See

Witham v. State, 311 So. 3d 34, 34 (Fla. 4th DCA 2021) (“[I]t appears that 

duplicate final judgments were entered. On remand, the [trial] court 

should also strike one of these judgments.”).

We reverse and remand the case to the trial court to strike the second 

adjudication of guilt. We affirm in all other respects.

Affirmed in part; reversed in part.

DAMOORGIAN and CONNER, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
I

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1603

To amend title 38, United States Code, to provide for permanent eligibility

of former members of the Selected Reserve for veterans housing loans.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

APRIL 28, 1999

Mr. EVANS (for himself and Mr. STUMP) introduced the following bill; which

was referred to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs

A BILL

To amend title 38, United States Code, to provide for permanent eligibility of former members of the Selected Reserve for veterans housing loans.

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Selected Reserve Hous5 ing Loan Fairness Act of 1999’’.

6 SEC. 2. PERMANENT ELIGIBILITY FOR HOUSING LOANS

7 FOR FORMER MEMBERS OF THE SELECTED

8 RESERVE.

9 Section 3702(a)(2)(E) of title 38, United States

10 Code, is amended by striking out ‘‘For the period begin-
2

•HR 1603 IH

1 ning on October 28, 1992, and ending on September 30,

2 2003, each veteran’’ and inserting in lieu thereof ‘‘Each

3 veteran’’.

Æ
```

```

----

Updated December 28, 2012
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
The Schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the financial
statements for American Tax-Exempt Bond Trust and is qualified in its entirety
by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<NAME>                             American Tax Exempt Bond Trust
<CIK>                                 0000916824
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                      YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                         836,779
<SECURITIES>                                   25,380,828
<RECEIVABLES>                                  463,942
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               0
<PP&E>                                         0
<DEPRECIATION>                                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 26,681,549
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          320,858
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     26,360,691
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   26,681,549
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               1,392,415
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               254,966
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                1,137,449
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            0
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   1,137,449
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  .95
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  .00


</TABLE>
Exhibit












FIRST AMENDMENT TO LIGNITE MINING AGREEMENT
THIS FIRST AMENDMENT to Lignite Mining Agreement (this “Amendment”) is made and entered into effective as of March 22, 2017, by and between DEMERY RESOURCES COMPANY, L.L.C., a Nevada limited liability company (“Contractor”), and FIVE FORKS MINING, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (“Owner”).
WITNESSETH THAT:
WHEREAS, Contractor and Owner are parties to a Lignite Mining Agreement, dated June 29, 2009 (the “Agreement”), pursuant to which Contractor has agreed to mine and deliver lignite to Owner from a mine in the Five Forks Reserves; and
WHEREAS, Contractor and Owner desire to amend the Agreement to clarify the application of the Third Party Sales Fee in connection with certain sales of lignite by Owner to third parties.
AGREEMENT:
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and the covenants and agreements set forth herein, Contractor and Owner hereby agree as follows:
A.Amendments.  
1.Exhibit F is hereby amended to add the following after the listing of Contractor-referred Third Parties:
For periods prior to October 1, 2017,   *   shall be paid in connection with sales of lignite to   *  . Commencing October l, 2017 and continuing thereafter, Owner shall pay to Contractor an amount equal to   *   of the Third Party Sales Fee in connection with sales of lignite to   *  .
B.Other Agreements.
1.Capitalized terms that are used but not defined in this Amendment shall have the meanings ascribed to them in the Agreement.
2.This Amendment is subject to the miscellaneous provisions set forth in Section 27.1 through 27.7 of the Agreement.
3.The Agreement remains in full force and effect as amended by this Amendment.


[Remainder of page intentionally blank.]


*Confidential Information has been omitted and filed separately with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Confidential treatment has been requested with respect to this omitted information.













IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties, with the intent to be bound hereby, have executed this Amendment as of the date first above written.
	
				
	 
	 
	 
	 

	 
	 
	OWNER:
	 

	 
	 
	 
	 

	ATTEST:
	 
	FIVE FORKS MINING, LLC

	 
	 
	 
	 

	 
	 
	By:
	ADA Carbon Solutions (Operations), LLC,

	 
	 
	 
	its Sole Member

	 
	 
	 
	 

	/s/ Peter O. Hansen
	 
	By:
	/s/ Eric Robinson

	Secretary
	 
	Name:
	Eric Robinson

	 
	 
	Its:
	Senior Vice President

	 
	 
	 
	 

	 
	 
	 

	 
	 
	CONTRACTOR:

	 
	 
	 

	ATTEST:
	 
	DEMERY RESOURCES COMPANY, L.L.C.

	 
	 
	 
	 

	/s/ [signature illegible]
	 
	By:
	/s/ Harry B. Tipton, III

	Secretary
	 
	Name:
	Harry B Tipton, III

	 
	 
	Its:
	Vice President
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

CLIFFORD P. TURNER, §

§

Plaintiff, §

§

versus § CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:23-CV-153

§

U.S. MARSHAL’S OFFICE, §

§

Defendant. §

ORDER ADOPTING 

THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Plaintiff Clifford P. Turner, proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights lawsuit. The court

previously referred this matter to the Honorable Zack Hawthorn, United States Magistrate Judge,

at Beaumont, Texas, for consideration pursuant to applicable laws and orders of this court. The

magistrate judge has submitted a Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge

recommending the case be dismissed without prejudice pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil

Procedure 41(b). To date, the parties have not filed objections.

The court has received the Report and Recommendation, along with the record, pleadings,

and all available evidence. After careful review, the court finds that the findings of fact and

conclusions of law of the magistrate judge are correct.

Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge (#11) is

ADOPTED. A final judgment shall be entered dismissing this lawsuit.

Case 1:23-cv-00153-MAC-ZJH Document 13 Filed 07/31/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 11