alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
`DTCC Repo-US Treasury <30 YR - NYSE LIFFE - NYPC                     Code-045L2T
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 11/27/12                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF $5,000,000)                            OPEN INTEREST:       43,458
COMMITMENTS
     874   11,787    1,882   39,452   28,918   42,208   42,587    1,250      871

CHANGES FROM 11/20/12 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:      3,066)
    -289    1,939     -357    3,163    1,293    2,517    2,875      549      191

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
     2.0     27.1      4.3     90.8     66.5     97.1     98.0      2.9      2.0

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:       44)
       4       11        6       21       23       29       36`

---

Updated December 5, 2012
Mike CARPENTER, Interim Warden, petitioner, v. Patrick Dwayne MURPHY.

No. 17-1107.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 4, 2018.

The parties, the Solicitor General, and the Muscogee (Creek) Nation are directed to file supplemental briefs addressing the following two questions: (1) Whether any statute grants the state of Oklahoma jurisdiction over the prosecution of crimes committed by Indians in the area within the 1866 territorial boundaries of the Creek Nation, irrespective of the area's reservation status. (2) Whether there are circumstances in which land qualifies as an Indian reservation but nonetheless does not meet the definition of Indian country as set forth in 18 U.S.C. § 1151(a). The briefs, not to exceed 6,000 words, are to be filed simultaneously with the Clerk and served upon opposing counsel on or before 2 p.m., Friday, December 28, 2018. Reply briefs, not to exceed 3,000 words, are to be filed simultaneously with the Clerk and served upon opposing counsel on or before 2 p.m., Friday, January 11, 2019.
Exhibit 99

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

Board
of Directors and Stockholders

WVS Financial Corp.

We have reviewed the accompanying consolidated balance sheet of WVS Financial Corp. and subsidiary as of September 30, 2009; the related consolidated statement of income for the three-month periods
ended September 30, 2009 and 2008; the consolidated statement of changes in stockholders equity for the three-month period ended September 30, 2009; and the consolidated statement of cash flows for the three-month periods ended
September 30, 2009 and 2008. These financial statements are the responsibility of the Companys management.

We conducted our
reviews in accordance with standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). A review of interim financial information consists principally of applying analytical procedures to financial data and making inquiries of persons
responsible for financial and accounting matters. It is substantially less in scope than an audit conducted in accordance with standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the objective of which is the expression of an
opinion regarding the financial statements taken as a whole. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion.

Based on our reviews, we are not
aware of any material modifications that should be made to the accompanying financial statements referred to above for them to be in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting principles.

We have previously audited, in accordance with standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated balance sheet of
WVS Financial Corp as of June 30, 2009, and the related consolidated statements of income, changes in stockholders equity, and cash flows for the year then ended (not presented herein), and in our report dated September 4, 2009, we
expressed an unqualified opinion on those consolidated financial statements. In our opinion, the information set forth in the accompanying consolidated balance sheet as of June 30, 2009, is fairly stated, in all material respects, in relation
to the balance sheet from which it has been derived.



|                        
|------------------------
|/s/ S.R. Snodgrass, A.C.
|                        
|Wexford, PA             

November 13, 2009



E-5
cc: Hon. David B. Barker, District Judge 

Stephen Ray Kern, Jr. 

Attorney General/Carson City 

Clark County District Attorney 

Eighth District Court Clerk 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

(0) I947A 

2
Hiawatha HENRY, et al., petitioners, v. CASH BIZ, LP, et al.

No. 17-1716.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Texas denied.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

TYLER DIVISION

LINDA MATHIS, on behalf of herself and 

all others similarly situated,

Plaintiff,

v.

SKILL ZONE USA, LLC AND 

PREDOMINANT SKILLZ, LLC

Defendants.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

 

Case No. 6:23-cv-234-JDK

 

JOINT STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

Plaintiffs Linda Mathis and Darlene Jackson (“Plaintiffs”) and Defendants Skill Zone 

USA, LLC and Predominant Skillz, LLC (“Defendants”) (collectively “the Parties”) stipulate 

and agree that as Plaintiffs no longer desire to pursue their claims against Defendants, any and all 

allegations, claims, and defenses asserted by and between them in the above-styled and 

numbered action should be dismissed with prejudice pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 41(a)(1)(ii) and 

each party shall bear their own fees and costs. 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs and Defendants respectfully request the Court enter an order 

dismissing with prejudice any and all claims asserted by and between Plaintiffs and Defendants 

in this action with each party bearing their own attorney’s fees and costs.

Case 6:23-cv-00234-JDK Document 14 Filed 11/15/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 62
2

Respectfully submitted,

WELMAKER LAW, PLLC

/s/ Douglas B. Welmaker

Douglas B. Welmaker

Attorney-in-Charge

State Bar No. 00788641

Welmaker Law, PLLC

409 N. Fredonia, Suite 118

Longview, Texas 75601

Phone: (512) 799-2048

Email: doug@welmakerlaw.com

ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF

Respectfully submitted, 

/s/ Dallas W. Tharpe 

Dallas W. Tharpe 

TX State Bar No. 24052036 

dallas@tharpefirm.com

THE THARPE FIRM, PLLC

455 Rice Rd., Suite 101 

Tyler, Texas 75703

P: (903) 253-9469 

F: (903) 253-9475 

ATTTORNEY FOR DEFENDANTS

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

On November 15, 2023, I electronically submitted the foregoing document with the clerk 

of court for the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas, using the electronic case filing 

system of the court. I hereby certify that I have served all counsel and/or pro se parties of record 

electronically or by another manner authorized by Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 5(b)(2). 

/s/ Douglas B. Welmaker

Douglas B. Welmaker

Case 6:23-cv-00234-JDK Document 14 Filed 11/15/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 63
Timmy A. DAWSON, petitioner, v. Lorie DAVIS, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division.

No. 17-8779.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Anthony L. VIOLA, petitioner, v. Mark S. BENNETT.

No. 17-9352.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 19, 2018.

Petition for rehearing denied.
Ron NEAL, Superintendent, Indiana State Prison, petitioner, v. Frederick Michael BAER.

No. 18-287.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 3, 2018.

Motion of respondent for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis* granted. Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 99 (Monday, May 23, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 31258-31259]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-10946]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

[Docket No. FR-7054-C-02]


60-Day Notice of Proposed Information Collection: Promise Zones 
Preference Point Certification Form 50153: Correction; OMB Control No.: 
2501-0033

AGENCY: Office of Field Policy and Management, HUD.

ACTION: Notice; correction.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: HUD published a document in the Federal Register of May 17, 
2022, concerning an information collection. The document contained an 
incorrect comment due date.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anna P. Guido, Reports Management 
Officer, QDAM, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 451 7th 
Street SW, Washington, DC 20410; email Anna P. Guido at 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#4c0d22222d621c620b392528230c243928622b233a"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="f8b9969699d6a8d6bf8d919c97b8908d9cd69f978e">[email protected]</span></a> or telephone 202-402-5535. This is not a toll-free 
number. Persons with hearing or speech impairments may access this 
number through TTY by calling the toll-free Federal Relay Service at 
(800) 877-8339. Copies of available documents submitted to OMB may be 
obtained from Ms. Guido.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

[[Page 31259]]

Correction

    In the Federal Register of May 17, 2022, in FR #2022-10522, on page 
29870, in the second column, correct the DATES caption to read:

DATES: Comments Due Date: July 18, 2022.

Nacheshia Foxx,
Federal Register Liaison for HUD, Office of Regulations, Office of the 
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2022-10946 Filed 5-20-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-67-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Tyrone PULLEY, petitioner, v. CALIFORNIA.

No. 18-6467.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 7, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of California denied.
Augustus Hebrew EVANS, Jr., petitioner, v. DELAWARE.

No. 18-5820.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 5, 2018.

Motion of petitioner for reconsideration of order denying leave to proceed *in forma pauperis* denied.
I

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2165

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain compound optical microscopes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JUNE 10, 1999

Mr. PORTER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain compound optical

microscopes.

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

3 SECTION 1. TEMPORARY DUTY SUSPENSION.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following

7 new heading:
2

•HR 2165 IH

‘‘ 9902.98.07 Compound optical microscopes:

whether or not

stereoscopic and

whether or not

provided with a

means for

photographing

the image; especially designed

for semiconductor inspection; with full encapsulation of all

moving parts

above the stage;

meeting

‘‘cleanroom class

1’’ criteria; having a horizontal

distance between

the optical axis

and C-shape microscope stand of

8′′ or more; and

fitted with special microscope

stages having a

lateral movement

range of 6′′ or

more in each direction and containing special

sample holders

for semiconductor wafers,

devices, and

masks (provided

for in heading

9011) ................. Free No Change No change On or before

12/31/2002 ’’.

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

2 subsection (a) applies with respect to goods entered, or

3 withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after

4 the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
I

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 198

To limit the types of commercial nonpostal services which may be offered

by the United States Postal Service.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 6, 1999

Mr. HUNTER (for himself, Mr. CUNNINGHAM, Mr. PACKARD, Mr. COX, Mrs.

BONO, Mr. BARTLETT of Maryland, Mr. ROHRABACHER, Mr. TALENT,

Mr. STUMP, and Mr. CALVERT) introduced the following bill; which was

referred to the Committee on Government Reform

A BILL

To limit the types of commercial nonpostal services which

may be offered by the United States Postal Service.

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 ‘‘Postal Service Core

5 Business Act of 1999’’.

6 SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

7 The Congress finds that—
2

HR 198 IH

1 (1) the United States Postal Service is a quasi2 government corporation and receives certain benefits

3 and privileges pursuant to that status;

4 (2) the United States Postal Service has a stat5 utory monopoly on the delivery of letters;

6 (3) economic development should be promoted

7 through small business enhancement; and

8 (4) the United States Postal Service has re9 cently entered into direct competition with private

10 companies in the offering of commercial nonpostal

11 services.

12 SEC. 3. LIMITATION ON ACTIVITIES ALLOWABLE.

13 (a) POSTAL POLICY.—Section 101 of title 39, United

14 States Code, is amended by adding at the end the follow15 ing:

16 ‘‘(h)(1) The Postal Service may not make available

17 to the public any commercial nonpostal service except if

18 or to the extent that such service was made available na19 tionwide by the Postal Service to the public (whether

20 under the Domestic Mail Manual or otherwise) as of Janu21 ary 1, 1994.

22 ‘‘(2) For the purposes of this subsection, the term

23 ‘commercial nonpostal service’ includes such services as

24 volume retail photocopying, packaging services (including
3

HR 198 IH

1 gift-wrapping services), notary public services, and the

2 sale of office supplies.

3 ‘‘(3) Nothing in this subsection shall be considered—

4 ‘‘(A) to affect any governmental function or

5 services in support of any governmental function; or

6 ‘‘(B) to be applicable to the extent contrary to

7 statute or any treaty or international agreement.’’.

8 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

9 this section shall take effect 4 months after the date of

10 the enactment of this Act.

Æ
<PAGE>

                                  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 of Agree Realty Corporation (the "Company")
on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Richard Agree,
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; and

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


/S/ RICHARD AGREE
-------------------------------------
Richard Agree
Chief Executive Officer

March 14, 2007
**EXHIBIT 23.2**

| | KMT                          | KRAFT, MILES & TATUM, LLCCERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS                                  | 
| | ---------------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | 
| | CHARLES R. LOVE, CPA
PARTNER | 1650 West Harper Street
Poplar Bluff, Missouri 63901
PH. 573.785.6438
FAX 573.785.0114 | 

> Board of Directors
> Southern Missouri Bancorp, Inc
> 531 Vine St.
> Poplar Bluff MO 63901
> 
> Gentlemen:
> We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements of Southern Missouri Bancorp, Inc on the Form S-8 (File No. 333-2320, effective March 16, 1996) of our report dated July 17, 2003 related to the audit of the consolidated financial statements of Southern Missouri Bancorp, Inc. for the year ended June 30, 2003, which report is incorporated by reference in the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB.
> 
> /s/ Kraft, Miles & Tatum, LLC
> 
> Kraft, Miles & Tatum, LLC
> Poplar Bluff, Missouri
> September 26, 2006
### NUMBER 13 - 1 4 - 00 121 - CV 

## COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________ JOSE JUAN GARCIA , APPELLANT ,
v. CARLOS TORRES SANTINI , APPELLEE.

____________________________________________________________

On a ppeal from the County Court at Law No. 1

of Hidalgo County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________



## MEMORANDUM OPINION
Before Justices Rodriguez, Garza , and Benavides Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam Appellant, Jose Juan Garcia, brought an appeal from a judgment entered by the County Court at Law No. 1 of Hidalgo County, Texas, in cause number CL

- 13

- 2857

- A

. Appellant has now filed an unopposed motion fo r voluntary dismissal of this appeal. Appellant seeks dismissal of the appeal pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.1(a)(1). See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.1(a)(1).2

The Court, having considered the documents on file and appellant ’ s motion to
dismiss the appeal, is of the opinion that the motion should be granted. See id. Accordingly, a ppellant ’ s motion for voluntary dismissal of the appeal i s granted, and the appeal is hereby DISMISSED. Costs will be taxed against appellant. See id. R. 42.1(d) ("Absent agreement of the parties, the court will tax costs against the appellant."). Having dismissed the appeal at appellant ’ s request, no motion for rehearing will be entertained, and our mandate will issue forthwith. PER CURIAM
D elivered and filed t he 7th day of August , 20 1 4

.
Edward Joseph KEHOE, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-6775.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 7, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
```
 
 
WHEAT - KANSAS CITY BOARD OF TRADE                                   Code-001612
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 07/24/12                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF 5,000 BUSHELS)                         OPEN INTEREST:      161,503
COMMITMENTS
  52,291   10,488   11,908   73,478  110,404  137,677  132,800   23,826   28,703

CHANGES FROM 07/17/12 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:      4,555)
  -2,121   -1,591     -558    2,923    1,091      244   -1,058    4,311    5,613

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
    32.4      6.5      7.4     45.5     68.4     85.2     82.2     14.8     17.8

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      180)
      63       16       33       58       79      129      125
```

----

Updated July 27, 2012
arvn-ex1016_955.htm



Confidential Materials omitted and filed separately with the

Securities and Exchange Commission. Double asterisks denote omissions.

 

Exhibit 10.16

AMENDMENT NO. 4

 

THIS AMENDMENT NO.4, effective as of January 9, 2019 (this “AMENDMENT”), to a certain Exclusive License Agreement dated July 5, 2013, and as amended on May 8, 2014, Oct. 23rd, 2014, and April 1, 2015 (the “LICENSE AGREEMENT”) by and between ARVINAS OPERATIONS, INC. (formerly known as Arvinas, Inc.) , a Delaware corporation having an office at 5 Science Park, 3rd Floor, New Haven, CT 06511 (“Arvinas”) and Yale University, a corporation organized and existing under and by virtue of a charter granted by the general assembly of the Colony and the State of Connecticut and located at 433 Temple St, New Haven, CT 06511 (“Yale”). 

 

BACKGROUND:

WHEREAS, Arvinas and Yale have entered into the LICENSE AGREEMENT; and

 

WHEREAS, Arvinas and Yale desire to amend the LICENSE AGREEMENT as set forth more particularly herein.

 

NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, and intending to be legally bound hereby, the parties hereby agree as follows:

 


	
1.
	
Appendix A “Licensed Patents and Patent Applications” of the LICENSE AGREEMENT is hereby amended to add the following:




 

[**]

 

Capitalized terms used but not defined in this AMENDMENT shall have the respective meanings ascribed to such terms in the LICENSE AGREEMENT. Any reference to “the Agreement” or “this Agreement” in the LICENSE AGREEMENT shall mean the LICENSE AGREEMENT, as amended by this AMENDMENT. Except as expressly provided herein: (a) no terms or provisions of the LICENSE AGREEMENT are modified or changed by this Amendment; and (b) the terms and provisions of the LICENSE AGREEMENT shall continue in full force and effect. This AMENDMENT may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be deemed to be an original, and all of which together shall constitute one and the same document.  This AMENDMENT may be executed by facsimile or electronic transmission signatures (including .pdf copies).

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this AMENDMENT as of the day and year first set forth herein above.

 


	
ARVINAS OPERATIONS, INC.
	
 
	
Yale University

	
 
	
 
	
 
	
 
	
 
	
 
	
 

	
By:
	
 
	
/s/ Sean Cassidy
	
 
	
By:
	
 
	
/s/ E. Jonathan Soderstrom

	
Name:
	
 
	
Sean Cassidy
	
 
	
E. Jonathan Soderstrom, Ph.D.

	
Title:
	
 
	
CFO and Treasurer
	
 
	
Managing Director, OCR

	
Date:
	
 
	
12/19/18
	
 
	
Date:
	
 
	
9 Jan 2019
Adem ALBRA, petitioner, v. BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF MIAMI DADE COLLEGE, et al.

No. 18-6376.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 7, 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.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1982 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.1982

                       One Hundred Sixth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

           Begun and held at the City of Washington on Monday,
             the twenty-fourth day of January, two thousand

                                 An Act

 
 To name the Department of Veterans Affairs outpatient clinic in Rome, 
  New York, as the ``Donald J. Mitchell Department of Veterans Affairs 
                          Outpatient Clinic''.

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

SECTION. 1. DESIGNATION.

    The Department of Veterans Affairs outpatient clinic in Rome, New 
York, shall after the date of the enactment of this Act be known and 
designated as the ``Donald J. Mitchell Department of Veterans Affairs 
Outpatient Clinic''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference to such outpatient clinic in a law, regulation, map, 
document, record, or other paper of the United States shall be 
considered to be a reference to the Donald J. Mitchell Department of 
Veterans Affairs Outpatient Clinic.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```