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

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSHALL DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA §

§

v. § CASE NO. 2:23-CR-0005 -JRG-RSP

§

LARRY BENNETT §

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE=S REPORT AND 

FINDING DEFENDANT GUILTY 

PURSUANT TO RULE 11 (c)(1)(C)

On this day, the Court considered the Findings of Fact and Recommendation of United 

States Magistrate Judge Roy S. Payne regarding defendant=s plea of guilty under the provisions of 

Rule 11(c)(1)(C) to Count 1 of an information charging defendant with a violation of 26 U.S.C. '

7201, Attempt to Evade or Defeat Taxes. Having conducted a proceeding in the form and manner 

prescribed by FED. R. CRIM P. 11, the Magistrate Judge recommends that the Court accept the 

defendant=s guilty plea, reserving to the District Judge the option of rejecting the Plea Agreement 

if, after review of the presentence report, the agreed sentence is determined not to be the 

appropriate disposition of the case. The parties waived their right to file objections to the Findings 

of Fact and Recommendation. The Court is of the opinion that the Findings of Fact and 

Recommendation should be accepted. 

It is accordingly ORDERED that the Findings of Fact and Recommendation of the 

United States Magistrate Judge, filed on June 13, 2023 are hereby ADOPTED. 

It is further ORDERED that, pursuant to defendant=s plea agreement, the Court finds 

defendant GUILTY of Count 1 of an information in the above-numbered cause, reserving to the 

District Judge the option of rejecting the Plea Agreement if, after review of the presentence report, 

the agreed sentence is determined not to be the appropriate disposition of the case. 

Case 2:23-cr-00005-JRG-RSP Document 22 Filed 07/06/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 62
2

____________________________________

RODNEY GILSTRAP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE So ORDERED and SIGNED this 6th day of July, 2023.

Case 2:23-cr-00005-JRG-RSP Document 22 Filed 07/06/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 63
Carlton BUTLER, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-5182.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 5, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>
                                              
<ARTICLE>                                          5
<LEGEND>

</LEGEND>                                     
<CIK>                                         0000911147
<NAME>                                        Century Casinos, Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>                                                     1
<CURRENCY>                                         U.S.DOLLARS
                                                    
<S>                                                  <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                      6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                  DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                     JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                       JUN-30-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                                  1
<CASH>                                                     2713648
<SECURITIES>                                                503895
<RECEIVABLES>                                               242787
<ALLOWANCES>                                                     0
<INVENTORY>                                                  60173
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                           3870967
<PP&E>                                                    22150487
<DEPRECIATION>                                             3657000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                            35539949
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                      3043322
<BONDS>                                                   13289896
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                            0
<PREFERRED>                                                      0
<COMMON>                                                    158619
<OTHER-SE>                                                19048112
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                              35539949
<SALES>                                                          0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                           9196259
<CGS>                                                            0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                              3755846
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                           4189374
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                          454236
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                            1111411
<INCOME-TAX>                                               (293000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                        1404411
<DISCONTINUED>                                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                  0
<CHANGES>                                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                               1404411
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                 0.09
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                 0.09
        


</TABLE>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

SHERMAN DIVISION

RILEY J. KUHN, 

 Plaintiff,

v.

CREDITFORHOMELOANS.COM, LLC,

 Defendant.

Case No. 4:23-cv-00308- ALM

Hon. Judge Amos L. Mazzant

ATTORNEY FEES AND COSTS

Attorney Fees:

Date Description Attorney/Staff Rate Time Amount

12/19/2022

Reviewed of documents 

verify potential causes of 

action, researched proper 

Defendant, verified facts 

to determine if all 

elements of CROA and 

MCSOA are present

Attorney $375.00 2.5 $937.50

12/19/2022 Drafted Complaint Attorney $375.00 1.3 $487.50

12/19/2022

Filed Case with the 

American Arbitration 

Association

Paralegal $125.00 0.5 $62.50

4/10/2023

Reworked Complaint so it 

can be filed in federal 

Court

Paralegal $125.00 0.5 $62.50

4/10/2023 Filed Complaint and 

summons issued Paralegal $125.00 0.6 $75.00

4/19/2023 Filed executed summons Paralegal $125.00 0.2 $25.00

5/10/2023 Draft Motion for Entry of 

Default Judgment Attorney $375.00 0.6 $225.00

Case 4:23-cv-00308-ALM Document 7-2 Filed 05/31/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 32
Costs:

Filing Fee $ 402.00

Service(R.O.S. Consulting, Inc.) $ 130.00

Mailing Cost $ 19.30

Total Costs: $ 551.30

Grand Total

Attorney Fees $ 2,875.00

Costs $ 551.30

Total $ 3,426.30

5/10/2023

Filed Motion for Entry of 

Default Judgment and sent 

to Defendant via mail

Paralegal $125.00 0.5 $62.50

5/23/2023 Drafted Motion for 

Default Judgment Attorney $375.00 2.5 $937.50

$2,875.00

Case 4:23-cv-00308-ALM Document 7-2 Filed 05/31/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 33
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

SHERMAN DIVISION

MICHAEL RAY WATKINS, #2420686

VS. 

WANDA ALLEN, ET AL.

§

§

§

§

§

CIVIL CASE NO. 4:23-CV-212

MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND

RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Came on for consideration the Report and Recommendation of the United 

States Magistrate Judge in this action (the “Report”) (Dkt. #16), this matter having 

been heretofore referred to the Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636. On 

July 10, 2023, the Magistrate Judge entered the Report (Dkt. #10), containing 

proposed findings of fact and recommendations that Plaintiff’s claims against “Dr. 

FNU LNU” and “Hopkins County Sheriff” be dismissed without prejudice under 

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

No objections having been timely filed, the Court concludes that the findings 

and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are correct and adopts the same as the 

findings and conclusions of the Court. 

It is therefore ORDERED that Plaintiff’s claims against “Dr. FNU LNU” and 

“Hopkins County Sheriff” are DISMISSED without prejudice.

Case 4:23-cv-00212-SDJ-KPJ Document 35 Filed 02/03/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 141
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                           1,433
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    9,802
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    119,585
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               137,513
<PP&E>                                         156,849
<DEPRECIATION>                                (32,645)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 266,965
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           36,248
<BONDS>                                         45,534
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       102,237
<OTHER-SE>                                      34,583
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   266,965
<SALES>                                        524,794
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               524,794
<CGS>                                          401,028
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  401,028
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               110,164
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,315
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,136
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,977
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              3,159
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,159
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .30
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .30


</TABLE>
Brian POWELL, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-6505.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 3, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit denied.
```
 
 
CRUDE OIL, LIGHT SWEET - ICE FUTURES EUROPE                          Code-067411
OPTION AND FUTURES COMBINED POSITIONS AS OF 10/23/12          |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  Long  | Short  |Spreads |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF 1,000 BARRELS)                         OPEN INTEREST:      647,072
COMMITMENTS
  65,665   51,920  198,086  361,333  383,553  625,084  633,559   21,988   13,513

CHANGES FROM 10/16/12 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:     -9,376)
  -1,973   -2,480    4,274  -11,237   -6,475   -8,935   -4,681     -441   -4,695

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADER
    10.1      8.0     30.6     55.8     59.3     96.6     97.9      3.4      2.1

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      152)
      39       36       56       70       66      142      127
```

----

Updated October 26, 2012
EXHIBIT 32.2

                   Certification of Periodic Financial Report
                       Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350

     In connection with the Annual Report of Extensions, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form  10-K,  for the period ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities
and  Exchange  Commission  on  the  date hereof (the "Report"), I, BB Tuley, the
chief  financial  officer  of  the company hereby certify as of the date hereof,
solely  for  purposes of 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section
906  of  the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act  of  2002,  that, to the best of my knowledge:

     (i)  the Annual Report on Form 10-K, of the Company for the year ended
          December 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
          Commission on the date hereof (the "Report") fully complies with the
          requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
          of 1934; and

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

Date:  May  21,  2009

/s/  BB  Tuley
--------------
BB  Tuley
Principal  Financial  Officer
Order entered September 19, 2013

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-12-01201-CR

DAVID DEWAYNE OWENS, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 1

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F12-51368-H

ORDER

The Court REINSTATES the appeal.

On August 20, 2013, we ordered the trial court to make findings regarding why 

appellant’s brief had not been filed. On September 17, 2013, we received appellant’s brief. 

Therefore, in the interest of expediting the appeal, we VACATE the August 20, 2013 order 

requiring findings.

We ORDER appellant’s brief filed as of the date of this order.

/s/ DAVID EVANS 

JUSTICE
October 4, 2012

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

BOWAN WANG, Appellant

NO. 14-11-01072-CV V.

MARKS TRANSPORT, INC. D/B/A CHAMPION TOYOTA, Appellee

________________________________

This cause, an appeal from the judgment in favor of appellee, signed, November 7, 

2011, was heard on the transcript of the record. We have inspected the record and find no 

error in the judgment. We order the judgment of the court below AFFIRMED.

We order appellant to pay all costs incurred in this appeal. 

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
EXHIBIT 32: Rule 13a-14(b) Certifications  The undersigned officers certify that this report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and that the information contained in the report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Jinzanghuang Tibet Pharmaceuticals, Inc.  A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Jinzanghuang Tibet Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and will be retained by Jinzanghuang Tibet Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.  May 19, 2009 /s/ Wang Shuxiang Wang Shuxiang (Chief Executive Officer)  May 19, 2009 /s/ Zeng Yiling Zeng Yiling (Chief Financial Officer)
Joseph J. GERMINARO, et al., petitioners, v. FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, et al.

No. 18-429.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 13, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
EXHIBIT 32.02**CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**     I, Theresa D. Becks, the Chief Financial Officer of Campbell & Company, Inc. as generalpartner, of Campbell Strategic Allocation Fund, L.P., certify that (i) the Form 10Q for the quarterended September 30, 2006 of Campbell Strategic Allocation Fund, L.P. fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) theinformation contained in the Form 10Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2006 fairly presents, inall material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Campbell StrategicAllocation Fund, L.P.      CAMPBELL STRATEGIC ALLOCATION FUND, L.P.   By: Campbell & Company, Inc., general partner      By:       /s/ Theresa D. Becks    Theresa D. Becks    Chief Financial Officer    October 31, 2006   
-E7-
~ 1 ~

No. 6:23-cv-00213

Jay Williams,

Plaintiff,

v.

Botie Hillhouse,

Defendant.

ORDER

On May 1, 2023, plaintiff Jay Williams, proceeding pro se, filed 

this civil rights lawsuit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The case was 

referred to United States Magistrate Judge K. Nicole Mitchell pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). 

The magistrate judge instructed plaintiff to either pay the $402 

filing fee or submit an application to proceed in forma pauperis, along 

with a current six-month history of his inmate trust fund account 

within thirty days of receipt of the order. Doc. 2. Plaintiff submitted 

a “notice of attempt to pay,” which contained a hand-written “coupon” of payment. Doc. 3. Plaintiff’s coupon or personal I.O.U does 

not comport with the court’s order.

On June 6, 2023, the magistrate judge entered a report recommending that plaintiff’s case be dismissed without prejudice for 

want of prosecution and failure to obey an order. Doc. 4. No objections were filed within the time period to do so.

When no party objects to the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, the court reviews it only for clear error. See Douglass 

v. United Servs. Auto. Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1420 (5th Cir. 1996). Having reviewed the magistrate judge’s report and being satisfied that 

the report contains no clear error, the court accepts the findings and 

conclusions of the report. Accordingly, the complaint is dismissed 

without prejudice for failure to prosecute and for failure to comply 

with a court order. 

Case 6:23-cv-00213-JCB-KNM Document 6 Filed 10/23/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 12
So ordered by the court on October 23, 2023.

J. CAMPBELL BARKER

United States District Judge

Case 6:23-cv-00213-JCB-KNM Document 6 Filed 10/23/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 13
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

__________________

No. 95-60485

Summary Calendar

__________________

JORGE GUADALUPE ELIZONDO,

 Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE,

 Defendant-Appellee.

- - - - - - - - - -

Petition for Review of an Order of the 

Board of Immigration Appeals

A36 596 086

- - - - - - - - - -

March 21, 1996

Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Jorge Guadalupe Elizondo-Chapa asserts that the Board of

Immigration Appeals (BIA) abused its discretion in denying his

motion to reconsider and reopen the denial of his application for

waiver of deportability; 8 U.S.C. § 1182(c). Elizondo contends

that the BIA erred in giving deferential review to the

Immigration Judges's (IJ) credibility determinations, rather than

conducting a de novo review of the record. Elizondo contends

that the proceedings should be reopened to present evidence that 
No. 95-60485

-2-

his testimony was credible and that he is genuinely

rehabilitated.

The BIA conducted an independent review of the record,

balanced the equities, and concluded that Elizondo's many

outstanding equities were outweighed by his criminal record and

the evidence indicating a lack of genuine rehabilitation. See

Osuchukwu v. I.N.S., 744 F.2d 1136, 1141 (5th Cir. 1984)(holding

that the BIA's denial of a motion to reconsider is reviewed for

abuse of discretion). The BIA will not grant a motion to reopen

to consider a § 212(c) application because an alien under a final

deportation order loses his lawful permanent resident status and

is thus no longer eligible for relief because he lacks the

required seven years consecutive, unrelinquished domicile. 

Rivera v. I.N.S., 810 F.2d 540, 541-42 (5th Cir. 1987); Ghassan

v. I.N.S., 972 F.2d 631, 635 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 113 S. Ct.

1412 (1992).

The petition for review is DENIED.
Archie BRADFIELD, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-9569.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 3, 2018.

Petition for rehearing denied.
`DTCC Repo-US Treasury <30 YR - NYSE LIFFE - NYPC                     Code-045L2T
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 10/16/12                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF $5,000,000)                            OPEN INTEREST:       42,550
COMMITMENTS
     967   19,661    2,267   37,087   19,212   40,321   41,140    2,229    1,410

CHANGES FROM 10/09/12 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:      3,446)
  -1,115      104      105    2,539    2,029    1,529    2,238    1,917    1,208

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
     2.3     46.2      5.3     87.2     45.2     94.8     96.7      5.2      3.3

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:       40)
       3       12        7       18       19       26       34`

---

Updated June 29, 2007
Keeland Duralle WILLIAMS, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-6622.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 10, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Jay Sandon COOPER, petitioner, v. BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, Trustee, et al.

No. 18-471.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 10, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Juanita L. BERRY, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-5353.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
```
 
 
MSCI EAFE MINI INDEX - NYSE LIFFE                                    Code-244041
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 02/28/12                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(MSCI EAFE INDEX X $50)                              OPEN INTEREST:       48,007
COMMITMENTS
   1,541    3,564       66   41,942   41,920   43,549   45,550    4,458    2,457

CHANGES FROM 02/21/12 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:       -534)
       2      560       66     -816   -1,260     -748     -634      214      100

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
     3.2      7.4      0.1     87.4     87.3     90.7     94.9      9.3      5.1

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:       58)
       2        6        1       31       31       34       37
 
 
MSCI EMERGING MKTS MINI INDEX - NYSE LIFFE                           Code-244042
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 02/28/12                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(MSCI EAFE INDEX X $50)                              OPEN INTEREST:       81,302
COMMITMENTS
  15,443   18,709      223   55,131   59,551   70,797   78,483   10,505    2,819

CHANGES FROM 02/21/12 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:        317)
     951     -406        0     -998      788      -47      382      364      -65

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
    19.0     23.0      0.3     67.8     73.2     87.1     96.5     12.9      3.5

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:       89)
      20        6        1       44       32       64       39
```

----

Updated March 2, 2012