alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```
 
 
VIX FUTURES - CBOE FUTURES EXCHANGE                                  Code-1170E1
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 09/04/12                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
($1000 X INDEX)                                      OPEN INTEREST:      367,377
COMMITMENTS
  75,560  142,887   66,356  199,105  131,954  341,021  341,197   26,356   26,180

CHANGES FROM 08/28/12 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:      7,442)
  -3,155     -177    2,969    4,890    3,769    4,704    6,561    2,738      881

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
    20.6     38.9     18.1     54.2     35.9     92.8     92.9      7.2      7.1

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      157)
      38       71       69       30       37      115      141
```

----

Updated September 4, 2012
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

versus

$101,020.00 IN UNITED STATES 

CURRENCY,

Defendant.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:23-CV-207

ORDER ADOPTING 

THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Pursuant to 21 U.S.C. § 881(a)(6), the United States initiated this civil action, in rem, to 

enforce the forfeiture of Defendant Property. The court referred this matter to the Honorable 

Christine L. Stetson, United States Magistrate Judge, for consideration pursuant to the applicable 

laws and orders of this court. On October 24, 2023, the United States filed its Motion for 

Default Judgment and the Clerk of Court filed its entry of default. On March 8, 2024, Judge 

Stetson entered a Report and Recommendation (#11) in which she recommended granting the 

Motion for Default Judgment (#8) and vesting in the United States all title, right, or interest in

Defendant Property. To date, the parties have not filed objections to the report.

The court received and considered the Report and Recommendation of the United States 

Magistrate Judge pursuant to such referral, 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 United States Magistrate Judge are correct. 

Case 1:23-cv-00207-MAC-CLS Document 12 Filed 03/27/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 76
Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge 

(#11) is ADOPTED. The United States’ Motion for Default Judgment (#8) is GRANTED. 

Defendant Property $101,020.00 is forfeited to the United States with all right, title, or interest

vesting in the United States. Any persons or entities that could claim any right, title, or interest 

in Defendant Property are divested of any right, title, or interest that they could claim.

________________________________________

MARCIA A. CRONE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE SIGNED at Beaumont, Texas, this 27th day of March, 2024.

Case 1:23-cv-00207-MAC-CLS Document 12 Filed 03/27/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 77
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Petitioner

v.

DARNELL BROWN,

Respondent :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 352 EAL 2016

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 14th day of December , 2016, the Petition for Allowance of

Appeal is GRANTED . The issue, as stated by petitioner is:

(1) Did the Superior Court err when it rejected binding Confrontation

Clause authority and held as a matter of first impression that

autopsy reports are testimonial?
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

SHERMAN DIVISION

MARICEL FORTEZA,

 Plaintiff,

v.

PELICAN INVESTMENT HOLDINGS 

GROUP, LLC d/b/a AAP and AUTO 

SERVICE DEPARTMENT, et al.,

 Defendants.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

Civil Action No. 4:23-cv-401-ALM-KPJ

ORDER

On September 26, 2023, Defendant Sing for Service LLC d/b/a Mepco (“Mepco”) filed the 

Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint Against Mepco and Brief in Support (the 

“Motion to Dismiss”) (Dkt. 27). See Dkt. 27. To date, Plaintiff Maricel Forteza (“Plaintiff”) has 

not filed a response.

The Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 27) includes a certificate of service, which states:

On September26, [sic] 2023, I filed the foregoing document with the clerk of court 

for the U.S. District Court, Northern [sic] District of Texas and electronically 

mailed this document to all parties by a manner authorized by Federal Rules [sic] 

of Civil Procedure 5(b).

Dkt. 27 at 21. Under Rule 5 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, a “written motion” must be 

“served on every party.” FED. R. CIV. P. 5(a)(1)(D). Service may be accomplished by “sending it 

to a registered user by filing it with the court’s electronic-filing system or sending it by other

electronic means that the person consented to in writing.” FED. R. CIV. P. 5(b)(2)(E). Under Local 

Rule CV-5, pro se litigants cannot register for the Electronic Filing System (“ECF”) without first 

obtaining “court permission.” See LOC. R. CV-5(a)(2)(B). The Court has not granted Plaintiff 

permission to register for ECF; nor does the Court have any record of Plaintiff consenting to 

Case 4:23-cv-00401-ALM-KPJ Document 36 Filed 12/21/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 173
2

receive electronic service by other means, such as electronic mail (“e-mail”). Thus, the Court is

not satisfied that it may rule on the Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 27). See LOC. R. CV-7(e) (“A party 

opposing a motion has fourteen days . . . from the date the motion was served in which to file a 

response and any supporting documents, after which the court will consider the submitted motion 

for decision.” (emphasis added)).

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Mepco has (7) days from the receipt of this Order 

to file a status report explaining how it served Plaintiff and, if by e-mail (as represented), whether 

Plaintiff has consented in writing to receive such service. If service was improperly executed, 

Mepco shall re-execute service on Plaintiff and, in the status report, indicate when and how such 

service was accomplished.

Case 4:23-cv-00401-ALM-KPJ Document 36 Filed 12/21/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 174
Anthony Jerome ADDISON, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-7012.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 14, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
People's Credit Card Master Trust

             Independent Accountants' Report on Management's Report
                 on People's Bank's Compliance with Article IV,
               Section 4.2 of the Pooling and Servicing Agreement

                          Year ended December 31, 1996



                        Independent Accountants' Report

People's Bank
850 Main Street
Bridgeport, Connecticut 06604

Bankers Trust Company
Four Albany Street, 10th Floor
New York, New York 10006

Gentlemen:

We have examined the assertion made by the management of People's Bank
("People's") in the accompanying management report entitled Management Report
on People's Bank Compliance with Article IV, Section 4.2 of the Pooling and 
Servicing Agreement that, as of December 31, 1996, People's was in compliance
with the provisions set forth in Article IV, Section 4.2 of the Pooling and
Servicing Agreement dated June 1, 1993, including the applicable supplements
dated June 1, 1993, February 1, 1994, October 1, 1994, March 1, 1995 and 
July 1, 1996 (collectively, the "Pooling and Servicing Agreement") between
Bankers Trust Company, as trustee, and People's as servicer.  Management is 
responsible for People's compliance with those requirements.  Our
responsibility is to express an opinion on management's assertion about 
People's compliance based on our examination.

Our examination was made in accordance with standards established by the 
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and, accordingly, included
examining, on a test basis, evidence about People's compliance with the
aforementioned provisions and performing such other procedures as we 
considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our examination 
provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.  Our examination does not provide
a legal determination on People's compliance with those provisions.

In our opinion, management's assertion that People's was in compliance with
the aforementioned provisions of Article IV, Section 4.2 of the Pooling and
Servicing Agreement as of December 31, 1996 is fairly stated, in all
material respects.

/s/ KPMG Peat Marwick LLP
March 20, 1997
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5


<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-31-2001
<PERIOD-START>                             MAY-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               AUG-31-2000
<CASH>                                           2,556
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   27,758
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                43,675
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,773,622
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        7,537,135
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,792
<OTHER-SE>                                  (1,765,305)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,773,622
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               367,586
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             707,199
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (1,074,785)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (1,074,785)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (1,074,785)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (0.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.06)



</TABLE>
Exhibit 23.1





CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM





We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-3 (File No. 333-161520) and on Form S-8 (File No. 333-141471) of Agree Realty Corporation of our report datedMarch 15, 2011, relating to the consolidated financial statements, the financial statement schedule and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, which appears on page F-2 of this annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010.





/s/ BAKER TILLY VIRCHOW KRAUSE, LLP





Chicago, Illinois


March 15, 2011
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998             DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998             DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                               0                  11,439
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    7,158                   2,691
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0                       0
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0                       0
<PP&E>                                         847,266                 535,303
<DEPRECIATION>                                  56,093                  38,306
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 968,922                 599,753
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0                       0
<BONDS>                                        234,573                 159,511
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                         20                       0
<COMMON>                                           327                     277
<OTHER-SE>                                     517,698                 371,311
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   968,922                 599,753
<SALES>                                              0                       0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                81,311                  48,005
<CGS>                                                0                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0                       0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                35,684                  20,136
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               9,454                   4,856
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 40,958                  27,585
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             40,958                  27,585
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                   5,940
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                    39,996                  21,293
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.30                    0.92
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.28                    0.91
        

</TABLE>
David T. ODOM, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-5929.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 9, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, '

'

Plaintiff, '

'

versus ' NO. 1:23-CR-33 (2)

'

CHRISTOPHER JAY JOHNSON, '

'

Defendant. '

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION

ON DEFENDANT’S GUILTY PLEA

The court referred this matter to the Honorable Zack Hawthorn, United States 

Magistrate Judge, for administration of a guilty plea under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of 

Criminal Procedure. Judge Hawthorn conducted a hearing in the form and manner prescribed 

by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11 and issued his Findings of Fact and 

Recommendation on Guilty Plea Before the United States Magistrate Judge. The magistrate 

judge recommended that the court accept the Defendant’s guilty plea. He further 

recommended that the court adjudge the Defendant guilty on Count Two of the Indictment filed 

against the Defendant.

The parties have not objected to the magistrate judge’s findings. The court ORDERS 

that the Findings of Fact and Recommendation on Guilty Plea of the United States Magistrate 

Judge are ADOPTED. The court accepts the Defendant’s plea but defers acceptance of the 

plea agreement until after review of the presentence report. 

It is further ORDERED that, in accordance with the Defendant’s guilty plea and the 

magistrate judge’s findings and recommendation, the Defendant, Christopher Jay Johnson (2), 

Case 1:23-cr-00033-MAC-ZJH Document 42 Filed 08/18/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 107
is adjudged guilty as to Count Two of the Indictment charging a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 

922(g)(1) - Felon in Possession of a Firearm.

Case 1:23-cr-00033-MAC-ZJH Document 42 Filed 08/18/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 108
```
 
 
CRUDE OIL, LIGHT SWEET - ICE FUTURES EUROPE                          Code-067411
OPTION AND FUTURES COMBINED POSITIONS AS OF 04/03/12          |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  Long  | Short  |Spreads |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF 1,000 BARRELS)                         OPEN INTEREST:      479,916
COMMITMENTS
  37,091   35,730  114,301  306,007  311,706  457,399  461,737   22,517   18,179

CHANGES FROM 03/27/12 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:      5,231)
  -9,309    1,309      -35   13,642    3,859    4,298    5,133      933       98

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADER
     7.7      7.4     23.8     63.8     65.0     95.3     96.2      4.7      3.8

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      131)
      32       25       47       68       61      125      111
```

----

Updated April 6, 2012
## Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

Jeremy Austin Carroll, Appellant

No. 06

- 18

- 00052

- CR v.

The State of Texas, Appellee Appeal from the 411th District Court of Trinity County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 09954 ). Memorandum Opinion delivered by Justice Moseley, Chief Justice Morriss and Justice Burgess participating.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find no error in the judgment of the court

below

. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

We further order that the appellant, Jeremy Austin Carroll, pay all costs of this appeal.

RENDERED OCTOBER 31 , 2018

BY ORDER OF THE COURT JOSH R. MORRISS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST: Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
Juliet YACKEL, petitioner, v. SOUTH DAKOTA, et al.

No. 18-553 (18A449).

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 29, 2018.

Application for stay of execution of sentence of death presented to Justice GORSUCH and by him referred to the Court denied. Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of South Dakota denied.
0IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSHALL DIVISION

XR COMMUNICATIONS, LLC 

D/B/A VIVATO TECHNOLOGIES, LLC,

 Plaintiff, 

v. 

AT&T INC., AT&T SERVICES INC., 

AT&T MOBILITY LLC, and AT&T 

CORP.,

 Defendants. 

§

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:23-CV-00202-JRG-RSP

(LEAD CASE) 

ORDER

Before the Court is the Stipulation of Dismissal (the “Stipulation”) filed by 

XR Communications, LLC d/b/a Vivato Technologies, LLC (“Plaintiff”) and AT&T 

Inc., AT&T Corp., AT&T Mobility LLC, and AT&T Services, Inc. (Dkt. No. 21.) In the 

Stipulation, the parties request that pursuant to FRCP 41(a)(1)(A)(ii), Plaintiff’s claims 

against Defendant AT&T Inc. should be dismissed without prejudice. (Id. at 1.) 

Having considered the Stipulation, the Court ACCEPTS AND ACKNOWLEDGES that 

Plaintiff’s claims against Defendant AT&T Inc. in the above-captioned case are DISMISSED 

WITHOUT PREJUDICE. 

The Clerk of Court is directed to MAINTAIN AS OPEN the above-captioned case and 

remove AT&T Inc. (but not the other AT&T Defendants) from the case caption. 

§

§ 

.

____________________________________

RODNEY GILSTRAP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE So ORDERED and SIGNED this 19th day of July, 2023.

Case 2:23-cv-00202-JRG-RSP Document 28 Filed 07/19/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 908
Billy Wayne LOCKE, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-6242.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 5, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
**EXHIBIT      21.1**

**FARO      TECHNOLOGIES, INC. LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES**

| Antares                LDA                                |   | Portugal                      |
|-----------------------------------------------------------|--------|-------------------------------|
| Cam2                SRL                                   |   | Italy                         |
| Faro                Benelux BV                            |   | Netherlands                   |
| Faro                Business Technologies India Pvt. Ltd. |   | India                         |
| Faro                Cayman LP                             |   | Cayman                Islands |
| Faro                Cayman Ltd                            |   | Cayman                Islands |
| Faro                Delaware Inc                          |   | Delaware,                USA  |
| Faro                Deutschland Holding GmbH              |   | Germany                       |
| Faro                Europe KG                             |   | Germany                       |
| Faro                FHN Netherlands BV                    |   | Netherlands                   |
| Faro                Japan KK                              |   | Japan                         |
| Faro                Scanning AG                           |   | Germany                       |
| Faro                Scanner Production GmbH               |   | Germany                       |
| IQ                Laser - Sales (Pty)                     |   | Germany                       |
| IQ                Laser - Scan (Pty)                      |   | Germany                       |
| Faro                Shanghai Co. Ltd                      |   | China                         |
| Faro                Singapore PTE Ltd                     |   | Singapore                     |
| Faro                Spain SL                              |   | Spain                         |
| Faro                Swiss Holding GmbH                    |   | Switzerland                   |
| Faro                Swiss Manufacturing GmbH              |   | Switzerland                   |
| Faro                Tech Polska                           |   | Poland                        |
| Faro                Verwaltungs GmbH                      |   | Germany                       |
| Faro                Worldwide Inc                         |   | Florida,                USA   |

----