alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EX-4.80





 Exhibit 4.80 

POWER OF ATTORNEY 
 I, Lu Wang, a citizen
of the People’s Republic of China (the “ PRC”) with ID No. and a shareholder holding 50% equity interests of Beijing Perusal Technology Co., Ltd. (“Beijing Perusal”), hereby irrevocably authorizes, pursuant to
the Proxy Agreement dated hereof between me and Baidu, Inc., as well as by designation of Baidu, Inc., Hailong Xiang with the following powers and rights in respect of my existing and future equity holding in Beijing Perusal (“My
Equity”) during the term of this Power of Attorney: 
 Hailong Xiang is hereby authorized as my sole and exclusive agent to exercise on my behalf
all of my rights as a shareholder to vote at shareholders’ meetings of Beijing Perusal in accordance with PRC laws and the articles of Beijing Perusal, including without limitation the right to sell or transfer any or all of My Equity, and to
designate and appoint the general manager of Beijing Perusal as my authorized representative at the shareholders’ meeting of Beijing Perusal. 
 Such
authorization is premised on the condition that Hailong Xiang is an employee of Baidu, Inc. and its affiliates, and Baidu, Inc. agrees to such authorization. Once Hailong Xiang’s employment with Baidu, Inc. and its affiliates terminates, or I
am notified by Baidu, Inc. to terminate such authorization, I will withdraw the authorization made hereunder immediately and designate/authorize any other person nominated by Baidu, Inc. to exercise all of my rights as a shareholder to vote at
shareholders’ meetings of Beijing Perusal. 
 Unless otherwise expressly provided herein, this Power of Attorney is irrevocable and continues to have
effect as of the date hereof as long as I holds equity interests in Beijing Perusal. 
  

			
	(Signature):	 	 /s/ Lu Wang

	
	Date: June 28, 2018


  
 1
United States District Court

EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

SHERMAN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v.

JUAN EMILIO GARDNER 

§

§

§

§

§

CRIMINAL ACTION NO. 4:23-CR-123-

ALM-BD-1

MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Came on for consideration the above-referenced criminal action, the Court having 

heretofore referred the request for the revocation of Defendant’s supervised release to the 

United States Magistrate Judge for proper consideration. The Court has received the Report and 

Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge pursuant to its order. With Defendant 

having waived allocution before the Court as well as his right to object to the report of the 

Magistrate Judge, the Court is of the opinion that the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate 

Judge are correct.

It is therefore ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of United States

Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED as the opinion of the Court.

It is further ORDERED that Defendant’s supervised release is hereby REVOKED.

It is further ORDERED that Defendant be committed to the custody of the Bureau of 

Prisons to be imprisoned for a term of fourteen (14) months with no term of supervised release 

to follow.

It is further ORDERED that allegations (1) and (7) of the First Amended Petition are 

dismissed. 

Case 4:23-cr-00123-ALM-BD Document 18 Filed 10/09/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 51
2

The Court also recommends that Defendant be housed in a Bureau of Prisons facility in 

the Seagoville, Texas area if appropriate.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Case 4:23-cr-00123-ALM-BD Document 18 Filed 10/09/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 52
```
 
 
WHEAT - KANSAS CITY BOARD OF TRADE                                   Code-001612
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 02/14/12                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF 5,000 BUSHELS)                         OPEN INTEREST:      143,382
COMMITMENTS
  36,233   17,136   20,461   68,588   79,232  125,282  116,829   18,100   26,553

CHANGES FROM 02/07/12 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:     -3,881)
    -774    2,488   -2,145   -1,036   -6,123   -3,955   -5,780       74    1,899

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
    25.3     12.0     14.3     47.8     55.3     87.4     81.5     12.6     18.5

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      154)
      43       32       40       58       55      121      113
```

----

Updated February 17, 2012
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-6836

AUTMUS PEEKS,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

S. R. WITKOWSKI, Warden; CHARLES MOLONY CONDON, Attorney General of the State of South

Carolina,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Charleston. Falcon B. Hawkins, Chief District

Judge. (CA-95-3557-2-11)

Submitted: November 7, 1996 Decided: November 19, 1996

Before RUSSELL and WIDENER, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Autmus Peeks, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Chief Deputy

Attorney General, Lauri J. Soles, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF

SOUTH CAROLINA, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying

relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (1994), amended

by Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, Pub. L.

No. 104-132, 110 Stat. 1214. We have reviewed the record and the

district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a

certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Peeks v. Witkowski, No. CA-95-3557-2-11

(D.S.C. Apr. 18, 1996). We dispense with oral argument because the

facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional

process.

DISMISSED
```
 
 
VIX FUTURES - CBOE FUTURES EXCHANGE                                  Code-1170E1
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 03/26/13                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
($1000 X INDEX)                                      OPEN INTEREST:      409,747
COMMITMENTS
 125,501  189,084   65,822  192,036  124,554  383,359  379,460   26,388   30,287

CHANGES FROM 03/19/13 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:    -53,685)
  10,866   -9,951  -12,979  -46,444  -26,289  -48,557  -49,219   -5,128   -4,466

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
    30.6     46.1     16.1     46.9     30.4     93.6     92.6      6.4      7.4

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      172)
      59       65       71       34       30      136      134
```

----

Updated March 29, 2013
POWER OF ATTORNEY


	KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS, that the undersigned, 
Ralph O. Hellmold, appoints Robert E. Swanson and Martin V. 
Quinn, and each of them, as his true and lawful attorneys-in-fact 
with full power to act and do all things necessary, advisable or 
appropriate, in their discretion, to execute on his behalf as an 
Independent Trustee of Ridgewood Electric Power Trust II and of 
Ridgewood Electric Power Trust III, the Annual Reports on Form 
10-K for the year ended December 31, 1997 for each of the above-
named trusts, and all amendments or documents relating thereto.

	IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Power 
of Attorney this 30th day of March, 1998, at Fort Lauderdale, 
Florida.

					        /s/Ralph O. Hellmold
						      Ralph O. Hellmold

<PAGE>
POWER OF ATTORNEY


	KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS, that the undersigned, 
Jonathan C. Kaledin, appoints Robert E. Swanson and Martin V. 
Quinn, and each of them, as his true and lawful attorneys-in-fact 
with full power to act and do all things necessary, advisable or 
appropriate, in their discretion, to execute on his behalf as an 
Independent Trustee of Ridgewood Electric Power Trust II and of 
Ridgewood Electric Power Trust III, the Annual Reports on Form 
10-K for the year ended December 31, 1997 for each of the above-
named trusts, and all amendments or documents relating thereto.

	IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Power 
of Attorney this 30th day of March, 1998, at Fort Lauderdale, 
Florida.

						/s/Jonathan C. Kaledin
						Jonathan C. Kaledin
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                          59,364
<SECURITIES>                                    25,092
<RECEIVABLES>                                   88,816
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               174,642
<PP&E>                                          65,418
<DEPRECIATION>                                  25,818
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 297,170
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           84,414
<BONDS>                                        120,006
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      82,838
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   297,170
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               219,712
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  113,229
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 7,758
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               6,125
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 92,600
<INCOME-TAX>                                    33,801
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      3
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    58,796
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

SHERMAN DIVISION

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v. 

LESLEY ODELL BROWN (25)

§

§

§

§

§

CASE NUMBER 4:23-CR-00014

ORDER ADOPTING UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S

REPORT AND FINDING DEFENDANT GUILTY

The Court referred this matter to the 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 One 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 Lesley Odell Brown

GUILTY of Count One of the Indictment, charging a violation of Title 18 U.S.C. § 1956(h) -

Conspiracy to Engage in Monetary Transactions with Criminally Derived Property (Money 

Laundering).

Case 4:23-cr-00014-SDJ-AGD Document 533 Filed 03/10/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 1769
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED> 
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998             DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998             JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                          28,649                   9,249
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    6,732                   3,748
<ALLOWANCES>                                       382                       0
<INVENTORY>                                          0                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0                       0
<PP&E>                                       3,946,531               1,975,891
<DEPRECIATION>                                 201,781                 145,572
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,012,011               1,892,504
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0                       0
<BONDS>                                      1,824,303                 786,745
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                    271,972                 126,013
<COMMON>                                             6                       4
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,353,024                 821,226
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,012,011               1,892,504
<SALES>                                              0                       0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               263,942                 142,295
<CGS>                                                0                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   73,126                  38,122
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                52,026                  29,550
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              60,198                  24,700
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 78,574                  49,923
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             81,972                  56,284
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                    69,056                  50,118
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.13                    1.10
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.11                    1.09
        

</TABLE>
United States District Court 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

SHERMAN DIVISION

MUSTAFA EL SHABAZZ BEY,

Plaintiff,

v. 

CHRISTINE A. NOWAK, et al., 

Defendants. 

§

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§

§

§ 

Civil Action No. 4:23-cv-00150

Judge Mazzant/Judge Davis 

MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND

RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Came on for consideration the report of the United States Magistrate Judge in this action, 

this matter having been heretofore referred to the Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636. 

On October 31, 2024, the Magistrate Judge entered a Report and Recommendation (Dkt. #5) that 

Plaintiff Mustafa El Shabazz Bey’s claims be dismissed without prejudice. 

Having received the report of the United States Magistrate Judge, and no timely objections 

being filed, the Court is of the opinion that the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge 

are correct and adopts the Magistrate Judge’s report as the findings and conclusions of the Court. 

It is therefore ORDERED that Plaintiff Bey’s claims are DISMISSED WITHOUT

PREJUDICE. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Case 4:23-cv-00150-ALM-BD Document 7 Filed 11/21/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 34
Opinion issued July 26 , 2012

In The 

## Court of Appeals
For The 

## First District of Texas

———————————— NO. 01

- 10

- 01023

- CV

——————————— SOLIZ AUTOMOTIVE, INC. , Appellant V. RENE BACA AND ORFA SANCHEZ , Appellee s

O n Appeal from the 80th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 2009

- 71829

MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant has filed an unopposed motion to dismiss the appeal. No opinion has issued. Accordingly, we grant the motion and dismiss the appeal. See T EX

. R.

A PP

. P. 42.1(a)(1). We dismiss all other pending motions as moot.

PER CURIAM2 Panel consists of Justices Higley, Sharp, and Huddle

.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

BEAUMONT DIVISION

MEDLIANT INC., 

Plaintiff,

v. 

KATRINA PONCE DE LEON,

Defendant.

Civil Action No.: 

1:23-cv-00203-MAC

NOTICE OF CORRECTION TO 

DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO 

DISMISS COMPLAINT [ECF NO. 8] 

AND REPLY TO MOTION TO 

DISMISS COMPLAINT [ECF NO. 

13]

Honorable Marcia A. Crone

In Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss Complaint, ECF No. 8 at 9, and Reply to Defendant’s 

Motion to Dismiss Complaint, ECF No. 13 at 5 and n.3, Counsel for Defendant represented to 

the Court that Defendant lives in Florida. Counsel for Defendant has since learned that 

Defendant has moved back from Florida to Beaumont, Texas. Counsel apologizes for this 

inadvertent error and requests that the Court disregard the references to Defendant’s location. 

The remainder of the Motion and Reply remain unaffected.

Case 1:23-cv-00203-MAC Document 19 Filed 10/25/23 Page 1 of 3 PageID #: 1240
2

DATED: October 25, 2023 /s/ Rachel Williams Dempsey

Denver, Colorado Rachel Williams Dempsey

TOWARDS JUSTICE

Rachel Williams Dempsey (pro hac vice)

Juno Turner (pro hac vice)

David H. Seligman (pro hac vice)

P.O. Box 371689, PMB 44465

Denver, CO 80237-5680

(720) 441-2236

david@towardsjustice.org 

juno@towardsjustice.org

rachel@towardsjustice.org

Attorneys for Katrina Ponce de Leon

Case 1:23-cv-00203-MAC Document 19 Filed 10/25/23 Page 2 of 3 PageID #: 1241
3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I certify that on October 25, 2023, I electronically filed a true and correct copy of 

NOTICE OF CORRECTION TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT 

[ECF NO. 8] AND REPLY TO MOTION TO DISMISS COMPLAINT [ECF NO. 13], with the 

Clerk of Court for the U.S. District Court, Eastern District of Texas, through the Court’s 

Electronic Case Filing system, which will serve all counsel of record listed below:

R. Brandon Bundren

Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

1600 Division Street, Suite 700

Nashville, TN 37203

bbundren@bradley.com

/s/ Rachel Williams Dempsey

Rachel Williams Dempsey

Case 1:23-cv-00203-MAC Document 19 Filed 10/25/23 Page 3 of 3 PageID #: 1242
Renee D. BELL, petitioner, v. ORLANDO HEALTH, INC., dba Winnie Palmer Hospital.

No. 18-6523.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 7, 2019.

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis* denied, and petition for writ of certiorari to the District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District dismissed. See Rule 39.8.
Exhibit 32.2








Certification of President and Co Chief Executive Officer








CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)








In connection with the Quarterly Report of Century Casinos, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:





(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 fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

















Date:  August 10, 2009








/s/ Peter Hoetzinger


Peter Hoetzinger


President and Co Chief Executive Officer
```
  
 
WHEAT - MINNEAPOLIS GRAIN EXCHANGE                                   Code-001626
OPTION AND FUTURES COMBINED POSITIONS AS OF 02/21/12          |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  Long  | Short  |Spreads |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF 5,000 BUSHELS)                         OPEN INTEREST:       39,842
COMMITMENTS
  12,342    1,529    3,799   15,490   26,718   31,631   32,046    8,210    7,796

CHANGES FROM 02/14/12 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:        735)
     -71     -606       41      928    1,201      898      636     -163       99

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADER
    31.0      3.8      9.5     38.9     67.1     79.4     80.4     20.6     19.6

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:       56)
      13        9       15       26       27       49       43
```

----

Updated February 24, 2012
Matthew Wade HOWARD, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-5967.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 15, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denied.
Jerry LOPEZ, petitioner, v. NEVADA.

No. 17-8699.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Nevada denied.
Corey Levon BECKHAM, petitioner, v. Darrell MILLER, Warden.

No. 18-6045.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 19, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
Court ACCEPTS AND ACKNOWLEDGES that allclaims and causes of action asserted by Plaintiff against Defendant in the above-captioned case areDISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE

ch

Case 2:23-cv-00271-JRG-RSP   Document 7   Filed 07/07/23   Page 1 of 1 PageID #:  33
In Re GRAND JURY SUBPOENA.

No. 18M93.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 22, 2019.

Motion for leave to file a petition for writ of certiorari under seal with redacted copies for the public record granted.