alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000911115
<NAME> ATCHISON CASTING CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2001
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                           4,185
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   81,170
<ALLOWANCES>                                       634
<INVENTORY>                                     54,928
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               160,045
<PP&E>                                         199,572
<DEPRECIATION>                                  63,998
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 335,505
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          194,081
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            83
<OTHER-SE>                                     105,957
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   335,505
<SALES>                                         99,208
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                99,208
<CGS>                                           95,208
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  104,569
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  (12)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,605
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (7,954)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (2,634)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (5,320)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                        (546)
<NET-INCOME>                                   (5,866)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.76)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.76)


</TABLE>
<PAGE>
                                                                   EXHIBIT 11.1

                                                                  June 30, 1997


              LODGENET ENTERTAINMENT CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES

             Statement Regarding Computation of Net Loss Per Share 
                        of Common Stock (Unaudited)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                        Three Months Ended             Six Months Ended
                                              June 30,                      June 30,
                                    -------------------------      --------------------------
                                        1996            1997           1996          1997
                                    ----------     -----------     ----------    ------------
<S>                                 <C>            <C>             <C>           <C>
Net loss (in thousands)             $   (3,395)    $    (5,756)    $   (6,268)   $    (12,435)
                                    ----------     -----------     ----------    ------------
                                    ----------     -----------     ----------    ------------

Weighted average shares:
  Average shares outstanding         8,801,485      11,213,437      8,077,939      11,211,292
  Assumed additional shares (1)         54,357          48,663         53,342          52,063
                                    ----------     -----------     ----------    ------------

  Weighted average common shares     8,855,842      11,262,100      8,131,281      11,263,355
                                    ----------     -----------     ----------    ------------
                                    ----------     -----------     ----------    ------------

Net loss per common share           $    (0.38)    $     (0.51)    $     0.77)    $     (1.10)
                                    ----------     -----------     ----------    ------------
                                    ----------     -----------     ----------    ------------

</TABLE>


-----------
(1)  Represents the effect of the assumed exercise of stock options issued 
during the twelve months preceding the Company's initial public offering.  
The exercise of other options and warrants has not been assumed because their 
effect would be anti-dilutive.
Michael Founier DIXON, aka Michael Fournier Dixon, petitioner, v. TEXAS; Michael Founier Dixon, aka Michael Fournier Dixon, petitioner, v. Texas; Michael Founier Dixon, aka Michael Fournier Dixon, petitioner, v. Texas; and Michael Founier Dixon, aka Michael Fournier Dixon, petitioner, v. Texas.

No. 18-6553.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 10, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas denied.
<PAGE>
                                                                      EXHIBIT 23

                          Independent Auditors' Consent

The Board of Directors
Vari-L Company, Inc.:

We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statement (Nos.
33-88666, 33-81045, 333-45137, and 333-81915) on Form S-8 of Vari-L Company,
Inc. of our report dated August 23, 2002, except for notes 3 , 13 and 14 as to
which the date is October 7, 2002, with respect to the balance sheets of Vari-L
Company, Inc. as of June 30, 2002 and 2001, and the related statements of
operations, stockholders' equity and cash flows for each of the years in the
two-year period ended June 30, 2002, and the related Schedule II--Valuation and
Qualifying Accounts for the years ended June 30, 2002 and 2001, which report
appears in the June 30, 2002, annual report on Form 10-K of Vari-L Company, Inc.


(signed) KPMG LLP


Denver, Colorado
October 7, 2002
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA

Present: Judges Elder, Lemons and Senior Judge Cole Argued at Richmond, Virginia

DAMON D. DAVIS MEMORANDUM OPINION * BY v. Record No. 2300-97-2 JUDGE DONALD W. LEMONS FEBRUARY 9, 1999 COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA

FROM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE CITY OF PETERSBURG James F. D'Alton, Jr., Judge Mary Katherine Martin, Senior Assistant Public Defender (John H. Cobb, Jr., Public Defender, on brief), for appellant. Kathleen B. Martin, Assistant Attorney General (Mark L. Earley, Attorney General, on brief), for appellee.

Damon D. Davis appeals his conviction for attempted robbery alleging that he was not prosecuted in a timely manner pursuant to the speedy trial provisions of Code § 19.2-243. We disagree

and affirm his conviction. On October 10, 1995, taxi driver John E. Jones was shot during an attempted robbery in his cab. On July 8, 1996, a preliminary hearing was held in the General District Court of the City of Petersburg, and the court found probable cause that Damon D. Davis, appellant, committed felonies related to the incident. On July 18, 1996, the grand jury returned indictments charging Davis with attempted robbery, use of a firearm while committing robbery, malicious wounding, and conspiracy to commit

* Pursuant to Code § 17.1-413, recodifying Code § 17-116.010, this opinion is not designated for publication.-2- robbery. A trial was set in the circuit court for September 10,

1996. Both Davis and the Commonwealth agree that the nine-month provision of Code § 19.2-243 is applicable to this case, by which the Commonwealth is required to try the accused within 273 days of a finding of probable cause. Davis was tried for these offenses on September 17, 1997, 436 days after the probable cause hearing. Among other things, the provisions of the speedy trial act do not apply to periods where the defendant has absconded or to periods where the case is continued on motion of the defendant, upon joint motion, or upon motion of the Commonwealth without objection from the defendant. See Code § 19.2-243. The first trial date was set for September 10, 1996, sixty-four days after the date of the probable cause hearing. This period constitutes the delay inherent in the orderly process of fixing a trial date and will be counted against the Commonwealth. From September 10 to December 19, 1996, Davis absconded from justice, was arrested, and upon apprehension, on his motion, new counsel was appointed to represent him. These eighty-nine days are not counted against the Commonwealth. From December 20, 1996 to September 17, 1997, multiple joint motions to continue were made, or motions were made by the Commonwealth, in which Davis either joined or the record does not show an objection. These 283 days are not counted against the

Commonwealth.-3- Upon review of the record we hold that the only delay properly attributable to the Commonwealth is sixty-four days. The trial court correctly concluded that Davis was tried within the nine-month provision of Code § 19.2-243. Because no violation of his right to a speedy trial occurred, we affirm his

conviction.

Affirmed.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

SHERMAN DIVISION

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v. 

JOSHUA MATTHEW BAHAM (24)

§

§

§

§

§

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 Joshua Matthew 

Baham 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 532 Filed 03/10/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 1768
CITY OF CIBOLO, TEXAS, petitioner, v. GREEN VALLEY SPECIAL UTILITY DISTRICT.

No. 17-938.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 7, 2019.

Motion of Guadalupe Valley Development Corporation, et al. for leave to file a brief as *amici curiae* granted. Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
```
  
 
VIX FUTURES - CBOE FUTURES EXCHANGE                                  Code-1170E1
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
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
($1000 X INDEX)                                      OPEN INTEREST:      310,512
COMMITMENTS
  76,912  103,249   32,680  176,384  144,741  285,976  280,670   24,536   29,842

CHANGES FROM 03/27/12 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:      6,173)
  -1,979   -5,269    2,296    4,159    6,321    4,476    3,348    1,697    2,825

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADER
    24.8     33.3     10.5     56.8     46.6     92.1     90.4      7.9      9.6

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      125)
      32       52       49       30       36       92      112
```

----

Updated April 6, 2012
##### 



LodgeNet Entertainment Corporation
    
    Form 10-Q
 Exhibit 32 LODGENET ENTERTAINMENT CORPORATION CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)
 Each of the undersigned, Scott C. Petersen and Gary H. Ritondaro, the
Chief Executive Officer and the Chief Financial Officer, respectively, of
LodgeNet Entertainment Corporation (the Company), individually and not
jointly has executed this Certification in connection with the filing with the
Securities and Exchange Commission of the Companys Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2004 (the Report). Each of the undersigned hereby certifies that:  Ø
    
    the Report fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
andØ
    
    the information contained in the Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.  IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the undersigned has executed this
Certification as of the 6th day of
August 2004. /s/ Scott C. PetersenScott C. PetersenChief Executive Officer/s/ Gary H. RitondaroGary H. RitondaroChief Financial Officer
 June 30, 2004
    
    Page 31
1 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

TYLER DIVISION 

CURT ADKISSON, 

 Plaintiff, 

v. 

SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY OF

INDIANA, 

 Defendant. 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

Case No. 6:23-cv-146-JDK-JDL 

ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 

OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

Plaintiff Curt Adkisson filed this action against Defendant Safeco Insurance 

Company of Indiana in Texas state court on February 20, 2023, asserting claims for 

breach of contract, breach of the duty of good faith and fair dealing, and violations of 

the Texas Insurance Code. Docket No. 3. Defendant removed the case to federal 

court on March 24, 2023. Docket No. 1. On September 13, 2024, Defendant filed a 

motion for summary judgment. Docket No. 34. The motion was referred to United 

States Magistrate Judge John D. Love for findings of fact, conclusions of law, and 

recommendations for the disposition of the motion. Docket No. 36. 

On November 15, 2024, Judge Love issued a Report recommending that 

Defendant’s motion for summary judgment be granted. Docket No. 39. No objections 

to the Report were filed, and the period in which to do so has passed. 

This Court reviews the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge de 

novo only if a party objects within fourteen days of service of the Report and 

Case 6:23-cv-00146-JDK Document 50 Filed 12/09/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 1464
2 

Recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). In conducting a de novo review, the Court 

examines the entire record and makes an independent assessment under the law. 

Douglass v. United Servs. Auto. Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1430 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc), 

superseded on other grounds by statute, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (extending the time to 

file objections from ten to fourteen days). 

Here, Plaintiff did not object in the prescribed period. The Court therefore 

reviews the Magistrate Judge’s findings for clear error or abuse of discretion and 

reviews the legal conclusions to determine whether they are contrary to law. See 

United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir. 1989) (holding that, if no 

objections to a Magistrate Judge’s Report are filed, the standard of review is “clearly 

erroneous, abuse of discretion and contrary to law”). 

Having reviewed the Magistrate Judge’s Report and the record in this case, 

the Court finds no clear error or abuse of discretion and no conclusions contrary to 

law. Accordingly, the Court hereby ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation of the 

United States Magistrate Judge (Docket No. 39) as the findings of this Court. It is 

therefore ORDERED that Defendant’s motion for summary judgment (Docket 

No. 34) is GRANTED and this case is DISMISSED with prejudice. 

So ordered and signed on this 

Dec 9, 2024

Case 6:23-cv-00146-JDK Document 50 Filed 12/09/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 1465
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

TEXARKANA DIVISION

ALEXANDRA DAVIS,

Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant,

v. 

JERRAL W. JONES, DALLAS COWBOYS 

FOOTBALL CLUB, LTD., JAMES 

WILKINSON, TRAILRUNNER 

INTERNATIONAL, LLC, DONALD JACK, 

JR.,

Defendants/Counter-Plaintiffs,

&

CYNTHIA DAVIS-SPENCER,

 Third-Party Defendant.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 5:23-CV-00032-RWS

ORDER

Before the Court is Defendants Jerral W. Jones, Dallas Cowboys Football Club Ltd., James 

Wilkinson, Trailrunner International, LLC, and Donald Jack, Jr.’s Unopposed Motion for 

Extension of Time to File Reply in Support of Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff Alexandra Davis’s First 

Amended Complaint. Docket No. 64. Defendants request an extension of their original deadline, 

December 29, 2023, to January 5, 2024. Id. Having considered Defendants’ motion, and because 

it is unopposed, the motion is hereby GRANTED. Accordingly, it is

ORDERED that Defendants have until on or before January 5, 2024, to file their reply in 

support of their Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s First Amended Complaint.

.

 

____________________________________

ROBERT W. SCHROEDER III

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

So ORDERED and SIGNED this 28th day of December, 2023.

Case 5:23-cv-00032-RWS Document 65 Filed 12/28/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 1109
Jose Guadalupe CEBREROS, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-261.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 7, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
AO 458 (Rev. 06/09) Appearance of Counsel

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

__________ District of __________

)

)

)

)

)

Case No.

Defendant

APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL

To: The clerk of court and all parties of record

I am admitted or otherwise authorized to practice in this court, and I appear in this case as counsel for:

.

Date:

Attorney’s signature

Printed name and bar number

Address

E-mail address

Telephone number

FAX number

Eastern District of Texas Headwater Research LLC 2:23-cv-00379-JRG-RSP Headwater Research LLC 09/05/2023 /s/ Neil A. Rubin Neil A. Rubin CA Bar No. 250761

Russ August & Kabat 

12424 Wilshire Blvd., 12th Floor 

Los Angeles, CA 90025 nrubin@raklaw.com (310) 826-7474 (310) 826-6991 Print Save As... Reset

Plaintiff

v.

T-Mobile US, Inc. et al

Case 2:23-cv-00379-JRG-RSP Document 12 Filed 09/05/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 196
EXHIBIT 10.1

                            Agreement with Management




                                       28
<PAGE>





                                    AGREEMENT

We, Eighth Business Service Group,  Inc., a Florida  corporation,  do agree with
you, our president,  director and management,  Michael T. Williams, as of May 1,
1999, as follows.

o     We will not sell any securities prior to the location of an acquisition or
      merger candidate.

o     The  costs  of   identifying,   investigating,   and  analyzing   business
      combinations  not  obtained  from  the  merger  fee  paid  to  us  by  the
      acquisition  candidate  will be paid with funds  contributed  as a capital
      contribution by our president.  Management will fund our cash requirements
      until an acquisition is closed. Management has placed no cap on the amount
      of funds they will lend.

o     We may not borrow funds and use the loan  proceeds to make payments to any
      officer, director, promoter or affiliate or associate of us.

o     We will not enter into a business combination with any company which is in
      any way wholly or partially  beneficially owned by any officer,  director,
      promoter or affiliate or associate of us.

o     We will not pay a finder's fee to any member of management  for locating a
      merger or acquisition candidate.

o     No member  of  management  intends  to or may seek and  negotiate  for the
      payment of finder's fees.

o     Other  fees may be paid to our  management  if and only if it is agreed by
      the acquisition  candidate in the merger  agreement.  Any such fee will be
      funded  by a fee the  acquisition  candidate  agrees to pay as part of the
      merger agreement. There is no minimum or maximum amount of fee that can be
      paid. The amount will be determined in  arms'-length  negotiations  in the
      merger agreement.

o     The only other  pecuniary  benefit to be  received  by  management  is the
      retention of a to-be-agreed percent of stock after the acquisition closes.
      There is no minimum or maximum amount of stock which can be retained.  The
      amount  will be  determined  in  arms'-length  negotiations  in the merger
      agreement.

o     Except as  described  above,  we will not  utilize  any other  methods  of
      payments by which management or current shareholders receive funds, stock,
      other assets or anything of value whether tangible or intangible

Eighth Business Service Group, Inc.,
a Florida corporation



By: /s/ Michael T. Williams ______________________
Michael T. Williams; president, director and management

/s/ Michael T. Williams
Michael T. Williams

                                       29
<PAGE>
FILED

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

May 18, 2006

THOMAS K. KAHN

CLERK

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

_____________

No. 05-16801

Non-Argument Calendar

_____________

D.C. Docket No. 04-81184-CV-WPD

CHRISTOPHER’S CREATIVE DESIGN, INC.,

a.k.a Christopher’s Christmas Party Gifts & Antiques,

CHRISTOPHER JAMES,

 Plaintiffs-Appellants,

versus

VILLAGE OF NORTH PALM BEACH,

Defendant-Appellee.

____________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Florida

____________

(May 18, 2006)

Before TJOFLAT, DUBINA and HILL, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:
2

This is an appeal from a final judgment and order granting summary

judgment in favor of the Village of North Palm Beach. The district court held that

plaintiff failed to show the essential element of its claim under 42 U.S.C. §

2000cc, the Religious Land Use and Institutionalized Persons Act, that the sign

ordinance of the Village of North Palm Beach was a substantial burden on its

exercise of religious rights. Finding no reversible error in this holding, the

judgment is due to be affirmed.

AFFIRMED.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      EXHIBIT 23


                      CONSENT OF PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP


                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS


        We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements of Health Power, Inc. on Form S-8 (File No. 33-91956), Form S-8 (File
No. 33-91958), Form S-8 (33-91852), Form S-8 (File No. 333-20535), Form S-8
(File No. 333-45857), and Form S-3 (File No. 33-80035) of our report dated March
11, 1999, on our audits of the consolidated financial statements of Health
Power, Inc. and Subsidiaries as of December 31, 1998 and 1997, and for the years
ended December 31, 1998, 1997, and 1996 which report is included in this Annual
Report on Form 10-K.


                                             /s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
                                             -----------------------------------
                                             PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Columbus, Ohio
March 31, 1999