alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Alba T. PFEFFER, petitioner, v. WELLS FARGO ADVISORS, LLC, et al.

No. 18M40.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 9, 2018.

Motion to direct the Clerk to file a petition for writ of certiorari out of time denied.
I

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2210

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain light absorbing photo dyes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JUNE 15, 1999

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

Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To suspend temporarily the duty on certain light absorbing

photo dyes.

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

3 SECTION 1. TEMPORARY SUSPENSION OF DUTY.

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

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following

7 new heading:
2

•HR 2210 IH

‘‘ 9902.29.34 Benzenesulfonic acid, 4-[4-

[3-[4-(dimethylamino)

phenyl]-2-propenylidene]-

4,5-dihydro-3-methyl-5-oxo1H-pyrazol-1-yl]-, compound

with N,N-diethylethanamine

(1:1) (CAS No. 109940–17–

2); 1H-Pyrazole-3-carboxylic

acid, 4-[3-[3-carboxy-5-hydroxy-1-(4-sulfophenyl)-1Hpyrazol-4-yl]-2-

propenylidene]-4,5-dihydro5-oxo-1-(4-sulfophenyl)-, sodium salt, compound with

N,N-diethylethanamine

(CAS No. 90066–12–9);

Benzenesulfonic acid, 4-[4,5-

dihydro-4-[[5-hydroxy-3-

methyl-1-(4-sulfophenyl)-1Hpyrazol-4-yl]methylene]-3-

methyl-5-oxo-1H-pyrazol-1-

yl]-, dipotassium salt (CAS

No. 94266–02–1);

Benzenesulfonic acid, 4-[4-

[[4- (dimethylamin

o)phenyl]methylene]-4,5-

dihydro-3-methyl-5-oxo-1Hpyrazol-1-yl]-, potassium salt

(CAS No. 27268–31–1);

1H-Pyrazole-3-carboxylic

acid, 4,5-dihydro-5-oxo-4-

[(phenylamino) methylene]-

1-(4-sulfophenyl)-, disodium

salt; and 1H-Pyrazole-3-carboxylic acid, 4-[5-3-carboxy5-hydroxy-1-(4-sulfophenyl)-

1H-pyrazol-4-yl]-2,4-

pentadienylidene]-4,5-

dihydro-5-oxo-1-(4-

sulfophenyl)-, tetrapotassium

salt (CAS No. 134863–74–

4) (the foregoing provided

for in subheading

2933.19.90) ......................... Free No change No change On or before

12/31/2003 ’’.

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

2 subsection (a) shall apply with respect to goods entered,

3 or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or after

4 the date that is 15 days after the date of the enactment

5 of this Act.

Æ
Stephen Brian TURNER, petitioner, v. Melody SMITH, et al.

No. 18-5583.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 9, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.

Justice BREYER took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
Bruce WISHNEFSKY, petitioner, v. Jawad SALAMEH, et al.

No. 18-5626.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 7, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1996
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1
       
<S>                                        <C>        
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                    6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1996
<CASH>                                           6,312
<SECURITIES>                                    49,598
<RECEIVABLES>                                   11,761
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                68,803
<PP&E>                                           3,250
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  91,729
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           11,265
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           131
<OTHER-SE>                                      80,333
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    91,729
<SALES>                                         27,605
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                27,605
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    3,845
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                18,559
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  6,734
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,014
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,720
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,720
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.21
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.20
        

</TABLE>
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSHALL DIVISION

PATENT ARMORY INC.,

Plaintiff,

v. 

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, 

INC.,

Defendant.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:23-CV-00199-JRG

ORDER

Before the Court is the Notice of Voluntary Dismissal with Prejudice (the “Notice”) filed 

by Patent Armory Inc. (“Plaintiff”). (Dkt. No. 16.) In the Notice, Plaintiff dismisses the abovecaptioned action against Defendant Samsung Electronics America, Inc. (“Defendant”) with 

prejudice pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1)(A)(i) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. (Id. at 1.) 

Having considered the Notice, the Court ACCEPTS AND ACKNOWLEDGES that all 

claims and causes of action asserted by Plaintiff against Defendant in the above-captioned case are 

DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Each party is to bear its own costs, expenses, and attorneys’ 

fees. All pending requests for relief in the above-captioned case not explicitly granted herein are 

DENIED AS MOOT. 

The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE the above-captioned case as no parties or claims 

remain.

.

____________________________________

RODNEY GILSTRAP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE So ORDERED and SIGNED this 11th day of August, 2023.

Case 2:23-cv-00199-JRG Document 17 Filed 08/11/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 529
Charles Litton MORRIS, petitioner, v. Julie L. JONES, Secretary, Florida Department of Corrections.

No. 18-5949.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 15, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
**RB** IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 20 - 0603 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. TRENTON MATTHEW LARSON ,

Defendant and Appellant.

**GRANT OF EXTENSION** Upon consideration of Appellee ’s motion for a 30 - day extension of time, and good cause appearing therefor, Appellee is granted an extension of time to and including April 15 , 2022 , within which to prepare, serve, and file its response.

Electronically signed by: Bowen Greenwood Clerk of the Supreme Court March 8 2022

03/08/2022
Case Number: DA 20-0603
Ricky Allen BARNETT, petitioner, v. Lorie DAVIS, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division.

No. 17-8716.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Chad Edward NOZISKA, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 17-8707.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSHALL DIVISION

XR COMMUNICATIONS LLC D/B/A 

VIVATO TECHNOLOGIES

v.

AT&T INC., ET AL.

§

§

§

§

§

Case No. 2:23-CV-0202-JRG-RSP

Markman Hearing

MAG. JUDGE ROY PAYNE PRESIDING

September 11, 2024

OPEN: 9:02 am ADJOURN: 12:20 pm 

ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF: James Pickens

Philip Wang

ATTORNEY FOR DEFENDANTS: Kevin Anderson

Matt Yungwirth

John Gibson

Sajid Saleem

Melissa Smith

TECHNICAL ADVISOR: Mike Paul

LAW CLERK: Nathan Gershengorin

COURT REPORTER: Ed Reed

COURTROOM DEPUTY: Becky Andrews

Court opened. Case called. James Pickens introduced co-counsel and announced ready. 

Melissa Smith introduced co-counsel and announced ready.

The Court heard argument on a term by term basis. Philip Wang and James Pickens presented 

argument on behalf of Plaintiff. Kevin Anderson, John Gibson, Matt Yungwirth and Sajid 

Saleem presented argument on behalf of Defendants.

The Court took the claim construction matters under submission.

Case 2:23-cv-00202-JRG-RSP Document 90 Filed 09/11/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 2728
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

September 22, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 135742(51) Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, AGRIS PAVLOVSKIS, Justices 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v SC: 135742 

 COA: 275236 

Ingham CC: 05-000523-NZ

CITY OF EAST LANSING, and 

EAST LANSING CITY CLERK, 

Defendants-Appellees. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court’s June 25, 2008 

order is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does not appear that the order was 

entered erroneously. 

d0915 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

September 22, 2008 

 Clerk
OLD DOMINION ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, petitioner, v. FEDERAL ENERGY REGULATORY COMMISSION.

No. 18-333.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 7, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit denied.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

SHERMAN DIVISION

DEDRICK POLK

v.

GRAYSON CNTY. HEALTH DEP’T.

§

§

§

§

§

CIVIL NO. 4:23-CV-261-SDJ

MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 

OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

Came on for consideration the Report and Recommendation of the United

States Magistrate Judge (“Report”), this matter having been referred to the

Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636. On October 30, 2023, the Report of the 

Magistrate Judge, (Dkt. #10), was entered containing proposed findings of fact and 

recommendation this case be dismissed without prejudice.

This Court has reviewed the Magistrate Judge’s proposed Findings, 

Conclusions, and Recommendation for plain error. Finding none, the undersigned 

District Judge believes that the Findings, Conclusions, and a Recommendation of the 

Magistrate Judge are correct, and they are accepted as the Findings and Conclusions 

of the Court.

It is therefore ORDERED that the above-captioned case is DISMISSED 

without prejudice.

The clerk is instructed to close this matter.

Case 4:23-cv-00261-SDJ-AGD Document 12 Filed 07/31/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 33
<PAGE>


                               Share Computation
                                   Year Ended
                                December 30,1995

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                                    Common Stock
                                                            -------------------------------------------------------------
                                                  Prefered                                 Total less         Weighted 
                                                     Stock         Total        Treasury     Tresury       Average Shares
                                              ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                                                 <C>          <C>             <C>         <C>           <C>    
Shares outstanding at December 31, 1994                   0      3,281,226       (69,200)    3,212,026         3,212,026
Issuance of stock in acqisitions                                   550,000        69,200       619,200           278,171
Issuance of preferred stock                          93,636                                          0
Preferred stock conversions                         (75,218)     4,136,488                   4,136,488           848,197
Issuance of common shares                                        2,482,511                   2,482,511         1,345,609
Exercise of stock options                                          196,318                     196,318            17,468
Exercise of warrants                                               250,000                     250,000            49,315
Common stock issued for services                                   280,000                     280,000           252,055
Acquisitions of treasury stock                                                   (71,100)      (71,100)          (47,470)
Debt conversions                                                   449,932                     449,932           338,990
                                              ===========================================================================
Shares outstanding at end of quarter                 18,418     11,626,475       (71,100)   11,555,375         6,294,361
                                              ===========================================================================

Net Loss                                                                                                   $ (14,663,000)

Weighted average shares                                                                                        6,294,361

Loss per share                                                                                                    ($2.33)
                                                                                                       ==================
</TABLE>
John LASCHKEWITSCH, petitioner, v. AMERICAN NATIONAL LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY.

No. 18M42.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 9, 2018.

Motion for leave to file a petition for writ of certiorari with supplemental appendix under seal granted.
Case 4:23-cv-00377-ALM Document 14 Filed 05/30/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 127
**Exhibit31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONS**

 

I, Casey J. Sylla, certify that:

 

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of LincolnBenefit Life Company;

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to makethe statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statementswere made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrantas of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

 

4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsiblefor establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as definedin Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, toensure that material information relating to the registrant, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

 

b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controlsand procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of theperiod covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

 

c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s mostrecent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of anannual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting;and

 

5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed,based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financialreporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’sboard of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

 

a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the designor operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process,summarize and report financial information; and

 

b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting.

 

Date: November 10, 2004

 
|   | /s/  Casey J. Sylla        |   |
|--------|----------------------------|--------|
|   | Casey  J. Sylla            |
|   | Chairman  of the Board and |
|   | Chief  Executive Officer   |

 

E-2

----
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   Exhibit 10(x)


                                 AMENDMENT NO. 1
                                       TO
                               HEALTH POWER, INC.
                  1996 DIRECTORS STOCK AWARD AND PURCHASE PLAN


         The Health Power, Inc. 1996 Directors Stock Award and Purchase Plan
(the "Plan") is hereby amended pursuant to the following provisions:

         Section 1. Definitions.

         All capitalized terms used in this amendment which are not otherwise
defined herein shall have the respective meanings given such terms in the Plan.

         Section 2. Additional Retainer.

         Commencing in 1997, each Eligible Director of the Company (but not an
Eligible Director of one of the Company's subsidiaries) shall receive on an
annual basis, in addition to the Retainer, an additional annual retainer (the
"Additional Retainer"), which Additional Retainer shall be paid solely in the
form of Shares pursuant to the Plan. The number of Shares evidencing the
Additional Retainer shall be in an amount equal to $3,000 divided by the fair
market value of the Shares as of the last trading day of the year with respect
to which the Additional Retainer is paid, which number shall then be rounded
down to the nearest whole number. No fractional Shares shall be issued in
connection with the payment of the Additional Retainer. In order to receive the
Additional Retainer, a person must be an Eligible Director as of December 31 of
the year with respect to which the Additional Retainer is paid.

         Section 3. Effective Date; Construction.

         The effective date of this amendment is August 21, 1997, and this
amendment shall be deemed to be a part of the Plan as of such date. In the event
of any inconsistencies between the provisions of the Plan and this amendment,
the provisions of this amendment shall control. Except as modified by this
amendment, the Plan shall continue in full force and effective without change.
Marlon PENN, petitioner, v. NEW YORK METHODIST HOSPITAL, et al.

No. 18-245.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 29, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.
Exhibit 21 
 
 
List of Subsidiaries 
 
Corporation                           Jurisdiction 
 
 
Inso Chicago Corporation              Illinois, USA 
 
Inso Corporation, Ltd.                England 
 
Inso Dallas Corporation               Delaware, USA 
 
Inso Foreign Sales Corporation        Barbados, USA 
 
Inso Kansas City Corporation          Missouri, USA 
 
Inso (Overseas) Corporation           Delaware, USA 
 
Inso Providence Corporation           Delaware, USA 
 
Inso Technology Corporation           Illinois, USA 
 
Inso Securities Corporation           Massachusetts, USA 
 
Electronic Book 
  Technologies Massachusetts, Inc.    Massachusetts, USA 
 
Electronic Book Technologies 
  International, Inc.                 Delaware, USA 
 
Electronic Book Technologies, S.A.    Switzerland 
 
Electronic Book Technologies, SARL    France 
 
Electronic Book Technologies 
  Australia Pty, Ltd.                 New South Wales, Australia 
 
Electronic Book Technologies KK       Tokyo, Japan 
 
Electronic Book Technologies 
  Canada, Ltd.                        Ontario, Canada 
 
Electronic Book Technologies 
  FSC, Inc.                           Barbados, USA
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

BEAUMONT DIVISION

DEVIN MCGHEE §

VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:23-CV-272

LIEUTENANT GUILLORY, ET AL. §

 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Plaintiff Devin McGhee, a prisoner confined at the Jefferson County Correctional Facility,

proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

This action was referred to the undersigned magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 for

findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations for the disposition of the case.

Discussion

On March 28, 2024, a document mailed to Plaintiff at the Jefferson County Correctional

Facility, his last known address, was returned to the court as undeliverable. Eastern District of Texas

Local Rule CV-11(d) requires pro se litigants to keep the clerk advised in writing of their current

address. As of this date, Plaintiff has not provided the court with his current address. 

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) authorizes the district court to dismiss an action sua

sponte for failure to prosecute or to comply with a court order. Griggs v. S.G.E. Mgmt., 905 F.3d

835, 844 (5th Cir. 2018); Larson v. Scott, 157 F.3d 1030, 1031 (5th Cir. 1998). “The power to

invoke this sanction is necessaryin order to prevent undue delays in the disposition of pending cases

and to avoid congestion in the calendars of the District Courts.” Link v. Wabash R.R., 370 U.S. 626,

629-30 (1962); Martinez v. Johnson, 104 F.3d 769, 772 (5th Cir. 1997).

Without a current mailing address, the court is unable to contact Plaintiff or proceed with this

action. Therefore, Plaintiff’s failure to comply with the Local Rules warrants dismissal without

prejudice for want of prosecution.

Case 1:23-cv-00272-MAC-ZJH Document 9 Filed 04/01/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 20
Recommendation

This action should be dismissed without prejudice for want of prosecution pursuant to

Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

Objections

Within fourteen days after receipt of the magistrate judge’s report, any party may serve and

file written objections to the findings of facts, conclusions of law and recommendations of the

magistrate judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C).

Failure to file written objections to the proposed findings of facts, conclusions of law and

recommendations contained within this report within fourteen days after service shall bar an

aggrieved party from the entitlement of de novo review by the district court of the proposed findings,

conclusions and recommendations and from appellate review of factual findings and legal

conclusions accepted by the district court, except on grounds of plain error. Douglass v. United

Servs. Auto. Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1417 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); FED. R.

CIV. P. 72. 

2

_________________________

Zack Hawthorn

United States Magistrate Judge SIGNED this 1st day of April, 2024.

Case 1:23-cv-00272-MAC-ZJH Document 9 Filed 04/01/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 21