alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

                            EXHIBIT 3.1.1

                       CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT
                                OF
                      CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION
                                OF
                             VISTA 2000,INC.


VISTA 2000, INC. ("Corporation"), a corporation organized and existing under 
and by virtue of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware, does 
hereby certify:

     FIRST: that the Corporation's Board of Directors has declared it 
advisable and in the best interest of the Corporation that Article One of the 
Corporation's Certificate of Incorporation be amended to read as follows:

                               ARTICLE ONE
                                  NAME
                                  ----
     The name of the corporation is Boss Holdings, Inc. (the "Corporation").

     SECOND: That this amendment has been duly adopted by the shareholders of 
the Corporation at a meeting held by a majority vote in accordance with the 
provisions of Sections 211 and 216 of the General Corporation Law of the 
State of Delaware.

     THIRD:  That this amendment was duly adopted in accordance with the 
provisions of Section 242 of the General Corporation Law of the State of 
Delaware.

  IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Corporation has caused this Certificate of 
Amendment to be signed by its president and attested by its secretary this 
26th day of October, 1998.


                                             /s/ Shyam H. Gidumal
                                             ----------------------------
                                             Shyam H. Gidumal, President

ATTESTED:

/s/ James F. Sanders
----------------------------
James F. Sanders, Secretary


State of Delaware
Secretary of State
Division of Corporations
Filed 09:00 AM 12/07/1998
981466696-2353459
Malik FARRAD, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-6573.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 10, 2018.

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

BEAUMONT DIVISION

MEDLIANT INC. §

§

versus § CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:23-CV-203

§

KATRINA PONCE DE LEON §

SCHEDULING ORDER

The following schedule shall be followed.1 All communications concerning the case shall be directed in writing

to Julia Colyer, Court Administrator for Judge Crone, 300 Willow Street, Suite 239, Beaumont, TX 77701-2200. 

For urgent matters, Ms. Colyer may be contacted at (409) 654-2880.

1. January 5, 2024 NEW PARTIES shall be joined by this date.

2. January 19, 2024 The pleadings shall be AMENDED by this date.

3. May 3, 2024 PLAINTIFF shall designate EXPERT WITNESSES in writing and provide

expert reports by this date.

4. May 24, 2024 DEFENDANT shall designate EXPERT WITNESSES in writing and

provide expert reports by this date. 

5. October 4, 2024 DISCOVERY shall be completed by this date.

6. October 18, 2024 MOTION CUT-OFF. Aside from motions in limine, no motion, including

motions to exclude or limit expert testimony, shall be filed after this date

except for good cause shown. Without leave of court, a party may file only

one summary judgment motion. 

7. January 10, 2025 The JOINT PRETRIAL ORDER, including motions in limine and proposed

findings of fact and conclusions of law, shall be filed and proposed trial

exhibits shall be exchanged on or before this date. 

8. January 17, 2025 OBJECTIONS TO proposed exhibits, witnesses, and deposition excerpts,

as well as responses to motions in limine, shall be filed by this date. 

9. January 24, 2025 RESPONSES TO OBJECTIONS shall be filed by this date. A failure to

file a response to an objection shall create a presumption in favor of the

court’s sustaining the objection. 

10. February 7, 2025 FINAL STATUS CONFERENCE at 10:00 a.m. The case will be set for

Final Pretrial Conference and Trial at the Final Status Conference. The

parties should be prepared to try the case by this date.

11. 3 Days Estimated time to try before the court. 

1 General Proviso: This scheduling order does not relieve the parties from obtaining leave of court whenever

required by statute, the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, local rule, or case law.

Case 1:23-cv-00203-MAC Document 24 Filed 12/18/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 1264
2

Case 1:23-cv-00203-MAC Document 24 Filed 12/18/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 1265
# C o urt o f A ppe a ls

o f th e S ta te o f G e o rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _
The C o u rt o f Appea ls h ereb

y p a s s es the fo llo wi

n g order:

A 24A 1 21 3. SI M PLY T H E B EST GRA D I N G, L LC v

. W H I TE A N CH OR EQUESTRI A N , LLC.

Simp ly the B e st Grad ing, LLC f iled an ac tio n in magistrate c o urt against W hite

A nc ho r Equ e strian to c ollec t f o r w o rk p erf

o rmed , and W hite A nc ho r c o u nterc laimed
f o r $35,000 to r ep a ir Simp ly’ s w o rk

. The magistrate co u rt entered j u d gment in f av o r

o f Simp ly, and d id no t c o nsid er W hite Anc ho r ’ s c o u nterc la i m

. 1 W hite A nc ho r

ap p ealed to the su p erio r c o u rt. Fo llo w ing a benc h trial, the su p er i o r c o u rt aw ard ed $3,500 t o Simp ly, b ut also aw ard ed $27 ,56 0 to White A nc ho r o n its co u nterc laim, and Simp ly f iled this ap p eal. W e lac k j u risd ic t io n. B ec a u s e the su p e rio r c o u rt’ s o rd er disp o ses o f a d e no v o ap p eal f ro m a magistrate c o u rt d ec isio n, Simp ly w as requ ired to f o llo w the d isc retio nary ap p eal

p ro c ed ure. See OCGA § 5- 6 -35 (a) (1 ); c f

. H a n d l e r v

. Hu ls e y , 1 9 9 G a

. A p p

. 7 51 , 7 51 (406 SE2d 225) (1 9 91 ) (ap p eal f ro m magistrate c o u rt to s tate c o u rt). This is tru e ev en in c ases, su c h as t his o ne, in w hic h the a p p eal was exp and e d i n su p erio r c o u rt to inc lu d e matters no t c o nsid ered initially in the magistrate c o u rt. Bu llo ck v

. S a n d , 26 0
Ga. A p p

. 87 4, 87 5 (581 SE2d 333) (2003); s ee Ha n dler , 1 9 9 Ga

. A p p

. at 7 52- 7 53 (w here issu es raised in c ou nterc laim w e re direc tly r el a t e d to t he issu es raised in magistrate c o u rt, they were p ro perly c o nsid ered p art o f t he d e no v o p ro c eed ing, su c h that ap p lic atio n w as requ ired ).

1 See OCGA § 1 5

- 1 0

- 2 ( a) (5) (p ro v id ing t hat magistrate c ou rt has j u risd ic tio n

o v e r c iv il c laims that d o no t exc eed $1 5,000). April 12, 2024“ Co mp lianc e w ith t h e d isc retio nary ap p eals p ro c ed u re is j u risd ic tio nal. ”

S mo a k v

. D ept

. o f Hu ma n Res ou rces , 221 Ga. A p p

. 257 , 257 (47 1 SE2d 6 0) (1 9 9 6 ). Simp ly ’ s f

ailu re to f

o llo w the d isc retio nary ap p eal p ro c ed ure d ep riv es u s o f j u risd ic tio n o v er this ap p e al, w hic h is hereby D I SM I SSED

. See Bu llo ck , 26 0 Ga. A p p

. at 87 5; Ha n dler , 1 9 9 Ga. A p p . at 7 5 2- 7 53.

C o u r t o f A p p e a ls o f t h e S t a t e o f G e o r g ia C le r k ’ s O ffic e , A t la n t a ,

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r t ify t h a t t h e a b o v e is a t

r u e e x t r a c t fr o m
t h e m in u t e s o f t h e C o u r t o f A pp e a ls o f G e o r g ia

. W it n e s s m y s ig n a t u r e a n d t h e s e a l o f s a id c o u r t h e r e t o a ffix e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r la s t a b o v e w r

it t e n

.

, C le r

k

. 04/12/2024
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED NO VEMBER 15, 2013

NO. 03
- 13
- 00140
- CR

Benjamin Louis Labahn, Appellant

v. The State of Texas, Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE 277TH DISTRICT COURT OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY BEFORE CHIEF JUS TICE JONES, JUSTICES PEMBERTON AND FIELD

MODIFIED AND, AS MODIFIED, AFFIRMED
-- OPINION BY CHIEF JUSTICE JONES

THIS CAUSE came on to be heard on the record of the court below, and the same being considered, it is the opinion of this Court that there wa s error in the trial court’s judgment revoking community supervision , but that such error does not require the judgment be reversed: IT IS THEREFORE considered, adjudged and ordered that the judgment of the trial court is
modified to delete “8 years TDCJ” as the “Terms of Plea Agreement” and to instead reflect that the “Terms of Plea Agreement” are “Not Applicable

. ” As so modified, the trial court ’s judgment revoking community supervision i s affirmed. It FURTHER appearing to the Court that the appellant is indigent and unable to pay costs, that no adjudication as to costs is made; and that
this decision be certified below for observance.
```
 
 
CRUDE OIL, LIGHT SWEET - ICE FUTURES EUROPE                          Code-067411
OPTION AND FUTURES COMBINED POSITIONS AS OF 08/28/12          |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  Long  | Short  |Spreads |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF 1,000 BARRELS)                         OPEN INTEREST:      590,316
COMMITMENTS
  35,173   47,976  176,192  353,115  348,243  564,480  572,411   25,836   17,904

CHANGES FROM 08/21/12 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:     23,523)
    -980    5,464    5,817   14,553   11,296   19,390   22,576    4,133      946

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADER
     6.0      8.1     29.8     59.8     59.0     95.6     97.0      4.4      3.0

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      137)
      28       33       52       63       64      125      122
```

----

Updated August 31, 2012
Exhibit
      32.2








Certification
      of Vice Chairman of the Board, 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 September 30, 2006 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:





|(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
              aspects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
              Company.
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




Date:
      November 8, 2006








/s/
      Peter Hoetzinger


Peter
      Hoetzinger


Vice
      Chairman of the Board, President and Co Chief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>             DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                  DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                        40,934
<SECURITIES>                  0
<RECEIVABLES>                 628,662
<ALLOWANCES>                  (5,000)
<INVENTORY>                   14,974
<CURRENT-ASSETS>              706,647
<PP&E>                        1,007,244
<DEPRECIATION>                913,919
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                802,923
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>         709,756
<BONDS>                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>         0
<PREFERRED>                   700,974
<COMMON>                      3,010
<OTHER-SE>                    (744,500)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>  802,923
<SALES>                       843,497
<TOTAL-REVENUES>              843,497
<CGS>                         589,975
<TOTAL-COSTS>                 589,975
<OTHER-EXPENSES>              546,651
<LOSS-PROVISION>              0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>            27,268
<INCOME-PRETAX>               (320,397)
<INCOME-TAX>                  0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>           (320,397)
<DISCONTINUED>                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>               325,869
<CHANGES>                     0
<NET-INCOME>                  5,472
<EPS-BASIC>                   (0.009)
<EPS-DILUTED>                 0


</TABLE>
Darryl MIXON, petitioner, v. MISSISSIPPI.

No. 18-7821.

Supreme Court of the United States

March 18, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Mississippi denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 7
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
THE CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND THE CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS OF ARM FINANCIAL GROUP, INC.'S  FORM 10-Q FOR THE
PERIOD ENDED AND THE SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS 
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                         3,392,030
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                                0
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                                  0
<EQUITIES>                                      21,171
<MORTGAGE>                                      28,346
<REAL-ESTATE>                                        0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                               3,564,678
<CASH>                                         164,269
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                                   0
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                          77,545
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,580,814
<POLICY-LOSSES>                              3,611,900
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                                  0
<POLICY-OTHER>                                       0
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                                0
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                 38,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     50,000
<COMMON>                                           232
<OTHER-SE>                                     225,514
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,580,814
<PREMIUMS>                                           0
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                            147,459
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                               2,651
<OTHER-INCOME>                                  11,264
<BENEFITS>                                     109,607
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                      4,611
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                            17,734
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 13,752
<INCOME-TAX>                                     5,999
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              7,753
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     7,753
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.30
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.30
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                       0
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                                  0
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                                    0
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                                   0
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                                     0
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                      0
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                              0
        

</TABLE>
# United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit Chicago, Illinois 60604 January 19, 2006 Before Hon. WILLIAM J. BAUER, Circuit Judge Hon. ILANA DIAMOND ROVNER, Circuit Judge Hon. TERENCE T. EVANS, Circuit Judge No. 03-2817 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee ,

v. ALBERTO RAMON DIAZ-GUTIERREZ, Defendant-Appellant

. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Illinois, Eastern Division No. 01 CR 883 Robert W. Gettleman, Judge

. O R D E R Alberto Ramon Diaz-Gutierrez pleaded guilty to reentering the United States without permission after he was deportedfollowing conviction for an aggravated felony. See 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). In sentencing him, Judge Robert W. Gettleman treated the guidelines as mandatory in acco rdance with the law as it existed before United States v. Booker , 543 U.S. 220 (2005). Following Booker , we ordered a limited remand, pursuant to United States v. Paladino , 401 F.3d 471 (7th Cir.2005), so the judge could inform us whether he would have sentenced DiazGutierrez differently had he known the sent encing guidelines were merely advisory. In response to our order, Judge Gettleman stated in part: The Court is unable at this time to say that it would have UNPUBLISHED ORDER Not to be cited per Circuit Rule 53No. 03-2817 Page 2 imposed the same sentence if it had known the Sentencing Guidelines were merely advisory. The Court therefore desires to re-sentence the defendant. We invited the parties to file position statements concerning the appropriate disposition of the case. Only Diaz-Gutierrez has responded, and he concurs with the district court that resentencing is appropriate. Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that Diaz-Gutierrez’s sentence is VACATED, and the case is REMANDED to the district court for resentencing.
```
 
 
MSCI EAFE MINI INDEX - NYSE LIFFE                                    Code-244041
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 04/03/12                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(MSCI EAFE INDEX X $50)                              OPEN INTEREST:       51,754
COMMITMENTS
   4,877    2,739        0   41,990   46,825   46,867   49,564    4,887    2,190

CHANGES FROM 03/27/12 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:      1,898)
   1,729      457        0      116    1,082    1,845    1,539       53      359

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
     9.4      5.3      0.0     81.1     90.5     90.6     95.8      9.4      4.2

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:       60)
       5        4        0       31       32       36       36
 
 
MSCI EMERGING MKTS MINI INDEX - NYSE LIFFE                           Code-244042
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 04/03/12                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(MSCI EAFE INDEX X $50)                              OPEN INTEREST:       84,703
COMMITMENTS
  16,826    6,926      223   56,513   73,618   73,562   80,767   11,141    3,936

CHANGES FROM 03/27/12 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:        411)
   1,997   -3,255        0    2,180    4,502    4,177    1,247   -3,766     -836

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
    19.9      8.2      0.3     66.7     86.9     86.8     95.4     13.2      4.6

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:       97)
      23       11        1       44       35       67       47
```

----

Updated April 6, 2012
*

 Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be

published and is not precedent except underthe limited circumstancessetforth inLocalRule

47.5.4.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 95-50922

Summary Calendar

CATHY PULLEN; BRUCE PULLEN;

FREDERICK ALLAN PULLEN,

Plaintiffs-Appellants,

versus

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Defendant-Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court

For the Western District of Texas

(EP-95-CV-139)

August 21, 1996

Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, DAVIS and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Bruce and Cathy Pullen and their majorson Frederick Allan (Shields) Pullen

appeal an adverse summary judgment in their Federal Tort Claims Act complaint

against the United States for injury sustained by Frederick Allan while a patient at
2

the William Beaumont Army Medical Center during the year 1973. The

government challenged subject matter jurisdiction on the grounds that the Pullens

failed to file an administrative complaint within two years of the accrual of their

cause of action, that their judicial complaint was not filed within six months of

rejection of that complaint, and that their claim is barred by 28 U.S.C. § 2401(b).

The Pullens counter that the government concealed the true cause of Frederick’s

injury; thus limitations were tolled until the summer of 1991 when they learned of

the concealment. They therefore immediately filed an administrative complaint

followed timely by the instant action.

The court treated the government’s motion to dismiss as a motion for

summary judgment and granted same, finding no basis for the claimed

concealment. The Pullens filed a timely Rule 59(e) motion which challenges the

validity of the underlying summary judgment and turns on the court’s resolution

thereof. Our de novo review of the record reflects no error in the trial court’sruling

and, on the facts as found, authorities cited, and analysis made by the trial judge in

his Memorandum Opinion and Ordersigned August 30, 1995 and filed and entered

September 5, 1995, the appealed rulings are AFFIRMED.
<PAGE>





                                                    Exhibit 23.1


                                          
                                          
                          Consent of Independent Auditors


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Forms S-8 No. 33-77302, 33-83606, 33-77304, 33-93324, 333-06847 and 333-06845)
pertaining to the INSO Corporation 1993 Stock Purchase Plan, 1993 Stock
Incentive Plan, 401 (k) Plan, 1996 Non-employee Director Plan and 1996 Stock
Incentive Plan of our report dated January 30, 1998, except for Note 13 as to
which the date is March 12, 1998, with respect to the consolidated financial
statements and schedule of  INSO Corporation included in the Annual Report (Form
10-K) for the year ended December 31, 1997.


                                          
                                          /s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP
                                          ---------------------
                                              ERNST & YOUNG LLP




Boston, Massachusetts
March 18, 1998