alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
C O U R T O F A P P E A LS EI GHTH D I STRI CT OF TEXAS ELPASO, TEXAS
L A WR E N CE WEN D E L LF E W, Ap pe lla nt,
v. CA T H E RI

N E JE A NN E F E W, Appellee
. § § § § § § No . 0 8- 06 -0 02 07 -C V

Appea l from the 388th J udicial District Court of El Pa so County , T e xas (TC# 2003CM4130)

M EM OR

AN DU M OP IN ION Th is a pp e a l is be fo re the Court

on its ow n mo tio n f

or de te rm inatio n w he the r t

he c a se should be dismissed for want of prosec ution. Finding that Appellant has not paid the f ee f or the filing of the cler k’s re cord, nor

shown himself entitled to a fr ee a ppellate r ecor d, we dismiss the appea l for wa

nt of prosec ution. Appellant filed a

notice of a

ppeal on July

25, 2006. Appellant has not pa id for, or
arr ang e d f

or pa y me nt f or the c le rk ’s re c or d in

thi s a pp e a l. T he Te xas R

ule s o f A pp e llate Procedur e provide that while it is the district clerk’s r esponsibility to prepa re the rec ord, the appellant must either pa

y for the pr epar ation of the re cord, or show himself entitled to appea l without paying the fee
. SeeT EX .R.A PP .P. 35.3(a)( 2). I f a c lerk’s r ecor d is not filed beca use the appellant ha s failed to pay the fe e for

prepa ring the re cord, w e may , afte r g iving the a ppellant
rea sonable opportunity

to cure , dismiss the appe al on our own motion. T EX .R.A PP .P. 37.3(b). By letter dated Octobe r 16, 2008, the c lerk of this Court notified Appellant in wr iting of our intent to dismis s this appeal for want of pr osecution due to his fa ilure to arr ang e for pay ment-2-

and fi lin g of the c le rk ’s re c or d, un le ss, wi thi n te n d ay s o f t he date the no tic e , a

ny pa rt y c ou ld show g rounds for c ontinuing the a ppeal. Appe llant has not responde d. Acc ording ly , we he reby dismiss this appeal for

want of pr osecution. T EX .R.A PP .P. 37.3(b).

November

25, 2008 DAVI D WEL L I NGTONCHEW, C hief Just ice B e f o r e C h e w , C
. J. , M c C l u r e , a n d C ar r , JJ. McClure, J., Not P articipating
Michael Anthony TANZI, petitioner, v. FLORIDA.

No. 18-5160.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 13, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Florida denied. Justice THOMAS, concurring in the denial of certiorari: I concur for the reasons set out in *Reynolds v. Florida,* 586 U.S. ----, 139 S.Ct. 27, ---L.Ed.2d ---- (2018) (Thomas, J., concurring). Justice SOTOMAYOR, dissenting from the denial of certiorari: I *479dissent for the reasons set out in *Reynolds v. Florida,* 586 U.S. ----, 139 S.Ct. 27, --- L.Ed.2d ---- (2018) (Sotomayor, J., dissenting).
Heon Seok LEE, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-879

Supreme Court of the United States.

Feb. 24, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

**782 CA 14-01844**  PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., SMITH, SCONIERS, VALENTINO, AND DEJOSEPH, JJ.

CAROL DURNEY, PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT,

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

PETER J. MCQUILLEN, JUDITH M. MCQUILLEN, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS, ET AL., DEFENDANTS.

KNAUF SHAW LLP, ROCHESTER (AMY K. KENDALL OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-APPELLANT.
BONARIGO & MCCUTCHEON, BATAVIA (KRISTIE L. DEFREZE OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Genesee County (Robert C. Noonan, A.J.), entered June 6, 2014. The order, inter alia, granted in part the motion of defendants Peter J. McQuillen and Judith M. McQuillen for summary judgment.
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.
Memorandum: Plaintiff appeals from an order that, inter alia, granted in part the motion for summary judgment of defendants Peter J. McQuillen and Judith M. McQuillen. We affirm for reasons stated in the “decision and order” of Supreme Court, and we write only to note that, under the circumstances presented, we decline to search the record to reach issues raised by defendants, who did not cross-appeal from the order ( see Ginter v Flushing Terrace, LLC , 121 AD3d 840, 845; New York Univ. Hosp. Rusk Inst. v Government Empls. Ins. Co. , 39 AD3d 832, 833).

Entered: June 12, 2015 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
Exhibit
32.3








Certification
of Senior Vice President (Principal Financial 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, 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:  November
6, 2009








/s/ Larry
Hannappel


Larry
Hannappel


Senior
Vice President (Principal Financial Officer)
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE BALANCE
SHEET AS FOR DECEMBER 31, 1995, AND STATEMENT OF INCOME FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS
ENDING DECEMBER 31, 1998, OF DOMINION HOMES, INC. AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                             207
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,231
<ALLOWANCES>                                       341
<INVENTORY>                                     94,938
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                           9,197
<DEPRECIATION>                                   3,781
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 105,031
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        30,146
<OTHER-SE>                                     (1,641)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   105,031
<SALES>                                        178,112
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               178,112
<CGS>                                          151,010
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  177,225
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               6,069
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (5,182)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (1,684)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (3,498)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (3,498)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.56)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.56)


</TABLE>
Brian DAVISON, Petitioner, v. FACEBOOK, INC., et al.

No. 19-728

Supreme Court of the United States.

Feb. 24, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
`DTCC Repo-US Treasury <30 YR - NYSE LIFFE - NYPC                     Code-045L2T
OPTION AND FUTURES COMBINED POSITIONS AS OF 10/30/12          |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  Long  | Short  |Spreads |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF $5,000,000)                            OPEN INTEREST:       41,910
COMMITMENTS
   1,776   19,153    2,219   37,267   19,646   41,262   41,018      648      892

CHANGES FROM 10/23/12 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:       -186)
    -322    1,251      206    1,423     -149    1,307    1,308   -1,493   -1,494

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADER
     4.2     45.7      5.3     88.9     46.9     98.5     97.9      1.5      2.1

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:       42)
       5       12        7       20       21       28       38`

---

Updated November 2, 2012
Peggy BERG, petitioner, v. SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION.

No. 18-668.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 14, 2019.

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

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2302 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.2302

                       One Hundred Sixth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

           Begun and held at the City of Washington on Monday,
             the twenty-fourth day of January, two thousand

                                 An Act

 
To designate the building of the United States Postal Service located at 
307 Main Street in Johnson City, New York, as the ``James W. McCabe, Sr. 
                         Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The building of the United States Postal Service located at 307 
Main Street in Johnson City, New York, shall be known and designated as 
the ``James W. McCabe, Sr. Post Office Building''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the building referred to in section 1 
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``James W. McCabe, Sr. Post 
Office Building''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
Eitan SOBEL, petitioner, v. CITY OF RUTLAND, VERMONT.

No. 17-1541.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 1, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Vermont denied.
ex10_6.htm










Exhibit 10.6


 


2012 Summary of Executive Cash Compensation


 and Award Targets Under the Annual Incentive Plan







The following table sets forth the current base salaries provided for the Company’s CEO, CFO and three most highly compensated executive officers.  Salary increases are determined annually in March and effective April 1, 2012:








	
Executive Officers

	 	
Current Salary

	 
	
 

	 	
 

	 
	
Angelo Brisimitzakis

	 	$	824,000	 
	
Rodney Underdown

	 	$	400,000	 
	
Gerald Bucan

	 	$	309,428	 
	
Keith Clark

	 	$	357,674	 
	
David Goadby

	 	£	207,776	*





 


* Salary is denominated in pounds, so U.S. dollar equivalent may vary.


 


Executive officers are also eligible to receive a bonus each year under the Company’s Annual Incentive Plan.  The target percentages (based on percentage of salary) under this plan for the Company’s CEO, CFO and three most highly compensated executive officers are as shown in the following table.








	
Executive Officers

	 	
Target Percentage

	 
	
 

	 	
 

	 
	
Angelo Brisimitzakis

	 	 	90	%
	
Rodney Underdown

	 	 	55	%
	
Gerald Bucan

	 	 	50	%
	
Keith Clark

	 	 	55	%
	
David Goadby

	 	 	50	%
Dawn L. HASSELL, petitioner, v. YELP, INC.

No. 18-506.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 22, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of California denied.
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**AFFINITYGROUP, INC.**

 

**STATEMENTPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

 

I, Michael A. Schneider, President and Chief Executive Officer ofAffinity Group, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), herebycertify as follows:

 

1.                                       Thisstatement is provided pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 in connectionwith the Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly periodended September 30, 2005 (the “Periodic Report”);

 

2.                                       ThePeriodic Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) and15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

3.                                       Theinformation contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company asof dates and for the periods indicated therein.

 

 

Date:  November 2, 2005

 
|   | /s/ Michael A. Schneider              |   |
|--------|---------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Michael A. Schneider                  |
|   | President and Chief Executive Officer |

 

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906,or such other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting thesignature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of thewritten statement as required by Section 906, has been provided toAffinity Group, Inc. and will be retained by Affinity Group, Inc. andfurnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

----
EXHIBIT C 

Case 2:23-cv-00397-JRG-RSP Document 80-2 Filed 11/07/24 Page 1 of 3 PageID #: 3212
Page 1 of 48

Exhibit 4 - U.S. Patent No. 9,198,042 (“’042 Patent”)

Accused Instrumentalities: smartphones, basic phones, tablets, laptops, and hotspot devices sold (including those sold in bundles with data plans) or 

used by AT&T for use with AT&T’s wireless network services, and all versions and variations thereof since the issuance of the asserted patent.

Claim 1

Issued Claim(s) Public Documentation

1. A method comprising: To the extent the preamble is limiting, AT&T’s Accused Instrumentalities practice the steps of a 

method as set forth in the limitations below.

1[a] receiving, over a service control link, 

a report from a wireless end-user device, 

the report comprising information about a 

device service state;

The Accused Instrumentalities comprise receiving, over a service control link, a report from a 

wireless end-user device, the report comprising information about a device service state. AT&T

offers telecommunications service plans to customers that are provided through various network 

elements such as telecommunications base stations and cell sites, edge servers, and other 

telecommunications servers. AT&T provides various network service plans to customers for 

purchase, including through the ATT.com website as well as through AT&T-provided services 

such as its pre-paid mobile service category, Prepaid by AT&T. See, e.g.:

Case 2:23-cv-00397-JRG-RSP Document 80-2 Filed 11/07/24 Page 2 of 3 PageID #: 3213
Page 9 of 48

https://www.comparecellular.com/att/att-prepaid-add-ons/

AT&T’s network receives service plan information from devices which correspond to the 

subscriber service plan associated with that wireless end-user device, which is a report 

comprising information about a device service state. For example, AT&T’s network receives an 

attach request, bearer resource allocation request, bearer resource modification request, or PDN 

connectivity request from a wireless end-user device (UE), which includes a report comprising 

information about the UE’s service state such as UE network capability, UE status, and protocol 

configuration options (PCO):

Case 2:23-cv-00397-JRG-RSP Document 80-2 Filed 11/07/24 Page 3 of 3 PageID #: 3214
Antyane ROBINSON, petitioner, v. PENNSYLVANIA.

No. 18-8848.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 17, 2019.

*2720Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Eastern District denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM 10-KSB AND
IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JUN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAY-31-2000
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     8906
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                       2909
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 12972
<PP&E>                                            4153
<DEPRECIATION>                                     552
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   18285
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             6999
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             7
<OTHER-SE>                                        9326
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     18285
<SALES>                                          13989
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 13989
<CGS>                                            10015
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    13428
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 490
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     71
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (607)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                678
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       678
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .10
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .10


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                5
<MULTIPLIER>         1,000
       
<S>                               <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                     9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                            DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                                JUL-1-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                 SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                           7,656
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    8,023
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                         497,560
<DEPRECIATION>                                  51,536
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 446,024
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                        177,648
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           121
<OTHER-SE>                                     180,662
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   487,606
<SALES>                                         23,323
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                23,323
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   15,182
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   554
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,484
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,593
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              5,593
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     5,593
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.47
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.47
        

</TABLE>
Lael J. ALLEYNE, petitioner, v. PENNSYLVANIA.

No. 18-361.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 19, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Superior Court of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia Office denied.
John R. Van ORDEN, Petitioner, v. Mark STRINGER, et al.

No. 19-6892

Supreme Court of the United States.

Feb. 24, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
NUMBER 13-14-00121-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________

JOSE JUAN GARCIA, APPELLANT,

v.

CARLOS TORRES SANTINI, APPELLEE.

____________________________________________________________

On appeal from the County Court at Law No. 1

of Hidalgo County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Rodriguez, Garza, and Benavides

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

Appellant, Jose Juan Garcia, brought an appeal from a judgment entered by the 

County Court at Law No. 1 of Hidalgo County, Texas, in cause number CL-13-2857-A. 

Appellant has now filed an unopposed motion for voluntary dismissal of this appeal. 

Appellant seeks dismissal of the appeal pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 

42.1(a)(1). See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a)(1). 
2

The Court, having considered the documents on file and appellant’s motion to 

dismiss the appeal, is of the opinion that the motion should be granted. See id. 

Accordingly, appellant’s motion for voluntary dismissal of the appeal is granted, and the 

appeal is hereby DISMISSED. Costs will be taxed against appellant. See id. R. 42.1(d) 

("Absent agreement of the parties, the court will tax costs against the appellant."). 

Having dismissed the appeal at appellant’s request, no motion for rehearing will be 

entertained, and our mandate will issue forthwith. 

PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed the

7th day of August, 2014.
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-00397-JRG-RSP Headwater Research LLC 09/05/2023 /s/ Jason M. Wietholter Jason M. Wietholter CA Bar No. 337139

Russ August & Kabat 

12424 Wilshire Blvd., 12th Floor 

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

Plaintiff

v.

AT&T Inc. et al

Case 2:23-cv-00397-JRG-RSP Document 16 Filed 09/05/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 285