alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
SIMPLY WIRELESS, INC., petitioner, v. T-MOBILE U.S., INC., fka T-Mobile USA, Inc., et al.

No. 17-1423.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 14, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
CONSENT OF EXPERT



March 30, 2017



Eldorado Gold Corporation



United States Securities and Exchange Commission

Ladies and Gentlemen:



Re: Eldorado Gold Corporation



I, Peter Lewis, do hereby consent to the filing
of the written disclosure regarding the description of mineral resources of the Sapes Project and of extracts from or a summary
of other information pertaining to this project, and the use of my name in the Annual Information Form and Annual Report on Form
40-F of Eldorado Gold Corporation (the “Company”) for the year ended December 31, 2016 and any amendments thereto and
any Registration Statement on Form S-8 incorporating by reference the Company’s Annual Information Form and Annual Report
on Form 40-F.



| | By: | /s/ Peter Lewis                                                                         
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |     | Peter Lewis, P.Geo
        Eldorado Gold Corporation
        Vice President, Exploration
| |     |                                                                                         
| |     |                                                                                         
| |     |
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                     DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                        JAN-1-2000
<PERIOD-END>                          MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                   20,806
<SECURITIES>                                  0
<RECEIVABLES>                                 0
<ALLOWANCES>                                  0
<INVENTORY>                                   0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              0
<PP&E>                                  860,482
<DEPRECIATION>                          147,166
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                          808,837
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         0
<BONDS>                                 224,677
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                         0
<PREFERRED>                                  10
<COMMON>                                    159
<OTHER-SE>                              273,013
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>            808,837
<SALES>                                       0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                         39,594
<CGS>                                         0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                            27,666
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            538
<LOSS-PROVISION>                              0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         5637
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            8827
<INCOME-TAX>                                  0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        8827
<DISCONTINUED>                                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                               0
<CHANGES>                                     0
<NET-INCOME>                               8827
<EPS-BASIC>                                0.49
<EPS-DILUTED>                              0.49


</TABLE>
Schedule of Omitted Instruments of Authorization



 Exhibit 4.13 
 SCHEDULE OF OMITTED INSTRUMENT OF AUTHORIZATION FOR THE USE OF RADIO FREQUENCY BLOCKS FOR 3G SERVICES 
 As these licenses are identical in every case except for their reference number, the Region, sector and frequency band covered by them, their fees and the statement of authorization for personal mobile
services under which they are granted, we have, for ease of reference, filed only the relevant standard instrument of authorization approved by ANATEL and provided this schedule to indicate the authorizations that we have omitted from filing as
exhibits to this annual report on Form 20-F. 
  

	1.	Instrument of Authorization for the Use of Radio Frequency Blocks for 3G Services between ANATEL and 14 Brasil Telecom Celular S.A., No 25/2008, dated April 29,
2008. 

  

	2.	Instrument of Authorization for the Use of Radio Frequency Blocks for 3G Services between ANATEL and 14 Brasil Telecom Celular S.A., No 26/2008, dated May 6, 2008.


  

	3.	Instrument of Authorization for the Use of Radio Frequency Blocks for 3G Services between ANATEL and TNL PCS S.A., No 22/2008, dated April 29, 2008.


  

	4.	Instrument of Authorization for the Use of Radio Frequency Blocks for 3G Services between ANATEL and TNL PCS S.A., No 23/2008, dated April 29, 2008.
THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSHALL DIVISION

SOCIAL POSITIONING INPUT SYSTEMS, 

LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

VALVE CORPORATION,

Defendants.

 CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:23-cv-422

 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

ORDER

The Court, having considered the Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to 

Defendant Valve Corporation’s Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 11), 

GRANTS the Motion. 

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that the deadline for the Plaintiff to submit its Response shall 

be extended up to and including March 21, 2024. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Case 2:23-cv-00422-JRG-RSP Document 19-1 Filed 03/11/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 150
Sobhy Fahmy Amin ISKANDER, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR the CENTRAL DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA, et al.

No. 18-6643.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 14, 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 __________

)

)

)

)

)

Plaintiff

v. 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

2:23-cv-409

ASUS TECHNOLOGY LICENSING INC. ET AL.

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., ET AL.

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS CO., LTD., SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS AMERICA, INC., and SAMSUNG RESEARCH 

AMERICA,

December 11, 2023

Richard A. Edlin

Greenberg Traurig, One Vanderbilt Ave., New York, NY 10017

Edlinr@gtlaw.com

212-801-6528

(212) 801-6400

Case 2:23-cv-00409-JRG-RSP Document 12 Filed 12/14/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 100
NO. 07-04-0349-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL D

SEPTEMBER 21, 2004

______________________________

AMERICAN HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY,

Appellant

v.

EDWARD VAUGHN, 

Appellee

_________________________________

FROM THE 251st DISTRICT COURT OF RANDALL COUNTY;

NO. 52,395-C; HON. PATRICK A. PIRTLE, PRESIDING

_______________________________

ON ABATEMENT AND REMAND

_______________________________

Before QUINN, REAVIS and CAMPBELL, JJ.

American Home Assurance Company appeals from an order on appellee’s

application for attorney fees. The clerk’s record was filed on August 3, 2004. The

reporter’s record was due on September 2, 2004. On September 10, 2004, a letter was

sent to the court reporter requesting a reporter’s status. No response has been received,

though due by September 20, 2004. 
2

Accordingly, we abate this appeal and remand the cause to the 251st District Court

of Randall County (trial court) for further proceedings. Upon remand, the trial court shall

immediately cause notice of a hearing to be given and, thereafter, conduct a hearing to

determine the following:

1. why the reporter’s record has not been filed; 

2. when the reporter’s record can reasonably be filed in a manner that

does not have the practical effect of depriving the appellant of his right

to appeal or delaying the resolution of this appeal. 

The trial court shall cause the hearing to be transcribed. So too shall it 1) execute

findings of fact and conclusions of law addressing the foregoing issues, 2) cause to be

developed a supplemental clerk’s record containing its findings of fact and conclusions of

law and all orders it may issue as a result of its hearing in this matter, and 3) cause to be

developed a reporter’s record transcribing the evidence and arguments presented at the

aforementioned hearing. Additionally, the district court shall then file the supplemental

record and reporter’s record transcribing the hearing with the clerk of this court on or before

October 20, 2004. Should further time be needed by the trial court to perform these tasks,

then same must be requested before October 20, 2004.

It is so ordered.

Per Curiam
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO  SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the  Quarterly Report of Penn-America Group, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for  the period ending March 31, 2004, as filed with
the  Securities and Exchange Commission  on the date hereof (the "Report"), we,
Jon S.  Saltzman, Chief Executive  Officer of the Company, and Joseph F. Morris, Chief
Financial Officer, certify, pursuant  to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant  to ss.
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,  that:

|(1) |  | The
Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) and 15(d) of  the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934; and
|--- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|(2) |  | The
information contained in the  Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and  result of operations of the Company.
|--- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

/s/ Jon S. Saltzman Jon S. Saltzman
President and Chief Executive Officer
May 7, 2004

/s/ Joseph F. Morris Joseph F. Morris

Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer &
Treasurer
May 7, 2004
Kevin Wayne VANOVER, and Meredith Ann Yates, petitioners, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-6515.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 3, 2018.

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

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                              48
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0<F1>
<PP&E>                                          11,178
<DEPRECIATION>                                     780
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  11,140
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                         10,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                         860<F2>
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    11,140
<SALES>                                            846
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   846
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   780
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 250
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (183)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (183)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (183)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0<F3>
<FN>
<F1>UNCLASSIFIED BALANCE SHEET USED
<F2>EQUITY IS PARTNERS' CAPITAL
<F3>ENTITY IS A PARTNERSHIP
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.2
 
                   [LETTERHEAD OF RYDER COMPANY APPEARS HERE]
 
                         CONSENT OF RYDER SCOTT COMPANY
 
   We consent to the incorporation by reference in the following registration
statements of Vastar Resources, Inc. (the "Company"), Registration Statement on
Form S-8 (No. 33-80844), Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 33-80846),
Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 33-80848), Registration Statement on
Form S-8 (No. 33-80850), Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 33-87814),
Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 33-87816), Registration Statement on
Form S-8 (No. 33-87818), Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-24077) and
Registration Statement on Form S-3 (No. 33-86310) and Registration Statement on
Form S-3 (No. 333-67159), of our report dated January 14, 1999 on our audit of
the remaining proved reserves attributable to the properties owned by the
Company as of December 31, 1998.
 
                                          /s/ RYDER SCOTT COMPANY
                                            PETROLEUM ENGINEERS
                                          -------------------------------------
                                          RYDER SCOTT COMPANY
                                          PETROLEUM ENGINEERS
 
March 4, 1999
FILED

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

OCT 20, 2008

THOMAS K. KAHN

CLERK

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 08-11589

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D. C. Docket No. 06-00100-CV-3

AARON LE VON JOHNSON,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

ATTORNEY GENERAL THURBERT E. BAKER,

JAMES E. DONALD,

JACQUELINE BUNN,

FRED BURNETTE,

PAT ETHEREDGE, et al.,

Defendants-Appellees.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Georgia

_________________________

(October 20, 2008)

Before CARNES, BARKETT and PRYOR, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:

Aaron Le Von Johnson, a state prisoner, appeals the dismissal of his

complaint. See 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The district court dismissed for lack of subject

matter jurisdiction Johnson’s collateral attack of the judgment of a state court. We

affirm.

We review de novo an issue of subject matter jurisdiction. Goodman ex. rel.

Goodman v. Sipos, 259 F.3d 1327, 1331 (11th Cir. 2001). Under the RookerFeldman doctrine, an inferior federal court lacks subject matter jurisdiction to

review either a final judgment of a state court or issues “inextricably intertwined”

with that judgment. District of Columbia Ct. of App. v. Feldman, 460 U.S. 462,

486, 103 S. Ct. 1303, 1317 (1983); Rooker v. Fidelity Trust Co., 263 U.S. 413,

415–16, 44 S. Ct. 149, 150 (1923). An issue is “inextricably intertwined” with a

judgment of a state court when a complaint “succeeds only to the extent that the

state court wrongly decided the issues before it.” Siegel v. LePore, 234 F.3d 1163,

1172 (11th Cir. 2000) (en banc).

For Johnson to succeed, a federal court would have to find an error in the

judgment of the state court. Johnson complains that prosecutors violated his rights

when they submitted a proposed order that contained allegedly false statements and

conspired to have a state judge sign that order. Johnson’s complaint about that

2
signed order could have been raised in the state courts. The district court correctly

dismissed Johnson’s complaint based on the Rooker-Feldman doctrine.

AFFIRMED.

3
Tracy Jarvis ALLEN, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-7178

Supreme Court of the United States.

February 24, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

TYLER DIVISION

JASON ANDERSON, #02223281 §

VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO. 6:23cv292

CAROL MONROE §

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Plaintiff Jason Anderson, a prisoner confined in the Texas prison system, proceeding pro 

se and in forma pauperis, filed the above-styled and numbered civil rights lawsuit. The complaint 

was referred for findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendations for the disposition of 

the case.

On October 23, 2023, the Court ordered Plaintiff to file an amended complaint. (Dkt. #13). 

The order was mailed to Plaintiff at his last known address, which was the Skyview Unit. As of 

today, Plaintiff has not filed an amended complaint, nor has he filed a motion for extension of time 

to file an amended complaint. In the Order, Plaintiff was warned that the failure to comply with 

the Order may result in the dismissal of the complaint. He has failed to prosecute this case. 

The exercise of the power to dismiss a case for failure to prosecute or obey a court order is 

committed to the sound discretion of the Court and appellate review is confined solely in whether 

the Court’s discretion was abused. Green v. Forney Eng’g Co., 589 F.2d 243 (5th Cir. 1979); Lopez 

v. Aransas Cnty. Indep. Sch. Dist., 570 F.2d 541 (5th Cir. 1978). Not only may a district court 

dismiss for want of prosecution upon motion of a defendant, but it may also, sua sponte, dismiss 

Case 6:23-cv-00292-JDK-KNM Document 14 Filed 12/07/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:

79
2

an action whenever necessary to achieve the orderly and expeditious disposition of cases. Anthony 

v. Marion Cnty. Gen. Hosp., 617 F.2d 1164 (5th Cir. 1980). 

 Recommendation

It is therefore recommended that the complaint be dismissed without prejudice for want of 

prosecution. Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). 

Within fourteen (14) days after receipt of the Magistrate Judge’s Report, any party may 

serve and file written objections to the findings and recommendations contained in the report.

A party’s failure to file written objections to the findings, conclusions, and 

recommendations contained in this Report within fourteen days after being served with a copy 

shall bar that party from de novo review by the district judge of those findings, conclusions, and 

recommendations and, except on grounds of plain error, from appellate review of unobjected-to 

factual findings and legal conclusions accepted and adopted by the district court. Douglass v. 

United Servs. Auto. Ass’n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1430 (5th Cir. 1996) (en banc), superseded by statute on 

other grounds, 28 U.S.C. ' 636(b)(1) (extending the time to file objections from ten to fourteen 

days).

So ORDERED and SIGNED this 7th day of December, 2023.

Case 6:23-cv-00292-JDK-KNM Document 14 Filed 12/07/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:

80
```
 
 
MSCI EAFE MINI INDEX - NYSE LIFFE                                    Code-244041
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 07/30/13                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(MSCI EAFE INDEX X $50)                              OPEN INTEREST:       80,310
COMMITMENTS
  28,219    2,155    2,958   42,676   72,996   73,853   78,109    6,457    2,201

CHANGES FROM 07/23/13 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:        426)
    -619        5       51      744      253      176      309      250      117

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
    35.1      2.7      3.7     53.1     90.9     92.0     97.3      8.0      2.7

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:       79)
      16        4        1       36       37       52       42
 
 
MSCI EMERGING MKTS MINI INDEX - NYSE LIFFE                           Code-244042
FUTURES ONLY POSITIONS AS OF 07/30/13                         |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  LONG  | SHORT  |SPREADS |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT  |  LONG  | SHORT
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(MSCI EAFE INDEX X $50)                              OPEN INTEREST:      221,702
COMMITMENTS
  69,382   42,731    1,638  137,039  171,453  208,059  215,822   13,643    5,880

CHANGES FROM 07/23/13 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:       -357)
   1,599      817     -309     -618    2,193      672    2,701   -1,029   -3,058

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADERS
    31.3     19.3      0.7     61.8     77.3     93.8     97.3      6.2      2.7

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      157)
      40       25       12       63       58      107       91
```

----

Updated August 2, 2013
EXHIBIT
32




CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO


18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




In
connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Gaming Partners
International Corporation for the year ended December 31, 2009, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
Gregory S. Gronau, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company and David W.
Grimes, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of his knowledge:




1.           The
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and




2.           The
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.




Gaming
      Partners International CorporationDate:
      March 30, 2010
                    By:
                    /s/
      Gregory s. gronauGregory
      S. GronauPresident
      and Chief Executive OfficerDate:
      March 30, 2010
                    By:
                    /s/
      David
      W. GrimesDavid
      W. GrimesChief
      Financial
Officer




This
certification is being furnished to the SEC as an exhibit to the Report pursuant
to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by
the Company for purposes of § 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended, or incorporated by reference in any filing under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Securities Act of 1933, as
amended.




A signed
copy of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided by
the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.