alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Daniel BRONSON, petitioner, v. Wanza JACKSON-MITCHELL, Warden.

No. 18-9112.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 24, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
Robert A. RUCHO, et al., appellants, v. COMMON CAUSE, et al.

No. 18-422.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 4, 2019.

Further consideration of the question of jurisdiction is postponed to the hearing of the case on the merits. The case will be set for argument in the March argument session.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

MARSHALL DIVISION

HEADWATER RESEARCH LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

T-MOBILE US, INC., T-MOBILE USA, 

INC., and SPRINT CORP.,

Defendants.

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

Case No. 2:23-CV-00377-JRG-RSP 

ORDER

Before the Court is the Unopposed Motion to Withdraw as Counsel filed by Plaintiff 

Headwater Research LLC. Dkt. No. 35. After consideration, and noting its unopposed nature, the 

Motion is GRANTED. It is

ORDERED that Robert Christopher Bunt and the firm Parker Bunt & Ainsworth, PC are 

withdrawn as counsel for Plaintiff in the above captioned case.

Case 2:23-cv-00377-JRG-RSP Document 36 Filed 07/19/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 351
IIB

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 20

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

OCTOBER 13, 1999

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural

Resources

AN ACT

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to construct and

operate a visitor center for the Upper Delaware Scenic

and Recreational River on land owned by the State of

New York.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

HR 20 RFS

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Upper Delaware Scenic

3 and Recreational River Mongaup Visitor Center Act of

4 1999’’.

5 SEC. 2. FINDINGS.

6 The Congress finds the following:

7 (1) The Secretary of the Interior approved a

8 management plan for the Upper Delaware Scenic

9 and Recreational River, as required by section 704

10 of Public Law 95–625 (16 U.S.C. 1274 note), on

11 September 29, 1987.

12 (2) The river management plan called for the

13 development of a primary visitor contact facility lo14 cated at the southern end of the river corridor.

15 (3) The river management plan determined that

16 the visitor center would be built and operated by the

17 National Park Service.

18 (4) The Act that designated the Upper Dela19 ware Scenic and Recreational River and the ap20 proved river management plan limits the Secretary

21 of the Interior’s authority to acquire land within the

22 boundary of the river corridor.

23 (5) The State of New York authorized on June

24 21, 1993, a 99-year lease between the New York

25 State Department of Environmental Conservation

26 and the National Park Service for the construction
3

HR 20 RFS

1 and operation of a visitor center by the Federal Gov2 ernment on State-owned land in the Town of

3 Deerpark, Orange County, New York, in the vicinity

4 of Mongaup, which is the preferred site for the vis5 itor center.

6 SEC. 3. AUTHORIZATION OF VISITOR CENTER FOR UPPER

7 DELAWARE SCENIC AND RECREATIONAL

8 RIVER.

9 For the purpose of constructing and operating a vis10 itor center for the Upper Delaware Scenic and Rec11 reational River and subject to the availability of appropria12 tions, the Secretary of the Interior may—

13 (1) enter into a lease with the State of New

14 York, for a term of 99 years, for State-owned land

15 within the boundaries of the Upper Delaware Scenic

16 and Recreational River located at an area known as

17 Mongaup near the confluence of the Mongaup and

18 Upper Delaware Rivers in the State of New York;

19 and

20 (2) construct and operate such a visitor center

21 on land leased under paragraph (2).

Passed the House of Representatives October 12,

1999.

Attest: JEFF TRANDAHL,

Clerk.
* The Honorable H. Dale Cook, United States Senior Di strict Judge for the

Northern District of Oklahoma, sitting by designati on. 

## F I L E D United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### JUN 19 2001 

### PATRICK FISHER Clerk UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT
MELANIE MCCANN, NOELE NELSON, LISA NIELSON, Plaintiffs - Appellants, v. BRYON L. ROSQUIST, D.C., P.C., a Utah corporation; BRYON L. ROSQUIST, individually, Defendants - Appellees. No. 98-4049

OPINION ON REMAND Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Utah (D.C. No. 97-CV-535-S) Larry S. Jenkins (Mary Anne Q. Wood, with him on th e briefs), Wood Crapo LLC, Salt Lake City, Utah, for the Plaintiffs - App ellants. Brent O. Hatch, Johnson & Hatch, P.C., Salt Lake Ci ty, Utah, for the Defendants - Appellees.
Before LUCERO and PORFILIO, Circuit Judges, and COOK * , District Judge.- 2 -

LUCERO , Circuit Judge.

In United States v. Morrison , 120 S. Ct. 1740, 1759 (2000), the Supreme Court invalidated the Civil Rights Remedies for Gen der-Motivated Violence Act, 42 U.S.C. § 13981, the civil liability provision of the Violence Against Women Act of 1994. The Court subsequently granted certio rari and vacated and remanded this case for further consideration in light of Morrison . Following Morrison , we must affirm the district court’s dismissal of the instant action based on the Supreme Court’s invalidation of the underlyi ng statute. The judgment of the district court is therefore AFFIRMED
. The mandate shall issue forthwith.
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

May 4, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver 129408 & (57) Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, MARION STANTON and ANITA AKERS, Justices Plaintiffs-Appellants and Cross-Appellees,

v SC: 129408 COA: 255716 Wayne CC: 03-338094-CZ CHARTER TOWNSHIP OF CANTON, Defendant-Appellee Cross-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, th e application for leave to appeal the Ju ly 26, 2005 judgment of the Court of Appeals and the application for leave to appeal as cross

appellant are considered, and they are DENI ED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

W EAVER , J., would grant leave to appeal.

d0427 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

May 4, 2006

Clerk
Exhibit 31.2

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER 
PURSUANT TO SEC RULE 13a-14(a)/15D-14(a) 
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, James R. Maronick, certify that:

1.          I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Solitario Resources Corporation for the year ended December 31, 2004;

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

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

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

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated 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 controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially 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 financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely 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 or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.

|Date: March 23, 2005
/s/ James R. Maronick
James R. Maronick
Chief Financial Officer
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Kurt ZAMOR, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-9104.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 3, 2019.

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

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2035 Received in Senate (RDS)]

  1st Session
                                H. R. 2035

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                July 13 (legislative day, July 12), 1999

                                Received

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
      To correct errors in the authorizations of certain programs 
  administered by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration.

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

SECTION 1. AMENDMENTS TO TITLE 49, UNITED STATES CODE.

    (a) Motor Vehicle Safety.--Section 30104 of title 49, United States 
Code, is amended by striking ``$81,200,000'' and inserting 
``$98,313,500''.
    (b) Motor Vehicle Information.--Section 32102 of title 49, United 
States Code, is amended by striking ``$6,200,000'' and inserting 
``$9,562,500''.

            Passed the House of Representatives July 12, 1999.

            Attest:

                                                 JEFF TRANDAHL,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
UAET (02-2008)

Unopposed Application for Extension of Time to Answer Complaint

Attach this form to the Application for Extension of Time to Answer Complaint event.

CASE AND DEADLINE INFORMATION

Civil Action No.:

Name of party requesting extension:

Is this the first application for extension of time in this case? Yes

No

If no, please indicate which application this represents: Second

Third

Other ___________

Date of Service of Summons:

Number of days requested: 30 days

15 days

Other _____ days

New Deadline Date: (Required)

ATTORNEY FILING APPLICATION INFORMATION

Full Name:

State Bar No.:

Firm Name:

Address:

Phone:

Fax:

Email:

A certificate of conference does not need to be filed with this unopposed application.

Case 2:23-cv-00398-JRG-RSP Document 23 Filed 09/25/23 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 212
Cortez MOORE, petitioner, v. ILLINOIS.

No. 18-5905.

Supreme Court of the United States

Oct. 15, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Appellate Court of Illinois, First District denied.
No. 6:23-cr-00069

United States of America

v.

Micheal Hollis

ORDER

This criminal action was referred to United States Magistrate 

Judge K. Nicole Mitchell for administration of a guilty plea under 

Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11. The magistrate judge conducted a hearing in the form and manner prescribed by Rule 11 and 

issued findings of fact and recommendation on guilty plea. Doc. 27. 

The magistrate judge recommended that the court accept defendant’s guilty plea and adjudge defendant guilty on count one of the 

indictment. Id. at 2. Defendant waived his right to object to the magistrate judge’s findings. Id.

The court hereby accepts the findings of fact and recommendation on guilty plea of the United States Magistrate Judge. The court 

also accepts defendant’s plea but defers acceptance of the plea 

agreement until after review of the presentence report. 

In accordance with defendant’s guilty plea, the court finds defendant Micheal Hollis guilty of count one of the indictment, charging a violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 2252A(a)(5)(B) and (b)(2) - Possession of Child Pornography.

So ordered by the court on April 29, 2024.

J. CAMPBELL BARKER

United States District Judge

Case 6:23-cr-00069-JCB-KNM Document 29 Filed 04/29/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 80
Amalya CHERNIAVSKY, aka Amalya Surenovna Yegiyan, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-6415.

Supreme Court of the United States

Dec. 3, 2018.

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


 


Date: January 5, 2012


 


Borrower:


Chardan Metropol Acqusition Corp


13 Donskeya Ulitsa


Moscow, Russia 119049


 


Lender:


Chardan Capital Markets, LLC


 


Principal Amount:


$12,271.07 USD


 


		1.	FOR VALUE RECEIVED, Chardan Metropol Acquisition Corp. (the “Borrower”) promises to pay to Chardan
Capital Markets, LLC (the “Lender”), at such address as may be provided in writing to the Borrower, the principal
sum of twelve thousand two hundred seventy one dollars and seven cents ($12,271.07), without interest, in lawful money of the United
States of America or such lesser amount, as the case may be, equal to the funds advanced by the Lender on behalf of the Borrower
(the “Note”). Documentation to substantiate all the amounts advanced to or on behalf of the Borrower pursuant
to this Note shall be attached hereto as such funds are so advanced.



		2.	This Note will be repaid in full upon demand.



		3.	At any time, the Borrow may pay the outstanding balance then owing under this Note to the Lender without premium or penalty.



		4.	This Note will be construed in accordance with and governed by the laws of the State of New York, without regard to conflicts
of laws principles thereof.



		5.	If any term, covenant, condition or provision of this Note is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void
or unenforceable, it is the intent of the parties to this Note that such provision be reduced in scope by the court only to the
extent deemed necessary by that court to render the provision reasonable and enforceable and the remainder of the provisions of
this Note will in no way be affected, impaired or invalidated as a result.



		6.	All costs, expenses and expenditures including, and without limitation, the reasonable legal costs incurred by the Lender in
enforcing this Note as a result of any default by the Borrower, will be added to the principal then outstanding and will immediately
be paid by the Borrower.



		7.	The Lender may not assign this note or any interest in the Note, if any.



		8.	This Note will inure to the benefit of and be binding upon the respective heirs, executors, administrators and successors of
the Borrower and the Lender. The Borrower waives presentment for payment, notice of non-payment, protest and notice of protest.



 



    	 



    	 



    

 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Chardan Metropol Acquisition Corp.,
intending to be legally bound hereby, has caused this Promissory Note to be duly executed by the authorized officer named below
on the date written above.


 


	Chardan Metropol Acquistion Corp.	 
	 	 
	By:	/s/ Kerry Propper	 
	Name:	Kerry Propper	 
	Title:	CEO	 
	 	 	 
	Confirmed by:	 
	 	 
	By:	/s/ Steven Urbach	 
	Name:	Steven Urbach
EXHIBIT 32.1

Certification of Principal Executive OfficerPursuant to
     U.S.C. Section 1350As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, Carl Spana, President and Chief
Executive Officer of Palatin Technologies, Inc., hereby certify, to my knowledge, that the
quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the period ending December 31, 2003 of Palatin
Technologies, Inc. (the Form 10-Q) fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information
contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of Palatin Technologies, Inc.

|Dated:  February 17, 2004 | /s/ Carl SpanaCarl SpanaPresident and Chief Executive
     Officer(Principal Executive Officer)
|------------------------- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Robert Joe McNEMAR, petitioner, v. Ralph TERRY, Acting Warden.

No. 18-6544.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 7, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
## **EXHIBIT 31.1**

##  

## **CERTIFICATIONOF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

##  

## I,Roger E. Gower, certify that:

##  

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form10-Q of Micro Component Technology, Inc.:

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly reportdoes not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state amaterial fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this quarterly report;

 

3. Based on my knowledge, the financialstatements, and other financial information included in this quarterly report,fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periodspresented in this quarterly report.

 

4. The registrant’s other certifying officersand I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls andprocedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15) for theregistrant and we have:

 

a)designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;

 

b)evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectivenessof the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period coveredby this report based on such evaluation.

 

c)disclosed in this report any changes in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscalquarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materiallyaffect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

5. The registrant’s other certifying officersand I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal controlover financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committeeof registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunction):

 

a)all significant deficiencies and material weakness in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and

 

b)any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal controls overfinancial reporting.

 

 
| Dated:   November  13, 2007 | By:                                    | /s/ Roger E. Gower |   |
|--------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------|--------------------|--------|
|                                       | Roger E. Gower                         |
|                                       | President and Chief  Executive Officer |

 

----
THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSHALL DIVISION

 

SYMBOLOGY INNOVATIONS, LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

VALVE CORPORATION,

GEARBOX SOFTWARE, L.L.C.,

Defendants.

 CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:23-cv-419

 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME FOR PLAINTIFF

TO RESPOND TO DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS 

Plaintiff Symbology Innovations, LLC (“Plaintiff”) respectfully submits this Motion for a 14-

day Extension of Time to Respond to Valve Corporation’s (“Defendant”) Motion to Dismiss for 

Improper Venue, filed at Docket 11.

Plaintiff’s Response is currently due November 20, 2023.

Counsel for Plaintiff has conferred with counsel for Defendant, and have agreed to extend the 

deadline for Plaintiff to respond to the Motion by 14 days. The proposed deadline would be December 4, 

2023. The present request is not offered for the purpose of delay or advantage.

Case 2:23-cv-00419-JRG Document 14 Filed 11/20/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 163
Dated: November 20, 2023 Respectfully Submitted,

/s/ Randall Garteiser

Randall Garteiser

 Texas Bar No. 24038912

 rgarteiser@ghiplaw.com

GARTEISER HONEA, PLLC

119 W. Ferguson Street

Tyler, Texas 75702

Telephone: (903) 705-7420

COUNSEL FOR PLAINTIFF

CERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE

The undersigned attorney represents and confirms that a conference was conducted with 

opposing counsel prior to filing this Motion, and counsel indicated its agreement with the relief 

requested herein.

/s/ Randall Garteiser

Randall Garteiser

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

The undersigned hereby certifies that a true and correct copy of the above document has been 

served to all counsel of record who are deemed to have consented to electronic service via the Court’s 

CM/ECF system on.

/s/ Randall Garteiser

Randall Garteiser

Case 2:23-cv-00419-JRG Document 14 Filed 11/20/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 164
Alex Lenard McCOY, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-6304.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 13, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
EXHIBIT 32.1

Certification of
Principal Executive OfficerPursuant to U.S.C. Section 1350As
Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

I, Carl Spana, President and Chief
Executive Officer of Palatin Technologies, Inc., hereby certify, to my knowledge, that the
quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2009 of Palatin
Technologies, Inc. (the Form 10-Q) fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information
contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of Palatin Technologies, Inc.

Dated: May 15, 2009

|                                                                                        | 
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | 
|/s/ Carl Spana                                                                          | 
|Carl Spana, President and Chief Executive Officer
        (Principal Executive Officer) |