alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IB

Union Calendar No. 468

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 2296

[Report No. 106–807]

To amend the Revised Organic Act of the Virgin Islands to provide that

the number of members on the legislature of the Virgin Islands and

the number of such members constituting a quorum shall be determined

by the laws of the Virgin Islands, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JUNE 22, 1999

Mrs. CHRISTENSEN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Resources

SEPTEMBER 6, 2000

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union

and ordered to be printed

A BILL

To amend the Revised Organic Act of the Virgin Islands

to provide that the number of members on the legislature

of the Virgin Islands and the number of such members

constituting a quorum shall be determined by the laws

of the Virgin Islands, and for other purposes.

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

•HR 2296 RH

1 SECTION 1. SIZE AND QUORUM OF LEGISLATURE DETER2 MINED BY LAWS OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS.

3 (a) SIZE OF LEGISLATURE.—Section 5(b) of the Re4 vised Organic Act of the Virgin Islands (48 U.S.C.

5 1571(b)) is amended—

6 (1) by striking ‘‘fifteen’’; and

7 (2) by inserting after the first sentence the fol8 lowing: ‘‘The number of such senators shall be de9 termined by the laws of the Virgin Islands.’’.

10 (b) NUMBER CONSTITUTING QUORUM.—The first

11 sentence of section 9(a) of the Revised Organic Act of the

12 Virgin Islands (48 U.S.C. 1575(a)) is amended to read

13 as follows: ‘‘The number of members of the legislature

14 needed to constitute a quorum shall be determined by the

15 laws of the Virgin Islands.’’.

Union Calendar No. 468

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 2296

[Report No. 106–807]

A BILL

To amend the Revised Organic Act of the Virgin Islands to provide that the number of members on

the legislature of the Virgin Islands and thenumber of such members constituting a quorumshall be determined by the laws of the Virgin Islands, and for other purposes.

SEPTEMBER 6, 2000

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the

State of the Union and ordered to be printed
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

MARSHALL DIVISION

COBBLESTONE WIRELESS, LLC, 

 Plaintiff, 

v. 

CISCO SYSTEMS, INC., 

 Defendant. 

 Case No. 2:23-cv-00454-JRG 

 (Lead Case) 

 JURY TRIAL DEMANDED 

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL 

Notice is hereby given that L. Norwood Jameson of the law firm of Duane Morris LLP, 

admitted to practice in this Court, enters his appearance as lead counsel of record for Defendant 

Cisco Systems, Inc., and as counsel of record for Defendants Hewlett Packard Enterprise 

Company and Aruba Networks, LLC (Member Case No. 2:23-cv-00457). Mr. Jameson will 

accept service of all pleadings, discovery, orders, notices, correspondence, and other material 

related to this litigation on their behalf at his contact information below. 

Dated: November 14, 2023 DUANE MORRIS LLP 

/s/ L. Norwood Jameson 

L. Norwood Jameson 

wjameson@duanemorris.com 

1075 Peachtree Street NE, Suite 1700 

Atlanta, GA 30309 

Telephone: 404.253.6900 

Facsimile: 404.253.6901 

Counsel for Defendants 

Cisco Systems, Inc., Hewlett Packard 

Enterprise Company and Aruba Networks, 

LLC 

 

Case 2:23-cv-00454-JRG-RSP Document 18 Filed 11/14/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 68
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

The undersigned counsel hereby certifies that on November 14, 2023, a true and correct 

copy of the foregoing NOTICE OF APPEARANCE was electronically filed with the Clerk of 

Court using the CM/ECF system, which will automatically send notification of such filing to all 

attorneys of record. 

/s/ L. Norwood Jameson 

 L. Norwood Jameson 

Case 2:23-cv-00454-JRG-RSP Document 18 Filed 11/14/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 69
David JOHNSON, petitioner, v. INDIANA.

No. 18-6603.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 7, 2019.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Indiana, Fifth District denied.
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, '

'

Plaintiff, '

'

versus ' NO. 9:23-CR-23

'

MILTON TREY ATKINSON, '

'

Defendant. '

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION

ON DEFENDANT’S GUILTY PLEA

The court referred this matter to the Honorable Zack Hawthorn, United States 

Magistrate Judge, for administration of a guilty plea under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of 

Criminal Procedure. Judge Hawthorn conducted a hearing in the form and manner prescribed 

by Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11 and issued his Findings of Fact and 

Recommendation on Guilty Plea Before the United States Magistrate Judge. The magistrate 

judge recommended that the court accept the Defendant’s guilty plea. He further 

recommended that the court adjudge the Defendant guilty on Count One of the Indictment filed 

against the Defendant.

The parties have not objected to the magistrate judge’s findings. The court ORDERS 

that the Findings of Fact and Recommendation on Guilty Plea of the United States Magistrate 

Judge are ADOPTED. The court accepts the Defendant’s plea but defers acceptance of the 

plea agreement until after review of the presentence report. 

It is further ORDERED that, in accordance with the Defendant’s guilty plea and the 

magistrate judge’s findings and recommendation, the Defendant, Milton Trey Atkinson, is 

Case 9:23-cr-00023-MAC-ZJH Document 24 Filed 12/04/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 67
2

adjudged guilty as to Count One of the Indictment charging a violation of 21 U.S.C. § 

841(a)(1) - Possession with the Intent to Distribute or Dispense Methamphetamine.

________________________________________

MARCIA A. CRONE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE SIGNED at Beaumont, Texas, this 4th day of December, 2023.

Case 9:23-cr-00023-MAC-ZJH Document 24 Filed 12/04/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 68
Roberto LLERENAS, Jr., petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-6343.

Supreme Court of the United States

Nov. 19, 2018.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
Exhibit 23.1

Consent of Independent Certified Public Accountants

          We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Form S-8 No. 333-23689 and Form S-8 No. 333-32007) pertaining to the Super VisionInternational, Inc. 1994 Stock Option Plan, as amended, of our report dated February 15, 2003, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Super Vision International, Inc. which is incorporated in the Annual Report (Form 10-KSB) for theyear ended December 31, 2002.

|   | /s/ GALLOGLY, FERNANDEZ & RILEY LLP |
|--------|-----------------------------------------|
|   |                                         |

Orlando, FloridaFebruary 15, 2003
Exhibit 32.2


                                  CERTIFICATION
            Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

The  undersigned  officers  hereby  certifies  that, to his  knowledge,  (1) the
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Productivity Technologies Corp. for the quarter
ended  September  30, 2003 as to which this  Certification  is an exhibit  fully
complies  with the  requirements  of  Section  13(a) or 15(d) of the  Securities
Exchange  Act of 1934 (15  U.S.C.  78m(a)  or  78o(d))  and (2) the  information
contained  in  such  Report  fairly  presents,  in all  material  respects,  the
financial  condition  and results of  operations  of  Productivity  Technologies
Corp..

Date: March 9, 2004

/s/ Jesse A. Levine
------------------------------------------
Jesse A. Levine,
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             NOV-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1996
<CASH>                                          10,393
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   17,583
<ALLOWANCES>                                       730
<INVENTORY>                                     12,175
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                40,369
<PP&E>                                           2,485
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,446
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  46,920
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            4,846
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            76
<OTHER-SE>                                      41,529
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    46,920
<SALES>                                        104,337
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               104,337
<CGS>                                           79,915
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   79,915
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    13
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  38
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  9,550
<INCOME-TAX>                                     3,629
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              5,921
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     5,921
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.72
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.72
        

</TABLE>
Luciano CAMBEROS-VILLAPUDA, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-7610.

Supreme Court of the United States.

March 9, 2020.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
Exhibit 32.2

               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 Baltic
International USA, Inc. (the "Company") for the period ended December 31, 2008
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, David A. Grossman, Chief Financial Officer and Principal
Accounting Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 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
       respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
       Company.

Date:  March 31, 2009

                              /s/ David A. Grossman
                              -------------------------------------------------
                              David A. Grossman
                              Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 99.1

May 7, 2007

Dear Bob:

I am
pleased to confirm your retention as a full-time employee of Trimeris, Inc. (the Company) as of May 1, 2007 and to memorialize the terms we discussed. The intent of this letter agreement is to again retain your services according to
the terms of your previous employment except as set forth below. You agree to serve in a financial advisory role until such time as you are appointed Interim Chief Financial Officer (CFO) by the Companys board of directors. If you
are appointed CFO, you agree to serve through May 2007 or until a successor is appointed. In the event that a successor CFO is appointed you will return to a financial advisory role for the remainder of the term.

Because your employment with the Company is continuing without interruption, you will continue to vest over the term of this letter agreement in any
stock options granted to you previously. You will be paid at a rate equal to your most recent Base Salary (as defined in the Employment Agreement dated March 9, 2007) for a period of thirty (30) days and will be eligible for benefits as an
active employee. The payment of any severance to which you were otherwise entitled or to which we had previously agreed will be delayed for the term of this engagement. The previously executed indemnification agreement between you and the Company
shall remain in effect.

This offer letter contains the entire understanding between you and Trimeris as to the terms of your offer of
employment for the period of May 2007, and specifically supersedes all previous discussions you may have had with anyone at Trimeris regarding those terms. It does not supersede the releases you have provided in connection with your employment
through April 30, 2007.

The Company agrees that this period of employment postpones but does not negate your treatment as having
retired for the purposes indicated in your letter of notification dated as of March 14, 2007 and the separation agreement dated as of March 15, 2007. At the conclusion of your employment you agree to execute a supplemental release
substantially in the form you have previously executed.

If you have any questions regarding this offer, please feel free to contact me.



|                                      |  | 
|------------------------------------- |  | 
|Sincerely,                            |  | 
|                                      | 
|/s/ E. Lawrence Hill, Jr.             |  | 
|E. Lawrence Hill, Jr.                 |  | 
|Trimeris, Inc.                        |  | 
|Chief Operating Officer and President |  | 
|                                      | 
|Agreed to and Acknowledged by:        |  | 
|                                      | 
|/s/ Robert R. Bonczek                 |  | 
|Robert R. Bonczek                     |  |
David Russell POSEY, Petitioner, v. Scott MIDDLEBROOKS, Warden, et al.

No. 19-6964

Supreme Court of the United States.

Feb. 24, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 19-0289

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, 

v. 

JAMES MICHAEL WEBB, JR.,

Defendant and Appellant.

GRANT

Pursuant to authority granted under Mont. R. App. P. 26(1), the 

Appellant is given an extension of time until January 29, 2021, to 

prepare, file, and serve the Appellant’s reply brief.

No further extensions will be granted.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

December 29 2020

12/29/2020

Case Number: DA 19-0289
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-00521-JRG-RSP Document 14 Filed 01/29/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 212
Antoanet IOTOVA, Petitioner, v. Gary FARMER, et al.

No. 18-9718

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit denied.
Ernest LAWRENCE, Petitioner v. Gurbir GREWAL, Attorney General of New Jersey, et al.

No. 19-7094

Supreme Court of the United States.

February 24, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

__________ District of __________ 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Plaintiff(s)

v. Civil Action No.

Defendant(s)

SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION

To: (Defendant’s name and address)

A lawsuit has been filed against you.

Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) — or 60 days if you

are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ.

P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) — you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiff’s attorney,

whose name and address are:

If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. 

You also must file your answer or motion with the court.

CLERK OF COURT

Date:

Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk

Eastern District of Texas

RSB SPINE, LLC,

4:23-cv-00959-ALM

ORTHOFIX MEDICAL, INC., SEASPINE

HOLDINGS CORP., SEASPINE, INC., and

SEASPINE ORTHOPEDICS CORP.,

Orthofix Medical, Inc.

c/o Corporation Service Company

251 Little Falls Drive

Wilmington, DE 19808

Mark D. Siegmund

Cherry Johnson Siegmund James, PLLC

400 Austin Ave., 9th Floor

Waco, TX 76701

10/27/2023

Case 4:23-cv-00959-ALM Document 4 Filed 10/27/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 382
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2)

Civil Action No.

PROOF OF SERVICE

(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (l))

This summons for (name of individual and title, if any)

was received by me on (date) .

u I personally served the summons on the individual at (place)

on (date) ; or

u I left the summons at the individual’s residence or usual place of abode with (name)

, a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there,

on (date) , and mailed a copy to the individual’s last known address; or

u I served the summons on (name of individual) , who is

 designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization)

on (date) ; or

u I returned the summons unexecuted because ; or

u Other (specify):

.

My fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $ .

I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.

Date:

Server’s signature

Printed name and title

Server’s address

Additional information regarding attempted service, etc:

4:23-cv-00959-ALM

0.00

Case 4:23-cv-00959-ALM Document 4 Filed 10/27/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 383
Carmieshra GORMAN, Petitioner, v. Regina COLE.

No. 19-6803

Supreme Court of the United States.

Feb. 24, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeal of California, Second Appellate District denied.
<PAGE>

                                                                      Exhibit 11

                        Computation of Net Loss Per Share

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                     Three Months Ended                  Six Months Ended
                                                                           June 30,                          June 30,
                                                                     1997            1996              1997            1996
                                                                  (unaudited)     (unaudited)       (unaudited)     (unaudited)
                                                                 ------------    ------------      ------------    ------------
<S>                                                              <C>             <C>               <C>             <C>          
Net loss                                                         $ (1,729,880)   $   (133,526)     $ (2,434,089)   $   (176,693)

Loss per common and common equivalent share:

   Weighted average number of shares of common stock
   outstanding during the periods after giving effect to the
   one-for-three reverse stock split in July 1996                  12,174,009       1,331,676        12,131,003       1,329,106

   Common equivalent shares from stock options issued
   during the 12-month period prior to the registration
   statement filing using the treasury stock method                        --              --                --          99,462

   Conversion of the Series A Convertible Preferred Stock
   using the if-converted method                                           --              --                --       2,479,942

   Conversion of the Series B Convertible Preferred Stock
   using the if-converted method                                           --              --                --       1,295,807
                                                                 ------------    ------------      ------------    ------------

   Shares used in calculation of net loss per share                12,174,009       1,331,676        12,131,003       5,204,317

   Net loss per common and common equivalent share               $      (0.14)   $      (0.10)     $      (0.20)   $      (0.03)
                                                                 ============    ============      ============    ============
</TABLE>
Anthwaun JORDAN, Petitioner v. TEXAS

No. 18-9011

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas denied.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, '

'

Plaintiff, '

'

versus ' NO. 9:23-CR-28-3-MAC

'

CAMDEN PATE, '

'

Defendant. '

ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS OF FACT AND RECOMMENDATION

ON DEFENDANT’S GUILTY PLEA

The court referred this matter to the Honorable Christine L. Stetson, United States 

Magistrate Judge, for administration of a guilty plea under Rule 11 of the Federal Rules of 

Criminal Procedure. Judge Stetson conducted a hearing in the form and manner prescribed by 

Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11 and issued her Findings of Fact and Recommendation on 

Guilty Plea Before the United States Magistrate Judge. Judge Stetson recommended that the 

court accept the Defendant’s guilty plea. She further recommended that the court adjudge the 

Defendant guilty on Count One of the Indictment filed against the Defendant.

The parties have not objected to Judge Stetson’s findings. The court ORDERS that the 

Findings of Fact and Recommendation on Guilty Plea of the United States Magistrate Judge are 

ADOPTED. The court accepts the Defendant’s plea but defers acceptance of the plea agreement 

until after review of the presentence report. 

It is further ORDERED that, in accordance with the Defendant’s guilty plea and the 

magistrate judge’s findings and recommendation, the Defendant, Camden Pate, is adjudged 

Case 9:23-cr-00028-MAC-CLS Document 76 Filed 05/10/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 214
2

guilty as to Count One of the Indictment charging a violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 - Conspiracy 

to Distribute and Possess with Intent to Distribute Methamphetamine.

Case 9:23-cr-00028-MAC-CLS Document 76 Filed 05/10/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 215
RIMINI STREET, INC., et al., petitioners, v. ORACLE USA, INC., et al.

No. 17-1625.

Supreme Court of the United States

Sept. 27, 2018.

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

Justice ALITO took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.