alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000910560
<NAME> AFFINITY GROUP, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                            5502
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    15327
<ALLOWANCES>                                      1367
<INVENTORY>                                       2660
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 35512
<PP&E>                                           16957
<DEPRECIATION>                                    6253
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  192656
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            37709
<BONDS>                                         120000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             1
<OTHER-SE>                                       76083
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    192656
<SALES>                                         101313
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                101313
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    64913
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 20120
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               12460
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   3820
<INCOME-TAX>                                      1945
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               1785
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      1875
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
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 Quarterly Report of Cadus  Corporation (the "Company") on
Form  10-Q for the three  months  ended  September  30,  2005 as filed  with the
Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, David
Blitz, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,  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) 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 result of operations of the Company.

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

 /s/ DAVID BLITZ
-------------------------------------------
David Blitz
President and Chief Executive Officer (Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer)
November 4, 2005

The foregoing  certification is furnished  solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section
1350 and is not being  filed as part of the Report or as a  separate  disclosure
document.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5


<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             MAY-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               AUG-31-1999
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               104,098
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,606,248
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        5,986,868
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,798
<OTHER-SE>                                    (382,418)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,606,248
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               130,539
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (130,539)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (130,539)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (130,539)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (0.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.01)



</TABLE>
Alexander Collin BAKER, Petitioner v. Clara VESELIZA Baker.

No. 19-17

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeal of California, Second Appellate District denied.
Kenneth ROSE, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-7173

Supreme Court of the United States.

Feb. 24, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
United States District Court

EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

SHERMAN DIVISION

JUDGE: Sean D. Jordan

COURT REPORTER:

Gayle Wear

COURTROOM DEPUTY:

Bonnie Sanford

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

v. Case No. 4:23cv885

KRISHNAN, ET AL 

PLAINTIFF: Clemon Ashley, Keefe Bernstein, Jason Reinsch, Samantha Martin

DEFENDANT: Leslye Moseley, David Clouston

This day came the parties and by their attorneys the following proceedings were 

held before Judge Sean D. Jordan in Plano, Texas on 11/30/2023.

Preliminary Injunction Hearing

8:11 am The court called the case, noting the appearance of counsel and parties.

8:12 am Court and counsel discuss how the hearing will proceed. 

8:18 am Court recessed for 10 minutes. 

9:08 am Court resumes. Mr. Bernstein addresses the court regarding an agreement that has 

been reached. 

9:11am Mr. Clouston addresses the court. 

9:13 am Court and counsel continue to discuss an agreement. 

9:25 am Court recessed.

10:26 am Court resumes. 

Case 4:23-cv-00885-SDJ Document 48 Filed 11/30/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 1307
10:28 am Court and counsel discuss the proposed order. 

10:31 am Court recessed. 

11:10 am Court resumes. Court and counsel discuss the agreed preliminary injunction.

11:11 am The Court will enter the order today. 

11:13 am Court adjourned. 

Case 4:23-cv-00885-SDJ Document 48 Filed 11/30/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 1308
February 3, 1939 

HOROrebl~ L. h. v&od 

State Superintendent of tibllo 

Instruction 

.custln, Texas 

In reiplJrtberst0, wenish tu sdtiss. 

&rtlalo BQZEa or Rerl#d airil 5tatutea, lms, Me& ln 

pert aa follmar 

"Ill eaoh 0rgmma OoLulty tnthits stdata aad 

lnanyaounty mhiohrhall bereafterba organized, 

the aauntysahooltruJBtee8 nbellblawthe atathorltytofo.mone or-ore ruralh%ighsahwLdlatrleta, by groupiag aontlgprow aamon aohool dietriot6 having lose than iour huatlred 8oholiu5tio 

ption and independw~t nohool dlmtrlota bav1~ less than two hundred and fifty saholastio 

pQpulat1on for the purpose 0r wtablishing and 

opemting rural high aohoola.* 

iartiole 89eea, Revised Civil StatulW; 19&S, reada in 

part a8 iolloaii 

"So rumilhhighsohoo1Q%striot, asproridti 

for herein, shall oontofa a greatu are0 than one 

handrsd equare ml&s, or more than 8evwi criemntalrg sabaol dietrlots except that the oouaty 8obeol 

boardof sohooltrua~eeepaytonurural hi@ a&ool 
Hon. I.. A. Plood, P'ebrunry 3, 1939, Pace 2 

dlstriats, as nrovidsd in Artiale 2922a, oontainlng more than one hundred square miles, upon 

a vote of ii majority of the qualified eleotors in 

t3e said proposed zural high sohool district voting at an election called for suoh purpose." 

29~~ approv~,l of dfstriot trustees is not neoessarj* when 

a rural hi?3 sohool distrlot is foxmed by wgroupingw districts. 

Bell vs. Kirkland, 41 S.K. (Zd) 443. 

Approval of trustees of.dlstrlots arrected in annexing dlstricts to r0m a NNl higbsohool,dlstriot is not neoessary where an 

eleotlon is required and held under provision of Article 29220. 

Cox vs. Beard, 87 SiPi.. (2d) 883. 

Tharefore, we hold that when, the dlstriat is loaatad wholly within one oountg and the area of tha proposed diatrlot is more 

than ona hundred square miles, and not more than seven sohool diatrlots are involved, that the oounty sahool trustsea OS tha prtlaular county may aall an aleotlon for the purpoee o? fonnlng a rural 

high sohool distriot of more than one hundred square miles, and not 

to exceed aeven elementary distrlota wlthout the oozment or the 

trustees or the IIUO~~~S distriots Involved; aid if a majority of’ all 

or tha ale&ore votin 

f 

at the aleotion held ror that purpose, and 

the whole of the terr tory lnvokved, vote in favor OS such formatlon 

OS a rural high school Uistriot, it 1s tha duty or the oounty aahool 

tNStOeS to (I) Or&JaniZS the 88mr). 

Yours very truly 

GSB:FG 

AlT.ORNEYGE3ERAL OF TEXAS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

SHERMAN DIVISION

IMPLICIT, LLC

v.

CAPITAL ONE FINANICIAL CORP., 

ET AL.

§

§

§

§

§

§

CIVIL NO. 4:23-CV-770-SDJ

 

ORDER

Before the Court is Capital One Defendants’ Unopposed Motion for Extension 

of Time to Move, Answer or Otherwise Respond to Plaintiff’s Complaint. (Dkt. #13). 

The Court, having considered the motion, concludes that it should be granted.

It is therefore ORDERED that the motion is GRANTED.

It is further ORDERED that the deadline for Defendants to move, answer, or 

otherwise respond to Plaintiff’s Complaint shall be extended to January 26, 2024. 

Case 4:23-cv-00770-SDJ Document 14 Filed 01/16/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 95
Jose Antonio RAMIREZ-JARAMILLO, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-9365

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Reserve System

The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank Control Act (Act) (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and § 225.41 of the Board's Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire shares of a bank or bank holding company. The factors that are considered in acting on the applications are set forth in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).

                    The public portions of the applications listed below, as well as other related filings required by the Board, if any, are available for immediate inspection at the Federal Reserve Bank(s) indicated below and at the offices of the Board of Governors. This information may also be obtained on an expedited basis, upon request, by contacting the appropriate Federal Reserve Bank and from the Board's Freedom of Information Office at                     *https://www.federalreserve.gov/​foia/​request.htm.*                     Interested persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated in paragraph 7 of the Act.                

Comments regarding each of these applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the offices of the Board of Governors, Ann E. Misback, Secretary of the Board, 20th Street and Constitution Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20551-0001, not later than June 13, 2022.

                    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland (Bryan S. Huddleston, Vice President) 1455 East Sixth Street, Cleveland, Ohio 44101-2566. Comments can also be sent electronically to                     *Comments.applications@clev.frb.org:*

                    1.                     *Jodi Hillyer and Kim Hillyer, both of Dennison, Ohio; Kurt Shelley, New Philadelphia, Ohio; Kim Shelley, Belmont, Maine; Tina Floyd, North Canton, Ohio; Todd Scott, Strasburg, Ohio; the Connolly, Hillyer and Ong Law Firm, Uhrichsville, Ohio*; to join the Hillyer Family Control Group, a group acting in concert, to retain voting shares of FNB, Inc., Dennison, Ohio.                

Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System.

Michele Taylor Fennell,

Deputy Associate Secretary of the Board.

[FR Doc. 2022-11545 Filed 5-27-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE P
The Honorable Lyle E. Strom, United States District Judge for the District of *

Nebraska, sitting by designation.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

_____________

No. 97-2958MN

_____________

In re: Kenneth L. Kasden, *

*

Debtor, *

___________________ *

*

Thomas F. Miller, Trustee, * Appeal from the United States

* Bankruptcy Appellate Panel.

Appellee, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

v. * 

*

Kenneth L. Kasden, *

*

Appellant. *

_____________

 Submitted: April 14, 1998

Filed: April 22, 1998

_____________

Before FAGG and HANSEN, Circuit Judges, and STROM, District Judge. *

_____________

PER CURIAM.

Kenneth L. Kasden appeals from the bankruptcy court's order revoking Kasden's

discharge and awarding a monetary judgment in favor of the bankruptcy estate. 
-2-

Appeals that fail to comply with the applicable rules governing briefs are subject to

dismissal. See Fed. R. App. P. 28; Slack v. St. Louis County Gov't, 919 F.2d 98, 99-

100 (8th Cir. 1990) (per curiam). Aside from a rambling conclusory argument,

Kasden's brief does not comply with Rule 28, and his appeal is subject to dismissal for

this reason. Additionally, even if we considered the merits of Kasden's appeal, we

would find no basis for reversing the bankruptcy court's order. We dismiss Kasden's

appeal and assess double costs against Kasden. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
```

```

----

Updated March 1, 2013
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                         0000911147
<NAME>                        Century Casinos, Inc.
<MULTIPLIER>                  1
<CURRENCY>                    US DOLLARS
       
<S>                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                       3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>             DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                  MAR-31-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                      1.00
<CASH>                          2,619,178
<SECURITIES>                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                     239,731
<ALLOWANCES>                            0
<INVENTORY>                        62,309
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                3,436,328
<PP&E>                         23,114,883
<DEPRECIATION>                  4,845,860
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                 33,942,651
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>           2,704,879
<BONDS>                        11,948,638
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                   0
<PREFERRED>                             0
<COMMON>                          158,619
<OTHER-SE>                     19,130,515
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>   33,942,651
<SALES>                                 0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                5,193,238
<CGS>                                   0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                   2,287,096
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                2,262,485
<LOSS-PROVISION>                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                251,199
<INCOME-PRETAX>                   372,539
<INCOME-TAX>                      183,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>               189,539
<DISCONTINUED>                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                         0
<CHANGES>                               0
<NET-INCOME>                      189,539
<EPS-PRIMARY>                        0.01
<EPS-DILUTED>                        0.01
        


</TABLE>
`DTCC Repo-US Treasury <30 YR - NYSE LIFFE - NYPC                     Code-045L2T
OPTION AND FUTURES COMBINED POSITIONS AS OF 10/16/12          |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  Long  | Short  |Spreads |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF $5,000,000)                            OPEN INTEREST:       42,550
COMMITMENTS
     967   19,661    2,267   37,087   19,212   40,321   41,140    2,229    1,410

CHANGES FROM 10/09/12 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:      3,446)
  -1,115      104      105    2,539    2,029    1,529    2,238    1,917    1,208

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADER
     2.3     46.2      5.3     87.2     45.2     94.8     96.7      5.2      3.3

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:       40)
       3       12        7       18       19       26       34`

---

Updated June 29, 2007
cASE NO. l2-14-00253-CV

JERITY WEAKS and

JOYCE WE,AKS,

APPF-,LLANT

V.

IN THE COURT OF

APPEALS I.'OIT

TWELFTH COTIRT OF

APPE,ALS DISTRICT

OF TEXAS

$

{i

$

$

KATHLEEN.IT'ANETl'Ii

WHITE.

APPIiLI,I'E

C]EITTI FI CATF], O F CON FEII IINC]E

TO THE FIONOITAI}I,F] ('OT]R'I:

'['ltis uill ccrtil'r anc] conllrnr that thc unclcrsignccl attorncy Ibr thc Appellants has

cortlcrlcd ri ith lVls. .lunc l)arrcinrs-llorta. thc attorncl lirr the Appcllcc. in rcgard to the

Appellants't.notiol-t to allou'filing ol'rcplv bricl'ancl lirr cxtension o1'tinte to flle certiflcate as to

word cttutrt. lV1s. I)arrcil'as-llorta ltas aclviscd thc unclcrsigrrccl tltat shc o1-rpttscs thc ntotion.

Respectlirl lr subm ittccl.

Statc Bar No. I Ott59100

P.O. Box 168

106 W. l-yler St.

$ cxks \. \\ h rlc

( erlific^tc of ( iilfcfeilcr

PA(;lt I

ALrbrey l-. .lones. .lr

Attorncy at Law

ACCEPTED

12-14-00253-CV

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS

TYLER, TEXAS

4/2/2015 3:50:53 PM

CATHY LUSK

CLERK

 FILED IN 12th COURT OF APPEALS TYLER, TEXAS 4/2/2015 3:50:53 PM CATHY S. LUSK Clerk
Athens. 'fexas 75751 'l'clcphone: 

1903) 67-5-799t)

Irax: (903) 670-3424

I jmail:aubrqyjgrcslaw-(r.smb_argrnatLc_o_m

Al"l'ORNLY FOI{ nPPlil,l.AN'fS

CI.]RTI FICATE OF' SERVICE

'l'his r,vill ccrlil'r that a tnrc ancl corrcct copy of'thc abovc C'crtillcatc of Confcrence has

becn scn'ccl olt Appcllcc's attorncv ol'rccurcl. Ms. .lanc I)arrciras-llorta. iu accordance witli the

J'exas Rulcs ol'Appcllatc l)roccdure .

N4

Sigrrcd tl',i, 2-'2 clal ol' 4 ', . 2015.

at) /L ,Wi'-

\\caks r- \\ hilc

( erlificrte of ( oilfercDCc

PA(;11 2

Aubrcy'
Mizell CAMPBELL, Jr., petitioner, v. THE FLORIDA BAR.

No. 18-8678.

Supreme Court of the United States

July 15, 2019.

Petition for rehearing denied.
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02-18-00428-CR

BOBBY JAMES GUILLORY, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

§

§

§

§

§

On Appeal from Criminal District 

Court No. 3

of Tarrant County (1548748R)

June 20, 2019

Per Curiam

(nfp)

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there 

was error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of the trial 

court is affirmed in part and reversed in part. We affirm the trial court’s judgment on 

count one in which the jury found Appellant guilty of capital murder under section 

19.03(a)(7)(A) of the penal code. We reverse the trial court’s judgments on counts 

two and three in which the jury found Appellant guilty of capital murder under 

section 19.03(a)(2) of the penal code, and we render judgments of acquittal as to only 

counts two and three.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

PER CURIAM
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSHALL DIVISION

COBBLESTONE WIRELESS, LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. 

Defendants.

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

(LEAD CASE)

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

COBBLESTONE WIRELESS, LLC

Plaintiff,

v.

HEWLETT PACKARD ENTERPRISE

COMPANY; ARUBA NETWORKS, LLC

Case No. 2:23-cv-00457 JRG-RSP

(MEMBER CASE)

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

ORDER GRANTING JOINT MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE 

PROPOSED PROTECTIVE ORDER

Pending before the Court is Plaintiff Cobblestone Wireless, LLC (“Cobblestone”) and 

Defendants Cisco Systems, Inc., Hewlett Packard Enterprise Company and Aruba Networks, LLC 

(“Defendants”) (collectively, the “Parties”) Joint Motion for Extension of Time to File Proposed 

Protective Order. The Court, having considered the joint motion, and for good cause shown, finds 

that the motion should be GRANTED.

Case 2:23-cv-00454-JRG-RSP Document 39-1 Filed 12/22/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 183
2

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the deadline for filing the proposed protective order is 

extended to January 11, 2024. All other deadlines shall remain in place absent further leave of 

Court. 

Case 2:23-cv-00454-JRG-RSP Document 39-1 Filed 12/22/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 184