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

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                             399
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   38,772
<ALLOWANCES>                                       480
<INVENTORY>                                     31,481
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                73,381
<PP&E>                                          74,728
<DEPRECIATION>                                  34,444
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 123,228
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           47,808
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            75
<OTHER-SE>                                      21,941
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   123,228
<SALES>                                        248,536
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               248,536
<CGS>                                          233,811
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  233,811
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                26,626
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   783
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,418
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (16,319)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (3,714)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (12,605)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (12,605)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (1.80)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.80)



</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.1


                         AQUENTIUM, INC.

                 CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT
    Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
                      18 U.S.C. Section 1350

The undersigned executive officer of Aquentium, Inc. (the "Company") certifies
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

..    the annual report on Form 10-KSB of the Company for the year ended
     September 30, 2004, 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-KSB fairly presents, in all
     material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
     the Company.



Date:   January 13, 2005
                                        /s/ Mark T. Taggatz
                                       ____________________________________
                                       Mark T. Taggatz
                                       Principal Executive Officer
                                       Principal Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 23.01
                                
                                
                                
                               58
                                
<PAGE>



INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We  consent  to  the incorporation by reference  in  Registration
Statement  Nos.  33-84726, 33-84728, and  333-25981  of  Paul-Son
Gaming  Corporation on Form S-8 of our report  dated  August  24,
1998,  appearing  in the Annual Report on Form 10-K  of  Paul-Son
Gaming Corporation for the year ended May 31, 1998.


/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
Las Vegas, Nevada
August 24, 1998

                               59
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.1
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    The Quarterly Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2.
    
    The information contained in the Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 Date: August 9, 2007
    By
    /s/ Cary L. DeaconCary L. DeaconPresident and Chief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                           1,748
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    6,417
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    132,230
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               142,175
<PP&E>                                         124,292
<DEPRECIATION>                                (20,301)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 265,534
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           37,126
<BONDS>                                         17,467
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       106,319
<OTHER-SE>                                      39,855
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   265,534
<SALES>                                        608,076
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               608,076
<CGS>                                          483,071
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  483,071
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               102,898
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,172
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 14,155
<INCOME-TAX>                                     5,308
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              8,847
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     8,847
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .83
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .83
        

</TABLE>
CERTIFICATION

I, David C. Bloom, Chief Executive Officer of Chelsea
Property Group, Inc. ("the Company"), pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, do hereby certify as follows:

|1. | The quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended March 31,
2004 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 such Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|-- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have executed this Certification this 6th
day of May 2004.

| | /s/ David C. Bloom
      David C. Bloom
Chief Executive Officer
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------

A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906 has been provided to Chelsea Property Group, Inc. and will be retained by
Chelsea Property Group, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

MARSHALL DIVISION

VALTRUS INNOVATIONS LTD.,

Plaintiff, 

v. 

AT&T INC., AT&T SERVICES, INC., 

AT&T MOBILITY LLC, AT&T CORP.,

Defendants. 

§

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:23-CV-00443-JRG

(Lead Case) 

v. 

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

INC., SPRINT CORP., ONEPLUS

TECHNOLOGY (SHENZEN) CO., LTD.,

ONEPLUS MOBILE COMMUNICATIONS

(GUANGDONG) CO., LTD.,

Defendants. 

§

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:23-CV-00444-JRG

(Member Case) 

v. 

VERIZON COMMUNICATIONS INC., 

CELLCO PARTNERSHIP, D/B/A VERIZON 

WIRELESS,

Defendants. 

§

§ 

§ 

§

§ 

§ 

§ 

§ 

§

CIVIL ACTION NO. 2:23-CV-00445-JRG

(Member Case) 

ORDER

Before the Court is the Joint Motion to Stay Deadlines and Notice of Settlement 

With Respect to the OnePlus Defendants (the “Motion to Stay”) filed by Plaintiff Valtrus 

Innovations Limited (“Valtrus”) and OnePlus Technology (Shenzen) Co., Ltd., and 

OnePlus Mobile Communications (Guangdong) Co., Ltd. (collectively, “OnePlus”). (Dkt. No. 

88.) 

Case 2:23-cv-00443-JRG Document 89 Filed 06/14/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 2742
2 

In the Motion to Stay, Valtrus and OnePlus represent that they have reached an agreement in 

principle to settle all matters in controversy between them. (Id.) Accordingly, Valtrus and 

OnePlus request that all deadlines with respect to OnePlus only be stayed for forty-five (45) 

days so that the parties may finalize the settlement agreement and prepare the appropriate 

dismissal papers for the Court. (Id.) 

Having considered the Motion to Stay, and noting its joint nature, the Court finds that 

the same should be and hereby is GRANTED. Accordingly, all deadlines with respect to OnePlus 

are stayed for forty-five (45) days from this Order, during which time appropriate dismissal 

papers are to be filed with the Court. 

.

____________________________________

RODNEY GILSTRAP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE So ORDERED and SIGNED this 14th day of June, 2024.

Case 2:23-cv-00443-JRG Document 89 Filed 06/14/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 2743
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

August 6, 2019

No. 04-19-00402-CR

Kyle STONE,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 399th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2018CR12634W

Honorable Frank J. Castro, Judge Presiding

ORDER

Pursuant to a plea-bargain agreement, Kyle Magee Stone pled guilty to possession of a 

controlled substance. The terms of his plea bargain agreement were as follows: (1) “Class A 

misdemeanor punishment with State Jail Felony Conviction under 12.44 P.C.”; (2) “Punishment 

to be assessed at 90 days BCJ”; (3) “Fine $500”; (4) “There is no application for community 

supervision/deferred adjudication”; and (5) “Full range of punishment if defendant doesn’t 

appear at sentencing.” On March 20, 2019, the trial court sentenced Stone to eighteen months in 

state jail. The judgment reflects that Stone “appeared in person with Counsel.” Appellant’s 

motion for new trial, however, states that “[a]ll parties agree that Kyle Magee Stone failed to 

appear on the day of sentencing.” The record, therefore, is not clear with regard to whether the 

trial court sentenced Stone in accordance with the terms of his plea-bargain agreement. On 

March 20, 2019, the trial court signed a certification of defendant’s right to appeal stating that 

this “is a plea-bargain case, and the defendant has NO right of appeal.” See TEX. R. APP. P.

25.2(a)(2). After Stone filed a notice of appeal, the trial court clerk sent copies of the 

certification and notice of appeal to this court. See id. 25.2(e). The clerk’s record, which includes 

the trial court’s Rule 25.2(a)(2) certification, has been filed. See id. 25.2(d). 

“In a plea bargain case . . . a defendant may appeal only: (A) those matters that were 

raised by written motion filed and ruled on before trial, (B) after getting the trial court’s 

permission to appeal; or (C) where the specific appeal is expressly authorized by statute.” Id.

25.2(a)(2). We must dismiss an appeal “if a certification that shows the defendant has the right of 

appeal has not been made part of the record.” Id. 25.2(d). 
This appeal will be dismissed pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 25.2(d) 

unless an amended trial court certification showing that Stone has the right to appeal is made part 

of the appellate record by September 5, 2019. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d), 37.1; Daniels v. 

State, 110 S.W.3d 174 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2003, order).

We ORDER all appellate deadlines be suspended until further order of the court.

_________________________________

Liza A. Rodriguez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 6th day of August, 2019.

___________________________________

KEITH E. HOTTLE,

Clerk of Court
Daniel Dale PARSONS, Petitioner, v. R. BLADES, Warden.

No. 19-7942.

Supreme Court of the United States.

April 6, 2020

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

SeaSpine, 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 6 Filed 10/27/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 386
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 6 Filed 10/27/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 387
Henry Vazquez VALOIS, Petitioner v. UNITED STATES

No. 19-5166

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.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 23.1

                        Consent of Independent Auditors


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (i)
on Form S-8 (No. 333-68221) pertaining to registration of shares under the
Smurfit-Stone Container Corporation Long Term Incentive Plan and shares under
Stone Container Corporation option plans converted to Smurfit-Stone Container
Corporation shares in the merger agreement; (ii) on Form S-8 (No. 33-57085)
pertaining to registration of shares under the Smurfit-Stone Container
Corporation 1992 Stock Option Plan; (iii) on Form S-8 (No. 333-31961) pertaining
to registration of additional shares under the Smurfit-Stone Container
Corporation 1992 Stock Option Plan; (iv) on Form S-8 (No. 333-47143) pertaining
to the registration of shares under the Smurfit-Stone Container Corporation
Management Incentive Plan; and, (v) on Form S-8 (No. 333-66421) pertaining to
the registration of shares under the Smurfit-Stone Container Corporation Hourly
Savings Plan, the Smurfit-Stone Container Corporation Savings Plan and the
Smurfit Packaging Corporation Savings Plan, of our report dated January 24, 2000
except for Note 20, as to which the date is February 23, 2000 with respect to
the consolidated financial statements and schedule of Smurfit-Stone Container
Corporation included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended
December 31, 1999.


/s/ Ernst & Young LLP
---------------------
Ernst & Young LLP
St. Louis, Missouri
March 9, 2000
Exhibit 32.1


                         AQUENTIUM, INC.

                 CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT
    Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
                      18 U.S.C. Section 1350

     I, Mark T. Taggatz, Principal Executive and Financial Officer of
Aquentium, Inc. certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

..    the annual report on Form 10-KSB of the Company for the year ended
     September 30, 2003, 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-KSB fairly presents, in all
     material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
     the Company.



Date:   December 29, 2003          /s/ Mark T. Taggatz
                                   ____________________________________
                                   Mark T. Taggatz
                                   Principal Executive and Financial Officer
# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 17-0576V Filed: March 19, 2018

UNPUBLISHED

LAURA SHANAHAN,

Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent. Special Processing Unit (SPU); Ruling on Entitlement; Concession; Table Injury; Influenza (Flu) Vaccine; Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration (SIRVA)

Jeffrey S. Pop, Jeffrey S. Pop & Asso ciates, Beverly Hills, CA, for petitioner. Jennifer Leigh Reynaud, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1

Dorsey , Chief Special Master:

On April 28, 2017, Laura S hanahan (“petitioner”) filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Com pensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et

seq.

, 2 (the “Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleges t hat that she suffered from a left shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (“S IRVA”) as a result of an influenza (“flu”) vaccine she received on September 14, 2016. Pe tition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

On March 19, 2018, respondent filed his Ru le 4(c) report in which he concedes that petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report

at 1. Specifically, respondent stat es that “petitioner’s injury is consistent with a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration (‘SI RVA’) that was caused by the administration

1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reaso ned explanation for the action in this case, the undersigned intends to post it on the United States Cour t of Federal Claims' website, in accordance with
the E-Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of Electronic Government Services). In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to redact medical or other inform ation, the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, t he undersigned agrees that the identified material fits within this definition, the undersigned will redact such material from public access.

2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755. Hereinafter, for ease of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Ac t will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 300aa (2012).of petitioner’s flu vaccination.” Id. at 3. Respondent “did not identify any other cause for petitioner’s shoulder injury, and the medica l records... demonstrate that she suffered
the residual effects of her conditi on for more than six months.” Id.

In view of respondent’s positio n and the evidence of record, the undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to compensation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Nora Beth Dorsey Nora Beth Dorsey Chief Special Master
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                          85,807
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           1,745
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                               871,355
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                  2,440,011
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                           4,035
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                             4,073
<LOANS>                                      8,603,104
<ALLOWANCE>                                  (108,000)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              13,093,985
<DEPOSITS>                                  11,035,921
<SHORT-TERM>                                    91,491
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                            294,618
<LONG-TERM>                                    399,541
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           551
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,268,225
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>              13,093,985
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                535,485
<INTEREST-INVEST>                              187,268
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                 4,867
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                               727,620
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                             353,206
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             369,222
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                          358,398
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                 (14,837)
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                               1,222
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                203,541
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                183,085
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                     110,893
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   110,893
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     2.74
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     2.73
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.94
<LOANS-NON>                                    351,409
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                             (105,000)
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                 (12,406)
<RECOVERIES>                                       569
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                            (108,000)
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                         (108,000)
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
Robbie Shane BATEMAN, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-8030.

Supreme Court of the United States.

April 20, 2020

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