alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```
 
 
MSCI EAFE MINI INDEX - NYSE LIFFE                                    Code-244041
OPTION AND FUTURES COMBINED POSITIONS AS OF 07/23/13          |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  Long  | Short  |Spreads |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(MSCI EAFE INDEX X $50)                              OPEN INTEREST:       79,884
COMMITMENTS
  28,838    2,150    2,907   41,932   72,743   73,677   77,800    6,207    2,084

CHANGES FROM 07/16/13 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:        776)
   1,069     -227      844     -748    1,142    1,165    1,759     -389     -983

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADER
    36.1      2.7      3.6     52.5     91.1     92.2     97.4      7.8      2.6

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:       81)
      17        4        1       36       38       53       43
 
 
MSCI EMERGING MKTS MINI INDEX - NYSE LIFFE                           Code-244042
OPTION AND FUTURES COMBINED POSITIONS AS OF 07/23/13          |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  Long  | Short  |Spreads |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(MSCI EAFE INDEX X $50)                              OPEN INTEREST:      222,059
COMMITMENTS
  67,783   41,914    1,947  137,657  169,260  207,387  213,121   14,672    8,938

CHANGES FROM 07/16/13 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:     -2,528)
   3,459   -3,032      438   -8,737   -2,173   -4,840   -4,767    2,312    2,239

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADER
    30.5     18.9      0.9     62.0     76.2     93.4     96.0      6.6      4.0

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      160)
      38       26       13       65       61      109       94
```

----

Updated July 26, 2013
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA

v.

GRIFFIN CAMPBELL

PETITION OF: GEORGE HENRY 

NEWMAN, ESQUIRE

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 66 EM 2021

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 15th day of December, 2021, in consideration of the Application to 

Withdraw as Counsel, this matter is REMANDED to the Court of Common Pleas of 

Philadelphia County for that court to determine whether Griffin Campbell’s present 

counsel should be permitted to withdraw, as well as any related questions, including 

whether to appoint new counsel for Griffin Campbell. 

The Court of Common Pleas of Philadelphia County is ORDERED to enter its order 

regarding this remand within 90 days and to notify this Court promptly of its determination.
EXHIBIT 32





The undersigned, Jeffrey I. Friedman, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
and Lou Fatica, Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Associated Estates Realty
Corporation (the "Company"), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

1.	The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended June
30, 2005, which this certification accompanies, fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13a-14 and 15d-14 of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934; and

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

/s/ Jeffrey I. Friedman

Jeffrey I. Friedman



/s/ Lou Fatica

Lou Fatica





August 2, 2005

Date

A signed original of this written statement has been provided to Associated Estates
Realty Corporation and will be retained by Associated Estates Realty Corporation and furnished
to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Andrew James GIBBONS, Petitioner, v. Nate KNUTSON, Warden.

No. 19-7398.

Supreme Court of the United States.

March 23, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
Albert J. HAMILTON, Petitioner, v. JURBAN, RN, et al.

No. 18-9290

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

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

10/5/2023

 EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

KATHRYN SNEED and SNEED

EQUESTRIAN ESTATES, LLC,

4:23-cv-00871

JEFFREY GIBBS, CALLI ROUSE,

GIBBS SHOW HORSES, CALLI ROUSE

SHOW HORSES, BLACK BIRD RANCH,

THE BONAPARTE FAMILY LIVING

Bonaparte Family Living Trust

c/o Frank Bonaparte or Patricia Bonaparte

1623 Mockingbird Lane

Southlake, Texas 76092

Charles S. North

KEARNEY, MCWILLIAMS & DAVIS, PLLC

1235 South Main, #280

Grapevine, Texas 76051

Case 4:23-cv-00871-ALM Document 7 Filed 10/05/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 28
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-00871

0.00

Case 4:23-cv-00871-ALM Document 7 Filed 10/05/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 29
Samuel C. MOHORNE, Petitioner, v. BEAL BANK, et al.

No. 19-599.

Supreme Court of the United States.

March 9, 2020.

Petition for rehearing denied.
Yisrael M. KEMP, Petitioner, v. GEORGIA STATE UNIVERSITY ADMISSIONS OFFICE, et al.

No. 19-880

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.
No. 6:24-cv-00029

Jody McCreary,

Plaintiff,

v.

Kerry L. Russell et al.,

Defendants.

ORDER

Plaintiff Jody McCreary, an inmate of the Smith County Jail proceeding pro se, filed this civil rights lawsuit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 

§ 1983 without paying the filing fee. The case was referred to United 

States Magistrate Judge John D. Love pursuant to 28 U.S.C. 

§ 636(b). Doc. 2. 

On January 29, 2024, the magistrate judge issued a report recommending that plaintiff be denied leave to proceed as a pauper as 

barred by 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g) and that the complaint be dismissed 

without prejudice as barred by the sanctions imposed by the United 

States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit in In re Jody Ford 

McCreary, No. 22-90025 (5th Cir. Oct. 11, 2022). Doc. 3. Plaintiff 

has filed written objections. Doc. 4.

The court reviews the objected-to portions of a magistrate 

judge’s report and recommendation de novo. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 

72(b)(3); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Plaintiff argues that the Fifth Circuit’s ruling in In re Jody Ford McCreary only barred future habeas 

challenges to his previous criminal judgment and that the ruling 

would not apply to his current § 1983 lawsuit. Doc. 4. The court disagrees. The clear language of the Fifth Circuit’s order bars plaintiff 

from filing any pleadings in this jurisdiction until his sanctions have 

been paid or he first obtains leave of the court. Order on Motion for 

Permission to Proceed after Sanction at 2, In re Jody Ford McCreary, 

No. 22-90025 (5th Cir. Oct. 11, 2022). And while plaintiff asserts 

that he has previously paid a sanction imposed by the Fifth Circuit, 

Case 6:24-cv-00029-JCB-JDL Document 7 Filed 02/23/24 Page 1 of 2 PageID #: 23
- 2 -

the court has confirmed by consulting the Fifth Circuit’s docket for 

the above-quoted case and inquiry to the Fifth Circuit’s clerk’s office 

that the sanction imposed has not been satisfied.

Having reviewed the magistrate judge’s report de novo, and being satisfied that it contains no error, the court overrules plaintiff’s 

objections and accepts the report’s findings and recommendation. 

This case is dismissed without prejudice as barred by the sanctions 

imposed by the Fifth Circuit.

So ordered by the court on February 23, 2024.

J. CAMPBELL BARKER

United States District Judge

Case 6:24-cv-00029-JCB-JDL Document 7 Filed 02/23/24 Page 2 of 2 PageID #: 24
```
 
 
CRUDE OIL, LIGHT SWEET - ICE FUTURES EUROPE                          Code-067411
OPTION AND FUTURES COMBINED POSITIONS AS OF 04/23/13          |
--------------------------------------------------------------| NONREPORTABLE
      NON-COMMERCIAL      |   COMMERCIAL    |      TOTAL      |   POSITIONS
--------------------------|-----------------|-----------------|-----------------
  Long  | Short  |Spreads |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short  |  Long  | Short
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(CONTRACTS OF 1,000 BARRELS)                         OPEN INTEREST:      726,721
COMMITMENTS
  99,540   29,073  207,323  401,149  471,149  708,012  707,545   18,709   19,177

CHANGES FROM 04/16/13 (CHANGE IN OPEN INTEREST:    -18,168)
   2,176   -2,903   -9,166   -9,537   -6,500  -16,527  -18,568   -1,641      401

PERCENT OF OPEN INTEREST FOR EACH CATEGORY OF TRADER
    13.7      4.0     28.5     55.2     64.8     97.4     97.4      2.6      2.6

NUMBER OF TRADERS IN EACH CATEGORY (TOTAL TRADERS:      159)
      45       44       69       62       62      141      144
```

----

Updated April 26, 2013
##### 



Exhibit 32  Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer -
Sarbanes-Oxley Section 906 Pursuant to 18 U. S. C. section 1350, the undersigned officers of Triad Guaranty Inc. (the
Company), hereby certifies, to such officers knowledge, that the Companys Quarterly Report on
Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2004 (the Report) fully complies with the
requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and
the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company. Date: May 9, 2005 By:
    
    /s/ Darryl W. ThompsonDarryl W. Thompson
President and Chief Executive OfficerBy:
    
    /s/ Ron D. KessingerRon D. Kessinger
Senior Executive Vice President and
Acting Chief Financial Officer as of March 31, 2005
 The signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document
authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form
within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided
to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
<partyblock><br><br><div align="center"><b><font size="+1">The People of the State of New York, Respondent,<br><br>against<br><br>Donald Holmes, Defendant-Appellant.</font></b></div><br><br><p>Defendant appeals from a judgment of the Criminal Court of the City of New York, New York County (Guy H. Mitchell, J.), rendered September 23, 2016, convicting him, upon his plea of guilty, of unlicensed general vending, and imposing sentence.</p><p>Per Curiam.</p><p>Judgment of conviction (Guy H. Mitchell, J.), rendered September 23, 2016, affirmed.</p><p>The accusatory instrument charging unlicensed general vending (<i>see</i> Administrative Code of City of New York ยง 20-453) was not jurisdictionally defective. The sworn police allegations that defendant was observed "in front of 8 Pennsylvania Place," "display[ing] and offer[ing] for sale two t-shirts," "holding the merchandise in his hand," and "showing the merchandise to numerous people" were "sufficiently evidentiary in character" (People v Allen, 92 NY2d 378, 385 [1998]) to support the "sale or offer for sale" element (see <a href="../2014/2014_02103.htm" target="_blank"><i>People v Kasse</i>, 22 NY3d 1142</a> [2014]; People v Abdurraheem, 94 AD3d 569 [2012], lv denied 19 NY3d 970 [2012]; <a href="../2018/2018_50213.htm" target="_blank"><i>People v Broussard</i>, 58 Misc 3d 157</a>[A], 2018 NY Slip Op 50213[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2018], <i>lv denied </i>31 NY3d 1079 [2018]; <a href="../2006/2006_51795.htm" target="_blank"><i>People v Zoungrana</i>, 13 Misc 3d 130</a>[A], 2006 NY Slip Op 51795[U][App Term, 1st Dept 2006]<i>, lv denied </i>7 NY3d 871 [2006]) and the "public space" element of the offense (see People v Abdurraheem, 94 AD3d at 570; <a href="../2017/2017_51166.htm" target="_blank"><i>People v Sosa</i>, 57 Misc 3d 129</a>[A], 2017 NY Slip Op 51166[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2017], <i>lv denied </i>30 NY3d 1063 [2017]; <a href="../2014/2014_51126.htm" target="_blank"><i>People v Fall</i>, 44 Misc 3d 132</a>[A], 2014 NY Slip Op 51126[U] [App Term, 1st Dept 2014], <i>lv denied </i>24 NY3d 1083 [2014]).</p><p>THIS CONSTITUTES THE DECISION AND ORDER OF THE COURT.</p><br>I concur I concur I concur<i><br>Decision Date: January 16, 2019<br><br><div align="center"><form method="LINK" action="../../slipidx/at_1_idxtable.shtml"><input type="submit" value="Return to Decision List"></form></div></i></partyblock>
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   EXHIBIT 23.01

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

The Board of Directors and Stockholders of
Guilford Pharmaceuticals Inc.:

   We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements (No.
33-90828 and No. 333-17833) on Form S-8 and registration statement No.
333-35415 on Form S-3 of Guilford Pharmaceuticals Inc. of our report dated
February 13, 1998, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of Guilford
Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Subsidiaries as of December 31, 1997 and 1996, and the
related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders' equity and cash
flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 1997,
which report appears in the December 31, 1997 annual report on Form 10-K of
Guilford Pharmaceuticals Inc.

                                                      KPMG Peat Marwick LLP

Baltimore, Maryland
March 25, 1998
Anthony MAY, Petitioner, v. Steven JOHNSON, Administrator, New Jersey State Prison, et al.

No. 19-7087

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.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

CHRISTOPHER JOE YOUNGER,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 380 WAL 2016

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 14th day of February, 2017

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED

.
Exhibit 10.18

 

AMENDMENT TO

DAVID REESE’S MEMBERSHIP TO

THE BOARD OF DIRECTORS

OF AUGME TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

 

The Agreement dated January 4, 2011 between David Reese and Augme Technologies, Inc. (“Augme” or the “Company”) is hereby amended:

 

Original Agreement:

 

The Board also approved the following compensation package:

 

You will receive a stock option grant of 300,000 unregistered options of common stock of the Company at an exercise price of $2.85 (which exercise price is not less than the closing price for the Company stock on the date of the Board approval of your appointment to the Board (January 4, 2010)), which options will vest 1/36 per month with a term of a five (5) years, per the terms and conditions of the Company’s standard stock option agreement (which agreement includes accelerated (100%) vesting upon a Change in Control of the Company).  In addition, you will receive a quarterly stock option grant, commencing with the Company’s fiscal fourth quarter ending February 28, 2011, equal to six-thousand (6,000) options per quarter in which you are a member of the Board on the last day of the quarter, which options (a) shall have an exercise price equal to the 20-day trailing average closing price of the stock (from the last day of the quarter) with respect to the quarter of which the grant relates; and (b) shall have the same vesting period and term as described above.

 

Replaced with:

 

The Board also approved the following compensation package:

 

You will receive a stock option grant of 300,000 unregistered options of common stock of the Company at an exercise price of $2.85 (which exercise price is not less than the closing price for the Company stock on the date of the Board approval of your appointment to the Board (January 4, 2010)), which options will vest 1/36 per month, over a three year period, with a term of a five (5) years, per the terms and conditions of the Company’s standard stock option agreement (which agreement includes accelerated (100%) vesting upon a Change in Control of the Company).  In addition, you will receive a quarterly stock option grant, commencing with the Company’s fiscal fourth quarter ending February 28, 2011, equal to six-thousand (6,000) options per quarter in which you are a member of the Board on the last day of the quarter, which options (a) shall have an exercise price equal to the 10-day trading days before the last  day of each fiscal quarter which the grant relates; and (b) shall have the same vesting period and term as described above.

 

[SIGNATURES ON FOLLOWING PAGE]

 











 

IN WITTNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Amendment to David Reese’s Membership to the Board of Directors of Augme Technologies, Inc. as of March 16, 2011.

 

 

	
ACCEPTED BY:
    	
ACCEPTED   BY:
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
Name: Shelly Meyers
    	
Name:   David Reese
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
Title: Chairwoman
    	
Title:   Director
COURT OF APPEALS

	SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

	FORT WORTH

	NO. 2-07-233   -      -CV

IN RE MS. mMorgORGAN	RELATOR

	------------

	ORIGINAL PROCEEDING

	------------

	MEMORANDUM OPINION1

	------------

	The court has considered relator’s “pPetition fo For Immediate Appeal Or Other Appropriate REliefRelief” , ” whcih ichw we construe as a “petition for writ of mandamus, and is of the opinion that relief should be denied.  Accordingly, relator’s petition for writ of mandamus is denied.

	Relator shall pay all costs of this original proceeding, for which let execution issue.

								PER CURIAM

PANEL  aA:   WALKER, LIVINGSTON, and DAUPHINOT, JJ.

DELIVERED:  July 6, 2007
Syl ROGERS, Petitioner, v. William P. BARR, Attorney General.

No. 19-7891.

Supreme Court of the United States.

April 27, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
#### Robert D. Murphy et al., Petitioners, *v.*Raymond T. Schuler, as Commissioner of Transportation of the State of New York, Respondent.

Supreme Court, Special Term, Albany County,

May 9, 1973.

*Gerald Orseck*for petitioners. *Louis J. Lefkowitz, Attorney-General (Alexander C. Scharf*of counsel), for respondent.

Edward S. Conway, J.

This is an article 78 proceeding brought by the petitioners for an order to compel the State with respect to a certain parcel of land owned by them to: (1) maintain the traveled portion of said parcel as a highway *733by paving, snow plowing and cleaning the same; and/or (2) abandon the subject parcel; and/or (3) close the said parcel as to traffic in the event that either of the first two alternatives are not performed.

Petitioners on April 23, 1971 and August 9, 1972 became the owners of two parcels of real property lying in the Town and Village of Liberty, County of Sullivan and State of New York. The west boundary of both parcels is bounded by a four-sided parcel containing about .7 acres purportedly owned by the State of New York.

Petitioners contend that the State has allowed automobile traffic along the said westerly portion of their property, and that respondent does not maintain the “ trail ” used for traffic, and that it is merely a ‘ ‘ dirt trail ’ ’. Petitioners further contend that the traffic use results in noise, dust, drainage problems and other nuisances and inconvenience to the petitioners and that it is the obligation of the respondent State of New York to either maintain it by paving or plowing it, or to abandon it and close it off to traffic.

The respondent cross-moves to dismiss the petition on the ground that the court is without jurisdiction over the subject of the action which is within the exclusive jurisdiction of tort claims against the state vested in the Court of Claims.

This court cannot agree with the contention of the respondent. Jurisdiction of the Court of Claims is confined to claims of money damages against the State. (Court of Claims Act, § 9.) The court’s equitable powers are limited solely to those expressly set forth in the Court of1 Claims Act or incidental to the enforcement of a claim for money judgment. *(Tompkins*v. *State of New York,*33 Misc 2d 828; *Tomlinson Constr. Co.*v. *State of New York,*26 Misc 2d 488, affd. 15 A D 2d 692; *Psaty*v. *Duryea,*282 App. Div. 94, affd. 306 N. Y. 413.) The equitable relief sought here can be fashioned only by the Supreme Court of the State of New York. This court is the appropriate forum and has jurisdiction.

The respondent has answered and denied all the material allegations of the petition and has demanded a bill of particulars. It is the opinion of this court that there are material questions of fact raised by the allegations and that the proceeding should be transferred to Part One Trial Term of the Nonjury Trial Calendar of this court pursuant to rule 862.5 of the Rules for Trial and Special Terms of Supreme Court Third Judicial Department (22 NYCRR 862.5).
Ashley R. HAMBRIGHT, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-7987.

Supreme Court of the United States.

April 20, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Alicia NORMAN, Kendra Brantley, and Deenvaughn Rowe, Petitioners, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-6589.

Supreme Court of the United States.

March 23, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit denied. Justice Kavanaugh took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
Herve WILMORE, Jr., Petitioner v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-9829

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.