alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 00-20143 Summary Calendar

EDWARD GUZMAN, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus G. W. SMITH; B. ROGEEN; C.R. ELLINGSBURG; JANE DOE, Doctor; JOHN DOE, doctor; JANE DOE, Grievance Coordinator; JOHN DOE, Grievance Coordinator, Defendants-Appellees.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. H-98-CV-3047

-------------------- December 22, 2000 Before SMITH, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Edward Guzman, Texas prisoner # 538210, appeals the district court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint as frivolous. Guzman argues that prison officials acted with deliberate indifference to a serious medical need when they made him work on the hoe squad, which aggravated Guzman’s injuries to his wrist, arm, and knee. He also argues that the prison doctors acted with deliberate indifference when they refused to place restrictions on his work assignment to prevent him from having to work on theNo. 00-20143 -2- hoe squad. Guzman additionally contends that prison officials retaliated against him for having filed grievances. A review of the record reveals that the prison officers did not act with deliberate indifference to a serious medical need by assigning Guzman to the hoe squad and that the prison doctors did not acted with deliberate indifference for not placing restrictions on Guzman’s work classification. See Jackson v. Cain , 864 F.2d 1235, 1246-47 (5th Cir. 1989); Reeves v. Collins , 27 F.3d 174, 176-77 (5th Cir. 1994). The record further reveals that Guzman’s retaliation claim was conclusional and insufficient to establish a viable claim for 42 U.S.C. § 1983 relief. See Whittington v. Lynaugh , 842 F.2d 818, 820 (5th Cir. 1988). The district court did not abuse its discretion when it dismissed Guzman’s claims as frivolous. See Denton v. Hernandez , 504 U.S. 25, 31-34 (1992). The judgment of the district court is
AFFIRMED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER>   1,000
<CURRENCY>     U.S DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                  1,000
<CASH>                                           1,999
<SECURITIES>                                     3,869
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,938
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      1,551
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                10,599
<PP&E>                                             500
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  13,491
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,091
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                         22
<COMMON>                                           132
<OTHER-SE>                                      12,223
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    13,491
<SALES>                                          2,521
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 2,896
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    1,131
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,831
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     20
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 20
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        20
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .00
        


</TABLE>
Order entered May 26 , 2015

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05 - 15 - 00437 - CV IN RE JIMMY JOHNSON, Relator Original Proceeding from the 68th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. TX - 10 - 31998 - C



### O RDER Before Justices Francis, Myers and Schenck Before the Court are relator’s “Amended Motion to Transfer Venue , ” “Amended Motion to Retained,” and motion for permission to file an amended notice of appeal and restricted appeal. We DENY relator’s motio n s . By order dated May 4, 2015, the Court denied relator’s “Amended Motion for Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law.” By order dated May 7, 2015, the Court denied relator’s “Amended Motion to File for a Mandate.” The deadline for seeking reconsidera tion of the court’s action on relator’s petition for writ of mandamus expired on April 30, 2015. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 52.9 (motion for rehearing may be filed within 15 days after final order is rendered determining petition for writ of mandamus). We will take no action on any further motions filed in this proc eeding

.
/s/ MOLLY FRANCIS JUSTICE
1 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

MARSHALL DIVISION

Headwater Research LLC, 

Plaintiff, 

 v. 

Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd., Samsung 

Electronics America, Inc., 

Defendants. 

Civil Action No. 2:23-cv-00641-JRG-RSP 

JURY DEMANDED 

NOTICE OF APPEARANCE 

 Notice is hereby given that Robert Christopher Bunt of Parker Bunt & Ainsworth, PC 

enters his appearance in this matter as additional counsel for Plaintiff Headwater Research LLC. 

 Mr. Bunt may receive all communications from the Court and all parties at Parker Bunt & 

Ainsworth, PC, 100 East Ferguson, Suite 418, Tyler, Texas 75702; Telephone 903-531-3535; 

Email: rcbunt@pbatyler.com. 

 Respectfully submitted, 

Dated: January 8, 2024. 

/s/ Robert Christopher Bunt 

Robert Christopher Bunt 

Texas State Bar No. 00787165 

PARKER, BUNT & AINSWORTH, P.C. 

100 E. Ferguson Suite 418 

Tyler, Texas 75702 

Tel.: (903) 531-3535 

Marc Fenster 

CA State Bar No. 181067 

Email: mfenster@raklaw.com 

Reza Mirzaie 

CA State Bar No. 246953 

Email: rmirzaie@raklaw.com 

Brian Ledahl 

Case 2:23-cv-00641-JRG-RSP Document 20 Filed 01/08/24 Page 1 of 3 PageID #: 804
2 

CA State Bar No. 186579 

Email: bledahl@raklaw.com 

Ben Wang 

CA State Bar No. 228712 

Email: bwang@raklaw.com 

Dale Chang 

CA State Bar No. 248657 

Email: dchang@raklaw.com 

Paul Kroeger 

CA State Bar No. 229074 

Email: pkroeger@raklaw.com 

Neil A. Rubin 

CA State Bar No. 250761 

Email: nrubin@raklaw.com 

Kristopher Davis 

CA State Bar No. 329627 

Email: kdavis@raklaw.com 

James S. Tsuei 

CA State Bar No. 285530 

Email: jtsuei@raklaw.com 

Philip Wang 

CA State Bar No. 262239 

Email: pwang@raklaw.com 

Amy Hayden 

CA State Bar No. 287026 

Email: ahayden@raklaw.com 

Jason M. Wietholter 

CA State Bar No. 337139 

Email: jwietholter@raklaw.com 

RUSS AUGUST & KABAT 

12424 Wilshire Blvd. 12th Floor 

Los Angeles, CA 90025 

Telephone: 310-826-7474 

ATTORNEYS FOR PLAINTIFF 

Headwater Research LLC 

Case 2:23-cv-00641-JRG-RSP Document 20 Filed 01/08/24 Page 2 of 3 PageID #: 805
3 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I certify that the foregoing document was filed electronically on January 8, 2024 and 

has been served on all counsel who have consented to electronic service. 

/s/ Robert Christopher Bunt 

Robert Christopher Bunt 

Case 2:23-cv-00641-JRG-RSP Document 20 Filed 01/08/24 Page 3 of 3 PageID #: 806
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             FEB-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1999
<CASH>                                          26,755
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   19,446
<ALLOWANCES>                                       433
<INVENTORY>                                     59,094
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               107,644
<PP&E>                                          70,177
<DEPRECIATION>                                  23,837
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 158,587
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           58,935
<BONDS>                                         14,863
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           102
<OTHER-SE>                                      82,317
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   158,587
<SALES>                                        261,093
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               261,093
<CGS>                                          182,597
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  182,597
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,979
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,993
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,222
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              3,771
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,771
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.46
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.42


</TABLE>
No. 6:23-cr-00110

United States of America

v.

Daniel Ramirez

ORD ER

This criminal action was referred to United States Magistrate 

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

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

issued findings of fact and recommendation on guilty plea. Doc. 26. 

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

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

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

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

agreement until after review of the presentence report. 

In accordance with defendant’s guilty plea, the court finds defendant Daniel Ramirez guilty of count one of the indictment, charging a violation of Title 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(v)(I) – Conspiracy 

to Transport Illegal Aliens.

So ordered by the court on July 31, 2024.

J. CAMPBELL BARKER

United States District Judge

Case 6:23-cr-00110-JCB-KNM Document 28 Filed 07/31/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID #: 86
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                     1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1996
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    7,695
<ALLOWANCES>                                       310
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                12,323
<PP&E>                                         178,757
<DEPRECIATION>                                  33,021
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 158,059
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           12,280
<BONDS>                                        118,027
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       117,950
<OTHER-SE>                                     (97,206)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   158,059
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                10,132
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    3,148
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   917
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               5,386
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    681
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                681
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       681
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .06
        


</TABLE>
Case 2:24-cv-00080-JRG Document 52-5 Filed 09/18/24 Page 1 of 4 PageID #: 1003
Case 2:24-cv-00080-JRG Document 52-5 Filed 09/18/24 Page 2 of 4 PageID #: 1
Case 2:24-cv-00080-JRG Document 52-5 Filed 09/18/24 Page 3 of 4 PageID #: 1005
Case 2:24-cv-00080-JRG Document 52-5 Filed 09/18/24 Page 4 of 4 PageID #: 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                         698,611
<SECURITIES>                                 1,639,065
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,500,051
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             4,445,215
<PP&E>                                       2,447,903
<DEPRECIATION>                             (1,295,601)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               6,709,247
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,414,791
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     4,921,208
<OTHER-SE>                                   (626,752)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 6,709,247
<SALES>                                      6,477,299
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             6,477,299
<CGS>                                        1,033,649
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,033,649
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             6,608,259
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (979,445)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    58,535
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,037,980)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,037,980)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.36)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.36)
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                                        Jurisdiction            Names under which
                           Name of                                         Where                  subsidiary does
                         Subsidiary                                      Organized                    Business
----------------------------------------------------------            ----------------       ------------------------

<S>                                                                      <C>                    <C>
Galion, Inc.                                                             Delaware               Valentec Galion
                                                                                                Valentec Galion, Inc.
                                                                                                Galion, a Division of
                                                                                                Valentec International
                                                                                                Corporation
Valentec Systems, Inc.                                                   Delaware
ASCI Holdings Germany (DE), Inc.                                         Delaware
ASCI Holdings Mexico (DE), Inc.                                          Delaware
ASCI Holdings UK (DE), Inc.                                              Delaware
ASCI Holdings Czech (DE), Inc.                                           Delaware
ASCI Holdings Asia (DE), Inc.                                            Delaware
Phoenix Airbag Verwaltungs GmbH                                          Germany
Phoenix Airbag GmbH & Co. KG                                             Germany
Automotive Safety Components International S.A. de C.V.                  Mexico
Automotive Safety Components International Limited                       United Kingdom
Automotive Safety Components Asia - Pacific Ltd.
Automotive Safety Components International, s.r.o.                       Czech Republic
Automotive Safety Components International, Inc.                         Delaware               Valentec Automotive
                                                                                                Valentec Wells
Valentec International Corporation*                                      Delaware               Valentec Wells, Inc.
</TABLE>
# C_2017421EN.01001902.xml

| 8.12.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 421/19 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.12.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 421/19

---

Information communicated by Member States regarding closure of fisheries

(2017/C 421/13)

In accordance with Article 35(3) of Council Regulation (EC) No 1224/2009 of 20 November 2009 establishing a Union control system for ensuring compliance with the rules of the common fisheries policy (1), a decision has been taken to close the fishery as set down in the following table:

1

| Date and time of closure | 10.10.2017 |
| --- | --- |
| Duration | 10.10.2017-31.12.2017 |
| Member State | Belgium |
| Stock or Group of stocks | SRX/89-C (including special condition RJC/89-C., RJH/89-C., RJN/89-C., RJU/8-C. and RJU/9-C.) |
| Species | Skates and rays (Rajiformes) |
| Zone | Union waters of VIII and IX |
| Type(s) of fishing vessels | — |
| Reference number | 25/TQ127 |

Date and time of closure

10.10.2017

Duration

10.10.2017-31.12.2017

Member State

Belgium

Stock or Group of stocks

SRX/89-C (including special condition RJC/89-C., RJH/89-C., RJN/89-C., RJU/8-C. and RJU/9-C.)

Species

Skates and rays (Rajiformes)

Rajiformes

Zone

Union waters of VIII and IX

Type(s) of fishing vessels

—

Reference number

25/TQ127

---

(1)  OJ L 343, 22.12.2009, p. 1.

1

---
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 77 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 77

 Expressing the sense of Congress opposing the proposal by the United 
States Department of State to relocate the United States Embassy to the 
                               Holy See.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 16, 2014

  Mr. Duffy submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
              referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
 Expressing the sense of Congress opposing the proposal by the United 
States Department of State to relocate the United States Embassy to the 
                               Holy See.

Whereas the United States Department of State has announced plans to relocate 
        the United States Embassy to the Holy See;
Whereas this action would close the freestanding embassy that has been located 
        at Aventine Hill;
Whereas the Vatican has requested that countries operate their embassies to the 
        Holy See and Italy in two different locations;
Whereas since 1984, the United States Embassy to the Holy See has been separate 
        from the Italian Embassy when Ronald Reagan and Pope John Paul II signed 
        an accord to establish it;
Whereas for the more than 78,000,000 Catholics in the United States and many 
        millions of others who value this relationship, any move that might 
        weaken this connection is unacceptable;
Whereas having both the Ambassador to the Holy See and the Ambassador to Rome in 
        one embassy compound will likely diminish one of their standings;
Whereas the United States relationship with the Vatican is separate and distinct 
        from the relationship with Rome, a distinction that should be 
        consistently maintained;
Whereas this should continue to be the standard that the United States meets; 
        and
Whereas simply providing a separate entrance and address to the same complex 
        fails to recognize the importance of United States-Vatican relations and 
        this instead strives for the bare minimum: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That Congress opposes the United States Department of State efforts to 
close the freestanding United States Embassy located at Aventine Hill.
                                 <all>
```
Dennis C. DAVIS, Petitioner, v. FAYETTE COUNTY APPRAISAL DISTRICT, et al.

No. 19-7415.

Supreme Court of the United States.

March 23, 2020

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