alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT
10.9


 


Land
Lease

Between

Midwest Investors of Iowa Cooperative

And

Golden Oval Eggs


 


This agreement is made
this first day of October, 1999 by and between Midwest Investors of Iowa,
Cooperative, and Golden Oval Eggs, a cooperative association organized under
the laws of the State of Minnesota, with a mailing address of P.O. Box 615, 340
Dupont Ave. NE, Renville, MN  56284.


 


LEASE:  Golden Oval Eggs shall
lease from Midwest Investors of Iowa, Cooperative 240 acres of land located in
Winnebago County, Iowa.  The lease shall
be $6,500 per month, payable on the first day of each month.


 


TERM:  This lease shall be
effective from October 1, 1999 until October 1, 2014 at such time it may be
renewed if agreed to by both parties.


 


 


	
  MIDWEST INVESTORS OF IOWA,

  COOPERATIVE

  	
  GOLDEN OVAL EGGS

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  By:

  	
   

  	
   

  	
  By:

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Its:

  	
   

  	
   

  	
  Its:

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Date:

  	
   

  	
   

  	
  Date:
In The 

Court of Appeals 

Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

________________________

No. 07-19-00034-CR 

________________________

JOSE TRINIDAD, APPELLANT 

 

V. 

 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE 

 

On Appeal from the 290th District Court 

Bexar County, Texas 

Trial Court No. 2018CR2027; Honorable Melisa C. Skinner, Presiding 

 

March 25, 2019 

 

ABATEMENT AND REMAND 

 

Before QUINN, C.J., and PIRTLE and PARKER, JJ. 

Appellant, Jose Trinidad, appeals his conviction of indecency with a child by sexual 

contact1 and sentence to twenty years confinement. The appellate record was due 

February 11, 2019. The clerk’s record was timely filed, but the reporter’s record was not 

filed by this deadline.2 By letter dated February 19, we notified the reporter that the 

 

1 TEX. PENAL CODE ANN. § 21.11 (West Supp. 2018).

2 Only portions of the reporter’s record were filed with this court, to-wit: the “Application for Writ of 

Habeas Corpus Seeking Bond Reduction” and “Motion for Continuance.”
2

reporter’s record was overdue and directed her to advise this court of the status of the 

record by March 1. To date, the reporter has not filed the complete reporter’s record.

The court reporter is responsible for preparing, certifying, and timely filing the 

reporter’s record. TEX. R. APP. P. 35.3(b). Additionally, trial and appellate courts are 

jointly responsible for ensuring that the appellate record is timely filed. TEX. R. APP. P. 

35.3(c). Consequently, we now abate this appeal and remand the cause to the trial court 

for further proceedings.

Upon remand, the trial court shall utilize whatever means necessary to determine 

the reasons for the delay in filing the reporter’s record and take such action as is 

necessary to ensure the filing of same on or before April 29, 2019. See TEX. R. APP. P. 

37.3(a)(2). In that event, the trial court shall enter findings of fact and conclusions of law 

and shall cause its findings, conclusions, and any necessary orders to be included in a 

supplemental clerk’s record filed with this court by April 29, 2019.

Should the reporter file the complete reporter’s record on or before April 15, 2019, 

she is directed to immediately notify the trial court of the filing, in writing, whereupon the 

trial court shall not be required to take any further action. 

It is so ordered.

Per Curiam

Do not publish.
Alexander OCASIO, Petitioner v. William PEREZ, et al.

No. 18-9535

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *in forma pauperis* denied, and petition for a writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit dismissed. See Rule 39.8. As petitioner has repeatedly abused this Court's process, the Clerk is directed not to accept any further petition in noncriminal matters from petitioner unless the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) is paid and petition submitted in compliance with Rule 33.1. See *Martin* v. *District of Columbia Court of Appeals* , 506 U.S. 1, 113 S.Ct. 397, 121 L.Ed.2d 305 (1992) (*per curiam* ).
In the United States Court of Federal Claims

No. 20-410C

(Filed: April 14, 2020)

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

IRA JEROME ROSS,

Pro Se Plaintiff,

v.

THE UNITED STATES,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Pro Se; Prison Litigation Reform Act; 

28 U.S.C. § 1915(g); Three-Strikes Bar

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO PROCEED IN FORMA PAUPERIS

On March 31, 2020, Ira Jerome Ross, a pro se prisoner currently incarcerated in 

Kinder, Louisiana, filed a complaint and motion to proceed in forma pauperis in this 

court, asserting he has suffered damages due to the Department of Justice’s and the 

Federal Bureau of Investigation’s failure to follow up on a criminal complaint he filed 

against Warner Brothers Corporation. Compl. at 3, ECF No. 1. Mr. Ross seeks $50

million in damages based on alleged violations of his Equal Protection rights under 42 

U.S.C. § 1981 and the Fourteenth Amendment of the United States Constitution. Compl. 

at 3. He also seeks an order that the United States Attorney’s Office settle this case and 

pay the filing fee for his lawsuit “due to the coronavirus.” Id. at 5.

This court has previously determined that, while incarcerated, Mr. Ross has filed 

at least three complaints that were dismissed as frivolous, malicious, or for failure to state 

a claim, and that Mr. Ross is therefore barred from proceeding in forma pauperis under 

the three-strikes provision of the Prison Litigation Reform Act. See Ross v. United 

States, No. 19-1175 (order dated Sept. 4, 2019) (listing cases); see also 28 U.S.C. §

1915(g). Although Mr. Ross argues in his complaint that he should not pay the filing fee 

“due to the coronavirus,” Compl. at 5, Mr. Ross has not shown that this bare allegation 

satisfies the “imminent danger” exception to the three-strikes bar. See Fourstar v. United 
2

States, 950 F.3d 856, 859-60 (Fed. Cir. 2019) (requiring a nexus between the complaint’s 

claims and the allegations of imminent danger).

For these reasons, Mr. Ross’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis, ECF No. 2, is 

DENIED. Mr. Ross is ORDERED to pay the filing fee by May 13, 2020. Failure to do 

so will result in dismissal of this action for failure to prosecute. See RCFC 41(b).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

/s Nancy B. Firestone

NANCY B. FIRESTONE

Senior Judge
Dennis JOHNSON, Petitioner v. Lorie DAVIS, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division.

No. 19-5836

Supreme Court of the United States.

November 4, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
EXHIBIT 32.a

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 Boston Capital Tax Credit Fund V L.P. (the "Fund") on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, John P. Manning, Principal Executive Officer of the Fund's general partner, Boston Capital Associates V, L.L.C., certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge, after due inquiry:



|(1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a)-15 or 15(d)-15 of the Securities and 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 Fund.



|                  |  |                            
|----------------- |  | ---------------------------
|Date:             |  |                            
|November 21, 2005 |  | /s/ John P. Manning        
|                  |  |                            
|                  |  | John P. Manning            
|                  |  | Principal Executive Officer
|                  |  |                            
|                  |  |                            



A 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 Fund and will be retained by the Fund and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Howard GRANT, Petitioner v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-6540

Supreme Court of the United States.

December 9, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
EXHIBIT 32.a

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 Boston Capital Tax Credit Fund V L.P. (the "Fund") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, John P. Manning, Principal Executive Officer of the Fund's general partner, Boston Capital Associates V, L.L.C., certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge, after due inquiry:



|(1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a)-15 or 15(d)-15 of the Securities and 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 Fund.



|                |  |                            
|--------------- |  | ---------------------------
|Date:           |  |                            
|August 16, 2010 |  | /s/ John P. Manning        
|                |  |                            
|                |  | John P. Manning            
|                |  | Principal Executive Officer
|                |  |                            
|                |  |                            



A 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 Fund and will be retained by the Fund and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
**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 accompanying Quarterly Report On Form 10-QSB of Wireless Holdings, Inc., for the Quarter ended March 31, 2006, I, Joseph Hess, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Wireless Holdings, Inc. hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that: 

 
| 1.     | Such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2006 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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2006, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Wireless Holdings, Inc. |

 
| By:    | */s/*   *Joseph Hess*

Joseph HessChief Executive OfficerChief Financial Officer |
|-----------------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

Dated: May 15, 2006
----

| (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 results of operations of the                registrant. |

| Dated:                November 3, 2006 |   |                                                                     |
|----------------------------------------|--------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                   | By:    | /s/                Dennis Highby                                         |
|                                   |   | Dennis                Highby                                             |
|                                   |   | President                and Chief Executive Officer                     |
|                                   |   |                                                                     |
|                                   |   |                                                                     |
|                                   |   |                                                                     |
|                                   | By:    | /s/                Ralph W. Castner                                      |
|                                   |   | Ralph                W. Castner                                          |
|                                   |   | Vice                President and Chief Financial                Officer |

Back      to Form 10-Q
### JUDGMENT 

## Court of Appeals First District of Texas

NO. 01

- 1 5

- 00 089

- CV IN THE INTEREST OF M. J. C., A CHILD
Appeal from the 313 th District Court of Harris County (Tr. Ct. No. 201 3

- 06 828J )
After due consideration, the Court grants the motion to dismiss this appeal filed by the appellant, M .M.C. It is therefore CONSIDERED , ADJUDGED , and ORDERED that the appeal be dismissed

. It is further ORDERED that this decision be certified below for observance. Judgment rendered March 1 2 , 201 5

. Judgment rendered by pan el consisting of Justice s Keyes , Bland, and Massengale.
NUMBER 13-22-00268-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI – EDINBURG 

 

VICTOR LEE ALFARO, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee.

On appeal from the 332nd District Court

of Hidalgo County, Texas.

ORDER OF ABATEMENT

Before Justices Benavides, Tijerina, and Peña

Order Per Curiam

This matter is before the Court upon appellant’s motion to appoint co-counsel and 

third request for extension of time to file opening brief. Appellant’s brief was originally due 

on October 12, 2022. 

Appointment of new counsel rests within the sound discretion of the trial court. 

Carroll v. State, 176 S.W.3d 249, 255 (Tex. App.--Houston [1st Dist.] 2004, pet. ref'd). In 
2

those circumstances where the appointment of new counsel may be necessary, an 

appellate court should abate the proceeding to the trial court for determination of this 

issue. 

Accordingly, we carry appellant’s third motion for extension of time to file opening 

brief and appellant’s motion to appoint co-counsel, abate the appeal, and remand the 

cause to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with this order. Upon remand, 

the trial court shall determine whether appellant is entitled to additional court-appointed 

co-counsel. If the trial court determines that co-counsel should be appointed, the name, 

address, email address, telephone number, and state bar number of newly appointed cocounsel shall be included in the order appointing co-counsel. If the trial court determines 

appellant has abandoned this appeal and/or is not entitled to court-appointment of cocounsel, it shall issue such findings. The supplemental clerk's record and supplemental 

reporter's record, if any, shall be filed with the Clerk of this Court within thirty days from 

the date of this order.

PER CURIAM

Do not publish.

TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Delivered and filed on this the

15th day of February, 2023.
Terry Lee CARLSON, Petitioner v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-5474

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
James Erin MCKINNEY, Petitioner v. ARIZONA

No. 18-1109

Supreme Court of the United States.

November 18, 2019

Motion of Criminal Justice Legal Foundation for enlargement of time for oral argument, for leave to participate in oral argument as *amicus curiae* , and for divided argument denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS
FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 25, 1999, AND SUCH IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000924902
<NAME> JPS AUTOMOTIVE, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                                       <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                             YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-25-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             DEC-26-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-25-1999
<CASH>                                             810
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   39,655
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,268
<INVENTORY>                                      6,912
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                68,428
<PP&E>                                          62,090
<DEPRECIATION>                                  13,782
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 227,700
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           15,853
<BONDS>                                         87,370
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     115,553
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   227,700
<SALES>                                        262,847
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               262,847
<CGS>                                          238,462
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   11,527
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     8
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   497
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               8,309
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (4,012)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    (1,052)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (2,960)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                         (791)
<NET-INCOME>                                    (3,751)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
Reginald Christopher GILBERT, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-5269

Supreme Court of the United States.

November 25, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
# C_2018385EN.01000401.xml

| 25.10.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 385/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.10.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 385/4

---

Special Report No 26/2018

A series of delays in Customs IT systems: what went wrong?

(2018/C 385/03)

The European Court of Auditors hereby informs you that Special Report No 26/2018 ‘A series of delays in Customs IT systems: what went wrong?’ has just been published.

The report can be accessed for consultation or downloading on the European Court of Auditors' website: http://eca.europa.eu.

---
Larry Brandon MOORE, Petitioner v. UNITED STATES

No. 19-5685

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
GREENWICH STREET SERIES FUND
on behalf of the
International Equity Portfolio
Emerging Growth Portfolio
(each a "Portfolio", collectively the "Portfolios")

Supplement dated September 6, 2001 to the
Prospectus dated April 28, 2001

The following information supplements certain information contained in
the Prospectus and Statement of Additional Information of the
Portfolios.


On September 6, 2001, the Board of Trustees of Greenwich Street Series
Fund (the "Trust") approved a reverse stock split with respect to the
shares of the International Equity Portfolio and the Emerging Growth
Portfolio.

Each shareholder's aggregate investment in a Portfolio will remain
unchanged as a result of the reverse stock split.  The effect of the
reverse stock split is to reduce the number of shares outstanding of a
Portfolio, but each shareholder's aggregate net asset value and the
aggregate net asset value of a Portfolio will remain unchanged.
Immediately following the reverse stock split, each shareholder of the
International Equity Portfolio will hold a number of shares of the
Portfolio equal to the number of shares held by the shareholder
immediately prior to the reverse stock split divided by sixteen and
each shareholder of the Emerging Growth Portfolio will hold a number of
shares of the Portfolio equal to the number of shares held by the
shareholder immediately prior to the reverse stock split divided by
seven.

The required distribution of significant capital gains caused the net
asset value of each Portfolio to decline.  Undistributed capital gains
in each Portfolio made up approximately 85%-90% of their net assets,
causing a proportionate drop in the net asset value per share upon
distribution.

Management believes that it is in the best interest of each Portfolio
and its shareholders to effect a reverse stock split of the Portfolio's
shares. The reverse stock split will be effected based on the net asset
value of each Portfolio as of the close of business on September 7,
2001.


FD 02385