alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Vincent ROGGIO; Callie Lasch Appellants, v. COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE.

No. 04-2438.

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.

Submitted Pursuant to Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) March 8, 2005.

Decided April 6, 2005.

E. William Pastor, Plymouth Meeting, PA, for Appellants.

Richard Farber, Karen D. Utiger, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Appellee.

Before NYGAARD, MCKEE & RENDELL, Circuit Judges.

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

Vincent Roggio and Callie Lasch (“Taxpayers”) appeal an Order of the United States Tax Court in which the court concluded that the Commissioner did not *453abuse his discretion in filing a lien on property owned by Taxpayers in an effort to collect a tax liability for the tax year 2000 that was admittedly due and owing. Taxpayers argue that their demonstrated good faith, which included entering into an installment plan to discharge the liability, should have precluded the Commissioner from engaging in what they refer to as “a very intrusive collection technique.” *See*Appellants’ brief at 5. We will affirm.

Inasmuch as we write only for the parties who are familiar with the background of this case, we need not reiterate the factual or procedural history. Appellants have submitted a brief consisting of two paragraphs of ai'gument, without citation to any legal authority, in which they argue that, “[i]n a credit-based society, a lien is a very intrusive collection technique.” *Id.*at 5.

We have reviewed the transcript from the bench opinion of the Tax Court dated February 9, 2004. In that opinion, the Honorable Robert Wherry, Jr., explains why the Commissioner did not abuse his discretion in filing the lien that is the subject of this dispute. We will affirm this frivolous appeal substantially for the reasons set forth by Judge Wherry in his bench opinion.
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 24 (Monday, February 7, 2005)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 6378]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-2227]


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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

14 CFR Part 71

[Docket No. FAA-2004-19581; Airspace Docket No. 04-ACE-71]


Proposed Establishment of Class E2 Airspace; and Modification of 
Class E5 Airspace; Ankeny, IA

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking; correction.

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

SUMMARY: This action corrects a notice of proposed rulemaking that was 
published in the Federal Register on Wednesday, January 19, 2005, (70 
FR 2991) [FR Doc. 05-969]. It corrects an error in the legal 
description of the proposed Class E airspace area designated as a 
surface area at Ankeny, IA.

DATES: Comments for inclusion in the Rules Docket must be received on 
or before March 1, 2005.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Brenda Mumper, Air Traffic Division, 
Airspace Branch, ACE-520A, DOT Regional Headquarters Building, Federal 
Aviation Administration, 901 Locust, Kansas City, MO 64106; telephone: 
(816) 329-2524.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

History

    Federal Register Document 05-969, published on Wednesday, January 
19, 2005, (70 FR 2991) proposed to establish a Class E airspace area 
designated as a surface area and to modify the existing Class E 
airspace area extending upward from 700 feet above the surface at 
Ankeny, IA. The proposed airspace and changes were to protect aircraft 
departing from and executing instrument approach procedures to Ankeny 
Regional Airport. However, the dimensions of the extension to the 
proposed Class E airspace area designated as a surface area were 
incorrect.
    Accordingly, pursuant to the authority delegated to me, the legal 
description of the Class E airspace area designated as a surface area 
at Ankeny, IA, as published in the Federal Register on Wednesday, 
January 19, 2005, (70 FR 2991) [FR Doc. 05-969] is corrected as 
follows:


Sec.  71.1  [Corrected]

    On page 2992, Column 1, fifth paragraph, fourth line from the 
bottom, change ``extending from the 7-mile radius'' to read ``extending 
from the 4.6-mile radius''.

    Issued in Kansas City, MO, on January 20, 2005.
Anthony D. Roetzel,
Acting Area Director, Western Flight Services Operations.
[FR Doc. 05-2227 Filed 2-4-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE>                        5
<MULTIPLIER>                     1,000
       
<S>                   <C>  
<PERIOD-TYPE>          9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>              DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                   SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                              18,541
<SECURITIES>                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                       43,759
<ALLOWANCES>                         2,982
<INVENTORY>                         48,964
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                   119,361
<PP&E>                              31,684
<DEPRECIATION>                      15,859
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                     182,261
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>               66,481
<BONDS>                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                    0
<PREFERRED>                              0
<COMMON>                             1,586
<OTHER-SE>                          87,719
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>       182,261
<SALES>                            178,582
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                   178,582
<CGS>                              141,872
<TOTAL-COSTS>                            0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                    32,635
<LOSS-PROVISION>                         7
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                   3,590
<INCOME-PRETAX>                      6,770
<INCOME-TAX>                           753
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                  6,127
<DISCONTINUED>                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                          0
<CHANGES>                                0
<NET-INCOME>                         6,127
<EPS-PRIMARY>                         4.31
<EPS-DILUTED>                         4.31
       


</TABLE>
## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 14

- 00122

- CR

JERRY EARL FILLMON APPELLANT

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE

----------

FROM THE 89TH DISTRI CT COURT OF WICHITA COUNTY

TRIAL COURT NO. 50,3 47

- C

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



### MEMORANDUM OPINI ON 1 

### AND JUDGMENT

----------

We have considered appellant’s “ Motion To Dismiss. ” The motion

complies with rule 42.2(a) of the rules of appellate procedure. Tex. R. App. P.

42.2(a). No decision of this court having been delivered before we received this

motion, we grant the motion and dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P.

42.2(a), 43.2(f).

1 See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.2 PER CURIAM

PANEL: DAUPHINOT, GARDNER, and WALKER, JJ.

DO NOT PUBLISH

Tex. R. App

. P. 47.2(b)

DELIVERED: November 2 6 , 2014
#### F. Chris CAWOOD, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Linda BOOTH; Jon French; Randy Scarbrough; and Dennis Worley, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 04-5319.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

April 6, 2005.

F. Chris Cawood, Kingston, TN, pro se.

John C. Duffy, Watson *&*Hollow, Knoxville, TN, for Defendants-Appellees.

Before NORRIS and BATCHELDER, Circuit Judges; and MILLS, District Judge.*

*

 The Honorable Richard Mills, United States District Court Judge for the Central District of Illinois, sitting by designation.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

PER CURIAM.

F. Chris Cawood appeals the district court’s decision to grant summary judgment to defendants, in this civil rights action brought pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

*701Having carefully considered the record on appeal, the briefs of the parties, and the applicable law, we are not persuaded that the district court erred in granting summary judgment to defendants.

Because the reasoning which supports judgment for defendants has been articulated by the district court, the issuance of a detailed written opinion by this court would be duplicative and serve no useful purpose. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is affirmed upon the reasoning employed by that court in its opinion, *Cawood v. Haggard,*327 F.Supp.2d 863 (E.D.Tenn., 2004).
Exhibit 31.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 302 OF THE

SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Cesar M. Garcia, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of IRIS International,
Inc.;



2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not
contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this
annual report;



3. Based on my knowledge, the financial
statements, and other financial information included in this annual report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual
report;



4. The registrants other certifying officer and
I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have:



a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under
our supervision to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this annual report is being
prepared;



b) evaluated the effectiveness of the
registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such valuation.



c) disclosed in this report any change in the
registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially effect the registrants internal control over financial reporting.



5. The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting,
to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal control which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants
ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and



b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.



|                                       
|---------------------------------------
|Date: March 24, 2004                   
|                                       
|/s/ Cesar M. Garcia                    
|                                       
|Cesar M. Garcia Chief Executive Officer
---

Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATIONPursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Strategic Internet Investments, Incorporated (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"). I,
Ralph Shearing, Chief Executive Officer of the company, certify, pursuant to 18 USC Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge and belief:

| | 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 Company.

|Date: | May 20, 2005 |  | /s/ Ralph Shearing      
|----- | ------------ |  | ------------------------
|      |              |  | Ralph Shearing, Director

---
Exhibit (99.3)

         Written Statement of the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
                     Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350

      Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, I, the
undersigned Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of Interstate Power and
Light Company (the "Company"), hereby certify, based on my knowledge, that
the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended
September 30, 2002 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information
contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.




/s/  Erroll B. Davis, Jr.
-------------------------
Erroll B. Davis, Jr.
November 14, 2002
#### STATE v. WEAVER

Nos. 22-PC and 14.

Case below: 3 N.C. App. 439.

Petition for writ of *certiorari*to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 3 March 1969. Appeal of right dismissed for lack of substantial constitutional question 3 March 1969.
#### IN RE HAWKINS

No. 40 PC.

Case below: 17 N.C. App. 378.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 30 April 1973. Appeal dismissed *ex mero motu*for lack of substantial constitutional question 30 April 1973.
EXHIBIT 31

CERTIFICATIONS

I, Brian R. Gamache
certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the annual report on Form 10-K of WMS Industries Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report.

October 8, 2013



|                       
|-----------------------
|/s/ Brian R. Gamache   
|Brian R. Gamache       
|Chief Executive Officer



---

I, Scott D. Schweinfurth certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the annual report on Form 10-K of WMS Industries Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report.

October 8, 2013



|                         
|-------------------------
|/s/ Scott D. Schweinfurth
|Scott D. Schweinfurth    
|Chief Financial Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.  No. 01-4064

RICHARD L. KESLING,

Defendant-Appellant. 

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Clarksburg.

Irene M. Keeley, Chief District Judge.

(CR-00-8)

Submitted: July 31, 2001

Decided: August 28, 2001

Before WILKINS, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

COUNSEL

J. Robert Russell, FURBEE, AMOS, WEBB & CRITCHFIELD,

P.L.L.C., Fairmont, West Virginia, for Appellant. Melvin W. Kahle,

Jr., United States Attorney, Paul T. Camilletti, Assistant United States

Attorney, Wheeling, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See

Local Rule 36(c). 
OPINION

PER CURIAM: 

Richard L. Kesling entered a guilty plea to possession of a firearm

by a convicted felon, 18 U.S.C.A. § 922(g)(1) (West Supp. 2000), and

received a sentence of thirty months’ imprisonment. He contends on

appeal the district court erred in finding his prior West Virginia conviction for first degree sexual abuse in violation of W. Va. Code § 61-

8B-7 was a crime of violence and in increasing his base offense level

as a result. We affirm. 

The federal sentencing guidelines applicable to a § 922(g)(1) conviction provide a base offense level of twenty if the defendant has one

prior felony conviction that is a crime of violence or a controlled substance offense. See U.S. Sentencing Guidelines Manual

§ 2K2.1(a)(4)(A)(1998). The term "crime of violence", as used in

USSG § 2K2.1(a)(4)(A), is defined in USSG § 4B1.2(a), as "any

offense under federal or state law, punishable by imprisonment for a

term exceeding one year, that has as an element the use, attempted

use, or threatened use of physical force against the person of another,

or . . . otherwise involves conduct that presents a serious potential risk

of physical injury to another." § 4B1.2(a). The determination as to

whether an offense is a crime of violence is a question of law that this

Court reviews de novo. United States v. Martin, 215 F.3d 470, 472

(4th Cir. 2000). 

Kesling was convicted of sexual contact without consent and by

forcible compulsion with a fourteen or fifteen year old boy. We find

the district court correctly held this offense, considered in the abstract,

is a crime of violence within the meaning of § 4B1.2(a). 

Kesling also contends he was entitled to the six-level downward

specific characteristic adjustment for possession of a weapon for lawful sporting or collection purposes pursuant to USSG § 2K2.1(b)(2).

The district court correctly found Kesling was ineligible for this

adjustment, since it is unavailable to one convicted of a prior crime

of violence under § 2K2.1(a)(4). 

2 UNITED STATES v. KESLING
Accordingly, we affirm Kesling’s sentence. We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid

the decisional process. 

AFFIRMED

UNITED STATES v. KESLING 3
#### SWAIN v. WILLIAMSON

No. 78 PC.

Case below: 4 N.C. App. 622.

Petition for writ of *certiorari*to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 23 June 1969.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   Year
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              Dec-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   Dec-31-1999
<CASH>                                              64,889
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      170,034
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                         28,723
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   289,950
<PP&E>                                           4,297,895
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,094,885
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   2,783,143
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              381,941
<BONDS>                                          1,333,410
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                             50
<COMMON>                                            16,699
<OTHER-SE>                                         930,946
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     2,783,143
<SALES>                                            735,518
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   735,518
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      580,871
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    48,289
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 106,081
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    (21,624)
<INCOME-TAX>                                           (72)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                (21,552)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       1,127
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    (23,413)
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                       (43,838)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          (0.31)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        (0.31)



</TABLE>
ایک آپ ےن ارمیکی جو ںی اوٹکیڈوییٹ * رپ 

دخامت ااجنم دی ںیہ؟

 

ایک آپ ذتل آزیم رطےقی ےک العوہ درگی رشاطئ 

ےک تحت المزتم ےس افرغ ای اکنال ایگ ا؟

 

اس ابت اک نیعت رکںی ہک آای آپ VEVRAAےک تحت وفحمظ ںیہ 

ایک ںی اکی وفحمظ اسقب جویج وہں؟ 

وانتیم دور ےک اسقب جوویجں ےک ساٹکی

 

ن

 

سسٹ

ریاڈیٹنمٹسجا 4791 )VEVRAA )ےک رتمیم دشہ ورژن )4212 § .C.S.U38 )ےک اطمقب، ہی اقونن وفحمظ اسقب جوویجں ےک الخف 

اایتمزی ولسک یک اممتعن رکات ےہ۔

VEVRAA ےک تحت ، اکی اسقب جویج یک"ذعمور اسقب جویج"، "احل یہ ںی اگل وہےنواےل اسقب جویج،" "اوٹکیڈوییٹ اور گنج ےک وتق ای یسک مہم ےکدوران اایتمزی اشنن احلص رکےن واےل اسقب 

جویج" ای "آرڈم جورزس رسوس ڈیمل احلص رکےن واےلاسقب جویج" ےک وطر رپ درہج دنبی یک اج یتکسےہ۔

رباہ ِرکم ونٹ رکںی ہک ہی ہحفص اعم ولعمامت رفامہ رکات ےہ۔ اس اک دصقم اس ںیایبن رکدہ رپورگام ےک ابرے ںی الص اقونن اور وقادع و وضاطب اک ابتمدلوہانںیہن ےہ۔

 †گنج ےک ادوار یک اترخی: راییئ انتزہع 79وجن ، 4791 - 14ونجری ، 4799۔ وہمجرہی وانتیم ںی دخامت ااجنم د ےن واےل اسقب جوویجں اک وانتیم دور 72رفوری ، 4794 - 9یئم، 4799 ای درگی امتم دقمامت ےک ےئل

9اتسگ، 4791 - 9یئم، 4799 ؛ جیلخ افرس گنج 7اتسگ 4771 – اب کت

ارگ آپ ےک اپس -214DD افرم ںیہن ےہ ، ای آپ ےکاپساسقب جویج سٹیٹس ےکابرےںیااضیفوساالتںیہوت،رباہِرکم 1-800-827-1000رپ اسقب جوویجں ےک اومر ےک ہمکحم ےس راہطب رکںی۔

ٹ لسنئ

م

آسفآفڈیفرلرٹنکٹکیک

رپورگامارمیکی ہمکحم ربیل

ofccp/gov.dol.www 1-800-397-6251: |1-877-889-5627 :TTY | فون نمبر20210 | واشنگٹن, ڈی سی | کانسٹیٹیوشن ایونیو این ڈبلیو 200

گنج ےک وتق اوٹکی ڈوییٹ ااجنم د ےن احل یہ ںی دحیلعہ رجتہب اکر ذعمور اسقب جویج

واےل ای یسک مہم ںی اایتمزی اشنن 

احلص رکےن واےل اسقب جویج

 ایک آپ ےن 101 §.C.S.U38ںی ایبن 

رکدہ گنج ےک اکی ای اکی ےس زایدہ ادوار 

ےک دوران اوٹکیڈوییٹ رپ دخامت ااجنم دںی

ںیہ۔ † 

 ایک آپ ےن یسک یھب مہم ںی اوٹکیڈوییٹ رپ

اییگنجمہمںیدخامت ااجنم دںیںیہ

سج ےک ےئل ہمکحم دافع ےک زری ااظتنم 

وقانین ےک تحت مہم اکاایتمزی اشنن

دای ایگ وہ ؟

حلسم اجوا ںی رسوس ڈیمل 

احلص رکےن واےل اسقب جویج 

 

 ایک آپ ےن اکی ارمیکی جویج 

آرپنشی ںیاوٹکیڈوییٹ رپ دخامت 

ااجنم دںی سج ےک ےئل ازگیوٹکی 

آرڈر 47729 ) FR 61

1209( ےک اطمقب آرڈم جورزس 

رسوس ڈیمل ےس ونازا ایگ ا اور 

ایک آپ آرڈم جورزس رسوس 

ڈیمل ےس ونازا ایگ ا؟

 ارگ آپ آرڈم جورزس ےک

رسوس ڈیمل ےس ونازا ایگ ا، وت 

ایک ہی آپ ےک افرم -214DD

رپ در ےہ؟

 ایک آپ اکی ارمیکی جو ےک اسقب 

 جویج ںیہ )ای وج جویج 

ن

 

س

 

 ٹن

پ

ےل 

رےہ ںیہ وہ یھب اعموےض اکدقحار 

وہں ےگ( وج اسقب جویج اومر ےک 

رکیسرٹی ےک زری ااظتنم وقانین ےک 

تحت اعموےض ےک دقحار ںیہ ؟

 ایک آپ زگہتش نیت اسولں ںی 

اعفل ڈوییٹ ےس افرغ ای راہ ایک ایگ 

ا؟

ای

ایک آپ رسوس ےس کلسنم ذعموری 

یک وہج ےس اوٹکیڈوییٹ ےس افرغ ای 

اکنالایگ ا؟
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-18-00253-CV

JC FODALE ENERGY SERVICES, LLC, and Mickey Hunt,

Appellants

v.

Jenny HENNES,

Appellee

From the 45th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2015CI12710

Honorable Stephani A. Walsh, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

Irene Rios, Justice

Beth Watkins, Justice

Delivered and Filed: January 16, 2019

MOTION GRANTED, DISMISSED

Appellants have filed a motion to dismiss this appeal. We grant the motion. See TEX. R.

APP. P. 42.1(a)(1). Because the motion does not disclose an agreement of the parties regarding the 

assessment of costs, we order all costs assessed against appellants. See id. R. 42.1(d) (absent 

agreement of the parties, costs are taxed against appellant).

PER CURIAM