alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

SUGARTOWN WORLDWIDE LLC, 

TOMMY BAHAMA GROUP, INC., and

SOUTHERN TIDE, LLC,

Plaintiffs,

v.

MEMORYHOME STORE, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 20-cv-02187

Judge Sara L. Ellis

Magistrate Judge Sidney I. Schenkier

NOTICE OF DISMISSAL UNDER RULE 41(a)(1)

Pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiffs Sugartown 

Worldwide LLC, Tommy Bahama Group, Inc., and Southern Tide, LLC (collectively 

“Plaintiffs”) hereby dismiss this action with prejudice as to the following Defendants:

Defendant Name Line No.

Sun goods 63

kristen Lee 80

Dated this 31st day of July 2020. Respectfully submitted,

/s/ RiKaleigh C. Johnson

Amy C. Ziegler

Justin R. Gaudio

RiKaleigh C. Johnson

Greer, Burns & Crain, Ltd.

300 South Wacker Drive, Suite 2500

Chicago, Illinois 60606

312.360.0080 

312.360.9315 (facsimile)

aziegler@gbc.law

jgaudio@gbc.law

rjohnson@gbc.law

Counsel for Plaintiffs Sugartown Worldwide LLC, 

Tommy Bahama Group, Inc., and Southern Tide, 

LLC

Case: 1:20-cv-02187 Document #: 53 Filed: 07/31/20 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:2463
##### 



Exhibit 10.1
 AgriFuel Co.
AMENDED AND RESTATED
STOCK SUBSCRIPTION AGREEMENT
AND STOCKHOLDER AGREEMENT
 Agreement Company Purchasers Purchaser Metalico
 ,
 Original Agreement
   1. AUTHORIZATION. " Founders Capitalization  Schedule 6A Securities " Capital Contribution
 2. PURCHASE AND SALE OF SECURITIES; CLOSING.
 2A. Purchase and Sale of Securities.
 2B. Closing. Closing Closing
Date




---



##### 



3. CONDITIONS OF CLOSING.
 3A. Formation of Company.
 3B. Representations and Warranties. Paragraph
6 .
 3C. Sale of all Securities Paragraph
2B provided
 4. COVENANTS OF THE COMPANY.
 4A. Financial and Other Reporting by the Company.
  Paragraph 5D
 Paragraph 5D
 4B. Use of Proceeds.
 4C. Business of the Company.
 4D. Investor Relations Firm. Paragraph 5C
 5. CONDITIONAL RIGHT TO SELL.
 5A. Sale Rights. Paragraph 5C Sale Notice
 Page 2




---



##### 



Paragraph 5A(i)
 Paragraph 5A(i)
 Paragraph 5A(i)(a) Paragraph
5A(i)(b)
 5B. Stock Rights. Paragraph 5A(i)(b) Paragraph 5A(i)(b) Paragraph 5A(i)(b)
 5C. Public Trading Event. Paragraph 5 Public Trading Event Trading Platform provided Paragraph 5C
 5D. Insider Information. Paragraphs
4A(ii) (iii)
 6. REPRESENTATIONS AND WARRANTIES OF THE COMPANY.
 6A. Organization, Etc. Schedule
6A
 Page 3




---



##### 



6B. Company Ownership. Schedule 6A Schedule 6A provided Schedule 6A Schedule 6A
 7. REPRESENTATIONS OF THE PURCHASERS.
 7A. Purchase for Own Account.
 7B. Accredited Investor Status.
 7C. Unregistered Securities.
 8. REPRESENTATIONS OF METALICO.
   9. RATABLE LIQUIDATION. Liquidation
 Page 4




---



##### 



10. MISCELLANEOUS.
 10A. Consent to Amendments.
 10B. Survival of Representations and Warranties; Entire Agreement.
 10C. Successors and Assigns.
 10D. Additional Stock.
 10E. Governing Law.
 10F. Counterparts.
 10G. Severability.
 Page 5




---



##### 



AGRIFUEL CO.By:Carlos E. AgüeroChairman 
 *
 By:SignatureName:Please Print
 Capital Contribution: $Number of Shares:
 
 *
    
    Corporate/business entities: Please insert
appropriate Purchasers name and signature block. Page 6
**Exhibit 31.2****Certification**I, Lark E. Wysham, Executive Vice-President and Chief Financial Officer of Citizens Bancorp,certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Citizens Bancorp; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness ofthe disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial 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 hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.Date: November 10, 2006              /s/ Lark E. Wysham   Lark E. Wysham   Executive Vice-President andChief Financial Officer
U.S. District Court for the Northern District Of Illinois

Attorney Appearance Form

Case Title: Case Number: 

An appearance is hereby filed by the undersigned as attorney for:

Attorney name (type or print): 

Firm: 

Street address: 

City/State/Zip: 

Bar ID Number: Telephone Number: 

 Yes No

 Yes No

 Yes No

 Yes No

(See item 3 in instructions)

Email Address:

Are you acting as lead counsel in this case?

Are you acting as local counsel in this case?

Are you a member of the court’s trial bar?

If this case reaches trial, will you act as the trial attorney? 

If this is a criminal case, check your status. Retained Counsel

Appointed Counsel 

If appointed counsel, are you 

a 

 Federal Defender

 CJA Panel Attorney

______________________________________________________________________

In order to appear before this Court an attorney must either be a member in good standing of this Court’s 

general bar or be granted leave to appear pro hac vice as provided for by local rules 83.12 through 83.14. 

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Under 28 U.S.C.§1746, this 

statement under perjury has the same force and effect as a sworn statement made under oath.

Executed on 

Attorney signature: S/

(Use electronic signature if the appearance form is filed electronically.)

Revised 8/1/2015

Case: 1:20-cv-02922 Document #: 20 Filed: 06/29/20 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:65
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Kelli Mars","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/kelli-l-marsnasa-gov\/","title":"40 Years Ago: STS-41C, the Solar Max Repair Mission","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"CoW4GHDird\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/history\/40-years-ago-sts-41c-the-solar-max-repair-mission\/\">40 Years Ago: STS-41C, the Solar Max Repair Mission<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/history\/40-years-ago-sts-41c-the-solar-max-repair-mission\/embed\/#?secret=CoW4GHDird\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“40 Years Ago: STS-41C, the Solar Max Repair Mission” — NASA\" data-secret=\"CoW4GHDird\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/04\/sts-41c-1-crew-s83-46072.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":480}
## In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02

- 17

- 00302

- CV

D AVID H ERNANDEZ

V

.

R OCKWATER E NERGY S OLUTIONS

, I NC

. §

§

§

§ On Appeal from 48th District Court

of Tarrant County (048

- 283327

- 16)

September 20, 2018

Opinion by Justic e Gabriel

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there

was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of the trial

court is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By /s/ Lee Gabriel

Justice Lee Gabriel
EXHIBIT 32.1

                   CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(b) OR
                       RULE 15d-14(b) and 18 U.S.C.  1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In  connection  with  the  annual  report of Petrosearch Energy Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Richard
D.  Dole, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
1350,  as  adopted  pursuant  to  Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:

     (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: March 31, 2006                            By: /s/ Richard D. Dole
                                                    ----------------------
                                                    Richard D. Dole
                                                    Chief Executive Officer
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE Northern District of Illinois − CM/ECF NextGen 1.6.3

Eastern Division

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 1:20−cr−00259

Honorable Thomas M. Durkin

Kevin D Tunstall

Defendant.

NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRY

This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Wednesday, May 25, 2022:

 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Thomas M. Durkin: as to Kevin D Tunstall.

Sentencing held on 5/25/2022. Judgment order to follow. Mailed notice. (ecw, )

ATTENTION: This notice is being sent pursuant to Rule 77(d) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure or Rule 49(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. It was

generated by CM/ECF, the automated docketing system used to maintain the civil and

criminal dockets of this District. If a minute order or other document is enclosed, please

refer to it for additional information.

For scheduled events, motion practices, recent opinions and other information, visit our

web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov.

Case: 1:20-cr-00259 Document #: 64 Filed: 05/25/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:190
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman

, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Kurtis T. Wilder

Elizabeth T. Clement

, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

December 21, 2018

a1217 

# Order

Clerk December 21, 2018

157519

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 157519

COA: 340277

Macomb CC: 2014

- 004731

- FH

DANIEL GENE FRITZ,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_____________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the February 22, 2018

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE Northern District of Illinois − CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 6.3.3

Eastern Division

Anthony Mays, et al.

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 1:20−cv−02134

Honorable Robert W. Gettleman

Dart J Thomas

Defendant.

NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRY

This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Friday, December 10, 2021:

 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Robert W. Gettleman: Joint motion for entry

of order extending the Preliminary Injunction [187] is granted. Enter Agreed Order.

Mailed notice (cn).

ATTENTION: This notice is being sent pursuant to Rule 77(d) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure or Rule 49(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. It was

generated by CM/ECF, the automated docketing system used to maintain the civil and

criminal dockets of this District. If a minute order or other document is enclosed, please

refer to it for additional information.

For scheduled events, motion practices, recent opinions and other information, visit our

web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov.

Case: 1:20-cv-02134 Document #: 188 Filed: 12/10/21 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:3910
8942.

#### McRee *v.*Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company.

Decided March 14, 1918.

Action for damages; from city court of Yáldosta—Judge Cranford. 'May 18, 1917.

*Whitaker & Dukes,*for plaintiff.

*Bennet & Branch, Patterson & Copeland,*contra.

Luke, J.

1. It is not ground for a new trial to the plaintiff that the, cpurt allowed the defendant railroad company to show by him, on cross-examination, that in the course of several years preceding the burning of the house for which a recovery was sought in this case, and which burning he alleged and by circumstantial evidence sought to show was caused *by*fire set out by a locomotive of the defendant, several other houses at the same place were burned.

2. The evidence authorized the verdict for the defendant, and the instructions complained of contain no error that .requires a new trial.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Wade, C. J., and Jenkins, J., concur.*
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE Northern District of Illinois − CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 6.3.3

Eastern Division

Fox Valley & Vicinity Construction Workers

Welfare Fund, et al.

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.:

1:20−cv−02702

Honorable Elaine E.

Bucklo

Porter Brothers Asphalt & Sealing, Inc., et al.

Defendant.

NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRY

This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Monday, February 1, 2021:

 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Elaine E. Bucklo: A notice of voluntary

dismissal has been filed. This case is dismissed without prejudice. All pending dates

before this court are stricken. Civil case terminated. Mailed notice. (mgh, )

ATTENTION: This notice is being sent pursuant to Rule 77(d) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure or Rule 49(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. It was

generated by CM/ECF, the automated docketing system used to maintain the civil and

criminal dockets of this District. If a minute order or other document is enclosed, please

refer to it for additional information.

For scheduled events, motion practices, recent opinions and other information, visit our

web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov.

Case: 1:20-cv-02702 Document #: 21 Filed: 02/01/21 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:80
No. 14,567.

#### Wall et al. *v.*Bagby.

Filed Dec. 18, 1890.

Supreme Court. — *Assignment of Error.*— Joint *Assignment.*— Practice.— Where several appellants join in an assignment of error they will fail unless the errors are well assigned as to all who unite in the assignment.

*Same.*— Bill *of Exceptions.*— Evidence.—Question *not Presented.*— Where it is not shown that the bill of exceptions contains all the evidence given in the cause, no question is presented upon a ruling denying a new trial.

Prom the Jay Circuit Court.

*C. Corwin*and *J. M. Smith,*for appellants.

*D. T. Taylor*and *R. H. Hartford,*for appellee.

Elliott, J.

— The appellee insists that as the appellants join in. their assignment of errors they must fail unless the errors alleged are well assigned as to both, and under the settled rule it is our duty to sustain this contention, for the errors are not well assigned as to all who unite in the assignment. It is a rule of practice, essential to the orderly administration of the law, that all who join in a motion or pleading must show a right to the relief demanded. The rule applies to complaints, answers, demurrers, motions for new trials, and other matters of procedure. Again and again it has been applied to assignments of error. *Hanshew*v. *State, ex rel.,*113 Ind. 261; *Walker*v. *Hill,*111 Ind. 223; *Orton*v. *Tilden,*110 Ind. 131; *Hochstedler*v. *Hochstedler,*108 Ind. 506; *Tucker*v. *Conrad,*103 Ind. 349; *Hinkle*v. *Shelley,*100 Ind. 88.

No question is presented upon the ruling denying a new trial, for the reason that it is not shown, in any form, that the bill of exceptions contains all the evidence given in the cause.

Judgment affirmed.
IV

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 135

To amend the Rules of the House of Representatives to permit disabled

individuals who have access to the House floor to bring supporting services.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

APRIL 29, 1997

Mr. WEYGAND (for himself, Mr. MCGOVERN, Mr. BLAGOJEVICH, Mr. MOAKLEY, Ms. DELAURO, Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts, Mr. DELAHUNT, Mr.

TIERNEY, Mr. KUCINICH, Mr. STARK, Mr. STRICKLAND, Mrs. MCCARTHY of New York, Mr. BLUMENAUER, Ms. DEGETTE, Mr. ETHERIDGE,

Mr. BOSWELL, Mr. SANDLIN, Mr. LAMPSON, Mr. ROTHMAN, and Mr.

PASCRELL) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the

Committee on Rules

RESOLUTION

To amend the Rules of the House of Representatives to

permit disabled individuals who have access to the House

floor to bring supporting services.

1 Resolved,

2 SECTION 1. SUPPORTING SERVICES.

3 Rule XXXII of the Rules of the House of Representa4 tives is amended by adding at the end the following:

5 ‘‘(6) Clerks of committees and persons from Mem6 ber’s staffs who have a disability (as defined in section

7 3 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 (42
2

•HRES 135 IH

1 U.S.C. 12102) and who have access to the Hall of the

2 House may bring supporting services (including service

3 dogs, wheelchairs, and interpreters) into the Hall of the

4 House.’’.

Æ
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                       AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
                        OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

     I, Jeff Shell, Chief Executive Officer of Gemstar-TV Guide International,
Inc. (the "Company"), do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my
knowledge:

     (i) the annual report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended
     December 31, 2002, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
     (the "Report"), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
     15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

     (ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
     material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
     Company.

Date:  March 31, 2003

                                         /s/ Jeff Shell
                                         ----------------------------------
                                         Jeff Shell
                                         Chief Executive Officer
                                         (Principal Executive Officer)

A signed original 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.
RECEIVED 5/8/2020

THOMAS G. BRUTON CLERK, U.S. DISTRICT COURT

KL

20-CV-2868

JUDGE PALLMEYER

MAGISTRATE JUDGE VALDEZ

PC5

Case: 1:20-cv-02868 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/08/20 Page 1 of 7 PageID #:1
Case: 1:20-cv-02868 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/08/20 Page 2 of 7 PageID #:2
Case: 1:20-cv-02868 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/08/20 Page 3 of 7 PageID #:3
Case: 1:20-cv-02868 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/08/20 Page 4 of 7 PageID #:4
Case: 1:20-cv-02868 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/08/20 Page 5 of 7 PageID #:5
Case: 1:20-cv-02868 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/08/20 Page 6 of 7 PageID #:6
Case: 1:20-cv-02868 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/08/20 Page 7 of 7 PageID #:7