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

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS, EASTERN DIVISION

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING )

COMMISSION, )

)

Plaintiff, ) Case No. 20-cv-03758

)

v. ) Judge: Hon. Thomas M. Durkin

)

LONG LEAF TRADING GROUP, INC., )

JAMES A. DONELSON, TIMOTHY )

M. EVANS, JEREMY S. RUTH, and )

ANDREW D. NELSON, )

)

Defendants. )

MOTION TO WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL

NOW COMES, Nicholas P. Iavarone and, for his Motion to Withdraw As Counsel For 

Defendants Long Leaf Trading Group, Inc. and James A. Donelson, states as follows:

1. On November 20, 2020, the undersigned will be 78-years old. 

2. The undersigned is currently recovering from COVID-19. 

3. The undersign is thus retiring from the practice of law since he is physically unable 

to perform his obligations to the level necessary to advance his clients’ interests.

WHEREFORE, the undersigned prays that an order be entered permitting him to withdraw 

as counsel for Defendants Long Leaf Trading Group, Inc. and James A. Donelson in this matter. 

Nicholas P. Iavarone

The Iavarone Law Firm

2516 Waukegan Road, #399

Glenview, Illinois 60025

niavarone@iavaronefirm.com

(312) 637-9466

Laurence M. Landsman

Case: 1:20-cv-03758 Document #: 33 Filed: 10/29/20 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:264
2

Latimer LeVay Fyock LLC

55 W Monroe Street - Suite 1100

Chicago Illinois 60603

llandsman@llflegal.com

(312) 419-3029

Case: 1:20-cv-03758 Document #: 33 Filed: 10/29/20 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:265
**EXHIBIT 32.1****CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**          Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,the undersigned officer of Xenonics Holdings, Inc. (the “Company”) hereby certifies that, to thebest of his knowledge:          (i) the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of the Company for the fiscal year ended September 30,2007 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), asapplicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and          (ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operation of the Company.       Dated: December 18, 2007 /s/ Charles W. Hunter             Charles W. Hunter
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 57 Introduced in House (IH)]

105th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 57

    Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on National 
              Security in the One Hundred Fifth Congress.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 13, 1997

   Mr. Spence (for himself and Mr. Dellums) submitted the following 
   resolution; which was referred to the Committee on House Oversight

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
    Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on National 
              Security in the One Hundred Fifth Congress.

    Resolved,

SECTION 1. AMOUNTS FOR COMMITTEE EXPENSES.

    For the expenses of the Committee on National Security (hereinafter 
in this resolution referred to as the ``Committee''), including the 
expenses of all staff salaries, there shall be paid, out of the 
applicable accounts of the House of Representatives for committee 
salaries and expenses, not more than $10,668,640 for the One Hundred 
Fifth Congress.

SEC. 2. SESSION LIMITATIONS.

    Of the amount specified in section 1--
            (1) not more than $5,145,928 shall be available for 
        expenses incurred during the period beginning at noon on 
        January 3, 1997, and ending immediately before noon on January 
        3, 1998; and
            (2) not more than $5,522,712 shall be available for 
        expenses incurred during the period beginning at noon on 
        January 3, 1998, and ending immediately before noon on January 
        3, 1999.

SEC. 3. VOUCHERS.

    Payments under this resolution shall be made on vouchers authorized 
by the Committee, signed by the Chairman of the Committee, and approved 
in the manner directed by the Committee on House Oversight.

SEC. 4. REGULATIONS.

    Amounts made available under this resolution shall be expended in 
accordance with regulations prescribed by the Committee on House 
Oversight.
                                 <all>
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                           5

<S>                                 <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                             6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                   DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                      JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                        JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                        0
<SECURITIES>                                  0
<RECEIVABLES>                           401,261
<ALLOWANCES>                                  0
<INVENTORY>                             123,251
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                        543,761
<PP&E>                                  189,306
<DEPRECIATION>                                0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                          825,749
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                 1,247,219
<BONDS>                                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                         0
<PREFERRED>                                   0
<COMMON>                                  2,344
<OTHER-SE>                             (506,790)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>            825,749
<SALES>                               1,021,544
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                      1,021,544
<CGS>                                   339,084
<TOTAL-COSTS>                           755,541
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                       (144,451)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                              0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                     (144,451)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                        (217,532)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                    (217,532)
<DISCONTINUED>                                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                               0
<CHANGES>                                     0
<NET-INCOME>                           (217,532)
<EPS-BASIC>                             (0.19)
<EPS-DILUTED>                             (0.19)


</TABLE>
Case: 1:20-cr-00280 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/05/20 Page 1 of 11 PageID #:1
Case: 1:20-cr-00280 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/05/20 Page 2 of 11 PageID #:2
Case: 1:20-cr-00280 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/05/20 Page 3 of 11 PageID #:3
Case: 1:20-cr-00280 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/05/20 Page 4 of 11 PageID #:4
Case: 1:20-cr-00280 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/05/20 Page 5 of 11 PageID #:5
Case: 1:20-cr-00280 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/05/20 Page 6 of 11 PageID #:6
Case: 1:20-cr-00280 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/05/20 Page 7 of 11 PageID #:7
Case: 1:20-cr-00280 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/05/20 Page 8 of 11 PageID #:8
Case: 1:20-cr-00280 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/05/20 Page 9 of 11 PageID #:9
Case: 1:20-cr-00280 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/05/20 Page 10 of 11 PageID #:10
Case: 1:20-cr-00280 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/05/20 Page 11 of 11 PageID #:11
#### Chas. Forster *v.*Martha E. Forster.

Divorce — Alimony Pendente Lite.

The authority of the court to allow the wife alimony pendente lite should or should not be exercised according to the facts developed in each particular case. Held, that where the wife, without any reasonable cause, abandons the husband voluntarily and against his will, alimony should be refused.

APPEAL PROM NELSON CIRCUIT COURT.

May 1, 1872.

*Muir & Wickliffe, for appellant.*

Opinion by

Judge Hardin:

The authority of the court, in a suit for divorce and alimony, to allow the wife alimony ■ *pendente lite,*under section 6, of article 3, of chapter 47, of the revised statutes, should or not be exercised according to the facts developed in each particular case, and, whereas, as is shown by the record in this case, the wife, without any reasonable cause, abandons the husband and, voluntarily and against his will, continues to live separately and apart from him, the application should be refused.

The order appealed from being deemed erroneous, therefore, the same is reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings.
#### CROTENKEMPER & Co. *v.*HILL & SMITH.

Equity — Order of Submission — Failure to Except.

Appellants did not except to the order of submission and in the absence of sucb fact it cannot be assumed that they were thereby prejudiced.

APPEAL FROM KENTON CIRCUIT COURT.

September 23, 1871.

Opinion by

Judge Lindsay:

Appellants did not except to the order of submission in this case. They did not ask a continuance, nor suggest to the court that they desired further time for preparation. In the absence of any such facts we cannot assume that they were prejudiced by the action of the court below.

The mandate of this court directed an adjustment of the accounts between the parties upon substantially the theory insisted upon by the appellants in their' pleadings, and with a view to which they had prepared the casé.

*681*Fisk, for appellant.*

*Stevenson & Myers, for appellee.*

The evidence fully sustains the action of the court in rendering the judgment complained of.

We perceive no available ground for a reversal.

Wherefore the judgment is affirmed.
Case: 1:20-cv-00447 Document #: 11-1 Filed: 01/24/20 Page 1 of 4 PageID #:54
Case: 1:20-cv-00447 Document #: 11-1 Filed: 01/24/20 Page 2 of 4 PageID #:54
Case: 1:20-cv-00447 Document #: 11-1 Filed: 01/24/20 Page 3 of 4 PageID #:54
Case: 1:20-cv-00447 Document #: 11-1 Filed: 01/24/20 Page 4 of 4 PageID #:54
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 &ourt an attorney must either be a member in good standing of this &ourt’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 8.6.&§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

$VVRFLDWLRQV RQ 6FKHGXOH 3$ ́

Ouyeinc Ltd. v. Individuals,

Partnerships, & Unincorporated

1:20-cv-03491

Jingdong E-commerce (Trade) Hong Kong Corporation Limited

Nicole E. Kopinski

Leydig, Voit & Mayer, Ltd.

Two Prudential Plaza, Suite 4900, 180 North Stetson Avenue

Chicago, Illinois 60601

6286626 (312) 616-5600

nkopinski@leydig.com

July 23, 2020

✔

✔

✔

✔

Nicole E. Kopinski

Case: 1:20-cv-03491 Document #: 34 Filed: 07/23/20 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:185
IV

House Calendar No. 57

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 154

[Report No. 105–160]

Expressing the sense of the House that the Nation’s children are its most

valuable assets and that their protection should be the Nation’s highest

priority.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MAY 20, 1997

Mr. COLLINS submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the

Committee on the Judiciary

JUNE 26, 1997

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of the House that the Nation’s children

are its most valuable assets and that their protection

should be the Nation’s highest priority.

Whereas the Nation’s most valuable and vulnerable asset is

its children;

Whereas their protection should be one of our highest priorities;
2

•HRES 154 RH

Whereas over 1,000,000 children are reported missing, and

over 100,000 attempted nonfamily abductions take place

every year;

Whereas over 750,000 children under the age of 18 disappear

for some length of time every year;

Whereas law enforcement officials constantly encounter

crimes against children;

Whereas sex offenders are nine times more likely to repeat

their crimes than any other class of criminal;

Whereas nearly two-thirds of State prisoners serving time for

rape and sexual assault victimized children; and

Whereas while many missing children are returned to their

homes, many others are exposed to danger and exploitation: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved, That—

2 (1) all Members of Congress should take appro3 priate action to ensure the safety and protection of

4 children in their jurisdictions;

5 (2) State governments should have in effect

6 laws which register offenders convicted of sexual

7 crimes against children and laws which require law

8 enforcement to notify communities of the presence of

9 these offenders;

10 (3) States should have in effect laws which se11 verely punish individuals convicted of offenses

12 against children, especially crimes involving abduc13 tion, sexual assault, exploitation, and stalking;
3

•HRES 154 RH

1 (4) law enforcement agencies should take the

2 necessary steps to safeguard children against the

3 dangers of abduction and exploitation; and

4 (5) State and local law enforcement agencies

5 should work in close cooperation with Federal law

6 enforcement to ensure a rapid and efficient response

7 to reports of child abductions, especially in cases

8 where a child’s life may be in danger.
House Calendar No. 57

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 154

[Report No. 105–160]

RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of the House that the Naest priority. that their protection should be the Nation’s high- tion’s children are its most valuable assets and

JUNE 26, 1997

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be

printed
<PAGE>
                                                                     EXHIBIT 4.9



                            CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT

                                       OF

                        THE CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION

                                       OF

                            CITY GAS SERVICE COMPANY

         The location of the principal office in this State is at No. 117 Main
Street, in the Borough of Flemington, County of Hunterdon.

         The name of the agent therein and in charge thereof upon whom process
against this corporation may be served is Scott Scammell, II.

         The Board of Directors of CITY GAS SERVICE COMPANY, a corporation of
the State of New Jersey, at a meeting held on the 2nd day of March, A.D. 1966,
adopted a resolution declaring it advisable that the name of the corporation be
changed and that the Certificate of Incorporation be amended to read as follows:

        "(a) The name of the corporation is

             UTILITY PROPANE COMPANY.";

and said Board of Directors does hereby direct that this matter be presented to
the shareholders of the corporation at the annual meeting of the stockholders to
be held at the Elizabethtown Service Center of the Elizabethtown Consolidated
Gas Company, Green Lane, Union, County of Union, State of New Jersey, on the 8th
day of March, 1966, at 3 o'clock p.m. (e.s.t.), to take action thereon.

                              CERTIFICATE OF CHANGE

         City Gas Service Company, a corporation of the State of New Jersey,
does hereby certify that it has amended Article FIRST of the Certificate of
Incorporation to read as follows:

                      "(a) The name of the corporation is:

                           UTILITY PROPANE COMPANY.";

said amendment having been declared by resolution of the Board of Directors of
said corporation to be advisable and having been duly and regularly consented to
by the unanimous vote of all of the shareholders of all of the stock of the
corporation issued and outstanding at a meeting duly called by the Directors for
that purpose.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, said corporation has made this certificate under
its seal and the hand of its President and Secretary, this 8th day of March,
1966.

                                               /s/ Stewart B. Kean
                                               ---------------------------------
                                               Stewart B. Kean, President



         (corporate seal)

ATTEST:


/s/ Harry L. Graham
------------------------------------
Harry L. Graham, Secretary
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 4 Agreed to House (ATH)]

105th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 4

 Authorizing the Clerk to inform the President of the election of the 
                         Speaker and the Clerk.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 7, 1997

Mr. Armey submitted the following resolution; which was considered and 
                               agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 Authorizing the Clerk to inform the President of the election of the 
                         Speaker and the Clerk.

    Resolved, That the Clerk be instructed to inform the President of the United 
States that the House of Representatives has elected Newt Gingrich, a 
Representative from the State of Georgia, Speaker; and Robin H. Carle, a citizen 
of the Commonwealth of Virginia, Clerk of the House of Representatives of the 
One Hundred Fifth Congress.
                                 <all>
```
#### Osawaru Amen AIDEYAN, aka John Anderson, Petitioner, v. John ASHCROFT, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 03-74125.

Agency No. [ AXX-XXX-XXX ].

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 6, 2004.*

Decided Dec. 15, 2004.

Brian D. Lerner, Law Offices of Brian D. Lerner, Long Beach, CA, for Petitioner.

Regional Counsel, Western Region Immigration & Naturalization Service, Laguna Niguel, CA, Jennifer A. Parker, Anthony W. Norwood, DOJ — U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Respondent.

*592Before GOODWIN, ALARCÓN, and TROTT, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM**

Osawaru Amen Aideyan, a native and citizen of Nigeria, petitions for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) denial of his motion to reopen immigration proceedings. Because the transitional rules of the Illegal Immigration Reform and Immigrant Responsibility Act of 1996 apply, we have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1105a(a). *Rodriguez-Lariz v. INS,*282 F.3d 1218, 1222-23 (9th Cir.2002). We review for abuse of discretion the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen, and we review de novo questions of law. *Id.*at 1222. We deny the petition for review.

The BIA properly denied petitioner’s second motion to reopen filed July 7, 2003. Because petitioner did not appeal the immigration judge’s (“IJ”) June 4, 1999 order, the BIA never rendered a decision on that order. Consequently, the BIA lacked authority to consider petitioner’s substantive request to reopen. *See*8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(a) (the BIA may reopen *sua sponte*“any case in which it has rendered a decision”).

Petitioner also contends that the BIA erred in dismissing petitioner’s appeal of the IJ’s denial of his first motion to reopen. However, we cannot say that the BIA abused its discretion by dismissing the appeal of the IJ’s decision not to exercise its *sua sponte*authority to reopen. *See Ekimian v. INS,*303 F.3d 1153, 1159 (9th Cir.2002) (court lacks “sufficiently meaningful standard against which to judge the BIA’s decision not to reopen”).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

OUYEINC LTD.,

Plaintiff,

v.

Alucy and et al., 

Defendants.

Case No. 20 cv 3490

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

Pursuant to Rule 41(a)(1) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Plaintiff Ouyeinc Ltd.

(“Ouyeinc” or “Plaintiff”) hereby dismisses this action with prejudice pursuant to settlement as 

to the following Defendants:

Defendant Name Line No.

wuyishang99 521

bestoffer365 140

shop2009mb 445

nychen-35 388

Nyliyan 389

tabletexpress_uk 474

bythechance_1 165

Valuefashionstore 505

toys-kids 489

Case: 1:20-cv-03490 Document #: 99 Filed: 12/02/20 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:495
Eshoppingstar75 225

Broadchoosen 158

Bestinthebox 135

eg-motor 218

Fulcat 244

Morriscarcam 368

shift-star 443

Smafay 452

uncledavid2010 493

chuengleo2010 175

Smartbizpro 551

Floureondeal 238

homehub_supplies 287

mei_ebuy 358

LIDDYGO 46

DATED December 2, 2020 Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Kenneth A. Nazarian

James A. Karamanis

Barney & Karamanis, LLP

Two Prudential Plaza

180 N. Stetson, Ste 3050

Chicago, IL 60601

Tel.: 312/553-5300

Attorney No. 6309765

James@bkchicagolaw.com

Ken@bkchicagolaw.com

ATTORNEY FOR PLAINTIFF Ouyeinc Ltd.

Case: 1:20-cv-03490 Document #: 99 Filed: 12/02/20 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:496
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS 

EASTERN DIVISION 

BRUCE PICKENS, Individually and On 

Behalf of All Others Similarly Situated, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

DAIMLER AG, MERCEDESBENZ, 

SAINT-GOBAIN SEKURIT, AND 

NAPLETON AUTOWERKS OF 

INDIANA, INC., 

Defendants. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case No. 1:20-cv-3470 

DEFENDANT MERCEDES BENZ, USA, LLC’S 

MOTION TO DISMISS OR, ALTERNATIVELY, MOTION TO STRIKE 

PLAINTIFF’S FIRST AMENDED COMPLAINT 

Defendant Mercedes-Benz USA, LLC (“MBUSA”), pursuant to Federal Rules of Civil 

Procedure 8, 9(b), 12(b)(1) and 12(b)(6), moves to dismiss Plaintiff Bruce Pickens’ First Amended 

Complaint or, in the alternative, to strike the class allegations. MBUSA files its Memorandum in 

Support contemporaneously with this motion, which it incorporates herein by reference. 

WHEREFORE, for the reasons set forth in its Memorandum in Support, MBUSA 

respectfully requests that this Court dismiss Pickens’ First Amended Complaint and grant such 

other and further relief as this Court deems proper. 

Respectfully submitted, 

By: Renato Mariotti

Renato Mariotti 

Holly H. Campbell 

THOMPSON COBURN LLP 

55 East Monroe, 37th Floor 

Chicago, Illinois 60603 

312.346.7500 

rmariotti@thompsoncoburn.com 

hcampbell@thompsoncoburn.com 

Case: 1:20-cv-03470 Document #: 30 Filed: 09/18/20 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:217
2 

Daniel C. Cox 

Christopher M. Hohn 

Brandi L. Burke 

THOMPSON COBURN LLP 

One US Bank Plaza 

St. Louis, MO 

314.552.6000 

dcox@thompsoncoburn.com 

chohn@thompsoncoburn.com 

bburke@thompsoncoburn.com 

Attorneys for Defendant MercedesBenz USA, LLC 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that on September 18, 2020, the foregoing was filed electronically with the 

Clerk of Court to be served by operation of the Court’s electronic filing system upon all counsel 

of record. 

 /s/ Renato Mariotti 

Case: 1:20-cv-03470 Document #: 30 Filed: 09/18/20 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:218