alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                           4,707
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   37,712
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,788
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                43,308
<PP&E>                                           8,354
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 217,462
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           38,173
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           119
<OTHER-SE>                                      97,625
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   217,462
<SALES>                                         57,129
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                57,129
<CGS>                                           35,414
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   20,742
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   (4)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,868
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (891)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       445
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,336)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,336)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.11)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.11)
                                               


</TABLE>
#### DAVIES et al. v. ALLIED INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTS, Inc.

No. 50 C 1583.

United States District Court N. D. Illinois, E. D.

July 2, 1951.

Wilfred S. Stone, Chicago, Ill., for plaintiffs.

James F. Duffy, Chicago, Ill., for defendant.

LA BUY, District Judge.

Complaint herein alleges plaintiff to be the owner by assignment of certain letters patent together with rights thereunder to sue and recover damages and profits resulting from past and future infringements; that defendant will continue to infringe unless enjoined by this court; wherefore, plaintiff demands a preliminary and final injunction against further infringement, an accounting for profits and damages, an assessment of costs against the defendant and allowance of attorney’s fees. Defendant has filed answer denying infringement and alleging said letters patent to be invalid. Plaintiff has filed a jury demand on the issue of validity and infringement and defendant has moved to strike said jury demand on the ground that said action is an equitable claim and plaintiff is not entitled to a jury trial as a matter of right.

As was stated an Bellavance v. Plastic-Craft Novelty Co., D.C.Mass.1939, 30 F.Supp. 37, 38:

> “The remedies open to one for the infringement of a patent are wholly statutory. The statutes afford two remedies — first, an action on the case to recover damages for infringement, * * * 35 U.S.C.A. § *11067. Such -an action, of course, is one at law and would entitle the parties to a jury trial. The other remedy is by proceeding under R.S. § 4921, 35 U.S.C.A. § 70, which gives the court ‘power to grant injunctions according to the course and principles of courts of equity, to prevent the violation of any right secured by patent He He H: ***

> “In proceedings under this latter statute the complainant m-ay ask for damages already sustained, as well as for injunctive relief. Clearly, it is under this * * * statute [providing equitable relief] that the plaintiff has proceeded. It has long been settled law that where suit is brought under the statute providing equitable relief, the fact that the plaintiff -also seeks damages for past infringement will not entitle the plaintiff to a jury trial on the issue of damages. Barton v. Barbour, 104 U.S. 126, 133, 26 L.Ed. 672.

Reading the complaint with the above principles in mind, the court is of the opinion the plaintiff has formed his complaint seeking relief under the equitable proceeding provided by the statute. While the allegations concerning the assignment allege also assignment of the right to sue and recover for damages, the relief he requests is injunctive and consequently there inures to him no right to trial by jury pursuant to the Seventh Amendment of the Constitution. For these reasons, the defendant’s motion to strike the jury demand is sustained.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
REGISTRANT'S UNAUDITED BALANCE SHEET AS OF MAY 31, 1999 AND THE UNAUDITED
STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS AND STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS FOR THE THREE MONTHS THEN
ENDED AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                          0000835585
<NAME>                         C-Phone Corporation
<MULTIPLIER>                            1
<CURRENCY>                            USD

<S>                                   <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                       3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>              FEB-28-2000
<PERIOD-START>                 MAR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                   MAY-31-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                         1
<CASH>                          3,600,609
<SECURITIES>                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                     395,500
<ALLOWANCES>                      (90,305)
<INVENTORY>                     1,124,111
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                5,134,188
<PP&E>                            967,795
<DEPRECIATION>                   (869,822)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  5,384,772
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>             816,479
<BONDS>                                 0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                   0
<PREFERRED>                             0
<COMMON>                           79,786
<OTHER-SE>                      4,488,507
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    5,384,772
<SALES>                           385,870
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                  385,870
<CGS>                             377,851
<TOTAL-COSTS>                     377,851
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                        0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                    1,843
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                      0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                  (986,329)
<INCOME-TAX>                            0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>              (986,329)
<DISCONTINUED>                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                         0
<CHANGES>                               0
<NET-INCOME>                     (986,329)
<EPS-BASIC>                           0
<EPS-DILUTED>                           0


</TABLE>
No. 15,143.

#### Leming *v.*Sale.

*Divoece.*— Custody *of Child.*— Status *Fixed by Decree.*— How *Status May be Changed.*— The decree in a divorce suit awarding the custody of a child to one of the parties, fixes the status of the child as between the parties until modified or set aside for cause shown by some subsequent, or supplemental, proceeding in the same cause.

From the Warren Circuit Court.

*W.*P. *Rhodes,*for appellant.

*E. Stansbury,*for appellee.

Coffey, J.

This was an application by the appellee against the appellant, made to the judge of the Warren Cir*318cuit Court, for a writ of *habeas corpus*to obtain the possession of a child.

Filed May 22, 1891.

' The petition in the cause alleges that the appellee obtained a divorce from the appellant in the Warren Circuit Court in the year 1888 ; that in said cause the court decreed the custody of the child in controversy, which is the child of the parties to this suit, to the.appellee; that the appellee placed said child in the care of his sister, from, whom the appellant took it without the knowledge or consent of the appellee, and without the knowledge or consent of the sister, and that she had for some months secreted and kept the child from the custody of the appellee.

The appellee filed a return, in which she sought to justify her possession of the child, on the ground that it was to its interest to remain in her custody.

The court sustained exceptions to this return, holding thát the decree in the divorce suit awarding the custody of the child to the appellee was conclusive between the parties, and settled the right of the appellee to such custody.

The only question presented for our consideration relates to the propriety of this holding.

Whatever may be the rule elsewhere, the question here presented is not an open one in this State. *Williams*v. *Williams,*13 Ind. 523; *Baily v. Schrader,*34 Ind. 260; *Sullivan*v. *Learned,*49 Ind. 252; *Joab*v. *Sheets,*99 Ind. 328.

It is settled by these cases that a decree of the kind under 'consideration fixes the *status*of the child as between its parents, and is conclusive between the parties until modified or set aside for cause shown by some subsequent, or supplemental, proceeding in the same cause.

There was no error in the ruling of the court below.

Judgment affirmed.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

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

Eastern Division

Benjamin Garner, et al.

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 1:20−cv−04693

Honorable John Z. Lee

Allstate Insurance Company

Defendant.

NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRY

This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Monday, October 19, 2020:

 MINUTE entry before the Honorable John Z. Lee:The status hearing set for

10/21/20 is reset to 11/5/20 at 9:15 a.m., the dial in number remains the same.Mailed

notice(ca, )

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-04693 Document #: 16 Filed: 10/19/20 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:50
# Fourth Court of Appeals
San Antonio, Texas

February 1, 2018

No. 04

- 17

- 00489

- CV

Paul BLACK

, Appellant

v.

Mikal WATTS ; Wa tts Guerra LLP; James R. Harris; and Harris & Greenwell, LLP, Appellees

From the 73rd Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2015

- CI

- 20874 Honorable Cathleen M. Stryker, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

The appel lees ’ second unopposed motion for extension of time to file brief is hereby GRANTED. Time is extended to February 16, 2018.

_________________________________ Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 1st day of February, 2018

.

___________________________________ KEITH E. HOTTLE

, Clerk of Court
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**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 Annual Report of Timberline Resources Corporation, (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the period ended September 30, 2023, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Ted R. Sharp, Chief Financial Officer and Principal Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 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 Timberline Resources Corporation. |

 

| /s/ Ted R. Sharp                      |   | Date: January 2, 2024 |
|---------------------------------------|--------|----------------------------|
| Ted R. Sharp, Chief Financial Officer |   |                       |

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Timberline Resources Corporation and will be retained by Timberline Resources Corporation to be furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit E

Case: 1:20-cr-00443 Document #: 52-5 Filed: 07/06/21 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:129
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined

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

No. 95-41009 Summary Calendar

LEE ANTHONY JOHNSON, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus ANN RICHARDS, Governor of Texas, ET AL., Defendants,
C. RAINE ET AL. Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 6:94-cv-197

- - - - - - - - - - April 25, 1997 Before JONES, DeMOSS and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Texas prisoner Lee Anthony Johnson, No. 290961, moves this court for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (IFP) on appeal from the dismissal of his civil rights complaint. On January 15, 1997, Johnson was ordered to file an application to proceed IFP on appeal which complied with the requirements of the PrisonNo. 95-41009 - 2 - Litigation Reform Act of 1995 (PLRA). The order held Johnson’s appeal in abeyance for 30 days pending payment of the $105 filing fee or submission of the required documents pursuant to the PLRA. Johnson timely responded; however, the documentation submitted by Johnson does not comply with the requirements imposed by the PLRA because he did not submit information regarding his prison trust account for the period required. See § 1915(a), (b). Accordingly, Johnson’s motion for leave to proceed IFP on appeal is DENIED, and his appeal is dismissed for want of prosecution. See 5th Cir. R. 42.3. Should Johnson wish to reinstate his appeal, he is instructed to pay the $105 filing fee to the clerk of the district court within 30 days from the date of this order.
MOTION DENIED. APPEAL DISMISSED.
H. Res. 500

In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

July 15, 1998.

Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it

shall be in order without intervention of any point of order

to consider in the House the bill (H.R. 3267) to direct the

Secretary of the Interior, acting through the Bureau of Reclamation, to conduct a feasibility study and construct a

project to reclaim the Salton Sea. The bill shall be considered

as read for amendment. In lieu of the amendment recommended by the Committee on Resources now printed in

the bill, the amendment in the nature of a substitute printed

in the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this

resolution shall be considered as adopted. The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill, as amended,

and on any further amendment thereto to final passage without intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate on the

bill, as amended, equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Resources; (2) a further amendment printed in the Congressional Record pursuant to clause 6 of rule XXIII, if offered
2

•HRES 500 EH

by Representative Miller of California or his designee, which

may be considered notwithstanding the adoption of the

amendment in the nature of a substitute printed in the report

of the Committee on Rules, shall be considered as read, and

shall be separately debatable for one hour equally divided and

controlled by the proponent and an opponent; and (3) one

motion to recommit with or without instructions.

Attest:

Clerk.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER  PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

I, G.J. Hart, Chief Executive Officer of Texas Roadhouse, Inc. (the "Company"), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

(1)   The
Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the fiscal year ended December 30, 2008 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements
of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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: February 27, 2009

By:

/s/ G.J. HART G.J. Hart
President, Chief Executive Officer


---



QuickLinks
|Exhibit 99.5 Holders of Record, holding 5% or more of the outstanding balance for Accredited Mortgage Loan Trust 2004-2, Asset-Backed Notes, Series 2004-2 as reflected in the security position listing as of December 31, 2004 provided by DTC.  Class
Name and Address of Holder


Amount Held
% Class
A-1
FHL/RETAIN




342,200,000
100%

155 Parkrun Drive

Mail Stop 5DN

McLean, VA 22102
A-2
The Bank of New York


203,110,000
59%

One Wall Street

New York, NY 10286

JP Morgan Chase Bank NA


49,380,000
14%

14201 Dallas Parkway

Dallas, TX 75254

SSB&T Co.




70,635,000
20%

1776 Heritage Dr.

Global Corporate Action Unit JAB 5NW

No. Quincy, MA 02171
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
**EXHIBIT32.2**

**Certification of Chief Financial Officer**

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of FirstConsulting Group, Inc., a Delaware, corporation (the “Company”), hereby certifies,to his knowledge, that:

(i)    theaccompanying quarterly report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period endedJune 29, 2007 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,as amended; and

(ii)   theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| Dated: August 8, 2007 |   | /s/ THOMAS A. WATFORD                               |   |
|-----------------------|--------|-----------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                  |   | Thomas A. Watford                                   |
|                  |   | Chief Operating Officer and Chief Financial Officer |

 

Theforegoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Reportpursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 and in accordance with SEC Release No. 33-8238.  This certification shall not be deemed “filed”for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended,nor shall it be incorporated by reference in any filing of the Company underthe Securities Act of 1933, as amended, whether made before or after the datehereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.

----
Exhibit 10.1


 


ADDITIONAL EXERCISE PROCEDURES


(November 7, 2005)


 


These
  Additional Exercise Procedures have been adopted by the Compensation Committee
  (the “Committee”) of the Board of Directors of TheStreet.com, Inc.
  (the “Company”) in accordance with the terms and conditions of the
  Company’s 1998 Stock Incentive Plan, as amended and restated as of May
  29, 2002 (the “Plan”). Capitalized terms used and not defined herein
  shall have the meanings assigned to them in the Plan.


Reference is made to the outstanding stock options (the “Options”) granted under the Plan and held by Thomas Clarke, Jordan Goldstein and Lisa Mogensen (each, an “Optionee”) to purchase 325,000, 11,750 and 18,500 shares of Stock, respectively, at an exercise price of $2.50 per share and expiring on November 29, 2005.  


Subject to the Plan and the applicable Options awards and without limiting any of the existing terms of the Options, all or any portion of the Options may be exercised by the respective Optionees at any time by instructing the Company to withhold from the shares of Stock that would otherwise be issued upon exercise of such Options that number of shares of Stock having a fair market value equal to the sum of the aggregate exercise price of such Options and the minimum amount of applicable withholding taxes then due.


In accordance with the Plan and for purposes of the foregoing, the fair market value of each share of Stock for purposes of each Option exercise shall be the closing price of the Stock on The NASDAQ Stock Market on the trading day immediately preceding the date of such exercise.


Such exercise by an Optionee shall be evidenced by delivery of a written stock option exercise notice specifying the number of whole shares of Stock to be purchased under these Additional Exercise Procedures.
EXHIBIT 32.53

 

 

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 on Form 10-Q of Dollar Thrifty Automotive Group, Inc. (the “Company”) for the period ended September 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Scott L. Thompson, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §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. |
|--------|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

 

/s/ Scott L. Thompson

Scott L. Thompson

Chief Executive Officer

November 5, 2008

 

 

 

 

 

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 Dollar Thrifty Automotive Group, Inc. and will be retained by Dollar Thrifty Automotive Group, Inc. and furnished to the        Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.