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

DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

ANGELA POSEY,

Plaintiff

 V. SUMMONS IN A CIVIL CASE

BUILDING MATERIALS CORPORATION OF

AMERICA, ET AL.,

Defendant

CASE NUMBER: 2:11−CV−04540−WJM −MF

 TO: (Name and address of Defendant):

 A lawsuit has been filed against you.

 Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) −− or 60 days if

you are the United States or a United States Agency, or an office or employee of the United States described in

Fed. R. civ. P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) −− you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a

motion under rule 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the

plaintiff or plaintiff`s attorney, whose name and address are:

 If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the

complaint. You also must file your answer or motion with the court.

WILLIAM T. WALSH

 CLERK

Case 2:11-cv-04540-WJM -MF Document 2 Filed 08/04/11 Page 1 of 3 PageID: 37
 MARQUIS WHITNEY

 (By) DEPUTY CLERK

ISSUED ON 2011−08−08 13:12:42.0, Clerk

USDC NJD

Case 2:11-cv-04540-WJM -MF Document 2 Filed 08/04/11 Page 2 of 3 PageID: 38
RETURN OF SERVICE

 Service of the Summons and complaint was made by me (1) DATE

 NAME OF SERVER (PRINT) TITLE

 Check one box below to indicate appropriate method of service

Served personally upon the defendant. Place where served: _______________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

Left copies thereof at the defendant's dwelling house or usual place of abode with a person of suitable age and

discretion then residing therein.

Name of person with whom the summons and complaint were left:__________________________________

Returned unexecuted:_____________________________________________________________________

_________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

Other (specify) :_________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

________________________________________________________________________

STATEMENT OF SERVICE FEES

 TRAVEL SERVICES TOTAL

DECLARATION OF SERVER

 I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the United States of America that the foregoing information

contained in the Return of Service and Statement of Service Fees is true and correct.

Executed on ___________________ _______________________________________

Date Signature of Server

_______________________________________

Address of Server

Case 2:11-cv-04540-WJM -MF Document 2 Filed 08/04/11 Page 3 of 3 PageID: 39
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Alan B. FABIAN, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 12-6976.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Nov. 30, 2012.

Decided: Dec. 19, 2012.

Alan B. Fabian, Appellant Pro Se. Jonathan Biran, Assistant United States Attorney, Tonya Nicole Kelly, Office of The United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Before KING, SHEDD, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Alan B. Fabian seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his Fed. R.Crim.P. 36 motion to correct a clerical error. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *United States v. Fabian,*No. 1:07-cr00355-CCB-1 (D.Md. May 24, 2012). We grant Fabian’s motion for leave to file exhibits, and we deny his motion for appointment of counsel. We dispense with *254oral 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.*
AO 440 (Rev. 12/09) Summons in a Civil Action 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

for the 


District ofNew Jersey 


ENID SANTIAGO 

) 

Plaintiff ) 

) 

v. ) Civil Action No. 

New York &NEW Jersey Port Authority. Tunnel & ) 

Bridge Agent Gregory Noa ET AL ) 

Defendant ) 

SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION 

To: (Defendant's name and address) 

A lawsuit has been filed against you. 

Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) - or 60 days if you 

are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee ofthe United States described in Fed. R. Civ. 

P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) - you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of 

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiffs attorney, 

whose name and address are: 

LOUIS A. ZAYAS. ESQ. 

LAW OFFICES OF LOUIS A. ZAYAS, LLC 

8901 Kennedy Boulevard, 5th Floor 

North Bergen, N.J. 07047 

Tel: (201) 977-2900 

If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. 

You also must file your answer or motion with the court. 

CLERK OF COURT 

Date: 

Signature ofClerk or Deputy Clerk 

Case 2:11-cv-04254-WJM-MF Document 1-1 Filed 07/25/11 Page 1 of 2 PageID: 12
--------------------------------------

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

AO 440 (Rev. 12/09) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2) 

Civil Action No. 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (I)) 

This summons for (name 0/individual and title. ifany) 

was received by me on (date) 

o 	I personally served the summons on the individual at (place) 

on (date) ; or 

o I left the summons at the individual's residence or usual place of abode with (name) 

, a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there, 

on (date) , and mailed a copy to the individual's last known address; or 

o I served the summons on (name o/individual) 	 , who is --------............ --------------------------­

designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name 0/organization) 

on (date) ; or 

o I returned the summons unexecuted because 	 ; or 

o Other (specifY): 

My fees are $ for travel and $ 	 for services, for a total of$ 0.00 

I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true. 

Date: 

Server's signature 

Printed name and title 

Server's address 

Additional information regarding attempted service, etc: 

Case 2:11-cv-04254-WJM-MF Document 1-1 Filed 07/25/11 Page 2 of 2 PageID: 13
Thomas R. Curtin 

George C. Jones

GRAHAM CURTIN

A Professional Association

4 Headquarters Plaza

P.O. Box 1991

Morristown, New Jersey 07962-1991

(973) 292-1700

Robert N. Eccles (pro hac vice pending)

Gary S. Tell (pro hac vice pending)

O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP

1625 Eye Street, NW

Washington, D.C. 20006-4001

(202) 383-5300

Attorneys for Defendants 

Transamerica Life Insurance Company, 

Transamerica Investment Management, LLC 

and Transamerica Asset Management, Inc. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

JACLYN SANTOMENNO, KAREN 

POLEY, and BARBARA POLEY, et 

al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

TRANSAMERICA LIFE 

INSURANCE COMPANY, 

TRANSAMERICA INVESTMENT 

MANAGEMENT, LLC, and 

TRANSAMERICA ASSET 

MANAGEMENT, INC.,

 

Defendants.

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

Civil Action No. 11-736 (FSH) (PS)

NOTICE OF TRANSAMERICA 

INVESTMENT MANAGEMENT, 

LLC AND TRANSAMERICA

ASSET MANAGEMENT, INC.’S

MOTION TO DISMISS CLASS 

ACTION COMPLAINT

Case 2:11-cv-00736-FSH -PS Document 11 Filed 05/16/11 Page 1 of 3 PageID: 407
2

TO: Robert L. Lakind

SZAFERMAN, LAKIND, BLUMSTEIN & BLADER, P.C.

101 Grovers Mill Road, Suite 200

Lawrenceville, New Jersey 08648

Moshe Maimon

LEVY, PHILLIPS & KONIGSBERG, LLP

800 Third Avenue, 11th Floor

New York, New York 10022

Attorneys for Plaintiffs

COUNSEL:

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that on Monday, June 20, 2011, at 9:30 a.m. or as 

soon thereafter as counsel may be heard, Defendants Transamerica Investment 

Management, LLC (“TIM”), located at 11111 Santa Monica Boulevard, Los 

Angeles, California 90025, and Transamerica Asset Management, Inc. (“TAM”), 

located at 570 Carillon Parkway, St. Petersburg, Florida 33716, by and through 

their undersigned counsel, will move before the Honorable Faith S. Hochberg, 

U.S.D.J., for entry of an order pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6) dismissing the 

Class Action Complaint in this case with prejudice. 

PLEASE TAKE FURTHER NOTICE that in support of this motion, TIM 

and TAM will rely upon the Memorandum and supporting Declaration of Darcy 

Hatton submitted herewith. A proposed form of Order is also submitted. TIM and 

TAM request oral argument of this motion.

Case 2:11-cv-00736-FSH -PS Document 11 Filed 05/16/11 Page 2 of 3 PageID: 408
3

Dated: May 16, 2011

s/ Thomas R. Curtin

Thomas R. Curtin

George C. Jones

GRAHAM CURTIN

A Professional Association

4 Headquarters Plaza

P.O. Box 1991

Morristown, New Jersey 07962-1991

Telephone: (973) 292-1700

Facsimile: (973) 292-1767

Robert N. Eccles (Pro Hac Vice pending)

Gary S. Tell (Pro Hac Vice pending)

O’MELVENY & MYERS LLP

1625 Eye Street, NW

Washington, D.C. 20006-4001

Telephone: (202) 383-5300

Facsimile: (202) 383-5414

Attorneys for Defendants

Transamerica Life Insurance Company, 

Transamerica Investment Management, 

LLC, and Transamerica Asset 

Management, Inc. 

Case 2:11-cv-00736-FSH -PS Document 11 Filed 05/16/11 Page 3 of 3 PageID: 409
Exhibit 13

CERTIFICATION OF CEO AND CFO 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 on Form 20-F of GigaMedia Limited (the Company) for
the year ended December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), Arthur Wang, as chief executive officer of the Company, and Thomas Hui, as chief financial officer of the
Company, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of his knowledge:



|(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/Arthur Wang                                                             
|Name:  Arthur Wang Title:    Chief Executive Officer Date:    June 28, 2006





|                                                                          
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                          
|/s/ Thomas Hui                                                            
|Name:  Thomas Hui Title:    Chief Financial Officer Date:    June 28, 2006

This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 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.
```

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

Certification of chief executive officer

I, Luigi Brun, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for Tekron,  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 quarterly 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 quarterly report.

4. The registrant's officers and I am responsible for establishing and
   maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
   Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and the company has:

         a)  designed such disclosure controls and procedure  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 as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date
             of this Annual Report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

         c)  presented in this Annual Report our conclusions about the
             effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based
             on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;

5. The registrant's officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
   evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of
   registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
   function):

         a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
            controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to
            record, process, summarize and report financial data and have
            identified for the registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in
            internal controls; and

         b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
            other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's
            internal controls; and

6. The registrant's officers and I have indicated in this Annual Report whether
   or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other
   factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the
   date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with
   regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Date: July 11, 2003

/s/ Luigi Brun
     Luigi Brun,  Chief Executive Officer
```
#### Charles E. WIIG, Plaintiff-Appellant v. C. ULRICH; Federal Bureau of Prisons, Defendants-Appellees.

No. 12-40339

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Dec. 11, 2012.

Charles E. Wiig, Herlong, CA, pro se.

*296Before REAVLEY, JOLLY, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Charles E. Wiig, federal prisoner # 15749-047, appeals the denial of his pro se, in forma pauperis (IFP) *Bivens*
      *1*
      **suit alleging that the defendants denied him meaningful access to Nebraska courts by refusing to provide him with copies of certain Nebraska Court Rules of Appellate Practice and the Supreme Court’s decision in *United States v. Morgan,*346 U.S. 502, 74 S.Ct. 247, 98 L.Ed. 248 (1954). Because the district court dismissed the suit both as frivolous and for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, our review is de novo. *See Geiger v. Jowers,*404 F.3d 371, 373 (5th Cir.2005).

The right of prisoners to meaningful court access “encompasses only a reasonably adequate opportunity to file nonfrivo-lous legal claims challenging their convictions or conditions of confinement.” *Jones v. Greninger,*188 F.3d 322, 325 (5th Cir.1999). To establish a valid claim for denial of access to the courts, an inmate must show that he suffered an actual injury as a result of the alleged denial. *Lewis v. Casey,*518 U.S. 343, 351-54, 116 S.Ct. 2174, 135 L.Ed.2d 606 (1996). Because the record reveals that the Nebraska Supreme Court dismissed Wiig’s appeal of the denial of his request for a writ of coram nobis for lack of jurisdiction, rather than for failure to comply with Nebraska Court Rules of Appellate Practice, and because *Morgan*pertained to the availability of the writ of coram nobis under federal procedural law, rather than Nebraska law, Wiig cannot show that he suffered any injury as a result of the alleged denials. *See id.*The district court did not err in dismissing Wiig’s complaint as frivolous and for failure to state a claim. *See Geiger,*404 F.3d at 373.

Wiig’s appeal is without arguable merit and is dismissed as frivolous. *See Howard v. King,*707 F.2d 215, 219-20 (5th Cir.1983); 5th Cir. R. 42.2. The dismissal of this appeal as frivolous and the district court’s dismissal as frivolous and for failure to state a claim each count as a strike for purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). *See Adepegba v. Hammons,*103 F.3d 383, 387-88 (5th Cir.1996). We caution Wiig that once he accumulates three strikes, he may not proceed in forma pauperis in any civil action or appeal filed while he is incarcerated or detained in any facility unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. *See*§ 1915(g).

APPEAL DISMISSED AS FRIVOLOUS; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 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 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

. *Bivens v. Six Unknown Agents of Fed. Bureau of Narcotics,*403 U.S. 388, 91 S.Ct. 1999, 29 L.Ed.2d 619 (1971)
M A N D A T E

TO THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO 1 of NUECES COUNTY, GREETINGS:

Before our Court of Appeals for the Thirteenth District of Texas, on the 7th day of 

August, 2014, the cause upon appeal to revise or reverse your judgment between

JORGE MARTINEZ, Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS Appellee.

CAUSE NO. 13-14-00053-CR (Tr.Ct.No. 2013-5253-2)

was determined; and therein our said Court made its order in these words:

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes the appeal should be DISMISSED. The Court orders the appeal 

DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

August 7, 2014.



WHEREFORE, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court of Appeals 

for the Thirteenth District of Texas, in this behalf, and in all things have it duly 

recognized, obeyed and executed.

WITNESS, the Hon. Rogelio Valdez, Chief Justice of our Court of Appeals, with the seal 

thereof affixed, at the City of Edinburg, Texas this 29th day of January, 2015.

Dorian E. Ramirez, CLERK
<Page>


                                                                    Exhibit 99.2


                            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 filing of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the
fiscal quarter ended July 31, 2002 (the "Report") by ADE Corporation (the
"Company"), the undersigned, as the Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:

     o  the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
        Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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


                                    /s/ Brian C. James
                                    ---------------------------------
                                    Name:  Brian C. James
                                    Title:  Chief Financial Officer
Case 3:11-cr-00468-PGS Document 5 Filed 07/11/11 Page 1 of 3 PageID: 26
Case 3:11-cr-00468-PGS Document 5 Filed 07/11/11 Page 2 of 3 PageID: 27
Case 3:11-cr-00468-PGS Document 5 Filed 07/11/11 Page 3 of 3 PageID: 28
#### Connecticut & P. R. R. Co. *v.*Hendee, Receiver, etc.

*(Circuit Court, D. Vermont.*

May 25, 1886.)

Equity—Original Bill—Dismissal by Plaintiff—Costs.

*A*complainant in an original bill has, as a general rule, the right to dismiss his bill upon payment of costs, provided no decree has been made by which the defendant’s rights have been adjudicated.

In Equity.

*Edwards, Dickerman & Young,*for orator.

*George W. Hendee*and *Albert P. Gross,*for defendant.

Wheeler, J.

This cause is at issue on bill, answer, and replication. The defendant has taken and filed testimony; the orator has not. There has been no hearing, and the cause has not been set down for hearing, nor ready to be so set down. The orator claims the right to discontinue the suit on payment of costs to the defendant, and asks leave to enter such discontinuance. In *Chicago & A. R. Co.*v. *Union Rolling-mill Co.,*109 U. S. 702, S. C. 3 Sup. Ct. Rep. 694, it is said by Mr. Justice Woods, in the opinion of the court, that, “as a general rule, a complainant in an original bill has the right at any time, upon payment of costs, to dismiss his bill;” but “subject to a' distinct and well-settled exception, namely, that after a decree, whether final or interlocutory, has been made, by which the rights of a party defendant have been adjudicated, or such proceedings have been taken as entitle the defendant to a decree, the complainant will not be allowed to dismiss his bill without the consent of the defendant. ” This case falls within the general rule stated, and not within the exception, and the orator appears to be entitled to have the leave granted. *Carrington*v. *Holly,*1 Dick. 280.

Leave to enter discontinuance on payment of costs granted.
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER ON MOTION

November 7, 2008 Revision

Cause number: 01-17-00137-CV

Style: In re Terra Energy Partners, LLC, Benjamin “B.J.” Reynolds, Mark 

Mewshaw, and Wes Hobbs, Relators

Date motions filed*: June 6, 2017

Type of motions: Motion for Pro Hac Vice Admission of Rachel Cowen with Christina 

E. Ponig’s Motion Pursuant to Rule XIX(B) of the Rules Governing 

Admission to the Bar of Texas

Parties filing motions: Counsel for relators, Terra Energy Partners, LLC, Benjamin “B.J.” 

Reynolds, Mark Mewshaw, and Wes Hobbs, Christina E. Ponig

Document to be filed: N/A

Is appeal accelerated? Yes (original proceeding).

Ordered that motions are:

 Granted

 Denied

 Dismissed (e.g., want of jurisdiction, moot)

 Other: _____________________________________ 

The motion for pro hac vice admission of Rachel Cowen, filed by the resident attorney, 

Christina E. Ponig, and Christina E. Ponig’s motion in support are denied without 

prejudice to refiling with the required motion filed by the non-resident attorney, 

Rachel Cowen. See TEX. RULES GOVERN. BAR ADM’N XIX(b) (West 2015) (“The 

motion of the non-resident attorney seeking permission to participate in Texas

proceedings must be accompanied by motion of the resident practicing Texas attorney

with whom the non-resident attorney will be associated in the proceeding of a

particular cause.”) (emphasis added).

Judge's signature: /s /Evelyn V. Keyes

  Acting individually Acting for the Court

Date: June 13, 2017