alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EX PARTE ORDER GRANTING GOLDBELT ENTERPRISES, INC., 

AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION, 

INC., LEAVE TO INTERVENE 1 

Case No. C06-0105 MJP 

THE HONORABLE MARSHA J. PECHMAN 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 

AT SEATTLE 

WASHINGTON MUTUAL BANK, a federal 

association, 

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

M/V WILDERNESS EXPLORER, Official No. 

520611; M/V WILDERNESS ADVENTURER, 

Official No. 664136; and M/V WILDERNESS 

DISCOVERER, Official No. 952722, In Rem, 

 Defendants. 

GOLDBELT ENTERPRISES, INC., an Alaska 

Corporation, and CULTURAL 

PRESERVATION, INC., an Alaska Corporation,

 Claimants/Plaintiffs-In-Intervention, 

 v. 

M/V WILDERNESS EXPLORER, Official No. 

520611; M/V WILDERNESS ADVENTURER, 

Official No. 664136; and M/V WILDERNESS 

DISCOVERER, Official No. 952722, In Rem, 

 Defendants. 

 IN ADMIRALTY 

CONSOLIDATED ACTIONS 

Case No. C06-0105 MJP 

EX PARTE ORDER GRANTING 

GOLDBELT ENTERPRISES, INC., AND 

CULTURAL PRESERVATION, INC., 

LEAVE TO INTERVENE 

CLERK’S ACTION REQUIRED 

THIS MATTER having come before the Court upon the Ex Parte Motion of 

Goldbelt Enterprises, Inc., and Cultural Preservation, Inc., for Leave to Intervene, and the 

Case 2:06-cv-00105-MJP Document 58 Filed 03/23/06 Page 1 of 2
EX PARTE ORDER GRANTING GOLDBELT ENTERPRISES, INC., 

AND CULTURAL PRESERVATION, 

INC., LEAVE TO INTERVENE 2 

Case No. C06-0105 MJP 

Court having reviewed the Verified Complaint of Goldbelt Enterprises, Inc., and Cultural 

Preservation, Inc., attached to the motion, and it appearing that the Complaint asserts a 

maritime lien for necessaries provided to the defendant vessels M/V WILDERNESS 

EXPLORER, Official No. 520611; M/V WILDERNESS ADVENTURER, Official No. 

664136; and M/V WILDERNESS DISCOVERER, Official No. 952722, which lien could 

be impaired or eliminated if Goldbelt Enterprises, Inc., and Cultural Preservation, Inc., are 

not permitted to intervene herein, 

NOW THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Goldbelt Enterprises, Inc., 

and Cultural Preservation, Inc., are granted leave to intervene in this action upon their 

Verified Complaint-in-Intervention. 

The Clerk of the Court is directed to file the Verified Complaint-in-Intervention of 

Goldbelt Enterprises, Inc., and Cultural Preservation, Inc., previously lodged with the 

Court. 

DATED this ___23rd ______ day of ____March_________________, 2006. 

 /s Marsha J. Pechman

 THE HONORABLE MARSHA J. PECHMAN 

Presented By: 

HOLMES WEDDLE & BARCOTT 

 

John E. Casperson, WSBA #14292 

Attorneys for Claimant-Intervenors Goldbelt 

Enterprises, Inc., and Cultural Preservation, Inc. 

999 Third Avenue, Suite 2600 

Seattle, WA 98104 

jcasperson@hwb-law.com 

Case 2:06-cv-00105-MJP Document 58 Filed 03/23/06 Page 2 of 2
Before the Second Division,

September 27, 1967

No. P67/317.

#### John L. Westland & Son, Inc., et al. *v.*United States, protests 63/12294, etc. (San Diego).

Rao, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of echo-sounding *888equipment similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Kelvin & Hughes America Corp.*v. *United States*(53 Cust. Ct. 21, C.D. 2468), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
NEWMAN & NEWMAN,

ATTORNEYS AT LAW, LLP

505 Fifth Ave. S., Ste. 610

Seattle, Washington 98104

(206) 274-2800

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING

DEFS.’ MOT. FOR AN UNDERTAKING - 1

(CV06-0204JCC)

The Honorable John C. Coughenour

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

JAMES S. GORDON, Jr., a married

individual, d/b/a

‘GORDONWORKS.COM’; OMNI

INNOVATIONS, LLC., a Washington

limited liability company,

Plaintiffs,

v.

VIRTUMUNDO, INC, a Delaware

corporation d/b/a

ADNOWLEDGEMAIL.COM;

ADKNOWLEDGE, INC., a Delaware

corporation, d/b/a

ADKNOWLEDGEMAIL.COM; SCOTT

LYNN, an individual; and JOHN DOES,

1-X,

Defendants.

No. CV06-0204JCC

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING

DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR AN

UNDERTAKING PURSUANT TO

15 U.S.C. § 7706(g)(4)

NOTE ON MOTION CALENDAR:

November 17, 2006

THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Defendants’s Motion for an

Undertaking pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 7706(g)(4) ("Motion"). The Court having reviewed

the pleadings on file, including the First Amended Complaint, the Motion, the Response

to the Motion and the Reply thereto hereby finds and orders that:

1. Pursuant to 15 U.S.C. § 7706(g)(4), Plaintiffs shall post an Undertaking

with the Clerk of the Court in the amount of $350,000 within ten (10) days of entry of

this order.

Case 2:06-cv-00204-JCC Document 38-2 Filed 11/02/2006 Page 1 of 2

Gordon v. Virtumundo Inc et al Doc. 38 Att. 1

Dockets.Justia.com
NEWMAN & NEWMAN,

ATTORNEYS AT LAW, LLP

505 Fifth Ave. S., Ste. 610

Seattle, Washington 98104

(206) 274-2800

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING

DEFS.’ MOT. FOR AN UNDERTAKING - 2

(CV06-0204JCC)

2. This action is stayed until such time as Plaintiff posts the above referenced

Undertaking. 

3. In the event that Plaintiff fails to timely post an undertaking, this lawsuit

shall be dismissed with prejudice.

DATED this ___ day of ______________, 2006.

_______________________________

HON. JUDGE COUGHENOUR

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:06-cv-00204-JCC Document 38-2 Filed 11/02/2006 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with this Amendment No. 1 of the Annual Report of Forbes Energy Services Ltd. filed on Form 10-K/A (the
Company) for the year ended December 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, L. Melvin Cooper, Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Assistant
Secretary 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, to my knowledge, 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/
L. Melvin Cooper                                                  
|                     |  |  |  | L. Melvin Cooper                                                      
|                     |  |  |  | Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Assistant Secretary
|Date: April 30, 2010 |  |  |  |                                                                       



Ex. 32.2  Page 1
No. 63862.

protest 59/18779 (New York).

#### Illfelder Importing Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with rule 5(b) of the rules of this court, as amended, the protest was dismissed for lack of prosecution.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ORDER

Page - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

NICHOLAS FUENTES, III.,

Plaintiff,

v.

CLAN JACOBS, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. C05-5579RBL

ORDER GRANTING

APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN

FORMA PAUPERIS AND

DIRECTING INSTITUTION TO

CALCULATE, COLLECT, AND

FORWARD PAYMENTS

The Court, having reviewed plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 1), does

hereby find and ORDER. 

(1) Plaintiff’s declaration indicates he is unable to afford the court’s filing fee or give security

therefor. Accordingly, plaintiff’s application to proceed as a pauper is GRANTED. As set forth below,

an initial partial filing fee will be collected, and plaintiff is required to make monthly payments of

20 percent of the preceding months income credited to his/her account until the full amount of the

filing fee is satisfied.

(2) Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 and plaintiff’s approved application to proceed in forma

pauperis, the agency having custody of the above named plaintiff is directed to calculate an initial partial

filing fee equal to 20 percent of greater of -- the average monthly deposits to the prisoner’s account or the

average monthly balance in the prisoner’s account for the 6-month period immediately preceding the date

of this Order. The initial partial filing fee should be forwarded to the court clerk as soon as practicable.

Subsequently, if the prisoner’s account exceeds $10.00, each month the agency is directed to

Case 3:05-cv-05579-RBL Document 3 Filed 09/26/05 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ORDER

Page - 2

collect and forward payments equal to 20 percent of the prisoner’s preceding month’s income credited to

the prisoner’s account. In the event that the monthly payment would reduce the prisoner’s account below

$10.00, the agency should collect and forward only that amount which would reduce the prisoner’s

account to the $10.00 level. Please note that this $10.00 limit does not apply to the initial partial filing fee

described above. Finally, the monthly payments should be collected and forwarded to the court until the

entire filing fee ($250.00) for this matter has been paid.

(3) The Clerk is directed to send plaintiff a copy of this Order and the General Order, and a copy

of this Order along with a copy of plaintiff’s Acknowledgment and Authorization portion of the IFP

application to the attention of the inmate account manager (IFP account manager) at the Washington State

Department of Corrections.

DATED this 26th day of September, 2005.

 /s/ J. Kelley Arnold____________ J. Kelley Arnold

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:05-cv-05579-RBL Document 3 Filed 09/26/05 Page 2 of 2
Fw: EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0172 

Susan Stone 

to: 

crabtree.tricia 

03/11/2010 07:59 PM 

Cc: 

Karen Martin, wegman.lydia, Steve Page 

Show Details 

Tricia: For the docket. 

Managers: FYI 

Susan Lyon Stone 

Ambient Standards Group l US EPA (C504-06) l Research Triangle Park, NC 27711 

Phone: 919-541-1146 l Fax: 919-541-0237 l HSD Phone 919-966-6226 

-----Forwarded by Susan Stone/RTP/USEPA/US on 03/11/2010 07:58PM ----- 

To: Susan Stone/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA 

From: <Susie.McKithan@bakerbotts.com> 

Date: 03/11/2010 06:46PM 

Subject: EPA-HQ-OAR-2005-0172 

<<TIP Request for Extension.pdf>> 

Susie McKithan

Senior Paralegal

Baker Botts L.L.P. &

910 Louisiana Street

Houston Texas 77002-4995

Phone: 713-229-2047

Fax: 713-229-7947

Mobile: 832-373-8094 

Page 1 of 1

file://C:\Documents and Settings\tcrabtre\Local Settings\Temp\notesFCBCEE\~web5892.h... 3/18/2010
# FILED March 16, 2000 Cecil Crowson, Jr. Appellate Court Clerk IN THE COURT OF APPEALS AT KNOXVILLE

RONALD STEPHEN SATTERFIELD, ) SR., ) ) Plaintiff-Appellee, ) ) ) vs. ) KNOX CIRCUIT ) E1999-00349-COA-R3-CV ) ) GARY LONG and RICHARD M. ) SMITH, ) ) Defendants-Appellants. )

OPINION ON SECOND PETITION TO REHEAR In light of an opinion of the Supreme Court, which was filed subsequent to our opinion denying the first petition to rehear in this case ( Brown v. Wal-Mart , No. M1997-00138-SCR11-CV), the Court granted Plaintiff Ronald Stephen Satterfield, Sr., leave to file a second petition to rehear.2 Upon considering the petition, along with the response and the Supreme Court case above noted, we conclude the second petition to rehear is meritorious and amend our original opinion to provide that the entire judgment for compensatory damages of $80,000.00 shall be adjudged against the Defendant Gary Long.

Costs incident to the petition to rehear are adjudged against Mr. Long.

____________________________ Houston M. Goddard, P.J. CONCUR:

____________________________ Charles D. Susano, Jr., J.

____________________________ William H. Inman, Sr.J.
No. 61558.

#### D. Strauss Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 87312-K and 94103-K (New York).

*453Opinion by

Foed, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of veils or veilings similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Elvic Import Corp.*v. *United States*(38 Cust. Ct. 13, C. D. 1837), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained. .
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                           4,605
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 9,100
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     14,107
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          20,586
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            20,588
<LOANS>                                         49,153
<ALLOWANCE>                                        387
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  87,955
<DEPOSITS>                                      79,745
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                                578
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,992
<OTHER-SE>                                       4,640
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                  87,955
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  2,453
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                  587
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   323
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 3,363
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               1,189
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            2,174
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                       38
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   2
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  1,797
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    553
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                         425
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       425
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .42
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .42
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.58
<LOANS-NON>                                        122
<LOANS-PAST>                                       237
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                   401
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                       61
<RECOVERIES>                                         9
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                  387
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
No. 69298.

#### Reliance Int’l Mfg., Ltd. *v.*United States,

protests 61/21703, etc. (New York).

*430Opinion by

Wilson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of plastic feeders and water fountains similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 67011, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Exhibit 99.1
                                  ------------




                      CEO AND CFO 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  of  ITEC  Attractions,  Inc.  (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Paul M.
Bluto,  Chief  Executive  Officer and Chief  Financial  Officer of the  Company,
certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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 result of  operations of the
Company.

/s/  Paul M. Bluto
------------------

Paul M. Bluto
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
May 12, 2003
(PROPOSED) ORDER 

CONTINUING PRE-TRIAL

MOTIONS CUTOFF DATE.. 1

JUDGE: BURGESS 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

)

Plaintiff, ) No. CR05-5839FDB

)

v. ) ORDER 

) CONTINUING PRE-TRIAL 

MELISSA VANESSA WOOLRIDGE, ) MOTIONS CUTOFF DATE

)

Defendant. )

 )

Defendant MELISSA VANESSA WOOLRIDGE, by and through her attorney, RONALD

D. NESS, of Ronald D. Ness and Associates, is requesting that the pre-trial motions cutoff date

currently set for December 30, 2005 be continued two weeks to January 13, 2006, and that the U.S.

Attorney has telephonically agreed to continue the pretrial motions cut-off date for two weeks to

January 13, 2006, and such a continuance is necessary for effective case preparation and would serve

the ends of justice and outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial;

therefore, 

//

//

//

Case 3:05-cr-05839-FDB Document 20 Filed 01/03/06 Page 1 of 3
(PROPOSED) ORDER 

CONTINUING PRE-TRIAL

MOTIONS CUTOFF DATE.. 2

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the pre-trial motions cutoff date is continued from

December 30, 2005 to January 12, 2006.

DONE this 3rd day of January, 2006.

A

FRANKLIN D. BURGESS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Presented by:

/s/ RONALD D. NESS 

State Bar Number 5299 

Ronald D. Ness & Associates

420 Cline Avenue

Port Orchard, WA 98366

Telephone: (360) 895-2042

Fax: (360) 895-3602

E-Mail: info@nesslaw.com

Approved by:

/s/ DAVID JENNINGS 

Assistant U.S. Attorney

Case 3:05-cr-05839-FDB Document 20 Filed 01/03/06 Page 2 of 3
(PROPOSED) ORDER 

CONTINUING PRE-TRIAL

MOTIONS CUTOFF DATE.. 3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on December 30th, 2005, I electronically filed the foregoing with the Clerk

of the Court using the CM/ECF system which will send notification of such filing to the attorney(s)

of record. I hereby certify that I have served the attorney(s) of record, if any, that are non CM/ECF

participants via telefax.

/s/ Linda L. Malcom

Legal Assistant

Ronald D. Ness & Associates

420 Cline Avenue

Port Orchard, WA 98366

Phone: (360) 895-2042

Fax: (360) 895-3602

E-mail: info@nesslaw.com

Case 3:05-cr-05839-FDB Document 20 Filed 01/03/06 Page 3 of 3
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

1106 CA 16-00552 PRESENT: WHALEN, P.J., CENTRA, LINDLEY, NEMOYER, AND TROUTMAN, JJ.

M&T BANK, PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

RONALD R. BENJAMIN, ALSO KNOWN AS RONALD BENJAMIN, ALSO KNOWN AS RONALD R. BENJAMIN, ESQ., DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. (APPEAL NO. 2.)

LAW OFFICE OF RONALD R. BENJAMIN, BINGHAMTON (MARY JANE MURPHY OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.

GETMAN & BIRYLA, LLP, BUFFALO (JOSEPH S. MONTAGNOLA OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT.

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Erie County (John M. Curran, J.), entered December 28, 2015. The judgment awarded plaintiff money damages.

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: In this action by plaintiff lender to collect debts from defendant borrower, defendant appeals from a statement for judgment entered in favor of plaintiff. Upon our review of the judgment, we conclude that Supreme Court properly granted plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment on the complaint and dismissal of defendant’s counterclaim, and denied defendant’s cross motion for, inter alia, leave to amend his answer and disclosure. We note with respect to the cross motion that defendant failed to support the request for leave to amend the answer with a copy of the “proposed amended . . . pleading clearly showing the changes or additions to be made” (CPLR 3025 [b]; see Barry v Niagara Frontier Tr. Sys.
, 38 AD2d 878, 878). We further note that, in opposition to the motion and in support of that part of the cross motion seeking disclosure, defendant did not demonstrate that “facts essential to justify opposition” existed but could not then be stated because they were within the exclusive knowledge and possession of plaintiff (CPLR 3212 [f]; see HSBC Bank USA, N.A. v Prime, L.L.C. , 125 AD3d 1307, 1308).

With respect to the merits of plaintiff’s motion, we agree with the court that the Term Note did not evidence a “home loan” within the meaning of the statute inasmuch as the debt was not “incurred by the borrower primarily for personal, family, or household purposes” (RPAPL-2- 1106 CA 16-00552
1304 [5] [a] [ii]). In any event, as noted by the court, this is not an action for foreclosure of a mortgage. Thus, the transaction is not subject to the notice and the judicial conference requirements of RPAPL 1304 and CPLR 3408 (a). Finally, we conclude that plaintiff demonstrated its entitlement to judgment as a matter of law with regard to defendant’s allegation that he was the victim of predatory and deceptive lending practices by plaintiff, and defendant failed to raise a triable issue of fact ( see generally Zuckerman v City of New York , 49 NY2d 557, 562).

Entered: December 23, 2016 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26 ORDER - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

SLIMAN FARRAN and FADUL FARRAN

dba JERUSALEM CAFÉ and JERUSALEM

RESTAURANT and CAFE,

Plaintiffs,

v.

JIMI ABDULLAH JOUZINE,

Defendant.

Case No. C06-5116FDB

ORDER SETTING BRIEFING

SCHEDULE ON MOTION FOR

TEMPORARY RESTRAINING

ORDER

Plaintiffs have moved for a temporary restraining order and a preliminary injunction in this

cause of action alleging that Defendant, a former employee of the Jerusalem Café, has

misappropriated the Farrans’ trade secrets in order to open a restaurant almost identical to the

Farrans’ Jerusalem Café in the same geographical area, using the Farrans’ trade dress and trade

secrets. Plaintiffs state in their Motion that contemporaneously with the filing of this motion,

Plaintiffs are providing notice of their Complaint, this Motion and Plaintiff’s Emergency Motion for

Expedited Discovery to Defendant by personal service. 

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED: 

1. Defendant shall have until Friday, March 24, 2006 at 4:00 p.m. to file a response to

the motion. 

2. Plaintiffs may file a reply March 27, 2006. 

3. The Clerk shall note this matter for the Court’s consideration on March 28, 2006. 

DATED this 6th day of March, 2006.AFRANKLIN D. BURGESS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-05116-FDB Document 17 Filed 03/06/2006 Page 1 of 1

Farran et al v. Jouzine Doc. 17

Dockets.Justia.com