alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2016326EN.01002801.xml

| 5.9.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 326/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.9.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 326/28

---

Order of the President of the General Court of 19 July 2016 — Belgium v Commission

(Case T-131/16 R)

((Application for interim measures - State aid - Tax scheme exempting excess profits of a number of multinational companies - Exemption granted on the basis of tax rulings - Decision declaring scheme to be aid incompatible with the internal market and ordering recovery of the aid - Application for suspension of operation of a measure - No urgency))

(2016/C 326/49)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Kingdom of Belgium (represented by: C. Pochet and J.-C. Halleux, acting as Agents, and by M. Segura Catalán and M. Clayton, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: P.-J. Loewenthal and B. Stromsky, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

APPLICATION pursuant to Articles 278 and 279 TFEU for the grant of interim measures suspending the operation of Articles 2, 3 and 4 of Commission Decision C(2015) 9887 final of 11 January 2016 on the excess profit State aid scheme SA.37667 (2015/C) (ex 2015/NN) implemented by Belgium

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1) | The application for interim measures is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1)

The application for interim measures is dismissed.

| 2) | The costs are reserved. |
| --- | --- |

2)

The costs are reserved.

---
EXHIBIT 32.2



STATEMENT FURNISHED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002, 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350



The
undersigned, Terry Prichard, is the Chief Financial Officer of Pocahontas Bancorp, Inc. (the Company).



This statement is being furnished in connection with the filing by the Company of the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
December 31, 2003 (the Report).



By execution of
this statement, I certify that:



| | A) | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)) and
| | -- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | B) | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of the dates and for the
periods covered by the Report.
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



This statement
is authorized to be attached as an exhibit to the Report so that this statement will accompany the Report at such time as the Report is filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18
U.S.C. Section 1350. It is not intended that this statement be deemed to be filed for purposes of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.



|                  |  |  |  |                   
|----------------- |  |  |  | ------------------
|                  |  | 
|February 13, 2004 |  |  |  | /s/ Terry Prichard
|                  |  |  |  |                   
|Dated             |  |  |  | Terry Prichard    



26
No. 55867.

protest 143130-K (New York).

#### Freedman & Slater, Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of reptile skins the same in all material respects as those passed upon in *Fleming-Joffe, Ltd.*v. *United States*(25 Cust. Ct. 56, C. D. 1263), the claim for free entry under paragraph 1765 was sustained.
Exhibit 32.1

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  EnerTeck  Corporation  (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ended  December 31, 2003, as filed with
the  Securities  and  Exchange   Commission  (the  "Report"),   the  undersigned
certifies,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350, as adopted  pursuant to Section
906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act  of  2002,  to  the  best  of the  undersigned's
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.



Dated:  April 14, 2004              By:/s/ Dwaine Reese
                                    Dwaine Reese, Chief Executive Officer
                                    (Principal Executive Officer)


Dated:  April 14, 2004              By:/s/ Leon van Kraayenburg
                                    Leon van Kraayenburg,
                                    Principal Financial Officer
```

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 191 (Monday, October 3, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 61135]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-25414]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Federal Aviation Administration

Environmental Impact Statement: Theodore Francis Green Airport, 
Warwick, RI

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of Availability.

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

SUMMARY: The FAA is issuing this notice to advise the public that a 
Record of Decision (ROD), resulting from an Environmental Impact 
Statement (EIS) has been prepared for Theodore Francis Green Airport, 
in Warwick, Rhode Island.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard Doucette, Environmental 
Program Manager, Federal Aviation Administration New England, 12 New 
England Executive Park, Burlington, MA. Telephone (781) 238-7613.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The FAA is making available a ROD regarding 
installation of runway safety areas, other safety improvements, a 
runway extension, and other efficiency improvements at Theodore Francis 
Green Airport, in Warwick, Rhode Island. The ROD documents the final 
Agency decisions regarding the proposed projects as described and 
analyzed in the EIS. The ROD is available for review during normal 
business hours at the following locations: FAA New England Region, 
Airports Division, 16 New England Executive Park, Burlington, 
Massachusetts (781) 238-7613, Theodore Francis Green Airport, 2000 Post 
Rd, Warwick, Rhode Island, and at public libraries in Warwick and 
Cranston, Rhode Island.

    Issued on: September 23, 2011.
Bryon H. Rakoff,
Acting Manager, Airports Division.
[FR Doc. 2011-25414 Filed 9-30-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-P
```
# C_2018142EN.01004801.xml

| 23.4.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 142/48 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.4.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 142/48

---

Judgment of the General Court of 7 March 2018 — Fertisac v ECHA

(Case T-855/16) (1)

1

((REACH - Fee due for registration of a substance - Reduction granted to SMEs - Verification by ECHA of the declaration relating to the size of the enterprise - Decision imposing an administrative charge - Recommendation 2003/361/EC - Exceeding of financial ceilings - Concept of ‘linked enterprise’))

(2018/C 142/63)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Fertisac, SL (Atarfe, Spain) (represented by: J. Gomez Rodriguez, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) (represented by E. Maurage, J.-P. Trnka and M. Heikkilä, acting as Agents, and C. Garcia Molyneux and L. Tosoni, lawyers)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of ECHA Decision SME(2016) 5150 of 15 November 2016, which states that the applicant has not fulfilled the conditions required in order to benefit from a reduced fee for medium-sized enterprises and imposes payment of an administrative charge and invoices Nos 10060160 and 10060161 issued by the ECHA and annexed to Decision SME(2016) 5150.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Fertisac, SL to pay the costs, including those relating to the interim proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Fertisac, SL to pay the costs, including those relating to the interim proceedings.

---

(1)  OJ C 30, 30.1.2017.

1

---
# MTS Cover

# Table 1

# Table 2

# Figure 1

# Figure 2

# Figure 3

# Figure 4

# Table 3

# Table 4

# Table 5

# Table 6

# Table 6A

# Table 6B

# Table 6C

# Table 6D

# Table 6E

# Table 7

# Table 8

# Table 9

# Sheet20
Case No. 6,670.

#### HOOFF v. HERBERT.

[Cited in Smith v. Stoops, Case No. 13,110. Nowhere reported; opinion not now accessible.]
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

ROBERT S. WALDMAN : CIVIL ACTION

:

v. :

: NO. 02-4091

T. BRADFORD, et al. :

O R D E R

AND NOW, this 6th day of September, 2002, the following schedule is HEREBY

ORDERED in the above captioned matter:

1. All discovery (including responses) shall be completed by NOVEMBER 15,

2002;

2. All dispositive motions and/or Daubert motions shall be filed on or before

DECEMBER 13, 2002, with courtesy copies hand delivered to chambers on the

day of filing;

3. All responses to dispositive motions shall be filed on or before DECEMBER 24,

2002, with courtesy copies hand delivered to chambers on the day of filing;

4. All Motions in Limine shall be filed by DECEMBER 31, 2002, with courtesy

copies hand delivered to chambers on the day of tiling. Responses to Motions in

Limine shall be filed by JANUARY 6, 2003, with courtesy copies hand delivered 

to chambers on the day of filing.

5. A Pretrial Stipulation, signed by all counsel, shall be filed by DECEMBER 31,

2002. (See Standing Order Re Pretrial Stipulation, attached hereto).

6. A final pretrial conference will take place on MONDAY, JANUARY 13, 2003,

at 10:00 a.m., WITH JURY SELECTION AND TRIAL TO COMMENCE

IMMEDIATELY THEREAFTER.

BY THE COURT:

___________________________________

 JACOB P. HART

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

cc: Faxed to:

 M. Phiambolis, Esq.; R. Henzes, Esq.

Case 2:02-cv-04091-MK Document 7 Filed 09/06/2002 Page 1 of 2
 JUDGE HART’S STANDING ORDER RE PRETRIAL STIPULATION

(JURY TRIAL)

In lieu of pretrial memoranda or a Final Pretrial Order, under Local Rules

16.1(d)(1) and (2), a Pretrial Stipulation shall be submitted, containing the following:

1. Agreed facts. A conscientious effort should be made to narrow the 

areas of dispute.

2. Each party's disputed facts.

3. Each party's exhibits, as marked for trial. (Any objections to authenticity

should be noted or will be considered waived. Exhibits shall be provided

to the Court in the form of two, jointly prepared, loose leaf Exhibit

Books, each separately numbering Joint Exhibits, Plaintiff's Exhibits,

and Defendant's Exhibits.)

4. Each party's witnesses and the subject matter of the witness's testimony.

(PLEASE NOTE: IF YOU WILL BE USING VIDEO EQUIPMENT TO

PRESENT THE TESTIMONY OF A WITNESS, YOU MUST EITHER

SUPPLY THAT EQUIPMENT OR REQUEST AT LEAST TWO

WEEKS BEFORE TRIAL THAT THE COURT RESERVE

EQUIPMENT FOR YOU)

5. Unusual issues - contentions and authority.

6. Proposed voir dire questions, requests for jury instructions, and a

proposed jury verdict form. Counsel shall make a good faith effort to

agree upon as many of these items as possible. ( THESE ITEMS ARE

TO BE SUBMITTED ON DISK (WORDPERFECT IF POSSIBLE) AS

WELL AS IN HARD COPY.)

7. The signed approval of trial counsel for each party.

IT SHALL BE THE RESPONSIBILITY OF PLAINTIFF’S COUNSEL TO CIRCULATE A

DRAFT OF THIS PRETRIAL STIPULATION AT LEAST ONE WEEK BEFORE IT IS

DUE.

Case 2:02-cv-04091-MK Document 7 Filed 09/06/2002 Page 2 of 2
**EXHIBIT 99.1**

 

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

 

**In connection with the Annual Report of Cap Rock EnergyCorporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002,as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the“Report”), I, David W. Pruitt, Co-Chairman of the Board, President and ChiefExecutive 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 therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934(15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and

 

(2)                                  The information contained in the Reportfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of the Company.

 

Dated: April 10, 2003

 
|   |   |   |   | By:  /s/  David W. Pruitt                         |   |
|--------|--------|--------|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   |   |   |   | David W.  Pruitt                                            |
|   |   |   |   | Co-Chairman  of the Board/President/Chief Executive Officer |

 

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Cap Rock EnergyCorporation and will be retained by Cap Rock Energy Corporation and furnishedto the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 

----
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350As Adopted Pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

 

Inconnection with the Annual Report of Badger State Ethanol, LLC (the “Company”)on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2005 as filed withthe Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, (the “Report”), I,James Leitzinger, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that:

 

1.                                       TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

2.                                       Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.

 

 

March 2, 2006

 
|   |                     |
|--------|--------------------------|
|   | /s/ James Leitzinger     |   |
|   | James Leitzinger         |
|   | Chief Financial  Officer |

 

----
Case: 16-13626 Date Filed: 07/13/2016 Page: 1 of 7 
Case: 16-13626 Date Filed: 07/13/2016 Page: 2 of 7 
Case: 16-13626 Date Filed: 07/13/2016 Page: 3 of 7 
Case: 16-13626 Date Filed: 07/13/2016 Page: 4 of 7 
Case: 16-13626 Date Filed: 07/13/2016 Page: 5 of 7 
Case: 16-13626 Date Filed: 07/13/2016 Page: 6 of 7 
Case: 16-13626 Date Filed: 07/13/2016 Page: 7 of 7
# C_2019093EN.01004201.xml

| 11.3.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 93/42 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.3.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 93/42

---

Judgment of the General Court of 16 January 2019 — Cham v Council

(Case T-413/16) (1)

((Common foreign and security policy - Restrictive measures taken against Syria - Freezing of funds - Rights of the defence - Right to effective judicial protection - Obligation to state reasons - Manifest error of assessment - Right to honour and reputation - Right to property - Presumption of innocence - Proportionality))

(2019/C 93/52)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Cham Holding (Damascus, Syria) (represented by: E. Ruchat, lawyer)

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: initially, S. Kyriakopoulou, G. Étienne and A. Vitro, then by S. Kyriakopoulou and A. Vitro, and subsequently by S. Kyriakopoulou, A. Vitro and V. Piessevaux, acting as Agents)

Re:

Action pursuant to Article 263 TFEU seeking the annulment of Council Decision (CFSP) 2016/850 of 27 May 2016 amending Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2016 L 141, p. 125), and its subsequent implementing acts, of Council Decision (CFSP) 2017/917 of 29 May 2017 amending Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2017 L 139, p. 62), and of Council Decision (CFSP) 2018/778 of 28 May 2018 amending Decision 2013/255/CFSP concerning restrictive measures against Syria (OJ 2018 L 131, p. 16), in so far as those measures apply to the applicant.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Cham Holding to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Cham Holding to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Council of the European Union.

---

(1)  OJ C 364, 3.10.2016.

---
# 2018_06 Pivot Table 4

# 4

&F	

&P/&N
Supplemental Agreement to the Centralized Services Agreement



 Exhibit 4.27 
 Summary 
 of 
 Supplemental Agreement 
 to 
 Centralized Services Agreement 
 Between 
 China Telecom Corporation Limited 
 and 
 China Telecommunications Corporation 
 dated
December 26, 2007 
 The key terms and conditions of the Supplemental Agreement to Centralized Services Agreement are: 
 Article 8.1 of the Centralized Services Agreement shall be amended. The parties agree that determination of the premises usage fee shall be based on comparable market
rates and both parties shall negotiate and determine the premises usage fee on a pro rata basis according to the area actually provided by China Telecommunications Corporation to China Telecom Corporation Limited.
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO



In connection with the Annual Report of Westsphere Asset Corporation, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Douglas MacDonald, President/CEO 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 results of operations of the Company.



/s/ Douglas MacDonaldName:	Douglas MacDonaldTitle:	President/CEODated: 	April 11, 2003



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES - OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Annual Report of Westsphere Asset Corporation, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Kim Law, Vice-President of Finance and CFO 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 results of operations of the Company.



/s/ Kim Law
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

JOHN PEREZ LEON : CIVIL ACTION

:

v. :

L. P. BENNING, et al. : NO. 02-4267

 ORDER

AND NOW, this Day of July, 2002, leave is granted Petitioner to proceed

in forma pauperis, for the purpose of all proceedings in this court and also for purposes of filing

of a notice of appeal.

 

JAMES McGIRR KELLY, J.

Case 2:02-cv-04267-JK Document 3 Filed 07/11/2002 Page 1 of 1
# C_2015337EN.01004201.xml

| 12.10.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 337/42 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.10.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 337/42

---

Action brought on 26 August 2015 — LG Electronics v OHIM — Cyrus Wellness Consulting (VIEWTY SMART)

(Case T-488/15)

(2015/C 337/47)

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: LG Electronics, Inc. (Seoul, Republic of Korea) (represented by: M. Graf, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Cyrus Wellness Consulting (Berlin, Germany)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Details of the proceedings before OHIM

Applicant of the trade mark at issue: Applicant

Applicant of the trade mark at issue:

Trade mark at issue: Community word mark ‘VIEWTY SMART’ — Application for Registration No 8 431 091

Trade mark at issue:

Procedure before OHIM:Opposition proceedings

Procedure before OHIM:

Contested decision:Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 11 June 2015 in Case R 1734/2014-2

Contested decision:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order OHIM to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order OHIM to pay the costs.

Plea in law

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009.

---
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

In re Petition of FRESCATI SHIPPING 

COMPANY, LTD., as the Owner of the M/T 

ATHOS I, and TSAKOS SHIPPING &

TRADING, S.A., as Manager of the M/T 

ATHOS I, for Exoneration from or Limitation 

of Liability 

CIVIL ACTION

NO. 05-cv-305 (JHS)

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

CITGO ASPHALT REFINING COMPANY, 

et al., 

Defendants.

CONSOLIDATED 

CIVIL ACTION

NO. 08-cv-2898 (JHS)

ORDER

AND NOW, this 25th day of July 2016, upon consideration of Defendants’ Motion to 

Draw Adverse Inferences Because of Plaintiffs’ Spoliation of Vessel Records (Doc. No. 754), 

Frescati Plaintiffs’ Brief in Opposition to Defendants’ Motion to Draw Adverse Inferences

Because of Plaintiffs’ Alleged Spoliation of Vessel Records (Doc. No. 765), Defendant’s Reply 

to Response to Motion (Doc. No. 777), Defendants’ Motion to Enforce the Best Evidence Rule 

and to Exclude and Disregard Secondary Evidence and Testimony Offered Instead of Original 

Evidence Lost or Destroyed in Bad Faith (Doc. No. 755), Frescati Plaintiffs’ Brief in Opposition 

to Defendants’ Motion to Enforce the Best Evidence Rule and to Exclude and Disregard 

Secondary Evidence and Testimony Offered Instead of Original Evidence Lost or Destroyed in 

Case 2:05-cv-00305-JHS Document 873 Filed 07/25/16 Page 1 of 2
2

Bad Faith (Doc. No. 766), Defendants’ Reply to Response to Motion (Doc. No. 776), and in 

accordance with the Opinion of the Court issued this day, it is ORDERED that:

1. Defendants’ Motion to Draw Adverse Inferences Because of Plaintiffs’ Spoliation 

of Vessel Records (Doc. No. 754) is DENIED.

2. Defendants’ Motion to Enforce the Best Evidence Rule and to Exclude and 

Disregard Secondary Evidence and Testimony Offered Instead of Original 

Evidence Lost or Destroyed in Bad Faith (Doc. No. 755) is DENIED.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Joel H. Slomsky

JOEL H. SLOMSKY, J.

Case 2:05-cv-00305-JHS Document 873 Filed 07/25/16 Page 2 of 2