alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without

oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

JORGE HERNANDEZ,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 08-50514

D.C. No. 3:07-cr-02953-IEG-1

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of California

Irma E. Gonzalez, Chief District Judge, Presiding

Submitted November 4, 2009** 

Pasadena, California

Before: T.G. NELSON, BYBEE and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Jorge Hernandez appeals his conviction under 8 U.S.C. § 1326. This court

has jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We affirm. 

FILED

NOV 18 2009

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
Here, the indictment alleged the elements of the offense and provided

sufficient detail to give Hernandez notice of the crime alleged. See United States v.

Alber, 56 F.3d. 1106, 1111 (9th Cir. 1995). Hernandez’s claim that the indictment

did not protect against double jeopardy is waived because he failed to argue this

issue beyond a cursory assertion. See Fed. R. App. P. 28(a)(9); Ghahremani v.

Gonzales, 498 F.3d 993, 997 (9th Cir. 2007)

The district court neither misapplied the correct burden of proof nor

attempted to shift the burden of proof; the district court’s statements reflect its

effort to analyze the record and weigh the evidence. See United States v. Brobst,

558 F.3d 982, 998 (9th Cir. 2009) (burden shifting); United States v. Banuelos, 322

F.3d 700, 704 (9th Cir. 2003) (standard of proof). 

Lastly, the cumulative error doctrine is inapplicable because we have found

no error in the asserted issues. See United States v. Berry, 627 F.2d 193, 201 (9th

Cir. 1980).

We have considered and reject all other arguments Hernandez raises on

appeal.

AFFIRMED.
EXHIBIT 23.1

                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED
                             PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

The Board of Directors and Shareholders
Interplay Entertainment Corp.

We consent to the  incorporation  by  reference in the  registration  statements
(Form S-8 No. 333-50254,  Form S-8 No. 333-60583,  Form S-3 No. 333-50252,  Form
S-3 No. 333-59088 and Form S-3 No. 333-60272) of Interplay  Entertainment  Corp.
of our report  dated  March 25,  2004  relating  to the  consolidated  financial
statements  and schedule,  which report  appears in the December 31, 2004 annual
report  on Form  10-K of  Interplay  Entertainment  Corp.  for the  years  ended
December 31, 2003 and 2002.


/S/ SQUAR, MILNER, REEHL & WILLIAMSON, LLP
June 2, 2005
#### C. R. Springman *v.*United States

No. 7655.

Pro forma invoices dated September 26, 1945, etc.

Entered at Brownsville, Tex., September 26, 1945, etc.

Entry No. 556-B, etc.

(Decided February 2, 1949)

Plaintiff not represented by counsel.

*David N. Edelstein,*Assistant Attorney General *(Charles J. Miville,*special attorney), for the defendant.

OliveR, Chief Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement listed in schedule “A”, hereto attached and made a part hereof, have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, subject to the approval of the Court, that the market value or price at the time of exportation of the chewing gum involved in the above reappraisement cases, at which such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal markets of the country from which exported, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade, including the cost of ail containers and coverings of whatever nature, and all other costs, charges and expenses incident to placing the merchandise in condition packed ready for shipment to the United States, is Mexican pesos .045 per tablet.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that there was no higher export value fof the merchandise herein at the time of exportation thereof.

> IT IS FURTHER AGREED that these cases are hereby submitted on the foregoing stipulation.

On the agreed facts I find the foreign value, as that value is defined in section 402 (c) of the Tariff Act of 1930 as amended by the Administrative Act of 1938, to be the proper basis for the determina*393tion of the value of the chewing gum involved, and that such value was Mexican pesos .045 per tablet.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
EXHIBIT 32

                            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 Sonoma  Valley  Bancorp (the
"Company")  on Form 10-Q for the period  ending  June 30, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  We, Mel
Switzer,  Jr., Chief  Executive  Officer and Mary Quade Dieter,  Chief 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 to the best of
our knowledge and belief:

          (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.


Dated: August 5, 2004       /s/ Mel Switzer, Jr.
       ---------------      ---------------------------------------------------
                            Mel Switzer, Jr.,
                            Chief Executive Officer
                            (Principal Executive Officer)

Dated: August 5, 2004       /s/ Mary Quade Dieter
       ---------------      ---------------------------------------------------
                            Mary Quade Dieter,
                            Executive Vice President
                            Chief Operating Officer and Chief Financial Officer
                            (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)
# C_2012118EN.01003002.xml

| 21.4.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 118/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.4.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 118/30

---

Action brought on 20 February 2012 — Chico's Brands Investments v OHIM — Artsana (CHICO'S)

(Case T-83/12)

2012/C 118/51

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Chico's Brands Investments, Inc. (Fort Myers, United States) (represented by: T. Holman, Solicitor)

Applicant:

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

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Artsana SpA (Grandate, Italy)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 27 October 2011 in case R 2084/2010-1; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 27 October 2011 in case R 2084/2010-1;

| — | Order the defendant to pay to the applicant, the applicant’s costs of and occasioned by this appeal. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant to pay to the applicant, the applicant’s costs of and occasioned by this appeal.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: The applicant

Applicant for a Community trade mark:

Community trade mark concerned: The word mark ‘CHICO’S’, for goods and services in classes 25 and 35 — Community trade mark application No 1585579

Community trade mark concerned:

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Italian trade mark registration No 420865 of the figurative mark ‘chicco’, for among others goods in class 25; Italian trade mark registration No 846672/380042 of the figurative mark ‘chicco’, for among others goods in class 25; International trade mark registration No 763084 of the figurative mark ‘chicco’, for among others goods in class 25

Mark or sign cited in opposition:

Decision of the Opposition Division: Upheld the opposition and rejected the Community trade mark application in its entirety

Decision of the Opposition Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Infringement of Articles 15(1)(a), 42(2) and (3) of Council Regulation No 207/2009, as the Board of Appeal erred in concluding that the opponent’s evidence proved genuine use of the earlier mark in Italy. Infringement of Article 8(1)(b) of Council Regulation No 207/2009, as the Board of Appeal erred in concluding that there was a likelihood of confusion between the CTM application and the earlier mark.

Pleas in law:

---
**Exhibit32.2**

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Reportof Smith Barney AAA Energy Fund L.P. (the"Partnership") on Form 10-K for the periodending December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the "Report"),I, Daniel R. McAuliffe, Jr., Chief Financial Officer and Director ofCitigroup Managed Futures LLC, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, that:

(1) The Report fully complies with therequirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934; and

(2) The information contained in theReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Partnership.

/s/ Daniel R. McAuliffe,Jr.                                        DanielR. McAuliffe, Jr. Citigroup Managed Futures LLC ChiefFinancial Officer and Director

March 15,2005                                                               Date

----
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 22

- 2209

STEVEN ROLLAKANTI , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v.
HOLY CROSS HOSPITAL , Defendant

- Appellee

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland , at Greenbelt

. Timothy J. Sullivan, Magistrate Judge. ( 8:22

- cv - 00887

- TJS )

Submitted : March 21, 2023 Decided: March 23, 2023

Before WYNN and RICHARD S ON , Circuit Judges , and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Steven Rollakanti , Appellant Pro Se. Robert R. Niccolini, OGLETREE DEAKINS NASH SMOAK & STEWART, PC , Washington, D

. C

. , for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not bindi ng precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 22-2209 Doc: 14 Filed: 03/23/2023 Pg: 1 of 22 PER CURIAM: Stephen Rollakanti appeals the magistrate judge’s order granting Appellee’s
motion for sanctions and dismissing Rollakanti’s complaint pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 37(b)(2)(A) (v)

. * We have reviewed the record an d find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the magistrate judge’s order. Rollakanti v. Holy Cross Hosp. , No. 8:22

- cv 00887

- TJS (D. Md. Nov. 15, 2022). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presente d in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED

* The parties consented to proceed before a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c). USCA4 Appeal: 22-2209 Doc: 14 Filed: 03/23/2023 Pg: 2 of 2
SERVED : FEBRUAR Y 7 , 201 2 0[:rv\RTMENTO F iRANSPORWIO N ••'JCi-El'OPERATION S 

### m i FE B - 3 P i : t. 3

U.S . DEPARTMEN T OFTRANSPORTATIO N

OFFIC E O FHEARING S WASHINGTON , D C I N THE MATTERO F JOSEP H MOESSE R FA A DOCKE T No . [T O B E ASSIGNED ] (Civi l Penalt

y Case ) DMSNo . FAA-20IM28 6 ORDE RVACATIN G ORDE RT O SHO WCAUS E

AND ACCEPTIN G ANSWE R Th e basi s fo

r ih e Motio n fo

r Decisio n {"Motion" ) o f

January 10 , 201 2 filedb

y Complainan t

Federal Aviatio n Administratio n ("Complainant" ) wa s th e failure o f Responden t

Josep h Moesse r

("Respondent" ) t

o file atimel y Answer

to Complainant' s Complaint . A

n Orde r t o Sho w Caus e ("OSC" ) wa s issue dunder date o f January 31 , 2012 , directin g Responden t to file a n Answer b y Februar y 10 , 2012 , or

ris k sanctions . Responden t

o n Februar

y 6 , 2012 , responde dto th e OS C andsubmitte da purporte dAnswer . Responden t ha s adequatel y explaine dwh y i t initiall y faile dto file a

n Answer . Responden t

als o substantivel y addresse s the Complaint' s allegations . I t i s foun dan dconclude dtha

t Responden t

ha s submitte daproper

Answe r to Complainant' s Complaint . I n vie w o f th e foregoing , i

t i s ordere da s follows :1 - Respondent' s documen t i s hereb y ACCEPTE D fo r filing a s it s Answer ; an

d 2 - Th e Orde r

to Sho w Caus e i s hereb y VACATED .

RichardC . Goodwi n ^ ^ U.S . Administrativ e La

w Judg e Attachmen t

- Servic e Lis tFDM S No . FAA-2011-128 6 (Civi l Penalt y Action ) SERVIC E LIS T ORIGINA L& ON E COP Y Federa l Aviatio n Administratio n 80 0 Independenc e Avenue , S.W . Washington , D C 2059 1 Attention : Hearin g Docke t Clerk , AGC-43 0 Wilbu r Wrigh t Building--Suit e 2W1000 ' ON E COP Y Gregor y G . Skordas , RespondenC s Counse l Skordas , Casto n & Hyde , LL C 34 1 Sout hMai n Street , Suit e 30 3 Sa hLak e City , U T 84111-270 7 TEL : 801-531-744 4 FAX : 801-531-888 5 Jeffre y M . Harper , Comp/ainan t ' s Counse l Attorney , Offic e o f

th e Regiona l Counse l Northwes t

Mountai n Region , ANM- 7 •Federa l Aviatio n Administratio n 160 1 Lin dAvenu e S.W . Renton,W A 9805 7 TEL : 425-227-216 1 FAX . 425-227-100 7 Th e Honorabl e Richar dC . Goodwin , Admmisiialiv e La w Judg e Offic e o f Hearings , M-2 0 U.S . Departmen t

o f Transportatio n 120 0 Ne w Jerse y Avenue , S.E . Washington , D C 2059 0 TEL : 202-366-213 9 Attorney-Adviso r 202-366-512 1 Lega l Assistan t FAX : 202-366-753 6

Service wa s b y U.S . Mail . Fo

r scr\'ic e i n perso n o r b y expedilc dcourier , use th

e followin g address : Federa l Aviatio n Adniinislmtio a60

0 Independence Avcmic . S W, Wilbu r Wrigh t Building—Suit

e 2W1000 . Washington , D

C 20591 ; Attention : Hearin g Docke t Clerk , AGC-430 .
```

[115th Congress Public Law 220]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

[[Page 132 STAT. 1558]]

Public Law 115-220
115th Congress

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
4910 Brighton Boulevard in Denver, Colorado, as the ``George Sakato Post 
             Office''. <<NOTE: July 27, 2018 -  [S. 931]>> 

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. GEORGE SAKATO POST OFFICE.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 4910 Brighton Boulevard in Denver, Colorado, shall be known 
and designated as the ``George Sakato Post Office''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``George 
Sakato Post Office''.

    Approved July 27, 2018.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--S. 931:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 164 (2018):
            Mar. 7, considered and passed Senate.
            July 16, considered and passed House.

                                  <all>
```
Before the Third Division,

October 22, 1941

No. 46491.

#### Protest 53316-K of Clicquot Club Co. (Boston).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise is similar to that the subject of *Wilson*v. *United States*(28 C. C. P. A. 63, C. A. D. 126). It was therefore held entitled to free entry under paragraph 1768 as ginger root, not preserved or candied, unground, as claimed.
Exhibit
32.1




CERTIFICATION
OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO


18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AND EXCHANGE ACT RULES 13a-14(b)
AND 15d-14(b)


(Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)




In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Sino Clean Energy Inc. on Form 10-Q for
the period ended March 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), each of the undersigned does
hereby certify, 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 or her
knowledge and belief:




(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 the operation of the
Company.




Dated:
      May 17, 2010
              By:
              /s/
      Baowen RenBaowen
      RenChief
      Executive Officer


Dated:
      May 17, 2010
              By:
              /s/
      Wen (Wendy) FuWen
      (Wendy) FuChief
      Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 99.7





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO





18 U.S.C. §1350,





AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO





SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002











In connection with the amended Annual Report of Rubicon Minerals Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 40-F for the period ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Robert G. Lewis, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.











April; 11, 2011                                                       /s/Robert G. Lewis


Robert G. Lewis


Chief Financial Officer











A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Rubicon Minerals Corporation and will be retained by Rubicon Minerals Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Millennium Capital Venture Holdings Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Mario Drolet, President and acting CFO, 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|Date: November 18, 2003 | By:/s/ MARIO DROLETName: Mario DroletTitle: President and Acting CFO
|----------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1947 

To prohibit attendance of an animal fighting venture, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

DECEMBER 6, 2011 

Mr. BLUMENTHAL (for himself, Mr. KIRK, Ms. CANTWELL, and Mr. BROWN

of Massachusetts) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry 

A BILL 

To prohibit attendance of an animal fighting venture, and 

for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Animal Fighting Spec5 tator Prohibition Act of 2011’’. 

6 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON ATTENDING AN ANIMAL FIGHT OR 

7 CAUSING A MINOR TO ATTEND AN ANIMAL 

8 FIGHT. 

9 Section 26 of the Animal Welfare Act (7 U.S.C. 

10 2156) is amended— 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1947 IS

1 (1) in subsection (a)— 

2 (A) in the heading, by striking ‘‘SPON3 SORING OR EXHIBITING AN ANIMAL IN’’ and in4 serting ‘‘SPONSORING OR EXHIBITING AN ANI5 MAL IN, ATTENDING, OR CAUSING A MINOR TO

6 ATTEND’’; 

7 (B) in paragraph (1)— 

8 (i) in the heading, by striking ‘‘IN

9 GENERAL’’ and inserting ‘‘SPONSORING OR

10 EXHIBITING’’; and 

11 (ii) by striking ‘‘paragraph (2)’’ and 

12 inserting ‘‘paragraph (3)’’; 

13 (C) by redesignating paragraph (2) as 

14 paragraph (3); and 

15 (D) by inserting after paragraph (1) the 

16 following new paragraph: 

17 ‘‘(2) ATTENDING OR CAUSING A MINOR TO AT18 TEND.—It shall be unlawful for any person to— 

19 ‘‘(A) knowingly attend an animal fighting 

20 venture; or 

21 ‘‘(B) cause a minor to attend an animal 

22 fighting venture.’’; and 

23 (2) in subsection (g), by adding at the end the 

24 following new paragraph: 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 1947 IS

1 ‘‘(5) the term ‘minor’ means a person under the 

2 age of 18 years old.’’. 

3 SEC. 3. ENFORCEMENT OF ANIMAL FIGHTING PROHIBI4 TIONS. 

5 Section 49 of title 18, United States Code, is amend6 ed— 

7 (1) by striking ‘‘Whoever’’ and inserting ‘‘(a) 

8 IN GENERAL.—Whoever’’; 

9 (2) in subsection (a), as designated by para10 graph (1) of this section, by striking ‘‘subsection 

11 (a),’’ and inserting ‘‘subsection (a)(1),’’; and 

12 (3) by adding at the end the following new sub13 sections: 

14 ‘‘(b) ATTENDING AN ANIMAL FIGHTING VENTURE.— 

15 Whoever violates subsection (a)(2)(A) of section 26 of the 

16 Animal Welfare Act (7 U.S.C. 2156) shall be fined under 

17 this title, imprisoned for not more than 1 year, or both, 

18 for each violation. 

19 ‘‘(c) CAUSING A MINOR TO ATTEND AN ANIMAL

20 FIGHTING VENTURE.—Whoever violates subsection 

21 (a)(2)(B) of section 26 (7 U.S.C. 2156) of the Animal 

22 Welfare Act shall be fined under this title, imprisoned for 

23 not more than 3 years, or both, for each violation.’’. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### Charlotte JOHNSON, Appellant (Plaintiff below), v. Arjum GUPTA, M.D. and Wallace Sherritt, D.O., Appellee (Defedant below).

No. 64S03-9805-CV 272.

Supreme Court of Indiana.

July 8, 1999.

Richard A. Miller, Gouveia & Miller, Mer-rillville, Indiana, Attorney for Appellant.

David C. Jensen, Sherry L. Clarke, Judith I. Snare, Eichhorn & Eichhorn, Hammond, IN, Attorneys for Appellee.

ON PETITION TO TRANSFER

SELBY, J.

The Court of Appeals, in this case, held that the Medical Malpractice statute of limitations contained in Indiana Code section 34-18-7-l(b)(1998) was constitutional. The constitutionality of this statute of limitations was discussed in two cases decided today, *Martin v. Richey,*711 N.E.2d 1273, (Ind.1999), and *Van Dusen v. Stotts,*712 N.E.2d 491 (Ind.1999). Therefore, we remand this case to the trial court for further proceedings consistent with *Martin*and *Van Dusen.*

SHEPARD, C.J., and DICKSON, SULLIVAN, and BOEHM, JJ., concur.