alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
-1-

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF MARYLAND 

SOUTHERN DIVISION

In re SANCTUARY BELIZE LITIGATION No: 18-cv-3309-PJM

MOTION FOR ORDER APPROVING SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT AND RELEASE 

BETWEEN RECEIVER AND LEE NOBMANN

Receiver Robb Evans & Associates LLC (“Receiver”), the Receiver appointed as 

permanent receiver pursuant to, among other orders, the Preliminary Injunction as to Defendants 

Andris Pukke, Peter Baker, Luke Chadwick, John Usher, Certain Corporate Defendants, and the 

Estate of John Pukke (Doc. 615) and the Stipulated Order for Permanent Injunction and 

Monetary Judgment Against Defendant Michael Santos (Doc. 820) (“Santos Judgment”), hereby 

moves the Court for an order approving the Settlement Agreement and Release (“Settlement 

Agreement”) entered into between the Receiver and Lee Nobmann (“Nobmann”), a copy of 

which is attached to the Declaration of Brick Kane as Exhibit 1. Pursuant to the Santos 

Judgment, Michael Santos transferred, assigned and relinquished to the Receiver, for liquidation 

and ultimate payment to the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”), all rights Michael Santos may 

have in five parcels of real property commonly described as (a) 17085 Birch Hill Road, 

Riverside, California (“Riverside Property”); (b) 1807 Coastal Way, Costa Mesa, California 

(“Costa Mesa Property”); (c) 460 Lindberg Circle, Petaluma, California (“Petaluma Property”); 

(d) 14070 Falling Leaf Road, Apple Valley, California (“Apple Valley Property”); and (e) 7862 

Chase Avenue, Hesperia, California (“Hesperia Property”). (Collectively, the five properties are 

referred to herein as the “Santos Properties.”) The Settlement Agreement provides, among other 

Case 1:18-cv-03309-PJM Document 886 Filed 03/24/20 Page 1 of 2
-2-

things, that in exchange for Nobmann’s payment of $350,000 to the Receiver, the Receiver 

transfers, assigns and relinquishes to Nobmann or his assignee all rights that the Receiver may 

have in the Santos Properties. The Settlement Agreement further contains general and mutual 

releases between the Receiver and Nobmann.

This Motion is made and based upon the Memorandum of Points and Authorities and 

Declaration of Brick Kane which are filed and served concurrently herewith.

Dated: March 24, 2020 Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Gary Owen Caris

Gary Owen Caris, Calif. Bar No. 088918

Admitted Pro Hac Vice 11/30/18

BARNES & THORNBURG LLP

2029 Century Park East, Suite 300

Los Angeles, CA 90067

Telephone: (310) 248-3880

Facsimile (310) 248-3894

Email: gcaris@btlaw.com

and

/s/ James E. Van Horn

James E. Van Horn (Bar No. 29210)

BARNES & THORNBURG LLP

1717 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW, Suite 500

Washington, DC 20006

Telephone: (202) 371-6351

Facsimile (202) 289-1330

Email: jvanhorn@btlaw.com

16932534v1

Case 1:18-cv-03309-PJM Document 886 Filed 03/24/20 Page 2 of 2
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

October 31, 2005 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
128435 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, Justices

v SC: 128435 COA: 251353 Calhoun CC: 2002-004919-FC JAMES ALFORD WINGFIELD, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, th e application for leave to a ppeal the February 15, 2005 judgment of the Court of Appeals is cons idered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented s hould be reviewed by this Court.

t1024 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

October 31, 2005

Clerk
#### ARISON SHIPPING COMPANY, a Florida corporation, et al., Appellants, v. KLOSTERS REDERI A/S, doing business as Norwegian Caribbean Lines, Appellee.

No. 72-1014.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Nov. 21, 1972.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
Exhibit 31.2
 CERTIFICATION
      (a)
    
    designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls
and procedures to be designed under our supervision, 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)
    
    Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal
control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide
reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation
of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted
accounting principles;(c)
    
    evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures
and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure
controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such
evaluation;(d)
    
    disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants
internal control over financial reporting; and
    /s/ William R. AbbottWilliam R. AbbottChief Financial Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-1086

CAROL JEFFERSON,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

NATIONAL RAILROAD PASSENGER CORPORATION, d/b/a Amtrak,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, Senior District 

Judge. (8:15-cv-02275-DKC)

Submitted: October 18, 2016 Decided: November 18, 2016

Before NIEMEYER, FLOYD, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Leland Alan Stark, Santa Monica, California, for Appellant. 

Christy Ann Fisher, John Christopher Nosher, BONNER KIERNAN 

TREBACH & CROCIATA LLP, Annapolis, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Carol Jefferson appeals the district court’s orders

dismissing her complaint for insufficient service of process and 

denying her motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the 

record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we grant 

leave to proceed in forma pauperis and affirm for the reasons 

stated by the district court. Jefferson v. Nat’l R.R. Passenger 

Corp., No. 8:15-cv-02275-DKC (D. Md. Oct. 21, 2015; Dec. 23, 

2015). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and 

legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 

before this court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process.

AFFIRMED
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (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 as of the
dates and for the periods expressed in the Report.
 Date: June 5, 2008
    /s/ CHARLES A. RATNERName:
    Charles A. RatnerTitle:
    President and Chief Executive Officer/s/ ROBERT G. O'BRIENName:
    Robert G. O'BrienTitle:
    Executive Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      EXHIBIT 12

EXHIBIT 12.    STATEMENT RE: COMPUTATION OF RATIOS


                      BancWest Corporation and Subsidiaries
         Computation of Consolidated Ratios of Earnings to Fixed Charges


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                          THREE MONTHS ENDED MARCH 31,
                                         ------------------------------
                                             2001              2000
                                         ------------      ------------
                                             (dollars in thousands)
<S>                                      <C>               <C>
Income before income taxes               $    102,584      $     84,802
                                         ------------      ------------


Fixed charges(1):
    Interest expense                          149,478           122,115
    Rental expense                              3,715             3,729
                                         ------------      ------------
                                              153,193           125,844
Less interest on deposits                     120,421            99,498
                                         ------------      ------------

    Net fixed charges                          32,772            26,346
                                         ------------      ------------

    Earnings, excluding
       interest on deposits              $    135,356      $    111,148
                                         ============      ============

    Earnings, including
       interest on deposits              $    255,777      $    210,646
                                         ============      ============

Ratio of earnings to fixed charges:

    Excluding interest on deposits              4.13X             4.22x

    Including interest on deposits              1.67X             1.67x
</TABLE>

(1) For purposes of computing the consolidated ratios of earnings to fixed
    charges, earnings represent income before income taxes plus fixed charges.
    Fixed charges, excluding interest on deposits, include interest (other than
    on deposits), whether expensed or capitalized, and that portion of rental
    expense (generally one third) deemed representative of the interest factor.
    Fixed charges, including interest on deposits, consists of the foregoing
    items plus interest on deposits.
EXHIBIT 23.01



Consent of Independent Public Accountants


As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the
incorporation of our reports included in this Annual Report on
Form 10-K, into the Company's previously filed Registration
Statement File No. 333-40601, Registration Statement File No. 333-
66949, Registration Statement File No. 333-72323, and
Registration Statement File No. 333-72351.





Omaha, Nebraska,
March 27, 2001
* This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the

doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and col lateral estoppel. This court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judg ments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and condi tions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.

** After examining the briefs and the appellate recor d, this three-judge panel has determined unanimously that oral argumentwould not be of material assistance in the determination of this appeal. Se e Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1 (G). The cause is therefore ordered s ubmitted without oral argument. 

## F I L E D United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### APR 26 2000 

### PATRICK FISHER Clerk UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT
BRENT B. GOLDEN, Plaintiff - Appellant, vs. DON WATERS, Sheriff of Carter County Detention a/k/a Don Water, Defendant - Appellee. No. 99-7124 (D.C. No. 98-CV-298-S) (E.D. Okla.)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT *
Before BRORBY , KELLY , and MURPHY , Circuit Judges. ** Plaintiff-Appellant Brent Golden, an inmate appeari ng pro se, appeals from the dismissal of his prisoner civil rights claim, 4 2 U.S.C. § 1983. Mr. Golden was stabbed in the neck with a pencil by another in mate, James Thompson, during a prison fight. He brought the instant case agains t the prison warden claiming a violation of the Eighth Amendment. The district co urt dismissed the claim as- 2 -

without merit under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2), althoug h the judge considered summary judgment affidavit evidence. Our jurisdict ion arises under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and we affirm, treating the case as an appeal from the grant of summary judgment. In order to prevail on an Eighth Amendment claim ag ainst the warden for injuries caused by another inmate, Mr. Golden must show that prison officials acted with “deliberate indifference” for his health and safety. See Lopez v. LeMaster , 172 F.3d 756, 760 (10th Cir. 1999); see also Barrie v. Grand County, Utah , 119 F.3d 862, 868-69 (10th Cir. 1997) (applying this standard to pre-trial detainees). This test requires proof that the pris on official subjectively knew of and disregarded “an excessive risk to inmate healthor safety.” Farmer v. Brennan , 511 U.S. 825, 837 (1994); see also Berry v. Muskogee , 900 F.2d 1489, 1496 (10th Cir. 1990) (official must disregard a kn own or obvious risk). As stated in an affidavit by Defendant Waters, it w as the practice of the prison to segregate inmates who posed a threat to o ther prisoners. Prior to plaintiff’s injury, Mr. Thompson had not threatenedor assaulted any of the other prisoners. Therefore, Defendant Waters, who was no t present at the time of the fight, did not consider him to be a threat to otherprisoners. After the fight, both Mr. Golden and Mr. Thompson were placed in lockdown . Because Mr. Golden failed to demonstrate any deliberate indifference o n the part of Defendant Waters,- 3 -

the district court correctly dismissed his claim.

AFFIRMED. Entered for the Court Paul J. Kelly, Jr. Circuit Judge
#### David GOODMAN and Jean Goodman, his wife, Appellants, v. Ronald LEBOW et al., Appellees.

No. O-295.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Aug. 10, 1971.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
Order filed March 2 9 , 2022

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 22

- 00094

- CR

____________ HERBERT BRISCOE , Appellant

V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 183rd District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1739168



### ORDER
Appellant is represented by appointed counsel, Carmen Roe . No reporter’s
record has been filed in this case. Linda Hacker , the official court reporter for the
183rd District Court , informed this court that appellant has not paid or mad e
arrang e ments to pay for the reporter ’ s record and is not appealing as indigent. On March 7, 2022, the clerk of this court notified appellant that we would consider and decide those issues that do not require a reporter’s record unless appellant,
within 15 days of notice, requested preparation of the record and ma de

arrang e me nts to pay the court reporter for pre par ing the record, if not filing as anindigent party, and provide d this court with proof of the re quest as well as payment

or indigency. See Tex. R. App. P. 37.3(c). Appellant filed no reply.
Accordingly, w e ORDER appellant ’ s appointed counsel, Carme n Roe , to file a brief in this appeal on or before April 28, 2022 . If Carme n Roe does not timely file the brief as ordered, we will issue a n order req uiring the trial court to hold a hearing to determine why the brief has not been filed.

PER CURIAM

Panel Consists of Justices Wise, Poissant, and Wilson.
#### Tamara VOLLENWEIDER, Appellant, v. Walter VOLLENWEIDER, Appellee.

No. 71-124.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Sept. 21, 1971.

George C. Vogelsang, Daniel Sorren-tino, Miami, for appellant.

Angelo A. Ali, and Bolles, Goodwin, Ry-skamp & Ware, Miami, for appellee.

Before SWANN, C. J., and PEARSON and CHARLES CARROLL, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

The judgment of the trial court is fully supported by the law set forth in Pemelman v. Pemelman, Fla.App.1966, 186 So.2d 552.

Affirmed.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-6048
RICHARD WAYNE GAY, Petitioner - Appellant, versus WARDEN, FCI Estill, Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Beaufort. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District Judge. (CA-94-945-9-20) Submitted: September 20, 1996 Decided: October 3, 1996 Before NIEMEYER, HAMILTON, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam. Richard Wayne Gay, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM:Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (1994) petition. Appellant's case was referred to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (1994). The magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and advised Appellant that failure to file timely objections to thisrecommendation could waive appellate review of a district court order based upon the recommendation. Despite this warning, Appellant failed to timely object to the magistrate judge's recommendation. The timely filing of objections to a magistrate judge's recommendation is necessary to preserve appellate review of the substance of that recommendation when the parties have been warned that failure to object will waive appellate r eview. Wright v. Collins , 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985). See generally Thomas v. Arn , 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Appellant has waived appellate review by failing to file timely objections after receiving proper notice. We accordingly deny a certificate of appealability to the extent that one is required and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED APRIL 15, 2021

NO. 03

- 19

- 00784

- CR

James Allen Brickley , Appellant

v.

The State of Texas , Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE 426TH DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE BYRNE , JU STICES BAKER AND KELLY

AFFIRMED

-- OPINION BY JUSTICE BAKER

This is an appeal from the judgments of conviction entered by the trial court. Having reviewed

the re cord and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was no reversible error in

the judgments

. Therefore, the Court affirms the trial court’s judgments of conviction

. Because

appellant is indigent and u nable to pay costs, no adjudica t i on of costs is made.
EXHIBIT 32.1

                   CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF
                        FINANCIAL INDUSTRIES CORPORATION
                       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 Financial  Industries  Corporation
("FIC") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2003, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Eugene
E. Payne, Chief Executive Officer,  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 my 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
          FIC.




  /s/ Eugene E. Payne
________________________
Eugene E. Payne
Chief Executive Officer
Date: November 25, 2003
XII. Purpose

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the purpose of this Order to Maintain Assets is to 

maintain the full economic viability, marketability and competitiveness of the Prince Business 

through its full transfer and delivery to an Acquirer; to minimize any risk of loss of competitive 

potential for the Prince Business; and to prevent the destruction, removal, wasting, deterioration, 

or impairment of any of the Prince Assets except for ordinary wear and tear. 

XIII. Term

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this Order to Maintain Assets shall terminate the day 

after the Decision and Order in this matter becomes final or the Commission withdraws 

acceptance of the Consent Agreement pursuant to the provisions of Commission Rule 2.34, 16 

C.F.R. § 2.34.

By the Commission. 

April J. Tabor 

Secretary 

SEAL 

ISSUED: April 20, 2022 

15
10:00 am Welcome and Opening Remarks

Andrew Smith

Director, Bureau of Consumer Protection, Federal Trade Commission

10:15 am*         Panel 1: Treasure or Trifle? A Macro Look at Microtransactions

This panel will explore the role of loot boxes and similar mechanics in the video game

ecosystem and the impact of these monetization models on end users.   

Panelists:

John Breyault  

Vice President of Public Policy, Telecommunications, and Fraud,  

National Consumers League

Omeed Dariani

CEO, Online Performers Group

Renee Gittins

Executive Director, International Game Developers Association  

Jeff Haynes  

Senior Editor of Video Games and Websites, Common Sense Media

Sean Kane  

Partner and Co‐chair of the Interactive Entertainment Group,  

Frankfurt Kurnit Klein & Selz  

Michael Warnecke  

Chief Counsel, Tech Policy, Entertainment Software Association  

Moderators:

Brittany Frassetto

BCP Division of Financial Practices, FTC

Andrew Wone

BCP Division of Advertising Practices, FTC

* There will be a 10‐minute break between panelists’ presentations and the moderated

discussion.
12:15 pm Lunch

1:15 pm Panel 2: Head in the Game – What Drives Loot Box Spending?

This panel will address potential social, psychological, and economic motivations

associated with loot box spending.

Panelists:

Sarah Domoff, Ph.D.

Assistant Professor, Clinical Psychology, Department of Psychology,  

Central Michigan University

Adam Elmachtoub, Ph.D.

Assistant Professor, Department of Industrial Engineering and Operations Research,

Columbia University

Andrey Simonov, Ph.D.

Assistant Professor of Marketing, Columbia Business School  

David Zendle, Ph.D.

Lecturer, Computer Science, York St John University

Moderator:

Patrick McAlvanah

Bureau of Economics, FTC

2:35 pm Break

2:45 pm Panel 3: A Level Playing Field – What’s Fair Game?

This panel will discuss current initiatives for disclosing in‐game microtransactions and

explore ideas for other mechanisms that may enhance consumer protection.

Panelists:

Ariel Fox Johnson

Senior Counsel for Policy and Privacy, Common Sense Media  

Anna Laitin

Director of Financial Policy, Consumer Reports  

Patricia Vance

President, Entertainment Software Rating Board

Keith Whyte

Executive Director, National Council on Problem Gambling

Moderators:

Mary Johnson and William Ducklow

BCP Division of Advertising Practices, FTC
4:00 pm Closing Remarks

Mary K. Engle

Associate Director, BCP Division of Advertising Practices, FTC