alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1 FTC’S JAN. 9, 2019 LIST OF WITNESSES

Case No. 5:17-cv-00220-LHK

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

Jennifer Milici, D.C. Bar No. 987096

J. Alexander Ansaldo, Va. Bar No. 75870

Joseph R. Baker, D.C. Bar No. 490802

Wesley G. Carson, D.C. Bar No. 1009899

Elizabeth A. Gillen, Cal. Bar No. 260667

Daniel Matheson, D.C. Bar No. 502490

Mark J. Woodward, D.C. Bar No. 479537

Federal Trade Commission

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20580

(202) 326-2912; (202) 326-3496 (fax)

jmilici@ftc.gov

Attorneys for Plaintiff Federal Trade Commission

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION,

Plaintiff,

v.

QUALCOMM INCORPORATED, a 

Delaware corporation,

Defendant.

Case No. 5:17-cv-00220-LHK

PLAINTIFF FEDERAL TRADE 

COMMISSION’S UPDATED LIST OF 

WITNESSES FOR TRIAL DAY 4, 

JANUARY 11, 2019

Courtroom: 7, 4th Floor

Judge: Hon. Lucy H. Koh

Plaintiff Federal Trade Commission submits the following list of witnesses it intends to 

call live and by videotaped deposition on January 11, 2019 (Trial Day 4):

1. Aichatou (Aicha) Evans, Intel (live) (cont’d)*

2. Mark Davis, former VIA Telecom (by videotaped deposition)*

3. Todd Madderom, Motorola (by videotaped deposition)*

4. Steve Mollenkopf, Qualcomm (live)

5. Tony Blevins, Apple (live) 

Case 5:17-cv-00220-LHK Document 1201 Filed 01/09/19 Page 1 of 2
2 FTC’S JAN. 9, 2019 LIST OF WITNESSES

Case No. 5:17-cv-00220-LHK

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

6. Isabel Mahe, Apple (by videotaped deposition)*

7. Brian Chong, Wistron (by videotaped deposition)* 

8. Monica Yang, Pegatron (by videotaped deposition)*

9. Hwi-Jae Cho, LG Electronics (by written deposition)*

10. Injung Lee, Samsung (by videotaped deposition) (time permitting)

11. Yooseok Kim, Samsung (by videotaped deposition) (time permitting)

12. Richard Blaylock, counsel for ZTE (by videotaped deposition) (time permitting)

At the close of Trial Day 3, counsel for the FTC addressed the status of motions to seal 

associated with third-party testimony. (Trial Tr. 632:6 - 633:5.) A number of witnesses listed 

above, denoted with an asterisk, were disclosed in advance of prior trial days, but time has not 

permitted the FTC to introduce their testimony. The Court has already received and addressed 

motions to seal in connection with these witnesses’ testimony and proposed exhibits, or the third 

party did not seek to seal relevant materials. For remaining third-party witnesses, third parties 

may file motions to seal testimony and proposed exhibits.

Dated: January 9, 2019 Respectfully submitted,

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION

 /s/ Jennifer Milici

Jennifer Milici

J. Alexander Ansaldo 

Joseph R. Baker

Wesley G. Carson

Elizabeth A. Gillen

Daniel Matheson

Mark J. Woodward

Federal Trade Commission

600 Pennsylvania Avenue, N.W.

Washington, D.C. 20580

(202) 326-2912; (202) 326-3496 (fax)

jmilici@ftc.gov

Attorneys for Federal Trade Commission

Case 5:17-cv-00220-LHK Document 1201 Filed 01/09/19 Page 2 of 2
STATE of Louisiana v. Dwayne CALLAHAN

NO. 2018-K-1760

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 28, 2019

Denied.

HUGHES, J., would grant.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         February 6, 2025.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on January 28, 2025, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage® Contract 1322 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                           ( print page 9092)    *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2025-1157, K2025-1157.                

Sean C. Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2025-02265 Filed 2-5-25; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
Joshua Charles THOMAS, DOC # T47951, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-4680

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed May 24, 2019

Joshua Charles Thomas, pro se.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Cynthia Richards, Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

KELLY, KHOUZAM, and BLACK, JJ., Concur.
[Graphic Omitted]

              INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

                             SUNCOAST NATURALS, INC.



TOTAL AUTHORIZED ISSUE OF PREFERRED STOCK 1,000,000 SHARES VALUE $.01 EACH TOTAL
          AUTHORIZED ISSUE OF COMMON STOCK 25,000,000 SHARES $.001 EACH

This is to Certify that  _____________________________ is the Owner of


________________________________________________________________________________
     Shares of Fully-Paid and Non-Assessable Shares of Common Stock of the
                                  Corporation

Transferable on the books of the Corporation by the holder hereof in person or
by duly authorized Attorney upon surrender of this Certificate properly
endorsed.

WITNESS, the seal of this Corporation and the signatures of its duly authorized
Officers.

DATED


/s/                                                    /s/
---------------------------                           --------------------------
SECRETARY                        [Graphic Omitted]    PRESIDENT
<PAGE>
COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE                                   Exhibit 11.1
(in thousands, except per share data)
<TABLE> 
<CAPTION> 
                                               1997
                                             --------
<S>                                          <C> 
Average shares outstanding                     95,000
Effect of dilutive options                         24
Treasury stock                                   -
                                             --------
      Total                                    95,024
                                             ========


Earnings before income taxes                 $205,613
Proforma income tax expense                    82,245
                                             --------
Adjusted net earnings                         123,368
                                             ========


Earnings per common share:
      Adjusted basic earnings per share          1.30
                                             ========
      Adjusted diluted earnings per share        1.30
                                             ========
</TABLE>
---

Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, Steve Bolton, President and Chief Executive
Officer of Carolyn River Projects Ltd., hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

|(1) | the quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Carolyn River
      Projects Ltd. for the period ended November 30, 2007 (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 Carolyn River Projects Ltd.                                                                      

Dated: January 14, 2008

| | /s/ Steve Bolton                                   
| | ---------------------------------------------------
| | Steve Bolton, President and Chief Executive Officer
| | (Principal Executive Officer)                      

A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the
signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this
written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Carolyn River
Projects Ltd. and will be retained by Carolyn River Projects Ltd. and furnished
to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---
**EXHIBIT 32**     The following certifications are being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18U.S.C. § 1350 and in accordance with SEC Release No. 33-8238. These certifications shall not bedeemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, norshall they be incorporated by reference in any filing of the Company under the Securities Act of1933, as amended, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any generalincorporation language in such filing.**Certification of Principal Executive Officer**     Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, theundersigned officer of VNUS Medical Technologies, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”),hereby certifies, to his knowledge, that:     (i) the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the period ended December31, 2006 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d),as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and     (ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.              /s/ BRIAN E. FARLEY   Brian E. Farley   *President, Chief Executive Officer and Director(Principal Executive Officer)*   Dated:March 30, 2007     A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to VNUSMedical Technologies, Inc. and will be retained by VNUS Medical Technologies, Inc. and furnished tothe Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.**Certification of Principal Financial Officer**     Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, theundersigned officer of VNUS Medical Technologies, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”),hereby certifies, to his knowledge, that:     (i) the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the period ended December31, 2006 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d),as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and     (ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.              /s/ TIMOTHY A. MARCOTTE   Timothy A. Marcotte   V*ice President and Chief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)*   Dated:March 30, 2007     A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to VNUSMedical Technologies, Inc. and will be retained by VNUS Medical Technologies, Inc. and furnished tothe Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 31.2

                                  CERTIFICATION

Manuel O. Morera, certifies that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Pharma-Bio Serv, Inc.
("Pharma-Bio Serv");

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly
report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of
Pharma-Bio Serv as of and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;

4. Pharma-Bio Serv's other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15(d)-15(e) for Pharma-Bio Serv and have:

      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 Pharma-Bio Serv, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;

      b. Evaluated the effectiveness of Pharma-Bio Serv'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; and

      c. Disclosed in this report any change in Pharma-Bio Serv's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during its most recent fiscal
quarter (Pharma-Bio Serv's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual
report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, Pharma-Bio Serv's internal control over financial reporting.

5. Pharma-Bio Serv's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reportings to
Pharma-Bio Serv's auditors and the audit committee of Pharma-Bio Serv's board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

      a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect Pharma-Bio Serv's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and

      b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in Pharma-Bio Serv's internal controls
over financial reporting.

                         /s/ Manuel O. Morera
                         --------------------
                         Manuel O. Morera
                         Chief Financial Officer

Dated: June 14, 2006

                                       32
STATE of Louisiana v. Bruce Alvin ROBERTSON

No. 2018-KH-1006

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

May 20, 2019

**ON SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE NINETEENTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF EAST BATON ROUGE**

PER CURIAM:

Writ granted. The case is remanded to the district court for merits consideration. Applicant's claimed violation of *Brady v. Maryland* , 373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963), overcomes the procedural bars of La.C.Cr.P. arts. 930.4(E) and 930.8(A) pursuant to the exception set out in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8(A)(1). *See**State ex rel. Cormier v. State* , 98-2111 (La. 12/18/98), 731 So.2d 274 ("[T]he discovery of new evidence excepting a claim from the prescriptive period of La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8 would necessarily except a claim from the repetitiveness bars of La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.4 ....").
The STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. Dominic HARRIS, Appellee.

No. 3D17-2703

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed May 1, 2019

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Christina L. Dominguez, Assistant Attorney General, for appellant.

Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and Howard K. Blumberg, Special Assistant Public Defender, and Franklin Sandrea-Rivero and Dharma Sierra, Certified Legal Interns, for appellee.

Before EMAS, C.J., and SCALES and LINDSEY, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

*1101The State appeals the trial court's order suppressing evidence seized in a warrantless search of Dominic Harris's property. After conducting an evidentiary hearing, the trial court determined that Mr. Harris had not abandoned his privacy interest in the subject property. This Court's review of the suppression order involves a mixed question of law and fact; the trial court's factual findings are presumed correct if supported by competent, substantial evidence, while we review, *de novo* , the trial court's ruling on the legality of the search. *See**State v. Milewski*, 194 So.3d 376, 378 (Fla. 3d DCA 2016). "[A] trial court's ruling on a motion to suppress comes to the appellate court clothed with a presumption of correctness, and the reviewing court must interpret the evidence and reasonable inferences and deductions derived therefrom in a manner most favorable to sustaining the trial court's ruling." *Pagan v. State*, 830 So.2d 792, 806 (Fla. 2002). With this standard in mind, we affirm the trial court's determination that Mr. Harris had not abandoned his reasonable expectation of privacy in his property when it was seized and searched by the police.

Affirmed.

EMAS, C.J., and SCALES, J., concur.

LINDSEY, J.

I respectfully dissent and would reverse the trial court's suppression order based on the authority of *State v. Jackson*, 240 So.2d 88 (Fla. 3d DCA 1970) (reversing trial court's order suppressing evidence and finding abandonment where defendant had possession of a bag and divested himself of the possession of that bag in the view of the police officer).
Adrian Fitzgerald TALLEY v. STATE

CR-16-0473

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

January 5, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
# L_2017064EN.01010701.xml

| 10.3.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 64/107 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

10.3.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 64/107

---

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2017/425

of 9 March 2017

on the minimum selling price for skimmed milk powder for the sixth partial invitation to tender within the tendering procedure opened by Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/2080

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 17 December 2013 establishing a common organisation of the markets in agricultural products and repealing Council Regulations (EEC) No 922/72, (EEC) No 234/79, (EC) No 1037/2001 and (EC) No 1234/2007 (1),

Having regard to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/1240 of 18 May 2016 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council with regard to public intervention and aid for private storage (2), and in particular Article 32 thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/2080 (3) has opened the sale of skimmed milk powder by a tendering procedure. |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/2080 (3) has opened the sale of skimmed milk powder by a tendering procedure.

| (2) | In the light of the tenders received for the sixth partial invitation to tender, a minimum selling price should not be fixed. |
| --- | --- |

(2)

In the light of the tenders received for the sixth partial invitation to tender, a minimum selling price should not be fixed.

| (3) | The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee for the Common Organisation of the Agricultural Markets, |
| --- | --- |

(3)

The measures provided for in this Regulation are in accordance with the opinion of the Committee for the Common Organisation of the Agricultural Markets,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

For the sixth partial invitation to tender for the selling of skimmed milk powder within the tendering procedure opened by Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/2080, in respect of which the period during which tenders were to be submitted ended on 7 March 2017, a minimum selling price has not been fixed.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 9 March 2017.

For the Commission,

On behalf of the President,

Jerzy PLEWA

Director-General

Directorate-General for Agriculture and Rural Development

---

(1)  
  OJ L 347, 20.12.2013, p. 671.

1

(2)  
  OJ L 206, 30.7.2016, p. 71.

2

(3)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2016/2080 of 25 November 2016 opening the sale of skimmed milk powder by a tendering procedure (OJ L 321, 29.11.2016, p. 45).

3

---
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia Clerk's Office, Atlanta, April 16, 2024. I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia. Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto affixed the day and year last above written. , Clerk. 

# Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia
ATLANTA, April 16, 2024 The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order A24I0150. TYRELL AUGUSTIN v. THE STATE. Upon consideration of the Application for Interlocutory Appeal, it is ordered that it be hereby DENIED.
LC NUMBERS: 23B03433