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

United States District Court 

Northern District of California 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al., 

Plaintiffs, 

v. 

MATTHEW WAYNE, et al., 

Defendants. 

Case No. 16-cv-06994-PJH 

ORDER RE TRIAL DATE 

On February 3, 2023, the parties filed a notice of tentative settlement and 

requested that the court vacate or continue the pretrial and trial dates (February 9 and 

March 6 respectively). At that time, defendants had filed all their pretrial papers except 

for jury instructions and a verdict form; relator had filed only a pretrial statement. On 

February 22, 2023, relator’s counsel emailed the court, copying defense counsel, 

advising that the settlement had fallen through. The court held a status conference on 

February 23, 2023 and advised the parties that if the settlement had indeed failed, the 

two trial dates available were the original date of March 6, 2023 or March 27, 2023. The 

parties were ordered to meet and confer and elect which trial date was preferable and 

notify the court on Monday February 27, 2023, by noon because the Jury Office needs at 

least one week’s notice to summon a jury panel. The parties have chosen not to comply 

with this order. 

Accordingly, as it is too late to summon a jury for a March 6 trial, the court sets the 

trial in this matter for March 27, 2023, at 8:30 a.m. The final pretrial conference will be 

held on March 16, 2023 at 2:00 p.m. Proposed jury instructions, verdict forms, and voir 

Case 4:16-cv-06994-PJH Document 195 Filed 02/28/23 Page 1 of 2
2 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

United States District Court 

Northern District of California 

dire questions must be filed by March 9, 2023. Sanctions will be imposed for any party 

failing to comply with this order. 

 IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: February 28, 2023 

 /s/ Phyllis J. Hamilton 

PHYLLIS J. HAMILTON 

United States District Judge 

Case 4:16-cv-06994-PJH Document 195 Filed 02/28/23 Page 2 of 2
Shukel MUTCH, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-3596

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

May 15, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Michael E. JONES, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. DEPT. OF BUSINESS & PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-3752

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 26, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
Curtis Jay HOLZSCHUH, Appellant, v. Eileen Wyatt HOLZSCHUH, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-3681

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed April 5, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
John Bruce MCNIDER, Jr., Lezli McNider Thomason, and Emmett Oris McNider v. Peggy J. MCNIDER, Sweet Water State Bank, and Stratton F. Lewis, Jr.

2170459

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

February 8, 2018

Transferred to Sup. Ct. for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction.
Brian BRANTLEY, Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE o/b/o Shavonta Demosthenes, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-4111

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed May 29, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

November 23, 2009 

s1116 

Order 

 

November 23, 2009 

139653 

FREDERICK HAMILTON, 

Plaintiff, 

v SC: 139653 

 AGC: 1088/09 

ATTORNEY GRIEVANCE COMMISSION, 

Defendant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the complaint for superintending control is considered, and 

relief is DENIED, because the Court is not persuaded that it should grant the requested 

relief.
Damanecia ROBERTSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-3569

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

June 20, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
EX PARTE Bernies BURNETT, Jr.

CR-16-1299

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

January 16, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Mand. pet. dismissed.
**Exhibit 31.1****Certifications**     I, Jerome J. Smith, Chief Executive Officer of First Business Financial Services, Inc.,certify that:1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of First Business Financial Services,Inc.;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a materialfact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this report;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport;4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13(a)-15(c)and 15(d)-15(e)) for the registrant and have: a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused suchdisclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensurethat material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;  b. Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and proceduresandpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosurecontrols and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based onsuch evaluation; and  c. Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal controlover financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation ofinternal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors: a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likelyto adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and  b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.         /s/ Jerome J. Smith   Jerome J. Smith   Chief Executive Officer    August 9, 2006           
33
QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document

Exhibit 4(d)  



	PROTECTIVE LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY	 	P. O. BOX 2606	 	BIRMINGHAM, ALABAMA	 	35202-2606
	





 
 

ENHANCED SPOUSAL CONTINUATION BENEFIT ENDORSEMENT    
    


This
endorsement amends the Contract to which it is attached by adding the following provisions and making them a part of the Contract as of its Effective Date: 


Enhanced Spousal Continuation Benefit

If a Beneficiary who is the surviving spouse of a deceased Owner elects, in lieu of receiving the death benefit, to continue the Contract and become the new Owner as provided in the Contract, we will
add to the Contract Value an amount equal to the positive difference, if any, between: 1) the value of the Contract's death benefit; and, 2) the Contract Value; both determined as of the
date we receive due proof of death. We will allocate the amount we add according to the Purchase Payment instructions then in effect, but the amount we add will not be considered a Purchase Payment. 


All
other provisions of your Contract not contrary to the terms of this endorsement remain in full force and effect. 


PROTECTIVE
LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY 



	

 	 	 
	Secretary	 	 











QuickLinks


ENHANCED SPOUSAL CONTINUATION BENEFIT ENDORSEMENT
AT/MOATT 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT 

FILED

JUL 29 2019 

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

NOKIA TECHNOLOGIES OY, 

Intervenor-Pending, 

v. 

QUALCOMM INCORPORATED, A 

Delaware corporation, 

Defendant-Appellant, 

SAMSUNG ELECTRONICS COMPANY, 

LTD.; et al.,

Intervenors.

No. 19-16122 

D.C. No. 5:17-cv-00220-LHK 

Northern District of California, 

San Jose 

ORDER 

Before: SCHROEDER, CANBY, and CHRISTEN, Circuit Judges. 

The unopposed motion of Nokia Technologies Oy to intervene (Docket 

Entry No. 48) is granted. 

The unopposed motions of ACT ǁ The App Association and MediaTek Inc. 

to file amicus briefs in opposition to the motion for stay (Docket Entry Nos. 37, 

50) are granted. 

The consent motion of the United States to file a statement of interest 

(Docket Entry No. 38) is granted. 

Case 5:17-cv-00220-LHK Document 1525 Filed 07/29/19 Page 1 of 2
ATIMOATT 2 19-16122

All other pending motions will be addressed in subsequent orders. 

The previously established briefing schedule remains in effect.

Case 5:17-cv-00220-LHK Document 1525 Filed 07/29/19 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 31.1

              CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER CERTIFICATION

I, David Cartisano, certify that:

1.     I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Elite Artz,
Inc.;

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 statement made, in light of the circumstances under which
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 report, fairly present in all material respects
the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small
business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report.

4.     The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I are
responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the
small business issuer 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 the small business issuer,
including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within
those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
prepared;

       (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer'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 the small business issuer's
internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small
business issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's
fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially
affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business
issuer's internal control over financial reporting; and

5.     The small business issuer's other certifying officer(s) and I have
disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over
financial reporting, to the small business issuer's auditors and the audit
committee of small business issuer's board of directors (or persons performing
the equivalent function):

       (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 the small business issuer'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 the small business issuer's
internal control over financial reporting.



                                /s/ David Cartisano
Date: August 8, 2005          ____________________________________________
                              David Cartisano, Chief Executive Officer
Charles HAMILTON, DOC #T05950, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-2083

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed March 13, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONUNDER SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each ofthe undersigned certifies that this periodic report fully complies with therequirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934 and that information contained in this periodic report fairly presents, inall material respects, the financial condition and results of operations ofGTA-IB, LLC.

 
| Date: November 7, 2007 |   | /s/ W. Bradley  Blair, II              |   |
|------------------------|--------|---------------------------------------------|--------|
|                   |   | W. Bradley  Blair, II                  |
|                   |   | Chief Executive Officer  and President      |
|                   |   |                                        |
| Date: November 7, 2007 |   | /s/ Tracy S. Clifford                       |   |
|                   |   | Tracy S. Clifford                           |
|                   |   | Principal Accounting  Officer and Secretary |

 

----
Form of Certificate for Series B Preferred Stock



 Exhibit 4.2 
  

			
	NUMBER	 	SHARES
	      001	 	326    

 ALARION FINANCIAL SERVICES, INC. 
 INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA 
 FIXED RATE CUMULATIVE
PERPETUAL PREFERRED STOCK, SERIES B 
 THIS CERTIFIES THAT THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY 
 is the owner of: 
 Three Hundred
Twenty Six 
 FULLY PAID AND NONASSESSABLE SHARES OF FIXED RATE CUMULATIVE PERPETUAL PREFERRED STOCK, SERIES B 
 $1,000 LIQUIDATION PREFERENCE PER SHARE 
 $0.01 PAR VALUE PER SHARE 
 The shares represented by this Certificate are transferable only on the stock transfer books of Alarion
Financial Services, Inc. by the holder of record hereof, or by his duly authorized attorney or legal representative, upon the surrender of this Certificate properly endorsed. This Certificate, and the shares represented hereby, are issued and shall
be held subject to all the provisions of the Articles of Incorporation and the Certificate Of The Designation, Preferences, Rights And Limitations Of Fixed Rate Cumulative Perpetual Preferred Stock, Series B of Alarion Financial Services, Inc., and
any amendments thereto (copies of which are on file with the Corporate Secretary of Alarion Financial Services, Inc. and the Secretary of State of the State of Florida), to all of which provisions the holder by acceptance hereof assents. Alarion
Financial Services, Inc., will furnish the holder hereof a full statement of such information on request and without charge. The shares evidenced by this Certificate are not of an insurable type and are not insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance
Corporation. 
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Alarion Financial Services, Inc. has caused this Certificate to be executed by the signature of its duly
authorized officers and has caused its corporate seal to be hereunto affixed. 
 Dated: January 23, 2009 
 SEAL 
  

					
	  
	 		 	  

	President	 		 	Chairman of the Board
Amendment No.2 to 1998 Director Option Plan



 EXHIBIT 10.1 
  
 Amendment No. 2 to 
 BioMarin Pharmaceutical Inc. 
 1998 Director Option Plan 
  
 Pursuant to the authority granted to the BioMarin Pharmaceutical Inc. (the “Company”) board of directors (the “Board”)
by the terms of Section 11(a) of the Company’s 1998 Director Option Plan (the “Plan”), effective as of the dates set forth below, the Board has amended the Plan as follows: 
  
 Amendment to Section 4(c) 
  
 Effective on June 12, 2003, subsections (b) and (c) of Section 4 (Administration and Grants of Options under the Plan) of the Plan are amended to read, in their entirety:

  

	 	“(b)	 	Each Outside Director shall be automatically granted an Option to purchase 30,000 Shares (the “First Option”) on the date on which such person first becomes an Outside
Director, whether through election by the stockholders of the Company or appointment by the Board to fill a vacancy; provided, however, that an Inside Director who ceases to be an Inside Director but who remains a Director shall not receive a First
Option. 

  

	 	“(c)	 	Each Outside Director shall automatically be granted an Option to purchase 30,000 Shares (a “Subsequent Option”) on each anniversary of the date on which such person first
became an Outside Director, whether through Election by the stockholders of the Company or appointment by the Board to fill a vacancy, provided he or she is then an Outside Director.” 

  
 Amendment to Section 8(b) 
  
 Effective on July 21, 2003, Section 8(b) of the Plan (Termination of
Continuous Status as a Director) is amended to read, in its entirety: 
  
 “Subject to Section 10 hereof, in the event Optionee’s status as a Director terminates (other than upon Optionee’s death or total and permanent disability (as defined in Section 22(e)(3) of the Code)),
the Optionee may exercise his or her Option (i) within such period of time as specified in the Option Agreement (of at least thirty (30) days) or (ii) in the absence of a specified time in the Option Agreement, within three (3) months following the
date of such termination, and, in either case, only to the extent that the Optionee was entitled to exercise the option on the date of such termination (but in no event later than the expiration of 







 its ten (10) year term). To the extent that the Optionee was not entitled to exercise an Option on the
date of such termination, and to the extent that the Optionee does not exercise such Option (to the extent otherwise so entitled) within the time specified herein, the Option shall terminate.”
<PAGE>

Exhibit 10.4
Promissory Note

Lender: Planeta Dorado, S,A,
Borrower: Inversiones La Ribera, S.A.
Amount: $150,000
Currency: U.S. Dollars
Interest Rate: 8.00% fixed rate
Date of issuance: May 14, 2002
Due date: Due on demand
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-6355

JOE FRANKLIN SANDERS,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA; HENRY MCMASTER, Attorney General for

South Carolina,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Rock Hill. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge.

(0:06-cv-03175-MBS)

Submitted: May 22, 2008 Decided: May 30, 2008

Before MOTZ and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Joe Franklin Sanders, Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, SOUTH

CAROLINA ATTORNEY GENERAL’S OFFICE, Columbia, South Carolina, for

Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Joe Franklin Sanders seeks to appeal the district court’s

order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and

dismissing as untimely his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. The

order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a

certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A

certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial

showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any

assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is

debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by

the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell,

537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484

(2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have

independently reviewed the record and conclude that Sanders has not

made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of

appealability 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
Karl J. RIEDTHALER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D17-3583

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed April 9, 2019 Rehearing Denied May 15, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
---

Exhibit 32.1

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Carbiz Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended October 31, 2008, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Carl
Ritter, Chief Executive 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 the Report fairly presents,
      in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
      operations of the Company.



| | /s/
      Carl Ritter        
| | -----------------------------
| | Carl Ritter                  
| | Chief Executive Officer      
| | (principal executive officer)
| | December 10, 2008            

---
Case 3:17-cv-00386-WHO Document 20 Filed 04/17/17 Page 1 of 1