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

Case No. 17-CV-00220-LHK 

ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE MOTIONS TO SEAL THE PARTIES’ PRETRIAL PROPOSED 

FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

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

SAN JOSE DIVISION

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION,

Plaintiff,

v.

QUALCOMM INCORPORATED,

Defendant.

Case No. 17-CV-00220-LHK 

ORDER DENYING WITHOUT 

PREJUDICE MOTIONS TO SEAL THE 

PARTIES' PRETRIAL PROPOSED 

FINDINGS OF FACT AND 

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

Re: Dkt. No. 1013, 1016

Before the Court are the parties’ joint administrative motions to seal portions of the pretrial 

proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law. ECF Nos. 1013 and 1016.

Applying the compelling reasons standard for sealing, the Court finds that the motions are 

overly broad and DENIES them without prejudice. The Court finds that much of the information 

that the parties seek to seal has been publicly disclosed elsewhere or is too general to be sealed. 

Even where the parties seek to seal information that may properly be sealed, they should seek to 

seal only the sealable information and not whole paragraphs or sections that do not warrant 

sealing.

The parties shall file their revised motions by January 14, 2019. The parties shall format 

Case 5:17-cv-00220-LHK Document 1137 Filed 01/06/19 Page 1 of 2
2

Case No. 17-CV-00220-LHK 

ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE MOTIONS TO SEAL THE PARTIES’ PRETRIAL PROPOSED 

FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

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

their motions and exhibits in accordance with the Court’s previous orders in this case.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: January 6, 2019

______________________________________

LUCY H. KOH

United States District Judge

Case 5:17-cv-00220-LHK Document 1137 Filed 01/06/19 Page 2 of 2
Edward ROMEO, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D19-2094

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 28, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Appeal is dismissed.
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

BAKER 

&

HOSTETLER LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

LOS 

ANGELES

- 1 - [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING STIPULATION TO CONTINUE DATES DUE TO PARTIES’ MEDIATION

CASE NO.: 3:16-CV-07231-JST 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

NYTASIA CALIP, on behalf of herself 

and all others similarly situated, and on 

behalf of the general public,

Plaintiff,

v.

CIOX HEALTH, LLC, a Georgia 

corporation, and DOES 1 through 10, 

inclusive,

Defendants.

Case No.: 3:16-cv-07231-JST 

[Judge Jon S. Tigar, Dept. 9]

[PROPOSED] ORDER 

GRANTING STIPULATION TO 

CONTINUE DATES DUE TO 

PARTIES’ MEDIATION

Action Removed: December 19, 2016

Action Filed: November 18, 2016
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

BAKER 

&

HOSTETLER LLP

ATTORNEYS AT LAW

LOS 

ANGELES

- 2 - [PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING STIPULATION TO CONTINUE DATES DUE TO PARTIES’ MEDIATION

CASE NO.: 3:16-CV-07231-JST 

PROPOSED ORDER

PURSUANT TO STIPULATION, IT IS SO ORDERED:

1. The current mediation completion is continued from November 3, 

2017 to December 5, 2017;

2. The “Further CMC” scheduled for October 13, 2017 is continued to 

______________________;

3. The January 12, 2018 deadline for Plaintiff to file her Motion for Class 

Certification is continued to May 1, 2018; 

4. The February 9, 2018 deadline for Defendant to file its Opposition to 

Plaintiff’s Motion for Class Certification (if any) is continued to May 31, 2018; and 

5. The deadline to file a Reply to any Opposition to Class Certification is 

continued from February 24, 2018 to June 15, 2018. 

DATED: ________________________ ________________________________

United States District/Magistrate Judge

December 20, 2017 at 2:00 PM August 9, 2017

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

IT IS SO ORDERED

 Judge Jon S. Tigar
Paul Mason TRULL v. STATE

CR-16-0805

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

February 2, 2018 Reh. denied February 23, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Rayl Lynn KELLAR, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-4246

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

June 19, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 591 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. RES. 591

Expressing support for the designation of April 10, 2022, as ``Venture 
                          Smith Freedom Day''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 7, 2022

 Mr. Blumenthal submitted the following resolution; which was referred 
                   to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Expressing support for the designation of April 10, 2022, as ``Venture 
                          Smith Freedom Day''.

Whereas, in about 1729, Venture Smith was born free in West Africa and, in 1739, 
        was seized from his home and enslaved in New England;
Whereas 257 years ago, in the year 1765, Venture Smith, at the age of 36, 
        purchased his freedom;
Whereas Venture Smith went on to free his family from the bondage of slavery;
Whereas Venture Smith became a successful landowner, businessman, and author in 
        the United States, generations before Black Americans began to obtain 
        constitutional, legal, social, and economic rights;
Whereas, in November 1798, Venture Smith was the first African American to write 
        and publish his own autobiography;
Whereas Venture Smith was the first person to write and publish the phrase, ``My 
        freedom is a privilege which nothing else can equal'';
Whereas Venture Smith died a free man on September 19, 1805, in Connecticut; and
Whereas April 10 would be an appropriate date to designate as ``Venture Smith 
        Freedom Day'': Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the Senate supports the designation of ``Venture 
Smith Freedom Day'' on April 10, which would recognize the 257th 
anniversary of Venture Smith purchasing his freedom and going on to 
become a landowner, businessman, and author in Connecticut.
                                 <all>
```
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

September 24, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver 134189 & (66) Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Justices Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 134189 COA: 266096 Saginaw CC: 04-024416-FC MOHAMMED HASSAN AL-KHALIL, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the April 26, 2007 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. The motion to remand is DENIED.

C AVANAGH , J., would remand this case fo r an evidentiary hearing.

d0917 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.

September 24, 2007

Clerk
# C_2018407EN.01000901.xml

| 12.11.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 407/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.11.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 407/9

---

Corrigendum to the statement of revenue and expenditure of the European Union Agency for Law Enforcement Training (CEPOL) for the financial year 2018

(
  Official Journal of the European Union C 108 of 22 March 2018
  )

(2018/C 407/08)

On page 109, row ‘Chapter 1 1’, in column ‘Appropriations 2018’:

for:

‘3 923 000’,

read:

read:

‘3 239 000’.

On page 109, row ‘Title 1 — Total’, in column ‘Appropriations 2018’:

for:

for:

‘4 607 000’,

read:

read:

‘3 923 000’.

On page 110, row ‘Grand Total’, in column ‘Appropriations 2018’:

for:

for:

‘9 900 720’,

read:

read:

‘9 216 720’.

---
D.P. v. MOBILE COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES

2170159

Court of Civil Appeals of Alabama.

March 30, 2018

Affirmed.
<PAGE>   1



                                                                      EXHIBIT 21



List of Subsidiaries

DMX Inc.
a Delaware Corporation

    TEMPO Sound, Inc.,
    an Oklahoma Corporation

    450714 B.C.,
    a British Columbia, Canada Corporation

    DMX-Europe N.V.,
    a Netherlands Corporation

Paradigm Music Entertainment Company
a Delaware Corporation

    SonicNet, Inc.
    a Delaware Corporation

    Purple Demon, Inc.
    a New York Corporation

The Box Worldwide, Inc.
a Florida Corporation

    The Box Worldwide - USA, Inc., a Delaware Corporation

    VJN LPTV CORP., a Delaware Corporation

    The Box Worldwide - Europe, B.V., A Netherlands Corporation

    The Box Worldwide - Latin America, Inc., a British Virgin Islands
    Corporation

    VJN Management Services, Inc., a British Virgin Islands Corporation

    Video Jukebox Network Europe, Ltd., a United Kingdom Corporation

    The Box Holland, B.V., a Netherlands Corporation

    The Box Argentina, Sri., an Argentina Corporation

    The Box Italy, Srl., an Italy Corporation
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Robert K. Mills, Chief Financial Officerof Tri-S Security Corporation (the “Company”), do hereby certify in accordancewith 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002, that, to my knowledge:

 

1.               The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of theCompany for the period ended September 30, 2005 (the “Periodic Report”) fullycomplies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. §§78m or 78o(d)); and

 

2.               The information contained in the PeriodicReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the Company.

 

 

Date:  November 21, 2005

 

 
|   | /s/Robert K. Mills      |   |
|--------|-------------------------|--------|
|   | Robert K. Mills,        |
|   | Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH DIVISION

SIDNEY JAMES BRASS, §

Petitioner, §

 § 

VS. § CIVIL ACTION NO.4:05-CV-660-Y

 §

UNITED STATES BUREAU OF PRISONS,§

Respondent. § 

 ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

Before the Court is the petition for writ of habeas corpus

under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 of petitioner Sidney James Brass, along with

the November 29, 2005, findings, conclusions, and recommendation of

the United States Magistrate Judge. The magistrate judge gave the

parties until December 20 to file written objections to the

findings, conclusions, and recommendation. As of the date of this

order, no written objections have been filed. 

The Court has reviewed the pleadings and the record in this

case, and has reviewed for clear error the proposed findings,

conclusions and recommendation of the United States Magistrate

Judge filed on November 29, 2005. The Court concludes that the

petition for writ of habeas corpus should be dismissed without

prejudice for the reasons stated in the magistrate judge's findings

and conclusions.

 The findings, conclusions and recommendation of the magistrate

judge are ADOPTED.

 

 Case 4:05-cv-00660-Y Document 6 Filed 01/04/06 Page 1 of 2 PageID 17
2

Sidney James Brass’s Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus under

28 U.S.C. § 2241 is DISMISSED without prejudice.

SIGNED January 4, 2006.

 

 Case 4:05-cv-00660-Y Document 6 Filed 01/04/06 Page 2 of 2 PageID 18
**EXHIBIT      32.1**

**CERTIFICATION      OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

**PURSUANT      TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

| 1) | such                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 such Report fairly presents, in all material                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Bridge                Capital Holdings. |
|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:                November 1, 2007 | /s/                Daniel P. Myers                        |
|---------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------|
|                                  | Daniel                P. Myers                            |
|                                  | President and Chief Executive Officer |

----
1

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

30

BRIAN J. STRETCH (CABN 163973)

United States Attorney

BARBARA J. VALLIERE (DCBN 439353)

Chief, Criminal Division

ROBERT DAVID REES (CABN 229441)

MEREDITH B. OSBORN (CABN 250467)

Assistant United States Attorney

450 Golden Gate Avenue, Box 36055

San Francisco, California 94102-3495

Telephone: (415) 436-7200

FAX: (415) 436-7234

Email: robert.rees@usdoj.gov

Attorneys for United States of America

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

OAKLAND DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff,

 v.

JEHOADDAN WILSON, and

MARCUS WILSON,

 Defendants.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

CR 17-0028-JST

STIPULATION AND [PROPOSED] ORDER 

CONTINUING BRIEFING SCHEDULE FOR 

DEFENDANT MARCUS WILSON

STIPULATION

The United States and defendant Marcus Wilson, through their respective undersigned counsel, 

hereby stipulate and agree as follows:

1. The motions hearing schedule for defendant Jehoaddan Wilson was changed today in light of her 

motion for her attorney to withdrawal.

2. The parties stipulate and agree it makes sense for all parties for the briefing schedule to be the 

same for both defendants due to the possibility of overlapping issues of both fact and law between them.

3. Accordingly, and for good cause shown, the parties hereby stipulate to amend the currently set 
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

30

briefing schedule for Marcus Wilson such that his Fed. R. Crim. P. 12 pretrial motions are due on 

November 16, 2018 by 5:00PM, that the government’s responses are due on December 7, 2018 by 

5:00PM, that any replies by Marcus Wilson are due on December 21, 2018 by 5:00PM, and that the 

motions will be heard on January 11, 2019 at 1:30PM before the Honorable Jon S. Tigar.

IT IS SO STIPULATED

Dated: October 26, 2018 ___________/s_________________________

ROBERT DAVID REES

MEREDITH B. OSBORN

Assistant United States Attorneys

Dated: October 26, 2018 ___________/s_________________________

ERIK BABCOCK, ESQ.

Attorney for Defendant Marcus Wilson

[PROPOSED] ORDER

Upon stipulation by the parties and for good cause shown, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT 

the briefing schedule for defendant Marcus Wilson’s Fed. R. Crim. P. 12 pretrial motions are amended 

such that they now are due on November 16, 2018 by 5:00PM, that the government’s responses are due 

on December 7, 2018 by 5:00PM, that any replies by Marcus Wilson are due on December 21, 2018 by 

5:00PM, and that the motions will be heard on January 11, 2019 at 1:30PM before the Court.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: October 29, 2018. ______________________________________

 THE HONORABLE JON S. TIGAR

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Exhibit 32.1





Certification of Chief Executive Officer 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 VirtualScopics, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I Jeffrey Markin, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 to the best of my knowledge, that:





(1)
The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





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




/s/ Jeffrey MarkinJeffrey MarkinPresident and Chief Executive OfficerMay 16, 2011





This Certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
<PAGE>   1
                                  EXHIBIT 21.1

SUBSIDIARIES OF INTERNATIONAL TOTAL SERVICES, INC.

Crown Technical Systems, Inc., an Ohio Corporation
I.T.S. of New York Security, Inc., a New York Corporation
Selective Detective Services, Inc., a New Jersey Corporation
T.I.S., Incorporated, a Texas Corporation
Certified Investigative Services, Inc., a Texas Corporation
International Total Services, Limited, a United Kingdom Company
OS Security Services, GMBH, a German company
ITS Security Services, GMBH, a German company
Texas International Services Corp., a Texas Corporation
  (fka Metroplex Control Systems, Inc.)
EX PARTE Orrin MARABLE

CR-17-0141

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

January 29, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Mand. pet. denied.
Exhibit 32



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION
1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



Each of the undersigned
hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, in his capacity as an officer of Community Bancorp Inc. (the Company) that, to his knowledge, the Quarterly Report of the Company on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2005 fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in such report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition of the Company at the end of such period and
the results of operations of the Company for such period.



|                      |  |  |  |                                                  
|--------------------- |  |  |  | -------------------------------------------------
|Date: August 12, 2005 |  |  |  | /s/ Edward M. Jamison                            
|                      |  |  |  | Edward M. Jamison                                
|                      |  |  |  | President and Chief Executive Officer            
|                      |  | 
|Date: August 12, 2005 |  |  |  | /s/ Cathy Robinson                               
|                      |  |  |  | Cathy Robinson.                                  
|                      |  |  |  | Executive Vice President, Chief Financial 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
Community Bancorp and will be retained by Community Bancorp and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit
32.2





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 Bois d'Arc Energy, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2008 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Roland
O. Burns, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§ 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 result of operations of the
      Company.





/s/ ROLAND O.
BURNS


Roland O.
Burns


Chief
Financial Officer


May 9,
2008
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 15**  **- 1471** 

PYLORD P. DOE, M.D. , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, for the Department of Human Health Services , Defendant

- Appellee

.

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

. Theodore D. Chuang , District Judge. ( 8:14

- cv - 01441

- TDC )

Submitted : July 2 3 , 2015 Decided: July 27, 2015

Before NIEMEYER and KING , Circuit Judges , and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.
Pylord P. Doe, Appellant Pro Se. Rebecca Ann Koch, Assistant United States Attorney, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in t his circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Pylord P. Doe, M.D., appeals the district court ’ s order granting Appellee’s motion to dismiss and dismissing Doe’s civil action on res judicata grounds and for failure to state a claim

. We have reviewed the record and find no re versible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district
court. Doe v. United States , No. 8:14

- cv - 01441

- TDC (D. Md. Mar. 27, 2015) . We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in t he materials before
th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED