alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT UNITED STATES OF AM ER IC A, Plaintiff - Appe lle e , v. SANTOS DIAZ-M AR TINEZ, De fe nda

nt - Appe lla

nt. No. 16-50447

D.C . No. 3:16-c r-01035-B EN M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the Southe rn Distric t of C a lifornia R oge r T. B e nite z , Distric t Judge , Pre s iding Subm itte d August 9, 2017 ** B e fore : SC HR O EDER , TASHIM A, a nd M . SM ITH, C irc uit Judge s. Santos Diaz -M artine z a

ppe a ls from

the distric t

c ourt’ s judgm e nt a

nd c ha lle nge s the 57-m onth se nte n c e and $250 fine im p ose d following his guilty -ple a c onvic tion for a

tte m pte d re e ntry

of a re m ove d a lie n, in viola

tion of 8 U.S.C . § 1326. W e have jurisdic t ion unde r 28 U.S.C . § 1291, a nd we a ffirm . 

# FIL ED

AUG 14 2017 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without oral a

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).Dia z -M artine z c onte nds tha t his se nte nc e is substa

nt ive ly unre a sona

ble . The distric t c o urt did not a

buse its disc re tion. Se e Gall v . Unite d State s , 552 U.S. 38, 51 (2007). The57-m onth se nte nc e is substa ntive ly re a sona b le in light of the

18 U.S.C . § 3553(a) se nte nc i ng fa c tors a nd the tota lity of the c irc um sta nc e s, inc luding Dia z -M artine z ’ s c rim ina l history and his prior 48-month se nte n c e for the sa m e offe nse . Se e Gall , 552 U.S. a t 51. Thebe low-Guide line s fine is a lso substa ntive ly re a s ona ble in light of Dia

z -M artine z ’ s work history . Se e Unite d State s v . Orlando , 553 F.3d 1235, 1239-40 (9th C ir. 2009). To the e xte nt tha

t Diaz -M artine z argue s tha t the c ourt se le c te d the se nte nc e ba se d on “ hostility a

nd a la c k of obje c tivity ,” the re c o rd doe s not support his c la im . R athe r, the re c ord re fle c ts tha t the c ourt re lie d on prope r se nte nc ing fa c t ors, inc l uding thene e d for de te rre nc e and prote c tion of thepublic . Se e 18 U.S.C . § 3553(a ); G all , 552 U.S. a t 51. AFFIRM E D.

1 6 - 5 0 4 4 7 2
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth ___________________________

No. 02-24-00377-CV

___________________________

Original Proceeding

153rd District Court of Tarrant County, Texas

Trial Court No. 153-335243-22

Before Kerr, Bassel, and Wallach, JJ.

Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion

IN RE LINDA MOLINA, Relator
2

MEMORANDUM OPINION

The court has considered relator’s petition for writ of mandamus, record, real 

party in interest’s response, and relator’s reply and is of the opinion that relief should 

be denied. Accordingly, relator’s petition for writ of mandamus is denied.

Per Curiam

Delivered: October 4, 2024
Statement of FCA Chairman and CEO Leland A. Strom 

Regarding the Proposed Rule on Diversity 

at the FCA Board Meeting

April 14, 2011

I believe this proposed regulation is extremely important because the mission of the Farm 

Credit System as a Government-sponsored enterprise is to serve all eligible, creditworthy 

borrowers. This includes women and minorities, as well as nontraditional producers such 

as those who operate within local food systems. I further believe that for System 

institutions to succeed in reaching diverse borrowers in all market segments, they should 

also reflect diversity within their own workforce, management, and governance structure.
Christopher J. FORRESTER, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-3259

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

June 13, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Joshua J. JACKSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-4076

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed May 29, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
## IN THE COURT OF CRIMINA L APP EALS

OF TEX AS

N O

. W R

- 8 4

, 3 2 2

- 0 1

E X P A R T E J A I M E P I E R O C O L E

O N A P P L I C A T I O N F O R P O S T

- C O N V I C T I O N W R I T O F H A B E A S C O R P U S

I N C A U S E N O

. 1 2 5 0 7 5 4 I N T H E 2 3 0 D I S T R I C T C O U R T T H

H A R R I S C O U N T Y

P e r c u r i a m

.

O R D E R

I n O c t o b e r 2 0 1 1

, a j u r y f o u n d a p p l i c a n t g u i l t y o f t h e o f f e n s e o f c a p i t a l m u r d e r

. T h e

j u r y a n s w e r e d t h e s t a t u t o r y p u n i s h m e n t q u e s t i o n s i n s u c h a w a y t h a t t h e t r i a l c o u r t s e t

a p p l i c a n t ’ s p u n i s h m e n t a t d e a t h

. O n J u l y 2 4

, 2 0 1 3

, t h e S t a t e f i l e d i n t h i s C o u r t i t s b r i e f o n

a p p l i c a n t ’ s d i r e c t a p p e a l

. P u r s u a n t t o A r t i c l e 1 1

. 0 7 1 § § 4 ( a ) a n d ( b )

, a p p l i c a n t ’ s i n i t i a l 1

U n l e s s o t h e r w i s e i n d i c a t e d a l l r e f e r e n c e s t o A r t i c l e s r e f

e r t o t h e C o d e o f 1

C r i m i n a l P r o c e d u r e

.C o l e

- 2

a p p l i c a t i o n f

o r a w r i t o f h a b e a s c o r p u s w a s d u e t o b e f i l e d i n t h e t r i a l c o u r t o n o r b e f o r e

D e c e m b e r 6

, 2 0 1 3

, a s s u m i n g a m o t i o n f o r e x t e n s i o n w a s t i m e l y f i l e d a n d g r a n t e d

. I t h a s

b e e n n e a r l y t w o y e a r s s i n c e t h e a p p l i c a t i o n w a s d u e i n t h e t r i a l c o u r t

. A c c o r d i n g l y

, w e o r d e r

t h e t r i a l c o u r t t o r e s o l v e a n y r e m a i n i n g i s s u e s i n t h e c a s e w i t h i n 1 2 0 d a y s f r o m t h e d a t e o f

t h i s o r d e r

. T h e c l e r k s h a l l t h e n i m m e d i a t e l y t r a n s m i t t h e c o m p l e t e w r i t r e c o r d t o t h i s C o u r t

.

A n y e x t e n s i o n s o f t i m e s h a l l b e o b t a i n e d f r o m t h i s C o u r t

.

I T I S S O O R D E R E D T H I S T H E 1 6 D A Y O F D E C E M B E R

, 2 0 1 5

. T H

D o N o t P u b l i s h
In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

DAVID HOSKINS, JR., *

Administrator of the Estate of * No. 15-071V

ANNABELLE HOSKINS, deceased, *

* Special Master Christian J. Moran

Petitioner, *

*

v. *

* Filed: March 8, 2017

SECRETARY OF HEALTH *

AND HUMAN SERVICES, *

*

Respondent. *

*

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

ORDER CONCLUDING PROCEEDINGS1

On March 8, 2017, the petitioner filed a Joint Notice of Dismissal in the above-captioned 

case. 

Accordingly, pursuant to Vaccine Rule 21(a)(1)(B), the above-captioned case is hereby 

dismissed without prejudice. The Clerk of the Court is hereby instructed that a judgment shall 

not enter in the instant case pursuant to Vaccine Rule 21(a).

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Christian J. Moran

Christian J. Moran

Special Master

 

1 The E-Government Act, 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and 

Promotion of Electronic Government Services), requires that the Court post this decision on its 

website. Pursuant to Vaccine Rule 18(b), the parties have 14 days to file a motion proposing 

redaction of medical information or other information described in 42 U.S.C. § 300aa-12(d)(4). 

Any redactions ordered by the special master will appear in the document posted on the website.
Angela DEBOSE, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH FLORIDA BOARD OF TRUSTEES, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D19-0611

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

March 19, 2019

**FLORIDA DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED AUGUST 23, 2024

NO. 03-24-00335-CR

Stephaney Veljean Lafears, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

APPEAL FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 3 OF WILLIAMSON COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES BAKER, SMITH, AND THEOFANIS

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION-- OPINION BY JUSTICE THEOFANIS

This is an appeal from the purported order entered by the trial court. Having reviewed the 

record, it appears that the Court lacks jurisdiction over this appeal. Therefore, the Court 

dismisses the appeal for want of jurisdiction. Because appellant is indigent and unable to pay 

costs, no adjudication of costs is made.
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

FAST TRAK INVESTMENT COMPANY, 

LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

RICHARD P SAX, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 4:17-cv-00257-KAW 

ORDER GRANTING TELEPHONIC 

APPEARANCE

Re: Dkt. No. 43

Defendants’ motion to appear telephonically at the case management conference on 

August 29, 2017 at 1:30 P.M. is GRANTED. 

Counsel shall comply with the Court’s Standing Order on Procedures for Telephonic 

Appearances, available online at http://cand.uscourts.gov/kaworders. This includes personally 

arranging the telephonic appearance with CourtCall—a paid, private service—in advance of the 

hearing date.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: August 1, 2017

______________________________________

KANDIS A. WESTMORE

United States Magistrate Judge
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.23

                          AMENDMENT NUMBER ONE TO THE
                           BEVERLY ENTERPRISES, INC.
                      EXECUTIVE DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN



         Amendment made this 11th day of December, 1997, by Beverly
Enterprises, Inc. (the "Corporation").

                              W I T N E S S E T H:

         WHEREAS, the Corporation sponsors the Amended and Restated Beverly
Enterprises, Inc. Executive Deferred Compensation Plan (the "EDC Plan");

         WHEREAS, the Corporation now desires to adopt an amendment to the EDC
Plan to provide for the transfer of a Participant's interest pursuant to
Domestic Relations Order entered by a court of competent jurisdiction incident
to a divorce;

         WHEREAS, the Corporation is empowered and authorized to amend the EDC
Plan pursuant to Section 13 of the EDC Plan;

         NOW, THEREFORE, the EDC Plan is hereby amended effective September 1,
1997 in the following respects:

         1.      The Plan is hereby amended by adding the following new
paragraph at the end of existing Section 15:

                          Notwithstanding the foregoing, a Participant's
interest in the Plan may be transferred pursuant to a domestic relations order
which is entered by a court of competent jurisdiction incident to a divorce,
however, the person claiming any share of a Participant's interest pursuant to
such an order shall not be entitled to receive a distribution from the Plan
until such time as distributions commence or could have commenced to the
affected Participant.  Furthermore, such transferred interest shall be subject
to the same terms, conditions, and restrictions of the Plan as were applicable
to the Participant.

         2.      The Plan is amended by replacing the second sentence of
existing Section 16 with the following:

                          The Participants, their beneficiaries, personal
representatives and any transferee pursuant to a domestic relations order shall
bear any and all federal, foreign, state or local income or any other tax
imposed on amounts paid under the Plan.





                                       1
<PAGE>   2
         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Corporation has caused this Amendment to be
executed by a duly authorized representative, as of the day and year first
written above.

                                      BEVERLY ENTERPRISES, INC.


                                      By:
                                      Its:





                                       2
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 20-0344

CITY OF MISSOULA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

BRUCE ALLEN WINCHESTER,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and 

good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including January 27, 2021, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Beth Baker

Justice, Montana Supreme Court

December 17 2020

12/17/2020

Case Number: DA 20-0344
Leonard Wayne TAYLOR, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D18-1719

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed January 30, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Robert Anthony ORTIZ, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-3

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed May 17, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
NON-PARTY APPLE’S STATUS REPORT RE: DOCUMENT PRODUCTION 

CASE NOS. 5:17-CV-00220-LHK-NMC & 5:17-MD-02773-LHK-NMC 

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 

BOIES SCHILLER FLEXNER LLP 

William A. Isaacson (Pro Hac Vice App. to be filed) 

DC Bar No. 414788, wisaacson@bsfllp.com 

Karen L. Dunn (Pro Hac Vice App. to be filed) 

DC Bar No. 1002520, kdunn@bsfllp.com 

Amy J. Mauser (Pro Hac Vice App. to be filed) 

DC Bar No. 424065, amauser@bsfllp.com 

1401 New York Avenue, N.W. 

Washington, DC 20005 

Telephone: (202) 237-2727 

Facsimile: (202) 237-6131 

BOIES SCHILLER FLEXNER LLP 

Edward H. Takashima, SBN 270945 

etakashima@bsfllp.com 

401 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 850 

Santa Monica, CA 90401 

Telephone: (310) 752-2400 

Facsimile: (310) 752-2490 

Attorneys for Non-Party APPLE INC. 

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-NMC

NON-PARTY APPLE INC.’S STATUS 

REPORT REGARDING DOCUMENT 

PRODUCTION 

Courtroom: 7, 4th Floor 

Judge: Hon. Nathanael M. Cousins 

IN RE QUALCOMM ANTITRUST 

LITIGATION

Case No. 5:17-md-02773-LHK-NMC

Case 5:17-cv-00220-LHK Document 582 Filed 02/20/18 Page 1 of 2
1 

NON-PARTY APPLE’S STATUS REPORT RE: DOCUMENT PRODUCTION 

CASE NOS. 5:17-CV-00220-LHK-NMC & 5:17-MD-02773-LHK-NMC 

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 

Pursuant to the Court’s order at the February 15, 2018 discovery hearing, Non-Party 

Apple Inc. (“Apple”) submits the following status report regarding documents it withheld from 

production due to potential third party notice or consent issues (ECF 562 at 1). 

1. Apple has resolved notice and consent issues for all responsive non-privileged 

documents it was withholding due to potential notice or consent issues as of the 

February 15, 2018 hearing. Apple will produce those documents as soon as 

possible, and anticipates completing production no later than February 23, 2018. 

2. Apple continued to downgrade documents from its privilege log after the February 

15, 2018 hearing, and will produce downgraded documents as soon as possible. If 

Apple identifies any documents among those downgrades that have potential third 

party notice or consent issues, it will address those issues in its February 23, 2018 

joint status report. 

Dated: February 20, 2018 Respectfully submitted, 

By: /s/ Edward H. Takashima

William A. Isaacson 

wisaacson@bsfllp.com 

Karen L. Dunn 

kdunn@bsfllp.com 

Amy J. Mauser 

amauser@bsfllp.com 

BOIES SCHILLER FLEXNER LLP 

1401 New York Avenue, N.W. 

Washington, DC 20005 

Telephone: (202) 237-2727 

Facsimile: (202) 237-6131 

Edward H. Takashima 

etakashima@bsfllp.com 

BOIES SCHILLER FLEXNER LLP 

401 Wilshire Blvd., Suite 850 

Santa Monica, CA 90401 

Telephone: (310) 752-2400 

Facsimile: (310) 752-2490 

Attorneys for Non-Party APPLE INC.

Case 5:17-cv-00220-LHK Document 582 Filed 02/20/18 Page 2 of 2
Darlene C. GOODRICH, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., et al, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-1417

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

May 20, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismiss.
EX PARTE STATE

(In re: State v. Terrell Corey McMullin)

CR-16-1242

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

January 29, 2018 Reh. denied February 22, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Mand. pet. granted.
EXHIBIT 32.01

                  CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER &
                            CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

I, Michael Pacult, the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of
TriView Capital Management, Inc. as managing member of TriView Global Fund,
LLC, certify that (i) the Form 10Q for the period ended March 31, 2007 of
TriView Global Fund, LLC fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the
information contained in the Form 10Q for the period ended March 31, 2007
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of TriView Global Fund, LLC.


TRIVIEW GLOBAL FUND, LLC
By:	TriView Capital Management, Inc., Managing Member


By: /s/ Michael Pacult
Michael Pacult
Chief Executive Officer &
Chief Financial Officer

Date:	May 21, 2007

<page>
Uni

ted 

Stat

es D

istr

ict C

ourt

For t

he N

orth

ern 

Dis

trict

 of C

alifo

rnia

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

DAVID CHAD GLOW, No. C-05-1933 MMC (JCS)

Plaintiff(s),

v. NOTICE AND ORDER SETTING FURTHER SETTLEMENT CONFERENCE

UNION PACIFIC RAILROADCOMPANY, ET AL.,

(E-FILING CASE)Defendant(s).

___________________________________/

TO ALL PARTIES AND COUNSEL OF RECORD:

You are hereby notified that a Further Settlement Conference is scheduled for November 20,

2006, at 9:30 a.m., in Courtroom A, 15th Floor, 450 Golden Gate Avenue, San Francisco,

California.  Lead trial counsel shall appear at the Further Settlement Conference with the parties

who have unlimited authority to negotiate and settle the case.

The parties shall notify the undersigned's Chambers immediately at (415) 522-3691 if this

case settles prior to the date set for the Further Settlement Conference.  All other provisions of this

Court's October 23, 2006 “Notice of Settlement Conference and Settlement Conference Order”

remain in effect.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated:  November 9, 2006                                                    JOSEPH C. SPEROUnited States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:05-cv-01933-MMC   Document 74   Filed 11/09/06   Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 32.1

SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION

I, Ronald G. Farrell, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of Tri-S
Security Corporation (the Company), do hereby certify in accordance with 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:



| | 1. | The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended March 31, 2009 (the Periodic Report) fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. §§78m or 78o(d)); and
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | The information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | -- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Dated: May 15, 2009



/s/ Ronald G. FarrellRonald G. Farrell,Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
EX PARTE Shannon Ray JOHNSON

1161083 (CR-16-0481)

Supreme Court of Alabama.

October 13, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Cert. denied.
----

**Exhibit32.2 **

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

**AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TOSECTION906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the Annual Report of China Expert Technology, Inc. (the“Company”) on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2004 as filed withthe United States Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the“Report”), the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below,hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:

 

1.      TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; as amended; and

2.      The information contained in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.

 

| Date: June    14, 2006 | By: /s/ Fu Wan Chung, Simon    |  |
|-----------------------------|-----------------------------------------------|--|
|                             | Name:Fu Wan Chung, Simon                      |  |
|                             | Title: Chief Financial Officer                |  |

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or otherdocuments authentications, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signaturesthat appears in typed for within the electronic version of this writtenstatement required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and will beretained by the Company and furnished to the United States Securities andExchange Commission or its staff upon request. 

----
**Exhibit 32.2****CERTIFICATION**     Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, the undersignedofficer of Novelis Inc. (the “Company”), herebycertifies that the Company’s Quarterly Report onForm 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2005 (the“Report”) fully complies with the requirements ofSection 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.Date: May 15, 2005     /s/ Geoffrey P. Batt       Geoffrey P. Batt     Chief Financial Officer     (Principal Financial Officer)     The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuantto 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed aspart of this report.
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

INSIGHT GLOBAL, LLC,

Plaintiff,

v.

BEACON HILL STAFFING GROUP, LLC,

Defendant.

Case No.5:17-cv-00309-BLF (HRL)

INTERIM ORDER RE DISCOVERY 

DISPUTE JOINT REPORT NO. 1

Re: Dkt. No. 37

The court requires Insight Global to lodge with chambers the Schedules A and B 

referenced in Discovery Dispute Joint Report No. 1.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: March 16, 2018

HOWARD R. LLOYD

United States Magistrate Judge