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

Case No. 17-CV-00220-LHK 

ORDER SETTING SCHEDULE FOR FTC’S MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S 

NONDISPOSITIVE PRETRIAL ORDER

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, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

QUALCOMM INCORPORATED, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 17-CV-00220-LHK 

ORDER SETTING SCHEDULE FOR 

FTC’S MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM 

MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S 

NONDISPOSITIVE PRETRIAL ORDER

On March 2, 2018, FTC filed a Motion for Relief from Nondispositive Pretrial Order of 

Magistrate Judge. ECF No. 715.

The Court sets the following briefing and hearing schedule:

Scheduled Event Date

Briefing on FTC’s Motion Qualcomm Response (if any): May 10, 2018

FTC Reply: May 17, 2018

Hearing on FTC’s Motion May 24, 2018 at 1:30 p.m.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Case 5:17-cv-00220-LHK Document 718 Filed 05/03/18 Page 1 of 2
2

Case No. 17-CV-00220-LHK 

ORDER SETTING SCHEDULE FOR FTC’S MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S 

NONDISPOSITIVE PRETRIAL ORDER

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

Dated: May 3, 2018

______________________________________

LUCY H. KOH

United States District Judge

Case 5:17-cv-00220-LHK Document 718 Filed 05/03/18 Page 2 of 2
1

Case No. 17-CV-00459-LHK 

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO WITHDRAW MOTION TO RE-OPEN

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

GLEN BERTULFO,

Plaintiff,

v.

GREENSKY LLC,

Defendant.

Case No. 17-CV-00459-LHK 

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO 

WITHDRAW MOTION TO RE-OPEN

Re: Dkt. Nos. 26, 27

On January 30, 2017, Plaintiff Glen Bertulfo (“Plaintiff”) filed this action against 

GreenSky, LLC (“Defendant”) alleging causes of action under the Rosenthal Fair Debt Collection 

Practices Act, Cal. Civ. Code § 1788 et seq., and the Telephone Consumer Protection Act, 28 

U.S.C. § 227 et seq. See ECF No. 1. On June 30, 2017, the parties filed a Stipulation to 

Arbitration stating that “[p]ursuant to the binding arbitration provision in the Loan Agreement 

between Plaintiff Glen Bertulfo and Defendant GreenSky, LLC,” this action “shall be dismissed 

and arbitration initiated with the American Arbitration Association or JAMS.” ECF No. 24 at 1. 

Then, on November 1, 2017, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Re-Open Case. ECF No. 26. 

Plaintiff stated in his motion that this case should be re-opened in this Court because the American 

Arbitration Association had “declined to administer this claim because the Defendant failed to 

Case 5:17-cv-00459-LHK Document 29 Filed 02/05/18 Page 1 of 2
2

Case No. 17-CV-00459-LHK 

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO WITHDRAW MOTION TO RE-OPEN

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

comply with several of its requests.” Id. at 2. However, on November 14, 2017, Plaintiff filed a 

motion to withdraw Plaintiff’s November 1, 2017 Motion to Re-Open Case pursuant to Civil 

Local Rule 7-7(e). ECF No. 27. Civil Local Rule 7-7(e) states that “[w]ithin the time for filing 

and serving a reply, the moving party may file and serve a notice of withdrawal of the motion. 

Upon the filing of a timely withdrawal, the motion will be taken off-calendar.” 

Because Plaintiff filed a timely motion to withdraw Plaintiff’s November 1, 2017 Motion 

to Re-Open Case, the Court GRANTS Plaintiff’s motion to withdraw. As a result, Plaintiff’s 

November 1, 2017 Motion to Re-Open Case is WITHDRAWN. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 5, 2018

______________________________________

LUCY H. KOH

United States District Judge

Case 5:17-cv-00459-LHK Document 29 Filed 02/05/18 Page 2 of 2
Jose Nascimento MARCONI, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. PROGRESSIVE SELECT INS. CO. a/s/o Christopher Neumann, Nickolas John Migliore, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.:2D19-1955

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 19, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Appeal is dismissed.
---

Exhibit 99.11


CONSENT OF EXPERT To:

   United States Securities and Exchange Commission Washington, D.C. 20549Alberta Securities CommissionBritish Columbia Securities CommissionOntario Securities CommissionRio Alto Mining Limited
 Ladies and Gentlemen: Re: Technical report entitled “La Arena Project, Peru”, effective December 31st, 2013 (the “Report” prepared for Rio Alto Mining Limited (the “Company") I, Enrique Garay, do hereby confirm that I am a qualified person under National Instrument 43-101 and a co-author of the Report. The undersigned, for himself, pursuant to Section 8.3 of National Instrument 43-101 Standards of Disclosure for Mineral Projects confirms thatthis letter is being filed as the consent to the use of extracts from, or summaries of, the Report in the Company's Annual Information Form for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013 (the "AIF") and to being named in the AIF. The undersigned further acknowledges that the AIF will be filed as an Exhibit to the Company's Annual Report on Form 40-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013 (the "Form 40-F") and consents to being named in the Form 40-F and authorize the use of the information represented therein relating to the Report.  DATED the 28th day of March 2014 By:

   /s/ Mr. Enrique GarayName: Mr. Enrique Garay M Sc (MAIG)Company: Rio Alto Mining LimitedTitle: Vice President Geology


---
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

FRANKIE ANTOINE, et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

CAPITOL DEL GRANDE 2, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No.5:17-cv-00542-LHK (HRL)

ORDER RE DISCOVERY DISPUTE 

JOINT REPORT NO. 2

Re: Dkt. No. 34

Plaintiffs, former employees of Capital Chevrolet, sue for racial discrimination and 

retaliation. In a prior discovery order, the court addressed plaintiffs’ requests for documents in the 

personnel files of nine non-parties, each a present or former employee of defendants, for 

information about “work place conduct.” The court limited the production to race-based conduct, 

broadly construed.

Now, plaintiffs are seeking pretty much the same kind of broad, sweeping information they 

wanted previously, but this time it is for documentation of any allegations that any employee 

engaged in “harassment, discrimination, bullying, or any other inappropriate conduct toward a coworker.”

The court agrees with defendants that the information to be produced should be about racebased conduct, as broadly defined in the previous court order, at the Capitol Chevrolet location 
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

only. Production should include copies of civil complaints or arbitration demands about racebased conduct. Copies of settlement agreements need not be produced.

Production shall take place by November 9th in order that depositions may proceed on 

November 14th.1

SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 6, 2017

HOWARD R. LLOYD

United States Magistrate Judge

 

1

The court warns the parties that they cannot assume the court will always be able to put aside its 

other, equally pressing matters to give instant attention to their discovery disputes.
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-10-00303-CV

DANNY LEE WEDDEL APPELLANT

V.

KATHERINE PHILLIPS WEDDEL APPELLEE

------------

FROM THE 360TH DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY

------------

MEMORANDUM OPINION1 AND JUDGMENT

------------

Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal from the trial court=s July 20, 2010

“Final Decree Of Divorce.” The trial court subsequently granted appellant=s 

motion for new trial on September 9, 2010, while it still had plenary jurisdiction 

over the case. See Tex. R. Civ. P. 329b(e).

On September 15, 2010, we informed the parties that it appeared the trial 

court=s granting of the motion for new trial rendered this appeal moot and that the 

 

1See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
2

appeal would be dismissed as moot unless, on or before September 27, 2010, 

any party desiring to continue the appeal filed a response showing grounds for 

continuing the appeal. Neither party filed a response.

Accordingly, on this court=s own motion, we dismiss the appeal as moot. 

See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a), 43.2(f).

PER CURIAM

PANEL: WALKER, MCCOY, and MEIER, JJ. 

DELIVERED: October 7, 2010
Exhibit 13.2  CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  The undersigned, who is carrying out the functions of chief financial officer for Brookfield Infrastructure Partners L.P. (the Partnership) pursuant to an Amended and Restated Master Services Agreement, dated March 28, 2014, among Brookfield Asset Management Inc., the Partnership, Brookfield Infrastructure L.P. and others, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to his knowledge, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, (i) the annual report of the Partnership on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2013 (the Annual Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and (ii) the information contained in the Annual Report fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of the Partnership.  Dated:  March 28, 2014   /s/   Bahir ManiosBahir   ManiosCFO,   Brookfield Infrastructure Group L.P.