alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF**

**CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

**OF PIONEER SOUTHWEST ENERGY PARTNERS L.P.**

**PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. § 1350**

 

I, Richard P. Dealy, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Pioneer Natural Resources GP LLC, the general partner of Pioneer Southwest Energy Partners L.P. (the "Partnership"), hereby certify that the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 2008 and filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to Section 13(a) of the            Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Report") by the Partnership fully complies with the requirements of that section.

 

I further certify that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Partnership.

 

|   |   |                                       |   |
|--------|--------|--------------------------------------------|--------|
|   |   | /s/ Richard P. Dealy                       |   |
|   | Name:  | Richard P. Dealy, Executive Vice President |   |
|   |   | and Chief Financial Officer                |   |
|   |   |                                       |   |
|   | Date:  | March 31, 2009                             |   |
### Nebraska Court of Appeals Memorandum Opinions

NOT Selected for Posting to Court Website

(r eleased A pril 11, 2023 

### )

The following memorandum opinions were filed by the Nebraska Court of

Appeals and can be viewed using SSCALES :



### None Available

The above

- listed memorandum opinions c an be viewed online through the

appellate court case search available by subscription through Nebra ska.gov:

http://www.nebraska.gov/subscriber/

.

Current subscribers to Nebraska.gov can search appellate court cases here:

http s ://www.nebraska.gov/courts/s c ca les/

.
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

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

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CANDIDA PALEGA, on behalf of herself and

on behalf of all others similarly situated,

Plaintiff,

 v.

THE PROPERTY SCIENCES GROUP

INCORPORATED,

Defendant. /

No. C 17-00855 WHA

ORDER GRANTING

CONTINUANCE OF CLASS

CERTIFICATION BRIEFING

SCHEDULE AS MODIFIED

The parties jointly request a continuance of the class certification briefing schedule. 

Their continuance is granted as modified. The motion for class certification must be filed by no

later than DECEMBER 28, 2017 to be heard on a 49-day track. No further extensions will be

granted. The Court is disappointed at the slow progress of discovery to date. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 26, 2017. WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
C.B., petitioner, v. WEST VIRGINIA DEPT. OF HEALTH AND HUMAN RESOURCES, et al.

No. 12-8180.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 1, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Appeals of West Virginia denied.
EXHIBIT 6

REDACTED VERSION OF

DOCUMENT SOUGHT TO BE SEALED

Case 3:17-cv-00359-WHA Document 23-9 Filed 02/09/17 Page 1 of 1
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE
F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Appellate case name: Nasser Chehab v. BBVA USA

Appellate case number: 01

- 20

- 0076 6

- CV

Trial court case number: 2020

- 39917

Trial court: 189th District Court of Harris County

On November 5, 2020, a ppellant, Nasser Chehab , filed a pro se notice of appeal challenging two trial court orders, including: (1) an October 7, 2020 order granting appellee, BBVA USA’s “Motion for Sanctions for [Appellant] Filing Yet Another

Frivolous Lawsuit and/or Motion to Declare [Appellant] a Vexatious Litigant and Motion for Security

, ” and (2) an October 15, 2020 “Final Summary Judgment” order granting appellee’s motion to dismiss pursuant to Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 91a or, in the alternative, moti on for summary judgment.

The appellate record was due to be filed by December 14, 2020. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 35.1. After being notified by the Clerk of this Court that the clerk’s record was past due, the clerk’s record was filed on January 26, 2021; however, a reporter’s record has not been

filed.

On J anuar y 22 , 20 21 , the Clerk of this Court notified appellant that the court reporter responsible for preparing the reporter’s record had not filed a reporter’s record because appellant ha s not requested p reparation of a reporter’s record and ha s not paid, or made arrangements to pay, the fee for preparation of the record. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P

. 37.3(c). The Clerk further notified appellant that unless he provided written evidence that he had paid, or made arrangements to pay, for the reporter’s record, or provided proof that he is entitled to proceed without payment of costs by February 22, 2021 , the Court might consider the appeal without a reporter’s re cord. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P

. 37.3(c ). Appellant

ha s not responded.Accordingly, the Court will consider and decide those issues or points that do not

require a reporter’s record for a decision. T EX

. R. A PP

. P

. 37.3. Appellant ’ s brief in appellate case number 01

- 20

- 00766

- CV is due to be filed no later than thirty days

from the date of this order. T EX

. R. A PP

. P

. 38.6 (a), (d).

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: ______ /s/ Amparo Guerra

_____  Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: __ March 9, 2021

____
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

DANIEL ANTHONY MCDADE,

Plaintiff,

v.

NANCY A. BERRYHILL,

Defendant.

Case No. 17-cv-00763-JCS 

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY 

ACTION SHOULD NOT BE DISMISSED 

FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE

Pursuant to Civil Local Rule 16-5, Plaintiff Daniel Anthony McDade’s motion for 

summary judgment in this action for review of a social security disability determination was 

initially due on July 6, 2017. On July 5, 2017, the parties submitted a stipulation to extend the 

deadline for McDade’s motion to August 17, 2017 due to the death of McDade’s counsel’s wife, 

see dkt. 10, and the Court so ordered on July 10, 2017, see dkt. 11.

That extended deadline has passed and no motion has been filed. McDade is therefore 

ORDERED to show cause why this action should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute. The 

parties may respond to this order by filing either a joint stipulated schedule or separate responses 

no later than October 5, 2017. The Court finds the matter suitable for resolution without oral 

argument and declines to set a hearing.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: September 21, 2017

______________________________________

JOSEPH C. SPERO

Chief Magistrate Judge
Dwayne WHITE, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 12-9013.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 1, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit denied.
Abdul Haqq SALAAM, aka Willie George, aka Willie Favors, petitioner, v. NEW JERSEY.

12-10054

Supreme Court of the United States

June 10, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Superior Court of New Jersey, Appellate Division, denied.
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10(F)

                                  AMENDMENT TO
                     THE DIAL CORP 1992 STOCK INCENTIVE PLAN

         WHEREAS, The Dial Corporation (the "Company") has entered into an
Agreement and Plan of Merger dated as of December 14, 2003 by and among the
Company, Henkel KGaA and Henkel Merger Corporation (the "Merger Agreement"); and

         WHEREAS, upon consummation of the merger pursuant to the Merger
Agreement (the "Effective Time"), each share of the Company's common stock (a
"Share") will be converted into the right to receive $28.75 in cash, without
interest, subject to any applicable withholding taxes, and the Shares will no
longer be publicly traded; and

         WHEREAS, under Section 9 of The Dial Corp 1992 Stock Incentive Plan
(the "Plan"), the Company's Board of Directors has the power to amend the Plan;

         THEREFORE, on December 14, 2003, and effective as of that date, the
Board of Directors has amended the Plan as follows:

1. The first sentence of Section 5(j) of the Plan is hereby amended by deletion
of the initial phrase, "On receipt of written notice of exercise,". The sentence
shall hereafter begin as follows: "The Committee may elect....".

2. Notwithstanding any other provisions of the Plan, from and after the
Effective Time, (i) there shall be no grant of any options or other equity
rights or awards under the Plan, and (ii) all administrative and other rights
and authorities granted under the Plan to the Company, the Board of Directors of
the Company or any committee or designee thereof shall reside with Henkel KGaA.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the foregoing was executed as of the 14th day of
December, 2003.

                                THE DIAL CORPORATION



                               /s/ Bernhard J. Welle
                               --------------------------------------------
                               By: Bernhard J. Welle
                               Its:Executive Vice President-Shared Services
Lamarvin DARDEN, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 12-10241.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 10, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit denied.
Detroit HINES, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 12-9937.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 28, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.

*2753Justice KAGAN took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.4

                            PAUL M. WEIL & ASSOCIATES
                                ATTORNEYS AT LAW
                          5810 EL CAMINO REAL, SUITE D
                           CARLSBAD, CALIFORNIA 92008
                                 (760) 438-1214
                               FAX (760) 431-2158

                                 August 20, 2001

PERSONAL & CONFIDENTIAL

Frank J. Mercardante
President and CEO
Southwest Community Bank
5810 El Camino Real
Carlsbad, CA 92008

         Re:      EXTENSION AND MODIFICATION OF YOUR EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

Dear Mr. Mercardante:

         This letter is written to confirm the action of the Board of Directors
of Southwest Community Bank ("SWCB") at its Board meeting on August 15, 2001.

         The Board approved the recommendation for a three (3) year extension of
the term of your Employment Agreement and an increase in your base salary to Two
Hundred Thousand Dollars ($200,000) per annum, both effective July 1, 2001. The
Board also granted stock option rights for an additional 13,714 shares of SWCB
Common Stock at the current market price of $28.50 per share. The grant of
options is in accordance with the terms and conditions of the SWCB Stock Option
Plan and will be separately memorialized. Except as modified by the foregoing,
all other covenants, terms and conditions of your Employment Agreement remain in
full force and effect.

         Please sign and return the duplicate copy of this letter acknowledging
and accepting these additional terms. We look forward to a long and mutually
profitable continuing relationship.

                                              Very truly yours,

                                              /s/ Paul M. Weil
                                              ----------------------------------
                                              Paul M. Weil, Corporate Secretary
                                              For the Board of Directors

PMM:CM
cc: Howard B. Levenson, Chairman

                                              ACKNOWLEDGED AND AGREED

                                              /s/ Frank J. Mercardante
                                              ----------------------------------
                                              Frank J. Mercardante

Exhibit 10.4
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 91 (Thursday, May 11, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 25204]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-11570]



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


DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Government-Industry Advisory Committee on the Operation and 
Modernization of the National Defense Stockpile; Notice of Meeting

SUMMARY: The second meeting of this committee will be held on May 23-
24, 1995, at the Doubletree Hotel, 300 Army Navy Drive, Arlington, VA. 
The meeting is open to the public. This committee was established under 
Public Law 102-484. The meeting times and agenda are as follows:

    Time: May 23, 1:30 pm to 4 pm; and May 24, 9 am to 3:30 pm.
    Agenda: Discussion and Determination of: scope of work, specific 
topics for investigation by the Committee, and Committee structure.
    For additional information contact Mr. Tom Meeker at 703-607-
3203.

    Dated: May 5, 1995.
Patricia L. Toppings,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 95-11570 Filed 5-10-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5000-04-M
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

for the 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

THE SUCCESSOR AGENCY TO THE FORMER 

EMERYVILLE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND THE 

CITY OF EMERYVILLE, 

Plaintiff(s) 

v. 

SWAGELOK COMPANY, an Ohio corporation; WHITNEY 

RESEARCH TOOL CO., a dissolved California corporation; 

HANSON BUILDING MATERIALS LIMITED, a British 

corporation; and CATHERINE LENNON LOZICK, an 

individual residing in Ohio, 

Defendant(s) 

To: (Defendant 's name and address) 

Civil Action No. 4:17-cv-00308-WHO 

SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION 

HANSON BUILDING MATERIALS LIMITED, a British Corporation 

A lawsuit has been filed against you. 

Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) — or 60 days if you 

are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ. 

P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) — you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of 

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiff's attorney, 

whose name and address are: 

Robert P. Doty, Ali P. Hamidi, Christopher W. Gribble 

COX, CASTLE & NICHOLSON LLP 

50 California Street, Suite 3200, San Francisco, CA 94111 

If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. 

You also must file your answer or motion with the court. 

Date: 

CLERK OF COURT 

Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk 

American LegalNet, Inc. 

www.FormsWorkFlow.com

Case 3:17-cv-00308-WHO Document 68 Filed 10/05/17 Page 1 of 2
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2) 

Civil Action No. 4:17-cv-00308 

PROOF OF SERVICE 

(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (1)) 

This summons for (name of individual and title, if any) 

was received by me on (date) 

I personally served the summons on the individual at (place) 

on (date) ; or 

I left the summons at the individual's residence or usual place of abode with (name) 

, a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there, 

• Date: 

on (date) , and mailed a copy to the individual's last known address; or 

:I served the Summons on (name of individual) , who is 

designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization) 

on (date) ; or 

I returned the summons unexecuted because 

Other (specify): 

My fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $ 0.00 

I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true. 

; or 

Server's signature 

Printed name and title 

Server's address 

Additional information regarding attempted service, etc: 

American LegalNet, Inc, 

,vww_FormsWorkFlow.com 

Case 3:17-cv-00308-WHO Document 68 Filed 10/05/17 Page 2 of 2
Subject: Re: Triton relay usage 

From: "Amol Pattekar" <pattekar@apple.com> 

Received(Date): Thu, 19 Jun 2014 05:41:26 +0000 

To: "Gokul Thirumalai" <gthirumalai@apple.com> 

Cc: "Patrick Gates" <pgates@apple.com>, "Lionel Gentil" 

<lgentil@apple.com>,"Artie Nathan III" <anathan@apple.com> 

Date: Thu, 19 Jun 2014 05:41:26 +0000 

Ah! That makes a lot of sense. Thanks for the explanation Gokul!

-Amol

Sent from my iPhone

On Jun 18, 2014, at 10:20 PM, Gokul Thirumalai <gthirumalai@apple.com> wrote:

I'm not following why the relay bandwidth utilization would recover.

iOS6 was the biggest user of relay bandwidth - all calls going over relay. iOS7 uses significantly 

less - most calls drop back down after relay. We broke all iOS6, and the only way to get 

FaceTime working again is to upgrade to iOS7.

iReporter charts show that iOS6 calls were minuscule before things broke and yet contributed to 

a large amount of relay traffic, indicating iOS7 was using very little relay bandwidth. Also, the 

day things broke, a ton of people upgraded to iOS7 (20% jump in accept rate from Sochi on 

4/17).

<PastedGraphic-1.png>

On Jun 18, 2014, at 8:24 PM, Amol Pattekar <pattekar@apple.com> wrote:

+Artie, who I believe is out until Monday. 

I would have expected the traffic to recover as some of these customers upgraded to newer 

builds. Not sure why it didn't recover. I do not recall any other change in April that would have 

reduced relay usage. 

I have also not heard any recent reports of customers complaining about FaceTime not working. 

Thanks,

-Amol

Sent from my iPhone

On Jun 18, 2014, at 8:01 PM, Patrick Gates <pgates@apple.com> wrote:

HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY APL-GRACE_00001002

Case 5:17-cv-00551-LHK Document 285-70 Filed 10/18/18 Page 1 of 2
But it seems like it never recovered. Is FaceTime still broken for a large number of people? 

Like half?

- Patrick

On Jun 18, 2014, at 19:58, Amol Pattekar <pattekar@apple.com> wrote:

There was a cert that expired and several client builds were enforcing the expiry, so FaceTime 

broke in all iOS except BrightonMaps, InnsbruckTaos and Sochi. It also broke in all major 

releases of OSX but all the SUs had a fix. This happened on April 15th. This substantially 

reduced relay utilization. 

For next year, we need to factor in additional relay usage for phone continuity. We will use 

more relay IPs. Bandwidth usage will likely not increase much. 

Thanks,

-Amol

Sent from my iPhone

On Jun 18, 2014, at 7:45 PM, Patrick Gates <pgates@apple.com> wrote:

Hey guys -

I'm looking at the Akamai contract for the next year. I understand we did something in April 

around iOS 6 to reduce relay utilization. Does this ring a bell for any of you? Got details?

Thanks,

Patrick

HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL - ATTORNEYS' EYES ONLY APL-GRACE_00001003

Case 5:17-cv-00551-LHK Document 285-70 Filed 10/18/18 Page 2 of 2
# Court of Appeals

**First District of Texas**

BILL OF COSTS

No. 01

- 13

- 00092

- CV

Augusta Barge Company

v

.

Five B's, Inc.

NO. 07CV0920 IN THE 212TH DISTRICT COURT OF GALVESTON C OUNTY

TYPE OF FEE CHARGES PAID/DUE STATUS PAID BY

MT FEE

MT FEE

MT FEE

MT FEE

MT FEE

E

- TXGOV FEE

E

- TXGOV FEE

MT FEE

MT FEE

E

- TXGOV FEE

E

- TXGOV FEE

E

- TXGOV FEE

MT FEE

E

- TXGOV FEE

E

- TXGOV FEE

E

- TXGOV FEE

MT FEE

E

- TXGOV FEE

E

- TXGOV FEE $15.00

$15.00

$10.00

$10.00

$10.00

$5.00

$5.00

$10.00

$10.00

$5.00

$5.00

$5.00

$10.00

$5.00

$5.00

$5.00

$10.00

$5.00

$5.00 10/13/2014

10/10/2014

09/09/2014

01/10/2014

12/17/2013

11/25/2013

11/21/2013

11/21/2013

10/31/2013

10/31/2013

10/02/2013

10/02/2013

09/27/2013

09/27/2013

09/19/2013

09/18/2013

09/18/2013

09/13/2013

09/06/2013 E

- PAID

E

- PAID

E

- PAID

E

- PAID

E

- PAID

E

- PAID

E

- PAID

E

- PAID

E

- PAID

E

- PAID

E

- PAID

E

- PAID

E

- PAID

E

- PAID

E

- PAID

E

- PAID

E

- PAID

E

- PAID

E

- PAI D ANT

ANT

ANT

ANT

ANT

APE

APE

APE

APE

APE

ANT

ANT

APE

APE

ANT

ANT

ANT

ANT

ANTE

- TXGOV FEE

MT FEE

E

- TXGOV FEE

MT FEE

E

- TXGOV FEE

RPT RECORD

E

- TXGOV FEE

REPORTER'S RECORD

E

- T XGOV FEE

CLERK'S RECORD

E

- TXGOV FEE

E

- TXGOV FEE

FILING $5.00

$10.00

$5.00

$10.00

$5.00
$2,300.00

$5.00

$300.00

$5.00

$342.00

$5 .00
$5.00

$175.00 07/31/2013

07/31/2013

07/08/2 013

07/08/2013

07/08/2013

06/07/2013

04/11/2013

04/03/2013

03/26/2013

03/26/2013

03/26/2013

03/26/2013

02/04/2013 E

- PAID

E

- PAID

E

- PAID

E

- PAID

E

- PAID

PAID

E

- PAID

PAID

E

- PAID

PAID

E

- PAID

E

- PAID

PAID ANT

ANT

ANT

ANT

ANT

ANT

ANT

ANT

ANT

ANT

ANT

ANT

ANT



### The costs incurred on appeal to the First Court of Appeals Houston, Texas are $3,32 2 .00.

Court costs in this case have been taxed in this Court’s judgment

I, Christopher A. Prine

, Clerk o f the Court of Appeals for the First District of Texas, do hereby certify that this is a true state ment of the costs of appeal in this case.

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, witness my

hand and the seal of the Court of Appeals for the First District of Texas, this May 22 , 2015

.
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

-1-

STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL AND ORDER Date No. 5:17-CV-00645-EJD-SVK

Fred W. Schwinn (SBN 225575)

Raeon R. Roulston (SBN 255622)

Matthew C. Salmonsen (SBN 302854)

CONSUMER LAW CENTER, INC.

12 South First Street, Suite 1014

San Jose, California 95113-2418

Telephone Number: (408) 294-6100

Facsimile Number: (408) 294-6190

Email Address: fred.schwinn@sjconsumerlaw.com

Attorneys for Plaintiff

CHRISTOPHER MAYN GILLESPIE

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

CHRISTOPHER MAYN GILLESPIE,

Plaintiff,

v.

MIDLAND CREDIT MANAGEMENT, INC., 

a Kansas corporation; and MIDLAND 

FUNDING, LLC, a Delaware limited liability 

company,

Defendants.

Case No. 5:17-cv-00645-EJD

STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL AND 

[PROPOSED] ORDER

Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1)

Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1), Plaintiff, CHRISTOPHER MAYN GILLESPIE, and 

Defendants, MIDLAND CREDIT MANAGEMENT, INC., and MIDLAND FUNDING, LLC, 

stipulate, and the Court hereby orders, as follows:

1. The dispute between the parties has been settled, therefore, the claims asserted by 

Plaintiff, CHRISTOPHER MAYN GILLESPIE, against all Defendants in the above-captioned 

proceeding are hereby dismissed, with prejudice, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(a)(1). Each party 

will bear his or its own attorneys’ fees and costs.

CORRECTED

Case 5:17-cv-00645-EJD Document 22 Filed 06/28/17 Page 1 of 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

-2-

STIPULATION OF DISMISSAL AND ORDER Date No. 5:17-CV-00645-EJD-SVK

CONSUMER LAW CENTER, INC.

By: s/ Fred W. Schwinn

Dated: June 27, 2017 Fred W. Schwinn (SBN 225575) 

Raeon R. Roulston (SBN 255622) 

Matthew C. Salmonsen (SBN 302854)

Attorneys for Plaintiff

CHRISTOPHER MAYN GILLESPIE

SOLOMON WARD SEIDENWURM & SMITH, LLP

By: s/ Thomas F. Landers

Dated: June 27, 2017 Thomas F. Landers (SBN 207335)

Leah S. Strickland (SBN 265724)

Attorneys for Defendants

MIDLAND CREDIT MANAGEMENT, INC. and 

MIDLAND FUNDING, LLC

THE FOREGOING STIPULATION

IS APPROVED AND IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: 

The Honorable Edward J. Davila

Judge of the District Court

The Clerk shall close this file. 

June 28, 2017

Case 5:17-cv-00645-EJD Document 22 Filed 06/28/17 Page 2 of 2