alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 34.2**

**REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

Discover Products Inc. 

West Valley City, UT 

We have examinedmanagement’s assertion, included in the accompanying Management’s Assertion on Compliance with Regulation AB Criteria, that Discover Products Inc. (DPI) complied with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) of the Securitiesand Exchange Commission’s Regulation AB for the asset-backed securities transactions involving credit card receivables conducted by Discover Card Master Trust I and Discover Card Execution Note Trust (the “Platform”) as of and for theyear ended November 30, 2012, excluding the criteria set forth in Items 1122 (d)(1)(i), (d)(1)(iii), (d)(1)(iv), (d)(2)(ii), (d)(2)(iii), (d)(2)(iv), (d)(2)(v), (d)(2)(vi), (d)(2)(vii), (d)(3)(i), (d)(3)(ii), (d)(3)(iii), (d)(3)(iv), (d)(4)(i),(d)(4)(ii), (d)(4)(iii), (d)(4)(v), (d)(4)(x), (d)(4)(xi), (d)(4)(xii), (d)(4)(xiii), and (d)(4)(xv), which management has determined are not applicable to the activities performed by DPI with respect to the Platform. Appendix A to management’sassertion identifies the individual asset backed-transactions defined by management as constituting the Platform. Management is responsible for DPI’s compliance with the servicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion onmanagement’s assertion about DPI’s compliance with the servicing criteria based on our examination. 

Our examination was conductedin accordance with attestation standards issued by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants, as adopted by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining, on a test basis, evidenceabout the DPI’s compliance with the applicable servicing criteria, including tests on a sample basis of the servicing activities related to the Platform, determining whether DPI performed those selected activities in compliance with theservicing criteria during the specified period, and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in the circumstances. Our procedures were limited to selected servicing activities performed by DPI during the period covered by thisreport and, accordingly, such samples may not have included servicing activities related to each asset-backed transaction included in the Platform. Further, an examination is not designed to detect noncompliance arising from errors that may haveoccurred prior to the period specified above that may have affected the balances or amounts calculated or reported by DPI during the period covered by this report. We believe that our examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Ourexamination does not provide a legal determination on DPI’s compliance with the servicing criteria. 

In our opinion, management’sassertion that DPI complied with the aforementioned applicable servicing criteria as of and for the year ended November 30, 2012, for the Platform is fairly stated, in all material respects. 

/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP 

Chicago,IL 

February 19, 2013
Robin Wade LIPPITT, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 12-9117.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 15, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
Abdul Karim HASSAN, petitioner, v. COLORADO, et al.

No. 12-1187.

Supreme Court of the United States

June 3, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                           11310
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       44
<ALLOWANCES>                                      5210
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 12561
<PP&E>                                           32849
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   49824
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             1151
<BONDS>                                          10088
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                       38585
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     49824
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                  2773
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   904
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  2694
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (825)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (825)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (825)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.94)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.94)
        

</TABLE>
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

FRANCIS TEJANI KUNDRA, )

ID # A 20661647, )

Petitioner, )

vs. ) No. 3:06-CV-0014-D

 )

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS )

OF TEXAS, )

Respondent. )

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATION

OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

After reviewing all relevant matters of record in this case, including the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge, in accordance with 28 U.S.C.

§ 636(b)(1), the undersigned District Judge is of the opinion that the Findings and Conclusions of

the Magistrate Judge are correct and they are accepted as the Findings and Conclusions of the Court.

SIGNED February 8, 2006.

_________________________________

SIDNEY A. FITZWATER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

 

 Case 3:06-cv-00014-D Document 7 Filed 02/08/06 Page 1 of 1 PageID 19
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 11 (Wednesday, January 18, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 3644-3645]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-1154]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION


Revised Jurisdictional Thresholds for Section 8 of the Clayton 
Act

AGENCY: Federal Trade Commission.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Trade Commission announces the revised thresholds 
for interlocking directorates [[Page 3645]] required by the 1990 
amendment of section 8 of the Clayton Act. Section 8 prohibits, with 
certain exceptions, one person from serving as a director or officer of 
two competing corporations if two thresholds are met. Competitor 
corporations are covered by section 8 if each one has capital, surplus, 
and undivided profits aggregating more than $10,000,000, with the 
exception that no corporation is covered if the competitive sales of 
either corporation are less than $1,000,000. Section 8(a)(5) requires 
the Federal Trade Commission to revise those thresholds annually, based 
on the change in gross national product. The new thresholds, which take 
effect immediately, are $12,804,000 for section 8(a)(1), and $1,280,400 
for section 8(a)(2)(A).

EFFECTIVE DATE: January 18, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: James Mongoven, Bureau of Competition, 
Office of Policy and Evaluation, (202) 326-2879.

    Authority: 15 U.S.C. 19(a)(5)).

    By direction of the Commission.
Donald S. Clark,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-1154 Filed 1-17-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6750-01-M
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

LAGREE TECHNOLOGIES, INC., et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v.

SPARTACUS 20TH L.P., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. 17-cv-00795-JST (DMR)

ORDER TO SHOW CAUSE WHY 

DEFENSE COUNSEL SHOULD NOT BE

SANCTIONED FOR FAILURE TO 

APPEAR AT THE FURTHER 

TELEPHONIC SETTLEMENT 

CONFERENCE 

At the parties’ request, the court scheduled a follow-up settlement call for November 16, 

2017. Plaintiff’s counsel appeared for the call; defense counsel did not. Defense counsel has yet 

to offer an explanation for their absence; indeed, they have been completely silent. 

By November 22, 2017, defense counsel shall show cause in writing why they should not 

be sanctioned for failing to appear. By November 28, 2017, counsel for both sides shall submit a 

joint letter with an update on the remaining dispute by emailing it to 

dmrchambers@cand.uscourts.gov. The court fully expects that the dispute will have been 

resolved by that time.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 21, 2017

______________________________________

Donna M. Ryu

United States Magistrate Judge

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORN

I

A

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Donna M. Ryu
H. Con. Res. 124 Agreed to September 10, 2024

One Hundred Eighteenth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE SECOND SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and twenty-four 

Concurrent Resolution 

Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 

SECTION 1. USE OF EMANCIPATION HALL FOR CEREMONY TO 

PRESENT CONGRESSIONAL GOLD MEDALS AWARDED 

UNDER HIDDEN FIGURES CONGRESSIONAL GOLD MEDAL 

ACT. 

(a) AUTHORIZATION.—Emancipation Hall in the Capitol Visitor 

Center is authorized to be used on September 18, 2024, for a 

ceremony to present the Congressional Gold Medals awarded under 

the Hidden Figures Congressional Gold Medal Act (Public Law 

116–68). 

(b) PREPARATIONS.—Physical preparations for the conduct of 

the ceremony described in subsection (a) shall be carried out in 

accordance with such conditions as the Architect of the Capitol 

may prescribe. 

Attest: 

Clerk of the House of Representatives. 

Attest: 

Secretary of the Senate.
#### E-SCRUB ENVIRONMENTAL ENTERPRISES, INC., Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 04-5056.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

April 12, 2004.

Thomas F. Decaro, Jr., Principal Attorney, DeCaro & Howell, Upper Marlboro, MD, for Plaintiff-Appellant.

Steven Mager, Principal Attorney, Brian M. Simkin, David M. Cohen, of Counsel, Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for Defendant-Appellee.

ORDER

The appellant having failed to file the brief required by Federal Circuit Rule 31(a) within the time permitted by the rules, it is

ORDERED that the notice of appeal be, and the same hereby is, DISMISSED, for *702failure to prosecute in accordance with the rules.
1
2
你希望厨房中出现以下这些人员吗?

腹泻 呕吐

发烧、喉咙疼 身目俱黄(黄疸)

维护众人健康。

生病时请呆在家里。

为何你生病还要去工作?
你希望厨房中出现以下这些人员吗?

腹泻 呕吐

发烧、喉咙疼 身目俱黄(黄疸)

维护众人健康。

生病时请呆在家里。

为何你生病还要去工作?
你希望厨房中出现以下这些人员吗?

腹泻 呕吐

发烧、喉咙疼 身目俱黄(黄疸)

维护众人健康。

生病时请呆在家里。

为何你生病还要去工作?
你希望厨房中出现以下这些人员吗?

腹泻 呕吐

发烧、喉咙疼 身目俱黄(黄疸)

维护众人健康。

生病时请呆在家里。

为何你生病还要去工作?
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1285 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1285

  To amend the Nursing Relief for Disadvantaged Areas Act of 1999 to 
  remove the limitation for nonimmigrant classification for nurses in 
                  health professional shortage areas.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 14, 2005

   Mr. Rush introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Nursing Relief for Disadvantaged Areas Act of 1999 to 
  remove the limitation for nonimmigrant classification for nurses in 
                  health professional shortage areas.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. REMOVAL OF LIMITATION FOR NONIMMIGRANT CLASSIFICATION FOR 
              NURSES IN HEALTH PROFESSIONAL SHORTAGE AREAS.

    Section 2(e) of the Nursing Relief for Disadvantaged Areas Act of 
1999 (Public Law 106-95; 113 Stat. 1317) is repealed.
                                 <all>
```
Case No.: 5:17-cv-000436 NC 

Order Permitting Withdrawal of Greenberg Traurig as Sterling’s Counsel of Record

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

SAN JOSE DIVISION

COLONEL DAVID RANDOLPH SCOTT,

Plaintiff,

vs.

CITIZEN WATCH COMPANY OF 

AMERICA, INC., a California Corporation 

(Successor to Bulova Corporation, a New York 

corporation); STERLING JEWELERS, INC. 

dba KAY JEWELERS, a Delaware Corporation; 

and DOES 1 through 99, inclusive,

Defendant.

CASE NO.: 5:17-cv-000436 NC 

ORDER PERMITTING WITHDRAWAL OF

GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP AS COUNSEL 

OF RECORD FOR DEFENDANT STERLING 

JEWELERS, INC.

Action Filed: January 27, 2017 

Case 5:17-cv-00436-NC Document 68 Filed 07/20/17 Page 1 of 2
1

Case No.: 5:17-cv-000436 NC 

Order Permitting Withdrawal of Greenberg Traurig as Sterling’s Counsel of Record

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

THE COURT, having considered the notice of withdrawal of Greenberg Traurig, LLP as counsel 

of record for defendant Sterling Jewelers, Inc. d/b/a Kay Jewelers (“Sterling”), hereby permits the 

withdrawal of Greenberg Traurig, LLP as counsel of record for Sterling. The law firm of McGlinchey 

Stafford and attorneys Richik Sarkar and Dhruv M. Sharma will remain as counsel of record for 

Sterling, and Greenberg Traurig, LLP will remain as counsel of record for defendant Citizen Watch 

Company of America, Inc.

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: July 20, 2017

Hon. NATHANAEL COUSINS

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 5:17-cv-00436-NC Document 68 Filed 07/20/17 Page 2 of 2
Case 3:17-cv-00600-LB   Document 148   Filed 10/16/19   Page 1 of 7

Case 3:17-cv-00600-LB   Document 148   Filed 10/16/19   Page 2 of 7

Case 3:17-cv-00600-LB   Document 148   Filed 10/16/19   Page 3 of 7

Case 3:17-cv-00600-LB   Document 148   Filed 10/16/19   Page 4 of 7

Case 3:17-cv-00600-LB   Document 148   Filed 10/16/19   Page 5 of 7

Case 3:17-cv-00600-LB   Document 148   Filed 10/16/19   Page 6 of 7

Case 3:17-cv-00600-LB   Document 148   Filed 10/16/19   Page 7 of 7
Kenric Lavaughn JACKSON, petitioner, v. Rick THALER, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division.

No. 12-8831.

Supreme Court of the United States

April 22, 2013.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
EXHIBIT 65 

Case 3:16-cv-07014-VC Document 141-65 Filed 11/20/17 Page 1 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-07014-VC Document 141-65 Filed 11/20/17 Page 2 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-07014-VC Document 141-65 Filed 11/20/17 Page 3 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-07014-VC Document 141-65 Filed 11/20/17 Page 4 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-07014-VC Document 141-65 Filed 11/20/17 Page 5 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-07014-VC Document 141-65 Filed 11/20/17 Page 6 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-07014-VC Document 141-65 Filed 11/20/17 Page 7 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-07014-VC Document 141-65 Filed 11/20/17 Page 8 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-07014-VC Document 141-65 Filed 11/20/17 Page 9 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-07014-VC Document 141-65 Filed 11/20/17 Page 10 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-07014-VC Document 141-65 Filed 11/20/17 Page 11 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-07014-VC Document 141-65 Filed 11/20/17 Page 12 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-07014-VC Document 141-65 Filed 11/20/17 Page 13 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-07014-VC Document 141-65 Filed 11/20/17 Page 14 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-07014-VC Document 141-65 Filed 11/20/17 Page 15 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-07014-VC Document 141-65 Filed 11/20/17 Page 16 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-07014-VC Document 141-65 Filed 11/20/17 Page 17 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-07014-VC Document 141-65 Filed 11/20/17 Page 18 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-07014-VC Document 141-65 Filed 11/20/17 Page 19 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-07014-VC Document 141-65 Filed 11/20/17 Page 20 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-07014-VC Document 141-65 Filed 11/20/17 Page 21 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-07014-VC Document 141-65 Filed 11/20/17 Page 22 of 23
Case 3:16-cv-07014-VC Document 141-65 Filed 11/20/17 Page 23 of 23
Mauro RAMIREZ, DOC #S04945, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D18-2039

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed April 3, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
P/NP: Present, Not Present

 C/NC: Custody, Not in Custody 

 I: Interpreter 

Adriana M. Kratzmann

Courtroom Deputy

Original: Efiled 

CC: 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

CRIMINAL MINUTES

Date: June 12, 2020 Time: 10:20 - 10:50 am

Total Time: 30 Mins.

Judge: Edward J. Davila

Case No.: 17-cr-00068-EJD7Case Name: UNITED STATES v. Alexander Martinez-Flores(P)(C)(I)

Attorney for Plaintiff: Stephen Meyer

Attorney for Defendant: Josh Cohen

Deputy Clerk: Adriana M. Kratzmann Court Reporter: Irene Rodriguez

Interpreter: Lupita Arce (Spanish) Probation Officer: Kyle Pollak

PROCEEDINGS – SENTENCING Via Zoom Webinar

Defendant is present, in-custody and assisted by the Spanish language interpreter. Hearing held.

Defendant is hereby committed to the custody of the Bureau of Prisons (BOP) to be imprisoned 

for a term of 360 months. This term consists of 240 months on each of Cts. 1 and 2 of the Second 

Superseding Indictment (Dkt. 147 filed 8/16/2018) and 120 months on Ct. 11, said term to be 

served concurrent to one another, and 120 months on Ct. 14, to be served consecutively to all other 

counts. 

The Court imposed a 5-year term of supervised release. This term consists of 5 years on Cts. 1 and 

14 and 3 years as to Cts. 2 and 11, said terms shall run concurrently to one another. The Court 

adopts the Probation Officer’s recommendations for standard and special conditions (SEE 

JUDGMENT).

$400 Special Assessment Fee imposed due immediately; Fine waived;

Defendant is remanded to the custody of the BOP;

The Government orally requests that the Court dismiss the underlying open Counts in the previous 

Indictment and that Cts. 12 and 13 be dismissed. The Court ordered those Indictments and those counts 

dismissed as to this defendant.

The Court orders the defendant’s interest in the forfeiture items be forfeited.

Case 5:17-cr-00068-EJD Document 337 Filed 06/12/20 Page 1 of 1
Shawn D.R. AGUIRRE, petitioner, v. Jeffrey BEARD, Secretary, California Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation, et al.

No. 12-9392.

Supreme Court of the United States

May 28, 2013.

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

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 18 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 18

   Establishing deadlines for the Joint Committee of Congress on the 
Library to approve or deny the statue of the Reverend William Franklin 
  ``Billy'' Graham, Jr., for placement in the National Statuary Hall.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 17, 2023

Mr. McHenry (for himself, Mr. Rouzer, Ms. Foxx, Mr. Edwards, Mr. Bishop 
   of North Carolina, Mr. Hudson, Mr. Murphy, and Mr. Davis of North 
  Carolina) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 
           referred to the Committee on House Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
   Establishing deadlines for the Joint Committee of Congress on the 
Library to approve or deny the statue of the Reverend William Franklin 
  ``Billy'' Graham, Jr., for placement in the National Statuary Hall.

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring),

SECTION 1. DEADLINES FOR APPROVAL OR DENIAL BY JOINT COMMITTEE OF 
              CONGRESS ON THE LIBRARY.

    The Joint Committee of Congress on the Library shall--
            (1) approve or deny the full-sized clay model and pedestal 
        design of a statue of the Reverend William Franklin ``Billy'' 
        Graham, Jr., not later than 30 days after the date on which the 
        State of North Carolina submits to the Architect of the 
        Capitol--
                    (A) photographs of the model from all 4 sides;
                    (B) the dimensions of the statue and pedestal;
                    (C) engineering drawings of the pedestal;
                    (D) the anticipated weight of the completed statue 
                and pedestal; and
                    (E) the text of any proposed inscription;
            (2) approve or deny the completed statue of the Reverend 
        William Franklin ``Billy'' Graham, Jr., not later than 30 days 
        after the date on which the State of North Carolina submits to 
        the Architect of the Capitol--
                    (A) photographs of the completed statue and 
                pedestal from all 4 sides;
                    (B) the dimensions of the statue and pedestal;
                    (C) the final weight of the statue and pedestal; 
                and
                    (D) the text of any inscription; and
            (3) if the Committee approves the statue of the Reverend 
        William Franklin ``Billy'' Graham, Jr., under paragraph (2), 
        not later than 30 days after the date of the approval, 
        determine a permanent public location in the Capitol for the 
        statue.
                                 <all>
```
Order of Dismissal

P:\PRO-SE\EJD\HC.17\00464Overton_dism-fee.docx

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

MICHAEL LOUIS OVERTON,

Petitioner,

v.

ATASCADERO STATE HOSPITAL

CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER,

 Respondent.

Case No. 17-00464 EJD (PR) 

ORDER OF DISMISAL

Petitioner, a California prisoner, filed a pro se petition for a writ of habeas corpus 

pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. On January 30, 2017, the Clerk notified Petitioner that he 

needed to either pay the filing fee or file a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis

(“IFP”) within twenty-eight days from the date of the notice to avoid dismissal. (Docket 

No. 2.) The deadline has passed, and Petitioner has failed to respond. Accordingly, the

action is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to pay the filing fee. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: _____________________ ________________________

EDWARD J. DAVILA

United States District Judge

3/9/2017

Case 5:17-cv-00464-EJD Document 4 Filed 03/09/17 Page 1 of 1