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



EXHIBIT 12.1
 GRACECHURCH CARD FUNDING (NO. 6) PLC
Certification Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F, and all reports on
Form 6-K containing distribution or servicing reports filed in respect
of periods included in the year covered by this annual report, of
Gracechurch Card Funding (No. 6) PLC;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the information in these reports, taken as a
whole, does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or
omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made,
in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made,
not misleading as of the last day of the period covered by this annual
report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the distribution or servicing information
required to be provided to the trustee by the servicer under the
pooling and servicing, or similar, agreement, for inclusion in these
reports is included in these reports;4.
    
    I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the
servicer under the pooling and servicing, or similar, agreement and
based upon my knowledge and the annual compliance review required
under that agreement, and except as disclosed in the reports, the
servicer has fulfilled its obligations under that agreement; and5.
    
    The reports disclose all significant deficiencies relating to the
servicers compliance with the minimum servicing standards based upon
the report provided by an independent public accountant, after
conducting a review in compliance with the Uniform Single Attestation
Program for Mortgage Bankers or similar procedure, as set forth in the
pooling and servicing, or similar, agreement.
 Name:   Paul Gerard Turner
Title:     Director
Date:     June 23, 2006
 - 26 -
# C_2011303EN.01000401.xml

| 14.10.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 303/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.10.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 303/4

---

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the TFEU

Cases where the Commission raises no objections

(Text with EEA relevance, except for products falling under Annex I to the Treaty)

2011/C 303/02

| Date of adoption of the decision | 12.9.2011 |
| --- | --- |
| Reference number of State Aid | N 529/08 |
| Member State | Italy |
| Region | — | Mixed |
| Title (and/or name of the beneficiary) | Attuazione della direttiva 2003/96/CE che ristruttura il quadro comunitario per la tassazione dei prodotti energetici e dell'elettricità |
| Legal basis | Legge 27 dicembre 2006 n. 296 (Legge Finanziaria 2007), articolo 1, commi 380/381
  Decreto Legislativo 2 febbraio 2007 n. 26, articolo 1, comma 1 — Attuazione della direttiva 2003/96/CE che ristruttura il quadro comunitario per la tassazione dei prodotti energetici e dell'elettricità (GU L 68 del 22.3.2007). |
| Type of measure | Scheme | — |
| Objective | Environmental protection, Tax exemptions under Directive 2003/96/EC |
| Form of aid | Tax rate reduction |
| Budget | | Overall budget: EUR 25 million |

Date of adoption of the decision

12.9.2011

Reference number of State Aid

N 529/08

Member State

Italy

Region

—

Mixed

Title (and/or name of the beneficiary)

Attuazione della direttiva 2003/96/CE che ristruttura il quadro comunitario per la tassazione dei prodotti energetici e dell'elettricità

Legal basis

Legge 27 dicembre 2006 n. 296 (Legge Finanziaria 2007), articolo 1, commi 380/381

Decreto Legislativo 2 febbraio 2007 n. 26, articolo 1, comma 1 — Attuazione della direttiva 2003/96/CE che ristruttura il quadro comunitario per la tassazione dei prodotti energetici e dell'elettricità (GU L 68 del 22.3.2007).

Type of measure

Scheme

—

Objective

Environmental protection, Tax exemptions under Directive 2003/96/EC

Form of aid

Tax rate reduction

Budget

Overall budget: EUR 25 million

| | Annual budget: EUR 2,50 million |
| --- | --- |

Annual budget: EUR 2,50 million

Intensity

0 %

Duration (period)

—

Economic sectors

Agriculture, forestry and fishing, Electricity, gas, steam and air conditioning supply

Name and address of the granting authority

| Ministero delle politiche agricole alimentari e forestali |
| --- |
| Via XX Settembre 20 |
| 00187 Roma RM |
| ITALIA |

Ministero delle politiche agricole alimentari e forestali

Via XX Settembre 20

00187 Roma RM

ITALIA

Other information

—

The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:

http://ec.europa.eu/community_law/state_aids/state_aids_texts_en.htm

---
Case 1:09-cv-00257-MP-AK Document 112 Filed 07/23/10 Page 1 of 10Case 1:09-cv-00257-MP-AK Document 112 Filed 07/23/10 Page 2 of 10Case 1:09-cv-00257-MP-AK Document 112 Filed 07/23/10 Page 3 of 10Case 1:09-cv-00257-MP-AK Document 112 Filed 07/23/10 Page 4 of 10Case 1:09-cv-00257-MP-AK Document 112 Filed 07/23/10 Page 5 of 10Case 1:09-cv-00257-MP-AK Document 112 Filed 07/23/10 Page 6 of 10Case 1:09-cv-00257-MP-AK Document 112 Filed 07/23/10 Page 7 of 10Case 1:09-cv-00257-MP-AK Document 112 Filed 07/23/10 Page 8 of 10Case 1:09-cv-00257-MP-AK Document 112 Filed 07/23/10 Page 9 of 10Case 1:09-cv-00257-MP-AK Document 112 Filed 07/23/10 Page 10 of 10
#### PILAND v. PILAND

No. 42 PC.

Case below: 24 N.C. App. 653.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 2 April 1975.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

June 28, 2011 

h0620 

Order 

 

June 28, 2011 

142634 

_________________________________________ 

IN RE PETITION OF CALHOUN COUNTY 

TREASURER 

_________________________________________/ 

CALHOUN COUNTY TREASURER, 

Petitioner-Appellee, 

v SC: 142634 

 COA: 293272 

Calhoun CC: 08-001834-CZ 

WAYNE and JOAN SWAFFORD, 

Respondents-Appellants. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the November 16, 2010 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
#### STATE v. GOOCH

No. 484PA82.

Case below: 58 N.C. App. 582.

Petition by defendant for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 allowed 25 August 1982.
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has det ermined t hat this opinion should not be

published and is not precedent except under the limit ed circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS For the Fifth Circuit

No. 96-60490 Summary Calendar

PASCUAL REN, Petitioner,

VERSUS

IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent.

Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

(A-70-671-591) May 15, 1997

Before WISDOM, KING, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * The appellant, Pascual Ren, petitions this court to review the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals upholding the Immigration Judge’s denial of his petition for political asylum and withholding of deportation. We will not reverse the findings of the Board of Immigration Appeals, or the Immigration Judge if the Board adopted his findings, if there is substantial evidence to support the Board’s2

decision. Jukic v. I.N.S. , 40 F.3d 747, 749 (5th Cir. 1994). Reversal is warranted only when the evidence is “so compelling that no reasonable fact-finder could fail to find the requisite fear of persecution”. I.N.S. v. Elias-Zacarias , 502 U.S. 478, 483-84 (1992). A review of the record indicates that Ren has not shown evidence of past persecution or fear of persecution because of one of the five statutory grounds in the definition of “refugee” at 8 U.S.C. § 1101(a)(42)(a). Rather, Ren’s fear was one of conscription or harm resulting from his refusal to be recruited. Hence, as the Immigration Judge found, any persecution Ren has experienced or fears he will experience is a result of his refusal to fight. The Board did not abuse its discretion, therefore, in upholding the decision of the Immigration Judge. Ren contends that under international law he should be granted temporary refuge in the United States as a place of safe haven. That issue was not raised before the Board, so we shall not consider it. Ozdemir v. I.N.S. , 46 F.3d 6, 8 (5th Cir. 1994). Furthermore, public international law controls only where there is no treaty and no controlling executive or legislative act or judicial decision. Gisbert v. U.S. Attorney Gen. , 988 F.2d 1437, 1447 (5th Cir. 1993). The petition for review is DENIED
.
#### STATE v. WILBURN KING.

(Filed 20 June, 1967.)

Criminal Law § 19—

Where a cause is transferred from the recorder’s court to the Superior Court upon defendant’s demand for a trial by jury, defendant may not be tried in the Superior Court upon the original warrant, but must be tried upon an indictment.

Appeal by defendant from *Falls, J.,*January-February 1967 Regular Criminal Session of Haywood.

On 24 November 1966, L. H. Cagle, a justice of the peace of Haywood County, issued a warrant which charged that defendant, on that date, operated a motor vehicle upon a public highway of North Carolina while under the influence of intoxicating liquor. Defendant was arrested and bound over for trial in the Recorder’s Court of Haywood County on 30 November 1966. A.t that time, defendant moved for a trial by jury. Whereupon, the recorder transferred the case to the Superior Court of Haywood County.

Upon a plea of not guilty, defendant was tried in the Superior Court *upon the warrant*on 31 January 1967. Both the State and defendant offered evidence. The verdict of the jury was “guilty as charged in the *bill of indictment.”*(Italics ours.) From judgment of imprisonment, defendant appealed.

*792
      *T. W. Bruton, Attorney General; William W. Melvin, Assistant Attorney General; T. Buie Costen, Staff Attorney, for the State.*

*Frank D. Ferguson, Jr.; R. Phillip Haire for defendant.*

PeR CuRiam.

The record affirmatively discloses that, despite the wording of the jury’s verdict, no bill of indictment has been returned against defendant charging him with the crime for which he was tried. “(A) person charged with the commission of a misdemeanor cannot be put on trial in the Superior Court upon the warrant of an inferior court unless he has been tried upon such warrant in the inferior court and has appealed from that court to the Superior Court.” *State v. Thomas,*236 N.C. 454, 462, 73 S.E. 2d 283, 288. *Accord, State v. Smith,*264 N.C. 575, 142 S.E. 2d 149; *State v. Evans,*262 N.C. 492, 137 S.E. 2d 811; *State v. Johnson,*251 N.C. 339, 111 S.E. 2d 297; *State v. Ferguson,*243 N.C. 766, 92 S.E. 2d 197. The Superior Court of Haywood County, therefore, lacked jurisdiction of the action; defendant’s conviction and sentence are void. The judgment is arrested. The solicitor for the district may yet prosecute the defendant for the offense charged in the warrant upon the return of a true bill of indictment.

Judgment arrested.
Case 1:07-cv-03545-DAB Document 21 Filed 11/01/2007 Page 1 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03545-DAB Document 21 Filed 11/01/2007 Page 2 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03545-DAB Document 21 Filed 11/01/2007 Page 3 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03545-DAB Document 21 Filed 11/01/2007 Page 4 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03545-DAB Document 21 Filed 11/01/2007 Page 5 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03545-DAB Document 21 Filed 11/01/2007 Page 6 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03545-DAB Document 21 Filed 11/01/2007 Page 7 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03545-DAB Document 21 Filed 11/01/2007 Page 8 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03545-DAB Document 21 Filed 11/01/2007 Page 9 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03545-DAB Document 21 Filed 11/01/2007 Page 10 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03545-DAB Document 21 Filed 11/01/2007 Page 11 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03545-DAB Document 21 Filed 11/01/2007 Page 12 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03545-DAB Document 21 Filed 11/01/2007 Page 13 of 13
UN PUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 18

- 6163

JOHN BACCUS, a/k/a John Baccus Roosevelt

,

Plaintiff

- Appellant

,

v.

EDGAR L. CLEMENTS, III; VON DEAN TURBEVILLE; BARRY PROSSER; AMBER MCDANIEL THOMPSON; KEITH LUTCKEN; BRIAN WALLACE; PAUL BAKER; MICHELLE DIXON; JOHN BLACK

,

Defendants

- Appellees

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Florence

. David C. Norton , District Judge. ( 4:17

- cv

- 01851

- DCN )

Submitted : June 21, 2018 Decided: June 26, 2018

Before DIAZ and HARRIS , Circuit Judges, and SHEDD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirm ed by un published per curiam opinion

.

John Roosevelt Baccus, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:

John Roosevelt Baccus seeks to ap peal from the district court’s order accepting the

recommendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing without prejudice Baccus’s 42

U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) complaint. Finding no error, we affirm on the reasoning of the

district court. * See Baccus v. Clements , No. 4:17

- cv

- 01851

- DCN (D.S.C. Jan. 23, 2018).

We deny Baccus’s motions for a transcript at Government expense and for appointment

of coun sel. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are

adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

AFFIRM ED

* The grounds of the dismissal make clear that no amendment could cure the defects in Baccus’s case. Therefore, the order is final and ap pealable. See Goode v. Cent. Va. Legal Aid Soc’y, Inc. , 807 F.3d 619 , 625, 629

- 30 (4th Cir. 2015).
T he Honorable Jerry W. Cavaneau, United States Magistrate Judge for th e 1 EasternDistrict of Arkansas, to whom the case was referred for final disposition b y consent of the parties pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(c).



## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 98-2084

___________ Terrick Terrell Nooner, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Eastern District of Arkansas. Larry Norris, Director, Arkansas * Department of Correction, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellee. *

___________ Submitted: October 1, 1998 Filed: October 8, 1998

___________ Before WOLLMAN, HANSEN, and KELLY, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Arkansas inmate Terrick Terrell Nooner appeals from the district court’s order 1 denying his petition for a writ of habe as corpus pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2254. Having carefully reviewed the record and the parties’ submissions, we affirm the judgment of the district court for the reasons set forth in its memorandum. See 8th Cir. R. 47B.-2-

A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

ERICA FRAZIER, CRYSTAL STUKES

- LEWIS, BIANCA PRICE, VENICAL CANADAY, L A SHAWN WEST, L A PORSCHA LAWSON, CHATOYA HARRIS, EBONY KEELS, On behalf of themselves individually, and their minor children, AND OTHER SIMILARLY

SITU A TED RESIDENTS, Appellant s ,

v.

GMF

- STONYBROOK, L.L.C., GMF

- PRESERVATION OF AFFORDABILITY CORP., STONYBROOK FL, L.L.C. a/k/a MILLENNIA HOUSING MANAGEMENT, LTD., LLC/M ILLENNIA COMPANIES, and THE CITY OF RIVERA BEACH, FLORIDA
, a Municipality in the State of Florida

, Appellee s

.

No. 4D 20

- 666

[ March 4, 2021 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm Beach County ; Howard K. Coates, Jr. , Judge; L.T. Case No.
502018CA009696XXXXMB

.

Malik Leigh of Watson Leigh, P.A., Pompano Beach, for appellant.

Mahra Sarofsky and Jonathan S. Glickman of Slusher & Rosenblum, P.A., West Palm Beach, for appellee GMF

- Stonybrook, LLC.

Katina M. Hardee of Fowler Whi te Burnett, P.A., Miami, for appellee Stonybrook FL, LLC, and Millennia Housing Management LTD, LLC.

Ch risty L. Goddeau of Torcivia, Donlon, Goddeau & Ansay, P.A., West Palm Beach, for appellee City of Riviera Beach.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed

.

M AY
, G ERBER and K UNTZ , JJ., concur.2 * * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

VA Software Corporation Fremont, California

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-92409; 333-92391; 333-38768; 333-38766; 333-38874; 333-59096; 333-71944; 333-101965; and 333-116778) of VA Software Corporation of our reports dated September 29, 2006, relating to the consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedule, and the effectiveness of VA Software Corporation’s internal control over financial reporting, which appears in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.  

| /s/   Stonefield Josephson, Inc. |   |
|----------------------------------|--------|
|                                  |   |
| San   Francisco, California      |   |
| October 13,   2006               |   |
Case 1:07-cv-03477-LAK Document 8-2 Filed 08/14/2007 Page 1 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03477-LAK Document 8-2 Filed 08/14/2007 Page 2 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03477-LAK Document 8-2 Filed 08/14/2007 Page 3 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03477-LAK Document 8-2 Filed 08/14/2007 Page 4 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03477-LAK Document 8-2 Filed 08/14/2007 Page 5 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03477-LAK Document 8-2 Filed 08/14/2007 Page 6 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03477-LAK Document 8-2 Filed 08/14/2007 Page 7 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03477-LAK Document 8-2 Filed 08/14/2007 Page 8 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03477-LAK Document 8-2 Filed 08/14/2007 Page 9 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03477-LAK Document 8-2 Filed 08/14/2007 Page 10 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03477-LAK Document 8-2 Filed 08/14/2007 Page 11 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03477-LAK Document 8-2 Filed 08/14/2007 Page 12 of 13
Case 1:07-cv-03477-LAK Document 8-2 Filed 08/14/2007 Page 13 of 13
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

DONNA ROBINS,

Plaintiff,

vs. CASE NO. 5:10cv53/RS-MD

MICHAEL J. ASTRUE, Commissioner

of Social Security,

Defendant.

___________________________________________/

ORDER

Before me is the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 23). No

objections have been filed.

IT IS ORDERED:

1. The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation is approved and is

incorporated in this Order.

2. Defendant’s Motion To Remand (Doc. 22) is granted, the Commissioner’s

decision denying benefits is reversed.

3. This case is remanded to the Commissioner of Social Security pursuant to

sentence four of 42 U.S.C. §405(g).

4. Defendant is ordered to direct the Administrative Law Judge to further

consider the severity of Plaintiff’s mental impairments. In doing so, the

Administrative Law Judge shall discuss and consider all of the relevant

evidence, including the October 30, 2006, psychological evaluation by Dr.

Renee Baskin.
5. The clerk is directed to enter judgment for Plaintiff and to close the file.

 ORDERED on December 8, 2010.

/S/ Richard Smoak 

RICHARD SMOAK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
#### IN THE MATTER OF THE WILL OF SARA B. COX, Deceased.

(Filed 9 May 1962.)

Appeal by propounders from *Hobgood, J.,*September-October 1961 Term, Columbus Superior Court.

The background of this case is set forth in a former appeal reported in 254 N.C. 90, 118 S.E. 2d 17. Judge Hobgood conducted the inquiry 'to ascertain whether Winifred B. Fuller and Bernard J. Baggett had notice of, or participated in, the caveat proceeding. After hearing much evidence, including unequivocal denial of notice by appellees, Judge Hobgood found as a fact: “That Winifred B. Fuller and Bernard J. Baggett were not cited or given any notice whatsoever with respect to the caveat proceeding filed on November 14, 1955, and had no knowledge thereof.” The court adjudged: “That as to Winifred B. Fuller *161and Bernard J. Baggett, and each of them, the judgment entered . . . November 9, 1955, probating in common and solemn form the paper writing purporting to be the last will and testament of Sara B. Cox, shall be, and the same is hereby vacated and set aside. This the 4th day of October, 1961.”

The propounders excepted and appealed.

*D. Jack Hooks, D. F. McGoughan, Jr., Powell & Powell, W. B. Rogers, for propounders, appellants.*

*J. B. Eure, Jordan, Wright, Henson & Nichols, Rodman & Rodman, John A. Wilkinson for caveators, appellees.*

Pee Cueiam.

Judge Hobgood conducted a hearing and made findings of fact as directed by this Court in the former opinion. That opinion, as supplemented by Judge Hobgood’s findings and judgment, becomes the law of the case. The order upon which the present appeal is taken is

Affirmed.
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 211 (Thursday, November 1, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 61858]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-5458]


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

COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS


Sunshine Act Notice

AGENCY: United States Commission on Civil Rights.

ACTION: Notice of briefing.

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

Date and Time: Friday, November 9, 2007; 9:30 a.m.

Place: U.S. Commission on Civil Rights, 624 Ninth Street, NW., Rm. 540, 
Washington, DC 20425.

Briefing Agenda

Briefing on Minorities in Foster Care and Adoption

I. Introductory Remarks by Chairman
II. Speakers' Presentations
III. Questions by Commissioners and Staff Director
IV. Adjourn

CONTACT PERSON FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: Sock Foon MacDougall, Press and 
Communications (202) 376-8582.

    Dated: October 30, 2007.
David Blackwood,
General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 07-5458 Filed 10-30-07; 1:05 pm]
BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
#### TOWN OF ATLANTIC BEACH v. YOUNG

No. 516PA82.

Case below: 58 N.C. App. 597.

Petition by plaintiff for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 allowed 5 October 1982.
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

LAEL OMAR WRIGHT,

Plaintiff,

vs. CASE NO.: 3:10cv162/LAC/MD

DAVID MORGAN, et al.,

Defendants.

 

O R D E R

This cause comes on for consideration upon the magistrate judge's report and

recommendation dated August 3, 2010. The plaintiff has been furnished a copy of

the report and recommendation and has been afforded an opportunity to file

objections pursuant to Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1). No objections

have been filed. 

Having considered the report and recommendation, I have determined that the

report and recommendation should be adopted.

Accordingly, it is now ORDERED as follows:

1. The magistrate judge's report and recommendation is adopted and

incorporated by reference in this order.

2. This cause is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE and the clerk is

directed to close the file.

DONE AND ORDERED this 7 day of September, 2010.

th

s/L.A. Collier 

LACEY A. COLLIER

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE