alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### TEXA S C OU R T OF A PPEAL S, THIR D DIST R ICT , AT AU STIN

NO. 03- 08 -00 716 -CR

Ro be r t J am iso n , A ppe lla nt

v. The State of Texas, App ellee

F ROM THE DISTRICT CO URT OF TRAVIS COUNTY , 403RD JUDICIAL DISTRICT NO. D-1- DC-07 -30 1448 , HO NORAB LE B RENDA P. K ENNEDY , JUDGE PRESIDI NG

M E M O R

A N D U M O P I N I O N A jury convicted a

ppell ant R obert Jamison of felony assault, family

violence, enhanc ed with a prior conviction for delivery of a controlled substance, and sentenc ed him to seve n y e ars ’ i mpr iso nme nt. Ap pe lla nt’ s a pp oin te d a tto rn e y ha s fi le d a br ie f c on c lud ingthat th e a pp e a l is fr ivo lou s and

wi tho ut m e ri t. Counsel’s brief

me e ts th e re quirements of An de rs v . Ca lif

or nia , 386 U.S. 738, 743-44 (1967), by

prese nting a

profe ssional evaluation of the rec ord and d em o n s t ra t i n g that there are no arguable g rounds to be adva nced. Se e Pe ns on v . O hio , 4 88 U. S. 7 5, 80 (1 98 8) ; An de rs , 386 U.S. at 74 3- 44 ; Hi

gh v . S tate , 5 73 S.W. 2d

80 7, 81 1- 13 (T e x. Cr im. Ap p. 19 78 ); Cur riev . S tate , 516 S.W .2d 68 4, 68 4 ( Te x. Cr im. Ap p. 19 74 ); Ga ino us v . S tate , 436 S.W .2d 137, 138 (Tex. Crim. App. 1969). Ap pe llant’ s att orn ey

se nt a pp e lla nt a c op y of the br ie f a

nd a dv ise d h im that he ha d th e ri g ht t oNo substitut e counsel will be appointed. Should appe llant w ish to seek f urther r eview of 1 his case by

the cour t of criminal appe als, he must either r etain an at t o rn ey t o fi l e a petition for discretionar

y revie w or file a pro se petition for discretionary revie w. See ge nerally Tex. R. App. P. 68-79 (g overningproce eding s in the Texas Court of Criminal Appeals). An y p et i t ion for dis c re tio na

ry re vie w mus t be fi le d with in t hir ty da y s f ro m th e date of

e ith e r t his op ini on

or the date this Court overrules the last ti m ely motion for rehe aringfiled. See Tex. R. App. P . 68.2. The petition must be filed with this Court, a fter which it will be forwa rded to the court of c ri m inal appea ls a long with the rest of the filings in the c ause. See Tex. R. App. P . 68.3, 68.7. Any petition for discr etionary

revie w should comply

with rules 68.4 and 68.5 of the rules of

appellate proce dure. See Tex. R. App. P . 68.4, 68.5. 2 examine the rec ord and f ile a pro se brief. Se e An de rs , 3 86 U. S. at 74 4; J ac k son v. S tate , 485 S.W .2d 553, 553 (Tex. Crim. App. 1972). No pro se br ief ha s been f iled. We h a ve c on sid e re d th e re c or d a nd c ouns e l’ s bri ef an d a g re e that th e a pp e a l is frivolous and with o u t merit. We have re viewed the evidenc e pre sented to the jury and the pr oc e dure s th a t w e re ob se rv e d and fi nd no thi ng in the re c or d that mig ht argua bly su pp or t th e a pp e a l. We gr ant counse l’s motion to wit hdrawand af firm the judg ment of convic tion. 1

______________________ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ ______________ David Pury ear , J ustice Be fore J ustices Patterson, Pury ear and Pember

ton Affir med Filed: May

7, 2010 Do No t Pu

bli sh
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 216 (Thursday, November 8, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 63183]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-5592]



[[Page 63183]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

National Communications System

[Docket No. NCS-2007-0005]


National Security Telecommunications Advisory Committee

AGENCY: National Communications System, DHS.

ACTION: Notice of Cancellation of the Federal Advisory Committee 
Teleconference Meeting of the President's National Security 
Telecommunications Advisory Committee (NSTAC).

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

SUMMARY: The meeting of the President's National Security 
Telecommunications Advisory Committee (NSTAC) scheduled for November 8, 
2007 from 2 p.m. to 3 p.m. is cancelled. Notice of this meeting was 
published in the October 12, 2007, Federal Register at 58110-58111.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Sue Daage, Industry Operations 
Branch at NPPD/NCS/Mail Stop 8510, DHS/245 Murray Lane, Bldg. 410, 
Washington, DC 20528-8510. Telephone: (703) 235-5526, e-mail: 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#2f7c5a4a016b4e4e484a6f4b475c01484059"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="2e7d5b4b006a4f4f494b6e4a465d00494158">[email protected]</span></a>.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: NSTAC advises the President on issues and 
problems related to implementing national security and emergency 
preparedness telecommunications policy. Notice of cancellation os this 
meeting is given under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), Pub. 
L. 92-463, as amended, 5 U.S.C. App.

Sallie McDonald,
Director, National Communications System.
[FR Doc. 07-5592 Filed 11-7-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-10-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

CROP PRODUCTION SERVICES, INC.,

a Delaware corporation,

Plaintiff,

vs. Case No. 3:10mc65/MCR/MD

TED BAXTER,

Defendant.

 /

O R D E R

Upon consideration of the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate

Judge filed on December 16, 2010, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), and after

reviewing objections to the Recommendation, if any, the Recommendation is

adopted as the opinion of the Court.

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. The defendant’s motion to dissolve writs of garnishment (doc. 19) is

GRANTED, and the writs of garnishment entered against Jackson County Teacher’s

Credit Union and William B. Floyd and Shirley Floyd are dissolved for the reasons

set forth in the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation of December 16,

2010.

DONE AND ORDERED this 18th day of January, 2011.

 s/M. Casey Rodgers 

M. CASEY RODGERS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
CAROLINE D. COOK, 

PLAINTIFF 

vs. 

MICHAEL GAY COOK, 

DEFENDANT 

CAUSE NO. Cll5-070 

Filed: 12/4/2015 9:32:08 PM 

Shelli Miller. 

County Clerk 

Rockwall County, Texas 

Angela Endicott 

IN THE COUNTY COURT 

ATLAW 

ROCKWALL COUNTY, TEXAS 

DEFENDANT'S NOTICE OF APPEAL 

COMES NOW, Michael Gay Cook, Defendant in the above styled cause of action, which he, as appellant, 

desires to appeal to the 5th District Court of Appeals. Defendant hereby gives notice of appeal of this court's 

judgment and files this his Notice of Appeal. 

Respectfully submitted, 

Respectfully submitted this the 1st day of December, 2015. 

Kerry L. Prisock 

Kerry L. Prisock 

State Bar Number 24082005 

Post Office Box 1051 

Rockwall, Texas 75087 

Telephone: 214-632-3823 

Facsimile: 469-252-7496 

kprisocklegal@sbcglobal.net 

ATIORNEY FOR DEFENDANT 

05-15-01493-CV

 FILED IN 5th COURT OF APPEALS DALLAS, TEXAS 12/7/2015 12:17:12 PM LISA MATZ Clerk
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

I hereby certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been served upon opposing counsel by 

electronic means. 

Kerry L. Prisock 

Kerry L. Prisock 

State Bar Number 2408200S 

Post Office Box 1051 

Rockwall, Texas 75087 

Telephone: 214-632-3823 

Facsimile: 469-252· 7496 

kprisocklegal@sbcglobal.net 

ATIORNEY FOR DEFENDANT 
C.\RUUl\1: r>. coor.;.. 

Pl.:\ l'.;Tl Ff 

\'S. 

\'11CI J.\l:L. (j,\ Y COOK. 

DF I Tl\ Di\t\ I 

s 1..\l L 01" l"FXA-.. 

CUL7\ IYO!· Rt >CK\\ ·\I L 

C\l ~I '' >. ( It 'i-\170 

!'\ I IH· Cul'!' l Y CUL RI 

R Ul. I'.\\ \I l ( I 1 t \ I Y . I 1-\. \ "i 
Lkt\.irt: m.:, th~ 1111dcr:.i~11\·d ,nHhllril~. nn thi' d;:~ p<.:r"•n;iJ!, .1r'p ... -;m;d \11~:ha..:l l1::t.\ C11ok. "hl' 

uftl'r \-l~in~ .!t1. -~~irn:-oil)1:ub ~1•1k~ tl1i: ll•r<:h!•'i1ii; s1:1tl.'m..:nh ;ir~· 1q1h111 Iii~ 11r h..:r p<r~un1il 

lo.no\\~1:·.~1.d-'f~:_:~~L't Sl HS( RIULL> .\\D "\\ (IR'-: 11• this 4th di!> 11t D1:1.:1:111~1~Ol5 

,, ~ . ·' 

\~- -R;;hi~ St.11..- 111 I ,.,.1.., . I f ..... _ .....
* P ursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5, the Court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________

No. 97-50162 Summary Calendar

_____________________

RAMSEY BLAKE HARRELL,

Petitioner-Appellee,

versus

GARY L. JOHNSON, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION,

Respondent-Appellant.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas

(MO-96-CV-131)

_________________________________________________________________ November 21, 1997

Before WIENER, BARKSDALE, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The Director of the Texas Department of Criminal Just ice,

Institutional Division, appeals the district court’s denial of his

F ED

. R. C IV

. P. 59(e) motion to alter or amend the judgment,

contending that the court abused its discretion by dismissing

Ramsey Blake Harrell’s habeas petition without, rather than with,

prejudice. Harrell did not file a brief in opposition.- 2 -

The summary judgment constituted a judgment on the me rits.

See Powell v. United States , 849 F.2d 1576, 1579 (5th Cir. 1988);

10A C HARLES A. W RIGHT , E T A L ., F EDERAL P RACTICE AND P ROCEDURE § 2719, at 7

(1983). Accordingly, the judgment should have provided for

dismissal with prejudice. We therefore M ODIFY the judgment to

reflect the dismissal as being with prejudice and AFF IRM the

judgment as modified.

AFFIRMED as MODIFIED
CERTIFICATION
      OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND


CHIEF
      FINANCIAL OFFICER


PURSUANT
      TO


18
      U.S.C.
      SECTION 1350,


AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002









In
      connection with the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Planet411.com.
      for the year ended June 30, 2006, I certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
      1350,
      as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to my
      knowledge, that:





|(1) | the
              Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Planet411.com. for the year ended June
              30,
              2006 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)
              of the
              Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
|--- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




|(2) | the
              information contained in the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year
              ended June 30, 2006, fairly presents in all material respects, the
              financial condition and results of operations of
              Planet411.com.
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




By:
            /s/
                Derek IvanyName:
            Derek
                IvanyTitle:
            Chief
                Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, and
                DirectorDate:
            October
                13, 2006
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

 PENSACOLA DIVISION

CERES ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES

INC.,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 3:09cv355/RV/MD

 

TRACEY STEWART, DAVID STEWART

and PATRICIA STEWART, etc.,

Defendants.

 /

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

The Court having been advised that this matter has been compromised and settled

between the parties, it is ORDERED:

(1) This cause is hereby dismissed, with prejudice and without taxation of costs. 

(2) In the event settlement is not consummated for any reason, the Court reserves

the power, upon motion filed by any party within 60 days after date, to amend, alter or

vacate and set aside this order of dismissal. 

DONE AND ORDERED this 21st day of September, 2009.

/s/ Roger Vinson 

ROGER VINSON

Senior United States District Judge
##### 



Exhibit 4.2
 CANWEST PETROLEUM CORPORATION
2006 STOCK OPTION PLAN
 Purposes of and Benefits Under the Plan
 Definitions
       1




---



##### 



Administration
     2




---



##### 



Eligibility
   Stock Reserved
   Incentive Stock Options
    3




---



##### 



Non-qualified Stock Options
 Terms and Conditions of Options Exhibit A
 Number of Shares
 Type of Option
 Option Price
      4




---



##### 



Term of Option
       Method of Exercise and Medium and Time of Payment
   5




---



##### 



Termination
   Death, Disability or Retirement of Recipient
  6




---



##### 



Transferability Restriction
    Effect of Certain Changes
   7




---



##### 



8




---



##### 



No Rights as Shareholder  Non-Distributive Intent
   Exhibit B
  Other Provisions
 Grant of Stock Bonuses
  9




---



##### 



Exhibit
B
 Agreement by Recipient Regarding Withholding Taxes
 Term of Plan
 Amendment and Termination of the Plan
   10




---



##### 



Approval of Shareholders
 Termination of Right of Action
 Tax Litigation
  11




---



##### 



Adoption
     12




---



##### 



Exhibit A
 FORM OF STOCK OPTION AGREEMENT
    Confirmation of Grant of Option
 Option Price
 Vesting and Exercise of Option [shall vest and become exercisable as follows: (insert vesting
schedule), provided, however, that no option shall vest or become exercisable unless the Recipient
is an employee of the Corporation on such vesting date/or may be exercised in whole or in part at
any time during the term of the Option.]




---



##### 



Term of Option
 Transferability Restriction
 Exercise Upon Termination
 Death, Disability or Retirement of Recipient
 Adjustments
 No Registration Obligation
   2




---



##### 



Notices
 Approval of Counsel
 Benefits of Agreement
 Effect of Governmental and Other Regulations
 Plan Governs
  3




---



##### 



CANWEST PETROLEUM CORPORATIONDate
    
    
    
    
    ,
    
    
    
    
    By:Christopher H. Hopkins, Chief Executive Officer
  Date
    
    
    
    
    ,Signature of RecipientTax ID Number:Address:
  4




---



##### 



Exhibit B
 SUBSCRIPTION AGREEMENT
 THE SECURITIES BEING ACQUIRED BY THE UNDERSIGNED HAVE NOT BEEN REGISTERED UNDER THE U.S. SECURITIES
ACT OF 1933 OR ANY OTHER LAWS AND ARE OFFERED UNDER EXEMPTIONS FROM THE REGISTRATION PROVISIONS OF
SUCH LAWS. THESE SECURITIES CANNOT BE SOLD, TRANSFERRED, ASSIGNED OR OTHERWISE DISPOSED OF EXCEPT
IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE RESTRICTIONS ON TRANSFER CONTAINED IN THIS STOCK SUBSCRIPTION AGREEMENT AND
APPLICABLE SECURITIES LAWS.




---



##### 



Date:
    
    
    
    
    ,Signature of RecipientTax ID Number:Address:
  2
Exhibit 32.1
                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of Eagle Broadband, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-K for the year ending August 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, David Weisman, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as
adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d),
as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

Date:  July 15, 2004

/s/ David A. Weisman
David A. Weisman,
Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 32.1 - President Certification (Section 906)

                        CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                         18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                         AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
             SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


I am the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Your Event,
Inc., a Nevada corporation (the "Company").  I am delivering this certificate
in connection with the Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter ended May 31,
2009 and filed with the U. S. Securities and Exchange Commission ("Form 10-Q").

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I hereby certify that, to the best of my knowledge,
the Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information
contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

/s/ Marilyn Montgomery
-----------------------
    Marilyn Montgomery
    President/CFO


Date  July 9, 2009
      ------------


<PAGE>
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 02-20748

Summary Calendar

 

OWIN DANZELL,

Petitioner-Appellant,

versus

JOHN ASHCROFT, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL; HIPOLITO M. ACOSTA,

Acting District Director of the Houston District Office of 

The Immigration and Naturalization Service,

Respondents-Appellees.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. H-01-CV-3612

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

February 13, 2003

Before BARKSDALE, DEMOSS, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Owin Danzell, a native of Trinidad admitted to the United

States in 1989 as a permanent resident alien, appeals the district

court’s denial of his petition for a writ of habeas corpus pursuant

to 28 U.S.C. § 2241. Danzell’s petition challenged an order of

deportation in which it was determined that he was removable as an

aggravated felon pursuant to 8 U.S.C. § 1227(a)(2)(A)(iii) on
2

account of his state cocaine-possession convictions. The district

court determined that it lacked jurisdiction to entertain the

28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition because the arguments raised therein had

been rejected by this court in dismissing Danzell’s direct petition

for review of the deportation order. Alternatively, the district

court determined that Danzell’s arguments were foreclosed by this

court’s precedent. 

It is unclear from the record whether Danzell’s direct

petition for review to this court raised the same issues asserted

in the instant petition for a writ of habeas corpus. In any event,

the arguments Danzell raised in his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition

concerning whether his state controlled-substance convictions are

“aggravated felonies” are foreclosed by this court’s precedent.

See United States v. Hernandez-Avalos, 251 F.3d 505 (5th Cir.),

cert. denied 122 S. Ct. 305 (2001); United States v. HinojosaLopez, 130 F.3d 691 (5th Cir. 1997).

AFFIRMED.
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

GLENN LEE SELDON,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 4:10cv143-RH/WCS

CORRECTIONAL MEDICAL

AUTHORITY et al.,

Defendants.

___________________________/

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

This case is before the court on the magistrate judge’s report and

recommendation, ECF No. 38, and the objections, ECF No. 47; see also ECF Nos.

41, 42, 43, 45, and 46. I have reviewed de novo the issues raised by the objections. 

Upon consideration,

IT IS ORDERED:

The report and recommendation is ACCEPTED and adopted as the court’s

opinion. The clerk must enter judgment stating, “The complaint is dismissed under

28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B).” The clerk must close the file.

SO ORDERED on August 25, 2010.

s/Robert L. Hinkle 

United States District Judge
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

ROBERT EARL ROYSTER,

Plaintiff,

vs. Case No. 3:10cv194/MCR/EMT

ESCAMBIA COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE,

et al.,

Defendants.

__________________________________/

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This cause is before the court upon referral from the clerk. Plaintiff commenced this action

by filing a civil rights complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (Doc. 1). On July 26, 2010, this court

entered an order giving Plaintiff thirty (30) days in which to pay the filing fee or submit a properly

completed motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 12). Plaintiff failed to respond to the order;

therefore, on September 1, 2010, the court issued an order requiring Plaintiff to show cause, within

twenty (20) days, why this action should not be dismissed for failure to comply with an order of the

court (Doc. 13). The time for compliance with the show cause order has now elapsed, and Plaintiff

has not paid the filing fee or submitted a properly completed motion to proceed in forma pauperis.

Accordingly, it is respectfully RECOMMENDED:

That this case be DISMISSED without prejudice for Plaintiff’s failure to comply with an

order of the court.

At Pensacola, Florida, this 23rd day of September 2010.

/s/ Elizabeth M. Timothy 

ELIZABETH M. TIMOTHY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Page 2 of 2

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

Any objections to these proposed findings and recommendations must be filed within

fourteen (14) days after being served a copy thereof. Any different deadline that may appear

on the electronic docket is for the court’s internal use only. A copy of objections shall be

served upon all other parties. Failure to object may limit the scope of appellate review of

factual findings. See 28 U.S.C. § 636; United States v. Roberts, 858 F.2d 698, 701 (11th Cir.

1988).

Case No: 3:10cv194/MCR/EMT
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff, 

3:09cv00374-LAC

v. 

 

BOOKETEE W. HARTFIELD,

 Defendant.

_______________________________/

DEFAULT JUDGMENT

The complaint in the above action was filed in this Court on August 31, 2009,

and after due service of process on the Defendant according to law, no appearance,

answer or other defense has been served or filed on behalf of the Defendant. Default

was duly entered as to the Defendant on March 1, 2010.

By reason of this default, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED and ADJUDGED that the

Plaintiff, United States of America, recover from the Defendant the sum of $15,896.64

(Defendant owes Plaintiff the principal sum of $5,000.00, interest of $10,239.64

accrued through February 3, 2009, plus accruing interest at the annual rate of 9% as

set forth in the Certificate of Indebtedness prepared by the Department of Education;

and $307.00 U. S. Marshal fees, and $350.00 for costs of the court allowed pursuant to

28 U.S.C. § 2412(a)(2)). 

DONE and ORDERED this 23 day of March, 2010.

rd

s/L.A. Collier 

LACEY A. COLLIER

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE