alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31.1  CERTIFICATIONS I, Boyd V. Applegate, certify that:  1.           I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Porfavor, Inc.;  2.           Based on my knowledge, this report 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 with respect to the period covered by this report;  3.           Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;  4.           The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:  a)           Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;  b)           Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and  c)           Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and  5.           The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):  a)           All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and  b)           Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.  May 15, 2008     By: /s/ Boyd V. Applegate Boyd V. Applegate CEO, President, Director
# C_2009048EN.01000201.xml

| 27.2.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 48/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.2.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 48/2

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

26 February 2009

(2009/C 48/02)

1 euro=

1 euro

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,2782 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 125,33 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4499 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,89130 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 11,3175 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,4848 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 8,7780 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 28,333 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 300,02 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,7094 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,6960 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,2904 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 2,1580 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,9590 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,5885 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 9,9108 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 2,4953 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,9633 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 931,75 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 12,6350 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 8,7429 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,3860 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 15 386,97 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,6916 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 61,900 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 45,5350 |
| THB | Thai baht | 45,939 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 3,0144 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 19,0420 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 64,4150 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,2782

JPY

Japanese yen

125,33

DKK

Danish krone

7,4499

GBP

Pound sterling

0,89130

SEK

Swedish krona

11,3175

CHF

Swiss franc

1,4848

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

8,7780

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

28,333

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

300,02

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,7094

PLN

Polish zloty

4,6960

RON

Romanian leu

4,2904

TRY

Turkish lira

2,1580

AUD

Australian dollar

1,9590

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,5885

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

9,9108

NZD

New Zealand dollar

2,4953

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,9633

KRW

South Korean won

1 931,75

ZAR

South African rand

12,6350

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

8,7429

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,3860

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

15 386,97

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,6916

PHP

Philippine peso

61,900

RUB

Russian rouble

45,5350

THB

Thai baht

45,939

BRL

Brazilian real

3,0144

MXN

Mexican peso

19,0420

INR

Indian rupee

64,4150

---

(1)

1

Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

Source:

---
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

JAMES L. TATE, JR.,

Plaintiff,

v. 4:10cv208-WS

PAUL HAWKES, et al.,

Defendants.

 

ORDER ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

Before the court is the magistrate judge's report and recommendation docketed

August 23, 2010. See Doc. 22. The magistrate judge recommends that the plaintiff's

complaint and this case be dismissed for failure to state a claim upon which relief may

be granted and because the plaintiff seeks monetary relief against numerous

defendants who are immune from such relief. The plaintiff has filed an "Amended

Notice of Appeal" (doc. 23)—which is directed to the Eleventh Circuit—in response to

the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. Because there has been no final

order or judgment entered in the case, the plaintiff's "appeal" is premature. The court,

therefore, will construe the "appeal" as objections to the magistrate judge's report and

recommendation.

Having considered the record in light of the plaintiff's "appeal" or objections, the 
Page 2 of 2

court finds that the case must be dismissed as recommended by the magistrate judge.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

1. The magistrate judge's report and recommendation (doc. 22) is hereby

ADOPTED and incorporated by reference into this order.

2. The plaintiff's complaint and this action are DISMISSED for failure to state a

claim upon which relief may be granted and because the plaintiff seeks monetary relief

against numerous defendants who are immune from such relief.

3. The clerk shall enter judgment accordingly, noting on the docket sheet that

the case was dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii). 

4. If the plaintiff wants to appeal the judgment, he must file a notice of appeal

directed to that judgment. His prematurely-filed "Amended Notice of Appeal" will not

serve to effectuate an appeal to the Eleventh Circuit.

5. If the plaintiff files a notice of appeal, the clerk shall refer the plaintiff's motion

to proceed in forma pauperis (doc. 24) to the magistrate judge.

DONE AND ORDERED this 16th day of September , 2010.

s/ William Stafford 

WILLIAM STAFFORD

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

LYSNER VALCIN et al.,

Plaintiffs,

v. CASE NO.: 1:10cv96-SPM/GRJ

STEVEN DAVIS and STEVEN

DAVIS FARMS, LLC,

Defendants. 

_____________________________/

ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO WITHDRAW

This cause comes before the Court upon Daniel W. Anderson’s Motion to

Withdraw as Counsel for Defendants (doc. 171). The Plaintiffs filed a response

opposing the motion (doc. 176). The Defendants, Steven Davis and Steven

Davis Farms, LLC, also filed an objection to the motion (doc. 178). Mr. Anderson

filed a Motion for Leave to Reply to Plaintiffs’ Response in Opposition and

Defendants’ Objections to Counsel’s Motion to Withdraw (doc. 181) in which

Plaintiffs also responded (doc. 182). A hearing regarding the issue of attorney

withdrawal was held on Thursday, October 18, 2012. Upon consideration of the

arguments and the evidence, it is hereby:

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:
Page 2 of 2

1. The motion to withdraw (doc. 171) is granted.

2. The motion for leave to reply (doc 178) is denied as moot.

3. On or before November 30, 2012, Defendants Steven Davis and

Steven Davis Farms, LLC shall respond to this order by (1) filing a

notice of appearance by their new lawyer or (2) filing a request for

more time to find a new lawyer along with a explanation of why

additional time is needed. Defendant Steven Davis may also file a

written notice stating that he will proceed pro se, that is, to

represent himself in this case by November 30, 2012. 

4. The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this order to the Defendants

directly: Steven Davis, 11204 NW CR 236, Alachua, Florida 32615

and Steven Davis Farms, LLC, P.O. Box 325, La Crosse, Florida,

32658.

DONE AND ORDERED this 29th day of October, 2012.

S/ Stephan P. Mickle 

Stephan P. Mickle

Senior United States District Judge

CASE NO.: 1:10cv96-SPM/GRJ
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

GAYLE BROOKS,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO.: 1:10cv73-SPM/AK

UNUM LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY

OF AMERICA, a foreign corporation,

Defendant.

_______________________________/

ORDER GRANTING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO AMEND AND DENYING AS

MOOT MOTION TO STRIKE OR FOR MORE DEFINITE STATEMENT

This cause comes before the Court on Defendant’s Motion to Strike and/or

Motion for More Definite Statement (doc. 5) and Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend

Complaint (doc. 6). Upon consideration, it is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

1. Plaintiff’s Motion to Amend Complaint (doc. 6) is granted. The clerk

shall file the Amended Complaint (doc. 6-1).

2. Defendant’s Motion to Strike and/or Motion for More Definite

Statement (doc. 5) is denied as moot, and without prejudice to Defendant’s

opportunity to file a new motion directed toward the Amended Complaint.

DONE AND ORDERED this 16th day of June, 2010.

 s/ Stephan P. Mickle 

Stephan P. Mickle

Chief United States District Judge
Case 3:10-mc-00063-MCR -EMT   Document 17    Filed 09/16/10   Page 1 of 1
# C_2010143EN.01002701.xml

| 2.6.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 143/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.6.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 143/27

---

Interest rate applied by the European Central Bank to its main refinancing operations (1):

1

1,00 % on 1 June 2010

Euro exchange rates (2)

2

1 June 2010

2010/C 143/08

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,2155 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 110,65 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4393 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,83470 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,6163 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,4183 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 7,9420 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 25,628 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 276,62 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,7093 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,1140 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,1868 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 1,9288 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,4595 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,2766 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 9,4720 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,8056 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,7193 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 478,29 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 9,3929 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 8,3021 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,2590 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 11 249,90 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,0203 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 56,709 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 38,0290 |
| THB | Thai baht | 39,607 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,2262 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 15,7893 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 57,3170 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,2155

JPY

Japanese yen

110,65

DKK

Danish krone

7,4393

GBP

Pound sterling

0,83470

SEK

Swedish krona

9,6163

CHF

Swiss franc

1,4183

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

7,9420

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

25,628

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

276,62

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,7093

PLN

Polish zloty

4,1140

RON

Romanian leu

4,1868

TRY

Turkish lira

1,9288

AUD

Australian dollar

1,4595

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,2766

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

9,4720

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,8056

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,7193

KRW

South Korean won

1 478,29

ZAR

South African rand

9,3929

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

8,3021

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,2590

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

11 249,90

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,0203

PHP

Philippine peso

56,709

RUB

Russian rouble

38,0290

THB

Thai baht

39,607

BRL

Brazilian real

2,2262

MXN

Mexican peso

15,7893

INR

Indian rupee

57,3170

---

(1)  Rate applied to the most recent operation carried out before the indicated day. In the case of a variable rate tender, the interest rate is the marginal rate.

1

(2)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

2

Source:

---
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

DA 23-0291

_________________

WILFRED L. DOLL and CHERI L. DOLL,

 Plaintiffs, Counter Defendants,

 Appellees and Cross Appellants,

 v.

LITTLE BIG WARM RANCH, LLC, LARRY H. 

SMITH, and MARK FRENCH,

 Defendants, Counter Plaintiffs 

 and Appellants.

________________________________________

LEVI DOLL and SHEILA DOLL,

 Intervenors.

O R D E R

_________________

Pursuant to the Internal Operating Rules of this Court, this cause is classified for 

submission on briefs to a five-justice panel of this Court. 

The Clerk is directed to provide a copy hereof to all counsel of record and to the 

Honorable Yvonne Laird, District Judge.

For the Court,

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

May 1 2024

05/01/2024

Case Number: DA 23-0291
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  Advance  Financial  Bancorp  (the
"Company")  on Form  10-KSB for the year  ended June 30,  2002 as filed with the
Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof (the  "Report"),  we,
Stephen M.  Gagliardi,  President and Chief  Executive  Officer,  and Stephen M.
Magnone,  Chief Financial Officer,  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) 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.




/s/Stephen M. Gagliardi                               /s/Stephen M. Magnone
-------------------------------------                 --------------------------
Stephen M. Gagliardi                                  Stephen M. Magnone
President and Chief Executive Officer                 Chief Financial Officer




September 24, 2002
# C_2009196EN.01000801.xml

| 20.8.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 196/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.8.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 196/8

---

New national side of euro coins intended for circulation

2009/C 196/08

Image

National side of the new commemorative 2-euro coin intended for circulation and issued by the Italian Republic

National side of the new commemorative 2-euro coin intended for circulation and issued by the Italian Republic

Euro coins intended for circulation have legal tender status throughout the euro area. The Commission publishes all new euro coin designs with a view to informing all parties required to handle coins in the course of their work as well as the public at large (1). In accordance with the Council conclusions of 10 February 2009 (2), the Member States and countries that have concluded a monetary agreement with the Community providing for the issuing of euro coins are allowed to issue commemorative euro coins intended for circulation, provided that certain conditions are met, particularly that only the 2-euro denomination is used. These coins have the same technical characteristics as other 2-euro coins, but their national side features a commemorative design that is highly symbolic in national or European terms.

1

2

Issuing country: Italian Republic

Subject of commemoration: Bicentenary of the birth of Louis Braille (1809-1852)

Description of the design: The inner part of the coin depicts a hand reading an open book by touch. Above the index finger, which is pointing at the vertical inscription ‘LOUIS BRAILLE 1809-2009’, are two birds symbolising freedom of knowledge. The issuing country reference, ‘RI’, is at the top right, while the mint mark ‘R’ is at the bottom right. Braille’s name is written under the book in the alphabet that he invented. At the very bottom are the initials ‘MCC’ of the artist Maria Carmela Colanéri.

The coin’s outer ring depicts the 12 stars of the European flag.

Number of coins to be issued: 2 million

Date of issue: September/October 2009

---

(1)  See OJ C 373, 28.12.2001, pp. 1-30 for the national sides of all the coins issued in 2002.

1

(2)  See the conclusions of the Economic and Financial Affairs Council of 10 February 2009 and the Commission Recommendation of 19 December 2008 on common guidelines for the national sides and the issuance of euro coins intended for circulation (OJ L 9, 14.1.2009, pp. 52-55).

2

---
Exhibit 31.2
 CERTIFICATIONS
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2008
of Lorillard, Inc.:2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this report 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 with respect to the period
covered by this report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of
operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this
report;4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
 a.
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is
made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in
which this report is being prepared;b.
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report
based on such evaluation; andc.
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter
(the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants
internal control over financial reporting; and
 5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the
audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
 a.
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation
of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely
affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial
information; andb.
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees
who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting.
 Date: November 4, 2008By:
    /s/ David H. TaylorDavid H. TaylorDirector, Executive Vice President,

Finance and Planning and Chief Financial
Officer 39
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v. CASE NO.: 4:10cr35-SPM

MICHAEL PIERRE

 a/k/a “Coco”

Defendant.

____________________________/

ORDER OF COMPETENCY

The parties have had an opportunity to review the forensic report (doc. 74)

and request a competency hearing if they still had reason to question

Defendant’s competency to proceed with this case. No such request has been

filed. Upon its own review, the Court finds all reasonable doubts have been

dispelled as to Defendant’s competency. Whereupon, it is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that Defendant Michael Pierre is competent. 

He is able to understand the nature and consequences of the proceedings

against him and to assist his attorney in his own defense. 

DONE AND ORDERED this 27th day of May, 2011.

s/ Stephan P. Mickle 

Stephan P. Mickle

Chief United States District Judge

Case 4:10-cr-00035-RH-CAS Document 82 Filed 05/27/11 Page 1 of 1
#### IN RE LANCASTER

No. 50 PC.

Case below: 28 N.C. App. 295.

Petition for discretionary review under G.S. 7A-31 allowed 8 April 1976. Motion by Thurman P. Thomas to dismiss appeal for lack of substantial constitutional question denied 8 April 1976.
Exhibit 4.1


 


Advisors Asset Management, Inc.

18925 Base Camp Road

Monument, Colorado 80132


April 17, 2020


 


Advisors Disciplined Trust 2009


c/o The Bank of New York Mellon, as Trustee


BNY Atlantic Terminal


2 Hanson Place, 12th Floor


Brooklyn, New York 11217


 


Re: Advisors Disciplined Trust 2009 (the “Fund”)


Ladies and Gentlemen:


We have examined
the Registration Statement File No. 333-236190 for the above captioned Fund. We hereby consent to the use in the Registration Statement
of the references to Advisors Asset Management, Inc. as evaluator.


You are hereby authorized
to file a copy of this letter with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

 


	 	Very truly yours,
	 	 
	 	Advisors Asset Management, Inc.
	 	 
	 	 	 
		By	/s/ALEX R. MEITZNER
	 	 	Alex R. Meitzner
	 		Senior Vice President
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

SQUARE RING, INC.,

Plaintiff,

vs. CASE NO. 3:10-cv-214/RS-MD

FINECREST INVESTMENTS PTY LTD.,

et al.,

Defendants.

_________________________________________/

ORDER

Before me is Plaintiff’s letter to the court (Doc. 7), requesting that the court “issue 

a preliminary injunction enjoining Defendants from winding up their operations or 

otherwise disbursing assets other than in the ordinary course of business.” I shall construe 

the letter as a motion for a preliminary injunction. In Grupo Mexicano de Desarrollo, 

S.A. v. Alliance Bond Fund, Inc., 527 U.S. 308, 318-33, 119 S.Ct. 1961 (1999), the 

Supreme Court held that a district court could not issue a preliminary injunction to 

preserve assets when a party had not yet obtained a judgment establishing a debt. 

Because Plaintiff does not yet have a judgment establishing the debt owed by Defendants, 

Plaintiff’s motion is DENIED.

ORDERED on June 23, 2010.

/S/ Richard Smoak 

RICHARD SMOAK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE