alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# C_2010132EN.01000901.xml

| 21.5.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 132/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.5.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 132/9

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

20 May 2010

2010/C 132/03

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,2334 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 111,93 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4422 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,86440 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,7388 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,4179 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 8,0450 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 25,913 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 283,00 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,7074 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,1880 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,2031 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 1,9625 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,4920 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,3120 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 9,6233 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,8412 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,7389 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 473,34 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 9,8041 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 8,4215 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,2680 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 11 297,49 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,0400 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 56,720 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 38,5590 |
| THB | Thai baht | 39,931 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,3067 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 16,1134 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 57,7540 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,2334

JPY

Japanese yen

111,93

DKK

Danish krone

7,4422

GBP

Pound sterling

0,86440

SEK

Swedish krona

9,7388

CHF

Swiss franc

1,4179

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

8,0450

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

25,913

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

283,00

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,7074

PLN

Polish zloty

4,1880

RON

Romanian leu

4,2031

TRY

Turkish lira

1,9625

AUD

Australian dollar

1,4920

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,3120

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

9,6233

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,8412

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,7389

KRW

South Korean won

1 473,34

ZAR

South African rand

9,8041

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

8,4215

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,2680

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

11 297,49

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,0400

PHP

Philippine peso

56,720

RUB

Russian rouble

38,5590

THB

Thai baht

39,931

BRL

Brazilian real

2,3067

MXN

Mexican peso

16,1134

INR

Indian rupee

57,7540

---

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

1

Source

---
**EXHIBIT
23(b)**
 
 
 **CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**
 
 We
consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos.
333-37652, 333-64504, 333-64504-01, 333-64504-02, 333-71004, 333-71004-01,
333-71004-02, 333-84418, 333-84418-01, 333-84418-02, 333-110125 and Amendment
No. 1 thereto, 333-103922, and 333-115159 on Form S-3 and Registration Statement
Nos. 333-32833, 333-32837, 333-45657, 333-46671, 333-62014, 333-92260 and
333-105133 on Form S-8 of TXU Corp. of our report on the consolidated financial
statements of Pinnacle One Partners, L.P. and subsidiaries as of and for the
years ended December 31, 2002 and 2001, dated March 21, 2003, except for Note
14, as to which the date is March 11, 2004 (which report expresses an
unqualified opinion and contains an explanatory paragraph relating to the
adoption of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 142 as described in
Note 1 of the Notes to the Financial Statements), appearing in this Annual
Report on Form 10-K of TXU Corp. for the year ended December 31,
2004.
 
 
 
 
 Dallas,
Texas
 March 16,
2005
# C_2011003EN.01000102.xml

| 6.1.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 3/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.1.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 3/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.6043 — Mubadala/UTC/Lockheed Martin/Ammroc)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2011/C 3/02

On 16 December 2010, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32010M6043. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/en/index.htm) under document number 32010M6043. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.

---
**Exhibit 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We consent to the incorporationby reference in the following Registration Statements Nos. 333-20549, 333-65459, 333-38568, 333-88836, 333-129922 and 333-148139 on Form S-8 of our reports dated February 19, 2010, relating to the financial statements and financial statementschedule of Powerwave Technologies, Inc. (which report expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph relating to the Company’s adoption of Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Accounting Standards Codification(ASC) Topic 740, “*Income Taxes*,” in 2007, and the effectiveness of Powerwave Technologies, Inc.’s internal control over financial reporting, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Powerwave Technologies, Inc. for theyear ended January 3, 2010. 

/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP 

Costa Mesa, California 

February 19, 2010
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

NYKA O’CONNOR

VS Case No. 3:10cv360/LAC/EMT

OFFICER KELLEY, et al.,

REFERRAL AND ORDER

Referred to Magistrate Judge Timothy on October 6, 2010 

Type of Motion/Pleading: Motion for Stay and Abeyance 

Filed by: Plaintiff on 9/28/10 Document 5

( ) Stipulated/Consented/Joint Pleading

RESPONSES:

on Doc.#

on Doc.#

SHEILA HURST-RAYBORN, ACTING, CLERK

OF COURT

 /s/ Teresa Milstead 

Deputy Clerk: Teresa Milstead

ORDER

Upon consideration of the foregoing, it is ORDERED this 7th day of

October, 2010, that:

The requested relief is DENIED. Plaintiff shall have until OCTOBER 21, 2010, in which

to comply with the court’s order of September 17, 2010, in this case directing him to either

pay the filing fee of $350.00 or submit a completed application to proceed in forma pauperis

(Doc. 3). 

/s/ Elizabeth M. Timothy 

ELIZABETH M. TIMOTHY

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

CATHY BAILEY, 

WALLACE BAILEY,

Plaintiffs,

vs. Case No. 4:10cv515-SPM/WCS

STATE OF FLORIDA, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This cause is again before me upon referral from the office of the clerk.

The court's order entered May 17, 2011, directed Plaintiffs to file a Fourth

Amended Complaint by June 17, 2011. Doc. 10. Plaintiffs then filed a motion for

enlargement of time, doc. 12, and the time for filing the Fourth Amended Complaint was

extended to July 18, 2011. Doc. 13. Because Plaintiffs failed to comply with that order,

an order to show cause why their case should not be dismissed was entered on July 

27, 2011, giving them until August 12, 2011, to respond. Plaintiffs were warned of

dismissal if they failed to file a response to the order. To date, Plaintiffs have failed to

file a response. 

Case 4:10-cv-00515-RH-WCS Document 15 Filed 08/31/11 Page 1 of 2
A trial court has inherent power to dismiss a case sua sponte for failure to

prosecute. See Link v. Wabash R.R., 370 U.S. 626, 82 S.Ct. 1386, 8 L.Ed.2d 734

(1962). Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) authorizes a district court to dismiss an action for failure to

obey a court order. Moon v. Newsome, 863 F.2d 835, 838 and cases cited (11th Cir.)

cert. denied, 493 U.S. 863 (1989). Because Plaintiffs have failed to prosecute this case,

their complaint should be dismissed.

It is therefore respectfully RECOMMENDED that this case be DISMISSED

WITHOUT PREJUDICE for failure to prosecute.

IN CHAMBERS at Tallahassee, Florida, on August 31, 2011.

s/ William C. Sherrill, Jr. 

WILLIAM C. SHERRILL, JR.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

A party may file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations

within 14 days after being served with a copy of this report and recommendation. A party may

respond to another party's objections within 14 days after being served with a copy thereof. Failure

to file specific objections limits the scope of review of proposed factual findings and

recommendations.

Case No. 4:10cv515-RH/WCS 

Case 4:10-cv-00515-RH-WCS Document 15 Filed 08/31/11 Page 2 of 2
Case 5:10-cv-00083-RS-GRJ Document 52 Filed 07/25/11 Page 1 of 5Case 5:10-cv-00083-RS-GRJ Document 52 Filed 07/25/11 Page 2 of 5Case 5:10-cv-00083-RS-GRJ Document 52 Filed 07/25/11 Page 3 of 5Case 5:10-cv-00083-RS-GRJ Document 52 Filed 07/25/11 Page 4 of 5Case 5:10-cv-00083-RS-GRJ Document 52 Filed 07/25/11 Page 5 of 5
<TABLE> <S> <C>
 
<ARTICLE>                                  5 



         

<LEGEND>
THIS  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL   INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM  THE
AUDITED CONSOLIDATED  FINANCIAL  STATEMENTS OF PRIME SUCCESSION,  INC.
AND SUBSIDIARIES,  FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1997. 
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                               1,555
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       20,213
<ALLOWANCES>                                         2,648
<INVENTORY>                                          5,531
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    25,694
<PP&E>                                              72,556
<DEPRECIATION>                                       3,165
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     395,106
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               14,964
<BONDS>                                            216,841
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                                 0
<OTHER-SE>                                         129,047
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       395,106
<SALES>                                            101,139
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   101,139
<CGS>                                               62,523
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                       62,523
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    14,492
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     3,217 
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  23,843
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                        280
<INCOME-TAX>                                           137
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                    143
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
                                 

<NET-INCOME>                                           143
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                            0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                            0
        







                                  



</TABLE>
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

TIMOTHY DEAN PETERSON,

Plaintiff,

vs. CASE NO. 5:10cv244/RS-EMT

N. ROBINSON, AW Programs;

R. KOWALCZYK, Head Chaplain; and

L. LAND, Chaplain for Jewish Inmates,

Defendants.

___________________________________________/

ORDER

Before me is the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 9). No

objections have been filed.

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

incorporated by reference in this order.

2. This case is dismissed without prejudice because of plaintiff’s failure to

comply with an order of the court.

3. The clerk is directed to close the file.

ORDERED on December 13, 2010.

/S/ Richard Smoak 

RICHARD SMOAK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

GAINESVILLE DIVISION

TERLAINE GIBSON, 

Petitioner, 

vs. 4:10cv226-SPM/WCS

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Respondent. 

_________________________________/

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This cause is before me upon referral from the Clerk.

In an order filed July 30, 2010, Petitioner was directed to show cause why his

petition should not be summarily dismissed or to file a notice of voluntary dismissal by

August 31, 2010. Petitioner was warned of dismissal if he failed to comply with that

order. Doc. 3. To date, no response has been received from the Petitioner. 

A trial court has inherent power to dismiss a case sua sponte for failure to

prosecute. Link v. Wabash R.R., 370 U.S. 626, 82 S.Ct. 1386, 8 L.Ed.2d 734

(1962). Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) authorizes a district court to dismiss an action for 
Page 2 of 2

failure to obey a court order. Moon v. Newsome, 863 F.2d 835, 838 and cases cited

(11th Cir.), cert. denied, 493 U.S. 863 (1989). Since Petitioner has failed to comply

with an order or to prosecute this case, this petition should now be dismissed

without prejudice. 

Petitioner shall have a 14 day period after service of this report and

recommendation in which to file objections. This will also afford Petitioner a final

opportunity to show good cause for this failure to respond. Plaintiff may do so by

filing a motion for reconsideration which will be referred to me by the Clerk.

It is therefore, respectfully RECOMMENDED that this case be DISMISSED

without prejudice.

IN CHAMBERS at Tallahassee, Florida, on September 13, 2010.

s/ William C. Sherrill, Jr. 

WILLIAM C. SHERRILL, JR.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

A party may file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and

recommendations within 14 days after being served with a copy of this report and

recommendation. A party may respond to another party's objections within 14 days after being

served with a copy thereof. Failure to file specific objections limits the scope of review of

proposed factual findings and recommendations.

4:10cv226-SPM/WCS
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

vs. 3:01cr107/LAC 

3:06cv377/LAC/MD

JIMMY MERCHANT, SR.

_____________________________________________________________________

ORDER

Upon consideration of the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate

Judge filed on September 13, 2006, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), and after

reviewing objections to the Recommendation, the Recommendation is adopted as

the opinion of the Court.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED:

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

incorporated by reference in this order.

2. The defendant’s motion to vacate as incorporated into his supporting

memorandum (doc. 197) is summarily dismissed.

DONE AND ORDERED this 28th day of September, 2006.

s/L.A. Collier 

LACEY A. COLLIER 

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:01-cr-00107-LC-MD Document 200 Filed 09/28/06 Page 1 of 1
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

LEE MARVIN HARPER, JR.,

Plaintiff, 

vs. Case No. 3:11cv6/LAC/CJK

MIKE BABCOCK,

Defendant.

________________________________________________________________

O R D E R

This cause comes on for consideration upon the magistrate judge’s Report and

Recommendation dated December 30, 2011. (Doc. 13). The parties have been

furnished a copy of the Report and Recommendation and have 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. The plaintiff’s amended civil rights complaint (doc. 5) is DISMISSED

WITH PREJUDICE under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(b)(ii), for failure to state a claim

Case 3:11-cv-00006-LC-CJK Document 14 Filed 02/06/12 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

upon which relief may be granted.

3. The clerk is directed to close the file.

DONE AND ORDERED this 6 day of February, 2012.

th

s/L.A. Collier 

LACEY A. COLLIER

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case No: 3:11v6/LAC/CJK

Case 3:11-cv-00006-LC-CJK Document 14 Filed 02/06/12 Page 2 of 2
# C_2010164EN.01000201.xml

| 24.6.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 164/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.6.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 164/2

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

23 June 2010

2010/C 164/02

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,2271 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 110,76 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4438 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,82290 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,5120 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,3611 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 7,9290 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 25,725 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 280,38 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,7084 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,0662 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,2235 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 1,9239 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,4062 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,2680 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 9,5445 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,7276 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,7064 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 457,85 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 9,2776 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 8,3595 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,1950 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 11 109,73 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 3,9709 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 56,506 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 38,0524 |
| THB | Thai baht | 39,730 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,1975 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 15,4432 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 56,6740 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,2271

JPY

Japanese yen

110,76

DKK

Danish krone

7,4438

GBP

Pound sterling

0,82290

SEK

Swedish krona

9,5120

CHF

Swiss franc

1,3611

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

7,9290

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

25,725

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

280,38

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,7084

PLN

Polish zloty

4,0662

RON

Romanian leu

4,2235

TRY

Turkish lira

1,9239

AUD

Australian dollar

1,4062

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,2680

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

9,5445

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,7276

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,7064

KRW

South Korean won

1 457,85

ZAR

South African rand

9,2776

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

8,3595

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,1950

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

11 109,73

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

3,9709

PHP

Philippine peso

56,506

RUB

Russian rouble

38,0524

THB

Thai baht

39,730

BRL

Brazilian real

2,1975

MXN

Mexican peso

15,4432

INR

Indian rupee

56,6740

---

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

1

Source

---
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

RICHARD BURTON, JR.,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 5:09cv274-RH/AK

PSYCHIATRIST RODRIQUEZ, et al.,

Defendants.

_________________________________/

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

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

recommendation (document 13). No objections have been filed. 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 January 19, 2010.

s/Robert L. Hinkle 

United States District Judge
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 Quarterly Report of Enox Biopharma,  Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period  ended June 30, 2010,  as filed with the  Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  the undersigned,  as
the Chief Executive  Officer of the Company,  hereby  certifies,  pursuant to 18
U.S.C.  Section 1350, as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

     (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.


Date: August 16, 2010                      By: /s/ Prof. Yossef Av-Gay
                                               ---------------------------------
                                               Acting Chief Executive Officer
                                               (Principal Executive Officer)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

FRANCISCO LOPEZ and

DANIELLE SILVANO,

Plaintiffs,

v. CASE NO.: 4:11cv136-SPM/WCS

ML #3,LLC, d/b/a FIRST

TEAM MITSUBISHI,

Defendant.

___________________________/

ORDER GRANTING LEAVE TO FILE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT

This cause comes before the Court on Plaintiffs motion for leave to file a

second amended complaint (doc. 6), Defendant’s response in opposition (doc.

7), and Plaintiffs’ motion for leave reply (doc. 8). Upon consideration, it is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

1. Plaintiffs’ motion (doc. 6) is granted. Plaintiffs shall have up to and

including May 25, 2011, to file their second amended complaint. Defendant shall

have 14 days to respond. 

2. Plaintiffs’ motion for leave to file a reply (doc. 8) is denied as moot.

DONE AND ORDERED this 23rd day of May, 2011.

s/ Stephan P. Mickle 

Stephan P. Mickle

Chief United States District Judge

Case 4:11-cv-00136-RS-WCS Document 11 Filed 05/23/11 Page 1 of 1