alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 31.1  Section 302 Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer  1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of HPC POS System, Corp.;  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. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) 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) Designed such internal controls over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles;  (c) 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  (d) 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 that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and  5. 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; 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.    Dated:  February 17, 2011  /s/ Melvin W. Coles Melvin W. Coles Title: Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
In Re Leo Pratt, No. S0844-02 Cncv (Katz, J., June 10, 2004) 

[The text of this Vermont trial court opinion is unofficial. It has been 

reformatted from the original. The accuracy of the text and the 

accompanying data included in the Vermont trial court opinion database is 

not guaranteed.] 

STATE OF VERMONT 

Chittenden County, ss.: 

IN RE LEO PRATT 

ENTRY 

 Petitioner was found guilty and sentenced on three separate counts. 

For burglary, he was sentenced 5 to 15 years to be served concurrently with 

his second sentence of 0 to 5 for possession of stolen goods. Four months 

later, petitioner was sentenced 2 to 5 years for obstruction of justice. This 

sentence was ordered to be concurrent with the possession of stolen goods 

but (and here is the rub) consecutive to his burglary sentence. Petitioner 

argues that these sentences are “logically impossible” to add together and 

that the Department of Corrections has incorrectly calculated his total 

sentence. We beg to differ. 
 The problem posed by petitioner’s sentence structure is essentially 

one of distribution. To clarify, we will express his sentence in somewhat 

algebraic terms: 

1. (Possession) concurrent with ((Burglary) consecutive to 

(Obstruction)) 

2. (0–5yrs.) concurrent with ((5–15yrs.) consecutive to (2–

5yrs.)) 

The consecutive sentences can then be added: 

3. (0–5yrs.) concurrent with (7–20yrs.) 

Thus, petitioner’s sentence comes out to a 7 year minimum– 20 year 

maximum period, which is what the Department of Corrections calculated. 

In the alternative we could express petitioner’s sentence as: 

4. 

((0–5yrs.) concurrent with (5–15yrs.)) consecutive to ((2–5yrs.) concurrent 

with (0–5yrs.)) 

But this is merely the equivalence of lines 1 and 2 with the (0–5yrs.) term 

distributed among the consecutive sentence terms. Or as a logician might 

write it: p v (q & r) is equivalent to (p v q) & (r v p). 

 In other words, it is logically quite possible to add petitioners 

sentence without ignoring or altering the terms of the sentence. That is 
what the Department of Corrections did, consistent with the statutory 

language, 13 V.S.A. § 7032(a), and the applicable regulations. 

 Plaintiff’s motion for summary judgment is denied. Defendant’s 

motion for summary judgment is granted. 

 Dated at Burlington, Vermont________________, 2004. 

 ________________________ 

 Judge
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

KIRBY BARONVILLE,

Petitioner,

vs. CASE NO. 5:11-cv-12/RS-CJK

PAIGE AUGUSTINE,

Respondent.

_________________________________________/

ORDER

Before me are the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 13) and 

Petitioners’ Response (Doc. 14). I have considered the response de novo. 

IT IS ORDERED: 

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

by reference in this Order. 

2. The petition for writ of habeas corpus filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Doc. 1) is 

DISMISSED with prejudice, as Petitioner has not demonstrated entitlement to 

proceed under that section. 

3. The Clerk is directed to close the file. 

ORDERED on June 19, 2012.

 /S/ Richard Smoak

 RICHARD SMOAK

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 5:11-cv-00012-RS-CJK Document 15 Filed 06/19/12 Page 1 of 1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

MUHAMMED AL HELOW,

Plaintiff,

vs. CASE NO. 4:09cv353/RS-WCS

PERWEZ SATTAR and PEJAYS,

INC.,

Defendants.

_________________________________/

ORDER

The relief requested by the Joint Motion To Extend Discovery Deadline (Doc. 29)

is granted. 

ORDERED on May 12, 2010.

/S/ Richard Smoak 

RICHARD SMOAK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
EX-10.66



 Exhibit 10.66 

AMENDMENT TO THE 

TRAVELPORT WORLDWIDE LIMITED 2013 EQUITY PLAN 

WHEREAS, Travelport Worldwide Limited (the “Company”) maintains the Travelport Worldwide Limited 2013 Equity Plan (the
“Plan”); 
 WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 8(a) of the Plan, the Board of Directors of the Company (the
“Board”) may amend or modify the Plan, or any portion thereof, at any time; 
 WHEREAS, the Board desires to amend
the Plan to provide for the issuance of performance share units; and 
 WHEREAS, the Board desires to amend the Plan such that any
Shares (as defined in the Plan) that are withheld for taxes shall not be available for regrant under the Plan. 
 NOW, THEREFORE,
pursuant to Section 8(a) of the Plan, the Plan is hereby amended as set forth herein: 
 FIRST: The last sentence of
Section 9(c) shall be deleted in its entirety. 
 SECOND: The definition of “Award” shall be deleted in its
entirety and replaced with the following: 
 “Award” shall mean, individually or collectively, a grant under this Plan of Shares, Restricted
Share Units or Options, each as defined in the Award Agreement, which may, for the sake of clarity, be subject to time- and/or performance-vesting conditions. 

THIRD: Except as specifically modified herein, the Plan shall continue in full force and effect in accordance with all of the
terms and conditions thereof, and this Amendment has been ratified, approved and adopted by the Board as of September 5, 2014.
Case 4:11-cv-00124-RH-WCS Document 11 Filed 05/13/11 Page 1 of 3
Case 4:11-cv-00124-RH-WCS Document 11 Filed 05/13/11 Page 2 of 3
Case 4:11-cv-00124-RH-WCS Document 11 Filed 05/13/11 Page 3 of 3
929 

OFFICE OF THE AITORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

Honorable 0, a. 8. naungaon 

Qelteral wer 

Texa8 Prleon 8yItem 

matail1e, Texas 

reopeot to it0 

6e Vernon' s noraf%matioa . All l3Pbuaero ahallb@ 

world titml the 

p"i 

8on~allS aabap 

on ruam omsd or eaoed by the Bkte# 

mll in no erollt Bball the labor of a 
maorable 01 J. Se Ellingrrorr - Rrga e 

paomr be 8Old to q oontraator sr 

lsrraes to tork on tu’ms, or SlseMmre, 

nor *all sw 

tr 

IsQsr be worked on 

any farm or 0 sxylss, up i!tlmrSP, exospt such farabe onm3 or lsased by 

the Gtats of TstuC 

a roM Is, by wnriatlon the OozWot'5 tlmf3 anil 

eervi4x3s are no 1 srhisoanbuttheybsloxqforthe 

fimo b&.ng to the 00&a 8 to as a pmalty for a trsas~eselon 

or th43 law. The t&3 and mezvloss of such com%at, thsrofore,arsaolo 

ntr 

the subjsot-anttsr of -7ate aentraet 

botreen the 00 at aal another, but they 8r0, In such manner as a,y be @zsaribad by tho et&tat&s, a pops a%bjsOfptter for eontract between ths State rad another. The 

stat3 itmlf, howver, aan do aothlng that would prt the 

eomict, a& In$iMsnWlly 31.28 labor, beyoxl it6 control. 

oo?~trol 

speoifieally, our statutes prmids Ear tbo gsneral of the Prison Systsm as f'ollowsi 

l ThsT- P&onBamd,tog~Umr‘ 

85th the nanagsr ha-r provided 

for, shall be tested with the sxeXns2vs 

Iswbgmmt aIxl00lltro1 of the lw.eon 

systsm,mldollpropsrt~bsl~ 

thereto0 eubjsot only to the lImita= 

tions Of this Aat, axl shall be rsiikTzi%?&%S~~~ zxr 

the moper aarea trsatamt,teedUgr 

QlOthlng and zarulag0Qnt of the prlsonare oonfln&~thoreln.~ 

&t&o10 eltwj authorhes the Texas Frlson Board 

to manage nnl oontrol the Prison Syeten through a Eanager 

selected br it* and erprossly declares athe duty of' suoh 

Unager shallsxtsmdto the emplOym3nt and thsdlsthaPgSr 

vith the approval of theBoard, of suob persons as qb3 

rrcoessary for the sffl0ien.t oonluot of the Prison Bgstemg 

Th8Leglslature inits regularbien&&l appropriation pro~Ues.for the various employees of the Edison 

8yStem, 8hbh OUqtOmr. $8 ~h%SfratOd d3i ths a~O~t~~ 

for tho ciurmnt bIenIIiUm Uhersin the V~W~OUS O!?fiOs2~ as2 
Bonor8810 0. J. 8. Elliryson - Fags 8 

s0p lo y sss nwdsd in the ia por a tlo f ota he l yotem 8x93 

naamd, lnslaaia6 m omployeoo as farm mmagsro, 

amaistunt iarm mnugers8 dog rsrgwntr, piaet men, 

stsmrds, guards, and the Itie. It TUB the svldsztt 

intention of fho Legislature that ghoao sPpl~yeee 

tom to '80 fres QBPI 00 

wllvlots. o8vlou8ly, 

1s0t0sntrast*,andmt 

3Lagi81at~~ OsuldaUth~rlce 

the use of oomiots in tlio psr?ornbanae of those sex-- 

riose not lasompattile tit& ths Stats*5 duty of reetralnt and the oonvlatd duty to serve, but It has 

not don3 80 In the partiou1sr as to wblsh you imqulrs. 

me smploopDllt or ssnv%si& 60 gufwds 38 ths 

o&bBl%tiOB Of t&S PPiSOB 8yStWU fs 00 ObVbRO~LO~~~Sd 

to the gtmwal ga-inslplos and the statutory 

hsreinabovs mrBtloBQcl and'dlsstum?d aa that 

or of the l!anugsr to control the PrMon sJ&mh 

t1t0. 

lfo therefore answac your inquiry in the nsgavery truly your0
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

JUAN FRANCISCO,

Petitioner,

v. CASE NO. 4:10cv399-RH/WCS

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA et al.,

Respondents.

___________________________/

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

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

recommendation, ECF No. 6. 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, AThe petition is dismissed 

without prejudice. @ The clerk must close the file.

SO ORDERED on December 20, 2010.

s/Robert L. Hinkle

United States District Judge
# C_2011119EN.01000401.xml

| 16.4.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 119/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.4.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 119/4

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

15 April 2011

2011/C 119/02

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,4450 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 120,37 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4581 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,88380 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 8,9660 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,2897 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 7,8080 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 24,213 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 267,18 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,7092 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 3,9467 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,0958 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 2,1932 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,3730 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,3934 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 11,2342 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,8152 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,7980 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 573,42 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 9,9400 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 9,4389 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,3555 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 12 520,27 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,3687 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 62,493 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 40,6500 |
| THB | Thai baht | 43,538 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,2798 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 16,9542 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 64,0610 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,4450

JPY

Japanese yen

120,37

DKK

Danish krone

7,4581

GBP

Pound sterling

0,88380

SEK

Swedish krona

8,9660

CHF

Swiss franc

1,2897

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

7,8080

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

24,213

HUF

Hungarian forint

267,18

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,7092

PLN

Polish zloty

3,9467

RON

Romanian leu

4,0958

TRY

Turkish lira

2,1932

AUD

Australian dollar

1,3730

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,3934

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

11,2342

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,8152

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,7980

KRW

South Korean won

1 573,42

ZAR

South African rand

9,9400

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

9,4389

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,3555

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

12 520,27

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,3687

PHP

Philippine peso

62,493

RUB

Russian rouble

40,6500

THB

Thai baht

43,538

BRL

Brazilian real

2,2798

MXN

Mexican peso

16,9542

INR

Indian rupee

64,0610

---

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

1

Source

---
Exhibit 32.01








SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION








In connection with the Quarterly Report of Rovi Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), Alfred J. Amoroso certifies in his capacity as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted), that to the best of his knowledge:





(a) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)), and





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





IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has hereunto signed this Certification as of May 6, 2010.





By:
/s/ Alfred J. AmorosoAlfred J. AmorosoChief Executive Officer
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

ADDYS T. WALKER,

Plaintiff,

vs. CASE NO. 4:11cv68/RS-WCS

CHARLES T. CANADAY, et al.,

Defendants.

__________________________________

ORDER

Plaintiff’s Motion to Alter or Amend Judgment (Doc. 33) is DENIED. 

ORDERED on July 13, 2011.

/S/ Richard Smoak 

RICHARD SMOAK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 4:11-cv-00068-RS-WCS Document 36 Filed 07/13/11 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 23.1











CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM











We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-142882) and the incorporation by reference in the Form 10-K of our report dated November 26, 2010, with respect to the financial statements of Simulations Plus, Inc. as of and for the years ended August 31, 2010 and 2009, which report appears in the August 31, 2010 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Simulations Plus, Inc.








/s/ Rose, Snyder & Jacobs


Rose, Snyder & Jacobs


A Corporation of Certified Public Accountants





Encino, California





November 26, 2010
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

KENNETH MCGHEE,

Plaintiff,

vs. CASE NO. 5:10cv279/RS-EMT

HEALTHCARE SERVICES 

GROUP, INC., SOVEREIGN 

HEALTHCARE OF BONIFAY, LLC,

and NANCY HALL,

Defendants.

_________________________________________/

ORDER

Before me is Defendant’s notice (Doc. 19). Plaintiff shall file his response 

to Defendants’ motion to dismiss (Doc. 11) not later than February 18, 2011. 

ORDERED on February 7, 2011.

/s/ Richard Smoak 

RICHARD SMOAK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case 3:11-cv-00103-RV -CJK Document 7 Filed 03/28/11 Page 48 of 48
# C_2011057EN.01002502.xml

| 23.2.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 57/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.2.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 57/25

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.6118 — Bain Capital Investors/IMCD)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2011/C 57/03

On 16 February 2011, 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 32011M6118. 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 32011M6118. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.

---
Exhibit
32.1





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, each of the undersigned officers of Poker Magic,
Inc. do hereby certify that, to the best of his knowledge:
 
 (a) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q
of Poker Magic, Inc. for the quarter ended June 30, 2009 (the “Report”) fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934; and
 
 (b) information contained in the Report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of Poker Magic, Inc.





October
      30, 2009
            /s/ Douglas
      PolinskyDouglas
      PolinskyChief
      Executive OfficerOctober
      30, 2009
            /s/ Joseph A. Geraci,
      IIJoseph
      A. Geraci, IIChief
      Financial Officer
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

KENDRICK D. ADDISON 

a/k/a CHILL,

Petitioner,

v. Case No.: 5:10cv39/MCR/EMT

KENNETH S. TUCKER,

Respondent.

_________________________________/

ORDER

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

Recommendation dated March 8, 2012 (doc. 24). 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). I have made a de

novo determination of any timely filed objections.

Having considered the Report and Recommendation, and any objections thereto

timely filed, I have determined that the Report and Recommendation should be adopted.1

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 petition for writ of habeas corpus (doc. 1) is DENIED.

3. The plaintiff’s Motion to Schedule Evidentiary Hearing and for Appointment

of Counsel (doc. 28) is DENIED.

The court notes that the record does not support the plaintiff’s contention in his objections to the

1

Report and Recommendation that his attorney advised him to reject a two-year plea agreement offered by

the State. 

Case 5:10-cv-00039-MCR-EMT Document 29 Filed 08/27/12 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

4. A certificate of appealability is DENIED.

DONE AND ORDERED this 27th day of August, 2012.

s/ M. Casey Rodgers 

M. CASEY RODGERS

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case No: 5:10cv39/MCR/EMT

Case 5:10-cv-00039-MCR-EMT Document 29 Filed 08/27/12 Page 2 of 2
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

CANTON OMAR DISMUKES,

Petitioner,

v. Case No.: 3:10cv295/MCR/MD

KENNETH S. TUCKER,

Respondent.

 /

ORDER

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

Recommendation dated January 10, 2012. (Doc. 35). Petitioner 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).

Having considered the Report and Recommendation, and no objections thereto

having been timely filed, 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. Petitioner’s 28 U.S.C. § 2254 petition for writ of habeas corpus (doc. 1),

challenging the conviction and sentence in State of Florida v. Dismukes in the Circuit Court

of Escambia County, Florida, case no. 06-4810, is DENIED and the clerk is directed to

close the file.

3. A certificate of appealability is DENIED.

DONE AND ORDERED this 17th day of February, 2012.

s/ M. Casey Rodgers 

M. CASEY RODGERS

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:10-cv-00295-MCR-MD Document 36 Filed 02/17/12 Page 1 of 1