alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

ERROL LEWIS,

Plaintiff,

v. CASE NO. 4:11-cv-00152-MP-WCS

CLOUD, KENNETH HOSFORD, JOHNSON, G PEZESHKIAN, STATE OF FLORIDA,

BILLY WOOD,

Defendants.

_____________________________/

O R D E R

This matter is before the Court on Doc. 11, Report and Recommendation of the

Magistrate Judge, which recommends that this case be dismissed without prejudice for failure to

follow the orders of the Court. The Magistrate Judge filed the Report on August 17, 2011,

Plaintiff has filed no objection, and the time to do so has passed. Upon consideration, the Court

agrees with the Magistrate Judge that the case should be dismissed. Accordingly, it is hereby

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:

The Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. 11) is ACCEPTED and

incorporated herein, and this case is DISMISSED without prejudice. 

DONE AND ORDERED this 21st day of October, 2011

 s/Maurice M. Paul 

 Maurice M. Paul, Senior District Judge

Case 4:11-cv-00152-MP-WCS Document 12 Filed 10/21/11 Page 1 of 1
EXHIBIT 31.2

CFO CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT

I, Kevin T. Michaels, certify that:



| | 1. | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Powerwave Technologies, Inc.; and
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 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.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                     |  |     |  |                             
|-------------------- |  | --- |  | ----------------------------
|Date: April 30, 2012 |  | By: |  | /s/ KEVIN T. MICHAELS       
|                     |  |     |  | Kevin T. Michaels           
|                     |  |     |  | Chief Financial Officer     
|                     |  |     |  | Powerwave Technologies, Inc.
# C_2011164EN.01000902.xml

| 2.6.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 164/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.6.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 164/9

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.6224 — Oaktree/TPG/Taylor Morrison Homebuilding Business)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2011/C 164/04

On 25 May 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 32011M6224. 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 32011M6224. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.

---
#### STATE v. BERRY

No. 33.

Case below: 13 N.C. App. 310.

Petition for writ of certiorari to North Carolina Court of Appeals denied 7 March 1972. Appeal dismissed ex mero motu for lack of substantial constitutional question 7 March 1972.
# C_2011117EN.01001201.xml

| 15.4.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 117/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.4.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 117/12

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

14 April 2011

2011/C 117/09

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,4401 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 119,85 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4586 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,88250 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,0293 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,2879 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 7,8580 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 24,269 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 267,48 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,7092 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 3,9526 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,1038 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 2,1947 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,3717 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,3906 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 11,1999 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,8238 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,8000 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 569,26 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 9,8789 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 9,4075 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,3628 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 12 513,34 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,3577 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 62,410 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 40,7325 |
| THB | Thai baht | 43,461 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,2913 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 16,9932 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 64,2930 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,4401

JPY

Japanese yen

119,85

DKK

Danish krone

7,4586

GBP

Pound sterling

0,88250

SEK

Swedish krona

9,0293

CHF

Swiss franc

1,2879

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

7,8580

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

24,269

HUF

Hungarian forint

267,48

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,7092

PLN

Polish zloty

3,9526

RON

Romanian leu

4,1038

TRY

Turkish lira

2,1947

AUD

Australian dollar

1,3717

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,3906

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

11,1999

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,8238

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,8000

KRW

South Korean won

1 569,26

ZAR

South African rand

9,8789

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

9,4075

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,3628

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

12 513,34

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,3577

PHP

Philippine peso

62,410

RUB

Russian rouble

40,7325

THB

Thai baht

43,461

BRL

Brazilian real

2,2913

MXN

Mexican peso

16,9932

INR

Indian rupee

64,2930

---

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

1

Source

---
I 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5412 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 

25 2nd Avenue in Brentwood, New York, as the ‘‘Army Specialist Jose 

L. Ruiz Post Office Building’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 26, 2018 

Mr. KING of New York (for himself, Mr. COLLINS of New York, Mr. 

SERRANO, Mr. MEEKS, Miss RICE of New York, Mr. FASO, Mr. SEAN

PATRICK MALONEY of New York, Ms. TENNEY, Mr. ZELDIN, Ms. 

VELA ́ZQUEZ, Mr. ESPAILLAT, Mr. KATKO, Mr. TONKO, Mr. HIGGINS of 

New York, Mr. SUOZZI, Mr. ENGEL, Mr. DONOVAN, Mr. REED, Ms. 

MENG, Ms. STEFANIK, Mr. JEFFRIES, Mrs. LOWEY, Ms. CLARKE of New 

York, Mrs. CAROLYN B. MALONEY of New York, and Mr. NADLER) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

A BILL 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 25 2nd Avenue in Brentwood, New York, 

as the ‘‘Army Specialist Jose L. Ruiz Post Office Building’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5412 IH

1 SECTION 1. ARMY SPECIALIST JOSE L. RUIZ POST OFFICE 

2 BUILDING. 

3 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

4 Postal Service located at 25 2nd Avenue in Brentwood, 

5 New York, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Army 

6 Specialist Jose L. Ruiz Post Office Building’’. 

7 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg8 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

9 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

10 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Army Specialist Jose 

11 L. Ruiz Post Office Building’’. 

Æ 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
a50937314ex10_1.htm


 


Exhibit 10.1


 



Written Description of Non-employee Director Compensation


 


Each non-employee Director is paid an annual retainer of $50,000 (except the Lead Director, who receives a $55,000 retainer), plus an annual grant of 1,000 shares of the Company’s stock.  The stock is granted under the Company’s 2007 Equity Incentive Plan.
H. R. 5349 

One Hundred Fifteenth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE SECOND SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and eighteen 

An Act 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 1325 Autumn 

Avenue in Memphis, Tennessee, as the ‘‘Judge Russell B. Sugarmon Post Office 

Building’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. JUDGE RUSSELL B. SUGARMON POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal 

Service located at 1325 Autumn Avenue in Memphis, Tennessee, 

shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Judge Russell B. Sugarmon 

Post Office Building’’. 

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 

document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference 

to the ‘‘Judge Russell B. Sugarmon Post Office Building’’. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
# C_2011117EN.01000901.xml

| 15.4.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 117/9 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.4.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 117/9

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.5928 — Sea Invest/EDF/OTCM)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2011/C 117/04

On 8 April 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 French 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 32011M5928. 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 32011M5928. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.

---
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

QUINTUS H. BELTON,

Plaintiff,

vs. CASE NO.: 5:11-cv-7-SPM/EMT

WALTER MCNEIL, et al.,

Defendants.

___________________________/

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

THIS CAUSE comes before the court upon the Magistrate Judge’s Report

and Recommendation (doc. 14), which recommends that the Plaintiff’s Motion for

Voluntary Dismissal (doc. 12) be granted. The Parties have been furnished a copy

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, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as

follows:

1. The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (doc. 14) is

adopted and incorporated by reference in this order.

2. The Plaintiff’s Motion (doc. 12) is granted and the case is dismissed

without prejudice.

Case 5:11-cv-00007-SPM-EMT Document 17 Filed 05/02/11 Page 1 of 2
3. The clerk is directed to close the file.

DONE AND ORDERED this second day of May, 2011.

s/ Stephan P. Mickle 

Stephan P. Mickle

Chief United States District Judge

Case 5:11-cv-00007-SPM-EMT Document 17 Filed 05/02/11 Page 2 of 2
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5405 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5405

To amend the Agricultural Act of 2014 to provide a limited exception to 
  the prohibition on price loss coverage payments or agriculture risk 
coverage payments when the sum of the base acres on a farm is 10 acres 
                                or less.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 22, 2018

  Mr. Rouzer introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                        Committee on Agriculture

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Agricultural Act of 2014 to provide a limited exception to 
  the prohibition on price loss coverage payments or agriculture risk 
coverage payments when the sum of the base acres on a farm is 10 acres 
                                or less.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. EXCEPTION TO PROHIBITION ON PRICE LOSS COVERAGE PAYMENTS OR 
              AGRICULTURE RISK COVERAGE PAYMENTS FOR CERTAIN FARMS WITH 
              MINIMAL PAYMENT ACRES.

    Section 1114(d)(1) of the Agricultural Act of 2014 (7 U.S.C. 
9014(d)(1)) is amended by adding before the period at the end the 
following: ``, unless the sum of the base acres on the farm, when 
combined with the base acres of other farms in which the producer has 
an interest, is more than 10 acres''.
                                 <all>
```
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

RICHARD C. GOINS,

Plaintiff,

vs. Case No. 3:10cv551/LAC/EMT

WALTER A. McNEIL, et al., 

Defendants.

___________________________________/

O R D E R

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

Recommendation dated August 18, 2011 (doc. 36). Plaintiff has been furnished a copy of the Report

and Recommendation and has been afforded an opportunity to file objections pursuant to Title 28,

United States Code, Section 636(b)(1). I have made a de novo determination of objections filed.

Having considered the Report and Recommendation, and the timely filed objections thereto,

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. Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment claim concerning the deprivation of adequate medical

treatment for Hepatitis C is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to exhaust administrative

remedies, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii);

3. Plaintiff’s remaining claims are DISMISSED with prejudice for failure to state a

claim upon which relief may be granted, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii); 

4. Plaintiff’s state law claims are DISMISSED without prejudice to Plaintiff’s right to

assert them in state court; and

Case 3:10-cv-00551-LC-EMT Document 41 Filed 08/31/11 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

5. The clerk is directed to enter judgment accordingly and close the file.

DONE AND ORDERED this 31 day of August, 2011. st

s/L.A. Collier

LACEY A. COLLIER

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case No: 3:10cv551/LAC/EMT

Case 3:10-cv-00551-LC-EMT Document 41 Filed 08/31/11 Page 2 of 2
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _

Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A1 7 A2 04 8 . ROGER DALE W HI TE v . DEBRA BURKE W HI TE.

Ro g er Dal e W h i t e fi led an act i o n s eek in g t o m o d i fy t h e am o u nt o f al i m o n y h e

was o rd ered t o p ay h is fo rm er wi fe. Th e t ri al co u rt en t ered s u m m ary ju d g m en t i n h i s

fo rm er wi fe’ s fav o r, a n d W h i t e fi l ed t h i s d irect ap p eal

. Th is ap p eal

, h o wev er, i s

b arred b y res ju d icat a.

OCGA § 5 -6 -3 5 (a) (2 ) p r o v i d e s t h at “ [a] p p eal s fro m j u d gm en t s o r o rd ers in

d i v o rce, al i m o ny , an d o t h er d o m es t i c rel at io ns cas es ” m u s t b e b ro u g ht b y ap p l i cat i o n

fo r d is cret i o n ary ap peal

. See Ma s s ey v. Ma s s ey , 2 9 4 Ga. 16 3

, 1 65 (2 ) (7 5 1 SE2 d 3 3 0 )
(2 0 1 3). W h i t e fi l ed an ap p l i cat i o n fo r d i s cret i o n ary ap p eal

, an d i t was den i ed o n J u l y

1 0 , 2 0 1 7 . See Cas e No . A1 7D0 5 1 4 . Becau s e t h at d en i al was an ad ju d i cat i o n o n t h e

m eri t s , t h e d o ct ri n e o f res ju d i cat a al s o b ars t h i s d i rect ap p eal

. See No r th wes t S o ci al

& Ci vi c Cl u b

, In c. v. Fr an kl i n , 2 7 6 Ga. 8 5 9

, 8 6 0 (5 8 3 SE2 d 8 5 8 ) (2 0 0 3 ); Ho o k v.

Ber g en , 2 8 6 Ga. Ap p

. 2 5 8

, 2 6 0 -2 6 1 (1 ) (6 4 9 SE2 d 31 3 ) (2 0 0 7). Th erefo re, th i s ap p eal

i s h ereb y DISM ISSED.

C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia

C le r k ’ s O f f i c e
, A t la n t a
,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r t i f y t h a t t h e a b o v e i s a t r u e e x t r a c t f r o m

t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

. W i tn e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d t h e s e a l o

f s a i d c o u r t

h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. February 20, 2018

02/20/2018
# C_2010250EN.01000701.xml

| 17.9.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 250/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.9.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 250/7

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.5859 — Whirlpool/Privileg Rights)

(Text with EEA relevance)

2010/C 250/03

On 7 July 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 32010M5859. 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 32010M5859. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.

---
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

MAINLINE INFORMATION SYSTEMS INC.,

Plaintiff,

vs. CASE NO.:4:11-cv-137-SPM/WCS

JIMMY D. FORDHAM,

Defendant.

__________________________________/

ORDER DENYING MOTION FOR LEAVE TO FILE REPLY

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Defendant’s Motion for Leave to

File a Reply (doc. 13) to the Plaintiff’s Response in Opposition (doc. 12) to the

Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction (doc. 10). The

Defendant’s Motion for Leave was filed without a statement certifying that

counsel had conferred with opposing counsel as required by Local Rule 7.1(B).

After the Court denied the Motion to Dismiss (doc. 14), the conference statement

was filed (doc. 15). Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that

Defendant’s Motion for Leave to File Reply (doc. 13) is denied as moot.

DONE AND ORDERED this second day of June, 2011.

s/ Stephan P. Mickle 

Stephan P. Mickle

Chief United States District Judge

Case 4:11-cv-00137-RS-WCS Document 16 Filed 06/02/11 Page 1 of 1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

ROBERT RODDENBERRY,

Plaintiff,

vs. CASE NO. 4:11cv204/RS-WCS

WAKULLA COUNTY BOARD OF 

COUNTY COMMISSIONERS; GORDON

S. McDERMID, Individually; DR. MICHAEL

LUSKO, Individually; and TIMOTHY BARDEN,

Individually,

Defendants.

___________________________________/

ORDER

Before me is Defendants’ Notice Of Conflict (Doc. 29). Trial is rescheduled for

May 21, 2012.

ORDERED on August 12, 2011.

/S/ Richard Smoak 

RICHARD SMOAK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 4:11-cv-00204-RS-CAS Document 30 Filed 08/12/11 Page 1 of 1
Case 3:11-cr-00044-MCR   Document 28   Filed 10/21/11   Page 1 of 8

Case 3:11-cr-00044-MCR   Document 28   Filed 10/21/11   Page 2 of 8

Case 3:11-cr-00044-MCR   Document 28   Filed 10/21/11   Page 3 of 8

Case 3:11-cr-00044-MCR   Document 28   Filed 10/21/11   Page 4 of 8

Case 3:11-cr-00044-MCR   Document 28   Filed 10/21/11   Page 5 of 8

Case 3:11-cr-00044-MCR   Document 28   Filed 10/21/11   Page 6 of 8

Case 3:11-cr-00044-MCR   Document 28   Filed 10/21/11   Page 7 of 8

Case 3:11-cr-00044-MCR   Document 28   Filed 10/21/11   Page 8 of 8