alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IV 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 715 

Recognizing the 70th anniversary of the Soviet and Nazi invasion of Poland 

and the pivotal role Poland has assumed at freedom’s edge since gaining 

independence. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 31, 2009 

Ms. KAPTUR submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Foreign Affairs 

RESOLUTION 

Recognizing the 70th anniversary of the Soviet and Nazi 

invasion of Poland and the pivotal role Poland has assumed at freedom’s edge since gaining independence. 

Whereas 2009 marks the 70th anniversary of the Soviet and 

Nazi invasion of Poland; 

Whereas Poland lost more lives as a percentage of its population than any other nation during World War II; 

Whereas the martyrology of Poles totaled nearly 6,000,000 

innocent victims, of which 3,000,000 were Jewish Poles 

and more than 2,000,000 were non-Jewish Poles; 

Whereas Poland’s freedom-loving people continued to endure 

political suppression and selective annihilation from 1939 

to 1989; 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 715 IH 

Whereas the Polish dedication to freedom and willingness to 

sacrifice for their country is embodied in the 

Warszawianka, which proclaims that, ‘‘Who will survive, 

free will be, who dies, free already’’; 

Whereas the first and last battles of World War II were 

fought in Poland; 

Whereas some Polish citizens who fought bravely for Poland 

during these fierce battles emigrated and made a new 

home in the United States, and became United States 

citizens; and 

Whereas Poland’s valiant struggle for freedom from fascism 

and communism continued for many decades after the 

end of World War II until 1989: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) recognizes the 70th anniversary of the So3 viet and Nazi Invasion of Poland; 

4 (2) commends the valiant people of Poland for 

5 their historic struggle against fascism and com6 munism; 

7 (3) commemorates the extraordinary sacrifices 

8 made by the Polish people, including those who have 

9 since become American citizens; 

10 (4) calls for strengthening our partnership in 

11 the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), 

12 European Union alliances, and continued friendship 

13 with our Polish allies in the furtherance of freedom’s 

14 cause; and 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HRES 715 IH 

1 (5) honors the historic ties between Poland and 

2 the United States dating back to the American Rev3 olution and the exceptional participation of Revolu4 tionary war patriots, now American citizens, Thad5 deus Kosciusko, who was named head engineer in 

6 the Continental Army, and General Casimir Pulaski, 

7 the cavalry leader who saved the life of George 

8 Washington and who died from wounds suffered in 

9 the Battle of Savannah. 

Æ 


wwoods2 on DSK1DXX6B1PROD with BILLS
FI L ED U.S. COURT OF A P P E A LS E LE V EN T H C IR C U IT APR 13 , 2006 THOMAS K. KAH

N CL ERK [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UN ITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FO R T HE EL EV EN TH CIRC UI T

____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ _ N o. 04- 1291 8

____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ _ D. C. Docket N o. 03-00009 CR-F TM- 29-DN F UNITED STAT ES OF AMERIC A, Plaintiff-Appellee, ve rs us AN TH ON Y B ER TU CCI, D ef en dant- Appe llant.

____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ Appeal f rom the United State s District Court fo r the Mi ddl e D istri ct

of F lor ida

____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ _ (A pr il 13, 200 6) Be fo re E D MO N D SO N , Ch ie f Judg e, A N D E RS O N and F A Y , Ci rc uit Jud ge s. PE R CU RIA M: A nth ony Be rt uc ci ( “ D ef

en dant” ) w as c onvi ct ed

of c onsp ir ac y

to poss es s w ithint en t t o di str ibu te 100 kg o r le ss o f m ar ij uana . D ef en dant atta ck s hi s2

co nvi ct ionon tw o gr ound s. F ir st, D ef en dant arg ue s th e dis tr ic t c ourt e rr ed by de ny ing his m oti on t o su

ppr es s e vid en ce se iz ed

f ro m his r es ide nc e. B ec au se thi s evidence wa s obtained p ursuant to a search w arrant sup ported by rec ent evidence of tr as h pu lls and an in dic tm en t tha t c or ro bor at ed old er inf orm at ionthat D ef

en dant was di st rib ut in g d ru gs fro m hi s h ou se , th e ev id en ce was pro pe rly adm it te d. Second, D efendant argues he is entitled to a new tr ial, bec ause the evidence at tria l es ta bli she d m ult ipl e co nspi ra ci es , not

the sin gle c onsp ir ac y

ind ic te d. A ssum ing that the e vid en ce did

e sta bli sh m ult ipl e co nspi ra ci es , D ef

en dant w oul d st ill not

be entitled to reversal of his convictio n, beca use he has not sh own substant ial pr ej udi ce . S ee U . S. v. Co y , 19 F . 3d 6 29, 633 ( 11th C ir . 199 4) . T hir d, D ef en dant ch al le nge s hi s se nte nc e, arg uin g th e dis tr ic t c ourt c om m itt ed r ev er sib le co nst itutio na l e rr or

und er U nit ed S ta te s v. Bo oke r, 125 S . Ct . 738 ( 2005 ). T he g o v ern m en tco n ce d es th i s erro r. An dwe ac ce p tth atth er e i s h arm fu l erro r. We af fi rm D ef en dant’ s c onvi ct ion , but

va cate the se nte nc e an d r em an d f or res en te nc in g. AFFIR MED in pa rt, VACATED in pa rt, a ndREMANDED.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA

January 5, 2024

SC-2023-0863

Ex parte D.G. PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT 

OF CIVIL APPEALS (In re: D.G. v. Marshall County Department of 

Human Resources)(Marshall Juvenile Court: JU-18-277.02; Civil 

Appeals: CL-2022-1282).

CERTIFICATE OF JUDGMENT

WHEREAS, the petition for writ of certiorari in the above 

referenced cause has been duly submitted and considered by the 

Supreme Court of Alabama and the judgment indicated below was 

entered in this cause on January 5, 2024:

Writ Denied. No Opinion. Mendheim, J. -- Parker, C.J., and 

Shaw, Bryan, and Mitchell, JJ., concur.

NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to Rule 41, Ala. R. App. P., IT IS 

HEREBY ORDERED that this Court's judgment in this cause is certified 

on this date. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that, unless otherwise ordered 

by this Court or agreed upon by the parties, the costs of this cause are 

hereby taxed as provided by Rule 35, Ala. R. App. P.

I, Megan B. Rhodebeck, certify that this is the record of the judgment of the Court, witness 

my hand and seal.

Clerk, Supreme Court of Alabama
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

MICHAEL BAILEY

United States Attorney

District of Arizona

RAQUEL ARELLANO

Assistant United States Attorney

AZ State Bar No.: 011796

CHRISTINE A. MELTON 

Assistant United States Attorney

AZ State Bar No.: 021649

United States Courthouse

405 W. Congress, Suite 4800

Tucson, Arizona 85701

raquel.arellano@usdoj.gov

christine.melton@usdoj.gov 

Telephone: (520) 620-7300

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

United States of America,

 Plaintiff, 

 vs. 

Robert Francis Krebs,

 Defendant.

CR 18-00263-TUC-JGZ (JR)

NOTICE OF INTENT TO RELY ON 

EXPERT WITNESS TESTIMONY

Pursuant to the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, Rule 16(a)(1)(G), the United 

States, by and through undersigned counsel, provides notice of its intent to use expert 

witness testimony under Rules 702, 703, or 705 of the Federal Rules of Evidence during

its case-in-chief, or in rebuttal, at trial. 

I. Notice of Expert Witnesses

A. Fingerprint Expert

Absent stipulation, the government may call a fingerprint expert to testify with 

regard to fingerprints taken of the defendant. The name and curriculum vitae of the expert 

will be disclosed in advance of trial. 

B. Mental Health Expert

The government may call Bennet Blum, M.D. to testify as to his findings and 

opinion related the defendant’s Notice of Insanity. Dr. Blum is a certified psychiatrist who 

Case 4:18-cr-00263-JGZ-JR Document 110 Filed 01/23/20 Page 1 of 2
- 2 -

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

was appointed by the court to evaluate the defendant’s case and provide an opinion as to 

the defendant’s sanity at the time of the crime in this case. Dr. Blum’s testimony may 

include any and all opinions proffered in his report, as well as the basis for those opinions, 

which will be disclosed in advance of trial, along with his curriculum vitae. 

II. Request for Reciprocal Disclosure

The government also requests written notice, pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal 

Procedure 16(b)(1)(C), of any expert witness the defendant may call at trial.

III. Expert Witnesses Generally

Additional lines of inquiry may be explored on redirect examination or rebuttal if 

the defendant opens the door. If the defense has any questions about the nature or content 

of the government’s expert testimony, the government invites the defense to make further 

inquiries to the undersigned prosecutor.

Respectfully submitted this 23rd day of January, 2020.

MICHAEL BAILEY 

United States Attorney

District of Arizona

S/ Raquel Arellano 

RAQUEL ARELLANO

Assistant U.S. Attorney

Copy of the foregoing served electronically or by

other means this 23rd day of January, 2020 to:

Jorge Leonardo Costales, Esq.

Gregory Jon Berger, Esq.

Attorneys for the Defendant 

Case 4:18-cr-00263-JGZ-JR Document 110 Filed 01/23/20 Page 2 of 2
H. Res. 790 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

October 28, 2009. 

Whereas hundreds of thousands of men and women have 

served this Nation in building its nuclear defense since 

World War II; 

Whereas these dedicated American workers paid a high price 

for their service and have developed disabling or fatal illnesses as a result of exposure to beryllium, ionizing radiation, toxic substances, and other hazards that are 

unique to the production and testing of nuclear weapons; 

Whereas these workers were put at individual risk without 

their knowledge and consent in order to develop a nuclear 

weapons program; 

Whereas these patriotic men and women deserve to be recognized for their contribution, service, and sacrifice towards 

the defense of our great Nation; and 

Whereas, on May 20, 2009, the Senate passed S. Res. 151, 

designating a national day of remembrance on October 

30, 2009, for nuclear weapons program workers: Now, 

therefore, be it 

Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 
2 

•HRES 790 EH 

(1) supports the goals and ideals of a national day 

of remembrance for American nuclear weapons program 

workers and uranium miners, millers, and haulers; and 

(2) encourages the people of the United States to 

support and participate in appropriate ceremonies, programs, and other activities to recognize a national day 

of remembrance for past and present workers in America’s nuclear weapons program. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Form S-8 No.’s 333-106276, 333-116602,333-48726, 333-96623, 333-65964, 333-127299) pertaining to the SupportSoft, Inc. Amended and Restated 1998 Stock Option Plan, the SupportSoft, Inc. 2000 Omnibus Equity Incentive Plan and the SupportSoft, Inc. 2000 Employee Stock Purchase Plan of ourreports dated March 14, 2006, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of SupportSoft, Inc., SupportSoft, Inc. management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31,2005, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of SupportSoft, Inc. included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2005. 

 

/s/    ERNST & YOUNG LLP 

 

San Jose, California 

March 14, 2006
#### Robin JOHNSTON, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. WD 47152.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

May 4, 1993.

Robert E. Steele, Asst. Public Defender, Kansas City, for appellant.

Philip M. Koppe, Asst. Atty. Gen., Kansas City, for respondent.

Before SHANGLER, P.J., and TURNAGE and KENNEDY, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals from the denial of a Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief, without an evidentiary hearing.

The denial of post-conviction relief is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
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 Uranium Hunter Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2008, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), the undersigned certifies,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of the undersigned's knowledge, 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.


Dated: May 13, 2008                  By:  /s/ Adam Cegielski
       ------------                       ------------------
                                          Adam Cegielski,
                                          President and Chief Executive Officer
                                          (Principal Executive Officer)


Dated: May 13, 2008                  By:  /s/ Rakesh Malhotra
       ------------                       -------------------
                                          Rakesh Malhotra,
                                          Chief Financial Officer
                                          (Principal Financial Officer)
| 1.   | The      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;  and |
|----------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

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

| Dated:      November 27, 2009  |   |                      /s/ Jana Whitlock |   |
|-------------------------------------|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                                |   | Jana      Whitlock, President, CEO, CFO,                                                                               |   |
|                                |   | Treasurer      and Director (Principal Executive Officer)                                                              |   |

----
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTIONS 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

This Certificate is beingdelivered pursuant to the requirements of Section 1350 of Chapter 63 (MailFraud) of Title 18 (Crimes and Criminal Procedures) of the United States Code,as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, andshall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, bedeemed filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of1934, as amended.

 

The undersigned, who arethe Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Behringer HarvardMultifamily REIT I, Inc. (the “Company”), each hereby certify as follows:

 

The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Qof the Company (the “Report”), which accompanies this Certificate, fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and all information contained inthe Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial conditionand results of operations of the Company.

 

Dated this 14th day ofAugust, 2008.

 
|   | /s/  Robert S. Aisner   |
|--------|-------------------------|
|   | Robert S. Aisner        |
|   | Chief Executive Officer |
|   |                    |
|   | /s/  Gary S. Bresky     |
|   | Gary S. Bresky          |
|   | Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 

9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 

21 

22 

23 

24 

25 

26 

27 

28 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

United States of America, 

Plaintiff, 

vs. 

Michael Lacey, et al., 

Defendants. 

No. CR-18-00422-PHX-SMB

[PROPOSED] ORDER 

The Court having reviewed the Government’s Motion to Confirm Trial Subpoenas, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS ORDERED granting the Motion to Confirm Trial Subpoenas. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all trial subpoenas issued for the previous trial 

dates in this case shall remain in effect for the current trial date of April 12, 2021. 

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1069-1 Filed 10/13/20 Page 1 of 1
N OTE : This order is nonprecedential

.



# United States Court of Appeals

**for the Federal Circuit**

______________________

In Re TRANSGENDER AMERICAN VETERANS

ASSOCIATION,

Petitioner

______________________

2024

- 108

______________________

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus to the Department

of Veterans Affairs.

______________________

ON MOTION

______________________

O R D E R

Petitioner moves with consent to voluntarily dismiss

the petition “without prejudice and without fees or costs to

either side, pursuant to Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 42(b).” ECF No. 52 at 1.

The court notes that while petitioner requests dismi ssal without prejudice, it is not the court’s practice to indicate whether dismissal is with or without prejudice.

Upon consideration thereof, Case: 24-108 Document: 55 Page: 1 Filed: 03/05/2024IN RE : TRANSGENDER AMERICAN VETERANS ASSOCIATION 2

I T I S O RDERED T HAT :

(1) The motion to dismiss is granted to the extent that

the petition is dismissed.

(2) All other pending motions are denied as moot.

March 5 , 2024

Date F OR THE C OURT Case: 24-108 Document: 55 Page: 2 Filed: 03/05/2024
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We consent to the incorporationby reference in registration statements No. 333-117956 and 333-79391 on Forms 

S-8 and No. 333-156652 on Form S-3 of HopFed Bancorp,Inc. and subsidiaries of our report dated March 31, 2011, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of Hopfed Bancorp, Inc., and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2010 and 2009, and the related consolidated statements of income,comprehensive income, changes in stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2010, which report appears in the December 31, 2010 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Hopfed Bancorp,Inc and subsidiaries. 

/s/ Rayburn, Bates & Fitzgerald, P.C. 

Brentwood, Tennessee 

Date: March 31, 2011
Administrative Office of the United States Courts FOR COURT USE ONLY

TRANSCRIPT ORDER

DUE DATE:

OAO 435

AZ Form (Rev. 10/2018)

1. NAME 2. PHONE NUMBER 3. DATE

4. FIRM NAME

5. MAILING ADDRESS 6. CITY 7. STATE 8. ZIP CODE

9. CASE NUMBER 10. JUDGE DATES OF PROCEEDINGS

11. 12. 

13. CASE NAME LOCATION OF PROCEEDINGS

14. 15. STATE

16. ORDER FOR

9 APPEAL 9 CRIMINAL

9 NON-APPEAL 9 CIVIL

9 CRIMINAL JUSTICE ACT

9 

IN FORMA PAUPERIS

BANKRUPTCY

OTHER (Specify)

17. TRANSCRIPT REQUESTED (Specify portion(s) and date(s) of proceeding(s) for which transcript is requested.)

PORTIONS DATE(S) PORTION(S) DATE(S)

9TESTIMONY (Specify)

9PRE-TRIAL PROCEEDING

9OTHER (Specify)

9VOIR DIRE

9OPENING STATEMENT (Plaintiff)

9OPENING STATEMENT (Defendant)

9CLOSING ARGUMENT (Plaintiff)

9CLOSING ARGUMENT (Defendant)

9OPINION OF COURT

9JURY INSTRUCTIONS

9SENTENCING

9BAIL HEARING

18. ORDER

CATEGORY

ORIGINAL + 1

(original to Court,

copy to ordering party)

FIRST

COPY

# OF

ADDITIONAL

COPIES

DELIVERY INSTRUCTIONS

(Check all that apply.)

ESTIMATED COSTS

30 DAYS 9 9

PAPER COPY

PDF (e-mail)

ASCII (e-mail)

14 DAYS 9 9

7 DAYS(expedited) 9 9

DAILY

9 9

HOURLY

9 9

REALTIME

9 9

E-MAIL ADDRESS

NOTE: IF ORDERING MORE THAN ONE FORMAT, 

THERE WILL BE AN ADDITIONAL CHARGE. 19. SIGNATURE

20. DATE

TRANSCRIPT TO BE PREPARED BY

ESTIMATE TOTAL

PROCESSED BY PHONE NUMBER

ORDER RECEIVED DATE BY

DEPOSIT PAID DEPOSIT PAID

TRANSCRIPT ORDERED TOTAL CHARGES

TRANSCRIPT RECEIVED LESS DEPOSIT

ORDERING PARTY NOTIFIED

TO PICK UP TRANSCRIPT

TOTAL REFUNDED

PARTY RECEIVED TRANSCRIPT TOTAL DUE

DISTRIBUTION: COURT COPY TRANSCRIPTION COPY ORDER RECEIPT ORDER COPY

3 DAYS

CERTIFICATION (19. & 20.) By signing below, I certify that I will pay all charges

(deposit plus additional).

Case 2:18-cr-00422-DJH Document 1104 Filed 12/09/20 Page 1 of 1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

EASTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

LEONARD KNOX,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 495 EAL 2019

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 31st day of March, 2020, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Alton Thomas Davis, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

December 20, 2010 

p1213 

Order 

 

December 20, 2010 

141509 

ARATH II, INC., and ARATH IV, INC., 

Plaintiffs-Appellants, 

v SC: 141509 

 COA: 288725 

Kent CC: 08-005778-CZ 

HEUKELS COUNTY DRAIN DISTRICT and 

KENT COUNTY DRAIN COMMISSIONER, 

 Defendants-Appellees. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the April 29, 2010 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.
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 Phoenix International Ventures, Inc.
(“the Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2009 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (“the Report”), I,
Neev Nissenson, Chief Financial Officer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that
to my knowledge:




(1)  the
Report fully comply 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 result of operations of the Company.




May
      14, 2009
                By:
                /s/ Neev
      NissensonNeev
      NissensonChief
      Financial Officer
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

Cause No. DA 20-0551

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

MARGARET BEAR,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of the Appellant’s Motion for Extension and good cause 

appearing: 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to 

and including Friday, October 8, 2021, within which to prepare, file and serve 

Appellant’s opening brief on appeal. 

DATED this ____ day of August, 2021.

_________________________________

Montana Supreme Court 

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

August 6 2021

08/06/2021

Case Number: DA 20-0551