alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### NUM BER 13-0 9-00 084- CR 

## COURT OF A PP EA LS T H I R T E E N T H D I S T R I C T O F T E X AS CORPUS CHRI ST I -E DI NBURG

____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ FR IZO VA LE RO, A pp ellan t, v . TH E STA

TE OF T EXAS, A pp ellee.

____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ On a p p ea l f ro m th e 40 4t h D is tr ic t C o u rt of C amero n Co un ty , T exas .

____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ ____ M EM ORA ND UM OPIN ION Be fo re C hie f J us tice Vald ez an d Ju stice s Ga rza an d Vela

M emo rand um Opin ion Pe r Cu riam This ca se isbefore the C our t on the S tate’ s mot ion to dis mis s t he appe al for want o f ju ri s d ic t io n . Ap p e ll a n t ’s n o t ic e o f a p p e a l s t a t e s t h a ta p p e ll a n t ’s “‘ a p p e a l’ in t h is co n t e xt on th e s e fa ct s me a n s a n a p p l i c a t i o n t o s u c h a n o r i g i n a l p ro c e e d i n g s e e k i n g a w ri t of proh ibition wi th respe ct to this Cou rt’s order of Janu ary29, 20 09. ...” Appe ll a n thas also filed an or ig ina l proceed ing in thi s Cou rt seek ing a w ri t of prohi bit ion
. The Stat e mai ntai ns

### 2

that appel lan t’ s n oti ce of appeal does not invoke thi s Cour t’ s appel lat e j ur is dicti on ov er the matter and that appel lan t hasac know led g ed i n hi s p eti ti on fo r wri t of prohi bit ion thathe does not h av e the r ig ht t o appea l the o rd er co mplai ned of. Appel lant h a s re sponded to the S tate’ s mot ion to dis mis s for want o f jur is dicti on co ncedi ng the Stat e’smoti on to di smi ss w hil e c ontes ti ng the acc uracy of some o f the sta tements and law

se t forth in the moti on. Appel lan t ac know led g es that thi s C our t doe s nothave appe llate jurisdiction ov er this ma tter. Accord ingly , the State ’s m otion t o dism iss isGRAN TED and the appeal is hereby DISM ISSE D FO R W AN T OF JU RI SD IC TION
. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 42 .3(a).
PERC UR IAM
Do not p ubl is h. SeeT EX . R. A PP . P. 4 7.2( b)
. Me moran dum Opi nio n del iv ered and filed thi s 2 3rd day

of Apr il , 200 9.
**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 Agent155 Media Corp., formerly Freshwater Technologies, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Christopher J. Martinez, Principal Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1)           The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)           The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial position and results of operations of the Company.

 

 

Date: August 15, 2011

 

/s/ Christppher Martinez

Christopher J. MartinezPresident, Chief Executive Officer and Director (Principal Executive Officer)

 

 

 

 

----
Martin, Disiere, Jefferson&WisdomL.L.P.

__________________________________________ ATTORNEYS AT LAW __________________________________________

808 Travis Street • 20th Floor • Houston, Texas 77002 • Phone: 713-632-1700 • Fax: 713-222-0101 • www.mdjwlaw.com

Levon G. Hovnatanian 

MANAGING PARTNER

Direct: (713) 632-1740 

e-mail: hovnatanian@mdjwlaw.com

July 24, 2015

Mr. Christopher A. Prine, Clerk 

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

301 Fannin, Room 245

Houston, Texas 77002

Re: Cause No. 14-15-00093-CV; State Farm Lloyds v. Ginger Hanson; in

the Fourteenth Court of Appeals

 

Dear Mr. Prine:

This letter replies to the Response to State Farm Lloyds’s Motion for Fourth 

Extension of Time to File Brief. 

In her Response, Ms. Hanson asserts that State Farm’s counsel filed the 

appellee’s brief in Feaster on June 5, not June 24. Response at 6. That is correct. 

It was the appellant’s reply brief that was filed on June 24 in Feaster. What State 

Farm’s motion should have stated is that Mr. Hovnatanian assisted in the 

preparation of, and, on June 22, 2015, the filing of real party in interest United 

Services Automobile Association d/b/a USAA’s Brief on the Merits in Cause No. 

14-1006; In re Stacey Bent and Mark Bent; in the Supreme Court of Texas. The 

undersigned apologizes for the mistake. 

Very truly yours,

MARTIN, DISIERE,JEFFERSON & WISDOM, L.L.P.

/s/ Levon G. Hovnatanian 

Levon G. Hovnatanian

Appellate Counsel for State Farm Lloyds

LGH:dsb

ACCEPTED

14-15-00093-CV

FOURTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

HOUSTON, TEXAS

7/24/2015 5:55:28 PM

CHRISTOPHER PRINE

CLERK

 FILED IN 14th COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TEXAS 7/24/2015 5:55:28 PM CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE Clerk
 

 Martin, Disiere, Jefferson & Wisdom

_____________ ATTORNEYS AT LAW __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Mr. Christopher A. Prine, Clerk

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

July 24, 2015

Page 2

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE

This is to certify that this computer-generated letter contains 122 words.

/s/ Levon G. Hovnatanian

Levon G. Hovnatanian

Dated: July 24, 2015

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

This is to certify that a true and correct copy of the foregoing letter has been 

forwarded to the individual(s) listed below, by the method indicated, on this 24th 

day of July, 2015:

Mr. Richard D. Daly

rdaly@dalyblack.com

Mr. John Black

jblack@dalyblack.com

RICHARD DALY LAW FIRM

2211 Norfolk Street, Ste. 800

Houston, Texas 77098

(via e-filing and e-mail)

(Attorneys for appellee Ginger Hanson)

/s/ Levon G. Hovnatanian

Levon G. Hovnatanian
EXHIBIT 31.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO EXCHANGE ACT RULE 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a)

AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Steven G. Crane, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the annual report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended July 31, 2011 of ModusLink
Global Solutions, 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: November 28, 2011



By:

/s/    STEVEN G.
CRANESteven G. CraneChief Financial Officer
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 130 (Friday, July 5, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 35194-35195]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-17158]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
[I.D. 062696B]


Permits; Foreign Fishing

    In accordance with a memorandum of understanding with the Secretary 
of State, the National Marine Fisheries Service publishes for public 
review and comment summaries of applications received by the Secretary 
of State requesting permits for foreign fishing vessels to operate in 
the Exclusive Economic Zone under provisions of the Magnuson Fishery 
Conservation and Management Act (Magnuson Act, 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.). 
This notice concerns the receipt of an application from the Government 
of the Republic of Poland requesting authorization to conduct a joint 
venture in the Northwest Atlantic Ocean for Atlantic sea herring and 
Atlantic mackerel. The freezer trawler GRINWAL is identified as the 
vessel that will receive sea herring and mackerel from U.S. vessels. 
Send comments on this application to:
    NOAA - National Marine Fisheries Service, Office of Fisheries 
Conservation and Management, 1315 East-West Highway, Silver Spring, MD 
20910;
    and/or to one or both of the Regional Fishery Management Councils 
listed below:
    Douglas G. Marshall, Executive Director, New England Fishery 
Management Council, 5 Broadway, Saugus, MA 01906, 617/231-0422;
    David R. Keifer, Executive Director, Mid-Atlantic Fishery 
Management Council, Federal Building, Room 2115, 300 South New Street, 
Dover, DE 19901-6790, 302/674-2331.

[[Page 35195]]

    For further information contact Robert A. Dickinson, Office of 
Fisheries Conservation and Management, (301) 713-2337.

    Dated: June 27, 1996.
Richard W. Surdi,
Acting Director, Office of Fisheries Conservation and Management, 
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 96-17158 Filed 7-3-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F
1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

DASSAULT SYSTÈMES, S.A., 

 Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant, Case No. 09-cv-10534 

 Hon. Matthew F. Leitman 

v. 

KEITH CHILDRESS, d/b/a 

PRACTICAL CATIA, 

 Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff. 

__________________________________________________________________ 

POST-TRIAL SCHEDULING ORDER 

__________________________________________________________________

Pursuant to the Court’s request at the April 4, 2024, Status Conference, 

Plaintiff Dassault Systemes S.A. (“Plainitiff” or “Dassault”) and 

Defendant/Counter-Plaintiff Keith Childress (“Childress”), by and through their 

respective attorneys of record, hereby stipulate to the following schedule for posttrial motions. 

May 15, 2024: Childress will file any motions pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. 

P. 50 and/or 59; and 

 Dassault will file any motion for attorneys’ fees pursuant 

to 17 U.S.C. 505. 

June 12, 2024: Childress will file his Response Brief to Dassault’s 

motion for attorneys’ fees; and 

Dassault will file its Response Brief to Childress’ 

motion(s) pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 50 and/or 59. 

Case 2:09-cv-10534-MFL-MJH ECF No. 672, PageID.25073 Filed 04/18/24 Page 1 of 2
2 

June 26, 2024: Childress and Dassault will file their respective reply 

briefs. 

 The Court will set a day/time for a hearing on the Parties’ respective posttrial motions, including Dassault’s renewed Motion for Judgment as a Matter of 

Law Regarding Childress’ Trademark Fair Use Defense [Dkt. 633], as already 

briefed. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

 s/Matthew F. Leitman 

 MATTHEW F. LEITMAN 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Dated: April 18, 2024 

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the parties 

and/or counsel of record on April 18, 2024, by electronic means and/or ordinary 

mail. 

 s/Holly A. Ryan 

 Case Manager 

 (313) 234-5126

Case 2:09-cv-10534-MFL-MJH ECF No. 672, PageID.25074 Filed 04/18/24 Page 2 of 2
1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Inter-Atlantic Financial,
Inc.;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made,
in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading
with respect to the period covered by this report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and
for, the periods presented in this report;4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange
Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:
    5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors
(or persons performing the equivalent functions):
    /s/ D. James DarasName:
    D. James DarasTitle:
    Chief Financial Officer
# Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas

July 15, 2015

N o. 04

- 15

- 00234

- CV

IN THE INTEREST OF J.F.B., ET AL., CHILDREN,

From the 218th Judicial District Court, Wilson Count y, Texas

Trial Court No. 13

- 10

- 0610

- CVW Honorable Melissa Uram

- Degerolami, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

Appellant Dorothy D.B.’s second motion for extension of time to file brief is hereby GRANTED. Time is extended to August 3, 2015. Further extension of time will be disfavored.

_________________________________ Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 15th day of J uly, 2015

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle Cl erk of Court
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

ADAL KAID, 

 Plaintiff, USDC Case No: 2:09-cv-11949 

vs. Hon. Patrick J. Duggan 

LIBERTY MUTUAL GROUP, 

a foreign corporation, 

Defendant. 

___________________________________________________________________/ 

MARC A. GOLDMAN AND ASSOC. P.C. 

By: Marc A. Goldman (P24024) 

30300 Northwestern Highway, Suite 312 

Farmington Hills, MI 48334 

(248) 932-3500 

mgoldman@marcagoldman.com

HEWSON & VAN HELLEMONT, P.C. 

By: Jerald Van Hellemont (P32173) 

 Christine Sutton (P61005) 

25900 Greenfield, Suite 326 

Oak Park, MI 48237 

(248) 968-5200 

jvh@vanhewpc.com

christine@vanhewpc.com

STIPULATION AND ORDER FOR DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE

At a session of said Court held in the Courthouse located in 

the City of Detroit, County of Wayne, State of Michigan 

on April 8, 2010.

 Present: HONORABLE PATRICK J. DUGGAN 

 U.S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE 

 Pursuant to the stipulation of the parties through their respective counsel below: 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the above entitled cause be 

and hereby is dismissed with prejudice and without costs to any of the parties. The 

Court retains jurisdiction for the sole purpose of enforcing or interpreting any issue 

surrounding the settlement agreement of the parties. 

 s/Patrick J. Duggan

 Patrick J. Duggan 

 United States District Judge 

Dated: April 8, 2010 

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon counsel of 

record on April 8, 2010, by electronic and/or ordinary mail. 

 s/Marilyn Orem

 Case Manager 

We stipulate to entry of the within Order. 

/s/ Marc A. Goldman__________ /s/ Jerald Van Hellemont___________

Marc A. Goldman (P24024) Jerald Van Hellemont (P32173) 

Attorney for Plaintiff Attorney for Defendant
To the extent the Company is funded through additional issuances ofequity, the Executive shall be given an opportunity to purchase additional equity in an amountnecessary to preserve the Executive’s 3.5% percent of ownership. The price for such additionalEquity shall be the purchase price paid for the additional equity issuance that gave rise to theadditional Equity purchase opportunity.The Company will provide Executive at least ten business days notice prior to any cashdistributions resulting from financing or sale transactions (as opposed to from operations) to theInvestors such that Executive shall have an opportunity to purchase Equity prior thereto andthereby be entitled to share in any such distribution. This notice obligation shall cease onceExecutive has purchased all of the Equity.2. Purchase Loan. The Lightstone Group LLC or an affiliate thereof (“Lightstone”)will make a loan (“Loan”) available to the Executive for his purchase of the Equity. The principaland interest on the loan will be subject to a ten-year balloon repayment with interest accruingannually at 7%; provided that Executive shall be required to apply the net after-tax cash proceedsof any distributions from the Company towards payment of the Loan. The Loan shall be secured bythe Equity and non-recourse to the Executive.The Loan may be prepaid without penalty. The Loan will accelerate and become due to theextent of any transfer or sale of Equity by Executive other than as permitted below.3. Transfer Restrictions. No Equity issued to the Executive may be transferred(subject to customary exceptions for estate planning, transfers at death and transfers to an entitycontrolled solely by the Executive and formed solely for the benefit of the Executive and hisimmediate family), except as permitted under drag-along, tag-along or registration rights.4. Tag-Along, Drag-Along and Registration Rights. Executive’s Equity will be subjectto customary tag-along drag-along and registration rights.5. Termination of Restrictions. The restrictions on transfer shall terminate in theevent of an IPO or other transaction whereby the Equity becomes publicly traded, subject to anylock-up restrictions imposed on other employee shareholders of the Company or its affiliates.6. Miscellaneous.(a) The validity, interpretation and effect of this Award Agreement shall be governed by thelaws of the State of Illinois, excluding the “conflicts of laws” rules thereof.(b) Signed copies of this Agreement may be executed in counterparts and/or sent by facsimileor email and shall be as effective and binding as original copies.
 
-2-

 
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have duly executed this Award Agreement on the day andyear first above written.      PRIME OFFICE COMPANY, LLC
5873079.1 30711/122570

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

ROBERT D. GORDON, RECEIVER OF THE 

ESTATE OF GREGORY N. McKNIGHT, 

LEGISI MARKETING INC., and LEGISI 

HOLDINGS, L.L.C., 

Plaintiffs, 

vs. 

ELITE CONSULTING GROUP L.L.C., a 

Florida limited liability company, IVAN 

MONSALVE aka IVAN MONSALVES, 

MARSHA FRIEDMAN, KAREN L. 

REDMAN, TRICIA WITHERSPOON, JANE 

DOE, JOHN DOE, and EDGETECH 

INTERNATIONAL INC., a Nevada 

corporation,, 

Defendants. 

Case No. 09-cv-10772 

Judge: Hon. George Caram Steeh 

UEX-PARTE MOTION FOR ISSUANCE OF ALIAS SUMMONS

 NOW COMES plaintiff, ROBERT D. GORDON, RECEIVER OF THE ESTATE OF 

GREGORY N. McKNIGHT, LEGISI MARKETING INC., and LEGISI HOLDINGS, LLC., by 

his attorneys, CLARK HILL PLC, and moves this Court to Issue an Alias Summons upon 

Defendant Edgetech International Inc., states as follows: 

1. On March 11, 2009, Plaintiff placed its Complaint and Summons with Burke 

Investigative Process Service, Inc. 

2. Burke Investigative Process Service, Inc. was unable to effectuate service upon 

Defendant Edgetech International Inc. 

3. The Summons on Edgetech International Inc. was non-served on April 23, 2009. 

Case 2:09-cv-10772-GCS-VMM ECF No. 11 filed 05/19/09 PageID.49 Page 1 of 3
5873079.1 30711/122570

4. Accordingly, Plaintiff requests that this Court issue an Alias Summons on Defendant 

Edgetech International Inc. 

 WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests this Court to Issue an Alias Summons on 

Defendant Edgetech International Inc. 

 Respectfully submitted, 

 CLARK HILL PLC 

 By: U/s/ Eric K. ShihU____________________ 

 Charles E. Murphy (P28909) 

 Edward J. Hood (P42953) 

 Eric K. Shih (P71326) 

 Counsel to the Plaintiff 

 151 S. Old Woodward Ave., Ste. 200 

 Birmingham, MI 48009 

 (248) 642-9692 

 (248) 988-2331 (fax) 

 cmurphy@clarkhill.com 

Date: May 19, 2009 

Case 2:09-cv-10772-GCS-VMM ECF No. 11 filed 05/19/09 PageID.50 Page 2 of 3
5873079.1 30711/122570

UCERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on May 19, 2009, I electronically filed the foregoing paper with the 

Clerk of the Court using the ECF system which will send notification of such filing to all 

attorneys of record. 

 By: U/s. Eric K. ShihU__________________ 

 Eric K. Shih (P71326) 

 500 Woodward Avenue, Suite 3500 

 Detroit, MI 48226-3435 

 (313) 965-8813 

 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

Case 2:09-cv-10772-GCS-VMM ECF No. 11 filed 05/19/09 PageID.51 Page 3 of 3
Fialka-Feldman v. Oakland University Board of Trustees Doc. 43 Att. 5

Dockets.Justia.com
1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

DASSAULT SYSTEMES, SA, 

 Plaintiff/Counter-Claim Defendant, 

 Case No. 09-cv-10534 

v. Hon. Matthew F. Leitman 

KEITH CHILDRESS, 

 Defendant/Counter-Claim Plaintiff. 

__________________________________________________________________/ 

ORDER TEMPORARILY BARRING ADDITIONAL 

FILINGS PENDING COMPLETION OF SETTLEMENT EFFORTS 

On March 2, 2023, the Court held a hearing over video conferencing to hear 

argument on the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment (ECF Nos. 581, 582). 

At the conclusion of that hearing, the Court directed the parties to participate in a 

settlement effort, either through a private facilitator or a judicial officer. The parties 

are now in the process of determining which of the two settlement frameworks they 

wish to pursue. Once they make that determination, the settlement process will 

proceed. 

The Court now orders that the parties shall not make any filings in this action 

– including, for instance, a motion for reconsideration regarding the Court’s rulings 

on the parties’ cross-motions for summary judgment – until the completion of the 

settlement proceedings. If the parties are unable to reach a settlement agreement, 

Case 2:09-cv-10534-MFL-MJH ECF No. 598, PageID.22202 Filed 03/03/23 Page 1 of 2
2 

the Court will give each party an opportunity to file a motion for reconsideration of 

the summary judgment rulings. The Court is precluding the parties from filing any 

additional motions at this time because the Court wishes for the parties to direct all 

of their attention and resources to the settlement process. Moreover, the Court 

believes that if the parties invest time and resources into additional motion practice 

at this time, that could inhibit settlement – by, for instance, leading the parties to 

increase their demands in order to recoup fees and costs incurred with the motion 

practice. Accordingly, neither party shall file any additional motions until further 

order of the Court authorizing them to do so. 

 IT IS SO ORDERED. 

 s/Matthew F. Leitman 

 MATTHEW F. LEITMAN 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Dated: March 3, 2023 

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the parties 

and/or counsel of record on March 3, 2023, by electronic means and/or ordinary 

mail. 

 s/Holly A. Ryan 

 Case Manager 

 (313) 234-5126

Case 2:09-cv-10534-MFL-MJH ECF No. 598, PageID.22203 Filed 03/03/23 Page 2 of 2
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 17

- 3077

_____________________________
T HOMAS R AY P RESSWOOD , Appellant,

v.

S TATE O F F LORIDA , Appellee.

___________________________ On appeal from the Circuit Court fo r Escambia County

. Thomas V. Dannheisser , Judge.

January 11 , 2018

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

. J AY , W INSOR , and M.K. T HOMAS , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.33 0 or 9.331

.

_____________________________
Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Steven L. Seliger, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee
, for Appellant.2 Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee
, for Appellee.
2:09-cv-11367-PDB-RSW Doc # 40 Filed 07/19/11 Pg 1 of 1 Pg ID 552