alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Tony L. Ellison

 v. Case No. 08-cv-018-JL

NH State Prison, Warden

O R D E R

In March of 2010, it was brought to the court's attention that court mail addressed to New

Hampshire State Prison inmates was being returned undelivered if the address did not contain the

correct inmate identification number. The clerk's office contacted Nancy J. Smith, Esq., Office

of the New Hampshire Attorney General, Civil Bureau, and requested she contact Warden

Richard M. Gerry in order to rectify this practice. On March 25, 2010, Attorney Smith informed

the clerk's office that she had been assured the State Prison mail room staff would be instructed

to refrain from returning court mail based upon an incorrect inmate identification number. 

Despite these assurances, on April 7, 2010, inmate mail was again returned to the court

for failure to include a correct inmate number in the mailing address. On April 9, 2010, the

Chief Deputy Clerk wrote Warden Gerry on behalf of the court and requested that he take

immediate measures to assure that inmates receive court mail and that no further mailings be

rejected for failure to contain the correct inmate identification number. The Warden did not

respond to that letter. On May 4, 2010, court mail sent to the plaintiff in the above-captioned

case was returned to the court for failure to contain a correct inmate number in the mailing

address. 

Case 1:08-cv-00018-JL Document 36 Filed 05/12/10 Page 1 of 2
Based on the foregoing, the New Hampshire Attorney General, Michael A. Delaney, Esq.,

is ordered to appear and show cause why he should not be ordered to personally deliver in hand

all mail addressed by this court to a New Hampshire State Prison inmate that is returned for

failure to affix a correct inmate number. That hearing shall occur on Monday, May 24, 2010 at

10:00 a.m.

SO ORDERED.

Date: May 12, 2010 /s/ James R. Muirhead

 James R. Muirhead

 U.S. Magistrate Judge

cc: Tony L. Ellison, pro se

Michael A. Delaney, Esq.

Susan P. McGinnis, Esq.

Nancy J. Smith, Esq.

Case 1:08-cv-00018-JL Document 36 Filed 05/12/10 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 32.2

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 Western Pennsylvania Adventure Capital Fund, LLC on Form 10-Q for the period ended
March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Alvin J. Catz, Chief Financial Officer of Western Pennsylvania Adventure Capital Fund, LLC certify to the best of my knowledge,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. (S) 1350, as adopted pursuant to (S) 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 condition and results of operations of Western Pennsylvania Adventure Capital Fund,
LLC.
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                               
|-----------------------------------------------
|/s/ Alvin J. Catz                              
|Alvin J. Catz                                  
|Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer and Director
|May 9, 2008                                    

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Western Pennsylvania
Adventure Capital Fund, LLC and will retained by Western Pennsylvania Adventure Capital Fund, LLC and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
41

C.7. Local Trends in Farm Income and Expenditures as Reported by Banks in Each RegionPercent

Farm income Farm household spending Farm capital sp

Quarter Lower Same Higher Lower Same Higher Lower Same 

Ninth (Minneapolis) Federal Reserve District (MI*, MN, MT, ND, SD, WI*)

2005: Q3... 33 61 6 9 68 23 28 6

 Q4... 26 32 42 4 55 41 18 52006: Q1... 37 38 25 6 62 32 22 5 Q2... 40 47 13 9 59 32 27 5 Q3... 52 41 7 20 59 21 47 4 Q4... 35 27 38 17 54 29 34 42007: Q1... 21 29 50 11 50 38 19 4 Q2... 10 39 51 4 55 41 7 5 Q3... 2 32 66 2 50 48 5 4

Tenth (Kansas City) Federal Reserve District (CO, KS, MO*, NE, NM*, OK, WY)

2005: Q3... 35 52 14 15 54 31 34 5

 Q4... 30 49 21 13 58 30 27 52006: Q1... 31 52 16 13 58 29 27 5 Q2... 37 57 6 15 60 25 37 5 Q3... 42 48 10 15 54 31 31 5 Q4... 25 43 32 8 62 29 18 62007: Q1... 18 38 44 5 59 36 14 5 Q2... 13 49 39 7 55 38 12 5 Q3... 6 38 56 5 52 44 8 5

Twelfth (San Francisco) Federal Reserve District (AL, AZ, CA, HI, ID, NV, OR, UT, WA)

2005: Q3... 24 38 38 19 62 19 29 5

 Q4... 24 29 48 14 62 24 24 42006: Q1... 36 45 18 18 68 14 27 5 Q2... 35 48 17 17 65 17 32 5 Q3... 23 55 23 5 86 9 23 5 Q4... 22 44 33 11 72 17 17 62007: Q1... 20 30 50 0 75 25 5 5 Q2... 10 15 75 5 70 25 10 4 Q3... 5 11 84 5 53 42 5 2 * State falls only partly within the indicated Reserve District. n.a. Not available. Source. Federal Reserve Bank quarterly surveys of agricultural credit conditions at commercial banks.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

In Re: the Search of

74 Stonepost Road

Pelham, New Hampshire

# d7 Mi D (P

!l .[Sr^ Df RCT^F

CWRT

F'ILED

1001 FEB - 8 P 4. 4 1

ORDER

After review of the application for search warrant (including the supporting affidavit of

Special Agent Norman J. Houle), the search warrant and the government's motion for delay of

providing notice of the execution of the search warrant on the above-referenced residence pursuant

to 18 U.S.C. 3103a(b), the Court hereby finds that immediate notification of the execution of the

warrant may have an adverse result, in that it would seriously jeopardize an ongoing law enforcement

investigation; that the warrant does not authorize the seizure of any tangible property; and the

warrant provides for the giving of such notice within a reasonable period of its execution.

WHEREFORE, the Court grants the government's motion for delayed notice of the

execution of the warrant on the above-referenced residence and orders that notice of the

execution of the warrant will be provided within 30 days of the execution of the warrant , unless,

upon a showing of good cause, that period is extended by this Court.

Dated: February 8, 2007

tes Magistrate Judge

Case 1:07-mj-00006-JM Document 5 Filed 02/08/07 Page 1 of 1
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 189 (Monday, September 29, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 56610]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-22660]


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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--Cooperative Research Group on Clean Diesel V

    Notice is hereby given that, on August 26, 2008, pursuant to 
Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 
1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), Southwest Research 
Institute--Cooperative Research Group on Clean Diesel V (``Clean Diesel 
V'') has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney 
General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its 
membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending 
the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to 
actual damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, Wuxi Weifu 
Lida Catalytic Converter Co., Ltd., Jiangsu, PEOPLE'S REPUBLIC OF 
CHINA, has been added as a party to this venture.
    No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned 
activity of the group research project. Membership in this group 
research project remains open, and Clean Diesel V intends to file 
additional written notifications disclosing all changes in membership.
    On January 10, 2008, Clean Diesel V filed its original notification 
pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice 
published a notice in the Federal Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of 
the Act on February 25, 2008 (73 FR 10064).
    The last notification was filed with the Department on June 24, 
2008 and published in the Federal Register on July 29, 2008 (73 FR 
43952).

Patricia A. Brink,
Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. E8-22660 Filed 9-26-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
|   | 1. | the      Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period      ended April 4, 2010 (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 or 780(d)); and |
|--------|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

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

|                   |   |   |                       |                                                                                              |
|------------------------|--------|--------|----------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                   |   |   |                       |
| Date:      May 6, 2010 |   | By:    | /s/      RONALD J. BUSCHUR |
|                   |   |   |                       | Ronald      J. BuschurPresident      and Chief Executive OfficerPowerwave      Technologies, Inc. |
**Exhibit 32.2**

ISONICS CORPORATION

Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350Principal Financial Officer

To my knowledge: the quarterly report onForm 10-Q for the period ended July 31, 2007, containing financial statementsfor the period then ended, fully complies with the requirements of Section13(a) of the Securities Act of 1934; and the information contained in the Form10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of Isonics Corporation for the periods presented.
| September 14,  2007                           |
|-----------------------------------------------|
|                                          |
|                                          |
| /s/ Kenneth J. Deane                          |   |   |
| Kenneth J. Deane, Chief Financial Officer and |
| Principal Financial Officer                   |

 

----
Case 1:07-cv-00320-JM   Document 9   Filed 11/29/07   Page 1 of 1
19

A.14. Survey of Terms of Bank Lending to Farmers, Selected Quarters 

Percent except as noted 

USDA Farm Production Region

NE LS CB NP AP SE DL SP MN PA 

Proportion of farm loans 

 outstanding, 2005 Q3 survey, 

 region share of national 

 total 2.9 8.9 27.2 22.0 7.7 5.4 5.1 8.7 5.4 6.7 

 

Sample coverage, 2005 Q3 

 survey, sample share of total 

 regional loans 10.8 2.9 18.1 32.6 21.1 11.7 9.7 5.1 9.0 27.9 

 

Avg. loan size, 2005 Q3 survey 

(thousands of dollars) 63.5 45.1 84.0 58.6 50.5 31.5 49.2 45.5 17.1 78.5 

 

Survey date Weighted average interest rate during sample week

 

2001: Q1 9.3 9.1 9.4 9.7 8.4 7.8 9.5 9.0 9.8 8.8 

 Q2 8.2 8.7 8.3 8.8 7.4 8.1 8.3 9.2 8.6 7.9 

 Q3 8.3 9.8 7.9 8.2 6.3 7.6 8.7 8.8 7.8 7.2 

 Q4 6.9 7.9 6.3 7.0 5.2 6.3 8.7 7.6 6.1 5.2 

 

2002: Q1 6.9 7.8 6.7 7.2 5.2 5.5 7.3 7.4 6.8 4.9 

 (.12) (.37) (.26) (.22) (.63) (1.14) (.39) (.45) (.26) (.25) 

 Q2 6.8 7.4 6.4 7.2 5.0 5.9 7.6 7.5 6.5 5.1 

 (.14) (.29) (.27) (.21) (.48) (1.03) (.23) (.34) (.36) (.26) 

 Q3 6.0 6.9 4.8 5.6 4.4 4.9 6.6 5.3 5.6 4.3 

 (.14) (.03) (.51) (.40) (.69) (.68) (.22) (.96) (.36) (.33) 

 Q4 5.7 6.9 5.1 5.5 4.6 5.2 6.7 7.6 6.4 4.5 

 (.35) (.45) (.47) (1.01) (.56) (.62) (.68) (.35) (.47) (.62) 

 

2003: Q1 5.3 7.0 5.6 5.7 4.4 5.6 6.7 7.4 6.1 4.5 

 (.15) (.26) (.31) (.73) (.65) (.63) (.54) (.66) (.35) (.40) 

 Q2 6.0 6.7 5.3 6.5 4.6 6.1 7.3 5.7 6.4 5.2 

 (.29) (.17) (.37) (.34) (.71) (.63) (.45) (.71) (.36) (.50) 

 Q3 6.0 6.9 4.7 5.6 4.5 4.8 6.7 5.5 5.6 4.3 

 (.15) (.04) (.49) (.39) (.73) (.69) (.27) (.99) (.35) (.26) 

 Q4 6.5 6.5 4.0 5.1 4.6 5.2 6.7 7.5 5.4 4.2 

 (.59) (.22) (.30) (.71) (.54) (.83) (.54) (.58) (.39) (.42) 

 

2004: Q1 5.8 7.0 5.2 5.7 4.3 5.9 6.4 6.3 5.7 3.8 

 (.21) (.15) (.44) (.25) (.48) (.64) (.37) (.23) (.37) (.41) 

 Q2 4.8 6.3 5.2 6.2 4.6 6.4 6.9 6.2 6.4 4.1 

 (.19) (.05) (.66) (.32) (.45) (.31) (.57) (.19) (.40) (.24) 

 Q3 6.2 6.6 4.8 5.5 4.8 5.2 6.1 6.7 6.7 4.9 

 (.79) (.14) (.58) (1.15) (.38) (.75) (.41) (.45) (.29) (.08) 

 Q4 6.2 6.4 5.2 5.4 5.1 6.0 7.5 6.4 7.0 5.2 

 (.48) (.07) (.45) (.88) (1.01) (.81) (.30) (.22) (.30) (.10) 

 

2005: Q1 6.2 7.4 6.4 6.3 5.3 6.0 7.2 7.5 7.1 6.0 

 (.19) (.16) (.14) (.71) (.60) (.67) (.34) (.59) (.17) (.15) 

 Q2 6.7 7.4 5.8 6.6 6.0 6.4 7.5 7.3 7.7 6.7 

 (.19) (.21) (.77) (.75) (.28) (.65) (.33) (.19) (.05) (.18) 

 Q3 7.1 7.7 6.9 6.3 6.1 7.2 7.6 7.2 8.2 6.8 

 (.18) (.23) (.28) (.70) (.20) (.57) (.43) (.30) (.09) (.07) 

 Notes. NE is Northeast, LS is Lake States, CB is Cornbelt, NP is Northern Plains, AP is Appalachia, SE is Southeast, DL is 

Delta States, SP is Southern Plains, MN is Mountain States, and PA is Pacific. The numbers in parentheses are standard errors. They 

are calculated from 100 replications of a bootstrap procedure (resampling of banks) in each region.
U .S . DiSTftICT CrUR T

iuS l L_: ~ 17 ~'~ i~ : 11 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

seaTel, Inc .

V .

Town of Hanover, et . al .

Case No . 07-cv-340-PB

O R D E R

I deny plaintiff's request for a Temporary Restraining Order

without prejudice for the following reasons :

1 . Plaintiffs have failed to submit their request for a

Temporary Restraining Order as a separate motion as is required

by LR 7 .1(a)(1) .

2 . Plaintiffs have failed to submit a draft Temporary

Restraining Order as is required by LR 65 .1 .

3 . Plaintiffs have failed to certify to the court "the

efforts that counsel have made to give notice and the reasons

supporting the claim that notice should not be required" as is

required by Fed . R . Civ . P . 65(b) .

Case 1:07-cv-00340-JL Document 3 Filed 10/17/07 Page 1 of 2
4 . If a request for temporary relief is submitted that

addresses these deficiencies, it shall be referred to the

Magistrate Judge for a Report and Recommendation .

SO ORDERED .

Paul Barbador o

United States District Judg e

October 17, 200 7

cc : Counsel of Record

Case 1:07-cv-00340-JL Document 3 Filed 10/17/07 Page 2 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America

V .

Linda D . Bevins

Case No . 08-cr-22-PB

O R D E R

The defendant, through counsel, has moved to continue the

trial scheduled for April 7, 2009 citing the need for additional

time to complete necessary medical treatment and a forensic

evaluation and to prepare for trial or other disposition . The

government does not object to a continuance of the trial date .

Accordingly, for the above reason and to allow the parties

additional time to properly prepare for trial, the court will

continue the trial from April 7, 2009 to June 2, 2009 . In

agreeing to continue the trial, the court finds pursuant to 18

U .S .C .A . § 3161(h)(8)(A) that for the above-stated reasons, the

ends of justice served in granting a continuance outweigh the

best interests of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial .

Case 1:08-cr-00022-PB Document 21 Filed 03/30/09 Page 1 of 2
The March 30, 2009 final pretrial conference is continued to

May 27, 2009 at 4 :00 p .m .

No further continuances .

SO ORDERED .

/s/Paul Barbadoro

Paul Barbador o

United States District Judge

March 30, 200 9

cc : Bjorn Lange, Esq .

Mark Zuckerman, Esq .

United States Probation

United States Marshal

2

Case 1:08-cr-00022-PB Document 21 Filed 03/30/09 Page 2 of 2
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







Pursuant
      to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of
      section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), each of the
      undersigned officers of M Power Entertainment, Inc., a Delaware corporation
      (the
      "Company"), does hereby certify, to such officer's knowledge, that:




·
            The
                Quarterly Report for the quarter ended June 30, 2007 (the "Form 10-QSB")
                of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
                or
                15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934,
                and





·
            the
                information contained in the Form 10-QSB fairly presents, in all
                material
                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
                Company.










Dated:November
      19, 2007











/s/
      Gary
      F. Kimmons


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


Gary
      F.
      Kimmons, President,


Chief
      Executive Officer and


Chief
      Financial Officer
2 

supported by specific factual allegations that are not belied by the record 

and, if true, would entitle her to relief. Hargrove v. State, 100 Nev. 498, 

502-03, 686 P.2d 222, 225 (1984). 

First, West argues that the district court erred in denying her 

claim that counsel was ineffective for conceding her guilt to the count 

alleging unauthorized signing of a credit card transaction document. We 

disagree. At trial, witnesses testified that they saw West sign the credit 

card transaction document. Further, the State introduced the transaction 

document signed by West and surveillance video showing her signing the 

document. In addition, the owner of the credit account testified that she 

had not given West permission to sign the document. Considering this 

evidence, West has failed to demonstrate a reasonable probability of a 

different outcome had counsel not conceded her guilt during opening 

argument as there was overwhelming evidence of her guilt. Therefore, the 

district court did not err in denying this claim without conducting an 

evidentiary hearing. 

Second, West argues that the district court erred in denying 

her claim that appellate counsel was ineffective for failing to challenge the 

imposition of the large habitual sentence on West as her offense was 

nonviolent. We disagree. Because the habitual criminal statute makes no 

special allowance for nonviolent crimes or remoteness of the prior 

convictions as these are merely considerations within the discretion of the 

district court, Arajakis v. State,108 Nev. 976, 983, 843 P.2d 800, 805 

(1992), appellant failed to demonstrate reasonable counsel would have 

argued that the district court erred for those reasons. The district court 

stated that sentencing West as a habitual criminal was appropriate due to 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

(0) 1947A 
J. 

West's extensive criminal activity. Therefore, the district court did not err 

in denying this claim. 

Third, West asserts that the district court erred in summarily 

denying the claims raised in her proper person petition without holding an 

evidentiary hearing. We conclude that this argument lacks merit. Other 

than asserting that the district court failed to hold an evidentiary hearing 

on these claims, West does not present any argument on appeal 

demonstrating that the district court erred in this regard. See Maresca v. 

State,103 Nev. 669, 673, 748 P.2d 3, 6 (1987) ("It is appellant's 

responsibility to present relevant authority and cogent argument."). 

Having considered West's contentions and concluded that they 

lack merit, we 

ORDER the judgment of the district court AFFIRMED. 

Hardesty 

Parraguirre 

J. 

cc: Hon. Douglas W. Herndon, District Judge 

Matthew D. Carling 

Attorney General/Carson City 

Clark County District Attorney 

Eighth District Court Clerk 

3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Xanoptix, Inc. n/k/a

Cubic Wafer, Inc.

v. Civil No. 08-cv-228-JL

Mintz, Levin, Cohn,

Ferris, Glovsky, and

Popeo, PC

O R D E R

The Preliminary Pretrial Conference currently scheduled for

July 17, 2008 at 10 a.m. will include a substantive, meaningful

discussion of the parties’ claims and defenses. Counsel are

expected to be prepared to engage in an open, cooperative

discussion in good faith. Counsel are reminded of the

obligations imposed by Fed. R. Civ. P. 11(b)(3) and (4), and

should be prepared to explain the factual basis underlying any

claims or defenses they have pleaded.

Each party shall be represented at the Preliminary Pretrial

Conference by counsel authorized to bind the party on all

matters.

To the extent that the substance of this order constitutes a

departure from the customary Preliminary Pretrial practice to

which counsel are accustomed, the court apologizes for the short

notice, and will bear this in mind at the conference.

Case 1:08-cv-00228-JL Document 6 Filed 07/08/08 Page 1 of 2
2

SO ORDERED.

____________________________

Joseph N. Laplante

United States District Judge

Dated: July 8, 2008

cc: Charles P. Bauer, Esq.

William C. Saturley, Esq.

Case 1:08-cv-00228-JL Document 6 Filed 07/08/08 Page 2 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

ROBERT P. DESROCHES, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) Civil No. 05-88-PB

)

PATRICK R. DONAHOE, Postmaster )

General, United States Postal )

Service, )

)

Defendant/Counterclaimant, )

)

v. )

)

ROBERT P. DESROCHES, )

)

Counterclaim Defendant, )

)

 and )

)

CITIZENS BANK, )

)

Garnishee. )

PROPOSED ORDER TO QUASH 

WRIT OF CONTINUING GARNISHMENT

On February 8, 2011, a Writ of Continuing Garnishment and 

Clerk's Notice of Continuing Garnishment were issued in the abovecaptioned action by James R. Starr, Clerk, United States District

Court. In accordance with the terms of the Writ of Continuing

Garnishment, on February 11, 2011, accounts in the name of Robert

DesRoches, held by Citizen’s Bank, were levied on by the United

States of America. Copies of the Application, Clerk's Notice and

Writ of Continuing Garnishment were received by counterclaim

defendant, Robert DesRoches, on February 15, 2011.

Case 1:05-cv-00088-PB Document 141 Filed 03/31/11 Page 1 of 2
Due to the minute balance in the account, the United States

does not request a turnover of these funds. Accordingly, it is 

ORDERED that funds in the amount of $6.03, seized on

February 11, 2011, from an account in the name of Robert

DesRoches, which are in the possession, custody or control of

Citizens Bank, be released back to the counterclaim defendant,

Robert DesRoches, and it is 

ORDERED that the Writ of Continuing Garnishment issued on

February 8, 2011, to Citizens Bank, is hereby quashed.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 

 _________________________ 

 U.S. District Court Judge

DATED:

cc: Michael T. McCormack, AUSA

 Robert DesRoches, pro se

 Citizens Bank

Case 1:05-cv-00088-PB Document 141 Filed 03/31/11 Page 2 of 2