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

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Timothy H. Bradley

v. Civil No. 07-11-JD

United States of America

PROCEDURAL ORDER

The movant has filed a motion under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 to

vacate, set aside, or correct the sentence ordered by the court

in United States v. Timothy H. Bradley, Cr. 03-cr-61-JD on

January 13, 2006. The court has reviewed the motion.

The court orders the United States Attorney to file an

answer within sixty (60) days of the date of this order, which

answer shall provide a detailed response, with appropriate

references to the record when necessary, to each claim asserted

by the movant.

In the event that the United States Attorney contends that

the motion is not timely filed under the limitations provided for

in 28 U.S.C. § 2255 or that it is a second or successive motion,

Case 1:07-cv-00011-JD Document 2 Filed 01/16/2007 Page 1 of 2

Bradley v. USA Doc. 2

Dockets.Justia.com
2

a motion to dismiss in lieu of a response shall be filed within

thirty (30) days of the date of this order.

 SO ORDERED.

____________________________

Joseph A. DiClerico, Jr.

District Judge

January 16, 2007

cc: Philip H. Utter, Esquire

Case 1:07-cv-00011-JD Document 2 Filed 01/16/2007 Page 2 of 2
#### Thelma Causey PENNINGTON, Tutrix for and on behalf of Nellie E. Causey, et al. v. KANSAS CITY BRIDGE COMPANY.

No. 2038.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. First Circuit.

Nov. 9, 1939.

Breazeale & Sachse, of Baton Rouge, for appellant.

Jos. A. Gladney and W. F. Gladney, both of Baton Rouge, for appellee.

DORE, Judge.

For the reasons set forth in our opinion in the consolidated cases of Mrs. Alice Edwards Causey v. Kansas City Bridge Company and Thelma Causey Pennington, Tut-rix for ,and on behalf of Nellie E. Causey et al. v. Kansas City Bridge Company, 191 So. 730, the judgment appealed from is affirmed.
Order entered October 16, 2017

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**

No. 05-17-01114-CV

MATTHEW D. STERN, Appellant

V.

BELLA CUSTOM HOMES, INC., Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 2 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC-16-00079-B



### ORDER

The reporter’s record is overdue. By letter dated October 3, 2 017, appellant informed the

Court that he has made arrangemen ts to pay for the reporter’s r ecord. Accordingly, we ORDER

Lanetta Williams, Official Court Reporter for County Court at L aw No. 2, to file the reporter’s

record by November 16, 2017

.

/s/ CRAIG STODDART JUSTICE
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

USA

v. Civil No. 08-cv-394-JM

R GUNS Model 44,

7.62 x 54 caliber rifle,

Serial Number 11844;

Winchester, Model 1300,

12 caliber shotgun,

Serial Number L3580523;

Sturm Ruger, Model MINI 12,

223 caliber rifle,

181-99128;

Sturm Ruger, Model 10/22,

22 caliber rifle,

Serial Number 350-62131;

Walther, Model P22,

22 caliber pistol,

Serial Number L010173;

Berretta, Pietro S.P.A.,

Model CX4 Storm, 9 caliber rifle,

Serial Number CX04102;

Servu Forearms, Model BFG50,

50 BMG caliber rifle,

Serial Number 1253;

Century Arms International,

Model L1A1 Sporter, 308 caliber rifle,

Serial Number 104090;

Century Arms International,

Model L1A1 308 caliber rifle,

Serial Number AD6215176;

Case 1:08-cv-00394-LM Document 43 Filed 05/14/09 Page 1 of 3
2

Harrington and Richardson Model 088,

16 caliber shotgun,

Serial Number 9300371;

Norinco, Model MAK90,

762 caliber rifle,

Serial Number 9300371;

Norinco, Model MAK90,

762 caliber rifle,

Serial Number 9475459;

Arsenal Co. Of Bulgaria, Model SLR95,

762 caliber rifle,

Serial Number IM371098;

Serbu Firearms, Model BFG50,

50 BMG caliber rifle,

Serial Number 1292

O R D E R

The government moved for “Partial Judgment on the Pleadings

and/or for Partial Summary Judgment” (document no. 33). The

“Objection” (document no. 36) relies upon six documents which

raise matters outside the pleadings. The surreply raises the

need for discovery (document no. 40). Under Fed. R. Civ. P.

12(d) “proper course for the district court (is) to convert the

motion into one for summary judgment.” See DeMayo v. Nugent, 517

F.3d 11, 19 (1st Cir. 2008). I am treating the motion as one for

summary judgment under Rule 56.

Case 1:08-cv-00394-LM Document 43 Filed 05/14/09 Page 2 of 3
3

Gonzalez’ counsel asserts the need for discovery, presumably

brief depositions of Jose and/or Romeo Gonzalez. Gonzalez’

counsel is to file a substantiated request under Rule 56(f) if he

needs more than thirty (30) days for his discovery. Otherwise,

the parties are each given forty-five (45) days to present all

material pertinent to the motion. Supplemental memos should also

address the applicability of the Doctrine of Judicial Admissions.

SO ORDERED.

____________________________________

James R. Muirhead

United States Magistrate Judge

Date: May 14, 2009

cc: Seth R. Aframe, Esq.

 David H. Bownes, Esq.

 Stanley W. Norkunas, Esq.

 Romeo Lee Gonzalez, pro se

Case 1:08-cv-00394-LM Document 43 Filed 05/14/09 Page 3 of 3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Seth Bader

v. Civil No. 06-cv-137-JM

NH Department of Corrections,

Commissioner

ORDER

Re: Document No. 21, Motion for Reconsideration

Ruling: Denied. The affidavit is untimely. Plaintiff was a

lawyer and counsel is a lawyer, both know or should know what

Rule 56 requires. Further, the state is not advocating religion. 

Plaintiff’s examples are taken out of context in my view.

James R. Muirhead

U.S. Magistrate Judge

Date: April 1, 2008

cc: Michael J. Sheehan, Esq.

 Deborah B. Weissbard, Esq.

 

 

Case 1:06-cv-00137-JM Document 22 Filed 04/01/08 Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE 

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

ERIC JAEGER, JERRY A. SHANAHAN, 

Defendants. 

C.A. No. 07-00039-SM 

FINAL JUDGMENT AS TO DEFENDANT ERIC JAEGER 

The Securities and Exchange Commission having filed a Complaint and Defendant Eric 

Jaeger (“Defendant”) having entered a general appearance; consented to the Court’s jurisdiction 

over Defendant and the subject matter of this action; consented to entry of this Final Judgment 

without admitting or denying the allegations of the Complaint (except as to jurisdiction); waived 

findings of fact and conclusions of law; and waived any right to appeal from this Final Judgment: 

I. 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that Defendant and 

Defendant’s agents, servants, employees, attorneys, and all persons in active concert or 

participation with them who receive actual notice of this Final Judgment by personal service or 

otherwise are permanently restrained and enjoined from violating, directly or indirectly, Section 

13(b)(5) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) [15 U.S.C. § 78m(b)(5)] 

and Rule 13b2-1 promulgated thereunder [17 C.F.R. § 240. 13b2-1], by knowingly 

circumventing or knowingly failing to implement a system of internal accounting controls or 

Case 1:07-cv-00039-SM Document 352 Filed 01/16/13 Page 1 of 2
knowingly falsifying any book, record, or account described in paragraph 2 of Section 13(b)(2) 

of the Exchange Act. 

II. 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the claims of aiding 

and abetting liability for violations of Sections 10(b) of the Exchange Act and Rules 10b-5(a) -

(c) thereunder are dismissed, all other claims as to Jaeger were dismissed in the Court’s order on 

Jaeger’s motion to dismiss [#209] and are unappealable. 

III. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that this Court shall retain 

jurisdiction of this matter for the purposes of enforcing the terms of this Final Judgment. 

IV. 

There being no just reason for delay, pursuant to Rule 54(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil 

Procedure, the Clerk is ordered to enter this Final Judgment forthwith and without further notice. 

Dated: _anuary 1_ , _ 0 1 _ 

ITED STATES DISTRICT 

2 

Case 1:07-cv-00039-SM Document 352 Filed 01/16/13 Page 2 of 2
I

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 2104

To amend the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 to authorize the provision

of education and related services to law enforcement and military personnel of foreign countries to prevent and control HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JUNE 7, 2001

Ms. EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON of Texas introduced the following bill; which

was referred to the Committee on International Relations

A BILL

To amend the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 to authorize

the provision of education and related services to law

enforcement and military personnel of foreign countries

to prevent and control HIV/AIDS and tuberculosis.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 2104 IH

1 SECTION 1. EDUCATION AND RELATED SERVICES TO FOR2 EIGN LAW ENFORCEMENT AND MILITARY

3 PERSONNEL TO PREVENT AND CONTROL HIV/

4 AIDS AND TUBERCULOSIS.

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 104(c) of the Foreign As6 sistance Act of 1961 (22 U.S.C. 2151b(c)) is amended by

7 adding at the end the following:

8 ‘‘(8)(A) In providing assistance under paragraphs (4)

9 through (7), the Administrator of the United States Agen10 cy for International Development is authorized, notwith11 standing section 660 of this Act, to provide education and

12 related services to law enforcement and military personnel

13 of foreign countries to prevent and control HIV/AIDS and

14 tuberculosis.

15 ‘‘(B) Education and related services described in sub16 paragraph (A) may be provided pursuant to subparagraph

17 (A) only if the Administrator determines that—

18 ‘‘(i) the education and related services are part

19 of a health initiative under one or more of para20 graphs (4) through (7) in the foreign country in21 volved;

22 ‘‘(ii) failure to provide the education and re23 lated services to law enforcement and military per24 sonnel of the foreign country would impair the

25 achievement of the overall objectives of the health

26 initiative;
3

•HR 2104 IH

1 ‘‘(iii) the education and related services are the

2 same or are similar to the education and related

3 services to be provided under the health initiative to

4 other population groups in the foreign country; and

5 ‘‘(iv) none of the education and related services,

6 including any commodity, can be readily adapted for

7 law enforcement, military, or internal security func8 tions.’’.

9 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by

10 subsection (a) shall apply with respect to education and

11 related services to law enforcement and military personnel

12 of foreign countries to prevent and control HIV/AIDS and

13 tuberculosis provided beginning before, on, or after the

14 date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
EXHIBIT 32.1



CEO CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT



I, Ronald J. Buschur, Chief Executive Officer of Powerwave Technologies, Inc. (the Company), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:



| | 1. | the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period ended April 3, 2005 (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 13, 2005 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ RONALD J. BUSCHUR                                                               
|      |  |              |  |  |  |     |  | Ronald J. Buschur President and Chief Executive Officer Powerwave Technologies, Inc.
17

A.12. Characteristics of Bank Loans to Farmers -- Large Farm Lenders, by Risk Rating, August 7-11, 20Percent except as notedLoan characteristic All Minimal Low Moderate Acceptable Special Not ratVolume of loans (thousands of dollars) 1,028,600 32,888 105,447 382,562 315,408 27,745 54,40Number of loans 16,683 688 1,887 8,547 3,636 554 4Weighted average maturity (months)1 20.70 18.00 9.21 21.00 16.01 22.66 14.0

Weighted average repricing interval (months)2 5.24 9.40 3.36 3.96 2.07 3.26 .4

Weighted average risk rating3 3.23 1.00 2.00 3.00 4.00 5.00 n

Weighted average interest rate 4 8.44 8.81 8.61 8.46 8.65 8.94 8.2

 Standard error5 .17 .49 .13 .07 .13 .42 .5

 Interquartile range6 75th percentile 9.26 9.92 9.14 9.38 9.65 9.77 8.2 25th percentile 7.60 7.92 8.06 7.50 8.03 8.03 7.9 Purpose of loan Feeder livestock 8.42 9.11 8.70 8.00 7.61 8.15 13.2 Other livestock 8.10 8.69 8.94 7.96 8.13 7.85 n Other current operating expenses7 8.70 7.63 8.55 8.76 8.64 9.29 9.2

 Farm machinery and equipment 9.06 9.88 8.81 9.39 8.67 9.11 9.7 Farm real estate 7.81 7.55 8.73 7.79 8.01 11.85 8.4 Other8 8.24 9.32 7.86 8.01 8.95 8.32 8.

Share of total loan volume Features of loan Floating rates 84.16 16.32 57.90 86.21 96.61 96.72 98.5 Under commitment 82.17 98.65 92.82 83.10 77.15 91.76 98. Callable 25.23 38.13 46.29 20.99 28.80 16.99 9.9 Purpose of loan Feeder livestock 10.30 69.46 38.21 5.59 6.40 1.25 .2 Other livestock 7.65 3.16 5.95 11.00 8.27 11.15 n Other current operating expenses7 32.72 14.53 45.68 43.09 27.77 68.53 .7 Farm machinery and equipment 7.78 4.62 2.67 10.36 11.03 .32 . Farm real estate 4.18 7.12 3.24 4.30 3.12 .20 . Other8 37.37 1.11 4.26 25.67 43.40 18.56 97.

 Type of collateral Farm real estate 9.16 4.17 17.11 7.65 6.20 4.92 5.5 Other 80.40 95.83 79.21 84.60 72.00 93.86 93.2 Note. Most large farm lenders that reported loans to farmers had more than $25 million in farm loans. For explanation of footnotes, see table A.8. n.a. Not available.
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 15** 

**- 6627** 

RAYMOND A. FORD, JR. ,

Plaintiff

- Appellant
,

v.

DR. JERRY A. MILES, DDS; DR. HAYES, Dentist; C. BAILEY, Health Services Administrator (“HS A ”); R. TYLER, Licensed Practical Nurse (“LPN”); C. SMITH, LPN; V. M. WASHINGTON, Assistant Warden; G. L. HOLLOWAY, Assistant Warden; FRED SCHILLING, Health Services Director
,

Defendants

- Appellees
,

and

MR. or MS. TURNER, LPN,

Defendant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Norfolk

. Rebecca Beach Smith
, Chief District Judge. ( 2:11

- cv

- 00636

- RBS

- LRL )

Submitted : July 21, 2015 Decided: July 24, 2015

Before WILKINSON and MOTZ, Circuit Judges , and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.2 Raymond Alexander Ford, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Michelle Lyn Rowling Warden, Carlyle Randolph Wimbish, III, SANDS ANDERSON, PC, Richmond, Virginia; Rosalie Fessier, TIMBERLAKE, SMITH, THOMAS & MOSES, PC, Staunton, Virginia; Elizabeth Martin Muldowney, RAWLS, MCNELIS & MITCHELL, PC, Richmond, Virginia; Kate Elizabeth Dwyre, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opi nions are not binding precedent in this circuit.3 PER CURIAM:

Raymond A. Ford, Jr., a ppeals the district court ’ s order s

denying relief on his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (20 12 ) complaint. We have

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we

affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Ford v.

Miles , No. 2:11

- cv

- 00636

- RBS

- LRL (E.D. Va. Feb. 27, 2014; Feb. 13,

2015; Mar. 24, 2015) . We dispense wit h oral argument because the

facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the

materials before th is court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

AFFIRMED
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIR E

United States of America

V .

Vincent Chaney

Criminal No . 06-cr-105-01-JD

O R D E R

The assented to motion to reschedule jury trial (document no .

40) filed by defendant is granted .

Defendant shall file a waiver of speedy trial rights within 10

days . The court finds that the ends of justice served by granting

a continuance outweigh the best interest of the public and the

defendant in a speedy trial, 18 U .S .C . § 3161 (h) (8) (B) (iv) , for the

reasons set forth in the motion .

SO ORDERED .

/s/Joseph A . DiClerico, Jr .

Joseph A . DiClerico, Jr .

United States District Judge

Date : April 4, 200 8

cc : Robert Daniels, Esq .

William Morse, Esq .

U .S . Marsha l

U .S . Probation

Case 1:06-cr-00105-PB Document 41 Filed 04/04/08 Page 1 of 1
203 La. 996

#### CITY OF NEW ORLEANS v. Mrs. Catherine HEFFLE, wife of Antoine Edward Wattigny, et al.

No. 36673.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 21, 1943.

Francis P. Burns and Leo L. Dubourg, both of New Orleans, for appellant.

John F. Stafford, Joseph H. Duval, and James H. Drury, all of New Orleans, for appellees.

PONDER, Justice.

For the reasons assigned in the case of City of New Orleans v. Larroux et al., consolidated with three other, cases, 14 So.2d 812, this day handed down; it is ordered that the judgment of the lower court is amended so as to award the defendant $400 per acre for the lands taken. As thus amended, the judgment of the lower court is affirmed. Cost of this appeal is to be paid by appellees.
33

C.2. Expected Farm Loan Volume for the Next Quarter, Compared with a Year EarlierPercent

Purpose of loan

Total Feeder cattle Dairy Crop storage Operating 

Quarter Lower Same Higher Lower Same Higher Lower Same Higher Lower Same Higher Lower Same Hig

Seventh (Chicago) Federal Reserve District (IL*, IN*, IA, MI*, WI*)

2007: Q1... 10 51 38 23 68 8 13 79 8 5 51 45 9 42 

 Q2... 10 59 30 23 71 6 12 79 8 8 48 44 11 55  Q3... 15 50 35 16 72 12 9 86 5 5 58 37 13 46  Q4... 16 42 41 27 67 6 9 80 11 5 62 33 18 32 2008: Q1... 20 46 34 41 55 4 17 77 6 8 59 33 19 35  Q2... 26 49 25 45 52 3 22 72 6 10 56 34 26 36  Q3... 18 37 45 31 64 4 19 76 5 13 67 20 8 35  Q4... 16 41 43 28 72 1 13 77 10 19 67 14 7 30 2009: Q1... 15 54 32 34 63 3 21 69 10 21 68 11 9 41 

Eleventh (Dallas) Federal Reserve District (LA*, NM*, TX)

2007: Q1... 13 64 24 18 72 10 12 77 5 12 81 7 7 65 

 Q2... 8 66 26 16 74 10 17 75 2 13 80 7 7 69  Q3... 10 72 18 15 75 10 11 80 3 8 75 18 7 69  Q4... 11 63 26 16 71 13 7 90 3 8 76 16 8 64 2008: Q1... 22 57 21 29 65 6 11 86 4 17 76 7 19 55  Q2... 21 56 23 40 53 8 13 85 2 8 78 14 15 51  Q3... 15 71 15 31 65 4 11 89 0 13 74 13 11 58  Q4... 38 52 10 47 48 5 19 69 6 23 71 6 22 52 2009: Q1... 30 59 11 41 56 3 16 75 4 16 77 8 16 64 

Fifth (Richmond) Federal Reserve District (MD, NC, SC, VA, WV*)

2007: Q1... 26 58 16 20 67 13 21 64 14 44 50 6 21 58 

 Q2... 12 88 0 6 94 0 13 88 0 11 78 11 11 84  Q3... 36 64 0 18 82 0 20 80 0 8 58 33 21 71  Q4... 39 56 6 33 67 0 31 69 0 24 76 0 17 61 2008: Q1... n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a. n.a.  Q2... 25 56 19 20 73 7 21 71 7 19 56 25 13 75  Q3... 60 33 7 36 64 0 46 54 0 29 64 7 40 47  Q4... 56 38 6 43 57 0 50 50 0 36 50 14 50 38 2009: Q1... 41 53 6 33 67 0 47 53 0 35 59 6 35 55  * State falls only partly within the indicated Reserve District. Source. Federal Reserve Bank quarterly surveys of agricultural credit conditions at commercial banks.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                              12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAY-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAY-31-1997
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   600
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     600
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        6,430,300
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       119,000
<OTHER-SE>                                   6,740,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       600
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               671,300
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             286,100
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (957,400)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (957,400)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (957,400)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     .008
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     .008
        



</TABLE>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

United States of America,

Plaintiff

 

v. Case No. 08-cr-67-01-SM

Raymond Crosdale,

 Defendant

O R D E R

Defendant Crosdale’s motion to continue the trial is granted (document no.

16). Trial has been rescheduled for the month of April 2009. Defendant

Crosdale shall file a waiver of speedy trial rights not later than February 23,

2009. On the filing of such waiver, his continuance shall be effective. 

 The Court finds that the ends of justice served by granting a continuance

outweigh the best interest of the public and the defendant in a speedy trial,

18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(8)(B)(iv), in that failure to grant a continuance would

unreasonably deny the defendant the reasonable time necessary for effective

preparation taking into account the exercise of due diligence under the

circumstances. 

Case 1:08-cr-00067-SM Document 17 Filed 02/09/09 Page 1 of 2
2

Final Pretrial Conference is scheduled for April 10, 2009 at 4:00 p.m. 

Jury selection will take place on April 21, 2009 at 9:30 a.m. 

SO ORDERED.

_________________________

 Steven J. McAuliffe

 Chief Judge

February 9, 2009

cc: Bjorn Lange, Esq.

Michael Zaino, AUSA

U.S. Marshal

U.S. Probation

Case 1:08-cr-00067-SM Document 17 Filed 02/09/09 Page 2 of 2
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, October 22, 2018.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes 

of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto 

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, October 22, 2018

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A19I0050. 1420 HWY 20, LLLP v. RICHFIELD DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION et 

al. .

Upon consideration of the Application for Interlocutory Appeal, it is ordered that it be 

hereby DENIED.

LC NUMBERS:

2016CV02027