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

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1207 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1207

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase and extend the 
            energy efficient commercial buildings deduction.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 25, 2007

 Ms. Landrieu introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase and extend the 
            energy efficient commercial buildings deduction.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Giving Reductions to Energy 
Efficient New Buildings Act'' or the ``GREEN Buildings Act''.

SEC. 2. INCREASE AND EXTENSION OF ENERGY EFFICIENT COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS 
              DEDUCTION.

    (a) Increase in Amount of Deduction.--Section 179D of the Internal 
Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to energy efficient commercial buildings 
deduction) is amended--
            (1) in subsection (b)(1)(A) by striking ``$1.80'' and 
        inserting ``$2.25'', and
            (2) in subsection (d)(1)(A) by striking ``$.60 for $1.80'' 
        and inserting ``$.75 for $2.25''.
    (b) Extension.--Section 179D(h) of the Internal Revenue Code of 
1986 (relating to termination) is amended by striking ``December 31, 
2008'' and inserting ``December 31, 2013''.
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to property placed in service in taxable years beginning after 
December 31, 2006.
                                 <all>
```
II 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1251 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide for the tax treatment 

of horses, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 30, 2007 

Mr. MCCONNELL (for himself, Mrs. LINCOLN, and Mr. BUNNING) introduced 

the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee 

on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide 

for the tax treatment of horses, and for other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Equine Equity Act 

5 of 2007’’. 

6 SEC. 2. 3-YEAR DEPRECIATION FOR ALL RACE HORSES. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Clause (i) of section 168(e)(3)(A) 

8 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to 3-year 

9 property) is amended to read as follows: 

10 ‘‘(i) any race horse,’’. 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with BILLS
2 

•S 1251 IS

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

2 this section shall apply to property placed in service on 

3 or after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

4 SEC. 3. REDUCTION OF HOLDING PERIOD TO 12 MONTHS 

5 FOR PURPOSES OF DETERMINING WHETHER 

6 HORSES ARE SECTION 1231 ASSETS. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subparagraph (A) of section 

8 1231(b)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating 

9 to definition of livestock) is amended by striking ‘‘and 

10 horses’’. 

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

12 this section shall apply to taxable years beginning after 

13 December 31, 2007. 

Æ 


jcorcoran on PROD1PC62 with BILLS
Case 1:11-cr-00375-CMA Document 53 Filed 09/30/11 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
Case 1:11-cr-00375-CMA Document 53 Filed 09/30/11 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
## I N T H E C O U R T O F C R I M I N A L A P P E A L S O F T E X A S NO. WR-84,446-01
EX P ARTE DAVID EARL HICK MAN, A ppl icant
ON AP P LICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NO. 25472 IN THE 354 DISTRICT COURT T H F ROM HUNT COUNTY
Per curiam . O R D E R Pursuant to the provisi o n s o f Ar t icle 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedur e, the cler k of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habea s corpus. Ex parte Y oung , 418 S.W .2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of murder and sentenc ed to life imprisonment. He did not appe al his conviction. Applicant conte nds that his plea was involuntary beca use counsel did not advise applica nt that a conviction require d non-ac complice witness testim ony when ther e wa s none. Appli cant has alleg ed fac ts that, if true, might entitle him to relief
. In these cir cu m s t ance s, additional fac ts are neede d. As we held in Ex parte Rodriguez , 334 S.W .2d 294, 294 (Tex. Crim. App. 1960), the trial court is the appropriate forum for finding s of fac t. The trial court shall order trial counsel to respond2

to Applicant’s claim of ineffe ctive assistance of counsel. The trial court may use any means set out in T E X . C O D E C R I M . P R O C . art. 11.07, § 3(d). In the appropriate case , the trial court may rely on its persona l rec ollection. Id
. I f the trial court elects t o hold a h ea ring , it shall deter mine whether Applicant is indige nt. I f Appl i ca n t is indige nt and wishes to be repr esente d by counsel, the trial court shall appoint an attorney to repre sent Applicant at the hearing. T E X . C O D E C R I M . P R O C . art. 26.04. The trial court shall make finding s of fa ct and c onclusions of law in re g ard to Applica nt’s claim that his plea was involuntary
. Should the trial court fi n d t h at co unsel err ed in advising Applicant, it shall make specific finding s addre ssing whether , but for counsel’s err ors, Applicant would have insisted on a trial. The trial court shall also make an y o t h er finding s of fac t and conclusions of law that it deems rele vant and appropriate to the dispositi on of Applicant’s claim for habea s corpus re lief. This application will be held in abeyance until the trial court has resolved the fac t issues. The issues shall be resolv ed wi thin 90 day s of this order
. A supplemental transcript containing all aff idavits and int err og atories or the transc ription of the court repor ter’s notes from any hearing or deposition, alongwith the trial court’ s supplemental finding s of fa ct and c onclusions of law, shall be forwa rded to this Court within 120 day s of the date of this order
. Any extensions of time shall be obtained fr om this C ourt.

Filed: F ebrua

ry 3, 2016 Do not publish
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health 

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following meeting. 

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(cX6), Title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         Endocrinology, Metabolism, Nutrition and Reproductive Sciences Integrated Review Group; Clinical and Integrative Diabetes and Obesity Study Section.                     

*Date:*                         October 2, 2008.                     

*Time:*                         8 a.m. to 6 p.m.                     

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                     

*Place:*                         Hyatt Regency Bethesda, One Bethesda Metro Center, 7400 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814.                     

*Contact Person:*                         Nancy Sheard, SCD, Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 6046-E, MSC 7892, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 435-1154,                         *sheardn@csr.nih.gov*.                     

This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and funding cycle.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, 93.337, 93.393-93.396, 93.837-93.844, 93.846-93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National Institutes of Health, HHS) 

Dated: September 22, 2008. 

Jennifer Spaeth, 

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy. 

[FR Doc. E8-22851 Filed 10-1-08; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

LEWIS T. BABCOCK, JUDGE

Civil Case No. 11-cv-02382-LTB-KLM

PENNY HOFFERT,

Plaintiff,

v.

DAVID R. POWELSON,

POWER WORLD, LLC,

B.W.L. HOLDINGS, LLC,

B.W.L. PARTNERSHIP, LLLP,

TRAIL RIDGE MARINA,

FIVESTAR MARINA, INC.,

FIVESTAR RENTALS,

GRAND LAKE MOTOR SPORTS,

PHLARE ORGANIZATION, LLC,

GEEZER CLUBS, LLC,

TRI-R LEASING, LLC,

TRI-R SYSTEMS CORPORATION,

TRI-R HOLDINGS, LLC,

COLORADO SPRINGS WASTE AND RECYCLING, LLC,

DATAGUARD USA, LLC,

ATTICUS, INC., and

TRM, LLC,

Defendants.

________________________________________________________________________

AMENDED ORDER 

________________________________________________________________________

This case is before me on the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge issued and

served on December 19, 2011 (Doc 46). Plaintiff has failed to file specific written objections

to the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation and is therefore barred from de novo review.

Accordingly, it is

Case 1:11-cv-02382-LTB-KLM Document 49 Filed 01/10/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
2

ORDERED that the recommendation is accepted and this action is DISMISSED

WITHOUT PREJUDICE as to Defendant Atticus, Inc. only, pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(m).

BY THE COURT:

 s/Lewis T. Babcock 

Lewis T. Babcock, Judge

DATED: January 10, 2012

Case 1:11-cv-02382-LTB-KLM Document 49 Filed 01/10/12 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
B.2. Delinquent Non-real-estate Farm Loans Held by Insured Commercial Banks

Share of outstanding farm production

Estimated volume (billions of dollars) loans (percent)

Nonperforming Nonperforming 

Past due Past due

30 to 89 Past due 30 to 89 Past due

days, 90 days, Non- days, 90 days, NonPeriod Total accruing Total accruing accruing Total accuring Total accruing accruing

1998...... 1.0 .5 .5 .1 .4 2.2 1.0 1.2 .3 .9

1999...... .9 .3 .6 .1 .5 2.1 .8 1.3 .2 1.1

2000...... 1.0 .4 .6 .1 .5 2.1 .9 1.2 .2 1.0

2001...... 1.3 .5 .7 .1 .6 2.7 1.2 1.5 .2 1.3

2002...... 1.2 .5 .7 .1 .6 2.6 1.0 1.6 .3 1.3

2003...... 1.0 .4 .7 .1 .5 2.3 .8 1.5 .3 1.2

2004...... .8 .3 .5 .1 .4 1.6 .5 1.0 .2 .9

2005...... .6 .3 .3 .1 .3 1.3 .6 .7 .2 .5

2006...... .7 .4 .3 .1 .3 1.3 .7 .6 .1 .5

2007...... .7 .4 .4 .1 .3 1.3 .7 .6 .1 .5

2008...... .9 .5 .4 .1 .3 1.5 .8 .6 .1 .5

2002: Q1... 1.7 .9 .8 .2 .6 3.9 2.1 1.8 .4 1.4

 Q2... 1.4 .5 .8 .2 .6 2.9 1.2 1.8 .5 1.3

 Q3... 1.3 .4 .8 .2 .6 2.7 .9 1.8 .4 1.4

 Q4... 1.2 .5 .7 .1 .6 2.6 1.0 1.6 .3 1.3

2003: Q1... 1.7 .9 .8 .2 .6 4.0 2.1 1.9 .4 1.5

 Q2... 1.4 .5 .9 .2 .7 3.1 1.1 2.0 .5 1.5

 Q3... 1.2 .4 .8 .2 .6 2.7 .9 1.8 .4 1.4

 Q4... 1.0 .4 .7 .1 .5 2.3 .8 1.5 .3 1.2

2004: Q1... 1.3 .6 .7 .2 .5 3.0 1.3 1.6 .4 1.2

 Q2... .9 .3 .6 .1 .5 2.1 .7 1.3 .3 1.0

 Q3... .8 .3 .5 .1 .4 1.7 .6 1.1 .2 .9

 Q4... .8 .3 .5 .1 .4 1.6 .5 1.0 .2 .9

2005: Q1... 1.0 .5 .5 .1 .4 2.3 1.2 1.1 .3 .9

 Q2... .8 .3 .5 .1 .4 1.6 .6 1.0 .3 .8

 Q3... .7 .3 .4 .1 .3 1.3 .5 .8 .2 .6

 Q4... .6 .3 .3 .1 .3 1.3 .6 .7 .2 .5

2006: Q1... .9 .5 .4 .1 .3 1.8 1.1 .8 .2 .5

 Q2... .7 .3 .4 .1 .2 1.3 .6 .7 .2 .5

 Q3... .6 .3 .4 .1 .3 1.2 .5 .7 .2 .5

 Q4... .7 .4 .3 .1 .3 1.3 .7 .6 .1 .5

2007: Q1... 1.0 .6 .4 .1 .3 1.9 1.1 .8 .3 .5

 Q2... .9 .4 .5 .1 .4 1.6 .7 .9 .2 .7

 Q3... .7 .3 .4 .1 .3 1.2 .5 .7 .2 .6

 Q4... .7 .4 .4 .1 .3 1.3 .7 .6 .1 .5

2008: Q1... .9 .5 .4 .1 .3 1.7 1.0 .7 .2 .5

 Q2... .8 .4 .4 .1 .3 1.4 .7 .7 .2 .5

 Q3... .8 .4 .4 .1 .3 1.3 .6 .7 .2 .5

 Q4... .9 .5 .4 .1 .3 1.5 .8 .6 .1 .5

2009: Q1... 1.4 .7 .6 .2 .5 2.5 1.4 1.2 .3 .9

 Q2... 1.4 .5 .8 .2 .7 2.4 .9 1.5 .3 1.2

 Note. Data are estimates of the national totals for non-real-estate farm loans. Reported amounts are adjusted to exclude foreign

results for large banks that report farm delinquencies on a consolidated basis and for small banks that are allowed to report

delinquencies according to their internal definition of agricultural loans. Yearly data are as of December 31. Quarterly data

are as of end of quarter.

22
EXHIBIT 32(i)(a)

CERTIFICATION PURSUANTTO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT
TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002*



In connection with the Annual Report of A.G.
Edwards, Inc. (the Registrant) on Form 10-K for the period ended February 28, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
May 6, 2005, hereof (the Report), I, Robert L. Bagby, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of the Registrant, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 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 the Registrant.
|--- |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



A.G. EDWARDS, INC.




Date: May 4,
2005


|By: |  | /s/ Robert L. BagbyRobert
L. Bagby Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
|--- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------






|* |  | A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906 has been provided to the Registrant and will be retained by the Registrant and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.
|- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---
Order entered Se ptember 29, 2020

In The 

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

No. 05-20-00706-CV

IN RE L.C. AKA S .R.M., Relators

Original Proceeding from the 330th Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DF-20-07925Y

ORDER

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DENY relators’ petition for

writ of mandamus without prejudice to refiling a petition that complies with the

Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. We also LIFT our stay order issued on

August 5, 2020.

/s/ DAVID EVANS JUSTICE
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 20

- 699

_____________________________
D USTYN A NDREW H OLMES , Appellant,

v.

S TATE OF F LORIDA , Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Alachua County

. James M. Colaw , Judge

. September 23, 2020

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

.
R AY , C.J.
, and B ILBREY and J AY , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________2 Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Kasey Lacey, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee
, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Damaris E. Reynolds, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee
, for Appellee.
*

Chief Judge R. Lanier Anderson recused himself and did not participate in this decision. 

Aurelia DAVIS, as Next Friend of LaShonda D., Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

MONROE COUNTY BOARD OF EDUCATION, et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 94-9121.

United States Court of Appeals,

Eleventh Circuit.

March 23, 2000.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Georgia (No. 94-00140-CV-4-MAC);

Wilbur D. Owens, Jr., Judge.

ON REMAND FROM THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES.

Before TJOFLAT, EDMONDSON, COX, BIRCH, DUBINA, BLACK, CARNES, BARKETT, HULL,

MARCUS and WILSON, Circuit Judges.*

PER CURIAM:

In light of the Supreme Court's decision in this case, Davis v. Monroe County Board of Education,

526 U.S. 629, 119 S.Ct. 1661, 143 L.Ed.2d 839 (1999), the judgment of the district court is REVERSED, and

the case is REMANDED for further proceedings.

SO ORDERED.
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland

Civil Action No. 11-cv-01934-DME-BNB

JEFFERY A. BOARDMAN,

Plaintiff,

v.

DYLAN HAUCK, and

AMERICAN FAMILY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, a Wisconsin corporation,

Defendants.

______________________________________________________________________________

ORDER

______________________________________________________________________________

On March 22, 2012, I held a final pretrial conference and entered a Final Pretrial Order

[Doc. # 35]. At Part 7 of the Final Pretrial Order I stated:

The exhibit lists are refused. On or before April 27, 2012, the

parties shall submit revised exhibit lists which comply with the

following requirements: (1) each exhibit shall be set out on the

exhibit list as it will be offered at trial; and (2) every page of each

exhibit shall be Bates numbered and the Bates numbers of the

beginning and ending pages of each exhibit shall be reported

on the exhibit list.

Final Pretrial Order [Doc. # 35] at p. 5 (emphasis added).

The plaintiff filed his exhibit list on April 26, 2012. Plaintiff’s Exhibits [Doc. # 38]. It

does not comply with the requirements of Part 7 of the Final Pretrial Order.

IT IS ORDERED:

(1) The plaintiff’s exhibit list [Doc. # 38] is STRICKEN; and

(2) The plaintiff shall file and serve an exhibit list, on or before May 4, 2012, that

Case 1:11-cv-01934-DME-BNB Document 39 Filed 04/27/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
2

complies with the requirements of the Final Pretrial Order. Failure to comply with this

requirement may result in the imposition of sanctions, including an order precluding the plaintiff

from introducing any exhibits into evidence at trial.

Dated April 27, 2012.

BY THE COURT:

 s/ Boyd N. Boland 

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 1:11-cv-01934-DME-BNB Document 39 Filed 04/27/12 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). 08-15988 NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T R E NE QU I NT AN I L L A, P e titio n e r- A p p e llan t, v. K A TH Y M EN D O ZA - PO W ERS, R es po nd ent- A pp el l ee . N o. 08- 15988 D. C . No . 1 : 0 6 - C V- 0 1 4 5 4 - L J ODLB ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e E a s te rn D is tr ic t o f C a lif o rn ia O l i ve rW . W a nge r , D i s tr i c tJudge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d June 15, 2011 ** B efo re: C A N B Y , O ’ S C A N N L A IN , an dF IS H E R , C i rcu i tJu d g es. C al i forni a s t at e pri soner R ene Q ui nt ani l l a app ea l s pro se fr om the di stri ct co u rt ’ s j u d g m en td en yi n g h i s 2 8 U . S . C . § 2 2 5 4 h ab eas p et i t i o n . W e d i sm i ss. 

# FI LED JU L 8 2 011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS08-15988

Q u in tan illac o n te n d s th a t th e B o a r do f P a r o le H e a r in g s ’ 2 0 0 5 d e c is io n to d e n yh im p a r o le w a s n o t s up p o rte db y“s o m e e v id e n c e ” a n dth e r e f o r e v io la te dh is du e p r o c e s s r ig h ts . A f

te rb r ie f in g w a s c o m p le te din th is c a s e , th is c o u rt h e ldth a t a c e rtif ic a te o f ap p e a lab ility( “C O A ” ) is r e q u ir e dto c h a lle n g e th e d e n ia l o f p a r o le . Se e H a y w a rd v . M a rs h a ll , 603 F . 3d 546, 554- 55 ( 9th C i r . 2010) ( e n ba nc ) . N ow the S upr e m e C ourtha s he l d tha tthe onl yf e de r a l r i ghta ti s s ue i n the pa r ol e c ont e xt i s pr oc e dur a l , a nd the onl ypr ope ri nqui ryi s w ha tpr oc e s s the i nm a t e r e c e i ve d, not w h eth er th e st at e co u rtd eci d edth e case co rrect l y. See Sw artho utv. C oo ke , 1 3 1 S. C t . 85 9, 86 3 (20 11 ) ( per c uri am ). B ec ause Q ui nt ani l l a r ai se s no p roce du ra l c ha l l e nge s r e ga r di ng hi s pa r ol e he a r i ng, aC O A c a nnoti s s ue , a nd w e di s m i s s the ap p e a l f o rla c ko f

ju r is d ic tio n . See 2 8 U .S .C . § 2 2 5 3 ( c ) ( 2 ) . W e d en y as m o o tQ u i n t an i l l a’ s m o t i o n t o l i ftth e st ay. DI S MI S S E D.
**Exhibit 15.3**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS**

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the RegistrationStatements on Form S-8 (File Nos. 333-135116 as amended, 333-125978, 333-122785, 333-107160, 333-100472, 333-81524, 333-13102, 333-07636, 033-35332, 033-04813 and 333-151490) of Ericsson of our report dated June 19, 2008 relating to the financialstatements of Sony Ericsson Mobile Communications AB, which appears in this annual report of Form 20-F/A. 

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers AB 

Stockholm, Sweden 

June 26, 2008
Case 1:11-cv-01976-LTB Document 9 Filed 10/04/11 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 3
Case 1:11-cv-01976-LTB Document 9 Filed 10/04/11 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 3
Case 1:11-cv-01976-LTB Document 9 Filed 10/04/11 USDC Colorado Page 3 of 3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

 FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO 

Criminal Case No. 11-cr-00365-WYD 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

1. GUSTAVO BARELA-HOTOF, a/k/a Gustavo Roblero, a/k/a Lopez Gustavo Roblero, 

a/k/a Alberto Gutierrez, a/k/a Alberto Zamora, a/k/a Juan Carlos Penagos, a/k/a Zacarias 

Robledo, a/k/a Gustavo Cifuentes, a/k/a Edgar Salazar, 

Defendant. 

MINUTE ORDER 

ORDER ENTERED BY CHIEF JUDGE WILEY Y. DANIEL 

 

Defendant’s Motion to Withdraw Defendant’s Request for Variance in Guideline 

Sentence (Doc. 24), [ECF No. 29], filed March 8, 2012, is GRANTED. Accordingly, 

Defendant’s motion entitled Further Grounds for Request For Variance In Guideline 

Sentence Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) [ECF No. 24], filed February 14, 2012 is 

WITHDRAWN.

Dated: March 9, 2012.