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

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 11-CV-02106-PAB-CBS

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff,

 

v.

DEFENDANT 1: ONE PARCEL OF PROPERTY

LOCATED AT 927 COLE STREET, GOLDEN,

COLORADO, with all appurtenances,

improvements and attachments thereon,

DEFENDANT 2: ONE 2008 TOYOTA 

HIGHLANDER, VIN #JTEES42A182076495,

 Defendants.

______________________________________________________________________________

DECLARATION OF PUBLICATION

______________________________________________________________________________

Notice of Civil Forfeiture was posted on an official government internet site

www.forfeiture.gov for at least 30 consecutive days, beginning on February 15, 2012, as

required by Rule G(4)(a)(iv)(C) of the Supplemental Rules for Admiralty or Maritime Claims

and Asset Forfeiture Actions, as evidenced by Attachment 1.

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. 

Executed on April 6, 2012.

/s/Christine E. Kenney

CHRISTINE E. KENNEY #13542

Special Attorney

444 S.E. Quincy, Suite 290

Topeka, KS 66683-3592

Tel: 785-295-2850

Fax: 785-295-2853

1

Case No. 1:11-cv-02106-PAB-CBS Document 44 filed 04/06/12 USDC Colorado pg 1 of 2
Christine.kenney@usdoj.gov

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on April 6, 2012, I electronically filed the foregoing with the clerk of

the court by using the CM/ECF system which will send a notice of electronic filing to counsel of

record.

/s/Christine E. Kenney

CHRISTINE E. KENNEY #13542

Special Attorney

444 S.E. Quincy, Suite 290

Topeka, KS 66683-3592

Tel: 785-295-2850

Fax: 785-295-2853

Christine.kenney@usdoj.gov

2

Case No. 1:11-cv-02106-PAB-CBS Document 44 filed 04/06/12 USDC Colorado pg 2 of 2
EXHIBIT 11



NORTH PITTSBURGH SYSTEMS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES



Statement of Computation of Earnings per Share

(Amounts in Thousands  Except Per Share Data)



|                                           |  | For theThree MonthsEnded Sept. 30 |        | For theNine MonthsEnded Sept. 30
|------------------------------------------ |  | --------------------------------- | ------ | --------------------------------
|                                           |  | 2003                              |        | 2002                            
|Net Income                                 |  | $                                 | 3,870  |                                 
|                                           |  |                                   |        |                                 
|Weighted average common shares outstanding |  |                                   | 15,005 |                                 
|                                           |  |                                   |        |                                 
|Basic and diluted earnings per share       |  | $                                 | .26    |                                 
|                                           |  |                                   |        |                                 

|
|
Exhibit 32.1

Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,

As Adopted Pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of iGATE Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30,
2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Phaneesh Murthy, Chief Executive Officer and Director of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to
§ 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:

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

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



|                                                    
|----------------------------------------------------
|/S/    PHANEESH
MURTHY                              
|Phaneesh Murthy
Chief Executive Officer and Director

Date: July 28, 2010
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02568-CMA-BNB

THE WELLINGER FAMILY TRUST 1998;

JULIE WELLINGER, trustee, and

JULIE WELLINGER, individually,

Plaintiffs,

v.

HARTFORD LIFE AND ACCIDENT INSURANCE COMPANY, a Connecticut insurance

company,

Defendant.

______________________________________________________________________________

MINUTE ORDER

______________________________________________________________________________

Minute Order Entered by Magistrate Judge Boyd N. Boland

This matter is before the Court on the Stipulated Motion to Amend the Scheduling

Order [docket no. 28, filed May 30, 2012] (the “Motion”).

IT IS ORDERED that the Motion is GRANTED and the parties shall designate all

rebuttal experts and provide opposing counsel with all information specified in Fed. R. Civ. P.

26(a)(2) on or before June 13, 2012.

DATED: May 30, 2012

Case 1:11-cv-02568-CMA-BNB Document 30 Filed 05/30/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
----

----

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

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

| Date:  | 5/25/10 |   |                                                           |   |
|--------|---------|--------|----------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   |    |   |                                                           |   |
|   |    |   | /s/ PATRICK J. LAWLOR                                          |   |
|   |    |   | Patrick J. Lawlor                                              |   |
|   |    |   | Vice President Finance,Chief Financial Officer & Secretary |   |

----

----
II 

Calendar No. 452 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1347 

[Report No. 110–208] 

To amend the Omnibus Indian Advancement Act to modify the date as 

of which certain tribal land of the Lytton Rancheria of California is 

deemed to be held in trust and to provide for the conduct of certain 

activities on the land. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 9, 2007 

Mrs. FEINSTEIN introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs 

OCTOBER 26, 2007 

Reported by Mr. DORGAN, without amendment 

A BILL 

To amend the Omnibus Indian Advancement Act to modify 

the date as of which certain tribal land of the Lytton 

Rancheria of California is deemed to be held in trust 

and to provide for the conduct of certain activities on 

the land. 

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

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

2 

•S 1347 RS

1 SECTION 1. LYTTON RANCHERIA OF CALIFORNIA. 

2 Section 819 of the Omnibus Indian Advancement Act 

3 (Public Law 106–568; 114 Stat. 2919) is amended— 

4 (1) in the first sentence, by striking ‘‘Notwith5 standing’’ and inserting the following: 

6 ‘‘(a) ACCEPTANCE OF LAND.—Notwithstanding’’; 

7 (2) in the second sentence, by striking ‘‘The 

8 Secretary’’ and inserting the following: 

9 ‘‘(b) DECLARATION.—The Secretary’’; and 

10 (3) by striking the third sentence and inserting 

11 the following: 

12 ‘‘(c) TREATMENT OF LAND FOR PURPOSES OF CLASS

13 II GAMING.— 

14 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—Subject to paragraph (2), 

15 notwithstanding any other provision of law, the 

16 Lytton Rancheria of California may conduct activi17 ties for class II gaming (as defined in section 4 of 

18 the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (25 U.S.C. 

19 2703)) on the land taken into trust under this sec20 tion. 

21 ‘‘(2) REQUIREMENT.—The Lytton Rancheria of 

22 California shall not expand the exterior physical 

23 measurements of any facility on the Lytton 

24 Rancheria in use for class II gaming activities on 

25 the date of enactment of this paragraph. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

3 

•S 1347 RS

1 ‘‘(d) TREATMENT OF LAND FOR PURPOSES OF

2 CLASS III GAMING.—Notwithstanding subsection (a), for 

3 purposes of class III gaming (as defined in section 4 of 

4 the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act (25 U.S.C. 2703)), the 

5 land taken into trust under this section shall be treated, 

6 for purposes of section 20 of the Indian Gaming Regu7 latory Act (25 U.S.C. 2719), as if the land was acquired 

8 on October 9, 2003, the date on which the Secretary took 

9 the land into trust.’’. 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

Calendar No. 452 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1347 

[Report No. 110

–208] 

A BILL 

To amend the Omnibus Indian Advancement Act to 

of certain activities on the land. be held in trust and to provide for the conduct the Lytton Rancheria of California is deemed to modify the date as of which certain tribal land of 

OCTOBER 26, 2007 

Reported without amendment 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Richard P. Matsch, Senior District Judge

Civil Action Number 11-cv-02548-RPM

ROBERT M. MIERAU,

Plaintiff,

vs.

TURNER CONSTRUCTION COMPANY,

Defendant.

____________________________________________________________________

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

_____________________________________________________________________

In this civil action complaint, Robert M. Mierau alleges that the termination of his

employment after more than 22 years of service was in violation of 29 U.S.C. § 1140

because it was motivated by an intent to deprive him of his right to pension benefits

under the defendant’s ERISA Plan. The defendant moved to dismiss under

Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6). In that motion the employer includes a statement of facts with

exhibits A and B, being the Cash Balance Retirement Plan and Amendment Number

Two. The plaintiff’s benefit accruals ended on December 31, 2003, so Mr. Mierau’s

were vested and only earning’s based credits are added, which do not require continued

employment. In his opposition to defendant’s motion, the plaintiff does not challenge

this fact but in the complaint and his response Mr. Mierau contends that he was entitled

to unspecified “make-up” payments.

Because the plaintiff has not pleaded facts making a plausible claim for a

violation of § 1140, it is

ORDERED that this civil action is dismissed pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 12(b)(6).

Case 1:11-cv-02548-RPM Document 15 Filed 02/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
Dated this 16th day of February, 2012.

BY THE COURT:

s/Richard P. Matsch

__________________________

Richard P. Matsch, Senior Judge

Case 1:11-cv-02548-RPM Document 15 Filed 02/16/12 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
| | Direct Phone: | (503) 952-7329        
| | ------------- | ----------------------
| | Direct Fax:   | (503) 952-7414        
| | E-Mail:       | mark.peterman@wfsg.com

## EXHIBIT 10.1

August 4, 2003

Jay H. Memmott
Wilshire Financial Services Group Inc.
14523 SW Millikan Way, Suite 200
Beaverton, Oregon  97005

Re:      Wilshire Financial Services Group Inc. - Change-in-Control Plan

Dear  Jay,

Wilshire Financial Services
Group Inc. has provided you with a Change-in-Control Plan dated as of June 22,
2000, as modified by a letter agreement dated April 5, 2001. Section 7.6 of the
Change-in-Control agreement is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with
the following:

| | 7.6      Term
| | -------------

| | This
Plan shall expire and be of no further force and effect on December 31, 2003
provided, however, if the Company engages an investment banker to determine if
Wilshire Credit Corporation should and could be sold under terms and conditions
satisfactory to the Company, then this Plan shall continue or re-commence and
then shall expire and be of no further force and effect on the date that is 90
days after termination of the services of the investment banker, unless by such
date there is an agreement or letter of intent executed by Wilshire Credit
Corporation and/or the Company for the potential sale of Wilshire Credit
Corporation or its assets.
| | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

If this letter correctly
expresses your understanding of our agreement, please sign one duplicate
original in the space provided below and return it to me.

| | Sincerely yours,
| | ----------------

| | Stephen P. Glennon     
| | -----------------------
| | Chief Executive Officer

MHP:lb
Enclosure

|Agreed: | ----------------------------------
|------- | ----------------------------------
|        | Jay H. Memmott                    
|        | Date:  August 4, 2003
-1-

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Criminal Case No. 11-cr-00361-WYD

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

1. THOMAS DANIEL SANCHEZ,

Defendant.

ORDER REGARDING COMPETENCY 

This matter initially came before me on the Motion to Determine Competency of

Defendant Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 4241, filed January 31, 2012 [ECF No. 27], by

counsel for Defendant Thomas Sanchez. By Order dated February 9, 2012 [ECF No.

28], I granted the motion and concluded that pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 4241(a),

“reasonable cause exists to believe that the defendant may presently be suffering from

a mental disease or defect rendering him mentally incompetent to the extent that he is

unable to understand the nature and consequences of the proceedings against him or

to assist properly in his defense.” I then ordered that Defendant be committed to the

custody of the Attorney General for a psychiatric or psychological evaluation by a

licensed certified psychiatrist or psychologist designated and provided by the Bureau of

Prisons. That evaluation took place at the Federal Detention Center in Seattle,

Washington, and a report was submitted to the Court and counsel for the parties on
-2-

May 10, 2012. 

The report concludes that “[f]rom the available information, there is no evidence

to indicate that Mr. Sanchez currently suffers from a mental disorder that would

substantially impair his present ability to understand the nature and consequences of

the court proceedings brought against him, or impair his ability to assist counsel in his

defense.” At a status conference on May 31, 2012, counsel for the parties indicated

that they accept the conclusions contained in the report and have no objection to a

finding by the Court that Defendant is competent to proceed in this matter based on the

report. In addition, counsel for Defendant stated that a hearing to determine

competency pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 4241(a) need not be conducted. 

Therefore, I hereby accept the conclusions contained in report the find that

Defendant is mentally competent to proceed in this matter within the meaning of 18

U.S.C. § 4241. 

 Dated: June 4, 2012.

BY THE COURT:

s/ Wiley Y. Daniel 

WILEY Y. DANIEL,

CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case No. 1:11-cv-02106-PAB-CBS Document 41 filed 03/14/12 USDC Colorado pg 1 of 2
Case No. 1:11-cv-02106-PAB-CBS Document 41 filed 03/14/12 USDC Colorado pg 2 of 2
#### JUZAN NICHOLAS & CO. v. FIDELITY & DEPOSIT CO. OF MARYLAND.

No. 14809.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. Orleans.

Feb. 26, 1934.

John C. Hollingsworth, Normann & McMahon, and Harold M. Rouchell, all of New Orleans, for appellant.

P. M. Milner, of New Orleans, for appel-lee.

PER CURIAM.

This matter comes before us on motion to dismiss the appeal. The only ground presented for dismissal is that the appeal “is utterly frivolous.”

In Succession of Damico, 161 La. 725, 109 So. 402, 403, the Supreme Court, in refusing to dismiss an appeal on the ground that it had not been seriously taken, said:

> “ * * * in all cases where an appeal lies, such appeal must be granted, and cannot be denied because it is said to be frivolous, or taken merely for delay, or only ‘to abuse the right of appeal.’ State ex rel. Duffard v. Recorder, 45 La. Ann. 1299, 14 So. 66.

> “The remedy for an alleged frivolous appeal is, therefore, not the dismissal of the appeal, but *the affirmance of the judgment appealed from*when the appeal is heard in due course and actually found to be without merit.”

In Succession of Pavelka, 161 La. 728, 109 So. 403, we find the following:

> “ * * * It appears that the grounds for dismissing the appeal are that the appeal is frivolous, and was taken for delay and to harass the appellee. A motion to dismiss an appeal cannot be based upon the ground that the appeal is frivolous. This is so, because to determine whether the appeal is frivolous requires an examination into, and a decision on, the merits of the appeal. Such examination and decision can be made properly only after the appeal has been heard, in due course, on its merits.”

See, also, Reiners v. St. Ceran, 27 La. Ann. 112; Baker v. Frellsen, 32 La. Ann. 822; Succession of Baumgarden, 35 La. Ann. 675; Thomas v. Guilbeau, 35 La. Ann. 927; Pasley v. McConnell, 39 La. Ann. 1097, 3 So. 484, 485; John Barkley & Co. v. Ham & Seymour, 157 La. 874, 103 So. 245; Keen & Woolf v. Caldwell, 161 La. 150, 108 So. 318; Louque v. Hercules Oil Co., 170 La. 355, 127 So. 866; Cochran v. Louisiana State Board of Education, 168 La. 1030, 123 So. 664, judgment affirmed 281 U. S. 370, 50 S. Ct. 335, 74 L. Ed. 913; Borden v. Louisiana State Board of Education, 168 La. 1005, 123 So. 655, 67 A. L. R. 1183; Bertoniere v. Savoure, 163 La. 1073, 113 So. 459; National City Bank of Chicago v. Barringer, 139 La. 630, 71 So. 894; Code Prac. art 907.

The motion to dismiss the appeal is denied.

Motion to dismiss appeal denied.
| 1.   | He is the duly elected and acting Co-Chief Executive Officer and Secretary of ZAP, a California corporation (the "Corporation"). |
|----------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2.   | Article III, paragraph (1) of the Amended and Restated Articles of Incorporation of the Corporation is amended and restated to read in full as follows: |
|----------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 3.   | The foregoing amendment has been approved by the Board of Directors of the Corporation in accordance with Section 902 of the California Corporations Code and the Bylaws of the Corporation. |
|----------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 4.   | The foregoing amendment was approved by the holders of the requisite number of shares of the Corporation in accordance with Section 902 and 903 of the California Corporations Code and the Bylaws of the Corporation. |
|----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 5.   | The total number of outstanding shares entitled to vote with respect to the foregoing amendment was 218,668,760 shares of Common Stock, which are issued and outstanding on the record date. The number of shares of Common Stock voting in favor of the foregoing amendment equaled or exceeded the vote required. The vote required was a majority of the outstanding shares of Common Stock. The Corporation has no outstanding shares of Preferred Stock. |
|----------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Exhibit 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

We have issued our report dated June 5, 2002, accompanying the consolidated financial statements and schedule included in the Annual Report of Gradco Systems,
Inc. on Form 10-K for the year ended March 31, 2002. We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of said report in the Registration Statements of Gradco Systems, Inc. on Forms S-8 (File No.
33-35656, effective June 29, 1990 and File No. 333-45483, effective February 3, 1998).

/s/
Grant Thornton LLP

Irvine,
California
July 9, 2002

---

QuickLinks
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 194 (Monday, October 6, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 58276]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-23498]


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

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

    Notice is hereby given, pursuant to the provisions of the 
Government in the Sunshine Act, Public Law 94-409, that the Securities 
and Exchange Commission will hold a Closed Meeting on Wednesday, 
October 1, 2008, at 2 p.m.
    Commissioners, Counsels to the Commissioners, the Secretary to the 
Commission, and certain staff members who have an interest in the 
matter will attend the Closed Meeting.
    The General Counsel of the Commission, or his designee, has 
certified that, in his opinion, one or more of the exemptions as set 
forth in 5 U.S.C. 552b(c)(8) and (9) and 17 CFR 200.402(a)(8) and (9), 
permit consideration of the scheduled matter at the Closed Meeting.
    Commissioner Aguilar, as duty officer, voted to consider the item 
listed for the closed meeting in closed session, and determined that no 
earlier notice thereof was possible.
    The subject matter of the Closed Meeting scheduled for Wednesday, 
October 1, 2008, will be: Matters Related to the Financial Markets.
    At times, changes in Commission priorities require alterations in 
the scheduling of meeting items. For further information and to 
ascertain what, if any, matters have been added, deleted or postponed, 
please contact: The Office of the Secretary at (202) 551-5400.

    Dated: October 1, 2008.
Jill M. Peterson,
Assistant Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-23498 Filed 10-3-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P