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

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Magistrate Judge Craig B. Shaffer

Civil Action: 11-cv-02523-REB-CBS FTR - Reporter Deck-Courtroom A402

Date: February 1, 2012 Courtroom Deputy: Robin Mason

Parties: Counsel:

BRITTANY THURMAN,

Plaintiff,

Kimberly Everette

v.

ARTHUR PETERSON, et al., 

Defendants.

Writer Mott

Gillian Dale

Amy Christine Colony

COURTROOM MINUTES/MINUTE ORDER

HEARING: TELEPHONIC MOTION HEARING

Court in Session: 11:04 a.m.

Court calls case. Appearances of counsel.

Discussion regarding Joint Motion to Stay Pending Outcome of Plaintiff's State Criminal Charges

(Docket No. 18, filed on 12/16/2011) and Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to File Answer

or Otherwise Respond re 1 Complaint, (also filed on behalf of Jefferson County Deputy Sheriff

Arthur Peterson, Jefferson County Sheriff's Office, Jefferson County, and Jefferson County Auto

Theft Task Force) (Docket No. 20, filed on 1/4/2012).

ORDERED: The court GRANTS Joint Motion to Stay Pending Outcome of Plaintiff's State

Criminal Charges (Docket No. 18, filed on 12/16/2011). The court will stay these

proceeding pending the outcome of the state criminal trial (not addressing any

appeals that may be filed). If in fact the trial is vacated and reset for some date after

March 5, 2012 (and is set out for a considerable amount of time), the plaintiff may

ask the court for reconsideration regarding the matter of the stay. If the trial goes

forward, counsel will need to put together a telephonic conference call and contact

Case 1:11-cv-02523-REB-CBS Document 32 Filed 02/01/12 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 2
Magistrate Judge Shaffer’s chambers at (303) 844-2117 within 72 hours of a jury

verdict in the state criminal case.

ORDERED: The court GRANTS Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to File Answer or

Otherwise Respond re 1 Complaint, (also filed on behalf of Jefferson County Deputy

Sheriff Arthur Peterson, Jefferson County Sheriff's Office, Jefferson County, and

Jefferson County Auto Theft Task Force) (Docket No. 20, filed on 1/4/2012). On

the assumption that the trial goes forward on March 5, 2012 the defendants will be

required to file answers (or otherwise respond to the complaint) within 14 calendar

days of a jury verdict in the state criminal case. The court will re-evaluate the

motion for extension of time if the trial is vacated (and looks like it will not move

forward for a considerable amount of time).

HEARING CONCLUDED.

Court in recess: 11:18 a.m.

Total time in court: 00:14

To order transcripts of hearings with Magistrate Judge Shaffer, please contact Avery Woods Reporting at (303)

825-6119 or toll free at 1-800-962-3345.

Case 1:11-cv-02523-REB-CBS Document 32 Filed 02/01/12 USDC Colorado Page 2 of 2
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 198 (Friday, October 10, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 60262]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-24160]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

 [Docket No. ER08-1522-000]


WG Energy LLC; Supplemental Notice That Initial Market-Based Rate 
Filing Includes Request for Blanket Section 204 Authorization

October 6, 2008.
    This is a supplemental notice in the above-referenced proceeding of 
WG Energy LLC's application for market-based rate authority, with an 
accompanying rate tariff, noting that such application includes a 
request for blanket authorization, under 18 CFR Part 34, of future 
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest should file with the 
Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the 
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 
385.214). Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve a 
copy of that document on the Applicant.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing protests with 
regard to the applicant's request for blanket authorization, under 18 
CFR Part 34, of future issuances of securities and assumptions of 
liability, is October 27, 2008.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper, using the FERC Online links at http://www.ferc.gov. To facilitate electronic service, persons with Internet 
access who will eFile a document and/or be listed as a contact for an 
intervenor must create and validate an eRegistration account using the 
eRegistration link. Select the eFiling link to log on and submit the 
intervention or protests.
    Persons unable to file electronically should submit an original and 
14 copies of the intervention or protest to the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First St., NE., Washington, DC 20426.
    The filings in the above-referenced proceeding are accessible in 
the Commission's eLibrary system by clicking on the appropriate link in 
the above list. They are also available for review in the Commission's 
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an eSubscription link 
on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail notification 
when a document is added to a subscribed dockets(s). For assistance 
with any FERC Online service, please e-mail <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#10565542535f7e7c797e75436560607f626450767562733e777f66"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="eaacafb8a9a5848683848fb99f9a9a85989eaa8c8f9889c48d859c">[email protected]</span></a> 
or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E8-24160 Filed 10-9-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
```

                                                              EXHIBIT 10(y)(iii)

                       EXECUTIVE COMPENSATION ARRANGEMENTS

The compensation of Victor Insetta, the Company's President and Chief Executive
Officer, and Judah Wolf, the Company's Senior Vice President, Thin Film
Products, is governed by the terms of their respective employments agreements.
Pursuant to his agreement, Mr. Insetta was paid base compensation for the fiscal
year ended June 30, 2004 of $350,000. The agreement provides for further
increases in Mr. Insetta's base salary by the Board of Directors from time to
time in its sole discretion. The agreement also provides that, as additional
annual compensation, Mr. Insetta is entitled to an amount equal to 2.5% of the
Company's net income (before such incentive compensation and before income
taxes). On February 8, 2005, the Compensation Committee of the Board of
Directors of the Company approved an increase in salary for Victor Insetta, the
Company's Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer, from $350,000 to
$390,000 per annum, effective June 1, 2005.

Mr. Wolf's agreement provides for annual base compensation of $125,000,
increasing by 8% in each successive year of the agreement. Mr. Wolf's current
base salary under the agreement is $157,464. In addition, Mr. Wolf receives a
quarterly incentive bonus equal to 3% of the Thin Film Profit Contribution (as
defined in his agreement). Mr. Wolf's annual bonus is determined in accordance
with the Company's Officers' Bonus Plan. Any amount to which he would be
entitled under such plan shall be reduced by an amount equal to one half of one
percent of the Thin Film Profit Contribution.

The base compensation for each of Richard Monsorno, the Company's Senior Vice
President, Technology, and David Ott, the Company's Senior Vice President, New
York Operations, is determined annually by the Board of Directors. Mr.
Monsorno's and Mr. Ott's current base salaries are $214,681 and $206,000,
respectively. Each of them is also entitled to bonuses pursuant to the Company's
Officers' Bonus Plan.
```
<PAGE>
EXHIBIT 32.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ENACTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of DCB Financial Corp (the "Company") on
Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Jeffrey Benton,
President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as enacted 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
Company.


/s/ Jeffrey Benton
-------------------------------------
Jeffrey Benton
President and Chief Executive Officer
August 5, 2005


                                                                              28
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Honorable Marcia S. Krieger

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02570-MSK-KLM

MARY OZNOFF,

Plaintiff,

v.

MERCK SHARP & DOEHME CORP.,

Defendant.

 

ORDER OF RECUSAL

 

THIS MATTER arises sua sponte. The undersigned is a beneficiary of a trust whose

assets include shares in one of the parties. Accordingly, the undersigned has a financial interest

in a party to the proceeding, and 28 U.S.C. § 455(b)(4) and the CODE OF CONDUCT FOR UNITED

STATES JUDGES require her recusal in this matter

Accordingly, the undersigned hereby RECUSES herself from hearing this matter. 

The Clerk shall randomly reassign this case to another judge of this Court.

DATED this 17th day of October, 2011.

BY THE COURT:

Marcia S. Krieger

United States District Judge

Case 1:11-cv-02570-WYD-KLM Document 7 Filed 10/17/11 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

# **CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Natrol, Inc.(the “Company”) for the period ended June 30, 2004, as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), theundersigned, in the capacity and on the date listed below, hereby certifies,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

 

(1)           The Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 

This Certification is provided solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350, and Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-K promulgated under theSecurities Act of 1933, as amended, and shall not be deemed part of the Reportor “filed” for any purpose whatsoever, nor shall it be deemed incorporated byreference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934.

 

 
| Date: August 25, 2004 |                                                     |
|-----------------------|----------------------------------------------------------|
|                  |   /s/ Dennis R. Jolicoeur                      |   |
|                  |   Dennis R. Jolicoeur                          |
|                  |   Chief Financial Officer and Executive        |
|                  |   Vice President (Principal Financial Officer) |

 

----
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 ZAP (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2013 as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), each of the undersigned certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:


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
















Dated:  August 14, 2013 By: /s/ Alex Wang


Alex Wang


Co-Chief Executive Officer


(Co-Principal Executive Officer).





Dated:  August 14, 2013 By: /s/ Charles Schillings


Charles Schillings


Co-Chief Executive Officer


(Co-Principal Executive Officer).








Dated: August 14, 2013 By: /s/  Chi Kwong FUNG


Chi Kwong FUNG


Finance Director


(Principal Financial Officer)
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             AUG-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-31-1997
<CASH>                                         128,051
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,775,658
<ALLOWANCES>                                   117,000
<INVENTORY>                                  3,071,971
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             7,162,546
<PP&E>                                       2,804,888
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,643,757
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              16,397,116
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        6,729,053
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        23,472
<OTHER-SE>                                   5,529,655
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                16,397,116
<SALES>                                     12,894,711
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            12,894,711
<CGS>                                        7,149,675
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                7,149,675
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             4,514,287
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             291,108
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                933,685
<INCOME-TAX>                                   351,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   582,685
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .24
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .24
        

</TABLE>
#### The State, ex rel. The Crystal Tissue Co., *v.*Industrial Commission of Ohio.

(No. 25049

Decided April 24, 1935.)

*321
      *Mr. Stanley S.*Stewart, for relator.

*Mr. John W. Bricher,*attorney general, and *Mr. B. B. Zurmehly,*for respondent.

Weygandt, C. J.

Solution of the single question here presented depends upon the provisions of the last paragraph [4] of Section 1465-54, General Code. This reads as follows:

> “The industrial commission of Ohio shall have the power to apply that form of rating system which, in its judgment, is best calculated to merit or individually rate the risk most equitably, predicated upon the basis of its individual industrial accident experience, and to encourage and stimulate accident prevention; shall develop fixed and equitable rules controlling the same, which rules, however, shall conserve to each risk the basic principles of workmen’s compensation insurance.”

The relator contends that “its individual industrial accident experience” should include the additional fact of Seraggs’ death, and that this requires a refund *322of premium, proportionate to that part of the award now unpaid and abated.

The respondent insists that under the circumstances of this case the relator’s “accident experience” must be determined from the fact of the employee’s *injury,*and that the employer cannot relieve itself of any part of that onus by pleading the subsequent death of the employee.

With the latter contention this court finds itself in unanimous agreement. This view is consistent with the above and related provisions of the statutes. In these there is no language to indicate that “accident experience” implies mere financial experience or compensation experience in the actual payment of awards to injured employees. On the contrary it is clearly apparent that under these provisions an employer’s rating is not necessarily determined even from “accident experience” alone. It should be noted that payment of compensation is not the only purpose of the Workmen’s Compensation Act. Another is “to encourage and stimulate accident prevention”; and in exercising its powers the Industrial Commission is expressly authorized to reflect its judgment in this respect in the rating it applies.

In the instant case the determination of the employer’s “accident experience” was definitely and properly predicated upon the fact of the employee’s injury, and inasmuch as the latter’s subsequent death was held to be unrelated to the injury, it would seem that neither the death nor the consequent abatement of the unpaid compensation should be considered as an element in the employer’s “accident experience”.

In conformity with the foregoing views the prayer of the petition is denied and the action is dismissed at the relator’s costs.

*Writ denied.*

Stephenson, Williams, Jones, Matthias, Day and Zimmerman, JJ., concur.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR 

THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO 

Judge Raymond P. Moore 

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02306-RM-KLM 

LARRY D. FREDERICK, 

Plaintiff 

v. 

HARTFORD UNDERWRITERS INSURANCE COMPANY, 

Defendant 

 

ORDER GRANTING JOINT MOTION TO ADMINISTRATIVELY CLOSE CASE

 

THIS MATTER comes before the Court upon the parties’ Joint Motion to Administratively 

Close Case (ECF No. 82). 

THE COURT, having reviewed the Joint Motion, and being otherwise sufficiently advised 

in the premises, HEREBY ORDERS: 

1. The Joint Motion is GRANTED; 

2. This case is administratively closed, effective as of today’s date; and 

3. Either party may move to reopen the case at any time for good cause within 

45 days after an opinion in Maxwell, et al. v. USAA, et al., District Court, 

Boulder, Colorado, Case No. 2006CV323 issues or certiorari is denied. 

DATED this 15th day of January, 2014. 

 BY THE COURT: 

____________________________________ 

RAYMOND P. MOORE 

United States District Judge 

Case 1:11-cv-02306-RM-KLM Document 83 Filed 01/15/14 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Civil Action No. 11-cv-02560-MSK-MEH

EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION,

Plaintiff,

WENDY CABRERA,

Intervenor Plaintiff,

v.

THE ORIGINAL HONEYBAKED HAM COMPANY OF GEORGIA, INC.,

Defendant.

MINUTE ORDER

Entered by Michael E. Hegarty, United States Magistrate Judge, on January 9, 2013.

Before the Court is Defendant’s Motion for Sanctions Under Fed. R. Civ. P. 37 Against

Plaintiff for Failure to Comply in Good Faith with the Court’s Order and Amended Order on Motion

to Compel [filed December 21, 2012; docket #269]. The motion appears to be duplicative of a

motion filed on the same date at docket #267, which remains pending before the Court. However,

the present motion was filed under restriction and has attached to it Exhibits A and D, also filed

under restriction. The motion filed at docket #267 does not include copies of Exhibits A and D, but

states that they are filed under restriction. Therefore, the Court must conclude that the present

motion was filed in error as duplicative and that the Defendant intended to file a motion for

restriction of public access pursuant to D.C. Colo. LCivR 7.2 with respect to Exhibits A and D,

which pertain to the motion filed at docket #267. 

Accordingly, the present motion is denied as moot; however, Defendant may file a motion

to restrict access concerning Exhibits A and D on or before January 16, 2013, in accordance with

D.C. Colo. LCivR 7.2 and all applicable local and federal rules. The Clerk of the Court is directed

to maintain under restriction those documents identified as Exhibits A (docket #268-1) and D

(docket #268-2) until further order of the Court.

Case 1:11-cv-02560-MSK-MEH Document 286 Filed 01/09/13 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1


                         INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT


We consent to the incorporation by reference into Colorado MEDtech, Inc.'s
Registration Statements File Nos. 333-17207 (Form S-8), 333-93689 (Form S-3),
333-70755 (Form S-8), 333-64705 (Form S-3) and 333-50168 (Form S-8) of our
report dated August 14, 2002, with respect to the consolidated balance sheet of
Colorado MEDtech, Inc. as of June 30, 2002, and the related consolidated
statements of operations, shareholders' equity and comprehensive income (loss),
and cash flows for the year then ended, which report appears in the June 30,
2002, annual report on Form 10-K/A of Colorado MEDtech, Inc. The consolidated
balance sheet as of June 30, 2001 and the consolidated statements of operations,
shareholders' equity and comprehensive income (loss) and cash flows for the
years ended June 30, 2001 and 2000 were audited by other auditors who have
ceased operations. Our report contains an explanatory paragraph discussing our
audit of: (i) certain adjustments made to restate the June 30, 2001 balance
sheet and statement of shareholders' equity and comprehensive income (loss) for
the year then ended to reclassify notes receivable from related parties, (ii)
certain transitional disclosures required by SFAS 142 "Goodwill and Other
Intangible Assets" and reflected in the June 30, 2001 and 2000 financial
statements, and (iii) certain adjustments that were applied to restate the
disclosures for reportable segments reflected in the June 30, 2001 and 2000
financial statements.


KPMG LLP



Denver, Colorado,
     June 10, 2003.
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 annual report of Heritage Bankshares, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-KSB for
the year ending December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Michael S. Ives, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:

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: June 9, 2006 |  | /s/ Michael S. Ives                  
|                   |  | Michael S. Ives,                     
|                   |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
Case No. 1:11-cv-02106-PAB-CBS Document 20 filed 10/11/11 USDC Colorado pg 1 of 1
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO

Magistrate Judge David L. West

Criminal No. 11-PO-00149-DLW

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

vs.

1. MARK L. HALPER,

Defendant.

 

MINUTE ORDER SETTING HEARING

 

ORDER ENTERED BY MAGISTRATE JUDGE DAVID L. WEST

The Defendant has filed Motion for Injunctive Relief - Temporary and Amended Motion for

Injunctive Relief - Temporary [Docs. #88 & #89].

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the Court will hear these motions on April 16, 2013 at

3:00 p.m. along with any motions filed regarding modification of the Defendant’s probation.

DATED: March 29, 2013.

BY THE COURT:

s/David L. West 

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 1:11-po-00149-DW Document 92 Filed 03/29/13 USDC Colorado Page 1 of 1