alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Network Services Agreement, btwn U.S. Bank, and Bank of Orange County



 Exhibit 10.37 
  
 Network Services Agreement, dated December 31, 2001 between 
  
 U.S. Bank, N.A. and Bank of Orange County 
  
  
 Schedule to Exhibit 10.29 
  
 Schedule of
Substantially Identical Network Services Agreement 
  
 Pursuant to Instruction
2 to Item 601 of Regulation S-K, the Network Services Agreement, dated December 31, 2001, between U.S. Bank, N.A. and Bank of Orange County (the “BOC Network Services Agreement”) is not being filed as an exhibit to the Registrant’s
registration statement on Form S-1 (File No. 333-1127778) (“Form S-1”). The BOC Network Services Agreement is substantially identical in all material respects to the Network Services Agreement between U.S. Bank, N.A. and Placer Sierra Bank
(the “PLS Network Services Agreement”), which is filed as Exhibit 10.29 to the Form S-1, except with respect to the parties thereto and the amount of a conversion support fee rebate. 
  
 Pursuant to a request for confidential treatment, a redacted form of the BOC Network Services
Agreement with substantially identical redactions as the PLS Network Services Agreement has been filed separately with the Securities and Exchange Commission.
`[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 113 Reported in House (RH)]






                                                  House Calendar No. 16
105th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 113

                          [Report No. 105-54]

  Providing for consideration of the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 62) 
 proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States with 
                      respect to tax limitations.


_______________________________________________________________________


                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 14, 1997

    Ms. Pryce, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following 
resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 
                                printed

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION


 
  Providing for consideration of the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 62) 
 proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States with 
                      respect to tax limitations.

    Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in 
order to consider in the House the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 62) 
proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States with 
respect to tax limitations. An amendment in the nature of a substitute 
consisting of the text recommended by the Committee on the Judiciary 
now printed in the joint resolution, modified by the amendment 
specified in the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this 
resolution, shall be considered as adopted. The previous question shall 
be considered as ordered on the joint resolution, as amended, and on 
any further amendment thereto to final passage without intervening 
motion except: (1) three hours of debate on the joint resolution, as 
amended, which shall be equally divided and controlled by the chairman 
and ranking minority member of the Committee on the Judiciary; (2) one 
motion to amend, if offered by the minority leader or his designee, 
which shall be considered as read and shall be separately debatable for 
one hour equally divided and controlled by the proponent and an 
opponent; and (3) one motion to recommit with or without instructions.
                                     





                                                  House Calendar No. 16

105th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                              H. RES. 113

                          [Report No. 105-54]

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

  Providing for consideration of the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 62) 
 proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States with 
                      respect to tax limitations.

_______________________________________________________________________

                             April 14, 1997

        Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed`
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Karl B. Hille","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/khille\/","title":"Big Science Drives Wallops\u2019 Upgrades for NASA Suborbital Missions","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"Ba4Dyjhlpk\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/technology\/goddard-tech\/big-science-drives-wallops-suborbital-upgrades\/\">Big Science Drives Wallops\u2019 Upgrades for NASA Suborbital Missions<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/technology\/goddard-tech\/big-science-drives-wallops-suborbital-upgrades\/embed\/#?secret=Ba4Dyjhlpk\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Big Science Drives Wallops\u2019 Upgrades for NASA Suborbital Missions” — NASA\" data-secret=\"Ba4Dyjhlpk\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2024\/05\/casba.png?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":417}
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE Northern District of Illinois − CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 6.3.3

Eastern Division

Kahleif Whitfield

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 1:20−cv−02956

Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama

Thomas Dart, et al.

Defendant.

NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRY

This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Friday, January 21, 2022:

 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Franklin U. Valderrama: Defendants'

Motions to Reassign Cases as Related Under Local Rule 40.4 [40], [44] are before the

Court. The Court permitted briefing on Defendants' motion [41], [51] and has reviewed

the motion and all briefing submitted. The Court finds that the 8 cases Defendants move

to reassign (see R. 40 at 4−5; R. 44 at 5) are related under Local Rule 40.4(a)(2), because

they involve several of the same issues of fact or law. The Court also finds that

reassignment is appropriate under Local Rule 40.4(b), because (i) all 8 cases are pending

in this District; (ii) the handling of these cases by the same Judge will save considerable

judicial resources; (iii) the earlier case has not progressed to the point where designating a

later filed case as related would be likely to delay the proceedings in the earlier case

substantially; and (iv) the cases are susceptible of disposition in a single proceeding. The

Court understands that one of the eight cases Defendant initially sought to reassign,

Reitinger v. Dart, 21−cv−2331, has since settled and has been voluntary dismissed.

Because the Court finds that the remaining 7 identified cases are related, and the 7 cases

pending before other Judges in this District may be reassigned to this Court's calendar,

Defendants' Motions to Reassign [40], [44] are granted with respect to those 7 cases. The

following cases will be reassigned for all purposes to this Court's calendar as related to

this action: Wilson v. Dart, 20−cv−7009 (pending before Judge Sara L. Ellis); Smith v.

Dart, 20−cv−7119 (pending before Judge Sara L. Ellis); Baker v. Dart, 20−cv−7246

(pending before Judge John Z. Lee); Allen Jr. v. Dart, 21−cv−545 (pending before Judge

Matthew F. Kennelly); Todd v. Dart, 21−cv−2193 (pending before Judge Charles R.

Norgle, Sr); Johnson v. Dart, 21−cv−2468 (pending before Judge John Z. Lee); and

Bonner v. Dart, 21−cv−2474 (pending before Judge Jorge L. Alonso). Mailed notice

(axc).

ATTENTION: This notice is being sent pursuant to Rule 77(d) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure or Rule 49(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. It was

generated by CM/ECF, the automated docketing system used to maintain the civil and

Case: 1:20-cv-02956 Document #: 59 Filed: 01/21/22 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:423
criminal dockets of this District. If a minute order or other document is enclosed, please

refer to it for additional information.

For scheduled events, motion practices, recent opinions and other information, visit our

web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov.

Case: 1:20-cv-02956 Document #: 59 Filed: 01/21/22 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:424
Exhibit 99.2



CERTIFICATION OF

CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

OF MILLER EXPLORATION COMPANY

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 Miller Exploration Company (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31 ,2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Deanna L. Cannon, Chief Financial Officer
of the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.S. 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.



|                                                     
|-----------------------------------------------------
|/S/    DEANNA L.
CANNON                              
|Deanna L. Cannon Chief Financial Officer May 14,
2003



33
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"NASA","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/nasamigrate\/","title":"NASA Astronauts Jessica Meir and Andrew Morgan\u2019s Scientific Journeys aboard the Space Station","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"K6qVXiMyYV\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/missions\/station\/nasa-jessica-meir-and-andrew-morgans-journeys-aboard-space-station\/\">NASA Astronauts Jessica Meir and Andrew Morgan\u2019s Scientific Journeys aboard the Space Station<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/missions\/station\/nasa-jessica-meir-and-andrew-morgans-journeys-aboard-space-station\/embed\/#?secret=K6qVXiMyYV\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“NASA Astronauts Jessica Meir and Andrew Morgan\u2019s Scientific Journeys aboard the Space Station” — NASA\" data-secret=\"K6qVXiMyYV\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2020\/04\/alt1_jsc2019e038378.png?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":400}
Case: 1:20-cv-02605 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/29/20 Page 1 of 5 PageID #:1
Case: 1:20-cv-02605 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/29/20 Page 2 of 5 PageID #:2
Case: 1:20-cv-02605 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/29/20 Page 3 of 5 PageID #:3
Case: 1:20-cv-02605 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/29/20 Page 4 of 5 PageID #:4
Case: 1:20-cv-02605 Document #: 1 Filed: 04/29/20 Page 5 of 5 PageID #:5
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Roxana Bardan","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/dbardan\/","title":"NASA invita a medios al lanzamiento de misi\u00f3n para estudiar oc\u00e9anos y nubes","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"MwkvnycGRQ\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/news-release\/nasa-invita-a-medios-al-lanzamiento-de-mision-para-estudiar-oceanos-y-nubes\/\">NASA invita a medios al lanzamiento de misi\u00f3n para estudiar oc\u00e9anos y nubes<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/news-release\/nasa-invita-a-medios-al-lanzamiento-de-mision-para-estudiar-oceanos-y-nubes\/embed\/#?secret=MwkvnycGRQ\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“NASA invita a medios al lanzamiento de misi\u00f3n para estudiar oc\u00e9anos y nubes” — NASA\" data-secret=\"MwkvnycGRQ\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/12\/pace.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":400}
**EXHIBIT 10.29**As previously reported on a Current Report on Form 8-K dated August 4, 2006, on August 2, 2006, theboard of directors of Color Kinetics Incorporated (the “Company”) approved and adopted an amendmentto the Company’s 2006 Chief Executive Officer Bonus Plan (the “Chief Executive Officer BonusPlan”), increasing his bonus target from 67% of base salary to 79% of base salary.The following is a summary of the material features of the Chief Executive Officer Bonus Plan, asamended:William Sims, our President and Chief Executive Officer (the “CEO”), is assigned a Bonus Targetequal to 79% of the CEO’s base salary. The CEO’s bonus is based on the following performancemeasures: (i) the Company’s attaining its adjusted operating income goal for 2006 as set forth inthe Company’s 2006 Operating Plan (the “AOI Goal”); and (ii) the Company’s attaining its top linerevenue goal for 2006 as set forth in the Company’s 2006 Operating Plan (the “Revenue Goal”).Achievement of at least 90% of the AOI Goal is required for payment of the portion of the CEO’sbonus that is based on attainment by the Company of the AOI Goal. The percent of payment is basedon a straight line linear scale and is equivalent to the percent of the AOI Goal achieved up to110%.Achievement of at least 85% of the Revenue Goal is required for payment of the portion of the CEO’sbonus that is based on attainment by the Company of the Revenue Goal. The percent of payment isbased on a straight line linear scale and is equivalent to the percent of the Revenue Goal achievedwith no maximum.
FILED 3/27/2024

THOMAS G. BRUTON CLERK, U.S. DISTRICT COURT

JXM

1:20-CV-02134

MR
Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed July 10, 2012.

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-12-00527-CR

STEPHEN ROBERT HOWARD, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 338th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 1276201

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Appellant entered a guilty plea to theft by check. In accordance with the terms of 

a plea bargain agreement with the State, the trial court sentenced appellant on March 9, 

2011, to two years’ deferred adjudication probation. On December 15, 2011, the State 

filed a motion to adjudicate appellant’s guilt. Appellant entered a plea of true to the 

allegations in the State’s motion to adjudicate. In accordance with the terms of a plea 

bargain agreement with the State, the trial court sentenced appellant on March 2, 2012, to 

confinement for six months in the State Jail Division of the Texas Department of 
2

Criminal Justice. Appellant filed a notice of appeal. We dismiss the appeal. 

The trial court entered a certification of the defendant’s right to appeal in which 

the court certified that the defendant waived the right of appeal. See Tex. R. App. P.

25.2(a)(2). The trial court’s certification is included in the record on appeal. See Tex. R. 

App. P. 25.2(d). The record supports the trial court’s certification. See Dears v. State, 

154 S.W.3d 610, 615 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). In the stipulation of evidence signed by 

appellant in conjunction with his plea of true, appellant initialed the following statement:

As part of my agreement with the prosecutor to plead true, I AGREE TO 

WAIVE any right to appeal I may have concerning any issue or claim in this 

case, including my plea or [sic] true or admission of guilt.

A defendant in any criminal action has a right to appeal. Tex. Code Crim. Proc. 

Ann. art. 44.02. A valid waiver of appeal, whether negotiated or non-negotiated, will 

prevent a defendant from appealing without the consent of the trial court. Monreal v. 

State, 99 S.W.3d 615, 622 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003). Although negotiated waivers of the 

right to appeal are valid, non-negotiated waivers of the right to appeal are valid only if 

the defendant waived the right of appeal, knowing with certainty the punishment that 

would be assessed. See id. at 621. Because this is a plea bargain case, and the waiver 

was negotiated as part of a plea deal, the waiver of the defendant’s right to appeal is 

valid. Id.

Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. 

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Boyce, Christopher, and Jamison.

Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).
#### Hartwig Mohr, Respondent, *v.*Nathan Feldman, Appellant.

Supreme Court, Appellate Term, First Department,

February 5, 1926.

Conversion — action for conversion of fur coat to which defendant pleaded general denial — evidence of burglary competent under general denial — exclusion of evidence error.

In an action for the conversion of a fur coat evidence to the effect that said coat had been stolen in a burglary of defendant’s store was competent under the general denial set up in defendant’s answer, and it was error to exclude said evidence on the ground that it had not been pleaded.

Appeal by defendant from a judgment of the Municipal Court, Borough of Manhattan, Fourth District, in favor of plaintiff, after a trial by a judge without a jury.

*Julius Steinberg,*for the appellant.

*John F. Forrester,*for the respondent.

Per Curiam.

Plaintiff’s summons contained a statement of the cause of action as one for “ $200 for conversion of personal property,” and the answer was, among other items, a general denial. Plaintiff proved a bailment on October 7, 1921, when he stored a fur coat with defendant with an unsuccessful demand for its return in October, 1924.

When defendant undertook to prove that the coat had been stolen in a burglary effected in defendant’s store, the evidence was excluded on the ground that it had not been pleaded. We think the evidence was competent under the general denial. (See *Schwarz*v. *Oppold,*74 N. Y. 307; *Milbank*v. *Jones,*141 id. 340, 345, 346.)

Judgment reversed and new trial ordered, with thirty dollars costs to appellant to abide the event.

Bijur and Wagner, JJ., concur; Delehanty, J., concurs in result.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS 

EASTERN DIVISION 

CHRISTIAN DIOR COUTURE, S.A., 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

CHINABRANDMALL.COM, et al., 

Defendants. 

Case No. 20-cv-02421 

Judge Robert W. Gettleman 

Magistrate Judge Susan E. Cox

NOTIFICATION OF AFFILIATES 

Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 7.1 and Local Rule 3.2, Christian Dior Couture, S.A., by and 

through its undersigned counsel, certifies that it is a wholly owned subsidiary of Christian Dior 

S.A. which is a publicly held company. 

Dated this 23rd day of April 2020. Respectfully submitted, 

/s/ Justin R. Gaudio________ 

Amy C. Ziegler 

Justin R. Gaudio 

Allyson M. Martin 

Greer, Burns & Crain, Ltd. 

300 South Wacker Drive, Suite 2500 

Chicago, Illinois 60606 

312.360.0080 

312.360.9315 (facsimile) 

 aziegler@gbc.law 

 jgaudio@gbc.law 

amartin@gbc.law 

Attorneys for Plaintiff Christian Dior Couture, S.A. 

Case: 1:20-cv-02421 Document #: 24 Filed: 04/23/20 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:2980