alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF2002**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Williams ScotsmanInternational, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year endingDecember 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on thedate hereof (the “Report”), I, Gerard E. Holthaus, Chief Executive Officer ofthe Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adoptedpursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1)           The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

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

 

 
|   |            | /s/    |                     | Gerard E. Holthaus |   |
|--------|-----------------|--------|--------------------------|--------------------|--------|
|   |            |   | Gerard  E. Holthaus      |
|   |            |   | Chief  Executive Officer |
|   |            |   |
| Date:  | March 17,  2006 |   |                     |
|        |                 |        |                          |                    |        |  |  |

 

1

----
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 20

- 2304

In re: STARSHA SEWELL , Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland , at Baltimore

. James K. Bredar , Chief District Judge. ( 1:18

- mc - 00114 )

Submitted : April 22, 2021 Decided: April 26, 2021

Before GREGORY, Chief Judge, AGEE , Circuit Judge , and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Starsha M. Sewell, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Starsha Sewell appeals the district court’s order returning certain pleadings to her
pursuant to a previously imposed prefiling injunction. * On ap peal, we confine our review
to the issues raised in the informal brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Sewell’s informal brief and various supplements do not challenge the district court’s rationale , she has forfeited appellate review of the court’s orde r. See Jackson v. Lightsey , 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) (“The informal brief is an important document; under Fourth Circuit rules, our review is limited to issues preserved in that brief.”). Accordingly, we affirm the district
court’s order. We de ny Sewell’s motion for enforcement. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

* To the extent that Sewell contests the prefiling injunction, we note that this court previously affirmed that order

. See In re Sewell , 732 F. App’x 221 (4th Cir. 2018) (No. 18

- 1298).
#### J. R. Hallam *v.*John Cline.

Judgment — Modification on Motion — Error of Loweir Court.

APPEAL EROM CAMPBELL OIROUIT COURT.

September 14, 1870.

*Hallam, for appellant.*

Webster, *for appellee.*

Opinion oe the Court by

Judge Robertson :

As the record does not, by bill of exceptions or otherwise, show the evidence heard by the court, we must presume from the face of the judgment, that the facts authorized the judicial recognition of the alleged terms of the oral extension of the lease, and consequently the appellant’s right to reimbursement of the cost of the improvements made by him, under faith in that contract when repudiated by the appellee.

This entitled the appellant to a judgment against the appellee for the excess of his account over that of the appellee, according to that contract for $'75 a month, which was, as to amount, altogether reasonable. Recognizing that contract, the circuit court had no authority for charging the appellant $35 a month, and especially as the appellee claimed only $30.

We therefore adjudge that the circuit court erred in not modifying the judgment on the appellant’s motion, and that consequently the judgment was erroneous as to the appellant and not so as to the appellee.

Wherefore the judgment is reversed on the original appeal only, and the cause remanded with instructions to render judgment in the appellant’s favor, according to the principle of this opinion.
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"NASA","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/nasamigrate\/","title":"Make a Paper Mars Helicopter","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"B5S5XOIzXn\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/stem-content\/make-a-paper-mars-helicopter\/\">Make a Paper Mars Helicopter<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/stem-content\/make-a-paper-mars-helicopter\/embed\/#?secret=B5S5XOIzXn\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Make a Paper Mars Helicopter” — NASA\" data-secret=\"B5S5XOIzXn\" 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\/02\/edu_srch_make_a_paper_mars_helicopter_0.gif?w=320","thumbnail_width":320,"thumbnail_height":282}
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

I, Douglas L. Schmick, Chief Executive Officer, in connection with the
Annual Report on Form 10-K of McCormick & Schmicks Seafood Restaurants, Inc. for the annual period ended December 30, 2006 (the Report), hereby certify in accordance with 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 McCormick & Schmicks Seafood Restaurants, Inc.



|                         
|-------------------------
|/s/    DOUGLAS L. SCHMICK
|Douglas L. Schmick       
|Chief Executive Officer  
|Dated: March 9, 2007
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-6628

GENE THOMAS MEYER, Petitioner - Appellant, versus RICHARD A. LANHAM, SR., Commissioner; J. JOSEPH CURRAN, JR., Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District ofMaryland, at Baltimore. Frederic N. Smalkin, District Judge. (CA98-884-S) Submitted: May 13, 1999 Decided: May 21, 1999Before WIDENER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Fred Warren Bennett, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellant. AnnabelleLouise Lisic, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF MARYLAND, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).* Although the district court’s order is marked as “filed” on March 30, 1998, the district court’s records show that it was entered on the docket sheet on March 31, 1998. Pursuant to Rules 58 and 79(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, it is the date that the order was physically entered on the docket sheet that we take as the effective date of the district court’s decision. Wilson v. Murray , 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35 (4th Cir. 1986). 2 PER CURIAM: Gene Thomas Meyer seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we denya certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See Meyer v. Lanham, No. CA-98-884-S (D. Md. Mar. 31, 1998). * We dispense with oral argument becausethe facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Jamie Adkins","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/jamieladkins-2-2-2-2-2-2-2-2\/","title":"Christyl Johnson","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"Ewq69OVrpO\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/people\/christyl-johnson\/\">Christyl Johnson<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/people\/christyl-johnson\/embed\/#?secret=Ewq69OVrpO\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Christyl Johnson” — NASA\" data-secret=\"Ewq69OVrpO\" 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\/01\/cj_port_1a.jpeg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":766}
Case: 1:20-cv-03058 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/22/20 Page 1 of 13 PageID #:1

Case: 1:20-cv-03058 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/22/20 Page 2 of 13 PageID #:2

Case: 1:20-cv-03058 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/22/20 Page 3 of 13 PageID #:3

Case: 1:20-cv-03058 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/22/20 Page 4 of 13 PageID #:4

Case: 1:20-cv-03058 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/22/20 Page 5 of 13 PageID #:5

Case: 1:20-cv-03058 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/22/20 Page 6 of 13 PageID #:6

Case: 1:20-cv-03058 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/22/20 Page 7 of 13 PageID #:7

Case: 1:20-cv-03058 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/22/20 Page 8 of 13 PageID #:8

Case: 1:20-cv-03058 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/22/20 Page 9 of 13 PageID #:9

Case: 1:20-cv-03058 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/22/20 Page 10 of 13 PageID #:10

Case: 1:20-cv-03058 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/22/20 Page 11 of 13 PageID #:11

Case: 1:20-cv-03058 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/22/20 Page 12 of 13 PageID #:12

Case: 1:20-cv-03058 Document #: 1 Filed: 05/22/20 Page 13 of 13 PageID #:13
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

COMMONWEALTH OF 

MASSACHUSETTS,

and

STATE OF WISCONSIN,

Plaintiffs,

v. 

DAIRY FARMERS OF AMERICA, INC.

and

DEAN FOODS COMPANY,

 Defendants.

No. 20 C 2658

Judge Feinerman

UNOPPOSED MOTION OF THE UNITED STATES TO APPOINT DIVESTITURE 

TRUSTEE

Plaintiff, United States of America, hereby moves this Court for entry of an order 

appointing Mr. Jerry Sturgill of CRS Capstone Partners LLC as Divestiture Trustee pursuant to 

Section V of the proposed Final Judgment in the above-captioned matter. The United States has 

informed Defendants Dairy Farmers of America, Inc., and Dean Foods Company (collectively, 

“Defendants”) that it is filing this motion, which, pursuant to the terms of the proposed Final 

Judgment, Defendants may not oppose. The Court may therefore proceed with the appointment. 

In support of its motion, the United States files herewith a Memorandum in Support of 

Unopposed Motion of the United States to Appoint Divestiture Trustee.

Case: 1:20-cv-02658 Document #: 35 Filed: 07/16/20 Page 1 of 4 PageID #:359
2

Dated: July 16, 2020

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Karl D. Knutsen 

Karl D. Knutsen

Justin Heipp

Nathaniel J. Harris

Christopher A. Wetzel

U.S. Department of Justice

Antitrust Division

Healthcare and Consumer Products Section

450 Fifth Street, NW, Suite 4100

Washington, DC 20530

202-514-0976

karl.knutsen@usdoj.gov

Case: 1:20-cv-02658 Document #: 35 Filed: 07/16/20 Page 2 of 4 PageID #:360
3

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, Karl D. Knutsen, hereby certify that on July 16, 2020, I caused a copy of the foregoing 

Unopposed Motion To Appoint Divestiture Trustee to be served on Defendants by mailing 

the document electronically to their duly authorized legal representatives as follows:

For Defendant Dairy Farmers of America, Inc.:

W. TODD MILLER

Baker & Miller

2401 Pennsylvania Ave., NW 

Washington, DC 20037

Tel: (202) 663-7822

Fax: (202) 663-7849

tmiller@bakerandmiller.com

MICHAEL G. EGGE

Latham & Watkins LLP 

555 Eleventh Street, NW, Suite 1000

Washington, DC 20004

Tel: (202) 637-2285

Fax: (202) 637-2201

michael.egge@lw.com

GARRET RASMUSSEN

Orrick Herrington & Sutcliffe LLP 

Columbia Center

1152 15th Street, N.W.

Washington, DC 20005

Tel: (202) 339-8481

Fax: (202) 339-8500

grasmussen@orrick.com

For Defendant Dean Foods Company:

ARTHUR J. BURKE

Davis Polk LLP

450 Lexington Ave.

New York, NY 

Tel: (212) 450-4352

Fax: (212) 701-5800

arthur.burke@davispolk.com

And other ECF registered users by ECF.

Case: 1:20-cv-02658 Document #: 35 Filed: 07/16/20 Page 3 of 4 PageID #:361
4

 /s/ Karl D. Knutsen

Karl D. Knutsen

Attorney for the United States

U.S. Department of Justice Antitrust Division

450 Fifth Street NW, Suite 4100

Washington, DC 20530

Tel.: 202-514-0976

Fax: 202-307-5802

E-mail: karl.knutsen@usdoj.gov

Case: 1:20-cv-02658 Document #: 35 Filed: 07/16/20 Page 4 of 4 PageID #:362
1st Amendment to the Licence Agreement



 EXHIBIT 10.24 
  
 1st AMENDMENT 

  
 to the LICENCE AGREEMENT of May 1, 2003 
  
 by and
between FUJISAWA Deutschland GmbH, a corporation organized and existing pursuant to the laws of Germany and having its registered office at Berg-am-Laim-Strasse 129, 81673 München, Germany (hereinafter referred to as “F-DE”) and
SALMEDIX, Inc., a corporation organized and existing pursuant to the laws of Delaware, having its principal office at 9380 Judicial Drive, San Diego, CA 92121, United States of America (hereinafter referred to as “SALMEDIX”). 

 
 F-DE and SALMEDIX mutually agree to amend the LICENCE AGREEMENT of May 1, 2003 between the
parties hereto as follows: 
  
 1. AMENDMENT OF ARTICLE 2 

 
 Paragraph 1 of Article 2 shall be replaced as follows: 
  
 1) F-DE grants to SALMEDIX an exclusive right and license under its Scientific Information
and Data (hereinafter defined) to develop, market, sell, import, distribute and promote the Product for all clinical indications under a SALMEDIX trademark in the Territory and to manufacture and have manufactured the Product, the Compound and any
and all drug intermediates of the same (whether within or without the Territory, but solely for the marketing, sale, distribution and promotion within the Territory). 
  
 2. OTHER 
  
 Except as specifically provided in this Amendment, the LICENCE AGREEMENT of May 1, 2003 shall remain unchanged an continue in full force and effect as it is. 

 

									
	 Munich, July 21, 2003
  
 FUJISAWA DEUTSCHLAND GmbH
	 	 	 	 San Diego,
  
 SALMEDIX, INCORPORATED

			
	 /s/ W. Tinhof

	 	 	 	 /s/ David S. Kabakoff


	 Dr. W. Tinhof, President
	 	 	 	 David S. Kabakoff, Chairman and CEO

				
	 /s/ W. Schoch

	 	 	 	 	 	 
	 W. Schoch, Executive Vice President
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 194 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                         July 24, 1997.
    Resolved, That at any time after the adoption of this resolution the Speaker 
may, pursuant to clause 1(b) of rule XXIII, declare the House resolved into the 
Committee of the Whole House on the state of the Union for consideration of the 
bill (H.R. 2203) making appropriations for energy and water development for the 
fiscal year ending September 30, 1998, and for other purposes. The first reading 
of the bill shall be dispensed with. General debate shall be confined to the 
bill and shall not exceed one hour equally divided and controlled by the 
chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations. After 
general debate the bill shall be considered for amendment under the five-minute 
rule. Points of order against provisions in the bill for failure to comply with 
clause 2 or 6 of rule XXI are waived. During consideration of the bill for 
amendment, the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may accord priority in 
recognition on the basis of whether the Member offering an amendment has caused 
it to be printed in the portion of the Congressional Record designated for that 
purpose in clause 6 of rule XXIII. Amendments so printed shall be considered as 
read. The Chairman of the Committee of the Whole may: (1) postpone until a time 
during further consideration in the Committee of the Whole a request for a 
recorded vote on any amendment; and (2) reduce to five minutes the minimum time 
for electronic voting on any postponed question that follows another electronic 
vote without intervening business, provided that the minimum time for electronic 
voting on the first in any series of questions shall be fifteen minutes. At the 
conclusion of consideration of the bill for amendment the Committee shall rise 
and report the bill to the House with such amendments as may have been adopted. 
The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the bill and amendments 
thereto to final passage without intervening motion except one motion to 
recommit with or without instructions.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 652 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  1st Session

                               H. R. 652

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

To extend the deadline under the Federal Power Act for the construction 
of a hydroelectric project located in the State of Washington, and for 
                            other purposes.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
105th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 652

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To extend the deadline under the Federal Power Act for the construction 
of a hydroelectric project located in the State of Washington, and for 
                            other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF DEADLINE.

    (a) In General.--Notwithstanding the time period specified in 
section 13 of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 806) that would 
otherwise apply to Federal Energy Regulatory Commission project 
numbered 9025, the Commission shall, upon the request of the project 
licensee, in accordance with the good faith, due diligence, and public 
interest requirements of that section and the Commission's procedures 
under that section, extend the time period during which the licensee is 
required to commence construction of the project for not more than 3 
consecutive 2-year periods.
    (b) Applicability.--An extension under subsection (a) shall take 
effect for a project upon the expiration of the extension, issued by 
the Commission under section 13 of the Federal Power Act (16 U.S.C. 
806), of the period required for commencement of construction of the 
project.
    (c) Reinstatement of Expired License.--If the license for the 
project referred to in subsection (a) has expired prior to the date of 
enactment of this Act, the Commission shall reinstate the license 
effective as of the date of its expiration and extend the time required 
for commencement of construction of the project as provided in 
subsection (a) for not more than 3 consecutive 2-year periods, the 
first of which shall commence on the date of such expiration.

            Passed the House of Representatives March 11, 1997.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
```
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

HOWARD COHAN, ) 

)

Plaintiff, )

)

vs. ) CASE NO.: 20-cv-03252

)

TRI CITY FOODS OF ILLINOIS LLC ) Judge Harry D. Leinenweber

d/b/a BURGER KING, )

)

Defendant. )

PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL OF 

ACTION PURSUANT TO FED.R.CIV.P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i)

Pursuant to FED. R. CIV. P. 41(a)(1)(A)(i), the Plaintiff, HOWARD COHAN hereby 

gives notice of the voluntary dismissal of this action with prejudice, each party to bear its own 

costs, including attorneys’ fees.

HOWARD COHAN

By: /s/ Marshall J. Burt

Marshall J. Burt

The Burt Law Group, Ltd.

Counsel for Plaintiff

77 W. Washington, Ste 1300

Chicago, IL 60602

312-419-1999

marshall@mjburtlaw.com

IARDC #6198381

Case: 1:20-cv-03252 Document #: 9 Filed: 09/15/20 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:36
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on September 15, 2020, I electronically filed this Notice of 

Settlement with the Clerk of Court using the CM/ECF system, which automatically sends 

electronic notification of its filing to all attorneys of record and to:

Robert E. Purgatorio

General Counsel

Tri-City Foods of Illinois

4415 State Highway 6

Sugar Land, Texas 77478

by emailing same on September 15, 2020

/s/ Marshall J. Burt

Marshall J. Burt

Case: 1:20-cv-03252 Document #: 9 Filed: 09/15/20 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:37