alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 14 

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 11-15 Filed: 08/27/20 Page 1 of 3 PageID #:200
From: Katrina Carroll

To: Weibell, Tony

Cc: Tom R. Freeman; Marc E. Masters; Jonathan Rotter; Marc L. Godino; Kara Wolke; Lionel Glancy; David M. Given;

Nicholas A. Carlin; James J. Pizzirusso; Megan E. Jones; Amanda Klevorn; Korey Nelson;

dgirard@girardsharp.com; jelias@girardsharp.com; apolk@girardsharp.com; bfj@chimicles.com;

bmm@chimicles.com; Kyle Shamberg; Nicholas Lange; lweaver@bfalaw.com; akeller@dicellolevitt.com;

dmillen@fklmlaw.com; bhogan@fklmlaw.com; Jon Jagher; kjustice@fklmlaw.com; jsprengel@caffertyclobes.com;

dherrera@caffertyclobes.com; nhagman@caffertyclobes.com; rrg@gordonlawchicago.com;

jgs@sstriallawyers.com; tyiatras@gmail.com; casey@lawofficeflynn.com; francisflynn@gmail.com;

jbk@sstriallawyers.com; twolfson@ahdootwolfson.com; rahdoot@ahdootwolfson.com;

tmaya@ahdootwolfson.com; bking@ahdootwolfson.com; rstephan@stephanzouras.com;

jzouras@stephanzouras.com; aficzko@stephanzouras.com; mshannon@stephanzouras.com;

elangeland@langelandlaw.com; jtostrud@tostrudlaw.com; fbottini@bottinilaw.com; achang@bottinilaw.com;

ykolesnikov@bottinilaw.com; jcotchett@cpmlegal.com; mmolumphy@cpmlegal.com;

tredenbarger@cpmlegal.com; nrahman@cpmlegal.com; ehg@classlawgroup.com; dmb@classlawgroup.com;

jbk@classlawgroup.com; william.a.baird.1@gmail.com; jguglielmo@scott-scott.com; ecomite@scott-scott.com;

jpettigrew@scott-scott.com; ekirkwood1@bellsouth.net; Wichmann@onderlaw.com; Onder@onderlaw.com;

ssklaver@susmangodfrey.com; Kalpana Srinivasan; mgervais@susmangodfrey.com; ecc@fmcolaw.com;

kcc@fmcolaw.com; rmf@fmcolaw.com; beth@feganscott.com; melissa@feganscott.com;

jonathan@feganscott.com; Benyamin, Ryan; Kowalk, Curtis; Ekwan E. Rhow

Subject: [EXTERNAL] RE: Demand Letter

Date: Tuesday, August 25, 2020 8:34:28 AM

Attachments: image007.png

image008.png

image009.png

image010.png

image011.png

image012.png

image013.png

Tony:

Following up on our conversation last night, Jon and I continue to believe that it is in the best

interests of the class to share (under Rule 408 and any other necessary confidentiality orders) the

settlement terms we reached on August 13th with all plaintiffs’ counsel. To that end, as you already

know, we waived mediation privilege last week regarding the August 13th settlement. Further, to

the extent that defendant is willing to discuss with the non-settling plaintiffs whether they can agree

to the settlement terms already negotiated or alternatively, to add value to the settlement, we are

fully supportive of those endeavors, whether they be conducted through Layn Phillips or not. We

would willingly participate in those discussions and assist in the process in any way we can.

Best,

Katrina

KATRINA CARROLL

Partner

CARLSON LYNCH LLP

111 W. Washington Street

Suite 1240

Chicago, IL 60602

Main: 312.750.1265

Direct: 312.750.1591

Fax: 773.598.5609

kcarroll@carlsonlynch.com

carlsonlynch.com

Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 11-15 Filed: 08/27/20 Page 2 of 3 PageID #:201
Case: 1:20-cv-04699 Document #: 11-15 Filed: 08/27/20 Page 3 of 3 PageID #:202
```

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 220 (Friday, November 14, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 68222]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-27177]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION

Sunshine Act Meetings

TIME AND DATE:  10:00 a.m., Friday, November 21, 2014.

PLACE:  Three Lafayette Centre, 1155 21st Street NW., Washington, DC, 
9th Floor Commission Conference Room.

STATUS:  Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:  Surveillance, enforcement, and examinations 
matters. In the event that the time, date, or location of this meeting 
changes, an announcement of the change, along with the new time, date, 
and/or place of the meeting will be posted on the Commission's Web site 
at http://www.cftc.gov.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:  Christopher Kirkpatrick, 202-418-
5964.

Christopher J. Kirkpatrick,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2014-27177 Filed 11-12-14; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
```
<PAGE>

                                                                Exhibit No. 99.2

           [On Letterhead of Aston Bell, Certified Public Accountant]

                         INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANT'S REPORT

Corporate Asset Backed Corporation, (as Depositor)
445 Broad Hollow Road, Suite 239
Melville, NY 11747

U.S. Bank Trust National Association
Corporate Trust Services
100 Wall Street, Suite 1600
New York, NY 10005

Re: CABCO Series 2004-101 Trust (Goldman Sachs Capital I) (the "Trust")

Ladies and Gentlemen:

We have examined assertions of Corporate Asset Backed Corporation (the
"Depositor") and U.S. Bank Trust National Association, (the "Trustee" and,
together with the Depositor, the "Management") that the Depositor and the
Trustee have complied, in all material respects, with the provisions of the
Trust Agreement dated as of May 20, 2004, (the "Trust Agreement") in respect of
the CABCO Series 2004-101 Trust (Goldman Sachs Capital I) (the "Trust"), during
the periods covered by the annual report on Form 10-K filed by the Depositor on
behalf of the Trust for the year ended December 31, 2005 (the "Annual Report").
Management is responsible for compliance with the Trust Agreement. Our
responsibility is to express an opinion on Management's assertions based on our
examination.

Our examination was made in accordance with attestation standards established by
the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants and, accordingly,
included examining, on a test basis, evidence about the Depositor's and the
Trustee's compliance with the Trust Agreement and performing such other
procedures as considered necessary in the circumstances. We believe that our
examination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion.

In our opinion, the Depositor and the Trustee have complied, in all material
respects, with the Trust Agreement during the period covered by the Annual
Report and Management's assertions with respect to such compliance are fairly
stated, in all material respects, for the year ended December 31, 2005.


/s/ Aston Bell, CPA
-------------------------------------
New York, New York
March 15, 2006
|   | EXHIBIT 15.24 |
|--------|---------------|

 

 

Dollar Thrifty Automotive Group, Inc. 

5330 East 31st Street

Tulsa, Oklahoma

We have reviewed, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the unaudited interim financial information of Dollar Thrifty Automotive Group, Inc. and subsidiaries for the three-month periods ended March 31, 2006 and 2005, and have issued our report dated May 5, 2006 (February 26, 2007, as to the effects of the restatement discussed in Note 16). As indicated in such report, because we did not perform an audit, we expressed no opinion on that information.

We are aware that our report referred to above, which        is included in your Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A for the quarter ended March 31, 2006, is incorporated by reference in Registration Statements No. 333-79603, No. 333-89189, No. 333-33144, No. 333-33146, No. 333-50800, No. 333-128714 and No. 333-136611 on Form S-8.

We also are aware that the aforementioned report, pursuant to Rule 436(c) under the Securities Act of 1933, is not considered a part of the Registration Statement prepared or certified by an accountant or a report prepared or certified by an accountant within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of that Act.

 

/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

Tulsa, Oklahoma

February 26, 2007
EXHIBIT 32.2
                           ============

        Certification of Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350
----------------------------------------------------------------------

In connection with the amended annual report on Form 10-KSB of Rotoblock
Corporation (Registrant), as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Lance Waymen, Chief
Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer, 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 and
belief:

   (1)  the annual 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 annual report fairly
        presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
        results of operations of Registrant.



Date:  August 12, 2005         /s/ Lance Waymen
                              -----------------------------------------
                              By: Lance Waymen., Chief Financial
                              Officer and Principal Accounting Officer












<PAGE>
H. Res. 453

In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

June 4, 1998.

Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it

shall be in order to consider in the House the joint resolution

(H.J. Res. 78) proposing an amendment to the Constitution

of the United States restoring religious freedom. The joint

resolution shall be considered as read for amendment. The

amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the

Committee on the Judiciary now printed in the joint 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) two hours of

debate on the joint resolution, as amended, equally divided

and controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member

of the Committee on the Judiciary; (2) the further amendment printed in the report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution, which may be offered only by the

Member designated in the report, shall be considered as read,

and shall be separately debatable for one hour equally divided
2

•HRES 453 EH

and controlled by the proponent and an opponent; and (3)

one motion to recommit with or without instructions.

Attest:

Clerk.
Exhibit 8.1

List of Subsidiaries of Spreadtrum Communications, Inc. (the Registrant)



|                                                                         |  |                              
|------------------------------------------------------------------------ |  | -----------------------------
|Name of Entity                                                           |  | Jurisdiction of Incorporation
|Direct or Indirect Wholly-Owned Subsidiaries:                            |  |                              
|Quorum Systems, Inc.                                                     |  | Delaware, U.S.A.             
|                                                                         | 
|SPRD LLC                                                                 |  | Delaware, U.S.A.             
|                                                                         | 
|Spreadtrum Hong Kong Limited                                             |  | Hong Kong                    
|                                                                         | 
|Spreadtrum International Limited                                         |  | Hong Kong                    
|                                                                         | 
|Quorum Technology (H.K.) Limited                                         |  | Hong Kong                    
|                                                                         | 
|Han & Qin International (BVI) Limited                                    |  | British Virgin Islands       
|                                                                         | 
|Spreadtrum Communications (Shanghai) Co., Ltd.                           |  | PRC                          
|                                                                         | 
|Spreadtrum Communications Technology (Shanghai) Co., Ltd.                |  | PRC                          
|                                                                         | 
|Tianjin Spreadtrum Communications Co., Ltd.                              |  | PRC                          
|                                                                         | 
|Shanghai Han & Qin Investment Co., Limited                               |  | PRC                          
|                                                                         | 
|Affiliated Entity Consolidated in the Registrants Financial Statements: |  |                              
|Beijing Spreadtrum Hi-Tech Communications Technology Co., Ltd.           |  | PRC
1 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

DEMETRIUS JOHNSON,

 

Plaintiff, 

v.

REYNALDO GUEVARA, the ESTATE of 

ERNEST HALVERSON, DARRYL DALEY, 

WILLIAM ERICKSON, JOHN HEALY, and 

the CITY OF CHICAGO

Defendants. 

)

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

 Case No. 20-cv-4156 

 Judge Sara L. Ellis 

Magistrate Judge Heather K. McShain

JURY TRIAL DEMANDED

 

PLAINTIFF’S UNOPPOSED MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO RESPOND TO 

DEFENDANTS’ MOTIONS FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT AND DAUBERT MOTIONS

 Plaintiff DEMETRIUS JOHNSON, by his undersigned attorneys, respectfully requests a 

four-week extension of time to file his response to the Defendants’ motions for summary 

judgment and Daubert motions, stating in support as follows: 

1. On April 12, 2024, Defendants filed three separate motions for summary 

judgment, along with two Daubert motions. Plaintiff’s responses to Defendants’ motions for 

summary judgment and Daubert motions are due May 13, 2024. Dkt. 307. 

2. Defendants sought and were granted leave to file motions in excess of the page 

limits set forth in the Local Rules. Dkt. 322. In total, Defendants’ three summary judgment 

motions and two Daubert motions consist of over 150 pages of briefing. 

3. Plaintiff’s counsel has worked diligently to complete a responsive brief, but due 

to the size and scope of the project and other professional commitments, including other summary 

Case: 1:20-cv-04156 Document #: 331 Filed: 05/08/24 Page 1 of 3 PageID #:26446
2 

judgment responses due on May 22, 2024, Plaintiff’s counsel will be unable to complete 

Plaintiff’s responsive brief by the stated deadline. 

4. Plaintiff has consulted with counsel for Defendants Reynaldo Guevara, counsel 

for Defendants Ernest Halverson, Darryl Daley, William Erickson, and John Healy, and counsel 

for Defendant City of Chicago, all of whom have kindly agreed to a four-week extension for 

Plaintiff’s completion of the responsive briefs. If the due date for Plaintiff’s response is extended, 

Defendants request the same extension to file their replies, which will then be due on July 19, 

2024. 

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court grant Plaintiff a four-week

extension to June 10, 2024 to file their responsive briefs to Defendants’ Motions for Summary 

Judgement and Daubert Motions, and extend Defendants’ reply deadlines to July 19, 2024. 

. 

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED,

/s/ Anand Swaminathan 

Counsel for Plaintiff 

Anand Swaminathan 

Steven Art

Sean Starr

Alyssa Martinez 

Meg Gould 

LOEVY & LOEVY

311 N. Aberdeen 

Chicago, Illinois 60607 

(312) 243-5900 

anand@loevy.com 

Case: 1:20-cv-04156 Document #: 331 Filed: 05/08/24 Page 2 of 3 PageID #:26447
3 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

 I, Anand Swaminathan, an attorney, certify that on May 8, 2024, I filed the foregoing 

pleading using the Court’s CM/ECF system, which effected service on all counsel of record. 

/s/ Anand Swaminathan 

One of Plaintiff’s Attorneys

Case: 1:20-cv-04156 Document #: 331 Filed: 05/08/24 Page 3 of 3 PageID #:26448
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                         481,978
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               529,478
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 529,478
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          189,135
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      2,500
<COMMON>                                         1,700
<OTHER-SE>                                     326,388
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   529,478
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               314,103
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (314,103)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (314,103)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.26)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.26)
        

</TABLE>
CyberArk is the pioneer of Privileged Access Management, CyberArk has the most advanced and secure 

technology and enables the same privilege controls across the entire identity lifecycle. With thousands 

of deployments & a vast partner ecosystem, CyberArk has the technology, experience, expertise and 

innovation track record to address the broadest range of Identity Security requirements.
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.2

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 on
Form 10-Q of DoubleClick Inc. (the Company) for
the period ended March 31, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), the undersigned, Bruce Dalziel, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, 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/ BRUCE DALZIEL      
| |                        
| | Bruce Dalziel          
| | Chief Financial Officer

Dated: May 10, 2004
#### Cleante’ Lakeith WOOLFOLK, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Gene JOHNSON, Director, Respondent—Appellee.

No. 04-7207.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Dec. 20, 2004.

Decided Jan. 7, 2005.

Cleante’ Lakeith Woolfolk, Appellant pro se. Jennifer Ransom Franklin, Office of the Attorney General of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before NIEMEYER and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM.

Cleante’ Lakeith Woolfolk seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing as untimely his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000). An appeal may not be taken from the final order in a habeas corpus proceeding unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28

*307U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue for claims addressed by a district court absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that his constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or wrong. *See Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003); *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *Rose v. Lee,*252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Woolfolk has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED*