alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### In the Matter of Cindy Catalano, Appellant, v David Catalano, Jr., Respondent.

[854 NYS2d 148]

*538By order of the Family Court, Rockland County (Miklitsch, H.E.), dated October 4, 2000, the respondent was directed to contribute the sum of $3,000 per year to the cost of the college education of the parties’ daughter, “so long as she is in college.” Although the respondent stipulated at a hearing that the daughter graduated in May 2004, the petitioner effectively was denied the opportunity to proffer evidence that the daughter was enrolled in and attended college during the 2003/04 school year *(cf. Matter of Carmen V. v Bruce R.,*87 AD2d 595, 596 [1982]). The Support Magistrate then denied that branch of the petition which sought reimbursement of the college expenses pertaining to that period upon concluding that the petitioner failed to submit evidence of the daughter’s enrollment and attendance during the relevant time period. Since, however, the Support Magistrate effectively precluded the petitioner from proffering the appropriate evidence, we remit the matter to the Family Court, Rockland County, for a hearing, with the benefit of the submission of such evidence, on that branch of the petition.

The petitioner’s remaining contentions are without merit. Mastro, J.P., Skelos, Florio and Dickerson, JJ., concur.
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED JULY 23, 2015

NO. 03-15-00059-CV

C. H., Appellant

v.

Texas Department of Family and Protective Services, Appellee

APPEAL FROM 119TH DISTRICT COURT OF RUNNELS COUNTY

BEFORE JUSTICES PURYEAR, PEMBERTON, AND BOURLAND

AFFIRMED -- OPINION BY JUSTICE PEMBERTON

This is an appeal from the order of termination signed by the district court on January 5, 2015. 

Having reviewed the record and the parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was no 

reversible error in the district court’s order of termination. Therefore, the Court affirms the 

district court’s order of termination. Because appellant is indigent and unable to pay costs, no 

adjudication of costs is made.
**EXHIBIT
      32**





**Certification
      of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer Pursuant
      to**


**Section
      906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section
      1350**








In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of Striker Energy Corp. (Registrant) on
      Form 10Q-SB filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission filed concurrently
      herewith (the Report), I, Shawn Perger, Chief Executive Officer, Chief Financial
      Officer and Principal Accounting Officer of Registrant, 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
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section13(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 Registrant.








**Striker
      Energy Corp., a Nevada corporation**




Date: July
      7, 2007    By:/s/
      Shawn Perger, President, CEO,  Treasurer,
      Principal Accounting Officer and Director
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 amended quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A in accordance with Rule 15(d)-14 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 of Red Trail Energy, LLC (the “Company”) for the fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2011 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Kent Anderson, Chief Financial Officer, certify, pursuant to 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, as amended; and




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




/s/ Kent AndersonKent AndersonChief Financial OfficerDated: February 16, 2012
UNITED STA'TES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA I-Ion. Dennis M. Cavanaugh, U.S.D.J. 

V. Crilnina1 No. 10-851 

RICHARD DEHMER ORDER 

This 1natter having been opened to the Court upon the request of the defendant for 

a revievv of the defendant's bail conditions, and the United States, represented by Paul 

Fishman, United States Attorney for the District of Ne\v Jersey (Anthony Mahajan, 

Assistant United States Attorney, appearing), and the defendant Richard Dehmer 

represented by Chester Keller, Assistant Federal Public Defender and Barbara Hutchinson 

representing the Pretrial Services Agency, and for good and sufficient cause shown; 

cPc-fIT IS on this / day of SepmffiDer, 2012, 

ORDERED that the bail previously set is a1nended to remove the defendant from 

home detention and any curfev,, that required electronic 1nonitoring. All other terms of 

Pretrial release previously imposed '"rill ren1ain in effect. 

Case 2:10-cr-00851-CCC Document 224 Filed 10/01/12 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 2339
<PAGE>
                                                                   EXHIBIT 23.1


                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on
Form S-8 (No. 33-43898, No. 333-51549 and No. 333-62676) pertaining to the
Westcorp 1991 Stock Option Plan, the Westcorp Employee Stock Ownership Plan and
the Westcorp 2001 Stock Option Plan, respectively, and in the related
prospectus' of our report dated January 22, 2002, with respect to the
consolidated financial statements of Westcorp and Subsidiaries included in the
Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2001.



                                        /s/ Ernst & Young LLP
                                        ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Los Angeles, California
March 25, 2002
# Result 22.3
Order entered September 3, 2014

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas**
No. 05
- 14
- 00054
- CV
FATIMA DOLORES RODAS , Appellant
V. LA MADELEINE OF TEXA S, INC., ET AL. , Appellee s On Appeal from the 162nd Judicial District Court Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 10
- 04672 

### O RDER
We GRANT appellees’ August 20, 2014 motion for leave to file a sur

- reply brief. Appellees shall file their sur

- reply brief by September 10, 2014 . No further briefing in this case will be permitted.

/s/ ADA BROWN JUSTICE
February 13, 2012

FILED ELECTRONICALLY

Honorable Michael A. Shipp

U.S. Magistrate Judge

Martin Luther King Jr. Federal Bldg. and Courthouse

50 Walnut Street

Newark, NJ 07102

Kenwood Appliances Luxembourg, S.A., et al.. v. Home Depot U.S.A., Inc., et al.,

2:10-cv-06356-SRC-MAS

Dear Magistrate Judge Shipp:

I represent the defendant, Home Depot U.S.A., Inc. (“Home Depot”), in the

above-captioned matter. The parties have a settlement conference presently scheduled

for Wednesday, February 15, 2012 at 2 p.m. My client has a conflict and is unable to

attend the conference at that time. Although Home Depot is prepared to attend the

conference at the presently scheduled time, we believe it would be more conducive to

settlement if the conference is rescheduled to permit my client to attend. In addition,

Defendants took the Rule 30(b)(6) depositions of three witnesses on February 8 and 9.

The parties are currently awaiting the transcripts of these depositions, which we believe

will bear significantly on settlement discussions.

I have consulted with counsel for the other parties in this matter and all parties are

available on February 21 or March 19. Because plaintiff’s expert disclosures are due on

March 15, 2012, the March 19 date, if available, would also allow for settlement

discussions to take place on a more complete record. If the Court’s calendar permits, we

respectfully request that the settlement conference be rescheduled for either February 21

or March 19.

Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Michael Potenza

Michael R. Potenza

Case 2:10-cv-06356-SRC -MAS Document 41 Filed 02/13/12 Page 1 of 2 PageID: 217
23413963v1

cc: Rudolph V. Pino, Esq.

John R. Altieri, Esq.

Trent S. Dickey, Esq.

Case 2:10-cv-06356-SRC -MAS Document 41 Filed 02/13/12 Page 2 of 2 PageID: 218
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 13-13891

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D.C. Docket No. 9:12-cr-80046-RNS-2

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff-Appellee,

 versus

RAUL DELTORO, 

a.k.a. Mark,

 Defendant-Appellant.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Florida

________________________

(July 24, 2015)

Before TJOFLAT, MARTIN and ANDERSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: 

Case: 13-13891 Date Filed: 07/24/2015 Page: 1 of 2 
2

Richard F. Della Fera, appointed counsel for Raul Deltoro in this direct 

criminal appeal has filed a motion to withdraw from further representation of the 

appellant and filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 

1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Our independent review of the entire record reveals 

that counsel’s assessment of the relative merit of the appeal is correct. Because 

independent examination of the entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit, 

counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and Deltoro’s convictions and 

sentences are AFFIRMED. 

Case: 13-13891 Date Filed: 07/24/2015 Page: 2 of 2
Hon. William H. Walls

v. Crim. No. 1O—cr—876

TERIEK EDWARDS ORDER FOR CONTINUANCE

This matter having come before the Court on the joint

application of Paul J. Fishman, United States Attorney for the

District of New Jersey (Rodney C. Villazor, Assistant U.S.

Attorney, appearing), and defendant Teriek Edwards (Chester

Keller, Esq., appearing), for an order granting a continuance of

the proceedings in the above-captioned matter, and the defendant

being aware that he has the right to have the matter brought to

trial within 70 days of the date of his appearance before a

judicial officer of this court pursuant to Title 18 of the United

States Code, Section 3161 (C) (1), two continuances having

previously been entered by this Court, and as the defendant has

consented to a second continuance, and for good and sufficientcause shown,

IT IS THE FINDING OF THIS COURT that this action should

be continued for the following reasons:

(1) The charges in this case involves numerous

witnesses that defense counsel requires adequate time to review

and prepare for;
p

p

;

(3) Plea negotiations are currently in progress, and

both the United States and the defendant desire additional time

to negotiate a plea agreement, which would render any grand jury

proceedings and any subsequent trial of this matter unnecessary;

(4) As a result of the foregoing, pursuant to Title

18, United States Code, Section 3161 (h) (7), the ends of justice

served by granting the continuance outweigh the best interest of

the public and the defendant in a speedy trial.

IT IS, therefore, on this day of August, 2011,

ORDERED that this action be, and hereby is, continued

from August 22, 2011 through October 24, 2011; and it is further

ORDERED that the period from August 22, 2011 through

October 24, 2011 shall be excludable in computing time under the

Speedy Trial Act of 1974

ILLIAM J4< WALLS

United Stats District Judge

—2—
y

-

—

Chester Keller, Esq,Counsel for defendant Teriek Edwards

—3—
## In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

No. 07 - 18 - 00427 - CR LORENZO CECIL GRAVES , APPELLANT

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS , APPELLEE On Appeal from the 47th District Court Randall County , Texas Trial Court No. 23 , 535 -

A , Honorable Dan L. Schaap , Presiding 

### January 11, 2019 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before QUINN , C.J. , and CAMPBELL and PARKER , JJ. Appellant , Lorenzo Cecil Graves , a Texas prison inmate appearing pro se , appeals from the trial court ’ s order denying his motion for post - conviction DNA testing pursuant to Chapter 64 of the Code of Criminal Procedure. Now pending before this court is appellant ’ s motion to dismiss the a ppeal signed by appellant. Without passing on the merits of the case , we grant the motion to dismiss pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 42.2(a) and dismiss the appeal. Having dismissed the appeal at appellant ’ s2

request , no motion for rehearing will be entertained , and our mandate will issue forthwith.
Per Curiam
Do not Pub lish.
LAW OFFICES OF PETER W. TILL

105 Morris Avenue, Suite 201

Springfield, New Jersey 07081

Telephone: (973)258-0064

Fax: (973)258-0478

tilllaw@aol.com

Attorneys for Defendant, SALVATORE LAGRASSO

(By Order of the Court pursuant to the Criminal Justice Act)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

-vs- : lOCr.851

STEPHEN DEPIRO, : 18 U.S.C. § 2, 371, 894(a),

a/k/a “Beach,” 1084(a). 1951(a),

ALBERT CERNADAS, : 1955(a). 1962(d) and 1963

a/k/a “The Bull,”

NUNZIO LAGRASSO,

RICHARD DEHMER,

a/k/a “Dickie,” ORDER

EDWARD AULISI,

a/k/a “Eddie,”

VINCENT AULISI,

a/k/a “The Vet,”

THOMAS LEONARDIS,

a/k/a “Tommy,”

ROBERT RUIZ.

a/k/a “Bobby,”

MICHAEL TRUEBA,

a/k/a “Mikey,”

RAMIRO QUINTANS,

a/k/a “Romo,”

SALVATORE LAGRASSO,

ANTHONY ALFANO,

a/k/a “Brooklyn,”

TONINO COLANTONIO,

a/k/a “Tony,”

JOHN HARTMANN,

a/k/a “Lumpy,” “Fatty”

and “Fats,” and

GJUSEPPE PUGLIESE,

a/k/a “Pepe”,

Defendants,
THIS MATTER having been brought before the Court by Peter W. Till, Esq., Law

Offices of Peter W. Till, attorneys for Defendant, Salvatore LaGrasso, and the Court having

considered the papers submitted by counsel and for good cause shown;

IT IS on this /day of , 2012;

ORDERED that The Law Offices of Peter W, Till, attorneys for Defendant, Salvatore

LaGrasso, (By Order ofthe Court pursuant to the Criminal Justice Act), is granted leave to allow

the associates of his firm and law clerks to assist with preparation of the defense in this matter;

and it is

FURTHER ORDERED that a copy of this Order be served upon all parties within

3 days from the date hereof.

Honorable Dennis M.
CHIEF JUSTICE

 CAROLYN WRIGHT

JUSTICES

 DAVID L. BRIDGES

 MOLLY FRANCIS

 DOUGLAS S. LANG

 ELIZABETH LANG-MIERS

 ROBERT M. FILLMORE

 LANA MYERS

 DAVID EVANS

 DAVID LEWIS

 ADA BROWN

 CRAIG STODDART

 BILL WHITEHILL

 DAVID J. SCHENCK

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

600 COMMERCE STREET, SUITE 200

DALLAS, TEXAS 75202

(214) 712-3400

LISA MATZ

CLERK OF THE COURT

(214) 712-3450

lisa.matz@5th.txcourts.gov

GAYLE HUMPA

BUSINESS ADMINISTRATOR

(214) 712-3434

gayle.humpa@5th.txcourts.gov

FACSIMILE

(214) 745-1083

INTERNET

HTTP://5TH.TXCOURTS.GOV

July 23, 2015

Ronald Huff

112 S. Crockett Str.

Sherman, TX 75090

Thomas Fee

Rebecca Bell

Wes Black

13155 Noel Rd., Suite 1000

Dallas, TX 75240

RE: 05-09-01140-CV

Billy & Debbie Hargesheimer d/b/a Ja-Makin Tan, et al. v. Simulated

Environmental Concepts

Counsel:

This appeal has been abated since February 4, 2010 due to the filing of bankruptcy by 

appellants. On June 5, 2014, we received correspondence from Mr. Huff stating the bankruptcy 

proceedings were still pending. Please notify us of the status of the bankruptcy proceedings 

within TEN DAYS of the date of this letter. We appreciate your attention to this matter.

Sincerely,

/s/ Lisa Matz, Clerk of the Court

ltr:mrh
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 122 (Friday, June 26, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 30642]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-15219]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration

[TA-W-65,920]


Toyal America, Inc., Lockport, IL; Notice of Termination of 
Investigation

    In accordance with Section 221 of the Trade Act of 1974, as 
amended, an investigation was initiated on May 15, 2009 in response to 
a petition filed by a company official on behalf of workers of Toyal 
America, Inc., Lockport, Illinois.
    The petitioner has requested that the petition be withdrawn. 
Consequently, the investigation has been terminated.

    Signed in Washington, DC, this 18th day of May 2009.
Richard Church,
Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. E9-15219 Filed 6-26-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO


PETROSONIC ENERGY, INC.


CONVERTIBLE DEBENTURE


 


This Amendment No. 1 to Petrosonic Energy,
Inc. Convertible Debenture (“Amendment”) is made on this 5th day of June 2013 by and between Petrosonic
Energy, Inc. (the “Company”) and Art Agolli (the “Holder”) based on the following:


 


RECITALS


 


A.On June 6, 2012, the Company issued
to the Holder the Petrosonic Energy, Inc. Convertible Debenture (the “Debenture”) in the face amount of CDN$200,000.


 


B.Pursuant to the Debenture, the payment
due date is June 6, 2013.


 


C.The Company and the Holder wish to
extend the payment due date to June 6, 2014.


 


THEREFORE, the Company and the Holder agree:


 


1.Amendment to Maturity Date.
Section 1(a) of the Debenture, which currently states:


 


The unpaid Principal of this Debenture shall be due and
payable by the Company on the anniversary of the date hereof (the “Maturity Date”).


 


shall be amended to state:


 


The unpaid Principal of this Debenture shall be due and
payable by the Company on the second anniversary of the date hereof (the “Maturity Date”).


 


2.All Other Terms Remain the Same.
In all other respects, the terms and conditions of the Debenture remain without modification.


 


WHEREFORE, the Company and the Holder have executed this Amendment
on the date set forth above.


 


	 	COMPANY
	 	PETROSONIC ENERGY, INC.
	 	 
	 	By:  	/s/ Art Agolli
	 	 	Art Agolli, Chief Executive Officer
	 	 
	 	HOLDER
	 	 
	 	/s/ Art Agolli
	 	Art Agolli
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Hon. Dennis M, Cavanaugh

v. : 10Cr. 851 (DMC)

STEPHEN DEPIRO, et a!. ORDER

This matter having been found by the Court to be a complex case pursuant to Title 18,

United States Code, Section 31 61(h)(7)(B)(ii); and the Court having found that an order granting a

further continuance of the proceedings in the above-captioned matter should be entered, and for

good and sufficient cause shown;

IT IS THE FfND1NG OF THIS COURT that the action should be continued for the

following reasons:

1. The government has filed a seconc superseding indictment in this matter, expanding

the allegations of racketeering that occurred over several decades and containing new charges.

2. The defendants and their counsel need time to review the discovery in this matter

and to investigate the charges.

3. The parties’ agreed motion schedule, Docket No. 169, provided for the filing of

motion responses in August 2012. In addition, the Court’s Amended Order for Discovery and

Inspection, filed January 27, 2012, establishes a September 24, 2012 motions hearing date and an

October 30, 2012 trial date.

4. In light of these findings, and given the nature ofthe case and its complexity, it is

unreasonable to expect adequate preparation for pretrial proceedings or the trial itself within the

time limits established under the Speedy Trial Act.

5. The grant of a further continuance will enable counsel for the defendants to
adequately review the discovery, prepare motions and proceed with trial.

6. Pursuant to Title 18, United States Code, Section 3161(h)(7), the ends ofjustice

served by granting the continuance outweigh the best interests of the public and the defendants in

a speedy trial,

WHEREFORE, it is on this 6’day of , 2012;

ORDERED that the proceedings in this matter are continued from April 3, 2012 until

October 30, 2012; and

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the period from April 3, 2012 until October 30, 2012,

shall be excludable in computing time under the Speedy Trial Act of 1974.

ON. DENNIS M. CA NAUGH

United States District Judge

2
(March 11, 2008)

#### Alisha K. Afridi et al., Appellants, v Glen Oaks Village Owners, Inc., Respondent.

[854 NYS2d 446]

*572The infant plaintiff sustained second degree burns to her thighs and abdomen after coming into contact with hot water from a faucet in the bathroom of her family’s apartment. The plaintiffs commenced this action against the cooperative corporation that owned the apartment where the family resided, alleging negligence in the supply of excessively hot water to the apartment. At the ensuing jury trial, the Supreme Court excluded from evidence a section of a police report indicating that, 12 days after the accident, the hot water from the subject faucet registered a temperature of 160 degrees Fahrenheit. The report failed to supply any details, inter alia, about how the temperature measurement was made.

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in denying the plaintiffs’ request to admit the police report into evidence, where the plaintiffs failed to establish a proper foundation for its admission *(see People v Freeland,*68 NY2d 699 [1986]; *Sassone v Corhouse,*129 AD2d 924 [1987]). Contrary to the plaintiffs’ contention, the mere fact that the report may have been a business record, as contemplated under CPLR 4518, “does not overcome any other exclusionary rule which might properly be invoked” *(People v Tortorice,*142 AD2d 916, 918 [1988]; *accord Bostic v State of New York,*232 AD2d 837, 839 [1996]).

The plaintiffs’ remaining contention is without merit. Fisher, J.P., Ritter, Angiolillo and Balkin, JJ., concur.
#### In the Matter of Jason Everett Panzer, Appellant, v Melissa Jean Wood, Respondent.

Submitted November 26, 2012;

decided January 10, 2013

Motion for leave to appeal dismissed upon the ground that the order sought to be appealed from does not finally determine the proceeding within the meaning of the Constitution.
[Cite as State v. Jones, 123 Ohio St.3d 146, 2009-Ohio-4689.]

THE STATE OF OHIO, APPELLEE, v. JONES, APPELLANT. 

[Cite as State v. Jones, 123 Ohio St.3d 146, 2009-Ohio-4689.] 

Discretionary appeal accepted, court of appeals’ judgment reversed in part on the 

authority of State v. Harris, and cause remanded. 

(No. 2009-0931 — Submitted August 11, 2009 — Decided September 15, 2009.) 

APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Lucas County, No. L-07-1292, 

2009-Ohio-1742. 

__________________ 

{¶ 1} The discretionary appeal is accepted. 

{¶ 2} The judgment of the court of appeals is reversed on the authority of 

State v. Harris, 122 Ohio St.3d 373, 2009-Ohio-3323, 911 N.E.2d 882, to the 

extent that the court of appeals held that robbery as defined in R.C. 2911.02(A)(2) 

and aggravated robbery as defined in R.C. 2911.01(A)(1) are not allied offenses 

of similar import. The cause is remanded to the court of appeals for further 

consideration of the animus analysis consistent with State v. Harris. 

 MOYER, C.J., and PFEIFER, LUNDBERG STRATTON, O’CONNOR,

O’DONNELL, LANZINGER, and CUPP, JJ., concur. 

__________________ 

Julia R. Bates, Lucas County Prosecuting Attorney, and David F. Cooper, 

Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. 

Deborah Kovac Rump, for appellant. 

__________________
Case 2:10-cv-06297-CCC -JAD Document 31 Filed 08/08/11 Page 1 of 2 PageID: 326
Case 2:10-cv-06297-CCC -JAD Document 31 Filed 08/08/11 Page 2 of 2 PageID: 327