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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 24-1098

TIGRESS SYDNEY ACUTE MCDANIEL,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

CREDIT MANAGEMENT, LP; CHARTER COMMUNICATIONS, INC., d/b/a 

Spectrum,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at 

Raleigh. James C. Dever III, District Judge. (5:23-cv-00408-D-RN)

Submitted: May 21, 2024 Decided: May 24, 2024

Before WYNN and BENJAMIN, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Tigress Sydney Acute McDaniel, Appellant Pro Se. Caren D. Enloe, SMITH DEBNAM 

NARRON DRAKE SAINTSING & MYERS, LLP, Raleigh, North Carolina; Elizabeth C. 

King, CRANFILL SUMNER, LLP, Wilmington, North Carolina, for Appellees. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 24-1098 Doc: 18 Filed: 05/24/2024 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Tigress Sydney Acute McDaniel appeals the district court’s order (a) denying 

McDaniel’s motions for an extension of time to respond to a pending dispositive motion 

and for leave to file a third amended complaint; and (b) granting Defendants’ motions to 

dismiss and for judgment on the pleadings under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), (c). We have 

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s 

order. McDaniel v. Credit Mgmt., LP, No. 5:23-cv-00408-D-RN (E.D.N.C. Jan. 8, 2024). 

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

USCA4 Appeal: 24-1098 Doc: 18 Filed: 05/24/2024 Pg: 2 of 2
#### Shifra Mendelovitz, Appellant, v Elyahu Cohen et al., Respondents.

[852 NYS2d 795]

The Supreme Court providently exercised its discretion in, inter alia, quashing the subpoenas served upon the nonparties Regal Home Collections, Inc., Mayer Rispler, Nat Safern, and Harri Shan, as the discovery sought is not material and necessary to the prosecution of the action *(see White Bay Enters, v Newsday, Inc.,*288 AD2d 211 [2001]; *see also Riverside Capital Advisors, Inc. v First Secured Capital Corp.,*28 AD3d 457, 459-460 [2006]; *Golden Mark Maintenance v Alarcon,*265 AD2d 377 [1999]). Mastro, J.P., Fisher, Florio, Angiolillo and Dickerson, JJ., concur.
** **

**EXHIBIT NO. 99.1**

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTEDPURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

Inconnection with the amended annual report on Form 10-K/A of NUI Corporation(the "company") for the period ended September 30, 2002 as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "report"), I, JohnKean, Jr., Chief Executive Officer of the company, certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002, that:

1)       thereport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and 

2)       theinformation contained in the report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the company.

/s/  John Kean, Jr.John Kean, Jr.PresidentandChiefExecutive OfficerFebruary13 , 2003
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 11**  **- 7200** 

DAVID BRIGHTWELL , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. D. SCOTT WHITNEY, Chief Attorney; GERALDINE K. SWEENEY, Chief Attorney; GOVERNOR MARTIN O'MALLEY; SOMERSET COUNTY ADMIN ISTRATOR , Defendants

- Appellees

.

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

. Deborah K. Chasanow , Chief District Judge. ( 8:11

- cv
- 01652

- DKC )

Submitted : December 15, 2011 Decided: December 20, 2011

Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and DAVIS , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

David Brightwell, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: David Brightwell appeals the district court ’ s order dismissing his civil rights complaint. We have reviewed the
record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for
the reasons stated by the district court. Brightwell v.
Whitney , No. 8:11

- cv
- 01652

- DKC (D. Md. Aug. 30, 2011). 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.

AFFIRMED
Case 2:11-cr-00162-SRC Document 14 Filed 07/15/09 Page 1 of 2 PageID: 13
Case 2:11-cr-00162-SRC Document 14 Filed 07/15/09 Page 2 of 2 PageID: 14
#### Little Red School House, Inc., et al., Respondents, v Jerrick Waterproofing Co., Inc., Defendant, North Shore Risk Management, LLC, Respondent, and Insurance Corporation of New York, Appellant.

[821 NYS2d 454]

Appeal from or*320der, Supreme Court, New York County (Herman Cahn, J.), entered October 5, 2005, unanimously withdrawn in accordance with the terms of the stipulation of the parties hereto. No opinion. Order filed. Concur—Buckley, EJ., Mazzarelli, Marlow, Sullivan and Gonzalez, JJ.
Exhibit 12

Case 2:11-cv-01210-JMV-SCM Document 469-15 Filed 06/21/19 Page 1 of 3 PageID: 20096
2719 ‐ Susman Godfrey, LLP

1 ‐ US Ex Rel v Boston Scientific, et als

Expenses

Expense

Date Code Amount Description

02/17/16 E101 9.80           Copying

02/17/16 E101 1.00           Copying

02/17/16 E101 0.50           Copying

02/17/16 E101 0.30           Copying

02/17/16 E101 0.10           Copying

02/17/16 E101 0.20           Copying

02/17/16 E101 0.40           Copying

02/17/16 E101 0.30           Copying

02/17/16 E101 0.60           Copying

02/17/16 E101 0.10           Copying

02/17/16 E101 0.60           Copying

02/17/16 E101 0.20           Copying

02/17/16 E101 0.70           Copying

02/17/16 E101 0.60           Copying

02/25/16 E101 0.20           Copying

02/25/16 E101 0.30           Copying

02/25/16 E101 0.20           Copying

02/25/16 E101 0.20           Copying

03/02/16 E101 0.80           Copying

03/02/16 E101 0.20           Copying

03/07/16 E101 0.60           Copying

03/07/16 E101 0.30           Copying

03/07/16 E101 0.70           Copying

03/07/16 E101 0.50           Copying

03/07/16 E101 0.20           Copying

03/07/16 E101 0.50           Copying

03/17/16 E101 1.20           Copying

06/17/16 E101 5.60           Copying

06/17/16 E101 0.40           Copying

06/21/16 E101 0.20           Copying

06/21/16 E101 0.20           Copying

07/18/16 E101 0.10           Copying

07/18/16 E101 2.00           Copying

07/18/16 E101 0.20           Copying

07/18/16 E101 0.20           Copying

07/18/16 E101 0.20           Copying

07/18/16 E101 1.10           Copying

07/18/16 E101 0.40           Copying

07/18/16 E101 0.30           Copying

07/18/16 E101 0.40           Copying

07/18/16 E101 0.60           Copying

07/18/16 E101 0.70           Copying

03/17/17 E101 10.30         Copying

03/17/17 E101 0.20           Copying

Case 2:11-cv-01210-JMV-SCM Document 469-15 Filed 06/21/19 Page 2 of 3 PageID: 20097
04/30/18 E101 120.80       Copying

04/30/18 E101 15.10         Copying

02/29/16 E107 39.60        

MERCURY MAIL & MESSENGER SERVICE, INC; Delivery Services/Messengers CK# 

80342 GWM (2/17/16 delivery to USDC, 50 Walnut St., Newark, NJ)

05/13/16 E107 39.60        

MERCURY MAIL & MESSENGER SERVICE, INC; Delivery Services/Messengers CK# 

81140 (4/20/16 delivery to Judge Mannion at 50 Walnut St., Newark, NJ)

07/25/16 E124 11.99         CONFERSAVE WORLDWIDE; Other ck# 81812 GWM (7/8/16 conference call)

04/04/19 E124 17.00       

GRANT W. MCGUIRE; Other CK# 91604 (Parking in connection with 3/25/19 travel to 

USDC ‐ Newark for motion hearing)

Total Expenses 288.49     

Case 2:11-cv-01210-JMV-SCM Document 469-15 Filed 06/21/19 Page 3 of 3 PageID: 20098
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-7070

CRAIG O. COPLEY,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. W. Earl Britt, District

Judge. (CA-90-47-HC)

Submitted: January 9, 1997 Decided: January 23, 1997

Before HALL and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Craig O. Copley, Appellant Pro Se. Eileen Coffey Moore, OFFICE OF

THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Craig O. Copley appeals from the district court's order denying his motion for reconsideration of the court's earlier order

denying his motion for a transfer. Because Copley's motion was untimely under Fed. R. Civ. P. 59(e), his motion should be construed

as a Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion. We review the district court's

denial of a Rule 60(b) motion for an abuse of discretion. Browder

v. Director, Dep't of Corrections, 434 U.S. 257, 263 n.7 (1978).

Relief is not authorized under Rule 60(b) where the motion

raises no new arguments, but merely requests the district court to

"change its mind." United States v. Williams, 674 F.2d 310, 313

(4th Cir. 1982). Copley's motion provided no new grounds for relief

and only reflected his disagreement with the court's earlier decision. Where a motion is for reconsideration of legal issues already

addressed in an earlier ruling, the motion "is not authorized by

Rule 60(b)." Id. at 313. Therefore, the motion was "properly

rejected by the district court." Id.; see also Hartman v. Lauchli,

304 F.2d 431, 432 (8th Cir. 1962) ("Rule 60(b) was not intended as

a substitute for a direct appeal from an erroneous judgment. The

fact that a judgment is erroneous does not constitute a ground for

relief under that Rule.").

Accordingly, the order of the district court is affirmed. 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.

AFFIRMED
Case 2:11-cv-00574-SDW-MCA Document 3 Filed 02/04/11 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 29
|   | (1) | The      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or      15(d), as applicable, 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. |
|--------|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                     | MEDPRO      SAFETY PRODUCTS, INC. |
|------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------|
|                                     |                              |   |
| Dated:  November      12, 2009 | By:                               | /s/      Marc T. Ray |   |
|                                     |                              |  Marc      T. Ray |
|                                     |                              |  Chief      Financial Officer |

----
Exhibit 10.2
 Amendment  Lease Agreement Lessor Lessee
       1.
    
    SCHEDULE 3DELIVERY CONDITIONS
 Sections 1.1 and 1.2 to Part I of Schedule 3 to the Lease Agreement are hereby amended and
restated in the form of Attachment 1 hereto. A new Annex 3 to Schedule 3 is hereby added in
the form of Attachment 2 hereto.
 2.
    
    SCHEDULED DELIVERY DATE(1)
 Subject to the written agreement of Airframe Manufacturer on or before May 31, 2010, the
definitions of Scheduled Delivery Date in Part I of Schedule 1 is hereby amended and
restated as follows:
 Scheduled Delivery Date means the date the Aircraft is delivered by the Airframe
Manufacturer, such date currently scheduled for a date in March 2011.
 3.
    
    OPERATIVE DOCUMENT; REMAINS IN EFFECTThis Amendment is an Operative Document for all purposes of the Lease Agreement. Except as
amended hereby the Lease Agreement remains in full force and effect.
  
 (1)
    
    Section 2 applicable to the lease covering
aircraft CAC264222. -1-




---



##### 



WELLS FARGO BANK NORTHWEST, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION,
as Owner TrusteeBy:
    /s/ Ron WainshalName:
    Ron WainshalTitle:
    Attorney in Fact SOUTH AFRICAN AIRWAYS (PTY) LTD.By:
    /s/ Sizakele MzimelaName:
    Sizakele MzimelaTitle:
    Chief Executive OfficerBy:
    /s/ Kaushik PatelName:
    Kaushik PatelTitle:
    Chief Financial Officer -2-




---



##### 



1.1
    
    SCNsWith the following SCN selections and any MSCNs applicable to the Aircraft:[***]1.2
    
    BFEWith the following BFE selections:[***]
  -3-




---



##### 



ANNEX 3 TO
SCHEDULE 3
 SCN AND BFE SUPPORTING ATTACHMENT
   -4-
<PAGE>
                                  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 of Regal Rock, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the period ended August 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, in
the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:

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

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


Date:  October 4, 2007


/s/ Wu Chih Chun
---------------------------------------
Wu Chih Chun, Principal Financial Officer
# Table 1202. income
UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
 Washington, D.C. 20549
 Form 10-K/A
 (Amendment No. 1)
  þ
    
    ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
 For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2008
 OR
 o
    
    TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934
 For the transition period from  to
 Commission File Number 001-33775
 Nanosphere, Inc.
 (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)
 Delaware
    
    36-4339870(State or other jurisdiction of
    
    (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.)incorporation or organization)4088 Commercial Avenue
    
    Northbrook, Illinois 60062(Address of principal executive offices)
    
    (Zip Code)
 (847) 400-9000
 Common Stock, par value $0.01
 None
 o þ
 o þ
 þ o
 o o
 þ
  Large accelerated filer o
    
    Accelerated filer o
    
    Non-accelerated filer þ
    
    Smaller reporting company o
 Yes o No þ
   DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE




---



##### 



EXPLANATORY NOTE




---



##### 



SIGNATURES
  NANOSPHERE, INC.By:
    /s/ William P. MoffittWilliam P. MoffittPresident and Chief Executive Officer   Signature
    
    Title(s)
    
    Date/s/ William P. Moffitt

William P. Moffitt
    
    President, Chief Executive Officer, Director
(principal executive officer)
    
    August 27, 2009/s/ Roger Moody

Roger Moody
    
    Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer
(principal financial officer and
principal accounting officer)
    
    August 27, 2009/s/ Mark Slezak

Mark Slezak
    
    Chairman of the board of directors
    
    August 27, 2009/s/ Jeffrey R. Crisan

Jeffrey R. Crisan
    
    Director
    
    August 27, 2009/s/ André de Bruin

André de Bruin
    
    Director
    
    August 27, 2009/s/ Chad A. Mirkin

Chad A. Mirkin
    
    Director
    
    August 27, 2009/s/ James J. Nahirny

James J. Nahirny
    
    Director
    
    August 27, 2009/s/ Sheli Z. Rosenberg

Sheli Z. Rosenberg
    
    Director
    
    August 27, 2009/s/ Lorin J. Randall

Lorin J. Randall
    
    Director
    
    August 27, 2009




---



##### 



EXHIBIT INDEX
 Exhibit Number
    
    Exhibit Description31.1
    
    
    Certification of Chief Executive Officer
pursuant to Exchange Act Rules 13a-14(a) and
15d-14(a), as adopted pursuant to Section 302
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 *31.2
    
    
    Certification of Chief Financial Officer
pursuant to Exchange Act Rules 13a-14(a) and
15d-14(a), as adopted pursuant to Section 302
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 *32.1
    
    
    Certification of Chief Executive Officer
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002 *32.2
    
    
    Certification of Chief Financial Officer
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002 *
 *
    
    Filed herewith
CU Di it U) Di Di Cl) CU <4 C)

Di

H

0 C)

0 Ft it

T

Q

0

H CU Di it it C) CU

H

CU Ft CD

0

0 CD

H

H

U) CU CU C) Di Di Di H- CU CUC Cl)

H I-H Di C) H-I

0 Di Di Di C)

H CU CU

Di CU

H

H CU it

0 CD CD H- Di CU CU

Di CU C) CD CU CU

< -< Di it H- Cl)

CU

H

0 I-H CU CU H- U) C) H- U)

H

CD <4 CU CU U) C) -, 0 it

CD

0 it CU Di it Di CU

H

CD Di Di tj

0 CU

0 Di Di • Di Di CU CU

Di Di C) Di Di U) CU Di

0 it CU CU

it

0 CU it CD CU CU CU it it

Di CD Di

H rj CU it CD Di CD

0

H Di CU CD Di CU U) Di CU it CU Di CU

it CU CU CU it H- CU Di U) CU CD

Di CD CU Di U)

0 H0 CD t-t CU CU

CD Di it Di it Di Di CD Di CU

CU Di

0

0 Di CU Di C) C) Di <4 CU

o CU Di CU Di CD j’

0 CU H- CU

Di CD CU L< CD <4 Di Di

H

it it CU U) FC

H CD Di C) C)

U) CU CU CU CD it

H Di it CU

CD

0 CU Di

0 CD Di C)

O <4 CU it CU Di CU

0

C) CD N) CD Di Di CD

0

Di it C) Di L< Di Di Di CU CD

CU H- CU CU I--k C) CU itDi it CD Di CU H0 U) CU CU

CD Di it Di it C) CU

- CU CD CU CU Di iQ CU Di o CU I--h

CU CU it CU CD CU Di

0

Di CU C) CU CD CU Di Di CU DiCU it

H CD CU Di CD

H it CD CU C) CU

Di Di C) Di it

H CU C) Di

0

it N) Di CD H- C) CU it CU H- Di

CU CD C) C) H- Di CU • CU CU CU .

CU U)

H C) Di CU C)

0 CU CD CU

Di NJ C) CD C) CU C) CUCU CU Di Di

0 Di H-

- C) it CU

H

Di Di • H- Di Di U) CU

0 HI C) C)

CU0 CU Di NJ CU — CU it Di CUCU CU CD • C) CD Di Di C)

H

CD Di it it

H Di CU Di Di it

H Di

CU it CD CU NJ U)

H

0

H U)

H- Di Di H- H- U) CD Di CU 1 0

Di

0 CU Di U) Di H- -< CU CU

H Di

Di Di Di CU U) C)

0 CU CU

CU Di it it Di it Di CU CU CU

—.

0 it Di CU Di H-

— *

C) it it H- Di it it CUDi it U) it U) it CD C) CU CU CU

H- CU CD CU

0 CD CU CD

CU C) Di Di C) CU --- CUDi CD

H Di • CU CD CD

H H- it CU it Di <1

Di U) it . Di

0

CU Di CU CD it

H

Di H-) Di CU Di CD CU U)Di

0 CD —“ U) U) CD

fr-h Di <4 Di C)0 Di H- CD DiDi CU CU CU Di

CU CD -< CU
Ox

HZ

it,CD

(1)

itCDit

CD(1)

Cl)CDH

hiC’jox

H-

<

(1)0rhiHhiU)H- Cli

C)

it0

C)a

CD

C) ito

a

C) CDhi Hit hi

C) hi

C) CD

a iiCD C)hi

0

(1) C)it (1)

CD CDC)

a it(1)

0

c it

HaNJ CDNJ

a

a hiCD CD

Nh

H- it

0)(1)

0

C)

h

CD CDa ií

CD

a C)

k< it

CD

o C)hi ()

CD

0C)

0

CD

0

0

CD

0

o hi

CD itaCDhi

aH

NJ (_)

a

hi

NJ CD

NJ

0

NJ hi

it

it

a

CD

0C)

0

hi

aCDit

0

hi

CD

C) CDC)

C)

CDhi

NJ

NJ

NJNJ

Cli

CDNJNJ

CD

hiitHCD

(I)(1)a

CDNJNJ

(1)

C)aSHit

NJ
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

JUDGMENT

No. 04

- 19

- 00824

- CV

IN THE INTEREST OF A.C.P.T. , a Child

From the 37th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2019

- PA

- 00127

Honorable Charles E. Montemayor, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE MARTINEZ

, JUSTICE WATKINS , AND JUSTICE RODRIGUEZ

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is

AFFIRMED. It is ORDERED that no costs be assessed against appellant in relation to this a ppeal.

SIGNED April 29, 2020.

_____________________________ Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Criminal Action No. 11-99 (JLL)

Plaintiffs,

ORDER

V.

ANDREW COX,

Defendant.

THiS MATTER comes before the Court by way of Defendant’s motion to withdraw his

plea of guilty [Docket Entry No. 95]. For the reasons stated in the Court’s corresponding

Opinion dated July 30, 2012,

IT IS on this 30th day ofJuly, 2012,

ORDERED that Defendant’s motion to withdraw his plea of guilty [Docket Entry No.

95] is DENIED; and it is further

ORDERED that the following motions are all DENIED AS MOOT: Defendant’s

motion to dismiss the Superseding Complaint and Indictment [Docket Entry No. 88];

Defendant’s motion to produce grand jury materials [Docket Entry No. 92]; Defendant’s motion

for discovery [Docket Entry No. 78]; Defendant’s motion to declare his innocence as to “the six

dated counts on which [he] previously pled guilty” and for the return of property seized by

pretrial services while on bail [Docket Entry No. 108]; Defendant’s motion to disclose the reason

for sealing [Docket Entry No. 90]; and Defendant’s motion for pretrial services to produce the

1

Case 2:11-cr-00099-CCC Document 125 Filed 07/30/12 Page 1 of 2 PageID: 1374
search warrant for its March 23, 2011 search and seizure [Docket Entry Nos. 87, 113]; and it is

further

ORDERED that Defendant’s sentencing is hereby set for Wednesday, August 8, 2012

at 1:30 p.m. before the Undersigned.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Linares

States District Judge

2

Case 2:11-cr-00099-CCC Document 125 Filed 07/30/12 Page 2 of 2 PageID: 1375
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2

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

      In connection with the Lexent Inc. (the "Company") Annual Report on Form
10-K for the period ended December 31, 2002 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Norman Fornella, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the
best of my knowledge:

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

Date: March 27, 2003           By:  /s/ Norman G. Fornella
      ----------------------        ----------------------
                                    Norman G. Fornella
                                    Chief Financial Officer


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Lexent Inc. and will be retained by Lexent Inc. and furnished to
the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.