alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY 

KEVIN M. MCCANN, M.D., 

Plaintiff, 

v.

Civil Action No. 11-3241 (MAS) 

Hon. Michael A. Shipp 

Magistrate Judge Tonianne J. Bongiovanni 

UNUM PROVIDENT, ET AL., 

a New Jersey corporation, 

Defendant. 

ORDER 

This matter having been opened to the Court by The Bayne Law Group LLC, attorneys for 

Plaintiff, for an Order permitting John J. Conway, Esq., to appear and participate pro hac vice, and 

the Court having considered the moving papers, and there being no opposition to such application, 

and for good cause shown pursuant to Local Civil Rule 101.1(c); it is hereby 

ORDERED that John J. Conway, who is a member of the bar in the State of Michigan and 

a member of the bar in the State of Arizona, be permitted to appear pro hac vice in this matter 

pursuant to Local Civil Rule 101.1(c); and it is further 

ORDERED that John J. Conway shall pay the annual fee to the New Jersey Lawyers’ fund 

for Client Protection, as required by New Jersey Court Rule 1:28-2, within 20 days from the date 

of entry of this Order, and it is further 

ORDERED that John J. Conway shall make payment to the Clerk of the Court pursuant to 

Local Civil Rule 101.1(c); and it is further 

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MAS-TJB Document 214 Filed 12/26/23 Page 1 of 2 PageID: 10887
ORDERED that John J. Conway shall be bound by the Local Civil Rules of this Court, 

including without limitation, the provisions with respect to judicial ethics and professional 

responsibility set forth in Local Civil Rule 103.1, and the provisions with respect to discipline of 

attorneys set forth in Local Civil Rule 104; and it is further

ORDERED that John J. Conway shall notify the Court immediately of any matter 

affecting his standing as member of the bar of any other Court; and it is further

ORDERED that all pleadings, briefs, and any other papers filed with this Court in this 

matter be signed by an attorney of record authorized to practice in this Court.

Entered on this _______ day of _________________, 2023. 

____________________________________ 

Hon. Tonianne J. Bongiovanni

United States Magistrate Judge 

26th December

s/ Tonianne J. Bongiovanni

[Docket Entry No. 209 is terminated.]

Case 3:11-cv-03241-MAS-TJB Document 214 Filed 12/26/23 Page 2 of 2 PageID: 10888
Case 2:11-cv-01210-JMV-SCM Document 469 Filed 06/21/19 Page 1 of 4 PageID: 19820
Case 2:11-cv-01210-JMV-SCM Document 469 Filed 06/21/19 Page 2 of 4 PageID: 19821
Case 2:11-cv-01210-JMV-SCM Document 469 Filed 06/21/19 Page 3 of 4 PageID: 19822
Grant W. McGuire, Esq. 

Case 2:11-cv-01210-JMV-SCM Document 469 Filed 06/21/19 Page 4 of 4 PageID: 19823
**Exhibit 21.1**

**List of Subsidiaries**

SeeBeyondTechnology Corporation Japan K.K.

SeeBeyondTechnology Corporation Korea Ltd.

SeeBeyondPty Ltd.

SeeBeyondPte Ltd.

SeeBeyond(Deutschland) GmbH

SeeBeyond(Schweiz) AG

SeeBeyond(France) SARL

SeeBeyond(Italy) S.R.L.

SeeBeyond(UK) Ltd.

SeeBeyondB.V.

SeeBeyond(Belgium) S.A.

SeeBeyond(Nordic) ApS

SeeBeyondEspana SL

SeeBeyondLimited (Hong Kong)

SeeBeyond(Norway) AS

SeeBeyond(Sweden) AB

SeeBeyond Limited (New Zealand)

1

----
S05F1812.

#### HARMON v. HARMON.

(622 SE2d 336)

HUNSTEIN, Presiding Justice.

Timothy Lane Harmon appeals from the order entered in his divorce from Brenda Harmon, challenging the trial court’s division of the parties’ marital and nonmarital property. “The purpose behind the doctrine of equitable division of marital property is ‘to assure that property accumulated during the marriage be fairly distributed between the parties.’ [Cit.]” *Payson v. Payson,*274 Ga. 231, 232 (1) (552 SE2d 839) (2001). “In equitable actions for divorce, the [fact-finder] possesses broad discretion to distribute marital property to assure that property accumulated during the marriage is fairly divided between the parties. [Cits.]” *Jones v. Jones,*264 Ga. 169 (441 SE2d 745) (1994). While each spouse is entitled to an allocation of the marital property based upon his or her respective equitable interest therein, *Byers v. Caldwell,*273 Ga. 228, 229 (539 SE2d 141) (2000), an award is not erroneous simply because one party receives a seemingly greater share of the marital property. See *Wright v. Wright,*277 Ga. 133 (2) (587 SE2d 600) (2003); *Mitchely v. Mitchely,*237 Ga. 138 (227 SE2d 34) (1976). An equitable division of marital property does not necessarily mean an equal division. *Goldstein v. Goldstein,*262 Ga. 136 (1) (414 SE2d 474) (1992). See also *Clements v. Clements,*255 Ga. 714 (1) (342 SE2d 463) (1986); *Stokes v. Stokes,*246 Ga. 765 (3) (273 SE2d 169) (1980) (trier of fact may award whole or part interest in property to one spouse or require the parties to sell property). Reviewing all the evidence adduced in this case we cannot say that the trial court treated Mr. Harmon inequitably in its decision regarding what constituted a fair division between the parties of the marital property. Therefore, we hold that Mr. Harmon failed to carry his burden of proving error in the trial court’s award to Ms. Harmon.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur.*

*119Decided November 21, 2005

Reconsideration denied December 15, 2005.

*Akin & Tate, William M. Akin,*for appellant.

*Perrotta, Cahn & Prieto, Hannibal F. Heredia,*for appellee.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 134 (Wednesday, July 15, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34335-34336]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-16728]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. RM06-22-009]


North American Electric Reliability Corporation; Notice of Filing

July 8, 2009.
    Take notice that on June 30, 2009, the North American Electric 
Reliability Corporation, in compliance with the directives in 
paragraphs 13-14 of the Commission's January 27, 2009 Order on 
Compliance Filing, 126 FERC 61,065 (2009), submitted modifications to 
Violation Risk Factors for four Requirements or Sub-Requirements in the 
Critical Infrastructure Protection (``CIP'') Reliability Standards CIP-
002-1 through CIP-009-1 that have been approved by the Commission.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must 
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the

[[Page 34336]]

appropriate action to be taken but will not serve to make protestants 
parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must 
file a notice of intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. 
Such notices, motions, or protests must be filed on or before the 
comment date. Anyone filing a motion to intervene or protest must serve 
a copy of that document on the Applicant and all the parties in this 
proceeding.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an 
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal 
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 
20426.
    This filing is accessible on-line at http://www.ferc.gov, using the 
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's 
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription'' 
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail 
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For 
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#cb8d8e998884a5a7a2a5ae98bebbbba4b9bf8badaeb9a8e5aca4bd"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="ebadaeb9a8a4858782858eb89e9b9b84999fab8d8e9988c58c849d">[email protected]</span></a>, or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For 
TTY, call (202) 502-8659.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. Eastern Time on July 29, 2009

Kimberly D. Bose,
Secretary.
 [FR Doc. E9-16728 Filed 7-14-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Case 3:11-cv-00760-JAP-TJB   Document 117   Filed 10/13/11   Page 1 of 6 PageID: 4107

Case 3:11-cv-00760-JAP-TJB   Document 117   Filed 10/13/11   Page 2 of 6 PageID: 4108

Case 3:11-cv-00760-JAP-TJB   Document 117   Filed 10/13/11   Page 3 of 6 PageID: 4109

Case 3:11-cv-00760-JAP-TJB   Document 117   Filed 10/13/11   Page 4 of 6 PageID: 4110

Case 3:11-cv-00760-JAP-TJB   Document 117   Filed 10/13/11   Page 5 of 6 PageID: 4111

Case 3:11-cv-00760-JAP-TJB   Document 117   Filed 10/13/11   Page 6 of 6 PageID: 4112
#### O’CONNELL et al. v. OLSEN & UGELSTADT et al.

Civ. A. No. 26371.

United States District Court, N. D. Ohio, E. D.

Dec. 27, 1949.

*143J. H. T. Miller, Cleveland, Ohio, for plaintiffs.

Leckie, McCreary, Schlitz & Hinslea, Cleveland, Ohio, for defendants.

JONES, Chief Judge.

This is a personal injury action in which plaintiff alleges that injuries he received have permanently and partially incapacitated him.

Defendant moves for the production and inspection of plaintiff’s income tax returns for the years 1945, 1946, 1947 and 1948.

There is authority in other District Courts for the production of income tax returns. Reeves v. Pennsylvania R.R. Co., D.C., 80 F.Supp. 107. Such authority is not binding on this Court.

The Internal Revenue Code, 26 U.S.C.A. § 55, and regulations issued thereunder provide that tax reurns shall be confidential and disclosed only upon application of the plaintiff or his attorney in fact. No provision is made for the production of such returns upon order of a Federal Court. Until such provision is made, this section of the Court has been and is of the opinion that such returns are, in private civil actions, confidential information between the taxpayer and the Government and should not be open to inspection under Rule 34, Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S. C.A. Such a ruling is in accord with previous holdings that documents which have been declared confidential by Federal department rulings are not open to discovery under Rule 34. 2 Moore’s Federal Practice 2641, F.N. 1.

Such a ruling will have no serious consequences as the information desired can be obtained by intelligent use of other discovery procedure.
Plaintiff.

vs. Case No.: lI—CV—01619—SRC —MAS

AMERICAN CORADIUS

INTERNATIONAL, LLC,

Defendant.

PLAINTIFF’S NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL

WITH PREJUDICE

Having amicably resolved all matters in controversy and pursuant to Federal Rule of

Civil Procedure 41(a)(l)(i), Plaintiff voluntary dismisses this action with prejudice.

Dated: May 3, 2011 Respectftilly submitted,

/s Andrew I. Glenn

Andrew I. Glenn

E-mail: AGlenn@cardandglenn.comNew Jersey Bar No.: 026491992

Card & Glenn. P.A.

35 Journal Square, Suite 403Jersey City, New Jersey 07306

Telephone: (201) 254-5009

Facsimile: (201)643-5959

Attorneys for Plaintiff
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Crim. No. 11-352-02(FSH) 

v. 

LUIS ABREU REPORT & RECOMMENDATION 

This matter having come before the Court by way of referral from the Hon. FaithS. 

Hochberg to conduct a proceeding pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 11 and to issue a report and 

recommendation regarding the defendant's entry of a guilty plea; and the Court having 

considered the written consent by the defendant and defense counsel to have the proceeding 

before the Undersigned; and the Undersigned having conducted a proceeding pursuant to Fed. R. 

Crim. P. 11; and as more fully set forth and reflected in the transcript of proceedings dated 

February 7, 2012, the Court makes the following report: 

1. The defendant consented to the entry of a guilty plea before a United States Magistrate 

Judge, subject to the defendant's ability to file any written objections to the findings and 

recommendations contained in this report and orally stated at the Rule 11 proceeding and subject 

to its adoption by the United States District Judge; 

2. The defendant fully understood the oath and consequences of failing to tell the truth at 

the plea hearing; 

3. The defendant fully understood the nature of the charges and the consequences of the 

guilty plea, including the maximum penalties that the defendant faces; 

4. The defendant fully understood that while the United States Sentencing Guidelines 

are not binding, they will be considered; 

5. The defendant fully understood the right to plead "not guilty" and to be tried by a jury, 

Case 2:11-cr-00352-MCA Document 72 Filed 02/07/12 Page 1 of 2 PageID: 201
.... with the assistance of counsel, and that the defendant would have the right to confront and crossexamine witnesses, call witnesses and compel the production of evidence if the defendant so 

chose, and to remain silent or testify, if the defendant so chose; 

6. The defendant fully understood that if the guilty plea is accepted, then there would be 

no trial in this case; 

7. The defendant was fully competent and capable of entering an informed guilty plea; 

8. The defendant's waiver of the right to file an appeal and to file a post-conviction 

challenge, and the plea were free, knowing, an~voluntary; and 

9. There is a factual basis to support the plea of guilty. 

Based upon the foregoing, and based upon the transcript of the proceedings, it is on this 

71

h day of February, 2012, recommended to the United States District Judge that the defendant's 

plea of guilty be accepted and that a judgment of guilt to the Indictment be entered. 

Respectfully, 

s/Patty Shwartz 

United States Magistrate Judge 

NlJtiCE 

FAILURE TO FILE WRITTEN OBJECTIONS TO THE FINDINGS AND 

RECOMMENDATIONS CONTAINED IN THE FOREGOING REPORT, WITHIN 

FOURTEEN DAYS OF RECEIPT OF SAME, MAY BAR DE NOVO DETERMINATION 

BY THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE OF AN ISSUE COVERED HEREIN AND 

SHALL BAR APPELLATE REVIEW OF SUCH FACTUAL FINDINGS AS MAY BE 

ACCEPTED OR ADOPTED BY THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE. 

Case 2:11-cr-00352-MCA Document 72 Filed 02/07/12 Page 2 of 2 PageID: 202
Exhibit 31.02

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO RULE 13A-14(A)/15D-14(A)

OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT AND SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I, Eric
R. Ludwig, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to quarterly report on Form 10-Q/A of Glu Mobile Inc.;
and

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a
material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report.



|                       |  |     |  |                                                    
|---------------------- |  | --- |  | ---------------------------------------------------
|Date: October 12, 2012 |  | By: |  | /s/ Eric R. Ludwig                                 
|                       |  |     |  | Eric R. Ludwig                                     
|                       |  |     |  | Executive Vice President and Chief Fnancial Officer
# Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas

January 18, 2018

No. 04

- 17

- 00692

- CV
COMAL AG OPERATIONS, LLC,

Appellant

v.

Justin KELLEY , Emily Kelley, Va lmark Chevrolet, Federated Insurance, Appellee s From the 2nd 25th Judicial District Court, Guadalupe County, Texas

Trial Court No. 17

- 0910

- CV

- A Jessica Crawford, Judge Presiding


### O R D E R
This is an accelerated appeal of the trial court’s Sep tember 29 , 2017 order granting Justin Kelley and Emily Kelley’s motio n to dismiss under the Texas Citizens Participation Act (TCPA)

. See T EX

. C IV

. P RAC

. & R EM

. C ODE A NN

. § 27.003 (West 2014) (motion to dismiss). Appellees’ briefs were due on December 27, 2017. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 38.6(b). After Valmark Chevrolet did not timely file an appellee’s brief, we advised Valmark that it was an appellee in this appeal, it had the choice to file

— or not file

— an appellee’s brief, but if it chose to file a brief, we ordered Valmark to file it by January 16, 2018. On January 12, 2018, Valmark filed its brief and a motion for extension of time to file the brief. The motion is GRANTED. Valmark’s brief is deemed timely filed.

_________________________________ Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 18th day of January, 2018

.

___________________________________ KEITH E. HOTTLE
, Clerk of Court
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 Annual Report of Paygard,  Inc. (the  "Company") on
Form 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"). I, John Mitchell, CFO
of the company, certify, pursuant to 18 USC 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 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/ John Mitchell
                                         --------------------------------
                                         John  Mitchell, CFO

Dated:  November 29, 2004
Exhibit 32.1  Certification of Principal Executive Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350 (Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002) In connection with the quarterly Report of Blugrass Energy, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John Kenney Berscht, Principal Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §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 the Company.  /s/ John Kenney BerschtJohn Kenney BerschtPrincipal Executive Officer  PrincipalDecember 23, 2010 This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference. A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
EXHIBIT 32.1

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 Annual Report of Click Commerce, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2004,
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Michael W. Ferro, Jr., Chief Executive Officer of the Company, do hereby 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; and

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

A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed
form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company] and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

The
foregoing certification is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission as an exhibit to the Form 10-K and shall not be considered filed as part of
the Form 10-K.

|Date: March 21, 2005 |  | /s/MICHAEL W. FERRO, JR.Chief Executive Officer
|-------------------- |  | -----------------------------------------------

---



QuickLinks
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### National Credit Union Administration

# Time and Date:

10 a.m., Thursday, July 16, 2009.

# Place:

Board Room, 7th Floor, Room 7047, 1775 Duke Street, Alexandria, VA 22314-3428.

# Status:

Open.

# Matter To Be Added:

5a. Revisions to Temporary Corporate Credit Union Liquidity Guarantee Program.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Mary Rupp, Secretary of the Board,                         *Telephone:*                         703-518-6304                    

Mary Rupp,

Board Secretary.

[FR Doc. E9-17021 Filed 7-14-09; 11:15 am]

BILLING CODE 7535-01-P