Unsigned narrowed receiver-order form — June 5 objection Exhibit 4
Original sourceUnsigned proposed order text attached to an objection; neither filing nor judicial phrasing proves entry.
Metadata only
The original file isn’t published in this edition.
The record remains visible so the reader can see that it exists without mistaking metadata for access to the underlying document.
SHA-256 ce75eecd6d73e2be1f46…0 pages · 341 KB
DISTILLATES
What the source contains
Each card carries the governed distillate name from the database. Open the quoted anchor before relying on the interpretation.
claimallegation
The June5,2025 objection Exhibit4 contains a seven-page order form also marked Exhibit1-B, followed by June5 automated service records. It r
The June5,2025 objection Exhibit4 contains a seven-page order form also marked Exhibit1-B, followed by June5 automated service records. It recites a January17 hearing, but its judicial date and signature are blank; defence counsel’s approved-as-to-form block is typed. It is not shown to be an entered order.
Read the anchor · page 1
EXHIBIT 4
6/5/2025 12:13 PM
Marilyn Burgess - District Clerk Harris County
Envelope No. 101664202
By: Shanelle Taylor
Filed: 6/5/2025 12:13 PM
UnofficialCopyOfficeofMarilynBurgessDistrictClerk
claimallegation
The form would grant turnover against Cyberlux but deny it against Schmidt; it recites original award components, credits and an October31,2
The form would grant turnover against Cyberlux but deny it against Schmidt; it recites original award components, credits and an October31,2024 remaining amount$848,363.37, and appoint Berleth subject to$2,000 bond. These are proposed findings, not established ledger balances or an effective appointment in this copy.
Read the anchor · page 2
ORDER APPOINTING RECEIVER AND TO COMPEL DISCOVERY
PAGE 1 OF 7
CAUSE NO. 2024-48085
ATLANTIC WAVE HOLDINGS, LLC AND § IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF
SECURE COMMUNITY, LLC, §
Plaintiffs, §
§
V. § 129th JUDICIAL DISTRICT
§
CYBERLUX CORPORATION and §
MARK SCHMIDT, Individually, §
Defendants. § HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART TURNOVER AND
APPOINTING RECEIVER
On January 17, 2025, came on to be heard the Application for Turnover After Judgment
and for Appointment of Receiver made by Plaintiffs Atlantic Wave Holdings LLC and Secure
Community LLC, (hereinafter “Applicants”). After the Court's review of the papers on the docket
and the testimony and admitted evidence, the Court GRANTS the Application to aid the collection
of the Judgment that is on file in this cause against Defendant Cyberlux Corporation (“Cyberlux”)
on the terms set forth herein and DENIES the Application as to Defendant Mark Schmidt. The
Court, therefore, ORDERS, ADJUDGES AND DECREES:
1. Applicants are judgment creditors of Cyberlux pursuant to the Amended Final Order
and Judgment signed on June 28, 2023, which sets forth an award of $1,572,500 “as
agreed to by the parties pursuant to the parties’ separate agreement”; an award of costs
of $177,126.19; and “sanctions” in the amounts of $3,895 and $6,842.50, plus interest
at 12% per annum “as provided in the parties’ agreement.” The Final Order has been
reduced pursuant to payments of the “sanctions” amounts and the costs, as well as by
application of additional amounts. The amount due pursuant to the Amended Final
Order as of October 31, 2024, was $848,363.37.
2. That Robert W. Berleth (“Receiver”), whose address is 9950 Cypresswood Dr., Suite
200 Houston, Texas 77070; phone: 713-588-6900, is hereby appointed Receiver in this
cause pursuant to the Texas Turnover Statute, shall post a $2,000 bond, and shall serve
with the powers and duties set forth herein and as limited by applicable law.
3. That Cyberlux shall make a full and complete disclosure to the Receiver with respect
to the Receivership Property (as defined herein) of the matters Cyberlux has been so
EXHIBIT
1-B
UnofficialCopyOfficeofMarilynBurgessDistrictClerk
claimallegation
The form would require ExhibitA documents within14days of receipt through counsel, prior discovery responses within30days, initial property
The form would require ExhibitA documents within14days of receipt through counsel, prior discovery responses within30days, initial property delivery within10days and later receipts within3days while the judgment remains unsatisfied. ExhibitA covers36months of financial/governance records and10years of deeds. These are proposed deadlines, not presently calculable obligations absent entry and receipt.
Read the anchor · page 3
ORDER APPOINTING RECEIVER AND TO COMPEL DISCOVERY
PAGE 2 OF 7
ordered to disclose pursuant to this Order and to neither directly nor indirectly interfere
or impede the Receiver in his performance of his duties under this Order.
4. That Cyberlux is Ordered to turnover and deliver custody to the Receiver within
fourteen (14) days from Cyberlux’s receipt of a copy of this Order, c/o its attorney of
record, Katharine Battaia Clark via email to kclark@thompsoncoburn.com, the
documents described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto, subject in all respects to the
Protective Order entered in this cause, and is further Ordered to provide to the Receiver
within 30 days hereof a copy of the responses to the previously pending Request for
Admission, Requests for Production, and Interrogatories, subject in all respects to the
Protective Order entered in this cause .
5. That Cyberlux shall turnover to the Receiver at Receiver's address stated above, within
ten (10) days of Cyberlux’s receipt of a copy of this Order through its attorney of
record, Katharine Battaia Clark via email to kclark@thompsoncoburn.com, all checks,
cash, securities (stocks and bonds), promissory notes, documents of title and contracts
that make up the Receivership Property (defined herein), and Cyberlux is hereby
Ordered to continue to turnover to the Receiver at the Receiver's address all of said
checks, cash, securities (stocks and bonds), promissory notes, documents of title and
contracts that make up the Receivership Property (defined herein) within three (3) days
from Cyberlux’s receipt and possession of such property, if, as and when Cyberlux
comes into receipt and possession of any such property, but only for so long as the
Amended Final Order remains unsatisfied.
6. Receiver shall have all the power and authority allowed by law to take possession of
the following of Cyberlux’s non-exempt property in its actual or constructive
possession or control, which property is defined herein as the “Receivership
Property”:
a. Its interest, if any, in the leased office and manufacturing facility of Catalyst
MachineWorks, LLC, located at 21631 Rhodes Road, Spring, TX 77388, as
shown on page 18 of 46 of Applicants’ Exhibit 2, admitted into evidence at the
hearing; provided, however, this Order shall not apply to property located at the
Spring, TX facility, as Applicants have not demonstrated Cyberlux has an
EXHIBIT
1-B
UnofficialCopyOfficeofMarilynBurgessDistrictClerk
claimallegation
Defined property would include Cyberlux’s interest, if any, in the Spring leased facility, excluding contents for lack of demonstrated owner
Defined property would include Cyberlux’s interest, if any, in the Spring leased facility, excluding contents for lack of demonstrated ownership; and its Datron interest, excluding the Vista lease and contents for lack of demonstrated ownership. This proposed evidentiary limitation does not itself establish who owns the excluded assets.
Read the anchor · page 3
ORDER APPOINTING RECEIVER AND TO COMPEL DISCOVERY
PAGE 2 OF 7
ordered to disclose pursuant to this Order and to neither directly nor indirectly interfere
or impede the Receiver in his performance of his duties under this Order.
4. That Cyberlux is Ordered to turnover and deliver custody to the Receiver within
fourteen (14) days from Cyberlux’s receipt of a copy of this Order, c/o its attorney of
record, Katharine Battaia Clark via email to kclark@thompsoncoburn.com, the
documents described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto, subject in all respects to the
Protective Order entered in this cause, and is further Ordered to provide to the Receiver
within 30 days hereof a copy of the responses to the previously pending Request for
Admission, Requests for Production, and Interrogatories, subject in all respects to the
Protective Order entered in this cause .
5. That Cyberlux shall turnover to the Receiver at Receiver's address stated above, within
ten (10) days of Cyberlux’s receipt of a copy of this Order through its attorney of
record, Katharine Battaia Clark via email to kclark@thompsoncoburn.com, all checks,
cash, securities (stocks and bonds), promissory notes, documents of title and contracts
that make up the Receivership Property (defined herein), and Cyberlux is hereby
Ordered to continue to turnover to the Receiver at the Receiver's address all of said
checks, cash, securities (stocks and bonds), promissory notes, documents of title and
contracts that make up the Receivership Property (defined herein) within three (3) days
from Cyberlux’s receipt and possession of such property, if, as and when Cyberlux
comes into receipt and possession of any such property, but only for so long as the
Amended Final Order remains unsatisfied.
6. Receiver shall have all the power and authority allowed by law to take possession of
the following of Cyberlux’s non-exempt property in its actual or constructive
possession or control, which property is defined herein as the “Receivership
Property”:
a. Its interest, if any, in the leased office and manufacturing facility of Catalyst
MachineWorks, LLC, located at 21631 Rhodes Road, Spring, TX 77388, as
shown on page 18 of 46 of Applicants’ Exhibit 2, admitted into evidence at the
hearing; provided, however, this Order shall not apply to property located at the
Spring, TX facility, as Applicants have not demonstrated Cyberlux has an
EXHIBIT
1-B
UnofficialCopyOfficeofMarilynBurgessDistrictClerk
claimallegation
The form permits records access, presale activity, subpoenas and limited securing of property, but requires individual court approval of eve
The form permits records access, presale activity, subpoenas and limited securing of property, but requires individual court approval of every sale with notice/hearing, no breach of peace, advance landlord notice before locks change and writ-based peace-officer assistance. Third-party restrictions are tied to covered receivership property.
Read the anchor · page 4
ORDER APPOINTING RECEIVER AND TO COMPEL DISCOVERY
PAGE 3 OF 7
interest in such property (and, instead, Applicants’ witness testified he has no
knowledge of what is located at the Spring, Texas facility);
b. Its interest in Datron World Communications that has a leased office and
manufacturing facility located at 995 Joshua Way, Vista, CA 92081, as shown
on page 18 of 46 of Applicants’ Exhibit 2, admitted into evidence at the hearing;
provided, however, this Order shall not apply to the lease of or property located
at the Vista, CA facility, as Applicants have not demonstrated Cyberlux has an
interest in such property in the form of a leasehold interest or otherwise (and,
instead, Applicants’ witness testified he has no knowledge of what is located at
the Vista, California facility);
7. Receiver shall have all the power and authority allowed by law to take possession of
all documents, books and records reasonably necessary to allow Receiver to evaluate
said Receivership Property that is in the actual or constructive possession or control of
Cyberlux;
8. The Receiver is hereby authorized to take all action necessary to gain access to all non-
exempt real property, leased premises, storage facilities and safe deposit boxes wherein
any real and/or personal property of Debtor may be situated and to seize the contents
thereof.
9. The Receiver is hereby authorized to secure control over the Receivership Property,
and engage in presale activities in order to secure the highest and best sales price for
such Receivership Property, including but not limited to appraisals, evaluations, listing
agreements, advertising agreements, etc. Receiver may not breach the peace but may
seek further instruction from this Court. All sales of Receivership Property must be
individually approved by this Court with reasonable and adequate notice and
opportunity for hearing granted for Applicants and Cyberlux.
10. Receiver is authorized but not required to (a) disable or remove the Receivership
Property or to place the Receivership Property into storage; (b) insure any Receivership
Property taken into his possession, and (c) change the locks to premises belonging to
EXHIBIT
1-B
UnofficialCopyOfficeofMarilynBurgessDistrictClerk
claimallegation
The form records applicants’ assertion that25% is reasonable, while requiring a noticed fee/reimbursement motion and proof of faithful perfo
The form records applicants’ assertion that25% is reasonable, while requiring a noticed fee/reimbursement motion and proof of faithful performance; reasonable expenses are contemplated and ungranted relief denied. It does not automatically award25% or any quantified receiver fee.
Read the anchor · page 5
ORDER APPOINTING RECEIVER AND TO COMPEL DISCOVERY
PAGE 4 OF 7
the Debtor, but only with reasonable advance, written notice to the real property owner
and/or manager and only to the extent necessary to secure the Receivership Property.
11. Receiver shall have the power to subpoena from Cyberlux, third parties, and witnesses
production of documents, things and information that would assist Receiver in carrying
out his duties hereunder, including but not limited to matters concerning the existence,
location, and/or value of Cyberlux’s non-exempt assets and the location of such assets
to the extent related to the Receivership Property.
12. That any constable, deputy constable, sheriff, deputy sheriff or any other peace officer
is hereby authorized to accompany Receiver pursuant to a writ to locations designated
by Receiver where Receiver believes the Receivership Property may be located, said
peace officers being hereby Ordered to prevent any person(s) from interfering with the
Receiver from carrying out any duty under this Order or interfering with any property
subject to this Order.
13. That any person or any agent of any person, with actual notice of this Order is not to
interfere with any property subject to this Order, and is further Ordered not to interfere
with the Receiver in the carrying out of any duty under this Order. Third parties are
hereby notified that the Receiver, to the exclusion of the Cyberlux, is the party entitled
to possess, sell, liquidate and otherwise deal with the Receivership Property, and once
any third party receives notice of this Order, they may be subject to liability should
they release any of the Receivership Property to Cyberlux unless directed by the
Receiver or this Court.
14. Applicants assert that a reasonable fee for a postjudgment receiver working under a
contingency that requires the advancement of time and expenses without prior
investigation into a judgment debtor’s assets is twenty-five percent (25%) of all
collections and credits against the Judgment; the Receiver must demonstrate his faithful
discharge of his duties in accordance with this Order upon application to this Court.
Receiver is also entitled to reimbursement of reasonable expenses incurred in
connection with his collection efforts. To obtain his fee and reimbursement of
expenses, Receiver shall first file a motion discussing the relevant factors and
considerations to the Court with notice to the parties and set for hearing on reasonable
and adequate notice. Receiver may seek interim fees and reimbursements in the same
EXHIBIT
1-B
UnofficialCopyOfficeofMarilynBurgessDistrictClerk
entityobservation
Cyberlux Corporation
Read the anchor · page 2
ORDER APPOINTING RECEIVER AND TO COMPEL DISCOVERY
PAGE 1 OF 7
CAUSE NO. 2024-48085
ATLANTIC WAVE HOLDINGS, LLC AND § IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF
SECURE COMMUNITY, LLC, §
Plaintiffs, §
§
V. § 129th JUDICIAL DISTRICT
§
CYBERLUX CORPORATION and §
MARK SCHMIDT, Individually, §
Defendants. § HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART TURNOVER AND
APPOINTING RECEIVER
On January 17, 2025, came on to be heard the Application for Turnover After Judgment
and for Appointment of Receiver made by Plaintiffs Atlantic Wave Holdings LLC and Secure
Community LLC, (hereinafter “Applicants”). After the Court's review of the papers on the docket
and the testimony and admitted evidence, the Court GRANTS the Application to aid the collection
of the Judgment that is on file in this cause against Defendant Cyberlux Corporation (“Cyberlux”)
on the terms set forth herein and DENIES the Application as to Defendant Mark Schmidt. The
Court, therefore, ORDERS, ADJUDGES AND DECREES:
1. Applicants are judgment creditors of Cyberlux pursuant to the Amended Final Order
and Judgment signed on June 28, 2023, which sets forth an award of $1,572,500 “as
agreed to by the parties pursuant to the parties’ separate agreement”; an award of costs
of $177,126.19; and “sanctions” in the amounts of $3,895 and $6,842.50, plus interest
at 12% per annum “as provided in the parties’ agreement.” The Final Order has been
reduced pursuant to payments of the “sanctions” amounts and the costs, as well as by
application of additional amounts. The amount due pursuant to the Amended Final
Order as of October 31, 2024, was $848,363.37.
2. That Robert W. Berleth (“Receiver”), whose address is 9950 Cypresswood Dr., Suite
200 Houston, Texas 77070; phone: 713-588-6900, is hereby appointed Receiver in this
cause pursuant to the Texas Turnover Statute, shall post a $2,000 bond, and shall serve
with the powers and duties set forth herein and as limited by applicable law.
3. That Cyberlux shall make a full and complete disclosure to the Receiver with respect
to the Receivership Property (as defined herein) of the matters Cyberlux has been so
EXHIBIT
1-B
UnofficialCopyOfficeofMarilynBurgessDistrictClerk
entityobservation
Mark Schmidt
Read the anchor · page 2
ORDER APPOINTING RECEIVER AND TO COMPEL DISCOVERY
PAGE 1 OF 7
CAUSE NO. 2024-48085
ATLANTIC WAVE HOLDINGS, LLC AND § IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF
SECURE COMMUNITY, LLC, §
Plaintiffs, §
§
V. § 129th JUDICIAL DISTRICT
§
CYBERLUX CORPORATION and §
MARK SCHMIDT, Individually, §
Defendants. § HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART TURNOVER AND
APPOINTING RECEIVER
On January 17, 2025, came on to be heard the Application for Turnover After Judgment
and for Appointment of Receiver made by Plaintiffs Atlantic Wave Holdings LLC and Secure
Community LLC, (hereinafter “Applicants”). After the Court's review of the papers on the docket
and the testimony and admitted evidence, the Court GRANTS the Application to aid the collection
of the Judgment that is on file in this cause against Defendant Cyberlux Corporation (“Cyberlux”)
on the terms set forth herein and DENIES the Application as to Defendant Mark Schmidt. The
Court, therefore, ORDERS, ADJUDGES AND DECREES:
1. Applicants are judgment creditors of Cyberlux pursuant to the Amended Final Order
and Judgment signed on June 28, 2023, which sets forth an award of $1,572,500 “as
agreed to by the parties pursuant to the parties’ separate agreement”; an award of costs
of $177,126.19; and “sanctions” in the amounts of $3,895 and $6,842.50, plus interest
at 12% per annum “as provided in the parties’ agreement.” The Final Order has been
reduced pursuant to payments of the “sanctions” amounts and the costs, as well as by
application of additional amounts. The amount due pursuant to the Amended Final
Order as of October 31, 2024, was $848,363.37.
2. That Robert W. Berleth (“Receiver”), whose address is 9950 Cypresswood Dr., Suite
200 Houston, Texas 77070; phone: 713-588-6900, is hereby appointed Receiver in this
cause pursuant to the Texas Turnover Statute, shall post a $2,000 bond, and shall serve
with the powers and duties set forth herein and as limited by applicable law.
3. That Cyberlux shall make a full and complete disclosure to the Receiver with respect
to the Receivership Property (as defined herein) of the matters Cyberlux has been so
EXHIBIT
1-B
UnofficialCopyOfficeofMarilynBurgessDistrictClerk
entityobservation
Robert W. Berleth
Read the anchor · page 2
ORDER APPOINTING RECEIVER AND TO COMPEL DISCOVERY
PAGE 1 OF 7
CAUSE NO. 2024-48085
ATLANTIC WAVE HOLDINGS, LLC AND § IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF
SECURE COMMUNITY, LLC, §
Plaintiffs, §
§
V. § 129th JUDICIAL DISTRICT
§
CYBERLUX CORPORATION and §
MARK SCHMIDT, Individually, §
Defendants. § HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS
ORDER GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART TURNOVER AND
APPOINTING RECEIVER
On January 17, 2025, came on to be heard the Application for Turnover After Judgment
and for Appointment of Receiver made by Plaintiffs Atlantic Wave Holdings LLC and Secure
Community LLC, (hereinafter “Applicants”). After the Court's review of the papers on the docket
and the testimony and admitted evidence, the Court GRANTS the Application to aid the collection
of the Judgment that is on file in this cause against Defendant Cyberlux Corporation (“Cyberlux”)
on the terms set forth herein and DENIES the Application as to Defendant Mark Schmidt. The
Court, therefore, ORDERS, ADJUDGES AND DECREES:
1. Applicants are judgment creditors of Cyberlux pursuant to the Amended Final Order
and Judgment signed on June 28, 2023, which sets forth an award of $1,572,500 “as
agreed to by the parties pursuant to the parties’ separate agreement”; an award of costs
of $177,126.19; and “sanctions” in the amounts of $3,895 and $6,842.50, plus interest
at 12% per annum “as provided in the parties’ agreement.” The Final Order has been
reduced pursuant to payments of the “sanctions” amounts and the costs, as well as by
application of additional amounts. The amount due pursuant to the Amended Final
Order as of October 31, 2024, was $848,363.37.
2. That Robert W. Berleth (“Receiver”), whose address is 9950 Cypresswood Dr., Suite
200 Houston, Texas 77070; phone: 713-588-6900, is hereby appointed Receiver in this
cause pursuant to the Texas Turnover Statute, shall post a $2,000 bond, and shall serve
with the powers and duties set forth herein and as limited by applicable law.
3. That Cyberlux shall make a full and complete disclosure to the Receiver with respect
to the Receivership Property (as defined herein) of the matters Cyberlux has been so
EXHIBIT
1-B
UnofficialCopyOfficeofMarilynBurgessDistrictClerk
entityobservation
Katharine Battaia Clark
Read the anchor · page 8
ORDER APPOINTING RECEIVER AND TO COMPEL DISCOVERY
PAGE 7 OF 7
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
THOMPSON COBURN LLP
Katharine Battaia Clark
State Bar No. 24046712
Alexander J. Pennetti State Bar
State Bar No. 24110208
2100 Ross Avenue, Suite 3200
Dallas, Texas 75201
Tel Phone: (972) 629-7100
Fax: (972) 629-7171
kclark@thompsoncoburn.com
apennetti@thompsoncoburn.com
COUNSEL FOR DEFENDANTS
EXHIBIT
1-B
UnofficialCopyOfficeofMarilynBurgessDistrictClerk
inferenceinference
This form is useful for comparing proposed limits with the eventual entered receivership instrument, but cannot establish that Schmidt was e
This form is useful for comparing proposed limits with the eventual entered receivership instrument, but cannot establish that Schmidt was excluded or a particular balance judicially fixed.
omissiongap
Judicial signature, entry date, receipt proof and supporting balance evidence are absent from this copy.
Read the anchor · page 1
EXHIBIT 4
6/5/2025 12:13 PM
Marilyn Burgess - District Clerk Harris County
Envelope No. 101664202
By: Shanelle Taylor
Filed: 6/5/2025 12:13 PM
UnofficialCopyOfficeofMarilynBurgessDistrictClerk
otherattribution
Complete supplied 10-page source reviewed at SHA-256 ce75eecd6d73e2be1f460e182159564ce26af98e750ad2dad771138d3914da56. Source assertions, or
Complete supplied 10-page source reviewed at SHA-256 ce75eecd6d73e2be1f460e182159564ce26af98e750ad2dad771138d3914da56. Source assertions, original visual features, filing/communication context and identified missing attachments are retained. Exact version_cf894ea65ebd4326820eaed1432a798e; SHA256 ce75eecd6d73e2be1f460e182159564ce26af98e750ad2dad771138d3914da56. Full10pages read; opening terms, blank judicial signature and counsel block visually checked. Original extraction retained.
Read the anchor · page 1
EXHIBIT 4
6/5/2025 12:13 PM
Marilyn Burgess - District Clerk Harris County
Envelope No. 101664202
By: Shanelle Taylor
Filed: 6/5/2025 12:13 PM
UnofficialCopyOfficeofMarilynBurgessDistrictClerk
questionquestion
Which signed entered order governed the receivership, and which of these proposed limitations did it adopt?
distillatequestion
CONNECT
Reviewed relationships
The canvas follows the database: source to DISTIL record, DISTIL record to knowledge object, then reviewed relationship. Position alone means nothing.
The form would grant turnover against Cyberlux but deny it against Schmidt; it recites original award components, credits and an October31,2024 remaining amount$848,363.37, and appoint Berleth subject to$2,000 bond. These are proposed findings, not established ledger balances or an effective appointment in this copy.supportsPennetti argues the Chapter31 receiver is limited to the domesticated judgment and should stop after sufficient tender; seeks registry payment, satisfaction and retroactive removal of Schmidt from the turnover order. He describes going-concern operations and subsidiary-sale risk but expressly lacks clarity about which subsidiary owns which contracts. These are counsel arguments, not adjudicated operational facts.
Proposed Schmidt exclusion supplies context to counsel’s later scope argument, not proof the exclusion was entered.
The entity-control provisions vest debtor management authority in the receiver, superseding officers, directors and managers. Sole-owned entities and individual ownership interests are addressed separately. The order asserts first-receivership control and restricts litigation against the receiver or his firm outside this court. These provisions must be compared with later modifications rather than treated as timeless authority.qualifiesThe form would grant turnover against Cyberlux but deny it against Schmidt; it recites original award components, credits and an October31,2024 remaining amount$848,363.37, and appoint Berleth subject to$2,000 bond. These are proposed findings, not established ledger balances or an effective appointment in this copy.
Original signed order covers both debtors and broad control; source68 is an unsigned proposed Cyberlux-only narrowing, not proof this instrument was replaced.
Defined property would include Cyberlux’s interest, if any, in the Spring leased facility, excluding contents for lack of demonstrated ownership; and its Datron interest, excluding the Vista lease and contents for lack of demonstrated ownership. This proposed evidentiary limitation does not itself establish who owns the excluded assets.supportsThis form is useful for comparing proposed limits with the eventual entered receivership instrument, but cannot establish that Schmidt was excluded or a particular balance judicially fixed.
Specifically named source propositions support the bounded distinction or question.
The form would grant turnover against Cyberlux but deny it against Schmidt; it recites original award components, credits and an October31,2024 remaining amount$848,363.37, and appoint Berleth subject to$2,000 bond. These are proposed findings, not established ledger balances or an effective appointment in this copy.supportsWhich signed entered order governed the receivership, and which of these proposed limitations did it adopt?
Specifically named source propositions support the bounded distinction or question.
The June5,2025 objection Exhibit4 contains a seven-page order form also marked Exhibit1-B, followed by June5 automated service records. It recites a January17 hearing, but its judicial date and signature are blank; defence counsel’s approved-as-to-form block is typed. It is not shown to be an entered order.supportsIs this the operative receiver order?
Specifically named source propositions support the bounded distinction or question.
The form would grant turnover against Cyberlux but deny it against Schmidt; it recites original award components, credits and an October31,2024 remaining amount$848,363.37, and appoint Berleth subject to$2,000 bond. These are proposed findings, not established ledger balances or an effective appointment in this copy.supportsThis form is useful for comparing proposed limits with the eventual entered receivership instrument, but cannot establish that Schmidt was excluded or a particular balance judicially fixed.
Specifically named source propositions support the bounded distinction or question.
The form records applicants’ assertion that25% is reasonable, while requiring a noticed fee/reimbursement motion and proof of faithful performance; reasonable expenses are contemplated and ungranted relief denied. It does not automatically award25% or any quantified receiver fee.supportsWhich signed entered order governed the receivership, and which of these proposed limitations did it adopt?
Specifically named source propositions support the bounded distinction or question.
Defined property would include Cyberlux’s interest, if any, in the Spring leased facility, excluding contents for lack of demonstrated ownership; and its Datron interest, excluding the Vista lease and contents for lack of demonstrated ownership. This proposed evidentiary limitation does not itself establish who owns the excluded assets.supportsWhich signed entered order governed the receivership, and which of these proposed limitations did it adopt?
Specifically named source propositions support the bounded distinction or question.
The form would grant turnover against Cyberlux but deny it against Schmidt; it recites original award components, credits and an October31,2024 remaining amount$848,363.37, and appoint Berleth subject to$2,000 bond. These are proposed findings, not established ledger balances or an effective appointment in this copy.supportsIs this the operative receiver order?
Specifically named source propositions support the bounded distinction or question.
The June5,2025 objection Exhibit4 contains a seven-page order form also marked Exhibit1-B, followed by June5 automated service records. It recites a January17 hearing, but its judicial date and signature are blank; defence counsel’s approved-as-to-form block is typed. It is not shown to be an entered order.supportsThis form is useful for comparing proposed limits with the eventual entered receivership instrument, but cannot establish that Schmidt was excluded or a particular balance judicially fixed.
Specifically named source propositions support the bounded distinction or question.
The form would grant turnover against Cyberlux but deny it against Schmidt; it recites original award components, credits and an October31,2024 remaining amount$848,363.37, and appoint Berleth subject to$2,000 bond. These are proposed findings, not established ledger balances or an effective appointment in this copy.supportsJudicial signature, entry date, receipt proof and supporting balance evidence are absent from this copy.
Specifically named source propositions support the bounded distinction or question.
The form would require ExhibitA documents within14days of receipt through counsel, prior discovery responses within30days, initial property delivery within10days and later receipts within3days while the judgment remains unsatisfied. ExhibitA covers36months of financial/governance records and10years of deeds. These are proposed deadlines, not presently calculable obligations absent entry and receipt.supportsJudicial signature, entry date, receipt proof and supporting balance evidence are absent from this copy.
Specifically named source propositions support the bounded distinction or question.
The form records applicants’ assertion that25% is reasonable, while requiring a noticed fee/reimbursement motion and proof of faithful performance; reasonable expenses are contemplated and ungranted relief denied. It does not automatically award25% or any quantified receiver fee.supportsIs this the operative receiver order?
Specifically named source propositions support the bounded distinction or question.
The June5,2025 objection Exhibit4 contains a seven-page order form also marked Exhibit1-B, followed by June5 automated service records. It recites a January17 hearing, but its judicial date and signature are blank; defence counsel’s approved-as-to-form block is typed. It is not shown to be an entered order.supportsWhich signed entered order governed the receivership, and which of these proposed limitations did it adopt?
Specifically named source propositions support the bounded distinction or question.
The June5,2025 objection Exhibit4 contains a seven-page order form also marked Exhibit1-B, followed by June5 automated service records. It recites a January17 hearing, but its judicial date and signature are blank; defence counsel’s approved-as-to-form block is typed. It is not shown to be an entered order.supportsJudicial signature, entry date, receipt proof and supporting balance evidence are absent from this copy.
Specifically named source propositions support the bounded distinction or question.
The form permits records access, presale activity, subpoenas and limited securing of property, but requires individual court approval of every sale with notice/hearing, no breach of peace, advance landlord notice before locks change and writ-based peace-officer assistance. Third-party restrictions are tied to covered receivership property.supportsIs this the operative receiver order?
Specifically named source propositions support the bounded distinction or question.
WEIGH
Explained weighting
A score appears only when its components and change threshold are published.
No published WEIGH run
The active Website Edition contains no applied score snapshot for this source or its connected objects. That means not assessed—not zero.