The evidence/GT-S-CE75EECD6D73

Context source · GT-S-CE75EECD6D73

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.
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.

50%
Confidence 75%Link weight 50%
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.

50%
Confidence 75%Link weight 50%
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.

50%
Confidence 75%Link weight 50%
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.

50%
Confidence 75%Link weight 50%
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.

50%
Confidence 75%Link weight 50%
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.

50%
Confidence 75%Link weight 50%
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.

50%
Confidence 75%Link weight 50%
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.

50%
Confidence 75%Link weight 50%
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.

50%
Confidence 75%Link weight 50%
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.

50%
Confidence 75%Link weight 50%
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.

50%
Confidence 75%Link weight 50%
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.

50%
Confidence 75%Link weight 50%
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.

50%
Confidence 75%Link weight 50%
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.

50%
Confidence 75%Link weight 50%
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.

50%
Confidence 75%Link weight 50%
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.

50%
Confidence 75%Link weight 50%

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.