alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 13-3658

___________________________

William T. Morrison, Jr.

lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellant

v.

Sheriff Kevin C. Bond; Sam Hargrave; John Brosch; Jason Atwood; Brian Egbert;

ReneWoolbridge;RichardTownsend;MattBahner;InnaKozhukharenko;AndyHoldeman

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendants - Appellees

____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Western District of Missouri - Jefferson City

____________

 Submitted: June 9, 2015

Filed: June 18, 2015

[Unpublished]

____________

Before MURPHY, BOWMAN, KELLY Circuit Judges. 

____________

PER CURIAM.
William Morrison appeals the district court’s adverse grant of summary 1

judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action, in which he asserted numerous claims

related to his pre-trial detention. After appointing Morrison counsel, this court

received briefs and then ordered supplemental briefing on whether summary

judgment was proper as to Morrison’s claim that defendants seized and censored his

mail without prior notice, in violation of his due process rights, and whether the

district court appropriately handled discovery matters. Following a careful review of

the record, and consideration of the parties’ arguments in their initial briefs and

supplemental briefs, we find no basis to reverse. See Menard, Inc. v. Dial-Columbus,

LLC, 781 F.3d 993, 997 (8th Cir. 2015) (grant of summary judgment is reviewed de

novo); In re Temporomandibular Joint (TMJ) Implants Prods. Liab. Litig., 113 F.3d

1484, 1489-90 (8thCir. 1997) (determination that claimisripe for summary judgment

is reviewed for abuse of discretion; discovery does not have to be completed before 

court can grant summary judgment). 

Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. 

______________________________

The Honorable Fernando J. Gaitan, Jr., United States District Judge for the

1

Western District of Missouri.

-2-
##### 



HMN FINANCIAL, INC.
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (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 result of operations of the Company.
 Date: March 1, 2006
    
    /s/ Michael McNeilMichael McNeil
President/Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)/s/Jon EberleJon Eberle
Senior Vice President/Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)
SOUTH TEXAS ASTRONOMICAL SOCIETY

Generation Artemis

Victor De Los Santos

2/01/22 - 6/14/23

The primary objectives of Generation Artemis are to 

utilize NASA STEM content, resources, and activities to 

deliver exciting and engaging STEM learning 

opportunities for K-12 students and the general public; 

maximize community involvement by including Spanish 

translations for content; and promote awareness of the 

opportunities the Artemis mission will bring to the Rio 

Grande Valley. Two Artemis Training Program sessions 

based on the NASA STEM Forward to the Moon Activity 

Guide for K-8 students will be held. High school 

students from the Brownsville Independent School 

District will be made aware of the NASA STEM 

Enhancement in Earth and Space Science summer 

internship opportunity. This program will create STEM 

education opportunities and pathways to STEM-related 

careers for a community historically underrepresented 

in space science.

List of Partners:

• Brownsville Independent School District

• Texas Space Grant Consortium

• Rio Grande Valley Science Association

• University of Texas - Rio Grande Valley Dept of

Physics and Astronomy

• Brownsville Museum of Fine Art

• Brownsville Historic Association

• Brownsville Convention & Visitor's Bureau

Generation Artemis campers learned about 

NASA’s Artemis program and humanity’s return to 

the Moon.

Credits: South Texas Astronomical Society

The material contained in this document is based upon 

work supported by a NASA grant or cooperative 

agreement award #80NSSC22K0453, under the Teams 

Engaging Affiliated Museums and Informal Institutions 

(TEAM II) activity of NASA’s Next Gen STEM Project.

Explore TEAM II Products 

https://www.nasa.gov/learning-resources/search/

www.nasa.gov
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _
Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A2 2 E0 02 6

. MATTHEW C H A R L E S CARDI NALE v . M ATT W ESTMORELAND et a l

.

Th e Ap p el l an t i n th e ab o v e-s ty l ed ca s e h as fi led an E m erg en cy M o t i o n

p u rs u an t t o Co u rt Ru l e 4 0 (b ) en t i t l ed Em erg en cy M o t io n Fo r St ay Of Ord er Co m p el l i n g W ai v er Of Ap p el l an t 's At t o rn e y

- C l i en t Pri v i l eg e. Aft er rev i ew, s ai d

m o ti o n i s h ereb y

DENIED.

C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia C le r k ’ s O f f i c e , A t la n t a ,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r t i f y t h a t t h e a b o v e i s a t r u e e x t r a c t f r o m
t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

. W i tn e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d t h e s e a l o

f s a i d c o u r t h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. 

## January 07, 2022

01/07/2022
#### THE FOURTEEN FLORENCE STREET CORP. v. THE GLIMCHER COMPANY.

May 22, 1984.

Petition for certification denied.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 23.1


                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

  We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Form S-8 (No. 333-92281 and No. 333-42722) of HealthCentral.com of
our reports dated February 9, 2001, relating to the consolidated financial
statements, which appear in this Form 10-K/A.  We also consent to the
incorporation by reference of our report dated February 9, 2001 relating to the
financial statement schedule, which appears in this Form 10-K/A.

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

San Jose, California
April 27, 2001
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 Quarterly Report of Ventana Medical Systems, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Christopher M. Gleeson, Chief 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 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; 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/    CHRISTOPHER M.
GLEESONChristopher M. Gleeson Chief Executive Officer July 31, 2003




This certification accompanies
this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                          45,569
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   22,030
<ALLOWANCES>                                       883
<INVENTORY>                                     14,072
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                84,463
<PP&E>                                          23,273
<DEPRECIATION>                                   8,927
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 121,078
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            8,442
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            15
<OTHER-SE>                                     110,798
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   121,078
<SALES>                                         17,829
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                17,829
<CGS>                                            6,134
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   16,356
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   (5)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  53
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,425
<INCOME-TAX>                                       456
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                969
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       969
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .07
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .06


</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.1

SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION

Of Chief Executive Officer

In connection with the Annual Report of eDiets.com, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Stephen J. Rattner, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §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 result of operations of the Company.



|                     |  |  |  |        |  |                        
|-------------------- |  |  |  | ------ |  | -----------------------
|Date: March 12, 2008 |  |  |  |        |  |                        
|                     |  |  |  | By:    |  | /s/ Stephen J. Rattner 
|                     |  |  |  | Name:  |  | Stephen J. Rattner     
|                     |  |  |  | Title: |  | Chief Executive Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has
been provided to eDiets.com, Inc. and will be retained by eDiets.com, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
II 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2330 

For the relief of Hyang Dong Joo. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 21, 2004 

Mr. ALLEN introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

For the relief of Hyang Dong Joo. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS FOR HYANG 

4 DONG JOO. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding subsections (a) 

6 and (b) of section 201 of the Immigration and Nationality 

7 Act, Hyang Dong Joo shall be eligible for issuance of an 

8 immigrant visa or for adjustment of status to that of an 

9 alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence upon fil10 ing an application for issuance of an immigrant visa under 

11 section 204 of that Act or for adjustment of status to law12 ful permanent resident. 
2 

•S 2330 IS 

1 (b) ADJUSTMENT OF STATUS.—If Hyang Dong Joo 

2 enters the United States before the filing deadline speci3 fied in subsection (c), Hyang Dong Joo shall be considered 

4 to have entered and remained lawfully and shall be eligible 

5 for adjustment of status under section 245 of the Immi6 gration and Nationality Act as of the date of enactment 

7 of this Act. 

8 (c) DEADLINE FOR APPLICATION AND PAYMENT OF

9 FEES.—Subsections (a) and (b) shall apply only if the ap10 plication for issuance of an immigrant visa or the applica11 tion for adjustment of status is filed with appropriate fees 

12 within 2 years after the date of enactment of this Act. 

13 (d) REDUCTION OF IMMIGRANT VISA NUMBERS.— 

14 Upon the granting of an immigrant visa or permanent res15 idence to Hyang Dong Joo, the Secretary of State shall 

16 instruct the proper officer to reduce by 1, during the cur17 rent or next following fiscal year, the total number of im18 migrant visas that are made available to natives of the 

19 country of birth of Hyang Dong Joo under section 203(a) 

20 of the Immigration and Nationality Act or, if applicable, 

21 the total number of immigrant visas that are made avail22 able to natives of the country of birth of Hyang Dong Joo 

23 under section 202(e) of that Act. 

Æ
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. ERNEST BROOKS.

June 19, 1984.

Petition for certification denied.
Exhibit 31.1

                          SARBANES-OXLEY CERTIFICATION

I, Jeffrey Lesnoy, certify that:

           1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K, and all reports
on Form 8-K containing distribution or servicing reports filed in respect of
periods included in the year covered by this annual report, of AICCO Premium
Finance Master Trust;

           2. Based on my knowledge, the information in these reports, taken as
a whole, 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 as of the
last day of the period covered by this annual report;

           3. Based on my knowledge, the distribution or servicing information
required to be provided to the trustee by the servicer under the pooling and
servicing, or similar, agreement, for inclusion in these reports is included in
these reports;

           4. I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the
servicer under the pooling and servicing, or similar, agreement and based upon
my knowledge and the annual compliance review required under that agreement, and
except as disclosed in the reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations
under that agreement; and

           5. The reports disclose all significant deficiencies relating to the
servicer's compliance with the minimum servicing standards based upon the report
provided by an independent public accountant, after conducting a review in
compliance with the Uniform Single Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers or
similar procedure, as set forth in the pooling and servicing, or similar,
agreement, that is included in these reports.




Date: March 31, 2005                           By: /s/ Jeffrey Lesnoy
                                                   -----------------------------
                                                   Name:   Jeffrey Lesnoy
                                                   Title:  Senior Vice President
NO. PD-0601-14 IN THE § CLAYTONDEANREEDER § COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS § V. § 

### STATE OF TEXAS § THE STATE OF TEXAS
NO. PD-0622-14 IN THE § MARCUS BRUCE HOLIDY § COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS § V. § 

### STATE OF TEXAS § THE STATE OF TEXAS APPELLANTS LIST OF SUPPLEMENTAL AUTHORITY 

### w NOW COMES Appellants herein and file this fferofSupplementalAuthoritywhich might have an effect on their cases. 1. Smith v. State, No. 13-11-00094-CR, opinion date November 13, 2014 2. Gore v. State, No. 01-13-00608-CR, opinion date November 13,2014 

### 3. Leal v. State,NO. 14-13-00208-CR, opinion date November 13, 2014 4. Flores v. State, No. 04-13-00754-CR, opinion date December 17, 2014 5. Cole v. State, No. 06-13-00179-CR, opinion date December 18, 2014 

### 6. Lloydv. State,No. 05-13-01004-CR, opinion date December 22, 2014 7. Burks v. State, No. 02-13-00560-CR, opinion date January 8, 2015 

### A copy ofthis pleading is provided to opposing counsel on January 14, 2015. 

### FILED IN COURTOFCRIMINALAPPEALS EBB B. MOBLEY 

### JAN 14 2015 Attorney forAppellants Abel Acosta, Clerk
#### VELMA MCCLAIN v. COLLEGE HOSPITAL AND STATE BOARD OF MEDICAL EXAMINERS.

June 19, 1984.

Leave to appeal granted.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Roger Lee Presswood,

Plaintiff,

v.

Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

MDL Case No. 2:15-md-02641-DGC

Civil Action No. CV-16-00203-PHX-DGC

WAIVER OF THE SERVICE OF SUMMONS

To: Freese & Goss, PLLC - Jackson, MS

(Name of plaintiff’s attorney or unrepresented plaintiff)

I have received your request to waive service of a summons in this action along with a copy of the complaint, two 

copies of this waiver form, and a prepaid means of returning one signed copy of the form to you.

I, or the entity I represent, agree to save the expense of serving a summons and complaint in this case.

I understand that I, or the entity I represent, will keep all defenses or objections to the lawsuit, the court’s 

jurisdiction, and the venue of the action, but that I waive any objections to the absence of a summons or of service.

I also understand that I, or the entity I represent, must file and serve an answer or a motion under Rule 12 within 

60 days from 2/8/2016, the date when this request was sent (or 90 days if it was sent outside the United States). If I fail to 

do so, a default judgment will be entered against me or the entity I represent.

Date: February 10, 2016 /s/ Richard B. North, Jr.

Signature of the attorney or unrepresented party

Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc.

Printed name of party waiving service

of summons

Richard B. North, Jr. (Ga. Bar No. 545599)

Printed Name

Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, LLP

201 17th St., NW, Suite 1700, Atlantic Station, Atlanta, GA 30363

Address

richard.north@nelsonmullins.com

E-mail Address

(404) 322-6155

Telephone number

Duty to Avoid Unnecessary Expenses of Serving a Summons

Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires certain defendants to cooperate in saving unnecessary expenses of serving a 

summons and complaint. A defendant who is located in the United States and who fails to return a signed waiver of service requested by a plaintiff 

located in the United States will be required to pay the expenses of service, unless the defendant shows good cause for the failure. 

“Good cause” does not include a belief that the lawsuit is groundless, or that it has been brought in an improper venue, or that the court has 

no jurisdiction over this matter or over the defendant or the defendant’s property. 

If the waiver is signed and returned, you can still make these and all other defenses and objections, but you cannot object to the absence of 

a summons or of service. 

If you waive service, then you must, within the time specified on the waiver form, serve an answer or a motion under Rule 12 on the 

plaintiff and file a copy with the court. By signing and returning the waiver form, you are allowed more time to respond than if a summons had been 

served.

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 829 Filed 02/17/16 Page 1 of 1
No. 14,350.

#### Abbett *v.*The Board of Commissioners of Switzerland County.

Tax *Sale.*— Foreclosure *of Tax Lien.*— Costs.—Liability *of County.*— Where an action is brought in the name of the State, on the relation of the prosecuting attorney, to foreclose the lien of the State for taxes (Elliott’s Supp., section 2147), and a sum sufficient is not realized from the sale of the real estate to pay the costs due the officers of the court in conse*468quence of the proceeding, the county in which the land is listed is not liable in its corporate capacity for the balance of such costs.

From the Switzerland Circuit Court.

*W. R. Johnston*and *F. M. Griffith,*for appellant.

*G. S. Pleasants,*for appellee.

Berkshire, C. J.

The record presents for our consideration but a single question.

In an action brought in the name of the State, on the relation of the prosecuting attorney, to foreclose the lien of the State for taxes, as provided in section 1, p. 123, Acts of 1883 (Elliott’s Supp., section 2147), in cases where a sum sufficient is not realized from the sale of the real estate to pay the costs due to the officers of the court in consequence of the proceeding, is the county wherein the land is listed liable in its corporate capacity for the balance of such costs ? In our opinion there is no such liability.

We can imagine no good reason for holding that the county is responsible for such costs. The action is brought in the name of the State, on the relation of the prosecuting attorney, who is a State officer. Nor can it be successfully maintained that the action is for the benefit of the county in its corporate capacity. The action is for the benefit of the public; not alone of the county, but of the entire State. All taxation, whether for State or county purposes, is for the support of the State government; but if this were not so, there is included in every delinquency taxes which belong in the State treasury as well as in the treasury of the county.

The lien which is foreclosed is held by the State, and not by the county; the county can not, though it might so desire, bring an action to foreclose a tax lien. It can not control the institution of tlie action, nor can it cause its discontinuance. ,

It is made the duty of the county auditor to furnish the proper list of delinquencies to the prosecuting attorney, and *469it then becomes his duty in all proper cases to bring and prosecute the action.

Filed June 24, 1890.

It would hardly be contended, if the law provided that the action should be brought in the name of the State without a relator, that the county would be liable for costs, and yet we think the contention would be equally plausible with the one made, with the law as it is. The relation of the county to the action would be the same in the one case as it is in the other.

We find no error in the record.

Judgment affirmed, with costs.