alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

LAWRENCE G. ADAMS,

Petitioner

v.

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 480 MAL 2017

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from

the Order of the Commonwealth Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 9th day of January, 2018

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED

.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                          29,868
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  581,734
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (16,585)
<INVENTORY>                                    126,747
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               823,382
<PP&E>                                         592,054
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,772,879
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,469,013
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                     1,348,632
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                   (217,188)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,772,879
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,361,891
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,225,988
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               186,675
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              42,291
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (74,598)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (1,020)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (73,578)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (73,578)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.56)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.56)
        

</TABLE>
DISMISS; Opinion Filed August 19, 2013.

In The

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-13-00819-CV

LOWELL MERRITT, Appellant

V.

ROBERT DAVIS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 380th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 380-01630-2013

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Lang, Myers, and Evans

Opinion by Justice Evans

This is an attempted appeal from the trial court’s order dismissing Lowell Merritt’s “bill 

of review.” The trial court’s order reflects Merritt, who has been declared a vexatious litigant and 

is subject to a pre-filing order under section 11.101 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies 

Code,

1

failed to obtain an order from the local administrative judge permitting him to proceed 

with his litigation. See TEX. CIV. PRAC. & REM. CODE ANN. §§ 11.101, 11.103 (West Supp. 

2012). By letter dated July 18, 2013, the Collin County District Clerk informed us that the local 

administrative judge had also denied the filing of Merritt’s appeal. See id. § 11.103. Because a 

 

1

See http://www.txcourts.gov/oca/Vexatious_Litigants.pdf (listing vexatious litigants subject to prefiling orders 

under section 11.101 of the Texas Civil Practice and Remedies Code). We take judicial notice of this list. See 

Douglas v. Am. Title Co., 196 S.W.3d 876, 878 n.2 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2006, no pet.) (taking judicial 

notice of Harris County record of vexatious litigants).
vexatious litigant may not file an appeal without an order from the local administrative judge 

permitting the filing, we directed Merritt to file a letter brief demonstrating grounds for 

continuing the appeal. See id. Merritt responded, but his response fails to show the appeal may 

proceed. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. See id.

130819F.P05

/David Evans/

DAVID EVANS

JUSTICE
Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

LOWELL MERRITT, Appellant

No. 05-13-00819-CV V.

ROBERT DAVIS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 380th Judicial District 

Court, Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 380-01630-2013.

Opinion delivered by Justice Evans. 

Justices Lang and Myers participating.

In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS the appeal.

We ORDER that appellee Robert Davis recover his costs, if any, of this appeal from 

appellant Lowell Merritt.

Judgment entered this 19th day of August, 2013.

/David Evans/

DAVID EVANS

JUSTICE
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Lillian Gipson","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/lillian-gipson-1nasa-gov\/","title":"HiCAM 2023 Spring Review","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"P2p0NAFKXe\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/directorates\/armd\/aavp\/armd-aavp-hicam\/hicam-2023-spring-review\/\">HiCAM 2023 Spring Review<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/directorates\/armd\/aavp\/armd-aavp-hicam\/hicam-2023-spring-review\/embed\/#?secret=P2p0NAFKXe\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“HiCAM 2023 Spring Review” — NASA\" data-secret=\"P2p0NAFKXe\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/06\/2023-05-11_2023_hicam_spring_review_lrc-2023-h1_p_ryoung-00304.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":523}
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### APPEAL 

### O F 

### F LORIDA 

### S ECOND 

### D ISTRICT CHRISTOPHER SCOTT SKELTON,

Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. No. 2D23-563 February 16, 2024 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Pinellas County; William H. Burgess, III, Judge. Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Kevin Briggs, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee. PER CURIAM. Affirmed. NORTHCUTT, VILLANTI, and LaROSE, JJ., Concur. Opinion subject to revision prior to official publication.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                       8,515,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               55,125,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                 2,922,000
<INVENTORY>                                 29,056,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           120,025,000
<PP&E>                                     111,219,000
<DEPRECIATION>                              24,968,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             308,630,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      101,629,000
<BONDS>                                    145,970,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        18,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  49,087,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               308,630,000
<SALES>                                     84,082,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            84,082,000
<CGS>                                       53,873,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               82,610,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              (229,000)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           4,309,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (2,608,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (710,000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (1,898,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 467,000
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (1,431,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     (.08)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (.08)
        

</TABLE>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Ann Mueller,

Plaintiff,

v.

C. R. Bard Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

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

Civil Action No. CV-17-04591-PHX-DGC

WAIVER OF THE SERVICE OF SUMMONS

To: Johnson Law Group

(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 12/12/2017, 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: December 20, 2017 /s/ Richard B. North, Jr.

Signature of the attorney or unrepresented party

C. R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Peripheral

Vascular, Inc.

Printed name of parties 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. 

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 9413 Filed 12/21/17 Page 1 of 2
2

“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 9413 Filed 12/21/17 Page 2 of 2
### The Honorable D. Brook Bartlett, Chief Judge, United States 1 

### District Court for the Western District of Missouri. _____________________ Nos. 95-4060/96-1189

_____________________ Ervin Wright, * * Appellant, * * Appeals from the United States v. * District Court for the * Western District of Missouri. City of Kansas City, * Missouri, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellee. *

___________ Submitted: November 8, 1996 Filed: November 15, 1996

___________ Before BEAM, HANSEN, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Erv inWright, an African American, appeals the district court's 1 grant of summary judgment to Kansas City, Missouri, in his civil right s action. After careful review of the record and the parties' briefs, w e conclude that the dis trict court's judgment was correct. Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
Exhibit 32.1



Certification of Chief Executive Officer



Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of
CV Therapeutics, Inc. (the Company) hereby certifies, to such officers knowledge, that:



(i) the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004, (the
Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and



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



|                      |  |                                                    
|--------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------------
|Dated: March 14, 2005 |  | /s/ LOUIS G. LANGE, M.D., PH.D.                    
|                      |  | Louis G. Lange, M.D., Ph.D. Chief Executive
Officer
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.                  

###### Department of Commerce

###### Foreign-Trade Zones Board

          - [Order No. 1951]

Pursuant to its authority under the Foreign-Trade Zones Act of June 18, 1934, as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u), the Foreign-Trade Zones Board (the Board) adopts the following Order:

*Whereas,*                     the Board adopted the alternative site framework (ASF) (15 CFR Sec. 400.2(c)) as an option for the establishment or reorganization of zones;                

*Whereas,*                     the Koochiching Economic Development Authority, grantee of Foreign-Trade Zone 259, submitted an application to the Board (FTZ Docket B-34-2014, docketed 04-24-2014) for authority to reorganize under the ASF with a service area of Koochiching County, Minnesota, within and adjacent to the International Falls Customs and Border Protection port of entry, and FTZ 259's existing Sites 1, 2 and 3 would be categorized as magnet sites;                

*Whereas,*                     notice inviting public comment was given in the                     **Federal Register**                     (79 FR 24669, 05-01-2014) and the application has been processed pursuant to the FTZ Act and the Board's regulations; and,                

*Whereas,*                     the Board adopts the findings and recommendations of the examiner's report, and finds that the requirements of the FTZ Act and the Board's regulations are satisfied;                

*Now, therefore,*                     the Board hereby orders:                

The application to reorganize FTZ 259 under the ASF is approved, subject to the FTZ Act and the Board's regulations, including Section 400.13, to the Board's standard 2,000-acre activation limit for the zone, and to a five-year ASF sunset provision for magnet sites that would terminate authority for Sites 1 and 3 if not activated by October 31, 2019.

Signed at Washington, DC, this 2nd day of October 2014.

Paul Piquado,

Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Enforcement and Compliance, Alternate Chairman, Foreign-Trade Zones Board.

Attest:

 Andrew McGilvray,

 Executive Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2014-24267 Filed 10-9-14; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2249 Referred in House (RFH)]

  2d Session
                                S. 2249

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 22, 2004

            Referred to the Committee on Financial Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To amend the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act to provide for 
                      emergency food and shelter.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Emergency Food and Shelter Act of 
2004''.

SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

    Section 322 of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act (42 
U.S.C. 11352) is amended to read as follows:

``SEC. 322. AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.

    ``There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this title 
$160,000,000 for fiscal year 2005, $170,000,000 for fiscal year 2006, 
and $180,000,000 for fiscal year 2007.''.

SEC. 3. NAME CHANGE TO NOMINATING ORGANIZATION.

    Section 301(b) of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act 
(42 U.S.C. 11331(b)) is amended by striking paragraph (5) and inserting 
the following:
            ``(5) United Jewish Communities.''.

SEC. 4. PARTICIPATION OF HOMELESS INDIVIDUALS ON LOCAL BOARDS.

    Section 316(a) of the Stewart B. McKinney Homeless Assistance Act 
(42 U.S.C. 11346(a)) is amended by striking paragraph (6) and inserting 
the following:
            ``(6) guidelines requiring each local board to include in 
        their membership not less than 1 homeless individual, former 
        homeless individual, homeless advocate, or recipient of food or 
        shelter services, except that such guidelines may waive the 
        requirement of this paragraph for any board that is unable to 
        meet such requirement if the board otherwise consults with 
        homeless individuals, former homeless individuals, homeless 
        advocates, or recipients of food or shelter services.''.

            Passed the Senate July 21, 2004.

            Attest:

                                             EMILY J. REYNOLDS,

                                                             Secretary.
```
**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**

 

I, Michael Silton, Chief Executive Officer of Rainmaker Systems, Inc. (the“Company”), certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge: 

 

(1) the Report of the Company on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (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.
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Brian Dunbar","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/brian-dunbarnasa-gov\/","title":"Home Page","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"Neq9rhNL9D\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/\">Home Page<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/embed\/#?secret=Neq9rhNL9D\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Home Page” — NASA\" data-secret=\"Neq9rhNL9D\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2016\/01\/meatball_hires.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":300}