alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                          24,073
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                         116,447
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                62,488
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    133,476
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          50,471
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            50,169
<LOANS>                                      1,106,122
<ALLOWANCE>                                     13,592
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,595,099
<DEPOSITS>                                   1,385,715
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             66,757
<LONG-TERM>                                     12,650
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           101
<OTHER-SE>                                     129,876
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>               1,595,099
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 25,529
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                2,756
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                 3,707
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                31,992
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              18,168
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              18,575
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           13,417
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      900
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  7,168
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  9,636
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       9,636
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     6,069
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.60
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.59
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.51
<LOANS-NON>                                     10,128
<LOANS-PAST>                                        93
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                10,221
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                12,794
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                     (102)
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                               13,592
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             5,018
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                              8,574
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

John L. Sullivan III, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc. and C. R. 

Bard, Inc., et al., 

Defendant. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

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

Civil Action No. CV-17-03949-PHX-DGC 

APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL 

To: The clerk of court and all parties of record 

I am admitted or otherwise authorized to practice in this court, and I appear in this case as counsel for: 

Defendants C. R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc. 

Date: November 6, 2017 /s/ Richard B. North, Jr. 

Attorney's signature 

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

Printed name and bar number 

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) 322-6000 

Telephone number

(404 322-6050 

FAX number 

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 8725 Filed 11/08/17 Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Virginia L. Williams,

Plaintiff,

v.

Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc. and C. R. 

Bard, Inc., et al.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

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

Civil Action No. CV-17-03515-PHX-DGC

APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL

To: The clerk of court and all parties of record

I am admitted or otherwise authorized to practice in this court, and I appear in this case as counsel for:

Defendants C. R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc.

Date: November 27, 2017 /s/ Richard B. North, Jr.

Attorney's signature

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

Printed name and bar number

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) 322-6000

Telephone number

(404 322-6050

FAX number

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 9229 Filed 12/06/17 Page 1 of 1
#### TRUJILLO v. VICK

No. 409P01

Case below: 143 N.C. App. 719

Petition by defendant (Donald Ray Vick) for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 denied 22 October 2001.
C.J.

clerk of this court shall transfer all documents filed in Docket No. 60331 to Docket No. 61383.

Further, the filing fee paid in Docket No. 60331 shall be applied to Docket No. 61383. Accordingly, appellant's motion for reconsideration in Docket No. 61383 is granted and that appeal is reinstated. It is so ORDERED.

cc: Hon. Patrick Flanagan, District Judge Zachary B. Coughlin Richard G. Hill, Chartered Washoe District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT

OF NEVADA 2 (0) 1947A
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                           3,677
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   63,838
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  1,113,628
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,213,636
<PP&E>                                          28,172
<DEPRECIATION>                                   7,117
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,234,691
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,073,015
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           193
<OTHER-SE>                                     161,676
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,234,691
<SALES>                                         13,455
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                30,057
<CGS>                                           17,964
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   22,839
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 4,875
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   265
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               9,720
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  7,218
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,748
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              7,218
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,470
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.23
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.23
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>


                                                      EXHIBIT 11.0


                                           
                                           
                                    ANALOGY, INC.
                       COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE (LOSS) EARNINGS
                        (In thousands, except per share data)
                                           
                                           
                                           
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                            THREE MONTHS ENDED        NINE MONTHS ENDED
                                               DECEMBER 31,               DECEMBER 31,
                                           ---------------------     ---------------------
                                              1996         1995        1996         1995
                                           ---------      ------    ---------      -------
<S>                                        <C>            <C>       <C>            <C>
    
Net (loss) income                          $  (1,675)     $  257    $  (3,316)     $   708
                                           ---------      ------    ---------      -------
                                           ---------      ------    ---------      -------

Net (loss) income per share (1)            $   (0.19)     $ 0.03    $   (0.39)     $  0.08
                                           ---------      ------    ---------      -------
                                           ---------      ------    ---------      -------
    
    

Weighted average shares outstanding:
    
Common stock                                   8,596       4,639        8,422        4,552
    
Dilutive common stock options and
warrants, using the treasury stock
method                                         -           2,868          -          2,851
                                           ---------      ------    ---------      -------
    
Shares used in per share calculations          8,596       7,507        8,422        7,403
                                           ---------      ------    ---------      -------
                                           ---------      ------    ---------      -------
    
</TABLE>
    

(1)  Fully diluted earnings per share is not disclosed on the consolidated
statements of operations as it is  not materially different from primary
earnings per share.
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. MARKO BEY.

July 12, 1984.

This matter having been duly presented to the Court, and the Court having determined that the application is in the nature of a request for clarification of the opinion of the Court that was filed on June 26,1984, and the Court having further determined that clarification of said opinion is desirable, and good cause otherwise appearing;

It is ORDERED that the opinion of the Court shall be clarified to show that prior convictions for murder cannot be used in subsequent prosecutions pending the conclusion of *667direct appeal proceedings that challenge the guilty verdict before this Court or the Supreme Court of the United States. Applications for post-conviction relief or collateral proceedings shall not prevent the use of such convictions as an aggravating factor. (See 96 *N.J.*625)
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2398 Engrossed in Senate (ES)]

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2398

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To designate the Federal building located at 324 Twenty-Fifth Street in 
         Ogden, Utah, as the James V. Hansen Federal Building.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The Federal building located at 324 Twenty-Fifth Street in Ogden, 
Utah, shall be known and designated as the ``James V. Hansen Federal 
Building''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the Federal building referred to in 
section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``James V. Hansen 
Federal Building''.

            Passed the Senate July 19, 2004.

            Attest:

                                                             Secretary.
108th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                                S. 2398

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

To designate the Federal building located at 324 Twenty-Fifth Street in 
         Ogden, Utah, as the James V. Hansen Federal Building.
```
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

IN RE BARD IVC FILTERS No. 2:15-MD-02641-DGC

PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION

This document relates to:

JENNIFER GREGORY

Civil Case No. 2:17-cv-00242-DGC

* * * * * * * * * * * * * *

NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL

NOW INTO COURT comes Plaintiff Jennifer Gregory, through undersigned counsel, to 

file this Notice of Dismissal in the above-captioned matter. Plaintiff’s original Complaint was filed 

on Jan. 25, 2017, and Defendants C.R. Bard and Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc. were served 

through counsel on Jan. 26, 2017. The Defendants have not served an answer to the complaint, nor 

has it served a motion for summary judgment on the same. The Plaintiff files this notice of 

dismissal with the intention of dismissing the case under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 

41(a)(1)(A)(i), without prejudice to refiling.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 8th day of November, 2017.

MURRAY LAW FIRM

/s/ Stephen B. Murray, Jr. 

Stephen B. Murray, Jr. (LA Bar No. 23877)

650 Poydras Street, Suite 2150

New Orleans, Louisiana 70130

(504) 525-8100

smurrayjr@murray-lawfirm.com

Attorney for Plaintiff

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 8710 Filed 11/08/17 Page 1 of 2
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on this 8

th day of November, 2017, I electronically transmitted the 

attached document to the Clerk’s office using the CM/ECF System for filing and transmittal of 

notice of electronic filing.

/s/ Stephen B. Murray, Jr. 

Stephen B. Murray, Jr.

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 8710 Filed 11/08/17 Page 2 of 2
## NO. 12

- 1 0

- 00 0 78

- C V

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

' IN RE: ROBERT C. MORRIS , RELATOR ' ORIGINAL PROCEEDING
'

MEMORANDUM OPINION In this original proceeding, Robert C. Morris seeks a writ of man damus requiring Janice Staples, District Clerk of Anderson County, Texas, to give him notice of the rulings on certain motions he filed in the trial court. In particular, Morris avers that he
has been informed that the trial court has ruled on his motions , but that he has not been informed of how the court ruled or received any orders memorializing the rulings. A court of appeals has the authority to issue writs of mandamus against a judge of a district or county in the court of appeals district and all writs necessary to enforce its jurisdiction. T EX

. G OV ’ T C ODE A NN

. § 22.221 (Vernon 2004). In order for a district clerk to fall within our jurisdictional reach, it must be established that the issuance of the writ of mandamus is necessary to enforce our jurisdiction. See id .; In re Coronado , 980 S.W.2d 691, 692

- 93 (Tex. App.

– San Antonio 1998, orig. proceeding). Morris has not demonstrated that the exercise of our mandamus authority against the district clerk is appropriate to enforce our jurisdiction. Consequently, we have no authority to issue a writ of mandamus. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is dismissed for want of jurisdiction

. BRIAN HOYLE

__ Justice Opinion delivered March 30 , 2010. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griffith, J., and Hoyle, J.

(PUBLISH)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Edmund Outland,

Plaintiff,

v.

C. R. Bard Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

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

Civil Action No. CV-17-04120-PHX-DGC

WAIVER OF THE SERVICE OF SUMMONS

To: Marc J Bern & Partners LLP

(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 11/10/2017, 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: November 27, 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. 

“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 8899 Filed 11/28/17 Page 1 of 1
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"NASA","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/nasamigrate\/","title":"NASA\u2019s X-57 Maxwell Powers Up","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"jtgaoLdFL6\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/centers-and-facilities\/armstrong\/nasas-x-57-maxwell-powers-up\/\">NASA\u2019s X-57 Maxwell Powers Up<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/centers-and-facilities\/armstrong\/nasas-x-57-maxwell-powers-up\/embed\/#?secret=jtgaoLdFL6\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“NASA\u2019s X-57 Maxwell Powers Up” — NASA\" data-secret=\"jtgaoLdFL6\" 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\/02\/afrc2021-0071-072_0.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":400}
Exhibit 32.1

           PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In  connection  with  the  accompanying  Quarterly  Report  on  Form  10-QSB  of
Powerchannel,  Inc. for the quarter ended September 30, 2004, I, Steven Lampert,
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of PowerChannel, Inc. hereby
certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:

1. Such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2004,
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 such  Quarterly  Report on Form 10-QSB for the
period ended March 31, 2004,  fairly  presents,  in all material  respects,  the
financial condition and results of operations of PowerChannel, Inc.

Dated: June 6, 2005

                               POWERCHANNEL, INC.





By: /s/ Steven Lampert
---------------------------
Chief Executive Officer and
Chief Financial Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-6989

CHARLES KEVIN BRUCE TYSON, a/k/a Charles Tyson,

 Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

ALAN WILSON, Attorney General SC,

 Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Greenville. David C. Norton, District Judge. 

(6:16-cv-01232-DCN)

Submitted: December 15, 2016 Decided: December 20, 2016

Before SHEDD, DUNCAN, and AGEE, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Charles Kevin Bruce Tyson, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Charles Kevin Bruce Tyson appeals the district court’s 

order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and 

dismissing without prejudice his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2012) 

complaint. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible 

error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the 

district court. Tyson v. Wilson, No. 6:16-cv-01232-DCN (D.S.C. 

June 28, 2016). We dispense with oral argument because the 

facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the 

materials before this court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process.

AFFIRMED