alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Anthony Greicius","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/anthony-greicius-116962jpl-nasa-gov\/","title":"Robotic Navigation Tech Will Explore the Deep Ocean","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"tT11F5MK3X\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/centers-and-facilities\/jpl\/robotic-navigation-tech-will-explore-the-deep-ocean\/\">Robotic Navigation Tech Will Explore the Deep Ocean<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/centers-and-facilities\/jpl\/robotic-navigation-tech-will-explore-the-deep-ocean\/embed\/#?secret=tT11F5MK3X\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Robotic Navigation Tech Will Explore the Deep Ocean” — NASA\" data-secret=\"tT11F5MK3X\" 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\/2021\/05\/1_orpheus-deck-1041.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":371}
**EXHIBIT 23.1**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRMWe have issued our report dated March 28, 2006, accompanying the consolidated financial statementsincluded in the Annual Report of ViewCast.com, Inc. on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31,2005. We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of said report in the RegistrationStatements of ViewCast.com, Inc. on Forms SB-2 No. 333-31947, S-8 No. 333-53159, S-8 No. 333-63799,S-3 No. 333-77923, S-3 No. 333-35662 and S-3 No. 333-40630./s/ GRANT THORNTON LLPDallas, Texas
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-6791

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

OMAR YUSUF DESANGES,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Samuel G. Wilson, Chief District

Judge. (CR-95-46, CA-02-126-7)

Submitted: July 18, 2002 Decided: July 25, 2002

Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Omar Yusuf Desanges, Appellant Pro Se. Thomas Jack Bondurant, Jr.,

Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Omar Yusuf Desanges seeks to appeal the district court’s order

dismissing as untimely his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255

(West Supp. 2001). We have reviewed the record and the district

court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny

a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the

reasoning of the district court. United States v. Desanges, Nos.

CR-95-46; CA-02-126-7 (W.D. Va. May 2, 2002). We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
#### Thomasson v. Tucker’s Administrators, in Error.

*Tuesday, May*13,

THE answer of one defendant in chancery is no evidence against his co-defendant.
EXHIBIT
32.1




CERTIFICATION




Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as
created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned
officer of Pipex Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the “Company”) hereby certifies, to such
officer’s knowledge, that:




(1) the
accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter period
March 31, 2008 (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




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




Date: May
15, 2008




By:/s/ Steve H.
Kanzer


Name:
Steve H. Kanzer


Title:
Chairman & Chief Executive Officer


(Principal
Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer)
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                          19,934
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                         220,162
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                38,921
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     48,430
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          47,945
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                      1,219,081
<ALLOWANCE>                                     25,137
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,662,160
<DEPOSITS>                                   1,484,270
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             43,418
<LONG-TERM>                                     12,650
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           101
<OTHER-SE>                                     121,752
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>               1,676,494
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 78,627
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                6,469
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                12,626
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                97,722
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              52,558
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              53,659
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           44,063
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                   17,665
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 21,940
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 18,669
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                      18,669
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    11,765
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.17
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.14
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.21
<LOANS-NON>                                     13,102
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                12,794
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                    5,323
<RECOVERIES>                                         1
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                               25,137
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             4,870
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                             20,267
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                         25,137


</TABLE>
#### STEPHEN MARK VANDLING v. STATE OF NEW JERSEY & ROBERT J. BAER, INC.

May 22, 1984.

Petition for certification denied.
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"William Steigerwald","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/wasteige\/","title":"NASA\u2019s Robotic OSAM-1 Mission Completes its Critical Design Review","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"OgVzlcZ0cd\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/centers-and-facilities\/goddard\/nasas-robotic-osam-1-mission-completes-its-critical-design-review\/\">NASA\u2019s Robotic OSAM-1 Mission Completes its Critical Design Review<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/centers-and-facilities\/goddard\/nasas-robotic-osam-1-mission-completes-its-critical-design-review\/embed\/#?secret=OgVzlcZ0cd\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“NASA\u2019s Robotic OSAM-1 Mission Completes its Critical Design Review” — NASA\" data-secret=\"OgVzlcZ0cd\" 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\/2022\/03\/osam_captured_arms_extended.242.cropped.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":402}
#### M’Gillicuddy *v.*Forsythe.—In error.

*Saturday, November*28.

IF to a declaration in trespass *quare clausum fregit*containing two counts, a plea to the whole cause of action, set*436ting out only matters in justification of one of the counts, do not aver that the causes of action in the two counts are the same, it is bad on general demurrer. *Rubottom et al. v. McClure,*4 Blackf. *505*(1).

A declaration stating that the plaintiff sues ■ by *prochein amy,*without alleging that he is an infant, is bad on general demurrer. *Shirley*v. *Hagar,*3 Blackf. 225.

(1)

 The plea, with the averment named in the text, is bad on special demurrer. *Rubottom et al. v. M'Clure,*cited in the text. But if the plaintiff reply to the plea containing the averment, he admits that there is but one cause of action, and is restricted thereto at the trial. 1 Chitt. Pl. 450.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Wilton H. Seyle, 

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-17-03490-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 8834 Filed 11/10/17 Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Mark Gore,

Plaintiff,

v.

C. R. Bard Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

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

Civil Action No. CV-17-04114-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 8996 Filed 11/30/17 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 32.2











CERTIFICATON OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER





Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to


§ 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002





In connection with the filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission of the Quarterly Report of Hemagen Diagnostics, Inc. on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2010, the (“Report”),I, Catherine M. Davidson, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 906 1350, that:





(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/Catherine M. Davidson


Catherine M. Davidson


Financial Officer


(Principal Financial Officer)








May 14, 2010




















A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Hemagen Diagnostics, Inc. and will be retained by Hemagen Diagnostics, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Thomas W. Moldovan, 

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-17-03521-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 8810 Filed 11/10/17 Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Linda E. Harper,

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-17-03755-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 9148 Filed 12/06/17 Page 1 of 1
**Exhibit 10.13****RIO VISTA GP LLC****FIRST AMENDMENT TO****AMENDED AND RESTATED LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY AGREEMENT**THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO AMENDED AND RESTATED LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY AGREEMENT of Rio VistaGP LLC (this “First Amendment”) is dated as of October 6, 2006. Capitalized terms used, and nototherwise defined, herein shall have the same meaning as set forth in the Amended and RestatedLimited Liability Company Agreement dated as of September 16, 2004 (the “Restated Agreement”) ofRio Vista GP LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (the “Company”).WHEREAS, in accordance with Section 13.8 of the Restated Agreement, the Board of Managersbelieves that it is in the best interests of the Company and the Members to amend the RestatedAgreement on the terms set forth herein.NOW, THEREFORE, the Board of Managers hereby adopts the following amendments to the RestatedAgreement:1. Amendment of Section 2.7 of the Restated Agreement. Section 2.7 of the RestatedAgreement is hereby amended to read, in full, as follows:“Richard R. Canney, Charles C. Handly and Ian T. Bothwell are hereby designated as authorizedpersons to execute, deliver and file any amendments or restatements of the Certificate, and anyother certificates and any amendments or restatements thereof necessary for the Company to qualifyto do business in a jurisdiction in which the Company may wish to conduct business.”2. Amendment of Section 5.2 of the Restated Agreement. Section 5.2(l) of the RestatedAgreement is hereby amended to read, in full, as follows:"(l) Compensation of Managers; Reimbursement of Expenses.The Managers shall receive for their services such compensation as may be determined from timeto time by the Board of Managers. Compensation may include, without limitation, cash, common unitsof Rio Vista Energy Partners L.P., a Delaware limited partnership, and/or options to purchase suchcommon units. No Manager who is also an officer or employee of the Company shall be entitled toreceive additional compensation for his services as a Manager. Managers (including Managers whoare also officers or employees of the Company) shall be reimbursed by the Company for theirreasonable travel, food, lodging and other expenses incurred in attending meetings in accordancewith policies approved from time to time by the Board of Managers.”3. Effect of This Amendment. Except as expressly provided in this Amendment, theRestated Agreement is reaffirmed and remains in full force and effect.
 

 
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the members of the Board of Managers have executed this First Amendment toAmended and Restated Limited Liability Company Agreement of Rio Vista GP LLC as of the day and yearfirst set forth above.**BOARD OF MANAGERS**:/s/ Richard R. Canney Richard R. Canney/s/ Murray J. Feiwell Murray J. Feiwell/s/ Douglas G. Manner Douglas G. Manner
<PAGE>


                                                                   EXHIBIT 23.2

                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements
of PDS Financial Corporation on Form S-8 (File No. 33-85966 and 333-79523)
and Form S-3 (File No. 333-49199) of our report dated March 8, 2000, on our
audit of the consolidated financial statements of PDS Financial Corporation
as of and for the year ended December 31, 1999, which report is included in
this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

                       /s/ Piercy Bowler Taylor & Kern


Las Vegas, Nevada
March 8, 2000
**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-45744) pertaining to the Amended 1999 Stock Option Plan of Voice Mobility International Inc. of our report dated March 20, 2009 with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Voice Mobility International Inc. included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2008.

 
| Vancouver, Canada | /s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP |
|-------------------|---------------------------|
| March 31, 2009    | Chartered Accountants     |