alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Lance Cain,

Plaintiff,

v.

C. R. Bard, Inc.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

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

Civil Action No. CV-16-00446-PHX-DGC

WAIVER OF THE SERVICE OF SUMMONS

To: Holland Law Firm

(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 2/18/2016, 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: March 2, 2016 /s/ Richard B. North, Jr.

Signature of the attorney or unrepresented party

C. R. Bard, 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. 

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 934 Filed 03/04/16 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 934 Filed 03/04/16 Page 2 of 2
IMAX CORPORATION
 EXHIBIT 10.24
 THIRD AMENDING AGREEMENT
  IMAX CORPORATION
  ROBERT D. LISTER
 WHEREAS
 AND WHEREAS
 NOW, THEREFORE
  Term of Employment.
  Base Salary.




---



##### 








---



##### 



th
 IMAX CORPORATIONBy:
    
    Richard L. GelfondName: Richard L. Gelfond 

Title: Co-Chief Executive OfficerBy:
    
    Bradley J. Wechsler

Name: Bradley J. WechslerTitle: Co-Chief Executive Officer
 SIGNED, SEALED AND DELIVERED
    
    EXECUTIVE:in the presence of:Stephen G. Abraham

Witness Stephen G. Abraham
    
     Robert D. Lister

Robert D. Lister
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

IN THE INTEREST OF U. G. G. AND A. 

N. A, CHILDREN,

 

 Appellant. 

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-18-00163-CV

Appeal from the

109th District Court

of Winkler County, Texas 

(TC# DC17-17073)

O R D E R

In order to protect the identity of the minor children who are the subject of this appeal, 

the Court has determined on its own motion that it is necessary to identify the children by their 

initials, U. G. G. and A. N. A., and the parent by initials as well, in all papers submitted to the 

Court, including letters, motions, and briefs. See Tex.R.App.P. 9..8. The Court will also refer to 

the children and parent by their initials in correspondence, orders, and in its opinion and 

judgment.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 11th day of September, 2018.

PER CURIAM

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez and Palafox, JJ.
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. STANLEY V. PINDYSKI.

September 18, 1984.

Petition for certification denied.
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Jim Banke","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/jim-bankenasa-gov\/","title":"NASA Flies Drones Autonomously for Air Taxi Research","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"WJCWjxV5bU\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/aeronautics\/nasa-flies-autonomous-drones\/\">NASA Flies Drones Autonomously for Air Taxi Research<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/aeronautics\/nasa-flies-autonomous-drones\/embed\/#?secret=WJCWjxV5bU\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“NASA Flies Drones Autonomously for Air Taxi Research” — NASA\" data-secret=\"WJCWjxV5bU\" 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\/12\/lrc-2023-h1-p-high-densityvertiplex-00451.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":365}
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Chad Jenkins, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

C. R. Bard Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc., 

Defendant. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

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

Civil Action No. CV-17-03496-PHX-DGC 

WAIVER OF THE SERVICE OF SUMMONS 

To: Freese & Goss PLLC - Birmingham, AL 

(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 10/30/2017, 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 6, 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 8621 Filed 11/06/17 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 8621 Filed 11/06/17 Page 2 of 2
i i i i i i

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-09-00089-CV

IN THE ESTATE OF DANIEL BERNARD LEVINSON, DECEASED

From the Probate Court No. 2, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2008-PC-0290

Honorable Tom Rickhoff, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice

Karen Angelini, Justice

Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Delivered and Filed: March 4, 2009

DISMISSED

Before the court is appellant’s motion for voluntary dismissal. Appellant’s motion to dismiss

is granted, and this appeal is dismissed. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a)(1). Costs of appeal are taxed

against the appellant. See id. at (d). 

PER CURIAM
#### W. L. Paynter *v.*C. E. Ballenger et al.

Vendor and Purchaser — Perfect Title.

The vendor has a right to expect, and require a perfect legal title before he shall be required to pay the last installment of the consideration.

APPEAL PROM BARREN CIRCUIT COURT.

October 7, 1868.

Leslie, *and*Harlan, *for appellant.*

Smith, *for appellee.*

Opinion op the Court by

Judge Bobertson :

The appellant certainly has a right to expect and require an assurance of a perfect legal title before he shall be compelled to pay the last installment of the consideration. Denying that such a title can be made to him, he requires an exhibition of the evidence of it. But the evidence produced fails to show, with satisfactory certainty, an assuring title to a large portion of the land. A cloud still hangs over that portion called *“The West Tract.”*It appears that Thomas West once occupied and claimed it, that, after his death, his widow sold and conveyed it to Delph, without proof of authority to sell more than dower, and witnesses say that his heirs also conveyed to Delph, but there is no documentary proof of it. And one of them, Edward West, long since died, leaving infant children who were not made parties, and against whom time might not availably operate. In some way the title ought to be cleared of these doubts and difficulties.

Wherefore the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                         5
       
<S>                               <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                     3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                  OCT-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                    DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                            3,693,384
<SECURITIES>                                              0
<RECEIVABLES>                                     7,192,051
<ALLOWANCES>                                         85,800
<INVENTORY>                                         597,016
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 13,857,086
<PP&E>                                            1,357,640
<DEPRECIATION>                                      847,255  
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   18,434,616
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             5,126,740
<BONDS>                                                   0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               346,507
<PREFERRED>                                               0
<COMMON>                                             67,006
<OTHER-SE>                                       12,894,363
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     18,434,616
<SALES>                                          67,617,938
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 67,617,938
<CGS>                                            61,864,395
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     5,423,547
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     43,791 
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   35,418
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     373,787
<INCOME-TAX>                                        149,500
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 224,287
<DISCONTINUED>                                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                           0
<CHANGES>                                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                                        224,287
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                           .03
<EPS-DILUTED>                                           .03
        


</TABLE>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Lance Cain,

Plaintiff,

v.

C. R. Bard, Inc., et al.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

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

Civil Action No. CV-16-00446-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: March 2, 2016 /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 933 Filed 03/04/16 Page 1 of 1
#### ROBERT R. KELLY v. MAYOR AND COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SALEM.

June 19, 1984.

Petition for certification denied.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED August 23, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________ No. 07-20134 Summary Calendar

_____________________ TRISHA L. WAKAT, as Administratrix of the Estate of James Henry Mitchell; KATHY GUTIERREZ, as Next Friend of AM, Minor Child of James Henry Mitchell; SHARON PATRICK, as Next Friend of JM and SM, Minor Children of James Henry Mitchell, Plaintiffs-Appellants v. MONTGOMERY COUNTY TEXAS, Defendant-Appellee

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, Houston

(4:05-CV-978) Before WIENER, GARZA, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * After James Henry Mitchell (“Decedent”) died on the mor ning of his twelfth day in the Montgomery County Texas jail, the Administratrix of his Estate an d the next friends of his minor children instituted this action against the Coun ty, the Sheriff’s Department, the former and current sheriffs2

of th e County, the Medical Director and physician for the inmates of the County Jail, the Tri-County Mental Health Agency, and various John an Jane Does, asserting constitutional claims under 42 U.S.C. § 1983 and Texas law claims. After considerable proceedings and the accumulation of a large record, the district court granted motions for summary judgment, dismissing all federal claims against a ll defendants with prejudice and dismissing all state law claims without prejudice. We have now reviewed with care the considerable record on appeal, including the district court’s extensive Memorandum Opinion and Order signed on January 12, 2007, and the facts and law as explicated in the excellent appellate briefs f iled by opposing counsel. As a result, we are in comp lete agreement with the rulings of the district court and the reasons and reasoning supporting those rulings; and we can see no reason for writing substantively, as our doing so would merely replicate the writing of the d istrict court. We therefore incorporate herein by reference the aforesaid Memorandum Opinion and Order of that court and affirm the rulings and judgments of the district court in all respects. AFFIRMED.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-7781
HUGH R. EPPS, Petitioner - Appellant, versus ALTON BASKERVILLE, Warden, Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. David G. Lowe, Magistrate Judge. (CA-96-178) Submitted: February 11, 1997 Decided: August 19, 1997 Before WILKINS, NIEMEYER, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.Hugh R. Epps, Appellant Pro Se. Leah Ann Darron, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).* The parties consented to the jurisdiction of the magistrate judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636(c) (1994). 2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the magistrate judge's * order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (1994), amended by Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, Pub. L. No.104-132, 110 Stat. 1214. We have reviewed the record and the magistrate judge's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the magistrate judge. Epps v. Baskerville , No. CA-96- 178 (E.D. Va. Nov. 7, 1996). We dispense with oral argument becausethe facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Darrell Wells,

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-17-03753-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 9034 Filed 11/30/17 Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Natalia A. Rebollo,

Plaintiff,

v.

C. R. Bard Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

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

Civil Action No. CV-17-03791-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 10/17/2017, 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: October 18, 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 8322 Filed 10/20/17 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 8322 Filed 10/20/17 Page 2 of 2
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Frederick Robinson, Appellant.

[788 NYS2d 111]

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Rena K. Uviller, J.), rendered July 2, 2002, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of murder in the second degree, and sentencing him to a term of 15 years to life, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant’s challenge to the validity of his plea is unpreserved *(People v Lopez,*71 NY2d 662 [1988]), and we decline to review it in the interest of justice. Were we to review this claim, we would find that defendant was fully apprised of the rights that *423he was waiving as a result of his guilty plea *(see Boykin v Alabama,*395 US 238 [1969]), and that the plea was knowing, intelligent and voluntary. While defendant argues that the court should have engaged in a more lengthy discussion of the possibility of psychiatric or intoxication defenses, we conclude that the court’s advice to defendant that by pleading guilty he waived such defenses was more than sufficient. Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Williams, Gonzalez, Sweeny and Catterson, JJ.