alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
108TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2436

AN ACT

To reauthorize the Native American Programs Act of 1974.

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

2

S 2436 ES

1 SECTION 1. NATIVE AMERICAN PROGRAMS ACT OF 1974.

2 (a) INTRA-DEPARTMENTAL COUNCIL ON NATIVE

3 AMERICAN AFFAIRS.—Section 803B(d)(1) of the Native

4 American Programs Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 2991b–

5 2(d)(1)) is amended by striking ‘‘There’’ and all that fol6 lows and inserting the following: ‘‘There is established in

7 the Office of the Secretary the Intra-Departmental Coun8 cil on Native American Affairs. The Commissioner and the

9 Director of the Indian Health Service shall serve as co10 chairpersons of the Council. The co-chairpersons shall ad11 vise the Secretary on all matters affecting Native Ameri12 cans that involve the Department.’’.

13 (b) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.—Section

14 816 of the Native American Programs Act of 1974 (42

15 U.S.C. 2992d) is amended—

16 (1) by striking subsections (a) through (c) and

17 inserting the following:

18 ‘‘(a) IN GENERAL.—There are authorized to be

19 appropriated—

20 ‘‘(1) to carry out section 803(d), $8,000,000

21 for each of fiscal years 2005 through 2009; and

22 ‘‘(2) to carry out provisions of this title other

23 than section 803(d) and any other provision having

24 an express authorization of appropriations, such

25 sums as are necessary for each of fiscal years 2005

26 through 2009.
†

3

S 2436 ES

1 ‘‘(b) LIMITATION.—Not less than 90 percent of the

2 funds made available to carry out this title for a fiscal

3 year (other than funds made available to carry out sec4 tions 803(d), 803A, 803C, and 804, and any other provi5 sion of this title having an express authorization of appro6 priations) shall be expended to carry out section 803(a).’’;

7 (2) by redesignating subsection (d) as sub8 section (c); and

9 (3) by striking subsection (e).

10 (c) REPORTS.—Section 811A of the Native American

11 Programs Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 2992–1) is amended—

12 (1) by striking the section heading and all that

13 follows through ‘‘each year,’’ and inserting the fol14 lowing:

15 ‘‘SEC. 811A. REPORTS.

16 ‘‘Every 5 years, the Secretary shall’’; and

17 (2) by striking ‘‘an annual report’’ and insert18 ing ‘‘a report’’.

19 SEC. 2. RESEARCH AND EDUCATIONAL ACTIVITIES.

20 Section 7205(a)(3) of the Native Hawaiian Edu21 cation Act (20 U.S.C. 7515(a)(3)) is amended—

22 (1) by redesignating subparagraphs (K) and

23 (L) as subparagraphs (L) and (M), respectively; and

24 (2) by inserting after subparagraph (J) the fol25 lowing:
†

4

S 2436 ES

1 ‘‘(K) research and educational activities re2 lating to Native Hawaiian law;’’.

Passed the Senate September 29, 2004.

Attest:

Secretary.
108TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2436

AN ACT

To reauthorize the Native American Programs Act

of 1974.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Michelle Richardson,

Plaintiff,

v.

C. R. Bard Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

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

Civil Action No. CV-17-04531-PHX-DGC

WAIVER OF THE SERVICE OF SUMMONS

To: Curtis 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 1/9/2018, 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: January 12, 2018 /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 9735 Filed 01/19/18 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 9735 Filed 01/19/18 Page 2 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Teddy Wilson,

Plaintiff,

v.

C. R. Bard Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

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

Civil Action No. CV-17-04532-PHX-DGC

WAIVER OF THE SERVICE OF SUMMONS

To: Curtis 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 1/9/2018, 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: January 12, 2018 /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 9755 Filed 01/19/18 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 9755 Filed 01/19/18 Page 2 of 2
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2423 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2423

To repeal the reduction in the tax rate for the top tax bracket and to 
 express the sense of the Senate that revenue savings from the repeal 
  should be used to improve benefits under the Montgomery GI Bill by 
 $6,000,000,000 over 10 years, to fund Federal Pell grants at the full 
amounts authorized for fiscal year 2004, and to double the fiscal year 
   2004 funding for Perkins loans, Federal work-study programs, and 
      Federal supplemental educational opportunity grants (SEOG).

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 13, 2004

  Mr. Dayton introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Banking

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To repeal the reduction in the tax rate for the top tax bracket and to 
 express the sense of the Senate that revenue savings from the repeal 
  should be used to improve benefits under the Montgomery GI Bill by 
 $6,000,000,000 over 10 years, to fund Federal Pell grants at the full 
amounts authorized for fiscal year 2004, and to double the fiscal year 
   2004 funding for Perkins loans, Federal work-study programs, and 
      Federal supplemental educational opportunity grants (SEOG).

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

SECTION 1. REPEAL OF REDUCTION IN TOP TAX RATE.

    (a) In General.--The table contained in section 1(i)(2) of the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (relating to reductions in rates after 
June 30, 2001) is amended by striking ``35.0%'' in the last column and 
inserting ``39.6%''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall apply 
to taxable years beginning after December 31, 2003.

SEC. 2. SENSE OF THE SENATE REGARDING EDUCATION FUNDING.

    It is the sense of the Senate that any increase in Federal revenue 
as a result of the amendment made by this Act should be used to improve 
benefits under the Montgomery GI Bill by $6,000,000,000 over 10 years, 
to fund Federal Pell grants at the full amounts authorized for fiscal 
year 2004, and to double the fiscal year 2004 funding for Perkins 
loans, Federal work-study programs, and Federal supplemental 
educational opportunity grants (SEOG).
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2518 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2518

  To amend the Omnibus Low-Level Radioactive Waste Interstate Compact 
    Consent Act to make the consent of Congress to certain compacts 
contingent on party states sharing the long-term liability for damages 
        caused by radioactive releases from regional facilities.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 15, 2004

 Mr. Nelson of Nebraska introduced the following bill; which was read 
          twice and referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Omnibus Low-Level Radioactive Waste Interstate Compact 
    Consent Act to make the consent of Congress to certain compacts 
contingent on party states sharing the long-term liability for damages 
        caused by radioactive releases from regional facilities.

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

SECTION 1. LIABILITY FOR DAMAGES CAUSED BY RADIOACTIVE RELEASES FROM 
              REGIONAL FACILITIES.

    (a) In General.--Section 212 of the Omnibus Low-Level Radioactive 
Waste Interstate Compact Consent Act (42 U.S.C. 2021d note; Public Law 
99-240) is amended--
            (1) in paragraph (2), by striking ``and'' after the 
        semicolon at the end;
            (2) in paragraph (3), by striking the period at the end and 
        inserting ``; and''; and
            (3) by adding at the end the following:
            ``(4) is granted only if the compact provides that all 
        party states to the compact are jointly and severally liable 
        for the cost of long-term liability incurred in connection with 
        the radioactive release from a regional facility in a host 
        state of the compact (in excess of fund available from the 
        extended care and long-term liability fund of the host State 
        and from property and third-party liability insurance), based 
        on the proportionate share of the total volume of waste placed 
        in the regional facilities by generators located in each party 
        state, except that this paragraph shall not apply to a party 
        state with a total volume of waste recorded on low-level 
        radioactive waste manifests for any year that is less than 10 
        percent of the total volume recorded on those manifests for the 
        region during the same year. ''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) take 
effect on the date that is 3 years after the date of enactment of this 
Act.
                                 <all>
```
#### STATE v. ANTHONY

No. 183A00

Case below: Gaston County Superior Court

Motion by defendant to dismiss 97CRS11653 for lack of jurisdiction denied 18 December 2001. Petition by defendant for writ of certiorari to consider dismissal of 97CRS11653 denied 18 December 2001.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-20216

JULIO GONZALEZ, Individually and as natural parent and next friend of minor children Emanuel Gonzalez, Lorenso Gonzales and Judy Gonzalez; CARMEN GONZALEZ, Individually and as natural parent and next friend of minor children Emanuel Gonzalez, Lorenso Gonzalez, and Judy Gonzalez; EMANUEL GONZALEZ, minor child; LORENSO GONZALEZ, minor child; JUDY GONZALEZ, minor child; DALIA R READEAUX; JULIO GONZALEZ, JR; DIANA GONZALEZ Plaintiffs-Appellants

versus

INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE; U S CUSTOMS SERVICE; FORT BEND COUNTY SHERIFF’S OFFICE; ELIZABETH WIGGINTON, Special Agent; BEN D STEVENS; JEROME RUSSEL, Special Agent; PETER JACKSON, Customs Agent; PATRICIA MCCAULEY, District Director, United States Customs Service; THE SUGARLAND POLICE DEPARTMENT; COMERCIA BANK-TEXAS, formerly Sugar Creek National Bank

Defendants-Appellees

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

(H-94-CV-3885)

April 14, 1998

Before WISDOM, HIGGINBOTHAM, and JONES, Circuit Judges.* Pursuant to 5th Cir. 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 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

2 PER CURIAM: *

AFFIRMED. See Local Rule 47.6.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

IN RE: BARD IVC FILTERS PRODUCTS 

LIABILITY LITIGATION Case No. MDL 15-2641-PHX DGC 

 ORDER 

This Document Relates to Plaintiff: 

James Headley and Pamela Headley v. 

C.R. Bard Incorporated, et al., 

Civil Case No.: CV17-2877-PHX DGC 

 The Court has considered the Stipulation of Dismissal Without Prejudice between 

the Parties. Doc. 9647. 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED AND DECLARED that all claims 

of Plaintiffs James and Pamela Headley against Defendants C.R. Bard, Inc. and Bard 

Peripheral Vascular, Inc. in Civil Action No. MDL15-02641-PHX DGC (Member Case 

CV17-2877-PHX DGC) are dismissed in their entirety without prejudice, and each party 

shall bear its own costs. 

 Dated this 17th day of January, 2018. 

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 9694 Filed 01/17/18 Page 1 of 1
**Exhibit 23**

 

**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements No. 333-07589, No. 333-31105, No. 333-83235, and No. 333-126876 each on Form S-8, of our report dated March 10, 2011 on our audits of the consolidated financial statements of Heritage Oaks Bancorp and Subsidiaries appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

 

 

/s/ Vavrinek, Trine, Day & Co., LLP

Rancho Cucamonga, California

March 10, 2011

 

114

----
#### Allen W. Rantt *v.*Lewis Hardin.

Deposition — Exceptions.

It not appearing that the exceptions of either party to the depositions were acted on in the court below, for this reason they must be regarded as uni-ead.

Same.

If the depositions were not taken at the place designated in the notice and the adjournment from that place was unorthized by the code, still the defendant was present, and cannot avail himself of such irregularity, if any existed.

APPEAL PROM BATH CIRCUIT COURT.

November 23, 1867.

Opinion op ti-ie Court by

Judge Hardin:

It does not appear that the exceptions of either party to depositions were acted on in the court below; for this reason they must be regarded ¿s having been unread.

But we perceive no sufficient ground of objection to the reading of any of the depositions excepted to by the defendant. If they were not taken at the exact place designated in the notice, and the adjournment from that place was -not such as authorized by the Code of Practice, the examiner’s certificate shows the defendant was present at the taking of the depositions. Nor does it appear to us that the court abused its discretion in overriding the defendant’s motion for a continuance.

The alleged partnership between the appellant and Hardin and John Rantt is, we think, established by a decided preponderance of the evidence. The report of the commissioner fixing the amount due the plaintiff, as agreed to by the parties, was not excepted to by the appellant, although the usual time was allowed for doing so. It seems to us the commissioner had a right to base his report on an agreed adjustment of the parties themselves, if made by them for that purpose before him; and if the report was not correct as to such agreement, or in any other particular, the defendant could have made the fact appear in the Circuit Court in the usual and proper mode.

*70Gudgell, *for appellant.*

Lacey, *for appellee.*

Wherefore, no special error being perceived in the judgment, the same is affirmed.
Exhibit 99.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Atec Group, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-Q/A-1 for the quarter ended December 31, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Balwinder Singh Bathla, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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 result of operations of the
Company.


                                       /s/ BALWINDER SINGH BATHLA
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                       Balwinder Singh Bathla
                                       Chief Executive Officer
                                       April 22, 2003


                                       22
<PAGE>
 
                                                                   EXHIBIT 11.2

                      PEDIATRIC SERVICES OF AMERICA, INC.

                       COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE

<TABLE> 
<CAPTION> 
                                                         Six Months Ended March 31,
                                            -------------------------------------------------
                                                    Primary                Fully Diluted
                                            -----------------------   -----------------------
                                               1997         1996         1997        1996
                                            ----------   ----------   ----------   ----------
<S>                                         <C>          <C>          <C>          <C> 
Weighted average common stock
  outstanding during the period..........    6,248,745    5,786,672    6,248,745    6,060,907
Options and warrants.....................      185,705      348,880      187,320      361,335
                                            ----------   ----------   ----------   ----------
Total....................................    6,434,450    6,135,552    6,436,065    6,422,242
                                            ==========   ==========   ==========   ==========

Net income attributable to
  common and common equivalent shares:
    Net Income...........................   $3,389,446   $2,065,125   $3,389,446   $2,065,125
    Less accretion on redeemable preferred
      stock..............................            -       10,162            -       10,162
    Less preferred stock dividend........            -       85,750            -       85,750
                                            ----------   ----------   ----------   ----------
Net income attributable to common and
  common equivalent shares...............   $3,389,446   $1,969,213   $3,389,446   $1,969,213
                                            ==========   ==========   ==========   ==========
Net income per common and common
  equivalent share.......................   $     0.53   $     0.32   $     0.53   $     0.31
                                            ==========   ==========   ==========   ==========
</TABLE>
II 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2407 

To clarify the intellectual property rights of the United States Olympic 

Committee. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 11, 2004 

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

referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To clarify the intellectual property rights of the United 

States Olympic Committee. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Support Our Olympic 

5 Athletes Act of 2004’’. 

6 SEC. 2. CLARIFICATION OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY 

7 RIGHTS OF UNITED STATES OLYMPIC COM8 MITTEE. 

9 Chapter 2205 of title 36, United States Code (com10 monly referred to as the ‘‘Ted Stevens Olympic and Ama-
2 

•S 2407 IS 

1 teur Sports Act’’), is amended in section 220506(c)(3) by 

2 inserting ‘‘the words ‘Olympik’, ‘Olympick’, ‘Olympika’, 

3 ‘Olympicka’, ‘Olympica’, or ‘Olympikus’,’’ after ‘‘the 

4 words described in subsection (a)(4) of this section,’’. 

Æ