alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Sarah Douglas","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/sschlied\/","title":"Pale Blue Dot: Visualization Challenge","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"Yrhy5L7gB9\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/directorates\/stmd\/stmd-prizes-challenges-crowdsourcing-program\/center-of-excellence-for-collaborative-innovation-coeci\/pale-blue-dot-challenge\/\">Pale Blue Dot: Visualization Challenge<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/directorates\/stmd\/stmd-prizes-challenges-crowdsourcing-program\/center-of-excellence-for-collaborative-innovation-coeci\/pale-blue-dot-challenge\/embed\/#?secret=Yrhy5L7gB9\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Pale Blue Dot: Visualization Challenge” — NASA\" data-secret=\"Yrhy5L7gB9\" 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\/11\/laosshiftingcultivzm-oli-2020.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":454}
Exhibit 32.01





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 Amended Annual Report of Power-Save Energy Company (the “Company”) on Form 10-K/A for the year ending December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Michael Forster, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:





(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/ Michael Forster


By: Michael Forster


Chief Executive Officer





Dated: February 13, 2012





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2682 Reported in Senate (RS)]

                                                       Calendar No. 663
108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2682

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
  at 222 West 8th Street, Durango, Colorado, as the ``Ben Nighthorse 
                    Campbell Post Office Building''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             July 16, 2004

  Mr. Allard introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
           referred to the Committee on Governmental Affairs

                              July 22, 2004

               Reported by Ms. Collins, without amendment

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
  at 222 West 8th Street, Durango, Colorado, as the ``Ben Nighthorse 
                    Campbell Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 222 West 8th Street, Durango, Colorado, shall be known and 
designated as the ``Ben Nighthorse Campbell Post Office Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Ben 
Nighthorse Campbell Post Office Building''.

                                                       Calendar No. 663

108th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                                S. 2682

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
  at 222 West 8th Street, Durango, Colorado, as the ``Ben Nighthorse 
                    Campbell Post Office Building''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                             July 22, 2004

                       Reported without amendment
```
#### Maguire *v.*Nowland.

The act of 1827, giving the Supreme Court jurisdiction in certain cases decided by the Circuit Court on appeal from the judgment of a justice of the peace, is prospective only, and does not apply to cases determined by a justice before the taking effect of the act.

ERROR to the *Marion*Circuit Court.

Friday, *May*18.

*Smeetser*and Wick, for the plaintiff.

Fletcher, for the defendant.

Buackford, J.

This judgment of the Circuit Court, was in a case from a Justice’s Court. Previously to the late act of the legislature, approved the 22d of January, 1827, this Court had no jurisdiction of such cases. That act makes some alterations in the mode of proceeding before justices of the peace; and, where the judgment of the Circuit Court is in a case where the judgment of the justice exceeds 20 dollars, the act gives this Court jurisdiction of the cause. We are of opinion, however, that this act of *the legislature is*prospective only, and was not intended to embrace any cases, except where the rendition of the justice’s judgment is subsequent to the taking effect of the statute. The judgment of the justice, in the case before us, was rendered long before the taking effect of the act above referred to (1).

*Per*Curiam.

The cause is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

(1)

 The law on the subject is now as follows:—u Writs of error issuing from, and appeals made to the Supreme Court, shall extend to all judgments and decrees, given by any of the inferior Courts of record, except such judgments as have been or may be rendered by any of the inferior Courts, confirming or reversing the judgment of any justice of the peace, where the amount in controversy, inclusive of interest and costs, is under the sum of twenty dollars: Provided, .that in all cases wjiepe judgment is rendered, affirming or reversing the judgment of any justice of the peace, on an appeal to any inferior tribunal, where the amount in controversy, inclusive of interest and costs, is under 50 dollars, if a supersedeas shall be refused, the Supreme Court shall have no jurisdiction. R. C, 1831, p. 149.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-01-2000
<CASH>                                           4,340
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   40,501
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,042
<INVENTORY>                                     27,305
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                77,347
<PP&E>                                          55,708
<DEPRECIATION>                                   9,538
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 179,415
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          123,202
<BONDS>                                         13,110
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            56
<OTHER-SE>                                      35,072
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   179,415
<SALES>                                        144,063
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               144,063
<CGS>                                          110,702
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  142,265
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  (35)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               6,646
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (3,445)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (1,701)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,997)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,997)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.36)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.36)


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-QSB FOR THE PERIOD ENDED JULY 31, 1998,
AND IS QUALIFIED IN IT'S ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENT.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-31-1998
<CASH>                                      11,515,762
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                4,901,655
<ALLOWANCES>                                   196,160
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            18,564,905
<PP&E>                                       8,014,488
<DEPRECIATION>                               4,815,956
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              26,718,658
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        6,423,770
<BONDS>                                        495,336<F1>
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        42,520
<OTHER-SE>                                  17,763,725
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                26,718,658
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            22,751,227
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               14,819,111
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             5,657,422
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                94,930
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              93,362
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,671,342
<INCOME-TAX>                                 1,097,846
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,573,496
<DISCONTINUED>                                (60,509)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 3,604,996<F2>
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.90<F3>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.83
<FN>
<F1>INCLUDES CURRENT PORTION OF 472,936
<F2>INCLUDES GAIN ON SALE OF PAYROLL DIVISION OF 2,092,009
<F3>ACTUALLY EPS BASIC
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-1061

JOHN LEE MORRIS, SR.,

Plaintiff – Appellant,

v.

THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES; JUDGES; ATTORNEYS; CLERKS; 

ROBERT J. FAVROT; WILLIAM J. DZIWURA; NC ATTORNEY GENERAL 

ROY COOPER; ROBERT MONTGOMERY; SARAH PARKER; MARK D. 

MARTION; ROBERT H. EDMUNDS, JR.; EDWARD T. BRANDY; PATRICIA 

TIMMONS GOODSON; PAUL M. NEWBY; ROBIN E. HUDSON; JUSTICE 

NIEMEYER; JUSTICE TRAXLER; JUSTICE GREGORY; WILLIAM K. 

SUTER; JEFFREY ATKINS; RUTH JONES; PAMELA K. STUMP; UNITED 

STATES OF AMERICA,

Defendants – Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle 

District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. James A. Beaty, Jr.,

Chief District Judge. (1:10-cv-00130-JAB-PTS)

Submitted: April 28, 2011 Decided: May 3, 2011

Before DAVIS, KEENAN, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

John Lee Morris, Sr., Appellant Pro Se. Gill Paul Beck, Sr., 

Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, 

Grady L. Balentine, Jr., Special Deputy Attorney General, 

Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees.
2

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
3

PER CURIAM:

John Lee Morris, Sr., appeals the district court’s 

order accepting the magistrate judge’s recommendation and 

dismissing Morris’ 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2006) complaint. We have 

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, 

we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. 

Morris v. People of the United States, No. 1:10-cv-00130-JAB-PTS 

(M.D.N.C. filed Jan. 14, 2011; entered Jan. 19, 2011). We 

further deny Morris’ motion for sanction or money demand. 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.

AFFIRMED
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Lloyd Levins,

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-18-00085-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: January 12, 2018 /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 9719 Filed 01/18/18 Page 1 of 1
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Cody S. Lydon","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/codyslydon\/","title":"Gulfstream III Aerodynamics Research Test Bed","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"kUXw7usNKe\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/gallery\/g-iii\/\">Gulfstream III Aerodynamics Research Test Bed<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/gallery\/g-iii\/embed\/#?secret=kUXw7usNKe\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Gulfstream III Aerodynamics Research Test Bed” — NASA\" data-secret=\"kUXw7usNKe\" 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"}
FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

June 8, 2010

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

MADELINE WAGNER,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 10-1184

(D.C. No. 1:09-CR-00343-MKS-1)

ORDER

Appellant’s motion to dismiss this matter is granted. 10th Cir. R. 46.3(B).

A copy of this order shall stand as and for the mandate of the court.

Entered for the Court,

ELISABETH A. SHUMAKER, Clerk

Appellate Case: 10-1184 Document: 01018436808 Date Filed: 06/08/2010 Page: 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Milo Hall,

Plaintiff,

v.

C. R. Bard Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

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

Civil Action No. CV-17-04639-PHX-DGC

WAIVER OF THE SERVICE OF SUMMONS

To: Blankenship 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 12/15/2017, the date when this request was sent (or 90 days if it was sent outside the United States). If I fail 

to do so, a default judgment will be entered against me or the entity I represent.

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

Signature of the attorney or unrepresented party

C. R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Peripheral

Vascular, Inc.

Printed name of parties waiving service of 

summons

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

Printed Name

Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, LLP

201 17th St., NW, Suite 1700, Atlantic Station, Atlanta, GA 30363

Address

richard.north@nelsonmullins.com

E-mail Address

(404) 322-6155

Telephone number

Duty to Avoid Unnecessary Expenses of Serving a Summons

Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires certain defendants to cooperate in saving unnecessary expenses of serving a 

summons and complaint. A defendant who is located in the United States and who fails to return a signed waiver of service requested by a plaintiff 

located in the United States will be required to pay the expenses of service, unless the defendant shows good cause for the failure. 

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 9468 Filed 12/28/17 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 9468 Filed 12/28/17 Page 2 of 2
EX-10.31





 Exhibit 10.31 

AMENDMENT TWELVE TO THE 

LOGISTICS SERVICES AGREEMENT 

This TWELFTH AMENDMENT TO THE LOGISTICS SERVICES AGREEMENT (this “Amendment”), is made and entered into as of October
31, 2019, by and between The Honest Company, Inc. (“Client”) and Geodis Logistics, LLC (“GEODIS,” and together with Client, the “Parties”). 

WHEREAS, the Parties entered into that certain Logistics Services Agreement, dated January 27, 2014, as amended (the
“Agreement”); 
 WHEREAS, the Term for the warehouse located at 13053 San Bernardino Avenue, Fontana, California 92335 (the
“Fontana Warehouse”) will expire on October 31, 2019; 
 WHEREAS, the Parties desire to extend the Term of the Fontana
Warehouse through November 15, 2019. 
 NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements set forth in the
Agreement and this Amendment, the Parties agree as follows: 
  

	1.	 Extension of Term. The Parties agree to extend the Term for the Fontana Warehouse through
November 15, 2019. 


  

	2.	 No Other Changes. Except as provided herein, all provisions of the Agreement and related Exhibits remain
unchanged and in full force and effect. 


  

	3.	 Capitalized Terms. Capitalized terms not herein defined shall have the meanings set forth in the
Agreement. 


  

	4.	 Counterparts. This Amendment may be executed in multiple counterparts (including execution by facsimile
or other electronic transmission) with the same effect as if all signing parties had signed the same document. All counterparts shall be construed together and constitute the same document. 



[Signatures on the Following Page] 












 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have caused this Amendment to be executed by their duly
authorized representatives as of the date first set forth above. 
  

									
	THE HONEST COMPANY, INC.	  		  	GEODIS LOGISTICS LLC
					
	Name:	  	 /s/ Glenn Klages
	  	                    	  	Name:	  	 /s/ Mike Honious

					
	Name:	  	 Glenn Klages
	  		  	Name:	  	 Mike Honious

					
	Title:	  	 EVP Supply Chain
	  		  	Title:	  	 COO

					
	Date:	  	 10/31/19
	  		  	Date:	  	 November 1, 2019