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

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Gary Micco,

Plaintiff,

v.

C. R. Bard Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

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

Civil Action No. CV-17-04574-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 12/12/2017, 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 9437 Filed 12/22/17 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 9437 Filed 12/22/17 Page 2 of 2
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

JAVIER AGUILAR, )

)

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D18-4941

)

STATE OF FLORIDA, )

)

Appellee. )

________________________________ )

Opinion filed October 2, 2019.

Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 

9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for 

Manatee County; Charles Sniffen, 

Judge.

Rachael E. Reese of O'Brien Hatfield, 

P.A., Tampa, for Appellant. 

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. 

KELLY, SALARIO, and SMITH, JJ., Concur.
N OTE : This disposition is nonprecedential. 

# United States Court of Appeals **for the Federal Circuit**

______________________ INTAMIN, LTD., Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

MAGNETAR TECHNOLOGIES CORP., Defendant-Appellee.

____________________

2010-1003

______________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California in no. 04-CV-0511, Judge Gary A. Feess.

______________________

JUDGMENT

______________________

T ED S. W ARD , Berke, Kent & Ward LLP, of Los Angeles, California, argued for plaintiff-appellant.

J OHN B. S GANGA , J R ., Knobbe, Martens, Olson & Bear, LLP, of Irvine, California, argued for defendant-appellee. With him on the brief were P AUL A. S TEWART , J OSEPH S. C IANFRANI , D AVID G. J ANKOWSKI and C HRISTOPHER L. R OSS

.

______________________T HIS C AUSE having been heard and considered, it is

O RDERED and A DJUDGED :

P ER C URIAM (R ADER , Chief Judge, P LAGER and G AJARSA , Circuit Judges ).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

E NTERED BY O RDER OF THE C OURT

December 10, 2010 /s/ Jan Horbaly Date Jan Horbaly Clerk
EXHIBIT 32.2

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 Annual Report of Consolidated Graphics, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the period ending March 31,
2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, G. Christopher Colville, Executive Vice President, Chief Financial and Accounting Officer and Secretary
of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



|Dated: June 2, 2004 |                                                                                                                                 
|------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                    | /s/G. CHRISTOPHER COLVILLEG. Christopher Colville
Executive Vice President, Chief Financial and Accounting Officer and Secretary

---



QuickLinks
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Elizabeth Morgan,

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-17-04028-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 8900 Filed 11/28/17 Page 1 of 1
##### 



Exhibit 99.2

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 Hayes Lemmerz International, Inc.
(the Issuer) on Form 10-Q for the period ending October 31, 2002 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report),
I, James A. Yost, Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer of the
Issuer, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my
knowledge:



| | 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 Issuer.



/s/ James A. Yost
James A. Yost
Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer
December 16, 2002
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

WESTERN DISTRICT 

MARGARET M. DIBISH, 

 Petitioner 

 v. 

AMERIPRISE FINANCIAL, INC., 

AMERIPRISE FINANCIAL SERVICES, 

INC., RIVERSOURCE LIFE INSURANCE 

COMPANY, AND JEFFREY C. 

SUHAYDA, 

 Respondents 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 113 WAL 2016 

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court 

ORDER 

PER CURIAM 

AND NOW, this 7th day of July, 2016, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
##### 



BankAtlantic Bancorp,
Inc. Exhibit 32.2 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 Annual
Report of BankAtlantic Bancorp, Inc. (the Company) on Form
10-K for the period ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
the date hereof (the Report), I, James A. White, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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 results of operations of the Company. By
    
    /s/James A. WhiteName:
    
    James A. WhiteTitle:
    
    Chief Financial OfficerDate:
    
    March 16, 2005
# STATE OF LOUISIANA



# COURTOFAPPEAL,FIRSTCIRCUIT
STATE OF LOUISIANA NO. 2022 KW 0021 

### VERSUS VICTOR GALAN 

### MARCH 14, 2022

In Re: Victor Galan, 

### applying for 

### supervisory writs, 

### 22nd

Judicial District Court, Parish of St. 

### Tammany, No. 563, 468.
BEFORE: GUIDRY, HOLDRIDGE, AND CHUTZ, JJ.

WRIT DENIED. JMG GH WRC

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT 

# IfI E UIEY CLERK OF COUR

FOR THE COURT
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Max Fleming,

Plaintiff,

v.

C. R. Bard Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

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

Civil Action No. CV-17-03649-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 11/14/2017, 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 9122 Filed 12/05/17 Page 1 of 1
# Fourth Court of Appeals San Antonio, Texas December 17, 2021 No. 04-21-00406-CV IN THE INTEREST OF X.L.C., A CHILD From the 288th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2020-PA-01100 Honorable Kimberly Burley, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R This is an accelerated appeal from a final order terminating appellant’s parental rights which must be disposed of by this court within 180 days of the date the notice of appeal was filed. See T EX . R. J UD . A DMIN . 6.2. The appellant’s brief was due on December 13, 2021. However, the appellant has filed her second motion requesting an extension of time to file the appellant’s brief. The motion is GRANTED. The appellant’s brief is due on or before January 4, 2022
. Given the time constraints governing the disposition of this appeal, no further requests for extensions of time will be granted absent extenuating circumstances.

_________________________________ Irene Rios, Justice IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 17th day of December, 2021.

___________________________________ MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Sameh Shaaban, Appellant.

[789 NYS2d 240]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Rosenzweig, J.), rendered January 7, 2003, convicting him of robbery in the second degree, assault in the second degree, criminal possession of stolen property in the fifth degree, and criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s contention that there was insufficient evidence to corroborate the accomplice testimony of the codefendant is unpreserved for appellate review, and, in any event, is without merit. Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution *(see People v Contes,*60 NY2d 620 [1983]), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence *(see*CPL 470.15 [5]).

The defendant’s remaining contentions either are without merit or are not properly before this Court. Florio, J.P., Krausman, Goldstein and Mastro, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 10.4


 


 


November 18, 2020


 


To the Members of the Board of


 


Brightlane Corp.


1600 West Loop South


Suite 600


Houston, TX
77056


 


Dear Sirs:


 


This letter confirms that I hereby
resign from my position as Chief Operating Officer, Chief Financial Officer of Brightlane Corp. (the “Company”), and all other
positions with the Company to which I have been assigned, regardless of whether I served in such capacity, effective immediately. My resignation
is not the result of any disagreement with the Company on any matter relating to the Company’s operations, policies or practices.


 


 


Sincerely,


 


 


/s/ Peter Hellwig


PETER HELLWIG
# First Launch

A new chapter in space flight began in July 1950 with the launch of the first rocket from Cape Canaveral, Fla: the Bumper 2, an ambitious two-stage rocket program that topped a V-2 missile base with a Corporal rocket. The upper stage was able to reach then-record altitudes of almost 250 miles, higher than the International Space Station's orbit. La

Read More

                    -  Facebook PinterestX
-  LinkedIn Emailhttps://www.nasa.gov/image-detail/first-launch/Copy URL to clipboard>DownloadShareSize1041x802pxNational Aeronautics and Space Administration
NASA explores the unknown in air and space, innovates for the benefit of humanity, and inspires the world through discovery.
- About NASA's Mission
Join Us- Home
- News & Events
- Multimedia
- NASA+
- Missions
- Humans in Space
- Earth & Climate
- The Solar System
- The Universe
- Science
- Aeronautics
- Technology
- Learning Resources
- About NASA
- NASA en Español
Follow NASA-   
-   
-   
-   
- More NASA Social Accounts
- NASA Newsletters
- Sitemap
- For Media
- Privacy Policy
- FOIA
- No FEAR Act
- Office of the IGBudget & Annual Reports
Agency Financial Reports
Contact NASA
Accessibility
-  									Page Last Updated:								  								Mar 18, 2023								 
-  									Page Editor:								   
-  								Responsible NASA Official:							  								Abigail Bowman
#### STATE v. NOLEN

No. 391P01

Case below: 144 N.C. App. 172

Motion by the Attorney General to dismiss the appeal for lack of substantial constitutional question allowed 8 November 2001. Petition by defendant for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 denied 8 November 2001.
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-12-00385-CR

Edwin Herbert Phelps III

v.

The State of Texas

§

§

§

§

§

From the 396th District Court

of Tarrant County (0784025D)

May 16, 2013

Per Curiam

(nfp)

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that 

there was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of 

the trial court is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

PER CURIAM
June 28, 2000




Frontier Airlines, Inc.
Denver, Colorado

Ladies and Gentlemen:

We have audited the balance  sheets of Frontier  Airlines,  Inc. as of March 31,
2000 and 1999, and the related statements of operations,  stockholders'  equity,
and cash flows for each of the years in the  three-year  period  ended March 31,
2000, and have reported  thereon under date of May 31, 2000. The  aforementioned
financial  statements and our audit report thereon are included in the Company's
annual  report on Form 10-K for the year ended March 31, 2000. As stated in Note
1 to those  financial  statements,  the Company changed its method of accounting
for required periodic  maintenance checks from the  accrue-in-advance  method to
the direct  expensing  method,  and  states  that the newly  adopted  accounting
principle  is  preferable  in the  circumstances  because  there has not been an
obligating  event prior to the  maintenance  checks actually being performed and
the  new  method  is  the  predominant  method  used  in the  airline  industry.
Previously,  the Company  accrued-in-advance  for  maintenance  checks and major
overhauls,  including the costs for scheduled major airframe,  landing gear, and
engine overhauls.  The Company continues to utilize the accrue-in-advance method
for major overhaul,  including scheduled major airframe, landing gear and engine
overhauls because the Company's aircraft lease agreements require the Company to
make non-refundable deposits monthly with the lessor for such costs.

In  accordance  with your request,  we have reviewed and discussed  with Company
officials the  circumstances  and business  judgment and planning upon which the
decision to make this change in the method of accounting was based.

With regard to the aforementioned accounting change, authoritative criteria have
not been established for evaluating the  preferability of one acceptable  method
of accounting over another acceptable method.  However, for purposes of Frontier
Airlines, Inc.'s compliance with the requirements of the Securities and Exchange
Commission, we are furnishing this letter.

Based on our review and  discussion,  with  reliance  on  management's  business
judgment and planning,  we concur that the newly adopted method of accounting is
preferable in the Company's circumstances.

Very truly yours,

KPMG LLP
Exhibit 32
                    CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                         18 U.S.C. 1350,
                     AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
          SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In connection with the Quarterly Report of AEI Net Lease Income &
Growth Fund XX Limited Partnership (the "Partnership") on Form 10-
Q  for  the  period  ended  June 30,  2008,  as  filed  with  the
Securities  and  Exchange  Commission on  the  date  hereof  (the
"Report"), the undersigned, Robert P. Johnson, President  of  AEI
Fund  Management XX, Inc., the Managing General  Partner  of  the
Partnership, and Patrick W. Keene, Chief Financial Officer of AEI
Fund  Management XX, Inc., each certify, pursuant  to  18  U.S.C.
1350,  as  adopted pursuant to Section 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 results of operations of the Partnership.


                          /s/ Robert P Johnson
                              Robert P. Johnson, President
                              AEI Fund Management XX, Inc.
                              Managing General Partner
                              August 8, 2008



                          /s/ Patrick W Keene
                              Patrick W. Keene, Chief Financial Officer
                              AEI Fund Management XX, Inc.
                              Managing General Partner
                              August 8, 2008