alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Stacy Holtz","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/stacy-a-holtznasa-gov\/","title":"STS-52","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"QNVL1aBQIr\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/gallery\/sts-52\/\">STS-52<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/gallery\/sts-52\/embed\/#?secret=QNVL1aBQIr\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“STS-52” — NASA\" data-secret=\"QNVL1aBQIr\" 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"}
_________________________________________ 

 

Order Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

September 28, 2005 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 128144 Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

WAYNE OAKLAND CONTRACTING, Stephen J. Markman,

INC., a Michigan Corporation, Justices 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 128144 

 COA: 248387 
 Wayne CC: 00-024745-CZ

CITY OF GARDEN CITY, a Municipal

Corporation and GARDEN CITY

DOWNTOWN DEVELOPMENT 

AUTHORITY, a Municipal Corporation, 

Defendants-Appellants. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the December 14, 2004 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

p0919 

I, CORBIN R. DAVIS, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

September 28, 2005
 

Clerk
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Brenda Waldner,

Plaintiff,

v.

C. R. Bard Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

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

Civil Action No. CV-18-00170-PHX-DGC

WAIVER OF THE SERVICE OF SUMMONS

To: Levin, Papantonio, Thomas, Mitchell, Raffert & Proctor, PA

(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 1/17/2018, 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 24, 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 9782 Filed 01/25/18 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 9782 Filed 01/25/18 Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     THIS SCHEDULE  CONTAINS SUMMARY  FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED FROM THE
     CONSOLIDATED   BALANCE  SHEET  OF   MULTIMEDIA   ACCESS   CORPORATION   AND
     SUBSIDIARIES AS OF DECEMBER 31, 1997 AND THE RELATED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT
     OF OPERATIONS FOR THE YEAR THEN ENDED,  AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
     REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                         1
<CURRENCY>                                  US DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                       3,117,202
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,260,230
<ALLOWANCES>                                    65,000
<INVENTORY>                                  1,762,186
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             6,341,001
<PP&E>                                       1,428,360
<DEPRECIATION>                                 550,920
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               8,211,415
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,793,151
<BONDS>                                      5,000,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           900
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,417,364
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 8,211,415
<SALES>                                      3,269,331
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,360,703
<CGS>                                        1,695,922
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,695,922
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             3,050,315
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                67,619
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             290,492
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (5,827,405)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (5,827,405)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                (5,827,405)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (0.75)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.75)
        


</TABLE>
#### Glass *v.*Doe, on the Demise of Murphy, on Appeal.

*Friday, November*13.

AN infant, having a title to land for which an action of ejectment is brought, has a right to be admitted a defendant on the usual terms; and the Court should appoint a guardian for him, in order that he may be enabled to defend the suit.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE FINANCIAL DATA SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED
FROM DRYPERS CORPORATION FORM 10Q AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>                      <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS                    6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-01-2000              DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000              JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                       2,521,000                2,521,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0                        0
<RECEIVABLES>                               67,423,000               67,423,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                 4,280,000                4,280,000
<INVENTORY>                                 37,959,000               37,959,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            38,831,000               38,831,000
<PP&E>                                     132,168,000              132,168,000
<DEPRECIATION>                              33,532,000               33,532,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             336,865,000              336,865,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      110,723,000              110,723,000
<BONDS>                                    145,834,000              145,834,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                        0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                        0
<COMMON>                                        18,000                   18,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  31,675,000               31,675,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               336,865,000              336,865,000
<SALES>                                     89,708,000              189,248,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            89,708,000              189,248,000
<CGS>                                       54,209,000              114,713,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               84,106,000              177,977,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             (417,000)              (1,015,000)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           5,733,000               11,661,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (548,000)              (1,405,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 (388,000)                (396,000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (160,000)              (1,009,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                        0
<CHANGES>                                            0                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (160,000)              (1,009,000)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.01)                    (.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.01)                    (.06)


</TABLE>
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 _________________________________________

 Clerk

July 24, 2012

p0716

Order 

July 24, 2012

144838

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 144838

COA: 299867

Wayne CC: 10-002425-FC

RICHARD HARRISON GOREE,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the February 21, 2012 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

IN RE: BARD IVC FILTERS

PRODUCTS LIABILITY

LITIGATION

No. MD-15-02641-PHX-DGC

ORDER REGARDING MOTION TO

STRIKE AND RE-FILE CERTAIN

EXHIBITS UNDER SEAL

The plaintiffs have filed an Unopposed Motion to Strike and Re-File Exhibits

in Support of Plaintiffs’ Memorandum Re Relevancy and Discoverability of FDA

Inspection and Warning Letter and Recovery Cone Removal System. Doc. ____.

IT IS ORDERED:

1. The motion to strike and re-file (Doc. ____) is granted.

2. Plaintiffs’ Exhibits in Support of Memorandum Re Relevancy and

Discoverability of FDA Inspection and Warning Letter and Recovery Cone

Removal System (Docs. 697-1 and 697-2) are stricken. Plaintiffs may re-file these

documents as corrected.

3. Plaintiffs may replace Exhibit 18.

4. Exhibits 6 and 10 to that Memorandum, constitute “Confidential

Information” under the stipulated protective order, and trade secrets or other

confidential research, development of commercial information pursuant to Federal

Rule of Civil Procedure 26(c)(1)(G), and therefore warrant protection from public

disclosure for a discovery related motion.

/ / /

/ / /

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 878-1 Filed 02/24/16 Page 1 of 2
2

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

5. Plaintiff may re-file Exhibits 6 and 10 under seal without further order

of the Court. The Clerk is directed to accept filing under seal Exhibits 6 and 10.

5256092v2/26997-0001

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 878-1 Filed 02/24/16 Page 2 of 2
p487

SP-4103 Model Research - Volume 2

http://history.nasa.gov/SP-4103/p487.htm (1 of 2) [3/31/2006 1:40:05 PM]
NAC Aeronautics Committee Public Agenda
 

Thursday ­Friday, October 25­26, 2012
 

Ohio Aerospace Institute
 

22800 Cedar Point Road, Cleveland , Ohio
 

The President's Room
 

Thursday, October 25 (Sessions are public except as noted)
 

8:00 am to 8:10 am Welcome and 

announcements

8:10 am to 9:30 am Glenn Research Center 

Overview/ Glenn 

Aeronautics Worforce 

Status

9:30 am to 10:30 pm	 ARMD related National 

Research Council 

interactions

10:30 am to 10:45 am Break
 

10:45 am to 12:00 am	 Aviation Safety R&D: 

technology transfer and 

cross agency collaboration

12:00 pm to 1:00 pm  Lunch (non­public)
 

1:00 pm to 2:00 pm ARMD Aeronautics Test 

Facilities Status

2:00 pm to 2:50 pm Committee Deliberations
 

2:50 pm to 3:00 pm Public Comment Period
 

3:00 PM	 Adjourn
 
NAC Aeronautics Committee Public Agenda
 

Thursday ­Friday, October 25­26, 2012
 

Ohio Aerospace Institute
 

22800 Cedar Point Road, Cleveland , Ohio
 

The President's Room
 

Friday, October 26 

8:00 am to 8:05 am Welcome and 

announcements

8:05 am to 9:15am UAS Subcommittee 

Outbrief

9:15 am to 9:30 am Break

9:30 am to 11:00 am	 Environmentally 

Responsible Aviation 

Project Phase 2 Status

11:00 am to 12:00 pm Committee Deliberations
 

12:00 pm to 12:15 pm Public Comment Period
 

12:15 PM	 Adjourn
|    |                                                                                                                  |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 1. | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Air Transport Services Group, Inc.; |

|    |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            |
|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| 2. | Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; |

|                                                                     |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                                                     |
| /s/ QUINT O. TURNER                                                 |
| Quint O. Turner                                                     |
| Chief Financial Officer(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer) |
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. GARY MESSINA.

May *2,*1978.

Petition for certification' denied.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Deanna Thomas,

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-17-04141-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 9036 Filed 11/30/17 Page 1 of 1
#### G. K. Sloan's Admr. *v.*T. B. Walters.

Evidence — Competency of Witness — Suit on Hote..

In a suit by an administrator against Walters on a note for $300, assigned by Talbot, Walters called Talbot e^s a witness to establish payments. Should the administrator recover the whole amount of the debt would have gone into judgment; and if Walters had failed in establishing his defense, Talbot would have been responsible to him for - such payments. Held, that Talbot’s interest being against Walters, he was a competent witness for him.

APPEAL EROM NELSON CIRCUIT COURT.

September 11, 1868.

Opinion oe the Court by

Judge Williams:

*635
      *Bunch & Lee, for appellant.*

*McKay, for appellee.*

Talbert having assigned to G. 3L Sloan, Walters’ note for $300, which was executed to him, was called by Walters to establish his defense of payment partly to Talbert, which was objected to by the plaintilf, but over-ruled by the court, and exceptions.

Appellant insists that Talbert’s interest was not in equipoise, and therefore, he is not a competent witness.

In a suit between Sloan’s administrator against Talbert on his assignment, he could not use the record to show the character of that assignment, and if Sloan’s administrator should recover, the measure of recovery would be the amount paid, or, in the absence of all proof as to this, the amount of the debt assigned with interest thereon and the legal costs recovered of him .in prosecuting this suit, whilst had Walters failed in establishing his defense, Talbert would have been responsible to him only for the amount received from him subsequent to the assignment, with interest thereon, but no costs; therefore, the legal interest of Talbert was against Walters who called him to testify, and -he was clearly competent. As to his preferences and partiality, that would go to his credibility in the consideration of the jury. As he was corroborated in a material point by another witness as to the motive and consideration of the assignment, we could not disturb the verdict and judgment on the evidence. We think the instructions properly expounded the law of the case, but if they did not no objections were made nor exceptions taken to them. Wherefore the judgment is affirmed.
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

**CERTIFICATION**

I, Steve H. Kanzer, certify that:

      1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Pipex Pharmaceuticals, Inc.;

      2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

      3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

      4. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have:

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under my supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to me by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report my conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

c) Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer’s most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting; and

      5. I have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer’s auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuer’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuer ‘s internal control over financial reporting.

Date: November 14, 2007

By: /s/ Steve H. KanzerName: Steve H. KanzerTitle: Chairman & Chief Executive Officer(Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer)

----