alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 3.3

                        EMPIRE FINANCIAL HOLDING COMPANY

                       AMENDMENT TO SECTIONS 3.9 AND 4.16
                                       OF
                 THE BYLAWS OF EMPIRE FINANCIAL HOLDING COMPANY
                         EFFECTIVE AS OF MARCH 20, 2003


3.9     SPECIAL MEETINGS. Special meetings of the Board of Directors or any
committee of the Board of Directors may be called by any Director or committee
member, as the case may be, on not less than 24 hours prior written notice to
each Director or committee member, as the case may be. Such written notice shall
be provided in the manner specified in Section 5.1. The written notice must
specify the place, date and time of the special meeting, but need not specify
the business to be transacted at, nor the purpose of, the meeting.


4.16    DISAGREEMENTS BETWEEN CO-OFFICERS. In the event that the Corporation's
Co-Chairmen of the Board, Co-Chief Executive Officers, Co-Presidents,
Co-Secretaries or other co-officers are not able to agree upon a particular
action to be taken, then the proposed action may be submitted to the Board of
Directors by either co-officer, and the determination with respect to such
proposed action by a majority of the Board of Directors shall be binding on the
Company and all of its officers. During the period prior to the Board's
determination, the status quo in effect immediately prior to the disagreement
shall remain in effect and no officer shall take any action to modify or change
the status quo with respect to such action. All officers of the Company shall
act only in a manner consistent with the provisions of this Section.
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Loura Hall","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/loura-hallnasa-gov\/","title":"Measurement and Modeling of Surface Coking in Fuel-Film Cooled Liquid Rocket Engines","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"kSbT0r9xg6\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/directorates\/stmd\/space-tech-research-grants\/measurement-and-modeling-of-surface-coking-in-fuel-film-cooled-liquid-rocket-engines\/\">Measurement and Modeling of Surface Coking in Fuel-Film Cooled Liquid Rocket Engines<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/directorates\/stmd\/space-tech-research-grants\/measurement-and-modeling-of-surface-coking-in-fuel-film-cooled-liquid-rocket-engines\/embed\/#?secret=kSbT0r9xg6\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Measurement and Modeling of Surface Coking in Fuel-Film Cooled Liquid Rocket Engines” — NASA\" data-secret=\"kSbT0r9xg6\" 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\/2016\/07\/kulakhmetov_rufat.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":399}
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOUND IN THE COMPANY'S FORM 10-Q FOR THE THREE
MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 1998, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                           3,202
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    4,506
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                10,456
<PP&E>                                          12,214
<DEPRECIATION>                                   8,670
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  18,651
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           12,321
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        18,081
<OTHER-SE>                                    (12,357)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    18,651
<SALES>                                          2,834
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 5,412
<CGS>                                              520
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      854
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 7,535
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (2,977)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       178
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (3,155)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (3,155)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.34)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.34)
        

</TABLE>
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Loura Hall","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/loura-hallnasa-gov\/","title":"Multitarget Approaches to Robust Navigation","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"YmN41yMfid\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/directorates\/stmd\/space-tech-research-grants\/multitarget-approaches-to-robust-navigation\/\">Multitarget Approaches to Robust Navigation<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/directorates\/stmd\/space-tech-research-grants\/multitarget-approaches-to-robust-navigation\/embed\/#?secret=YmN41yMfid\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Multitarget Approaches to Robust Navigation” — NASA\" data-secret=\"YmN41yMfid\" 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\/2016\/06\/hubble_friday_06242016.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":374}
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 01-50144 

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JOSE ANTONIO PIEDRA-OJEDA,

Defendant-Appellant.

--------------------

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. EP-00-CR-845-ALL-H

--------------------

August 23, 2001

Before KING, Chief Judge, and POLITZ and PARKER, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Jose Antonio Piedra-Ojeda appeals the 60-month term of

imprisonment imposed following his guilty plea conviction of

attempting to illegally reenter the United States after removal

in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Piedra-Ojeda argues that his

sentence should not have exceeded the two-year maximum term of

imprisonment prescribed in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). Piedra-Ojeda

acknowledges that his argument is foreclosed by the Supreme

Court’s decision in Almendarez-Torres v. United States, 523 U.S.

224 (1998), but seeks to preserve the issue for Supreme Court
No. 01-50144 

-2-

review in light of the decision in Apprendi v. New Jersey, 530

U.S. 466 (2000). 

Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres. See Apprendi,

530 U.S. at 489-90; United States v. Dabeit, 231 F.3d 979, 984

(5th Cir. 2000), cert. denied, 121 S. Ct. 1214 (2001). PiedraOjeda’s argument is foreclosed. The judgment of the district

court is AFFIRMED.

The Government has moved for a summary affirmance in lieu of

filing an appellee’s brief. In its motion, the Government asks

that the judgment of the district court be affirmed and that an

appellee’s brief not be required. The motion is GRANTED. 

 AFFIRMED; MOTION GRANTED.
|  | (a) | The                Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d)                of                the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;                and |
|--|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | (b) | The                information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the                Company                as of and for the period covered by the                Report. |
|--------|-----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                                       |                                                                   |                                     |
|--------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------|
| Date: November                8, 2005 | By:                                                          | /s/ Randall                L. Fewel |
|                                       |                                                                        |
|                                       | Randall                L. Fewel, President and Chief Executive Officer |
|                                       |

----
**Exhibit
      23.01**








**CONSENT
      OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**





We
      consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form
      S-8 No. 333-92094) pertaining to the Kenneth Cole Productions, Inc. 1994 Stock
      Option Plan, Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-31868) pertaining to
      the
      Kenneth Cole Productions, Inc. Employee Stock Purchase Plan, Registration
      Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-119101) pertaining to the Kenneth Cole Productions,
      Inc. 2004 Stock Incentive Plan, and Registration Statement (Form S-8 No.
      333-131724) pertaining to the Kenneth Cole Productions, Inc. 2004 Stock
      Incentive Plan of our reports dated March 1, 2007, with respect to the
      consolidated financial statements and schedule of Kenneth Cole Productions,
      Inc., Kenneth Cole Productions, Inc. management’s assessment of the
      effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, and the
      effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of Kenneth Cole
      Productions, Inc., included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended
      December 31, 2006.








*/s/
      Ernst & Young LLP*





New
      York,
      New York


March
      1,
      2007
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Lenora McMorris, 

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-17-03445-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 6, 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 8753 Filed 11/09/17 Page 1 of 1
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Ronald Marshall,

Plaintiff,

v.

C. R. Bard Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

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

Civil Action No. CV-17-04137-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 11/10/2017, 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 9002 Filed 11/30/17 Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

John Constantino, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

C. R. Bard Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc., 

Defendant. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

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

Civil Action No. CV-17-03549-PHX-DGC 

WAIVER OF THE SERVICE OF SUMMONS 

To: Freese & Goss PLLC - Birmingham, AL 

(Name of plaintiff’s attorney or unrepresented plaintiff) 

I have received your request to waive service of a summons in this action along with a copy of the complaint, two 

copies of this waiver form, and a prepaid means of returning one signed copy of the form to you. 

I, or the entity I represent, agree to save the expense of serving a summons and complaint in this case. 

I understand that I, or the entity I represent, will keep all defenses or objections to the lawsuit, the court’s 

jurisdiction, and the venue of the action, but that I waive any objections to the absence of a summons or of service. 

I also understand that I, or the entity I represent, must file and serve an answer or a motion under Rule 12 within 

60 days from 10/30/2017, the date when this request was sent (or 90 days if it was sent outside the United States). If I fail 

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

Date: November 6, 2017 /s/ Richard B. North, Jr. 

Signature of the attorney or unrepresented party 

C. R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc.

Printed name of parties waiving service of 

summons 

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

Printed Name 

Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, LLP 

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

Address 

richard.north@nelsonmullins.com 

E-mail Address 

(404) 322-6155 

Telephone number 

Duty to Avoid Unnecessary Expenses of Serving a Summons

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

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

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

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 8723 Filed 11/08/17 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 8723 Filed 11/08/17 Page 2 of 2
<PAGE>   1


                                  EXHIBIT 11.1

                    RESOURCE BANCSHARES MORTGAGE GROUP, INC.
            STATEMENT RE: COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME PER COMMON SHARE,
                      BASIC AND DILUTED EARNINGS PER SHARE

                   ($ in thousands, except per share amounts)

                                                        For the Quarter Ended
                                                            March 31, 2000
                                                        ---------------------

Net income                                                    $ (9,967)

Net income per common share - basic (1)                       $  (0.53)

Net income per common share - diluted (2)                     $  (0.53)


1) The number of common shares outstanding used to compute net income per
share-basic was 18,657,683 for the quarter ended March 31, 2000.

2) Diluted earnings per common share for the quarter ended March 31, 2000, was
calculated based on weighted average common shares outstanding of 18,657,683
which assumes the exercise of options covering -0- shares and computes
incremental shares using the treasury stock method.
THE STATE OF TEXAS

M A N D A T E

TO THE 175TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF BEXAR COUNTY, GREETINGS:

Before our Court of Appeals for the Fourth District of Texas on June 10, 2015, the cause upon appeal to revise

or reverse your judgment between

Andres Ramon Juarez, Appellant(s)

V.

The State of Texas, Appellee(s)

No. 04-14-00372-CR and Tr. Ct. No. 2013CR0936B

was determined, and therein our Court of Appeals made its order in these words:

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the motion to

withdraw filed by appellant’s attorney is GRANTED, and the trial court’s

order is AFFIRMED as modified. It is ORDERED no costs shall be assessed

against appellant in relation to his trial or this appeal because he qualifies as

indigent under TEX. R. APP. P. 20.

WHEREFORE, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court of Appeals for the Fourth

District of Texas, in this behalf and in all things have the order duly recognized, obeyed, and executed.

Witness the Hon. Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice of the Court of Appeals for the Fourth District of Texas,

with the seal of the Court affixed and the City of San Antonio on December 28, 2015.

KEITH E. HOTTLE, CLERK

Cynthia A. Martinez

Deputy Clerk, Ext. 53853