alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
 
EXHIBIT 11.1

                             RF MONOLITHICS, INC.

                      COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME PER SHARE
                   YEARS ENDED AUGUST 31, 1997, 1996 AND 1995
                     (IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT PER-SHARE DATA)



<TABLE> 
<CAPTION> 
                                                   1997        1996        1995
                                                   ----        ----        ---- 
<S>                                              <C>         <C>         <C> 
Average common shares outstanding..............    5,403       5,116       4,980

Net effect of dilutive stock options - based
  on the treasury stock method.................      387         313         345
                                                 -------     -------     -------

    Total common and common equivalent shares..    5,790       5,429       5,325
                                                 =======     =======     =======

Net income.....................................  $ 3,807     $ 1,889     $ 1,520
                                                 =======     =======     =======

Net income per share...........................  $  0.66     $  0.35     $  0.29
                                                 =======     =======     =======
</TABLE>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Stacy McGillivary,

Plaintiff,

v.

C. R. Bard Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

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

Civil Action No. CV-17-04000-PHX-DGC

WAIVER OF THE SERVICE OF SUMMONS

To: Padberg, Corrigan & Appelbaum

(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 1/22/2018, 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 9851 Filed 01/26/18 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 9851 Filed 01/26/18 Page 2 of 2
No. 15,424.

#### Conner *v.*Lewis.

Filed Oct. 10, 1890.

From the Jennings Circuit Court.

*J. Overmyer*and *F. E. little,*for appellant.

*G. F. Lawrence*and *J. M. Lewis,*for appellee.

Elliott, J.

— Two questions only are argued by the appellant’s counsel, and these are that the verdict is contrary to law and that it is contrary to the evidence, but as there is no evidence in the record the argument is, of course, without the slightest force.

Judgment affirmed.

Berkshire, C. J., took no part in the decision of this case.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Robert A. Carr,

Plaintiff,

v.

C. R. Bard Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

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

Civil Action No. CV-17-03714-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 9173 Filed 12/06/17 Page 1 of 1
* 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. 02-50364

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

CESAR OCTAVIO MORALES-HINOJOSA,

 DefendantAppellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. EP-97-CR-569-ALL-DB

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

October 28, 2002

Before JONES, STEWART and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Cesar Octavio Morales-Hinojosa (“Morales”), federal prisoner #80352-080, appeals the

district court’s denial of his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion for reduction of his sentence for illegal

reentry into the United States after deportation. Morales argues that he is entitled to a sentence

reduction under amendment 632 to the sentencing guidelines because the amendment clarified

U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2's adjustment for deportation following an aggravated felony conviction. 
-2-

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2), a sentencing court may reduce a term of imprisonment

“based on a sentencing range that has been subsequently lowered by the Sentencing Commission . . . ,

if such a reduction is consistent with applicable policy statements issued by the Sentencing

Commission.” Section 3582(c)(2) applies only to amendments to the sentencing guidelines that

operate retroactively, as set forth in subsection (c) of the applicable policy statement, U.S.S.G. §

1B1.10, p.s. See United States v. Drath, 89 F.3d 216, 217-18 (5th Cir. 1996). 

Amendment 632 is not listed in U.S.S.G. § 1B1.10(c), p.s. Thus, an 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2)

sentence reduction based on amendment 632 would not be consistent with the Sentencing

Commission’s policy statement. See id. at 218. Amendment 632 therefore cannot be given

retroactive effect in the context of an 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) motion. See id. The district court

lacked the authority to reduce Morales’s sentence pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2). See United

States v. Lopez, 26 F.3d 512, 515 & n.3 (5th Cir. 1994).

Morales contends, for the first time on appeal, that his indictment violated Apprendi v. New

Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000), by failing to allege all of the elements of his offense. Morales does not

indicate what element he believes was omitted from the indictment. Morales may not raise his

Apprendi contention for the first time on appeal. See Leverette v. Louisville Ladder Co., 183 F.3d

339, 342 (5th Cir. 1999), cert. denied, 528 U.S. 1138 (2000). 

AFFIRMED.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Sarah Merrifield,

Plaintiff,

v.

C. R. Bard, Inc.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

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

Civil Action No. CV-16-00525-PHX-DGC

WAIVER OF THE SERVICE OF SUMMONS

To: Brenes Law Group

(Name of plaintiff’s attorney or unrepresented plaintiff)

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

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

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

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

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

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

60 days from 2/26/2016, 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: March 2, 2016 /s/ Richard B. North, Jr.

Signature of the attorney or unrepresented party

C. R. Bard, Inc.

Printed name of party 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 948 Filed 03/04/16 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 948 Filed 03/04/16 Page 2 of 2
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference inAmendment No. 1 to Registration Statement Nos. 333-134867, 333-157760 and333-130193 on Form S-3, in Registration Statement Nos. 333-121350 and333-115765 on Form S-3; in Registration Statement No. 333-132340 on Form S-4,and in Post-Effective Amendment No.1 to Registration Statement Nos. 333-87633and 333-84344 on Form S-8, of our reports dated September 28, 2010, relating tothe consolidated financial statements and consolidated financial statementschedules of Ferrellgas Partners, L.P.,and the effectiveness of Ferrellgas Partners, L.P.’s internal control overfinancial reporting, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of FerrellgasPartners, L.P. for the year ended July 31, 2010.

 

 

/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

Kansas City, MissouriSeptember 28, 2010

 

----
Exhibit 32.2




CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER




Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350), the undersigned, James Weber, Chief Financial Officer of FalconStor Software, Inc., a Delaware Corporation (the “Company”), does hereby certify, to his knowledge, that:




The Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010 of the Company (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Sections 13(a) and 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


/s/ James WeberJames WeberVice President, Chief Financial Officer, Interim Chief Operating Officer and TreasurerMarch 14, 2011
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Christine Wells,

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-18-00050-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 9633 Filed 01/12/18 Page 1 of 1
#### KEISHA HENDERSON, ETC., ET AL. v. J.F.K. MEMORIAL HOSPITAL/STRATFORD DIVISION, ET AL.

June 13, 1989.

Petition for certification denied.
108TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2693

AN ACT

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service

located at 1475 Western Avenue, Suite 45, in Albany,

New York, as the ‘‘Lieutenant John F. Finn Post Office’’.

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

2

S 2693 ES

1 SECTION 1. LIEUTENANT JOHN F. FINN POST OFFICE.

2 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States

3 Postal Service located at 1475 Western Avenue, Suite 45,

4 in Albany, New York, shall be known and designated as

5 the ‘‘Lieutenant John F. Finn Post Office’’.

6 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg7 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United

8 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall

9 be deemed to be a reference to the Lieutenant John F.

10 Finn Post Office.

Passed the Senate October 10, 2004.

Attest:

Secretary.
108TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 2693

AN ACT

To designate the facility of the United States PostJohn F. Finn Post Office’’. 45, in Albany, New York, as the ‘‘Lieutenant al Service located at 1475 Western Avenue, Suite
EXHIBIT 32.1





CERTIFICATION PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER


PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Adeona Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the “Registrant”) hereby certifies, to such officer’s knowledge, that:





(1)
the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Registrant for the quarter ended March 31, 2010 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and(2)
the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.





Date: May 17, 2010





By:   /s/James S. Kuo, M.D., M.B.A.


Name: James S. Kuo, M.D., M.B.A.


Title: President and Chief Executive Officer


(Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer)
<PAGE>

                     CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement 
(Form S-8 No. 333-43483) pertaining to the Amended and Restated 1997 Employee 
Stock Purchase Plan of Heftel Broadcasting Corporation and the Registration 
Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-43495) pertaining to the Heftel Broadcasting 
Corporation Long-Term Incentive Plan, of our report dated July 2, 1997, with 
respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of Heftel 
Broadcasting Corporation included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the 
year ended December 31, 1998.

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP

Los Angeles, California
March 29, 1999
EXHIBIT
32.2



Certification
of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to

Title
18, United States Code, Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to

Section
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



I,
Susanne Robertson , Chief Financial Officer of REGI U.S., Inc., certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that, to the best of my knowledge:



|1. | The
    Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of REGI U.S., Inc., for the year ended April 30, 2015 (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 REGI U.S., Inc.                                                         





|Richmond,
    BC, Canada |     |                            
|------------------------ | --- | ---------------------------
|                         |     |                            
|July
    30 , 2015       | by: | /s/
    “Susanne Robertson”
|                         |     | Susanne
    Robertson      
|                         |     | Chief
    Financial Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23-6294

JESSE N. FRISBEE,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

BUNCOMBE COUNTY DETENTION FACILITY; CORRECTIONAL OFFICER 

OWENS,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of North Carolina, at 

Asheville. Martin K. Reidinger, Chief District Judge. (1:23-cv-00011-MR)

Submitted: July 20, 2023 Decided: July 25, 2023

Before NIEMEYER and THACKER, Circuit Judges, and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jesse N. Frisbee, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6294 Doc: 9 Filed: 07/25/2023 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Jesse N. Frisbee appeals the district court’s order dismissing for lack of standing the 

42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint Frisbee purported to bring on behalf of his deceased mother. 

The court dismissed the action because Frisbee failed to allege that he is the personal 

representative of his mother’s estate, as required to bring a wrongful death action under 

North Carolina law. See Williams v. Bradshaw, 459 F.3d 846, 848 (8th Cir. 2006) 

(explaining that “[f]ederal courts are to apply state law in deciding who may bring a § 1983

action on a decedent’s behalf”). We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. 

Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order. Frisbee v. Buncombe Cnty. Det. Facility, 

No. 1:23-cv-00011-MR (W.D.N.C. Mar. 6, 2023). We dispense with oral argument 

because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this 

court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

USCA4 Appeal: 23-6294 Doc: 9 Filed: 07/25/2023 Pg: 2 of 2