alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Ray and Another *v.*Roe, on the Demise of Brown.

The pendency of an action of slander does not, of itself, render the defendant’s sale and conveyance of real estate void as to the plaintiff ; though a judgment be after-wards recovered against the defendant, and he have no other property to satisfy the debt.

The pendency of an action is constructive notice of the matter involved in that suit; and a purchaser of the property which is the immediate object of the pending action will be affected by it, as a purchaser with notice.

Thursday, *May*21.

ERROR to the *Union*Circuit Court.—Ejectment by *Roe,*on the demise of *Brown,*against *W. Ray*and *D. Ray.*Plea, not guilty. Verdict and judgment for the plaintiff.

Scott, J.

This was an action of ejectment in the *Union*Circuit Court. We have no information by what kind of title the lands in controversy were claimed by either party. The only point referred to our adjudication, is the correctness of the charge given by the Court to the jury. The Court instructed the jury, that a transfer of property, made by a defendant during the pendency of an action of slander against him, and before the rendition of judgment, is of itself fraudulent; unless it be made in performance of a prior contract, or in payment of a precedent *bona fide*debt: that all purchasers are bound to take notice of the pendency of said suit: and that if a purchase be made during the pendency of such action, whether with or without consideration, it is considered fraudulent in law as to the judgment plaintiff; unless there is other property sufficient to satisfy the judgment. To this instruction the defendants except.

On the broad ground that fraud vitiates all contracts, a com veyance made with design to avoid the payment of a just debt, or to defeat the recovery of a pre-existing right, is void as it respects creditors; and the pendency of a suit is one of the many badges of fraud, which would induce a Court of equity to set aside such conveyance, or a jury to regard it as a nullity, in a trial at law. The pendency of an action is constructive notice of the matter involved in that suit, and a purchaser of the property which is the immediate object of the pending action will be affected by it, as a purchaser with notice. But a *lis pendens*is not even constructive notice of any other points than *259those which are in dispute between the parties to such action. 3 Atk. 392.—Newl. on Con. 506, 507. So much, then, of the instruction as states that a transfer of property, made during the pendency of an action of slander, is of itself fraudulent, whether with or without consideration; and that all persons are bound to take notice of the pendency of such action, in the unqualified manner there expressed; is unsupported by authority. Not having the evidence before us, we cannot say how far these instructions might tend to influence the verdict; hut there is reason to presume that the jury might have been misled by them.

*Smith,*for the plaintiffs.

*M Kinney, Morris,*and *Perry,*for the defendant;

*Per*Curiam.

The judgment is reversed, and the verdict set aside, with costs. Cause remanded, &c.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.2

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
            PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

This certification is provided pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002 and accompanies the quarterly report on Form 10-Q (the "Form 10-Q") for
the period ended December 31, 2003 of MPW Industrial Services Group, Inc. (the
"Issuer") as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on this date
hereof. I, Robert Valentine, Chief Financial Officer 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:

       (i)    the Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section
              13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15
              U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and

       (ii)   the information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all
              material respects, the financial condition and results of
              operations of the Company.

Dated: February 13, 2004

                                                  /s/ Robert Valentine
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                                      Robert Valentine

                                        Vice President, Chief Financial Officer,
                                                Secretary and Treasurer
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Erika Peters","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/epeters9\/","title":"jsc2023e016453","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"N7pHzFu6l1\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-detail\/amf-jsc2023e016453\/\">jsc2023e016453<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-detail\/amf-jsc2023e016453\/embed\/#?secret=N7pHzFu6l1\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“jsc2023e016453” — NASA\" data-secret=\"N7pHzFu6l1\" 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:\/\/images-assets.nasa.gov\/image\/jsc2023e016453\/jsc2023e016453~large.jpg?w=600&h=1316&fit=clip&crop=faces%2Cfocalpoint","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":1316}
##### 



1.
    
    I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of PLATO Learning, 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 registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this
report;4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:
 a.
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is
made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in
which this report is being prepared;b.
    
    Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such
internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to
provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the
preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally
accepted accounting principles;c.
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our 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; andd.
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrants first fiscal quarter that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants
internal control over financial reporting; and
 5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the
audit committee of the registrants board of directors:
 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 registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial
information; andb.
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees
who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting.
 Date: March 11, 2008

/s/
MICHAEL A. MORACHEMichael A. MorachePresident and Chief Executive Officer
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Henry Altschuh,

Plaintiff,

v.

C. R. Bard Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

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

Civil Action No. CV-17-03999-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 9800 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 9800 Filed 01/25/18 Page 2 of 2
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. JAMES AURIEMMA.

May 30, 1989.

Petition for certification denied.
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Lillian Gipson","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/lillian-gipson-1nasa-gov\/","title":"Boeing Transports Aircraft for Conversion into NASA\u2019s New X-Plane","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"sowGEn38vm\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-article\/boeing-transports-aircraft-for-conversion-into-nasas-new-x-plane\/\">Boeing Transports Aircraft for Conversion into NASA\u2019s New X-Plane<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-article\/boeing-transports-aircraft-for-conversion-into-nasas-new-x-plane\/embed\/#?secret=sowGEn38vm\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Boeing Transports Aircraft for Conversion into NASA\u2019s New X-Plane” — NASA\" data-secret=\"sowGEn38vm\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/08\/1-afrc2023-0134-17.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":400}
Case 2:15-cv-01786-DLR Document 12 Filed 10/13/15 Page 1 of 7
Case 2:15-cv-01786-DLR Document 12 Filed 10/13/15 Page 2 of 7
Case 2:15-cv-01786-DLR Document 12 Filed 10/13/15 Page 3 of 7
Case 2:15-cv-01786-DLR Document 12 Filed 10/13/15 Page 4 of 7
Case 2:15-cv-01786-DLR Document 12 Filed 10/13/15 Page 5 of 7
Case 2:15-cv-01786-DLR Document 12 Filed 10/13/15 Page 6 of 7
Case 2:15-cv-01786-DLR Document 12 Filed 10/13/15 Page 7 of 7
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME FOUND IN THE
COMPANY'S FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTER ENDED APRIL 30, 2000, AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>  1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-30-2000
<CASH>                                             119
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    18380
<ALLOWANCES>                                      1272
<INVENTORY>                                        676
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 19896
<PP&E>                                            1560
<DEPRECIATION>                                    3935
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   40668
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            14823
<BONDS>                                           2750
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            75
<OTHER-SE>                                       22525
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     40668
<SALES>                                          19765
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 19765
<CGS>                                             2966
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     2966
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 18148
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   700
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 485
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (1834)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (696)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (1138)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (1138)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.18)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.18)


</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 11-4143

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff – Appellee,

v.

CORENZO MOBERY,

 Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

Maryland, at Greenbelt. Deborah K. Chasanow, Chief District 

Judge. (8:09-cr-00445-DKC-3)

Submitted: January 5, 2012 Decided: January 9, 2012

Before GREGORY, SHEDD, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded by unpublished 

per curiam opinion.

Edward C. Sussman, LAW OFFICE OF EDWARD SUSSMAN, Washington, 

D.C., for Appellant. Mara Zusman Greenberg, OFFICE OF THE UNITED 

STATES ATTORNEY, Robert K. Hur, Assistant United States 

Attorney, Erin Baxter Pulice, Special Assistant United States 

Attorney, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee. 

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Corenzo Mobery pleaded guilty to conspiracy to 

distribute cocaine base (“crack”), in violation of 21 U.S.C. 

§ 846 (2006); and possession of a firearm after having 

previously been convicted of a crime punishable by a term of 

imprisonment exceeding one year, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 

§ 922(g)(1) (2006). The district court sentenced Mobery to a 

total of 125 months of imprisonment and he now appeals. For the 

reasons that follow, we affirm Mobery’s conviction but vacate 

the sentence and remand for resentencing. 

On appeal, Mobery does not challenge his conviction. 

His sole argument is that the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010 (FSA)

should have applied to his sentence. The Government has filed a 

joint motion to remand this case to the district court to allow 

Mobery to be resentenced in accordance with the FSA. Based on 

our consideration of the record and the materials submitted with 

this motion, we affirm Mobery’s conviction, vacate his sentence, 

and grant the motion to remand this case to the district court 

to permit resentencing. By this disposition, however, we 

indicate no view as to whether the FSA is retroactively 

applicable to a defendant like Mobery whose offenses were 

committed prior to August 3, 2010, the effective date of the 
3

Act, but who was sentenced after that date, leaving that 

determination in the first instance to the district court.*

AFFIRMED IN PART;

VACATED IN PART;

AND REMANDED

 * We note that at Mobery’s sentencing hearing conducted on 

December 15, 2010, counsel for the Defendant unsuccessfully 

argued for retroactive application of the FSA. Nevertheless, in 

light of the Attorney General’s revised view on the 

retroactivity of the FSA, as well as the development of case law 

on this point in other jurisdictions, we think it appropriate, 

without indicating any view as to the outcome, to accord the 

district court an opportunity to consider the matter anew.