alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Monika Luabeya","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/mluabeya\/","title":"Artemis II Water Deluge Test","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"1ZjVZDn8xk\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-detail\/afs-8-101-443\/\">Artemis II Water Deluge Test<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-detail\/afs-8-101-443\/embed\/#?secret=1ZjVZDn8xk\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Artemis II Water Deluge Test” — NASA\" data-secret=\"1ZjVZDn8xk\" 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\/10\/ksc-20231024-ph-kls01-0066orig.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":400}
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Clara Clyburn Abdelrazea,

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-17-04519-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: December 8, 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 9276 Filed 12/12/17 Page 1 of 1
Exhibit 13.1



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



I, Raju Vegesna, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report on Form 20-F of
Sify Technologies Limited for the year ended March 31, 2014, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and that information contained in such Annual Report on Form 20-F fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Sify Technologies Limited.



Date: July 18,
2014

| | /s/ Raju Vegesna                                    
| | ----------------------------------------------------
| | Name: Raju Vegesna                                  
| | Title: Chief Executive Officer and Managing Director



The foregoing certification is being furnished
solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, and is not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference to any filing of the Company, whether
made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF IOS CAPITAL, INC. AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                           3,998
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,909,928<F1>
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                         116,666<F2>
<DEPRECIATION>                                  64,576<F2>
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,064,090
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                      2,418,936
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0<F3>
<OTHER-SE>                                     411,846
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,064,090
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               358,424
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                20,333
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             149,014
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                127,862
<INCOME-TAX>                                    48,446
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             79,416
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    79,416
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0<F4>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0<F4>
<FN>
<F1>INCLUDES NET INVESTMENTS IN LEASES OF $2,808,239 AND OTHER ACCOUNTS
RECEIVABLE.
<F2>INCLUDES LEASED EQUIPMENT AT A COST OF $98,588 AND ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION
OF $55,595.
<F3>COMMON STOCK, $.01 PAR VALUE, 1,000 SHARES OUTSTANDING. SINCE TOTAL IS LESS
THAN $1,000, ZERO IS REPORTED.
<F4>NOT REQUIRED AS THE REGISTRANT IS A WHOLLY-OWNED SUBSIDIARY.
</FN>


</TABLE>
DISTRICT JUDGE'S MINUTES 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA – TUCSON 

U.S. District Judge: Raner C. Collins Date: April 20, 2018 

USA v. Lonnie Ray Swartz Case Number: CR-15-01723-001-TUC-RCC (DTF)

Assistant U.S. Attorney: Wallace Kleindienst/Mary Sue Feldmeier 

Attorney for Defendant: Sean Chapman/Jaime Calle, Retained 

Deputy Clerk: Sherry Gammon 

Court Reporter: Candy Potter 

Spanish Interpreter for victim’s family: Sandy Frady 

Defendant: ☒ Present ☐ Not Present ☒ Released ☐ Custody ☐ Summons ☐ Writ 

JURY TRIAL – Day 20 

The jury arrives at 9:30 a.m. to resume deliberation. 

10:23 a.m. - Jury question received. After consultation with counsel, the Court provides the requested 

exhibit, defense exhibit 1538. 

Lunch recess taken 11:30 a.m. – 12:30 p.m. 

Lunch is provided to jurors. 

 

1:10 p.m. – Jury question received. 

2:02 p.m. – With counsel and the defendant present, the Court consults counsel during a bench 

conference. 

The jury enters at 2:08 p.m. 

The Court instructs the jury with an Allen charge. 

The jury is excused at 2:11 p.m. to resume deliberation. 

The jury is excused at 3:30 p.m. Jury deliberation continues to 4/23/2018 at 9:30 a.m. before Chief 

Judge Raner C. Collins. 

Jury trial: 9 minutes 

Start: 2:02 p.m. 

Stop: 2:11 p.m. 

Jury deliberation time: 4 Hours 50 Minutes 

9:30 a.m. – 11:30 a.m., 12:31 p.m. – 2:02 p.m. 

and 2:11 p.m. – 3:30 p.m. 

 

Case 4:15-cr-01723-RCC-DTF Document 452 Filed 04/20/18 Page 1 of 1
#### STATE v. MESSER

No. 405A01

Case below: 145 N.C. App. 43

Temporary stay dissolved 18 December 2001. Petition by Attorney General for writ of supersedeas dismissed as moot 18 December 2001.
#### John Mardis *v.*E. B. Reeder and Klette.

Ejectment — Claim by Long Occupancy — Muniments of Title not Considered.

Where land is claimed by long occupancy, and the verdict of the jury is founded on that ground alone, the question of documentary evidence of title need not be considered.

APPEAL FROM KENTON CIRCUIT COURT.

November 20, 1869.

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Robertson:

After the áppellees and those under whom they claim had *606enjoyed, for about thirty .years, the continuous possession of a large tract of land in Kenton county granted in 1786, by Virginia to Henry Field, the appellant, without proof, of possessory or documentary title, took and still-forcibly holds a portion of it for the restitution of which the appellees obtained a verdict and judgment in this action of ejectment.

*Carlisle &*O’Hara, *for appellant.*

*Stevenson*& Myers, *for appellees.*

The appellees claim by derivative conveyances from persons claiming to have been the devisees of the patentee, and also by long occupancy; and the verdict was demonstrably founded on the latter ground alone and authorized by the evidence.

It is useless, therefore, to consider the questions discussed concerning the will and the conveyances introduced on the trial and extensively argued in this court; for however we might dispose of any of those questions, the verdict is right and could not have been superinduced by any error in the rulings of the circuit court respecting documents, and there is no plausible pretense of error in its decisions respecting the question of possession.

Wherefore, without unneeesary elaboration, this court affirms the judgment of the circuit court.
#### Johnny Michael PERRY, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. Barb MORRONE; Juanita Staten; Richard Perry; Ric Morrone; Mabel Smith; Wayne County Sheriffs Department; City of Kenova, West Virginia; Jim Perry; David Perry; Dorothy Perry; Mildred Mitchell-Bateman Hospital, Defendants—Appellees.

No. 04-2461.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: March 10, 2005.

Decided: March 14, 2005.

Johnny Michael Perry, Appellant pro se.

Before LUTTIG, MOTZ, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Johnny Michael Perry appeals the district court’s order accepting the recom*118mendation of the magistrate judge and dismissing his civil actions. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. *See Perry v. Morrone,*Nos. CA-04-792; Ca-04-793; CA-04-794; CA-04-795; CA-04-796; CA-04-797; CA-04-798; CA-04-799; CA-04-810; CA-04-1080; CA-04-1111 (S.D.W. Va. filed Nov. 3, 2004; entered Nov. 4, 2004 and Nov. 5, 2004). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED*
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Troy Boone, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

C. R. Bard Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc., 

Defendant. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

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

Civil Action No. CV-17-03992-PHX-DGC 

WAIVER OF THE SERVICE OF SUMMONS 

To: Lopez McHugh LLP - Newport Beach, CA 

(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 11/1/2017, 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 8818 Filed 11/10/17 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 8818 Filed 11/10/17 Page 2 of 2
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"NASA","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/nasamigrate\/","title":"Sally Ride and Valentina Tereshkova: Changing the Course of Human Space Exploration","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"rH6T1aTQo2\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/history\/sally-ride-and-valentina-tereshkova-changing-the-course-of-human-space-exploration\/\">Sally Ride and Valentina Tereshkova: Changing the Course of Human Space Exploration<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/history\/sally-ride-and-valentina-tereshkova-changing-the-course-of-human-space-exploration\/embed\/#?secret=rH6T1aTQo2\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Sally Ride and Valentina Tereshkova: Changing the Course of Human Space Exploration” — NASA\" data-secret=\"rH6T1aTQo2\" 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\/S85-41007\/S85-41007~large.jpg?w=600&h=1920&fit=clip&crop=faces%2Cfocalpoint","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":1920}
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 

WO 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

United States of America, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Darren Ricky Siyuja, 

Defendant.

No. CR-15-50144-PHX-DGC

DETENTION ORDER 

 On July 20, 2016, defendant, Darren Ricky Siyuja, appeared before this Court on a 

petition for revocation of supervised release. The Court considered the information 

provided to the Court, and the arguments of counsel in determining whether the 

defendant should be released on conditions set by the Court. 

 The Court finds that the defendant, having previously been convicted and placed 

on supervised release, and having appeared before the Court in connection with a petition 

to revoke his supervised release, has failed to establish by clear and convincing evidence 

that he is not likely to flee or pose a danger to the safety of the community if released 

pursuant to Rule 46(d), and Rule 32.1(a)(6), Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure, and 18 

U.S.C. § 3143. 

 IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that defendant be detained pending further 

proceedings. 

 Dated this 21st day of July, 2016. 

Case 2:15-cr-50144-DGC Document 11 Filed 07/21/16 Page 1 of 1
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"NASA","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/nasamigrate\/","title":"Homecoming for First Shuttle Crew","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"0tbrVzwScL\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-article\/homecoming-first-shuttle-crew\/\">Homecoming for First Shuttle Crew<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-article\/homecoming-first-shuttle-crew\/embed\/#?secret=0tbrVzwScL\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Homecoming for First Shuttle Crew” — NASA\" data-secret=\"0tbrVzwScL\" 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\/03\/588697main_S81-30985_full.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":394}
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Antonio Childs,

Plaintiff,

v.

C. R. Bard Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

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

Civil Action No. CV-17-04594-PHX-DGC

WAIVER OF THE SERVICE OF SUMMONS

To: Shaw Cowart, 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 9416 Filed 12/21/17 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 9416 Filed 12/21/17 Page 2 of 2