alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Com NY DWH BF WN |

NN KY NY HN NNN &— Bee Be Be ee Be ee
ont nn fF wYw NH KF DO we ADH FF WN & SO

FILED ~—-_ LODGED
___ RECEIVED ____ COPY

J1

JOHN S. LEONARDO DEC 3 1 2015
United States Attorney CLERK U § DISTRICT ¢
District of Arizona By. BIsTRICT OF RL oat

LISA E. JENNIS (Lisa.jennis@usdoj.gov)

Assistant U.S. Attorneys

Two Renaissance Square

40 N. Central Avenue, Suite 1200
Phoenix, Arizona 85004-4408
Attorneys for Plaintiff

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

United States of America,

Plaintiff, NO. 15-8513MJ-001-PHX-JZB
v. INFORMATION
Craig Dewalt, VIO: 49 U.S.C. § 46506(2)

(Application of Certain Criminal

Defendant. aws to Acts on Aircraft)

THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY CHARGES:

On or about February 27, 2015, in the special aircraft jurisdiction of the United
States, Craig Dewalt, while on an aircraft publically and indecently exposed his genitalia
while onboard Southwest Airlines flight 333, enroute from Burbank, California to
Phoenix, Arizona.

In violation of Title 49, United States Code, Section 46506(2).

Dated this 11th day of December, 2015.

JOHN S. LEONARDO
United States Attorney
District of Arizona

pw C Ohun

LISA E. JENNIS
Assistant U.S. Attorney
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Bart Stafford,

Plaintiff,

v.

C. R. Bard Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

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

Civil Action No. CV-17-03837-PHX-DGC

WAIVER OF THE SERVICE OF SUMMONS

To: Wagstaff & Cartmell 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 10/20/2017, 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: October 26, 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 8405 Filed 10/27/17 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 8405 Filed 10/27/17 Page 2 of 2
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 99.2

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

I, Jenelle Ray, the Chief Financial Officer of Liquidix, Inc. (the "Company"),
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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the fiscal
         quarter ended June 30, 2002 (the "Report") fully complies with the
         requirements of Section 13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act
         of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and

(2)      the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
         material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
         the Company.



Dated: September 30, 2002



                                               /s/Jenelle Ray
                                               --------------
                                               Name: Jenelle Ray
                                               Title: Chief Financial Officer
#### Walter C. Whitaker *v.*Lemuel Kesler.

Attorney and Client — Responsibility of One Member for Moneys Collected by the Other.

Where one member of a law firm collects moneys of a client of the firm, either member of the firm is personally liable to the client therefor.

APPEAL FROM SHELBY CIRCUIT COURT.

September 25, 1869.

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Peters:

The evidence preponderates decidedly to the conclusion that Brown, the senior' member of the firm, received on the 21st of April, 1860, of the money of appellee as much as $252.4-0, of which Whitaker, the other member of the firm, may not, and most *237probably had no knowledge; but his responsibility as the law partner of Brown at the time, if Brown received the money, is not seriously controverted.

Roberts, *for appellant.*

*Frazier &*Beckham, *for appellee.*

Although the judgment recites that the money was paid into court by Stratton, still it does not appear that the court took charge of it, by having a receiver appointed and ordering it into his hands, and Brown being in court may have, consistently with the recital of the judgment, received the money for his client.

Nor can we say under all the circumstances, that the lapse of time raises a presumption of payment. Within less than one year after Brown received the money he left the state, and has remained out of the State ever since, having permanently located in another State. In the latter part of the year 1861, Whitaker took command as colonel of the Sixth Kentucky regiment, was promoted to the command of brigadier general in July, 1863, and continued in the service of the United States in that office until August, 1865. During a portion of the time, by án act of the legislature of Kentucky, suits could not be prosecuted to judgments against officers and soldiers engaged in the service of the United States.

While it is certainly true that Whitaker is not the defaulting party in this case, still it is but another added to the long list of examples too common in human affairs, where the innocent have to suffer for the misdeeds of transgressors. No error is perceived prejudicial to appellee.

The judgment must be *affirmed*on the original and cross-appeal.
<PAGE>
                                                                   Exhibit 10.16

                           STOCK RESTRICTION AGREEMENT

                            AMENDED OCTOBER 24, 2002

WHEREAS, a Stock Restriction Agreement (the "Agreement") was entered into
between PerkinElmer, Inc. (the "Company") and _____________________ (the
"Employee") dated January 16th 2002; and

WHEREAS, the Company and the Employee wish to amend the Agreement in accordance
with Section 17 of the Agreement.

NOW, THEREFORE, the Agreement is hereby amended as follows:

1.    The next to last sentence of Section 1 is hereby amended to read as
follows in its entirety:

      "The Employee may make an irrevocable election to exchange the Shares for
an account balance under the Company's Deferred Compensation Plan denominated in
units equal in value to the value of the Shares and distributable only in shares
of Common Stock at a time designated by the Employee at the time of such
election; such value shall be reduced to $.001 per share on the earlier of (a)
the date the Employee ceases to be employed by the Company for any reason or no
reason, with or without cause, before the date the Purchase Option expires, or
(b) January 16, 2012.

2.    Section 2(a)(6) is deleted so that the Purchase Option will not expire
merely as a result of the passage of time.

3.    New Section 2(d) is added, which will read in its entirety as follows:

      "(d) The Purchase Option will automatically be exercised on January 16,
2012 if it has not already expired under the terms of the Agreement and the
Employee is still then employed and shall be deemed to have given the notice
described in Section 3(a) for all the Shares and the Employee shall tender the
Shares to the Company in accordance with Section 3(b) within 10 days of January
16, 2012.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the
24th of October, 2002.

                                          PerkinElmer, Inc.

                                          By:______________________________

                                          Employee

                                          _________________________________
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Jim Banke","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/jim-bankenasa-gov\/","title":"NASA’s DC-8 Flying Laboratory","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"czsRt7fv3U\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-detail\/nasas-dc-8-jb\/\">NASA’s DC-8 Flying Laboratory<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-detail\/nasas-dc-8-jb\/embed\/#?secret=czsRt7fv3U\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“NASA’s DC-8 Flying Laboratory” — NASA\" data-secret=\"czsRt7fv3U\" 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\/07\/nasas-dc-8-jb.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":234}
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS






We consent to the use in this  registration  statement  of our report dated June
17, 2002 on the financial  statements for Rub A Dub Soap,  Inc. as of the period
from  inception  (September  28, 2001) to May 31, 2002, and to references to our
firm as accounting and auditing experts in the prospectus.



Denver, Colorado
March 14, 2003


                                                   /s/Comiskey & Company
                                                PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
Case 2:15-mj-01836-JFM Document 4 Filed 11/17/15 Page 1 of 3
Case 2:15-mj-01836-JFM Document 4 Filed 11/17/15 Page 2 of 3
Case 2:15-mj-01836-JFM Document 4 Filed 11/17/15 Page 3 of 3
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Heather Deiss","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/heather-s-deissnasa-gov\/","title":"Green Propellant Infusion Mission (GPIM)","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"c2Ue1qOCku\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/mission\/green-propellant-infusion-mission-gpim\/\">Green Propellant Infusion Mission (GPIM)<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/mission\/green-propellant-infusion-mission-gpim\/embed\/#?secret=c2Ue1qOCku\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Green Propellant Infusion Mission (GPIM)” — NASA\" data-secret=\"c2Ue1qOCku\" 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\/2017\/01\/gpim_photo_11_0.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":607}
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM 
[identify specific financial statements here]
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   Year
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              Dec-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                                 Jan-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   Dec-31-1996
<CASH>                                         1,418,054
<SECURITIES>                                   0    
<RECEIVABLES>                                  1,506,363
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (517,000)
<INVENTORY>                                    52,028 
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               2,713,608
<PP&E>                                         1,115,813
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (424,576)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 7,114,493
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          2,126,865
<BONDS>                                        0    
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       5,464,061
<OTHER-SE>                                     (540,752)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   7,114,493
<SALES>                                        5,751,896
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               5,751,896
<CGS>                                          2,181,807
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  2,181,807
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               5,183,414
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               379,672
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (68,981)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (352,289)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (20,415)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (331,874)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0    
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (331,874)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (.10)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (.10)
        


</TABLE>
#### Hiler *v.*The State.

„ The prisoner should be acquitted, in all criminal cases, unless the testimony satisfy the jury, beyond a reasonable doubt, that he is guilty.

*Friday, June*8.

ERROR to the *Parke*Circuit Court.

Sullivan, J.

The defendant was indicted for an assault and *battery*with intent to murder. The jury found him guilty of an assault and battery. Judgment on the verdict.

On the trial of the cause, the defendant’s counsel moved the Court to instruct the jury, “ that if after hearing all the evidence in the cause, there remained in their minds a rational doubt of the guilt of the defendant, they *ought to*find him not guilty.” The Court refused *to*give the charge as asked, but they instructed the jury, “that *they*must be satisfied beyond a rational doubt of the guilt of the defendant, before they could find him guilty of the assault and battery with the intent to commit murder; but if the offence fell short of that, (although the consequence of a conviction might be imprisonment,) the doctrine of rational doubt did not apply; and that the jury ought to find according to the weight of evidence,” &c. To this instruction the defendant excepted.

The distinction made by the Circuit Court in the foregoing instruction, is not sustained by the authorities. The principle is well settled, “that *in all criminal cases whatsoever,*it is essential to a verdict of condemnation that the guilt of the accused, should be fully proved; that neither a mere preponderance of evidence, nor any weight of preponderant evidence, is sufficient for the purpose, unless it generate full belief of the fact, to the exclusion of all reasonable doubt.” 1 Stark. Ev. 5 *Am.*ed. 478. There is a ground of distinction in this respect between civil and criminal cases; but it does not exist between felonies and misdemeanox-s. In civil cases, the jury weigh the testimony, and after striking a fair balance, decide accordingly; but in criminal cases, the testimony must be such as to satisfy the jury beyond a rational doubt, that the prisoner is guilty of the charge alleged against him in the indictment, or it will be their duty to acquit. M’Nally’s Ev. 2—4, 578. The Court erred in not giving the instruction asked fox, and the judgment must be reversed.

*553*T. A. Howard*and *W. P.*Bryant, for the plaintiff.

*W.*Quarles, for the state.

*Per*Curiam.

The judgment is reversed and the verdict set aside. Cause remanded, &c.
EXHIBIT 32.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
                            (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)


     In  connection  with  the  accompanying  Annual Report of American Homestar
Corporation  (the  "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended June 27, 2003 (the
"Report"),  I,  Finis  F. Teeter, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby
certify  that  to  my  knowledge:

     (1)  The  Report  fully  complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
          15(d)  of  the  Securities  Exchange  Act  of  1934  (15 U.S.C. 78m or
          78o(d));  and

     (2)  The  information  contained  in  the  Report  fairly  presents, in all
          material  respects,  the financial condition and results of operations
          of  the  Company.



Dated: September 23, 2003           /s/ Finis F. Teeter
                                    ----------------------
                                    Finis F. Teeter,
                                    Chief Executive Officer


     In  connection  with  the  accompanying  Annual Report of American Homestar
Corporation  (the  "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended June 27, 2003 (the
"Report"),  I, Craig A. Reynolds, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby
certify  that  to  my  knowledge:

     (1)  The  Report  fully  complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
          15(d)  of  the  Securities  Exchange  Act  of  1934  (15 U.S.C. 78m or
          78o(d));  and

     (2)  The  information  contained  in  the  Report  fairly  presents, in all
          material  respects,  the financial condition and results of operations
          of  the  Company.



Dated: September 23, 2003           /s/ Craig A. Reynolds
                                    ------------------------
                                    Craig A. Reynolds,
                                    Chief Financial Officer


<PAGE>
I

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 570

To make appropriations for fiscal year 1998 for a plant genetic conservation

program.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 4, 1997

Mr. MINK introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee

on Appropriations

A BILL

To make appropriations for fiscal year 1998 for a plant

genetic conservation program.

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Plant Genetic Con5 servation Appropriations Act for Fiscal Year 1998’’.

6 SEC. 2. APPROPRIATION FOR PLANT GENETIC CONSERVA7 TION.

8 The following sums are appropriated, out of any

9 money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for fis10 cal year 1998:
2

•HR 570 IH

1 DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

2 UNITED STATES FISH AND WILDLIFE SERVICE

3 PLANT GENETIC CONSERVATION

4 For expenses necessary to carry out a plant genetic

5 conservation program to store material from rare, endan6 gered, and threatened plants in Hawaii and other States

7 and areas of the United States, including expenses for

8 construction and maintenance of a temperature-controlled

9 facility for such purpose, $1,500,000.

Æ