alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

District of Arizona

Chad McAllister and Jordan McAllister, individually

and as husband and wife; Mind Smoothie, LLC, an

Arizona limited liability company; Chad's Videos,

LLC, an Arizona limited liability company; et al.

Plainti, f,~(s)

v.

Alan Halls and Tamara Halls, individually and as

husband and wife; Course Saver, LLC, an Arizona

limited liability company; and Course Saver, LAC, a

Utah limited liability company etc., et al.

Defendants)

Civil Action No.

SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION

To: (Defendant's name and address) Tamara Halls, 1142 E. 2000 North, Lehi, UT 84043

A lawsuit has been filed against you.

Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) — or 60 days if you

are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ.

P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) —you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiffl s attorney,

whose name and address are: Bradley D. Weech

Jackson White, P.C.

40 N. Center, St., Suite 200

Mesa, AZ 85201

480-464-1111

If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint.

You also must file your answer or motion with the court.

Date:

CLERK OF COURT

Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk

Case 2:15-cv-02204-ESW Document 2-2 Filed 11/02/15 Page 1 of 1
I

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 88

To suspend Federal education benefits to individuals convicted of drug

offenses.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

JANUARY 7, 1997

Mr. SOLOMON introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Education and the Workforce

A BILL

To suspend Federal education benefits to individuals

convicted of drug offenses.

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

3 SECTION 1. SUSPENSION OF ELIGIBILITY FOR DRUG4 RELATED OFFENSES.

5 Section 484 of the Higher Education Act of 1965 (20

6 U.S.C. 1091) is amended by adding at the end thereof

7 the following new subsection:

8 ‘‘(q) SUSPENSION OF ELIGIBILITY FOR DRUG9 RELATED OFFENSES.—
2

•HR 88 IH

1 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—An individual student who

2 has been convicted of any offense under any Federal

3 or State law involving the possession or sale of a

4 controlled substance shall not be eligible to receive

5 any grant, loan, or work assistance under this title

6 during the period beginning on the date of such con7 viction and ending after the interval specified in the

8 following table:

‘‘If convicted of an offense involving:

The possession of a controlled substance: Ineligibility period is:

First offense .............................................. 1 year

Second offense .......................................... 2 years

Third offense ............................................. indefinite

The sale of a controlled substance:

First offense .............................................. 2 years

Second offense .......................................... indefinite

9 ‘‘(2) REHABILITATION.—A student whose eligi10 bility has been suspended under paragraph (1) may

11 resume eligibility before the end of the period deter12 mined under such paragraph if the student satisfac13 torily completes a drug rehabilitation program that

14 complies with such criteria as the Secretary shall

15 prescribe for purposes of this paragraph.

16 ‘‘(3) DEFINITIONS.—As used in this subsection,

17 the term ‘controlled substance’ has the meaning

18 given in section 102(6) of the Controlled Substances

19 Act (21 U.S.C. 802(6)).’’.
3

•HR 88 IH

1 SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.

2 The amendment made by section 1 shall apply with

3 respect to financial assistance to cover the costs of attend4 ance for periods of enrollment beginning after the date

5 of enactment of this Act.

Æ
`[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 105 Reported in House (RH)]






                                                  House Calendar No. 13
105th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 105

                          [Report No. 105-41]

 Providing for consideration of the resolution (H. Res. 91) providing 
    amounts for the expenses of certain committees of the House of 
           Representatives in the One Hundred Fifth Congress.


_______________________________________________________________________


                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 20, 1997

    Mr. Dreier, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following 
resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 
                                printed

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION


 
 Providing for consideration of the resolution (H. Res. 91) providing 
    amounts for the expenses of certain committees of the House of 
           Representatives in the One Hundred Fifth Congress.

    Resolved, That immediately upon the adoption of this resolution the 
House shall consider without the intervention of any point of order the 
resolution (H. Res. 91) providing amounts for the expenses of certain 
committees of the House of Representatives in the One Hundred Fifth 
Congress. The resolution shall be considered as read for amendment. An 
amendment in the nature of a substitute consisting of the text of House 
Resolution 102 shall be considered as adopted. The previous question 
shall be considered as ordered on the resolution, as amended, to final 
adoption without intervening motion or demand for division of the 
question except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled 
by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee on House 
Oversight; and (2) one motion to recommit.
                                     





                                                        Calendar No. 13

105th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                              H. RES. 105

                          [Report No. 105-41]

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 Providing for consideration of the resolution (H. Res. 91) providing 
    amounts for the expenses of certain committees of the House of 
           Representatives in the One Hundred Fifth Congress.

_______________________________________________________________________

                             March 20, 1997

        Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed`
EXHIBIT 10.10.BP


 


SECURITY AGREEMENT


 


This Security
Agreement (the “Agreement”) is entered into as of this 20th day of
May, 2004 by and between ANTHONY M. FRANK, an individual, as the secured party
hereunder, ELECTROPURE, INC., a California corporation, and its subsidiary,
MICRO IMAGING TECHNOLOGY, a Nevada corporation (collectively referred to herein
as “ELTP”), as the company granting the security interest hereunder, with
reference to the following facts:


 


E.                                      On
the dates indicated below, Secured Party has made various loans to ELTP in the
amounts listed below.  For each such
loan, the parties have entered into 8% Term Notes upon terms and conditions set
forth in each respective Term Note (collectively, the “Notes”).


 


THE NOTES:


 




	
  ORIGINAL

  LOAN DATE

  	
   

  	
  ORIGINAL

  LOAN

  AMOUNT

  	
   

  	
  ORIGINAL

  MATURITY

  DATE

  	
   

  	
  PRINCIPAL

  AND INTEREST

  DUE AS AT

  04/30/04

  	
   

  
	
  11/21/03

  	
   

  	
  100,000

  	
   

  	
  11/21/04

  	
   

  	
  402,667

  	
   

  
	
  12/19/03

  	
   

  	
  100,000

  	
   

  	
  12/19/04

  	
   

  	
  173,000

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  200,000

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
  575,667

  	
   

  






 


F.                                      Electropure,
Inc. is the parent company and majority owner of Micro Imaging Technology, the
owner of record of the Collateral (as defined below).


 


G.                                     In
order to induce Secured Party to extend the payment dates for the Notes, ELTP
desires to grant to Secured Party a security interest in the Collateral upon
the terms and subject to the conditions hereinafter provided.


 


Now, therefore, in
consideration of the foregoing recitals of facts and the mutual agreements set
forth below, the parties hereto agree as follows:


 


SECTION 1 
-  DEFINITIONS


 


1.7                                 “Collateral” means all of that property
identified on Exhibit “A” attached hereto and all proceeds arising out of
the sale, lease, license, exchange, collection or other disposition thereof.


 


1.8                                 “Secured Party Indebtedness” means all
indebtedness and obligations of ELTP to the Secured Party described or referred
to in Section 3.


 


1.9                                 “Security Interest” means that security
interest in the Collateral granted to the Secured Party pursuant to Section 2.
#### Van Vleet, Administrator, *v.*Adair.

Covenant on an obligation for the payment of a certain sum, one halfin specie, and the other in bankable paper. Judgment on demurrer for the plaintiff., *Held,*that the damages should be assessed by a jury, not by the Court. Held, also, that the value of the bankable paper at the time it was to be paid, is the measure of damages for its non-payment.

ERROR to the *Fayette*Circuit Court. — In this case *Adair*was the plaintiff below, and *Van Vleet,*administrator of Scott, the defendant.

Blackford, J.

By the obligation upon which this action of covenant was founded, the obligor promised the obligee to pay him a certain sum, one half in specie, and the other in bankable paper. On demurrer to three frivolous pleas filed, judgment was rendered for the plaintiff, and the damages were assessed by the Court without a jury of inquiry.

This case is different from that of *Mettler & Smith*v. Moore, decided at this term. There the obligation was for the payment of a certain sum in whiskey; here, for the payment of a certain sum in bankable paper. In the former, whiskey was to be delivered to the value of the sum mentioned; in the latter, bankable paper, not to the value of the sum mentioned, but, counting the face of the bank notes, that sum in dollars. In the former, the plaintiff was entitled at least to the amount stated in the obligation; in the latter, as respects the part to be paid in paper, only to the value of bankable notes, counting on their face the sum in the obligation mentioned, which value might be considerably less than the nominal amount. In this case a jury *347was necessary to assess the value of the bankable paper, at the time fixed by the contract for its delivery (1).

*Smith,*for the plaintiff.

*Rariden,*for the defendant.

*Per Curiam.*

The judgment is reversed, and the proceedings subsequent to the judgment on demurrer are set aside, with costs. Cause remanded, &c.

(1)

 As to when a jury must assess the damages, and where the Court may do bo, vide *Clark*v. Goodwin, ante, p. *74.*— Tannehill v. Thomas, ante, p. 144 and *note.*— Wood v. Lemon, ante, p. *198.*— Hedges *v. Gray,*ante, p. *216.*— Duerson, v. *Bellows,*ante, p. *217.*— Wilson v. *Hickson,*ante, *p. 230.*— Osborne v. *Fulton,*ante, p. *233.*— Harper v. *Levy,*ante, p. *294.*— Coldren v. *Miller,*ante, p, 296.— *Melller*v. *Moore,*cited in the text, ante, p. 342.
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 935 Introduced in House (IH)]

105th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 935

To amend title 18, United States Code, to impose a penalty upon States 
  that do not give full faith and credit to the protective orders of 
                             other States.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 5, 1997

 Mr. Conyers introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend title 18, United States Code, to impose a penalty upon States 
  that do not give full faith and credit to the protective orders of 
                             other States.

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

SECTION 1. FULL FAITH AND CREDIT GIVEN TO PROTECTIVE ORDERS.

    Section 2265 of title 18, United States Code, is amended by adding 
at the end the following:
    ``(d) Formula Grant Reduction for Noncompliance.--
            ``(1) Reduction.--The Attorney General shall reduce by 10 
        percent (for redistribution to other participating States that 
        comply with subsections (a) and (b)) the amount a State would 
        receive under subpart 1 of part E of title I of the Omnibus 
        Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 if such State fails 
        to comply with the requirements of subsections (a) and (b).
            ``(2) Effective Date.--The Attorney General may begin to 
        reduce funds described in paragraph (1) on the first day of 
        each fiscal year succeeding the first fiscal year beginning 
        after the date of the enactment of this subsection.''.
                                 <all>
```
9635.

#### Kendall *v.*Goodson.

Decided July 10, 1918.

Action for damages; from city court of Sylvester—Judge Monk. March 5, 1918. ' ,

*Parlcer & Gibson, Perry & Williamson,*for-.plaintiff in error.

*James L. Dowling, Erie B. AsTcew,*contra.

Bboyles, P. J.

1. In an action for’damages for malicious prosecution, where the petition alleges that the prosecution was without probable cause, allegations showing that the defendant appeared before the grand jury as a witness and succeeded in getting a true bill returned against the petitioner, on an indictment drawn by the solicitor-general of the circuit, do not render the petition subject to general demurrer, when it does not appear that the defendant made to the solicitor-general a fair, 'truthful, and complete statement of the facts connecting the petitioner with the alleged criminal offenses. *Hicks*v. *Brantley,*102 *Ga.*264, 273 (29 S. E. 459). See also *Clark*v. *Douglas, 6 Ga. App. 489*(65 S. E. 304).

2. Under the foregoing ruling the court did not err in overruling the general demurrer to the petition.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Bloodworth and Harwell, JJ., concur.*
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Access Worldwide Communications, Inc. (the Company) on Form
10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Shawkat Raslan, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350,
as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



|(1) | 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 result of operations of the Company.
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                                                                         
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ SHAWKAT RASLAN                                                                                       
|Shawkat Raslan Chairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer (principal executive
officer)

May 22, 2006
CERTIFICATIONS OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT 

Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 

(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350) 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Most Home Corp., a Nevada corporation (the "Company"), on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended April 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), Michael Schutz, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, does hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350), that to his knowledge: 

(1) 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 result of operations of the Company. 

|  
 
 
 
Date: June 18, 2007
 
/s/ Michael Schutz
 
 
Michael		Schutz		Chief Financial Officer
 

 

[A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Most Home Corp. and will be retained by Most Home Corp. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.] |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Exhibit
32.1
  YUHE
INTERNATIONAL, INC.
  CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO
  18 U.S.C.
SECTION 1350,
  AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
  OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  In
connection with the Quarterly Report of YUHE INTERNATIONAL, INC. (the “Company”)
on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Gao Zhentao, the
Chief Executive 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:
  (1)   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 the Company.
  Date:
August 13, 2010
  /s/
      Gao ZhentaoGao
      ZhentaoChief
      Executive Officer(Principal
      Executive Officer)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Lori Barrett,

Plaintiff,

v.

C. R. Bard Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

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

Civil Action No. CV-17-04481-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 12/5/2017, 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 8, 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 9354 Filed 12/15/17 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 9354 Filed 12/15/17 Page 2 of 2
I

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 853

To direct the Comptroller General of the United States to study the effect

that a tax system comprised of a 10 percent Federal consumption tax

and a 10 percent flat Federal income tax would have on the Federal

Government and the United States economy.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 26, 1997

Mr. TRAFICANT introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To direct the Comptroller General of the United States to

study the effect that a tax system comprised of a 10

percent Federal consumption tax and a 10 percent flat

Federal income tax would have on the Federal Government and the United States economy.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
2

•HR 853 IH

1 SECTION 1. STUDY OF TAX SYSTEM COMPRISED OF CON2 SUMPTION TAX AND FLAT INCOME TAX.

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Comptroller General of the

4 United States shall study the effect that a tax system com5 prised of a 10 percent Federal consumption tax and a 10

6 percent flat Federal income tax would have on—

7 (1) revenues to the United States Government,

8 including the effect on the annual budget deficit,

9 and

10 (2) the economy of the United States.

11 (b) MATTERS AFFECTING THE STUDY.—In conduct12 ing the study under subsection (a), the Comptroller Gen13 eral shall assume no exclusions, deductions, or credits

14 other than those in connection with a trade or business

15 and the standard deduction, the personal exemption, inter16 est on indebtedness to acquire a principal residence, and

17 payments made for college tuition.

18 (c) VARIANCE OF RATES.—For purposes of para19 graphs (1) and (2) of subsection (a), the Comptroller Gen20 eral shall also study the effect if the rates of tax referred

21 to in subsection (a) are varied over time but raise the same

22 revenue as the tax system in effect on the date of the en23 actment of this Act.
3

•HR 853 IH

1 (d) SUBMISSION TO CONGRESS.—Not later than one

2 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Comp3 troller General shall submit to the Congress a report con4 cerning the study under subsection (a).

Æ