alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
I

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 790

To amend the Federal Crop Insurance Act to ensure the continued availability

of affordable crop insurance for producers whose farms are located in

counties designated as Federal disaster areas because of weather-related

conditions.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FEBRUARY 13, 1997

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

Committee on Agriculture

A BILL

To amend the Federal Crop Insurance Act to ensure the

continued availability of affordable crop insurance for

producers whose farms are located in counties designated

as Federal disaster areas because of weather-related conditions.

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 ‘‘Crop Insurance Im5 provement Act of 1997’’.
2

•HR 790 IH

1 SEC. 2. EFFECT OF DISASTER DECLARATION ON AVAIL2 ABILITY OF AFFORDABLE CROP INSURANCE.

3 (a) DEFINITION OF DESIGNATED DISASTER AREA.—

4 Section 502(b) of the Federal Crop Insurance Act (7

5 U.S.C. 1502(b)) is amended—

6 (1) by redesignating paragraphs (6), (7), and

7 (8) as paragraphs (7), (8), and (9), respectively; and

8 (2) by inserting after paragraph (5) the follow9 ing new paragraph:

10 ‘‘(6) DESIGNATED DISASTER AREA.—The term

11 ‘designated disaster area’ means an area—

12 ‘‘(A) covered by a Presidential declaration

13 of major disaster issued under section 401 of

14 the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and

15 Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5170); or

16 ‘‘(B) determined to be a disaster area by

17 the Secretary under subpart A of part 1945 of

18 title 7, Code of Federal Regulations.’’.

19 (b) CLASSIFICATION OF APPLICANTS INTO RISK

20 CATEGORIES.—Section 506(o)(3) of such Act (7 U.S.C.

21 1506(o)(3)) is amended by adding at the end the following

22 new sentence: ‘‘In the case of a producer operating in a

23 county included in a designated disaster area declared as

24 a result of damaging weather, or operating in a county

25 adjacent to the designated disaster area, the Corporation
3

•HR 790 IH

1 may not include the producer in the nonstandard classi2 fication list on the basis of crop losses resulting from ei3 ther the damaging weather that was the basis for the dec4 laration or conditions related to the damaging weather.’’.

5 (c) YIELD DETERMINATIONS.—Section 508(g) of

6 such Act (7 U.S.C. 1508(g)) is amended by adding at the

7 end the following new paragraph:

8 ‘‘(4) EXCLUSION OF CERTAIN CROP YEARS.—In

9 establishing the actual production history of a pro10 ducer for a crop under paragraph (2)(A) or using

11 the producer’s actual production records for any

12 other purpose under this subsection, the Corporation

13 shall exclude a crop year of the crop if, at any time

14 during the crop year, the county in which the crop

15 was grown (or an adjacent county) was included in

16 a designated disaster area declared as a result of

17 damaging weather.’’.

Æ
423 A.2d 1312

#### Commonwealth v. Schaller, Appellant.

Argued August 28, 1979.

John M. O'Connell, Jr., for appellant; James J. Conte, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.

*643Before VAN der VOORT, LARSEN and LAVELLE, JJ.*

*

 Justice Rolf Larsen of the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, and Judge John E. Lavelle of the Court of Common Pleas of Schuylkill County, Pennsylvania, are sitting by designation.

Judgment of sentence affirmed.
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Lee Mohon","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/lee-a-mohonnasa-gov\/","title":"Artemis III: NASA\u2019s First Human Mission to the Lunar South Pole","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"RRNZFkCK7a\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/missions\/artemis\/artemis-iii\/\">Artemis III: NASA\u2019s First Human Mission to the Lunar South Pole<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/missions\/artemis\/artemis-iii\/embed\/#?secret=RRNZFkCK7a\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Artemis III: NASA\u2019s First Human Mission to the Lunar South Pole” — NASA\" data-secret=\"RRNZFkCK7a\" 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\/2022\/11\/52508358665_efb8a65d31_o.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":222}
#### Watson v. Cunningham.

*<&.*and *B.*resident in this state being at *New-Orleans,*the latter sued the former there on his indorsement of a note, which the maker had failed to pay when due. On being served with process, *Jl.*paid the money, and after his return sued *B.*in order to recover it hack. *Held,*that he had no right of action.

ERROR to the *Harrison*Circuit Court.

Scott, *J.*

Davis made a note payable to Cunningham, the present defendant; which note was indorsed by *Cunningham*to the plaintiff,' *Watson. Davis foiled*to. pay the money when due. *Watson*brought suit in the city *of .IVew-Orleans*against *Cunning-Mam,*who, on being served with process, paid the amount without resisting the claim of *Walson,*and on his return brought suit in the Circuit Court to recover back the money thus paid; alleging that.it was paid through mistake and ignorance, and that, an undue advantage had been taken of his situation.- By a bill of exceptions,- incorporated with the record, we are informed that the plaintiffin the Circuit Court gave evidence of the existence of the note given by *Davis*to *Cunningham;*of the transfer by *Cunningham*to *Walson*before the note became due; of the commencement of a suit by *Watson*against *Cunningham*at the city of *Jfew-Orleans,*better than two years after the note was made pay-, able-; of the payment by- *Cunningham*without resistance;- that the parties reside in this state, except *Davis*who resides in the low country; and that no attempt had ever been made to re'co-. ver the amount of the note by a suit at law against *Davis.*On this evidence the jury found for the plaintiff.' The defendant then moved for a new trial, which the Court refused and gave judgment on the verdict.

W@ are not informed where the note was. executed, where *322the indorsement was made, or what was the law of the state of *Louisiana*on the subject of negotiable paper. But, be that as it may, we are clearly of opinion that the evidence in this case was-not sufficient to entitle the plaintiff to a verdict If, on the failure jjjaher of the note to pay the amount at the time stipulated, the indorser became liable, *Cunningham*could have no pretext for bringing this action. If, on the other hand, the indorsee, in order to have recourse against the indorser, was bound to use due diligence by a suit at law against the maker, still, as he thought proper to settle the matter with *Watson*without resistance, he had a right to do so. He could take up the.note and look to the maker for payrrient, but could have no colour of claim to recover the money back by an action against the indorsee. The verdict is unsupported by evidence, and a new trial ought to have been granted.

*Moore*and Payne, for the plaintiff.

Kelson, for the defendant.

*Per Curiam.*

The judgment is reversed, and the verdict set aside, with costs. Cause remanded, &c.
9438.

#### Smith *v.*The State.

Decided March 12, 1918.

Conviction of manslaughter; from Macon superior court—Judge Littlejohn. November 37, 1917.

*R. L. Greer, Jule Felton,*for -plaintiff in error. ■

*John A. Fort, solicitor-general,*contra.

Bloodworth, J.

1. When the excerpts from the charge of the court which are complained of in the motion for a new trial are viewed in the light of the whole charge and of the explanatory notes of the trial judge in approving the grounds of the motion, and in connection with the evidence and the statement of the defendant, no error appears therein. See *Deal*v. *State,*145 *Ga.*33 (88 S. E. 573); *Worley*v. *State,*21 *Ga. App.*787 (95 S. E. 304).

2. There was evidence sufficient to support the verdict of voluntary manslaughter.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Broyles, P. J., and Harwell, J., concur.*
#### Cyprian P. Mattingly *v.*Thos. P. Linthicum.

Attorney and Client.

Notes deposited as collateral security. Collection and payment.

. APPEAL PROM NELSON CIRCUIT COURT.

December 20, 1871.

Opinion op the- Court by

Judge Lindsay :

The facts in this case do not warrant the conclusion that Linthicum received the notes deposited with him by Mattingly in the capacity of attorney. We are satisfied that he received them as *583collaterals to hold as indemnity on account of his suretyship to Willit. There is nothing in the record conducing to show that in the matter of their collection and in the application of their proceeds to the payment of Willit’s note he failed in any particular to act with reasonable prudence, or in the utmost good faith. He is, therefore, not responsible for the amounts he was not able to collect.

*Johnson, for appellant.*

*Muir & Wicldiffe, for appellee.*

The commissioner’s report, however, shows that there remained in his hands December, 1867, the sum of $56.66. In his exceptions he complains that the commissioner made errors in his calculations prejudicial to him, and that the basis of some of these calculations were erroneous. He fails, however, to point out specifically these errors. The court below did not pass upon these exceptions, and this court has failed to discover the errors alleged. We are of opinion that judgment should have been rendered against him for the amount mentioned.

His services as attorney, although not specially employed to sue, were worth far more to appellant than the amount of this balance, but Linthicum insists that by express contract he was to receive nothing for such services, except the attorney’s fee allowed against the parties sued.

Judgment reversed, and the cause remanded for proceedings consistent with this opinion.
**EXHIBIT32.1**

 

**Certificateof the President and Chief Executive OfficerPursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

In connection withthe quarterly report of Xponential, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-QSB/A(Amendment No. 1) for the quarter ended September 30, 2003, as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, JohnR. Boudreau, the President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

1.                                       TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

2.                                       Theinformation contained in this Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial conditions and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| Date: December 22, 2003 |   | /s/ John R. Boudreau                  |
|-------------------------|--------|---------------------------------------|
|                    |   | John R. Boudreau                      |
|                    |   | President and Chief Executive Officer |

 

----
---



| |                             
| | ----------------------------
| | 900  688 West Hastings St. 
| | Vancouver, BC V6B 1P1 Canada
| | Phone: (604) 688-9427       
| | Fax: (604) 688-9426         

Exhibit 99.7

CONSENT OF TECHNICAL REPORT AUTHOR

Reference is made to the technical report entitled NI 43-101
Technical Report Update, Yukon-Nevada Gold Corp., Jerritt Canyon Property, Elko
County, Nevada, USA, dated June 28, 2011, as amended on January 6, 2012, which
the undersigned has prepared (the Technical Report). The undersigned hereby
consents to the written disclosure of extracts therefrom or summaries thereof,
either directly or as incorporated by reference, in the annual information form
of Yukon-Nevada Gold Corp. (the Corporation) dated March 29, 2012 and the Form
40-F of the Corporation for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2011. The
undersigned further consents to the incorporation by reference in Registration
Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-171775) of the Corporation of the extracts from,
or summaries of, the Technical Report.

(Seal)

/s/ Todd W. Johnson, P.E. Todd W. Johnson, P.E.

  March 29, 2012

---
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Zachary J. Pohto","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/zacharypohto-2\/","title":"Anita Harrell","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"AT67l69rvg\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/people\/anita-harrell\/\">Anita Harrell<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/people\/anita-harrell\/embed\/#?secret=AT67l69rvg\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Anita Harrell” — NASA\" data-secret=\"AT67l69rvg\" 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\/02\/anita_redone.jpg?w=300","thumbnail_width":300,"thumbnail_height":375}
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"NASA","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/nasamigrate\/","title":"NASA Awards Contract to Launch Initial Elements for Lunar Outpost","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"tD4lCKzDQB\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/news-release\/nasa-awards-contract-to-launch-initial-elements-for-lunar-outpost\/\">NASA Awards Contract to Launch Initial Elements for Lunar Outpost<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/news-release\/nasa-awards-contract-to-launch-initial-elements-for-lunar-outpost\/embed\/#?secret=tD4lCKzDQB\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“NASA Awards Contract to Launch Initial Elements for Lunar Outpost” — NASA\" data-secret=\"tD4lCKzDQB\" 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\/2021\/02\/gateway_ppehalo_angles_003_0.png?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":338}
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 

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

David DiPiazza, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Experian Information Solutions 

Incorporated, 

Defendant.

No. CV-16-00368-PHX-GMS

ORDER 

 Pursuant to the parties’ Stipulation for Dismissal (Doc. 16) and good cause 

appearing, 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED dismissing this action with prejudice, each party to 

bear his or its own attorneys’ fees and costs. 

 Dated this 11th day of April, 2016. 

Honorable G. Murray Snow

United States District Judge

Case 2:16-cv-00368-GMS Document 17 Filed 04/11/16 Page 1 of 1
```

[Congressional Bills 105th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 807 Introduced in House (IH)]

105th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 807

To repeal the requirement relating to specific statutory authorization 
  for increases in judicial salaries, to provide for automatic annual 
        increases for judicial salaries, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 13, 1997

    Mr. Wicker (for himself, Mr. Shays, Mr. Davis of Virginia, Ms. 
    Molinari, Mr. Gejdenson, Mr. Borski, Mr. LaHood, Mr. King, Mrs. 
 Clayton, Mr. Schiff, Mrs. Meek of Florida, Ms. Lofgren, Mr. Hyde, Mr. 
  English of Pennsylvania, Mr. Gekas, Mr. Frank of Massachusetts, Mr. 
Skeen, Mr. Ackerman, Mr. Minge, Mr. Bryant, and Mr. Graham) introduced 
    the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the 
                               Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To repeal the requirement relating to specific statutory authorization 
  for increases in judicial salaries, to provide for automatic annual 
        increases for judicial salaries, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. JUDICIAL COST-OF-LIVING INCREASES.

    (a) Repeal of Statutory Requirement Relating to Judicial 
Salaries.--Section 140 of the resolution entitled ``A Joint Resolution 
making further continuing appropriations for the fiscal year 1982, and 
for other purposes.'', approved December 15, 1981 (Public Law 97-92; 95 
Stat. 1200; 28 U.S.C. 461 note) is repealed.
    (b) Automatic Annual Increases.--Section 461(a) of title 28, United 
States Code, is amended to read as follows:
    ``(a) Effective on the first day of the first applicable pay period 
beginning on or after January 1 of each calendar year, each salary rate 
which is subject to adjustment under this section shall be adjusted by 
an amount, rounded to the nearest multiple of $100 (or if midway 
between multiples of $100, to the next higher multiple of $100) equal 
to the percentage of such salary rate which corresponds to the most 
recent percentage change in the Employment Cost Index, as determined 
under section 704(a)(1) of the Ethics Reform Act of 1989.''.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT
32.1
 
 
 CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
 PURSUANT
TO 18 U.S.C. SS. 1350 ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
 SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
 
 
 In
connection with the Report of Physical Property Holdings Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Ngai Keung Luk,
Chairman and 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 result of operations of the
      Company.
 
 
 /s/ Ngai Keung
Luk
 Ngai
Keung Luk
 Chairman
and Chief Executive Officer
  November
13, 2009
Case 2:15-mj-01912-JFM Document 3 Filed 12/10/15 Page 1 of 3
Case 2:15-mj-01912-JFM Document 3 Filed 12/10/15 Page 2 of 3
Case 2:15-mj-01912-JFM Document 3 Filed 12/10/15 Page 3 of 3
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Mary King,

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-17-03434-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: October 26, 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 8523 Filed 11/01/17 Page 1 of 1