alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT
23.1


CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
  We
consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements (No.’s
333-139309 and 333-145241) on Form S-8 of Neuro-Hitech, Inc. of our report dated
March 24, 2009 relating to our audit of the consolidated financial statements
which, appear in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Neuro-Hitech, Inc. for the
year ended December 31, 2008.
  /s/ Sherb
& Co., LLP
  Sherb
& Co., LLP
  Certified
Public Accountants
  Boca
Raton, FL
  March 31,
2009
#### § 408.401 What is this subpart about?

We cannot determine your entitlement to SVB based solely on your statements about your qualification for benefits or other facts concerning payments to you. We will ask you for specific evidence or additional information. We may verify the evidence you give us with other sources to ensure that it is correct. This subpart contains our rules about the evidence you need to give us when you claim SVB.
§ 666.220 What information must be included in a State Board's application for an Incentive Grant? ( a ) After consultation with the Secretary of Education, we will issue instructions annually which will include the amount of funds available to be awarded for each State and provide instructions for submitting applications for an Incentive Grant.
( b ) Each State desiring an incentive grant must submit to the Secretary an application, developed by the State Board, containing the following assurances: ( 1 ) The State legislature was consulted regarding the development of the application.
( 2 ) The application was approved by the Governor, the eligible agency (as defined in WIA section 203), and the State agency responsible for vocational and technical programs under the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Technical Education Act.
( 3 ) The State exceeded the State negotiated levels of performance for title I, the levels of performance under title II and the levels for vocational and technical programs under the Carl D. Perkins Vocational and Technical Education Act. (WIA sec. 503(b).)
**Exhibit 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We herebyconsent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-172864) of MagnaChip Semiconductor Corporation of our report dated February 1, 2011, except for the effects of the conversion to a corporation asdescribed in note 27(B), as to which the date is March 10, 2011, relating to the consolidated financial statements of MagnaChip Semiconductor Corporation, successor to MagnaChip Semiconductor LLC, and subsidiaries, and of our report datedMarch 13, 2010, except for Note 28, condensed consolidating financial information, as to which the date is August 4, 2010, relating to the consolidated financial statements of MagnaChip Semiconductor LLC and subsidiaries, which appear inthis Form 10-K. 

/s/ Samil PricewaterhouseCoopers 

Seoul, Korea 

March 18, 2011
Editorial Note on Part 655
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 655 appear at 71 FR 35521, 35522, June 21, 2006.

§ 655.1314 Setting meal charges; petition for higher meal charges. ( a ) *Meal charges.* Until a new amount is set under this paragraph an employer may charge workers up to $9.90 for providing them with three meals per day. The maximum charge allowed by this paragraph (a) will be changed annually by the same percentage as the 12 month percentage change for the Consumer Price Index for all Urban Consumers for Food between December of the year just concluded and December of the year prior to that. The annual adjustments will be effective on the date of their publication by the Administrator, OFLC, as a Notice in the Federal Register. When a charge or deduction for the cost of meals would bring the employee's wage below the minimum wage set by the FLSA at 29 U.S.C. 206 (FLSA), the charge or deduction must meet the requirements of 29 U.S.C. 203(m) of the FLSA, including the recordkeeping requirements found at 29 CFR 516.27.
( b ) *Filing petitions for higher meal charges.* The employer may file a petition with the CO to charge more than the applicable amount for meal charges if the employer justifies the charges and submits to the CO the documentation required by paragraph (b)(1) of this section. ( 1 ) *Required documentation.* Documentation submitted must include the cost of goods and services directly related to the preparation and serving of meals, the number of workers fed, the number of meals served and the number of days meals were provided. The cost of the following items may be included: Food; kitchen supplies other than food, such as lunch bags and soap; labor costs that have a direct relation to food service operations, such as wages of cooks and dining hall supervisors; fuel, water, electricity, and other utilities used for the food service operation; and other costs directly related to the food service operation. Charges for transportation, depreciation, overhead and similar charges may not be included. Receipts and other cost records for a representative pay period must be retained and must be available for inspection by the CO for a period of 1 year.
( 2 ) *Effective date for higher charge.* The employer may begin charging the higher rate upon receipt of a favorable decision from the CO unless the CO sets a later effective date in the decision.
( c ) *Appeal.* In the event the employer's petition for a higher meal charge is denied in whole or in part, the employer may appeal the denial. Appeals will be filed with the Chief Administrative Law Judge. ALJ's will hear such appeals according to the procedures in 29 CFR part 18, except that the appeal will not be considered as a complaint to which an answer is required. The decision of the ALJ is the final decision of the Secretary.
###### Editorial Note on Part 655

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 655 appear at 71 FR 35521, 35522, June 21, 2006.

#### § 655.721 [Reserved]
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Justice

###### Drug Enforcement Administration

                    By Notice dated December 5, 2011, and published in the                     **Federal Register**                     on December 12, 2011, 76 FR 77253, Hospira Inc., 1776 North Centennial Drive, McPherson, Kansas 67460-1247, made application by renewal to the Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) to be registered as an importer of Remifentanil (9739), a basic class of controlled substance listed in schedule II.                

The company plans to import Remifentanil for use in dosage form manufacturing.

No comments or objections have been received. DEA has considered the factors in 21 U.S.C. 823(a) and 952(a), and determined that the registration of Hospira Inc. to import the basic class of controlled substance is consistent with the public interest, and with United States obligations under international treaties, conventions, or protocols in effect on May 1, 1971, at this time. DEA has investigated Hospira Inc. to ensure that the company's registration is consistent with the public interest. The investigation has included inspection and testing of the company's physical security systems, verification of the company's compliance with state and local laws, and a review of the company's background and history. Therefore, pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 952(a) and 958(a), and in accordance with 21 CFR 1301.34, the above named company is granted registration as an importer of the basic class of controlled substance listed.

Dated: April 17, 2012.

Joseph T. Rannazzisi,

Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement Administration.

[FR Doc. 2012-10048 Filed 4-25-12; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410-09-P
EXHIBIT 31.3

CERTIFICATION

I, Michael Bailey, certify that:

|   | 1. | I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 on Form 10-K/A of AVEO Pharmaceuticals, Inc.; and |
|--------|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 2. | Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report. |
|--------|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

Date: April 30, 2019

 

| /s/ Michael Bailey                               |
|-------------------------------------------------------|
| Michael Bailey                                        |
| Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer) |
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 76 (Wednesday, April 20, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 22156]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-9552]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NATIONAL CREDIT UNION ADMINISTRATION


Agency Information Collection Activities: Submission to OMB for 
Review; Comment Request

AGENCY: National Credit Union Administration (NCUA).

ACTION: Request for comment.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The NCUA intends to submit the following information 
collection to the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) for review and 
clearance under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (Public Law 104-13, 
44 U.S.C. Chapter 35). This information collection is published to 
obtain comments from the public.

DATES: Comments will be accepted until June 20, 2011.

ADDRESSES: Interested parties are invited to submit written comments to 
the NCUA Clearance Officer listed below:
    Clearance Officer: Tracy Sumpter, National Credit Union 
Administration, 1775 Duke Street, Alexandria, VA 22314-3428, Fax No. 
703-837-2861, E-mail: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#6d222e2422000c04012d030e180c430a021b"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="541b171d1b39353d38143a3721357a333b22">[email protected]</span></a>.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Requests for additional information 
should be directed to Tracy Sumpter at the National Credit Union 
Administration, 1775 Duke Street, Alexandria, VA 22314-3428, or at 
(703) 518-6444.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Proposal for the following collection of 
information:
    Title: Corporate Credit Union Monthly Call Report.
    OMB Number: 3133-0067.
    Form Number: NCUA 5310.
    Type of Review: Reinstatement, without change, of a previously 
approved collection.
    Description: NCUA utilizes the information to monitor financial 
conditions in corporate credit unions, and to allocate supervision and 
examination resources.
    Respondents: Corporate credit unions, or ``banker's banks'' for 
natural person credit unions.
    Estimated No. of Respondents/Record keepers: 27.
    Estimated Burden Hours per Response: 8 hours.
    Frequency of Response: Monthly.
    Estimated Total Annual Burden Hours: 2,592 hours.
    Estimated Total Annual Cost: $64,800.

    By the National Credit Union Administration Board on April 14, 
2011.
Mary Rupp,
Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 2011-9552 Filed 4-19-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7535-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
#### Clifton T. NEAL, Appellant v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee.

No. 11873.

United States Court of Appeals District of Columbia Circuit.

Argued March 9, 1954.

Decided April 22, 1954.

Mr. T. Emmett McKenzie, Washington, D. C., for appellant.

Mr. Robert J. Asman, Jr., Asst. U. S. Atty., Washington, D. C., with whom Mr. Leo A. Rover, U. S. Atty., and Messrs. Lewis A. Carroll and Arthur J. McLaughlin, Asst. U. S. Attys., Washington, D. C., were on the brief, for ap-pellee.

Before CLARK, WILBUR K. MILLER, and PRETTYMAN, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant was indicted, tried, convicted and sentenced upon three counts *33charging violations of the federal narcotic laws.1 We find no error affecting his substantial rights, and the judgment of the District Court is

Affirmed.

1

. Secs. 1 and 2, Harrison Narcotic Act, 38 Stat. 785-786 (1914), as amended, 26 U.S.C.A. §§ 2553(a), 2554(a); Sec. 1, Jones-Miller Act, 42 Stat. 596 (1922), as amended, 21 U.S.C.A. § 174.
**Exhibit23.1**

**CONSENTOF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We have issued our reportdated February 16, 2007, accompanying the consolidated financial statements andschedule of Clayton Holdings, Inc. as of December 31, 2006 and 2005 (SuccessorCompany balance sheets), and the related consolidated statements of income,changes in stockholders’ equity and cash flows for the years ended December 31,2006 and 2005, and for the period from inception (May 24, 2004, the earlierdate common control was established — see Note 1, Organization and Descriptionof Business, and Basis of Presentation*, Basis of Presentation*) throughDecember 31, 2004 and for the year ended December 31, 2005 (Successor Companyoperations) and for the period from January 1, 2004 through August 1, 2004(Predecessor Company operations). We have also issued our report dated October14, 2005, accompanying the consolidated statements of income, shareholders’equity and cash flows of Clayton Fixed Income Services Inc. (formerly known as TheMurrayhill Company) and its subsidiary for the period January 1, 2004 throughMay 23, 2004. These reports are included in the Annual Report of ClaytonHoldings, Inc. on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006.  We hereby consent to the incorporation byreference of said reports in the previously filed Registration Statement ofClayton Holdings, Inc. on Form S-8 (File No. 333-132683).

 

 

/s/GRANT THORNTONLLP

 

New York, New York

March 20, 2007

----
###### Editorial Note on Part 655

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 655 appear at 71 FR 35521, 35522, June 21, 2006.

#### § 655.47 Referrals of U.S. workers.

SWAs may only refer for employment individuals who have been apprised of all the material terms and conditions of employment and who are qualified and will be available for employment.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v. Anthony Siviglia, Appellant.

Present — Martin, P. J., Townley, Untermyer, Dore and Callahan, JJ.; Untermyer, J., dissents and votes to affirm.
§ 618.605 General procedures. ( a ) *Assessments.* The State must ensure and document that every trade-affected worker has an initial assessment and that a comprehensive and specialized assessment is made available, as described in subpart C of this part. If a worker refused to take an assessment, the information necessary to determine eligibility for training must be documented. If a trade-affected worker has an IEP, the assessment results must support the training program set out in the worker's IEP, as described in subpart C of this part, before an application for training is approved. As with assessments, if a worker refused to develop an IEP, the information necessary to determine eligibility for training must be documented.
( b ) *Applications.* Applications for training, including requests for TAA Program-funded transportation and subsistence payments, must be made to the State in accordance with any policies and procedures established by the State.
( c ) *Determinations.* Decisions on selection for, approval of, or referral of a trade-affected worker to training, including whether to provide TAA Program-funded transportation and subsistence payments, under this subpart, or a decision with respect to any specific training or nonselection, nonapproval, or nonreferral for any reason is a determination to which §§ 618.820 (determinations of eligibility; notices to individuals), 618.824 (liable State and agent State responsibilities), and 618.828 (appeals and hearings) apply.
( d ) *Training opportunities.* ( 1 ) The State must explore, identify, and secure training opportunities to ensure trade-affected workers return to employment as soon as possible. States must use all necessary and reasonable means to find alternatives when local training resources cannot adequately train trade-affected workers for reemployment. Training resources may be inadequate when they cannot train workers quickly, or at a reasonable cost, or equip workers with skills that meet the demands of the job market.
( 2 ) When available training is inadequate, TAA Program funds may be used to create customized, group training opportunities in response to a particular dislocation event. Funds may be used for trainings that provide intensive remedial education classes, English language training, or contextualized occupational training, which combines academic and occupational training. These group trainings must adhere to the principles described in § 618.600.
( 3 ) States are required to coordinate with other public and private agencies, in cooperation with local workforce development boards (LWDBs) established under WIOA, to ensure a wide-range of training opportunities are available to trade-affected workers in demand occupations.
( e ) *Timing of application and approval of training.* A trade-affected worker may apply for training and a State may approve training at any time after the certification date on which his or her worker group is certified under subpart B of this part, without regard to whether such worker has applied for or exhausted all rights to any UI to which the worker is entitled.
§ 620.4 Testing of unemployment compensation applicants for the unlawful use of a controlled substance. ( a ) States may require drug testing for unemployment compensation applicants, as defined in § 620.2, for the unlawful use of one or more controlled substances, as defined in § 620.2, as a condition of eligibility for unemployment compensation, if the individual is one for whom suitable work, as defined in State law, as defined in § 620.2, is only available in an occupation that regularly conducts drug testing as identified under § 620.3.
( b ) A State conducting drug testing as a condition of unemployment compensation eligibility, as provided in paragraph (a) of this section, may only elect to require drug testing of applicants for whom the only suitable work is available in one or more of the occupations listed under § 620.3. States are not required to apply drug testing to any applicants for whom the only suitable work is available in any or all of the occupations listed.
( c ) No State is required to drug test UC applicants under this part 620.
§ 654.400 Scope and purpose. ( a ) This subpart sets forth the Department's Employment and Training Administration (ETA) standards for agricultural housing and variances. Local Wagner-Peyser Act Employment Service (ES) offices, as part of the State ES agencies and in cooperation with the ES program, assist employers in recruiting farmworkers from places outside the area of intended employment. The experiences of the ES agencies indicate that employees so referred have on many occasions been provided with inadequate, unsafe, and unsanitary housing conditions. To discourage this practice, it is the policy of the Federal-State ES system to deny its intrastate and interstate recruitment services to employers until the State ES agency has ascertained that the employer's housing meets certain standards.
( b ) To implement this policy, § 653.501 of this chapter provides that recruitment services must be denied unless the employer has signed an assurance that if the workers are to be housed, a preoccupancy inspection has been conducted, and the ES staff has ascertained that, with respect to intrastate or interstate clearance orders, the employer's housing meets the full set of standards set forth at 29 CFR 1910.142 or this subpart, except that mobile range housing for sheepherders or goatherders must meet existing Departmental guidelines and/or applicable regulations.
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4246 Received in Senate (RDS)]

<DOC>
114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 4246

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           December 16, 2015

                                Received

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To exempt for an additional 4-year period, from the application of the 
means-test presumption of abuse under chapter 7, qualifying members of 
  reserve components of the Armed Forces and members of the National 
 Guard who, after September 11, 2001, are called to active duty or to 
     perform a homeland defense activity for not less than 90 days.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``National Guard and Reservist Debt 
Relief Extension Act of 2015''.

SEC. 2. NATIONAL GUARD AND RESERVISTS DEBT RELIEF AMENDMENT.

    Section 4(b) of the National Guard and Reservists Debt Relief Act 
of 2008 (Public Law 110-438; 122 Stat. 5000) is amended by striking 
``7-year'' and inserting ``11-year''.

            Passed the House of Representatives December 16, 2015.

            Attest:

                                                 KAREN L. HAAS,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
### §2291k. Repealed. Pub. L. 104–66, title I, §1112(b), Dec. 21, 1995, 109 Stat. 724

Section, Pub. L. 87–195, pt. I, §490A, as added Pub. L. 102–583, §5(a), Nov. 2, 1992, 106 Stat. 4927; amended Pub. L. 103–447, title I, §101(g)(2), Nov. 2, 1994, 108 Stat. 4693, related to annual certification procedures after Sept. 30, 1995.