alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 23.3








Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm











We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Form S-8 of China Digital Communication Group (File No. 333-162701) of our report dated March 28, 2011 with respect to our audit of the consolidated financial statements of New Energy Systems Group (Formerly known as China Digital Communication Group) as of December 31, 2010 and for the year then ended, which report is included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of New Energy Systems Group for the year ended December 31, 2010.








/s/ Goldman Kurland and Mohidin LLP


Goldman Kurland and Mohidin LLP


Encino, California





August 24, 2011
###### Editorial Note on Part 126

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 126 appear at 72 FR 50041, Aug. 30, 2007.

#### § 126.207 Do all of the offices or facilities of a certified HUBZone small business concern have to be located in a HUBZone?

A HUBZone small business concern may have offices or facilities in multiple HUBZones or even outside a HUBZone. However, in order to be certified as a HUBZone small business concern, the concern's principal office must be located in a HUBZone (except *see* § 126.200(c)(2) for concerns owned by Indian Tribal Governments).

[84 FR 65243, Nov. 26, 2019]
<PAGE>


                    JEFFERSON SAVINGS BANCORP, INC.
                      INCENTIVE BONUS PROGRAM


Eligibility for Incentive Bonus Program:

     1.   David McCay, COB & CEO, 60% of base salary if 100%
          of the EPS objective is achieved.

     2.   Joe Williams, President & COO, 50% of base salary if
          100% of the EPS objective is achieved.

     3.   Senior Vice Presidents, Division Heads, 40% of base
          salary if 100% of the EPS objective is achieved.

     4.   Other Senior Vice Presidents 30% of base salary if
          100% of the EPS objective is achieved.

     5.   Vice Presidents not receiving commissions or
          overrides, 20% of base salary if 100% of the EPS
          objective is achieved.

     6.   EPS objective determined annually by the Board of
          Directors at the recommendation of the outside
          directors of the Employee Compensation and Benefits
          Committee.

     7.   All eligible Incentive Bonus participants must be
          employed when the annual bonus is paid.

     8.   Eligible participants in the Incentive Bonus Program
          must have completed one full year of employment to
          receive the maximum bonus consideration.

     9.   Those eligible participants, without one full year
          of service, that are hired between January 1 and June
          30 are eligible for 50% of the maximum bonus
          consideration.

     10.  No consideration will be given for the payment of an
          incentive bonus unless, at least, 90% of the EPS
          objective is achieved.

     11.  Annual Incentive Bonuses will be considered for
          payment after the Company's outside auditors have
          signed off on the Company's annual EPS.

     12.  EPS targets are net of all expenses including bonus
          accruals and are rounded to the nearest cent.

<PAGE>
<PAGE>


Payment scale:

               Total                            % of
          Achieved of Target EPS             Target Bonus
               150%                            200%
               140%                            160%
               130%                            140%
               120%                            125%
               110%                            115%
               100%                            100%
               95%                              50%
               90%                              40%
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO.: 20-80993-DIMITROULEAS

TIMOTHY O’BRYAN, 

Plaintiff, 

vs.

JOE TAYLOR RESTORATION, INC., a Florida

Corporation, AARON GETTY, individually,

KAREN RADEWICZ, individually, and

GLENDA GALARZA, individually,

Defendants. 

___________________________________/

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE

THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendants’ Amended Motion to Tax Costs Under 

28 U.S.C. § 1920 [DE 90], and the September 29, 2021 Report and Recommendation of 

Magistrate Judge William Matthewman [DE 98] (the “Report”). The Court notes that no 

objections to the Report [DE 98] have been filed, and the time for filing such objections has 

passed. As no timely objections were filed, the Magistrate Judge’s factual findings in the Report 

[DE 98] are hereby adopted and deemed incorporated into this opinion. LoConte v. Dugger, 847 

F.2d 745, 749-50 (11th Cir. 1988), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 958 (1988); RTC v. Hallmark Builders, 

Inc., 996 F.2d 1144, 1149 (11th Cir. 1993). 

 Although no timely objections were filed, the Court has conducted a de novo review of the 

Report [DE 98] and record and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. The Court agrees with 

the Magistrate Judge’s reasoning and conclusions. 

Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:

1. The Report [DE 98] is hereby ADOPTED and APPROVED; 

Case 9:20-cv-80993-WPD Document 99 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/14/2021 Page 1 of 2
2. Defendants’ Amended Motion to Tax Costs [DE 90] is GRANTED IN PART AND 

DENIED IN PART; 

3. Defendants are entitled to costs in the amount of $4,478.81.

4. Defendants’ Motion to Tax Costs [DE 87] is DENIED as moot.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Fort Lauderdale, Broward County, Florida, this 

14th day October, 2021.

Copies furnished to:

Counsel of record

Case 9:20-cv-80993-WPD Document 99 Entered on FLSD Docket 10/14/2021 Page 2 of 2
United States Court of Appeals

For the Seventh Circuit

Chicago, Illinois 60604

Submitted March 7, 2012*

Decided March 9, 2012

Before

RICHARD A. POSNER, Circuit Judge

DIANE P. WOOD, Circuit Judge

JOHN DANIEL TINDER, Circuit Judge

   

No. 11‐3308

KIRSHA BROWN‐YOUNGER,

Plaintiff‐Appellant,

v.

STATE OF ILLINOIS and CITY OF

CHICAGO,

Defendants‐Appellees.                 

Appeal from the United States District

Court for the Northern District of Illinois,

Eastern Division.

No. 11 C 6071

Robert W. Gettleman,

Judge.

O R D E R

Kirsha Brown‐Younger appeals the dismissal of her civil rights complaint against the

State of Illinois and the Chicago Police Department for failure to state a claim. See 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(e)(2)(B). We affirm.

NONPRECEDENTIAL DISPOSITION

To be cited only in accordance with

Fed. R. App. P. 32.1

* The appellees were not served with process in the district court and are not

participating in this appeal. After examining the appellant’s brief and the record, we have

concluded that oral argument is unnecessary. Thus, the appeal is submitted on the brief and

the record. See FED. R. APP. P. 34(a)(2)(C).
No. 11‐3308 Page 2

In her complaint, filed in part under 42 U.S.C. § 1983, Brown‐Younger claimed that

police, the State, the CIA, and the FBI were monitoring her behavior, organizing hate groups

to attack her, and otherwise harassing her. The district court screened the complaint and

dismissed it because Brown‐Younger failed to name an individual defendant, specify how

her rights were violated, or allege that any violation of her rights resulted from an official

policy of the State of Illinois or the Chicago Police Department.

On appeal Brown‐Younger rehashes the allegations of her complaint and argues that

the district court abused its discretion by failing to serve process on the defendants and by

dismissing the complaint without a hearing. But dismissal here was appropriate because a

complaint must contain sufficient facts to state a claim that is plausible on its face, see

Ashcroft v. Iqbal, 129 S.Ct. 1937, 1949–50 (2009); Bausch v. Stryker Corp., 630 F.3d 546, 558 (7th

Cir. 2010); Sharp Elecs. Corp. v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., 578 F.3d 505, 510 (7th Cir. 2009); Brooks v.

Ross, 578 F.3d 574, 581 (7th Cir. 2009). Brown‐Younger’s implausible allegations—that state

and federal officials are organizing hate groups to attack her, using various technologies to

monitor her activities and thoughts, psychologically harassing her, and attempting to drive

her to suicide and financial ruin—do not meet this standard.

AFFIRMED.
###### Editorial Note on Part 120

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 120 appear at 72 FR 50039, Aug. 30, 2007.

#### § 120.474 Relation to other actions.

In lieu of, or in addition to, the procedures in this subpart, the individual minimum capital requirement for an SBLC may be established or revised through a written agreement or cease and desist proceedings under subpart I of this part.

[73 FR 75517, Dec. 11, 2008]
### §4404. Territorial extent

The tax imposed by this subchapter shall apply only to wagers

(1) accepted in the United States, or

(2) placed by a person who is in the United States

(A) with a person who is a citizen or resident of the United States, or

(B) in a wagering pool or lottery conducted by a person who is a citizen or resident of the United States.

(Aug. 16, 1954, ch. 736, 68A Stat. 525.)
#### Richmond D. Moot, Appellant, v. Margaret A. Moot, Respondent.

Order modified by striking out the following specifications: 5, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15; and, further, that the plaintiff be required, within five days from the entry of this order and service thereof on plaintiff’s attorney, to serve said bill of particulars; and as so modified affirmed, without costs. All concurred; Woodward, J., not sitting.
##### 



Exhibit 99.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, being the Chief Executive Officer of TEPPCO GP, Inc., the sole
general partner of TE Products Pipeline Company, Limited Partnership (the
Company), hereby certifies that, to his knowledge, the Companys Annual
Report on Form 10-K/A for the annual period ended December 31, 2002, filed with
the United States Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to Section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)),
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Annual
Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.

|                                      |  | 
|------------------------------------- |  | 
|April 1, 2003                         |  | 
|                                      |  | 
|Date                                  |  | 
|                                      |  | 
|/s/ BARRY R. PEARL                    |  | 
|                                      |  | 
|Barry R. Pearl                        |  | 
|President and Chief Executive Officer |  |
### **CHAPTER 113—PROCESS**

Sec.
1691.
Seal and teste of process.
1692.
Process and orders affecting property in different districts.
1693.
Place of arrest in civil action.
1694.
Patent infringement action.
1695.
Stockholder's derivative action.
1696.
Service in foreign and international litigation.
1697.
Service in multiparty, multiforum actions.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

**2002**—Pub. L. 107–273, div. C, title I, §11020(b)(4)(A)(ii), Nov. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 1828, added item 1697.

**1964**—Pub. L. 88–619, §4(b), Oct. 3, 1964, 78 Stat. 996, added item 1696.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-6588

In Re: ALBERT CHARLES BURGESS, JR.,

Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CR-92-217)

Submitted: May 30, 2002 Decided: June 10, 2002

Before WILKINS, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Petition dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Albert Charles Burgess, Jr., Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Albert Charles Burgess, Jr., has filed a petition for a writ

of mandamus, seeking to compel the district court to rule on his

motion to recuse the district court judge. Because the district

court has disposed of Burgess’ motion, we dismiss the mandamus

petition as moot. We dispense with oral argument because the facts

and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials

before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
Editorial Note on Part 120
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 120 appear at 72 FR 50039, Aug. 30, 2007.

§ 120.848 Requirements for 504 loan processing, closing, servicing, liquidating, and litigating by PCLP CDCs. ( a ) *General.* In processing closing, servicing, liquidating and litigating 504 loans under the PCLP (“PCLP Loans”), the PCLP CDC must comply with Loan Program Requirements and conduct such activities in accordance with prudent and commercially reasonable lending standards.
( b ) *Documentation of decision making.* For each PCLP Loan, the PCLP CDC must document in its files the basis for its decisions with respect to loan processing, closing, servicing, liquidating, and litigating.
( c ) *Processing requirements.* SBA expects PCLP CDCs to handle most 504 loan processing situations, although SBA may require that the PCLP CDC process 504 loans involving complex or problematic eligibility issues through the SBA using standard 504 loan processing procedures. The PCLP CDC is responsible for properly determining borrower creditworthiness and establishing the terms and conditions under which the PCLP Loan will be made. The PCLP CDC also is responsible for properly undertaking such other processing actions as SBA may delegate to the PCLP CDC.
( d ) *Submission of loan documents.* A PCLP CDC must notify SBA of its approval of a 504 loan by submitting to SBA's PCLP Loan Processing Center all documentation required by SBA, including SBA's PCLP eligibility checklist, signed by an authorized representative of the PCLP CDC. The PCLP Loan Processing Center will review these documents to determine whether the PCLP CDC has identified any problems with the PCLP Loan approval, and whether SBA funds are available for the PCLP Loan. If appropriate, the PCLP Processing Center will notify the PCLP CDC of the loan number assigned to the loan.
( e ) *Loan and Debenture closing.* After receiving notification from SBA PCLP Loan Processing Center, the PCLP CDC is responsible for properly undertaking all actions necessary to close the PCLP Loan and Debenture in accordance with the expedited loan closing procedures applicable to a Priority CDC and with § 120.960.
( f ) *Servicing, liquidation and litigation responsibilities.* The PCLP CDC generally must service, liquidate and litigate its entire portfolio of PCLP Loans, although SBA may in certain circumstances elect to handle such duties with respect to a particular PCLP Loan or Loans. Additional servicing and liquidation requirements are set forth in subpart E of this part.
( g ) *Making a 504 loan previously considered by another CDC.* A PCLP CDC also may utilize its PCLP status to process a 504 loan application from an applicant whose application was declined or rejected by another CDC operating in that same Area of Operations, if the applicant is located within that area and as long as SBA has not previously declined that applicant's 504 loan application. This may include the processing of a 504 loan application from an applicant that has withdrawn its application from another CDC.
[68 FR 57984, Oct. 7, 2003, as amended at 72 FR 18364, Apr. 12, 2007]
II 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 5149 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to exclude independent 

agents and brokers from requirement to record calls with beneficiaries 

under the Medicare Advantage and Prescription Drug Benefit programs. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

NOVEMBER 30 (legislative day, NOVEMBER 29), 2022 

Mr. ROUNDS (for himself and Mr. RISCH) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to exclude 

independent agents and brokers from requirement to 

record calls with beneficiaries under the Medicare Advantage and Prescription Drug Benefit programs. 

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


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•S 5149 IS

1 SECTION 1. EXCLUDING INDEPENDENT AGENTS AND BRO2 KERS FROM REQUIREMENT TO RECORD 

3 CALLS WITH BENEFICIARIES UNDER MEDI4 CARE ADVANTAGE AND PRESCRIPTION DRUG 

5 BENEFIT PROGRAMS. 

6 (a) MEDICARE ADVANTAGE PROGRAM.—Section 

7 1851(h) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w– 

8 21(h)) is amended by adding at the end the following new 

9 paragraph: 

10 ‘‘(8) EXCLUSION OF INDEPENDENT AGENTS

11 AND BROKERS FROM REQUIREMENT TO RECORD

12 CALLS WITH BENEFICIARIES.—The requirement de13 scribed in paragraph (g)(2)(ii) of section 422.2274 

14 of title 42, Code of Federal Regulations, or any suc15 cessor regulation (relating to recording calls with 

16 beneficiaries), shall not apply to an agent or broker 

17 appointed in accordance with paragraph (7)(A).’’. 

18 (b) PRESCRIPTION DRUG BENEFIT PROGRAM.—Sec19 tion 1860D–4(l) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 

20 1395w–104(l)) is amended— 

21 (1) by redesignating paragraphs (1) through 

22 (4) as subparagraphs (A) through (D), respectively, 

23 and indenting appropriately; 

24 (2) by striking ‘‘ACTIVITIES.—The following 

25 provisions’’ and inserting ‘‘ACTIVITIES.— 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
3 

•S 5149 IS

1 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—The following provisions’’; 

2 and 

3 (3) by adding at the end the following new 

4 paragraph: 

5 ‘‘(2) EXCLUSION OF INDEPENDENT AGENTS

6 AND BROKERS FROM REQUIREMENT TO RECORD

7 CALLS WITH BENEFICIARIES.—The requirement de8 scribed in paragraph (g)(2)(ii) of section 423.2274 

9 of title 42, Code of Federal Regulations, or any suc10 cessor regulation (relating to recording calls with 

11 beneficiaries), shall not apply to an agent or broker 

12 appointed in accordance with section 1851(h)(7)(A), 

13 as applied under paragraph (1)(D).’’. 

14 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

15 this section shall apply to plan years beginning on or after 

16 January 1, 2023. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
§ 49.575 How will collected civil penalties be used? Civil penalties collected under this subpart are available without further appropriation to the bureau that administers the Federal land or paleontological resources that were the subject of the violation, and may be used only to: ( a ) Protect, restore, repair, prepare, and curate the paleontological resources and sites that were the subject of the action, and to protect, monitor, and study the resources and sites;
( b ) Provide educational materials to the public about paleontological resources, paleontological sites, or resource protection; or
( c ) Pay rewards under subpart H of this part.
###### Editorial Note on Part 126

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 126 appear at 72 FR 50041, Aug. 30, 2007.

#### § 126.100 What is the purpose of the HUBZone program?

The purpose of the HUBZone program is to provide federal contracting assistance for qualified SBCs located in historically underutilized business zones in an effort to increase employment opportunities, investment, and economic development in such areas.
Skip to global NPS navigation
Skip to this park navigation
Skip to the main content
Skip to this park information section
Skip to the footer section






National Park Service Search Search
This Site
All NPS
 Open
Menu
Close
Menu
Explore This Park
Explore the National Park Service


Exiting nps.gov
  Cancel


Yukon - Charley Rivers
National Preserve
Alaska


Info
Alerts
Maps
Calendar
Fees


Alerts In Effect Dismiss
 more information on current conditions...
 Dismiss View all alerts


Contact Us
  NPS.gov
Park Home
Learn About the Park
News
News Releases
 News Release Gelvin's Airstrip Repaired in Yukon-Charley Rivers
 The rehabilitated Gelvin's Airstrip, as viewed from the south end, looking north, downriver.The rehabilitated Gelvin's Airstrip, as viewed from the south end, looking north and downriver. NPS/Nick Thompson 2017
  Subscribe
 |
What is RSS News Release Date:  **Contact:** Kris Fister, 907-455-0641 when a flood washed out multiple sections of the runway   air carriers authorized to conduct business in the Preserve   floated the Charley       Yukon-Charley Rivers' public use cabins   www.nps.gov/yuch floating the Charley River Tags: alaska news news release backcountry airstrip flying access maintenance rehabilitation project float river charley river yukon-charley rivers national preserve wilderness
 Last updated: February 22, 2021
 Park footer Contact Info Mailing Address: 101 Dunkel St
Suite 110
Fairbanks,
AK
99701
 Phone: 907-459-3730 Contact Us
 Tools FAQ
Site Index
Español
 Stay Connected


This Site
All NPS 
  National Park Service U.S. Department of the Interior
 Accessibility
Privacy Policy
FOIA
Notices
Contact The National Park Service NPS FAQ
No Fear Act
Disclaimer
Vulnerability Disclosure Policy
USA.gov Facebook
Youtube
Twitter
Instagram
Flickr
### §1743. Demand on postmaster

The certificate of the Postmaster General or the Government Accountability Office of the mailing to a postmaster of a statement of his account and that payment of the balance stated has not been received shall be sufficient evidence of a demand notwithstanding any allowances or credits subsequently made. A copy of such statement shall be attached to the certificate.

(June 25, 1948, ch. 646, 62 Stat. 948; Pub. L. 108–271, §8(b), July 7, 2004, 118 Stat. 814.)

#### Historical and Revision Notes

Based on title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., §670 (R.S. §890; June 10, 1921, ch. 18, §301, 42 Stat. 23).

Provisions in section 670 of title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., that the statement should recite that a letter has been mailed to a described post office and sufficient time has elapsed for it to have reached its destination, was omitted as superfluous.

The last clause of section 670 of title 28, U.S.C., 1940 ed., was omitted as covered by the phrase "notwithstanding any allowances or credits subsequently made" in the revised section.

Changes were made in phraseology.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2004—Pub. L. 108–271 substituted "Government Accountability Office" for "General Accounting Office".

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Transfer of Functions

The office of Postmaster General of the Post Office Department was abolished and all functions, powers, and duties of the Postmaster General were transferred to the United States Postal Service by Pub. L. 91–375, §4(a), Aug. 12, 1970, 84 Stat. 773, set out as a note under section 201 of Title 39, Postal Service.