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





Consent of Independent Registered Public
Accounting Firm








The Board of
Directors and Shareholders


Building Materials
Holding Corporation:




We
consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements Nos.
333-61221 and 333-36387 on Form S-4; 333-150906, 333-150905, 333-136632,
333-117237, 333-44260 and 333-47122 on Form S-8; and 33-52478-99 and 33-80952-99
on Form S-8/A of Building Materials Holding Corporation of our reports dated
April 14, 2009, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Building
Materials Holding Corporation as of December 31, 2008 and 2007, and the related
consolidated statements of operations, shareholders’ equity, comprehensive
(loss) income, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period
ended December 31, 2008, and the related financial statement schedule, and our
report dated April 14, 2009 with respect to the Company’s internal control
over financial reporting as of December 31, 2008,  which reports
appear in the December 31, 2008, annual report on Form 10-K of Building
Materials Holding Corporation.





Our report datedon the consolidated financial
statements of Building Materials Holding Corporation and subsidiaries referred
to abovecontains an explanatory paragraph that states that the
Company’s recurring losses from operations and uncertainty whether it will
remain in compliance with certain covenants of its bank credit agreement during
2009 raise substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going
concern.  The consolidated financial statements and financial
statement schedule do not include any adjustments that might result from the
outcome of this uncertainty.








/s/ KPMG
LLP





San Francisco,
California


April 14,
2009
NRC NEWS

 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

 801 Warrenville Road

 Lisle IL 60532

 Web Site: http://www.nrc.gov 

No.III-03-022 April 2, 2003

CONTACT: Jan Strasma (630) 829-9663 E-mail: opa3@nrc.gov

Viktoria Mitlyng (630) 829-9662 

NRC TO MEET WITH OFFICIALS FROM NUCLEAR MANAGEMENT

TO DISCUSS SAFETY PERFORMANCE AT MONTICELLO

The U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with officials from the Nuclear

Management Company on Monday, April 7, to discuss the results of NRC’s annual assessment of the

Monticello nuclear power plant, located in Monticello, Minnesota.

The meeting will be held at 7 p.m. in the Bridge Room of the Monticello Community Center, in

Monticello. The public is invited to observe the meeting, and NRC officials will be available before

the conclusion of the meeting for questions and comments from the public.

A letter from the NRC to the Nuclear Management Company addresses plant safety

performance during the previous year and forms the basis for the meeting discussions. The letter

states that, overall, Monticello operated in a manner that preserved public health and safety and that

plant performance was at a level requiring no additional NRC inspection beyond normal baseline

activities. The letter is available from Region III Public Affairs Office and on the NRC web site at:

http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/LETTERS/mont_2002q4.pdf

In addition, the letter notes: "As you are aware, since the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001,

the NRC has issued several Orders and threat advisories to enhance security capabilities and improve guard

force readiness. We have conducted inspections to review your implementation of these requirements and

have monitored your actions in response to changing threat advisories. For calendar Year 2003, we plan

to continue these inspections and conduct portions of the security baseline inspection program, as well as

perform additional inspections to evaluate your compliance with new requirements that may be ordered."

Current performance information for Monticello is available on the NRC web site at: 

http://www.nrc.gov/NRR/OVERSIGHT/ASSESS/MONT/mont_chart.html

###
### §60j–1. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 60j–1 was editorially reclassified as a note under section 1927 of this title.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO.: 1:20-cv-23185-GAYLES/OTAZO-REYES

FABRIZIO DELLA POLLA,

Plaintiff,

v.

ALEXANDER PALENCIA,

Defendant.

______________________________________/

ORDER

THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Magistrate Judge Alicia M. Otazo-Reyes’s 

Report and Recommendation (the “Report”) [ECF No. 72] regarding Defendant Alexander 

Palencia’s Rule 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss (the “Motion”) [ECF No. 17]. On July 31, 2020, 

Plaintiff brought this action against Defendant. [ECF No. 1]. On October 26, 2020, Defendant filed 

his Motion seeking to dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint. [ECF No. 17]. On November 1, 2020, the 

Court referred this case to Judge Otazo-Reyes, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), for a ruling 

on all pre-trial, non-dispositive matters and a report and recommendation on all dispositive matters. 

[ECF No. 21]. On April 27, 2021, Judge Otazo-Reyes issued her Report recommending that the

Court deny Defendant’s Motion. Defendant timely filed objections, [ECF No. 77], to which 

Plaintiff responded. [ECF Nos. 78 & 92].

A district court may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge’s report and 

recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Those portions of the report and recommendation to which 

objections are made are accorded de novo review, if those objections “pinpoint the specific findings 

Case 1:20-cv-23185-DPG Document 94 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/10/2021 Page 1 of 2
that the party disagrees with.” United States v. Schultz, 565 F.3d 1353, 1360 (11th Cir. 2009); see 

also Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). Any portions of the report and recommendation to which no specific 

objections are made are reviewed only for clear error. Liberty Am. Ins. Grp., Inc. v. WestPoint 

Underwriters, L.L.C., 199 F. Supp. 2d 1271, 1276 (M.D. Fla. 2001); accord Macort v. Prem, Inc., 

208 F. App’x 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006).

Having conducted a de novo review of the record, the Court agrees with Judge OtazoReyes’s well-reasoned analysis and conclusion that Defendant’s Motion should be denied.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:

1. Magistrate Judge Alicia M. Otazo-Reyes’s Report and Recommendation, [ECF No. 

72], is AFFIRMED AND ADOPTED and incorporated into this Order by 

reference.

2. Defendant Alexander Palencia’s Rule 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss, [ECF No. 17],

is DENIED.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 10th day of August, 2021.

________________________________

DARRIN P. GAYLES

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 1:20-cv-23185-DPG Document 94 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/10/2021 Page 2 of 2
NRC NEWS

 U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS -- REGION I

 475 Allendale Road

 King of Prussia, PA 19406

No. I-03-004 February 10, 2003

CONTACT: Diane Screnci, (610) 337-5330 E-mail: opa1@nrc.gov

Neil A. Sheehan, (610) 337-5331

NRC ISSUES CONFIRMATORY ACTION LETTER TO 

UNION CITY, N.J., MEDICAL FIRM

 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff has issued a Confirmatory Action Letter to a Union

City, N.J., medical center that provides nuclear medicine services. The letter confirms the center’s

agreement to halt all NRC-licensed activities until it takes several actions to adhere to agency

regulations.

 In the letter to Union City Diagnostic Center, the NRC states that an inspector from the agency’s

Region I Office visited the 48th Street facility on February 5 after the State of New Jersey informed the

NRC that the center no longer had a Radiation Safety Officer. The NRC requires that medical

facilities licensed by the NRC to provide nuclear medicine services have a Radiation Safety Officer to

ensure that proper safety procedures are in place and followed. During that inspection, the NRC

determined the center did not, in fact, have a Radiation Safety Officer and that none of the Authorized

Users of nuclear medicine materials listed on the center’s license still worked there. In addition, the

inspector found that the lock on the door to the “hot lab,” or the room where radioactive materials are

used and stored, was broken, though no radioactive materials were determined to be missing.

 Union City Diagnostic Center agreed during a call with NRC staff on February 6 that it will take

the following actions in response: it will immediately cease all NRC-licensed activities until it has

hired a Radiation Safety Officer and an Authorized User or Users of nuclear medicine materials; it will

provide the NRC with a written statement indicating that the Radiation Safety Officer and Authorized

User or Users understand and are capable of carrying out required duties; it will repair the door lab

door and place all radioactive materials in secure storage in that room; and it will obtain NRC’s

approval before resuming licensed activities.

 Issuance of the Confirmatory Action Letter does not preclude the NRC from taking additional

steps, including enforcement actions, for any violations of NRC requirements that are identified.

 ###
§ 220.13 Commission final report. ( a ) The Commission will submit its final report on each petition for a duty suspension or reduction specified in the preliminary report to the Committees not later than 60 days after the Commission submits its preliminary report. The final report will contain the following information— ( 1 ) The information required to be included in a preliminary report under section 3(b)(3)(C)(i)-(ii) of the Act and updated as appropriate after considering any information submitted by the Committees under section 3(b)(3)(D) of the Act.
( 2 ) A determination of the Commission whether— ( i ) The duty suspension or reduction can likely be administered by U.S. Customs and Border Protection;
( ii ) The estimated loss in revenue to the United States from the duty suspension or reduction does not exceed $500,000 in a calendar year during which the duty suspension or reduction would be in effect; and
( iii ) The duty suspension or reduction is available to any person importing the articles that is the subject of the duty suspension or reduction.
( b ) [Reserved]
[81 FR 67149, Sept. 30, 2016. Redesignated at 84 FR 44693, Aug. 27, 2019]
### §908. Repealed. Pub. L. 105–33, title X, §10210, Aug. 5, 1997, 111 Stat. 711

Section, Pub. L. 99–177, title II, §258, as added Pub. L. 100–119, title I, §105(a), Sept. 29, 1987, 101 Stat. 778, related to modification of Presidential order.
§ 191.23 Methods of claiming drawback. ( a ) *Used in.* Drawback may be paid based on the amount of the imported or substituted merchandise used in the manufacture of the exported article, where there is no waste or the waste is valueless or unrecoverable. This method must be used when multiple products also necessarily and concurrently result from the manufacturing process, and there is no valuable waste (see paragraph (c) of this section).
( b ) *Appearing in.* Drawback is allowable under this method based only on the amount of imported or substituted merchandise that appears in (is contained in) the exported articles. This method may not be used if there are multiple products also necessarily and concurrently resulting from the manufacturing process.
( c ) *Used in less valuable waste.* Drawback is allowable under this method based on the quantity of merchandise or drawback products used to manufacture the exported or destroyed article, reduced by an amount equal to the quantity of this merchandise that the value of the waste would replace. This method must be used when multiple products also necessarily and concurrently result from the manufacturing process, and there is valuable waste.
( d ) *Abstract or schedule.* A drawback claimant may use either the abstract or schedule method to show the quantity of material used or appearing in the exported or destroyed article. An abstract is the summary of records which shows the total quantity used in or appearing in all articles produced during the period covered by the abstract. A schedule shows the quantity of material used in producing, or appearing in, each unit of product. Manufacturers or producers submitting letters of notification of intent to operate under a general manufacturing drawback ruling (see § 191.7) and applicants for approval of specific manufacturing drawback rulings (see § 191.8) shall state whether the abstract or schedule method is used; if no such statement is made, drawback claims must be based upon the abstract method.
( e ) *Recordkeeping* — ( 1 ) *Valuable waste.* When the waste has a value and the drawback claim is not limited to the quantity of imported or substituted merchandise or drawback products appearing in the exported or destroyed articles claimed for drawback, the manufacturer or producer shall keep records to show the market value of the merchandise or drawback products used to manufacture or produce the exported or destroyed articles, as well as the market value of the resulting waste, under the used in less valuable waste method (see § 191.2(u) of this part).
( 2 ) *If claim for waste is waived.* If claim for waste is waived, only the “appearing in” basis may be used (see paragraph (b) of this section). Waste records need not be kept unless required to establish the quantity of imported duty-paid merchandise or drawback products appearing in the exported or destroyed articles claimed for drawback.
[T.D. 98-16, 63 FR 11006, Mar. 5, 1998; 63 FR 15288, Mar. 31, 1998]
### §387. Notice of depositions

#### (a) Time for service; form

A party desiring to take the deposition of any person upon oral examination shall serve written notice on the opposing party not later than two days before the date of the examination. The notice shall state the time and place for taking the deposition and the name and address of each person to be examined. A copy of such notice, together with proof of such service thereof, shall be attached to the deposition when it is filed with the Clerk.

#### (b) Testimony by stipulation

By written stipulation of the parties, the deposition of a witness may be taken without notice. A copy of such stipulation shall be attached to the deposition when it is filed with the Clerk.

#### (c) Testimony by affidavit; time for filing

By written stipulation of the parties, the testimony of any witness of either party may be filed in the form of an affidavit by such witness or the parties may agree what a particular witness would testify to if his deposition were taken. Such testimonial affidavits or stipulations shall be filed within the time limits prescribed for the taking of testimony in section 386 of this title.

(Pub. L. 91–138, §8, Dec. 5, 1969, 83 Stat. 287.)

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

#### Effective Date

Section applicable with respect to any general or special election for Representative in, or Resident Commissioner to, the Congress of the United States occurring after Dec. 5, 1969, see section 19 of Pub. L. 91–138, set out as a note under section 381 of this title.
#### In the Matter of the Application of John Rose, Appellant, for Payment of Additional Interest on an Award Made in a Proceeding to Acquire Title to the Addition to the Public Beach, Brooklyn. City of New York, Respondent.

Close, P. J,, Hagarty, Johnston, Taylor and Lewis, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 21.1

SUBSIDIARIES OF FEDERAL DATA CORPORATION

                                    State of                 Doing
Subsidiaries                      Incorporation           Business Name
--------------------------     ---------------------   ------------------

FDCT Corp.                      Delaware               FDCT Corp.

FDC Technologies, Inc.          Delaware               FDC Technologies, Inc.

NYMA, Inc.                      Maryland               NYMA, Inc.

Sylvest Management                                     Sylvest  Management
   Systems Corporation          Maryland                  Systems Corporation

R.O.W. Sciences, Inc.           Delaware               R.O.W. Sciences, Inc.

Technical and Management                               Technical and Management
     Assistance, Inc.           New Jersey                 Assistance, Inc.
U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office of Public Affairs, Region IV

Walnut Creek Field Office

1450 Maria Lane, Walnut Creek, CA 94596-5378

RIV 98-04

CONTACT: Mark Hammond January, 9, 1998

Office: (510) 975-0254 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Home: (415) 674-1024

Pager: (800) 916-4952

INTERNATIONAL NUCLEAR REGULATORS CONTINUE CONFERENCE

WITH VISITS TO LIVERMORE LABORATORY, YUCCA MOUNTAIN

The International Nuclear Regulators Association, created in May 1997 in an effort to

enhance international cooperation and communications among top nuclear regulators and to

improve nuclear safety and regulation worldwide, wrapped up the initial portion of its semiannual meeting Friday morning in Walnut Creek, California. INRA consists of top nuclear

regulators from Canada, France, Germany, Japan, Spain, Sweden, the United Kingdom and the

United States.

The group met at the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Region IV Field Office in

Walnut Creek. From the NRC office, the group proceeded on a tour of the U.S. Department of

Energy’s Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory on Friday afternoon. At Lawrence Livermore,

INRA members met with the Laboratory’s senior management and toured the Lab’s Atomic

Vapor Laser Separation, National Ignition and Plutonium facilities.

On Monday, Jan. 12, INRA members are scheduled to tour the DOE’s Yucca Mountain

site, which is being considered as a repository for the spent fuel generated by commercial

power reactors in United States.

During the meeting, INRA members discussed how national regulatory approaches

impact nuclear safety. Members are identifying common key elements in nuclear safety

regulation to form a basis for evaluating and strengthening the safety of nuclear power

programs worldwide. They also are discussing how to best plan for and coordinate approaches

to assisting other nations in developing robust nuclear safety programs.

Dr. Shirley Ann Jackson, Chairman of both the NRC and INRA, will conduct a news

conference at 6 p.m. Monday at the Yucca Mountain Science Center, 4101 Meadows Lane in

Las Vegas. She will make brief introductory remarks and be available, along with other INRA

members, for questions. Chairman Jackson also conducted a news conference on Thursday in

Walnut Creek.

The INRA meets twice a year. Besides Dr. Jackson, INRA members are:

Canada--Dr. Agnes Bishop, President and Chief Executive Officer, Atomic Energy

Control Board.
France--Andre-Claude Lacoste, Director, Directorate for the Safety of Nuclear

Installations.

Germany--Gerald Hennenhofer, Director-General for Nuclear Safety, Federal

Ministry for Environment, Nature Conservation and Nuclear Safety

Japan--Yasumasa Togo, Chairman, Nuclear Safety Commission

Tomihiro Taniguchi, Deputy Director-General, Ministry of International Trade

and Industry

Spain--Dr. Juan Manuel Kindelan, President, Council for Nuclear Safety

Sweden--Lars Hogberg, Director-General, Nuclear Power Inspectorate

United Kingdom--Dr. Sam A. Harbison, Director and Chief Inspector, Nuclear

Installations Inspectorate, Health and Safety Executive

###
#### § 210.54 Service of motion by the complainant.

Notwithstanding the provisions of § 210.11 regarding service of the complaint by the Commission upon institution of an investigation, on the day the complainant files a complaint and motion for temporary relief, if any, with the Commission (see § 210.8(a)(1) and (a)(2) of subpart B of this part), the complainant must serve non-confidential copies of both documents (as well as non-confidential copies of all materials or documents attached thereto) on all proposed respondents and on the embassy in Washington, DC of the country in which each proposed respondent is located as indicated in the Complaint. If a complainant files any supplemental information with the Commission prior to institution, nonconfidential copies of that supplemental information must be served on all proposed respondents and on the embassy in Washington, DC of the country in which each proposed respondent is located as indicated in the complaint. The complaint, motion, and supplemental information, if any, shall be served by messenger, overnight delivery, or equivalent means. A signed certificate of service must accompany the complaint and motion for temporary relief. If the certificate does not accompany the complaint and the motion, the Secretary shall not accept the complaint or the motion and shall promptly notify the submitter. Actual proof of service on each respondent and embassy (e.g., certified mail return receipts, messenger, or overnight delivery receipts, or other proof of delivery)—or proof of a serious but unsuccessful effort to make such service—must be filed within 10 days after the filing of the complaint and motion. If the requirements of this section are not satisfied, the Commission may extend its 35-day deadline under § 210.58 for determining whether to provisionally accept the motion for temporary relief and institute an investigation on the basis of the complaint.

[73 FR 38326, July 7, 2008, as amended at 78 FR 23485, Apr. 19, 2013]
#### §§ 182.81-182.82 [Reserved]
§ 206.64 Institution of investigation or review; publication of notice; and availability for public inspection. ( a ) Paragraphs (a) and (b) in § 206.3 govern the institution of an investigation under section 422(b) of the Act and the publication of a Federal Register notice concerning the investigation. Following receipt of notification that the WTO member or members involved have notified the Committee on Safeguards of the WTO of a modification in the action taken by them against the People's Republic of China pursuant to consultation referred to in section 422(a) of the Act, the Commission will promptly conduct a review under section 422(j) of the Act regarding the continued need for action taken under section 422(h) of the Act. The Commission also will publish notice of the review in the Federal Register.
( b ) The Commission will make available for public inspection the notification document that prompted a review under paragraph (a) of this section, excluding any confidential business information in the document. Paragraph (c) in § 206.3 governs the availability for public inspection of a petition, request, resolution, or motion that prompted the Commission to institute an investigation under section 422(b) of the Act.