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 the following Registration Statements:



|(1) | Registration Statement (Form S-3 Nos. 333-108909 and 333-121597) of Kosan Biosciences Incorporated,
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|(2) | Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-63534, 333-96669, 333-115766 and 333-123578) pertaining to the 1996 Stock Option Plan,
|--- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|(3) | Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-108502) pertaining to the 1996 Stock Option Plan and 2000 Employee Stock Purchase Plan,
|--- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|(4) | Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-47758) pertaining to the 1996 Stock Option Plan, 2000 Employee Stock Purchase Plan and the 2000 Non-Employee Directors Stock Option Plan,
|--- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|(5) | Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-136067) pertaining to the 2006 Equity Incentive Plan;
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



of our report dated March 14, 2007, with respect to the financial statements of Kosan Biosciences Incorporated, our report dated March 14,
2007, with respect to Kosan Biosciences Incorporated managements assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of Kosan Biosciences Incorporated,
included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2006.



/s/    Ernst & Young LLP



San Francisco, California

March 14, 2007
Exhibit No. 32.2



Certification of Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, filed herewith.



Armstrong Holdings,
Inc. and

Armstrong World Industries, Inc.

(the Companies)



Written Statement by Chief Financial Officer

Pursuant to Section 906 of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



I certify to the best of my knowledge and belief that the Companies Form 10-K annual
report containing their respective financial statements for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2005 fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and that information contained in that report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Companies as of that date.



|                                                                                                                                          
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                                                                          
|/s/ F. Nicholas Grasberger III                                                                                                            
|F. Nicholas Grasberger III Senior Vice President and
Chief Financial Officer Armstrong Holdings, Inc. and Armstrong World Industries, Inc.



Dated: February 24, 2006
### §362. International Searching Authority and International Preliminary Examining Authority

(a) The Patent and Trademark Office may act as an International Searching Authority and International Preliminary Examining Authority with respect to international applications in accordance with the terms and conditions of an agreement which may be concluded with the International Bureau, and may discharge all duties required of such Authorities, including the collection of handling fees and their transmittal to the International Bureau.

(b) The handling fee, preliminary examination fee, and any additional fees due for international preliminary examination shall be paid within such time as may be fixed by the Director.

(Added Pub. L. 94–131, §1, Nov. 14, 1975, 89 Stat. 686; amended Pub. L. 98–622, title IV, §403(a), Nov. 8, 1984, 98 Stat. 3392; Pub. L. 99–616, §4, Nov. 6, 1986, 100 Stat. 3485; Pub. L. 106–113, div. B, §1000(a)(9) [title IV, §4732(a)(10)(A)], Nov. 29, 1999, 113 Stat. 1536, 1501A–582; Pub. L. 107–273, div. C, title III, §13206(b)(1)(B), Nov. 2, 2002, 116 Stat. 1906.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2002—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 107–273 made technical correction to directory language of Pub. L. 106–113. See 1999 Amendment note below.

1999—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 106–113, as amended by Pub. L. 107–273, substituted "Director" for "Commissioner".

1986—Pub. L. 99–616 inserted "and International Preliminary Examining Authority" in section catchline and amended text generally. Prior to amendment, text read as follows: "The Patent and Trademark Office may act as an International Searching Authority with respect to international applications in accordance with the terms and conditions of an agreement which may be concluded with the International Bureau."

1984—Pub. L. 98–622 substituted "Patent and Trademark Office" for "Patent Office".

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

#### Effective Date of 1999 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 106–113 effective 4 months after Nov. 29, 1999, see section 1000(a)(9) [title IV, §4731] of Pub. L. 106–113, set out as a note under section 1 of this title.

#### Effective Date of 1986 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 99–616 effective July 1, 1987, and applicable to all international applications pending before or after that date, see section 9 of Pub. L. 99–616, set out as a note under section 351 of this title.

#### Effective Date of 1984 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 98–622 effective Nov. 8, 1984, see section 406(a) of Pub. L. 98–622, set out as a note under section 351 of this title.

#### Effective Date

Section effective Jan. 24, 1978, and applicable to international and national applications filed on and after that date, see section 11 of Pub. L. 94–131, set out as a note under section 351 of this title.
Home > NRC Library > ADAMS Public Documents

# NEI Transmittal Letter & Comments on the ROP Safety Culture Lessons Learned Recommendations, Draft Inspection Procedure 95003, and Draft IMC 0305.

Accession Number: ML081490487

Date Released: Wednesday, May 28, 2008

Package Contents

The following links on this page are to Adobe Portable Document Format (PDF) files. To obtain a free viewer for displaying this format, see our Plugins, Viewers, and Other Tools.
    - ML081490493 - NEI Transmittal Letter Providing Comments on the Reactor Oversight Process Safety Culture Lessons Learned Recommendations, Draft Inspection Procedure 95003, and Draft IMC 0305. (2 page(s), 5/27/2008)
    - ML081490502 - NEI Comments on the Reactor Oversight Process Safety Culture Lessons Learned Recommendations, Draft Inspection Procedure 95003, and Draft IMC 0305. (11 page(s), 5/27/2008)

Privacy PolicySite Disclaimer
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES–OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Mothers Work, Inc.(the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2008 asfiled with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),I, Judd P. Tirnauer, Senior Vice President & Chief Financial Officerof the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adoptedpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirementsof Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934; and

 

(2) The information contained in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.

 
| **/s/ JUDD P. TIRNAUER**                                   | ** ** | ** ** |
|------------------------------------------------------------|------------|------------|
| Judd P. Tirnauer                                           |
| *Senior Vice President & Chief Financial Officer* |
| August 8, 2008                                        |

 

----
---



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 In connection with the annual report on Form 20-F of Oromin Explorations Ltd. (the “Company”) for the year ended February 28, 2013, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge that: 1. The annual report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and 2. The information contained in the annual report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
Date: September 13, 2013 (signed): “Ian Brown” Ian BrownChief Financial Officer


---
NRC CHAIRMAN TASKS STAFF TO EVALUATE 

AGENCY ACTIVITIES ON BURIED PIPING AT NUCLEAR REACTORS 

NRC Chairman Gregory B. Jaczko has tasked the agency’s technical staff to review the 

NRC’s approach for overseeing buried pipes given recent incidents of leaking buried pipes at 

several U.S. commercial nuclear power plants. 

“Although they have not jeopardized public health and safety, leaks from buried pipes 

continue to occur and we need to assess the NRC’s and licensee’s efforts to prevent them,” 

Jaczko said. “The agency’s handling of these events has focused on each incident as it occurs, 

but we need to look at what we’re doing on a generic level to determine what additional actions 

may be necessary.” 

 The staff must provide the Commission an information paper in early December that 

explains both ongoing and planned generic activities that address leaks from buried piping. 

Chairman Jaczko also asked the staff to discuss actions or plans regarding: 

• Evaluating the adequacy of NRC requirements for designing, inspecting and maintaining 

safety-related buried piping, including rules governing operating reactors, reactor license 

renewal and new reactor licensing; 

• Evaluating the adequacy of American Society of Mechanical Engineers Code for 

designing, inspecting and maintaining safety-related buried piping; 

• Evaluating how effective current rules and voluntary initiatives for designing, inspecting 

and maintaining all nuclear power plant buried piping are in ensuring public health and 

protecting the environment, and; 

• Recommending any necessary revisions to existing regulations, requirements, practices 

or oversight regarding the integrity of buried piping. 

Recent instances of leaks in buried pipes have primarily involved water containing 

elevated levels of tritium, a mildly radioactive isotope of hydrogen. The NRC continues to 

review how plants dealing with these leaks are using monitoring programs to confirm there is no 

significant effect on public health and safety and the environment. 

NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 

Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 

E-mail: opa.resource@nrc.gov

Site: http://www.nrc.gov

No. 09-146 September 3, 2009
A copy of the Chairman’s September 3 memorandum tasking the staff with this review 

will be available via the NRC web site at: www.nrc.gov . It will be located in the online 

electronic documents system known as ADAMS under Accession Number ML092460648. 

 

### 

News releases are available through a free listserv subscription at the following Web address: 

http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/listserver.html. The NRC homepage at www.nrc.gov also offers a SUBSCRIBE 

link. E-mail notifications are sent to subscribers when news releases are posted to NRC's Web site.
§ 890.1102 Definitions. In this subpart— *Gross misconduct* means a flagrant and extreme transgression of law or established rule of action for which an employee is separated and concerning which a judicial or administrative finding of gross misconduct has been made.
*Qualifying event* means any of the following events that qualify an individual for temporary continuation of coverage under subpart K of this part: ( 1 ) A separation from Government service.
( 2 ) A divorce or annulment.
( 3 ) A change in circumstances that causes an individual to become ineligible to be considered a child who is a covered family member under this part.
[54 FR 52339, Dec. 21, 1989, as amended at 78 FR 64878, Oct. 30, 2013]
De-conversion Facility License Application

Review Process

License

Application

Public 

Outreach

Meeting

Safety

Review

Safety

Evaluation

Report

Environmental

Review

FRN Request

a Hearing

Scoping

Activities

Draft

EIS

Final

EIS

Comments

on Draft EIS

Possible

Hearing

Commission

Decision on

Application

Request 

Additional 

Information

Additional Information

* Documents available to the public – ; Opportunity for public participation – ; NRC Interaction with Licensee – . 

Public Participation

 Obtain information at www.nrc.gov on

• Time, location and public access to 

meetings, see Public Meetings & 

Involvement 

• NRC processes and how to 

participate

• Publicly available information about 

the license application

 Four additional NRC public outreach 

meetings including environmental 

scoping meeting

 Respond to the Federal Register notice 

announcing the opportunity to request 

a hearing

 Request to be added to the NRC’s email 

distribution list (email 

matthew.bartlett@nrc.gov)

NRC Licensing Process

 NRC performs a technical review of 

the application to ensure it meets 

NRC health and safety regulations

• The technical review takes 18 

months

• Request additional information, if 

needed

• Document safety review in a Safety 

Evaluation Report

 In parallel to the safety review, NRC 

prepares an Environmental Impact 

Statement

• The environmental review takes 24 

months

• The draft and final EIS are 

published in the Federal Register
#### Elsie Nelson, Defendant in Error, v. Ephraim Swanson, Plaintiff in Error.

Gen. No. 19,320.

(Not to be reported in full.)

Error to the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. Charles M. Foell, Judge, presiding.

Heard in the Branch Appellate Court at the March term, 1913.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed May 19, 1914.

Statement of the Case.

Proceeding by Ephraim Swanson for a discharge from arrest under a *copáis ad satisfaciendum*issued *633on a judgment in favor of Elsie Nelson after the return of a writ of *fieri facias, nulla bona.*

It was urged as ground for a discharge that the affidavit was defective and fatal because an unreasonable length of time intervened between the time the affidavit was sworn to and tlie day it was filed in court.

To reverse an order of the Superior Court denying a motion to quash the *capias,*the petitioner brings error.

Samuel J. Richman, for plaintiff in error.

Eugene Stewart and William Reeda, for defendant in error.

Abstract of the Decision.

1. Execution, § *286*
      ***
      *—when a writ of ca. sa. will issue without an affidavit.*A *capias ad satisfaciendum*may be ordered against the body of the judgment debtor upon the mere motion of the judgment creditor based on the record without any affidavit, where the record shows that the judgment was entered in a case where malice was the gist of the action.

2. Execution, § *286*
      ***
      *—when insufficiency and time of filing affidavit for a ca. sa. immaterial.*Whether an affidavit for a *capias ad satisfaciendum*was filed within a reasonable time after it was sworn to or whether it was sufficient to justify the issuance of the *capias is*wholly immaterial, where the record shows that the judgment was entered in a case wherein malice was the gist of the action, and the judgment creditor files a motion for a *capias*based on the record.

3. Execution, § *278*
      ***
      *—when capias ad satisfaciendum may issue.*The filing of a creditor’s bill by the judgment creditor does not cut off his right to resort to the remedy provided by statute for the enforcement of the judgment by *capias,*where the judgment is unsatisfied.

See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.

Mr. Presiding Justice Smith

delivered the opinion of the court.
NRC APPROVES LICENSE RENEWAL FOR WOLF CREEK 

NUCLEAR POWER PLANT FOR AN ADDITIONAL 20 YEARS 

 

 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission has approved the operating license renewal of the 

Wolf Creek Generating Station in Kansas for an additional 20 years. 

 The Wolf Creek nuclear power plant is located about 4 miles northeast of Burlington, 

Kans. The operator, Wolf Creek Nuclear Operating Corp., submitted its license renewal 

application Sept. 27, 2006. With the renewal, the license is extended until March 11, 2045. 

 The NRC’s environmental review for this license renewal is described in a site-specific 

supplement to the NRC’s “Generic Environmental Impact Statement for License Renewal of 

Nuclear Power Plants” (NUREG-1437, Supplement 32), issued in May. The review concluded 

there were no environmental impacts that would preclude renewal of the license for 

environmental reasons. Public meetings to discuss the environmental review were held near the 

plant Dec. 19, 2006 and Nov. 8, 2007. 

 After carefully reviewing the plant’s safety systems and specifications, the staff 

concluded that there were no safety concerns that would preclude license renewal, because the 

applicant had effectively demonstrated the capability to manage the effects of plant aging. The 

“Safety Evaluation Report Related to the License Renewal of Wolf Creek Generating Station” 

(NUREG-1915) was published in October. In addition, NRC conducted inspections of the plant 

to verify information submitted by the applicant. The reports relating to the Wolf Creek license 

renewal are available on the NRC Web site at: 

http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/renewal/applications/wolf-creek.html. 

 On Sept. 17, the Advisory Committee on Reactor Safeguards – an independent body of 

technical experts which advises the Commission – Iissued its recommendation that license 

renewal for Wolf Creek should be approved. That recommendation is contained in “Report on 

the Safety Aspects of the License Renewal Application for the Wolf Creek Nuclear Generating 

Station.” This document is available on the NRC Web site at: http://www.nrc.gov/readingrm/doc-collections/acrs/letters/2008/. 

NRC NEWS

U.S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

Office of Public Affairs Telephone: 301/415-8200 

Washington, D.C. 20555-0001 

E-mail: opa@nrc.gov 

Site: http://www.nrc.gov

No. 08-213 November 20, 2008
 The Wolf Creek renewed license brings the total number of renewals to 49 reactor units. 

A complete listing of renewal applications can be found on the NRC Web site at: 

http://www.nrc.gov/reactors/operating/licensing/renewal.html. 

### 

 News releases are available through a free listserv subscription at the following Web address: 

http://www.nrc.gov/public-involve/listserver.html. The NRC homepage at www.nrc.gov also offers a SUBSCRIBE 

link. E-mail notifications are sent to subscribers when news releases are posted to NRC's Web site.
#### § 843.310 Annuity based on death of an employee.

Except as provided in § 843.312, if an employee dies after completing at least 10 years of service, a current spouse is entitled to an annuity equal to 50 percent of the annuity computed under subpart D of part 842 of this chapter (without reduction for age), with respect to the employee. The annuity is in addition to the benefit described in § 843.309.

[52 FR 2074, Jan. 16, 1987, as amended at 52 FR 23014, June 17, 1987]
### §152911. Service of process

The corporation shall comply with the law on service of process of each State in which it is incorporated and each State in which it carries on activities.

(Pub. L. 105–225, Aug. 12, 1998, 112 Stat. 1422.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 152911 | 36:2904. | Oct. 30, 1984, Pub. L. 98–561, §4, 98 Stat. 2910. |

Section

The words "in furtherance of its corporate purposes" are omitted as unnecessary.
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth ___________________________

No. 02-20-00193-CV

___________________________

On Appeal from the 325th District Court

Tarrant County, Texas

Trial Court No. 325-620231-17

Before Bassel, Womack, and Wallach, JJ.

Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion

JOSE MANUEL LOMELI JR., Appellant

V.

JULIE KRISTINE LOMELI, Appellee
2

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant Jose Manuel Lomeli Jr. attempts to appeal from a judgment that was 

signed on May 10, 2017. No postjudgment motion was filed to extend the appellate 

deadline, so the notice of appeal was due on June 9, 2017, see Tex. R. App. P. 26.1, but 

was filed in our court on May 8, 2020. 

We notified Appellant of our concern that we lacked jurisdiction over the 

appeal because the notice of appeal was not timely filed. We stated that unless 

Appellant or any party desiring to continue the appeal filed a response showing 

grounds to continue the appeal, we would dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. 

See Tex. R. App. P. 26.1, 42.3(a), 44.3.

Appellant filed a response, but it does not show grounds for continuing the 

appeal. Therefore, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See, e.g., In re D.A., 

No. 02-15-00346-CV, 2015 WL 9244637, at *1 (Tex. App.—Fort Worth Dec. 17, 

2015, no pet.) (mem. op.) (“The time for filing a notice of appeal is jurisdictional in 

this court, and absent a timely-filed notice of appeal or extension request, we must 

dismiss the appeal.”); see also Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a), 43.2(f).

Per Curiam

Delivered: July 30, 2020
99–008

107TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 1st Session 107–295

WAIVING REQUIREMENT OF CLAUSE 6(A) OF RULE XIII WITH RESPECT TO

CONSIDERATION OF CERTAIN RESOLUTIONS REPORTED FROM THE

COMMITTEE ON RULES

NOVEMBER 16 (legislative day, NOVEMBER 15), 2001.—Referred to the House

Calendar and ordered to be printed

Mrs. MYRICK, from the Committee on Rules,

submitted the following

R E P O R T

[To accompany H. Res. 291]

The Committee on Rules, having had under consideration House

Resolution 291, by a non-record vote, report the same to the House

with the recommendation that the resolution be adopted.

SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS OF THE RESOLUTION

The resolution waives clause 6(a) of rule XIII (requiring a twothirds vote to consider a rule on the same day it is reported from

the Rules Committee) against certain resolutions reported from the

Rules Committee. The rule applies the waiver to any special rule

reported on the legislative day of November 16, 2001, providing for

the consideration or disposition of a bill making appropriations for

the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending September 30,

2002, and for other purposes.

Æ