alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 9.5
                               IRREVOCABLE PROXY

     For  good and  valuable  consideration,  the  receipt  of  which is  hereby
acknowledged,  the  undersigned  hereby  agrees to, and hereby  grants to Dennis
Vadura and Frank Wiebe,  with full power of substitution,  an irrevocable  proxy
pursuant to Section  78.355 of the Nevada  Revised  Statutes,  to represent  the
undersigned and vote, or to executed and deliver  written  consents or Statutes,
to  represent  the  undersigned  and vote,  or to execute  and  deliver  written
consents  or  otherwise  act with  respect  to, all  shares of capital  stock of
AccuPoll Holding Corp., a Nevada  Corporation (the  "Corporation")  now owned or
hereafter acquired by the undersigned (the "Proxy Shares") as fully, to the same
extent and with the same effect as the  undersigned  might or could do under any
applicable  laws or regulations  governing the rights and powers of stockholders
of a Nevada  corporation  in  connection  with the  election of directors of the
Corporation as provided in Section 6.8 of that certain Stock Exchange Agreement,
dated as of May 20,  2002,  by and  among the  Corporation,  AccuPoll,  Inc.,  A
Delaware  corporation  ("AccuPoll"),  and certain  stockholders of AccuPoll (the
"Agreement").  The  undersigned  hereby  affirms  that this  proxy is given as a
condition of said agreement and as such is coupled with an interest and,  except
as provided  below,  is irrevocable for a period (the "Proxy Period") of six (6)
years and three hundred sixty-four (364) days from the date hereof.

     This  irrevocable  proxy  shall  remain  in full  force and  effect  and be
enforceable  against any  transferee who is an Affiliate (as defined in Rule 501
promulgated  under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended) of the transferor for
the Proxy Period.  Immediately and automatically  upon any transfer of the Proxy
Shares to any person or entity  which is not an  Affiliate  of the  undersigned,
this proxy shall  terminate  and be of no force or effect  with  respect to such
     Proxy  Shares so  transferred.  Nothing  contained  herein shall in any way
operate to  restrict  or limit the  undersigned's  right to  transfer  the Proxy
Shares at any time,  subject to  compliance  with  applicable  state and federal
securities.

Dated this 20 day of May, 2002




/s/ The Morpheus Trust                         No. of Shares: 1,000,000
----------------------------------                    ---------------------
Name of Stockholder (please print)




/s/
-----------------------------------
Authorized Signature



/s/
-----------------------------------
Title of Signatory (please print)
Exhibit 23.10



LOGO



Consent of Independent Registered
Public Accounting Firm



The Board of Directors

FNB United Corp.



We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements (Nos. 33-72686, 333-54702, 333-99333, 333-105442 and 333-109450) on Form S-8 and
the registration statement (No. 33-59565) on Form S-3 of FNB United Corp. of our reports dated March 26, 2007 with respect to the consolidated financial statements of FNB United Corp. and subsidiaries, and managements assessment of the
effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2006, which reports appear in the December 31, 2006 Annual Report on Form 10-K.



LOGO



March 26, 2007

Raleigh, North Carolina
#### § 147.30 Temporary eligibility for access at the confidential and secret levels and temporary eligibility for “L” access authorization.

As a minimum, such temporary eligibility requires completion of the Standard Form 86, including any applicable supporting documentation, favorable review of the form by the appropriate adjudicating authority, and submission of a request for an expedited National Agency Check with Local Agency Checks and Credit (NACLC).
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS

Appeals of - )

)

A Plus Industries, Inc. ) ASBCA Nos. 62101, 62434

)

Under Contract No. FA4418-16-C-0009 )

APPEARANCES FOR THE APPELLANT: Terrence L. Brennan, Esq.

Brian S. Schaps, Esq.

 Deutsch Kerrigan, L.L.P.

 New Orleans, LA

APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: Jeffrey P. Hildebrant, Esq.

Deputy Chief Trial Attorney

Danielle A. Runyan, Esq.

Josephine R. Farinelli, Esq.

 Trial Attorneys

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

The dispute has been settled. The appeals are dismissed with prejudice.

Dated: July 28, 2021

I certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the Order of Dismissal of the Armed 

Services Board of Contract Appeals in ASBCA Nos. 62101, 62434, Appeals of A Plus 

Industries, Inc., rendered in conformance with the Board’s Charter.

Dated: July 28, 2021 

STEPHANIE CATES-HARMAN

Administrative Judge

Armed Services Board

of Contract Appeals

PAULLA K. GATES-LEWIS

Recorder, Armed Services

Board of Contract Appeals
#### In the Matter of Charles Meinecke, Respondent, v. John M. Beckmann, as Police Commissioner of Nassau County, Appellant.

Motion by respondent to dismiss appeal on the ground that it is moot, denied with leave to renew upon the argument of the appeal. Beldock, Acting P. J., Ughetta, Kleinfeld, Christ and Pette, JJ., concur.
Editorial Note on Part 817
Editorial Note: At 82 FR 54999, Nov. 17, 2017, as required by the Congressional Review Act and Public Law 115-5, the Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement removed all amendments to part 817 made effective on Jan. 19, 2017, at 81 FR 93418, Dec. 20, 2016.

§ 817.111 Revegetation: General requirements. ( a ) The permittee shall establish on regraded areas and on all other disturbed areas except water areas and surface areas of roads that are approved as part of the postmining land use, as vegetative cover that is in accordance with the approved permit and reclamation plan and that is— ( 1 ) Diverse, effective, and permanent;
( 2 ) Comprised of species native to the area, or of introduced species where desirable and necessary to achieve the approved postmining land use and approved by the regulatory authority;
( 3 ) At least equal in extent of cover to the natural vegetation of the area; and
( 4 ) Capable of stabilizing the soil surface from erosion.
( b ) The reestablished plant species shall— ( 1 ) Be compatible with the approved postmining land use;
( 2 ) Have the same seasonal characteristics of growth as the original vegetation;
( 3 ) Be capable of self-regeneration and plant succession;
( 4 ) Be compatible with the plant and animal species of the area; and
( 5 ) Meet the requirements of applicable State and Federal seed, poisonous and noxious plant, and introduced species laws or regulations.
( c ) The regulatory authority may grant exception to the requirements of paragraphs (b) (2) and (3) of this section when the species are necessary to achieve a quick-growing, temporary, stabilizing cover, and measures to establish permanent vegetation are included in the approved permit and reclamation plan.
( d ) When the regulatory authority approves a cropland postmining land use, the regulatory authority may grant exceptions to the requirements of paragraphs (a) (1), (3), (b) (2), and (3) of this section. The requirements of part 823 of this chapter apply to areas identified as prime farmland.
[48 FR 40161, Sept. 2, 1983, as amended at 81 FR 93418, Dec. 20, 2016; 82 FR 54999, Nov. 17, 2017]
### Geology of the western part of the Harold D. Roberts Tunnel, Colorado (Stations 0+00 to 690+00)

By: Ernest Eugene WahlstromCharles Sherwood Robinson**V. Quentin Hornback

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/pp831C

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Plates:                               - **Plate 1**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 2**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 3**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 4**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 5**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 6**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 7**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 8**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 9**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 10**                            (pdf)
  - **Plate 11**                            (pdf) 
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
#### § 922.824 Special performance standards—mountaintop removal.

Part 824 of this chapter, *Special Permanent Program Performance Standards—Mountaintop Removal,* shall apply to any person who conducts surface coal mining operations constituting mountaintop removal mining.
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED August 8, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-60999 Summary Calendar

GRANT AYERS Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus JOSEPH THOMAS, SR., in his individual capacity,

Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 3:05-CV-75

-------------------- Before JOLLY, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Appellant Joseph Thomas, Sr., a police officer for the City of Holly Springs, has filed an interlocutory appeal of the district court’s order denying summary judgment on his qualified immunity defense in a case involving a dispute between Thomas and the plaintiff, Grant Ayers, over a traffic stop. A district court’s decision to deny qualified immunity on a motion for summary judgment is only immediately appealable if it turns on an issue of law, and is not immediately appealable if it is based on a claim regarding the sufficiency of the evidence.No. 06-60999 -2- Gobert v. Caldwell , 463 F.3d 339, 344 (5th Cir. 2006). “Therefore, if the district court concludes that the summary judgment record raises a genuine issue of material fact with respect to whether ... qualified immunity is applicable, then that decision is not immediately appealable....” Id. , quoting Palmer v. Johnson, 193 F.3d 346, 351 (5th Cir. 1999). The only authority Thomas cites to the contrary is Petta v. Rivera , 143 F.3d 895, 899 (5th Cir. 1998),

a case in which the district court denied summary judgment without any explanation. In this case, the district court explained its decision in a written opinion, concluding that the evidence presented “clearly establishes fact issues” as to the First Amendment claims. The court deferred a decision on the Fourth Amendment claims, noting that it was disinclined to ultimately allow them to proceed. Even if this deferral is assumed to constitute a final order, the court’s decision was also based solely on whether there were “triable jury issues regarding plaintiff’s Fourth Amendment claims against Thomas.” We therefore DISMISS THE APPEAL for lack of jurisdiction.
Exhibit 32.2 Certification of Periodic Financial Report Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350

 

The undersigned officer of First National Lincoln Corporation (the “Company”) hereby certifies that the Company’s annual report on Form 10-K/A for the period ended December 31, 2006 to which this certification is being furnished as an exhibit (the “Report”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”), and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. This certification is provided pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-K (“Item 601(b)(32)”) promulgated under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), and the Exchange Act.In accordance with clause (ii) of Item 601(b)(32), this certification (A) shall not be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act, or otherwise subject to the liability of that section, and (B) shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.

 

Date: September 28, 2007

 

/s/ F. STEPHEN WARD

F. Stephen Ward

Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer
§ 840.10 Information collection. ( a ) The collections of information contained in part 840 have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget under 44 U.S.C. 3501 *et seq.* and assigned clearance number 1029-0051. The information is being collected by States for use in assessing penalties as evidence in enforcement cases and as an inspection management record. The obligation to respond is required to obtain a benefit in accordance with 30 U.S.C. 1201 *et seq.*
( b ) Public reporting burden for this information is estimated to average 3.7 hours per response, including the time for the reviewing instructions, searching existing data sources, gathering and maintaining the data needed and completing and reviewing the collection of information. Send comments regarding this burden estimate or any other aspect of this collection of information, including suggestions for reducing the burden, to the Information Collection Clearance Officer (MS-202), 1951 Constitution Ave, NW., Washington, DC 20240.
[59 FR 60883, Nov. 28, 1994, as amended at 75 FR 60276, Sept. 29, 2010]
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS





We consent to the use in this  registration  statement  of our report dated June
17, 2002 on the financial  statements for Rub A Dub Soap,  Inc. as of the period
from  inception  (September  28, 2001) to May 31, 2002, and to references to our
firm as accounting and auditing experts in the prospectus.


Denver, Colorado
November 20, 2002

                                                           /s/Comiskey & Company
                                                        PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION
### IN THE UNI TED STATES COURT OFAPPEALS FOR THE FIF TH CIRCU IT

No. 11-50232 Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee

v. JOHN EDWARD MILLIGAN, also known as Johnny Yahoo, also known as John Milligan, Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 6:09-CR-191-8
Before REAVLEY, SMITH, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The attorney appointed to represent John Edward Milligan has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 7 3 8 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 ( 5th Cir. 2011). Milligan has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with c o u n s el’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. U n i te d S ta te s C o u rt o f A p p ea l s

F i ft h C i rc u i t 

### F I L E D April 4, 201 2 Lyle W . Cayce Clerk

Purs uant to 5 T H C IR
. R. 47.5 , the cour t hasd ete rm inedt hat this op inion sho uld not * be publ ish ed and is not pr ece dent excep t unde r the lim ite d cir cum st ance s se t forth in 5 T H C IR
. R. 47.5 .4. Case: 11-50232 Document: 00511811672 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/04/2012No. 11-50232

Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw i s G RANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See5 T H C I R
. R. 42.2.

2 Case: 11-50232 Document: 00511811672 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/04/2012
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER

Appellate case name: Fernando Guerrero v. The State of Texas

Appellate case number: 01-17-00462-CR

Trial court case number: 1493328

Trial court: 351st District Court of Harris County

On December 5, 2017, we abated this appeal and remanded the case to the trial 

court. In the abatement order, we directed the trial court to determine appointed trial 

counsel’s motion to withdraw and, if necessary, appoint counsel, at no expense to 

appellant, to represent him on appeal. The trial court clerk has filed a supplemental 

clerk’s record that includes the trial court’s December 7, 2017 order appointing Scott C. 

Pope of the Harris County Public Defender’s Office to represent appellant on appeal. 

Accordingly, we REINSTATE this case on the Court’s active docket.

On January 8, 2018, appellant filed a notice designating Daucie Schindler of the 

Harris County Public Defender’s Office as new lead counsel for appellant. See TEX. R.

APP. P. 6.1(c). The Clerk of this Court is directed to note Daucie Schindler as appointed 

counsel for appellant on the docket of this Court. See id. 6.1(c), 6.3.

Appellant’s brief is due to be filed in this appeal no later than 30 days from the 

date of this order.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Russell Lloyd

  Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: January 18, 2018
Exhibit 15

August 14,
2002

The
Board of Directors
Credit Suisse First Boston (USA), Inc.
New York, New York

Re:
Registration Statement No. 333-86720

With
respect to the subject registration statement, we acknowledge our awareness of the use therein of our report dated August 14, 2002 related to our review of interim financial information.

Pursuant
to Rule 436 under the Securities Act of 1933 (the "Act"), such report is not considered part of a registration statement prepared or certified by an accountant, or a report prepared or
certified by an accountant within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of the Act.

/s/
KPMG LLP
New York, New York

---

QuickLinks
### §436. Transferred

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 436, comprising section 802 of the National Security Act of 1947, act July 26, 1947, ch. 343, was editorially reclassified as section 3162 of this title.
# C_2013071EN.01001802.xml

| 9.3.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 71/18 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.3.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 71/18

---

Order of the General Court of 22 January 2013 — Cooperativa Mare Azzurro and Others v Commission

(Case T-218/00) (1)

1

(Action for annulment - State aid - Relief from social security contributions for firms in Venice and Chioggia - Decision declaring the aid scheme to be incompatible with the common market and requiring the recovery of aid paid - Action in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly lacking any foundation in law)

2013/C 71/28

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Parties

Applicants: Cooperativa Mare Azzurro Soc. coop. rl (Chioggia, Italy); Cooperativa vongolari Sottomarina Lido Soc. coop. rl (Chioggia) (represented initially by: G. Boscolo, and subsequently by A. Boscolo, lawyers); and Ghezzo Giovanni & C. Snc di Ghezzo Maurizio & C. (Venice, Italy) (represented by: R. Volpe and C. Montagner, lawyers)

Applicants:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: V. Di Bucci, Agent, assisted by A. Dal Ferro, lawyer)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision 2000/394/EC of 25 November 1999 on aid to firms in Venice and Chioggia by way of relief from social security contributions under Laws Nos 30/1997 and 206/1995 (OJ 2000 L 150, p. 50).

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The objection of inadmissibility raised by the European Commission is joined to the substance; |
| --- | --- |

1.

The objection of inadmissibility raised by the European Commission is joined to the substance;

| 2. | The action is dismissed as being, in part, manifestly inadmissible and, in part, manifestly lacking any foundation in law; |
| --- | --- |

2.

The action is dismissed as being, in part, manifestly inadmissible and, in part, manifestly lacking any foundation in law;

| 3. | Cooperativa Mare Azzurro Soc. coop. rl, Cooperativa vongolari Sottomarina Lido Soc. coop. rl and Ghezzo Giovanni & C. Snc di Ghezzo Maurizio & C. are to bear the Commission’s costs in addition to their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Cooperativa Mare Azzurro Soc. coop. rl, Cooperativa vongolari Sottomarina Lido Soc. coop. rl and Ghezzo Giovanni & C. Snc di Ghezzo Maurizio & C. are to bear the Commission’s costs in addition to their own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 302, 21.10.2000.

1

---
### §30901. Congressional Space Medal of Honor

(a) Authority To Award.—The President may award, and present in the name of Congress, a medal of appropriate design, which shall be known as the Congressional Space Medal of Honor, to any astronaut who in the performance of the astronaut's duties has distinguished himself or herself by exceptionally meritorious efforts and contributions to the welfare of the Nation and of humankind.

(b) Appropriations.—There is authorized to be appropriated from time to time such sums of money as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this section.

(Pub. L. 111–314, §3, Dec. 18, 2010, 124 Stat. 3371.)

| Revised Section | Source (U.S. Code) | Source (Statutes at Large) |
| --- | --- | --- |
| 30901(a) | 42 U.S.C. 2461 (1st par.). | Pub. L. 91–76, §1, Sept. 29, 1969, 83 Stat. 124. |
| 30901(b) | 42 U.S.C. 2461 (last par.). | Pub. L. 91–76, §2, Sept. 29, 1969, 83 Stat. 124. |

Section