alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 947.843 Federal enforcement. ( a ) Part 843 of this chapter, *Federal Enforcement,* shall apply when enforcement action is required for violations on surface coal mining and reclamation operations.
( b ) Upon request OSM shall furnish a copy of each enforcement action document and order to show cause issued pursuant to this section to the Washington Department of Natural Resources and the Department of Ecology. If there is a planning department in the county government where the operation is located, a copy of the enforcement action shall be furnished to that agency.
**EXHIBIT 23.2**

 

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

 

Weconsent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (FormS-8 No. 333-55234) pertaining to the Security Capital Corporation 2000Long-Term Incentive Plan of our report dated June 10, 2005, with respect to theconsolidated financial statements and schedule of Security Capital Corporationand subsidiaries as of December 31, 2004 and for each of the two years in theperiod ended December 31, 2004 included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) forthe year ended December 31, 2005.

 

 
|                   | /s/  Ernst & Young LLP |   |
|------------------------|----------------------------|--------|
|                   |
|                   |
| Stamford,  Connecticut |
| March  28, 2006        |

 

----
Motion Granted; Appeal Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed 

November 22, 2022

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14-22-00481-CV

WM TRUCKING & EXCAVATING, INC., Appellant

V.

SPRINT SAND AND CLAY, LLC, Appellee

On Appeal from the 400th District Court

Fort Bend County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 17-DCV-240294

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This is an appeal from a judgment signed April 6, 2022. On November 14, 

2022, appellant filed a motion, joined by appellee, to dismiss the appeal. See Tex. 

R. App. P. 42.1. The motion is granted. 

We dismiss the appeal.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Wise, Jewell, and Poissant.
# C_2009032EN.01002502.xml

| 7.2.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 32/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.2.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 32/25

---

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 17 December 2008 — HEG and Graphite India v Council

(Case T-462/04) (1)

1

(Common commercial policy - Anti-dumping duties - Countervailing duties - Imports of certain graphite electrode systems originating in India - Rights of the defence - Equal treatment - Determination of injury - Causal link)

(2009/C 32/46)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: HEG Ltd (New Delhi, India); and Graphite India Ltd (Kolkata, India) (represented: initially by K. Adamantopoulos, lawyer, and J. Branton, Solicitor, and subsequently by J. Branton)

Applicants:

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: J.-P. Hix, acting as Agent, assisted by G. Berrisch, lawyer)

Defendant:

Intervener in support of the defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: T. Scharf and K. Talabér-Ritz, acting as Agents)

Intervener in support of the defendant

Re:

Application for annulment of Council Regulation (EC) No 1628/2004 of 13 September 2004 imposing a definitive countervailing duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of certain graphite electrode systems originating in India (OJ 2004 L 295, p. 4) and of Council Regulation (EC) No 1629/2004 of 13 September 2004 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of certain graphite electrode systems originating in India (OJ 2004 L 295, p. 10).

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders HEG Ltd and Graphite India Ltd to bear their own costs and to pay the costs of the Council; |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders HEG Ltd and Graphite India Ltd to bear their own costs and to pay the costs of the Council;

| 3. | Orders the Commission to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Orders the Commission to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 69, 19.3.2005.

1

---
| (a)   | The      Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended May 4, 2008, which      accompanies this certification, fully complies with the requirements of      section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;      and                                   |
|-----------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| (b)   | The      information contained in the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter      ended April 29, 2007, which accompanies this certification, fairly      presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of      operation of Duckwall-ALCO Stores,Inc. |

----
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

T.L., the father,

Appellant,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES

and GUARDIAN AD LITEM,

Appellees.

No. 4D21-801

[August 2, 2021]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, 

Broward County; Shari Africk-Olefson, Judge; L.T. Case No. 

062013DP005342AXXXCE.

Bernard R. Appleman of the Law Office of Bernard R. Appleman, Fort 

Lauderdale, for appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Carolyn Schwarz, 

Assistant Attorney General, Fort Lauderdale, for appellee Department of 

Children and Families. 

Thomasina F. Moore, Statewide Director of Appeals, and Rebecca L. 

Bartlett, Senior Attorney, Statewide Guardian ad Litem Office, 

Tallahassee, for appellee Guardian ad Litem o/b/o S.L..

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

DAMOORGIAN, LEVINE and KUNTZ, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
### Summary of Analy tical Results (662 - June 2011) **Sample ID** 662-GRAB 662-GRAB 662-GRAB 662-GRAB **Date** 6/6/11 6/13/11 6/20/11 6/27/11 **Top (ft)** 0 0 0 0 **Total (T)/ Bottom (ft)**  0 0 0 0 **An aly**  **te units**  **Diss. (D) Duplicate #**  1 1 1 1 PFOA ug/L T 7.11 6.83 5.13 3.79

Samples were analyzed by Critical Path Services. Reported results PFOA = Perfluorooctanoic Acid ug/L = micrograms per Liter
represent a single analysis, except for the sample collected on 6/13/11. collected on 6/13/11 represents the average of duplicate results. Aceptable precision was obtained and the reported result for the sample

< and ND = Non detect at stated reporting limit Page 1 of 1 0900006480fc8945.xls:Sheet1 2/29/2012 8:38 AM
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 23.1

                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS



We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement
pertaining to the MMI Companies, Inc. Savings and Profit Sharing Plan
(401(k)) Form S-8 No. 33-72786), in the Registration Statements pertaining to
the MMI Companies, Inc. 1993 Employee Stock Plan, and 1993 Non-employee
Director's Formula Stock Option Plan (Form S-8 No. 333-46889 and No.
33-81228) and the Registration Statement pertaining to the 1995 Employee
Stock Investment Plan (Form S-8 No. 33-87356), and in the related
Prospectuses, of our report dated February 24, 1999, except for Notes 15 and
16 as to which the date is January 11, 2000, with respect to the consolidated
financial statements and schedules of MMI Companies, Inc. included in the
Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 1998, as amended.

                                                   ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Chicago, Illinois
January 18, 2000
Exhibit 10.38

LV1 392943v1 03/31/06
                                     TRIDENT
                                   GROWTH FUND

March 23, 2006

Roger Abel
President and Chief Executive Officer
Touchstone Resources USA, Inc.
1600 Smith, Suite 5100
Houston, Texas 77002

Dear Mr. Abel:

      Trident Growth Fund L.P. ("Trident") hereby agrees to extend the due date
of Touchstone Resources USA, Inc.'s ("Touchstone") $2,100,000 Convertible
Promissory Note from March 23, 2006 to a date no later than May 7, 2006 (the
"Note Extension"). In addition, Trident agrees to waive the Cash Interest
Coverage, The Cash Flow Coverage and the Current Ratio to a date no later than
May 7, 2006 (the "Requirement Waivers"). In consideration for the above Note
Extension and Requirement Waivers, Touchstone will issue to Trident a Common
Stock Purchase Warrant to purchase 50,000 shares of Touchstone's common stock at
$0.90 per share. These Warrants shall have the same terms and conditions as the
Warrants issued in the original loan transaction.

      In the event that Touchstone raises funds sufficient to repay the Trident
note through private placement of equity or debt during the term of the Note,
Touchstone shall have the obligation to pay the $2,100,000 Convertible
Promissory Note and any accrued interest outstanding out of such funds within
ten days of the closing of such placement.

If the above corresponds with our agreement, please execute the acknowledgement
below as evidence of your agreement.

                                           Very truly yours,

                                           TRIDENT GROWTH FUND, L.P.
                                           BY: TRIDENT MANAGEMENT, LLC.
                                               GENERAL PARTNER

                                           BY: /s/ Scotty Cook
                                               --------------------------------
                                               Scotty Cook, Authorized Member

   700 Gemini, Suite 100 o Houston, Texas 77058 o Tel: 281.488.8484 o Fax:
                                 281.488.5353
                          www.tridentgrowthfund.com

<PAGE>

                                                                   Exhibit 10.38

----------------
03/23/06

Agreed and Accepted
This 23rd day of March, 2006

TOUCHSTONE RESOURCES USA, INC.

BY: /s/  Roger Abel
    -----------------------------
    Roger Abel, President and
    Chief Executive Officer

   700 Gemini, Suite 100 o Houston, Texas 77058 o Tel: 281.488.8484 o Fax:
                                 281.488.5353
                          www.tridentgrowthfund.com
##### 



Eaton Corporation
Second Quarter 2007 Report on Form 10-Q
Item 6
Exhibit 12
Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges
 Six monthsended
    
    
    
    Year ended December 31June 30,2007
    
    
    2006
    
    
    2005
    
    
    2004
    
    
    2003
    
    
    2002Income from continuing operations
before income taxes
    
    $
    519
    
    
    $
    969
    
    
    $
    964
    
    
    $
    749
    
    
    $
    463
    
    
    $
    364AdjustmentsMinority interest in consolidated
subsidiaries
    
    
    5
    
    
    
    10
    
    
    
    5
    
    
    
    7
    
    
    
    12
    
    
    
    14(Income) losses of equity investees
    
    
    
    
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    (3
    )
    
    
    (1
    )Interest expensed
    
    
    92
    
    
    
    139
    
    
    
    109
    
    
    
    88
    
    
    
    93
    
    
    
    110Amortization of debt issue costs
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    2
    
    
    
    2Estimated portion of rent expense
representing interest
    
    
    21
    
    
    
    41
    
    
    
    38
    
    
    
    37
    
    
    
    38
    
    
    
    34Amortization of capitalized interest
    
    
    6
    
    
    
    12
    
    
    
    12
    
    
    
    17
    
    
    
    13
    
    
    
    13Distributed income of equity investees
    
    
    
    
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    4
    
    
    
    3Adjusted income from continuing
operations before income taxes
    
    $
    644
    
    
    $
    1,174
    
    
    $
    1,134
    
    
    $
    902
    
    
    $
    618
    
    
    $
    536Fixed chargesInterest expensed
    
    $
    92
    
    
    $
    139
    
    
    $
    109
    
    
    $
    88
    
    
    $
    93
    
    
    $
    110Interest capitalized
    
    
    8
    
    
    
    14
    
    
    
    13
    
    
    
    7
    
    
    
    7
    
    
    
    8Amortization of debt issue costs
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    1
    
    
    
    2
    
    
    
    2Estimated portion of rent expense
representing interest
    
    
    21
    
    
    
    41
    
    
    
    38
    
    
    
    38
    
    
    
    38
    
    
    
    34Total fixed charges
    
    $
    122
    
    
    $
    195
    
    
    $
    161
    
    
    $
    134
    
    
    $
    140
    
    
    $
    154Ratio of earnings to fixed charges
    
    
    5.28
    
    
    
    6.02
    
    
    
    7.04
    
    
    
    6.73
    
    
    
    4.41
    
    
    
    3.48
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING 

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED 

 IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL 

 OF FLORIDA 

 SECOND DISTRICT 

DON EARLE MORGAN, ) 

 ) 

 Appellant, ) 

 ) 

v. ) Case No. 2D17-342 

 ) 

STATE OF FLORIDA, ) 

 ) 

 Appellee. ) 

 ) 

Opinion filed October 13, 2017. 

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Highlands 

County; Michael E. Raiden, Judge. 

Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, 

and Pamela H. Izakowitz, Assistant Public 

Defender, Bartow, for Appellant. 

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, 

Tallahassee, and Johnny T. Salgado, 

Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, 

for Appellee. 

PER CURIAM. 

 Don Earle Morgan appeals his convictions and sentences for one count of 

criminal mischief in violation of section 806.13(1)(b)(1), Florida Statutes (2014), and one 

count of burglary of a dwelling in violation of section 810.02(3)(a). The written judgment 
- 2 - 

improperly identifies the criminal mischief as a first-degree misdemeanor, rather than a 

second-degree misdemeanor. Accordingly, we remand with instructions for the trial 

court to correct that scrivener's error in the written judgment. See Jackson v. State, 192 

So. 3d 649 (Fla. 2d DCA 2016); Riley v. State, 622 So. 2d 94 (Fla. 2d DCA 1993); 

Culbertson v. State, 547 So. 2d 725 (Fla. 2d DCA 1989). We affirm Mr. Morgan's 

convictions and sentences in all other respects. 

 Affirmed; remanded with instruction to correct scrivener's error. 

LaROSE, C.J., and CRENSHAW and LUCAS, JJ., Concur.
#### In re TOWNSEND AVE.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.

January 9, 1903.)

In the matter of Townsend avenue. No opinion. Motion denied.
#### § 26.610 Controlled substance.

*Controlled substance* means a controlled substance in schedules I through V of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 812), and as further defined by regulation at 21 CFR 1308.11 through 1308.15.
# C_2023305EN.01000301.xml

| 29.8.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 305/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

29.8.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 305/3

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.11141 – WENDEL / TOPSCALE)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2023/C 305/03)

On 29 June 2023, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the ‘Competition policy’ website of the Commission (https://competition-cases.ec.europa.eu/search). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the ‘Competition policy’ website of the Commission (https://competition-cases.ec.europa.eu/search). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32023M11141. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32023M11141. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

---
November 13, 2014

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

EX PARTE MARIA A. MARTINEZ

NO. 14-14-00253-CR

________________________________

This cause was heard on the transcript of the record of the court below. 

Having considered the record, this Court holds that there was no error in the 

judgment. The Court orders the judgment AFFIRMED.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AT DECEMBER 31, 1995 (UNAUDITED) AND THE
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATION FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED
DECEMBER 31, 1995 (UNAUDITED) AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                           2,090
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      700
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                        814
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 3,756
<PP&E>                                          12,957
<DEPRECIATION>                                  11,387
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   6,338
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,732
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        29,493
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     6,338
<SALES>                                          3,129
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 3,353
<CGS>                                            2,200
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    2,200
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 2,659
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   4
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,258)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,258)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,258)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.15)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.15)
        

</TABLE>
§ 37.130 Which other parts of the DoD Grant and Agreement Regulations apply to TIAs? ( a ) TIAs are explicitly covered in this part and part 21 of the DoD Grant and Agreement Regulations (DoDGARs). Part 21 (32 CFR part 21) addresses deviation procedures and other general matters that relate to the DoDGARs, to DoD Components' authorities and responsibilities for assistance instruments, and to requirements for reporting information about assistance awards.
( b ) Two additional parts of the DoDGARs apply to TIAs, although they do not mention TIAs explicitly. They are: ( 1 ) Part 1125 (2 CFR part 1125) on nonprocurement debarment and suspension, which applies because it covers nonprocurement instruments in general;
( 2 ) Part 26 (32 CFR part 26), on drug-free workplace requirements, which applies because it covers financial assistance in general; and
( 3 ) Part 28 (32 CFR part 28), on lobbying restrictions, which applies by law (31 U.S.C. 1352) to TIAs that are cooperative agreements and as a matter of DoD policy to all other TIAs.
( c ) Portions of other DoDGARs parts apply to TIAs only as cited by reference in this part.
[68 FR 47160, Aug. 7, 2003, as amended at 70 FR 49477, Aug. 23, 2005; 72 FR 34999, June 26, 2007; 85 FR 51245, Aug. 19, 2020]
§ 37.205 What judgments must I make about the nature of the project? You must: ( a ) Conclude that the principal purpose of the project is stimulation or support of research (*i.e.,* assistance), rather than acquiring goods or services for the benefit of the Government (*i.e.,* acquisition);
( b ) Decide that the basic, applied, or advanced research project is relevant to the policy objective of civil-military integration (*see* appendix A of this part); and
( c ) Ensure that, to the maximum extent practicable, any TIA that uses the authority of 10 U.S.C. 2371 (*see* appendix B of this part) does not support research that duplicates other research being conducted under existing programs carried out by the Department of Defense. This is a statutory requirement of 10 U.S.C. 2371.
( d ) When your TIA is a type of assistance transaction other than a grant or cooperative agreement, satisfy the condition in 10 U.S.C. 2371 to judge that the use of a standard grant or cooperative agreement for the research project is not feasible or appropriate. As discussed in appendix B to this part: ( 1 ) This situation arises if your TIA includes a patent provision that is less restrictive than is possible under the Bayh-Dole statute (because the patent provision is what distinguishes a TIA that is a cooperative agreement from a TIA that is an assistance transaction other than a grant or cooperative agreement).
( 2 ) You satisfy the requirement to judge that a standard cooperative agreement is not feasible or appropriate when you judge that execution of the research project warrants a less restrictive patent provision than is possible under Bayh-Dole.
EXHIBIT 23




                          CONSENT OF DELOITTE & TOUCHE




<PAGE>
                    CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

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

Security Capital Corporation:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Post-Effective Amendment No. 2
to Registration Statement No. 2-91703 (which is also Post-Effective Amendment
No. 3 to Registration Statement No. 2-82443) of Security Capital Corporation on
Form S-8 of our report dated April 7, 1998, appearing in the Annual Report on
Form 10-K of Security Capital Corporation for the year ended December 31, 1997.


DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
Houston, Texas
April 7, 1998
PD1396-14COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXASTransmitted 5/19/2015 3:30:34 PM

Accepted 5/22/2015 9:32:51 AMABEL ACOSTA

CLERK