alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit
      23(d)





CONSENT
        OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
 
 We
        hereby
        consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on
        Form
        S-3 (Nos. 333-116478, 333-116478-01, 333-116478-02, 333-85716, 333-85716-01,
        333-85716-02, 333-106200, 333-106200-01, 333-132574, 333-132574-01,
        333-132574-02, and 333-132574-03 ), the Registration Statements on Form S-3D
        (Nos. 333-128543 and 333-102845), and the Registration Statements on Form
        S-8
        (Nos. 333-02003, 333-112453, 333-110372, and 333-95967) of PPL Corporation
        of
        our report dated February 24, 2006, except for Note 10 which is as of December
        13, 2006, relating to the consolidated financial statements and financial
        statement schedule, which appears in this Form 10-K.
 
 
 
 /s/
        PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
 Philadelphia,
        Pennsylvania
 February
        26, 2007
Certification
 Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes  Oxley Act of 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Emerson Radio Corp.;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material
fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the
circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the
period covered by this report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included
in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of
operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this
report;4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)
and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:
     5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and
the audit committee of registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
   Date: August 16, 2010
    /s/ Adrian MaAdrian MaChief Executive Officer  21
§ 935.162 Use of special areas. The Commander may regulate the use of designated or posted areas on Wake Island, as follows: ( a ) Restricted areas—which no person may enter without permission.
( b ) Prohibited activities areas—in which no person may engage in any activity that is specifically prohibited.
( c ) Special purpose areas-in which no person may engage in any activity other than that for which the area is reserved.
#### 1315.209 Solicitation provisions and contract clauses.

The designee authorized to waive the examination of records by the Comptroller General is set forth in CAM 1301.70.
§ 811.3 Official requests for visual information productions or materials. ( a ) Send official Air Force requests for productions or materials from the DoD Central Records Centers by letter or message. Include: ( 1 ) Descriptions of the images needed, including media format, dates, etc.
( 2 ) Visual information record identification number (VIRIN), production, or Research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E) identification numbers, if known.
( 3 ) Intended use and purpose of the material.
( 4 ) The date needed and a statement of why products are needed on a specific date.
( b ) Send inquiries about motion picture or television materials to the Defense Visual Information Center (DVIC), 1363 Z Street, Building 2730, March ARB, CA 92518-2703.
( c ) Send Air Force customer inquiries about still photographic materials to 11 CS/SCUA, Bolling AFB, Washington, DC 20332-0403 (the Air Force accessioning point).
( d ) Send non-Air Force customers' inquiries about still photographic materials to the DVIC.
###### Editorial Note on Part 842

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 842 appear at 81 FR 83688, Nov. 22, 2016.

#### § 842.114 Scope of this subpart.

This subpart describes how to settle claims for and against the United States for property damage, personal injury, or death arising out of the operation of nonappropriated fund instrumentalities (NAFIs). Unless stated below, such claims will follow procedures outlined in other subparts of this part for the substantive law applicable to the particular claim. For example, a NAFI claim adjudicated under the Federal Tort Claims Act will follow procedures in this subpart as well as subpart K of this part.

[81 FR 83700, Nov. 22, 2016]
**EXHIBIT
      32(A)**




**Section
      1350 Certification**


**By
      Principal Executive Officer**





I,
      Daniel
      Greenberg, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
      to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the periodic report,
      to which this Statement is attached, fully complies with the requirements of
      Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, and the
      information contained in the periodic report to which this Statement is
      attached, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
      and
      results of operations of the registrant.





A
      signed original of this written statement has been provided to the Company
      and
      will be retained by the Company and furnished to the SEC upon request.




Dated: December
      21, 2007





/s/
                Daniel GreenbergDaniel
                Greenberg
              Chief
                Executive Officer
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

CLIFFORD WILSON,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 249 WAL 2022

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 15th day of February, 2023, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED.
# MEMORANDUM

TO:          Addressees

FROM:    The Secretary

SUBJECT:  Delegation of Authority

## I. DELEGATION

Under the authority vested in me by section 412 of the Department of Education Organization Act, 20 U.S.C. §3472, I hereby delegated to you, and to anyone serving for you in an acting capacity, for your respective Principal Office, the authority under 5 U.S.C. Section 3595(b)(3)(B), to file written objections to the Office of Personnel Management, when appropriate, based on your determination that the career Senior Executive Service employees referred failed to meet the technical qualifications for applicable position vacancies.

Unless otherwise noted in future delegations of authority, legislative amendments to the authorities delegated herein are included in the scope of this delegation.

## II. RESERVATIONS

None.

## III. REDELEGATION

This authority may not be redelegated.

## IV. CERTIFICATION AND EFFECTIVE DATE

This delegation is effective upon certification by the Department’s Principal Delegations Control Officer and supersedes all previous delegation of this authority.

___________(Signed)___________ 

Richard W. Riley

**OGC Clearance****and Date:**/s/ R. Wexler, 7/12/96

**Certification Date**:  7/31/96

**Certified by Departmental Delegations Control Officer:**/s/ Naty Beetle****

**Control Number**:   EA/EV/52

Addressees and PO Control No.

EA/EB/137 – Deputy Secretary

EA/EC/185 – Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights

EA/EE/16 – Under Secretary

EA/EF/83 – Inspector General

EA/EG/79 – General Counsel

EA/EH/69 – Assistant Secretary for Special Education and Rehabilitative Services

EA/EJ/28 - Assistant Secretary for Legislation and Congressional Affairs

EA/EK/86 - Assistant Secretary for Intergovernmental and Interagency Affairs

EA/EL/62 – Chief Financial Officer

EA/EP/244 - Assistant Secretary for Postsecondary Education

EA/ES/54- Assistant Secretary for Elementary and Secondary Education

EA/EV/52 - Assistant Secretary for Vocational and Adult Education

EA/EI/2 - Chief Information Officer

EA/EN/2 - Chief Operating Officer, Federal Student Aid

EA/EQ/2 - Deputy Under Secretary for Safe and Drug-Free Schools

EA/ER/1 - Director, Institute of Education Sciences

EA/EU/2 - Deputy Under Secretary for Innovation and Improvement
### §99. Separability

If any provision of this chapter or the application thereof to any person or circumstances is held invalid, the validity of the remainder of the chapter and of the application of such provisions to other persons and circumstances shall not be affected thereby.

(Mar. 3, 1923, ch. 217, §9, 42 Stat. 1437.)
EXHIBIT 32.1
Certification of the Chief Executive Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
      as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with this quarterly report of Espey Mfg. & Electronics  Corp. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the
Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof,  I, Howard  Pinsley,
President and Chief Executive  Officer of the Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18
U.S.C.  Section 1350, as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

      1.    The report fully complies with the  requirements of Section 13(a) or
            15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

      2.    The  information  contained in this report fairly  presents,  in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of the Company.

Date: February 14, 2005

                                        /s/Howard Pinsley
                                        ----------------------------------
                                        Howard Pinsley
                                        President and
                                        Chief Executive Officer

                                  EXHIBIT 32.2

 Certification of the Principal Financial Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
   1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with this quarterly report of Espey Mfg. & Electronics  Corp. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the
Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof,  I, David A. O'Neil,
Principal  Financial  Officer of the  Company,  certify,  pursuant  to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of
2002, that to my knowledge:

      1.    The report fully complies with the  requirements of Section 13(a) or
            15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

      2.    The  information  contained in this report fairly  presents,  in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of the Company.

Date: February 14, 2005

                                       /s/David A. O'Neil
                                       ----------------------------------
                                       David A. O'Neil
                                       Treasurer and Principal Financial Officer


                                       16
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Bernard Winber, Appellant, v. Gottlieb Adorn Printing Co., Inc., et al., Respondents. Workmen’s Compensation Board, Respondent.

Appeal by the claimant from a decision of the Workmen’s Compensation Board denying compensation benefits to the claimant. Claimant, a compositor, suffered an injury to his lower back on November 3, 1958 while attempting to lift a type form. That disability resulted from this injury is not here disputed. The sole question is whether the board’s finding that a subsequent reduction in earnings suffered in January, 1960 was not due to the disability but rather to the employer’s economic condition is supported by substantial evidence. A reduction in earnings due solely to economic conditions is not compensable *(Matter of Haynos*v. *American Brass Co.,*8 A D 2d 870). However, if the disability did, in fact, cause or contribute to reduced earnings an award must be made *(Matter of Croce*v. *Ford Motor Co.,*307 N. Y. 125). The resolution of this issue in a given case is factual and thus the board’s *914determination if based on substantial evidence is not reviewable (see *Matter of Connor*v. *Bethlehem, Steel Co.,*11 A D 2d 578). There is testimony by the employer that only economic considerations caused claimant’s pay to be reduced. This testimony was to the effect that general business conditions were poor at the time claimant’s decrease took place and that just prior thereto a special contract had been lost on which claimant did primarily all the work, since he was the only compositor, and which had previously justified his receiving $32 above the union scale while all the rest of the employees received only the scale. The loss of this contract when coupled with the generally poor conditions necessitated a reduction in claimant’s salary as an economy measure. Claimant discounts these economic reasons advanced by the employer on the grounds that he was the only employee who suffered a reduction in pay as result of such conditions and that at the time his wages were reduced two office workers were granted increases. He also points to the fact that a witness for the employer when asked if he felt claimant’s wages would ever return to their former standard replied he felt it unlikely due to claimant’s physical condition. The employer’s reply was that since its other employees were being paid the minimum union scale, their pay could not be reduced, that no comparison can be made between pay policies with respect to production employees and office workers and that claimant, even after the reduction, was still receiving $10 above the union scale and received a $5 raise in October of 1960. On this state of the record we cannot disturb the determination of the board. Decision affirmed, without costs. Bergan, P. J., Gibson, Herlihy and Reynolds, JJ., concur.
#### 1371.107 Performance.

Insert clause 1352.271-76, *Performance,* in all solicitations and contracts for ship construction and ship repair.
Exhibit 32(c)

CERTIFICATE PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
FOR PPL ENERGY SUPPLY, LLC'S 10-K FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 2004

In connection with the annual report on Form 10-K of PPL Energy Supply, LLC (the "Company") for the year ended December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Covered Report"), I, the principal executive officer of the Company, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, hereby certify that:

| |  | The Covered Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and                   
| | - | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |   |                                                                                                                                                             
| |  | The information contained in the Covered Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





|Date:  March 1, 2005 | /s/ William F. HechtWilliam F. Hecht
        President
        PPL Energy Supply, LLC
|-------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS 

EASTERN DIVISION

MARCIEA WILLIAMS, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) No. 1:12-cv-00789

)

LUXOTTICA RETAIL dba )

LENSCRAFTERS, )

)

Defendant. )

STIPULATION FOR ENTRY OF ORDER 

DISMISSING THE CASE WITH PREJUDICE

The undersigned parties hereby stipulate to and jointly move this court for the entry of an 

Order dismissing all claims of Plaintiff Marciea Williams against all Defendants. A proposed 

Order, agreed to by Plaintiff Williams and Defendant Luxottica Retail North America Inc. 

(“LRNA”), erroneously named herein as Luxottica Retail dba LensCrafters, is attached. 

1. On February 3, 2012, Plaintiff Williams filed a lawsuit against LRNA alleging

discrimination and retaliation. 

2. On July 5, 2012, the parties to this lawsuit agreed to a settlement that fully 

compromised and settled the above-captioned lawsuit in its entirety. 

THEREFORE:

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED by and between all of the parties hereto, through their 

respective undersigned attorneys, that this entire action may be, and hereby is, dismissed on its 

merits and with prejudice, but without costs or disbursements to any of the parties.

Case: 1:12-cv-00789 Document #: 24 Filed: 08/03/12 Page 1 of 3 PageID #:148
2

IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED that without further notice the Order of Dismissal with 

prejudice and on the merits of all claims, without costs or disbursements to any of the parties, 

may be entered herein.

Wherefore Defendants LRNA and Plaintiff Williams respectfully request that this Court 

enter the attached stipulated Order dismissing this action, including all possible claims and crossclaims, in its entirety with prejudice.

Date: August 3, 2012

Respectfully submitted,

s/ Julie O. Herrera

One of the Attorneys for Plaintiff

MARCIEA WILLIAMS

Julie O. Herrera

ED FOX & ASSOCIATES

300 West Adams, Suite 330

Chicago, Illinois 60606

(312) 345-8877 - Telephone

(312) 853-3489 - Facsimile

s/ Jason E. Barsanti

One of the Attorneys for Defendant

LUXOTTICA RETAIL dba LENSCRAFTERS

Timothy A. Wolfe

Jason E. Barsanti

MECKLER BULGER TILSON

MARICK & PEARSON LLP

123 North Wacker Drive, Suite 1800

Chicago, Illinois 60606

(312) 474-7900 - Telephone

(312) 474-7898 - Facsimile

Case: 1:12-cv-00789 Document #: 24 Filed: 08/03/12 Page 2 of 3 PageID #:149
3

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

MARCIEA WILLIAMS, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) No. 1:12-cv-00789

)

LUXOTTICA RETAIL dba )

LENSCRAFTERS, )

)

Defendant. )

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on August 3, 2012, I electronically filed the foregoing Stipulation 

for Entry of Order Dismissing the Case with Prejudice with the Clerk of the Court using the 

CM/ECF system which will send notification of such filing to:

Julie O. Herrera

Ed Fox & Associates

300 West Adams, Suite 330

Chicago, Illinois 60606

s/ Jason E. Barsanti

Jason E. Barsanti

M:\14677\1.NDIL.Pleadings\Stip.Dismiss.w.Prejudice.docx

Case: 1:12-cv-00789 Document #: 24 Filed: 08/03/12 Page 3 of 3 PageID #:150
EX-10.2



 







Exhibit 10.2




JO-ANN STORES, INC.




LIST OF EXECUTIVE OFFICERS WHO PARTICIPATE IN THE REGISTRANT’S 1979

SUPPLEMENTAL RETIREMENT BENEFIT PLAN, AS AMENDED




     David Holmberg
---

---

Exhibit 14(a)(3)

# [Chaikin, Cohen, Rubin
& Gilboa. Letterhead]

# CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT
PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

We hereby consent to the the
inclusion in the Annual Report on Form 20-F of Scitex Corporation Ltd.
(Scitex) for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2003 (the Annual
Report), and to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements of
Scitex on Form S-8 (Registration No. 33-34233, Registration No. 33-46861, Registration No.
33-87614, Registration No. 33-97622, Registration No. 33-97624 and Registration No.
33-39364), of our Report dated February 16, 2004, with respect to the financial statements
Objet Geometries Ltd. as of December 31, 2003.

| |  | Sincerely yours,/s/ Chaikin, Cohen, Rubin & Gilboa 
Chaikin, Cohen, Rubin & GilboaCertified Public Accountants (Isr.)
| |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Tel-Aviv, Israel
June 28, 2004



---

---
### §7502. Actions covered

This subchapter applies to a suspension for 14 days or less, but does not apply to a suspension under section 7521 or 7532 of this title or any action initiated under section 1215 of this title.

(Added Pub. L. 95–454, title II, §204(a), Oct. 13, 1978, 92 Stat. 1135; amended Pub. L. 101–12, §9(a)(2), Apr. 10, 1989, 103 Stat. 35.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

1989—Pub. L. 101–12 substituted "1215" for "1206".

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

#### Effective Date of 1989 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 101–12 effective 90 days following Apr. 10, 1989, see section 11 of Pub. L. 101–12, set out as a note under section 1201 of this title.

#### Effective Date

Section effective 90 days after Oct. 13, 1978, see section 907 of Pub. L. 95–454, set out as an Effective Date of 1978 Amendment note under section 1101 of this title.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

CANDACE BUSH, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) No. 11 C 9188

)

STARBUCKS CORPORATION, )

)

Defendant. )

MEMORANDUM ORDER

Starbucks Corporation (“Starbucks”) has filed its Answer and

Defenses (“ADs”) to the ADA action brought against it by Candace

Bush. This sua sponte memorandum opinion and order addresses a

repeatedly occurring problematic aspect of that responsive

pleading.

Many of the Answer’s responses (Answer ¶¶3, 6, 8, 9, 12, 15,

21 and 23) follow an invocation of the disclaimer of some of

Bush’s allegations--a disclaimer that tracks the language of Fed.

R. Civ. P. 8(b)(5)--by stating that Starbucks “therefore, denies

them.” This Court has had to deal with distressing frequency

with the oxymoronic nature of such a combination--indeed, as

chance would have it, Starbucks’ counsel has been tagged with one

of this Court’s opinions on the subject so recently in another

case that counsel have noticed up a motion for presentment on

January 25 in which they seek leave to file an Amended Answer to

cure that flaw.

There is no need for counsel to spend their time (for which

Case: 1:11-cv-09188 Document #: 16 Filed: 01/23/12 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:51
this Court would require that they not bill the client) for that

purpose. Instead the quoted phrase is simply stricken from each

of the cited paragraphs of the Answer. This action remains set

for a February 28 status hearing.

________________________________________

Milton I. Shadur

Senior United States District Judge

Date: January 23, 2012

2

Case: 1:11-cv-09188 Document #: 16 Filed: 01/23/12 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:52