alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
E X H I B I T   2 0

                  OPINION OF FRIEDMAN & FRIEDMAN,
      INDEPENDENT AUDITORS FOR MULTISCRIPT INTERNATIONAL INC.



To the Shareholder of 
Multiscript Inc.


We have audited the balance sheets of Multiscript Inc. as at December 31, 1995
and 1994 and the statements of earnings, deficit and changes in financial
position for each of the years ended December 31, 1995, 1994 and 1993.  These
financial statements are the responsibility of the Company's management.  Our
responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial statements based on
our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with generally accepted auditing
standards.  Those standards require that we plan and perform an audit to obtain
reasonable assurance whether the financial statements are free of material
misstatement.  An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting
the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements.  An audit also includes
assessing the accounting principles used and significant estimates made by
management, as well as evaluating the overall financial statement presentation.

In our opinion, these financial statements present fairly, in all material
respects, the financial position of the Company as at December 31, 1995 and 1994
and the results of its operations and the changes in its financial position for
each of the years in the three year period ended December 31, 1995 in accordance
with generally accepted accounting principles.


\s\FRIEDMAN & FRIEDMAN


Chartered Accountants

Montreal, Quebec
February 7, 1996
222.101-4 Removal of items from contractors' facilities affected by work stoppages. ( a ) When a contractor is unable to deliver urgent and critical items because of a work stoppage at its facility, the contracting officer, before removing any items from the facility, shall— ( i ) Before initiating any action, contact the labor advisor to obtain the opinion of the national office of the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service or other mediation agency regarding the effect movement of the items would have on labor negotiations. Normally removals will not be made if they will adversely affect labor negotiations.
( ii ) Upon the recommendation of the labor advisor, provide a written request for removal of the material to the cognizant contract administration office. Include in the request the information specified at PGI 222.101-4(a)(ii).
( iii ) With the assistance of the labor advisor or the commander of the contract administration office, attempt to have both the management and the labor representatives involved agree to shipment of the material by normal means.
( iv ) If agreement for removal of the needed items cannot be reached following the procedures in paragraphs (a) (i) through (iii) of this subsection, the commander of the contract administration office, after obtaining approval from the labor advisor, may seek the concurrence of the parties to the dispute to permit movement of the material by military vehicles with military personnel. On receipt of such concurrences, the commander may proceed to make necessary arrangements to move the material.
( v ) If agreement for removal of the needed items cannot be reached following any of the procedures in paragraphs (a) (i) through (iv) of this subsection, refer the matter to the labor advisor with the information required by 222.101-3-70(b). If the labor advisor is unsuccessful in obtaining concurrence of the parties for the movement of the material and further action to obtain the material is deemed necessary, refer the matter to the agency head. Upon review and verification that the items are urgently or critically needed and cannot be moved with the consent of the parties, the agency head, on a nondelegable basis, may order removal of the items from the facility.
[56 FR 36358, July 31, 1991, as amended at 71 FR 18670, Apr. 12, 2006]
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 993 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 993

 To prohibit the Federal Communications Commission from reclassifying 
 broadband Internet access service as a telecommunications service and 
    from imposing certain regulations on providers of such service.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 1, 2017

 Mr. Lee (for himself, Mr. Cornyn, Mr. Cotton, Mr. Cruz, Mr. Johnson, 
    Mr. Paul, Mr. Tillis, Mr. Sasse, and Mr. Inhofe) introduced the 
 following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
                 Commerce, Science, and Transportation

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To prohibit the Federal Communications Commission from reclassifying 
 broadband Internet access service as a telecommunications service and 
    from imposing certain regulations on providers of such service.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Restoring Internet Freedom Act''.

SEC. 2. LIMITATION ON AUTHORITY OF FCC.

    (a) In General.--The rule adopted by the Federal Communications 
Commission in GN Docket No. 14-28 on February 26, 2015 (relating to 
broadband Internet access service), shall have no force or effect, and 
the Commission may not reissue such rule in substantially the same 
form, or issue a new rule that is substantially the same as such rule, 
unless the reissued or new rule is specifically authorized by a law 
enacted after the date of enactment of this Act.
    (b) Rule Defined.--In this section, the term ``rule'' has the 
meaning given the term in section 804 of title 5, United States Code.
                                 <all>
```
#### 1309.507 Solicitation provisions and contract clauses.
225.7705-3 Procedures. ( a ) The contracting officer shall not obligate or expend funds for contracts for a construction or other infrastructure program or project in Afghanistan, awarded after December 23, 2016, unless the requiring activity provides the following documentation: ( 1 ) Written affirmation that military or civilian personnel of the United States Government or their representatives, with authority to conduct oversight of such program or project, can safely access such program or project; or
( 2 ) ( i ) For programs or projects valued at less than $1 million, sufficient information upon which to base the determination described in 225.7705-2(a); or
( ii ) ( A ) For programs or projects valued at $1 million or more, a copy of the approved determination described in 225.7705-2(a) and (b); and
( B ) For programs or projects valued at $40 million or more, a copy of the Congressional notification described in 225.7705-2(c).
( b ) After contract award, the contracting officer shall review the requiring activity's progress reports (*e.g.,* contracting officer's representative reports) that addresses whether access continues to be safe or security conditions continue to permit effective implementation and oversight of the contract. If the requiring activity does not affirm continued safe access or, if a determination to waive the prohibition has been approved, that security conditions continue to permit effective implementation and oversight of the contract, then the contracting officer shall consult with the requiring activity to take any appropriate actions.
Order issued Noveiiiher
, 2012

In The 

## Qtourt nfAppiat 

## 3FiftI

1 1iitrirt nf rxaa at 3atkta
No. 05-12-00427-CR JOSHUA O’NEALWHiTE, Appellant V. 

### THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee 

### ORDER BeforeJustices Richter, Lang-Miers, and Myers Based on the Court’s opinion ofthis date, we GRANT the September 5, 2012 motion of Deborah Ellison Farris for leave to withdraw as appointed counsel on appeal. We

### DIRECT the Clerk ofthe Court to remove Deborah Ellison Farris as counsel ofrecord for appellant. We DIRECT the Clerk ofthe Court to send a copy ofthis order and all future correspondence to Joshua O’Neal White, No. 12011949, Dallas County Jail, P.O. Box 660334, Dallas, Texas, 75266-0334.

LANA MYERS JUSTICE
**Print

## Published Guidance

## Webinars and Recordings

## Resources

                    Last Modified: 01/23/2024 •                    Published: 05/15/2023
A grantee under a Department discretionary grant program that is denied a continuation award under 34 C.FR. 75.253 may object under 2 CFR §200.342 in the form of a request for  reconsideration of the decision.

- A request for reconsideration must:- Be submitted in writing to the Department official identified in the notice denying the continuation award by a date specified in that notice.
- Set forth the grantee's basis for objecting to the decision not to make a continuation award and include any relevant supporting documentation.

- The designated Department official identified in the notice denying the continuation award will consider the request for reconsideration and will provide the grantee with a written response to that request.  That response will be the Department's final decision on the matter.
212.203 Procedures for solicitation, evaluation, and award. ( 1 ) See 215.101-2-70 for the limitations and prohibitions on the use of the lowest price technically acceptable source selection process, which are applicable to the acquisition of commercial products and commercial services.
( 2 ) See 217.7801 for the prohibition on the use of reverse auctions for personal protective equipment and aviation critical safety items.
( 3 ) See 204.7603 for procedures on the required use of Supplier Performance Risk System risk assessments as part of the award decision.
( 4 ) See subpart 212.70 for acquisitions resulting from a commercial solutions opening.
[84 FR 50788, Sept. 26, 2019, as amended at 88 FR 6582, Jan. 31, 2023; 88 FR 17339, Mar. 22, 2023; 88 FR 55939, Aug. 17, 2023]
#### 1428.301 Policy.

It is the policy of DOI to insure its own risks only when such action is in the best interest of the Government. Circumstances where contractors are required to carry insurance are listed under FAR 28.301 and 28.306. In these circumstances, the CO shall insert the clause at 1452.228-70, Liability Insurance— Department of the Interior, in solicitations and contracts.
#### 206.302-3-70 Solicitation provision.

Use the provision at 252.206-7000, Domestic Source Restriction, in all solicitations that are restricted to domestic sources under the authority of FAR 6.302-3.
#### 223.7203 Contract clause.

Use the clause at 252.223-7007, Safeguarding Sensitive Conventional Arms, Ammunition, and Explosives, in all solicitations and contracts to which DoD Manual 5100.76 applies, in accordance with the policy at 223.7201. Complete paragraph (b) of the clause based on information provided by cognizant technical or requirements personnel.

[61 FR 7743, Feb. 29, 1996; 61 FR 18195, Apr. 24, 1996; 88 FR 80466, Nov. 17, 2023]
U.S. Dept Commerce/NOAA/NMFS/NWFSC/PublicationsFigure 6. Prevalences of toxicopathic kidney lesions in English sole captured at northern (A) and southern (B) sites in the National Benthic Surveillance Project (1984-88). Prolif = proliferative lesions. The number of fish examined per site is given below each site abbreviation (see Table 1 for site definitions). The reference site is shown at the far right of the graph and is indicated by enclosed brackets { }. Lesion prevalences significantly higher than those detected at the reference site (p < 0.05) are indicated by an asterisk (*). Figure 7. Prevalences of toxicopathic liver lesions in starry flounder at sites sampled in the NBSP (1984-88). FCA = foci of cellular alteration; Prolif = nonneoplastic proliferative lesions; SDN = specific degenerative/necrotic lesions; HydVac = hydropic vacuolation. The number of fish examined per site is given below each site abbreviation (see Table 1 for site definitions). The reference site is shown at the far right of the graph and is indicated by enclosed brackets { }. Lesion prevalences significantly higher than those detected at the reference site (p < 0.05) are indicated by an asterisk (*). Figure 8. Prevalences of toxicopathic kidney lesions in starry flounder at sites sampled in the National Benthic Surveillance Project (1984-88). Prolif = proliferative lesions. The number of fish examined per site is given below each site abbreviation (see Table 1 for site definitions). The reference site is shown at the far right of the graph and is indicated by enclosed brackets { }. Lesion prevalences significantly higher than those detected at the reference site (p < 0.05) are indicated by an asterisk (*).
#### 22.406-5 Subcontracts.

In accordance with the requirements of the clause at 52.222-11, Subcontracts (Labor Standards), the contractor and subcontractors at any tier are required to submit a fully executed SF 1413, Statement and Acknowledgment, upon award of each subcontract.
The District voluntarily signed a resolution agreement to resolve a Title IX violation on December 3, 2015. On November 2, 2015, OCR issued a letter of finding stating that the district was in violation of Title IX for discriminating against a transgender high school student by denying her access to the girls' locker rooms for more than two years. The agreement requires the District to provide the student access to the girls’ locker rooms based on her request to change in private changing stations within the locker rooms; install sufficient privacy curtains for use by any student who desires privacy; provide a reasonable alternative for any student who desires additional privacy; coordinate with hosts of off-campus events to provide the student access to female facilities; engage a consultant with expertise in adolescent gender identity; establish a support team, if requested by the student; and adopt and published a revised notice of nondiscrimination.  OCR will monitor the District’s implementation of the Agreement. 

***Read the Press Release	| Read the Letter of Findings PDF (243K)	| Read the Resolution Letter PDF (47.64K)        | Read the Resolution Agreement PDF (100.37K)***

Top
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000016104
<NAME> CAGLE'S, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-30-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-02-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-30-1995
<CASH>                                           (1900)
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    14378
<ALLOWANCES>                                       480
<INVENTORY>                                      28542
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 50773
<PP&E>                                           90608
<DEPRECIATION>                                   30766
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  125582
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            18791
<BONDS>                                          48838
<COMMON>                                          5006
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                       45402
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    125582
<SALES>                                         231103 
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                231103
<CGS>                                           219182
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   231117
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                (12387)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                1449
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  10924
<INCOME-TAX>                                      3988
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               6936
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      6936
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    1.386
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    1.386
        

</TABLE>
#### 219.805 Competitive 8(a).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                      19,987,000
<SECURITIES>                                27,072,000
<RECEIVABLES>                              143,266,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                 7,337,000
<INVENTORY>                                 82,893,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           303,384,000
<PP&E>                                     298,958,000
<DEPRECIATION>                             147,728,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             665,327,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      154,197,000
<BONDS>                                     51,773,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    47,205,000
<OTHER-SE>                                 306,354,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               665,327,000
<SALES>                                    491,095,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           496,031,000
<CGS>                                      178,988,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              461,843,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           3,312,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             34,188,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                13,333,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         20,855,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                20,855,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .45
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .45
        

</TABLE>
#### 2146.270-1 Contract clause.

The clause at 2152.246-70 shall be inserted in all FEGLI Program contracts.
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10(a)




INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT


We consent to the use in this Post-Effective Amendment No. 21 to the
Registration Statement on Form N-4 of Sun Life (N.Y.) Variable Account B (Reg.
No. 2-95003) of our report dated February 10, 2000 accompanying the financial
statements of Sun Life (N.Y.) Variable Account B and to the use of our report
dated February 10, 2000 accompanying the statutory financial statements of Sun
Life Insurance and Annuity Company of New York, which includes explanatory
paragraphs relating to the use of statutory accounting practices which differ
from generally accepted accounting principles, appearing in the Statement of
Additional Information, which is part of such Registration Statement, and to the
incorporation by reference of our report dated February 10, 2000 appearing in
the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Sun Life Insurance and Annuity Company of
New York for the year ended December 31, 1999, which includes explanatory
paragraphs relating to the use of statutory accounting practices which differ
from generally accepted accounting principles.

We also consent to the references to us under the heading "Condensed
Financial Information -- Accumulation Unit Values" in the Prospectus, which
is part of such Registration Statement, and under the heading "Accountants"
in such Statement of Additional Information.


DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

Boston, Massachusetts
April 20, 2000
#### In the Matter of Confesora C. Ruiz et al., as Administratrices of the Estate of Ismael Ruiz, Deceased, Respondents, v. Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corporation, Appellant.

In a proceeding pursuant to statute (Insurance Law, § 618), by petitioners, as the administratrices of a decedent’s estate, for the court’s permission to institute an action against the Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification 'Corporation, to recover damages for the decedent’s wrongful death and for conscious pain and suffering, the corporation appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County, entered October 24, 1962 after a hearing, which, on reargument, granted the application. Order reversed on the law and the facts, without costs, and application denied, without costs. Findings of fact which may be inconsistent herewith are reversed and new findings are made as indicated herein. The record discloses substantial evidence of identification of the second successive vehicle operated by a hit-and-run driver, which was caused to run over petitioners’ intestate. Under the circumstances, an action against the registered owner and the actual owner and apparent operator of the vehicle in the vicinity should he commenced and vigorously prosecuted. Only in the event of such prosecution, if unsuccessful for lack of identity, should leave to sue the appellant corporation (MVAXC) be considered, provided application for such relief be made within the time prescribed by statute (Insurance Law, § 618). (C£. *Matter of Buiz*v. *MVA1C,*
      *83319 A D 2d 833.) Ughetta, Acting P. J., Eleinfeld, Christ, Brennan and Hopkins, JJ., concur.
# C_2016398EN.01000101.xml

| 28.10.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 398/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.10.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 398/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.8215 — Apollo Management/Rackspace Hosting)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2016/C 398/01)

On 21 October 2016, 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 language and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). 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 website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). 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 32016M8215. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32016M8215. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to the European law.

---

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

1

---