alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
 
                                                                      Exhibit 23

                      CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS
                      -----------------------------------

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Prospectus
constituting part of the Registration Statement on Form S-3 (No. 33-61617) and
the Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-30229) of United Water Resources
of our report dated February 25, 1999, appearing on page 34 of this Annual
Report on Form 10-K.  We also consent to the reference to us under the heading
"Experts" in the Prospectus constituting part of the Registration Statement on
Form S-3 (No. 33-61617).



PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP
New York, New York
March 23, 1999

                                      117
#### 53.204-2 [Reserved]
<PAGE>
 
                                                                      EXHIBIT 11


                UNOCAL CORPORATION AND CONSOLIDATED SUBSIDIARIES
                    COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER COMMON SHARE
                       (DOLLARS AND SHARES IN THOUSANDS,
                           EXCEPT PER SHARE AMOUNTS)
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
 
 
                                                            YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31
                                        ------------------------------------------------------------
                                             1995         1994        1993        1992        1991
                                        ------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                                        <C>         <C>          <C>         <C>         <C>
PRIMARY:
Net earnings (loss) including
 cumulative effect of accounting
 changes                                   $260,319    $(153,374)   $212,867    $220,013    $ 72,545
Preferred stock dividend                    (35,875)     (35,875)    (35,875)    (16,642)          -
                                        ------------------------------------------------------------
Net earnings (loss) applicable to           224,444    $(189,249)   $176,992    $203,371    $ 72,545
 common stock
 
Weighted average common shares
 outstanding                                246,112      242,640     241,114     238,278     234,594
Dilutive common stock equivalents               943        1,040       1,081       1,123         629
                                        ------------------------------------------------------------
                                            247,055      243,680     242,195     239,401     235,223
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 NET EARNINGS (LOSS) PER COMMON SHARE     $    .91    $    (.78)   $    .73    $    .85    $    .31
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FULLY DILUTED:
Net earnings (loss) including
 cumulative effect of accounting
 change                                    $260,319    $(153,374)   $212,867    $220,013    $ 72,545
 
Weighted average common shares
 outstanding                                246,112      242,640     241,114     238,278     234,594
Dilutive common stock equivalents             1,511        1,714       1,743       1,561         629
Conversion of preferred stock *              16,667       16,667      16,667      16,667      16,667
                                        ------------------------------------------------------------
                                            264,290      261,021     259,524     256,506     235,223
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
   NET EARNINGS (LOSS) PER COMMON SHARE    $    .98    $    (.59)   $    .82    $    .86    $    .31
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
</TABLE> 
 
* The effect of assumed conversion of preferred stock on earnings per share is
  antidilutive
401.101 Purpose. ( a ) The AGAR provides for the codification and publication of uniform policies and procedures for acquisitions by contracting activities within USDA.
( b ) The purpose of the AGAR is to implement the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR), where further implementation is needed, and to supplement the FAR when coverage is needed for subject matter not covered in the FAR. The AGAR is not by itself a complete document, as it must be used in conjunction with the FAR.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 57 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 57

    Expressing the sense of Congress supporting the State of Israel.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 17, 2023

 Mr. Pfluger (for himself, Mr. Kustoff, Mr. Miller of Ohio, Mr. Waltz, 
Mr. McCaul, Mr. Carter of Texas, Mr. Williams of Texas, Ms. Van Duyne, 
 Mrs. Bice, Mrs. Miller of West Virginia, Mr. Moran, Mr. Aderholt, Mr. 
Webster of Florida, Mr. Weber of Texas, Mr. Johnson of Ohio, Mr. Self, 
 Mr. Ogles, Mr. Moolenaar, Mr. Kean of New Jersey, Mr. Reschenthaler, 
    Mr. Burgess, Mr. Mann, Mr. Jackson of Texas, Mr. Moskowitz, Mr. 
    Garbarino, and Mr. Feenstra) submitted the following concurrent 
resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs, and 
   in addition to the Committee on the Judiciary, for a period to be 
subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration 
  of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee 
                               concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
    Expressing the sense of Congress supporting the State of Israel.

    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That it is the sense of Congress that--
            (1) the State of Israel is not a racist or apartheid state;
            (2) Congress rejects all forms of antisemitism and 
        xenophobia; and
            (3) the United States will always be a staunch partner and 
        supporter of Israel.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 10.4
                                                                    ------------




2005 CORPORATE BONUS PLAN
-------------------------

     The Company's annual corporate bonus plan is intended to assist the Company
in rewarding and motivating key employees, focuses strongly on Company and
individual performance, and provides a fully competitive compensation package to
plan participants. As a pay-for-performance plan, cash incentive awards are paid
annually based on the achievement of performance objectives for the year. Under
the plan, each plan participant is provided a range of potential annual
incentive awards based on competitive award levels in the marketplace. Actual
awards paid under the plan are based on the Company's corporate performance.
Individual performance is also considered in determining actual award levels,
but is assessed in a non-formulaic fashion. The 2005 Corporate Bonus Plan
performance objective is earnings per share performance against plan. The
maximum incentive awards that could be awarded to the named executive officers
pursuant to the 2005 Corporate Bonus Plan are as follows: Zan Guerry - (150% x
annual base salary); A. Alexander Taylor II - (150% x annual base salary); B.
Derrill Pitts - (60% x annual base salary); Richard D. Moss - (60% x annual base
salary) and Donald K. Riker - (60% x annual base salary).
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 15

- 41686 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.
ANSELMO SOLANO

- CRUZ , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:15

- CR

- 1080

- 1

Before JOLLY, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: *
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Anselmo Solano

Cruz has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and Unite d States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Solano

- Cruz has filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein , as well

as Solano

- Cruz ’ s response . We concur with counsel’s assessment that the

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. 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 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED July 8, 2016 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 15-41686 Document: 00513584929 Page: 1 Date Filed: 07/08/2016No. 15

- 41686

2 appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSE D. See 5 TH C IR

. R. 42.2. Case: 15-41686 Document: 00513584929 Page: 2 Date Filed: 07/08/2016
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

JAIRO E. MELENDEZ

- IRAHETA, AKA Jairo Melendez,

Petitioner,

v.
MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General,

Respondent. No. 20

- 72557

Agency No. A044

- 471

- 286

MEMORANDUM *

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted January 19, 2022 * *

Before: SILVERMAN
, CLIFTON , and HURWITZ , Circuit Judges.

Jairo E. Melendez

- Iraheta
, a native and citizen of El Salvador
, petitions pro

se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his
appeal from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for
relief under the Convention Against Torture (“ CAT”)

. Our jurisdiction is

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

JAN 21 2022

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 20

- 72557

governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence the agency’s

factual findings. Conde Quevedo v. Barr , 947 F.3d 1238, 1241 (9th Cir. 2020).

We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

Substanti al evidence supports the agency’s denial of deferral of removal

under CAT because Melendez

- Iraheta failed to show it is more likely than not he

will be tortured by or with the consent or acquiescence of the government if

returned to El Salvador

. See Aden v. Holder , 589 F.3d 1040, 1047 (9th Cir. 2009) ;

see also Wakkary v. Holder , 558 F.3d 1049, 1068 (9th Cir. 2009) ( finding no

likelihood of tortu re)

. We reject as unsupported by the record Melendez

- Iraheta ’s

contentions that the agency ignored evidence or otherwise erred in its analysis of

his claim.

We lack jurisdiction to consider Melendez

- Iraheta’s contentions regarding

his removability because he did not raise them to the BIA. See Barron v. Ashcroft
, 358 F.3d 674, 677

- 78 (9th Cir. 2004) (court lacks jurisdiction to review claims not

presented to the agency) ; Zara v. Ashcroft , 383 F.3d 927, 931 (9th Cir. 2004)

( concluding the exhaustion requirement applies to “streamlined” decisions in

which the BIA affirms the IJ ’ s decision without opinion ).

T he temporary stay of removal remains in place until issuance of the

mandate.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part

.
Industrial Sites Controlled by Others – Operation Description

M

NEW CHEMICAL SUBSTANCE

OTHER CHEMICALS

FINISHED PRODUCT

FILLER

OPERATION

CONSUMER PUMP BOTTLE

CLEANING RAG

WAREHOUSE

ACTIVITY A

ACTIVITY B

ACTIVITY C

ACTIVITY E

SAMPLING/TESTING

ACTIVITY D

ACTIVITY F

SAMPLING/TESTING

ACTIVITY G

TO FILLER OPERATION

ACTIVITY H

release point 1

release point 2

release point 3

release point 4

release point 5
The new chemical is off-loaded from transport vehicle (Activity A) and placed into warehouse. The 

product is sampled prior to being used (Activity C; Release Point 1). Upon approval, the new chemical is 

placed into the mixing tank (Activity D; Release Point 2). Other chemical are added, and the mixture is 

allowed to mix under predetermined conditions. The mixture is then sampled for quality (Activity F; 

Release Point 4); and the quality and performance of the mixture is tested by quality laboratory. Upon 

approval, the mixture is placed into package drums (Activity E; Release Point 3). The full drums are 

moved to the “filler” operation (Activity G) for consumer packaging. The pump bottles are filled with 

the new chemical (Activity H; Release Point 5) and distributed to customers.

Cleaner

The new chemical substance is pumped from the consumer pump bottle onto a cleaning rag (Activity I; 

Release Point 6). 

The rag is then used to clean various implements to remove built-up residue (Activity J). 

The used rag is either disposed of (Activity K; Release Point 7), or the rag is cleaned via washing machine 

(Activity L; Release Point 8).

CLEANING RAG

ACTIVITY I

release point 6

IMPLEMENT TO BE CLEANED

CLEANING RAG

ACTIVITY J

ACTIVITY K

ACTIVITY L
FY 2017 HBCU-M Program New Awards Slate

NO. AWARD NO. STATE INSTITUTION NAME

FY 2017 HBCU 

NEW AWARD 

AMOUNT

1 P382G170101 AR University Of Arkansas Pine Bluff $416,666

2 P382G170102 NC Elizabeth City State University $416,666

3 P382G170103 GA Savannah State University $416,666

4 P382G170104 TN Fisk University $416,666

5 P382G170105 MD Coppin State University $416,666

6 P382G170106 SC South Carolina State University $416,666

7 P382G170107 WV West Virginia State University $416,666

8 P382G170108 OH Wilberforce University $416,666

9 P382G170109 KY Kentucky State University $416,666

10 P382G170110 SC Claflin University $416,666

11 P382G170111 GA Albany State University $416,666

12 P382G170112 NC Fayetteville State University $416,666

13 P382G170113 GA Fort Valley State University $416,666

14 P382G170114 NC Winston-Salem State University $416,666

15 P382G170115 MS Alcorn State University $416,666

16 P382G170116 LA Grambling State University $416,666

17 P382G170117 MS Mississippi Valley State University $416,666

18 P382G170118 VA Virginia State University $416,666

TOTAL $7,499,988
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court 

Lansing, Michigan 

November 29, 2005 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

127861 & (14) Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 127861 

 COA: 255530 

Hillsdale CC: 98-228109 

LYNN C. CALER,

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 3, 2005 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has 

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D). The 

motion to remand is also considered, and it is DENIED. 

s1121 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

November 29, 2005 

Clerk
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATE PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, Alan Vituli, Chief Executive Officer of Carrols Corporation (the
Company), hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) | The Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended April 2, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Annual
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 the Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                 
|-------------------------------------------------
|                                                 
|/S/ ALAN VITULI                                  
|Alan Vituli                                      
|Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer

June 30, 2006
#### The People of the State of Illinois for use of Esther S. Hanmann, appellee, v. Albert Sturman, appellant.

Bastardy proceedings. Judgment of guilty. Appeal from the County Court of Clinton county; the Hon. Richard P. Farrell, Judge, presiding. Heard in this court at the March term, 1926.

Reversed and remanded.

Opinion filed July 9, 1926.

Wilson & Wilson, W. Murphey and C. A. McNeil, for appellant.

Hugh Vincent Murray, State’s Attorney, for appellee; Andrew O. Niehoff and Maurice B. Johnston, of counsel.

Mr. Justice Higbee

delivered the opinion of the court.
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

 

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration StatementNos. 33-25938, 33-25939, 33-46233 and 33-46234 on Form S-8 and Registration No. 333-111347on Form S-3 of Clinical Data, Inc. of our report dated June 25, 2004, appearing in thisAnnual Report on Form 10-KSB of Clinical Data, Inc. for the years ended March 31, 2004 and2003.

/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP

Boston, MassachusettsJune 25, 2004
# C_2020393EN.01000201.xml

| 18.11.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 393/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.11.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 393/2

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

17 November 2020

(2020/C 393/02)

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,1882 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 123,78 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4480 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,89585 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 10,2375 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,0816 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | 161,50 |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 10,7683 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 26,508 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 361,50 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,4964 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,8720 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 9,2071 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,6236 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,5560 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 9,2119 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,7234 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5962 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 314,74 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 18,3062 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,7892 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,5668 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 16 779,76 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,8770 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 57,389 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 90,7340 |
| THB | Thai baht | 35,836 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 6,4375 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 24,2129 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 88,4825 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,1882

JPY

Japanese yen

123,78

DKK

Danish krone

7,4480

GBP

Pound sterling

0,89585

SEK

Swedish krona

10,2375

CHF

Swiss franc

1,0816

ISK

Iceland króna

161,50

NOK

Norwegian krone

10,7683

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

26,508

HUF

Hungarian forint

361,50

PLN

Polish zloty

4,4964

RON

Romanian leu

4,8720

TRY

Turkish lira

9,2071

AUD

Australian dollar

1,6236

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,5560

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

9,2119

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,7234

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5962

KRW

South Korean won

1 314,74

ZAR

South African rand

18,3062

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,7892

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,5668

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

16 779,76

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,8770

PHP

Philippine peso

57,389

RUB

Russian rouble

90,7340

THB

Thai baht

35,836

BRL

Brazilian real

6,4375

MXN

Mexican peso

24,2129

INR

Indian rupee

88,4825

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

---
#### Harold Wilhelm, Jr., an Infant, by His Guardian ad Litem, Harold Wilhelm, Sr., et al., Respondents, v. Board of Education of the City of New York, Appellant, et al., Defendant.

In a negligence action by the infant plaintiff to recover damages for personal injuries and by his father to recover damages for loss of his son’s services and medical expenses, the defendant Board of Education of the City of New York appeals from so much of a judgment Of the Supreme Court, Queens County, entered April 4,1961, upon a jury’s verdict after trial, as is in favor of the infant and Ms father against it. At the end of the entire ease the court dismissed the complaint as against the defendant the City of New York; there is no appeal with respect to such dismissal. Judgment, insofar as appealed from, reversed on the' law, without costs, and complaint dismissed. We have considered all the facts and if we did not reverse on the law and dismiss the complaint we would have affirmed the findings of fact implicit in the jury’s verdict. As the infant' plaintiff was mixing and grinding chemicals they flared up, causing him to be seriously injured. He was then 13 years of age. He and a classmate were in a laboratory, with, the door closed, working on " science projects ” with the approval, of the infant plaintiff’s teacher. After spending about 10 minutes on their respective projects and without pci-mission to do so, the two boys began to “Tool around” with chemicals in glass bottles which were on a shelf in the laboratory.. While the infant plaintiff, with knowledge that the chemicals were- dangerous,, was' mixing and grinding them, they were caused to flarfi1 up. In our' opinion, under all the eiraimsianees, the infant plaintiff was guilty of contributory’ negligence as a matter of law *(Fox*v. *Mission of Immaculate Virgin,*285 App. Div. 898, affd. 309 N. Y. 812). Beldock, P. J., Ughetta, Brennan, and Rabin,, JJ.,. concur) Kleinfeld, J., dissents and votes’ to affirm the judgment, insofar as appealed from, on the ground that the record presented issues of fact for determination by the jury with respect to the contributory negligence of the infant plaintiff and the negligence of the defendant Board of Education.
<PAGE>


                                                                    Exhibit 99.1

                        CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT



I, Marvin Rounick, President and Chief Executive Officer of Deb Shops, Inc. (the
"Company"), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, to the best of my knowledge, that:

    (1) the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the fiscal year ended
January 31, 2003 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 780(d));
and

    (2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


Dated:   April 29, 2003




                                                /s/ Marvin Rounick
                                                -----------------------------
                                                Marvin Rounick, President and
                                                 Chief Executive Officer