alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>   1


                                                                    EXHIBIT 16.1

                       [KPMG Peat Marwick LLP LETTERHEAD]



June 27, 1997

Securities and Exchange Commission
Washington, D.C. 20549

Ladies and Gentlemen:

We were previously principal accountants for Leading-Edge Earth Products, Inc.
and, under the date of October 7, 1996, we reported on the financial statements
of Leading-Edge Earth Products, Inc. as of and for the years ended April 30,
1996 and 1995. On June 16, 1997, we declined to stand for re-election. We have
read Leading-Edge Earth Products, Inc.'s statements included under Item 4 of its
Form 8-K dated June 24, 1997 and we agree with such statements, except that
we are not in a position to agree or disagree with Leading-Edge Earth Products,
Inc.'s statement that the change was approved at a meeting of the stockholders. 

Very truly yours,


KPMG Peat Marwick LLP
§ 1302.07 Labeling and packaging requirements for imported and exported substances. ( a ) The symbol requirements of §§ 1302.03 through 1302.05 apply to every commercial container containing, and to all labeling of, controlled substances imported into the customs territory of the United States from any place outside thereof (but within the United States), or imported into the United States from any place outside thereof.
( b ) The symbol requirements of §§ 1302.03 through 1302.05 do not apply to any commercial containers containing, or any labeling of, a controlled substance intended for export.
( c ) The sealing requirements of § 1302.06 apply to every bottle, multiple dose vial, or other commercial container of any controlled substance listed in schedule I or II, or any narcotic controlled substance listed in schedule III or IV imported into the customs territory of the United States from any place outside thereof (but within the United States), or imported into the United States from any place outside thereof. The sealing requirements of § 1302.06 apply to every bottle, multiple dose vial, or other commercial container of any controlled substance listed in schedule I or II, or any narcotic controlled substance listed in schedule III or IV, exported or intended for export from the United States. These sealing and labeling requirements are in addition to any sealing requirements required under applicable customs laws.
[81 FR 97020, Dec. 30, 2016]
§ 507.50 Reanalysis. ( a ) You must conduct a reanalysis of the food safety plan as a whole at least once every 3 years.
( b ) You must conduct a reanalysis of the food safety plan as a whole, or the applicable portion of the food safety plan: ( 1 ) Whenever a significant change in the activities conducted at your facility creates a reasonable potential for a new hazard or creates a significant increase in a previously identified hazard;
( 2 ) Whenever you become aware of new information about potential hazards associated with the animal food;
( 3 ) Whenever appropriate after an unanticipated animal food safety problem in accordance with § 507.42(b); and
( 4 ) Whenever you find that a preventive control, combination of preventive controls, or the food safety plan as a whole is ineffective.
( c ) You must complete the reanalysis required by paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section and validate, as appropriate to the nature of the preventive control and its role in the facility's food safety system, any additional preventive controls needed to address the hazard identified: ( 1 ) Before any change in activities (including any change in preventive control) at the facility is operative; or
( 2 ) When necessary to demonstrate the control measures can be implemented as designed: ( i ) Within 90 calendar days after production of the applicable animal food first begins; or
( ii ) Within a reasonable timeframe, provided that the preventive controls qualified individual prepares (or oversees the preparation of) a written justification for a timeframe that exceeds 90 calendar days after production of the applicable animal food first begins.
( d ) You must revise the written food safety plan if a significant change in the activities conducted at your facility creates a reasonable potential for a new hazard or a significant increase in a previously identified hazard, or document the basis for the conclusion that no revisions are needed.
( e ) A preventive controls qualified individual must perform (or oversee) the reanalysis.
( f ) You must conduct a reanalysis of the food safety plan when FDA determines it is necessary to respond to new hazards and developments in scientific understanding.
[80 FR 56337, Sept. 17, 2015, as amended at 81 FR 3718, Jan. 22, 2016]
38600.

#### MARTIN *et al.*v. THE STATE.

Decided January 18, 1961.

Carlisle, Judge.

The facts in this case, while involving a separate and distinct occurrence, are substantially and legally identical with the facts in *Samuels v. State,*ante, and the ruling and judgment in that case is controlling of the issues presented in this case. The evidence authorized the verdicts and judgments of guilty and the trial court did not err in overruling the motion for a new trial on the general grounds.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Townsend, P. J., Frankum and*Jordan, *JJ., concur.*

*70
      *B. Clarence Mayfield, E. H. Gadsden,*for plaintiffs in error.

*Eugene Cook, Attorney-General, G. Hughel Harrison, Assistant Attorney-General, Andrew J. Ryan, Solicitor-General, Sylvan A. Garfunkel, Assistant Solicitor-General,*contra.
<PAGE>

                                                                     Exhibit 3.3

                              ARTICLES OF AMENDMENT OF
                            ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION OF

                                   OAKLEY, INC.

     ARTICLES OF AMENDMENT of the Articles of Incorporation of Oakley, Inc.
(the "Corporation") are herein executed by said Corporation, pursuant to the
provision of RCW 23B.10.060, as follows:

     FIRST: The name of the Corporation is Oakley, Inc.

     SECOND: The first paragraph of Article II of the Corporation's Amended
and Restated Articles of Incorporation is amended to read as follows:

          The total number of shares of stock which the corporation shall have
     authority to issue is two hundred and ten million (210,000,000), which
     shall consist of two hundred million (200,000,000) shares of Common
     Stock, each having a par value of one penny ($.01) (the "Common Stock"),
     and ten million (10,000,000) shares of Preferred Stock, each having a
     par value of one penny ($.01) (the "Preferred Stock").

     THIRD: This amendment does not provide for an exchange, reclassification
or cancellation of issued shares.

     FOURTH: The effective date of the adoption of said Amendment by the
Directors of said Corporation was the 10th day of September, 1996.

     FIFTH: The amendment was approved by resolution of the Board of
Directors without shareholder action. Pursuant to RCW 23B.10.020(4),
shareholder action is not required.

     The foregoing is executed under penalty of perjury by the undersigned,
who is authorized to do so on behalf of the Corporation.

     DATED this 26th day of September, 1996.

                                       OAKLEY, INC.

                                       By: /s/ Link Newcomb
                                          ---------------------------------
                                          Link Newcomb
                                          Executive Vice President and
                                          Chief Financial Officer
`[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 939 Reported in House (RH)]







                                                 House Calendar No. 217
109th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 939

                          [Report No. 109-595]

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 1956) to regulate certain 
     State taxation of interstate commerce; and for other purposes.


_______________________________________________________________________


                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 24, 2006

   Mr. Gingrey, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following 
resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 
                                printed

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION


 
Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 1956) to regulate certain 
     State taxation of interstate commerce; and for other purposes.

    Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in 
order without intervention of any point of order to consider in the 
House the bill (H.R. 1956) to regulate certain State taxation of 
interstate commerce; and for other purposes. The amendment in the 
nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on the Judiciary 
now printed in the bill shall be considered as adopted. The bill, as 
amended, shall be considered as read. The previous question shall be 
considered as ordered on the bill, as amended, to final passage without 
intervening motion except: (1) one hour of debate equally divided and 
controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee 
on the Judiciary; and (2) one motion to recommit with or without 
instructions.
                                                 House Calendar No. 217

109th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                              H. RES. 939

                          [Report No. 109-595]

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

Providing for consideration of the bill (H.R. 1956) to regulate certain 
     State taxation of interstate commerce; and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                             July 24, 2006

        Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed`
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

                             Washington, D.C. 20549

                                  F O R M  8-K

                                 CURRENT REPORT

                     Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the
                         Securities Exchange Act of 1934

                        Date of Report: November 2, 2000
                        (Date of earliest event reported)

                   The CIT Group Securitization Corporation II
                               The CIT Group, Inc.
             (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

                                    Delaware
                 (State or other jurisdiction of incorporation)

           000-20615                            22-3328188
           001-01861                            22-3411516
    (Commission File Number)         (IRS Employer Identification No.)

                                  650 CIT Drive
                        Livingston, New Jersey 07039-0491
                           1211 Avenue of the Americas
                            New York, New York 10036
              (Address of principal executive offices and zip code)
                                 (973) 740-5000
                                 (212) 536-1950
               Registrants' telephone number, including area code

                                       N/A
          (Former name or former address, if changed since last report)
<PAGE>

Item 7. Financial Statements and Exhibits.

(c)  Exhibits.

      The following are filed herewith. The exhibit numbers correspond with Item
601(b) of Regulation S-K.

Exhibit No.         Description
-----------         -----------
    25              Statement of Eligibility of Trustee

                                   SIGNATURE

      Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the
registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned hereunto duly authorized.

                                           The CIT Group Securitization
                                           Corporation II

                                           By:    /s/ Barbara Callahan
                                           Name:  Barbara Callahan
                                           Title: Vice President

                                           The CIT Group, Inc.

                                           By:    /s/ Barbara Callahan
                                           Name:  Barbara Callahan
                                           Title: Vice President

Dated: November 2, 2000
## COURT OF APPEALS

SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AMARILLO

MANDATE

THE STATE OF TEXAS

To the 364th District Court of Lubbock County, Greeting:

BEFORE our Court of Appeals for the Seventh District of Texas, on October 21,

2014, the cause upon appeal to revise or reverse your judgment between

Andre Norris v. The State of Texas

Case Number: 07-13-00116-CR Trial Court Number: 2013-437,508

was determined and therein our said Court made its order in these words:

Pursuant to the opinion of the Court dated October 21, 2014, it is ordered,

adjudged and decreed that the judgment of the trial court be affirmed.

Inasmuch as this is an appeal in forma pauperis

, no costs beyond those that

have been paid are adjudged.

It is further ordered that this decision be certified below for observance.

o O o

WHEREFORE, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of said Court of

Appeals for the Seventh District of Texas, in this behalf, and in all things to have it duly

recognized, obeyed and executed.

WITNESS, the Honorable Justices of our said Court, with the seal thereof

annexed, at the City of Amarillo on March 6, 2015

.



# Vivian Long

VIVIAN LONG, CLERK
38686, 38700.

#### WILLIAMS *et al.*v. LANE (two cases).

Decided February 14, 1961.

*Fulcher, Fulcher, Flagler & Harper, J. Walker Harper, Wm. C. Reed,*for plaintiffs in error.

*Sanders, Thurmond & Hester, Glen B. Hester,*contra.

*151Nichols, Judge.

The sole question to be decided in both cases is whether the trial court erred in refusing to grant the. defendants’ motion for a continuance, which motion was made after the plaintiffs’ counsel asked the prospective jurors: “Are any of you policy holders in the American Fire *&*Casualty Insurance Company?”

Assuming, but not deciding, that the motion was proper (See *Fievet v. Curl,*96 Ga. App. 535, 536, 101 S. E. 2d 181), the question asked the prospective jurors was not an improper question per se. In the case of *Parker v. Bryan,*96 Ga. App. 283, 284 (99 S. E. 2d 810), it was held not to be error for the prospective jurors to be asked: “Are either of you policy holders, stockholders, employees of, or relatives of any stockholders, employees or policy holders in the Great American Indemnity Company?” In that case, as in the present case, interest of the insurance company was admitted, and here it is admitted that stockholders and employees and their relatives were properly purged from the prospective jurors, and the sole objection deals with the policy holders, and under the decision in the *Parker*case, supra, and *Code Ann.*§ 59-705 such question was proper. There was no showing, and this court cannot take judicial notice, of whether the insurance company was a “stock” or “mutual” company or whether it issued contracts whereby the policy holders received dividends. The trial court did not err in overruling the motions for new trial.

*Judgments affirmed.*

*Bell, J., concurs. Felton, C. J., concurs specially.*

Felton, Chief Judge,

concurring specially. The gravamen of the exception in this case is that the following question was propounded to prospective jurors: “Are any of you policy holders in the American Fire & Casualty Insurance Company?” and that the effect of the question was to inform the members of the jury that the insurance company was interested in the outcome of the case. It does not appear in the special ground of the amended motion that any juror disqualified by reason of such question. The court, after having asked the above question of the jury, qualified the jury with reference to their employment by the insurance company, as to whether they *152were stockholders in the insurance company and as to whether they were related to a stockholder in the company. There was no objection to this latter qualification of the jurors. This latter qualification gave the jury the same information which was given by the question objected to, namely, whether the jurors were policy holders in the insurance company. Since it does not appear that any member of the jury disqualified because he was a policy holder, whatever error the court committed, if he committed any, by asking the question under attack, was harmless because the jury obtained the insurance information in a manner admittedly proper otherwise than by qualification as to policy holders.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### National Science Foundation

In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463 as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the following meeting:

*Name:*                         Site visit review of the Materials Research Science and Engineering Center (MRSEC) at Colorado School of Mines by NSF Division of Materials Research (DMR) #1203.                    

*Dates and Times:*                         Thursday, April 22, 2010; 8:30 a.m.- 4 p.m.                    

*Place:*                         Colorado School of Mines, Golden, CO.                    

*Type of Meeting:*                         Part-open.                    

*Contact Person:*                         Dr. Charles Ying, Program Director, Materials Research Science and Engineering Centers Program, Division of Materials Research, Room 1065, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230, Telephone (703) 292-8428.                    

*Purpose of Meeting:*                         To provide advice and recommendations concerning progress of the MRSEC at the Colorado School of Mines.                    

*Agenda:*                         Thursday, April 22, 2010                    

8:30 a.m.-2 p.m. Open—Review of the Colorado School of Mines MRSEC.

2 p.m.-4 p.m. Closed—Executive Session.

*Reason for Closing:*                         The work being reviewed may include information of a proprietary or confidential nature, including technical information; financial data, such as salaries and personal information concerning individuals associated with the proposals. These matters are exempt under 5 U.S.C. 552b(c), (4) and (6) of the Government in the Sunshine Act.                    

Dated: February 23, 2010.

Susanne Bolton,

Committee Management Officer.

[FR Doc. 2010-3976 Filed 2-25-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
Exhibit 99.06

[Letterhead]

Report of Independent Accountants

Target
Corporation,
Its Officers and Directors
        and
Target Receivables Corporation,
Its Officers and Directors
As Transferor
        and
Retailers National Bank,
Its Officers and Directors
As Servicer
        and
Wells Fargo Bank, National Association
As Trustee

We
have audited, in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States, the statements of financial condition of Retailers National Bank (the Bank) as of December 31,
2002 and 2001, and the related statements of income, stockholders' equity, and cash flows for the years then ended and have issued our report thereon dated January 24, 2003.

Our
audit, referred to in the preceding paragraph, included procedures applied to the documents and records relating to the servicing of credit card receivables under the Amended and Restated Target
Credit Card Master Trust Pooling and Servicing Agreement (the Pooling and Servicing Agreement), dated as of August 22, 2001. Our procedures were as follows:

Documents
and records relating to the servicing of credit card receivables under the Pooling and Servicing Agreement:



The
results of the procedures described above provided satisfactory evidential matter for the purposes of our audit of the financial statements, referred to in the introductory paragraph of this
letter, taken as a whole. The administration and servicing appear to be conducted in compliance with Article III, Article IV, and Section 8.8 of the Pooling and Servicing
Agreement insofar as such articles and section relate to accounting matters.

This
report is intended solely for the use of the specified users listed above and should not be used by those who have not agreed to the procedures and taken responsibility for the sufficiency of the
procedures for their purposes. However, this report is a matter of public record, as a result of its inclusion as an exhibit to the Annual Report on Form 10-K filed by Target
Receivables Corporation on behalf of the Trust, and its distribution is not limited.

SIGNATURE

January 24,
2003



QuickLinks
#### IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION OF ALLEN STERLING FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS.

Argued April 21, 1939

Decided May 22, 1939.

Before Justice Donges.

For the petitioner, *Mario H. Volpe.*

For the state, *Robert Peacock*and *Lynwood Lord.*

Donges, J.

Por the reasons stated in the opinion filed on a similar application by James Rose, *122 N. J. L.*507, submitted herewith, the petitioner is directed to be discharged from custody.
CERTIFICATION
      (a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made
known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which
this report is being prepared;(b)
    
    Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal
control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide
reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the
preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally
accepted accounting principles;(c)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report
based on such evaluation; and(d)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter
(the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants
internal control over financial reporting; and
  (a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation
of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely
affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial
information; and(b)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees
who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting.
  /s/ Nathan Zommer

Nathan Zommer, Chairman of the Boardand Chief Executive Officer