alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 23


                        INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS' CONSENT




     The Board of Directors
     Statewide Financial Corp.:

     We consent to incorporation by reference in the Registration
     Statements (No. 33-96844) on Form S-8 and (No. 33-09665) on Form S-8
     of our report dated January 27, 1997, relating to the consolidated
     statements of financial condition of Statewide Financial Corp. and
     subsidiary as of December 31, 1996 and 1995 and the related
     consolidated statements of income, shareholders' equity, and cash
     flows for the year ended December 31, 1996, the nine-month period
     ended December 31, 1995 and the year ended March 31, 1995, which
     report appears in the December 31, 1996 Annual Report on Form 10-K of
     Statewide Financial Corp.


                                        KPMG Peat Marwick LLP



     Short Hills, New Jersey
     March 25, 1997
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 43 (Friday, March 5, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 10308-10309]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-4414]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

National Park Service


Fire Management Plan, Final Environmental Impact Statement, 
Record of Decision, Grand Canyon National Park, AZ

AGENCY: National Park Service, Department of the Interior.

ACTION: Notice of Availability of a Record of Decision on the Final 
Environmental Impact Statement for the Fire Management Plan, Grand 
Canyon National Park.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, 42 
U.S.C. 4332(2)(C), the National Park Service announces the availability 
of the Record of Decision for the Fire Management Plan, Grand Canyon 
National Park, Arizona. On January 12, 2010, the Regional Director, 
Intermountain Region, approved the Record of Decision for the project. 
As soon as practicable, the National Park Service will begin to 
implement the Preferred Alternative contained in the FEIS issued on 
August 7, 2009.
    The document describes and analyzes the environmental impacts of 
several action alternatives, including the preferred alternative for 
management of fire in Grand Canyon National Park. The preferred 
alternative analyzes the use of prescribed fire, wildland fire use, 
suppression fire, and manual and

[[Page 10309]]

mechanical thinning. A no-action alternative was also evaluated. 
Alternative 2 (Mixed Fire Treatment) was selected as the preferred 
alternative. The Record of Decision includes a statement of the 
decision made, synopses of other alternatives considered, the basis for 
the decision, a description of the environmentally preferable 
alternative, a finding of no impairment of park resources and values, a 
listing of measures to minimize environmental harm, and an overview of 
public involvement in the decision-making process.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Chris Marks, Project Lead, Fire 
Management Plan, P.O. Box 129, Grand Canyon, Arizona 86023, 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#24474c564d57504b544c41567b4945564f57644a54570a434b52"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="1d7e756f746e69726d75786f42707c6f766e5d736d6e337a726b">[email protected]</span></a> or at 928-638-7417.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Copies of the Record of Decision may be 
obtained from the contact listed above or online at http://parkplanning.nps.gov/grca.

    Dated: January 15, 2010.
Michael D. Snyder,
Regional Director, Intermountain Region, National Park Service.
[FR Doc. 2010-4414 Filed 3-4-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
§ 556.700 Sulfomyxin. ( a ) [Reserved]
( b ) *Tolerances.* The tolerances for sulfomyxin are: ( 1 ) *Chickens and turkeys.* Edible tissues (excluding eggs): Zero.
( 2 ) [Reserved]
( c ) *Related conditions of use.* See § 522.2340 of this chapter.
COURT OF APPEALS OF VIRGINIA

Present: Judges Humphreys, Huff and Senior Judge Clements

VERIZON SOUTH, INC. AND

NATIONAL UNION FIRE INSURANCE

COMPANY OF PITTSBURGH

MEMORANDUM OPINION *

v. Record No. 2498

- 1 1

- 2 PER CURIAM

APRIL 10, 2012

SEDRICK J. BAILEY

FROM THE VIRGINIA WORKERS’ COMPENSATION COMMISSION

(Richard S. Sperbeck; Angela F. Gibbs; Midkiff, Muncie & Ross,

P.C., on brief)

, for appellant s

.

No brief for appellee.

Verizon South, Inc. and its insurer contend the Workers’ Compensat ion Commission

erred in finding that he sustained a c ompensable injury by accident.

We have reviewed the record and the commission ’ s opinion and find that this appeal is

without merit. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the commission in its final

opinion. See Verizon S

. , Inc. v. Bailey

, VWC File No. 020 0000 4696 (Nov. 15 , 2011). We

dispense with oral argument and summarily affirm because the facts and legal contentions are

adequately presented in the materials before the Court and argument would not aid the decisional

process. See Code § 17.1

- 403; Rule 5A:27.

Affirmed.

* Pursuant to Code § 17.1

- 413, this opinion is not designated for publication.
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access to publicationsin the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging and locatorservices, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications (CGP). Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event that publicationsare no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:****Motorized travel managementfinal environmental impact statement [electronic resource].**
 
v1|v2
 
SuDoc Number:A 13.105/2:R 5-MB-210 A-B

Item Number:0082-A-05 (online)
CGP systemNumber: 000749953

 
July 16, 2018
# C_2016232EN.01001202.xml

| 27.6.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 232/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.6.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 232/12

---

Judgment of the General Court of 12 May 2016 — Trioplast Industrier v Commission

(Case T-669/14) (1)

1

((Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Market in industrial plastic bags - Action for annulment - Challengeable act - Admissibility - Action for damages - Default interest - Concept of a debt which is certain, of a fixed amount and due - Proportionality - Legal certainty - Principle that penalties must be specific to the individual and to the offence - Lack of legal basis - Article 266 TFEU - Causal link))

(2016/C 232/15)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Trioplast Industrier AB (Smålandsstenar, Sweden) (represented by: T. Pettersson and A. Johansson, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: V. Bottka, L. Parpala and P. Rossi, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application, first, for annulment of the decision allegedly contained in the letter of the Commission of 3 July 2014 in case COMP/38.354 (Industrial bags — Trioplast Industrier AB) and, secondly, for damages under the second paragraph of Article 340 TFEU.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Trioplast Industrier AB to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Trioplast Industrier AB to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 409, 17.11.2014.

1

---
# C_2015198EN.01005001.xml

| 15.6.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 198/50 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.6.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 198/50

---

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (Third Chamber) of 30 April 2015 — Maraoud v EEAS

(Case F-71/14) (1)

1

((Civil Service - Staff of the EEAS - Member of the contractual staff - Mission in a third country - Workplace accident - Allowance for living conditions - Days of leave not taken - Reimbursement of healthcare - Failure to follow the pre-litigation procedure - Manifestly inadmissible))

(2015/C 198/68)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Hayet Maraoud (Brussels, Belgium) (represented by: L.F. de Castro Fernandez and J.-L. Gillain, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European External Action Service (EEAS) (represented by: S. Marquardt and M. Silva, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of the decision no longer to pay the allowance for living conditions (ALC), the additional payment (AP) based on the living conditions in the applicant’s place of employment and a daily allowance (DA) and to pay for 49 days’ leave not taken in respect of 2012 and a claim for compensation for the harm caused by a failure to offer aid or assistance and abandonment following the workplace accident suffered by the applicant.

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible.

| 2. | Ms Maraoud shall bear her own costs and pay the costs incurred by the European External Action Service. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Ms Maraoud shall bear her own costs and pay the costs incurred by the European External Action Service.

---

(1)  OJ C 388, 3.11.2014, p. 29.

1

---
# C_2016027EN.01005002.xml

| 25.1.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 27/50 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.1.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 27/50

---

Judgment of the General Court of 3 December 2015 — Hewlett Packard Development Company v OHIM (FORTIFY)

(Case T-628/14) (1)

1

((Community trade mark - Application for Community word mark FORTIFY - Absolute ground for refusal - Descriptive character - Article 7(1)(c) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2016/C 027/63)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Hewlett Packard Development Company LP (Dallas, Texas, United States) (represented by: T. Raab and H. Lauf, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: L. Rampini, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 3 June 2014 (Case R 249/2014-2), concerning an application for registration of the word sign FORTIFY as a Community trade mark.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Hewlett Packard Development Company LP to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM). |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Hewlett Packard Development Company LP to bear its own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM).

---

(1)  OJ C 361, 13.10.2014.

1

---
# C_2016016EN.01003102.xml

| 18.1.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 16/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

18.1.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 16/31

---

Judgment of the General Court of 25 November 2015 — Masafi v OHIM — Hd1 (JUICE masafi)

(Case T-248/14) (1)

1

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for Community figurative mark JUICE masafi - Earlier national word mark masafi - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2016/C 016/38)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Masafi Co. LLC (Dubai, United Arab Emirates) (represented by: G. Hinarejos Mulliez, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: G. Schneider, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Hd1 Ltd (Huddersfield, United Kingdom)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 10 February 2014 (Case R 119/2013-4), concerning opposition proceedings between Hd1 Ltd and Masafi Co. LLC.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

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

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Masafi Co. LLC to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM). |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Masafi Co. LLC to bear its own costs and to pay those incurred by the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM).

---

(1)  OJ C 235, 21.7.2014.

1

---
Exhibit 32.1
 
  (1)
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable,
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and(2)
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 /s/ Arthur A. RodneyArthur A. RodneyChief Executive Officer April 26, 2010 The foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany this Report pursuant to 18
U.S.C. §1350, and is not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company,
whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in
such filing.
# C_2016243EN.01002902.xml

| 4.7.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 243/29 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.7.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 243/29

---

Judgment of the General Court of 25 May 2016 — Ice Mountain Ibiza v EUIPO — Etyam (ocean beach club ibiza)

(Case T-753/14) (1)

1

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU figurative mark ocean beach club ibiza - Earlier national figurative and word marks ocean drive Ibiza-hotel and OCEAN THE GROUP - Annulment of the earlier mark on which the contested decision was based - No need to adjudicate))

(2016/C 243/30)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Ice Mountain Ibiza, SL (San Antonio, Spain) (represented by: J. L. Gracia Albero, F. Miazzetto and E. Cebollero González, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: S. Palmero Cabezas, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO: Etyam, SL (Ibiza, Spain)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 31 July 2014 (Case R 2293/2013-1) relating to opposition proceedings between Etyam and Ice Mountain Ibiza

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Declares that there is no need to adjudicate on the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Declares that there is no need to adjudicate on the action;

| 2. | Orders each party to bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders each party to bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 26, 26.1.2015.

1

---
# C_2015007EN.01005602.xml

| 12.1.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 7/56 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.1.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 7/56

---

Action brought on 24 October 2014 — ZZ v Commission

(Case F-119/14)

(2015/C 007/71)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: ZZ (represented by: L. Levi and A. Blot, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Annulment of the Commission’s decision closing the procedure for the appointment of the applicant as an official, the latter being entered on a competition reserve list, having informed him that the DG concerned had agreed to his employment and having found that his professional experience was not sufficient.

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decision of 17 December 2013 by which the Directorate-General for Human Resources (‘DG HR’) of the European Commission, in its capacity as appointing authority, refused to employ the applicant as an official at the General Directorate for Justice and Home Affairs (‘DG JUST’); |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of 17 December 2013 by which the Directorate-General for Human Resources (‘DG HR’) of the European Commission, in its capacity as appointing authority, refused to employ the applicant as an official at the General Directorate for Justice and Home Affairs (‘DG JUST’);

| — | annul the decision of the appointing authority of 14 July 2004 rejecting the complaint brought by the applicant against the decision of the appointing authority of 17 December 2013; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of the appointing authority of 14 July 2004 rejecting the complaint brought by the applicant against the decision of the appointing authority of 17 December 2013;

| — | order the defendant to pay the sum of EUR 26  132,85, together with interest for late payment, in addition to the payment of the contributions to the pension scheme as from September 2013; |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay the sum of EUR 26  132,85, together with interest for late payment, in addition to the payment of the contributions to the pension scheme as from September 2013;

| — | order the Commission to pay one euro in respect of non-material damage; |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to pay one euro in respect of non-material damage;

| — | order the Commission to pay all the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the Commission to pay all the costs.

---
# C_2015245EN.01002702.xml

| 27.7.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 245/27 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.7.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 245/27

---

Order of the General Court of 22 May 2015 — Vestolit v Commission

(Case T-305/14) (1)

1

((State aid - Measures adopted by Germany in favour of electricity generated from renewable energy sources and of energy-intensive undertakings - Decision to open the procedure under Article 108(2) TFEU - Adoption of the final decision after the action was brought - No need to adjudicate))

(2015/C 245/33)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Vestolit GmbH (Marl, Germany) (represented by: D. Greinacher, J. Martin and B. Scholtka, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: T. Maxian Rusche and R. Sauer, acting as Agents, and by C. von Donat and G. Quardt, lawyers)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application to annul in part Commission decision C (2013) 4424 final of 18 December 2013 to open the procedure under Article 108(2) TFEU regarding measures implemented by the Federal Republic of Germany in favour of renewable electricity and of energy-intensive users (State aid SA.33995 (2013/C) (ex 2013/NN)).

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the present action. |
| --- | --- |

1.

There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the present action.

| 2. | There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the application for intervention submitted by the EFTA Surveillance Authority. |
| --- | --- |

2.

There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the application for intervention submitted by the EFTA Surveillance Authority.

| 3. | Vestolit GmbH shall bear its own costs and those incurred by the European Commission, including those relating to the proceedings for interim measures. |
| --- | --- |

3.

Vestolit GmbH shall bear its own costs and those incurred by the European Commission, including those relating to the proceedings for interim measures.

| 4. | The EFTA Surveillance Authority shall bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

4.

The EFTA Surveillance Authority shall bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 223, 14.7.2014.

1

---
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER ON MOTION

Cause Number: 01-13-01052-CR

Trial Court Cause 

Number: 11CR2795

Style: Danny Jarrod Hamilton

v The State of Texas

Date motion filed*: August 19, 2014

Type of motion: Motion for Extension of Submission Date

Party filing motion: The State of Texas

Document to be filed:

Is appeal accelerated? YES NO

Ordered that motion is:

 Granted

If document is to be filed, document due: 

Absent extraordinary circumstances, the Court will not grant additional motions to extend time

 Denied

 Dismissed (e.g., want of jurisdiction, moot)

 Other: 

Judge's signature: /s/ Harvey Brown 

 Acting individually Acting for the Court

Panel consists of Justices Massengale, Brown, and Huddle

Date: August 21, 2014
**Exhibit 23.1**

 

**Consent of Independent Auditors**

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the post effective amendment no. 1registration statement on Form S-8 of 1st Independence Financial Group, Inc. (Company) (333-113163) and in theregistration statement of the Company on Form S-8 (333-118198) of our report dated December 7, 2004, appearing in the annual report on Form 10-KSB of the Company for the year ended September 30, 2004. 

 

 

Louisville, Kentucky 

December 23, 2004