alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 23.1**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRMWe consentto the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements Nos.333-121081, 333-83444, 333-93473, 33-12399,333-39319, 33-78584, 33-40796, and 33-65081 on Form S-8 of ourreports dated October 12, 2005,relating to the consolidated financial statements and consolidated financial statement schedule ofDionex Corporation and its subsidiaries (collectively, the “Company”), and management’s report onthe effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting (which report expresses an adverseopinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting because ofa material weakness) appearing in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year endedJune 30, 2005.DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLPSan Jose, CA
§ 204.4 Procedure for notification of the existence of records pertaining to individuals. ( a ) The Copyright Office will publish in the Federal Register, upon the establishment or revision of the system of records, notices of all Copyright Office systems of records subject to the Privacy Act, as provided by 5 U.S.C., section 552a(e)(4). Individuals desiring to know if a Copyright Office system of records contains a record pertaining to them should submit a written request to that effect either by mail to the Supervisory Copyright Information Specialist, U.S. Copyright Office, P.O. Box 70400, Washington, DC 20024-0400, or in person between the hours of 8:30 a.m. and 5 p.m. on any working day except legal holidays at Room LM-401, The James Madison Memorial Building, 1st and Independence Avenue, SE, Washington, DC.
( b ) The written request should identify clearly the system of records which is the subject of inquiry, by reference, whenever possible, to the system number and title as given in the notices of systems of records in the Federal Register. Both the written request and the envelope carrying it should be plainly marked “Privacy Act Request.” Failure to so mark the request may delay the Office's response.
( c ) The Office will acknowledge all properly marked requests made by individuals wishing to gain access to view or copy their records or any information pertaining to the individual, within a reasonable time. The Office will acknowledge in writing an individual's request to amend a record pertaining to him or her within ten business days.
( d ) Since all Copyright Office records created under section 705 of title 17 are open to public inspection, no identity verification is necessary for individuals who wish to know whether a system of records created under section 705 pertains to them.
[43 FR 776, Jan. 4, 1978, as amended at 47 FR 36821, Aug. 24, 1982; 50 FR 697, Aug. 14, 1985; 60 FR 34169, June 30, 1995; 64 FR 36575, July 7, 1999; 65 FR 39820, June 28, 2000; 73 FR 37839, July 2, 2008; 82 FR 9364, Feb. 6, 2017]
#### LAWLEY V. THE STATE.

(Decided Dec. 19, 1911.)

Appeal from Chilton Circuit Court.

Heard before Hon. W, W. Pearson.

Thomas A. Curry, for appellant. R. C. Brickell, Attorney General, and W. L. Martin, Assistant Attorney General, for the State.

Per curiam.

Affirmed on authority of *Maddox v.*State, *infra;*57 South. 95.
Exhibit 32

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

      In connection with the Quarterly Report of Presidential Associates I
Limited Partnership (the "Partnership"), on Form 10-QSB for the three month
period ended September 30, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, in the capacities
and on the date indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that: (1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934; and (2) the information
contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Partnership.


Date: August 12, 2005                                    /s/ Michael L. Ashner
                                                         -----------------------
                                                         Michael L. Ashner
                                                         Chief Executive Officer


Date: August 12, 2005                                    /s/ Thomas Staples
                                                         -----------------------
                                                         Thomas Staples
                                                         Chief Financial Officer


                                      -16-
#### § 93.222 Research.

*Research* means a systematic experiment, study, evaluation, demonstration or survey designed to develop or contribute to general knowledge (basic research) or specific knowledge (applied research) relating broadly to public health by establishing, discovering, developing, elucidating or confirming information about, or the underlying mechanism relating to, biological causes, functions or effects, diseases, treatments, or related matters to be studied.
Subject: FW: Quantitative results from you 2012 paper in EHP

Date: Monday, April 08, 2013 9:20:07 AM

Attachments: Effect estimates adjusted analyses CRP paper.xlsx

From: E.H. van den Hooven [mailto:e.vandenhooven@erasmusmc.nl] 

Sent: Monday, April 08, 2013 4:45 AM

To: Luben, Tom

Subject: RE: Quantitative results from you 2012 paper in EHP

Dear Dr. Luben,

Please find attached an Excel file with the results for the adjusted analyses that were used to

create Figures 1 and 2 of the paper.

If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to ask me.

Kind regards,

Edith

Van: Luben, Tom [mailto:Luben.Tom@epa.gov] 

Verzonden: woensdag 3 april 2013 11:47

Aan: E.H. van den Hooven

Onderwerp: RE: Quantitative results from you 2012 paper in EHP

That would be great!

Thank you,

Tom

From: E.H. van den Hooven [mailto:e.vandenhooven@erasmusmc.nl] 

Sent: Wednesday, April 03, 2013 3:04 AM

To: Luben, Tom

Subject: RE: Quantitative results from you 2012 paper in EHP

Dear Dr. Luben,

Thank you for your interest in our results.

Of course I can provide you with the results for the adjusted analyses. I will look it up this week, I hope

that is in time for you?

Kind regards,

Edith van den Hooven

--

Edith van den Hooven

Department of Epidemiology
Erasmus Medical Center

PO Box 2040

3000 CA Rotterdam

The Netherlands

Tel +31 10 70 44291

Fax +31 10 70 44657

Email e.vandenhooven@erasmusmc.nl

Van: Luben, Tom [Luben.Tom@epa.gov]

Verzonden: dinsdag 2 april 2013 19:08

To: E.H. van den Hooven

Onderwerp: Quantitative results from you 2012 paper in EHP

Dear Dr. van den Hooven,

I am characterizing the health effects of air pollution to support U.S. EPA National Ambient Air

Quality Standards.  Could you please send me the quantitative data used to create Figures 1 and 2

in your 2012 publication, “Chronic Air Pollution Exposure during Pregnancy and Maternal and Fetal

C-Reactive Protein Levels: The Generation R Study”?

I realize that the unadjusted results for these analyses are found in tables in the Supplementary

Material.  If you could provide similar tables with the adjusted results of these analyses, it would be

very much appreciated.

Thank you,

Tom Luben, PhD

National Center for Environmental Assessment

Office of Research and Development

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

RTP, NC 27711

(919) 541-5762
41465.

#### NICHOLSON v. THE STATE.

Nichols, Presiding Judge.

The defendant was tried and convicted of burglary. Thereafter the defendant’s motion for new trial, based on the usual general grounds only, was overruled and it is to this judgment that the defendant now excepts. Evidence was adduced of recent possession of a part of the goods, musical instruments, and such recent possession was admitted by the defendant. An explanation of such possession was offered to the jury. The explanation, presented by the defendant in his statement (and by the defendant’s wife in sworn testimony), was that the musical instruments were purchased by the defendant from a named individual for cash. *Held:*

1. Standing alone an explanation of the recent possession by sworn testimony unimpeached and uncontradicted would demand a new trial under the decisions of this court in *Law v. State,*106 Ga. App. 782 (128 SE2d 204); and *Cox v. State,*
      *307109 Ga. App. 797 (137 SE2d 516), and cases there cited. However, in the present case there was additional testimony-adduced by the State of an unsuccessful effort to locate the person from whom the musical instruments were supposedly purchased; and under the decision of the Supreme Court in *Lankford v. Holton,*187 Ga. 94, 102 (200 SE 243), the jury was authorized to determine the testimony as to the purchase'of the musical instruments was “incredible, impossible or inherently improbable” and to find the defendant guilty based upon the recent possession of the stolen property. The trial court did not err in overruling the defendant’s motion for new trial.

Argued September 9, 1965

Decided September 21, 1965.

*Tom Dillon, Wayne Jemigan,*for plaintiff in error.

*Lewis B. Slaton, Solicitor General, Paul Ginsberg, Carter Goode, J. Walter LeCraw,*contra.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Eberhardt and Pannell, JJ., concur.*
**
**Exhibit 35.1**

**SERVICER COMPLIANCE STATEMENT**

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Drive Auto Receivables Trust 2020-2 for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2021, (the “Report”), the undersigned, a duly authorized officer of Santander Consumer USA Inc. (the “Servicer”), does hereby certify andrepresent that: 

 
 1.
A review of the activities and performance of the Servicer under the Sale and Servicing Agreement, dated as ofJune 17, 2020, among Santander Drive Auto Receivables LLC, Santander Consumer USA Inc., Drive Auto Receivables Trust 2020-2 and Wilmington Trust, National Association (the “Agreement”) duringthe period that is the subject of the Report has been made under my supervision. 

 
 2.
To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer has fulfilled all of its obligations under theAgreement in all material respects throughout the period that is the subject of the Report. 

 
SANTANDER CONSUMER USA INC.By: 
/s/ Marc Womack
Name: Marc WomackTitle: EVP, Head of OperationsDate: March 31, 2022By: 
/s/ Erik Laney
Name: Erik LaneyTitle: TreasurerDate: March 31, 2022**
#### August Wabberson, Plaintiff, *v.*Carrie Wabberson, Defendant.

(Supreme Court, New York Special Term,

April, 1899.)

Annulment of marriage — Alimony and counsel fees.

Where an actual marital relation has been admitted or shown and its existence is sought to be avoided by the husband upon the ground that when it was contracted the wife had a husband living, she is entitled to alimony pending his action to annul the marriage • and to counsel fees in order to defend the action.-

Motion for alimony and counsel fee in a husband’s action to annul the marriage on the ground that when it was contracted the wife had a husband living.

H. V. Brown, for motion.

Philip Carpenter, opposed,

Giegerich, J.

The case of Lee v. Lee, 4 Civ. Pro. 321, is a direct authority for the allowance to the wife of alimony *pendente lite,*and counsel fees to enable her to defend an action brought by the husband -to annul a marriage. The principle upon which such allowance was made was thus clearly stated by the court in Brinkley v. Brinkley, 50 N. Y. 190, 193 *“*Where an actual marital relation has been admitted or shown, and its existence is sought to be avoided by some fact set up by the husband and it devolves upon him to show that fact, alimony will be granted until that fact is shown.” This case, in its facts, comes directly within the above rule, and after reading the motion papers, I conclude that the defendant should have a counsel fee of $30, to enable her to defend the action, and $4 per week during the pendency thereof ;for the support of herself and the two children of the marriage. The counsel fee may be paid in weekly installments of $3 each.

Ordered accordingly.
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-10969 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus ISA DANASABE YUSUFU, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:89-CR-114-Y

- - - - - - - - - - June 17, 1997 Before SMITH, STEWART, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * The Federal Public defender appointed to represent Isa Danasabe Yusufu has filed a brief as required by Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Yusufu’s motion for a second extension of time to respond to this motion is DENIED. Our independent review of the brief and record discloses no nonfrivolous issue. Accordingly, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5thCir. R. 42.2.
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 210 

To amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to waive the requirement 

for proof of citizenship during first year of life for children born in 

the United States to a Medicaid-eligible mother. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 4, 2007 

Mr. SERRANO introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to waive 

the requirement for proof of citizenship during first year 

of life for children born in the United States to a Medicaid-eligible mother. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Medicaid Newborn 

5 Coverage Act of 2007’’. 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with BILLS
2 

•HR 210 IH

1 SEC. 2. WAIVER OF REQUIREMENT OF PROOF OF CITIZEN2 SHIP DURING FIRST YEAR OF LIFE FOR CHIL3 DREN BORN IN THE UNITED STATES TO A 

4 MEDICAID-ELIGIBLE MOTHER. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1903(x)(2) of such Act 

6 (42 U.S.C. 1396b(x)(2)), as amended by section 405(c)(1) 

7 of the Medicare Improvements and Extension Act of 2006 

8 (division B of Public Law 109–432, is amended— 

9 (1) by striking ‘‘or’’ at the end of subparagraph 

10 (C); 

11 (2) by redesignating subparagraph (D) as sub12 paragraph (E); and 

13 (3) by inserting after subparagraph (C) the fol14 lowing new subparagraph: 

15 ‘‘(D) and is a child born to a woman eligible for 

16 and receiving medical assistance under this title on 

17 the date of the child’s birth, without regard to the 

18 child’s basis of eligibility for medical assistance, but 

19 only with respect to medical assistance for items and 

20 services furnished during the child’s first year of life; 

21 or’’. 

22 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

23 this section shall take effect on the date of the enactment 

24 of this Act and section 1903(x)(2)(D) of the Social Secu25 rity Act, as inserted by subsection (a)(4), shall apply to 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with BILLS
3 

•HR 210 IH

1 children born on or after the date of the enactment of this 

2 Act. 

Æ 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with BILLS
-84 -82 -80 -78 -76 -74 -72 -70

 34

 36

 38

 40

 42

★

▲

▲

▲

▲

★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲

 500

 1000

 1500

 100

18 12 06 00

06/18

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 18 Jun 06

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 39.46 N 76.63 W Meters AGL

★

■

■

■

■

★

■ ■ ■

■

★

●

●

●

●

★

●

●

●

●
```

[107th Congress Public Law 92]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]

<DOC>
[DOCID: f:publ092.107]

[[Page 115 STAT. 898]]

Public Law 107-92
107th Congress

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
8588 Richmond Highway in Alexandria, Virginia, as the ``Herb Harris Post 
       Office Building''. <<NOTE: Dec. 21, 2001 -  [H.R. 1761]>> 

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The facility of the United States Postal Service located at 8588 
Richmond Highway in Alexandria, Virginia, shall be known and designated 
as the ``Herb Harris Post Office Building''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the facility referred to in section 1 
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Herb Harris Post Office 
Building''.

    Approved December 21, 2001.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 1761:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 147 (2001):
            Sept. 10, considered and passed House.
            Dec. 6, considered and passed Senate.

                                  <all>
```
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

KEVIN J. COLL, JR.,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 812 MAL 2017

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 24th day of April, 2018, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I
Editorial Note: Part 2 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I
Editorial Note: Part 6 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I
Editorial Note: Part 7 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to trademarks regulations.

Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I
Editorial Note: Part 1 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.

Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I
Editorial Note: Part 3 pertaining to both patents and trademarks is placed in the grouping pertaining to patents regulations.

Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I
Editorial Note: Part 4 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.

Editorial Note on Subchapter A of Chapter I
Editorial Note: Part 5 is placed in the separate grouping of parts pertaining to patents regulations.

§ 41.3 Petitions. ( a ) *Deciding official.* Petitions must be addressed to the Chief Administrative Patent Judge. A panel or an administrative patent judge may certify a question of policy to the Chief Administrative Patent Judge for decision. The Chief Administrative Patent Judge may delegate authority to decide petitions.
( b ) *Scope.* This section covers petitions on matters pending before the Board (§§ 41.35, 41.64, 41.103, and 41.205); otherwise, see §§ 1.181 to 1.183 of this title. The following matters are not subject to petition: ( 1 ) Issues committed by statute to a panel, and
( 2 ) In pending contested cases, procedural issues. See § 41.121(a)(3) and § 41.125(c).
( c ) *Petition fee.* The fee set in § 41.20(a) must accompany any petition under this section except no fee is required for a petition under this section seeking supervisory review.
( d ) *Effect on proceeding.* The filing of a petition does not stay the time for any other action in a Board proceeding.
( e ) *Time for action.* ( 1 ) Except as otherwise provided in this part or as the Board may authorize in writing, a party may: ( i ) File the petition within 14 days from the date of the action from which the party is requesting relief, and
( ii ) File any request for reconsideration of a petition decision within 14 days of the decision on petition or such other time as the Board may set.
( 2 ) A party may not file an opposition or a reply to a petition without Board authorization.
[69 FR 50003, Aug. 12, 2004, as amended at 69 FR 58260, Sept. 30, 2004]
### Open Literature Review Screen Chemical Name: Atrazine 

### CAS No: 1912-24-9 

### Citation: Van den Brink, P. J., S. 1. H. Crum, et al. (2009). "Effects ofaherbicideinsecticide mixture in freshwater microcosms: Risk assessment and ecological effect chain." Environmental Pollution 157(1): 237-249.**CWl~1** 

### 10 i-{C(;2101 f

## 3S- ) Date ofScreen: 08/24/09 

### Rationale for Not Conducting a Full Open Literature Review Summary: The study evaluates amixture ofatrazine and lindane as the active ingredient; data onthe single atrazine active ingredient are not provided. 

### Primary Reviewer: Lisa Muto, StaffScientist, Cambridge Environmental Inc. 

### Secondary Reviewer: Teri Myers, Senior Scientist, Cambridge Environmental Inc.



# /1111111111 2087845
EXHIBIT 32
                                                                      ----------

          CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED
           PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned have executed this certification in connection with the filing
with the Securities and Exchange Commission of the Company's Quarterly Report on
Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2006. The undersigned hereby certify
that to our knowledge:

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

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


Dated:   August 11, 2006               /s/Raul S. McQuivey
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                       Raul S. McQuivey
                                       President and Chief Executive Officer
                                       (Principal Executive Officer)




Dated August 11, 2006                  /s/Sidney C. Hooper
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                       Sidney C. Hooper
                                       Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
                                       (Principal Accounting Officer)
#### § 86.1 Applicability.

The regulations of this part are applicable to the award of training grants and direct traineeships pursuant to section 21(a)(1) of the Occupational Safety and Health Act of 1970 (29 U.S.C. 670(a)(1)) to assist in providing an adequate supply of qualified personnel to carry out the purposes of the Act.