alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 23.02

                 NOTICE REGARDING CONSENT OF ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP

Section 11(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the "Securities  Act"),
provides  that  if part  of a  registration  statement  at the  time it  becomes
effective  contains an untrue  statement of a material fact, or omits a material
fact required to be stated therein or necessary to make the  statements  therein
not misleading,  any person acquiring a security  pursuant to such  registration
statement  (unless it is proved that at the time of such acquisition such person
knew of such untruth or omission) may assert a claim against,  among others,  an
accountant  who has  consented to be named as having  certified  any part of the
registration  statement or as having  prepared any report for use in  connection
with the registration statement.

On May 15, 2002, the Board of Directors of Delta and Pine Land Company ("D&PL"),
upon  recommendation of its Audit Committee,  decided to no longer engage Arthur
Andersen LLP  ("Arthur  Andersen")  as D&PL's  independent  public  accountants,
effective immediately.  For additional information, see D&PL's Current Report on
Form 8-K filed with the  Securities and Exchange  Commission  ("SEC") on May 17,
2002.

After  reasonable  efforts,  D&PL has been  unable to obtain  Arthur  Andersen's
written  consent to the  incorporation  by  reference  into D&PL's  registration
statements   (Form  S-8  Nos.   333-21049  and  333-74168)  (the   "Registration
Statements")  of  Arthur   Andersen's   audit  report  with  respect  to  D&PL's
consolidated  financial  statements as of August 31, 2001, and for the year then
ended.  Under these  circumstances,  Rule 437a under the  Securities Act permits
D&PL to file this Annual Report on Form 10-K, which is incorporated by reference
into  the  Registration  Statements,  without  a  written  consent  from  Arthur
Andersen.  As a result,  with  respect  to  transactions  in  D&PL's  securities
pursuant to the  Registration  Statements that occur subsequent to the date this
Annual Report on Form 10-K is filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission,
Arthur  Andersen  will  not  have  any  liability  under  Section  11(a)  of the
Securities  Act for any untrue  statements of a material  fact  contained in the
financial  statements  audited by Arthur Andersen or any omissions of a material
fact  required  to  be  stated  therein.  Accordingly,  an  acquiror  of  D&PL's
securities  would be unable  to assert a claim  against  Arthur  Andersen  under
Section 11(a) of the Securities Act.
xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?


Euroopa Liidu C 458I/2021


| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | | ISSN 1977-0898 |
| Euroopa Liidu Teataja | | C 458I |
| European flag | | |
| Eestikeelne väljaanne | Teave ja teatised | 64. aastakäik 13. november 2021 |

---

| | | |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Sisukord | | Lehekülg |
| | IV   Teave | |
| | TEAVE EUROOPA LIIDU INSTITUTSIOONIDELT, ORGANITELT JA ASUTUSTELT | |
| | Euroopa Komisjon | |
| 2021/C 458 I/01 | [Ravimite müügilubasid käsitlevate Euroopa Liidu otsuste kokkuvõte, 12. november 2021 (Avaldatud vastavalt Euroopa Parlamendi ja nõukogu määruse (EÜ) nr 726/2004 artiklile 13 või 38)](http://publications.europa.eu/resource/uriserv/OJ.CI.2021.458.01.0001.01.EST.xhtml) | [1](#CI2021458ET.01000101.doc) |

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| ET | |

---

IV Teave

TEAVE EUROOPA LIIDU INSTITUTSIOONIDELT, ORGANITELT JA ASUTUSTELT

Euroopa Komisjon

| | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 13.11.2021 | ET | Euroopa Liidu Teataja | CI 458/1 |

---

Ravimite müügilubasid käsitlevate Euroopa Liidu otsuste kokkuvõte, 12. november 2021

(Avaldatud vastavalt Euroopa Parlamendi ja nõukogu määruse (EÜ) nr 726/2004 [(1)](#ntr1-CI2021458ET.01000101-E0001)
artiklile 13 või 38)

(2021/C 458 I/01)

| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| — | Müügiloa väljaandmine (Euroopa Parlamendi ja nõukogu määruse (EÜ) nr 726/2004 artikkel 13): Heaks kiidetud | | | | | | | | | | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | | Otsuse tegemise kuupäev | Ravimi nimetus | Rahvusvaheline mittekaubanduslik nimetus (INN) | Müügiloa omanik | Kande number ühenduse registris | Ravimivorm | ATC-kood (anatoomilis-terapeutiline keemiline kood) | Teatamise kuupäev | | 12.11.2021 | Regkirona | regdanvimab | | | | --- | | Celltrion Healthcare Hungary Kft. | | Váci út 1-3. WestEnd Office Building B torony, 1062 Budapest, Magyarország | | EU/1/21/1597 | Kontsentraat infusioonilahuse valmistamiseks | Pending | 12.11.2021 | | 12.11.2021 | Ronapreve | kasirivimab / imdevimab | | | | --- | | Roche Registration GmbH | | Emil-Barell-Strasse 1, 79639 Grenzach-Wyhlen, Deutschland | | EU/1/21/1601 | Süste-või infusioonilahus | Pending | 12.11.2021 | |

Kõnealuseid ravimeid käsitleva avaliku hindamisaruandega ja vastavate otsustega tutvuda soovijatel palutakse pöörduda:

| |
| --- |
| European Medicines Agency |
| Domenico Scarlattilaan 6 |
| 1083 HS Amsterdam |
| NETHERLANDS |

---

[(1)](#ntc1-CI2021458ET.01000101-E0001)  [ELT L 136, 30.4.2004, lk 1](http://publications.europa.eu/resource/oj/JOL_2004_136_R_TOC).

---
#### AMES AND BUCKINGHAM *v.*SLOAT.

.Special contract — breach—recovery—when ended may recover on common counts — suit against one and judgment against two — verdict without damages — costs on a partial reversal.

A party cannot recover on a special contract without a breach of it is proven, but if the contract has been put an end to, or been waved, or performed, or rescinded by the conduct of the parties, ho may recover on the common counts.

When the original suit and judgment is against A, who alone.appeared and appealed, and a declaration is filed in the appellate court against A. and B. wjrile A. alone pleaded, and was tried and the judgment was against the defendant, the record is not sufficiently certain to be sustained. /

A verdict for the plaintiff in assumpsit without assessing any damages is not good, as la3'ing no foundation for a judgment.

Judgment reversed in part, costs divided equally.

Error to the Common Pleas. Sloat declared in assumpsit for work, &c.; and on a special contract for the sale of twenty cords of wood *578at *‡5*per cord. On the trial of the issue of non assumpsit, the court was asked by the defendant to instruct the jury, ‘ that the plaintiff could not recover on the special contract declared upon, and were not liable unless a breach of it was proven.’ The court refused to give’this charge, but instructed the jury,£ that if they found the- special contract had been put an end to or rescinded by the conduct of the parties, the plaintiff might recover on the common counts what was justly due.’

The jury found that, £ *the defendants did assume as alleged'’*— the court rendered judgment for *the damages assessed as*aforesaid, *and ‡45*85 *costs.'*

An exception was taken to the refusal and charge of the Court. and both are now assigned for error, as also the eommon errors.

*Strait*and Hawes, for the plaintiff in error.

By the Court.

We think, that both in refusing to instruct the jury as the defendant asked, and in instructing the jury as the court did, theywere right: (5 *O. R.*351, 386.) But the verdict assesses no damages, and there is therefore no foundation for the judgment, as the finding is imperfect. Again it appears that the original suit before the justice, was carried On against *Ames.*He alone appeared; against *him*the judgment was rendered, but the transcript does not show whether the process was served on him only. The declaration was against *Ames*and Buckingham, the plea by Ames alone, and the trial was alone had with him; yet the verdict and judgment is against the defendants in the plural. This record attains to too little certainty to -be sustained. The proceedings' since the filing the appeal from the justice, are reversed, but affirmed up to that time, and each party under our law will pay half the costs of this writ. This operates a just punishment for their carelessness.
#### CLARK AND COOK *v. F.*B. O. KENSELL AND SNYDER.

Partnership — partnership endorsees — evidence—endorsement for costs.

A note signed Kensell & Co. offered against the person alleged to be the partner, should be accompanied with proof of partnership.

Where a note is endorsed to a *firm,*proof, as of other facts, is required of the existence of the partnership.

An endorser for costs is incompetent as a witness — if the endorsement is by the clerk in the name of the attorney, it is good if the attorney authorized it.

Assumpsit upon a note signed *F. B. O. Kensell, Sf Co.*Plea non assumpsit without affidavit. The plaintiff offered to read the note in evidence.

*Goddard,*for the defendants,

objected, 1. The want of proof of execution: 2. That the name of the payee had been altered from *Samuel*to *S. A.*Wescott, since it was read in' evidence in the Court of Common Pleas.

By the Court.

The evidence offered is intended to affect *Snyder,*whose name does not appear on that note. To make the evidence effectual against him, some proof will be necessary to show that Snyder was a member of the firm of Kensell & Co. The order of the evidence is of little consequence.

The plaintiff then read an *entry in the*books of the commissioner of insolvents, on the application of the defendant, Snyder, to be dis*481charged from arrest, in which the note in contest is described in the schedule of the debts due from *Kensell Co.*‘of which I am a partner-.’

*Goddard,*

objected that he'was security for costs.

*S. W. Culbertson,*for the plaintiff.

*Goddard*and Keith, for the defendants.

G. James, Esq. was called as a witness.

The writ was examined, and found endorsed by *Iheclerh,*‘ George James, attorney for plaintiff, and security for costs.’

By the Court. The endorsement is not the act of James, but of the clerk, and will not bind James unless he authorized it.

The precipe was then produced from which it appeared James had ordered the endorsement; and James, on his voir dire, stated that he intended to bind himself for the costs, and held himself as bound.

By the Court. The witness is incompetent.

The Court, to the jury. It is urged that you must have strict proof that *the plaintiffs*are the endorsees of the note, the *same*Clark and Cook named in the endorsement. A note to the case in the 3 *Camp. R. 239, is*relied upon as authority for this assumption. The case decides that in an endorsement in blank, authorizes any who unite in the suit to recover. The note asserts that where the endorsement is *special*to a firm, proof is required that the firm consists of the persons who sue. This does not change the common rule, a jury is to be satisfied by the proof of the plaintiff’s right to recover, and no more *strict proof*is required of the partnership of the plaintiffs than of any other essential fact. The possession of the note, when endorsed to them by name, with slight circumstances,will be sufficient prima facie.

Yerdict and judgment for the plaintiffs.
RECORD OF CONFERENCE CALL

DATE: May 2 7, 2011 EPA PARTICIPANTS: OAQPS/SLPG and OTAQ OUTSIDE EPA PARTICIPANTS: None SUBJECT: Discussion of meeting with OMB to prepare for presentation of Regulatory Support Document final results and discussion on Proposed Rule for Determining Widespread Use of ORVR and Stage II Vapor Recovery Waiver. DISCUSSION: Conference call held to discuss final edits to preamble and to prepare for presentation to OMB on the final analysis of the financial benefits for faciliti es that are electing to decommission their system once States eliminate the Stage II requirements. Final draft copies of proposed rule and regulatory support document transmitted via email.
# Eiropas Savienības C 464A/2021

| | ISSN 1977-0952 |
| --- | --- |
| Eiropas Savienības
  Oficiālais Vēstnesis | C 464A |
| | |
| Izdevums latviešu valodā | Informācija un paziņojumi | 64. gadagājums2021. gada 17. novembris |

ISSN 1977-0952

Eiropas Savienības

Oficiālais Vēstnesis

C 464A

Izdevums latviešu valodā

Informācija un paziņojumi

64. gadagājums2021. gada 17. novembris

---

| Saturs | Lappuse |
| --- | --- |
| | Labojumi |
| 2021/C 464 A/01 | Labojums sludinājumā Pētniecības un inovācijas ģenerāldirektorāts – Sludinājums par galvenā padomdevēja vakanci – Eiropas Inovācijas padomes valdes priekšsēdētājs (pagaidu darbinieks – AD 14 pakāpe) – COM/2021/10408( OV C 432 A, 26.10.2021. ) | 1 |

Saturs

Lappuse

Labojumi

2021/C 464 A/01

Labojums sludinājumā Pētniecības un inovācijas ģenerāldirektorāts – Sludinājums par galvenā padomdevēja vakanci – Eiropas Inovācijas padomes valdes priekšsēdētājs (pagaidu darbinieks – AD 14 pakāpe) – COM/2021/10408( OV C 432 A, 26.10.2021. )

( OV C 432 A, 26.10.2021. )

1

---

| LV | |
| --- | --- |

LV

---

Labojumi

| 17.11.2021 | LV | Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis | CA 464/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.11.2021

LV

Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis

CA 464/1

---

Labojums sludinājumā “Pētniecības un inovācijas ģenerāldirektorāts – Sludinājums par galvenā padomdevēja vakanci – Eiropas Inovācijas padomes valdes priekšsēdētājs

(pagaidu darbinieks – AD 14 pakāpe)

COM/2021/10408”

(
  “Eiropas Savienības Oficiālais Vēstnesis” C 432 A, 2021. gada 26. oktobris
  )

(2021/C 464 A/01)

5. lappusē “Reģistrēšanās termiņa” pirmajā daļā:

| tekstu: | “Reģistrēšanās termiņš ir 2021. gada 26. novembris plkst. 12.00 dienā pēc Briseles laika, un pēc tam reģistrēties vairs nav iespējams.” |
| --- | --- |

tekstu:

“Reģistrēšanās termiņš ir 2021. gada 26. novembris plkst. 12.00 dienā pēc Briseles laika, un pēc tam reģistrēties vairs nav iespējams.”

| lasīt šādi: | “Reģistrēšanās termiņš ir 2021. gada 17. decembris plkst. 12.00 dienā pēc Briseles laika, un pēc tam reģistrēties vairs nav iespējams.” |
| --- | --- |

lasīt šādi:

lasīt šādi:

“Reģistrēšanās termiņš ir 2021. gada 17. decembris plkst. 12.00 dienā pēc Briseles laika, un pēc tam reģistrēties vairs nav iespējams.”

---
<PAGE>


                                                                      Exhibit 23


                               Consent of KPMG LLP

The Board of Directors
Aksys, Ltd.:



We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements (Nos.
333-44668 and 333-36674) on Form S-3 and (Nos. 333-64134, 333-64136 and
333-18073) on Form S-8 of Aksys, Ltd. of our report dated February 25, 2002,
relating to the consolidated balance sheets of Aksys, Ltd. as of December 31,
2001 and 2000, and the related consolidated statements of operations,
stockholders' equity, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year
period ended December 31, 2001, and for the period from January 18, 1991
(inception) through December 31, 2001, which report appears in the December 31,
2001 annual report on Form 10-K of Aksys, Ltd.

Chicago, Illinois
March 29, 2002
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:20 Filed:05/08/17 Entered:05/11/17 13:54:59 Desc: Main

Document Page 1 of 4
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:20 Filed:05/08/17 Entered:05/11/17 13:54:59 Desc: Main

Document Page 2 of 4
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:20 Filed:05/08/17 Entered:05/11/17 13:54:59 Desc: Main

Document Page 3 of 4
Case:17-03283-LTS Doc#:20 Filed:05/08/17 Entered:05/11/17 13:54:59 Desc: Main

Document Page 4 of 4
#### § 7.1001 National bank acting as general insurance agent.

Pursuant to 12 U.S.C. 92, a national bank may act as an agent for any fire, life, or other insurance company in any place the population of which does not exceed 5,000 inhabitants. This section is applicable to any office of a national bank when the office is located in a community having a population of less than 5,000, even though the principal office of such bank is located in a community whose population exceeds 5,000.

[85 FR 35374, June 10, 2020]
1 HOULITIGATION:1438938.1 NO. 06-15-00091-CV

IN THE SIXTH COURT OF APPEALS TEXARKANA, TEXAS

ON APPEAL FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW PANOLA COUN TY, TEXAS TRIAL COURT NUMBER 2013-457

BRAMMER PETROLEUM, INC., APPELLANT

v. BAGLEY MINERALS, L.P., BI LLY MCFADDEN AND ARTHUR MCFADDEN, APPELLEES

JOINT MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE BRIEFS

In accordance with Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 10.5 and 38.6(d), Appellant Brammer Petroleum, Inc. and Appellees Bagley Minerals, L.P., Billy
McFadden and Arthur McFadden (collectively referred to herein as “the Parties”)
file this Joint Motion for Extension of Time to File Briefs as follows: ACCEPTED 06-15-00091-CV SIXTH COURT OF APPEALS TEXARKANA, TEXAS 11/24/2015 9:43:46 AM DEBBIE AUTREY

CLERK2 HOULITIGATION:1438938.1 I. Appellant’s Brief is currently du e on or before December 23, 2015. Appellant request an extension of the d eadline to file its brief. If granted, that would make Appellant’s Brief due on or before Friday, January 22, 2016

. This is Appellant’s first requested extension of its briefing deadline. Following the Rules thereafter, Appe llee’s Brief would then be due on February 22, 2016 a nd any Reply Brief by Appellan t would be due on March 14,

2016.

II. Appellant Brammer Petroleum, Inc. requests this extension because its appellate counsel is preparing for 3-4 day jury trial in Cause No. 2013-36621A styled Lawsky v. SureTec Insurance Co. , in the 61st District Court of Harris County set for trial on December 7, 2015. Further, a significant portion of Appellee’s response time woul d fall during the holidays. All counsel for the
Parties need this extension due to th e press of numerous other business and litigation matters. Allowing Appellees an ex tension on its brief would provide for a single briefing schedule.

III. The parties have conferred, and Appe llees do not oppose and join in the requested extension.3 HOULITIGATION:1438938.1 IV. The Court may grant an extension of tim e to file a brief under the authority of Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 10.5( b). Because this is an unopposed joint motion to extend time to file a brief, it may be determined by the Court without waiting the 10-day submission delay. See Tex. R. App. P. 10.3(a)(1)-(2). WHEREFORE, Appellees request an extension for filing their briefs, making the Appellees’ Briefs due on or before January 22, 2016

. Respectfully submitted,

/s/ Konor Cormier Konor A. Cormier State Bar No. 24040731 MehaffyWeber, P.C. One Allen Center 500 Dallas, Suite 1200 Houston, Texas 77002 Phone: (713) 655-1200 Facsimile: (713) 655-0222 Counsel for Appellant Brammer Petroleum, Inc

.4 HOULITIGATION:1438938.1 /s/ J. Don Westbrook J. Don Westbrook State Bar No. 24040731 Coghlan Crowson 1127 Judson Road Suite 211 Longview, TX 75601 Phone: (903) 758-5543 Facsimile: (903) 753-6989 Counsel for Appellees

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on November 24t h, 2015, a true and correct copy of this Motion was served in accordance with the Texas Ru les of Appellate Procedure by electronic filing and/or first- class U.S. mail to all known counsel of record.

/s/ Konor Cormier
<PAGE>   1

                                                                     EXHIBIT 11




                             BACK YARD BURGERS, INC.
                       COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME PER SHARE
                                   (Unaudited)

(in thousands except per share amounts)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                     For the Year Ended
                                                 December 28,    December 30,
                                                   1996              1995
                                                   ----              ----
<S>                                                <C>            <C>     
Net Income (Loss)                                  $   357        ($2,953)
                                                   =======        ======= 

Weighted average number of common
  shares and common share equivalents
  outstanding during the period                      4,543          4,533
                                                   -------        -------
                                                     4,543          4,533
                                                   =======        ======= 

Primary income (loss) per share                        .08          (0.65)
                                                   =======        ======= 


Primary weighted average number of
  common shares and common share
  equivalents outstanding during the period          4,543          4,533
                                                   -------        -------
                                                     4,543          4,533
                                                   =======        ======= 

Fully diluted income (loss) per share                  .08          (0.65)
                                                   =======        ======= 
</TABLE>
# Az Európai Unió C 463I/2021

| | ISSN 1977-0979 |
| --- | --- |
| Az Európai Unió
  Hivatalos Lapja | C 463I |
| | |
| Magyar nyelvű kiadás | Tájékoztatások és közlemények | 64. évfolyam2021. november 16. |

ISSN 1977-0979

Az Európai Unió

Hivatalos Lapja

C 463I

Magyar nyelvű kiadás

Tájékoztatások és közlemények

64. évfolyam2021. november 16.

---

| Tartalom | Oldal |
| --- | --- |
| | IV   Tájékoztatások |
| | AZ EURÓPAI UNIÓ INTÉZMÉNYEITŐL, SZERVEITŐL, HIVATALAITÓL ÉS ÜGYNÖKSÉGEITŐL SZÁRMAZÓ TÁJÉKOZTATÁSOK |
| | Európai Bizottság |
| 2021/C 463 I/01 | Egyes versenyjogi eljárásokban eljáró meghallgatási tisztviselő kinevezése | 1 |

Tartalom

Oldal

IV   Tájékoztatások

AZ EURÓPAI UNIÓ INTÉZMÉNYEITŐL, SZERVEITŐL, HIVATALAITÓL ÉS ÜGYNÖKSÉGEITŐL SZÁRMAZÓ TÁJÉKOZTATÁSOK

Európai Bizottság

2021/C 463 I/01

Egyes versenyjogi eljárásokban eljáró meghallgatási tisztviselő kinevezése

1

---

| HU | |
| --- | --- |

HU

---

IV Tájékoztatások

AZ EURÓPAI UNIÓ INTÉZMÉNYEITŐL, SZERVEITŐL, HIVATALAITÓL ÉS ÜGYNÖKSÉGEITŐL SZÁRMAZÓ TÁJÉKOZTATÁSOK

Európai Bizottság

| 2021.11.16. | HU | Az Európai Unió Hivatalos Lapja | CI 463/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2021.11.16.

HU

Az Európai Unió Hivatalos Lapja

CI 463/1

---

Egyes versenyjogi eljárásokban eljáró meghallgatási tisztviselő kinevezése

(2021/C 463 I/01)

Wouter WILS áthelyezését követően a Bizottság 2021. december 1-jei hatállyal Eric GIPPINI FOURNIER-t nevezte ki meghallgatási tisztviselőnek a meghallgatási tisztviselő egyes versenyjogi eljárásokban meglévő feladatáról és megbízatásáról szóló, 2011. október 13-i európai bizottsági elnöki határozatnak (HL L 275., 2011.10.20., 29. o.) megfelelően.

---