alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 23.3

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PETROLEUM ENGINEERS

LaRoche Petroleum
Consultants, Ltd. consents to: (i) the references to our firm in the form and context in which they appear in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Quicksilver Resources Inc. (the Company) for the year ended December 31, 2011 (the
Annual Report); (ii) the use in the Annual Report of information contained in our reports setting forth the estimate of net revenue from the Companys proved oil and gas reserves as of December 31, 2011, 2010 and 2009 and our
summary report filed as Exhibit 99.2 to the Annual Report; and (iii) the incorporation by reference into the Companys Registration Statement No. 333-160046 on Form S-3 and Registration Statement Nos. 333-91526, 333-161235, 333-116180,
333-134430 and 333-166208 on Form S-8 of all references to our firm including the information and summary report referenced in (ii) above.



LAROCHE PETROLEUM CONSULTANTS, LTD.By:

/s/ Stephen W. DanielStephen W. Daniel
Partner


April 11, 2012
Exhibit
      32.1





CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO 8 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
      SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of Element 21 Golf Company (formerly BRL
      Holdings, Inc.) (the "Registrant") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended March
      31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
      hereof, I, Nataliya Hearn, Ph.D., President and Chief Executive Officer of
      the
      Registrant, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
      to
      Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge
      and belief:





(1)
      The Quarterly 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 result of operations of the
      Registrant.





Date: May
              18,
              2006
            By:
            /s/ Nataliya
              HearnNataliya Hearn, Ph.D.
              President and Director
# FILED November 19, 1998 Cecil W. Crowson Appellate Court Cle rk IN THE COURT OF CR IMINAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE

AT NASHVILLE OCTOBER 1998 SESSION
WILLIAM C. HIGHTOWER, ) ) NO. 01C01-9802-CC-00081 Appellant, ) ) WILLIAMSON COUNTY VS. ) ) HON. DONALD P. HA RRIS, STATE OF TENNESSEE, ) JUDGE ) Appellee. ) (Sentencing) ) ) AFFIRMED - RULE 20 O R D E R Appellant, William C. Hightower, appeals the trial court's denial of his motion to correct an illegal sentence. The tr ial court previously r

evoked his probation and orde r ed an effective eight-year s entence to run consecutively to a fifteen-year Alabama sentence. Appellantpreviously appealed his pr obation revocation and unsuccessfully argued this very issue. The fact that appellant is now attacking his sentence under the guise of a motion to corr ect an illegal sentence does n ot detract fr om this Court's previousruling that consecutive sentencing was proper. Appellant is bound by that ruling. We reiterate that "Hight ower's contention that

the trial court erred b

y requiring the Tennessee senten ces to be served consecutively to the Alabama sentences is without merit. The trial court is authorized to run such sentences consecutively pursuant toT.C.A. § 40-35-310. Consecutive sentencing is justified under the facts." State v. William Hi ghtower , C.C.A. No. 01C01-95 07 -CC-00234, Williamson County (Tenn. Crim. A pp . f iled January 16, 1997, at Nashv ille)(no permission to appeal sought).

The judgment of the trial cour t is affirmed pursuant to Rule 2 0, Ten nesseeCourt of Criminal Appeals. It appearing that the appellant is indigent, costs

shall be taxed to the state.
So ordered. Enter:

_______________________ JOE G. RILEY, JUDGE
CONCUR:

________________________ PAUL G. SUMMERS, JU DGE

________________________ JOSEPH M. TIPTON, JUDG E
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3693

To provide additional resources to the Department of Justice for the investigation and prosecution of identity theft and related credit card and other 

fraud. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 8, 2003

Mr. SCOTT of Virginia (for himself, Mr. COBLE, Mr. CONYERS, Mr. CASE, Mr. 

FROST, Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts, Mr. BERMAN, Ms. SCHAKOWSKY, 

Ms. LEE, and Mr. KUCINICH) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL

To provide additional resources to the Department of Justice 

for the investigation and prosecution of identity theft 

and related credit card and other fraud.

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 ‘‘Identity Theft Inves5 tigation and Prosecution Act of 2003’’. 
2

•HR 3693 IH 

1 SEC. 2. ADDITIONAL FUNDING FOR IDENTITY THEFT AND 

2 RELATED CREDIT CARD AND OTHER FRAUD. 

3 In addition to any other sums authorized to be appro4 priated for this purpose, there is authorized to be appro5 priated to the Department of Justice, $100,000,000 for 

6 the investigation and prosecution of identity theft and re7 lated credit card and other fraud cases.

Æ
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 Transportation Safety Board

# “FEDERAL REGISTER” CITATION OF PREVIOUS ANNOUNCEMENT:

Vol. 65, No. 80/Tuesday, April 25, 2000.

# PREVIOUSLY ANNOUNCED TIME AND DATE:

9:30 a.m., Wednesday, May 3, 2000.

# CHANGE IN MEETING:

A majority of the Board Members determined by recorded vote that the business of the Board required deleting the following item from the agenda at this time and that no earlier announcement was possible.

7256 Special Investigation Report:

Actions to Reduce Fatalities, Injuries, and Crashes Involving the Hard Core Drinking Driver.

# FOR MORE INFORMATION CONTACT:

Rhonda Underwood, (202) 314-6065.

Dated: April 27, 2000.

Rhonda Underwood,

Federal Register Liaison Officer.

[FR Doc. 00-10961  Filed 4-27-00; 4:41 pm]

BILLING CODE 7533-01-M
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-7185

TERRY ALLEN ALSTON,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

RONALD J. ANGELONE, Director of the Virginia

Department of Corrections,

Respondent - Appellee.

No. 98-7458

TERRY ALLEN ALSTON,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

RONALD J. ANGELONE, Director of the Virginia

Department of Corrections,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeals from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca B. Smith, District Judge.

(CA-97-699-2, CA-97-1027-2)
2

Submitted: January 7, 1999 Decided: January 19, 1999

Before WIDENER, MURNAGHAN, and ERVIN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Terry Allen Alston, Appellant Pro Se. John H. McLees, Jr., OFFICE

OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
3

PER CURIAM:

Terry Allen Alston appeals the district court’s orders denying

relief on his petitions filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994

& Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district

court’s opinions accepting the reports and recommendations of the

magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we

deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeals on the

reasoning of the district court. See Alston v. Angelone, Nos. CA97-699-2; CA-97-1027-2 (E.D. Va. July 28 & Sept. 23, 1998). We

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions

are adequately presented in the materials before the court and

argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
#### GOUDY *v.*GOUDY AND OTHERS.

Conveyance by parents for their support — lien on the land — the heir takes it so encumbered5.

Where a son takes a conveyance of his father’s land under an agreement to support his father and mother, the advances for support are the purchase of the land.

And if the son die leaving a child and widow, and the widow continue the advances for the support to save her dower and the child’s interest, and the child dies and the property goes to his uncles, they take it subject to such advances and the future support of the parents.

If there be a case in proof for relief, but the proper case is not made in the bill, the court will allow an amendment even after hearing.

Chancery. In May, 1808, R. Goudy deeded sixty-nine acres of land to his son Joseph, in consideration of certain covenants by the son, to provide for the wants of his father and mother for a stipulated time. These covenants were complied with until 1816, when Joseph died, leaving the complainant his widow, and an infant son his only child. The effects of the deceased came to the hands of the complainant, who in order to secure the property for her son, and her own dower in it, continued for five years longer to comply with the covenants of her husband, and to support the father and mother. The father then died, and the complainant complied with the covenants as to the mother, for five years longer, and advanced during that time $>216 70, under the contract. The son of Joseph died without issue, and the land descended to the defendants, his uncles, who claim to hold it discharged of these payments. The complainant claims to assert her advances as a lien upon the land.

*C.*Pease, for the complainant.

*R.*Stone, contra.

Lane, J.

The covenants to support the grantor and his wife, were the consideration agreed to be paid by Joseph for the land, and as between the parties could be enforced as a lien upon the land. The covenants however, were to be performed by the payment of money, or provision. What was due at the death of Joseph were chargeable upon the assets to be administered. The land descended to the child charged with the payment by him of the sums to become due. At his death, it descended to the defendants, subject to the charge for arrears either upon the child’s other effects or upon the land. If thei'efore, the complainant paid money,, *of the effects*of the child or his father Joseph, for arrears, it was so far equitable and right; but if she paid out of her own funds, it seems to us she should be permitted to charge it on the land. The personal assets of an intestate do not pass by descent to heirs — they pass to the representatives of the personalty, and the heirs take from them, as distributees. The case made does not disclose the facts essential to a decree. Nor could we, without the pleadings are *411amended, settle the whole matter between the parties. The cause, howevei, may go to a master, to state an account of the personal effects of Joseph and the son — the payments under the covenants— the amount of the dower interest, and of the rents received.
Exhibit
      32.1




CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO 8 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE


SARBANES-OXLEY
      ACT OF 2002




In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of Element 21 Golf Company (the
      "Registrant") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended March 31, 2007, as filed
      with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, we, Nataliya Hearn,
      Ph.D., President and Chief Executive Officer, and John Grippo, Chief Financial
      Officer of the Registrant, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
      adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to
      the
      best of our knowledge and belief:





(1)
      The Quarterly 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 result of operations of the
      Registrant.


Date:
                May 21, 2007
            By:
            /s/
              Nataliya
              Hearn, Ph.D.President
                and Director


Date:
                May 21, 2007
            By:
            /s/
              John
              GrippoChief
                Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 32.1


                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter
ending June 30, 2004 of Joule Inc. (the "Company") as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Emanuel N.
Logothetis, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 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 Exchange Act of 1934; and
         (2)      The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the
Company.

/s/ EMANUEL N. LOGOTHETIS
-----------------------------
Emanuel N. Logothetis,
Chairman of the Board and
Chief Executive Officer

August 16, 2004
###### Editorial Note on Part 11

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 11 appear at 61 FR 18052, April 24, 1996.

#### § 11.27 Are there other ways FAA collects specific rulemaking recommendations before we issue an NPRM?

Yes, the FAA obtains advice and recommendations from rulemaking advisory committees. One of these committees is the Aviation Rulemaking Advisory Committee (ARAC), which is a formal standing committee comprised of representatives of aviation associations and industry, consumer groups, and interested individuals. In conducting its activities, ARAC complies with the Federal Advisory Committee Act and the direction of FAA. We task ARAC with providing us with recommended rulemaking actions dealing with specific areas and problems. If we accept an ARAC recommendation to change an FAA rule, we ordinarily publish an NPRM using the procedures in this part. The FAA may establish other rulemaking advisory committees as needed to focus on specific issues for a limited period of time.
BRAZIL AIR 

TRAVEL SERVICES PHPT CFT.••••^S^ORWION 

February 24, 2010 '"•:• "" 

The Honorable Ray LaHood 

Secretary 

United States Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE 

Washington, D.C.20590 

Subject: Haneda Combination Services Allocation Proceeding 

DOT-OST-2010-0018 

Dear Secretary LaHood, 

As a dedicated travel partner of American Airlines, I am writing in support of American's application 

to provide new service from New York's John F. Kennedy International Airport and Los Angeles 

International Airport to Tokyo International Airport at Haneda. 

I recognize and applaud you and the Obama administration for your success last December in 

reaching a landmark Open Skies agreement with Japan, which opens up Haneda to service by U.S. 

airlines. 

I encourage your selection of American Airlines to provide nonstop service from New York and Los 

Angeles to Haneda in order to provide an essential connection between three of the worlds largest 

financial and commerce centers. 

Recent events, including the successful preservation of Japan Airlines' Oneworld Alliance 

membership, have underscored American's strong commitment to the trans-Pacific market. 

American is likewise committed to New York and Los Angeles - both vital focal points of business, 

trade, entertainment, technology and education - providing unsurpassed air service since the mid1900s 

Both the New York and Los Angeles metro areas will gain significant economic benefits from these 

proposed new flights, as will American's customers and employees. However, we need your help 

to make the JFK & LAX/Haneda connection a reality. 

Therefore, I strongly urge you to say yes to American Airlines and its request for slots to fly from 

Kennedy and Los Angeles to Haneda! 

Sincerely, 

5anos 

Owner 

10751 WiLSHiRE BOULEVARD, SUITE 1007 • Los ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90024 

(310) 441-8500 • (800) 441-8515 • Hnp://www.BRAZiLAiR.coM • E-MAIL: TONYBANOS®BRAZILAIR.COM
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

LARRY KLAYMAN

, Appellant,

v.

PORTFOLIO MEDIA, INC., ET AL.

, Appellee s

.

No. 4D 22

- 1803

[ March 23, 2023 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm

Beach County ; James Nutt , Judge; L.T. Case No. 502021CA004857

.

Larry Klayman, Boca Raton, pro se.

Deanna K. Shullman and Giselle M. Girones of Shullman Fugate PLLC,

West Palm Beach and Elizabeth A. McNamara and Amanda B. Levine of

Davis Wright Tremaine LLP, Ne w Y ork, pro hac vice, for appellees.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

M AY

, C IKLIN and K UNTZ , JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
EXHIBIT 21.1



Significant Subsidiaries of the Registrant



The following are significant subsidiaries of Knight Capital Group, Inc. as of December 31, 2008 and the states in which they are organized. Indentation
indicates the principal parent of each subsidiary. Except as otherwise specified, in each case Knight Capital Group, Inc. owns, directly or indirectly, at least 99% of the voting securities of each subsidiary. The names of particular subsidiaries
have been omitted because, considered in the aggregate as a single subsidiary, they would not constitute, as of December 31, 2008, a significant subsidiary as that term is defined in Rule 1-02(w) of Regulation S-X under the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934.



|                                         |  |                
|---------------------------------------- |  | ---------------
|Name                                     |  | State of Entity
|Knight Capital Group, Inc.               |  | Delaware       
|Knight/Trimark, Inc.                     |  | Delaware       
|Knight Securities General, Inc.          |  | Delaware       
|Knight Securities Operations, Inc.       |  | Delaware       
|Knight Equity Markets, L.P.              |  | Delaware       
|Knight Capital Markets LLC               |  | Delaware       
|DTI Acquisition LLC                      |  | Delaware       
|DT Holdings (GP) LLC                     |  | Delaware       
|DT Holdings (LP) LLC                     |  | Delaware       
|Knight Direct LLC                        |  | Delaware       
|Knight Libertas Holdings LLC             |  | Delaware       
|Knight Libertas LLC                      |  | Delaware       
|Knight Equity Markets International Ltd. |  | United Kingdom 
|Hotspot FX, Inc                          |  | Delaware       
|Hotspot FXr, L.L.C                       |  | New Jersey     
|Hotspot FXi, L.L.C                       |  | New Jersey     
|Hotspot FXpb LLC                         |  | Delaware       
|Hotspot FXi Europe Limited               |  | United Kingdom 
|                                         | 
|ValuBond, Inc.                           |  | Georgia        
|Knight BondPoint, Inc.                   |  | Georgia
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5 
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1994             DEC-31-1994
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1995             JAN-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1995             JUN-30-1995
<CASH>                                         381,446                 708,742
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,515,503               1,789,437
<ALLOWANCES>                                   332,608                (334,553)
<INVENTORY>                                    366,581                 214,402
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             2,680,692               3,127,612
<PP&E>                                       3,123,871               2,769,459
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,727,552              (1,377,225)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               8,154,312               8,259,611
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,152,744               1,761,129
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<COMMON>                                        80,541                  74,773
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                3                       6
<PREFERRED>                                          0                      10
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,457,190               3,206,574
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 8,154,312               8,259,611
<SALES>                                      8,853,691              13,564,975
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             8,853,691              14,579,163
<CGS>                                        6,351,681               9,215,427
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                9,787,655              14,219,182
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             273,871                 324,887
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (933,964)                359,981
<INCOME-TAX>                                    12,834                (267,000)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (946,798)                626,981
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0                       0
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (946,798)                626,981
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (.123)                     .09
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (.123)                     .09
        

</TABLE>
#### § 1245.300 Scope of subpart.

This subpart establishes policy, criteria, and procedures concerning the NASA Foreign Patent Program.
**Exhibit 23.1**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

We consent tothe incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-3 (Nos. 333-164025, 333-166366 and 333-168191) and related Prospectuses, and the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-128647, 333-132679, 333-138758, 333-145404,333-150834 and 333-160528) pertaining to the 1998 Stock Plan, 2001 Stock Plan, 2005 Equity Incentive Award Plan, Amended and Restated 2006 Employment Commencement Incentive Plan and Employee Stock Purchase Plan of Sunesis Pharmaceuticals, Inc.,of our report dated March 29, 2011, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Sunesis Pharmaceuticals, Inc. included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2010. 

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP 

Palo Alto,California 

March 29, 2011