alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT (21)



                         LUFKIN INDUSTRIES, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
                         ----------------------------------------

                             SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT
                             ------------------------------

                                                           Name under which
                                     Jurisdiction           such subsidiary
     Name of subsidiary            of Incorporation           does business
------------------------------- ----------------------     ----------------


Lufkin Industries Canada, Ltd.   Province of Alberta,            Same
                                   Canada

P. T. Lufkin Indonesia           Republic of Indonesia           Same


Lufkin Industries FSC, Inc.      Barbados                        Same


Lufkin Industries Europe, Bv.    The Netherlands                 Same


Lufkin Japan, L. L. C.           Japan                           Same
<PAGE>
EXHIBIT 32.2

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

         Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections
(a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), the
undersigned officer of Marine Petroleum Trust (the "Company"), does hereby
certify, to such officer's knowledge, that:

         The Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended June 30, 2003 (the
"Form 10-K") of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the
information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as
of, and for, the periods presented in the Form 10-K.

/s/ RON E. HOOPER
-------------------------
Ron E. Hooper
Senior Vice President Royalty Management on behalf of Bank of
America Private Bank, not in its individual capacity but solely as
the trustee of Tidelands Royalty Trust "B"

Dated: September 26, 2003

The foregoing certification is being furnished as an exhibit to the Form 10-K
pursuant to Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-K and Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63
of Title 18, United States Code) and, accordingly, is not being filed as part of
the Form 10-K.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Marine Petroleum Trust and will be retained by Marine Petroleum
Trust and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
§ 502.44 Additional information, if required. Where the ARB has determined to review such decision and order, the ARB shall notify each party of: ( a ) The issue or issues raised;
( b ) The form in which submissions shall be made (*i.e.*, briefs, oral argument, etc.); and
( c ) The time within which such presentation shall be submitted.
12AConsentN-4SEC325Ex2-GWNYAdvisorChoice-Corporate




CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS
We consent to the use in this Post-Effective Amendment No. 1 to Registration Statement No. 333-194100 of the Variable Annuity-1 Series Account of Great-West Life & Annuity Insurance Company of New York on Form N-4 of our report dated March 31, 2015 on the financial statements Great-West Life & Annuity Insurance Company of New York (which report expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an emphasis-of-matter paragraph referring to the financial statements which have been prepared from separate records maintained by the Company and may not necessarily be indicative of conditions that would have existed or the results of operations if the Company had been operated as an unaffiliated company) appearing in the Statement of Additional Information, which is part of the Registration Statement.
We also consent to the references to us as experts under the heading “Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm and Independent Auditors” in the Statement of Additional Information. 


/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
Denver, Colorado 
April 10, 2015
§ 541.400 General rule for computer employees. ( a ) Computer systems analysts, computer programmers, software engineers or other similarly skilled workers in the computer field are eligible for exemption as professionals under section 13(a)(1) of the Act and under section 13(a)(17) of the Act. Because job titles vary widely and change quickly in the computer industry, job titles are not determinative of the applicability of this exemption.
( b ) The section 13(a)(1) exemption applies to any computer employee who is compensated on a salary or fee basis at not less than the level set forth in § 541.600. The section 13(a)(17) exemption applies to any computer employee compensated on an hourly basis at a rate of not less than $27.63 an hour. In addition, under either section 13(a)(1) or section 13(a)(17) of the Act, the exemptions apply only to computer employees whose primary duty consists of: ( 1 ) The application of systems analysis techniques and procedures, including consulting with users, to determine hardware, software or system functional specifications;
( 2 ) The design, development, documentation, analysis, creation, testing or modification of computer systems or programs, including prototypes, based on and related to user or system design specifications;
( 3 ) The design, documentation, testing, creation or modification of computer programs related to machine operating systems; or
( 4 ) A combination of the aforementioned duties, the performance of which requires the same level of skills.
( c ) The term “salary basis” is defined at § 541.602; “fee basis” is defined at § 541.605; “board, lodging or other facilities” is defined at § 541.606; and “primary duty” is defined at § 541.700.
[69 FR 22260, Apr. 23, 2004, as amended at 81 FR 32550, May 23, 2016; 84 FR 51306, Sept. 27, 2019; 89 FR 32971, Apr. 26, 2024]
EXHIBIT
(23)
 
 
 CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
 
 
 We
consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos.
33-62021, 333-112890, and 333-07129 on Form S-8 of our report dated March 1,
2010, relating to the consolidated financial statements and financial statement
schedule of Lufkin Industries, Inc., and the effectiveness of Lufkin Industries,
Inc.’s internal control over financial reporting (which report expresses an
unqualified opinion), appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of Lufkin
Industries, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2009.
 
 /s/
DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
 
 Houston,
Texas
 March 1,
2010
[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 157 (Monday, August 15, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 50480]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-20591]


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

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Notice of Proposals To Engage in Permissible Nonbanking 
Activities or To Acquire Companies That Are Engaged in Permissible 
Nonbanking Activities; Correction

    This notice corrects a notice (FR Doc. 2011-20130) published on 
pages 48862 and 48863 of the issue for Tuesday, August 9, 2011.
    Under the Federal Reserve Bank of New York heading, the entry for 
ES Bancshares, Newburgh, New York, is revised to read as follows:
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of New York (Ivan Hurwitz, Vice President) 
33 Liberty Street, New York, New York 10045-0001:
    1. ES Bancshares Inc., Newburgh, New York; to engage de novo 
through its newly formed subsidiary, Empire Lockbox Settlements, Inc., 
Newburgh, New York, in servicing extensions of credit, including 
factoring, for the company's account or the account of others, pursuant 
to section 225.28(b)(1) of Regulation Y.
    Comments on this application must be received by August 24, 2011.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, August 9, 
2011.
Robert deV. Frierson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 2011-20591 Filed 8-12-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
#### § 779.9 Reliance on interpretations.

The interpretations of the law contained in this part are official interpretations which may be relied upon as provided in section 10 of the Portal-to-Portal Act of 1947. In addition, the Supreme Court has recognized that such interpretations of the Act “provide a practical guide to employers and employees as to how the office representing the public interest in its enforcement will seek to apply it” and “constitute a body of experience and informed judgment to which courts and litigants may properly resort for guidance.” Further, as stated by the Court: “Good administration of the Act and good judicial administration alike require that the standards of public enforcement and those for determining private rights shall be at variance only where justified by very good reasons.” (*Skidmore* v. *Swift,* 323 U.S. 134.) Some of the interpretations in subpart D of this part relating to the scope of the exemption provided for retail or service establishments are interpretations of this exemption as it appeared in the original Act before amendment in 1949 and 1961, which have remained unchanged because they were consistent with the amendments. These interpretations may be said to have Congressional sanction because “When Congress amended the Act in 1949 it provided that pre-1949 rulings and interpretations by the Administrator should remain in effect unless inconsistent with the statute as amended. 63 Stat. 920.” (*Mitchell* v. *Kentucky Finance Co.,* 359 U.S. 290.)
§ 580.7 General. ( a ) Except as specifically provided in this subpart, and to the extent they do not conflict with the provisions of this subpart, the Rules of Practice and Procedure for Administrative Hearings Before the Office of Administrative Law Judges established by the Secretary at 29 CFR part 18 shall apply to administrative proceedings under this subpart.
( b ) Subpart B of the Rules of Practice and Procedure for Administrative Hearings Before the Office of Administrative Law Judges (29 CFR part 18, subpart B) shall apply except as follows: Notwithstanding the provisions of subpart B, including the hearsay rule (§ 18.802), testimony of current or former Department of Labor employees concerning information obtained in the course of investigations and conclusions thereon, as well as any documents contained in Department of Labor files (other than the investigation file concerning the violation(s) as to which the penalty in litigation has been assessed), shall be admissible in proceedings under this subpart. Nothing in this paragraph is intended to limit the admissibility of any evidence which is otherwise admissible under 29 CFR part 18, subpart B.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 103 (Friday, May 26, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Pages 34200-34211]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-13208]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Food and Drug Administration

[FDA 225-99-7000]


Memorandum of Understanding Between the Food and Drug 
Administration, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the 
U.S. Department of Agriculture, the U.S. Department of Defense, and the 
Environmental Protection Agency

AGENCY: Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is providing notice of 
a memorandum of understanding (MOU) between FDA, the Centers for 
Disease Control and Prevention, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the 
U.S. Department of Defense, and the Environmental Protection Agency. 
The purpose of the MOU is to establish an interagency coordinating 
committee on animal production and food health with the goal of 
improving animal and public health.

DATES: The agreement became effective November 17, 1999.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Robert C. Livingston, Center for 
Veterinary Medicine (HFV-1), Food and Drug Administration, 7500 
Standish Pl., Rockville, MD 20855, 301-594-5903.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with 21 CFR 20.108(c), which 
states that all written agreements and MOU's between FDA and others 
shall be published in the Federal Register, the agency is publishing 
notice of this MOU.

    Dated: May 19, 2000.
William K. Hubbard,
Senior Associate Commissioner for Policy, Planning, and Legislation.
    The MOU is set forth in its entirety as follows:
BILLING CODE 4160-01-F

[[Page 34201]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN26MY00.006


[[Page 34202]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN26MY00.007


[[Page 34203]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN26MY00.008


[[Page 34204]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN26MY00.009


[[Page 34205]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN26MY00.010


[[Page 34206]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN26MY00.011


[[Page 34207]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN26MY00.012


[[Page 34208]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN26MY00.013


[[Page 34209]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN26MY00.014


[[Page 34210]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN26MY00.015


[[Page 34211]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN26MY00.016

[FR Doc. 00-13208 Filed 5-25-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-01-C
#### STATE OF MISSOURI, Respondent, v. HENRY BENTON, Appellant.

Springfield Court of Appeals,

April 1, 1912.

APPELLATE PRACTICE: Criminal Law: Examining Record Proper. In an appeal by defendant convicted of violating the Local Option Law, the transcript filed in the appellate court did not contain any bill of exceptions and there was nothing to examine but the record proper, which is examined and held to contain no substantial error.

*40Appeal from Dent Circuit *Court.*— Eon. *L. B. Woodside,*Judge.

Affirmed.

*W. P. Elmer*for appellant.

*L. T. McGee,*Prosecuting Attorney, and *E. W. Bennett,*Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for respondent. ■

NIXON, P. J.

Appellant was tried and convicted in the circuit court of Dent county for a violation of the Local Option Law alleged to have been in force in said county, and his punishment assessed at a fine of three hundred dollars and imprisonment in the county jail for a term of three months. An appeal was granted to this court. In attempting to perfect this appeal, appellant filed in this court a typewritten transcript which contains only the record proper, omitting entirely the bill of exceptions. The first seven pages of this transcript is taken up with matters of record proper. It was obviously intended that the bill of exceptions should be inserted after page seven because the following page is numbered *“*18,” and the first line on page eighteen begins “Which said bill of exceptions is indorsed,” etc. The bill of exceptions was entirely omitted. We therefore have none of the evidence, instructions, motion for neAV trial, etc., before us and have no way of ascertaining on what ground appellant relies for reversal. He has not even filed a brief. There is nothing therefore to examine in this case except the record proper which under the la\v we are required to pass on. [Sec. 5312, R. S. 1909; State v. Donahue, 139 Mo. App. 639, 124 S. W. 42.] The information is in proper form and sufficiently charges the offense of which the defendant was convicted. The record shows that the defendant was duly arraigned and entered his plea of not guilty. A trial was had by a *41jury regularly impaneled, and a verdict of guilty returned, assessing the punishment as heretofore stated. Being unable to discover any substantial error in the record before us, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

All concur.
Information on the 2024 Campaign is available now.  Click here to find out more.

# 

# About Us

We have an integrated mission of protection and investigations to ensure the safety and security of our protectees, key locations, and events of national significance.  We also protect the integrity of our currency and investigate crimes against the U.S. financial system committed by criminals around the world and in cyberspace.

 

                              - Strategic Plan FY 2023-FY 2027        FY2023 - FY2027 Strategic Plan Cover - ICON      This plan serves as a roadmap for the U.S. Secret Service.Download 
                              - Annual ReportsLearn more about the U.S. Secret Service's mission, achievements and focus during each fiscal year.Download

## Our Vision

Excellence through talent, technology, and diversity

## Our Law Enforcement Authority

Our law enforcement authority and responsibilities are coded in U.S. criminal code Title 18 U.S.C. 3056 -- Powers, authorities, and duties of United States Secret Service.

Learn More

## Partnerships

The Secret Service never works alone. We accomplish our full mission through robust partnerships with local, state, federal and international law enforcement agencies and the private sector.

## Our Highly-Skilled Workforce

----

Interested in joining our team? Learn more by visiting our Careerssection.

 

Special agents focus on protecting top U.S. and visiting foreign officials and investigating financial crimes.

 

Our Uniformed Division officers' mission is to protect facilities and venues secured for U.S. Secret Service protectees.

 

The Technical Law Enforcement job family supports our special agents and Uniformed Division officers in their duties. 

 

Our civil service professionals, from a wide variety of disciplines, support the overall protective and investigative missions.

## Leadership

Learn more about the men and women who lead us in our contribution to the Department of Homeland Security’s common mission of protecting the American people from harm.

Learn More

## History

The Secret Service was established in 1865 as a bureau in the Treasury Department to suppress widespread counterfeiting.

Learn More

Return to top of page
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                           8,641
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 8,049
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     17,980
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                         70,874
<ALLOWANCE>                                        901
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 113,780
<DEPOSITS>                                      97,384
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                                660
<LONG-TERM>                                      7,600
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      1,993
<COMMON>                                         6,528
<OTHER-SE>                                       (385)
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 113,780
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  1,305
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                  231
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                    57
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 1,593
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                                 513
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 696
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                              897
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                        0
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  1,157
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (120)
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (93)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.26)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.26)
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.49
<LOANS-NON>                                        604
<LOANS-PAST>                                        45
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                   493
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                  1,100
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                   549
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                       53
<RECOVERIES>                                         3
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                  901
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                               631
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                            270
        

</TABLE>
[657 NE2d 493, 633 NYS2d 472]

#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Christian Germosen, Appellant.

Decided September 21, 1995

*823APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

*Joseph A. Zayas,*New York City, and *Philip L. Weinstein*for appellant.

*Robert T. Johnson, District Attorney*of Bronx County, Bronx *(Gina D'Angelica*and *Allen H. Saperstein*of counsel), for respondent.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Memorandum.

The order of the Appellate Division should be affirmed.

*824The prosecutor’s examination of defendant before the Grand Jury does not warrant dismissal of the charges on the ground that defendant was deprived of a fair opportunity to testify *(see,*CPL 190.50 [5]; *People v Karp,*158 AD2d 378, 388-389 [dissenting opn of Sullivan, J.], *revd*76 NY2d 1006). Defendant was permitted to make a full narrative statement of his version of events before the prosecutor examined him. The prosecutor’s questions with respect to defendant’s statement that the Grand Jury "should check the fingerprints” were properly aimed at clarifying that defendant was not aware of any exculpatory fingerprint evidence. The prosecutor’s assertion that defendant "was taking all the responsibility for the gun” may have allowed an inference that defendant accepted blame for the incident. However, the prosecutor’s questions were directed principally at establishing that defendant was not being forced to accept sole responsibility and that the other occupants of the car were likewise appearing in court on charges arising out of the incident. Immediately after the prosecutor’s statement, defendant countered to the Grand Jury that he had been informed by a police officer that he would be forced to take responsibility if the other occupants did not "talk”. Thus, the prosecutor’s isolated statement cannot be said to have denied defendant a full and fair opportunity to testify or to have impaired the integrity of the proceedings *(see, People v Gonzalez,*201 AD2d 414, 415, *lv denied*83 NY2d 871 [citing *People v Darby,*75 NY2d 449, 455]).

Chief Judge Kaye and Judges Simons, Titone, Bellacosa, Smith, Levine and Ciparick concur.

On review of submissions pursuant to section 500.4 of the Rules of the Court of Appeals (22 NYCRR 500.4), order affirmed in a memorandum.
Exhibit 23.1





                    Independent Auditors' Consent



The Board of Directors
Arrow-Magnolia International, Inc.


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Nos. 333-47709 and 333-01511) on Form S-8 of Arrow-Magnolia International,
Inc. of our report dated March 20, 2003, relating to the balance sheets of
Arrow-Magnolia International, Inc. as of December 31, 2002 and 2001 and the
related statements of income, shareholders' equity, and cash flows for the
three-year period ended December 31, 2002, which report appears in the
December 31, 2002 annual report on Form 10-KSB of Arrow-Magnolia,
International, Inc.




							PHILIP VOGEL & CO., INC.



Dallas, Texas
March 31, 2002