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

**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

The Board of Directors 

Cybex International, Inc.: 

We consent to the incorporationby reference in the registration statements (Nos. 333-34309, 333-118475 and 333-114028) on Form S-3 and (Nos. 333-79899, 333-29045, 33-46109, 33-46110, 33-48124, 33-59947, 33-59945, 333-97379, 333-97377 and 333-125434) on Form S-8 of CybexInternational, Inc. of our reports dated March 12, 2008, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Cybex International, Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2007 and 2006, and the related consolidated statements of operations,stockholders’ equity and other comprehensive income and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2007, and the related financial statement schedule, and the effectiveness of internal control overfinancial reporting as of December 31, 2007 which reports appear in the December 31, 2007 annual report on Form 10-K of Cybex International, Inc. 

Our report on the consolidated financial statements refers to the Company’s adoption of Statement of Financial Accounting Standard No. 123(R), *Share-Based Payment,* effective January 1, 2006.

/s/ KPMG LLP 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 

March 12, 2008
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT ANTONIO M. SALCEDO, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D18-4079 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. ) ) Opinion filed September 27, 2019. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Highlands County; Peter F. Estrada, Judge. Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Daniel Muller, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

NORTHCUTT, SILBERMAN, and LaROSE, JJ., Concur.
11TH COURT OF APPEALS

EASTLAND, TEXAS

JUDGMENT

In the interest of T.L.C. and C.A.C., * From the County Court at 

children, Law No. 2 of Ector County,

 Trial Court No. CC2-3157-PC.

No. 11-13-00171-CV * November 27, 2013

* Memorandum Opinion by Wright, C.J.

 (Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,

 Willson, J., and Bailey, J.)

This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that there is no 

error in the judgment below. Therefore, in accordance with this court’s opinion, the 

judgment of the trial court is in all things affirmed.
---

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

The undersigned, Robert Kinloch, Chief Executive Officer and
Chief Financial Officer of Maverick Minerals Corporation (the Company), 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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period ended
September 30, 2009 (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: November 13, 2009





/s/ Robert Kinloch Robert Kinloch Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer



A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the
signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this
written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and
will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.

---
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R.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. 97-30097 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus SAM PRESLEY, II, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana

USDC No. 95-CR-368-F

- - - - - - - - - - July 24, 1998 Before KING, DAVIS and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Court-appointed counsel, Professor Henry Gabriel, has filed a brief as required by Anders v. California , 396 U.S. 738 (1976). Presley has filed a response and has renewed his motion for legal assistance and legal materials. We have independently reviewed the brief, Presley’s response, and record and found no nonfrivolous issue. Accordingly, counsel is excused from further responsibilitiesNo. 97-30097 - 2 - herein and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 5th Cir. R. 42.2. Because the appeal lacks merit, Presley’s motion is DENIED. MOTION TO WITHDRAW GRANTED; RENEWED MOTION DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED.
#### The State of Vermont *v.*John Brown.

*Indictment.*

The omission by the foreman of a grand jury to add the word *“forman”*to his signature to the Words *“ a true bill,”*written by him bn an indictment found, does not invalidate the indictment.

Indictment. The respondent moved to quash the indictment against him upon the ground that the word “foreman” was not annexed to the name of Ira Allen, whose name was indorsed by him on the bill under the words “a true bill.”

It was admitted by the defendant, subject to its legal effect, that Ira Allen acted as foreman of the grand jury at the term of the court at which the indictment was found.

*603The county court, — Bennett, J., presiding, — at the June Term, 1858, overruled the motion to quash the indictment, to which the respondent excepted,

*L. E.*Chittenden, for the respondent.

*F. E.*Woodbridge, State’s attorney, for the prosecution.

Aidis, J.

The Compiled Statutes, chap. 35, § 16, provides that where twelve of the grand jury shall find a bill, the foreman shall write thereon “ a true bill.” In this case the foreman wrote “ a true bill, Ira Allen,” but omitted the word “foreman.”

We do not think the word foreman is required to be added to the signature of that officer’s name. The court appoint the fore-* man, and the appointment should in all cases be made a matter of record, so that an inspection of the records will always show who is the foreman.

No mischiefs are likely to ensue from omitting the word. The grand jury present their bills in open court, the court knows that they are presented by the foreman with the approval of the body of the jury, the clerk enters upon the back of the indictment a minute of its being duly presented and filed. These seem to us the sufficient safeguards, and to which the official signature of the foreman would add nothing.

As we understand the bill of exceptions, it appears that Ira Allen’s name “was indorsed *by hint”*on the indictment, and it is admitted he was the foreman.

The judgment of the county court is affirmed.
###### Editorial Note on Part 117

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 117 appear by USCG-1998-3799, 63 FR 35529, June 30, 1998.

#### § 117.904 Delaware River.

See § 117.716, Delaware River, listed under New Jersey.

[CGD 92-015, 57 FR 37880, Aug. 21, 1992]
ACL Medicare Improvements for Patients and Providers Act (MIPPA)

FY 2014 Annual Allocation

9/26/2014

State

Priority 1 - 

SHIPs

Priority 2 - 

AAAs

Priority 3 - 

ADRCs Total for State

Alabama $214,128 $208,270 $119,826 $542,224

Alaska $14,532 $14,184 $6,883 $35,599

Arkansas $161,675 $157,459 $75,578 $394,712

California $362,126 $351,628 $203,971 $917,725

Colorado $97,159 $94,471 $85,726 $277,356

Connecticut $41,999 $40,818 $80,687 $163,504

Delaware $24,070 $23,449 $21,098 $68,617

District Of Columbia $6,052 $5,869 $11,102 $23,023

Florida $383,881 $372,936 $473,881 $1,230,698

Georgia $317,639 $309,061 $174,443 $801,143

Idaho $59,433 $57,962 $32,328 $149,723

Illinois $297,782 $289,591 $238,408 $825,781

Indiana $205,477 $199,951 $142,898 $548,326

Iowa $115,786 $112,977 $18,383 $247,146

Kansas $99,489 $96,938 $61,651 $258,078

Kentucky $240,513 $234,198 $107,891 $582,602

Louisiana $146,440 $142,427 $97,186 $386,053

Maine $48,434 $47,367 $37,597 $133,398

Maryland $113,277 $110,018 $111,145 $334,440

Massachusetts $85,157 $82,720 $150,427 $318,304

Michigan $262,937 $255,798 $218,498 $737,233

Minnesota $121,579 $118,563 $111,168 $351,310

Missouri $213,685 $208,066 $8,775 $430,526

Montana $50,567 $49,299 $17,093 $116,959

Nebraska $61,807 $0 $0 $61,807

Nevada $55,656 $54,081 $49,103 $158,840

New Hampshire $46,160 $44,992 $30,837 $121,989

New Jersey $144,918 $140,525 $188,765 $474,208

New Mexico $68,661 $66,884 $44,245 $179,790

New York $370,122 $359,528 $234,772 $964,422

North Carolina $371,377 $361,398 $133,150 $865,925

Ohio $280,030 $272,419 $269,718 $822,167

Oklahoma $140,525 $136,868 $85,647 $363,040

Oregon $103,880 $101,217 $32,142 $237,239

Pennsylvania $348,189 $338,520 $324,264 $1,010,973

South Carolina $202,053 $196,481 $109,077 $507,611

South Dakota $34,547 $33,707 $19,444 $87,698

Tennessee $228,319 $222,329 $149,438 $600,086

Texas $675,162 $656,057 $299,180 $1,630,399

Utah $44,752 $43,588 $37,203 $125,543

Vermont $26,668 $26,058 $15,772 $68,498

Virginia $243,603 $236,993 $138,539 $619,135

Washington $124,383 $121,108 $48,554 $294,045

West Virginia $114,512 $111,551 $54,425 $280,488

Wisconsin $130,859 $127,676 $129,082 $387,617

Total $7,500,000 $7,236,000 $5,000,000 $19,736,000
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 107 (Friday, June 2, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 35326]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-13853]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

[I.D. 053000B]


Submission for OMB Review; Proposed Information Collection; 
Comment Request

    The Department of Commerce has submitted to the Office of 
Management and Budget (OMB) for clearance the following proposal for 
collection of information under the provisions of the Paperwork 
Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).
    Agency: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
    Title: Atlantic Highly Migratory Species Vessel Permits.
    Agency Form Number(s): None.
    OMB Approval Number: 0648-0327.
    Type of Request: Regular submission.
    Burden Hours: 4,700.
    Number of Respondents: 25,000.
    Average Hours Per Response: 30 minutes for initial applications, 6 
minutes for renewal applications.
    Needs and Uses: Persons wishing to participate in the Federal 
Atlantic Highly Migratory Species Fishery (Atlantic tunas, sharks, 
swordfish, and billfish) must apply for an annual fishing permit. The 
information in the applications is necessary for managing the fishery 
and complying with international obligations.
    Affected Public: Business or other for-profit institutions, and, 
individuals.
    Frequency: Annual.
    Respondent's Obligation: Mandatory.
    OMB Desk Officer: David Rostker, (202) 395-3897.
    Copies of the above information collection proposal can be obtained 
by calling or writing Linda Engelmeier, DOC Forms Clearance Officer, 
(202) 482-3272, Department of Commerce, Room 6066, 14th and 
Constitution Avenue, NW, Washington, DC 20230 (or via the Internet at 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#c1ada4afa6a4adaca481a5aea2efa6aeb7"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="670b020900020b0a022703080449000811">[email protected]</span></a>).
    Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information 
collection should be sent within 30 days of publication of this notice 
to David Rostker, OMB Desk Officer, Room 10202, New Executive Office 
Building, Washington, DC 20503.

    Dated: May 26, 2000.
Madeleine Clayton,
Management Analyst, Office of the Chief Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 00-13853 Filed 6-1-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-7223

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

MAYSO LAWRENCE, JR.,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. Herbert N. Maletz, Senior Judge, sitting

by designation. (CR-89-391-JFM, CA-96-1336-HNM)

Submitted: July 15, 1997 Decided: July 30, 1997

Before HALL and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Mayso Lawrence, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. John Vincent Geise, OFFICE

OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant appeals the district court's order denying his

motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (1994) (current version at 28

U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997)). We have reviewed the

record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district

court. United States v. Lawrence, Nos. CR-89-391-JFM; CA-96-1336-

HNM (D. Md. June 28, 1996). See Lindh v. Murphy, 521 U.S. ___, 1997

WL 338568 (U.S. June 23, 1997) (No. 96-6298). 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.

AFFIRMED
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in this Registration Statement on Form S3(File No. 333-103659) of our report dated March 11, 2005, relating to the financial statements,financial statement schedule, management's assessment of the effectiveness of internal controlover financial reporting and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, whichappears in MGE Energy Inc.'s Annual Report on Form 10 K for the year ended December 31,2004. We also consent to the references to us under the headings "Experts" and "SelectedFinancial Data" in such Registration Statement.

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLPChicago, IllinoisMarch 11, 2005
ACL Help American Vote Act for PA (PAVA) Awards for the States/Territories

FY 2022 Annual Allocation

5/9/2022

State/Territory

Help American Vote 

Act for P&A (PAVA)

Alabama $119,365

Alaska $119,365

Arizona $119,365

Arkansas $119,365

California $578,533

Colorado $119,365

Connecticut $119,365

Delaware $119,365

District of Columbia $119,365

Florida $319,381

Georgia $157,389

Hawaii $119,365

Idaho $119,365

Illinois $184,980

Indiana $119,365

Iowa $119,365

Kansas $119,365

Kentucky $119,365

Louisiana $119,365

Maine $119,365

Maryland $119,365

Massachusetts $119,365

Michigan $146,463

Minnesota $119,365

Mississippi $119,365

Missouri $119,365

Montana $119,365

Nebraska $119,365

Nevada $119,365

New Hampshire $119,365

New Jersey $130,531

New Mexico $119,365

New York $284,163

North Carolina $155,784

North Dakota $119,365

Ohio $171,837

Oklahoma $119,365

Oregon $119,365

Pennsylvania $187,856

Rhode Island $119,365

South Carolina $119,365

South Dakota $119,365

Tennessee $119,365

Texas $431,470

Utah $119,365

Vermont $119,365

Virginia $126,242

Washington $119,365

West Virginia $119,365

Wisconsin $119,365

Wyoming $119,365

American Samoa $59,682

Guam $59,682

Puerto Rico $119,365

Virgin Islands $59,682

TOTAL $7,828,275
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>  5

<MULTIPLIER>                                                                 1

<S>                                         <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                            6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                                  MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                                       SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                                                 800,399
<SECURITIES>                                                                 0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                        1,419,612
<ALLOWANCES>                                                            28,906
<INVENTORY>                                                          1,818,608
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                     4,603,082
<PP&E>                                                               3,008,136
<DEPRECIATION>                                                       1,438,589
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                       8,340,436
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                                1,231,180
<BONDS>                                                                 51,070
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                        0
<PREFERRED>                                                                  0
<COMMON>                                                                 1,364
<OTHER-SE>                                                           6,866,216
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                         8,340,436
<SALES>                                                              4,287,909
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                     4,557,194
<CGS>                                                                3,697,215
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                        3,697,215
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                             0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                             0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                         287
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                     (2,491,756)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                            13,934
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                                 (2,505,690)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                               0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                              0
<CHANGES>                                                                    0
<NET-INCOME>                                                        (2,505,690)
<EPS-BASIC>                                                           (18.86)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                           (18.86)


</TABLE>
#### § 780.808 Who may qualify for the exemption generally.

The exemption applies to “any employee engaged in” ginning of cotton. This means that the exemption may apply to an employee so engaged, no matter by whom he is employed. Employees of the gin operator, of an independent contractor, or of a farmer may come within the exemption in any workweek when all other conditions of the exemption are met. To come within the exemption, however, an employee's work must be an integral part of ginning of cotton, as previously described. The courts have uniformly held that exemptions in the Act must be construed strictly to carry out the purpose of the Act. (See § 780.2, in subpart A of this part.) No operation in which an employee engages in a place of employment where cotton is ginned is exempt unless it comes within the meaning of the term “ginning.”
§ 779.368 Printing and engraving establishments not recognized as retail. ( a ) An establishment which is engaged in printing and engraving is not recognized as a retail establishment for purposes of section 13(a)(4). Therefore, employees of a stationery establishment engaged in printing and/or engraving do not come within the exemption. This fact will not affect the exemption under section 13(a)(2) of employees of stationery establishments who are not engaged in printing or engraving.
( b ) In a combined stationery and printing or engraving establishment there are employees who operate the machines in the printing or engraving department and there may be other employees who also perform work primarily or exclusively for that department. There are in addition various employees in such combined establishments whose work relates to the stationery portion of the business but who also perform some work for the printing department. For example, office workers may keep records of both the printing plant and stationery department, maintenance workers may clean up in both departments; and warehousemen, messengers and stock clerks may handle material for both departments. In some establishments these workers spend relatively little time in the work of the printing department. As an enforcement policy an auxiliary employee will not be considered to be engaged in the making or processing of goods for purposes of the exemption under section 13(a)(2) in any workweek in which an insubstantial amount of his time (20 percent or less) is allocable to the clerical, messenger, or custodial work of the printing department.
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 543 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

110th CONGRESS
  2d Session
S. RES. 543

Designating the week beginning May 11, 2008, as ``National Nursing Home 
                                Week''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 30, 2008

 Mr. Thune (for himself, Mr. Johnson, and Mr. Bingaman) submitted the 
   following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the 
                               Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Designating the week beginning May 11, 2008, as ``National Nursing Home 
                                Week''.

Whereas more than 1,500,000 elderly and disabled individuals live in the nearly 
        16,000 nursing facilities in the United States;
Whereas the annual celebration of National Nursing Home Week invites people in 
        communities nationwide to recognize nursing home residents and staff for 
        their contributions to their communities;
Whereas the theme for National Nursing Home Week in 2008 is ``Love is Ageless'', 
        emphasizing that each person, caregiver, and community has an abundance 
        of love, no matter what their age;
Whereas love can be celebrated in a variety of ways, such as through the telling 
        of personal stories, traditions, friendship, and family; and
Whereas National Nursing Home Week recognizes the people who provide care to the 
        Nation's most vulnerable population: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the Senate--
            (1) designates the week beginning May 11, 2008, as 
        ``National Nursing Home Week'';
            (2) recognizes that a majority of people in the United 
        States, because of social needs, disability, trauma, or 
        illness, will require long-term care services at some point in 
        their lives;
            (3) honors nursing home residents and the people who care 
        for them each day, including family members, volunteers, and 
        dedicated long-term care professionals, for their contributions 
        to their communities and the United States; and
            (4) encourages the people of the United States to observe 
        National Nursing Home Week with appropriate ceremonies and 
        activities.
                                 <all>
```