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

                     [LETTERHEAD OF HOBE & LUCAS CPAS, INC.]

                                 March 18, 2002

Mr. Richard Ham
Millenium Holding Group, Inc.
3800 Old Cheney Rd., Suite 101-222
Lincoln, NE  68516

     Re: Consent to Incorporation of
         Independent Auditors' Report

Dear Mr. Ham:

     This firm was the  independent  auditor for Millenium  Holding Group,  Inc.
(the "Company") for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2000. In this context, we
understand  that the Company is filing a Form  10-KSB/A  with the  Securities  &
Exchange Commission.

     Pursuant to Rule 601(b)(23),  this letter will serve as our consent for the
Company to file with the Form 10-KSB/A our  Independent  Auditors'  Report dated
July 9, 2001 for fiscal year ended  December  31, 2000 and to the  reference  of
Hobe & Lucas, Certified Public Accountants, Inc., therein.

                                  /s/ Hobe & Lucas CPAs, Inc.

                                  Hobe & Lucas,
                                  Certified Public Accountants, Inc.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5234 Received in Senate (RDS)]

  2d Session
                                H. R. 5234

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

           September 26 (legislative day, September 22), 2000

                                Received

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To amend the Hmong Veterans' Naturalization Act of 2000 to extend the 
 applicability of that Act to certain former spouses of deceased Hmong 
                               veterans.

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

SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF HMONG VETERANS' NATURALIZATION ACT OF 2000 TO 
              CERTAIN FORMER SPOUSES OF DECEASED HMONG VETERANS.

    (a) In General.--Section 2 of the Hmong Veterans' Naturalization 
Act of 2000 (Public Law 106-207; 114 Stat. 316; 8 U.S.C. 1423 note) is 
amended--
            (1) in paragraph (1), by striking ``or'' at the end;
            (2) in paragraph (2), by striking the period at the end and 
        inserting ``; or''; and
            (3) by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
            ``(3) who--
                    ``(A) satisfies the requirement of paragraph 
                (1)(A); and
                    ``(B) is the surviving spouse of a person described 
                in paragraph (1)(B) which described person was killed 
                or died in Laos, Thailand, or Vietnam.''.
    (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 3 of such Act is amended by 
striking ``or (2)'' and inserting ``, (2), or (3)''.

SEC. 2. DEADLINE FOR APPLICATION.

    Section 6 of such Act is amended by adding at the end the following 
new sentence: ``In the case of a person described in section 2(3), the 
application referred to in the preceding sentence, and appropriate 
fees, shall be filed not later than 18 months after the date of the 
enactment of this sentence.''.

            Passed the House of Representatives September 25, 2000.

            Attest:

                                                 JEFF TRANDAHL,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

June 28, 2011 

h0620 

Order 

 

June 28, 2011 

142782 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 142782 

 COA: 293129 

RONALD DAVID MARTIN, Oakland CC: 2009-224853-FC 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the February 8, 2011 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
Case 1:22-cr-20423-RNS   Document 91   Entered on FLSD Docket 03/04/2024   Page 1 of 12

Case 1:22-cr-20423-RNS   Document 91   Entered on FLSD Docket 03/04/2024   Page 2 of 12

Case 1:22-cr-20423-RNS   Document 91   Entered on FLSD Docket 03/04/2024   Page 3 of 12

Case 1:22-cr-20423-RNS   Document 91   Entered on FLSD Docket 03/04/2024   Page 4 of 12

Case 1:22-cr-20423-RNS   Document 91   Entered on FLSD Docket 03/04/2024   Page 5 of 12

Case 1:22-cr-20423-RNS   Document 91   Entered on FLSD Docket 03/04/2024   Page 6 of 12

Case 1:22-cr-20423-RNS   Document 91   Entered on FLSD Docket 03/04/2024   Page 7 of 12

Case 1:22-cr-20423-RNS   Document 91   Entered on FLSD Docket 03/04/2024   Page 8 of 12

Case 1:22-cr-20423-RNS   Document 91   Entered on FLSD Docket 03/04/2024   Page 9 of 12

Case 1:22-cr-20423-RNS   Document 91   Entered on FLSD Docket 03/04/2024   Page 10 of 12

Case 1:22-cr-20423-RNS   Document 91   Entered on FLSD Docket 03/04/2024   Page 11 of 12

Case 1:22-cr-20423-RNS   Document 91   Entered on FLSD Docket 03/04/2024   Page 12 of 12
§ 101-26.505-1 Description of office and household furniture. ( a ) Office furniture is equipment normally associated with occupancy or use in such areas as offices, conference and reception rooms, institutional waiting rooms, lobbies, and libraries. Such equipment includes desks, tables, credenzas, bookcases, coatracks, telephone cabinets, filing sections and cabinets, office safes, security cabinets, chairs, and davenports.
( b ) Household furniture is equipment normally associated with occupancy or use in areas such as housekeeping and nonhousekeeping quarters, reception rooms, and lobbies. Such equipment includes davenports, chairs, tables, buffets, china cabinets, beds, wardrobes, and chests.
[33 FR 14959, Oct. 5, 1968]
#### § 102-117.370 Should I have a Transportation Officer warrant to acquire transportation services using a rate tender?

Yes, it is recommended that you have a written document, such as a warrant, issued by the head of your agency or their designee, which expressly allows you to acquire transportation services for using approved non-Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) acquisition methods for specified transportation services, and states a dollar limit or range for the warrant authority.
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title: Thedoppler widths of solar absorption lines**
 
PDF | Mobi | ePub
 
SuDoc Number:SI 1.12/2:3/5
Item Number:0909-B (online)
CGP systemNumber:001060507
 
June 15, 2018
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS INCLUDED IN ITEM 1 OF FORM 10-Q DATED JUNE 30, 1996 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1996
<CASH>                                             499
<SECURITIES>                                        42
<RECEIVABLES>                                      130
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                         36
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   733
<PP&E>                                             380
<DEPRECIATION>                                      91
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   1,533
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               60
<BONDS>                                            873
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             1
<OTHER-SE>                                         542
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     1,533
<SALES>                                             54
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   204
<CGS>                                               46
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      115
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  17
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     70
<INCOME-TAX>                                        27
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 44
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        44
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .51
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .51
        

</TABLE>
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack, Chief Justice

David F. Viviano,

Chief Justice Pro Tem

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 August 14, 2019

izm

Order 

Clerk

August 14, 2019

160082 (25)

DENNIS PATRICK BIRD, JR., 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

V SC: 160082 

COA: 348319 

GUS HARRISON CORRECTIONAL FACILITY 

WARDEN, 

Defendant-Appellee. 

_______________________________________/

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion to waive fees is considered and it is 

DENIED because MCL 600.2963 requires that a prisoner pursuing a civil action be liable 

for filing fees. 

Within 21 days of the date of this order, appellant shall pay to the Clerk of the 

Court the initial partial filing fee of $14.00; submit a copy of this order; and refile the 

copy of the pleadings returned with this order. Failure to comply with this order shall 

result in the appeal not being filed in this Court.

If appellant timely files the partial fee and refiles the pleadings, monthly payments 

shall be made to the Department of Corrections in the amount of 50 percent of the deposits 

made to appellant’s account until the payments equal the balance due of $361.00. This 

amount shall then be remitted to this Court.

Pursuant to MCL 600.2963(8) appellant shall not file a new civil action or appeal in 

this Court until the entry fee in this case is paid in full. 

The Clerk of the Court shall furnish two copies of this order to appellant and return 

a copy of appellant’s pleadings with this order.
Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

Mario Mobley, Appellant

No. 06-24-00021-CR v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

Appeal from the 102nd District Court of 

Bowie County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 

23F0584-102). Panel consists of Chief 

Justice Stevens and Justices van Cleef and 

Rambin. Memorandum Opinion delivered 

by Chief Justice Stevens. 

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find no error in the judgment of the court 

below. We affirm the judgment of the trial court.

We note that the appellant, Mario Mobley, has adequately indicated his inability to pay 

costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED SEPTEMBER 13, 2024

BY ORDER OF THE COURT

SCOTT E. STEVENS

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST:

Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
Case 1:22-cv-23700-PAS   Document 31   Entered on FLSD Docket 07/17/2023   Page 1 of 3

Case 1:22-cv-23700-PAS   Document 31   Entered on FLSD Docket 07/17/2023   Page 2 of 3

Case 1:22-cv-23700-PAS   Document 31   Entered on FLSD Docket 07/17/2023   Page 3 of 3
#### § 963.12 Settlement agreements.

These rules do not preclude the disposition of any matter by agreement between the parties at any stage of the proceeding.
Rockingham

No. 78-188

#### Clifford Baillargeon v. Brodhead Ford Sales, Inc. and Dover Ford, Inc.

November 15, 1978

*Flynn, McGuirk & Blanchard,*of Portsmouth *(Raymond P. Blanchard*orally), for the plaintiff.

*Boynton, Waldron, Dill & Aeschliman,*of Portsmouth *(Richard E. Dill*orally), for the defendants.

MEMORANDUM

On March 2, 1973, Dover Ford, Inc. [hereinafter Dover], purchased the assets of Brodhead Ford Sales [hereinafter Brodhead], and notified all disclosed creditors of Brodhead that it had purchased Brodhead’s assets. The notice and list of creditors’ names supplied did not include the plaintiff. The plaintiff instituted suit in June 1973 to recover in assumpsit for a breach of contract. Service was made on Brodhead and one “Bob Brodeur, person in apparent charge” of Dover. Brodhead was in fact the business manager of Dover at the time. An attorney, apparently intending to enter an appearance on behalf of Brodhead, entered an appearance which was interpreted by the superior court as being on behalf of both corporate *791defendants. Two-and-one-half years later that attorney withdrew for Brodhead only. Because no one appeared for either Brodhead or Dover at a subsequent pretrial call of the list, default judgments were entered against them. Plaintiff filed an affidavit of damages, and damages of $3,300 were assessed. Dover’s motion to strike the default was denied by the superior court, and its exception was transferred here by *Bean,*J.

We note that but for the fact that the appearance originally filed by Brodhead’s attorney was assumed by court personnel to be filed on behalf of Dover ¿Iso, the latter would have been defaulted in 1973 rather than in 1976.

Upon a review of the file and exhibits we find no abuse of discretion by the trial court. *See Lewellyn v. Follansbee,*94 N.H. 111, 47 A.2d 572 (1946); Superior Court Rule 14.

*Exceptions overruled.*
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 24.1

                                POWER OF ATTORNEY

      KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that the undersigned hereby constitutes
and appoints Mark A. Kopser and John J. Wellik and each of them, his true and
lawful attorneys-in-fact, with full power of substitution and resubstitution,
for him and in his name, place and stead, to sign on his behalf, as a director
or officer, or both, as the case may be, of United Surgical Partners
International, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the "Corporation"), the
Corporation's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004,
and to sign any or all amendments to such Form 10-K, and to file the same, with
all exhibits thereto, and other documents in connection therewith, with the
Securities and Exchange Commission, granting unto said attorneys-in-fact, and
each of them with or without the others, full power and authority to do and
perform each and every act and thing requisite and necessary to be done in and
about the premises, as fully to all intents and purposes as he might or could do
in person, hereby ratifying and confirming all that each of said
attorneys-in-fact or their substitute or substitutes may lawfully do or cause to
be done by virtue hereof.

                                               /s/  Donald E. Steen
                                               ---------------------
                                               Donald E. Steen
#### ELLIOTT C. COWDEN et al., Respondents, v. ALFRED TEALE, Appellant.

Appeal from an order made at the’ Special Term granting a. reference.

In this case, the plaintiff’s claim rested upon an account embracing many items. The defendant admitted the items to be correct, but alleged that they related to merchandise which was to be sold by the plaintiff on commission, that he had violated the rights of the defendant by selling it at improper times, and for less than its value. The account of the plaintiffs embraced advances, commissions and charges in reference to this merchandise. The defendant interposed a counter-claim, relating to it exclusively. The General Term *held,*that, in order to sustain his claim, which was based upon the contract made between him and the plaintiff, it would be neces*533sary for the defendant to show that each sale of the article sold was improperly made. That this would involve proof of the value of the article, and the circumstances showing the sale to have been disadvantageous and improper. That the effect of this was to assail the plaintiff’s account, because, though the advances and charges are admitted, the sales are questioned and disputed ; and that thé case was, therefore, properly referred.

*H. O. Southworth,*for the appellant. *John D. Taylor,*for the respondents.

Opinion by

Brady, J.

Davis, P. J., and Daniels, J., concurred.

Order affirmed.
[if !vml]>[endif]>
[if !vml]>[endif]>
You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:Piracy analysis and warning weekly (PAWW) report for ...
 
2017:
 
20171026_PAWW.pdf
20171101_PAWW.pdf
20171108_PAWW.pdf
20171115_PAWW.pdf
20171122_PAWW.pdf
20171129_PAWW.pdf
20171213_PAWW.pdf
20171220_PAWW.pdf
20171227_PAWW.pdf
 

2018:
 
 
20180103_PAWW.pdf
20180502_PAWW.pdf
20180829_PAWW.pdf
20180110_PAWW.pdf
20180509_PAWW.pdf
20180905_PAWW.pdf
20180117_PAWW.pdf
20180516_PAWW.pdf
20180919_PAWW.pdf
20180124_PAWW.pdf
20180523_PAWW.pdf
20180926_PAWW.pdf
20180131_PAWW.pdf
20180530_PAWW.pdf
20181003_PAWW.pdf
20180207_PAWW.pdf
20180606_PAWW.pdf
20181010_PAWW.pdf
20180214_PAWW.pdf
20180613_PAWW.pdf
20181017_PAWW.pdf
20180221_PAWW.pdf
20180620_PAWW.pdf
20181024_PAWW.pdf
20180228_PAWW.pdf
20180627_PAWW.pdf
20181031_PAWW.pdf
20180307_PAWW.pdf
20180704_PAWW.pdf
20181107_PAWW.pdf
20180314_PAWW.pdf
20180711_PAWW.pdf
20181114_PAWW.pdf
20180321_PAWW.pdf
20180718_PAWW.pdf
20181121_PAWW.pdf
20180328_PAWW.pdf
20180725_PAWW.pdf
20181128_PAWW.pdf
20180404_PAWW.pdf
20180801_PAWW.pdf
20181205_PAWW.pdf
20180411_PAWW.pdf
20180808_PAWW.pdf
20181212_PAWW.pdf
20180418_PAWW.pdf
20180815_PAWW.pdf
20181219_PAWW.pdf
20180425_PAWW.pdf
20180822_PAWW.pdf
20181226_PAWW.pdf

2019:
 
20190102_PAWW.pdf
20190501_PAWW.pdf
 
20190109_PAWW.pdf
20190508_PAWW.pdf
 
20190116_PAWW.pdf
20190515_PAWW.pdf
 
20190123_PAWW.pdf
20190522_PAWW.pdf
 
20190130_PAWW.pdf
20190529_PAWW.pdf
 
20190206_PAWW.pdf
20190605_PAWW.pdf
 
20190213_PAWW.pdf
20190612_PAWW.pdf
 
20190220_PAWW.pdf
 
 
20190227_PAWW.pdf
 
 
20190306_PAWW.pdf
 
 
20190313_PAWW.pdf
 
 
20190321_PAWW.pdf
 
 
20190327_PAWW.pdf
 
 
20190403_PAWW.pdf
 
 
20190410_PAWW.pdf
 
 
20190417_PAWW.pdf
 
 
20190424_PAWW.pdf
 
 

 
SuDoc Number: D201.51:
Item Number: 0370-A-11(online)
CGP systemNumber: 001060735
 
June 13, 2018**
§ 3065.3 Procedure for seeking clarification or interpretation. ( a ) The Commission may, on its own motion, initiate a proceeding under this subpart pursuant to § 3010.201(a) of this chapter.
( b ) The Commission may provide interpretation of these regulations or 39 U.S.C. 601 upon: ( 1 ) A party's request to initiate a rulemaking proceeding with the Commission pursuant to the requirements of § 3010.201(b) of this chapter; or
( 2 ) A party's request for an advisory opinion from the General Counsel.
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

__________ District of __________ 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Plaintiff(s)

v. Civil Action No.

Defendant(s)

SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION

To: (Defendant’s name and address)

A lawsuit has been filed against you.

Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) — or 60 days if you

are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ.

P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) — you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiff’s attorney,

whose name and address are:

If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. 

You also must file your answer or motion with the court.

CLERK OF COURT

Date:

Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk

 Southern District of Florida

Case 1:22-cv-23684-JAL Document 1-9 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/09/2022 Page 1 of 2
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2)

Civil Action No.

PROOF OF SERVICE

(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (l))

This summons for (name of individual and title, if any)

was received by me on (date) . I personally served the summons on the individual at (place)

on (date) ; or

I left the summons at the individual’s residence or usual place of abode with (name)

, a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there,

on (date) , and mailed a copy to the individual’s last known address; or

I served the summons on (name of individual) , who is

 designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization)

on (date) ; or

I returned the summons unexecuted because ; or

Other (specify):

. My fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $ .

I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.

Date:

Server’s signature

Printed name and title

Server’s address

Additional information regarding attempted service, etc:

Case 1:22-cv-23684-JAL Document 1-9 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/09/2022 Page 2 of 2