alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
GAO-01-140R National Safety Council

United States General Accounting Office

Washington, DC 20548

October 27, 2000

The Honorable Henry J. Hyde

Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary

House of Representatives

Subject: Federally Chartered Corporation: Review of the Financial Statement Audit

Report for the National Safety Council for Fiscal Years 1999 and 1998

Dear Mr. Chairman:

As requested, we reviewed the audit report covering the financial statements of the

National Safety Council, a federally chartered corporation, for the fiscal years ended

June 30, 1999 and 1998. The purpose of the corporation is to promote safety to

human life in the industries of the United States.

Federally chartered corporations are required under 36 U.S.C. 10101 to

• present the corporation’s assets and liabilities and reasonable detail on the

corporation’s income and expenses in annual financial statements,

• obtain an annual financial audit by an independent public accountant, and

• submit the auditors’ report and the corporation’s financial statements to the

Congress.

The objective of our review was to determine whether the audit report complied with

the financial reporting requirements of the law. In carrying out our work, we

reviewed the corporation’s financial statements and the accompanying notes,

performed certain analytical procedures related to information presented in the

financial statements, reviewed the auditors’ report, and made inquiries to corporation

officials or the auditor as we deemed necessary. We did not review the auditors’

working papers. Our review disclosed no reportable instances of noncompliance.
Page 2 GAO-01-140R National Safety Council

The audit report included the auditors’ opinion that the financial statements of the

corporation were presented fairly in accordance with generally accepted accounting

principles. We are returning the audit report you sent with your letter.

Sincerely yours,

Jeffrey C. Steinhoff

Managing Director

Financial Management and Assurance

w/o Enclosure

(912008)
#### § 4.19-5 Adherence to rules of evidence.

As hearings under this part are administrative in character, strict adherence to the formal rules of evidence is not imperative. However, in the interest of orderly presentation of the facts of a case, the rules of evidence should be observed as closely as possible.
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.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

                    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the Cell Structure and Function Study Section, June 7, 2007, 8 a.m. to June 8, 2007, 5:30 p.m., Admiral Fell Inn, 888 South Broadway, Baltimore, MD 21231, which was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     on April 5, 2007, 72 FR 16805-16806.                

The meeting will be held one day only June 7, 2007, 8 a.m. to 7 p.m. The meeting location remains the same. The meeting is closed to the public.

Dated: April 9, 2007.

Jennifer Spaeth, 

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 07-1841  Filed 4-13-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff,

v Case No. 15-20382

Hon. Victoria A. Roberts

PAUL NICOLETTI,

Defendant.

_________________________________/

DEFENDANT’S MOTION TO DISMISS 

BASED UPON PROSECUTORIAL MISCONDUCT AND GRAND JURY ABUSE

Defendant Paul Nicoletti, by and subject to a Limited Appearance for the 

purposes of this motion, requests that this Court grant his motion for the following 

reasons:

1. Defendant is charged in a four-count indictment, with one count of conspiracy 

to commit bank fraud and three counts of aiding and abetting bank fraud. 

2. The conduct alleged occurred in 2005, during the pervasive mortgage loan 

industry misconduct involving mortgage loans, which led in significant part to 

the financial crisis of 2008.

3. This motion is filed by the Defendant on the basis that the Prosecution along 

with the FBI, falsely represented to this court as well as the Grand Jury, that 

the “Lender” was Fifth Third Bank, which it was not.

4. Moreover, the Prosecution cannot prove among other elements, that the 

financial institution at issue (Fifth Third Mortgage-MI, LLC) was insured by 

Case 2:15-cr-20382-VAR-MKM ECF No. 80 filed 06/22/18 PageID.646 Page 1 of 2
2

the FDIC.

5. The Prosecutor has been contacted for concurrence and he has failed to concur 

in the relief sought.

WHEREFORE, Defendant requests that the Court dismiss all charges with prejudice.

Respectfully Submitted, 

/s/ Paul J. Nicoletti

PAUL J. NICOLETTI (P44419)

Attorney for Defendant 

33717 Woodward Avenue, Suite 433

Birmingham, MI 48009

(248) 203-7800

pauljnicoletti@gmail.com

Dated: June 22, 2018

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on June 22, 2018, I electronically filed the foregoing document with 

the Clerk of the Court using the ECF system, which will send notification of such filing 

to the attorneys of record.

/s/ Paul Nicoletti

Case 2:15-cr-20382-VAR-MKM ECF No. 80 filed 06/22/18 PageID.647 Page 2 of 2
#### § 46.05-20 Great Lakes voyage.

A Great Lakes voyage is any voyage from a United States port or place on the Great Lakes to another United States port or place on the Great Lakes or to a Canadian port or place on the Great Lakes, or conversely.
**Exhibit 31.1****CERTIFICATION**I, Stephen L. Day, certify that:1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of DOVER SADDLERY, INC.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact oromit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstancesunder which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by thisreport; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) andinternal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have: a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared; and  b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and  c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who havea significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.        Date: August 14, 2007 /s/  Stephen L. Day  Stephen L.  Day   President, Chief Executive Officer and Director*(Principal Executive Officer)*
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF THE JPM COMPANY AND SUBSIDIARIES AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                             543
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   12,914
<ALLOWANCES>                                       222
<INVENTORY>                                     19,328
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                34,608
<PP&E>                                          22,125
<DEPRECIATION>                                   8,573
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  54,130
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           21,996
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                      28,231
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    54,130
<SALES>                                        112,787
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               112,787
<CGS>                                           89,250
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   99,934
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     1
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 670
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 12,182
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,853
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              7,329
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     7,329
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.97
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.97
        

</TABLE>
# C_2014282EN.01000401.xml

| 25.8.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 282/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.8.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 282/4

---

Judgment of the Court (Fifth Chamber) of 12 June 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Gerechtshof te’s-Hertogenbosch — Netherlands) — Granton Advertising BV v Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst Haaglanden/kantoor Den Haag

(Case C-461/12) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Sixth VAT Directive - Exemptions - Article 13(B)(d)(3) and (5) - ‘Other securities’ and ‘other negotiable instruments’ - Sales promotion scheme - Discount card - Taxable amount))

2014/C 282/05

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Referring court

Gerechtshof te’s-Hertogenbosch

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Granton Advertising BV

Applicant:

Defendant: Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst Haaglanden/kantoor Den Haag

Defendant:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Article 13(B)(d) of Sixth Council Directive 77/388/EEC of 17 May 1977 on the harmonization of the laws of the Member States relating to turnover taxes — Common system of value added tax: uniform basis of assessment must be interpreted as meaning that the sale of a discount card, such as that at issue in the main proceedings, does not constitute a transaction in ‘other securities’ or concerning ‘other negotiable instruments’, within the meaning, respectively, of paragraphs 5 and 3 of that provision, which refers to certain transactions which the Member States must exempt from value added tax.

---

(1)  OJ C 9, 12.1.2013.

1

---
L EROY ROBERTS

,

Appellant,

v.

REEMPLOYMENT

ASSISTANCE APPEALS

COMMISSION and COCA COLA
REFRESHMENTS USA, INC.,

Appellee s

. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D 1 6

- 5 5 06

_____________________________/

Opinion filed August 1, 2017.

An appeal from an order of the Reemployment Assistance Appeals Commission.

Michael A. Hoffman, Hollywood, for Appellant

.

Norman Blessing , General Counsel, and Cristina A. Velez, Appellate Counsel, Tallahassee, for Appellee Reemployment Assistan ce Appeals Commission

.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

KELSEY, WINOKUR, and WINSOR, J J

., CONCUR.
EXHIBIT 99.14

CONSENT OF EXPERT

Reference is made to the Annual Report on Form 40-F (the Form 40-F) of Cameco Corporation (the Corporation) to be
filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to the United States Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

I hereby consent to reference to my name and my involvement in the preparation of, or supervision of the preparation of, scientific and
technical information in the following instances:



| | (a) | under the headings Operations and Development Projects  Uranium Operating Properties  Inkai, Mineral Reserves and Resources  and Governance  Interest of Experts in
the Corporations Annual Information Form for the year ended December 31, 2013 dated February 27, 2014 for the Inkai property; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (b) | under the headings Our Operations and Projects  Uranium Operating Properties  Inkai and Mineral Reserves and Resources in Managements Discussion and Analysis of Financial
Condition and Results of Operation for the year ended December 31, 2013 dated February 10, 2014 for the Inkai property,
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

(collectively the Technical Information) in the Form 40-F, and to the inclusion and incorporation by reference of information derived from the
Technical Information in the Form 40-F.

I also hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of such Technical Information in the
registration statements (Nos. 333-11736, 333-6180 and 333-139165) on Form S-8 for the Cameco Corporation Stock Option Plan, registration statement (No. 333-139324) on Form S-8 for the Cameco Corporation Employee Share Ownership Plan and registration
statement (No.333-181577) on Form F-10.

Sincerely,



|               |  |                                                                 
|-------------- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Ken Gullen
|Name:          |  | Ken Gullen, P. Eng.                                             
|Title:         |  | Technical Director, International Production, Cameco Corporation

Date: February 27, 2014
#### In the Matter of John Lowden.

Oral reargument ordered, without costs. Opinion by

Davis, P. J.
2:15-cv-11328-SFC-RSW   Doc # 1   Filed 04/10/15   Pg 1 of 14    Pg ID 1

2:15-cv-11328-SFC-RSW   Doc # 1   Filed 04/10/15   Pg 2 of 14    Pg ID 2

2:15-cv-11328-SFC-RSW   Doc # 1   Filed 04/10/15   Pg 3 of 14    Pg ID 3

2:15-cv-11328-SFC-RSW   Doc # 1   Filed 04/10/15   Pg 4 of 14    Pg ID 4

2:15-cv-11328-SFC-RSW   Doc # 1   Filed 04/10/15   Pg 5 of 14    Pg ID 5

2:15-cv-11328-SFC-RSW   Doc # 1   Filed 04/10/15   Pg 6 of 14    Pg ID 6

2:15-cv-11328-SFC-RSW   Doc # 1   Filed 04/10/15   Pg 7 of 14    Pg ID 7

2:15-cv-11328-SFC-RSW   Doc # 1   Filed 04/10/15   Pg 8 of 14    Pg ID 8

2:15-cv-11328-SFC-RSW   Doc # 1   Filed 04/10/15   Pg 9 of 14    Pg ID 9

2:15-cv-11328-SFC-RSW   Doc # 1   Filed 04/10/15   Pg 10 of 14    Pg ID 10

2:15-cv-11328-SFC-RSW   Doc # 1   Filed 04/10/15   Pg 11 of 14    Pg ID 11

2:15-cv-11328-SFC-RSW   Doc # 1   Filed 04/10/15   Pg 12 of 14    Pg ID 12

2:15-cv-11328-SFC-RSW   Doc # 1   Filed 04/10/15   Pg 13 of 14    Pg ID 13

2:15-cv-11328-SFC-RSW   Doc # 1   Filed 04/10/15   Pg 14 of 14    Pg ID 14
# C_2013108EN.01000702.xml

| 13.4.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 108/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.4.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 108/7

---

Order of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 17 January 2013 — Abbott Laboratories v Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

(Case C-21/12 P) (1)

1

(Appeal - Community trade mark - Word mark ‘RESTORE’ - Refusal to register - Absolute grounds for refusal - Descriptive character - Lack of distinctiveness - Right to be heard - Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Articles 7 (1(b) and (c) and 75, second sentence - Equal treatment)

2013/C 108/13

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Appellant: Abbott Laboratories (represented by: R. Niebel, Rechtsanwalt)

Appellant:

Other party to the proceedings: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: D. Walicka, agent)

Other party to the proceedings:

Re:

Re:

Appeal brought against the judgment of the General Court (Sixth Chamber) of 15 November 2011 in Case T-363/10 Abbott Laboratories v OHIM, by which the General Court dismissed the appellant’s action against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 9 June 2010 (Case R 1560/2009-1), concerning an application for registration of the word mark RESTORE as a Community trade mark — Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) and (c) and of Article 75 of Council Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 of 26 February 2009 on the Community trade mark (OJ 2009 L 78, p. 1) — Distinctiveness of the word mark RESTORE

Abbott Laboratories

OHIM

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The appeal is dismissed. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The appeal is dismissed.

| 2. | Abbott Laboratories is ordered to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Abbott Laboratories is ordered to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 98, 31.3.2012.

1

---
# C_2013108EN.01000803.xml

| 13.4.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 108/8 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

13.4.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 108/8

---

Order of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 7 February 2013 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Audiencia Provincial de Burgos — Spain) — La Retoucherie de Manuela S. L. v La Retoucherie de Burgos S. C.

(Case C-117/12) (1)

1

(Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure - Competition - Agreements between undertakings - Article 81 EC - Block exemption for vertical agreements - Regulation (EC) No 2790/1999 - Article 5(b) - Non-compete obligation imposed on the buyer upon expiry of a franchise agreement - Premises and land from which the buyer has operated during the contract period)

2013/C 108/16

Language of the case: Spanish

Referring court

Referring court

Audiencia Provincial de Burgos

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: La Retoucherie de Manuela S. L.

Applicant:

Defendant: La Retoucherie de Burgos S. C.

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Request for a preliminary ruling — Audiencia Provincial de Burgos — Interpretation of Article 5(b) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2790/1999 of 22 December 1999 on the application of Article 81(3) of the Treaty to categories of vertical agreements and concerted practices (OJ 1999 L 336, p. 21) — Block exemption — Distortions of competition not exempt — Conditions imposed on the buyer upon expiry of the franchise agreement — Concept of ‘premises and land from which the buyer has operated during the contract period’

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

Article 5(b) of Commission Regulation (EC) No 2790/1999 of 22 December 1999 on the application of Article 81(3) [EC] to categories of vertical agreements and concerted practices, must be interpreted as meaning that the words ‘premises and land from which the buyer has operated during the contract period’ refers only to the place from which the contract goods or services are offered for sale and not to the whole of the territory in which those goods or services may be sold under a franchise agreement.

---

(1)  OJ C 151, 26.5.2012.

1

---