alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>   1



                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.4

                          INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT


The Board of Directors
CT Communications, Inc.:

We consent to incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Registration Nos. 33- 59641, 33-59643, 33-59645, 333-15537, 333-30125,
333-38895, 333-77323 and 333-79723) of CT Communications, Inc. of our report
dated June 10, 1999, relating to the audited consolidated financial statements
of Palmetto MobileNet, L.P. as of and for the years ended December 31, 1998,
1997 and 1996, which report is included in Exhibit 99.2 of the December 31, 1998
Annual Report on Form 10-K/A No. 3 of CT Communications, Inc.



                                  /s/ Bauknight Pietras & Stormer, P.A.

                                  Bauknight Pietras & Stormer, P.A.

Columbia, South Carolina
June 14, 1999



                                        6
From: MATTHEW RAHFALDT [mailto:mrahfaldt@msn.com] 

Sent: Wednesday, February 03, 2010 9:56 AM 

To: EBSA, E-ORI - EBSA 

Subject: RIN 1210-AB33

To Whom It May Concern: 

I will make opinion very short and concise. I would consider any seizure or forced 

enrollment of my defined contribution plans, into such a program as theft. A choice 

to enroll for those that wish to is acceptable, as many have a limited financial IQ or 

no appetite to manage their own investments. 

Personally I would never elect to take part in a governmental ponsi scheme such as 

this, as I would bet my life that it would quickly end up like Social Security, and the 

US Congress spending the money faster than it comes in. 

Regards, 

Matt Rahfaldt 

845 W. Gregory Blvd. 

Kansas City, MO 64114 

Cell: 816-308-1490 

Hotmail: Trusted email with Microsoft’s powerful SPAM protection. Sign up now.
§ 583.15 Joint ownership. ( a ) A carline jointly owned and/or produced by more than one manufacturer shall be attributed to the single manufacturer that markets the carline, subject to paragraph (b) of this section.
( b ) ( 1 ) The joint owners of a carline may designate, by written agreement, the manufacturer of record of that carline.
( 2 ) The manufacturer of record is responsible for compliance with all the manufacturer requirements in this part with respect to the jointly owned carline. However, carline determinations must be consistent with § 583.4(3).
( 3 ) A designation under this section of a manufacturer of record is effective beginning with the first model year beginning after the conclusion of the written agreement, or, if the joint owners so agree in writing, with a specified later model year.
( 4 ) Each manufacturer of record shall send to the Administrator written notification of its designation as such not later than 30 days after the conclusion of the written agreement, and state the carline of which it is considered the manufacturer, the names of the other persons which jointly own the carline, and the name of the person, if any, formerly considered to be the manufacturer of record.
( 5 ) The joint owners of a carline may change the manufacturer of record for a future model year by concluding a written agreement before the beginning of that model year.
( 6 ) The allied suppliers for the jointly owned carline are the suppliers that are wholly owned by any of the manufacturers of the jointly owned carline.
#### William R. Willcox et al., Constituting the Public Service Commission of the State of New York for the First District, Respondents, *v.*Richmond Light and Railroad Company et al., Appellants.

*Willcox*v. *Richmond Light*& *R. R. Co.,*142 App. Div. 44, affirmed.

(Argued March 14, 1911;

decided April 25, 1911.)

Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered December 30, 1910, which affirmed an order of Special Term granting a motion for a peremptory writ of mandamus to compel the defendant railroad companies to exchange transfers at certain intersecting points on their lines.

*Lewis H. Freedman*and *Harold Bussell Griffith*for appellants.

*George 8. Coleman, Arthur Du Bois*and *Edward M. Deegan*for respondents.

Order affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Vann, Werner, Willard Bartlett, Hiscock and Chase, JJ. Absent: Haight, J. .
----

Action brought on 9 April 2004 by Lapin liitto, Enontekiön kunta, Inarin kunta, Utsjoen kunta and Unto Autto against the Commission of the European Communities

(Case T-141/04)

(2004/C 146/11)

Language of the case: Finnish

An action against the Commission of the European Communities was brought before the Court of First Instance of the European Communities on 9 April 2004 by Lapin liitto (Lapland Region), Enontekiön kunta (municipality of Enontekiö), Inarin kunta (municipality of Inari), Utsjoen kunta (municipality of Utsjoki) and Unto Autto, reindeer herder, represented by Kari Marttinen, lawyer, and Professor Pertti Eilavaara.

The applicants claim that the Court should:

Pleas in law and main arguments

The Commission's decision was adopted on the following principal unlawful bases:

----
Q '-^RIMtNTOF 

m ' u M: 2 b 

Small Airplane Directorate 

901 Locust Street 

Kansas City, Missouri 64106 

U.S. Depaitment 

of Transportation 

Federal Aviation 

Administration 

APR U 2010 

Mr. Sergio Augusto Viana de Carvalho 

Airworthiness Manager 

Embraer S.A. 

Av. Brigadeiro Faria Lima, 2170 - PC 179 

) 2227-901 Sao Jos6 dos Campos, SP-Brazil 

Dear Mr. Viana de Carvalho: 

This letter is to itifomi you that we have received and begun processing your petition for 

exemption. It acknowledges receipt of the petition and describes how we will process it. 

We Have the Petition 

We've received your March 21,201,1, petition on behalf of Embraer S.A. (Embraer) for an 

exemption from § 23.562(a) of Title 1,4, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). This 

exemption, if granted, would allow Embraer, model EMB-505, to be certified with two-place 

side facing divans. 

We've received your petition in the public docket (No. FAA-2011-0336) and are processing it. 

We will contact you if we need additional information. 

How We'll Process the Petition 

A petition for an exemption, according to 14 CFR 11.63(d), must be sent to the FAA at least 

120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption. In addition, we publish a 

summary of the petition in the Federal Register for public comment unless, according to 

14 CFR 11.87, we determine that good cause exists for not publishing it. 

We will advise you of the agency's final decision on your petition as soon as possible. If you 

have any questions in the meantime, you may contact Robert Stegeman at (816) 329-4140. 

Sincerely, 

e^ 

Earl Lawrence 

Manager, Small Airplane Directorate 

Aircraft Certification Service
**EXHIBIT
      23.3**




**CONSENT
      OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**




We
        consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No.
        333-64215 on Form S-3 of our report dated March 8, 2006 (which expresses
        an
        unqualified opinion and includes explanatory paragraphs relating to PNM
        Resources, Inc.’s acquisition of TNP Enterprises, Inc in 2005 and the adoption
        of Financial
        Accounting Standards Board Financial Interpretation No. 47, *Accounting
        for Conditional Asset Retirement Obligations* in
        2005 ),
        relating to the consolidated financial statements and financial statement
        schedule of Texas-New Mexico Power Company appearing in this Annual Report
        on
        Form 10-K of Texas-New Mexico Power Company for the year ended December 31,
        2005.


/s/
      DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP




Philadelphia,
      Pennsylvania


March
      10,
      2006
CITICORP
CALCULATION OF RATIO OF INCOME TO FIXED CHARGES
(In Millions)

                                                    YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31,

EXCLUDING INTEREST ON DEPOSITS:          1999    1998     1997     1996     1995
                                       ------  ------   ------   ------   ------
FIXED CHARGES:
     INTEREST EXPENSE (OTHER THAN
        INTEREST ON DEPOSITS)           3,925   4,162    4,042    3,911    4,574
     INTEREST FACTOR IN RENT EXPENSE      205     190      169      159      150
                                       ------  ------   ------   ------   ------

        TOTAL FIXED CHARGES             4,130   4,352    4,211    4,070    4,724
                                       ------  ------   ------   ------   ------

INCOME:
     INCOME BEFORE TAXES                8,293   4,916    6,109    6,377    5,929
     FIXED CHARGES                      4,130   4,352    4,211    4,070    4,724
                                       ------  ------   ------   ------   ------

        TOTAL INCOME                   12,423   9,268   10,320   10,447   10,653
                                       ======  ======   ======   ======   ======

RATIO OF INCOME TO FIXED CHARGES
     EXCLUDING INTEREST ON DEPOSITS      3.01    2.13     2.45     2.57     2.26
                                       ======  ======   ======   ======   ======

INCLUDING INTEREST ON DEPOSITS:

FIXED CHARGES:
     INTEREST EXPENSE                  14,700  15,671   13,655   12,885   13,476
     INTEREST FACTOR IN RENT EXPENSE      205     190      169      159      150
                                       ------  ------   ------   ------   ------

        TOTAL FIXED CHARGES            14,905  15,861   13,824   13,044   13,626
                                       ------  ------   ------   ------   ------

INCOME:
     INCOME BEFORE TAXES                8,293   4,916    6,109    6,377    5,929
     FIXED CHARGES                     14,905  15,861   13,824   13,044   13,626
                                       ------  ------   ------   ------   ------

        TOTAL INCOME                   23,198  20,777   19,933   19,421   19,555
                                       ======  ======   ======   ======   ======

RATIO OF INCOME TO FIXED CHARGES
     INCLUDING INTEREST ON DEPOSITS      1.56    1.31     1.44     1.49     1.44
                                       ======  ======   ======   ======   ======

On August 4, 1999, CitiFinancial Credit Company (CCC), an indirect wholly-owned
subsidiary of Citigroup Inc., became a subsidiary of Citicorp Banking
Corporation, a wholly-owned subsidiary of Citicorp. Citicorp has issued a
guarantee of all outstanding long-term debt and commercial paper of CCC. All
prior periods have been restated to include the results of CCC.
D AN W EISS

M ANAGING D IRECTOR

, I NTERNATIONAL A FFAIRS & R EGULATORY ( 3 12 ) 997

-

7573

DAN

. WEISS @ COAIR

. COM

June 15, 2012

Mr. Paul L. Gretch

Director

Office of International Aviation

Depar tment of Transportation

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE

Washington, DC 20590

RE: United and South African Airways

Docket DOT

- OST

- 2005

- 22618

Dear Mr. Gretch:

By Notice of Action Taken on October 11, 2006 in this docket, the Department granted broad

stateme nts of authorization and exemptions authorizing reciprocal code

- share services by

Continental/United and South African Airways (“SAA”). 1 Consistent with Department

requirements, Continental/United notify the Department that they will cease codesharing with

SAA in the Cape Town (CPT)

– London (LHR) market, effective August 15, 2012.

Sincerely,

Dan Weiss

Managing Director, International and

Regulatory Affairs

UNITED AIR LINES, INC. AND

CONTINENTAL AIRLINES, INC.

cc: Robert Finamore

Esta Rosenberg

Benjamin Taylor

Anita Mosner

1 By Order 20 11

- 3

- 14, the Department reissued authorities originally granted to United in the name of

“Continental, Continental Micronesia and Air Micronesia and/or United”.CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that I have this date served a copy of the foregoing document on all

persons named below by causing a copy to be sent via email:

anita.mosner@hklaw.com (UPS)

carl.nelson@aa.com

charters@ev ergreenairlines.com

francis.heil@aa.com

howard.kass@usairways.com

james.kaleigh@aa.com

jrichardson@johnlrichardson.com

kevin.montgomery@polaraircargo.com

matwood@cozen.com

mlbenge@zsrlaw.com (World Airways) nssparks@fedex.com

robert.wirick@aa.com

rpommer@atlasair.com

rsilverberg@sgbdc.com ( Air Transport Intl. )

sascha.vanderbellen@delta.com

slachter@lachter

- clements.com

william.stallings@usdoj.gov

dwight.moore@ustranscom.mil

john.allen@faa.gov

Annalei Avanceña

International Regulatory A dvisor

June 15, 2012
Exhibit 10.57


 


	
  Irwin J. Gruverman

  	
   

  	
  December 31, 2003

  
	
  60 Seminary Ave

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Auburndale, MA 02466

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Dear Mr. Gruverman:

  	
   

  	
   

  



 


This will confirm our Agreement concerning your compensation as
Chairman and CEO of MFIC.


 


Subject to approval by the Board, we will pay you at a base rate of
$97,000 per year, beginning January 1, 2004. You will participate in a bonus
pool, if any, for management employees, and the Board will consider a Special
Bonus if financial results and stock performance warrant it.  You agree that MFIC will withhold money from
your compensation to pay appropriate taxes. You will be included in MFIC’s
insurance and medical programs as in past years, at standard employee cost to
you, as part of your compensation.


 


 


	
  MFIC CORPORATION

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Irwin Gruverman, CEO, Chairman

  	
  Irwin Gruverman, for myself

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
  Robert Bruno, President
1210-AB32-2-1210.html[7/24/2015 8:19:25 PM]

PUBLIC SUBMISSION

As of: July 16, 2015

Received: July 09, 2015

Status: Pending_Post

Tracking No. 1jz-8jvs-4ler

Comments Due: July 21, 2015

Submission Type: Web

Docket: EBSA-2010-0050

Definition of the Term ‘‘Fiduciary’’; Conflict of Interest Rule—Retirement Investment Advice; Notice of

 proposed rulemaking and withdrawal of previous proposed rule.

Comment On: EBSA-2010-0050-0205

Definition of Fiduciary; Conflict of Interest Rule-Retirement Investment Advice and Related Proposed

 Prohibited Transaction Exemptions; Hearing and Comment Period Extension

Document: EBSA-2010-0050-DRAFT-1705

Comment on FR Doc # 2015-14921

Submitter Information

Name: William Courtney

General Comment

I have MUCH more faith in my own decisions for my future than I do in incompetent bureaucrats. Keep your

 hands off my damn investments!
From: Ron Dean [mailto:rdean@74erisa.com] 

Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 2:00 PM

To: EBSA, E-ORI - EBSA

Subject: RIN 1210-AB39

I write to oppose the 90 day delay of the effective date of the Disability 

Regulations.

I am a lawyer and I represent both participants and plans. 

On behalf of participants, the regulations represent just one step 

forward toward a more level playing field. As we know, it is not just 

fairness that counts, but also the appearance of fairness. These 

Regulations not only provide more fairness, but also more transparency 

into the decision making process so that participants may know what 

evidence they have to address and a full and fair opportunity to address 

all of it – even that evidence that is first provided in the denial of an 

appeal.

On behalf of plans, we had no problem adjusting our procedures to 

comply with these new Regulations. The cost was minimal. While 

adjudicating claims might (or might not) be slightly more expensive, it 

is a small price to pay for making sure that claimants whose benefits 

are denied still feel that they have had a fair hearing. Further, the 

additional process provided by the new Regulations has also resulted in 

greater depth in the benefit inquiry – to the advantage of both the plans 

and the participants.

In sum, the new Regulations are a solid step forward in due process in 

the benefits administrative process at a small, if any, cost to the plan. 

For the plans I represent, there has been no cost. The leap forward in 

transparency benefits both the plans and the participants.

Ron Dean

P.O. Box 910

Pacific Palisades, CA 90272

Phone: 310.459.1636

Fax: 310.459.6224
#### § 236.52 Relayed cut-section.

Where relayed cut-section is used in territory where noncoded direct-current track circuits are in use the energy circuit to the adjoining track shall be open and the track circuit shunted when the track relay at such cut-section is in deenergized position.
Here's how you know
 **Official websites use .mil** .mil
 **Secure .mil websites use HTTPS** lock () https://


Skip to main content (Press Enter).
 Toggle navigation
            
            U.S. Central Command
                CENTCOM
        Search
                    Search CENTCOM:
                        Search
                Search CENTCOM:
                    Search
    Home

    ABOUT US
    
        COMMAND PRIORITIES

    LEADERSHIP

    COMPONENT COMMANDS

    HISTORY

    POSTURE STATEMENT

    CENTCOM AOR
    
        CENTCOM COALITION

    OPERATIONS AND EXERCISES
    
        USMTM

    CONTACT
    
        OPERATIONAL CONTRACT SUPPORT

    COMMUNITY RELATIONS

    THEATRE MEDICAL CLEARANCE

    INNOVATION VENDOR PORTAL

    MILITARY MEMBER INNOVATION PORTAL

    MEDIA
    
        SOCIAL MEDIA

    NEWS ARTICLES

    PRESS RELEASES

    STATEMENTS

    IMAGERY

    VIDEOS

    TRANSCRIPTS

    VISITORS AND PERSONNEL
    
        FAMILY CENTER

    FAMILY READINESS

    CENTCOM WEBMAIL

    SOCIAL MEDIA SECURITY

    ACCOUNTABILITY

    EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS

    USCENTCOM UNCLASSIFIED REGULATIONS

    FOIA LIBRARY

    INNOVATION OASIS

    WELCOME GUIDE  Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesCommunity RelationsOtherPreviousCommanders
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Share
  
 Small () Medium () Full Size (1.61 MB)
 
 3rd Brigade First Team Greywolf 1st CAV 3ABCT 1st Cavalry 215th BSB Kuwait
 Photo Gallery
 About UsCommand PrioritiesLeadershipComponent
   CommandsHistoryPosture Statement
   Area of
   ResponsibilityCENTCOM Coalition
   Operations And
   ExercisesOperation Inherent
   ResolveResolute Support
   MediaSocial MediaNews ArticlesPress ReleasesVideo And Imagery
   Visitors And
   PersonnelFamily ReadinessCENTCOM WebmailSocial MediaSecurityAccountabilityEmergency
   Preparedness
   ContactCommunity Relations
                    Stay Connected
                
                Privacy & Security  Inspector General  FOIA  Privacy Act
            

Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil
#### John P. McDonald, Respondent, *v.*Degnon-McLean Contracting Company, Appellant, Impleaded with Another.

*McDonald*v. *Degnon-McLean Contracting Co.,*140 App. Div. 411, affirmed.

(Argued May 7, 1912;

decided May 21, 1912.)

Appeal, by permission, from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered November 28, 1910, affirming a judg-

*603ment in favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict in an action to recover for personal injuries alleged to have been sustained through the negligence of defendant.

*James F. Donnelly*for appellant

*John M. Ward*for respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Gray, Haight, Vann, Werner, Willard Bartlett and Chase, JJ.
----

(2004/C 84 E/0396)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0228/04

by Erik Meijer (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(2 February 2004)

Subject:   Timely development and production of drugs to combat the merging of avian influenza virus H5N1 and influenza A occurring in humans

Sources:TV Nederland 1, Netwerk 18.1.2004, www.netwerk.tv; World Health Organisation: www.who.int (in English); Erasmus medical Centre Rotterdam: www.virology.nl (in English).

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(18 March 2004)

----

(1)  Commission Decision 2004/84/EC of 23.1.2004, OJ L 17, 24.1.2004, Commission Decision 2004/93/EC of 29.1.2004, OJ L 27, 30.1.2004, and Commission Decision 2004/122/EC of 6.2.2004, OJ L 36, 7.2.2004.

(2)OJ L 117, 8.5.1990.

(3)OJ L 183, 29.6.1989.

(4)OJ L 262, 17.10.2000.

----
99–008

107TH CONGRESS REPORT " ! HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 2d Session 107–489

PROVIDING FOR CONSIDERATION OF H.R. 4664, INVESTING

IN AMERICA’S FUTURE ACT

JUNE 4, 2002.—Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

Mr. REYNOLDS, from the Committee on Rules,

submitted the following

R E P O R T

[To accompany H. Res. 432]

The Committee on Rules, having had under consideration House

Resolution 432, by a nonrecord vote, report the same to the House

with the recommendation that the resolution be adopted.

SUMMARY OF PROVISIONS OF THE RESOLUTION

The resolution provides for the consideration of H.R. 4664, the

Investing in America’s Future Act, under an open rule. The rule

provides one hour of general debate equally divided and controlled

by the chairman and ranking minority member of the Committee

on Science.

The rule waives all points of order against consideration of the

bill. The rule provides that the amendment in the nature of a substitute recommended by the Committee on Science now printed in

the bill be considered as an original bill for the purpose of amendment.

The rule provides that the bill shall be considered for amendment by section. The rule authorizes the Chairman of the Committee of the Whole to accord priority in recognition to Members

who have preprinted their amendments in the Congressional

Record. Finally, the rule provides one motion to recommit with or

without instructions.

The waiver of all points of order against consideration is needed

because the report was not filed until Tuesday, June 4, and the bill

may be considered by the House as early as Wednesday, June 5.

Æ