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

                                                                    Exhibit 23.1




              CONSENT OF DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos.
33-57700, 33-65084, and 33-10965 of SSE Telecom, Inc. on Form S-8 and in
Registration Statement No. 33-57046 of SSE Telecom, Inc. on Form S-3 of our
report dated November 25, 1998, appearing in and incorporated by reference in
this Annual Report on Form 10-K for SSE Telecom, Inc. for the year ended
September 26, 1998.



                                                       /s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP


San Jose, California
December 28, 1998
#### Robert Zane BOGLE, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Stan CZERNIAK, Respondent—Appellee.

No. 04-35612.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted * July 15, 2005.

Decided July 22, 2005.

Before: RYMER and KLEINFELD, Circuit Judges, and WEINER, District *550Judge.**

*

 The Panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R.App. P. 34(a).

**

 The Honorable Charles R. Weiner, • Senior United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania, sitting by designation.

MEMORANDUM ***

The district judge correctly determined that Robert Bogle’s federal habeas petition was procedurally defaulted and that Bogle failed to establish that his procedural default should be excused based on the actual-innocence exception.

Or.Rev.Stat. § 138.550(3) requires that “[a]ll grounds for relief claimed by petitioner ... must be asserted in the original or amended petition, and any grounds not so asserted are deemed waived.... ” The statute provides an exception to this rule only when “the court on hearing a subsequent petition finds grounds for relief asserted therein which could not reasonably have been raised in the original or amended petition.” As the rule of Or.Rev.Stat. § 138.550(3) is firmly established and consistently applied by the Oregon courts, *see, e.g., Makinson v. Lampert,*199 Or.App. 418, 112 P.3d 365 (2005) (holding that plain error analysis cannot be applied in derogation of the statutory requirement to reach an issue not raised in the petition), Bogle’s failure to raise his claim of ineffective assistance in his original petition, when he reasonable could have done so, resulted in a procedural default.

The procedural default bars federal habeas review unless Bogle can demonstrate either cause for the default and actual prejudice as a result of the alleged violation of federal law, or that the failure to consider the claim will result in a fundamental miscarriage of justice. *Coleman v. Thompson,*501 U.S. 722, 750, 111 S.Ct. 2546, 115 L.Ed.2d 640 (1991). Neither the decision in Bogle’s brother’s case, which arose from the same criminal episode and found that counsel’s failure to object to the state trial judge’s improper kidnaping instruction was ineffective assistance, nor the subsequent dismissal of three kidnaping counts in that case, constituted evidence of Robert’s innocense, so as to support a miscarriage of justice argument for excusing the default. • *See Schlup v. Delo,*513 U.S. 298, 324, 115 S.Ct. 851, 130 L.Ed.2d 808 (1995) (claim of actual innocence requires petitioner to “support his allegations of constitutional error with new reliable evidence” not presented at trial); *Bousley v. United States,*523 U.S. 614, 623, 118 S.Ct. 1604, 140 L.Ed.2d 828 (1998) (“actual innocence” means factual innocence, not mere legal insufficiency). Accordingly, the district court’s determination that the procedural default could not be excused was not error.

AFFIRMED.

***

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as may be provided by 9th Circuit Rule 36-3.
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 72 Introduced in House (IH)]

106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. CON. RES. 72

Providing support to the United States Armed Forces in their efforts to 
         halt the brutal ethnic cleansing of Kosovar Albanians.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 24, 1999

Mr. Hastings of Florida submitted the following concurrent resolution; 
which was referred to the Committee on International Relations, and in 
     addition to the Committee on Armed Services, in each case for 
consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the 
                          committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
Providing support to the United States Armed Forces in their efforts to 
         halt the brutal ethnic cleansing of Kosovar Albanians.

Whereas Yugoslav President Slobodan Milosevic has refused to halt the brutal 
        ethnic cleansing of Kosovar Albanians despite significant international 
        mediation;
Whereas the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) has ordered warships and 
        aircraft to commence the bombardment of Yugoslav military targets in 
        response to this ethnic cleansing; and
Whereas the United States, as a member nation of NATO, may be called upon to 
        participate in ground forces to bring about an end to ethnic cleansing 
        in the region: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That the Congress gives its full support to the United States Armed 
Forces in their efforts to halt the brutal ethnic cleansing of Kosovar 
Albanians.
                                 <all>
```
IV

106TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 76

Recognizing the social problem of child abuse and neglect, and supporting

efforts to enhance public awareness of it.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 24, 1999

Mr. SALMON submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred

to the Committee on Education and the Workforce

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Recognizing the social problem of child abuse and neglect,

and supporting efforts to enhance public awareness of it.

Whereas more than 3,000,000 American children are reported as suspected victims of child abuse and neglect

annually;

Whereas more than 500,000 American children are unable to

live safely with their families and are placed in foster

homes and institutions;

Whereas it is estimated that more than 1,000 children, 78

percent under the age of 5 and 38 percent under the age

of 1, lose their lives as a direct result of abuse and neglect every year in America;

Whereas this tragic social problem results in human and economic costs due to its relationship to crime and delin-
2

•HCON 76 IH

quency, drug and alcohol abuse, domestic violence, and

welfare dependency; and

Whereas Childhelp USA has initiated a ‘‘Day of Hope’’ to be

observed on the first Wednesday in April, during Child

Abuse Prevention Month, to focus public awareness on

this social ill: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That—

3 (1) it is the sense of the Congress that—

4 (A) all Americans should keep these vic5 timized children in their thoughts and prayers;

6 (B) all Americans should seek to break

7 this cycle of abuse and neglect, and give our

8 children hope for the future; and

9 (C) the faith community, nonprofit organi10 zations, and volunteers across America should

11 recommit themselves and mobilize their re12 sources to assist these children; and

13 (2) the Congress—

14 (A) supports the goals and ideas of the

15 ‘‘Day of Hope’’; and

16 (B) commends Childhelp USA for its ef17 forts on behalf of abused and neglected children

18 everywhere.

Æ
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 205 (Wednesday, October 25, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 73387]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-23510]


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

POSTAL SERVICE


Product Change--Priority Mail and USPS Ground Advantage[supreg] 
Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal Service<SUP>TM</SUP>.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: October 25, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean Robinson, 202-268-8405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
October 18, 2023, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a USPS 
Request to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage[supreg] Contract 
78 to Competitive Product List. Documents are available at www.prc.gov, 
Docket Nos. MC2024-18, CP2024-18.

Sean Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2023-23510 Filed 10-24-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                                       <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                    9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-28-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             MAR-02-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               NOV-29-1997
<CASH>                                          33,779
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  634,621
<ALLOWANCES>                                    15,353
<INVENTORY>                                    242,414
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,041,386
<PP&E>                                         508,497
<DEPRECIATION>                                 178,871
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,151,053
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          527,079
<BONDS>                                        744,414
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            28
<OTHER-SE>                                     788,930
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,151,053
<SALES>                                      3,048,125
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,048,125
<CGS>                                        2,318,386
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  615,101
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              36,212
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 78,426
<INCOME-TAX>                                    35,077
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             44,363
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  7,108
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    37,255
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .25
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .25
        

</TABLE>
AVALANCHA 

Deslizamiento de una gran masa de nieve, hielo, tierra, rocas y otros materiales.

Acumulación 

signifi cante 

de nieve.

Vibraciones por voz y 

movimientos humanos.

Terremotos.

Aumento de la 

temperatura.

Lluvias fuertes o 

nevadas intensas. 

Pendientes 

superiores a 

20 o 30 grados 

(35 a 40 grados 

plantean el mayor 

riesgo).

Capas de nieve 

de distintas 

densidades.

CONDICIONES NECESARIAS DESENCADENANTES 

Daño a caminos, 

sistemas de 

alcantarillado, líneas 

de electricidad y de 

teléfono.

Lesiones 

o pérdida 

de vidas. 

Impactos económicos 

por causa de negocios 

dañados y reducción 

de turismo.

Daños a edifi cios 

y viviendas. 

CAUSAS IMPACTOS

Reducción del riesgo

CÓMO PUEDO REDUCIR MI RIESGO

Reubicando viviendas en áreas de alto riesgo.

Adoptando y exigiendo estándares para la edifi cación, 

construcción o zonifi cación a fi n de reducir el daño 

ocasionado por las avalanchas.

Activando avalanchas controladas para prevenir niveles 

de acumulación de nieve peligrosos.

Desarrollando un mapa del área de estudio de la 

trayectoria de avalanchas. Realizando un estudio 

específi co sobre el peligro de avalanchas. 

Defi niendo áreas conocidas y potenciales de la 

trayectoria de avalanchas.

Adoptando una ordenanza para avalanchas a fi n de 

restringir el desarrollo en áreas de alto riesgo. Limitando 

el acceso durante periodos posteriores a una avalancha. 

Protegiendo estructuras e infraestructuras vulnerables 

aplicando medidas preventivas. Estas incluyen 

estructuras de retención, redistribución o captación.

Averigüe si vive, trabaja o viaja a través 

de una zona de avalanchas conocida.

Aprenda a identifi car señales de advertencia

y eventos desencadenantes estudiando la 

información disponible en

www.avalanche.org/national-avalanche-center/

Inscríbase para recibir notifi caciones 

de emergencia.

Consulte las condiciones climáticas actuales 

y los pronósticos antes de realizar actividades 

al aire libre.

Obtenga asesoramiento profesional acerca 

del uso de estructuras de protección.

¿CÓMO PUEDEN REDUCIR MI RIESGO

LOS FUNCIONARIOS LOCALES?

Recursos adicionales

Ready.gov 

www.ready.gov/avalanche

National Avalanche Center

www.avalanche.org/national-avalanche-center/

Comuníquese con su departamento de administración de 

emergencias local o estatal para obtener más información 

sobre cómo reducir el riesgo de avalanchas.

www.fema.gov
<PAGE>
                                 EXHIBIT 12(A)

               COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
                                  SALTON, INC.

<Table>
<Caption>
                                                   13 WEEKS
                                                    ENDED
                                                   09/28/02                               YEAR ENDED
(IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT RATIOS)                    (UNAUDITED)      2002          2001         2000          1999         1998
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                                           <C>               <C>         <C>           <C>           <C>          <C>
Fixed Charges
Interest and amortization of debt issuance
 costs on all indebtedness                         $  9,981    $ 43,357      $  39,043    $  31,102     $ 15,864     $  7,336
Add interest element implicit in rentals                737       3,040          3,724        1,923        1,158          521
                                           -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total fixed charges                                $ 10,718    $ 46,397      $  42,767    $  33,025     $ 17,022     $  7,857
Income
Income before income taxes                         $  5,973    $ 44,541      $  73,846    $ 146,903     $ 53,863     $ 32,186
Add fixed charges                                    10,718      46,367         42,767       33,025       17,022        7,857
                                           -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Income before fixed charges and income taxes       $ 16,691    $ 90,908      $ 116,613    $ 179,928     $ 70,885     $ 40,043
                                           ===================================================================================
Ratio of earnings to fixed charges                     1.56        1.96           2.73         5.45         4.16         5.10
</Table>
# L_2022043EN.01009301.xml

| 24.2.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 43/93 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.2.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 43/93

---

Corrigendum to Commission Delegated Regulation (EU) 2021/2026 of 13 September 2021 amending Delegated Regulation (EU) 2020/592 as regards certain temporary derogations from Regulation (EU) No 1308/2013 of the European Parliament and of the Council to address the market disturbance in the wine sector caused by the COVID-19 pandemic and their period of application

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 415 of 22 November 2021
  )

On page 2, in Article 1(2):

for:

‘in Article 10, the date “
  15 October 2021
  ” is replaced by “
  15 October 2022
  ”
  ’,

read:

‘Article 10 is replaced by the following:

“Article 10

Application of the temporarily increased Union contribution

Articles 5a, 6, 7(2) and 9 shall apply to operations selected by the competent authorities in the Member States as of the date of entry into force of this Regulation and not later than 15 October 2022.”’.

---
No. 58800.

protests 234946-K, etc. (New York).

#### Bel Paese Sales Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of Feta cheese, similar in all material respects to that the subject of *Lekas & Drivas, Inc.*v. *United States*(33 Cust. Ct. 242, C. D. 1660), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
III

106TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. CON. RES. 309

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MAY 16, 2000

Received and referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor and

Nutrition

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Expressing the sense of the Congress with regard to inschool personal safety education programs for children.

Whereas there were more than 84,000 confirmed cases of

sexual abuse in the United States in 1997 and 90 percent of the victims under 12 years old knew their offender;

Whereas 867,129 individuals were reported missing in 1999

and 85 to 90 percent of these missing persons were children;
2

HCON 309 RFS

Whereas according to Department of Justice research, there

are approximately 114,000 nonfamily abductions in any

one-year period;

Whereas a central element of the National Center for Missing

and Exploited Children’s (NCMEC) congressionally mandated mission is to prevent the victimization of children;

Whereas NCMEC examined the state of child safety education in the United States, focusing on what works and

what does not;

Whereas nearly every primary and secondary school in the

Nation conducts some sort of child safety education program, but NCMEC concluded that most such child safety

programs were inadequate to promote personal safety for

children;

Whereas guidelines, such as those developed by NCMEC, will

help ensure that educators and child-serving organizations have the best possible tools and information to

make decisions regarding child safety curriculum selection and development; and

Whereas child safety guidelines should be developed in collaboration with leading educational, public policy, and

child-serving organizations and the NCMEC’s guidelines

have been endorsed and are supported by many such organizations: Now, therefore, be it

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring), That—

3 (1) it is the sense of the Congress that States

4 should encourage their primary and secondary

5 schools to implement quality child safety curricula so
3

HCON 309 RFS

1 that each child receives instruction that is positive,

2 comprehensive, and effective; and

3 (2) the Congress recognizes the National Center

4 for Missing and Exploited Children’s ‘‘Guidelines for

5 Programs to Reduce Child Victimization’’ as one of

6 the tools to guide the selection of quality child safety

7 programs when local schools develop such programs.

Passed the House of Representatives May 15, 2000.

Attest: JEFF TRANDAHL,

Clerk.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION FURNISHED PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the report of SWS Group, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Donald W. Hultgren, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to my knowledge that:



| | 1. | 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.
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                       |  |                                      
|---------------------- |  | -------------------------------------
|Date: February 9, 2010 |  | /S/ Donald W. Hultgren               
|                       |  | Donald W. Hultgren                   
|                       |  | President and Chief Executive Officer

The foregoing certification is being furnished as an exhibit to the Form 10-Q 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-Q for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation
language in such filing.