alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 23.3


CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS





We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos. 333-153229, 333-175230 and 333-116837 on Form S-8 and Nos. 333-126312, 333-126573, 333-179850 and 333-127464 on Form S-3 of our report dated March 12, 2014, relating to the combined financial statements of FMT Scottsdale Holdings, L.L.C. and Walton/SHR FPH Holdings, L.L.C. as of December 31, 2013 and 2012 and for the years ended December 31, 2013 and 2012 and for the period from June 9, 2011 (Transaction Date) to December 31, 2011, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of Strategic Hotels & Resorts, Inc.





/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP


Chicago, Illinois


March 12, 2014
# C_2015138EN.01001301.xml

| 27.4.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 138/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.4.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 138/13

---

Judgment of the Court (Third Chamber) of 5 March 2015 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tallinna ringkonnakohus — Estonia) — Tallinna Ettevõtlusamet v Statoil Fuel & Retail Eesti AS

(Case C-553/13) (1)

1

((Reference for a preliminary ruling - Indirect taxation - Excise duties - Directive 2008/118/EC - Article 1(2) - Liquid fuel subject to excise duty - Sales tax - Concept of ‘specific purpose’ - Predetermined allocation - Organisation of public transport within the territory of a city))

(2015/C 138/16)

Language of the case: Estonian

Referring court

Referring court

Tallinna ringkonnakohus

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Tallinna Ettevõtlusamet

Applicant:

Defendant: Statoil Fuel & Retail Eesti AS

Defendant:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

Article 1(2) of Council Directive 2008/118/EC of 16 December 2008 concerning the general arrangements for excise duty and repealing Directive 92/12/EEC must be interpreted as not permitting a tax such as that at issue in the main proceedings, in so far as it is levied on retail sales of liquid fuel subject to excise duty, to be regarded as having a specific purpose within the meaning of that provision where that tax is intended to finance the organisation of public transport within the territory of the authority imposing the tax and where that authority is required to undertake and finance such transport irrespective of the existence of that tax, even if the revenue from that tax has been used solely for the purpose of performing that activity. The provision in question must therefore be interpreted as precluding national rules such as those at issue in the main proceedings instituting such a tax on retail sales of liquid fuel subject to excise duty.

---

(1)  OJ C 15, 18.1.2014.

1

---
Order entered March 18, 2015 

In The 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-15-00241-CV 

IN THE ESTATE OF NORMAN SIMON BROWN, DECEASED 

On Appeal from the Probate Court No. 2 

Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. PR-14-04275-2 

ORDER 

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DENY as moot court reporter Andrea L. 

Reed’s March 12, 2015 motion for extension of time to file record. 

/s/ MOLLY FRANCIS 

 JUSTICE
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 99 (Wednesday, May 23, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 28975]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-9935]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Change in Bank Control Notices; Acquisition of Shares of Bank or 
Bank Holding Companies

    The notificants listed below have applied under the Change in Bank 
Control Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)) and Sec. [thinsp]225.41 of the Board's 
Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.41) to acquire a bank or bank holding company. 
The factors that are considered in acting on the notices are set forth 
in paragraph 7 of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1817(j)(7)).
    The notices are available for immediate inspection at the Federal 
Reserve Bank indicated. The notices also will be available for 
inspection at the office of the Board of Governors. Interested persons 
may express their views in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for 
that notice or to the offices of the Board of Governors. Comments must 
be received not later than June 7, 2007.
    A Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City (Donna J. Ward, Assistant 
Vice President) 925 Grand Avenue, Kansas City, Missouri 64198-0001:
    1. Susi Covolik, Omaha, Nebraska; to retain voting shares of 
Clearwater Development Co., Inc., and thereby indirectly retain shares 
of Citizens State Bank, both in Clearwater, Nebraska.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, May 18, 2007.
Jennifer J. Johnson,
Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. E7-9935 Filed 05-22-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-S
No. 44351.

#### Protests 473321-G, etc., of Feltex Corp. (New York.)

Opinion by

Brown, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise is bodies, hoods, forms, or shapes similar to those the subject of *Cohn*v. *United States*(4 Cust. Ct. 166, C. D. 314). The protests were therefore sustained.
EXHIBIT 32.2







CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002







In connection with the Quarterly Report of nFinanSe Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Raymond P. Springer, in my capacity as Chief Financial 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, that:




The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and




The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.







/s/ Raymond P. SpringerDate:  August 11, 2011
Raymond P. Springer

Secretary and Chief Financial Officer
September 20, 1950

No. 7883.

#### United *States*v. *Marine Products Co.*

Entered at San Diego, Calif. Reap. Dec. 7830. Motion by appellee.
No. 46507.

#### Protests 770264-G, etc., of W. A. Taylor & Co. et al. (Baltimore, etc.).

Opinion by

Oliver, P. J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
[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:****Safety evaluation reportrelated to the license renewal of Beaver Valley Power Station, Units 1 and 2[electronic resource] : dockets nos. 50-334 and 50-412, FirstEnergy NuclearOperating Company.**
 
Volume1: Cover through Section 2
Volume2: Section 3 | Section 4 and Appendices A- D
Supplement1: Cover through Section 6 andAppendices A and B
 
SuDoc Number:Y 3.N 88:10/1929/
Item Number:1051-H-2 (online)
CGP systemNumber:000655313
 
January 9, 2020
## Exhibit 99.3

I, Douglas P. Wieten, the Vice President,  Finance;  Chief Financial Officer and
Treasurer of Bioanalytical  Systems, Inc., certify that (i) the Annual Report on
Form 10-K for the year ended September 30, 2002, (the Report)  fully
complies  with the  requirements  of  Section  13(a) or 15(d) of the  Securities
Exchange Act of 1934,  and (ii) the  information  contained in the Report fairly
presents,  in all material  respects,  the  financial  condition  and results of
operations of  Bioanalytical  Systems,  Inc. as of the dates and for the periods
set forth therein.

| | /s/  Douglas P. Wieten
Vice President, Finance;
Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer
January 13, 2003
| | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Exhibit
32.2





CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Huifeng Bio-Pharmaceutical Technology
Inc. on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2010 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date here of, I, Sanding Tao, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as
adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





1. The
Report 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:
August 16, 2010





/S/
      Sanding TaoSanding
      Tao
                Chief
      Financial Officer (Principal Accounting and Financial
                Officer)
#### Joske Bros., and Joske’s of Texas *v.*United States

No. 8103.

Entry No. 440-S.

(Decided March 27, 1952)

*Joseph F. Lockett*for the plaintiffs.

*Charles J. Wagner,*Acting Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Oliver, Chief Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement has been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

> It is hereby stipulated, subject to the approval of the Court:

> 1. That the merchandise in this case is Spratling Silverware and is similar in all material respects to the Spratling Silverware the subject of *Montgomery Ward & Company*v. *United States,*Reappraisement No. 164420-A, etc., decided in R. D. 7637, and reversed in R. D. 7984, and that the issues herein are similar to the issues in that case.

> 2. That the record in said case of *Montgomery Ward & Company*v. *United States*may be, and hereby is, incorporated into and made a part of the record in the instant case.

> 3. That the entered values of the merchandise involved herein are equal to the foreign values as defined in Section 402 (c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended, and that there was no higher export value.

> 4. This appeal is submitted for decision upon the foregoing stipulation.

On the agreed facts I find the foreign value, as that value is defined in section 402 (c) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Administrative Act of 1938, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise here involved, and that such values were the entered values.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
....11

;.. ~- ..~: (,

()

• n'J t , ,'. L

Qy E·MAIL

February 27,2014

Michael Martin

EAS Program

U.S. Department of Transportation

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE

Washington, DC 20590

Re: EAS at Presque Isle, Maine, and Plattsburgh, New York

Dockets DOT-OST-2000-8012 and 2003-14783

Dear Mr. Martin:

Peninsula Airways, Inc. ("PenAir"), the current EAS carrier on these two routes, is working

diligently to evaluate and prepare a service proposal in response to DOT Order 2014-1-21. The

current due date for such proposals is March 4, 2014. PenAir respectfully requests a one-week

extension, until March 11, 2014, for submitting its EAS proposal for these markets.

We appreciate your expedited consideration of this request.

'<, -~-\~c

. --------

f Scott Bloomquist

President, PenAir

• 6j oo BQeingAvenue • Anchorage, Alaska 99502· (907) 243-2485 • Fax 243-6848 • www.penair.com

Peninsula Airways, Inc. D/B/A P£NAIR
February 8, 1940

No. 43232.

Suit 4212.

#### *Bata Shoe Co.*v. *United States.*

C. D. 45 affirmed.
No. 47743.

#### Protests 76711-K, etc., of American Merchandise Co. (New York).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and on the authority of *Woolworth*v. *United States*(26 C. C. P. A. 221, C. A. D. 20), paperweights were held dutiable as household utensils at 40 percent under paragraph 339 as claimed. On the authority of Abstracts 38680 and 43372 savings banks and -tape measures were held dutiable as household utensils at 40 percent under paragraph 339 as claimed.
# C_2017104EN.01000401.xml

| 3.4.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 104/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.4.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 104/4

---

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 26 January 2017 — Masco Corp. and Others v European Commission

(Case C-614/13 P) (1)

1

((Appeal - Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Bathroom fittings and fixtures markets of Belgium, Germany, France, Italy, the Netherlands and Austria - Coordination of selling prices and exchange of sensitive business information - Single and continuous infringement - Obligation to state reasons))

(2017/C 104/06)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Appellants: Masco Corp., Hansgrohe AG, Hansgrohe Deutschland Vertriebs GmbH, Hansgrohe Handelsgesellschaft mbH, Hansgrohe SA/NV, Hansgrohe BV, Hansgrohe SARL, Hansgrohe Srl, Hüppe GmbH, Hüppe GesmbH, Hüppe Belgium SA/NV, Hüppe BV (represented by: D. Schroeder and S. Heinz, Rechtsanwälte, and by B. Fischer, advocate, instructed by J. Temple Lang, Solicitor)

Appellants:

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: L. Malferrari and F. Ronkes Agerbeek, acting as Agents, and by B. Kennelly, Barrister)

Other party to the proceedings:

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the appeal; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the appeal;

| 2. | Orders Masco Corp., Hansgrohe AG, Hansgrohe Deutschland Vertriebs GmbH, Hansgrohe Handelsgesellschaft mbH, Hansgrohe SA/NV, Hansgrohe BV, Hansgrohe SARL, Hansgrohe Srl, Hüppe GmbH, Hüppe GesmbH, Hüppe Belgium SA/NV and Hüppe BV to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Masco Corp., Hansgrohe AG, Hansgrohe Deutschland Vertriebs GmbH, Hansgrohe Handelsgesellschaft mbH, Hansgrohe SA/NV, Hansgrohe BV, Hansgrohe SARL, Hansgrohe Srl, Hüppe GmbH, Hüppe GesmbH, Hüppe Belgium SA/NV and Hüppe BV to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 24, 25.1.2014.

1

---
No. 95-1918.

#### Arkansas *v.*Farm Credit Services of Central Arkansas et al.

C. A. 8th Cir. [Certiorari granted, 519 U. S. 1085.] Motion of the Acting Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as *amicus curiae*and for divided argument granted.
No. 44385.

#### Protests 816703-G, etc., of Herbert Silk Co., Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Brown, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise is wool hat bodies similar to those the subject of *Cohn*v. *United States*(4 Cust. Ct. 166, C. D. 314). The protests were therefore sustained.
No. 46473.

#### Protest 49713-K (A) of Freedman & Slater, Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Walker, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and on the Authority, of *Brachman*v. *United States (5*Cust. Ct. 153, C. D. 389) the claim for free entry under paragraph 1681 was sustained.
No. 74-5993.

#### Forman *v.*New York.

App. Div., Sup. Ct. N. Y., 4th Jud. Dept. Certiorari denied.
Regulatory Evaluation

Docket No. FAA-2011-0573 Directorate Identifier: 2011-NM-082-AD

If you make changes to the values in the table below, you must ensure the totals update accordingly. If 

they do not, click (or Tab) into and then out of the changed cell.

Estimated Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection, 

replacement)

Do not include oncondition costs here

Costs per Product (e.g., aircraft, engine, 

propeller, appliance)

Work-hours

(include 

access, testing, 

and close-up)

Labor 

cost 

(@$85/h

our)

Parts Cost Total Costs 

(labor + 

parts)

Number of 

U.S. 

Registered

Products

Total Cost 

for U.S. Fleet

Inspection 1.5 $ 127.50 $0 $ 127.50 745 $94,987.50

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

The known number of products in compliance:

Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet: $94,988

Costs covered under warranty (if known) $

On-Condition Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection, 

replacement)

Work-hours

(include access, 

testing, and closeup)

Labor cost 

(@$85/hour)

Parts Cost Cost per Product

Replacement 5.0 $ 425.00 $0 $ 425.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

Special considerations for Economic Analysis (Use this field to explain anything in the Estimated Costs table 

that was assumed or might not be obvious. This field can also be used to explain warranty costs):
Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”?

YES* NO 

*Explanation: 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant? 

YES* NO 

*Explanation: 

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? Explain for 

either a Yes or No answer.

YES NO 

Explanation: 

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for 

aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode of transportation?

YES* NO 

*Explanation:
# C_2012209EN.01001102.xml

| 14.7.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 209/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.7.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 209/11

---

Action brought on 18 May 2012 — Think Schuhwerk v OHIM (Shoes with red aglets)

(Case T-208/12)

2012/C 209/19

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Think Schuhwerk GmbH (Kopfing, Austria) (represented by M. Gail, lawyer)

Applicant

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 23 February 2012 in Case R 1552/2011-1; |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the decision of the First Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) of 23 February 2012 in Case R 1552/2011-1;

| — | Order the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) to bear its own costs and to pay those of the applicant. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) to bear its own costs and to pay those of the applicant.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Community trade mark concerned: Other mark relating to shoes with laces at the end of which are red aglets, for goods in Class 25 — Application No 9 130 361

Community trade mark concerned

Decision of the Examiner: Registration refused

Decision of the Examiner

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Appeal dismissed

Decision of the Board of Appeal

Pleas in law:

Pleas in law:

| — | Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009 |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009

| — | Infringement of the principle of equal treatment |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of the principle of equal treatment

---
(Reap. Dec. 9115)

#### Intermaritime Fwdg. Co., Inc. *v.*United States

Entry Nos. 8739; 15316; 107966.

(Decided March 28, 1958)

Plaintiff not represented by counsel.

*George Cochran Doub,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Laweence, Judge:

When the appeals for a reappraisement enumerated in schedule “A,” attached to and made part of this decision, were called for hearing, there was no appearance on behalf of plaintiff.

An examination of the official record discloses no reason for disturbing the presumptively correct value for the merchandise found by the appraiser.

I, therefore, find and hold the proper dutiable value of the merchandise covered by these appeals to be the value found by the appraiser.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
# C_2014261EN.01001002.xml

| 11.8.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 261/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.8.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 261/10

---

Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 30 April 2014 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Giudice di pace di Matera — Italy) — Intelcom Service Ltd v Vincenzo Mario Marvulli

(Case C-600/13) (1)

1

((Request for a preliminary ruling - Articles 34 TFEU, 35 TFEU, 37 TFEU, 56 TFEU and 60 TFEU - Directive 2006/123/EC - National legislation granting notaries the exclusive right to draft and authenticate deeds relating to the sale of immovable property - Manifest inadmissibility))

2014/C 261/17

Language of the case: Italian

Referring court

Referring court

Giudice di pace di Matera

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Intelcom Service Ltd

Applicant:

Defendant: Vincenzo Mario Marvulli

Defendant:

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

The request for a preliminary ruling presented by the Giudice di pace di Matera (Italy) by decision of 22 April 2013 is manifestly inadmissible.

---

(1)  OJ C 52, 22.2.2014.

1

---
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 145 (Tuesday, July 29, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 40519]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-19878]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. RP97-143-004]


TCP Gathering Co.; Notice of Tariff Filing

July 23, 1997.
    Take notice that on July 1, 1997 TCP Gathering Co. (TCP) tendered 
for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Original Volume No. 1, the 
following revised tariff sheet, to be effective August 1, 1997:

Second Revised Sheet No. 103

    TCP states that this tariff sheet is being filed to comply with the 
Commission's letter order in Docket No. RP97-143-002, issued June 10, 
1997.
    TCP states that copies of the filing were served upon TCP's 
jurisdictional customers, interested public bodies, and all parties to 
the proceedings.
    Any person desiring to protest said filing should file a protest 
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., 
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rule 211 of the Commission's 
Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211). All such protests 
must be filed as provided in Section 154.210 of the Commission's 
Regulations. All protests filed with the Commission will be considered 
by it in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will not 
serve to make the protestants parties to the proceeding. Copies of this 
filing are on file with the Commission and are available for public 
inspection.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-19878 Filed 7-28-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M