alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

**INDEPENDENT AUDITORS’CONSENT**

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No. 333-31468 of AirNet Communications Corporation on Form S-8 of our report dated March 31,2003, (May 13, 2003 as to Note 16 and as to the effects of the restatement discussed in Note 17) (which report expresses an unqualified opinion and includes explanatory paragraphs related to substantial doubt as to the Company’s ability tocontinue as a going concern, to the Company’s adoption of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 145, and to the restatement discussed in note 17) appearing in the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of AirNet Communications Corporation forthe year ended December 31, 2002. 

 

|                          |   |   |   |
|-------------------------------|--------|--------|--------|
| /s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP |   |   |   |
| Orlando, FloridaMay 13, 2003  |   |   |   |
### Compilation of records of surface waters of the United States, October 1950 to September 1960, part 11. Pacific slope basins in California

By: E. L. Hendricks

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/wsp1735

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Plate:  **Plate 1**                            (pdf)
- NGMDB Index Page:  **National Geologic Map Database Index Page**                            (html)
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

No abstract available.

#### Study Area

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Dallas John BADON v. C. Paul PHELPS, Secretary, Dept. of Corrections, Baton Rouge, La.

No. 61754.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 27, 1978.

In re: Dallas John Badon applying for Writ of Habeas Corpus. St. Martin Parish.

Writ denied.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 180 (Wednesday, September 17, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 48828]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-24688]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. ER97-3667-000]


Columbia Power Marketing Corporation; Notice of Issuance of Order

September 12, 1997.
    Columbia Power Marketing Corporation (CPMC) submitted for filing a 
rate schedule under which CPMC will engage in wholesale electric power 
and energy transactions as a marketer. CPMC also requested waiver of 
various Commission regulations. In particular, CPMC requested that the 
Commission grant blanket approval under 18 CFR Part 34 of all future 
issuances of securities and assumptions of liability by CPMC.
    On September 3, 1997, pursuant to delegated authority, the 
Director, Division of Applications, Office of Electric Power 
Regulation, granted requests for blanket approval under Part 34, 
subject to the following:
    Within thirty days of the date of the order, any person desiring to 
be heard or to protest the blanket approval of issuances of securities 
or assumptions of liability by CPMC should file a motion to intervene 
or protest with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First 
Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 
214 of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 
and 385.214).
    Absent a request for hearing within this period, CPMC is authorized 
to issue securities and assume obligations or liabilities as a 
guarantor, endorser, surety, or otherwise in respect of any security of 
another person; provided that such issuance or assumption is for some 
lawful object within the corporate purposes of the applicant, and 
compatible with the public interest, and is reasonably necessary or 
appropriate for such purposes.
    The Commission reserves the right to require a further showing that 
neither public nor private interests will be adversely affected by 
continued approval of CPMC's issuances of securities of assumptions of 
liability.
    Notice is hereby given that the deadline for filing motions to 
intervene or protests, as set forth above, is October 3, 1997. Copies 
of the full text of the order are available from the Commission's 
Public Reference Branch, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 
20426.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-24688 Filed 9-16-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
EXHIBIT 32.2

WRITTEN STATEMENT OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, I, the undersigned Chief Financial Officer of Vion Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the ‘‘Company’’), hereby certify that the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2007 (the ‘‘Report’’) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Date: March 17, 2008

/s/ Howard B. JohnsonHoward B. Johnson
Chief Financial Officer


---
#### Hans Jochel WARNCKE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 70-776.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

April 16, 1971.

Walter R. Talley, Public Defender, and D. Turner Matthews, Asst. Public Defender, Bradenton, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Charles Corees, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Lakeland, for appellee.

MANN, Judge.

Warncke is to be commended for surrendering voluntarily and pleading guilty to a number of robberies. If his attitude within the correctional system is as represented to us in his brief the Probation and Parole Commission will take due account of it and he will have paid his debt to society all the sooner for recognizing the unwisdom of a professional criminal career. He is serving eight sentences of twenty years, running concurrently, with credit for jail time served prior to sentence. He could *28have been sentenced to life. Fla.Stat. § 813.011, F.S.A. (1969). The trial judge obviously gave considerable credit to Warncke for his attitude. We can find no warrant in the statutes or cases for Warncke’s statement that he would be eligible for parole in less than half the time had he been given a life sentence. See Fla.Stat. § 947.16(1) (1969).

Thus we find no error. There is one item which, although harmless error, deserves discussion. A general sentence of twenty years was given in one case, involving counts of breaking and entering with intent to commit a felony (Fla.Stat. § 810.-02) and grand larceny (Fla.Stat. § 811.021 (2)), the aggregate sentence being the sum of the máximums under each section. We think the reasoning of Judge Brown in Benson v. United States, 5th Cir. 1964, 332 F.2d 288, is persuasive and that separate sentences are desirable in these cases. In Evans v. State, Fla.App.1967, 197 So.2d 323, a 99-year sentence was upheld by the Third District, but that was less than the maximum possible under a single count. See also 21 Am.Jur.2d Criminal Law § 54b; Annotation, 91 A.L.R.2d 511. The error being harmless, we affirm. Fla.Stat. § 924.-33 (1969).

PIERCE, C. J., and LILES, J., concur.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 172 (Friday, September 5, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 46955]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-23558]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. RP97-482-000]


Algonquin LNG, Inc.; Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC Gas 
Tariff

August 29, 1997.
    Take notice that on August 26, 1997, Algonquin LNG, Inc. (ALNG) 
tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, First Revised 
Volume No. 1, First Revised Sheet No. 53 to be effective September 25, 
1997.
    ALNG asserts that the purpose of this filing is to comply with the 
Commission's Order No. 636-C, Ordering Paragraph (B) which requires any 
pipeline with a right-of-first-refusal tariff provision containing a 
contract term cap longer than five years to revise its tariff 
consistent with the revised cap of five years adopted in Order No. 636-
C.
    ALNG states that copies of this filing were served on firm 
customers of ALNG and interested state commissions.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest this filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 20426, in 
accordance with Sections 385.214 and 385.211 of the Commission's Rules 
and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed as provided 
in Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to 
intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and 
are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-23558 Filed 9-4-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
```

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 109 (Wednesday, June 6, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Page 33459]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-13661]

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

FEDERAL FINANCIAL INSTITUTIONS EXAMINATION COUNCIL

[Docket No. AS12-11]

Appraisal Subcommittee Notice of Meeting

AGENCY: Appraisal Subcommittee of the Federal Financial Institutions 
Examination Council.

ACTION: Notice of Meeting.

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

    Description: In accordance with Section 1104 (b) of Title XI of the 
Financial Institutions Reform, Recovery, and Enforcement Act of 1989, 
as amended, notice is hereby given that the Appraisal Subcommittee 
(ASC) will meet in closed session:

Location: OCC--250 E Street SW., Room 8C, Washington, DC 20219.
Date: June 13, 2012.
Time: Immediately following the ASC open session.

    Status: Closed.
    Matters To Be Considered:

May 9, 2012 minutes--Closed Session.

    Dated: June 1, 2012.
James R. Park,
Executive Director.
[FR Doc. 2012-13661 Filed 6-5-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
```
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

JUDGMENT

No. 04

- 12

- 00693

- CR

Anthony L. MALDONADO

, Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 186th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2012CR6679

Honorable Maria Teresa Herr, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE ANGELINI

, JUSTICE BARNARD , AND JUSTICE MARTINEZ

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, we MODIFY the judgment of the trial

court by VACATING the convictions for indecency with a child by contact under Count III and

Count X

. As modified, the judgment of the trial court is AFFIRMED.

SIGNED March 26, 2014.

_____________________________ Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice
Case 4:04-cr-00336-JEJ Document 42 Filed 08/23/05 Page 1 of 6
Case 4:04-cr-00336-JEJ Document 42 Filed 08/23/05 Page 2 of 6
Case 4:04-cr-00336-JEJ Document 42 Filed 08/23/05 Page 3 of 6
Case 4:04-cr-00336-JEJ Document 42 Filed 08/23/05 Page 4 of 6
Case 4:04-cr-00336-JEJ Document 42 Filed 08/23/05 Page 5 of 6
Case 4:04-cr-00336-JEJ Document 42 Filed 08/23/05 Page 6 of 6
Case 4:09-cv-02030-MM Document 9 Filed 02/09/10 Page 1 of 3
Case 4:09-cv-02030-MM Document 9 Filed 02/09/10 Page 2 of 3
Case 4:09-cv-02030-MM Document 9 Filed 02/09/10 Page 3 of 3
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

SHAUN REILLY,

Defendant Below,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF DELAWARE,

Plaintiff Below,

Appellee.

§

§ 

§ No. 175, 2018

§

§ Court Below—Superior Court

§ of the State of Delaware

§ 

§ C.A. No. N17C-09-001

§

§

§

Submitted: April 25, 2018

Decided: April 26, 2018

Before VALIHURA, VAUGHN, and SEITZ, Justices.

ORDER

This 26th day of April 2018, having considered the notice to show cause and 

the appellant’s response, it appears to the Court that:

(1) On April 5, 2018, the appellant, Shaun Reilly, filed a notice of appeal 

from a Superior Court order, dated March 9, 2018, denying his motion for 

appointment of counsel in an asset forfeiture case. The Senior Court Clerk issued a 

notice directing Reilly to show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed for 

his failure to comply with Supreme Court Rule 42 in filing an appeal from an 
2

interlocutory order. In his untimely response to the notice to show cause,1 Reilly 

address the merits of his motion for appointment of counsel. He does not address 

his failure to comply with Rule 42.

(2) The denial of a motion for appointment of counsel is an interlocutory 

order for which appellate review is available only upon compliance with Supreme 

Court Rule 42.2 Absent compliance with Supreme Court Rule 42, this Court is 

limited to the review of a trial court’s final judgment.3 An order is deemed final and 

appealable if the trial court has declared its intention that the order be the court’s 

final act in the case.4 The Superior Court proceedings are ongoing. Reilly’s failure 

to comply with Rule 42 requires the dismissal of this appeal.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED, under Supreme Court Rule 29(b),

that this appeal is DISMISSED. 

BY THE COURT:

/s/ James T. Vaughn, Jr.

Justice

 

1 A party must respond to the notice to show cause within ten days after receipt of the notice. Supr. 

Ct. R. 29(b). Reilly received the notice to show cause before April 12, 2018, but did not file his 

response until April 25, 2018, making his appeal subject to dismissal. Supr. Ct. R. 3(b)(2).

2 Abdul-Akbar v. Wynn/D.C.S.E., 1989 WL 27731, at *1 (Del. Feb. 10, 1989).

3

Julian v. State, 440 A.2d 990, 991 (Del. 1982).

4

J.I. Kislak Mortg. Corp. v. William Matthews, Builder, Inc., 303 A.2d 648, 650 (Del. 1973).
<PAGE>   1
                                                                     EXHIBIT 22


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
<S><C>
                                                           STANDARD FEDERAL BANCORPORATION, INC.
                                                    SUBSIDIARIES AND AFFILIATES AS OF DECEMBER 31, 1996

                                                            STANDARD FEDERAL BANCORPORATION, INC.
                                                                            |
                                                                            |
                                                                 STANDARD FEDERAL BANK
                                                                            |
        ____________________________________________________________________|___________________________________________________
        |            |           |        |          |           |        |         |     |       |      |       |             |
        |            |   Standard Service |  Standard Insurance  | Central Venture  |  Mackinac   |   Fidelity   |       Standard-  
        |            |      Corporation   |   Agency (Michigan)  |   Corporation    |   Agency    | Corporation  |       Curti 
Standard Financial   |           |        |                      |                  |             |              |       Insurance
  Corporation        |           |  Eureka Service        Central Mortgage  Bankers Home Loan  Mackinac   Bell Insurance  Agency
        |    Standard Brokerage  |   Corporation            Corporation      Insurance Agency   Realty       Agency            |
        |         Services       |                                                                                             |
        |                        |                                                                                             |
        |               ___________________                                                                                    |
    Kercheval           |                 |                                                                              Dan Gilbert
   Development  Standard Insurance   Tower Service                                                                      & Associates
     Company     Agency (Indiana)     Corporation
 (Joint Venture)


</TABLE>
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED June 6, 2007 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-41248 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus JORGE HERNANDEZ-MARTINEZ, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 5:04-CR-1062-ALL

-------------------- Before SMITH, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Jorge HernandezMartinez raises arguments that are foreclosed by AlmendarezTorres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), which held that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate criminal offense. The appellant’s motion for summary disposition is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is
AFFIRMED.
#### Ralph Preston ARNOLD, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 2353.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. Fourth District.

April 25, 1969.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Indian River County; D. C. Smith, Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
**EXHIBIT 15.1**

 

Consent of Independent Registered Public AccountingFirm

 

We consent to theincorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form F-3 No. 333-141489)on Form F-3 and related Prospectus of Progen Pharmaceuticals Limited ofour report dated December 18, 2009, with respect to the consolidatedfinancial statements of Progen Pharmaceuticals Limited included in this AnnualReport on Form 20-F for the year ended June 30, 2009.

 

 
| /s/ Ernst &  Young |   |
|-----------------------------|--------|

Brisbane,Australia

December 22,2009

 

----
106°23",

WATER-SUPPLY PAPER 1619-Y
PLATE 1

GEOLOGICAL SURVEY

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

AYWNYALYNO, AMVILYSL

EXPLANATION

ate 00"

i bog, gy if i |
: Walt gil imal pills alia
é a ay : i on THE dl ie
= aot eae He 3 ui : pa Py
; Hood ol iu oalo 4 Hol |
==5
a
a Ce sate er
AY
~ AN

6

679-607 O - 63 {In pocket)

ey by R.L. Griggs, 1950

Geolo,

LOS ALAMOS COUNTIES, NEW MEXICO

angle maps

al Survey quadré

GEOLOGIC MAP SHOWING LOCATION OF SELECTED WELLS OF THE
VALLE GRANDE AND VALLE TOLEDO AREA, SANDOVAL AND

Base from U.S. Geologict
Exhibit 31.2  I, Dempsey Mork, certify that:  1.           I have reviewed this quarterly report for the period ended Sept. 30, 2008 on Form 10-Q of China Holdings, Inc.;  2.           Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;  3.           Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and 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 maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:  a)           Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;  b)           Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, 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 financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and  5.           The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):  a)           All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and  b)           Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.  Oct. 1, 2008   /s/ Dempsey Mork Dempsey Mork Chief Financial Officer