alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit
      23.1    CONSENT
      OF MOSS ADAMS LLP 
      INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
      (Forms S-3 No. 333-109150, No. 333-104632, No. 333-100754, No. 333-87348,
      No. 333-51236, No. 333-96231, No. 333-82591, and No. 333-49001; and Forms
      S-8 No. 333-123396, 333-106502, 333-87368, No. 333-85721, No. 333-68347,
      No. 333-66060, No. 333-59838, No. 333-07669, and No. 33-97350) and related
      Prospectuses of our report dated March 6, 2006, with respect to the consolidated
      financial statements of Socket Communications, Inc., Socket Communications,
      Inc. management's assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over
      financial reporting, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial
      reporting of Socket Communications, Inc., included in this Annual Report
      (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2005.  /s/
      Moss Adams LLP San Francisco,
      California 
      March 6, 2006
USGS HomeContact USGSSearch USGS
U.S. Geological Survey Data Series 772
Acquisition GeometryHome | Acronyms | Contents | Navigation | Profiles | Logs | Metadata | Software | IndexHome | Acronyms | Contents | Navigation | Profiles | Logs | Metadata | Software | Index
AccessibilityFOIAPrivacyPolicies and Notices

U.S. Department of the Interior | U.S. Geological SurveyURL: http://pubs.usgs.gov/ds/772/html/fig2.htmlPage Contact Information: GS Pubs Web ContactPage Last Modified: Thursday, July 18, 2013, 12:16:02 PM
DISMISS and Opinion Filed June 27, 2024 

S 

In The 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-24-00273-CV 

IN RE CHARLES LEON WILKERSON, Appellant 

On Appeal from the Probate Court No. 3 

Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. PR-19-00837-3 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before Chief Justice Burns, Justice Molberg, and Justice Pedersen, III 

Opinion by Chief Justice Burns 

The filing fee, docketing statement, and clerk’s record in this case have not 

been filed. By postcards dated March 11, 2024 and March 15, 2024, we notified 

appellant the $205 filing fee was due. We directed appellant to remit the filing fee 

within ten days and expressly cautioned appellant that failure to do so would result 

in dismissal of the appeal. Also by postcard dated March 11, 2024, we informed 

appellant the docketing statement was due and directed appellant to file the 

docketing statement within ten days. By letter dated April 30, 2024, we informed 

appellant the clerk’s record had not been filed because appellant had not paid for the 

clerk’s record. We directed appellant to provide, within ten days, verification he (1) 
 –2– 

had either paid for or made arrangements to pay for the clerk’s record, or (2) was 

entitled to proceed without payment of costs. We cautioned appellant that failure to 

do so would result in the dismissal of this appeal without further notice. To date, 

appellant has not paid the filing fee, provided the required documentation, or 

otherwise corresponded with the Court regarding the status of this appeal. 

Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal. See TEX.R. APP. P. 37.3(b); 42.3(b), (c). 

240273F.P05 

 

/Robert D. Burns, III/

ROBERT D. BURNS, III 

CHIEF JUSTICE 
 –3– 

S 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

JUDGMENT 

IN RE CHARLES LEON 

WILKERSON, Appellant 

No. 05-24-00273-CV 

 On Appeal from the Probate Court 

No. 3, Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. PR-19-00837-

3. 

Opinion delivered by Chief Justice 

Burns. Justices Molberg and 

Pedersen, III participating. 

 In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is 

DISMISSED. 

Judgment entered June 27, 2024
#### Carlos LAND, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. ALLEN PARISH SCHOOL BOARD, Defendant and Appellant.

No. 5942.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana, Third Circuit.

Aug. 16, 1977.

Ryder & Deshotels by Errol D. Deshotels, Oberlin, for defendant and appellant.

D. Michael Mooney, Lake Charles, for plaintiff and appellee.

Before HOOD, CULPEPPER, WATSON, FORET and STOKER, JJ.

STOKER, Judge.

This case was consolidated for trial and appeal with several suits one of which is *Young v. Allen Parish School Board,*349 So.2d 469, which is being decided on this date.

For the reasons which we assigned in *Young v. Allen Parish School Board,*supra, we take the following action in this case. We affirm the judgment of the trial court insofar as it renders judgment in favor of plaintiff-appellee, Carlos Land, against Allen Parish School Board, and assesses court costs to the latter. However, the one judg*477ment rendered and signed for all of the plaintiffs in the consolidated case (described in *Young v. Allen Parish School Board,*supra) granted the same form of decree to each plaintiff and ordered the total amount of salary to be paid for the year 1975-76, rather than awarding the difference in what was actually received and what should have been paid. The portion of the judgment in favor of the plaintiff in this suit, Carlos Land, reads: “IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that there be judgment herein in favor of Carlos Land and against Allen Parish School Board to pay unto Carlos Land the salary of Ten Thousand Nineteen ($10,-019.00) and No/100 Dollars for the 1975-76 school term together with legal interest from the date of judicial demand; . . . ”

For the reasons given in the *Young*case we amend the trial court judgment with respect to the award. Accordingly, it is ordered, adjudged and decreed that there be judgment herein in favor of plaintiff, Carlos Land, and against the Allen Parish School Board in the full sum of Ten Thousand Nineteen ($10,019.00) and No/100 Dollars, subject to a credit for all sums paid Carlos Land as salary by defendant during the 1975-76 school term for Allen Parish, together with legal interest from date of judicial demand on the net amount due under this judgment, all costs of these proceedings in the trial court to be assessed against defendant, Allen Parish School Board, insofar as defendant may be legally cast for such costs.

All costs of this appeal are assessed to defendant-appellant insofar as it may be legally cast for such costs.

AMENDED AND AFFIRMED AS AMENDED.

CULPEPPER, J., dissents and assigns written reasons in 5919.

HOOD, J., dissents for the reasons assigned by CULPEPPER, J.
OVER

2007

Medicine 

and Pregnancy

You still can use many medicines 

when you are pregnant or nursing. 

Use this guide and talk to your 

doctor, nurse, or pharmacist about 

keeping you and your baby safe.

Know the facts

• If you’re not pregnant yet, you can 

help your chances for having a 

healthy baby by planning ahead. 

You can make choices about 

which medicines to use before you 

get pregnant. Always talk to your 

doctor, nurse, or pharmacist first! 

It’s very important that you keep 

getting treatment for any health 

problems.

• Your heart and kidneys work 

harder when you are pregnant. 

This makes some medicines pass 

through your body faster than 

usual. Your doctor might need to 

give you a higher dose of your 

medicines or make you take them 

more often.

• Some drugs can harm your baby 

during different stages of your 

pregnancy. At these times, your 

doctor might tell you to stop 

taking your regular medicine until 

it is safe to go back on it. Your 

doctor may put you on a different 

medicine that is safer for your 

baby.

Read the label and ask questions

• The law says that all drug labels 

must list the risks for women 

who are pregnant or trying to get 

pregnant.

• Your doctor, nurse, or pharmacist 

can help you choose the 

medicines that are right for you.

Don’t take:

Aspirin

• Don’t take aspirin during the last 

three months of your pregnancy, 

unless your doctor tells you to. 

Aspirin can cause problems for 

your baby or cause problems 

when you are in labor.

Ibuprofen (Motrin, Advil)

• Like aspirin, it may cause 

problems during the last three 

months of pregnancy and when 

you are in labor.

Products like herbs, minerals, 

amino acids

• No one is sure if these are safe for 

pregnant women, so it’s best not 

to use them. Even some “natural” 

products may not be good for 

women who are pregnant or 

nursing.
FDA Office of Women’s Health http://www.fda.gov/womens

TAKE TIME TO CARE... For yourself, for those who need you.

Vitamins

• Women who are pregnant should 

not take regular vitamins. They 

can contain doses that are too 

high.

• Ask about special vitamins for 

pregnant women that can help 

keep you and your baby healthy.

To report a problem

Contact the FDA Safety Information 

and Adverse Event Reporting 

Program:

Website: http://www.accessdata.fda.

gov/scripts/medwatch/

Phone: 1-888-463-6332

Medicine 

and Pregnancy

To Learn More:

These websites can tell you more about the risks of certain drugs before, during, and after pregnancy:

FDA Pregnancy Registries

http://www.fda.gov/womens/registries/default.htm

The Safe Motherhood Initiative

http://www.safemotherhood.org
#### Wesley Harry SLOBODIAN, Appellant, v. GENERAL TELEPHONE COMPANY OF FLORIDA, a Florida corporation and American Motorists Insurance Company, a foreign corporation authorized to do business in the State of Florida, Appellees.

No. 70-262.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

April 21, 1970.

Kates & Ress and Roland Gomez, North Miami, for appellant.

Fowler, White, Humkey, Burnett, Hurley & Banick, Miami, Fowler, White, Gillen, Humkey & Kenney, Edward M. Waller, Jr., and John W. Boult, Tampa, for appellees.

Before CHARLES CARROLL BARK-DULL and HENDRY, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed on authority of Enfinger v. Baxley, Fla.1957, 96 So.2d 538; Commercial Carrier Corporation v. Mercer, Fla. App.1969, 226 So.2d 270.
Regulatory Evaluation 

Docket No. FAA- Directorate Identifier: -AD 

(/you make changes to the values in the tahle he/em. you must ensure the towls update accordint•!/)'. (/ 

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

Estimated Costs: 

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

(e.g., Inspection, propeller, appliance) 

Work-hours Labor Pm1s Cost Total Costs Number of Total Cost replacement) 

D (include cost (labor + u.s. for U.S. Fleet o not include oncondition costs here access, testing, (@$85/h parts) Registered 

and close-up) our) Products 

Upgrade of one 4.0 $0 107 SECU 

Upgrae of two 

6.0 so 107 SECU 

The known number of products in compliance: 

Total Costs of compl iance for U.S. fl eet: $90,950 

Costs covered under warranty (if known) $ 

On-Condition Costs: 

Action Work-hours Labor cost Parts Cost Cost per Product 

(e.g., Inspection, (include access, (@$85/hour) 

testing, and close- replacement) up) 

Special conside rations for Economic Analysis (Use this field to explain ttny thing in the Estimated Costs table 

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

Could the AD be considered a "significant regulatory action''? G 

YES*0 NO~ 

*Explanation: 

DOT Regulatot-y Policies and Procedures: 

Is the AD significant? G 

YES* D NO~ 

*Explanation: 

Regulatot·y 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. @ 

YESD 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? G 

YES*0 NO~ 

*Explanation:
#### STATE of Louisiana v. L. C. BUTLER.

No. 62293.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

June 9, 1978.

In re: State of Louisiana through the District Attorney, Harry F. Connick, applying for writs of certiorari, mandamus and prohibition. Parish of Orleans.

Writ granted. Trial judge ordered to issued arrest warrant in this matter.

DIXON, J.,

dissents from this grant. 209 C.Cr.P. gives the judge discretion and there is absolutely no showing of abuse.
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2868 

To accept the request to revoke the charter of incorporation of the Lower 

Sioux Indian Community in the State of Minnesota at the request of 

that Community, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 20, 2023 

Ms. SMITH (for herself and Ms. KLOBUCHAR) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Indian Affairs 

A BILL 

To accept the request to revoke the charter of incorporation 

of the Lower Sioux Indian Community in the State of 

Minnesota at the request of that Community, and for 

other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. REVOCATION OF CHARTER OF INCORPORA4 TION OF THE LOWER SIOUX INDIAN COMMU5 NITY. 

6 The request of the Lower Sioux Indian Community 

7 in the State of Minnesota to surrender the charter of in8 corporation issued to that community and ratified on July 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•S 2868 IS

1 17, 1937, pursuant to section 17 of the Act of June 18, 

2 1934 (commonly known as the ‘‘Indian Reorganization 

3 Act’’) (48 Stat. 988, chapter 576; 25 U.S.C. 5124), is 

4 hereby accepted and that charter of incorporation is here5 by revoked. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                       5,305,129
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               35,634,164
<ALLOWANCES>                                 1,555,812
<INVENTORY>                                 23,266,196
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            68,811,180
<PP&E>                                       5,543,221
<DEPRECIATION>                               2,835,964
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              71,860,678
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       23,506,734
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                    16,100,483
<OTHER-SE>                                  32,253,461
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                71,860,678
<SALES>                                    260,092,777
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           260,505,397
<CGS>                                      220,995,754
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              220,995,754
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            22,017,417
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,470,762
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             16,021,464
<INCOME-TAX>                                 5,235,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         10,786,464
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                10,786,464
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.64
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.59
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.1 - Chief Executive Officer Certification (Section 906)

                        CERTIFICATION 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 Quarterly Report of RPM Advantage, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2008, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the "Report").

I, David R. Pressler, 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, that, to the best of my knowledge and belief:

               (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
                     result of operations of the Company.

/s/ David R. Pressler
--------------------------
    David R. Pressler
    CEO President and Director


Date  April 25, 2011
      -----------------
Customer Service Hotline: 1-800-438-2474

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

REGION III

1650 Arch Street

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103-2029

September 20, 2013

The Honorable Randy C. Huffman

Secretary, West Virginia Department of Environmental Protection

Division of Air Quality

601 57th Street, SE 

Charleston, WV 25304-2943

Dear Secretary Huffman:

On August 7, 2013, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency received a revision to the 

West Virginia State Implementation Plan (SIP) from the Department of Environmental 

Protection. This SIP revision requests redesignation of the Martinsburg-Hagerstown, WV-MD

1997 annual fine particulate matter (PM2.5) nonattainment area to attainment and approval of the 

Area’s maintenance plan. EPA has determined that the submittal is administratively and 

technically complete, and is reviewing it to prepare a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. 

If members of your staff have any questions, they may direct them to Ms. Rose Quinto, 

Office of Air Program Planning at (215) 814-2182 or at quinto.rose@epa.gov. She is the 

principal contact for this rulemaking. 

 Sincerely, 

 /s/

Diana Esher, Director

 Air Protection Division 

cc: John Benedict, WVDEP

 Fred Durham, WVDEP
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2806 

To repeal certain provisions relating to taxpayer subsidies for home 

electrification, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 14, 2023 

Mr. BRAUN (for himself, Mr. THUNE, Mr. BARRASSO, Mr. MARSHALL, Mr. 

WICKER, Mrs. CAPITO, Mr. SCHMITT, Mr. RUBIO, Mr. RICKETTS, Mr. 

HAWLEY, Mr. VANCE, and Ms. LUMMIS) introduced the following bill; 

which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Energy and Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To repeal certain provisions relating to taxpayer subsidies 

for home electrification, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Homeowner Energy 

5 Freedom Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. HOMEOWNER ENERGY FREEDOM. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—The following are repealed: 

8 (1) Section 50122 of Public Law 117–169 (42 

9 U.S.C. 18795a; 136 Stat. 2036) (commonly known 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•S 2806 IS

1 as the ‘‘Inflation Reduction Act’’) (relating to a 

2 high-efficiency electric home rebate program). 

3 (2) Section 50123 of Public Law 117–169 (42 

4 U.S.C. 1879b; 136 Stat. 2041) (commonly known as 

5 the ‘‘Inflation Reduction Act’’) (relating to State6 based home energy efficiency contractor training 

7 grants). 

8 (3) Section 50131 of Public Law 117–169 (136 

9 Stat. 2041) (commonly known as the ‘‘Inflation Re10 duction Act’’) (relating to assistance for latest and 

11 zero building energy code adoption). 

12 (b) RESCISSIONS.—The unobligated balances of any 

13 amounts made available under each of the sections de14 scribed in subsection (a) (as in effect on the day before 

15 the date of enactment of this Act) are rescinded. 

16 (c) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 

17 50121(c)(7) of Public Law 117–169 (42 U.S.C. 

18 18795(c)(7); 136 Stat. 2033) (commonly known as the 

19 ‘‘Inflation Reduction Act’’) is amended by striking ‘‘, in20 cluding a rebate provided under a high-efficiency electric 

21 home rebate program (as defined in section 50122(d)),’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
No. 00-749.

#### Alfair Development Co., Inc., et al. *v.*City of Jacksonville et al.

C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.
USGS HomeContact USGSSearch USGS
Data Series 720
EAARL Coastal       Topography and Imagery�Western Louisiana, Post-Hurricane Rita, 2005: First       Surface                  Acronyms and       Abbreviations       ACRONYM ORABBREVIATION            DEFINITION            ALPS            Airborne Lidar Processing             System            ASCII            American Standard Code for Information             Interchange            ASPRS            American Society for Photogrammetry and Remote             Sensing            BA            Bathymetry            BE            Bare Earth            CIR            Color Infrared            cm            Centimeter(s)            CMGP            Coastal and Marine Geology Program            DEM            Digital Elevation Model            DVD            Digital Versatile Disc            EAARL            Experimental Advanced Airborne Research Lidar            ESRI            Environmental Systems Research Institute, Inc.            FGDC            Federal Geographic Data Committee            FS            First Surface            GB            Gigabyte(s)            GeoTIFF            Georeferenced Tagged Image File Format            GIS            Geographic Information System            GPS            Global Positioning System            GRASS            Geographic Resources Analysis Support         System            HTML            Hypertext Markup Language            IDL            Interactive Data Language            kHz            Kilohertz            LAS            Log ASCII             Standard            lidar            Light Detection and Ranging            m            Meter(s)            NASA            National Aeronautics and Space           Administration            NAD83            North American Datum 1983            NAVD88            North American Vertical Datum 1988            nm            Nanometer(s)            RCF            Random Consensus Filter            RGB            Red-Green-Blue            TIF            Tagged Image File            USGS            U.S. Geological             Survey            UTM            Universal Transverse Mercator            WGS84            World Geodetic System 1984            XML            Extensible Markup       Language
Back to Index       Page

AccessibilityFOIAPrivacyPolicies and Notices

U.S. Department of the Interior | U.S. Geological SurveyURL: http://pubs.usgs.gov/ds/720/html/acronyms.htmlPage Contact Information: GS Pubs Web ContactPage Last Modified: Thursday, July 18, 2013, 01:29:11 PM