alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 23**








**CONSENT
      OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**








We
      consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No.
      333-139671 on Form S-8 of our report dated February 15, 2007, relating to the
      financial statements and financial statements schedules of Microfield Group,
      Inc. and management’s report on the effectiveness of internal control over
      financial reporting (which report expresses an adverse opinion on the
      effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting because
      of a material weakness), appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of
      Microfield Group, Inc. for the year ended December 30, 2006.








/s/
      RUSSELL BEDFORD STEFANOU MIRCHANDANI LLP




McLean,
        Virginia


March
      15,
      2007
#### Teri FERNER, Appellant, v. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee.

Nos. 77-872, 77-2521.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

July 11, 1978.

Horton, Perse & Ginsberg, Miami, Grover, Ciment, Weinstein & Stauber, Miami Beach, for appellant.

Talburt, Kubicki & Bradley and Betsy E. Hartley, Miami, for appellee.

Before PEARSON, BARKDULL and HUBBART, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. *Reid v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Co.,*352 So.2d 1172 (Fla.1978).
#### WAGONER v. SWOPE.

No. 8384.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Feb. 3, 1937.

John J. Sullivan and Everett O. Butts, both of Seattle, Wash. (Fred McDonald, of San Francisco, Cal-., of counsel), for appellant.

J. Charles Dennis, U. S. Atty., of Seattle, Wash., and Oliver Malm, Asst. U. S. Atty., of Tacoma,. Wash., for appellee.

Before WILBUR and GARRECHT, Circuit Judges, and NETERER, District Judge.

PER curiam:.

This is an appeal from an order dismissing appellant’s petition for writ of habeas corpus. The appellant was convicted of uttering United States bonds, having forged indorsement thereon. Appellant contends that by a construction of this indictment with a number of others returned at the same time charging conspiracy and forgery, it appears from all these indictments construed together that the payee of the registered bond either indorsed or authorized the indorsement of the bonds and, consequently, argues that there is no forgery and therefore there could be no uttering of the forgery. These questions cannot be raised by writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte Ruef, 150 Cal. 665, 89 P. 605; In re Coy, 127 U.S. 731, 8 S.Ct. 1263, 32 L.Ed. 274; Goto et al. v. Lane, 265 U.S. 393, 44 S.Ct. 525, 68 L.Ed. 1070.

Order affirmed.
1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA : Crim. No. 4:16-CR-0006-1

:

v. : (Judge Brann)

:

RAHEEM JAMAR RULEY, :

:

Defendant. :

ORDER

April 15, 2016

AND NOW, in accordance with the Memorandum of this same date, IT IS 

HEREBY ORDERED THAT Defendant’s Motion to Sever (ECF No. 40) and 

Motion to Suppress (ECF No. 38) are DENIED.

BY THE COURT: 

s/ Matthew W. Brann 

Matthew W. Brann

United States District Judge 

Case 4:16-cr-00006-MWB Document 57 Filed 04/15/16 Page 1 of 1
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 201 (Friday, October 17, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 54114]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-27702]


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

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Sunshine Act Meeting

Agency Holding the Meeting: Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve 
System.

Time and Date: 10:00 a.m., Wednesday, October 22, 1997.

Place: Marriner S. Eccles Federal Reserve Board Building, 20th and C 
Streets, NW., Washington, DC 20551.

Status: Closed.

Matters to be Considered:

    1. Personnel actions (appointments, promotions, assignments, 
reassignments, and salary actions) involving individual Federal Reserve 
System employees.
    2. Any items carried forward from a previously announced meeting.

Contact Person for More Information: Mr. Joseph R. Coyne, Assistant to 
the Board; (202) 452-3204. You may call (202) 452-3207, beginning at 
approximately 5 p.m. two business days before this meeting, for a 
recorded announcement of bank and bank holding company applications 
scheduled for the meeting.

    Dated: October 15, 1997.
Jennifer J. Johnson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 97-27702 Filed 10-15-97; 11:34 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
EXHIBIT
32








CERTIFICATION


PURSUANT
TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


(SUBSECTIONS
(a) AND (b) OF SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18,


UNITED
STATES CODE)





Pursuant to section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63
of Title 18, United States Code), each of the undersigned officers of Trestle
Holdings, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), does hereby certify with
respect to the Annual Report of the Company on Form 10-KSB/A for the year ended
December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
“10-KSB Report”) that:





(1)
            the
      10-KSB/A 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 10-KSB/A Report fairly presents, in all
      material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
      the Company.














Date:  August
20,
2008                                                                   /s/ ERIC
STOPPENHAGEN


Eric Stoppenhagen


Interim President and Corporate
Secretary
June 25, 2015



### JUDGMENT 

## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

CRAIG ANTHONY GILDER , Appellant

NO. 14

- 14

- 00523

- CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee

______ __________________________ This cause was heard on the transcript of the record of the court below. Having considered the record, this Court holds that there was no error in the judgment. The Court orders the judgment AFFIRMED

. We further order appellan t pay all costs expended in the appeal. We further order this decision certified below for observance.
#### The FIDELITY AND CASUALTY COMPANY OF NEW YORK, a stock company, Appellant, v. James P. SELVAGE and Helen Selvage, his wife, Appellees.

No. 70-419.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Dec. 8, 1970.

Rehearing Denied Jan. 11, 1971.

*162Knight, Underwood, Peters, Hoeveler & Pickle, and J. T. Blackard, Miami, for appellant.

Milton E. Grusmark, Miami Beach, for appellees.

Before PEARSON, C. J., and HENDRY and SWANN, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed upon authority of the rule stated in Hough v. Menses, Fla.1957, 95 So.2d 410; Hattaway v. Florida Power & Light Company, Fla.App.1961, 133 So.2d 101.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                       2,145,404
<SECURITIES>                                28,726,602
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            31,042,459
<PP&E>                                       4,810,334
<DEPRECIATION>                             (1,811,918)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              34,049,270
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,940,638
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      3,750
<COMMON>                                        13,077
<OTHER-SE>                                  29,912,442
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                34,049,270
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             6,584,462
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               17,133,247
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             104,187
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (10,652,972)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (10,652,972)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (10,652,972)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.84)
        

</TABLE>
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MICHAEL A. WIGGINS, 

Petitioner,

v.

WARDEN JAMES SHERMAN, et al., 

 Respondent.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Civ. A. No. 06-20 Erie

District Judge McLaughlin 

Magistrate Judge Baxter

MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

I. RECOMMENDATION

It is respectfully recommended that the Petitioner’s Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis

[Document # 1] be denied and the case dismissed without prejudice.

II. REPORT

When submitting a Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis, the Petitioner is required to

submit “an affidavit that includes a statement of all assets such prisoner possesses that the person

is unable to pay such fees or give security therefor.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(1). In addition to the

afore-mentioned affidavit, Petitioner is further required to “submit a certified copy of the trust fund

account statement (or institutional equivalent) for the prisoner for the 6-month period immediately

preceding the filing of the complaint or notice of appeal, obtained from the appropriate official of

each prison at which the prisoner is or was confined.” 28 U.S.C. § 1915(a)(2).

In this case, Petitioner has failed to submit a copy of his institutional account statement,

certified or otherwise. Because Petitioner has failed to comply with the statutory prerequisites for

proceeding In Forma Pauperis, Petitioner’s Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis should be

denied and the case dismissed without prejudice.

Case 1:06-cv-00020-SJM-SPB Document 2 Filed 02/02/2006 Page 1 of 2
 Case 1:06-cv-00020-SJM-SPB Document 3 Filed 02/02/06 Page 1 of 2
2

III. CONCLUSION

For the reasons set forth above, it is respectfully recommended that the Petitioner’s Motion

to Proceed In Forma Pauperis [Document # 1] be denied and the case dismissed without prejudice.

In accordance with the Magistrates Act, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and (C), and Rule

72.1.4(B) of the Local Rules for Magistrates, the parties are allowed ten (10) days from the date of

service to file objections to this report and recommendation. Any party opposing the objections

shall have seven (7) days from the date of service of objections to respond thereto. Failure to file

timely objections may constitute a waiver of any appellate rights.

S/Susan Paradise Baxter 

SUSAN PARADISE BAXTER

Chief U.S. Magistrate Judge

Dated: February 2, 2006

cc: The Honorable Sean J. McLaughlin

United States District Judge

Case 1:06-cv-00020-SJM-SPB Document 2 Filed 02/02/2006 Page 2 of 2
 Case 1:06-cv-00020-SJM-SPB Document 3 Filed 02/02/06 Page 2 of 2
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Sal Perisano, certify that:

 

1.                                       I have reviewedthis quarterly report on Form 10-Q of iParty Corp.;

 

2.                                       Based on myknowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

3.                                       Based on myknowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

 

4.                                       The registrant’sother certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

a) Designedsuch disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

 

b) [Paragraphomitted in accordance with the SEC transition instructions contained in SECRelease 34-47986];

 

c) Evaluatedthe effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

 

d) Disclosedin this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

5.                                       The registrant’sother certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions):

 

a) Allsignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and

 

b) Any fraud,whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

 

 
| Date:  May 10, 2004 | /s/ SAL  PERISANO        |   |
|--------------------------|--------------------------|--------|
|                     | Sal Perisano             |
|                     | Chief  Executive Officer |

 

1

----
Fourth Amend. of the Sky Financial Group, Inc.Profit Sharing and 401 (K) Plan



 
Exhibit 10.14

 
FOURTH
AMENDMENT 
OF THE

SKY FINANCIAL GROUP, INC. PROFIT
SHARING AND 401(K) PLAN 
(As Amended and
Restated Effective January 1, 2001) 
 
WHEREAS, Sky Financial Group, Inc. (the “Company”) maintains the Sky Financial Group, Inc. Profit Sharing and 401(k) Plan (the “Plan”); and 
 
WHEREAS, the Company has
delegated authority to amend the Plan to the Sky Financial Group, Inc. Benefit Plans Committee (the “Committee”), and the Committee has determined that amendment of the Plan is necessary and desirable. 
 
NOW,
THEREFORE, pursuant to the power reserved to the Company by Section 10.01 of the Plan, and by virtue of the authority delegated to the Committee, the Plan, as previously amended, is hereby further amended effective
January 1, 2003, in the following particulars: 
 
1. By substituting the following sentence for the second sentence of Section 2.01 of the Plan: 
 
“Each Employee of Sky Insurance shall participate in the Plan on or after January 1, 2003, solely in accordance with Section
2.04.” 
 
2. By substituting the following for
Section 2.04 of the Plan: 
 
“2.04 Eligibility for Employees of Sky Insurance. Effective January 1, 2003, each Employee of Celaris Group, Inc., Value Added Benefits, Ltd. and Picton Cavanaugh, and their successors, including Sky Insurance, will
become a Participant according to the following: 
 
(a) Each Employee shall be eligible to make Compensation Deferral Contributions provided for under Section 3.02 hereof and to receive Employer Matching Contributions provided for under Section 3.03 beginning with the first day the
Employee completes an Hour of Service, or on the first Entry Date thereafter, if the Employee meets both of the following requirements: 







(i) the Employee has attained age 18 years; and 
 
(ii) the Employee is not a member of a
collective bargaining unit unless the collective bargaining agreement between the Employer and the union provides for participation in this Plan. 
 
(b) No Employee shall be eligible to receive Profit Sharing Contributions provided for under Section 3.04 of the Plan,
unless the Employee’s employment agreement explicitly provides for such contributions.” 
 
3. By deleting clause (iii) of Section 4.02 of the Plan. 
 
*        *        *

 
I, Thomas A. Sciorilli, on behalf of the
Sky Financial Group, Inc. Benefit Plans Committee, hereby certify that the foregoing is a correct copy of a resolution duly adopted by the Committee on November 13, 2002 and that the resolution has not been changed or repealed. 
 

	 SKYFINANCIAL GROUP, INC.
 BENEFIT PLANS COMMITTEE

	
	 By:
	 	  


	 	 	 A Member of the Committee




	

 

-2-
# EUR-Lex - 32005M3694 - EN

Important legal notice

*|*

# 32005M3694

**Commission Decision of 24/02/2005 declaring a concentration to be compatible with the common market (Case No IV/M.3694 - HOCHTIEF / ABB / JV) according to Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 (Only the German text is authentic) **

*

*

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case COMP/M.3694 — Hochtief/ABB/JV)

(2005/C 59/05)

(Text with EEA relevance)

On 24 February 2005, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the common market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004. The full text of the decision is available only in German and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

- from the Europa competition web site (http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/mergers/cases/). This web site provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

- in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website under document number 32005M3694. EUR-Lex is the on-line access to European law. (http://europa.eu.int/eur-lex/lex)

--------------------------------------------------
Exhibit 18.1


To the Board of Directors
Of Hollywood Entertainment Corporation


Dear Directors:

We have audited the consolidated financial statements
included in the Corporation's Annual Report on Form 10-K for
the year ended December 31, 1998 and issued our report
thereon dated March 1, 1999.  Note 4 to the consolidated
financial statements describes a change in the Corporation's
amortization method for videocassette rental inventory.  It
should be understood that the preferability of one
acceptable method of amortization of videocassette rental
inventory accounting over another has not been addressed in
any authoritative accounting literature and in arriving at
our opinion expressed below, we have relied on management's
business planning and judgement.  Based on our discussions
with management and the stated reasons for the change, we
believe that such change represents, in your circumstances,
the adoption of a preferable alternative accounting
principle for the amortization of videocassette rental
inventories in conformity with Accounting Principles Board
Opinion No. 20.

Yours very truly,


PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Portland, Oregon
March 1, 1999
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3277 Engrossed in Senate (ES)]

<DOC>
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3277

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To amend the Marine Debris Act to reauthorize the Marine Debris Program 
        of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.

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

SECTION 1. REAUTHORIZATION OF THE MARINE DEBRIS PROGRAM OF THE NATIONAL 
              OCEANIC AND ATMOSPHERIC ADMINISTRATION.

    Section 9(a) of the Marine Debris Act (33 U.S.C. 1958(a)) is 
amended by striking ``for'' the first place it appears and all that 
follows through ``carrying out'' and inserting ``for each of fiscal 
years 2018 through 2028 for carrying out''.

            Passed the Senate December 3, 2024.

            Attest:

                                                             Secretary.
118th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                                S. 3277

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

To amend the Marine Debris Act to reauthorize the Marine Debris Program 
        of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration.
```
### T E X A S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S , T H I R D D I S T R I C T , A T A U S T I N
NO. 03-11-00649- CR
Jennif er A nn Meek, a/k/a Jenn if er A nn Martin, App ellant
v. The State of Texas, App ellee
F ROM TH E DISTRI CT COURT O F B ELL COUNTY , 264 TH JUDICI AL DISTRICT

NO. 686 34, H ONO RAB LE F ANCY JEZE K, JUDGE P RESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N Appellant J ennife r Ann Meek, a/k / a J ennife r Ann Martin, has filed a motion reque sting that this appea l be dismiss ed. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a) (1). We grant the motion and dismiss the appe al.

__________________________________________ Diane M. H enson, Jus tice Be fore Justices Puryear , Henson a nd Goodwin Dismissed on Appellant’s Motion Filed: Mar ch 22, 2012 Do Not Publish
EXHIBIT 32.1



RURAL/METRO CORPORATION



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 Annual Report of Rural/Metro Corporation, a Delaware corporation (the Company) on Form
10-K for the period ended June 30, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Jack E. Brucker, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



Dated: October 14, 2003



|/s/ JACK E. BRUCKER                   |  | 
|------------------------------------- |  | 
|Jack E. Brucker                       |  | 
|President and Chief Executive Officer |  |