alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    Exhibit 23.1




                          Consent of Ernst & Young LLP


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form
S-8 No. 333-04373) pertaining to the Optical Sensors Incorporated 1989 Omnibus
Stock Option Plan and the Optical Sensors Incorporated 1993 Stock Option Plan
and, in the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-17493) pertaining to the
Optical Sensors Incorporated Employee Stock Purchase Plan, of our report dated
February 12, 1999, with respect to the financial statements of Optical Sensors
Incorporated, included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended
December 31, 1998.

                                                   /s/ Ernst & Young LLP

                                                   ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Minneapolis, Minnesota
March 23, 1999
I 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1601 

To increase the exempt amount applicable for the retirement earnings test 

for months in 2020 and 2021, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 3, 2021 

Mrs. WALORSKI introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To increase the exempt amount applicable for the retirement 

earnings test for months in 2020 and 2021, 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 ‘‘Pandemic Relief for 

5 Working Seniors Act of 2021’’. 

6 SEC. 2. DETERMINATION OF EXEMPT AMOUNTS FOR 2020 

7 AND 2021. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—For purposes of subsection (b) of 

9 section 203 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 403) 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1601 IH

1 and notwithstanding subsection (f)(8)(B) of such sec2 tion— 

3 (1) the exempt amount which is applicable to 

4 all individuals (including individuals described in 

5 subsection (f)(8)(D) of such section) for months in 

6 the taxable year ending after 2019 and before 2021 

7 shall be an amount equal to the contribution and 

8 benefit base determined under section 230 of such 

9 Act with respect to remuneration paid (and taxable 

10 years beginning) in calendar year 2020; and 

11 (2) the exempt amount which is applicable to 

12 all individuals (including individuals described in 

13 subsection (f)(8)(D) of such section) for months in 

14 the taxable year ending after 2020 and before 2022 

15 shall be an amount equal to the contribution and 

16 benefit base determined under section 230 of such 

17 Act with respect to remuneration paid (and taxable 

18 years beginning) in calendar year 2021. 

19 (b) DETERMINATION OF EXEMPT AMOUNTS FOR

20 MONTHS AFTER 2021.—For purposes of determining ex21 empt amounts for months in taxable years beginning after 

22 2021, section 203(f)(8) shall be applied as if exempt 

23 amounts for months in taxable years ending after 2019 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 1601 IH

1 and before 2022 had been determined under such section 

2 without regard to subsection (a). 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 196 (Thursday, October 9, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 52706]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-26748]



[[Page 52706]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. RP98-9-000]


Mississippi River Transmission Corporation; Notice of Termination 
of Gathering Services

October 3, 1997.
    Take notice that on October 1, 1997, Mississippi River Transmission 
Corporation (MRT) filed to terminate the gathering services it performs 
over the following discrete gathering facilities: (1) The Corney Bayou 
System in Union Parish, Louisiana, (2) The Hico-Knowles System in 
Lincoln Parish, Louisiana, (3) The Leatherman Creek System in Claiborne 
Parish, Louisiana, (4) The Waskom System in Harrison County, Texas, and 
(5) the Holly Field System in DeSoto Parish, Louisiana. MRT performs 
services for shippers over these gathering systems pursuant to its FERC 
Gas Tariff, Third Revised Volume No. 1:

Twenty-Fourth Revised Sheet No. 5
Twenty-Fourth Revised Sheet No. 6
Twenty-First Revised Sheet No. 7
Second Revised Sheet No. 21
Second Revised Sheet No. 28
Second Revised Sheet No. 33
First Revised Sheet No. 61
Third Revised Sheet No. 72
Second Revised Sheet No. 111
Third revised Sheet No. 150

    MRT filed to abandon these systems by sale to NorAm Field Services 
Corp. (NFS) in Docket No. CP96-268-000. The facilities are no longer 
integral to MRT's operations in the post-restructuring environment. On 
September 15, 1997 the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission granted the 
requested abandonment authorization and ordered MRT to make a Section 4 
Natural Gas Act filing for authorization to terminate its gathering 
services.\1\ MRT requests that its filing become effective November 1, 
1997.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ See Mississippi River Transmission Corp., 80 FERC para. 
61,294 (1997).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Any person desiring to be heard or protest the subject filing 
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 Sections 385.211 and 385.214 of the Commission's 
Rules of Practice and Procedure. All such motions and protests must be 
filed in accordance with 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 available for public inspection.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-26748 Filed 10-8-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
RECOMMENDED FOR FULL-TEXT PUBLICATION 

Pursuant to Sixth Circuit I.O.P. 32.1(b) 

File Name: 17a0246p.06 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SIXTH CIRCUIT 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v. 

RAY GIBSON, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

┐

│

│

│

│

│

│

│

┘

No. 15-6122 

Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Eastern District of Kentucky at London. 

No. 6:14-cr-00025-1—Amul R. Thapar, District Judge. 

Argued: October 11, 2017 

Decided and Filed: October 31, 2017 

 Before: COLE, Chief Judge; BATCHELDER, DAUGHTREY, MOORE, 

CLAY, GIBBONS, ROGERS, SUTTON, COOK, McKEAGUE, GRIFFIN, 

KETHLEDGE, WHITE, STRANCH, DONALD, and BUSH, Circuit Judges.*

_________________ 

COUNSEL 

ARGUED EN BANC: Dennis C. Belli, Columbus, Ohio, for Appellant. Finnuala K. Tessier, 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Appellee. ON 

SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF: Dennis C. Belli, Columbus, Ohio, for Appellant. Finnuala K. 

Tessier, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., Charles P. 

Wisdom, Jr., John Patrick Grant, UNITED STATES ATTORNEY’S OFFICE, Lexington, 

Kentucky, for Appellee. 

 *

Judge Amul R. Thapar recused himself from participation in this ruling. 

>
No. 15-6122 United States v. Gibson Page 2

_________________ 

ORDER 

_________________ 

This case was heard by the en banc court on October 11, 2017. The en banc court is 

evenly divided; therefore, the sentence imposed by the district court is AFFIRMED. See Sch. 

Dist. of City of Pontiac v. Sec’y of U.S. Dep’t of Educ., 584 F.3d 253, 256 (6th Cir. 2009) (en 

banc); Stupak-Thrall v. United States, 89 F.3d 1269, 1269 (6th Cir. 1996) (en banc). 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

 ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT 

 Deborah S. Hunt, Clerk
Exhibit
32.1





CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


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 Bio Matrix Scientific Group, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2009 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the
undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, hereby
certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:





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





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




Dated:  May
6, 2009


By:
                /s/
      David KoosDavid
      KoosChief
      Executive Officer





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, or other document authentications, acknowledging, or otherwise
adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version
of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Bio
Matrix Scientific Group, Inc. and will be retained by Bio Matrix Scientific
Group, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

                          INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT


        We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements
No. 333-21273 and No. 333-54392 on Form S-3 and in Registration Statements No.
333-03465 and No. 333-61611 on Form S-8 of Shurgard Storage Centers, Inc. of our
report dated February 8, 2001 (February 28, 2001, as to Note P), appearing in
the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of Shurgard Storage Centers, Inc. for the year
ended December 31, 2000.

/s/  Deloitte & Touche LLP
Deloitte & Touche LLP

Seattle, Washington
July 27, 2001
### IN THE UNI TED STAT ES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIF TH CIRCU IT

N o

. 0 9

- 6 0 4 8 8 S u m m a r y C a l e n d a r

P E R P E T U A R A M I R O P A G A L L A M A N
, a l s o k n o w n a s P e t t y P a g a l l a m a n ,

P e t i t i o n e r

v

.

E R I C H

. H O L D E R
, J R

. , U

. S

. A T T O R N E Y G E N E R A L
,

R e s p o n d e n t

P e t i t i o n f

o r R e v i e w o f a n O r d e r o f t h e B o a r d o f I m m i g r a t i o n A p p e a l s B I A N o

. A 0 9 7

- 2 4 2

- 1 6 0

B e f o r e H I G G I N B O T H A M
, B E N A V I D E S
, a n d E L R O D
, C i r c u i t J u d g e s

. P E R C U R I A M : *

P e r p e t u a R a m i r o P a g a l l a m a n i s a n a t i v e a n d c i t i z e n o f t h e P h i l i p p i n e s

. S h e p e t i t i o n s t h i s c o u r t t o r e v i e w t h e d e c i s i o n o f t h e B o a r d o f I m m i g r a t i o n
A p p e a l s ( B I A )
, d i s m i s s i n g h e r a p p e a l f r o m t h e d e c i s i o n o f t h e I m m i g r a t i o n J u d g e ( I J ) t h a t s h e i s r e m o v a b l e a n d n o t e l i g i b l e f o r d i s c r e t i o n a r y r e l i e f f r o m r e m o v a l

. P a g a l l a m a n h a s w a i v e d a n y c h a l l e n g e t o t h e I J ’ s d e t e r m i n a t i o n t h a t s h e i s

r e m o v a b l e a n d n o t e l i g i b l e f o r c a n c e l l a t i o n o f r e m o v a l b y f a i l i n g t o c h a l l e n g e t h i s
d e t e r m i n a t i o n i n h e r p e t i t i o n f o r r e v i e w

. S e e S o a d

j e d e v

. A s h c r o f

t , 3 2 4 F

. 3 d 8 3 0
, U n i te d S ta te s C o u rt o f A p p ea l s

F i ft h C i rc u i t 

### F I L E D Octob er 7, 20 10

Lyle W . Cayce Clerk

Purs uant to 5 T H C I R

. R. 47.5
, the cour t has d ete rm ined t hat this op inion sho uld not * be publ ish ed and is not pr ece dent excep t unde r the lim ite d cir cum st ance s se t for th in 5 T H C I R

. R. 47.5 .4. Case: 09-60488 Document: 00511257315 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/07/2010N o

. 0 9

- 6 0 4 8 8

8 3 3 ( 5 t h C i r

. 2 0 0 3 )

. F u r t h e r , t h i s c o u r t l a c k s j u r i s d i c t i o n t o r e v i e w P a g a l l a m a n ’ s

c l a i m s t h a t h e r p r o c e d u r a l d u e p r o c e s s r i g h t s w e r e v i o l a t e d b e c a u s e s h e f a i l e d

t o p r e s e n t t h e c l a i m s t o t h e B I A

. S e e 8 U

. S

. C

. § 1 2 5 2 ( d ) ( 1 ) ; R o y v

. A s h c r o f t , 3 8 9

F

. 3 d 1 3 2
, 1 3 7 ( 5 t h C i r

. 2 0 0 4 )

. A c c o r d i n g l y , t h e p e t i t i o n f o r r e v i e w i s D I S M I S S E D F O R L A C K O F

J U R I S D I C T I O N I N P A R T a n d D E N I E D I N P A R T

.

2 Case: 09-60488 Document: 00511257315 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/07/2010
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF PUEBLO INTERNATIONAL FOR THE YEAR ENDED JANUARY 29, 2000
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
(Dollars in thousands).
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   OTHER
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-29-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-29-2000
<CASH>                                          95,711
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    4,012
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     57,161
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               168,244
<PP&E>                                         234,264
<DEPRECIATION>                                 112,001
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 521,564
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          146,030
<BONDS>                                        269,645
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      91,500
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   521,564
<SALES>                                        674,145
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               674,145
<CGS>                                          456,143
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  651,560
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              (13,775)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              27,621
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  8,739
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,015
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              4,724
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,724
<EPS-BASIC>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL ACTS SERIES 11-1004 

________________________________________________________________________ 

SCIENTIFIC COOPERATION 

Earth Sciences

 Agreement Between the 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

and the REPUBLIC OF KOREA 

Amending the Memorandum of 

Understanding of March 5, 2002, as 

Amended and Extended 

Signed at Reston and Seoul October 4, 2011 
 NOTE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

 Pursuant to Public Law 89—497, approved July 8, 1966 

(80 Stat. 271; 1 U.S.C. 113)—

“. . .the Treaties and Other International Acts Series issued 

under the authority of the Secretary of State shall be competent 

 evidence . . . of the treaties, international agreements other than 

treaties, and proclamations by the President of such treaties and 

international agreements other than treaties, as the case may be, 

therein contained, in all the courts of law and equity and of maritime 

jurisdiction, and in all the tribunals and public offices of the 

United States, and of the several States, without any further proof 

or authentication thereof.” 
 REPUBLIC OF KOREA 

 Scientific Cooperation: Earth Sciences 

 Agreement amending the memorandum of understanding 

 of March 5, 2002, as amended and extended. 

 Signed at Reston and Seoul October 4, 2011; 

 Entered into force October 4, 2011.
# L_2005347EN.01000701.xml

| 30.12.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 347/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.12.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 347/7

---

COUNCIL REGULATION (EC) No 2174/2005

of 21 December 2005

concerning the implementation of the Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters between the European Community and Japan pursuant to Article XXIV:6 and Article XXVIII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994

THE COUNCIL OF THE EUROPEAN UNION,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community, and in particular Article 133 thereof,

Having regard to the proposal from the Commission,

Whereas:

By Decision 2005/958/EC of 21 December 2005 on the conclusion of an Agreement in the form of an Exchange of Letters between the European Community and Japan pursuant to Article XXIV:6 and Article XXVIII of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) 1994 (1), the Council approved, on behalf of the Community, the said Agreement with a view to closing negotiations initiated pursuant to Article XXIV:6 of GATT 1994,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The duty rates shown in the Annex to this Regulation shall apply for the period indicated.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 21 December 2005.

For the Council

The President

B. BRADSHAW

---

(1)  See page 75 of this Official Journal.

1

---

ANNEX

Notwithstanding the rules for the interpretation of the Combined Nomenclature, the wording for the description of the products is to be considered as having no more than an indicative value, the concessions being determined, within the context of this Annex, by the coverage of the CN codes as they exist at the time of adoption of the current regulation. Where ex CN codes are indicated, the concessions are to be determined by application of the CN code and corresponding description taken together.

| Part two
  Schedule of Customs duties |
| --- |
| CN code | Description | Duty rate |
| 3702 32 19 | Photographic film in rolls; for colour photography; other | A lower applied rate of 1,3 % (1) |
| 8525 40 19 | Still image video cameras; other | A lower applied rate of 1,2 % (1) |
| 8525 40 99 | Still image video cameras; other video camera recorders; other | A lower applied rate of 12,5 % (1) |

Part two

Schedule of Customs duties

CN code

Description

Duty rate

3702 32 19

Photographic film in rolls; for colour photography; other

A lower applied rate of 1,3 % (1)

8525 40 19

Still image video cameras; other

A lower applied rate of 1,2 % (1)

8525 40 99

Still image video cameras; other video camera recorders; other

A lower applied rate of 12,5 % (1)

---

(1)  The lower applied rates indicated above are to be applied for four years or until the implementation of the results of the Doha Development Agenda Round reaches the tariff level above, whichever comes first.

---
#### Philip J. WARRINER, Petitioner, v. Guillermo RAMIREZ et al., Respondents. Guillermo RAMIREZ and Government Employees Insurance Company, etc., Petitioners, v. Philip J. WARRINER, Respondent. Philip J. WARRINER, Relator, v. The Honorable Rhea Plncus GROSSMAN, Judge of the Circuit Court of the 11th Judicial Circuit, etc., et al., Respondents. Philip J. WARRINER, Relator, v. The Honorable Thomas H. BARKDULL, Chief Judge, et al., Respondents.

Nos. 44188, 44238, 44192 and 44193.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Oct. 30, 1973.

Certiorari denied. 280 So.2d 4.

CARLTON, C. J., and ROBERTS, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.

ERVIN, J., dissents.
also

Bamber, Amy 

t

o

:

Jordan Page 02/04/2010 02:04 PM

You should probably contact Peter Rice, with the University of Montana. He is 

conducting aquatic herbicide trials in a reservoir in NW Montana for control of 

milfoil. His work is specific to supporting the EA for control of the weed. This 

would be good, very specific information for you to look at.

Amy Bamber

Montana Department of Agriculture

303 N. Roberts

Helena, MT 59620-0201

406-444-3676

abamber@mt.gov
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.2

                            APPLIEDTHEORY CORPORATION

                  CALCULATION OF LOSS PER SHARE (UNAUDITED) (1)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                THREE MONTHS ENDED
                                                                  MARCH 31, 1998
                                                                ------------------
<S>                                                             <C>
Weighted average shares outstanding:
Common stock:
       Shares outstanding at beginning of period                      9,810,000
       Weighted average shares issued during three months
       ended March 31, 1998 (1,222,876 shares)                        1,097,075
                                                                   ------------
                                                                     10,907,075
                                                                   ============
Net loss                                                           $   (789,000)
                                                                   ============
Loss per share attributable to common stockholders                 $      (0.07)
                                                                   ============
</TABLE>


----------
(1)  For a discussion of loss per share, see Note B of the Notes to the
     Financial Statements provided in Part I, Item 1 of our Form 10-Q for the
     period ended March 31, 1999.


                                       36
#### E. G. LAYTON CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, a corporation, and National Union Fire Insurance Company of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, a corporation, Appellants, v. David J. KALIN, Appellee.

No. L-409.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. First District.

Jan. 20, 1970.

Rehearing Denied Feb. 9, 1970.

Donald H. Partington, of Harrell, Caro, Middlebrooks & Wiltshire, Pensacola, for appellants.

Levin, Askew, Warfield, Graff & Mabie, Pensacola, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant seeks reversal of a judgment rendered against him in the court below after a trial without jury. The dispute between the parties arose out of the construction of an apartment complex by the appellant construction company for appellee who sued appellant for damages arising from defects in the job.

Extensive evidence was adduced before the experienced trial judge who after reconciling and considering same entered the judgment herein appealed. Our consideration of the record on appeal, briefs and oral arguments leads us to the view that appellant has failed to demonstrate that the judgment is not supported by the evidence; accordingly, the judgment appealed is

Affirmed.

CARROLL, DONALD K., Acting C. J., and WIGGINTON and SPECTOR, JJ., concur.