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

                                                                      Exhibit 23

                       Consent of Independent Accountants

     We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statement on Form S-8 of the Catellus Development Corporation 2000 Performance
Award Plan, the Registration Statement on Form S-8 of the Catellus Development
Corporation Amended and Restated Executive Stock Option Plan, the Registration
Statement on Form S-8 of the Catellus Development Corporation Profit Sharing &
Savings Plan & Trust, the Registration Statement on Form S-8 of the Catellus
Development Corporation Long-Term Incentive Compensation Plan, Stock Purchase
Program, Incentive Stock Compensation Plan and Stock Option Plan, the
Registration Statement on Form S-8 of the Catellus Development Corporation 1995
Stock Option Plan and the Registration Statement on Form S-8 of the Catellus
Development Corporation 1996 Performance Award Plan (Nos. 333-69806, 333-58143,
333-38827, 333-42124, 333-01215 and 333-04293, respectively) of our report dated
January 29, 2003, except as to Note 18, for which the date is March 3, 2003,
appearing on Page F-2 of this Form 10-K. We also consent to the incorporation by
reference of our report dated January 29, 2003, except as to Note 18, for which
the date is March 3, 2003, relating to the financial statement schedules, which
appears on page S-1 of this Form 10-K.




PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP

San Francisco, California
March 27, 2003
#### Lester L. ALLEN, Appellant, v. Lillian J. ALLEN, Appellee.

No. 73-246.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Dec. 7, 1973.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
T HIS P LACE -H OLDER P AGE R EPLACES THE

S ELF -I GNITION T EMPERATURE R EPORT C LAIMED CBI

(54 PAGES )
CONSULTING SERVICES CONTRACT

This consulting agreement ("Consulting Agreement") is made as of this 18th day
of June, 2001, by and between, William T. McClellan ("McClellan"), an individual
with an address at P.O. Box 460460, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, 33316 and RONAOKE
TECHNOLOGY CORP. (the "Company"), a North Carolina Corporation with, McClellan
and the Company collectively sometimes herein referred to as the "Parties". The
Parties hereby acknowledges and agree as follows:

     WHEREAS, the Company is a fully reporting company whose securities are
traded on the Over-the-Counter Bulletin Board under the ticker symbol "RNKE",
and

     WHEREAS, McClellan is acting as a consultant with private and public
companies regarding issues of business development, management reorganization
merger and acquisition strategies; and

     WHEREAS, the Company wishes to retain McClellan as non-exclusive corporate
consultant; and

         IT IS THEREFORE agreed that:

1.   Services. The Company shall retain McClellan to provide general corporate
     consulting service. The Company understands that any and all suggestions,
     opinions or advice given to the Company by McClellan are advisory only and
     the ultimate responsibility, liability and decision regarding any action(s)
     taken or decision made lies solely with the Company and not with McClellan.

2.   Term. The Term of this Consulting Agreement shall be for a period of six
     months from the date hereof (the "Term").

3.   Compensation. As compensation for entering into this Consulting Agreement
     and for services rendered over the Term, McClellan shall receive 10,000
     common shares of Roanoke technology Corp. unrestricted shares (RNKE).

<PAGE>

4.   Entire Agreement. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement and
     understanding between the parties with respect to the subject herein and
     supercedes and replaces any prior agreements and understanding, whether
     oral or written, between them with respect to such matters.


     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have duly executed this Agreement as
of the date first above written.

                                    ROANOKE TECHNOLOGY CORP.

                                    By: /s/ David Smith, Jr.
                                            David Smith, Jr.

ACCEPTED AND AGREED TO BY:

/s/ William T. McClellan
William T.  McClellan

6-18-01
**Exhibit 32.2**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

            Inconnection with the Quarterly Report of Forest Laboratories, Inc.(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended December 31, 2007as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the datehereof (the "Report"), I, Francis I. Perier, Jr., Chief FinancialOfficer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Actof 2002, that:

            1.         TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

            2.         Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in allmaterial respects, the financial condition and result of operationsof the Company.

 

/s/ Francis I. Perier,Jr.         Francis I. Perier, Jr.Senior Vice President - Finance andChief Financial OfficerFebruary 11, 2008
#### RESERVE REALTY COMPANY, INC. v. Hugues J. DE LAVERGNE, II et al.

No. 60944.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Nov. 11, 1977.

In re: Reserve Realty Co., Inc. applying for supervisory writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus.

Writ denied. Ruling of the trial judge was correct.
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Leslie C. COLLINS.

No. 60414.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 14, 1978.

Barrie Byrnes, Student Practitioner, William J. O’Hara, III, Supervising Atty., Loyola Law School Clinic, New Orleans, for defendant-appellant.

William J. Guste, Jr., Atty. Gen., Barbara Rutledge, Asst. Atty. Gen., Harry F. Con-nick, Dist. Atty., William L. Brockman, Asst. Dist. Atty., for plaintiff-appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
March 16, 2012

The Honorable Ray LaHood U.S. Department of Transportation 1200 New Jersey Ave, SE Washington, DC 20590

Re: Alaska Airlines’ application for SAN

- DCA, Docket No. DOT

- OST

- 2012

- 0029.

Dear Secretary LaHood :

A mylin Pharmaceuticals, Inc. fully supports the application of Alaska Airlines for air service between San Diego and Washington Reagan Nati onal Ai rport (DCA) . San Diego is the largest region without direct service

to DCA

. Additionally, due to the profound community of interest between San Diego and th e nation’s capital, the region generates the largest passenger market demand without nonstop service to the convenient and close

- in airport serving our nation’s capital

.

San Diego’s sheer market size to Washington coupled with the fact that San Diego to Dulles average airfares are the highest of west coast cities

, s hould qualify for the limited slots available for this flight

. The high airfare is exacerbated when factoring in taxi fares from Dulles to Washington’s city center that average
about $ 6 0 each way. This means travelers between Washington’s city center and San Diego via Dulles can
pay on average close to $400 one

- way

.

There are also countless other San Diego

- based and Washington

- based busines ses that are engaged in health science, telecommunications, and national defense that need quick and convenient access to Reagan National Airport. Amylin has an immediate need for additional nonstop air se rvice to our nation’s capital.
Alask a Airlines service would add a needed nonstop option to a primary gateway to Washington, DC. Amylin joins with the San Diego County Regional Airport Authority, the San Diego Regional Economic Development Corporation, the World Trade Center Sa n Diego, and the San Diego Regional Chamber of Commerce in support of Alaska Airlines’ application for San Diego

– Washington Reagan National slots.

We thank the Department of Transportation for the opportunity to comment on the above referenced
docket an d we hope to hear of a favorable review of Alaska Airlines’ San Diego

– DCA proposal soon.

Sincerely,

Daniel M. Bradbury President and Chief Executive Officer
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

BEFORE THE FEDERAL TRADE COMMISSION 

COMMISSIONERS: Lina M. Khan, Chair 

Noah Joshua Phillips 

Rebecca Kelly Slaughter 

Christine S. Wilson 

Alvaro M. Bedoya 

RESOLUTION DIRECTING USE OF COMPULSORY PROCESS

IN NONPUBLIC INVESTIGATIONS OF COLLUSIVE PRACTICES 

File No. 

Nature and Scope of Investigation: 

To investigate whether any persons, partnerships, corporations, or others have engaged or 

are engaging in inviting, initiating, participating in, or facilitating collusion or coordination in 

any way with any other market participant, whether through private communications, public 

statements, sharing information, or other actions, in violation of Section 5 of the Federal Trade 

Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45, as amended, or any other statutes or rules enforced by the 

Commission; and to determine the appropriate action or remedy, including whether injunctive 

and monetary relief would be in the public interest. 

The Federal Trade Commission hereby resolves and directs that any and all compulsory 

processes available to it be used in connection with any inquiry within the nature and scope of 

this resolution for a period not to exceed ten years. The expiration of this ten-year period shall

not limit or terminate the investigation or the legal effect of any compulsory process issued 

during the ten-year period. The Federal Trade Commission specifically authorizes the filing or 

continuation of actions to enforce any such compulsory process after the expiration of the tenyear period. 

Authority to Conduct Investigation: 

Sections 6, 9, 10, and 20 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 46, 49, 50, 

and 57b- 1, as amended; and FTC Procedures and Rules of Practice, 16 C.F.R. § 1.1 et seq., and 

supplements thereto. 

By direction of the Commission. 

April J. Tabor 

Secretary 

Issued: 

Expires:
^ T 

STATE OF MICHIGAN 

JENNIFER M. GRANHOLM DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION KlRK T. STEUDLE 

GOVERNOR , ^,. , DIRECTOR 

LANSIiNG 

May 3, 2010 

DOT' OST'looTi^ VSlZf, 

DOT-o»r- \^^<\'ens 

Mr. Dennis DeVany 

Chief, Essential Air Service Division, X-53 

Office of Aviation Analysis 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Room 6401 

400 Seventh Street, SW 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

Reference: Docket Numbers 15128,5175, 1266, & 1711 

Dear Mr. DeVany: 

As the agency responsible for promoting air service development in the state, the Michigan 

Department of Transportation- Bureau of Aeronautics and Freight Services appreciates the 

opportunity to provide input on the Essential Air Service (EAS) selection for Gogebic-Iron 

County, Ford, Manistee Blacker, and Delta County Airports. 

While encouraged by the interest of Charter Air Transport and Sovereign Air in ser\'ing these 

airports, we believe the bids offered by Mesaba Airlines d/Va Delta Connection for service at 

Ford and Delta County Airports best meet the community's needs. Mesaba's reliability has been 

exceptional and they have demonstrated a commitment to continual improvement of service in 

both communities. The carrier, in partnership with Delta Airlines, has an extensive hub network 

offering Michigan travelers flexible scheduling. Furthermore, Mesaba's existing fleet and 

infrastructure appears sufficient to support the service as bid. 

In addition, our discussions with community officials revealed their preference for the third 

option outlined in Mesaba's bid. This option includes service to both Detroit and Mirmeapolis 

hubs and would offer myriad connecting opportunities. The diversity of this schedule provides a 

greater chance for air service in these communities to eventually become self-sufficient. 

With reference to Gogebic-Iron County (IWD) and Manistee Blacker (MBL) airports, we request 

that USDOT award service to Great Lakes Airlines. We request that USDOT negotiate a 

prorated award to reflect service to only IWD and MBL (as opposed to the original fourcommunity bid). We believe Great Lake's service proposal is the most likely to succeed in 

meeting the transportation needs of these communities. 

AERONAUTICS BUILDING • 2700 PORT LANSING ROAD • LANSING, MICHIGAN 48906 

www.michigan.gov • (517) 335-9283 

LH-LAN-0 (01/03) 
Mr. Dennis DeVany 

Page 2 

Mays, 2010 

Once again, thank you for the opportunity to participate in the carrier selection process. If you 

need any further information, please contact me at 517-335-8556 or Matt Brinker at 517-335-

9918. 

Sincerelv. 

Gerald E. Edwards 

Assistant Administrator, Aviation Services Division 

Bureau of Aeronautics & Freight Services 

Michigan Department of Transportation 

cc: Mr. William Marchetti, Manager, Ford Airport 

Mr. Duane DuRay, Manager, Gogebic-Iron County Airport 

Mr. William House, Manager, Manistee County-Blacker Airport 

Ms. Connie Ness, Manager, Delta County Airport
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 23.02



CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos.
333-83585 and 333-13977 on Form S-3 of our report on the consolidated financial
statements of Benihana Inc. and subsidiaries (the "Company") dated June 22,
2005, and of our report on internal control over financial reporting dated June
22, 2005 (which report expresses an adverse opinion on the effectiveness of the
Company's internal control over financial reporting because of a material
weakness), incorporated by reference in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the
Company for the year ended March 27, 2005 and to the reference to us under the
heading "Experts" in such Registration Statements.


Deloitte & Touche LLP

Miami, Florida
June 22, 2005





                                       57
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-6792

JOSEPH CARTER,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

RONALD J. ANGELONE, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond. Richard L. Williams, Senior

District Judge. (CA-96-747-3)

Submitted: September 11, 1997 Decided: September 23, 1997

Before RUSSELL, MURNAGHAN, and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Joseph Carter, Appellant Pro Se. Kimberley Ann Whittle, OFFICE OF

THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's orders denying

relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 &

Supp. 1997), and motion for reconsideration. We have reviewed the

record and the district court's opinions and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Carter v.

Angelone, No. CA-96-747-3 (E.D. Va. Apr. 29, 1997). We dispense

with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument

would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                    UT
<MULTIPLIER>                                 1,000,000
<CIK>                                        0000357261
<NAME>                                       FLORIDA PROGRESS CORPORATION
       
<S>                                                    <C>
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                      DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                           JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                          6-MOS
<BOOK-VALUE>                                           PER-BOOK
<TOTAL-NET-UTILITY-PLANT>                                  3,524
<OTHER-PROPERTY-AND-INVEST>                                  892
<TOTAL-CURRENT-ASSETS>                                       804
<TOTAL-DEFERRED-CHARGES>                                     124
<OTHER-ASSETS>                                               185
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                             5,529
<COMMON>                                                   1,209
<CAPITAL-SURPLUS-PAID-IN>                                      0
<RETAINED-EARNINGS>                                          617
<TOTAL-COMMON-STOCKHOLDERS-EQ>                             1,826
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                          0
<PREFERRED>                                                   34
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-NET>                                       1,827
<SHORT-TERM-NOTES>                                             0
<LONG-TERM-NOTES-PAYABLE>                                      0
<COMMERCIAL-PAPER-OBLIGATIONS>                                94
<LONG-TERM-DEBT-CURRENT-PORT>                                 25
<PREFERRED-STOCK-CURRENT>                                      0
<CAPITAL-LEASE-OBLIGATIONS>                                    0
<LEASES-CURRENT>                                               0
<OTHER-ITEMS-CAPITAL-AND-LIAB>                             1,723
<TOT-CAPITALIZATION-AND-LIAB>                              5,529
<GROSS-OPERATING-REVENUE>                                  1,545
<INCOME-TAX-EXPENSE>                                         (10)
<OTHER-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                                 1,485
<TOTAL-OPERATING-EXPENSES>                                 1,475
<OPERATING-INCOME-LOSS>                                       70
<OTHER-INCOME-NET>                                             1
<INCOME-BEFORE-INTEREST-EXPEN>                                71
<TOTAL-INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                      66
<NET-INCOME>                                                   5
<PREFERRED-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                                    1
<EARNINGS-AVAILABLE-FOR-COMM>                                  4
<COMMON-STOCK-DIVIDENDS>                                     102
<TOTAL-INTEREST-ON-BONDS>                                      0
<CASH-FLOW-OPERATIONS>                                       195
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                               0.04
<EPS-DILUTED>                                               0.04
        


</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 119 (Wednesday, June 20, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 28670]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-13184]


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

POSTAL SERVICE


Product Change--Priority Mail Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal Service<SUP>TM</SUP>.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: June 20, 2018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elizabeth Reed, 202-268-3179.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
June 14, 2018, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a USPS 
Request to Add Priority Mail Contract 448 to Competitive Product List. 
Documents are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2018-178, CP2018-
250.

Elizabeth Reed,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2018-13184 Filed 6-19-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
#### Gustav RIST, Appellant, v. FLORIDA POWER & LIGHT CO., a Florida corporation; and Northside Center, Inc., a Florida corporation, Appellees.

No. 69-311.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Jan. 26, 1972.

Horton, Schwartz & Perse, Welsh & Carroll, Miami, for appellant.

Mershon, Sawyer, Johnston, Dunwody & Cole, George W. Wright, Jr., Wein-stein, Weissenborn & Burr, Jeanne Hey-ward, Miami, for appellees.

Before SWANN, C. J., and CHARLES CARROLL and BARKDULL, JJ.

ORDER ON MANDATE

PER CURIAM.

Whereas, the judgment of this court was entered on May 12, 1970 (235 So.2d 361) affirming the summary judgments of the Circuit Court of Dade County, Florida, in the above styled cause; and

Whereas, on review of this court’s judgment, by certiorari, the Supreme Court of Florida, by its opinion filed October 13, 1971, 254 So.2d 540, and mandate now lodged in this court quashed this court’s judgment as it pertained to appellee Florida Power & Light Co. and denied certiorari as to appellee Northside Center, Inc.,

Now, therefore, It is Ordered that the mandate of this court heretofore issued in this cause on June 3, 1970 is withdrawn, the opinion and judgment of this court filed in this cause on May 12, 1970 insofar as it is in conflict with or fails to conform to the views expressed in the opinion and judgment of the Supreme Court of Florida is vacated and the said opinion and judg*83ment of the Supreme Court of Florida is herewith made the opinion and judgment of this court. The summary judgment of the circuit court as to Florida Power & Light Co. is reversed and the cause is remanded for trial as to appellee Florida Power & Light Co. The judgment of af-firmance as to appellee Northside Center, Inc. is adhered to. Costs allowed shall be taxed in the trial court (Rule 3.16, subd. b, Florida Appellate Rules, 32 F.S.A.).
No. D-2249.

#### In re Disbarment of Rathjen.

Stephen Paul Rathjen, of Hauppauge, N. Y., is suspended from the practice of law in this Court, and a rule will issue, returnable within 40 days, requiring him to show cause why he should not be disbarred from the practice of law in this Court.
EXHIBIT
32.2




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 SCOLR Pharma, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form
10-K for the period ended December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Richard M. Levy,
Chief Financial Officer and Vice President—Finance of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:




(1) The
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and,




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




By:
            /s/    RICHARD M. LEVYRichard
      M. LevyChief
      Financial Officer and
              Vice
      President—FinanceSCOLR
      Pharma, Inc.




Date:
March 10, 2008