alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 2.3   STATE OF UTAH DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE SECURITIES DIVISION PERMIT AUTHORIZING ISSUANCE OF SECURITIES  Bullion Monarch Mining Co. Inc.  Entity #:001-6729-21  THIS CERTIFIES THAT THE ABOVE REFERENCED ISSUED is hereby permitted, pursuant to Utah Code Ann. Section 61-1-11.1(3), to offer, sell and issue the securities described in its application filed March 29, 2006 relating to the offer of securities to former shareholders of Bullion Monarch Company, Inc. and any amendments and supplements thereto to the date hereof, to the persons described in said application, for the considerations, uses and purposes, and in the manner set forth in said application.  This permit is effective for 12 months from the date hereof.  DATED this 27th day of September, 2006.   UTAH DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE DIVISION OF SECURITIES   /S/Wayne Klein WAYNE KLEIN, DIRECTOR  TO:  Mr. A. O. Headman, Jr. Cohne, Rappaport & Segal, P.C. 257 E. 200 S., Suite 700 Salt Lake City, UT 84111  This permit is permissive only and is not to be construed as an endorsement of any person or security.
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 35 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. J. RES. 35

    Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States 
              relative to equal rights for men and women.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 29, 2019

Mrs. Carolyn B. Maloney of New York (for herself, Mr. Reed, Ms. Speier, 
 Mr. Rouda, Mr. Cicilline, Mr. Sarbanes, Ms. Kuster of New Hampshire, 
  Ms. Omar, Mrs. Hayes, Mr. Sires, Ms. Spanberger, Ms. Bonamici, Ms. 
Titus, Ms. Pingree, Mr. Price of North Carolina, Mr. Heck, Ms. Wexton, 
  Ms. McCollum, Ms. Lee of California, Ms. Velazquez, Ms. Brownley of 
 California, Mrs. Luria, Ms. Norton, Mr. Grijalva, Mr. Blumenauer, Ms. 
     Meng, Mr. Khanna, Mr. Loebsack, Mr. Langevin, Mr. Swalwell of 
   California, Mrs. Beatty, Mr. Suozzi, Ms. DeGette, Mr. Raskin, Ms. 
    Haaland, Mr. McNerney, Mr. Cummings, Ms. Wasserman Schultz, Mr. 
  Espaillat, Mr. Brendan F. Boyle of Pennsylvania, Mrs. Dingell, Mr. 
 Cohen, Mr. Serrano, Ms. Frankel, Ms. Moore, Mrs. Watson Coleman, Ms. 
  Jayapal, Ms. Fudge, Ms. Ocasio-Cortez, Mr. Connolly, Mr. Meeks, Mr. 
 Lowenthal, Mrs. Lawrence, Mr. Beyer, Ms. Schakowsky, Mr. Pallone, Mr. 
    Lynch, Mr. McGovern, Ms. Jackson Lee, Mr. Clay, Mrs. Lowey, Ms. 
 Schrier, Mr. Peters, and Mrs. Lee of Nevada) submitted the following 
 joint resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
    Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States 
              relative to equal rights for men and women.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled   (two-thirds of each House 
concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an 
amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be 
valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when 
ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States:

                              ``Article--

    ``Section 1. Women shall have equal rights in the United States and 
every place subject to its jurisdiction. Equality of rights under the 
law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any 
State on account of sex.
    ``Section 2. Congress and the several States shall have the power 
to enforce, by appropriate legislation, the provisions of this article.
    ``Section 3. This amendment shall take effect two years after the 
date of ratification.''.
                                 <all>
```
FILED

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

July 18, 2006

THOMAS K. KAHN

CLERK

[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 05-16593

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D. C. Docket No. 05-00016-CR-4-RH-WCS

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

versus 

CRAIG RUSSELL, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Florida

_________________________

(July 18, 2006)

Before TJOFLAT, CARNES and PRYOR, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

This appeal presents one issue: whether supervised release standard
 The mandate in Nash issued on April 14, 2006. 1

2

condition No. 13 delegates a judicial function to the district court’s probation

office. We resolved this issue in United States v. Nash, 438 F.3d 1302, 1306 (11th

Cir. 2006). “Standard Condition Thirteen . . . does not improperly delegate a 1

judicial function to a probation officer. . . .” Id. at 1306. 

AFFIRMED.
**Exhibit 31.2**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302**

**OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

I, Kenneth Stastny, certify that: 

1. I havereviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Wise Metals Group LLC; 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untruestatement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 

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

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this reportour conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and 

(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during theregistrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and 

5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation ofinternal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): 

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which arereasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and 

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

Date: August 15, 2006
Deny and Opinion Filed April 13, 2015 

S 

In The 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-15-00437-CV 

IN RE JIMMY JOHNSON, Relator 

Original Proceeding from the 68th Judicial District Court 

Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. TX-10-31998-C 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before Justices Francis, Myers, and Schenck 

Opinion by Justice Francis 

Before the Court is relator’s Amended Motion to File Writ of Mandamus. We treat the 

motion as a petition for writ of mandamus.1

 Relator complains that this Court withdrew leave to 

extend time to file the record in the appeal of this case. The Court disposed of the appeal in 

March 2014 by affirming the trial court’s judgment. Johnson v. Dallas County, No. 05-12-

01046-CV, 2014 WL 1010259, at *3 (Tex. App.—Dallas Mar. 5, 2014, writ denied) (mem. op.). 

The mandate issued on January 26, 2015. Neither the mandamus record nor the record on appeal 

reflect any action by the Court withdrawing leave to file the record and the appellate record 

includes the clerk’s record. 

 1

 A motion for leave to file a petition for writ of mandamus is required when relief is sought from the court of criminal appeals. See TEX. R.

APP. P. 72.1. A motion for leave is not required for a petition filed in an intermediate appellate court. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.1. 
 –2– 

 Relator has not established a right to relief. We DENY the petition. 

150437F.P05 /Molly Francis/ 

MOLLY FRANCIS 

JUSTICE
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1211 

To amend the Ohio & Erie Canal National Heritage Canalway Act of 1996 

to repeal the funding limitation. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 13, 2019 

Mr. RYAN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To amend the Ohio & Erie Canal National Heritage 

Canalway Act of 1996 to repeal the funding limitation. 

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

3 SECTION 1. OHIO & ERIE NATIONAL HERITAGE CANALWAY. 

4 Section 810(a) of the Ohio & Erie National Heritage 

5 Canalway Act of 1996 (Public Law 104–333; 110 Stat. 

6 4275; 122 Stat. 826) is amended by striking the second 

7 sentence. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
International Affairs Division

IAD Topics

 Role of IAD

 S.E. Asia Outreach

 International Sampling Methods

 Soybean Exports to China 

 Complaints
Role of International Affairs Division

 Liaison with USDA agencies, customers, 

and other governments

 Facilitates resolution of trade barriers

 Conducts grain surveys

 Monitors grain shipment quality

 Assists USDA cooperators with market 

development projects

 Conducts educational programs

 Investigates quality/weight complaints
International Outreach

 S.E. Asia Buyers Conference – Aug

 Malaysia

 USGC & USSEC 

 Visits to Processing Plants 

 Results in sales of corn, wheat, soybeans, DDGS, 

soybean meal

 S.E. Asia 1-month TDY – Sept.

 Indonesia, Thailand, Vietnam, Philippines, Japan, Taiwan 

 USWA, USGC, USSEC 

 Seminars, wheat and corn grading workshops 

 Meetings with importers and government officials
International Outreach

 GLI Conference – Sept.

 Global Low-Level Presence Initiative (GLI)

 Natal, Brazil

 Up to 29 countries represented

 Develop approaches to manage LLP

 Low Level Presence

 Establish marketing threshold
International Sampling Methods

IMPORTERS

 Mexico

 Probe, belt sampling, D/T

 Egypt 

 Grain other than wheat, Min. of Ag. Use probe

 Wheat, sampled by Min. of Trade – not standardized

 Jordan 

 Pneumatic probe

 Belgium 

 Belt sampling (stopped) remove a 1-meter section of grain

 China

 Probe, small hand scoop, D/T at 3 ports

 Korea

 Probe, sling cup

 Japan

 Probe, D/T

EXPORTERS

U.S.

 Diverter-Type Samplers

Argentina

 Compartmented pneumatic probe for trucks;

 Cone-shape device on pole for belt sampling for ships

 Every 500 MT

 Yields non-representative samples

Brazil 

 Vacuum probes for trucks;

 Cylinder/can on pole for belt sampling for ships 

 4 samples/500 MT

Canada 

 D/T samplers

France

 1 quart scoops of truck dumps and probed

 D/T at exports
Soybean Exports to China

 No. 1 importer of U.S. soybeans

 July 7 China imposes 25% tariff

 MY 16-17 

 42 MMT soybeans to China

 MY 17-18

 33.2 MMT soybeans to China (last 

contracts filled prior to trade war)

 Decrease of 21%

 Exports to EU & others increased

 Net decrease of 3 %
Foreign Complaints

0

100,000

200,000

300,000

400,000

500,000

600,000

700,000

800,000

900,000

FY 10 FY 11 FY 12 FY 13 FY 14 FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18*

594,434

777,686

236,666

58,770

841,144

146,354

318,923

212,363

329,434
Reasons for Complaints

 Non-representative sampling at 

destination

 Different testing methods and 

interpretation for subjective factors

 Commodity prices changed

 Protect domestic markets

 Political reasons
QUESTIONS?
**EXHIBIT
      32.1**




**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**


**AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE**


**SARBANES-OXLEY
      ACT OF 2002**




Pursuant
      to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and in connection with the
      Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Lightstone Value Plus Real Estate Investment
      Trust, Inc. (the “Company”) for the period ended March 31, 2006, as filed with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the
      undersigned, the President, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board
      of
      Directors of the Company, certifies 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 the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
      the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.




/s/
      David
      Lichtenstein


David
      Lichtenstein


Chairman,
      President, and Chief Executive Officer


(Principal
      Executive Officer)


May
      15,
      2006
Updated June 17, 2010

Formal Recommendation by the 

National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) 

to the National Organic Program (NOP)

Date: April 29, 2011

Subject: Nutrient Vitamins and Minerals Sunset

Chair: Tracy Miedema

 

The NOSB hereby recommends to the NOP the following: 

Rulemaking Action X

Guidance Statement

Other

Statement of the Recommendation (Including Recount of Vote): 

To relist: 

Nutrient Vitamins and Minerals, in accordance with 21 CFR 104.20, Nutritional 

Quality Guidelines for Foods

on § 205.605(b) of the National List.

 

Rationale Supporting Recommendation (including consistency with 

OFPA and NOP): 

Over 2000 public comments were received on the renewal of Nutrient Vitamins 

and Minerals to §205.605(b) in advance of the Spring 2011 NOSB Meeting. 

The Handling Committee has not had time to review all the comments. Much 

new information has surfaced since the last time this material was reviewed for 

listing to the National List, including an important memo from FDA, dated April 

14th, 2011. However, the National Organic Standards Board has been advised 

by the Deputy Secretary of the USDA that we must vote on the sunsetting of 

this material at the Spring 2011 NOSB meeting. The committee foresees no 

unacceptable risks in relisting the material to the National List. The Handling 

Committee wishes to review public input with the intent of recommending an 

annotation change in the Fall 2011.

NOSB Vote:

Moved: Steve DeMuri Second: Katrina Heinze 

Yes: 13 No: 0 Abstain: 1 Absent: 0 Recusal: 0
**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 Quarterly Report of Celanese Holdings LLC(the “Company”) onForm 10-Q for theperiod ending March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securitiesand Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the“Report”), I, John J. Gallagher III,Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of theCompany, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 ofthe 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 the Report fairly presents, in all    material respects, the financial condition and results of    operations of the Company.Date: May 11, 2006     /s/ John J. Gallagher III       John J. Gallagher III     Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer     (Principal Financial Officer)
The State of TexasAppellee/s

Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

April 13, 2015

No. 04-14-00618-CR

Thomas LITTLE,

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

From the 25th Judicial District Court, Guadalupe County, Texas

Trial Court No. 14-0698-CR-C

The Honorable William Old, Judge Presiding

ORDER

A supplemental clerk’s record containing the trial court’s findings of fact and conclusions 

of law has been filed. We reinstate the appeal on the docket of this court. We order the State’s 

brief due May 13, 2015.

_________________________________

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 13th day of April, 2015.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
EXHIBIT 21 - SUBSIDIARIES OF REGISTRANT

U.S. Subsidiaries
-----------------

Argo Scientific, Inc., a California corporation.

BetzDearborn China Ltd., a Delaware corporation.

BetzDearborn Europe Inc., a Delaware corporation.

BetzDearborn Hydrocarbon Process Group Inc., a Texas corporation.

BetzDearborn International Inc., a Pennsylvania corporation.

BetzDearborn Paper Process Group Inc., a Florida corporation.

Non-U.S. Subsidiaries
---------------------

BetzDearborn Argentina S.A., an Argentinean corporation.

BetzDearborn Australia Pty Limited, an Australian corporation.

BetzDearborn Ges. mbH, an Austrian corporation.

BetzDearborn Europe N.V., a Belgian corporation.

BetzDearborn N.V., a Belgian corporation.

Dearborn International Ltda., a Brazilian corporation.

BetzDearborn Canada, Inc., a Canadian corporation.

BetzDearborn de Chile Ltda., a Chilean corporation.

BetzDearborn Colombia S.A., a Colombian corporation.

BetzDearborn Denmark A/S, a Danish corporation.

BetzDearborn de Ecuador S.A., an Ecuadorian corporation.

BetzDearborn 0Y, a Finnish corporation.

BetzDearborn S.A., a French corporation.

BetzDearborn GmbH, a German corporation.


<PAGE>


BetzDearborn India Private Limited, an Indian corporation.

PT BetzDearborn Persada, an Indonesian corporation.

BetzDearborn Ireland Limited, an Irish corporation.

BetzDearborn S.p.A., an Italian corporation.

Nippon BetzDearborn K.K., a Japanese corporation.

BetzDearborn Korea Ltd., a Korean corporation.

Argo Scientific and Marketing Ltd., a Korean corporation.

Betz (Malaysia) Sdn. BHD, a Malaysian corporation.

BetzDearborn de Mexico S.A. de C.V., a Mexican corporation.

BetzDearborn B.V., a Dutch corporation.

BetzDearborn Norge A/S, a Norwegian corporation.

BetzDearborn del Peru S.A., a Peruvian corporation.

BetzDearborn Sp. ZO.O., a Polish corporation.

BetzDearborn Portuguesa, Lda., a Portuguese corporation.

BetzDearborn Pte. Ltd., a Singapore corporation.

BetzDearborn South Africa (Pty) Ltd., a South Africa corporation.

BetzDearborn Iberica S.A., a Spanish corporation.

BetzDearborn AB, a Swedish corporation.

BetzDearborn Taiwan Limited, a Taiwanese corporation.

BetzDearborn (Thailand) Co. Ltd., a Thailand corporation.

BetzDearborn de Uruguay S.A., a Uruguayan corporation.

BetzDearborn Limited, a United Kingdom corporation.

Argo Scientific Limited, a United Kingdom corporation.

BetzDearborn Venezuela C. A., a Venezuelan corporation.
J

~~~ ED STq T

~ S UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
o ~ \ ~~~ Q WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 z ~ il

~ ft► _

G

~ \ 0 PROI -



### MAR 1 6 2011 OFFICE OF AIR AND RADIATION

.I R Stroble, Manager National TRU Program Carlsbad Field Office U.S. Department of Energy P.O. Box 3090 Carlsbad, NM 88221-3090
Dear Mr. Stroble: "This letter provides the results of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) unannounced continued compliance inspection at the Advanced Mixed Waste Treatment Project (AMWTP) facility in Idaho Falls, ID. On November 17-18, 2010, EPA inspected AMWTP's waste characterization (WC) program for contact-handled (CH) transuranic (TRU) waste. As a result of this unannounced continued compliance inspection, EPA confirmed that AMWTP continues to characterize CH TRU waste consistent with the conditions and limitations from EPA's baseline approval granted in October 2006 (EPA Air pocket No. A-98-49; II-A4-66). The enclosed report (EPA Air pocket No. A-98-49; II-A4-143) gives the details of the evaluation. In accordance with 40 CFR 194.8(b), during this on-site inspection, EPA evaluated samples of the following waste characterization activities used to characterize CH TRU debris waste from Hanford: 1 • Acceptable knowledge (AK) • Nondestructive assay (NDA) • Real-time radiography (RTR) for CH retrievably-stored "1'RU debris waste (S5000) • Visual examination (VE for newly generated TRU waste) During the inspection, EPA raised an issue concerning AMWTP's use of AK documents prepared by the Hanford-Central Characterization Project for the Hanford debris waste managed by AMWTP as BN510.1 waste. To address this EPA issue, AMWTP staff revised Hanford

1 Hanford is sending approximately 800 55-gallon drums of debris waste belonging to four waste streams that were characterized by Hanford prior to termination of the non-CCP Hanford waste characterization prograni in 2008.

Internet Address (URL) • http://www.epa.gov

Recycled/Recyclable • Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on 100% Postconsumer, Process Chlorine Free Recycled Paperdebris waste specific AK documents. This revision incorporated AK for the subject waste stream

that Hanford generated which EPA approved as part of the baseline approval of August 2008 (EPA Air pocket No. A-98-49; II-A4-106). EPA has determined that the AMWTP implemented CH waste characterization program in the configuration observed during this unannounced inspection is consistent with the limitations described in the October 2006 baseline inspection report cited above. If you have any questions, please contact Rajani Joglekar (202 343-9462) or Ed Feltcorn (202 343- 9422). Sincerely,

Tom Peake, Director Center for Waste Management and Regulations

Enclosure
cc: electronic distribution Alton Harris, DOE EM Ed Ziemianski, CBFO Court Fesmire, CBFO Norma Casteneda, CBFO Dennis Miehls, CBFO Martin Navarrete, CBFO Jon Edwards, EPA Steve Zappe, NMED David Ploetz, WTS Allison Pangle, CTAC
ACCEPTED

14-14-00254-CV

FOURTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

HOUSTON, TEXAS

4/13/2015 4:37:53 PM

CHRISTOPHER PRINE

CLERK

 FILED IN 14th COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TEXAS 4/13/2015 4:37:53 PM CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE Clerk
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h Marilyn Kell y Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathawa y Mary Beth Kell y Brian K. Zahra,

J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk December 28, 2011

t1219 

# Order

December 28, 2011

143852

GARY F. LALONDE, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v SC: 143852 COA: 295238 St Clair CC: 09-002373 JP MORGAN CHASE BANK N.A., BRANDT, FISHER, ALWARD & ROY, P.C., DONALD A. BRANDT, JOSEPH C. FISHER, THOMAS R. ALWARD, EDGAR ROY, III, GARY D.POPOVITS, BUTLER, BUTLER & ROWSEOBERLE, P.L.L.C., KENNETH C. BUTLER, II and JOHN W. BUTLER, Defendants-Appellees.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the July 14, 2011 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.