alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      EXHIBIT 23

                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Form S-8 dated October 7, 1993 pertaining to the 1992 Prime Hospitality Corp.
Employee Stock Option Plan; Form S-8, file number 033-54995 pertaining to the
Prime Hospitality Corp. 1992 Performance Incentive Plan; Form S-8, file number
333-03361 of Prime Hospitality Corp. pertaining to the 1995 Employee Stock
Option Plan and the 1995 Non-employee Director Stock Option Plan; Form S-8, file
number 333-44287 pertaining to the Prime Hospitality Corp. 1995 Employee Stock
Option Plan and the 1995 Non-employee Director Stock Option Plan; and Form S-8,
file number 333-60911, pertaining to the Prime Hospitality Corp. 1995 Employee
Stock Option Plan) of our report dated February 9, 2000, except for Note 1
(Business Activities) and Note 20, as to which the date is March 20, 2000, with
respect to the consolidated financial statements of Prime Hospitality Corp.
included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for each of the three years in the
period ended December 31, 1999.


                                                        Ernst & Young LLP


New York, New York
March 24, 2000
United States 

Office of 

Personnel Management 

The Federal Government’s Human Resources Agency

Benefits Administration Letter 

Number: 09-302 Date: February 2009 

Subject: March 2009 Headcount 

This is a reminder for you to submit your semiannual Headcount for the March 2009 reporting 

period. 

The Headcount is reported semiannually (March and September) by all payroll providers that 

withhold monies from salaries for participants in the Civil Service Retirement System, Federal 

Employees Retirement System, Federal Employees Health Benefits Program, and the Federal 

Employee Group Life Insurance Programs. 

The March 2009 Headcount will be for payroll paid during the FIRST 15 DAYS of March. For 

monthly pay cycles, the reporting period will be February 2009. The Headcount report must be 

submitted no later than March 17, 2009. We ask that you notify us if you anticipate a delay or 

any difficulties in submitting it by that date. Under no circumstances should you delay 

transmitting your normal Retirement and Insurance Transfer System (RITS) report because your 

Headcount is not ready to be submitted. 

Please FAX (using CLEAR, legible originals) your OPM Forms 1523 and SF 2812-A to us at 202-

606-0701. If you prefer, you may email your forms to either Patricia Dickey at 

padickey@opm.gov or Yvonne Fields at ycfields@opm.gov. If you have any questions 

concerning the preparation of your Headcount report, please call Fund Management Section at 

202-606-4118. 

Kathi Ledford, Chief 

Financial Reporting and Analysis Group 

Center for Financial Services
United States 

Office of 

Personnel Management 

The Federal Government’s Human Resources Agency

Benefits Administration Letter 

Number: 10-307 Date: October 2010 

Subject: 2011 FEHB Withholdings and Contribution Rates 

The official Federal Employees Health Benefits (FEHB) Program withholdings and contribution 

rates for 2011 are available in a PDF file format on the OPM web site at 

http://www.opm.gov/insure/health/rates/index.asp. These are the only rates agency payroll providers 

should use to update their systems and are effective for pay periods beginning after December 31, 

2010. 

The FEHB withholdings and contribution rates also are available in an ASCII and Excel file format. 

If you are a subscriber to "FINPAY" listserv, you will receive these files. If you are not a FINPAY 

subscriber and want these files, please email us at finance@opm.gov using “Want FEHB Rates” as 

the subject. We will email you the rate files. 

If you have questions about this letter, we recommend sending an email to finance@opm.gov. 

You also may call us on 202-606-0606. 

 

 

 Robert D. Wurster 

 Acting Associate Chief Financial Officer 

 Financial Services
**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**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Castwell Precast Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on or about the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Jason Haislip, President, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.

 

| November 13, 2009 | /s/ Jason Haislip |
|-------------------|-------------------|

|   | Jason Haislip |
|--------|---------------|

|   | President and Treasurer |
|--------|-------------------------|

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act has been furnished to Castwell Precast Corporation and will be retained by Castwell Precast Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Civil Service 

Retirement 

System 

Federal Employees’ 

Group Life 

Insurance Program 

Federal Employees 

Health Benefits 

Program 

Federal Employees 

Retirement 

System 

Long Term 

Care Insurance 

Program 

United States 

Office of 

Personnel Management 

The Federal Government’s Human Resources Agency

Retirement and Insurance Service 

Benefits Administration Letter 

Number: 01-331 Date: December 17, 2001 

Subject: Meeting of Agency Payroll Office Officials

We have scheduled a meeting for agency payroll office officials to discuss important issues that will 

have an impact on payroll operations and systems. The featured topic will be the implementation of 

the Federal Long-Term Care Insurance Program. In addition, we will present updates on the impact 

of the Federal Erroneous Retirement Coverage Corrections Act (FERCCA) on agency payroll 

offices and the status of the development of the Centralized Enrollment Clearinghouse System 

(CLER). The complete agenda is attached. 

Please make every effort to attend this important meeting. 

Where When 

Office of Personnel Management 

Campbell Auditorium 

1900 E Street NW 

Washington, D.C. 20415 

Wednesday, January 9, 2002 

9:00 A.M. to 12:00 noon 

 

Due to heightened security, we would advise attendees to arrive at least one-half hour before the 

meeting begins. Attendees are reminded to bring their Government IDs. If they do not have one 

with them, they will be required to show another form of picture ID, such as drivers license, and 

will need to be photographed before they are allowed to enter the building. OPM staff members 

will be present to escort attendees to the auditorium. 

In addition, we must provide our Security Office with the names of attendees at least one week 

prior to the meeting. Thus, we ask that you let us know no later than December 31 who will attend 

this session. Please email us at finance@opm.gov, using "1/9 Meeting" as the subject, the following 

information for each individual who will attend. 
 

Name (Last, First, M.I.) 

Agency or Company 

City, State, Zip 

Phone 

Fax 

Email 

If you have questions regarding this session, please contact us on (202) 606-0606 or via email at 

finance@opm.gov. 

 Robert A. Yuran, Chief 

 Financial Policy Staff 

 Retirement and Insurance Service 

Attachment
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3414 

To improve the certification and licensing of employees and medical laboratories of the Department of Veterans Affairs that furnish prosthetic 

and orthotic services, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 29, 2015 

Mr. STIVERS (for himself, Mrs. BEATTY, and Mr. TAKANO) introduced the 

following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To improve the certification and licensing of employees and 

medical laboratories of the Department of Veterans Affairs that furnish prosthetic and orthotic services, 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 ‘‘Veterans Access to 

5 Orthotic and Prosthetic Care Act’’. 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3414 IH

1 SEC. 2. IMPROVEMENT OF CERTIFICATION AND LICENSING 

2 OF EMPLOYEES AND LABORATORIES OF DE3 PARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS THAT 

4 FURNISH PROSTHETIC AND ORTHOTIC SERV5 ICES. 

6 (a) CERTIFICATION AND LICENSING OF EMPLOY7 EES.—Beginning not later than one year after the date 

8 of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Veterans 

9 Affairs shall ensure that each prosthetist and orthotist of 

10 the Department of Veterans Affairs, and each employee 

11 of the Department that provides prosthetic or orthotic 

12 services (as determined by the Secretary), meets all cur13 rent certification and licensing requirements applicable to 

14 such prosthetist, orthotist, or other employee, as the case 

15 may be, consistent with the provisions of section 427 en16 acted for the Medicare program in BIPA 2000. 

17 (b) CERTIFICATION OF LABS.—Beginning not later 

18 than one year after the date of the enactment of this Act, 

19 the Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall ensure that each 

20 orthotic or prosthetic facility and laboratory of the De21 partment of Veterans Affairs that provides prosthetic and 

22 orthotic services is certified by one of the nationally recog23 nized accrediting bodies, as provided for Medicare in sec24 tion 427 of BIPA 2000. 

25 (c) INSPECTOR GENERAL REPORT.— 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 3414 IH

1 (1) IN GENERAL.—Not later than one year 

2 after the date of the enactment of this Act, and not 

3 less frequently than annually thereafter for four 

4 years, the Inspector General of the Department of 

5 Veterans Affairs shall submit to Congress a report 

6 on the compliance of the Department of Veterans 

7 Affairs with the requirements under subsections (a) 

8 and (b). 

9 (2) RECOMMENDATIONS.—Each report sub10 mitted under paragraph (1) shall include such rec11 ommendations with respect to improving the compli12 ance of the Department with the requirements under 

13 subsections (a) and (b) as the Inspector General 

14 considers appropriate. 

Æ 


asabaliauskas on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### ELLISON v. STATE.

No. 16537.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

April 4, 1934.

L. D. Ratliff, Jr., of Spur, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

*593LATTIMORE, Judge.

Conviction for violating local option law; punishment, a fine of ?50.

We are this day handing down an opinion in Letcher v. State, - S.W.(2d) -1, appealed from the county court of Mitchell county, Tex., in which we hold that in counties and subdivisions thereof, in which the sale, etc., of intoxicating liquor had been forbidden by local option election prior to the taking effect of section 20, art. 16, of the Constitution of Texas, and in which by no subsequent election has the sale, etc., of wine or beer of not more than 3.2 alcoholic content been legalized, that the sale of such liquors is still a felony, and hence the county courts have no jurisdiction of prosecutions for the sale thereof.

As we understand this record, Lichens county is a county which had forbidden the sale, etc., of intoxicating liquor by local option election prior to the adoption of said constitutional amendment. There appears to have been held no subseqiient election at which the vote was otherwise as to the wine or beer referred to. If appellant is guilty, his offense is a felony, and hence the county court of Dickens county was without jurisdiction to! try him.

The judgment of the trial court will be reversed and the prosecution ordered dismissed.
[ DO NOT PUBLISH] 

## In the 

# United States Court of Appeals For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________ No. 23

- 12832 Non

- Argument Calendar

____________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff

- Appellee,

versus DONDRAEL WEBSTER, a.k.a. Dondrale Webster, a.k.a. Dondrell Webster,

Defendant

- Appellant.

____________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Alabama USCA11 Case: 23-12832 Document: 30-1 Date Filed: 06/14/2024 Page: 1 of 22 Opinion of the Court 23

- 12832
D.C. Docket No. 2:21

- cr
- 00118

- JB

- MU

- 1

____________________ Before B RASHER , A BUDU , and M ARCUS , Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Kristen Rogers , appointed counsel for Dondrael Webster , has moved to withdraw on appeal, supported by a brief prepared under Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Our independent review of the entire record reveals that counsel’s assessment of the relative merit of the appeal is correct. Because an independent examination of the entire record reveals no issue s of arguable merit, counsel’s mo tion to withdraw is GRANTED , and Webster’s conviction s and sentence s are AFFIRMED

. USCA11 Case: 23-12832 Document: 30-1 Date Filed: 06/14/2024 Page: 2 of 2
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

2009-8004

CYNTHIA WOODWARD, on behalf of herself

and minor daughter MOLLY WOODWARD,

ASHLEY MARTIN individually and

BRANDON MARTIN individually,

Petitioners,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,

Respondent.

Petition for review of the decision of the Bureau of Justice Assistance in

PSOB claim no 2004-13.

ON MOTION

Before NEWMAN, Circuit Judge.

ORDER

Cynthia Woodward et al. (Woodward) move to supplement the record to include

various documents not before the Bureau of Justice Assistance. The Department of

Justice opposes and moves to strike any portion of Woodard's brief referencing those

documents. The Department also moves for an extension of time to file its opposition.

Woodward replies.

Upon consideration thereof,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

(1)	The motion to supplement the record is deferred for consideration by the

merits panel that is assigned to hear the case.
A copy of this order and the motions papers shall be transmitted to the

merits panel assigned to hear this case. The motion to strike is denied without

prejudice to the Department moving to strike within its brief.

The Department's motion for an extension of time is granted.

(4)	The Department's brief is due within 40 days of the date of filing of this

order.

FOR THE COURT

MAY 19 2009

/s/ Jan Horbalv

Jan Horbaly

Clerk

Date

PIL ED

U.S. COUR!' OF APPEALS FOR

THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT

MAY 1 9 2009

JHIV HUreunLi

CLERK

cc:	Tara S. Emory, Esq.

Tara K. Hogan, Esq.

s19

2009-8004	 2
# C_2014274EN.01000301.xml

| 21.8.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 274/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.8.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 274/3

---

State aid — Decision to close an existing aid case as a result of acceptance of appropriate measures by an EFTA State

(2014/C 274/03)

The EFTA Surveillance Authority has proposed appropriate measures, which were accepted by Norway, on the following State aid measure:

| Date of adoption of the decision | : | 8 May 2014 |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Decision number | : | 192/14/COL |
| Case number | : | 71659 |
| EFTA State | : | Norway |
| Title | : | Financing of Norwegian public dental health care services |
| Legal basis | : | Act on public dental health services of 3 June 1983 No 54 |
| Objective | : | n.a. |
| Economic sectors | : | Dental health care |
| Other information | : | Based on measures undertaken and further commitments given by the Norwegian authorities to amend the current financing regime, the Authority’s concerns regarding the incompatibility of the Norwegian public dental health care services were dispelled and the investigation closed. |

Date of adoption of the decision

Date of adoption of the decision

:

8 May 2014

Decision number

Decision number

:

192/14/COL

Case number

Case number

:

71659

EFTA State

EFTA State

:

Norway

Title

Title

:

Financing of Norwegian public dental health care services

Legal basis

Legal basis

:

Act on public dental health services of 3 June 1983 No 54

Objective

Objective

:

n.a.

Economic sectors

Economic sectors

:

Dental health care

Other information

Other information

:

Based on measures undertaken and further commitments given by the Norwegian authorities to amend the current financing regime, the Authority’s concerns regarding the incompatibility of the Norwegian public dental health care services were dispelled and the investigation closed.

The authentic text of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found on the EFTA Surveillance Authority’s website:

http://www.eftasurv.int/state-aid/state-aid-register/

---
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

MERIT SYSTEMS PROTECTION BOARD 

ALISON KOHLER,

Appellant,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY,

Agency.

DOCKET NUMBER

NY-0752-15-0199-I-1

DATE: February 25, 2016

Alison Kohler, Oceanside, New York, pro se.

Shayla N.M. Sipp, Esquire, Washington, D.C., for the agency.

BEFORE

Susan Tsui Grundmann, Chairman

Mark A. Robbins, Member

ORDER

¶1 The appellant has filed a petition for review of the initial decision, which 

dismissed her removal appeal for lack of jurisdiction. The two Board members 

cannot agree on the disposition of the petition for review. Therefore, the initial 

decision now becomes the final decision of the Merit Systems Protection Board in 

this appeal. Title 5 of the Code of Federal Regulations, section 1200.3(b) 

(5 C.F.R. § 1200.3(b)). This decision shall not be considered as precedent by the 

Board in any other case. 5 C.F.R. § 1200.3(d).
2

NOTICE TO THE APPELLANT REGARDING

YOUR FURTHER REVIEW RIGHTS

You have the right to request review of the final decision by the U.S. Court 

of Appeals for the Federal Circuit. You must submit your request to the court at 

the following address: 

United States Court of Appeals

for the Federal Circuit

717 Madison Place, N.W.

Washington, DC 20439

The court must receive your request for review no later than 60 calendar days 

after the date of this order. See 5 U.S.C. § 7703(b)(1)(A) (as rev. eff. Dec. 27, 

2012). If you choose to file, be very careful to file on time. The court has held 

that normally it does not have the authority to waive this statutory deadline and 

that filings that do not comply with the deadline must be dismissed. See Pinat v. 

Office of Personnel Management, 931 F.2d 1544 (Fed. Cir. 1991). 

If you need further information about your right to appeal this decision to 

court, you should refer to the Federal law that gives you this right. It is found in 

title 5 of the United States Code, section 7703 (5 U.S.C. § 7703) (as rev. eff. 

Dec. 27, 2012). You may read this law as well as other sections of the 

United States Code, at our website, http://www.mspb.gov/appeals/uscode.htm.

Additional information is available at the court’s website, www.cafc.uscourts.gov.

Of particular relevance is the court’s “Guide for Pro Se Petitioners and 

Appellants,” which is contained within the court’s Rules of Practice, and Forms 5, 

6, and 11. 

If you are interested in securing pro bono representation for an appeal to 

the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, you may visit our website 

at http://www.mspb.gov/probono for information regarding pro bono representation 

for Merit Systems Protection Board appellants before the Federal Circuit. The 
3

Merit Systems Protection Board neither endorses the services provided by any 

attorney nor warrants that any attorney will accept representation in a given case. 

FOR THE BOARD:

Washington, D.C.

______________________________

William D. Spencer

Clerk of the Board
#### Lena Aprea et al., Plaintiffs, *v.*City of New York, Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff. Louis Castoria et al., Individually and Doing Business as Greenpoint Plumbing and Heating Co., Third-Party Defendants.

Supreme Court, Special Term, Kings County,

January 28, 1958.

*646
      *Louis Riger for*plaintiffs.

*Peter Campbell*Broivn, *Corporation*Counsel, for defendant.

*Paul 0. Hastings*for Philip Gol'owitz, individually and doing-business as Greenpoint Plumbing- and Heating Co., third-party defendant.

*Daniel Castoria*for Louis Castoria and another, third-party defendants.

James S. Brown, J.

The third-party defendant moves to strike out plaintiffs’ amended complaint on the ground that it was not timely served. The plaintiffs cross-move for an order *nunc pro tunc*granting leave to serve an amended complaint or, in the alternative, for an order granting such leave pursuant to section 193-a of the Civil Practice Act.

In the original complaint the City of New York was the only defendant named in the action. The city impleaded the third-party defendants and issue was joined between them on September 12,1957. On December 12,1957 plaintiffs served an amended complaint naming not only the City of New York but also the third-party defendant as defendants. The third-party defendant now urges that since more than 20 days had elapsed after the joinder of issue between the City of New York and the third-party defendant, the plaintiffs lost their right to serve an amended complaint without leave of the court.

Under subdivision 3 of said section 193-a, a plaintiff may amend his pleading to assert against a third-party defendant any claim which plaintiff might have asserted against the third-party defendant had he been joined originally as a defendant. This may be done as of course without the necessity of securing leave of the court. The section does not set forth any limitation of time within which such right may be exercised nor is this *647privilege limited by the provisions of section 244 of the Civil Practice Act. That latter section contemplates the amendment of a complaint previously served upon a defendant. Subdivision 3 of section 193-a contemplates the original service of a complaint upon a new defendant. After such service under subdivision 3 of section 193-a, then any amendment would be subject to the provisions of section 244. Accordingly, the motion must be denied. The cross motion is denied as unnecessary.

Submit order.
#### Willie THORNTON v. STATE.

No. 20824.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Jan. 10, 1940.

W. M. Zachry and D. M. Wilson, both of Waco, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

The conviction is for theft over the value of fifty dollars; penalty assessed at confinement in the penitentiary for two years.

Appellant has filed a written motion, duly verified, requesting the privilege of withdrawing his appeal. The request is granted and the appeal is ordered dismissed.