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

            Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Form S-8 Nos. 333-84499, 33-98918, 333-26737, 333-70346, and 333-126478)
pertaining to the Acme United Corporation Amended and Restated Stock Option
Plan, the Registration Statements (Form S-8 Nos. 333-84505, 333-26739,
333-70348, and 333-126478) pertaining to the Acme United Corporation
Non-Salaried Director Stock Option Plan and the Registration Statement (Form S-8
No. 333-84509) pertaining to the Acme United Corporation Deferred Compensation
Plan for Directors and Acme United Corporation Deferred Compensation Plan for
Walter C. Johnsen of our report dated February 28, 2006, with respect to the
consolidated financial statements and schedule of Acme United Corporation and
subsidiaries included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended
December 31, 2005.


                                                /s/ Ernst & Young LLP


Hartford, Connecticut
March 9, 2006
```

[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 176 (Wednesday, November 19, 2008)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E2268]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                          EARMARK DECLARATION

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. THOMAS E. PETRI

                              of wisconsin

                    in the house of representatives

                      Wednesday, November 19, 2008

  Mr. PETRI. Madam Speaker, pursuant to the Republican Leadership 
standards on earmarks, I am submitting the following information 
regarding an earmark I received as part of H.R. 2638--The Consolidated 
Security, Disaster Assistance, and Continuing Appropriations Act, 2009:
  Requesting Member: The Honorable Thomas E. Petri.
  Bill Number: H.R. 2638--The Consolidated Security, Disaster 
Assistance, and Continuing Appropriations Act, 2009.
  Account: Army Operations & Maintenance, Operating Forces 115 Land 
Forces, Operations Support Account.
  Legal Name of Requesting Entity: Deere & Company--World Headquarters.
  Address of Requesting Entity: One John Deere Place, Moline, IL 61265.
  Description of Request: Provide $3,200,000 to complete the 
manufacturing of approximately 215 Light-weight Tactical Utility 
Vehicles at John Deere Horicon Works in Horicon, Wisconsin. (Joint 
request with Representative Mike McIntyre of North Carolina.) The 
Light-weight Tactical Utility Vehicle is a rugged, air droppable, 
highly mobile diesel-powered tactical utility vehicle to expedite 
casualty evacuation and resupply activities of Corps units. They have 
been heavily utilized during Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring 
Freedom. This request is consistent with the intended purpose of the 
Department of Defense, Army Operations and Maintenance account.

                          ____________________
```
```

[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 177 (Thursday, November 20, 2008)]
[Senate]
[Page S10776]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                     TRIBUTES TO RETIRING SENATORS

  Mr. DORGAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
from September 27 regarding tributes to retiring Senators be modified 
so that Senators be permitted to submit such tributes for inclusion in 
a Senate document until Friday, December 12, 2008.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>




<PAGE>



        

<ARTICLE>               5
<CIK>                   0000926978
<NAME>                  Frederick Brewing Co.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S Dollars

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                 APR-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                          1
<CASH>                                             458,463
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      430,456
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                        306,967
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 1,634,945
<PP&E>                                           9,050,907
<DEPRECIATION>                                     561,673
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  11,065,140
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,307,697
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                      2,500,987
<COMMON>                                                79
<OTHER-SE>                                       1,865,475
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    11,065,140
<SALES>                                            875,416
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   875,416
<CGS>                                              730,353
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      991,626
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   (74,187)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  80,792
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (907,243)
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (935,869)
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (935,869)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        (0.46)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        (0.46)



        

</TABLE>
Exhibit 23(f)1








INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT


We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No.
333-103772 of Savannah Electric and Power Company on Form S-3 of our reports
dated March 1, 2004 (which report on the financial statements expresses an
unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph relating to the change
in the method of accounting for asset retirement obligations), relating to the
financial statements of Savannah Electric and Power Company as of and for the
years ended December 31, 2003 and 2002 appearing in this Annual Report on Form
10-K of Savannah Electric and Power Company for the year ended December 31,
2003.


/s/Deloitte & Touche LLP

Atlanta, Georgia
March 1, 2004
# Official Journal L 133/2018

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 133 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 6130 May 2018 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 133

English edition

Legislation

Volume 6130 May 2018

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | * | Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/773 of 15 May 2018 on design, construction and performance requirements and testing standards for marine equipment and repealing Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/306Text with EEA relevance.
   (1
  ) | 1 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

REGULATIONS

*

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2018/773 of 15 May 2018 on design, construction and performance requirements and testing standards for marine equipment and repealing Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/306Text with EEA relevance.
   (1
  )

1

1

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance. |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance.

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
Docket No: FAA- 2015 - 2463 Dir ID: 2015 - NM - 086 - AD
Occupational Safety and Health Review Commission

Commission Monthly Case Activity for October 2012

1. Cases Pending Beginning of Month 31

2. Cases Added to Docket 

Charles W. Mason, DDS & Associates, PLLC

No. 10-2313

Direction for Review on 10/22/12 

Gabriel Lopez Alvarez DBA Three Amigos

No. 12-0710

Direction for Review And Remand Order on 10/24/12

2

3. Cases Subtracted From Docket

Federal Construction Group

No. 12-0097

Remand Order on 10/11/12

Gabriel Lopez Alvarez DBA Three Amigos

No. 12-0710

Direction for Review And Remand Order on 10/24/12

-2

4. Total Cases Pending End of Month 31
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 Annual Report on Form 10-K of American Express Credit Corporation (the
Company) for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2009, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), David L.
Yowan, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

| |     |                                                                                                                                                       
| | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | (1) | The Report
 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
 Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and                               
| |     |                                                                                                                                                       
| | (2) | The
 information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
 respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

|                    |                         
|------------------- | ------------------------
|/s/ David L.
 Yowan
|                   
|Name:               | David L.
 Yowan         
|Title:              | Chief
 Executive Officer
|Date:               | March 31,
 2010         

The foregoing
certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and is not
being filed as part of the Form 10-K or as a separate disclosure document for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange
Act), or otherwise subject to liability under that section. This certification
shall not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the
Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act except to the extent
that this Exhibit 32.1 is expressly and specifically incorporated by reference
in any such filing.

A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities
and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---
United States of America

OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

 1120 20th Street, N.W., Ninth Floor

 Washington, DC 20036-3457

SECRETARY OF LABOR,

Complainant,

v. OSHRC Docket No. 18-1091

KEENAN, HOPKINS, SUDER AND STOWELL 

CONTRACTORS, INC., dba KHS&S 

CONTRACTORS, 

Respondent.

BRIEFING NOTICE

The parties are requested to brief the issues presented in Respondent’s petition for 

discretionary review. The parties are advised that when the merits or characterization of an item 

are before the Commission on review, the appropriateness of the penalty is also subject to review. 

Accordingly, the parties may address the amount of the penalty if they so choose.

All briefs are to be filed in accordance with Commission Rule 93. 1 The first brief is to be 

filed within 40 days of this notice. A party not intending to file a brief shall notify the Commission 

in accordance with Commission Rule 93. The time for filing any responsive briefs (or letters filed 

in lieu of briefs) shall commence on the date of service.

 BY DIRECTION OF THE COMMISSION

Dated: July 23, 2020 /s/ 

 John X. Cerveny

Executive Secretary

1 The Commission requests that all briefs include an alphabetical table of authorities with 

references to the pages on which they are cited, and that an asterisk be placed in the left-hand 

margin of the table to indicate those authorities on which the brief principally relies. The 

Commission also requests that copies of cited authority, other than statutes, case law, law journal 

articles and legal treatises, be provided to the Commission and to the opposing party. Parties 

should be cautioned that these materials will be considered only if appropriate.
United States of America

OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION

 1120 20th Street, N.W., Ninth Floor

 Washington, DC 20036-3457

SECRETARY OF LABOR,

Complainant,

v. OSHRC Docket No. 11-1788

Q3 CONTRACTING, INC.,

Respondent.

BRIEFING NOTICE

The Commission requests that the parties brief the issues presented in the Respondent’s 

Petition for Discretionary Review. The parties are also asked to specifically address the 

following issue:

Are the alleged violations of 29 C.F.R. § 1926.200(g)(2) (traffic signs) and 29 

C.F.R. § 1926.202 (barricades) based on mandatory provisions of either Part VI of 

the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (“MUTCD”), 1988 Edition, 

Revision 3, September 3, 1993, or Part VI of the MUTCD Millennium Edition, 

December 2000? See Ruhlin Co., 21 BNA OSHC 1779, 1784 (No. 04-2049, 

2006) (holding that only mandatory provisions of the MUTCD are incorporated as 

OSHA standards); 29 C.F.R. § 1926.6(a). 

The parties are advised that when the merits or characterization of an item are before the 

Commission for review, the appropriateness of the penalty is also subject to review. 

Accordingly, the parties may address the amount of the penalty if they so choose.

All briefs are to be filed in accordance with Commission Rule 93.1 The first brief is to be 

filed within 40 days of this notice. A party who does not intend to file a brief must notify the 

Commission in writing setting forth the reason therefor within the applicable time for filing

 

1

The Commission requests that all briefs include an alphabetical table of authorities with 

references to the pages on which they are cited, and that an asterisk be placed in the left-hand 

margin of the table to indicate those authorities on which the brief principally relies. The 

Commission also requests that copies of cited authority, other than statutes, case law, law journal 

articles and legal treatises, be provided to the Commission and to the opposing party. Parties 

should be cautioned that these materials will be considered only if appropriate.
2

briefs, and shall serve a copy on all other parties. The time for filing briefs (or similar notices of

intent) of opposing parties shall commence on the date of service.

BY DIRECTION OF THE COMMISSION

Dated: September 17, 2012 __/s/______________________________

Ray H. Darling, Jr.

Executive Secretary
#### Isham A. Dumas *v.*Robert Powell *et al. adm’rs.*

To let in secondary evidence, the best evidence of the loss of the oiv ginal document, that the nature of the case admits of, must bo produced.

Debt, tried before his Honor Judge Danieb, at. Richmond, on the last circuit. The plaintiff declared upon a lost bond, alleged to have been executed by the/ defendant’s intestate. A witness, one *Mask,*testified that he once had a bond in his possession, as assignee, corresponding in date and, amount, with that declared on *;*that he received it from the plaintiff as genuine, and believed it to have been executed by the defendant’s in-, testate, with whose handwriting lie. was acquainted ; that while the bond was in his possession, he presented it to one of the defendants, as a claim which he held against the estate of his intestate j that thp defendant Vas also well acquainted with the handwriting of his intestate, and made no objection, but took a memorandum of the amountthat the witness afterwards, at the request of the plaintiff, returned the bond to him, and *104also a note executed by the plaintiff, and received instead tlie plaintiff’s own note for the amount of both. Another witness, who was present, testified that the plaintiff, on receiving the bond;, put it in bis pocket, and on their leaving *Mask's*house- in company, took out a paper and tore it up. On the part of the plaintiff it was contended, that from this -testimony the jury might infer, that the bond was- torn up by mistake. But his Honor being of opinion, that there was not such proof of the loss of the bond, as entitled the plaintiff to put his case to the jury, directed a nonsuit to be entered, and the plaintiff appealed.

No counsel appeared' for either party.

Ease, Judge.

It is a rule of evidence, that the best Which the nature of the case will admit of, must be produced. When that cannot be produced, and the non-production of it is accounted for, the next best evidence in the party’s power is required. It is that rule of evidence, which required the- production of the bond upon the trial.

In order to dispense with the, production of it, it was incumbent on the plaintiff to give all the evidence reasonably in Ms power, to prove the loss of it. It appears to me,, that he is chargeable with two omissions : in the first place, in not having gone to the house of *Mask,*where he tore up the paper the day before, as soon as he discovered the loss of the bond. He might perhaps have discovered some remnants of the paper torn up. In the second place, he might have produced his own note, taken up from *Mask.*It would then appear, that he had not torn up that paper, and tend to a belief, that he had destroyed the lost bond, through mistake, instead of his own. It does not now appear, but that be destroyed bis own note, when he took it from *Mask.*,

Pee Cukiam. — Judgment- aeeíkmedí
# Official Journal L 126/2017

| | ISSN 1977-0677 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 126 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 6018 May 2017 |

ISSN 1977-0677

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 126

English edition

Legislation

Volume 6018 May 2017

---

| Contents | | II   Non-legislative acts | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | REGULATIONS |
| | * | Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/812 of 15 May 2017 laying down technical information for the calculation of technical provisions and basic own funds for reporting with reference dates from 31 March until 29 June 2017 in accordance with Directive 2009/138/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the taking-up and pursuit of the business of Insurance and Reinsurance (
  1
  ) | 1 |

Contents

II   Non-legislative acts

page

REGULATIONS

*

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/812 of 15 May 2017 laying down technical information for the calculation of technical provisions and basic own funds for reporting with reference dates from 31 March until 29 June 2017 in accordance with Directive 2009/138/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on the taking-up and pursuit of the business of Insurance and Reinsurance (
  1
  )

1

1

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance. |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance.

1

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
6

of Nanim’s trial. S ee, e.g.

, Shannon v. State

, 942 S.W.2d 591, 597-98 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996)

(prosecutor’s comment that defendant was sociopath held cured by prompt instruction to disregard);

Norris v. State , 902 S.W.2d 428, 442-43 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995) (prompt instruction cured

prosecution’s use of word “extortion” in reference to defense co unsel’s jury argument in capital

case). The court’s curative instruction is presumed to remove from the jury’s consideration any

evidence of the plea negotiations. S ee Bauder

, 921 S.W.2d at 700. We overrule Nanim’s point of

error as it pertains to the prosecutor’s first comment.

We conclude that the prosecutor’s second and third comments complained about by

Nanim also do not require reversal. Among the well-established categories for proper jury argument

is a plea for law enforcement. B orjan v. State

, 787 S.W.2d 53, 55 (Tex. Crim. App. 1990). A proper

plea for law enforcement may take many forms, one of which is to argue the relationship between

the jury’s verdict and the deterrence of crime in general. Id. App ellate courts have upheld

arguments that probation is an inappropriate punishment for certain offenses. L ugo v. State

, 732

S.W.2d 662, 664 (Tex. App.—Corpus Christi 1987, no pet.). Here, the prosecutor told the jury that,

in his opinion, Nanim h ad demonstrated a lack of respect for the judicial system and was a poor

candidate for probation. The State contends this was a proper plea for law enforcement. In making

that argument, the prosecutor explained to the jury how his reasoning had changed over the course

of the trial, including his initial satisfaction with the time Nanim had previously spent in jail and his

subsequent change of opinion after evaluating the evidence presented at trial. The error, if any, was

followed immediately by the court’s instruction to disregard.7 CONCLUSION

We fail to find that the State’s references to the time Nanim served in jail and pleabargain negotiations, promptly corrected by the trial court, were so inflamm a tory that their

prejudicial effect was not reasonably cured by judicial instruction to disregard. Because we have

found the curative instruction to be effective, it is not necessary to decide whether the argument had

a substantial and injurious effect or influence on the jury’s verdict. We hold that the trial court did

not err in denying the motion for mistrial and affirm the trial court’s judgment.

_____________________________________________

Bea Ann Smith, Justice

Before Chief Justice Law, Justices B. A. Smith and Patterson

Affirmed

Filed: March 18, 2004

Do Not Publish
Independent Auditors' Consent


Board of Directors
Aeroflex Incorporated:


We consent to incorporation  by reference in the  registration  statements (Nos.
33-75496,  33-88868, 33-88878,  333-42399,  333-42405 and 333-64611) on Form S-8
and  (Nos.  333-15339,   333-21803  and  333-46689)  on  Form  S-3  of  Aeroflex
Incorporated  of our report dated August 10, 1999  relating to the  consolidated
balance sheets of Aeroflex Incorporated and subsidiaries as of June 30, 1999 and
1998 and the related consolidated  statements of earnings,  stockholders' equity
and cash  flows and  related  schedule  for each of the years in the  three-year
period  ended June 30,  1999 which  report  appears in the June 30,  1999 annual
report on Form 10-K of Aeroflex Incorporated.


                                             /s/ KPMG LLP
                                             KPMG LLP



Melville, New York
September 28, 1999