alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 99.24

News
Release
July 5, 2000

Trading Symbols:TRBD (EASDAQ)

TURBODYNE REPORTS ON CORPORATE PROGRESS IN H1/Q2 2000

Carpinteria, CAJuly 5, 2000Turbodyne Technologies Inc. (EASDAQ:TRBD) has continued to
focus its main resources on the joint development of DynachargersTM and TurbopacsTM for automobile mass production, together with the Garrett® Engine Boosting
Systems Division of Honeywell. The joint development work is governed by the Joint Development and Licensing Agreements signed in 1999 with Honeywell's Garrett® Engine Boosting Systems
Division (previously AlliedSignal Turbocharging Systems). These agreements are described in detail in, and filed as exhibits to, the Company's filing of its Annual Report on Form 10-K with the SEC and
the Market Authority of EASDAQ, available as public documents through the respective websites.

As
a result of this ongoing joint development work, DynachargerTM prototypes have been delivered to five automobile manufacturers by the end of the first half of 2000.
The prototypes are being tested and evaluated by these automobile manufacturers for possible application on a total of seven different engine families, including diesel as well as gasoline engines.
This number includes DynachargerTM prototypes delivered to two automobile manufacturers for three engine families in 1999.

Turbodyne
has continued to implement its business strategy, as outlined in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K. That strategy includes shifting the business target from
aftermarket to becoming a mass production supplier to the automobile industry.

Turbodyne
Technologies Inc., a California based high technology company, specializes in the development of charging technology for internal combustion engines plus the development and
manufacturing of high-tech assemblies for electrically assisted turbochargers and superchargers. Turbodyne Technologies Inc.'s headquarters is located in Carpinteria, CA; the European business
location is Frankfurt, Germany.

Contacts:

Kenneth
Fitzpatrick, VP Group FinanceInvestor Relations: (800) 566-1130
Markus Kumbrink, Turbodyne Frankfurt Investor Relations: +49-69-69-76-73-13
Peter Weichselbraun, Corporate Communications: (800) 566-1130

This
release contains forward-looking statements as defined in Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, including statements about future business operations, financial performance and
market conditions. Such forward-looking statements involve risks and uncertainties inherent in business forecasts.

---

QuickLinks
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT UNITED STATES OF AM ERIC A,

Pla i ntiff-Appe lle e , v. KOR Y ANTHONY JOSEPH HALL, a .k.a . Kory AJ Ha ll, De fe nda nt-Appe l la

nt. No. 15-30283

D.C . No. 2:14-c r-00021-R

M P-3 M EM O R ANDUM *

Appe a l from

the Unite d

Stat e s Distric t C ourt for the Ea ste rn Distric t of W a shington R osa nna M a louf Pe te rson, Distric t Judge , Pre siding Subm itte d Fe brua

ry 2, 2017 ** B e fore : HUG, FAR

R IS, an d C ANB Y, C irc uit Judge s . Kory Anthony Jose ph Ha ll a

ppe a ls from

the distric t c ourt’ s judgm e nt a nd c ha lle nge s his 100-month se nte nc e for c onspira c y to distribute oxy c odone hy droc hloride , in viola

tion 21 U.S.C . §§ 841(a)(1) and 846. Pursua nt to A nde rs v . 

# FIL ED FEB 06 2017 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U
. S
. CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by Ninth C irc uit R

ule 36-3.

* * The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without oral a

rgum e nt. Se eFe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).C

alifornia , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Ha ll’ s c ounse l ha s file d a

brie f stat ing tha

t the re are n o grounds for re lie f, a long with a m otion to withdra

w a s c ounse l of re c ord. No pro se supple m e nta l brie f or answe ring brie f ha s be e n file d. Ha ll ha s wa ive d his right to a ppe a l his se nte nc e . B e c a

use the re c ord disc lose s no a

rgua ble issue a s to theva lidity of the a ppe a l wa ive r, we dism iss the a ppe a l. Se eUnite d State

s v . W atson, 582 F.3d 974, 986-88 (9th C ir. 2009). C ounse l’ s m otion to withdra w is G RANT E D. DISM I SSE D.

2
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 23.1

                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS


We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-47928) of Oplink Communications, Inc. of our
report dated September 26, 2002 relating to the financial statements of Oplink
Communications, Inc., which appears in this Form 10-K. We also consent to the
incorporation by reference of our report dated September 26, 2002 relating to
the financial statement schedule, which appears in this Form 10-K.


/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
San Jose, California
September 26, 2002
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2737 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2737

 To amend the American History and Civics Education program under the 
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to require inclusion of 
programs that educate students about the history and principles of the 
    Constitution of the United States, including the Bill of Rights.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 14, 2021

    Mr. Inhofe (for himself, Mr. King, Mr. Coons, and Mr. Lankford) 
introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the 
          Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the American History and Civics Education program under the 
Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 to require inclusion of 
programs that educate students about the history and principles of the 
    Constitution of the United States, including the Bill of Rights.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Constitution education Is Valuable 
In Community Schools Act of 2021'' or the ``CIVICS Act of 2021''.

SEC. 2. NATIONAL ACTIVITIES.

    Section 2233(b) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 
1965 (20 U.S.C. 6663(b)) is amended by striking paragraphs (1) and (2) 
and inserting the following:
            ``(1) shall--
                    ``(A) show potential to improve the quality of 
                student achievement in, and teaching of, American 
                history, civics and government, or geography, in 
                elementary schools and secondary schools;
                    ``(B) demonstrate innovation, scalability, 
                accountability, and a focus on underserved populations; 
                and
                    ``(C) include programs that educate students about 
                the history and principles of the Constitution of the 
                United States, including the Bill of Rights; and
            ``(2) may include hands-on civic engagement activities for 
        teachers and students.''.
                                 <all>
```
# C_2015057EN.01000201.xml

| 17.2.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 57/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.2.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 57/2

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.7417 — Sime Darby/New Britain Palm Oil)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2015/C 57/03)

On 23 January 2015, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in the English language and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32015M7417. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32015M7417. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D2022-3455

_____________________________

EDWARD ALBERT CHILDRESS,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Escambia County.

Jennie Kinsey, Judge.

May 17, 2024

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

B.L. THOMAS, BILBREY, and WINOKUR, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
2

Jessica J. Yeary, Public Defender, and Joel Arnold, Assistant 

Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information primarily extracted from
Capita Preferred Funding L.P.'s audited consolidated income statement and
balance sheet as of and for the twelve months ended December 31,1997 and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such audited consolidated financial
statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<MULTIPLIER>                          1,000
<PERIOD-TYPE>                        12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                  JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                    DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                    0
<SECURITIES>                              0
<RECEIVABLES>                             0
<ALLOWANCES>                              0
<INVENTORY>                               0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                      2,434<F2>
<PP&E>                                    0
<DEPRECIATION>                            0<F1>
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                      242,580
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                     0<F2>
<BONDS>                                   0
<COMMON>                             36,394
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                     0
<PREFERRED>                         206,186
<OTHER-SE>                                0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>        242,580
<SALES>                                   0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                     21,438
<CGS>                                     0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                             0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                          0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                        0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                      21,438
<INCOME-TAX>                              0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                  21,438
<DISCONTINUED>                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                           0
<CHANGES>                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                         21,438
<EPS-PRIMARY>                             0
<EPS-DILUTED>                             0


<FN>

*  In accordance with Regulation S-K item 601(c)(2), inapplicable or immaterial
   financial data is reflected as zero value.

<F1> - Accumulated depreciation relates to equipment under operating leases.

<F2> - This item is not applicable since the Company does not prepare a
      classified balance sheet.
</FN>




</TABLE>
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

The Board of Directors and Stockholders
Liberty Satellite & Technology, Inc.:

    We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements
(Nos. 333-18167, 333-35454 and 333-48770) on Form S-8 of Liberty Satellite &
Technology, Inc. of our report relating to the consolidated balance sheets of
Liberty Satellite & Technology, Inc. (formerly TCI Satellite Entertainment,
Inc.) and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2000 and 1999, and the related
consolidated statements of operations, comprehensive income (loss),
stockholders' equity (deficit) and cash flows for each of the years in the
three-year period ended December 31, 2000, which report appears in the
December 31, 2000 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Liberty Satellite &
Technology, Inc.

                                          KPMG LLP

Denver, Colorado
March 29, 2001
SERVED: SEPTEMBER23, 2014 U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION OFFICE OF HEARINGS

WASHINGTON, DC

. IN THE MATTER OF CHERIF DIALLO DOCKET NO. FAA-2014-0544 (Civil Penalty Action)
NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT OF PROCEEDING This proceeding (heretofore designated as Case No. 2014S0290047) has been assigned to Administrative Law Judge J.E. Sullivan. All future pleadings and other communications regarding this proceeding shall be served onthe Judge, the FAA Hearing Docket, and the other persons onthe attached Service List.

Attachment

- Service List ,. : *
.SERVICE LIST- BY 

### U.S. MAIL ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

### Federal Aviation Administration 800 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, DC 20591 Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk,**AGC~30** 

### Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2Wl000 1


### CherifDiallo, Respondent 

### 263 W 153rd St. Apt. 6D New York, NY 10039 Taneesha D. Marshall Complainant's Counsel 

### Office ofthe Regional Counsel, AS0-7 ONE COPY



### Federal Aviation Administration, Southern Region 1701 ColumbiaAvenue College Park, GA 30337 TEL: 404-305-5200 FAX: 404-305-5223 Hon. J.E. Sullivan,Administrative Law Judge 

### Office ofHearings, M-20 U.S. Department ofTransportation 1200 NewJersey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) Washington, DC 20590 TEL: 202-366-6941 FAX: 202-366-7536 DocketNo. FAA-2014-0544 (Civil Penalty Action)

1 ServiCe was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal Aviation Administration, 600 IndependenceAvenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2Wl000, Washington, DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430. 

### -2-
EXHIBIT 32.1  Certification of Principal Executive Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350 (Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)   I, Ed Bailey, Chief Executive Officer, and Principal Accounting Officer, of LightTouch Vein & Laser, Inc. (the "Registrant") do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of our knowledge, based upon a review of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period June 30, 2010 of the Registrant, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"):  (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and  (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.  Dated:  August 18, 2010 By: /s/ Ed Bailey  Ed Bailey  Chief Executive Officer and Principal Accounting Officer  * A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to LightTouch Vein & Laser, Inc. and will be retained by LightTouch Vein & Laser, Inc. and furnished to the Securities Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
# C_2016080EN.01000101.xml

| 2.3.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 80/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.3.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 80/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.7915 — American Securities/Blount International)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2016/C 80/01)

On 23 February 2016, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English language and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32016M7915. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32016M7915. EUR-Lex is the online access to the European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
#### The State vs. Bierbach and others.

*When criminal action may he certified here on exceptions.*

To give this court jurisdiction of a criminal action certified to it upon exceptions (under see. 4720, R. S.), such exceptions must have been presented to the judge of the court below and allowed by him during the term of the trial. In other cases, the remedy is by writ of error to bring up the record, after judgment.

OEBTIFIED on Exceptions from the Municipal Court of *Milwaukee*County.

On a motion by the state to dismiss the exceptions, there was a brief by the *Attorney*General, and oral argument by *II. W. Ohynoweth,*Assistant Attorney General.

Tayloe, *J.*

This case is certified to this court upon exceptions taken by the defendant in the court below. The record discloses that the exceptions were not presented to the judge and allowed by him until after the expiration of the term of court at which the trial was had. This court has no jurisdiction to pass upon such exceptions. The right of this court to pass upon exceptions taken and allowed by the court, when there is no final judgment and no writ of error is issued to the court below, is given by section 4720, B. S. 1878. That section provides that “ any person who shall be convicted of an offense before the circuit court, being aggrieved by any opinion, direction or judgment of the court in any matter of law, may allege exceptions to such opinion, direction or judgment, which exceptions, being reduced to writing in a summary mode and presented to the court *at any time lefore the end, of the*term, and if found conformable to the truth of the case, shall be allowed and signed by the judge,” etc.

The statute then provides that upon allowing such exceptions the court shall stay proceedings, unless it shall clearly appear that such exceptions are frivolous, immaterial or in*530tended for delay. The practice under this section is to certify such exceptions at once to this court for its consideration. The proceeding is intended to be a summary one, and it is therefore required that the exceptions must be allowed before the end of the term at which the trial is had. When exceptions are not allowed and signed until after the term, judgment must follow the conviction, and the exceptions then allowed are made a part of the record, as a hill of exceptions, under the provisions of section 4724; and in order to enable this court to review such exceptions settled after term and allowed as a bill of exceptions, the record containing such bill must be brought to this court by writ of error. It appearing that the exceptions were not allowed before the end of the term at which the trial was had, and there being no final judgment and writ of error in the case, the exceptions must be .dismissed. *State v. Pooler,*37 Wis., 305.

*By the Court.*— So ordered.
June Term, 1860.

#### Franz vs. The State.

This court cannot take notice of proceedings had upon the trial of a criminal action, although the minutes of them, as taken by the clerk or judge, are returned by the clerk as part of the record. They must be embraced in a bill of exceptions in order to become a part of the record, or be entitled to notice.

A sentence in these words, “The court sentences the prisoner as follows: that the said F-F--be punished by confinement in the state prison,” &c., though lacking in formality, purports to be the judgment of the court, and is sufficient.

ERROR to the Circuit Court for *Manitowoc*County.

Franz, indicted jointly with Peglow, for murder, as stated in the preceding case, was convicted of manslaughter in the first degree. There was no bill of exceptions made. The only question in this court was as to the validity of the judgment or sentence, which was in these *words*— ■“ The court' sentences the prisoner as follows: That the said *Frederick Franz*be punished by confinement at hard labor, in the state prison, at Waupun, for the term of ten years, and that ten days of each year, during said term, be passed in solitary imprisonment.”

• *F. Fox Cook,*for plaintiff in error.

*J. H.*Howe, Attorney Gfeneral, for the state.

October 15.

*Py the Court,*

Dixow, C. J.

With the exception of the form of the sentence which was awarded, the position of this case is precisely the same as that of *Peglow vs. The State.*At the April term, 1857, of the circuit court for the county of Man-itowoc, the plaintiff in error and Peglow were jointly indicted for the murder of one John W.- Shultz, alleged to have been committed by them in that county, on the ,12th day of *537December, 1856. At the October term, 1857, they received separate trials. Peglow was found guilty as charged in the indictment. The plaintiff was convicted of manslaughter in the first degree, and sentenced by the court to ten years’ imprisonment in the state prison.- There is no bill of exceptions in the case, and we are of opinion that the record shows no error. The only one urged goes merely to the form of •the sentence. By a further return, which was made pursuant to an order of the court, it appears that all the substantial requirements of the statute were complied with; and al-. though the judgment is not recorded with as much precision and formality as it might have been, it nevertheless is sufficiently certain, and does not appear as the-recital or history 'of the clerk, but as the act and consideration of the court, by which it was adjudged, “that the said *Frederick Franz*be punished by confinement at hard labor, in the state prison at Waupun, for the term of ten years, and that ten days of each year, during said term, be passed in solitary imprisonment.”

The judgment is therefore affirmed.