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


                                                                      EXHIBIT 23


                    CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS



The Board of Directors
Applied Innovation Inc.:


We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements (No.
33-62646, 33-94582, 333-4432 and 333-68608) on Form S-8 of Applied Innovation
Inc. of our reports dated February 2, 2001, relating to the consolidated balance
sheets of Applied Innovation Inc. and subsidiary as of December 31, 2000 and
1999, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders'
equity, and cash flows and the related financial statement schedule for each of
the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2000, which reports appear
in the December 31, 2000 annual report on Form 10-K/A of Applied Innovation Inc.


/s/ KPMG LLP

Columbus, Ohio
October 24, 2001
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

EMPLOYERS MUTUAL CASUALTY

COMPANY,

Plaintiff,

V.

THE CHURCH OF THE LIVING

GOD INTERNATIONAL, INC.,

And

HARVEST CHURCH OF HAMPTON,

Defendants

AGREED ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE OF ALL CLAIMS

All claims against and between the parties have been amicably resolved.

Accordingly, this matterishereby dismissed initsentirety, with prejudice. The resolution

ofthis matter includes notonly the claims asserted intheComplaint, hut also all claims

asserted in theCounterclaims ofThe Church ofThe Living God International, Inc. Each

party isresponsible for their ownattorney'sfees and costs.

IT IS SO ORDERED this iTth day ofApril, 2019.

Case No.: 2:i8-cv-5i7

JUDGE GEORGE C. SMITH

MAGISTRATE JUDGE JOLSON

orge C. Smith
/s/Thomas F. Glassman

Thomas F. Glassman (0061466)

BonezziSwitzer Polite &Hupp Co., LPA

312 Walnut Street, Suite 2530

Cincinnati, Ohio 45202

Phone 513-345-5500

Fax 513-345-5510

tglassman@bsDhlaw.com

Counselfor Plaintiff

/s/RichardS. Levering

Richard S. Levering (0022027)

Sean R. Lehman (0096703)

Bricker & Eckler LLP

100 South Third Street

Columbus, Ohio 43215-4291

Phone 614-227-2300

Fax 614-227-2390

rlovering@bricker.com

slehman@bricker.com

Counselfor Defendants,

Church ofthe Living GodInternational, Inc.

PoolofBethesda Church of theLiving God

International, Inc., Mary Butler, Martha

Edwards and William Lee

/s/Todd E. Bryant

Todd E. Bryant (0072738)

The Biyant Firm, LLC.

122 West Main Street

Troy, Ohio 45373

Phone 937-581-3792

todd@thebrvantfirm.com

Counselfor Defendant, Harvest Church

ofHampton
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 19 (Friday, January 28, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Pages 4565-4566]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-01750]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

[RTID 0648-XB761]


Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council (MAFMC); Public Meeting

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Notice; public meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council's (Council) 
Mackerel, Squid, and Butterfish Committee will hold a public webinar 
meeting. See SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION for agenda details.

[[Page 4566]]


DATES: The meeting will be held on Monday, February 14, 2022, from 
11:30 a.m. until 2:30 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held via webinar. Connection information 
will be posted to the calendar prior to the meeting at www.mafmc.org.
    Council address: Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, 800 N 
State Street, Suite 201, Dover, DE 19901; telephone: (302) 674-2331; 
www.mafmc.org.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Christopher M. Moore, Ph.D., Executive 
Director, Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management Council, telephone: (302) 
526-5255.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Council's Mackerel, Squid, and 
Butterfish (MSB) Committee will meet via webinar. The purpose of this 
meeting is to review public input from two informational webinars in 
January 2022, and further develop alternatives for the action 
considering revisions to the rebuilding plan for Atlantic mackerel. 
Additional information on the action is available at https://www.mafmc.org/actions/atlantic-mackerel-rebuilding-amendment.

Special Accommodations

    The meeting is physically accessible to people with disabilities. 
Requests for sign language interpretation or other auxiliary aid should 
be directed to Shelley Spedden, (302) 526-5251, at least 5 days prior 
to the meeting date.
    Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.

    Dated: January 25, 2022.
Tracey L. Thompson,
Acting Deputy Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National 
Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 2022-01750 Filed 1-27-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
### 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 February 7, 2011

0131 

# Order

February 7, 2011

141250

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 141250 COA: 286580 Kalamazoo CC: 2007-000606-FC ANDREW JOHN MILLER, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the April 22, 2010 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.
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, I, Stephen Pelletier, Chief Executive Officer and President of Prudential Annuities Life Assurance Corporation (the Company), hereby certify that the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
March 31, 2011 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated: May 13, 2011



/s/ Stephen PelletierName: Stephen PelletierTitle:   Chief Executive Officer and President


The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of the
Report or as a separate disclosure document.



52
I N THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN RE:

A PPOINTMENT TO CONTINUING

JUDICIAL EDUCATION BOARD OF

JUDGES :

:

:

:

:

: NO. 955

SUPREME COURT RULES DOCKET

ORDER

PER CURIA M

AND NOW, this 21 st of July , 202 3 , the Honorable Maria C. McLaughlin

,

Philadelphia , is hereby appointed to the Continuing Judicial Education Board of Judges

for a term expiring December 31, 202 4

.
EXHIBIT 32

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 Cross Timbers Royalty Trust
(the Trust) on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2012 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, not in its individual capacity but solely as
the trustee of the Trust, certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to its knowledge:

(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 Trust.



|               |  |  |  |                                                                |  |                    
|-------------- |  |  |  | -------------------------------------------------------------- |  | -------------------
|               |  |  |  | Bank of America, N.A., Trustee for Cross Timbers Royalty Trust
|               |  |  | 
|April 27, 2012 |  |  |  | By                                                             |  | /S/ NANCY G. WILLIS
|               |  |  |  |                                                                |  | Nancy G. Willis    
|               |  |  |  |                                                                |  | Vice President
Exhibit








Exhibit 10.3
FIRST AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
THIS FIRST AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT (the “Amendment”) is made and entered into by and between WP Glimcher Inc., an Indiana corporation (the “Company”), and Michael P. Glimcher (“Executive”), executed on November 2, 2015, effective as of January 1, 2016.
WHEREAS, the Company and Executive are parties to an employment agreement, dated as of September 16, 2014 (the “Employment Agreement”) (capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein shall have the same meaning as set forth in the Employment Agreement); and
WHEREAS, the Company and Executive now desire to amend the Employment Agreement to reflect Executive’s continued employment on the terms and subject to the conditions set forth herein;
NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY AGREED AS FOLLOWS:
1. Terms of Employment.    Section 2(a)(i) of the Employment Agreement is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced as follows:
“(i) During the Employment Period, the Executive shall serve the Company as its Vice-Chairman and Chief Executive Officer and shall perform customary and appropriate duties as may be reasonably assigned to the Executive from time to time by the Board of Directors of the Company (the “Board”), and shall provide services to the Company, the Partnership, and Glimcher LP.  The Executive shall have such responsibilities, power and authority as those normally associated with such position in public companies of a similar stature.  The Executive shall report solely and directly to the Board.  The Executive shall perform his services at the offices of the Company in the Columbus, Ohio metropolitan area and shall travel for business purposes to the extent reasonably necessary or appropriate in the performance of such services.  During the Employment Period, the Executive shall, without compensation other than that herein provided, also serve and continue to serve, if and when elected and re-elected, as a member of the Board; provided that the Executive shall be appointed as a member of the Board effective as of the Effective Date.”
 

f






2. Miscellaneous. The address information in Section 9(b) that pertains to the Company is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:


	
		
	If to the Company:
	WP Glimcher Inc. 
180 East Broad Street

	 
	Columbus, Ohio 43215

	 
	Attention: General Counsel




 
3. Entire Agreement.  Except as otherwise provided herein, the Employment Agreement shall remain unaltered and of full force and effect.
[SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS]



2








IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed and delivered as of the day and year first above set forth.


	
								
	 
	 
	 
	 
	 

	Michael P. Glimcher





	 

	/s/ Michael P. Glimcher

	 

	









WP Glimcher Inc.

	 
	 

	By:
	 
	/s/ Mark E. Yale

	 
	 
	Name:
	 
	Mark E. Yale

	 
	 
	Title:
	 
	Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer







[Signature Page – M. Glimcher First Amendment to Employment Agreement]
Date:

AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action 

United States District Court 

for the 

Southern District of Ohio 

) 

Hudson Shipping Lines, Inc. ) 

) 

Plaintiff(s), ) 

) Civil Action No. 2:18-cv-00478-GCS-EPD 

v. ) 

) District Judge Smith 

Phoenix Global DMCC ) 

) Magistrate Judge Preston Deavers 

) 

Defendant(s) ) 

SUMMONS 

To: (Defendant’s name and address) Phoenix Global DMCC 

In Care Of Its Statutory Agent 

ILLINOIS REGISTERED AGENT INC. 

4505 WEST MARGARET STREET 

MONEE, ILLINOIS 60449 

A lawsuit has been filed against you. 

On May 19, 2018, the garnishee in this action, Phoenix Commodities USA LLC, was served with Process of 

Maritime Attachment and Garnishment, a copy of which Process is included with this Summons. Pursuant to Rule 

B(3)(b) of the Supplemental Rules for Admiralty or Maritime Claims and Asset Forfeiture Actions of the Federal Rules 

of Civil Procedure, within 30 days of May 19, 2018, you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the enclosed 

Complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on 

the plaintiff’s attorney, whose name and address is: 

John B. Kopf, Esq. 

THOMPSON HINE LLP 

41 South High Street, 17th Floor 

Columbus, OH 43215 

If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. 

You also must file your answer or motion with the court. 

CLERK OF COURT 

Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk 

Case: 2:18-cv-00478-GCS-EPD Doc #: 12 Filed: 05/22/18 Page: 1 of 2 PAGEID #: 66
Date: 

AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2) 

Civil Action No. 2:15-cv-00478-GCS-EPD

PROOF OF SERVICE 

(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4(l)) 

This summons for (name of individual and title, if any)

was received by me on (date) . 

☐ I personally served the summons on the individual at (place)

on (date) ; or 

☐ I left the summons at the individual’s residence or usual place of abode with (name)

, a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there, 

on (date) , and mailed a copy to the individual’s last known address; or 

☐ I served the summons on (name of individual) , who is

designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization)

on (date) ; or 

☐ I returned the summons unexecuted because ; or

☐ Other (specify):

. 

My fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $ . 

I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true. 

Server’s signature 

Printed name and title 

Server’s address 

Additional information regarding attempted service, etc: 

Case: 2:18-cv-00478-GCS-EPD Doc #: 12 Filed: 05/22/18 Page: 2 of 2 PAGEID #: 67
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

Board of Trustees,

Plaintiff,

V. Case No. 2:18-cv-23

Specialty Contracting, Inc., et al., Judge Michael H. Watson

Defendants.

ORDER

Plaintiff moves for default judgment against Defendant Specialty

Contracting, Inc. ("Specialty Contracting"). Mot. Def. J., ECF No. 24. The Court

GRANTS PlalntlfFs motion.

PlalntlfTs complaint was filed on January 9,2018. Compl., ECF No. 1.

The summons for Specialty Contracting was returned executed on March 27,

2018. ECF No. 12. Specialty Contracting failed to file a responsive pleading.

Plaintiffmoved for defaultJudgment on September 20, 2018. ECF No. 24. After

being Informed that default had not been entered against Specialty Contracting,

Plaintiff applied to the Clerk for entry of default, ECF No. 25, which the Clerk

entered on September 24,2018, In accordance with Rule 55(a) of the Federal

Rules of Civil Procedure, ECF No. 26. Plaintiff then supplemented Its motion for

default judgment on September 24, 2018. ECF No. 27. The time forfiling a

response has passed.
On September 25, 2018, the Magistrate Judge entered a report and

recommendation (R&R) recommending that Plaintiff's motion for default

judgment be granted. EOF No. 28. The R&R informed the parties of their rightto

object within fourteen days and specifically noted that the failure to object would

result in waiver of the right to de novo review by the DistrictJudge or the right to

appeal the District Court's adoption of the R&R. Id. at 3. No objections have

been filed.

Accordingly, the R&R, EOF No. 28, is ADOPTED and AFFIRMED.

Plaintiffs unopposed motion for default judgment is GRANTED. The Clerk of

Court is DIRECTED to enter JUDGMENT against Specialty Contracting.

The Court awards $9,904.34, including unpaid fringe benefit contributions,

liquidated damages, and interest for October 2017 through December 2017, plus

attorney's fees of $6,860.00 plus interest from the time of judgment at the rate of

1% per month, and the costs of this action.

Additionally, Defendant Jonathan Good is DISMISSED from this action

without prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

MICHAEL H. WATSON, JUDGE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
ex10_31.htm


    
       EXHIBIT
10.31 

    

     

     Equity
Transferring Agreement 

    


    


     Party
A (Assignor): SinoHub Technology (Hong Kong) Ltd. 

    


     Party
B (Assignee): B2B Chips Ltd. 

    


    


     Party
A and Party B do hereby agree on equity transferring issue as
following: 

    


     Party
A agrees to sell its whole equity registered under SinoHub HK Technology Ltd. to
Party B at the price of HK$10,000. Upon the completion of the equity transfer,
Party B shall be liable for all the rights and obligations of Party A, and all
the tax return and documents, profiles, corporate chops, etc. shall be
transferred to Party A. 

    


     Upon
the signature of both parties on this Agreement, Party B shall set about the
relative issues concerning the equity transfer, and Party A shall assist with
all the procedures without reserve. 

    


    


    


    
      	
               Party
      A: SinoHub Technology (Hong Kong) Ltd. 

               

            	
               Party
      B: B2B Chips Ltd. 

               

            
	
               Legal
      representative: /s/Henry T. Cochran 

               

            	
               Legal
      representative: /s/Willa Li 

            
	
               April
      10, 2008 

            	
               April
      10, 2008
*The Hon. Ronald E. Longstaff, United States District Judge

for the Southern District of Iowa, sitting by designation.

 1The Hon. Fernando J. Gaitan, Jr., United States District

Judge for the Western District of Missouri.

_____________

No. 96-1932WM

_____________

James C. Budd, *

*

Appellant, * On Appeal from the United

* States District Court

v. * for the Western District

* of Missouri

* ADT Security Systems, Inc., * [To Be Published] * Appellee. *

___________

 Submitted: November 18, 1996

 Filed: December 31, 1996 ___________

Before RICHARD S. ARNOLD, Chief Judge, MAGILL, Circuit Judge, and

LONGSTAFF,* District Judge. ___________

PER CURIAM.

This is an action under the Americans With Disabilities Act,

42 U.S.C. § 12101 et seq. The plaintiff, James C. Budd, claims

that the defendant, his former employer, ADT Security Systems,

Inc., has violated the Act by refusing to allow plaintiff to return

to his former job as a system-service technician installing alarm

systems. The District Court1 held, on defendant's motion for

summary judgment, that plaintiff was estopped to claim that he
-2-

could perform the job in question, with or without reasonable

accommodation, and that, in any case, plaintiff's evidence did not

create a genuine issue of material fact with respect to his being

qualified to perform the job. We agree and affirm.

The able opinion of the District Court thoroughly lays out the

facts and discusses the law. We have little to add. It is

sufficient to say that the plaintiff, in applying for socialsecurity and disability-insurance benefits, both of which were

granted, and both of which he is still, apparently, drawing, made

representations about his own physical abilities that are

completely at odds with the theory of his lawsuit. He clearly

represented that he was not able to return to his former job, and

he is, in effect, making this representation continuously, because

he is drawing the benefits that were granted in reliance upon it.

Moreover, even apart from any estoppel theory, it is clear as a

matter of law on this record that plaintiff is not able to perform

the essential functions of his former job, which was very

strenuous, with or without any reasonable accommodation. The fact

that the defendant has offered plaintiff other jobs, which he has

turned down, does nothing but strengthen the defendant's case.

The present appeal does not present any question sufficiently

novel to justify more extended treatment. See Beauford v. Father

Flanagan's Boys' Home, 831 F.2d 768 (8th Cir. 1987), cert. denied,

485 U.S. 938 (1988).

Affirmed.
-3-

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
AFS-11-115-E 

February 24, 2011 

 Exemption No. 8839B 

 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2006-26739 

Mr. David L. Jones 

Corporate Aviation Education Director 

Aviation Institute of Maintenance 

4455 South Boulevard 

Virginia Beach, VA 23452 

Dear Mr. Jones: 

This letter is to inform you that we have granted your petition to extend Exemption No. 8839, 

as amended. It explains the basis for our decision and describes its effect. 

The Basis for Our Decision 

By letter dated December 26, 2010, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration 

(FAA) on behalf of American Trans Air Training Corp. d.b.a. Aviation Institute of 

Maintenance (Aviation Institute) (operating under Air Agency Certificate USBT077S) for an 

extension of Exemption No. 8839, as amended. That exemption from § 65.75(a) of Title 14, 

Code of Federal Regulations allows Aviation Institute to administer the aviation mechanic 

general written test to students immediately following their successful completion of the 

general curriculum but before they meet the experience requirements of § 65.77. 

In your petition, you indicate that there has been no change in the conditions and reasons 

regarding public interest and safety that were the basis for granting the original exemption. 

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition 

in the Federal Register. The requested extension of the exemption would not set a precedent, 

and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to Aviation Institute. 
2 

Our Decision

The FAA has determined that the justification for the issuance of Exemption No. 8839, as 

amended, remains valid with respect to this exemption and is in the public interest. 

Therefore, under the authority provided by 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701, which the FAA 

Administrator has delegated to me, I grant your petition. 

The Effect of Our Decision

Our decision extends the termination date of Exemption No. 8839, as amended, to 

February 28, 2013, unless sooner superseded or rescinded. 

All conditions and limitations of Exemption No. 8839 remain the same. This letter must be 

attached to, and is a part of, Exemption No. 8839. 

Sincerely, 

/s/ 

Raymond Towles 

Acting Director, Flight Standards Service