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

Exhibit 99.8



March 27, 2017

Consent of Independent Auditor

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in this
Annual Report on Form 40-F for the year ended December 31, 2016 of Osisko Gold
Royalties Ltd of our report dated March 15, 2017, relating to the consolidated
financial statements, which appears in the Exhibit to this Annual Report on Form
40-F.

/s/_PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP1

Montreal, Quebec, Canada

|_____________________________                                                                                      
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|1CPA auditor, CA, public accountancy permit No.
      A122718                                                      
|                                                                                                                   
|PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP/s.r.l./s.e.n.c.r.l.                                                                     
|1250 René-Lévesque Boulevard West, Suite 2500, Montréal,
      Quebec, Canada H3B 4Y1                              
|T: +1 514 205 5000, F: +1 514 876 1502                                                                             
|                                                                                                                   
|"PwC" refers to PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP / s.r.l. /
      s.e.n.c.r.l., an Ontario limited liability partnership.

---
#### COM. v. GARCIA, J.

131 MDA 2017

Superior Court of Pennsylvania.

09/21/2017

CP-06-CR-0003340-2012 (Berks)

Affirmed
No. 11-10037.

#### Castorillo Ibale *v.*Safeway Inc.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Jose GAZCA-SOLIS, Defendant-Appellant

No. 16-51173 Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Filed November 28, 2017

Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Western District of Texas, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee

Jose Gazca-Solis, Pro Se

Before DAVIS, CLEMENT, and COSTA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The Federal Public defender appointed to represent Jose Gazca-Solis has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed briefs • pursuant to *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967), and *United States v. Flores,*632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Gazca-Solis has filed a response. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Gazca-Solis’s claim of ineffective *393assistance of counsel; we therefore decline to consider the claim without prejudice to collateral review. *See United States v. Isgar,*739 F.3d 829, 841 (5th Cir. 2014).

We have reviewed counsel’s briefs and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein, as well as Gazca-Solis’s response. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivo-lous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, the motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. *See*5th Cir. R. 42.2. Gazca-Solis’s motion to appoint new counsel is DENIED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
#### Spencer Ulises TASAYCO-JOHNSTON, AKA Spencer Ulises Tasayco, Petitioner, v. Jefferson B. SESSIONS III, Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 16-71256

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted December 18, 2017 *

Filed December 20, 2017

*879Spencer Ulises Tasayco-Johnston, Pro Se

Daniel Eric Goldman, Esquire, Senior Litigation Counsel, OIL, Stefanie A. Svo-ren-Jay, Trial Attorney, DOJ — U.S. Department of Justice, Civil Division/Office of Immigration Litigation, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel ICE, Office of the Chief Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent

Before: WALLACE, SILVERMAN, and BYBEE, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Spencer Ulises Tasayco-Johnston, a native and citizen of Peru, petitions pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s (“U”) removal order and denial of a continuance. Our jurisdiction is governed by 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a continuance and review de novo due process challenges. *Sandoval-Luna v. Mukasey,*526 F.3d 1243, 1246 (9th Cir. 2008). We deny in part and dismiss in part the petition for review.

The agency did not abuse its discretion or violate due process in denying Tasayco-Johnston a further continuance to pursue a U Visa application, where United States Citizenship and Immigration Services reopened his U Visa application and denied it on the merits during the pendency of his appeal, and therefore his motion was moot. *See 8*C.F.R. § 1003.29; *Sandoval-Luna,*526 F.3d at 1247 (no abuse of discretion to deny a continuance where relief was not immediately available); *Padilla-Martinez v. Holder,*770 F.3d 825, 830 (9th Cir. 2014) (“To prevail on a due-process claim, a petitioner must demonstrate both a violation of rights and prejudice.” (citations omitted)).

We lack jurisdiction to review Tasayco-Johnston’s unexhausted contentions regarding the agency’s removability determination and the IJ’s compliance with 8 C.F.R. § 1240.1(b). *See Abebe v. Mukasey,*554 F.3d 1203, 1208 (9th Cir. 2009) (en banc) (the court lacks jurisdiction to review claims not exhausted before the agency; when an alien files a brief with the BIA, he will be deemed to have exhausted only the issues raised and argued in the brief).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellant, Cross-Appellee, v. Criss E. DUNCAN, Defendant-Appellee, Cross-Appellant.

Nos. 04-1916, 05-3655 and 05-3727.

United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.

Oct. 21, 2005.

*465Lesley J. Miller Lowery, Office of U.S. Attorney, South Bend, IN, Daniel L. Bella, Office of U.S. Attorney, Hammond, IN, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

John C. Hamilton, The Hamilton Law Firm, South Bend, IN, for Defendanb-Ap-pellant.

Before BAUER, POSNER and RIPPLE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

This matter is before the court for the second time. In the original appeal, 04-1916, we remanded this case to the district court under *United States v. Paladino,*401 F.3d 471, 483-84 (7th Cir.2005), to permit the district court to assess the case and to inform us whether it was inclined to re-sentence the defendant. As in all *Paladi-no*remands, we retained jurisdiction in order to complete our plain error review upon receiving the views of the district court as to whether it was disposed to re-sentence.

It appears from the papers now available to us that, rather than follow the procedure set forth in *Paladino,*the district court, over the specific objection of the Government that it lacked jurisdiction to re-sentence, proceeded to re-sentence the defendant. It further appears that the district court gave no explanation for imposing the sentence it purported to impose. The defendant then filed the present appeal.

The district court was without jurisdiction to re-sentence the defendant. Our limited remand to the district court was solely to ascertain whether it was inclined to re-sentence *if*we later remanded the case to the district court.

Because the district court was without jurisdiction to re-sentence the defendant, its “amended judgment” of August 5, 2005 is vacated. We shall consider this attempt to re-sentence the defendant as the district court’s indication under *Paladino*that it is disposed to re-sentence, and therefore we shall remand this case to the district court for that purpose.

We take this opportunity to respectfully remind the district court that, upon re-sentencing, it must provide a reasoned explanation for its action so that we are able to fulfill, in due course, our duty to determine whether the sentence is reasonable.

Accordingly, the amended judgment of the district court appealed in 05-3655 and 05-3727 is vacated because the district court was without jurisdiction to enter such a judgment. The sentence in 04-1916 is vacated, and the case is remanded in order to permit the district court to re-sentence the defendant. The district court and the parties shall proceed in accordance with the procedure set forth in *Paladino.*

IT IS SO ORDERED.
105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 67

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Authorizing the 1997 Special Olympics Torch Relay

to be run through the Capitol Grounds.
105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 67

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate

2 concurring),
2

•HCON 67 EH

1 SECTION 1. AUTHORIZATION OF RUNNING OF SPECIAL

2 OLYMPICS TORCH RELAY THROUGH CAPITOL

3 GROUNDS.

4 On June 13, 1997, or on such other date as the

5 Speaker of the House of Representatives and the Presi6 dent pro tempore of the Senate may jointly designate, the

7 1997 Special Olympics Torch Relay may be run through

8 the Capitol Grounds, as part of the journey of the Special

9 Olympics torch to the District of Columbia Special Olym10 pics summer games at Gallaudet University in the District

11 of Columbia.

12 SEC. 2. RESPONSIBILITY OF CAPITOL POLICE BOARD.

13 The Capitol Police Board shall take such actions as

14 may be necessary to carry out section 1.

15 SEC. 3. CONDITIONS RELATING TO PHYSICAL PREPARA16 TIONS.

17 The Architect of the Capitol may prescribe conditions

18 for physical preparations for the event authorized by sec19 tion 1.

Passed the House of Representatives May 13, 1997.

Attest:

Clerk.
#### NEESE v. STATE

20170788

Supreme Court of Utah.

12-12-2017

20160903, 405 P.3d 805

Petition for Writ of Certiorari Denied.
2022 EAVS Data Brief: Idaho EAVS Jurisdictions:

44 

Voter Registration 

Active Reg. Voters as of Nov. 8, 20221 

1,004,608 

Reg. Forms Received2* 

0 

Total Confirmation Notices Sent3* 

--

Voters Removed from Reg. Rolls4* 

0 



0.0% 

0.0% 

0.0% 

0.0% 

0.0% 

In Person 

Mail, Email, Fax 

Other 

Online 

Motor Vehicle Dept.

Source of Registration Applications5 

Note: Idaho was unable to report 

data on the sources of registration 

applications in the 2022 EAVS. 

 Voting and Turnout 

Voters Participating By Mode6 

7 Turnout 

43.3% 

In-Person 

Election Day 

401,184 

67.4% 

Mail 

128,723 

21.6% 

In-Person 

Early 

65,129 

10.9% 

Other 

314 

0.1% 

Total Voting Locations8: 734 

Total Poll Workers9: 4,071 

 

Election Technology 

Percentage of Jurisdictions Using...10 

88.6% 

Ballot 

Marking 

Devices 

75.0% 

Scanners 

65.9% 

Electronic 

Poll 

Books 

25.0% 

Hand 

Counting

0.0% 

DREs w/o

VVPAT 

0.0% 

 DREs with 

VVPAT 

 Mail Ballots 

• 144,960 mail ballots transmitted11 

• 88.8% of transmitted mail ballots returned by voters12 

• 100.1% of returned mail ballots counted13 

• 0.0% of returned mail ballots rejected14 

• Did not conduct all-mail election15 

• Allowed drop boxes16 

• Allowed ballot curing17 

 Election Audits18 

-- Access audit 

-- Ballot design audit 

✔ Ballot reconciliation 

audit 

-- Compliance/ 

procedural audit 

-- Eligibility audit 

-- Legal audit 

✔ Logic and accuracy 

testing 

✔ Post-election 

tabulation audit 

-- Other 

Notes 

EAVS data and reports may be downloaded at www.eac.gov 

/research-and-data/datasets-codebooks-and-surveys. 

Responses of “Does not apply,” “Data not available,” and “Valid 

skip” are shown as zeroes or dashes. Percentages may not sum 

to 100% because of missing data or rounding. 

* Close of registration for 2020 

general election to close of 

registration for 2022 general 

election. 

1 A1b of EAVS. 

2 A3a of EAVS. 

3 A8a of EAVS. 

4 A9a of EAVS. 

5 Mail, Email, Fax is A4a/A3a. 

In Person is A4b/A3a. Online is 

A4c/A3a. Motor Vehicle Dept. is 

A4d/A3a. Other is the sum of 

A4e–A4l/A3a. May not sum to 

100% because of missing data. 

6 In-Person Election Day is F1b. 

Mail is F1d+F1g. In-Person Early 

is F1f. Other is F1c+F1e+F1h. 

7 F1a of EAVS divided by citizen 

voting age population (CVAP). 

8 D2a of EAVS. 

9 D7a of EAVS. 

10 F3a–f, F5a–F9a of EAVS; 

number of jurisdictions that 

responded “Yes” divided by

number of jurisdictions in 

state/territory. 

11 C1a of EAVS. 

12 C1b/C1a of EAVS. 

13 C8a/C1b of EAVS. 

14 C9a/C1b of EAVS. 

15 Q17 and Q17a of Policy 

Survey. 

16 Q19 of Policy Survey. 

17 Q20 of Policy Survey. 

18 Q36 of Policy Survey. See 

survey questionnaire for full 

definitions of each type of 

audit.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF STEVENS INTERNATIONAL, INC.
AND SUBSIDIARIES AS OF MARCH 31, 2000 AND FOR THE THREE MONTHS THEN ENDED
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                               2
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      559
<ALLOWANCES>                                        77
<INVENTORY>                                      6,100
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 6,753
<PP&E>                                           9,337
<DEPRECIATION>                                   7,599
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   9,267
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            5,427
<BONDS>                                          7,509
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           950
<OTHER-SE>                                     (7,729)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     9,267
<SALES>                                            821
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   821
<CGS>                                              854
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      854
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   853
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,201
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (2,141)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (2,141)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (2,141)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.22)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.22)



</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE (IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT PER SHARE DATA) CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL
INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE QUARTER
ENDED JUNE 30, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                             250
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,078
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (172)
<INVENTORY>                                      3,744
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 6,052
<PP&E>                                           4,356
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (1,548)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   9,498
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            3,013
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            54
<OTHER-SE>                                       2,761
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     9,498
<SALES>                                          2,348
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 2,348
<CGS>                                            1,124
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    1,124
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  98
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    126
<INCOME-TAX>                                         3
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                123
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       123
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.02
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.00
        

</TABLE>
CCARAnnoucementPressRelease3-26-14FINAL




           News Release


Contacts:  
Investors            Media
Ankur Vyas        Hugh Suhr 
(404)827-6714        (404)827-6813    
    
    
For Immediate Release
March 26, 2014




SunTrust to Increase Quarterly Common Stock Dividend
and Share Repurchase Program


ATLANTA -- SunTrust Banks, Inc. (NYSE: STI) today announced that the Federal Reserve has completed its review of the Company's capital plan submitted in connection with the 2014 Comprehensive Capital Analysis and Review ("CCAR") and has no objections to the planned capital actions. The capital actions, subject to the approval of SunTrust’s Board of Directors, include:


		
	•
	An increase in the quarterly common stock dividend from $0.10 per share to $0.20 per share, beginning in the second quarter of 2014; 


		
	•
	The repurchase of up to $450 million of the Company's outstanding common stock to be completed between the second quarter of 2014 and the first quarter of 2015; 


		
	•
	Maintaining dividend payments on the Company's preferred stock.




"We are pleased to move ahead with our plans to increase the return of capital to our shareholders through a higher common stock dividend and a larger share repurchase program," said William H. Rogers, Jr., chairman and chief executive officer of SunTrust Banks, Inc. "We remain committed to driving further improvements in our business performance and delivering long-term value to our shareholders."


(more)


About SunTrust Banks, Inc.
SunTrust Banks, Inc., headquartered in Atlanta, is one of the nation's largest banking organizations, serving a broad range of consumer, commercial, corporate and institutional clients. As of December 31, 2013, SunTrust had total assets of $175.3 billion and total deposits of $129.8 billion. Through its flagship subsidiary, SunTrust Bank, the company operates an extensive branch and ATM network throughout the high-growth Southeast and Mid-Atlantic states and a full array of technology-based, 24-hour delivery channels. The company also serves clients in selected markets nationally. Its primary businesses include deposit, credit, trust and investment services. Through its various subsidiaries, the company provides mortgage banking, asset management, securities brokerage, and capital market services. SunTrust's Internet address is suntrust.com.


#     #     #
[Federal Register Volume 87, Number 67 (Thursday, April 7, 2022)]
[Notices]
[Page 20453]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2022-07387]



[[Page 20453]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke; Notice 
of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The contract proposals and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the contract proposals, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Neurological Disorders 
and Stroke Special Emphasis Panel; Biologics Contract Review.
    Date: May 3, 2022.
    Time: 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate contract proposals.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, Neuroscience Center, 6001 
Executive Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20852 (Virtual Meeting).
    Contact Person: Joel A. Saydoff, Ph.D., Scientific Review 
Officer, Scientific Review Branch, Division of Extramural 
Activities, NINDS/NIH, NSC, 6001 Executive Boulevard, Room 3205, MSC 
9529, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-496-9223, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#7d17121811530e1c0419121b1b3d131415531a120b"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="016b6e646d2f726078656e6767416f68692f666e77">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.853, 
Clinical Research Related to Neurological Disorders; 93.854, 
Biological Basis Research in the Neurosciences, National Institutes 
of Health, HHS)

    Dated: April 1, 2022.
Tyeshia M. Roberson-Curtis,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2022-07387 Filed 4-6-22; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>