alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 4.3


 


Consent of Independent Registered
Public Accounting Firm


We consent to the
reference made to our firm under the caption “Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” in Part B of the Prospectus
and to the use of our report dated June 26, 2014, in this Registration Statement (Form S-6 No. 333-195985) of Smart Trust, Tax
Free Income Trust, Series 17.


 


/s/ Grant
Thornton LLP


Grant
Thornton LLP


Chicago, Illinois


June 26, 2014
* This order and judgment is not binding precedent, e xcept under the

doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and col lateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judg ments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and condi tions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3. 

## F I L E D United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### MAY 20 1999 

### PATRICK FISHER Clerk UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
ERSILIA E. YURMANN,

Plaintiff-Appellant,
v. TOGO WEST, in his official capacity as Secretary of the Army,

Defendant-Appellee. No. 98-2163 (D.C. No. CIV-95-1226-HB)

(D. N.M.)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

Before PORFILIO , McKAY , and LUCERO , Circuit Judges.

After examining the briefs and appellate record, th is panel has determined unanimously to grant the parties’ request for a dec ision on the briefs without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(f) and 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). T he case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.-2-

Plaintiff Ersilia E. Yurmann appeals from the distr ict court’s entry of summary judgment in favor of defendant on her claim s filed under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. §§ 2000e to 200 0e-17. Appellant is employed by the Department of the Armyat White Sands Missile Range, New Mexico. She alleged that the Ar my wrongfully failed to promote her based on sex discrimination and retaliation for protected activities. The district court granted summary judgment based o n its finding that appellant presented no evidence to show that the facially leg itimate reasons defendant produced for promoting another employee were a pret ext for illegal discrimination. The case is expressly narrowed on appeal. See Appellant’s Br. at 8. Appellant argues that the district court erred: (1 ) in finding that she presented no evidence of pretext for the employee selection Whit e Sands made; and (2) in granting summary judgment on her sex discriminationclaim instead of letting that claim proceed to trial. “We review the grant of summary judgment de novo, e xamining the record and the reasonable inferences to be drawn therefrom in the light most favorable to the nonmoving party.” Templeton v. Neodata Servs., Inc. , 162 F.3d 617, 618 (10th Cir. 1998).-3-

We have carefully reviewed the district court’s dec ision, the parties’ briefs, and the record on appeal. We find no error, and af firm for substantially the same reasons as those set forth in the district court’s memorandum opinion filed on May 5, 1998. AFFIRMED.

Entered for the Court

John C. Porfilio Circuit Judge
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUN-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1996
<CASH>                                               3,431
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       18,225
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                        307,659
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   329,315
<PP&E>                                             231,530
<DEPRECIATION>                                     231,236
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     335,602
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              856,445
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                            97,014
<OTHER-SE>                                        (617,857)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       335,602
<SALES>                                            443,176
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   443,176
<CGS>                                              670,728
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      670,728
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  37,880
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (265,432)
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (265,432)
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (265,432)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        (0.28)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        (0.28)
        


</TABLE>
No. 11-5246.

#### Enrique Alphonso Gayle, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 946, 132 S. Ct. 402,

181 L. Ed. 2d 263,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 7350.

October 11, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                                              5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM REGENCY
CENTER'S, LP QUARTERLY REPORT FOR THE PERIOD ENDED 9/30/98
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                                               0001066247
<NAME>                                              REGENCY CENTERS, LP
<MULTIPLIER>                                                           1
       
<S>                                                 <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                       9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                   DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                        SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                                        13,069,033
<SECURITIES>                                                           0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                 15,425,161
<ALLOWANCES>                                                   2,093,924
<INVENTORY>                                                            0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                       0
<PP&E>                                                       966,658,241
<DEPRECIATION>                                                30,092,439
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                               972,235,042
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                                  0
<BONDS>                                                                0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                  0
<PREFERRED>                                                            0
<COMMON>                                                               0
<OTHER-SE>                                                   554,409,575
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                 972,235,042
<SALES>                                                                0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                              82,229,584
<CGS>                                                                  0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                 17,035,859
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                              14,068,450
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                            14,522,548
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                               35,918,008
<INCOME-TAX>                                                           0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                           35,918,008
<DISCONTINUED>                                                         0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                        0
<CHANGES>                                                              0
<NET-INCOME>                                                  35,918,008
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                       1.34
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                       1.31
        


</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 135 (Wednesday, July 15, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 38159]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-18810]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. TM98-2-53-002]


KN Interstate Gas Transmission Co.; Notice of Revised Tariff 
Filing

July 9, 1998.
    Take notice that on July 1, 1998, KN Interstate Gas Transmission 
Co. (KNI) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, the 
following revised tariff sheets, proposed to be effective August 1, 
1998:

Third Revised Volume No. 1-A

2nd Rev First Revised Sheet No. 4-E
2nd Rev First Revised Sheet No. 4-F

First Revised Volume No. 1-C

2nd Rev Substitute Ninth Revised Sheet No. 4

    KNI states that this filing revises the fuel and loss percentage 
rates previously filed on June 1, 1998 in this proceeding, and sets 
forth a system-wide fuel and loss reimbursement percentage, rather than 
the zonal fuel and loss percentage previously filed. KNI states that, 
pursuant to the suspension order in its general rate proceeding in 
Docket No. RP98-117, it will be implementing a system-wide fuel rate 
effective August 1, 1998.
    Any person desiring to protest this filing should file a protest 
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., 
Washington, D.C. 20426, in accordance with Sec. 385.211 of the 
Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such protests must be filed as 
provided in Sec. 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests will 
be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action 
to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceedings. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and 
are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room.
David P. Boergers,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-18810 Filed 7-14-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
##### 



Exhibit 21.1
 EMERSON RADIO CORP. AND SUBSIDIARIES
EXHIBIT TO FORM 10-K
SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT
 Jurisdiction of
    
    Percentage ofName of Subsidiary
    
    Incorporation
    
    OwnershipEmerson Radio (Hong Kong) Limited.
    
    Hong Kong
    
    
    100.0
    %*Emerson Radio International Ltd.
    
    British Virgin Islands
    
    
    100.0
    %Emerson Global Limited
    
    British Virgin Islands
    
    
    100.0
    %
 
 *
    
    One share is owned by a resident director, pursuant to local law.
No. 11-52.

#### Kenny Archila, Petitioner v. KFC U.S. Properties, Inc.

565 U.S. 880, 132 S. Ct. 246,

181 L. Ed. 2d 141,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 5444.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 420 Fed. Appx. 667.
# C_2013313EN.01003001.xml

| 26.10.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 313/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.10.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 313/30

---

Action brought on 12 August 2013 — Gruppo Norton v OHIM — Marín Nicolás (Gruppo Norton S.r.l.)

(Case T-427/13)

2013/C 313/56

Language in which the application was lodged: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Gruppo Norton Srl (Carini, Italy) (represented by: García Lirola, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Victoriano Marín Nicolás (Alcantarailla, Spain)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | deliver a judgment in which, ruling on the substance of the case, it upholds the registration of the trade mark for all of the goods in respect of which it is sought. |
| --- | --- |

—

deliver a judgment in which, ruling on the substance of the case, it upholds the registration of the trade mark for all of the goods in respect of which it is sought.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Applicant for a Community trade mark: Gruppo Norton Srl

Applicant for a Community trade mark:

Community trade mark concerned: Figurative mark ‘Gruppo Norton S.r.l.’ for goods in Classes 7 and 9 — Community trade mark application No 10 169 753

Community trade mark concerned:

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings: Victoriano Marín Nicolás

Proprietor of the mark or sign cited in the opposition proceedings:

Mark or sign cited in opposition: Spanish trade mark ‘NORTON HISPANO’ for goods in Class 9

Mark or sign cited in opposition:

Decision of the Opposition Division: Opposition upheld in part

Decision of the Opposition Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Inadmissibility of the appeal

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Breach of Article 8(5) of Regulation No 207/2009

Pleas in law:

---
EXHIBIT 32.2

CERTIFICATION

PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, Larry E. Finger, the Executive Vice PresidentChief Financial Officer and Treasurer
of Federal Realty Investment Trust (the Trust), has executed this certification in connection with the filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission of the Trusts Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2005 (the Report). The undersigned hereby certifies 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 Trust.
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                       |  |              |  |                                                                               
|---------------------- |  | ------------ |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                       |  |              |  | /s/    Larry E. Finger                                                        
|Date:    March 2, 2006 |  | NAME: TITLE: |  | Larry E. Finger Executive Vice PresidentChief Financial Officer and Treasurer
# NYTS2006_FORMATS_2008_08_05

||
||
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-6847
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus KYLE JOSEPH MOMON, a/k/a Calvin Flavor, a/k/a Flavor Flave, a/k/a Cow, a/k/a Moo-Moo, Defendant - Appellant.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. Terrence W. Boyle, District Judge. (CR-92-70-BO, CA-96-189-BO) Submitted: September 30, 1997 Decided: October 28, 1997 Before HALL and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and PHILLIPS, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Kyle Joseph Momon, Appellant Pro Se. Fenita Talore Morris, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny Appellant's motion for a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Momon , Nos. CR92-70-BO; CA-96-189-BO (E.D.N.C. May 20, 1997). We dispense withoral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
A|1A MODE REPLY       |0|*|#|#
B|1B MODE REPLY       |0|*|#|#
D|SELECT REPLY CODE   |1|*|#|#
F|1F MODE REPLY       |0|T|B|#
G|FULL TEXT WRITE-IN  |0|*|#|#
H|2D MODE REPLY       |2|*|#|#
H|3D MODE REPLY       |3|*|#|#
H|4D MODE REPLY       |4|*|#|#
H|5D MODE REPLY       |5|*|#|#
H|6D MODE REPLY       |6|*|#|#
H|7D MODE REPLY       |7|*|#|#
H|8D MODE REPLY       |8|*|#|#
J|1D AND 1A MODE REPLY|1|A|X|#
J|1D AND 1B MODE REPLY|1|*|X|#
J|1D AND 1F MODE REPLY|1|B|T|X
J|2D AND 1A MODE REPLY|2|A|X|#
J|2D AND 1B MODE REPLY|2|*|X|#
J|2D AND 1F MODE REPLY|2|B|T|X
J|3D AND 1A MODE REPLY|3|A|X|#
J|3D AND 1B MODE REPLY|3|*|X|#
J|3D AND 1F MODE REPLY|3|B|T|X
J|4D AND 1A MODE REPLY|4|A|X|#
J|4D AND 1B MODE REPLY|4|*|X|#
J|4D AND 1F MODE REPLY|4|B|T|X
J|5D AND 1A MODE REPLY|5|A|X|#
J|5D AND 1B MODE REPLY|5|*|X|#
J|5D AND 1F MODE REPLY|5|B|T|X
J|6D AND 1A MODE REPLY|6|A|X|#
J|6D AND 1B MODE REPLY|6|*|X|#
J|6D AND 1F MODE REPLY|6|B|T|X
J|7D AND 1A MODE REPLY|7|A|X|#
J|7D AND 1B MODE REPLY|7|*|X|#
J|7D AND 1F MODE REPLY|7|B|T|X
J|8D AND 1A MODE REPLY|8|A|X|#
J|8D AND 1B MODE REPLY|8|*|X|#
J|8D AND 1F MODE REPLY|8|B|T|X
L|1L MODE REPLY       |0|*|#|#
No. 10-11282.

#### Juan Aparicio-Lopez, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 876, 132 S. Ct. 238,

181 L. Ed. 2d 135,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6652.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 425 Fed. Appx. 655.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 139 (Tuesday, July 21, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 39106]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-19354]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management
[AK-962-1410-00-P]


Notice for Publication; F-14908-A; Alaska Native Claims Selection

    In accordance with Departmental regulation 43 CFR 2650.7(d), notice 
is hereby given that a decision to issue conveyance under the 
provisions of Sec. 14(a) of the Alaska Native Claims Settlement Act of 
December 18, 1971, 43 U.S.C. 1601, 1613(a), will be issued to Sitnasuak 
Native Corporation for 0.614 acre. The lands involved are in the 
vicinity of Nome, Alaska.
    The Court House lot and School lot, within U.S. Survey No. 451.
    A notice of the decision will be published once a week, for four 
(4) consecutive weeks, in The Nome Nugget. Copies of the decision may 
be obtained by contacting the Alaska State Office of the Bureau of Land 
Management, 222 West Seventh Avenue, #13, Anchorage, Alaska 99513-7599 
((907) 271-5960).
    Any party claiming a property interest which is adversely affected 
by the decision, an agency of the Federal government or regional 
corporation, shall have until August 20, 1998 to file an appeal. 
However, parties receiving service by certified mail shall have 30 days 
from the date of receipt to file an appeal. Appeals must be filed in 
the Bureau of Land Management at the address identified above, where 
the requirements for filing an appeal may be obtained. Parties who do 
not file an appeal in accordance with the requirements of 43 CFR Part 
4, Subpart E, shall be deemed to have waived their rights.
Katherine L. Flippen,
Land Law Examiner, ANCSA Team, Branch of 962 Adjudication.
[FR Doc. 98-19354 Filed 7-20-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-JA-P
EXHIBIT 10(iii)B(2)

                                   EXHIBIT F

Performance criteria for FY 1998 - FY 2000 cycle include the following:
Aggregate Income, defined as the targeted income, before taxes and extraordinary
items,<F5> for the entire three-year period, as shown in the table below.

Performance goals and amounts funding the payout pool include the following:

Performance              Aggregate Income          % of Net Earnings to Pool
Level                              

Below Target              Below $498,327,000                   0%
Target                          $498,327,000            .83% of earnings
Above Target              Above $498,327,000            .83% of earnings



During the FY 1998 - 2000 cycle, Farmland Industries, Inc. must return to its
members at least $168,912,000 in cash,<F6> or no payout will occur under this 
plan.

In order to ensure the integrity of Farmland's financial strength, a limit on
funded indebtedness as a percent of capitalization is incorporated into this
plan.  In the event that the indebtedness ratio is above the level which is
established by bank covenants at the end of the cycle, not payout will occur
under this plan.


                    
<F5> The Chief  Financial  Officer and  the  Chief Executive  Officer  must
     approve the classification  of any  item as  "extraordinary."   Transaction
     deemed as "extraordinary"  and therefore excluded  in the determination  of
     Income for variable compensation include:
     _    The punitive  portion of  litigation results  in favor  of or  against
          Farmland, excluding redemptive payments on normal business matter  
          where the intent is  to substantially restore net income to  where 
          it would have  been had the incident  not occurred.
     _    Nonrecurring (one-time) adjustments to income  or expense such as  the
          gain from  settlement of the retirement plan.  Any such items would 
          generally  be reported as extraordinary items on Farmland financial 
          statements under generally accepted accounting principles.
     _    The gain or loss on the disposal of a major asset, group of assets, or
          investments.
     _    The impact of adjustments resulting from LIFO inventory computations
          or reserves.
     _    Other items as approved.

     Specific requests by an operating unit for treatment of an item as
     "extraordinary" must be approved by the Senior Management representative 
     before review by the Chief Financial Officer and Chief Executive Officer.
                    
<F6> Cash Returned to Members includes cash patronage, equity  redemptions,
     additional equity redemptions due  to tax savings  on net operating  losses
     (NOL), ownerships retirements, capital credits, preferred stock  dividends,
     preferred stock redemptions, and estate settlements.
No. 11-5371.

#### Rafael Juan Colon, Petitioner v. William Lee, Superintendent, Green Haven Correctional Facility.

565 U.S. 904, 132 S. Ct. 303,

181 L. Ed. 2d 184,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 5776.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.
December 15, 2016

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

THE PORT OF HOUSTON AUTHORITY OF HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS, 

Appellant

NO. 14-10-00708-CV V.

ZACHRY CONSTRUCTION CORPORATION

N/K/A ZACHRY INDUSTRIAL, INC., Appellee

________________________________

This cause, an appeal from the judgment in favor of appellee, Zachry 

Construction Corporation n/k/a/ Zachry Industrial, Inc., signed April 28, 2010, was 

heard on the transcript of the record. We have inspected the record and find no 

error in the judgment. We order the judgment of the court below AFFIRMED.

We order appellant, the Port of Houston Authority of Harris County, Texas, 

to pay all costs incurred in this appeal. 

We further order this decision certified below for observance.