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



                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1
                         Independent Auditors' Consent

The Board of Directors
VISX, Incorporated:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in registration statement nos.
33-34374, 33-40519, 33-53806, 33-69044, 333-23999, 333-53041, 333-75207, and
333-57524 on Form S-8 of VISX, Incorporated of our report dated March 31, 2003
with respect to the consolidated balance sheet of VISX, Incorporated as of
December 31, 2002 and the related consolidated statements of operations,
stockholders' equity and comprehensive income, and cash flows for the year then
ended and the related financial statement schedule, which report appears in the
December 31, 2002 annual report on Form 10-K of VISX, Incorporated.

Our report refers to our audit of the adjustments that were applied to revise
the 2001 and 2000 consolidated financial statements, as more fully described in
Note 1 to the consolidated financial statements. However, we were not engaged to
audit, review, or apply any procedures to the 2001 and 2000 consolidated
financial statements other than with respect to such adjustments.

KPMG LLP

Mountain View, California
March 31, 2003
**EXHIBIT32.1**

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The certifications setforth below are hereby submitted to the Securities and Exchange Commissionpursuant to, and solely for the purpose of complying with, Section 1350 ofChapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code in connection with the filingon the date hereof with the Securities and Exchange Commission of the AnnualReport on Form 10-K of MAIR Holdings, Inc. and subsidiaries (the “Company”)for the fiscal year ended March 31, 2007 (the “Report”).

Each of the undersigned,the Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer, respectively, of theCompany, hereby certifies that, as of the end of the period covered by theReport:

1.               Such Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

2.               The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| /s/  PAUL F. FOLEY                                     |   |
|--------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                                                   |
| Paul F. Foley                                          |
| President and Chief Executive Officer                  |
| June 19, 2007                                          |
|                                                   |
|                                                   |
| /s/ ROBERT E. WEIL                                     |   |
|                                                   |
| Robert E. Weil                                         |
| Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and  Treasurer |
| June 19, 2007                                          |
|                                                        |        |  |

 

1

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000837290
<NAME> SHERRI NITTA
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                              12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                           1,581
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    8,623
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                11,078
<PP&E>                                         113,172
<DEPRECIATION>                                  28,941
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  95,940
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            6,018
<BONDS>                                         22,500
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,928
<OTHER-SE>                                      52,341
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    95,940
<SALES>                                         37,553
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                37,886
<CGS>                                           22,160
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   22,160
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 2,236
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 667
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 12,871
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,891
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              7,980
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     7,980
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .69
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .69
        

</TABLE>
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-1475

JOHN N. DENNETT; GRAFTON G. DIETZ, JR.; STEPHANIE DIETZ; BRIAN L. BOND, and all other employees of the Anne Arundel County Fire Department similarly situated; KAREN ESTEPP; MICHELE DELALLA; MARA L. EICENS; KENNETH L. PARDOE; MICHAEL CONNOR; PETER G. STALEY; STEVEN K. FRYE; MARIANNE C. ANDERSON; JAMES DAVID KRUGER; MICHAEL J. MARSIGLIA; CECILIA WARREN; DAVID WILLIAMS; ROLAND K. FINK, JR.; DOUGLAS G. FISHEL, JR.; FRANK R. STAMM; KEITH D. SWINDLE; JOHN STEVEN THOMPSON, Plaintiffs - Appellants,
versus ANNE ARUNDEL COUNTY, MARYLAND, Defendant - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. Walter E. Black, Jr., Senior District Judge. (CA-96-1448-B) Submitted: April 20, 2000 Decided: May 1, 2000 Before WILKINSON, Chief Judge, and WIDENER and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.2Francis J. Collins, KAHN, SMITH & COLLINS, P.A., Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellants. Linda M. Schuett, County Attorney, John F. Breads, Jr., Senior Assistant County Attorney, Annapolis, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).3 PER CURIAM: Appellants appeal the district court’s order granting Anne Arundel County’s second motion for reconsideration and its motion for summary judgment on Appellants’ claim of unlawful retaliation in violation of the Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA). See 29 U.S.C. § 215(a)(3). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. We conclude Appellants failed to establish a prima facie case of retaliation under the FLSA. See McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792 (1973); Conner v. Schnuck Mkts., Inc. , 121 F.3d 1390, 1394 (10th Cir. 1997) (applying McDonnell Douglas burdenshifting scheme to FLSA retaliation claim). Furthermore, even if Appellants established a prima facie case for retaliation, they failed to show the County’s legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for its actions was pretextual. See Texas Dep't of Community Affairs v. Burdine , 450 U.S. 248, 253-54 (1981). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s order based uponits reasoning stated from the bench. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
STATE v. Cedric Theodis HOBBS, Jr.

263PA18-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 28, 2019

John Keating Wiles, Attorney at Law, Raleigh.

Amy Kunstling Irene, Special Deputy Attorney General, William R. West, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

Sterling P. Rozear, Assistant Appellate Defender, Cedric Theodis Hobbs, Jr., for Hobbs, Cedric Theodis (Jr.)

Donald H. Beskind, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, for Fred T. Korematsu Center for Law and Equality.

David Weiss, Attorney at Law, for Coalition of State and National Criminal Justice and Civil Rights Advocates.

James E. Coleman, Jr., Attorney at Law, Elizabeth Hambourger, Attorney at Law, Durham, for Coalition of State and National Criminal Justice and Civil Rights Advocates.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 28th of June 2019 by Fred T. Korematsu Center for Law and Quality for leave to file Amicus Curiae Brief:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 28th of June 2019."

Unless already submitted, the Amicus Brief shall be submitted to the court within the times allowed and in the manner provided by Appellate Rule 28(i).
### MANDATE

THE STATE OF TEXAS

TO THE 289TH JUDICIA L DISTRICT COURT OF BEXAR COUNTY, GREETI NGS:

Before our Court of Appeals for the Fourth District of Texas on May 10, 2017, the cause upon appeal to revise or reverse your judgment between

In the Matter of B.S.P., Appellant

V.

No. 04

- 16

- 00343

- CV and Tr. Ct. No. CM2012JUV01933

was determined, and therein our said Court of Appeals made its or der in these words:



## In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s judgment is AFFIRMED. Court

- appointed counsel’s motion to withdraw is GRANTED.

WHEREFORE, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court of Appeals for the Fourth District of Texas, in this behalf and in all things have the order duly recognized, obeyed, and executed.

WITNESS the Hon. Sandee Bryan Mari on, Chief Justice of the Court of Appeals for the Fourth District of Texas, with the seal of the Court affixed and the City of San Antonio on July 19, 2017

.
LUZ ESTRADA, CHIEF DEPUTY CLERK

____________________________ Cynthia A. Martinez Deputy Clerk, Ext. 53853BILL OF COSTS


### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, FOURTH DISTRICT, AT SAN ANTONIO

No. 04

- 16

- 00343

- CV

In the Matter of B.S.P.

v.

(NO. CM2012JUV01933 IN 2 89TH JUDICIAL DISTRI CT COURT OF BEXAR CO UNTY)

TYPE OF FEE CHARGES PAID BY FILING $205.00 EXEMPT N/A

Balance of costs owing to the Fourth Court of Appeals, San Antonio, Texas: 0.00

**Court costs in this cause shall be paid as per the Judgment issued by this Court.** 

I, LUZ ESTRADA , CHIEF DEPUTY CLERK OF THE FOURTH COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF TEXAS, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true and correct copy of the cost bill of THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS, sho wing the charges and payments, in the above numbered and styled cause, as the same appears of record in this office.

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, witness my hand and the Seal of the COURT OF APPEALS for the Fourth District of Texas, this July 19, 2017

.
LUZ ESTRADA , CHIEF DEPUTY CLERK

____________________________ Cynthia A. Martinez Deputy Clerk, Ext. 53853
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    Exhibit 23.2

                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We hereby consent to the incorporation of reference in the Registration
Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-50273) of Consolidation Capital of North America,
Inc. of our report dated December 5, 1997, except as to Note 14, which is as of
February 10, 1999, relating to the financial statements of Toledo Pickling &
Steel Sales, Inc., which appears in the Current Report on Form 8-K/A of
Consolidated Capital of North America, Inc. dated February 12, 1999.



/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers, LLP
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Toledo Ohio
February 10, 1999
ACCARDI v. HARTFORD UNDERWRITERS INSURANCE COMPANY

42A19-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

May 15, 2019

Daniel K. Bryson, Attorney at Law, J. Hunter Bryson, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, for Accardi, Thomas.

Stephen D. Feldman, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, Kim E. Rinehart, Attorney at Law, Pro Hac Vice, David R. Roth, Attorney at Law, Pro Hac Vice, for Hartford Underwriters Insurance Company.

Mark R. Sigmon, Attorney at Law, Raleigh, for United Policyholders.

Roger A. Peters, II, Attorney at Law, for American Property Casualty Insurance Association.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 13th of May 2019 by Gary E. Mason for Admission Pro Hac Vice:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 15th of May 2019."
OMNI AIR INTERNATIONAL

P.O. BOX 582527  TULSA, OK 74158  918-836-5393  FAX: 918-831-3098

U. S. Department of Transportation 21 January 2013

Docket Operations, M-30

West Building ground floor,

Room W12-140

1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE.

Washington, DC 20590

Ladies/Gentlemen:

In accordance with the Code of Federal Regulations, 14 CFR §11.25, Omni Air 

International petitions the Administrator for an extension of Exemption No. 9878 

(Docket number FAA -2009 – 0443).This exemption is set to expire on May 31st 2013.

Exemption 9878 provides relief, under certain conditions and limitations, from 14 

CFR 121.623(a) and (d), 121.643 and 121.645(d) to the extent necessary to allow Omni 

to conduct its supplemental operations within the 48 contiguous United States and the 

District of Columbia using the flight regulations for alternate airports as required by 

121.619 and fuel reserves requirements as required by 121.639 that are applicable to 

domestic operations.

This exemption has been used to the benefit of the traveling public for many years, 

with no known compromise of safety. With regard to public interest and equivalent 

levels of safety, the circumstances that warranted the initial grant of exemption continue 

to exist.

The renewal of this exemption is not a controversial issue. For this reason, and the 

reasons stated above, Omni Air International requests that a finding of good cause be 

made for waiving publication in the Federal Register. Granting the request for relief will 

set no precedents. The existence of the exemption is well known and widely accepted.

If any further information is required, please call me at (918) 831-3067.

Respectfully,

Robert E. Zeng

Director of Operations

Omni Air International
STATE v. Ben Lee CAPPS

206A19-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

July 22, 2019

Michelle F. Lynch, GAL Appellate Counsel.

Nicholas C. Woomer-Deters, Assistant Appellate Defender, For Capps, Ben Lee.

Glenn Gerding, Appellate Defender, For Capps, Ben Lee.

Vinston Walton, Associate Attorney General, For State of North Carolina.

Kristin Jo Uicker, Assistant Attorney General, For State of North Carolina.

Ted Bell, District Attorney, for State.

The following order has been entered on the Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief filed on the 22nd of July 2019 by State of NC:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 22nd of July 2019."

State of NC shall have up to and including the 26th day of August 2019 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court.
Exhibit 23

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration
statements (No. 333-02465 and No. 333-44243) on Form S-8 and in the registation
statement (No. 333-04559) on Form S-3 of Sparta Foods, Inc. of our report dated
November 12, 1999 relating to the financial statements of Sparta Foods, Inc. and
Subsidiary as of September 30, 1999 and 1998 which report appears in the
September 30, 1999 annual report on Form 10-KSB of Sparta Foods, Inc.

/s/ McGladrey & Pullen, LLP
Minneapolis, Minnesota
December 27, 1999
June 29, 2015

Kevin Cooper

705 Powers Ferry Road #415

Marietta, GA 30067

Dear Mr. Cooper:

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption from 

Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR). It explains why we can not process your 

request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can Not Process Your Request

We entered your June 24, 2015, exemption request into the public docket (No. FAA-2015-

2432), but we are unable to process your request any further. The information you sent does

not comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the request 

any further, you must send us all of the following:

 The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek relief, the extent of the 

relief you seek, and the reason you seek relief.

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would 

benefit the public as a whole.

 The reasons why the exemption would not adversely affect safety or how the exemption 

would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you 

seek an exemption.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described 

earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your 

petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption.
2

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you 

further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267-9677.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brenda Robeson

Program Analyst, Airmen and 

 Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
6/25/2015 Regulations.gov ­ Other Document

http://www.regulations.gov/#!documentDetail;D=FAA­2015­2432­0001 1/2

Kevin Cooper - Exemption/Rulemaking

This Other document was issued by the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA)

For related information, Open Docket Folder

Content

Requesting FAA authorization to operate a UAS for civil (non­governmental) purposes other than for

recreation or hobby for aerial photography and videography of real estate for realtors and private

homeowners. The UAS proposed by the petitioner is a DJI Phantom 2 and DJI Phantom 3.

Comment Now!

ID: FAA­2015­2432­0001

Document Information

Date Posted:

Jun 24, 2015

Show More Details

Submitter Information

Submitter Name:

Kevin Cooper

Mailing Address:

Revealing Homes

Mailing Address 2:

705 Powers Ferry Road #415

City:

Marietta

Country:

United States

State or Province:

GA

ZIP/Postal Code:

30067
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Labor

###### Employment and Training Administration 

          - [TA-W-64,389] 

                    By application received on February 4, 2009, the petitioner requested administrative reconsideration of the negative determination regarding workers' eligibility to apply for Trade Adjustment Assistance (TAA) and Alternative Trade Adjustment Assistance (ATAA) applicable to workers and former workers of the subject firm. The determination was issued on December 22, 2008. The Notice of Determination was published                           ( print page 10300)                        in the                     **Federal Register**                     on January 14, 2009 (74 FR 2139).                 

The initial investigation resulted in a negative determination based on the finding that imports of color concentrates did not contribute importantly to worker separations at the subject firm and no shift in production to a foreign source occurred. 

In the request for reconsideration, the petitioner provided additional information regarding a shift in production of color concentrates to Mexico. 

The Department has carefully reviewed the request for reconsideration and the existing record and has determined that the Department will conduct further investigation to determine if the workers meet the eligibility requirements of the Trade Act of 1974. 

## Conclusion 

After careful review of the application, I conclude that the claim is of sufficient weight to justify reconsideration of the U.S. Department of Labor's prior decision. The application is, therefore, granted. 

Signed at Washington, DC, this 24th day of February 2009. 

Elliott S. Kushner, 

Certifying Officer, Division of Trade Adjustment Assistance.

 [FR Doc. E9-5044 Filed 3-9-09; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 4510-FN-P
-81 -80 -79 -78 -77 -76 -75

 37

 38

 39

 40

 41

★

▲

▲

▲ ▲

★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲

 500

 1000

 1500

 100

18 12 06 00

08/04

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 04 Aug 07

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 38.77 N 77.11 W Meters AGL
exv10w30






Exhibit 10.30




			
	 	 	 
	As of October 1, 2010
	 	






Mr. J. Stuart Moore

4710 63rd Blvd. West

Bradenton, FL 34210



RE: Amendment to the Separation Agreement dated July 31, 2006, between Sapient Corporation
(“Sapient”) and J. Stuart Moore (the “Separation Agreement”)



Dear Stuart:



This letter sets forth our mutual understanding regarding certain changes to the benefits granted
you under your Separation Agreement and will serve as an amendment thereof.



Our mutual understanding is as follows:



If and when the Sapient Board of Directors (the “Board”) determines that your services as a Board
member will be compensated in accordance with the compensation arrangements applicable to outside
Directors of the Board, the benefits to which you are entitled under your Separation Agreement will
cease, except for the following:





	 	o	 	The COBRA medical insurance premium payments described under the “COBRA Benefits
Continuation” section of your Separation Agreement
	 
	 	o	 	Up to eight (8) hours per month of administrative support from your former
executive assistant (or her successor)




Please indicate your agreement with the above by signing the two enclosed copies of this
letter and returning one of them to Jane Owens, General Counsel, at the Company’s Boston
headquarters.



Best regards,




	 	 	 

	/s/ Alan J. Herrick
 

Alan J. Herrick, Chief Executive Officer

	 	 
	 
	 	 
	ACCEPTED AND AGREED TO:
	 	 
	 
	 	 
	/s/ J. Stuart Moore
	 	 
	 

J. Stuart Moore