alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
AWARENESS LETTER OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS





EXHIBIT 15.2





August 13,
2002





Securities and Exchange Commission


450 Fifth Street, N.W.


Washington, D.C. 20549





Commissioners:





We are aware that our report dated August 7, 2002 on our review of interim financial information of Ribapharm Inc. (the Company) as of and for
the period ended June 30, 2002 and included in the Companys quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter that ended is incorporated by reference in its Registration Statement on Form S-8 (File No. 333-91116).





Very truly yours,





/s/    
PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP


PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP


Los Angeles, California
## I N T H E C O U R T O F C R I M I N A L A P P E A L S O F T E X A S NO. WR-94,186-01

EX P ARTE MELVIN GEORG E QUINNEY, Appl icant

ON AP P LICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NO. 1990CR4339-W1 IN THE 227TH DIS TRICT COURT

F ROM BEXAR COUNTY

Per curiam . Y E A R Y , J. dissented. O P I N I O N Applicant was convicted of indece ncy with a child and sentenc ed to t we n t y y ear s’ imprisonment. The Four

th Court of Appea ls aff

irmed his conviction. Quinney v. State , No. 04-91- 00541-CR (Tex. App. — San Antonio May 27, 1992) (not designa ted for publication). Applicant filed t his application for a writ of habeas corpus in the county of conviction, and the distr i ct cler k forwa rded it to this Court. See T E X . C O D E C R I M . P R O C . art. 11.07. Applicant conte nds, among other things, that he is a ctually innocent. B ased on the rec ord, the trial court has deter

mined that Applicant has established by clea r and convincing evidenc e that he is ac tually

innocent. We a g ree . Relief is g rante d. Ex parte Elizondo , 947 S.W .2d 202 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996);2

Ex parte Tuley , 109 S.W .3d 388 (Tex. Crim. App. 2002). Th e j u d gm en t in cause number 90-CR4339 in the 227th District Court of Be x ar Co u n t y i s s et as ide, and Applicant is rema nded to the custody of the Sheriff of Be x ar County to answe r the char g es as set out in the indictment. The trial court shall issue any nece ssary bench war rant within ten day s from the date of this Court’s mandate. Copies of this opinion shall be sent to th e T e xa s D e p a r tm e n t o f Cr iminal J ustice–Corre ctional I nstitut ions Division and the Boa rd of Par dons and Paroles.

Deliver ed: Fe bruar

y 15, 2023 Do not publish
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

We hereby consent to the incorporation byreference in the Registration Statements on Form S-3 (Nos. 333-113213 and 333-125045) and Form S-8 (Nos. 333-47072, 333-68318, 333-101064, 333-105102, 333-121319) of Curon Medical, Inc. of our report dated March 29, 2006 relating to thefinancial statements and financial statement schedule, which appears in this Form 10-K. 

/s/    PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP 

San Jose, California 

March 29, 2006
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

JAMES A. MACHIN

, Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

, Appellee.

No. 4D2024

- 0197

[ June 27, 2024 ]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for

the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, St. Lucie County ; James W. McCann

, Judge; L.T. Case No. 562015CF000434

.

James A. Machin, Bristol, pro se.

No appearance required for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed

.

W ARNER

, M AY and G ERBER

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Sean SOUTH, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D18-618

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed November 28, 2018

Sean South, in proper person.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, for appellee.

Before SUAREZ, EMAS, and FERNANDEZ, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
A99A2413.

#### BOLER v. THE STATE.

(522 SE2d 676)

Decided September 17, 1999.

McMurray, Presiding Judge.

Defendant was tried before a jury and convicted of aggravated battery, possession of a firearm during the commission of a felony, discharge of a pistol near a public street, and carrying a pistol without a license. The evidence which authorized these convictions reveals that defendant fired a handgun during a high school graduation party and that a bullet from this gun wounded the victim. The victim’s spinal cord was severed — she will be paralyzed for the rest of her life.

This appeal followed the entry of defendant’s judgment of convictions and sentences. *Held:*

1. Defendant contends the trial court erred in allowing a Georgia State Patrol Officer to testify that two unidentified partygoers identified defendant as the gunman. Because these declarations were uttered in response to the lone officer’s unfocused questioning to a disturbed crowd upon his arrival at the crime scene, within minutes after the shooting and while the officer was aiding the wounded victim and assessing the immediate risk of another shooting, the trial court did not err in admitting the statements as part of the res gestae. When the circumstances under which a statement is uttered renders the statement free from suspicion or device of afterthought, a trial court’s admission of the statement under the res gestae rule will not be disturbed absent clear error. *Andrews v. State,*249 Ga. 223, 224-228 (290 SE2d 71); *Stovall v. State,*216 Ga. App. 138 (1) (453 SE2d 110). We find no such error in the case sub judice.

2. The trial court did not abuse its discretion by replacing a juror with an alternate juror after the jury began deliberations when it was discovered that the replaced juror met with a relative during a lunch break and that this relative stated her opinion as to defendant’s innocence. The replaced juror’s relative explained to the trial court: “I told her I didn’t feel like he was guilty because there was no evidence. No solid evidence.”

The trial court’s discharge of the juror in question had a sound basis in that it served the legally relevant purpose of preserving the integrity of the judicial process. *Miller v. State,*261 Ga. 679, 680 (6) (410 SE2d 101).

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Johnson, C. J., and Phipps, J., concur.*

*91
      *John A. Rumker,*for appellant.

*Richard E. Currie, District Attorney,*for appellee.
EX PARTE David LUCAS

CR-16-1061

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

September 13, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Mand. pet. dismissed.
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Geology General

Filters

              - science_science(3)
              - products_data(1)
              - products_publications(11)
              - multimedia_video(16)
              - (-)multimedia_video-149194(13)
              - multimedia_video-149195(1)
              - multimedia_video-149197(2)

## By Location

              - alabama(1)
              - alaska(8)
              - arizona(6)
              - arkansas(1)
              - california(43)
              - colorado(1)
              - commonwealth of the northern mariana islands(1)
              - florida(2)
              - georgia(1)
              - hawaii(15)
              - idaho(1)
              - indiana(1)
              - iowa(1)
              - louisiana(2)
              - maine(1)
              - maryland(2)
              - massachusetts(1)
              - michigan(1)
              - minnesota(2)
              - mississippi(1)
              - missouri(1)
              - nevada(1)
              - new jersey(2)
              - north carolina(2)
              - north dakota(1)
              - oregon(3)
              - puerto rico(2)
              - south carolina(1)
              - south dakota(2)
              - tennessee(1)
              - texas(2)
              - u.s. virgin islands(1)
              - virginia(4)
              - (-)washington(13)
              - west virginia(1)
              - wisconsin(4)
              - wyoming(2)

## By Year

Presentations and Events        May 17, 2023        Communicating landslide information and hazards with maps and graphics at the Washington Geological Survey

Presentations and Events        July 21, 2021        Washington Geological Survey’s Landslide Hazard Program

Presentations and Events        May 13, 2021        Status of (mostly) WA Volcanoes: Report to Emergency Managers 2020-21

Presentations and Events        March 23, 2021        Volcano Hazard Maps: Past, Present, and Future

Presentations and Events        June 22, 2022        Shear surface undulations modulate gouge strength and contribute to divergent landslide acceleration

Presentations and Events        April 6, 2021        CVO Monitoring Program: Keeping an Eye on Cascade Volcanoes

Presentations and Events        March 10, 2021        Mount St. Helens—Lives Changed, Lessons Learned, Legacies of 1980

Presentations and Events        February 23, 2021        Mount St. Helens Rocked Our World! What we've learned since 1980.

Presentations and Events        March 11, 2021        Managing Post-Fire, Climate-Induced Vegetation Transitions

Presentations and Events        June 19, 2020        Lahar Detection System Developments at Mount Rainier

Presentations and Events        March 26, 2020        Transboundary Connectivity Conservation for a Changing Climate

Presentations and Events        September 22, 2022        PubTalk-09/2022 - You Can be Powered by ShakeAlert®️ - Earthquake Early Warning for All!

Presentations and Events        June 24, 2021        PubTalk - 6/2021: Mount St. Helens Revisited
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 501 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 501

     To authorize testimony and representation in United States v. 
                              Nformangum.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           December 13, 2023

  Mr. Schumer (for himself and Mr. McConnell) submitted the following 
             resolution; which was considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
     To authorize testimony and representation in United States v. 
                              Nformangum.

Whereas, in the case of United States v. Nformangum, Cr. No. 22-367, pending in 
        the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas, the 
        prosecution has requested the production of testimony from Amy English, 
        Grant Murray, and Anthony Rodregous, employees of the Office of Senator 
        Ted Cruz;
Whereas, pursuant to sections 703(a) and 704(a)(2) of the Ethics in Government 
        Act of 1978, 2 U.S.C. Sec. Sec.  288b(a) and 288c(a)(2), the Senate may 
        direct its counsel to represent current and former officers and 
        employees of the Senate with respect to any subpoena, order, or request 
        for evidence relating to their official responsibilities;
Whereas, by the privileges of the Senate of the United States and Rule XI of the 
        Standing Rules of the Senate, no evidence under the control or in the 
        possession of the Senate may, by the judicial or administrative process, 
        be taken from such control or possession but by permission of the 
        Senate; and
Whereas, when it appears that evidence under the control or in the possession of 
        the Senate may promote the administration of justice, the Senate will 
        take such action as will promote the ends of justice consistent with the 
        privileges of the Senate: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That Amy English, Grant Murray, and Anthony Rodregous, 
employees in the Office of Senator Ted Cruz, are authorized to provide 
relevant testimony in the case of United States v. Nformangum, except 
concerning matters for which a privilege should be asserted.
    Sec. 2.  The Senate Legal Counsel is authorized to represent Ms. 
English, Messrs. Murray, and Rodregous, and any current or former 
officer or employees of Senator Cruz's office, in connection with the 
production of evidence authorized in section one of this resolution.
                                 <all>
```
James ROBINSON v. ALABAMA BOARD OF PARDONS & PAROLES

CR-16-0480

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

July 14, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Reh. denied.
```

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 244 (Thursday, December 19, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 103897]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-30149]

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

POSTAL SERVICE

Product Change--Priority Mail and USPS Ground Advantage[supreg] 
Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal ServiceTM.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: December 19, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean Robinson, 202-268-8405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
December 11, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a 
USPS Request to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage[supreg] 
Contract 529 to Competitive Product List. Documents are available at 
www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2025-778, K2025-777.

Sean Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2024-30149 Filed 12-18-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Statement of Financial position at September 30, 2000 (Unaudited) and the
Statement of Income for the nine months ended September 30, 2000 (Unaudited) and
is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                             310
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   15,660
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      6,677
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                65,875
<PP&E>                                          17,954
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (4,148)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  79,981
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           56,008
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           419
<OTHER-SE>                                     111,504
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    79,981
<SALES>                                         36,100
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                36,100
<CGS>                                           28,837
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   56,297
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,649
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (38,863)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (38,863)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (38,863)
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.01


</TABLE>
# C_2020433EN.01002502.xml

| 14.12.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 433/25 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.12.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 433/25

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Rayonen sad Lukovit (Bulgaria) lodged on 23 September 2020 — Criminal proceedings against AZ

(Case C-454/20)

(2020/C 433/32)

Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Rayonen sad Lukovit

Accused person

AZ

Questions referred

| 1. | Does the principle of legality of criminal offences and penalties allow national legislation which provides for both administrative and criminal liability for the same act, namely driving a motor vehicle that is not duly registered, in the absence of any criteria enabling the objective assessment of the degree of danger to society? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Does the principle of legality of criminal offences and penalties allow national legislation which provides for both administrative and criminal liability for the same act, namely driving a motor vehicle that is not duly registered, in the absence of any criteria enabling the objective assessment of the degree of danger to society?

| 2. | Should the Court of Justice answer the first question in the negative, what powers does the national court have to ensure the effective application of the principles of EU law? |
| --- | --- |

2.

Should the Court of Justice answer the first question in the negative, what powers does the national court have to ensure the effective application of the principles of EU law?

| 3. | Does the procedural possibility for the court to acquit the person accused of committing a criminal offence and impose an administrative penalty on him or her constitute a sufficient safeguard against the arbitrary application of the law? |
| --- | --- |

3.

Does the procedural possibility for the court to acquit the person accused of committing a criminal offence and impose an administrative penalty on him or her constitute a sufficient safeguard against the arbitrary application of the law?

| 4. | Is a penalty involving deprivation of liberty of up to a year proportionate for the purpose of Article 49(3) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union as regards a criminal offence committed by driving a motor vehicle which is not duly registered? |
| --- | --- |

4.

Is a penalty involving deprivation of liberty of up to a year proportionate for the purpose of Article 49(3) of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union as regards a criminal offence committed by driving a motor vehicle which is not duly registered?

---
**Exhibit 32.1**

**CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with this Quarterly Report of Harbor Global Company Ltd. (the “Company”)on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ending March 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Stephen G. Kasnet, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge: 

(1) The Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and 

(2) The information contained inthe Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company. 

Dated: May 5, 2006
Exhibit 99.1

      CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       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  OrderPro  Logistics,  Inc.  (the
"Company")  on Form 10-QSB for the period  ending March 31, 2003,  as filed with
the Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I,
Richard L. Windorski,  Chief Executive Officer of the Company and I, Patricia L.
Robinson,  Chief Financial  Officer,  certify  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  ss.1350 as
adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 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 Company.

IN WITNESS  WHEREOF,  the undersigned has executed this  certification as of the
22nd day of May 2003.


/s/ Richard L. Windorski
-----------------------------------
Richard L. Windorski
Chief Executive Officer


/s/ Patricia L. Robinson
-----------------------------------
Patricia L. Robinson
Chief Financial Officer
##### 



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
    By:
    /s/ Joyce M. SchuldtJoyce M. SchuldtSenior Vice President  Finance, Chief Financial Officer and Secretary (Principal Financial and
Principal Accounting Officer)
# C_2021471EN.01001402.xml

| 22.11.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 471/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.11.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 471/14

---

Appeal brought on 23 October 2020 by FL Brüterei M-V GmbH against the order of the General Court (Ninth Chamber, Extended Composition) made on 20 August 2020 in Case T-755/18, FL Brüterei M-V GmbH and Others v European Commission

(Case C-540/20 P)

(2021/C 471/19)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Appellant: FL Brüterei M-V GmbH (represented by: H. Schmidt, Rechtsanwalt)

Other party to the proceedings: Erdegut GmbH, Ökofarm Groß Markow GmbH, European Commission

By order of 24 September 2021, the Court of Justice of the European Union (Sixth Chamber) dismissed the appeal as being in part manifestly inadmissible and in part manifestly unfounded and ordered the appellant to bear its own costs.

---
EX PARTE Cedric Lamar WALLACE

CR-16-0978

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

August 30, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Mand. pet. dismissed.
Kenju Joseph KONN, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D18-681

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[February 14, 2019]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.