alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 23.1** **Consent    of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration    statements    (No. 333-142201)    on    Form S-8    of Asta Funding, Inc. of our reports dated December 27,    2007 with respect to our audit of the consolidated balance    sheets of Asta Funding, Inc. and subsidiaries as of    September 30, 2007 and 2006, and the related consolidated    statements of operations, stockholders’ equity and cash    flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended    September 30, 2007, and management’s assessment of the    effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of    September 30, 2007 and the effectiveness of internal    control over financial reporting as of September 30, 2007,    which reports appear in the September 30, 2007 annual    report on    Form 10-K    of Asta Funding, Inc. and subsidiaries. /s/  Eisner,    LLP    Eisner, LLP     New York, NY    December 27, 2007
(January 24, 1986)

#### In the Matter of Michael Clements, Petitioner, v Eugene LeFevre, as Superintendent of Clinton Correctional Facility, et al., Respondents.

— Motion for permission to proceed as a poor person treated as an application, pursuant to CPLR 5704 (a), to review an order of the Supreme Court at Special Term, which denied petitioner’s application for an order to show cause to commence a proceeding against respondents pursuant to CPLR article 78. Application denied *(see, Matter of King v Gregorie,*90 AD2d 922, *Iv dismissed*58 NY2d 822). Mahoney, P. J., Kane, Yesawich, Jr., Levine and Harvey, JJ., concur.
INDEPENDENT AUDITOR'S CONSENT


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Annual Report on
Form-10KSB under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 of Pelican
Properties, International Corp. for the year ended December 31, 1997 of our
report dated April 9, 1997 insofar as such report relates to the financial
statements and schedules of Pelican Properties, International Corp. for the
year ended December 31, 1997.

/s/ GARCIA, ESPINOSA, MIYARES & CO.
-----------------------------------
    GARCIA, ESPINOSA, MIYARES & CO.

Miami, Florida
April 14, 1998
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 Justice Drug Enforcement Administration [Docket No. DEA-871]
 AGENCY: Drug Enforcement Administration, Justice.
 ACTION: Notice of application.
 SUMMARY: Purisys, LLC. has applied to be registered as an importer of basic class(es) of controlled substance(s). Refer to Supplementary Information listed below for further drug information.
 DATES: Registered bulk manufacturers of the affected basic class(es), and applicants therefore, may file written comments on or objections to the issuance of the proposed registration on or before August 30, 2021. Such persons may also file a written request for a hearing on the application on or before August 30, 2021.
 ADDRESSES: Written comments should be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attention: DEA Federal Register Representative/DPW, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152. All requests for a hearing must be sent to: Drug Enforcement Administration, Attn: Administrator, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152. All request for a hearing should also be sent to: (1) Drug Enforcement Administration, Attn: Hearing Clerk/OALJ, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152; and (2) Drug Enforcement Administration, Attn: DEA Federal Register Representative/DPW, 8701 Morrissette Drive, Springfield, Virginia 22152.


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with 21 CFR 1301.34(a), this is notice that on June 29, 2021, Purisys, LLC., 1550 Olympic Drive, Athens, Georgia 3601-1602, applied to be registered as an importer of the following basic class(es) of controlled substance(s): Controlled substance
Drug code
ScheduleOpium, raw
9600
IIOpium, powdered
9639
IIOpium, granulated
9640
II
 The company plans to import Opium, raw (9600), Opium, powered (9639) and Opium, granulated (9640) to manufacture Active Pharmaceutical Ingredient (API) only for distribution to its customers. No other activity for these drug codes is authorized for this registration. Approval of permit applications will occur only when the registrant's business activity is consistent with what is authorized under 21 U.S.C. 952(a)(2). Authorization will not extend to the import of the Food and Drug Administration-approved or non-approved finished dosage forms for commercial sale. Brian S. Besser, Acting Assistant Administrator.


[FR Doc. 2021-16142 Filed 7-28-21; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE P
#### Daniel Rivera, Appellant, v Triple M. Roofing Corp., Respondent.

— In a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Gowan, J.), dated May 24, 1984, which denied his motion to vacate the marking of this matter as settled and to restore the action to the Trial Calendar.

Order reversed, on the law, without costs or disbursements, motion granted, and matter remitted to the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, for further proceedings consistent herewith.

We have previously held that an attorney who appears at a pretrial settlement conference without expressly qualifying his authority impliedly acknowledges his authority to bind his client *(see, Collazo v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp.,*103 AD2d 789; 22 NYCRR 699.6). At bar, however, it is undisputed that the acceptance of the proffered settlement was expressly conditioned on counsel’s obtaining his client’s approval thereof *(see, Graffeo v Brenes,*85 AD2d 656). Thus, the instant case is distinguishable from one in which an attorney with the implied authority to bind his client uncondi*562tionally consents to a settlement and then later seeks to vacate the settlement on the ground that he was without authority to do so *(see, Continental Cas. Co. v Chrysler Constr. Co.,*80 Mise 2d 552).

Moreover, it does not appear from the record before us that the provisions of CPLR 2104 were complied with. The purported stipulation of settlement reached in chambers was not reduced to writing nor were its terms entered in the minutes of an open court proceeding. As we held in *Collazo (supra),*notwithstanding the favor with which stipulations of settlement are generally viewed *(see, Matter of Galasso,*35 NY2d 319), an oral stipulation will not be enforced unless its terms are definite and it is made in open court (CPLR 2104; *Collazo v New York City Health & Hosps. Corp., supra; see also, Matter of Dolgin Eldert Corp.,*31 NY2d 1).

Accordingly, plaintiff is entitled to have the purported settlement vacated and the action restored to the Trial Calendar. Mangano, J. P., Thompson, Bracken and Brown, JJ., concur.
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Northwest Watershed Research Center: Boise, ID
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    Scientific Products
                        Publications
                                    Models
                                    Published Datasets
                                    Snow Pack Reports
                    Reynolds Creek
                        Watershed Description
                                    Data AccessSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Pacific West Area Boise, Idaho Northwest Watershed Research Center Docs dev







dygraphheadline bar   Air Temperatures at selected sites on Reynolds Creek Experimental Watershed


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Horticultural Crops Production and Genetic Improvement Research Unit: Corvallis, OR
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    CareersSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Pacific West Area Corvallis, Oregon Horticultural Crops Production and Genetic Improvement Research Unit People Lee, Jungmin







Technical Staffheadline bar Chris Rennaker Biological Science Technician chris.rennaker@usda.gov  Lee, Jungmin Home


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov
#### In the Matter of Colin E. Ingham, Petitioner, v Public Service Commission of the State of New York et al., Respondents.

— Motion by respondent Power Authority of the State of New York to dismiss a proceeding brought pursuant to Public Service Law § 129.

Motion granted.

Public Service Law § 128 (1) provides that "[a]ny *party*aggrieved by any order issued on an application for a certificate [of environmental compatibility and public need] may *719apply for a rehearing under section twenty-two within thirty days after issuance of the order” (emphasis added). That statute states further that a proceeding may be brought in the Appellate Division to review such an order, and that "[s]uch proceeding shall be initiated * * * within thirty days after the issuance of a final order by the [Public Service] commission upon the application for [a] rehearing”. Public Service Law § 124 defines the various persons, officials, and bodies which are included as "parties” to certification proceedings.

It is undisputed that petitioner Colin Ingham did not commence this proceeding within 30 days after the issuance of the final order of the Public Service Commission on his application for a rehearing. His proceeding would accordingly be time barred unless, as Mr. Ingham argues, the 30-day time period is measured from the date he purportedly received notice of the order, rather than from the date the order was actually issued *(cf Matter of Biondo v New York State Bd. of Parole,*60 NY2d 832; *Bernstein Co. v Popolizio,*97 AD2d 735). This argument assumes that Mr. Ingham was entitled to notice of the order made upon his application for a rehearing. He was not. Mr. Ingham has failed to demonstrate that he met the requirements of Public Service Law § 124 (1) (j) in order to be considered a "party”; he cannot, therefore, argue that he was entitled to notice of the Public Service Commission’s order denying his application for a rehearing *(see,*16 NYCRR 2.4). That being the case, there is no basis upon which to excuse his failure to commence the proceeding in a timely manner. Mollen, P. J., Lazer, Mangano and Gibbons, JJ., concur.
#### Rebecca Ayala, an Infant by her Mother and Natural Guardian Lydia Esther Quintana, et al., Appellants, v Daniel Cruz et al., Respondents, et al., Defendant.

[945 NYS2d 240]—

*700Judgment, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Sharon A.M. Aarons, J.), entered on or about June 14, 2011, dismissing the complaint on the ground that plaintiffs did not suffer serious injuries within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d), and bringing up for review an order, same court and Justice, entered on or about June 7, 2011, which granted defendants’ motions for summary judgment, unanimously modified, on the law, to reinstate the claims of permanent consequential limitation and significant limitation of use of the lumbar spines against all defendants, and otherwise affirmed, without costs. Appeal from the aforesaid order unanimously dismissed, without costs, as subsumed in the appeal from the judgment.

Defendants established prima facie that plaintiffs did not suffer either significant limitation or permanent consequential limitation of use of their lumbar spines, by submitting the affirmations of two orthopedists who found full ranges of motion in all planes (see *Thompson v Abbasi,*15 AD3d 95, 96 [2005]). However, defendants failed to make a prima facie showing that plaintiffs’ injuries were not caused by the accident. One of their orthopedists conceded that the injuries were caused by the accident, and their neurologist’s opinion was too equivocal to satisfy their burden with respect to causation (see *e.g. Biascochea v Boves,*93 AD3d 548 [2012]; *Mitchell v Calle,*90 AD3d 584, 585 [2011]).

Plaintiffs submitted the affirmations of a radiologist who reviewed MRI films of their lumbar spines taken about two months after the accident and found that plaintiff Quintana had bulging discs at numerous levels, and at least one disc herniation, and that plaintiff Ayala, then 18 years old, had bulging discs at three levels. In addition, plaintiffs’ treating physician conducted EMG tests that showed that Quintana suffered from acute right L5-S1 radiculopathy and Ayala suffered from acute L4 radiculopathy. The physician also found upon testing on multiple occasions that plaintiffs had diminished ranges of motion in their spines *(see Antonio v Gear Trans Corp.,*65 AD3d 869 [2009]), and causally related those injuries to the accident *(see Pommells v Perez,*4 NY3d 566, 574-575 [2005]; *Yuen v Arka Memory Cab Corp.,*80 AD3d 481 [2011]). With respect to the alleged gap in treatment, plaintiffs’ treating physician opined that plaintiffs had reached maximum medical improvement when treatment stopped and that further treatment would only have been palliative. Either of these is a reasonable explanation sufficient to raise an issue of fact *(Pommells,*4 NY3d at 577; *Mitchell,*90 AD3d at 585).

*701Plaintiffs’ 90/180-day claims are untenable in light of Quintana’s testimony that she only missed two days of work because of the accident and Ayala’s testimony that she did not miss any time from school because of the accident *(see Gaddy v Eyler,*79 NY2d 955, 958 [1992]; *Ramos v Rodriguez,*93 AD3d 473 [2012]). Concur — Gonzalez, P.J., Andrias, Saxe, DeGrasse and Román, JJ.
#### Vance Edward JOHNSON, Appellant v. William K. SUTER, Clerk and Gail Johnson, Deputy Clerk, Appellees.

No. 11-5080.

United States Court of Appeals, District of Columbia Circuit.

Dec. 16, 2011.

Vance Edward Johnson, Represa, CA, for Appellant.

R. Craig Lawrence, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Washington, DC, for Appellees.

BEFORE: SENTELLE, Chief Judge; and GARLAND and BROWN, Circuit Judges.

*JUDGMENT*

PER CURIAM.

This appeal was considered on the record from the United States District Court *574for the District of Columbia and on the brief filed by the appellant. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2); D.C.Cir. Rule 34®. It is

ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the district court’s order filed February 14, 2011, be affirmed. The district court correctly determined appellees are protected by absolute immunity. *See Sindram v. Suda,*986 F.2d 1459, 1460 (D.C.Cir.1993).

Pursuant to D.C. Circuit Rule 36, this disposition will not be published. The Clerk is directed to withhold issuance of the mandate herein until seven days after resolution of any timely petition for rehearing or petition for rehearing en banc. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 41(b); D.C.Cir. Rule 41.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MIGUEL SALAZAR, a.k.a. Miguel Angel

Salazar-Flores,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 08-74209

Agency No. A070-952-222

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted February 15, 2011** 

Before: CANBY, FERNANDEZ, and M. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

Miguel Salazar, native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the

Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen based

on ineffective assistance of counsel. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. 

FILED

MAR 02 2011

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 08-74209

We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, Mohammed v.

Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791 (9th Cir. 2005), and we deny the petition for review. 

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Salazar’s motion to reopen

because he presented insufficient evidence to establish prejudice. See

Rojas-Garcia v. Ashcroft, 339 F.3d 814, 826 (9th Cir. 2003) (to prevail on an

ineffective assistance of counsel claim a petitioner must demonstrate prejudice).

Salazar’s remaining contentions are unavailing. 

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-40245 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus WILLIAM FARRELL SARGENT, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 1:95-CR-108

- - - - - - - - - - August 30, 1996 Before JONES, DeMOSS and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * William Farrell Sargent appeals his sentence after his guilty plea to possession with intent to distribute cocaine base. Sargent argues that the district court erred when it denied him a reduction in his offense level for acceptance of responsibility because he used drugs while on release but before pleading guiltyNo. 96-40245 - 2 - and when it counted cocaine purchased and used during controlled buys as relevant conduct. We have reviewed the record and the briefs of the parties and hold that the court’s refusal to grant a reduction for acceptance of responsibility and its inclusion of the cocaine which was not that for which Sargant was convicted were not clearly erroneous. United States v. Rickett , ___ F.3d ___, 1996 WL 393536 at *3 (5th Cir. July 15, 1996, No. 95-40877); United States v. Lokey , 945 F.2d 825, 839 (5th Cir. 1991).
AFFIRMED.
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 141 (Tuesday, July 27, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 40216]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-16104]


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

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Sunshine Act Meeting

    The National Science Board's Committee on Awards & Facilities 
hereby gives notice of the scheduling of a teleconference for the 
transaction of National Science Board business, as follows:

TIME AND DATE: Tuesday, August 3, 2021, from 10:45-11:45 a.m. EDT.

PLACE: This meeting will be held by teleconference through the National 
Science Foundation, 2415 Eisenhower Avenue, Alexandria, VA 22314.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: The agenda of the teleconference is: 
Committee Chair's Opening Remarks; approval of Prior Minutes; Action 
Item: Rubin Observatory Management Reserve; Action Item: Arecibo 
Observatory Clean-up Costs Award; Committee Chair's Closing Remarks.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Point of contact for this meeting 
is: Chris Blair, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#6b0809070a02192b05180d450c041d"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="1f7c7d737e766d5f716c7931787069">[email protected]</span></a>, 703/292-7000. Meeting information and 
updates may be found at http://www.nsf.gov/nsb/meetings/notices.jsp#sunshine. Please refer to the National Science Board 
website www.nsf.gov/nsb for general information.

Chris Blair,
Executive Assistant to the National Science Board Office.
[FR Doc. 2021-16104 Filed 7-23-21; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Case: 1:01-cv-08619 Document #: 1 Filed: 11/08/01 Page 1 of 9 PageID #:1
Case: 1:01-cv-08619 Document #: 1 Filed: 11/08/01 Page 2 of 9 PageID #:2
Case: 1:01-cv-08619 Document #: 1 Filed: 11/08/01 Page 3 of 9 PageID #:3
Case: 1:01-cv-08619 Document #: 1 Filed: 11/08/01 Page 4 of 9 PageID #:4
Case: 1:01-cv-08619 Document #: 1 Filed: 11/08/01 Page 5 of 9 PageID #:5
Case: 1:01-cv-08619 Document #: 1 Filed: 11/08/01 Page 6 of 9 PageID #:6
Case: 1:01-cv-08619 Document #: 1 Filed: 11/08/01 Page 7 of 9 PageID #:7
Case: 1:01-cv-08619 Document #: 1 Filed: 11/08/01 Page 8 of 9 PageID #:8
Case: 1:01-cv-08619 Document #: 1 Filed: 11/08/01 Page 9 of 9 PageID #:9
Case: 1:03-cr-00779 Document #: 123 Filed: 11/10/04 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:636