alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 23.04



CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM



We consent to the incorporation by reference in each of the following Registration Statements of Caraustar Industries, Inc.:



| | 1. | Registration Statement (Form S-8) No. 33-53726
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------

| | 2. | Registration Statement (Form S-8) No. 33-77682
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------

| | 3. | Registration Statement (Form S-8) No. 333-02948
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------

| | 4. | Registration Statement (Form S-8) No. 333-57965
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------

| | 5. | Registration Statement (Form S-8) No. 333-37168
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------

| | 6. | Registration Statement (Form S-3) No. 333-65555
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------

| | 7. | Registration Statement (Amendment No. 1 Form S-3) No. 333-66943
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------

| | 8. | Registration Statement (Form S-4) No. 333-31618
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------

| | 9. | Registration Statement (Form S-8) No. 333-106062
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------

| | 10. | Registration Statement (Form S-8) No. 333-106064
| | --- | ------------------------------------------------

| | 11. | Registration Statement (Form S-3) No. 333-122084
| | --- | ------------------------------------------------



of our report dated February 6, 2004, with respect to the financial statements of Standard Gypsum LP, included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) of Caraustar Industries,
Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2005.



/s/ Ernst & Young LLP



Austin, Texas

March 14, 2006
Technical Work Group

November 8, 2000

Phoenix, Arizona

List of Attendees

Presiding: Rick Johnson, Chairperson

Committee Members Present:

Cliff Barrett, UAMPS Pamela Hyde, Southwest Rivers

Robert Begay, Navajo Nation Matt Kaplinski, GCRG

Perri Benemelis, ADWR Robert King, UDWR

Kerry Christensen, Hualapai Tribe Phillip Lehr, Colo. River Comm./Nevada

Dave Cohen, Trout Unlimited Don Metz, USFWS

Wm. Davis, CREDA S. Clayton Palmer, WAPA

Kurt Dongoske, The Hopi Tribe Bill Persons, AGFD

Brenda Drye, So. Paiute Consortium Randall Peterson, USBR

Norm Henderson, NPS/GCNRA D. Randolph Seaholm, CWCB

Amy Heuslein, BIA Robert Winfree, NPS/GCNP

Nancy Hornewer, USGS

Committee Members Absent:

Andres Cheama, Pueblo of Zuni Christopher S. Harris, CRBC

Wayne Cook, UCRC John Shields, WY State Engineer’s Office

Alternates Present: For:

Jonathan Damp Andres Cheama, Pueblo of Zuni

Other Interested Persons Present:

Timothy Begay, Navajo Nation Ruth Lambert, GCMRC

Gary Burton, WAPA Lisa Leap, NPS/GCNP

Nancy Coulam, USBR Mike Liszewski, GCMRC

Barry Gold, GCMRC Ted Melis, GCMRC

Suzette Homer, Pueblo of Zuni Darlynn Panteah, Pueblo of Zuni

Christine Karas, USBR David Rubin, USGS

Dennis Kubly, USBR
Technical Work Group

November 9, 2000

Phoenix, Arizona

List of Attendees

Presiding: Rick Johnson, Chairperson

Committee Members Present:

Robert Begay, Navajo Nation Pamela Hyde, Southwest Rivers

Perri Benemelis, ADWR Matt Kaplinski, GCRG

Kerry Christensen, Hualapai Tribe Robert King, UDWR

Dave Cohen, Trout Unlimited Phillip Lehr, Colo. River Comm./Nevada

Wm. Davis, CREDA Don Metz, USFWS

Kurt Dongoske, The Hopi Tribe Bill Persons, AGFD

Brenda Drye, So. Paiute Consortium Randall Peterson, USBR

Norm Henderson, NPS/GCNRA D. Randolph Seaholm, CWCB

Amy Heuslein, BIA Robert Winfree, NPS/GCRA

Committee Members Absent:

Cliff Barrett, CREDA Christopher S. Harris, CRBC

Andres Cheama, Pueblo of Zuni S. Clayton Palmer,WAPA

Nancy J. Hornewer, USGS John Shields, WY State Engineer’s Office

Wayne Cook, UCRC

Alternates Present: For:

Gary Burton Clayton Palmer, WAPA

Jonathan Damp Andres Cheama, Pueblo of Zuni

Other Interested Persons Present:

Nancy Coulam, USBR Mike Liszewski, GCMRC

Jeffrey Cross, NPS Ted Melis, GCMRC

Barry Gold, GCMRC Mary Orton, Mary Orton Company

Suzette Homer, Pueblo of Zuni David Ostergren, NAU

Dennis Kubly, USBR Darlynn Panteah, Pueblo of Zuni

Lisa Leap, NPS/GCNP
UNITED STATES NAVY–MARINE CORPS

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

_________________________

No. 201600354

_________________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Appellee

v.

JONATHON D. FRAZIER

Lance Corporal (E-3), U.S. Marine Corps

Appellant

_________________________

Appeal from the United States Navy-Marine Corps Trial Judiciary

Military Judge: Colonel Peter S. Rubin, USMC.

Convening Authority: Commanding Office, 2d Reconnaissance 

Battalion, 2d Marine Division, Camp Lejeune, NC.

Staff judge Advocate’s Recommendation: Major W.G. McMillan, USMC.

For Appellant: Lieutenant Commander Derek C. Hampton, JAGC, USN.

For Appellee: Brian K. Keller, Esq.

_________________________

Decided 10 January 2017

_________________________

Before MARKS, GLASER-ALLEN, and ELLINGTON, Appellate Military 

Judges

_________________________

After careful consideration of the record, submitted without assignment of 

error, we affirm the findings and sentence as approved by the convening 

authority. Art. 66(c), Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 U.S.C. § 866(c). 

For the Court

R.H. TROIDL

Clerk of Court
#### Randolph WILLIAMS, Petitioner—Appellant, v. Gene M. JOHNSON, Respondent—Appellee.

No. 06-7880.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: March 19, 2007.

Decided: June 1, 2007.

Randolph Williams, Appellant Pro Se. Deana A. Malek, Office of the Attorney-General of Virginia, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before MICHAEL, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Randolph Williams seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appeal-ability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. *Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003); *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *Rose v. Lee,*252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Williams has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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.

*DISMISSED.*
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1793 

To provide a categorical exclusion under the National Environmental Policy 

Act of 1969 to allow the Director of the Bureau of Land Management 

and the Chief of the Forest Service to remove Pinyon–Juniper trees 

to conserve and restore the habitat of the greater sage–grouse and 

the mule deer. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 14, 2015 

Mr. STEWART introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources, and in addition to the Committee on Agriculture, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in 

each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

A BILL 

To provide a categorical exclusion under the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969 to allow the Director of 

the Bureau of Land Management and the Chief of the 

Forest Service to remove Pinyon–Juniper trees to conserve and restore the habitat of the greater sage–grouse 

and the mule deer. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1793 IH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Sage–Grouse and Mule 

3 Deer Habitat Conservation and Restoration Act of 2015’’. 

4 SEC. 2. CATEGORICAL EXCLUSION FOR PINYON–JUNIPER 

5 TREE REMOVAL. 

6 Notwithstanding any other provision of law, a vegeta7 tion management project by the Director of the Bureau 

8 of Land Management or the Chief of the Forest Service 

9 involving removal or treatment of any Pinyon or Juniper 

10 tree for the purpose of conserving or restoring the habitat 

11 of the greater sage–grouse or mule deer shall be eligible 

12 to be a categorical exclusion (as defined in section 1508.4 

13 of title 40, Code of Federal Regulations (or a successor 

14 regulation)) for purposes of the National Environmental 

15 Policy Act of 1969 (42 U.S.C. 4321 et seq.). 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
[Federal Register Volume 86, Number 169 (Friday, September 3, 2021)]
[Notices]
[Page 49509]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2021-19051]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

Foreign-Trade Zones Board

[B-37-2021]


Foreign-Trade Zone (FTZ) 20--Norfolk, Virginia, Authorization of 
Production Activity, STIHL, Incorporated (Handheld Outdoor Power 
Equipment), Virginia Beach, Virginia

    On May 3, 2021, STIHL, Incorporated submitted a notification of 
proposed production activity to the FTZ Board for its facility within 
Subzone 20E in Virginia Beach, Virginia.
    The notification was processed in accordance with the regulations 
of the FTZ Board (15 CFR part 400), including notice in the Federal 
Register inviting public comment (86 FR 24841, May 10, 2021). On August 
31, 2021, the applicant was notified of the FTZ Board's decision that 
no further review of the activity is warranted at this time. The 
production activity described in the notification was authorized, 
subject to the FTZ Act and the FTZ Board's regulations, including 
Section 400.14.

    Dated: August 31, 2021.
Andrew McGilvray,
Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2021-19051 Filed 9-2-21; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
#### Noldalia Escotto, Appellant, v Roque Vallejo et al., Respondents.

[944 NYS2d 550]—

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Julia I. Rodriguez, J), entered October 6, 2011, which, to the extent appealed from as limited by the briefs, granted defendants Roque Vallejo and NYLL Management Ltd’s (defendants) motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as it alleged serious injuries of plaintiffs left knee under the permanent consequential limitation of use and/or significant limitation of use categories of Insurance Law § 5102 (d), unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, and the motion denied as to said claim. Appeal from order, same court, Justice, and date of entry, which dismissed the complaint as against the City, unanimously dismissed, without costs, as abandoned.

On April 2, 2007, plaintiff sustained injuries when a vehicle operated and owned, respectively, by defendants Roque Vallejo and NYLL Management Ltd. struck her as she was crossing the street.

Defendants failed to meet their initial burden of establishing that plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury to her knee as a result of the accident. In support of their summary judgment motion, defendants submitted the report of their orthopedist, Dr. Gregory Montalbano, who examined plaintiff in November 2008 and found full range of motion, absence of valgus and varus instability, and negative McMurray, Lachman, and anterior and posterior drawer tests. He also noted in his report pain to patella compression, and ambulation with an unsteady gait. Based on his examination and review of plaintiffs medical records, he concluded that plaintiff had sustained left knee contusion/strain, and that such condition has resolved. He also opined that any persisting symptoms were caused by advanced degenerative conditions, which included osteoarthritis and medial and lateral meniscal tears.

However, the MRI reports of defendants’ radiologist, one of which was relied upon by Dr. Montalbano, concluded that a finding of traumatic injury could not be ruled out given the evidence of an ACL and a meniscal tear. Such contradictory evidence as to whether the tears were chronic or acute in nature creates issues of fact as to whether the persisting knee symptoms were causally related to the accident *(see Suazo v Brown,*88 AD3d 602 [2011]). Further, defendants have not established that the persisting limitations are not “consequential” or “significant” *(see Licari v Elliott,*57 NY2d 230, 236 *668[1982]). Dr. Montalbano did not indicate the extent of plaintiffs pain on patella compression, and noted that plaintiff was ambulating with an unsteady gait. Because defendants failed to meet their prima facie burden, their motion must be denied, regardless of the claimed insufficiency of the opposing papers *(see Feaster v Boulabat,*77 AD3d 440 [2010]). Concur — Mazzarelli, J.P., Friedman, Catterson, Richter and ManzanetDaniels, JJ.
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
 Plant Genetics Research: Columbia, MO
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    CareersSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Midwest Area Columbia, Missouri Plant Genetics Research





- ARS National Programs
- Search for a scientific manuscript
- Search for a research project
- ARS Software
- Programs and Projects
- Collaborations
- Subjects of Investigation
- Publications
- IACUC Summaries

Research Programs and Projects at this LocationARS research is organized into National Programs. Within each National Program are research projects. Listed below are  the National Programs and research projects currently conducted at this location.
Clicking on a National Program (NP) will take you  to the main ARS site for more information on the program. Clicking on a research  project title will take you to more information on the project.  Current View: All Projects   Show All Projects ||
         Appropriated Projects Only


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
Exhibit



Exhibit 10.3



FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE
SURGERY PARTNERS, INC. CASH INCENTIVE PLAN


                 THIS AMENDMENT to the Surgery Partners, Inc. Cash Incentive Plan (the “Plan”) is made by Surgery Partners, Inc. (the “Company”) on this 18th day of March, 2020, but to be effective with respect to awards made beginning in 2019 and thereafter.


RECITALS:


                 WHEREAS, the Company established the Plan to provide incentive awards to selected officers of the Company that are paid in cash based on the achievement of performance goals that are identified by the compensation committee of the Company’s board of directors (the “Committee”);


                 WHEREAS, the Company also maintains the Surgery Partners, Inc. 2015 Omnibus Stock Incentive Plan (the “Stock Incentive Plan”) that provides for stock incentive awards to officers, directors and employees of the Company, and the Stock Incentive Plan permits the Committee to distribute common stock authorized thereunder in settlement of cash payments due under any other plan or program of the Company; and


                 WHEREAS, the Company desires to amend the Plan so that amounts due under the Plan can be paid out in the form of the Company’s common stock under an award authorized under the Stock Incentive Plan at the discretion of the Committee;


             NOW, THEREFOR, based on the foregoing premises, the Company does hereby amend the Plan by restating Section 7 as follows:


7.          PAYMENT UNDER AWARDS


                 Except as otherwise determined by the Administrator or as otherwise provided in this Section 7, all payments under the Plan will be made, if at all, not later than March 30th of the calendar year following the calendar year in which the Performance Period ends; provided, that the Administrator may authorize elective deferrals of any Cash Incentive Award payments in accordance with the deferral rules of Section 409A of the Code. Payments under the Plan will be made in cash or, at the sole discretion of the Administrator, in the form of an award under the Company’s 2015 Omnibus Stock Incentive Plan (including without limitation “Unrestricted Stock” as defined therein). Any such award under the Stock Incentive Plan is conditioned on action by the administrator thereof to authorize the award. Unless otherwise determined by the Administrator, a Cash Incentive Award payment will not be made unless a Participant has remained employed with the Company and its affiliates through the date of payment.




                 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned authority has executed this instrument on the date first written above.


SURGERY PARTNERS, INC.


By:       /s/ Jennifer Baldock


		
	Its:
	Executive Vice President, Chief Administrative and Development Officer
Technical Work Group (TWG) 1-Year Running Workplan 

Updated: September 18, 2009 

December 1-3, 2009 

Workshop 

January 12-14, 2010 

2 days reporting, 1 day TWG 

Consider Flagstaff 

March 15-16, 2010 June 8-9

Socioeconomics workshop GCMRC Annual Reporting Meeting (2 days, 1 TWG) Initial biennial budget review & rec. (BAHG & CRAHG reports) Final biennial budg

(BAHG & CRAHG 

Core Monitoring Plan (CMP) workshop 2008 HFE reporting FY 09 carry over and CPI Core monitoring pl

Annual FSF/NSE report TWG operating procedures: (final) TWG operating procedures (initial) NSE/FSF update of 09 results Develop initial budget concerns/priorities HBC ASMR assessment update General Core monitoring plan (CMP) HBC LCR survey update Implement Fish PEP recommendations General Core monitoring plan Fish Core Monitoring Implement Fish PEP recommendations Vegetation Core Monitoring Fish Core Monitoring Review nonnative fish removal efforts Vegetation Core Monitoring Fall Steady Flow/NSE study Plan HFE reporting continued Nonnative fish control plan 2000 LSSF synthesis report 

Burden overview 

Science Advisors annual report 

GCMRC science updates GCMRC science up

Revise TWG workplan Revise TWG workplan Revise TWG workp

AMWG meeting scheduled for February 3-4
**Exhibit 23.01**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos. 33-53726, 333-02948, 333-57965, 333-37168, 333-106062, and333-106064 on Form S-8, 333-65555, 333-66943, and 333-122084 on Form S-3, and 333-31618 on Form S-4, of our report dated March 16, 2007 relating to the consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedule of Caraustar Industries,Inc. and subsidiaries (the “Company”) (which report on the consolidated financial statements expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph relating to the adoption by the Company of Statement of FinancialAccounting Standards No. 123(R), Share-Based Payment, on January 1, 2006 and the related recognition and related disclosure provisions of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No. 158, Employers’ Accounting for Defined BenefitPension and Other Postretirement Plans, on December 31, 2006), and our report dated March 16, 2007 related to management’s report on the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, appearing in this Annual Report on Form10-K of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2006. 

 

/s/ Deloitte& Touche LLP 

 

Atlanta, Georgia 

March 16, 2007
EXHIBIT 32.1


                   Certification of Periodic Financial Report
                       Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350

     Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Obsidian Enterprises,
Inc. (the "Company") certifies that the annual report on Form 10-K of the
Company for the fiscal year ended October 31, 2002, as amended by Amendment No.
1, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information contained in that Form 10-K
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of the Company.

Dated: August 25, 2003             /s/ Timothy S. Durham
                                   ---------------------------------------
                                   Timothy S. Durham
                                   Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Martin Montgomery, Appellant.

The claim by the defendant that the indictment was improperly amended during trial is not preserved for our review since he argued only that the evidence did not warrant the amendment, not that the amendment was otherwise impermissible.

The defendant contends that the sentencing court improperly considered a robbery count for which he had been indicted but not convicted, and that his sentence should therefore be vacated. We disagree. Rather, the court expressly predicated its determination upon consideration of the petit larceny count of which the defendant had been convicted and on the defendant’s prior criminal record. The court also noted that it was not inclined to impose a sentence concurrent to those the defendant was presently serving inasmuch as such a sentence would be tantamount to an acquittal. Since we find the sentence to be both validly imposed and appropriate to the crime of which the defendant was convicted, we decline to substitute our discretion for that of the sentencing court.

The remainder of the defendant’s contentions are unpreserved for our review. Lazer, J. P., Niehoff, Lawrence and Kooper, JJ., concur.