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


 





 


April 13, 2010


 


Consent of B. Terrence Hennessey, P. Geo


Board of Directors, Osisko Mining Corporation


United States Securities and Exchange Commission


 


To the Board of Directors of Osisko Mining
Corporation


 


I, B. Terrence Hennessey, P. Geo, of Micon
International Limited, consent to:


 


1.             The incorporation by
reference in the Offer and Circular of Osisko Mining Corporation (the “Company”),
included as part of the Company’s Registration Statement on Form F-8 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, of the description of the
report titled “Feasibility Study — Canadian Malartic Project (Malartic, Quebec)”
dated December, 2008.


 


2.             The information that forms
the summary of the report of the description of project and to the use of my
name under the Offer and Circular and Registration Statement as a named expert.


 


	
  Dated
  as of the 13th day of April, 2010

  	
   

  
	
   

  
	
  SIGNED

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
  /s/
  B. Terrence Hennessey

  	
   

  
	
  B. Terrence Hennessey

  	
   

  



 


SUITE
900 - 390 BAY STREET, TORONTO ONTARIO, CANADA M5H 2Y2


Telephone
(1) (416) 362-5135 Fax (1) (416) 362 5763
Not published

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR VETERANS CLAIMS

NO. 17-0000

JOHN DOE, APPELLANT,

V.

DAVID J. SHULKIN, M.D.,

SECRETARY OF VETERANS AFFAIRS, APPELLEE.

S A M P L E 

O R D E R

The appellant, who is represented, appeals a September XX, 201X, Board of Veterans' 

Appeals decision. A "Notice to File Brief" within 60 days was mailed to the appellant on August 

XX, 201X. Accordingly, it is

ORDERED that the Court will initiate a telephonic briefing conference on October XX, 

201X, at 1:30 p.m. (ET). It will be conducted by [name of Staff Attorney] of the Court's Central

Legal Staff (CLS), and this conference may be rescheduled by the Court only upon a showing of 

good cause. It is further

ORDERED that not later than 14 days prior to the scheduled conference, the 

appellant's counsel or representative shall submit to the Secretary and the Central Legal 

Staff (by e-mail or fax), a summary of the issues that the appellant intends to raise in the 

appeal before the Court, to include citations to the relevant authorities and the pertinent

documents in the record. The appellant's counsel or representative shall also file with the Clerk

and serve on the Secretary a separate certificate of service that includes the date of the appellant's

submission to the Secretary and the Central Legal Staff, the specific manner of the service (e-mail

or fax), and the names and addresses of the persons served. E-mail submissions shall be sent to the 

Central Legal Staff at CLS-Calendar@uscourts.cavc.gov. Fax submissions shall be sent to CLS 

fax number at (202) 585-3951. It is further

ORDERED that the attorney or representative for both parties shall attend the conference

with the authority to enter into a joint resolution of the appeal or settlement to the extent authorized 

by the client or be within immediate contact with such a person during the staff conference. The

parties shall jointly notify the Court if the parties reach agreement on the disposition of any or all

issues prior to the conference.

DATED: FOR THE COURT:

Copies to:

Appellant's Counsel, Esq. 

VA General Counsel (027)

GREGORY O. BLOCK

Clerk of the Court
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR VETERANS CLAIMS

MISC. NO. 03-15

IN RE: COMMITTEE ON ADMISSION AND PRACTICE

O R D E R

ItisORDERED, pursuanttoRule 2(a)(1) oftheCourt'sRules ofAdmission andPractice, thatthe

following individuals have been reappointed by the Court to serve as members of the Committee on

Admission and Practice: 

GlennR.Bergmann,Esq.has been reappointed, effective April 17, 2015, for a term expiring on

April 17, 2018;

Ronald L. Frampton has been reappointed, effective May 10, 2015, for a term expiring on

May 10, 2018;

Mark W. Foster, Esq. has been reappointed, effective May 10, 2015, for a term expiring on 

May 10, 2018;

GeoffreyG.Hengerer,Esq. has been reappointed, effectiveApril 15, 2015,for a termexpiringon

April 15, 2018;

Jeffery N. Lüthi, Esq. has been reappointed, effective April 17, 2015, for a term expiring on

April 17, 2018;

Jeffrey J. Schueler, Esq. has been reappointed, effective April 17, 2015, for a term expiring on 

April 17, 2018;

Leonard J. Selfon, Esq. has been reappointed, effective April 17, 2015, for a term expiring on 

April 17, 2018.

DATED: June 3, 2015 FOR THE COURT:

/s/ Gregory O. Block

GREGORY O. BLOCK

Clerk of the Court
7

Graph 1. Periods of delayed notice – fiscal year 2008

Graph 2. Total numbers of extensions – fiscal year 2008
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

NYGEL HARRIS, )

)

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D17-4384

)

STATE OF FLORIDA, )

)

Appellee. )

________________________________ )

Opinion filed May 25, 2018.

Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P. 

9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Polk

County; Wayne M. Durden, Judge. 

Nygel Harris, pro se.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. 

NORTHCUTT, KELLY, and MORRIS, JJ., Concur.
**Exhibit      32.2**

**Stratus      Services Group, Inc.**

**Certification      Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

**(18      U.S.C. Section 1350)**

| 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 in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,                the                financial condition and results of operations of the                Company. |

| Dated:                August 16, 2006 |                                                                     |
|---------------------------------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                  | By:                /s/ Michael A. Maltzman                               |
|                                  | Michael                A. Maltzman                                       |
|                                  | Vice                President and Chief Financial                Officer |
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 10 (Friday, January 14, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 2435]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-941]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration
[TA-W-36, 824]


Crouse-Hinds Division of Cooper Industries Syracuse, New York; 
Notice of Revised Determination on Reconsideration

    On December 2, 1999, the Department issued an Affirmative 
Determination Regarding Application on Reconsideration applicable to 
workers and former workers of the subject firm. The notice was 
published in the Federal Register on December 23, 1999 (64 FR 72101).
    The Department initially denied TAA to workers of Crouse-Hinds 
Division of Cooper Industries, Syracuse, New York, producing EMT 
electrical fittings because none of the worker group eligibility 
requirements of Section 222 of the Trade Act of 1974, as amended, were 
met.
    On reconsideration, the subject firm provided additional 
information on imports of EMT electrical fittings. Findings on 
reconsideration show that the subject firm increased their reliance on 
imports of EMT electrical fittings. The petitioners, International 
Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW). Local 2084, have provided 
additional information showing that there is a threat of worker 
separations at the subject plant in Syracuse, New York.

Conclusion

    After careful review of the additional facts obtained on 
reconsideration, I conclude that increased imports of articles like or 
directly competitive with EMT electrical fittings, contributed 
importantly to the declines in sales or production and to the total or 
partial separation of workers of Crouse-Hinds Division of Cooper 
Industries. In accordance with the provisions of the Act, I make the 
following certification:

    ``All workers of Crouse-Hinds Division of Cooper Industries, 
Syracuse, New York, engaged in employment related to the production 
of EMT electrical fittings, who became totally or partially 
separated from employment on or after September 1, 1998 through two 
years from the date of this issuance, are eligible to apply for 
adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974.''

    Signed in Washington, DC this 4th day of January 2000.
Grant D. Beale,
Program Manager, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 00-941 Filed 1-13-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Zachary Hill, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Beerman, J.), rendered February 3, 1986, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant contends that it was improper for the prosecutor to cross-examine him with respect to prior convictions which had been excluded under the court’s *Sandoval*ruling *(see, People v Sandoval,*34 NY2d 371). However, the defendant failed to object to the prosecutor’s initial questioning with respect to an excluded August 1980 attempted assault conviction *(see,*CPL 470.05 [2]). Furthermore, when the prosecutor subsequently made reference to that same conviction, defense counsel’s objection was sustained. Thereafter, defense counsel failed to request a mistrial or ask for further curative instructions, thereby indicating that he perceived the error to have been cured *(see, People v Jalah,*107 AD2d 762).

*781The prosecutor’s brief questioning of the defendant as to his use of aliases did not deprive him of a fair trial *(see, People v Jimenez,*79 AD2d 1012, 1013, *mod*55 NY2d 895). Although several of the prosecutor’s comments were improper, the defendant in many instances failed to preserve his claims of prosecutorial misconduct. In any event, we find that these comments did not deprive the defendant of a fair trial in light of the overwhelming evidence of guilt *(see, People v Wood,*66 NY2d 374).

We have examined the defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be either unpreserved for review or without merit. Lawrence, J. P., Weinstein, Kooper and Sullivan, JJ., concur.
**Exhibit 12.2**

 

**Certification pursuant to Section 302 Sarbanes Oxley Act by the Chief Financial Officer of Telecom Italia Media S.p.A.**

 

I, Paolo Serra, certify that: 

 

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of Telecom Italia Media S.p.A.; 

 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statementof a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 

 

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 

 

4. The company’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules *13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)*) for the company and have: 

 

(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to the company, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

 

(b) *[Reserved]*

 

(c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the company’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and 

 

(d) Disclosed in this report any change in thecompany’s internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the company’s internal control over financialreporting; and 

 

5. The company’s other certifyingofficer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the company’s auditors and the audit committee of the company’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions): 

 

(a) All significant deficienciesand material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the company’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the company’s internal control over financial reporting. 

 

Date: June 30, 2005 

 
By: 
/s/ Paolo Serra
Name: Paolo SerraTitle: Chief Financial Officer
##### 



EXHIBIT 23.2 CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT REGISTERED
PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Form S-3 No.
333-75798 and No. 333-123577) and related Prospectuses of Endwave Corporation and in the
Registration Statements (Form S-8 No. 333-49012 pertaining to the 1992 Stock Option Plan, 2000
Equity Incentive Plan, 2000 Non Employee Directors Stock Option Plan and the 2000 Employee Stock
Purchase Plan and No. 333-115183 pertaining to the 2000 Equity Incentive Plan and 2000 Employee
Stock Purchase Plan), of our report dated February 3, 2004 with respect to the financial statements
and schedule of Endwave Corporation included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended
December 31, 2004. /S/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP Palo Alto, California
March 29, 2005
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Thomasina Snow, Appellant.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Robert Haft, J.), rendered on September 26, 1983, unanimously affirmed.

Application by appellant’s counsel to withdraw as counsel is granted. *(See, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Saunders,*52 AD2d 833.) We have reviewed this record and agree with appellant’s assigned counsel that there are no nonfrivolous points which could be raised on this appeal. *564Concur — Kupferman, J. P., Sullivan, Carro, Milonas and Smith, JJ.
Form of Registrant's Common Stock Certificate



 Exhibit 4.2 
  

			
	Number	  	Shares
	SPECIMEN	  	SPECIMEN

 GLASSHOUSE
TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 
 Common Stock 
 $.001 Par Value Per Share 
 SEE REVERSE SIDE FOR RESTRICTIONS ON TRANSFER

 This certifies that SPECIMEN is the owner of SPECIMEN (XXXXX) shares, fully paid and nonassessable, of the Common
Stock of GLASSHOUSE TECHNOLOGIES, INC., a Delaware corporation, transferable only on the books of the Corporation by the holder hereof in person or by attorney upon surrender of this certificate properly endorsed. 
 This certificate and the shares represented hereby are subject to the laws of the State of Delaware and to the Certificate of Incorporation
and the By-laws of the Corporation, in each case as from time to time amended. 
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, GLASSHOUSE
TECHNOLOGIES, INC., has caused this certificate to be signed by its duly authorized officers as of this      day of             ,
20    . 
  

					
	  
	  		  	  

	President	  		  	Secretary or Treasurer

 [seal] 







 Restrictions on Transfer 
 The corporation has more than one class of stock authorized to be issued. The corporation will furnish without charge to each
stockholder upon written request a copy of the full text of the preferences, voting powers, qualifications and special and relative rights of the shares of each class of stock (and any series thereof) authorized to be issued by the corporation as
set forth in the Certificate of Incorporation of the corporation and amendments thereto filed with the Secretary of the state of Delaware. 
 Assignment 
 For value received, the undersigned hereby sells, assigns and
transfers to      shares of the capital stock represented by this certificate, and hereby irrevocably constitutes and appoints
                     attorney to transfer such stock on the books of the Corporation with full power of substitution in the premises.

 Dated                    , 
  

			
		  	  

		  	Signature of registered owner corresponding exactly to the name of such owner as written on the face of this certificate.
		
	  
	  	
	Witness
### T E X A S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S , T H I R D D I S T R I C T , A T A U S T I N NO. 03-12-00157- CV In re Edw ard Brogdon an d Bon ny Brogdon ORI GINAL P ROCEEDI NG F ROM MI LAM CO UNTY M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N The petition for writ of mandamus and reque st for emer g ency relief are denied. See Tex. R. App. P . 52.8(a) .

__________________________________________ Melissa Goodwin, Jus tice Be fore J ustices Pury ear , Henson a nd Goodwin Filed: Mar ch 23, 2012
I 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5871 

To amend the Public Works and Economic Development Act of 1965 to 

allow non-debt financing for for-profit companies in business incubators. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 27, 2010 

Mr. CARNAHAN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the Committee on Financial Services, 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 amend the Public Works and Economic Development 

Act of 1965 to allow non-debt financing for for-profit 

companies in business incubators. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Supporting Entrepre5 neurial Economic Development Act’’ or ‘‘SEED Act’’. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5871 IH

1 SEC. 2. NON-DEBT FINANCING IN DIRECT EXPENDITURE OR 

2 REDISTRIBUTION. 

3 Section 217(c) of the Public Works and Economic 

4 Development Act of 1965 (42 U.S.C. 3154c) is amended 

5 to read as follows: 

6 ‘‘(c) ECONOMIC ADJUSTMENT.— 

7 ‘‘(1) NON-DEBT FINANCING ADDITION.—Sub8 ject to subsection (d), a recipient of a grant under 

9 section 209 may directly expend the grant funds or 

10 may redistribute the funds to public and private or11 ganizations and entities in the form of a grant, loan, 

12 loan guarantee, payment to reduce interest on a loan 

13 guarantee, or other appropriate assistance, including 

14 non-debt financing of for-profit companies in busi15 ness incubators. 

16 ‘‘(2) DEFINITIONS.—For purposes of this sub17 section— 

18 ‘‘(A) the term ‘business incubator’ means 

19 an organization or entity, including an aca20 demic institution, established to foster the 

21 start-up of businesses or accelerate the growth 

22 of fledgling companies by providing entre23 preneurs with resources and services to produce 

24 viable businesses that can help create jobs and 

25 restore vitality to distressed areas. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 5871 IH

1 ‘‘(B) the term non-debt financing means 

2 funding used to help business incubators de3 velop an idea and create the first product to be 

4 brought to market for the first time.’’. 

Æ 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
(85 South. 816)

#### AMERICAN INS. CO. v. BLUMBERG SHOE CO.

(6 Div. 110.)

(Supreme Court of Alabama.

June 30, 1920.)

Appeal from Circuit Court, Jefferson County; Romain Boyd, Judge.

Action by the Blumberg Shoe Company against the American Insurance Company. From judgment for plaintiff, defendant appeals. Transferred from Court of Appeals under Acts 1911, p. 450, § 6.

Affirmed.

Coleman & Coleman & Spain & Fisk, of Birmingham, for appellant.

Cabaniss & Cabaniss, of Birmingham, for appellee.

McGLELLAN, J.

Affirmed on the authority of Blumberg Shoe Co. v. Phœnix Assur. Co., 203 Ala. 551, 84 South. 763, and Phœnix Assur. Co. v. Blumberg Shoe Co., ante, p. 443, 85 South. 815.

ANDERSON, C. J., and SOMERVILLE and THOMAS, JJ., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1998             MAR-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1997             OCT-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997             DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                           1,796                   1,796
<SECURITIES>                                         0                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   30,831                  30,831
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,522                   1,522
<INVENTORY>                                     31,762                  31,762
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                66,229                  66,229
<PP&E>                                          12,929                  12,929
<DEPRECIATION>                                   8,894                   8,894
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 111,718                 111,718
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           32,004                  32,004
<BONDS>                                              0                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0                       0
<PREFERRED>                                          0                       0
<COMMON>                                           105                     105
<OTHER-SE>                                           0                       0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   111,718                 111,718
<SALES>                                        136,306                  50,300
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               136,306                  50,300
<CGS>                                           92,916                  33,909
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   34,336                  13,183
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,426                   1,426
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,109                     897
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,519                     885
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,429                     350
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,092                     535
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  5,750                   5,750
<CHANGES>                                            0                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (3,660)                 (5,215)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (0.54)                  (0.48)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.54)                  (0.48)
        

</TABLE>