alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
February 25, 1997
Smith Barney Telecommunications Trust
388 Greenwich Street
New York, New York 10013

                   Re:  Rule 24f-2 Notice
                              
Gentlemen:

    In connection with the filing by Smith Barney
Telecommunications Trust, a Massachusetts business trust
(the "Fund"), of a Notice (the "Notice"), pursuant to Rule
24f-2 under the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended
(the "Act"), for the Fund's fiscal year ended December 31,
1996, the undersigned hereby provides the legal opinion
required by that Rule.

     In accordance with Rule 24f-2, the Fund has registered
an indefinite number of shares of common stock, $0.001 par
value, under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the
"1933 Act"). The purpose of the Notice is to make definite
the registration of 27,670 shares of the Fund (the "Shares")
sold in reliance upon the Rule during the fiscal year ended
December 31, 1996.

     The undersigned is Deputy General Counsel of Smith
Barney Mutual Funds Management Inc., the Fund's
administrator, and in such capacity, from time to time and
for certain purposes, acts as counsel to the Fund. He has
examined copies of the Fund's Declaration of Trust, its By-
Laws, resolutions adopted by its Board of Trustees, and such
other records and documents as have been deemed necessary
for purposes of this opinion.  Furthermore, he has examined
a Certificate of the Controller of the Fund to the effect
that the Fund received the cash consideration for each of
the Shares in accordance with the aforementioned
organizational documents and resolutions.

     On the basis of the foregoing, and assuming all of the
Shares were sold in accordance with the terms of the Fund's
Prospectus in effect at the time of sale, he is of the
opinion that the Shares have been duly authorized and
validly issued and are fully paid and non-assessable.  This
opinion is for the limited purposes expressed above and
should not be deemed to be an expression of opinion as to
compliance with the 1933 Act, the 1940 Act or applicable
State "blue sky" laws in connection with the sales of the
Shares.


                                        Very truly yours,


                                        Robert Vegliante
                                        Deputy General
                                        Counsel
                                        Smith Barney Mutual
Funds
Management Inc.
David Allen OLSEN, Petitioner, v. Kaylee Ann FRANCOIS.

No. 19-7907.

Supreme Court of the United States.

May 18, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Wisconsin, District III denied.
Daniel MACIAS, et al., Petitioners, v. Raymond NICHOLS, et al.

No. 19-794.

Supreme Court of the United States.

April 20, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
Robert L. SWINTON, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-8275.

Supreme Court of the United States.

May 18, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.
SMITH BARNEY MID CAP BLEND FUND  

Supplement dated July 20, 1998
to the Prospectus dated June 30, 1998 

The following information supplements, and to the extent inconsistent 
therewith, supercedes the information contained in the Prospectus under 
Prospectus Summary. 

EXAMPLE 
 
The following example is intended to assist an investor in understanding the 
various costs that an investor in Fund will bear directly or indirectly.  The 
example assumes payment by the Fund of operating expenses.  See Purchase of 
Shares, Redemption of Shares and Management of the Fund in the accompanying 
Prospectus for more information.
 

1 year
3 years
An investor would pay the following 
expenses 
On a $1,000 investment, assuming (1) 
5.00% 
annual return and (2) redemption at 
the end of 
each time period:





Class L

39
69



An investor would pay the following 
expenses
On the same investment, assuming the 
same
annual return and no redemption: 





Class L
29
69
The example also provides a means for the investor to compare expense levels 
of funds with different fee structures over varying investment periods. To 
facilitate such comparison, all funds are required to utilize a 5.00% annual 
return assumption. However, the Funds actual return will vary and may be 
greater or less than 5.00%. This example should not be considered a 
representation of past or future expenses and actual expenses may be greater 
or less than those shown. 







FD 01522

u:\legal\funds\slit\1998\secdocs\798stk.doc
Thomas TAFFE, et al., Petitioners, v. FIRST NATIONAL BANK OF ALASKA.

No. 19-1202.

Supreme Court of the United States.

May 18, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Alaska denied.
<Page>

                               F-44


                                EXHIBIT 23.1

                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


The Board of Directors
Wave Systems Corp.:

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements
Nos. 333-46330, 333-33236, 333-92845, 333-38265, 333-28819, 333-20017,
333-73236 and 333-65648 on Form S-3 and Nos. 333-88665, 333-68911, 333-69041,
33-97612, 333-11611 and 333-11609 on Form S-8, of our report dated March 7,
2002, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of Wave Systems Corp. and
subsidiaries as of December 31, 2001 and 2000, and the related consolidated
statements of operations, stockholders' equity (deficiency) and other
comprehensive income (loss), and cash flows for each of the years in the
three-year period ended December 31, 2001 and for the period from February
12, 1988 (inception) through December 31, 2001 which report appears in the
December 31, 2001 annual report on Form 10-K of Wave Systems Corp.

                                       KPMG LLP


                                       /s/ KPMG LLP

Boston, Massachusetts
March 29, 2002
Roxanne Marie CARPENTER, Petitioner v. UNITED STATES

No. 19-5691

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                       9,587,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                8,067,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                 1,916,000
<INVENTORY>                                    507,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            17,096,000
<PP&E>                                      12,893,000
<DEPRECIATION>                               3,424,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              32,584,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        6,552,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         7,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  23,985,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                32,584,000
<SALES>                                      7,750,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             7,750,000
<CGS>                                        5,849,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,510,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               251,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            (197,000)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                337,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                    17,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            320,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   320,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .05
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .05
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                          14,355
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   24,604
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,336
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                         170,622
<DEPRECIATION>                                  16,134
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 207,769
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            4,630
<BONDS>                                        115,865
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                         29
<COMMON>                                            41
<OTHER-SE>                                      86,628
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   207,769
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 8,076
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    1,506
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,817
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,093
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,761
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              2,597
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,597
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.19
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.19
        

</TABLE>
## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

_____________ No. 97-3971EM

_____________ DeWolff, Boberg & Associates, Inc. * * Appellant, *

* v. * * Chrysler Corporation, * * Appellee. * Appeals from the United States

_____________ District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri. No. 97-4104EM

_____________ [UNPUBLISHED] DeWolff, Boberg & Associates, Inc., * * Appellee, *

* v. * * Chrysler Corporation, * * Appellant. *

_____________ Submitted: November 19, 1998

Filed: November 27, 1998

_____________The Honorable Cynthia Holcomb Hall, United States Circuit Judge for the Ninth * Circuit, sitting by designation. -2- Before RICHARD S. ARNOLD, FAGG, and HALL, Circuit Judges. *

_____________ PER CURIAM. The court has considered the briefs and heard oral arguments in this diversitybased breach of contract action. Chrysler Corporati on raises several contentions about ins tructions, admissibility of evidence, and post-trial rulings deemed adverse t o Chrysler. DeWolff, Boberg & Associates, Inc. contend the district court improperly refused its request for prejudgment interest. The parties' arguments have been carefully analyzed and con sidered. We have reviewed de novo questions of state law. Having reviewed the record in the context of the parties' arguments, we find the record supports th e district court's decisions. Because our review involves the application o f establishe d principles of law in a fact-intensive diversity case, and the parties ' submissions show they are thoroughly familiar with the issues before the court, w e conclude that an extensive discussion would serve nouseful precedential purpose. We thus affirm the district court without further discussion. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. A true copy.
Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
##### Form 10-Q Table of Contents

Exhibit 32.1

# CERTIFICATION 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 SeaBright Insurance Holdings, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2005, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, John G. Pasqualetto,
Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350,
as adopted pursuant to §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.

Dated: November 9, 2005

| |  |  |                                                                                            
| |  |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |  |  | /s/ John G. PasquqalettoJohn G. PasquqalettoChairman, President and Chief Executive Officer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or
other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic
version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to SeaBright Insurance Holdings, Inc. and will
be retained by SeaBright Inhsurance Holdings, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---
# C_2017340EN.01001401.xml

| 11.10.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 340/14 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

11.10.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 340/14

---

Commission notice pursuant to Article 16(4) of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council on common rules for the operation of air services in the Community

Public service obligations in respect of scheduled air services

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2017/C 340/06)

| Member State | Spain |
| --- | --- |
| Routes concerned | Gran Canaria-Tenerife Sur
  Gran Canaria-El Hierro
  Tenerife Norte-La Gomera
  Gran Canaria-La Gomera |
| Reopening date of the PSO route to Community air carriers | 1 August 2018 |
| Address where the text and any other information or documentation related to the public service obligations can be obtained | Ministerio de Fomento |
| Dirección General de Aviación Civil |
| Subdirección General de Transporte Aéreo |
| Paseo de la Castellana 67 |
| 28071 Madrid |
| MADRID |
| ESPAÑA |
| Tel. +34 915977505 |
| Fax +34 915978643 |
| Email: osp.dgac@fomento.es |

Member State

Spain

Routes concerned

Gran Canaria-Tenerife Sur

Gran Canaria-El Hierro

Tenerife Norte-La Gomera

Gran Canaria-La Gomera

Reopening date of the PSO route to Community air carriers

1 August 2018

Address where the text and any other information or documentation related to the public service obligations can be obtained

Ministerio de Fomento

Dirección General de Aviación Civil

Subdirección General de Transporte Aéreo

Paseo de la Castellana 67

28071 Madrid

MADRID

ESPAÑA

Tel. +34 915977505

Fax +34 915978643

Email: osp.dgac@fomento.es

The routes subject to public service obligations may be operated on the basis of free competition access as from 1 August 2018. In the event that no air carrier submits a program of services compliant with the public service obligations imposed, access will be restricted to a single air carrier through the corresponding public tender procedure, in accordance with Article 16(9) of Regulation (EC) No 1008/2008.

---
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Con. Res. 85 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. CON. RES. 85

  Expressing the sense of Congress that a commemorative postage stamp 
           should be issued in honor of the Buffalo Soldiers.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 21, 2014

 Mrs. Beatty (for herself, Mr. Enyart, Ms. Hahn, Mr. Butterfield, Ms. 
    Speier, Mr. Meeks, Ms. Norton, and Mr. McNerney) submitted the 
following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on 
                    Oversight and Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                         CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

 
  Expressing the sense of Congress that a commemorative postage stamp 
           should be issued in honor of the Buffalo Soldiers.

Whereas, on July 28, 1866, Congress established six all-Black regiments, later 
        consolidated to four, to help rebuild the country after the Civil War 
        and to patrol the remote western frontier during the Indian wars;
Whereas Colonel Charles Young was a Buffalo Soldier and the highest ranking 
        African-American commanding officer in the United States Army from 1894 
        until his death in 1922;
Whereas more than 200,000 African-Americans served in World War I and more than 
        1 million served in World War II;
Whereas the Buffalo Soldiers received their name because of the buffalo's fierce 
        bravery and fighting spirit;
Whereas African-American troops accepted the name, Buffalo Soldiers, with pride 
        and honor;
Whereas the Buffalo Soldiers fought alongside White regiments in many conflicts 
        and were instrumental in the exploration and settlement of western 
        lands;
Whereas, over the 82 years of the Buffalo Soldiers' existence, 23 men received 
        the Congressional Medal of Honor, the highest recognition awarded by the 
        United States Government for military service;
Whereas the Buffalo Soldiers ceased to exist in 1948 when President Harry Truman 
        signed Executive Order 9981 mandating equal treatment and opportunity 
        for African-American servicemen;
Whereas the Buffalo Soldiers are a significant part of American military 
        history;
Whereas a stamp was issued in honor of the Buffalo Soldiers on April 22, 1994, 
        and this stamp was placed on ``off sale'' in December 1995; and
Whereas reissuing a postage stamp to honor the Buffalo Soldiers is fitting and 
        proper: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), 
That it is the sense of Congress that--
            (1) a commemorative postage stamp should be issued in honor 
        of the Buffalo Soldiers; and
            (2) the Citizens' Stamp Advisory Committee should recommend 
        to the Postmaster General that such a stamp be issued.
                                 <all>
```
UAET (02-2008)

Unopposed Application for Extension of Time to Answer Complaint

Attach this form to the Application for Extension of Time to Answer Complaint event.

CASE AND DEADLINE INFORMATION

Civil Action No.:

Name of party requesting extension:

Is this the first application for extension of time in this case? Yes

No

If no, please indicate which application this represents: Second

Third

Other ___________

Date of Service of Summons:

Number of days requested: 30 days

15 days

Other _____ days

New Deadline Date: (Required)

ATTORNEY FILING APPLICATION INFORMATION

Full Name:

State Bar No.:

Firm Name:

Address:

Phone:

Fax:

Email:

A certificate of conference does not need to be filed with this unopposed application.

Case 2:23-cv-00521-JRG-RSP Document 14 Filed 01/29/24 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:

212
Juan Carlos RODRIGUEZ, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-8098.

Supreme Court of the United States.

April 20, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.
Joshua Frederick DAVIS, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-5347

Supreme Court of the United States.

October 7, 2019

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit denied.
# C_2017180EN.01003402.xml

| 8.6.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 180/34 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.6.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 180/34

---

Explanatory notes to the Combined Nomenclature of the European Union

(2017/C 180/06)

Pursuant to Article 9(1)(a) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 (1), the explanatory notes to the Combined Nomenclature of the European Union (2) are hereby amended as follows:

1

2

On page 169, after the explanatory note to CN subheading ‘3504 00 10 Concentrated milk proteins specified in additional note 1 to this chapter’, the following text is inserted:

On page 169, after the explanatory note to CN subheading ‘3504 00 10 Concentrated milk proteins specified in additional note 1 to this chapter

| ‘3504 00 90 | Other

  This subheading includes plant-based products with a high protein content of more than 85 % by weight calculated on the dry matter. Products which are excluded are generally classified under headings 2106 or 2309.’ |
| --- | --- |

‘3504 00 90

Other

This subheading includes plant-based products with a high protein content of more than 85 % by weight calculated on the dry matter. Products which are excluded are generally classified under headings 2106 or 2309.’

---

(1)  Council Regulation (EEC) No 2658/87 of 23 July 1987 on the tariff and statistical nomenclature and on the Common Customs Tariff (OJ L 256, 7.9.1987, p. 1).

1

(2)  OJ C 76, 4.3.2015, p. 1.

2

---
Melvin PRYOR, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-7409.

Supreme Court of the United States.

May 4, 2020

Petition for rehearing denied.
EXHIBIT 32.b



CERTIFICATION 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 BCTC V Assignor Corp. (the "registrant") on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Marc N. Teal, Principal Financial Officer of the registrant, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge, after due inquiry:



|(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 registrant.



|             |  |                            
|------------ |  | ---------------------------
|Date:        |  |                            
|May 15, 2007 |  | /s/ Marc N. Teal           
|             |  |                            
|             |  | Marc N. Teal               
|             |  | Principal Financial Officer
|             |  |                            
|             |  |                            

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other

document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the registrant and will be retained by the registrant and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Ryan Douglas LASALLE, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-7663.

Supreme Court of the United States.

March 23, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.