alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Independent Auditors' Report


To the Shareholders and Board of Directors of
Smith Barney World Funds, Inc.:

In planning and performing our audit of the financial statements
of the International All Cap Growth Portfolio of Smith Barney
World Funds, Inc. (Fund) for the year ended October 31, 2002, we
considered its internal control, including control activities for
safeguarding securities, in order to determine our auditing
procedures for the purpose of expressing our opinion on the
financial statements and to comply with the requirements of Form
N-SAR, not to provide assurance on internal control.

The management of the Fund is responsible for establishing and
maintaining internal control.  In fulfilling this responsibility,
estimates and judgments by management are required to assess the
expected benefits and related costs of controls.  Generally,
controls that are relevant to an audit pertain to the entity's
objective of preparing financial statements for external purposes
that are fairly presented in conformity with accounting
principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
Those controls include the safeguarding of assets against
unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition.

Because of inherent limitations in internal control, error or
fraud may occur and not be detected.  Also, projection of any
evaluation of internal control to future periods is subject to
the risk that it may become inadequate because of changes in
conditions or that the effectiveness of the design and operation
may deteriorate.

Our consideration of internal control would not necessarily
disclose all matters in internal control that might be material
weaknesses under standards established by the American Institute
of Certified Public Accountants.  A material weakness is a
condition in which the design or operation of one or more of the
internal control components does not reduce to a relatively low
level the risk that errors or fraud in amounts that would be
material in relation to the financial statements being audited
may occur and not be detected within a timely period by employees
in the normal course of performing their assigned functions.
However, we noted no matters involving internal control and its
operation, including controls for safeguarding securities that we
consider to be material weaknesses as defined above as of October
31, 2002.

This report is intended solely for the information and use of
management and the Board of Directors of the Fund and the
Securities and Exchange Commission and is not intended to be and
should not be used by anyone other than these specified parties.


                                                  KPMG LLP

New York, New York
December 11, 2002
To the Shareholders and Board of Trustees of the
Smith Barney Diversified Strategic Income Fund:

In planning and performing our audit of the financial statements of the Smith
Barney Diversified Strategic Income Fund (the "Fund") for the year ended July
31, 2000, we considered its internal control, including control activities for
safeguarding securities, in order to determine our auditing procedures for the
purpose of expressing our opinion on the financial statements and to comply
with the requirements of Form N-SAR, not to provide assurance on the internal
control.

The management of the Fund is responsible for establishing and maintaining
internal control.  In fulfilling this responsibility, estimates and judgments
by management are required to assess the expected benefits and related costs
of controls.  Generally, controls that are relevant to an audit pertain to the
entity's objective of preparing financial statements for external purposes
that are fairly presented in conformity with generally accepted accounting
principles. Those controls include the safeguarding of assets against
unauthorized acquisition, use, or disposition.

Because of inherent limitations in internal control, errors or fraud may occur
and not be detected.  Also, projection of any evaluation of internal control
to future periods is subject to the risk that it may become inadequate because
of changes in conditions or that the effectiveness of the design and operation
may deteriorate.

Our consideration of the internal control would not necessarily disclose all
matters in the internal control that might be material weaknesses under
standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public
Accountants.  A material weakness is a condition in which the design or
operation of one or more of the internal control components does not reduce to
a relatively low level the risk that misstatements caused by error or fraud in
amounts that would be material in relation to the financial statements being
audited may occur and not be detected within a timely period by employees in
the normal course of performing their assigned functions.  However, we noted
no matters involving the internal control and its operation, including
controls for safeguarding securities that we consider to be material
weaknesses as defined above.

This report is intended solely for the information and use of management, the
Trustees of the Fund, and the Securities and Exchange Commission.



New York, New York
September 11, 2000
MARKETPLACE ANTIQUE MALL, INC., D.G. Samuel, Jr., Individually and D.G. Samuel, Jr., D/B/A Queen Street Antiques v. Steven M. LEWIS.

No. 220P04.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 24, 2004.

David Hough, Winston-Salem, for D.G. Samuel, Jr.

Michelle Reingold, William L. Durham, Winston-Salem, for Steven M. Lewis.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 10th day of May 2004 by Plaintiff (Samuel) in this matter for discretionary review of the decision of the North Carolina Court of Appeals pursuant to G.S. 7A-31, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

> "Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 24th day of June 2004."
----

            COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1425/2004

of 6 August 2004         

fixing the A1 and B export refunds for fruit and vegetables (tomatoes, oranges, table grapes and apples)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 2200/96 of 28 October 1996 on the common organisation of the market in fruit and vegetables (1), and in particular the third subparagraph of Article 35(3),

Whereas:

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

1.   For system A1, the refund rates, the refund application period and the scheduled quantities for the products concerned are fixed in the Annex hereto.

For system B, the indicative refund rates, the licence application period and the scheduled quantities for the products concerned are fixed in the Annex hereto.

2.   The licences issued in respect of food aid as referred to in Article 16 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 1291/2000 (4) shall not count against the eligible quantities in the Annex hereto.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on 10 September 2004.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 6 August 2004.

For the Commission

Franz FISCHLER            

Member of the Commission

----

(1)OJ L 297, 21.11.1996, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Commission Regulation (EC) No 47/2003 (OJ L 7, 11.1.2003, p. 64).

(2)OJ L 268, 9.10.2001, p. 8. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 1176/2002 (OJ L 170, 29.6.2002, p. 69).

(3)OJ L 366, 24.12.1987, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 2180/2003 (OJ L 335, 22.12.2003, p. 1).

(4)OJ L 152, 24.6.2000, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 636/2004 (OJ L 100, 6.4.2004, p. 25).

----

ANNEX

to the Commission Regulation of 6 August 2004 fixing the export refunds on fruit and vegetables (tomatoes, oranges, table grapes and apples)

----

(1)  The product codes are set out in Commission Regulation (EEC) No 3846/87 (OJ L 366, 24.12.1987, p. 1).

(2)  The ‘            A            ’ series destination codes are set out in Annex II to Regulation (EEC) No 3846/87.

The numeric destination codes are set out in Commission Regulation (EC) No 2081/2003 (OJ L 313, 28.11.2003, p. 11).

The other destinations are defined as follows:

----
STATE v. HOLDER.

COA03-586.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed August 3, 2004.

Certification Date August 23, 2004.

Case reported without published opinion. Remanded for resentencing.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v. No. 97-6311

KEVIN JEROME FUELL,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Richmond.

Richard L. Williams, Senior District Judge.

(CR-93-138-R, CA-96-1043-R)

Submitted: July 30, 1998

Decided: August 19, 1998

Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

_________________________________________________________________

Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL

Joseph Samuel Massie, III, MORRISSEY, HERSHNER & JACOBS,

Richmond, Virginia, for Appellant. Gurney Wingate Grant, II,

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Richmond, Virginia; David S. Kris, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See

Local Rule 36(c).

_________________________________________________________________

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief

on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp.

1998). Appellant's conviction became final in 1994. On December

27, 1996, Appellant filed a § 2255 motion. The district court denied

relief because Appellant filed his motion outside the one-year limitation period imposed by § 2255. Pursuant to our recent decision in

Brown v. Angelone, ___ F.3d ___, Nos. 96-7173, 96-7208, 1998 WL

389030 (4th Cir. July 14, 1998), Appellant had until April 23, 1997,

in which to file a timely motion. Accordingly, because Appellant filed

his § 2255 motion before April 23, 1997, we grant a certificate of

appealability, vacate the district court's order, and remand this case

for further proceedings. 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.

VACATED AND REMANDED

 2
Independent Auditors' Consent



To the Shareholders and Board of Directors of
Smith Barney Premium Total Return Fund:

We consent to the use of our report dated February 8, 
1999, with respect to Smith Barney Premium Total Return 
Fund, incorporated herein by reference and to the 
references to our Firm under the headings "Financial 
Highlights" in the Prospectus and "Auditors" in the 
Statement of Additional Information.



	KPMG LLP


New York, New York
April 27, 1999
STATE of North Carolina v. Tracy R. INGRAM.

No. 47P04.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

February 3, 2004.

Tracy R. Ingram, Pro Se.

William P. Hart, Special Deputy Attorney General, for State.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the application filed by Petitioner on the 2nd day of February 2004 in this matter for Writ of Habeas Corpus, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court, Forsyth County:

> "Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 3rd day of February 2004."
IIB 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 1451 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 25, 2014 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 14 Main Street in Brockport, New York, as 

the ‘‘Staff Sergeant Nicholas J. Reid Post Office Building’’. 

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


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

HR 1451 RFS

1 SECTION 1. STAFF SERGEANT NICHOLAS J. REID POST OF2 FICE BUILDING. 

3 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

4 Postal Service located at 14 Main Street in Brockport, 

5 New York, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Staff 

6 Sergeant Nicholas J. Reid Post Office Building’’. 

7 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg8 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

9 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

10 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Staff Sergeant Nich11 olas J. Reid Post Office Building’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives March 24, 

2014. 

Attest: KAREN L. HAAS, 

Clerk. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
James Wardell QUARY v. N.C. ENGLISH, Warden

No. 19-5154

Supreme Court of the United States.

January 13, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit denied.
# C_2017278EN.01000101.xml

| 22.8.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 278/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

22.8.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 278/1

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.8483 — Bain Capital Investors/Cinven Capital Management/Stada Arzneimittel)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2017/C 278/01)

On 29 June 2017, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

1

| — | in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the Competition website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32017M8483. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32017M8483. EUR-Lex is the online access to European law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

1

---
Chad Michael STONER, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 19-6609.

Supreme Court of the United States.

April 20, 2020

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

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1300 

To amend the Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956 to reauthorize the volunteer 

programs and community partnerships for the benefit of national wildlife 

refuges, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 20, 2013 

Mr. RUNYAN (for himself and Mr. SABLAN) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To amend the Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956 to reauthorize 

the volunteer programs and community partnerships for 

the benefit of national wildlife refuges, and for other 

purposes. 

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

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS

2 

•HR 1300 IH

1 SECTION 1. REAUTHORIZATION OF NATIONAL WILDLIFE 

2 REFUGE SYSTEM VOLUNTEER, COMMUNITY 

3 PARTNERSHIP, AND EDUCATION PROGRAMS. 

4 Section 7(g) of the Fish and Wildlife Act of 1956 

5 (16 U.S.C. 742f(g)) is amended by striking ‘‘2011 

6 through 2014’’ and inserting ‘‘2014 through 2018’’. 

Æ 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
EXHIBIT 99.1





Description of Incentive Award granted to George H. Richter





On September 30, 2009, the Compensation Committee of the Smithfield Foods, Inc. (the “Company”) Board of Directors approved a performance-based award for George H. Richter, President and Chief Operating Officer of the Company’s Pork Group, pursuant
to the Smithfield Foods, Inc. 2008 Incentive Compensation Plan.  Under the award, Mr. Richter will receive a one-time cash payment of $1.5 million upon the Compensation Committee’s certification that the pre-tax profits of the consolidated Pork Group for the period beginning August 3, 2009 and ending April 29, 2012 are not less than $1,412,000,000.  Pre-tax  profits are generally defined as profits before deductions for inter-company royalties and income taxes.
Kenneth N. MCFALL, Petitioner v. INDIANA

No. 19-6469

Supreme Court of the United States.

January 13, 2020

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of Indiana denied.
# C_2006121EN.01001202.xml

| 20.5.2006 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 121/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

20.5.2006

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 121/12

---

Order of the Court of First Instance of 22 March 2006 — Strack v Commission

(Case T-4/05) (1)

1

(Officials - Official informing OLAF of possible irregularities - Decision of OLAF to close the investigation - Act adversely affecting an official - Standing to bring proceedings - Inadmissibility)

(2006/C 121/21)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Guido Strack (Wasserliesch, Germany) (represented by: R. Schmitt, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: C. Ladenburger and H. Kraemer, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

First, an application for annulment of the decision of the European Anti-Fraud Office (OLAF) of 5 February 2004 to close the investigation number OF/2002/0356 and the final case report on which that decision was based dated 5 February 2004 and, secondly, an application to reopen that investigation and to draw up a new final case report.

Operative part of the order

| 1. | The application is dismissed as inadmissible. |
| --- | --- |

1.

The application is dismissed as inadmissible.

| 2. | Each party shall bear its own costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Each party shall bear its own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 57, 5.3.2005.

1

---
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1486 

To prohibit the Secretary of the Treasury and the Administrator of the 

Environmental Protection Agency from devising or implementing a carbon tax. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 11, 2013 

Mr. RAHALL introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce, and in addition to the Committee on 

Ways and Means, 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 prohibit the Secretary of the Treasury and the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency from devising or implementing a carbon tax. 

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 ‘‘No Carbon Tax Act 

5 of 2013’’. 

6 SEC. 2. CARBON TAX PROHIBITION. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—The Secretary of the Treasury 

8 and the Administrator of the Environmental Protection 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1486 IH

1 Agency are prohibited from devising or implementing a 

2 carbon tax. 

3 (b) DEFINITION.—For purposes of this section, the 

4 term ‘‘carbon tax’’ means— 

5 (1) a tax, fee, or price on emissions, including 

6 carbon dioxide emissions generated by the burning 

7 of coal, natural gas, or oil; or 

8 (2) a tax, fee, or price on coal, natural gas, or 

9 oil based on emissions, including carbon dioxide 

10 emissions that would be generated through the fuel’s 

11 combustion. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
EXHIBIT 32.2



LUDUSON G Inc.

CERTIFICATION OF THE PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL
OFFICER
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In
connection with the Annual Report of Luduson G Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December
31, 2022, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Lan Chan, Chief
Financial 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.





| | By: | /s/ Lan Chan                                                                                                                    
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |     | Lan ChanChief Financial Officer
                                                                   (Principal Financial Officer)



Date:  April 17, 2023
Clarence SCRANAGE, Jr., Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 18-9308

Supreme Court of the United States.

January 13, 2020

The petition for rehearing is denied.
Document Headings

                    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.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

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

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         June 15, 2022.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on June 7, 2022, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Contract 744 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2022-64, CP2022-70.                

Sean Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2022-12913 Filed 6-14-22; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P