alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 23.1

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (File
Nos. 333-130159, 333-128741, 333-128740, 333-128738, 333-148793 and 333-148794) and Form S-3 (File
Nos. 333-109564, 333-111181 and 333-143162) of ArQule, Inc., of our report dated March 6, 2009 relating to the financial statements and the
effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, which appears in this Form 10-K.

/s/
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Boston,
Massachusetts
March 6, 2009

---



QuickLinks
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

June 6, 2007

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-20549

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

FRANCISCO RANGEL-PEREZ, also known as Francisco Rangel, also

known as Alberto Perez,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas 

USDC No. 4:06-CR-17-ALL

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

Before SMITH, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Francisco RangelPerez raises arguments that are foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres

v. United States, 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), which held that

8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate

criminal offense. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance

is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
HEAD v. NORTH CAROLINA STATE.

No. COA05-1034.

North Carolina Court of Appeals.

Filed April 4, 2006.

Certification Date April 24, 2006.

Appeal from Rutherford (04CVS1533).

Case without published opinion. Dismissed.
STATE of North Carolina v. Tyrone Lamont FOWLER.

No. 690P05.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

January 26, 2006.

Kathryn L. VandenBerg, Raleigh, for Tyrone Lamont Fowler.

Linda Kimbell, Assistant Attorney General, C. Colon Willoughby, Jr., District Attorney, for State of NC.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 16th day of December 2005 by Defendant 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:

*624"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 26th day of January 2006."
**Exhibit 5.2**

**CERTIFICATION**

  
> 
 I, Gaétan Mercier, certify that: 

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 40-F of Virginia Mines Inc.; 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of 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 financial information 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 and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the company and have: 

 (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, 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) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused such internal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles; 

 (c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the company’s disclosure 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 the company’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 financial reporting; and 

5. The company’s other certifying officer 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 equivalent functions): 

(a) All significant deficiencies and 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 who have a significant role in the company’s internal control over financial reporting. 

Date: May 29, 2008 

*/s/ Gaétan Mercier*      Gaétan Mercier     Chief Financial Officer
STATE v. WILSON

No. COA05-589

North Carolina Court of Appeals

Filed March 21, 2006

Certification Date April 10, 2006

Appeal from Guilford (03CRS24459, 03CRS70228, 03CRS70229).

Case reported without published opinion. Affirmed.
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17
- 1586

DEBRA F. MEADOWS , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. CHARLES COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD OF EDUCATION; KELLER III BUS SERVICE INCORPORATED, Keller Jr. Owner/President of School Board; HELEN E. KELLER, Owner; KELLER TRANSPORTATION INC

. , Defendants

- Appellees

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland , at Greenbelt

. Timothy J. Sullivan , Magistrate Judge. ( 8:16

- cv
- 02897

- DKC )

Submitted : August 17, 2017 Decided: August 21, 2017

Before KEENAN , THACKER , and HARRIS , Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion

.
Debra F. Meadows, Appellant Pro Se. Edmund J. O’Meally, PESSIN KATZ LAW, P.A., Towson, Maryland; Mark Jay Swerdlin, SHAWE & ROSENTHAL, LLP, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: On May 1, 2017, Debra F. Meadows filed a notice of appeal in her pending civil

case that did not clearly state the order she sought to appeal . In her informal brief,
Meadows references the magistrate judge ’s January 25, 2017, order denying he r mo tion for a protective order. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2012), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2012); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp. , 337 U.S. 541, 545

- 46 (1949). The order Meadows seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. Accordingly, we deny Meadows’ motion for oral argument and dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
DISMISSED
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 53 

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to enter into a long-term lease 

with the Government of the United States Virgin Islands to provide 

land on the island of Saint John, Virgin Islands, for the establishment 

of a school, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 4, 2007 

Mrs. CHRISTENSEN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To authorize the Secretary of the Interior to enter into 

a long-term lease with the Government of the United 

States Virgin Islands to provide land on the island of 

Saint John, Virgin Islands, for the establishment of a 

school, 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, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Virgin Islands Na5 tional Park School Lease Act’’. 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
2 

•HR 53 IH

1 SEC. 2. LONG-TERM LEASE, VIRGIN ISLANDS NATIONAL 

2 PARK, SAINT JOHN, VIRGIN ISLANDS. 

3 (a) LEASE AUTHORIZED.—The Secretary of the Inte4 rior may lease to the Government of the United States 

5 Virgin Islands a parcel of real property, including any im6 provements thereon, located within the boundaries of Vir7 gin Islands National Park on the island of Saint John, 

8 Virgin Islands, as depicted on the map entitled 

9 ‘‘llllll’’, numbered lllllll, and 

10 dated llll 2007, for the purpose of providing a suit11 able location for the establishment of a school by the Gov12 ernment of the United States Virgin Islands on the island. 

13 (b) TERM OF LEASE.—The lease authorized by sub14 section (a) may not exceed a term of 99 years. 

15 (c) AVAILABILITY OF MAP.—The map referred to in 

16 subsection (a) shall be on file and available for public in17 spection in the appropriate offices of the National Park 

18 Service. 

19 (d) ADDITIONAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS.—The 

20 Secretary may require such additional terms and condi21 tions in connection with the lease under this section as 

22 the Secretary considers appropriate to protect the inter23 ests of the United States. 

Æ 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
PARAMOUNT ACQUISITION CORP.

                                ___________, 2005

Paramount BioCapital Asset Management, Inc.
787 7th Avenue
48th Floor
New York, New York 10019

Gentlemen:

     This letter will confirm our agreement that, commencing on the effective
date ("Effective Date") of the registration statement for the initial public
offering ("IPO") of the securities of Paramount Acquisition Corp. ("PAC") and
continuing until the earlier of the consummation by PAC of a "Business
Combination" or PAC's liquidation (as described in PAC's IPO prospectus) (the
"Termination Date"), Paramount BioCapital Asset Management, Inc. shall make
available to PAC certain office space, utilities and secretarial support as may
be required by PAC from time to time, situated at 787 7th Avenue, 48th Floor,
New York, New York 10019. In exchange therefor, PAC shall pay Paramount
BioCapital Asset Management, Inc. the sum of $7,500 per month on the Effective
Date and continuing monthly thereafter until the Termination Date.

                                              Very truly yours,

                                              PARAMOUNT ACQUISITION CORP.


                                              By:
                                                  ------------------------------
                                                  Name: J. Jay Lobell
                                                  Title: Chief Executive Officer

AGREED TO AND ACCEPTED BY:

PARAMOUNT BIOCAPITAL ASSET MANAGEMENT, INC.


By:
    -------------------------
    Name:
    Title:
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 521 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

  1st Session
                                H. R. 521

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 31, 2007

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 2633 11th Street in Rock Island, Illinois, as the ``Lane Evans Post 
                           Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. LANE EVANS POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 2633 11th Street in Rock Island, Illinois, shall be known 
and designated as the ``Lane Evans Post Office Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Lane Evans 
Post Office Building''.

            Passed the House of Representatives January 29, 2007.

            Attest:

                                                 KAREN L. HAAS,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
STATE v. HOLDER.

No. COA05-414.

North Carolina Court of Appeals.

Filed March 7, 2006.

Certification Date March 27, 2006.

Appeal from Johnston (02CRS6247, 02CRS54284)

Case without published opinion. No error in part; remanded for resentencing.
# L_2012244EN.01003002.xml

| 8.9.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 244/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.9.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 244/30

---

Corrigendum to Commission Regulation (EU) No 794/2012 of 5 September 2012 on transitional measures concerning the Union list of flavourings and source materials set out in Annex I to Regulation (EC) No 1334/2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 243 of 7 September 2012
  )

The publication of Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 794/2012 is to be considered null and void.

---
94 Office of Local Defense Community Cooperation — Defense Spending by Territory, FY 2022

, DEFENSE CONTRACTS

DEFENSE PERSONNEL

By Type

By Service

Top Defense Contractors (M = millions, B = billions) 

Bechtel Group $2.1 B

AmerisourceBergen $2.0 B

Fluor Corp. $1.7 B

BAE Systems $1.1 B

Boeing $781.5 M

Siemens AG $651.3 M

Highmark, Inc. $504.9 M

OraSure Technologies, Inc. $400.5 M

Lockheed Martin $361.6 M

Pennsylvania State University $251.4 M

Contract Awards Performed (By Fiscal Year, billions)

PENNSYLVANIA

Allocations, By Type

Allocations, By Service

$3.1 BILLION

TOTAL PAYROLL

54,181

TOTAL PERSONNEL

Top Defense Personnel Locations

County Active 

Duty

Civilian National 

Guard

Reserve Total

Philadelphia 337 8,240 1,379 63 10,019

Allegheny 329 1,500 1,336 2,661 5,826

Cumberland 616 4,188 202 444 5,450

Lebanon ND 886 3,651 139 ND

York 233 3,006 69 382 3,690

Monroe 14 2,762 35 200 3,011

Montgomery 22 319 1,681 582 2,604

Franklin ND 1,955 147 370 ND

Dauphin 81 236 1,798 171 2,286

Butler 14 724 190 321 1,249

Construction: 0%

Research and 

Development: 8%

Service: 19%

Supplies and Equipment: 72%

Active Duty: 4%

Civilian: 47% National 

Guard: 32%

Reserve: 18%

Army

Navy/Marines

Air Force

Other Defense

17%

43%

5%

36%

Army

Navy/Marines

Air Force

Other Defense

54%

19%

12%

15%

$9.3

$7.7

$9.6

$12.0

$13.4 $12.6

$14.3

FY15 FY16 FY17 FY18 FY19 FY20 FY21 FY22

#8 #23 3.2% $1,382 #8 #5 #17 #15

$17.9 B SPENT 

IN STATE

1.9% OF 

STATE GDP

OF TOTAL U.S. 

DEFENSE SPENDING

PER 

RESIDENT

$14.3 B CONTRACT 

SPENDING

54,181 NUMBER 

OF PERSONNEL

$3.1 B PERSONNEL 

SPENDING

$495.2 M GRANT 

SPENDING

$12.5
Office of Local Defense Community Cooperation — Defense Spending by State, FY 2022 95

AF Active AF Guard AF Reserve Army Active Army Guard Army Reserve MC Active Navy Active WHS

FISCAL YEAR 2018

TOP DEFENSE PERSONNEL SPENDING LOCATIONS

Northampton

PENNSYLVANIA FISCAL YEAR 2018

TOP DEFENSE CONTRACT SPENDING LOCATIONS (M = millions, B = billions) (M=millions) (M=millions)

FISCAL YEAR 2022

Allegheny

Montgomery

York

Franklin

Delaware

Philadelphia

Bucks

Dauphin

Northampton

Cumberland

(M = millions)

$4.2 B

$2.4 B

$1.2 B

$1.1 B

$908.8 M

$726.7 M

$537.3 M

$524.4 M

$429.2 M

$406.4 M

Philadelphia

Cumberland

York

Allegheny

Monroe

Lebanon

Franklin

Montgomery

Dauphin

Butler

$884.1 M

$452.6 M

$294.2 M

$272.2 M

$210.0 M

$200.0 M

$167.8 M

$95.5 M

$76.7 M

$76.7 M

Allegheny

Allegheny

Butler

Franklin

Dauphin

Cumberland

York

Franklin

Dauphin

Cumberland

York

Montgomery

Delaware

Philadelphia

Bucks

Lebanon

Montgomery

Philadelphia

Monroe
STATE v. SANDERS.

No. COA05-608.

North Carolina Court of Appeals.

Filed April 4, 2006.

Certification Date April 24, 2006.

Appeal from Forsyth (04CRS52469).

Case without published opinion. No error.
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5299 

To suspend temporarily the duty on 7-Hydroxy. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 7, 2008 

Mr. LAHOOD introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To suspend temporarily the duty on 7-Hydroxy. 

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

3 SECTION 1. 7-HYDROXY. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

7 new heading: 

‘‘ 9902.l.l 2,3-Dihydro-2,2-Dimethyl-7- 

Hydroxybenzofuran 

(Carbofuran phenol) (CAS 

No. 1563–38–8) (provided 

for in subheading 

2932.99.70) ........................... Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2011 ’’. 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with BILLS
2 

•HR 5299 IH

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

2 subsection (a) applies to articles entered, or withdrawn 

3 from warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day 

4 after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


hsrobinson on PROD1PC76 with BILLS
STATE v. BRYANT.

No. COA05-514.

North Carolina Court of Appeals.

Filed February 21, 2006.

Certification Date March 13, 2006.

Appeal from Durham (02CRS41702, 02CRS49468).

Case reported without published opinion. Affirmed in part, remanded in part, vacated in part.
Agreement of Termination



 Exhibit 10.9 
  
 AGREEMENT OF TERMINATION 
  
 This AGREEMENT OF TERMINATION (the “Termination”) is made, entered into and effective as of June 30, 2005, by and between Stephen A. Wynn
(“Mr. Wynn”) and Wynn Las Vegas, LLC, a Nevada limited liability company (“Wynn Las Vegas”). 
  
 RECITALS 
  
 WHEREAS, Mr. Wynn and Wynn Las Vegas entered into that certain Third Amended and Restated Art Rental and Licensing Agreement, dated as of August 6, 2004
(the “Agreement”); and 
  
 WHEREAS, the parties
hereto desire to terminate the Agreement, including, without limitation, all rights and obligations thereunder. 
  
 AGREEMENT 
  
 NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the foregoing premises, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, Mr. Wynn and Wynn Las Vegas hereby declare and agree that the
Agreement is hereby terminated, extinguished and of no further force or effect from this date forward. 
  
 [Signatures appear on the following pages.] 
  

 1 








 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have set forth their hands on the day and year first above mentioned.

  

							
	 “Mr. Wynn”:

	
	 /s/ Stephen A. Wynn

	 Stephen A. Wynn

	
	 “Wynn Las Vegas”:

	
	 Wynn Las Vegas, LLC,

	 a Nevada limited liability company

		
	 By:
	 	 Wynn Resorts Holdings, LLC,

	 	 	 a Nevada limited liability company,

	 	 	 its sole member

			
	 	 	 By:
	 	 Wynn Resorts, Limited,

	 	 	 	 	 a Nevada corporation,

	 	 	 	 	 its sole member

				
	 	 	 	 	 By:
	 	 /s/ Marc D. Schorr

	 	 	 	 	 	 	Marc D. Schorr, Chief Operating Officer

  

 2
Exhibit 32.1

GLOBAL SIGNAL INC.

CERTIFICATIONS PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Global Signal Inc., (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the
period ending September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Jerry V. Elliott, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                     
|-------------------------------------
|/s/ Jerry V. Elliott                 
|Jerry V. Elliott                     
|Chief Executive Officer and President

November 3, 2006

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Global Signal Inc. and will be retained by Global Signal, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by
such Act, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the Exchange Act). Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under
the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the registrant specifically incorporates it by reference.
NO. 12-19-00111-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

LG CHEM AMERICA, INC., 

APPELLANT

V.

ETHAN LUSK,

APPELLEE

§

§

§

APPEAL FROM THE 241ST 

JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

SMITH COUNTY, TEXAS

MEMORANDUM OPINION

PER CURIAM

This appeal is being dismissed for failure to comply with the Texas Rules of Appellate 

Procedure. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c).

On March 27, 2019, the Clerk of this Court notified Appellant that the filing fee in this 

appeal is due. See TEX. R. APP. P. 5. Appellant was informed that failure to remit the filing fee 

on or before April 8, 2019, would result in the Court’s taking appropriate action, including 

dismissal of the case without further notice. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c). The date for remitting 

the filing fee has passed, and Appellant has not complied with the Court’s request.

Because Appellant has failed, after notice, to comply with Rule 5, the appeal is dismissed. 

See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c).

Opinion delivered April 17, 2019.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.

(PUBLISH)
COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXAS

JUDGMENT

APRIL 17, 2019

NO. 12-19-00111-CV

LG CHEM AMERICA, INC.,

Appellant

V.

ETHAN LUSK,

Appellee

Appeal from the 241st District Court 

of Smith County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. 18-2524-C)

THIS CAUSE came to be heard on the appellate record; and the same being 

considered, it is the opinion of this Court that this appeal should be dismissed.

It is therefore ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED by this Court that this 

appeal be, and the same is, hereby dismissed; and that this decision be certified to the court below 

for observance.

By per curiam opinion. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J. and Neeley, J.