alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NOS. 07-11-00413-CR AND 07-11-00414-CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL D

APRIL 10, 2012

BRANDON MICHAEL-RAY BENSON, APPELLANT

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE 

FROM THE 52ND DISTRICT COURT OF CORYELL COUNTY;

NO. FAM-11-20729, FAM-11-20730; HONORABLE TRENT D. FARRELL, JUDGE

Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and PIRTLE, JJ.

**MEMORANDUM OPINION**

Pending before the court is the motion of appellant Brandon Benson to dismiss his two appeals.  Appellant and his attorney have both signed the motion.  Tex. R. App. P. 42.2(a).  No decision of this court having been delivered to date, we grant the motion. Accordingly, the two appeals are dismissed.  No motions for rehearing will be entertained and our mandates will issue forthwith.

								James T. Campbell

									Justice

Do not publish.  

2
Exhibit 8.1
                                   -----------
                            Significant Subsidiaries

                        Industrias Bachoco, S.A. de C.V.

                         Subsidiaries as of May 31, 2002



1.   Bachoco, S.A. de C.V.

2.   Operadora de Servicios de Personal, S.A. de C.V.

3.   Servicios de Personal Administrativo, S.A. de C.V.

4.   SEPETEC, S.A. de C.V.

5.   Acuicola Bachoco, S.A. de C.V.

6.   Huevo y Derivados, S.A. de C.V.

7.   Pecuarius Laboratorios, S.A. de C.V.

8.   Aviser, S.A. de C.V.

9.   Campi Comercial, S.A. de C.V.

Each of the subsidiaries listed above is incorporated under the laws of Mexico.



                                        1
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 Annual Report on Form 10-K of GameTech International, Inc. (the “Company”) for the 52 weeks ended October 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, William Fasig, 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 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); 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/ WILLIAM FASIG


William Fasig


Chief Executive Officer


February 15, 2011
STATE of North Carolina v. Jacob Mark SPIVEY.

No. 143PA15.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Aug. 20, 2015.

W. Michael Spivey, Attorney at Law, Rocky Mount, for Spivey, Jacob Mark.

Brent Kiziah, Assistant Attorney General, for State of North Carolina.

Ben R. David, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the petition filed by State of NC on the 23rd of April 2015 for Writ of Supersedeas of the judgment of the Court of Appeals, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals:

> "Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 20th of August 2015."

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 23rd of April 2015 by State of NC 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:

> "Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 20th of August 2015."

Therefore the case is docketed as of the date of this order's certification. Briefs of the respective parties shall be submitted to this Court within the times allowed and in the manner provided by Appellate Rule 15(g)(2).
LOGO

EXHIBIT 99.23

CONSENT OF KATHLEEN ANN ALTMAN

In
connection with the Annual Report on Form 40-F, and any amendments and exhibits thereto, of Goldcorp Inc. (the Company) for the year ended December 31, 2016 (collectively, the Annual
Report), I, Kathleen Ann Altman, consent to (i) the use of and reference to the technical report dated March 27, 2014, entitled Technical Report on the Pueblo Viejo Project, Sanchez Ramirez Province, Dominican Republic
(the Technical Report), or portions thereof, that was prepared by me, that I supervised the preparation of and/or was reviewed and approved by me, (ii) the use of and references to my name, including as an expert or qualified
person, in connection with the Annual Report and the Technical Report, and (iii) the information derived or summarized from the Technical Report that is included or incorporated by reference in the Annual Report and any of the exhibits
thereto.

I also hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of such information contained in the Annual Report and exhibits thereto into
Registration Statement Nos. 333-126039, 333-126040, 333-151243, 333-151251, 333-174376, 333-181116, 333-188805, 333-195816 and
333-213153 on Form S-8, No. 333-207371 on Form F-3 and No. 333-211892 on Form F-10 of the Company.

Dated this 16th day of March, 2017



|       |  |                                 
|------ |  | --------------------------------
|       |  | (Signed)Kathleen Ann
Altman   
|Name:  |  | Kathleen Ann Altman, Ph.D., P.E.
|Title: |  | Principal Metallurgist          
|       |  | Roscoe Postle Associates Inc.   





RPA Inc. 55 University Ave. Suite 501 | Toronto, ON, Canada M5J 2H7 | T +1 (416) 947
0907 www.rpacan.com
----

(2004/C 33 E/203)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-2015/03

by Lucio Manisco (GUE/NGL) to the Commission

(17 June 2003)

Subject:   Transfer of the ‘castrum’ of San Gimignano into private ownership

The development of the town of San Gimignano began in the Middle Ages around the ‘castrum’, the ancient and vast fortified complex of dwellings, which was turned into the convent of San Domenico.

It was purchased by the State and used as a prison in the past. For years the municipality of San Gimignano has been trying in vain to get it back, on the basis of the right of the local community to make use of the public areas in its historic centre, especially those inside the original city walls, and by virtue of a municipal council act passed in 1999 concerning a project for its recovery and restoration.

However, the Italian Government, on the strength of Articles 7 and 8 of Law No 112 of 15 June 2002, which provide for the transfer of national heritage sites for budgetary reasons or in order to build facilities, arranged for the ‘castrum’ to be sold to private purchasers, who intend to build a hotel and an underground garage, which would destroy one of the most important masterpieces of town planning in medieval and modern history. The plan has been opposed jointly by local public and private bodies and is a cause of concern to Unesco, which has declared the historic centre of San Gimignano a world heritage site.

Furthermore, according to Article 151 of the EC Treaty Action by the Community shall be aimed at encouraging cooperation between Member States' (which are signatories to the Convention for the Protection of the Architectural Heritage of Europe) and the competent international organisations'in the area of conservation and safeguarding of cultural heritage of European significance'.

In view of this, can the Commission say what steps it will support or take to prevent the execution of this unfortunate project and encourage the Italian Government to hand the ‘castrum’ of San Gimignano back to the municipality?

Answer given by Mrs Reding on behalf of the Commission

(24 July 2003)

Article 151 of the EC Treaty gives the Community powers to encourage cultural cooperation between Member States and support and supplement (on the basis of funding and if necessary) their action in the following areas:

It should be noted that Article 151 specifically excludes any ‘harmonisation of the laws and regulations of the Member States’ (1).

Consequently the Honourable Member's question does not come within the Community's competence.

----

(1)  Article 151(5), first indent of the EC Treaty.

----
STATE v. CALDWELL.

No. COA07-1463.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed July 1, 2008.

Certification Date July 21, 2008.

Appeal from Forsyth (06CRS24110, 06CRS57002).

Case reported without published opinion. No error.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                          25,261
<SECURITIES>                                        18
<RECEIVABLES>                                    5,958
<ALLOWANCES>                                       642
<INVENTORY>                                      1,563
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                33,496
<PP&E>                                           6,705
<DEPRECIATION>                                   4,587
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  37,085
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            5,954
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        15,803
<OTHER-SE>                                      15,327
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    37,085
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                38,095
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    8,794
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                23,143
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   120
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  7,208
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,514
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              4,694
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,694
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.89
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.87


</TABLE>
STATE of North Carolina v. Cecil Harold JONES.

No. 179P15.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Aug. 20, 2015.

Paul M. Green, Attorney at Law, Durham, For Jones, Cecil Harold.

Sherri Lawrence, Assistant Attorney General, for State of North Carolina.

Ernie Lee, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

***ORDER***

Upon consideration of the notice of appeal from the North Carolina Court of Appeals, filed by the Defendant on the 26th of May 2015 in this matter pursuant to G.S. 7A-30, and the motion to dismiss the appeal for lack of substantial constitutional question filed by the State of NC, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the North Carolina Court of Appeals: the motion to dismiss the appeal is

> "Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 20th of August 2015."

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 26th of May 2015 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:

> "Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 20th of August 2015."
STATE v. SLADE.

No. COA08-367.

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed November 18, 2008.

Certification Date December 8, 2008.

Appeal from Guilford (06CRS94355).

Case reported without published opinion. No error.
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

April 24, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 132767 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, FOUAD NAKHLE, Justices 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v SC: 132767 

 COA: 267553 
 Wayne CC: 03-332445-NI

JANET B. NAKHLE and FATME 

MOHAMAD HAMMOUD, 

Defendants-Appellees. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the November 7, 2006 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

d0416 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

April 24, 2007 

 Clerk
<PAGE>
                                                                      EXHIBIT 99

AUDIT COMMITTEE REPORT

Membership and Role of the Audit Committee

The Audit Committee consists of the following members of the Company's Board of
Directors: John J. Murphy (Chair), John F. Akers, H. Furlong Baldwin, Ronald C.
Cambre, Marye Anne Fox and Thomas A. Vanderslice. Each of the members of the
Audit Committee is "independent," as defined under the New York Stock Exchange's
listing standards. The Audit Committee operates under a written charter adopted
by the Board of Directors.

The Audit Committee is responsible for reviewing the financial information that
the Company provides to stockholders and others, and for overseeing the
Company's internal controls and its auditing, accounting and financial reporting
processes generally. The Committee's specific responsibilities include (1)
recommending to the Board of Directors the selection of independent accountants
to audit the annual financial statements of the Company, (2) serving as an
independent and objective party to monitor the Company's annual and quarterly
financial reporting process and internal control system, (3) reviewing and
appraising the audit efforts of the Company's independent accountants and
internal auditing department, and (4) providing an open avenue of communication
among the independent accountants, the internal auditors, management and the
Board of Directors.

Review of the Company's Audited Financial Statements for the Year ended December
31, 2001

The Audit Committee has reviewed and discussed the audited financial statements
of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2001 with the Company's
management. The Audit Committee has discussed with PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
("PwC"), the Company's independent accountants, the matters required to be
discussed by generally accepted auditing standards.

The Audit Committee has also received the written disclosures and the letter
from PwC required by Independence Standards Board Standard No. 1 (Independence
Discussion with Audit Committees) and the Audit Committee has considered whether
the provision of non-audit services by PwC is compatible with its independence.

Based on the Audit Committee's review and discussions noted above, the Audit
Committee recommended to the Board of Directors that the Company's audited
financial statements be included in the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for
the year ended December 31, 2001 for filing with the SEC.

                                               AUDIT COMMITTEE

                                               John J. Murphy, Chair
                                               John F. Akers
                                               H. Furlong Baldwin
                                               Ronald C. Cambre
                                               Marye Anne Fox
                                               Thomas A. Vanderslice
# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 751/2014Show full title

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 751/2014 of 10 July 2014 establishing the standard import values for determining            the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables         

        - Previous
        - Next

U.K.

# Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 751/2014                     

# of 10 July 2014

# establishing the standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 of 22 October 2007 establishing a common organisation of agricultural                           markets and on specific provisions for certain agricultural products (Single CMO Regulation)(1),                        

Having regard to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 of 7 June 2011 laying down detailed rules for the application                           of Council Regulation (EC) No 1234/2007 in respect of the fruit and vegetables and processed fruit and vegetables sectors(2), and in particular Article 136(1) thereof,                        

Whereas:

(1)Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 lays down, pursuant to the outcome of the Uruguay Round multilateral trade negotiations,                              the criteria whereby the Commission fixes the standard values for imports from third countries, in respect of the products                              and periods stipulated in Annex XVI, Part A thereto.

(2)The standard import value is calculated each working day, in accordance with Article 136(1) of Implementing Regulation (EU)                              No 543/2011, taking into account variable daily data. Therefore this Regulation should enter into force on the day of its                              publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

# Article 1U.K.

The standard import values referred to in Article 136 of Implementing Regulation (EU) No 543/2011 are fixed in the Annex to                     this Regulation.                  

# Article 2U.K.

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day of its publication in the *Official Journal of the European Union*.                  

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

Done at Brussels, 10 July 2014.

*For the Commission,*                            

*On behalf of the President,*                            

Jerzy Plewa                            

*Director-General for Agriculture and Rural Development*                            

## ANNEXU.K.Standard import values for determining the entry price of certain fruit and vegetables

1

OJ L 299, 16.11.2007, p. 1.                           

2

OJ L 157, 15.6.2011, p. 1.
Exhibit 23.1
                               Consent of Auditors

Consent of Independent Certified Public Accountants

The Board of Directors
Premier Bancorp, Inc.

We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statement (No.
333-34243) on Form S-4 of Premier Bancorp, Inc., of our report dated February
17, 2000, relating to the consolidated statements of financial condition of
Premier Bancorp, Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 1999 and 1998, and the
related consolidated statements of operations, shareholders' equity and
comprehensive income (loss), and cash flows for the years then ended, which
report appears in the December 31, 1999 Form 10-KSB of Premier Bancorp, Inc.


/s/ KPMG LLP
March 27, 2000
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
# CE2004084EN.01001301.xml

| 3.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 84/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 84/13

---

(2004/C 84 E/0013)

WRITTEN QUESTION P-1974/03

by Rodi Kratsa-Tsagaropoulou (PPE-DE) to the Commission

(5 June 2003)

Subject:   Rehabilitation of earthquake victims in Attica

Subject:

There are serious social problems in the areas of Attica affected by the earthquakes of 1999, in particular housing and unemployment. The National Action Plan for social integration incorporates retraining schemes to promote the employment of earthquake victims who were unemployed or lost their jobs owing to the damage caused by the 1999 earthquake. Moreover, unemployed earthquake victims were entitled to places on the new jobs programme with higher benefit.

What is the take-up rate for the above programmes and how effective have the measures been? Does the Commission know how many participants managed to obtain employment after training? Is it satisfied with the policy pursued by the Greek Government?

Answer given by Mrs Diamantopoulou on behalf of the Commission

(4 July 2003)

(4 July 2003)

A National Action Plan for Social Integration is drawn up every two years by each Member State under the open method of coordination. The objective is to set out an overall strategy embracing all measures aimed at minimising social exclusion and promoting the integration of disadvantaged people.

An Action Plan therefore does not constitute a programme in the Structural Funds sense and is not part-financed by the European Union, although specific activities under it may be part-financed if they are included in a Community Support Framework (CSF) currently being implemented.

Vocational training and employment assistance measures for victims of the 1999 Athens earthquake part-financed by the European Social Fund (ESF) were included in the ‘Social Exclusion’ programme under the second Community Support Framework (CSF II) 1994-1999. This programme has been wound up with a take-up rate of 97,77 %.

An ex-post evaluation is now being carried out. This will reveal whether the objectives laid down have been achieved and how effective the measures financed have been.

The Commission will inform the Honourable Member as soon as the results of this evaluation are available.

---
STATE v. Reco KAMSON.

No. 275P15-1.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Sept. 24, 2015.

Reco Kamson, Taylorsville, Attorney at Law, for Kamson, Reco.

*860Robert C. Montgomery, Special Deputy Attorney General, for State of N.C.

R. Andrew Murray, District Attorney, for State of N.C.

**Opinion**

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 5th of August 2015 by Defendant to Proceed In Forma Pauperis:

> "Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 24th of September 2015."