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





CONSENT
OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM





The Board
of Directors


CKE
Restaurants, Inc.:





We
consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements on Form
S-3 (No. 333-111284), on Form S-4 (No. 333-75880), and on Form S-8 (Nos.
333-126681, 333-104957, 333-83666, 333-76884, 333-41266, 333-83601, 333-12399,
002-86142-01, 033-31190-01, 033-53089-01, 033-56313, 033-55337, 333-144225,
333-157699 and 333-160599) of CKE Restaurants, Inc., of our reports dated March
24, 2010, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of CKE Restaurants,
Inc. and subsidiaries as of January 31, 2010 and 2009, and the related
consolidated statements of income, stockholders' equity, and cash flows for each
of the years in the three-year period ended January 31, 2010, and the
effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of January 31,
2010, which reports appear in the January 31, 2010, annual report on Form 10-K
of CKE Restaurants, Inc.




Our
report on the consolidated financial statements refers to changes in the
Company’s method of accounting for uncertainties in income taxes in fiscal 2008
and in its method of presenting earnings per share in fiscal 2010 due to the
adoption of new accounting pronouncements.








/s/ KPMG
LLP





Irvine,
California


March 24,
2010
# CE2004084EN.01071201.xml

| 3.4.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 84/712 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.4.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 84/712

---

(2004/C 84 E/0799)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-0093/03

by Peter Skinner (PSE) to the Commission

(28 January 2003)

Subject:   German capital gains tax

Subject:

Could the Commission tell the European Parliament what steps it is taking to persuade the German Government not to adopt its proposed new capital gains tax discriminating against funds domiciled outside of Germany (by exposing them to higher taxation levels than funds domiciled within Germany)? Does the Commissioner agree that this measure is an illegal breach of single market principles, constituting an impediment to the free movement of capital? Has the Commission been in touch with the German Government to give its views on the proposed new tax?

Answer given by Mr Bolkestein on behalf of the Commission

(18 February 2003)

(18 February 2003)

The Commission has opened an infringement procedure against Germany for an already existing discriminatory tax regime for foreign investment funds (infr 2000/5059). In the press release issued on that occasion (1) the Commission also expressed its concern about the draft German bill, which, if adopted, would extend the tax discrimination to capital gains.

1

---

(1)  IP/02/1924.

1

---
In the Matter of M.P.M.

No. 340A15.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 18, 2016.

Mercedes O. Chut, Greensboro, for Guilford County Department of Health and Human Services, petitioner-appellee.

Opoku-Mensah Law Firm, PLLC, by Gertrude Opoku-Mensah, for appellee Guardian ad Litem.

Mary McCullers Reece, Smithfield, for respondent-appellant father.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.
CLARKE, ex rel. v. MIKHAIL, et al.

No. 29P16-1.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 17, 2016.

Gary K. Shipman, Wilmington, Attorney at Law, for Clarke, Timothy (Representative), et al.

*514W. Cory Reiss, Wilmington, for Clarke, Timothy (Representative), et al.

C. Andrew Childers, for Clarke, Timothy (Representative), et al.

B. John D. Martin, Wilmington, for Mikhail, Ashraf Gad Bakhom (M.D.), et al.

Colleen N. Shea, Wilmington, for Mikhail, Ashraf Gad Bakhom (M.D.), et al.

Kara O. Gansmann, Wilmington.

Jaye E. Bingham-Hinch, Raleigh, for Mikhail, Ashraf Gad Bakhom.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 12th of February 2016 by Plaintiff to Amend Petition for Discretionary Review:

> "Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 17th of March 2016."
# C_2008313EN.01002902.xml

| 6.12.2008 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 313/29 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.12.2008

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 313/29

---

Judgment of the Court of First Instance of 23 October 2008 — TIM and TTV v OHIM — PAST PERFECT

(Case T-133/06) (1)

1

(Community trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - Community word mark PAST PERFECT - Rejection of the application for a declaration of invalidity - Article 7(1)(b), (c) and (d) of Regulation (EC) No 40/94 - Article 7(2))

(2008/C 313/51)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicants: TIM The International Music Company AG and TTV Tonträger-Vertrieb-2000 GmbH (Hamburg, Germany) (represented initially by J. Wendt and G. Kukuk, and subsequently by J. Wendt, lawyers)

Applicants:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: G. Schneider, Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the Court of First Instance: Past Perfect Ltd (Bucknell, Oxfordshire, United Kingdom) (represented initially by S. Disraeli, and subsequently by K. Tinkler, Solicitors)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the Court of First Instance:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of OHIM of 3 February 2006 (Case R 150/2005-1), relating to invalidity proceedings between TIM The International Music Company AG and TTV Tonträger-Vertrieb-2000 GmbH, on the one hand, and Past Perfect Ltd, on the other.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders TIM The International Music Company AG and TTV Tonträger-Vertrieb-2000 GmbH to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders TIM The International Music Company AG and TTV Tonträger-Vertrieb-2000 GmbH to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 154, 1.7.2006.

1

---
State of North Carolina v. Michael Antonio Bullock

No. 194A16

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 16, 2016

Mr. Jon H. Hunt, Assistant Appellate Defender, For Bullock, Michael Antonio

Ms. Kristin Jo Uicker, Attorney at Law, Mr. Roger A. Echols, District Attorney, For State of North Carolina *928**ORDER**

Upon consideration of the petition filed by State of NC on the 23rd of May 2016 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 16th of June 2016."
HYDE v. STATE of N.C.

No. 88P15-2.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Oct. 9, 2015.

Mason W. Hyde, Salisbury, for Hyde, Mason White.

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

**Opinion**

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 5th of October 2015 by Defendant for Petition for Writ of Error Coram Nobis:

> "Motion Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 9th of October 2015."
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2



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


In connection with the Annual Report of Ohio State Bancshares, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2002 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Gary E. Pendleton, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to
18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as enacted 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/ Gary E. Pendleton
Gary E. Pendleton
Chief Executive Officer
March 20, 2003
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-7050

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

WILLIAM FRANKLIN SEHEN,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western

District of Virginia, at Danville. Norman K. Moon, District Judge.

(4:02-cr-70128-nkm-mfu-1; 4:08-cv-80043-nkm-mfu)

Submitted: August 14, 2008 Decided: August 22, 2008

Before MICHAEL, Circuit Judge, and WILKINS and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

William Franklin Sehen, Appellant Pro Se. Anthony Paul Giorno,

Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
 2 

PER CURIAM:

William Franklin Sehen seeks to appeal the district

court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion.

The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge

issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)

(2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28

U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any

assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is

debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by

the district court is likewise debatable. Miller-El v. Cockrell,

537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484

(2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir. 2001). We have

independently reviewed the record and conclude that Sehen has not

made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of

appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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.

DISMISSED
STATE of North Carolina v. Marlette TOOMER and Vernon Toomer.

No. 397P15.

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

Jan. 1, 2016.

Kathryn L. VandenBerg, for Toomer, Marlette.

Joseph E. Herrin, Special Deputy Attorney General, for State of North Carolina.

Alexandra M. Flightower, Assistant Attorney General, for State of North Carolina.

Vernon Toomer, for Toomer, Vernon.

Patrick Nadolski, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the petition filed on the 23rd of November 2015 by Defendant (Vernon Toomer) 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 1st of January 2016."
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 7
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AS OF DECEMBER 31, 1998 AND THE CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENT OF INCOME FOR THE PERIOD FROM JANUARY 27, 1998 TO DECEMBER 31, 1998
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-27-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                        18,306,720
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                                0
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                                  0
<EQUITIES>                                           0
<MORTGAGE>                                           0
<REAL-ESTATE>                                        0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                              95,504,300
<CASH>                                      26,152,550
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                          16,000,000
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                       1,147,923
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             169,971,128
<POLICY-LOSSES>                            125,191,823
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                                  0
<POLICY-OTHER>                                       0
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                                0
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                             30,000,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      1,010
<COMMON>                                        40,790
<OTHER-SE>                                   7,968,894
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               169,971,128
<PREMIUMS>                                 138,182,450
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                        (7,828,731)
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                         (8,274,514)
<OTHER-INCOME>                                       0
<BENEFITS>                                 134,312,059
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                          0
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                         5,192,047
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (23,255,039)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (23,255,039)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (23,255,039)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (5.70)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (5.70)
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                       0
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                        131,437,059
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                                    0
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                           6,245,236
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                                     0
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                            125,191,823
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                              0
        

</TABLE>
JOHN GAY

, Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

, Appellee

. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D 15

- 4316

_______________ ______________/

Opinion filed March 18, 2016.

An appeal from an order of the Circuit Court for Escambia County

. Edward P. Nickinson, III , Judge

. John Gay, pro se

, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Jennifer J. Moore, Assista n t Attorney G eneral, Tallahassee , for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

The appellant challenges the denial of his motion to correct illegal sentence

filed pursuant to rule 3.800(a). We reverse and remand.2 The appellant alleges that his life sentence for attempted capita l sexual

battery exceeds the statutory maximum of thirty years’ imprisonment that may be

imposed for that offense. §§ 775.082(3)(b) ; 777.04 (4)(a); 794.011 (2), Fla. Stat.

(1989). The trial court failed to attach any portion of the record refuting the

appel lant’s claim or demonstrating why a life sentence for attempted capital sexual

battery is legal. Accordingly, we reverse and remand for the trial court to attach

portions of the record refuting appellant’s claim or to grant relief

.

REVERSED and REMANDED for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.

ROBERTS, C.J., SWANSON, and KELSEY, JJ., CONCUR.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                           8,707
<SECURITIES>                                    18,009
<RECEIVABLES>                                   11,909
<ALLOWANCES>                                       349
<INVENTORY>                                     14,355
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                54,162
<PP&E>                                          32,389
<DEPRECIATION>                                  22,988
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  63,655
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           12,188
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        52,394
<OTHER-SE>                                     (1,563)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    63,655
<SALES>                                         48,211
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                48,211
<CGS>                                           39,838
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   39,838
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 6,659
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   349
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 231
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (6,824)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (6,824)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (6,824)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.88)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.88)


</TABLE>
2008 Decisions

Opinions of the United

States Court of Appeals

for the Third Circuit

8-21-2008

Whitfield v. Radian Guaranty Inc

Precedential or Non-Precedential: Precedential

Docket No. 05-5017

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2008

This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2008 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.

Recommended Citation

"Whitfield v. Radian Guaranty Inc" (2008). 2008 Decisions. Paper 579.

http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2008/579
 Hon. Richard D. Cudahy, United States Senior Circuit Judge for the United States

*

Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit, sitting by designation.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

 

No. 05-5017

 

WHITNEY WHITFIELD;

CELESTE WHITFIELD,

on behalf of themselves and all others similarly situated,

 Appellants

 v.

RADIAN GUARANTY, INC.

 

On Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania

(D.C. No. 04-cv-00111)

District Judge: Honorable Juan R. Sanchez

 

Argued January 19, 2007

On Remand from the United States Supreme Court

June 9, 2008

Before: SLOVITER, RENDELL, and CUDAHY, Circuit Judges *

 

O R D E R

This court filed its opinion in this matter on August 30, 2007 in which we reversed

the District Court’s entry of summary judgment for defendant Radian Guaranty, Inc., held

that the notice requirement of the Fair Credit Reporting Act was applicable to Radian, and
directed a remand for a determination whether Radian had acted willfully. Whitfield v.

Radian Guaranty, Inc., 501 F.3d 262 (3d Cir. 2007). On December 19, 2007, Radian filed

a petition for a writ of certiorari in the Supreme Court. On February 5, 2008, the

Supreme Court requested a response. On April 24, 2008, counsel for Whitney and

Celeste Whitfield filed a motion in the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Pennsylvania to dismiss the action with prejudice pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P.

41(a)(2). The same day, the District Court, pursuant to that motion, dismissed the action

with prejudice.

On May 5, 2008, Radian Guaranty, Inc., noting the dismissal, filed in the Supreme

Court a suggestion of mootness and motion to vacate this court’s judgment. On June 9,

2008, the Supreme Court entered an order granting the petition for a writ of certiorari

filed by Radian Guaranty, Inc., vacating the judgment of this court and remanding the

case to this court with instructions to dismiss the case as moot.

Pursuant to the order of the Supreme Court, this case is hereby dismissed as moot.

By the Court,

/s/ Dolores K. Sloviter 

Circuit Judge

Dated: August 21, 2008
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AS OF JUNE 30, 1999 (UNAUDITED) AND THE CONSOLIDATED
STATEMENTS OF INCOME FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 1999 (UNAUDITED) AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                          21,432
<SECURITIES>                                    36,055
<RECEIVABLES>                                   18,450
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                      5,243
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                84,667
<PP&E>                                           5,943
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 100,920
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           17,826
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        48,797
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   100,920
<SALES>                                         60,707
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                60,707
<CGS>                                           21,496
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   21,496
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                28,716
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 11,306
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,966
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              6,340
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     6,340
<EPS-BASIC>                                     0.43
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.40


</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 175 (Monday, September 12, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Page 53834]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-18181]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

UNITED STATES INSTITUTE OF PEACE


Sunshine Act Meeting

DATE/TIME: Thursday, September 22, 2005, 9:15 a.m.-3.45 p.m.

LOCATION: 1200 17th Street, NW., Suite 200, Washington, DC 20036-3011.

STATUS: Open Session--Portions may be closed pursuant to Subsection (c) 
of Section 552(b) of Title 5, United States Code, as provided in 
subsection 1706(h)(3) of the United States Institute of Peace Act, 
Public Law 98-525.

AGENDA: September 2005 Board Meeting; Approval of Minutes of the One 
Hundred Nineteenth Meeting (June 15-17, 2005) of the Board of 
Directors; Chairman's Report; President's Report; Committee Reports; 
Fiscal Years 2006 and 2007 Budget Review; Organizational Structure 
Review; Approval of 2005 Unsolicited and Solicited Grant; Other General 
Issues.

CONTACT: Tessie Higgs, Executive Office, Telephone: (202) 429-3836.

    Dated: September 7, 2005.
Patricia P. Thomson,
Executive Vice President, United States Institute of Peace.
[FR Doc. 05-18181 Filed 9-8-05; 4:07 pm]
BILLING CODE 6820-AR-M