alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 23.1

              CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

   We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Form S-8 No.'s 333-32854 and 333-41394) pertaining to the eGain
Communications Corporation Amended and Restated 1998 Stock Plan, the Social
Science, Inc. 1997 Stock Option Plan, the Big Science Corporation 1999 Stock
Incentive Plan, the eGain Communications Corporation 1999 Employee Stock
Purchase Plan, the Amended and Restated Inference Corporation 1993 Stock
Option Plan, the Inference Corporation 1998 Non-Management Stock Option Plan,
the Inference Corporation 1998 New Hire Stock Option Plan, the Inference
Corporation Charles W. Jepson Stock Option Plan, the Inference Corporation
Private Placement Stock Option Plan, and the Inference Corporation Fourth
Amended and Restated Incentive Stock Option Plan and Nonqualified Stock Option
Plan of our report dated July 28, 2000, except for Note 10 as to which the
date is August 28, 2000, with respect to the consolidated financial statements
of eGain Communications Corporation included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K)
for the year ended June 30, 2000.

                                          /s/ Ernst & Young LLP

Palo Alto, California
September 27, 2000
STATE of North Carolina v. Christina Anne CALABRESE

No. COA17-1001

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: April 17, 2018

NO PREJUDICIAL ERROR.
#### Charles Alan KNIGHT, Appellant, v. Julie Ann KNIGHT, Appellee.

No. 01-02-01016-CV.

Court of Appeals of Texas, Houston (1st Dist.).

July 10, 2003.

Rehearing Overruled Aug. 26, 2003.

L.T. “Butch” Bradt, Teltschik Law Firm, Paul E. Nunu, Houston, TX, for Appellant.

Kimberly Hare, Houston, TX, for Appel-lee.

Panel consists of Justices HEDGES, JENNINGS, and ALCALA.

*805OPINION ON REHEARING

ADELE HEDGES, Justice.

The Court today heard the appellant’s motion for rehearing, and the same is hereby granted. The appeal is dismissed as moot.

On February 17, 2003, the 306th Judicial District Court of Galveston County, Texas found that all the parties reside in Harris County; therefore, it granted appellant’s motion to transfer venue to the Family District Court of Harris County, Texas. Accordingly, our April 10, 2003 opinion was moot when it was issued.

Conclusion

It is ordered that appellant’s motion for rehearing is granted. Any other pending motions are denied. It is further ordered that this Court’s former Judgment of April 10, 2003, is vacated, set aside, and annulled, and this Court’s opinion dated April 10, 2003, is withdrawn.

The appeal is dismissed as moot.
STATE v. Tilmon Charles GOLPHIN

441A98-4

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 22, 2018

Mr. Jay H. Ferguson, Durham, Attorney at Law, for Golphin, Tilmon Charles

Mr. Kenneth J. Rose, Durham, Attorney at Law, for Golphin, Tilmon Charles

Ms. Danielle Marquis Elder, Special Deputy Attorney General, for State of N.C.

Mr. Jonathan P. Babb, Special Counsel to Attorney General, for State of N.C.

Mr. James E. Williams, Jr., Carrboro, Attorney at Law, for N.C. Advocates for Justice

Mr. William R. West, District Attorney, for State

The following order has been entered on the Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief filed on the 21st of June 2018 by Defendant:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 22nd of June 2018."

Defendant shall have up to and including the 16th day of July 2018 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court.
**Exhibit 32.1**





**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO**


**EXCHANGE
      ACT RULE 15d-14(b) AND**


**18
      U.S.C. SECTION 1350**





In
      connection with the Amended Quarterly Report of Eternal Energy Corp.
      (the ”Company”) on Form 10-QSB/A for the period ending March 31, 2006,
      as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
      “Report”), I, Bradley M. Colby, President, Chief Executive Officer,
      Treasurer, Secretary and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify,
      to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to Exchange Act
      Rule 15d-14(b) and 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
      Section 906 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002, that:





i.
            The
                Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
                15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
                and





ii.
            The
                information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
                respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
                Company.





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




/s/ BRADLEYM.
              COLBYBradley
                M. Colby*President,
                Chief Executive Officer, Treasurer,**Secretary
                and Chief Financial Officer**Eternal
                Energy Corp.*August
                22, 2006
Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-13-0004433 30-JUN-2015 08:48 AM
In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS 

No. 15-850V 

Filed: November 18, 2015 

Unpublished 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

JENNIFER HENDRICKS, * 

 * 

 Petitioner, * Ruling on Entitlement; Concession; 

 * Influenza (“Flu”) Vaccine; Shoulder 

 * Injury Related to Vaccine 

SECRETARY OF HEALTH * Administration (“SIRVA”); Special 

AND HUMAN SERVICES, * Processing Unit (“SPU”) 

 * 

 Respondent. * 

 * 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * 

Curtis R. Webb, counsel for petitioner. 

Lisa Ann Watts, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent. 

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

Dorsey, Chief Special Master: 

 On August 10, 2015, petitioner filed a petition for compensation under the 

National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq.,

2 [the 

“Vaccine Act”]. Petitioner alleges that as a result of a trivalent influenza (“flu”) vaccine 

she received on October 15, 2014, petitioner developed a shoulder injury related to 

vaccination (SIRVA). Petition at 1. This case was assigned to the Special Processing 

Unit (SPU) of the Office of Special Masters. 

On November 18, 2015, respondent filed the Rule 4(c) report in conceding that 

petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report at 1. 

Specifically, respondent states that “petitioner’s SIRVA was more likely than not caused 

by the October 15, 2014, flu vaccination,” and that “petitioner has satisfied all legal 

prerequisites for compensation under the Act.” Id. at 5. 

 

1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the 

undersigned intends to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, in accordance with 

the E-Government Act of 2002, Pub. L. No. 107-347, § 205, 116 Stat. 2899, 2913 (codified as amended 

at 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2006)). In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), petitioner has 14 days to 

identify and move to redact medical or other information, the disclosure of which would constitute an 

unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, the undersigned agrees that the identified material fits 

within this definition, the undersigned will redact such material from public access. 

2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755. Hereinafter, for 

ease of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 

300aa (2012). 
2

 In view of respondent’s concession and the evidence before me, the 

undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to compensation. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 s/Nora Beth Dorsey 

 Nora Beth Dorsey 

 Chief Special Master
STATE v. Antwan ANTHONY

324A16-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

May 23, 2017

*277Kathryn L. VandenBerg, Assistant Appellant Defender, Kimberly S. Robb, District Attorney, Jonathan E. Broun, Attorney at Law, for Anthony, Antwan

Kimberly Robb, Assistant District Attorney, Robert C. Montgomery, Special Deputy Attorney General, for State of N.C.

Morgan, J.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 19th of May 2017 by Defendant for Extension of Time to Prepare Trial Transcript:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 23rd of May 2017."

Court reporter shall have up to and including the 21st day of June 2017 to prepare and deliver transcript to counsel.
HAIRSTON v. HARWARD

416A17-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

March 2, 2018

C. Douglas Maynard, Jr., Attorney at Law, Winston-Salem, James M. Roane, III, Attorney at Law, John F. Bloss, Attorney at Law, Greensboro, for Hairston, William (Jr.)

Kent L. Hamrick, Attorney at Law, Ann C. Rowe, Attorney at Law, Winston-Salem, for Harward, Ashwell Bennett (Jr.)

Stephanie W. Anderson, Attorney at Law, Greensboro, for Erie Insurance Exchange

Ann C. Ochsner, Attorney at Law, Raleigh.

Huntington M. Willis, Attorney at Law, Raleigh.

Deborah J. Bowers, Attorney at Law, Greensboro.

Andrew Pinto, Attorney at Law, Greensboro.

The following order has been entered on the Motion for Extension of Time to File Brief filed on the 22nd of February 2018 by Defendant (Unnamed):

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 2nd of March 2018."

Defendant (Unnamed) shall have up to and including the 10th day of April 2018 to file and serve his/her brief with this Court.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT 

No. 09-1514

MARGARET NJOB TESAMBOM NGBATKAM, 

 Petitioner, 

 v. 

ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General, 

 Respondent. 

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration 

Appeals.

Submitted: December 30, 2009 Decided: January 19, 2010 

Before MICHAEL and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior 

Circuit Judge. 

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

Danielle L. C. Beach-Oswald, BEACH-OSWALD IMMIGRATION LAW 

ASSOCIATES, PC, Washington, D.C., for Petitioner. Tony West, 

Assistant Attorney General, Mary Jane Candaux, Assistant 

Director, David H. Wetmore, Office of Immigration Litigation, 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for 

Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. 
PER CURIAM: 

 Margaret Njob Tesambom Ngbatkam, a native and citizen 

of Cameroon, petitions for review of an order of the Board of 

Immigration Appeals (“Board”) dismissing her appeal from the 

immigration judge’s denial of her requests for asylum, 

withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention 

Against Torture. 

 Ngbatkam first challenges the determination that she 

failed to establish her eligibility for asylum. We have 

reviewed the administrative record, the immigration judge’s 

decision, and the Board’s affirmance thereof, and find that 

substantial evidence supports the Board’s ruling that Ngbatkam 

failed to establish persecution or a well-founded fear of 

persecution on account of membership in a particular social 

group, political opinion, or any other protected ground. See 8 

U.S.C. § 1101(a)(42)(A) (2006) (defining refugee). We therefore 

uphold the denial of relief. 

 Additionally, we uphold the denial of Ngbatkam’s 

request for withholding of removal. “Because the burden of 

proof for withholding of removal is higher than for asylum--even 

though the facts that must be proved are the same--an applicant 

who is ineligible for asylum is necessarily ineligible for 

withholding of removal under [8 U.S.C.] § 1231(b)(3).” 

Camara v. Ashcroft, 378 F.3d 361, 367 (4th Cir. 2004). Because 

2 
3 

Ngbatkam failed to show that she is eligible for asylum, she 

cannot meet the higher standard for withholding of removal. 

 Finally, we find that substantial evidence supports 

the finding that Ngbatkam failed to meet the standard for relief 

under the Convention Against Torture. To obtain such relief, an 

applicant must establish that “it is more likely than not that 

he or she would be tortured if removed to the proposed country 

of removal.” 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(c)(2) (2009). We find that 

Ngbatkam failed to make the requisite showing before the 

immigration court. 

 Accordingly, we deny the petition for review. 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. 

PETITION DENIED
# Official Journal C 70/23 F

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 70 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6123 February 2018 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 70

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6123 February 2018

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | IV   Notices |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2018/C 70/01 | Summary of European Union decisions on marketing authorisations in respect of medicinal products from 1 January 2018 to 31 January 2018(Published pursuant to Article 13 or Article 38 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council) | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2018/C 70/01

Summary of European Union decisions on marketing authorisations in respect of medicinal products from 1 January 2018 to 31 January 2018(Published pursuant to Article 13 or Article 38 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council)

(Published pursuant to Article 13 or Article 38 of Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council)

1

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
In the MATTER OF K. Douglas THORNTON, Respondent.

Appellate Case No. 2018-000559

Supreme Court of South Carolina.

March 30, 2018

**423ORDER

The Office of Disciplinary Counsel asks this Court to place Respondent on interim suspension pursuant to Rule 17(b) of the Rules for Lawyer Disciplinary Enforcement (RLDE) contained in Rule 413 of the South Carolina Appellate Court Rules (SCACR). The petition also seeks appointment of the Receiver pursuant to Rule 31, RLDE, Rule 413, SCACR.

IT IS ORDERED that Respondent's license to practice law in this state is suspended until further order of this Court.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Peyre Thomas Lumpkin, Esquire, Receiver, is hereby appointed to assume responsibility for Respondent's client files, trust account(s), escrow account(s), operating account(s), and any other law office accounts Respondent may maintain. Mr. Lumpkin shall take action as required by Rule 31, RLDE, to protect the interests of Respondent's clients. Mr. Lumpkin may make disbursements from Respondent's trust account(s), escrow account(s), operating account(s), and any other law office accounts Respondent may maintain that are necessary to effectuate this appointment.

This Order, when served on any bank or other financial institution maintaining trust, escrow and/or operating account(s) of Respondent, shall serve as an injunction to prevent Respondent from making withdrawals from the account(s) and shall further serve as notice to the bank or other financial institution that Peyre Thomas Lumpkin, Esquire, Receiver, has been duly appointed by this Court.

Finally, this Order, when served on any office of the United States Postal Service, shall serve as notice that Peyre Thomas Lumpkin, Esquire, Receiver, has been duly appointed by this Court and has the authority to receive Respondent's mail and **424the authority to direct that Respondent's mail be delivered to Mr. Lumpkin's office.

Mr. Lumpkin's appointment shall be for a period of no longer than nine months unless an extension of the period of appointment is requested.

Within fifteen days of the date of this order, Respondent shall serve and file the affidavit required by Rule 30, RLDE. Should Respondent fail to timely file the required affidavit, he may be held in civil and/or criminal contempt of this Court as provided by Rule 30, RLDE.

*/s/ Donald W. Beatty*, C.J.

FOR THE COURT
Terrance L. JAMES v. STATE of North Carolina

No. 536P00-8

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 15, 2018

Mr. Terrance James, for James, Terrance L.

Ms. Kathleen N. Bolton, Assistant Attorney General, for State of N. C.

***ORDER***

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 13th of June 2018 by Petitioner for Averment of Jurisdiction:

"Motion Dismissed by order of the Court in conference, this the 15th of June 2018."

Upon consideration of the application filed by Petitioner on the 13th of June 2018 in this matter for Writ of Habeas Corpus, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court, Cleveland County:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 15th of June 2018."

Upon consideration of the petition filed by Petitioner on the 13th of June 2018 in this matter for a writ of mandamus, the following order was entered and is hereby certified to the Superior Court, Cleveland County:

"Denied by order of the Court in conference, this the 15th of June 2018."
WEAVER v. DEDMON, et al.

203P17-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

February 27, 2018

Mr. Leonard T. Jernigan, Jr., Attorney at Law, Raleigh, For Weaver, Shaun

Ms. Kristina Brown Thompson, Attorney at Law, For Weaver, Shaun

Ms. M. Hayes Jernigan, Attorney at Law

Mr. J. Timothy Wilson, Attorney at Law, For Seegars Fence Company, Inc., et al

Mr. Anthony L. Lucas, Attorney at Law, For Weaver, Shaun

Mr. M. Pierce Sandwith, Attorney at Law, For Seegars Fence Company, Inc., et al

Mr. Bryan L. Cantley, Attorney at Law, For Seegars Fence Company, Inc., et al

The following order has been entered on the consent motion filed on the 20th of February 2018 by Plaintiff and Defendants for Leave to Withdraw Petitions for Discretionary Review:

*501"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 27th of February 2018."
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 22

- 1375

SHIRLEY MARIE TRENT , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v. VIRGINIA COMMONWEALTH UNIVERSITY, Administration , Defendant

- Appellee

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia , at Richmond

. Henry E. Hudson , Senior District Judge. ( 3:21

- cv - 00710

- HEH )

Submitted : July 2 6 , 2022 Decided: July 28, 2022

Before MOTZ, KING , and AGEE , Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.
Shirley Marie Trent, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 22-1375 Doc: 8 Filed: 07/28/2022 Pg: 1 of 22 PER CURIAM: Shirley Marie Trent appeals the district court’s order dismissing her ci vil complaint
as frivolous . We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we
affirm the district court’s order

. Trent v. Va. Commonwealth Univ. , No. 3:21

- cv - 00710

-
HEH (E.D. Va. Mar. 14, 2022). W e dispense with oral argument bec ause the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED USCA4 Appeal: 22-1375 Doc: 8 Filed: 07/28/2022 Pg: 2 of 2
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3872 

To amend title 23, United States Code, to reauthorize the State infrastructure 

bank program. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 14, 2014 

Mr. HANNA (for himself and Ms. HAHN) introduced the following bill; which 

was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To amend title 23, United States Code, to reauthorize the 

State infrastructure bank program. 

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 ‘‘State Transportation 

5 and Infrastructure Financing Innovation Act (STIFIA)’’. 

6 SEC. 2. STATE INFRASTRUCTURE BANK PROGRAM. 

7 Section 610 of title 23, United States Code, is 

8 amended— 

9 (1) in subsection (d)— 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3872 IH

1 (A) in paragraph (1), by striking subpara2 graph (A) and inserting the following: 

3 ‘‘(A) 15 percent of the funds apportioned 

4 to the State for each of fiscal years 2013 and 

5 2014 under each of sections 104(b)(1) and 

6 104(b)(2); and’’; 

7 (B) in paragraph (2), by striking ‘‘2005 

8 through 2009’’ and inserting ‘‘2013 and 2014’’; 

9 (C) in paragraph (3), by striking ‘‘2005 

10 through 2009’’ and inserting ‘‘2013 and 2014’’; 

11 and 

12 (D) in paragraph (5), by striking ‘‘section 

13 133(d)(3)’’ and inserting ‘‘section 133(d)(4)’’; 

14 and 

15 (2) in subsection (k), by striking ‘‘2005 through 

16 2009’’ and inserting ‘‘2013 and 2014’’. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
# Official Journal C 13/2013

| | ISSN 1977-091X
  doi:10.3000/1977091X.C_2013.013.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 13 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5616 January 2013 |

ISSN 1977-091X

doi:10.3000/1977091X.C_2013.013.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 13

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5616 January 2013

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | III   Preparatory acts |
| | COURT OF AUDITORS |
| 2013/C 013/01 | Opinion No 9/2012 on an amended proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down common provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund, the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund covered by the Common Strategic Framework and laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund and the Cohesion Fund and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 — (COM(2012) 496 final — 2011/0276 (COD)) (pursuant to the second subparagraph of Article 287(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning on the European Union) | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

III   Preparatory acts

COURT OF AUDITORS

2013/C 013/01

Opinion No 9/2012 on an amended proposal for a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council laying down common provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund, the Cohesion Fund, the European Agricultural Fund for Rural Development and the European Maritime and Fisheries Fund covered by the Common Strategic Framework and laying down general provisions on the European Regional Development Fund, the European Social Fund and the Cohesion Fund and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 1083/2006 — (COM(2012) 496 final — 2011/0276 (COD)) (pursuant to the second subparagraph of Article 287(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning on the European Union)

(pursuant to the second subparagraph of Article 287(4) of the Treaty on the Functioning on the European Union)

1

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN