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

                                                                 Exhibit 23.1

                     Consent of Independent Auditors

We consent to the reference to our firm under the caption "Selected Financial 
Data" and to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement 
(Form S-8 No. 33-59740) pertaining to the Amended and Restated 1986 Stock 
Option Plan, 1991 Stock Option Plan and Stock Option Plan for Directors of 
Peer Review Analysis, Inc. and in the Registration Statement (Form S-8, No 
333-00354) pertaining to the CORE, INC. 1991 Stock Option Plan, as amended, 
and in the Registration Statement (Form S-8, No. 333-4144) pertaining to the 
CORE, INC. 1991 Stock Option Plan, as amended, and in the Registration 
Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-15261) pertaining to the CORE, INC. 1991 Stock 
Option Plan, as amended, and in the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 
333-16961) pertaining to the CORE, INC. 1991 Stock Option Plan, as amended, 
of our report dated February 19, 1998 (except for Note 15 as to which the 
date is March 17, 1998), with respect to the consolidated financial 
statements and schedule of CORE, INC. included in the Annual Report (Form 
10-K) for the year ended December 31, 1997.

                                           /s/ Ernst & Young LLP

                                           ERNST & YOUNG LLP


Boston, Massachusetts
April 8, 1998
#### Simeon Cunliff, Respondent, v. The President, etc., of the Delaware and Hudson Canal Company, Appellant.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. Opinion by

Bockes, J.
| Skip to contentSocial Security Online | Actuarial Publications |
|---------------------------------------|------------------------|

| www.socialsecurity.gov |  | **Search**  |
|------------------------|--|------------------|

| Actuarial Publications | Summary of Provisions That Would Change the Social Security ProgramUpdated May 3, 2006   |
|------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Solvency Provisions | Description of Proposed Provisions:              All Categories |
|---------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                     |

*Estimates based on the intermediate assumptions of         the 2005 Trustees Report*

|        |
|--------|
|   | Privacy Policy      | Website Policies        & Other Important Information      | Site Map |
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

United States Space Command

USSPACECOM

                - 
                - 
                - 
                - 
                - 

Search

Search
Search

-  Home		 
-  About    -  Mission         
  -  Warfighting Units         
  -  Frequently Asked Questions         
  -  Strategic Vision         
  -  Emblem 
-  Leaders    -  Commander         
  -  Deputy Commander         
  -  Command Senior Enlisted Leader         
  -  Chief of Staff 
-  Support    -  Inspector General         
  -  FOIA      -  Making a FOIA Request         
    -  Reading Room 
  -  Equal Opportunity Coordinator         
  -  Sexual Assault Prevention and Response Victim Advocate         
  -  Command Chaplain         
  -  Commandant         
  -  Resilience Program 
-  Newsroom    -  News      -  FY2025 Testimony 
  -  Photos and Videos         
  -  Speeches         
  -  Publications 
-  Contact		 
-  Partnerships and Outreach    -  Academic Engagement Enterprise      -  AEE Articles of Interest         
    -  AEE Members         
    -  AEE Multimedia 
  -  Careers      -  Civilians         
    -  Internships 
  -  Industry Engagement Portal 
-  Newcomers    -  Newcomer Information         
  -  Checking In 

##### U.S. Space Command Public Affairs:719-554-3478

 

#### **QUICK LINKS**

#### Accessibility  |  Section 508    Web PolicySite Map  |  Defense.gov  |  Intel.govQuestions  |  Privacy and SecurityContact Us  |  Inspector General  |  FOIAOPM.gov  |  Plain Writing Act | MISONo Fear Act  |  Links DisclaimerUSA.gov  |  DoD Open Government

                  - Facebook
                  - X
                  - YouTube
                  - LinkedIn
                  - Civilian Careers

Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil
**
EXHIBIT 23 

February 7, 2024 

Tracie White 

XTO Energy Inc. 

22777 Springwoods Village Parkway 

Spring, TX 77389-1425 

Re:  CRT ConsentLetter   

Dear Tracie White: 

This letter is to confirm that Millerand Lents, Ltd. (M&L) authorizes XTO Energy Inc. (XTO) to use our name and report dated January 18, 2024, related to the Cross Timbers Royalty Trust (CRT) for use in the electronic filing of the CRT Annual Report on Form 10-K with the SEC. 

Please provide us with an exact copy of the Annual Report on Form 10-Kas electronically filed with the SEC. 

 

Very truly yours,

MILLER AND LENTS, LTD.

Texas Registered Engineering Firm No.F-1442
By 
/S/ JENNIFER A. GODBOLD
 Jennifer A. Godbold, P. E. Senior Vice President**
#### Willis Gurley v. The People of the State of Illinois.

*Bastardy—Release of Claim—Fraud and Duress—Evidence.*

Upon bastardy proceedings, the defense being the execution of a release of all claims in consideration of the payment of a certain sum of money, this court holds that the same was procured through fraud and misrepresentation, and declines to interfere with a verdict for the plaintiff.

*466[Opinion filed March 1, 1889.]

Appeal from the Circuit Court of Massac County; the' Hon. Robert W. McCartney, Judge, presiding.

Mr. William A. Spann, for appellant.

Messrs. Courtney & Helm, for appellee.

Phillips, J.

Appellant was found guilty in a prosecution for bastardy, and brings the record to this court by appeal.

The evidence of the prosecutrix shows his guilt. The paternity of the child is not denied, but the defense relied on is the execution of a release. The execution of that release, and that the same was explained to the prosecutrix, is shown. The effect of that release is sought to be avoided by reason of the fact that the signature thereto was procured by fraud and misrepresentation and by duress. The evidence shows that James Richardson, a brother-in-law of appellant, visited the prosecutrix and represented to her that appellant had left the State and gone to Minnesota; that his family were to follow him, and he would never *return,*and that she would never get anything by the prosecution; this was untrue. He further said he would pay her '§50 if she would execute a release. To that proposition she desired that her attorneys who had been employed in the bastardy prosecution might be consulted, and requested Richardson to see them.

It is not shown that he endeavored to see her attorneys; but it appears he employed an attorney to write a release and get her signature to the same. The evidence shows the attorney who was thus employed wrote the release and presented the same to the prosecutrix; represented to her that he was not employed by the appellant and was her friend, and would advise her right. He further’represented that if she did not sign the release the father would kidnap her child. To these representations she replied she would do whatever that attorney said was best, and he said sign it. The attorney does not deny these statements of the prosecuting witness, and on *467cross-examination states he made the representations of friendship to produce her confidence, but further insists he advised her correctly. The prosecutrix further testifies that she relied on the advice of that attorney as a friend, on his representations, and her-fears were so excited that she believed her child, soon to be born, would be kidnaped; that she signed the release without understanding it, and that it was signed by the advice of that attorney. There was such fraud and misrepresentation in procuring her signature to the release as to avoid it.

The jury were correctly instructed, and had the evidence before them. They found the release was procured.by fraud, misrepresentation and duress, and found the appellant guilty. The verdict was right, and the judgment is affirmed.

*Judgment affirmed.*
### Proposed Provision: H4. Increase the threshold for taxation of OASDI benefits to $50,000 for single filers and $100,000 for joint filers starting in 2025. Taxation of benefits revenues transferred to the Hospital Insurance (HI) Trust Fund would be the same as if the current-law computation applied.

back
<PAGE>
 
                                                                     Exhibit 3.4

                           CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT
                                      OF
                     RESTATED CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION
                                      OF
                           SYQUEST TECHNOLOGY, INC.



     SyQuest Technology, Inc., a corporation organized and existing under and by
virtue of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware,

     DOES HEREBY CERTIFY:

     FIRST:   That at a meeting of the Board of Directors of SyQuest Technology,
Inc., resolutions were duly adopted setting forth a proposed amendment of the
Restated Certificate of Incorporation of said corporation, declaring said
amendment to be advisable and recommending such resolution at the NOvember 5,
1997, special meetig of the stockholders of said corporation for consideration
thereof.  The resolution setting forth the proposed amendment is as follows:

     RESOLVED, that Paragraph (A) of Article IV of the Restated Certificate of
Incorporation of this corporation be amended to read in its entirety as follows:

     Classes of Stock.  This corporation is authorized to issue the following
     ----------------                                                        
classes of stock:  Common Stock ("Common Stock" or "Common") and Preferred Stock
("Preferred Stock" or "Preferred").  The total number of shares which the
corporation is authorized to issue is One Hundred Twenty Four Million
(224,000,000).  One Hundred Twenty Million (240,000,000) shares shall be Common
Stock and Four Million (4,000,000) shares shall be Preferred Stock.  Each share
of Common and Preferred Stock shall have a par value of $0.0001.

     SECOND:  That thereafter, pursuant to resolution of its Board of Directors,
a special meeting of the stockholders of said corporation was duly called and
held, upon notice in accordance with Section 222 of the General Corporation Law
of the State of Delaware at which meeting the necessary number of shares as
required by statute were voted in favor of the amendment.

     THIRD:  That said amendment was duly adopted in accordance with the
provisions of Section 242 of the General Corporation Law of the State of
Delaware.
<PAGE>
 
     IN WITNESS THEREOF, said SyQuest Technology, Inc. has caused this
certificate to be signed by Edward L. Marinaro, its authorized officer, this
26th day of November, 1997.

                                             SYQUEST TECHNOLOGY, INC.



                                             By /Edward L. Marinaro/
                                                --------------------
                                             Title Chairman of the Board
                                                   ---------------------

                                       2
EXHIBIT 31.2
                                  CERTIFICATION

I, Henry Houston, Chief Financial Officer, certify that:

     1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of remote
knowledge, inc. (the "Corporation");

     2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly
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 registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;

     4. The Corporation's other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:

          a. designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
material information relating to the Corporation, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this quarterly reports is being prepared;

          b. evaluated the effectiveness of the Corporation's disclosure
controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusion 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

          c. disclosed in this report any change in the Corporation's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the Corporation's most
recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an
quarterly report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the Corporation's internal control over financial reporting;
and

     5. The Corporation's other certifying office and I have disclosed, based on
my most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
Corporation's auditors and the audit committee of Corporation's board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

          a. all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely
affect the Corporation's ability to record, process, summarize and report
financial data and have identified for the Corporation's auditors any material
weaknesses in internal controls; and

          b. any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the Corporation's internal
controls over financial reporting.

Date: May 21, 2004

/s/ Henry Houston
-----------------
Henry Houston
Chief Financial Officer
#### RALEIGH STORAGE COMPANY v. J. W. BUNN et al.

(Filed 20 October, 1926.)

Deeds and Conveyances — Railroads—Easements.

A railroad company may convey a good fee-simple title to lands conveyed to it by its predecessor, admittedly the owner, that were included in the operation of the railroad system, and as such in the operation of the railroad property.

*329Appeal by defendants from *Barnhill, J.,*at May Term, 1926, of WaKE.

Controversy without action, submitted on an agreed statement of facts. Plaintiff, being under contract to convey a certain tract of land to the defendants, properly executed and tendered deed therefor and demanded payment of the purchase price as agreed. The defendants declined to accept the deed, claiming that the title offered was defective.

Upon the facts agreed, the court, being of opinion that the deed tendered would convey a good title to the property, .gave judgment for the plaintiff; whereupon the defendants excepted and appealed.

*Matt H. Allen, John N. Duncan, Oliver Allen and Murray Allen for plaintiff.*

*Bantes Arendell for defendants.*

Stacy, C. J.

On the hearing, the title offered was properly made to depend on whether a deed given by the Raleigh, Charlotte & Southern Railway Company to the Norfolk Southern Railroad Company, 25 July, 1912, for all its lines of railroad, rights of way, etc., ratified by Act of Assembly, 1913, was sufficient to convey the land in question situate, as it was, immediately adjacent to the railroad, tracks of the Raleigh, Charlotte & Southern Railway Company in the city of Raleigh, with a warehouse and sidetracks located thereon and used at the time by said company for railroad purposes, under the following description in said deed, which comes after the particular description of lines of railroad and various properties situate in a number of counties of the State, to wit: “Also all lands, terminals, yards, . . . sidetracks, . . . warehouses . . . and all other property, real and personal, rights and things of every kind and description which appertain to any or all of the above described lines of road.”

It is conceded by both sides, plaintiff and defendants, that if the *locus in quo*— admittedly owned by the Raleigh, Charlotte & Southern Railway at the time — passed under this conveyance, the judgment in favor of the plaintiff is correct and ought to be affirmed; otherwise not.

The Norfolk Southern Railroad Company took immediate possession of all the property owned by the Raleigh, Charlotte & Southern Railway Company at the time of the execution of the deed above mentioned, including the *locus in quo,*and the same was used continuously as an appurtenant to said line of railroad until the conveyance of the *locus in quo*to E. C. Duncan in 1919.

*330Tbe intention to convey tbe property in question by tbe deed now under consideration is quite clear — indeed frankly conceded by tbe defendants — and we tbink tbe language used is sufficient for tbe purpose. *Mo. Pac. Ry. Co. v. Moffitt,*94 Mo., 59; *Wise v. Wheeler,*28 N. C., 196.

Affirmed.
## Detailed Single Year Tables

- Individual Provisions
- Payroll Taxes (including maximum taxable)

### **Description of Proposed Provision:						E2.12: Eliminate the taxable maximum in years 2035 and later. Phase in elimination by taxing all earnings above the current-law taxable maximum at: 1.24 percent in 2026, 2.48 percent in 2027, and so on, up to 12.40 percent in 2035. Provide benefit credit for earnings above the current-law taxable maximum. Create a new bend point at the current-law taxable maximum with a 3 percent formula factor applying above the new bend point.**

### Financial Estimates for the OASDI Trust Fund Program

### Summarized Estimates
Exhibit 2.18
 SECOND SUPPLEMENTAL INDENTURE




---



##### 



Supplemental
Indenture sociedad anónima bursátil de
capital variable Company New
Guarantor Existing Guarantor Existing Guarantors Trustee Registrar Paying Agent
 RECITALS
 Indenture Notes
  AGREEMENT
        1




---



##### 



VITRO, S.A.B. de C.V., as IssuerBy:Name: Ramón Leal ChapaTitle: Attorney in FactBy:Name: Rafael Colome CarrascoTitle: Attorney in FactNEW GUARANTORVIDRIOS Y CRISTALES DEL NOROESTE, S.A. DE C.V.By:Name: Javier Arechavaleta SantosTitle: Attorney in FactEXISTING GUARANTORSVIMEXICO, S.A. DE
C.V.;VITRO ENVASES NORTEAMÉRICA, S.A. DE C.V.;VITRO
CORPORATIVO, S.A. DE C.V.;VITRO ENVASES HOLDING, S.A.
DE C.V.;TALLER DE COLECCIÓN VITRO, S.A. DE C.V.;
SERVICIOS CORPORATIVOS DE EDIFICACIONES, S.A. DE
C.V.;VIDRIERA MONTERREY, S.A. DE C.V.;VIDRIERA LOS
REYES, S.A. DE C.V.; VIDRIERA GUADALAJARA, S.A. DE
C.V.;VIDRIERA QUERETARO, S.A. DE C.V.;VIDRIERA
MEXICO, S.A. DE C.V.;VIDRIERA TOLUCA, S.A. DE C.V.;
  2




---



##### 



COMPAÑÍA VIDRIERA, S.A. DE C.V.; FABRICACION DE
MAQUINAS, S.A. DE C.V.;SERVICIOS INTEGRALES DE
ACABADOS, S.A. DE C.V.; INMOBILIARIA LOMA DEL TORO,
S.A. DE C.V.; INDUSTRIA DEL ALCALI, S.A. DE
C.V.;COMERCIALIZADORA ALCALI, S. DE R.L. DE
C.V.;VIDRIO LUX, S.A.;VITRO PACKAGING,
INC.;CENTRO DE TECNOLOGIA VIDRIERA, LTD.;VITRO
EUROPA, LTD.; AMERICAN ASSET HOLDINGS, CORP.;CRISA
HOLDINGS CORP.;TROPER INC.;IMPERIAL ARTS
CORP.;TROPER SERVICES, INC.;SFK INDUSTRIES,
INC.;ALLIANCE PRECISION PRODUCTS
CORPORATION;AMSILCO HOLDINGS, INC.;BBO HOLDINGS,
INC.;CRISA CORP.;VK CORP.;VITRO AUTOMOTRIZ,
S.A. DE C.V.;VITRO FLEX, S.A. DE C.V.;DISTRIBUIDORA
NACIONAL DE VIDRIO, S.A. DE C.V.;VITRO VIDRIO Y
CRISTAL, S.A. DE C.V.;VITRO FLOTADO CUBIERTAS, S.A. DE
C.V.;DISTRIBUIDOR VIDRIERO LAN, S.A. DE
C.V.;VITROCAR, S.A. DE C.V.;CRISTALES INASTILLABLES
DE MEXICO, S.A. DE C.V.;VIDRIO PLANO DE MEXICO, S.A. DE
C.V.;VVP HOLDINGS CORP.;VVP SYNDICATION,
INC.;VVP AUTOGLASS, INC.;VITRO AMERICA,
INC.;SUPER SKY PRODUCTS, INC.;SUPER SKY
INTERNATIONAL, INC.;VVP FINANCE CORP.;SUPER SKY
CONSTRUCTORS, INC.;VITRO COLOMBIA, S.A.; VVP EUROPA
HOLDINGS, B.V.;
  3




---



##### 



VITRO DO BRASIL INDUSTRIA E COMERCIO,
LTDA.;ORIENTAL GLASS, INC.;VITRO CHEMICALS, FIBERS
AND MINING, INC.;VITROSA HOLDING, LTD.; VITRO
GLOBAL, LTD.; VIDRIO PLANO, S.A. DE
C.V.;DISTRIBUIDORA DE VIDRIO Y CRISTAL, S.A. DE
C.V.;VIDRIO PLANO DE MEXICALI, S.A. DE C.V.;VITEMCO
VENEZUELA, S.A.;VITRO PANAMA, S.A.;SERVICIOS Y
OPERACIONES FINANCIERAS VITRO, S.A. DE C.V.; ANDVITEMCO
ECUADOR, S.A.By:Name: Ramón Leal ChapaTitle: Attorney in FactBy:Name: Rafael Colome CarrascoTitle: Attorney in Fact
  4




---



##### 



THE BANK OF NEW YORK, as
Trustee, Registrar and
Paying AgentBy:Name:Title:
  5
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-89,601-01

EX PARTE CHARLES EDWARD THOMPSON, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. 1380303-A IN THE 179 DISTRICT COURT TH

FROM HARRIS COUNTY

Per curiam. KELLER, P.J. filed a dissenting opinion in which KEEL and SLAUGHTER,

JJ., joined. YEARY, J., filed a dissenting opinion.

O P I N I O N

Pursuant to the provisions of Article 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure, the

clerk of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte

Young, 418 S.W.2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of possession of a

controlled substance and sentenced to two years’ imprisonment. He did not appeal his conviction. 

Applicant contends that his plea was involuntary because a newly disclosed laboratory report

shows that he possessed less than one gram of cocaine. He was charged with the third degree felony

of possession of cocaine in an amount of one gram or more but less than four grams. Applicant was

admonished as to the penalty range for a third degree felony. However, after Applicant’s conviction
2

became final, the laboratory report was disclosed showing that the substance Applicant possessed

weighed less than one gram. Because this quantity of cocaine would have only supported a charge

and conviction for a state jail felony, the State agreed that Applicant’s plea was not knowingly and

voluntarily entered. The trial court determined that Applicant’s decision to plead guilty in this case

was not a voluntary and intelligent choice. Brady v. United States, 397 U.S. 742 (1969); Ex parte

Mable, 443 S.W.3d 129, 131 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014). 

Relief is granted. The judgment in Cause No. 138030301010 in the 179 District Court of th

Harris County is set aside, and Applicant is remanded to the custody of the Sheriff of Harris County

to answer the charges as set out in the indictment. The trial court shall issue any necessary bench

warrant within 10 days after the mandate of this Court issues.

Copies of this opinion shall be sent to the Texas Department ofCriminal Justice–Correctional

Institutions Division and Pardons and Paroles Division.

Delivered: October 2, 2019

Do not publish