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

                                                                  EXHIBIT 23.1




                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS



We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Forms S-8 (File Nos. 33-08837, 33-84116, 33-84118, 33-84120,
33-84122, 33-84124, 333-33231, 333-36071) and Form S-3 (File No. 33-70618) of
Gateway, Inc. of our report dated February 27, 2001, relating to the
consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedule, which
appears in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. We also consent to the references
to us under the heading "Selected Consolidated Financial Data" in such Annual
Report.

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLP


SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA
March 2, 2001
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 8 (Thursday, January 12, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 2985]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-779]



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



DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Lodging of Consent Decree Pursuant to the Clean Water Act

    In accordance with Departmental policy, 28 CFR 50.7, notice is 
hereby given that a proposed consent decree in United States v. City of 
Titusville, Florida, and State of Florida (M.D. Fla.), Civil Action No. 
95-9-CIV-ORL-18, was lodged on January 4, 1995 with the United States 
District Court for the Middle District of Florida. The consent decree 
settles a civil judicial enforcement action brought under Section 309 
of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. 1319, for the City of Titusville's 
operation of a publicly owned sanitary sewage collection system and two 
associated treatment plants in violation of National Pollutant 
Discharge Elimination System permits and in violation of section 301(a) 
of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. Sec. 1311(a). Under the Consent 
Decree, the City of Titusville will construct a new Advanced Wastewater 
Treatment Plant and an associated wetlands treatment system, modify its 
existing treatment plants to eliminate discharges of wastewater into 
the Indian River, and pay a civil penalty of $600,000.
    The Department of Justice will receive, for a period of thirty (30) 
days from the date of this publication, comments relating to the 
proposed consent decree. Comments should be addressed to the Assistant 
Attorney General for the Environment and Natural Resources Division, 
Department of Justice, Washington, D.C. 20530, and should refer to 
United States v. City of Titusville, Florida, and State of Florida, DOJ 
Ref. #90-5-1-1-3979.
    The proposed consent decree may be examined at the Office of the 
United States Attorney, Middle District of Florida, 80 North Hughey 
Avenue, 201 Federal Building, Orlando Florida 32801; and at the Consent 
Decree Library, 1120 G Street, N.W., 4th Floor, Washington, D.C. 20005, 
(202) 624-0892. A copy of the proposed consent decree may be obtained 
in person or by mail from the Consent Decree Library, 1120 G Street, 
N.W., 4th Floor, Washington, D.C. 20005. In requesting a copy please 
refer to the referenced case and enclose a check in the amount of 
$10.75 (25 cents per page reproduction costs), payable to the Consent 
Decree Library.
Bruce Gelber,
Acting Chief, Environmental Enforcement Section, Environment and 
Natural Resources Division.
[FR Doc. 95-779 Filed 1-11-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-01-M
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

January 4, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-4805

Arrowhead Electrical Products, Inc:

The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the product exclusion request referenced 

above has been denied. As you are aware, USTR published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 

28710) on June 20, 2018, that announced the Trade Representative’s determination to impose an 

additional duty of 25 percent on certain products from China. On July 11, 2018, the Trade 

Representative published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 32181) which announced that a 

process had been established under which interested persons could request that products falling 

within a covered HTSUS subheading be excluded from the additional duties announced on June 

20. 

Your request was reviewed in accordance with the factors and procedures set forth in 

Section B(1) of the July 11 notice. Based on that review, and after careful consideration, your 

request was denied because the request failed to show that this particular product is available 

only from China.

Because USTR will grant exclusion requests on a product specific basis, you may still 

benefit from a product exclusion if a similar product is granted an exclusion. Products for which 

an exclusion has been granted will be periodically announced on the USTR website. Product 

exclusions will become legally effective once published in the Federal Register. 

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Vaughn
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 520 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 520

      To amend the Endangered Species Act of 1973 to provide that 
 artificially propagated animals shall be treated the same under that 
      Act as naturally propagated animals, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 25, 2023

Mr. McClintock introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                     Committee on Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
      To amend the Endangered Species Act of 1973 to provide that 
 artificially propagated animals shall be treated the same under that 
      Act as naturally propagated animals, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. TREATMENT OF ARTIFICIALLY PROPAGATED ANIMALS.

    Section 4 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1533) is 
amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
    ``(j) Treatment of Artificially Propagated Animals.--The Secretary 
shall not distinguish between naturally propagated animals and 
artificially propagated animals in making any determination under this 
Act.''.

SEC. 2. ARTIFICIAL PROPAGATION FOR MITIGATION PURPOSES.

    (a) In General.--Section 14 of the Endangered Species Act of 1973 
(relating to repeals of provisions of law, which have executed) is 
amended to read as follows:

            ``artificial propagation for mitigation purposes

    ``Sec. 14. The Secretary shall authorize the use of artificial 
propagation of animals of a species for purposes of any mitigation 
required under this Act with respect to such species.''.
    (b) Conforming Amendment.--The table of contents in the first 
section of such Act is amended by striking the item relating to such 
section and inserting the following:

``Sec. 14. Artificial propagation for mitigation purposes.''.

SEC. 3. APPLICATION.

    The amendments made by this Act shall apply with respect to a 
species without regard to whether the species was determined to be an 
endangered species or threatened species under the Endangered Species 
Act of 1973 (16 U.S.C. 1531 et seq.) before, on, or after the date of 
enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Organization Name:

Note: Representatives submitting on behalf of an organization must enter information below.

Requestor Representative:

Section 301 Investigation: China's Acts, Policies, and Practices Related to Technology 

Transfer, Intellectual Property, and Innovation - Form to Request Exclusion of Product

When submitting a product exclusion request using this form, enter the specified 

information in the following fields and explain the basis and rationale for your statements. 

By completing this form, you certify that the information provided is complete and 

correct to the best of your knowledge. 

1. Indicate whether the comment contains business confidential information (BCI), is a public

document, or is a public version of a BCI document.

3.

2. Please provide a complete and detailed description of the product of concern:

4.

5. Requestor's relationship to the product:

CONTINUED BELOW

*

10-digit HTSUS item number* for product you wish to address in this product exclusion request:

Use numerical characters only with no special characters (example: 1023456789). For help in finding 

the HTSUS item number associated with your product, see https://hts.usitc.gov/

1

7.

6. Does this submission in regulations.gov include additional attachments?

Please indicate whether any additional attachment contains business confidential

information (BCI), is a public document, or is a public version of a BCI document.

VERSION 1

Requestor Information

Requestor Name (Last, First):

Public Version of BCI

HCR1504, 168 ton Capacity, 3.94 in Stroke, Double-Acting, High Tonnage Hydraulic Cylinder; 

Maximum Operating Pressure psi: 10150; Weight Kgs: 67; Oil Capacity Advance cm3: 2138; Stroke 

Ranges mm: 95 - 119

8412210075 Schmidt, Jackie Enerpac Jackie SchmidtImporter Yes Contains BCI
END 2

8. Is this product, or a comparable product, available from sources in the United States?:

VERSION 1

11. Please provide information in support your request, taking account of the instructions

provided in Section B of the Federal Register notice (note: text entered below can extend

beyond the apparent size of this box).

9. Is this product, or a comparable product, available from sources in third countries?:

10. Please provide the value and quantity (with units) of the Chinese-origin product of concern

that you purchased for each calendar year specified. Limit this figure to the products

purchased by your firm (or by members of your trade association) alone. Please provide 

estimates if precise figures are unavailable.

2016 Value:

2015 Value:

2017 Value:

2016 Quantity:

2015 Quantity:

2017 Quantity:

No No BCI BCI BCI BCI BCI BCI

See addendum for additional information.
#### CHRYSLER CREDIT CORPORATION, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Stephen M. SCHAAF, Defendant/Appellant.

No. 66296.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

Feb. 28, 1995.

Stephen M. Schaaf, pro se.

Nelson L. Mitten, Riezman & Blitz, P.C., St. Louis, for respondent.

Before REINHARD, P.J., and CRANDALL and CRAHAN, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals from the summary judgment entered in favor of plaintiff. We affirm. No error of law appears. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. Rule 84.16(b).
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

November 19, 2018

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-4615

Yaesu USA Inc:

The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the product exclusion request referenced 

above has been denied. As you are aware, USTR published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 

28710) on June 20, 2018, that announced the Trade Representative’s determination to impose an 

additional duty of 25 percent on certain products from China. On July 11, 2018, the Trade 

Representative published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 32181) which announced that a 

process had been established under which interested persons could request that products falling 

within a covered HTSUS subheading be excluded from the additional duties announced on June 

20. 

Your request was reviewed in accordance with the factors and procedures set forth in 

Section B(1) of the July 11 notice. Based on that review, and after careful consideration, your 

request was denied because the request failed to show that the imposition of additional duties on 

the particular product would cause severe economic harm to you or other U.S. interests.

Because USTR will grant exclusion requests on a product specific basis, you may still 

benefit from a product exclusion if a similar product is granted an exclusion. Products for which 

an exclusion has been granted will be periodically announced on the USTR website. Product 

exclusions will become legally effective once published in the Federal Register. 

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Vaughn
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
December 31, 1997 Form 10-K and is qualified in its entirety by reference to
such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1,000

<S>                            <C>               <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-mos           12-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               DEC-31-1997      DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                  JAN-01-1997      JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                    DEC-31-1997      DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                          23,770             20,096
<SECURITIES>                         0                  0
<RECEIVABLES>                   19,387             16,346
<ALLOWANCES>                       811                335
<INVENTORY>                          0                  0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                47,542             40,073
<PP&E>                          27,225             22,452
<DEPRECIATION>                   7,518              7,122
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                 225,826            197,753
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>           37,383             31,555
<BONDS>                              0                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                0                  0
<PREFERRED>                          0                  0
<COMMON>                           193                191
<OTHER-SE>                      91,871             76,236
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>   225,826            197,753
<SALES>                              0                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                95,979             72,404
<CGS>                                0                  0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                   33,285             24,799
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                 9,911              7,455
<LOSS-PROVISION>                     0                  0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>               7,477              5,977
<INCOME-PRETAX>                 20,651             10,957
<INCOME-TAX>                     5,795              1,996
<INCOME-CONTINUING>             14,856              8,961
<DISCONTINUED>                       0                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                      0                  0
<CHANGES>                            0                  0
<NET-INCOME>                    14,856              8,961
<EPS-PRIMARY>                     0.77               0.51
<EPS-DILUTED>                     0.76               0.49

<FN>
NOTE: Due to the change in computing EPS per FASB No. 128, the tags per the
FDS schedule will correspond to FASB No. 128 as follows:
     FDS tag                  FASB No. 128
     EPS - Primary            EPS - Basic
     EPS - Diluted            EPS - Diluted
In addition, the EPS amounts for the year ended December 31, 1996 presented
above have been restated to reflect the changes promulgated by FASB No. 128.
No other amounts for 1996 presented above have been restated.
</FN>

</TABLE>
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit 

___________________________

No. 22-2767

___________________________ 

Victor Hugo Cardona-Gomez

 Petitioner

v.

Merrick B. Garland, Attorney General of the United States

 Respondent

____________

Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

____________ 

Submitted: February 7, 2023

Filed: February 10, 2023 

[Unpublished]

____________ 

Before COLLOTON, BENTON, and GRASZ, Circuit Judges. 

____________

PER CURIAM. 

Guatemalan citizen Victor Hugo Cardona-Gomez petitions for review of an 

order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA). Having jurisdiction under 8 

U.S.C. § 1252, this court denies the petition.
-2- 

The BIA dismissed Cardona-Gomez’s appeal from the decision of an 

immigration judge denying his request for asylum and withholding of removal 

relief.1

 Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s determination that Cardona-Gomez 

was not eligible for asylum, because he did not establish past persecution or a wellfounded fear of future persecution. See Malonga v. Mukasey, 546 F.3d 546, 550 (8th 

Cir. 2008) (standard of review); Menjivar v. Gonzales, 416 F.3d 918, 920 (8th Cir. 

2005), as corrected (Sept. 21, 2005) (asylum eligibility requirements); see also Cano 

v. Barr, 956 F.3d 1034, 1039 (8th Cir. 2020) (persecution involves infliction or 

credible threat of death, torture, or injury; it is an extreme concept that excludes lowlevel intimidation and harassment) (citations and quotations omitted); La v. Holder, 

701 F.3d 566, 572 (8th Cir. 2012) (a well-founded fear of future persecution is both 

subjectively genuine and objectively reasonable). 

Substantial evidence also supports the BIA’s denial of withholding of removal 

relief. See Guled v. Mukasey, 515 F.3d 872, 881-82 (8th Cir. 2008) (noncitizen who 

does not meet standard for asylum cannot meet more rigorous clear probability 

standard for withholding of removal). 

The petition is denied. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. 

______________________________

 1The denial of relief under the Convention Against Torture is not before this 

panel. See Chay-Velasquez v. Ashcroft, 367 F.3d 751, 756 (8th Cir. 2004) (claim 

not raised in opening brief is waived).
Exhibit 32.4

RULE 13(a)-14(b) 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 Quarterly Report of Brandywine Operating Partnership, L.P. (the Partnership) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
September 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Howard M. Sipzner, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Brandywine Realty Trust, the Partnerships
sole general partner, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



|1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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 result of operations of the Partnership.
|-- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                                                             
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Howard M. Sipzner                                                                        
|Howard M. Sipzner Executive
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer Date: November 6, 2009



|* | A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Brandywine Realty Trust and will be retained by the Partnership and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
|- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
June 17, 2011


 


Southshore Real Estate Development, LLC


Four Executive Boulevard – Suite 200


Suffern, NY  10901


Attention: Josh Goldstein








Re:  3rd Amendment to Promissory Note









Dear Josh:







In accordance with our discussions, Q Lotus Holdings, Inc. and Southshore Real Estate Development, LLC hereby agree to further amend the Promissory Note dated February 23, 2011 (as amended, supplemented or otherwise modified from time to time) between Q Lotus Holdings, Inc. and Southshore Real Estate Development, LLC in the amount of two hundred thousand dollars ($200,000) such that, notwithstanding anything contained in the Promissory Note to the contrary:








	
  

	
1.

	
Q Lotus Holdings, Inc. (“Obligor’) hereby promises to pay to the order of Southshore Real Estate Development, LLC (“Payee’) the principal sum of Three Hundred Forty Thousand Dollars ($340,000); and













	
  

	
2.

	
The Maturity Date is hereby extended to August 17, 2011.












Please acknowledge your acceptance of the above change by executing this amendment below.







Q Lotus Holdings, Inc.








	
By:

	
/S/ GARY ROSENBERG

	  
	  	
Gary Rosenberg

	  
	
Its:

	
CEO

	  










Understood and Agreed to this 17th day of June, 2011.







Southshore Real Estate Development, LLC








	
By:

	
/S/ JOSH GOLDSTEIN

	  
	  	
Josh Goldstein

	  
	
Its:

	
General Partner

	  





 




  





Page 1 of 1
Order entered October 9, 2015

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05 - 15 - 01069 - CV IN THE INTEREST OF A .C.M., A MINOR CHILD On Appeal from the 256th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DF - 12 - 195 69 - Z



### O RDER Before the Court is appellant Justin Ray Monroe’s October 8, 2015 Motion to Compel the District Court Reporter to Prepare and File the Reporters Record and Provide a Copy to the Petition er . The reporter’s record is past du e in the above refer enced cause

. The record reflects appellant Justin Ray Monroe is indigent and entitled to proceed without payment of costs

. Because this is a parental termination case, we remind both Judge David Lopez and Court Reporter Glenda Johnson that it is the res ponsibility of the Court Reporter to prepare, certify, and timely file the reporter’s record and that Judge Lopez must direct Ms. Johnson to immediately commence the preparation of the reporter’s record. Judge Lopez must arrange a substitute reporter if n ecessary. T EX . R. A PP . P

. 28.4(b)(1). W e ORDER Glenda Johnson , Official Court Reporter for the 256th Judicial District Court, to file the reporter’s record with this Court within TEN ( 10 ) DAYS of the date of this Order. T EX . R. A PP . P . 35.5.We DIRECT the Clerk of the Court to send copies of this order, by electronic

transmission, to the following persons: Honorable David Lopez Presiding Judge of the 256th Judicial District Court Glenda Johnson Official Court Reporter, 256th Judicial District Court Afte r the reporter’s record is filed, we DIRECT the Clerk of this Court to send a copy of the reporter’s record in paper format to Justin Ray Monroe, Sanders Estes Unit, TDCJ #01856907 , 1100 Hwy 1807, Venus, TX, 76084.

/s/ ELIZABETH LANG

- MIERS PRESIDING JUST ICE