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






**CONSENT
      OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**





We
      consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Forms
      S-8 Nos. 333-74245, 333-39450, 333-67720 and 333-129225) pertaining to the
      1998
      Stock Incentive Plan  of
      GeoGlobal Resources Inc. pertaining to our report dated March 23, 2007 with
      respect to the consolidated financial statements of GeoGlobal Resources Inc.
      included in the Annual Report (Form 10-KSB) for the year ended December 31,
      2006.







Calgary,
                Canada
            
            */s/
                Ernst & Young LLP (signed)*March
                23, 2007
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 68 (Monday, April 10, 1995)]
[Sunshine Act Meetings]
[Page 18169]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-8836]





                Sunshine Act Meetings



Federal Register/Vol. 60, No. 68 / Monday, April 10, 1995 / Sunshine 
Act Meetings
[[Page 18169]] 




United States Enrichment Corporation Board of Directors

TIME AND DATE: 8:00 am, Wednesday, April 12, 1995.

PLACE: USEC Corporate Headquarters, 6903 Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, 
Maryland 20817.

STATUS: A portion of the meeting will be closed to the public.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED:

Portion Open to the Public

    <bullet> Introduction of new Officers.

Portion Closed to the Public

    <bullet> Review of commercial and financial issues of the 
Corporation
    <bullet> Procedural matters

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Barbara Arnold, 301-564-3354.

    Dated: April 5, 1995.
William H. Timbers, Jr.

President and Chief Executive Officer.

[FR Doc. 95-8836 Filed 4-6-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8720-01-M
EXHIBIT 32.1
                                                                    ------------


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



In connection with the Quarterly Report of iVoice Technology, Inc. ("the
Company") on Form 10-QSB/A for the period ended September 30, 2006, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof ("the Report"),
I, Jerome Mahoney, President, Chief Executive Officer and Principal Financial
Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my
knowledge and belief, 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.



                                             Date:   January 16, 2007




                                             By /s/ Jerome Mahoney
                                             --------------------------------
                                             Jerome Mahoney
                                             President, Chief Executive Officer
                                             and Principal Financial Officer
EXHIBIT
32.2




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 FedFirst Financial Corporation (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2009 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Robert
C. Barry Jr., the Chief Financial Officer and Senior Vice President of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:




(1)
            The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of
      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;
and




(2)
            The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Company






Date:
            May
      13, 2009
            
            /s/
      Robert C. Barry Jr.Robert
      C. Barry Jr.Chief
      Financial Officer and Senior Vice
President
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AT DECEMBER 31, 1996 (AUDITED) AND CONSOLIDATED
INCOME STATEMENT FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1996 (AUDITED) AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          26,930
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  409,425
<ALLOWANCES>                                    73,809
<INVENTORY>                                     55,733
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               493,747
<PP&E>                                         615,783
<DEPRECIATION>                                 282,151
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,149,110
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          181,756
<BONDS>                                        623,276
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            51
<OTHER-SE>                                     342,884
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,149,110
<SALES>                                      1,181,143
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,181,143
<CGS>                                          400,675
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  400,675
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                67,040
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              49,249
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 52,028
<INCOME-TAX>                                    18,728
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             33,300
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    33,300
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .64
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .64
        

</TABLE>
#### TMB SERVICE CORP., Respondent, v. Stephanie G. HAZELTON, Appellant.

No. WD 51571.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

May 21, 1996.

Donald Scott, Kansas City, for Respondent.

Patrick Shepard and Melissa Rodriguez, Kansas City, for Appellant.

Before LOWENSTEIN, P.J., and HANNA and SPINDEN, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Hazelton appeals the summary judgment against her in TMB’s declaratory judgment action and on her counterclaim. The trial court held that there was no enforceable real estate contract between the parties. Judgments affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

February 7, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-6291

OSRAM Opto Semiconductors, 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

General Counsel
**Exhibit 31.2**

 

**SARBANES-OXLEY**

**SECTION 302 CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Edward M. Krell, certify that:

 

       1.     Ihave reviewed this Amendment No. 1 on Form 10-K/A to the AnnualReport on Form 10-K of Mothers Work, Inc;

 

       2.     Basedon my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statementsmade, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

       3.     Basedon my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

 

       4.     Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishingand maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

 

       (a)   Designedsuch disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

 

       (b)   Evaluatedthe effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

 

       (c)   Disclosedin this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

 

       5.     Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors:

 

       (a)   Allsignificant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and

 

       (b)   Anyfraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.

 

Date: October 4, 2005

 
| /s/   EDWARD M. KRELL                    |   |
|----------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Edward M.  Krell                                   |   |
| *Executive Vice President-Chief Financial Officer* |
|                                                    |        |  |

 

----
```

[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 52 (Friday, March 17, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14424-14425]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-6664]

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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
[I.D. 031095C]

Marine Mammals

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
[[Page 14425]] Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Request to export nonreleasable beached and stranded marine 
mammals (P582).

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that TOBA Aquarium, Toba 3-3-6 Toba 
City, Mie Prefecture, 517 Japan, has requested authorization to export 
nonreleasable beached/stranded marine mammals from the United States 
for the purpose of public display.

ADDRESSES: The request for authorization and related documents are 
available for review upon written request to the Chief, Permits 
Division, F/PR1, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, 1335 East-West 
Highway, Silver Spring, MD 20910-3226 (301/713-2289).
    Relevant written comments about this request should be submitted to 
the above address by April 17, 1995.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: TOBA Aquarium is requesting authorization 
for the export of five nonreleasable rehabilitated California sea lions 
(Zalophus californianus) for the purpose of public display under the 
Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972 (MMPA), as amended (16 U.S.C. 1361 
et seq.).
    The permanent retention or export for public display purposes of a 
beached or stranded marine mammal taken for the purpose of 
rehabilitation under section 109(h) of the MMPA must be authorized by 
NMFS. Under the 1994 amendments to the MMPA, in order to obtain any 
marine mammal for public display purposes, the recipient must: (1) 
Offer a program for education or conservation purposes that is based on 
professionally recognized standards of the public display community; 
(2) be registered or hold a license issued under 7 U.S.C. 2131 et seq.; 
i.e., from the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), U.S. 
Department of Agriculture (or, for foreign facilities, meets comparable 
standards); and (3) maintain facilities for the public display of 
marine mammals that are open to the public on a regularly scheduled 
basis and to which access is not limited or restricted other than by 
charging of an admission fee. In this regard, the required 
certifications and statements provided by TOBA Aquarium and the 
Japanese Fisheries Agency have been submitted to NMFS and APHIS, and 
have been found appropriate and sufficient to allow consideration of 
the request.

    Dated: March 13, 1995.
Art Jeffers,
Acting Chief, Division of Permits & Documentation, National Marine 
Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 95-6664 Filed 3-16-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F
```
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent

except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule

47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 96-50006

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

MOSES RAMIREZ,

Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. W-95-CV-210

- - - - - - - - - -

July 9, 1996

Before JOLLY, JONES and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Moses Ramirez, #60364-080, appeals from the district court’s

order denying his motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his

sentence pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 2255. He argues his criminal

prosecution following the administrative forfeiture of $3,000

violated the Fifth Amendment prohibition against double jeopardy. 

Ramirez is procedurally barred from asserting a double jeopardy

claim. See United States v. Frady, 456 U.S. 152, 102 S. Ct. 1584
No. 96-50006

- 2 -

(1982). Under United States v. Arreola-Ramos, 60 F.3d 188 (5th

Cir. 1995), there can be no double jeopardy claim because he

failed to contest the forfeiture. Id., 60 F.3d at 192. 

AFFIRMED.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 49 (Tuesday, March 14, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 13745]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-6251]



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

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION


Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements Under OMB Review

ACTION: Notice of reporting requirements submitted for review.

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

SUMMARY: Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 
Chapter 35), agencies are required to submit proposed reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements to OMB for review and approval, and to 
publish a notice in the Federal Register notifying the public that the 
agency has made such a submission.

DATE: Comments should be submitted within 30 days of this publication 
in the Federal Register. If you intend to comment but cannot prepare 
comments promptly, please advise the OMB Reviewer and the Agency 
Clearance Officer before the deadline.

COPIES: Request for clearance (OMB 83-1), supporting statement, and 
other documents submitted to OMB for review may be obtained from the 
Agency Clearance Officer. Submit comments to the Agency Clearance 
Officer and the OMB Reviewer.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
    Agency Clearance Officer: Cleo Verbillis, Small Business 
Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., 5th Floor, Washington, DC 20416, 
Telephone: (202) 205-6629.
    OMB Reviewer: Donald Arbuckle, Office of Information and Regulatory 
Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, New Executive Office 
Building, Washington, DC 20503.
    Title: Program Evaluation SBA 7(a) Loan Program.
    Form No.: N/A.
    Frequency: On Occasion.
    Description of Respondents: 7(a) loan applicants.
    Annual Responses: 1,700.
    Annual Burden: 312.

    Dated: March 2, 1995.
Calvin Jenkins,
Assistant Administrator for Administration.
[FR Doc. 95-6251 Filed 3-13-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-M
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

January 23, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-5618

Tianhai Electric North America:

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 concerns a product strategically important or related to 

‘‘Made in China 2025’’ or other Chinese industrial programs.

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

General Counsel
#### STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Marlon HAMPTON, Defendant/Appellant.

No. 58842.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

Jan. 5, 1993.

John Klosterman, St. Louis, for defendant/appellant.

William L. Webster, Atty. Gen., Millie Aulbur, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for plaintiff/respondent.

*410ORDER

PER CURIAM.

This case comes to us after an evidentia-ry hearing on remand. *State v. Hampton,*824 S.W.2d 437 (Mo.App.1991). We have reviewed the record and find the claims of error to be without merit. An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisprudential purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 67 (Friday, April 7, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 17845]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-8550]



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


DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Order Adjusting International Cargo Rate Flexibility Level

    Policy Statement PS-109, implemented by Regulation ER-1322 of the 
Civil Aeronautics Board and adopted by the Department, established 
geographic zones of cargo pricing flexibility within which certain 
cargo rate tariffs filed by carriers would be subject to suspension 
only in extraordinary circumstances.
    The Standard Foreign Rate Level (SFRL) for a particular market is 
the rate in effect on April 1, 1982, adjusted for the cost experience 
of the carriers in the applicable ratemaking entity. The first 
adjustment was effective April 1, 1983. By Order 95-2-8, the Department 
established the currently effective SFRL adjustments.
    In establishing the SFRL for the two-month period beginning April 
1, 1995, we have projected non-fuel costs based on the year ended 
December 31, 1994 data, and have determined fuel prices on the basis of 
the latest available experienced monthly fuel cost levels as reported 
to the Department.
    By Order 95-4-1 cargo rates may be adjusted by the following 
adjustment factors over the April 1, 1982 level:

Atlantic
1.2505
Western Hemisphere
1.1483
Pacific
1.2965


    For further information contact: Keith A. Shangraw (202) 366-2439.


    Dated: April 3, 1995.

    By the Department of Transportation.

Patrick V. Murphy,
Acting Assistant Secretary for Aviation.and International Affairs.
[FR Doc. 95-8550 Filed 4-6-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-62-P
#### Donald HOWARD, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. 66508.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

March 14, 1995.

Ellen H. Flottman, Office of the State Public Defender, Columbia, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Becky Owenson Kilpatrick, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before REINHARD, P.J., and GARY M. GAERTNER and CRAHAN, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Donald Howard, appeals from a judgment entered in the Circuit Court of the County of St. Francois denying appellant’s motion for an evidentiary hearing under Rule 24.035. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the legal file and find the judgment of the circuit court is not clearly erroneous. As we find an extended opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose, we affirm the circuit court’s judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).