alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 23**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

The Board ofDirectors 

First State Bancorporation: 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements (No. 333-17727) on Form S-3, and (No. 333-3048, No. 333-92795, No. 333-83132, No. 333-107061, and No. 333-131642) on FormS-8 of First State Bancorporation of our reports dated March 14, 2006, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of First State Bancorporation and subsidiary as of December 31, 2005 and 2004, and the related consolidated statementsof operations, comprehensive income, stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2005, management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financialreporting as of December 31, 2005 and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2005, which reports appear in the December 31, 2005, annual report on Form 10-K of First State Bancorporation.

KPMG LLP 

Albuquerque, New Mexico 

March 15, 2006
<PAGE>
                                  EXHIBIT 99.2
                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                               18 U.S.C. ss.1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of Stratosphere Corporation (the "Company")
on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2001 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Denise Barton,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.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) of
   the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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


                                /s/ Denise Barton
                                -----------------------------------
                                Denise Barton
                                Chief Financial Officer
                                October 9, 2002
**EXHIBIT 31.01**

**Rule13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) Certifications**

I, Benjamin Weston,certify that:

1. I have reviewed thisreport on Form 10-Q of ML Winton FuturesAccess LLC;

2. Based on my knowledge,this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit tostate a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading withrespect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge,the financial statements, and other financial information included in thisreport, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, theperiods presented in this report;

4. The registrant’s othercertifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

a) Designed suchdisclosure 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; and

b) Evaluated theeffectiveness 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;

c) Disclosed inthis report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrant’s othercertifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation ofinternal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing theequivalent functions):

a) All significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and

b) Any fraud, whether ornot material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.

Date: August 14, 2006
| By                                     | /s/ BENJAMIN  WESTON |   |
|----------------------------------------|----------------------|--------|
| Benjamin Weston                        |
| Chief Executive  Officer and President |
| (Principal  Executive Officer)         |

 

----
United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 96-3464

___________

Anthony McFarlin, *

*

Plaintiff/Appellant, *

*

v. *

*

McDonnell Douglas Corporation, *

*

Defendant/Appellee. *

---------------------------------- *

*

Anthony McFarlin, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the Eastern

Plaintiff/Appellant, * District of Missouri.

*

v. * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Jeff Ashley, Individually and in his *

capacity as Supervisor, McDonnell *

Douglas; McDonnell Douglas *

Corporation, *

*

Defendants/Appellees. *

---------------------------------- *

*

Anthony McFarlin, *

*

Plaintiff/Appellant, *

*

v. *

*
McFarlin also sued his union and a fellow employee, but has abandoned his

1

appeal from the summary judgment dismissing his claims against them.

-2-

McDonnell Douglas Corporation; *

Local Lodge 837 B, International *

Association of Machinists and *

Aerospace Workers, *

*

Defendants/Appellees. *

___________

Submitted: May 23, 1997

Filed: June 9, 1997

___________

Before MURPHY, HEANEY, and MAGILL, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Anthony McFarlin was fired by McDonnell Douglas Corporation in 1993, later

rehired, and then terminated in 1994. McFarlin sued, claiming that McDonnell Douglas

had discriminated against him on the basis of his race in violation of Title VII of the

Civil Rights Act of 1964, 42 U.S.C. § 2000e et. seq.; 42 U.S.C. § 1981; the Missouri

Human Rights Act, Mo. Rev. Stat. §§ 213.010 et. seq.; and state common law. The 1

district court granted summary judgment in favor of McDonnell Douglas, and McFarlin

appeals. A careful review of the record shows that McFarlin did not make a sufficient

showing to withstand the motion for summary judgment. See Celotex Corp. v. Catrett,

477 U.S. 317, 322 (1986). The judgment is therefore affirmed.
-3-

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 78 (Monday, April 24, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 20119-20120]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-9960]



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


DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--Fuel Filtration Cooperative Research Program

    Notice is hereby given that, on February 10, 1995, pursuant to 
Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 
1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301, et seq. (``the Act''), Southwest Research 
Institute (``SwRI'') has filed written notifications simultaneously 
with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing 
the addition of a party to its group research project entitled ``Fuel 
Filtration Cooperative Research Program.'' The notifications were filed 
for the purpose of extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery 
of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified 
circumstances. Specifically, United Defense LP, San Jose, CA (effective 
January 10, 1995) has become a party to the group research project. 
[[Page 20120]] 
    No other changes have been made in either the membership, or 
planned activity of the group research project. Membership in this 
group research project remains open, and SwRI intends to file 
additional written notifications disclosing all changes in membership.
    On October 5, 1994, SwRI filed its original notification pursuant 
to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a 
notice in the Federal Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on 
December 30, 1994, (59 FR 67733-34).
Constance K. Robinson,
Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 95-9960 Filed 4-21-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-01-M
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

May 29, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-7791

ECM Industries LLC: 

I am pleased to notify you that the United States Trade Representative has determined to 

grant the above-referenced exclusion request submitted pursuant to the notice published at 83 FR 

32181 (‘July 11 notice’). The exclusion determination is set out in a formal notice which has 

been submitted to Office of the Federal Register for publication (‘the exclusion notice’). A prepublication version of the exclusion notice has been posted on the USTR website, at 

https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/301Investigations/Notice_of_Product_Exclusions

_5-30-2019.pdf.

The scope of the exclusion is governed by the formal HTSUS language in the annex to 

the product exclusion notice, and not by the product descriptions set out in any particular request 

for exclusion. An exclusion in response to your request has been granted by excluding from the 

additional tariffs products covered by a specially drafted description contained in the annex to 

the product exclusion notice. 

In accordance with the July 11 notice, the exclusion applies as of the July 6, 2018 

effective date of the tariff action, and will extend for one year after the exclusion notice is 

published in the Federal Register. As stated in the exclusion notice, U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection will issue additional instructions on entry guidance and implementation

Sincerely,

Joseph Barloon

General Counsel
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-15-00450-CV

WILMINGTON TRUST, NATIONAL ASSOCIATION,

AS SUCCESSOR TRUSTEE TO CITIBANK, N.A. AS TRUSTEE

FOR BEAR STEARNS ASSET BACKED SECURITIES I

TRUST 2006-HE4 ASSET-BACKED CERTIFICATES, SERIES 2006-HE4 

v.

ESTELLA SALINAS, JAIME SALINAS AND ALL OTHER

OCCUPANTS 502 EL PINTO ROAD, SULLIVAN, TX 78595

On Appeal from the

County Court at Law No. 4 of Hidalgo County, Texas

Trial Cause No. CL-14-3562-D

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed. The Court 

orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED. Costs of the appeal are adjudged 

against appellants.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

September 1, 2016
<Page>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 31.01

                     RULE 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) CERTIFICATIONS

I, Robert M. Alderman, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q of ML Aspect FuturesAccess LLC;

2. Based on my knowledge, this 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 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 report;

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

   a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
   disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
   ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its
   consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those
   entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being
   prepared;

   b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
   procedures and presented in this report our conclusions 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 registrant's internal control
   over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent
   fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
   materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial
   reporting; and

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

   a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
   operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
   likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
   summarize and report financial information; and

   b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
   employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control
   over financial reporting.


Date: November 14, 2005
-----------------------

By /s/ ROBERT M. ALDERMAN
   ----------------------
Robert M. Alderman
Chief Executive Officer, President and Manager
(Principal Executive Officer)
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.2


                   CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS


As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation by
reference of our report dated March 12, 1998 covering the consolidated financial
statements of Innovative Gaming Corporation of America and Subsidiary as of
December 31, 1997 and for the two years then ended, included in this Form 10-K,
into the Company's previously filed Registration Statements on Form S-8 (File
Nos. 33-73764, 333-06669, 333-37813 and 333-37815) and on Form S-3 (File No.
333-53893).



                                        ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP


Las Vegas, Nevada
March 30, 1999
#### STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Michael WARREN, Appellant.

No. WD 42831.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

May 14, 1991.

Raymond L. Legg, Columbia, for appellant.

William L. Webster, Atty. Gen., Breck K. Burgess, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before KENNEDY, P.J., and FENNER and BRECKENRIDGE, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Consolidated appeal from conviction and sentence, as a prior and persistent offender, of receiving stolen property and the denial, following evidentiary hearing, of Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief.

Conviction and denial of motion for post-conviction relief affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
Exhibit 13.1

                            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 Annual Report of Magal Security System Ltd. (the
"Company") on Form 20-F for the period ending December 31, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Jacob Even Ezra, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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 result of operations of the
Company.


/s/ Jacob Even-Ezra*
--------------------
Jacob Even-Ezra
Chief Executive Officer

June 30, 2005

* The originally executed copy of this Certification will be maintained at the
Company's offices and will be made available for inspection upon request.
#### Jose GUANA, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. WD 50983.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Dec. 12, 1995.

Gary E. Brotherton, Office of the State Public Defender, Columbia, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., John M. Morris, Christine M. Blegan, Asst. Attys. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before SPINDEN, P.J., and BRECKENRIDGE and SMART, JJ.

BRECKENRIDGE, Judge.

Jose Guana pleaded guilty to one count of unlawful use of a weapon, § 571.030.1(1), RSMo Supp.1990. The guilty plea court sentenced him to a two-year term of imprisonment, suspended the execution of the sentence, and placed him on probation for five years. Following several reports of probation violations, Mr. Guana’s probation was *327revoked and he was placed in the custody of the Department of Corrections. Mr. Guana subsequently filed a Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief, which was denied by the motion court. Mr. Guana now appeals the denial of his Rule 24.035 motion.

The judgment denying post-conviction relief is vacated and the cause remanded for dismissal.

Mr. Guana filed his *pro se*Rule 24.035 motion on January 24, 1994. In his motion, Mr. Guana indicated that he had been delivered to the custody of the Department of Corrections on June 9, 1993, over seven months earlier. The motion court then appointed post-conviction counsel for Mr. Gua-na, and said counsel filed an “Affidavit of Counsel and Notice of Waiver of Amended Motion.” Subsequently, the motion court denied Mr. Guana’s Rule 24.035 motion without an evidentiary hearing.

A Rule 24.035 motion must be filed within ninety days after the defendant is delivered to the custody of the Department of Corrections. Rule 24.035(b). The ninety-day filing deadline in Rule 24.035(b) is constitutional and mandatory, and a failure to comply with this filing deadline constitutes a complete waiver of any right to proceed under the Rule. *Smith v. State,*798 S.W.2d 152, 153-54 (Mo. banc 1990); *McFarland v. State,*876 S.W.2d 48, 49 (Mo.App.1994).

In the case at bar, Mr. Guana did not comply with the ninety-day filing deadline in Rule 24.035(b). Nevertheless, the motion court ultimately denied the motion on its merits. Technically, the motion court should have dismissed the motion without considering the allegations it contained. *McFarland,*876 S.W.2d at 49-50. Therefore, this court vacates the motion court’s judgment denying Mr. Guana’s Rule 24.035 motion, and the cause is remanded to the motion court for dismissal of the motion under Rule 24.035. *Smith,*798 S.W.2d at 153-54.

All concur,
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

September 17, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number USTR-2018-0025-5205

Bergstrom, Inc: 

I am pleased to notify you that the United States Trade Representative has determined to 

grant the above-referenced exclusion request submitted pursuant to the notice published at 83 FR 

32181 (‘July 11 notice’). The exclusion determination is set out in a formal notice which has 

been submitted to Office of the Federal Register for publication (‘the exclusion notice’). A prepublication version of the exclusion notice has been posted on the USTR website, at 

https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/301Investigations/%2434_Billion_Exclusions_Gr

anted_September.pdf. 

The scope of the exclusion is governed by the formal HTSUS language in the annex to 

the product exclusion notice, and not by the product descriptions set out in any particular request 

for exclusion. An exclusion in response to your request has been granted by excluding from the 

additional tariffs products covered by a specially drafted description contained in the annex to 

the product exclusion notice. 

In accordance with the July 11 notice, the exclusion applies as of the July 6, 2018 

effective date of the tariff action, and will extend for one year after the exclusion notice is 

published in the Federal Register. As stated in the exclusion notice, U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection will issue additional instructions on entry guidance and implementation

Sincerely,

Joseph Barloon

General Counsel
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

TREON TARIQ MORGAN,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

Nos. 4D20-969 and 4D20-971

[February 4, 2021]

CORRECTED OPINION

Consolidated appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial 

Circuit, Palm Beach County; Jeffrey Dana Gillen, Judge; L.T. Case Nos. 

502019CF000405AXXXMB and 502019CF001155AXXXMB.

Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Benjamin Eisenberg, 

Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Heidi L. Bettendorf, 

Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

GERBER, FORST and KUNTZ, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
<PAGE>   1









     EXHIBIT 23.1



     INDEPENDENT AUDITORS CONSENT



     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement
     of American Bio Medica Corporation (the "Company") on Form S-3 (File No.
     333-16535), Form S-8 (File No. 333-91025) and Form S-8 (File No. 333-19203)
     of our report dated June 20, 2001 (with respect to the last paragraph of
     Note A and J[2], August 13, 2001, Note B and Note L[5], July 23, 2001, the
     last paragraph of Note J[3], July 18, 2001) on our audits of the financial
     statements of the Company as of April 30, 2001 and 2000 which report is
     included in this Annual Report on Form 10-KSB.





     Richard E. Eisner & Company, LLP



     New York, New York



     _________________, 2001