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

Independent Auditors' Consent

The
Board of Directors and Stockholders
Caldera International, Inc.:

We
consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No.s 333-43822, 333-97865, and 333-100105 on Form S-8 and Registration
Statement No. 333-65658 on Form S-3 of Caldera International, Inc. of our report dated January 27, 2003, on the consolidated balance sheet of
Caldera International, Inc. and subsidiaries as of October 31, 2002, and the related consolidated statements of operations and comprehensive loss, stockholders' equity, and cash flows
for the year then ended, which report appears in the October 31, 2002 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Caldera International, Inc.

/s/
KPMG LLP

Salt
Lake City, Utah
January 27, 2003

---

QuickLinks
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 84 (Tuesday, April 30, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19089-19090]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-10574]



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


DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--``Precision Balancing for Enhanced Engine 
Integrity Program''

    Notice is hereby given that, on April 4, 1996, 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 (1) the 
identities of the parties and (2) the nature and objectives of the 
venture. The notifications were filed for the purpose of invoking the 
Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to

[[Page 19090]]

actual damages under specified circumstances. Pursuant to Section 6(b) 
of the Act, the identities of the parties are Southern Natural Gas 
Company, Birmingham, AL; Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company, its subsidiary 
and affiliate companies, Houston, TX; and Woodward Governor Company, 
Fort Collins, CO; and its general areas of planned activities are to 
document, from a mechanical integrity perspective, the impact of 
precision continuous engine autobalancing on mechanical wear and 
failure.
    Membership in the program remains open, and SwRI intends to file 
additional written notifications disclosing all changes in the 
membership or planned activities.
Constance K. Robinson,
Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 96-10574 Filed 4-29-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-01-M
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

April 12, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-3729

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

_04.15.19.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,

Stephen P. Vaughn

General Counsel
Exhibit 23 

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM 

We hereby consent toincorporation by reference in the previously filed Registration Statement on Forms S-8 File Nos. 333-69420 and 333-69416 and Form S-3 File No. 33-71692 of Dimeco, Inc. of our report dated March 12, 2010, relating to our audit of theconsolidated financial statements, which appears in the December 31, 2009, Annual Report on Form 10-K of Dimeco, Inc. 

/s/ S.R.SNODGRASS, A.C. 

Wexford, Pennsylvania 

March 18, 2010
---

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 

I, Christine Kilbourn, hereby 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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Intelbahn Inc. for
      the period ended July 31, 2009 (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 Intelbahn Inc.                                                                

Dated: September 17, 2009

| | /s/
      Christine Kilbourn                                   
| | ---------------------------------------------------------------
| | Christine Kilbourn                                             
| | President, Treasurer and Director                              
| | (Principal Executive Officer, Principal
      Financial Officer
| | and Principal Accounting Officer)                              
| | Intelbahn Inc.                                                 

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

---
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-2018-0025-7807

Nissan North America, 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,

Joseph Barloon

General Counsel
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

May 7, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-7170

United Scope 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

_05.09.19.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
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 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 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

April 26, 2007

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-50353

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

JUAN O. CASTELLANOS, also known as Osmin Castellanos, 

also known as Juan Osmin,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 3:05-CR-1927

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

Before REAVLEY, GARZA and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Juan O. Castellanos appeals the 37-month sentence he

received following his guilty-plea conviction for illegal

reentry, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. He contends that the

district court violated his constitutional rights as set forth in

United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), by finding that his

prior New York rape conviction enhanced his sentence without

submitting the question to a jury and by sentencing him under a

mandatory version of the Guidelines.
No. 06-50353

-2-

Sentencing in the instant case occurred post-Booker, and the

district court thus did not err in making factual findings

relevant to sentencing. See United States v. Mares, 402 F.3d

511, 519 (5th Cir. 2005). Castellanos’s assertion that the

district court sentenced him under a mandatory version of the

Guidelines is wholly conclusional and is unsupported by the

record. To the extent that Castellanos argues that the district

court erred in determining that his rape conviction is a “crime

of violence” for enhancement purposes, the argument fails. See

U.S.S.G. § 2L1.2, comment. n.1B(iii). Additionally, the district

court did not err in refusing to entertain Castellanos’s implicit

challenge to the validity of his prior rape conviction when the

challenge was not grounded in the denial of counsel. See Custis

v. United States, 511 U.S. 485, 496-97 (1994). To the extent

that Castellanos argues, for the first time on appeal, that the

use of his prior rape conviction for enhancement purposes

violates the Double Jeopardy Clause, the argument also fails. 

See Sudds v. Maggio, 696 F.2d 415, 417 (5th Cir. 1983); see also

United States v. Hawkins, 69 F.3d 11, 13-15 (5th Cir. 1995).

This court lacks jurisdiction to consider Castellanos’s

argument that the district court erred in failing to downwardly

depart from the guidelines range based on the fact that he

reentered the U.S. as a refugee in fear for his life. See United

States v. Hernandez, 457 F.3d 416, 424 & n.5 (5th Cir. 2006). 

AFFIRMED.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

In re: SCOTT C. TOWNLEY;

STEPHANIE TASHIRO-TOWNLEY,

 Debtors,

SCOTT C. TOWNLEY; STEPHANIE

TASHIRO-TOWNLEY,

 Appellants,

 v.

K. MICHAEL FITZGERALD, Trustee,

 Appellee.

No. 12-60001

BAP No. 10-1397

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the Ninth Circuit

Bankruptcy Appellate Panel

Jury, Wallace, and Pappas, Bankruptcy Judges, Presiding

Submitted January 21, 2014** 

Before: CANBY, SILVERMAN, and PAEZ, Circuit Judges.

FILED

JAN 27 2014

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
Scott C. Townley and Stephanie Tashiro-Townley appeal pro se from the

Bankruptcy Appellate Panel’s (“BAP”) judgment dismissing as moot their appeal

from the bankruptcy court’s order denying confirmation of their Chapter 13 plan

and dismissing their case. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 158(d). We

review de novo a determination that an appeal from a bankruptcy court decision is

moot. Nat’l Mass Media Telecomm. Sys., Inc. v. Stanley (In re Nat’l Mass Media

Telecomm. Sys., Inc.), 152 F.3d 1178, 1180 (9th Cir. 1998). We affirm. 

The BAP properly dismissed the appeal as moot because the debtors failed

to seek a stay of the foreclosure sale pending appeal. See Onouli-Kona Land Co. v.

Estate of Richards (In re Onouli-Kona Land Co.), 846 F.2d 1170, 1171 (9th Cir.

1988) (“Bankruptcy’s mootness rule applies when an appellant has failed to obtain

a stay from an order that permits a sale of a debtor’s assets.”). 

The debtors’ request, filed on March 9, 2012, that this court take judicial

notice of a motion in another case is denied.

AFFIRMED.

2 12-60001
#### STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Ronald E. HUDSON, Defendant/Appellant. Ronald E. HUDSON, Movant/Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent/Respondent.

Nos. 59570, 62428.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

March 2, 1993.

R. Cristine Stallings, Columbia, for defendant/appellant.

*495William L. Webster, Atty. Gen., Michael J. Spillane, Jefferson City, for plaintiff/respondent.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Defendant was convicted by a jury of stealing property with a value of at least $150, § 570.030, RSMo 1986. He was sentenced by the court as a prior offender to five years imprisonment, with the sentence to be served consecutive to prior convictions. After sentencing, defendant filed a *pro se*Rule 29.15 motion. Counsel was appointed for defendant, however, an amended motion was not filed. The *pro se*motion was denied without an evidentiary hearing. He appeals his conviction and the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion. Pursuant to Rule 29.15(Z) these appeals have been consolidated. We affirm.

The evidence in support of the jury’s verdict is not insufficient and no error of law appears. 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 Rules 30.25(b) and 84.16(b).
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATIONS

In
connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Accentia Biopharmaceuticals, Inc. (the Company) for the three months ended March 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Form
10-Q), I, Alan M. Pearce, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby 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 Form 10-Q fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

(2) The information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.

Dated: August 16, 2010



|                                 
|---------------------------------
|/s/ Alan M. Pearce               
|Alan M. Pearce                   
|Chief Financial Officer; Director

This certification
accompanies the Form 10-Q to which it relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of Accentia Biopharmaceuticals, Inc. under the Securities Act of 1933, as
amended, or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of the Form 10-Q), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 77 (Friday, April 21, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 19965]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-9869]



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


NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

Special Emphasis Panel in Computer and Computation Research; 
Meeting

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-
463, as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the 
following meeting:

    Name: Special Emphasis Panel in Computer and Computation 
Research.
    Date and Time: May 8, 1995; 8:30 a.m.-5 p.m.
    Place: Holiday Inn Arlington at Ballston, 4610 North Fairfax 
Dr., Arlington, VA.
    Type of Meeting: Closed.
    Contact Person: Gerald L. Engel, Program Director, Special 
Projects, Computer and Computation Research, Room 1145, NSF, 4201 
Wilson Blvd., Arlington, VA 22230, (703) 306-1910.
    Purpose of Meeting: To provide advice and recommendations 
concerning proposals submitted to NSF for financial support.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate research proposals submitted to 
the Division of Computer and Computation Research.
    Reason for Closing: The proposals being reviewed include 
information of a proprietary or confidential nature, including 
technical information; financial data, such as salaries; and 
personal information concerning individuals associated with the 
proposals. These matters are exempt under 5 U.S.C. 552b(c), (4) and 
(6) of the Government in the Sunshine Act.

    Dated: April 17, 1995.
M. Rebecca Winkler,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 95-9869 Filed 4-20-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
#### Thomas Alexander Mandrafino RUZICKA, By and Through his next friend, Thomas R. RUZICKA, and Thomas R. Ruzicka, Individually, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. Janice Lauren MANDRAFINO, Respondent-Respondent.

No. 69660.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Three.

Nov. 19, 1996.

Daniel P. Card, II, Paule, Camazine & Blumenthal, P.C., Clayton, for plaintiff-appellant.

Susan M. Hais, James P. Carmody, Clayton, for respondent-respondent.

Before CRAHAN, P.J., and GRIMM and HOFF, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Thomas R. Ruzicka (Father) appeals from a judgment and decree entered by the trial court in a paternity action. The trial court’s judgment is supported by substantial evidence and is not against the weight of the evidence. No error of law appears. *Murphy v. Carron,*536 S.W.2d 30, 32 (Mo. banc 1976).

An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion, for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 31.2

                      CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER CERTIFICATION

I, Danny E. Hosler certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of OC Financial, Inc.;

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 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 respect
     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 officers 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 officers 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 the 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:  May 15, 2006

/S/DANNY E. HOSLER.
-------------------
Danny E. Hosler
Chief Financial Officer