alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.3



                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We hereby consent to the use in Amendment No. 1 to Registration Statement No.
333-56799 on Form S-1 of our report dated February 18, 1997, related to the
financial statements of Bank Compensation Strategies Group as of December 31,
1996 and 1995, and for the years then ended. We also consent to the reference
to our Firm under the caption "Experts" in the Prospectus.


                                   /s/ McGLADREY & PULLEN, LLP

                                   McGLADREY & PULLEN, LLP


Minneapolis, Minnesota
July 27, 1998
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 405 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 405

  To provide that a person who brings a product liability action in a 
 Federal or State court for injuries sustained from a product that is 
not in compliance with a voluntary or mandatory standard issued by the 
Consumer Product Safety Commission may recover treble damages, and for 
                            other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 28, 2003

 Mr. Andrews introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
Committee on the Judiciary, and in addition to the Committee on Energy 
    and Commerce, for a period to be subsequently determined by the 
  Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall 
           within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To provide that a person who brings a product liability action in a 
 Federal or State court for injuries sustained from a product that is 
not in compliance with a voluntary or mandatory standard issued by the 
Consumer Product Safety Commission may recover treble damages, 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. DAMAGE RECOVERIES.

    (a) Treble Damages.--Any person who brings a product liability 
action in a Federal or State court for injuries sustained from the use 
of a product that is not in compliance with a voluntary or mandatory 
standard issued by the Consumer Product Safety Commission shall recover 
treble damages.
    (b) Notice.--Within 90 days of the date of enactment of this Act, 
the Consumer Product Safety Commission shall reissue each voluntary and 
mandatory standard the Commission has for a product with a notice 
notifying manufacturers of such products of the treble damage provision 
of subsection (a).
                                 <all>
```
WEBINAR September 28, 2022 3.00 - 5.00 PM ET

NIST

INNOVATIVE

TECHNOLOGIES

SHOWCASE

Transferring Invention and

Innovation to Commercialization

REGISTER NOW

Technology Partnerships Office (TPO)

mary-deirdre.coraggio@nist.gov

Communications and Technology

Promotion Director

(301) 975-5158

FOR MORE INFORMATION

Select presentations by NIST

researchers describing cutting-edge

technologies

Panel Discussion to discover how to

collaborate or license a NIST

technology

The Technology Partnerships Office (TPO)

at the National Institute of Standards and

Technology (NIST) is excited to invite you

to participate in the NIST Innovative

Technologies Showcase event!

The showcase will include:

FEATURED

TECHNOLOGIES & SPEAKERS

Zeeshan Ahmed, Ph.D.,

Senior Scientist, National Institute of Standards

and Technology

Photonic Dosimeter and

Calorimeter Technology

Paul Williams, Ph.D.,

Physicist, National Institute of Standards and

Technology

Smart-Mirror: Noninvasively Measuring

Laser Power Technology

Greg Cooksey, Ph.D.,

Biomedical Engineer ,

National Institute of

Standards and

Technology

Optical Flow Meter and Serial

Cytometry Technology

Paul Patrone Ph.D.,

Staff Scientist ,

National Institute of

Standards and

Technology

Credit; NIST
#### Henry Buchter *v.*Commonwealth.

Criminal Law — Instruction—Concealed Weapon.

Under § *2,*Act March. 10, 1854 (1 R. Stat., 414), in a prosecution for carrying a deadly weapon, the court properly refused to instruct the jury to find for defendant upon evidence sustaining the charge, but also conducing to prove that at the .time of the alleged commission of the offense defendant had prepared to go, and was about to isitart on a journey from Louisville, Kentucky, to Salem,' Indiana, in' the absence of any evidence to show that defendant on such journey would be required to travel at night.

APPEAL FROM LOUISVILLE CITY COURT.

December 8, 1872.

Opinion by

Judge Hardin :

This is an appeal from a judgment of the Louisville City Court, imposing a fine upon the appellant for carrying concealed a deadly weapon, viz.: a pistol.

Upon evidence sustaining the charge, but also conducing to prove that at the time of the alleged commission of the offense the appellant had prepared to go, and was then about to start on a journey from Louisville, Kentucky, to Salem, in the state of Indiana; and the court having refused hypothetically to instruct the jury to find for the defendant on this evidence — the only question to be determined is whether or not it was lawful for the appellant, in view of the ordinary dangers of such a journey, alone, to start upon it armed with a concealed deadly weapon.

*50
      *Green & Allen, for appellant.*

*Attorney General, for appellee.*

Únder Section 2 of the “act to prohibit the carrying of concealed deadly weapons,” approved March 10, 1854 (I. R. S., 414), it is lawful for persons so to be armed who are required by their business or occupation to travel during the night. But if performing the single brief trip, which was contemplated by the appellant, could be regarded as a business or occupation within the meaning of the statute there is an utter failure of evidence to- show that the appellant was thereby required to travel in the night; and it would therefore be misleading and erroneous to instruct the jury, as the court was asked to do, for the defendant, with reference to his going to Salem, and the court properly refused to give the instructions based on the evidence relating toi it.

Wherefore the judgment is affirmed.
Argued: November 3, 2022

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

OF MARYLAND

Misc. No. 3

September Term, 202 2

IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION

OF WILLIAM WALLACE MONTIER FOR

ADMISSION TO THE BAR OF MARYLAND

Fader , C.J.

Watts

Hotten

Booth

Biran

Gould

Eaves

JJ.

ORDER

Filed: November 7, 2022IN THE MATTER OF THE APPLICATION * IN THE

OF WILLIAM WALLACE MONTIER * COURT OF APPEALS

FOR ADMISSION TO THE * OF MARYLAND

BAR OF MARYLAND * Misc . No

. 3

* September Term, 202 2

O R D E R

The Court having considered the adverse recommendation of the Character

Committee for the Third Appellate Judicial Circuit and the favorable recommendation of

the State Board of Law Examiners concerning the app lication of William Wallace Montier

for admission to the Bar of Maryland, it is this 7th day of November , 202 2

ORDERED , by the Court of Appeals of Maryland, a majority of the Court

concurring, that the favorable recommendation of the State Board of Law Examiners is

accepted, and it is further

ORDERED , that the applicant, upon taking the oath prescribed by statute,

be admitted to the practice of law in this State.

/s/ Matthew J. Fader

Chief Judge
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.10

                            STEEL CITY PRODUCTS, INC.
                                 AMENDMENT NO. 1
                                       TO
                     TERRANCE W. ALLAN EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

THIS AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT (this "Agreement") is made as of
this 17th day of October 2002 by and between TERRANCE W. ALLAN (hereinafter
referred to as "Mr. Allan") and STEEL CITY PRODUCTS, INC., a Delaware
corporation (hereinafter referred to as the "Company.")

1.    BACKGROUND. Mr. Allan and the Company entered into an employment agreement
      dated as of May 1, 2000 (the "Employment Agreement.") Among other things,
      the Employment Agreement provides (i) for Mr. Allan's entitlement to an
      Annual Executive Bonus (the "Executive Bonus") and (ii) for Mr. Allan's
      participation in the Company's Annual Management Bonus pool (the "the
      Bonus Pool"). The parties now wish to amend the Employment Agreement in
      certain respects all as more particularly set forth herein.

2.    CONSIDERATION. The parties are entering into this Agreement for and in
      consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein and other good and
      valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby
      acknowledged.

3.    EXHIBIT A. The Section of Exhibit A of the Employment Agreement entitled
      "Incentive Compensation" of Exhibit A of the Employment Agreement is
      hereby amended in its entirety effective retroactively to January 1, 2002
      to delete all references to Mr. Allan's entitlement to the Executive Bonus
      or his participation in the Bonus Pool, and to read as follows:

      INCENTIVE         Mr. Allan shall be entitled to incentive compensation in
      COMPENSATION:     accordance with the bonus plan or plans in effect from
                        time to time for senior managers of the Company. All
                        references in this Agreement to bonuses or incentive
                        compensation of any kind shall refer to such plan or
                        plans.

4.    NO OTHER CHANGES. In all other respects, the Employment Agreement shall
      remain as originally written.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the
day and year first above written.

STEEL CITY PRODUCTS, INC.

By /s/ Bernard H. Frank                              /s/ Terrance W. Allan
   ----------------------------------          ---------------------------------
   Bernard H. Frank                                            TERRANCE W. ALLAN
   Chairman of the Board of Directors
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF EARNINGS AND THE CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             FEB-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-31-1997
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                     2,485
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 2,603
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   2,603
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,953
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     2,603
<SALES>                                          5,631
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 6,001
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      381
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,620
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              5,620
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     5,620
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .43
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .43
        

</TABLE>
Laboratory Name Measurement Assurance – System Evaluation       Date:         

1

Measurement Parameter  

(E.g., Mass)

Scope/Range and Echelon

Max to Min capacity/ranges.  E.g., 1 kg to 1 mg

Echelon level (where available.)  E.g., Echelon II

Brief Description of Measurement Assurance Approach

Click here to enter text.

Status of Control Chart Reviews

Please assess the charts for this measurement area based on the following series of questions. These are

the kinds of things we would look for during an evaluation.  You can tailor this to your own system and

approach and format.  An “executive summary” in text form would be useful for the annually required

Technical Audit and for the Management Review.

1. Provide a list of control charts for this particular parameter and Scope (or Reference a Table

that is up to date in your Quality Manual Appendix or reference another table.)

2. Do all of the charts comply with the Control Chart/Range Chart Evaluation Checklist (and SOP 9,

17, 20, or 30?)

3. What was the date of the last review of the control chart for compliance (or include on Table)?   

4. What is the review interval and who conducts the review?

5. Questions to consider:

a. How much data is on the chart? If less than 25 points, please describe how you ensure

you have adequate data for valid uncertainty reporting.  If limited data is retained from

year to year, describe how you determine what historical data “drops off”.  

b. Are the observed values “in control”?   

c. Is action needed based on the data in this chart?

d. Has action been taken already?  If yes, what was the impact?  If action is needed and has

not been taken, why not?

e. Have you compared past and current data with F‐tests or t‐tests and if so, what was the

status?  If not, how often do you assess the reference values and process?

f. Is there “bias” or deviation from the reference value noted on this chart? (You need a

reference value to assess this – if you don’t have one, provide an explanation for why

not.)  Have you assessed the bias against the rest of the combined uncertainty for this

measurement process/scope?  How is the bias included in your uncertainty

tables/calculations? Have you evaluated any observed bias against results from

proficiency tests?
Laboratory Name Measurement Assurance – System Evaluation       Date:         

2

g. Is the data pulled from these charts to update your uncertainties on at least an annual

basis?   

6. Be sure to include any action items uncovered during this assessment as a part of your annual

Technical Audit and Management Review processes!
Amendment to warrant certificated dated August 9, 2005



 Exhibit 4.1 
  

AMENDMENT TO WARRANT CERTIFICATE 
  
 This Amendment is made to the Warrant Certificate dated July 9, 2002 (the “Warrant”) issued by Advant-e Corporation (the “Company”) for the
benefit of                                     ,
(“Holder”). Capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings set forth in the Warrant. 
  
 The Company and Holder agree that the Warrant shall be amended as follows: 
  
 1. Immediately following Section 1 of the Warrant, the following Section shall be added: 
  
 “SECTION 1A. CASHLESS EXERCISE OF WARRANT. In addition to and without limiting the
rights of the Holder hereof under the terms hereof, at the Holder’s option this Warrant may be exercised in whole prior to its expiration by exchanging this Warrant for a number of shares of Common Stock having an aggregate market value on the
date of such exercise equal to the difference between (a) the closing price of the shares on the date of exercise, not to exceed the closing price as of August 9, 2005 ($1.35) and (b) the aggregate Warrant Price for such shares in
effect at such time. In the event that the holder elects to exchange this Warrant for shares of Common Stock under this Section 1A, the Holder must deliver the Warrant Certificate to the Company with the exercise form set forth as Exhibit B
duly executed.” 
  
 2. The Warrant is amended by the addition
of Exhibit B following Exhibit A in the form attached hereto. 
  
 3. Except as set forth herein, all of the remaining terms and conditions of the Warrant shall remain in full force and effect. 
  

			
	ADVANT-E CORPORATION
		
	By:	 	  


	 	 	Jason K. Wadzinski, CEO
		
	Date:	 	August 9, 2005
	
	 HOLDER
  


		
	By:	 	  


		
	Date:	 	  




  

 13 








 EXHIBIT B 
 to Warrant Certificate 
  
 NOTICE OF ELECTION TO EXERCISE 
  
 TO:
                                        
             
  
 The undersigned holder of a Warrant to Purchase (the “Warrant”) of Advant-e Corporation, a Delaware corporation (the “Company”), hereby irrevocably exercises its right to exchange this Warrant for
shares of Common Stock of the Company in an amount to be computed in accordance with Section 1A of the Warrant, and directs that the shares issuable and deliverable upon exercise be issued in the name of and delivered to the undersigned, unless
a different name has been indicated below. If shares are to be issued in the name of a person other than the undersigned, the undersigned will pay all transfer taxes payable with respect thereto. 
  
 Dated:
                     
  
 Number of Shares of Common Stock to be acquired via cashless exercise:
                     
  

			
	Holder
		
	By:	 	  


		
	Printed:	 	  


		
	Title:	 	  



  

 14
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2

                      CONSENT TO BE NAMED AS TRUST MANAGER

         I, Douglas W. Schnitzer, hereby consent to be nominated as a trust
manager of Automotive Realty Trust of America, and to be named as a nominated
trust manager in the Form S-11 Registration Statement filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission by Automotive Realty Trust of America.

Dated:   March 27, 1998

                                        /s/  Douglas W. Schnitzer 
                                        -----------------------------------
                                             Douglas W. Schnitzer
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 NexGen Biofuels Ltd. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2008 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, J. Ram
Ajjarapu, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify to my knowledge
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, following due inquiry, I believe 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.

     A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to the Company. and will be retained by the Company and furnished
to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.


                                         NEXGEN BIOFUELS LTD.

August 14, 2008                          By: /s/ J. Ram Ajjarapu
                                         -----------------------
                                         J. RAM AJJARAPU
                                         CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
<PAGE>
                                                                     Exhibit 3.1

                            CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT
                                       OF
                          CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION
                                       OF
                              TRICORD SYSTEMS, INC.

Tricord Systems, Inc., a corporation organized and existing under and by virtue
of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware, does hereby certify
that:

         1.       The Board of Directors of the Corporation did duly adopt the
following resolution proposing and declaring advisable the following amendment
to the Certificate of Incorporation of said corporation:

         RESOLVED, that Section 1 of Article IV of the Company's Certificate of
         Incorporation be amended to read as follows:

                  The aggregate number of shares which this Corporation has the
                  authority to issue is 80,750,677 shares, 75,000,000 of which
                  shall be designated common stock, $.01 par value (hereinafter
                  referred to as the "Common Stock"), 2,043,966 of which shall
                  be designated series C convertible preferred stock, $.01 par
                  value (hereinafter referred to as the "Series C Preferred
                  Stock"), 706,711 of which shall be designated series D
                  convertible preferred stock, $.01 par value (hereinafter
                  referred to as the "Series D Preferred Stock"), and 3,000,000
                  undesignated stock, $.01 par value (hereinafter referred to as
                  the "Undesignated Stock"), which Undesignated Stock may be
                  issued in different classes or series, with the designation of
                  the class or series, the relative rights and preferences of
                  each class or series, to be determined by the Board of
                  Directors of this Corporation. Series C Preferred Stock and
                  Series D Preferred Stock are herein sometimes referred to
                  collectively as "Preferred Stock." Common Stock and Preferred
                  Stock are herein sometimes referred to collectively as
                  "Capital Stock."

         2.       The stockholders of said corporation approved said 
amendment at a special meeting of stockholders following due notice.

         3.       The aforesaid amendment was duly adopted in accordance with 
the applicable provisions of Section 242 of the General Corporation Law of 
the State of Delaware.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Tricord Systems, Inc. has caused this certificate
to be signed by its Chief Executive Officer the 29th day of March, 1999.

                                                TRICORD SYSTEMS, INC.

                                                By:   /s/ John J. Mitcham
                                                      -------------------
                                                      John J. Mitcham
                                                      Chief Executive Officer


                                       16