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

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

The
Board of Directors and Shareholders Aquila, Inc.:

We
consent to the incorporation by reference into Aquila, Inc.'s previously filed registration statements on Form S-3 (Nos. 333-88280 and
333-67822) and on Form S-8 (Nos. 333-92294, 333-68042, 333-68040, 333-68044, 333-67820,
333-66233, 033-45525, 033-50260, 333-19671, 333-91305, 333-94955, 333-30742, and 333-77703) of our
reports dated February 28, 2008, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Aquila, Inc. as of December 31, 2007 and 2006, and the related consolidated statements of
income, common shareholders' equity, comprehensive income, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2007, and all related consolidated
financial statement schedules, management's assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2007, and the effectiveness of internal control over
financial reporting as of December 31, 2007, which reports appear in the December 31, 2007 annual report on Form 10-K of Aquila, Inc. Our report refers to
Aquila, Inc.'s adoption of Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) Interpretation No. 48,Accounting for Uncertainty in Income Taxesan
interpretation of FASB Statement No. 109, Accounting for Income Taxes,and FSP AUG AIR-1, Accounting for Planned Major Maintenance
Activities.

/s/
KPMG LLP

Kansas
City, Missouri
February 29, 2008

---



QuickLinks
1

In The

Court of Appeals

Ninth District of Texas at Beaumont

__________________

NO. 09-20-00265-CV

__________________

IN RE COMMITMENT OF THOMAS RAY PILGRIM

__________________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 435th District Court

Montgomery County, Texas

Trial Cause No. 14-05-04994-CV

__________________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant Thomas Ray Pilgrim was civilly committed for sex offender 

treatment as a sexually violent predator. See In re Commitment of Pilgrim, No. 09-

14-00528-CV, 2015 WL 3897877 (Tex. App.—Beaumont June 25, 2015, no pet.) 

(mem. op.). On November 12, 2020, Pilgrim filed a pro se notice of appeal with the 

Montgomery County District Clerk appealing an order signed on October 7, 2020, 

that denied his request for removal to less restrictive housing and supervision. We 

questioned our jurisdiction over this appeal, and both parties filed responses.

Generally, the trial court retains jurisdiction while the commitment order 

remains in effect, and we lack appellate jurisdiction when a committed person is still 
2

under the trial court’s supervision and when the trial court does not make an 

otherwise interlocutory order appealable. See In re Commitment of Cortez, 405 

S.W.3d 929, 932 (Tex. App.—Beaumont 2013, no pet.). Pilgrim has not identified a 

signed order by the trial court that is appealable at this time. Accordingly, we dismiss 

the appeal for lack of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(a), 43.2(f).

APPEAL DISMISSED.

 PER CURIAM

 

Submitted on December 16, 2020

Opinion Delivered December 17, 2020

Before McKeithen, C.J., Horton and Johnson, JJ.
OSAC 2.0 

Karen Reczek, NIST Ex-Officio, Forensic Science Standards Board
OSAC 2.0

2018 Worked on concepts based on feedback 

from Request for Information 

Presented concepts to FSSB in June 

Presented concepts to several forensic 

science professional societies June-Oct.

2019 Listened to feedback and concerns

Regrouped and developed a new plan

Presented proposed changes to FSSB 

earlier this week
• Have not found a suitable and sustainable home

• Remain at NIST for now

• Moving OSAC from NIST is now OSAC 3.0 

• Will maintain OSAC as a single organization

• Best course forward to continue to stimulate crossfertilization and leverage expertise

• Continued FSSB focus on strategy and priorities 

building on the Organizational Priorities Document and 

Roadmap Analysis

OSAC 

2.0
• Revise structure:

• reduce layers

• number of people

• build in interdisciplinary function

• Redefine roles and representation:

• integrate resource committee input earlier in the 

development process

• Streamline Registry Approval Process

OSAC 

2.0
• Develop a different approval process for methods vs. 

training, reporting, and terminology documents

• Introduction of an OSAC Internal Review Panel for 

documents that address scientific issues such as 

validation, test methods, etc. 

• Involves OSAC members and affiliates outside of 

the group that drafted the documents

• Phased-in transition over 12 months

OSAC 

2.0
2.0

Timeline

Discussed with OSAC FSSB in meetings earlier 

this week. Clarified some roles and 

questions

Update Forensics Science Societies and 

others (at their request) over the Summer

Present new structure to OSAC Leadership in 

September of this year

Subsequent 12 months spent refining details 

and preparing OSAC membership to take on 

new roles, responsibilities, and processes.

Launch 2.0 October 1, 2020
Thank you
EXHIBIT 32(b)

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

In connection  with the Annual  Report of DRYCLEAN USA, Inc. (the  "Company") on
Form 10-KSB for the year ended June 30, 2002, as filed with the  Securities  and
Exchange  Commission  on  the  date  hereof  (the  "Report"),  I,  Venerando  J.
Indelicato,  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 that, to the best of my knowledge:

     (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.

September 29, 2003

                                             /s/ Venerando J. Indelicato
                                             ----------------------------------
                                             Venerando J. Indelicato
                                             Treasurer and Principal
                                             Financial Officer
10599.

#### Reeves, guardian, *v.*Harrell, administrator.

Jenkins, P. J.

“Any person interested as distributee or legatee may, after the expiration of one year from the grant of administration, cite the administrator to appear before the ordinary for a settlement of his accounts, or, if the administrator chooses, he may cite all of the distributees to be present at the settlement of his accounts by the ordinary; such settlement shall be conclusive upon the administrator, and upon all the distributees who are present at the hearing.” Civil Code (1910), § 4073. This section of the code does not contemplate that after an administrator has thus cited all the distributees to be present at the settlement of his accounts, and after the distributees *477have appeared and one of them has filed objections to the accounting as made by the administrator, the objecting distributee shall then have the additional right of citing the administrator to appear for a settlement. This is true because the pending proceeding as instituted by the administrator is such as to determine all questions that might be raised by such a subsequent citation on the part of the distributee. Therefore, in the present case, after the objection filed by the distributee under the administrator’s citation had been passed upon by the ordinary, that court did not err in dismissing, such other and additional proceeding undertaken by the distributee; nor did the superior court commit any error in dismissing the appeal entered by the distributee from the judgment of the ordinary in thus dismissing his subsequent and independent proceeding.

Decided November 19, 1919.

Appeal; from Grady superior court—Judge Harrell. March 7, 1919.

*8. P. Gain,*for plaintiff in error.

*B. B. Terrell,*contra.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Stephens and, Smith, JJ., eoneur.*
20-F










Exhibit
10.2  



INDEPENDENT
AUDITORS’ CONSENT 



To the Shareholders of 
Gilat Satellite
Networks Ltd. 




As independent public accountants for
StarBand Communications Inc., we hereby consent to the incorporation by reference to these
Registration Statements on Form S-8 (Registration Nos. 333-113932, 333-96630, 333-08826,
333-10092, 333-12466, 333-12988 and 333-123410) and Form F-3 (Registration Nos. 333-113950 and
333-12698) of our report dated January 19, 2005, with respect to the consolidated
financial statements of Gilat Satellite Networks Ltd. included in this Amended Annual Report on
Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2004. 




/s/ MAYER HOFFMAN MCCANN P.C. 

Bethesda, Maryland 




November 28,, 2005
<PAGE>

Exhibit 99.1



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


I, Thomas G. Tachovsky, Ph.D., President and Chief Executive Officer of
Entropin, Inc. (the "Company"), do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that, to my knowledge:

         (a) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the fiscal
quarter ended March 31, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the "Report"), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

Dated: May 13, 2003

By:      /s/ Thomas G. Tachovsky, Ph.D.
         -------------------------------------
         Thomas G. Tachovsky, Ph.D.
         President and Chief Executive Officer
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

# AGENCY:

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.

# ACTION:

State and Local Government Information Report (EEO-4): Cancellation of hearing.

# SUMMARY:

Notice is hereby given that the Commission is cancelling the public hearing on the above proposed information collection—extension with change: The State and Local Government Information Report (EEO-4). (79 FR 51155, August 27, 2014). No requests to present oral testimony at a hearing concerning the information collection were received from the public. Therefore, it will not be necessary to hold the hearing.

      ( print page 72680)    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ronald Edwards, Director, Program Research and Surveys Division, Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, 131 M Street NE., Room 4SW30F, Washington, DC 20507; (202) 663-4949 (voice) or (202) 663-7063 (TTY).

Dated: November 25, 2014.

For the Commission.

Jenny R. Yang,

Chair.

[FR Doc. 2014-28669 Filed 12-5-14; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6570-01-P
EXHIBIT 23

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC
ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to
the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Form S-8 No.
333-144680, No. 333-43837, No. 333-43839, No. 333-72939 and No. 333-102701, and
Form S-3 No. 333-81037) of Siebert Financial Corp. and in the related
prospectus of our report dated March 31, 2011 with respect to the consolidated
financial statements of Siebert Financial Corp. and our report dated February
18, 2011 with respect to the financial statements of Siebert, Brandford, Shank
& Co., L.L.C. included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year
ended December 31, 2010.

/s/
EisnerAmper LLP

New York, New
York
March 31, 2011

---
#### A. M. Robbins *v.*J. T. Spurgin.

Accord and Satisfaction — Paying Less Than Amount Due.

Where from all the facts it appears that defendant was hound to pay plaintiff a certain sum past due and that plaintiff was entitled to receive that amount, an agreement to take a less sum is without consideration, and is not a har to an action for the remainder, there being no circumstances to serve as a consideration for the agreement.

APPEAL PROM HENRY CIRCUIT COURT.

December 18, 1873.

Opinion by

Judge Petees:

Appellee, in his answer, admits he purchased the land of appellant at the price and on the payments set forth in the petition. He says of the deferred payments, he paid off the note which first matured “at its face;” and he also says he “has paid off, discharged and taken up the last named note,” and that it is- true- he did not pay the full amount of the last named note, but that he paid thereon about nine hundred sixty dollars to the plaintiff about the — day of February, 1869, and that the plaintiff then accepted said sum, so paid, in full satisfaction and discharge of said last named note, and delivered said note to defendant; and defendant does not now, *378and has not since, for two years arid five months before the bringing of this suit, owed the plaintiff any sum whatever on said land. The foregoing is the substance of the defense m'ade by appellee.

*Robbins, DeHaven, Carroll, for appellant.*

*Rodman, Montfort, for appellee.*

It is a well settled principle that the payment'by the debtor to> his creditor of a less sum than is due is not a good defense as payment; nor is it a good plea of accord and satisfaction. In this case, it is not alleged in the answer that the money was paid before it was due, nor that it was paid at a different place from, that at which appellee was bound to make payment, nor that a less sum was paid, as a compromise of a controversy about the location of one of the lines of the tract of land, for a part of the price of which the note was given. But the only defense is that in satisfaction of his note for $1,117.68, over due, appellant agreed to take and did take in discharge and satisfaction thereof, $960. From all that appears in the answer, appellee was bound to pay the whole amount of the note, and appellant was entitled to receive the whole of it; and an agreement to take a less sum was without consideration, and presented no bar to the action.

*Fenwick v.*Phillips, 3 Met. 88; *Jones v. Bullitt,*2 Littell 49; *Williams v. Langford,*15 B. Mon. 566.

' As the answer failed to state the facts which would constitute sufficient consideration for the agreement to take a less sum- than was shown to be due by the note, it presented no defense, and appellant was not entitled to a judgment for the amount he claimed in his petition.

Wherefore, the judgment is reversed, and the cause is remanded for further proceedings consistent herewith.
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4620 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        H.R.4620

                       One Hundred Eighth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
           the twentieth day of January, two thousand and four

                                 An Act

 
  To confirm the authority of the Secretary of Agriculture to collect 
  approved State commodity assessments on behalf of the State from the 
                 proceeds of marketing assistance loans.

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

SECTION 1. CONFIRMATION OF AUTHORITY OF SECRETARY OF AGRICULTURE TO 
              COLLECT STATE COMMODITY ASSESSMENTS.

    (a) Collection From Marketing Assistance Loans.--The Secretary of 
Agriculture may collect commodity assessments from the proceeds of a 
marketing assistance loan for a producer if the assessment is required 
to be paid by the producer or the first purchaser of a commodity 
pursuant to a State law or pursuant to an authority administered by the 
Secretary. This collection authority does not extend to a State tax or 
other revenue collection activity by a State.
    (b) Collection Pursuant to Agreement.--The collection of an 
assessment under subsection (a) shall be made as specified in an 
agreement between the Secretary of Agriculture and the State requesting 
the collection.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
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 Amendment No. 1 to the Quarterly Report of Magnitude Information
          Systems, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended June
          30, 2007
          (the "Amendment"), I, Edward Marney, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
          certify, as of the date hereof, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
          adopted
          pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the
          best of
          my **** knowledge,
          that the Company's Amendment fully complies with the requirements of Section
          13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information
          contained in the Amendment, fairly presents, in all material respects,
          the
          financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Dated:
      September 11, 2007   /s/
        Edward Marney


Edward
      Marney


President and Chief Executive Officer
NIST Safety Commission

National Institute of Standards and Technology

KATHARINE BLODGETT GEBBIE LABORATORY

Building 81, Rm 1A116, Boulder, CO

Hybrid Meeting

March 9 – 10, 2023

8:30 AM – 5:00 PM MT

Meeting Agenda 

Thursday, March 9, 2023

Time Topics and Speakers

8:30 AM Call to Order and Roll Call

Dr. Mark Peters – Chair, NIST Safety Commission

8:35 AM

Annual Ethics Briefing

Rebecca Hermanowicz – Attorney-Advisor, Office of General Counsel, U.S. 

Department of Commerce

8:50 AM

NIST Director’s Update

Dr. Laurie Locascio – Under Secretary of Commerce for Standards and Technology 

and NIST Director

9:05 AM Discussion

9:15 AM

NIST 2023 Safety Culture Survey: Preliminary Results for Federal Employees

Crystal Cannan – Director, Workplace Training and Safety Services, National Safety

Council

9:45 AM Discussion

10:15 AM Break

10:30 AM Listening Session 1 – Discussion with Boulder Technical Division Chiefs

11:30 AM Listening Session 2 – Discussion with NIST Boulder Laboratory Director and NIST 

Boulder Operations Director

12:00 PM Lunch

1:00 PM Listening Session 3 – Discussion with Members of the Boulder Safety, Health, and 

Environment Division

2:00 PM Listening Session 4 – Discussion with Boulder Researchers on Safety Risk Analysis

for Hazardous Materials, Processes, and Conditions

3:00 PM Break
3:15 PM Listening Session 5 – Discussion with NIST Associates

4:15 PM Working Session

4:45 PM Public Comment

5:00 PM Adjourn

Friday, March 10, 2023

Time Topics and Speakers

8:30 AM Call to Order 

Dr. Mark Peters – Chair, NIST Safety Commission

8:35 AM

Lab Tour – Wineland’s Nobel and its Legacy

In 2012, Dave Wineland won the Nobel Prize in Physics for his advances in laser 

cooling and trapping ions. Ten years later, this work has rapidly advanced 

quantum computing, precision timekeeping, and more.

Contact: Dr. John Bollinger – Physicist and Group Leader Ion Storage Group, 

Physical Measurement Laboratory

Locations: Building 81, G Hall and H Hall

9:15 AM Travel Time

9:30 AM Unrehearsed Discussion with Researchers in Multiple Labs

12:10 PM Lunch

12:50 PM

Subcommittees – Findings and Observations

• Hazard Analysis and Risk Management – Joseph Kolly and Allison Jones

• Incident Investigations, Corrective Actions, and Follow Up – James Bagian

and Craig Merlic

• Safety and Culture – Darryl Hill and David Hofmann

2:20 PM Break

2:30 PM Working Session

4:00 PM Adjourn
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S 1997 ANNUAL REPORT TO SHAREHOLDERS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY TO
SUCH ANNUAL REPORT.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                           8,159
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   64,862
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,767
<INVENTORY>                                     69,310
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               149,033
<PP&E>                                         697,101
<DEPRECIATION>                                 304,706
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 858,545
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           95,123
<BONDS>                                         14,500
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           280
<OTHER-SE>                                     439,149
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   858,545
<SALES>                                        520,569
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               524,221
<CGS>                                          366,961
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  429,303
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   567
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,331
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 90,587
<INCOME-TAX>                                    34,772
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             55,815
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    55,815
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     2.29
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
```

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

               CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

We have issued our report dated February 13, 2004, accompanying the consolidated
financial  statements  and  schedules  included  in the Annual  Report of United
Capital  Corp.  and  Subsidiaries  on Form 10-K for the year ended  December 31,
2003. We hereby consent to the  incorporation by reference of said report in the
Registration  Statements of United Capital Corp. on Forms S-8 (Registration Nos.
33-28045,  33-65140,  333-28395,  333-57873  and  333-98645),  pertaining to the
Incentive and  Non-Qualified  Stock Option Plan, as amended,  and the 1988 Joint
Incentive and Non-Qualified Stock Option Plan, as amended.

/s/ GRANT THORNTON LLP

Melville, New York
March 22, 2004
```