alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement
(Form S-8 No. 333-45468) pertaining to the Micro-ASI, Inc. 1999 Stock Option
Plan, the Micro-ASI, Inc. Employee Stock Purchase Plan and Miscellaneous Stock
Options and Warrants, and in the Registration Statement (Form S-8 No.
333-46466) pertaining to the Micro-ASI, Inc. Miscellaneous Stock Options of our
report dated March 12, 2001 except for the sixth paragraph of Note 1, as to
which the date is March 16, 2001 and the last paragraph of Note 13, as to which
the date is April 3, 2001, the fifth paragraph of Note 1 and the sixth
paragraph of Note 13, as to which the date is April 26, 2001, with respect to
the financial statements of Micro-ASI, Inc., included in this Annual Report on
Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2000.


                                                    /s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Dallas, Texas
May 7, 2001
Order entered September 2 4 , 2015

In The 

## Court of Appeals **Fifth District of Texas at Dallas** No. 05 - 15 - 00001 - CV THE GOODYEAR TIRE & RUBBER COMPANY, Appellant V. VICKI LYNN ROGERS, I NDIVIDUALLY AND AS R EPRESENTATIVE OF THE

ESTATE OF CARL ROGER S, NATAL IE ROGERS AND COURTN EY DUGAT, Appellee s On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 5 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC - 10 - 03294 - E 

### O RDER A partial review of the seven

- volume supplemental reporter’s record court reporter Alexandra McMillen fil ed September 21, 2015 reveals numerous errors, including exhibits included in the record but not listed in the exhibit index, exhibits included in the record but which the index reflects were withdrawn, and exhibits listed in the index but omitted from the record

. Accordingly, we STRIKE the supplemental reporter’s record and ORDER Ms. McMillen to file, no later than October 5, 2015, a record which is accurate and complete.

/s/ CRAIG STODDART JUSTICE
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                  5

<S>                                        <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                              YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                         168,549
<SECURITIES>                                 2,327,304
<RECEIVABLES>                                  137,146
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,405,774
<PP&E>                                          72,235
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,717,737
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           77,781
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                        94,483
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,533,219
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,717,737
<SALES>                                        300,371
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               335,088
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   16,228
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                93,925
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                241,163
<INCOME-TAX>                                    73,604
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            167,559
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   167,559
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .20
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .20


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-30-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                           9,416
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   11,289
<ALLOWANCES>                                       160
<INVENTORY>                                     10,034
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                32,091
<PP&E>                                          11,692
<DEPRECIATION>                                   7,503
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  36,506
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            7,131
<BONDS>                                          5,264
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            76
<OTHER-SE>                                      21,832
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    36,506
<SALES>                                         11,026
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                11,026
<CGS>                                            6,235
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    6,235
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,029
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 127
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (418)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (142)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (276)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (276)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.04)
        

</TABLE>
United States Court of Appeals

for the Fifth Circuit

No. 21-50641

Summary Calendar

United States of America, 

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Mario Ramirez-Perez,

Defendant—Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Texas

USDC No. 4:19-CR-227-1

Before King, Costa, and Ho, Circuit Judges. 

Per Curiam:*

The attorney appointed to represent Mario Ramirez-Perez has moved 

for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. 

California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th 

Cir. 2011). Ramirez-Perez has not filed a response. We have reviewed 

* Pursuant to 5th Circuit Rule 47.5, the court has determined that this 

opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited 

circumstances set forth in 5th Circuit Rule 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

February 14, 2022

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Case: 21-50641 Document: 00516201294 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/14/2022
No. 21-50641

2

counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We 

concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous 

issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to 

withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities 

herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2.

Case: 21-50641 Document: 00516201294 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/14/2022
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

April 28, 2009 

p0420 

Order 

 

April 28, 2009 

137795 

JOSEFINA RODRIGUEZ, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 137795 

 COA: 285270 

Van Buren CC: 01-048134-CK 

FARMERS INSURANCE EXCHANGE, 

Defendant-Appellant, 

and 

SAFECO INSURANCE COMPANY and 

ALLSTATE INSURANCE COMPANY, 

 Defendants. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the September 17, 2008 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

SOUTHERN DIVISION

SHERMAN ANTWAN BROADHEAD,

Plaintiff,

:

:

:

:

vs. : CIVIL ACTION NO. 14-00216-CB-N

:

CYNTHIA D. McCOVERY, et. al.,

Defendants.

:

:

ORDER

After due and proper consideration of the issues raised, and there having been 

no objections filed, the Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge made under 28 

U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) is adopted as the opinion of this Court.

It is ORDERED that:

1. Summary Judgment is GRANTED in favor of Defendants Wayne Gray, Amanuel 

DuBose, Anthony Gibson, and Timothy Wetzel.

2. Summary Judgment is DENIED as to Defendants Cynthia McCovery and Shirley 

Smith; claims of failure to protect remain against them in their individual capacities.

3. Summary Judgment is DENIED as to Defendants Tyus, McKenzie, Smith, Fountain, 

Pacheco, and McQuirter; claims of excessive force and assault remain against them in 

their individual capacities. 

There being no just reason for delay, the Court will separately enter final 

judgment in favor of Defendants Wayne Gray, Amanuel DuBose, Anthony Gibson, 

and Timothy Wetzel in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 54(b).

DONE and ORDERED this 11th day of April, 2016.

s/Charles R. Butler, Jr.

Senior United States District Judge

Case 1:14-cv-00216-CB-N Document 76 Filed 04/11/16 Page 1 of 1
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-6992
WATSON JOHNSON, JR., Petitioner - Appellant, versus STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA JUSTICE COMMITTEE; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Respondents - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Charleston. Patrick Michael Duffy, District Judge. (CA-95-1655-23-2) Submitted: October 7, 1997 Decided: November 7, 1997 Before MURNAGHAN and HAMILTON, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Watson Johnson, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Donald John Zelenka, Chief Deputy Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's order denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1997). We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of probable cause and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. Johnson v. South Carolina , No. CA-95-1655-23-2 (D.S.C. June 19, 1997). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Brian Arden RICHMOND, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 06-6570.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: June 15, 2006.

Decided: June 21, 2006.

Brian Arden Richmond, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Lee Keller, Office of the United States Attorney, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee.

Before KING, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM:

Brian Arden Richmond seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000) motion. The order is not appeal-able unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that any assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by the district court is likewise debatable. *Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003); *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *Rose v. Lee,*252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir.2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Richmond has not made the *230requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. *See United States v. Morris,*429 F.3d 65 (4th Cir.2005) (holding that the relief discussed in *United States v. Booker,*543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005), is not available on collateral review to prisoners whose convictions became final before *Booker*was decided). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED.*
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    Exhibit 11.0

                             BTU INTERNATIONAL, INC.
        CALCULATION OF NET INCOME PER COMMON AND COMMON EQUIVALENT SHARE
                 (in thousands, except share and per share data)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                      FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED        FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED
                                                    ------------------------------    ----------------------------
                                                       Oct. 1,         Sept. 26,        Oct. 1,         Sept. 26,
                                                        2000             1999             2000             1999
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                                                  <C>              <C>              <C>              <C>

Net income                                           $    1,551       $      701       $    4,158       $    1,853

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Net income applicable to
     common stockholders                             $    1,551       $      701       $    4,158       $    1,853
==================================================================================================================

Weighted average number of shares outstanding:

     Basic Shares                                     6,886,833        6,791,389        6,861,694        6,796,913
     Effect of Dilutive Options                         484,373          219,030          447,368          153,543
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Diluted Shares                                   7,371,206        7,010,419        7,309,062        6,950,456
==================================================================================================================

Earnings per Share

     Basic                                           $     0.23       $     0.10             0.61       $     0.27

     Diluted                                         $     0.21       $     0.10             0.57       $     0.27
==================================================================================================================
</TABLE>


                                       13
EXHIBIT 12.2
 Doral Financial Corporation
Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges and Preferred Stock Dividends
 For the six month periodended June 30, 2008Including Interest on DepositsPre-tax income from continuing operations
    

    $
    4,515Plus:Fixed Charges:
    
    
    177,069Total Earnings
    
    $
    181,584Fixed Charges:Interest expensed and capitalized
    
    $
    175,759Amortized premiums, discounts, and capitalized expenses related to indebtedness
    
    
    96An estimate of interest component within rental expense
    
    
    1,214Total Fixed Charges before preferred dividends
    
    $
    177,069Preferred dividends
    
    
    (16,650
    )Ratio of pre-tax income to net loss
    
    
    (6.883
    )Preferred dividend factor
    
    
    114,602Total fixed charges and preferred stock dividends
    
    $
    291,671Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges and Preferred Stock Dividends
    
    
    (A)Excluding Interest on Deposits Earnings:Pre-tax income from continuing operations
    
    $
    4,515Plus:Fixed Charges (excluding capitalized interest)
    
    
    97,153Total Earnings
    
    $
    101,668Fixed Charges:Interest expensed and capitalized
    
    $
    95,043Amortized premiums, discounts, and capitalized expenses related to indebtedness
    
    
    96An estimate of interest component within rental expense
    
    
    1,214Total Fixed Charges before preferred dividends
    
    $
    97,153Preferred dividends
    
    
    (16,650
     )Ratio of pre-tax income to net loss
    
    
    (6.883
     )Preferred dividend factor
    
    
    114,602Total fixed charges and preferred stock dividends
    
    $
    211,755Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges and Preferred Stock Dividends
    
    
    (A)
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.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), notice is hereby given of the following meeting. 

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee*: Digestive, Kidney and Urological Systems Integrated Review Group Clinical, Integrative and Molecular Gastroenterology Study Section.                    

*Date*: January 26-27, 2015                    

*Time*: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.                    

*Agenda*: To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place*: Embassy Suites at the Chevy Chase Pavilion, 4300 Military Road NW., Washington, DC 20015.                    

*Contact Person*: Mushtaq A. Khan, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 Rockledge Drive, Room 2176, MSC 7818, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-1778,                         *khanm@csr.nih.gov*.                    

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.306, Comparative Medicine; 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, 93.337, 93.393-93.396, 93.837-93.844, 93.846-93.878, 93.892, 93.893, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: December 17, 2014.

David Clary, 

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2014-30009 Filed 12-22-14; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
The State of TexasAppellee



# Fourth Court of Appeals **San Antonio, Texas**

September 18, 2015

N o. 04

- 15

- 00530

- CR

Abelardo Gerardo Gonzalez, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

From t he 111th Judicial District Court, Webb County, Texas Trial Court No. 2008CRR000662

- D1 Honorable David Peeples, Judge Presiding



### ORDER

Appellant Abelardo Gerardo Gonzalez = s notice of appeal, which was filed August 10, 2015 , states he is appealing the denial of his motion to recuse in cause numbers 2008

- CRR

- 657, 2008

- CRR

- 662, and 2008

- CRR

- 665 . The clerk’s record has been filed. Our review of the record raises a question regarding our jurisdiction over the appeal.

“ Jurisdiction must be expressly given to the co urts of appeals in a statute. ” Ragston v. State , 424 S.W.3d 49, 52 (Tex. Crim. App. 2014)

. “ [ T ] he standard for determining jurisdiction is not whether the appeal is precluded by law, but whether the appeal is authorized by law.” Abbott v. State , 271 S.W.3d 694, 696

- 97 (Tex. Crim. App. 2008) . “ This extends to interlocutory appeals as well, of which this Court has said: ‘ The courts of appeals do not have jurisdiction to review interlocutory orders unless that jurisdiction has been expressly granted by law.’” Ragston , 424 S.W.3d at 52 (quoting Apolinar v. State , 820 S.W.2d 79 2, 794 (Tex. Cr im

. App. 1991)).

We therefore order appellant to file, by October 12, 2015 , a response showing why this appeal should not be dismissed for want of jurisdiction. If appellant fails to satisfactorily respond within the time provided, the appeal will be dismissed. See T EX

. R. A PP . P. 42.3(c). If a supplemental clerk’s record is re quired to show this court’s jurisdiction, appellant must request the trial court clerk to prepare one and must file a copy of the request with this court.

All deadlines in this matter are suspended until further order of the court._________________________________ Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 18th day of September, 2015

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle Clerk of Court
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1854 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for Senate, Policy 

Committees for fiscal year 2024. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 29, 2023 

Mr. BIGGS (for himself, Mr. ROSENDALE, Mr. GAETZ, Mr. GOOD of Virginia, 

Mr. ROY, and Mr. CRANE) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on House Administration 

A BILL 

To provide for a limitation on availability of funds for 

Senate, Policy Committees for fiscal year 2024. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. LIMITATION ON AVAILABILITY OF FUNDS FOR 

4 SENATE, POLICY COMMITTEES FOR FISCAL 

5 YEAR 2024. 

6 Notwithstanding any other provision of the law, 

7 amounts authorized to be appropriated or otherwise avail8 able for Senate, Policy Committees for fiscal year 2024 

9 may not exceed $3,481,810. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS