alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 14

           CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM


The Supervisory Board of
Infineon Technologies AG:

We consent to the  incorporation by reference in the registration  statements on
Form S-8 (No.  333-11670;  No. 333-12952;  No. 333-13566;  No. 333-13856 and No.
333-104935) of Infineon  Technologies  AG and  subsidiaries  of our report dated
October 22, 2004,  with respect to the  consolidated  balance sheets of Infineon
Technologies AG and  subsidiaries and as of September 30, 2003 and 2004, and the
related consolidated  statements of operations,  shareholders'  equity, and cash
flows for each of the years in the three-year  period ended  September 30, 2004,
which report  appears in the annual report of Infineon  Technologies  AG on Form
20-F for the 2004 financial year.



/s/ KPMG Deutsche Treuhand-Gesellschaft
Aktiengesellschaft
Wirtschaftsprufungsgesellschaft
IN THE COURT OF CRIMI NAL APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT JACKSON MAY 1997 SESSION STATE OF TENNESSEE, * C.C.A. # 02C01-9701-CC- 00013 Appellee, * MADISON CO UNTY VS. * Hon. Franklin Murc hison, Judge DANNY RAY LACY, * (First-degree murder)

Appellant. *

CONCURRING OPINION I concur in the judgment of my colleagues that the sentence and conviction should be affirmed and write separately only to address whether "double weighing" (use of the un derlying felony as an aggravating ci rcumstance for the imposition of a greater sentenc e) is permissible in a life without parole sentenc e. The majority correctly

notes that in State v. Frederick D. Butler, Dewayne B. Butler, and Eric D. Alexander , No. 02C01-9604-CR-00128, slip op. at 21 (Tenn. Crim. A pp., at Jackson, March 19, 1997), app. granted , Nov. 3, 1997, our court held that "double-weighing" i s appropriate in these cir cumstances. I believe, how ever, that the reasoning of this court in State v. James Lloyd Jul ian, II , No. 01C01-9511-CV00371, slip op. at 17 (Tenn. Cri m. App., at Knoxville, July 24, 1997), perm. to app. filed , Oct. 30, 1997, is more persua sive. In Julian , Judge David Welles spoke for the panel : "We do not b elieve the leg islatu re inte nded to e xcept t hose rec

eiving life without parole from the protections against double enhan cement afforded those receiving death and thos e receiving lesser

sentences." Cf., State v. Middlebrooks , 840 S.W.2d 317 (Tenn. 1992). In my opinion, this view better reflects the intent of our statutory scheme. See State v. Jones , 883 S.W.2d 597 (Tenn. 1994). I agree, however, with the conclusion reached by the majority. The sentence shou ld be affirmed, because no double weighi ng occurred in this ca se.

__________________________________ Gary R. Wad e, Judge
32.2 Section 906 Certification of the Chief Financial Officer

                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 on Form 10-QSB of Terra Nova Financial
Group, Inc. (the "Company") for the period ended May 15, 2007 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, M. Patricia Kane, the Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, that:

(1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

                                                 /s/ M. Patricia Kane
                                                 --------------------
                                                 Name: M. Patricia Kane
                                                 Title: Chief Financial Officer

Date: May 15, 2007



This certification shall not be deemed "filed" for purposes of Section 18 of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, nor shall it be deemed incorporated by
reference in any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, except to the extent as shall be expressly set forth by
specific reference in such filing.







                                       23
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 the Treasury

###### Internal Revenue Service

# AGENCY:

Internal Revenue Service (IRS), Treasury.

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting.

# SUMMARY:

An open meeting of the Area 7 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be conducted. The Taxpayer Advocacy Panel is soliciting public comments, ideas, and suggestions on improving customer service at the Internal Revenue Service.

# DATES:

The meeting will be held Wednesday, August 19, 2009.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Janice Spinks at 1-888-912-1227 or 206-220-6098.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    Notice is hereby given pursuant to section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. (1988) that a meeting of the Area 7 Taxpayer Advocacy Panel will be held Wednesday, August 19, 2009, at 2 p.m. Pacific Time via telephone conference. The public is invited to make oral comments or submit written statements for consideration. Due to limited conference lines, notification of intent to participate must be made with Janice Spinks. For more information please contact Ms. Spinks at 1-888-912-1227 or 206-220-6098, or write TAP Office, 915 2nd Avenue, MS W-406, Seattle, WA 98174 or post comments to the Web site:                     *http://www.improveirs.org.*

The agenda will include various IRS issues.

Dated: July 16, 2009.

Shawn F. Collins,

Acting Director, Taxpayer Advocacy Panel.

[FR Doc. E9-17479 Filed 7-22-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
Exhibit 10.21



 Exhibit 10.21 
 AMENDMENT NO. 1 
 TO 

EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT 
 THIS AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT (“Amendment No. 1”) dated as of December 27, 2012 is made between ASSET ACCEPTANCE LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (the
“Company”), a wholly owned subsidiary of Asset Acceptance Capital Corp., a Delaware corporation (“AACC”) and Deborah L. Everly (the “Executive”). 
 Recitals 
 1. Prior to the date hereof, the parties hereto entered
into that certain Employment Agreement, effective as of January 1, 2010 (the “Employment Agreement”). Capitalized terms not otherwise defined herein shall have the respective meanings set forth in the Employment Agreement. 

2. The Internal Revenue Service has issued guidance under Internal Revenue Code Section 409A that requires AACC and the Executive to
amend the release provision in the Employment Agreement. 
 3. Pursuant to Section 13 of the Employment Agreement, the
Executive and AACC agree to modify the Employment Agreement as set forth below. 
 Agreement 

NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and subject to the terms and conditions contained herein and for other consideration
provided herein, the parties agree as follows: 
 8. SEVERANCE BENEFITS. The third sentence in Section 8(a) is hereby
amended and restated to read as follows: 
 As a condition of receiving the Severance Benefits, Executive agrees
to sign an effective legal release (in any form the Board of Directors may require), waiving any and all claims Executive has or may have against the Company, AACC and their agents, employees, directors, subsidiaries, attorneys, successors, assigns,
and affiliates, as of the date of Executive’s termination (the “Release”), including a statutory period during which Executive is entitled to revoke the Release, and Severance Benefits hereunder shall commence to be paid or made, as
applicable, within 60 days following Executive’s termination of employment; provided, however, that the revocation period has first expired and provided further, that if such 60-day revocation period begins in one taxable year of the Executive
and ends in the second calendar year, the payments and benefits shall commence to be paid or made in the second taxable year. 







 The undersigned parties do hereby execute this Amendment No.1 on December 27, 2012,
effective as of January 1, 2010. 
  

			
	ASSET ACCEPTANCE CAPITAL CORP.
		
	By:	 	 /s/ Rion B. Needs

	Its:	 	 President and Chief Executive Officer

	
	 /s/ Deborah L. Everly

	Deborah L. Everly, Executive



  
 2
EXHIBIT 32.1


                  CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(b) and
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002


     In  connection  with the filing by  Rushmore  Financial  Group,  Inc.  (the
"Company") of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30,
2003 (the  "Report"),  I, Dewey M. Moore,  Jr., Chief  Executive  Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

          1.   The Report fully complies with the  requirements of Section 13(a)
               and 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
               operation of the Company.







                                               /s/ Dewey M. Moore, Jr.
                                               ---------------------------------
                                               Dewey M. Moore, Jr.
                                               Chief Executive Officer


Dated:  November 14, 2003











                                       30
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5211 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5211

         To suspend temporarily new shipper bonding privileges.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 5, 2004

 Mr. Pickering (for himself, Mr. Berry, Mr. McCrery, Mrs. Emerson, and 
Mr. Moran of Kansas) introduced the following bill; which was referred 
                   to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
         To suspend temporarily new shipper bonding privileges.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``New Shipper Review Amendment Act of 
2004''.

SEC. 2. TEMPORARY SUSPENSION OF NEW SHIPPER BONDING PRIVILEGES.

    Clause (iii) of section 751(a)(2)(B) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 
U.S.C. 1675(a)(2)(B)(iii)) shall not be effective during the 3-year 
period beginning on the date of the enactment of this Act.

SEC. 3. REPORT TO CONGRESS.

    Not later than 2 years after the date of the enactment of this Act, 
the Commissioner of Customs, the Secretary of Commerce, and the United 
States Trade Representative shall submit to the Committee on Ways and 
Means of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Finance of 
the Senate a report containing--
            (1) recommendations on whether the suspension of the 
        effectiveness of section 751(a)(2)(B)(iii) of the Tariff Act of 
        1930 should be extended beyond the date provided in section 2 
        of this Act; and
            (2) assessments of the effectiveness of any administrative 
        measures that have been implemented to address the difficulties 
        giving rise to section 2 of this Act, including--
                    (A) problems in assuring the collection of 
                antidumping duties on imports from new shippers;
                    (B) administrative burdens imposed on the 
                Department of Commerce by new shipper reviews; and
                    (C) the use of the bonding privilege by importers 
                from new shippers to circumvent the effect of 
                antidumping duty orders.
                                 <all>
```
# 19QRTL5_00
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

IN THE INTEREST OF Z. Z. E-P., A 

CHILD,

 

 Appellant.

 

§

§

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-21-00024-CV

Appeal from the

65th District Court

of El Paso County, Texas 

(TC# 2019DCM3417)

O R D E R

On February 3, 2021, Appellant filed notice of appeal in the above-styled and numbered 

cause. The notice of appeal is late, but it was filed within fifteen days after the deadline for the 

notice of appeal to be filed. A motion for extension of time is necessarily implied when an 

appellant, acting in good faith, files a notice of appeal beyond the time allowed by TEX.R.APP.P.

26.1 but within the fifteen-day grace period provided by Rule 26.3 for filing a motion for extension 

of time. See Verburgt v. Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615, 617 (Tex. 1997). However, an appellant must 

still provide the Court with a reasonable explanation for the late filing of the notice of appeal before 

the Court may accept the appeal. Accordingly, Appellant is ordered to respond in writing and 

provide the Court with a reasonable explanation for filing the notice of appeal late. See

TEX.R.APP.P. 10.5(b)(1)(C), 26.3; Verburgt, 959 S.W.2d at 617. The explanation is due to be filed 

no later than February 21, 2021. This order previously issued to Appellant’s former counsel, but 

the Court is reissuing the notice to ensure Appellant’s current counsel is aware of the situation.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 16th day of February, 2021.

PER CURIAM

Before Rodriguez, C.J., Palafox and Alley, JJ.

Alley, J., not participating
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 861 Introduced in House (IH)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 861

   To provide that the individual income tax rate reductions of the 
  Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 shall be 
                               permanent.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 13, 2003

  Mr. Toomey introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To provide that the individual income tax rate reductions of the 
  Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2001 shall be 
                               permanent.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Permanent Income Tax Rate Reduction 
Act of 2003''.

SEC. 2. INDIVIDUAL INCOME TAX RATE REDUCTIONS MADE PERMANENT.

    Section 901 of the Economic Growth and Tax Relief Reconciliation 
Act of 2001 (Public Law 107-16) is amended by adding at the end the 
following new subsection:
    ``(c) Exception.--Subsections (a) and (b) shall not apply to the 
provisions of, and amendments made by, title I (relating to individual 
income tax rate reductions).''.
                                 <all>
```
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 Agriculture

###### Forest Service

# AGENCY:

Forest Service, USDA.

# ACTION:

Withdrawal of a Notice of Intent to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement.

# SUMMARY:

The Allegheny National Forest, Bradford Ranger District is issuing this notice to advise the public that the agency intends to withdraw their Notice of Intent (NOI) to prepare an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) for the proposed Willow Creek All-Terrain Vehicle (ATV) Trail Expansion Project (WCATEP).

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The NOI for this project was published on Friday, April 9, 2004, and can be found in the                     **Federal Register**                     Vol. 69, No. 69, pages 18866-18867.                

Bradford District Ranger Anthony Scardina has recommended cancellation saying: It is important to focus on the maintenance and improvement of the recreation facilities and trails that we currently have on the District and Forest. This is the message that we continue to hear from our visitors and that is made apparent from our recent Recreation Facilities Analysis and other data analyses. Some of our existing motorized and non-motorized trails and recreation facilities need significant amounts of work to be maintained to standard and provide quality recreational experiences for our visitors. I have determined that it is not a responsible use of public funds to add 24 to 43 miles of new trail, estimated to cost $40,000 per mile to build. Therefore, I recommend that this project be cancelled.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Anthony V. Scardina, District Ranger or Julie Moyer, IDT Leader, Bradford Ranger District, 29 Forest Service Drive, Bradford, PA 16701, telephone (814)-363-6000.

Responsible Official: Leanne Marten, Forest Supervisor, Allegheny National Forest, 4 Farm Colony Drive, Warren, PA 16365, is the responsible official.

Dated: July 10, 2009.

Leanne M. Marten,

Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. E9-16914 Filed 7-15-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-P
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

HUGO QUENTAL BARROS ,

Appellant ,
v. Case No. 5D 18

- 1181 STATE OF FLORIDA ,

Appellee

. ________________________________/ Opinion filed September 28, 2018 3.850 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Orange County , Dan Traver , Judge.
Lisabeth J. Fryer, of Lisabeth J. Fryer, P

. A ., Lake Mary, for Appellant. No Appearance for Appellee.

PER CURIAM

. Appellant, Hugo Quental Barros, appeals the summar y denial of his m otion for
p ostc onviction r elief filed pursuant to Florida Ru le of Criminal Procedure 3.850 , which alleg ed one claim of newly discovered evidence. In his motion, Appellant alleges that one of the two victims who testified against Appellant at trial has recanted. The trial court summarily denied the motion findi ng that the recantation is not credible, and that even if2

it were credible, it is contradicted by the other victim ’s trial testimony. We reverse, finding that an evidentiary hearing on this claim is necessary. At Appellant’s trial, two witnesses testified that they were shot and identified Appellant as the shooter. Appellant’s motion now attaches an affidavit from one of the victims recanting his testimon y

. The recanting witness alleges that Appellant was not the
shooter and that he was forced to identif y Appellant as the shooter due to threats from law enforcement.
Florida courts recognize that “ recantations are ‘ exceedingly unreliable. ’ ” Archer v. State , 934 So. 2d 1187, 1196 (Fla. 2006) ( collecting cases). Thus, w hen a movant alleges newly discovered evidence in the form of recanted testimony, a movant is entitled to a new trial only if the trial court finds that the recantation is true and that “the witness ’ s testimony will change to such an extent as to render pr obable a different verdict.”
Robinson v. State , 736 So. 2d 93, 93 (Fla. 4th DCA 1999) (quoting Armstrong v. State , 642 So. 2d 730, 735 (Fla. 1994 ) ). Generally, in such circumstances, an evidentiary hearing is required to evaluate the veracity of the recant ing witness. Id

. In this case , the trial court determined the recanting witness’s credibility and weighed conflicting testimony based upon the proffered affidavit

. G iven that the affidavit was not “inherently incredible” n or “obviously immaterial ,” see Davis v. State , 26 So. 3d 519, 526 (Fla. 2009) , w e conclude that the trial court improperly made these
determinations without the benefit of an evidentiary hearing. As such, we reverse and remand for an evidentiary hearing.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
EVANDER , BERGER and EISNAUGLE, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 32
                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTON 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, James K. Dorney, President, Secretary and Treasurer of Haven
Holding, Inc., (the "Company") certifies, under the standards set forth and
solely for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to his knowledge, the Annual Report on
Form 10-KSB of the Company for the fiscal year ended February 29, 2004, fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in that Form 10-KSB fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.

Date: October 4, 2004               /s/James K. Dorney
                                    ------------------
                                    James K. Dorney
                                    President, Secretary and Treasurer

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