alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Pincock Allen & Holt
 Consultants for Mining and Financial Solutions
 165 South Union Boulevard, Suite 950
 Lakewood, Colorado 80228-2226
 
 
 
 
 Consent of Barton Stone
 
 I consent to the inclusion in this annual report on Form 40-F of New Gold Inc., which is being filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission, of references to my name in connection with mineral reserve and resource estimates for the El Morro Project and to the use of information derived from the technical report entitled “Feasibility NI 43-101 Technical Report for the El Morro Copper-Gold Project, Region III, Chile,” dated May 9, 2008, and readdressed to New Gold on August 26, 2009, included in the Annual Information Form of New Gold Inc. for the financial year ended December 31, 2010, and I consent to the incorporation by reference of such information in the registration statement on Form S-8 (File No. 333-160500) of New Gold Inc.
 
 
 
 Dated this 31st day of March, 2011
 
 
 /s/ Barton StoneName:
Barton Stone, C.P.G.Title:
Chief Geologist for Pincock, Allen & Holt
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.fmcs.gov","title":"FMCS Statement on the Passing of Former Director Bernard E. DeLury - Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"QjiNxPyGAh\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.fmcs.gov\/fmcs-statement-on-the-passing-of-former-director-bernard-e-delury\/\">FMCS Statement on the Passing of Former Director Bernard E. DeLury<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.fmcs.gov\/fmcs-statement-on-the-passing-of-former-director-bernard-e-delury\/embed\/#?secret=QjiNxPyGAh\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“FMCS Statement on the Passing of Former Director Bernard E. DeLury” — Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service\" data-secret=\"QjiNxPyGAh\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script type=\"text\/javascript\">\n\/* <![CDATA[ *\/\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n\/* ]]> *\/\n<\/script>\n","description":"WASHINGTON, D.C. \u2014 Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service (FMCS) senior leadership issued the following statement regarding the passing of former Director Bernard \u201cBernie\u201d E. DeLury on March 20, 2019: \u201cIt is with great sadness that we mourn the loss of a great leader and friend to FMCS, Bernard E. DeLury.\u00a0 Bernie was our 12th director, […]","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.fmcs.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/03\/bedl.jpg"}
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                          25,246
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      280
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                         31
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 5,233
<PP&E>                                           9,017
<DEPRECIATION>                                     426
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  39,381
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           13,176
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           204
<OTHER-SE>                                      26,001
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    39,381
<SALES>                                          9,333
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 9,333
<CGS>                                            5,916
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    9,326
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 4,802
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               (634)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (10,077)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        10
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (10,087)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (10,087)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.50)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.50)


</TABLE>
108 A.3d 630

#### IN THE MATTER OF NICHOLAS FITZGERALD, AN ATTORNEY AT LAW (ATTORNEY NO. 044651984).

February 27, 2015.

ORDER

This matter have been duly presented pursuant to *Rule*1:20-10(b), following a granting of a motion for discipline by consent in DRB 14-378 of NICHOLAS FITZGERALD of JERSEY CITY, who was admitted to the bar of this State in 1984;

And the Office of Attorney Ethics and respondent having signed a stipulation of discipline by consent in which it was agreed that respondent violated *RPC*1.17(c)(2) (failure to timely notify clients of the sale of the attorney’s law practice, at least sixty days prior to the actual transfer of the law practice), *RPC*1.17(c)(3) (failure, as purchasing attorney of a law practice to publish a notice of the transfer in the *New Jersey Law Journal,*at least thirty days in advance of the transfer date), *RPC*1.17(d) (improperly charging additional fees to transferred clients, by reason of the sale of the law practice), and *RPC*8.4(a) (violating the *RPCs*through the acts of another);

And the parties having agreed that respondent’s conduct violated *RPC*1.17(c)(2), *RPC*1.17(c)(3), *RPC*1.17(d), and *RPC*8.4(a), and that said conduct warrants a reprimand or lesser discipline;

*571And. the Disciplinary Review Board having determined that a reprimand is the appropriate discipline for respondent’s unethical conduct and having granted the motion for discipline by consent in District Docket No. XIV-2014-0435E;

And the Disciplinary Review Board having submitted the record of the proceedings to the Clerk of the Supreme Court for the entry of an order of discipline in accordance with *Rule*1:20—16(e);

And good cause appearing;

It is ORDERED that NICHOLAS FITZGERALD of JERSEY CITY is hereby reprimanded; and it is further

ORDERED that the entire record of this matter be made a permanent part of respondent’s file as an attorney at law of this State; and it is further

ORDERED that respondent reimburse the Disciplinary Oversight Committee for appropriate administrative costs and actual expenses incurred in the prosecution of this matter, as provided in *Rule*1:20-17.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Edward WILLIAMS, also known as E-Mac, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 08-10378

Conference Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Dec. 8, 2010.

Edward James Williams, Forrest City, AR, pro se.

Before KING, BENAVIDES, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Edward Williams, federal prisoner # 05418-031, was convicted of distribution of cocaine base. After the Sentencing Commission reduced the guidelines ranges applicable to cocaine base offenses, Williams filed a motion under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) seeking a reduction of his sentence. The district court determined that Williams was not eligible for a reduction of his sentence because of the quantity of cocaine base involved in the offense. Williams gave timely notice of his appeal and has requested appointment of counsel.

Williams contends that the district court erred in failing to reexamine its “previous mandatory guidelines sentencing calculation” and relevant conduct determination. Williams invokes *United States v. Booker,*543 U.S. 220, 125 S.Ct. 738, 160 L.Ed.2d 621 (2005). “A § 3582(c)(2) motion is not a second opportunity to present mitigating factors to the judge, nor is it a challenge to the appropriateness of the original sentence.” *United States v. Whitebird,*55 F.3d 1007, 1011 (5th Cir.1995). *Booker*does not apply in § 3582(c)(2) proceedings. *Dillon v. United States,*— U.S. -, 130 S.Ct. 2683, 2691-94, 177 L.Ed.2d 271 (2010).

Because Williams’s offense involved more than 4.5 kilograms of cocaine base, *919he was ineligible for relief under § 3582(c)(2). *See*U.S.S.G., Supp. to App. C, Amend. 706; U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1, comment. (n. 10(D)(ii)(I)). Thus, the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion. *See United States v. Evans,*587 F.3d 667, 672 (5th Cir.2009), *cert. denied,*— U.S. -, 130 S.Ct. 3462, 177 L.Ed.2d 1064 (2010). The district court’s order is AFFIRMED. Williams’s request for appointment of counsel is DENIED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 14-13532

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D.C. Docket No. 8:14-cv-01398-EAK

Bankruptcy No. 8:13-bk-16027-CPM

In Re: JUDITH L. HACKBART,

 Debtor.

______________________________________________________

BANK OF AMERICA, N.A., 

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

JUDITH L. HACKBART, 

 Defendant - Appellee.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Florida

________________________

(December 15, 2014)

Case: 14-13532 Date Filed: 12/15/2014 Page: 1 of 2 
2

Before ROSENBAUM, JILL PRYOR, and COX, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Appellee Judith Hackbart is a Chapter 7 debtor. Hackbart has two 

mortgages on her house. The first mortgage exceeds the current market value of 

the house. Appellant Bank of America, N.A. holds the second mortgage. 

Hackbart filed a motion to void, or “strip off,” the junior lien under § 506(d) of the 

Bankruptcy Code. The bankruptcy court granted the motion, and the district court 

affirmed. We affirm the district court’s order. Folendore v. Small Bus. Admin., 

862 F.2d 1537, 1540 (11th Cir. 1989); McNeal v. GMAC Mortgage, LLC, 735 F.3d 

1263, 1265–66 (11th Cir. 2012). Should Bank of America choose to petition this 

Court for en banc consideration of the issue it raises here, this panel is of the 

opinion that the Court should seriously consider the petition.

AFFIRMED.

Case: 14-13532 Date Filed: 12/15/2014 Page: 2 of 2
Exhibit 32.2
                                  CERTIFICATION

     Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350, as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Obsidian Enterprises,
Inc. (the  "Company")  certifies  that the quarterly  report on Form 10-Q of the
Company for the fiscal  quarter ended July 31, 2002, as amended by Amendment No.
1,  fully  complies  with  the  requirements  of  Section  13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the information  contained in that Form 10-Q
fairly presents,  in all material respects,  the financial condition and results
of operations of the Company.

Date: August 25, 2003                  /s/ Rick D. Snow
                                       ---------------------------------
                                       Rick D. Snow
                                       Executive Vice President/Chief
                                        Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS AS REPORTED ON FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTER ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1998 AND
IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                         346,492
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    6,241
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               352,733
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 352,733
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            3,207
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     349,526
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   352,773
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               245,354
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   48,466
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                196,888
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            196,888
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   196,888
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
**Exhibit 23.2**

 

 

**NOTICEREGARDING CONSENT OF ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP**

 

 

Section 11(a) of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the“Securities Act”), provides that any part of a registration statement at thetime such part becomes effective contains an untrue statement of a materialfact or an omission to state a material fact required to be stated therein ornecessary to make the statements therein not misleading, any person acquiring asecurity pursuant to such a registration statement (unless it is proved that atthe time of such acquisition such person knew of such untruth or omission) maysue, among others, every accountant who has consented to be named as havingprepared or certified any report or valuation which is used in connection witthe registration statement, with respect to the statement in such registrationstatement, report or valuation which purports to have been prepared orcertified by the accountant.

 

This 10-K is incorporated by reference into Rotonics ManufacturingInc’s filings on Form S-3 Nos. 333-70569,33-62721 and 33-70526 and Form S-8 No.33-88410 (collectively the “Registration Statements”) and, for purposes ofdetermining any liability under the Securities Act, is deemed to be a newregistration statement for each Registration Statement into which it isincorporated by reference.

 

On May 24, 2002, Rotonics Manufacturing Inc. dismissed Arthur AndersenLLP as its independent auditor and appointed Windes & McClaughryAccountancy Corporation to replace Arthur Andersen.  Rotonics’ understanding is that the staff of the Securities andExchange Commission has taken the position that it will not accept consentsfrom Arthur Andersen if the engagement partner and the manager for the Rotonicsaudit are no longer with Arthur Andersen. Both the engagement partner and the manger for the Rotonics audit are nolonger with Arthur Andersen.  As aresult, Rotonics has been unable to obtain Arthur Andersen’s written consent tothe incorporation by reference into the Registration Statements of its auditreport with respect to Rotonics’ financial statements as of June 30, 2001 and2000 and for the years then ended. Under these circumstances, Rule 437a under the Securities Act permitsRotonics to file this Form 10-K without a written consent from Arthur Andersen.  As a result, however, Arthur Andersen willnot have any liability under section 11(a) of the Securities Act for any untruestatements of material fact contained in the financial statements audited byArthur Andersen or any omissions of a material fact required to be statedtherein.  Accordingly, you would beunable to assert a claim against Arthur Andersen under Section 11(a) of theSecurities Act for any purchase of securities under Registration Statementsmade on or after the date of this Form 10-K.  To the extent provided in section 11(b)(3)(C) of the SecuritiesAct, however, other persons who are liable under Section 11(a) of theSecurities Act, including the Company’s officers and directors, may still relyon Arthur Andersen’s original audit reports as being made by an expert forpurposes of establishing a due diligence defense under Section 11(b) of theSecurities Act.

----
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

LEE DAVID COLLINS, JR.,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

PARKER EVATT, Commissioner;

No. 95-7499

DAVID L. BARTLES, Director;

ROBERT W. DONLIN, Deputy

Regional Administrator, South

Carolina Department of Corrections,

Defendants-Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of South Carolina, at Rock Hill.

Matthew J. Perry, Jr., Senior District Judge.

(CA-94-2426-3-OBD)

Submitted: February 13, 1996

Decided: February 28, 1996

Before MURNAGHAN, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL,

Circuit Judges.

_________________________________________________________________

Vacated and remanded by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________

COUNSEL

Lee David Collins, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Vinton DeVane Lide,

Michael Stephen Pauley, LIDE, MONTGOMERY, POTTS &

MEDLOCK, P.C., Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellees.

_________________________________________________________________
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See

Local Rule 36(c).

_________________________________________________________________

OPINION

PER CURIAM:

Lee David Collins appeals from the district court's order granting

Appellees' motion for summary judgment. The district court granted

the motion upon recommendation by a magistrate judge. Although we

express no opinion as to the ultimate success of Collins's claims, we

vacate the district court's order and remand for further proceedings.

Collins noted specific, timely objections to the magistrate judge's

report and recommendation that the motion for summary judgment be

granted. The district court was required to review the disputed issues

de novo. 28 U.S.C.A. § 636(b)(1) (West 1993). Reliance upon the

magistrate judge's summary of the record is insufficient in this

regard. Thus, the district court was required to review the entire

record in the case. See Wimmer v. Cook, 774 F.2d 68, 76 (4th Cir.

1985); Orpiano v. Johnson, 687 F.2d 44, 48 n.1 (4th Cir. 1982).

It is unclear from the district court's order whether a de novo

review was indeed conducted. Accordingly, we vacate the decision

below and remand for the district court to state that it conducted a de

novo review if it previously did, or to review the magistrate judge's

report, the objections, and the record under the proper standard if it

has not already done so. 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.

VACATED AND REMANDED

 2
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.

      ( print page 66871)    

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting.

# SUMMARY:

The Siuslaw Resource Advisory Committee (RAC) will meet on January 25, 2002. The meeting will begin at 9:30 a.m., in the Siuslaw Valley Fire & Rescue Station, 2625 Highway 101 N., Florence, OR. Agenda items will include: Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA) Overview; Roles and Responsibilities for Advisory Committees; Rules/Operational Guides/Bylaws; “The RAC Guidebook;” How to Stay Connected/Means of Communication; Flow of Work (Future Agendas & Meeting Dates); Project Process & Contracting; Election of RAC Chairperson; and Public Forum (at approximately 3:20 p.m.). The meeting is expected to adjourn at 4:00 p.m. Interested citizens are encouraged to attend.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Linda Stanley, Community Development Specialist, Siuslaw National Forest, 541/750-7210 or write to Forest Supervisor, Siuslaw National Forest, P.O. Box 1148, Corvallis, OR 97339.

Dated: December 19, 2001.

Gloria D. Brown,

Forest Supervisor.

[FR Doc. 01-31738  Filed 12-26-01; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M