alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 23.1


               Consent of Independent Certified Public Accountants


Astea International Inc. Subsidiaries
Horsham, Pennsylvania



We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements (Nos. 333-33825, 333-34865, and 333-61981) on Form S-8 and (Nos.
333-11949 and 333-17459) on Form S-3 of Astea International, Inc. and
subsidiaries of our report dated February 25, 2005, relating to the consolidated
financial statements of Astea International, Inc. and subsidiaries appearing in
the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004.




BDO Seidman, LLP
Philadelphia, PA


March 28, 2005





<PAGE>
II 

Calendar No. 467 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 7199 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JUNE 4, 2024 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

AUGUST 1, 2024 

Reported by Mr. PETERS, without amendment 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at S74w16860 Janesville Road, in Muskego, Wisconsin, as the ‘‘Colonel Hans Christian Heg Post Office’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. COLONEL HANS CHRISTIAN HEG POST OFFICE. 

4 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

5 Postal Service located S74w16860 Janesville Road in 

6 Muskego, Wisconsin, shall be known and designated as the 

7 ‘‘Colonel Hans Christian Heg Post Office’’. 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 7199 RS

1 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg2 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

3 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

4 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Colonel Hans Chris5 tian Heg Post Office’’. 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS

ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
Calendar No. 467 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 7199 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States PostChristian Heg Post Office’’. in Muskego, Wisconsin, as the ‘‘Colonel Hans al Service located at S74w16860 Janesville Road, 

AUGUST 1, 2024 

Reported without amendment 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 96-6638
JAMES BYRD MILLER, Plaintiff - Appellant, and WARREN H. COX, Plaintiff, versus JAMES B. HUNT, Governor; FRANKLIN E. FREEMAN, JR.; NORTH CAROLINA PRISONER LEGAL SERVICES,INCORPORATED; MARVIN SPARROW; MARTIN SUPERINTENDENT OF CUSTODY MCDADE, Defendants - Appellees.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Raleigh. James C. Fox, Chief District Judge. (CA-94-289-5-F) Submitted: August 22, 1996 Decided: September 10, 1996 Before HALL, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.2 James Byrd Miller, Appellant Pro Se. Jane Ray Garvey, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NORTH CAROLINA, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellees. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).3 PER CURIAM: Appellant appeals the district court's order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (1988) complaint. Appellant's case was referred to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (1988). The magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and advisedAppellant that failure to file timely objections to this recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court order based upon the recommendation. Despite this warning, Appellant failed to object to the magistrate judge's recommendation. The timely filing of objections to a magistrate judge's recommendation is necessary to preserve appellate review of the substance of that recommendation when the parties have been warned that failure to object will waive appellate review. Wright v. Collins , 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985). See generally Thomas v. Arn , 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Appellant has waived appellate review by failing to file objections after receiving proper notice. Accordingly, we affirm. We dispense with oral argument because thefacts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
§ 346.12 Vasoconstrictor active ingredients. The active ingredient of the product consists of any of the following when used in the concentration or within the concentration range established for each ingredient. ( a ) Ephedrine sulfate 0.1 to 1.25 percent.
( b ) Epinephrine 0.005 to 0.01 percent.
( c ) Epinephrine hydrochloride 0.005 to 0.01 percent.
( d ) Phenylephrine hydrochloride 0.25 percent.
**Exhibit
      31.2**




EXHIBIT
      32: Rule 13a-14(b) Certification





The
      undersigned officer
      certifies that this report fully complies with the requirements of Section
      13(a)
      of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and that the information contained
      in
      the report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
      and results of operations of China Dongsheng International, Inc.





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





**CHINA
      DONGSHENG INTERNATIONAL, INC.**





By:   */s/
                Aidong Yu*AIDONG
                YUChief
                Executive OfficerChief
                Financial Officer





Date: October
      12, 2007
Exhibit 23

               Consent of Independent Certified Public Accountants

The Board of Directors and
Stockholders of Porta Systems Corp.:

      We hereby consent to the  incorporation  by reference in the  Prospectuses
constituting a part of the  Registration  Statements (Reg. No. 33-12146) on Form
S-8,  (Reg. No.  33-41992) on Form S-8, (Reg. No.  333-48839) on Form S-3, (Reg.
No.  333-68321) on Form S-8, and (Reg. No.  333-72369) on Form S-8 of our report
dated March 21, 2001, relating to the consolidated financial statements of Porta
Systems Corp. and subsidiaries  appearing in the Company's Annual Report on Form
10-K for the year ended  December 31, 2000.  Our report  contains an explanatory
paragraph regarding the Company's ability to continue as a going concern.



                                       /s/ BDO Seidman, LLP

                                       BDO SEIDMAN, LLP

Melville, New York
March 29, 2001
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

RICHARD WAYNE SCHOCK,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 456 MAL 2022

Petition for Allowance of Appeal 

from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 5th day of April, 2023, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                     EXHIBIT 5.1

                       [Letterhead of McCarthy Tetrault]

                                 August 5, 1999



Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street NW
Washington, DC  20549

Dear Sirs/Mesdames:

        Re:     Registration Statement on Form S-8 of Intrawest Corporation;
                Intrawest 401(k) Retirement Plan

        We have acted as Canadian counsel to Intrawest Corporation (the
"Company") in connection with the filing of the above-referenced Registration
Statement (the "Registration Statement") relating to the registration of 30,000
common shares without par value of the Company (the "Shares") issuable upon the
exercise of options granted or to be granted under the Company's 401(k)
Retirement Plan (the "Plan"). In connection therewith, we have considered such
questions of law and have examined and relied upon such resolutions, records,
certificates of public officials and officers of the Company and other documents
we deemed necessary or appropriate to enable us to render the opinion expressed
below.

        Based on the foregoing, it is our opinion that any shares issued in
accordance with the Plan and upon receipt by the Company of the consideration
therefor shall be validly issued and outstanding as fully paid and
non-assessable shares.

        We hereby consent to the filing of this opinion as an exhibit to the
Registration Statement and to all references to our firm included in or made a
part of the Registration Statement.


                                  Yours Truly,

                                  /s/ McCARTHY TETRAULT
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.                  

###### Commodity Futures Trading Commission

# TIME AND DATE: 

11 a.m., Friday March 26, 2010.

# PLACE: 

1155 21st St., NW., Washington, DC, 9th Floor Commission Conference Room.

# STATUS: 

Closed.

# MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: 

Surveillance matters.

# CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: 

Sauntia S. Warfield, 202-418-5084.

Sauntia S. Warfield,

Assistant Secretary of the Commission.

[FR Doc. 2010-3529 Filed 2-18-10; 4:15 pm]

BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
(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/ WILLIAM C. GRIFFITHSWilliam C. GriffithsChairman of the Board of Directors,President and Chief Executive OfficerChampion Enterprises, Inc.July 28, 2008/s/ PHYLLIS A. KNIGHTPhyllis A. KnightExecutive Vice President, Treasurer andChief Financial OfficerChampion Enterprises, Inc.July 28, 2008
* Pursuant to Local 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 Local Rule 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-30572 Summary Calendar

LIONELL J. DAVIS, Plaintiff-Appellant,
versus, RICHARD L. STALDER; C. MARTIN LENSING, Warden; C. DAVID RAGLAND; C. SCROPSHIRE, LT., Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Louisiana

USDC No. 95-CV-2024

- - - - - - - - - - October 3, 1996 Before DAVIS, EMILIO M. GARZA and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Because Lionell J. Davis (#118554) makes no argument that challenges the district court’s dismissal of his civil-rights action, his motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (“IFP”) on appeal is DENIED. See Carson v. Polley , 689 F.2d 562, 586 (5th Cir. 1982). Because only Davis signed the notice of appeal, he is the only appellant moving for IFP. Carter v. Stalder , 60 F.3d 238, 239 (5th Cir. 1995). The appeal is DISMISSED. See 5th Cir. R. 42.2.No. 96-30572 - 2 -
IFP DENIED; APPEAL DISMISSED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                           5,600
<SECURITIES>                                     9,606
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                15,636
<PP&E>                                           2,496
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  19,493
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            3,364
<BONDS>                                            100
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            77
<OTHER-SE>                                      41,807
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    19,493
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                12,037
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   1
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (11,520)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (11,520)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (1.51)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.51)


</TABLE>
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 12-3153

___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

Keith Sun Bear

lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant

____________

 Appeal from United States District Court 

for the District of South Dakota - Pierre

____________

 Submitted: March 11, 2013

Filed: April 5, 2013

[Unpublished]

____________

Before WOLLMAN, BYE, and COLLOTON, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

In 2002, Keith Sun Bear was convicted of sexual abuse of a minor in violation

of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1153, 2243(a), and 2246(2). Four years later, Congress enacted the

Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act (SORNA), which requires sex

offenders to periodically register with state government. Pursuant to a rule

promulgated by the AttorneyGeneral on February 28, 2007, declaring the registration
requirements of SORNA to apply retroactively to sex offenders convicted prior to the

enactment date of SORNA, Sun Bear is required to register as a sex offender.

Sun Bear initially properly registered as a sex offender. However, when he

failed to update his registration after moving from his residence in Rapid City, South

Dakota, on March 18, 2012, he was indicted for failing to register as a sex offender

in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2250(a). Sun Bear moved the district court to dismiss the

1

indictment, arguing Congress had violated the non-delegation doctrine by enacting

42 U.S.C. § 16913(d), in which it authorized the Attorney General to specify whether

the registration requirements of SORNA apply retroactively. See Panama Ref. Co.

v. Ryan, 293 U.S. 388, 421 (1935) (“The Congress manifestly is not permitted to

abdicate or to transfer to othersthe essential legislative functions with which it isthus

vested.”). The district court denied the motion, and Sun Bear pled guilty conditioned

on his right to appeal the denial of the motion to dismiss.

On appeal, Sun Bear again asserts Congress violated the non-delegation

doctrine by enacting 42 U.S.C. § 16913(d). While Sun Bear’s appeal was pending,

we issued our decision in United States v. Kuehl, No. 12-2598, 2013 WL 599556 (8th

Cir. Feb. 19, 2013), in which we held the congressional grant of authority to the

Attorney General in 42 U.S.C. § 16913(d) to be constitutionally valid because

Congress had set forth an intelligible principle to guide in the exercise of the granted

authority. Id. at *2; see also Mistretta v. United States, 488 U.S. 361, 372 (1989)

(Congress may delegate legislative authority to another body, providedCongress lays

down by legislative act an intelligible principle for the exercise of the granted

authority to which the authorized body must conform). Under our holding in Kuehl,

Sun Bear’s argument that Congress improperly delegated its legislative authority to

the Attorney General, must fail.

The Honorable Roberto A. Lange, United States District Court for the District 1

of South Dakota.

-2-
The judgment of the district court is affirmed. 

______________________________

-3-
§ 121.401 Compliance. ( a ) The operation of a facility that manufactures, processes, packs, or holds food for sale in the United States if the owner, operator, or agent in charge of such facility is required to comply with, and is not in compliance with, section 418 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act or subparts C or D of this part is a prohibited act under section 301(uu) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.
( b ) The failure to comply with section 420 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act or subparts C or D of this part is a prohibited act under section 301(ww) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act.
**EXHIBIT
      12****Republic
      Bancorp Inc.****Calculations of Ratios of Earnings to Combined Fixed Charges****Three
      Months Ended**
    
    
    **Six
      Months Ended**(in
      thousands)
    
    **June
      30,**
    
    
    **June
      30,****2005**
    
    
    
    **2004**
    
    
    **2005**
    
    
    **2004****Including
      Interest on Deposits:**Fixed
      charges:Total
      interest expense
    
    $
    41,986
    
    
    
    $
    31,795
    
    
    
    $
    79,499
    
    
    
    $
    63,735Interest
      portion of rent expense
    
    
    185
    
    
    
    
    183
    
    
    
    
    385
    
    
    
    
    377Fixed
      charges including interest on deposits
    
    $
    42,171
    
    
    
    $
    31,978
    
    
    
    $
    79,884
    
    
    
    $
    64,112Earnings:Net
      income
    
    $
    17,475
    
    
    
    $
    16,368
    
    
    
    $
    34,782
    
    
    
    $
    32,667Income
      taxes
    
    
    7,503
    
    
    
    
    6,968
    
    
    
    
    15,190
    
    
    
    
    13,840Fixed
      charges, as above
    
    
    42,171
    
    
    
    
    31,978
    
    
    
    
    79,884
    
    
    
    
    64,112Earnings
      for purposes of calculation
    
    $
    67,149
    
    
    
    $
    55,314
    
    
    
    $
    129,856
    
    
    
    $
    110,619Ratio
      of earnings to combined fixed charges including interest on
      deposits
    
    
    1.59
    
    x
    
    
    1.73
    
    x
    
    
    1.63
    
    x
    
    
    1.73
    
    x**Excluding
      Interest on Deposits:**Fixed
      charges:Total
      interest expense excluding interest on deposits
    
    $
    25,319
    
    
    
    $
    19,128
    
    
    
    $
    47,644
    
    
    
    $
    38,031Interest
      portion of rent expense
    
    
    185
    
    
    
    
    183
    
    
    
    
    385
    
    
    
    
    377Fixed
      charges excluding interest on deposits
    
    $
    25,504
    
    
    
    $
    19,311
    
    
    
    $
    48,029
    
    
    
    $
    38,408Earnings:Net
      income
    
    $
    17,475
    
    
    
    $
    16,368
    
    
    
    $
    34,782
    
    
    
    $
    32,667Income
      taxes
    
    
    7,503
    
    
    
    
    6,968
    
    
    
    
    15,190
    
    
    
    
    13,840Fixed
      charges, as above
    
    
    25,504
    
    
    
    
    19,311
    
    
    
    
    48,029
    
    
    
    
    38,408Earnings
      for purposes of calculation
    
    $
    50,482
    
    
    
    $
    42,647
    
    
    
    $
    98,001
    
    
    
    $
    84,915Ratio
      of earnings to combined fixed charges excluding interest on
      deposits
    
    
    1.98
    
    x
    
    
    2.21
    
    x
    
    
    2.04
    
    x
    
    
    2.21
    
    x
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 7218 Received in Senate (RDS)]

<DOC>
118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 7218

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 18, 2024

                                Received

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
   To amend title III of the Public Health Service Act to extend the 
   program for promotion of public health knowledge and awareness of 
   Alzheimer's disease and related dementias, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``BOLD Infrastructure for Alzheimer's 
Reauthorization Act of 2024''.

SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF PROGRAM FOR PROMOTION OF PUBLIC HEALTH KNOWLEDGE 
              AND AWARENESS OF ALZHEIMER'S DISEASE AND RELATED 
              DEMENTIAS.

    Section 398B(e) of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 280c-
5(e)) is amended by inserting ``and $33,000,000 for each of fiscal 
years 2025 through 2029'' before the period at the end.

            Passed the House of Representatives September 17, 2024.

            Attest:

                                             KEVIN F. MCCUMBER,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
§ 522.1696c Penicillin G procaine in oil. ( a ) *Specifications.* Each milliliter contains penicillin G procaine equivalent to 300,000 units of penicillin G.
( b ) *Sponsor.* See No. 054771 in § 510.600(c) of this chapter.
( c ) *Conditions of use* — ( 1 ) *Amount.* Dogs and cats—10,000 units per pound of body weight once daily. Horses—3,000 units per pound of body weight once daily.
( 2 ) *Indications for use.* Treatment of infections of dogs, cats, and horses caused by penicillin-susceptible organisms such as Streptococci, Staphylococci, and Corynebacteria.
( 3 ) *Limitations.* Not for use in food-producing animals. Federal law restricts this drug to use by or on the order of a licensed veterinarian.
[57 FR 37333, Aug. 18, 1992, as amended at 79 FR 16193, Mar. 25, 2014]
#### § 340.10 Stimulant active ingredient.

The active ingredient of the product consists of caffeine when used within the dosage limits established in § 340.50(d).