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

**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

K-V Pharmaceutical Company

Bridgeton, MO 

Wehereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Nos. 33-44927, 333-00199, 333-48252 and 333-85516) on Form S-8 and the Registration Statements (Nos. 333-87402 and 333-106294) on Form S-3 of K-V PharmaceuticalCompany (the Company) of our reports dated December 23, 2010 relating to the consolidated financial statements, financial statement schedule, and the effectiveness of K-V Pharmaceutical Company’s internal control over financialreporting included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. 

Our report on the effectiveness of internal control overfinancial reporting expresses an adverse opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control over financial reporting as of March 31, 2010. 

Our report on the consolidated financial statements and financial statement schedule contains an explanatory paragraph regarding the Company’s ability to continue as a going concern. 

/s/ BDO USA, LLP 

Chicago, Illinois

December 23, 2010
Exhibit 99.1

                                    a21, Inc
                        One Embarcadero Center, Suite 500
                         San Francisco, California 94111
                                 (415) 284-2121



                            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 of a21, Inc. (the  "Company") on Form
10-QSB  for the year  ended  March 31,  2003 as filed  with the  Securities  and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Haim Ariav, President
of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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/ Haim Ariav
-------------------------------
Haim Ariav, President
(Principal Executive Officer)
§ 32.10 Effect of State or local law or other requirements and effect of employment opportunities. ( a ) The obligation to comply with this part is not obviated or alleviated by the existence of any state or local law or other requirement that, on the basis of handicap, imposes prohibitions or limits upon the eligibility of qualified handicapped individuals to receive services, participate in programs or activities or practice any occupation or profession.
( b ) The obligation to comply with this part is not obviated or alleviated because employment opportunities in any occupation or profession are or may be more limited for handicapped individuals than for nonhandicapped persons.
[45 FR 66709, Oct. 7, 1980, as amended at 68 FR 51368, Aug. 26, 2003]
Exhibit 4.37


 





SPOUSAL CONSENT


 


I, Joseph Chen, the legal spouse of Jing Yang , hereby unconditionally
consent that the ninety-nine percent (99%) equity interest held by my spouse in Beijing Jingwei Zhihui Information Technology Co.,
Ltd. and registered under his name will be disposed according to the arrangements under the Loan Agreement, the Equity Option Agreement,
and the Equity Interest Pledge Agreement as executed by my spouse on May 22, 2014.


 


I further guarantee not to take any action for the intentions
in conflict with the aforementioned arrangements, including claiming that such equity interest constitutes the property between
my spouse and me or our common property. I hereby unconditionally and irrevocably renounce any rights or interests to which I may
be entitled on such equity interest in accordance with any applicable laws.


 


 


	 	 
	 	 
	 	 
	 	/s/ Joseph Chen
	 	Date: May 22, 2014


 






    	 



    	 



    

 


SPOUSAL CONSENT


 


I, Yan Chen, the legal spouse of Jian Liu , hereby unconditionally
consent that the one percent (1%) equity interest held by my spouse in Beijing Jingwei Zhihui Information Technology Co., Ltd.
and registered under his name will be disposed according to the arrangements under the Loan Agreement, the Equity Option Agreement,
and the Equity Interest Pledge Agreement as executed by my spouse on May 22, 2014.


 


I further guarantee not to take any action for the intentions
in conflict with the aforementioned arrangements, including claiming that such equity interest constitutes the property between
my spouse and me or our common property. I hereby unconditionally and irrevocably renounce any rights or interests to which I may
be entitled on such equity interest in accordance with any applicable laws.


 


 


	 	 
	 	 
	 	 
	 	/s/ Yan Chen
	 	Date: May 22, 2014
Exhibit 32.1

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of The Boyds Collection, Ltd. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended
September 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Jan L. Murley, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature
that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to The Boyds Collection, Ltd. and will be retained by The
Boyds Collection, Ltd. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

|/s/JAN L. MURLEYJan L. Murley
Chief Executive Officer
November 15, 2004 |  | 
|----------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | 

---



QuickLinks
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AT JULY 31, 1997 AND THE CONSOLIDATED STATEMENT OF
OPERATIONS FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED JULY 31, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUL-31-1997
<CASH>                                           4,144
<SECURITIES>                                    15,750
<RECEIVABLES>                                  703,886
<ALLOWANCES>                                    37,019
<INVENTORY>                                    629,206
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,760,416
<PP&E>                                       1,559,636
<DEPRECIATION>                                 905,091
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               3,519,686
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,639,256
<BONDS>                                        507,344
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      2,053
<COMMON>                                        45,996
<OTHER-SE>                                     990,970
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 3,519,686
<SALES>                                      3,090,702
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,175,524
<CGS>                                        2,376,755
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                3,266,437
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               137,502
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              44,370
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                269,976
<INCOME-TAX>                                   107,990
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            161,986
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   161,986
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     3.40
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     3.39
        

</TABLE>
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR
. 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 5 TH C IR
. R. 47.5.4. 

### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-20389 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee

v. DANILO SANCHEZ-CACERES Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:06-CR-418-1
Before WIENER, GARZA, and BENAVIDES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * DaniloSanchez-Caceres (Sanchez) appeals hisconviction for possession of a firearm as an illegal alien under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(5). Sanchez asserts that the district court erred in denying his motion tosuppress the firearm as the fruit ofan unconstitutional search and that § 922(g)(5) is unconstitutional on its face and as applied in his case. As Sanchez acknowledges, the latter argument is United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D March 24, 2008 Charles R. Fulbruge III ClerkNo. 07-20389

2 foreclosed by our precedent. See United States v. Daugherty, 264 F.3d 513, 518 (5th Cir. 2001). We reviewthe district court’sfactual findingsfor clear error and its Fourth Amendment rulings de novo. U nited States v. Gonzalez, 328 F.3d 755, 758 (5th Cir. 2003). Although based upon an anonymous tip, the investigatory stop and frisk did not violate Sanchez’s Fourth Amendment rights. See United States v. Bolden, 508 F.3d 204, 206 n.2 (5th Cir. 2007); United States v. Chavez, 281 F.3d 479, 485 (5th Cir. 2002). The tip concerned on-going illegal activity by a finite group of individuals, ofwhich Sanchez was a member. Agents corroborated the tip prior to initiating the stop by sending a know n, reliable informant to the nightclub to confirm that at least one of the security guards was an illegal alien who had carried a firearm in the past. Agents also personally observed that one ofthe security guards was carrying a visible firearm. Unlike F lorida v. J.L. , 529 U.S. 266, 271-72 (2000), lawenforcement officers here had the means to test the reliability of the tip, and they confirmed the reliability of the tip’s allegation of illegality before acting on it. The pat down of the four security guards was a reasonable precaution in light ofthe totality ofthe circumstances. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
EXHIBIT 99.1
                                                                    ------------




                              ANNUAL CERTIFICATION
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and
(b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), each of the
undersigned officers of Kinark Corporation (the registrant"), does hereby
certify, to each officer's knowledge, that:

The Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002 of the registrant
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
the registrant.



Dated:  March 18, 2003                            /s/  Ronald J. Evans
        --------------                            --------------------------
                                                  Ronald J. Evans
                                                  President and
                                                  Chief Executive Officer


Dated:  March 18, 2003                            /s/  Paul R. Chastain
        --------------                            --------------------------
                                                  Paul R. Chastain
                                                  Vice President and
                                                  Chief Financial Officer
                                                  (Principal Financial Officer)
Document Headings

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

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

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

###### National Institutes of Health

                    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute Special emphasis Panel, June 7, 2000, 7 PM to June 8, 2000, 3 PM, Columbia Sheraton, 10207 Wincopin Circle, Columbia, MD, 21044 which was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     on April 2, 2000, 65 FR 24491-24492.                

The name of the meeting will be changed to Hematopoietic Stem Cell Biology RFA. The meeting is closed to the public.

Dated: May 12, 2000.

LaVerne Y. Stringfield,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 00-12905 Filed 5-22-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
#### § 4211.37 Allocating unfunded vested benefits for withdrawals before the end of the initial plan year.

If an employer withdraws after the effective date of a merger and before the end of the initial plan year, the amount of unfunded vested benefits allocable to the employer shall be determined as if each plan had remained a separate plan. In making this determination, the plan sponsor shall use the allocation method of the withdrawing employer's prior plan and shall compute the employer's allocable share of the plan's unfunded vested benefits as if the day before the effective date of the merger were the end of the last plan year prior to the withdrawal.
#### § 1472.620 Cooperative agreement.

*Cooperative agreement* means an award of financial assistance that, consistent with 31 U.S.C. 6305, is used to enter into the same kind of relationship as a grant (see definition of grant in § 1472.650), except that substantial involvement is expected between the Federal agency and the recipient when carrying out the activity contemplated by the award. The term does not include cooperative research and development agreements as defined in 15 U.S.C. 3710a.
Tom Moore, WRAP/WESTAR

February 25, 2016

Preliminary Results from Western Air Quality Study

(8 pages)
WRAP Air Quality Pro

WE
1. Ozone NAAQS planning – (realistically) requires 

photochemical modeling for SIP attainment demonstrations for nonattainment areas.

2. Ozone transport SIPs – photochemical source apportionment 

modeling is tool of choice to quantify U.S. Ozone background as well as transport between states and jurisdictions.

3. Identification of Ozone exceptional events caused by 

stratospheric intrusion and wildfires – can require variety of observations & data analysis, supplemented with global / regional scale photochemical models and regression models.

4. Identification of international transport of Ozone for §179B 

demonstrations: requires nested global and regional scale photochemical modeling to evaluate international transport of Ozone. 

5. Identification of §182 Rural Transport Areas – combination of 

data analysis and photochemical modeling.
Uncertainty in model estimates of U.S. Background

WRAP WestJumpACAMx model platfoBC contributions of much larger than OA

EPA 2007 CAMx moBC contributions of 3substantial U.S. anthcontribution to O3.

CAMx simulations for 2007 and 2008 at Canyonlands National Park – Easte

Same methodology - modeled differences understood
Background / BouConditions evaluatMOZARTGEOS-Chem(now adding AM3)+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++Observations vs. BoundBackground Monthly M+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++Animations of Modeled Concentrations

Background contribuDifference plots for bU.S. sources 

O3, NOx, CO, PM2.5

+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++Animations of Daily Mfor O3 and Dust Bound

Boundary conditions p

O3, Ox (O3+NO+NO2+PA

Coarse Dust (CCRS), Fine 

http://views.cira.colostate.edu/tsdw/
IWDW-WAQS USB Modeling Simulation Descr

 3 2011b annual USB+Natural sources using just the 36 km CONUS 

runs invoke OSAT source apportionment (not APCA) with the followCategories:

 Mexico, Canada and Offshore Shipping (MCO) anthropogenic e Natural emissions (Biogenic, Lightning NOx, SS and WBD) Open Land Fires (combined WF, Rx and Ag fires). Initial Concentrations (IC) Boundary Conditions (BC)

 These 3 use different sets of Boundary Conditions (BCs): MOZART 

dust cap; GEOS-Chem (GC) and AM3 (AM). Also conducted CAMkm Base Case (all emissions) and Clean CAMx 36/12 km run using 

 Base_MZBC_36 run (no OSAT) performed to run MATS with Clean_M Clean_MZBC_3612 run (No OSAT) will be run after the 36 km runs so 

determine the importance of the 12 km WESTUS domain for Clean sim

 IWDW

‐WAQS Round

3 2011 Source Apportionment Modeling S
IWDW-WAQS 2011b Ozone base case - Mozart global m

modeled 1st high modeled 4th h
Highest Modeled Ozone Max 2011b platform

Mozart top, GeosCHEM bottom 

USB contribution USB-Fires
4th Highest Modeled Max 2011b platform

Mozart top, GeosCHEM bottom 

USB contribution USB-Fires
<PAGE>   1



                                                                   Exhibit 23(a)





                          INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT




The Board of Directors
LaBarge, Inc.:



We consent to incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements No.
33-53583 and 33-31330 on Form S-8 of LaBarge, Inc. of our report dated August
7, 1998, relating the consolidated balance sheets of LaBarge, Inc. and
subsidiaries as of June 28, 1998 and June 29, 1997, and the related
consolidated statements of operations, stockholders' equity and cash flows, and
related schedule for each of the years in the three-year period ended June 28,
1998, which report appears in the June 28, 1998 Annual Report on Form 10-K of
LaBarge, Inc.
        




                                                 s/KPMG Peat Marwick LLP/s
                                                 -------------------------




KPMG Peat Marwick LLP
St. Louis, Missouri
September 4, 1998
**EXHIBIT 32.1**
 
 **CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**
 **18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**
 **AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906**
 **OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**
 
 In connection with the Annual Report of Longview Fibre Company (the "Company") on Form 10- K for the period ended October 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Form 10-K"), I, R. H. Wollenberg, President, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
 
 (1) The Form 10-K fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and
 
 (2) The information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
  Dated:  January 13, 2005
 
 **R. H. WOLLENBERG**
 R. H. WOLLENBERG
 President, Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.  No. 00-4655

DWIGHT DELINOR EPPS,

Defendant-Appellant. 

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke.

Samuel G. Wilson, Chief District Judge.

(CR-00-11)

Submitted: April 24, 2001

Decided: May 14, 2001

Before WILKINS, NIEMEYER, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. 

COUNSEL

J. Christopher Clemens, Sr., CLEMENS & CLEMENS, P.C., Salem,

Virginia, for Appellant. Robert P. Crouch, Jr., United States Attorney,

Anthony P. Giorno, Assistant United States Attorney, Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See

Local Rule 36(c). 
OPINION

PER CURIAM: 

Dwight Delinor Epps appeals his conviction and sentence of

seventy-seven months’ imprisonment for the strong arm robbery of

John Crenshaw in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2111 (1994). Epps challenges the sufficiency of the evidence underlying the conviction. We

review the record in the light most favorable to the government to

determine if there is substantial evidence to support the conviction.

Glasser v. United States, 315 U.S. 60, 80 (1942). Circumstantial as

well as direct evidence is considered, and the government is allowed

the benefit of all reasonable inferences from the facts proven to those

sought to be established. See United States v. Tresvant, 677 F.2d

1018, 1021 (4th Cir. 1982). We have reviewed the record and affirm

the conviction and sentence. 

Epps and Crenshaw are patients of the Salem Veterans Administration Medical Center. A volunteer observed Epps speak sternly to

Crenshaw, lead him into the men’s restroom by placing a hand on the

back of Crenshaw’s neck and a hand on his arm, and shove Crenshaw

against a wall. The volunteer then observed Crenshaw withdrawing

his billfold and giving Epps five dollars. Government witnesses testified that Epps is a large, overbearing man, while Crenshaw is a timid,

gentle man who often does not speak. Crenshaw testified he had given

Epps $605 over the previous months. Crenshaw testified he did not

want to give Epps money, but was afraid Epps would reach into Crenshaw’s pocket and take it himself. Following Epps’ arrest, Epps’ lawyer tendered a check for $605 to Crenshaw and asked him to sign an

affidavit stating the monies taken by Epps were loans and had been

repaid in full. 

Epps argues the evidence is insufficient to establish a robbery by

force or threat of force. He further contends the exchanged funds were

loans that have now been repaid in full. Taking the evidence in the

light most favorable to the Government, we find the evidence of

intimidation and force to be sufficient to support Epps’ conviction.

We therefore affirm. We dispense with oral argument because the

2 UNITED STATES v. EPPS
facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials

before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED

UNITED STATES v. EPPS 3
#### § 2200.94 [Reserved]