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


                                                                EXHIBIT 23.1
                                                                ------------


                     CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

     We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the
Registrations Statements on Form S-3 (No. 333-66730, 333-57106, 333-50872,
333-47996, 333-38068, 333-33000, 333-94723, 333-64755, 333-64605, 333-59523,
333-57613, 333-51067, 333-45139, 333-37713, 333-81533, 333-25431) and in the
Registration Statements on Form S-8 (No. 333-48364, 333-38420, 333-31696,
333-93117, 333-92327, 333-11294, 333-88421 and 333-39553) of Applied Digital
Solutions, Inc. and subsidiaries of our report dated March 27, 2002.




/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

St. Louis, Missouri
March 28, 2002
#### Woody v. Coenan.

1. Intoxicating Liquors: action: damages por sale op beer. By the statutes in force prior to Sept. 1,1873, no right of action was given for injuries produced by the sale of beer.

*Appeal frorh Lirm Distriet Court.*

Saturday, June 17.

Action for injury from the sale of intoxicating liquor to the plaintiff’s husband. Judgment for defendant. Plaintiff appeals,

*20
      *J. B.*Young, for appellant.

*I. M. Preston & Son*and *Wm. G.*Thompson, for appellee.

Adams, J.

The only question in this case is as to the right to recover for injuries resulting from the sale of beer, prior to September 1st, 1873. As the right to recover for injuries from the sale of intoxicating liquor, given by the statute of 1862, was allowed only where intoxicating liquor was sold “ contrary to the provisions of the act entitled ‘An Act for the Suppression of Intemperance,’ passed January 22, 1855,. or under the act entitled ‘An Act Supplementary and Amendatory to An Act for the Suppression of Intemperance,’ passed January 28, 1857,” and as neither of those acts prohibited the salé of beer *when the act of*1862 *was passed*(although the act of 1855 did prohibit it before it was amended), we think that; under the said act of 1862, no right was given to recover for injuries from the sale of beer.

The District Court so held, and there being no evidence of the sale of liquor to plaintiff’s husband, other than beer, prior to September. 1st, 1873, we think that judgment was properly rendered for defendant.

Affirmed.
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"Denali Commission","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.denali.gov","author_name":"rdata","author_url":"https:\/\/www.denali.gov\/author\/rdata\/","title":"Privacy Statement","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"wixru583Rq\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.denali.gov\/privacy-statement\/\">Privacy Statement<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.denali.gov\/privacy-statement\/embed\/#?secret=wixru583Rq\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Privacy Statement” — Denali Commission\" data-secret=\"wixru583Rq\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\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<\/script>\n"}
EXHIBIT 32





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350





In connection with the quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Transatlantic Acquisition Corporation (the “Company”) for the quarter ended March 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Joseph Rozelle, 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, to the best of my knowledge that:





1.
The Report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 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.








Date: My 13, 2011





/s/ Joseph RozelleJoseph Rozelle

President

(Principal Executive and Financial Officer)











The foregoing certification is being furnished as an exhibit to the Report pursuant to Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-K and  Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code) and, accordingly, is not being filed as part of the Report for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not incorporated by reference into any filings of the Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.
II 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 633 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to provide for coverage under the 

beneficiary travel program of the Department of Veterans Affairs of 

certain disabled veterans for travel in connection with certain special 

disabilities rehabilitation, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 21, 2013 

Mr. TESTER (for himself, Mr. LEAHY, Mr. BAUCUS, Mr. BEGICH, and Mr. 

BLUMENTHAL) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To amend title 38, United States Code, to provide for coverage under the beneficiary travel program of the Department of Veterans Affairs of certain disabled veterans 

for travel in connection with certain special disabilities 

rehabilitation, and for other purposes. 

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


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 633 IS

1 SECTION 1. COVERAGE UNDER DEPARTMENT OF VET2 ERANS AFFAIRS BENEFICIARY TRAVEL PRO3 GRAM OF TRAVEL IN CONNECTION WITH 

4 CERTAIN SPECIAL DISABILITIES REHABILI5 TATION. 

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 111(b)(1) of title 38, 

7 United States Code, is amended by adding at the end the 

8 following new subparagraph: 

9 ‘‘(G) A veteran with vision impairment, a vet10 eran with a spinal cord injury or disorder, or a vet11 eran with double or multiple amputations whose 

12 travel is in connection with care provided through a 

13 special disabilities rehabilitation program of the De14 partment (including programs provided by spinal 

15 cord injury centers, blind rehabilitation centers, and 

16 prosthetics rehabilitation centers) if such care is pro17 vided— 

18 ‘‘(i) on an in-patient basis; or 

19 ‘‘(ii) during a period in which the Sec20 retary provides the veteran with temporary 

21 lodging at a facility of the Department to make 

22 such care more accessible to the veteran.’’. 

23 (b) REPORT.—Not later than 180 days after the date 

24 of the enactment of this Act, the Secretary of Veterans 

25 Affairs shall submit to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

26 of the Senate and the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs of 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 633 IS

1 the House of Representatives a report on the beneficiary 

2 travel program under section 111 of title 38, United 

3 States Code, as amended by subsection (a), including— 

4 (1) the cost of the program; 

5 (2) the number of veterans served by the pro6 gram; and 

7 (3) any other matters the Secretary considers 

8 appropriate. 

9 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

10 this Act shall take effect on the first day of the first fiscal 

11 year that begins after the date of the enactment of this 

12 Act. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
II 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 668 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 

14 Main Street in Brockport, New York, as the ‘‘Staff Sergeant Nicholas 

J. Reid Post Office Building’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

APRIL 8, 2013 

Mrs. GILLIBRAND introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 

referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

A BILL 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 14 Main Street in Brockport, New York, as 

the ‘‘Staff Sergeant Nicholas J. Reid Post Office Building’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. STAFF SERGEANT NICHOLAS J. REID POST OF4 FICE BUILDING. 

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

6 Postal Service located at 14 Main Street in Brockport, 

7 New York, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Staff 

8 Sergeant Nicholas J. Reid Post Office Building’’. 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 668 IS

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 ‘‘Staff Sergeant Nich5 olas J. Reid Post Office Building’’. 

Æ 


tjames on DSK6SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
- 132 -

Nebraska Supreme Court Advance S

297 Nebraska Report

FARMERS CO-OP v. STATE

Cite as 297 Neb. 132

Farmers Cooperative, a cooperative corporat

organized under the laws of the Sta

Nebraska, appellant, v. State

Nebraska et al., appellees.

Frontier Cooperative Company, a cooperat

corporation organized under the laws o

State of Nebraska, appellant, v. Sta

Nebraska et al., appellees.

___ N.W.2d ___

Filed July 7, 2017. Nos. S-16-312, S-16-313.

supplemental opin

Appeals from the District Court for Lancaster County: 

Andrew R. Jacobsen, Judge. Supplemental opinion: Fo

opinion modified. Motion for rehearing overruled.

Thomas E. Jeffers and Andrew C. Pease, of Crosby Guenzel, 

L.L.P., for appellants.

Douglas J. Peterson, Attorney General, and L. Jay Bartel for 

appellees.

Heavican, C.J., Wright, Miller‐Lerman, Cassel

and Funke, JJ

Per Curiam

Cases Nos. S-16-312 and S-16-313 are before this court on 

the appellees’ motion for rehearing concerning our opinion 

Nebraska Supreme Court Online Library

www.nebraska.gov/apps-courts-epub/

07/21/2017 12:10 AM CDT
- 133 -

Nebraska Supreme Court Advance S

297 Nebraska Report

FARMERS CO-OP v. STATE

Cite as 297 Neb. 132

in Farmers Co‐op v. State.

1

 We overrule the motion, but we 

modify the original opinion as follows:

(1) We withdraw the last two sentences in the paragraph 

preceding the subheading “(b) Frontier’s Refund Claims” 

and substitute the following: “Farmers appealed the Tax 

Commissioner’s decision to the district court for Lancaster 

County.”2

(2) We withdraw the last two sentences in the paragraph 

preceding the subheading “(c) District Court’s Decisions” 

and substitute the following: “Frontier appealed the Tax 

Commissioner’s decision to the district court for Lancaster 

County.”3

(3) We withdraw the second to the last sentence in the 

second paragraph under the subheading “3. The Cooperative

Failed to Establish They Were Entitled to Refun

Denied by Tax Commissioner” and substitute the followi

“Neither of the Cooperatives requested a formal hearing from 

the Department prior to the Tax Commissioner taking action 

on their refund claims, so no additional evidence was developed on the record regarding the denied claims.”4

 And we 

withdraw the last sentence of that same paragraph, which 

stated, “Further, the Cooperatives did not submit any additional evidence to the district court on its appeal.”5

The remainder of the opinion shall remain unmodified.

Former opinion modifi

 Motion for rehearing overr

Stacy, J., not participatin

1 Farmers Co‐op v. State, 296 Neb. 347, 893 N.W.2d 728 (2017).

2 Id. at 351, 893 N.W.2d at 733.

3 Id. at 352, 893 N.W.2d at 734.

4 Id. at 364, 893 N.W.2d at 740.

5 Id.
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 The Singing Machine Company, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for the period ended March 31, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Yi Ping
Chan, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Operating 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:

(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 result of operations of the Company.

Date: January 19, 2005              /s/ Yi Ping Chan
                                    -----------------------------

                                    Yi Ping Chan
                                    Chief Executive Officer and
                                    Chief Operating Officer
                                    (Principal Executive Officer)
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Rubin Restrepo, Appellant.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Leslie Crocker Snyder, J.), rendered on February 17, 1989, convicting defendant, upon a plea of guilty of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree and sentencing defendant to an indeterminate term of imprisonment of four years to life, unanimously affirmed.

We are unpersuaded that the sentence imposed was unduly harsh or severe. Taking into account, "among other things, the crime charged, the particular circumstances of the individual before the court and the purpose of a penal sanction”, we perceive no abuse of discretion warranting a reduction in sentence. *(People v Farrar,*52 NY2d 302, 305.)

Further, defendant was sentenced in accordance with his plea bargain and within statutory guidelines. "Having received the benefit of his bargain, defendant should be bound by its terms.” *(People v Felman,*141 AD2d 889, 890, *lv denied*72 NY2d 918.) Concur—Carro, J. P., Milonas, Ellerin and Rubin, JJ.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Anthony Morgan, Appellant.

Judgments, Supreme Court, Bronx County (Lawrence Bernstein, J.) rendered May 7, 1987, convicting defendant, under Indictment No. 4991/85 of murder in the second degree (three counts), and under Indictment No. 4895/85, of arson in the second degree, and sentencing him to three concurrent indeterminate terms of imprisonment of 25 years to life on the murder counts, and a consecutive, indeterminate term of 2 to 6 years on the arson count, both sentences to run consecutively to a sentence defendant was already serving, unanimously affirmed.

Defendant was charged under Indictment No. 4991/85 in connection with the burning of a numbers betting parlor on August 23, 1984, in which three persons died. William Diaz recruited defendant for the crime on behalf of defendant’s co-defendant Conrado Pons. Pons worked for a large "numbers corporation”, which was trying to eliminate its competition.

Defendant was charged under Indictment No. 4895/85 with setting fire to yet another numbers location, having been again recruited by Diaz. Subsequently, Diaz agreed to cooperate with the authorities in various counties in exchange for leniency, and testified against defendant at trial.

Defendant contends that he was prejudiced at both trials by improper comments made by the prosecutors on summation in which, among other things, they sought to inflame the jurors’ emotions, vouched for the credibility of witnesses, referred to *313facts not in evidence, and attempted to shift the burden of proof.

Specifically, at the trial held in connection with Indictment No. 4991/85, the prosecutor improperly appealed to the jurors’ emotions by referring to a poem dealing with the death of one of two close friends and compared the thoughts of the poet with the thoughts of the friends of the deceased victims of the fire. While the comments were clearly erroneous, the error was harmless in view of the overwhelming evidence against defendant. *(People v Crimmins,*36 NY2d 230.) The other comments made by the prosecutors at both trials to which error is sought to be ascribed, were either responsive to the respective summations of defense counsel or were adequately cured by the court’s instructions. *(People v Galloway,*54 NY2d 396, 400; *People v Berg,*59 NY2d 294.)

Defendant’s claim that at the trial of Indictment No. 4991/ 85 the court improperly permitted the introduction of uncharged crimes, is unpreserved and in any event is without merit. In particular, the testimony describing William Diaz as an "enforcer” for the numbers corporation and describing the "corporation’s” reason for ordering the arsons, was necessary background information. Moreover, *Molineux*considerations do not apply to the prior uncharged crimes of the prosecutor’s main witness. *(People v McCray,*165 AD2d 765.)

We have reviewed defendant’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Rosenberger, Wallach and Asch, JJ.
Martin, Michael (OST) Po"^ -QSr - ^to)?^- n^4(^ 

From: leedrum [leedrum@att.net] 

Sent: Monday, April 19, 2010 8:01 AM 

To: EAS (OST) 

Subject: Re: Altoona-Blair Co, PA service 

The Altoona Mirror has published an article stating that you are collecting comments 

regarding commercial service at this airport. 

I am an Altoona resident that has been using this airport since I left for the Army in 1969 

(Allegheny Air at that time). Over the years I have seen service decline and then get better. 

I have been mostly satisfied with the current service provided by Colgan from Dulles. Most of 

my flights have been on time and comfortable. I would recommend that you retain their 

service. 

Thank youj 

Lee Appleman 

2400 Bell Avenue ;-? 

Altoona, PA 16602-3310 zi 

leedrum(a)att.net 'CD 

C5
An official website of the United States government         Here's how you know         
**Official websites use .mil**
A **.mil** website belongs to an official U.S. Department of Defense organization in the United States.
**Secure .mil websites use HTTPS**
 A **lock (lock )** or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .mil website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Skip to main content (Press Enter).

Defense Intelligence AgencyCOMMITTED TO EXCELLENCE IN DEFENSE OF THE NATION

Search
Search

Search
                    - Facilities Operating Status
                    - Employee Resources

-  Home		 
-  About    -  FAQs             
  -  Organization      -  Locations             
    -  Missile and Space Intelligence Center             
    -  Joint Military Attache School             
    -  Joint Military Intelligence Training Center 
  -  Office of the Inspector General             
  -  Equal Opportunity & Diversity             
  -  Military Integration Office             
  -  History      -  DIA Museum             
    -  George Washington Letters             
    -  Directors of DIA             
    -  The Historians 
  -  Patriots Memorial             
  -  Sexual Assault Prevention and Response             
  -  Contact Us 
-  News & Features    -  Articles             
  -  Videos             
  -  DIA in the News             
  -  Threat Reports             
  -  Photo Gallery             
  -  No FEAR             
  -  Podcasts             
  -  DIA Comics 
-  Careers & Opportunities    -  Career Fields      -  Analysis             
    -  Counterintelligence             
    -  Finance & Acquisition             
    -  Human Intelligence             
    -  Human Services             
    -  Information Technology             
    -  Inspector General             
    -  Legal             
    -  Mission Management             
    -  Office Management & Infrastructure             
    -  Science & Technology             
    -  Security 
  -  Search Vacancies             
  -  Apply to DIA             
  -  Hiring Process             
  -  Internships             
  -  Veteran Programs 
-  Business    -  Contractor Personnel Security             
  -  SIA3             
  -  SITE III             
  -  Innovation             
  -  NeedipeDIA             
  -  Office of Small Business Programs             
  -  Small Business FAQs 

HOMENEWS & FEATURES

Search

Search

                            - All Images 
                            - Other 

                            - Upload Date
                            - Photo Date
                            - Title

Clear Search2 results found.