alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 1a


                      INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANT'S REPORT


To the Board of Directors and Shareholders of
Central Newspapers, Inc.

We have reviewed the accompanying consolidated statement of financial position
of Central Newspapers, Inc. as of September 28, 1997, and the consolidated
statements of income, shareholders' equity and cash flows for the three-month 
and nine-month periods then ended.  These financial statements are the
responsibility of the Company's management.

We conducted our review in accordance with standards established by the American
Institute of Certified Public Accountants.  A review of interim financial
information consists principally of applying analytical procedures to financial
data and making inquiries of persons responsible for financial and accounting
matters. It is substantially less in scope than an audit conducted in accordance
with generally accepted auditing standards, the objective of which is the
expression of an opinion regarding the financial statements taken as a whole. 
Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion.

Based on our review, we are not aware of any material modifications that should
be made to the accompanying financial statements as of and for the three-month
and nine-month periods ended September 28, 1997 for them to be in conformity 
with generally accepted accounting principles.

/s/Price Waterhouse LLP
-----------------------
Price Waterhouse LLP

Indianapolis, Indiana
October 20, 1997
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<CIK>                        0001002137
<NAME>                       SWISSRAY INTERNATIONAL, INC.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                            1
<CASH>                                     3,011,183
<SECURITIES>                               0
<RECEIVABLES>                              3,356,282
<ALLOWANCES>                               170,883
<INVENTORY>                                4,637,152
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           13,831,501
<PP&E>                                     7,694,305
<DEPRECIATION>                             1,393,689
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             25,383,014
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      21,233,649
<BONDS>                                    14,150,396
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                      0
<PREFERRED>                                0
<COMMON>                                   233,999
<OTHER-SE>                                 (10,555,015)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               25,383,014
<SALES>                                    22,030,124
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           22,030,124
<CGS>                                      16,499,996
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              16,499,996
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                           17,011,097
<LOSS-PROVISION>                           0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                         10,347,427
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (21,638,080)
<INCOME-TAX>                               0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (21,638,080)
<DISCONTINUED>                             0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                            0
<CHANGES>                                  0
<NET-INCOME>                               (21,638,080)
<EPS-BASIC>                                (1.14)
<EPS-DILUTED>                              (1.14)




</TABLE>
EXHIBIT24.10

POWER OF ATTORNEY

KNOWN ALL MEN BY THESEPRESENTS, that the undersigned hereby constitutes and appoints each ofDamien M. Sullivan, Ross G. Landsbaum and Barry F. Schwartz or any ofthem, each acting alone, his true and lawful attorney-in-fact andagent, with full power of substitution, for him and in his name, placeand stead, in any and all capacities, in connection with thePANAVISION INC. (the "Corporation")Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005 underthe Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, including, withoutlimiting the generality of the foregoing, to sign the Form 10-K in thename and on behalf of the Corporation or on behalf of the undersignedas a director or officer of the Corporation, and any amendments to theForm 10-K and any instrument, contract, document or other writing, ofor in connection with the Form 10-K or amendments thereto, and to filethe same, with all exhibits thereto, and other documents in connectiontherewith, including this power of attorney, with the Securities andExchange Commission and any applicable securities exchange orsecurities self-regulatory body, granting unto said attorneys-in-factand agents, each acting alone, full power and authority to do andperform each and every act and thing requisite and necessary to be donein and about the premises, as fully to all intents and purposes as hemight or could do in person, hereby ratifying and confirming all thatsaid attorneys-in-fact and agents, each acting alone, or his substituteor substitutes, may lawfully do or cause to be done by virtuehereof.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has signed thesepresents this 30th day of March, 2006.

|  | /S/ KENNETH ZIFFREN KENNETHZIFFREN |
|--|------------------------------------|

----
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

June 22, 2016

t0615 

# Order

Clerk June 22, 2016

152959

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 152959

COA: 322874

Wayne CC: 11

- 001958

- FH

MICHAEL ANTHONY GREENE,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the December 10, 2015

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, bec ause we are not

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
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

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Sonus Networks, Inc. (the "Company") for the period
ended June 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned, Richard J. Gaynor, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby
certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his knowledge:



Date: July 30, 2009

/s/ RICHARD J. GAYNOR Richard J. Gaynor
Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)


---



QuickLinks
**Exhibit 23.1****CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**     Wehave issued our reports dated March 14, 2008, accompanying the consolidated financialstatements and Schedule II and management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal controlover financial reporting included in the Annual Report of Intevac, Inc and subsidiaries on Form10-K for the year ended December 31, 2007. We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference ofsaid reports in the Registration Statements of Intevac, Inc and subsidiaries on Forms S-8 (FileNos. 33-99648, 33-65421, 333-50166, 333-106960, 333-109260,333-125523, 333-134422, and 333-143418) pertainingto the 1995 Stock Option/Stock Issuance Plan, the 2003 Employee Stock Purchase Plan and the 2004Equity Incentive Plan and in the Registration Statements on Forms S-3 (File Nos. 333-24275, and333-124978)./s/ GRANT THORNTON LLPSan Jose, California
# Army National Guard Soldiers Train in Funeral Honors Program

/ Published March 20, 2024

VIRGINIA BEACH, Va. - The Virginia Army National Guard Funeral Honors Program hosted 11 Army National Guard Soldiers from nine states and territories for a training course Feb. 26-March 8 at the State Military Reservation.

Soldiers from Virginia, Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Puerto Rico, Rhode Island, Tennessee and Wisconsin participated in the two-week, level 2 funeral honors training, which certifies instructors to teach fellow Soldiers the skills, procedures and standards for providing final respects to military veterans.

“It’s hard physically and mentally,” said Staff Sgt. Antonio Alexander, a Virginia National Guard Soldier assigned to Bravo Battery, 1st Battalion, 111th Field Artillery Regiment, 116th Infantry Brigade Combat Team. “It’s much tougher than level 1. They challenge us to be better personally and professionally and it’s a great experience.”

There are three levels of training in the military funeral honors program. Level 1 is the foundation and teaches Soldiers how to perform the services. Virginia conducts a 40-hour, Level 1 training course several times a year.

Level 2 covers instructing and how to become more of a trainer.

Level 3 is used as a recertification and helps ensure each state maintains the national standard.

“Level 2 really refines our knowledge of what we learned in level 1,” explained Pfc. Daven Melvin, assigned to 2nd Battalion, 130th Infantry Regiment, Illinois Army National Guard.

After basic training, Melvin tried to find a meaningful full-time job.

“I had no idea what I was going to do,” he said. “I’m glad I came across this. I think it’s great for newer Soldiers because of how unique and meaningful the mission is.”

Alexander had already completed the level 2 course. However, after a deployment to Africa, he returned to Virginia and needed to go through the level 2 course again to become recertified.

“It’s an honorable profession,” he said. “I like the service that we provide. I feel like you really have to show out for your fallen comrades.”

The mental and physical discipline required for the course prepares you for the mission, which “is not something everyone can do,” said Spc. Angel Rodriguez, a Puerto Rico National Guard Soldier assigned to the 105th Quartermaster Company, 3678th Combat Sustainment Support Battalion, 191st Regional Support Group. “It’s a unique job and it’s very honorable to give back to people who’ve given to the country.”

“Besides it being honorable, we’re the last Soldiers the family sees before we bury their loved ones,” said Spc. Karla Colindres, assigned to 1st Squadron, 230th Cavalry Regiment, Tennessee Army National Guard. “It’s such an amazing thing to go out there and do the best we can to honor their loved one.”

Begun in January 2007, the Virginia National Guard Military Funeral Honors Program comprises four teams throughout the state that provide funeral details to National Guard Soldiers and veterans of the active Army, Army Reserve and Army National Guard.

They have performed over 26,000 funeral services, averaging 200 each month.
BWXTechnologies,Inc.aMcDermottcompanyNuclearProductsDivisionP.O.Box785Lynchburg,VA24505-0785(434)522-6000RECE!VEDFebruary21,2003FEi252003p1iOWMr.DonaldS.WelshOFFICEOFREGlOALA4INiSTRATOHRegionalAdministratorU.S.EnvironmentalProtectionAgency,RegionIII1650ArchStreetPhiladelphia,PA19103-2029Re:PetitionforDelistingofHazardousWastesDearMr.Welsh:EnclosedisaPetitionpursuantto42U.S.C.§6921(f)requestingthedelistingofwastesidentifiedbytheVirginiaDepartmentofEnvironmentalQualityasF006hazardouswastes.InaccordancewiththeResourceConservationandRecoveryActMemorandumofAgreementbetweenEPAandVirginiaDEQ,wearealsoforwardingthePetitiontoDEQ.ThePetitionissubmittedbyBWXTechnologies,Inc.,operatingthroughitsNuclearProductsDivision(“BWXT”).BWXTmanufacturesandsuppliesproductsandservicestotheU.S.Governmentandotherentitiesinthenuclearpowerindustry.WebelievethatthePetitiondemonstrates,anddatageneratedandtobegeneratedwillconfirm,thatthepetitionedwastesmeetthelegalstandardfordelisting.Consistentwiththelegalstandard,thewastesposenosubstantialpresentorpotentialhazardtohumanhealthortheenvironment.Further,thepetitionedwastesareuniqueinthebeingregulatedundertheRCRAhazardouswastesprogram,theNuclearRegulatoryCommission’sradioactivewastesprogram,andtheNPDESprogram.Ifthewastesaredelisted,theywillcontinuetoberegulatedundertheNRCandNPDESprograms.WearealsoforwardingthisPetitiontoMr.DavidFriedmanofRegionIII,withwhomwehavehadsubstantialpriordiscussionsconcerningthepetitionedwastesandthedevelopmentofthePetition.WewillcontactMr.FriedmaninabouttwoweekstofollowuponthePetition.BWXT’sprincipalcontactisMr.JohnM.Storton,attheaddressabove(434/522-6677).PleasefeelfreetocontactMr.Storton,ifwemayprovideanyadditionalinformationinthemeantime.OnbehalfofBWXT,weappreciatetheAgency’sworkinthismatter.WealsoappreciateMr.Friedman’sassistanceandreviewofourearlierpartialdrafts.Sincerely,DavidC.WardManager,EnvironmentalSafetyHealth&SafeguardsDepartmentCopies:RobertG.Burnley,VirginiaDepartmentofEnvironmentalQualityDavidFriedman,EPARegionIIIJohnM.Storton,BWXT
Securities and Exchange Commission 100 F Street, N.E. Washington, D.C. 20549-7561   22 March 2013 OL2013032006/CAW/SUB/RLS/dik   Commissioners:   We have read the statements made by Perusahaan Perseroan (Persero) PT Telekomunikasi Indonesia Tbk. (copy attached), which we understand will be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, pursuant to Item16F of Form 20-F, as part of the Form 20-F of Perusahaan Perseroan (Persero) PT Telekomunikasi Indonesia Tbk. dated 22 March 2013. We agree with such statements concerning our Firm in such Form 20-F.    Very truly yours,     /s/ Chrisna A. Wardhana, CPA Partner


---
**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 on Form 10-Q of Airspan Networks Inc.
      (the
“Company”) for the period ended September 28, 2008 as filed with the Securities
      and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),





I,
      Eric
      Stonestrom, Chief Executive Officer 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
      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.





Date:
      November 5, 2008


By:  
                  /s/ ERIC STONESTROMEric
                  Stonestrom*Chief
                  Executive Officer*




**A
      signed original of this statement required by Section 906 has been provided
      to
      Airspan Networks Inc. and will be retained by Airspan Networks Inc. and
      furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.**
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-6616

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

GLENN ALBERT STEWART, JR.,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern

District of West Virginia, at Wheeling. Frederick P. Stamp, Jr.,

District Judge. (CR-97-53, CA-00-138-5)

Submitted: June 12, 2003 Decided: June 20, 2003

Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Glenn Albert Stewart, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Lisa Grimes Johnston,

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Wheeling, West Virginia, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Glenn A. Stewart seeks to appeal the district court’s order

adopting the report and recommendation of the magistrate judge and

denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000).

The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge

issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)

(2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28

U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that his

constitutional claims are debatable and that any dispositive

procedural rulings by the district court are also debatable or

wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 123 S. Ct. 1029, 1040 (2003);

Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d

676, 683 (4th Cir.), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 941 (2001). We have

independently reviewed the record and conclude that Stewart has not

made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny Stewart’s motion

for a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. 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. 

DISMISSED
<PAGE>

                                 EXHIBIT 21.1

                        SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT



Learning Tree International USA, Inc.         (U.S.)
Learning Tree International, K.K.             (Japan)
Learning Tree International Ltd.              (United Kingdom)
Learning Tree International S.A.              (France)
Learning Tree International AB                (Sweden)
Learning Tree Publishing AB                   (Sweden)
Learning Tree International Inc.              (Canada)
Learning Tree International Ltd.              (Hong Kong)
Advanced Technology Marketing, Inc.           (U.S.)
Technology for Business and Industry, Inc.    (U.S. Virgin Islands)
|                                       |         | State or    |         |     |
|-------------------------------------------------|--------------|-------------|--------------|----------|
|                                            |         | Country of  |         |     |
| Subsidiary Name                                 |         | Incorp.     |         | Status   |
|                                            |         |        |         |     |
| NeoMedia Europe  AG                   |         | Germany     |         | Active   |
|                                            |         |        |         |     |
| NeoMedia Migration, Inc.                        |         | Delaware    |         | Inactive |
|                                            |         |        |         |     |
| NeoMedia Micro Paint Repair, Inc.               |         | Nevada      |         | Inactive |
|                                            |         |        |         |     |
| NeoMedia Technologies de Mexico, S. A. de C. V. |         | Mexico      |         | Inactive |
|                                            |         |        |         |     |
| NeoMedia Migration de Mexico, S. A. de C. V.    |         | Mexico      |         | Inactive |
|                                            |         |        |         |     |
| NeoMedia Technologies de Guatemala, S. A.       |         | Guatemala   |         | Inactive |
|                                            |         |        |         |     |
| "NeoMedia" EDV - GmbH                           |         | Austria     |         | Inactive |
|                                            |         |        |         |     |
| NeoMedia Technologies UK Limited                |         | UK          |         | Inactive |
|                                            |         |        |         |     |
| NeoMedia Technologies Holding Company, B.V.     |         | Netherlands |         | Inactive |
|                                            |         |        |         |     |
| NeoMedia Technologies of Canada, Inc.           |         | Canada      |         | Inactive |
|                                            |         |        |         |     |
| NeoMedia Technologies do Brasil Ltda            |         | Brazil      |         | Inactive |
|                                            |         |        |         |     |
| NeoMedia Tech, Inc.                             |    | Delaware    |    | Inactive |

----
# Five Guard brigades alerted for 2009 deployments

/ Published Dec. 5, 2007

WASHINGTON - Defense officials announced today the deployment of five National Guard brigade combat teams to begin in summer 2009.

These units will replace units that have not yet deployed. Pentagon spokesman Bryan Whitman told reporters the units are being identified well in advance to give maximum time possible for mission-specific training.

"It's a tribute to the military planners who are trying to provide -- particularly for our National Guard brigades -- the type of timely notification so they can be prepared for the specific missions, but also to give the predictability for their families and employers," Whitman said.

The Soldiers will be mobilized for 12 months.

The Defense Department alerted the 53rd and 48th brigade combat teams, roughly 7,000 soldiers, to support Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan. "The 48th Infantry Brigade is from Georgia, and its mission will be to train the Afghan national security forces," Whitman said. "The 53rd, out of Florida, will assume battlespace in Afghanistan and conduct the full spectrum of operations."

The 32nd BCT from the Wisconsin Guard, the 41st BCT of the Oregon Guard and the 155th BCT from the Mississippi Guard have been alerted for deployment to Iraq in summer 2009.

The roughly 8,000 soldiers will take over the security force mission "and will ensure freedom of movement and continuity of operations within the country," Whitman said. The units will be responsible for base defense and route security within Kuwait and Iraq.
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D17-3948

_____________________________

HUNTER TYLER LAFOE,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Escambia County.

Edward P. Nickinson, III, Judge.

March 29, 2018

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED. 

B.L. THOMAS, C.J., and BILBREY and JAY, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
2

Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Steven L. Seliger, Assistant 

Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.