alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      EXHIBIT 23

                        Consent of Independent Auditors

We consent to the incorporation by reference in this Annual Report (Form 10-K)
of Dan River Inc. of our report dated February 4, 1998, included in the 1997
Annual Report to Shareholders of Dan River Inc.

Our audits also included the financial statement schedule of Dan River Inc.
listed in Item 14(a). This schedule is the responsibility of the Company's
management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion based on our audits. In
our opinion, the financial statement schedule referred to above, when
considered in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole,
present fairly in all material respects the information set forth therein.

/s/  Ernst & Young LLP

Greensboro, North Carolina 
February 4, 1998
Exhibit 21

SUBSIDIARIES OF SPHERION CORPORATION

Following is a list of the direct and indirect subsidiaries of Spherion Corporation, a Delaware corporation. Certain inactive subsidiaries have been excluded from
the list below as such subsidiaries, when considered in the aggregate as one subsidiary, would not constitute a "significant subsidiary." All active subsidiaries do business under their corporate name
listed below, or close derivatives thereof, except where indicated otherwise:

|6063721 Canada Inc.                 |  | Canada        
|----------------------------------- |  | --------------
|Comtex Information Systems, Inc.    |  | Delaware      
|Human Resource Capital Group Inc.   |  | Canada        
|IMARK/TSRC Management Corp.         |  | Delaware      
|IMRC, Inc.                          |  | Nevada        
|IntelliMark Holdings, Inc.          |  | Delaware      
|NorCross Holdings LLC               |  | Delaware      
|NorCross Teleservices L.P.          |  | Delaware      
|Norrell Corporation                 |  | Delaware      
|Norrell Services, Ltd               |  | Canada        
|Spherion Assessment Inc.            |  | North Carolina
|Spherion Atlantic Enterprises LLC * |  | Delaware      
|Spherion Atlantic Resources LLC *   |  | Delaware      
|Spherion (Europe) Inc.              |  | Delaware      
|Spherion Financial Corporation      |  | Delaware      
|Spherion Government Services LLC    |  | Delaware      
|Spherion Operations Inc.            |  | Delaware      
|Spherion Technology (UK) Limited    |  | United Kingdom
|Spherion U.S. Inc.                  |  | Florida       
|Spherion Worldwide Holding B.V.     |  | Netherlands   
|Technisource, Inc.                  |  | Delaware      
|Todays Staffing, Ltd               |  | Canada        

---

---



QuickLinks
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 of KBL Healthcare Acquisition Corp. III (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2008 (the Report), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I Michael Kaswan, Chief Operating Officer of the Company, certify
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Sec. 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, as amended; and

2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents,
in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.



|    |  |                                              |  |  |  |                         
|--- |  | -------------------------------------------- |  |  |  | ------------------------
|By: |  | /s/ Michael Kaswan                           |  |  |  | Dated: November 13, 2008
|    |  | Michael Kaswan                               |  |  |  |                         
|    |  | Chief Operating Officer                      |  |  |  |                         
|    |  | (Principal Accounting and Financial Officer) |  |  |  |
Exhibit 32

CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND  PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO  18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350  AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906  OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

We,
Richard J. Thompson, Chief Executive Officer, and Jeffrey J. Kyle, Vice PresidentFinance, Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer of Power-One, Inc.
(the "Company"), do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to our knowledge:



|Date: March 14, 2008                                                                                                          |  | 
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | 
|/s/RICHARD J. THOMPSONRichard J. Thompson Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)                               |  | 
|/s/JEFFREY J. KYLEJeffrey J. Kyle Vice PresidentFinance, Treasurer and
Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer) |  | 

---



QuickLinks
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 TRB Systems International, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ended June 30, 2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Byung
Yim, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

	(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:  June 20, 2006


/s/ Byung Yim
------------------------------------
Byung Yim
President and Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer and
Principal Financial Officer)
#### STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Calvin ROBERSON, Appellant.

No. 67838.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Three.

April 2, 1996.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied May 6,1996.

Application to Transfer Denied June 25,1996.

Jack F. Allen, Clayton, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Attorney General, Mary Moulton Bryan, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before SMITH, P.J., and GARY M. GAERTNER and RHODES RUSSELL, JJ.

*MEMORANDUM DECISION*

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals from his judgment of conviction of one count of robbery in the first degree and one count of armed criminal action, for the armed robbery of an Arby’s restaurant on October 18, 1993. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. The parties have been furnished with a statement of the reasons for the court’s decision. Judgments affirmed. Rule 30.25(b).
<PAGE>
                                                                               .
                                                                               .
                                                                               .
                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.1

<Table>
<Caption>
NAME OF SUBSIDIARY                             STATE OF ORGANIZATION             NAMES USED TO TRANSACT BUSINESS
------------------                             ---------------------             -------------------------------
<S>                                            <C>                               <C>
Buford Bros., Inc.                             Tennessee                         Industrial Distribution Group, Inc.
Cardinal Machinery, Inc.                       Tennessee                         Industrial Distribution Group, Inc.
E.C. Blackstone Company                        Georgia                           Industrial Distribution Group, Inc.
IDG USA, LLC                                   Georgia                           Boring-Smith
                                                                                 Industrial Distribution Group, Inc.
IDG-Mexico, Inc.                               Georgia                           None
The New England Group Industrial               New Hampshire                     Industrial Distribution Group, Inc.
Distributors, Inc.
</Table>
Case 2:09-cv-10454-VAR-VMM Document 66-28 Filed 11/19/10 Page 1 of 2
Case 2:09-cv-10454-VAR-VMM Document 66-28 Filed 11/19/10 Page 2 of 2
2:09-cv-10918-PDB-MKM   Doc # 103-12    Filed 05/14/12   Pg 1 of 2    Pg ID 5418

2:09-cv-10918-PDB-MKM   Doc # 103-12    Filed 05/14/12   Pg 2 of 2    Pg ID 5419
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-2154

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus PATTY JEAN CYRUS, Claimant - Appellant,

and CLARENCE EDWARD CYRUS, a/k/a Red, a/k/a CC, Defendant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Florence. Cameron McGowan Currie, District Judge. (CR-99-221) Submitted: June 23, 2004 Decided: July 14, 2004 Before WIDENER, GREGORY, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. William Isaac Diggs, DIGGS, DIGGS & AXELROD, Myrtle Beach, South Carolina, for Appellant. J. Strom Thurmond, Jr., United States Attorney, Mark C. Moore, Chief, Narcotics Unit, Beth Drake,- 2 - Assistant United States Attorney, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).* The court also ordered the forfeiture of $690,000 plus interest; however, it is only the forfeiture of the real property that Patty Cyrus contests. - 3 - PER CURIAM: Patty Jean Cyrus appeals the district court’s order directing the forfeiture to the United States of certain real property in Florence, South Carolina. * The district court found that the property was purchased with drug proceeds and that Cyrus was not, as she claimed, the bona fide purchaser of the property. Evidence before the court demonstrated that the property was instead purchased by Cyrus’ brother, Clarence Cyrus, with proceeds obtained from his distribution of cocaine and crack. The sole issue raised on appeal is whether the district court should have recused itself pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 455(a) (2000). The district court presided at the trial and sentencing of Clarence Cyrus. At sentencing, the court commented that it believed that Cyrus and her uncle, Robert Singletary, had lied under oath when they testified that Patty Cyrus purchased the property. Cyrus claims that the court’s comment disclosed that the judge had a pre-existing bias that reasonably placed in question the court’s impartiality at the ancillary forfeiture proceeding. Under § 455(a), any alleged bias ordinarily must stem from an extrajudicial source and result in an opinion on the merits that is based on something other than what the judge learned from participating in the case. Liteky v. United States , 510 U.S. 540,- 4 - 555 (1994). Our review of the record discloses that the court’s opinion was not based on any extrajudicial source and that there existed no “deep-seated favoritism or antagonism that would make fair judgment impossible.” Seeid. Accordingly, we conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying the motion for recusal, and we affirm. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not significantly aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3886 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 3886

 To clarify the intent of the Congress in Public Law 93-632 to require 
the Secretary of Agriculture to continue to provide for the maintenance 
    of 18 concrete dams and weirs that were located in the Emigrant 
Wilderness at the time the wilderness area was designated as wilderness 
                          in that Public Law.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 24, 1996

Mr. Doolittle introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                         Committee on Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To clarify the intent of the Congress in Public Law 93-632 to require 
the Secretary of Agriculture to continue to provide for the maintenance 
    of 18 concrete dams and weirs that were located in the Emigrant 
Wilderness at the time the wilderness area was designated as wilderness 
                          in that Public Law.

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

SECTION 1. RETENTION AND MAINTENANCE OF CERTAIN DAMS AND WEIRS, 
              EMIGRANT WILDERNESS, STANISLAUS NATIONAL FOREST, 
              CALIFORNIA.

    With respect to the Emigrant Wilderness in the Stanislaus National 
Forest, California, as designated by section 2(b) of Public Law 93-632 
(88 Stat. 2154; 16 U.S.C. 1132 note), the Secretary of Agriculture 
shall retain and maintain the 18 concrete dams and weirs that were 
located within the boundaries of the Emigrant Wilderness on the date of 
the enactment of such Public Law, January 3, 1975. If personnel of the 
Forest Service are unavailable to perform the maintenance of the dams 
and weirs, or to supplement the maintenance activities of Forest 
Service personnel, the Secretary shall contract with other persons to 
perform the maintenance at Government expense or permit other persons 
to perform the maintenance at private expense.
                                 <all>
```
2:09-cv-10918-PDB-MKM   Doc # 102    Filed 05/14/12   Pg 1 of 29    Pg ID 4621

2:09-cv-10918-PDB-MKM   Doc # 102    Filed 05/14/12   Pg 2 of 29    Pg ID 4622

2:09-cv-10918-PDB-MKM   Doc # 102    Filed 05/14/12   Pg 3 of 29    Pg ID 4623

2:09-cv-10918-PDB-MKM   Doc # 102    Filed 05/14/12   Pg 4 of 29    Pg ID 4624

2:09-cv-10918-PDB-MKM   Doc # 102    Filed 05/14/12   Pg 5 of 29    Pg ID 4625

2:09-cv-10918-PDB-MKM   Doc # 102    Filed 05/14/12   Pg 6 of 29    Pg ID 4626

2:09-cv-10918-PDB-MKM   Doc # 102    Filed 05/14/12   Pg 7 of 29    Pg ID 4627

2:09-cv-10918-PDB-MKM   Doc # 102    Filed 05/14/12   Pg 8 of 29    Pg ID 4628

2:09-cv-10918-PDB-MKM   Doc # 102    Filed 05/14/12   Pg 9 of 29    Pg ID 4629

2:09-cv-10918-PDB-MKM   Doc # 102    Filed 05/14/12   Pg 10 of 29    Pg ID 4630

2:09-cv-10918-PDB-MKM   Doc # 102    Filed 05/14/12   Pg 11 of 29    Pg ID 4631

2:09-cv-10918-PDB-MKM   Doc # 102    Filed 05/14/12   Pg 12 of 29    Pg ID 4632

2:09-cv-10918-PDB-MKM   Doc # 102    Filed 05/14/12   Pg 13 of 29    Pg ID 4633

2:09-cv-10918-PDB-MKM   Doc # 102    Filed 05/14/12   Pg 14 of 29    Pg ID 4634

2:09-cv-10918-PDB-MKM   Doc # 102    Filed 05/14/12   Pg 15 of 29    Pg ID 4635

2:09-cv-10918-PDB-MKM   Doc # 102    Filed 05/14/12   Pg 16 of 29    Pg ID 4636

2:09-cv-10918-PDB-MKM   Doc # 102    Filed 05/14/12   Pg 17 of 29    Pg ID 4637

2:09-cv-10918-PDB-MKM   Doc # 102    Filed 05/14/12   Pg 18 of 29    Pg ID 4638

2:09-cv-10918-PDB-MKM   Doc # 102    Filed 05/14/12   Pg 19 of 29    Pg ID 4639

2:09-cv-10918-PDB-MKM   Doc # 102    Filed 05/14/12   Pg 20 of 29    Pg ID 4640

2:09-cv-10918-PDB-MKM   Doc # 102    Filed 05/14/12   Pg 21 of 29    Pg ID 4641

2:09-cv-10918-PDB-MKM   Doc # 102    Filed 05/14/12   Pg 22 of 29    Pg ID 4642

2:09-cv-10918-PDB-MKM   Doc # 102    Filed 05/14/12   Pg 23 of 29    Pg ID 4643

2:09-cv-10918-PDB-MKM   Doc # 102    Filed 05/14/12   Pg 24 of 29    Pg ID 4644

2:09-cv-10918-PDB-MKM   Doc # 102    Filed 05/14/12   Pg 25 of 29    Pg ID 4645

2:09-cv-10918-PDB-MKM   Doc # 102    Filed 05/14/12   Pg 26 of 29    Pg ID 4646

2:09-cv-10918-PDB-MKM   Doc # 102    Filed 05/14/12   Pg 27 of 29    Pg ID 4647

2:09-cv-10918-PDB-MKM   Doc # 102    Filed 05/14/12   Pg 28 of 29    Pg ID 4648

2:09-cv-10918-PDB-MKM   Doc # 102    Filed 05/14/12   Pg 29 of 29    Pg ID 4649
exhibit_10-16.htm








EXHIBIT 10.16


 



 


Restricted Stock Agreement


 


Credo Argentarius, LLC ("Credo") rendered various consulting services, including providing background research, background checks and investigative and due diligence information on individuals and companies, and performed various administrative duties and clerical services, to Seafarer Exploration Corp. ("Seafarer") since 2008.


 


On August 8, 2013 Seafarer issued 600,000 shares of its restricted common stock (the "Shares") to Credo as payment for services rendered. The Shares were issued to Credo in book entry form.


 


The Shares were paid to offset the fact that the cash compensation that Seafarer had previously paid to Credo was not adequate to fully compensate Credo for the time and effort required to perform the consulting services. Additionally, Seafarer believes that Credo provided outstanding service to Seafarer and met or exceeded all expectations in performance of the consulting services. Therefore Seafarer also paid the Shares in order to show appreciation for Credo's willingness to provide services at below market rates of cash compensation and as an incentive and an inducement for Credo to continue to provide services to Seafarer. There was no previous billing for this amount by Credo.


 


Credo agreed to accept the 600,000 shares of Seafarer restricted common stock in lieu of receiving additional cash compensation for past consulting services that were provided to Seafarer.


 


Seafarer represents that the Shares issued under this Agreement were fully paid and non-assessable shares. There were no actions, proceedings or investigations pending or threatened which questioned the validity of the issuance of the Shares to Credo or any of the forgoing representations.


 


Credo provided all of the consulting services referenced in this Agreement as an independent contractor. Seafarer and Credo agree that this Agreement was effective and binding as of August 8, 2013.


 


 


Agreed to and Accepted,

 


 


Seafarer Exploration Corp.


 


 


By: /s/ Kyle Kennedy 








Name:Kyle Kennedy


Title:Cheif ExecutiveOfficer


 


 


 




Credo Argentarius, LLC


 


By: Linda Kennedy











Name:Linda Kennedy


Title:Managing Member


 


 


1
• 4

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

DA 20-0357

IN THE MATTER OF:

A.W. and B.W.

Youths in Need of Care.

FILED

OCT 2 7 2020

Bowen (...3 r eenwood

Clerk of Supreme Court

State of Montana

ORDER

Counsel for the appellant father of A.W. and B.W. filed a motion and brief asking

to be allowed to withdraw from this appeal on grounds that counsel has been unable to find

any nonfrivolous issues to raise on appeal, pursuant to § 46-8-103(2), MCA, and Anders v.

California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S. Ct. 1396 (1967). The father was granted time to file a

response, but no response was filed.

The Court has now independently examined the record pursuant to § 46-8-103(2),

MCA, and Anders. We conclude there are no arguments with potential legal merit that

could be raised in the father's appeal in this case.

Therefore,

IT IS ORDERED that this appeal is DISMISSED.

The Clerk is directed to provide copies of this Order to all counsel of record and to

the appellant father persot411y.

DATED this Z-)- ciay of October, 2020.

Chief Justice

10/27/2020
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack, Chief Justice

David F. Viviano,

Chief Justice Pro Tem

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh,

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.

 February 4, 2020

a0127

Order 

Clerk

February 4, 2020

159555(22)

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 159555

COA: 346486

Wayne CC: 14-004639-FC

ANTHONY ALEXANDER MADDOX, Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court’s September 

30, 2019 order is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that 

reconsideration of our previous order is warranted. MCR 7.311(G).
================================================================================

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 Glance, Inc. (the "Company") on  Form
10-QSB for the period ended December 31, 2007 as  filed with the Securities  and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned,  in  the
capacities and on  the  dates  indicated  below,  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:

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:  February 11, 2008

/s/ Moneca Rayner
---------------------------
Moneca Rayner
President, Chief Executive
Officer, and Director
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN

SOUTHERN DIVISION

JULEA WARD,

Plaintiff,

Case No. 09-CV-11237 

vs. HON. GEORGE CARAM STEEH

ROY WILBANKS, et al.,

Defendant.

_____________________________/

ORDER DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE

PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR A PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION (# 9)

ON CONSOLIDATING THE MOTION WITH TRIAL, AND

AMENDED SCHEDULING ORDER

The court held a status conference in chambers on November 4, 2009, prompted

by the defendants' recent filing of motions for dismissal/summary judgment, and the

plaintiff's filing of a Rule 56(f) motion. A hearing on plaintiff's April 21, 2009 motion for a

preliminary injunction is currently scheduled for December 14, 2009. At the conference,

counsel for both plaintiff and the defendants contemplated filing additional dispositive

motions before the December 14, 2009 hearing date. The court has determined that, for

purposes of judicial economy, the dispositive motions should be heard before plaintiff's

motion for a preliminary injunction, and that plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction

should be consolidated with a trial on the merits. Fed. R. Civ. P. 65(a)(2). Accordingly,

Plaintiff's April 21, 2009 motion for a preliminary injunction is hereby DENIED,

without prejudice, consistent with the motion being consolidated with a trial on the merits.

The court's June 1, 2009 Scheduling Order is hereby AMENDED to the extent that:

2:09-cv-11237-GCS-PJK Doc # 39 Filed 11/04/09 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 1385
2

Final Pretrial Order Due: March 8, 2010

Final Pretrial Conference: March 15, 2010 @ 10:00 a.m.

Non-Jury Trial: March 22, 2010 @ 9:00 a.m.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: November 4, 2009

s/George Caram Steeh 

GEORGE CARAM STEEH

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

Copies of this Order were served upon attorneys of record on

November 4, 2009, by electronic and/or ordinary mail.

s/Josephine Chaffee

Deputy Clerk

2:09-cv-11237-GCS-PJK Doc # 39 Filed 11/04/09 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 1386
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

GEORGE J. TORSILIERI,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 100 MM 2019

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 25th day of November, 2019, the Petition for Leave to File Petition 

for Allowance of Appeal Nunc Pro Tunc is GRANTED. Counsel is DIRECTED to file a 

Petition for Allowance of Appeal within 15 days.