alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 21.01

                         Kenneth Cole Productions, Inc.

                              List of Subsidiaries


Name                                                 State of Incorporation

1. Kenneth Cole Productions, Inc.                    New York

2. Kenneth Cole Financial Services, Inc.             New Jersey

3. Cole Carnegie, Inc.                               New York

4. Kenth Ltd.                                        Hong Kong

5. Kenneth Cole Catalog, Inc.                        Virginia

6. Kenneth Cole Services, Inc.                       Delaware

7. K.C.P.L., Inc.                                    Delaware

8. Cole South Beach, Inc.                            Florida

9. Cole Somerset, Inc.                               Michigan

10. Kenneth Cole Gilroy, Inc.                        California

11. Cole NorthPark, Inc.                             Texas

12. Cole Phipps, Inc.                                Georgia

13. Cole Westchester, Inc.                           New York

14. Cole Tyson, Inc.                                 Virginia

15. Cole Napa, Inc.                                  California

16. Cole Destin, Inc.                                Florida

17. Cole Prussia, Inc.                               Pennsylvania

18. Cole Pentagon, Inc.                              Virginia

19. Cole Sawgrass, Inc.                              Florida

20. Kenneth Cole, Inc. (Secaucus Outlet)             New York

21. Cole Short Hills, Inc.                           New Jersey

22. Cole Cabazon, Inc.                               California

23. Cole Copley, Inc.                                Massachusetts

24. Cole Stanford, Inc.                              California

25. Cole Roosevelt, Inc.                             New York

26. Cole Newbury, Inc.                               Massachusetts

27. Cole Waikele, Inc. (Hawaii)                      New York

28. Cole Reading Outlet, Inc.                        Pennsylvania

29. Cole Broadway, Inc.                              New York

30. Cole Amsterdam, B.V.                             Amsterdam
    Cole Amsterdam, Inc.                             Delaware

31. Cole Clinton, Inc.                               Connecticut



<PAGE>

32. Cole Boca, Inc.                                  Florida

33. Cole Century City, Inc.                          California

34. Cole Georgetown, Inc.                            District of Columbia

35. Cole Dadeland, Inc.                              Florida

36. Cole Aspen, Inc.                                 Delaware

37. Cole Houston, Inc.                               Delaware

38. Cole Fashion Valley, Inc.                        Delaware
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. KENNETH S. HAYES.

May 2, 1989.

Petition for certification denied.
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. SAMUEL T. WHEELER.

April 19, 1989.

Petition for certification denied.
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Rachel Hoover","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/rlhoove1\/","title":"All Together Now: Drill Joins Other Moon Rover Science Instruments","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"pINUSJ0sHx\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/general\/all-together-now-drill-joins-other-moon-rover-science-instruments\/\">All Together Now: Drill Joins Other Moon Rover Science Instruments<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/general\/all-together-now-drill-joins-other-moon-rover-science-instruments\/embed\/#?secret=pINUSJ0sHx\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“All Together Now: Drill Joins Other Moon Rover Science Instruments” — NASA\" data-secret=\"pINUSJ0sHx\" 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","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/10\/jsc2023e053794-2.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":400}
Exhibit 23

                            Zafar Husain Siddiqui
                            Chartered Accountant

                      CONSENT OF Zafar Husain Siddiqui

The undersigned, Zafar Husain Siddiqui, Chartered Accountants hereby
Consent to the use of our name and the use of our opinion dated August 12,
2001 on the consolidated financial statements of The Widecom Group Inc.
("the Company") for the years ended March 31, 2000 and 2001 included in
Form 10-K Annual Report being filed by the Company.


Toronto, Ontario                       /s/ Zafar Husain Siddiqui llp
August 15, 2001                             Charted Accountants
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. PERRY L. HERRING.

May 30, 1989.

Petition for certification denied.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

David Turner,

Plaintiff,

v.

Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

MDL Case No. 2:15-md-02641-DGC

Civil Action No. CV-16-00554-PHX-DGC

WAIVER OF THE SERVICE OF SUMMONS

To: Shaw Cowart, LLP

(Name of plaintiff’s attorney or unrepresented plaintiff)

I have received your request to waive service of a summons in this action along with a copy of the complaint, two 

copies of this waiver form, and a prepaid means of returning one signed copy of the form to you.

I, or the entity I represent, agree to save the expense of serving a summons and complaint in this case.

I understand that I, or the entity I represent, will keep all defenses or objections to the lawsuit, the court’s 

jurisdiction, and the venue of the action, but that I waive any objections to the absence of a summons or of service.

I also understand that I, or the entity I represent, must file and serve an answer or a motion under Rule 12 within 

60 days from 3/1/2016, the date when this request was sent (or 90 days if it was sent outside the United States). If I fail to 

do so, a default judgment will be entered against me or the entity I represent.

Date: March 2, 2016 /s/ Richard B. North, Jr.

Signature of the attorney or unrepresented party

 Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc.

Printed name of party waiving service

of summons

Richard B. North, Jr. (Ga. Bar No. 545599)

Printed Name

Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, LLP

201 17th St., NW, Suite 1700, Atlantic Station, Atlanta, GA 30363

Address

richard.north@nelsonmullins.com

E-mail Address

(404) 322-6155

Telephone number

Duty to Avoid Unnecessary Expenses of Serving a Summons

Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires certain defendants to cooperate in saving unnecessary expenses of serving a 

summons and complaint. A defendant who is located in the United States and who fails to return a signed waiver of service requested by a plaintiff 

located in the United States will be required to pay the expenses of service, unless the defendant shows good cause for the failure. 

“Good cause” does not include a belief that the lawsuit is groundless, or that it has been brought in an improper venue, or that the court has 

no jurisdiction over this matter or over the defendant or the defendant’s property. 

If the waiver is signed and returned, you can still make these and all other defenses and objections, but you cannot object to the absence of 

a summons or of service. 

If you waive service, then you must, within the time specified on the waiver form, serve an answer or a motion under Rule 12 on the 

plaintiff and file a copy with the court. By signing and returning the waiver form, you are allowed more time to respond than if a summons had been 

served.

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 981 Filed 03/04/16 Page 1 of 1
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

LORENZO LEE WILLIAMS, DOC #127304, )

)

Appellant, )

)

v. )

) Case No. 2D16-4911

STATE OF FLORIDA, ) 

)

Appellee. )

)

Opinion filed March 23, 2018. 

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Highlands 

County; Peter F. Estrada, Judge.

Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and 

John C. Fisher, Assistant Public Defender, 

Bartow, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, 

Tallahassee, and Jeffrey H. Siegal,

Assistant Attorney General, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Lorenzo Williams appeals the order revoking his probation in circuit court 

case numbers 15-438 and 15-494 after a hearing. We affirm without comment the trial 

court's finding that Williams willfully violated condition five and special condition four of 

his probation by committing new law offenses and contacting the victim and the court's 

revocation of Williams' probation. However, we reverse the revocation order to the 
2

extent that it incorrectly states that Williams admitted the violations, and we remand for 

the trial court to correct this scrivener's error. See Hamilton v. State, 128 So. 3d 177 

(Fla. 2d DCA 2013).

Affirmed in part; reversed in part; remanded with instructions. 

VILLANTI, SLEET, and ROTHSTEIN-YOUAKIM, JJ., Concur.
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Lillian Gipson","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/lillian-gipson-1nasa-gov\/","title":"Stunning Aeronautics Images Gallery","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"EyujRsb8av\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/gallery\/stunning-aeronautics-images-gallery\/\">Stunning Aeronautics Images Gallery<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/gallery\/stunning-aeronautics-images-gallery\/embed\/#?secret=EyujRsb8av\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Stunning Aeronautics Images Gallery” — NASA\" data-secret=\"EyujRsb8av\" 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","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/images-assets.nasa.gov\/image\/AFRC2024-0048-06\/AFRC2024-0048-06~large.jpg?w=600&h=1280&fit=clip&crop=faces%2Cfocalpoint","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":1280}
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                    EXHIBIT 31.2

                                  CERTIFICATION

I, James Charles, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this transition report on Form 10-Q of Interpharm Holdings,
Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a
material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements
made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not
misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a 14 and 15d 14) for the registrant and we have:

           a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this report is being prepared;

           b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure
controls and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of
this report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

           c) presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness
of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the
Evaluation Date;

5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of
registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

           a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of
internal controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to
record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the
registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

           b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or
other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
controls; and

6. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have indicated in this report
whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other
factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the date
of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with regard to
significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Date:      November 14, 2003


/s/ James Charles
--------------------------------
James Charles
Chief Financial Officer





<PAGE>
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Jim Banke","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/jim-bankenasa-gov\/","title":"NASA Contracts to Demonstrate Unmanned Aircraft Technologies","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"HHT7puARMG\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/aeronautics\/nasa-contracts-to-demonstrate-unmanned-aircraft-technologies\/\">NASA Contracts to Demonstrate Unmanned Aircraft Technologies<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/aeronautics\/nasa-contracts-to-demonstrate-unmanned-aircraft-technologies\/embed\/#?secret=HHT7puARMG\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“NASA Contracts to Demonstrate Unmanned Aircraft Technologies” — NASA\" data-secret=\"HHT7puARMG\" 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","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2018\/10\/pae_isr_resolute_eagle.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":400}
[Cite as State v. Montoya, 138 Ohio St.3d 345, 2014-Ohio-848.] 

THE STATE OF OHIO, APPELLEE, v. MONTOYA, APPELLANT. 

[Cite as State v. Montoya, 138 Ohio St.3d 345, 2014-Ohio-848.] 

Court of appeals’ judgment affirmed on the authority of State v. Miranda.

(No. 2013-1344—Submitted February 26, 2013—Decided March 13, 2014.) 

APPEAL from the Court of Appeals for Clermont County, No. CA2012-02-015, 

2013-Ohio-3312. 

____________________ 

{¶ 1} The judgment of the court of appeals is affirmed on the authority 

of State v. Miranda, 138 Ohio St.3d 184, 2014-Ohio-451, 5 N.E.3d 603. 

O’CONNOR, C.J., and PFEIFER, O’DONNELL, LANZINGER, KENNEDY,

FRENCH, and O’NEILL, JJ., concur. 

____________________ 

Vincent Faris, Clermont County Prosecuting Attorney, and Judith Brant, 

Assistant Prosecuting Attorney, for appellee. 

Timothy Young, Ohio Public Defender, and Peter Galyardt, Assistant 

Public Defender, for appellant. 

_________________________
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Forms S-8 No. 333-107246, dated July 22, 2003; No.333-102209, dated December 26, 2002; No. 333-010179, dated November 7, 2002; No. 333-65188, dated July 16, 2001; No. 333-60702, dated May 11, 2001; No. 333-49436, dated November 7, 2000; No. 333-88645, dated October 8, 1999; No. 333-79463, dated May27, 1999; No. 333-79457, dated May 27, 1999; No. 333-74555, dated March 17, 1999; No. 333-56473, dated June 10, 1998; and No. 333-15069, dated October 30, 1996 pertaining to various employee benefit plans of Main Street Banks, Inc. and on Form S-3No. 333-111505 of our reports dated March 4, 2005, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Main Street Banks, Inc., Main Street Banks Inc.’s management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financialreporting, and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of Main Street Banks Inc., included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2004. 

 

/s/ Ernst & Young LLP 

 

Atlanta, Georgia 

March 11, 2005
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Clara Clyburn Abdelrazea,

Plaintiff,

v.

C. R. Bard Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

MDL Case No. 2:15-md-02641-DGC

Civil Action No. CV-17-04519-PHX-DGC

WAIVER OF THE SERVICE OF SUMMONS

To: Weitz & Luxenberg, PC

(Name of plaintiff’s attorney or unrepresented plaintiff)

I have received your request to waive service of a summons in this action along with a copy of the complaint, two 

copies of this waiver form, and a prepaid means of returning one signed copy of the form to you.

I, or the entity I represent, agree to save the expense of serving a summons and complaint in this case.

I understand that I, or the entity I represent, will keep all defenses or objections to the lawsuit, the court’s 

jurisdiction, and the venue of the action, but that I waive any objections to the absence of a summons or of service.

I also understand that I, or the entity I represent, must file and serve an answer or a motion under Rule 12 within 

60 days from 12/6/2017, the date when this request was sent (or 90 days if it was sent outside the United States). If I fail 

to do so, a default judgment will be entered against me or the entity I represent.

Date: December 8, 2017 /s/ Richard B. North, Jr.

Signature of the attorney or unrepresented party

C. R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Peripheral

Vascular, Inc.

Printed name of parties waiving service of 

summons

Richard B. North, Jr. (Ga. Bar No. 545599)

Printed Name

Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, LLP

201 17th St., NW, Suite 1700, Atlantic Station, Atlanta, GA 30363

Address

richard.north@nelsonmullins.com

E-mail Address

(404) 322-6155

Telephone number

Duty to Avoid Unnecessary Expenses of Serving a Summons

Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires certain defendants to cooperate in saving unnecessary expenses of serving a 

summons and complaint. A defendant who is located in the United States and who fails to return a signed waiver of service requested by a plaintiff 

located in the United States will be required to pay the expenses of service, unless the defendant shows good cause for the failure. 

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 9275 Filed 12/12/17 Page 1 of 2
2

“Good cause” does not include a belief that the lawsuit is groundless, or that it has been brought in an improper venue, or that the court has 

no jurisdiction over this matter or over the defendant or the defendant’s property. 

If the waiver is signed and returned, you can still make these and all other defenses and objections, but you cannot object to the absence of 

a summons or of service. 

If you waive service, then you must, within the time specified on the waiver form, serve an answer or a motion under Rule 12 on the 

plaintiff and file a copy with the court. By signing and returning the waiver form, you are allowed more time to respond than if a summons had been 

served.

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 9275 Filed 12/12/17 Page 2 of 2