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

 

 

**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

 

The Board of Directors

RehabCare Group, Inc:

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement No. 33-43236 on Form S-8, registration statement No. 33-67944 on Form S-8, registration statement No. 33-82106 on Form S-8, registration statement No. 33-82048 on Form S-8, registration statement No. 333-11311 on Form S-8, registration statement No. 333-120005 on Form S-8, and registration statement No. 333-138628 on Form S-8 of RehabCare Group, Inc. of our reports dated March 13, 2007, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of RehabCare Group, Inc. as of December 31, 2006 and 2005, and the related consolidated statements of earnings, stockholders’ equity and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2006, management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2006 and the effectiveness of internal control over financialreporting as of December 31, 2006, which reports appear in the December 31, 2006 annual report on Form 10-K of RehabCare Group, Inc.

 

Our report dated March 13, 2007, on management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2006, contains an explanatory paragraph that states RehabCare Group, Inc. excluded the recent acquisitions of the assets of Symphony Health Services, LLC (Symphony), Solara Hospital of New Orleans (Solara) and Memorial Rehabilitation Hospital (Memorial), which were acquired in purchase acquisitions during 2006.  Our audit of internal control over financial reporting of RehabCare Group, Inc. also excluded an evaluation of the internal control over financial reporting of Symphony, Solara, and Memorial.

 

Our report dated March 13, 2007 on the consolidated financial statements makes reference to our reliance on the report of other auditors as it relates to the amounts included for InteliStaf Holdings, Inc. and subsidiaries as of and for the year ended December 31, 2005.  In addition, our report refers to the adoption of Statement of Financial Accounting Standard No. 123(R), *Share Based-Payment*, effective January 1, 2006.

 

/s/ KPMG LLP

 

St. Louis, Missouri

March 13, 2007
#### Elizabeth Cioffi-Petrakis, Respondent, v Panagiotis Petrakis, Appellant.

Submitted June 3, 2013;

decided June 27, 2013

Motion by the American Academy of Matrimonial Lawyers for leave to appear amicus curiae on the motion for leave to appeal herein granted and the affirmation is accepted as filed.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

 Petitioner

 v.

ZACHERY TAYLOR BINKLEY,

 Respondent

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 143 MAL 2015

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the

Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 27th day of July, 2015, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is

DENIED.
---

EXHIBIT 12.1

SARBANES-OXLEY CEO CERTIFICATION

I, Rene G. Carrier, President of Quartz Mountain Resources
Ltd., certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Annual Report on Form 20-F of Quartz
Mountain Resources Ltd.

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
Company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The Companys other certifying officers and I are
responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures
(as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the Company and
have:

(a) Designed such disclosure controls
and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed
under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the
Company, 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
Companys disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our
conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures,
as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(c) Disclosed in this report any change
in the Company's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during
the period covered by the annual report that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the Company's internal control over
financial reporting; and

5. The Companys other certifying officer(s) and I have
disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of the internal control over
financial reporting, to the Companys auditors and the audit committee of
Companys board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):

(a) All significant deficiencies and
material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over
financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the
Companys ability to record, process, summarize and report financial
information; and

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material,
  that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the
  Companys internal control over financial reporting.

|Date:  | 15 December 2005   
|------ | -------------------
|       |                    
|       | /s/ Rene G. Carrier
|       |                    
|By:    | Rene G. Carrier    
|Title: | President          

---
<PAGE>


                                  Exhibit 23.1


                                BDO Seidman, LLP
                      1900 Avenue of the Starts, 11th Floor
                              Los Angeles, CA 90067




               Consent of Independent Certified Public Accountants


Sorrento Networks Corporation.
San Diego, California


We hereby consent to incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Nos. 333-28863, 333-22291 and 333-51445) 333-59730 and 333-68850 (IIG S-3
Debenture S-3) on Form S-3 and No. 333-92111 on Form S-8 of Sorrento Networks
Corporation (formerly Osicom Technologies, Inc.) of our report, dated
March 22, 2002, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of Sorrento
Networks Corporation and subsidiaries as of January 31, 2002 and 2001, and
the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders' equity, and
cash flows for the years ended January 31, 2002, 2001 and 2000, which report
appears in the January 31, 2002 annual report on Form 10-K of Sorrento Networks
Corporation.

Our report indicates that we did not audit the financial statements of a
discontinued foreign subsidiary which statements reflect net assets of
$1,632,000 as of January 31, 2000 and total revenues of $20,819,000 for the year
ended January 31, 2000. These amounts are included in the net investment in and
results of discontinued operations in the accompanying financial statements.
Those statements were audited by other auditors whose report has been furnished
to us, and our opinion, insofar as it relates to the amounts included for such
subsidiary, is based solely on the reports of the other auditors.



                                        BDO SEIDMAN, LLP

Los Angeles, California
March 22, 2002
**Exhibit32.1**

**CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF EXECUTIVEOFFICER**

**PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Qof Pinnacle Gas Resources, Inc. (the “Company”) for the period ending March 31,2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof(the “Report”), I, Peter G. Schoonmaker, President and Chief Executive Officerof the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adoptedpursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1)           TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)           Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.

Date: May 30, 2007
|        |   | /s/ Peter  G. Schoonmaker             |   |
|--------|--------|---------------------------------------|--------|
|   |   | Peter G. Schoonmaker                  |   |
|   |   | President and Chief Executive Officer |   |

 

----
NOTE : This order is nonprecedential. 

# United States Court of Appeals **for the Federal Circuit**

______________________ In re: E

- Z

- DOCK, INC., Plaintiff

- Appellant

______________________ 2023

- 1253

______________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida in No. 2:21

- cv

- 00450

- SPC

- NPM , Judge Sheri Polster Chappell.

______________________ O R D E R The parties having so agreed, it is ordered that: (1) The proceeding is DISMISSED under Fed. R. App

. P. 42 (b). (2) Each side shall bear their own costs.

FOR THE COURT
August 30, 2023 Date /s/ Jarrett B. Perlow Jarrett B. Perlow Clerk of Court

ISSUED AS A MANDATE: August 30, 2023 Case: 23-1253 Document: 15 Page: 1 Filed: 08/30/2023
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 All American Pet Company, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q/A for the period ended March 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Victor Hollander, CFO and Principal Accounting 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:





3.
The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





4.
The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.








/S/ Victor HollanderVictor HollanderCFO andPrincipal Accounting OfficerAugust 18, 2010
***Exhibit 31.1******CERTIFICATIONS***     I, Gary L. Scott, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this Form 10-Q of Mid-America Bancshares, Inc.;     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects, the financial condition, results ofoperations 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 andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:(a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;(b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation;and(c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting; and     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors:(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who havea significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.May 8, 2007/s/ Gary L. Scott
OFFICIAL NOTICE FROM COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS

OFFIGIABORUESIAGAREDL stATIO S (189.EKOSTAGE)) PITNEY BOWES.

PENALTY FOR ———— os
PRIVATE USE zp 78701 § 000.27

&? 0001401623 JUN. 24. 2015.

6/17/2015
LEWIS, DARREN D.
On this day, the application fors(1-

WR-83,458-01

and presented to the Court ~ ai ‘
X ” Abel Acosta, Clerk
DARREN D. LEWIS hue
PLU ePID -. TIC #1964379

ey
See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(d) ("When denying relief, the court may hand down an opinion but is not 1

required to do so."); TEX. R. APP. P. 47.4 (distinguishing opinions and memorandum opinions).

 Pursuant to order, the real party in interes t’s response to the petition for writ of mandamus was 2

originally due on May 9, 2008. The real party in interest filed a motion or extension of time to file his response

until May 14, 2008, and the same was filed on May 14, 2008. The Court herein GRANTS this motion for

NUMBER 13-08-00237-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________

IN RE BRANDI FRAZIER

____________________________________________________________

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus

____________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Garza and Benavides

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam1

Relator, Brandi Frazier, filed a petition for writ of mandamus in the above cause on

April 3, 2006, asking this Court to compel the respondent, the Honorable Marisela Saldana,

Presiding Judge of the 148th District Court of Nueces County, to vacate a temporary order

signed on December 5, 2007. The Court requested and received a response from the real

party in interest, John Longoria, and one has been filed. 

2
extension of time. 

2

The Court, having examined and fully considered the petition for writ of mandamus

and the response, is of the opinion that relator has not shown herself entitled to the relief

sought, and the petition for writ of mandamus should be denied. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8.

Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is DENIED. 

PER CURIAM

Memorandum Opinion delivered

and filed this 9th day of June, 2008.
#### WILD v. KNUDSEN (two cases).

Nos. 207, 208.

District Court, E. D. Tennessee, S. D.

March 4, 1941.

Berke & Fleming, of Chattanooga, Tenn., for plaintiffs.

Raulston & Raulston, of South Pittsburg, Tenn., for defendant.

DARR, District Judge.

These are companion cases and substantially the same questions are raised for consideration. For this reason a decision will be announced in both cases in one opinion.

The cases were removed from a state court before initial pleading was filed. The relief sought is based upon negligence. The plaintiffs had prepared their declarations to be filed in the state court and when the causes were removed, filed their declarations as complaints in this court.

By motion the defendant seeks to strike certain portions of the declarations.

It is my judgment that the substance and form of the declarations as prepared for state court do not comply with the spirit and letter of the provisions of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure as contained in Rule 8(a) and Rule 10, 28 U.S.C.A. following section 723c.

It is true that if the pleadings are filed before removal, such pleadings may stand to make the issue in the federal court. But if the pleadings are not filed until after the removal, the pleadings must conform to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

*647It is my judgment that due regard should be given to Rule 8(a) and Rule 10, with consideration for Rule 84, and that the complaint should be in substantially the form provided in the Appendix of Forms to the Rules in Official Form 9.

The defendant contends in his motion that the negligence based upon violations of state statutes, as contained in the declarations, are in effect the same as the common law negligence, and should be stricken from the pleadings.

I am of the opinion that the plaintiffs are entitled to plead negligence by reason of the violation of these statutes and this complaint of the defendant can be better adjudicated at the trial as the proof develops. The plaintiffs may plead the violations of the statutes as contained in their declarations.

It results that it is my judgment that the declarations should be stricken in their entirety and that the plaintiffs should re-plead in conformity to the announcements in this decision.

The plaintiffs will be given fifteen days to file their complaints.

It is so adjudged.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 08-6120

ANTOINE L. THOMAS,

Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

GENE M. JOHNSON, Director of Virginia D.O.C.,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District

Judge. (2:07-cv-00219-RAJ-FBS)

Submitted: March 25, 2008 Decided: March 31, 2008

Before MOTZ, KING, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Antoine L. Thomas, Appellant Pro Se. Karen Misbach, OFFICE OF THE

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Antoine L. Thomas seeks to appeal the district court’s

order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and

denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000) petition. The order

is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a

certificate of appealability. See 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 any

assessment of the constitutional claims by the district court is

debatable or wrong and that any dispositive procedural ruling by

the district court is likewise debatable. See Miller-El

v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 336-38 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529

U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v. Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683-84 (4th Cir.

2001). We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that

Thomas has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a

certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma

pauperis, 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
IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

David Harri s and Steven Thompson, :

Appellants :

:

v. : No. 169 C.D. 2022

:

SEPTA Police Detective Dani el :

Burgmann, SEPTA Police Detective :

Stewart, SEPTA Police Detective :

Bacon, and SEPTA Police :

Detective Bryan McCauley :

PER CURIAM O R D E R

NOW, July 6, 2023

, having considered A ppell ee s ’ application for

re consideration and A ppell ants’ answer in response thereto , the application is

DENIED

.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

July 20, 2018

No. 04-18-00459-CR

Victor RIGGAN,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the County Court at Law, Kerr County, Texas

Trial Court No. CR171327

Honorable Susan Harris, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

The court reporter responsible for preparing the reporter’s record in this appeal has filed a 

notification of late record, stating that the appellant has failed to pay or make arrangements to 

pay the fee for preparing the reporter’s record.

We, therefore, ORDER appellant to provide written proof to this court on or before July 

30, 2018 that either (1) the reporter’s fee has been paid or arrangements have been made to pay 

the reporter’s fee; or (2) appellant is entitled to appeal without paying the reporter’s fee. If 

appellant fails to respond on or before July 30, 2018, appellant’s brief will be due within thirty 

days from the date of this order, and the court will only consider those issues or points raised in 

appellant’s brief that do not require a reporter’s record for a decision. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(c).

_________________________________

Irene Rios, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 20th day of July, 2018.
___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
# covid_table28_c24_naics
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

NELSON IVAN DEL VALLE NAZARIO, )

)

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D18-1133

)

STATE OF FLORIDA, )

)

Appellee. )

)

Opinion filed June 28, 2019. 

Appeal from the Circuit Court for 

Hillsborough County; Mark Wolfe, Judge.

Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and 

J.L. "Ray" LeGrande, Special Assistant 

Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, 

Tallahassee, and Kiersten E. Jensen, 

Assistant Attorney General, Tampa, for 

Appellee. 

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. 

CASANUEVA, VILLANTI, and LUCAS, JJ., Concur.
1. Maxcime Cagan, DOB SBI# 517011E is now confined in Bergen County Jail

2. Said individual will be required at United States District Court, before the Honorable Stanley R. Chesler, Friday, February 4, 2011 at 10:00 a.m. for an ARRAIGNMENT, in the above captioned case, in which heis a defendant and a Writ of Habeas Corpus should be issued for that purpose

/

DATED: January 31, 2011 //

Assistant United States Attorney

Petitioner Michael H. Robertson

ORDER FOR WRIT: Let the Writ Issue.

DATED

‘J / / ôNOLE Stanley R Chesler -‘ UNITED STATES Distict JUDGE

WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS: The United States of America to

WARDEN, BERGEN COUNTY JAILWE COMMAND YOU, that you have the body of Z4AXCIME CAGAN, now confined in Bergen County Jail brought to the United States District Court before the Honorable Stanley R. Chesler in Newark, New Jersey on Friday, February 4th, 2011 at 10:00 am, for an Arraignment, in the above-captioned matter. Immediately on completion of the proceedings, defendant will be returned to said place of confinement in safe and secure conduct.

WITNESS the Honorable Stanley R. Chesler

United States District Judge at Newark, N.J.

DATED: WILLIAM T. WALSH

Clerk of the U.S. District Courtfor the District of New Jersey

I

‘ ( - ‘

Deput.- Clerk