alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 21.1

SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT



|                                                                       |  |                                             
|---------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | --------------------------------------------
|NAME OF SUBSIDIARY                                                     |  | STATE OR OTHER JURISDICTION OF INCORPORATION
|TriQuint, Inc. (f/k/a Sawtek, Inc.)                                    |  | Florida                                     
|TriQuint Asia, Inc. (f/k/a Sawtek Far East, Inc.)                      |  | Delaware                                    
|TriQuint Japan TYK                                                     |  | Japan                                       
|TriQuint (Shanghai) Trading Company, Ltd.                              |  | China                                       
|Sawtek Sweden AB                                                       |  | Sweden                                      
|TFR Technologies, Inc.                                                 |  | Oregon                                      
|TriQuint S.R.L. (f/k/a Sawtek S.R.L)                                   |  | Costa Rica                                  
|TriQuint Semiconductor GmbH                                            |  | Germany                                     
|                                                                       | 
|TriQuint Texas General Holding Company                                 |  | Delaware                                    
|TriQuint Texas Limited Holding Company                                 |  | Delaware                                    
|TriQuint Semiconductor Texas, LP                                       |  | Texas                                       
|                                                                       | 
|TriQuint Sales and Design, Inc. (f/k/a TriQuint Optoelectronics, Inc.) |  | Delaware                                    
|                                                                       | 
|TriQuint Technology Holding Co.                                        |  | Delaware                                    
|                                                                       | 
|TriQuint International Holding Co.                                     |  | Delaware                                    
|                                                                       | 
|TriQuint Europe Holding Company                                        |  | Delaware
#### § 902.1 Purpose and authority.

The purpose of Part 902 is to establish protocols and procedures for the adjudication of disputes by the Compact Council. The Compact Council is established pursuant to the National Crime Prevention and Privacy Compact (Compact), Title 42, U.S.C., Chapter 140, Subchapter II, Section 14616.
Exhibit 32

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT BY
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


         In  connection   with  the  Quarterly   Report  of  Western   Financial
Corporation,  on Form 10-QSB for the period  ending  September 30, 2004 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),
the  undersigned,  Daniel L.  Hodges,  Chief  Executive  Officer  and  Principal
Accounting Officer of the Company,  certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted  pursuant to ss. 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002, that to the
best of my knowledge and belief:

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

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


Date: April 19, 2005


/s/ Daniel L. Hodges
Daniel L. Hodges
President
(Principal Executive & Accounting Officer)

A signed  original of this written  statement  required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the  electronic  version of this written  statement
has been  provided  to the  Company  and will be  retained  by the  Company  and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### J. Schnyder A. G., a Corporation, Respondent, v. Draeger Shipping Co., Inc., et al., Defendants, and Chester C. Sztejn, Defendant-Appellant.

Present — Martin, P. J., Townley, Glennon, Untermyer and Dore, JJ.
### §449. Acceptance of donations of land and funds; acquisition of land

The Secretary of the Interior be, and he is, authorized to accept donations of land, interests in land and/or buildings, structures, and other property within the boundaries of said national monument as determined and fixed hereunder, and donations of funds for the purchase and/or maintenance thereof, the title and evidence of title to lands acquired to be satisfactory to the Secretary of the Interior: Provided, That he may acquire on behalf of the United States out of any donated funds, by purchase at prices deemed by him reasonable, or by condemnation under the provisions of section 3113 of title 40, such tracts of land within the said national monument as may be necessary for the completion thereof.

(June 18, 1934, ch. 573, §2, 48 Stat. 983.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

"Section 3113 of title 40" substituted in text for "the Act of August 1, 1888" on authority of Pub. L. 107–217, §5(c), Aug. 21, 2002, 116 Stat. 1303, the first section of which enacted Title 40, Public Buildings, Property, and Works.
# Official Journal C 406/2020

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 406 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6326 November 2020 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 406

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6326 November 2020

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | III   Preparatory acts |
| | COUNCIL |
| 2020/C 406/01 | Position (EU) No 13/2020 of the Council at first reading with a view to the adoption of a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the service in the Member States of judicial and extrajudicial documents in civil or commercial matters (service of documents) (recast) Adopted by the Council on 4 November 2020 | 1 |
| 2020/C 406/02 | Statement of the Council’s reasons: Position (EU) No 13/2020 of the Council at first reading with a view to the adoption of a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the service in the Member States of judicial and extrajudicial documents in civil or commercial matters (service of documents) (recast) | 41 |

Contents

page

III   Preparatory acts

COUNCIL

2020/C 406/01

Position (EU) No 13/2020 of the Council at first reading with a view to the adoption of a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the service in the Member States of judicial and extrajudicial documents in civil or commercial matters (service of documents) (recast) Adopted by the Council on 4 November 2020

1

2020/C 406/02

Statement of the Council’s reasons: Position (EU) No 13/2020 of the Council at first reading with a view to the adoption of a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council on the service in the Member States of judicial and extrajudicial documents in civil or commercial matters (service of documents) (recast)

41

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
#### HIGH EXPOSURE, INC., Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, Federal Aviation Administration, Respondents.

No. 01-2615.

United States Court of Appeals, Third Circuit.

Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a) April 18, 2002.

Filed April 29, 2002.

Before NYGAARD and AMBRO, Circuit Judges, and O’NEILL, District Judge.

OPINION OF THE COURT

PER CURIAM.

High Exposure, Inc., petitions for review of an order of the FAA assessing a civil penalty against it in the amount of eleven hundred dollars for violating sections 91.119(a), (b), and 91.13(a) of the Federal Aviation Regulations. See 14 C.F.R. § 91.119(a),(b) (2001); 14 C.F.R. § 91.13 (2001). We have jurisdiction under 49 U.S.C. § 46110(a) (1994). The parties are familiar with the facts and procedural posture underlying this matter; therefore, because we write solely for the benefit of the parties we will proceed directly to High Exposure’s contentions.

I.

High Exposure asserts that the ALJ’s findings were not supported by substantial evidence. We disagree. While alleging that the ALJ committed numerous errors, at bottom petitioner argues that the evidence was insufficient to show that it operated the aircraft in question below the permissible flight ceiling. In reviewing an appeal from an administrative body, we are bound by the agencies factual findings if supported by substantial evidence. See *Air East, Inc., v. NTSB,*512 F.2d 1227, 1233 (3d Cir.1975). We have throughly reviewed the record in this case and conclude that the record contains ample evidence that the plane was operated by petitioner, and that the plane flew below the permissible ceiling on the day in question.

For example, in regard to establishing that the plane was in fact operated by petitioner, the ALJ relied on the testimony *425of two FAA inspectors who witnessed the plane on the day in question, as well as the testimony of the president of the High Exposure, who admitted that his company’s plane was towing a banner in the vicinity on the day in question. Further, there was testimony from the advertising agency to the effect that it contracted with High Exposure to tow the banner, which the FAA inspectors observed on the day in question. With regard to the ALJ’s finding that petitioner’s plane flew below the permissible ceiling, there was testimony as to the altitude of High Exposure’s plane from another pilot who passed the petitioner’s plane. Based on the foregoing, we cannot say that the ALJ’s findings were not based on substantial evidence. As a result, we will affirm the FAA’s Order.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 20-6632

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

JOHN ADAM RILLO,

 Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at 

Greensboro. William L. Osteen, Jr., District Judge. (1:14-cr-00341-WO-1;

1:17-cv-00938-WO-JEP)

Submitted: December 17, 2020 Decided: January 6, 2021

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

John Adam Rillo, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

John Adam Rillo seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the 

recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on Rillo’s 28 U.S.C. § 2255

motion. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of 

appealability. See 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(B). 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). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this

standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists could find the district court’s assessment 

of the constitutional claims debatable or wrong. See Buck v. Davis, 137 S. Ct. 759, 773-74 

(2017). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must 

demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable and that the motion

states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Gonzalez v. Thaler, 565 U.S. 

134, 140-41 (2012) (citing Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)). 

We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Rillo has not made 

the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny 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 this court and argument would not aid the 

decisional process. 

DISMISSED
Exhibit 32.1

SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
Morteza Ejabat, Chief Executive Officer of Zhone Technologies, Inc. (the Company), and Kirk Misaka, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certify that, to their knowledge:



|1. | The Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2009 (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 6, 2009



|                        |  |  |  |                        
|----------------------- |  |  |  | -----------------------
|/s/    MORTEZA EJABAT   |  |  |  | /s/    KIRK MISAKA     
|Morteza Ejabat          |  |  |  | Kirk Misaka            
|Chief Executive Officer |  |  |  | Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 32

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT BY
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


         In  connection  with the Quarterly  Report of Spring Valley  Management
Corp.,  on Form  10-QSB for the period  ending  June 30,  2005 as filed with the
Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof (the  "REPORT"),  the
undersigned,  Robert D. Hadley, Chief Executive Officer and Principal Accounting
Officer of the Company,  certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to ss. 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  that to the best of my
knowledge and belief:

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

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


Date: November 21, 2005


/s/ Robert D. Hadley
Robert D. Hadley
President
(Principal Executive & Accounting Officer)


A signed  original of this written  statement  required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the  electronic  version of this written  statement
has been  provided  to the  Company  and will be  retained  by the  Company  and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
EXHIBIT 32.1





Section 906 Certification by the Chief
Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer



Stephen J. Schoepfer, Chief Executive Officer
and Chief Financial Officer of Westport Energy Holdings Inc., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”) hereby certifies
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as added by ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to their knowledge:



(1) The Company’s periodic report
on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2012 (“Form 10-Q”) 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 Form
10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.





|                               |  |  |                                | 
|------------------------------ |  |  | ------------------------------ | 
|/s/ Stephen J. Schoepfer       |  |  | /s/ Stephen J. Schoepfer       | 
|                               |  |  |                                | 
|Name: Stephen J. Schoepfer     |  |  | Name: Stephen J. Schoepfer     | 
|Title: Chief Executive Officer |  |  | Title: Chief Financial Officer | 
|                               |  |  |                                | 
|Date: January 11, 2013         |  |  |                                |
Appendix E2 

Empire Connector Project
**Important legal notice**

*|*

# 32005M3857

**Commission Decision of 29/07/2005 declaring a concentration to be compatible with the common market (Case No IV/M.3857 - SITA / FLUGHAFEN DÜSSELDORF / FDITG) according to Council Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 (Only the English text is authentic)****

| |Brussels, 29.07.2005

SG-Greffe(2005) D/204117

To the notifying parties

Dear Madam(s) and/or Sir(s),

Subject : Case No. COMP/M.3857 - SITA/Flughafen Düsseldorf/FDITG Notification of 01.07.2005 pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No. 139/2004 [1] Publication in the Official Journal of the European Union No. C 172, 12.7.2005, p. 19.

1.  On 01.07.2005 , the Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of Council Regulation (EC) No. 139/2004 by which the undertakings SITA Information Networking Computing BV (“SITA”, The Netherlands) and Flughafen Düsseldorf GmbH (“Flughafen Düsseldorf”, Germany), controlled by the city of Düsseldorf (“Stadt Düsseldorf”, Germany) and Hochtief AG (“Hochtief”, Germany), acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) of the Council Regulation joint control of Flughafen Düsseldorf Informationstechnologie GmbH (“FDITG”, Germany), currently solely controlled by Flughafen Düsseldorf, by way of purchase of shares.

2.  The business activities of the undertakings concerned are:

- For SITA: provision of information and telecommunications services to global air transport and related industries

- for Flughafen Düsseldorf: operation of Düsseldorf airport in Germany

- for FDITG: provision and marketing of IT and telecommunications services for the campus of the Düsseldorf airport and business park “Airport City”

3.  After examination of the notification, the Commission has concluded that the notified operation falls within the scope of Council Regulation (EC) No. 139/2004 and of paragraph 5, subparagraphs a and c, of the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under Council Regulation (EC) No. 139/2004[2].

4.  For the reasons set out in the Notice on a simplified procedure, the Commission has decided not to oppose the notified operation and to declare it compatible with the common market and with the EEA Agreement. This decision is adopted in application of Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No. 139/2004.

For the Commission

signed Neelie KROES Member of the Commission

[1] OJ L 24, 29.1.2004 p. 1

[2] OJ C 56, 05.3.2005 p.32

MERGER PROCEDURE

ARTICLE 6(1)(b) DECISION

SIMPLIFIED PROCEDURE

PUBLIC VERSION
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4745 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 4745

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow refunds of Federal 
 motor fuel excise taxes on fuels used in mobile mammography vehicles.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            October 18, 2019

 Mr. Luetkemeyer (for himself, Mrs. Wagner, and Mr. Costa) introduced 
  the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and 
                                 Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow refunds of Federal 
 motor fuel excise taxes on fuels used in mobile mammography vehicles.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Mobile Mammography Promotion Act of 
2019''.

SEC. 2. REFUNDS OF FEDERAL MOTOR FUEL EXCISE TAXES FOR FUEL USED IN 
              MOBILE MAMMOGRAPHY VEHICLES.

    (a) Refunds.--Section 6427 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 
(relating to fuels not used for taxable purposes) is amended by 
inserting after subsection (e) the following new subsection:
    ``(f) Fuels Used in Mobile Mammography Vehicles.--Except as 
provided in subsection (k), if any fuel on which tax was imposed by 
section 4041 or 4081 is used in any highway vehicle designed 
exclusively to provide mobile mammography services to patients within 
such vehicle, the Secretary shall pay (without interest) to the 
ultimate purchaser of such fuel an amount equal to the aggregate amount 
of the tax imposed on such fuel.''.
    (b) Exemption From Retail Tax.--Section 4041 of such Code is 
amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
    ``(n) Fuels Used in Mobile Mammography Vehicles.--No tax shall be 
imposed under this section on any liquid sold for use in, or used in, 
any highway vehicle designed exclusively to provide mobile mammography 
services to patients within such vehicle.''.
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall take 
effect on the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### Administration for Children And Families

# AGENCY:

Office of Policy, Research and Evaluation, ACF, HHS.

# ACTION:

The Administration for Children and Families (ACF) announces the award of a cooperative agreement to the Congressional Hunger Center in Washington, DC.

*C.F.D.A. Number:*                     93.647.                

Statutory Authority:  The award is authorized under Section 1110 of the Social Security Act, 42 U.S.C. 613.

# SUMMARY:

The Administration for Children and Families (ACF), Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary and Inter-Departmental Liaison for Early Childhood Development announces the award of a cooperative agreement with the Congressional Hunger Center (CHC) in Washington, DC, to work with ACF programs on hunger and obesity issues for young children. An award in the amount of $3,000 has been made to the CHC.

# DATES:

March 15, 2011-August 1, 2011.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        George Askew, MD, FAAP, Senior Policy Advisor for Early Childhood Health and Development, Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary and Inter-Departmental Liaison for Early Childhood Development, 901 D Street, SW., Washington, DC 20447.                         *Telephone:*      ( print page 16631)                            202-401-1399;                         *E-mail:**george.askew@acf.hhs.gov.*

Dated: March 16, 2011.

George Askew,

Senior Policy Advisor for Early Childhood Health and Development, Office of the Deputy Assistant Secretary and Inter-Departmental Liaison for Early Childhood Development.

[FR Doc. 2011-6991 Filed 3-23-11; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4184-07-P