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

SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANTS




Madison River Management Company    (Delaware)
Madison River Holdings Corp.    (Delaware)
Madison River LTD Funding Corp.    (Delaware)
Gallatin River Holdings L.L.C.    (Delaware)
Gallatin River Communications L.L.C.    (Delaware)
MEBTEL, Inc.    (North Carolina)
Madison River Communications, LLC    (Delaware)
Gulf Communications, LLC    (Delaware)
Gulf Coast Services, Inc.    (Alabama)
Gulf Telephone Company    (Alabama)
Gulf Long Distance, Inc.    (Alabama)
Madison River Long Distance Solutions, Inc.    (Delaware)
Mebtel Long Distance Solutions, Inc.    (Delaware)
Coastal Communications, Inc.    (Delaware)
Coastal Utilities, Inc.    (Georgia)
Coastal Long Distance Services, Inc.    (Georgia)
Savannah River Communications, LLC    (Delaware)
#### Alexander Moscaritolo, as Guardian ad Litem of Joseph Moscaret, an Infant, Respondent, v. Marsden Fox et al., Appellants.

Present—Crosby, P. J., Cunningham, Taylor, Harris and McCurn, JJ.
#### § 1116.12 Commission response to section 37 reports.

Upon receipt of a section 37 report, the Commission will evaluate the information contained in the report and any relevant information contained in its files or data bases to determine what, if any, follow-up or remedial action by the Commission is appropriate. If the Commission requires additional information, it will notify the manufacturer in writing of the specific information to provide. In addition, the Commission will routinely review section 37 reports to determine whether the reporting manufacturers have fulfilled their obligations under both sections 37 and 15(b) in a timely manner. Such a review may also engender a request for additional information, including the dates on which final orders were entered in each of the lawsuits reported under section 37. The Commission will treat any subsequent submission of information by the manufacturer as a submission under section 37(c)(2)(B) subject to the restrictions on public disclosure contained in sections 6(a) and (b) of the Consumer Product Safety Act.
This section of the FEDERAL REGISTER

contains editorial corrections of previously

published Presidential, Rule, Proposed Rule,

and Notice documents. These corrections are

prepared by the Office of the Federal

Register. Agency prepared corrections are

issued as signed documents and appear in

the appropriate document categories

elsewhere in the issue.

Corrections Federal Register

13074

Vol. 70, No. 51

Thursday, March 17, 2005

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

Federal Aviation Administration 

14 CFR Part 39

[Docket No. FAA–2004–19530; Directorate 

Identifier 2002–NM–274–AD; Amendment 

39–14008; AD 2005–05–19] 

RIN 2120–AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Boeing 

Model 727 Airplanes

Correction 

In rule document 05–4826 beginning 

on page 12120 in the issue of Friday, 

March 11, 2005, make the following 

corrections:

§ 39.13 [Corrected] 

1. On page 12122 in § 39.13(h), in the 

table, in the fifth column, in the first 

entry, in the fourth line, ‘‘of the upper 

chord the’’ should read ‘‘of the upper 

chord of the’’. 

2. On the same page, in the same 

section, in the same table, in the same 

column, in the second entry, in the third 

line, ‘‘chord’’ should read ‘‘chords’’. 

3. On the same page, in the same 

section, in the same table, in the same 

column, in the third entry, in the third 

line, ‘‘of the rear spar from’’ should read 

‘‘of the front spar and the lower chord 

of the rear spar from ’’. 

4. On the same page, in the same 

section, in the same table, in the same 

column, in the fourth entry, in the third 

line, ‘‘rear spar WBL’’ should read ‘‘rear 

spar from WBL’’. 

5. On page 12123, in the same section, 

in the same table, in the same column, 

the first entry is corrected to read as 

follows:

An HFEC inspection of the upper chord of 

the rear spar from WBL 70.5 to the wing tip 

for cracks, corrosion, minor surface defects, 

and existing stop-drilled repairs of cracking 

(initial inspection only), in accordance with 

paragraph 3.B., Work Instructions, Part 9, of 

the Accomplishment Instructions of the 

service bulletin.

[FR Doc. C5–4826 Filed 3–16–05; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 1505–01–D
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

RODERICK LOCKHART,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D20-652 

[November 19, 2020]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, 

Broward County; Mariya Weekes, Judge; L.T. Case No. 19-012985CF10A 

and 20-000716CF10A.

Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Robert Porter, Assistant Public 

Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Georgina JimenezOrosa, Senior Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

LEVINE, C.J., MAY and DAMOORGIAN, JJ., concur. 

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
#### § 890.1101 Purpose.

This subpart identifies the individuals who may temporarily continue coverage after the coverage would otherwise terminate under this part and sets forth the circumstances of their enrollment.
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 356 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 356

                For the relief of Flavia Maboloc Cahoon.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 19, 2011

  Mr. Filner introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
                For the relief of Flavia Maboloc Cahoon.

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

SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENT STATUS FOR FLAVIA MABOLOC CAHOON.

    (a) In General.--Notwithstanding subsections (a) and (b) of section 
201, and section 245(d), of the Immigration and Nationality Act, Flavia 
Maboloc Cahoon shall be eligible for issuance of an immigrant visa or 
for adjustment of status to that of an alien lawfully admitted for 
permanent residence upon filing an application for issuance of an 
immigrant visa under section 204 of such Act or for adjustment of 
status to lawful permanent resident.
    (b) Adjustment of Status.--Notwithstanding subsection (d) of 
section 245 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, if Flavia Maboloc 
Cahoon enters the United States before the filing deadline specified in 
subsection (c) of this Act, she shall be considered to have entered and 
remained lawfully and shall, if otherwise eligible, be eligible for 
adjustment of status under such section 245 as of the date of the 
enactment of this Act.
    (c) Deadline for Application and Payment of Fees.--Subsections (a) 
and (b) shall apply only if the application for issuance of an 
immigrant visa or the application for adjustment of status is filed 
with appropriate fees within 2 years after the date of the enactment of 
this Act.
    (d) Reduction of Immigrant Visa Number.--Upon the granting of an 
immigrant visa or permanent residence to Flavia Maboloc Cahoon, the 
Secretary of State shall instruct the proper officer to reduce by 1, 
during the current or next following fiscal year, the total number of 
immigrant visas that are made available to natives of the country of 
the alien's birth under section 203(a) of the Immigration and 
Nationality Act or, if applicable, the total number of immigrant visas 
that are made available to natives of the country of the alien's birth 
under section 202(e) of such Act.
    (e) Denial of Preferential Immigration Treatment for Certain 
Relatives.--The natural parents, brothers, and sisters of Flavia 
Maboloc Cahoon shall not, by virtue of such relationship, be accorded 
any right, privilege, or status under the Immigration and Nationality 
Act.
                                 <all>
```
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.1 CERTIFICATE 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 on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2003 of XO Communications, Inc. (the Company), as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Carl
J. Grivner, Chief Executive 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 to the best of my knowledge:  1.
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m
or 78o(d)); and2.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
of the Company. Date:  March 15, 2004 /s/ Carl J. GrivnerCarl J. Grivner
Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)
#### In the Matter of Supplementary Proceedings. E. B. Latham & Company, Respondent, v. H. Freyknecht Electrical Engineering and Construction Company and Harry Freyknecht, Appellants.

Order affirmed by default, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. Jenks, P. J., Burr, Thomas, Stapleton and Rich, JJ., concurred.
§ 970.102 Nature of licenses. ( a ) A license issued under this part will authorize the holder thereof to engage in exploration within a specific portion of the sea floor consistent with the provisions of the Act, this part, and the specific terms, conditions and restrictions applied to the license by the Administrator.
( b ) Any license issued under this part will be exclusive with respect to the holder thereof as against any other United States citizen or any citizen, national or governmental agency of, or any legal entity organized or existing under the laws of, any reciprocating state.
( c ) A valid existing license will entitle the holder, if otherwise eligible under the provisions of the Act and implementing regulations, to a permit for commercial recovery from an area selected within the same area of the sea floor. Such a permit will recognize the right of the holder to recover hard mineral resources, and to own, transport, use, and sell hard mineral resources recovered, under the permit and in accordance with the requirements of the Act.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 19-2001

In re: TIMOTHY WALKER,

 Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus

(5:19-hc-02071-FL)

Submitted: January 23, 2020 Decided: February 21, 2020

Before NIEMEYER and HARRIS, Circuit Judges, and TRAXLER, Senior Circuit Judge.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Timothy Walker, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Timothy Walker petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging that the district court 

has unduly delayed in ruling on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2018) petition. He seeks an order 

from this court directing the district court to act. The present record does not reveal undue 

delay in the district court. Accordingly, although we grant leave to proceed in forma 

pauperis we deny the mandamus petition. To the extent Walker specifically seeks an order 

from this court directing the district court to order the Government to respond to his 

petition, we deny that request.*

 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.

PETITION DENIED

 * The Government’s response to Walker’s petition was filed on January 24, 2020.
### SUBCHAPTER II—AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 3534 

To amend title 31, United States Code, to revise requirements related to 

assets pledged by a surety, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

DECEMBER 1, 2011 

Mr. HANNA (for himself and Mr. MULVANEY) introduced the following bill; 

which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To amend title 31, United States Code, to revise requirements related to assets pledged by a surety, and for 

other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Security in Bonding 

5 Act of 2011’’. 

6 SEC. 2. SURETY BOND REQUIREMENTS. 

7 Chapter 93 of subtitle VI of title 31, United States 

8 Code, is amended— 

9 (1) in section 9304(b)— 


rfrederick on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 3534 IH

1 (A) by striking ‘‘may not require’’ and in2 serting ‘‘may require’’; and 

3 (B) by striking ‘‘or through’’ and inserting 

4 ‘‘, but not through’’; 

5 (2) by adding at the end the following: 

6 ‘‘§ 9310. Individual sureties 

7 ‘‘If another applicable law or regulation permits the 

8 acceptance of a bond from a surety that is not subject 

9 to sections 9305 and 9306 and is based on a pledge of 

10 assets by the surety, the assets pledged by such surety 

11 shall— 

12 ‘‘(1) consist of eligible obligations described 

13 under section 9303(a); and 

14 ‘‘(2) be submitted to the official of the Govern15 ment required to approve or accept the bond, who 

16 shall deposit the assets with a depository described 

17 under section 9303(b).’’; and 

18 (3) in the table of contents for such chapter, by 

19 adding at the end the following: 

‘‘9310. Individual sureties.’’. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
### SUBCHAPTER XI—HOUSING FOR MILITARY PERSONNEL
No: 14-028 April 18, 2014

CONTACT: Scott Burnell, 301-415-8200 

NRC Seeks Public Comment on Proposed Procedures

For New Reactor Pre-Operation Hearings; Meeting May 21

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff is seeking public comments on proposed generic 

procedures the agency would use to conduct hearings on whether a new reactor has been built 

according to its license.

The agency expects to hold an information meeting on the proposed procedures May 21 at NRC 

headquarters in Rockville, Md. Further details on the meeting will be available approximately two 

weeks before the meeting.

When the NRC issues a Combined License for a new reactor, that license includes the 

inspections, tests, analyses and acceptance criteria to be satisfied during construction. The NRC must 

find the acceptance criteria are met before reactor operation is authorized. Individuals or groups have a 

limited opportunity to ask for a hearing to challenge whether all the acceptance criteria have been or 

will be met. The NRC updated its policy on this subset of hearings in 2008.

The Commission directed the staff in 2013 to draw up procedures for these “acceptance criteria” 

hearings. After the staff resolves public comments, the draft procedures will go to the Commission for 

approval. The Commission will then use the adopted final procedures as a basis for orders specific to 

each hearing.

Comments on the proposed procedures will be accepted until July 2 and can be submitted via 

the federal rulemaking website under Docket ID NRC-2014-0077. Comments may also be submitted by 

mail to Cindy Bladey, Chief, Rules, Announcements, and Directives Branch, Office of Administration, 

Mail Stop: 3WFN-06-44M, U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20555-0001.
#### Edwin C. Barnes, trading as Edwin C. Barnes & Brothers, Appellee, v. William E. Martin, trading as Martin & Martin, Appellant.

Gen. No. 21,314.

(Not to be reported in full.)

Appeal from the Superior Court of Cook county; the Hon. Clarence N. Goodwin, Judge, presiding.

Heard in this court at the March term, 1915.

Affirmed.

Opinion filed January 3, 1916.

Rehearing denied January 17, 1916.

Statement of the Case.

Action by Edwin C. Barnes, trading as Edwin C. Barnes & Brothers, plaintiff, against William E. Martin, trading as Martin & Martin, defendant, for the price of two “Edison Dictating Machines” with accessory appliances, which were sold and delivered to defendant pursuant to a written order. Upon trial by the court, plaintiff had judgment for two hundred and thirty dollars, from which defendant appeals.

The order upon which the appliances were delivered was explicit as to prices and terms. Among other things it contained a provision that if the purchaser should for any reason be unable to use them they should be returned in ten days and full credit for them would be allowed. This order is dated July 22, 1914.

The appliances were delivered and used, by the defendant, and it was not until September 5th that defendant notified plaintiff that the machines were not wanted.

Defendant says he is not bound by the order for the reason that his cashier, McCallister, who signed the order had no authority to do so. The said evidence showed that the latter had general charge of the office, buying supplies, signing checks, and employing and discharging some of the employees. During defend*299ant’s absence from the city he was apparently the general manager of the business.

Abstract of the Decision.

Principal and agent, § *8*****—when evidence sufficient to show relation.*In an action to recover for the purchase price of goods, where the evidence shows that the person purchasing had general charge of defendant’s office, buying supplies, signing checks and employing and discharging some of the employees and acted as general manager of the business during defendant’s absence from the city, and that' such person had stated to defendant that he proposed to try the article in question to which defendant consented, evidence *held*sufficient to show that he acted as defendant’s authorized agent in purchasing the goods in question.

The evidence also showed that defendant contemplated leaving the city, to be gone about six weeks, and before he left, McCallister told him that he proposed to try a dictating machine in the office, and defendant consented to this.

Pringle *&*Fearing, for appellant.

Fulton, Garey & Deutschman, for appellee.

*

See Illinois Notes Digest, Vols. XI to XV, and Cumulative Quarterly, same topic and section number.

Mr. Presiding Justice MuSurely

delivered the opinion of the court.
QuickLinks
 -- Click here to rapidly navigate through this document

Exhibit 10.8  


 
 

FORM OF
  OMNIBUS AMENDMENT TO RESTRICTED STOCK UNIT AGREEMENTS  
    



        This Omnibus Amendment to Restricted Stock Unit Agreements (this "Omnibus Amendment"), dated May 16, 2007, by and between  Archstone-Smith
Trust, a Maryland real estate investment trust ("ASN"), and                        ("Outside
Trustee"). 


        WHEREAS,
ASN and the Outside Trustee have executed certain Restricted Stock Unit Agreements (each, an "RSU Agreement")
dated                        ; 



        WHEREAS,
the Board of Trustees of ASN has approved an amendment to each of the RSU Agreement to provide for vesting of unvested restricted stock units
("RSUs") upon the retirement of an Outside Trustee. 


        NOW,
THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises, and other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, ASN and the Outside Trustee
hereby agree as follows: 


        Section 4
of each RSU Agreement is hereby amended to add after subsection (b) the following: 



        (c)   Notwithstanding
subsections (a) and (b) above, all Units shall immediately vest upon the Date of Termination in connection with the Participant's
Retirement. 




        Section 4
of each RSU Agreement is hereby further amended to add the following at the end of such section: 




"Retirement"
means that the Participant (i) has reached the age of 60, and (ii)(A) has elected not to run for re-election to the Board, (B) has resigned from the Board
between annual meetings of the shareholders of the Trust, or (C) is ineligible to stand for re-election under the then-existing age limitation for nomination to the
Board under the Trust's Corporate Governance Guidelines. 





        Except
as set forth above, each RSU Agreement remains in full force and effect. 


        IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this Omnibus Amendment as of the date first written above. 



	 	 	ARCHSTONE-SMITH TRUST
	

 	
 	

By:	
 	

    
 Caroline Brower

General Counsel
	

 	
 	

    
 [Trustee Name]













QuickLinks


FORM OF OMNIBUS AMENDMENT TO RESTRICTED STOCK UNIT AGREEMENTS
Appendix 2-1

12/14/99 8300.10 CHG 12

Appendix 2

APPENDIX 2. INSPECTOR FEEDBACK

INFORMATION CURRENCY. The Continuous Airworthiness and Maintenance Division, AFS-300, has developed a revision process to ensure that the information contained in this handbook is current and correct. Any

comments regarding content, whether to point out deficiencies or suggest improvements, should be directed to

AFS-340. All comments will be reviewed and the handbook amended as appropriate. An inspector feedback sheet

is provided on the following page for your convenience. If an issue requires immediate clarification, please fax to

AFS-340 at (703) 661-0274, or simply mail to the following address:

Handbook Project Manager

General Aviation and Commercial Branch, AFS-340

P.O. Box 16787

Dulles International Airport

Washington, D.C. 20041
 8300.10 CHG 12 12/14/99

Appendix 2

Appendix 2-2

[THIS PAGE INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK]
INSPECTOR FEEDBACK SHEET 

Subject:[X] Order 8300.10, Airworthiness Inspector’s Handbook, Change No. ___________

To: Handbook Project Manager

General Aviation and Commercial Branch, AFS-340

P.O. Box 16787

Dulles International Airport

Washington, D.C. 20041

Fax: (703) 661-0274

Please check all appropriate items. Attach a copy of the affected pages.

[ ] An error (procedural or typographical) has been noted in volume _________,

chapter ________, section ________, paragraph ________ on page ________.

[ ] Recommend Volume ________, chapter ________, section ________, 

paragraph ________, page ________, be changed as follows: (Attach separate sheets if

necessary).

[ ] Recommend a change to national policy in volume ________, chapter ________, 

section ________, paragraph ________, on page ________ as follows:

[ ] In a future change to this order, please cover the following subject (briefly describe what

you want added):

[ ] Regional handbook standardization representative recommendation:

[ ] I would like to discuss the above. Please contact me.

Submitted by: ________________________________________________ Date: _________________ 

Telephone Number: _____________________________________ Routing Symbol: _________________ 

Telemail Address: ______________________________________________________
### §11925. Regulations

Not later than 6 months after November 18, 1988, the Secretary shall issue any regulations necessary to carry out this subchapter.

(Pub. L. 100–690, title V, §5146, Nov. 18, 1988, 102 Stat. 4304.)