alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 228 (Monday, November 29, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 69397]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-26210]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--Mobile Enterprise Alliance, Inc.

    Notice is hereby given that, on September 30, 2004, pursuant to 
Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 
1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), Mobile Enterprise Alliance, 
Inc. has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney 
General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its 
membership status. The notifications were filed for the purpose of 
extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust 
plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. 
Specifically, Intellisync Corporation, San Jose, CA has been added as a 
party to this venture. Also, Symbian Ltd., London, United Kingdom has 
been dropped as a party to this venture.
    No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned 
activity of the group research project. Membership in this group 
research project remains open, and Mobile Enterprise Alliance, Inc. 
intends to file additional written notification disclosing all changes 
in membership.
    On June 24, 2004, Mobile Enterprise Alliance, Inc. filed its 
original notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The 
Department of Justice published a notice in the Federal Register 
pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on July 23, 2004 (69 FR 44062).

Dorothy B. Fountain,
Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 04-26210 Filed 11-26-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
### §§16616, 16617. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section 16616, Pub. L. 109–155, title I, §108, Dec. 30, 2005, 119 Stat. 2913, which related to commercialization plan for missions to the Moon and Mars, and required plan submission to Congress not later than 180 days after Dec. 30, 2005, was omitted from the Code following the enactment of Title 51, National and Commercial Space Programs, by Pub. L. 111–314.

Section 16617, Pub. L. 109–155, title I, §109, Dec. 30, 2005, 119 Stat. 2913, which related to study on the feasibility of use of ground source heat pumps and required study transmission to Congress not later than one year after Dec. 30, 2005, was omitted from the Code following the enactment of Title 51.
#### Manhattan Maternity and Dispensary, Appellant, v. The City of New York and Others, Respondents.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Present — Clarke, P. J., Laughlin, Dowling, Page and Davis, JJ.
### §15097. Reporting

A State that receives a grant under this subchapter shall prepare and submit to the Secretary, at the end of the grant period, a report containing the results of State efforts to develop and implement, or expand and enhance, a statewide system of family support services for families of children with disabilities.

(Pub. L. 106–402, title II, §208, Oct. 30, 2000, 114 Stat. 1732.)
Subpart 5346.1 – GENERAL

Parent topic: Part 5346 - Quality Assurance

5346.103 Contracting Office Responsibilities

See MP5346.103 for Department of the Air Force requirements regarding contracting office

responsibilities for the Quality Assurance Program.
3-2-6-1* 

## C/K/r-/- a / s^yypff/f ' ^7/ Q//dh/ec/ 4C.cr.sS T^c) /ny Wr//r*?j /*7<?/£/-y>/ r0 /^/rye/y 

### Sultm// /my PPK JTs -/firs*- Qnyu/eiy f#s^/J>/e JT C<?s> jhtiue C\ Tf/r/cv?XV/7 </(/<. -•/# we J>€/tnc />? C/arc Ccy/fdy 7%6s?6. y0t/„ jyCl**~<5>/ u2u*e*v£L
HiGErVEOfN COURTOF CRIMINAL APPEALS MAR 312015 AbelAcosta, Clerk FILED IN COURTOF-eRIMINAL APPEAIrS--*PR-eH0frAbel Acosta, Clerk
#### Michael Ellenbast, Appellant, v Jesse Watkins et al., Defendants, and Unkechaug Indian Nation of Poospatuck Indians, Respondent.

[821 NYS2d 275]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Cohalan, J.), dated February 4, 2004, which granted the motion of the defendant Unkechaug Indian Nation of Poospatuck Indians to dismiss the complaint insofar as asserted against it.

Ordered that the order is affirmed, with costs.

Contrary to the plaintiffs contention, it is not necessary for an Indian tribe to have attained federal recognition in order to successfully assert its sovereign immunity from suit, so long as the tribe has “tribal status” *(Native Village of Tyonek v Puckett,*957 F2d 631, 634-635 [1992]; *see Mashpee Tribe v Secretary of Interior,*820 F2d 480, 482-483 [1987]; *Bottomly v Passamaquoddy Tribe,*599 F2d 1061, 1065 n 5 [1979]; *New York v Shinnecock Indian Nation,*400 F Supp 2d 486 [2005]). The Poospatuck Indian tribe has been recognized by the State of New York pursuant to Indian Law § 150, and its history appears in both case law and the plaintiffs submissions *(see Matter of District Attorney of Suffolk County v Nelson,*68 Misc 2d 614, 616 [1972]; *New York v Shinnecock Indian Nation, supra).*

The Poospatuck Indian tribe meets the definition of a tribe set forth in *Montoya v United States*(180 US 261, 266 [1901]), and therefore cannot be sued in New York courts without its consent *(see Kiowa Tribe of Okla. v Manufacturing Technologies, Inc.,*523 US 751, 754 [1998]; *Three Affiliated Tribes of Fort Berthold Reservation v Wold Engineering, P.C.,*476 US 877, 891 [1986]; *Matter of Ransom v St. Regis Mohawk Educ. & Community Fund,*86 NY2d 553, 560 [1995]). No waiver of *992sovereign immunity occurred here, and the Supreme Court properly dismissed the complaint insofar as asserted against the tribe for lack of subject matter jurisdiction *(see Santa Clara Pueblo v Martinez,*436 US 49, 58 [1978]; *Matter of Ransom v St. Regis Mohawk Educ. & Community Fund, supra*at 561). Krausman, J.P., Mastro, Spolzino and Covello, JJ., concur.
### §1523. Omitted

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section, acts Oct. 14, 1940, ch. 862, title I, §3, 54 Stat. 1126; Apr. 29, 1941, ch. 80, §2, 55 Stat. 147; June 28, 1941, ch. 260, §2, 55 Stat. 361; Jan. 21, 1942, ch. 14, §3, 56 Stat. 12; Ex. Ord. No. 9070, §1, eff. Feb 24, 1942, 7 F.R. 1529; Oct. 1, 1942, ch. 572, 56 Stat. 763; July 7, 1943, ch. 196, §§1, 2, 57 Stat. 387; July 1, 1944, ch. 374, 58 Stat. 720; Apr. 20, 1950, ch. 94, title II, §204, 64 Stat. 73, which related to authorization of appropriations for the purpose of this subchapter, was omitted in view of the omission of section 1521 of this title.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Prior Additional Appropriations

Joint Res. Oct. 14, 1940, ch. 857, 54 Stat. 1115, $75,000,000.

Acts Mar. 1, 1941, ch. 9, 55 Stat. 14, $5,000,000.

May 24, 1941, ch. 132, 55 Stat. 199, $150,000,000.

Dec. 17, 1941, ch. 591, title III, 55 Stat. 818, $300,000,000.

Dec. 23, 1941, ch. 621, 55 Stat. 855, $300,000,000.

July 12, 1943, ch. 229, title I, 57 Stat. 540, $50,000,000.

Dec. 23, 1943, ch. 380, title I, 57 Stat. 618, $50,000,000.

Apr. 1, 1944, ch. 152, title I, 58 Stat. 153, $115,000,000.

June 28, 1944, ch. 304, title I, 58 Stat. 604.

Apr. 25, 1945, ch. 95 title I, 59 Stat. 82; July 5, 1945, ch. 271, title I, 59 Stat. 420, $84,373,000.
```

[115th Congress Public Law 360]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

[[Page 132 STAT. 5083]]

Public Law 115-360
115th Congress

                                 An Act

 
To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 
  90 North 4th Avenue in Brighton, Colorado, as the ``Detective Heath 
  McDonald Gumm Post Office''. <<NOTE: Dec. 21, 2018 -  [H.R. 5792]>> 

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. DETECTIVE HEATH MCDONALD GUMM POST OFFICE.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 90 North 4th Avenue in Brighton, Colorado, shall be known and 
designated as the ``Detective Heath McDonald Gumm Post Office''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Detective 
Heath McDonald Gumm Post Office''.

    Approved December 21, 2018.

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY--H.R. 5792:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 164 (2018):
            Sept. 28, considered and passed House.
            Dec. 12, considered and passed Senate.

                                  <all>
```
·;·it!!~ ti~~i ~a~· • • 

I I I

l', 0 :tt=: 

FEMA 

BJl l'~tti!mi 

m-~¥-MiMIR.i~ll!!BlB~~~*l' mt~*Dm, -~*l' 

FEMA 529TC 9/2014
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

* * T he pane lunani m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T AN GELI CA M ARTINEZ, P et i t i on er , v. E R I C H . H O L D E R , J r ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 08- 71015 A ge nc yN o. A 077- 839- 539 ME MOR AN DU M *

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

an O r de rof

the B o ar do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls S ubm i tt e d June 29, 2010 ** B efo re: A L A R C Ó N , L E A V Y , an dG R A B E R , C i rcu i tJu d g es. A nge l i c aM art i ne z , ana t i ve and c i t i z e n of M e xi c o, pe t i t i ons f

orr e vi e w of the B oard of Im m i grat i on A pp ea l s’ (“ B IA ”) order denyi ng her m ot i on t o reopen b a s e do n i n e f

f e c t i v e a s s i s t an c e o f

c o u n s e l . W e h av e j u r i s d i c t i o n u n d e r8 U . S. C. § 1252. W e r e vi e w f

orabus e of

di s c r e t i on the de ni a lof am ot i on t o r e ope n and de 

# FI LED JU L 19 2010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS08- 71015 2 n o v o c la im s o f

du e p r o c e s s v io la tio n s in im m ig r a tio n p r o c e e d in g s . Moh am m ed v. G on zales , 4 0 0 F . 3 d7 8 5 , 7 9 1 - 9 2 ( 9 th C i r . 2 0 0 5 ) . We d e n yth e p e t i t i o n f o rr e v i e w. T h e B I A d idn o t ab u s e its d is c r e tio n b yd e n y in g M artin e z ’s m o tio n to r e o p e n o n th e g r o u n dth a t s h e f a ile dto e s tab lis h p r e

ju d ic e . Se e id . a t793 ( r e qu ir in g p r e

ju d ic e to s ta te v a lidc la im o f in e f f e c tiv e a s s is tan c e o f

c o u n s e l) . I t f o llo w s th a t th e d e n ia l o f M artin e z ’s m o tio n to r e o p e n d idn o t v io la te du e p r o c e s s . Se e La ta v . I

NS , 204 F . 3d 1241, 1246 ( 9th C i r . 2000) ( r e qui r i ng e rr orf oradue p r o c e s s v io la tio n ) . P E T I T I ON F OR RE V I E W DE NI E D.
AUSTIN.TEXAS

November 21,,

1949

~Hon, Tom A. Craven County Auditor MoLeman Couuty Waco, Texas opiuiouRo. v-948.
Re: The legality of raising the cmapensatlouof couutg of- , ficials under S.B. Bo. 92, 31st Legislature,

without giving a like raise to the Dear Sira CritinalDistrictAttorney.

YQU Fequest an opinion conceruingthe legality of raising the compensationof county officials (includiqgmembers of the Cosnnlsslouers' Court) uudep Senate Bill Ro, 92, 51st Legislature, without giving a like raise to the Criminal DistrictAttorney.

Seuate Dill 92 was passedRay 31, 1949, and became effectiveJune 6, 1949. Under its provisions, the Comissloners~ Court of each countywas compelled to raise the salary of county officers in like proportion before a raise could be granted the members of the Conmissioners Court. A. G. Opinion Ro. V-864. However, House Bill 339, applicableto McLennan County, was passed subsequentto Senate Bill 92 (June 16, 1949) and set the salary of the CrimlualDistrictAttorney at $6500.00,payable in twelve equal installments. A. G. opinionNo. v-893.

Since House Bill 339 is a specifio statute covering the salary of the CriminalDistrictAttorney, it would control over the provisions of Senate Bill

v, Terrell, 118 Tex. 463, 16 S.W.28 1063 Lawhlin, 147 Tex. 169, 214 S.W.28 erefore our opinion that the pro92 are not applicable to the salary of the Criminal DistrictAttorney in McLeman county
.

Rouse Bill 339, Acts of the 51st Legislature,was passed after Senate Bill 92, Acts of the 31st Legislature,set the salary of the Crimiml DistrictAttorney in certainHon. Tom A. Craven, page 2 (V-948)

countiesat $6500.00. It is a specific statute covering~thesalary of the CrimiualDistrict Attorney, and controls over the general provisions of Senate Bill 92. Townsend v. Temell, 118 Tex. 463, 16 S.W.28 1063 (1929);

v. LawhUn, 147 Tex.'l69, 214 S.W.26 IY1

Your~~ very t+~;

ATTOFU'iEY

GE!+AL,OF TEXAS

JEF:mwrbh BY J@-Je.Yy James E. Ferguson

Assistant

ATTOKUEY GEB'lQATj
### §11378. Administrative costs

A recipient may use up to 7.5 percent of any annual grant received under this part for administrative purposes. A recipient State shall share the amount available for administrative purposes pursuant to the preceding sentence with local governments funded by the State.

(Pub. L. 100–77, title IV, §418, as added Pub. L. 101–625, title VIII, §832(b)(1), Nov. 28, 1990, 104 Stat. 4359; amended Pub. L. 111–22, div. B, title II, §1204, May 20, 2009, 123 Stat. 1680.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2009—Pub. L. 111–22 substituted "7.5 percent" for "5 percent".

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date of 2009 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 111–22 effective on the earlier of 18 months after May 20, 2009, or 3 months after publication of certain final regulations by Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, see section 1503 of Pub. L. 111–22, set out as a note under section 11302 of this title.
### §11252. Dissemination

The Director of the National Institute of Mental Health shall disseminate the results of research conducted under this part to appropriate professional entities and to the public.

(Pub. L. 99–660, title IX, §932, formerly §945, Nov. 14, 1986, 100 Stat. 3810; renumbered §932, Pub. L. 100–607, title I, §142(c)(2)(B), Nov. 4, 1988, 102 Stat. 3057.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Prior Provisions

A prior section 932 of Pub. L. 99–660 was classified to section 11232 of this title prior to repeal by section 142(c)(1)(A) of Pub. L. 100–607.
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 232 (Friday, December 3, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Page 70281]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-26620]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--ANSI Accredited Standards Committee ``C81''

    Notice is hereby given that, on September 17, 2004, pursuant to 
section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 
1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), ANSI Accredited Standards 
Committee ``C81'' (``C81 Committee''), by its Secretariat, National 
Electrical Manufacturers Association (``NEMA''), has filed written 
notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal 
Trade Commission disclosing (1) the name and principal place of 
business of the standards development organization and (2) the nature 
and scope of its standards development activities. The notifications 
were filed for the purpose of invoking the act's provisions limiting 
the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified 
circumstances.
    Pursuant to section 6(b) of the Act, the name and principal place 
of business of the standards development organization is: ANSI 
Accredited Standards Committee ``C81'', Rosslyn, VA. The nature and 
scope of C81 Committee's standard development activities are: To 
develop and maintain standards relating to electric lamp bases and 
holders. C81 Committee currently maintains four standards relating to 
different types of electric lamp bases and lamp holders. The standards 
developed by C81 Committee are published by NEMA.

Dorothy B. Fountain,
Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 04-26620 Filed 12-2-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
NRC NEWS

U. S. NUCLEAR REGULATORY COMMISSION

OFFICE OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, REGION IV

611 Ryan Plaza Drive - Suite 400

Arlington, Texas 76011-8064

CONTACT: Breck Henderson (817) 860-8128

CONTACT: Mark Hammond June 4, 1996

Office: (817) 860-8128 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Pager: (800) 916-4952 RIV-3696

E-mail: mfh2@nrc.gov

 NRC STAFF PLANS DISCUSSION OF PLANT PERFORMANCE

 AT SIEMENS FUEL PLANT IN RICHLAND

 The Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff will meet with officials of the Siemens Power

Corp. commercial nuclear fuel fabrication facility in Richland, Wash., at 9 a.m. on Tuesday, June

18, to discuss plant performance in safety and safeguards and current operations.

 The parties will discuss a Plant Performance Review conducted by NRC staff that

evaluated plant performance in eight functional areas for the period Feb. 1, 1994, to Jan. 31 of

this year.

 The review found that Siemens has ``exhibited a good level of performance with attention

to safety,'' L. Joe Callan, Regional Administrator of NRC Region IV in Arlington, Texas, said.

 As a result, NRC inspection efforts will remain at normal levels, with a focus on the

startup and operation of a new dry conversion fuel fabrication facility, Mr. Callan said.

 The meeting, at the Siemens facility on Horn Rapids Road, will be open to the public for

observation. NRC officials will be available afterwards for questions.

 - 30 -

 (NOTE: A copy of the Plant Performance Review report is available from this office).
§ 143.2 Notice of claim. ( a ) The Commission will send a written notice to any person who owes payment to the United States under this part, stating the basis for the claim, the interest, penalties, and administrative costs that may be imposed for non-payment, and the date full payment is due.
( b ) If the claim is disputed, the debtor shall respond to the notice in writing and state the reasons for non-payment. If the claim is not disputed but full payment is not made by the date indicated in the notice, the debtor shall state the reasons for the failure to make full payment.
( c ) If no response or an unsatisfactory response is received by the date indicated in the notice, the Commission may take further action as appropriate under the Commodity Exchange Act or regulations thereunder, or under 31 CFR parts 900-905 or the Federal Claims Collection Act as amended, 31 U.S.C. 3701-3720E.
[50 FR 5384, Feb. 8, 1985, as amended at 69 FR 52997, Aug. 31, 2004]
§ 311.1 Definitions. As used in this part: ( a ) *Manufacturer* means any person who re-refines or otherwise processes used oil to remove physical or chemical impurities acquired through use or who blends such re-refined or otherwise processed used oil with new oil or additives.
( b ) *New oil* means any synthetic oil or oil that has been refined from crude oil and which has not been used and may or may not contain additives. Such term does not include used oil or recycled oil.
( c ) *Processed used* oil means re-refined or otherwise processed used oil or blend of oil, consisting of such re-refined or otherwise processed used oil and new oil or additives.
( d ) *Recycled oil* means processed used oil that the manufacturer has determined, pursuant to section 311.4 of this part, is substantially equivalent to new oil for use as engine oil.
( e ) *Used oil* means any synthetic oil or oil that has been refined from crude oil, which has been used and, as a result of such use, has been contaminated by physical or chemical impurities.
( f ) *Re-refined oil* means used oil from which physical and chemical contaminants acquired through use have been removed.
No. 89-973.

#### Lowe et al. *v.*Commack Union Free School District et al.

C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.
#### Vinton J. Hayworth, Appellant, v. Union News Company et al., Respondents.

Present — Dore, J. P., Cohn, Callahan, Van Voorhis and Shientag, JJ.
Exhibit 32.1

Certification of the Chief Executive Officer

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 Inergy Holdings, L.P. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2009 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John J. Sherman, Chief Executive Officer of Inergy Holdings, L.P., certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



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



| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ John J. ShermanJohn J. Sherman Chief Executive OfficerMay 7, 2009


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 required by Section 906, 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.



43
#### Etta G. Hinaman, as Administratrix, etc., of William Hinaman, Deceased, Respondent, v. Erie Railroad Company, Appellant.

Motion denied. Present — Jenks, P. J., Carr, Stapleton and Putnam, JJ.
# Subpart 505.1 - Dissemination of Information

**Parent topic:**Part 505 - Publicizing Contract Actions

## 505.101 Methods of disseminating information.

If the acquisition is for real property appraisal services estimated to cost $25,000 or more and is not exempt under FAR 5.202 or GSAR 505.202, then the contracting officer must publicize the proposed acquisition in FedBizOpps. (*Note: See part  570 for information regarding publicizing contracts actions for leasehold interests in real property.*)
Exhibit 21. List of Subsidiaries     Name of Subsidiary Ownership     CCI Southeast, LLC (“CCISE”)  100.00%Riverdale Carwash Lot 3A, LLC (“Riverdale”)  100.00%AARD Cypress Sound, LLC (“Cypress Sound’)  51.00%AARD TSD-CSK Firestone, LLC (“Firestone”)  51.00%South Glen Eagles Drive, LLC (“West Valley”)  51.00%119th and Ridgeview, LLC (“Ridgeview”)  51.00%53rd and Baseline, LLC (“Baseline”)  51.00%Hwy 278 and Hwy 170, LLC (“Bluffton 278”)  51.00%State and 130th, LLC (“American Fork”)  51.00%Clinton Keith and Hidden Springs, LLC (“Murietta”)  51.00%Hwy 46 and Bluffton Pkwy, LLC (“Bluffton 46”)  51.00%AARD Bader Family Dollar Flat Shoals, LLC (“Flat Shoals”)  51.00%AARD Westminster OP7, LLC (“Westminster OP7”)  51.00%Eagle Palm I, LLC (“Eagle”)  51.00%AARD Econo Lube Stonegate, LLC (“Econo Lube”)  51.00%AARD Bader Family Dollar MLK, LLC (“MLK”)  51.00%AARD Charmar Greeley, LLC (“Starbucks”)  51.00%AARD Charmar Greeley Firestone, LLC  51.00%AARD 5020 Lloyd Expy, LLC (“Evansville”)  51.00%AARD 2245 Main Street, LLC (“Plainfield”)  51.00%AARD Buckeye, LLC (“Buckeye”)  51.00%AARD Esterra Mesa 1, LLC (“Esterra Mesa 1”)  51.00%AARD Esterra Mesa 2, LLC (“Esterra Mesa 2”)  51.00%AARD Esterra Mesa 3, LLC (“Esterra Mesa 3”)  51.00%AARD Esterra Mesa 4, LLC (“Esterra Mesa 4”)  51.00%AARD MDJ Goddard, LLC (“Goddard”)  51.00%AARD Charmar Arlington Boston Pizza, LLC (“Charmar Boston Pizza”)  51.00%L-S Corona Pointe, LLC (“L-S Corona”)  50.01%AARD NOLA St Claude LLC (NOLA St Claude)  51.00%AARD LECA LSS Lonestar LLC (Lake Elsinore LSS)  51.00%AARD LECA VL1 LLC (Lake Elsinore Land)  51.00%AARD ORFL FD Goldenrod LLC (Goldenrod)  51.00%AARD SATX CHA LLC (Champs)  51.00%