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



EXHIBIT 21 SYBASE, INC. SUBSIDIARIES
(AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2004) COMPANY NAME
    
    
    
    JURISDICTION OF FORMATIONSybase Argentina, S.A.
    
    
    
    ArgentinaSybase Australia Pty Limited
    
    
    
    AustraliaSybase BVBA/SPRL
    
    
    
    BelgiumSybase Brasil Software Limitada
    
    
    
    BrazilSybase Canada Limited
    
    
    
    CanadaiAnywhere Solutions Canada Limited
    
    
    
    CanadaSybase Software (China) Co., Ltd.
    
    
    
    ChinaSybase (Cyprus) Limited
    
    
    
    CyprusSybase ApS
    
    
    
    DenmarkSybase France S.a.r.l.
    
    
    
    FranceSybase GmbH
    
    
    
    GermanyNew Era of Networks Hong Kong Ltd.
    
    
    
    Hong KongSLI Consulting Limited
    
    
    
    Hong KongSybase China Limited
    
    
    
    Hong KongSybase Hong Kong Limited
    
    
    
    Hong KongFinancial Services Square Limited
    
    
    
    Hong KongSybase India, Ltd.
    
    
    
    IndiaSybase (India) Private Limited
    
    
    
    IndiaP.T. Sybase Informatindo Indonesia
    
    
    
    IndonesiaSybase Ireland Limited
    
    
    
    IrelandSybase Italia S.r.l.
    
    
    
    ItalyiAnywhere Solutions KK
    
    
    
    JapanSybase KK
    
    
    
    JapanSybase Korea, Ltd.
    
    
    
    KoreaSybase Europe Luxembourg S.a.r.l.
    
    
    
    LuxembourgSybase Luxembourg S.a.r.l.
    
    
    
    LuxembourgSLI Consulting Sdn Bhd
    
    
    
    MalaysiaSybase Software (Malaysia) Sdn Bhd
    
    
    
    MalaysiaSybase de Mexico, S. de R.L. de C.V.
    
    
    
    MexicoSybase Europe B.V.
    
    
    
    NetherlandsSybase Nederland B.V.
    
    
    
    NetherlandsiAnywhere Solutions B.V.
    
    
    
    NetherlandsChristie Partners Holdings C. V.
    
    
    
    NetherlandsSybase (N.Z.) Limited
    
    
    
    New ZealandSybase Norge AS
    
    
    
    NorwaySybase Philippines Inc.
    
    
    
    PhilippinesNew Era of Networks (Singapore) Ltd.
    
    
    
    SingaporeSybase (Singapore) Pte Ltd.
    
    
    
    SingaporeSLI Consulting Pte Ltd.
    
    
    
    SingaporeSLI Singapore
    
    
    
    SingaporeSybase Iberia S.L.
    
    
    
    SpainSybase Sverige AB
    
    
    
    SwedenSybase (Schweiz) GmbH
    
    
    
    SwitzerlandSybase Taiwan Co., Ltd.
    
    
    
    TaiwanSybase (Thailand) Limited
    
    
    
    ThailandAvantGo Europe Limited
    
    
    
    United KingdomSybase International Limited
    
    
    
    United KingdomSybase (UK) Limited
    
    
    
    United KingdomNew Era of Networks (UK) Limited
    
    
    
    United KingdomSLI Consulting UK Limited
    
    
    
    United KingdomSybase International Limited
    
    
    
    United KingdomSybase International Holdings Corporation
    
    
    
    United StatesiAnywhere Solutions, Inc.
    
    
    
    United StatesFinancial Fusion, Inc.
    
    
    
    United StatesSybase Global, LLC
    
    
    
    United States
§ 1665.6 Schedule of fees. ( a ) *Prohibitions against charging fees.* Individuals will not be charged for: ( 1 ) The search and review of the record.
( 2 ) Any copies of the record produced as a necessary part of the process of making the record available for access, or
( 3 ) Any copies of the requested record when it has been determined that access can only be accomplished by providing a copy of the record through the mail.
( 4 ) Where a registrant has been charged under the Military Selective Service Act and must defend himself in a criminal prosecution, or where a registrant submits to induction and thereafter brings habeas corpus proceedings to test the validity of his induction, the Selective Service System will furnish to him, or to any person he may designate, one copy of his Selective Service file free of charge.
( b ) *Waiver.* The Director of Selective Service may at no charge, provide copies of a record if it is determined the production of the copies is in the interest of the Government.
( c ) *Fee schedule and method of payment.* Fees will be charged as provided below except as provided in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section. ( 1 ) *Duplication of records.* Records will be duplicated at a rate of $.25 per page.
( 2 ) Fees should be paid in full prior to issuance of requested copies. In the event the requester is in arrears for previous requests, copies will not be provided for any subsequent request until the arrears have been paid in full.
( 3 ) Remittance shall be in the form of cash, a personal check or bank draft drawn on a bank in the United States, or postal money order. Remittances shall be made payable to the order of the Selective Service System and mailed or delivered to the records manager, Selective Service System, 1501 Wilson Blvd., Suite 700, Arlington, VA 22209.
( 4 ) A receipt of fees paid will be given upon request.
[47 FR 7224, Feb. 18, 1982; 69 FR 1525, Jan. 9, 2004, as amended at 89 FR 35006, May 1, 2024]
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS INCLUDED
HEREIN AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                           2,047
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   99,764
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,125
<INVENTORY>                                     74,250
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               177,820
<PP&E>                                         437,970
<DEPRECIATION>                                 187,759
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 551,516
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          116,523
<BONDS>                                        155,444
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           211
<OTHER-SE>                                     243,938
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   551,516
<SALES>                                      1,020,484
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,020,484
<CGS>                                          847,383
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  847,383
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   861
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              10,136
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 69,417
<INCOME-TAX>                                    29,160
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             40,257
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    40,257
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.86
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.83
        


</TABLE>
IV 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 1344 

Finding that Merrick Garland, Attorney General of the United States, is 

in contempt of the House of Representatives for disobeying a certain 

subpoena. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 9, 2024 

Mrs. LUNA (for herself, Mr. CRENSHAW, Mr. MCCORMICK, Mr. BURCHETT, 

and Mr. ALFORD) submitted the following resolution; which was referred 

to the Committee on Rules 

RESOLUTION 

Finding that Merrick Garland, Attorney General of the 

United States, is in contempt of the House of Representatives for disobeying a certain subpoena. 

Whereas, on February 27, 2024, Merrick Garland, Attorney 

General of the United States, was duly served with a subpoena to produce a narrow and specific set of materials 

possessed by the Department of Justice and related to 

Special Counsel Robert K. Hur’s investigation of President Joe Biden’s ‘‘willful’’ mishandling of classified documents to the Committee on the Judiciary of the House 

of Representatives and the Committee on Oversight and 

Accountability of the House of Representatives in Washington, DC; 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HRES 1344 IH 

Whereas Attorney General Garland has, in disobedience of 

such subpoena, failed to produce the set of materials; and 

Whereas the set of materials possessed by the Department of 

Justice is material and necessary in order that the House 

of Representatives may properly execute the functions 

imposed on it and may obtain information necessary as 

a basis for such legislative and other action as the House 

of Representatives may deem necessary and proper: Now, 

therefore be it 

1 Resolved, That— 

2 (1) Merrick Garland, Attorney General of the 

3 United States, is found in contempt of the House of 

4 Representatives for disobeying the February 27, 

5 2024, subpoena; and 

6 (2) the Speaker of the House of Representa7 tives shall impose a fine, which may not be paid with 

8 appropriated funds, on Attorney General Garland of 

9 $10,000 per day, until such time as Attorney Gen10 eral Garland complies with the subpoena of the 

11 House of Representatives by turning over the audio 

12 tapes. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
### §495. Staff composition

The Council shall have a staff, the head of which shall be a civilian Executive Secretary, who shall be appointed by the President. The President is authorized to fix the pay of the Executive Secretary at a rate not to exceed the rate of pay payable to the Executive Secretary of the National Security Council.

(Pub. L. 107–296, title IX, §905, Nov. 25, 2002, 116 Stat. 2259.)
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               379,999
<PP&E>                                         175,365
<DEPRECIATION>                                 140,801
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 516,135
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          526,370
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        54,166
<OTHER-SE>                                    (10,235)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   516,135
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,403,517
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              35,111
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (2,414,188)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,414,188)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,414,188)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.07)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.07)


</TABLE>
ENCLOSURE 2

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION CERTIFICATION

AND COMPLIANCE WITH

STATE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

As required by 40 CFR 51.102 and Section 2.1 of Appendix V of 40 CFR Part 51, the 

following information regarding public participation activities and compliance with state 

administrative procedures is provided.

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ACTIVITIES

As required by 40 CFR 51.102(a), a hearing to accept public testimony concerning a 

proposed revision to the Commonwealth of Virginia State Implementation Plan was

held in the Obenshain Room, DEQ West Central Regional Office, 3019 Peters Creek 

Road, Roanoke, Virginia, at 5:30 p.m. on June 3, 2008.

As required by 40 CFR Part 51.102(d)(1) and (2), the public was given notice of the 

hearing in the Roanoke Times and Lynchburg News and Advance, along with the 

location of the proposal for public inspection, on May 2, 2008. The attached copy of the 

notice provides the evidence required by Section 2.1(f) of Appendix V of 40 CFR Part 

51. As required by 40 CFR 51.102(f) and Section 2.1(g) of Appendix V of 40 CFR Part 

51, the hearing was held in accordance with the information found in the public notice, 

and according to the state's laws.

The Regional Administrator for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency was notified 

of the hearing. This notification follows the requirements of 40 CFR Part 51.102(d)(3), 

(4) and (5). As provided in 40 CFR 51.302(b)(2), the federal land managers (FLMs) 

were given the opportunity to comment on this permit on December 7, 2007. No 

comments were received, and no meeting was requested. This information regarding 

FLM consultation was provided in the public hearing notice.

COMPLIANCE WITH STATE ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURES

As required by Section 2.1(b) of Appendix V of 40 CFR Part 51, the permit was issued

by the Department of Environmental Quality on June 12, 2008, to be effective that 

same day. The statement of authority and procedures followed for approval and 

issuance of the permit and the signature of the Regional Director on the permit are

included in Attachment A to Enclosure 1, providing the evidence required by Section 

2.1(b) and (e) of Appendix V of 40 CFR Part 51. As required by Section 2.1(d) of 

Appendix V of 40 CFR Part 51, a copy of the actual permit submitted for approval and 

incorporation by reference into the Commonwealth of Virginia State Implementation 

Plan is included in Attachment A to Enclosure 1.

TEMPLATES\SOURCE-SPECIFIC\PLN02

SRCESPEC\GPBI-SIP-2.DOC
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
The schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Company's Consolidated Balance Sheet at March 31, 1999 and the Company's
Consolidated Statement of Operations for the three months ended March 31,
1999 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial
statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                             198
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    10881
<ALLOWANCES>                                       613
<INVENTORY>                                       3254
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 14437
<PP&E>                                            7171
<DEPRECIATION>                                    2422
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   19186
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            12147
<BONDS>                                           2083
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                          1233
<OTHER-SE>                                        2212
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     19186
<SALES>                                          10119
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 10147
<CGS>                                             8563
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                     8563
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    53
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 149
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    134
<INCOME-TAX>                                        26
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                108
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       108
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .08
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .08
        

</TABLE>
§ 200.2003 Rights of parties. ( a ) Except as otherwise limited by this part, all parties may— ( 1 ) Be accompanied, represented, and advised by an attorney;
( 2 ) Participate in any conference held by the ALJ;
( 3 ) Conduct discovery of documents as permitted by this part;
( 4 ) Agree to stipulations of fact or law which will be made part of the record;
( 5 ) Present evidence relevant to the issues at the hearing;
( 6 ) Present and cross-examine witnesses;
( 7 ) Present oral arguments at the hearing as permitted by the ALJ; and
( 8 ) Submit written briefs and proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law after the hearing.
( b ) Fees for any services performed on behalf of a party by an attorney are not subject to the provisions of section 206 of title II of the Act, which authorizes the Secretary to specify or limit these fees.
**EXHIBIT 10.45**SUMMARY OF VESTING TERMS FOR 2007 GRANTS TO CHEN, VAN DER VORST, BEARD, NATHAN AND CAPELLIThe Stock Options, Time Vested Restricted Stock and Performance Based Restricted Stock referencedin the February 23, 2007 letter to John Chen and the February 26, 2007 letters to each of PieterVan der Vorst, Marty Beard, Raj Nathan and Steve Capelli vest as follows:Stock Options — Were granted with the closing price on the date of each letter agreement.Options vest 1/8th of the total option amount six months after the date of grant and theremaining shares vest 1/48th monthly such that the options will vest in full 4 yearsfrom the date of grantTime Vested Restricted Stock — Was granted with an exercise price equal to $0.00 and shallvest on the date that is 3 years from the date of each officer’s letter agreement. Restrictedstock shall not vest and shall be subject to the Company’s repurchase right if prior to the vestingdate the grantee’s continuous status as an employee has terminated (as defined in the Company’sAmended and Restated 2003 Stock Plan).Performance Based Restricted Stock — Was granted with an exercise price equal to $0.00 pershare and shall be earned based on Sybase’s percentage achievement during calendar year 2007 ofcertain Total Revenue, Return on Invested Capital and Cash Flow from Operations targets approved bythe Compensation Committee of the Sybase, Inc. Board of Directors. These restricted stock sharesshall not vest and shall be subject to the Company’s repurchase right if prior to the vesting datethat is 3 years from the date of grant the grantee’s continuous status as an employee hasterminated (as defined in the Company’s Amended and Restated 2003 Stock Plan). The targets areweighted as follows in each grant: Total Revenue 60%, Return on Invested Capital 20% and Cash Flowfrom Operations 20%. Each target has a vesting ceiling of 125%.
#### In the Matter of the Estate of George MacDonald, Deceased. Chase Manhattan Bank, as Executor, of George MacDonald, Deceased, Appellant; Maurice J. Giaimo, as Special Guardian for George M. MacDonald, an Infant, Respondent.

In a proceeding to probate the decedent’s last will and testament, the executor appeals from so much of a decree of the Surrogate’s Court, Queens County, made and entered December 7, 1961, admitting the will to probate, as allowed $15,000 to the special guardian for his services on behalf of an infant beneficiary. Decree modified on the facts by reducing to $3,500 the allowance to the special guardian. As so modified, the decree, insofar as appealed from, is affirmed, without costs. The special guardian was appointed on November 30,1961. He concluded his services one week later, on December 7, 1961, when the decree was signed. In view of the nature and extent of the services, the actual time spent, the necessity therefor, the nature of the issues involved and the results achieved, the allowance to the special guardian should be reduced to $3,500. Beldock, P. J., Christ, Hill, Rabin and Hopkins, JJ., concur.
* Pursuant to Local Rule 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in Local Rule 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 96-40236 Summary Calendar

SHANE EDWARD BISHOP, Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus DOUG LEE, Denton County Detention Officer; JEFF HENSLEY, Denton County Detention Officer; DALE BOOKER, Denton County Detention Officer; JERRY FLOWERS, Denton County Detention Officer; J. R. TORRES; DEE DEE WILSON; JEFF COATS; MIKE YERIK; and CALVIN TIPTON, Defendants-Appellees.

____________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas

(4:94-CV-98)

____________________________________________________________ October 14, 1996 Before KING, DUHÉ, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Shane Edward Bishop, a Texas prisoner (#658145), appeals the orders of the district court and magistrate judge granting the defendants’ motion to dismiss and motion for summary judgment. Bishop brought this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, alleging2

that defendants violated his constitutional rights when they used excessive force in transferring him from his cell to “the rubber room.” We have reviewed the record, the magistrate judge’s findings and order addressing defendant Lee’s summary judgment motion, and the magistrate judge’s recommendation that the remaining defendants’ motion to dismiss be granted. Because we find no reversible error, we affirm for essentially the reasons stated by the magistrate judge and adopted by the district court in granting the defendants’ motion to dismiss, and stated by the magistrate judge in granting Lee’s motion for summary judgment. We recognize Bishop’s contention that summary judgment was inappropriate because defendants had not produced several photographs of his alleged injuries or an unedited version of the videotape submitted in support of the motion for summary judgment. However, despite Bishop’s argument in his response to the motion for summary judgment that the videotape had undergone edits “that even a child could see,” he offered no specific facts indicating what had been omitted. A review of the tape discloses no discernable editing during the portion relevant to this appeal, which portion does not show that any of the defendants violated Bishop’s constitutional rights. Bishop also argues that the district court and magistrate judge erred in denying his motions to amend his complaint and motion for appointment of counsel, that he was treated improperly at a management conference when he was allegedly “pushed” into3

consenting to the magistrate judge’s presiding over the case, that the court did not afford his pro se pleadings liberal construction, and that his lawsuit was improperly dismissed “with prejudice.” These claims are unavailing. Bishop’s “Motion for Relief” is DENIED.
AFFIRMED.