alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
                                                                      EXHIBIT 21

SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT

THE COMPANY OR ONE OF ITS WHOLLY-OWNED SUBSIDIARIES BENEFICIALLY OWNS THE
FOLLOWING PERCENT OF THE OUTSTANDING CAPITAL STOCK, VOTING SECURITIES AND
INTERESTS OF EACH OF THE CORPORATIONS AND LIMITED PARTNERSHIPS LISTED BELOW.

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                      STATE OR OTHER
                                      JURISDICTION OF   PERCENT
NAME                                   INCORPORATION     OWNED
                                      ---------------   -------
<S>                                   <C>               <C>
City Bank                                 Hawaii         100.0%
  CB Technology, Inc.                     Hawaii         100.0%
  Citibank Properties, Inc.               Hawaii          99.9%
  ISL Capital Corporation               California       100.0%
      Hospitality Capital Group, LP     California        50.0%
  ISL Financial Corp.                    Virginia        100.0%
  Pacific Access Mortgage, LLC            Hawaii          50.0%
Datatronix Financial Services, Inc.       Hawaii         100.0%
O.R.E., Inc.                              Hawaii         100.0%
</TABLE>

All subsidiaries were included in the consolidated financial statements of the
Registrant.
EXHIBIT 32.2



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. 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 fiscal year ended December 31, 2005 of Robert Half International Inc. (the Form
10-K), I, M. Keith Waddell, Chief Financial Officer of Robert Half International Inc., certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



1.    The Form 10-K 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 Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Robert Half International Inc.



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 Robert Half International Inc. and will be
retained by Robert Half International Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



|              |  |                                                                        
|------------- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------
|March 6, 2006 |  | /s/ M. Keith Waddell                                                   
|              |  | M. Keith Waddell Chief Financial Officer Robert Half International Inc.
Exhibit 12.1

I, Doron Birger, certify that:

|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       
|-- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|1. | I have reviewed this amendment
  to annual report on Form 20-F of Elron Electronic Industries Ltd.; and                                                                                                                                                                                                                               
|2. | Based on my knowledge, this
  amendment to report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact
  or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in
  light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not
  misleading with respect to the period covered by this annual report.

Date: March 16, 2006

|                                        | 
|--------------------------------------- | 
|/s/ Doron Birger                        | 
|                                        | 
|Doron Birger                           
|President and Chief Executive
  Officer

9

---
#### Louis Glick, Respondent, v. Excess Insurance Company Limited et al., Appellants.

Judgment affirmed, with costs to the respondent. No opinion. Concur — Breitel, J. P., Rabin, Eager and Bastow, JJ.; Stevens, J., dissents and votes to reverse and dismiss the complaint.
2009 Decisions

Opinions of the United

States Court of Appeals

for the Third Circuit

6-1-2009

USA v. Diallo

Precedential or Non-Precedential: Non-Precedential

Docket No. 07-1299

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2009

This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2009 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.

Recommended Citation

"USA v. Diallo" (2009). 2009 Decisions. Paper 1266.

http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2009/1266
NOT PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

___________

No. 07-1299

___________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v.

BOUBACAR DIALLO,

Appellant

___________

On Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Pennsylvania

(D.C. Criminal No. 06-cr-00236)

District Judge: The Honorable Arthur J. Schwab

___________

Submitted Under Third Circuit LAR 34.1(a)

May 22, 2009

BEFORE: FUENTES, JORDAN, and NYGAARD, Circuit Judges.

(Filed: June 1, 2009)

___________

OPINION OF THE COURT

 

NYGAARD, Circuit Judge.

Because our opinion is wholly without precedential value, and

because the parties and the District Court are familiar with its operative facts, we offer
2

only an abbreviated recitation to explain why we will affirm the order of the District

Court.

Diallo appeals the District Court’s order of judgment and sentence. He pleaded

guilty to one count of Trafficking in Counterfeit Labels Affixed to Copies of Motion

Pictures and Audiovisual Works. 18 U.S.C. §2318. He was sentenced at the low end of

the advisory range: eighteen months’ incarceration; three years’ supervised release; and,

restitution of $120,000.

During the investigation Diallo agreed to speak with the Federal Bureau of

Investigation, where he admitted knowledge of the illegality of his actions. He changed

his initial not-guilty plea to guilty after making a plea agreement with the government.

The District Court, which properly had jurisdiction, conducted the standard plea colloquy

prior to filing the order. There is clear evidence that Diallo knowingly and voluntarily

entered the plea.

Diallo’s appellate counsel filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S.

738 (1967), concluding that there are not any issues of arguable merit. After our

independent investigation of the record, we conclude that counsel has conducted a

reasonable review, and we agree that there are not any issues of arguable merit. 

Accordingly, we will affirm the order of the District Court, and we will grant

counsel’s motion to withdraw.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.B


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


         In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period
ending March 31, 2004, of El Paso Natural Gas Company (the "Company") as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Greg G. Gruber, Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer and
Director, certify (i) that the Report fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and
(ii) that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.


                                                /s/ Greg G. Gruber
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           Greg G. Gruber
                                           Senior Vice President, Chief
                                           Financial Officer, Treasurer
                                             and Director
                                           (Principal Financial
                                             and Accounting Officer)

                                           November 12, 2004



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to El Paso Natural Gas Company and will be retained by El Paso Natural
Gas Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff
upon request.
#### § 1903.19 Gambling.

Gambling in any form, or the operation of gambling devices, is prohibited. This prohibition shall not apply to the vending or exchange of chances by licensed blind operators of vending facilities for any lottery set forth in a State law and authorized by the provisions of the Randolph-Sheppard Act (Title 20 U.S.C. 107 *et seq.*).
### §1627a. Sheep production and marketing grant program

#### (a) Establishment

The Secretary of Agriculture, acting through the Administrator of the Agricultural Marketing Service, shall establish a competitive grant program for the purposes of strengthening and enhancing the production and marketing of sheep and sheep products in the United States, including through—

(1) the improvement of—

(A) infrastructure;

(B) business; and

(C) resource development; and

(2) the development of innovative approaches to solve long-term needs.

#### (b) Eligibility

The Secretary shall make grants under this section to at least one national entity, the mission of which is consistent with the purpose of the grant program.

#### (c) Funding

Of the funds of the Commodity Credit Corporation, the Secretary shall use to carry out this section $2,000,000 for fiscal year 2019, and $400,000 for fiscal year 2024, to remain available until expended.

(Aug. 14, 1946, ch. 966, title II, §209, as added Pub. L. 113–79, title XII, §12102(a), Feb. 7, 2014, 128 Stat. 978; amended Pub. L. 115–334, title XII, §12102, Dec. 20, 2018, 132 Stat. 4942; Pub. L. 118–22, div. B, title I, §102(d)(8)(E), Nov. 17, 2023, 137 Stat. 118.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2023—Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 118–22 inserted "and $400,000 for fiscal year 2024," after "2019,".

2018—Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 115–334 substituted "$2,000,000 for fiscal year 2019" for "$1,500,000 for fiscal year 2014".

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

#### Effective Date of 2023 Amendment

Amendment by Pub. L. 118–22 to be applied and administered as if enacted on Sept. 30, 2023, see section 102(g) of Pub. L. 118–22, set out in an Extension of Agricultural Programs note under section 9001 of this title.
#### HARLOW v. VOYAGER COMMUNICATIONS V

No. 612PA97

Case below: 127 N.C.App. 623

Petition by plaintiffs for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 allowed 5 February 1998.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      EXHIBIT 21




                                 SUBSIDIARIES OF
                          AMERICAN CLASSIC VOYAGES CO.
                             AS OF DECEMBER 31, 1998



<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                     Jurisdiction Under                Percentage
                          Name of Subsidiary                          Which Organized                 of Ownership
          ---------------------------------------------------      -----------------------        ---------------------

<S>                                                                 <C>                                   <C> 
          The Delta Queen Steamboat Co.                                   Delaware                        100%

               DQSB II, Inc.                                              Delaware                         (1)

               Cruise America Travel, Incorporated                        Delaware                         (1)

               Great River Cruise Line, L.L.C.                            Delaware                         (2)

               Great Ocean Cruise Line, L.L.C.                            Delaware                         (2)

               Great AQ Steamboat, L.L.C.                                 Delaware                         (2)


          Great Hawaiian Cruise Line, Inc.                                Delaware                        100%

               Great Independence Ship Co.                                Delaware                         (3)

               Oceanic Ship Co.                                           Delaware                         (3)

               Great Hawaiian Properties Corporation                      Delaware                         (3)

               American Hawaii Properties Corporation                     Delaware                         (3)

               CAT II, Inc.                                               Delaware                         (3)
</TABLE>




(1) 100% owned subsidiaries of The Delta Queen Steamboat Co.
(2) 99% owned subsidiaries of The Delta Queen Steamboat Co. and 1% owned
    subsidiaries of DQSB II, Inc.
(3) 100% owned subsidiaries of Great Hawaiian Cruise Line, Inc.
### §§148, 148a. Repealed. Pub. L. 106-224, title IV, §438(a)(6), June 20, 2000, 114 Stat. 454

Section 148, acts Apr. 6, 1937, ch. 69, 50 Stat. 57; May 9, 1938, ch. 192, 52 Stat. 344; Aug. 13, 1954, ch. 731, 68 Stat. 717, related to control of incipient or emergency outbreaks of insect pests and plant diseases.

Section 148a, act Apr. 6, 1937, ch. 69, §2, as added May 9, 1938, ch. 192, 52 Stat. 344, related to availability of appropriated money for personnel, general administration, material and equipment, and other necessary expenses.
EXHIBIT 32.2


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


      I, Anna M. Morrison, Chief Accounting Officer of American Vantage
Companies (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:

      (2)   the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the annual period
            ended December 31, 2005 (the "Report"), to which this certification
            has been made an exhibit, 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.


Dated:  April 12, 2006

                                          /s/ Anna M. Morrison
                                          --------------------------------------
                                          Anna M. Morrison,
                                          Chief Accounting Officer
No. 12

- 15

- 00019

- CR
LEE VINCENT § IN THE COURT OF APPEALS Appellant § § vs. § 12 TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT § THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee § § AT TYLER , TEXAS
APPELLANT’S FIRST MOTION FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO FILE BRIEF 21

- DAY REQUEST
TO THE HONORABLE COURT: Now comes Austin Reeve Jackson, counsel for Appellant in the abo ve entitled and numbered cause, and makes this Motion , and for good cause shows the following:
I. Appellant’s brief in this matter is due on 5 March 2015

. No prior extensions have been requested.
II. Mr. Vincent’s mother notified counsel yesterday that he no longer desires to pursue his appeal . Counsel is requesting an additional three weeks to either verify with
Mr. Vincent that that is his desire or to complete the brief in this matter. Should he in fact wish to terminate this appeal, the resources of the Court and the State ’ s attorney would be best served by permitting a brief extension to pursue that end

. II.
No prior extension s have been requested and is respectfully prayed that the in the interest of justice, the Court grant this motion

. ACCEPTED 12-15-00019-CR TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS

TYLER, TEXAS 3/5/2015 11:11:45 PM CATHY LUSK CLERKWHEREFORE, PREMISES CONSIDERED , undersigned counsel respectfully prays that, in accordance with the applicable law, the Court grant this Motion and extend the date by which to file a brief by twenty

- one days

. Respectfu lly submitted,
/s/Austin Reeve Jackson Texas Bar No. 24046139 112 East Line, Suite 310 Tyler, TX 75702 Telephone: (903) 595

- 6070 Facsimile: (866) 387

- 0152

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE This is to certify that a true and correct copy of the above and foregoing document

was served on counsel for the State by facsimile concurrently with its filing.
/s/Austin Reeve Jackson
§ 37.560 Must I be able to estimate project expenditures precisely in order to justify use of a fixed-support TIA? ( a ) To use a fixed-support TIA, rather than an expenditure-based TIA, you must have confidence in your estimate of the expenditures required to achieve well-defined outcomes. Therefore, you must work carefully with program officials to select outcomes that, when the recipient achieves them, are reliable indicators of the amount of effort the recipient expended. However, your estimate of the required expenditures need not be a precise dollar amount, as illustrated by the example in paragraph (b) of this section, if: ( 1 ) The recipient is contributing a substantial share of the costs of achieving the outcomes, which must meet the criteria in § 37.305(a); and
( 2 ) You are confident that the costs of achieving the outcomes will be at least a minimum amount that you can specify and the recipient is willing to accept the possibility that its cost sharing percentage ultimately will be higher if the costs exceed that minimum amount.
( b ) To illustrate the approach, consider a project for which you are confident that the recipient will have to expend at least $800,000 to achieve the specified outcomes. You must determine, in conjunction with program officials, the minimum level of recipient cost sharing that you want to negotiate, based on the circumstances, to demonstrate the recipient's commitment to the success of the project. For purposes of this illustration, let that minimum recipient cost sharing be 40% of the total project costs. In that case, the Federal share should be no more than 60% and you could set a fixed level of Federal support at $480,000 (60% of $800,000). With that fixed level of Federal support, the recipient would be responsible for the balance of the costs needed to complete the project.
( c ) Note, however, that the level of recipient cost sharing you negotiate is to be based solely on the level needed to demonstrate the recipient's commitment. You may not use a shortage of Federal Government funding for the program as a reason to try to persuade a recipient to accept a fixed-support TIA, rather than an expenditure-based instrument, or to accept responsibility for a greater share of the total project costs than it otherwise is willing to offer. If you lack sufficient funding to provide an appropriate Federal Government share for the entire project, you instead should rescope the effort covered by the agreement to match the available funding.
#### Edward Kowalczyk, Appellant, v. Marcel Krum, Respondent.

Judgment for defendant after trial in personal injury negligence action, entered on October 25, 1961, unanimously reversed, on the law and in the exercise of discretion, without costs, the verdict vacated and a new trial ordered. Defendant introduced evidence to support his contention that plaintiff sustained his injuries, at least in part, because he ran into the path of defendant’s automobile while suffering from the effects of intoxication. While on the evidence properly introduced in the case, defendant would be entitled to retain his verdict, the trial is tainted with unfairness because of the prejudicial errors in allowing the testimony concerning arrests and convictions for intoxication in past years. The errors were not sufficiently cured by belated instructions coming merely as *804an addendum to the court’s charge. (See *McQuage*v. *City of New York,*285 App. Div. 249; cf. *People*v. *Broivn,*2 A D 2d 202, 204.) Concur — Botein, P. J., Breitel, Rabin, Stevens and Eager, JJ.
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATE OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C.ss.
1350):

I, Thomas D. Karol, Chief Executive Officer of ElkCorp, certify to my
knowledge and belief pursuant to Section 906 of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18
U.S.C.ss. 1350) that:



| | (1) |  | The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended
December 31, 2003, which this statement accompanies, 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 Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q for the period ended December 31, 2003 fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
of ElkCorp.        

|                       |  |    |  |     |  |                        
|---------------------- |  | -- |  | --- |  | -----------------------
|Date: February 9, 2004 |  | By |  | /s/ |  | Thomas D. Karol        
|                       |  |    |  |    
|                       |  |    |  |     |  | Thomas D. Karol        
|                       |  |    |  |     |  | Chief Executive Officer
#### § 34.40 Purpose of reports and records.

Sections 34.41 and 34.42 prescribe requirements for monitoring and reporting financial and program performance and for records retention.