alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 21

PAETEC Holding Corp. Subsidiaries



|                                                |  |                                       
|----------------------------------------------- |  | --------------------------------------
|Subsidiary                                      |  | State of Incorporation or Organization
|PAETEC Corp.                                    |  | Delaware                              
|PaeTec Communications, Inc.                     |  | Delaware                              
|PAETEC Communications of Virginia, Inc.         |  | Virginia                              
|PAETEC Integrated Solutions Group, Inc.         |  | Delaware                              
|PaeTec Software Corp.                           |  | New York                              
|PAETEC iTel L.L.C.                              |  | North Carolina                        
|US LEC LLC                                      |  | Delaware                              
|US LEC Communications LLC(1)                    |  | North Carolina                        
|US LEC of Alabama LLC(1)                        |  | North Carolina                        
|US LEC of Florida LLC(1)                        |  | North Carolina                        
|US LEC of North Carolina LLC(1)                 |  | North Carolina                        
|US LEC of Georgia LLC(1)                        |  | Delaware                              
|US LEC of Tennessee LLC(1)                      |  | Delaware                              
|US LEC of South Carolina LLC(1)                 |  | Delaware                              
|US LEC of Maryland LLC(1)                       |  | North Carolina                        
|US LEC of Pennsylvania LLC(1)                   |  | North Carolina                        
|US LEC of Virginia L.L.C.(1)                    |  | Delaware                              
|Allworx Corp.                                   |  | Delaware                              
|MPX, Inc.                                       |  | Delaware                              
|Technology Resource Solutions, Inc.(2)          |  | New York                              
|McLeodUSA LLC                                   |  | Delaware                              
|McLeodUSA Information Services LLC              |  | Delaware                              
|McLeodUSA Telecommunications Services, L.L.C(1) |  | Iowa                                  
|McLeodUSA Purchasing, L.L.C.                    |  | Iowa                                  
|U.S. Energy Partners LLC                        |  | New York                              
|PAETEC Realty LLC                               |  | New York                              



|(1) | Doing business as PAETEC Business Services.
|--- | -------------------------------------------

|(2) | Doing business as PAETEC Energy.
|--- | --------------------------------
§ 96.84 Miscellaneous. ( a ) *Rights and responsibilities of territories.* Except as otherwise provided, a territory eligible for funds shall have the same rights and responsibilities as a State.
( b ) *Applicability of assurances.* The assurances in section 2605(b) of Public Law 97-35 (42 U.S.C. 8624(b)), as amended, pertain to all forms of assistance provided by the grantee, with the exception of assurance 15, which applies to heating, cooling, and energy crisis intervention assistance.
( c ) *Prevention of waste, fraud, and abuse.* Grantees must establish appropriate systems and procedures to prevent, detect, and correct waste, fraud, and abuse in activities funded under the low-income home energy assistance program. The systems and procedures are to address possible waste, fraud, and abuse by clients, vendors, and administering agencies.
( d ) *End of transfer authority.* Beginning with funds appropriated for FY 1994, grantees may not transfer any funds pursuant to section 2604(f) of Public Law 97-35 (42 U.S.C. 8623(f)) that are payable to them under the LIHEAP program to the block grant programs specified in section 2604(f).
[57 FR 1978, Jan. 16, 1992, as amended at 64 FR 55858, Oct. 15, 1999]
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

____________________________________ 

) 

TEA PARTY LEADERSHIP FUND, et al. ) 

 ) 

 Plaintiffs, ) 

 ) 

 v. ) Civil Case No. 1:12-cv-01707-KBJ 

 ) 

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION ) 

 ) 

Defendant. ) 

____________________________________) 

STIPULATION OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL 

PURSUANT TO F.R.C.P. 41(a)(1)(A)(ii) 

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between Plaintiffs Tea Party 

Leadership Fund, Mr. John Raese, and Mr. Sean Bielat, and Defendant Federal Election 

Commission that the above-captioned action, as set forth in plaintiffs’ complaint (Docket 

No. 1), is voluntarily dismissed with prejudice pursuant to the Federal Rule of Civil 

Procedure 41(a)(1)(A)(ii). 

Plaintiffs are filing a separate consent motion withdrawing all pending motions in this 

action. 

Dated: November 7, 2013 

/s/ Dan Backer 

Dan Backer (D.C. Bar No. 996641) 

DB Capitol Strategies, PLLC 

717 King Street, Suite 300 

Alexandria, VA 22314 

(202) 210-5431 

dbacker@dbcapitolstrategies.com

Attorney for Plaintiffs 

Lisa J. Stevenson (D.C. Bar No. 457628) 

Deputy General Counsel 

Kevin Deeley 

Acting Associate General Counsel 

/s/ Greg J. Mueller 

Greg J. Mueller (D.C. Bar No. 462840) 

Attorney 

Attorneys for Defendant 

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 

999 E Street NW 

Washington, DC 20463 

(202) 694-1650 

Case 1:12-cv-01707-KBJ Document 50 Filed 11/07/13 Page 1 of 1
#### John Sparhawk, Jr., as Trustee in Bankruptcy of Charles M. Stoever, Appellant, *v.*Gillin Printing Company, Respondent.

Reported below, 131 App. Div. 900.

(Submitted January 3, 1910;

decided January 11, 1910.)

Motion to dismiss an appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered April 5, 1909, affirming a judgment in *557favor of plaintiff entered upon a verdict and an order denying a motion for a new trial in an action to recover for goods sold and delivered.

The motion was made upon the ground that the appeal was frivolous, the record disclosing no questions of law requiring review.

*Wales F. Severance*for motion.

*Henry Siegrist, Jr.,*and *F. R. Minrath*opposed.

Motion denied, with ten dollars costs.
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 16**  **- 6686** 

JACK RANDALL CRABTREE , Petitioner

- Appellant ,
v. HAROLD W. CLARKE, Director , Respondent

- Appellee
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia , at Roanoke
. Michael F. Urbanski , District Judge. ( 7:16

- cv - 00169

- MFU

- RSB )

Submitted : October 18, 2016 Decided: October 20, 2016

Before WILKINSON , KING, and FLOYD, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion
.
Jack Randall Crabtree , Appellant Pro Se.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Jack Randall Crabtree seeks to appeal the district court’s order d ismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition becaus e he failed to exhaust his state remedies . The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (A) (2012)
. A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012)
. When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see Miller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Crabtree has not made the requisi te showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately3 presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
#### § 410.1400 Purpose of this subpart.

This subpart concerns the safe transportation of each unaccompanied child while in ORR's care.
EXHIBIT 3.3

                            CERTIFICATE OF AMENDMENT

                                       OF

                          CERTIFICATE OF INCORPORATION

                                       OF

                           NETWORK EVENT THEATER, INC.

It is hereby certified that:

      1.    The name of the corporation is Network Event Theater, Inc.

      2.    The Certificate of Incorporation of the corporation is hereby
amended by striking out Article 4 thereof and by substituting in lieu of said
Article the following new Article:

      "4.   The corporation shall have the authority to issue 33,000,000 shares,
consisting of 32,000,000 shares of Common Stock, par value $0.01 per share, and
1,000,000 shares of Preferred Stock, par value $0.01 per share."

      3.    The amendment of the Certificate of Incorporation herein certified
has been duly adopted and approved in accordance with the provisions of Section
242 of the General Corporation Law of the State of Delaware.

Dated:  May 19, 1998

                                         NETWORK EVENT THEATER, INC.

                                         By:/s/ Bruce L. Resnik
                                            Name:  Bruce L. Resnik
                                            Title: Executive Vice President
#### § 96.110 Scope.

Except as otherwise stated, this subpart applies to the community services, preventive health and health services, alcohol and drug abuse and mental health services, and maternal and child health services block grants for the fiscal year beginning October 1, 1981. The social services block grant and the low-income home energy assistance program are not subject to the provisions of this subpart.
In The

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06-12-00180-CR

JIMMY DON MATTHEWS, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 102nd District Court

Bowie County, Texas

Trial Court No. 12-F-584-102

Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ.

Memorandum Opinion by Chief Justice Morriss
2

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Jimmy Don Matthews appeals from his conviction by the trial court for criminal mischief 

resulting in damages of $1,500.00 or more but less than $20,000.00, and sentence of one year in 

state jail. Matthews has filed a single brief, in which he raises issues common to all of his 

appeals.

1

 He argues that the trial court erred: (1) in failing to instruct the jury to disregard 

testimony of a witness speaking to Matthews’ prior bad acts and extraneous offenses and (2) in 

failing to grant a motion for mistrial “based on the State’s willful violation of the trial court’s 

ruling on Defendant’s Motion for Discovery.” 

We addressed these issues in detail in our opinion of this date on Matthews’ appeal in 

cause number 06-12-00179-CR. For the reasons stated therein, we likewise conclude that error 

has not been shown in this case.

We affirm the trial court’s judgment.

Josh R. Morriss, III

Chief Justice

Date Submitted: June 5, 2013

Date Decided: June 18, 2013

Do Not Publish

 1

Matthews also appeals from a conviction of criminal mischief resulting in damage of $20,000.00 or more but less 

than $100,000.00 in our cause number 06-12-00179-CR.
Exhibit 32


               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 of Integrated Performance Systems,
 Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended August 31, 2003,
 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
 (the "Report"), I, D. Ronald Allen, Chief Executive Officer and Chief
 Financial Officer of the Company, do hereby 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 Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

       Date: October 30, 2003

                                    /s/ D. Ronald Allen
                                    ----------------------------------------
                                    D. Ronald Allen, Chief Executive Officer
                                    and Chief Financial Officer
p130679.eng

 

SAT (concerns) (07/16/2013):

Related Cases and Related Cases and Misc SAT Info:

Ecotox: Analogs: 

Migration to groundwater: Negligible

PBT rating: P3B2T2 PMN - P3B1T1; Deg Pdt - P3B2T2. //

Health Rating: PMN - 1-2; Per-F acid - 2. // Eco Rating:

inact material - 2; incomplete incineration product - 3.

Health: 2 Drinking Water, Inhalation, XB Testing (No

Testing desired)

Eco: 3 Water (All releases to water with a CC = 420.00

ppb), XB Testing (Testing desired)

OCCUPATIONAL EXPOSURE RATING: 0-1

NOTES & KEY ASSUMPTIONS:

Generated by the 06/07/2005 version of ChemSTEER. 

Page 2



p130679.eng

Page 6
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 JUL-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                              48,297
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,709,495
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 3,235,008
<PP&E>                                           6,333,984
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,570,413
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  21,493,175
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            9,898,119
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                            20,588
<OTHER-SE>                                      11,574,468
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    21,493,175
<SALES>                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 3,797,439
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    1,461,855
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                10,315,927
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                (840,207)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (9,203,116)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        35,940
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (9,239,056)
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (9,239,056)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          (0.51)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        (0.51)



</TABLE>
```

                                                                      EXHIBIT 13

             CERTIFICATION OF THE CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF
                                FINANCIAL OFFICER

                            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 Annual Report of VocalTec Communications Ltd. (the
"Company") on Form 20-F for the period ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), we, Ido
Gur, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Joshua Di-nur, Chief Financial
Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted
pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of our
knowledge, information and belief:

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

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

Dated: May 12, 2010

                                            By: /s/ Ido Gur
                                            ----------------------
                                            Ido Gur
                                            Chief Executive Officer

                                            By: /s/ Joshua Di-nur
                                            ----------------------
                                            Joshua Di-nur
                                            Chief Financial Officer
```
§ 96.89 Exemption from standards for providing energy crisis intervention assistance. The performance standards in section 2604(c) of Pub. L. 97-35 (42 U.S.C. 8623), as amended by section 502(a) of the Human Services Reauthorization Act of 1986 (Pub. L. 99-425)—concerning provision of energy crisis assistance within specified time limits, acceptance of applications for energy crisis benefits at geographically accessible sites, and provision to physically infirm low-income persons of the means to apply for energy crisis benefits at their residences or to travel to application sites—shall not apply under the conditions described in this section. ( a ) These standards shall not apply to a program in a geographical area affected by ( 1 ) a major disaster or emergency designated by the President under the Disaster Relief Act of 1974, or
( 2 ) a natural disaster identified by the chief executive officer of a State, territory, or direct-grant Indian tribe or tribal organization, if the Secretary (or his or her designee) determines that the disaster or emergency makes compliance with the standards impracticable.
( b ) The Secretary's determination will be made after communication by the chief executive officer (or his or her designee) to the Secretary (or his or her designee) of the following: ( 1 ) Information substantiating the existence of a disaster or emergency;
( 2 ) Information substantiating the impracticability of compliance with the standards, including a description of the specific conditions caused by the disaster or emergency which make compliance impracticable; and
( 3 ) Information on the expected duration of the conditions that make compliance impracticable. If the communication is made by the chief executive officer's designee and the Department does not have on file written evidence of the designation, the communication must also include:
( 4 ) Evidence of the appropriate delegation of authority.
( c ) The initial communication by the chief executive officer may be oral or written. If oral, it must be followed as soon as possible by written communication confirming the information provided orally. The Secretary's exemption initially may be oral. If so, the Secretary will provide written confirmation of the exemption as soon as possible after receipt of appropriate written communication from the chief executive officer.
( d ) Exemption from the standards shall apply from the moment of the Secretary's determination, only in the geographical area affected by the disaster or emergency, and only for so long as the Secretary determines that the disaster or emergency makes compliance with the standards impracticable.
[53 FR 6827, Mar. 3, 1988]
§ 1641.11 Suspension. ( a ) IPAs suspended from providing audit services for all recipients are prohibited from soliciting or entering into any new contracts for audit services with recipients for the duration of the suspension. Recipients shall not knowingly award contracts to, extend or modify existing contracts with, or solicit proposals from, such IPAs. Suspended IPAs also are prohibited from providing audit services to recipients as agents or representatives of other IPAs.
( b ) IPAs suspended from providing audit services for one or more specific recipient(s) are prohibited from soliciting or entering into any new contracts for audit services with such recipient(s) for the duration of the period of suspension as determined pursuant to this part. The affected recipient(s) shall not knowingly award contracts to, extend or modify existing contracts with, or solicit proposals from, such IPAs. Suspended IPAs also are prohibited from providing audit services to the affected recipient(s) as agents or representatives of other IPAs, and are required to provide prior written notice to the debarring official before providing such services to other recipients. Suspended IPAs also must provide prior written notice of the suspension to any recipient for which the IPA provides audit services.
; BEFORE THE FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION 

r 

f 

•• In the Matter of • ) 

) A13-10 

j Audit Division Recommendation ) Agenda Document No. 16-02-A 

Memorandum on the Utah State ) 

Democratic Conunittee (USDC) ) 

CERTIFICATION 

I I, Shawn Woodhead Werth, recording secretary of the Federal Election Commission open 

meeting on January 14,2016 do hereby certify that the Commission took the following actions in 

' the above-captioned matter: 

y 

[ ]. Failed by a vote of 3-3 to: 

I 

a. Approve the recommendations for Findings 1,3,4 and 5 as set forth 

f in Agenda Document No. 16-02-A. 

i 

b. Approve the recommendation in Finding 2, Recordkeeping for Employees, 

as set forth in Agenda Document No. 16-02-A, subject to an amendment to 

include $99,431.97 paid to contract workers. 

Conunissioners Ravel, Walthei, and Weintraub voted afliimatively for the motion. 

Commissioners Goodman, Hunter, and Petersen dissented. 

2;. Decided by a vote of 6-0.to: 

Approve the recommendations for Findings 1,2,3,4, and 5 subject to the 

following edit: Change the title of Finding 4 to "Receipt of Levin Fund 

Donations" wherever it appears in the Proposed Final Audit Report. 

Commissioners Goodman, Hunter, Petersen, Ravel, Walther, and Weintraub voted 

affirmatively for the decision. 

Attest: 

Shawn Woodhead Werth 

Secretary and Clerk of the C^nii^siidn