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

                                                                      EXHIBIT 21

        KAISER ALUMINUM & CHEMICAL CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARY COMPANIES
                             (DEBTOR-IN-POSSESSION)

                                  SUBSIDIARIES

     Listed below are the principal subsidiaries and affiliates of Kaiser
Aluminum & Chemical Corporation, the jurisdiction of their incorporation or
organization, and the names under which such subsidiaries do business. The
Company's ownership is indicated for less than wholly owned affiliates. Certain
subsidiaries are omitted which, considered in the aggregate as a single
subsidiary, would not constitute a significant subsidiary.

<Table>
<Caption>
                                                                   PLACE OF
                                                               INCORPORATION OR
NAME                                                             ORGANIZATION
----                                                           ----------------
<S>                                                            <C>
Continuing entities --
Anglesey Aluminium Limited (49%)............................   United Kingdom
Kaiser Aluminium International, Inc.(1).....................   Delaware
Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical of Canada Limited(1).............   Ontario
Kaiser Bellwood Corporation(1)..............................   Delaware
Liquidating entities --
Alpart Jamaica Inc.(1)(2)(3)................................   Delaware
Kaiser Jamaica Corporation(1)(2)(3).........................   Delaware
Kaiser Alumina Australia Corporation(1)(2)(3)...............   Delaware
Kaiser Finance Corporation(1)(2)(3).........................   Delaware
</Table>

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

(1) Filed a voluntary petition for reorganization under the Code.

(2) Entities that have been materially affected as a result of the commodity
    asset sales, as discussed more fully in Note 1 and 5 of Notes to
    Consolidated Financial Statements.

(3) Entities are being liquidated as more fully discussed in Note 1 of Notes to
    Consolidated Financial Statements.
Before the Third Division,

May 5, 1955

No. 59027.

protest 145257-K (San Francisco).

#### British Western Agencies *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of Rockingham earthenware teapots similar in all material respects to those the subject of *United States*v. *M. & D. Miller, Inc.*(41 C. C. P. A. 226, C. A. D. 556), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

JOEL WHITNEY, 

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-2683 DFL PAN P

vs.

 SCOTT KERNAN, et al., 

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, has filed this civil rights action

seeking relief under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The matter was referred to a United States Magistrate

Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local General Order No. 262.

On May 23, 2005, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein

which were served on all parties and which contained notice to all parties that any objections to

the findings and recommendations were to be filed within twenty days. Neither party has filed

objections to the findings and recommendations.

The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be

supported by the record and by the magistrate judge’s analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY

ORDERED that:

/////

Case 2:04-cv-02683-DFL-PAN Document 18 Filed 09/09/05 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

1. The findings and recommendations filed May 23, 2005, are adopted in full; and 

2. Claims against defendant Kernan are dismissed without prejudice. 

Dated: 9/9/2005

DAVID F. LEVI

United States District Judge

Case 2:04-cv-02683-DFL-PAN Document 18 Filed 09/09/05 Page 2 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

KING VISION PAY-PER-VIEW, LTD.,

Plaintiff, No. CIV S-04-2004 MCE KJM

vs.

MIGUEL ARROYO, et al.,

Defendants. ORDER

 /

Plaintiff’s motion for default judgment came on regularly for hearing on

November 16, 2005 before the undersigned. Thomas Riley appeared telephonically for plaintiff. 

No appearance was made for defendant Arroyo. Upon review of the documents in support, no

opposition having been filed, upon hearing the arguments of counsel, and good cause appearing

therefor, THE COURT ORDERS AS FOLLOWS:

Within thirty days from the date of this order, plaintiff may supplement the

evidentiary record with an affidavit pertaining to the applicable licensing fee, the hours expended

/////

/////

/////

/////

Case 2:04-cv-02004-RRB -KJM Document 29 Filed 11/18/05 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

by counsel and billing rate therefor, and any case or statutory authority allowing for recovery of

investigative costs.

DATED: November 17, 2005.

______________________________________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

006 kingvision.oah

Case 2:04-cv-02004-RRB -KJM Document 29 Filed 11/18/05 Page 2 of 2
Case No. 15,090.

#### UNITED STATES v. FIFTEEN HOGSHEADS OF BRANDY.

[5 Blatchf. 106.] 1

Circuit Court, N. D. New York.

Nov., 1862.

Appeal—Forfeiture Case—Trial without Jury.

1. A seizure case, triable by a jury in the district court, cannot be reviewed in this court on an appeal, but can be reviewed only on a writ of error.

2. Where such a case is, by agreement of parties, tried by the district court without a jury, the record should be made up in form, as in the case of a writ of error, with the proper exceptions to the admission or rejection of testimony, pr to the instructions of the court to the jury.

[Cited in Town of Lyons v. Lyons Nat. Bank, 8 Fed. 373; Boyd v. Clark, 13 Fed. 909; Doty v. Jewett, 19 Fed. 338; Rogers v. U. S., 12 Sup. Ct. 94.]

[Appeal from the district court of the United States for the Northern district of New York.]

In this case a libel of information was filed in the district court, for the forfeiture of fifteen hogsheads of brandy, for undervaluation. The case was tried in the district court, by the court without a jury [case unreported], under an agreement between the parties that the court should determine the law and render a verdict and judgment. This was done, and the court gave judgment for the libellants, and the claimants took an appeal to this court. The libellants now moved to dismiss the appeal.

1

 [Reported by Hon. Samuel Blatchford, District Judge, and here reprinted by permission.]

NELSON, Circuit Justice.

A seizure case, such as the present one is, in which the parties, are entitled to a trial by jury, can only be reviewed on a writ of error. And, if a writ of error had been taken in this case, this court could not have entertained it, because there is no bill of exceptions; and there could have been none, as the court below was made the judge of both the law and the fact. The record should have been made up in form, as in the case of a writ of error, with the proper exceptions to the admission or rejection of testimony, or to the instructions of the court to the jury.

The appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction, but without costs.
PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS (LOGO)

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
2001 Ross Avenue, Suite 1800
Dallas TX 75201-2997
Telephone (214) 999 1400

Report of Independent Accountants

To ORIX Real Estate Capital Markets, LLC:

We have examined management's  assertion about ORIX Real Estate Capital Markets,
LLC's ("ORECM")  compliance with the minimum servicing  standards  identified in
the Mortgage Bankers Association of America's Uniform Single Attestation Program
for Mortgage Bankers ("USAP") (except,  for commercial loan and multifamily loan
servicing,  minimum servicing standards V.4 and VI.l, which the Mortgage Bankers
Association has interpreted as inapplicable to such servicing) as of and for the
year ended December 31, 1999 included in the accompanying  management assertion.
Management is responsible for ORECM's  compliance  with those minimum  servicing
standards. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management's assertion
about the entity's compliance based on our examination.

Our  examination  was  made in  accordance  with  standards  established  by the
American  Institute of Certified Public Accountants and,  accordingly,  included
examining,  on a test basis,  evidence about ORECM's compliance with the minimum
servicing  standards  and  performing  such other  procedures  as we  considered
necessary  in the  circumstances.  We believe  that our  examination  provides a
reasonable  basis for our  opinion.  Our  examination  does not  provide a legal
determination on ORECM's compliance with the minimum servicing standards.

In  our  opinion,   management's   assertion   that  ORECM   complied  with  the
aforementioned minimum servicing standards as of and for the year ended December
31, 1999 is fairly stated, in all material respects.

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
February 18, 2000
No. 54682.

#### J. & H. Baer, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 147918-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, O. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of synthetic stones the same in all material respects as those-the subject of *S. Nathan & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(37 C. C. P. A. 99, C. A. D. 426), the claim at 10 percent under paragraph 1528 was sustained.
1999 Decisions

Opinions of the United

States Court of Appeals

for the Third Circuit

8-20-1999

Mistick PBT v. Housing Auth Cty Pgh

Precedential or Non-Precedential:

Docket 97-3248

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_1999

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 1999 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

"Mistick PBT v. Housing Auth Cty Pgh" (1999). 1999 Decisions. Paper 230.

http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_1999/230
 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

 FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT 

 No. 97-3248 

 Mistick PBT v. Housing Authority of Pittsburgh 

 The following modifications have been made to the Court's 

Opinion issued on 7/30/99 , to the above-entitled appeal and 

will appear as part of the final version of the opinion: 

 

 1. On page 31, lines 5-6, delete the words "ARTICLES FOOTNOTE." 

 

 

 Very truly yours, 

 /s/ P. Douglas Sisk, 

 Clerk 

Dated: August 20, 1999
# C_2007309EN.01014701.xml

| 19.12.2007 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 309/147 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.12.2007

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 309/147

---

Corrigendum to the Annual Report of the Court of Auditors on the implementation of the budget concerning the financial year 2006, together with the institutions' replies

(
  Official Journal of the European Union C 273 of 15 November 2007
  )

(
  Official Journal of the European Union C 273 of 15 November 2007

(2007/C 309/25)

On page 127, Table 6.2 is replaced by the following table:

Table 6.2 — Cross-tabulation of reimbursement correctness by fund (1)

1

| Correctness of reimbursement | Fund | Total |
| --- | --- | --- |
| ERDF | ESF | EAGGF | Cohesion Fund |
| Eligibility error | 15 cases | 9 cases | 3 cases | 2 cases | 29 cases |
| 19 % | 15 % | 10 % | 20 % | 16 % |
| Occurrence error | 5 cases | 7 cases | 0 cases | 1 cases | 13 cases |
| 6 % | 12 % | 0 % | 10 % | 7 % |
| Accuracy error | 2 cases | 7 cases | 1 cases | 0 cases | 10 cases |
| 3 % | 12 % | 3 % | 0 % | 6 % |
| Multiple error | 13 cases | 12 cases | 0 cases | 0 cases | 25 cases |
| 17 % | 20 % | 0 % | 0 % | 14 % |
| Correct reimbursement | 42 cases | 25 cases | 26 cases | 7 cases | 100 cases |
| 55 % | 42 % | 87 % | 70 % | 56 % |
| Total | 77 cases | 60 cases | 30 cases | 10 cases | 177 cases |
| 100 % | 100 % | 100 % | 100 % | 100 %
   (2) |

Correctness of reimbursement

Fund

Total

Total

ERDF

ESF

EAGGF

Cohesion Fund

Eligibility error

15 cases

9 cases

3 cases

2 cases

29 cases

29 cases

19 %

15 %

10 %

20 %

16 %

16 %

Occurrence error

5 cases

7 cases

0 cases

1 cases

13 cases

13 cases

6 %

12 %

0 %

10 %

7 %

7 %

Accuracy error

2 cases

7 cases

1 cases

0 cases

10 cases

10 cases

3 %

12 %

3 %

0 %

6 %

6 %

Multiple error

13 cases

12 cases

0 cases

0 cases

25 cases

25 cases

17 %

20 %

0 %

0 %

14 %

14 %

Correct reimbursement

42 cases

25 cases

26 cases

7 cases

100 cases

100 cases

55 %

42 %

87 %

70 %

56 %

56 %

Total

Total

77 cases

77 cases

60 cases

60 cases

30 cases

30 cases

10 cases

10 cases

177 cases

177 cases

100 %

100 %

100 %

100 %

100 %

100 %

100 %

100 %

100 %
   (2)

100 %

2

---

(1)  This cross-tabulation is based on the Court's sample of projects.

1

(2)  Columns ESF and total do not sum up to 100 %. The differences are due to rounding.

2

---
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

1

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DIRECTV INC.,

Plaintiff, 2:04-cv-2409-GEB-GGH

vs.

JACK TURNBOUGH,

Defendant. ORDER

__________________________________/

On October 28, 2005, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations

herein which were served on the parties and which contained notice that any objections to the

findings and recommendations were to be filed within ten days. No objections were filed.

 Accordingly, the court presumes any findings of fact are correct. See Orland v.

United States, 602 F.2d 207, 208 (9th Cir. 1999). The magistrate judge’s conclusions of law are

reviewed de novo. See Britt v. Simi Valley Unified School Dist., 708 F.2d 452, 454 (9th Cir.

1983).

The court has reviewed the applicable legal standards and, good cause appearing,

concludes that it is appropriate to adopt the Proposed Findings and Recommendations in full.

\\\\\

\\\\\

Case 2:04-cv-02409-GEB-GGH Document 29 Filed 01/30/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

2

Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED that:

1. The Proposed Findings and Recommendations filed October 28, 2005, are

ADOPTED; and

2. Plaintiff’s motion for entry of default judgment is GRANTED. Judgment is

rendered in the amount of $10,000 in damages and $3,488 in attorneys’ fees against defendant

Turnbough.

Dated: January 27, 2006

/s/ Garland E. Burrell, Jr.

GARLAND E. BURRELL, JR.

United States District Judge

Case 2:04-cv-02409-GEB-GGH Document 29 Filed 01/30/06 Page 2 of 2
EXHIBIT 4.06

SEE ADDITIONAL LEGEND ON REVERSE SIDE OF CERTIFICATE

|NUMBER
PA- |  | Incorporated Under the Laws
of the State of Delaware
July 17, 1996 |  | SHARES
**
|---------- |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------ |  | ---------

ALLOS THERAPEUTICS, INC.
SERIES A EXCHANGEABLE PREFERRED STOCK

THIS CERTIFIES THATis the record holder
of                        (            ) shares of the Series A
Exchangeable Preferred Stock of Allos Therapeutics, Inc. (the "Corporation") transferable only on the books of the Corporation by the holder hereof, in person or by duly authorized attorney, upon
surrender of this Certificate properly endorsed or assigned.

A statement of the rights, preferences, privileges and restrictions granted to or imposed upon the respective classes or series of shares of stock of
the Corporation, and upon the holders thereof as established by the
Restated Certificate of Incorporation, as amended, and the number of shares constituting each series and the designations thereof, may be obtained by any stockholder upon request and without charge at
the principal office of the Corporation.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the Corporation has caused this Certificate to be signed by its duly authorized officers this
 day of , 200.

|Secretary |  | President
|--------- |  | ---------

SHARES

EACH

---



For value Received,                        hereby sell, assign and transfer
unto                                         
                               Shares of the Preferred Stock of the within named
Corporation, represented by the within Certificate and do hereby irrevocably constitute and
appoint                                        
        Attorney to transfer the said shares of said Preferred Stock on the books of the
said Corporation, pursuant to the provisions of the By-Laws thereof, with full powers of substitution in the premises.

Dated                               
                 A.D.

In Presence of:

NOTICE: The signature to this assignment must strictly correspond with the name as written upon the face of the Certificate in every particular and
without alteration or enlargement or any change whatever.

THE SHARES REPRESENTED BY THIS CERTIFICATE ARE HELD BY A PERSON WHO MAY BE DEEMED TO BE AN AFFILIATE OF THE ISSUER FOR PURPOSES OF RULE 144 PROMULGATED UNDER THE
SECURITIES ACT OF 1933, AS AMENDED.

2

---



QuickLinks
Exhibit 32.2

The following certification shall not be deemed filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Exchange Act or otherwise subject to the liability of that section. Such certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by
reference into any filing under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act, except to the extent that the registrant specifically incorporates it by reference.

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 of Magellan Midstream Holdings, L.P. (the
Partnership) for the quarter ending June 30, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John D. Chandler, Chief Financial Officer of Magellan Midstream Holdings GP,
LLC, the General Partner of the Partnership, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §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 Partnership.



|                                         
|-----------------------------------------
|                                         
|/s/ John D. Chandler                     
|John D. Chandler, Chief Financial Officer
|Date: August 6, 2007                     

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Partnership
and will be retained by the Partnership and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
No. 46153.

#### Protests 23384-K, etc., of DeLuxe Saddlery Co. et al. (Baltimore, etc.).

Opinion by

Walker, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

United States District Court

Eastern District of California 

David Gathings,

Petitioner, No. Civ. S 04-2210 MCE PAN P

vs. Order

George J. Giurbino, Warden,

Respondent.

-oOoOctober 19, 2004, petitioner filed a petition for a writ of

habeas corpus and paid the filing fee. July 29, 2005, petitioner

filed a motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis.

Since petitioner paid the filing fee, his July 29, 2005,

motion is denied.

So ordered.

Dated: January 17, 2006. 

 /s/ Peter A. Nowinski 

 PETER A. NOWINSKI

 Magistrate Judge

Case 2:04-cv-02210-MCE -KJN Document 17 Filed 01/18/06 Page 1 of 1
(Reap. Dec. 8671)

Entry No. W-05478, etc.

#### New York Merchandise Co., Inc. *v.*United States

(Decided October 10, 1956)

*Siegel, Mandell & Davidson*for the plaintiff.

*George Cochran Doub,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Mollison, Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement listed in schedule *“A,”*hereto attached and made a part hereof, have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

> IT IS STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the respective parties hereto, subject to the approval of the Court, that the export value of the merchandise at the time of exportation to the United States covered by the Appeals to Reappraisement enumerated above at which time such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal market of the country from which exported in the usual wholesale quantity and in the ordinary course of trade for export to the United States including costs of containers and coverings of whatever nature and all other costs, charges and expenses incident to placing the merchandise ready for shipment to the United States was the appraised value less the addition made to meet the advances by the Appraiser in similar eases covering non-dutiable E. O. B. charges for inland freight, insurance premium, storage, hauling and lighterage, etc.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that there was no higher foreign value for merchandise such or similar to the merchandise herein at the time of exportation thereof.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the Appeals to Re-appraisement enumerated above may be submitted for decision on the foregoing stipulation.

*528On the agreed facts I find the export value, as that value is defined in section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise here involved, and that such values were the appraised values, less the additions made to meet the advances by the appraiser in similar cases covering non-dutiable f. o. b. charges for inland freight, insurance premium, storage hauling, and lighterage, etc.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.