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

                                   EXHIBIT 21
<PAGE>

                                                                      Exhibit 21


                        SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT


                                                     JURISDICTION OF
         SUBSIDIARIES                  OWNERSHIP      INCORPORATION
---------------------------------      ---------     ---------------

Echo Bay Inc.                            100%        Delaware, U.S.A.
Echo Bay Finance Corporation             100%        Delaware, U.S.A.
Round Mountain Gold Corporation          100%        Delaware, U.S.A.
Echo Bay Minerals Company                100%        Delaware, U.S.A.
Sunnyside Gold Corporation               100%        Delaware, U.S.A.
Echo Bay Exploration Inc.                100%        Delaware, U.S.A.
Echo Bay Management Corporation          100%        Delaware, U.S.A.
White Pine Gold Corporation              100%        Delaware, U.S.A.
Echo Bay Alaska Inc.                     100%        Delaware, U.S.A.
Echo Bay Resources Inc.                  100%        Delaware, U.S.A.
Echo Bay Sales Ltd.                      100%        Alberta, Canada
Corp. Air Inc.                           100%        Alberta, Canada

A total of 21 subsidiaries were omitted because they are not considered
significant individually or in the aggregate.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 148 (Friday, August 1, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 41427]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-20339]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration
[TA-W-32, 842 and 842A]


Sara Lee Bodywear, McAdoo and Allentown, Pennsylvania; Amended 
Certification Regarding Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment 
Assistance

    In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 
2273) the Department of Labor issued a Revised Determination on 
Reopening on April 17, 1997, applicable to all workers of Sara Lee 
Bodywear, located in McAdoo, Pennsylvania. The notice was published in 
the Federal Register on May 9, 1997 (62 FR 25663).
    At the request of the petitioners, the Department reviewed the 
certification for workers of the subject firm. New information received 
from the company shows that worker separations occurred at the 
Allentown, Pennsylvania facility of Sara Lee Bodywear when it closed 
during June 1997. The workers produce ladies' activewear and tee 
shirts.
    The intent of the Department's certification is to include all 
workers of Sara Lee Bodywear who were adversely affected by increased 
imports of ladies' activewear.
    Accordingly, the Department is amending the certification to cover 
the workers of Sara Lee Bodywear, Allentown, Pennsylvania.
    The amended notice applicable to TA-W-32,842 is hereby issued as 
follows:

    All workers of Sara Lee Bodywear, McAdoo, Pennsylvania (TA-W-
32,842), and Allentown, Pennsylvania (TA-W-32,842 A) who became 
totally or partially separated from employment on or after October 
7, 1995 are eligible to apply for adjustment assistance under 
Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974.

    Signed at Washington D.C. this 18th day of July, 1997.
Curtis K. Kooser,
Acting Program Manager, Policy and Reemployment Services, Office of 
Trade Adjustment.
[FR Doc. 97-20339 Filed 7-31-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
Exhibit 32.1



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 Big Sky Industries IV, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Ramon Chimelis, President of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(1)

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



(2)

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



Dated: February 4, 2009



/s/ Ramon Chimelis

Ramon Chimelis, President

Big Sky Industries IV, Inc.
Exhibit 32.2

STATEMENT PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906

OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I, Jeffery McConnell, Chief Financial Officer of Media and Entertainment.com, Inc. (the Company), hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



(a)

the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarter ended September 30, 2004, to which this certification accompanies (the Periodic Report), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



(b)

the information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Dated: November 15, 2004



/s/ Jeffery McConnell

Jeffery McConnell,

Chief Financial Officer



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 Media and Entertainment.com, Inc. and will be retained by Media and Entertainment.com, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

NEWY1-621103-2
No. 00-6866.

#### De’Oliveira *v.*Kelly, Superintendent, Attica Correctional Facility.

C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Charles MOSELEY.

No. 60300.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

July 19, 1977.

In re: Charles Moseley applying for writs of certiorari, supervisory writs and stay order.

Writ denied. No showing of an abuse of discretion is made at this time. This Court will not interfere in the orderly proceeding of the trial court in the absence of palpable error, irreparable injury or great wrong.

DENNIS, J.,

concurs in denial of the writ. Applicant may reurge his motion for continuance if the information disclosed in response to pretrial motions indicates grounds therefor.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

November 2, 2022

No. 04-22-00569-CR

Richard Alexander VALLEJO,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 437th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2020CR10924

Honorable Melisa C. Skinner, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

The trial court sentenced the defendant on August 26, 2022, and the reporter’s record was 

due on October 25, 2022. See TEX. R. APP. P. 35.1. 

After the due date, court reporter Mary Beth Sasala filed a notification of late record. In 

it, she requested a sixty-day extension of time to file the record.

The reporter’s request is GRANTED IN PART. See id. R. 35.3(c) (limiting an extension 

in a regular appeal to thirty days). The reporter’s record is due on November 28, 2022. See id.

If the reporter’s record is not filed with this court by November 28, 2022, any further 

requests for additional time to file the record must be accompanied by a signed, written status 

report. The report must describe the transcript by day with the date, description, page counts, 

and remarks for each day. The page counts must include the total number of pages, the number 

of pages edited, proofread, and formatted into the required electronic form (including 

bookmarks). The report may describe any unusual aspects of the record. The report must 

describe any problems the court reporter reasonably believes may delay the completion of the 

record beyond the extended date. A preferred form for the status report, with an accompanying 

example, is attached.

_________________________________

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 2nd day of November, 2022.

___________________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court
Exhibit 31.2

                                  CERTIFICATION


I, Robert Knoth, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report of Form 10-QSB of IEH Corporation.

2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly
report.

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report.

4. The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and we have:

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, is made known to me by others within the
company, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being
prepared; and

b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this
quarterly report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

c) Presented in this quarterly report my conclusions about the effectiveness of
the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the
Evaluation Date.

5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of
registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function);

a) All significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls
which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial data and have identified for the registrant's
auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls.

6. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have indicated in this
quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes in internal
controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls
subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective
actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Date: January 31, 2007

/s/ Robert Knoth
----------------
Robert Knoth
Chief Financial Officer, Controller and Principal Accounting Officer

                                       28
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Global Earth Energy, Inc. for the fiscal quarter ending February 28, 2013, I, Sydney A. Harland, Chief Executive Officer of Global Earth Energy, Inc., hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:

1.

Such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ending February 28, 2013, 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 such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ending February 28, 2013, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Global Earth Energy, Inc.

Dated: April 22, 2013.

/s/ Sydney A. Harland

Sydney A. Harland, Chief Executive Officer of
    Global Earth Energy, Inc.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 153 (Friday, August 8, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 42822-42823]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-21023]


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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Employment and Training Administration
[NAFTA-01068 and 01068B]


Hickory Hills Industries, Incorporated, Savannah Manufacturing 
Company, Savannah, Tennessee and Fort Lauderdale, Florida; Amended 
Certification Regarding Eligibility To Apply for NAFTA Transitional 
Adjustment Assistance

    In accordance with Section 250(a), Subchapter 2, Title II, of the 
Trade Act of 1974, as amended (19 USC 2273), the Department of Labor 
issued a Certification for NAFTA Transitional Adjustment Assistance on 
July 22, 1996, applicable to all workers of Hickory Hills Industries, 
Incorporated, Savannah Manufacturing Company, Savannah, Tennessee. The 
notice was published in the Federal Register on August 6, 1996 (61 FR 
40853).
    At the request of the State agency, the Department reviewed the 
certification for workers of the subject firm. New findings show that 
worker separations occurred at Hickory Hills Industries, Incorporated, 
Fort Lauderdale, Florida when it closed during the last half of 1996. 
The workers at the Fort Lauderdale, Florida location provided sales 
office functions to support the production of children's sportswear at 
Savannah Manufacturing. Accordingly, the Department is amending the 
certification to cover workers at the Hickory Hills Industries, 
Incorporated, Fort Lauderdale, Florida.
    The intent of the Department's certification is to include all 
workers of

[[Page 42823]]

Hickory Industries, Incorporated adversely affected by imports from 
Mexico.
    The amended notice applicable to NAFTA-01068 is hereby issued as 
follows:

    All workers of Hickory Hills Industries, Incorporated, Savannah 
(Savannah Manufacturing Company), Tennessee (NAFTA-01068) and 
Hickory Hills Industries, Incorporated, Fort Lauderdale, Florida 
(NAFTA-01068B) who became totally or partially separated from 
employment on or after June 7, 1995 are eligible to apply for NAFTA-
TAA under Section 250 of the Trade Act of 1974.

    Signed at Washington, D.C. this 29th day of July 1997.
Grant D. Beale,
Acting Director, Office of Trade Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 97-21023 Filed 8-7-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 153 (Friday, August 8, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 42849]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-20924]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION


Reporting and Recordkeeping Requirements Under OMB Review

ACTION: Notice of reporting requirements submitted for review.

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

SUMMARY: Under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 
Chapter 35), agencies are required to submit proposed reporting and 
recordkeeping requirements to OMB for review and approval, and to 
publish a notice in the Federal Register notifying the public that the 
agency has made such a submission.

DATES: Comments should be submitted on or before September 8, 1997. If 
you intend to comment but cannot prepare comments promptly, please 
advise the OMB Reviewer and the Agency Clearance Officer before the 
deadline.

COPIES: Request for clearance (OMB 83-1), supporting statement, and 
other documents submitted to OMB for review may be obtained from the 
Agency Clearance Officer. Submit comments to the Agency Clearance 
Officer and the OMB Reviewer.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

    Agency Clearance Officer: Jacqueline White, Small Business 
Administration, 409 3rd Street, S.W., 5th Floor, Washington, D.C. 
20416, Telephone: (202) 205-6629.
    Omb Reviewer: Victoria Wassmer, Office of Information and 
Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, New Executive 
Office Building, Washington, D.C. 20503.
    Title: Voluntary Customer Surveys in Accordance with E.O. 12862.
    Form No: N/A.
    Frequency: On Occasion.
    Description of Respondents: SBA Participants.
    Annual Responses: 85,614.
    Annual Burden: 13,102.

    Dated: August 4, 1997.
Jacqueline White,
Chief, Administrative Information Branch.
[FR Doc. 97-20924 Filed 8-7-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-M
| (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:      December 23, 2008 | By:   | /s/      Richard Peidong Wu  |
|-------------------------------|-----------------|------------------------------|
|                          |            |                         |
|                          |            |                         |
|                          |            | Chief      Financial Officer |

----
Exhibit 32.2

WRITTEN STATEMENT OF THE CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350

Solely for the purposes of complying with 18 U.S.C. §1350, I, the undersigned Chief Financial Officer of Jagged Peak, Inc. (the Company),
hereby certify that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the period ended June 25, 2010, (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                     |  |                              
|-------------------- |  | -----------------------------
|Date: August 6, 2010
|                     | 
|By:                  |  | /s/ Andrew J. Norstrud       
|                     |  | Chief Financial Officer      
|                     |  | (Principle Financial Officer)
Order filed July 10 , 2014.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 14

- 00 29 6

- C V

____________ IN RE PLATINUM ENERGY SOLUTIONS, INC. , Relator

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING WRIT OF MANDAMUS 234 th D istrict Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 20 12

- 30972



### CONTINUING ABATEMENT ORDER

On April 2 1, 2014 , relator Platinum Energy Solutions , Inc. filed a petition for
writ of mandamus in this c ourt. See Tex. Gov = t Code Ann. ' 22.221. In the petition, r elator asked that this court compel The Honorable Wesley War d , Judge of
the 2 34 th District Court, Harris Cou nty, Texas , to vacate his March 31, 2014 order directing relator to produce documents in response to the real parties in interest’s2 forty

- three discovery requests enter ed in trial court cause number 2012

- 30972
, styled Starstream Capital, LLC, et al. v. L. Charles Moncla, Jr., et al.

On June 2, 2014, relator informed this court that the parties have agreed to settle the underlying dispute, subject to the execution of a mutually acceptable settlement agreement. We abated the case for thirty days and directed the parties to advise the court of the status of the settlement. On July 3, 2014, relator adv ised this court that the parties are still continuing to work towards a settlement agreement.
Therefore, the abatement of this case is continued for an additional thirty days, at which time the parties are directed to advise the court of the status of the
settlement. The original proceeding will be reinstated on this court’s active docket when the parties file a motion to dismiss the original proceedin g or other dispositive
motion. The c ourt also will consider an appropriate motion to reinstate th e original proceeding, or the court may reinstate the original proceeding on its own motion

.
PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Frost and Justices Boyce and Jamison

.
#### Anthony CUCCO, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 77-113.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

March 14, 1978.

*59Valentine Gabaldon, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Glenn H. Mitchell, Asst. Atty. Gen., West Palm Beach, for appellee.

ALDERMAN, Chief Judge.

In this revocation of probation case the defendant contends that he was denied due process of law. We reverse.

The State alleged that the defendant violated his probation by failing to live and remain at liberty without violating any law in that he committed grand larceny by participating in the theft of 35 rolls of barbed wire. The defendant denied this charge and a trial was held. At the conclusion of the hearing the trial judge stated:

> It is my factual conclusion that the defendant Cucco is not guilty of grand larceny; but is guilty of participating in the sale of stolen merchandise.

Based upon this finding the court revoked the defendant’s probation.

This court has consistently held that fundamental due process requires that revocation of probation be based only on violations alleged, and after a hearing. *Crum v. State,*286 So.2d 268 (Fla. 4th DCA 1973); *Warr v. State,*330 So.2d 504 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976); *Frederick v. State,*339 So.2d 251 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976). The sale of stolen property is not an included offense of the crime of larceny. *Johnson v. State,*226 So.2d 884 (Fla. 2d DCA 1969). The fact that the State alleged that the defendant violated the terms of his probation by committing grand larceny did not put the defendant on notice that his probation might be revoked because he had participated in the sale of stolen merchandise. Each are substantial offenses separate and distinct from each other.

We conclude that the defendant was denied fundamental due process. Accordingly, the order revoking probation is reversed; however, the State, within a reasonable time to be set by the trial court, may file an amended petition for revocation, should it choose to do so.

DAUKSCH, J., concurs.

CROSS, J., dissents without opinion.
No. 44408.

#### Protests 912250-G, etc., of Centropol Co. et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Keefe, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel and on the authority of *Stokby*v. *United States*(4 Cust. Ct. 343, C. D. 358) it was held that 10 percent allowance should have been made for the weight of the gelatinous material in question.
No. 47793.

#### Protests 92894-K, etc., of Gemsco, Inc. (New York).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that certain •of the merchandise in question is similar in all material respects to that involved in *Meyer*v. *United States*(6 Cust. Ct. 191, C. D. 459) the protests were sustained as to those items.