alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 21.1**

**LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES OFREGISTRANT**

**Subsidiaries of DeCraneHoldings Co.**

DECRANE AIRCRAFT HOLDINGS, INC., a Delaware corporation.

**Subsidiaries of DeCraneAircraft Holdings, Inc.**

AEROSPACE DISPLAY SYSTEMS, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company.

AUDIO INTERNATIONAL, INC., an Arkansas corporation.

AVTECH CORPORATION, a Washington corporation.

CARL F. BOOTH & CO., LLC, a Delaware limited liability company.

COLTECH, INC., a Texas corporation.

CUSTOM WOODWORK & PLASTICS, LLC, a Delaware limited liabilitycompany.

DAH–IP HOLDINGS, INC., a Delaware corporation.

DAH–IP INFINITY, INC., a Delaware corporation.

DECRANE AIRCRAFT FURNITURE CO., LP, a Texas limited partnership.

DECRANE AIRCRAFT SEATING COMPANY, INC., a Wisconsin corporation.

DECRANE CABIN INTERIORS, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company.

DETTMERS INDUSTRIES, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company.

HOLLINGSEAD INTERNATIONAL, INC., a California corporation.

PATS, INC., a Maryland corporation.

PCI NEWCO, INC., a Delaware corporation.

PPI HOLDINGS, INC., a Kansas corporation.

PRECISION PATTERN, INC., a Kansas corporation.

THE INFINITY PARTNERS, LTD., a Texas limited partnership.

TRI–STAR ELECTRONICS EUROPE S.A., a Swiss company.

TRI–STAR ELECTRONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC., a California corporation.

TRI–STAR TECHNOLOGIES, a California general partnership.
**EXHIBIT 10.1**
Schedule of Parties to Executive Employment Agreements
     Each of the following employees is a party to the form of Executive EmploymentAgreement filed as Exhibit 10.32 to Amendment No. 3 to the RegistrationStatement on Form S-1 (No. 333-113764) of Life Time Fitness, Inc. filed withthe SEC on June 9, 2004:                   **Length of Severance Period****Employee** **Title** **Termination** **Change of Control**      **(Section 3(a)(i))** **(Section 3(c)**Mike Gerend + EVP 18 mos. 21 mos.Mike Robinson + EVP 18 mos. 21 mos.Mike Brown SVP 18 mos. 12 mos.Eric Buss SVP   9 mos.* 12 mos.Steve Lundeen SVP    12 mos.** 18 mos.Mark Zaebst SVP 18 mos. 12 mos.Jeff Zwiefel SVP 18 mos. 12 mos.
* Effective September 27, 2004 (fifth anniversary of employment with LTF),Length of Severance Period Termination benefits will be extended to 18 mos.
** Effective September 1, 2008 (fifth anniversary of employment with LTF),Length of Severance Period Termination benefits will be extended to 18 mos.
+ Upon execution of the new executive employment agreement, Mr. Robinson’semployment agreement with the Company dated March 4, 2002 terminated and Mr.Gerend’s executive employment agreement with the Company dated January 23, 2003terminated.
109TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 193

AN ACT

To increase the penalties for violations by television and

radio broadcasters of the prohibitions against transmission of obscene, indecent, and profane language.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Broadcast Decency

5 Enforcement Act of 2005’’.
 †

2

S 193 ES

1 SEC. 2. INCREASE IN PENALTIES FOR OBSCENE, INDECENT,

2 AND PROFANE BROADCASTS.

3 Section 503(b)(2) of the Communications Act of

4 1934 (47 U.S.C. 503(b)(2)) is amended—

5 (1) by redesignating subparagraphs (C) and

6 (D) as subparagraphs (D) and (E), respectively;

7 (2) by inserting after subparagraph (B) the fol8 lowing new subparagraph:

9 ‘‘(C) Notwithstanding subparagraph (A), if the viola10 tor is—

11 ‘‘(i)(I) a broadcast station licensee or permittee;

12 or

13 ‘‘(II) an applicant for any broadcast license,

14 permit, certificate, or other instrument or authoriza15 tion issued by the Commission; and

16 ‘‘(ii) determined by the Commission under

17 paragraph (1) to have broadcast obscene, indecent,

18 or profane language, the amount of any forfeiture

19 penalty determined under this subsection shall not

20 exceed $325,000 for each violation or each day of a

21 continuing violation, except that the amount as22 sessed for any continuing violation shall not exceed

23 a total of $3,000,000 for any single act or failure to

24 act.’’; and
†

3

S 193 ES

1 (3) in subparagraph (D), as redesignated by

2 paragraph (1), by striking ‘‘subparagraph (A) or

3 (B)’’ and inserting ‘‘subparagraph (A), (B), or (C)’’.

Passed the Senate May 18, 2006.

Attest:

Secretary.
109TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION S. 193

AN ACT

To increase the penalties for violations by television

profane language.against transmission of obscene, indecent, andand radio broadcasters of the prohibitions
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

DA 21–0436

THE ESTATE OF CHARLOTTE MANDICH, via Susan G. Mathews, its Personal 

Representative

Plaintiff/Appellee,

v.

MARK AND KATHLEEN FRENCH,

Defendants/Appellants.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellee’s Rule 25 motion to substitute the Estate of 

Charlotte Mandich, via Susan G. Mathews, its Personal Representative, as the 

Appellee, the motion is granted. 

The caption of this case shall be amended as shown above.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

February 11 2022

02/11/2022

Case Number: DA 21-0436
#### PREFERRED RISK MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY v. Frank FARRIS, Mrs. Lorene Farris and Government Employees Insurance Company.

No. 50107.

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Dec. 21, 1977.

Aultman, Pope, Aultman & Tyner, Lawrence C. Gunn, Jr., Hattiesburg, for appellant.

Heidelberg, Sutherland & McKenzie, D. Gary Sutherland, Hattiesburg, for appel-lees.

Before SMITH, P. J., and LEE and BOWLING, JJ., and HOWARD R. PIG-FORD, Commissioner.

Appeal from Chancery Court, Perry County; John M. Dunnam, Chancellor.

APPEAL DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE AS HAVING BEEN IMPROVIDENTLY GRANTED.
Exhibit 10.8
 LEASE GUARANTY AND NEGATIVE
PLEDGE AGREEMENT
  R E C I T A L S




---



##### 



2




---



##### 



3




---



##### 



4




---



##### 



5




---



##### 



6




---



##### 



7




---



##### 



GUARANTOR:LIFE TIME FITNESS, INC.By:Name: Eric J. BussTitle: Secretary
   LTF REAL ESTATE VRDN I, LLCBy:Name: Eric J. BussTitle: Secretary




---



##### 



EXHIBIT A-1
 LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF MINNESOTA PREMISES
 Property Address:

    2902 Corporate Place
 Chanhassen, MN




---



##### 



EXHIBIT A-2
 LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF KANSAS PREMISES




---



#####
Exhibit 10.11
 
  -




---



##### 



2




---



##### 



for any
  3




---



##### 



4




---



##### 



5




---



##### 



6




---



##### 



LESSEE, LESSOR AND GECC HEREBY KNOWINGLY, VOLUNTARILY AND INTELLIGENTLY WAIVE ANY AND ALL
RIGHTS THAT EACH PARTY MAY NOW OR HEREAFTER HAVE UNDER THE LAWS OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA OR
THE STATE OF MINNESOTA, TO A TRIAL BY JURY OF ANY AND ALL ISSUES ARISING DIRECTLY OR INDIRECTLY IN
ANY ACTION OR PROCEEDING RELATING TO THIS AGREEMENT OR ANY RELATED TRANSACTIONS. IT IS INTENDED
THAT THIS WAIVER SHALL APPLY TO ANY AND ALL DEFENSES, RIGHTS, CLAIMS AND/OR COUNTERCLAIMS IN ANY
SUCH ACTION OR PROCEEDING.
 LESSEE, LESSOR AND GECC UNDERSTAND THAT THIS WAIVER IS A WAIVER OF A CONSTITUTIONAL SAFEGUARD,
AND EACH PARTY INDIVIDUALLY BELIEVES THAT THERE ARE SUFFICIENT ALTERNATE PROCEDURAL AND SUBSTANTIVE
SAFEGUARDS, INCLUDING, A TRIAL BY AN IMPARTIAL JUDGE, THAT ADEQUATELY OFFSET THE WAIVER CONTAINED
HEREIN.
   7




---



##### 



LESSEE:LTF CLUB OPERATIONS COMPANY, INC.,
a Minnesota corporationByName:
    
    Eric J. BussTitle:
    
    Secretary
 STATE OF MINNESOTA
    
    )) ss.COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
    
    )
 
 Notary PublicMy commission expires:




---



##### 



GECC:GENERAL ELECTRIC CAPITAL CORPORATION,
a Delaware corporationByNameTitle
 STATE OF MINNESOTA
    
    ))  ssCOUNTY OF HENNEPIN
    
    )
 
 
 Notary Public, State of`
    
    My Commission Expires:




---



##### 



LESSOR:LTF REAL ESTATE VRDN I, LLC,
a Delaware limited liability companyByName:
    
    Eric J. BussTitle:
    
    Secretary
 STATE OF MINNESOTA
    
    ))  ss.COUNTY OF HENNEPIN
    
    )
 
 Notary PublicMy commission expires:




---



#####
DISMISS and Opinion Filed May 4, 2022 

S 

In The 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-21-01010-CV 

SHAWN TREMBLAY, Appellant 

V. 

SIMMONS BANK, TRUSTEE OF THE RENEE LYNN TREBLAY TRUST 

UNDER AGREEMENT DATED 2/3/2011, Appellee 

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 1 

Hunt County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. CC2100383 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before Chief Justice Burns, Justice Molberg, and Justice Goldstein 

Opinion by Chief Justice Burns 

Appellant appeals from the trial court’s judgment of possession in a forcible 

detainer action. After reviewing the clerk’s record, we questioned our jurisdiction 

and whether the appeal is now moot because a writ of possession has been executed 

and appellant is no longer in possession of the property. See Olley v. HVM, LLC, 

449 S.W.3d 572, 575 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2014, pet. denied) (appellate 

court lacks jurisdiction to consider moot controversies); Williams v. Lara, 52 S.W.3d 

171, 184 (Tex. 2001) (case becomes moot if, at any stage of proceedings, a 
 –2– 

controversy ceases to exist between parties). We directed appellant to file a letter 

brief addressing our concern. 

The only issue in a forcible detainer case is the right to actual possession of 

property. See Marshall v. Housing Auth’y of City of San Antonio, 198 S.W.3d 782, 

787 (Tex. 2006) (citing former Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 746, now Texas Rule 

of Civil Procedure 510.3(e)). When a writ of possession has been executed 

following the filing of an appeal and possession is no longer an issue, the appeal in 

a forcible detainer case becomes moot and the appellate court lacks jurisdiction 

unless the appellant holds and asserts a meritorious claim of right to current, actual 

possession of the property or damages or attorney’s fees remain at issue. See Daftary 

v. Prestonwood Mkt. Square, Ltd., 399 S.W.3d 708, 711 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2013, 

pet. denied). 

Although appellant filed a letter brief, nothing therein demonstrates the appeal 

is not moot. We dismiss the appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a). 

211010F.P05 

 

/Robert D. Burns, III/

ROBERT D. BURNS, III 

CHIEF JUSTICE 
 –3– 

S 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

JUDGMENT 

SHAWN TREMBLAY, Appellant 

No. 05-21-01010-CV V. 

SIMMONS BANK, TRUSTEE OF 

THE RENEE LYNN TREMBLAY 

TRUST UNDER AGREEMENT 

DATED 2/3/2011, Appellee 

 On Appeal from the County Court at 

Law No. 1, Hunt County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. CC2100383. 

Opinion delivered by Chief Justice 

Burns. Justices Molberg and 

Goldstein participating. 

 In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is 

DISMISSED. 

 

Judgment entered May 4, 2022
No. 98-9701.

#### Sarroca *v.*United States.

C. A. 2d Cir. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *informa pauperis*granted. Certiorari granted, judgment vacated, and case remanded for further consideration in light of *Roe*v. *Flores-Ortega, ante,*p. 470.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 175 (Wednesday, September 10, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 47679]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-23937]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management
[AZ-910-0777-61-241A]


State of Arizona Resource Advisory Council Meeting

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION: Arizona Resource Advisory Council meeting, notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: This notice announces a meeting of the Arizona Resource 
Advisory Council. The meeting will be held October 7, 1997, beginning 
at 8:30 a.m. in the Montana Room at the Bureau of Land Management 
National Training Center, 9828 N. 31st Avenue, Phoenix, Arizona. The 
agenda items to be covered at the one-day meeting include: Welcome 
Remarks to newly-appointed 1997-99 RAC members; BLM State Director's 
Update on legislation, regulations and statewide planning efforts; 
Review of previous meeting minutes; Review of RAC charter and election 
of Vice-Chairperson; Update on BIA Cooperating Agency Status; Followup 
on letter to Director Shea on standards and guidelines implementation 
and impacts of FWS biological opinions; Orientation on RAC Working 
Groups for new members; Reports by the Recreation and Public Relations 
Working Groups; Reports from RAC members; RAC Discussion on future 
meeting dates and locations. A public comment period will take place at 
11:30 a.m. for any interested publics who wish to address the Council.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Deborah Stevens, Bureau of Land 
Management, Arizona State Office, 222 North Central Avenue, Phoenix, 
Arizona 85004-2203, (602) 417-9215.
Joan B. Losacco,
Deputy State Director, External Affairs.
[FR Doc. 97-23937 Filed 9-9-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-32-M
# L_2023069EN.01000101.xml

| 7.3.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 69/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.3.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 69/1

---

COMMISSION IMPLEMENTING REGULATION (EU) 2023/493

of 28 February 2023

entering a name in the register of protected designations of origin and protected geographical indications (‘Cebolla de la Mancha’ (PGI))

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION,

Having regard to the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union,

Having regard to Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 21 November 2012 on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (1), and in particular Article 52(2) thereof,

Whereas:

| (1) | Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Spain’s application to register the name ‘Cebolla de la Mancha’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2). |
| --- | --- |

(1)

Pursuant to Article 50(2)(a) of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012, Spain’s application to register the name ‘Cebolla de la Mancha’ was published in the Official Journal of the European Union (2).

| (2) | As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Cebolla de la Mancha’ should therefore be entered in the register, |
| --- | --- |

(2)

As no statement of opposition under Article 51 of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 has been received by the Commission, the name ‘Cebolla de la Mancha’ should therefore be entered in the register,

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

The name ‘Cebolla de la Mancha’ (PGI) is hereby entered in the register.

The name specified in the first paragraph denotes a product in Class 1.6. Fruit, vegetables and cereals, fresh or processed, as listed in Annex XI to Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 (3).

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the twentieth day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 28 February 2023.

For the Commission,

On behalf of the President,

Janusz WOJCIECHOWSKI

Member of the Commission

---

(1)  
  OJ L 343, 14.12.2012, p. 1.

1

(2)  
  OJ C 433, 15.11.2022, p. 60.

2

(3)  Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) No 668/2014 of 13 June 2014 laying down rules for the application of Regulation (EU) No 1151/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council on quality schemes for agricultural products and foodstuffs (OJ L 179, 19.6.2014, p. 36).

3

---
#### Myles C. ANDREWS, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. HH-450.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

April 19, 1978.

Michael J. Minerva, Public Defender, and Margaret Good, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., George R. Georgieff and Patti Englander, Asst. Attys. Gen., for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from an allegedly illegal sentence imposed following conviction of resisting arrest without violence under Florida Statute § 843.02. The trial court initially sentenced appellant to serve nine months in the county jail, but failed to *490allow credit for jail time served as required by § 921.161(1), Florida Statutes (1975). At that time, defendant was taken by the bailiff across the street to the county jail where he began serving his sentence. Subsequently, the public defender brought to the court’s attention the fact that it neglected to give credit for 54 days of jail time served. The court then set aside its prior sentence and re-sentenced the defendant/appellant to serve ten months imprisonment with credit for 54 days jail time.

Under this Court’s decision in *Flowers v. State,*351 So.2d 387 (1st DCA 1977), the trial court had no authority to set aside its prior sentence and impose a new and different sentence increasing the time to be served.

Accordingly, the sentence of ten months with credit for time served is set aside and the cause remanded with directions to the trial court to impose a sentence of nine months with credit for 54 days jail time. The appellant need not be present for this purpose.

MILLS, Acting C. J., and ERVIN and BOOTH, JJ., concur.
#### STATE of Florida and Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission, Appellants, v. Ralph Elish TURNER and Stevens 12 Ga. Pump Shotgun Model 167, Appellee.

No. 37905.

Supreme Court of Florida.

July 2, 1969.

*291Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., T. T. Turnbull and Halley B. Lewis, Asst. Attys. Gen., for appellants.

Ralph Elish Turner, for appellee.

CULVER SMITH, Circuit Judge.

This is a direct appeal from a judgment of the Circuit Court of the Twelfth Judicial Circuit in and for Collier County which adjudged Section 372.312(1) and Section 372.312(5), Florida Statutes, F.S.A., to be unconstitutional. The facts are these: On April 6, 1968, one Stevens 12 Gauge Pump Shotgun of the value of $25.00 was seized from Ralph Elish Turner, the Appellee, pursuant to Sections 372.99 and 372.9901, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., for alleged violation of Section 372.99. The gun was thereafter placed in the custody of the Director of the Game and Fresh Water Fish Commission. On June 18, 1968, the Director of that Commission made a return of the seized property to the Clerk of the Circuit Court of Collier County setting forth the facts bearing on the seizure. After the filing of the return, an affidavit was made of the posting of notice of forfeiture. On August 27, 1968, a default judgment was entered in the proceedings against the Ap-pellee. The case was brought on for final judgment before the Circuit Judge who dismissed it with prejudice, holding that a portion of Section 372.312(1) and all of Section 372.312(5) are unconstitutional.

Appellants have briefed and argued the constitutionality of the statutes in question. We conclude, however, that this cause must be remanded without a consideration of their constitutionality.

The record shows that at no time did the Appellee, or any other party, raise a constitutional question. Appellee did not defend in the Court below and a default was entered against him. He did not defend this appeal. This Court has, on a number of occasions, held that it is not only unnecessary, but improper for a Court to pass upon the constitutionality of an act, the constitutionality of which is not challenged; that Courts are not to consider a question of constitutionality which has not been raised by the pleadings, or which has not been raised by a person having the requisite interest. See Mills v. Mills, 153 Fla. 746, 15 So.2d 763; State ex rel. McClure v. Sullivan, Fla., 43 So.2d 438; Henderson v. Antonacci et al., Fla., 62 So.2d 5, and Mott v. Cochran, Fla., 117 So.2d 408. In the latter we stated:

> “It is not a part of the judicial responsibility to undertake to invalidate them (statutes) unless the parties to the cause raise the question and assault the statute because of organic weaknesses.”

The Circuit Judge erred in considering and passing on the constitutionality of the statutes, and we do not, by this opinion, in any way deal with their constitutionality. This cause is hereby remanded with directions to the Court below to vacate its Final Judgment of August 28, 1968, and to enter Judgment for the Appellants.

ERVIN, C. J., and DREW, CARLTON and ADKINS, JJ., concur.
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: November 6, 2007

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


                                       31