alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit
21  Subsidiaries  THQ Inc.  Name
  
  Jurisdiction of IncorporationBig Huge Games, Inc.
  
  MarylandBlue Tongue Entertainment Pty. Ltd.
  
  AustraliaJuice Games Limited
  
  United KingdomLocomotive Games, Inc.
  
  CaliforniaRainbow Multimedia Group, Inc.
  
  ArizonaTHQAC, Inc.
  
  TexasTHQAC, Inc.
  dba Vigil Games
  
  TexasTHQ/JAKKS Pacific, LLC
  
  DelawareTHQ*ICE LLC
  
  DelawareTHQ Asia Pacific Pty. Ltd.
  
  AustraliaTHQ Canada Inc. dba Relic
  Entertainment
  
  British ColumbiaTHQ Entertainment GmbH
  
  GermanyTHQ France S.a  r.l.
  
  FranceT.HQ (Holdings) Limited
  
  United KingdomTHQ Interactive Entertainment Espana,
  S.L.
  
  SpainTHQ International GmbH
  
  SwitzerlandTHQ Italy Srl
  
  ItalyTHQ Japan K.K.
  
  JapanTHQ Korea Ltd.
  
  KoreaTHQ Nordic ApS
  
  DenmarkTHQ Software Development (Shanghai) Co., Ltd.
  
  ChinaTHQ Studio Australia Pty. Ltd.
  
  AustraliaTHQ (UK) Limited
  
  United KingdomTHQ Wireless Inc.
  
  DelawareTHQ Wireless International S.a
  r.l.
  
  LuxembourgTHQ Wireless Singapore Pte.
  Ltd.
  
  SingaporeUniversomoLtd.
  
  FinlandVolition, Inc.
  
  Delaware
2009 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 1-13-2009 

# In Re: Mich a el Nitt olo P r e c e de n t i al or N on-P r e c e de n t i al : N on-P r e c e de n t i al D ocke t N o . 08-1862

F o l low thi s a nd a dd it ion al work s at : h tt p://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi l l a no va . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2009

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou gh t t o you for f r e e a nd ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i l l a no va U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Re posit or y

. It h as be e n a c c e pt e d for inclusion in 2009 D e c i sion s b y a n author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i l l a no va U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Re posit or y

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c on t a ct Be n j amin . C a rl s on@l a

w . vi l l a no va . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion " In Re: Mich a e l Nitt o lo " (2009). 2009 D e cisio n s . P ape r 2043. h tt p://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi l l a no va . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2009/2043HL D- 1 4 6 NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT

___________ N o. 08- 1862

___________ I N R E : M I CH AE L NI T T OL O, Pet i t i oner

____________________________________ O n a Pet i t i on forW r i tof M andamus fr om t he U n i t e d S t a t e s D i s t r i c tC o u r tf o rt h e N e w J e r s e y ( R el at ed t o 06- cv- 00194)

____________________________________ Sub mi t t e d Pu r s ua ntt o Rul e 21 , Fe d. R. A pp . P.

A ugus t29, 2008 B efore: S C IR IC A , C hief J ud ge, A L D ISE R T and G A R T H , C i rcui tJudg es. ( Fi l ed: J anuary13, 2009)

_________ OPI NI ON O F THE COURT

_________ P E R C U R I A M. Pr o s e pet i t i onerM i chae l N i t t ol o s eeks a w r i tof m andamus t o compel t he U ni t ed S tate s D istric t C o u rt f

o r th e D istric t o f

N e w Je rse yto ru le u p o n h is m o tio n to v a c a te s ent ence pur s uantt o 28 U . S. C . § 2255. T he D i s t r i ctC our tent er ed an or derdeny i ng N i t t ol o’ s § 2255 m ot i on on O ct ober20, 2008. T her efor e, w e w i l l denyt he pet i t i on for w rit o f m a n d a m u s a s m o o t.
#### Martha Jean GRAY, Appellant, v. SEABOARD COAST LINE RAILROAD COMPANY, a foreign corporation, and W. B. Henderson, Appellees.

No. O-123.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

May 6, 1971.

Truett & Watkins, Tallahassee, for appellant.

Ausley, Ausley, McMullen, McGehee & Carothers, Tallahassee, for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff in a wrongful death action seeks reversal of a final judgment based upon a verdict directed in favor of defendant at the close of the evidence. The order granting defendant’s motion for directed verdict was upon the 'stated ground that the evidence established without dispute that plaintiff’s decedent was guilty of contributory negligence.

We have carefully reviewed the evidence as reflected by the record on appeal and fail to find therefrom any proof sufficient to raise a jury issue on the question of the decedent’s contributory negligence as a matter of law. The totality of the evidence, and all reasonable deductions which may be drawn therefrom, points only to the one conclusion that it was the decedent’s negligence which contributed to or proximately caused his death. See Florida East Coast Ry. Co. v. Davis (1928), 96 Fla. 171, 117 So. 842; Atlantic Coast Line Railroad Company v. Walker (Fla.App.1959), 113 So.2d 420; O’Keefe v. Butler (Fla.App.1961), 126 So.2d 764.

The judgment appealed is affirmed.

JOHNSON, C. J., and WIGGINTON and SPECTOR, JJ., concur.
259 La. 687

#### HANOVER INSURANCE COMPANY v. CARUSO-SIMONEAUX AGENCY, INC., et al.

No. 51659.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Aug. 17, 1971.

In re: Ted V. Bagwell applying for Certiorari, or writ of review. 249 So.2d 322.

Not considered. Not timely filed.
#### John GRAYBILL, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 72-417.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Dec. 15, 1972.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
IN THE SUPREME COURT FOR THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 23-0664

WALTER JOEY OVERSTREET,

Plaintiff/Appellant, 

 

 vs. 

ERIC FETTERHOFF, in his official and

individual capacities, JOHN DOES 3-7,

MONTANA HIGHWAY PATROL,

and PARK COUNTY, MONTANA,

a political subdivision, Bruce Becker,

individually, and as Park County Attorney, 

Shannan Piccolo, individually, and as

Deputy Park County Attorney, STATE OF

MONTANA, and KENDRA LASSITER,

Individually, and in her official capacity as

Park County Attorney,

Defendants/Appellees.

 

ORDER FOR ADDITIONAL TIME TO FILE REPLY

Upon consideration of Appellant’s Unopposed Motion for extension of time to file the 

reply brief, and good cause therefrom;

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including 

July 2, 2024, within which to prepare, file, and serve the reply brief.

No further extensions will be granted.

cc: Jami Rebsom

Suzanne Marshall

Mitchell Young

Jennifer Morgan

Elizabeth Leman 

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

June 18 2024

06/18/2024

Case Number: DA 23-0664
EXHIBIT B 

Case 2:21-cv-00640-RJS Document 2-2 Filed 10/28/21 PageID.23 Page 1 of 2
Case 2:21-cv-00640-RJS Document 2-2 Filed 10/28/21 PageID.24 Page 2 of 2
INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the  incorporation by reference in the  registration  statement of
Pamida Holdings  Corporation  and Subsidiary on Form S-8 (File No.  33-83708) of
our report  dated March 26, 1996,  on our audit of the fiscal 1996  consolidated
financial  statements  and  financial  statement  schedule  of  Pamida  Holdings
Corporation  and  Subsidiary as of January 28, 1996 and for the year then ended,
which report is included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

/s/ COOPERS & LYBRAND L.L.P.

Chicago, Illinois
April 15, 1998
#### Edward L. ARNDT, Appellant, v. Steven SUCHMAN, a minor, by his father and next friend, Clifford Suchman, and Clifford Suchman, individually, Appellees.

No. 70-541.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Nov. 2, 1970.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal dismissed.
<PAGE>

                                                                     EXHIBIT 4.6


                                     AMENDMENT TO
                                  PACKAGED ICE, INC.
                         2000 EMPLOYEE STOCK PURCHASE PLAN



         WHEREAS, Packaged Ice, Inc. (the "COMPANY") adopted the 2000 Amended
Employee Stock Purchase Plan (the "PLAN"), effective January 1, 2000, to
provide additional incentive to the directors, officers and employees of the
Company who are primarily responsible for the management and growth of the
Company, or otherwise materially contribute to the conduct and direction of
its business, operations and affairs, in order to strengthen their desire to
remain with the Company and for the Company to retain and attract competent
individuals; and

                WHEREAS, the Board of Directors has determined that certain
                changes to the Plan are necessary and desirable to authorize
                adjustments under certain circumstances, and the Company's
                shareholder's by a vote of 11,477,611 to 273,349 at the annual
                meeting of the shareholders held June 19, 2001, approved the
                amendment.

         NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby amended as follows:

                Sections 10.a of the Plan is amended to read in full as
                follows:

                "The maximum number of shares of Common Stock which shall be
                reserved for sale under the Plan shall be 500,000, subject to
                adjustment upon the occurrence of an event as provided in
                Section 15 hereof.  If the total number of shares which would
                otherwise be subject to options granted pursuant to Section
                4.a hereof on an Offering Date exceeds the number of shares
                then available under the Plan (after deduction of all shares
                for which options have been exercised or are then
                outstanding), the Committee shall make a pro rata allocation
                of the shares remaining available for option grant in as
                uniform a manner as shall be practicable and as it shall
                determine to be equitable.  In such event, the Committee shall
                give written notice to each Participant of such reduction of
                the number of option shares affected thereby and shall
                similarly reduce the rate of payroll deductions, if necessary.
                The source of shares may be treasury, open market purchase,
                or new issue."

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Plan has been amended effective June 19, 2001.


                               PACKAGED ICE, INC.



                               By:            /s/ WILLIAM P. BRICK
                                    --------------------------------------------
                                    William P. Brick, Chief Executive Officer
**Exhibit 32.1**

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ENACTED BYSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection withthe annual report on Form 10-K of THQ Inc. (the “Company”) for theperiod ended March 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Brian J. Farrell, ChiefExecutive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350,that:

(1)         The Report fully complieswith the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and

(2)         Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|        | /s/ Brian J. Farrell    |
|--------|-------------------------|
|   | Brian J. Farrell        |
|   | Chief Executive Officer |
|   | May 30, 2007       |

 

A signed original of this written statement requiredby Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained bythe Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or itsstaff upon request.

----
### The Honorable George F. Gunn, Jr., United States Distric t 1 

### Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri. The Honorab le James J. Barta, United States Bankruptcy Judge 2 

### for the Eastern District of Missouri.



# United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 96-1904

___________ In re: Darius J. Whitson, Sr., * * Debtor. * *

----------------- * * Darius J. Whitson, Sr., * * Appeal from the United States Appellant, * District Court for the * Eastern District of Missouri. v. * * [UNPUBLISHED] Transouth Financial * Corporation, * * Appellee. *

___________ Submitted: April 1, 1997 Filed: April 9, 1997

___________ Before HANSEN, MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Da rius J. Whitson appeals the district court's affirmance of th e 1 bankruptcy

court's grant of Transouth Financial Corporation's motion for

2 relief from an automatic stay. After careful review of the record and the parties' briefs, we conclude the district

### -2-

court's j udgment was correct. Accordingly, we affirm. See8th Cir. R . 47B. We also deny Whitson leave to move for supplemental relief. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     THIS SCHEDULE  CONTAINS SUMMARY  FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED FROM THE
BALANCE SHEET OF KLEVER MARKETING,  INC. AS OF DECEMBER 31, 1997 AND THE RELATED
STATEMENTS  OF INCOME AND CASH FLOWS FOR THE YEAR THEN ENDED AND IS QUALIFIED IN
ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                    DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                       JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                         DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                        11
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  0
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0      
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              38
<PP&E>                                        58
<DEPRECIATION>                                38
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               851
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        148
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                      98
<OTHER-SE>                                   376
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 851
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               0
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             751
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             5
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (755)
<INCOME-TAX>                                 100
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            0
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                               (755)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                             (0.08)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0
        

</TABLE>
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

1062 

TP 11-01098 

PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., SMITH, CENTRA, GREEN, AND GORSKI, JJ. 

 

IN THE MATTER OF JAMAAL COLESON, PETITIONER, 

V ORDER

BRIAN FISCHER, COMMISSIONER, NEW YORK STATE 

DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONAL SERVICES, RESPONDENT. 

 

JAMAAL COLESON, PETITIONER PRO SE. 

ERIC T. SCHNEIDERMAN, ATTORNEY GENERAL, ALBANY (PETER H. SCHIFF OF

COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT. 

 

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 (transferred to the

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the Fourth Judicial

Department by order of the Supreme Court, Oneida County [David A.

Murad, J.], entered April 18, 2011) to review a determination of

respondent. The determination found after a Tier III hearing that

petitioner had violated various inmate rules. 

It is hereby ORDERED that the determination is unanimously

confirmed without costs and the petition is dismissed. 

Entered: November 10, 2011 Patricia L. Morgan

Clerk of the Court
!	"	#$	##%&'(#)*

&&# $&'(#)* #" &#+ 		#,



-!.,-	/'	 &0# 

1#23	 #4,

5###&  "(!#($# $#678#&	#'(#

)*!&&&0# &9:&;-6*<=+#"#(/&#

#&' $+  #8#($ & 	#>	 

 *



 /'+ " $"+#((8#&(!

"#0#(:&;-6*)	$8#&"8#&	#"*



)	(0?  ! " $0 @;ABC*/##	#!

:&;-6&0# $0 8 ,DD"""*	*0D *



-#($





@ #C

@'(#)*C
Exhibit 32.2

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

In connection
with the Teda Travel Group, Inc.s Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year
ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
the date hereof (the Report), I, Hon Ming Wong, Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my
knowledge:

|    |                                                                                                                                                       
|--- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|(1) | The Report
  fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
  Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and                 
|    |                                                                                                                                                       
|(2) | The
  information contained in the Report fairly presents in all material respects
  the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906, another 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 Teda Travel Incorporated and will be
retained by Teda Travel Incorporated and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

| |                              
| | -----------------------------
| | /s/ Hon Ming Wong            
| |                              
| | Hon Ming Wong                
| | Chief Financial Officer      
| | (Principal Financial Officer)

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION FROM THE TEMTEX INDUSTRIES,
INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED AUGUST
31, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          AUG-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             AUG-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               AUG-31-1997
<CASH>                                             575
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    5,464
<ALLOWANCES>                                       364
<INVENTORY>                                      8,172
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                15,198
<PP&E>                                          28,851
<DEPRECIATION>                                  21,162
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  23,233
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            5,208
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           718
<OTHER-SE>                                      15,063
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    23,233
<SALES>                                         39,208
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                39,322
<CGS>                                           29,693
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   29,693
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   271
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 519
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (345)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (144)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (201)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (201)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.06)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.06)
        

</TABLE>
*** E.O. 12866 Review - Draft - Do Not Cite, Quote or Release During Review ***

Category

Primary 

Estimate Low Estimate High Estimate

Year 

Dollar

Discount 

Rate

Period 

Covered Notes

Benefits

$11,500.0 NA NA 2012 7% 2015-2059

$13,600.0 NA NA 2012 3% 2015-2059

NA NA NA NA 7% NA

NA NA NA NA 3% NA

Qualitative

Costs

$1,300.0 NA NA 2012 7% 2015-2059

$1,400.0 NA NA 2012 3% 2015-2059

NA NA NA 7%

NA NA NA 3%

Qualitative

Transfers

NA NA NA 7%

NA NA NA 3%

From/To From: To:

NA NA NA 7%

NA NA NA 3%

From/To From: To:

Effects

State, Local, 

and/or Tribal 

Government

Small Business

Wages

Growth

The cost analysis does not include any cost savings associated with the 

small entity flexibilities

Annualized 

Monetized 

($millions/year)

Annualized 

Quantified 

Estimates Units

Annualized 

Monetized 

($millions/year)

Annualized 

Quantified (tons)

Other Annualized 

Monetized 

($millions/year)

Federal 

Annualized 

Monetized 

($millions/year)

EPA conducted a Small Business Advocacy Review (SBAR) Panel as required by the RFA/SBREFA. The agencies are 

proposing flexibilities for small businesses meeting the criteria specified in 13 CFR 121.201 that would ensure the rule 

does not have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities. The proposed flexibilities include 

additional lead time, less stringent standards, and reduced compliance requirements.

This action does not have tribal implications, as specified in Executive Order 13175 (65 FR 67249, November 9, 2000). 

These rules will be implemented at the Federal level and impose compliance costs on vehicle manufacturers. Tribal 

governments would be affected only to the extent they purchase and use regulated vehicles. Thus, Executive Order 13175 

does not apply to these rules.

Note: The present value of costs and 

benefits reflect costs/benefits that accrue 

over the lifetime of each 2018-2029 MY 

vehicle, discounted back to 2015. 

Annualized values have been calculated 

over a 30-year period.

Annualized benefits represent total benefits 

(including fuel savings, the social cost of 

carbon, energy security, and other economic 

impacts) from EPA's model year analysis. 

The model year benefits presented here are 

also based on an average social cost of 

carbon (SCC) value derived using a 3% 

discount rate; as such, annualized SCC 

benefits always use a 3% discount rate. 

More details regarding the benefits can be 

found in the Preamble Section IX.

Note: Annualized costs include costs for 

new technology along with compliance, 

R&D and increased maintenance. More 

details regarding costs can be found in 

Preamble Section IX.