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

BORLAND SOFTWARE CORPORATION



SUBSIDIARIES*



|Name                                     |  | Jurisdiction of Incorporation
|---------------------------------------- |  | -----------------------------
|ADVANCED TRAINING CENTER, LTDA.          |  | Brazil                       
|BORLAND (FRANCE)                         |  | France                       
|BORLAND (H.K.) LIMITED                   |  | Hong Kong                    
|BORLAND (HOLDING) UK LIMITED             |  | United Kingdom               
|BORLAND (JAPAN) CO., LTD.                |  | Japan                        
|BORLAND (SINGAPORE) PTE., LTD.           |  | Singapore                    
|BORLAND (UK) LIMITED                     |  | United Kingdom               
|BORLAND AUSTRALIA PTY LTD.               |  | Australia                    
|BORLAND B.V.                             |  | The Netherlands              
|BORLAND CANADA, INC.                     |  | Canada                       
|BORLAND GMBH                             |  | Germany                      
|BORLAND KOREA LTD.                       |  | Korea                        
|BORLAND LATIN AMERICA LTDA.              |  | Brazil                       
|BORLAND SOFTWARE DE MÉXICO, S.A. DE C.V. |  | Mexico                       
|BORLAND NEW ZEALAND LIMITED              |  | New Zealand                  
|BORLAND SOFTWARE (BEIJING) CO., LTD.     |  | China                        
|BORLAND SOFTWARE INDIA PRIVATE LIMITED   |  | India                        
|BORLAND TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION           |  | Delaware                     
|BORLAND TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION           |  | Ireland                      
|BORLAND TECHNOLOGY CORPORATION           |  | Russia                       
|STARBASE CORPORATION                     |  | Delaware                     
|INPRISE SOLUTIONS GMBH                   |  | Germany                      

---

|* |  | As of December 31, 2002. Excludes some subsidiaries that do not fall under definition of Significant Subsidiary as defined under Rule 1-02(w) of
Regulation S-X
|- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Alton Thomas Davis, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

September 9, 2010 

s0830 

Order 

 

September 9, 2010 

140876 & (20) 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 140876 

 COA: 294601 

Wayne CC: 04-011031 

VERNICE RAY ROBINSON, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

 On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the February 8, 2010 

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the question presented should be reviewed by this Court. The motion for 

miscellaneous relief is DENIED.
**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**

| (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. |
|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| November                14, 2008 |                                   |
|----------------------------------|----------------------------------------|
|                             | /s/                Jerry Silva         |
|                             | Jerry                Silva             |
|                             | Chief                Executive Officer |

----
| 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. |
|----------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|                      |   |   |                                                                         |
|---------------------------|--------|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|  April      11, 2008 |   |   | /s/      George J. Coates                                                    |
|                      |   |   | George      J. Coates                                                        |
|                      |   |   | President,      Chief Executive Officer and Principal      Executive Officer |

|   |   |   |                                                                          |
|--------|--------|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |   |   | /s/      Barry C. Kaye                                                        |
|   |   |   | Barry      C. Kaye                                                            |
|   |   |   | Treasurer,      Chief Financial Officer and      Principal Accounting Officer |
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 Fresh Harvest Products, Inc. (the Registrant) on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended July 31, 2012 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Michael Jordan Friedman, Principal Executive Officer and the Principal Financial Officer of the Registrant, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to 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 Registrant.





|                          |                                                                                                  | 
|------------------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | 
|                          |                                                                                                  | 
|                          |                                                                                                  | 
|                          | FRESH HARVEST PRODUCTS, INC.                                                                     | 
|Dated: September 19, 2012 | /s/ Michael Jordan Friedman                                                                      | 
|                          | Michael Jordan Friedman
Chief Executive Officer, President, Chief Financial Officer and Chairman |
#### STATE OF CONNECTICUT *v.*MAURICE BILLIE

The Supreme Court docket number is SC 15929.

The defendant’s petition for certification for appeal and the cross petition by the state of Connecticut for certification for appeal from the Appellate Court, 47 Conn. App. 678 (AC 15347), is granted, limited to the following issues:

> “1. Did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the trial court abused its discretion in striking the testimony of the defendant’s expert witness regarding the substance known as ‘illy’ and its effects?

> “2. If the answer to question one is yes, did the Appellate Court properly conclude that the trial court’s error was harmless?”

*934
      *James B. Streeto,*special public defender, in support of the petition.

*John A. East III,*assistant state’s attorney, in opposition.

*John A. East III,*assistant state’s attorney, in support of cross petition.

Decided March 7, 1998
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Marilyn Kelly

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 _________________________________________

 Clerk

September 4, 2012

d0827

Order 

September 4, 2012

144331-3

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 144331-3

COA: 299684; 299716; 299717

Ingham CC: 09-001331-FH;

WAYLAND LYNN DILTS, 09-001265-FC; 09-001332-FC

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the November 8, 2011 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

CAVANAGH, J., would grant leave to appeal.
|Household Finance Corporation                                          |               
|---------------------------------------------------------------------- | --------------
|Household Consumer Loan Corporation                                    |               
|Household Consumer Loan Trust 1995-1                                   |               
|**********************************************************************
|                                                                       |               
|Original Principal Class A                                             | 750,000,000.00
|Number of Class A Bonds (000's)                                        | 750,000.00    
|Original Principal Class B                                             | 172,196,000.00
|Number of Class B Bond (000's)                                         | 172,196.00    
|Original Principal Certificate                                         | 30,304,000.00 
|Number of Certificate Bond (000's)                                     | 30,304.00     
|                                                                       |               
|Distribution Date                                                      |               
|Days                                                                   |               
|                                                                       |               
|CLASS A                                                                |               
|Principal Distribution                                                 |               
|Interest Distribution                                                  |               
|                                                                       |               
|                                                                       |               
|CLASS B                                                                |               
|Principal Distribution                                                 |               
|Interest Distribution                                                  |               
|                                                                       |               
|                                                                       |               
|CERTIFICATES                                                           |               
|Principal Distribution                                                 |               
|Interest Distribution                                                  |
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-6881

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

KAREEM TAYLOR, a/k/a Che,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Wilmington. James C. Fox, Senior District Judge. (5:06-cr-00057-F-2)

Submitted: August 20, 2009 Decided: August 27, 2009

Before WILKINSON and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Kareem Taylor, Appellant Pro Se. Barbara Dickerson Kocher, Rudolf A. Renfer, Jr., Assistant United States Attorneys, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:

Kareem Taylor appeals the district court’s order

denying his 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(2) (2006) motion for reduction

in sentence. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible

error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the

district court. United States v. Taylor , No. 5:06-cr-00057-F-2

(E.D.N.C. May 8, 2009). We dispense with oral argument because

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the

materials before the court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

AFFIRMED
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE DIEDRICH
COFFEE, INC. REPORT ON FORM 10-K FILED HEREWITH AND IS QUALIFIED IN IS ENTIRETY
BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-27-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-29-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-27-1999
<CASH>                                       1,200,861
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  263,651
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  1,279,436
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,050,627
<PP&E>                                      14,035,728
<DEPRECIATION>                               4,915,869
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              12,736,452
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,706,086
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        61,674
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                12,736,452
<SALES>                                     24,215,203
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            24,215,203
<CGS>                                       10,955,197
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               10,955,197
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            15,524,597
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             384,544
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (2,558,618)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     3,690
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,562,308)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,562,308)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.43)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.43)
        

</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.1

10-Q Exhibit 32.1: Certifications 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 iShares Silver Trust (the Trust) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Lee T. Kranefuss, Chief Executive Officer of Barclays Global Investors International Inc., the Sponsor of the Trust, 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, 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 Trust.

Date: November 13, 2006



|                             
|-----------------------------
|/s/ Lee T. Kranefuss         
|Lee T. Kranefuss *           
|Chief Executive Officer      
|(Principal executive officer)

---

|* | The Registrant is a trust and Mr. Kranefuss is signing in his capacity as an officer of Barclays Global Investors International Inc., the Sponsor of the Registrant.
|- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
# Fourth Court of Appea **l s** 

**San Antonio, Texas**

February 19, 2020

No. 04

- 20

- 00101

- CR

IN RE Bryan Keith CRUM

Original Mandamus Proceeding 1

ORDER

Sit ting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

Luz Elena D. Chapa , Justice

Irene Rios , Justice

On February 14 , 2020 , relator filed a “Notice of Intent to File a Writ of Mand amus

. ” If

relator desires to f ile a petition for writ of mandamus in this court he must do so no later than

March 2, 2020 . If relator does not file his pe tition by March 2, 2020 , this original proceeding

will be dismissed for want o f prosecution.

It is so ORDERED on February 19, 2020

.

PER CURIAM

ATT ESTED TO: _____________________________

Michael A. Cruz,

Clerk of Court

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. B10

- 826 , styled The State of Texas v. Bryon Keith Crum , pending in the

198th Judicia l District Court

, Kerr County, Texas, the Honorable Re x Emerson pres iding.
#### American Mailing Device Corporation, Appellant, *v.*Widener et al., Executors.

*Contracts*— Principal *and agent-**— Contracts *by agent on behalf of principal*— Authority *of agent to act*— Architects.

No recovery can. be had upon a contract for the installing of mail chutes in a building in the course of construction, under the supervision of an architect, where the contract upon which the action was brought was alleged to have been made by the architect on behalf of the owners of the property, but where it appeared that the architect had no authority to make any such contract.

Argued J,an. 15,1918.

Appeal, No. 209, Jan. T., 1917, by plaintiff, from order of C. P. No. 1, Philadelphia Co., March T., 1916, No. 4001, refusing to take off nonsuit, in case of American Mailing Device Corporation v. Joseph E. Widener and George D. Widener, Executors of Peter A. B. Widener, deeeaséd.

Before Brown, C. J., Stewart, Moschzisker, Frazer and Walling, JJ.

Affirmed.

Assumpsit for breach of contract. Before Patterson, J.

From the record it appeared that the action was brought against the executors of Peter A. B. Widener upon a verbal contract alleged to have been made by Mr. Widener “through his duly authorized agents and employees” on or about the 15th day of January, 1915, for the erection of mail chutes in the Widener building.

The only person whom the plaintiff attempted to .show was the decedent’s agent was Horace Trumbauer, the architect of the building. That Mr. Trumbauer was the architect was admitted by the pleadings and was shown by the contract between Mr. Widener and the Geo. A. Fuller Company for the erection of the building; that contract did not give Mr. Trumbauer any powers other than those ordinarily given to supervising architects in *376the erection of buildings. There was no other evidence of any authority to Mr. Trumbauer to enter into a contract on the defendants’ behalf.

The court entered a compulsory nonsuit, which it subsequently refused to take off. Plaintiff appealed.

*Error assigned*was in refusing to take off the nonsuit.

*Joseph L. McAleer,*for appellant.

*Ellis Ames Ballard,*for appellees.

February 25, 1918:

Per Curiam,

The burden was upon the plaintiff to show that Trumbauer had authority to make the alleged contract with it upon which it has brought suit. It not only failed to do so, but showed affirmatively by Trumbauer himself, whom it called as a witness, that he had no such authority.

Judgment affirmed.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v.

DARRYL BURTON,

Defendant

- Appellant. No. 18

- 10143

D.C. No. 1:85

- cr

- 00205

- LJO

- 1

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Lawrence J. O ’ Neill, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted June 11, 2019 **

Before: CANBY, GRABER, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.

Darryl Burton appeals pro se from the district court’s order denying his

motion s challenging his 25

- year term of special parole

. We have jurisdiction under

28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm

.

Burton first contends that he is entitled to rel ief under Federal Rule of

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

JUN 13 2019

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K

U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 18

- 10143

Criminal Procedure 35(a) (198 4 ) because hi s special parole term is illegal. We

disagree. The term d oes not exceed the penalty authorized by the applicable

statute, see 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)( B ) (1984) (establishing a minimum term of

special parole , but no maximum term)

, and is not otherwise illegal on its face

, s ee

United States v. Montalvo , 581 F.3d 1147, 1153 (9th Cir. 2009) (illegality

warranting relief under Rule 35(a) “must be apparent in the terms of the sentence

it self ” (internal quotation marks omitted ) ). T o the extent Burton’s Rule 35 motion

“ challenge [s] the process by which the sentence was imposed, not the terms of the

sentence ,” Montalvo , 581 F.3d at 1153, it is time

- barred because Burton did not

bring the challen ge within 120 days of his judgment of conviction becoming final.

See i d.

Burton also contends that the district court should have exercised its

discretion to reduce his 25

- year special parole term under a doctrine deriving from

United States v. Holloway , 68 F. Supp. 3d 310 (E.D.N.Y. 2014). However, as t he

district court noted

, the Holloway doctrine has not been adopted in this Circuit

.

Moreover, we agree with the district court that the instant case is factually

distinguishable from Holloway

.

In light of this disposition, we do not reach the parties’ remaining

arguments. The government’s motion to take judicial notice is denied

.

AFFIRMED.