alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT      21**

**Subsidiaries      of the Registrant**

|  **Name                of Entity****(Former                Name)**              |  **State                of Org.**                          |  **Entity                Type/** |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------------------|---------------------------------------|
| Merisel                Inc.                                                               | Delaware                                                        | Corp                             |
| Merisel                Americas, Inc.                                                     | Delaware                                                        | Corp                             |
| Merisel                Properties, Inc.                                                   | Delaware                                                        | Corp                             |
| Color                Edge, LLC (MCEI,                LLC)                                 | Delaware                                                        | LLC                              |
| Color                Edge Visual, LLC (MCEV,                LLC acq’d Photobition ) | Delaware                                                        | LLC                              |
| Comp                24, LLC (MC24,                LLC)                                    | Delaware                                                        | LLC                              |
| Crush                Creative, LLC (MCRU,                LLC)                             | Delaware                                                        | LLC                              |
| Dennis                Curtin Studios,                LLC (Merisel                CD, LLC) | Delaware,                Qualified                in California | LLC                              |
| MADP,                LLC                                                                  | Delaware                                                   | LLC                                   |
| Advertising                Props Inc.                                                     | Georgia                                                         | Corp                             |
| Fuel                Digital, LLC                                                          | Delaware,                Qualified                in New York   | LLC                                   |
# Please wait...

If this message is not eventually replaced by the proper contents of the document, your PDF viewer may not be able to display this type of document.

You can upgrade to the latest version of Adobe Reader for Windows®, Mac, or Linux® by visiting http://www.adobe.com/go/reader_download.

For more assistance with Adobe Reader visit http://www.adobe.com/go/acrreader.

Windows is either a registered trademark or a trademark of Microsoft Corporation in the United States and/or other countries. Mac is a trademark of Apple Inc., registered in the United States and other countries. Linux is the registered trademark of Linus Torvalds in the U.S. and other countries. ACCEPTED 06-15-00054-CV SIXTH COURT OF APPEALS TEXARKANA, TEXAS 8/24/2015 3:50:53 PM DEBBIE AUTREY

CLERK
<PAGE>
                         AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
                              AS AMENDED APRIL 1, 1998


1)   Change title of Chief Executive Officer to Executive Vice President for
     Strategic Business Affairs.

2)   300,000 shares as previously granted for future performance vesting monthly
     over four (4) years.

3)   Target bonus for the 1st 3 Quarters @ $60,0000 (annualized) and the 4th
     Quarter at $15,000 (annualized). Thereafter at $15,000 annually and/or may
     be determined by the Board of Directors.

     A bonus will not be paid if the company does less than 75% of plan
     pre-tax/interest. Between 75% and 100% of plan, the bonus is paid pro-rata.
     Above plan, the company will accrue 5% of the incremental pre-tax profits,
     all or some of which the Board will distribute in its discretion.






                                        Imaging Technologies Corporation


                                        By: /s/ [ILLEGIBLE]  /s/ Brian Bonar
                                           ----------------------------------

                                        Title:  Chairman         CEO
                                              -------------------------------


                                         /s/ Edward W. Savarese
                                        -------------------------------------
                                        Edward W. Savarese
#### Richard P. GHOLSON, Appellant, v. Joyce GHOLSON, Appellee.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

Nov. 6, 1964.

*910David R. Reed, Tyler C. Bourne, Pa-ducah, 'for. appellant.

Robert Hines, Jr., Joseph S. Freeland, ■Paducah,, for 'appellee.

WILLIAMS, Judge.

This is an appeal from an order of the McCracken Circuit Court dismissing a husband’s petition for modification of a divorce judgment granting custody of the children to the wife.

The order .appealed from was entered as the result of a motion for summary judgment. Summary judgment was not appropriate here because the court necessarily had to make a factual determination regarding change of conditions. However, both parties have treated the order as if it were made pursuant to a motion ,to submit, and we' shall do likewise.

Three depositions were taken by the husband; his own, that of a friend of his former wife, and that of her housekeeper. They show that the former wife lived in an apartment where she kept her three children. The housekeeper stayed with the children during the day while their mother worked, and stayed with them in the evening when their mother went out. The former wife went out on dates fairly often. On one-occasion she went to Memphis with a man named Kleet where they stayed in the same motel. Another time she met him in St. Louis where they stayed in the same hotel. No improper relations were admitted by Kleet.

The husband visited on many occasions with the children and their mother. He would occasionally baby-sit with the children when the mother went out in the evening, and apparently had several of his meals with them. Twice he called his wife when he knew her to be in the apartment of another man and she willingly talked to him on the telephone. It' .was his wish that the two could be remarried and, as recently as two weeks prior to filing the petition for modification, he had asked her to marry him.

The circuit court -apparently did not see any change in conditions in the behavior of the wife. He may have concluded that the husband did not really feel the wife was an improper person to have custody of the children by virtue of the fact he kept attempting to remarry her. We do not know what prompted his conclusion, but we are convinced that the proof is not sufficient to declare it clearly erroneous.

Judgment affirmed.
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1341 

To amend title 5, United States Code, to require the Environmental Protection Agency to include in any notice of rule making a statement regarding the impact of the rule on jobs loss or creation, and for other 

purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

APRIL 4, 2011 

Mr. OLSON (for himself, Mr. POE of Texas, Mr. SAM JOHNSON of Texas, Mr. 

MCKINLEY, and Mr. FARENTHOLD) introduced the following bill; which 

was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To amend title 5, United States Code, to require the Environmental Protection Agency to include in any notice 

of rule making a statement regarding the impact of 

the rule on jobs loss or creation, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Establishing Public 

5 Accountability Act of 2011’’. 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1341 IH

1 SEC. 2. EFFECT ON JOBS STATEMENT REQUIRED FOR NO2 TICE OF RULE MAKINGS BY EPA. 

3 Section 553(b) of title 5, United States Code is 

4 amended— 

5 (1) in paragraph (2), by striking ‘‘and’’ at the 

6 end; 

7 (2) in paragraph (3), by striking the period at 

8 the end and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and 

9 (3) by inserting after paragraph (3) the fol10 lowing: 

11 ‘‘(4) in the case of a rule making by the Envi12 ronmental Protection Agency, a statement that iden13 tifies any net gain or loss of domestic jobs that is 

14 likely to result if the rule is adopted, and includes 

15 the analysis used to identify that net gain or loss.’’. 

Æ 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
N OTE : This disposition is nonprecedential. 

# United States **Court of Appeals**  **for the Federal Circuit**

______________________
THE MEDICINES COMPAN Y, Plaintiff

- Appellant

v.

HOSPIRA, INC., Defendant

- Cross

- Appellant

______________________

2014

- 1469,

- 1504

______________________ Appeals from the United States District Court for the District of Delaware in No. 1:09

- cv

- 00750

- RGA, Judge Richard G. Andrews.

______________________

O R D E R

______________________

P ER C URIAM

. The en banc o ral argument in this case is scheduled for May 5, 201 6 at 1 0 :00 a.m. in courtroom 201. Each side will have 30 minutes for a total argument time of one hour. The parties shall notify the c ourt by ECF by April 15 , 2016 of the name s of the counsel who will present oral argument

.THE MEDICINES COMPAN Y v. HOSPIRA , INC

. 2

F OR THE C OURT

March 11, 2016 /s/ Daniel E. O ’Toole Date Daniel E. O’Toole Clerk of Court
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1248 

To amend title 5, United States Code, to provide that civilian employees 

of the Department of Defense performing unsatisfactory work shall not 

be eligible for annual nationwide adjustments to pay schedules. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 29, 2011 

Mr. WEST introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee 

on Oversight and Government Reform 

A BILL 

To amend title 5, United States Code, to provide that civilian 

employees of the Department of Defense performing unsatisfactory work shall not be eligible for annual nationwide adjustments to pay schedules. 

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

3 SECTION 1. DENIAL OF PAY ADJUSTMENTS FOR UNSATIS4 FACTORY PERFORMANCE. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 5303 of title 5, United 

6 States Code, is amended by adding at the end the fol7 lowing: 


Emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1248 IH

1 ‘‘(h)(1) Notwithstanding any other provision of this 

2 section, an adjustment under this section shall not be 

3 made in the case of any employee of the Department of 

4 Defense having an unacceptable performance rating. 

5 ‘‘(2) For purposes of administering any provision of 

6 law, rule, or regulation which— 

7 ‘‘(A) provides premium pay, retirement, life in8 surance, or any other employee benefit which re9 quires any deduction or contribution, 

10 ‘‘(B) imposes any requirement or limitation, or 

11 ‘‘(C) requires any other computation (such as 

12 under section 5304(c)(1)(B)), 

13 on the basis of a rate of basic pay, the rate of basic pay 

14 payable after the application of paragraph (1) shall be 

15 treated as the rate of basic pay for the employee in16 volved.’’. 

17 (b) REGULATIONS.—The Secretary of Defense, in 

18 consultation with the Director of the Office of Personnel 

19 Management, may prescribe any regulations necessary to 

20 carry out the purposes of this section. 

Æ 


Emcdonald on DSK2BSOYB1PROD with BILLS
---

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

The undersigned, Bondy Tan, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that:

|(1) | the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Lightscape
      Technologies Inc. for the quarter ended June 30, 2008 (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 Lightscape Technologies Inc.                                                                 

Dated: August 14, 2008



/s/ Bondy TanBondy Tan President and Chief Executive Officer (Principal
Executive Officer, Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting
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 Lightscape
Technologies Inc. and will be retained by Lightscape Technologies Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



---
Name(Last,First,Middle)TitleCompany/OrganizationStreetAddressPhoneEmailWebinar Attendees: Notice of intent to establish a subcommitteeand negotiate a proposed rule on Energy Efficiency Standards for DistributionTransformersFaxCityState/ProvZipMeeting Date: 9/28/2011Transformer TechnologyLeaderMetglas, Inc.jerry.allen@metglas.com440 Allied Drive843-349-6810Allen, Ph.D., Jerry843-349-6829ConwaySC29526N/ALBNLcabolduc@lbl.gov1 Cyclotron Road647-832-4021Bolduc , ChristopherN/ABerkeleyCA94720President and ChiefExecutive Officer P.E.HVolt Inc.PHopkinson@hvolt.com3704 High Ridge Road704-846-3290Hopkinson, Philip J.704-845-2520CharlotteNC28270Vice President ofTechnologyABB Inc.wes.patterson@us.abb.com940 Main CampusDriveSuite 500919-829-4364Patterson, Wesley919-856-2363ReleighNC27606Distinguished ScientistEmeritusLawrence Berkeley NationalLaboratoryAHRosenfeld@lbl.govartrosenfeld@gmail.com160 SouthamptonAvenue916-495-2227Rosenfeld, Arthur H.510-486-5454BerkleyCA94707Systems EngineerMemphis Light Gas andWaterjrossetti@mlgw.org220 South MainN/ARossetti, JohnN/AMemphisTN38103PresidentEMS International Consulting,Incmaneshsampat@bellsouth.net1180 Brookview Drive706-549-8155Sampat, Manesh P.706-549-8155AthensGA30606Principal Engineer,Specialty Product Research& Applications EngineeringAK Steel Corporationjerry.schoen@aksteel.com705 Curtis Street513-425-5164Schoen, Jerry W.513-425-5866MiddletownOH45043Product ManagerFederal Pacificbsmith@federalpacific.com601 Old Airport Rd276-645-8836Smith, RobertN/ABristolVA24201Energy Efficiency AdvocateNatural Resources DefenseCouncil (NRDC)mwaltner@nrdc.org1152 15th St NWSuite 300202-513-6270Waltner, Meg202-289-1060WashingtonDC20005Project ManagerEnergy Solutionsdyoung@energy-solution.com1610 Harrison StreetN/AYoung, DanielN/AOaklandCA94612ContactsIncluded:11DocketId:EERE‐2011‐BT‐STD‐0051Page1of101/10/201210:25:43
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 29 (Monday, February 12, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 9851]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-02768]


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

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION

[DOCKET NO. 23-14]


Notice of Filing of Amended Complaint and Assignment; D.F. Young, 
Inc., Complainant v. Wallenius Wilhelmsen Logistics AS, n/k/a Wallenius 
Wilhelmsen Ocean AS, and Wallenius Wilhelmsen Logistics Americas, LLC, 
Respondents

Served: February 6, 2024.
    Notice is given that an amended complaint has been filed with the 
Federal Maritime Commission (the ``Commission'') by D.F. Young, Inc. 
(the ``Complainant'') against Wallenius Wilhelmsen Logistics AS, n/k/a 
Wallenius Wilhelmsen Ocean AS, and Wallenius Wilhelmsen Logistics 
Americas, LLC (the ``Respondents''). Complainant states that the 
Commission has jurisdiction over the amended complaint pursuant to 46 
U.S.C. 41301, et seq. and pursuant to 46 U.S.C. 40904, 41102, and 41104 
and 46 CFR 515.42.
    Complainant is a corporation organized and existing under the laws 
of the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania with a principal place of business 
in Berwyn, Pennsylvania.
    Complainant identifies Respondent Wallenius Wilhelmsen Logistics 
AS, n/k/a Wallenius Wilhelmsen Ocean AS (WWL Ocean) as a Norwegian 
corporation or other business entity with a principal place of business 
in Lysaker, Norway.
    Complainant identifies Respondent Wallenius Wilhelmsen Logistics 
Americas, LLC (WWL Americas) as a corporation organized and existing 
under the laws of the State of Delaware with a place of business in 
Parsippany, New Jersey.
    Complainant alleges that Respondents violated 46 U.S.C. 41102, 
40501, 40904 and 46 CFR 515.42 by refusing to compensate for freight 
forwarding services on shipments of automobiles in accordance with the 
terms of the applicable tariff following demand for such compensation.
    An answer to the amended complaint must be filed with the 
Commission within 25 days after the date of service.
    The full text of the amended complaint can be found in the 
Commission's electronic Reading Room at https://www2.fmc.gov/readingroom/proceeding/23-14/. This proceeding has been assigned to the 
Office of Administrative Law Judges. The initial decision of the 
presiding judge shall be issued by December 13, 2024, and the final 
decision of the Commission shall be issued by June 27, 2025.

David Eng,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2024-02768 Filed 2-9-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6730-02-P
#### Manuel H. MARTINEZ, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 34279.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Feb. 7, 1962.

*937John W. O’Dowd, Houston, for appellant.

Frank Briscoe, Dist. Atty., Carl E. F. Dally, Edward N. Shaw, Jr., Assts. Dist. Atty., Houston, and Leon B. Douglas, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State

MORRISON, Judge.

The offense is rape; the punishment, SO years.

In view of our disposition of this appeal, a statement of the facts will not be deemed necessary other than to state that formal bill of exception No. 2 recites that during the cross-examination of the prosecuting witness appellant developed that the witness had previously made a written statement to the police and district attorney concerning the offense on trial. Appellant made a request upon the prosecutor to furnish such statement to him for the purpose of cross-examination and possible impeachment of the witness. This was denied, and appellant then asked the court to instruct the prosecutor to turn the statement over to the court reporter so that it might be incorporated into the record as a part of his bill of exception “ * * * so the appellate court might see what was contained in the statement * * This was also denied even though it was stipulated that the prosecutor had the statement in his possession.

Formal bill of exception No. 3 recites that appellant followed the same procedure in regard to a written statement made by the State’s fourth witness, Mercedes Singleton.

This is the same question which was presented in the recent cases of Gaskin v. State, No. 33,909, Tex.Cr.App., 353 S.W.2d 467, and Pruitt v. State, No. 34,207, Tex.Cr.App, 355 S.W.2d 528. In Pruitt, supra, we said: .

> “ * * * such statement should have been made available for the record for the purpose of showing injury, if there was injury, and that the refusal of counsel for the State to make available the statements or reports which appellant’s counsel was not permitted to inspect, deprived appellant of the opportunity to show, if he could, that he was prejudiced by the court’s refusal to require the statements to be produced.”

In Gaskin, supra, we said:

> “The rule applies where demand is made after the witness has testified on direct examination and is for the purpose of cross-examination, and possibly impeachment purposes, *whether the statement has been used by the witness before trial to refresh his memory or not.”*

For the error of the court in failing to permit appellant to perfect his bill so that he might show injury, if any occurred, the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.
# Fourth Court of Appeals **San Antonio, T exas**  May 16, 2014 N o. 04 - 14 - 00227 - CV BEXAR APPRAISAL DISTRICT, Appellant v. SIVAGE INVESTMENTS, LTD. and Sivage Community Development, Inc, Appellee s From the 408th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas Trial Court No. 2012 - CI - 04570 Honorab le Janet P. Littlejohn, Judge Presiding 

### ORDER Appellant has filed an unopposed motion to consolidate appeal numbers 04 - 14 - 00227 - CV, 04 - 14 - 00228 - CV, 04 - 14 - 00229 - CV, and 04 - 14 - 00230 - CV. Based on the representations in the motion regarding the similarities in the cases, this court has determined that the appeals should be consolidated for briefing and argument. We there fore grant the motion and order the appeals consolidated for the purp ose of briefing and argument. The parties shall file all motions, briefs, and other documents as if the four appeals were one case, but shall include all four appeal numbers in the style. See T EX . R. A PP . P . 9.3(a). The records for the four appeals shal l remain separate . The four appeals will be argued together, as a single appeal, and the total time limit for each side at oral argument shall equal the ordinary time limit for a single appeal absent a motion requesting different time considerations. The court will dispose of all four appeals with the same judgment, opinion, and mandate.

_________________________________ Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereun to set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court on this 16th day of May, 2014 .

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle Clerk of Court
Exhibit 32.2

Certification of Chief Financial Officer pursuant to U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of OPNET Technologies, Inc. (the Company), I, Mel F. Wesley, Vice President and 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:



| | (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: November 6, 2007 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/ Mel F. Wesley                         
|                        |  |  |  |     |  | Mel F. Wesley                             
|                        |  |  |  |     |  | Vice President and Chief Financial Officer