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

ESI Subsidiaries

As of March 29, 2008



|                                                   |  |                               |  |                                    |  
|-------------------------------------------------- |  | ----------------------------- |  | ---------------------------------- | -
|Name                                               |  | State/Country ofIncorporation |  | Percentageof VotingSecuritiesOwned |  
|Electro Scientific Industries GmbH                 |  | Germany                       |  | 100                                | %
|ESI International Corp.                            |  | Oregon                        |  | 100                                | %
|Electro Scientific Industries Japan Co., Ltd.      |  | Japan                         |  | 100                                | %
|ESI Korea Co. Ltd.                                 |  | Korea                         |  | 100                                | %
|Electro Scientific Industries Europe Ltd.          |  | United Kingdom                |  | 100                                | %
|Electro Scientific Industries, SARL                |  | France                        |  | 100                                | %
|Electro Scientific Industries Singapore PTE Ltd.   |  | Singapore                     |  | 100                                | %
|ESI China, Inc.                                    |  | Oregon                        |  | 100                                | %
|ESI Electronic Equipment (Shanghai) Co., Ltd.      |  | China                         |  | 100                                | %
|ESI (Beijing) R&D Center Co., Ltd.                 |  | China                         |  | 100                                | %
|ESI Technology Development, Pte. Ltd.              |  | Singapore                     |  | 100                                | %
|ESI China R&D Investment, Pte. Ltd.                |  | Singapore                     |  | 100                                | %
|ESI Taiwan (Branch Office)                         |  | Taiwan                        |  | 100                                | %
|ESI (Beijing) Electro Optic Manufacturing Co. Ltd. |  | China                         |  | 100                                | %
|New Wave Research, Inc                             |  | California                    |  | 100                                | %
|New Wave Research, Ltd (FSC)                       |  | Virgin Islands                |  | 100                                | %
|New Wave Research, K.K                             |  | Japan                         |  | 100                                | %
|New Wave Research, Ltd.                            |  | Hong Kong                     |  | 100                                | %
|New Wave Research Co., Ltd. (WOFE)                 |  | China                         |  | 100                                | %
|New Wave Research Co., Ltd. (FICE)                 |  | China                         |  | 100                                | %
|New Wave Research G.C. Ltd.                        |  | Taiwan                        |  | 100                                | %
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE
F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Appellate case name: Cora Lea Byford v. Lila Thompson

Appellate case number: 01

- 20

- 00180

- CV

Trial court case number: 20CCV0001

Trial court: County Court of Chambers County

Appellant’s brief was originally due on May 11, 2020. The En Banc court issued an order on May 19, 2020, extending the time for all pending motions for extension until June 30, 2020. We granted appellant’s motion for extension until August 3, 2020. Noti ce of late brief issued on August 12, 2020, advising appellant that unless her brief was filed within 10 days, the appeal might be dismissed. Appellee filed a motion to dismiss on August 13, 2020, seeking dismissal based on appellant’s failure to file a b rief. On August 24, 2020, appellant filed a second motion for extension and the Court granted this until October 12, 2020. Another notice of late brief issued on October 21, 2020. This notice was returned to the Court undelivered. On January 15, 2021, appellee filed another motion to dismiss. Appellant filed a third motion for extension which the Court granted until March 4, 2021. No brief has been filed.

The Court will dismiss this appeal this appeal unless appellant files her brief within 10 days of the date of this order . No further extensions will be granted.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature:

_____

/s/ Peter Kelly

_____  Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: __ March 18, 2021

_____
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Office of the United States Trade Representative

# AGENCY:

Office of the United States Trade Representative.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

                        This notice announces the Office of the United States Trade                               ( print page 9284)                            Representative (USTR) staff members selected to serve on the Senior Executive Service (SES) and Senior Level (SL) Performance Review Board (PRB). This notice supersedes all previous PRB membership notices.                    

# DATES:

The staff members in this notice will begin serving as PRB members on February 9, 2024.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Cassie Ender, Human Capital Specialist, Office of Human Capital and Services, at (202) 881-7782 or                         *Cassie.L.Ender@ustr.eop.gov.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    USTR is required (                    *see*5 U.S.C. 4314(c)) to establish a PRB to review and make recommendations to the U.S. Trade Representative for final approval of the performance rating, performance-based pay adjustment, and performance award for each incumbent SES and SL. The following staff members have been selected to serve on USTR's PRB:                

*Chair:*                         Rachel Howe, Assistant U.S. Trade Representative for ICTIME.                    

*Member:*                         Daniel Lee, Assistant U.S. Trade Representative for Innovation and Intellectual Property.                    

*Member:*                         Daniel Watson, Assistant U.S. Trade Representative for Western Hemisphere Affairs.                    

*Member:*                         Julie Callahan, Assistant U.S. Trade Representative for Agricultural Affairs.                    

*Member:*                         Juan Millan, Assistant U.S. Trade Representative for Monitoring and Investment.                    

Fred Ames,

Assistant U.S. Trade Representative for Administration, Office of the United States Trade Representative.

[FR Doc. 2024-02714 Filed 2-8-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3390-F4-P
Exhibit 99.4

Press Release                                      Source: Hesperia Holding Inc.

Hesperia Holding Inc. Completes Financing with Laurus Funds
Wednesday October 13, 12:05 am ET

HESPERIA, Calif.--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Oct. 13, 2004--Hesperia Holding, Inc.
(OTCBB:HSPR - News) announced today that it completed a $1 million financing
with Laurus Master Fund, Ltd. ("Laurus Funds"), a New York City based
institutional fund, that specializes in providing financing to growing, small
and micro-capitalization companies.

Under the arrangement, Hesperia Holding Inc. issued a $1.0 million secured
convertible term note with an initial interest rate of prime plus 3 percent,
secured by the assets of Hesperia Holding Inc.


The funding will be used to expand current operations as part of our business
strategy of "growth by expansion." The note is convertible into shares of
Hesperia Holding Inc. stock subject to certain conditions. In connection with
the financing facility, Hesperia Holding has issued to Laurus Funds warrants to
purchase up to 461,000 shares of Hesperia Holdings. The details of the
transaction will be available in the Company's 8K filing.


Hesperia's Chairman and CEO, Don Shimp stated, "the arrangement with Laurus
Funds provides Hesperia with additional working capital to grow with the demand
of our customers. We view this transaction as extremely positive for Hesperia
Holding and our shareholders."


About Hesperia Holding Inc.


Hesperia Holding Inc., through its wholly owned subsidiary, Hesperia Truss Inc.,
designs, engineers and manufactures roof and floor trusses that serve both the
residential and commercial construction industry. Hesperia Truss Inc. was
founded in 1993 in Hesperia, California by Don Shimp and Mark Presgraves. The
company has since grown to annual revenue of $8.14 million in 2003 and continues
to grow in the fast-growing High Desert Region and Inland Empire areas of
Southern California and Southern Nevada markets. Hesperia Holding Inc, employs
approximately 110 people on its five-acre facility in Hesperia, California.


Forward Looking Statements: Statements about the Company's future expectations,
including future revenues and earnings, and all other statements in this press
release other than historical facts are "forward-looking statements" within the
meaning of section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, Section 21E of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and as the term is defined in the Private
Litigation Reform Act of 1995. The company's actual results could differ
materially from expected results. The Company undertakes no obligation to update
forward-looking statements to reflect subsequently occurring events or
circumstances. Should events occur which materially affect any comments made
within this press release, the Company will appropriately inform the public.



Contact:
     Hesperia Holding Inc.
     Andrew Austin, 619-334-8521
EXHIBIT 24.2

POWER OF ATTORNEY

(Annual Report on Form 10-K)

The undersigned, an officer and/or director of Electro Scientific Industries, Inc., constitutes and appoints Nicholas Konidaris, Paul Oldham and Kerry Mustoe, and each
of them, his or her true and lawful attorney and agent to do any and all acts and things and execute in his or her name as an officer or director of the Company the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended March 29, 2008 and any and
all amendments thereto, and to file the same, with all exhibits thereto, and other documents in connection therewith, with the Securities and Exchange Commission; and the undersigned does hereby ratify and confirm all that said attorneys and agents
and each of them shall do or cause to be done by virtue hereof. Any one of said attorneys or agents shall have, and may exercise, all powers conferred.

Dated: May 15, 2008.



/s/ RICHARD J. FAUBERTRichard J. Faubert
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-7736

DAVIS MOSES LEUDVICK,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

ROY W. CHERRY, Superintendent, Hampton Roads

Regional Jail, Portsmouth, Virginia; WARREN A.

LEWIS, District Director, Immigration and

Naturalization Service; JAMES ZIGLER,

Commissioner, Immigration and Naturalization

Service; JOHN ASHCROFT, Attorney General of

the United States,

Respondents - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. James C. Cacheris, Senior

District Judge. (CA-03-1107-AM)

Submitted: July 21, 2004 Decided: August 24, 2004

Before LUTTIG, WILLIAMS, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Davis Moses Leudvick, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
*The district court, by order of June 1, 2004, again dismissed

the action without prejudice, citing Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b).

Leudvick has not noted an appeal from that order.

- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Davis Moses Leudvick appeals the district court’s order

of October 23, 2003, dismissing his petition for habeas corpus, 28

U.S.C. § 2241 (2000), pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b). After the

district court dismissed Leudvick’s petition for failure to inform

the court of a new address, Leudvick filed a notice of appeal. He

subsequently filed a document tending to show that he did not have

a new address. The district court construed this document as a

motion for relief from judgment pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P.

60(b)(1) and issued an order indicating its inclination to grant

the motion. See Fobian v. Storage Tech. Corp., 164 F.3d 887, 891

(4th Cir. 1999). This Court remanded for the limited purpose of

considering the merits of Leudvick’s motion pursuant to Fed. R.

Civ. P. 60(b). See Fobian, 164 F.3d at 892. 

On remand, the district court entered an order vacating the

October 23, 2003, order of dismissal, and reopened the action.*

Because the order on appeal has been vacated, this appeal is now

moot. Mellen v. Bunting, 327 F.3d 355, 363-64 (4th Cir. 2003)

(“When a case has become moot after the entry of the district

court’s judgment, an appellate court no longer has jurisdiction to

entertain the appeal.”), cert. denied, 124 S. Ct. 1750 (2004).

Therefore, we dismiss the appeal as moot. We deny Leudvick’s
- 3 -

motion for appointment of counsel, and 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.

DISMISSED
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. No. 96-4145 LOUIE CLEMENT CAFFEY, Defendant-Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Greensboro. William L. Osteen, Sr., District Judge. (CR-95-225) Submitted: October 3, 1996 Decided: October 16, 1996 Before ERVIN, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

_________________________________________________________________ Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________ COUNSEL K. E. Krispen Culbertson, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellant. Walter C. Holton, Jr., United States Attorney, Richard S. Glaser, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Gill P. Beck, Assistant United States Attorney, Lynne P. Klauer, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________Unpublished opinions are not binding pr ecedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

_________________________________________________________________ OPINION PER CURIAM: Louie Clement Caffey pleaded guilty to possession with attempt to distribute marijuana in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) (1994). On appeal, he attacks his conviction on the grounds that the district court erred by failing to grant his "Motion to Vacate Guilty Plea for D oubleJeopardy and Motion to Dismiss." Caffey contended a federal conviction following a state seizure of his property constituted double jeopardy. Because Caffey's conviction does not violate the D ouble Jeopardy Clause, we affirm the conviction. Caffey's prosecution was not barred by the Double Jeopardy Clause, because the state of North Carolina seized his property for failure to pay state taxes on controlled substances in his possession. Even if the seizure was punitive, federal and state governments may prosecute a defendant for the same conduct without violating the dual sovereignty doctrine, unless one sovereign is merely acting as a tool of the other. United States v. Pena , 67 F.3d 153, 156 (8th Cir. 1995) (citation omitted); see also Bartkus v. Illinois , 359 U.S. 121, 123-24 (1959) (cooperation of federal law enforcement officers with state law officials does not violate the Double Jeopardy Clause). There was no showing here that federal officials were manipulated by state officials in prosecuting Caffey. Thus, as this is Caffey's sole issue on appeal, we affirm Caffey's conviction.We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the record and briefs, and oral argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED July 13, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-50163 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus JORGE ALBERTO CRUZ-MONTALVO, also known as Elias Gutierrez-Cruz, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:05-CR-2049

-------------------- Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Jorge Alberto Cruz-Montalvo raises arguments that are foreclosed by AlmendarezTorres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), which held that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) is a penalty provision and not a separate criminal offense. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is
AFFIRMED.
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 Annual Report on Form 10-K of Merchants Bancshares, Inc. (the "Company") for the year ending December 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Janet P. Spitler, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §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, and (2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and the results of operations of the Company.  Merchants Bancshares, Inc.By:/s/  Janet P. SpitlerJanet P. SpitlerChief Financial Officer & TreasurerMarch 16, 2009Date
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF TEXAS 

AUSTIN ; 

G~OVLR BLLLLI)S 

A-m.““.Y’ OsYm”AL 
Hon. Slerveland Devla - pups 2 

"1 have boon roquestinl to advise under the 

provisions of thie firtlols if tb4 Sheriff of 

Brazorle County i4 entltlad to gay his fir4t 

4ti8iGt4Xt ia OhGrge Or OiVil k84tttW8 the 8Wa Of 

$2OGG.O@ per annum and his oblei daputy ln 

ohaqe Of oriminal mettors the 81~4 of Q2GOC.00 

per onnuxi umtar this sootion Ib of Article 3902. 

“It wOU,lE Q~peSYr frm rORdh@ %OtlOn 

2 or Artiol4 3902 thnt th4 aberirf 18 8OBiiXOd 

to one rlrat easiatnnt or rtr8t ds uty to whom 

ha sari pay a aelary~ not to exooad x 2000.00 per 

annua. Or.% tbo Other hand, 8U8b a ,OOn8trUOtiOn 

mif,,t be placed ox tnir seotion thnt would 

eBtit&O thQ shariir to a rir8t 688$8tant in 

ohsr@ rzi oiril matter8 4t.@OO0.00 p8r 8naum 

and a ohief deputy in oharg8 of arlnlnal aatter8 

~rho oan receive not to exacosod #OOO.OO p8r annum. 

x 8bil tk5Xik fOU t0 4dVi8e WhiOh Of thO80 OOI%- 

OiU8iOn5 Of i8W 18 OOIT4Mt.” 

After oarsfully aanriid8rU@ Article 5902, Varnon~8. 

AXBOtekd Girt1 8tatats8, tt 18 8pp8lWlt th8t lb Pa8 OOBtenplated by the Is@?islstuxv that 4117 l 8trPot, oauxty QT 

p~eOinOf orriaw roquirlng th8 8ervfoes or dagUtht8, an8ietant8 or olork8 in th4 perraraaxo8 or hi8 duties, 8uoh ofriaer 

i8 OOBihed t0 O@ first M48iSt8At Or i%8t deptlty t0 whoa 

he aan laally pay the aaxlmu8 8alary mithorieed by the 

prOVi8iOX8 Of 8eid 8t8tllte 8pp11Odde to hi8 oO&Ulty. 8WtiOR 

e of artlole ?I?OL 18 8pplloobl,8 to BraIIOrl5~OoMty sad th8 

nexirrun 8alary sutharixed by 88id prOri8ion thet oiB ls&ally 

h'mid th8 first 885i4tMl'Or ahid deputy i8 #Z,OOO QOX' 

snnua, other Pe8btant8, do uti88 or olork8 omMOt ba psid 

an 8~~8~ esl.sry gxpeading 8 1900 per 8lUhU 8aoh. %%4nfOrO, 

it l8 our opinion that tho Sherirf 0r Brsaarla 4annot 

legally pay th4 narlmum salar;l of $2000 per 4nUm to ht8 

8hiaI deputy nnd'e&30 pay @ClOG per 4nWm t4 4 p4r8on dO8& 

nat4d 48 his first 444ist4Bt. 

3takd oaeth4r wry, the Sharlff 18 OOnfiBsd to one 

first 44sletsnt~or rirat U4puty to whom he oan leg8lly pay 4 

salary not 4xoseding $2000 psr anna 
suppartlng the foregoing statement, %mdlr~ot your 

nt:eatiou to mr Gplnion Ho. o-91 p44sing upon a queetlon 

similar to the one preeanted in your ioquiry. X4 4BO1054 4 

00~3 Or 84fd OptBiOR fQr YOU! 005V4!11OnO4~ 

Yours very truly 

BY /a/ 

Aird*I.l rll114m8 

Asalstant 

APPROVED JAN. ES, 1944 

/8/,arar*r S4114rs 

ATTciRUEY tX.ONtAt OF T?GW3
December 15, 2015

U.S. Department of Transportation

Federal Aviation Administration 

Document Management System 

1200 New Jersey Ave., SE 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

RE: Access Geographic, LLC Petition to Amend Section 333 Exemption No. 13932, Docket 

No. FAA-2015-4284-0001

Dear Sir or Madam: 

Access Geographic, LLC petitions to amend its 333 Exemption (No. 13932) to include the 

following small Unmanned Aerial Systems (sUAS): DJI Inspire 1 and 3D Robotics X8-M.

These additional systems will allow Access Geographic, LLC improved flexibility to acquire 

geospatial information in various environments and conditions. 

All operations of these aircraft will continue to be in accordance with the exemption previously 

granted.

Respectfully Submitted, 

ACCESS GEOGRAPHIC, LLC

Robert C. Moore

Principal Geographer

(FAA Pilot Certification #3557232)

Phone: (480) 709-2710

Email: rmoore@accessgeographic.com

Attachments: 

Inspire 1 User Manual v1.8

Inspire 1 Safety Guidelines and Disclaimer v1.2

Inspire 1 Maintenance Manual v1

3D	Robotics	X8-M	Operation	Manual v3
**Exhibit No. 15**

Awareness Letter from Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm 

May 8, 2007 

Armstrong Holdings, Inc. 

Lancaster, Pennsylvania 

Re:     Registration Statements No. 33-65768 and 333-79093 

With respect to the subject registration statements, we acknowledge our awareness of the use therein of our report dated May 8, 2007 related to our review of interim financial information of Armstrong Holdings, Inc. 

Pursuant to Rule 436 under the Securities Act of 1933 (the “Act”), such report is not considered part of a registration statement prepared or certified by anindependent registered public accounting firm, or a report prepared or certified by an independent registered public accounting firm within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of the Act. 

 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania