alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit21.1**

LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES
| **Entity (1)**                                  | ** ** | **Jurisdiction of Incorporation** |
|-------------------------------------------------|------------|-----------------------------------|
| BHR Partners, LLC                               |       | Delaware                          |
| BHR, Inc.                                       |       | Delaware                          |
| BHR Business Trust                              |       | Maryland                          |
| Behringer Harvard Operating Partnership I LP(2) |       | Texas                             |

 

----

(1) Does notinclude subsidiaries of Behringer Harvard Operating Partnership I LP, whichholds our investment assets.

(2) As of January 1,2007, BHR, Inc. was the sole general partner and owner of 17 generalpartnership units in Behringer Harvard Operating Partnership I LP, ouroperating partnership.  As of January 1,2007, BHR Business Trust was a limited partner and owner of approximately107.0 million partnership units in Behringer Harvard OP.  As of January 1, 2007, BHR Partners, LLC wasa limited partner and owner of approximately 14.6 million partnershipunits in Behringer Harvard OP.  Minorityinterest not owned by us consists of 432,586 partnership units in BehringerHarvard OP.

 

----
### APPEAL NO.

___________ COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS

IN RE EMMANUEL ARMENDARIZ , PETITIONER

Appeal from Eighth Court of Appeals , No. 08

- 13

- 00125

- CR Appeal from the 409 th District Court of El Paso County, Texas (TC# 20 10 0 D06116)

MOTION TO EXTEND TIME TO FILE PETITION FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

To the Honorable Justices of Said Court:
Now comes Emmanuel Armendariz, Appellant in the above styled and
numbered cause, and moves for an extension of time of 30 days to file a petition
for discretionary revi ew, and for good cause shows the following:

1. On May 8, 2015, the Court of Appeals affirmed appellant's

conviction. Emmanuel Armendariz v. State , 08

- 13

- 00125

- CR. This petition is

therefore due on June 8, 2015.

2. Counsels will be unable to complete the petition for the following

reasons: Petitioner's attorneys will not be able to complete the Petition for
Discretionary Review by the due date because of the 1) complexity of the legal

issues requiring extensive research and writing; 2) counsel s' responsib ilities on
other urgent client matters, and 3) Petitioner's counsel s ha ve complex briefs due
before the Eighth Court of Appeals and the Texas Supreme Court due in June and PD-0646-15 COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS Transmitted 5/28/2015 2:43:28 PM Accepted 5/28/2015 4:47:04 PM

ABEL ACOSTA CLERKJuly, that require extensive research and drafting.

3. Defendant is currently free o n bond.

Wherefore, Premises Considered
, Petitioner respectfully requests an
extension of 30 days, i.e. until July 9, 2015 , to file a petition for discretionary

review.
Respectfully submitted,

By: /s/ Eduardo N. Lerma, Sr. Eduardo N. Lerma, Sr. SBOT 13331200 enl1417@aol.com

Law Offices of Eduardo N. Lerma, Sr. 1417 Montana Avenue El Paso, Texas 79902

- 5617 T / 915.533.0177 F / 915.533.7236

By: /s/ Veronica Teresa Lerma Veronica Teresa Lerma SBOT 24062846 vtlerma@gmail.com

Lerma Law 1417 Montan a Avenue El Paso, Texas 79902

- 5617 T / 915.533.4779 F / 915.533.7236 Attorney s for Emmanuel ArmendarizCERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

Th e undersigned counsel certifies that this pleading was served by electronic
service on opposing party: Tom Darnold, Appel late lead attorney for the District
Attorney's Office, El Paso County, 500 East San Antonio St., Room 201, El Paso,

Texas 79901 , at t.darnold@epcounty.com and the State Prosecuting Attorney at
information@spa.texas.gov

. By: /s/ Eduardo N. Lerma, Sr. Ed uardo N. Lerma, Sr. SBOT 13331200 enl1417@aol.com

By: /s/ Veronica Teresa Lerma Veronica Teresa Lerma SBOT 24062846 vtlerma@gmail.com Attorneys for Emmanuel ArmendarizCERTIFICATE OF CONFERENCE

On May 28 , 2015, the undersigned attorney conferred with Respondent’s
counsel by telephonic communication , Tom Darnold, who does not oppose this

extension.

By: /s/ Eduardo N. Lerma, Sr. Eduardo N. Lerma, Sr. SBOT 13331200 enl1417@aol.com

By: /s/ Veronica Teresa Lerma Veronica Teresa Lerma SBOT 24062846 vtlerma@gmail.com Attorneys for Emmanuel Armendariz
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


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 The Stephan Co. (the
"Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2005 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the "Report"), I, Frank F. Ferola, Chief Executive
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 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
results of operations of the Company.



/s/ Frank F. Ferola
__________________________________
Frank F. Ferola
Chief Executive Officer
September 29, 2005
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                          71,558
<SECURITIES>                                    20,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                  310,932
<ALLOWANCES>                                    16,386
<INVENTORY>                                    231,985
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               635,746
<PP&E>                                       1,054,871
<DEPRECIATION>                                 603,918
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,549,621
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          320,754
<BONDS>                                        531,505
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                        797
<COMMON>                                        10,915
<OTHER-SE>                                     570,626
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,549,621
<SALES>                                        373,328
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               373,328
<CGS>                                          303,609
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  358,939
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (2,130)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   980
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              12,494
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  4,025
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,500
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,525
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,525
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.08
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.14
        

</TABLE>
# United States Court of Appeals **for the Fifth Circuit**

____________ No. 22-20340 Summary Calendar

____________ United States of America, Plaintiff—Appellee ,

versus Troy Fabian Heflin, Defendant—Appellant

.

______________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:21-CR-269-1

______________________________ Before Jones, Haynes, and Oldham, Circuit Judges

. Per Curiam: * Troy Fabian Heflin appeals the 41 -month sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction for unlawful possession of a firearm as a convicted felon. Heflin argues that the distri ct court erred in applying a two-level reckless endangerment enhancement pursu ant to U.S.S.G. § 3C1.2 because his reckless conduct was not the resu lt of attempting to flee from the

_____________________

* This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED April 21, 2023 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 22-20340 Document: 00516721146 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/21/2023No. 22-20340

2 consequences of the offense of conviction . He also argues that his conduct was not reckless. Heflin preserved his challenge to the reckless endangerment enhancement in the district court; accord ingly, we review the district court’s interpretation of the Guidelines de novo and its factual findings for clear

error. See United States v. Deckert , 993 F.3d 399, 401 (5th Cir. 2021). There is no clear error when the district cour t’s findings are plausible in light of the entire record. United States v. Torres-Magana , 938 F.3d 213, 216 (5th Cir. 2019). Citing United States v. Southerland , 405 F.3d 263, 268 (5th Cir. 2005), Heflin argues that the § 3C1.2 enha ncement was not applicable because the evidence reveals that he fled from l aw enforcement officials because he knew he had warrants, not because of the offens e of conviction. He further asserts that his conduct did not create a seriou s risk of bodily injury and that the record is ambiguous as to whether he knew the police were pulling him over. We have held that a substantial risk of serious injury is created when police officers are led on a high-speed chase. United States v. Lee , 989 F.2d 180, 183 (5th Cir. 1993). Nothing in the record suggests that Heflin was unaware that police were attempting to pull him over. See United States v. Gould , 529 F.3d 274, 276 (5th Cir. 2008). Further, since the chase took place while Heflin was illegally in possession of a firearm, a sufficient nexus exists between his flight and the offense of conviction. See Southerland , 405 F.3d at 268. The district court’s conclusion that th e § 3C1.2 enhancement was applicable given the facts of this case was not clear error. See Torres-Magana, 938 F.3d
at 216. Accordingly, the judg ment of the district court is AFFIRMED

. Case: 22-20340 Document: 00516721146 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/21/2023
INDEPENDENT REGISTERED
PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM’S CONSENT





We
consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement of
Skinny Nutritional Corp. on Form S-8 (File Nos. 333-161178 and 333-161677) of
our report which includes an explanatory paragraph as to the Company’s ability
to continue as a going concern dated April 1, 2010, with respect to our audit of
the financial statements of Skinny Nutritional Corp. as of December 31, 2009 and
for the year ended December 31, 2009, which report is included in this Annual
Report on Form 10-K of Skinny Nutritional Corp. for the year ended December 31,
2009.





/s/
Marcum llp





Marcum
llp


Bala
Cynwyd, Pennsylvania


April 1,
2010
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5737 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5737

To provide that a former Member of Congress receiving compensation as a 
   highly paid lobbyist shall be ineligible to concurrently receive 
                      Federal retirement benefits.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 11, 2012

  Mr. Israel introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
Committee on House Administration, and in addition to the Committee on 
   Oversight and Government Reform, for a period to be subsequently 
   determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such 
 provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To provide that a former Member of Congress receiving compensation as a 
   highly paid lobbyist shall be ineligible to concurrently receive 
                      Federal retirement benefits.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Congressional Double Dipping Pension 
Prevention Act''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON TAXPAYER-FUNDED PENSIONS FOR MEMBERS OF CONGRESS 
              WHO BECOME HIGHLY PAID LOBBYISTS.

    (a) In General.--Any former Member of Congress who is registered as 
a lobbyist, and whose annual income from lobbying activities exceeds 
$1,000,000, shall not be eligible to receive benefits under either the 
Civil Service Retirement System or the Federal Employees' Retirement 
System for the period of time during which such former Member is 
employed as such a lobbyist and receiving from lobbying activities an 
annual income that exceeds $1,000,000.
    (b) Definition.--For purposes of this section, the term ``former 
Member of Congress'' means an individual who becomes a former Member of 
Congress after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5119 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5119

    To extend the temporary suspension of duty on calcium chloride 
        phosphate phosphor activated by manganese and antimony.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 27, 2012

Mr. Huelskamp introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To extend the temporary suspension of duty on calcium chloride 
        phosphate phosphor activated by manganese and antimony.

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

SECTION 1. CALCIUM CHLORIDE PHOSPHATE PHOSPHOR ACTIVATED BY MANGANESE 
              AND ANTIMONY.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.22.70 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to calcium chloride phosphate 
phosphor activated by manganese and antimony) is amended by striking 
the date in the effective period column and inserting ``12/31/2015''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Derrick Stevens, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Suffolk County (Hurley, J.), rendered July 11, 1989, convicting him of robbery in the second degree (two counts), upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant’s assertion that the County Court improperly denied his application for youthful offender status is not preserved for appellate review and is, in any event, without merit *(see,*CPL 720.10 [3]; *People v Maybeck,*157 AD2d 861; *People v Calabro,*157 AD2d 736, 738). Thompson, J. P., Brown, Balletta, Miller and O’Brien, JJ., concur.
#### COOPER v. STATE.

No. 22730.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Dec. 15, 1943.

Bert G. Ashby, of Dallas, for appellant.

Spurgeon E. Bell, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

KRUEGER, Judge.

The offense is the possession of whis-ky in a container to which no tax stamp had been affixed. The punishment was assessed at confinement in the county jail for a period of 60 days and a fine of $250.

Appellant seriously contends that the court erred in two respects: First, in declining to grant his motion protesting the entry of the judgment of conviction on the minutes of the court for the reason that appellant was not given a public trial as provided by Section 10 of Article 1 of the Constitution, Vernon’s Ann.St., and Article 518, C.C.P.; and second, because the court declined to hear and consider his motion for new trial.

We will undertake to dispose of the questions in the order in which they are presented. The record shows that when appellant was arrested for the offense charged, he was placed in jail. The next day he was escorted to the office of the county judge, where he waived a jury and entered a plea of guilty. After the court had received the plea of guilty and assessed the punishment as above stated, appellant obtained the services of an attorney who, four days after the court had pronounced *191judgment but before the same was entered upon the minutes, filed a motion protesting the entry of the judgment upon the minutes because appellant was not given a public trial but was given a trial in the judge’s private office. The court, upon the hearing thereof, dismissed the same together with appellant’s motion for new trial. It is our opinion that there was no error in the trial court’s action for the reasons stated in our opinion this day delivered in the case of Tischmacher v. State, 176 S.W.2d 188. The motion for new trial was not filed within two days as provided by Art. 755, C.C.P., Vernon’s Ann.C.C.P. art. 755, and no valid reason is given for the delay. Therefore, in the absence of a showing that the trial court abused his discretion in declining to consider the motion, this court is not authorized to interfere with the judgment of conviction. See Synagogue v. State, 122 Tex.Cr.R. 472, 55 S.W.2d 1052, and cases there cited.

No reversible error appearing in the record, the judgment of the trial court is affirmed.

PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the Court.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 31.1

                                  CERTIFICATION

      I, Harold F. Zagunis, Chief Financial Officer and Secretary of Sequoia
Residential Funding, Inc., a Delaware corporation, hereby certify that:

      1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A, and all reports on
Form 8-K containing distribution or servicing reports filed in respect of the
Certificates for periods included in the year covered by this annual report, of
Sequoia Residential Funding, Inc.;

      2. Based on my knowledge, the information in these reports, taken as a
whole, does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state
a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the
circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading as of the
last day of the period covered by this annual report;

      3. Based on my knowledge, the distribution or servicing information
required to be provided to the trustee by the servicer under the pooling and
servicing agreement, for inclusion in these reports is included in these
reports;

      4. Based on my knowledge and upon the annual compliance statement included
in the report and required to be delivered to the trustee in accordance with the
terms of the pooling and servicing agreement, and except as disclosed in the
reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing
agreement; and

      5. The reports disclose all significant deficiencies relating to the
servicer's compliance with the minimum servicing standards based upon the report
provided by an independent public accountant, after conducting a review in
compliance with the Uniform Attestation Program for Mortgage Bankers or similar
procedure, as set forth in the pooling and servicing agreement, that is included
in these reports.

      In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on
information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties: Morgan Stanley
Dean Witter Credit Corporation, as Servicer, GreenPoint Mortgage Funding. Inc.,
as Servicer, Cendant Mortgage Corporation, as Servicer and Bank of America,
N.A., as Servicer.

Date: May 31, 2005

/s/ Harold F. Zagunis
-----------------------
Signature
Name: Harold F. Zagunis
Title: Chief Financial Officer and Secretary
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                       1,244,648
<SECURITIES>                                 3,210,597
<RECEIVABLES>                                  905,828
<ALLOWANCES>                                       300
<INVENTORY>                                  7,569,588
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             9,755,040
<PP&E>                                       4,027,173
<DEPRECIATION>                               3,038,074
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              13,977,805
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          304,202
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       480,074
<OTHER-SE>                                  13,007,707
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                13,977,805
<SALES>                                        890,711
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               946,726
<CGS>                                          559,493
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  559,493
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               242,755
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   300
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              19,800
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                125,095
<INCOME-TAX>                                    42,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             83,095
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    83,095
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.02
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.02
        

</TABLE>