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

 

**TransmeridianExploration, Inc.**

List of Subsidiaries

December 31, 2004

 
| **Name**                                    | ** ** | **Jurisdiction**       |
|---------------------------------------------|------------|------------------------|
|                                        |       |                   |
| Transmeridian Exploration,  Inc             |       | Delaware               |
|                                        |       |                   |
| TMEI Operating, Inc.                   |       | Texas                  |
|                                        |       |                   |
| Transmeridian Exploration, Inc.  (BVI) |       | British Virgin Islands |
|                                        |       |                   |
| Transmeridian (Kazakhstan), Inc.       |       | British Virgin Islands |
|                                        |       |                   |
| SOJSC Caspi Neft TME                        |       | Republic of Kazakhstan |
|                                        |       |                   |
| SOJSC Transmeridian Caspi  Petroleum Ltd.   |       | Republic of Kazakhstan |

 

Notes:

 

1)   Allsubsidiaries, except for Caspi Neft TME, are 100% owned, directly or indirectly

2)   Caspi Neft TME is a 50% ownedsubsididary

3)   “SOJSC”stands for Subsidiary Open Joint Stock Company

 

----
Order entered August 26, 2020

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-20-00516-CV

ANDREW CHOI, SN DALLAS-AMERICAN CORPORATION, AND

NEHA GUPTA, AND AVINASH GUPTA, Appellants

V.

BRIXMOR HOLDINGS 12 SPE, LLC, Appellee

On Appeal from the 68th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-18-18475

ORDER

Before the Court is the August 24, 2020 unopposed motion of appellants SN 

Dallas-American Corporation, Neha Gupta, and Avinash Gupta for an extension of 

time to file their brief on the merits. We GRANT the motion and extend the time 

to September 25, 2020.

/s/ ROBERT D. BURNS, III

CHIEF JUSTICE
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

     In connection with the accompanying Amendment No. 1 to Annual Report on Form 10-K of Travelzoo Inc. for the period ended December 31, 2009 (the “Report”), the undersigned certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of his knowledge, that (1) this Report complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and (2) the information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant. 

 

                

Date: May 6, 2010                                                                                                      /s/ Holger Bartel         

                                                                                                                          Holger Bartel

                                                                                                                          *Chief Executive Officer*

 

 

     The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350 and is not being filed as part of this Report or as a separate disclosure document. 

 

----
<PAGE>
CINGULAR WIRELESS LLC

EXHIBITS - Powers of Attorney

                                                                      EXHIBIT 24

POWERS OF ATTORNEY

KNOW ALL PERSONS BY THESE PRESENTS:

     WHEREAS, CINGULAR WIRELESS LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (the
"Company"), proposes to file with the Securities and Exchange Commission, under
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, its Annual Report on Form 10-K
for the year ended December 31, 2005.

     NOW THEREFORE, each of the undersigned hereby constitutes and appoints
Peter A. Ritcher, Gregory T. Hall, Sean Foley and Philip Teske, and each of
them, as attorneys for him in his name, place and stead in his capacities in the
Company, to execute and cause to be filed the Annual Report and thereafter to
execute and file any amendment or supplement thereto deemed by them to be
necessary or desirable, hereby giving and granting to said attorneys full power
and authority (including substitution and revocation) to do and perform all and
every act and thing whatsoever requisite and necessary to be done in and about
the premises as fully, to all intents and purposes, as he might or could do if
personally present at the doing thereof, hereby ratifying and confirming all
that said attorneys may or shall lawfully do, or cause to be done, by virtue
hereof.

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the undersigned has hereunto set his hand on
the date indicated.


/s/ Stanley T. Sigman                   February 24, 2006
-------------------------------------
Stanley T. Sigman
President and Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)


/s/ Peter A. Ritcher                    February 24, 2006
-------------------------------------
Peter A. Ritcher
Chief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer)


/s/ Gregory T. Hall                     February 24, 2006
-------------------------------------
Gregory T. Hall
Controller
(Principal Accounting Officer)


/s/ Richard A. Anderson                 February 24, 2006
-------------------------------------
Richard A. Anderson
Class B Director


/s/ Mark L. Feidler                     February 24, 2006
-------------------------------------
Mark L. Feidler
Class B Director


/s/ Richard G. Lindner                  February 24, 2006
-------------------------------------
Richard G. Lindner
Class B Director

<PAGE>

CINGULAR WIRELESS LLC

EXHIBITS - Powers of Attorney

                                                                      EXHIBIT 24


/s/ W. Patrick Shannon                  February 24, 2006
-------------------------------------
W. Patrick Shannon
Class B Director


/s/ Randall L. Stephenson               February 24, 2006
-------------------------------------
Randall L. Stephenson
Class B Director


/s/ Rayford Wilkins, Jr.                February 24, 2006
-------------------------------------
Rayford Wilkins, Jr.
Class B Director
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Resulting from International Agreements

# Analysis of Semiscale Test S–LH–1 Using RELAP5/MOD2 (NUREG/IA–0064, GD/PE–N/725, PWR/HTWG/P(88)629(Rev))

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Summary

Download complete document
        - NUREG/IA-0064 (PDF 1.48 MB)

## Publication Information

**Date Published:** April 1992

**Prepared by:** P. C. Hall, D. R. Bull

National Power Nuclear Barnett Way Barnwood, Gloucester GL4 7RS United Kingdom

**Prepared as part of:** The Agreement on Research Participation and Technical Exchange under the International Thermal-Hydraulic Code Assessment and Application Program (ICAP)

Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001

Availability Notice

## Summary

The RELAP5/MOD2 code is being used by GDCD for calculating Small Break Loss of Coolant Accidents (SBLOCA) and pressurised transient sequences for the Sizewell 'B' PWR. These calculations are being carried out at the request of the Sizewell 'B' Project Management Team.

To assist in validating RELAP5/MOD2 for the above application, the code is being used by GDCD to model a number of small LOCA and pressurised fault simulation experiments carried out in various integral test facilities. The present report describes a RELAP5/MOD2 analysis of the small LOCA test S-LH-1 which was performed on the Semiscale Mod-2C facility. S-LH-1 simulated a small LOCA caused by a break in the cold leg pipework of an area equal to 5% of the cold leg flow area.

RELAP5/MOD2 gave reasonably accurate predictions of system thermal hydraulic behaviour. In particular, the hydrostatic core level depression resulting from the hold-up of water in the steam generator tubes and pump suction legs was well predicted. A reasonable prediction of core inventory was also obtained in the period of the test in which the core level fell as a result of coolant boil-off.

The code did not give an accurate prediction of the liquid distribution within the core during the uncovering phases. Consequently the fuel temperature excursions due to uncovery were not captured by the code. Failure to calculate the correct void fraction distribution and dryout behaviour is believed to be due to numerical approximations in representing the core by a small number of nodes, rather than due to errors in the physical models and correlations used in the code.

Based on the present study it is suggested that, in reactor analyses in which the potential for core uncovery occurs, the mixture level trajectory and peak fuel temperatures are calculated outside RELAP5 using a code employing a fine axial mesh, using boundary conditions from the RELAP5 analysis.

February 1989

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Tuesday, March 09, 2021
No: IV-19-014 August 1, 2019

Contact: Victor Dricks, 817-200-1128

NRC to Hold Public Meeting to Discuss Oversight Activities

at San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station

The Nuclear Regulatory Commission will hold a public meeting on Aug. 20 to discuss the status 

of fuel loading operations at the San Onofre Nuclear Generating Station. The San Clemente, Calif., 

plant is owned by Southern California Edison and permanently shut down in 2013.

The “town hall” style meeting, to be held at the San Juan Capistrano Community Center, 

25925 Camino Del Avion, will run from 7-8:30 p.m. NRC staff will update the public on ongoing 

inspection activities, then seek questions and comments from members of the public on spent fuel 

storage related issues.

Fuel loading operations were suspended following an Aug. 3, 2018, incident involving a loaded 

spent fuel storage canister that was misaligned and became stuck on a flange while being lowered into a 

storage vault. Information about the incident and NRC’s response is available on the NRC website.

Edison resumed fuel loading operations last month after the NRC determined operations could 

be safely resumed following extensive corrective actions by the company.
### T E X A S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S , T H I R D D I S T R I C T , A T A U S T I N ON MOTION F OR REHEARING NO. 03-13-00579- CV In re Elena Hutchin s ORI GINAL P ROCEEDI NG F ROM CO MAL CO UNTY M E M O R AN D U M O P I N I O N Relator’s m o t ion for rehe aring and amende d petition for writ of mandamus are denied. See Tex. R. App. P . 52.8(a) , 52.9.

__________________________________________ J eff Rose, J ustice Be fore J ustices Pemberton, Rose, a nd Goodwin Filed: De cembe r 5, 2013
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.                  

###### National Science Foundation

The National Science Board's Committee on Education and Human Resources (CEH), pursuant to NSF regulations (45 CFR part 614), the National Science Foundation Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. § 1862n-5), and the Government in the Sunshine Act (5 U.S.C. § 552b), hereby gives notice of the scheduling of a teleconference for the transaction of National Science Board business, as follows:

# DATE AND TIME:

 Friday, January 23, 2:00-3:00 p.m., EST.

# SUBJECT MATTER:

 Chairman's remarks; discussion of Committee goals; and discussion of format for February meeting.

# STATUS:

 Open.

                        This meeting will be held by teleconference. A public listening line will be available. Members of the public                               ( print page 2747)                            must contact the Board Office (call 703-292-7000 or send an email message to                         *nationalsciencebrd@nsf.gov*) at least 24 hours prior to the teleconference for the public listening number. Please refer to the National Science Board Web site                         *www.nsf.gov/​nsb*                         for additional information and schedule updates (time, place, subject matter or status of meeting) which may be found at                         *http://www.nsf.gov/​nsb/​notices/​.*                         Point of contact for this meeting is Jacqueline Meszaros at                         *jmeszaro@nsf.gov.*

Ann Bushmiller,

Senior Counsel to the National Science Board.

[FR Doc. 2015-00896 Filed 1-15-15; 4:15 pm]

BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
No. 85-6552.

#### Jackson *v.*Ohio.

Ct. App. Ohio, Hamilton County. Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed *in forma pau-*
      *1076
      *peris*and certiorari granted. Judgment- vacated and case remanded for further consideration in light of *Griffith*v. *Kentucky, ante,*p. 314.
No. PD-0823-14

TO THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF THE STATE OF TEXAS

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellant

v.

JOHN BERRY JACKSON, Appellee

Appeal from Mitchell County

* * * * * *

JOHN BERRY JACKSON’S MOTION TO EXTEND TIME

FOR FILING HIS BRIEF ON DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

* * * * * *

Jeffrey A. Propst

Attorney for Appellee, John Berry Jackson

Texas Bar No. 24064062

P.O. Box 3717

Abilene, Texas 79604

Tel. (325) 455-1599

Fax (325) 455-1507

Email: jeff@keithandpropst.com

PD-0823-14

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

AUSTIN, TEXAS

Transmitted 12/29/2014 12:48:10 PM

Accepted 12/29/2014 3:57:00 PM

ABEL ACOSTA

CLERK
No. PD-0823-14

TO THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF THE STATE OF TEXAS

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellant

v.

JOHN BERRY JACKSON, Appellee

* * * * * *

JOHN BERRY JACKSON’S MOTION TO EXTEND TIME

FOR FILING HIS BRIEF ON DISCRETIONARY REVIEW

* * * * * *

TO THE HONORABLE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS:

 Pursuant to the Rules of Appellate Procedure, Appellee John Berry Jackson 

moves this Honorable Court to extend the time for filing his brief 15 days - until 

January 13, 2015. Mr. Jackson’s brief is currently due for filing on December 29, 

2014. No previous motions to extend the deadline for filing the brief have been 

filed. In the last 30 days the undersigned counsel’s caseload has included a threeday jury trial, the filing of an appellate brief to the United States Court of Appeals 

for the Fifth Circuit, and multiple other hearings and appointments. Due to the 

undersigned counsel’s caseload and administrative duties, as well as the disruptive 

effect on business of the holiday season, counsel needs additional time to prepare 

the Appellee’s brief. 
 WHEREFORE, the Appellee prays that his motion to extend the time for 

filing his brief until January 13, 2015, be granted.

 Respectfully submitted,

 /s/ Jeffrey A. PROPST 

 JEFFREY A. PROPST

 Texas Bar No. 24064062

 P.O. Box 3717

 Abilene, Texas 79604

 Tel. (325) 455-1599

 Fax (325) 455-1507

 Email: jeff@keithandpropst.com

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, Jeffrey A. Propst, hereby certify that on December 29, 2014, a copy of the 

Appellee’s Motion to Extend Time for Filing his Brief on Discretionary Review 

was served via certified electronic service provider to:

Lisa McMinn

State Prosecuting Attorney

P.O. Box 13046

Austin, Texas 78711

information@spa.texas.gov

Barrett Thomas

Assistant District Attorney

100 E. 3rd St., Suite 202

Sweetwater, Texas 79556

barrett@32ndda-tx.us

 /s/ Jeffrey A. Propst 

 JEFFREY A. PROPST

 Attorney for John Berry Jackson
No. 86-986.

#### Schneidewind et al. *v.*ANR Pipeline Co. et al.

C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari granted.
Exhibit 31.1

SARBANES-OXLEY SECTION 302(a) CERTIFICATION

Principal Executive Officer

I, John Brian Nichols, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report of First American Scientific Corp.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report 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 with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.



|Date: November 10, 2004 | /s/ John Brian Nichols                   
|----------------------- | -----------------------------------------
|                        | John Brian Nichols                       
|                        | President and Principal Executive Officer
Issue Date: 12/08/86 - 1 - 10 CFR

NRC INSPECTION MANUAL DI

PART 9900: 10 CFR GUIDANCE

10.CFR

TITLE 10 OF THE CODE OF FEDERAL REGULATIONS

A. PURPOSE

To provide guidance on certain sections of Title 10, Code of Federal

Regulations.

B. OBJECTIVE

Guidance presented in this chapter does not constitute written

interpretation by the Office of the General Counsel even though some

of the guidance may have received concurrence by the legal staff and

other regulatory components before it was issued. Although this

guidance is not an official interpretation, it has been sufficiently

developed and reviewed so that it can be used in determining whether

a licensee or construction permit holder has complied with its

requirements or commitments. It is not intended that all sections

of the regulations will be discussed; rather, the chapter will

include discussions of those sections that appear to require

guidance, or where guidance is requested by the region, and for

which a well defined position exists.

C. GUIDANCE

Each directive issued for this manual chapter will be identified by

Part and Section for which the particular guidance is provided.

This identification will appear at the top of the first page of each

directive. Directives should be filed after the 10 CFR tab

according to the numeric sequence of the directive.

END
#### JOHN W. B. WATSON v. OREEN L. DODD.

The weightiest considerations make it the duty of the Courts to adhere to their decisions. No case ought to he reversed upon a petition to re-hear, unless it was decided hastily and some material point was overlooked, or some direct authority was not called to the attention of the Court.

A contingent remainder is not subject to execution for the payment of a debt before the falling in of a particular estate.

*(Watson*v. *Dodcl,*68 N. C. Rep. 528 affirmed,)

Petitioh to RE-heaR the judgment in this ease entered in this Court at its January Term, 1873; and which is reported in the 68 N. C. Reports, 528.

The facts of the case are fully stated in the report of the case at January Term, 1873.

*IIay wood*and *Moore <& Gatling,*for the petitioner.

*Pov,*contra.]

PeaRSOít, O. J.

The weightiest considerations make it the duty of the Courts to adhere to their decisions. No case ought to ho reversed upon petition to re-hear, unless it was decided hastily, and some material point was overlooked, or some direct authority was not called to the attention of the Court. Such is not the fact in this instance.

*Watson*v. *Dodd,*68 N. C. Rep., 528, was decided upon full argument by counsel, and after full consideration by the Court, and must be treated as an authority, by which the law is settled.

Mr. Haywood in his much elaborated, and I will add, very able argument at this term, did not suggest any material point, which has been overlooked by the Court; and was forced to admit, that aflerthe fullest research, he has not been able to find any direct authority in support of the power of the Court to order a contingent remainder to be sold for the payment of a debt, in a proceeding between the *immediate*(parties, that is, *241creditor and debtor; and in cases where a third person, for instance, an heir charged with a specialty debt, taking a contingent remainder by descent, or an assignee in bankruptcy, taking a contingent remainder by act of law ; he was not able to find any instance where the contingent remainder was sold, before the falling in of the preceding estate, so that a clear title could be made to the purchaser, thus showing the policy of the law to be, not to encourage *gambling*and *speculation*by the sale of a contingent interest, which is the reason given in the books, for not allowing a contingent remainder to be assigned. Indeed the argument suggested an additional reason for not selling a contingent interest, growing out of the provision for a “ homestead,” made by the Constitution.

The docketed judgment is a lien upon the contingent remainder, if matters stand as they are now, until the falling in-of the preceding estate. The defendant will take his homestead without question ; if a sale is ordered now, his right to a* homestead will be defeated, or a least greatly embarrassed.. There is no error. Judgment against plaintiff for cost.

.Per Curiam. Judgment accordingly..
No. 82-1140.

#### McLean *v.*United States.

C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.