alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                  JAN-01-1999
<CASH>                                            431,000
<SECURITIES>                                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   5,248,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                      191,000
<INVENTORY>                                    16,719,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               22,424,000
<PP&E>                                          4,662,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                    969,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 31,042,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           5,049,000
<BONDS>                                        19,917,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                   0
<PREFERRED>                                             0
<COMMON>                                          372,000
<OTHER-SE>                                      5,704,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   31,042,000
<SALES>                                        23,851,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               23,851,000
<CGS>                                          16,536,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  21,916,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                1,410,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  217,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              2,249,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (1,941,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        9,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (1,950,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                         0
<CHANGES>                                               0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (1,950,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                       (0.82)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       (0.51)
        

</TABLE>
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 18-2891

___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

v.

David Holiday

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant

 ____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Western District of Missouri - Springfield

 ____________

 Submitted: April 15, 2019

Filed: April 29, 2019 

[Unpublished]

____________

Before LOKEN, GRUENDER, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges. 

____________

PER CURIAM.
David Holiday appeals the district court’s order committing him under 18

1

U.S.C. § 4245, which provides for hospitalization and treatment of an imprisoned

person suffering from a mental disease or defect, until he no longer needs treatment

or his prison sentence expires, whichever occurs first. Upon careful review of the

record--including the psychological evaluations ofmental health professionals where

Holiday is presently confined for treatment, and of defense counsel’s independent

psychological examiner--we conclude the district court’s section 4245 finding was

supported by a preponderance of the evidence, and was not clearly erroneous. See

18 U.S.C. § 4245(d); United States v. Bean, 373 F.3d 877, 879 (8th Cir. 2004)

(standard of review). We also conclude that Holiday’s pro se arguments offer no

basis for relief. 

The judgment of the district court is affirmed, and counsel’s motion to

withdraw is granted.

______________________________

The Honorable M. Douglas Harpool, United States District Judge for the

1

Western District of Missouri, adopting the report and recommendations of the

Honorable David P. Rush, United States Magistrate Judge for the Western District of

Missouri.

-2-
----

----

FORM 10-K

| Subsidiary Name                                                 | Jurisdiction of Incorporation or Organization |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------|
|  Silicon Image International LLC                           | Delaware                                      |
|  HDMI Licensing, LLC                                       | Delaware                                      |
| Simplay Labs, LLC                                               | Delaware                                      |
| MHL, LLC                                                   | Delaware                                      |
| SPMT, LLC                                                       | Delaware                                      |
| Silicon Image Cayman Islands Limited                            | Cayman Islands                                |
|  Silicon Image Electronics Technology (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. | China                                         |
| Silicon Image Japan KK                                          | Japan                                         |
| Silicon Image UK Limited                                        | United Kingdom                                |
| Silicon Image International B.V.                                | The Netherlands                               |
| Silicon Image Cooperatie U.A.                                   | The Netherlands                               |
| Silicon Image GmbH                                              | Germany**                                     |
| CMD Technology Inc.                                             | California *                                  |
| DVDO, Inc.                                                      | California *                                  |
| Zillion Technologies, LLC                                       | California *                                  |
| Fairview, LLC                                                   | Delaware *                                    |
| Slice Acquisition Corp.                                         | Delaware *                                    |
| TWN Acquisition Corp.                                           | Delaware *                                    |
|                                                            |                                          |
|                                                            |                                          |
|                                                            |                                          |
|                                                            |                                          |

----

----
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.1

               SUBSIDIARIES OF INTEREP NATIONAL RADIO SALES, INC.

                                                             Name Under Which
          Name                 State of Organization    Subsidiary Does Business
---------------------------  ------------------------- -------------------------
Allied Radio Partners, Inc.        New York                Allied Radio Partners
                                                           Concert Music Network
                                                            Cumulus Radio Sales
American Radio Sales, Inc.         New York                American Radio Sales
                                                              ABC Radio Sales
Cybereps, Inc.                     Delaware                        Same
D&R Radio, Inc.                    New York                        Same
Infinity Radio Sales, Inc.         New York                Infinity Radio Sales
                                                              Infinity Sports
Interep Interactive, Inc.          Delaware                 Interep Interactive
                                                            Winstar Interactive
                                                           Perfect Circle Media
Interep New Media, Inc.            New York                        Same
McGavren Guild, Inc.               New York                        Same
Morrison and Abraham, Inc.         New York                        Same
Public Radio Network, Inc.         New York                        Same
SBS/Interep LLC                    New York                     SBS/Interep
                                                         Caballero Spanish Media
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO 

WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON 

BRUCE B. WHITMAN, : Case No. 1:17-CV-00667 

 : 

 Plaintiff, : Judge Thomas M. Rose 

 : 

v. : 

 : 

ESTATE OF ROY W. WHITMAN, : 

ESTHER WHITMAN, EXTRX., et al., : 

 : 

 Defendants. : 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

ENTRY AND ORDER GRANTING DEFENDANT ALLIANZ LIFE 

INSURANCE COMPANY OF NORTH AMERICA’S MOTION TO 

JOIN INDISPENSABLE PARTIES (DOC. 3) 

______________________________________________________________________________ 

This case is before the Court on the Motion to Join Indispensable Parties (Doc. 3) 

filed by Defendant Allianz Life Insurance Company of North America (“Allianz”). 

Allianz moves the Court for an order joining Laura Whitman (“Laura”) and Joy P. 

Whitman (“Joy”) as parties to this lawsuit pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 19. In addition to 

serving the parties, Allianz served copies of its Motion on Laura and Joy. Neither the 

current parties nor Laura and Joy have opposed Allianz’s Motion, and the time do so 

has expired. As Laura and Joy are indispensable parties and their joinder is proper 

under Fed. R. Civ. P. 19, the Court hereby GRANTS the Motion to Join Indispensable 

Parties (Doc. 3). 

DONE and ORDERED in Dayton, Ohio, this Wednesday, December 27, 2017. 

 s/Thomas M. Rose 

 ________________________________ 

 THOMAS M. ROSE 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-11-00579-CV

In re Pablo T. Caudillo

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING FROM CALDWELL COUNTY

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Relator Pablo T. Caudillo has filed a petition for writ of mandamus, complaining that

the trial court had not entered judgments nunc pro tunc in his two convictions for drug possession

and criminal non-support. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.8. The judgments arise out of earlier convictions

that resulted in probation. The State filed motions to revoke Caudillo’s probation, and he pled true

to the allegations. The trial court signed two judgments of conviction on August 2, 2010, sentencing

Caudillo to serve 700 days in state jail in each cause and setting the sentences to run concurrently. 

In the possession case, the trial court gave Caudillo time-served credit for 215 days. In the nonsupport cause, the court gave him 252 days of time-served credit. In his petition for writ of

mandamus, Caudillo argues that because his sentences are running concurrently, he should receive

credit for the cumulative total of the time granted by the court, 467 days. We disagree.

First, we note that the record presented by Caudillo does not support his argument

because it does not show when he earned the time-served credits, the conditions under which the

credits were granted, or other important information related to how the credits accumulated. Even

if the record was complete, however, article 42.03, section 2(a) provides that the trial court “shall
give the defendant credit on his sentence for the time that the defendant has spent in jail for the

cause.” Tex. Code Crim. Proc. Ann. art. 42.03, § 2(a) (West Supp. 2010) (emphasis added). 

Caudillo’s sentences are running concurrently but are separate and distinct from each other. Thus,

the time-served credit earned in the possession case applies only to his sentence in that case, and the

credit earned in the non-support conviction, which was originally entered several years before the

possession conviction, applies only to that sentence. That Caudillo’s sentences are running at the

same time does not change the fact that he is serving two sentences for two different convictions and

does not mean that his two independent time-served credits should be combined. See id. We deny

the petition for writ of mandamus.

__________________________________________

David Puryear, Justice

Before Justices Puryear, Rose and Goodwin

Filed: November 3, 2011

2
From: Kevin.Mattison@illinois.gov To: Adams, Lucy H. Subject: Illinois.gov File Transfer Link Date: Thursday, February 17, 2011 2:27:33 PM
You have files (SIEPA FOS C11021713130.pdf, SIEPA FOS C11021713160.pdf) waiting for you, sent by Kevin.Mattison@illinois.gov. Message from sender: Two more. Kevin To download the file, simply click this link https://filet.illinois.gov/filet/download.asp? key=FwSkv1UTnkvslUj586Zm5hSFnqwRIp If you are unsure of the sender, or question the file, validate with the sender Kevin.Mattison@illinois.gov before downloading
<PAGE>
                                 EXHIBIT 21.1
                       LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES OF REGISTRANT


SUBSIDIARIES OF DECRANE AIRCRAFT HOLDINGS, INC.


AEROSPACE DISPLAY SYSTEMS, INC., a Delaware corporation.

AUDIO INTERNATIONAL, INC., an Arkansas corporation.

AVTECH CORPORATION, a Washington corporation.

CORY COMPONENTS, INC., a California corporation.

CUSTOM WOODWORK & PLASTICES, Inc., a Delaware corporation.

THE INFINITY PARTNERS, LTD., a Texas limited partnership.

DAH-IP HOLDINGS, INC., a Delaware corporation.

DAH-IP INFINITY, INC., a Delaware corporation.

DECRANE AIRCRAFT INTERNATIONAL SALES, INC., a Barbados corporation.

DETTMERS INDUSTRIES, INC., a Delaware corporation.

ELSINORE AEROSPACE SERVICES, INC., a California corporation.

ELSINORE ENGINEERING, INC., a Delaware corporation.

FLIGHT REFUELING, INC., a Maryland corporation.

HOLLINGSEAD INTERNATIONAL, INC., a California corporation.

HOLLINGSEAD INTERNATIONAL, LTD., a UK company.

INTERNATIONAL CUSTOM INTERIORS, INC., a Florida corporation.

PATRICK AIRCRAFT TANK SYSTEMS, INC., a Maryland corporation.

PATS AIRCRAFT AND ENGINEERING CORPORATION, a Maryland corporation.

PATS SUPPORT, INC., a Maryland corporation.

PATS, INC., a Maryland corporation.

PCI NEWCO., INC., a Delaware Corporation.

PPI HOLDINGS, INC., a Kansas corporation.

PRECISION PATTERN, INC., a Kansas corporation.

TRI-STAR ELECTRONICS EUROPE S.A., a Swiss company.

TRI-STAR ELECTRONICS INTERNATIONAL, INC., a California corporation.

TRI-STAR TECHNOLOGIES, a California general partnership.
United States Court of Appeals

For the First Circuit

No. 20-1936

DR. JUAN M. RODRIGUEZ-RIVERA, d/b/a "Centro Reumatologico Dr. 

Juan Rodriguez",

Plaintiff, Appellant,

v.

ALLSCRIPTS HEALTHCARE SOLUTIONS, INC.; ALLSCRIPTS HEALTHCARE, 

LLC,

Defendants, Appellees,

HEALTHCARE DATA SOLUTIONS, LLC, a/k/a HDSOSF, LLC; INSURANCE 

COMPANIES A, B, and C; JOHN DOE; RICHARD ROE,

Defendants.

ERRATA SHEET

 The opinion of this Court issued on July 19, 2022, is 

amended as follows:

 On page 4, line 10, add "right" after "stage"
#### Gregory Wilder HOLMAN *v.*STATE of Arkansas

CR 74-142

515 S.W. 2d 638

Opinion delivered November 18, 1974

No briefs.

George Rose Smith, Justice.

The appellant was found guilty of delivering marihuana, a three-year sentence being imposed. On October 7, 1974, his attorneys sought to perfect an appeal by tendering the record to the clerk of this court. The clerk correctly refused to accept the record, because it was tendered more than seven months after the entry of the judgment. Counsel then filed the present motion, under our Rule 5, to require the clerk to docket the case. It is asserted that the error occurred because both the trial judge and the attorneys mistakenly believed that the trial judge could grant *240an extension for a period of seven months beginning 90 days after the filing of the notice of appeal, when in fact the seven months runs from the entry of the judgment. Ark. Stat. Ann. § 43-2705 (Supp. 1973) and § 27-2127.1 (Supp. 1973). The trial judge has filed a statement acknowledging his error and recommending that the record be accepted.

In a recent case, *Dorsey*v. *State,*we entered a per curiam order allowing the record to be filed in somewhat similar circumstances. There was, however, a significant difference, in that Dorsey was an indigent person represented by court-appointed counsel. Inasmuch as postconviction relief may be available to an indigent prisoner whose right to an appeal has been lost through the carelessness or inc ompetence of appointed counsel, we have avoided circuity of action by allowing a belated appeal, as in *Dorsey.*

Here, however, the appellant appears to be represented by retained counsel. It was formerly the general rule that the failure of retained counsel to perfect an appeal did not entitle the client to any relief. See annotation, 74 A.L.R. 2d 1457 (1960). Since the decision in *Douglas*v. *California,*372 U.S. 353 (1963), however, some courts have held that gross incompetence or gross negligence on the part of retained lawyers may involve a denial of due process or equal protection. *United States ex rel. O’Brien*v. *Maroney,*423 F. 2d 865 (3rd Cir. 1970); *Shiftman*v. *Gladden,*453 F. 2d 921 (Ore., 1969).

We need not explore that area of developing legal theory, for in the case at hand a misunderstanding shared by counsel and by the trial judge brought about the tardy tender of the record. A litigant should not be prejudiced by the action of the court. *Wallis*v. *State,*245 Ark. 29, 430 S.W. 2d 860 (1968). Moreover, when, as in the present case, a fairly recent statutory change had led to an error on the part of an attorney, we have allowed a short period of grace before requiring strict adherence- to the new law. *Gallman*v. *Carnes,*254 Ark. 155, 492 S.W. 2d 255 (1973). We therefore permit the record to be filed in this instance, but after January 1, 1975, the statute will be applied according to its terms.

The requested rule on the clerk is granted.
Case: 1:18-mj-00129-KLL Doc #: 1 Filed: 02/26/18 Page: 1 of 25 PAGEID #: 1
Case: 1:18-mj-00129-KLL Doc #: 1 Filed: 02/26/18 Page: 2 of 25 PAGEID #: 2
Case: 1:18-mj-00129-KLL Doc #: 1 Filed: 02/26/18 Page: 3 of 25 PAGEID #: 3
Case: 1:18-mj-00129-KLL Doc #: 1 Filed: 02/26/18 Page: 4 of 25 PAGEID #: 4
Case: 1:18-mj-00129-KLL Doc #: 1 Filed: 02/26/18 Page: 5 of 25 PAGEID #: 5
Case: 1:18-mj-00129-KLL Doc #: 1 Filed: 02/26/18 Page: 6 of 25 PAGEID #: 6
Case: 1:18-mj-00129-KLL Doc #: 1 Filed: 02/26/18 Page: 7 of 25 PAGEID #: 7
Case: 1:18-mj-00129-KLL Doc #: 1 Filed: 02/26/18 Page: 8 of 25 PAGEID #: 8
Case: 1:18-mj-00129-KLL Doc #: 1 Filed: 02/26/18 Page: 9 of 25 PAGEID #: 9
Case: 1:18-mj-00129-KLL Doc #: 1 Filed: 02/26/18 Page: 10 of 25 PAGEID #: 10
Case: 1:18-mj-00129-KLL Doc #: 1 Filed: 02/26/18 Page: 11 of 25 PAGEID #: 11
Case: 1:18-mj-00129-KLL Doc #: 1 Filed: 02/26/18 Page: 12 of 25 PAGEID #: 12
Case: 1:18-mj-00129-KLL Doc #: 1 Filed: 02/26/18 Page: 13 of 25 PAGEID #: 13
Case: 1:18-mj-00129-KLL Doc #: 1 Filed: 02/26/18 Page: 14 of 25 PAGEID #: 14
Case: 1:18-mj-00129-KLL Doc #: 1 Filed: 02/26/18 Page: 15 of 25 PAGEID #: 15
Case: 1:18-mj-00129-KLL Doc #: 1 Filed: 02/26/18 Page: 16 of 25 PAGEID #: 16
Case: 1:18-mj-00129-KLL Doc #: 1 Filed: 02/26/18 Page: 17 of 25 PAGEID #: 17
Case: 1:18-mj-00129-KLL Doc #: 1 Filed: 02/26/18 Page: 18 of 25 PAGEID #: 18
Case: 1:18-mj-00129-KLL Doc #: 1 Filed: 02/26/18 Page: 19 of 25 PAGEID #: 19
Case: 1:18-mj-00129-KLL Doc #: 1 Filed: 02/26/18 Page: 20 of 25 PAGEID #: 20
Case: 1:18-mj-00129-KLL Doc #: 1 Filed: 02/26/18 Page: 21 of 25 PAGEID #: 21
Case: 1:18-mj-00129-KLL Doc #: 1 Filed: 02/26/18 Page: 22 of 25 PAGEID #: 22
Case: 1:18-mj-00129-KLL Doc #: 1 Filed: 02/26/18 Page: 23 of 25 PAGEID #: 23
Case: 1:18-mj-00129-KLL Doc #: 1 Filed: 02/26/18 Page: 24 of 25 PAGEID #: 24
Case: 1:18-mj-00129-KLL Doc #: 1 Filed: 02/26/18 Page: 25 of 25 PAGEID #: 25
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

In connection with the Annual Report of Zoran Corporation (the Company) on
Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Levy Gerzberg, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby 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) 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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and
will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



|                     |  |  |  |                                      
|-------------------- |  |  |  | -------------------------------------
|                     |  |  |  | /s/    LEVY
GERZBERG                 
|                     |  |  |  | Levy Gerzberg                        
|Dated: March 1, 2010 |  |  |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
<PAGE>   1



                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.1



NAMES OF SUBSIDIARY COMPANIES OF THE DWYER GROUP, INC.


1.       Rainbow International Carpet Dyeing and Cleaning Co.

2.       Mr. Rooter Corporation

3.       General Business Services, Inc.

4.       Edwin K. Williams & Co.

5.       Aire Serv Heating & Air Conditioning, Inc.

6.       Mr. Electric Corp.

7.       Mr. Appliance Corp.

8.       The Dwyer Group National Accounts, Inc.

9.       Synergistic International, Inc.

10.      The Dwyer Group Canada, Inc.

11.      Ekwill Acquisition Corporation
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

NATIONAL LOGISTICS
SERVICE, LLC

Plaintiff/Counterclaim Defendant,

v.

MEGATRUCKS LOGISTICS, INC.

Defendant/Counterclaim Plaintiff.

WESTERN DIVISION

Case No. 1:18-cv-250-KLL

AGREED ENTRY OF DISMISSAL

By agreement of the parties and undersigned counsel, and with all claims filed in the above-

captioned matter having been resolved, the claims of all parties herein are dismissed with

prejudice, with each party to bear its own costs, expenses and attorney fees.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Agreed to:

/s/ Thomas P. Doyle

Magistrate Karen L. Litkovitz A (

/s/ Curtis L. Cornett

Thomas P. Doyle (0085418)
Doyle & Hassman, LLC

526 York Street

Newport, Kentucky 41071
513-321-0900

859-251-5106 (fax)
tdoyle@doylehassmanlaw.com

Trial Attorney for Plaintiff

Curtis L. Cornett (0062116)
Alison M. Huenefeld — (0091253)
Cors & Bassett, LLC

201 E. Fifth Street, Suite 900
Cincinnati, OH 45202
513-852-8226

Fax: 513-852-8222
cle@corsbassett.com
amh@corsbassett.com

Trial Attorney for Defendant
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

, Justices

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

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

_________________________________________ Clerk April 1, 2013

h0325 

# Order

April 1, 2013

145799

- 802

KARTER LANDON,

Petitioner

- Appellant,

v SC: 145799

- 802

COA: 301802, 301832,

301905, 301919

CITY OF FLINT, MTT: 00

- 339811, 00

- 339812,

Respondent

- Appellee

. 00

- 339813, 00

- 33 9814

____________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 2 4, 2012

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

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