alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
 
                                  EXHIBIT 21.1

                         SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT
                            AS OF DECMEBER 31, 1995


<TABLE> 
<CAPTION> 
                                       PERCENTAGE OF     JURISDICTION
     NAME OF SUBSIDIARY                 STOCK OWNED    OF INCORPORATION
     ------------------                 -----------    ----------------
<S>                                    <C>             <C> 
1. Gulf Southwest Nevada Bancorp, Inc.    100.0%            Nevada

<CAPTION> 
 
SUBSIDIARIES OF GULF SOUTHWEST          PERCENTAGE OF    JURISDICTION
      NEVADA BANCORP, INC.               STOCK OWNED    OF INCORPORATION
------------------------------         --------------   ----------------
<S>                                    <C>              <C>

1. Merchants Bank                         100.0%            Texas
 
2. G.S.W. Data Processing, Inc.           100.0%            Texas
 
3. Central Data Processing, Inc.          100.0%            Texas
  
4. First Bank Mainland                    100.0%            Texas
 
5. First Bank Pearland                     99.5%            Texas
 
6. Texas City Bank                         97.1%            Texas
</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>


<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-27-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAY-30-1998
<CASH>                                          16,493
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   10,763
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     39,961
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                82,933
<PP&E>                                          70,418
<DEPRECIATION>                                  32,465
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 130,122
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           12,499
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           104
<OTHER-SE>                                     113,234
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   130,122
<SALES>                                         32,012
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                32,012
<CGS>                                           15,512
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   36,424
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  73
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (4,129)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    (1,404)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (2,725)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (2,725)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (0.29)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.29)
        



</TABLE>
#### Stephen A. CHERRY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. DeWayne SHEDD; et al., Defendants-Appellees.

No. 16-35921

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted February 13, 2018 *

Filed February 22, 2018

Stephen A. Cherry, Pro Se

Emily A. Mac Master, Office of Attorney General, Boise, ID, for Defendants-Appel-lees DeWayne Shedd, Brent Reinke

Mark Kubinski, Esquire, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, Office of the Idaho Attoney General, Boise, ID, Emily A. Mac Master, Office of Attorney General, Boise, ID, Mary Karin Magnelli, AGID—Idaho Office of the Attorney General, Boise, ID, for Defendants-Appellees Jeff Kirkman, Randy Higgins, Andrea Blades

Before: LEAVY, FERNANDEZ, and MURGUIA, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Idaho state prisoner Stephen A. Cherry appeals pro se from the district court’s summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging an access-to-courts claim. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo. *Brodheim v. Cry,*584 F.3d 1262, 1267 (9th Cir. 2009). We affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment on Cherry’s access-to-courts claim against defendant Higgins because Cherry failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether he suffered an actual injury as a result of defendant Higgins’s misplacement of his legal materials. *See Lewis v. Casey,*518 U.S. 343, 348-53, 116 S.Ct. 2174, 135 L.Ed.2d 606 (1996) (access-to-courts claim requires the plaintiff to show that the defendants’ conduct caused actual injury to a non-frivolous legal claim); *see also Silva v. Di Vittorio,*658 F.3d 1090, 1101-04 (9th Cir. 2011) (discussing access-to-courts claims arising from “active interference”), *overruled on other grounds as stated by Richey v. Dahne,*807 F.3d 1202, 1209 n.6 (9th Cir. 2015).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<CASH>                                         318,317
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   81,315
<ALLOWANCES>                                     4,000
<INVENTORY>                                     38,371
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               588,481
<PP&E>                                      15,511,554
<DEPRECIATION>                              13,632,061
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,467,974
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          307,811
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     2,019,197
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,467,974
<SALES>                                        951,015
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,002,801
<CGS>                                        1,387,326
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,779,582
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                16,082
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               7,696
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (800,559)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,125
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (801,684)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (801,684)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.32)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.32)
        

</TABLE>
June 26, 2015

Mr. Russ Hilyard

1210 Della Street Hanford, CA 93230

Dear Mr. Hilyard:

This letter is to inform you that we are unable to process your request for an exemption from Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) . It explains why we can not process your request and what you should do in the next 30 days.

Why We Can Not Process Your Request

We entered your June 16, exemption request into the public docket (No. FAA-2015-2291), but we are unable to process your request any further. The information you sent does not comply with the requirements of § 11.81 (copy enclosed). For us to consider the request any further, you must send us all of the following:

 The specific section or sections of 14 CFR from which you seek relief, the extent of the relief you seek, and the reason you seek relief.

 The reasons why granting the request would be in the public interest; that is, how it would benefit the public as a whole.

 The reasons why the exemption would not adversely affect safety or how the exemption would provide a level of safety at least equal to that provided by the rule from which you seek an exemption.

 Any additional information, views, or arguments available to support your request.2

What You Should Do

If you want us to process your request any further, you must send the information described earlier to reach us within 30 days. Please note that § 11.63(d) requires you to send your petition for exemption at least 120 days before the proposed effective date of the exemption.

If We Do Not Hear From You

If we do not hear from you within 30 days, we will close the docket without notifying you further. If you have any questions or require additional time, you may call (202) 267-9677.

Sincerely,

/s/

Brenda Robeson Program Analyst, Airmen and Airspace Rules Division

Enclosure
Order filed October 16, 2018 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-18-00865-CV

____________

IN THE INTEREST OF F.M.E.A.F., A.A.F.H., AND A.J.F.H., CHILDREN

On Appeal from the 315th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2013-04982J

ORDER

This is an accelerated appeal from a judgment in a suit in which the 

termination of the parent-child relationship is at issue (“parental termination case”). 

The notice of appeal was filed on October 5, 2018. Appellant, D.M.F., has 

established indigence or is presumed to be indigent. See Tex. R. App. P. 20.1(a). The 

reporter’s record was due October 15, 2018 (10 days after the notice of appeal was 

filed). See Tex. R. App. P. 35.1(b); 28.4(a)(1). The record has not been filed.

Appeals in parental termination cases and child protection cases are to be 

brought to final disposition within 180 days of the date the notice of appeal is filed.

See Tex. R. Jud. Admin. 6.2(a). The trial and appellate courts are jointly responsible 
2

for ensuring that the appellate record is timely filed. See Tex. R. App. P. 35.3(c).

The trial court must direct the court reporter to immediately commence the 

preparation of the reporter’s record and must arrange for a substitute reporter, if 

necessary. See Tex. R. App. P. 28.4(b)(1).

Because the reporter’s record has not been filed timely in this accelerated 

appeal, we order the official court reporter for the 315th District Court to file the 

reporter’s record in this appeal by October 26, 2018. If the record is not timely filed, 

we will order the trial court to conduct a hearing to determine the reason for the failure to 

file the record.

PER CURIAM
No. 11-10466.

#### O’Neal *v.*Williams et al.

C. A. 11th Cir. Certiorari denied.
#### Tax Securities Corporation v. O. L. Dayton, Judge, Circuit Court, Pinellas County.

Case No. 2.

155 So. 157.

Opinion Filed April 26, 1934.

Petition for Rehearing Denied June 15, 1934.

*Edwin Brobston,*for Relator;

*Hugh L.*McArthur, for Respondents.

Davis, C. J.

— This is an original proceeding in mandamus, which was instituted in this Court by the relator, Tax Securities Corporation, against O. L. Dayton, as Judge of the Circuit Court in and for the Sixth Judicial Circuit of Florida, Pinellas County, as a companion case of the style Tax Securities Corporation, a corporation, v. John U. Bird, *et al.,*disposed of by an opinion this' day filed.

Upon the authority of the opinion in the companion case, it is ordered that the alternative writ of mandamus in this cause be and the same is hereby quashed for the reasons stated in the opinion in the companion case.

Whitfield, Terrell; Brown and Buford, J. J., concur.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE CONDENSED
CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF NORTHLAND  CRANBERRIES,  INC. AS OF AND FOR
THE 3 MONTHS  ENDED  NOVEMBER  30,  1999 AND IS  QUALIFIED  IN ITS  ENTIRETY  BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              AUG-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 SEP-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   NOV-30-1999
<CASH>                                         801
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  37,711
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (693)
<INVENTORY>                                    124,843
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               173,135
<PP&E>                                         209,847
<DEPRECIATION>                                 39,846
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 386,735
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          47,814
<BONDS>                                        162,794
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       203
<OTHER-SE>                                     160,071
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   386,735
<SALES>                                        74,967
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               74,967
<CGS>                                          51,555
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  19,948
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             2,911
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                553
<INCOME-TAX>                                   232
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            321
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   321
<EPS-BASIC>                                  0.02
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0.02


</TABLE>
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 8666 

To prohibit certain business concerns from receiving assistance from the 

Small Business Administration, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

OCTOBER 23, 2020 

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

on Small Business 

A BILL 

To prohibit certain business concerns from receiving assistance from the Small Business Administration, and for 

other purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘No Small Business 

5 Aid for China Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON AFFILIATION WITH THE PEOPLE’S 

7 REPUBLIC OF CHINA. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 3(a) of the Small Busi9 ness Act (15 U.S.C. 632(a)) is amended by adding at the 

10 end the following: 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 8666 IH

1 ‘‘(10) PROHIBITION ON AFFILIATION WITH THE

2 PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF CHINA.—For purposes of 

3 this Act, a small business concern may not— 

4 ‘‘(A) be headquartered in the People’s Re5 public of China; 

6 ‘‘(B) have more than 25 percent of the vot7 ing stock of the small business concern owned 

8 by affiliates that are citizens of or organized 

9 under the laws of the People’s Republic of 

10 China; or 

11 ‘‘(C) be known to be associated with 

12 human rights violations that have occurred in 

13 Xinjiang Province, China.’’. 

14 (b) REGULATIONS AND GUIDANCE.—Not later than 

15 6 months after the date of the enactment of this Act, the 

16 Administrator of the Small Business Administration shall 

17 amend the regulations and guidance of the Administra18 tion, including sections 120.100, 120.110, and 121.105 of 

19 title 13, Code of Federal Regulations, to carry out the 

20 amendment made by this Act. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
No. 11-10479.

#### Rogers *v.*Davis, Warden.

C. A. 6th Cir. Certiorari denied.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 46 (Monday, March 10, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 10835]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-5752]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. RP96-338-002]


Texas Eastern Transmission Corporation; Notice of Compliance 
Filing

March 4, 1997.
    Take notice that on February 28, 1997, Texas Eastern Transmission 
Corporation (Texas Eastern) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas 
Tariff, Sixth Revised Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets to 
become effective March 1, 1997:

Substitute Original Sheet No. 606
Substitute Original Sheet No. 607
Original Sheet No. 608
Sheet Nos. 609-615

    Texas Eastern asserts that the purpose of this filing is to comply 
with the Commission's order issued February 18, 1997 in Docket Nos. 
RP96-338-000 and RP96-338-001.
    Texas Eastern states that in compliance with the February 18 Order, 
this filing reflects in the General Terms and Conditions (GT&C) of its 
FERC Gas Tariff (1) the pro forma revisions that were submitted in its 
November 1, 1996 initial comments in this proceeding and (2) a 
provision stating that ``MDDO'' and/or ``MDRO'' capacity is not 
considered to be ``Section 14.9 Firm Capacity'' and is therefore not 
subject to potential reduction pursuant to GT&C Section 14.10.
    Texas Eastern states that copies of the filing were served on firm 
customers of Texas Eastern, interested state commissions and parties to 
the proceeding.
    Any person desiring to protest this filing should file a protest 
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., 
Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Section 385.211 of the 
Commission's Rules and Regulations. All such protests must be filed as 
provided in Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests 
will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate 
action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to 
the proceeding. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission 
and are available for public inspection in the Public Reference Room.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-5752 Filed 3-7-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
<TABLE> <S> <C>



<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE COMPANY'S
CONSOLIDATED  FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<MULTIPLIER>                                   1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-1-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                         8,447
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  6,125
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               0
<PP&E>                                         351,848
<DEPRECIATION>                                 86,156
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 341,047
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          0
<BONDS>                                        284,713
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       8
<OTHER-SE>                                     18,968
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   341,047
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               78,562
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  45,778
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             22,330
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (5,985)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (2,215)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (3,770)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (3,770)
<EPS-BASIC>                                  (4.71)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (4.71)



</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 31.1


                        CERTIFICATIONS UNDER SECTION 302


I, Guy L. Mayer certify that:

         1. I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Tutogen
Medical, Inc.;

         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(s) 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) [reserved] / [paragraph omitted pursuant to SEC Release Nos. 33-8238
and 34-47986];

         c) 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

         d) 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(s) 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: August 14, 2006



/s/ Guy L. Mayer
-----------------------
Guy L. Mayer
Chief Executive Officer