alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>   1


EXHIBIT 21.1


                           SUBSIDIARIES OF THE COMPANY

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>


                                                                      Jurisdiction of
Subsidiary                                                     Incorporation or Organization
----------                                                     -----------------------------
<S>                                                           <C>
I.H.F.P., Inc.                                                         Delaware
Luck's, Incorporated                                                   Delaware
M. Polaner, Inc.                                                       Delaware
International Home Foods (Canada), Inc.                                Canada
3423425 Canada Ltd                                                     Canada
Heritage Brands Holdings, Inc.                                         Delaware
Heritage Brands, Inc.                                                  Delaware
Campfire, Inc.                                                         Delaware
Bumble Bee Seafoods, Inc.                                              Delaware
Sociedad Ecuatoriana de Alimentos
    Frigorificos Manta C.A.                                            Ecuador
Commerce Distributing Company                                          Delaware
Santa Fe Springs Holding Company                                       Delaware
BBII Acquisition Corporation                                           Delaware
Pesquena Manteuse de Alun
   Mantatun, S.A.                                                      Ecuador
Mayaguez Water Treatment Co., Inc.                                     Puerto Rico
DM US Holding Corp.                                                    Delaware
HMTF Mexico Holdings, S.A. de C.V.                                     Mexico
Productos Del Monte, S.A. de C.V.                                      Mexico
Frutas Y Verduras Selectas, S. de R.L. de C.V.                         Mexico
Creative Products, Inc. of Rossville                                   Delaware
Orleans Acquisition Corp.                                              Delaware
IHF/GM Holding Corp.                                                   Delaware
IHF/GM Acquisition Corp.                                               Delaware

</TABLE>
#### MJ Cahn Co., Respondent, v New York State Division of Human Rights, Appellant, et al., Respondent.

[50 NYS3d 348]

Order and judgment (one paper), Supreme Court, New York *603County (Manuel J. Mendez, J.), entered February 22, 2016, granting the petition to annul the determination of respondent New York State Division of Human Rights (DHR), dated July 17, 2015, which dismissed respondent Maimouna Kamate’s complaint on the ground that her election of an administrative remedy was annulled, unanimously reversed, on the law, without costs, the petition denied and the proceeding brought pursuant to CPLR article 78 dismissed.

DHR properly dismissed Kamate’s complaint on the ground that her election of remedies was annulled *(see*Executive Law § 297 [9]), notwithstanding that she sought dismissal of the DHR complaint only after commencing a state court action alleging the same claims *(Kamate v MJ Cahn Co.,*147 AD3d 573 [1st Dept 2017]; *see generally Eastman Chem. Prods. v New York State Div. of Human Rights,*162 AD2d 157 [1st Dept 1990]; *see also Mitsubishi Bank v New York State Div. of Human Rights,*176 AD2d 689 [1st Dept 1991]). “The only prerequisite to dismissal of the DHR complaint on this ground is that dismissal be sought ‘prior to a hearing before a hearing examiner’ in the DHR proceeding (Executive Law § 297 [9]). The statute does not require that dismissal be obtained prior to commencement of the state court action. [Kamate] made her request prior to a hearing before a hearing examiner, and her election of remedies was annulled upon DHR’s dismissal of her complaint” *(Kamate,*147 AD3d at 573).

Under these circumstances, DHR’s dismissal was not, as Supreme Court found, purely arbitrary *(see Acosta v Loews Corp.,*276 AD2d 214, 220-221 [1st Dept 2000]).

Concur — Friedman, J.R, Sweeny, Renwick, Andrias and Manzanet-Daniels, JJ.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 112 (Thursday, June 11, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 31974]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-15514]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. CP96-152-000, et al.]


Kansas Pipeline Company; Notice of Technical Conference

June 5, 1998.
    Take notice that on June 18, 1998, from 9:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., the 
Commission Staff will convene a technical conference in the above 
captioned docket at the offices of the Federal Energy Regulatory 
Commission, 888 1st Street NE, Washington, DC 20426. Any party, as 
defined in 18 CFR 385.102(c), and any participant, as defined in 18 CFR 
385.102(b), is invited to attend.
    The purpose of the conference is to discuss the Service Agreements 
between Kansas Pipeline Company and its customers, Missouri Gas Energy 
and Kansas Gas Service Company.
    For further information, contact Sharon Dameron (202) 208-2017, 
Office of the General Counsel.
David P. Boergers,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-15514 Filed 6-10-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
No. 09-1507.

#### Segundo Seunos, LLC, Petitioner v. Nasrin Satchell, et al.

562 U.S. 837, 131 S. Ct. 164,

178 L. Ed. 2d 40,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 5822.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeal of California, Second Appellate District, denied.
---

---

# EXHIBIT 13.1

# Section 906
Certification by Principal Executive Officer

In connection with the Annual Report
of Elbit Imaging Ltd. (the Company) on Form 20-F for the year ended December
31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Shimon Yitzhaki, Principal 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 the best of my knowledge:

| | (1)
the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
                    the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 as amended; and
| | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

| | (2)
                                        the information contained in the Report fairly
presents, in all material                     respects, the financial condition and
results of operations of the Company.
| | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: June 30, 2008

| | By: /s/ Shimon Yitzhaki
Shimon YitzhakiPresident
| | --------------------------------------------------------------



---

---
##### 



We have made a review, in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight
Board (United States), of the unaudited interim financial information of the Michigan Consolidated
Gas Company and subsidiaries for the periods ended June 30, 2005 and 2004, as indicated in our
report dated August 4, 2005; because we did not perform an audit, we expressed no opinion on that
information.We are aware that our report referred to above, which is included in your Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2005, is incorporated by reference in Registration Statement
No. 333-124169 on Form S-3.We also are aware that the aforementioned report, pursuant to Rule 436(c) under the Securities Act
of 1933, is not considered a part of the Registration Statement prepared or certified by an
accountant or a report prepared or certified by an accountant within the meaning of Sections 7 and
11 of that Act.
# DLA  helps grounded C-17 fly

/ Published Jan. 18, 2022
NEW CUMBERLAND, Pa, 
Defense Logistics Agency Distribution Susquehanna, Pennsylvania’s team worked with DLA Disposition Services and DLA Aviation to ensure a grounded C-17 at Robins Air Force Base in Georgia, received a part needed to fly.

The part, a wire rope assembly that is only 4’’ long and weighs less than 1⁄2 a pound, prevented the aircraft from passing through the maintenance line of production, thus grounding the flexible cargo aircraft used by the Air Force for rapid strategic delivery of troops and cargo to military bases.

DLA Aviation’s materiel planner Dan Pak, in coordination with the customer assistance specialist and resolution specialist, determined that 40 wire assemblies were inadvertently sent to DLA Disposition Services at DLA Distribution Susquehanna, Pennsylvania, for disposition.

                Johnny Riegel, a Material Examiner and Identifier lead at Defense Logistics Agency Distribution Susquehanna, Pennsylvania, showcases the C-17 wire rope assembly that was needed for a C-17 aircraft at Robins Air Force Base, Georgia.                            DLA  helps grounded C-17 fly                            Johnny Riegel, a Material Examiner and Identifier lead at Defense Logistics Agency Distribution Susquehanna, Pennsylvania, showcases the C-17 wire rope assembly that was needed for a C-17 aircraft at Robins Air Force Base, Georgia.            SHARE IMAGE:Download ImageImage DetailsPhoto By: DLA Distribution Public AffairsVIRIN: 220103-D-D0441-5769

After further research, it was determined that the system generated a disposal order for the parts. To recoup the material, a direct reporting unit ticket was created.Johnny Riegel, the Material Examiner and Identifier work lead at DDSP, received the order Dec. 28, 2021, and reached out for the status.

When it was confirmed the parts were still missing, Riegel initiated a search through two warehouses and found the wire rope assembly parts. DLA Aviation was then able to receipt the material back into the system and the parts shipped overnight to Robins Air Force Base.

Thanks to Riegel’s thorough search, the missing assets were shipped overnight to Robins Air Force Base and the C-17 was able to fly Dec. 30.Steve Millovich, the ME&I supervisor, praised Riegel for his hard work locating the missing assets.“When we discovered that we needed to find the missing assets, Johnny immediately went to look for them,” he said. “He went above and beyond our duties to try and locate them.”

Dan Shrawder, the emergency supply operations center supervisor at DLA Distribution Susquehanna, Pennsylvania, praised how everyone was able to coordinate together to find the missing assets.

“Work is a little like music,” he said. “If you hold a chord and stay in tune, you will produce a song. If you strive and work hard together, you will support the warfighter and never go wrong.”
No. 09-1184.

#### Michael Stratechuk, Individually and on Behalf of His Minor Children, Petitioner v. Board of Education, South Orange-Maplewood School District, et al.

562 U.S. 828, 131 S. Ct. 72,

178 L. Ed. 2d 24,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 6598.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit denied.

Same case below, 587 F.3d 597.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Statement of Financial Position and Statement of Income and is qualified
in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                          65,542
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  183,076
<ALLOWANCES>                                     5,851
<INVENTORY>                                    157,034
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               456,721
<PP&E>                                         642,239
<DEPRECIATION>                                 317,036
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 934,161
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          208,098
<BONDS>                                        215,839
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        24,984
<OTHER-SE>                                     344,631
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   934,161
<SALES>                                      1,088,905
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,099,044
<CGS>                                          742,206
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  742,206
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              20,931
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 79,824
<INCOME-TAX>                                    28,337
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             40,578
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    40,578
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.67
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.2 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 In connection with the Annual Report of Covansys Corporation (the Company) on
Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I,
James S. Trouba, Chief Financial 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:  (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/ James S. Trouba James S. Trouba
Chief Financial Officer
March 8, 2006
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

JOSE LUIS MURILLO ESPINOSA,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 14-30197

D.C. No. 3:13-cr-05569-MJP-1

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Washington

Marsha J. Pechman, Chief District Judge, Presiding

Submitted April 5, 2016** 

Seattle, Washington

Before: RAWLINSON, CALLAHAN, and GILMAN*** Circuit Judges. 

Defendant-Appellant Jose Luis Murillo Espinosa was found guilty by a jury

of 1) conspiracy to possess heroin and morphine with intent to distribute and, 

FILED

APR 07 2016

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

 *** The Honorable Ronald Lee Gilman, Senior Circuit Judge for the U.S.

Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit, sitting by designation.
2) possession of heroin or morphine with intent to distribute, in violation of 21

U.S.C. §§ 841 and 846. He now appeals his convictions. 

 The district court did not plainly err when it allowed a Drug Enforcement

Agency (DEA) agent to provide expert testimony about the structure and methods

of drug-trafficking organizations, because the testimony was relevant and more

probative than prejudicial. See United States v. Sepulveda-Barraza, 645 F.3d

1066, 1071 (9th Cir. 2011), as amended. The DEA agent’s expert testimony was

directly relevant to the charge of conspiracy and rebutted Espinosa’s assertion that,

although he was discovered in a drug stash house with heroin in his suitcase, he

had nothing to do with the drug-distribution activities that occurred there. Further,

the DEA agent’s testimony helped the jury understand Espinosa’s role in the

conspiracy, including comments made by Espinosa to other co-conspirators, and

the significance of evidence found in Espinosa’s room. In any event, Espinosa has

not shown that admission of the testimony affected the fairness of the proceedings

against him. See United States v. Rizk, 660 F.3d 1125, 1132 (9th Cir. 2011).

AFFIRMED.

2
Exhibit 31.2I, William W. Phillips, certify that: 1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Harrington West FinancialGroup, Inc.;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial 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 misleadingwith respect to the period covered by this report;  3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respects thefinancial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;  4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in ExchangeAct Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) for the registrant and have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls andprocedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to bedesigned under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to us by others within those entities, particularly duringthe period in which this report is being prepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’sdisclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report ourconclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based onsuch evaluation; and  (c) Disclosed in this report any change in theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting that occurredduring the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, theregistrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors(or persons performing the equivalent function): (a) All significant deficiencies and materialweaknesses in the design or operation of internal control overfinancial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and  (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, thatinvolves management or other employees who have a significant role inthe registrant’s internal controls over financial reporting.Date: August 10, 2007                                                              /s/ WILLIAM W. PHILLIPS   William W. Phillips,   President, Chief Operating Officer
No. 09-1517.

#### Edward H. Flint, Petitioner v. James Shake, Chief Judge, Circuit Court of Kentucky, 30th Circuit, et al.

562 U.S. 838, 131 S. Ct. 179,

178 L. Ed. 2d 41,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 5803.

October 4, 2010.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit denied.
# Employee Spotlight: Talon Sickler

/ Published March 29, 2021
RICHMOND, Va, 
*Employee spotlight regularly features outstanding non-supervisory personnel from throughout the Defense Logistics Agency Aviation and other DLA employees on Defense Supply Center Richmond, Virginia. Organizational directors may submit names of employees they wish to feature in this column to DLA Aviation Public Affairs. For more information, call (804) 279-3139.*

**Name:** Talon Sickler

**Organization:** DLA Aviation at Ogden

**Years of Service:** 10

**What is your job title, and what do you do, specifically?** I’m a sustainment specialist. In this capacity, I analyze and prevent potential material shortages and backorders of national stock numbers that would otherwise create work stoppages in the field and maintenance depots. Preventing material shortages ensures the warfighter has the assets necessary to perform their mission.

**What do you like most about your job?** I enjoy being a part of an organization that supports our country and those who serve to protect it.

**What is your fondest memory of working for DLA Aviation?** While it’s not one memory, I appreciate all of the great friends that I have made during my time with DLA.

**If you could speak directly to the warfighters you support, what would you tell them?** Being a veteran myself, I would tell them to make the most of every moment. Although some situations can be unbelievably tough, someday the memories of working through those situations beside your brothers and sisters will be worth it.

**What was your first job?** My first job was washing dishes and catering banquets at my family’s restaurant in Tyrone, Pennsylvania.

**What advice would you have given yourself 10 years ago?** Put more money away in your Thrift Savings Plan.

**What’s your biggest pet peeve?** My biggest pet peeve is drivers not using their turn signals.

**What are some of your passions outside of work?** Some of my passions outside of work are boating, wakeboarding, camping, football and woodworking.

**Who is the most influential person in your life...past or present?** That would be my father.

**Who is your favorite actor or actress and why?** Christoph Waltz is my favorite actor. I like how well he portrays characters whether they are good or evil.

**What is your favorite military aircraft and why?** The Air Force B-1 bomber. While deployed to Qatar, I fueled them before them took off on each mission, which was to provide air support to troops on the ground.

**What type of music do you most enjoy?** I love country music.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Brian D., Appellant.

[65 NYS3d 445]

An appeal having been taken to this Court by the above-named appellant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, New York County (Abraham Clott, J.), rendered April 20, 2016, said appeal having been argued by counsel for the respective parties, due deliberation having been had thereon, and finding the sentence not excessive, it is unanimously ordered that the judgment so appealed from be and the same is hereby affirmed.

Concur—Gische, J.P., Web-ber, Oing, Singh and Moulton, JJ.