alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
                                                                      EXHIBIT 21


                              LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES

The following are subsidiaries of the Company, the respective jurisdictions of
their incorporation and names (if any) under which they do business. The Company
owns all of the voting securities (including directors' qualifying shares owned
beneficially by the Company) of each such subsidiary except the Company owns
only approximately 50% of EDO (Canada) Limited.

The names of particular subsidiaries of the Company have been omitted. When
considered in the aggregate as a single subsidiary, these omitted subsidiaries
do not constitute a "significant subsidiary" as such term is defined in Rule
1-02(v) of Regulation S-X of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                            Jurisdiction                 Name Under Which
                                                Of                         Subsidiary
Name                                        Incorporation                 Does Business
----                                        -------------                 -------------
<S>                                         <C>                         <C>
EDO Western Corporation                     Utah                        EDO Electro-Ceramics
EDO (Canada) Limited                        Canada
EDO Foreign Sales Corporation               U.S. Virgin Islands
EDO Sports, Inc.                            Delaware
EDO Western International Corp.             Delaware
EDO International Corporation               Delaware
EDO Energy Corporation                      Delaware
EDO Automotive Natural Gas, Inc.            Delaware
Specialty Plastics, Inc.                    Louisiana                   EDO Specialty Plastics
EDO Acquisition II, Inc.                    Delaware                    EDO Technology Services
                                                                               and Analysis
AIL Technologies, Inc.                      Delaware
M. Technologies Inc.                        Pennsylvania                EDO M. Tech
AIL Systems, Inc.                           Delaware
American Nucleonics Inc.                    California
Astro Optics Laboratories, Inc.             California
Dynamic Systems, Inc.                       Maryland
</TABLE>
Amendment No. 3 to Revolving Credit and Security Agreement



 Exhibit 10.7 
  
 AMENDMENT NO. 3 TO 
 REVOLVING CREDIT AND SECURITY AGREEMENT 
  
 This AMENDMENT NO. 3
(the “Amendment”) is made and entered into as of March 1, 2004 by and between Countrywide Warehouse Lending (“Lender”) and Encore Credit Corporation (“Borrower”). This Amendment amends that certain Revolving Credit and Security Agreement by and between lender and Borrower dated as of May 13, 2002 (as
may be amended from time to time, the “Credit Agreement”). 
  
 R E C I T A L S 
  
 Lender and Borrower have
previously entered into the Credit Agreement pursuant to which Lender may, from time to time, provide Borrower credit in the form of a warehouse line secured by residential mortgage loans. Lender and Borrower hereby agree that the Credit Agreement
shall be amended as provided herein. 
  
 In consideration of the mutual promises
contained herein, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, Lender and Borrower hereby agree as follows: 
  
 New Section - Secondary Marketing, Underwriting, Third Party Origination and Interest Rate Risk Management
Practices. The following new section, numbered Section 10.11 and titled “Secondary Marketing, Underwriting, Third Party Origination and Interest Rate Risk Management Practices,” shall be added to the Credit Agreement: 

 
 Borrower shall not, without the prior written approval of Lender, change
any secondary marketing, underwriting, third party origination and interest rate risk management practices of Borrower that exist as of the date hereof. The fact that Borrower may from time to time disclose to Lender in writing proposed changes in
such practices after the date hereof shall not be deemed Lender’s consent to or written approval thereof unless a duly authorized Lender has indicated written approval of such changes and it shall be deemed an Event of Default if Borrower has
failed to obtain such written approval prior to implementation of such changes. 
  

	2.	No Other Amendments. Other than as expressly modified and amended herein, the Credit Agreement shall remain in full force and effect and nothing herein shall affect
the rights and remedies of Lender as provided under the Credit Agreement. 

  

	3.	Capitalized Terms. Any capitalized term used herein and not otherwise defined herein shall have the meaning ascribed to such term in the Credit Agreement.


  

	4.	Facsimiles: Facsimile signatures shall be deemed valid and binding to the same extent as the original. 

  
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Lender and Borrower have caused their names to be signed hereto by their
respective officers thereunto duly authorized as of the date first written above. 
  

									
	COUNTRYWIDE WAREHOUSE LENDING	 	 	 	Encore Credit Corporation
					
	 By:
	 	 	 	 	 	By:	 	 /s/ Jon Daurio

	 	 	 Signature
	 	 	 	 	 	 Signature

	 Name:
	 	 	 	 	 	 Name:
	 	 Jon Daurio

	 Title:
	 	 	 	 	 	 Title:
	 	EVP/Secretary
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Be th Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , 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.

April 23, 2015

jam 

# Order

Clerk April 23, 2015

1 51436 ( 19 )

DAVID FRANKLIN MCNEES, JR.

,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v SC: 1 51436

COA: 324175

MARY ANNA OWENS,

Defendant

- Appellee.

___________________________________

On order of the Court, the motion to waive fees is considered and it is DENIED

because MCL 600.2963 requires that a prisoner pursuing a civil action be liable for filing

fees. Appellant is not required to pay an initial partial fee. However, for an appea l to be

filed, appellant must resubmit a copy of this order, and shall refile the copy of the

pleadings which is being returned with this order within 21 days. By doing this,

appellant becomes responsible for paying the $375.00 filing fee. Failure to comp ly with

this order shall result in the appeal not being filed in this Court.

If appellant timely refiles the pleadings, monthly payments shall be made to the

Department of Corrections in an amount of 50 percent of the deposits made to appellant’s

account u ntil the payments equal the total amount of the filing fee stated above. That

amount shall then be remitted to this Court.

Pursuant to MCL 600.2963(8) plaintiff shall not file further appeals in this Court

until the entry fee in this case is paid in full.

The Clerk of the Court shall furnish two copies of this order to appellant and

return appellant’s pleadings with this order.
11TH COURT OF APPEALS

EASTLAND, TEXAS

JUDGMENT

James Cole Hanlon, * From the County Court

of Eastland County,

Trial Court No. 1300341

Vs. No. 11-14-00234-CR * September 15, 2016

The State of Texas, * Memorandum Opinion by Wright, C.J.

(Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,

Willson, J., and McCall, sitting

by assignment)

(Bailey, J., not participating)

This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that there 

is no error in the judgment below. Therefore, in accordance with this court’s 

opinion, the judgment of the trial court is in all things affirmed.
<PAGE>
                                                                      Exhibit 32

                                  CERTIFICATION

      Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned certifies that (1) this Annual
Report of EDO Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the "Report"), fully complies with the requirements of Section
13(a) or Rule 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and (2)
the information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

                                        /s/ JAMES M. SMITH
                                        ------------------
                                        James M. Smith
                                        Chief Executive Officer
                                        March 1, 2005

                                        /s/ FREDERIC B. BASSETT
                                        -----------------------
                                        Frederic B. Bassett
                                        Chief Financial Officer
                                        March 1, 2005
No. 10-7843.

#### Shannon L’Ray Walker, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 1162, 131 S. Ct. 971,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 427.

178 L. Ed. 2d 798,

January 10, 2011.

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

Same case below, 394 Fed. Appx. 467.
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahr a Bridget M. McCormac k David F. Viviano Richard H. Bernstei n Kurtis T. Wilde r Elizabeth T. Clement, J ustices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at t he direction of the Court.
May 29, 2018

d0521 

# Order

Clerk May 29, 2018

155453

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 155 453 COA: 327189 Ingham CC: 14-000272-FC RONNIE LEE KIRBY, JR., Defendant-Appellant.

_____________ _______________ ____________/

By order of September 12, 2017, the application for leave to a ppeal the January 17, 2017 judgment of the Court of Appeals was held in abeyance pending the decision in People v Chatman (Docket No. 155184). On order of the Court, leave to appeal h aving been denied in Chatman on March 9, 2018, ___ Mich ___ (2018), the application is agai n considered, and it is DENIED, bec ause we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
Executive Bonus Program



 Exhibit 10.13 
  
 EXECUTIVE BONUS PROGRAM 
  
 Executive Bonus Program 
  
 Executives of the company are generally compensated through base salary, performance based annual bonus and long-term option grants. This approach allows the company to
annually review the performance of the executive against their individual goals, corporate or divisional goals and overall market considerations. 
  
 The potential realization from these awards is directly related to the continuing success of the Company as measured by increasing shareholder value. 
  
 Each year, the company sets specific strategic goals by which each executive is measured.
Individual performance factors are relevant to the area of responsibility for each executive, and include division performance where appropriate. 
  
 Executive compensation is evaluated against other comparable salary and incentive data within the medical device industry. Each year, the Compensation Committee reviews
this data for each executive and recommends to the Hologic Board of Directors a compensation strategy for each of the executive officers. Incentive cash bonuses, where applicable are awarded annually and may represent up to 100% of the executives
base compensation. Stock options and stock grants are often awarded at this time as well.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
             THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION
             EXTRACTED FROM THE CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
             FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED
             IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
             STATEMENTS AND THE NOTES THERETO.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                               <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                     YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                   DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                        DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                   13,799
<SECURITIES>                             15,843
<RECEIVABLES>                            32,818
<ALLOWANCES>                                  0
<INVENTORY>                              12,188
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                         79,283
<PP&E>                                   37,357
<DEPRECIATION>                           27,139
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                          124,491
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                    44,173
<BONDS>                                  33,679
<COMMON>                                  8,454
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                         0
<PREFERRED>                                  57
<OTHER-SE>                               31,730
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>            124,491
<SALES>                                  97,936
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                         97,936
<CGS>                                    72,337
<TOTAL-COSTS>                            88,687
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                              0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                        2,419
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           8,694
<INCOME-TAX>                              2,610
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       6,084
<DISCONTINUED>                           (4,064)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                               0
<CHANGES>                                     0
<NET-INCOME>                              2,020
<EPS-BASIC>                              0.15
<EPS-DILUTED>                              0.15


</TABLE>
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 99.2


                         AMERINST INSURANCE GROUP, LTD.

     CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
                            (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)


Pursuant to the requirements of Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
(18 U.S.C. Sections 1350 (a) and (b)), the undersigned hereby certify as
follows:

     1.   Murray Nicol is the Vice President and CFO of AmerInst Insurance
          Group, Ltd.

     2.   The Company's Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30,
          2002, accompanying this Certification, in the form filed with the
          Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report") fully complies with
          the requirements of Section 13 (a) of the Securities Act of 1934 (the
          "Exchange Act"), and

     3.   The information in the Report fairly presents, in all material
          respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
          Company.



Dated:  November 14, 2002


                                                        By:  /s/ Murray Nicol
                                                        -----------------------
                                                        Murray Nicol
                                                        Vice President and CFO
EXHIBIT 31.2RULE 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a) CERTIFICATIONS, ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACTOF 2002I, Russell Van Zandt certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of Veridien Corporation;2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operationsand cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;4. The small business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have: a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is madeknown to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which thisreport is being prepared;  b) evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluation; and  c) disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer’s internal controlover financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuer’s most recentfiscal quarter (the small business issuer’s fourth physical quarter in the case of anannual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect,the small business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting.5. The small business issuer’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small businessissuer’s auditors and the audit committee of small business issuer’s board of directors (or personsperforming the equivalent functions): a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the small business issuer’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and  b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the small business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting.        Date:   August 14, 2007 /s/   Russell Van Zandt   Russell Van Zandt   Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of AmerInst Insurance Group, Ltd. (the Company)
on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Stuart Grayston, President and chief executive officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:



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



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



|                                                                       
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ STUART GRAYSTON                                                    
|Stuart Grayston President and chief executive
officer November 14, 2006



17
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-18-00583-CR

Jose Manuel HERNANDEZ PEREZ,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 289th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2018CR4049

Honorable Daphne Previti Austin, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

Irene Rios, Justice

Delivered and Filed: October 31, 2018

DISMISSED

The clerk’s record has been filed in this case. The clerk’s record contains the trial court’s 

Rule 25.2 certification, which does not show appellant has the right of appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P.

25.2. We issued an order notifying appellant that this appeal would be dismissed within 30 days 

of the order if two conditions were met: (1) a certification or amended certification showing 

appellant has the right of appeal has not been made part of the record; and (2) the trial court’s 

certification is not defective. See id. R. 25.2(d) (requiring us to dismiss a criminal appeal if a 

certification that shows the defendant has the right of appeal has not been made part of the record). 
04-18-00583-CR

- 2 -

Because no amended certification showing appellant has the right of appeal has been made part of 

the appellate record, the only issue is whether the trial court’s certification is defective in the 

notification of the defendant’s appellate rights. See Dears v. State, 154 S.W.3d 610 (Tex. Crim. 

App. 2005) (holding court of appeals must determine whether the certification is defective). 

The trial court’s certification states this is a plea bargain case and the defendant has no 

right of appeal. See R. 25.2(a); see also TEX.CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 44.02. The clerk’s record 

establishes the punishment assessed by the trial court does not exceed the punishment 

recommended by the prosecutor and agreed to by the defendant in the plea bargain agreement. See 

R. 25.2(a). The clerk’s record also does not show the trial court granted appellant permission to 

appeal or contain any matters that were raised by written motion and ruled on before trial. See id.

Appellant’s counsel has filed a response confirming that the trial court’s certification is not 

defective and stating appellant has no right of appeal. We conclude the trial court’s certification is 

not defective in its notification of the defendant’s appellate rights. Accordingly, we must dismiss 

this appeal. See id. R. 25.2(d). 

PER CURIAM 

DO NOT PUBLISH