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


                                                                      EXHIBIT 21

                        SUBSIDIARIES OF CHOICEPOINT INC.



<TABLE>
<S>                                                             <C>
Bti LP                                                          Texas
ChoicePoint Asset Company                                       Delaware
ChoicePoint Business and Government Services Inc.               Georgia
ChoicePoint Capital Inc.                                        Delaware
ChoicePoint Financial Inc.                                      Delaware
ChoicePoint Health Systems Inc.                                 Kansas
ChoicePoint Licensing Company                                   Delaware
ChoicePoint Precision Marketing Inc.                            Georgia
ChoicePoint Police Records Inc.                                 Arizona
ChoicePoint Public Records Inc.                                 Georgia
ChoicePoint Services Inc.                                       Georgia
CITI NETWORK, Inc.                                              Florida
CPPM Inc.                                                       Georgia
DataMart Processing LLC                                         Georgia
EquiSearch Services Inc.                                        Georgia
Identico Systems, LLC                                           Delaware
Insurity Inc.                                                   Georgia
KnowX LLC                                                       Georgia
Mortgage Asset Research Institute, Inc.                         Virginia
National Credit Audit Corporation                               Illinois
National Data Retrieval, Inc.                                   Georgia
National Safety Alliance, Incorporated                          Tennessee
Patlex Corporation                                              Pennsylvania
Resident Data Financial, LLC                                    Texas
Resident Data, Inc.                                             Delaware
The Bode Technology Group, Inc.                                 Virginia
The List Source, Inc.                                           Texas
The Templar Corporation                                         Virginia
Vital Chek Network, Inc.                                        Tennessee
Vital Chek Network of Canada, Inc.                              Delaware
</TABLE>
Form of Certificate for the Series A Preferred Stock



  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
 Exhibit 4.2
David Ren MOORE, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-3778

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

May 21, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Wendy Sue CARTER, Former Wife, Appellant, v. Jasper James CARTER, Former Husband, Appellee.

No. 1D18-4107

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

May 22, 2019

Caleb D. Rowland of Rowland Law, LLC, Jacksonville, for Appellant.

Jasper James Carter, pro se, Appellee.

Per Curiam.

AFFIRMED .

Wetherell, Ray, and Winsor, JJ., concur.
i i i i i i

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-09-00038-CV

Daniel CERVANTES,

Appellant

v.

Amy CERVANTES,

Appellee

From the 224th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2008-CI-13303

Honorable Andy Mireles, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice

Karen Angelini, Justice

Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice

Delivered and Filed: March 4, 2009

DISMISSED

Appellant has filed a motion indicating that the parties have fully resolved and settled all

issues in dispute. Because the parties have reached a final settlement of all issues raised in this

appeal, appellant asks that we dismiss this appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a)(1). Appellant’s

motion to dismiss is granted, and this appeal is dismissed. Costs of appeal are taxed against the

appellant. See id. at (d). 

PER CURIAM
III 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 212 

Establishing a McCain-Mansfield Fellowship Program in the Senate. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 13, 2021 

Mr. ROUNDS (for himself, Ms. SINEMA, Mr. COTTON, Mr. CRAMER, Mr. 

COONS, Mr. KELLY, Mr. KING, and Mr. PETERS) submitted the following 

resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration 

RESOLUTION 

Establishing a McCain-Mansfield Fellowship Program in the 

Senate. 

1 Resolved, 

2 SECTION 1. MCCAIN-MANSFIELD FELLOWSHIP PROGRAM. 

3 (a) DEFINITIONS.—In this resolution— 

4 (1) the term ‘‘eligible military veteran’’ means 

5 a veteran, as defined in section 101 of title 38, 

6 United States Code, that meets any eligibility re7 quirements established by the Secretary for partici8 pation in the program under this section; and 

9 (2) the term ‘‘Sergeant at Arms’’ means the 

10 Sergeant at Arms and Doorkeeper of the Senate. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•SRES 212 IS 

1 (b) ESTABLISHMENT OF FELLOWSHIP PROGRAM.— 

2 (1) IN GENERAL.—From amounts made avail3 able to carry out this section, the Sergeant at Arms 

4 shall establish a program through which eligible 

5 military veterans may apply for and participate in a 

6 fellowship position in the personal office of a Sen7 ator. 

8 (2) DESIGNATION.—The program established 

9 under paragraph (1) shall be referred to as the 

10 ‘‘McCain-Mansfield Fellowship Program’’. 

11 (3) ESTABLISHMENT OF AN OFFICE.—The Ser12 geant at Arms shall establish, in the Office of the 

13 Sergeant at Arms, an office to administer the 

14 McCain-Mansfield Fellowship Program. The office 

15 shall develop a process through which— 

16 (A) Senators who wish to participate in the 

17 McCain-Mansfield Fellowship Program may no18 tify the Sergeant at Arms; and 

19 (B) eligible military veterans may apply for 

20 a McCain-Mansfield Fellowship. 

21 (c) DURATION, NUMBER, DISTRIBUTION, AND

22 AMOUNT OF FELLOWSHIPS.— 

23 (1) DURATION.—A McCain-Mansfield Fellow24 ship shall be for a 2-year period. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
3 

•SRES 212 IS 

1 (2) NUMBER AND DISTRIBUTION OF FELLOW2 SHIPS.—Subject to the availability of appropria3 tions— 

4 (A) the Sergeant at Arms shall award not 

5 more than 100 McCain-Mansfield Fellowships; 

6 and 

7 (B) the Sergeant at Arms shall distribute 

8 the McCain-Mansfield Fellowships under this 

9 section for an award period in a manner that 

10 provides not less than 1 Fellowship position for 

11 each Senator wishing to participate in the pro12 gram. 

13 (3) AMOUNT OF FINANCIAL ASSISTANCE.—The 

14 Sergeant at Arms shall determine the stipend or 

15 other financial assistance appropriate for each par16 ticular McCain-Mansfield Fellowship position under 

17 this section, depending on the duties of the position 

18 and the recommendations from the Senator offering 

19 the position. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

United States District Court

Northern District of California

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SAN JOSE DIVISION

FINJAN, INC.,

Plaintiff,

v.

CISCO SYSTEMS INC.,

Defendant.

Case No. 17-cv-00072-BLF 

ORDER REFERRING THE PARTIES' 

PROCEDURAL DISPUTE 

REGARDING JUDGE VAN KEULEN'S 

ORDER ON CISCO'S MOTION TO 

STRIKE AT ECF 582 TO JUDGE VAN 

KEULEN

On April 28, 2020, Magistrate Judge, the Honorable Susan van Keulen, issued an Order on 

Defendant Cisco Systems Inc.’s Motion to Strike Portions of Plaintiff Finjan, Inc.’s Amended 

Expert Report on Infringement of Patent No. 7,647,633. SVK Order, ECF 582.

The undersigned held a Final Pretrial Conference on April 30, 2020. In that Conference, 

counsel for Finjan indicated that Finjan intends to appeal from the SVK Order to this Court on two 

grounds: (1) a procedural issue – because Finjan did not have an opportunity to oppose Cisco’s posthearing submission at ECF 558 and (2) Judge van Keulen’s substantive ruling. The Court construes 

the procedural dispute as a request to file a motion for reconsideration of the SVK Order. 

Accordingly, the Court REFERS the procedural dispute to Judge van Keulen to decide whether a 

motion for reconsideration is appropriate. Once the parties’ procedural dispute is resolved, Finjan 

may file its substantive appeal of the SVK Order with this Court.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: May 1, 2020

______________________________________

BETH LABSON FREEMAN

United States District Judge

Case 5:17-cv-00072-BLF Document 609 Filed 05/01/20 Page 1 of 1
<PAGE>




                                  EXHIBIT 10.1

  DESCRIPTION OF PRUDENTIAL SAVINGS BANK'S FISCAL 2006 DIRECTORS' COMPENSATION

        Compensation to directors for their service on the Board of Directors is
paid by Prudential Savings Bank (the "Bank"), the wholly-owned subsidiary of
Prudential Bancorp, Inc. of Pennsylvania (the "Company"). The Company does not
pay separate compensation to its directors for their service on the Company's
Board of Directors. For fiscal 2007, members of the Bank's Board of Directors
will receive an annual retainer of $21,000 if they attend 10 of the twelve
regularly scheduled Board meetings. If a director does not attend at least 10
meetings, he instead will receive $1,750 per meeting attended, including both
regular and special Board meetings. Members of the Audit Committee, Executive
Committee, Compensation Committee and Budget/Finance Committee will receive fees
of $800 per meeting attended. As Chairman of the Board, Mr. Packer will receive
an annual retainer of $69,750 in addition to standard board and committee
meeting fees. Mr. Judge will receive an additional $5,000 per year for service
as chairman of the Bank's Finance Committee. As solicitor of the Bank, Mr. Balka
will receive an annual retainer of $45,000. Mr. Balka also will receive the
normal meeting fees for service on the Executive Committee and the normal annual
Board retainer of $21,000.
Alberto F. SARASUA, Appellant, v. AVILA PROPERTIES, LLC, et al., Appellees.

No. 3D17-1091

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed February 27, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
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 report of Ironclad Performance Wear Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Scott Jarus, Chief 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; 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/ Scott JarusScott JarusChief Executive OfficerNovember 10, 2010
REPORT OF INDEPENDENT
REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM





To the
Board of Directors and Shareholders


XsunX,
Inc. (A Development Stage Company)


Alisa
Viejo, California





We have
audited the accompanying balance sheets of XsunX, Inc. (a development stage
company) as of September 30, 2010 and 2009, and the related statements of
operations, stockholders' equity, and cash flows for the years then ended and
for the period from February 25, 1997 (inception) to September 30,
2010.  These financial statements are the responsibility of the
Company's management.  Our responsibility is to express an opinion on
these financial statements based on our audit.  The financial
statements for the period from February 25, 1997 (inception) to September 30,
2008 were audited by other auditors and our opinion, insofar as it relates to
cumulative amounts included for such prior periods, is based solely on the
reports of such other auditors.





We
conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company
Accounting Oversight Board (United States).  Those standards require
that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether
the financial statements are free of material misstatement.  The
Company is not required to have, nor were we engaged to perform an audit of its
internal control over financial reporting. Our audits included consideration of
internal control over financial reporting as a basis for designing audit
procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of
expressing an opinion on the effectiveness of the Company’s internal control
over financial reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also
includes examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and
disclosures in the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles
used and significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the
overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a
reasonable basis for our opinion.





In our
opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all
material respects, the financial position of XsunX, Inc. as of September 30,
2010 and 2009, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for the
years then ended and for the period from February 25, 1997 (inception) to
September 30, 2010, in conformity with U.S. generally accepted accounting
principles.





The
accompanying financial statements have been prepared assuming that the Company
will continue as a going concern.  As discussed in Note 1 to the
financial statements, the Company does not generate significant revenue and has
negative cash flows from operations which raise substantial doubt about its
ability to continue as a going concern.  Management’s plans in regard
to these matters are also described in Note 1.  The financial
statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of
this uncertainty.





HJ
Associates & Consultants, LLP


Salt Lake
City, Utah


December
29, 2010
Eddie W. BONET, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D18-2526

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed February 13, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Case 4:16-cv-07387-JSW   Document 32-1   Filed 12/14/17   Page 1 of 4

Case 4:16-cv-07387-JSW   Document 32-1   Filed 12/14/17   Page 2 of 4

Case 4:16-cv-07387-JSW   Document 32-1   Filed 12/14/17   Page 3 of 4

Case 4:16-cv-07387-JSW   Document 32-1   Filed 12/14/17   Page 4 of 4
EX PARTE J.L.L.

CR-16-1095

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

December 21, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Habeas corpus pet. dismissed.
Sergio ACEVEDO, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D18-1660

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed January 23, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
NO. 01-15-00397-CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST SUPREME JUDICIAL DISTRICT OF TEXAS

HOUSTON, TEXAS

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

NO. 1434115

IN THE 179TH DISTRICT COURT OF HARRIS COUNTY, TEXAS

----------------------------------------------------------------- AUGUSTUS MITCHELL, Appellant

VS. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

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

APPELLANT'S MOTION TO SUPPLEMENT THE RECORD

TO THE HONORABLE JUSTICES OF THE COURT OF APPEALS: AUGUSTUS MITCHELL, Appellant herein, by and through the undersigned attorney of record, files this his Motion to Supplement the Record in the above entitled and numbered cause, pursuant to Rule 34.5, T.R.A.P., and in support thereof, would show the Court the following: 1. There is in the possession of the clerk the following items (a) Defendant’s Motion for Judgment Nunc Pro Tunc (b) Order on said motion (c) Judgment Nunc Pro Tunc 2. Appellant is requesting that the clerk supplement the record to include these items.

WHEREFORE, Appellant prays that the Court grant this Motion in all things and order the record supplemented as prayed for above. ACCEPTED 01-15-00397-CV FIRST COURT OF APPEALS

HOUSTON, TEXAS 7/7/2015 3:09:49 PM CHRISTOPHER PRINE

CLERKRespectfully submitted,

/s/ Joseph W. Varela JOSEPH W. VARELA Texas Bar No. 20496400 Suite 247 2500 East TC Jester Blvd. Houston, Texas 77008 (713) 957-0440 Fax (713) 957-2862

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing was served on the Appellate Division of the District Attorney's Office, 1201 Franklin, Houston , Texas 77002, by U.S. Mail, on the 7th day of July, 2015.

/s/ Joseph W. Varela JOSEPH W. VARELA
September 2 4 , 201 5



### JUDGMENT 

## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

ALEJANDRO MORALES C ALLES , Appellant

NO. 14

- 14

- 00696

- CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appe llee

________________________________ This cause was heard on the transcript of the record of the court below. Having considered the record, this Court holds that there was no error in the judgment. The Court orders the judgment AFFIRMED

. We further ord er appellant pay all costs expended in the appeal. We further order this decision certified below for observance.
Exhibit 31.2
 Certification Pursuant To
18 U.S.C. ss. 1350,
As Adopted Pursuant To
Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Consolidated Communications Holdings,
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 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)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13(a)-15(f) and 15(d)  15(f)) for the registrant and have:
     5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit
committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
   August 7, 2009
    /s/ Steven L. ChildersSteven L. ChildersChief Financial Officer
(Principal Financial Officer and Chief Accounting
Officer)
William Anthony DANTE, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 3D17-2344

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed November 7, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

DALLAS DIVISION

DON WAYNE SIMON, §

Petitioner, §

§

v. §

§ Civil Action No. 3:05-CV-1388-N

NATHANIEL QUARTERMAN, Director, §

Texas Department of Criminal Justice, §

Correctional Institutions Division, §

Respondent §

 

ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATION

OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

After reviewing all relevant matters in this case, including the Findings, Conclusions and

Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge and any objections thereto, in accordance

with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), the undersigned District Judge is of the opinion that the Findings and

Conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are correct, and they are accepted as the Findings and

Conclusions of the Court.

SIGNED January 31, 2008.

_________________________________

DAVID C. GODBEY

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
IIA 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. J. RES. 8 

Providing for the appointment of Barbara M. Barrett as a citizen regent 

of the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 23, 2021 

Mr. LEAHY (for himself and Mr. BOOZMAN) introduced the following joint resolution; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Rules 

and Administration 

JOINT RESOLUTION 

Providing for the appointment of Barbara M. Barrett as 

a citizen regent of the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution. 

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 That, in accordance with section 5581 of the Revised Stat4 utes of the United States (20 U.S.C. 43), the vacancy on 

5 the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution, in 

6 the class other than Members of Congress, occurring by 

7 reason of the expiration of the term of David M. 

8 Rubenstein of Maryland on May 7, 2021, is filled by the 

9 appointment of Barbara M. Barrett of Arizona. The apVerDate Sep 11 2014 22:41 Feb 23, 2021 Jkt 019200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\SJ8.IS SJ8

pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•SJ 8 IS 

1 pointment is for a term of 1,912 days, beginning on May 

2 8, 2021, or the date of the enactment of this joint resolu3 tion, whichever occurs later. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23-b



                                CONSENT OF EXPERT


         I consent to the references to me under the headings "Item 1. Business
- Environmental Matters" and "Item 3. Legal Proceedings" in the Annual Report on
Form 10-K of Meritor Automotive, Inc. ("Meritor") for the year ended September
30, 1998, and under the heading "Chief Financial Officer's Review - Management's
Discussion and Analysis - Environmental Matters" in Meritor's Annual Report to
Shareowners, incorporated by reference in the Form 10-K. I also consent to the
incorporation by reference of such references into Meritor's Registration
Statement on Form S-8 (Registration No. 333-35403) pertaining to the Meritor
Savings Plan; Meritor's Registration Statement on Form S-8 (Registration No.
333-35407) pertaining to the Meritor 1997 Long-Term Incentives Plan; and
Meritor's Registration Statement on Form S-3 (Registration No. 333-49777)
pertaining to debt securities.




                                             --------------------------------
                                                    David W. Greenfield
                                                  Senior Vice President,
                                             General Counsel and Secretary of
                                                 Meritor Automotive, Inc.
                                         
Date:  December 18, 1998