alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 21.1

Subsidiaries of the Registrants



|                                              |  |                             
|--------------------------------------------- |  | ----------------------------
|Subsidiaries of MetroPCS Communications, Inc. |  | Jurisdiction of Organization
|                                              | 
|MetroPCS, Inc.                                |  | Delaware                    
|MetroPCS Wireless, Inc.                       |  | Delaware                    
|MetroPCS Michigan, Inc.                       |  | Delaware                    
|MetroPCS Texas, LLC                           |  | Delaware                    
|MetroPCS California, LLC                      |  | Delaware                    
|MetroPCS Florida, LLC                         |  | Delaware                    
|MetroPCS Georgia, LLC                         |  | Delaware                    
|GWI PCS1, Inc.                                |  | Delaware                    
|Royal Street Communications, LLC              |  | Delaware                    
|                                              | 
|Subsidiaries of MetroPCS, Inc.                |  | Jurisdiction of Organization
|                                              | 
|MetroPCS Wireless, Inc.                       |  | Delaware                    
|MetroPCS Michigan, Inc.                       |  | Delaware                    
|MetroPCS Texas, LLC                           |  | Delaware                    
|MetroPCS California, LLC                      |  | Delaware                    
|MetroPCS Florida, LLC                         |  | Delaware                    
|MetroPCS Georgia, LLC                         |  | Delaware                    
|GWI PCS1, Inc.                                |  | Delaware                    
|Royal Street Communications, LLC              |  | Delaware
EXHIBIT 31.2

                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER


I, Jay Thailer, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of DVL, 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 officers 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 we 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) 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 evaluations; and

c) 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 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 function):

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.



/s/ Jay Thailer
------------------------
Jay Thailer
Chief Financial Officer
March 30, 2004
Exhibit 31.1

                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER

I, Alan E. Casnoff, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this Annual Report of Form 10-KSB of DVL, 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 small business
issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The small business issuer's other certifying officers 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 small business issuer 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 small business issuer, 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) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuer'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

c) Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business
issuer's most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuer's fourth fiscal
quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is
reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
small business issuer's auditors and the audit committee of the small business
issuer's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):

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 small business issuer's internal
control over financial reporting.


/s/ Alan E. Casnoff
-----------------------------
Alan E. Casnoff
Chief Executive Officer
March 27, 2006
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  Quarterly  Report  of  On2  Technologies,  Inc.  (the
"Company")  on Form 10-QSB for the period  ended June 30, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Anthony
Principe,  Vice President and Chief Financial  Officer of the Company,  certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section.  1350, as adopted pursuant  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
      aspects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


                                                        /s/ Anthony Principe
                                                        ------------------------
                                                        Anthony Principe
                                                        Vice President and Chief
                                                        Financial Officer
                                                        On2 Technologies, Inc.
                                                        July 22, 2004


                                       27
**Installations and Environmental Menu**

                    - Installations and Environment Home
                    - NEPA Projects
                    - At-Sea Initiatives                        - At-Sea Training
                      - Environmental Planning
                    - Ashore Initiatives                        - Home Basing and Homeporting
                      - Field Carrier Landing Practice (FCLP) 
                      - Aircraft Noise Modeling
                      - Naval Range Complex                           - Range Clearance
                        - Range Air Installations Compatible Use Zones (RAICUZ) Program
                    - Operational Energy
                    - U.S. Navy Stewards of the Sea Outreach Program

**Stewards of the Sea**The Stewards of the Sea: Defending Freedom, Protecting the Environment exhibit opened on March 13, 2014, and is located on the 3rd Floor of the Nauticus in Norfolk, Virginia. The 1,000-square foot exhibit is a dynamic display that showcases how the U.S. Navy protects the environment while operating at sea.Through the use of hands-on activities, games, videos, and immersive scenarios, visitors can:
                        -  Scan the horizon through giant “Big Eye” binoculars to look for whales, dolphins, or manatees 
                        -  Pretend to be a Sailor looking for enemy submarines using sonar 
                        -  Hear what marine mammal, man-made, and natural sounds are like underwater 
                        -  Learn how whales are tagged and monitored 
                        -  See scientific equipment used by the Navy to study the ocean environment 
                        -  Learn about environmental careers in the Navy 

#####  

##### Navy.mil  |  Navy.com  |  Navy FOIA  |  DoD Accessibility/Section 508  |  No Fear Act  |  Open Government  |  Plain Writing Act USA.gov  |  Veterans Crisis Line  |  VA Vet Center  |  FVAP  |   DoD Safe Helpline  |  Navy SAPR  |  NCIS Tips  |  Privacy Policy  |  Site Map  |  Contact US

###### Commander, U.S. Fleet Forces Command   |   1562 Mitscher Ave., Suite 250   |   Norfolk, Virginia 23551-2487

###### Official U.S. Navy Website
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Ronald Cooper, Appellant.

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: Defendant appeals from a judgment convicting him, after a jury trial, of two counts of robbery in the first degree and one count each of criminal possession of a weapon in the second and third degrees. Defendant argues that the court erred in refusing to suppress the victim’s showup identification of defendant. We disagree. Based on the testimony adduced at the *Wade*hearing, defendant was apprehended at 6:00 a.m. about 1,000 feet from the scene of the crime, and within one-half hour of the crime. Thus, the showup was permissible because the suspect was captured near the crime scene and viewed in spatial and temporal proximity by the victim *(see, People v Riley,*70 NY2d 523, 529). The fact that defendant was handcuffed, by itself, does not invalidate the showup, because "[t]he mere fact that the police present a man to be viewed implies that they consider him to be a suspect and the presence of handcuffs adds little to the inference” *(People v Thomas,*105 AD2d 1098).

We have examined defendant’s remaining contentions on appeal and find them to be without merit. (Appeal from judgment of Monroe County Court, Bergin, J. — robbery, first degree, and other charges.) Present — Boomer, J. P., Pine, Balio, Lawton and Davis, JJ.
#### Sterling Arthur CUMMINGS, Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES of America, Respondent.

No. 72 C 120(1).

United States District Court, E. D. Missouri, E. D.

March 6, 1972.

Sterling Arthur Cummings, pro se.

Daniel Bartlett, U. S. Atty., John P. Glynn, Asst. U. S. Atty., St. Louis, Mo., for respondent.

MEMORANDUM

MEREDITH, Chief Judge.

This matter is pending on the petition of Sterling Arthur Cummings to set aside the sentence previously imposed by this Court. Petitioner was charged with stealing chattels in a value in excess of $100.00 from a motor truck of the N. K. Transfer Company while the chattels were moving as a part of interstate shipment of freight from the Delmonico International Corporation at Overland, Missouri, to the Dale Snively Sewing Center at Olney, Illinois. He was tried before a jury and convicted on April 3, 1970; a sentence of ten years was imposed by this Court, an appeal was taken and affirmed.

Petitioner now complains that the federal court has no jurisdiction since this was not a federal offense for the reason that the N. K. Transfer Company does not now and has never held a license from the Interstate Commerce Commission and, therefore, the freight could not have been in interstate commerce.

This Court takes judicial notice of the fact that the City and County of St. Louis are in an exempt zone and that it is not necessary that carriers of interstate freight be licensed by the Interstate Commerce Commission or by the State of Missouri Public Service Commission.

The evidence in this case clearly showed that the freight in question had left the shipper’s possession and was in the possession of the N. K. Transfer Company, en route to an interstate carrier. Such freight once commenced on an interstate shipment is in interstate commerce. The complaint of the petitioner is without merit and will be dismissed.
II 

Calendar No. 669 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 6387 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

NOVEMBER 17, 2010 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

DECEMBER 1, 2010 

Reported by Mr. LIEBERMAN, without amendment 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 337 West Clark Street in Eureka, California, 

as the ‘‘Sam Sacco Post Office Building’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SAM SACCO POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

4 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

5 Postal Service located at 337 West Clark Street in Eure6 ka, California, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Sam 

7 Sacco Post Office Building’’. 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 6387 RS

1 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg2 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

3 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

4 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Sam Sacco Post Office 

5 Building’’. 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS

jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
Calendar No. 669 

111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 6387 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postfice Building’’. Eureka, California, as the ‘‘Sam Sacco Post Of- al Service located at 337 West Clark Street in 

DECEMBER 1, 2010 

Reported without amendment 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
Petition for Writ of Mandamus Denied and Memorandum Opinion filed January

10 , 2012

.

In The



## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14

- 11

- 01111

- CR

IN RE MARCUS COFER , Relator

ORIGINAL PROCEEDING WRIT OF MANDAMUS



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

On December 28, 2011 , relator Marcus Cofer filed a petition for writ of mandamus in this c ourt. See Tex. Gov’t Code Ann. §22.221; see also Tex. R. App. P. 52. In the petition, relator ask s this c ourt to compel the Honorable Vanessa Velasquez, presiding judge of the 183rd District Court of Harris C ounty to rule on his Motion to Quash Charge, Motion to Quash Indictment, and Motion for Discovery

. To be entitled to mandamus relief in a criminal case, a relator must show that he has no adequate remedy at law to redress his alleged harm, and that what he seeks to compel is a ministerial act, not involving a discretionary or judicial decision. State ex rel. Young v. Sixth Judicial Dist. Court of Appeals at Texarkana , 236 S. W.3d 207, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007) (orig. proceeding). Consideration of a motion that is properly filed and before the court is a ministerial act. State ex rel. Curry v. Gray , 726 S.W.2d 125, 128 (Tex. Crim. App. 1987) (orig. proce eding). A relator must establish the trial court (1) had2

a legal duty to rule on the motion; (2) was asked to rule on the motion; and (3) failed to do so. In re Keeter , 134 S.W.3d 250, 252 (Tex. App.

— Waco 2003, orig. proceeding); In re Villarreal , 96 S.W .3d 708, 710 (Tex. App.

— Amarillo 2003, orig. proceeding) (relator must show that trial court received, was aware of, and was asked to rule on motion). Relator has not provided this court with copies of the motions on which he requests rulings. In addition , relator has not established that the motions were properly filed and that the trial court was asked to rule on them but failed to do so. It is relator’s burden to provide this court with a record sufficient to establish his right to relief. Walker v. Packer , 827 S.W.2d 833, 837 (Tex. 1992); Tex. R. App. P. 52.3(k), 52.7(a). Accordingly, we deny relator ’ s petition for writ of mandamus.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Frost, Seymore, and Jamison. Do Not Publish

— T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 47.2( b).
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 813 Reported in Senate (RS)]

                                                        Calendar No. 75
111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 813

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 11, 2009

 Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and 
                              Public Works

                             June 11, 2009

               Reported by Mrs. Boxer, without amendment

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To designate the Federal building and United States courthouse located 
at 306 East Main Street in Elizabeth City, North Carolina, as the ``J. 
   Herbert W. Small Federal Building and United States Courthouse''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The Federal building and United States courthouse located at 306 
East Main Street in Elizabeth City, North Carolina, shall be known and 
designated as the ``J. Herbert W. Small Federal Building and United 
States Courthouse''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the Federal building and United States 
courthouse referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference 
to the ``J. Herbert W. Small Federal Building and United States 
Courthouse''.
                                                        Calendar No. 75

111th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                               H. R. 813

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

To designate the Federal building and United States courthouse located 
at 306 East Main Street in Elizabeth City, North Carolina, as the ``J. 
   Herbert W. Small Federal Building and United States Courthouse''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                             June 11, 2009

                       Reported without amendment
```
Topical Fire Report Series December 2018 | Volume 19, Issue 8

At a Glance

Residential Building Electrical Fires 

(2014-2016)

From 2014 to 2016, 

an estimated 

24,000

residential building 

electrical fires

were reported to United 

States fire departments 

each year.

These fires caused an estimated:

310 

deaths

850

injuries in property loss

Residential building electrical 

fires resulted in over twice 

the dollar loss per fire than 

residential building nonelectrical 

fires did.

Residential building electrical 

fires occurred most often in 

one- and two-family dwellings 

(83 percent).

Residential building electrical 



fires occurred most often in 

the winter month of January 

(12 percent).

JAN

In only 17 percent of residential 

building electrical fires, the fire 

spread was limited to the object 

where the fire started.  Residential building electrical fires 

most often started in bedrooms 

(15 percent) and attics or vacant 

crawl spaces (13 percent).

These topical reports are designed to explore facets of the U.S. fire problem as depicted through data collected in the U.S. Fire Administration’s National 

Fire Incident Reporting System. Each topical report briefly addresses the nature of the specific fire or fire-related topic, highlights important findings 

from the data, and may suggest other resources to consider for further information.

To read the full report, visit: www.usfa.fema.gov/data/statistics/reports.html.

National Fire Data Center

16825 S. Seton Ave.

Emmitsburg, MD 21727

https://www.usfa.fema.gov/data/statistics/
# CE2010137EN.01005201.xml

| 27.5.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 137/52 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.5.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 137/52

---

Thursday 2 April 2009Approving the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on trade in agricultural products *

P6_TA(2009)0198

European Parliament legislative resolution of 2 April 2009 on the proposal for a Council decision on the conclusion of the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation amending Annex 11 to the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on trade in agricultural products (15523/2008 – COM(2008)0685 – C6-0028/2009 – 2008/0202(CNS))

2010/C 137 E/12

(Consultation procedure)

The European Parliament,

The European Parliament

having regard to the proposal for a Council decision (COM(2008)0685),

having regard to the draft Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation amending Annex 11 to the Agreement between the European Community and the Swiss Confederation on trade in agricultural products (15523/2008),

having regard to Articles 37, 133 and 152(4)(b) of the EC Treaty,

having regard to Article 300(3), first subparagraph, of the EC Treaty, pursuant to which the Council consulted Parliament (C6-0028/2009),

having regard to Rules 51 and 83(7) of its Rules of Procedure,

having regard to the report of the Committee on International Trade (A6-0122/2009),

| 1. | Approves the conclusion of the Agreement; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Approves the conclusion of the Agreement;

| 2. | Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission, and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and the Swiss Confederation. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and the Commission, and the governments and parliaments of the Member States and the Swiss Confederation.

---