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


                    SUBSIDIARIES OF McLEODUSA INCORPORATED


                                                                      State of
Name                                                               Incorporation
----                                                               -------------

McLeodUSA Telecommunications Services, Inc.                        Iowa

Consolidated Communication Inc.                                    Delaware

McLeodUSA Media Group, Inc.                                        Iowa

Dakota Telecommunications Group, Inc.                              Delaware

Info America Phone Books, Inc.                                     Michigan

Talking Directories, Inc.                                          Michigan

McLeodUSA Diversified, Inc.                                        Iowa

McLeodUSA Publishing Company                                       Iowa

McLeodUSA ATS, Inc.                                                Iowa

McLeodUSA ACS, Inc.                                                Iowa

MWR Towers, Inc.                                                   Iowa

Ruffalo, Cody & Associates, Inc.                                   Iowa

McLeodUSA Network Services, Inc.                                   Iowa

McLeodUSA Integrated Business Systems, Inc.                        Iowa

NewCom Companies, Inc.                                             Iowa

QST Communications Inc.                                            Iowa

Frontier Directory Company of Nebraska, Inc.                       Nebraska

Campus-Call, Inc.                                                  Iowa
<PAGE>
 
ESI Cabling Services Incorporated                                  Minnesota

DTG Community Telephone, Inc.                                      South Dakota

Dakota Telecom, Inc.                                               South Dakota

DTG Internet, Inc.                                                 South Dakota

DTG Communications, Inc.                                           South Dakota

DTG DataNet, Inc.                                                  South Dakota

Dakota Telecommunications Systems, Inc.                            South Dakota

Dakota Wireless Systems, Inc.                                      South Dakota

Consolidated Communications Operator Services Inc.                 Illinois

Consolidated Communications Public Services Inc.                   Illinois

Consolidated Communications Directories Inc.                       Illinois

Greene County Partners, Inc.                                       Illinois

Consolidated Market Response Inc.                                  Illinois

Illinois Consolidated Telephone Company                            Illinois

Consolidated Communications Systems & Services Inc.                Illinois

                                      -2-
State of North Carolina v. Larry Anthony Bowes

No. COA16-304

Court of Appeals of North Carolina.

Filed: December 20, 2016

NO ERROR.
Exhibit 32.0
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (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. The undersigned have
executed this Certificate as of the 26th day of
October 2010.
 /s/ Andrew DenverAndrew DenverInterim Chief Executive Officer and
Executive Chairman/s/ Salesh BalakSalesh BalakChief Financial Officer 
 *
    
    This certification is being furnished as required by Rule 13a-14(b)
under the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the
Exchange Act), and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the
United States Code, and shall not be deemed filed for purposes of
Section 18 of the Exchange Act or otherwise subject to the liability
of that section. This certification shall not be deemed to be
incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of
1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act, except to the extent such
certification is explicitly incorporated by reference in such filing.
Exhibit 11 - Computation of Earnings Per Share

                                                            Years Ended
                                                            December 31,
Primary:                                               1996             1995
                                                   -----------------------------
Weighted average shares outstanding                 4,467,350          4,342,883
Net effect of dilutive stock
   options - based on the
   treasury stock method using
   average market price                               217,263            170,473
                                                   -----------------------------
Totals                                              4,684,613         4,513,355

Pro Forma Net Income                               $1,593,779         $1,142,635
                                                   -----------------------------
Per share Amount                                   $     0.34         $     0.25
                                                   =============================


Fully Diluted:
Weighted average shares outstanding                 4,467,350          4,342,883
Net effect of dilutive stock
   options - based on the
   treasury stock method using
   the higher of the average
   or the closing price                                217,263           195,651
                                                   -----------------------------
Totals                                              4,684,613          4,538,534

Pro Forma Net Income                               $1,593,779         $1,142,635
                                                   -----------------------------
Per share Amount                                   $     0.34         $     0.25
                                                   =============================


All shares outstanding have been restated to give effect to the 5-for-4 stock
splits declared during September 1995 and June 1996.
EXHIBIT 32

          CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       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 Cameron International, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ending September 30, 2005 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Stephen Samuels, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the
Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.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 result of operations of
          the Company.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this certification as of the
8th day of November, 2005.


/s/ Stephen Samuels
-----------------------------------
Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer
**Exhibit 23.1**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRMWe hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements onForms S-3 (No. 333-86457, 333-93516, 333-60651 and 333-109406) and Forms S-8 (No.333-19197, 333-60079 and 333-60619) of Winston Hotels, Inc. of our report dated March 13,2006 relating to the financial statements, financial statement schedules, management’sassessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting and theeffectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, which appears in this Form10-K.      /s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP Raleigh, NC  March 13, 2006  
93
State v. David Michael Wilson

164P16-1

Supreme Court of North Carolina.

June 9, 2016

David Michael Wilson, for Wilson, David Michael.

Anne M. Middleton, Special Deputy Attorney General, Todd Williams, District Attorney, for State of North Carolina.

The following order has been entered on the motion filed on the 6th of May 2016 by Defendant to Proceed In Forma Pauperis:

"Motion Allowed by order of the Court in conference, this the 9th of June 2016."
[Federal Register Volume 70, Number 182 (Wednesday, September 21, 2005)]
[Notices]
[Pages 55408-55409]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 05-18867]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; Notice 
of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Child Health and Human 
Development Special Emphasis Panel, Learning Disabilities Research 
Center.
    Date: October 13-14, 2005.
    Time: 9 a.m. to 5 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Hyatt Regency Bethesda, One Bethesda Metro Center, 7400 
Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20814.
    Contact Person: Marita R. Hopmann, PhD, Scientific Review 
Administrator, Division of Scientific Review, National Institute of 
Child Health and Human Development, 6100 Building, Room 5B01, 
Bethesda, MD 20892, (303) 435-6911, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#5d35322d303c3333301d303c343173333435733a322b"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="99f1f6e9f4f8f7f7f4d9f4f8f0f5b7f7f0f1b7fef6ef">[email protected]</span></a>.


[[Page 55409]]


(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.864, 
Population Research; 93.865, Research for Mothers and Children; 
93.929, Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research; 93.209, 
Contraception and Infertility Loan Repayment Program, National 
Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: September 13, 2005.
Anthony M. Coelho, Jr.,
Acting Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 05-18867 Filed 9-20-05; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
# C_2011232EN.01004103.xml

| 6.8.2011 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 232/41 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.8.2011

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 232/41

---

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 25 May 2011 — Stefan Meierhofer v European Commission

(Case F-74/07 RENV) (1)

(Civil service - Recruitment - Open competition - Failure of a candidate in the oral test - Obligation to state reasons - Rules governing the work of the selection board)

(2011/C 232/74)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Stefan Meierhofer (Munich, Germany) (represented by: H.-G. Schiessl, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Currall and B. Eggers, Agents)

Re:

Action for annulment of the decision of the selection board in competition EPSO AD/26/05 of 10 May 2007 not to include the applicant on the reserve list of that competition on the ground of his insufficient mark in the oral test.

Operative part of the order

| 1. | There is no need to adjudicate on Mr Meierhofer's action in so far as it disputes the insufficient statement of reasons for the decision of 19 June 2007. |
| --- | --- |

1.

There is no need to adjudicate on Mr Meierhofer's action in so far as it disputes the insufficient statement of reasons for the decision of 19 June 2007.

| 2. | The remainder of Mr Meierhofer's action is dismissed, in part as manifestly unfounded, and in part as manifestly inadmissible. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The remainder of Mr Meierhofer's action is dismissed, in part as manifestly unfounded, and in part as manifestly inadmissible.

| 3. | The European Commission shall bear two thirds of the costs incurred by the applicant in the first set of proceedings before the Tribunal and its own costs relating to the first set of proceedings before the Tribunal, the proceedings before the General Court of the European Union and the present proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

3.

The European Commission shall bear two thirds of the costs incurred by the applicant in the first set of proceedings before the Tribunal and its own costs relating to the first set of proceedings before the Tribunal, the proceedings before the General Court of the European Union and the present proceedings.

| 4. | The applicant shall bear one-third of his own costs relating to the first set of proceedings before the Tribunal and all his own costs relating to the proceedings before the General Court of the European Union and the present proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

4.

The applicant shall bear one-third of his own costs relating to the first set of proceedings before the Tribunal and all his own costs relating to the proceedings before the General Court of the European Union and the present proceedings.

---

(1)  OJ C 223, 22.9.2007, p. 21.

---
1639.

#### Warnack *v.*The State.

Hill, C. J.

1. When this ease was previously before this court it was expressly held that in no view of the evidence or of the statement of the accused' was the law of justifiable homicide in eases of mutual combat, as laid down in g73 of the Renal Code, applicable, and that the court erred in giving in charge that section. (3 *Ga. App.*594, 60 S. E. 288.) Without any substantial change in the evidence or in the statement of the accused, the trial court again gave in charge §73 of the Penal Code, with an immaterial modification. It was error-*817so to charge. *Holland*v. *State,*3 *Ga. App.*465 (60 S. E. 205) ; *Lightsy*v. *State,*2 *Ga. App.*442 (58 S. E. 686), and citations from the Supreme Court.

Indictment for murder — 'Conviction of involuntary manslaughter in the commission of an unlawful act; from Whitfield superior-court — 'Judge Fite. December 16, 1908.

Argued February 10,

Decided March 16, 1909.

The trial judge, in his charge to the jury, gave the language of the Penal Code, §71, and continued as follows: “It must also appear that the danger was so urgent and pressing at the time of the killing that, in order to save his brother’s life, or to prevent a felony from being committed upon him, the killing of the deceased was absolutely necessary.” In the motion for a new trial it is alleged that the court erred in so charging; that the language here quoted was not applicable to the case; that it is applicable only to mutual combat, and that there was no evidence authorizing it.

*George G. Glenn, William E. Mann,*for plaintiff in error*

*T. G. Milner, solicitor-general, Sam P. Maddox,*contra.

2. The other assignments of error are without merit.

*Judgment reversed.*
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Justice

###### Antitrust Division

                    Notice is hereby given that, on September 1, 2005, pursuant to Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301*et seq.*                     (“the Act”), ControlNet International, Ltd. (“ControlNet”) has filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose of extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. Specifically, McNaughton-McKay Electric Company, Madison Heights, MI; IDC Corporation, Dimondale, MI; and Kawasaki Robotics (USA), Inc., Wixom, MI have withdrawn as parties to this venture.                

                    No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned                           ( print page 55921)                        activity of the group research project. Membership in this group research project remains open, and ControlNet intends to file additional written notification disclosing all changes in membership.                

                    On February 3, 2005, ControlNet filed its original notification pursuant to Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice in the                     **Federal Register**                     pursuant to section 6(b) of the Act on March 1, 2005 (70 FR 9979).                

                    The last notification was filed with the Department on May 18, 2005. A notice was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     pursuant to section 6(b) of the Act on June 13, 2005 (70 FR 34150).                

Dorothy B. Fountain,

Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.

[FR Doc. 05-19007 Filed 9-22-05; 8:45am]

BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-10897 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus ROBERTO OCAMPO-CASTANEDA, also known as Roberto Garcia, also known as Emilio Calderon, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:01-CR-48-1-P

-------------------- June 19, 2002 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Roberto Ocampo-Castaneda appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction of being found in the United States after deportation in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Ocampo-Castaneda contends that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) define separate offenses. He argues that the aggravated felony conviction that resulted in his increased sentence is an element of the offense under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) that should have been alleged in his indictment. Ocampo-No. 01-10897 -2- Castaneda maintains that he pleaded guilty to an indictment which charged only simple reentry under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a). He argues that his sentence exceeds the two-year maximum term of imprisonment which may be imposed for that offense.
In Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), the Supreme Court held that the enhanced penalties in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are sentencing provisions, not elements of separate offenses. The Court further held that the sentencing provisions do not violate the Due Process Clause. Id. at 239-47. Ocampo-Castaneda acknowledges that his argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres , but asserts that the decision has been cast into doubt by Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000). He seeks to preserve his argument for further review. Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres

. See Apprendi , 530 U.S. at 489-90; United States v. Dabeit , 231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir. 2000), cert. denied , 531 U.S. 1202 (2001). This court must follow Almendarez-Torres “unless and until the Supreme Court itself determines to overrule it.” Dabeit , 231 F.3d at 984 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. In lieu of filing an appellee’s brief, the Government has filed a motion asking this court to dismiss this appeal or, in the alternative, to summarily affirm the district court’s judgment. The Government’s motion to dismiss is DENIED. The motion for a summary affirmance is GRANTED. The Government need not file an appellee’s brief. AFFIRMED; MOTION TO DISMISS DENIED; MOTION FOR SUMMARY AFFIRMANCE GRANTED.
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1


INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

     We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements 
No. 33-81718, 33-89474, 333-19777, 333-14799, 333-03877, 333-03881, 333-03677, 
333-02812 and 333-59483 of C-Cube Microsystems Inc. on Forms S-8 of our reports 
dated January 21, 1999, appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of C-Cube 
Microsystems Inc. for the year ended December 31, 1998.


/s/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

San Jose, California
March 22, 1999
I 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 3940 

To amend title 23, United States Code, with respect to weight limitations 

for natural gas vehicles, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 28, 2014 

Mr. GRAVES of Missouri (for himself and Mr. TERRY) introduced the following 

bill; which was referred to the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To amend title 23, United States Code, with respect to 

weight limitations for natural gas vehicles, and for other 

purposes. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Natural Gas Long 

5 Haul Truck Competitiveness Act of 2014’’. 

6 SEC. 2. WEIGHT LIMITATIONS FOR NATURAL GAS VEHI7 CLES. 

8 Section 127 of title 23, United States Code, is 

9 amended by adding at the end the following: 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS

2 

•HR 3940 IH

1 ‘‘(j) NATURAL GAS VEHICLES.—Not later than 90 

2 days after the date of enactment of this subsection, the 

3 Secretary shall issue regulations to allow a vehicle, if oper4 ated by an engine fueled primarily by natural gas, to ex5 ceed any vehicle weight limit under this section by an 

6 amount that is equal to— 

7 ‘‘(1) the weight of the vehicle attributable to 

8 the natural gas tank and fueling system carried by 

9 such vehicle; less 

10 ‘‘(2) the weight of a comparable diesel tank and 

11 fueling system.’’. 

Æ 

mstockstill on DSK4VPTVN1PROD with BILLS