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


                                                                   EXHIBIT 21

                              LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES


The following table lists the Company's subsidiaries, all of which are directly
or indirectly wholly-owned, except as provided below:

<TABLE>
<S>                                                           <C>
       Power-Electronics, Inc.                                Puerto Rico
       Poder Uno de Mexico, S.A. de C.V.                      Mexico
       P-O Nevada Corp.                                       USA
       Power-One Holding AG                                   Switzerland
       Melcher Holding, Inc.                                  USA
       Power-One AG                                           Switzerland
       Melcher, Inc.                                          USA
       Power-One S.A.                                         France
       Power-One Ltd.                                         Great Britain
       Power-One GmbH                                         Germany
       Power-One B.V.                                         Netherlands
       Power-One SIMP Ltd.                                    Ireland
       Power-One Produktion AG                                Switzerland
       Power-One s.r.o.                                       Slovakia
       Melcher Incorporated                                   USA
       Melcher Corp.                                          Canada
       International Power Devices, Inc.                      USA
       HC Power, Inc.                                         USA
       Power-One S.r.l.                                       Italy
       Power-One I/S                                          Denmark
       Power-One Denmark ApS                                  Denmark
       Power-One Norge AS                                     Norway
       Powec AS                                               Norway
       Powec Eiendom AS                                       Norway
       Powec Ltd.                                             Great Britain
       Powec GmbH                                             Germany
       Powec Finland OY                                       Finland
       Powec AB                                               Sweden
       Powec Pty Ltd.                                         Australia
       Powec Pte. Ltd.                                        Singapore
       Power-One Asia Ltd.                                    Hong Kong
</TABLE>

1. Power-One S.A., otherwise indirectly wholly-owned by the Company, has seven
single-shore "fiduciary shareholders" as required by local law.

2. Power-One Ltd. is 99% indirectly owned by the Company and 1% owned by an
individual stockholder.
I

104TH CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4026

To assist the State of New Hampshire in examining the historical significance

of the Berlin, New Hampshire, area.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 5, 1996

Mr. BASS introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee

on Resources

A BILL

To assist the State of New Hampshire in examining the

historical significance of the Berlin, New Hampshire, area.

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 ‘‘Berlin, New Hamp5 shire Historic Recognition Act’’.

6 SEC. 2. PURPOSE.

7 The purpose of this Act is to assist the State of New

8 Hampshire in examining the historical significance of the

9 Berlin, New Hampshire, area.
2

•HR 4026 IH

1 SEC. 3. FINDINGS.

2 The Congress finds the following:

3 (1) The Berlin, New Hampshire, area has been

4 the site of logging and papermaking for over 125

5 years.

6 (2) The multicultural history of such area, built

7 on the immigrants who came to the area to work in

8 the forests and mills, is an important part of life in

9 Berlin, New Hampshire.

10 (3) The economic situation in such area has

11 changed drastically in recent years, and the vitality

12 of the city of Berlin, New Hampshire, depends on its

13 ability to capitalize on its diverse resources to main14 tain a strong job base.

15 (4) One of the resources that may provide jobs

16 is heritage-based development.

17 (5) Berlin, New Hampshire, has developed a

18 Heritage Trail to document and promote apprecia19 tion of its many architecturally significant buildings

20 and sites.

21 (6) Over 7,000,000 people a year benefit from

22 the White Mountain National Forest, which owes a

23 great deal to Berlin, New Hampshire, and its indus24 try, since the Brown Company donated 38,000 acres

25 of land in the area.
3

•HR 4026 IH

1 (7) A number of sites in the Berlin, New

2 Hampshire, area are of historical significance and

3 could play a role in any designation of National His4 toric Landmarks in the area, including the Brown

5 Company House, the Nansen Ski Jump, the Brown

6 Company Research Building, and the Androscoggin

7 River Boom Piers.

8 SEC. 4. ASSISTANCE.

9 The Secretary of the Interior shall assist the State

10 of New Hampshire in examining Berlin, New Hampshire,

11 area and the Androscoggin Valley region for historical sig12 nificance and identification of sites for possible listing on

13 the National Register of Historic Places.

Æ
#### STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Michael GRAY, Appellant. Michael GRAY, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. 68044.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

Feb. 25, 1997.

David L. Simpson, Asst. Public Defender, Columbia, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Joanne E. Joiner, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before DOWD, P.J., and REINHARD and GARY M. GAERTNER, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Appellant, Michael Gray (“defendant”), appeals the judgment of conviction entered by the Circuit Court of the County of St. Louis after a jury found him guilty of one count of possession of a controlled substance with intent to deliver, RSMo § 195.211 (1994). Defendant also appeals the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion for post conviction relief after an evidentiary hearing. We affirm.

Wé have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the legal files and find the judgment of the trial court is supported by substantial evidence, is not against the weight of the evidence, and no error of law appears. Likewise, we find the decision of the motion court is not clearly erroneous. As an extended opinion would serve no jurisprudential purpose, we affirm the judgments pursuant to Rules 30.25(b) and 84.16(b).
Exhibit 4.1


 


 


THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON


NEW YORK’S FIRST BANK-FOUNDED 1784 BY ALEXANDER HAMILTON


 


 


2 HANSON PLACE, 12TH FLOOR, BROOKLYN,
N.Y. 11217


 


 


 


April 17, 2014


 


Hennion & Walsh, Inc.


2001 Route 46, Waterview Plaza


Parsippany, New Jersey 07054


 


Smart Trust, New York Municipal Portfolio
of Closed-End Funds Trust, Series 7


Dear Sirs:


The Bank of New York
Mellon is acting as trustee for Smart Trust, New York Municipal Portfolio of Closed-End Funds Trust, Series 7 set forth above (the
“Trust”). We enclosed a list of the Securities to be deposited in the Trust on the date hereof. The prices indicated
therein reflect our evaluation of such Securities as of close of business on April 17, 2014, in accordance with the valuation method
set forth in the Trust Indenture and Agreement. We consent to the reference to The Bank of New York Mellon as the party performing
the evaluations of the Trust Securities in the Registration Statement (No. 333-194167) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
with respect to the registration of the sale of the Trust Units and to the filing of this consent as an exhibit thereto.


 


 


Very truly yours,


 


/s/
GERARDO CIPRIANO _______________ 


Gerardo Cipriano


Vice President
NUMBER 13-14-00724-CR

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

Michael Phillips, Appellant,

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee.

On appeal from the 319th District Court

of Nueces County, Texas.

O R D E R

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Rodriguez, and Garza

Order Per Curiam

Appellant, Michael Phillips, has filed a notice of appeal with this Court from his 

conviction in trial court cause number 14-CR2619-G. The trial court’s certification of the 

defendant’s right to appeal shows that the defendant does not have the right to appeal. 

See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). The Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure provide that an 

appeal must be dismissed if a certification showing that a defendant has a right of 

appeal is not made a part of the record. TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d); see TEX. R. APP. P. 

37.1, 44.3, 44.4.
2

Within thirty days of receipt of this notice, appellant’s lead appellate counsel, 

Donald Edwards, is hereby ORDERED to: 1) review the record; 2) determine whether 

appellant has a right to appeal; and 3) forward to this Court, by letter, counsel’s findings 

as to whether appellant has a right to appeal and/or advise this Court as to the 

existence of any amended certification. 

If appellant’s counsel determines that appellant has a right to appeal, counsel is 

further ORDERED to file a motion with this Court within thirty days of receipt of this 

notice, identifying and explaining substantive reasons why appellant has a right to 

appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 44.3, 44.4; see also, e.g., Carroll v. State, No. 04-03-

00473-CR, 2003 Tex. App. LEXIS 7317 (San Antonio 2003, no pet.) (designated for 

publication) (certification form provided in appendix to appellate rules may be modified 

to reflect that defendant has right of appeal under circumstances not addressed by the 

form). The motion must include an analysis of the applicable case law, and any factual 

allegations therein must be true and supported by the record. Cf. Woods v. State, 108 

S.W.3d 314, 316 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003) (construing former appellate rule 25.2(b)(3) 

and holding that recitations in the notice of appeal must be true and supported by the 

record). Copies of record documents necessary to evaluate the alleged error in the 

certification affecting appellant’s right to appeal shall be attached to the motion. See 

TEX. R. APP. P. 10.1, 10.2.

PER CURIAM

Do not publish. 

TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).

Delivered and filed the 

18th day of December 2014.
Exhibit
23.1




Consent
of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
  We
consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements (Form
S-3 No. 333-98775 and Form S-8 Nos. 333-99597, 333-103368 and 333-118347) of
Equity One, Inc. and subsidiaries and in the related Prospectuses of our reports
dated February 21, 2008, with respect to the consolidated financial statements
and schedules of Equity One, Inc. and  subsidiaries, and the
effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of Equity One, Inc.
and subsidiaries included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended
December 31, 2007.
  /s/
Ernst & Young LLP
 Certified
Public Accountants
 Fort
Lauderdale, Florida
 February
21, 2008
Exhibit 99.1

                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 Annual Report of Urbani Holdings, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-KSB for the year ended  December  31, 2002 as filed with the  Securities
and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I, Rosario  Safina
Chief  Executive  Officer  and  Principal  Accounting  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.



                     May 23, 2003



                  By: /s/ Rosario Safina
                          ---------------
                  Name:   Rosario Safina
                  Title: Chief Executive Officer
                         and Principal Accounting Officer
EXHIBIT 32.2









CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(b) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934, AS AMENDED,


AND 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002










The undersigned officer of Consorteum Holdings, Inc. (hereinafter the "Company") hereby certifies to such officer's knowledge that the Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2011 (the "Report"), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. This certification is provided solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and shall not be deemed to be part of the Report or "filed" for any purpose whatsoever.










Date: May 23, 2011
/s/ Geoffrey William SmethurstGeoffrey William SmethurstChief Financial Officer
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

NORTHERN DIVISION 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff,

Case Number 08-20599-BC

v. Honorable Thomas L. Ludington

STEVEN PAUL WALTON,

Defendant.

__________________________________/ 

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION, GRANTING THE

GOVERNMENT’S MOTION FOR INVOLUNTARY MEDICAL TREATMENT, AND

AUTHORIZING INVOLUNTARY MEDICAL TREATMENT

This matter is before the Court on a report and recommendation [Dkt # 25] issued by

Magistrate Judge Charles E. Binder on September 25, 2009. The magistrate judge recommends that

the Court grant the government’s motion for involuntary medical treatment [Dkt. # 23]. As of

today’s date, no party has filed any objections to the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation.

The failure to file objections to the report and recommendation waives any further right to appeal.

Smith v. Detroit Fed’n of Teachers Local 231, 829 F.2d 1370, 1373 (6th Cir. 1987). Likewise, the

failure to object to the magistrate judge’s report releases the Court from its duty to independently

review the record. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985). However, the Court agrees with the

conclusions of the magistrate judge.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation [Dkt

# 25] is ADOPTED.

It is further ORDERED that the government’s motion for involuntary medical treatment

[Dkt. # 23] is GRANTED.

1:08-cr-20599-TLL-CEB Doc # 27 Filed 10/28/09 Pg 1 of 2 Pg ID 89
-2-

It is further ORDERED that the officials at FMC Butner are AUTHORIZED to

involuntarily administer medical treatment for a period of four months from the onset of the

administration consistent with the medical evaluation submitted to the Court [Dkt. # 22-4].

It is further ORDERED that the time beginning February 24, 2009, continues to be

DETERMINED to be EXCLUDABLE DELAY pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3161(h)(4) because the

defendant continues to be mentally incompetent.

s/Thomas L. Ludington 

THOMAS L. LUDINGTON

United States District Judge

Dated: October 28, 2009

PROOF OF SERVICE

The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing order was served

upon each attorney or party of record herein by electronic means or first

class U.S. mail on October 28, 2009.

s/Tracy A. Jacobs 

TRACY A. JACOBS

1:08-cr-20599-TLL-CEB Doc # 27 Filed 10/28/09 Pg 2 of 2 Pg ID 90
================================================================================

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 Glance, Inc. (the "Company") on  Form
10-QSB for the period ended December 31, 2007 as filed with  the Securities  and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the  undersigned, in  the
capacities and on  the  dates  indicated  below,  hereby  certifies  pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that to his 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.


Date:  February 11, 2008


/s/ Alla Karmazina
----------------------------------
Alla Karmazina
Chief Financial Officer, Secretary
Treasurer, principal accounting
officer and Director
#### STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Timothy JOHNSON, Appellant.

No. WD 47115.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

July 19, 1994.

Stephen J. Harris, Office of the State Public Defender, Columbia, for appellant.

Philip M. Koppe, Kansas City, for respondent.

Before ELLIS, P.J., and BERREY and SMART, JJ.

*933ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Consolidated appeal from conviction of offering to commit violence to an employee of the Department of Corrections, § 217.385, RSMo Supp.1993, and from denial of Rule 29.15 postconviction motion.

Conviction affirmed, Rule 30.25(b); denial of postconviction motion affirmed, Rule 84.-16(b).
Exhibit 32.1

DOT HILL SYSTEMS CORP.        OFFICERS' CERTIFICATE

Pursuant to the requirement set forth in Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, (the "Exchange Act") and
Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code (18 U.S.C. §1350), James L. Lambert, Chief Executive Officer of Dot Hill Systems Corp. (the "Company"), and Preston
S. Romm, the Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies that, to the best of his knowledge:

1.     The
Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2004, to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32.1
(the "Periodic Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act; and

2.     The
information contained in the Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company for the
period covered by the Periodic Report.

In Witness whereof,the undersigned have set their hands hereto as of the 15th day of March, 2005.

|/s/JAMES L. LAMBERTJames L. Lambert Chief Executive
Officer |  | /s/PRESTON S. ROMMPreston S. Romm Chief Financial Officer
|----------------------------------------------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------

A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the "SEC") or its staff upon request.

This
certification "accompanies" the Periodic Report, is not deemed filed with the SEC and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the Securities Act
of 1933, as amended, or the Exchange Act (whether made before or after the date of the Periodic Report), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.

---



QuickLinks
Exhibit 32.1

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Casey Container Corp. (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the quarter ending June 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Terry W. Neild,
Chairman and Chief Executive 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 results of operations
          of the Company.


                                            /s/ Terry W. Neild
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Terry W. Neild
                                            Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
                                            August 10, 2010

This certification accompanies this Report pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and 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 that the Company specifically incorporates it
by reference.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
## NO. 12

- 15

- 00048

- CR

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

CHASE ALLEN GILLIAM,

APPELLANT

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

APPELLEE §

§

§ APPEAL FROM THE 173R D

JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

HENDERSON COUNTY, TE XAS

MEMORANDU

M OPINION

PER CURIAM

Appellant has filed a motion to dismiss this appeal. The motion is signed by Appellant

and his counsel. No decision has been delivered in this appeal. Accordingly, Appellant’s motion

to dismiss is granted, and the appeal is dismisse d

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.2 (a).

Opinion delivered June 3, 2015.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J., and Neeley, J.

( DO NOT PUBLISH )

## COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT OF TEXA S

JUDGMENT

JUNE 3, 2015

NO. 12

- 15

- 00048

- CR

CHASE ALLEN GILLIAM,

Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

Appeal from the 173rd District Court

of Henderson County, Texas (Tr.Ct.No. C

- 20,707)

THIS CAUSE came on to be heard on the motion of the Appe llant to dismiss

the appeal herein, and the same being considered, it is hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED and

DECREED by this Court that the motion to dismiss be granted and the appeal be dismissed, and

that the decision be certified to the court below for observa nce.

By per curiam opinion

. Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Hoyle, J. and Neeley, J.
Exhibit
32.1




CERTIFICATION




In
connection with the periodic report of Premier Power Renewable Energy, Inc. (the
“Company”) on Form 10-Q/A for the quarter ended March 31, 2009 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Dean Marks, Chief
Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer) of the Company, hereby certify
as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350
of the United States Code, that to the best of my knowledge:




(1)
      The Report fully complies with the requirements
of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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 at the dates and for the periods
indicated.





Date:
      August 14, 2009
              /s/
      Dean MarksDean
      MarksChief
      Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)