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





SUBSIDIARIES
OF THE REGISTRANT










SUBSIDIARIES
OF THE REGISTRANT


Parent
                                          
                                          Subsidiary
                                          
                                          Percentage
                                            of
                                            Ownership
                                          
                                          State of
                                            Incorporation
                                            or
                                            OrganizationMutualFirst Financial, Inc.
                                          
                                          MutualBank
                                          
                                          
                                          100
                                          %
                                          United
      StatesMFBC
      Statutory Trust I
                                          
                                          
                                          100
                                          %
                                          IndianaMutualBank
                                          
                                          First
      M.F.S.B. Corporation
                                          
                                          
                                          100
                                          %
                                          IndianaMutual
      Federal Investment Co.
                                          
                                          
                                          100
                                          %
                                          NevadaMishawaka
      Financial Services, Inc.
                                          
                                          
                                          100
                                          %
                                          IndianaMutual
      Federal Investment Co.
                                          
                                          Mutual
      Federal REIT, Inc.
                                          
                                          
                                          100
                                          %
                                          Maryland
*

 This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of

law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the

citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under

the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

Filed 11/29/96

TENTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

 v.

CARNELL D. BRUMFIELD,

Defendant-Appellant.

No. 96-6026

(D.C. No. CR-95-119-M)

(W.D. Okla.)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

Before PORFILIO, HOLLOWAY, and BRISCOE, Circuit Judges.

Carnell D. Brumfield appeals his convictions of bank robbery, 18 U.S.C. § 2113(a)

and (d), and use of a firearm during a crime of violence, 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1). 

Brumfield contends there was insufficient evidence identifying him as a participant. We

affirm.

When sufficiency of the evidence is challenged on appeal, this court must view the

evidence in the light most favorable to the government to determine whether any rational

factfinder could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt. E.g., United

States v. Reece, 86 F.3d 994, 995 (10th Cir. 1996). "In order to conclude the evidence
-2-

was insufficient, as a matter of law, to support a conviction, we must find that no

reasonable juror could have reached the disputed verdict." United States v. Ivy, 83 F.3d

1266, 1284 (10th Cir.), cert. denied 117 S. Ct. 253 (1996). This court will not reverse a

conviction merely because a verdict was grounded on the uncorroborated testimony of a

co-conspirator. Id. On appeal, this court may not reweigh the credibility of witnesses. 

United States v. Ruis-Castro, 92 F.3d 1519, 1530 (10th Cir. 1996).

Brumfield does not challenge the sufficiency of the evidence generally. He argues

the testimony of Josue Jerome Walton, who is a confessed participant in the robbery, is

not sufficiently credible. Walton's testimony that Brumfield participated in the robbery

was clearly sufficient to sustain Brumfield's conviction. Walton's credibility was a

question for the jury, United States v. Jaynes, 75 F.3d 1493, 1498 (10th Cir. 1996), and

the jury was fully aware of his past inconsistent stories and of the terms of his plea

bargain.

AFFIRMED.

Entered for the Court

Mary Beck Briscoe

Circuit Judge
Alabama California

Ohio Washington, D.C.

Oregon

Germany

X-31 No. 2

Deutsches Museum 

Flugwerft Schleissheim

X-1B

X-3 Stiletto

X-4 Bantam No. 2

X-5

XF-91 Thunderceptor No. 1

XF-92A

X-30

One-third scale mockup: 

Aviation Challenge campus, 

U.S. Space & Rocket Center

X-15A-2

X-24B

XB-70 Valkyrie No. 1

X-38 Vehicle 131

Evergreen Aviation & 

Space Museum

Nebraska

X-45 No. 2

Florida

D-558-I Skystreak No. 1

Naval Aviation Museum

North Carolina

D-558-I Skystreak No. 3

Carolinas Aviation Museum

X-29A

X-36 No. 1

X-38 Vehicle 132

Strategic Air and Space Museum

X-PLANES

X-1E

NASA’s Armstrong Flight 

Research Center

Mock up: Air Force Flight Test 

Museum

X-2 Starbuster

Replica: Planes of Flame 

Air Museum

X-4 Bantam No. 1

Air Force Flight Test 

Museum

HL-10

NASA’s Armstrong 

Flight Research Center

M2-F1

Air Force Flight Test Museum

X-15

Mock up: Air Force Flight 

Test Museum

X-48C

Air Force Flight Test 

Museum

D-558-II Skyrocket

No. 1: Planes of Fame Museum

No. 3: Antelope Valley College

X-29

NASA’s Armstrong Flight 

Research Center

X-36

Air Force Flight Test Museum

X-planes on display at National Museum

of the United States Air Force

 X-planes on display at Smithsonian

National Air and Space Museum

M2-F2/M2-F3

X-15 No. 1

X-1 Glamorous Glennis

X-45A

D-558-II Skyrocket No. 2

Where Are They Now?

Scan here for

more information.

www.nasa.gov

National Aeronautics and

Space Administration
Analytical Chemical Laboratory Facility

PerkinElmer Clarus SQ8 GC-MS

Sampling module includes Thermal Desorption, Headspace, Sample autosampler and Gas injection valve

The Analytical Laboratory in the Life Sciences Building (N239) is a full-service chemistry lab supporting a 

wide variety of research analysis needs. Analysis can be performed utilizing HPLC, Ion Chromatography, 

Gas Chromatography, GC-Mass Spectrometer, Total Organic Carbon analysis, Elemental Analysis and 

other wet chemistry methods. New or customized methods can be developed specific to your analytical 

chemical needs.

Thermo Scientific-Dionex

Ion Chromatographs (Conductivity)

i.e. Cation and Anion analysis

Mili-Q purified water system

Good quality low TOC purified water

Agilent® HPLC

Detectors: UV-Vis and Refractive Index

Shimadzu TOC-VCPH

Total Organic Carbon Analysis (Combustion)

Low concentration method

Detector (Hall) HP 5890 Gas Chromatograph

Detectors: Flame Ionization Detector, Photo-Ionization, 

Pulse Discharged Helium Ion Detector (PDHID) and 

Electrolytic Conductivity 

Instrumentation available but not shown:

HACH DR3900: water analysis capability

Thermo Fisher Orion Star pH meter: TDS, conductivity and pH 

measurement

Thermo Quest NA1100 Elemental Analyzer: Carbon, Hydrogen, 

Nitrogen, Oxygen and Sulfur composition study

Thermo Fisher Ultimate 3000 UPLC: UV/Vis, Fluorescent, and RI 

detector

Shimadzu TOC-VWS

Total Organic Carbon Analyzer 

(UV - Persulfate)

Point of Contact: Jessica Kong; Contact: jessica.z.kong@nasa.gov

Tel: 650-604-1257; Office: Bldg. 239, Rm. 235A, M/s 239-15

Bioengineering Branch, SCB

Bruker Inventio R

FT-IR range: Vis-MIR, ATR and 

Air sampling module
EXHIBIT 32

                            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  Penn  Octane  Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended October 31, 2004 as filed with the
Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on  the  date  hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned,  Jerome B. Richter, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Ian
T.  Bothwell,  Chief  Financial  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:

(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/  Jerome B. Richter
                                      ------------------------------------------
                                      Jerome B. Richter, Chief Executive Officer
                                      December 15, 2004


                                            /s/  Ian T. Bothwell
                                      ------------------------------------------
                                      Ian T. Bothwell, Chief Financial Officer
                                      December 15, 2004


<PAGE>
WORLDTEX, INC.
                        COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE
                 (Dollars in thousands except per share amounts)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                         Nine Months Ended                 Three Months Ended
                                                           September 30,                      September 30,
                                                      1996              1995             1996              1995
                                                   -------------    -------------     -------------    -------------

<S>                                                <C>              <C>               <C>              <C>          
Net income                                         $       8,407    $       4,893     $       2,481    $         395
                                                   =============    =============     =============    =============

Shares:
Weighted average number of shares outstanding
                                                      14,474,848       14,475,571        14,473,419       14,475,571
Assumed exercise of options                              145,644           82,072           195,569          137,859
                                                   -------------    -------------     -------------    -------------

Total average number of common and common
     equivalent shares used for primary
     computation                                     14,557,643        14,668,988        14,613,430       14,620,492
                                                   =============    =============     =============    =============

Primary earnings per share                         $        .58     $         .34     $         .17    $         .03
                                                   =============    =============     =============    =============

Shares:
Weighted average number of shares outstanding        14,475,366        14,475,571        14,473,419       14,475,571
Assumed exercise of options                             355,289           122,180           276,456          122,180
                                                   ------------     -------------     -------------    -------------
Total average number of common and common
     equivalent shares used for fully diluted
     computation                                     14,830,137        14,597,751        14,749,875       14,597,751
                                                   ============     =============     =============    =============

Fully diluted earnings per share                   $        .57     $         .34     $         .17    $         .03
                                                   ============     =============     =============    =============

</TABLE>

Earnings per share are  calculated  based upon the  weighted  average  number of
common shares outstanding and common equivalent shares during the year.
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 215 (Monday, November 8, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 68669]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-28127]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS


Loan Guaranty: Assistance to Eligible Individuals in Acquiring 
Specially Adapted Housing; Cost-of-Construction Index

AGENCY: Department of Veterans Affairs.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The U. S. Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) announces that 
the aggregate amounts of assistance available under the Specially 
Adapted Housing (SAH) grant program remains unchanged during fiscal 
year 2011, pursuant to 38 CFR 36.4412.

DATES: Effective Date: October 1, 2010.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: William White, Acting Assistant 
Director for Loan Policy and Valuation, Department of Veterans Affairs, 
810 Vermont Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20420, (571) 272-0084 (not a 
toll-free number).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In accordance with 38 U.S.C. 2102(e) and 38 
CFR 36.4412(c), the Secretary of the Department of Veterans Affairs 
announces the aggregate amounts of assistance available to Veterans and 
Servicemembers eligible for the Specially Adapted Housing program 
grants during fiscal year 2011.
    Public Law 110-289, the Housing and Economic Recovery Act of 2008, 
authorized the Secretary to increase the aggregate amounts of SAH 
assistance annually based on a residential home cost-of-construction 
index. The Secretary uses the Turner Building Cost Index for this 
purpose.
    During the most recent calendar year for which the Turner Building 
Cost Index is available, 2009, the index did not increase as compared 
to the next preceding year. Pursuant to 38 CFR 36.4412(b), therefore, 
the aggregate amounts of assistance for Specially Adapted Housing 
grants will remain unchanged during fiscal year 2011.
    Full Text of Announcement Reads as Follows:

Specially Adapted Housing: Aggregate Amounts of Assistance Available 
During Fiscal Year 2011

2101(a) Grants

    The aggregate amount of assistance available for SAH grants made 
pursuant to 38 U.S.C. 2101(a) will be $63,780 during fiscal year 2011.

2101(b) Grants

    The aggregate amount of assistance available for SAH grants made 
pursuant to 38 U.S.C. 2101(b) will be $12,756 during fiscal year 2011.

Temporary Residence Adaption (TRA) Grants

    Please note that TRA grants made pursuant to 38 U.S.C. 2102A are 
not indexed, and the amounts of assistance remain unchanged at $14,000 
for individuals eligible for the 2101(a) grant and $2,000 for 
individuals eligible for the 2101(b) grant.

    Approved: November 1, 2010.
John R. Gingrich,
Chief of Staff, Department of Veterans Affairs.
[FR Doc. 2010-28127 Filed 11-5-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

IN RE BARD IVC FILTERS PRODUCTS )

LIABILITY LITIGATION, ) 

 )

THIS DOCUMENT RELATES TO: )

 )

Lisa Smullen, ) MDL Docket No. 15-2641

C.A. No. CV-15-1900-PHX-DGC )

 ) 

 )

Lisa Smullen, ) NOTICE

 ) 

 Plaintiff(s), ) 

 ) 

v. )

 )

C R Bard, Inc., et al., )

 )

 Defendant(s) )

 IN THE ABOVE MATTER, you are advised that the case listed 

above (formerly Middle District of Florida 3:15-cv-1086) is 

now consolidated with and part of MDL No. 2641 pursuant to the 

Transfer Order filed September 21, 2015. Therefore, future 

pleadings pertaining to the above case will be filed in MDL-No. 

2641, the title page of these documents should be prepared as shown

above. 

 

September 22, 2015 BRIAN D. KARTH 

 Date DCE/Clerk of Court

 s/M. Pruneau 

 Deputy Clerk 

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 89 Filed 09/22/15 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                      $4,673,796
<SECURITIES>                                        $0
<RECEIVABLES>                               $6,122,670
<ALLOWANCES>                                ($880,825)
<INVENTORY>                                         $0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           $14,213,155
<PP&E>                                     $40,234,469
<DEPRECIATION>                           ($12,332,591)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             $49,317,477
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      $17,429,200
<BONDS>                                             $0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               $0
<PREFERRED>                                         $0
<COMMON>                                        $4,010
<OTHER-SE>                                 $11,662,564
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               $49,317,477
<SALES>                                    $33,989,459
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           $33,989,459
<CGS>                                      $29,260,234
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              $29,260,234
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            $6,320,360
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    $0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            $790,633
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           ($2,381,768)
<INCOME-TAX>                                ($928,993)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       ($1,452,775)
<DISCONTINUED>                                      $0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     $0
<CHANGES>                                           $0
<NET-INCOME>                              ($1,452,775)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   ($.36)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   ($.33)
        

</TABLE>
#### NEW MILFORD EDUCATION ASSOCIATION v. NEW MILFORD BOARD OF EDUCATION.

July 2, 1984.

Petition for certification granted.
II 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2226

To extend the period for COBRA coverage for recipients of trade adjustment 

assistance. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 23, 2004

Mr. CORZINE introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 

A BILL

To extend the period for COBRA coverage for recipients 

of trade adjustment assistance.

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

3 SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF COBRA COVERAGE PERIOD FOR 

4 TAA-ELIGIBLE INDIVIDUALS. 

5 (a) ERISA.—Section 605(b) of the Employee Retire6 ment Income Security Act of 1974 (29 U.S.C. 1165(b)) 

7 is amended—

8 (1) in the subsection heading, by inserting 

9 ‘‘AND COVERAGE’’ after ‘‘ELECTION’’; and 

10 (2) in paragraph (2)—
2

•S 2226 IS 

1 (A) in the paragraph heading, by inserting 

2 ‘‘AND PERIOD’’ after ‘‘COMMENCEMENT’’; 

3 (B) by striking ‘‘and shall’’ and inserting 

4 ‘‘, shall’’; and 

5 (C) by inserting ‘‘, and in no event shall 

6 the maximum period required under section 

7 602(2)(A) be less than the period during which 

8 the individual is a TAA-eligible individual’’ be9 fore the period at the end. 

10 (b) INTERNAL REVENUE CODE OF 1986.—Section 

11 4980B(f)(5)(C) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is 

12 amended—

13 (1) in the subparagraph heading, by inserting 

14 ‘‘AND COVERAGE’’ after ‘‘ELECTION’’; and 

15 (2) in clause (ii)—

16 (A) in the clause heading, by inserting 

17 ‘‘AND PERIOD’’ after ‘‘COMMENCEMENT’’; 

18 (B) by striking ‘‘and shall’’ and inserting 

19 ‘‘, shall’’; and 

20 (C) by inserting ‘‘, and in no event shall 

21 the maximum period required under paragraph 

22 (2)(B)(i) be less than the period during which 

23 the individual is a TAA-eligible individual’’ be24 fore the period at the end. 
3

•S 2226 IS 

1 (c) PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE ACT.—Section 

2 2205(b) of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 

3 300bb–5(b)) is amended—

4 (1) in the subsection heading, by inserting 

5 ‘‘AND COVERAGE’’ after ‘‘ELECTION’’; and 

6 (2) in paragraph (2)—

7 (A) in the paragraph heading, by inserting 

8 ‘‘AND PERIOD’’ after ‘‘COMMENCEMENT’’; 

9 (B) by striking ‘‘and shall’’ and inserting 

10 ‘‘, shall’’; and 

11 (C) by inserting ‘‘, and in no event shall 

12 the maximum period required under section 

13 2202(2)(A) be less than the period during 

14 which the individual is a TAA-eligible indi15 vidual’’ before the period at the end. 

16 (d) RETROACTIVE EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amend17 ments made by this section shall take effect as if included 

18 in the enactment of the Trade Act of 2002 (Public Law 

19 107–210; 116 Stat. 933).

Æ
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION 

ADMlNlSTRATOR I 

I I I I DEPUTY 

ADMINISTRATOR 

lI(ICUII"1 OIFIcle 

1 I I 

ORGANIZATION 

AND MANAGEMENT 

t 

I I 

OFFICE 

I 

OF 

APPLICATIONS 

, 

I 

OFFICE I I OFFICE OF I I 

OF
#### Joshua Davis et al, *v.*Wm. Higgenbothom et al.

Land — Conveyance Extorted — Held in Trust.

The conveyance litigated in this suit was extorted from the father and mother by assurance that the land should be held in trust for all their heirs, subject to equal distribution among them at their death. Held, that a trust, both expressed and implied, is the plain and inevitable eonclusof reason and law.

APPEAL EROM GARRABD CIRCUIT COURT.

December 16, 1867.

OPINION OE THE OoüRT BY

JuDGE EoBERTSON :

Considering the condition of the old father Emanuel Higgenbothom, the influence of his sons George and William who could mould him like clay in the hands of the potter, the gross inadequacy of the ostensible consideration, the strong probability that none of it' was paid by George, and the extreme doubtfulness of any payment by William, and the facts and circumstances conducing to show a fraudulent purpose and sinister consummation by these two sons, and proving that the conveyances now litigated were finally extorted from their father and mother by assurances that the lands should be held in trust for all their heirs, subject to *135equal distribution among them at his death. Such a trust, both express and implied, is the plain and inevitable conclusion of reason and of law.

*Bradley Dunlap, for Appellant.*

*Tturner, for Appellee.*

Consequently, as the appellants had no cause of action until the old man’s death and a refusal to fulfill the trust, neither a statutory nor presumptive bar applies to this case.

Wherefore the judgment dismissing the petition against George and William is reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings for distribution, by sale or otherwise, of the lands among all the heirs and an equitable adjustment of the rights of all parties.

But the judgment dismissing the petition against Davis is affirmed.