alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.1

                           Subsidiaries of the Company


Allegiance Telecom International, Inc.                                 Delaware

Allegiance Telecom of District of Columbia, Inc.                       Delaware

Allegiance Telecom of California, Inc.                                 Delaware

Allegiance Telecom of Florida, Inc.                                    Delaware

Allegiance Telecom of Georgia, Inc.                                    Delaware

Allegiance Telecom of Illinois, Inc.                                   Delaware

Allegiance Telecom of Maryland, Inc.                                   Delaware

Allegiance Telecom of Massachusetts, Inc.                              Delaware

Allegiance Telecom of Michigan, Inc.                                   Delaware

Allegiance Telecom of New Jersey, Inc.                                 Delaware

Allegiance Telecom of New York, Inc.                                   Delaware

Allegiance Telecom of Pennsylvania, Inc.                               Delaware

Allegiance Telecom of Texas, Inc.                                      Delaware

Allegiance Telecom of Virginia, Inc.                                   Virginia

Allegiance Telecom of Washington, Inc.                                 Delaware

Allegiance Telecom Service Corporation                                 Delaware
N O T F O RP U B L IC A T IO NIN W E S T ' S H AWA I # I RE P O R T S A N D P A C IF IC RE P O R T E R



### NO. CAAP-21-0000425

IN THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

O F THE STATE OF HAWAI # I

OLGA VLADIMIROVNA BORDENYUK, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. D AYNA SARA KAULIA-WEBB, Defendant-Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF THE SECOND CIRCUIT WAILUKU DIVISION (CASE NO. 2DRC-21-0000556)

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL (By: Leonard, Presiding Judge, Hiraoka and Nakasone, JJ.) Upon review of the record, it appears that:(1) On July 19, 2021, self-represented PlaintiffAppellant Olga Vladimirovna Bordenyuk (Bordenyuk) filed the notice of appeal;

(2) On August 13, 2021, the district court clerk filed the record on appeal, and the appellate clerk notified the parties that the statement of jurisdiction and opening brief were due on or before August 23, 2021, and September 22, 2021, respectively;

(3) Bordenyuk failed to file either document or request an extension of time;

(4) On September 29, 2021, the appellate clerk entered a default notice informing Bordenyuk that the time for filing the statement of jurisdiction and opening brief had expired, the matter would be called to the court's attention on October 11, 2021, for appropriate action, which could include dismissal of the appeal, under Hawai # i Rules of Appellate Procedure (HRAP) Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-21-0000425 27-OCT-2021 10:34 AM Dkt. 17 ODSDN O T F O RP U B L IC A T IO NIN W E S T ' S H AWA I # I RE P O R T S A N D P A C IF IC RE P O R T E R



### Rules 12.1(e) and 30, and Bordenyuk could request relief from default by motion;

(5) The appellate clerk mailed the notice of entering case on calendar and the default notice to Bordenyuk at her address indicated on the notice of appeal and record on appeal, but both documents were returned. The appellate clerk also mailed the default notice to another address for Bordenyuk found in the district court record, which was not returned; and

(6) Bordenyuk has not filed a notice of change of address, consistent with HRAP Rule 25(f), or taken any further action in this appeal.

Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the appeal is dismissed. DATED: Honolulu, Hawai # i, October 27, 2021.
/s/ Katherine G. Leonard Presiding Judge
/s/ Keith K. Hiraoka Associate Judge
/s/ Karen T. Nakasone Associate Judge

2
1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
BOBBY RAY GRADY , ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Civil Action No. 22

- 2870 (UNA) ) DISTRICT COURT JUDGE (U.S.) ) LOUISE WOOD FLANAGAN, ) ) Defendan t

. )

MEMORANDUM OPINION
This matter is before the Court on consideration of plaintiff’s application to proceed in forma pauperis and his pro se complaint. The application will be granted, and for the reasons stated below, the complaint is dismissed. Plaintiff filed a petition f

or a writ of habeas corpus in th is district court

. Compl. at 6 (page numbers designated by CM/ECF); s ee Grady v. Stein , No. 1:18

- cv
- 3154 (D.D.C. Dec. 19, 2018)

. The case was transferred to the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North
Carolina , assigned to Judge Flanagan, and dismissed without prejudice. See Grady v. Stein , No.
5:19

- hc

- 2127 (E.D.N.C. Aug. 15, 2019). According to plaintiff, defe ndant “committed acts of perjury to prevent the plaintiff from being granted a remedy of relief by habeas corpus.” Compl. at 5. Plaintiff asks this Court “to reprimand Judge Flanagan,” and to allow plaintiff “to file another habeas petition and order the court to allow it to proceed to an evidentiary hearing,” among other
relief

. Id.2

It appears that plaintiff expects this Court, essentially, to review or overrule the decision of
another federal court with which he disagrees. This Court lacks jur isdiction to do so. “A federal district court lacks jurisdiction to review decisions of other federal courts.” Smalls v. United States , 471 F.3d 186, 192 (D.C. Cir. 2006); see also Partington v. Houck , 2014 WL 5131658, at *1 (D.C. Cir. Oct. 3, 2014) (“The district court correctly held that it lacked authority to declare void a decision of this court.”); Mullis v. U.S. Bankr. Ct. for the Dist. of Nev ., 828 F.2d 1385, 1392

- 93 (9th Cir. 1987) (“To allow a district court to grant injunctive relief against a ba nkruptcy court or the district court in the underlying bankruptcy case would be to permit, in effect, a ‘horizontal appeal’ from one district court to another or even a ‘reverse review’ of a ruling of the court of appeals by a district court. Such collate ral attacks on the judgments, orders, decrees or decisions of federal courts are improper.”). An Order is issued separately.

DATE: December 7, 2022 /s/ AMY BERMAN JACKSON United States District Judge
**EXHIBIT32.2**

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

# SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection withthe Quarterly Report of 1-800 CONTACTS, INC. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q forthe period ended March 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Robert G. Hunter, ChiefFinancial 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, tothe best of my knowledge:

(1)          The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Actof 1934; and

(2)          The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company.

This certificationaccompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

A signed originalof this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to theCompany and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities andExchange Commission or its staff upon request.

 
|        | /s/ Robert G. Hunter    |   |
|--------|-------------------------|--------|
|   | Chief Financial Officer |
|   | Date: May 10, 2007      |

 

----
Exhibit 31.2

CERTIFICATION

I,
Robert I. Webber, certify that:



|Date: |  | March 14, 2008 |  |        |  |                                                                                                            
|----- |  | -------------- |  | ------ |  | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|      |  |                |  |        |  | /s/ROBERT I. WEBBER                                                                                        
|      |  |                |  |       
|      |  |                |  | Name:  |  | Robert I. Webber                                                                                           
|      |  |                |  | Title: |  | Chief Operating Officer, Chief Financial Officer and Executive Vice President
(Principal Financial Officer)

---



QuickLinks
1

Restoration of Rigid-Body Condition (RRBC) Method Illustrated
2

CONTACT: 

Marek Franaszek, marek@nist.gov

Gerry Cheok, cheok@nist.gov
```

                                                                    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 NexGen Biofuels Ltd.(the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2009 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, J. Ram
Ajjarapu, Interim Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify to my
knowledge pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, following due inquiry, I believe 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.

     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.

                                               NEXGEN BIOFUELS LTD

May 20, 2009                              By: /s/ J. Ram Ajjarapu
                                               -----------------------
                                               J RAM AJJARAPU
                                               INTERIM CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
```
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE Northern District of Illinois − CM/ECF NextGen 1.6.3

Eastern Division

Nathaniel Polley, et al.

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 1:20−cv−04798

Honorable Harry D. Leinenweber

Northwestern University

Defendant.

NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRY

This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Thursday, August 4, 2022:

 MINUTE entry before the Honorable Harry D. Leinenweber: For the reasons

stated in the Court's next docket entry and order, Northwestern's Motion to Dismiss (Dkt.

No. 58) is denied. Telephone Conference set for 9/27/22 at 9:15 a.m. for further

scheduling. Dial: 888−684−8852 or 215−446−0155, access code: 9582710#. Outstanding

responsive pleadings shall be filed by 9/21/22. Joint status report shall be filed by 9/21/22.

Mailed notice notice(maf)

ATTENTION: This notice is being sent pursuant to Rule 77(d) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure or Rule 49(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. It was

generated by CM/ECF, the automated docketing system used to maintain the civil and

criminal dockets of this District. If a minute order or other document is enclosed, please

refer to it for additional information.

For scheduled events, motion practices, recent opinions and other information, visit our

web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov.

Case: 1:20-cv-04798 Document #: 70 Filed: 08/04/22 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:1143
H. Res. 106

In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

March 21, 1997.

Resolved, That the following named Member be, and is

hereby, elected to the following standing committee of the

House of Representatives:

COMMITTEE ON INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS: Mr. Luther of Minnesota.

Attest:

Clerk.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   Exhibit 99(a)

Schedule VIII - Valuation and Qualifying Accounts



                        VALUATION AND QUALIFYING ACCOUNTS
                          ALLOWANCE FOR UNCOLLECTIBLES
                                   (In 000's)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                               Balance at                          Balance at
                               Beginning              Deductions     End of
                               of Period   Additions  (Write-offs)   Period
                               ----------  ---------  ------------ ----------
<S>                             <C>        <C>        <C>          <C>
December 31, 1997 .......       $6,787       $1,167      $6,769     $1,185

December 31, 1996 .......       $1,352       $5,625      $  190     $6,787

December 31, 1995 .......       $  382       $1,068      $   98     $1,352
</TABLE>























                                      24
**Exhibit 23.1** **CONSENT    OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration    statements on    Form S-8(No. 333-120320)    and    Form S-3(No. 333-127730)    of Tower Group, Inc. of our reports dated March 13, 2008    with respect to the consolidated financial statements, financial    statement schedules, and the effectiveness of internal control    over financial reporting of Tower Group, Inc. and subsidiaries,    included in this Annual Report    (Form 10-K)    for the year ended December 31, 2007. /s/ JOHNSON    LAMBERT & CO.    LLP                Falls Church, Virginia    March 13, 2008
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-7587

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

JEFFREY MAILLARD, a/k/a Spice,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Rebecca B. Smith, District Judge.

(CR-94-163, CA-98-214-2)

Submitted: December 17, 1998 Decided: January 12, 1999

Before WILKINS, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jeffrey Maillard, Appellant Pro Se. Laura P. Tayman, OFFICE OF THE

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Norfolk, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
* Pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 58 and 79(a), the order from

which Maillard appeals was entered on the district court’s docket

September 3, 1998. See Wilson v. Murray, 806 F.2d 1232, 1234-35

(4th Cir. 1986).

2

PER CURIAM:

Jeffrey John Maillard seeks to appeal the district court’s

order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994

& Supp. 1998). We have reviewed the record and the district

court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny

a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Maillard, Nos.

CR-94-163; CA-98-214-2 (E.D. Va. Sept. 3, 1998).* We dispense with

oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument

would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 97-60663

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

REAL PROPERTY AND RESIDENCE AT 1118 WOODLEA STREET,

ETC., YAZOO CITY, MISSISSIPPI, INCLUDING BUT NOT

LIMITED TO: ALL IMPROVEMENTS, STRUCTURES, BUILDINGS, 

FIXTURES, FURNISHINGS, GOODS, WARES, APPLIANCES,

JEWELRY, GOLD, SILVER ARTIFACTS, IMPLEMENTS, 

MACHINERY, EQUIPMENT AND PROPERTY OF EVERY

DESCRIPTION; APPURTENANCES SITUATED THEREON

AND ALL CONTENTS THEREIN,

Defendant,

EDWARD HANSERD,

Claimant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 5:90-CV-22 B

- - - - - - - - - -

June 17, 1998

Before DAVIS, PARKER, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Edward Hanserd (#14178-039), a federal prisoner, appeals the

district court’s order denying his motion to vacate or set aside
No. 97-60663

-2-

its default judgment of forfeiture under Rules 55(c) and 60(b)(4)

of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. Hanserd contends that

he was the true owner of the forfeited property and that he was

never notified of the pendency of the forfeiture proceedings. 

This court reviews “a district court’s refusal to set aside an

entry of default under Fed. R. Civ. P. 55(c) or to set aside a

default judgment under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) under an abuse of

discretion standard.” CJC Holdings, Inc. v. Wright & Lato, Inc.,

979 F.2d 60, 63 (5th Cir. 1992). There is no basis for

concluding that the Government knew that the address to which

notice was mailed was not likely to result in Hanserd receiving

actual notice of the forfeiture. No abuse of discretion has been

shown. The district court’s order is

AFFIRMED.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS 

EASTERN DIVISION 

SHARONDA ROBERSON, as Independent )

Executor of the Estate of DENISE M. ROSS, )

Deceased, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

v. ) No. 1:20-cv-03325

)

WALMART, INC., a Corporation, SAM’S ) Judge Sara L. Ellis

WEST, INC., a Corporation, and SAM’S REAL )

ESTATE BUSINESS TRUST, a Foreign Trust, )

)

Defendants. )

MOTION FOR LEAVE TO WITHDRAW AS COUNSEL

Pursuant to Local Rule 83.17 of the United States District Court for the Northern District 

of Illinois, Plaintiff SHARONDA ROBERSON, as Independent Executor of the Estate of 

DENISE M. ROSS, Deceased, by her attorneys, Hetherington, Karpel & Bobber, LLC, 

respectfully requests that this Court grant Michael L. Teich of Hetherington, Karpel & Bobber, 

LLC, leave to withdraw his appearance as one of the attorneys of record in this matter. In support 

of this motion, Plaintiff states as follows: 

1. Michael L. Teich has been one of the attorneys of record for Plaintiff.

2. Mr. Teich recently left the firm of Anesi, Ozmon, Rodin, Novak & Kohen, Ltd. and 

joined the firm Hetherington, Karpel & Bobber, LLC.

3. At the request of Plaintiff, she will continue to be represented by counsel from 

Anesi, Ozmon, Rodin, Novak & Kohen, Ltd. and Michael L. Teich and Hetherington, Karpel & 

Bobber, LLC, are to be withdrawn as counsel in this case.

Case: 3:20-cv-50313 Document #: 17 Filed: 10/27/20 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:49
WHEREFORE, Plaintiff respectfully requests that the Court grant Michael L. Teich leave 

to withdraw as one of the attorneys of record in this action. 

Respectfully submitted, 

Hetherington, Karpel & Bobber, LLC

By: /s/Michael L. Teich 

Michael L. Teich #6216938

Hetherington, Karpel & Bobber, LLC

Attorneys for Plaintiff

120 North LaSalle Street

Suite 2810

Chicago, Illinois 60602

(312) 878-6680

Case: 3:20-cv-50313 Document #: 17 Filed: 10/27/20 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:50
##### 



EXHIBIT 12 AMERICAN STANDARD COMPANIES INC.
COMPUTATION OF THE RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
(Dollars in Millions) Nine MonthsFor the Years ended December 31,
    
    Ended September 30,1999
    
    2000
    
    2001
    
    2002
    
    2003
    
    2003
    
    2004Income from continuing
operations before income taxes
    
    $
    451.5
    
    
    $
    509.4
    
    
    $
    476.4
    
    
    $
    556.2
    
    
    $
    549.2
    
    
    $
    464.1
    
    
    $
    550.4Equity in net (income) loss of
associated companies net of dividends
received
    
    
    (5.1
    )
    
    
    (8.7
    )
    
    
    (2.8
    )
    
    
    (13.5
    )
    
    
    (14.3
    )
    
    
    (9.2
    )
    
    
    (12.0
    )Amortization of capitalized interest
    
    
    1.8
    
    
    
    1.9
    
    
    
    2.3
    
    
    
    2.3
    
    
    
    2.3
    
    
    
    1.8
    
    
    
    1.8Interest expense
    
    
    187.8
    
    
    
    198.7
    
    
    
    168.7
    
    
    
    129.0
    
    
    
    117.0
    
    
    
    88.9
    
    
    
    86.5Rental expense factor
    
    
    33.9
    
    
    
    49.4
    
    
    
    53.2
    
    
    
    58.6
    
    
    
    37.5
    
    
    
    45.6
    
    
    
    29.3Earnings available for fixed charges
    
    $
    669.9
    
    
    $
    750.7
    
    
    $
    697.8
    
    
    $
    732.6
    
    
    $
    691.7
    
    
    $
    591.2
    
    
    $
    656.0Interest expense
    
    $
    187.8
    
    
    $
    198.7
    
    
    $
    168.7
    
    
    $
    129.0
    
    
    $
    117.0
    
    
    $
    88.9
    
    
    $
    86.5Capitalized interest
    
    
    3.3
    
    
    
    2.0
    
    
    
    4.8
    
    
    
    2.6
    
    
    
    0.9
    
    
    
    1.2
    
    
    
    0.2Rental expense factor
    
    
    33.9
    
    
    
    49.4
    
    
    
    53.2
    
    
    
    58.6
    
    
    
    37.5
    
    
    
    45.6
    
    
    
    29.3Fixed charges
    
    $
    225.0
    
    
    $
    250.1
    
    
    $
    226.7
    
    
    $
    190.2
    
    
    $
    155.4
    
    
    $
    135.7
    
    
    $
    116.0Ratio of earnings to fixed charges (a)
    
    
    3.0
    
    
    
    3.0
    
    
    
    3.1
    
    
    
    3.9
    
    
    
    4.5
    
    
    
    4.4
    
    
    
    5.7
   a)
    
    For the purpose of computing the ratio of earnings to fixed charges, fixed charges consist of interest on debt (including
capitalized interest), amortization of debt discount and expense, and a portion of rentals determined to be representative of interest.
Earnings consist of consolidated net income before income taxes, plus fixed charges other than capitalized interest but including the
amortization thereof, adjusted by the excess or deficiency of dividends over income of entities accounted for by the equity method.
[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 228 (Wednesday, November 26, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 70535]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-28028]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES


Office of the Secretary; Office of the Assistant Secretary for 
Health; Statement of Organization, Functions, and Delegations of 
Authority

    Part A, Office of the Secretary, Statement of Organization, 
Functions, and Delegations of Authority of the Department of Health and 
Human Services is being amended at Chapter AC, Office of the Assistant 
Secretary for Health (OASH), as last amended at 77 FR 2012-30005-30007, 
dated May 21, 2012. This amendment reflects the realignment of the 
Medical Reserve Corps from OASH to the Office of the Assistant 
Secretary for Preparedness and Response and is consistent with 
authorities established under Sections 1703, 2811(c)(2)(D), and 2813 of 
the Public Health Service Act, as modified by the Pandemic and All-
Hazards Preparedness Reauthorization Act of 2013 (Pub. L. 113-5). The 
change is as follows.
    I. Under Part A, Chapter AC, OASH makes the following changes:
    A. Under Section ACM.00, Mission, delete ``(7) Maintaining and 
overseeing the activities of the Volunteer Medical Reserve Corps 
program (42 U.S.C. 300hh-15).''
    B. Under Section ACM.10, Organization, delete ``Division of the 
Civilian Volunteer Medical Reserve Corps (ACM5).''
    C. Under Section ACM.20, Functions, delete section ``(d) Division 
of the Civilian Volunteer Medical Reserve Corps (ACM5)'' in its 
entirety.
    II. Delegations of Authority. All delegations and redelegations of 
authority made to officials and employees of affected organizational 
components will continue in them or their successors pending further 
redelegation, provided they are consistent with this reorganization.

    Dated: November 19, 2014.
Sylvia M. Burwell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2014-28028 Filed 11-25-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4150-28-P