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



                                                                   EXHIBIT 21.1

                         SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT

            Subsidiary                               State of Incorporation
     --------------------------                      ----------------------
     Universal Fabricators, LLC                             Louisiana
     PIM, LLC                                               Louisiana
**Exhibit32(a)**

 

**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 accompanying Annual Report of ALLTEL Corporation(the Company) on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2003 as filedwith the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I,Scott T. Ford, Chief Executive Officer and President of the Company, certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002, to the best of my knowledge, that:

 

(1)   TheReport fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2)   Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.

 

 
| /s/ Scott T. Ford                     |   |
|---------------------------------------|--------|
| Scott T. Ford                         |
| Chief Executive Officer and President |
| March 5, 2004                         |

 

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 hasbeen provided to ALLTEL Corporation and will be retained by ALLTEL Corporationand furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff uponrequest.

 

----
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    Exhibit 10.1

                     AMENDMENT TO STOCK OPTION AGREEMENT

      THIS AMENDMENT TO STOCK OPTION AGREEMENT, entered into as of January 16,
1997, by and among Metro Global Media, Inc., a Delaware corporation formerly
known as South Pointe Enterprises, Inc. with an office at 1060 Park Avenue,
Cranston, RI 02910 (hereinafter called the "Company") and Kenneth F. Guarino,
having a mailing address at 1060 Park Avenue, Cranston, RI  02910
(hereinafter called the "Optionee").

                              W I T N E S S E T H

      WHEREAS, the parties entered into a Stock Option Agreement effective as
of January 1, 1993 (the "Stock Option Agreement"); and

      WHEREAS, the parties desire to amend the Stock Option Agreement as set
forth herein.

      NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants herein set forth, the
parties agree as follows:

      1.   Section 2 of the Option Agreement is hereby amended by deleting said
Section 2 in its entirety and by inserting to following, such that Section 2
shall be and shall read as follows:

                  2.   Term of Option.  This Option and all rights hereunder 
           shall expire on December 31, 2006, unless this Option shall have 
           sooner terminated as provided herein.

      2.   Section 5 of the Option Agreement is hereby amended by deleting said
Section 5 in its entirety.
<PAGE>   2
      3.    Except as expressly modified hereby, the Option Agreement is hereby
ratified and affirmed and remains in full force and effect as of the date
hereof.

      IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of
the date first above written.

                                                   Metro Global Media, Inc.
 
                                                   By: /s/ T. James  Blair      
                                                       -------------------------
                                                       T. James Blair, Treasurer
                                                   
                                                   
                                                   /s/ Kenneth F. Guarino       
                                                   -----------------------------
                                                   Kenneth F. Guarino
# United States **Court of Appeals**  **for the Federal Circuit**

______________________

April 2 8 , 2017
ERRATA

______________________

Appeal No. 2015

- 5084

REOFORCE, INC., THEO DORE SIMONSON, RONALD STEHN, Plaintiffs

- Appellants

v.

UNITED STATES, Defendant

- Appellee

Decided: March 17, 2017 Precedential Opinion

______________________

Please make the following change s:

On page 4, lines 4 -13, delete:

Once established, a mining claimant r eceives “a ‘patent,’ that is, an official document issued by the United States attesting that fee title to the land is in the private owner.” Kunkes v. United
States , 78 F.3d 1549, 1551 (Fed. Cir. 1996). A patented mining claim is “a property right in the full sense.” Union
Oil Co. v. Smith , 249 U.S. 337, 349 (1919).REOFORCE

, INC

. v. US 2

Until a patent issues, the mining clai mant has an “unpatented” mining claim, a “unique form of property.” Best , 371
U.S. at 335

– 36.

R eplace the deleted language with this paragraph :

The Mining Law allows the holder of a valid mining claim to apply for “a ‘p atent,’ that is, an official document i ssued by the United States attesting that fee title to the land is in the private
owner.” Kunkes v. United States , 78 F.3d 1549, 1551 (Fed. Cir. 1996). [i nsert footnote 1] Until a patent issues, however, the mining claimant has an “unpatented” mining claim, a “unique form of property.” Best , 371 U.S. at 335

– 36; see also Union Oil Co. v. Smith , 249 U.S. 337, 349 (1919) (an unpatented mining claim i s “a property right in the full sense”).

Inse r t Footnote 1, as indicated above

, to read :

“Since 1994, Congress has imposed a moratorium on the processing of new patent applications. See Interior and Related Agencies Appropriations Act of 1995, Pub. L. No. 103

- 332, 108 Stat. 2499 (1994).”

The following paragraph should start with the se ntence currently at page 4, line 13 :

“An unpatented claim...”
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-1476

PETER JAMES ATHERTON,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

versus

ARLINGTON COUNTY,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Albert V. Bryan, Jr., Senior

District Judge. (CA-81-1104-A)

Submitted: April 28, 1998 Decided: June 2, 1998

Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Peter James Atherton, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Peter James Atherton appeals the district court's order denying

his motion to file an amended complaint without prejudice to his

right to file a new complaint. We have reviewed the record and the

district court's opinion and find no reversible error. In an order

dated January 26, 1982, the district court removed Atherton's case

from the active docket, but retained jurisdiction to consider his

claims once various state court proceedings had concluded. Although

Atherton seeks to file an amended complaint on the basis that the

state court proceedings have recently concluded, he provided no

evidence to establish this fact. Further, the district court dismissed Atherton's motion without prejudice to his right to file a

new complaint. Accordingly, we affirm the district court's order.

See Atherton v. Arlington County, No. CA-81-1104-A (E.D. Va. Feb.

25, 1997). 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.

AFFIRMED
* 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. 97-40309 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus DAVID BRYAN SPRATT, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 4:96-CV-216

- - - - - - - - - - November 9, 1998 Before DAVIS, DUHE’, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * David Bryan Spratt, federal prisoner # 04999-078, appeals the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence. On September 9, 1997, this court granted COA on the issue “whether counsel was ineffective in advising Spratt to stipulate to a quantity of 137 marijuana plants without investigating whether fewer than 100 of them had `roots, a root ball, or root hairs’ to qualify as `plants’ under the sentencing guidelines.” Spratt argues thatNo. 97-40309 -2- his counsel’s performance was deficient in failing to argue that some of the marijuana cuttings did not constitute “plants” because they did not have roots, a root ball, or root hairs. Spratt also argues that he was prejudiced by his counsel’s error because his counsel’s stipulation that there were over 100 plants caused him to be subject to a five-year mandatory minimum sentence under 18 U.S.C. § 841(b)(10(B)(vii). He contends that but for his counsel’s error, he would have received a significantly less harsh sentence. Spratt did not present any evidence in the district court which established that some of the marijuana did not have roots, a root ball, or root hairs and thus did not constitute “plants” under § 2D1.1. There is only speculation that some of marijuana did not constitute “plants” under § 2D1.1. Therefore, Spratt has not demonstrated that he was prejudiced by his counsel’s alleged error in stipulating to the number of marijuana plants. Spratt has filed a motion to remand the case to the district court for an evidentiary hearing on this issue. Spratt has not shown that an evidentiary hearing would add any additional evidence to the record to support his claim as the marijuana has been destroyed. Therefore, Spratt’s motion to remand the case for an evidentiary hearing is DENIED.
AFFIRMED; MOTION TO REMAND CASE FOR EVIDENTIARY HEARING
DENIED.
Exhibit 32.1
 MTS SYSTEMS CORPORATION
 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
 PURSUANT TO
 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)
  The undersigned, William V. Murray, the Interim Chief Executive Officer of MTS Systems Corporation (the "Company"), has executed this Certification in connection with the filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission of the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended October 1, 2011 (the "Report").
  The undersigned hereby certifies 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.
  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 SEC or its staff upon request.
  Date: November 29, 2011/s/ William V. MurrayWilliam V. MurrayInterim Chief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5


<CIK>                         0000066052
<NAME>                        AMERICAN MIDLAND CORPORATION



<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                  JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                    DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                          4,000
<SECURITIES>                                    0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   23,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                    0
<INVENTORY>                                     0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                27,000
<PP&E>                                          0
<DEPRECIATION>                                  0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  1,027,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           464,000
<BONDS>                                         0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           0
<PREFERRED>                                     0
<COMMON>                                        57,000
<OTHER-SE>                                      506,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    1,027,000
<SALES>                                         0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                0
<CGS>                                           0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                2,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (2,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (2,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                 0
<CHANGES>                                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (2,000)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   0


</TABLE>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

____________________________________

)

ALLEN F. CALTON, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

v. ) Civil Action No. 23-01399 (ABJ)

)

SCOTT S. HARRIS, )

)

Respondent. )

____________________________________)

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Petitioner Allen F. Calton is a Texas state prisoner appearing pro se. He seeks a writ of 

mandamus against the Clerk of the U.S. Supreme Court, who allegedly has refused to file 

petitioner’s “original jurisdiction habeas petition under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 to Justice Alito” and to 

accept his $300.00 filing fee. Pet., ECF No. 1 at 3. As petitioner admits, “the clerk has made clear 

that [the] papers” were rejected because “the Supreme Court rules make no provision for the filing 

of a petition for an extraordinary writ addressed to an individual Justice.” Id. at 4, citing Ex. A. 

Regardless of the reason, “supervisory responsibility” over the Clerk “is exclusive to the 

Supreme Court” and “neither a district court nor a circuit court of appeals has jurisdiction to 

interfere with it by mandamus or otherwise.” In re Marin, 956 F.2d 339, 340 (D.C. Cir. 1992) (per 

curiam). So, this case will be dismissed by separate order for want of jurisdiction. See id. 

(affirming “the district court’s order dismissing Marin’s complaint for lack of subject matter 

jurisdiction”); Fed. R. Civ. P. 12 (h)(3) (requiring dismissal of the action “at any time” the court 

determines that it lacks subject-matter jurisdiction). 

AMY BERMAN JACKSON

DATE: May 23, 2023 United States District Judge
EXHIBIT
      32.1




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 Miller Industries, Inc. (the
      "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending April 30, 2007 as filed with
      the
      Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Angelo
      Napolitano, Chief Executive Officer and 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 to the best of my knowledge:




(1)
            The
                Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section
                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.







Dated:   February
                8, 2008/s/  Angelo
                NapolitanoAngelo
                Napolitano
              Chief
                Executive Officer and
              Chief
                Financial Officer








A
      signed
      original of this written statement required by Section 906 or other document
      authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that appears
      in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required
      by Section 906, has been provided to Miller Industries, Inc. and will be
      returned by Miller Industries, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
      Commission or its staff upon request.
CERTIFICATION





I,  Gregory B. Lipsker, the Principal Executive Officer of Metaline Mining and Leasing Company, certify that:



1.

This annual report on Form 10-KSB of Metaline Mining and Leasing Company 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 this quarterly report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Metaline Mining and Leasing Company.



Date:  April 4, 2003

/s/ Gregory B. Lipsker

_____________________________________

Gregory B. Lipsker, Principal Executive Officer
Coverage,	Capacity	and	Resilience	Enhancement	In	PSN

Objectives:	Support	mission-critical	voice	(MCV)	

communication	for	FRs	in	the	broadest	set	of	environments	and	

situations	possible

• Extending	coverage	and	capacity	by	prudent	use	of	relays	and	

mobile	eNBs

• Trajectory	and	placement	optimization	

• Real-time	scheduling	of	relay	operation	(on/off)	and	coordination

• Network-resilience	analysis	and	enhancement

• Enhanced	LTE	multicast/broadcast	capabilities	for	PSN	to	support	

MCPTT,	including	off-network	D2D	and	multi-hop

Unique	Approach

• Leveraging	relays,	broadly,	to	dynamically	extend,	direct,	or	

modify	network	coverage	and	capacity

• Trajectory	and	placement	optimization	of	relays	in	stochastic,	

deterministic	,	and	real-time	scenarios

• Online/offline,	distributed/centralized,	stochastic/deterministic	or	

hybrid	scheduling	and	coordination	approaches.

• Specific	FR-scenario-based	combination	in	scheduling	approach	

and	coordination	

Expected	Impact

• A	critical	stage	in	evolution	of	broadband	PSN

• Capacity	extension	via	relays	and	scheduling

• Standardization	in	D2D,	multi-hop,	and	multicast	for	MCV/MCPTT

• Coverage	enhancement

• Failure	resilience

• Reconfiguration

• BS	to	off-network	UE	and	UE-to-UE	multicast

• QPP		in	eMBMS

George	Washington	U.,	Miami	U.,	Virginia	Commonwealth	U.

Problem:		A	PSN	that	intelligently	adapts	and	extends	its	

coverage	using	relays	and	mobile	eNBs,	scheduling,	coordination,	and	

optimization	to	ensure	the	availability	of	the	services,	bandwidth,	and	

reliability	required	by	the	FRs	wherever	they	go,	with	a	focus	on	MCVand-MCPTT	-using	FR	communities.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS ENDING DECEMBER 31, 1999 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                             225
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,447
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                        266
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 2,272
<PP&E>                                           5,210
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,545
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   7,539
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,345
<BONDS>                                          2,202
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              350
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            94
<OTHER-SE>                                       1,431
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     7,539
<SALES>                                         18,622
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                18,622
<CGS>                                           17,465
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      829
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  (86)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 185
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    229
<INCOME-TAX>                                        68
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                161
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       161
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.75
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.75


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER>     1000

<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                          JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                            SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                       9,105
<SECURITIES>                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                                8,151
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (241)
<INVENTORY>                                 10,733
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            28,944
<PP&E>                                      31,267
<DEPRECIATION>                             (24,128)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              36,335
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       12,180
<BONDS>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            0
<PREFERRED>                                      0
<COMMON>                                   102,682
<OTHER-SE>                                 (78,527)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                36,335
<SALES>                                     38,798
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            38,798
<CGS>                                       21,840
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               35,615
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               383
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              3,566
<INCOME-TAX>                                   450
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          3,116
<DISCONTINUED>                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  0
<CHANGES>                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                 3,116
<EPS-BASIC>                                 .170
<EPS-DILUTED>                                 .150


</TABLE>
Presidents of the United States

1.451.501.551.601.651.701.751.801.851.901.952.00

Height in Meters (m)

James Madison Ulysses S. Grant Jimmy Carter George W. Bush Barack Obama George George H. W. Bill Clinton 

Washington Bush 

President Name