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

                           BERKELEY TECHNOLOGY LIMITED

                     Subsidiary Listing as of March 31, 2010


Berkeley Technology Limited (Jersey, Channel Islands corporation)

  Berkeley International Capital Limited (Guernsey, Channel Islands corporation)

  Frederick Morgan & Co. Limited (Jersey, Channel Islands corporation)

  London Pacific Assurance Limited (Jersey, Channel Islands corporation)

       LPAL Investments Limited (Guernsey, Channel Islands corporation)

  London Pacific Trust Company Limited (Jersey, Channel Islands corporation)

       Berkeley (USA) Holdings Limited (California corporation)

             Berkeley International Capital Corporation (California corporation)

             Berkeley VC LLC (California Limited Liability corporation)

       London Pacific Secretaries Limited (Jersey, Channel Islands corporation)


_____________


Notes:

(1)   Each indentation reflects another tier of ownership.

(2)   All subsidiaries are 100% owned and are listed above,  except that
      subsidiaries that in the aggregate are insignificant have been omitted.
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

 NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

SHIQUAN YAN,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 07-74824

Agency No. A097-610-531

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted January 10, 2011** 

Before: BEEZER, TALLMAN, and CALLAHAN, Circuit Judges.

Shiquan Yan, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the Board

of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s

(“IJ”) decision denying his application for asylum, withholding of removal, and

relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”). We have jurisdiction under

FILED

JAN 19 2011

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 07-74824

8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for substantial evidence, Li v. Ashcroft, 378 F.3d 959,

962 (9th Cir. 2004), and we deny the petition for review.

Substantial evidence supports the agency’s adverse credibility finding

because Yan testified inconsistently as to whether he was fired from his job as a

result of his practice of Falun Gong, and also as to the days and frequency of his

practice. See id. Yan also failed to provide consistent explanations for these

inconsistencies. See Rivera v. Mukasey, 508 F.3d 1271, 1275 (9th Cir. 2007).

Substantial evidence also supports the IJ’s adverse credibility determination based

on the IJ’s negative assessment of Yan’s demeanor. See Singh-Kaur v. INS, 183

F.3d 1147, 1151 (9th Cir. 1999). In the absence of credible testimony, Yan’s

asylum and withholding of removal claims fail. See Farah v. Ashcroft, 348 F.3d

1153, 1156 (9th Cir. 2003).

Because Yan’s CAT claim is based on evidence the agency found not

credible, and he points to no other evidence that shows it is more likely than not he

would be tortured if returned to China, his CAT claim also fails. See id. at 1156-

57.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Supermarkets
General Holdings Corporation's Consolidated Statement of Operations for the 13
weeks ended May 1, 1999 and Consolidated Balance Sheet as of May 1, 1999 and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-29-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAY-01-1999
<CASH>                                           8,572
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   14,150
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (1,287)
<INVENTORY>                                    150,519
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               259,932
<PP&E>                                         864,039
<DEPRECIATION>                               (385,169)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 846,474
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          312,576
<BONDS>                                      1,270,694
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          109,553
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            10
<OTHER-SE>                                 (1,396,139)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   846,474
<SALES>                                        894,457
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               894,457
<CGS>                                          639,510
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  639,510
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                    21
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            (39,475)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (9,274)
<INCOME-TAX>                                      (25)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (9,299)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (9,299)
<EPS-BASIC>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
exv10wpv2



 





EXHIBIT 10-p-2



Schedule identifying agreements substantially identical to the form of Indemnity Agreement
constituting Exhibit 10-p-1 hereto entered into by Conexant Systems, Inc. and each of the following
persons




Name




Donald R. Beall




Steven J. Bilodeau




Dwight W. Decker




F. Craig Farrill




Balakrishnan S. Iyer




John W. Marren




D. Scott Mercer




Jerre L. Stead




Giuseppe Zocco




J. Scott Blouin




Jasmina T. Boulanger




Lewis C. Brewster




Dennis E. O’Reilly




Kerry K. Petry




F. Matthew Rhodes




Michael J. Rispoli




Dan Artusi




Ralph Cicerone




Dipanjan Deb




Armando Geday




 









 





Karen Roscher




Michael Vishny





2
EXHIBIT 99.2

              REPORT OF THE INDEPENDENT AUDITORS



To the Board of Directors and Shareholders of
S.A. FPL Hancesti


We  have  audited the accompanying balance sheets of S.A.  FPL
Hancesti   ("the Company") as of December 31, 1998  and  1997,
and the related statement of operations and cash flows for the
year  ended December 31, 1998. These financial statements  are
the   responsibility   of   the  Company's   management.   Our
responsibility  is  to express an opinion on  these  financial
statements based on our audits.

We  conducted our audits in accordance with generally accepted
auditing  standards  in  the United  States.  Those  standards
require  that  we  plan  and  perform  the  audit  to   obtain
reasonable  assurance  about whether the financial  statements
are   free   of  material  misstatement.  An  audit   includes
examining,  on a test basis, evidence supporting  the  amounts
and  disclosures in the financial statements.  An  audit  also
includes   assessing  the  accounting  principles   used   and
significant  estimates  made  by  management,   as   well   as
evaluating  the  overall financial statement presentation.  We
believe  that  our audits provide a reasonable basis  for  our
opinion.

In  our  opinion, the financial statements referred  to  above
present  fairly,  in  all  material  respects,  the  financial
position  of the Company as of December 31, 1998 and 1997  and
the  results  of its operations and cash flows  for  the  year
ended December 31, 1998, in conformity with generally accepted
accounting principles in the United States.

The  accompanying  financial  statements  have  been  prepared
assuming that the Company will continue as a going concern. As
discussed  in Note 2 to the financial statements, the  Company
has  suffered recurring losses and has an accumulated  deficit
at   December  31,  1998.  These  matters  combined  with  the
uncertainty  due  to  the  year 2000  issue  and  the  current
economic environment in Moldova raise substantial doubt  about
its ability to continue as a going concern. Management's plans
in  regard to these matters are also described in Note 2.  The
financial statements do not include any adjustments that might
result from the outcome of this uncertainty.

Chisinau (Moldova),


/s/ KPMG Moldova
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 7

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                         2,718,982
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                                0
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                                  0
<EQUITIES>                                      30,257
<MORTGAGE>                                     240,879
<REAL-ESTATE>                                   17,807
<TOTAL-INVEST>                               3,315,242
<CASH>                                          24,872
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                                   0
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                         310,117
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,724,135
<POLICY-LOSSES>                              3,166,277
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                             12,976
<POLICY-OTHER>                                  41,370
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                           69,302
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                359,755
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           19,867
<PREFERRED>                                    249,670
<COMMON>                                           289
<OTHER-SE>                                     610,277
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,724,135
<PREMIUMS>                                     345,566
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                            273,237
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                              17,487
<OTHER-INCOME>                                  27,504
<BENEFITS>                                     324,289
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                     44,323
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                           220,284
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 51,543
<INCOME-TAX>                                    20,375
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             50,140
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    30,607
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.09
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.07
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                       0
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                                  0
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                                    0
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                                   0
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                                     0
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                      0
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                              0


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 99.1

              REPORT OF THE INDEPENDENT AUDITORS'



To the Board of Directors and Shareholders of
S.A. Fabrica de Brinzeturi Soroca


We have audited the accompanying balance sheets of S.A.
Fabrica de brinzeturi Soroca  ("the Company") as of December
31, 1998 and September 30, 1998, and the related the
statements of operations and cash flows for the three month
period ended December 31, 1998. These financial statements are
the responsibility of the Company's management. Our
responsibility is to express an opinion on these financial
statements based on our audits.

We conducted our audits in accordance with generally accepted
auditing standards in the United States. Those standards
require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain
reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements
are free of material misstatement. An audit includes
examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts
and disclosures in the financial statements. An audit also
includes assessing the accounting principles used and
significant estimates made by management, as well as
evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We
believe that our audits provide a reasonable basis for our
opinion.

In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above
present fairly, in all material respects, the financial
position of the Company as of December 31, 1998 and the
results of its operations and cash flows for the three month
period then ended, in conformity with generally accepted
accounting principles in the United States.

The accompanying financial statements have been prepared
assuming that the Company will continue as a going concern. As
discussed in Note 2 to the financial statements, the Company
has suffered losses and has an accumulated deficit at December
31, 1998. These matters combined with the uncertainty due to
the year 2000 issue and the current economic environment in
Moldova raise substantial doubt about its ability to continue
as a going concern. The financial statements do not include
any adjustments that might result from the outcome of this
uncertainty.

Chisinau (Moldova),

/s/ KPMG Moldova

April 30, 1999
```

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 926 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 926

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide that the credit 
  for producing fuel from a nonconventional source shall apply to gas 
     produced onshore from a formation more than 15,000 feet deep.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             April 27, 2005

   Mr. Inhofe (for himself, Mr. Vitter, and Mr. Enzi) introduced the 
 following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
                                Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide that the credit 
  for producing fuel from a nonconventional source shall apply to gas 
     produced onshore from a formation more than 15,000 feet deep.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Natural Gas Production Act of 
2005''.

SEC. 2. CREDIT FOR PRODUCING FUEL FROM NONCONVENTIONAL SOURCE TO APPLY 
              TO GAS PRODUCED ONSHORE FROM FORMATIONS MORE THAN 15,000 
              FEET DEEP.

    (a) In General.--Subparagraph (B) of section 29(c)(1) of the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (defining qualified fuels) is amended by 
striking ``or'' at the end of clause (i), by striking ``and'' at the 
end of clause (ii) and inserting ``or'', and by inserting after clause 
(ii) the following new clause:
                            ``(iii) an onshore well from a formation 
                        more than 15,000 feet deep, and''.
    (b) Eligible Wells.--Section 29 of such Code is amended by adding 
at the end the following new subsection:
    ``(h) Eligible Deep Gas Wells.--In the case of a well producing 
qualified fuel described in subsection (B)(iii)--
            ``(1) for purposes of subsection (f)(1)(A), such well shall 
        be treated as drilled before January 1, 1993, if such well is 
        drilled after the date of the enactment of this subsection, and
            ``(2) subsection (f)(2) shall not apply.''.
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to taxable years ending after the date of the enactment of this 
Act.
                                 <all>
```
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 Quarterly Report of Arête Industries, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Charles L. Gamber, Chief Executive 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 result of operations of the Company.














February 2, 2011
By:
/s/ Charles L. GamberCharles L.Gamber, Chief Executive Officer


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Arête Industries, Inc. and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

SOPHIA R. DAVIS,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 317 MAL 2018

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 18th day of September, 2018

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED

.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                  DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                       SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                                       0
<SECURITIES>                                                 0
<RECEIVABLES>                                            9,700
<ALLOWANCES>                                                 0
<INVENTORY>                                             15,541
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                        28,463
<PP&E>                                                  69,225
<DEPRECIATION>                                         (30,414)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                          86,234
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                   14,110
<BONDS>                                                      0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                        0
<PREFERRED>                                                  0
<COMMON>                                                    71
<OTHER-SE>                                              52,484
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                            86,234
<SALES>                                                 72,673
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                        72,673
<CGS>                                                   64,894
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                           64,894
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                             0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                             0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                       1,002
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                          1,491
<INCOME-TAX>                                               851
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                        640
<DISCONTINUED>                                               0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                              0
<CHANGES>                                                    0
<NET-INCOME>                                               640
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                              .00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                              .00
        


</TABLE>
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 22
- 0212 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. LOUIS TED CAYE,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including March 20 , 2023 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

February 8 2023

02/08/2023

Case Number: DA 22-0212
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.2



               CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS - ERNST & YOUNG LLP


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Form S-8, No. 333-51382) pertaining to the 2000 Employee Stock Purchase Plan,
(Form S-8, No. 333-06419) pertaining to the 1996 Nonqualified Stock Option Plan,
(Form S-8, No. 333-06415) pertaining to Key Employee Restricted Stock Purchase
Plan, (Form S-8 No. 333-28259) pertaining to the Key Employee Restricted Stock
Purchase Plan, (Form S-8, No. 333-46393) pertaining to Key Employee Options and
FocusSoft Stock Option Plan, (Form S-8, No. 333-41321) pertaining to the 1997
Nonqualified Stock Option Plan and Platinum Software Corporation Clientele
Incentive Plan, (Form S-3, No. 333-38105) pertaining to the registration of
450,935 shares, (Form S-3, No. 333-46395) pertaining to the registration of
2,474,794 shares, (Form S-8, No. 333-67841) pertaining to the 1998 Nonqualified
Stock Option Plan, (Form S-8, No. 333-70855) pertaining to DataWorks 1995 Equity
Incentive Plan, DataWorks 1995 Non-Employee Directors Stock Option Plan,
Interactive 1997 Nonstatutory Stock Option Plan, Interactive 1995 Stock Option
Plan, and Nonstatutory Stock Option Agreements, Nonqualified Stock Option
Agreement, (Form S-8, No. 333-85105) pertaining to the 1999 Nonstatutory Stock
Option Plan and 1999 Merger Transition Nonstatutory Stock Plan, and (Form S-8,
No. 333-91505) pertaining to the Key Employee Nonqualified Option Agreement, of
our report dated January 26, 2001, with respect to the consolidated financial
statements and schedule of Epicor Software Corporation as of December 31, 2000
and the two years then ended, included in its Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the
year ended December 31, 2001.



                                             /s/ Ernst & Young LLP


Orange County, California
March 29, 2002
.T 

Pickering 

judgment of conviction. But, as no final appealable judgment has been 

entered below at this point, we lack jurisdiction and we 

ORDER this appeal DISMISSED. 1 

Saitta 

Gibboffs 

cc: Hon. Stefany Miley, District Judge 

Law Office of Kristina Wildeveld 

Attorney General/Carson City 

Clark County District Attorney 

Eighth District Court Clerk 

'In light of this order, we will take no action on the motion 

submitted on April 10, 2015. The clerk of this court shall reject the motion 

received on April 10, 2015, and the addendum received on April 14, 2015. 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

2 

(0) 1947A
#### State ex rel. Utils. Comm’n v. Wardlaw

Case below: 179 N.C. App. 582

No. 573P06

Appellants’ (Wardlaw) PDR Under G.S. 7A-31 (COA05-1481)

Denied 12/14/06