alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 21**Subsidiaries of the Company   **Name of Company** **State or Country of Corporation**   Wm. Wrigley Jr. Company Delaware   All the companies listed below are included in the Company’s consolidated financial statements.Except as otherwise indicated below, the Company has 100% direct or indirect ownership of, andultimate voting control in, each of these companies. The list is as of December 31, 2006 andexcludes 100% owned subsidiaries which are primarily inactive and taken singly, or as a group, donot constitute significant subsidiaries:   Northwestern Flavors, LLC. IllinoisL. A. Dreyfus Company DelawareFour-Ten Corporation IllinoisZeno Air, Inc. DelawareWrigley WebEsprit, Inc. DelawareWrigley Investment Company DelawareWrigley International Holding Company IllinoisWrigley Enterprises, Inc. DelawareWrigley Manufacturing Company, LLC DelawareWrigley Sales Company DelawareThe Wrigley Company South Africa (Pty) Limited DelawareThe Wrigley Company Pty. Limited AustraliaWrigley Austria Ges.m.b.H. AustriaWrigley Bulgaria EOOD BulgariaTechninter, S.A. British Virgin IslandsWrigley Canada CanadaWrigley (Cayman) Ltd. Cayman IslandsWrigley Confectionery (China) Ltd. Peoples Republic of ChinaWrigley Confectionery (Shanghai) Co. Ltd. Peoples Republic of ChinaWrigley Taiwan Limited Republic of ChinaWrigley Croatia d.o.o. CroatiaWrigley s.r.o. Czech RepublicThe Wrigley Company Limited EnglandWrigley Confectionery (U.K.) Company Ltd. EnglandWrigley France SNC FranceWrigley SAS FranceWrigley GmbH GermanyWrigley BV HollandWrigley Europe B.V. HollandWrigley Overseas Finance Co. BV HollandWrigley Asia, Limited Hong Kong
 

 
   The Wrigley Company (H.K.) Limited Hong KongWrigley Hungaria, Kft. HungaryWrigley India Private Limited IndiaJoyco India Private Limited (India) IndiaP.T. Wrigley Indonesia IndonesiaWrigley Israel Ltd. IsraelWrigley Italia, Srl ItalyWrigley & Company Ltd., Japan JapanThe Wrigley Company (E.A.) Ltd. KenyaUAB Wrigley Baltics LithuaniaThe Wrigley Company (Malaysia) Sdn. Bhd. MalaysiaDulces de las Americas, S. de R.L. de C.V. MexicoWrigley Mexico S. de. R.L. de C.V. MexicoThe Wrigley Company (N.Z.) Limited New ZealandWrigley Scandinavia AS NorwayThe Wrigley Company (P.N.G) Ltd. Papua, New GuineaWrigley Philippines, Inc. PhilippinesGreen Arrow Development Corporation PhilippinesWrigley Poland Sp. zo.o. PolandWrigley Romania Produse Zaharoase SRL RomaniaOOO Wrigley RussiaWrigley d.o.o. Beograd SerbiaWrigley Slovakia, s.r.o. SlovakiaWrigley Ljubljana d.o.o. SloveniaWrigley Co., S.A.U. SpainRegico, S.L. SpainCafosa Gum, S.A. SpainWrigley Scandinavia AB SwedenWrigley Middle East FZCo. Dubai, UAEWrigley Ukraine, TzoV UkraineJoint venture entities in which the Company has controlling shares:Wuzhou Cafosa Gum Ltd. (70% owned by the Company and 30% by Chinese JV China partner — Wuzhou PineChemicals Ltd.)
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

October 7, 2020

No. 04

- 20

- 00495

- CV

IN RE Alicia P. WILLEFORD

From the 408th Judicial District Court

, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2018CI11792

Richard Edward Price , Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

Original Mandamus Proceeding 1

Proceeding

Sitting: Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

Irene Rios, Justice

On October 6

, 2020

, relator filed a petition for writ of mandamus and a motion for stay

pending final resolution of the petition for writ of mandamus. This court believes a serious

question concerning the mandamus relief sought requires further consideration. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 52 .8(b). The respondent and the real part y in interest may file a response to the petition in this

court no later than October 22, 2020. Any such response must conform to Texas Rule of

Appellate Procedure 52.4.

Relator’s request for a stay of trial court proceedings is GRANTED. All proceedings in

the underlying case are STAYED pending final resolution of the petition for writ of mandamus.

It is so ORDE RED October 7

, 2020.

PER CURIAM

ATTESTED TO:

__________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ

, CLERK OF COURT

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2018

- CI

- 11792 , styled in the Matter of the Marriage of Alicia P.

Willeford and Jimmy D. Willeford , pending in the 408th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas . T he

Honorable Richard Price issued the order at i ssue in this original proceeding

.
CONTACT:
                                        Marianne V. Pastor
                                        (703) 335-7800
                                   FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Williams Industries Inc. Announces
Fiscal 2005 Results

Manassas, VA. --- October 14, 2005 --- Williams Industries, Inc.
(NASDAQ - WMSI) today announced its results for Fiscal 2005, which ended
July 31, 2005.   The company had revenues of $48,572,000 with a loss of
$11,374,000 or $3.12 per share for the year.   This compares to revenue of
$53,884,000 with a loss of $780,000, or $0.22 per share, for the Fiscal
2004.

For the fourth quarter of the fiscal year, the company had revenue of
$11,391,000 with a loss of $5,616,000, or $1.54 per share.  Interested
parties are encouraged to read the company's Securities and Exchange
Commission (SEC) filings in order to get specific information.   To access
these filings, go to www.sec.gov.  Once the SEC site has been accessed,
click on "Filings and Forms (EDGAR)".   At the "Search for Company Filings"
prompt, click on "Companies and Other Filers" and enter the company's ticker
symbol "WMSI".   The company will also send a copy of the 10-K filing to
anyone who requests it.

Frank E. Williams, III, President and CEO of Williams Industries, said
the loss, coupled with the company's difficulties in Fiscal 2004, has caused
management to totally reevaluate the company's structure and long-term
business plan.   Some internal reorganization has already occurred and
additional measures, which could significantly influence the type of work
the company bids in the future, are also anticipated.

Williams said that "unacceptable" was the only word that could be
applied to the company's 2005 results.  "The combination of the new
infrastructure spending bill from Congress and work generated by the major
hurricanes should create potential in the construction industry,"  Williams
noted.  "Obviously, Williams Industries is going to have to find a way to
take better advantage of the opportunities now available to us.  I intend to
see that we do whatever it takes to make that happen."

Williams Industries, Inc. is the largest publicly owned specialty
construction company in the Mid-Atlantic region.  Its subsidiaries provide a
wide range of quality, cost competitive services and products for the
industrial, commercial and institutional construction markets.  The
construction and manufacturing services include: steel and precast concrete
erection; miscellaneous metals installation; the fabrication of welded steel
plate girders; rolled steel beams, and light structural and other metal
products; the construction, repair and rehabilitation of bridges; and crane
rental, heavy and specialized hauling and rigging.

     The company's web site is currently being restructured, so for
additional information, please call Marianne Pastor at the investor
relation's office at (703) 335-7800.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
     financial statements included in EnviroSource's Form 10-K for the fiscal
     year ended December 31, 1997 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>                              DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                   DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                               9,942
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       33,961
<ALLOWANCES>                                           701
<INVENTORY>                                              0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                    49,923
<PP&E>                                             283,360
<DEPRECIATION>                                     144,978
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     413,302
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               50,702
<BONDS>                                            281,614
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                              0
<COMMON>                                             2,036
<OTHER-SE>                                          38,175
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       413,302
<SALES>                                                  0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   227,678
<CGS>                                                    0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      180,123
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  29,308
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     (7,094)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         1,368
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                (8,462)
<DISCONTINUED>                                      9,600
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                         0
<CHANGES>                                            (639)
<NET-INCOME>                                          499
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        (.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        (.01)



</TABLE>
#### In the Matter of Amber A. and Another, Infants. Erie County Department of Social Services, Respondent; Kathy A., Respondent-Appellant, et al., Respondent.

(Appeal No. 1.)

[852 NYS2d 904]

Present—Hurlbutt, J.P., Smith, Centra, Green and Gorski, JJ.
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 279 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                 In the House of Representatives, U.S.,

                                                         June 19, 2003.
Whereas, on June 15, 2003, the San Antonio Spurs won the National Basketball 
        Association's (NBA) Championship best-of-seven series with an 88-77 
        victory over the New Jersey Nets;
Whereas the Spurs' victory over the Nets is their second NBA championship in 
        five years;
Whereas this year's Spurs-Nets Finals is the first time two former American 
        Basketball Association teams have played for the NBA Championship;
Whereas seven foot center David Robinson joined the Spurs in 1987, and Tim 
        Duncan joined the team in 1997;
Whereas last night's match-up was the final game of David Robinson's 14-year 
        career, and his 13 points, 17 rebounds, and two blocked shots will be 
        remembered as his best performance of the season;
Whereas Tim Duncan's triple-double, (21 points, 20 rebounds, and ten assists), 
        and his eight blocked shots will be remembered as one of the greatest 
        individual efforts in Finals' history;
Whereas Tim Duncan won the regular season Most Valuable Player award for the 
        second consecutive year, and he was named the Finals Most Valuable 
        Player following the Spurs victory;
Whereas Spurs head coach Gregg Popovich was awarded the Red Auerbach Trophy as 
        the NBA Coach of the Year for the 2002-03 season; and
Whereas Gregg Popovich is the first Spurs coach in franchise history to win the 
        Red Auerbach Trophy: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives congratulates the San Antonio 
Spurs and Coach of the Year Gregg Popovich for an unforgettable season of 
basketball excellence and for winning the 2003 National Basketball Association 
Championship.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
#### STROM v. ANDERSON et al.

Civ. No. 5326.

United States District Court W. D. New York.

May 18, 1953.

Rogerson & Hewes, Jamestown, N. Y., J. Russell Rogerson, Jamestown, N. Y., of counsel, for plaintiff.

Bigham, Englar, Jones & Houston, New York City, Arthur E. Otten, Buffalo, N. Y., of counsel, for defendants. •

KNIGHT, Chief Judge.

Plaintiff has moved on the pleadings heretofore filed and the affidavit of plaintiff’s attorney, verified April 15, 1953 and filed April 16, 1953, for an order allowing and permitting the plaintiff to file a demand for a jury trial of this action and to serve a note of issue stating that such action shall be triable by a jury on the ground that the failure to make timely demand for a jury trial was because said action was commenced in the Supreme Court of the State of New York and transferred by motion of the defendant to this Court and that the plaintiff’s attorney was unfamiliar with Rule 38 of the Rules of Civil Procedure, 28 U.S.C.A., requiring that a demand for a jury trial be served.

Rule 38 has been in force since 1938. Many motions by those unfamiliar with the Rules were granted during the early years of its existence. Personally, I should be glad to relieve plaintiff from the consequences’ of the failure of his attorney seasonably to demand that his action be tried to a jury. My right to grant plaintiff’s motion is seriously doubted. Steiger v. Mullaney, D.C., 8 F.R.D. 486. Defendant Anderson has objected to the granting of the motion and has supported his objection by a rather substantial brief. It is made to appear, among other things, that defendant Anderson claims, to have lost some of his rights (see the pleadings) through the failure of the plaintiff to make timely demand for a jury trial. Langnes v. Green, 282 U.S. 531, 51 S.Ct. 243, 75 L. Ed. 520; Ex parte Green, 286 U.S. 437, 52 S.Ct. 602, 76 L.Ed. 1212. Plaintiff’s motion for a jury trial comes too late. Buescher v. Auto Lite Battery Corp., D.C., 11 F.R.D. 514.

The practice in the United States District Courts with respect to removed actions is of long standing and very definite. Rule 81(c). Petsel v. Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co., D.C., 101 F.Supp. 1006. Nothing appears which would cause the Court in its discretion to order a trial by jury as provided in Rule 39(b). The reasons given by plaintiff for the exercise of the Court’s discretion are not persuasive. State of Delaware, for use of General Crushed Stone Co. v. Massachusetts Bonding & Ins. Co., D.C., 3 F.R.D. 65; Arnold v. Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co., D.C., 7 F.R.D. 678.

Plaintiff’s motion for a jury trial is denied. Prepare and present order accordingly.
EXHIBIT 32

                         SALIVA DIAGNOSTIC SYSTEMS, INC.
                                  JUNE 30, 2004

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350

I, Leo Ehrlich, President and Chief Financial Officer of Saliva Diagnostic
Systems, Inc., hereby certify, to my knowledge:

      (1)   that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Saliva Diagnostic
            Systems, Inc. for the quarterly period ended on June 30, 2004 filed
            with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof at
            File No. 0-21284 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements
            of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange
            Act of 1934; and

      (2)   that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of Saliva Diagnostic Systems, Inc.

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.
1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure
document.

Dated: August 5, 2004

                                 /s/ Leo Ehrlich
                                 -----------------------------------------
                                 Leo Ehrlich
                                 President & Chief Financial Officer
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,



AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO



SECTION 906 OF THE U.S. SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002







In connection with the Quarterly Report of Jewett-Cameron Trading Company Ltd. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended May 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of the undersigned officers of the Company does hereby certify, to such officers knowledge, that, 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|Date: July 13, 2009 | Signed:  /s/Donald M. Boone       
|------------------- | ----------------------------------
|                    | Donald M. Boone,
President and CEO
**POWER OFATTORNEY**

Saturna Investment Trust, (the "Trust"), and each of the undersigned officers and trustees of the Trust hereby nominates, constitutes and appoints each of Nicholas F. Kaiser and Jane K. Carten, (with full power to each of them to act alone) its/his true and lawful attorney-in-fact and agent, for it/him and on its/his behalf and in its/his name, place and stead in any and all capacities, to make, execute and sign the Trust's Registration Statement on Form N-1A under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and the Investment Company Act of 1940, as amended, and any and all amendments to such Registration Statement and to file with the Securities and Exchange Commission, and any other regulatory authority having jurisdiction over the offer and sale of shares of the Beneficial Interest of the Trust, any and such Registration Statement or amendment, and any and all supplements thereto or to any prospectus or statement of additional information forming a part thereof, and any and all exhibits and other documents requisite in connection therewith, granting unto said attorneys, and each of them, full power and authority to do and perform each and every act and thing requisite and necessary to be done in and about the premises as fully to all intents and purposes as the Trust and the undersigned officers and trustees itself/themselves might or could do.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the TRUST has caused this power of attorney to be executed in its name by its President, and attested by its Secretary, and the undersigned officers and trustees have hereunto set their hands and seals at Washington, D.C. this 17th day of December, 2013.

	SATURNA INVESTMENT TRUST

By: ***/s/ Nicholas F. Kaiser*******NicholasF. KaiserPresident

ATTEST:

*/s/ Ethel Bartolome*Ethel BartolomeSecretary

 

[Signatures Continued on Next Page]

----

 

| Signature                                                    | Title                                               |
|--------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------------------------------------------|
| */s/ Nicholas Kaiser*    Nicholas F. kaiser                  | Trustee; President    (Principal Executive Officer) |
| */s/ Christopher R. Fankhauser*    Christopher R. Fankhauser | Treasurer    (Principal Financial Officer)          |
| */s/ Gary Goldfogel*    Gary Goldfogel                       | Trustee                                             |
| */s/ Herbert Grubel*    Herbert Grubel                       | Trustee                                             |
| */s/ John Love*    John Love                                 | Trustee                                             |
| */s/ Ronald H. Fielding*    Ronald Fielding                  | Trustee                                             |

 

 

2
To the Board of Directors and Shareholders of Wiltek, Inc.

 the accompanying consolidated balance sheet of Wiltek, Inc.
and Subsidiary (the "Company") as of October 31, 1996, and the related
consolidated statements of operations and deficit and cash flows for each of
the two years then ended.  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. 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 consolidated financial position of Wiltek, Inc. and
Subsidiary as of October 31, 1996, and the consolidated results of their
operations and their consolidated cash flows for each of the two years then
ended, in conformity with generally accepted accounting principles.



GRANT THORNTON, LLP



New York, New York
December 11, 1996
Exhibit 21

WENDYS INTERNATIONAL, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT



|                                                      |         |                                             |       |         
|----------------------------------------------------- | ------- | ------------------------------------------- | ----- | --------
|Subsidiary                                            |         | Jurisdiction ofincorporationor organization
|                                                      | Country |                                             | State
|Wendys Old Fashioned Hamburgers of New York, Inc.    |         | U.S.                                        |       | Ohio    
|Wendy Restaurant, Inc.                                |         | U.S.                                        |       | Delaware
|Wendys of Denver, Inc.                               |         | U.S.                                        |       | Colorado
|Wendys Restaurants of Canada, Inc.                   |         | Canada                                      |       |         
|Wendys of N.E. Florida, Inc.                         |         | U.S.                                        |       | Florida 
|Wendys Old Fashioned Hamburger Restaurants Pty. Ltd. |         | Australia                                   |       |         
|The New Bakery Co. of Ohio, Inc.                      |         | U.S.                                        |       | Ohio    
|NBCO Maintenance Corporation                          |         | U.S.                                        |       | Ohio    
|BDJ 71112, LLC                                        |         | U.S.                                        |       | Ohio    
|Scioto Insurance Company                              |         | U.S.                                        |       | Vermont 
|Oldemark LLC                                          |         | U.S.                                        |       | Vermont 
|Restaurant Finance Corporation                        |         | U.S.                                        |       | Ohio    
|WBT GC, LLC                                           |         | U.S.                                        |       | Colorado
|The Wendys National Advertising Program, Inc.        |         | U.S.                                        |       | Ohio    
|Wendys Canadian Advertising Program Inc.             |         | Canada                                      |       |         
|256 Gift Card Inc.                                    |         | U.S.                                        |       | Colorado
|Wendys Restaurants (Asia) Limited                    |         | China                                       |       |