alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 21.1**

 

**Subsidiaries of the Trust**

 

Wholly-OwnedCorporate Subsidiaries of the Trust:

BPP/Arrowhead,Inc. (Delaware) (Consolidated)

BPP/Crenshaw-Imperial,Inc. (Delaware) (Consolidated)

BPP/Riley, Inc. (California)(Consolidated)

BPP/Simi Valley, Inc.(Delaware) (Consolidated)

Burnham Pacific L.P., Inc.(Delaware) (Consolidated)

BPP/Golden StateAcquisitions, Inc. (Delaware) (Consolidated) *

BPP/Mountaingate, Inc.(Delaware) (Consolidated) *

BPP/Puente Hills, Inc.(Delaware) (Consolidated) *

 

 

Partnershipsin which the Trust holds interests:

BPP/Arrowhead,L.P. (Delaware) (Consolidated)

BPP/Marin, L.P. (California)(Consolidated)

Burnham Pacific OperatingPartnership, L.P. (Delaware) (Consolidated)

 

 

----

*  The Trust was previously advised that theseentities were closed.  Although theseentities’ final closings are nearing completion at this time, as of December31, 2004, the entities remain open.

 

----
----

|   | 2. | The      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material      respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the      Company. |
|--------|----|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| /s/      L. Paul Latham                               |
|-------------------------------------------------------|
| L.      Paul Latham                                   |
| President      and Chief Executive Officer            |
| of      Southwest Royalties, Inc., the                |
| Managing      General Partner of                      |
| Southwest      Oil & Gas Income Fund VIII-A, L.P. |
|                                                  |
| May      15, 2009                                     |
|                                                  |
|                                                  |
| /s/      Mel G. Riggs                                 |
| Mel      G. Riggs                                     |
| Vice      President and Chief Financial Officer of    |
| Southwest      Royalties, Inc., the                   |
| Managing      General Partner of                      |
| Southwest      Oil & Gas Income Fund VIII-A, L.P. |
|                                                  |
| May      15, 2009                                     |
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000827164
<NAME> VPN COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       0
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            6,864
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         6,428
<OTHER-SE>                                     (6,864)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         0
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                         0
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.00)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.00)


</TABLE>
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 22

- 1383

In re: PATRICIA L. HARRISON

.

---------------------------------------------------------- PATRICIA L. HARRISON , Respondent

- Appellant , ESTATE OF LATOYA NICOLE VALENTINE, by and through Debra Grate, Personal Representative; DEBRA GRATE, in her individual capacity , Plaintiffs,

v.
THE SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES; THE OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR; HENRY D. MCMASTER; NIMRATA “ NIKKI ” HALEY ; JOSHUA BAKER; CHRISTIAN SOURA; THE SOUTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF DISABILITIES AND SPECIAL NEEDS; MARY POOLE; PATRICK J. MALEY; LOIS PARK MOLE; SUSAN BECK; BEVERLY BUSCEMI; STANLEY BUTKUS; KATHI LACY; WILLIAM BARFIELD; THOMAS WARING; ROBERT KERR; WILLIAM DANIELSON , Defendants

- Appellees , THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; PICKENS COUNTY DISABILITIES AND SPECIAL NEEDS BOARD; ELAINE THENA; JOHN OWENS; DIANE ANDERSON , Defendants,
WILLIAM BOUTON Respondent. USCA4 Appeal: 22-1383 Doc: 80 Filed: 02/21/2023 Pg: 1 of 32 Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Columbia

. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., Senior District Judge. ( 3:18

- cv - 00895

- JFA )

Submitted : February 7, 2023 Decided: February 21, 2023

Before WILKINSON and HEYTENS , Circuit Judges , and KEENAN, Senior Circuit Judge

.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

ON BRIEF : Patricia Logan Harrison , Appellant Pro Se. Thomas A shley Limehouse, Jr. , W illiam Grayson Lambert , OFFICE OF THE GOVERNOR OF SOUTH CAROLINA, Columbia, South Carolina ; William Henry Davidson, II , Kenneth Paul Woodington , DAVIDSON, WREN & DEMASTERS, P.A. , Columbia, South Carolina ; Damon C. Wlodarczyk , RILEY POPE & LANEY , LLC , Columbia, South Carolina ; James H ouston Burns , Matthew D ouglas Patterson , Thad eous H erbert Westbrook , III, Columbia, South Carolina , Miles Edward Coleman , NELSON, MULLINS, RILEY & SCARBOROUGH LLP , Gre enville , South Carolina , for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 22-1383 Doc: 80 Filed: 02/21/2023 Pg: 2 of 33 PER CURIAM: Patricia L. Harrison appeals the district court’s order sanctioning her pursuant to
Fed. R. Civ. P. 11. We review for abuse of discre tion a district court’s order granting
sanctions under Fed. R. Civ. P. 11. Morris v. Wachovia Sec., Inc. , 448 F.3d 268, 277 (4th Cir. 2006). After reviewing the record, the parties’ briefs, and the district court’s thorough order, we affirm for the reaso ns stated by the district court. Estate of Valentine v. South
Carolina , No. 3:18

- cv - 00895

- JFA (D.S.C

. Mar. 29, 2022). We deny Harrison’s motions for judicial notice and for a stay pending appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional pr ocess.
AFFIRMED USCA4 Appeal: 22-1383 Doc: 80 Filed: 02/21/2023 Pg: 3 of 3
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1
                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
(Form S-8 Nos. 333-04731, 333-04733 and 333-52565) of our report dated February
20, 2004, except for Note 17, as to which the date is February 26, 2004, with
respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule of TechTeam
Global, Inc. included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended
December 31, 2003.

                                                           /s/ Ernst & Young LLP

Detroit, Michigan
March 24, 2004















                                      155
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL DATA EXTRACTED FROM THE REGISTRANT'S
FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTER ENDED SEPTEMBER, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY
TO SUCH FORM 10-Q.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                           4,077
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   11,177
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                15,254
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 226,481
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           70,460
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,150
<OTHER-SE>                                     688,951
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   226,481
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                36,326
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                83,314
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (46,988)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (46,988)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (46,988)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.00)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.00)
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>  92
EXHIBIT (18)

Deloitte &
  Touche LLP
--------------      ------------------------------------------------
                    Twenty-Fourth Floor Telephone: (215) 246-2300
                    1700 Market Street  Facsimile: (215) 569-2441
                    Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19103-3984



     
December 29, 1997

Uni-Marts, Inc.
477 East Beaver Avenue
State College, Pennsylvania


Board of Directors:

We have audited the consolidated financial statements of Uni-Marts, Inc.
and subsidiary as of September 30, 1997 and 1996, and for each of the three
years in the period ended September 30, 1997, included in your Annual
Report on Form 10-K to the Securities and Exchange Commission and have
issued our report thereon dated December 29, 1997.  Note C to such
consolidated financial statements contains a description of your adoption
during the year ended September 30, 1997 of a change in the method of
calculating merchandise inventory under the retail inventory method.  In
our judgment, such change is to an alternative accounting principle that is
preferable under the circumstances.

Yours truly,

/S/ DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP
























-----------------
Deloitte & Touche
Tomatsu
International
-----------------
**FEDERALMINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION**

 

SUNSHINE ACT NOTICE

 

BAC 6735-01

 

March 25, 2016

 

 

TIMEAND DATE:                11:00 a.m., Tuesday, April 5, 2016

 

PLACE:                                  TheRichard V. Backley Hearing Room, Room 511N, 1331 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW,Washington, DC 20004 (enter from  F Street entrance)

 

STATUS:                                Open

 

MATTERSTO BE 

CONSIDERED:                     TheCommission will consider and act upon the following in open session: *Secretaryof Labor v. Kentucky Fuel Corporation,*Docket Nos. KENT 2011-1557, et al. (Issuesinclude whether the Judge erred in ruling that the Secretary’s issuance of twoseparate citations with regard to the condition of a dozer was notimpermissibly duplicative.)

 

 

Any person attending this meeting who requires specialaccessibility features and/or auxiliary aids, such as sign languageinterpreters, must inform the Commission in advance of those needs. Subject to29 C.F.R. § 2706.150(a)(3) and § 2706.160(d).

 

 

CONTACTPERSON 

FOR MORE INFO:                EmogeneJohnson (202) 434-9935 / (202) 708-9300 for TDD

                                                Relay/ 1-800-877-8339 for toll free.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

                                                __________________________________

                                                SarahL. Stewart

                                                DeputyGeneral Counsel
## In The

Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06

- 13

- 00170

- CR

CLAYTON MARQUIS RICKS, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 102nd District Court

Red River County, Texas

Trial Court No. CR01943

Before Morriss, C.J., Carter and Moseley, JJ.2 

### O RDER

Clayton Marquis Ricks appeals from his conviction of burglary of a habitation. The

clerk’s record was filed August 21, 2013, and the reporter’s record was filed November 8,

making the appellant’s brief due December 9. This deadline was extended twice by this Court

on appellant’s motion, resulting in the current due date of January 29, 2 014. Appellant has now

filed a third motion to extend seeking an additional thirty

- day extension of the briefing deadline.

We have reviewed appellant’s third motion to extend time as well as the appellate record,

and we find no compelling information to convince us that this brief requires more time to

prepare. The motion to extend time to file appellant’s brief is overruled.

We order appellant’s counsel, Jason L. Horton, to file appellant’s brief with this Court on

or before February 19, 2014.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

BY THE COURT

Date: February 4, 2014
#### BOLON v. SMITH.

No. 23647.

Jan. 29, 1935.

Jones & Wesner, for plaintiff in error.

T. R. Wise, for. defendant in error.

PER CURIAM.

This action was Instituted iu the district court of Beckham county by J. B. Smith against Park Bolon, being for personal injuries alleged to have been sustained by plaintiff when he was struck by a truck owned and operated by defendant. Judgment being rendered for plaintiff, and defendant prosecuting this appeal, the parties will be referred to as they appeared in the court below.

The evidence of the plaintiff discloses that be was walking along tfie fiighway at its extreme right side, about one mile east of the town of Carter, Okla.; that defendant’s truck, or some braces extending out from it, struck him and knocked him off into the ditch at the side of the road. It clearly appears from the record that plaintiff was injured, and the amount of the judgment is not attacked. Defendant’s defense is based solely on the claim that it was not a truck of defendant’s that injured plaintiff. On this point# the evidence is conflicting, being largely circumstantial. We do not deem it necessary, however, to consider the weight of the evidence for the reason that the record discloses that defendant demurred at the conclusion of plaintiff’s evidence, upon which demurrer being overruled defendant put on its evidence, at the conclusion oil which, after instructions by the court, the cause was submitted to the jury. The defendant did not at the conclusion of all the evidence renew his demurrer, or move for an instructed verdict. This precludes any inquiry on our part into the weight of the evidence, or its sufficiency to sustain the verdict of the jury.

This court, in the recent case of Marland Refining Co. v. Harrel, 167 Okla. 548, 31 P. (2d) 121, in the first paragraph of the syllabus, said:

> “If a defendant, after its demurrer to the evidence of the plaintiff has been overruled, does not stand upon the demurrer but puts in its evidence, it waives the demurrer, and if it does not move for a directed verdict after the parties have finally rested, it cannot urge against an adverse verdict that the evidence was insufficient to establish a cause of action in favor of the plaintiff.”

See, also, Hinshaw et al. v. Brannon, 163 Okla. 225, 22 P. (2d) 74; Local Building & Loan Ass’n v. Hudson-Houston Lumber Co. et al., 150 Okla. 44, 3 P. (2d) 156; Watson v. Doss, 151 Okla. 132, 3 P. (2d) 156.

For the reasons given, the judgment of the court below is affirmed.

The Supreme Court acknowledges the aid of Attorneys Charles E. Dierker, Roscoe C. Arrington, and G.' C. Abernathy in the preparation of this opinion. These attorneys constituted an advisory committee selected *408by tbe State Bar, appointed by tbe Judicial Council, and approved by the Supreme Court. After the analysis of law and facts was prepared by Mr. Dierker, and approved by Mr. Arrington and Mr. Abernathy, the cause was assigned to a Justice of this court for examination and report to the court. Thereafter, upon consideration by a majority of this court, this opinion was adopted.
In the United States Court of Federal Claims 

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 16-255V 

Filed: August 26, 2016

UNPUBLISHED

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

CHERYL BOURGERIE, * 

 * 

 Petitioner, * Ruling on Entitlement; Concession;

v. * Influenza (“Flu”) Vaccination; Shoulder

 * Injury Related to Vaccine Administration

SECRETARY OF HEALTH * (“SIRVA”); Special Processing Unit 

AND HUMAN SERVICES, * (“SPU”)

 * 

 Respondent. * 

 * 

* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * *

Jeffrey S. Pop, Jeffrey S. Pop, Attorney at Law, Beverly Hills, CA, for petitioner.

Kelly Heidrich, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT1

Dorsey, Chief Special Master:

On February 23, 2016, petitioner filed a petition for compensation under the 

National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa-10, et seq.,

2 (the 

“Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleges that her September 23, 2014 influenza (“flu”) 

vaccination caused her to suffer Shoulder Injury Related to Vaccine Administration

(“SIRVA”). Petition at 1. The case was assigned to the Special Processing Unit of the 

Office of Special Masters.

On August 25, 2016, respondent filed her Rule 4(c) report in which she concedes 

that petitioner is entitled to compensation in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report

at 1. Specifically, respondent 

 

has concluded that petitioner’s alleged injury is consistent with shoulder 

injury related to vaccine administration (“SIRVA”), and that it was caused 

 

1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, the 

undersigned intends to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website, in accordance with 

the E-Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Management and Promotion of 

Electronic Government Services). In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), petitioner has 14 days to 

identify and move to redact medical or other information, the disclosure of which would constitute an 

unwarranted invasion of privacy. If, upon review, the undersigned agrees that the identified material fits 

within this definition, the undersigned will redact such material from public access.

2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 1986, Pub. L. No. 99-660, 100 Stat. 3755. Hereinafter, for 

ease of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subparagraph of 42 U.S.C. § 

300aa (2012).
2

in fact by the flu vaccine she received on or about September 23, 2014.

[Respondent] did not identify any other causes for petitioner’s SIRVA, and 

records show that she suffered the sequela of her injury for more than six 

months. 

Id. at 2-3. Respondent further agrees that based on the medical records “petitioner has 

met the statutory requirements for entitlement to compensation” and “satisfied all legal 

prerequisites for compensation under the Act.” Id. at 3.

In view of respondent’s concession and the evidence before me, the

undersigned finds that petitioner is entitled to compensation. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

 s/Nora Beth Dorsey

Nora Beth Dorsey

 Chief Special Master
#### Emeka EKE, Plaintiff—Appellant, v. BANK OF AMERICA, NA, Defendant—Appellee.

No. 10-2036.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Dec. 10, 2010.

Decided: Dec. 23, 2010.

Emeka Eke, Appellant Pro Se. Michael E. Lacy, Troutman Sanders, LLP, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

*635Before NIEMEYER, DAVIS, and WYNN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Emeka Eke appeals the district court’s order granting summary judgment to the Bank of America, NA and dismissing his complaint. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *Eke v. Bank of America, NA,*3:09-cv-00488-RLW, 2010 WL 3122806 (E.D.Va. Aug. 6, 2010). 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.*
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1647

To suspend temporarily the duty on fastusol C blue 76L.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

APRIL 2, 1993

Mr. TAUZIN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee

on Ways and Means

A BILL

To suspend temporarily the duty on fastusol C blue 76L.

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

3 SECTION 1. FASTUSOL C BLUE 76L.

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of

5 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is

6 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following

7 new heading:

‘‘ 9902.32.13 Fastusol C Blue

76L (provided

for in subheading

3204.13.30) ...... Free No change No change On or before

12/31/97 ’’.

8 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—
2

•HR 1647 IH

1 (1) IN GENERAL.—The amendment made by

2 subsection (a) applies with respect to goods entered,

3 or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on

4 or after the 15th day after the date of the enact5 ment of this Act.

6 (2) RETROACTIVE APPLICATION TO CERTAIN

7 ENTRIES.—Notwithstanding section 514 of the Tar8 iff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1514) or any other provi9 sion of law, upon proper request filed with the ap10 propriate customs officer before the 90th day after

11 the date of the enactment of this Act, any entry, or

12 withdrawal from warehouse for consumption, of any

13 goods described in heading 9902.32.13 of the Har14 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (as

15 added by subsection (a)) that was made—

16 (A) after December 31, 1992; and

17 (B) before the 15th day after the date of

18 the enactment of this Act;

19 shall be liquidated or reliquidated as though such

20 entry or withdrawal occurred on the 15th day after

21 the date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ