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



SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT



NovaStar Financial, Inc., a Maryland corporation, and its subsidiaries



| |  | NovaStar Assets Corp., a Delaware corporation
|- |  | ---------------------------------------------



| |  | NovaStar Certificates Financing Corporation, a Delaware corporation
|- |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  | NovaStar Capital Access Corp., a Delaware corporation
|- |  | -----------------------------------------------------



| |  | NFI Repurchase Corporation, a Delaware corporation
|- |  | --------------------------------------------------



| |  | NFI Holding Corporation, a Delaware corporation, and its subsidiaries
|- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------



| | a. | NovaStar Capital, Inc., a Delaware corporation
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------



| | b. | AmPro Financial Services, Inc., a Delaware corporation
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------



| | c. | NovaStar Credit Services, Inc., a Delaware corporation
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------



| | d. | NovaStar Mortgage, Inc., a Virginia corporation, and its subsidiaries
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 1. | NovaStar Mortgage Funding Corporation, a Delaware corporation
| | -- | -------------------------------------------------------------



| | 2. | NovaStar Mortgage Funding Corporation II, a Delaware corporation
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------



| | 3. | NovaStar Mortgage Funding Corporation III, a Delaware corporation
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------



| | 4. | NovaStar REMIC Financing Corporation, a Delaware corporation
| | -- | ------------------------------------------------------------



| | 5. | NMI Repurchase Corporation, a Delaware corporation
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------



| | 6. | NMI Repurchase Corporation II, a Delaware corporation
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------



| | e. | NovaStar Home Mortgage, Inc., a Delaware corporation, and its subsidiaries
| | -- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | 1. | NovaStar Home Mortgage of South Carolina, Inc., a Delaware corporation
| | -- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------



| | f. | NovaStar Mortgage Financing Corp., a Delaware corporation
| | -- | ---------------------------------------------------------



| | g. | Acceleron Lending, Inc., a Delaware corporation
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Communications Commission

# AGENCY:

Federal Communications Commission. 

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting correction. 

# SUMMARY:

                        The Federal Communications Commission published a document in the                         **Federal Register**                         on January 26, 2001 announcing a meeting of the Network Reliability and Interoperability Council to be held on Tuesday, February 27, 2001 (See FCC Public Announcement DA 01-294). The document incorrectly specified that February 27 was a Wednesday.                     

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Robert Kimball at 202-418-2339 or TTY 202-418-2989. 

# CORRECTION: 

                        In the                         **Federal Register**                         of January 26, 2001 in FR document 01-2284, on page 7911, in the third column, correct the                         **Dates**                         caption to read:                     

# DATES:

Tuesday, February 27, 2001 at 2 p.m. to 4 p.m. 

Federal Communications Commission. 

Rebecca Dorch, 

Deputy Chief, Office of Engineering and Technology. 

[FR Doc. 01-4724 Filed 2-26-01; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712-01-U
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                          18,991
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                          40,854
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 5,900
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                    464,131
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                         122,787
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                           123,552
<LOANS>                                      1,310,492
<ALLOWANCE>                                     10,890
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,998,299
<DEPOSITS>                                   1,222,856
<SHORT-TERM>                                    18,275
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             38,456
<LONG-TERM>                                    578,018
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     28,719
<COMMON>                                        75,998
<OTHER-SE>                                      35,977
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>               1,998,299
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 26,375
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                9,213
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                35,588
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                              13,126
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              22,416
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           13,172
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      650
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  9,551
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  6,208
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       4,048
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,048
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.44
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.43
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    2.84
<LOANS-NON>                                      8,673
<LOANS-PAST>                                        43
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                  8,848
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                10,733
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      590
<RECOVERIES>                                        97
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                               10,890
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                            10,890
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

 v.

HUGO LOUIS RAMIREZ,

Defendant-Appellant.

No. 21-10078

D.C. No. 

2:05-cr-00090-MCE-1

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Morrison C. England, Jr., District Judge, Presiding

Submitted December 7, 2021** 

San Francisco, California

Before: GRABER and COLLINS, Circuit Judges, and CHOE-GROVES,*** Judge.

 

Hugo Ramirez appeals from the district court’s order denying his motion for

compassionate release under 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A). We review for abuse of

FILED

DEC 9 2021

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

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

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

*** The Honorable Jennifer Choe-Groves, Judge for the United States

Court of International Trade, sitting by designation.
discretion, United States v. Aruda, 993 F.3d 797, 799 (9th Cir. 2021), and affirm. 

The district court assumed that Ramirez’ medical conditions, in combination

with the threat of COVID-19, were sufficient to qualify him for consideration for

release pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3582(c)(1)(A)(i). But, after considering the 18

U.S.C. § 3553(a) factors and the danger that Ramirez would pose to the community

if released, the court denied compassionate release. 

Ramirez contends that the district court gave insufficient consideration to his

medical conditions and vulnerability to COVID-19 and gave excessive weight to

the government’s contentions regarding his danger to the community. We

disagree. The weight to give the various § 3553(a) factors is for the district court

to determine, United States v. Gutierrez-Sanchez, 587 F.3d 904, 908 (9th Cir.

2009), and it did not abuse its discretion in denying relief. See United States v.

Robertson, 895 F.3d 1206, 1213 (9th Cir. 2018) (recognizing that a district court

abuses its discretion only if its decision applies the wrong legal rule or is illogical,

implausible, or without support in the record). Moreover, contrary to Ramirez’

remaining arguments, the court did not rely on any improper consideration to deny

relief.

AFFIRMED.

2
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO  18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350  AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-Q of The Sports Authority, Inc. (the "Company") for the period ended October 30,
2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Thomas T. Hendrickson, Chief Financial Officer, Chief Administrative Officer and Treasurer 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:

| |  | /s/THOMAS T. HENDRICKSONThomas T. Hendrickson Chief Financial Officer,
Chief Administrative Officer and Treasurer
April 14, 2005
| |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---



QuickLinks
#### Tungalag BALCHIGSUREN; et al., Petitioners, v. Eric H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General, Respondent.

No. 08-74945.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Jan. 10, 2011.*

Decided Jan. 19, 2011.

Daniel Ralph Richardson, Esquire, Richardson Intellectual Property Law, P.C., San Francisco, CA, for Petitioners.

Sunah Lee, Trial, OIL, Keith Ian Mc-Manus, Senior Litigation Counsel, U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, Chief Counsel Ice, Office of the Chief Counsel, Department of Homeland Security, San Francisco, CA, for Respondent.

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

*

 The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Tungalag Balchigsuren and her daughter, natives and citizens of Mongolia, petition for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying their motion to reopen removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the denial of a motion to reopen, *Malty v. Ashcroft,*381 F.3d 942, 945 (9th Cir.2004), and we deny the petition for review.

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying petitioners’ motion to reopen as untimely because petitioners’ did not file the motion within 90 days of the BIA’s final order of removal, *see*8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(2), and they failed to demonstrate material changed circumstances in Mongolia to qualify for the regulatory exception to the time limit, *see*8 C.F.R. § 1003.2(c)(3)(h); *see also Toufighi v. Mukasey,*538 F.3d 988, 996-97 (9th Cir.2008) (evidence must demonstrate prima facie eligibility for relief in order to reopen proceedings based on changed circumstances). The record does not support petitioners’ contentions that the BIA failed to accept the facts in their supporting affidavits as true and failed to evaluate the petitioners’ new facts in the context of the country conditions evidence.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.1

                           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 Franklin Credit Management
Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30,
2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), I, Seth Cohen, 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:

The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.

/s/ Seth Cohen
--------------
Seth Cohen
Chief Executive Officer
November 13, 2002

                                    Page 26
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

Pursuant to Section 906of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350,Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code), the undersigned officer of ChasePackaging Corporation (the “Company”), does hereby certify, to such officer’sknowledge, that:

 

The QuarterlyReport on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2008 (the “Form 10-Q”)of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and theinformation contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company asof, and for, the periods presented in the Form 10-Q.

 

The foregoingcertification is being furnished as an exhibit to the Form 10-Q pursuantto Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-K and Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63of Title 18, United States Code) and, accordingly, is not being filed as partof the Form 10-Q for purposes of Section 18 of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not incorporated by reference into anyfiling of the Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardlessof any general incorporation language in such filing.

 

 
| November 13,  2008 | /s/ Ann C. W.  Green                             |
|-------------------------|--------------------------------------------------|
|                    | Ann C. W. Green                                  |
|                    | Chief Financial  Officer and Assistant Secretary |

 

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>          
               THIS SCHEDULE  CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED
               FROM THE CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEETS AND CONSOLIDATED  STATEMENTS
               OF  OPERATIONS  FOUND ON PAGES 1, 2 AND 3 OF THE  COMPANY'S  FORM
               10-Q FOR THE  YEAR-TO-DATE,  AND IS  QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
               REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         130,726
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  1,960,819
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (89,326)
<INVENTORY>                                    3,343,418
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               5,532,388
<PP&E>                                         4,802,999
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (2,701,675)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 7,753,568
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          2,725,550
<BONDS>                                        2,581,946
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       55,406
<OTHER-SE>                                     2,390,666
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   7,753,568
<SALES>                                        11,801,859
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               11,801,859
<CGS>                                          9,780,395
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  9,780,395
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               1,937,702
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (223,731)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (64,338)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (64,338)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (64,338)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (.01)
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>
 
EXHIBIT 10.11.4     QUAKER CITY FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION CHANGE IN
                    CONTROL AGREEMENT RENEWAL AND EXTENSION ACKNOWLEDGMENT
                    BETWEEN QUAKER CITY FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION AND
                    ROBERT C. TEELING DATED JULY 1, 1998.



                QUAKER CITY FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATION
                          CHANGE IN CONTROL AGREEMENT
                      RENEWAL AND EXTENSION ACKNOWLEDGMENT



Name of Participant:    Robert C. Teeling
                    -------------------------



The undersigned participant does hereby acknowledge that, at their regularly
scheduled meeting on June 25, 1998, the Board of Directors of Quaker City
Federal Savings and Loan Association acted to renew and extend the Quaker City
Federal Savings and Loan Association Change in Control Agreement with the
undersigned participant to a full twenty-four (24) month term, until June 30,
2000.


Dated this 1st day of July, A.D., 1998.



                                       QUAKER CITY FEDERAL SAVINGS AND LOAN 
                                       ASSOCIATION


/s/ Robert C. Teeling                  By: /s/ Frederic R. McGill
-------------------------                 --------------------------
Participant                               President
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-24-00331-CR

Jason Neil Kosier, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 2 OF BELL COUNTY

NO. 23CCR02924, THE HONORABLE JOHN MICHAEL MISCHTIAN, JUDGE PRESIDING

O R D E R A N D M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N 

PER CURIAM

A jury found appellant Jason Neil Kosier guilty of the misdemeanor offense of 

deadly conduct. Kosier, proceeding pro se, filed a notice of appeal after the jury’s verdict but

before the trial court sentenced him, making his notice premature. See Tex. R. App. P. 27.1(b)

(“In a criminal case, a prematurely filed notice of appeal is effective and deemed filed on the 

same day, but after, sentence is imposed or suspended in open court” but “is not effective if filed 

before the trial court makes a finding of guilt or receives a jury verdict.”); Franks v. State,

219 S.W.3d 494, 497 (Tex. App.—Austin 2007, pet. ref’d) (“[U]nder Rule 27.1(b), a 

prematurely filed notice of appeal is one that is filed in the time period after the jury’s verdict 

and before sentence is imposed.”).
2

We have now received the clerk’s record, which does not contain a copy of 

Kosier’s judgment of conviction or the trial court’s certification of Kosier’s right to appeal. The 

county clerk’s office has informed us that it cannot provide those documents because 

the punishment hearing, which was originally set for June 5, 2024, has been rescheduled for 

July 24, 2024, due to Kosier “fail[ing] to report as ordered to a Pre-Sentence Investigation 

Interview.” Without the judgment of conviction and certification of Kosier’s right to appeal, we 

cannot move forward with the appeal at this time.

The appropriate remedy under these circumstances is to abate the appeal pending

the punishment hearing and the pronouncement of Kosier’s sentence in the court below. See 

Meachum v. State, 273 S.W.3d 803, 806 (Tex. App.—Houston [14th Dist.] 2008) (abatement 

order). Accordingly, we abate this appeal and remand the case to the trial court for further 

proceedings. A supplemental clerk’s record, containing both Kosier’s judgment of conviction 

and the trial court’s certification of Kosier’s right to appeal, shall be filed in this Court within ten

days after the trial court pronounces Kosier’s sentence in open court. The appeal will be 

reinstated after the supplemental clerk’s record is filed.

Before Chief Justice Byrne, Justices Triana and Kelly

Abated and Remanded

Filed: July 11, 2024

Do Not Publish