alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<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 General Kinetics Incorporated
(the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended February 28, 2003 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
I, Larry M. Heimendinger, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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 results of operations
          of the Company.

                                                /s/ Larry M. Heimendinger
                                                --------------------------------
                                                Larry M. Heimendinger
                                                Chief Executive Officer
                                                April 14, 2003
EXHIBIT 23.1






INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT


We  hereby  consent  to the  incorporation  by  reference  to  the  Registration
Statements on Form S-8 (Registration Numbers 333-99761, 333-50558 and 333-33528)
of our report dated January 28, 2003, except for Note 9(c), as to which the date
is March 27, 2003,  on our audits of the  consolidated  financial  statements of
MDSI Mobile Data Solutions Inc. and its subsidiaries as of December 31, 2002 and
2001,  which report is included in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of MDSI Mobile
Data Solutions Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2002.


/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP

Chartered Accountants
Vancouver, British Columbia
March 28, 2003
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 120 (Thursday, June 21, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 28847]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-13445]



[[Page 28847]]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL ELECTION COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

TIME AND DATE: Tuesday, June 26, 2018 at 10:00 a.m.

PLACE: 1050 First Street NE, Washington, DC.

STATUS: This meeting will be closed to the public.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Compliance matters pursuant to 52 U.S.C. 
30109.
    Matters concerning participation in civil actions or proceedings or 
arbitration.
* * * * *

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:  Judith Ingram, Press Officer, 
Telephone: (202) 694-1220.

Laura E. Sinram,
Deputy Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2018-13445 Filed 6-19-18; 4:15 pm]
 BILLING CODE 6715-01-P
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

RESEARCH TRIANGLE PARK, NC 27711 

The Honorable Stacey Newman 

State Representative 

District 87 

201 West Capitol Avenue 

Room 101-K 

Jefferson City, Missouri 65101-6806 

Dear Representative Newman: 

AUG Z Z 2014 

OFFICE OF 

AIR QUALITY PLANNING 

AND STANDARDS 

Thank you for your letter of July 29, 2014, to United States Environmental Protection Agency 

Administrator McCarthy regarding the EPA's review ofthe national ambient air quality standards 

(NAAQS) for ozone. The Administrator asked that I respond on her behalf. 

The EPA is currently in the midst of reviewing the ozone NAAQS. We expects to complete its review 

and issue a proposed rule reflecting the Administrator's decision about the appropriateness of revising 

the standards by December 1, 2014. As we move forward, we will take into account your comments in 

favor of tightening the 8-hour primary ozone standard to a level of 60 parts per billion (ppb ). 

Under the Clean Air Act, decisions regarding the NAAQS must be based solely on an evaluation ofthe 

health and environmental effects evidence. The EPA is prohibited from considering costs or ease of 

implementation in setting the NAAQS. However, once the Administrator has determined the appropriate 

level for the standards, costs are carefully considered as part of the implementation process. 

Your comments and recommendations will be forwarded to the docket for this rulemaking (Docket ID 

No. EP A-HQ-OAR-2008-0699) so that they may be considered, along with the recommendations of 

the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee, and other comments received, as the EPA develops its 

proposed decision. 

Again, thank you for your letter. I appreciate the opportunity to be of service, and hope this information 

has been helpful to you. 

Sincerely 

ephen . age 

Director 

Office of Air Quality Planning 

and Standards 

Internet Address (URL) • http://www.epa.gov 

Recycled/Recyclable • Printed wUh Vegetable Oil Based Inks on Recycled Paper (Minimum 25% Postconsumer)
#### Trazysie ENSTROM, Appellant, v. Liisa A. DIXON, as Personal Representative of the Estate of Elin M. Enstrom, Deceased, Appellee.

No. 76-2671.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Feb. 7, 1978.

Guy C. Hill, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Robert E. Hathaway, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff appeals an order granting Defendant’s motion to dismiss her amended complaint with prejudice.

In a four count amended complaint Plaintiff alleges that she housed and cared for Defendant’s decedent from 1967 to 1975 and is entitled to reimbursement for expenses incurred therein under theories of breach of contract, conversion, and several equitable theories. Although the amended complaint could have been more artfully drafted, we agree that Plaintiff should have been allowed another opportunity to amend so as to attempt to state a cause of action.

It is the policy in this State to freely allow amendments to pleadings in order that causes may be tried on their merits and justice may be achieved. In exercising the discretion inherent in the trial court to allow or disallow amendments, all doubts should be resolved in favor of the former unless the privilege be abused. *David Miller Distributing v. Fla. Nat. Bank,*342 So.2d 856 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977). We find no such abuse here. Plaintiff should be allowed an opportunity to amend unless it is apparent that the pleading cannot be amended to state a cause of action. *Hansen v. Central Adjustment Bureau, Inc.,*348 So.2d 608 (Fla. 4th DCA 1977).

The defendant relies heavily on *First Gulf Beach Bank & Trust Co. v. Grubaugh,*330 So.2d 205 (Fla. 2nd DCA 1976) which dealt with contracts to make a will and the effect of Fla.Stat. 731.051. Clearly, that decision has no bearing on the theories attempted to be raised in Plaintiff’s amended complaint.

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

ALDERMAN, C. J., and CROSS and MOORE, JJ., concur.
#### Richard Laverne JOHNSTON, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 71-943.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Feb. 1, 1972.

*95Phillip A. Hubbart, Public Defender, and Lewis S. Kimler, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Arnold Ginsberg, Asst. Atty. Gen., and Barry J. Clyman, Legal Intern, for appellee.

Before SWANN, C. J., and CHARLES CARROLL and HENDRY, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal by the defendant below from judgment of conviction based on a jury verdict, for the offense of larceny of a motor vehicle. Upon consideration of the contentions of the appellant, in the light of the record and briefs, we conclude no reversible error has been made to appear. The ruling by the trial court that the inculpatory statement of the defendant which was received in evidence was voluntarily made was not error. Although the evidence relating thereto was not without conflict, the trial court was entitled to conclude therefrom that the voluntariness of the statement was established by the preponderance of the evidence relating thereto. Dawson v. State, Fla.1962, 139 So.2d 408; Moffet v. State, Fla.App.1965, 179 So.2d 408. In addition to the admissions made by the defendant, the evidence showed unexplained possession by the defendant of the recently stolen property (automobile). The appellant’s contention that the verdict was not properly determined to be the unanimous verdict of the jury is not supported by the record.

Affirmed.
N O T FO R PUB L ICAT IO N UNITED STATES C OUR T OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH C IR C UIT ALIAKSANDR

KR ASANTOVIC H; LIUB OV VYAC HESLAVOVNA AKULINTSEVA, a .k.a . Le obov Vioa c hisla

vovna , Pe titione rs, v. ER IC H. HOLDER , Jr., Attorne y Ge ne ra l, R

e sponde nt . No. 12-70026 Age n c y Nos. A088-534-519

A088-534-520 M EM O R ANDUM *

On Pe tition for Re vie w of a n Orde r of the B oa rd of Im m igration Appe a ls Subm itte d M arc h 10, 2014 ** B e fore : PR EGER SON, LEAVY, a n d M UR GUIA, C irc uit Judge s . Alia ksa ndr Kra sa nt ovic h, a native and c itiz e n of B e la rus, a nd Liubov Vy a c he sla

vovna Akulintse va , a

native and c itiz e n of R

ussia , pe tition for re vie w of the B oa rd of Im m igration Appe a ls’ orde r dism issing the ir a ppe a l from

an 

# FIL ED MAR 17 2014 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S . CO URT O F APPEALS

* This disposition is not a ppropria te for public at ion a

nd is not pre c e de nt e xc e pt a s provide d

by 9th C ir. R . 36-3. ** The pa

ne l una nim ously c onc lude s this c a se is suita ble for de c ision without oral a

rgum e nt. Se e Fe d. R . App. P. 34(a)(2).im

m igration judge ’ s de c i sion de ny i ng the ir a pplic ation for a sy lum , withholding of re m ova l, a

nd re lie f unde r the C onve ntion Agai nst Torture(“ C AT” ). W e have jurisdic tion unde r 8 U.S.C . § 1252. W e re vie w for substa ntia l e vide n c e the a ge nc y ’ s fa c tua l findings, a pply ing the sta

nda rds gove rning a d

ve rse c re dibility de te rm i nations c re ate d

by the REAL ID Ac t. S

hre s tha v . Holde r , 590 F.3d 1034, 1039 (9th C ir. 2010). W e grant the pe tition for re vie w a nd re m and. The a ge n c y

found Kra sa

ntovic h not c re dible ba se d on a pe rc e i ve d la c k of c andor in his te stim o ny

and disc re pa

nc ie s be twe e n his te stim ony and his visa a pplic ation. The se findings a re not supporte d by

substa ntia l e vide nc e . Se e Re n v . Holde r , 648 F.3d 1079, 1087 (9th C ir. 2011) (inc onsiste nc ie s ha d no ba sis in the re c o rd). The a ge nc y a lso found Kra sa ntovic h fa ile d to c orroborate his te stim ony . Howe ve r, at the tim e it m a de this finding, it did not ha v e the be n e fit of our de c ision in Re n , 648 F.3d a

t 1089-94. Ac c ordingly , we grant the pe tition for re vie w, a nd re m and Kra sa

ntovic h’ s c la im s, on a

n ope n re c ord, for furthe r proc e e dings c onsiste n t with this disposition. Se e IN S v . Ve ntura , 537 U.S. 12, 16-18 (2002) (pe r c uriam ); Soto-Olarte v . Holde r , 555 F.3d 1089, 1093-96 (9th C ir. 2009). PE T IT IO N FO R RE V IE WG RANT E D; RE M A NDE D.

1 2 - 7 0 0 2 6 2
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Chester LEE.

No. 62059.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 14, 1978.

Robert J. Zibilich, Orleans Indigent Defender Program, New Orleans, for defendant-appellant.

William J. Guste, Jr., Atty. Gen., Barbara Rutledge, Asst. Atty. Gen., Harry F. Con-nick, Dist. Atty., Louise S. Korns, Asst. .Dist. Atty., for plaintiff-appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 848 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 848

 To continue the authorization of appropriations for the East Court of 
                the National Museum of Natural History.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 4, 1993

 Mr. Mineta (for himself, Mr. Natcher, and Mr. McDade) introduced the 
 following bill; which was referred jointly to the Committees on House 
           Administration and Public Works and Transportation

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To continue the authorization of appropriations for the East Court of 
                the National Museum of Natural History.

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

SECTION. 1. NATIONAL MUSEUM OF NATURAL HISTORY.

    (a) In General.--Section 2 of the Act entitled ``An Act to 
authorize the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution to plan, 
design, construct, and equip space in the East Court of the National 
Museum of Natural History building, and for other purposes'', approved 
October 24, 1990 (20 U.S.C. 50 note), is amended by inserting ``and 
succeeding fiscal years'' after ``1991''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) shall 
take effect as of October 24, 1990.

                                 <all>
```
<PAGE>

                                 EXHIBIT 23.1

                      CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

     We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Form S-8 (No. 333-89908 and No. 333-30561) and Form S-3 (No. 333-
44559 and No. 333-30473) of P-Com, Inc. of our report dated January 22, 1998
(except for Note 10 which is as of March 28, 1998) appearing on page 39 of
this Annual Report on Form 10-K.


Price Waterhouse LLP
San Jose, California
March 30, 1998
Exhibit 23.1



INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT


We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration
Statement No. 333-89375 (Fleming Companies, Inc. Matching
401(k) Plan) (formerly known as the Consolidated Savings Plus
and Stock Ownership Plan for Fleming Companies, Inc. and Its
Subsidiaries) on Form S-8 of our report dated June 29,
2000, on the financial statements of the Fleming Companies,
Inc. Matching 401(k) Plan for the year ended December 24,
1999 appearing in this Form 11-K of Fleming Companies, Inc.


DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
July 6, 2000
#### Georgia L. SLONE v. TRAVELERS INDEMNITY CO. et al. Jeanell P. RUIZ v. TRAVELERS INDEMNITY CO. et al.

No. 60834.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Nov. 11, 1977.

In re: Georgia L. Slone & Jeanell P. Ruiz applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, Parish of Calcasieu. 349 So.2d 460; 349 So.2d 461.

Writ denied.
DENIED and Opinion Filed January 3, 2020

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 19
- 01554
- CV IN RE LEVY PREMIUM F OOD SERVICE, LLC D/B /A LEVY RESTAURANTS , Relator

Original Proceeding from the County Court at Law No. 1

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC
- 18
- 06335
- A 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Schenck, Reichek, and Evans Opinion by Justice Schenck Before the Court is relator’s December 19, 201 9 petition for writ of mandamus. In its petition, relator requests this Court to vacate the trial court’s October 15, 2019 order denying relator’s motion to transfer and to direct the trial court to enter an order transferring this case to
the 160 th Judic ial District Court, where an earlier suit relator contends arises out of the same transaction or occurrence is pending. To be entitled to mandamus relief, relator must show both that the trial court has clearly abused its discretion and that relators have no adequate appellate remedy. In re Prudential Ins. Co ., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135

– 36 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding). After reviewing the petition and mandamus record, we conclude relator has failed to show it is entitled to the relief requested.– 2

–

Accordingly, w e deny relator’s petition for writ of mandamus. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 52.8(a) (the court must deny the petition if the court determines relator is not entitled to the relief sought).

191554 F

. P 05 /David J. Schenck/ DAVID J. SCHENCK JUSTICE
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S UNAUDITED CONDENSED STATEMENTS OF INCOME, CONDENSED BALANCE SHEETS AND
CONDENSED STATEMENTS OF CASH FLOWS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS CONTAINED WITHIN THE COMPANY'S FORM 10-Q FOR THE
THREE AND NINE MONTHS ENDED OCTOBER 31, 1998.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-30-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1998
<CASH>                                           3,804
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   76,108
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,939
<INVENTORY>                                     58,641
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               152,866
<PP&E>                                         209,231
<DEPRECIATION>                                 100,085
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 362,810
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           68,942
<BONDS>                                          3,600
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        41,100
<OTHER-SE>                                      55,283
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   362,810
<SALES>                                        365,571
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               365,571
<CGS>                                          253,181
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  337,611
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                (4,360)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   609
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              10,176
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 22,144
<INCOME-TAX>                                     6,975
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             15,169
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    15,169
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .84
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .82
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.1
                                PROGENITOR, INC.
                          (A Development Stage Company)
                   Statement of Computation of Per Share Loss


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                         YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30,
                                                         -------------------------------------------------------- 
                                                             1997                  1996                  1995
                                                         ------------          ------------          ------------ 
<S>                                                      <C>                   <C>                   <C>          
Net loss                                                 $ 30,282,543          $ (5,483,804)         $ (2,875,467)
Preferred stock dividend                                  (12,283,481)
                                                         ------------          ------------          ------------ 
Net loss attributable to common stockholders             $ 42,566,024          $ (5,483,804)         $ (2,875,467)
                                                         ============          ============          ============
Weighted average number of shares outstanding:
Weighted average shares outstanding, beginning
of year                                                     2,885,904             2,789,271             2,818,668
Add: Common and common share equivalents issued
     at prices below the anticipated Offering
     price during the last 12 months immediately
     preceding the filing date of the Offering                 16,383                32,765                32,765
Add: Weighted average common shares issued
     (repurchased) during year                              1,431,097                41,174               (40,580)
                                                         ------------          ------------          ------------ 
Weighted average number of shares outstanding
    used in computing net loss per share                    4,333,384             2,863,210             2,810,853
                                                         ============          ============          ============

Net loss per share                                       $      (9.82)         $      (1.92)         $      (1.02)
                                                         ============          ============          ============ 
</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 827 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 827

 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to permanently extend the 
               treatment of qualified small issue bonds.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 4, 1993

  Mr. Coyne (for himself, Mr. Rangel, Mr. Matsui, Mrs. Kennelly, Mr. 
   Thomas of California, Mr. Jacobs, Mr. Sundquist, Mr. Cardin, Mr. 
  Grandy, Mr. Neal of Massachusetts, Mr. Houghton, Mr. Kopetski, Mr. 
Brewster, Mr. Jefferson, Mr. Santorum, Mr. Payne of Virginia, Mr. Shaw, 
Mr. McCrery, Mr. Levin, and Mr. McNulty) introduced the following bill; 
         which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to permanently extend the 
               treatment of qualified small issue bonds.

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

SECTION 1. PERMANENT EXTENSION OF QUALIFIED SMALL ISSUE BONDS.

    (a) In General.--Subparagraph (B) of section 144(a)(12) of the 
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended to read as follows:
                    ``(B) Bonds issued to finance manufacturing 
                facilities and farm property.--Subparagraph (A) shall 
                not apply to any bond issued as part of an issue 95 
                percent or more of the net proceeds of which are to be 
                used to provide--
                            ``(i) any manufacturing facility, or
                            ``(ii) any land or property in accordance 
                        with section 147(c)(2).''
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall 
apply to bonds issued after the date of the enactment of this Act.

                                 <all>
```
directive. Accordingly, we conclude that appellants have abandoned this 

appeal, and we 

ORDER this appeal DISMISSED. 

Saitta 

cc: Hon. Jerry A. Wiese, District Judge 

Lansford W. Levitt, Settlement Judge 

Bryant Hayward 

Paraskevi Siderakis 

Phillip Edward Jones 

Eighth District Court Clerk 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

(0) 1947A 74/P49> 

2
256 La. 849

#### LOUISIANA MATERIALS CO., Inc. v. Alwynn J. CRONVICH, Sheriff of the Parish of Jefferson et al.

No. 50790.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 30, 1970.

In re: The Parish of Jefferson applying for certiorari, or writ of review, to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, Parish of Jefferson. 236 So.2d 510.

It is ordered that the writ of review issue ; that the Court of Appeal send up the record in duplicate of the case; and that counsel for plaintiff and defendant be notified.