alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION
                          302 OF THE SARBANES OXLEY ACT
I,  Robert  C.  Russell  certify  that:

1.  I  have  reviewed  this  annual  report  on Form 10-KSB of TELECOMMUNICATION
PRODUCTS,  INC.,

2.  Based  on  my  knowledge,  this  annual  report  does not contain any untrue
statement  of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make
the  statements  made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were  made,  not  misleading  with  respect to the period covered by this annual
report;

3.  Based  on  my  knowledge,  the  financial  statements,  and  other financial
information  included  in  this  annual  report,  fairly present in all material
respects  the  financial  condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant  as  of,  and  for,  the  periods  presented  in  this annual report;

4.  The  registrant's  other  certifying  officers  and  I  are  responsible for
establishing  and  maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange  Act  Rules  13a-14  and  15d-14)  for  the  registrant  and  have:
a)  designed  such  disclosure  controls  and procedures to ensure that material
information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries,
is  made  known  to  us by others within those entities, particularly during the
period  in  which  this  annual  report  is  being  prepared;
b)  evaluated  the  effectiveness  of  the  registrant's disclosure controls and
procedures  as  of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this annual
report  (the  "Evaluation  Date");  and
c)  presented  in  this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness of
the  disclosure  controls  and  procedures  based  on  our  evaluation as of the
Evaluation  Date;

5. The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our
most  recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of
registrant's  board  of  directors  (or  persons  performing  the  equivalent
functions):
a)  all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls
which  could  adversely  affect  the  registrant's  ability  to record, process,
summarize  and  report  financial  data and have identified for the registrant's
auditors  any  material  weaknesses  in  internal  controls;  and

b)  any  fraud,  whether  or  not  material,  that  involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls; and
6.  The  registrant's  other  certifying  officers  and I have indicated in this
annual  report whether there were significant changes in internal controls or in
other  factors  that  could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to
the  date  of  our most recent evaluation, including any corrective actions with
regard  to  significant  deficiencies  and  material  weaknesses.

Date:  July  19,  2004

By:  /s/  Robert  C  Russell
------------------------------------
CEO,  President
December 3, 2014

U.S. Department of Transportation 

Docket Management System

400 7th Street SW, Plaza 401

Washington, DC 20591-0001

Re: Exemption No. 4298, Docket No. 23290

Ladies/Gentlemen:

In accordance with Title 14 of the Code of Federal Regulations (14CFR) § 11.61, Airlines for 

America (A4A), on behalf of its member airlines1/and other similarly situated part 121 certificate 

holders, petitions for an extension of Exemption No. 4298N (Docket No. 23290). This exemption is 

scheduled to expire on March 31, 2015.

Exemption No. 4298N provides relief from §§ 121.311(f) and 121.391(d) of Title 14 CFR and 

permits A4A member airlines and other similarly situated part 121 certificate holders’ required 

flight attendants to be located at the mid-cabin flight attendant station during takeoff and landing on 

Boeing 767 airplanes.

The conditions and circumstances, in regard to public interest and equivalent levels of safety, which 

warranted the original grant of exemption, continue to exist. This exemption and its predecessor, 

Exemption No. 4298, have been in use for almost eighteen years with no known compromise of 

safety.

____________________________________

1/Operator Members: 

Alaska Airlines, American Airlines, Atlas Air, Delta Air Lines, Federal Express, Hawaiian Airlines, 

JetBlue Airways, Southwest Airlines, United Airlines, United Parcel Service, US Airways.

Associate Members: 

Air Canada.
U.S. Department of Transportation

Docket Management System

Docket No. 23290

December 3, 2014

Page Two

The renewal of this exemption is not a controversial issue. A4A believes that there is just cause to 

waive the requirement of public notice of this petition. There is no substantial change to the 

exemption and the renewal of this exemption is not precedent setting, therefore, A4A requests that 

publication in the Federal Register be waived as unnecessary.

A summary of this petition as required by 14 CFR §11.81 is attached. 

If you have any questions or need additional information, please call me at (202) 626-4285

Very truly yours,

Airlines for America

 By: __________________________ 

Paul W. Railsback

Director - Operations

1301 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Suite 1100

Washington, D.C. 20004-1707 

(202) 626-4285

prailsback@airlines.org

Attachment
U.S. Department of Transportation

Docket Management System

Docket No. 23290

December 3, 2014

Attachment

SUMMARY OF ATA PETITION

Airlines for America, on behalf of its member airlines and other similarly situated Part 

121 operators, petitions for an extension of Exemption No. 4298 Exemption No. 4298 

provides relief from 14CFR §§ 121.391(d) and 121.311(f) and permits required flight 

attendant(s) to be located at the mid-cabin flight attendant station during takeoff and 

landing on Boeing 767 aircraft.
#### Elmer HARDY, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 27774.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 2, 1955.

*235R. E. Murphey, Coleman, for appellant.

Leon B. Douglas, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

MORRISON, Presiding Judge.

The offense is transportation of whiskey in a dry area; the punishment, 6 months in jail and a fine of $500.

In view of our disposition of this cause, a recitation of the facts is not deemed necessary.

An examination of the statement of facts reveals that the State wholly failed to establish that the order of the Commissioners Court declaring the result of the prohibition election was ever published as required by law.

Recently, in Bell v. State, 156 Tex.Cr.R. 440, 243 S.W.2d 585, we had this to say on the identical point here presented:

> “Such failure resulted in a reversal in Sweeten v. State, 135 Tex.Cr.R. 445, 120 S.W.2d 1074; in Craig v. State, 145 Tex.Cr.R. [185], 167 S.W.2d 523; in Jones v. State [154 Tex.Cr.R. 88], 225 S.W.2d 190, and in numerous other cases over a period of many years.

> “The reason for this rule lies in the fact that the local option election does not in itself standing alone make illegal that which had been legal. Notice to the public of the result of such election is a prerequisite.”

See also Moore v. State, 156 Tex.Cr.R. 512, 244 S.W.2d 240.

We observe, further, that the information alleged with unnecessary particularity the license number of the automobile in which it was alleged the whiskey had been transported and the number of the highway, yet no proof was offered to support such unnecessary averments. Daulton v. State, 155 Tex.Cr. 335, 235 S.W.2d 165; Staley v. State, 154 Tex.Cr.R. 546, 229 S.W.2d 170, and Vaught v. State, 145 Tex.Cr.R. 623, 171 S.W.2d 128.

The judgment of the trial court is reversed and the cause remanded.
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 464 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        S.464

                       One Hundred Fourth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE FIRST SESSION

         Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,
  the fourth day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-five

                                 An Act

 
 To make the reporting deadlines for studies conducted in Federal court 
    demonstration districts consistent with the deadlines for pilot 
                   districts, and for other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. EXTENSION OF CIVIL JUSTICE EXPENSE AND DELAY REDUCTION 
DEMONSTRATION PROGRAMS.
    Section 104 of the Civil Justice Reform Act of 1990 (28 U.S.C. 471 
note) is amended--
        (1) in subsection (a)(1) by striking ``4-year period'' and 
    inserting ``5-year period''; and
        (2) in subsection (d) by striking ``December 31, 1995,'' and 
    inserting ``December 31, 1996,''.

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1258 

To provide for the conveyance of parcels of land to Mantua, Box Elder 

County, Utah. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 30, 2011 

Mr. BISHOP of Utah introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Natural Resources 

A BILL 

To provide for the conveyance of parcels of land to Mantua, 

Box Elder County, Utah. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Box Elder Utah Land 

5 Conveyance Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. CONVEYANCE OF CERTAIN LANDS TO MANTUA, BOX 

7 ELDER, UTAH. 

8 (a) CONVEYANCE REQUIRED.—The Secretary of Ag9 riculture shall convey, without consideration, to the town 

10 of Mantua, Utah (in this section referred to as the 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1258 IH

1 ‘‘town’’), all right, title, and interest of the United States 

2 in and to parcels of National Forest System land in the 

3 Wasatch-Cache National Forest in Box Elder County, 

4 Utah, consisting of approximately 31.5 acres within sec5 tion 27, township 9 north, range 1 west, Salt Lake merid6 ian and labeled as parcels A, B, and C on the map entitled 

7 ‘‘Box Elder Utah Land Conveyance Act’’ and dated July 

8 14, 2008. 

9 (b) SURVEY.—If necessary, the exact acreage and 

10 legal description of the lands to be conveyed under sub11 section (a) shall be determined by a survey satisfactory 

12 to the Secretary. The cost of the survey shall be borne 

13 by the town. 

14 (c) USE OF LAND.—As a condition of the conveyance 

15 under subsection (a), the town shall use the land conveyed 

16 under such subsection for public purposes. 

17 (d) REVERSIONARY INTEREST.—In the quitclaim 

18 deed to the town prepared as part of the conveyance under 

19 subsection (a), the Secretary shall provide that the land 

20 conveyed to the town under such subsection shall revert 

21 to the Secretary, at the election of the Secretary, if the 

22 land is used for other than public purposes. 

23 (e) ADDITIONAL TERMS AND CONDITIONS.—The 

24 Secretary may require such additional terms and condi25 tions in connection with the conveyance authorized under 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 1258 IH

1 subsection (a) as the Secretary considers appropriate to 

2 protect the interests of the United States. 

Æ 


tjames on DSKG8SOYB1PROD with BILLS
EXHIBIT 23.1


                       CONSENT TO INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

         We hereby  consent to the  incorporation  of our  report,  dated May 8,
1998,  relating  to the  consolidated  financial  statements  of First  Citizens
Corporation and subsidiaries for the two years ended March 31, 1998, included in
the 1998 Annual Report to  Shareholders  and  incorporated  by reference in this
Form 10-KSB in the previously  filed  Registration  Statements of First Citizens
Corporation  on Form  S-8  (No.  333-36765  and  333-37099)  and  Form  S-3 (No.
333-35197 and 333-52207).


                                                  /s/ Mauldin & Jenkins, LLC


Atlanta, Georgia
June 26, 1998
S. 377

One Hundred Fourth Congress

of the

United States of America

AT THE FIRST SESSION

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,

the fourth day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-five

An Act

To amend a provision of part A of title IX of the Elementary and Secondary

Education Act of 1965, relating to Indian education, to provide a technical amendment, and for other purposes.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. TECHNICAL AMENDMENT.

Section 9112(a)(1)(A) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act of 1965 (as added by section 101 of the Improving

America’s Schools Act of 1994 (Public Law 103–382)) is amended

by striking ‘‘and’’ and inserting ‘‘or’’.

Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
J

- A15034

- 17 2017 PA Super 320
C.G. , : IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF : PENNSYLVANIA Appellant : : v. : : J.H. : No. 1733 MDA 2016

Appeal from the Order entered September 22, 2016 in the Court of Common Pleas of Centre County, Civil Division, No(s): 2015

- 4710
BEFORE: MOULTON, SOLANO and MUSMANNO, JJ. CONCURRING OPINION BY MUSMANNO, J.: FILED OCTOBER 11, 2017 While the Majority sets forth a comprehensive analysis of the issue of standing in this case, I write separately to convey my concerns regarding the trial court’s evidentiary hearing in this matter. From the trial court’s Opinion, it is apparent that the court applied a custody “best interests” standard, rather than considering the factors relevant to a standing challenge asserted through preliminary objections. I additionally note that, while the Majority properly relied on our Supreme Court’s decision in T.B. v. L.R.M. , 786 A.2d 913, 916 (Pa. 2001), it may be time to re

- visit the issue of the appropriate standard and presumptions to be applied in determining standing where a child is born during a same

- sex relationship. I question whether treating C. G. as a “third party” is appropriate where, as here, the parties lived together following aJ

- A15034

- 17

- 2

-

commitment ceremony; 1 Child was conceived during the parties’ relationship; and the parties subsequently lived together with Child for over five years.

1 At that time, same

- sex marriage was not recognized under Florida law. If C.G. were male, standing would not be an iss ue because C.G. would have been considered to be a “parent.”
#### Victor Hanford McCARTY, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 30108.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 12, 1958.

*749Clinton & Shelton, Lubbock, for appellant.

William J. Gillespie, County Atty., Lubbock, and Leon B. Douglas, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

WOODLEY, Judge.

The offense is driving a motor vehicle upon a public highway while intoxicated; the punishment, thirty days in jail and a fine of $250.

The verdict of the jury upon which the judgment was rendered reads:

> “We, the jury, find the defendant guilty as charged and assess his punishment at $250.00 Dollars fine and 30-in the County Jail.”

The verdict is fatally defective under our holding in Bumpass v. State, 160 Tex.Cr.R. 423, 271 S.W.2d 953, and Cooper v. State, 136 Tex.Cr.R. 498, 126 S.W.2d 974.

The judgment is reversed and the cause remanded.
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT
JOSE LUIS HUERTA, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D18-1227 ) STATE OF FLORIDA, ) ) Appellee. )

) Opinion filed May 29, 2019. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Lee County; J. Frank Porter, Judge. Howard L. Dimmig, II, Public Defender, and Robert D. Rosen, Assistant Public Defender, Bartow, for Appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. BLACK, SALARIO, and BADALAMENTI, JJ., Concur.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Government-Appellee, v. Fermina THOMAS, Defendant-Appellant.

Docket No. 01-1263.

United States Court of Appeals, Second Circuit.

Aug. 20, 2002.

B. Alan Seidler, Law Office of B. Alan Seidler, Nyack, N.Y. (by submission), for Defendant-Appellant.

Jo-Anne Weissbart, Assistant United States Attorney, Brooklyn, N.Y. (by submission), for Government-Appellee.

Present: OAKES, GRAAFEILAND, KATZMANN, Circuit Judges.

SUMMARY ORDER

ON CONSIDERATION WHEREOF, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED that the judgment of the District Court be and it hereby is AFFIRMED.

Defendant Fermina Thomas appeals her conviction following a guilty plea to one count of possession with intent to distribute 50 grams or more of a substance containing a cocaine base in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), 841(b)(l)(A)(iii). Thomas’s sole contention on appeal is that 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(A) unconstitutionally requires a *judge*to determine the quantity of drugs for sentencing purposes, and that 21 U.S.C. § 841(b) is therefore unconstitutional on its face. Because a panel of this court recently rejected the same argument, *U.S. v. Outen,*286 F.3d 622, 634-36 (2d Cir.2002), we affirm Thomas’s conviction and sentence.

The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
#### Modie Rhea Miller MOOREFIELD et vir., Appellants, v. Leona Worley MILLER, Appellee.

No. 13041.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. San Antonio.

May 2, 1956.

Rehearing Denied May 31, 1956.

David R. White, Uvalde, Edward A. John, Galveston, for appellant.

Leo Darley, Uvalde, for appellee.

POPE, Justice.

Appellant Modie Rhea Miller Moorefield as the only child of Raymond W. Miller, deceased, sued her step-mother, Leona Worley Miller, for the partition of certain Uvalde County lands and other property. The suit involved the construction of Miller’s holographic will. Appellant insists that the trial court erred in holding that the will passed all of Miller’s estate to appellee, the testator’s widow. The complete will is as follows :

> “San Antonio, Texas May 29, 1949 I Raymond W. Miller hereby designate my wife Leona Worley Miller the sole Executor of my Estate both personal and jointly owned by we two. She to act with out Bond or any form of Court perceeding on her part to des-pose of keep or what ever she see fit or so desires.

> Signed Raymond W. Miller”

The testator, by those words, named his widow executrix of his estate. He explained the term “estate” to include what was “both personal and jointly owned by we two.” He authorized her to act without bond. The testator expressed the intent that his wife, as she may desire, could dispose of that estate or keep it. The word “keep” is the word which passes the estate to his named widow. This result is not by reason of presumption, but by reason of the ordinary meaning of that term as used in context with this informal will. “Keep” has been defined as the durability of having, and is synonymous with “hold” or “have.” Cehney v. Plumb, 79 Wis. 602, 48 N.W. 668; Busteed v. Cambridge Sav. Bank, 306 Mass. 9, 26 N.E.2d 983, 986; Robinson v. Powell, 210 Pa. 232, 59 A. 1078; 23 Words and Phrases, Keep, pp. 496, 501.

All of Miller’s property passed by his will to his widow.

The judgment is affirmed.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

 v.

CLARENCE TSOSIE,

 Defendant - Appellant.

No. 14-10485

D.C. No. 3:13-cr-08149-NVW-1

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Arizona

John A. Jarvey, Chief District Judge, Presiding

Submitted January 28, 2016** 

Before: HUG, FARRIS, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.

Clarence Tsosie appeals from the district court’s judgment and challenges

his guilty-plea conviction and 120-month sentence for assault resulting in serious

injury, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1153 and 113(a)(6). Pursuant to Anders v.

California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), Tsosie’s counsel has filed a brief stating that there

FILED

FEB 01 2016

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

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

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

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

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
are no grounds for relief, along with a motion to withdraw as counsel of record. 

We have provided Tsosie the opportunity to file a pro se supplemental brief. No

pro se supplemental brief or answering brief has been filed. 

Tsosie has waived his right to appeal his conviction, sentence, and order of

restitution. Because the record discloses no arguable issue as to the validity of the

appeal waiver, we dismiss the appeal. See United States v. Watson, 582 F.3d 974,

986-88 (9th Cir. 2009).

Counsel’s motion to withdraw as counsel is GRANTED.

DISMISSED.

2
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 546 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 546

                   For the relief of Dan Aurel Suciu.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

               March 14 (legislative day, March 6), 1995

 Mr. Thurmond introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
               referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
                   For the relief of Dan Aurel Suciu.

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

SECTION 1. PERMANENT RESIDENCE.

    Notwithstanding any other provision of law, for purposes of the 
Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1101 et seq.), Dan Aurel 
Suciu shall be held and considered to have been lawfully admitted to 
the United States for permanent residence as of the date of the 
enactment of this Act upon payment of the required visa fee.

SEC. 2. REDUCTION OF NUMBER OF AVAILABLE VISAS.

    Upon the granting of permanent residence to Dan Aurel Suciu as 
provided in this Act, the Secretary of State shall instruct the proper 
officer to reduce by one number during the current fiscal year the 
total number of immigrant visas available to natives of the country of 
the alien's birth under section 203(a) of the Immigration and 
Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 1153(a)).
                                 <all>
```
Exhibit




















PRUCO LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY


ROLL-UP DEATH BENEFIT SCHEDULE SUPPLEMENT




Annuity Number:   [001-00001]


Effective Date of the Roll-Up Death Benefit Rider:  [Issue Date of the Annuity]


Due Proof of Death Period: [A period of [1 year], beginning on the decedent’s date of death]


Roll-Up Rate:  [6.0%]


Roll-Up Cap Percentage: [200%]


Maximum Roll-Up Age: [80]


Charge for the Rider: [Assessed quarterly at the annualized rate of [0.80]%]


Maximum Charge for the Rider: [1.50%]


Earliest Charge Change Date: [The Valuation Day coinciding with or next following the [5th] anniversary of the Effective Date]


Account Value Floor: [The lesser of [$500] or [5.00%] of the sum of the Unadjusted Account Value on the Effective Date and any subsequent Adjusted Purchase Payments we accept]














P-SCH-DBROLL(5/17)