alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Mark Veney 2907 Needlewood Lane Bowie, Maryland 20716 301-390-2366 Home Phone MarkLVeneySr@gmail.com Email August 18, 2013

U.S. Department ofTransportation, Docket Operations, West Building Ground Floor, Room W12-140, 200 New Jersey Avenue, SE. Washington, DC 20590. Ladies and Gentlemen:

I write this letter to request an amendment be added to the definition of"Cross-Country Time" purpose ofmeeting the aeronautical experience requirements for an airline transport pilot in regard to**Certifi~ated** Flight Instructors. The additional language would ensure the public interest by expanding**~he** pool ofpotential ATP applicants and promotes an environment of continuing education and professionalism for flight instructors. Therefore, it is proposed that that following language be added to definition ofCross Country flighttime to meet the requirements for an Airline Transportation Pilot: "Any time in which a Certificate Flight Instructor provides flight instruction in an aircraft for which the Certificate Flight Instructor is appropriately rated where the aircraft is flown to an airport and lands, to a full stop, that is different than the airport ofdeparture can be used as Cross Country flight time toward the certification ofAirline Transportation Pilot."

: - •• :· :**~** ':**~'** • ¢ ;. l

..

....

1 i. r·.·**~** '; .. '.. I' I ' ./**~ ·~··**  I' '

• l

.),**~ ~**  ! • ·•
CERTIFICATION

I, Rahim Rayani, certify that:

1.   I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB for the quarterly
     period ending March 31, 2007 of Gulf Coast Oil & Gas, Inc.;

2.   Based on my knowledge, this quarterly 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 quarterly report;

3.   Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
     information included in this 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 report;

4.   I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and
     procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for
     the registrant and have:

     (a)  Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
          disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our
          supervision, 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; and presented in this report our conclusions about the
          effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end
          of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and
     (c)  Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal
          control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's
          fourth fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably
          likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over
          financial reporting; and

5.   I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control
     over financial reporting, 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 and material weaknesses in the design or
          operation of internal control over financial reporting which adversely
          affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and
          report financial information; and
     (b)  Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
          employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal
          control over financial reporting.

Date:  May 21, 2007
                                    /S/ RAHIM RAYANI
                                   Rahim Rayani
                                   Chief Executive Officer and President
                                   Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                           5
<LEGEND>

This schedule  contains  summary  financial  information  extracted  from DREXEL
BURNHAM  LAMBERT REAL ESTATE  ASSOCIATES  II 1999 Fourth  Quarter  10-KSB and is
qualified in its entirety by reference to such 10-KSB filing.

</LEGEND>

<CIK>                               0000725646
<NAME>                          DREXEL BURNHAM LAMBERT REAL ESTATE ASSOCIATES II
<MULTIPLIER>                               1,000


<S>                                   <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                       12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                   DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                      JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                        DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                       691
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  0
<ALLOWANCES>                                   0
<INVENTORY>                                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               0 <F1>
<PP&E>                                     7,970
<DEPRECIATION>                             5,810
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             3,400
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          0 <F1>
<BONDS>                                    3,122
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                     8
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               3,400
<SALES>                                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           1,518
<CGS>                                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                           1,534
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           276
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                0
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            0
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                              (45)
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                               1,803
<EPS-BASIC>                                48.37 <F2>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0
<FN>

<F1> Registrant has an unclassified balance sheet. <F2> Multiplier is 1.

</FN>


</TABLE>
Exhibit 10.8


 





TERM SHEET FOR


 


PROPOSED TRANSACTION


 


BETWEEN


 


DIGITAL DONATIONS TECHNOLOGIES, INC.


 


AND


 


DIGITAL PROCESSING SOLUTIONS, INC.


 


Dated: ______________, 2017


 


 


Non-Binding


 


The intent of this
document is to describe, for negotiation purposes only, some key terms of the proposed business relationship between Digital Donations
Technologies, Inc., a Delaware corporation (“Digital Donations”), and Digital Processing Solutions, Inc., a
Texas corporation (“Digital Processing”). This document is not
intended to be a binding agreement between Digital Donations and Digital Processing with respect to the subject matter hereof.
A binding agreement will not occur unless and until all necessary Digital Donations and Digital Processing approvals have been
obtained and the parties have negotiated, approved, executed and delivered the appropriate definitive agreements.
Until the execution and delivery of such definitive agreements, each party shall have the absolute right to terminate all
negotiations for any reason, without liability therefor.


 


 


SUMMARY OF PROPOSED TRANSACTIONS










 





	Parties:



	Digital Donations Technologies, Inc. a Delaware corporation.




	 	 
	 	Digital Processing Solutions, Inc., a Texas corporation.




	 	 
	Asset Acquisition:	Digital Donations shall acquire the logo, trade name and trade mark of Digital Processing and, in consideration thereof, Digital Processing shall receive ___________ shares of the common stock of Digital Donations.
	 	 
	Closing Date:	The Closing of the transactions contemplated herein shall take place on ____________________ or as otherwise determined by the mutual agreement of the parties.



 






     


     


    

 


	 	 
	Documentation:	
        The following documents, and such
other documents and instruments as may be required, shall be prepared by counsel to Digital Donations, and shall be satisfactory
to each party, in form and substance:

        

	 	 



 


	 	 	(1)	Asset Purchase Agreement among Digital Donations and Digital Processing and ancillary documents thereto




 


 





	
        

        DIGITAL DONATIONS
        TECHNOLOGIES, INC., 

a Delaware corporation

        

        
	 	
        

        DIGITAL PROCESSING
        SOLUTIONS, INC., 

a Texas corporation

        

        

         

	 	 	 
	By: __________________________________	 	By: __________________________________
	Keith Orlean, Chief Executive Officer	 	Keith Orlean, President


 






    -2-
### Coil only combinations, 1CM ratings >=5% higher than OEM HSV Totals:>=5% Total 

### % 1CM 1484 9533 1 5.57% OEM 44 4000 1.10%
Opinion issued May 16, 2023

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-23-00350-CV

———————————

IN RE PLATINUM II, LLC, Relator

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relator, Platinum II, LLC, filed a petition for a writ of mandamus challenging 

the trial court’s January 18, 2023 “Order Denying [Relator’s] Motion for Leave to 

Designate [John Nau and Nau Capital, LLC as] Responsible Third-Parties.”

1

 Relator 

further argued that the trial court abused its discretion by failing to rule on two other 

1 The underlying case is Kerry Fritz v. Platinum II, LLC and Standard Constructors, 

Inc., Cause No. 2022-32347, in the 333rd District Court of Harris County, Texas, 

the Honorable Brittanye Morris presiding.
2

motions to designate responsible third parties, including (1) relator’s “Motion to 

Designate [Riviera Australia Pty Ltd as a] Responsible Third Party,” filed on January 

5, 2023 and set on the trial court’s March 27, 2023 submission docket, and (2) 

relator’s “Motion to Designate Seabrook Harbor & Marine, LLC as Responsible 

Third Party,” filed on April 6, 2023 and set on the trial court’s April 24, 2023 

submission docket. 

In connection with its mandamus petition, relator also filed an “Emergency 

Motion for Stay Pending Review,” requesting that this Court “enter an order staying 

the underlying suit pending a decision” on the mandamus petition. Relator stated

that the stay is necessary to prevent trial of the underlying litigation, currently set on 

the trial court’s trial docket beginning July 10, 2023, from moving forward until the 

Court has considered its mandamus petition.

Our review of relator’s mandamus petition reflects that relator has failed to 

establish that it is entitled to mandamus relief. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.7, 52.8; see 

also Walker v. Packer, 827 S.W.2d 833, 837 (Tex. 1992). Accordingly, we deny 

relator’s petition for writ of mandamus. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a). All pending 

motions, including relator’s “Emergency Motion for Stay Pending Review,” are 

dismissed as moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Adams and Justices Guerra and Farris.
#### Douglas C. McQUINLEY, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 27606.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

May 18, 1955.

*101No attorney on appeal for appellant.

Dan Walton, . Dist; Atty., Houston, I Douglas, State’s Atty., Austin, for the S

PER CURIAM.

The offense is felony theft; the punishment, two years.

The record on appeal contains no statement of facts or bills of exception. . All proceedings appear to be regular and nothing is presented for review.

The judgment is affirmed.
11TH COURT OF APPEALS

EASTLAND, TEXAS

JUDGMENT

Chester Arther Hall Jr., * From the 441st District Court

of Midland County,

Trial Court No. CR49744.

Vs. No. 11-19-00401-CR * September 3, 2020

The State of Texas, * Memorandum Opinion by Bailey, C.J. 

(Panel consists of: Bailey, C.J.,

Stretcher, J., and Wright, S.C.J., 

sitting by assignment)

(Willson, J., not participating)

This court has inspected the record in this cause and concludes that there is

error in the judgment below. Therefore, in accordance with this court’s opinion, 

we modify the judgment of the trial court, the order to withdraw funds, and the bill 

of cost to delete the assessment of the $500 fine and the imposition of courtappointed attorney’s fees in the amount of $1,800. As modified, we affirm the 

judgment of the trial court.
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

Certification Pursuant toSection 1350 of Chapter 63of Title 18 of the United States Code

 

I, Edileen Salicrup, the Chief Financial Officer ofClearComm, L.P., certify that (i) the December 31, 2003 10-K Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934 and (ii) the information contained in the December 31,2003 10-K Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of ClearComm, L.P.

 
| April 14, 2004 | /s/ Edileen Salicrup    |   |
|----------------|-------------------------|--------|
|           | Edileen Salicrup        |
|           | Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
My name is Sarah Bro y, and I am here to speak in favor of the Clean Power Plan. As 

an eighth-grade teacher, I have chosen to invest my time in future generations. Though 

our generation is already experiencing the effects of climate change, my students' 

generation will be even more affected. It's time we make the hard decision in favor of our 

children, rather than protecting the coal industry, whose interests are in immediate gain 

rather than forward thinking. 

The use of fossil fuels has a disproportionate impact on the most vulnerable populations 

in the US and elsewhere. The urban poor, the elderly, and children are most at risk. 

Global warming caused by pollution from fossil-fuel burning power plants is creating 

harsher conditions for children who suffer from asthma and other respiratory diseases. 

Children are also more susceptible to heat-related illnesses like heat stroke, a 

consideration that will become more serious as extreme weather events become more 

frequent. 

Our children deserve clean air, and they deserve to grow up in a healthy environment. I 

want to have kids someday, but I want the world I bring them into to be a safe one, one 

where there is clean air for them to breathe. I want them to experience the outdoors as a 

place of happiness rather than fear. They should be allowed the same freedoms and 

choices we are. 

Carbon dioxide emissions that enter the atmosphere today will affect global temperatures 

for thousands of years. The choices we make today will determine whether the effects on 

the globe will be manageable or unmanageable. There is no more efficient way to 

regulate US carbon emissions than managing the emissions of existing power plants. 

We must pass the Clean Power Plan, not only to protect the health and future of our 

children, but to set a good example for them. Most children today grow up learning 

nothing about environmental stewardship, and many never develop a relationship with 

the environment they live in. We must show them that the Earth is something to be 

valued, and passing the Clean Power Plan is step in the right direction.
Exhibit 32



PUBLIC MEDIA WORKS, INC.



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C.
§1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Public Media Works, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the period ending November 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the
date hereof (the Report), I, Stephen Brown, the Chief Executive Officer and Interim Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §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.



|                       |  |  |  |                                                            
|---------------------- |  |  |  | -----------------------------------------------------------
|                       |  | 
|Date: January 23, 2006 |  |  |  | /s/    STEPHEN BROWN                                       
|                       |  |  |  | Stephen Brown                                              
|                       |  |  |  | Chief Executive Officer and Interim Chief Financial Officer



A signed original of this written
statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
EXHIBIT 31.2**CERTIFICATION**I, Thomas C. Chesterman, certify that:     1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Aradigm Corporation;     2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report;     3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;     4. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:     a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating tothe registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within thoseentities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;     b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and     c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter that has materially affected,or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and     5. The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation, of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):     a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and     b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.
   /s/ Thomas C. Chesterman     Thomas C. Chesterman
NO. 07-05-0406-CR 

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL B

FEBRUARY 24, 2006

______________________________

CHRISTOPHER JOSEPH HADLEY, 

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, 

Appellee

_________________________________

FROM THE CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT NUMBER FOUR OF TARRANT COUNTY;

NO. 0934194D; HON. MIKE THOMAS, PRESIDING

_______________________________

Memorandum Opinion

_______________________________

Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ.

Christopher Joseph Hadley (appellant) appeals his conviction for possessing

marijuana. His three issues involve the trial court’s refusal to grant his motion to suppress

evidence of the contraband. This is supposedly reversible since the marijuana was

discovered as a result of an illegal stop. We overrule the issues.

The marijuana in question was discovered after an officer spied appellant driving

from a wooded area onto Highway 360. To get there, according to the officer, “you actually
2

have to jump a curb.” Furthermore, the officer knew of complaints about people dumping

in that vicinity. Consequently, he stopped appellant. Appellant contends that the stop was

improper because his conduct was as consistent with innocent activity as it was with guilty

activity. We reject the contention for several reasons.

First, the Court of Criminal Appeals held that the construct to which appellant refers

is no longer viable. Woods v. State, 956 S.W.2d 33, 38-39 (Tex. Crim. App. 1997). Thus,

and contrary to appellant’s supposition, innocent activity may give rise to reasonable

suspicion if the totality of the circumstances, and rational inferences therefrom,

nonetheless permit an officer to reasonably conclude that the detained individual actually

engaged in, was engaging in, or was about to engage in criminal conduct. Id.

Second, statute generally prohibits one from driving over or across a physical barrier

constructed to impede vehicular traffic. TEX. TRANS. CODE ANN. §545.063(b) (Vernon

1999). Furthermore, the obstruction need not be impassible for it to be a physical barrier.

Kindell v. State, 407 S.W.2d 784, 786 (Tex. Crim. App. 1966). Here, the officer noticed

that to arrive at the location where appellant was first seen, appellant would have had to

jump a curb adjacent to Highway 360. Furthermore, a curb can be considered a physical

barrier designed to impede vehicular traffic. Given this and §545.063(b) of the

Transportation Code, we conclude that circumstances existed upon which an officer could,

at the very least, reasonably suspect that appellant had engaged in unlawful conduct, i.e.

the violation of a traffic law. And, that would have justified appellant’s stop.
3

Accordingly, the trial court did not err in holding that the stop was lawful. So, we

affirm the judgment. 

 

Brian Quinn

 Chief Justice

Publish.