alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 99.3



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



In connection with the Quarterly  Report of MDSI Mobile Data Solutions Inc. (the
"Company")  on Form 10-Q for the quarter  ended March 31, 2003 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),  I, Verne
D.  Pecho,  the Vice  President  Finance &  Administration  and Chief  Financial
Officer of the  Company,  certify,  pursuant  to 18 U.S.C.  ss.1350,  as adopted
pursuant to Section 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/ Verne D. Pecho
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Verne D. Pecho
                                            Vice President Finance &
                                            Administration and Chief Financial
                                            Officer
                                            May 15, 2003



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.
IB 

Union Calendar No. 141 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2650 

[Report No. 113–194] 

To allow the Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa in the State 

of Minnesota to lease or transfer certain land. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 10, 2013 

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

on Natural Resources 

SEPTEMBER 10, 2013 

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union 

and ordered to be printed 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2650 RH

A BILL 

To allow the Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior Chippewa 

in the State of Minnesota to lease or transfer certain land. 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•HR 2650 RH

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 ‘‘Fond du Lac Band 

5 of Lake Superior Chippewa Non-Intercourse Act of 

6 2013’’. 

7 SEC. 2. CONGRESSIONAL APPROVAL OF CERTAIN LAND 

8 TRANSACTIONS. 

9 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding any other provi10 sion of law, and without further approval, ratification, or 

11 authorization by the United States, the Fond du Lac 

12 Band of Lake Superior Chippewa in the State of Min13 nesota (referred to in this Act as the ‘‘Band’’) may lease, 

14 sell, convey, warrant, or otherwise transfer all or any por15 tion of the interest of the Band in any real property that 

16 is not held in trust by the United States for the benefit 

17 of the Band. 

18 (b) NO EFFECT ON TRUST LAND.—Nothing in this 

19 Act— 

20 (1) authorizes the Band to lease, sell, convey, 

21 warrant, or otherwise transfer all or any portion of 

22 any interest in any real property that is held in trust 

23 by the United States for the benefit of the Band; or 

24 (2) affects any Federal law (including regula25 tions) relating to leasing, selling, conveying, warVerDate Mar 15 2010 21:03 Sep 10, 2013 Jkt 029200 PO 00000 Frm 00003 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H2650.RH H2650

sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
4 

•HR 2650 RH

1 ranting, or otherwise transferring any interest in the 

2 real property described in paragraph (1). 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS

sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Union Calendar No. 141 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2650 

[Report No. 113–194] 

A BILL 

To allow the Fond du Lac Band of Lake Superior 

transfer certain land. Chippewa in the State of Minnesota to lease or 

SEPTEMBER 10, 2013 

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 

State of the Union and ordered to be printed 


sroberts on DSK5SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-6020
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus JERRY LEE ADAMS, a/k/a Clown, Defendant - Appellant.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle District of North Carolina, at Durham. James A. Beaty, Jr., District Judge. (CR-94-248) Submitted: April 29, 1999 Decided: May 4, 1999 Before WILLIAMS, TRAXLER, and KING, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.Jerry Lee Adams, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Francis Joseph, Assistant United States Attorney, Greensboro, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM:Jerry Lee Adams appeals from the district court’s order denying his motion for resentencing. Our review of the record and thedistrict court’s opinion discloses no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Adams , No. CR-94-248 (M.D.N.C. Dec. 16, 1998). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
EXHIBIT 99.1

           CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 8 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  Tel-Instrument  Electronics
Corp.  (the  "Company"),  on Form 10-Q for the period  ending June 30, 2002,  as
filed with the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof  (the
"Report"),  I, Harold K. Fletcher,  President and Chief Executive Officer of the
Company,  certify,  pursuant to and solely for the purpose of 18 U.S.C.  Section
1350,  as adopted  pursuant  to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,
that, to my knowledge and based on my review of the Report:

            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 result of
                  operations of the Company.

                                                   By: /s/ Harold K. Fletcher
                                                       ----------------------
                                                       /s/ Harold K. Fletcher
                                                       Chairman and President

                                                       August 13, 2002
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>      5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
consolidated financial statements and is qualified in its entirety by reference
to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>   1
       
<S>                                   <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                         9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                     FEB-28-1998
<PERIOD-END>                          NOV-30-1998
<CASH>                                    124,806
<SECURITIES>                                    0
<RECEIVABLES>                           2,598,155
<ALLOWANCES>                            1,181,000
<INVENTORY>                               136,444
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                        2,276,262
<PP&E>                                    962,092
<DEPRECIATION>                            427,980
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                          3,370,024
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                   3,723,177
<BONDS>                                   200,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           0
<PREFERRED>                                     1
<COMMON>                                  348,011
<OTHER-SE>                               (901,165)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>            3,370,024
<SALES>                                 3,175,771
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                        3,175,771
<CGS>                                     523,610
<TOTAL-COSTS>                             523,610
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                        121,818
<INCOME-PRETAX>                        (2,055,018)
<INCOME-TAX>                                    0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                    (2,055,018)
<DISCONTINUED>                                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                 0
<CHANGES>                                       0
<NET-INCOME>                           (2,055,018)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                (.12)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                (.12)
        


</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 204 (Friday, October 20, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 63112]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-26949]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

[USCG-2000-8103]


Navigation Safety Advisory Committee

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: The Navigation Safety Advisory Council (NAVSAC) will meet to 
discuss various issues relating to the safety of navigation. The 
meeting is open to the public.

DATES: NAVSAC will meet on Monday, November 13, 2000, from 8 a.m. to 5 
p.m., Tuesday, November 14, 2000, from 2:30 to 6 p.m., and on 
Wednesday, November 15, 2000, from 8 a.m. to 3 p.m. The meeting may 
close early if all business is finished. Written material should reach 
the Coast Guard on or before November 3, 2000. Requests to make oral 
presentations should reach the Coast Guard on or before November 8, 
2000. Requests to have a copy of your material distributed to each 
member of the Council should reach the Coast Guard on or before 
November 3, 2000.

ADDRESSES: NAVSAC will meet at The Admiral Fell Inn; 888 South 
Broadway, Baltimore, MD 21231. Send written material and requests to 
make oral presentations to Ms. Margie G. Hegy, Commandant (G-MW), U.S. 
Coast Guard Headquarters, 2100 Second Street SW., Washington, DC 20593-
0001.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. Margie G. Hegy, Executive Director 
of NAVSAC, telephone 202-267-0415, fax 202-267-4700.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice of this meeting is given under the 
Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. 2.

Agenda of Meeting

    The meeting topics include the following:
    (1) High speed craft.
    (2) Aids to navigation.
    (3) Crew alertness campaign.
    (4) Electronic navigational aids.
    You may request a copy of the agenda from Ms. Hegy at the number 
listed in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT.

Procedural

    The meeting is open to the public. Please note that the meeting may 
close early if all business is finished. At the Chair's discretion, 
members of the public may make oral presentations during the meetings. 
If you would like to make an oral presentation, please notify the 
Executive Director no later than November 8, 2000. Written material for 
distribution at a meeting should reach the Coast Guard no later than 
November 8, 2000. If you would like a copy of your material distributed 
to each member of the Council in advance of the meeting, please submit 
25 copies to the Executive Director no later than November 3, 2000.

Information on Services for Individuals With Disabilities

    For information on facilities or services for individuals with 
disabilities or to request special assistance at the meetings, contact 
the Executive Director as soon as possible.

    Dated: October 12, 2000.
Jeffrey P. High,
Acting Assistant Commandant for Marine Safety and Environmental 
Protection.
[FR Doc. 00-26949 Filed 10-19-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-M
<PAGE>
                                                               Exhibit 10.e(iii)

                              [For directors' existing stock options and awards]

                                Masco Letterhead

Date _________________

Name _________________

[Address1]
[Address2]
[Address3]

Dear [Salutation]:

     On behalf of the Company, I am pleased to inform you that the Board of
Directors approved the following enhancements to outstanding awards of stock
options and restricted stock to non-employee directors under the 1997
Non-Employee Directors Long Term Stock Incentive Plan (the "1997 Plan") and
under the 1991 Long Term Stock Incentive Plan (the "1991 Plan").

     If your service as a director terminates for any reason other than as a
result of death, disability or retirement due to age, any portion of an option
that is then exercisable will remain exercisable beyond the period currently
provided until the later of (i) the 15th day of the third month following the
date at which the option would otherwise have terminated in connection with the
termination of service, or (ii) December 31 of the calendar year in which the
option would otherwise have terminated in connection with the termination of
service.

     If your service as a director terminates as a result of permanent and total
disability, any portion of an option not then exercisable will immediately
become exercisable and will remain exercisable until the earlier of the
expiration of its original term or one year after death.

     The "clawback" provisions of the 1997 Plan (formerly Section 6(b)(5)) and
comparable provisions in any stock option granted to you under the 1991 Plan
will no longer apply.

     For purposes of a "Change in Control" under the 1991 Plan and the 1997
Plan, the definition of "Excluded Director" (i.e., a director who is deemed not
to be an incumbent director) will also include directors whose initial
assumption of office occurs as a result of certain actual or threatened election
contests not by or on behalf of the Board.

                                        Very truly yours,


                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        Richard A. Manoogian
                                        Chairman of the Board and
                                        Chief Executive Officer
#### STATE ex rel. Basil SPURLOCK, relator, v. Joe C. CRAIN, Judge of the Circuit Court of Douglas County, Missouri, and of the Thirty-First Judicial Circuit of Missouri, respondent.

No. 44083.

Supreme Court of Missouri. En Banc.

April 12, 1954.

J. Bernie Lewis, Ava, R. Jasper Smith, Keith V. Williams, Springfield, William H. Becker, Columbia, for, relator.

James E. Curry, John M. Bragg, Ava, for respondent.

DALTON, Judge.

This is an original proceeding in this court for mandamus. It is a companion case with State ex rel. Floyd v. Philpot, Mo.Sup., 266 S.W.2d 704 hereinafter referred to. Alternative writs in the two cases were issued on the 'same date and, since it was apparent that the cases were intended to present the same issue, they were consolidated and argued together. In this particular proceeding relator sought to require the respondent judge of the circuit court of Douglas, County to exercise jurisdiction and hear and determine upon its merits a certain action for an injunction which relator had- instituted in the circuit court of said county.

Since the primary issue clearly intended for decision herein is already moot by reason of its decision in the case of State ex rel. Floyd v. Philpot, supra, decided concurrently herewith and, since on the record here presented it is not clear that the issue intended would necessarily be reached for decision in this case, we have reached the conclusion that the alternative writ of mandamus issued herein should be quashed and the proceeding dismissed. It is so ordered.

All concur.
AFFIRM; and Opinion issued March i 2013.

In The

Qlourt of Ztppeat

jfiftj itrtct of exa at aUa

No. 05- 12-00733-CR

_____

I)OMINGO SANTINO CARVA.JAL, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 265th Judicial District Court

I)allas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. FlO-52736-R

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Moseley. O’Neill, and Lewis

Opinion by Justice Lewis

Domingo Santino Carvajal appeals from the revocation of his community supervision.

The trial court convicted appellant of felony DWI and assessed punishment at ten years’

imprisonment. See TEx. PENAL CODE ANN. § 49.04(a), 49.09(b)(2) (West Supp. 2012). On

appeal, appellant’s attorney filed a brief in which she concludes the appeal is wholly frivolous

and without merit. The brief meets the requirements of Anders v. C’alifornia, 386 U.S. 738

(1967). The brief presents a professional evaluation of the record showing why, in effect, there

are no arguable grounds to advance. See High v. State, 573 S.W.2d 807, 811 (Tex. Crim. App.
IPanel Op1 1978). Counsel delivered a copy of the brief to appellant. We advised appellant of

his right to file a pro se response, hut he did not file a pro se response.

We have reviewed the record and counsel’s brief. Bledwe 1. State, 178 S.W.3d 24.

827 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005) (explaining appellate courts duty in Anders cases). We agree the

appeal is frivolous and without merit. We find nothing in the record that might arguably support

the appeal.

We affirm the trial court’s judgment.

DAVID LEWIS

JUSTICE

Do Not Publish

TEx. R. ApP. P.47

12073 3F1.J05

-2-
Qtourt of ppeat

jfiftb Oitrict of exa at afta

JUDGMENT

DOMINGO SANTINO CARVAJAL.

Appellant

No, 05l2O0733CR V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

Appeal from the 265th Judicial District

Court of Dallas County. Texas (Tr.CLNo.

Fl 052736R).

Opinion delivered by Justice Lewis,

Justices Moseley and O’Neill participating.

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date. the trial court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.

Judgment entered March 1. 2013.

J —

DAVID LEWIS

JUSTICE
Opinion issued December 10, 2019

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-18-00869-CV

———————————

RUTH BACARDI & COMPANY, Appellant

V.

NAJIB BAOULOS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 55th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Case No. 2016-44867

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant, Ruth Bacardi & Company, has neither established indigence nor 

paid, or made arrangements to pay, the fee for preparing the clerk’s record. See TEX.

R. APP. P. 37.3(b). After being notified that this appeal was subject to dismissal, 
2

appellant did not adequately respond. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(b), 42.3(b). Appellee 

subsequently filed a motion to dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. More than 

ten days have passed and appellant failed to respond to the motion to dismiss. See

TEX. R. APP. P. 10.3. Accordingly, we grant the motion and dismiss the appeal for 

want of prosecution. We dismiss any other pending motions as moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Landau and Hightower.
#### Clarence MULLINS, Sr., et al., Appellants, v. Morgan HALL et al., Appellees.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

Dec. 17, 1954.

*832N. Baxter Jenkins, .Whitesburg, for appellants.

Harry M. Caudill, Whitesburg, for ap-pellees.

STANLEY, Commissioner.

The appeal was granted by the circuit court following dismissal of a petition upon a general demurrer. The petition sought to set aside a bond executed by the plaintiffs to discharge an order of attachment of property. Neither the petition nor the copy of the bond reveals the amount or value of the property attached or the judgment which it appears the principals and sureties bound themselves to perform; nor, did the trial court state in the judgment “the actual value in controversy” as is required upon request. KRS 21-.070. The statement of appeal does not say whether the appeal is prosecuted under KRS 21.080 as is required by RCA 1.090.

The statute, KRS 21.060, gives the right of appeal from all final orders and judgments of circuit courts in civil cases *except,*among others, “(a) Judgments where the value of the amount or thing in controversy is less than twenty-five hundred dollars, exclusive of interest and costs.”

■[1] When the amount in controversy is within this exception, the aggrieved party may file a motion in the Court of Appeals to grant him an appeal and the case is submitted upon that motion. KRS 21.080. Where the judgment is within this class, or is within any of the circumscribed limitations, the circuit court has no power to grant an appeal and this court will raise the question sua sponte and dismiss an appeal _ so granted. Stephens v. Davis, 286 Ky. 608, 151 S.W.2d 384. '

It is a general rule of appellate procedure that the burden of establishing jurisdiction is on the appellant, and the court is without jurisdiction to hear an appeal where the amount in dispute in a case is not affirmatively shown in the record to be within the minimum jurisdictional limitation. 4 C.J.S., Appeal and Error, §§ 681, 688; 3 Am.Jur., Appeal and Error, Secs. 575, 576; Heisler & Bro. v. Merchants’ Cold Storage & Ice Mfg. Co., 139 Va. 114, 123 S.E. 505; Enriquez v, Enriquez, 222 U.S. 127, 32 S.Ct. 64, 56 L.Ed. 124. There may be a distinction or exception to this rule where the subject matter of the.suit or the judgment is not money or property and the nature of the action may not be measured or valued in money. McLean v. Thurman, Ky., 1954, 273 S.W.2d 825. But this is not of such class.

This is a character of action where the “amount or thing in value” may be at least reasonably estimated. The statement in briefs may not be regarded. Armes v. Louisville Trust Co., 306 Ky. 155, 206 S.W.2d 487. In the absence from the record of judicial statement of such amount or value, we must dismiss the appeal granted by the circuit court.

Appeal dismissed.