alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0001011701
<NAME> RIFKIN ACQUISITION CAPITAL CORP
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                           1,623
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,255
<ALLOWANCES>                                       348
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0<F1>
<PP&E>                                         133,659
<DEPRECIATION>                                  20,778
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 312,729
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0<F1>
<BONDS>                                        224,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      52,979
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   312,729
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                40,668
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   42,332
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 2,374  
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              11,508
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (15,546)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (2,658)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (12,888)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (12,888)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>The amount shown for current assets and current liabilities is
zero due to an unclassified balance sheet in the financial
statements.
</FN>
        


</TABLE>
Petition for Writ of Mandamus Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed November 20, 2014 .

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals
NO. 14 - 14 - 00883 - CV

IN RE CHANEL MELTON , Relator
ORIGINAL PROCEEDING WRIT OF MANDAMUS County Court at Law No . 2

Galveston Count y, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 13 - FD - 0582



### MEMORANDUM OPINION On November 4, 2014, relator Chanel Melton filed a petition for writ of m andamus in this c ourt. See Tex. Gov’t Code § 22.221 ; see also Tex. R. App. P. 52. In the petition, relator asks this c our t to compel the Honorable Stephen Baker , associate family judge of the County Court at Law Number 2 of Galveston County , to vacate a purported order finding relator in contempt
.2 This court does not have jurisdiction to issue a writ of mandamus against an a ssociate judge. See Tex. Gov’t Code § 22.221(a), (b); see also In re D.G. , No. 14

- 14

- 00420

- CV, 2014 WL 2767623, *1 (Tex. App.

— Houston [14th Dist.] June 17, 2014, orig. proceeding [mand. denied] ) (mem. op., per curiam); In re Nomura , No. 14

- 13

- 00744

- CV, 201 3 WL 4774087, *1 (Tex. App.

— Houston [14th Dist.] Sept. 5, 2013, orig. proceeding) (mem. op., per curiam); In re J.W.B. , No. 14

- 12

- 00410

- CV, 2012 WL 1695208, *1 (Tex. App.

— Houston [14th Dist.] May 15, 2012, orig. proceeding) (mem. op., per curiam). And r ela tor has not provided this court any document ation demonstrating that the referring court has approved of the purported contempt judgment. See Tex. Fam. Code §§ 201.007(a)(13), 201.013(b). In fact , relator has not provided this court any documentation whats oever in support of her mandamus petition, contrary to the applicable rules. See Tex. R. App. P. 52.3(k)(1)(A), 52.7(a)(1). Accordingly, because relator has not demonstrated that this court has jurisdiction to grant the requested relief, we dismiss relator ’s petition for want of jurisdiction.
PER CURIAM Panel c onsists of Justices Boyce, McCally, and Brown
.
<PAGE>
 
                [LETTERHEAD OF COOPERS & LYBRAND APPEARS HERE]

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

                      CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the (i) Registration Statements 
(Form S-8 No. 33-41528, No. 33-78846 and No. 33-89366) pertaining to the 1991 
Employee Stock Option Plan of Cellular Communications International Inc. (ii) 
Registration Statements (Form S-8 No. 33-55442 and No. 33-89368) pertaining to 
Non-Employee Director Stock Option Plan of Cellular Communications
International, Inc. and (iii) Registration Statements (Form S-8 No. 33-55440,
No. 33-78840 and No. 33-89370) pertaining to Non-Qualified Stock Option
Agreements of Cellular Communications International, Inc. and (iv) Registration
Statement (Form S-3 No. 33-90980) pertaining to the registration of 281,571
Units consisting of 13 1/4% Senior Discount Notes and Warrants to purchase
Common Stock and the related Prospectus of our report dated February 28, 1997 on
our audit of the financial statements of Omnitel Sistemi Radiocellulari Italiani
S.p.A as of December 31, 1996 and for the year then ended, and our report dated
February 28, 1997 on our audit of the financial statements of Omnitel Pronto
Italia S.p.A as of December 31, 1996 and for the year then ended, which reports
are included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

                                                       
                                                     /s/ Coopers & Lybrand S.p.A
                                                     COOPERS & LYBRAND S.p.A

                                                     

Turin, Italy.
March 25, 1997
March 2, 2012 

Mr. Maurice J. Montgomery, Jr. 

Manager – Flight Operations 

United Continental Holdings, Inc. 

233 South Wacker Drive 

Chicago, IL 60606 

Dear Mr. Montgomery: 

This is in response to your November 3, 2011 letter (public docket No. FAA-2007-0209) 

petitioning the Federal Aviation Administration on behalf of United Continental Holdings, 

Inc. (United/Continental) for an extension to exemption No. 9621. That exemption from 

§ 121.619 of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) allows United/Continental, 

their certificated dispatchers, and their pilots in command (PIC) to dispatch aircraft to 

domestic airports without designating an alternate for the destination airport, where, for at 

least 1 hour before and 1 hour after the estimated time of arrival at the destination airport, the 

appropriate weather reports or forecasts, or any combination of them, indicate the ceiling will 

be at least 1,000 feet above the airport elevation and visibility will be at least 3 statute miles. 

On December 21, 2011, the FAA issued exemption No. 8653E to United/Continental. This 

exemption combined Exemption No. 8653 and Exemption No. 9621. The exemption also 

included all of the provisions and limitations of Operations Specification C355 (exemption to 

§ 121.619 for domestic destination alternate airport requirements). A copy of this exemption 

is enclosed for your information. 

Because the relief you seek is now covered under exemption No. 8653, as amended, we will 

take no further action on your petition. 

Sincerely, 

/s/ 

Ida M. Klepper 

Manager, Airmen and 

 Airspace Rules Division 

Enclosure
Exhibit 32.2




CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER




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




AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO




SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002









In connection with the Annual Report of Numerex Corp (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Alan B. Catherall, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to my knowledge, 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.




This certificate is being furnished solely pursuant to 8 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document, and may not be disclosed, distributed or used by any person or for any reason other than as specifically required by law.









March 30, 2011




By: /s/ Alan B. Catherall




Alan B. Catherall




Chief Financial Officer, Executive Vice President




And Principal Financial and Accounting Officer
Document Headings

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

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Emergency Management Agency

          - [FEMA-1347-DR] 

# AGENCY:

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 

# ACTION:

Notice. 

# SUMMARY:

                        This notice amends the notice of a major disaster for the State of Arizona, (FEMA-1347-DR), dated                               ( print page 75717)                            October 27, 2000, and related determinations.                     

# EFFECTIVE DATE:

November 27, 2000. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Madge Dale, Response and Recovery Directorate, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC 20472, (202) 646-3772. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of a major disaster for the State of Arizona is hereby amended to include the following area among those areas determined to have been adversely affected by the catastrophe declared a major disaster by the President in his declaration of October 27, 2000: 

Yavapai County for Individual Assistance.

(The following Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers (CFDA) are to be used for reporting and drawing funds: 83.537, Community Disaster Loans; 83.538, Cora Brown Fund Program; 83.539, Crisis Counseling; 83.540, Disaster Legal Services Program; 83.541, Disaster Unemployment Assistance (DUA); 83.542, Fire Suppression Assistance; 83.543, Individual and Family Grant (IFG) Program; 83.544, Public Assistance Grants; 83.545, Disaster Housing Program; 83.548, Hazard Mitigation Grant Program)

Lacy E. Suiter, 

Executive Associate Director, Response and Recovery Directorate. 

[FR Doc. 00-30707 Filed 12-01-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6718-02-P
Exhibit
32.2
  CERTIFICATION
BY CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
 PURSUANT
TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
 AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
 SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  
  In
connection with Amendment No. 1 (the “Amendment”) to the annual report of
Numerex Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K/A for the year ended
December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on
March 29, 2010 (the “Report, and as amended by the Amendment No. 1 filed on
the date hereof, the “Amended Report”), I, Alan B. Catherall, as Chief Financial
Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to my
knowledge, that:
  (1)           The
Amended 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 Amended Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Company.
  This
certificate is being furnished solely pursuant to 8 U.S.C. Section 1350 and
is not being filed as part of the Amended Report or as a separate disclosure
document, and may not be disclosed, distributed or used by any person or for any
reason other than as specifically required by law.
  
  April 20,
2010
  By: /s/ Alan
B. Catherall
 Alan B.
Catherall
 Chief
Financial Officer, Executive Vice President
 and
Principal Financial and Accounting Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-2068

FAVIO SECUNDINO VASQUEZ-PEREZ,

 Petitioner,

v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, JR., Attorney General of the United States,

 Respondent.

On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration 

Appeals.

Submitted: May 20, 2014 Decided: May 29, 2014

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jaime Jasso, LAW OFFICES OF JAIME JASSO, Westlake Village, 

California, for Petitioner. Stuart F. Delery, Assistant Attorney 

General, Jennifer P. Levings, Julia J. Tyler, UNITED STATES 

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Favio Secundino Vasquez-Perez, a native and citizen of 

Guatemala, petitions for review of an order of the Board of 

Immigration Appeals (Board) affirming the Immigration Judge’s 

decision denying his motion for a continuance and pretermitting 

his application for cancellation of removal. We have reviewed 

the administrative record and Vasquez-Perez’s contentions on 

appeal and conclude that his contentions are without merit. 

Accordingly, we deny the petition for review for the reasons 

stated by the Board. See In re: Vasquez-Perez, (B.I.A. Aug. 14, 

2013). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and 

legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 

before this court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process.

PETITION DENIED
#### WOMACK v. STATE.

No. 20926.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

March 13, 1940.

Rehearing Denied April 17, 1940.

*94Wiley B. Thomas, of Groveton, for appellant.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State. .

GRAVES, Judge.

Appellant was convicted of forgery, and sentenced to a term of five years in the penitentiary.

His motion for a new trial was overruled on October 5, 1939, and his notice of appeal was entered on said date.

There are no bills of exception in the record, and the statement of facts was filed in the lower court on January 12, 1940, ninety-nine days after the giving of the notice of appeal. This filing was too late, under numerous decisions of this court, to allow us to consider the same. - See Art. 760, C.C.P., Vernon’s Ann. C.C.P. art. 760; Williams v. State, 133 Tex.Cr.R. 443, 112 S.W.2d 184.

The indictment appears to be in proper form, and all proceedings regular thereunder. Without a statement of facts we are unable to appraise the matters complained of in appellant’s brief.

The judgment is affirmed.

On Motion for Rehearing.

KRUEGER, Judge.

In his motion for a rehearing appellant asserts that he was, through no fault on his part, deprived of the filing of a statement of facts within the time prescribed by law. He sets forth in his motion that a day or two before the time allowed by law for filing a statement of facts, he made satisfactory arrangements with the court reporter to deliver to him (appellant) a narrative statement of facts. That the court reporter agreed to take the statement of facts to Huntsville, have the District Attorney and the judge approve the same, sign it and he (the court reporter) would file it with the clerk the next day, which was the last day on which it could be filed. That the court reporter did not file it with the clerk until nine days later. That he (appellant) did not know of the delayed filing until this court affirmed the judgment of conviction. We do not think that the excuse set forth in the motion, supported by affidavits, in not having the statement of facts filed in time, is sufficient to relieve appellant from a want of due diligence. When appellant selected the court reporter as his agent to perform such services for him, then appellant is bound by the acts of his agent. The negligence of his agent is chargeable to him under the rule announced by this court in the case of Riley v. State, 95 Tex.Cr.R. 539, 255 S.W. 179; Byrd v. State, 113 Tex.Cr.R. 5, 18 S.W.2d 624.

We regret that appellant’s statement of facts. was not filed in time, but this court can have but one rule and apply it in all instances under the same or similar circumstances.

The motion for rehearing is overruled.

PER CURIAM.

' The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the Court.
#### HANKAMER v. ROBERTS UNDERTAKING CO. et al.

Application No. 25028.

Supreme Court of Texas.

June 19, 1940.

*588Williams, Lee, Sears & Kennerly, Sam R. Fisher, and W. H. Blades, all of Houston, for plaintiff in error.

P. C. Matthews, of Liberty, and Wood, Morrow, Gresham & McCorquodale, A. C. Wood, and Walter E. Boyd, all of Houston; for defendants in error.

PER CURIAM.

The application for writ of error is “Dismissed W. O. J. — Correct Judgment.”

We agree that the issue of unavoidable accident was raised by the evidence in this case for the second reason given in the opinion of the Court of Civil Appeals. We disagree with the following holding announced in'the note to the opinion in Independent Eastern Torpedo Co. v. Carter, Tex.Civ.App., 131 S.W.2d 125, 128: *“In*all cases wherein there are controverted issues of fact, of defendant’s negligence as proximate cause of an’injury and of plaintiff’s negligence as proximate cause of the injury, the issue of unavoidable accident also necessarily arises as an issue of fact.”
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 99.2

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

         In connection with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of SS&C
Technologies, Inc. (the "Company") for the period ended March 31, 2003 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"),
the undersigned, Patrick J. Pedonti, Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, 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: May 13, 2003                 By:/s/ Patrick J. Pedonti

                                   Patrick J. Pedonti
                                   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 upon request.
Exhibit 32.1
                                  ------------



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


         In connection with the annual report of Groen Brothers  Aviation,  Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the year ended June 30, 2005,  David L. Groen
hereby  certifies,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350, as adopted  pursuant to
Section  906 of the  Sarbanes  - Oxley  Act of  2002,  that  to the  best of his
knowledge:

         1.   The annual report fully complies with the  requirements of Section
              13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

         2.   The information contained in the annual report fairly presents, in
              all material  respects,  the  financial  condition  and results of
              operations of the Company.


October 13, 2005                                     /s/ David L. Groen
------------------                                   ------------------
    (Date)                                           David L. Groen
                                                     President (principal
                                                     executive officer)
IV 

111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. CON. RES. 173 

Expressing the sense of the Congress that the Federal Government should 

not levy any additional taxes on firearms or firearm ammunition during 

the current economic hardship. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 30, 2009 

Mr. ALEXANDER submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was 

referred to the Committee on Ways and Means 

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 

Expressing the sense of the Congress that the Federal Government should not levy any additional taxes on firearms 

or firearm ammunition during the current economic 

hardship. 

Whereas the constitutional right to keep and bear arms conferred by the Second Amendment is essential to the defense of the United States, the maintenance of liberty, 

and the suppression of tyranny; 

Whereas the Supreme Court ruled, in District of Columbia v. 

Heller, that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm for traditionally lawful 

purposes such as self-defense and the defense of others; 

Whereas infringement of the right to keep and bear arms 

would place individual citizens and the United States as 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS
2 

•HCON 173 IH 

a whole at the mercy of threats both foreign and domestic; 

Whereas levying taxes on firearms and firearm ammunition 

would place additional financial burden on law-abiding 

citizens during our current economic hardship; 

Whereas during the current economic crisis, the Federal Government should not place additional burdens on law-abiding citizens by arbitrarily levying taxes of firearms or 

firearm ammunition in an attempt to restrict an individual’s right to bear arms; and 

Whereas law-abiding citizens have a constitutional right to 

keep and bear arms free from harassment and intimidation: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate 

2 concurring), That it is the sense of the Congress that the 

3 Federal Government should not levy any additional taxes 

4 on the sale of firearms or firearm ammunition during the 

5 current economic hardship. 

Æ 


jbell on DSKDVH8Z91PROD with BILLS