alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

HJSA NO. 3, LIMITED PARTNERSHIP,

 Appellant,

v.

SUNDOWN ENERGY LP, SMC 2000 LP, 

PGP HOLDINGS 1, LLC, SMITH 

ALLEN OIL & GAS, LLP, 

TRANSMOUNTAIN EXPLORATION 

LLC, FORTUNE NATURAL 

RESOURCES CORPORATION, TEXAS 

HEAT OF THE PERMIAN BASIN, INC., 

WHITING OIL AND GAS 

CORPORATION, EAGLE ROCK 

ACQUISITION PARTNERSHIP II, LP, 

ODYSSEY ROYALTIES, LLC, 

HORIZON ROYALTIES LLC, 

PINECONE RESOURCES LLC, 

BRENDA DORMAN FAUGHT, and 

LENA RENEE BRIGMAN,

 Appellees.

§

§

§

§

§

§ 

§

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-18-00113-CV

Appeal from the

143rd District Court 

of Ward County, Texas 

(TC# 16-05-23886-CVW) 

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes there was error in that 

part of the judgment granting partial summary judgment for Appellees and denying Appellant’s 

cross motion for partial summary judgment. We therefore reverse that part of the judgment, 

render judgment stating that under the unambiguous terms of lease, Sundown was required to 

engage in a continuous development program to maintain the lease under Paragraph 7(b), and 
2

that program required the spudding in of a continuous development well within 120 days of 

completion or abandonment of a prior well; and remand to the trial court for further proceedings 

in accordance with this Court’s opinion.

We conclude there was no error in that part of the judgment regarding the exclusion of 

extrinsic evidence. We therefore affirm that part of the judgment. We further order that

Appellant and its sureties, if any, see TEX.R.APP.P. 43.5, and Appellees each pay one-half (1/2) 

the costs of this appeal. This decision shall be certified below for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 16TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2019.

YVONNE T. RODRIGUEZ, Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Palafox, JJ.

Palafox, J. (Dissenting)
EXHIBIT 24.11

POWER OF ATTORNEY

KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that the undersigned hereby constitutes and appoints Robert E. Sulentic, Arlin E. Gaffner and J. Christopher Kirk and each of
them, his true and lawful attorneys-in-fact, with full power of substitution and resubstitution, for him and in his name, place and stead, to sign on his behalf, as a director
or officer, or both, as the case may be, of Trammell Crow Company, a Delaware corporation (the "Corporation"), the Corporation's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 2001, and to sign any or all amendments to such Form 10-K, and to file the same, with all exhibits thereto, and other documents in connection therewith, with the
Securities and Exchange Commission, granting unto said attorneys-in-fact, and each of them with or without the others, full power and authority to do and perform each and every
act and thing requisite and necessary to be done in and about the premises, as fully to all intents and purposes as he might or could do in person, hereby ratifying and confirming all that each of
said attorneys-in-fact or their substitute or substitutes may lawfully do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.

| |  | /s/DEREK R. MCCLAINDerek R. McClain
| |  | -----------------------------------

---

QuickLinks
* This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of

law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. The court generally disfavors the citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3. 

## F I L E D United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### MAR 24 2004 

### PATRICK FISHER Clerk UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT
SAMUEL E. TOOTLE, II,

Petitioner-Appellant,

v. COLONEL COLLEEN MCGUIRE,

Respondent-Appellee. No. 03-3162 (D.C. No. 02-CV-3013-RDR)

(D. Kan.)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT *

Before BRISCOE and McKAY , Circuit Judges, and BRORBY , Senior Circuit Judge.

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this appeal. SeeFed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2); 10th Cir. R. 34.1(G). The case is therefore ordered submitted without oral argument.-2-

On February 20, 2004, this court ordered Mr. Tootle to show cause why this appeal should not be dismissed as moot. Mr. Tootle filed a timely response, which we have reviewed. We now dismiss the appeal. Mr. Tootle, a former inmate of the United States Disciplinary Barracks in Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, appeals from the district court’s order dismissing his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 petition for habeas corpus. He was convicted before a general court-martial of numerous offenses and was sentenced to a term of 3140 days of confinement. As is proper in the case of a § 2241 petition, he does not challenge the validity of his conviction and sentence, only the execution of his sentence. See Bradshaw v. Story , 86 F.3d 164, 166 (10th Cir. 1996). Specifically, he complains that he was improperly classified upon his admission to the USDB; improperly denied employment; and retaliated against for exercising his right to appeal his sentence by being assigned to a non-working detail, all of which caused him to earn fewer credits toward sentence reduction than he would otherwise have earned. His § 2241 petition seeks injunctive relief against any future retaliation, and an award of Good Conduct Time and Extra Good Conduct Time credits. On October 19, 2003, during the pendency of this appeal, Mr. Tootle completed his sentence and was released from incarceration at USDB. A claim for good time credits becomes moot where the prisoner has been released and asserts no continuing incarceration or period of probation or parole that can be the subject of judicial relief. See-3-

generally Aragon v. Shanks , 144 F.3d 690, 691-92 (10th Cir. 1998). Mr. Tootle’s claim for good time credits is therefore moot. Nor does Mr. Tootle have any continuing claim for injunctive relief against future retaliation. His release from incarceration has mooted these claims as well. See Wirsching v. Colorado , ___F.3d___, No. 00-1437, 2004 WL 309318, at *4 (10th Cir. Feb. 19, 2004). As there are no cognizable claims before us, we dismiss this appeal as moot. Mr. Tootle’s “Motion to Attach Documents to the Record” is denied.

Entered for the Court

Monroe G. McKay Circuit Judge
ex10_1.htm





Exhibit 10cw


 


MET-PRO CORPORATION


160 Cassell Road


Harleysville, PA 19438







April __, 2013







Dear ________________________________:







This letter agreement, which is entered into in connection with the proposed transaction (the “CECO Merger Transaction”) of which you are aware between Met-Pro Corporation (the “Company”) and CECO Environmental Corp. (“CECO”), serves as an amendment to each of the option award agreements between you and the Company (collectively, the “Award Agreements”).







In connection with the CECO Merger Transaction and upon and subject to the closing thereof, the Company agrees that all of the options to purchase Met-Pro Common Shares granted under the Award Agreements which as of the date of the closing of the CECO Merger Transaction have not been exercised, have not expired or have not been forfeited shall be accelerated and shall be deemed exercisable (whether or not such options are otherwise then exercisable or vested under the terms of the Award Agreements) (“Exercisable Options”).







In consideration of the foregoing, you agree that all Exercisable Options shall as of the closing of the CECO Merger Transaction be deemed cancelled and shall be void, and the Award Agreements shall be deemed terminated, in exchange for the payment to you of an amount in cash equal to $13.75 for each Met Pro Common Share issuable upon exercise of the Exercisable Options, less the exercise price for the Exercisable Options and less any required withholdings. Such net amount shall be paid to you as soon as reasonably practicable following the closing of the CECO Merger Transaction.







In the event that there is no closing under the CECO Merger Transaction, this letter agreement shall be deemed to be of no effect and shall be void. Except to the extent the Award Agreements are modified by this letter agreement, the remaining terms and conditions of the Award Agreements shall remain unmodified and in full force and effect. In the event of a conflict between the terms and conditions of an Award Agreement and the terms and conditions of this letter agreement, the terms and conditions of this letter agreement shall prevail and control.







Very truly yours,









	
MET-PRO CORPORATION

	  	
ACCEPTED AND AGREED TO:

	 
	  	  	  	
This  ___ day of April, 2013:

	 
	
By:

	  	  	  	 
	  	
Raymond J. De Hont, CEO

	  	  	 
	  	  	  	
Signature

	 
	  	  	  	  	 
	  	  	  	  	 
	
Witness to Option Holders Signature

	  	
Print Name

	 
	  	  	  	  	 
	  	  	  	  	 
	
Name of Witness

	  	
Address
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                              5
       
<S>                                    <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                          OTHER <F1>
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                      DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                           DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                           0
<SECURITIES>                                     0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    0
<ALLOWANCES>                                     0
<INVENTORY>                                      0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 0
<PP&E>                                           0
<DEPRECIATION>                                   0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             206,186
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            0
<BONDS>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     6,186
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                      200,000
<PREFERRED>                                      0
<OTHER-SE>                                       0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               206,186
<SALES>                                          0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,425
<CGS>                                            0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              3,425
<INCOME-TAX>                                     0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              0
<DISCONTINUED>                                   0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                  0
<CHANGES>                                        0
<NET-INCOME>                                 3,425
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    0
        
<FN>
<F1> The period covered is August 29, 1996 through December 31, 1996
</FN>



</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 99.1

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

In
connection with the Annual Report of Simon Property Group, L.P. (the "Company"), on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, David Simon, Chief Executive Officer of Simon Property Group, Inc., the general partner of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



|/s/ David SimonDavid Simon
Chief Executive Officer,
Simon Property Group, Inc.,
the General Partner of the Company
March 31, 2003 |  | 
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | 

A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Simon Property Group, L.P. and will be retained by Simon Property Group, L.P. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

99

---

QuickLinks
[Federal Register Volume 80, Number 63 (Thursday, April 2, 2015)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17741-17742]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2015-07531]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission


Combined Notice of Filings

    Take notice that the Commission has received the following Natural 
Gas Pipeline Rate and Refund Report filings:

Filings Instituting Proceedings

    Docket Numbers: RP15-668-000.
    Applicants: Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America.
    Description: Penalty Revenue Crediting Report of Natural Gas 
Pipeline Company of America LLC.
    Filed Date: 3/20/15.
    Accession Number: 20150320-5268.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/1/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-669-000.
    Applicants: Ozark Gas Transmission, L.L.C.
    Description: Section 4(d) rate filing per 154.204: OGT March 2015 
Cleanup Filing to be effective 4/24/2015.
    Filed Date: 3/23/15.
    Accession Number: 20150323-5109.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/6/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-671-000.
    Applicants: Enable Gas Transmission, LLC.
    Description: Annual Revenue Crediting Filing of Enable Gas 
Transmission, LLC.
    Filed Date: 3/23/15.
    Accession Number: 20150323-5217.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/6/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-672-000.
    Applicants: Natural Gas Pipeline Company of America.
    Description: Section 4(d) rate filing per 154.204: Nicor's 
Amendment to be effective 4/1/2015.
    Filed Date: 3/23/15.
    Accession Number: 20150323-5251.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/6/15.

    Docket Numbers: RP15-673-000.
    Applicants: Equitrans, L.P.
    Description: Section 4(d) rate filing per 154.204: Update LPS and 
LPS Form of Service Agreements to be effective 4/23/2015.
    Filed Date: 3/23/15.
    Accession Number: 20150323-5292.
    Comments Due: 5 p.m. ET 4/6/15.

    The filings are accessible in the Commission's eLibrary system by 
clicking on the links or querying the docket number.
    Any person desiring to intervene or protest in any of the above 
proceedings must file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the 
Commission's Regulations (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214) on or before 5:00 
p.m. Eastern time on the specified comment date.

[[Page 17742]]

Protests may be considered, but intervention is necessary to become a 
party to the proceeding.
    eFiling is encouraged. More detailed information relating to filing 
requirements, interventions, protests, service, and qualifying 
facilities filings can be found at: http://www.ferc.gov/docs-filing/efiling/filing-req.pdf. For other information, call (866) 208-3676 
(toll free). For TTY, call (202) 502-8659.

    Dated: March 24, 2015.
Nathaniel J. Davis, Sr.,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2015-07531 Filed 4-1-15; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE CODE 6717-01-P
II 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 2844 

To require the Secretary of Health and Human Services to publish all of 

its studies and findings related to COVID–19. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 23, 2021 

Mr. LEE introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to 

the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions 

A BILL 

To require the Secretary of Health and Human Services 

to publish all of its studies and findings related to 

COVID–19. 

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 ‘‘Transparency in 

5 COVID–19 Research Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. PUBLICATION OF STUDIES AND FINDINGS. 

7 Not later than 14 days after the date of enactment 

8 of this Act, the Secretary of Health and Human Services 

9 shall publish all studies related to COVID–19 conducted 

10 by such Secretary and findings related to such studies, 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2844 IS

1 in a manner that maintains the privacy of any study par2 ticipants. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 31.3



CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE
OFFICER



Pursuant to Rule 13a-14(a) adopted pursuant
to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



I, Dan Mondor, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this Amendment No. 1 to the annual report
on Form 10-K of Inseego Corp.; and



2. Based on my knowledge, this 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 report.



Date: April 28, 2020



|                                                             
|-------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Dan Mondor                                               
|Dan Mondor                                                   
|Chief Executive Officer
        (principal executive officer)
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman, Chief Justice

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 March 10, 2017

Order 

Clerk

March 10, 2017

154836(70)

In re ESTATE OF LINDA ROBERDEAUX.

_______________________________________

DENNIS ROBERDEAUX, SR., Personal

Representative of the ESTATE OF LINDA 

ROBERDEAUX

Plaintiff-Appellee,

MSC: 154836

v COA: 323802

Washtenaw CC: 13-000675-NH

EVANGELICAL HOMES OF MICHIGAN, d/b/a

EVANGELICAL HOME-SALINE and

MICHIGAN SPORTS MEDICINE &

ORTHOPEDIC CENTER,

Defendants,

and

WASHTENAW MEDICINE, P.C., d/b/a

WASHTENAW INTERNAL MEDICINE

ASSOCIATES, and CHERYL A. HUCKJNS, M.D.,

Defendants-Appellees,

and

MARK A. KELLEY, M.D.,

Defendant-Appellant.

___________________________________________/

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion of plaintiff-appellee to extend the time 

for filing its answer to the application for leave to appeal is GRANTED. The answer 

submitted on March 7, 2017, is accepted for filing.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 99-7536

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus WILLIAM STEPHEN JAVAGE, Defendant - Appellant.Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of West Virginia, at Elkins. Robert Earl Maxwell, Senior District Judge. (CR-95-7, CA-98-64-2) Submitted: April 27, 2000 Decided: May 19, 2000Before NIEMEYER and MOTZ, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. William Stephen Javage, Appellant Pro Se. Sherry L. Muncy, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Elkins, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).* The district court granted a certificate of appealability. 2 PER CURIAM: William Stephen Javage seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying his motion filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp. 1999). We have reviewed the record, including the transcript of the hearing on the motion, and the district court’s order and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on reasoning of the district court. * See United States v. Javage , Nos. CR-95-7; CA-98- 64-2 (N.D.W. Va. Sept. 8, 1999). 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 13.1





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




In connection with the Annual Report of Top Image Systems Ltd. (the “Company”) on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Ido Schechter, Chief Executive 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.




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.




Date: June 23, 2010




/s/ Ido Schechter

——————————————

Name: Ido Schechter

Title: Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 3.2.2

SECOND AMENDMENT  TO THE BYLAWS  OF  TRAMMELL CROW COMPANY

Article IV    Committees

Section 2.    Procedure; Meetings; Quorum.Any committee designated pursuant to Section 1 of this Article
shall keep regular minutes of its proceedings and report the same to the Board of Directors when requested, shall fix its own rules or procedures, and shall meet at such time and at such place or
places as may be provided by such rules, or by resolution of such committee or resolution of the Board of Directors. Committee members and committee chairpersons shall be appointed by the Board of
Directors. At every meeting of any such committee, the presence of a majority of all the members thereof shall constitute a quorum and the affirmative vote of a majority of the members present shall
be necessary for the adoption by it of any resolution.

CERTIFICATION

I, the undersigned officer, hereby certify this 5th day of March, 2003 that the foregoing Section 2 of Article IV was duly approved and adopted as an amendment to
the bylaws, as amended, of Trammell Crow Company and was approved and adopted by the Board of Directors of Trammell Crow Company at a meeting held March 5, 2003.

| |  | /s/J. CHRISTOPHER KIRKJ. Christopher Kirk
Executive Vice President and Secretary
| |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

---

QuickLinks