alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    Exhibit 11.1


              CAMBRIDGE TECHNOLOGY PARTNERS (MASSACHUSETTS), INC.
             STATEMENTS REGARDING COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
 
 
                                      Three Months Ended             Six Months Ended                 
                                           June 30,                    Ended June 30,                 
                                 ----------------------------  -----------------------------          
                                      1997         1996              1997         1996                
                                   -----------  -----------      ------------  -----------            
<S>                                <C>          <C>              <C>           <C>                    
                                                                                                      
Net income                          $  8,063     $  4,865          $ 15,153     $  9,452                
                                    ========     ========          ========     ========                
                                                                                                        
Weighted average number of                                                                              
  common shares outstanding           49,288       46,950            49,019       46,806                
                                                                                                        
Dilutive effect of common                                                                               
  equivalent shares of stock                                                                            
  options and warrants                 5,535        7,623             5,733        7,355                
                                    --------     --------          --------     --------                
                                                                                                        
Weighted average number of                                                                              
  common and common equivalent                                                                          
  shares outstanding                  54,823       54,573            54,752       54,161                
                                    ========     ========          ========     ========       
                                                                                                        
Net income per share (1)            $    .15     $    .09          $    .28     $    .18                
                                    ========     ========          ========     ========        
 
</TABLE>
     (1) Primary and fully diluted income per share are the same for each
     periods presented.
### §3117. Authorization of appropriations

There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out the purposes of this chapter.

(Pub. L. 101–630, title III, §318, Nov. 28, 1990, 104 Stat. 4544.)
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.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### Food and Drug Administration

          - [Docket No. 2004N-0132]

# AGENCY:

Food and Drug Administration, HHS.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The  Food  and  Drug   Administration  (FDA)  is  announcing  that  a  collection  of information entitled   “Premarket  Approval of Medical Devices”  has  been  approved  by  the  Office of  Management  and  Budget  (OMB)  under  the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.   

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Peggy Robbins, Office of Management Programs  (HFA-250),  Food and  Drug    Administration,   5600   Fishers   Lane,   Rockville,   MD   20857,  301-827-1223.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    In the                     **Federal Register**                     of July 9, 2004 (69 FR 41505), the  agency  announced   that  the  proposed  information  collection  had  been  submitted to OMB for review and clearance under  44 U.S.C. 3507.  An agency  may not conduct or sponsor,  and  a person is not required to respond to, a  collection of information unless it  displays a currently valid OMB control  number.  OMB has now approved the information  collection  and has assigned  OMB control number 0910-0231.   The approval expires on September 30,  2007.   A copy of the supporting statement for this information  collection  is        available        on        the        Internet        at                     *http://www.fda.gov/​ohrms/​dockets*.                

Dated: October 4, 2004.

Jeffrey Shuren,

Assistant Commissioner for Policy.

[FR Doc. 04-22766 Filed 10-8-04; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4160-01-S
(March 31, 1948.)

#### In the Matter of the Application of Joseph J. Cantwell for Admission to Practice as an Attorney. (From the District of Columbia.)

—Application granted. Present —- Lewis, P. J., Johnston, Adel, Sneed and Wenzel, JJ.
###### Editorial Note on Part 10

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 10 appear by CBP Dec. 16-26, 81 FR 93010, Dec. 20, 2016.

#### § 10.172 Claim for exemption from duty under the Generalized System of Preferences.

A claim for an exemption from duty on the ground that the Generalized System of Preferences applies shall be allowed by the Center director only if he is satisfied that the requirements set forth in this section and §§ 10.173 through 10.178 have been met. If duty-free treatment is claimed at the time of entry, a written claim shall be filed on the entry document by placing the symbol “A” as a prefix to the subheading of the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States for each article for which such treatment is claimed.

[T.D. 76-2, 40 FR 60048, Dec. 31, 1975, as amended by T.D. 77-36, 42 FR 5041, Jan. 27, 1977; T.D. 89-1, 53 FR 51252, Dec. 21, 1988; T.D. 94-47, 59 FR 25569, May 17, 1994; T.D. 99-27, 64 FR 13675, Mar. 22, 1999]
!


	

	 




 

	

 

"







	





	












	 

 	 

	

	


#


	

 	


	


 !"

	# !"

" $





	


	


 

	


	
 	 




  

     

$ &'


( ) 	

 ** $ 

	 $ '	

	


#% ''(')(*+

	


	





	




The boundaries and names shown and the designations

used on this map do not imply official endorsement or 

acceptance by the United Nations.

U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID)

Office of U.S. Foreign Disaster Assistance (OFDA)

Original Map Courtesy of the UN Cartographic Section
PUBLIC LAW 106–339—OCT. 19, 2000 114 STAT. 1313

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 4554:

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 146 (2000):

July 18, considered and passed House.

Oct. 6, considered and passed Senate.

Æ

Public Law 106–339

106th Congress

An Act

To redesignate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 1602

Frankford Avenue in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, as the ‘‘Joseph F. Smith Post

Office Building’’.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. REDESIGNATION.

The facility of the United States Postal Service located at

1602 Frankford Avenue in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, and known

as the Kensington Station, shall be known and designated as the

‘‘Joseph F. Smith Post Office Building’’.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper,

or other record of the United States to the facility referred to

in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Joseph

F. Smith Post Office Building’’.

Approved October 19, 2000.

Oct. 19, 2000

[H.R. 4554]
Case 0:20-cv-61469-RS Document 207-200 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2023 Page 1 of 5
	

Case 0:20-cv-61469-RS Document 207-200 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2023 Page 2 of 5
	


Case 0:20-cv-61469-RS Document 207-200 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2023 Page 3 of 5
	


Case 0:20-cv-61469-RS Document 207-200 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2023 Page 4 of 5
	


Case 0:20-cv-61469-RS Document 207-200 Entered on FLSD Docket 12/05/2023 Page 5 of 5
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14

- 40923 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.
ADOLFO GALVEZ

- PEREZ , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 2:14

- CR

- 143

- 1

Before DAVIS, CLEMENT, and COSTA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Adolfo Galvez

- Perez pleaded guilty to being found unlawfully present in the United States following removal. He was sentenced below the recommended Sentencing Guidelines range to 30 months of imprisonment. The parties agree that the judgment of conviction improperly reflects that he

was con victed and sentenced under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2). See United States v. Mondragon

- Santiago , 564 F.3d 357, 368 (5th Cir. 2009). Because Galvez

-

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED May 22, 2015 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 14-40923 Document: 00513053016 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/22/2015No. 14

- 40923

Perez ’s offense was a § 1326(b)(1) violation rather than a § 1326(b)(2) violation, we REMAND for the limited purp ose of reforming the judgment to reflect the proper statute of conviction. See 28 U.S.C. § 2106. In all other respects, the judgment is AFFIRMED

.

2 Case: 14-40923 Document: 00513053016 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/22/2015
#### § 108.350 Eligibility and completeness.

SBA will not consider any application that is not complete or that is submitted by an Applicant that does not meet the eligibility criteria described in subpart C of this part. SBA, at its sole discretion, may request from an Applicant additional information concerning eligibility criteria or easily completed portions of the application in order to allow SBA to consider that Applicant's application.
### [§621. Repealed. Pub. L. 101–508, title XI, §11801(a)(28), Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1388–521]

Section, act Aug. 16, 1954, ch. 736, 68A Stat. 212, related to payments to encourage exploration, development, and mining for defense purposes.

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Savings Provision

For provisions that nothing in repeal by Pub. L. 101–508 be construed to affect treatment of certain transactions occurring, property acquired, or items of income, loss, deduction, or credit taken into account prior to Nov. 5, 1990, for purposes of determining liability for tax for periods ending after Nov. 5, 1990, see section 11821(b) of Pub. L. 101–508, set out as a note under section 45K of this title.
United States Nuclear Regulatory Commission

Office of Public Affairs, Region I

475 Allendale Road King of Prussia, PA 19406

Fax: 610/337-5241

Internet: dps@nrc.gov or nas@nrc.gov

I-98-132 December 21, 1998

Contact: Diane Screnci (610/337-5330) FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

Neil A. Sheehan (610/337-5331)

NRC, NEW JERSEY MEDICAL SCHOOL TO DISCUSS APPARENT VIOLATIONS

Nuclear Regulatory Commission staff and representatives

of the University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey,

Newark, N.J., will discuss two apparent violations of NRC

requirements pertaining to the handling of radioactive

materials on Wednesday, December 23.

Scheduled to begin at 3 p.m. in the Public Meeting Room

at the NRC Region I office in King of Prussia, Pa., the

predecisional enforcement conference will be open to the public

for observation.

The university has an NRC license to use radioactive

materials for medical diagnosis, treatment, research on humans

and non-human research. During an unannounced inspection at

the university from November 17 through 19, an NRC inspector

found two apparent violations.

The more serious of the apparent violations was the

finding that two vials containing a total of 136 microcuries of

polonium-210 -- approximately 36 times the annual limit of

intake -- were left unsecured and unattended in a research

laboratory. The other apparent violation, discovered during a

review of records, was the loss of a package containing 5

millicuries of hydrogen-3, or tritium, in December 1997.

The NRC’s decision to hold a pre-decisional enforcement

conference does not mean the agency has determined that a

violation has occurred or that enforcement action will be

taken. Rather, the purpose is to discuss apparent violations,

their causes and safety significance; to provide the licensee

an opportunity to point out any errors that may have been made

in the NRC inspection report; and to enable the licensee to

outline its proposed corrective actions.

No decision on the apparent violations will be made at

the conference. Those decisions will be made by senior NRC

officials at a later time.

#
2

ˇˇˇˇ
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 18

- 1644

_____________________________
T ED H ORN , Appellant,

v.

C OCA C OLA C OMPANY , and C NA
, Appellee s

.

_____________________________

On appeal from an order of the Judge of Compensation Claims

. Robert A. Arthur , Judge

.
Date of Accident: April 23, 1985.

October 26, 2018

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

.
M AKAR , W INOKUR , and M. K. T HOMAS , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________2 Nicolette E. Tsambis of Smith, Feddeler, & Smith, P.A., Lakeland
, for Appellant.

Robin D. Black and April F. Coyne of Law Offices of Lorraine Lester, Lake Mary
, for Appellee s

.
Uses of the Outer Continental Shelf

iple

Mult

ip

October 2003

7

—

SS Sos Se OO GS HO oe So

Prov

ont

‘at
+

Wind Farm Proposals

E
°
e
£
S
oD
-
o
£
3
Fd
5
5
i]
=
a
2
o
5
£
°
iJ
=
”
®
=]
©
£
mo)
-
°
°
°
®
=
”
1
oO
al
al
~
i]
-
o
£
s

Cape Wind Associates LLC - Site coordinates from "Expanded

Winergy LLC Proposals (withdrawn)

; | | | | 4+—+—
}———7 71 |

; {of | | | +
|} |—+-e-— TI
j+—— e777 |

Environmental Notification Form” Nov. 15, 2001 (Alternates hashed)

See: www.capecodonline.com/special/windfarm/images/windmap26.jpg
Sand Resource Areas

Long Island Power Authority - Site coords digitized from map in
Sea Energy Generation Inc. - Size and shape of area not available.

"Phase 2 Siting Assessment” Jan 21, 2003
coordinates from: http://capewind.whgrp.com/

Cape Wind Data Collection Tower

LI
L_|
*

RFIN Sand Study Area - 1999
State Co-Op Sand Study Areas

Other Uses

Shipping Lanes, Fairways, and Precautionary Areas
Hazardous areas - dumping areas; toxic wastes; unexploded
ordinance, torpedos, depth charges, etc.

telecomunications cables - active

telecomunications cables - inactive

Artificial Reefs / Fish Havens

Submerged Lands Act Boundary (3 nautical miles)

National Marine Sanctuary (Stellwagen)

Marine Protected Areas (NMFS)

eel

AR

k
\
1
\

tEbg

LAA
\

athom

hom Bank:

xX Grea

ive Fz

RFIN 1999

Five Fat

bor

/

Stone Har

S

CA
No

UTM Zone 18, NAD 83

MMS Mapping & Boundary Branch, Jan 27, 2004, 303 275-7186 /wind2/use.map
§ 102.19 NAFTA preference override. ( a ) Except in the case of goods covered by paragraph (b) of this section, if a good which is originating within the meaning of § 181.1(q) of this chapter is not determined under § 102.11(a) or (b) or § 102.21 to be a good of a single NAFTA country, the country of origin of such good is the last NAFTA country in which that good underwent production other than minor processing, provided that a Certificate of Origin (see § 181.11 of this chapter) has been completed and signed for the good.
( b ) If, under any other provision of this part, the country of origin of a good which is originating within the meaning of § 181.1(q) of this chapter is determined to be the United States and that good has been exported from, and returned to, the United States after having been advanced in value or improved in condition in another NAFTA country, the country of origin of such good for Customs duty purposes is the last NAFTA country in which that good was advanced in value or improved in condition before its return to the United States.
( c ) Paragraphs (a) and (b) of this section apply only to goods entered for consumption, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, prior to July 1, 2020.
[T.D. 96-48, 61 FR 28957, June 6, 1996, as amended by CBP Dec. 21-10, 86 FR 35582, July 6, 2021]
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

LUIS FERNANDO ERAZO

- GUZMAN,

Petitioner,

v.

MERRICK B. GARLAND, Attorney General,

Respondent. No. 16

- 70094

Agency No. A205

- 317

- 136

MEMORANDUM *

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

Submitted May 17, 2022 * *

Before: CANBY, TASHIMA, and NGUYEN, Circuit Judges.

Luis Fernando Erazo

- Guzman, a native and citizen of Guatemala, petitions

pro se for review of the Board of Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal

from an immigration judge’s (“IJ”) decision denying his application for asylum,

withholding of removal, and relief under the Convention Against Torture (“CAT”).

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

MAY 24 2022

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 16

- 70094

Our jurisdiction i s governed by 8 U.S.C § 1252. We deny in part and dismiss in

part the petition for review.

In his opening brief, Erazo

- Guzman does not challenge the dispositive

grounds relied on by the agency in denying his claims for asylum and withholding

of removal. See Lopez

- Vasquez v. Holder , 706 F.3d 1072, 1079

- 80 (9th Cir. 2013)

(issue s not specifically raised and argued in an opening brief are w aived ). To the

extent that Erazo

- Guzman proposes a new particular social group in his opening

brief, we lack jurisdiction to consider it. See Barron v. Ashcroft , 358 F.3d 674,

677

- 78 (9th Cir. 2004) (court lacks jurisdiction to review claims not presente d to

the agency). Thus, Erazo

- Guzman’s asylum and withholding of removal claims

fail.

We also lack jurisdiction to consider Erazo

- Guzman’s contentions as to the

merits of his CAT claim, the IJ’s evaluation of the evidence, and the IJ’s denial of

a contin uance. See id.

The temporary stay of removal remains in place until the issuance of the

mandate.

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED in part; DISMISSED in part.
Editorial Note on Part 10
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 10 appear by CBP Dec. 16-26, 81 FR 93010, Dec. 20, 2016.

§ 10.779 Goods eligible for tariff preference claims. The following goods are eligible for a TPL claim filed under § 10.778 of this subpart: ( a ) *Fabric goods.* Fabric goods provided for in Chapters 51, 52, 54, 55, 58, and 60 of the HTSUS that are wholly formed in Morocco, regardless of the origin of the fiber or yarn used to produce the goods, provided that they meet the applicable conditions for preferential tariff treatment under the MFTA, other than the condition that they are originating; and
( b ) *Apparel goods.* Apparel goods provided for in Chapters 61 and 62 of the HTSUS that are cut or knit to shape, or both, and sewn or otherwise assembled in Morocco, regardless of the origin of the fabric or yarn used to produce the goods, provided that they meet the applicable conditions for preferential tariff treatment under the MFTA, other than the condition that they are originating goods.
### §24. Secretary of Senate or assistant secretary may administer oaths

The Secretary of the Senate, and the assistant secretary thereof, shall, respectively, have power to administer any oath or affirmation required by law, or by the rules or orders of the Senate, to be taken by any officer of the Senate, and to any witness produced before it.

(Apr. 18, 1876, ch. 66, §2, 19 Stat. 34; Pub. L. 92–51, July 9, 1971, 85 Stat. 125.)

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Change of Name

Assistant secretary of the Senate deemed successor in references to chief clerk of the Senate in all laws, rules, resolutions, and orders, effective July 1, 1971, under provisions of Pub. L. 92–51, July 9, 1971, 85 Stat. 125.
DECLARATION OF MARY CARLETON 

I, the undersigned, Mary Carleton, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1746, declare that: 

1. My name is Mary Carleton, I am over twenty-one years of age, and I have personal 

knowledge of the matters set forth herein. 

2. I own a company called CapJet (the "Company"), which is located in Houston, Texas. 

3. In August of 2019, Complete Business Solutions Group ("CBSG") made a loan to my 

Company in the amount of $112,536.13 (the "Loan") through what CBSG calls its "merchant capital 

advance" ("MCA") business. 

4. I applied to Fast Advance Funding a broker for the Loan and was the contact with CBSG 

on behalf of my Company during the Loan application process and CBSG' s underwriting process. 

5. CBSG did not perform an on-site inspection of my Company prior to approving the Loan, 

or at any other time. 

6. At no time did CBSG offer me or my Company insurance of any kind. 

7. CBSG did not request information from me or the Company about the Company's expenses 

during the underwriting process or at any other time prior to approving the Loans. 

8. CBSG did not request information from me or the Company about the Company's profit 

margins during the underwriting process or at any other time prior to approving the Loans. 

9. CBSG did not request information from me or the Company about the Company's account 

receivables during the underwriting process or at any other time prior to approving the Loans. 

10. CBSG did not request a debt schedule for the Company during the underwriting process or 

at any other time prior to approving the Loans. 

11. CBSG assigned the Company a liaison, but the liaison never returned my telephone calls. 

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. 

Executed on July 7, 2020, in Houston,~ 

lid::: 

Mary arleton 

Case 9:20-cv-81205-RAR Document 29-1 Entered on FLSD Docket 07/27/2020 Page 1 of 1