alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 11-1


                   THE NAVIGATORS GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES


                        COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS

         Earnings Per Share of Common Stock and Common Stock Equivalents

                      (In thousands, except per share data)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                           YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31,
                                                      -----------------------------------
                                                       1997          1996          1995
                                                      -------       -------       -------

<S>                                                   <C>           <C>           <C>
Net income applicable to common stock .........       $12,546       $16,752       $12,582

Average number of common shares outstanding ...         8,296         8,197         8,154

Net income per share - Basic ..................       $  1.51       $  2.04       $  1.54


Average number of common shares outstanding ...         8,296         8,197         8,154
Add: Assumed exercise of stock options ........            89            89            59
                                                      -------       -------       -------
Common and common equivalent shares outstanding         8,385         8,286         8,213
                                                      =======       =======       =======
Net income per share - Diluted ................       $  1.50       $  2.02       $  1.53
</TABLE>
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 221 (Wednesday, November 17, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 70200]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-28939]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Nevada and Placer Counties Resource Advisory Committee

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of Meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Nevada and Placer Counties Resource Advisory Committee 
(RAC) will meet in Nevada City, California. The committee is meeting as 
authorized under the Secure Rural Schools and Community Self-
Determination Act (Pub. L. 110-343) and in compliance with the Federal 
Advisory Committee Act. The purpose of the meeting is to discuss 
projects submitted for funding and the expenditure of Title II funds 
benefiting National Forest System lands in Nevada and Placer Counties.

DATES: The meeting will be held Monday, December 6, 2010, at 9 a.m. 
with a backup meeting planned for Thursday, December 9, 2010, at 9 a.m. 
if necessary.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Tahoe National Forest 
Headquarters, 631 Coyote St., Nevada City, CA.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ann Westling, Committee Coordinator, 
USDA, Tahoe National Forest, 631 Coyote St., Nevada City, CA 95959, 
(530) 478-6205, e-mail: <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#48293f2d3b3c2421262f082e3b662e2d2c663d3b"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="85e4f2e0f6f1e9ecebe2c5e3f6abe3e0e1abf0f6">[email protected]</span></a>.
    Individuals who use telecommunication devices for the deaf (TDD) 
may call the Federal Information Relay Service (FIRS) at 1-800-877-8339 
between 8 a.m. and 8 p.m., Eastern Standard Time, Monday through 
Friday.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Agenda items to be covered include: (1) 
Welcome and Introductions; (2) Review of Past Meeting Notes and Agenda 
Discussion; (3) Discussion of Proposed Projects; (4) Vote on Proposed 
Projects; and (5) Comments from the Public. The meeting is open to the 
public and the public will have an opportunity to comment at the 
meeting.

    Dated: November 9, 2010.
Tom Quinn,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 2010-28939 Filed 11-16-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Exhibit 31.1
 CERTIFICATIONS
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Farmers & Merchants Bancorp, Inc.;
 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;
 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.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f) for the registrant and have:
     5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer(s) and 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 the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
    /s/ Paul S. SiebenmorgenPaul S. Siebenmorgen, President and CEO 84
#### § 2003.10 Rural Development State Offices.

(a) Headed by State Directors, State Offices report directly to the Under Secretary, Rural Development, and are responsible to the three Rural Development agency Administrators for carrying out agency program operations at the State level, ensuring adherence to program plans approved for the State by the Under Secretary, and rendering staff advisory and manpower support to Area and Local offices. The Rural Development State Directors, for budget and accounting purposes, are housed in the RHS agency.

(b) Program Directors within the State Office provide oversight and leadership on major program functions. Major program functions include: Single Family and Multi-Family Housing loans and grants, Community Facility, Water and Waste Disposal, Business and Cooperative, and the Empowerment Zones and Enterprise Communities (EZ/EC) programs.

(c) The USDA Rural Development State Office locations are as follows:

| State | Location |
| --- | --- |
| Alabama | Montgomery, AL |
| Alaska | Palmer, AK |
| Arizona | Phoenix, AZ |
| Arkansas | Little Rock, AR |
| California | Woodland, CA |
| Colorado | Lakewood, CO |
| Delaware | Camden, DE |
| Florida | Gainesville, FL |
| Georgia | Athens, GA |
| Hawaii | Hilo, HI |
| Idaho | Boise, ID |
| Illinois | Champaign, IL |
| Indiana | Indianapolis, IN |
| Iowa | Des Moines, IA |
| Kansas | Topeka, KS |
| Kentucky | Lexington, KY |
| Louisiana | Alexandria, LA |
| Maine | Bangor, ME |
| Massachusetts | Amherst, MA |
| Michigan | East Lansing, MI |
| Minnesota | St. Paul, MN |
| Mississippi | Jackson, MS |
| Missouri | Columbia, MO |
| Montana | Bozeman, MT |
| Nebraska | Lincoln, NE |
| Nevada | Carson City, NV |
| New Jersey | Mt. Holly, NJ |
| New Mexico | Albuquerque, NM |
| New York | Syracuse, NY |
| North Carolina | Raleigh, NC |
| North Dakota | Bismarck, ND |
| Ohio | Columbus, OH |
| Oklahoma | Stillwater, OK |
| Oregon | Portland, OR |
| Pennsylvania | Harrisburg, PA |
| Puerto Rico | Hato Rey, PR |
| South Carolina | Columbia, SC |
| South Dakota | Huron, SD |
| Tennessee | Nashville, TN |
| Texas | Temple, TX |
| Utah | Salt Lake City, UT |
| Vermont | Montpelier, VT |
| Virginia | Richmond, VA |
| Washington | Olympia, WA |
| West Virginia | Charleston, WV |
| Wisconsin | Stevens Point, WI |
| Wyoming | Casper, WY |

[62 FR 67259, Dec. 24, 1997; 63 FR 3256, Jan. 22, 1998]
**EXHIBIT32.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18            USC, SECTION 1350,**

**AS            ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the quarterly report of Northern Ethanol, Inc. (the            “Company”) on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended June 30, 2007, as filed            with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the            “Report”), I, the undersigned, in the capacity and on the date indicated            below, certify, 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 my knowledge:

 

|   | 1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Rule                            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. |
|--------|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

 

| Dated: August 29, 2007 | s/Gordon                            Laschinger____________________

Gordon Laschinger, Chief Executive Officer |
|------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
EXHIBIT 31.2

Certifications

I, Yichun Jiang, Chief Financial Officer and Prinicipal Accounting Officer certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of China Runji Cement Inc.

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

4. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(c) and 15d-(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 subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this 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 most recent fiscal period 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, to the Registrant's auditors and the Registrant's board of directors (performing the functions of an audit committee):

a) all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the Registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the Registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls (all of which do not apply); and

b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls, (all of which do not apply).

Date: April 14, 2008

/s/ Yichun Jiang
Yichun Jiang
Chief Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer

---
#### In the Matter of Suman K. Dass, Petitioner, v Board of Regents of the University of the State of New York, Respondent.

Proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78 initiated in this court, pursuant to subdivision 4 of section 6510-a of the Education Law, to review a determination of the Board of Regents which revoked petitioner’s license to practice medicine. Petitioner was charged with the fraudulent practice of medicine as a result of his unlawful issuance of prescriptions for controlled substances to persons, not in good faith, and not in the regular course of his professional practice in the care and treatment of those persons, during the periods January 1, 1975 to March 10, 1975 and January 24, 1977 to February 23, 1977. He was also charged with unprofessional conduct within the purview of subdivision (9) of section 6509 of the Education Law for his failure to maintain proper records with respect to the dispensing of large quantities of controlled substances between November 17, 1976 and February 24, 1977. Review of the minutes of the hearing before the hearing committee of the State Board for Professional Medical Conduct reveals that the petitioner stipulated to his guilt upon each of the charges of misconduct contained in the statement of charges. His assertion that he made the "confessions” upon the assurance that his license would not be revoked is without credible support in the record. While the precise terms of the understanding are not clear, its import, at most, was that the panel would recommend a suspension of petitioner’s license but with a stay thereof. This is precisely what the panel did. Its recommendation is not binding on the Board of Regents and this was understood. Moreover, the petitioner signed admissions of guilt "of my own free will without fear or promise of immunity” and "without threat, duress or promise of immunity”. Accordingly, the determination of guilt is conceded and we look now to the sanction imposed. Though we are not unmindful of the mitigating circumstances present here, we cannot overlook this thoughtless, careless, irresponsible, flagrant and indiscriminate dispersal of dangerous drugs, and the possible consequences are frightening to contemplate. The entire system for controlling dangerous drugs is based on the assumption that physicians will exercise their prescription-writing power to treat patients and not to supply drugs to addicts *(Matter of Kenna*v *Ambach,*61 AD2d 1091; *Matter of Pannone v New York State Edue. Dept,*54 AD2d 1014). Our review of the propriety of the penalty imposed in these matters is severely restricted (see *Pell v Board ofEduc.,*34 NY2d 222, 233, 234), and under the circumstances here prevailing, we cannot conclude that the penalty was either shocking or inappropriate. Determination confirmed, and petition dismissed, without costs. Mahoney, P. J., Greenblott, Sweeney, Kane and Main, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10-13







                                                          July 8, 1996



Mr. William D. Warren
Chairman, CEO & President
National Reinsurance Corporation
777 Long Ridge Road
P.O. Box 10167
Stamford, CT  06904

Dear Bill:

This is a follow up to the brief conversation we had at the last Navigators'
Board Meeting.

Our Group has some major decisions to make during the next twelve months and I
will need all the help and advice I can get. I value your input tremendously,
and I would appreciate being able to counsel with you from time to time during
this period to help ensure we make the right calls.

I would feel much more comfortable if, in addition to the regular Directors fees
etc., I could pay you a further modest retainer of say $25,000 per annum,
payable bi-annually, this way I will not be as reluctant to come to you for
advice on topics where I know you can help me.

If this arrangement is agreeable to you I suggest we make it effective July 1.

Many thanks.

                                                          Sincerely,




TND:ac
Editorial Note on Part 1944
Editorial Note: Nomenclature changes to part 1944 appear at 80 FR 9885, Feb. 24, 2015.

§ 1944.540 Requesting TSA checks. ( a ) The initial TSA check may cover the applicant's needs for the first calendar month. If the first calendar month is a partial month, the check will cover the needs for the partial month and the next whole month.
( b ) The initial advance of TSA grant funds may not be requested simultaneously with the request for obligation of TSA grant funds. The initial advance must be requested on Form RD 440-57 in accordance with the FMI after it has been received from the Finance Office indicating that funds have been obligated.
( c ) All advances will be requested only after receipt of Standard Form 270 from the grantee. The amount requested must be in accordance with the detailed budget, including amendments, as approved by Rural Development. Standard Form 270 will not be submitted more frequently than once every 30 days. In no case will additional funds be advanced if the grantee fails to submit required reports or is in violation of the grant agreement.
98-1293.

#### Kraft Constr. Co. v. Cuyahoga Cty. Bd. of Commrs.

Cuyahoga App. No. 72095.

Pfeifer and Cook, JJ., dissent.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsDroplet sizing instrumentation used for icing research: Operation, calibration, and accuracyThe accuracy of the Forward Scattering Spectrometer Probe (FSSP) is determined using laboratory tests, wind tunnel comparisons, and computer simulations. Operation in an icing environment is discussed and a new calibration device for the FSSP (the rotating pinhole) is demonstrated to be a valuable tool. Operation of the Optical Array Probe is also presented along with a calibration device (the rotating reticle) which is suitable for performing detailed analysis of that instrument.Document ID19900002683Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeContractor Report (CR)AuthorsHovenac, Edward A.*(Sverdrup Technology, Inc. Cleveland, OH, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateAugust 1, 1989Subject CategoryInstrumentation And PhotographyReport/Patent NumberNASA-CR-182293DOT/FAA/CD-89/13E-4538NAS 1.26:182293Accession Number90N11999Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: NAS3-25266PROJECT: RTOP 505-68-1ADistribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19900002683.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
Dated: June 17, 2013 

· - · ',- · Reeve Air Alaska, LLC 

2__?47 Mistybrook Circle 

Response to Re-solicitation 

· ' · VJ/nchorage, Alaska 99502 

(907) 250-4766 

mreeve@reevecorp.com 

Reeve Air Alaska, LLC 

Proposal to Provide Essential Air Service at 

Tatitlek, Alaska 

DOCKET DOT-OST-2013-0030 

For the rate period of this docket beginning in 2013 and lasting 2 years from the 

date of commencement, Reeve Air Alaska, LLC proposes to provide passenger 

and freight service between Tatitlek (PAKA) and Anchorage International Airport 

(PANG) using an IFR equipped Piper Navajo PA-31 twin engine aircraft with up 

to 7 passenger seats. For consideration by the Department of Transportation and 

the Village of Tatitlek, Reeve Air Alaska offers two (2) options of service for 

review. 

Option 1 

Year-round, weekly service, of a single non-stop flight for an annual subsidy of 

$46,540 ($895 per flight). 

Option 2 

Year-round, weekly service, with two non-stop flights for an annual subsidy of 

$93,080 ($895 per flight) 

For further consideration: 

• Reeve's flights to Tatitlek will be non-stop flights to and from Anchorage. 

• Reserved one-way seat fare for self-paying village residents is $110.00. 

• Freight and Excess Baggage rate is $.60 per pound. 

• Reeve Air Alaska will seek to provide scheduled mail delivery to Tatitlek 

from the USPS. 

Proposed Schedule on day of flight: 

• Depart Anchorage at 1:00pm- Arrive at Tatitlek at 2:00pm 

• Depart Tatitlek at 2:15 pm- Arrive at Anchorage at 3:15 pm 

Sincerely, 

1
Opinion issued October 13, 2015

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-15-00786-CR

———————————

IN RE DERRICK LEE THOMAS, Relator

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Habeas Corpus

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relator, Derrick Lee Thomas, has filed a “Petition for Writ of Habeas 

Corpus for Bond Reduction,” contending that he is being unlawfully confined and 

restrained and the required bail is excessive.1 Relator seeks issuance of a writ of 

 

1 Relator’s petition identifies the underlying cause as Derrick Lee Thomas v. The 

State of Texas, cause number 1386629, in the 262nd District Court of Harris 

County, Texas, the Honorable Denise Bradley, presiding. This Court’s records 

reflect that a jury found relator guilty of the felony offense of possession of a 

controlled substance, namely cocaine, weighing less than one gram, and the trial 
2

habeas corpus and an order discharging him from custody, or a reduction in the 

amount of the bond.

This Court does not have “original habeas corpus jurisdiction of a bail issue” 

in a criminal case. Ortiz v. State, 299 S.W.3d 930, 932 (Tex. App.—Amarillo 

2009, no pet.) (citing TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 22.221(d) (Vernon 2004); Ex parte 

Enriquez, 2 S.W.3d 362, 363 & n.1 (Tex. App.—Waco 1999, orig. proceeding) 

(mem. op.)); see Ex parte Barnes, No. 03-13-00429-CV, 2013 WL 3723333, at *1 

(Tex. App.—Austin July 12, 2013, orig. proceeding) (mem. op.) (dismissing for 

want of jurisdiction application for writ of habeas corpus seeking release or 

reduction in appeal bond when relator was convicted of felony offense of 

aggravated assault). In criminal matters, our habeas corpus jurisdiction is appellate 

only, and we do not have original habeas corpus jurisdiction. Ex parte Denby, 627 

S.W.2d 435, 435 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 1981, orig. proceeding); see also 

Chavez v. State, 132 S.W.3d 509, 510 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 2004, no 

pet.) (citing TEX. GOV’T CODE ANN. § 22.221 (Vernon 2004)) (“A court of appeals 

does not have original habeas corpus jurisdiction in felony cases.”)

Accordingly, we dismiss the petition for want of jurisdiction.

 

court assessed his punishment at confinement for five years. See Thomas v. State, 

No. 01-14-00332-CR, 2015 WL 5076292, at *1 (Tex. App.—Houston [1st Dist.] 

Aug. 27, 2015, no. pet. h.).
3

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Jennings, Higley, and Brown.

Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
#### § 1781.23 Servicing.

Servicing will be handled in accordance with the provisions of subpart E of part 1951 of this title.
#### § 15a.455 Textbooks and curricular material.

Nothing in this part shall be interpreted as requiring or prohibiting or abridging in any way the use of particular textbooks or curricular materials.