alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE>
                                                                    Exhibit 11.1
                           Family Bargain Corporation
                    Computation of Net Loss Per Common Share
                                   (Unaudited)



                                      3 Months Ended
                                      --------------
<CAPTION>                                    
                                 April 27,        May 3,
                                   1996            1997
                                   ----            ----

The Computation of net (loss)
available & adjusted shares
outstanding follows:
<S>                              <C>            <C>
Net income (loss)                $(1,558,000)   $(1,360,000)

Less: Preferred stock dividends
Series A                         $  (854,000)   $  (864,000)
Series B                         $        -     $  (656,000) 
                                 ------------   ------------

Net (loss) used for primary and
diluted computation              $(2,412,000)   $(2,880,000)
                                 ------------   ------------

Weighted average number of
common shares outstanding          4,040,034      4,818,076

Add:
Assumed exercise of those options
that are common stock equivalents

Assumed exercise of convertible
preferred stock                  ____________   ____________

Adjusted shares outstanding,
used for primary & fully
diluted computation                4,040,034      4,818,076
                                 ------------   ------------

Net loss applicable to common
stock per common & common
share equivalent                 $     (0.60)   $     (0.60)
                                 ------------   ------------
</TABLE>
                                     - 10 -
# C_2015414EN.01003101.xml

| 14.12.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 414/31 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.12.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 414/31

---

Judgment of the General Court of 23 October 2015 — David Bonney v OHIM — Bruno (ATHEIST)

(Case T-714/14) (1)

1

((Community trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the Community word mark ATHEIST - Earlier national word mark athé - Relative ground for refusal - Article 8(1)(b) and (2) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009))

(2015/C 414/40)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: David Bonney (London, United Kingdom) (represented by: D. Farnsworth, Solicitor)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: initially by L. Rampini, and subsequently by D. Walicka, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM: Vanessa Bruno (Paris, France)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fourth Board of Appeal of OHIM of 5 August 2015 (Case R 803/2013-4), relating to opposition proceedings between Ms Vanessa Bruno and Mr David Bonney.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Mr David Bonney to bear his own costs and to pay those incurred by Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM). |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Mr David Bonney to bear his own costs and to pay those incurred by Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (OHIM).

---

(1)  OJ C 431, 1.12.2014.

1

---
# C_2015254EN.01002402.xml

| 3.8.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 254/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.8.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 254/24

---

Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Single Judge Chamber) of 25 June 2015 — Mikulik v Council

(Case F-67/14) (1)

1

((Civil Service - Officials - Probationary period - Extension of probationary period - Dismissal at the end of the probationary period - Probation carried out under irregular conditions))

(2015/C 254/27)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Filip Mikulik (Prague, Czech Republic) (represented by: M. Velardo, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Council of the European Union (represented by: M. Bauer and M. Veiga, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of the decision to dismiss the applicant at the end of his probationary period and for compensation for the non-material harm allegedly suffered.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Mr Mikulik to bear his own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the Council of the European Union. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Mr Mikulik to bear his own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the Council of the European Union.

---

(1)  OJ C 380, 27.10.2014, p. 26.

1

---
# C_2016392EN.01002402.xml

| 24.10.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 392/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.10.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 392/24

---

Judgment of the General Court of 8 September 2016 — Goldfish and Others v Commission

(Case T-54/14) (1)

1

((Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Belgian, German, French and Dutch markets in North Sea shrimps - Decision finding an infringement of Article 101 TFEU - Price-fixing and allocation of sales volumes - Admissibility of evidence - Use of secret recordings of telephone conversations as evidence - Assessment of ability to pay - Unlimited jurisdiction))

(2016/C 392/28)

Language of the case: Dutch

Parties

Parties

Applicants: Goldfish BV (Zoutkamp, Netherlands), Heiploeg BV (Zoutkamp), Heiploeg Beheer BV (Zoutkamp) and Heiploeg Holding BV (Zoutkamp) (represented by: P. Glazener and B. Winters, lawyers)

Applicants:

Defendant: European Commission (represented initially by: F. Ronkes Agerbeek and P. Van Nuffel, and subsequently by: P. Van Nuffel and H. van Vliet, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application based on Article 263 TFEU and asking, first, for annulment of Commission Decision C(2013) 8286 final of 27 November 2013 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU (Case AT.39633 — Shrimps), in so far as it concerns the applicants, and, secondly, for reduction in the amount of the fines imposed on those applicants.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Goldfish BV, Heiploeg BV, Heiploeg Beheer BV and Heiploeg Holding BV to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Goldfish BV, Heiploeg BV, Heiploeg Beheer BV and Heiploeg Holding BV to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 71, 8.3.2014.

1

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                             451
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               196,782
<PP&E>                                         864,519
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,115,265
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,315,929
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         9,674
<OTHER-SE>                                 (1,268,346)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,115,265
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 6,075
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                5,169,786
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                           (2,278,895)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           (323,638)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (7,766,244)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   (2,400)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (7,768,644)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (7,768,644)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.84)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
# C_2015363EN.01004801.xml

| 3.11.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 363/48 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.11.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 363/48

---

Judgment of the Civil Service Tribunal (Second Chamber) of 22 September 2015 — Silvan v Commission

(Case F-83/14) (1)

1

((Civil Service - Officials - 2013 promotion procedure - Decision not to promote the applicant - Articles 43 and 45(1) of the Staff Regulations - Commission GIP - Plea of illegality - Comparison of the merits - Account taken of the staff assessment reports - Lack of marks awarded or analytical assessments - Wording of the comments))

(2015/C 363/57)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Juha Tapio Silvan (Brussels, Belgium) (represented initially by: D. de Abreu Caldas, M. de Abreu Caldas and J.-N. Louis, lawyers, and subsequently by: J.-N. Louis and N. de Montigny, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: C. Berardis-Kayser and G. Berscheid, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of the decision not to promote the applicant to the next grade (AST 10) in the European Commission’s 2013 promotion procedure.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Tribunal:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Mr Silvan to bear his own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Commission. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Mr Silvan to bear his own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Commission.

---

(1)  OJ C 7, 12.1.2015, p. 47.

1

---
<PAGE>   1



                                                                     EXHIBIT 5.1


                                PERKINS COIE LLP

          1211 SW FIFTH AVENUE, SUITE 1500, PORTLAND, OREGON 97204-3715
                 TELEPHONE: 503 727-2000 FACSIMILE: 503 727-2222

                                 April 22, 1999



WebTrends Corporation
621 S.W. Morrison St., Suite 1300
Portland, Oregon 97205

        Re:  Registration Statement on Form S-8

Ladies and Gentlemen:

        We have acted as counsel to you in connection with the preparation of a
Registration Statement on Form S-8 (the "Registration Statement") under the
Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the "Act"), that you are filing with the
Securities and Exchange Commission with respect to the reoffering and resale of
37,678 shares of Common Stock, without par value (the "Shares") issued pursuant
to the WebTrends Corporation 1997 Stock Incentive Compensation Plan (the
"Plan").

        Based upon and subject to the foregoing, we are of the opinion that the
Shares issued pursuant to the Plan have been duly authorized and that such
Shares are validly issued, fully paid and nonassessable.

        We hereby consent to the filing of this opinion as an exhibit to the
Registration Statement. In giving such consent, we do not admit that we are in
the category of persons whose consent is required under Section 7 of the Act.

                                       Very truly yours,



                                       /s/ Perkins Coie LLP
#### § 607.7 Establishment registration and product listing of blood banks and other firms manufacturing human blood and blood products.

All owners or operators of establishments that engage in the manufacturing of blood products are required to register, pursuant to section 510 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act. Registration and listing of blood products must comply with this part. Registration does not permit any blood bank or similar establishment to ship blood products in interstate commerce.

[81 FR 60222, Aug. 31, 2016]
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 8 (Wednesday, January 13, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 1784-1785]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-448]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding 
Companies

    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for 
approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 
1841 et seq.) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR Part

[[Page 1785]]

225), and all other applicable statutes and regulations to become a 
bank holding company and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, 
control of, or the power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding 
company and all of the banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank 
holding company, including the companies listed below.
    The applications listed below, as well as other related filings 
required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the 
Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The application also will be available 
for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested 
persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated 
in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the 
acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether 
the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards 
in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise noted, 
nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United States. 
Additional information on all bank holding companies may be obtained 
from the National Information Center website at www.ffiec.gov/nic/.
    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these 
applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the 
offices of the Board of Governors not later than February 5, 2010.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of San Francisco (Tracy Basinger, Director, 
Regional and Community Bank Group) 101 Market Street, San Francisco, 
California 94105-1579:
    1. BW Acquisition, LLC, and Teach and Save, LLC (as a controlling 
owner of BW Acquisition, LLC), both of Fountain Green, Utah, to become 
bank holding companies by acquiring 57.7 percent of the voting shares 
of Utah Community Bancorp and thereby indirectly acquire Utah Community 
Bank, both of Sandy, Utah.



    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, January 8, 
2010.
Robert deV. Frierson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 2010-448 Filed 1-12-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-S
§ 582.1033 Citric acid. ( a ) *Product.* Citric acid.
( b ) *Conditions of use.* This substance is generally recognized as safe when used in accordance with good manufacturing or feeding practice.
§ 310.4 Biologics; products subject to license control. ( a ) If a drug has an approved license under section 351 of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 262 *et seq.*) or under the animal virus, serum, and toxin law of March 4, 1913 (21 U.S.C. 151 *et seq.*), it is not required to have an approved application under section 505 of the act.
( b ) To obtain marketing approval for radioactive biological products for human use, as defined in § 600.3(ee) of this chapter, manufacturers must comply with the provisions of § 601.2(a) of this chapter.
[64 FR 56448, Oct. 20, 1999, as amended at 70 FR 14981, Mar. 24, 2005]
§ 601.9 Licenses; reissuance. ( a ) *Compliance with requirements.* A biologics license, previously suspended or revoked, may be reissued or reinstated upon a showing of compliance with requirements and upon such inspection and examination as may be considered necessary by the Director, Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research or the Director, Center for Drug Evaluation and Research.
( b ) *Exclusion of noncomplying location.* A biologics license, excluding a location or locations that fail to comply with the requirements in this chapter, may be issued without further application and concurrently with the suspension or revocation of the license for noncompliance at the excluded location or locations.
( c ) *Exclusion of noncomplying product(s).* In the case of multiple products included under a single biologics license application, a biologics license may be issued, excluding the noncompliant product(s), without further application and concurrently with the suspension or revocation of the biologics license for a noncompliant product(s).
[64 FR 56451, Oct. 20, 1999, as amended at 70 FR 14983, Mar. 24, 2005]
#### § 1250.61 Inspection and approval.

The Commissioner of Food and Drugs may inspect any such areas to determine whether they shall be approved. He may base his approval or disapproval on investigations made by representatives of State departments of health.

[40 FR 5624, Feb. 6, 1975, as amended at 48 FR 11432, Mar. 18, 1983]
EXHIBIT 32.2

                            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 of CEC  Entertainment,  Inc. (the
"Company")  on Form 10-Q for the  quarter  ended  July 3, 2005 as filed with the
Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof (the  "Report"),  the
undersigned  certifies,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:


     (1)  The Report fully  complies with the  requirements  of Section 13(a) or
          15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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



                                            /s/ Christopher D. Morris
                                            ------------------------------
                                            Christopher D. Morris
                                            Chief Financial Officer
                                            August 11, 2005



A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided to CEC  Entertainment,  Inc. and will be retained by CEC Entertainment,
Inc. and furnished to the Securities  and Exchange  Commission or its staff upon
request.
Office for Domestic Preparedness 

U.S. Department of Homeland Security 

Washington, DC 20531

ODP Information Bulletin 

No. 162 April 25, 2005 

TO: All State Administrative Agency Heads 

 All State Administrative Agency Points of Contact 

 All State Administrative Agency Exercise Points of Contact 

 All Urban Area Security Initiative Points of Contact 

 All State Homeland Security Directors 

 All State Emergency Management Directors 

 All Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program Newsletter Recipients 

 

FROM: Matt Mayer 

 Acting Executive Director 

 

SUBJECT: Improvised Explosive Device (IED) exercise requirements 

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Office for Domestic Preparedness (DHS/ODP), is pleased to 

announce an update on the FY ’05 Improvised Explosive Device (IED) requirement. In order to gain 

compliance with the FY ’05 Homeland Security Grant Program (HSGCP), States and Urban Area 

Security Initiatives (UASI) are required to conduct one (1) operations-based exercise involving the IED 

scenario as described in the FY ’05 HSGCP. Previous guidance required two (2) discussion-based and 

one (1) operations-based exercise. 

Guidance on specific exercise requirements will be forthcoming. States and UASIs are not required to 

start planning for this exercise until this guidance is released. 

For questions or additional information, please contact the ODP Helpline at 1-800-368-6498.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 7500 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 7500

To amend the Defense Production Act of 1950 to allow an Indian Tribe to 
 request CFIUS review of certain transactions between the Indian Tribe 
              and foreign persons, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 29, 2024

Mr. Luetkemeyer (for himself and Mrs. Peltola) introduced the following 
bill; which was referred to the Committee on Financial Services, and in 
addition to the Committees on Energy and Commerce, and Foreign Affairs, 
for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case 
for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of 
                        the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Defense Production Act of 1950 to allow an Indian Tribe to 
 request CFIUS review of certain transactions between the Indian Tribe 
              and foreign persons, and for other purposes.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. REQUESTS BY INDIAN TRIBES FOR CFIUS REVIEW.

    Section 721(a)(4) of the Defense Production Act of 1950 (50 U.S.C. 
4565(a)(4)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
                    ``(G) Requests by indian tribes for review of 
                transactions.--Upon the written request of an Indian 
                Tribe (as defined in section 4(e) of the Indian Self-
                Determination and Education Assistance Act, (25 U.S.C. 
                5304(e))) with respect to a transaction between such 
                Indian Tribe and a foreign person (other than an Indian 
                Tribe), this section shall apply--
                            ``(i) to such transaction in the same 
                        manner as this section applies to a covered 
                        transaction; and
                            ``(ii) to the business or real estate that 
                        is the subject of such transaction in the same 
                        manner as this section applies to a United 
                        States business or real estate located in the 
                        United States.''.
                                 <all>
```