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

                                                                     EXHIBIT 11



                       AMERICAN PRECISION INDUSTRIES INC.
                       COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME PER SHARE
           (Shares and dollars in thousands except per share amounts)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>                                     
                                              
                                              
                                                        Second Quarter                       Six Months
                                                             Ended                             Ended
                                                 ------------------------------    ------------------------------
                                                   June 30,         July 4,          June 30,         July 4,
                                                     1998             1997             1998             1997
                                                 -------------    -------------    -------------    -------------
<S>                                             <C>              <C>              <C>              <C>
Net Income                                           $  1,024         $  1,970         $  2,583         $  3,855
                                                 =============    =============    =============    =============
                                              
Weighted average common shares outstanding    
       Basic                                            7,462            7,365            7,453            7,341
                                              
Incremental shares from assumed conversions:  
       Stock options and warrants                         346              350              374              354
       Series B convertible preferred stock             1,539                -            1,539                -
                                                 -------------    -------------    -------------    -------------
                                              
Weighted average common shares outstanding    
       Diluted                                          9,347            7,715            9,366            7,695
                                                 =============    =============    =============    =============
                                              
                                              
Earnings per share:                           
       Basic                                            $0.14            $0.27            $0.35            $0.53
       Diluted                                          $0.11            $0.26            $0.28            $0.50
                                              
</TABLE>
No. 11-91.

#### Norris *v.*United States.

C. A. 3d Cir. Certio-rari denied.
#### § 302-9.207 What will I be reimbursed if I transport my POV from a point of origin or to a destination that is different from my authorized origin or destination?

You will be reimbursed the transportation costs you actually incur, not to exceed what it would have cost to transport your POV from your authorized origin to the authorized destination.
```

[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 128 (Monday, July 3, 2000)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 41035]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-16686]

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

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION

47 CFR Part 73

[DA-1411, MM Docket No. 00-116, RM-9877]

Digital Television Broadcast Service; Kansas City, MO

AGENCY: Federal Communications Commission.

ACTION: Proposed rule.

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

SUMMARY: The Commission requests comments on a petition filed by KMBC 
Hearst-Argyle Television, Inc. licensee of station KMBC(TV), NTSC 
Channel 9, Kansas City, Missouri, requesting the substitution of DTV 
Channel 7 for DTV Channel 14. DTV Channel 7 can be allotted to Kansas 
City, Missouri, in compliance with the principle community coverage 
requirements of Section 73.625(a) at reference coordinates (39-05-01 N. 
and 94-30-57 W.). As requested, we propose to allot DTV Channel 7 to 
Kansas City with a power of 115 and a height above average terrain 
(HAAT) of 357 meters.

DATES: Comments must be filed on or before August 21, 2000, and reply 
comments on or before September 5, 2000.

ADDRESSES: Federal Communications Commission, 445 12th Street, SW, Room 
TW-A325, Washington, DC 20554. In addition to filing comments with the 
FCC, interested parties should serve the petitioner, or its counsel or 
consultant, as follows: Mark J. Prak, Brooks, Pierce, McLendon, 
Humphrey & Leonard, Post Office Box 1800, Raleigh, North Carolina 27602 
(Counsel for KMBC Hearst-Argyle Television, Inc.).

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Pam Blumenthal, Mass Media Bureau, 
(202) 418-1600.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: This is a synopsis of the Commission's 
Notice of Proposed Rule Making, MM Docket No. 00-116, adopted June 23, 
2000, and released June 28, 2000. The full text of this Commission 
decision is available for inspection and copying during normal business 
hours in the FCC Reference Center 445 12th Street, SW, Washington, DC. 
The complete text of this decision may also be purchased from the 
Commission's copy contractor, International Transcription Services, 
Inc., (202) 857-3800, 1231 20th Street, NW, Washington, DC 20036.
    Provisions of the Regulatory Flexibility Act of 1980 do not apply 
to this proceeding.
    Members of the public should note that from the time a Notice of 
Proposed Rule Making is issued until the matter is no longer subject to 
Commission consideration or court review, all ex parte contacts are 
prohibited in Commission proceedings, such as this one, which involve 
channel allotments. See 47 CFR 1.1204(b) for rules governing 
permissible ex parte contacts.
    For information regarding proper filing procedures for comments, 
see 47 CFR 1.415 and 1.420.

Federal Communications Commission.
Barbara A. Kreisman,
Chief, Video Services Division, Mass Media Bureau.
[FR Doc. 00-16686 Filed 6-30-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
```
<PAGE>
                                                                      Exhibit 21


                        SUBSIDIARIES OF AIRPLANES GROUP AT MARCH 31, 2002


SUBSIDIARIES OF AIRPLANES LIMITED

Airplanes Bermuda Limited (Bermuda)
Airplanes Bermuda No 2 Limited (Bermuda)
Airplanes Finance Limited (Ireland)
Airplanes Funding 1 Limited (Ireland)
Airplanes Holdings Limited (Ireland)
Airplanes Jetprop Finance Limited (Ireland)
Airplanes IAL Limited (Ireland)
Airplanes IAL Finance Limited  (Ireland)
Airplanes Leasing GmbH (Austria)
Airplanes R Finance Limited (Ireland)
Airplanes III Limited  (Ireland)
Airplanes 100 Finance Limited (Ireland)
Airplanes 320 Funding Limited (Ireland)
Airplanes 320 Limited (Ireland)
Asset Leasing N.V. (Belgium)
Asset Management 2 A/S (Norway)
Castle Management A/S (Norway)
Elasis Leasing S.A.R.L. (France)
Elasis Leasing IV Limited (United Kingdom)
Emerald Aviation Investments Limited (Ireland)
Fideck S.A.R.L. (France)
Leverage Leasing S.A.R.L. (France)

SUBSIDIARIES OF AIRPLANES U.S. TRUST

AeroUSA, Inc. (Delaware, U.S.)
AeroUSA 3, Inc. (Delaware, U.S.)


Two subsidiaries of Airplanes Limited (Airplanes Aviation Limited (Isle of Man)
and Airplanes Denmark ApS (Denmark)) were liquidated during the year ended March
31, 2002.
# AGENCY:

 Federal Communications Commission. 

# ACTION:

 Final rule; announcement of effective date. 

# SUMMARY:

                         This document announces the effective date of rules published in the                         **Federal Register**                         on November 15, 1999. They related to application requirements for earth stations communicating with non-U.S. licensed space stations.                     

# EFFECTIVE DATES:

 The amendments to 47 CFR 25.137 published at 64 FR 61791 became effective on December 22, 1999. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

 Steven Spaeth, International Bureau, (202) 418-1539. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    1. On October 29, 1999, the Commission released a First Order on Reconsideration, a summary of which was published in the                     **Federal Register**                    . See 64 FR 61791, November 15, 1999. The First Order on Reconsideration streamlined the process established in the Commission's 1997 DISCO II Order, by which non-U.S. licensed fixed-satellites providing service in the conventional C-and Ku-bands may serve the U.S. market. Because the amendments to 47 CFR 25.137 imposed modified information collection requirements, the amendments could not become effective until approved by the Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”), and no sooner than December 15, 1999. OMB approved these amendments on December 22, 1999.                 

                    2. The                     **Federal Register**                     summary stated that the Commission would publish a document announcing the effective date of the rule changes requiring OMB approval. The amendments to 47 CFR 25.137 became effective on December 22, 1999. This publication satisfies the statement that the Commission would publish a document announcing the effective date of the rule changes requiring OMB approval.                 

# List of Subjects in 47 CFR Part 25

- Satellites

Federal Communications Commission.

Magalie Roman Salas, 

Secretary. 

[FR Doc. 00-1619 Filed 1-21-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
Swanson, Brian (OST). 

From: 

Sent: 

To: 

Cc: 

Subject: 

jayme Ievandoski <jayme0307@yahoo.com> 

Thursday, August 02, 2012 3:33 PM 

Devany, Dennis (OST) 

Swanson, Brian (OST) 

Rhinelander, WI 

Dear Mr. Devany & Mr. Swanson: 

1?61""-0S'r· 2.0U .. o\ 001 

In reference to flight service at Rhinelander airport. Please allow Sky West Airlines to service this 

airport as we would really appreciate their service through Delta. We do not like to drive 100 miles 

(one way) to Central Wise Airport to connect to an airflight. Your assistance in this matter will be 

appreciated. 

Thank you. 

Jim & Jayme Levandoski 

1
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________

KENNETH ANTOINE CHLOE,

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

DAVID DENT,

Defendant

GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY,

Defendant-Appellee

______________________

2024-1093

______________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the 

District of Columbia in No. 1:20-cv-03090-EGS, Judge Emmet G. Sullivan.

______________________

Before LOURIE, PROST, and STOLL, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

O R D E R

Kenneth Antoine Chloe appeals from the judgment of 

the United States District Court for the District of Columbia arising out of a private-employment dispute. In response to this court’s December 6, 2023, order to show 

Case: 24-1093 Document: 12 Page: 1 Filed: 02/05/2024
2 CHLOE v. DENT

cause, the appellee urges dismissal. Mr. Chloe urges that 

this court retain jurisdiction over the case. 

Our jurisdiction to review decisions of federal district 

courts extends only to cases arising under the patent laws, 

see 28 U.S.C. § 1295(a)(1); civil actions on review to the district court from the United States Patent and Trademark 

Office, see § 1295(a)(4)(C); or certain damages claims 

against the United States “not exceeding $10,000 in 

amount,” 28 U.S.C. § 1346(a)(2), see 28 U.S.C. § 1295(a)(2); 

28 U.S.C. § 1292(c)(1). This case is outside of that limited

subject matter jurisdiction. We may transfer to another 

court, if it is in the interest of justice, where “the action or 

appeal could have been brought at the time it was filed.” 

28 U.S.C. § 1631. Here, the court concludes that transfer 

to the United States Court of Appeals for the District of 

Columbia Circuit is appropriate. 

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

The appeal and all its filings are transferred to the 

United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia 

Circuit pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1631. 

February 5, 2024

 Date

 FOR THE COURT

Case: 24-1093 Document: 12 Page: 2 Filed: 02/05/2024
#### § 302-7.404 Are separate weight certificates required when HHG are shipped under the actual expense method and PBP&E are shipped as an administrative expense in the same lot?

Yes, separate weight certificates are required when the PBP&E and its packing allowance pushes the shipment over the net weight allowance. Otherwise, for administrative efficiency, the HHG shipment should be billed and paid for as a single shipment. If separate weight certificates are required, then the weight of PBP&E and the administrative appropriation chargeable must be listed as separate items on the bill of lading or other shipping document.
EXHIBIT 99.2

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

           I, Richard W. Lucas, as Chief Financial Officer of KSW, Inc., (the
"Company"), certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.ss.1350, as adopted by Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:

           (1) the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ending
December 31, 2002 as filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (the
"Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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:  March 31, 2003

                                     /s/ Richard W. Lucas
                                     -------------------------------------
                                     Richard W. Lucas
                                     Chief Financial Officer
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","provider_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov","author_name":"25005pwpadmin","author_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/author\/25005pwpadmin\/","title":"2021-1511: Broadcom Corporation v. Renesas Electronics - U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"PqaXoM8OfT\"><a href=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/01-14-2022-2021-1511-broadcom-corporation-v-renesas-electronics-audio-uploaded\/\">2021-1511: Broadcom Corporation v. Renesas Electronics<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/01-14-2022-2021-1511-broadcom-corporation-v-renesas-electronics-audio-uploaded\/embed\/#?secret=PqaXoM8OfT\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“2021-1511: Broadcom Corporation v. Renesas Electronics” — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit\" data-secret=\"PqaXoM8OfT\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","description":"Oral argument audio posted: Broadcom Corporation v. Renesas Electronics (mp3) Appeal Number: 2021-1511 To listen to more oral argument recordings, follow this link: Listen To Oral Arguments."}
###### Editorial Note on Part 1

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 1 appear at 63 FR 54077, Oct. 8, 1998.

#### § 1.202 Official reporter; transcript.

The Commission will designate an official reporter for the recording and transcribing of hearing proceedings as necessary. Transcripts will be transmitted to the Secretary for inclusion in the Commission's Electronic Comment Filing System.

[85 FR 63174, Oct. 6, 2020]
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 Wyeth (the Company) on Form 10-Q for
the fiscal quarter ended June 30, 2003, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on August 8, 2003 (the Report), I, Kenneth J. Martin, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as
adopted pursuant to ss. 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.



Dated:  August 8, 2003

                                By /s/         Kenneth J. Martin
                                   ------------------------------------------
                                               Kenneth J. Martin
                                         Executive Vice President and
                                           Chief Financial Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4194 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4194

  To designate the United States post office located in the Tutu Park 
 Mall in Saint Thomas, Virgin Islands, as the ``Earle B. Ottley United 
                         States Post Office''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 13, 1994

 Mr. de Lugo introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
               Committee on Post Office and Civil Service

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To designate the United States post office located in the Tutu Park 
 Mall in Saint Thomas, Virgin Islands, as the ``Earle B. Ottley United 
                         States Post Office''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The United States post office located in the Tutu Park Mall in 
Saint Thomas, Virgin Islands, shall be known and designated as the 
``Earle B. Ottley United States Post Office''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the post office referred to in section 1 
shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Earle B. Ottley United 
States Post Office''.

                                 <all>
```
**Exhibit23.2**

 

 

 

[BDOLETTERHEAD]

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS**

 

We consent to the incorporation by referencein the Registration Statements on Form S-3 (SEC File Nos. 333-123401 and333-115033), and on Form S-8 (SEC File Nos. 333-108672 and 333-108673) ofElixir Gaming Technologies, Inc. (formerly VendingData Corporation) of ourreport dated March 22, 2007, included in this amendment No. 1 to the AnnualReport on Form 10-KSB/A for the year ended December 31, 2006.

 

/s/ BDO Kendalls Audit & Assurance (VIC)Pty LTD

 

Melbourne, Austrailia

 

November 12, 2007

 

----
###### Editorial Note on Part 1

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 1 appear at 63 FR 54077, Oct. 8, 1998.

#### § 1.1501 Purpose of these rules.

The Equal Access to Justice Act, 5 U.S.C. 504 (called *the EAJA* in this subpart), provides for the award of attorney's fees and other expenses to eligible individuals and entities who are parties to certain administrative proceedings (called *adversary adjudications*) before the Commission. An eligible party may receive an award when it prevails over the Commission, unless the Commission's position in the proceeding was substantially justified or special circumstances make an award unjust, or when the demand of the Commission is substantially in excess of the decision in the adversary adjudication and is unreasonable when compared with such decision, under the facts and circumstances of the case, unless the party has committed a willful violation of law or otherwise acted in bad faith, or special circumstances make an award unjust. The rules in this part describe the parties eligible for awards and the proceedings that are covered. They also explain how to apply for awards, and the procedures and standards that the Commission will use to make them.

[47 FR 3786, Jan. 27, 1982, as amended at 61 FR 39898, July 31, 1996]
§ 302-10.202 Am I entitled to any other allowances when I transport my mobile home by POV? Yes, you are also entitled to the following allowances when you transport your mobile home by POV: ( a ) Payment of mileage for use of a POV to transport yourself and/or immediate family member(s) as provided in § 302-4.30 of this chapter; and
( b ) Preparation costs as provided in § 302-10.205.
Exhibit 32.2



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Curtis J. Parker, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge, Cotelligent, Inc.s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2003 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Annual Report on Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Cotelligent, Inc.



|                    |  |  |  |     |  |                         |  |                                                                      
|------------------- |  |  |  | --- |  | ----------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------
|                    |  |  | 
|Date: April 8, 2004 |  |  |  | By: |  | /s/    CURTIS J. PARKER
|                    |  |  |  |     |  |                         | 
|                    |  |  |  |     |  |                         |  | Curtis J. Parker Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer