alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Case 1:12-cv-00143-RMC Document 9 Filed 09/04/12 Page 1 of 18
Case 1:12-cv-00143-RMC Document 9 Filed 09/04/12 Page 2 of 18
Case 1:12-cv-00143-RMC Document 9 Filed 09/04/12 Page 3 of 18
Case 1:12-cv-00143-RMC Document 9 Filed 09/04/12 Page 4 of 18
Case 1:12-cv-00143-RMC Document 9 Filed 09/04/12 Page 5 of 18
Case 1:12-cv-00143-RMC Document 9 Filed 09/04/12 Page 6 of 18
Case 1:12-cv-00143-RMC Document 9 Filed 09/04/12 Page 7 of 18
Case 1:12-cv-00143-RMC Document 9 Filed 09/04/12 Page 8 of 18
Case 1:12-cv-00143-RMC Document 9 Filed 09/04/12 Page 9 of 18
Case 1:12-cv-00143-RMC Document 9 Filed 09/04/12 Page 10 of 18
Case 1:12-cv-00143-RMC Document 9 Filed 09/04/12 Page 11 of 18
Case 1:12-cv-00143-RMC Document 9 Filed 09/04/12 Page 12 of 18
Case 1:12-cv-00143-RMC Document 9 Filed 09/04/12 Page 13 of 18
Case 1:12-cv-00143-RMC Document 9 Filed 09/04/12 Page 14 of 18
Case 1:12-cv-00143-RMC Document 9 Filed 09/04/12 Page 15 of 18
Case 1:12-cv-00143-RMC Document 9 Filed 09/04/12 Page 16 of 18
Case 1:12-cv-00143-RMC Document 9 Filed 09/04/12 Page 17 of 18
Case 1:12-cv-00143-RMC Document 9 Filed 09/04/12 Page 18 of 18
EXHIBIT 11


                             SUPERIOR SERVICES, INC.
                         EARNINGS PER SHARE CALCULATIONS


   The following table reconciles the number of common shares outstanding
   with the number of common shares used in computing earnings per share:

 
                                            For the Year     For the Year
                                                Ended           Ended 
                                            December 31,     December 31,
                                                1995             1996

    Common shares outstanding                   9,886,815    17,021,449

    Effect of using weighted average
    common shares during the period                45,704     (944,755)

    Effect of shares issued under
    stock options                                 223,625       367,563

    Effect of weighted average shares
    issuable upon conversion of Series
    A Preferred Stock                           3,317,890          ---
                                               ----------    ----------
    Common shares and common share
    equivalents used in computing
    earnings per share                         13,474,034    16,444,257
                                               ==========    ==========
# CE2009294EN.01010501.xml

| 3.12.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 294/105 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.12.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 294/105

---

Tuesday 8 July 2008Common authorisation procedure for food additives, food enzymes and food flavourings ***II

P6_TA(2008)0329

European Parliament legislative resolution of 8 July 2008 on the Council common position for adopting a regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a common authorisation procedure for food additives, food enzymes and food flavourings (16673/2/2007 — C6-0138/2008 — 2006/0143(COD))

2009/C 294 E/35

(Codecision procedure: second reading)

The European Parliament,

The European Parliament

having regard to the Council common position (16673/2/2007 — C6-0138/2008) (1),

1

having regard to its position at first reading (2) on the Commission proposal to Parliament and the Council (COM(2006)0423),

2

having regard to the amended proposal (COM(2007)0672),

having regard to Article 251(2) of the EC Treaty,

having regard to Rule 62 of its Rules of Procedure,

having regard to the recommendation for second reading of the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Food Safety (A6-0179/2008),

| 1. | Approves the common position as amended; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Approves the common position as amended;

| 2. | Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and Commission. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Instructs its President to forward its position to the Council and Commission.

---

(1)  OJ C 111 E, 6.5.2008, p. 1.

1

(2)  Texts adopted, 10.7.2007, P6_TA(2007)0320NRT.

2

---

Tuesday 8 July 2008P6_TC2-COD(2006)0143

Position of the European Parliament adopted at second reading on 8 July 2008 with a view to the adoption of Regulation (EC) No .../2008 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing a common authorisation procedure for food additives, food enzymes and food flavourings

(As an agreement was reached between Parliament and Council, Parliament's position at second reading corresponds to the final legislative act, Regulation (EC) No 1331/2008).

---
<PAGE>
 
                                                                      EXHIBIT 12

                      COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO
                 COMBINED FIXED CHARGES AND PREFERRED DIVIDENDS
                                  (UNAUDITED)
                     (dollars in thousands, except ratio's)
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
 
 
                                         1994     1995     1996      1997       1998
                                        ------  --------  -------  ---------  --------
<S>                                     <C>     <C>       <C>      <C>        <C>
 
Net income (loss) before taxes          $4,539  $(3,222)  $ 3,168  $(16,903)  $(4,524)
Interest expense                         3,869    5,409    14,275    15,939    12,867
                                        ------  -------   -------  --------   -------
 
  Earning before fixed charges           8,408    2,187    17,443      (964)    8,343
                                        ======  =======   =======  ========   =======
 
Preferred dividends                          -        -     2,129     3,346     6,335
Ratio of pretax income to net income      1.54     1.54      0.89      1.00      1.00
                                        ------  -------   -------  --------   -------
 
  Preferred dividend factor                  -        -     1,895     3,346     6,335
 
Fixed charges:
Interest expense                         3,869    5,409    14,275    15,939    12,867
Preferred dividend factor                    -        -     1,895     3,346     6,335
                                        ------  -------   -------  --------   -------
 
  Total fixed charges and preferred
    dividends                            3,869    5,409    16,170    19,285    19,202
                                        ======  =======   =======  ========   =======
 
  Ratio of earning to combined fixed
    charges and preferred dividend        2.17     0.40      1.08     (0.05)     0.43
                                        ======  =======   =======  ========   =======
</TABLE>
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

**CERTIFICATIONS**

I, Mark B. Knudson, certify that: 

1. I have reviewed the report on Form 10-K, as amended, of EnteroMedics 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 makethe 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 consolidated financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations andcash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 

4. The registrant’s other certifyingofficer(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)) 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, toensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated 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 theeffectiveness 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 quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case ofan annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and 

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 auditcommittee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): 

a) All significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financialinformation; and 

b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role inthe registrant’s internal control over financial reporting. 

 

Date: December 2, 2008
#### Louis Bossert, *Respondent, v.*Joseph Arnold, *Appellant*.

Judgment of County Court and order denying new trial affirmed, with costs. Opinion by

Barnard, P. J.
#### § 680.13 Purposes for “substitute” requirements.

Appointment of a “substitute principal investigator” or “substitute negotiator” ensures against unthinking violation of the restrictions on dealings with NSF officials. It serves this purpose by flagging proposals or awards affected by the restrictions and by identifying someone else with whom NSF officials can properly discuss them or negotiate over them. Designation of a substitute principal investigator while an employee is at NSF has two additional functions: it identifies another person to be responsible for the work and equipment, and it reminds all concerned that during an employee's NSF service his or her attentions should focus on NSF duties.
§ 13.111 Restricted tankerman endorsement. ( a ) An applicant may apply for a tankerman endorsement restricted to specific cargoes, specific vessels, or groups of vessels (such as uninspected towing vessels and Oil Spill Response Vessels), specific facilities, and/or specific employers. The Coast Guard will evaluate each application and may modify the applicable requirements for the endorsement, allowing for special circumstances and for whichever restrictions the endorsement will state.
( b ) To qualify for a restricted tankerman-PIC endorsement, an applicant must meet §§ 13.201 (excluding paragraph (c)(4)), 13.203, and 13.205 of this part. ( 1 ) Twenty-five percent of the service described in § 13.203(a) of this part must have occurred within the past 5 years.
( 2 ) Two of the transfers described in § 13.203(b) of this part must have occurred within the past 5 years.
( c ) To qualify for a restricted tankerman-PIC (barge) endorsement, an applicant must meet §§ 13.301 (excluding paragraph (c)(4)), 13.303, and 13.305 of this part. ( 1 ) Twenty-five percent of the service described in § 13.303(a) of this part must have occurred within the past 5 years.
( 2 ) Two of the transfers described in § 13.303(b) of this part must have occurred within the past 5 years.
( d ) To qualify for a restricted tankerman-PIC (barge) endorsement restricted to a tank-cleaning and gas-freeing facility, an applicant must— ( 1 ) Be at least 18 years old;
( 2 ) Apply on a form provided by the Coast Guard;
( 3 ) Present evidence of passing a physical and medical examination according to § 13.125 of this part;
( 4 ) Present evidence in the form of a letter, which must be dated within the 5 years prior to the application for the credential, on company letterhead from the operator of the facility stating that OSHA considers the applicant a “competent person (as designated under 29 CFR 1915.7)” for the facility and that the applicant has the knowledge necessary to supervise tank-cleaning and gas-freeing; and
( 5 ) Be capable of speaking and understanding, in English, all instructions needed to commence, conduct, and complete a transfer of cargo, and of reading and understanding the English found in the Declaration of Inspection, vessel response plans, and Cargo Information Cards.
( e ) The restricted tankerman-PIC (barge) endorsement restricted to a tank-cleaning and gas-freeing facility is valid only while the applicant is employed by the operator of the facility that provided the letter of service required by paragraph (d)(4) of this section, and this and any other appropriate restrictions will appear in the endorsement.
( f ) A restricted tankerman-PIC endorsement limited to operation on vessels inside the boundary line is not valid where STCW certification is required.
[USCG-2004-17914, 78 FR 77988, Dec. 24, 2013]
EXHIBIT 10.1

            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM



We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the previously filed
Registration Statements on Form S-8 (No 333-110696, 333-100971 and 333-11650) of
B.O.S. Better Online Solutions Ltd. ("BOS") of our report dated March 22, 2004
(except for note 1e, for which the date is January 6, 2005), with respect to the
consolidated financial statements of B.O.S. Better Online Solutions Ltd.
included in this Annual Report on Form 20-F/A for the year ended December 31,
2003.


We also consent to the incorporation by reference to such Registration
Statements of our report dated April 4, 2004 with respect to the consolidated
financial statements of Surf-Communications Solutions Ltd. included in the
abovementioned Annual Report of BOS.

                                                /S/ Kost Forer Gabbay & Kasierer

Tel Aviv, Israel                                Kost Forer Gabbay & Kasierer
February 28, 2005                               A Member of Ernst & Young Global
y 04/08/2013 10:03 FAX 202 2875108



### UNITED STATES OF AMERICA U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

FEDERAL AVIATION ADMINISTRATION WASHINGTON, 

### D.C.
IN THE MA ITER OF 

### MAGORIEN HONING & 

### HYDRAULICS

FAA DOCKET NO. [TO BE ASSIGNED] (Civil Penalty Action)



### . FDMS 

## NO,**:FA.A~2ol2-cJ9os**

## ,__**-~=,~-~"·--** FAA CASE NO. 2011WP910318



### COMPLAINANT'S WITHDRAWAL OF COMPLAINT 141002/003

Pursuant to the Rules of Practice 

### in Federal Aviation Administration Civil Penalty Actions, 

### 14 C.F.R. 

### § 13.220, Complainant, the Federal 

### Aviation Administration, hereby 

### withdraws its Complaint, filed on October 4, 2012, as a result 

### ofa settlement between the parties.

Date: AprilS, 2013 Respectfully submitted,

# JIL~:U?!v(~ Senior Attorney Enforcement Division04/08/2013 10:03 FAX 202 2875108**~** 003/003



### CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

### I hereby certify that 

### I delivered 

### by faxsimile one copy ofthe foregoing Complainant's Withdrawal ofComplaint 

### in In 

### the Matter of Magorien Honing & 

### Hydraulics, FAA Docket No. Unassigned, Case No. 2011 WP910318, to: Federal Aviation Administration 600 Independence Ave., S.W. Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2Wl000 Washington, D.C. 20591



### ..**A~.!.B~~g~P2.9.!~LCl~r_k,_~GJ;~4l0**

### __**-~' ~** **~'-'·--=-·-'--·-~=--"'-- ~-**  --'.:"-

'··FAX!**-202-:493~5142**

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin Administrative Law Judge U.S. Department ofTransportation Office ofHearings, M-20 1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) Washington, DC 20590 FAX: 202-366-7536 In addition, I hereby certify that I served a copy ofthe same by electronic mail, addressed to the following: Doug Griffith, Esq. 633 

# w. 5tll 

### st., ste. 2800 Los Angeles, CA 90071 doug@douggriffithlaw.com

Senior Attomey



### 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
ANNUAL REPORT AND FORM 10-K FOR FISCAL YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1999 AND
IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                           18282
<SECURITIES>                                      5887
<RECEIVABLES>                                    10633
<ALLOWANCES>                                       171
<INVENTORY>                                      17460
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 55234
<PP&E>                                           13538
<DEPRECIATION>                                    6742
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   62987
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            14321
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            12
<OTHER-SE>                                       47473
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     62987
<SALES>                                          58436
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 58436
<CGS>                                            36303
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    22210
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 227
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    450
<INCOME-TAX>                                        67
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                383
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       383
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.03
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.03


</TABLE>
[No. 3827.]

#### Jewel v. Sais.

1. Bill of *Exceptions*— Failure *of Party to Comply With the Orders of the Court.*Where the defeated party fails to comply with the orders of the court as to the presentation of his bill of exceptions the court of review will not require the judge of the trial court to authenticate such bill of exceptions.

2. *Appeals*— Transcript *of Record*— Instructions. Where com*527plaint is made of the denial of instructions all those given must appear in the transcript.

3. *-Defective Transcript*— Affirmation *of Judgment.*No Question being presented which could be considered by the court, the judgment of the trial court was affirmed.

*Appeal from Morgan District Court.*Hon. H. P Burke, Judge.

On motion to dismiss appeal.

Mr. James E. Jewel, *Pro se.*

Mr. John H. Reddin, Messrs. Marron & Wood, for appellee.

*Per Curiam.*

Upon a former hearing, and upon motion of appellee, defendant’s bill of exceptions was stricken from the *files.*— Jewel *v.*Sais, 123 Pac., 830. Supplementary proceedings were had in the trial court from which it is made to appear that no bill of exceptions had been settled by the judge of said court, nor presented to him to be settled or signed, and that said court now declines to grant appellant’s motion to sign and seal the same.

Appellant, having failed to comply with the rule and order of the court in the matter of presenting and filing his bill of exceptions, his motion for an order of this court commanding the trial judge to sign and seal his alleged bill of exceptions, must be denied.

Appellee renews his motion for an affirmance of the judgment. The assignments of errors on the appeal herein raise no objections that can be considered in the absence of a bill of exceptions, unless it be the errors assigned to the action of the court in *528giving instructions to the jury, and in refusing instructions offered by the defendant. Only the instructions offered and refused are preserved in the record as certified to this court. The instructions given are not before us. It is settled law in this jurisdiction that where exception is taken to a refusal to give certain instructions, all instructions actually given must be included in the transcript for review, or the errors assigned cannot be considered. *Tucker v. Parks,*7 Colo,, 62. *McQuown v. Cavanaugh,*14 Colo., 188. *Bradbury et al v. Butler et al.,*1 Colo. App., 430, 435.

Decided May 13, A. D. 1912.

Rehearing denied October 14, A. D. 1912.

For the reasons given the judgment appealed from is affirmed.
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 32

                          CERTIFICATE OF NURESCELL INC.
               CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                            PURSUANT TO SECTION 1350
               OF CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18 OF THE UNITED STATES CODE

I, Lawrence Shatsoff, President and Chief Financial Officer of Nurescell Inc.
(the "Company"), do hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350 that, to my
knowledge:

(1)      the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarter
         ended September 30, 2003, as filed with the 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; 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: NOVEMBER 10, 2003                      /S/    LAWRENCE SHATSOFF
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           PRESIDENT AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER



                                       21