alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE>
                                                                                Exhibit 12
KANSAS CITY POWER & LIGHT COMPANY

COMPUTATION OF RATIOS OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES

<CAPTION>



                                   1999        1998        1997        1996        1995
                                                       (Thousands)
<S>                            <C>         <C>         <C>         <C>         <C>
Net income                         $81,915    $120,722     $76,560    $108,171    $122,586

Add:
Taxes on income                      3,180      32,800       8,079      31,753      66,803
Kansas City earnings tax               602         864         392         558         958

 Total taxes on income               3,782      33,664       8,471      32,311      67,761

Interest on value of
 leased property                     8,577       8,482       8,309       8,301       8,269
Interest on long-term debt          51,327      57,012      60,298      53,939      52,184
Interest on short-term debt          4,362         295       1,382       1,251       1,189
Mandatorily redeemable
  Preferred Securities              12,450      12,450       8,853           0           0
Other interest expense
 and amortization                    3,573       4,457       3,990       4,840       3,112

 Total fixed charges                80,289      82,696      82,832      68,331      64,754

Earnings before taxes
 on income and fixed
 charges                          $165,986    $237,082    $167,863    $208,813    $255,101
Ratio of earnings to
 fixed charges                        2.07        2.87        2.03        3.06        3.94



</TABLE>
Exhibit 10.5(a) 


 


Compensation
Arrangement Dr. Richard Franklin


 


Effective
March 1, 2015, the annual compensation to which Dr. Richard Franklin is entitled under his consulting agreement with Pathfinder
Cell Therapy, Inc. has been reduced to $60,000.
#### Mary Boas, *Respondent, v.*Thomas Boas and others, Appellants.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. Opinion by Westbrook, J.
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

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

 

In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Fidelity D & D Bancorp, Inc. (the “Company”) for the year ended December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Steven C. Ackmann, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as added by § 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.               To my knowledge, the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of and for the period covered by the Report.

 
| Date:  March 12, 2008 | By:    | /s/    | STEVEN C. ACKMANN                     |
|--------------------------------------|--------|--------|---------------------------------------|
|                                 |   |   | Steven C. Ackmann,                    |
|                                 |   |   | President and Chief Executive Officer |
|                                      |        |        |                                       |  |

 

86

----
Cause No. 2015-004508-1

To the Honorable Judge: Defendants file this motion for new trial and show as follows.

Attorney’s Fees The trial court erred by awarding attorney’s fees for the following reasons. First, the Court erred by awarding attorney fees because no rule, statute, or case permits the award of attorney fees in this type of case. Second, the Court erred by awarding attorney fees because plainti ff has no pleadings to support an award of attorney fees. Third, the Court erred by awarding attorney fees because there is no ev

idence or, in the alternative, insu ffi cient evidence to support the Court’s award of attorney fees. In sum, this court did not and does not have jurisdiction over this mat

ter. Therefore, this court should grant this motion for new trial and dismiss this action.

Jimmy Ray Matthews, Jr. and Nicholas Matthews, plainti ff s In the

v. County Court at Law No. 1 Marta Carrejo Martinez and all occupants, defendants Tarrant County, Texas

Motion for New Trial

Motion for New Trial Page of 1 2 E-FILED TARRANT COUNTY, TEXAS 10/26/2015 4:21:10 PM MARY LOUISE GARCIA COUNTY CLERK BY: T.W. B.Respectfully submitted, /s/ Leigh W. Davis

___________ (Mr.) Leigh W. Davis 1901 Central Dr. Suite 708 LB 57 Bedford, TX 76021 817.868.9500 817.887.2401 (fax) State Bar No. 24029505 leighwdavis@gmail.com

Certificate of Service I certify that on October 26 , 2015, a copy of this document was served on all counsel of record in this case by electronic mail service through the elec

tronic case filing system. /s/ Leigh W. Davis

____________ (Mr.) Leigh W. Davis

Motion for New Trial Page of 2 2
#### NEW YORK BUTTON WORKS v. CRESCENT BUTTON CO. et al.

(Circuit Court, S. D. New York.

September 19, 1910.)

Patents (§ 297*) — Suit for Infringement — Preliminary Injunction.

A preliminary injunction, restraining infringement of a patent, will not be granted, although the patent has been sustained in a prior suit, which does not clearly appear to have been contested, and where on its face, as well as on the showing made, its validity appears doubtful.

[Ed. Note. — For other eases, see Patents, Cent. Dig. §§ 4S1-488; Dee. Dig. § 297.*

Grounds for denial of preliminary injunctions in patent infringement suits, see note to Johnson v. Foos Mfg. Co., 72 C. C. A. 123.]

In Equity. Suit by the New York Button Works against the Crescent Button Company and others. On motion for preliminary injunction.

Denied.

Kenyon & Kenyon, for complainant.

Paul Gross, for defendants.

HOLT, District Judge.

It is at least doubtful on these papers whether the decree against Liberman was anything more than a consent decree.' Therefore a clear case for a preliminary injunction must be made out. I think that in view of the affidavits put in by the defendants, particularly those of Hornich and Menkin, who seem disinterested witnesses, in which it is asserted that similar buttons were made and sold long before the patent was applied for, it would be improper to issue a preliminary injunction in this case.'

Moreover, I think that a question may be raised on the trial whether this button is the subject of a design patent. A design patent is based on the idea of beauty or ornamentation. I do not understand that the mere shape of a useful article, or a pleasing appearance caused by the use of a handsome material in its manufacture, is a subject of a design patent. This is a good-looking .button; but it has no ornamentation, and its fundamental purpose is utility. If a valid design patent can be taken out for this button, I do not see why one could not be taken out for'every different kind of well-made button.

But, at all events, on the proof tending to show prior use in the papers submitted, I think the motion should be denied.
(Reap. Dec. 10490)

#### Arbit Trading Company *v.*United States

Entry No. 427.

(Decided April 16, 1963)

*Tompkins & Tompkins*for the plaintiff.

*John W. Douglas,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Wilson, Judge:

Counsel for the parties have submitted the above-enumerated appeal for reappraisement for decision upon stipulation, reading as follows:

> It is hereby stipulated and agreed hy and between counsel for the Plaintiff and the Assistant Attorney General for the United States, Defendant, that the *447items marked “A” and initialed RA by Examiner Robert Abramson o,n the invoice covered by tbe above-named reappraisement appeal consists of S MM thick W.G. quality birch plywood exported from Finland on June 8, 1954, of the same kind in all material respects as the merchandise that was the subject of decisio.n, and subject to the same marketing conditions as in the ease of *United States*v. *Plywood & Door Manufacturers Corporation,*A.R.D. 133, wherein it was held that the dutiable values should be based upon the “AMFIN” price list, and that the record in said cited ease be incorporated in the record in this appeal.

> It is further stipulated and agreed that at the time of exportation the “export values” under Section 402(d) Tariff Act of 1930 (prior to the Customs Simplification Act of 1956) based upon the applicable “AMFIN” price list for the plywood under appeal, was $41.00 per 1,000 square feet, net packed, less, prorated, the items of ocean freight, insurance and consular fees as set forth on the invoice under appeal.

On the agreed facts and following the decision in the cited case, I find and hold export value, as defined in section 402(d), Tariff Act of 1930, as in effect prior to the effective date of the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the involved plywood and that such value was $41 per 1,000 square feet, net, packed, less, prorated, the items of ocean freight, insurance, and consular fees as set forth on the invoice.

Judgment will issue accordingly.
#### **EXHIBIT 21.1**

 

##### **SUBSIDIARIES OF THEREGISTRANT**

 
| **Legal name**                                                        | ** ** | **Country**        |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|------------|--------------------|
| **Websense UK Limited**                                               | ** ** | **United Kingdom** |
| **Websense Japan KK**                                                 | ** ** | **Japan**          |
| **Websense (Australia) Pty Limited**                                  | ** ** | **Australia**      |
| **Websense International Limited**                                    | ** ** | **Ireland**        |
| **Websense Holdings International Limited**                           | ** ** | **Ireland**        |
| **Websense France S.A.R.L.**                                          | ** ** | **France**         |
| **Websense Deutschland GmbH**                                         | ** ** | **Germany**        |
| **Websense Italia S.r.l.**                                            | ** ** | **Italy**          |
| **Websense Brasil  Gerenciamento e Segurança de Internet Ltda.** | ** ** | **Brazil**         |

 

----
---

Exhibit 32.1

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 Annual Report of IntelGenx Technologies Corp. (the
Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Horst
Zerbe, Principal Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. 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 and Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

|March 29, 2010 | By: | /s/Horst G. Zerbe                    
|-------------- | --- | -------------------------------------
|               |     | Horst G. Zerbe                       
|               |     | President and Chief Executive Officer
|               |     | (Principal Executive Officer)        

---
00334042 

010214518 

AUC 85 12-28 

UJSA 

1>3370 

RECJBO : 005550 

CIJIIPRA HEIR: 

TOTAL 

CREDIBAMCf 12 de Noviembre de 2015 

1211112015 06:03:20 Ron Levy SPUUOLC65 

HOTEL AND I NO ROYAl ll 0 

lER: OOOY3923 

CR CUOJAS: 01 

03/19 RRN: 006133 

AU!: IS013l 

1209, 469 

$209, 469 

us 

420943750 

015 

Hab.No.l Room No. : 0510 

No. Personas I Pax : 1 

No. Reserva I Conf No: 20498908 

nH COLLECTION 

BOGOTA • ROYAL ..\NOINO 

NIT : 800.241.641-7 

Hotel Andino Royal S A S. 

Factura de 

ventalnvoice No. 

Cajero I Cashier 

Pagina No. 1 1 

Page No. 

: 193016 

Cod. Credito . 

AIRNo. . 

: Carlos Andres Jimenez SUJEIO A UE~IFICACION DE lA DIAN 

LEUY/RON 

Cl'iptograua: 6Af3CA7DBA5AS8J[ o/o Valor Credltos Credits IUR : 8080008000 

lSI : 6800 

AID AOOOOOOOOJ1010 UISA DEBIJ 

) 

idas AguaRoyal 16% 

204,869 

4,600 

i ' 

!! ~ •. ' 

lf!lll!• ~t oil 

'"'•"·. 

I· 

Base lmpoconsumo 8 o/o 

lngreso gravado para Tare 8 o/o 

Base 2 gravada 16 o/o 

lngreso gravado para Ter 16% 

Total Base Gravable 

Exentos 

Excluldos 

Terceros 

0 

0 

3,966 

0 

3,966 

0 

0 

0 

Total= 209,469 

IMPOCONSUMO 8% 

IVA16% 

Total lmpuestos 

Total 

209,469 

209,469 

0 

205,503 

205,503 

0.00 

FIRMA Da HUESPED I GUEST SIGNATURE 

* Paquete Turistico : lncluye Alojamiento+ Internet +3 mlnutos por 

dia de llamadas naclonales o lntemacionales
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C.§1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Balanced Series, a Series of The Frontier Fund on Form 10-Q for the
period ended March 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), each of the undersigned hereby certifies, to the best of his knowledge:



| | (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 Balanced Series.
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                                                                                                           
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Robert J. Enck                                                                                                                         
|Robert J. Enck                                                                                                                             
|President and Chief Executive Officer of Equinox Fund Management, LLC, the Managing Owner of Balanced Series, a Series of The Frontier Fund
|                                                                                                                                           
|/s/ Brent Bales                                                                                                                            
|Brent Bales                                                                                                                                
|Chief Financial Officer of Equinox Fund Management, LLC, the Managing Owner of Balanced Series, a Series of The Frontier Fund              
|                                                                                                                                           
|Date: May 10, 2007
MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-11-00735-CR

Sergio Nicholas LORD,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 175th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2010-CR-8155

Honorable Mary Roman, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Phylis J. Speedlin, Justice

Rebecca Simmons, Justice

Steven C. Hilbig, Justice

Delivered and Filed: January 4, 2012

DISMISSED

On October 27, 2011, this court issued an order stating this appeal would be dismissed 

pursuant to Rule 25.2(d) unless an amended trial court certification that shows appellant has the 

right of appeal was made part of the appellate record within thirty days. See TEX. R. APP. P.

25.2(d), 37.1; see also Daniels v. State, 110 S.W.3d 174, 175-76 (Tex. App.—San Antonio 2003, 

order). Appellant did not file an amended certification. The clerk’s record does not contain a 

certification that shows the defendant has the right of appeal; to the contrary, the trial court 
04-11-00735-CR

- 2 -

certification in the record states “this criminal case is a plea-bargain case, and the defendant has 

NO right of appeal.” The clerk’s record contains a written plea bargain, and the punishment 

assessed did not exceed the punishment recommended by the prosecutor and agreed to by the 

defendant; therefore, the clerk’s record supports the trial court’s certification that defendant has 

no right of appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(a)(2). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. See

TEX. R. APP. P. 25.2(d).

PER CURIAM

DO NOT PUBLISH
## In The Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas at Texarkana

No. 06

- 18

- 00140

- CR

MICHAEL CRAWFORD, Appellant
V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 431st District Court Denton County, Texas Trial Court No. F16

- 1629

- 431

Before Morriss, C.J., Burgess and Stevens, JJ.2 

### O RDER
Our review of the court reporter’s record in this case indicates that it contains “sensitive data” as that phrase is defined in Rule 9.10 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P . 9.10(a). 1 Sensitive data includes “a driver’s license num ber, passport number, social security number, tax identification number or similar government

- issued personal identification number.” T EX
. R. A PP
. P . 9.10(a)(1). Volume seven of the reporter’s record includes a social security number. Rule 9.10(b) states , “Unless a court orders otherwise, an electronic or paper filing with the court, including the contents of any appendices, must not contain sensitive data.”
T EX
. R. A PP
. P . 9.10(b). Rule 9.10(g) provides, “A court may also order that a document be filed under seal in paper form or electronic form, without redaction.” T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 9.10(g). Therefore, because volume seven of the reporter’s record contains sensitive data, we order the clerk of this Court or her appointee, in accordance with Rule 9.10(g ), to seal the electronically filed volume seven of the reporter’s record in this case.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

BY THE COURT
Date: March 13, 2019

1 Originally appealed to the Second Court of Appeals in Fort Worth , this case was transferred to this Court by the Texas Supreme Court pursuant to Section 73.001 of the Texas Government Code. See T EX
. G OV ’ T C ODE A NN
. § 73.001 (West 2013). We are unaware of any conflict between precedent of the Second Court of Appeals and that of this Court on any relevant issue. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P . 41.3.
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section1350,**

**as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

In connectionwith the Annual Report of eAcceleration Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10-KSBfor the fiscal year ended December 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), we, Clinton L. Ballard,Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and E. Edward Ahrens, Chief FinancialOfficer of the Company, each hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section1350, that to our knowledge:

 

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

 

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

 

 
|   |  /s/  Clinton L. Ballard          |   |
|--------|----------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Clinton L.  Ballard                    |
|   | President  and Chief Executive Officer |
|   |                                   |
|   |                                   |
|   |  /s/ E.  Edward Ahrens            |   |
|   | E. Edward  Ahrens                      |
|   | Chief  Financial Officer               |
|   |                                   |
|   |                                   |
|   | Dated: March  31, 2006                 |

 

----
Exhibit 4.1



 Exhibit 4.1 
  





 
  

CERTIFICATE NUMBER SHARES COMMON STOCK $0.001 Par Value CoLucid Pharmaceuticals, Inc. CUSIP 19716T 101 INCORPORATED UNDER
THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE SEE REVERSE FOR CERTAIN DEFINITIONS This Certifies that is the owner of fully paid and nonassessable Shares of the Common Stock, $0.001 par value per share, of CoLucid Pharmaceuticals, Inc. transferable only on the
books of said Corporation in person or by duly authorized attorney upon surrender of this Certificate properly endorsed. This Certificate is not valid unless countersigned by the Transfer Agent and registered by the Registrar. Witness the facsimile
seal of the Corporation and the facsimile signatures of its duly authorized officers. Dated: S P E C I M E NCORPORATE SEAL S P E C I M E N President Secretary 







 



 
  
 THE
CORPORATION WILL FURNISH WITHOUT CHARGE TO EACH STOCKHOLDER WHO SO REQUESTS, THE POWERS, DESIGNATIONS, PREFERENCES AND RELATIVE, PARTICIPATING, OPTIONAL OR OTHER RIGHTS OF EACH CLASS OF STOCK OF THE CORPORATION AND THE QUALIFICATIONS, LIMITATIONS OR
RESTRICTIONS OF SUCH PREFERENCES AND/OR RIGHTS. The following abbreviations, when used in the inscription on the face of this certificate, shall be construed as though they were written out in full according to applicable laws or regulations: TEN
COM—as tenants in common UNIF GIFT MIN ACT Custodian (Cust) (Minor) Under Uniform Gifts to Minors Act (State) TEN ENT—as tenants by the entireties JT TEN—as joint tenants with right of survivorship and not as tenants in common
Additional abbreviations may also be used though not in the above list. FOR VALUE RECEIVED, HEREBY SELL, ASSIGN AND TRANSFER UNTO PLEASE INSERT SOCIAL SECURITY OR OTHER IDENTIFYING NUMBER OF ASSIGNEE PLEASE PRINT OR TYPEWRITE NAME AND ADDRESS,
INCLUDING POSTAL ZIP CODE OF ASSIGNEE Shares of the common stock represented by the within Certificate, and do(es) hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint Attorney To transfer the said stock on the books of the within-named Corporation with full
power of substitution in the premises. Dated X X NOTICE: THE SIGNATURE(S) TO THIS ASSIGNMENT MUST CORRESPOND WITH THE NAME(S) AS WRITTEN UPON THE FACE OF THE CERTIFICATE IN EVERY PARTICULAR WITHOUT ALTERATION OR ENLARGEMENT OR ANY CHANGE WHATEVER.
Signature(s) Guaranteed: THE SIGNATURE(S) MUST BE GUARANTEED BY AN ELIGIBLE GUARANTOR INSTITUTION (BANKS, STOCKBROKERS, SAVINGS AND LOAN ASSOCIATIONS, AND CREDIT UNIONS WITH MEMBERSHIP IN AN APPROVED SIGNATURE GUARANTEE MEDALLION PROGRAM), PURSUANT
TO S.E.C. RULE 17Ad-15.
EXHIBIT 13.2

    CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 USC ss.1350,
        AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO ss.906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

      In connection with the annual report on Form 20-F for the fiscal year
ended December 31, 2009 of Metalink Ltd. (the "Company") as filed with the U.S.
Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Commission") on the date hereof (the
"Report"), and pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, Rony Eizenshtein, Chief
Financial Officer, certify that:

      1. 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.

Date: June 29, 2010

                                                By: /s/ Rony Eizenshtein
                                                ------------------------
                                                Name:  Rony Eizenshtein
                                                Title: Chief Financial Officer