alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
FORM 10-K
                      DYNAMIC HEALTHCARE TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

                                   EXHIBIT 11




                               STATEMENT REGARDING
                                 COMPUTATION OF
                               PER SHARE EARNINGS

                                       20

<PAGE>
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                      DYNAMIC HEALTHCARE TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
            COMPUTATION OF WEIGHTED AVERAGE COMMON SHARES OUTSTANDING
                                       AND
                     EARNINGS PER SHARE FOR THE YEARS ENDED
                        DECEMBER 31, 1994, 1995 AND 1996

                                                               YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31,


                                                          1994           1995           1996
                                                       -----------    ----------    ------------
<S>                                                    <C>            <C>           <C>
Earnings (loss) available for common shareholders:

      Net earnings (loss)                              $(4,307,500)   $ (512,623)   $(15,151,342)

      Preferred stock dividends                               --         (24,844)       (251,037)
                                                       -----------    ----------    ------------
Earnings (loss) available for common shareholders      $(4,307,500)   $ (537,467)   $(15,402,379)
                                                       ===========    ==========    ============



Weighted average common and common equivalent
  shares outstanding:


Primary:                                                 5,536,202     6,443,294       8,974,775
      Weighted average number of common shares
        outstanding
      Dilutive effect of options and warrants
        using average market price                            --            --              --
                                                       -----------    ----------    ------------

      Weighted average common and common
        equivalent shares outstanding                    5,536,202     6,443,294       8,974,775
                                                       ===========    ==========    ============


Fully diluted:
      Weighted average number of common shares
        outstanding                                      5,536,202     6,443,294       8,974,775

      Dilutive effect of options and warrants
        using the greater of average market
        price or period end market price                      --            --              --
                                                       -----------    ----------    ------------
      Weighted average common and common equivalent
        shares outstanding assuming full dilution        5,536,202     6,443,294       8,974,775
                                                       ===========    ==========    ============

Earnings (loss) per share primary and fully diluted:   $     (0.78)   $    (0.08)   $      (1.72)
                                                       ===========    ==========    ============
</TABLE>

                                       21
#### Dickie WALTMAN, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 97-3243.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Oct. 23, 1998.

Nancy A. Daniels, Public Defender; David P. Gauldin, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Robert A. Butterworth, Attorney General; James W. Rogers, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

DISMISSED. *See Robinson v. State,*373 So.2d 898 (Fla.1979).

BARFIELD, C.J., and WOLF and DAVIS, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 24

POWER OF ATTORNEY

KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, THAT EACH
PERSON WHOSE SIGNATURE APPEARS BELOW CONSTITUTES AND APPOINTS JONG S. WHANG AND
BRADLEY C. ANDERSON, AND EACH OF THEM, HIS TRUE AND LAWFUL ATTORNEYS-IN-FACT AND
AGENTS, WITH FULL POWER OF SUBSTITUTION AND RESUBSTITUTION, FOR HIM AND IN HIS
NAME, PLACE AND STEAD, IN ANY AND ALL CAPACITIES, TO SIGN AMTECH SYSTEMS, INC.S
ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2007, AND ANY
AND ALL AMENDMENTS TO SUCH ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K, AND TO FILE THE SAME,
WITH ALL EXHIBITS THERETO, AND OTHER DOCUMENTS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH WITH THE
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION, GRANTING UNTO SAID ATTORNEYS-IN-FACT AND
AGENTS, AND EACH OF THEM, FULL POWER AND AUTHORITY TO DO AND PERFORM EACH AND
EVERY ACT AND THING REQUISITE AND NECESSARY TO BE DONE IN AND ABOUT THE
PREMISES, AS FULLY AND TO ALL INTENTS AND PURPOSES AS HE MIGHT OR COULD DO IN
PERSON HEREBY RATIFYING AND CONFIRMING ALL THAT SAID ATTORNEYS-IN-FACT AND
AGENTS, OR HIS SUBSTITUTE OR SUBSTITUTES, MAY LAWFULLY DO OR CAUSE TO BE DONE BY
VIRTUE HEREOF.

|SIGNATURE                 |  | TITLE                                    |  | DATE                  
|------------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------- |  | ----------------------
|/s/ Jong S. Whang         |  | Chairman of the
      Board, President   |  | December 6,
      2007
|Jong S.
    Whang         |  | and Chief
      Executive Officer        |  |                       
|                          |  | (Principal
      Executive Officer)      |  |                       
|                         
|/s/ Bradley C. Anderson   |  | Vice President 
      Finance and Chief |  | December 6,
      2007
|Bradley C.
      Anderson |  | Financial
      Officer                  |  |                       
|                          |  | (Principal
      Financial Officer)      |  |                       
|                         
|/s/ Robert T. Hass        |  | Chief Accounting
      Officer           |  | December 6,
      2007
|Robert T.
      Hass      |  | (Principal
      Accounting Officer)     |  |                       
|                         
|/s/ Michael Garnreiter    |  | Director                                 |  | December 6,
      2007
|Michael
      Garnreiter  |  |                                          |  |                       
|                         
|/s/ Robert F. King        |  | Director                                 |  | December 6,
      2007
|Robert F.
      King      |  |                                          |  |                       
|                         
|/s/ Brian L. Hoekstra     |  | Director                                 |  | December 6,
      2007
|Brian L.
      Hoekstra   |  |                                          |  |                       
|                         
|/s/ Alfred W. Giese       |  | Director                                 |  | December 6,
      2007
|Alfred W.
      Giese     |  |                                          |  |
Exhibit 15.5

LOGO

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the incorporation in the Form 20-F of Global-Tech Appliances, Inc. for the year ended March 31, 2007 of our report, dated
August 20, 2007, with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Lite Array Holdings Limited (A Development Stage Enterprise) and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2005 and 2006, and the related consolidated statements of operations,
changes in shareholders equity, and cash flows for the period from December 20, 2004 (date of inception) to December 31, 2005, for the year ended December 31, 2006 and for the period from December 20, 2004 (date of
inception) to December 31, 2006.



|                            
|----------------------------
|LOGO                        
|Certified Public Accountants
|Hong Kong                   
|                            
|September 21, 2007          

LOGO
Case No. 10,068.

#### NEALE v. HILL.

[1 Cranch, C. C. 3.] 1

Circuit Court, District of Columbia.

April Term, 1801.

Evidence — Stamp Act — Receipt — Note pok Security op Money.

A receipt for hogshead staves to be paid at a certain price is “a note for the security of money” within the stamp act of 1797 [1 Stat. 527).

Assumpsit for goods sold and delivered. Non assumpsit, and issue.

THE COURT,

considering the following note as “a note for the security of money,” refused to suffer it to go in evidence to the jury, because it was not stamped according to the act of 6th July, 1797, §§ 1, 13 (1 Stat. 527).

The note was in these words, viz.: “Alexandria, December 15, 1798. Received of Mr. Thomas Carberry six hundred and fifty cart white-oak hhd. staves, at the rate of twenty dollars per thousand, and eighteen hundred barrel staves, at ten dollars per thousand, the which I promise to pay the said Thomas Carberry, or order, in all the month of April next ensuing. Witness my hand, day and date above written. George Hill.” Indorsed: “December 15th, 1798. Pay the within to Joseph Neale or order, and his receipt shall be good against Thomas Carberry.”
Opinion issued April 30, 2019

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-19-00192-CV

———————————

IN RE MAX F. STOVALL AND MAX F. STOVALL, P.C., Relators

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Relators, Max F. Stovall and Max F. Stovall, P.C., have filed a petition for 

writ of mandamus challenging the trial court’s March 5, 2019 order denying their 

motion for protective order and to quash discovery subpoena.

1 We deny the petition 

and lift the stay imposed by our March 20, 2019 order.

 

1 The underlying case is Jerome O. Fjeld PLLC v. Max F. Stovall and Max F. Stovall, 

P.C., cause number 2017-34723, pending in the 133rd District Court of Harris 

County, Texas, the Honorable Jaclanel McFarland presiding.
2

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Higley, and Landau.
No. 46533.

#### Protests 987737-G, etc., of Lamborn & Co. et al. (Milwaukee, etc.).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
No. 54387.

#### Bohemian Distributing Co. *v.*United States,

protest 115712-K (Los Angeles).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

For the reasons stated in *Austin, Nichols & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(22 Cust. Ct. 33, C. D. 1155), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
II 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 2087 

To clarify the meaning of ‘‘produced’’ for purposes of limitations on the 

procurement by the Department of Defense of specialty metals within 

the United States. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 9, 2012 

Mr. BROWN of Ohio (for himself, Ms. KLOBUCHAR, Mr. FRANKEN, Mrs. 

GILLIBRAND, Mr. SCHUMER, Mr. CASEY, and Mrs. HAGAN) introduced 

the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee 

on Armed Services 

A BILL 

To clarify the meaning of ‘‘produced’’ for purposes of limitations on the procurement by the Department of Defense 

of specialty metals within the United States. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘United States Steel 

5 and Security Act of 2012’’. 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 2087 IS

1 SEC. 2. ADDITIONAL DEFINITION RELATING TO PRODUC2 TION OF SPECIALTY METALS WITHIN THE 

3 UNITED STATES. 

4 Section 2533b(m) of title 10, United States Code, is 

5 amended by adding at the end the following new para6 graph: 

7 ‘‘(11) The term ‘produced’, as used in sub8 sections (a) and (b), means melted, or processed in 

9 a manner that results in physical or chemical prop10 erty changes that are the equivalent of melting. The 

11 term does not include finishing processes such as 

12 rolling, heat treatment, quenching, tempering, grind13 ing, or shaving.’’. 

Æ 


pwalker on DSK7TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### In the Matter of Raymond Griffin et al., Petitioners, *v.*Suffolk County Civil Service Commission et al., Respondents.

Supreme Court, Special Term, Suffolk County,

March 14, 1966.

*Meyer & Weasier*for petitioners. *George W. Percy, Jr., County Attorney (Stanley Corwin*of counsel), for respondents.

Jack Stanislaw, J.

These three petitioners took and passed the written examination of the Suffolk County Civil Service Commission for the position -of Patrolman for the ‘County Police Department. However, they all failed the subsequent medical examination because of high blood pressure and, in the case of petitioner G-riffin, defective vision. All requested an appeal of the findings of the medical examination. In the past, such appeals had been granted to the extent of directing appellants to an independent physician whose decision would then be deemed final. In this instance, that appeal procedure was not followed. Petitioners were told simply that the Commission, in the exercise of its discretion, had decided to abrogate this medical appeal procedure.

This is an article 78 proceeding brought to review the commission’s denial of the “usual” procedure, and to direct the granting of their appeal to the extent of a new or further medical examination. Bespondent, citing the urgent need for the establishment of an eligible list, defends its refusal to follow former procedure as neither arbitrary, capricious, nor beyond the lawful exercise of its discretionary powers.

*563Although petitioners have indicated their medical qualifications, based on examinations made independently after those of the respondent, it is not disputed that the results of the Commission's examinations are accurate. The official tests did disqualify the petitioners (though the adverse results are conceivably attributable to other than strictly medical or physical reasons). That the Commission did not then follow prior liberal medical appeals procedures is not a sufficient basis for the relief sought here and now. *(Matter of Eisig*v. *Conway,*198 Misc. 770.) The petition is dismissed.
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2100 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 2100

  To suspend sales of petroleum products from the Strategic Petroleum 
               Reserve until certain conditions are met.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           February 13, 2012

  Mr. Vitter (for himself, Mr. Hoeven, and Mr. Lugar) introduced the 
 following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
                      Energy and Natural Resources

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To suspend sales of petroleum products from the Strategic Petroleum 
               Reserve until certain conditions are met.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Strategic Petroleum Supplies Act''.

SEC. 2. LIMITATION ON SALES FROM THE STRATEGIC PETROLEUM RESERVE.

    (a) In General.--Except as provided in subsection (b), the 
Administration shall not authorize a sale of petroleum products from 
the Strategic Petroleum Reserve established under part B of title I of 
the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (42 U.S.C. 6231 et seq.) until 
the date on which all permits necessary under Executive Order 13337 (3 
U.S.C. 301 note; relating to issuance of permits with respect to 
certain energy-related facilities and land transportation crossings on 
the international boundaries of the United States) for the Keystone XL 
pipeline project application filed on September 19, 2008 (including 
amendments) have been issued.
    (b) Exception.--Subsection (a) shall not affect any obligations of 
the United States under the international energy program.
                                 <all>
```
Before the Third Division,

December 3, 1942

No. 47768.

#### Protest 966661-G of Kwong Kee Jan & Co. (San Francisco).

Opinion by

Cline, J.

It was stipulated “that the merchandise consists of whole ducks, packed in tins covered with uncooked milled rice and excelsior; and that the rice being impregnated with oil is not used.” *Wa Chong Co.*v. *United States*(61 Treas. Dec. 1118, T. D. 45695), *Von Bremen, Asche*v. *United States*(57 Treas. Dec. 679, T. D. 44000), and *Peabody*v. *United States*(13 Ct. Cust. Appls 80, T. D. 40935), cited by counsel for plaintiff, were held not applicable to the case at bar as *456the collector did not assess duty on the rice at the rate applicable to the ducks but at the rate of duty applicable to rice. The record did not show that the rice is of no value. As rice is enumerated in paragraph 727, the claim that it is a nonenumerated manufactured article was found to have no merit. On the record presented, the protest was overruled.
#### R. J. Saunders & Co., Inc. *v.*United States

No. 6945.

Entry No. 723747, etc.

Invoices dated Kendal, England, October 1, 1941, etc.

Certified October 3, 1941, etc.

Entered at New York, N. Y., November 10, 1941, etc.

(Decided March 3, 1947)

*Lane & Wallace*and *Lane, Young & Fox*for the plaintiff.

*Paul P. Rao,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Cole, Judge (Abstract):

These appeals for reappraisement of various items of merchandise concern the so-called British purchase tax, described in the law of the United Kingdom entitled, “Finance (No. 2) Act 1940 3 & 4 Geo. 6 Ch. 48.” The said tax was held not to be an item to be included in foreign value as defined in section 402 (c) of the Tariff Act of 1930 as amended by the Customs Administrative Act of 1938 (19 U. S. C. § 1402 (c)). *United States*v. *Wm. S. Pitcairn Corp.,*33 C. C. P. A. 183, C. A. D. 334.

Undisputed facts establish that the proper basis for appraisement of the instant merchandise is export value, section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U. S. C. § 1402 (d)), and that such statutory values for the articles in question are the appraised values, less the additions made by the importer on entry because of advances by the appraiser in similar cases.
EXHIBIT 24.1
                         Consent of Independent Auditors


We consent to the incorporation by reference in:

-  Form S-3 (Registration No. 333-647) dated February 2, 1996 and related
   Prospectus
-  Form S-3 (Registration No. 33-63123) dated October 2, 1995 and related
   Prospectus
-  Form S-8 (Registration No. 33-71786) dated November 15, 1993 pertaining to 
   1994 Employee Stock Purchase Plan
-  Form S-8 (Registration No. 33-66992) dated August 3, 1993 pertaining to 1993
   Stock Option Plan
-  Form S-8 (Registration No. 33-66952) dated August 3, 1993 pertaining to 1991
   Non-Employee Directors' Stock Option Plan
-  Form S-8 (Registration No. 33-40391) dated May 6, 1991 pertaining to 
   Director Stock Option Grant
-  Form S-8 (Registration No. 33-28662) dated May 11, 1989 pertaining to 1983 
   Stock Option Plan
-  Form S-8 (Registration No. 33-26833) dated February 3, 1989 pertaining to 
   1984 Employee Stock Participation Plan

of our report dated February 9, 1996, with respect to the consolidated financial
statements  of Imatron  Inc.  included in the Annual  Report on Form 10K for the
year ended December 31, 1995.


                                                    ERNST & YOUNG LLP


San Francisco, California
March 26, 1996

<PAGE>
#### H. S. Dorf *&*Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States

No. 6546.

Entry No. 00876, etc.

Invoices dated London, England, July 1944, etc.

Certified July 1944, etc.

Entered at New York, N. Y., August 15, 1944, etc.

(Decided November 25, 1946)

*John D. Rode*for the plaintiffs.

*Paul P. Rao,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Oliver, Presiding Judge:

The appeals for reappraisement listed in schedule A, hereto attached and made a part hereof, have been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation of counsel for the parties hereto:

(Stipulation omitted.)

On the agreed facts I find the export value, as that value is defined in section 402 (d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for the determination of the value of the merchandise here involved, and that such values are the appraised values, less the additions made by the importers on entry because of advances by the appraiser in similar cases.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 24.1



                                POWER OF ATTORNEY

         Each of the undersigned, being a Member of the Board of Managers of
Advanced Accessory Systems, LLC (the "Registrant"), hereby severally constitutes
and appoints Terence C. Seikel, the Registrant's Chief Executive Officer, with
full powers of substitution and resubstitution, his true and lawful attorney,
with full powers to sign for him, in his name, in the capacities indicated
below, (a) the annual report of the Registrant for the fiscal year ending
December 31, 2000 on Form 10-K and (b) a registration statement on Form S-4, and
any and all amendments to such Form 10-K and Form S-4, and to file or cause to
be filed the same, with all exhibits thereto and other documents in connection
therewith, with the Securities and Exchange Commission, granting unto said
attorney, full power and authority to do and perform each and every act and
thing requisite and necessary to be done in connection therewith, as fully to
all intents and purposes said attorney might or could do in person, and hereby
ratifying and confirming all that said attorney, or his substitute or
substitutes, shall do or cause to be done by virtue of this Power of Attorney.
This power of attorney may be executed in separate original or facsimile
counterparts.













<PAGE>   2


         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned have executed this instrument this
12th day of March, 2001.



                                      /s/ F. ALAN SMITH
                                -----------------------------------
                                F. Alan Smith



                                      /s/ BARRY BANDICCI
                                -----------------------------------
                                Barry Banducci



                                      /s/ RICHARD E. BORGHI
                                -----------------------------------
                                Richard E. Borghi



                                      /s/ GERARD J. BRINK
                                -----------------------------------
                                Gerard Jacobus Brink



                                      /s/ GERRIT DE GRAAF
                                -----------------------------------
                                Gerrit de Graaf



                                      /s/ DONALD J. HOFMANN
                                -----------------------------------
                                Donald J. Hofmann



                                      /s/ BRYAN FLETCHER
                                -----------------------------------
                                Bryan Fletcher