alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<Page>
                                                                      EXHIBIT 11

                 STATEMENT RE COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS

                      WEIGHTED AVERAGE SHARES OUTSTANDING

<Table>
<Caption>
                                                              QUARTER ENDED
                                                              JUNE 30, 2001
                                                              -------------
<S>                                                           <C>
Shares Outstanding March 31, 2001...........................     9,966,572

Total shares outstanding June 30, 2001......................     9,966,572
                                                               ===========

Weighted average shares outstanding.........................     9,966,572
                                                               ===========

Net loss for the three months ended June 30, 2001...........   $(3,661,000)
Net loss per share, basic and fully diluted.................        $(0.37)
</Table>

<Table>
<Caption>
                                                              SIX MONTHS ENDED
                                                               JUNE 30, 2001
                                                              ----------------
<S>                                                           <C>
Shares Outstanding December, 2000...........................       9,575,763

Shares retired February 1...................................        (187,500)
Shares issued February 9....................................         600,000
Shares retired February 12..................................          (9,999)
Shares retired March 19.....................................         (11,692)
                                                                ------------

Total shares outstanding June 30, 2001......................       9,966,572
                                                                ============

Weighted average shares outstanding.........................       9,874,538
                                                                ============

Net loss for the six months ended June 30, 2001.............    $(11,059,000)
Net loss per share, basic and fully diluted.................          $(1.12)
</Table>
Exhibit (j)

            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
            --------------------------------------------------------



We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in this Registration
Statement of DWS Value Equity Trust on Form N-1A ("Registration Statement") of
our report dated April 27, 2009 relating to the financial statements and
financial highlights which appears in the February 28, 2009 Annual Report to
Shareholders of the DWS S&P 500 Plus Fund (formerly DWS Enhanced S&P 500 Index
Fund), which is also incorporated by reference into the Registration Statement.
We also consent to the references to us under the headings "Financial
Highlights", "Financial Statements" and "Independent Registered Public
Accounting Firm" in such Registration Statement.


/s/PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Boston, Massachusetts
June 23, 2009
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 204 (Wednesday, October 22, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Page 54850]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-28167]


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

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: Federal Maritime Commission.

TIME AND DATE: 10:00 A.M., October 20, 1997.

PLACE: 800 North Capitol Street, N.W., Room 1000, Washington, D.C.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTER(S) TO BE CONSIDERED: 1. Docket No. 96-20--Port Restrictions and 
Requirements in the United States/Japan Trade.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Joseph C. Polking, Secretary, 
(202) 523-5725.
Joseph C. Polking,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-28167 Filed 10-20-97; 2:38 pm]
BILLING CODE 6730-01-M
#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Michael BURGE v. Honorable Louis G. DESONIER, Jr., Judge, Section A, 24th Judicial District Court, Parish of Jefferson.

No. 62648.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Sept. 1, 1978.

In re: Michael Burge applying for writ of mandamus. Parish of Jefferson.

Application granted; except that the Court will appoint counsel to represent applicant on application for rehearing.

Previous action by this Court denying rehearing [see 359 So.2d 616] is set aside, having been improvident in light relator’s not having been represented by counsel, and in light of relator’s having timely sought a rehearing and appointment of counsel.
No. 9938.

#### Paramuthia Lodge, No. 25, Free and Accepted Masons of Athens et al. *v.*Dana.

(Decided February 5, 1907.)

Error to Circuit Court of Athens County.

*Messrs. Grosvenor, Jones & Worstell*and *Mr. PI. G. Stalder,*for plaintiffs in error.

*Messrs. Jewett & Wood; Messrs. Addison, Sinks & Babcock; Messrs. Lents, Fritter & Belcher*and *Mr. James N. Linton,*for defendant in error.

*643Judgment affirmed.

Shauck, C. J., Crew and Spear, JJ., concur.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 3765 Reported in Senate (RS)]

<DOC>

                                                       Calendar No. 424
118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 3765

  To amend the Public Health Service Act to reauthorize the Emergency 
                 Medical Services for Children program.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            February 7, 2024

Mr. Casey (for himself, Mr. Budd, Mr. Boozman, Ms. Collins, Ms. Smith, 
Mrs. Shaheen, Mr. Blumenthal, Ms. Baldwin, and Mr. Marshall) introduced 
the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee 
               on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions

                             June 18, 2024

               Reported by Mr. Sanders, without amendment

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Public Health Service Act to reauthorize the Emergency 
                 Medical Services for Children program.

    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 ``Emergency Medical Services for 
Children Reauthorization Act of 2024''.

SEC. 2. REAUTHORIZATION OF GRANTS FOR EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES FOR 
              CHILDREN.

    Section 1910(d) of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 300w-
9(d)) is amended by striking ``and $22,334,000 for each of fiscal years 
2020 through 2024'' and inserting ``$22,334,000 for each of fiscal 
years 2020 through 2024, and $24,334,000 for each of fiscal years 2025 
through 2029''.
                                                       Calendar No. 424

118th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                                S. 3765

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

  To amend the Public Health Service Act to reauthorize the Emergency 
                 Medical Services for Children program.

_______________________________________________________________________

                             June 18, 2024

                       Reported without amendment
```
Memo

Financing Marketable All Other Change in End-Of-Quarter SOMA

Need Borrowing Sources Total Cash Balance Cash Balance Redemptions

Quarter Announcement Date (1) (2) (3) (4) = (2) + (3) (5) = (4) - (1) (6) (7)

Apr - Jun

2012 Actual 129 172 5 177 48 91 0

Jul - Sep

2012 Actual 234 264 (36) 228 (6) 85 (32)

Oct - Dec

2012 Actual 291 297 1 298 7 93 (1)

Jan - Mar

2013 Actual 354 349 (8) 341 (14) 79 0

Apr - Jun

2013 Actual (73) (11) (7) (18) 56 135 0

Jul - Sep

2013 Actual 205 197 (38) 159 (46) 88 0

Oct - Dec

2013 Actual 179 264 (11) 253 74 162 0

Jan - Mar

2014 Actual 275 265 (10) 254 (20) 142 0

Apr - Jun

2014 Actual (60) (64) 1 (63) (3) 139 0

Jul - Sep

2014 Actual 176 205 (10) 195 19 158 0

Oct - Dec

2014 Actual 170 227 8 236 65 223 0

Jan - Mar

2015 Actual 268 141 3 144 (123) 100 0

Apr - Jun

2015 Actual (120) 57 (22) 35 154 254 0

Jul - Sep

2015 Actual 163 133 (26) 107 (56) 199 0

Oct - Dec

2015 Actual 212 354 (7) 347 135 333 0

Jan - Mar

2016 Actual 266 244 3 247 (20) 314 0

Apr - Jun

2016 Actual (60) (25) 14 (10) 50 364 0

Jul - Sep

2016 Actual 234 222 2 224 (10) 353 0

Oct - Dec

2016 Actual 201 255 (8) 246 46 399 0

Jan - Mar

2017 Actual 335 40 (12) 28 (307) 92 0

Apr - Jun

2017 Actual (75) 35 (22) 14 89 181 0

Jul - Sep

2017 Actual 192 189 (19) 170 (22) 159 0

Oct - Dec

2017 Actual 204 282 (8) 274 70 229 (12)

Jan - Mar

2018 Actual 374 488 (54) 435 61 290 (30)

Apr - Jun April 30, 2018 (62) 75 (66) 9 70 360 (48)

2018 Actual (43) 72 (72) 0 43 333 (48)

Forecast Revisions 19 (3) (6) (9) (27) (27) 0

Jul - Sep April 30, 2018 202 273 (81) 192 (10) 350 (66)

2018 July 30, 2018 226 329 (86) 243 17 350 (66)

Forecast Revisions 24 56 (5) 51 27 0 (0)

Oct - Dec

2018 July 30, 2018 292 440 (108) 332 40 390 (91)

Sources and Uses Reconciliation Table

Financing
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 210 (Thursday, October 30, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58761-58762]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-28769]


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

SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION


Senior Executive Service; Performance Review Board Membership

AGENCY: Social Security Administration.

ACTION: Notice of Senior Executive Service Performance Review Board 
Membership.

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

[[Page 58762]]

    Title 5, U.S. Code, Section 4314(c)(4) of the Civil Service Reform 
Act of 1978, Pub. L. 95-454, requires that the appointment of 
Performance Review Board members be published in the Federal Register.
    The following persons will serve on the Performance Review Board 
which oversees the evaluation of performance appraisals of Senior 
Executive Service members of the Social Security Administration:

Kathleen M. Adams
Eli N. Donkar
Glennalee K. Donnelly
Armando A. Gonzalez
Charlotte A. J. Hardnett
W. Burnell Hurt
Carolyn J. Shearin-Jones
Gordon M. Sherman
Barbara S. Sledge
Miguel A. Torrado

    Dated: October 21, 1997.
Paul D. Barnes,
Deputy Commissioner for Human Resources.
[FR Doc. 97-28769 Filed 10-29-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4190-29-P
Exhibit 23.01

 

 

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-3 (Nos. 333-80489, 333-104792, 333-110345, 333-112058) and Form S-8 (No. 333-112717) of FX Energy, Inc and subsidiaries of our report dated March 7, 2008 relating to the financial statements and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, which appears in this Form 10-K.

 

| /s/ | PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP |
|-----|----------------------------|

 

PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Salt Lake City, Utah

March 7, 2008
### NUMBER 13 - 18 - 00 055 - CV COURT OF APPEALS THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

IN RE GREGORY WALLACE

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Justices Rodriguez, Longoria, and Hinojosa Memorandum Opinion by Justice Rodriguez 1 By pro se petition for writ of mandamus, Gregory Wallace seeks to compel the trial court to “enforce the Default Judgment filed on January 10, 2018.” Relator contends that his “Writ in the Nature of Discovery was not Honored,” and therefore the default judgment must be enforced and “all claims, petitions, suits, [and filings] with any third party corporations regarding [relator’s] credit history [must] be dismissed and expunged.”

1 See T EX

. R. A PP . P. 52.8(d) (“When granting relief, the court must hand down an opinion as in any other case,” but when “ denying relief, the court may hand down an opinion but is not required to do so.”); T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 47.4 (distinguishing opi nions and memorandum opinions).2

Mandamus is an extraordinary remedy. In re H.E.B. Grocery Co. , 492 S.W.3d 300 , 302 (Tex. 2016) (orig. proceeding) (pe r curiam)

. Mandamus relief is proper to correct a clear abuse of discretion when there is no adequate remedy by appeal. In re Christus Santa Rosa Health Sys. , 492 S.W.3d 276 , 279 (Tex. 2016) (orig. proceeding). An abuse of discretion occurs when a trial court's ruling is arbitrary and unreasonable or is made without regard for guiding legal principles or supporting evidence. In re Nationwide Ins. Co. of Am. , 494 S.W.3d 708, 712 (Tex. 2016) (orig. proceeding); Ford Motor Co. v. Garcia , 363 S.W.3d 573, 57 8 (Tex. 2012). We determine the adequacy of an appellate remedy by balancing the benefits of mandamus review against the detriments. In re Essex Ins. Co ., 450 S.W.3d 524, 528 (Tex. 2014) (orig. proceeding); In re Prudential Ins. Co. of Am. , 148 S.W.3d 12 4, 136 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding).
The relator bears the burden of demonstrating his entitlement to mandamus relief. In re H.E.B. Grocery Co. , 492 S.W.3d at 302 ; Walker v. Packer , 827 S.W.2d 833, 840 (Tex. 1992) (orig. proceeding) ; see also Barnes v. State , 832 S.W.2d 424, 426 (Tex. App.

— Houston [1st Dist.] 1992, orig. proceeding) (“Even a pro se applicant for a writ of mandamus must show himself entitled to the extraordinary relief he seeks.”) ; s ee generally T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 52 (governing original p roceedings). This burden includes providing this Court with a record sufficient to make that showing. See Walker , 827 S.W.2d at 837; see generally T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 52.3(k) (specifying the required contents for the appendix); id. R. 52.7(a) (specifying the required contents for the record). The Court, having examined and fully considered the petition for writ of mandamus and the applicable law , is of the opinion that relator ha s not shown himself entitled to the3

relief sought. Accordi ngly, we DENY the petitio n for writ of mandamus

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 52.8(a). NELDA V. RODRIGUEZ Justice
D elivered and filed the 23rd day of January, 2018

.
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.A
                            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 on Form 10-Q for the period
ending June 30, 2004, of El Paso CGP Company (the "Company") as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Douglas L. Foshee, President and Chief Executive Officer, certify (i) that the
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and (ii) that the information
contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


                                       /s/ Douglas L. Foshee
                                       -----------------------------------
                                       Douglas L. Foshee
                                       President and Chief Executive Officer
                                       (Principal Executive Officer)

                                       December 3, 2004








A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to El Paso CGP Company and will be retained by El Paso CGP Company and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL ACTS SERIES 11-510 

________________________________________________________________________ 

SPACE COOPERATION 

 Arrangement Between 

the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

and NORWAY 

Signed at Washington and Oslo 

May 3 and 10, 2011 

 
 NOTE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

 Pursuant to Public Law 89—497, approved July 8, 1966 

(80 Stat. 271; 1 U.S.C. 113)—

“. . .the Treaties and Other International Acts Series issued 

under the authority of the Secretary of State shall be competent 

 evidence . . . of the treaties, international agreements other than 

treaties, and proclamations by the President of such treaties and 

international agreements other than treaties, as the case may be, 

therein contained, in all the courts of law and equity and of maritime 

jurisdiction, and in all the tribunals and public offices of the 

United States, and of the several States, without any further proof 

or authentication thereof.” 
NORWAY 

Space Cooperation 

 Arrangement signed at Washington and Oslo 

 May 3 and 10, 2011; 

 Entered into force May 10, 2011.
[Federal Register Volume 62, Number 210 (Thursday, October 30, 1997)]
[Notices]
[Pages 58727-58728]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 97-28699]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. RP97-373-000]


Koch Gateway Pipeline Company; Notice of Informal Settlement 
Conference

October 24, 1997.
    Take notice that an informal settlement conference will be convened 
in this proceeding on November 4, 1997, at 10:00 a.m., at the offices 
of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., 
Washington, D.C., for the purpose of exploring the possible settlement 
of the above-referenced docket.
    Any party, as defined by 18 CFR 385.102(c), or any participant as 
defined by 18 CFR 385.102(b), is invited to attend. Persons wishing to 
become a party must move to intervene and receive intervenor status 
pursuant to the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 385.214).

[[Page 58728]]

    For additional information, contact Edith A. Gilmore at (202) 208-
2158 or Sandra J. Delude at (202) 208-0583.
Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 97-28699 Filed 10-29-97; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
#### Randolph D. STANTON et al., Appellants, v. COUNTY OF SARASOTA, Appellee.

No. 69-561.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

May 19, 1971.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3633 

To amend the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 to allow the District 

of Columbia to receive Federal funding under such Act, and for other 

purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

JANUARY 22, 2024 

Mr. CARPER introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation 

A BILL 

To amend the Coastal Zone Management Act of 1972 to 

allow the District of Columbia to receive Federal funding 

under such Act, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Flood Prevention Act 

5 of 2024’’. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•S 3633 IS

1 SEC. 2. ELIGIBILITY OF DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA FOR FED2 ERAL FUNDING UNDER THE COASTAL ZONE 

3 MANAGEMENT ACT OF 1972. 

4 Section 304(4) of the Coastal Zone Management Act 

5 of 1972 (16 U.S.C. 1453(4)) is amended by inserting ‘‘the 

6 District of Columbia,’’ after ‘‘the term also includes’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
EASTERN FEDERAL LANDS ACCESS PROGRAM

Application 

No. Project/Facility Name Project Type Federal Land Accessed Applicant County

Fiscal 

Year*

DE-03 Safety & Accessibility 

Improvement Analysis

Safety Study & 

Wayfinding

National Park Service - 

First State National 

Historical Park

DE Department 

of Transportation

New 

Castle 

and Kent

2023

The Programming Decisions Committee (PDC) responsible for the Delaware Federal Lands Access Program (FLAP) has selected its multiyear 

Program of Projects. The projects identified for programming for the Delaware FLAP are listed below in no particular order and include:

Delaware Program of Projects for Federal Fiscal Years 2023-2026

* Fiscal Year Programmed/Project Schedule is subject to change

The Delaware PDC does not have a firm date for the next Call for Projects under the Access Program. Please watch our website for updates in your 

state. https://highways.dot.gov/federal-lands/programs-access

If you have any questions regarding the Call for Projects, please contact Mr. Lewis Grimm, Planning Team Leader, at 703-404-6289 or 

Lewis.Grimm@dot.gov. For questions regarding project agreements and funding, please contact Ms. Jacinda Russell, Access Program Manager, at 

571-434-1543 or Jacinda.Russell@dot.gov.
NOTICE: NOT FOR OFFICIAL PUBLICATION.

UNDER ARIZONA RULE OF THE SUPREME COURT 111(c), THIS DECISION IS NOT PRECEDENTIAL

AND MAY BE CITED ONLY AS AUTHORIZED BY RULE.

IN THE

ARIZONA COURT OF APPEALS

DIVISION ONE

STATE OF ARIZONA, Respondent,

v.

ARMANDO MEDRANO VALENZUELA, Petitioner.

No. 1 CA-CR 22-0477 PRPC

Petition for Review from the Superior Court in Maricopa County

No. CR2011-006301-001

CR2011-006241-001

The Honorable Pamela Gates, Judge

REVIEW GRANTED; RELIEF DENIED

COUNSEL

Maricopa County Attorney’s Office, Phoenix

By Krista Wood

Counsel for Respondent

Armando Medrano Valenzuela, Eloy

Petitioner

FILED 4-6-2023
STATE v. VALENZUELA

Decision of the Court

2

MEMORANDUM DECISION

Presiding Judge Paul J. McMurdie, Judge Michael J. Brown, and Judge 

Michael S. Catlett delivered the following decision.

PER CURIAM:

¶1 Petitioner Armando Medrano Valenzuela seeks review of the 

superior court’s order denying his petition for post-conviction relief, filed 

pursuant to Arizona Rule of Criminal Procedure 32. This is Petitioner’s 

third petition.

¶2 Absent an abuse of discretion or error of law, this court will 

not disturb a superior court’s ruling on a petition for post-conviction relief. 

State v. Gutierrez, 229 Ariz. 573, 577, ¶ 19 (2012). It is the petitioner’s burden 

to show that the superior court abused its discretion by denying the petition 

for post-conviction relief. See State v. Poblete, 227 Ariz. 537, 538, ¶ 1 (App. 

2011) (petitioner has burden of establishing abuse of discretion on review).

¶3 We have reviewed the record in this matter, the superior 

court’s order denying the petition for post-conviction relief, and the petition 

for review. We find the petitioner has not established an abuse of discretion. 

¶4 We grant review but deny relief.