alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>  27

                                  EXHIBIT 11.1

             Statement Regarding Computation of Per Share Earnings


<PAGE>  28

Computation of Earnings Per Share
---------------------------------

The following formula was used to calculate the earnings per share,
Consolidated Statements of Income for the three and six months ended June 30,
2000 and 1999, included in this report as Exhibit 13.3.


Earnings Per Share

Net Income /
Weighted average shares of common stock outstanding for the period

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                 Three months ended
                                      June 30,
                                 2000            1999
                               -------         -------
<S>                             <C>            <C>
Weighted Average
Shares Outstanding              1,508,526      1,508,526

Net Income                        584,860        744,190

Per Share Amount                    .39            .49

</TABLE>
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                  Six months ended
                                      June 30,
                                 2000            1999
                               -------         -------
<S>                             <C>            <C>
Weighted Average
Shares Outstanding              1,508,526      1,508,526

Net Income                      1,144,403      1,292,406

Per Share Amount                    .76            .86

</TABLE>

No common stock equivalents exist.
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 799 

To amend the Fair Credit Reporting Act to prohibit certain persons from 

furnishing negative credit information of furloughed employees, and for 

other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 25, 2019 

Mr. MEEKS (for himself, Mr. BEYER, Ms. NORTON, Ms. KELLY of Illinois, 

Ms. JACKSON LEE, Mr. LANGEVIN, Mr. RYAN, Mr. BROWN of Maryland, 

Mr. VARGAS, Mrs. WATSON COLEMAN, Mr. GREEN of Texas, Ms. 

WASSERMAN SCHULTZ, Mr. DESAULNIER, Mr. HECK, Ms. DELAURO, 

Mr. QUIGLEY, and Mr. PERLMUTTER) introduced the following bill; which 

was referred to the Committee on Financial Services 

A BILL 

To amend the Fair Credit Reporting Act to prohibit certain 

persons from furnishing negative credit information of 

furloughed employees, 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 ‘‘Federal Worker Credit 

5 Protection Act of 2019’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
2 

•HR 799 IH

1 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON FURNISHING NEGATIVE CREDIT 

2 INFORMATION OF FURLOUGHED EMPLOY3 EES. 

4 Section 623(a)(1) of the Fair Credit Reporting Act 

5 (15 U.S.C. 1681s–2(a)(1)) is amended by adding at the 

6 end the following new subparagraph: 

7 ‘‘(F) REPORTING INFORMATION OF FUR8 LOUGHED EMPLOYEES.— 

9 ‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding 

10 any other provision of this section and 

11 upon request of a furloughed employee, a 

12 person that furnishes information to any 

13 consumer reporting agency may not pro14 vide negative credit information of such 

15 furloughed employee to a consumer report16 ing agency if the action or inaction to 

17 which such negative credit information re18 lates originated, and was rectified, during 

19 the period beginning 30 days before a 

20 shutdown and ending 90 days after such 

21 shutdown. 

22 ‘‘(ii) NOTIFICATION.—With respect to 

23 any negative credit information described 

24 in clause (i) and upon request of the fur25 loughed employee to which such negative 

26 credit information relates, a person that 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
3 

•HR 799 IH

1 furnishes information to any consumer re2 porting agency shall notify a consumer re3 porting agency that the action or inaction 

4 to which such negative credit information 

5 relates occurred during the period de6 scribed in clause (i). 

7 ‘‘(iii) DEFINITIONS.—For purposes of 

8 this subparagraph— 

9 ‘‘(I) the term ‘furloughed em10 ployee’ means— 

11 ‘‘(aa) a Federal or District 

12 of Columbia employee who is fur13 loughed or excepted from fur14 lough during a shutdown; and 

15 ‘‘(bb) a Federal contractor 

16 who, during a shutdown, is not 

17 receiving pay by reason of such 

18 shutdown; and 

19 ‘‘(II) the term ‘shutdown’ means 

20 any lapse in appropriations beginning 

21 on or about December 22, 2018.’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42 with BILLS
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 31.2

CERTIFICATION

I, Harry Bergman, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of The First Republic
Corporation of America;

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 make the 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 financial statements, and other financial
information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the
financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as
of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrant's other certifying officer 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 we have:

a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure 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 the effectiveness
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 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 and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrant's auditors and the audit committee of registrant's board of directors
(or persons performing the equivalent function):

a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal controls over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and

b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls over
financial reporting.

May 25, 2004                      /s/ Harry Bergman
                                  ------------------------------------
                                  Harry Bergman
                                  Chief Financial and Chief Accounting Officer
EXHIBIT 21.1
                                                                                
                                                                                
                                                                                
                                                                                
                                                                                
                         INDEPENDENT BANKSHARES, INC.
                              LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES
                                        
                                DECEMBER 31, 1998
                                        
                                        
                                                                  STATE OF
                                  NAME                          INCORPORATION
                         ----------------------------           -------------
                    
Parent:                  Independent Bankshares, Inc.              Texas

Non-banking
Subsidiaries:            Independent Financial Corp.               Delaware
                         Independent Capital Trust                 Delaware
Banking
Subsidiaries:            First State Bank, National Association    Texas
                         Azle State Bank                           Texas
| Area Code/County            | Count |
|-----------------------------|-------|
| 207  Maine                  | 11381 |
| Androscoggin Maine          | 1039  |
| Aroostook Maine             | 779   |
| Cumberland Maine            | 4796  |
| Franklin Maine              | 268   |
| Hancock Maine               | 1121  |
| Kennebec Maine              | 1351  |
| Knox Maine                  | 628   |
| Lincoln Maine               | 458   |
| No Zip Code Reported, Maine | 65    |
| Oxford Maine                | 542   |
| Penobscot Maine             | 2143  |
| Piscataquis Maine           | 136   |
| Sagadahoc Maine             | 487   |
| Somerset Maine              | 650   |
| Waldo Maine                 | 642   |
| Washington Maine            | 255   |
| York Maine                  | 2754  |
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

June 26, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 131995(60) Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, DAIMLERCHRYSLER SERVICES Justices 

OF NORTH AMERICA, L.L.C., 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 131995 

 COA: 264323 

Ct of Claims: 04-000113-MT 

DEPARTMENT OF TREASURY,

 Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the motion for reconsideration of this Court’s March 21, 

2007 order is considered, and it is DENIED, because it does not appear that the order was 

entered erroneously. 

WEAVER, J., would grant the motion for reconsideration. 

d0618 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

June 26, 2007 

 Clerk
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 8047 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

116th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 8047

   To amend the Inspector General Act of 1978 to prohibit an acting 
Inspector General from serving in more than one position in the Federal 
                              Government.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            August 14, 2020

 Mr. Keating introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                   Committee on Oversight and Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend the Inspector General Act of 1978 to prohibit an acting 
Inspector General from serving in more than one position in the Federal 
                              Government.

    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 ``Demanding Unconditional 
Accountability under the Law for Inspectors General Act'' or the ``DUAL 
IG Act''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON DUAL ROLE FOR ACTING INSPECTORS GENERAL.

    The Inspector General Act of 1978 (5 U.S.C. App.) is amended in 
section 3 by adding at the end the following:
    ``(h) In the event of a vacancy in the position of any Inspector 
General appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent 
of the Senate, an acting Inspector General performing the functions and 
duties of such vacant position may not perform the functions and duties 
of any other position within the Government.''.
                                 <all>
```
---

**EXHIBIT 99.13**

CONSENT OF AUTHOR





Ronald Scheurenberg, Pr.Eng. Knight Piesold (Pty) Ltd TC
Watermeyer Centre Cnr. Rivonia Blvd and 10thAvenue Rivonia,
2128 South Africa

US Securities and Exchange Commission

I, Ronald Scheurenberg, Pr.Eng., certify that I have read the
written disclosure being filed and I do not have any reason to believe that
there are any misrepresentations in the information derived from the Technical
Report or that the written disclosure in the Form 40F of Great Basin Gold Ltd.
contains any misrepresentation of the information contained in Technical Report
on the Optimisation of the Feasibility Study of the Burnstone Project,
Mpulamalanga Province, Republic of South Africa dated June 21, 2007.

I do hereby consent to the filing with the regulatory
authorities.

Dated this 26thday of March 2008.



|signed and
      sealed     
|----------------------------
|Ronald Scheurenberg, Pr.Eng.

---
Exhibit 10.1 (be)  AMENDMENT
NUMBER 7
TO THE
SAUER-DANFOSS LASALLE FACTORY EMPLOYEE SAVINGS PLAN
(As Amended and Restated Effective January 1, 1998)  By virtue and in exercise of
the amending power reserved to Sauer-Danfoss (US) Company (the Company) by Section
14.1 of Sauer-Danfoss LaSalle Factory Employee Savings Plan as amended and
restated effective January 1,1998
(the Plan) and pursuant to the authority delegated to the undersigned officer
of the Company by the Employee Benefits Committee of the Company, the Plan is
hereby amended, effective as of January 1, 2003, as follows:  1.The Plan is amended by deleting the last two
sentences in Section 12.8(b) of the Plan, which begin All distribution and
Any Plan provisions.  2.The Plan is amended by deleting Section
12.8(f) in its entirety and substituting the following 12.8(f) in its place:  (f)If a Participant dies before distribution of
his interest has begun, distribution of his entire interest shall be completed
by December 31of the calendar year
containing the fifth anniversary of his death, However, if a portion of the
Participants interest is to be paid to a Beneficiary designated by him, that
portion may, if the other provisions of this Plan so provide, be distributed
over the life or life expectancy of the Beneficiary. In that case, distribution
must begin not later than December 31 of the calendar year following the
calendar year of the Participants death. If the Beneficiary is the
Participants surviving spouse, and other provisions of the Plan so provide,
distribution need not begin until December 31 of the calendar year in which the
Participant would have attained age 70l/2. If the surviving Spouse
dies before distribution to her begins, then for purposes of the requirements
of this and the preceding subsections (concerning the latest date a
distribution may begin and the longest period of time over which payments may
be made), the surviving spouse shall be treated as if she were the
Participant.  3.The Plan is amended by adding the following
new Section 12.8(g):  (g)Notwithstanding any provision of the Plan to
the contrary, with respect to distributions under the Plan for calendar years
beginning on or after January 1, 2003, the Plan will apply the minimum
distribution requirements of Section 40l(a)(9) of the Code in accordance with
the final regulations under Section 401(a)(9) of the Code that were published
in the Federal Register on April 17, 2002 and in accordance with revenue
rulings, notices and other guidance published in the Internal Revenue Bulletin
reflecting Section 401(a)(9) of the Code. In addition, any distribution
required under the incidental death benefit rule of Section 401(a)(9)(G) of the
Code shall be treated as a distribution required under this paragraph.  
   IN WITNESS
WHEREOF, the Company has authorized the execution on its behalf this Amendment
Number 7, this 18th day of December, 2003.   SAUER
  DANFOSS (US) COMPANYBy:
  /s/ James T.
  RemusJames T.
  RemusDirector -
  Global Compensation and Benefits
#### Tom WOLFE, dba Tom Wolfe Discount Cars, Appellant, v. Eva TYLER, Appellee.

No. 70-949.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

July 8, 1971.

Appeal dismissed.
[Federal Register Volume 83, Number 115 (Thursday, June 14, 2018)]
[Notices]
[Page 27802]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2018-12743]



[[Page 27802]]

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

POSTAL SERVICE


Product Change--Priority Mail Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal Service<SUP>TM</SUP>.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: June 14, 2018.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Elizabeth Reed, 202-268-3179.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
June 8, 2018, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a USPS 
Request to Add Priority Mail Contract 439 to Competitive Product List. 
Documents are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2018-162, CP2018-
233.

Elizabeth Reed,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2018-12743 Filed 6-13-18; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 7710-12--P
#### Edward BLACKMAN, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 72-1418.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

June 12, 1973.

Phillip A. Hubbart, Public Defender and John Lipinski, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., and William L. Rogers, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appel-lee.

Before BARKDULL, C. J., and CHARLES CARROLL and HENDRY, JJ-

PER CURIAM.

On appeal from conviction of unlawful possession of a narcotic drug and a barbiturate the appellant contends the judgment should be reversed because of a remark made by the prosecutor in closing argument. An objection made thereto at trial by defendant’s counsel was sustained by the court. Considered in light of the evidence in the case the challenged remark of the prosecutor did not constitute harmful error. Under § 924.33 it is provided that a judgment should not be reversed unless the appellate court is of the opinion after examination of all of the appeal papers that error was committed which injuriously affected the substantial rights of the appellant. See Cornelius v. State, Fla.1950, 49 So.2d 332.

Affirmed.
#### Leroy RUSS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 72-1495.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

June 12, 1973.

Pollack, Yocom & Haggard, Alvin E. Entin, Miami, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen. and J. Robert Olian, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before BARKDULL, C. J., and PEARSON and HENDRY, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Appellant seeks review of his conviction and sentence on the charge of possession of marijuana. We affirm.

Appellant 'challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to convict due to the lack of proof of appellant’s knowledge of the presence of marijuana in appellant’s car. Appellant was stopped by police and after a consensual search of his car, a package or bag of the drug was discovered under the driver’s side of the dashboard. At the time of the search, appellant owned the car in question and was driving the car alone when stopped. At trial appellant denied knowledge of the presence of the drug and alleged that the car'had been used earlier by another person.

The proof of scienter or knowledge of the presence of the drug in the case sub judice was in conflict and it was within the *93purview of the trier of fact to resolve the issue. Frank v. State, Fla.App.1967, 199 So.2d 117. The finding of the trial judge, sitting as the trier of fact, is accorded the weight of a jury verdict. We are of the opinion that the findings of the lower court were supported by competent substantial evidence as a whole and specifically as to appellant’s knowledge and constructive possession of the drug. Spataro v. State, Fla.App.1965, 179 So.2d 873.

Accordingly, no reversible error having been made to appear, the judgment and sentence appealed is hereby affirmed.

Affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>      5
<LEGEND>

This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
consolidated statements of income for the nine months August 31, 1999 and the
consolidated balance sheet as of August 31, 1999 and is qualified in its
entirety by reference to such financial statements.

</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                         NOV-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                            DEC-1-1998
<PERIOD-END>                              AUG-31-1999
<CASH>                                       367,750
<SECURITIES>                                       0
<RECEIVABLES>                                 11,645
<ALLOWANCES>                                       0
<INVENTORY>                                        0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             395,927
<PP&E>                                        31,857
<DEPRECIATION>                                     0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               427,784
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        367,183
<BONDS>                                            0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                              0
<PREFERRED>                                        0
<COMMON>                                      23,357
<OTHER-SE>                                   129,649
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 427,784
<SALES>                                            0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             325,980
<CGS>                                              0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              1,056,914
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              (4,339)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                            (735,273)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    0
<INCOME-TAX>                                       0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                0
<DISCONTINUED>                                     0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                    0
<CHANGES>                                          0
<NET-INCOME>                                       0
<EPS-BASIC>                                  (0.08)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.08)





</TABLE>