alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>   1

                                                                   EXHIBIT 11.2

                             PAGEMART WIRELESS, INC.
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>


                                                            THREE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1996
                                                          ----------------------------------------
                                                            NUMBER       PERCENT       EQUIVALENT
                                                          OF SHARES    OUTSTANDING       SHARES
                                                          ----------   -----------    ------------
<S>                                                        <C>          <C>              <C>      
COMMON STOCK
   From Founders' Stock                                    2,300,000    100.00%          2,300,000
   Stock Options Exercised                                   553,164     99.96%            552,943
   Preferred Stock Converted to Common Stock              15,310,943    100.00%         15,310,943
   1994 Common Stock Offerings                            11,242,857    100.00%         11,242,857
   1995 Common Stock Offerings                             4,323,874    100.00%          4,323,874
   1996 Common Stock Offering                              6,000,000    100.00%          6,000,000
                                                          ----------                  ------------
                                                          39,730,838                    39,730,617

WEIGHTED AVERAGE SHARES OUTSTANDING                                                     39,730,617

NET LOSS                                                                              ($11,986,000)

NET LOSS PER SHARE                                                                          ($0.30)
                                                                                      ============
</TABLE>
# C_2022171EN.01004001.xml

| 25.4.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 171/40 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.4.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 171/40

---

Order of the General Court of 21 February 2022 — Carlings v EUIPO — Margarete Steiff (STUHF)

(Case T-635/21) (1)

(EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Withdrawal of the opposition - No need to adjudicate)

(2022/C 171/54)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Applicant: Carlings AS (Billingstad, Norway) (represented by: V. Töbelmann and J. Haesemann, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: A. Bosse and D. Hanf, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Margarete Steiff GmbH (Giengen/Brenz, Germany) (represented by: U. Hildebrandt, lawyer)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 14 July 2021 (Case R 2024/2020-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Margarete Steiff and Carlings.

Operative part of the order

| 1. | There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action. |
| --- | --- |

1.

There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.

| 2. | Carlings AS and Margarete Steiff GmbH shall bear their own costs and shall each pay half of the costs incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO). |
| --- | --- |

2.

Carlings AS and Margarete Steiff GmbH shall bear their own costs and shall each pay half of the costs incurred by the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO).

---

(1)  OJ C 471, 22.11.2021.

---
OMB Control Number: 2060

- 0482

Expiration Date : 10 /31/ 1 1 OMB Control Number: 2060

- 0482 Expiration Date: 8/31/11

EPA Form # 5900

- 14 5 , Revised 5/11



### U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

STRATOSPHERIC OZONE PROTECTION PROGRAM 

### CLASS I CONTROLLED SUBSTANCE

METHYL BROMIDE

SECOND



### - PARTY DESTRUCTION ANNUAL REPORT



### (40 CFR 82. 13 )



## SECTION 1 COMPANY IDENTIFICAT ION

1.1 Date of Submission 1.2 Year to Which This Report Applies

1. 3 Original Submittal Re

- submittal

1.4 Have you submitted a one

- time destruction report to EPA (per 40 CFR 82.13)? Yes No



### 1.5 Have you submitted a destruction verification to the producer or importer (per 40

CFR 82.13)? Yes No



### 1. 6 Company Information

Company Name

Street Address

City State Zip Code



### 1. 7 Company Contact Identification

Reporting Company Contact Perso n Phone Number Fax Number

E

- mail Address



### 1. 8 Destruction Total

Second

- Party Destruction of Methyl Bromide (kg) :



### 1. 9 Signature of Reporting Company R epresentative

I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this and all attached

documents, and that based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the inf ormation, I believe that the

submitted information is true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information,

including the possibility of fine and imprisonment.

Name

Title

Signature Date



## SEND COMPLETED FORMS TO: For U.S. Postal Service:

Tracking System Program Manager

Stratospheric Protection Division

U.S. EPA (6205J)

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20460 For Private Courier:

Tracking System Program Manager

Stratospheric Protection Division

U.S. EPA (6205J)

1310 L Street, NW; 10 th Floor

Washington, DC 20005

A company may assert a claim of confidentiality for information submitted in this form by clearly marking that information as confidential. Such information

shall be treated in accordance with EPA’s procedures for information claimed as confidential at 40 CFR Part 2, Subpart B, and will only be disclosed by the

m eans set forth in the subpart. If no claim of confidentiality accompanies the report when it is received by EPA, it may be made public without further notic e to the company (40 CFR 2.203).

The public reporting and recordkeeping burden for this collection of information is estimated to average 1 hour per response. Send comments on the

Agency's need for this information, the accuracy of the provided burden estimates, and any suggested methods for minimizing r espondent burden,

including through the use of automated col lection techniques to the Director, Collection Strategies Division, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (2822T),

1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW, Washington, D.C. 20460. Include the OMB control number in any correspondence. Do not send the c ompleted form to this

address.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER>   1,000

<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                           6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                       Dec-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                          Jan-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                            Jun-30-1999
<CASH>                                        75232
<SECURITIES>                                  20653
<RECEIVABLES>                                 47282
<ALLOWANCES>                                   2400
<INVENTORY>                                       0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             160935
<PP&E>                                        36507
<DEPRECIATION>                                14603
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               186922
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         49725
<BONDS>                                           0
<COMMON>                                         27
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                             0
<PREFERRED>                                       0
<OTHER-SE>                                    66988
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 186922
<SALES>                                       93316
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              93316
<CGS>                                          1274
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 30375
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                  0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             2038
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (4959)
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (1685)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (3274)
<DISCONTINUED>                                    0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   0
<CHANGES>                                         0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (3274)
<EPS-BASIC>                                  (.12)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (.12)


</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1171 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1171

   To amend the Controlled Substances Act to allow a veterinarian to 
  transport and dispense controlled substances in the usual course of 
        veterinary practice outside of the registered location.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 17, 2013

   Mr. Moran (for himself, Mr. King, Ms. Stabenow, Mr. Cochran, Mr. 
 Grassley, Mr. Barrasso, Mr. Enzi, and Mrs. Gillibrand) introduced the 
 following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
                             the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend the Controlled Substances Act to allow a veterinarian to 
  transport and dispense controlled substances in the usual course of 
        veterinary practice outside of the registered location.

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

SECTION 1. TRANSPORTING AND DISPENSING CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES IN THE 
              USUAL COURSE OF VETERINARY PRACTICE.

    Section 302(e) of the Controlled Substances Act (21 U.S.C. 822(e)) 
is amended--
            (1) by striking ``(e)'' and inserting ``(e)(1)''; and
            (2) by adding at the end the following:
    ``(2) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), a registrant who is a 
veterinarian shall not be required to have a separate registration in 
order to transport and dispense controlled substances in the usual 
course of veterinary practice at a site other than the registrant's 
registered principal place of business or professional practice, so 
long as the site of transporting and dispensing is located in a State 
where the veterinarian is licensed to practice veterinary medicine and 
is not a principal place of business or professional practice.''.
                                 <all>
```
<PAGE>   1
                         [PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LOGO]

                         PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS L.L.P.
                             One Post Office Square
                                Boston, MA 02109
                            Telephone (617) 478-5000
                            Facsimile (617) 478-5900


                         REPORT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTS

To the Board of Directors and
 Stockholders of PictureTel Corporation:

In our opinion, the accompanying consolidated balance sheets and the related
consolidated statements of operations, stockholders, equity and cash flows
present fairly, in all material respects, the financial position of PictureTel
Corporation and its subsidiaries at December 31, 1999 and 1998, and the results
of their operations and their cash flows for each of the three years in the
period ended December 31, 1999 in conformity with accounting principles
generally accepted in the United States. These financial statements are the
responsibility of the Company's management; our responsibility is to express an
opinion on these financial statements based on our audits. We conducted our
audits of these statements in accordance with auditing standards generally
accepted in the United States, which require that we plan and perform the audit
to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial statements are free
of material misstatement. An audit includes examining, on a test basis, evidence
supporting the amounts and disclosures in the financial statements, assessing
the accounting principles used and significant estimate made by management, and
evaluating the overall financial statement presentation. We believe that our
audits provide a reasonable basis for the opinion expressed above.

The accompanying consolidated financial statements have been prepared assuming
the Company will continue as a going concern. As discussed in Note 1 to the
consolidated financial statements, the Company has incurred recurring losses
from operations and requires additional financing. These factors raise
substantial doubt abut its ability to continue as a going concern. Management's
plans in regard to these matters are also described in Note 1. The financial
statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome of
this uncertainty.


PriceWaterhouseCoopers L.L..

February 15, 2000, except for
 the information in the first
 paragraph of Note 7,
 as to which the date is
 March 28, 2000
# United States Court of Appeals

f or the Fifth Circuit

No. 20

- 61035 Summary Calendar

Bidpua Fabrisk,

Petitioner ,

versus

Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General ,
Respondent

.

Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals BIA No. A213 186 553

Before Davis, Jones, and Elrod, Circuit Judges

.
Per Curiam : * Bidpua Fabrisk, a native and citizen of Cameroon, petitions for review
of a decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA)

. The immigration judge (IJ) denied his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the convention agai nst torture (CAT) based on an adverse

* Pursuant to 5th Cir cuit R ule 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir cuit R ule 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED February 18, 2022

L yle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 20-61035 Document: 00516207916 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/18/2022No. 20

- 61035

2 credibility finding. The BIA upheld the credibility finding and found that he had failed to meet the burden of proof for asylum and withholding of removal. The BIA also upheld the IJ’s determination that Fabrisk was not eligible for protection under the CAT.
On appeal, Fabrisk argues that the adverse credibility finding was not supported by substantial evidence. We generally review only decisions of the

BIA. Singh v. Sessions , 880 F.3d 220, 224 (5th Cir. 2018)

. However, when the IJ’s ruling affects the BIA’s decision, as it does here, we review the decisions of both the BIA and the IJ. Id. Factual findings are reviewed for substantial evidence, and constitutional claims and questions of law are
reviewed de novo. Fuentes

- Pena v. Barr , 917 F.3d 827, 829 (5th Cir. 2019);
Orel lana

– Monson v. Holder , 685 F.3d 511, 518 (5th Cir. 2012).
Although Fabrisk suggests possible explanations for the inconsistencies identified by the IJ and BIA , the record does not compel the
conclusion that he should have been found credible. Mwembie v . Gonzales , 443 F.3d 405, 410 (5th Cir. 2006). The inconsistencies listed by the IJ and

BIA are accurate reflections of the record. His explanations for the
inconsistencies do not compel a credibility finding different from the IJ’s and
BIA’s conclusions

. Morales v. Sessions , 860 F.3d 812, 817 (5th Cir. 2017). Additionally, Fabrisk fails to brief , and there fore has abandoned , the denial of protection under the CAT. See Soadjede v. Ashcroft , 324 F.3d 830, 833 (5th Cir. 2003); Brinkmann v. Dallas Cty. De puty Sheriff Abner , 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987). Accordingly, Fabrisk has failed to show that the BIA erred in dismissing his appeal.
The petition for review is DENIED

. Case: 20-61035 Document: 00516207916 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/18/2022
December 17, 2014

Dennis J. McLerran, Regional Administrator U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region l0 1200 SixthAvenue Mail Code: RA-140 Seattle, WA 98101 

### Department of Environmental Quality Headquarters 811 SW SixthAvenue Portland, OR 97204-1390 (503) 229-5696 FAX (503) 229-6124 TTY: 711

RE: Withdrawal ofOregon Administrative Rule 340-200-0040 from State Implementation Plan Dear Dennis: As the Governor's designee for the CleanAir Act State Implementation Plan, the Oregon Department ofEnvironmental Quality requests withdrawal ofOregon Administrative Rule 340-200- 0040 from the State Implementation Plan. DEQ is withdrawing OAR 340-200-0040 from the Klamath Falls attainmentplan submission in 2012. DEQ adopts amendments to OAR 340-200-0040 as part ofOregon's SIP process. This rule contains the date Oregon adopted revisions to the SIP, but it does not contain information for inclusion into the federally-approved SIP and does not need EPA approval. DEQ therefore withdraws OAR 340-200-0040 as part ofthe Klamath Falls attainmentplan submissionthat is currentlyunder considerationby EPA.

Thankyou for your assistance withrevisions to Oregon's SIP. Ifyou need additional information or have questions, please contact Andrea Gartenbaum, SIP Coordinator at (503) 229-5946. Sincerely,

# J~~i Aammond, Deputy Director CC David Collier, DEQ AQ Planning Paul Koprowski, EPA Oregon Operations office Justin Spenillo, EPA, Region 10 Andrea Gartenbaum, DEQ SIP Coordinator Robbye Lanier, Lane Regional Air Protection Agency
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.2


                    CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS



As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation of our
reports included in this Form 10-K, into the Company's previously filed
Registration Statements on Form S-8, File Nos. 33-37913, 33-41664, 33-41665,
33-41783, 33-65754, 33-71010, 33-71008, 33-86368, 33-86370, 33-86372, 333-03429,
and 333-03427. It should be noted that we have not audited any financial
statements of the Company subsequent to June 30, 1996, or performed any audit
procedures subsequent to the date of our report.



                                                  /s/ Arthur Andersen LLP


Dallas, Texas
September 21, 1998
#### McGaha *v.*State.

(Division B.

Sept. 30, 1935.)

[163 So. 442.

No. 31699.]

Orma R. Smith, of Corinth, for appellant.

*830W. D. Conn, Jr., assistant attorney-general, for the state.

Ethridge, P. J.,

delivered the opinion of the court.

The appellant, Oscar McGaha, was convicted of petit larceny and sentenced to serve sixty days in jail upon an affidavit as follows: “Oscar J. McGaha did, on or *831about the third day of July, 1932, in said district, county and state, wilfully and unlawfully and feloniously steal and carry away one jersey color cow, weight about #500, known as the Louis Suitor cow calf — val. cow at $25.00. Against the peace and dignity,” etc.

There was nO' demurrer to the affidavit and no motion in arrest of judgment, but an appeal has been taken, and it is contended that the affidavit is fatally defective, in that it fails to charge that the property stolen belonged to anyone, and no attempt is made to allege ownership of the property stolen.

In Hughes v. State, 74 Miss. 368, 20 So. 838, it was held that the failure to show ownership of the property stolen is a defect of substance and not form, and may be taken advantage of by motion in arrest of judgment as well as by demurrer before trial.

In Reed v. State, 171 Miss. 65, 156 So. 650, it was held that a fatal defect in an indictment or affidavit may be availed of on appeal for the first time.

It is necessary for an indictment or affidavit to allege ownership of the property stolen, that being the essence of the offense, and a conviction upon such an affidavit is void, and the defect may be availed of here for the first time.

The judgment of conviction will therefore be reversed, and the appellant will be held upon his appearance bond to await the action of the next grand jury of the county.

Reversed and remanded.
<PAGE>   1


                                                                    EXHIBIT 12.1

                             PAGEMART WIRELESS, INC.
                COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
                                 (IN THOUSANDS)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                                                     THREE MONTHS   NINE MONTHS
                                YEAR ENDED    YEAR ENDED    YEAR ENDED    YEAR ENDED    YEAR ENDED       ENDED          ENDED
                               DECEMBER 31,  DECEMBER 31,  DECEMBER 31,  DECEMBER 31,  DECEMBER 31,  SEPTEMBER 30,  SEPTEMBER 30,
                                   1993         1994          1995          1996          1997          1998 (1)       1998 (1)
                               ------------  ------------  ------------  ------------  ------------  -------------  -------------
<S>                            <C>           <C>           <C>           <C>           <C>           <C>            <C>           
Earnings:
  Net loss                     $    (31,121) $    (45,813) $    (53,113) $    (48,598) $    (43,887) $      (8,982) $     (44,485)
  Add:  Amount of
     previously capitalized
     interest amortized                  --            --            --            --            --             56              56
  Add: Fixed charges                  6,538        12,933        30,720        35,041        38,499         10,434          32,357
                               ------------  ------------  ------------  ------------  ------------  -------------   -------------
  Adjusted earnings                 (24,583)      (32,880)      (22,393)      (13,557)       (5,388)         1,508         (12,072)

Fixed charges:
  Interest in
     indebtedness                     5,785        11,209        28,383        32,368        36,672         13,480         38,804
  Amortization of debt
     issuance costs                     159           800         1,052         2,143           844            303            866
  Interest portion
     of rental and
     lease expense                      594           924         1,285           530           983            342            922
                               ------------  ------------  ------------  ------------  ------------  -------------  -------------
  Fixed charges                       6,538        12,933        30,720        35,041        38,499         14,125         40,592

Deficiency of
  earnings available to
  cover fixed charges          $    (31,121) $    (45,813) $    (53,113) $    (48,598) $    (43,887) $     (12,617) $     (52,664)
                               ============  ============  ============  ============  ============  =============  =============

Earnings to fixed charges ratio          --            --            --            --            --           0.11             --
</TABLE>

(1) The fixed charge adjustment to earnings excludes $3.7 million and $8.2
    million of capitalized interest for the three and nine months ended 
    September 30, 1998.