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


                    TEL-SAVE HOLDINGS, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
                       COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME PER SHARE
                                 (IN THOUSANDS)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                                    FOR THE THREE MONTHS
                                                                                       ENDED MARCH 31,
                                                                            ---------------------------------
                                                                                 1998                  1997
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                                                                            <C>                  <C>     
Net income (loss)                                                              $(41,795)            $  5,430
                                                                               =========            ========

BASIC

Weighted average common shares outstanding - Basic:                              64,153               62,429
                                                                               ========             ========

Net income (loss) per share - Basic                                            $   (.65)            $    .09
                                                                               =========            ========

DILUTED

Weighted average common and common equivalent shares
   outstanding - Diluted:

Weighted average shares                                                          64,153               62,429
Weighted average equivalent shares                                                    -                3,410
                                                                               --------             --------
Weighted average common and common equivalent shares -Diluted                  $ 64,153               65,839
                                                                               ========             ========

Net income (loss) per share - Diluted                                          $   (.65)            $    .08
                                                                               =========            ========
</TABLE>
<PAGE>   1




                                                                     EXHIBIT 12




                       UNION PACIFIC RESOURCES GROUP INC.

               COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
                     (Amounts in Thousands, Except Ratios)
                                  (Unaudited)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                      Six Months
                                                                     Ended June 30,
                                                               ------------------------
                                                                  1996           1997
                                                               ----------    ----------
<S>                                                            <C>           <C>       
Income before income taxes .................................   $  192,350    $  280,628
                                                          
Add (deduct) distributions greater (less) than            
     income of unconsolidated affiliates ...................        2,398        (1,099)
                                                          
Fixed charges from below ...................................       29,041        25,293
                                                          
Capitalized interest included in fixed charges .............         (122)         (662)
                                                               ----------    ----------
                                                          
         Earnings available for fixed charges ..............   $  223,667    $  304,160
                                                               ==========    ==========
                                                          
Fixed charges:                                            
     Interest expense, including amortization of debt     
         expense/discount ..................................   $   25,567    $   21,661
     Portion of rentals representing an interest factor ....        3,352         2,970
     Interest capitalized ..................................          122           662
                                                               ----------    ----------
                                                          
         Total fixed charges ...............................   $   29,041    $   25,293
                                                               ==========    ==========
                                                          
Ratio of earnings to fixed charges .........................          7.7          12.0
                                                               ==========    ==========
</TABLE>
Page No. & fs
upon’ Dist. No...

Veid—

enumerated by mon the 2

4 County of __

Be , State‘of. Mle Drea, -s
day of Ju, 1880. Ea

aggESN aah aero]

MF [olen
TZ

ina"

SSW

vk

5

ESREN

A

RES

Ba
Perey

es

Historic census records are maintained and released by the National Archives and Records Adminis

tla

Visit http://www.archives.gov for more information about publicly

- in
mld

available records li

V hehe e
not the U.S. Census Bureau

shown here.

[=|
ES
2
Fa
Z

Rone.
Lon
Meee.
hace.
Ben
Gere.

A
iar]
cle
fe
REGULATORY DOCKET NO: FAA 2015-1766-001 

The Purpose of this petition is to amend Addendum 1. Exemption No: FAA 2015-1766-001, TITLED, 

INTRODUCTION AND INTERESTS OF THE PETITIONER to include the following interests, filming of 

special events, film sets, scripted and unscripted television sets and landscape, conducting power line 

inspection, aerial mapping, surveying and search and rescue specifically targeting: 

• Aerial videography of power lines. 

• Aerial event photography. 

• Aerial videography of Construction Development Sites. 

• Aerial Film & Television production, closed set. 

• Aerial Videography of Search and Rescue. 

Previous exemption requirements as submitted for relief in addendum 1; still apply to this amendment. 

All other terms and conditions and equipment still remain in effect as previously approved. 

Respectfully submitted by, 

Brian Morson 

12135 Sand Pebble Way 

Orlando, FL 32824 

407-432-5364 

BBritboy@gmail.com
Ref: Aviaservice, LLC s eeking exemption for Title 14 C.F.R. 47.65 (US citizenship)

We need the non

-citizen corporation exemption because as the authorized dealer for Robinson Helicopters in San Juan Puerto Rico, we are required to have a “dealer’s aircraft registration certificate”. The public as a whole will benefit by having a dealer for this US manufactured product on location that can sell, repair and assist in the use of these Helicopters. This exemption should not adversely affect safety, Robinson H elicopters has process es that have been developed during many years of experience and they are using best practices in the industry and requiring these from all of th eir dealers and representatives, including ourselves. Aviaservice, LLC is seeking the exemption of Title 14 C.F.R. 47.65 (US citizenship ) rule, as a business located in Sa n Juan Puerto Rico, which requires engaged in the distribution or sale of new aircraft, or the distribution or sale of used aircraft.
T he Federal Aviation Act provided for issuance of dealer’s aircraft registration certificates to be used as an alternative for the certificate of aircraft registration. This form identifies the applicant as a person engaged in the business of manufacturing, distributing, or selling aircraft. A citizen of the United States means (a) an individual who is a citizen of the United States; or (b) a partnership each of whose partners is an individual who is a citizen of the United States; or (c) a corporation or association organized under the laws of the United States or a State, the District of Columbia, or a Territory o r possession of the United States, of which the president and at least two

-thirds of the board of directors and other managi ng officers are citizens of the United States, and in which at least 75 percent of the voting interest is owned or controlled by persons that are citizens of the United States. Title 49 United States Code 40102(a) (15). Aviaservice, LLC does not fulfill with these definitions and therefore is seeking the exemption. As Robinson Helicopters representative for Puerto Rico, this is a requ irement for standard operations and normal business procedures.
--

.,_,,l--·l--·l--.,

1----+--~'---"-i---'-'"-.!...t.4<£<"7'----~c"-~="--1~~.-""""=--"°-.=::!:'.:o=.!!'...-=::'.:__ __ l----l--,--.,---l--'"'-"'"""~'---~-l--l--'--l--l--l,/~·-1--1--·1-

,_ l---l-=--"--l--«!:ZU~~....::::!~~C!L_~,_,L_j_e__--!'£~-!YL..!.~~_l.L......&;.~t_~--l---1-.JL~'.EQ~~---1-'L....l-~-~--l:-1-~..o..I
## In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02

- 17

- 00264

- CV

E STATE OF F ELIPE A. R ADELAT

, D ECEASED §

§

§

§ On Appeal from Probate Court No. 1

of Tarrant County (1994

- 0001187

- 1

- A)

November 7, 2019

Opinion by Justice Birdwell

JUDGMENT

Thi s court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there

was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of the trial

court is affirmed.

It is further ordered that Appe llees Ana Radelat and Andrew Radelat shall pay

all of the costs of this appeal, for which let execution issue.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By /s/ Wade Birdwell

Justice Wade Birdwell
**Exhibit 32.1**
 
 **CERTIFICATION
        OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO
        SECTION 906**
 **OF
        THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**
 
 I,
        William J. Gervais, Chief Executive Officer of Qualstar Corporation (the
        “Company”), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
        2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:
 
 (1) the
        Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the fiscal year ended
        June 30, 2007 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of
        Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
        (15 U.S.C. 78m or 780(d)); and
 
 (2) the
        information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
        the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 
 Dated:
        September 26, 2007
 
 /s/  WILLIAM
                  J. GERVAISWilliam
                  J. Gervais,Principal
                  Executive Officer
Exhibit 4.3



Consent of Independent Registered Public
Accounting Firm


We have issued our report
dated October 14, 2022, with respect to the financial statement of SmartTrust 586 contained in Amendment No. 1 to the Registration Statement
on Form S-6 (File No. 333-266192) and related Prospectus. We consent to the use of the aforementioned report in the Registration Statement
and Prospectus, and to the use of our name as it appears under the caption “Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm”.


 


/s/ Grant
Thornton LLP


 


Chicago, Illinois


October 14, 2022
<PAGE>


                                  EXHIBIT (23)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


                          INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

        The Board of Directors
        Syntellect Inc.:

        We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements
        (Nos. 333-58029, 333-58027, 333-44587, 333-2368, 333-2302, 33-96472,
        33-96464, 33-63642, 33-48638, 33-35976, 33-48637, 33-35973; 33-42704,
        33-35974 and 333-48870) filed on Form S-8 of Syntellect Inc. of our
        report dated February 5, 2002, relating to the consolidated balance
        sheets of Syntellect Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2000 and
        2001, and the related consolidated statements of operations and
        comprehensive income, shareholders' equity and cash flows for each of
        the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2001, which report
        appears in the December 31, 2001 annual report on Form 10-K of
        Syntellect Inc.

        Our report dated February 5, 2002 contains an explanatory paragraph that
        states that the Company has suffered losses from operations, a working
        capital deficit, and an accumulated deficit that raise substantial doubt
        about its ability to continue as a going concern. The consolidated
        financial statements do not include any adjustments that might result
        from the outcome of that uncertainty.


                                                              /s/ KPMG LLP
        Phoenix, Arizona
        March 21, 2002
II 

113TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1672 

To amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to empower individuals with 

disabilities to establish their own supplemental needs trusts. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

NOVEMBER 7, 2013 

Mr. NELSON (for himself, Mr. GRASSLEY, Mr. ROCKEFELLER, and Mr. ENZI) 

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

Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend title XIX of the Social Security Act to empower 

individuals with disabilities to establish their own supplemental needs trusts. 

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 ‘‘Special Needs Trust 

5 Fairness Act of 2013’’. 

6 SEC. 2. FAIRNESS IN MEDICAID SUPPLEMENTAL NEEDS 

7 TRUSTS. 

8 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 1917(d)(4)(A) of the So9 cial Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396p(d)(4)(A)) is amended 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1672 IS

1 by inserting ‘‘the individual,’’ after ‘‘for the benefit of such 

2 individual by’’. 

3 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

4 subsection (a) shall apply to trusts established on or after 

5 the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


smartinez on DSK6TPTVN1PROD with BILLS
#### J. E. S., Appellant, v. B. J. F., Appellee.

No. 70-167.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Sept. 25, 1970.

T. G. LaGrone, Orlando, for appellant.

No appearance for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

In this interlocutory appeal, appellant-defendant, J. E. S., attacks the trial court’s order finding the court to have jurisdiction over the defendant to determine paternity in a suit filed by appellee-plaintiff, B. J. F.

Plaintiff attempted service of process upon the defendant, a nonresident of Florida, by publication in a newspaper. The defendant through special appearance promptly moved to quash and set aside the service of process and to dismiss the complaint for lack of jurisdiction over the person of the defendant.

The sole issue before us is whether jurisdiction to determine the question of paternity can be acquired in a paternity suit through constructive service by publication on the defendant.

Our court has recently treated this subject in T. J. K. v. N. B., Fourth District Court of Appeal, 237 So.2d 592, opinion filed July 17, 1970, by determining that a paternity action is one “in personam,” and concluding:

> “* * * A judgment in .personam against a nonresident who does not enter a voluntary general appearance or otherwise waive personal service of process can be predicated only upon jurisdiction over the person of the non-resident acquired by proper personal service of process upon him within the territorial jurisdiction of the court.”

In this instance, these requirements were not met, and defendant’s motions to quash and dismiss should have been granted.

*521Accordingly, the order finding the court to have jurisdiction to determine paternity is reversed, and this cause is remanded to the trial court for entry of an order consistent herewith.

Reversed and remanded with directions.

McCAIN and OWEN, JJ., concur.

WALDEN, J., dissents, without opinion.
#### William L. FREDRICKS, Appellant, v. John F. ZOLLER, Appellee.

No. T-299.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

Dec. 18, 1973.

Anthony J. Busicco, Ormond Beach, for appellant.

Richard S. Graham, of Landis, Graham, French, Husfeld, Sherman & Ford, Day-tona Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Reversed on authority of Hoffman v. Jones, 280 So.2d 431, decided by the Florida Supreme Court on July 10, 1973, not yet reported, and remanded for a new trial in accordance with the principles established thereby.

Reversed.

JOHNSON, Acting C. J., and SPEC-TOR and BOYER, JJ., concur.
#### FELLER v. BOARD OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION OF DADE COUNTY.

No. 38554.

Supreme Court of Florida.

June 1969.

Rehearing Denied July 9, 1969.

Certiorari denied without opinion. 219 So.2d 737.
#### C. J. VAN DELINDER, Appellant, v. ALBION REALTY & MORTGAGE, INC., a Florida corporation, Appellee.

Nos. 73-1067, 73-1036.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Dec. 4, 1973.

Rehearing Denied Jan. 21, 1974.

*353C. J. Van Delinder, in pro per.

Friedman, Britton & Stettin, Miami, and Bennett A. Spector, Miami Beach, for ap-pellee.

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

CARROLL, Judge.

Following a foreclosure sale at which real estate of some substantial value was sold upon a bid of $50, the mortgagee filed a motion to set aside the sale. In support thereof it was disclosed the owner became deprived of an opportunity to bid at the sale when, because of inadvertence or a mistake, an attorney who was to represent him there for that purpose was not present. The court granted the motion, and ordered the sale set aside and directed a resale. The purchaser appealed.

While the general rule is that inadequacy of price standing alone is not a ground for setting aside a judicial sale, where the inadequacy is gross and is suiting injustice tothe complaining party, shown to result from a mistake, accident, surprise, fraud, misconduct or irregularity on the part of either the purchaser or other person connected with the sale, with resulting injustice to the complaining party, the court will act to prevent the wrong result. Lawyers’ Co-operative Pub. Co. v. Bennett, 34 Fla. 302, 16 So. 185; City of Sanford v. Ashton, 131 Fla. 759, 179 So. 765; Eristavi-Tchitcherine v. Miami Beach Federal Savings & Loan Assn, 154 Fla. 100, 16 So.2d 730; Arlt v. Buchanan, Fla. 1966, 190 So.2d 575, 577.

Based on the law as pronounced in the cited cases, the order entered was one within the discretion of the court, and in the circumstances presented we hold such action by the trial court was not an abuse of discretion.

Affirmed.
#### Daniel MONTAGUE et al., Appellants, v. GUNITE CONTRACTORS OF FLORIDA, INC., a Florida corporation, Appellee.

No. 71-1044.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

Feb. 2, 1972.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Broward County; Jose A. Gonzalez, Jr., Judge.

Appeal dismissed.
#### Joanna RAY, a minor by her mother and next friend, Jo Ann Ray, and Jo Ann Ray, individually, Appellants, v. Frank E. PFEIFFER and The Shelby Mutual Insurance Company of Shelby, Ohio, a foreign corporation, Appellees.

No. 71-438.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Nov. 16, 1971.

Appeal dismissed.
#### Hyatt Roller Bearing Co. *v.*Bloch et al.

*Supreme Court*— Affirmances—Record *insufficient to disclose errors complained of.*

(No. 18428

Decided December 16, 1924.)

Error to the Court of Appeals of Cuyahoga county.

*Messrs. Treadway & Marlatt,*for plaintiff in error.

*Messrs. Galfee, Fogg & White,*and *Messrs. Sawyer, \Gwmmings & Strong,*for defendants in error.

It is ordered and adjudged by this court, that the judgment of the said Court of Appeals be and the same is hereby affirmed on the ground that the record does not disclose the error complained of.

*Judgment affirmed.*

Marsttat.t.j C. J., Robinson, Jones, Matthias, Day, Allen and Conn, JJ., concur.
256 La. 763

#### STATE of Louisiana ex rel. Willie C. WASHINGTON v. C. Murray HENDERSON, Warden, Louisiana State Penitentiary.

No. 50823.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Aug. 31, 1970.

In re: Willie C. Washington applying for writs of habeas corpus, mandamus and certiorari.

The application is denied. Considering the written reasons assigned by the trial judge, and the application, the showing made does not warrant the exercise of our original or supervisory jurisdiction.
113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 1171 

AN ACT 

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. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

†S 1171 ES

1 SECTION 1. TRANSPORTING AND DISPENSING CON2 TROLLED SUBSTANCES IN THE USUAL 

3 COURSE OF VETERINARY PRACTICE. 

4 Section 302(e) of the Controlled Substances Act (21 

5 U.S.C. 822(e)) is amended— 

6 (1) by striking ‘‘(e)’’ and inserting ‘‘(e)(1)’’; 

7 and 

8 (2) by adding at the end the following: 

9 ‘‘(2) Notwithstanding paragraph (1), a registrant 

10 who is a veterinarian shall not be required to have a sepa11 rate registration in order to transport and dispense con12 trolled substances in the usual course of veterinary prac13 tice at a site other than the registrant’s registered prin14 cipal place of business or professional practice, so long as 

15 the site of transporting and dispensing is located in a 

16 State where the veterinarian is licensed to practice veteri17 nary medicine and is not a principal place of business or 

18 professional practice.’’. 

Passed the Senate January 8, 2014. 

Attest: 

Secretary. 

113TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 1171 

AN ACT 

To amend the Controlled Substances Act to allow 

nary practice outside of the registered location. trolled substances in the usual course of veteria veterinarian to transport and dispense con-
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

 

*906 CERTIFICATION*

 

The undersigned certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

| (1) | The accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended May 31, 2006, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and |
|-----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

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

 

 

| Date:  July 14, 2006 | /s/  David H. Roche                        |
|--------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------|
|                           | President and Chief Executive Officer                |
|                           |                                                 |
|                           | /s/  Steven M. Caspers                     |
|                           | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |
#### STATE of Florida, Appellant, v. Deborah Ann PARKER, Appellee.

No. 73-1167.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

March 27, 1974.

Appeal from Circuit Court, Seminole County; Volie Williams, Judge.

Appeal dismissed.