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

                                                                   Exhibit 11(a)
                             BLUE WAVE SYSTEMS INC.
                             (FORMERLY MIZAR, INC.)
                     COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE INCOME (LOSS)
                    (in thousands, except per share amounts)
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                                                        Three Months Ended
                                                                                            March 31,
                                                                                         1998       1997
                                                                                       --------   --------
<S>                                                                                    <C>        <C>
BASIC INCOME (LOSS) PER SHARE:
     Net income (loss)                                                                 $   218    $  (665)
                                                                                       =======    =======

     Weighted average shares outstanding                                                 5,136      4,950

Basic income (loss) per share                                                          $  0.04    $ (0.13)
                                                                                       =======    =======


DILUTED INCOME (LOSS) PER SHARE:
     Weighted average shares outstanding                                                 5,136      4,950

     Effect of common stock equivalents:
               Options outstanding                                                         417        N/A
               Weighted average exercised options outstanding for portion of period,
                     net of equivalent shares purchased at average fair market value        --        N/A
               Effect of using option proceeds to repurchase common stock at
                     average fair market value                                            (184)       N/A
                                                                                       -------    -------
                                                                                           233         --
                                                                                       -------    -------
                                 Total common stock equivalents                          5,369      4,950
                                                                                       -------    -------

Diluted income (loss) per share                                                        $  0.04    $ (0.13)
                                                                                       =======    =======
</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.1

Certification pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as Adopted Pursuant to Section 906

of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

Each of the undersigned officers of
Income Opportunity Realty Investors, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the Company) hereby certifies that:



| | (i) | The Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three months ended March 31, 2011 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (ii) | The information contained in the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three months ended March 31, 2011 fairly presents in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the Company, at and for the period indicated.
| | ---- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|                   |  |  |  |  |     |  |  |                                                                                    |  | 
|------------------ |  |  |  |  | --- |  |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | 
|                   |  |  |  |  |     |  |  | INCOME OPPORTUNITY REALTY INVESTORS, INC.                                          |  | 
|                   |  |  |  | 
|Date: May 13, 2011 |  |  |  |  | By: |  |  | /s/ Daniel J. Moos                                                                 |  | 
|                   |  |  |  |  |     |  |  | Daniel J. Moos                                                                     |  | 
|                   |  |  |  |  |     |  |  | President and Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)                |  | 
|                   |  |  |  | 
|Date: May 13, 2011 |  |  |  |  | By: |  |  | /s/ Gene S. Bertcher                                                               |  | 
|                   |  |  |  |  |     |  |  | Gene S. Bertcher                                                                   |  | 
|                   |  |  |  |  |     |  |  | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer (Principal Financial Officer) |  |
# C_2014082EN.01000501.xml

| 21.3.2014 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 82/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.3.2014

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 82/5

---

Call for proposals 2013 — EAC/S11/13 — Erasmus+ programme

Prolongation of deadline for submission of applications (Key Action 1 — Mobility of individuals in the field of education, training and youth)

(Official Journal of the European Union C 362 of 12 December 2013)

2014/C 82/05

Due to technical problems encountered by applicants, the deadline for submission of applications for ‘Key Action 1 — Mobility of individuals in the field of education, training and youth’ of 17 March 2014 (point 6 of the call) has been prolonged until 24 March 2014, 12.00 (noon), Brussels time.

24 March 2014

---
U.S. flag
              An official website of the United States government Skip to main content   end of header Census.gov Newsroom Releases 2010 Census
 Newsroom Archive
 Skip left menu navigation
 About the Newsroom
 				Facts for Features
 				**News Releases**
 				Press Kits
 				Tip Sheets
 Release Information CB11-CN.73 **Contact:**  Public Information Office
301-763-3030
 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:  TUESDAY, MARCH 8, 2011 Media Advisory — Census Bureau Ships Local 2010 Census Data to Pennsylvania http://www2.census.gov/census_2010/01-Redistricting_File--PL_94-171/ http://factfinder2.census.gov The data will include summaries of population totals, as well as data on race, Hispanic origin and voting age for multiple geographies within the state, such as census blocks, tracts, voting districts, cities, counties and school districts. According to Public Law 94-171, the Census Bureau must provide redistricting data to the 50 states no later than April 1 of the year following the census. As a result, the Census Bureau is delivering the data state-by-state on a flow basis in February and March. All states will receive their data by April 1, 2011.
  https://www.census.gov/rdo  http://2010.census.gov/news/press-kits/redistricting.html Please visit <http://2010.census.gov/2010census/data/> for an interactive map showcasing county-level population change from 1960 to 2010, as well as state-level data on race and Hispanic or Latino origin for 2010. The widget will be updated as states are released and can be embedded on your website. Follow us on Twitter, Facebook, Flickr and YouTube (/uscensusbureau).
  CONNECT WITH US

Information Quality
                    Data Linkage Infrastructure
                    Data Protection and Privacy Policy
                    Accessibility      
                    FOIA
                    Inspector General
                    No FEAR Act
                    U.S. Department of Commerce
                    USA.gov
                   Measuring America's People, Places, and Economy
#### Peter Joseph FINELLI, Petitioner, v. Patricia Joan FINELLI, Respondent.

No. 41532.

Supreme Court of Florida.

Nov. 4, 1971.

Certiorari denied. 250 So.2d 659.

ROBERTS, C. J., and ADKINS, BOYD, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur.
Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed November 26 , 2013
.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14
- 13
- 00971
- CR NO. 14
- 13
- 00972
- CR

REGINALD KEITH BANKS , Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appellee
On Appeal from the 248th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No s . 1376089 & 1376090

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
Appellant was charged in two separate indictments for assault of two public servants. In trial court cause number 1 376089 appellant entered a guilty plea pursuant to a plea bargain agreement with the State. In exchange for appellant’s guilty plea the State agreed to dismiss the indictment in cause number 1376090 and recommend a three

- year sentence. In accordance with t he terms of the plea bargain2

agreement, the trial court dismissed the indictment in cause number 1376090 and sentenced appellant to confinement for three years in the Institutional Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. Appellant filed notic e s of appeal from the judgment in cause number 1376089 and the dismissal in cause number 1376090

. We dismiss the appeal s
. In trial court cause number 1376089 (appellate court cause number 14

- 13

- 00971

- CR), t he trial court entered a certification of the defendant’s right to appeal in which the court certified that this is a plea bargain case, and the defendant has no right of appeal. See T ex. R. App. P. 25.2(a)(2). The trial court’s certification is included i n the record on appeal. See T ex. R. App. P. 25.2(d). The record supports the trial court’s certification. See Dears v. State , 154 S.W.3d 610, 615 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). In trial court cause number 1376090 (appellate cause number 14

- 13

- 00972

- CR), there is no judgment of conviction because the trial court dismissed the charge pursuant to the plea bargain agreement. Generally, an appellate court only has jurisdiction to consider an appeal by a criminal defendant where there has been a final judgment of convic tion. Workman v. State , 170 Tex. Crim. 621, 343 S.W.2d 446, 447 (1961); McKown v. State , 915 S.W.2d 160, 161 (Tex. App.

C Fort Worth 1996, no pet.). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal s
.

PER CURIAM
Panel consists of Justices McCally, Busby, and Wise

. Do Not Publish

— T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 47.2(b)
U.S. flag
              An official website of the United States government Skip to main content   end of header Census.gov Newsroom Releases Miscellaneous
 Newsroom Archive
 Skip left menu navigation
 About the Newsroom
 				Facts for Features
 				**News Releases**
 				Press Kits
 				Tip Sheets
 Release Information CB12-TPS.74 **Contact:** Public Information Office
 FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:  FRIDAY, OCT. 19, 2012 "Wages and Benefits" Live on C-SPAN's "America by the Numbers" To find out more about the wages and benefits Americans receive from their employers, tune in to "America by the Numbers" on C-SPAN's Washington Journal on Friday, Oct. 19, 2012, at approximately 9 a.m. EDT. William Wiatrowski, Associate Commissioner for Compensation and Working Conditions at the Bureau of Labor Statistics, discusses the compilation of data on compensation, which are the wages and benefits that working Americans receive from their employer. Each Friday, C-SPAN's "America by the Numbers" segment features information from the federal statistical system. The program highlights the trends and allows the public to call in or email their views. More information on previous C-SPAN programs is available at <https://www.census.gov/newsroom/cspan.html>. **No news release associated with this report. Tip Sheet only.**
  CONNECT WITH US

Information Quality
                    Data Linkage Infrastructure
                    Data Protection and Privacy Policy
                    Accessibility      
                    FOIA
                    Inspector General
                    No FEAR Act
                    U.S. Department of Commerce
                    USA.gov
                   Measuring America's People, Places, and Economy
#### Kenneth A. PLANTE, Dempsey J. Barron, Phillip D. Lewis, Jack D. Gordon and Jon C. Thomas, Petitioners, v. The FLORIDA COMMISSION ON ETHICS, Respondent.

No. HH-431.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

April 6, 1978.

*1354Tobias Simon, Miami, Charles L. Carlton, and Richard C. McFarlain, Tallahassee, for petitioners.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., James D. Whisenand, Deputy Atty. Gen., for respondent.

Bruce C. Starling, Gen. Counsel, Miami, and Donald M. Middlebrooks, Miami, of Sunshine Amendment, Inc., for amicus curiae.

MELVIN, Judge.

Upon consideration of the pleadings filed in this cause by the petitioners and respondent and oral argument of counsel, this Court on December 23, 1977, 354 So.2d 87, rendered its opinion wherein it was considered, held and determined that, as to a member of the Legislature of Florida, the respondent was without authority to enter any judgment as to “probable cause” that failure on the part of such member to file financial disclosure statements constituted a breach of public trust. The authority of the respondent to conduct investigations, file its report and to disseminate the same was ruled upon. The Court' ruled that under Article III, Sections 2 and 4, Florida Constitution, the Senate is the sole judge of the qualifications and elections of its members and has the sole power to punish or to expel any one of its members. It follows, therefore, that the Senate has the sole power to adjudge that a Senator has committed any act, the effect of which would constitute a breach of the public trust and for which he should be unseated or otherwise disciplined.

It appears from the pleadings filed before this Court that the respondent Commission, on February 15, 1978, entered its formal order, paragraph 2(c) thereof, ruling that petitioners “by failing to file such disclosure, the above-named parties have breached the public trust.”

It is blatantly apparent that a body, such as the Commission, found without even the authority to find “probable cause” that an offense has been committed may not subsequently find such person “guilty” of a breach of the public trust by reason of failure to make such filing.

Paragraph 2(c) of the final order and public report of said Commission of date February 15, 1978, being in plain conflict with the order and opinion of this Court, is void and without any force and effect.

With reference to the petition to find the respondents in contempt of this Court, we find that they are not in contempt of court. Upon a reading of the transcript of the proceedings conducted by such respondents, it is clear that they acted upon inadequate legal advice and there is nothing before this Court to indicate that either commissioner did not act in good faith.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

BOYER, Acting C. J., and ERVIN, J., concur.
#### Spencer L. SMITH, Appellant, v. Vincent F. STRAWBRIDGE and Marion S. Strawbridge, his wife, Appellees.

No. 72-411.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Jan. 19, 1973.

Rehearing Denied Feb. 20, 1973.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.
#### William Henry DRAYTON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Nos. 71-225, 72-248.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Aug. 22, 1973.

W. Daniel Kearney, Asst. Public Defender, Bradenton, and William Henry Drayton, in pro. per., for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Charles Corees, Jr., Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

We have carefully considered the briefs and record on appeal and find that the appellant’s motion under RCrP 3.850, 33 F.S. A., is without merit.

Affirmed.

MANN, C. J., and LILES and HOB-SON, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 32

 

FORM OF 906 CERTIFICATION

The certification set forth below is being submitted in connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended January 1, 2005 (the "Report") for the purpose of complying with Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the "Exchange Act") and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code.

David G. Whalen, the Chief Executive Officer and Kevin F. Mahoney, the Chief Financial Officer of A.T. Cross Company, each certifies that, to the best of his knowledge:
#### Robert Allen RUSSELL, Petitioner, v. Louie L. WAINWRIGHT, Director, Division of Corrections, State of Florida, Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, Respondent.

No. 73-469.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

July 27, 1973.

Robert Allen Russell, pro se.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Tallahassee, and Guy E. Labalme, Asst. Atty. Gen., Tampa, for respondent.

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner filed his petition for writ of habeas corpus alleging that he was entitled to a direct appeal by way of habeas corpus on the ground that “to the best of his knowledge and belief” he was not advised of his right to appeal by the trial court.

In response to the rule issued to the respondent, it is shown by the minutes of the trial court that the petitioner was advised by the court of his right to appeal and of his right to have counsel for appeal purposes.

Upon consideration of respondent’s response, the petition is hereby

Denied.

HOBSON, A. C J„ and McNULTY and BOARDMAN, JJ., concur.
From: Mark Champion [ mailto:mark@hearthlabsolutions.com ]

Sent: Wednesday, July 30, 2014 4:50 PM

To: Toney, Mike

Cc: Wood, Gil; Sanchez, Rafael; Brandon Subject: Pellet cert using ASTM 2779

Mike,

England's stove works is nearly finished with development of two new pellet stove models which I have been helping them with. We expect to schedule EPA certification testing in the next few days for one
and the second will follow a few weeks later.

We wo uld like to get EPA's approval to use the new proposed test method for pellet heaters (ASTM

2779

- 10) during this certification testing, even prior to EPA's new regulation going into effect. I understand that under the current NSPS, EPA has the authority t o allow alternate test methods. For England's Stove Works, the benefit would primarily be financial in that testing costs may be significantly reduced with the proposed method and presumably, testing would be valid once the new regulations do go into effe ct; the later would possibly make testing on these models unnecessary in the future (other than audit testing as required).

Development laboratory results show emissions of about 1 g/hr using the current NSPS methods. We expect numbers approximately 30% lower using ASTM 2779

- 10 however testing has been very limited
thus far since allowance of the method is undetermined.

In public and private meetings and conversations, I have never heard a negative comment or concern
about the use of ASTM 2779

- 10. I rea lize this is no guarantee of it's inclusion in the new NSPS but allowance by EPA of this 'alternate' method would be applauded by all concerned. I believe the method to be more technically valid in that it includes transition periods of emissions, not jus t steady state operation using four discreet power settings. This better mimics field operation. (It would be nice to
find a similar solution for wood stoves as well.)

Please consider allowing England's to use ASTM 2779

- 10 for these upcoming certificat ions. I assume a letter of allowance will be necessary and as available, this should be directed to:

Brandon Morrison England's Stove Works, Inc
589 South Five Forks Road
Monroe, VA 24574

800

- 516

- 3636 x144 bmorrison@englanderstoves.com

Thank you for your consideration of this matter.

Sincerely, Mark Champion Hearthlab Solutions, LLC

650 302 5517
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             NOV-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               APR-30-1999
<CASH>                                       1,456,000
<SECURITIES>                                 8,100,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,367,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (19,000)
<INVENTORY>                                    658,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            11,822,000
<PP&E>                                       3,750,000
<DEPRECIATION>                               (597,000)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              20,573,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,344,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        68,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  19,161,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                20,573,000
<SALES>                                      3,007,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,007,000
<CGS>                                        1,095,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  765,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              1,164,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                   447,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            717,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   717,000
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.11
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.10
        

</TABLE>
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 3020

To amend the Water Quality Act of 1987 relating to the treatment works

being constructed by the International Boundary and Water Commission

in San Diego, California.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

SEPTEMBER 8, 1993

Mr. FILNER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the

Committee on Public Works and Transportation

A BILL

To amend the Water Quality Act of 1987 relating to the

treatment works being constructed by the International

Boundary and Water Commission in San Diego, California.

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

3 SECTION 1. DEADLINE FOR CONSTRUCTION OF TREAT4 MENT WORKS.

5 Section 510(e) of the Water Quality Act of 1987 (101

6 Stat. 81) is amended by adding at the end the following:

7 ‘‘The capacity of such treatment works shall be, at a mini8 mum, 50,000,000 gallons per day. Construction of such
2

•HR 3020 IH

1 treatment works shall be completed not later than Decem2 ber 31, 1995.’’.

3 SEC. 2. FEDERAL SHARE.

4 Section 510(f) of the Water Quality Act of 1987 (101

5 Stat. 81) is amended by adding at the end the following:

6 ‘‘The United States shall negotiate an agreement with the

7 Government of Mexico for payment of any increase in the

8 costs of construction of treatment works incurred as a re9 sult of the next to the last sentence of subsection (e).’’.

Æ
#### Richard Paul BRANDT, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 71-430.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Nov. 16, 1971.

Philip A. Hubbart, Public Defender and Alan S. Becker, Asst. Public Defender, for appellant.

Robert L. Shevin, Atty. Gen., Barry Scott Richard, Asst. Atty. Gen., and William L. Rogers, Legal Intern, for appellee.

Before SWANN, C. J., and CHARLES CARROLL and HENDRY, JJ.

*370PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. Morris v. State, Fla.App.1971, 255 So.2d 704; Ward v. State, Fla.App.1970, 236 So.2d 187; Steinhauser v. State, Fla.App.1969, 228 So.2d 446; Manning v. State, Fla.App.1967, 203 So.2d 360; and Hines v. State, Fla.App.1967, 195 So.2d 605.