alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>   1
                                                                Exhibit 11

                          AAMES FINANCIAL CORPORATION
                               Earnings Per Share
         For the three and six months ended December 31, 1995 and 1996

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                        THREE MONTHS ENDED                 SIX MONTHS ENDED
                                                            DECEMBER 31,                      DECEMBER 31,
                                                       1995             1996             1995             1996
                                                   ------------     ------------     -----------      ------------
<S>                                                  <C>             <C>              <C>              <C>
Weighted average shares outstanding                  15,897,000       18,265,000       15,897,000       17,051,000

Common equivalent shares:

   Options and warrents                                 672,000        1,503,000          634,000        1,533,000

   Convertible subordinated notes                             -        4,108,000                -        4,108,000
                                                   ------------     ------------     -----------      ------------

                                                     16,569,000       23,876,000       16,531,000       22,692,000
                                                   ============     ============     ============     ============

Net income                                           $7,289,000      $18,274,000      $12,947,000      $13,650,000

Adjustment to add back interest on
  Convertible subordinated notes                              -          917,125               -         1,875,010
                                                   ------------     ------------     -----------      ------------

Adjusted net income                                   7,289,000       19,191,125       12,947,000       15,525,010
                                                   ============     ============     ============     ============

Fully diluted earnings per share                     $     0.44      $      0.80      $      0.78      $      0.68
                                                   ============     ============     ============     ============
</TABLE>
# C_2020095EN.01002301.xml

| 23.3.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 95/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.3.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 95/23

---

Judgment of the General Court of 12 February 2020 — WD v EFSA

(Case T-320/18) (1)

(Civil service - Temporary agents - Fixed term contract - Decision not to reclassify - Lack of staff reports - Carrying forward reclassification points - Manifest error of assessment - Non-renewal decision - Duty of care - Manifest error of assessment - Misuse of power - Principle of the protection of legitimate expectations - Duty to state reasons - Right to a hearing - Liability)

(2020/C 95/27)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: WD (represented by: L. Levi and A. Blot, lawyers)

Defendant: European Food Safety Authority (represented by: D. Detken and F. Volpi, Agents, and D. Waelbroeck, A. Duron and C. Dekemexhe, lawyers)

Re:

Application based on Article 270 TFEU seeking, first, the annulment of the EFSA’s decision of 14 July 2017 not to reclassify the applicant at Grade AST 6 in the 2017 reclassification exercise, the EFSA’s decision of 9 August 2017 not to renew her contract, and the decisions of 9 February and 12 March 2018 dismissing the complaints against those two decisions and, second, seeking compensation for the material and non-material damage the applicant claims to have suffered as a result of those decisions.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | dismisses the application; |
| --- | --- |

1.

dismisses the application;

| 2. | orders WD to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

orders WD to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 259, 23. 7. 2018.

---
21494

#### State v. Nguyen

Affirmed
# C_2018436EN.01002202.xml

| 3.12.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 436/22 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

3.12.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 436/22

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Landgericht Hamburg (Germany) lodged on 31 August 2018 — Eurowings GmbH v JJ and KI

(Case C-557/18)

(2018/C 436/30)

Language of the case: German

Referring court

Landgericht Hamburg

Parties to the main proceedings

Defendant and appellant: Eurowings GmbH

Applicants and respondents: JJ, KI

Question referred

Is the total flight distance to be used as a basis for calculating the entitlement to compensation under Article 7 of Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 (1) also in the case where the arrival of a passenger at the final destination is delayed by three hours or more solely as a result of a delay/cancellation of the connecting flight, but the feeder flight was on time, the two flights were operated by different air carriers and the booking confirmation was issued by a tour operator which combined the flights for its customer?

---

(1)  Regulation (EC) No 261/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 11 February 2004 establishing common rules on compensation and assistance to passengers in the event of denied boarding and of cancellation or long delay of flights, and repealing Regulation (EEC) No 295/91 (OJ 2004 L 46, p. 1).

---
18677

#### State v. Cochran

February 25, 1997

Order No. 97-20

Affirmed
USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.

www.aphis.usda.gov/aphis/biotechnology

Countries Engaged

Countries Engaged (over 40)

• Delivered 16 presentations at scientific conferences 

throughout the United States.

• Issued more than 32 communications to over 85,000 

stakeholders. 

• Delivered approximately 10 presentations on 

the biotechnology regulations to international 

representatives from over 40 countries.

• Partnered with the Organization for Economic 

Cooperation and Development to finalize the OECD 

Consensus Document on Environmental Considerations 

for the Release of Transgenic Plants. 

Engagement Activities

FY23 Inspections

Conducted 711 inspections.

80% conducted in-person

FY23 Permits

Issued 784 authorizations to

225 organizations.

90% met specified time frame

FY23 Confirmation 

Requests

Responded to 40 

confirmation requests in an 

average of 51 days.

100% met specified time frame

FY23 Regulatory 

Status (RSR) Reviews

Received 48 RSR requests

and issued 15 RSR responses, 

with 8 new speicies reviewed.

20% met specified time frame

51

39

44

40

9

6

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

FY23

FY22

FY21

Total Confirmed Average Time (Days)

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

0

5

10

15

20

Petitions

(FY92-FY22)

(Avg)

RSR FY22 RSR FY23

Number Average Time

Confirmation Requests Regulatory Status Determinations

The Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service’s (APHIS) Biotechnology Regulatory Services (BRS) safeguards American 

agriculture and fosters the safe research, development, and commercialization of innovative new agricultural products. APHIS 

regulates plants and certain organisms developed using genetic engineering to ensure they do not pose a pest risk to plants.

FY2023 DATA SNAPSHOT

BIOTECHNOLOGY REGULATORY SERVICES
20085

#### Moody v. Moody

Affirmed
#### PACER SPORT AND CYCLE, INC., Plaintiff and Respondent, v. Frank MYERS and Carl W. Myers, Defendants and Appellants.

No. 13839.

Supreme Court of Utah.

April 14, 1975.

E. H. Fankhauser, of Cotro-Manes, Warr, Fankhauser & Beasley, Salt Lake City, for defendants-appellant.

Robert M. McDonald, of Jones, Waldo, Holbrook & McDonough, Salt Lake City, for plaintiff-respondent.

ELLETT, Justice:

This is an appeal by Carl W. Myers from the refusal of the court to set aside a judgment taken by default against him.

It appears that Frank Myers entered into some sort of a contract with the plaintiff for the purchase of a racing motorcycle and that his father, Carl W. Myers, cosigned the promise to pay. Payment was not made, and since neither Frank nor the motorcycle could be located, the attorney *617for plaintiff wrote Carl requesting payment. In reply to the letter, Carl phoned the attorney stating that it was not his debt, that he only signed for the purpose of obtaining credit for his son Frank, and that he would not pay since Frank got all the benefits of the transaction. The attorney advised him that he was obligated to pay.

Thereafter an action was commenced and summons served personally upon Carl, who called the attorney again stating that it was of no concern to him; that Frank was in California and plaintiff would have to wait until Frank returned. The lawyer again told Carl that regardless of his feeling on the matter, he was liable, and unless he filed an answer, a default judgment would be taken against him. The attorney also told Carl to verify the statement with his own attorney and respond to the complaint. Carl ignored the advice and did nothing.

The plaintiff undertook to find Frank and the motorcycle but was unable to do so and finally took a default judgment against Carl.

Carl then moved to set aside the default judgment and stated in his affidavit of excusable neglect that he told plaintiff’s counsel that the son was the one who should have been sued and that the default judgment was not taken until one year after the action was commenced. He also claimed that he assumed the action had been taken care of and therefore took no steps to file an answer to the complaint.

None of these claims even approaches “excusable neglect” as required under Rule 60(b), U.R.C.P., in order to be relieved from a default judgment.

The trial court has a discretion in determining whether or not a default judgment should be set aside, and we, on appeal, should not reverse its ruling except for abuse of discretion, to wit, that it is arbitrary, capricious, or not based on adequate findings of fact or on the law.

We do not think the trial court abused its discretion in this matter and, therefore, affirm the ruling made. The respondent is awarded costs.

HENRIOD, C. J., and TUCKETT, CROCKETT and MAUGHAN, JJ., concur.
##### 



Exhibit 32.2 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 In
connection with Amendment No. 2 to the Quarterly Report of Belden & Blake Corporation (the Company) on Form
10-Q/A for the quarterly period ended March 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates
indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the knowledge of the undersigned:  1.
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2.
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. Date:  March 30, 2006
    By:

/s/ James M. VanderhiderJames M. Vanderhider,
President and 
Chief Financial Officer
 This certification
accompanies the Form 10-Q/A and shall not be treated as having been filed as part
of the Form 10-Q/A. 25
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 75 Introduced in House (IH)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 75

 Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on Transportation 
       and Infrastructure in the One Hundred Fourteenth Congress.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            February 2, 2015

   Mr. Shuster (for himself and Mr. DeFazio) submitted the following 
resolution; which was referred to the Committee on House Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on Transportation 
       and Infrastructure in the One Hundred Fourteenth Congress.

    Resolved,

SECTION 1. AMOUNTS FOR COMMITTEE EXPENSES.

    For the expenses of the Committee on Transportation and 
Infrastructure (hereafter in this resolution referred to as the 
``Committee''), including the expenses of all staff salaries, there 
shall be paid, out of the applicable accounts of the House of 
Representatives for committee salaries and expenses, not more than 
$16,721,800 for the One Hundred Fourteenth Congress.

SEC. 2. SESSION LIMITATIONS.

    Of the amount specified in section 1--
            (1) not more than $8,360,900 shall be available for 
        expenses incurred during the period beginning at noon on 
        January 3, 2015, and ending immediately before noon on January 
        3, 2016; and
            (2) not more than $8,360,900 shall be available for 
        expenses incurred during the period beginning at noon on 
        January 3, 2016, and ending immediately before noon on January 
        3, 2017.

SEC. 3. VOUCHERS.

    Payments under this resolution shall be made on vouchers authorized 
by the Committee, signed by the Chairman of the Committee, and approved 
in the manner directed by the Committee on House Administration.

SEC. 4. REGULATIONS.

    Amounts made available under this resolution shall be expended in 
accordance with regulations prescribed by the Committee on House 
Administration.
                                 <all>
```
Marketing and
Regulatory Programs

Animal and Plant
Health Inspection
Service

Veterinary Services

Natlonal Veterinary
Services Laboratories

Center for
Veterinary Blologics

P.O. Box 844
1920 Dayton Avenue
Ames, 1A 50010
(515) 337-7266

(515) 337-6100

Research,
Education, and
Economics

Agricultural Research
Service

Midwest Area

National Animal
Disease Center

P.O. Box 70
1920 Dayton Avenue
Ames, |A 50010
(515) 337-7201

Federal Relay Service
(Volce/TY/ASCIY/Sparish)
1-800-877-8339

USDA is an equal
opportunity provider
and employer

SDA

aa

United States Department of Agriculture

December 11, 2013
Subject: Environmental Management Policy Statement

To: Employees at the National Centers for Animal Health (NCAH)

The NCAH is committed to conducting its mission in a manner that protects human
health and the environment, promotes the principles of environmental stewardship
within our community, and strives for excellence by implementing continuous
improvement in our processes. Compliance with federal, state, and local environmental
laws, regulations, codes, and standards, as well as Federal Executive Orders, is essential
to accomplish our goals and protect the environment.

Environmental stewardship is a core value at the NCAH and all employees have the
responsibility for ensuring that environmental impacts are considered in all operations,
including those performed by contractors or visitors. All employees are responsible for
fostering and maintaining a culture of Environmental Awareness and shall comply with
established environmental protection standards, policies, and procedures related to their
work.

An environmental protection attitude and knowledge of proper practices and procedures
will facilitate the overall success of the NCAH’s Environmental Management Program
and our Missions. The NCAH Environmental Management System will be based on
international ISO 14001 standards. Beyond compliance, we shall implement
procedures and practices that emphasize pollution prevention, waste minimization,
energy and water conservation, and sustainable practices as means to achieve, maintain,
and demonstrate excellence in environmental stewardship.

As the Board of Directors for the NCAH, we are committed to comply with all
pertinent environmental laws, regulations, and directives.

Smt. 120 Meccan

Steven A. Karli Paul J. Hauer
Acting Director, CVB Acting Director, NVSL

Mine he Van
Diana L. Whippl

Director, NADC Associate Director, NADC
NUMBER 13-11-00405-CV

COURT OF APPEALS

THIRTEENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

CORPUS CHRISTI - EDINBURG

____________________________________________________________

ROBERT ZUNIGA, Appellant,

v.

EDINBURG REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER, ET AL., Appellees. 

____________________________________________________________

On Appeal from the 389th District Court 

of Hidalgo County, Texas.

____________________________________________________________

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Chief Justice Valdez and Justices Garza and Vela

Memorandum Opinion Per Curiam

The appellant's brief in the above cause was due on June 22, 2012. On July 3, 

2012, the Clerk of the Court notified appellant that the brief had not been timely filed and 

that the appeal was subject to dismissal for want of prosecution under Texas Rule of 

Appellate Procedure 38.8(a)(1), unless within ten days from the date of receipt of the 

Court's letter, appellant reasonably explained the failure and the appellee was not 
2

significantly injured by the appellant's failure to timely file a brief. To date, no response 

has been received from appellant. 

Appellant has failed to either reasonably explain his failure to file a brief, file a 

motion for extension of time to file his brief, or file his brief. Accordingly, the appeal is 

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF PROSECUTION. See TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a), 42.3(b). 

Any pending motions are dismissed as moot.

PER CURIAM

Delivered and filed this 

23rd day of August, 2012.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      Exhibit 15

                              ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP



                    REPORT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS


To Education Management Corporation and Subsidiaries:


We have reviewed the accompanying consolidated balance sheet of Education
Management Corporation (a Pennsylvania corporation) and Subsidiaries as of
December 31, 1997, and the related consolidated statements of income for the
three-month and six-month periods then ended, and the related consolidated
statement of cash flows for the six-month period then ended. These financial
statements are the responsibility of the Company's management.

We conducted our review in accordance with standards established by the
American Institute of Certified Public Accountants. A review of interim
financial information consists principally of applying analytical procedures to
financial data and making inquiries of persons responsible for financial and
accounting matters. It is substantially less in scope than an audit conducted
in accordance with generally accepted auditing standards, the objective of
which is the expression of an opinion regarding the financial statements taken
as a whole. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion.

Based on our review, we are not aware of any material modifications that should
be made to the financial statements referred to above for them to be in
conformity with generally accepted accounting principles.



                                                         /s/ ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP



Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania,

January 15, 1998
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 685 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

114th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 685

 Recognizing Linemen, the profession of Linemen, and the contributions 
 of these brave men and women to protect public safety, and expressing 
     support of designation of April 18, 2016, as National Lineman 
                           Appreciation Day.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 15, 2016

Mr. Tom Price of Georgia submitted the following resolution; which was 
            referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Recognizing Linemen, the profession of Linemen, and the contributions 
 of these brave men and women to protect public safety, and expressing 
     support of designation of April 18, 2016, as National Lineman 
                           Appreciation Day.

Whereas the profession of Lineman is steeped in personal, family, and 
        professional tradition;
Whereas Linemen are often first responders during storms and other catastrophic 
        events where these brave men and women work to make the scene safe for 
        the other public safety heroes;
Whereas Linemen work with thousands of volts of electricity high atop power 
        lines 24 hours a day, 365 days a year, to keep electricity flowing;
Whereas Linemen must often work under dangerous conditions far from their 
        families to construct and maintain the Nation's energy infrastructure;
Whereas Linemen put their lives on the line every day with little recognition or 
        appreciation from the community regarding the danger of their work; and
Whereas April 18, 2015, would be an appropriate date to designate as National 
        Lineman's Appreciation Day: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives--
            (1) recognizes the efforts of Linemen in keeping the power 
        on and protecting public safety; and
            (2) supports the designation of National Lineman 
        Appreciation Day.
                                 <all>
```
# C_2020061EN.01003001.xml

| 24.2.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 61/30 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.2.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 61/30

---

Judgment of the General Court of 19 December 2019 — ZQ v Commission

(Case T-647/18) (1)

(Civil service - Officials - Psychological harassment - Article 12a of the Staff Regulations - Request for assistance - Article 24 of the Staff Regulations - Rejection of the request - Reasonable time - Absence of prima facie evidence - Obligation to state reasons - Liability)

(2020/C 61/36)

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Applicant: ZQ (represented by: B. Cortese and C. Cortese, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: B. Mongin, acting as Agent, and A. Dal Ferro, lawyer)

Re:

Application based on Article 270 TFEU seeking, first, annulment of the Commission decision of 15 December 2017 rejecting the request for assistance made by the applicant on 18 August 2017 and, in so far as is necessary, of the Commission decision of 19 July 2018 rejecting the complaint lodged by the applicant on 19 March 2018 and, second, compensation for the material and non-material damage he claims to have suffered.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders ZQ to bear his own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders ZQ to bear his own costs and to pay those incurred by the European Commission.

---

(1)  OJ C 16, 14.1.2019.

---