alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.1

                           DRILEX INTERNATIONAL INC.

                           COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME
                    PER COMMON AND COMMON EQUIVALENT SHARE

              (IN THOUSANDS OF DOLLARS, EXCEPT PER SHARE AMOUNTS)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION> 
                                               TWELVE MONTHS ENDED
                                                   DECEMBER 31,
                                             ----------------------
                                                1996        1995
                                             ----------  ----------
<S>                                          <C>         <C> 
Net income.................................  $    3,042  $    1,784
                                                         ==========
Interest expense on Convertible
  Promissory Note, net of tax..............          66
                                             ----------
As adjusted for fully diluted
  computation..............................  $    3,108
                                             ==========
Weighted average common shares out-
  standing.................................   5,558,347   4,004,682
Incremental effect of shares issued
  during the twelve months prior to
  the filing date of the Registration
  Statement................................           -      277,921
                                             ----------  -----------
Incremental shares attributable to
  outstanding stock options and
  warrants.................................     153,355      128,357
                                             ----------  -----------
Weighted average common and common
  equivalent shares outstanding............   5,711,702    4,410,960
                                                         ===========
Incremental shares attributable to
  conversion of Convertible
  Promissory Note..........................     182,948
                                             ----------
As adjusted for fully diluted computation..   5,894,650
                                             ==========
Net income per common and common
  equivalent share:
  Primary..................................  $      .53  $       .40
                                             ==========  ===========
  Fully diluted............................  $      .53
                                             ==========
</TABLE> 

Note:  The computations in this exhibit are presented in accordance with
       Regulation S-K, Item 601(b)(11). Under the provisions of Accounting
       Principles Board Opinion No. 15, the fully diluted amounts are not
       presented in the Company's Consolidated Statement of Income, since such
       amounts are anti-dilutive.
#### UPPER NECHES RIVER MUNICIPAL WATER AUTHORITY OF TEXAS, Appellant, v. A. M. WYLIE, Appellee.

No. 3993.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Waco.

Jan. 25, 1962.

Justice & Kugle, Athens, for appellant.

Fields & Fields, Athens, Gordon R. Well-born, Henderson, for appellee.

McDONALD, Chief Justice.

This is a condemnation case in which the Upper Neches River Municipal Water Authority of Texas sought condemnation of 190 acres of land of A. M. Wylie. The Trial Court awarded the plaintiff the land, and awarded defendant $25,050 damages. From such award, plaintiff appealed, and caused transcript and statement of facts to be filed in the 5th Court of Civil Appeals at Dallas. The case was transferred to this court by our Supreme Court. Prior to the time of submission of such cause, plaintiff, appellant, filed motion in this court moving that such appeal be dismissed.

Motion is granted, and appeal dismissed.
#### Shirley Neal BABB et al., Appellants, v. Fred BABB, Appellee.

Court of Appeals of Kentucky.

Sept. 21, 1956.

*729Shumate & Shumate, Irvine, for appellants.

John W. Walker, Irvine, for appellee.

STANLEY, Commissioner.

This is a child custody case. A divorce was awarded the appellant on the ground of cruelty. No alimony was asked. The young couple have a boy who was about two and one-half years old when the judgment was rendered. The judgment provides that each parent shall have his custody one week alternately unless the mother should go to Ohio to work as contemplated, and under that condition, the period should be three weeks. The mother did go to work in Dayton, Ohio, and executed the bond required by the court to secure compliance with its order. The father was directed to pay $30 a month to the mother for the child’s support. The mother seeks to have the judgment reversed and the entire custody of the child given to her.

The parents were married when very young. They lived, at least until after the child was born, with her parents in Raven-na. For a few months before the separation they lived with the husband’s parents and for a brief time alone in a locality called Wisemantown. The conditions are much like those in Shehan v. Shehan, 152 Ky. 191, 153 S.W. 243. It is the general rule, as the appellant submits, that a child of tender years should be cared for by his mother unless she is shown to be unfit for the responsibility. But the father’s rights may not be ignored. Always the welfare of the child is the chief consideration, regard being had for all the circumstances of the particular case. Disposition of the care and custody of a child is committed to the trial court’s discretion. The judgment seems proper and just. Shehan v. Shehan, supra. Certainly it is not shown to have been either unjustified or an abuse of judicial discretion. The father of this child seems to be not very industrious, and is pretty rough when drinking. At least, he does not seem to be appreciative of the responsibility of fatherhood. The mother’s employment necessarily requires that the child be looked after by someone else. In all probability, this child will live with and be cared for by the paternal and maternal grandparents. They are estimable people and their homes and environments are much alike. All of them want the little fellow.

Changes in the circumstances and other causes may justify or require a modification of the order of custody at any time.

The judgment is affirmed.
FILED United States Court of Appeals Tenth Circuit 

### April 29, 2014 Elisabeth A. Shumaker Clerk of Court UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS TENTH CIRCUIT
WENDEL ROBERT WARDELL, JR.,
No. 13-1339 (D.C. No. 1:13-CV-00037-LTB) (D. Colo.) Petitioner–Appellant,
v. EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, Colorado Department of Corrections; ARCHIE B. LONGLEY, Warden; ATTORNEY GENERAL OF THE STATE OF COLORADO, Respondents–Appellees.
ORDER DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY *
Before LUCERO , McKAY , and MURPHY , Circuit Judges. Petitioner Wendel Wardell, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, seeks a certificate of appealability to appeal the district court’s denial of his § 2254 habeas petition. Petitioner filed this § 2254 petition in January 2013 to challenge his 1996 Colorado convictions for theft and forgery. Petitioner’s sentence for these convictions expired when he was released on parole in 2004, and his sentence was fully discharged in 2008. Because Petitioner’s sentence was discharged more than four years before he filed his federal

* This order is not binding precedent except under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. It may be cited, however, for its persuasive value consistent with Fed. R. App. P. 32.1 and 10th Cir. R. 32.1.habeas petition, the district court concluded it lacked jurisdiction to entertain the petition based on the “custody” requirement of § 2254(a). The court dismissed the action for lack of jurisdiction. Petitioner contends he satisfies the custody requirement because he is currently in custody in a federal prison on a federal sentence that was ordered to run consecutively to any sentence previously imposed. However, the district court clearly explained why this argument is incorrect, with citation to applicable legal authorities. See, e.g. , Brown v. Warden , 315 F.3d 1268 (10th Cir. 2003) (rejecting essentially the same argument in a similar case). Reasonable jurists would not debate the district court’s resolution of this
case. See Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000)
. We accordingly DENY Petitioner’s request for a certificate of appealability and DISMISS the appeal. Petitioner’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis on appeal is GRANTED
. ENTERED FOR THE COURT
Monroe G. McKay Circuit Judge

-2-
#### Thomas Lorenza WILLIAMS, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 37276.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 18, 1964.

Rehearing Denied Jan. 6, 1965.

Kenneth Bing, Freeport, for appellant.

Leon B. Douglas, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

McDonald, judge.

This is an appeal from an entry of a nunc pro tunc judgment.

Appellant was convicted on October 22, 1951, in the District Court of Brazoria County for theft of property over the value of $50.00; his punishment, two years confinement in the state penitentiary.

On June 8, 1964, the trial court on appellant’s application entered an order correcting the sentence to show that it should have contained the following: “This term to run concurrent with Federal Term existing on October 22, 1951.”

Appellant is attempting to here raise matters during the trial held some thirteen years before and apparently attack a sentence imposed against him in Moore County, Texas, in 1961. The trial court’s action did not disturb appellant’s status and constituted no action at all as the sentence was valid and had already been served. There is nothing before us for review.

No error is claimed in the nunc pro tunc proceeding, and we find none.

Accordingly, the judgment is affirmed.
Exhibit 10.7


 


I. Contracting Parties LIN,GENG MENG, to be known as Party A
LIAN,CHENG YU, to be known as Party B


 


II. Party A holds 49 percent of the total stock of Yao-Teh International
Recreation Company, Inc. (hereafter to be known as Yao-Teh) equalling 190,000,000NT. The address of Yao-Teh is 333 Keelung Rd,
World Trade Bldg 29F, Taipei, Taiwan. LO, FUN MING acts as its chairman of the board. Yao-Teh established the Royal Country Club
Golf Course (business registration certification is included in the appendix as Document 1) in Miaoli County, Zaoqiao and Touwu
Townships.


III. Party A acts as Yao-Teh 's vice chairman of the board and
is responsible for the company's operations. Because the golf course has a lack of funding, Party A agrees to the below-stated
assurance conditions to the 400,000,000NT loan originating from Party B.


 


1 . 1. Yao-Teh owns the Royal Country Club and nearby lands
together equaling more than 210 hectares (a list of land records is included in the appendix as Document 2). The land is already
subject to a 380,000,000NT mortgage with the Taiwan Business Bank and is guaranteed for 310,000,000NT by the golf course's members.
Party A agrees that the aforementioned mortgage rights 500,000,000NT and ground rights are assigned to Party B indefinitely. 2.
Party A agrees to 15 days after the contract's signing to give Party B 49 percent of the total stock (enclosed as document 3 in
the appendix). Within 30 days after the contract's signing, Yao-Teh will provide Party B all information regarding sold and unsold
golf passes and their associated serial numbers. Party A will provide documents regarding the sale to Party B. Concurrently, Party
A will provide Party B will 500 unsold golf passes. Party A promises in the future that either it or Yao-Teh will use 70 percent
of the proceeds from golf pass sales as repayment to Party B's loan. After repayment, this condition will be canceled.


 


2 .


 


3. The interest during the lending period will be 1.2 percent.
Party A shall repay the principal and installment interest to Party B before December, 30, 1993 (the installment repayment schedule
is enclosed in the appendix as document. Upon a missed payment, the entire amount will become due.


 


4. Party B agrees at the time of signing the contract to pay
Party A 330,000,000NT. Party A agrees at the provide Party B rights in the mortgage and ground right (as described above) as well
as the associated documentation to Party B (enclosed in the appendix as document 5). After waiting for Party B or their appointee
to register their name, Party A will pay 70,000,000NT.


 




    	 		 



     


    

  


Both Parties agrees to set mortgage of 1968931.51 m2
land and other land to be completed within 2 weeks signing of contract.


 


5. Any matters not cover in this contract will be decided by
the agreement of both parties.


 


	Contracting Parties:
	Party A: LIN,GENG MENG
	ID: A101632641


 


	Party B: LIAN,CHENG YU
	ID:


 


	Witness: CHEN,YONG CHENG
	ID:


 


June 15, 1993
EXHIBIT 32.2








SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATIONS





In connection with the Annual Report of Security Capital Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Connie Hawkins, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, to the best of my knowledge and belief, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act of 2002, that:





1)
The Report 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 Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Date:           March 12, 2010








/s/ Connie Hawkins


Connie Hawkins


Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 10.24


 


March 27, 2017


 


Boston Therapeutics, Inc.


354 Merrimack Street, #4


Lawrence, MA 01843


 


		Re:	Executive Employment Agreement dated August 12, 2016 between Boston Therapeutics, Inc. and Carl W. Rausch (the “Agreement”)



 


Gentlemen:


 


Section 1(B) of the Agreement shall be amended
and restated as follows:


 


(B) Except for business travel by the Executive that may
from time to time be necessary or advisable on behalf of the Company, the Executive will provide his services in a virtual manner
and all parties understand that Executive will be located in Hong Kong and Executive will travel to and from the various territories
covered by the Company.


 


We kindly request that you execute below agreeing
to the above amendment and restatement.


 


 


/s/ Carl W. Rausch


Carl W. Rausch


 


ACKNOWLEDGED AND AGREED:


 


Boston Therapeutics, Inc.


 


 


By:/s/ Colin Neill


Name: Colin Neill


Title: Authorized Person
Ed Arey & Sons, Inc. 

WV0078719

4/20/2011

Convert Data

EXTERNAL_PERMIT_NMBR

PERM_FE

ATURE_N

MBR

LIMIT_SE

T_DESIG

NATOR

LIMIT_SE

ASON_ID

MONITORI

NG_PERI

OD_END_

DATE

NMBR_O

F_REPO

RT

MONITO

RING_LO

CATION_

CODE

PARAME

TER_CO

DE MC3

NMBR_O

F_DAYS FC3

WV0078719 001 C 2 30-Apr-09 6 1 1042 0.25 181 16WV0078719 001 C 2 31-Oct-09 6 1 01042 0.01 184 23

WV0078719 002 C 2 30-Apr-09 6 1 01042 0.02 181 21

WV0078719 002 C 2 31-Oct-09 6 1 01042 0.02 184 14WV0078719 003 C 2 30-Apr-09 6 1 01042 0.02 181 24

WV0078719 003 C 2 31-Oct-09 6 1 01042 0.06 184 18

Incorrect data Corrected data
Import Table

Calc LBY using 

Revised FC3 NPID DSCH DRID MLOC SEAN MVDT

PRAM_C

ODE UPDT FIELD

0.0604 WV0078719 001 C 1 2 4/30/2009 50050 0.000235 FC30.0036 WV0078719 002 C 1 2 4/30/2009 50050 0.000215 FC30.0640 WV0078719 003 C 1 2 4/30/2009 50050 0.000245 FC30.0065 WV0078719 001 C 1 2 10/31/2009 50050 0.00016 FC30.0043 WV0078719 002 C 1 2 10/31/2009 50050 0.00014 FC30.0108 WV0078719 003 C 1 2 10/31/2009 50050 0.00018 FC30.00740.01660.0240

0.100.06
Exhibit 32.2



Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,

As Adopted Pursuant To

Section 906 of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



May 14, 2004



In connection with the Large Scale Biology Corporation Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2004 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Ronald J. Artale, certify, pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted
pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to my knowledge:



|(1) | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|(2) | that information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Large Scale Biology Corporation for the
fiscal periods covered by the Report.
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



By:

/s/    Ronald J. ArtaleRonald J. Artale Senior Vice President, Chief
Operating Officer and Chief Financial Officer Large Scale
Biology Corporation
**EXHIBIT 23.1**

 

 

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLICACCOUNTING FIRM 

 

The Board of Director 

Cytogen Corporation: 

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements (Nos. 33-30595, 33-52574, 33-57004, 33-63321, 333-00431, 333-04679, 333-27673, 333-48454, 333-58384, 333-59718, 333-75304, 333-109986 and333-121320) on Form S-8 and the registration statements (Nos. 33-35140, 33-77396, 333-43809, 333-83215, 333-34550, 333-33436, 333-72226, 333-100315, 333-106797, 333-109344, 333-110040 and 333-120262) on Form S-3 of Cytogen Corporation of our reportdated March ****15, 2005, which report is based in part on a report of other auditors (which report of the other auditors on the financial statements of PSMA Development Company LLC contains an explanatory paragraph that states that PSMADevelopment Company LLC has suffered recurring losses from operations and has a net capital deficiency that raise substantial doubt about its ability to continue as a going concern, and that its financial statements do not include any adjustmentsthat might result from the outcome of that uncertainty), with respect to the consolidated balance sheets of Cytogen Corporation and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2004 and 2003, and the related consolidated statements of operations,stockholders’ equity and comprehensive loss, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2004, and of our report dated March 15, 2005 with respect to management’s assessment of the effectiveness ofinternal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2004 and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2004, which reports appear in the December 31, 2004 annual report on Form 10-K of CytogenCorporation. 

 

/s/ KPMG LLP 

 

 

Princeton, NewJersey 

March 15, 2005
Exhibit 32.1

Certification of Chief Executive Officer pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to

Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with this quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2010 (the Report) of OPNET
Technologies, Inc. (the Company), I, Marc A. Cohen, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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: August 6, 2010 |  | By: |  | /s/    MARC A.
COHEN                
|                      |  |     |  | Marc A. Cohen                       
|                      |  |     |  | Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

          - 45 CFR Part 170

### CFR Correction

This rule is being published by the Office of the Federal Register to correct an editorial or technical error that appeared in the most recent annual revision of the Code of Federal Regulations.

In Title 45 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Parts 140 to 199, revised as of October 1, 2023, amend section 170.580 by reinstating paragraph (a)(3)(ii) to read as follows:

§ 170.580

* * * * *

(a) * * *

(3) * * *

(ii) ONC may assert exclusive review of certified health IT as to any matters under review by ONC and any similar matters under surveillance by an ONC-ACB.

* * * * *

[FR Doc. 2024-02940 Filed 2-9-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 0099-10-P
Exhibit 32


                                CERTIFICATION OF
               CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
      AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


     Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350, as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and in connection with the filing by Soyo Group,
Inc.  (the  "Company")  with  the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  of its
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three months ended September 30, 2005 (the
"Report"), the undersigned does hereby certify that:

     (1) The Report fully  complies  with the  requirements  of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

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

A signed  original of this  written  statement  required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.



 /s/ MING TUNG CHOK
------------------------------
Name:  Ming Tung Chok
Title: Chief Executive Officer
Date:  November 14, 2005


 /s/ NANCY CHU
------------------------------
Name:  Nancy Chu
Title: Chief Financial Officer
Date:  November 14, 2005
#### Zona SMITH, Appellant, v. The STATE of Texas, Appellee.

No. 27765.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Nov. 2, 1955.

*233¡No appearance for appellant.

Leon B. Douglas, State’s Atty., Austin, for the State.

PER CURIAM.

Possessing beer in a dry area for the purpose of sale is the offense, with punishment assessed at a fine of $200.

The record on appeal contains no statement of facts or bills of exception. All proceedings appear to be regular, and nothing is presented for review.

The judgment is affirmed.