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


                        STERLING BANCORP AND SUBSIDIARIES
                 Statement Re: Computation of Per Share Earnings



<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                      Three Months Ended           Nine Months Ended
                                                         September 30,                 September 30,
                                                 -----------     -----------     -----------     -----------
                                                     1999           1998            1999             1998
                                                 -----------     -----------     -----------     -----------

<S>                                              <C>             <C>             <C>             <C>
Net income                                       $ 3,684,808     $ 3,254,405     $10,700,861     $ 9,370,842
Less: preferred dividends                             16,319          12,734          49,269          38,319
                                                 -----------     -----------     -----------     -----------
Net income available for common shareholders
      and adjusted for diluted computation       $ 3,668,489     $ 3,241,671     $10,651,592     $ 9,332,523
                                                 ===========     ===========     ===========     ===========



Weighted average common shares outstanding         8,040,787       8,261,166       8,116,514       8,244,125
Add dilutive effect of:
      Stock options                                  116,197         218,259         123,645          94,990
      Convertible preferred stock                    241,883         243,929         242,906         244,785
                                                 -----------     -----------     -----------     -----------
Adjusted for assumed diluted computation           8,398,867       8,723,354       8,483,065       8,583,900
                                                 ===========     ===========     ===========     ===========

Basic earnings per share                         $      0.45     $      0.39     $      1.31     $      1.13
                                                 ===========     ===========     ===========     ===========
Diluted earnings per share                       $      0.44     $      0.38     $      1.26     $      1.09
                                                 ===========     ===========     ===========     ===========
</TABLE>


                                       30
I 

112TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5565 

To reduce temporarily the duty on mixtures containing Imidacloprid and 

Cyfluthrin or its β-Cyfluthrin isomer. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 8, 2012 

Mrs. CAPITO introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Ways and Means 

A BILL 

To reduce temporarily the duty on mixtures containing 

Imidacloprid and Cyfluthrin or its β-Cyfluthrin isomer. 

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

3 SECTION 1. MIXTURES CONTAINING IMIDACLOPRID AND 

4 CYFLUTHRIN OR ITS β-CYFLUTHRIN ISOMER. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of 

6 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is 

7 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following 

8 new heading: 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5565 IH

‘‘ 9902.01.00 Mixtures containing 1-[(6- 

Chloro-3-pyridinyl)methyl]- 

N-nitro-2- 

imidazolidinimine) 

(Imidacloprid) (CAS No. 

138261–41–3) and (R)- 

cyano-(4-fluoro-3- 

phenoxy)phenyl)methyl 

(1R,3R)-3-(2,2- 

dichloroethenyl)-2,2- 

dimethylcyclopropane-1- 

carboxylate (cyfluthrin) 

(CAS 68359–37–5) or its 

beta-cyfluthrin isomer 

(RS)-a-cyano-4-fluro-3- 

phenoxybenzyl- 

(1RS,3RS;1RS,3SR)-2- 

(2,2-dichlorovinyl)-2,2- 

dimethylcyclopropanecarboxylate, including application adjuvants provided for 

in subheading 3808.91.25 Free No change No change On or before 

12/31/2015 ’’. 

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

2 subsection (a) applies to articles entered, or withdrawn 

3 from warehouse for consumption, on or after the 15th day 

4 after the date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


rfrederick on DSK6VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
AFS-11-044-E Dec 21 2010 Exemption No. 10153A Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2010-0895

Mr. Thomas A. Johnson Commercial Pilot and Flight Instructor

10156 New Devon Street Munster, IN 46321

Dear Mr. Johnson:

This letter is to inform you that we have denied your petition to amend Exemption No. 10153. It explains the basis for our decision and describes its effect.

The Basis for Our Decision

By letter dated October 30, 2010, you petitioned the Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) for an amendment to Exemption No. 10153. That exemption from § 91.109(a) and (b)(3) of Title 14, Code of Federal Regulations (14 CFR) allows you to conduct certain flight instruction in Beechcraft Bonanza, Debonair, Ba ron, and TravelAir aircraft equipped with a functioning throwover control wheel instead of functioning dual controls. The current exemption limits operations to flights for completion of the flight review required by § 61.56 and for accomplishing recency of experience as required by § 61.57. You request an amendment to the conditions and limitations of Exemption No. 10153 that would allow flight instruction for the commercial pilot rating.

The FAA has determined that good cause exists for not publishing a summary of the petition in the Federal Register because the exemption would not set a precedent, and any delay in acting on this petition would be detrimental to you.

The FAA has determined that operations under this exemption may be conducted for completion of the flight review required by § 61.56 and for accomplishing recency of2

experience as required by § 61.57. Operations under this exemption do not include flight instruction toward a pilot certificate.

The training for a commercial pilot certificate includes ten takeoff and landing tasks along with four tasks relating to slow flight and st alls. You have failed to explain how granting the exemption would not adversely affect safet y. According to the National Transportation Safety Board’s Annual Review of U.S. General Aviation Accident Data 2005 , about half of general aviation accidents occur during takeo ff or landing. Extensive takeoff and landing training is required in preparation for the commercial practical test. Allowing flight instruction for a commercial pilot license in an aircraft equipped with a functioning throwover control wheel instead of functioning dual cont rols would put your student in a high risk environment without the instructor’s ability to assist in maneuvering the airplane.

Our Decision

In consideration of the foregoing, I find that a grant of the amendment to Exemption No. 10153 would not be in the public interest. Therefore, under the authority contained in 49 U.S.C. 40113 and 44701, which the FAA Administrator has delegated to me, I hereby deny your petition for an amendment to Exemption No. 10153.

Sincerely,

/s/ Raymond Towles Acting Director, Flight Standards

Service
June 17, 2011

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: Notes on call w/ ARB re: VOC as a PM2.5 plan precursor in SJV

FROM: Scott Bohning

EPA Region 9, Air Quality Analysis Office

TO: Docket No. EPA-R09-OAR-2010-0516

Call w/ ARB re: VOC as a PM2.5 plan precursor in SJV

Wed 01/26/2011 11:00 AM - 12:00 PM

ARB: Karen Magliano, Sylvia Zulawnick, Ajith Kaduwela, John DaMassa, Patricia Velasco

EPA OAQPS: Brian Timin, Chet Wayland

EPA Region 9: Scott Bohning, Carol Bohnenkamp, Frances Wicher

Karen M.: Fundamental idea: evaluate VOC in context of real-world control strategy; modeling -

50% VOC is useful, but just a first step. NOx is primary focus of control strategy, ask what is 

incremental benefit of VOC as additional control; large -50% VOC reduction not really feasible. 

Examined the three main modeling papers, plus some internal work, and some Mike Kleeman 

additional work.

- See Kleeman 2005 paper isopleths: disbenefit of VOC control

- Pun 2009 paper: no VOC benefit/response till very high PM2.5 concentrations near end of 

episode, > 100 μg/m3, and have not seen such high episodes lately. Design value now around 70 

μg/m3.

Ajith K.: oxidizing power from background O3 at around 50 ppb is enough to generate free 

radicals to drive nitrate chemistry. CRPAQS episode highs were due to stagnation, with some 

VOC-assisted photochemistry [late in episode]

Karen M.: With SJV's controls, PM2.5 not building up to such high levels, the VOC-assisted 

photochemistry doesn't kick in. There are still stagnation episodes, with as severe a potential as 

the CRPAQS episodes, but such high PM2.5 not seen.

John dM: the control program helped, there is less precursor load

Ajith K.: There is not much O3 during that episode [in Pun paper], so it is probably **not** 

VOC-driven oxidation

Livingston paper, Table 1: "Vehicle NH3" is most appropriate emission scenario, looks more 

consistent with other papers' VOC reduction results
Karen M.: District (receptor modeling documentation) was showing % response to compare 

amongst individual pollutants, not in context of a realistic control strategy. For argument on 

VOC as a plan precursor, ARB is not currently planning on evaluating the realism of big VOC 

reductions

Brian T.: See PM2.5 rule language: says "significant contribution" means plan precursor. NOx 

control more effective than VOC is not the deciding factor, and [VOC] impacts probably large in 

SJV than in many other areas.

Ajith K.: Would one ever need [anthropogenic] VOC control? There is a lot of biogenic VOC. 

Carnegie Mellon group working on SOA [secondary organic aerosol], some "secondary" may 

actually be primary, from vehicle emissions; Lynn Russell at Scripps working on SOA functional 

groups
#### The People of the State of New York, Plaintiff, *v.*Charles B. Langford, Defendant.

County Court, Schenectady County,

February 7, 1958.

*Stanley J. Marynowski*for defendant.

*Morris M. Cohn, District Attorney (W. Albert De Matteo*of counsel), for plaintiff.

*479Archibald 0. Wemple, J.

The defendant states that his plea of guilty was entered without adequate counseling by his court-appointed attorney, in ignorance of the potential consequences of such a plea, in a situation where the District Attorney allegedly *“*distorted ” the true facts of the case, and in a “ courtroom atmosphere of hostility ” and at a time when the defendant was “ placed in fear.”

The record is barren of any facts to substantiate any of the charges presented in the petition. In fact, the record shows that the defendant was represented by mature and able counsel and given every consideration to which he was entitled.

The matter of ultimate punishment is always the responsibility of the judge. There is absolutely no evidence in the record to support the defendant’s charge that there was any *“*promise made to the defendant.” It is reasonable to assume that probation was considered by the presiding Judge in fixing sentence. But again, the decision as to imprisonment, or release, or probation, was left to the independent judgment of the committing Judge.

This defendant has made many applications for writs of error and other forms of relief. Each has been carefully reviewed and passed upon. The grounds stated in this application are the same as found in other previous applications. Nothing new or different from allegations contained in previous petitions is presented herein. *Res judicata*will apply in this application. The defendant should know by this time that he cannot vary the record of this case by unfounded and unwarranted charges of fraud and misrepresentation against those officials charged with the administration of justice at the time of his indictment, imprisonment and sentence.

What has been decided previously stands as the decision of this court unless the defendant can present some new evidence or grounds warranting the granting of the writ.

Application for hearing denied. Submit order.
```

[Congressional Bills 112th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5689 Introduced in House (IH)]

112th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5689

         To suspend temporarily the duty on Pigment Orange 74.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 9, 2012

 Mr. Hultgren introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                      Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
         To suspend temporarily the duty on Pigment Orange 74.

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

SECTION 1. PIGMENT ORANGE 74.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``     9902.01.00        2-                  Free            No change      No change      On or before     ''.
                          Naphthalenecarbox                                                 12/31/2015
                          amide, N-(4-
                          chlorophenyl)-4-
                          (2-(2,5-dichloro-
                          4-
                          ((dimethylamino)s
                          ulfonyl)
                          phenyl)diazenyl)-
                          3-hydroxy- (CAS
                          No. 85776-14-3)
                          (provided for in
                          subheading
                          3204.17.60)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Re:	Petition	for	Amendment	to	Add	Aircraft	to	Exemption	No.	#	12315	Issued	to AirFrame	LLC	(Regulatory	Docket	No.	FAA

- 2015

- 1710

Dear	Sir	or	Madam:

AirFrame	LLC	was	granted	exemption	(Exemption	No.	12315,	Docket	No.	FAA

- 2015

- 1710)	to	use	UAS	for	aerial da ta	collection	using	the	DJI	S80 0	and	Tarot	680Pro. AirFrame	LLC	requests	for	an	amendment	to	that	exemption	to	add	the	DJI	Inspire	1, DJI	Phantom	3,	Tarot	650	and	Tarot	810	aircraft.		AirFrame	LLC	agrees	to	operate

these	aircraft	under	the	same	restrict ions	in	the	exemption.

These aircraft	have	been	previously	granted	in	other	exemptions	a nd	would	not	set any	precedent.		All	proposed	aircraft	are	of	the	same	or	smaller	size	and	weight	as the	DJI	S800	and	would	utilize	the	identical	flight	and	ground	sta tion	components used	in	the	original	exemption.

Sincerely,

Nathan	Richards
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 Commerce

###### National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

          - [I.D. 091400A]

# AGENCY:

National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

# ACTION:

Issuance of photography permit no. 986-1592-00.

# SUMMARY:

Pandion Enterprises, P.O. Box 545, Summerland, California 93067, [Permit Holder: Bruce Reitherman], has been issued a permit to take by Level B harassment one species, elephant seal(Mirounga angustirostris), of non-threatened, non-endangered marine mammals for purposes of commercial photography.

# ADDRESSES:

The permit and related documents are available for review upon written request or by appointment in the following offices:

Permits Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS,1315 East-West Highway, Room 13130, Silver Spring, MD 20910 (301/713-2289); and 

Regional Administrator, Southwest Region, NMFS, 501 West Ocean Boulevard, Long Beach, California 90802-4213, (562/980-4000).

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                     On August 9, 2000, notice was published in the                     **Federal Register**                    (65 FR 48679) that the above-named applicant had submitted a request for a permit to take one species of marine mammals by Level B harassment during the course of commercial photographic activities in Piedras Blancas and Ano Nuevo, California.  The requested permit has been issued, under the authority of §104(c)(6) of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1361*et seq.*).                

Dated: October 5, 2000.

Ann D. Terbush,

Chief, Permits and Documentation Division, Office of Protected Resources, National Marine Fisheries Service.

[FR Doc. 00-26655 Filed 10-16-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-22-S
## 1998 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t a t e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit

5-14-1998 

# I n g r a m v . B uck s C oun t y
P r e c e de n t i al or N on-P r e c e de n t i al : D ocke t 97-1360

F o l lo w thi s a nd a dd it ion al w ork s a t : h tt p://d i g it alc ommon s .l a w . v i l l a no v a . e du/thir dc ir c uit_1998

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou gh t t o y ou for f r e e a nd ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t a t e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit a t V i l l a no v a U niv e r sit y S choo l of L a

w Di g it al Re posit or y

. It h as be e n a c c e pt e d for inclusion in 1998 D e c i sion s b y a n a uthor i z e d a dmini s tr a t or of V i l l a no v a U niv e r sit y S choo l of L a

w Di g it al Re posit or y

. F or mor e infor m a t ion, p le as e c on t a ct Be n j a min

. C a rl s on@l a

w . v i l l a no v a . e du

. 

## Re c omme nde d C it a t ion

" I n gr a m v . B uck s C oun t y " (1998). 1998 D e cisio n s . P ape r 112. h tt p://d i g it alc ommon s .l a

w . v i l l a no v a . e du/thir dc ir c uit_1998/112

### UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

97-1360 INGRAM v. BUCKS COUNTY
The following modifications have been made to t he Court's opinion issued on 5/12/98 in the above-entitled app eal and will appear as part of the final version of the opinion:

1. On Page 1, change the District Court Docket Number from D.C. Civ. No. 95-02122 to D.C. Civ. No. 96-02122.

/s/ P. Dou glas Sisk, Clerk

Date: May 14, 1998
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 201 (Tuesday, October 17, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 61347]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-26579]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; Notice 
of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Child Health and Human 
Development Initial Review Group, Medical Rehabilitation Research 
Subcommittee.
    Date: October 23-24, 2000.
    Time: 8 am to 5 pm.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: Woodfin Suites Hotel, Conference Room, 1380 Piccard 
Drive, Rockville, MD 20850.
    Contact Person: Anne Krey, Scientific Review Administrator, 
Division of Scientific Review, National Institute of Child Health, 
and Human Development, National Institutes of Health, 6100 Executive 
Blvd., Rm. 5E03, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-6908.
    This notice is being published less than 15 days prior to the 
meeting due to the timing limitations imposed by the review and 
funding cycle.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.209, 
Contraception and Infertility Loan Repayment Program; 93.864, 
Population Research; 93.865, Research for Mothers and Children; 
93.929, Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research, National 
Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: October 6, 2000.
Anna P. Snouffer,
Acting Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 00-26579 Filed 10-16-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM
FORM 10-Q FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED JUNE 30, 1998 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                       8,926,069
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                5,633,159
<ALLOWANCES>                                   123,543
<INVENTORY>                                 15,493,893
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            30,215,105
<PP&E>                                       4,606,026
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,474,949
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              63,608,461
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        6,481,372
<BONDS>                                     11,719,873
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        47,259
<OTHER-SE>                                  45,010,778
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                63,608,461
<SALES>                                     16,951,274
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            17,215,460
<CGS>                                        8,319,427
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                8,319,427
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             6,097,024
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                38,074
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             446,806
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              2,799,009
<INCOME-TAX>                                   929,774
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,869,235
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,869,235
<EPS-BASIC>                                     0.42
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.42


</TABLE>