alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
                                                                  EXHIBIT 24.1
                          PACIFIC GAS TRANSMISSION COMPANY
                                 BOARD OF DIRECTORS
                              ACTION BY WRITTEN CONSENT

       The Board of Directors of Pacific Gas Transmission Company, a California
  corporation, acting  by  written  consent pursuant to the Bylaws of this
  corporation and the Corporations Code of California, hereby adopts the
  following resolutions:

            WHEREAS, the management of the corporation has recommended the
       filing of the corporation's Annual Report on Form 10-K of the fiscal
       year ending December 31, 1996, with the Securities and Exchange
       Commission; and
            WHEREAS, the Board finds that it is in the best interests of the
       corporation to approve the Annual Report on Form 10-K for fiscal year
       ended December 31, 1996 in substantially the form as circulated to the
       Board prior to approval;
            NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that Frank R. Lindh and Vincent
       P. Salvi are hereby authorized to sign, on behalf of this corporation
       and as attorneys in fact for the President, Vice President and Chief
       Financial Officer and Controller of this corporation, the Pacific Gas
       Transmission Company Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year
       ended December 31, 1996, required by Section 13 or 15(d) of the
       Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and all amendments and other filings
       or documents related thereto to be filed with the Securities and
       Exchange Commission, and to do any and all acts necessary to satisfy
       the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and the
       regulations of the Securities and Exchange Commission adopted thereto
       with regard to said Annual Report on Form 10-K.
            BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that this written consent may be signed
       in counterparts, the sum of which constitute the entire written
       consent.

       The undersigned, constituting all of the members of the Board of 
  Directors, hereby consent to and approve the action described above and direct
  the Secretary to file this written consent with the minutes of the proceedings
  of the Board of Directors.

       Dated this 26th day of March, 1997.


                               /s/  TONY F. DISTEFANO
                               ----------------------
                                  Tony F. DiStefano

                              /s/  ROBERT D. GLYNN, JR.
                              -------------------------
                                Robert D. Glynn, Jr.

                              /s/  JACK F. JENKINS-STARK
                              --------------------------
                                Jack F. Jenkins-Stark

                              /s/  STEPHEN P. REYNOLDS
                              --------------------------
                                 Stephen P. Reynolds

                              /s/  GORDON R. SMITH
                              --------------------------
                                   Gordon R. Smith
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
     THIS SCHEDULE  CONTAINS SUMMARY  FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED  FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF ICG COMMUNICATIONS,  INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES
FOR THE SIX MONTHS  ENDED JUNE 30,  1997,  AS RESTATED  TO REFLECT THE  COMBINED
OPERATIONS  OF ICG AND NETCOM AS THOUGH THE MERGER  OCCURRED AT THE BEGINNING OF
THE PERIOD  PRESENTED,  AND IS  QUALIFIED  IN ITS  ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                  JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                    JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                              451,834
<SECURITIES>                         12,413
<RECEIVABLES>                        57,792
<ALLOWANCES>                          6,131
<INVENTORY>                           4,184
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                    530,934
<PP&E>                              710,883
<DEPRECIATION>                      113,338
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                    1,222,203
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>               123,245
<BONDS>                             908,911
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>               271,652
<PREFERRED>                            0<F1>
<COMMON>                                657
<OTHER-SE>                          (82,566)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>       1,222,203
<SALES>                                0<F1>
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                    207,841
<CGS>                                  0<F1>
<TOTAL-COSTS>                       166,602
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                    148,748
<LOSS-PROVISION>                      2,796
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                   53,633
<INCOME-PRETAX>                    (147,859)
<INCOME-TAX>                             13
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                (162,741)
<DISCONTINUED>                         0<F1>
<EXTRAORDINARY>                        0<F1>
<CHANGES>                              0<F1>
<NET-INCOME>                       (162,741)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                         (3.87)
<EPS-DILUTED>                          0<F1>
<FN>
<F1>THIS VALUE IS NOT APPLICABLE.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
#### McGINNESS v. McGINNESS.

No. 12650.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. Dallas.

March 18, 1939.

Z. E. Coombes, of Dallas, for appellant.

W. E. Pinkston, of Dallas, for appellee.

LOONEY, Justice.

L. M. McGinness sued his wife, Delia McGinness, for divorce, alleging in substance, that soon after their marriage, the defendant began a course of unkind and cruel treatment of plaintiff, which grew worse until plaintiff was forced, on July *674IS, 1935, to separate from her; that she would fuss, nag, quarrel, curse, and threaten plaintiff, and that about July 15, 1935, told plaintiff to get his clothing, leave -and stay away, all of which rendered their living together a,s husband and wife insupportable.

The defendant’s answer contained a general demurrer and a general denial. The general demurrer was overruled and, on trial before a jury, the defendant was found guilty of cruelty, as alleged, and the verdict meeting the approval of the court, judgment was'rendered for plaintiff as prayed, from which defendant appealed.

Only one assignment of error is urged, that is, that the court erred in overruling defendant’s general demurrer to plaintiff’s petition. This assignment is overruled, on authority of McCullough v. McCullough, 120 Tex. 209, 36 S.W.2d 459, Priddy v. Priddy, Tex.Civ.App., 78 S.W.2d 1110, and other cases to the same effect, hence, the judgment below is affirmed.

Affirmed.
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT

I, Michael G. Moore, Chief
Financial Officer of Gulfport Energy Corporation (the Company), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that, to the best of my knowledge:



|(1) | the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended December 31, 2009 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13
(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m(a) or 78o(d)); and
|--- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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



|                     |  |  |  |  |  |                         |  |                                         
|-------------------- |  |  |  |  |  | ----------------------- |  | ----------------------------------------
|                     |  |  |  | 
|                     |  |  | 
|Date: March 12, 2010 |  |  |  |  |  | /s/    MICHAEL G.
MOORE
|                     |  |  |  |  |  |                         |  | Michael G. Moore Chief Financial Officer

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.
Amendment to 2000 Stock Plan



 Exhibit 4.7 
  

AMENDMENT 
 to the 

MICROTUNE, INC. 
 2000 STOCK PLAN

  
 Pursuant to Section 16 of the Microtune, Inc. 2000 Stock
Plan (the “Plan”), the Plan is hereby amended as follows: 
  
 1. The first paragraph of Section 3 of the Plan is deleted in its entirety and the following is substituted in its place: 
  
 “Stock Subject to the Plan. Subject to the provisions of Section 14 of the Plan, the maximum aggregate number of Shares that may be optioned
and sold under the Plan is 10,554,496 shares, plus the number of Shares subsequently returned to the Company’s 1996 Stock Option Plan (the “1996 Plan”) as a result of termination of options which were issued and outstanding under the
1996 Plan on the date immediately prior to the date of stockholder approval of the original adoption of the Plan. The Shares may be authorized, but unissued, or reacquired Common Stock.” 
  
 2. This Amendment shall amend only those provisions of the Plan set forth
herein, and those sections, paragraphs and sentences not expressly amended hereby shall remain in full force and effect. 
  
 3. This Amendment shall be effective immediately upon its approval by the stockholders of the Company. 
  
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this Amendment as of
February 27, 2004. 
  

			
	MICROTUNE, INC.
		
	By:	 	/s/ James A. Fontaine
		
	Name:	 	James A. Fontaine
		
	Title:	 	Chief Executive Officer & President


  
 APPROVED BY THE
STOCKHOLDERS OF 
 THE COMPANY ON MAY 5, 2004
# United States Court of Appeals Forthe First Circuit

No. 11-1275 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Appellee, v. JAMES M. CAMERON, Defendant, Appellant. ERRATA SHEET The opinion of this Court issued on November 14, 2012 is amended as follows: On page 64, line 2, the phrase "Counts One, Three, Four, Five and Eleven" should be replaced with "Counts One, Three, Four, Five, Eleven and Fourteen."
EXHIBIT 99.1

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of WellPoint Health Networks Inc. (the "Company") for the period ending
September 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Leonard D. Schaeffer, 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 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.

|/s/LEONARD D. SCHAEFFERLeonard D. Schaeffer Chief Executive
OfficerNovember 13, 2002 | 
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ | 

---

QuickLinks
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION FROM THE COMPANY'S
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS OF AND FOR THE QUARTER ENDED MARCH 31, 1997 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND NOTES
THERETO.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                          31,996
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   40,106
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,876
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                74,475
<PP&E>                                          68,835
<DEPRECIATION>                                   8,531
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 139,406
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           25,922
<BONDS>                                          5,369
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           215
<OTHER-SE>                                     105,402
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   139,406
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                38,015
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   27,497
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 4,668
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   535
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 173
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  5,487
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,195
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,292
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .16
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .16
        

</TABLE>
REGULATORY EVALUATION

Directorate Identifier: 2013-NM-116-AD

Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific 

requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska, where aviation might be the only mode of 

transportation?

YES ( ) explain NO (X)
<PAGE>   1
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.1
 
                            CABLE-SAT SYSTEMS, INC.
 
                       COMPUTATION OF NET LOSS PER SHARE
 
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                 3 MONTHS ENDED     3 MONTHS ENDED
                                                                  DECEMBER 31,       DECEMBER 31,
                                                                      1995               1996
                                                                 --------------     --------------
<S>                                                              <C>                <C>
PRIMARY
Weighted average number of common shares outstanding during
  the period.................................................       1,833,333          4,972,000
Incremental common shares attributable to the application of
  SAB 64 and 83..............................................       2,268,500                 --
                                                                   ----------         ----------
Shares used in computing net loss per share applicable to
  common shareholders........................................       4,101,833          4,972,000
                                                                   ==========         ==========
Net loss.....................................................      $ (254,765)        $(1,314,266)
                                                                   ==========         ==========
Net loss per share applicable to common shareholders               $    (0.06)        $    (0.26)
                                                                   ==========         ==========
FULLY DILUTED
Weighted average number of common shares outstanding during
  the period.................................................       1,833,333          4,972,000
Incremental common shares attributable to the application of
  SAB 64 and 83..............................................       2,268,500                 --
                                                                   ----------         ----------
Total shares outstanding for purposes of computing fully
  diluted net loss per share.................................       4,101,833          4,972,000
                                                                   ==========         ==========
Net loss.....................................................      $ (254,765)        $(1,314,266)
                                                                   ==========         ==========
Net loss per fully diluted share.............................      $    (0.06)        $    (0.26)
                                                                   ==========         ==========
</TABLE>
 
Fully diluted earnings per share is not presented because its effects are
anti-dilutive
#### NATIONAL STANDARD LIFE INS. CO. v. FLEMING.

No. 2917.

Court of Civil Appeals of Texas. El Paso.

Jan. 4, 1934.

Rehearing Denied Jan. 25, 1934.

Jos. W. Bailey, Jr., of Dallas, for appellant.

W. O. Scott, of Dallas, for appellee.

HIGGINS, Justice.

Appellee was an insurance solicitor for appellant. Under the contract of employment, appellant. agreed to pay him a commission on the first year’s premiums on all insurance procured by appellee. Appellee brought this suit to rcover a commission upon a policy of insurance issued by appellant to S. J. Waugh, and from an adverse judgment the defendant appeals.

The evidence shows appellee procured the insurance, though appellant’s district manager, Ashby, finally closed the contract with Waugh. As to this appellant makes no point, but asserts Waugh was induced to take the insurance upon an agreement to allow him a rebate of one-third of the first year’s commission. . Such an agreement is forbidden by article 5053, R. S., as amended by Acts 1929, 1st Called Sess., c. 3, § 1 (Vernon’s Ann. Civ. St. art. 5053). It is asserted the undisputed evidence shows Ashby made such an agreement ; that plaintiff was a party thereto, and he cannot maintain the action because of the unlawful nature of the agreement out of which it arises.

The evidence clearly supports the view that appellee was not a party to any such agreement. The question is one of fact, under the evidence, and the finding of the jury, in appellee’s favor, controls.

Affirmed.
# Amtsblatt C 303A/15.

| | ISSN 1977-088X |
| --- | --- |
| Amtsblatt
  der Europäischen Union | C 303A |
| | |
| Ausgabe in deutscher Sprache | Mitteilungen und Bekanntmachungen | 58. Jahrgang15. September 2015 |

ISSN 1977-088X

Amtsblatt

der Europäischen Union

C 303A

Ausgabe in deutscher Sprache

Mitteilungen und Bekanntmachungen

58. Jahrgang15. September 2015

---

| Informationsnummer | Inhalt | Seite |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | V   Bekanntmachungen |
| | VERWALTUNGSVERFAHREN |
| | Europäisches Amt für Personalauswahl (EPSO) |
| 2015/C 303A/01 | Reserveliste — Allgemeines Auswahlverfahren — EPSO/AST-SC/02/14 — Personal für interne Sicherheit (SC 1) | 1 |

Informationsnummer

Inhalt

Seite

V   Bekanntmachungen

VERWALTUNGSVERFAHREN

Europäisches Amt für Personalauswahl (EPSO)

2015/C 303A/01

Reserveliste — Allgemeines Auswahlverfahren — EPSO/AST-SC/02/14 — Personal für interne Sicherheit (SC 1)

1

---

| DE | |
| --- | --- |

DE

---

V Bekanntmachungen

VERWALTUNGSVERFAHREN

Europäisches Amt für Personalauswahl (EPSO)

| 15.9.2015 | DE | Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union | CA 303/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.9.2015

DE

Amtsblatt der Europäischen Union

CA 303/1

---

Reserveliste (1)

Allgemeines Auswahlverfahren

EPSO/AST-SC/02/14 — Personal für interne Sicherheit (SC 1)

(2015/C 303 A/01)

| BACCOLINI | Riccardo Maria |
| --- | --- |
| BOGAERTS | Joachim |
| BOHY | Geert |
| BOTEA | Corina-Ionica |
| CORREIA NEVES CORDEIRO DE AZEVEDO | Rui |
| FERNANDEZ RAMOS | Pablo |
| ΙΟΑΝ | Aurelian Mihut |
| IVANOV | Catalin |
| JACOBS | Iris |
| MARINKOVIC | Vladimir |
| MATHIEU | Fabrice Amour Jenny |
| MURARU | Stefan Marian |
| NEGOITA | Adrian |
| NGELIAS | Nikolaos |
| NIEMINEN | Jörgen |
| PACHECO BERNARDINO | Sebastien |
| PACIFICO | Marco |
| PANS | Christophe |
| PAUSESCU | Alexandru |
| RUIZ LOZANO | Jose-Manuel |
| SARDELLI | Silvia |
| SCHNELL | Karine |
| STEFANAKAKIS | Constantin |
| STOIAN | Valeria |
| SZÉPLAKI | Florian |
| VERLEGH | Eric |
| VUKOSAV | Denis |
| ZIPIS | Emanuel |

BACCOLINI

Riccardo Maria

BOGAERTS

Joachim

BOHY

Geert

BOTEA

Corina-Ionica

CORREIA NEVES CORDEIRO DE AZEVEDO

Rui

FERNANDEZ RAMOS

Pablo

ΙΟΑΝ

Aurelian Mihut

IVANOV

Catalin

JACOBS

Iris

MARINKOVIC

Vladimir

MATHIEU

Fabrice Amour Jenny

MURARU

Stefan Marian

NEGOITA

Adrian

NGELIAS

Nikolaos

NIEMINEN

Jörgen

PACHECO BERNARDINO

Sebastien

PACIFICO

Marco

PANS

Christophe

PAUSESCU

Alexandru

RUIZ LOZANO

Jose-Manuel

SARDELLI

Silvia

SCHNELL

Karine

STEFANAKAKIS

Constantin

STOIAN

Valeria

SZÉPLAKI

Florian

VERLEGH

Eric

VUKOSAV

Denis

ZIPIS

Emanuel

Die Reserveliste gilt bis zum 24. Juli 2018.

---

(1)  Auf ausdrücklichen Wunsch einer erfolgreichen Prüfungsteilnehmerin oder eines erfolgreichen Prüfungsteilnehmers wird ihr bzw. sein Name nicht veröffentlicht.

---