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

                     HI-LO AUTOMOTIVE, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

                  SCHEDULE OF COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE

                   FOR THE THREE YEARS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1996
                        (IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT SHARE DATA)
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                COLUMN A                                                    COLUMN B
                                                                                          DECEMBER 31,
                                                                                 1996         1995         1994
                                                                             -----------  -----------   -------
<S>                                                                           <C>          <C>           <C>       
Weighted average common shares outstanding.................................   10,756,000   10,733,000    10,703,000
Common equivalent shares resulting from stock options
   issued..................................................................           --           --        33,000
                                                                             -----------  -----------   -----------
Total weighted average common and common equivalent shares
   outstanding.............................................................   10,756,000   10,733,000    10,736,000
                                                                             ===========  ===========   ===========

Net income (loss)..........................................................  $  (53,723)  $     1,688   $     9,133
                                                                             ===========  ===========   ===========

Earnings (loss) per common and common equivalent share.....................  $    (4.99)  $       .16   $       .85
                                                                             ===========  ===========   ===========
</TABLE>
     Earnings (loss) per common and common equivalent share have been computed
by dividing net income (loss) by the weighted average number of common and
common equivalent shares outstanding. Common equivalent shares outstanding were
computed using the treasury stock method. The difference between shares for
primary and fully diluted earnings per share was not significant in any year. On
November 1, 1994, a note was issued that is convertible, effective November 1,
1996, into 93,859 shares of the companies Common Stock. As of December 31, 1996,
this note had no significant effect on earnings per share.
<PAGE>   1

                                   EXHIBIT 23

PETERSON SULLIVAN LETTERHEAD

                          INDEPENDENT AUDITORS CONSENT

     We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration
statement (No. 33-90026) on Form S-8 of Mercer International Inc. of our report
dated March 16, 1998, relating to the balance sheets of Mercer International
Inc. as of December 31, 1997 and 1996, and the related statements of operations,
shareholders' equity and cash flows for the years ended December 31, 1997, 1996
and 1995, which report appears in the Annual Report of Form 10-K for the year
ended December 31, 1997, of Mercer International Inc.

                                                  /s/ PETERSON SULLIVAN P.L.L.C.

March 25, 1998
Seattle, Washington

                                       49
#### TEXAS EMPLOYERS INSURANCE ASSOCIATION, Plaintiff in Error, v. Maurice SNYDER et al., Defendants in Error.

No. 1944—6568.

Commission of Appeals of Texas, Section A.

Feb. 26, 1936.

T. R. Boone, of Wichita Falls, and Lawther, Cox & Cramer and Wm. M. Cramer, all of Dallas, for plaintiff in error.

Grindstaff, Zellers & Hutcheson, of Weatherford, Weeks, Morrow, Francis & Hankerson, of Wichita Falls, and B. W. Tipton, of Electra, for defendants in error.

*321HICKMAN, Commissioner.

This is a companion case to Texas Employers Insurance Association v. Mrs. Maranda Russell et al., 91 S.W.(2d) 317, this day decided. The defendants in error are the beneficiaries under the Workmen’s Compensation Law (Vernon’s Ann. Civ.St. art. 8306. et seq.) of J. H. Snyder, who lost his life in the same explosion that took the life of J. B. Russell. In the Russell Case the evidence was introduced, after which a peremptory instruction was given in favor of the Texas Employers Insurance Association, while in this case a general demurrer was sustained to the petition of the claimants. Counsel have agreed that the judgment in the Russell Case should control the decision in this case. Acting on that agreement, the Court of Civil Appeals wrote no opinion herein, but merely made the notation that the same was reversed and remanded because that disposition had been made of the Russell Case. Giving effect to the agreement, we direct that the same order be entered herein as that entered in the other case. Accordingly, it is ordered that the judgment of the Court of Civil Appeals be reversed and that of the trial court be aD firmed.

Opinion adopted by the Supreme Court.
Order entered September 17, 2019

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-19-00857-CV

KENNETH BUHOLTZ, Appellant

V.

LEAP PROPERTY MANAGEMENT, ET AL., Appellees

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 2

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. CC-18-05525-B

ORDER

The clerk’s record in this appeal has been filed, but the court reporter’s record has not. 

From a review of the record, however, it appears no record exists as the appeal is from the trial 

court’s summary judgment. Accordingly, we deem the appellate record complete and ORDER

appellant’s opening brief be filed no later than October 28, 2019. 

/s/ KEN MOLBERG 

JUSTICE
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

ROBERTINA RANSOM

,

Appellant

,

v.

UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT EL PASO

,

Appe llee

. **§**

**§**

**§**

**§**

**§**

**§** No. 08

- 22

- 000 63

- C V

Appeal from the

County Court at Law No. 3

of El Paso County, Texas

(TC# 2020DCV1513 )

O R D E R

The Court GRANTS the Appellant’s third motion for extension of time within which to

file the brief until October 1 2 , 2022

. NO FURTHER MOTIONS FOR EXTENSION OF TIME

TO FILE THE APPELLANT’S BRIEF WILL BE CONSIDERED BY THIS COURT.

It is further ORDERED that the Hon. Stewart W. Forbes

, the Appellant ’s attorney, prepare

the Appellant ’s brief and forward the same to this Court on o r before October 1 2

, 2022

.

I T IS SO ORDERED this 12 th day of September , 2022.

PER CURIAM

B efore Rodriguez, C.J., Palafox, and Alley, JJ.
# C_2023195EN.01001501.xml

| 2.6.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 195/15 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

2.6.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 195/15

---

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

Cases where the Commission raises no objections

SA.105247

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2023/C 195/14)

| Date of adoption of the decision | 6.1.2023 |
| --- | --- |
| Aid number | SA.105247 |
| Member State | Latvia |
| Region | |
| Title (title and/or name of the beneficiary) | State Aid SA.105247 (2022/N) — Latvia TCF: Subsidised loans scheme (amendment to SA.103359) |
| Legal basis | Cabinet Regulation No.349 of 14 June 2022 on the loan programme to reduce the economic consequences caused by the Russian military aggression against Ukraine |
| Type of measure | Scheme |
| Objective | Remedy for a serious disturbance in the economy |
| Form of aid | Soft loan |
| Budget | Overall budget: 141 500 000 EUR |
| Intensity | |
| Duration | Until 31.12.2023 |
| Economic sectors | All economic sectors eligible to receive aid |
| Name and address of the granting authority | Development Finance Institution Altum |
| Doma laukums 4, Riga |

Date of adoption of the decision

6.1.2023

Aid number

SA.105247

Member State

Latvia

Region

Title (title and/or name of the beneficiary)

State Aid SA.105247 (2022/N) — Latvia TCF: Subsidised loans scheme (amendment to SA.103359)

Legal basis

Cabinet Regulation No.349 of 14 June 2022 on the loan programme to reduce the economic consequences caused by the Russian military aggression against Ukraine

Type of measure

Scheme

Objective

Remedy for a serious disturbance in the economy

Form of aid

Soft loan

Budget

Overall budget: 141 500 000 EUR

Intensity

Duration

Until 31.12.2023

Economic sectors

All economic sectors eligible to receive aid

Name and address of the granting authority

Development Finance Institution Altum

Doma laukums 4, Riga

Other information

The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:

https://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/index.cfm

---
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1

REVIEW REPORT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

To the Board of Directors and Shareholders
TIB Financial Corp.
Key Largo, Florida

We have reviewed the consolidated balance sheet of TIB Financial Corp. as of
June 30, 2003, the related consolidated statements of income for the quarter and
year-to-date periods ended June 30, 2003 and the related consolidated statements
of changes in shareholders' equity and cash flows for the year-to-date period
ended June 30, 2003. 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 auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America, 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 accompanying financial statements for them to be in conformity
with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.

The consolidated statements of income of TIB Financial Corp. for the quarter and
year-to-date periods ended June 30, 2002 and the consolidated statements of
changes in shareholders' equity and cash flows for the year-to-date period ended
June 30, 2002 were reviewed by other accountants whose report dated August 13,
2002 stated that they were not aware of any material modifications that should
be made to those statements in order for them to be in conformity with generally
accepted accounting principles.

/s/ Crowe, Chizek and Company LLP
---------------------------------
Crowe, Chizek and Company LLP

Fort Lauderdale, Florida
August 8, 2003
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 14**  **- 6630** 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,
v. LLOYD EMMANUEL BEST , Defendant

- Appellant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina , at Wilmington
. Malcolm J. Howard , Senior District Judge. ( 7:09

- cr - 00132

- H

- 1 )

Submitted : July 24, 2014 Decided: July 29, 2014

Before FLOYD and THACKER , Circuit Judges , and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judge
.
Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion
. Lloyd Emmanuel Best, Appellant Pro Se. Gaston Williams, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Lloy d Emmanuel Best appeals the district court’s order denying his self

- styled “M otion to Dismiss Indictment for Lack of Exclusive Legislative and Subject Matter Jurisdiction Pursuant to Rule 12(b)(1) Federal Rules of Civil Procedure[.]” We have reviewed the record and agree that Best’s motion is meritless. Accordingly, w e affirm the district court’s order
. U nited States v. Best , No. 7:09

- cr - 00132

- H

- 1 ( E.D.N.C. March 31 , 2014). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequ ately presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional
process.

AFFIRMED
# C_2023203EN.01001301.xml

| 9.6.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 203/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.6.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 203/13

---

Authorisation for State aid pursuant to Articles 107 and 108 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union

Cases where the Commission raises no objections

SA.102185

(2023/C 203/12)

| Date of adoption of the decision | 13.2.2023 |
| --- | --- |
| Aid number | SA.102185 |
| Member State | Czechia |
| Region | |
| Title (title and/or name of the beneficiary) | Podprogram 129 382 ‘Podpora výstavby, obnovy, rekonstrukce a odbahnění rybníků a vodních nádrží’ |
| Legal basis | — | Zákon č. 254/2001 Sb., o vodách a o změně některých zákonů (vodní zákon), ve znění pozdějších předpisů — Vyhláška č. 560/2006 Sb., o účasti státního rozpočtu na financování programů reprodukce majetku (dále jen ‘vyhláška č. 560/2006 Sb.’) — Pravidla České republiky — Ministerstva zemědělství pro poskytování finančních prostředků z programu 129 380 ‘Podpora retence vody v krajině — rybníky a vodní nádrže — 2. etapa’ (dále jen ‘Pravidla’) - |

Date of adoption of the decision

13.2.2023

Aid number

SA.102185

Member State

Czechia

Region

Title (title and/or name of the beneficiary)

Podprogram 129 382 ‘Podpora výstavby, obnovy, rekonstrukce a odbahnění rybníků a vodních nádrží’

Legal basis

—

Zákon č. 254/2001 Sb., o vodách a o změně některých zákonů (vodní zákon), ve znění pozdějších předpisů — Vyhláška č. 560/2006 Sb., o účasti státního rozpočtu na financování programů reprodukce majetku (dále jen ‘vyhláška č. 560/2006 Sb.’) — Pravidla České republiky — Ministerstva zemědělství pro poskytování finančních prostředků z programu 129 380 ‘Podpora retence vody v krajině — rybníky a vodní nádrže — 2. etapa’ (dále jen ‘Pravidla’) -

Type of measure

Scheme

Objective

Fisheries and aquaculture, Other measures (Fisheries Guidelines point 5.7)

Form of aid

Direct grant

Budget

Overall budget: 3 150 000 000 CZK

Annual budget: 450 000 000 CZK

Intensity

70,0  %

Duration

Until 31.12.2028

Economic sectors

Freshwater fishing, Freshwater aquaculture

Name and address of the granting authority

| Ministerstvo zemědělství |
| --- |
| Těšnov 65/17, 110 00 Praha 1 |

Ministerstvo zemědělství

Těšnov 65/17, 110 00 Praha 1

Other information

The authentic text(s) of the decision, from which all confidential information has been removed, can be found at:

https://ec.europa.eu/competition/elojade/isef/index.cfm

---
# C_2023145EN.01001001.xml

| 27.4.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 145/10 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.4.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 145/10

---

Opinion of the Advisory Committee on restrictive practices and dominant positions at its meeting on 25 November 2022 concerning a draft decision in case AT.40547 – STYRENE MONOMER

Rapporteur: Kristiina Arnus

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2023/C 145/07)

1.

The Advisory Committee (13 Member States) agrees with the Commission that the anti-competitive conduct covered by the draft decision constitutes an agreement and/or concerted practice between undertakings within the meaning of Article 101 of the Treaty (1).

2.

The Advisory Committee (13 Member States) agrees with the Commission that the object of the agreement and/or concerted practices was to restrict competition within the meaning of Article 101(1) of the Treaty.

3.

The Advisory Committee (13 Member States) agrees with the Commission that the undertakings concerned by the draft decision participated in a single and continuous infringement of Article 101 of the Treaty.

4.

The Advisory Committee (13 Member States) agrees with the Commission that the agreement and/or concerted practice was capable of appreciably affecting trade between the Member States of the EU and the Contracting Parties to the EEA Agreement.

5.

The Advisory Committee (13 Member States) agrees with the Commission’s assessment as regards the duration of the infringement.

6.

The Advisory Committee (13 Member States) agrees with the Commission that fines should be imposed on the addressees of the draft decision.

7.

The Advisory Committee (13 Member States) agrees with the Commission on the application of the 2006 Guidelines on the method of setting fines imposed pursuant to Article 23(2)(a) of Regulation No 1/2003.

8.

The Advisory Committee (13 Member States) agrees with the Commission as regards the reduction of the fines based on the 2006 Leniency Notice and the 2008 Settlement Notice.

9.

The Advisory Committee (13 Member States) agrees with the Commission on the final amounts of the fines.

10.

The Advisory Committee (13 Member States) recommend the publication of its Opinion in the Official Journal of the European Union.

11.

The Advisory Committee asks the Commission to take into account all the other points raised during the discussion.

---

(1)  In the present case, references to Article 101 of the Treaty are to be understood as referring as well to Article 53 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area (the ‘EEA Agreement’).

1

---
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 3000 Introduced in House (IH)]

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 3000

    To require the Administrator for General Services to obtain an 
  antivirus product to make available to Federal agencies in order to 
   provide the product to individuals whose personally identifiable 
                 information may have been compromised.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              July 9, 2015

 Mr. Cartwright (for himself, Mr. Cummings, and Mr. Hanna) introduced 
 the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight 
                         and Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
    To require the Administrator for General Services to obtain an 
  antivirus product to make available to Federal agencies in order to 
   provide the product to individuals whose personally identifiable 
                 information may have been compromised.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``A Necessary and Targeted Impediment 
to Viruses Act'' or the ``ANTI Viruses Act''.

SEC. 2. REQUIREMENTS FOR PROVISION OF ANTIVIRUS SOFTWARE TO CERTAIN 
              INDIVIDUALS AFFECTED BY DATA BREACH.

    (a) Requirement To Procure Antivirus Product.--
            (1) In general.--The Administrator for General Services 
        shall procure an antivirus product suitable for Federal 
        agencies to provide to individuals whose personally 
        identifiable information may have been compromised.
            (2) Deadline.--As soon as practicable after the date of the 
        enactment of this Act, the Administrator shall issue a 
        solicitation for vendors to provide the antivirus product 
        described in paragraph (1). Not later than 1 year after such 
        date, the Administrator shall award the contract for the 
        product.
    (b) Requirement To Provide One-Year License for Use of Antivirus 
Product.--A Federal agency that experiences a compromise in its 
computer systems resulting in the loss of personally identifiable 
information shall provide to any individual directly affected a one-
year license of the antivirus product procured under subsection (a).
    (c) Federal Agency.--In this section, the term ``Federal agency'' 
has the meaning provided the term ``Executive agency'' in section 105 
of title 5, United States Code, and also includes the United States 
Postal Service and the Postal Regulatory Commission.
    (d) Source of Funds.--The funds used by a Federal agency to carry 
out this Act shall be derived from amounts made available to the agency 
for operating expenses.
                                 <all>
```
# C_2022255EN.01000301.xml

| 4.7.2022 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 255/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

4.7.2022

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 255/3

---

Non-opposition to a notified concentration

(Case M.10635 – CVC / HTB / FL)

(Text with EEA relevance)

(2022/C 255/03)

On 20 June 2022, the Commission decided not to oppose the above notified concentration and to declare it compatible with the internal market. This decision is based on Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 (1). The full text of the decision is available only in English and will be made public after it is cleared of any business secrets it may contain. It will be available:

| — | in the merger section of the ‘Competition policy’ website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes, |
| --- | --- |

—

in the merger section of the ‘Competition policy’ website of the Commission (http://ec.europa.eu/competition/mergers/cases/). This website provides various facilities to help locate individual merger decisions, including company, case number, date and sectoral indexes,

| — | in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32022M10635. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law. |
| --- | --- |

—

in electronic form on the EUR-Lex website (http://eur-lex.europa.eu/homepage.html?locale=en) under document number 32022M10635. EUR-Lex is the online point of access to European Union law.

---

(1)  OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1.

---