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

                 STATEMENT RE COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                   THREE MONTHS     THREE MONTHS
                                                                  ENDED MARCH 31,  ENDED MARCH 31,
                                                                  ---------------  ---------------
                                                                        1997             1996
                                                                       ------           ------
<S>                                                               <C>              <C>
 
Net income available to common stockholders                            $  563,476       $   85,820
Accrued dividends on preferred stock                                            -           82,346
                                                                       ----------       ----------
Net income for computing net income per share                             563,476          168,166
                                                                       ==========       ==========
Weighted average common shares outstanding
     assuming conversion of all preferred stock                         5,352,033        3,987,491
 
Shares of common stock assumed to be issued upon
     exercise of common stock options and warrants to
     purchase common stock using treasury stock method,
     including "cheap" options and warrants as outstanding for
     all periods                                                          401,967          457,509
                                                                       ----------       ----------
Weighted average number of common and common
     equivalent shares outstanding during the period                    5,754,000        4,445,000
                                                                       ==========       ==========
Net income per share                                                        $0.10            $0.04
                                                                       ==========       ==========
</TABLE>
### IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS No. 10
- 18
- 00278
- CV IN THE ESTATE OF JUL IA LOPEZ, DECEASED

From the County Court at Law No
. 2 McLennan County, Texas Trial Court No. 2014 0322 PRl

A B A T E M E N T ORDER
On November 29, 2018, Appellee, Jacob George Straub, Dependent Administrator of the Estate of Julia Lopez, deceased, filed a motion to abate the appeal for correction of the record. This Court requested a response from the Appellant, Andrew Lopez. Appell ant filed a response on December 4, 2018 opposing the abatement for correction of
the record. Appellee contends that he filed a trial brief with the trial court at a hearing held on October 12, 2016 that is not included in the appellate record. Appell ee states that the trial brief appears to be lost or destroyed and requests that this Court abate the appeal to direct the trial court to determine what constitutes an accurate copy of the trial brief filedIn the Est ate of Julia Lopez Page 2

with the trial judge at the October 12, 2016 hear ing and order its inclu sion in a supplemental record. We abate this appeal for the trial court to conduct a hearing to determine if Appellee filed a trial brief at the October 12 hearing that was not included in the appellate
record and should have been i ncluded in the record. The trial court should hold the hearing within 30 days from the date of this order. If the trial court determines that the trial brief was properly filed and not included in the record, the trial court should then
determine what co nstitutes an accurate copy of the trial brief and supplement the record accordingly. If the trial court determines that the trial brief was not properly filed, the trial court shall prepare and file findings accordingly. The supplemental clerk’s record i s ordered to be filed within 45 days of the date of this Order. The motion to abate the appeal is granted. Appellant filed his brief on January 28, 2019. Appellant will have 30 days after the supplemental clerk’s record is filed to make any necessary ame ndments to
the brief.
PER CURIAM Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Davis, and Ju stice Neill Motion granted; Appeal abated Order issued and filed February 27 , 2019
No. 90-676.

#### Miami Center Limited Partnership et al. *v.*Bank of New York.

C. A. 11th Cir. Motion of petitioners to defer consideration of the petition for writ of certiorari denied. Certiorari denied.
Exhibit
23.1





CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT
REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM





We
hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements
on Form S-3 (Nos. 333-91316, 333-102962, 333-122555 , 333-123408 and 333-129033)
of Kinder Morgan Management, LLC of our reports dated February 27, 2008 relating
to the financial statements and the effectiveness of internal control over
financial reporting, which appear in this Form 10-K, and of our report dated
February 25, 2008 relating to the financial statements and the effectiveness of
internal control over financial reporting of Kinder Morgan Energy Partners,
L.P., which appears in Kinder Morgan Energy Partners, L.P.'s Annual Report on
Form 10-K, which is included as Annex A in this Form 10-K.
 
 
 
 
 PricewaterhouseCoopers
LLP
 Houston,
Texas
 February
27, 2008
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE SIX
MONTHS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1996 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH DECEMBER 31, 1996 FORM 10-Q.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                       4,808,581
<SECURITIES>                                 3,692,325
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,333,629
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                    641,909
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            10,861,370
<PP&E>                                       4,605,288
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,644,952
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              16,867,221
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          645,293
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         7,198
<OTHER-SE>                                  13,086,001
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                16,867,221
<SALES>                                      1,492,155
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             4,040,491
<CGS>                                        1,278,756
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                4,453,812
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             172,851
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                717,942
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   717,942
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.10
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
# Request for 60 Day Extension to Comment Period

To Whom it May Concern; The Interstate Natural Gas Association of America ( INGAA) is a trade association of the interstate nat ural gas pipeline industry. INGAA member companies transport the vast majority of the natural gas consumed in th e United States through over 185,000 miles of interst ate natural gas pipelines. On April 15, 2014, EPA released for external review five technical white papers on potentially signifi cant sources of methane and volatile organic compound (VOC) emis sions in the oil and gas sector (EPA White Papers). The deadline for submitting a response currently is Jun e 16, 2014. INGAA respectfully requests a 60 day ex tension of time—to and including August 15, 2014—within which to submit our comments and answers to the questions posed in the EPA White Papers. A more detailed written request is attached. INGAA appreciates your prompt attention to this req uest and looks forward to your response. Please contact me at 202­216­5935 or lbeal@ingaa.org if you have any questions. Thank you. Lisa S. Beal VP, Environment & Construction Policy INGAA 20 F Street NW Suite 450 Washington, DC 20001 (O) 202­216­5935 (M) 202­256­9134 

### Beal <lbeal@ingaa.org> Lisa Thu 5/15/2014 4:16 PM To: OilandGas.Whitepapers <OilandGas.Whitepapers@epa.go v>; Cc: Moore, Bruce <Moore.Bruce@epa.gov>; Importance: High 

###  1 attachment White Paper Request For an Extension.pdf; 

### Page **1 of**  **2 Request for 60 Day Extension to Comment Period** 
**- OilandGas.Whitepapers** 

**8/ 26/** **2014 https://pod51045.outlook.com/owa/OilandGas.Whitepapers@epa.gov/** 

### Page **2 of**  **2**

**Request for 60 Day Extension to Comment Period**
**- OilandGas.Whitepapers** 

**8/ 26/** **2014 https://pod51045.outlook.com/owa/OilandGas.Whitepapers@epa.gov/**
**Exhibit 23.1****CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No. 333-133702 on Form S-8of our reports dated March 16, 2007, relating to the financial statements of Taleo Corporation andmanagement’s report on the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting (which reporton the consolidated financial statements expresses an unqualified opinion and includes anexplanatory paragraph relating to the adoption of Statement of Financial Accounting Standards No.123(R), Share Based Payment), appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of TaleoCorporation for the year ended December 31, 2006./s/Deloitte & Touche LLP
exv10w1






Exhibit 10.1




Description of long-term performance incentives under the National Fuel Gas Company Performance
Incentive Program



On December 20, 2010, the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of National Fuel Gas
Company (the “Company”) established long-term performance incentives under the National Fuel Gas
Company Performance Incentive Program (the “Program”) for a performance period of October 1, 2010
to September 30, 2013. The Compensation Committee established levels of performance at which 50%,
100%, 150% and 200% of the target incentive will be payable, as described below. For performance
levels between established levels, a portion of the target incentive will be payable as determined
by mathematical interpolation.



The performance condition for the October 1, 2010 to September 30, 2013 performance period is the
Company’s total return on capital as compared to the same metric for peer companies in the Natural
Gas Distribution and Integrated Natural Gas Companies group as calculated and reported in the
Monthly Utility Reports of AUS, Inc., a leading industry consultant (“AUS”). In determining the
Company’s total return on capital for purposes of this comparison, the Compensation Committee may
adjust the AUS calculation of the Company’s total return on capital so as to include any gains
realized by the Company on the sale of operations that were reported under Generally Accepted
Accounting Principles as discontinued operations.



Payment will be made in accordance with the Program if the Company achieves certain levels of
performance relative to the peer group. For example, if the Company achieves a rank, as a
percentile of the peer group, of 60%, then 100% of the target incentive will be paid. Other
performance levels may result in payments ranging from 0% to 200% of the target incentive.



For the October 1, 2010 to September 30, 2013 performance period, the Compensation Committee
established the following target incentives for the principal executive officer, principal
financial officer and named executive officers of the Company: David F. Smith, $765,000; David P.
Bauer, $120,000; Ronald J. Tanski, $430,000; Matthew D. Cabell, $300,000; Anna Marie Cellino,
$230,000; and James D. Ramsdell, $120,000.
EXHIBIT 23.1

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

We consent
to the incorporation by reference in the following Registration Statements:



|(1) | Registration Statement (Form S-8 No. 333-134741) of Union Drilling, Inc. Amended and Restated 2000 Stock Option Plan, 2005 Stock Option Plan and Stock Option Plan
and Agreement of Christopher D. Strong, and
|--- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|(2) | Registration Statement (Form S-3 No. 333-161996) of Union Drilling, Inc.;
|--- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------

of our reports dated March 5, 2010, with respect to the financial statements of Union Drilling, Inc., and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of Union Drilling, Inc.,
included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009.

/s/ Ernst &
Young LLP

Fort Worth, Texas

March 5, 2010
#### State ex rel. Sanderson and others, Appellants, vs. Amundson and others, Respondents.

*December 4, 1940*

January *7, 1941.*

*524
      *J. Reese Jones*of Osseo, for the appellants.

*Sydney J. Baker*of Augusta, for the respondents.

Rosenberry, C. J.

Upon the oral argument it was disclosed that sec. 40.85, Stats., under which the detachment and review proceeding were had, was repealed by ch. 342, Laws of 1939. The language of the act is as follows:

> “Section 1. Section 40.85. of the statutes is repealed.

> “Section 2. This act shall take effect upon passage and publication.”

The act was approved on August 15th and published August 17, 1939. The order of the appeal board is dated September 2, 1939, sixteen days after the act creating the *525appeal board had been repealed. There being no saving clause in ch. 342, Laws of 1939, the appeal board, which was created by sec. 40.85 (10), Stats., ceased to exist on the day ch. 342, Laws of 1939, went into effect. Nor is the board continued by operation of sec. 370.04, Stats., which relates to civil and criminal actions.

It requires no argument to show that the proceeding before the appeal board was not an action or a special proceeding. The appeal board not being in existence on the day when it made its order, the order is void. The order of the district and town boards, not having been legally vacated, still stands.

*By the Court.*— Judgment reversed, and cause remanded with directions to the circuit court to enter judgment vacating and setting aside the order of the appeal board.
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNUREG-Series PublicationsPublications Prepared by NRC Contractors

# Seismic Analysis of Simplified Piping Systems for the NUPEC Ultimate Strength Piping Test Program (NUREG/CR-6889)

On this page:
        - Publication Information
        - Abstract

Download complete document
        - NUREG/CR-6889 (PDF - 3.67 MB)

## Publication Information

**Manuscript Completed:** September 2005**Date Published:** December 2005

**Prepared by:** G. DeGrassi and C. Hofmayer Brookhaven National Laboratory Upton, NY 11973-5000

S. Ali, NRC Project Manager

**Prepared for:** Division of Engineering Technology Office of Nuclear Regulatory Research U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission Washington, DC 20555-0001

NRC Job Code N6076

Availability Notice

## Abstract

The Nuclear Power Engineering Corporation (NUPEC) of Japan has conducted a multi-year test program for the Ministry of Economy, Trade and Industry (METI) of Japan to investigate the behavior of typical Nuclear Power Plant (NPP) piping systems under large seismic loads. The objectives of this program are to develop a better understanding of the elasto-plastic response and ultimate strength of nuclear piping systems, to ascertain the seismic safety margins in current piping design codes, and to assess new code allowable stress rules. The test program consisted of a series of static and dynamic material tests, piping component tests, simplified piping system tests, and large scale piping tests. As part of collaborative efforts between the United States and Japan on seismic issues, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission(NRC) and the Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL) participated in this program by performing both pre-test and post-test analysis for selected tests, and by evaluation of program results. This report presents a summary of the NUPEC tests, describes the BNL post-test analyses of selected simplified piping system tests, and discusses the insights gained from this program.

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Thursday, March 25, 2021
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

###### Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

This gives notice under the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463) of October 6, 1972, that the Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), has amended their charter to reflect the change in the filing date. The amended filing date is January 13, 2015.

For information, contact Dr. Larry Pickering, Designated Federal Officer, Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices, HHS, CDC, 1600 Clifton Road NE., Mailstop E05, Atlanta, Georgia 30333, telephone (404) 639-8562 or fax (404) 639-8626.

                    The Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, has been delegated the authority to sign                     **Federal Register**                     notices pertaining to announcements of meetings and other committee management activities, for both the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry.                

Elaine L. Baker,

Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.

[FR Doc. 2015-01767 Filed 1-29-15; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4163-18-P
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.27

                                                 BRIDGE TRADING COMPANY
                                                 TRANSACTION SYSTEM AGREEMENT
                                                 TRANSACTION SYSTEM SUPPLEMENTAL
                                                 ORDER FORM

This Transaction System Supplemental Order Form dated December 17, 2003 is
annexed to and forms a part of the Transaction System Agreement by and between
Bridge Trading Company, and Instinet Group Incorporated dated November 25, 2002
(the "AGREEMENT"). Capitalized terms not defined in this Supplemental Order Form
have the same meanings as set forth in the Agreement.

This Supplemental Order Form supersedes the Fees stated in the Initial Order
Form between the parties dated__________.

[ ] IOE SYSTEM

                               [PRICING SCHEDULE]

TERM

This agreement shall remain in effect for a term equal to the earlier of (i) two
years or (ii) until the percentage of ownership or interest in Instinet Group by
Reuters PLC reduces below the current percentage ratio.

By signing below, the parties agree to amend the Agreement by adding the System,
Fees, Additional Charges and/or other terms and conditions set forth in this
Transaction System Supplemental Order Form. Any Systems ordered under this
Transaction System Supplemental Order Form shall be co-terminous with the
Agreement and, except as set forth in this Supplemental Order Form, all of the
terms and conditions of the Agreement remain in full force and effect.

BRIDGE TRADING COMPANY ("BRIDGE")        BROKER  INSTINET GROUP INCORPORATED

Signed:_______________________________   Signed:________________________________

Print /s/ Jeffrey Woodruff, EVP          Print /s/ Natan Tiefenbrun
Name:_________________________________   Name:__________________________________

Title:________________________________   Title:_________________________________

Date: January 8, 2004                    Date: December 17, 2003

                                              ("EFFECTIVE DATE")
HomeNRC LibraryDocument CollectionsNews Releases

# NRC To Meet With SONGS To Discuss Safety Performance at Nuclear Power Plant

Page Last Reviewed/Updated Thursday, February 04, 2021
#### In the Matter of Stephen Gilliard, Respondent, v Jose R. Sanchez, as Acting Director of Bronx Psychiatric Center, Appellant.

[631 NYS2d 330]

Order, Supreme Court, Bronx *501County (Bertram Katz, J.), entered on or about March 8, 1995, which, after a retention hearing pursuant to Mental Hygiene Law § 9.13, directed that respondent be released from the Bronx Psychiatric Center, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Petitioner failed to establish by clear and convincing evidence that as a result of mental illness, respondent would present a substantial threat of physical harm to himself or others if released from the psychiatric institution (see, *Matter of Carl C.,*126 AD2d 640). The State’s only witness, respondent’s treating physician, testified that respondent’s frequent refusal to take his diabetes medication exacerbated his mental problems; that respondent’s compliance with his treatment as an outpatient has been the same as when he is an inpatient; that she was more concerned with his medical than psychiatric condition; that respondent was currently medically and psychiatrically stable and cooperative with his treatment; and that one week of stability was sufficient for her to determine whether he would remain stable. Respondent testified that he was aware of the need to take his medicine and promised to do so. Treatment of a chronic medical condition is not a legitimate purpose of involuntary confinement in a psychiatric hospital. "Absent an overriding State interest * * * a patient has the basic right to control the course of his own treatment, even though such treatment may be necessary to preserve his life.” *(Matter of Harry M.,*96 AD2d 201, 207.) Concur — Sullivan, J. P., Rubin, Kupferman, Asch and Nardelli, JJ.