alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Computation of Earnings Per Share
                                   (Unaudited)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                   Three Months Ended                  Nine Months Ended
                                                             -----------------------------       -----------------------------
                                                               Dec. 31,          Dec. 31,          Dec. 31,          Dec. 31,
                                                                1997              1996              1997               1996
                                                             -----------       -----------       -----------       ----------- 
<S>                                                          <C>               <C>               <C>               <C>         
Net loss                                                     $(1,556,253)      $(2,046,936)      $(3,512,057)      $(5,199,487)
Less recognition of beneficial conversion
  feature of preferred stock                                    (926,282)               --          (926,282)               --
                                                             -----------       -----------       -----------       ----------- 
Net loss available to common stockholders                    $(2,482,535)      $ 2,046,936)      $(4,438,339)      $(5,199,487)
                                                             ===========       ===========       ===========       =========== 
Weighted-average shares used in computing net
  loss per common share                                        7,562,500         7,562,500         7,562,500         7.562,500
                                                             ===========       ===========       ===========       =========== 
Net loss per common share                                    $      (.33)      $      (.27)      $      (.59)      $      (.73)
                                                             ===========       ===========       ===========       =========== 
</TABLE>
**EXHIBIT31.2**

 

CERTIFICATIONS

I,Susan J. Kelley, Director of Finance and Principal Accounting Officer of AMLCommunications Inc., (the “Company), certify that:

1.I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB of AML Communications,Inc.;

2.Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statementsmade, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3.Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financialinformation included in this report, fairly present in all material respectsthe financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrantas of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible forestablishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined inExchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

(a)Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b)Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectivenessof the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period coveredby this report based on such evaluation; and

(c)Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscalquarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annualreport) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materiallyaffect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting; and

5.The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on ourmost recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a)All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operationof internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize andreport financial information; and

(b)Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employeeswho have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.

Date: November 14, 2005

 
| /s/ Susan J. Kelley           |
|-------------------------------|
| By: Susan J. Kelley           |
| Director of Finance and       |
| Principal Accounting  Officer |

 

----
# C_2005006EN.01002602.xml

| 8.1.2005 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 6/26 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.1.2005

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 6/26

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling by the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden by order of that court of 15 October 2004 in the case of J.E. van den Hout-van Ejnsbergen against Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst — ondernemingen Leiden

(Case C-444/04)

(2005/C 6/50)

Language of the case: Dutch

Reference has been made to the Court of Justice of the European Communities by order of the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Netherlands Supreme Court), Third Chamber (Netherlands) of 15 October 2004 received at the Court Registry on 20 October 2004, for a preliminary ruling in the case of J.E. van den Hout-van Ejnsbergen against Inspecteur van de Belastingdienst — ondernemingen Leiden on the following question:

Must Article 13(A)(1)(c) of the Sixth Directive (1) be construed as meaning that psychotherapeutic treatments provided by a person carrying on a profession who satisfies the legal requirements for registration listed in paragraph 3.1, and is registered in the Register of Psychotherapists, are exempt from VAT, even where those interventions cannot be subsumed within the exercise, by the person carrying out those interventions, of a medical or paramedical profession as defined by the Member State concerned?

1

---

(1)  OJ L 145 of 13.6.1977, p. 1.

1

---
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-1925

LOURDES IGLESIAS,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

WAL-MART STORES EAST L.P.,

Defendant - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Mark S. Davis, District 

Judge. (2:09-cv-00008-MSD-FBS)

Submitted: October 17, 2013 Decided: October 21, 2013

Before AGEE, DAVIS, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Lourdes Iglesias, Appellant Pro Se. Lindsey Hager McGinnis, 

LITTLER MENDELSON PC, Washington, D.C., for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Lourdes Iglesias appeals the district court’s order 

denying her Fed. R. Civ. P. 60 motion to set aside judgment for 

fraud upon the court. We have reviewed the record and find no 

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s 

order. See Iglesias v. Wal-Mart Stores East L.P., No. 2:09-cv00008-MSD-FBS (E.D. Va. filed July 15, 2013; entered July 16, 

2013). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and 

legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 

before this court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process.

AFFIRMED
# United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 22-1107

___________________________ United States of America lllllllllllllllllllll Plaintiff - Appellee

v. Jeremiah Taylor lllllllllllllllllllll Defendant - Appellant

____________ Appeal from United States District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri - St. Louis

____________ Submitted: December 12, 2022 Filed: January 13, 2023 [Unpublished]

____________ Before LOKEN, MELLOY, and KOBES, Circuit Judges.

____________ PER CURIAM. A jury found Jeremiah Taylor guilty of being a felon in possession of a firearm. Taylor appeals arguing it was plain error to admit evidence collected during a traffic stop. We affirm.Taylor was stopped for driving a car with stolen plates. During the stop an

officer saw a gun through the car window. Knowing Taylor was a felon, the officer placed Taylor in custody and searched the car, including the locked trunk. Taylor did not move to suppress any evidence before the trial and did not object to any evidence during the trial. Taylor now asserts it was plain error for the district court 1 to admit evidence collected from the trunk of the car. Defendants are required to bring motions to suppress evidence before trial “if the basis for the motion is then reasonably available[.]” Fed. R. Crim. P. 12(b)(3). Taylor was aware that the government intended to use the evidence and any possible grounds for suppression before trial. Untimely motions can be reviewed “if the party shows good cause.” Fed. R. Crim. P. 12(c)(3). No explanation for the delay or good cause was given, therefore “we need not consider the merits” of the claim. United States v. Anderson, 783 F.3d 727, 741 (8th Cir. 2015). Even if we were to assume a showing of good cause, the issue would be reviewed for plain-error. United States v. Navarette, 996 F.3d 870, 875 (8th Cir. 2021). It was not error to admit evidence found in the trunk. “[A] police officer who has lawfully made a roadside stop of a vehicle may search the passenger compartment and trunk of that vehicle if probable cause exists to believe that contraband or evidence of criminal activity is located inside the vehicle.” United States v. Walker, 840 F.3d 477, 483 (8th Cir. 2016). Given the firearm and stolen plates it was reasonable to believe a search of the trunk would yield additional evidence. Accordingly, we affirm the judgement of the district court.

______________________________

1 The Honorable Stephen R. Clark, then United States District Judge for the Eastern District of Missouri, now Chief Judge. -2-
EXHIBIT 31

I, John P. Manning, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of BCTC IV Assignor Corp. (the "Assignor");
2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this quarterly report;
3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Company as of, and for, the periods presented in this quarterly report;
4. The Assignor's other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the Company and we have:



1. designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that material information relating to the Assignor, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this quarterly report is being prepared;
2. evaluated the effectiveness of the Assignor's disclosure controls and procedures as of a date (the "Evaluation Date") within 90 days prior to the filing date of this quarterly report; and
3. presented in this quarterly report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our evaluation as of the Evaluation Date;



1. The Assignor's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation, to the Assignor's auditors and the audit committee of the Assignor's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent function):



1. all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal controls which could adversely affect the Assignor's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the Assignor's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and
2. any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the Assignor's internal controls; and



1. The Assignor's other certifying officer and I have indicated in this quarterly report whether or not there were significant changes in internal controls or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls subsequent to the Evaluation Date, including any corrective actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.



|Date:  November 20, 2003 | /s/ John P. Manning 
|------------------------ | --------------------
|                         | John P. Manning     
|                         | Director, President 
|                         | (Principal Executive
|                         | Officer), BCTC IV   
|                         | Assignor Corp.;
SERVED: OCTOBER 28, 2014 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 

OFFICE OF HEARINGS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

IN THE MATTER OF 

UNITED PARCEL SERVICE COMPANY. 

DOCKET NO. FAA-2014-0806 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT OF PROCEEDING 

This proceeding (heretofore designated as Case No. 2011CE250036) has been assigned to 

Administrative Law Judge J.E. Sullivan. All future pleadings and other communications 

regarding this proceeding shall be served on the Judge, the FAA Hearing Docket, and the other 

persons on the attached Service List. 

Attachment - Service List 
SERVICE LIST- BY U.S. MAIL 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2Wl 0001 

ONE COPY 

Mark A. Dombroff, Respondent's Counsel 

McKenna Long & Aldridge, LLP 

1676 International Drive- Penthouse 

McLean, VA 22102 

TEL: 703-336-8700 

Andrea Michelle Harper, Complainant's Counsel 

Federal Aviation Administration 

Office of the Regional Counsel, AS0-7 

Southern Region 

1701 Columbia Avenue 

College Park, GA 30337 

TEL: 404-305-5200 

FAX: 404-305-5223 

Hon. J.E. Sullivan, Administrative Law Judge 

Office ofHearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. (Ell-310) 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-366-6941 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

Docket No. FAA-2014-0806 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

1 Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address: Federal 

Aviation Administration, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building-Suite 2W1000, Washington, 

DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430. 

-2-
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 22-0323 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. JASON PEARSON,

Defendant and Appellant.

**GRANT** Pursuant to authority granted under Mont. R. App. P. 26(1), the Appellant is given an extension of time until September 30, 2022, to prepare, file, and serve the Appellant's opening brief.

Electronically signed by: Bowen Greenwood Clerk of the Supreme Court August 31 2022

08/31/2022
Case Number: DA 22-0323
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-4273

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

GREGORY TOBIAS THOMPSON,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

South Carolina, at Greenville. Henry M. Herlong, Jr., District

Judge. (CR-02-102)

Submitted: January 23, 2004 Decided: February 10, 2004

Before NIEMEYER, SHEDD, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Parks N. Small, Federal Public Defender, Columbia, South Carolina,

for Appellant. J. Strom Thurmond, Jr., United States Attorney,

Isaac Louis Johnson, Jr., Assistant United States Attorney,

Greenville, South Carolina, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Gregory Tobias Thompson seeks to appeal his conviction

and sentence. In criminal cases, a defendant must file his notice

of appeal within ten days after the entry of judgment. Fed. R.

App. P. 4(b)(1)(A). With or without a motion, the district court

may grant an extension of time to file of up to thirty days upon a

showing of excusable neglect or good cause. Fed. R. App. P.

4(b)(4); United States v. Reyes, 759 F.2d 351, 353 (4th Cir. 1985).

The district court entered its judgment on June 14, 2002.

Thompson filed his notice of appeal on March 18, 2003, seeking a

finding of excusable neglect. Because Thompson’s notice was filed

well beyond the periods specified in Rule 4(b), this court is

without jurisdiction to consider his claims. See United States v.

Raynor, 939 F.2d 191, 196 (4th Cir. 1991). Accordingly, we dismiss

the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and

legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before

the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
Exhibit 10.27

                                       March 26, 2001

Board of Directors
UroMed Corporation

1400 Providence Highway Building
Norwood, Massachusetts 02062


Ladies and Gentlemen:

         This letter is to confirm that the  undersigned  hereby  agrees that he
will vote all of the  shares of UroMed  Corporation's  common  stock,  par value
$0.01 per share ("Common  Stock") held by him of record (and to cause any shares
of Common Stock held by his  affiliates  to be voted)  either (i) in  accordance
with  the  recommendation  of the  Board  of  Directors  of  UroMed  Corporation
(`UroMed") or (ii) in the same  proportion as UroMed's  unaffiliated  holders of
the Common Stock, with UroMed's Board of Directors having the right from time to
time to elect  between (i) and (ii)  above,  so long as Philip  Heintz,  Lillian
Heintz and the Heintz  Family  Trust- 1997 (the  "Trust")  are  obligated  under
Section 6 of that certain Registration Rights and Voting Agreement,  dated as of
the date herewith among UroMed,  Providence Merger  Corporation,  a wholly owned
subsidiary of UroMed,  the stockholders of SSGI, the Trust and Philip Heintz, as
representative of the stockholders of SSGI ("Registration  Rights Agreement") to
vote each of their shares of  Registrable  Securities,  as defined  therein,  in
accordance with Section 6 of the Registration Rights Agreement. This restriction
shall terminate upon the  undersigned's  transfer of shares of Common Stock held
by him of record (or held by his  affiliates)  to any third party that is not an
affiliate of the undersigned.

                                       Very truly yours,



                                       /s/ John Simon
                                       ------------------------------
                                       John Simon
# Composting Facility (No.) (317) Conservation Practice Standard

## Breadcrumb

-  Home 
-  Resources 
-  Composting Facility (No.) (317) Conservation Practice Standard 

Download the national conservation practice standard and supporting documents for Composting Facility (No.) (317).

## National Standard Document

NOTICE - National conservation practice standards should not be used to plan, design or install a conservation practice. To find these documents at the local level, visit our Field Office Technical Guide website.

Conservation Practice Name (Units) (Code) (Date Issued)

Composting Facility (No.) (317) (9/2020) Standard Document(83.11 KB)

###   Supporting Documents

Composting Facility (No.) (317) Overview(134.93 KB)

Composting Facility (No.) (317) CPPE(17.7 KB)

Composting Facility (No.) (317) ND(80.71 KB)

##   Additional Information

### Conservation Practice Standards

On this page find links to national conservation practice standards and supporting documents.
Learn More

### Conservation Practice Standards Information

Learn about the information provided in conservation practice standards and supporting documents, such as overviews, worksheets, and network effects diagrams.
Learn More
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 Energy

###### Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

          - [Docket No. ER15-402-001; Docket No. ER15-817-000; Docket No. ER15-861-000]

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Saeed Farrokhpay at                         *saeed.farrokhpay@ferc.gov,*                         (916) 294-0322.                    

Dated: January 29, 2015.

Kimberly D. Bose,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2015-02295 Filed 2-4-15; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6717-01-P
EXHIBIT
32.1





CERTIFICATION
OF PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


PURSUANT
TO 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the Annual Report of ATSI Communications, Inc. on Form 10-K for
the period ending July 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof, I, Arthur L. Smith, President and Chief Executive
Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C, ss. 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that,





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





2)
            the
      information in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
      financial condition and result of operations of the
    Company.





By /s/
Arthur L. Smith


Arthur L.
Smith


President
and


Chief
Executive Officer


October
8, 2010