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



Exhibit 11
 North Fork Bancorporation, Inc.
 COMPUTATION OF NET INCOME PER COMMON AND COMMON EQUIVALENT SHARE
September 30, 2005
(unaudited)
 Three Months Ended
    
    
    Nine Months Ended(dollars in thousands, except per share amounts)
    
    September 30, 2005
    
    
    September 30, 2004
    
    
    September 30, 2005
    
    
    September 30, 2004Net Income
    
    $
    237,296
    
    
    $
    119,728
    
    
    $
    738,397
    
    
    $
    331,244Common and Common Equivalent Shares:Weighted Average Common Shares Outstanding
    
    
    470,004
    
    
    
    252,162
    
    
    
    468,644
    
    
    
    237,398Weighted Average Common Equivalent Shares
    
    
    5,623
    
    
    
    3,323
    
    
    
    6,313
    
    
    
    3,684Weighted Average Common and Common Equivalent
Shares
    
    
    475,627
    
    
    
    255,485
    
    
    
    474,957
    
    
    
    241,082Net Income per Common Share  Basic
    
    $
    .50
    
    
    $
    .47
    
    
    $
    1.58
    
    
    $
    1.39Net Income per Common and Common Equivalent
Share  Diluted
    
    $
    .50
    
    
    $
    .47
    
    
    $
    1.55
    
    
    $
    1.37
 46
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>       5
<LEGEND>        THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL
                INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM 10Q DATED
                JUNE 30, 1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
                ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
                STATEMENTS
<MULTIPLIER>    1,000
                
<S>             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>           DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                           28,108
<SECURITIES>                    169,956
<RECEIVABLES>                    34,302
<ALLOWANCES>                          0
<INVENTORY>                           0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                254,443
<PP&E>                           67,710
<DEPRECIATION>                   53,810
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                  344,486
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>            50,483
<BONDS>                               0
<COMMON>                            940
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                 0
<PREFERRED>                           0
<OTHER-SE>                      269,665
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>    344,486
<SALES>                          83,246
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                 83,246
<CGS>                            53,185
<TOTAL-COSTS>                    53,185
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                      0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                      0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                    0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                  35,922
<INCOME-TAX>                     14,250
<INCOME-CONTINUING>              21,672
<DISCONTINUED>                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                       0
<CHANGES>                             0
<NET-INCOME>                     21,672
<EPS-PRIMARY>                      2.31
<EPS-DILUTED>                      2.31
        


</TABLE>
... "' ~ .. ....... I 

-J : ~ 

,~ 

;. 

REF ID:A72629 

THE mBEaroH CF :-IA.VAL IMT.ELLIGEHCE 

NAVY DEP AR'llriSNT 

WASEING'IUN,D. C • 

~ 

? .t 

'·,# 

.... :J-'i 

II 

I 

,/ ' 

-

@'pp roved for Release by NSA on 09-18 2013 pursuantto E .0. 1352\3 

··.i ,.~
|   | 1.     | The Company’s Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2010 (the “Form 10-Q”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and |
|--------|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                            |
|   | 2.     | Information contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.                                                                                             |

| Dated:November 15, 2010  |   | /s/ Michael J. Cushman                                           |   |
|--------------------------|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                     |   | Michael J. Cushman                                               |   |
|                     |   | President and Chief Executive Officer                            |   |
|                     |   | (Principal Executive Officer)                                    |   |
|                     |   |                                                             |   |
| Dated: November 15, 2010 |   | /s/ Kevin R. Watson                                              |   |
|                     |   | Kevin R. Watson                                                  |   |
|                     |   | Executive Vice President & Chief Financial Officer           |   |
|                     |   | (Principal Financial Officer & Principal Accounting Officer) |   |

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS FOR THE PERIOD ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1996 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                       3,869,549
<SECURITIES>                                 7,498,343
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            11,455,166
<PP&E>                                       1,687,838
<DEPRECIATION>                                 195,483
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              12,959,465
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,679,561
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        71,638
<OTHER-SE>                                  11,234,904
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                12,959,465
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             7,146,979
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             945,316
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (7,486,747)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (7,486,747)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (14,783,591)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (2.24)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (2.24)


</TABLE>
99-543.

#### State v. Akemon.

Hamilton App. No. C-980333. Discretionary appeal allowed; *sua sponte,*cause held for the decisions in 98- 1779, *State v. Conyers,*Lucas App. No. L-97-1327, and 98-1929, *State v. Schultz,*Hamilton App. No. C-970954; briefing schedule stayed.

Pfeifer, J., dissents.
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pane l unani m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T J UA NA I NE S S AL AZ AR - AR ME NT A, P et i t i on er , v. E R I C H . H O L D E R , J r ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 11- 70389 A ge nc yN o. A 074- 820- 499 ME MOR AN DU M *

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

an O r de rof

the B o ar do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls S ubm i tt e d O c t obe r9, 2012** B efo re: R A W L IN S O N , M U R G U IA , an dW A T F O R D , C i rcu i tJu d g es. JuanaI ne s S a l a z ar - A rm e nt a , ana t i ve and c i t i z e n of M e xi c o, pe t i t i ons f

or r e v ie w o f

th e B o ar do f

I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a l’s ( “B I A ” ) o r d e rd e n y in g h e rm o tio n to r e o p e n r e m o v a l p r o c e e d in g s . O u rju r is d ic tio n is g o v e rn e db y8 U .S .C . § 1 2 5 2 . W e r e v ie w f o rab u s e o f

d is c r e tio n th e d e n ia l o f am o tio n to r e o p e n . Moh am m ed v.



# FI LED OC T 15 2012 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS11- 70389 2 G o n z a les , 4 0 0 F .3 d7 8 5 , 7 9 1 - 9 2 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 5 ) . W e d e n yin p art an dd is m is s in p art th e p e titio n f

o rr e v ie w . T h e B I A d idn o t ab u s e its d is c r e tio n in d e n y in g S a la z ar - A rm e n ta ’s m o tio n to r e ope n f orf a i l ur e t o c om pl yw i th the r e qui r e m e nt s s e tf orth i n M at te rof L oz ada , 19 I . & N . D e c . 637 ( B I A 1988) , w he r e the i ne f f e c t i ve a s s i s t anc e s he a l l e ge s i s not p la in o n th e f

a c e o f th e r e c o r d . Se e R e

y es v . A s h c r o

ft , 3 5 8 F .3 d5 9 2 , 5 9 6 - 9 9 ( 9 th C i r. 20 04 ). W e l a c k j ur i s di c t i on t o r e vi e w the B I A ’ s de c i s i on nott o i nvoke i t s s ua s p o n te au th o r ityto r e o p e n p r o c e e d in g s u n d e r8 C .F .R . § 1 0 0 3 .2 ( a ) . Se e Me j i aH e rn a n dezv . H

o lde r, 63 3 F . 3d81 8, 82 3-24 (9th C i r. 20 11 ). P E T IT IO N F O R R E V IE W D E N IE D i n p art; D IS M IS S E D i n p art.
IN IUIPLY REPER TO 

REF ID:A67821 

WAR DEPARTMENT 

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF SIGNAL. OFFICER 

WASHINGTON 

• 

August 61 1936. 

lfemorandum For Kr. William F. Friedman and Jlr. Frank B. Howlett, 

Office of the Ohiet Signal Officer• 

w. P. and T. Division. 

SubJeat1 Jfew Patent Application, System for Bandomisi:ng the Belation1 

of Electrical Circuit• 

l. !rhe documents in the matter of 7our proposed patent application, abo"18 identified, have been completed and are submitted tor JOUl" 

approval and execution prior to the filing ot the application in the Patent 

Office. 

2. In executing the application, please be aura to sign 70ur 

names 1n three places and in each instance, the first name must be aigned 

in full. ~e oath must be aolmowledged before a notary public who mu.ft 

also sign and im,Presa his notarial seal. 

rn executing the license each of you gentlemen should sign 

in one place as indicated and the f irat name must be signed 1D full in 

each instance. 'l'wo persons nm.st also sign as witness••· 

3. When these documents have been executed, pleaae return to 

this office whereupon the application will be placed in order and ctul.7 

filed in the Patent Office. 

Charles A., B.~ 1 Patents section, S:(gnal Corps. 

Declassified and approved for release by NSA on 09-05-2013 pursuantto E .0. 1352a 

- &nfidential -
REGULATORY EV ALUA nON

Directorate Identifier: 2009-NM-134-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 Aviiation 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)
r1~ '>~~ -2.3 ~ s-+ 

Spotlight On Intelligence - .. Senator Mansfield of Montana has introduced a 

resolution that on first view has a strong appeal. 

He proposes that Congress establish a Joint Com· 

mittee on Intelligence, on the model of the Joint 

Committee on Atomic Energy, to keep Congress 

informed on the activities of the Central Intelli· 

gence Agency. There has been concern about some 

of CIA's activities that have seemed to be contrary 

to American foreign policy, and there is a com· 

mendable reluctance in Congress to see an agency 

operate outside the public view ·as CIA does. Sena· 

- tor Mansfield argues that "an urgent need exists 

for regular and responsible congressional scrutiny.". 

Such scrutiny, he says, is essential to the success 

of our-foreign policy, to the preservation of our 

democratic processes and to the security of CIA 

itself. 

These are forceful arguments, and they would be 

convincing if the agency had any powers within the 

United States or over American citizens. But the 

agency does not; it op~rates only in the foreign 

field. It is a new type of organization for our 

country that no one can be confident will always 

stay within proper bounds. But its aims will be 

defeated if it is hampered by undue legislative 

interference in what is essentially an executive re· 

sponsibiiity. If CIA were subject to no congressional check, Senator Mansfield's proposal would be 

extremely difficult to resist. liowever, the Armed 

Services Committees have a perfunctory knowledge 

of what is going on, and the Appropriations Com· 

mittees pass on CIA's spending. Also, CIA makes 

periodic reports to the Joint Committee on Atomic 

Energy. All this does not constitute close scrutiny, 

but another committee with broad powers to in· 

vestigate might be one too many, and there would 

be additional opportunities for leaks, either by 

committee members or members of the committee 

staff. 

CIA operates under the President .and the Na· 

tional Security Council, and it works closely with 

the Budget Bureau and the State and Defense 

Departments. It does not give detailed i!Ccountings 

of its funds, as other agen.cies do, and its appropria· 

tions are hidden from public view. Secrecy is re· 

quired by the nature of the operation. If there is 

to be an intelligence organization-and Congress 

created this one-its secrets must be protected. The 

primary responsibility for its activities must rest 

with the President rather than with Congress. CIA 

is one of the tools of the official responsible for the 

Nation's foreign and defense policies. He of all 

people should be the first to assure himself that it 

operates in conformity with established foreign 

policies. 

If the President should fail in this respect, CIA 

would lose its usefulness and the confidence of 

Congress. When there is evidence that CIA has 

abused its authority or violated the statute under 

which it was established, Congress, of course, would 

have a right to demand an accounting even at the 

risk of harmful disclosures. 

REF ID:A42929
:;' 

.. .. 

-------.B ...... :E ..... E-ID-:.A52.2.1.-.l,,__8 ____________ _ 

WAR DEPARTMENT alll 

·~ ...... · 

OFFICE OF THE CHIEF SIGNAL OFFICER 

J4r. George A. Graham, 

Signal Corps Laboratories, 

Fort !.'ionmouth, New Jersey: 

·Dear Graham: 

WASHINGTON 

June 6, 1932 

M1j4.;1 - .s 1<:;J)£' -sReply in& to your note or Ma;y 27, .I can see no object fon 

to submitting a copy of our recently issu.ed patent to the J •• T. &: T. 

Company. · 

I hope that the nominal smn .. that they talk about in connect ioh wt th tbe printer pat·ent ·iurns 012t to be aomething \\'Ol'thwhile •. 

. :'(~ 

I shall be interested in learning any rut~e deve.lopments z M 1~~ 

. in connect ion with our present model being constructed. · ~ 

Very tmly yours, 

... 

IA\pproved for Release by NSA on 11-20-2013 pursuant to E.O. 1352fA
<PAGE>   1

                                                                     EXHIBIT 3.1


                              ARTICLES OF AMENDMENT
                                     TO THE
                            ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION
                                       OF
                               QUEST MEDICAL, INC.


Pursuant to the provisions of Article 4.04 of the Texas Business Corporation
Act, as amended, the undersigned corporation adopts the following Articles of
Amendment to its Articles of Incorporation:

                                  ARTICLE ONE

The name of the corporation is Quest Medical, Inc.

                                  ARTICLE TWO

The following amendment to the Articles of Incorporation was adopted by the
shareholders of the corporation on May 28, 1998. The amendment alters Article
One of the original Articles of Incorporation and the full text of Article One
as amended is as follows:

                                  "ARTICLE ONE

The name of the corporation is Advanced Neuromodulation Systems, Inc."

                                  ARTICLE THREE

The number of shares of the corporation outstanding at the time of the adoption
of the above amendment was 8,682,045, and the number of shares entitled to vote
on the amendment was 8,682,045.

                                  ARTICLE FOUR

The number of shares voted for and against the above amendment, were 8,037,290
and 59,772, respectively.

Dated: June 12, 1998.

                                            QUEST MEDICAL, INC.

                                            By: /S/ F. Robert Merrill III
                                               ------------------------------
                                               F. Robert Merrill III
                                               Secretary
98-616.

#### State v. Climaco, Climaco, Seminatore, Lefkowitz & Garofoli Co., L.P.A.

Franklin App. No. 97APA03-429. Reported at 85 Ohio St.3d 582, 709 N.E.2d 1192. On motion for reconsideration. Motion denied.

Moyer, C.J., and Cook, J., dissent.
#### Haven, Respondent, vs. Markstrum, imp., Appellant.

*November 27*

December *14, 1886.*

*Evidence: Admissions.*

Evidence of casual statements or admissions by a party, made in casual conversations and to disinterested persons, is very weak testimony, because of the liability of the witness to misunderstand or forget what was really said or intended by the party.

APPEAL from the Circuit Court for *Marathon*County.

The case is sufficiently stated in the opinion. The defend*494ant *Marlestrum*appealed from, the judgment in favor of the plaintiff.

For the appellant there was a brie£ by *Meal Brown,*and oral argument by *G. N. Brown.*

For the respondent there was a brief by *Bardeen, Mylrea c& Marchetti,*and oral argument by *Mr. Bardeen.*

ORtost, J.

The plaintiff brought suit against the 'defendant Cole, for cutting logs for him at $30 per month, and the defendant *Marlestrum*was made a party, at his own request, as being the owner of the logs cut upon, which the plaintiff was seeking to enforce a lien. The main evidence against *Marlestrum*was, the defendant Cole and the plaintiff testified that the contract was that the plaintiff was to have for such cutting $30 per month. To rebut this evidence the defendan t *Marlestrum*sought to prove, by the admission of the plaintiff to various persons, that the contract was that he was to have fifty cents per thousand feet for such cutting. The plaintiff recovered the balance unpaid of what was due him at the rate of $30 per month. The evidence was conflicting as to the admissions and as to what the contract was. The evidence for the plaintiff was sufficient to sustain the verdict, and we should not be justified in disturbing it on the facts. The payment of $10 to Cole was no evidence of the payment to the plaintiff, for there was no evidence of Cole’s authority to receive it for him.

The instruction complained of was as follows: “In weighing and considering testimony, admissions of a party, satisfactorily proven, tending to disprove and defeat the claim made by him, may be considered by the jury; but evidence of casual statements or admissions by a party, made in casual conversations and to disinterested persons, are. regarded by law as very weak testimony, owing to the liability of the witness to misunderstand or forget what was really said or intended by the party.” This instruction is *495strictty correct, and the court might have properly gone further, and told the jury that all admissions made to third and disinterested persons is the weakest kind of evidence that can be produced. *Dreher v.*Fitchburg, 22 Wis. 675; *Husbrook v. Strawser,*14 Wis. 403; 1 Greenl. Ev. sec. 173. We cannot say that the instruction was inapplicable to tho case. We find no error in the record.

*By the*Court.— The judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<CIK> 0000353191
<NAME> NORTH VALLEY BANCORP
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1995
<CASH>                                           9,965
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                         184,303
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                14,100
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     12,493
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          41,416
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            43,262
<LOANS>                                        145,870
<ALLOWANCE>                                      1,316
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 233,313
<DEPOSITS>                                     210,179
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              2,286
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         9,759
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                      11,089
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 233,313
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  3,441
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                1,027
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 4,468
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               1,973
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,973
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            2,495
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      200
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                  16
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  1,499
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,531
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       1,531
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,074
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .58
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .58
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    5.22
<LOANS-NON>                                        312
<LOANS-PAST>                                         1
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 1,143
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      209
<RECOVERIES>                                        32
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                1,316
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>