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

                                                                    Exhibit 11.1

                            REUNION INDUSTRIES, INC.

                       COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS PER SHARE
                        (IN THOUSANDS, EXCEPT PER DATA)


                                           For the years ended December 31,
                                           ---------------------------------
                                               1996       1995      1994
                                           ----------- ---------- ----------

     Income (loss) from continuing
     operations                                (965)     (3,282)     (380)

     Income (loss) from discontinued
     operations                              (1,317)    (10,688)   (3,710)
                                            -------    --------   -------
     Net income (loss)                      $(2,282)   $(13,970)  $(4,090)
                                            =======    ========   =======
     Weighted average common shares
     outstanding                              3,855       3,832     3,794

     Net additional shares outstanding
     assuming all stock options exercised
     using the Treasury Stock Method (a)          -           -         -
                                             ------      ------    ------
     Average common shares and
     common share equivalents
     outstanding                              3,855       3,832     3,794
                                             ======      ======    ======
     Net income (loss) per common
     share and common share equivalent:

     Income (loss) from continuing
     operations                              $ (.25)     $ (.86)   $ (.10)

     Income (loss) from discontinued
     operations                                (.34)     $(2.79)     (.98)
                                             ------      ------    ------
     Net income (loss)                       $ (.59)     $(3.65)   $(1.08)
                                             ======      ======    ======

Notes:

(a) The 1996, 1995 and 1994 computation of common share equivalents excludes
    anti-dilutive shares.
Exhibit C

Case: 2:18-cv-00478-GCS-EPD Doc #: 1-3 Filed: 05/15/18 Page: 1 of 3 PAGEID #: 19
Case: 2:18-cv-00478-GCS-EPD Doc #: 1-3 Filed: 05/15/18 Page: 2 of 3 PAGEID #: 20
Case: 2:18-cv-00478-GCS-EPD Doc #: 1-3 Filed: 05/15/18 Page: 3 of 3 PAGEID #: 21
#### McLaughlin *v.*Coffey.

1041

293 S. W. 2d 455

Opinion delivered July 2, 1956.

*Lloyd Darnell,*for appellant.

*Earl J. Lane,*for appellee.

Per Curiam:

The appellant did not file the assent required by Sub-section 2 of Section 27-2101 Ark. *717Stats., and it is too late to file it now. (See *Osborn*v. *LeMaire,*82 Ark. 490, 102 S. W. 372.) The appeal is dismissed for lack of final judgment; and the case is still pending in the Garland Circuit Court for new trial on all issues. Mr. Justice Robinson dissents because he thinks that the appellant should be allowed to file the assent at this time in this Court.
1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO

EASTERN DIVISION

PREMIER DEALER SERVICES, INC., 

 

Plaintiff, Case No. 2:18-cv-735

 JUDGE EDMUND A. SARGUS, JR.

v. Magistrate Judge Chelsey M. Vascura

 

ALLEGIANCE ADMINISTRATORS, 

LLC, et al.,

Defendants.

ORDER 

This matter is before the Court on Defendants’ Motion to File Documents Under Seal (ECF 

No. 188). The Court previously directed Defendants to file supplemental briefing addressing why 

the trial exhibits should be sealed. Defendants thereafter notified the Court that they do not believe 

the documents should be sealed and filed the motion in order to comply with the parties’ Agreed 

Protective Order. (ECF No. 205.) 

The party seeking to seal records bears the burden of showing why the Court should seal 

them. Shane Grp., Inc. v. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan, 825 F.3d 299, 305 (6th Cir. 2016).

(Order, ECF No. 202.) Defendants no longer argue the exhibits should be sealed. Therefore, their

motion (ECF No. 188) is DENIED AS MOOT. 

IT IS SO ORDERED.

5/17/2022 s/Edmund A. Sargus, Jr.

DATE EDMUND A. SARGUS, JR.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case: 2:18-cv-00735-EAS-CMV Doc #: 208 Filed: 05/17/22 Page: 1 of 1 PAGEID #: 6616
<PAGE>

EXHIBIT 32.1

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

In connection with the Aethlon Medical, Inc. Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for
the quarter ended June 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, James A. Joyce, Chairman and
Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that, to the best of my knowledge:

(1) Fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and

(2) The information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB fairly
presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of
operations of the Company.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, another
document authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
required by Section 906, has been provided to Aethlon Medical, Inc. and will be
retained by Aethlon Medical, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.

                                   /S/ JAMES A. JOYCE
                                   --------------------
                                   JAMES A. JOYCE
                                   CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                                   (PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER)

August 19, 2003
SUBSIDIARIES OF THE REGISTRANT
     

          Atrium Nursing Home, Inc.                      Florida
          Brent-Lox Hall Nursing Home, Inc.              Virginia
          Capitol Care Management Company, Inc.          Georgia
          Crescent Medical Services, Inc.                Georgia
          Encore Retirement Partners, Ltd.               New York
          F & L Associates, Inc.                         Virginia
          Gardendale Health Care Center, Inc.            Georgia
          Lake Forest Healthcare Center, Inc.            Georgia
          Lake Health Care Center, Inc.                  Georgia
          Libbie Rehabilitation Center, Inc.             Virginia
          Mid-Florida, Inc.                              Georgia
          Phoenix Associates, Inc.                       Virginia
          Pro-Scription, Inc.                            Georgia
          Quality N.H.F. Leasing, Inc.                   Georgia
          Retirecare, Inc.                               Colorado
          Retirement Management Corp.                    Georgia
          Riviera Retirement, Inc.                       Georgia
          Roberta Health Care Center, Inc.               Georgia
          Sea Side Retirement, Inc.                      Georgia
          Southside Health Care Center, Inc.             Georgia
          Statesboro Health Care Center, Inc.            Georgia
          Summers Landing, Inc.                          Georgia
          Sun Coast Retirement, Inc.                     Georgia
          The Atrium of Jacksonville, Ltd.               Florida
          West Tennessee, Inc.                           Georgia
          Willow Way, Inc.                               Georgia
          Woodbury Health Care Center, Inc.              Georgia

          Contour Medical, Inc.                          Nevada
          Contour Fabricators, Inc.                      Michigan
          Contour Fabricators of Florida, Inc.           Florida
          AmeriDyne Corporation                          Tennessee
          Atlantic Medical Supply Company, Inc.          Georgia
          Americare Health Services Corp.                Delaware
          Facility Supply, Inc.                          Florida
          Gerimed, Inc.                                  Florida
          Florida ACLF, Inc.                             Florida
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

JACK STEIN
, Appellant,

v.

JEFFREY GREEN, MYLES SCHACK,

D O LORES CASTILONIA, JOHN CHARLES,
RIVERWALK OF THE PALM BEACHES HOWEOWNERS ASSOCIATION INC., DAVID STEINFELD, ASH LE Y LANDRUM,
BARG A IN BOB ’ S CARPETS INC.
, and DPL CONSULTANTS, INC.
, Appellee s

.

No. 4D 21

- 899

[ December 2, 2021 ]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circ uit, Palm Beach County ; Paige Gillman , Judge; L.T. Case No.
502020CA007787XXXXMB

.

Jack Stein, West Palm Beach, pro se.

David Steinfeld of Law Offices of David Steinfeld, Palm Beach
Gardens

, for appellee David Steinfeld.

Ashley N. Landrum of Ver n is & Bow ling, P.A., North Palm Beach

, for appellee Ashley N. Landrum.

Selina Patel and Michael A. Rosenberg of Cole, Scott & Kissane, P.A., Fort Lauderdale, for appellees Riverwalk of the Palm Beaches Homeowners Association, Inc., Myles Schack, Dolores Castilonia

, Jeffrey
Green and John Charles.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed.

W ARNER , G ERBER and L EVINE , JJ., concur.

* * *2 Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

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

      In connection with the Quarterly Report of Sholodge, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ending April 18, 2004 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on or about the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Leon
Moore, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

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

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

/s/ Leon Moore
------------------------------
Leon Moore
Chief Executive Officer
May 28, 2004

<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 32.1

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

      In connection with the Quarterly Report of Sholodge, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ending April 18, 2004 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on or about the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Bob
Marlowe, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, that:

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

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

/s/  Bob Marlowe
---------------------------------------
Bob Marlowe
Chief Financial Officer
May 28, 2004
CERTIFICATION
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of PowerSecure International, Inc.;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this 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 report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of
operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this
report;4.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:




---



##### 



5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the
audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
   Date:  May 7, 2009
    /s/ Sidney HintonSidney HintonPresident and Chief Executive Officer
#### People v Shanes,

No. 90995;

Court of Appeals No. 130355.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Company's Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended April 2, 2000 and
is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                             DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                  APR-02-2000
<CASH>                                              1,457
<SECURITIES>                                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       5,406
<ALLOWANCES>                                          650
<INVENTORY>                                         6,687
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                      553
<PP&E>                                             55,811
<DEPRECIATION>                                      1,258
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     77,302
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                              87,846
<BONDS>                                            87,754
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                   0
<PREFERRED>                                             3
<COMMON>                                              129
<OTHER-SE>                                        (30,869)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       77,302
<SALES>                                            15,649
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   15,649
<CGS>                                              12,976
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      12,976
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                        0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 (2,576)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    (2,215)
<INCOME-TAX>                                           15
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                     0
<DISCONTINUED>                                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                         0
<CHANGES>                                               0
<NET-INCOME>                                       (2,160)
<EPS-BASIC>                                         (0.17)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       (0.17)



</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
COMPANY'S CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER
31, 1996, INCLUDED IN THE COMPANY'S ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K FOR THE
YEAR 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-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                       2,390,411
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               19,946,100
<ALLOWANCES>                                   346,480
<INVENTORY>                                  9,894,707
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            41,492,787
<PP&E>                                      36,966,443
<DEPRECIATION>                               6,866,817
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              86,518,411
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       18,922,670
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        15,952
<OTHER-SE>                                  25,336,813
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                86,518,411
<SALES>                                     73,056,197
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            73,056,197
<CGS>                                       53,597,621
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               53,597,621
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            13,459,721
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,203,226
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              5,771,379
<INCOME-TAX>                                 2,177,591
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          3,593,788
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 3,593,788
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.21
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.21
        

</TABLE>
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

RAJA AFTAB AKBAR,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 11-73565

Agency No. A075-306-278

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted March 12, 2013** 

Before: PREGERSON, REINHARDT, and W. FLETCHER, Circuit Judges.

Raja Aftab Akbar, a native and citizen of Pakistan, petitions for review of

the Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying his motion to reopen

and to reissue its previous decision based on ineffective assistance of counsel. We

have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the

FILED

MAR 25 2013

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 11-73565

denial of a motion to reopen, and review de novo questions of law. Mohammed v.

Gonzales, 400 F.3d 785, 791-92 (9th Cir. 2005). We grant the petition for review

and remand to the BIA. 

The BIA abused it discretion in denying Akbar’s motion to reopen and

reissue. The BIA erred in finding that Akbar is barred from discretionary relief

under 8 U.S.C. § 1229c(d)(1)(B). Because Akbar was unaware that his counsel

failed to preserve the voluntary departure period despite securing a stay of removal

while his prior petition for review was pending before this court, he did not

voluntarily fail to depart during his voluntary departure period. See Matter of

Zmijewska, 24 I. & N. Dec. 87 (BIA 2007). Akbar was therefore prejudiced by his

attorney’s failure to preserve his grant of voluntary departure. See Mohammed,

400 F.3d at 793-794 (prejudice is established when counsel’s errors “may have

affected the outcome of the proceedings”).

We remand to the BIA for further proceedings consistent with this

disposition. 

PETITION FOR REVIEW GRANTED; REMANDED.
# United States Court of Appeals

f or the Fifth Circuit

____________
No. 23

- 60478 Summary Calendar

____________ Maria De Lourdes Sanchez Garcia,

Petitioner ,

versus
Merrick Garland, U.S. Attorney General , Respondent

.

______________________________ Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals Agency No. A209 961 767

___________________ ___________
Before Smith, Higginson, and Engelhardt, Circuit Judges

. Per Curiam : *

Maria De Lourdes Sanchez Garcia , a native and citizen of Mexico, petitions for review of the decision of the Board of Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirming the denial of asylum and withholding of removal. 1 We review

_____________________

* This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir

. R

. 47.5.

1 The BIA’s decision also involved the denial of Sanchez Garcia ’s applications for cancellation of removal or for protection under the Convention Against Torture , but she does not contest those claims here

. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED June 10, 2024 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 23-60478 Document: 46-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/10/2024No. 23

- 60478

2 the BIA’s decision and consider the decision of the immigration judge (IJ) only to the extent it influenced the BIA. Martinez Manzanares v. Barr , 92 5 F.3d 222, 226 (5th Cir. 2019).

While Sanchez Garcia lists the question of nexus in her statement of issues, she does not adequately brief any argument in the body of her brief challenging the BIA’s determination that she failed to demonstrate the requisi te nexus for asylum and withholding of removal. She has thus waived
the issue. See Chambers v. Mukasey , 520 F.3d 445, 448 n.1 (5th Cir. 2008).
The Government asserts that partial remand might be warranted because the BIA did not explicitly address Sanche z Garcia ’s claims concerning one of her alleged persecutors. Partial remand is not warranted,

as Sanchez Garcia has failed to adequately brief any argument that past or future persecution, by any of the alleged persecutors , was or will be on account of a protected ground . Her failure on the issue of nexus is dispositive for asylum and withholding of removal

. See G onzales

- Veliz v. Barr , 938 F.3d 219, 224 (5th Cir. 2019).
In any event, there is no realistic possibility that the BIA would have
concluded that she was eligible for asylum or withholding of removal, regardless of her claims concerning the alleged persecut or in question. See
Luna

- Garcia v. Barr , 932 F.3d 285, 291 (5th Cir. 2019). As the IJ determined, her proposed particular social group of single mothers from Mexico under threats from multiple parties is not cognizable because it is impermissibly
defined in a circular manner, as it is defined by reference to the alleged harm.
See Jaco v. Garland , 24 F.4th 395, 407 (5th Cir. 2021); Matter of W

- G

- R

- , 26 I.&N. Dec. 208, 215 (BIA 2014). Sanchez Garcia does not address political opinion as a protected ground , and she has failed to demonstrate a protected ground for her claims concerning any of the alleged persecutors.
The petition for review is DENIED

. Case: 23-60478 Document: 46-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/10/2024