alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>   1
                                POWER OF ATTORNEY


         We, the undersigned directors of Duramed Pharmaceuticals, Inc. hereby
appoint E. Thomas Arington and Timothy J. Holt or either of them, our true and
lawful attorneys and agents, to do any and all acts and things in our names and
on our behalf in our capacities indicated below, which said attorneys and
agents, or each of them, may deem necessary or advisable to enable said
corporation to comply with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and
any rules, regulations and requirements of the Securities and Exchange
Commission, in connection with the corporation's Annual Report on Form 10-K for
the fiscal year ended December 31, 1999, including, without limitation, power
and authority to sign for us, or any of us, in our names in the capacities
indicated below, the Report and any and all amendments to the Report, and we
hereby ratify and confirm all that said attorneys and agents, or each of them,
shall do or cause to be done by virtue hereof.

         Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as
amended, this Power of Attorney has been signed below by the following persons
as of the 23rd day of March 2000 in the capacities indicated.


          Signature                        Title
          ---------                        -----

/s/ E. Thomas Arington                     Chairman of the Board
------------------------------
E. Thomas Arington


/s/ Jeffrey T. Arington                    Director
------------------------------
Jeffrey T. Arington


/s/ George W. Baughman                     Director
------------------------------
George W. Baughman


/s/ Richard R. Frankovic                   Director
------------------------------
Richard R. Frankovic


/s/ Peter R. Seaver                        Director
------------------------------
Peter R. Seaver


/s/ S. Sundararaman                        Director
------------------------------
S. Sundararaman
**IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVA NIA** 

IN RE: REAPPOINTMENT TO THE CONTINUING LEGAL EDUCATION BOARD : : : : : NO. 684 SUPREME COURT RULES DOCKET

**O R D E R**
**PER CURIA M:** 

AND NOW , this 1 st day of December , 2015, Anthony Charles Aliano , Esquire, Dauphin County, is hereby re appointed as a member of the Continuing Legal Education Board for a term of three years commencing December 31, 2015.
Travis L. KENYON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 4D17-2155

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

[March 1, 2018]

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Furman O. CLARK, Jr., Appellant, v. Lala H. CLARK, Appellee.

No. 1D16-5508

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

April 3, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
-80 -79 -78 -77 -76 -75 -74

 38

 39

 40

 41

★

▲

▲

▲

▲

★

▲ ▲

▲ ▲ 500

 1000

 1500

 500

18 12 06 00

07/17

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 17 Jul 07

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 38.92 N 77.01 W Meters AGL
William C. COLEMAN v. STATE

CR-15-1497

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

March 17, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

In the

United States Court of Appeals

For the Eleventh Circuit

____________________

No. 23-13172

Non-Argument Calendar

____________________

In re: SEAWALK INVESTMENTS, LLC

Debtor.

_______________________________________________

SKY ENTERPRISES, LLC, 

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

SEAWALK INVESTMENTS, LLC, 

Defendant-Appellee.

USCA11 Case: 23-13172 Document: 24-1 Date Filed: 04/23/2024 Page: 1 of 3
2 Opinion of the Court 23-13172

____________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Florida

D.C. Docket No. 3:21-cv-01148-TJC

____________________

Before WILSON, JILL PRYOR, and GRANT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Sky Enterprises, LLC (“Sky”) appeals from the district 

court’s August 29, 2023 order, which affirmed several bankruptcy 

court rulings but remanded for further consideration of the 

amount of attorney’s fees to which Sky is entitled as part of its secured claim. We asked the parties to address whether we have jurisdiction to review that order. Upon our review of the record and 

the response to our jurisdictional question, this appeal is 

DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.

We conclude that the pending attorney’s fees issue is not 

collateral to the underlying bankruptcy dispute and is instead intertwined with the merits. The bankruptcy court did not award attorney’s fees to Sky as a sanction; instead, Sky’s entitlement to attorney’s fees arises from the mortgage and promissory note that 

formed the basis of its secured claim. A change in the attorney’s 

fees amount will thus affect the value of the claim, which was an 

essential merits issue resolved by the bankruptcy court. 

Accordingly, the district court’s August 29, 2023 order did 

not “[end] the litigation on the merits and [leave] nothing for the 

USCA11 Case: 23-13172 Document: 24-1 Date Filed: 04/23/2024 Page: 2 of 3
23-13172 Opinion of the Court 3

court to do but execute the judgment.” See Mich. State Univ. v. Asbestos Settlement Tr. (In re Celotex Corp.), 700 F.3d 1262, 1265 (11th 

Cir. 2012). Nor did the order leave only a “ministerial duty collateral to the merits of the action” for the bankruptcy court to perform on remand. See Miscott Corp. v. Zaremba Walden Co. (In re Miscott Corp.), 848 F.2d 1190, 1193 (11th Cir. 1988). We thus lack jurisdiction to consider this appeal. See 28 U.S.C. § 158(d)(1).

USCA11 Case: 23-13172 Document: 24-1 Date Filed: 04/23/2024 Page: 3 of 3
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted form the balance
sheet as of December 31, 1999, and statements of operations for the twelve
months ended December 31, 1999, and is qualified in its entirety by reference
to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                          61,167
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   30,289
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               106,456
<PP&E>                                          13,693
<DEPRECIATION>                                   3,520
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 116,629
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           64,001
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       787,742
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   116,629
<SALES>                                        579,617
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               579,617
<CGS>                                          379,853
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  379,853
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             1,246,994
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (1,047,230)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (1,047,230)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,047,230)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.01)


</TABLE>
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION



Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002



(18 U.S.C. 1350)



Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of (18 U.S.C. 1350), the undersigned officer of Elephant Talk Communications Corp., a Delaware corporation (the “Company”),
does hereby certify, to the best of such officer’s knowledge and belief, that:



(1)           The
Annual Report on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 2012 (the “Form 10-K”) of the Company 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 Form 10-K fairly presents, in all materials respects, the financial condition and results of operations
of the Company.



|Date:  April 25, 2013 | /s/ Steven van der Velden                                                                       | 
|--------------------- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | 
|                      | Steven van der
    Velden, President and Chief
 Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer) | 



This certification shall not be deemed
“filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act, or otherwise subject to the liability of that section.  Such
certification will not be deemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act or the Securities Exchange
Act.
**EXHIBIT
      32.1**





**CERTIFICATION
        OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS
        ADOPTED PURSUANTTO SECTION 906 OF SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF
        2002**






In
      connection with the Annual Report of New World Brands, Inc. (the “Company”) on
      Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities
      and Exchange Commission on the date therein specified (the “Report”), the
      undersigned, M. David Kamrat, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certifies
      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), as
      applicable, 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 results of operations of the Company.




Date:
                April 15, 2008
            /s/
                M. David
                KamratM.
                David KamratChief Executive Officer and
              President(principal executive officer)
OKLAHOMA

Final Area Designations for the 

2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards

As indicated in the table below, EPA is designating no counties or portions of counties within Oklahoma 

as nonattainment for the 2008 ozone national ambient air quality standards (2008 ozone NAAQS). In 

accordance with section 107(d) of the Clean Air Act, EPA must designate an area “nonattainment” if it 

is violating the 2008 ozone NAAQS or if it is contributing to a violation of the 2008 ozone NAAQS in a 

nearby area. 

Designated Nonattainment Areas in Oklahoma

Area

Oklahoma’s Recommended 

Nonattainment Counties

EPA’s Designated

Nonattainment Counties

None None None

State and Tribal Government Recommendations

Governor Henry submitted an ozone designation recommendation letter to then Acting Regional 

Administrator, Larry Starfield, on March 9, 2009, recommending that no counties be designated 

nonattainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, based on certified data for the period from 2006 – 2008. An 

updated recommendation letter, based on certified monitoring data from 2008 – 2010, was submitted to 

our current Regional Administrator, Al Armendariz, by Governor Fallin on October 11, 2011. This letter 

recommended that all counties in Oklahoma be designated as “attainment” for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.

In addition to the recommendation letters received from the state of Oklahoma, EPA also received an 

ozone designation recommendation letter from the Cherokee Nation Environmental Programs 

Administrator, Tom Elkins, on February 13, 2009. Administrator Elkins did not make a 

recommendation, but instead reported that the Cherokee Nation is in attainment with the 2008 ozone 

NAAQS.

Conclusions

Upon evaluation of the recommendation letters received from the State of Oklahoma and the Cherokee 

Nation, as well as the most recent certified air quality monitoring data, EPA is designating all counties

and areas of Indian country in Oklahoma as “unclassifiable/attainment” for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. 

There are no ambient air quality monitors within the state of Oklahoma with design values that indicate 

a violation of the 2008 ozone NAAQS, and there are no nonattainment areas or intended nonattainment 

areas that border the state of Oklahoma. The nearest nonattainment areas are the Dallas-Fort Worth area 

in Texas and the Denver-Boulder-Greeley-Ft Collins-Loveland area in Colorado.
### Page 1 of 3 **Disposition Comments Docket No:**  

### FAA - 2012 - 0177 These comments are in **Directorate ID:** 

### 2009 - SW - 59 - AD response to an SNPRM Originating Office Tracking No.: **Next Step:** FRAN SNPRM 

### N o C omments/Only

Supportive Comments Received

– If this box is checked, no signatures are required. No 

### Has the reference d service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? I f ye s, list latest revision and attach a cop y. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance. Instructions: Summarize all comments **by issue** (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of each issue. **All comments relating to the sam e issue should be discussed together.**  Do not list all of the issues from one commenter togeth er. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA - IR- M - 8040.1C Chapter 9. **ISSUE 1:** Select one o

f the following : If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree with because We disagree with because

Make the following changes to the AD: If **NO** , we don’t agree because **ISSUE 2**  **:** Select one of the following :

If other, explain : Commenter(s): What change to the AD action is requested? Why is the change requested or how is it justified? Do we agree? If **YES,** we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: If **PARTIALLY AGREE** , we agree with because We disagree with because Make the following changes to the AD:

### Page 2 of 3

If **NO** , we don’t agree because **For additional issues, do uble**  **- click**  **here**

### Page 3 of 3 **S ignature Section**  Signature indicates concurrence with this action. Originating Office Tracking No.: **ASE** Printed Name **: Date** 

**Branch M anager**  **Date**
**Final Listing of Questionnaire Files for Steam Electric Rulemaking Record**

**Plant ID 00948**  **Removed from Public**  **(Non-CBI) Docket**  **1 Copyright** 

**Flag 2**  **File Name 3**  **Description** x 00948\00948_Checklist.xls EPA Technical Review Checklist Workbook

00948\00948_Completeness_Checklist.xls EPA Completeness Review Checklist x 00948\00948_PartA.xls Plant submitted survey file

00948\Certifcation Statement_00948.pdf Plant certification statement

1Final reviewed survey responses are located in the Steam Electric Technical Questionnaire Database
. 2 Copyright documents are available from the docket. 3 No hardcopy log is included for this plant as no hardcopy materials were received.
EX PARTE Clinton IRBY

CR-16-0204

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

March 8, 2017 Reh. denied March 22, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Mand. pet. dismissed.
Patrick G. WILSON v. STATE

CR-15-1110

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

February 1, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
**Exhibit
      24.2**


STATE
        OF
        TEXAS       §
 COUNTY
        OF
        DALLAS            §





POWER
      OF
      ATTORNEY





Know
      all
      men by these presents, that I, TILMAN J. FALGOUT, III, a Director of AMERICA’S
      CAR-MART, INC., a Texas corporation, do constitute and appoint JEFFREY A.
      WILLIAMS my true and lawful attorney-in-fact, with full power of substitution,
      for me in any and all capacities, to sign, pursuant to the requirements of
      the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the Annual Report on Form 10-K for AMERICA’S
      CAR-MART, INC. for the fiscal year ended April 30, 2007 and to file the same
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission and National Association of
      Securities Dealers, Inc., together with all exhibits thereto and other documents
      in connection therewith, and to sign on my behalf and in my stead, in any and
      all capacities, any amendments to said Annual Report, incorporating such changes
      as said attorney-in-fact deems appropriate, hereby ratifying and confirming
      all
      that said attorney-in-fact, or his substitute may do or cause to be done by
      virtue hereof.





In
      witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and seal this 13th day of July,
      2007.








/s/
      Tilman J. Falgout,
      III


TILMAN
      J. FALGOUT,
      III











ACKNOWLEDGMENT





Before
      me
      this 13th day
      of July, 2007, came TILMAN J. FALGOUT, III, personally known to me, who in
      my
      presence did sign and seal the above and foregoing Power of Attorney and
      acknowledged the same as his true act and deed.





/s/
        Paula
        Hodges
 NOTARY
        PUBLIC
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-26,178-03

EX PARTE ARTHUR BROWN, JR.

ON APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. 636535-B IN THE 351 JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT

ST

HARRIS COUNTY

Per curiam. KELLER, P.J., dissents.

O R D E R

This is a subsequent application for writ of habeas corpus filed pursuant to the

provisions of Texas Code of Criminal Procedure Article 11.071, § 5.

In November 1993, Applicant was convicted of the offense of capital murder. The

jury answered the special issues submitted pursuant to Texas Code of Criminal Procedure

Article 37.071, and the trial court, accordingly, set punishment at death. This Court affirmed
Brown - 2

Applicant’s conviction and sentence on direct appeal. Brown v. State, No. AP-71,817 (Tex.

Crim. App. December 18, 1996). This Court denied relief on Applicant’s initial postconviction application for writ of habeas corpus. Ex parte Brown, No. WR-26,178-02 (Tex.

Crim. App. June 18, 2008). Applicant’s instant post-conviction application for writ of

1

habeas corpus was filed in the trial court on November 3, 2014.

In his application, Applicant alleges prosecutorial misconduct (Claim A) and

ineffective assistance of counsel (Claim B). Within Claim A, Applicant alleges that State’s

witness C. E. Anderson “testified falsely or in a materially misleading manner when he

expressed his unequivocal opinion that the evidence bullets were fired from the two guns that

the State recovered in Alabama and tied to [Applicant].” We have reviewed the application

and find that this particular allegation satisfies the requirements of Texas Code of Criminal

Procedure Article 11.071, § 5(a). Accordingly, the cause is remanded to the trial court for

consideration of the allegation that Anderson gave false or misleading testimony at

Applicant’s trial.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS THE 28 DAY OF OCTOBER, 2015.

th

Do Not Publish

 Ex parte Brown, No. WR-26,178-01, was an application for writ of mandamus, which 1

this Court denied leave to file on March 23, 1994.
Julie A. WELCH, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Michael W. WELCH, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-0663

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

April 11, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Denied.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                  EXHIBIT 11.1


                              CHEMTRAK INCORPORATED

                          COMPUTATION OF LOSS PER SHARE




<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                          Three months ended
                                                              March 31,
                                                ----------------------------------------
                                                      1997                   1996
                                                ------------------     -----------------
<S>                                             <C>                    <C>      
Weighted average common shares outstanding              12,085,000             9,732,000
                                                ==================     =================
Net loss                                        $       (1,295,000)    $      (1,496,000)
                                                ==================     =================
Net loss per share                              $            (0.11)    $           (0.15)
                                                ==================     =================
</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                           7
<LEGEND>
     (Replace this text with the legend)
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000882087
<NAME>                        CUMBERLAND TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                 JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   MAR-31-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                           5,502,537
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                          1,221,785
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                            0
<EQUITIES>                                     278,250
<MORTGAGE>                                     940,006
<REAL-ESTATE>                                  0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                                 8,372,817
<CASH>                                         2,060,341
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                             2,796,311
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                         1,809,930
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 21,731,198
<POLICY-LOSSES>                                4,648,867
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                            5,352,631
<POLICY-OTHER>                                 483,622
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                          0
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                2,268,435
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       5,816
<OTHER-SE>                                     0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   21,731,198
<PREMIUMS>                                     2,710,887
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                            139,570
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                             213,258
<OTHER-INCOME>                                 396,414
<BENEFITS>                                     750,096
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                    886,483
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                           1,109,983
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                660,765
<INCOME-TAX>                                   222,091
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            438,674
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   438,674
<EPS-BASIC>                                    0.08
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  0
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                 0
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                            0
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                              0
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                             0
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                               0
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                0
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                        0



</TABLE>