alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>   1
                                   EXHIBIT 11

                              THE FINOVA GROUP INC.
                        Computation of Earnings Per Share
                  (Dollars in Thousands, except per share data)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                      Three Months Ended               Nine Months Ended
                                         September 30,                    September 30,
                                  ---------------------------     ---------------------------
                                      1996            1995            1996            1995
                                  -----------     -----------     -----------     -----------
<S>                               <C>             <C>             <C>             <C>        
 Net income and earnings 
 available to common
  shareholders                    $    29,763     $    25,150     $    85,005     $    71,147
                                  ===========     ===========     ===========     ===========
Average common shares
 outstanding before
 common equivalents                27,432,000      27,370,000      27,372,000      27,515,000
Common equivalent stock
  options                             599,000         401,000         599,000         330,000
                                  -----------     -----------     -----------     -----------
Average outstanding common
  and equivalent shares            28,031,000      27,771,000      27,971,000      27,845,000
                                  ===========     ===========     ===========     ===========
Earnings per common
 and equivalent share             $      1.06     $      0.91     $      3.04     $      2.56
                                  ===========     ===========     ===========     ===========
</TABLE>

                                       11
Michael Anthony HAYES, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-932

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

March 1, 2018 Rehearing Denied April 13, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          AUG-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAY-31-1997
<CASH>                                         496,879
<SECURITIES>                                   737,212
<RECEIVABLES>                                   22,691
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     49,695
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,327,057
<PP&E>                                         399,204
<DEPRECIATION>                                 217,488
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,531,219
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           63,962
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        27,422
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,344,761
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,531,219
<SALES>                                        163,546
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               163,546
<CGS>                                           93,710
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  208,452
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (312,097)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (312,097)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (312,097)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (0.11)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.11)
        


</TABLE>
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                        Pomeroy Computer Resources, Inc.
                 Exhibit 11 - Computation of Earnings Per Share
                    (in thousands, except per share amounts)


                                                Quarter Ended     Year to date
                                                  October 5,       October 5,
                                              ----------------  ----------------
                                               2003     2002     2003     2002
                                              -------  -------  -------  -------
<S>                                           <C>      <C>      <C>      <C>
BASIC
Weighted average common shares
outstanding                                    12,226   12,745   12,340   12,729
                                              =======  =======  =======  =======

Net income                                    $ 2,563  $ 5,094  $ 6,083  $14,384
                                              =======  =======  =======  =======

Net income per common share                   $  0.21  $  0.40  $  0.49  $  1.13
                                              =======  =======  =======  =======

DILUTED
Weighted average common shares
outstanding                                    12,226   12,745   12,340   12,729

Dilutive effect of stock options outstanding
during the period                                 143       27       50       70

Total common and common equivalent            -------  -------  -------  -------
shares                                         12,369   12,772   12,390   12,799
                                              =======  =======  =======  =======

Net income                                    $ 2,563  $ 5,094  $ 6,083  $14,384
                                              =======  =======  =======  =======

Net income per common share                   $  0.21  $  0.40  $  0.49  $  1.12
                                              =======  =======  =======  =======
</TABLE>


<PAGE>
#### Adam PELLETIER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. Harold CLARKE, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 17-6742

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: October 23, 2017

Decided: October 26, 2017

Adam Pelletier, Appellant Pro Se. Michael Thomas Judge, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before KING, WYNN, and THACKER, Circuit Judges.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Adam Pelletier seeks to appeal from the district court’s order dismissing as time-barred and partially proeedurally defaulted his second 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. The district court’s order is not ap-pealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)(A) (2012). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012). When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *see Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. *Slack,*529 U.S. at 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595.

*265We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Pelletier has not made the requisite showing. In the absence of prefiling authorization from this court, the district court lacked jurisdiction to hear this successive § 2254 petition. *See*28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(3) (2012). Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability, deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis, and dismiss the appeal. 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.

*DISMISSED*
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

719 

CAF 14-00693 

PRESENT: CENTRA, J.P., PERADOTTO, LINDLEY, VALENTINO, AND DEJOSEPH, JJ. 

 

IN THE MATTER OF ANDREA E. RAFFERTY, 

PETITIONER-RESPONDENT, 

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

MICHAEL J. RAFFERTY, RESPONDENT-APPELLANT. 

 

JOHN J. RASPANTE, UTICA, FOR RESPONDENT-APPELLANT. 

LAW OFFICE OF TIMOTHY A. BENEDICT, ROME (TIMOTHY A. BENEDICT OF

COUNSEL), FOR PETITIONER-RESPONDENT.

Appeal from an order of the Family Court, Oneida County (Joan E.

Shkane, J.), entered March 24, 2014 in a proceeding pursuant to Family

Court Act article 4. The order committed respondent to jail for a

period of six months. 

It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal is unanimously dismissed

without costs.

Memorandum: Respondent father appeals from an order committing

him to jail for six months based on a finding of the Support

Magistrate that he willfully violated a prior child support order. 

Respondent contends that the Support Magistrate erred in finding that

his admitted failure to pay child support was willful, inasmuch as he

demonstrated at the violation hearing that he was unable to pay the

amount due. Because respondent has appealed only from the order of

commitment, and not from the order finding that he willfully violated

the child support order, the appeal must be dismissed (see Matter of

McDowell v Domenech, 31 AD3d 554, 555; Matter of St. Lawrence County

Dept. of Social Servs. v Pratt, 24 AD3d 1050, 1050, lv denied 6 NY3d

713; Matter of Dauria v Dauria, 286 AD2d 879, 880). 

Entered: June 19, 2015 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1425 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1425

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the limitation on 
  the cover over of distilled spirits taxes to the Virgin Islands and 
                              Puerto Rico.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 26, 2021

   Ms. Plaskett (for herself and Miss Gonzalez-Colon) introduced the 
 following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Ways and Means

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to repeal the limitation on 
  the cover over of distilled spirits taxes to the Virgin Islands and 
                              Puerto Rico.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. REPEAL OF LIMITATION ON COVER OVER OF DISTILLED SPIRITS 
              TAXES.

    (a) In General.--Section 7652 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 
is amended by striking subsection (f) and by redesignating subsections 
(g), (h), and (i) as subsections (f), (g), and (h), respectively.
    (b) Conforming Amendment.--Section 7652(f)(1) of such Code, as 
redesignated by subsection (a), is amended--
            (1) by striking subparagraph (B), and
            (2) by striking ``as if--'' and all that follows through 
        ``the use and tax'' and inserting ``as if the use and tax''.
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply to distilled spirits brought into the United States after 
December 31, 2020.
                                 <all>
```
# Službeni list C 160A/27.

| | ISSN 1977-1088 |
| --- | --- |
| Službeni list
  Europske unije | C 160A |
| | |
| Hrvatsko izdanje | Informacije i objave | 5727. svibnja 2014. |

ISSN 1977-1088

Službeni list

Europske unije

C 160A

Hrvatsko izdanje

Informacije i objave

5727. svibnja 2014.

---

| Obavijest br. | Sadržaj | Stranica |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | V.   Objave |
| | ADMINISTRATIVNI POSTUPCI |
| | Europska agencija za lijekove |
| 2014/C 160A/01 | Obavijest o odustanku | 1 |

Obavijest br.

Sadržaj

Stranica

V.   Objave

ADMINISTRATIVNI POSTUPCI

Europska agencija za lijekove

2014/C 160A/01

Obavijest o odustanku

1

| | |
| --- | --- |
| 2014/C 160A/02 | Pregled Natječaja SL C A | 2 |

2014/C 160A/02

Pregled Natječaja SL C A

2

| HR | |
| --- | --- |

HR

---

V. Objave

ADMINISTRATIVNI POSTUPCI

Europska agencija za lijekove

| 27.5.2014 | HR | Službeni list Europske unije | CA 160/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.5.2014

HR

Službeni list Europske unije

CA 160/1

---

Obavijest o odustanku

2014/C 160 A/01

Europska agencija za lijekove je odlučila odustati od sljedećeg postupka odabira:

| — | EMA/AD/359: Voditelj Odjela IT operacija, Odsjek informacijske tehnologije (AD 10). |
| --- | --- |

—

EMA/AD/359: Voditelj Odjela IT operacija, Odsjek informacijske tehnologije (AD 10).

---

27.5.2014

| 27.5.2014 | HR | Službeni list Europske unije | CA 160/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

HR

Službeni list Europske unije

CA 160/2

---

PREGLED NATJEČAJA SL C A

2014/C 160 A/02

Dolje je naveden popis SL C A objavljenih u tekućoj godini.

Ako nije drugačije navedeno, SL je objavljen na svim jezičnim inačicama.

| 5 | |
| --- | --- |
| 6 | |
| 11 | |
| 19 | |
| 21 | |
| 26 | |
| 27 | |
| 30 | (PL) |
| 35 | |
| 41 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 42 | |
| 43 | |
| 46 | |
| 47 | |
| 48 | |
| 55 | |
| 56 | |
| 60 | |
| 62 | |
| 65 | |
| 73 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 74 | |
| 81 | |
| 88 | |
| 92 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 97 | |
| 98 | |
| 99 | |
| 108 | |
| 109 | |
| 116 | |
| 119 | |
| 133 | |
| 134 | |
| 136 | |
| 137 | (DE/EN/FR) |
| 140 | |
| 145 | |
| 152 | |
| 160 | |

5

6

11

19

21

26

27

30

(PL)

35

41

(DE/EN/FR)

42

43

46

47

48

55

56

60

62

65

73

(DE/EN/FR)

74

81

88

92

(DE/EN/FR)

97

98

99

108

109

116

119

133

134

136

137

(DE/EN/FR)

140

145

152

160

---
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 19-0422

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, 

v. 

JACK ELDON JARVEY,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and 

good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including July 27, 2020, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

June 19 2020

06/19/2020

Case Number: DA 19-0422
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

DERIN RESTAURANTS, LLC, a Florida )

limited liability company, )

)

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D18-826

)

HERITAGE SQUARE REAL ESTATE, LLC, )

a Florida limited liability company; and )

JOSEPH MAGDALENER, individually, )

)

Appellees. )

___________________________________)

Opinion filed September 20, 2019.

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Collier

County; James R. Shenko, Judge.

Joseph A. Davidow and Yasser Lakhlifi of 

Willis and Davidow, LLC, Naples, for 

Appellant.

Rachel A. Kerlek of Woods, Weidenmiller, 

Michetti & Rudnick, LLP, Naples, for 

Appellees.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. 

NORTHCUTT, CASANUEVA, and SILBERMAN, JJ., Concur.
Gary SIPEK, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 2D17-4164

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

Opinion filed February 14, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
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 Annual Report of Garb Oil & Power Corporation, and
subsidiaries (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ending June 30,
2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), I, Louis J. Zant, Chief Executive Officer of the Company
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of our knowledge and belief:

         (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.


Date: 7/21/2005                             By: /s/ Louis J. Zant
     -------------                             ------------------
                                               Louis J. Zant
                                               Chief Executive Officer


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that
appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 99.11

                            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 Pomeroy Computer Resources, Inc. (the
"Company")  on  Form  10-Q  for the period ending July 5, 2002 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I certify,
pursuant  to  18  U.S.C.  Sec.  1350,  as  adopted  pursuant  to Sec. 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/ David B. Pomeroy III

David B. Pomeroy III
Chief Executive Officer
August 13, 2002



/s/ Michael E. Rohrkemper

Michael Rohrkemper
Chief Financial Officer
August 13, 2002


<PAGE>
Otis James WRIGHT, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D16-5526

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

March 22, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.2

               CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

    We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement
(Form S-8) pertaining to the 1997 Employee Stock Option Plan and the 1998 Stock
Plan and the 1999 Employee Stock Purchase Plan of rStar Corporation (formerly
known as ZapMe! Corporation) of our report dated January 28, 2000, except for
Note 2, as to which the date is March 27, 2001, with respect to the consolidated
balance sheet of rStar Corporation as of December 31, 1999 and the related
consolidated statements of operations, redeemable convertible preferred stock
and stockholders' equity (deficit), and cash flows for each of the two years in
the period ended December 31, 1999, included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K)
for the year ended December 31, 2000.

                                          /s/ ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Walnut Creek, California

April 16, 2001
Exhibit 24.1

STATE OF TEXAS      § 
COUNTY OF DALLAS      §

POWER OF ATTORNEY

Know
all men by these presents, that I, WILLIAM H. HENDERSON, 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, 2008 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 3rd day of July,
2008.

| |                           | 
| | ------------------------- | 
| | /s/ William
 H. Henderson | 
| |                           | 
| | WILLIAM H.
 HENDERSON     | 

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

Before
me this 3rd day of July, 2008, came WILLIAM H. HENDERSON, 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   | 

66

---
#### Sabrina Renee BROWN, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. UNIVERSAL MUSIC GROUP, Defendant-Appellee.

No. 17-1316

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: May 25, 2017

Decided: May 30, 2017

Sabrina Renee Brown, Appellant Pro Se.

Before MOTZ, THACKER, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

*71Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Sabrina Renee Brown seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing her civil complaint under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2) (2012) without prejudice for failure to state a claim. This court may exercise jurisdiction only over final orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1291 (2012), and certain interlocutory and collateral orders, 28 U.S.C. § 1292 (2012); Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b); *Cohen v. Beneficial Indus. Loan Corp.,*337 U.S. 541, 545-47, 69 S.Ct. 1221, 93 L.Ed. 1528 (1949). Because it is possible that Brown could cure the defects in her complaint through amendment, the order she seeks to appeal is neither a final order nor an appealable interlocutory or collateral order. *Goode v. Cent. Va. Legal Aid Soc’y, Inc.,*807 F.3d 619, 623-25, 628-30 (4th Cir. 2015); *Domino Sugar Corp. v. Sugar Workers Local Union 392,*10 F.3d 1064, 1066-67 (4th Cir. 1993). Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction and remand the case to the district court with instructions to allow Brown to file an amended complaint. 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.

*DISMISSED AND REMANDED WITH INSTR UCTIONS*