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


                                                    Exhibit 12
                                                    Form 10-Q
                                                    For the Three
                                                    Months Ended
                                                    December 31, 1998


                             Lucent Technologies Inc.
                Computation of Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges

                              (Dollars in Millions)
                                   (Unaudited)


                                                               For the Three
                                                                Months Ended
                                                             December 31, 1998

Income Before Income Taxes.............................          $ 2,121
                                                              
Less Interest Capitalized during                              
  the Period...........................................                5
Less Undistributed Earnings of Less than 50%                  
  Owned Affiliates.....................................                1
                                                              
Add Fixed Charges......................................              117
                                                              
Total Earnings ........................................          $ 2,232
                                                              
                                                              
                                                              
Fixed Charges                                                 
                                                              
Total Interest Expense Including Capitalized Interest..          $    80
                                                              
Interest Portion of Rental Expense.....................               37
                                                              
    Total Fixed Charges................................          $   117
                                                              
Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges.....................             19.1
**Exhibit 11.0**
     **Statement re: Computation of Per Share Earnings (Unaudited)**
     Earnings per share were computed as follows (dollar amounts in thousands except share data):                       **Weighted**            **Average**  **Per Share**     **Income**  **Shares**  **Amount**          **For the nine months ended September 30, 2003:**            **Basic Earnings per Share:**             Income available to common stockholders $1,960   1,472,457  $1.33 **Effect of Dilutive Securities:**              Stock options      137,804                **Diluted Earnings per Share:**              Income available to common stockholders andassumed conversions $1,960   1,610,261  $1.22        **For the nine months ended September 30, 2002:**            **Basic Earnings per Share:**              Income available to common stockholders $1,776   1,470,502  $1.21 **Effect of Dilutive Securities:**              Stock options      123,318                **Diluted Earnings per Share:**             Income available to common stockholders andassumed conversions $1,776   1,593,820  $1.12        
21

 
                     **Weighted**            **Average**  **Per Share**    **Income**  **Shares**  **Amount**         **For the three months ended September 30, 2003:**            **Basic Earnings per Share:**             Income available to common stockholders $497   1,494,322  $0.33 **Effect of Dilutive Securities:**             Stock options      130,444                **Diluted Earnings per Share:**             Income available to common stockholders andassumed conversions $497   1,624,766  $0.31        **For the three months ended September 30, 2002:**            **Basic Earnings per Share:**             Income available to common stockholders $379   1,470,502  $0.26 **Effect of Dilutive Securities:**             Stock options      131,698                **Diluted Earnings per Share:**             Income available to common stockholders andassumed conversions $379   1,602,200  $0.24        
22
# Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed January 25, 2023. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________ No. 3D22-1778 Lower Tribunal No. F04-14122

________________ 

### Roberto Ordonez-Medina,

Appellant, vs. 

### The State of Florida, Appellee. An Appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Tanya Brinkley, Judge. Roberto Ordonez-Medina, in proper person. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, for appellee. Before SCALES, LINDSEY, and BOKOR, JJ. PER CURIAM. Affirmed.
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 201 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

  1st Session
S. RES. 201

    Commending the CIA's statutory Inspector General on his 5-year 
                         anniversary in office.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           December 21, 1995

 Mr. Specter (for himself, Mr. Kerrey, Mr. Glenn, Mr. Bryan, Mr. Robb, 
   Mr. Johnston, Mr. Chafee, Mr. Baucus, Mr. Warner, Mr. Kerry, Mr. 
 Shelby, Mr. Graham, Mr. Kyl, Mr. Lugar, Mr. Inhofe, Mr. Byrd, and Mr. 
 DeWine) submitted the following resolution; which was considered and 
                               agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
    Commending the CIA's statutory Inspector General on his 5-year 
                         anniversary in office.

Whereas, because of its concern with the need for objectivity, authority and 
        independence on the part of the Central Intelligence Agency's Office of 
        Inspector General, the Senate in 1989 included in the Intelligence 
        Authorization Act of Fiscal Year 1990--subsequently enacted into law--a 
        provision establishing an independent, Presidentially-appointed 
        statutory Inspector General at the CIA;
Whereas in November, 1990, the Honorable Frederick P. Hitz was formally sworn in 
        as the CIA's first statutory Inspector General;
Whereas the CIA's statutory Office of Inspector General, under the capable 
        leadership of Frederick P. Hitz, has demonstrated its independence, 
        tenacity, effectiveness and integrity; and
Whereas the work of the CIA Office of Inspector General under Mr. Hitz's 
        leadership has contributed notably to the greater efficiency, 
        effectiveness, integrity and accountability of the Central Intelligence 
        Agency: Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the Senate expresses its congratulations to 
Frederick P. Hitz on his 5-year anniversary as the first statutory CIA 
Inspector General and expresses its support for the Office of the CIA 
Inspector General.
    Sec. 2. The Secretary of the Senate shall transmit a copy of this 
resolution to Frederick P. Hitz.
                                 <all>
```
# Official Journal C 105/2013

| | ISSN 1977-091X
  doi:10.3000/1977091X.C_2013.105.eng |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 105 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5611 April 2013 |

ISSN 1977-091X

doi:10.3000/1977091X.C_2013.105.eng

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 105

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5611 April 2013

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2013/C 105/01 | Guidelines on the classification in the Combined Nomenclature of goods put up in sets for retail sale | 1 |
| 2013/C 105/02 | Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.6714 — U-SHIN/Valeo Cam) (1) | 7 |

Notice No

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2013/C 105/01

Guidelines on the classification in the Combined Nomenclature of goods put up in sets for retail sale

1

2013/C 105/02

Non-opposition to a notified concentration (Case COMP/M.6714 — U-SHIN/Valeo Cam) (1)

7

---

| | IV   Notices |
| --- | --- |
| | NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2013/C 105/03 | Euro exchange rates | 8 |
| | Court of Auditors |
| 2013/C 105/04 | Special Report No 1/2013 ‘Has the EU support to the food-processing industry been effective and efficient in adding value to agricultural products?’ | 9 |
| | NOTICES FROM MEMBER STATES |
| 2013/C 105/05 | Information communicated by Member States regarding closure of fisheries | 10 |

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2013/C 105/03

Euro exchange rates

8

Court of Auditors

2013/C 105/04

Special Report No 1/2013 ‘Has the EU support to the food-processing industry been effective and efficient in adding value to agricultural products?’

9

NOTICES FROM MEMBER STATES

2013/C 105/05

Information communicated by Member States regarding closure of fisheries

10

---

| | |
| --- | --- |
| | (1)   Text with EEA relevance |

---

(1)   Text with EEA relevance

1

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h

Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,

J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk September 28, 2009

s0921 

# Order

September 28, 2009

139136-7

_____________ _______________ _____________

In re Estate of ELMA ZYLA, Deceased.

_____________ _______________ _____________
PETER S. GRAPP, as Pe rsonal Representative of the Estate of ELMA ZYLA, Deceased, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v SC: 139136-7 COA: 281355, 281356 Oakland Probate Court: 2000-272816-DA, 2006-305456-CZ LAURIE HILL-PTAS HNIK and CYNTHIA BERTOLINI, as Personal Representatives of the Estate of CLARENCE HILL, Deceased,Defendants/Third-Party-PlaintiffsAppellees,

and

DOUGLAS S. TOUMA and TOUMA, WATSON, WHALING, COURY & CASTELLO, P.C., f/k/a TOUMA, WATSON, NICH OLSON, WHALING, FLETCHER & DEGROW, Third-Party-Defendants.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the applicati on for leave to appeal the May 14, 2009 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
421 P.2d 903

#### STATE of Arizona, Appellee, v. Frankie J. CORDOVA, Appellant.

No. 1 CA-CR 101.

Court of Appeals of Arizona.

Dec. 28, 1966.

Darrell F. Smith, Atty. Gen., by Gary K. Nelson, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.

McGillicuddy, Johnson & Rich, by Chris T. Johnson, Phoenix, for appellant.

CAMERON, Judge.

Defendant was adjudged guilty and sentenced to serve a term of not less than 10 nor more than 12 years for the crime of burglary in the nighttime—-13-302, subsec. B, A.R.S.—and from said judgment and sentence filed his notice of appeal in propria persona.

Counsel was appointed to represent defendant on appeal and counsel has advised this Court that he has carefully searched the record and can find no reversible error. Under these circumstances, we must search the entire record for fundamental error. 13-1715 A.R.S., State v. Burrell, 96 Ariz. 233, 393 P.2d 921 (1964), State v. Padilla, 2 Ariz.App. 374, 409 P.2d 90 (1965).

Defendant was charged in an information filed 21 October, 1963, with the crime of burglary in the first degree in that he did,

> “unlawfully and feloniously in violation of A.R.S. 13-302 enter, in the nighttime, the premises known as Evelyn’s Bar and Liquor Store located in Winslow, Navajo County, Arizona, with the intent then and there to commit grant or petty theft, all the said acts named within taking place in the said city of Winslow, Navajo County, Arizona.”

Defendant entered a plea of guilty and the court finding that,

> “It appearing to the court that the ends of justice will best be served by suspending the imposition of sentence”,

ordered that the imposition of sentence Be suspended for a period of three years on certain terms and conditions. Among other conditions, defendant was required to pay the owner' of the bar the amount of $750.00, he was to refrain from the use of intoxi*471eating liquors, and lie was to obey all the laws of the land.

Motion to revoke and terminate probation was filed on 1 September 1965, and the court found that the defendant,

> “On the 2nd day of February, 1966, being present in court and therein admitting that he had escaped from lawful custody, and further, that he had been convicted of driving while under the influence of intoxicating liquor, and the court having this date heard evidence accusing the defendant of aggravated battery and kidnapping, and it appearing to the satisfaction of the court that the defendant committed said acts, the defendant having waived time for passing of sentence the court then proceeded'to sentence him as follows

The sentence is within the allowable limits provided in the statute .(one to fifteen years). We find no error in the magnitude of the sentence.

We have searched the record and find no reversible error.

Judgment affirmed.

STEVENS, C. J., and DONOFRIO, J., concur.
<PAGE>

                                                                     Exhibit 4.2

               Description of International Consulting Agreements

     Cardiac Science, Inc. (the "Company"), entered into business services
consulting agreements on September 26, 2001, with Stuart Hildage, Steve Jelfs,
Tamas Kecskemeti, Kurt Lemvigh, Tom Marres and Johan Ubby (the "Consultants")
(the "Consulting Agreements"). Pursuant to the Consulting Agreements,
Consultants agreed to provide business advisory services to the Company. The
services contracted for included business sales services consulting in the areas
of operations, business plan implementation and marketing. In return for such
advisory services, the Company agreed to issue, to Consultants options for
205,500 shares of the Company's Common Stock. The stock options issued to the
Consultants are subject to the same vesting requirements as employee stock
options issued pursuant to the Company's 1997 Stock Option/Stock Issuance Plan.
The shares underlying such Consultant stock options are being registered
pursuant to this Registration Statement to fulfill the Company's contractual
obligations.

                                       7
Exhibit
      16


REPORT
        OF
        INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM
 
 To
        the
        Board of Directors and
 Stockholders
        of OptiCon Systems, Inc.
  We
        have
        audited the accompanying balance sheets of OptiCon Systems, Inc. as of June
        30,
        2006, and the related statements of operations, stockholders' deficit and
        cash
        flows for the year ended June 30, 2006. These financial statements are the
        responsibility of the Company's management. Our responsibility is to express
        an
        opinion on these financial statements based on our audits.
  We
        conducted our audits in accordance with the standards of the Public Company
        Accounting Oversight Board (United States).Those standards require that we
        plan
        and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the financial
        statements are free of material misstatement. The company is not required
        to
        have, nor were we engaged to perform, an audit of its internal control over
        financial reporting. Our audit included consideration of internal control
        over
        financial reporting as a basis for designing audit procedures that are
        appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an
        opinion on the effectiveness of the company's internal control over financial
        reporting. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also includes
        examining, on a test basis, evidence supporting the amounts and disclosures
        in
        the financial statements, assessing the accounting principles used and
        significant estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall
        financial statement presentation. We believe that our audits provide a
        reasonable basis for our opinion.
  In
        our
        opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all
        material respects, the financial position of OptiCon Systems, Inc. as of
        June
        30, 2006, and the results of its operations and its cash flows for the year
        ended June 30, 2006 in conformity with accounting principles generally accepted
        in the United States of America.
 
 The
        accompanying financial statements have been prepared assuming that the Company
        will continue as a going concern. As discussed in Note 2 to the financial
        statements, the Company has suffered recurring losses from operations and
        has a
        net stockholders' deficit as of June 30, 2006. These factors raise substantial
        doubt about the Company's ability to continue as a going concern. Management's
        plans in regard to these matters are also described in Note 2. The financial
        statements do not include any adjustments that might result from the outcome
        of
        this uncertainty.
 
 
 /s/
        Herman, Lagor, Hopkins & Meeks, P.A.
 
 Tampa,
        Florida
 February
        6, 2007
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR
. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR
. R. 47.5.4. 

### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 07-41105 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff-Appellee

v. RAUL MACHADO-MARTINEZ, also known as Raul Machado, also known as Simon Hernandez Sanchez, also known as Francisco Javier Lima-Valdez Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 3:07-CR-11-1
Before GARZA, CLEMENT, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Raul Machado-Martinez appeals the sentence imposed following his guiltyplea conviction ofbeing found in the United Stateswithout permission, following removal. Machado-Martinez argues that his sentence is procedurally unreasonable because the district court did not provide notice that it was considering an upward variance in his case. Machado-Martinez does not contend United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D August 20, 2008 Charles R. Fulbruge III ClerkNo. 07-41105

2 that the district court committed any other procedural error in imposing his sentence or that the sentence imposed in his case is substantively unreasonable. See Gall v. United States, 128 S. Ct. 586, 596-97 (2007). The Government has filed a motion for summary affirmance, or in the alternative, for an extension of time in which to file a brief. As Machado-Martinez concedes, his argument is foreclosed by this court’s holding in United States v. Mejia-Huerta, 480 F.3d 713, 722-23 (5th Cir. 2007), cert. denied, 128 S. Ct. 2954 (2008). The Supreme Court recently reached the same conclusion. Irizarry v. United States, 128 S. Ct. 2198, 2202-04 (2008). The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the district court’sjudgment is AFFIRMED. The Government’s alternative motion for an extension of time is DENIED.
EXHIBIT 32



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350



In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K/A of Juniper Growth Corporation (the Company) for the period ended June 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, the undersigned officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:



1.  The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) 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:  November 24, 2009

/s/    Joseph R. Rozelle



JOSEPH R. ROZELLE

Principal Executive Officer

and Principal Financial Officer





The foregoing certification is being furnished as an exhibit to the Report pursuant to Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-K and Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code) and, accordingly, is not being filed as part of the Report for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not incorporated by reference into any filings of the Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.
III

104TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. CON. RES. 1

Providing for television coverage of open conference committee meetings.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JANUARY 4, 1995

Mr. DOLE (for himself and Mr. DASCHLE) submitted the following concurrent

resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration

CONCURRENT RESOLUTION

Providing for television coverage of open conference

committee meetings.

1 Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives

2 concurring), That it is hereby authorized to provide cov3 erage by television cameras of all open conference commit4 tee meetings.

Æ
**Exhibit 99.1**

 

**CERTIFICATE OF CHIEF EXECUTIVEOFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

 

Pursuant to Section 906 ofSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted), Sergio Magistri,Chief Executive Officer of InVision Technologies, Inc. (the “Company”), andRoss Mulholland, the Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each herebycertifies that, to the best of his knowledge:

** **

**1.    **The Company’s QuarterlyReport on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2002, and to which thisCertification is attached as Exhibit 99.1, (the “***Periodic Report***”) fully complies withthe requirements of section 13(a) or section 15(d) of the Securities ExchangeAct of 1934, and

** **

**2.    **The information contained inthe Periodic Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financialcondition and results of operations of the Company.

** **

**IN WITNESS WHEREOF,** the undersigned have settheir hands hereto as of the 14th day of August, 2002.

 

 
|   | /s/  Sergio Magistri     |   |
|--------|--------------------------|--------|
|   | Sergio Magistri          |
|   | Chief  Executive Officer |
|   |                     |
|   |                     |
|   | /s/  Ross Mulholland     |   |
|   | Ross Mulholland          |
|   | Chief  Financial Officer |

 

----