alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>   1
 
                                                                      EXHIBIT 11
 
                          EL PASO NATURAL GAS COMPANY
 
                           EARNINGS PER COMMON SHARE
 
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                              FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31,
                                                              --------------------------------
                                                                  1996               1995
                                                              -------------      -------------
<S>                                                           <C>                <C>
Income available for common stock dividends.................    $38,211,000        $85,363,000
Primary average common shares outstanding...................     36,701,878         34,495,676
Primary earnings per share..................................    $    1.0411        $    2.4746
Fully diluted average common shares outstanding.............     37,120,972         34,733,823
Fully diluted earnings per common share.....................    $    1.0294        $    2.4576
</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 116th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2969 Engrossed in House (EH)]

<DOC>
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
116th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 2969

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
  at 1401 1st Street North in Winter Haven, Florida, as the ``Althea 
              Margaret Daily Mills Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. ALTHEA MARGARET DAILY MILLS POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 1401 1st Street North in Winter Haven, Florida, shall be 
known and designated as the ``Althea Margaret Daily Mills Post Office 
Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Althea 
Margaret Daily Mills Post Office Building''.

            Passed the House of Representatives September 14, 2020.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
116th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 2969

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
  at 1401 1st Street North in Winter Haven, Florida, as the ``Althea 
              Margaret Daily Mills Post Office Building''.
```
S91A1176, S91A1178.

#### WARD v. WARD (two cases).

(409 SE2d 518)

Hunt, Justice.

We granted this discretionary application to determine whether the trial court erred by holding the former wife in criminal contempt for failing to pay a sum which had been discharged in bankruptcy. We also asked the parties to address the propriety of the trial court’s reduction of the former husband’s child support obligations.

The parties’ divorce decree required each to make half the payments due on a bank loan. Mrs. Ward was adjudicated in civil contempt after she failed to make any payments. Despite her statement at the civil contempt hearing that she was unable to do so, she purged herself of contempt by immediately paying all amounts due, including attorney fees. Two months later, Mr. Ward agreed to an order increasing his child support obligations. The following month, Mrs. Ward filed a bankruptcy petition, resulting in a discharge from her responsibility for the bank loan. On Mr. Ward’s motion, the trial court held Mrs. Ward in criminal contempt, ordered her to serve six days in jail1 and pay a $500 fine, and reduced Mr. Ward’s child support obligations.

1. In *Banks v. Wells,*256 Ga. 164 (344 SE2d 652) (1986), we reviewed the distinctions between civil and criminal contempt and reversed a judgment for civil contempt under facts similar to those in this case. Because of the automatic stay provisions of the bankruptcy act, the issue of the dischargeability of the debt in that case was res judicata, and civil contempt would not lie to enforce payment. However, we noted the unavailability of civil contempt to collect the debt would not preclude a finding of criminal contempt for wilful refusal to obey a court order. Under the facts of this case, the trial court was authorized to find beyond a reasonable doubt that Mrs. Ward wilfully disobeyed its orders and was guilty of criminal contempt. *In re Bergin,*255 Ga. 429 (341 SE2d 8) (1986). See also *Hopkins v. Hopkins,*244 Ga. 66, 67 (1) (257 SE2d 900) (1979).

2. The trial court’s decision to decrease Mr. Ward’s child support obligation is supported, inter alia, by the facts that since the previous *660child support order Mrs. Ward’s income had doubled and Mr. Ward had been required to assume the entire loan obligation as the result of Mrs. Ward’s bankruptcy. Thus, the trial court’s decision is supported by “some evidence,” and will not be disturbed on appeal. *Decker v. Decker,*256 Ga. 513, 515 (2) (350 SE2d 434) (1986).

Decided October 18, 1991 —

Reconsideration denied November 6, 1991.

*Womack & Rhyne, Ronald R. Womack,*for appellant.

*John 0. Wiggins,*for appellee.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur.*

1

 The order provides that Mrs. Ward’s confinement be served on alternate weekends concurrent with Mr. Ward’s exercise of his visitation privileges with the children.
United States Court of Appeals

For the First Circuit

No. 98-1567

No. 99-1111

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Appellee,

v.

ANTHONY M. SHEA,

Defendant, Appellant.

____________________

No. 98-1568

No. 99-1110

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Appellee,

v.

MICHAEL K. O'HALLORAN

Defendant, Appellant.

____________________

No. 98-1569

No. 99-2009

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Appellee,

v.

PATRICK J. McGONAGLE,

Defendant, Appellant.

____________________

____________________

No. 98-1570

No. 99-1109

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Appellee,

v.

STEPHEN G. BURKE,

Defendant, Appellant.

____________________

No. 98-1767

No. 99-1204

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Appellee,

v.

MATTHEW McDONALD,

Defendant, Appellant.

____________________

ERRATA

The opinion of this Court, issued on May 2, 2000, should be

amended as follows:

On page 17, line 9 down, insert "thus" between "and" and "failed".
**DAAN-13-05**

**Quote Submission Method**

(March 2017)

Quotes in response to this solicitation may be submitted by the following method(s) as indicated below:  

______Upload Proposals on the DLA Internet Bid Board System (DIBBS) at: 	https://www.dibbs.bsm.dla.mil/default.aspx

______Buyer’s Facsimile: ______________________________

______Buyer’s email address: _______________________________

*Note:* E-mailed RFQs must not exceed 15 MB.  Proposals greater than 15 MB must be submitted using multiple emails. 

(End of Notice)
January 27, 2016 

Dear Mr. Herzog: 

This letter is to inform you that the following information is missing from your petition (Docket 

No. FAA–2015–5610). This information is necessary for the Federal Aviation Administration 

(FAA) to process your petition. 

 Provide a copy of the Motion Picture and Television Operations Manual (MPTOM) 

which is required by Order 8900.1, Volume 3, Chapter 8, Section 1. If you wish for us to 

proceed without this manual and remove closed-set filming from your proposed operation 

please inform of us of your intention by the requested response date listed below. 

Please submit the additional information (non-proprietary) to your docket at 

www.regulations.gov. Once your information has been submitted, please also send a copy of the 

requested information (and any proprietary information), as well as your comment tracking 

number from regulations.gov via e-mail to 333exemptions@faa.gov. If you want us to process 

your request any further, we must receive the information described above by 2/10/16. If we do 

not receive the information, we will close the docket without notifying you further. 

If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at (202) 267-2999. 

Sincerely, 

/S/ 

Program Analyst
I 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2638 

To direct the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency to issue 

guidance on minimizing the use of firefighting foam containing PFAS, 

and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 9, 2019 

Mrs. FLETCHER introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL 

To direct the Administrator of the Environmental Protection 

Agency to issue guidance on minimizing the use of firefighting foam containing PFAS, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. GUIDANCE. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than one year after the 

5 date of enactment of this Act, the Administrator of the 

6 Environmental Protection Agency shall issue guidance on 

7 minimizing the use of firefighting foam and other equip8 ment containing any PFAS by firefighters, police officers, 

9 paramedics, emergency medical technicians, and other 


pbinns on DSK79D2C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 2638 IH

1 first responders, in order to minimize the risk to such fire2 fighters, police officers, paramedics, emergency medical 

3 technicians, and other first responders, and the environ4 ment, without jeopardizing firefighting efforts. 

5 (b) DEFINITION.—In this Act, the term ‘‘PFAS’’ 

6 means a perfluoroalkyl or polyfluoroalkyl substance with 

7 at least one fully fluorinated carbon atom. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSK79D2C42PROD with BILLS
EXHIBIT 11.1
                         ESPEY MFG. & ELECTRONICS CORP.
                     Computation of per Share Net Income as
                        Disclosed in Item 14 of Form 10-K

                         Five years ended June 30, 2004

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                  2004           2003           2002            2001           2000
                                              -----------    -----------    -----------     -----------     ----------
<S>                                           <C>            <C>            <C>             <C>             <C>
Computation of net income
     per share:

         BASIC
         Weighted average
         number of primary
         shares outstanding ..........          1,013,663      1,025,200      1,030,556       1,031,403      1,045,235
                                              ===========    ===========    ===========     ===========     ==========

Net income ...........................        $   960,826    $   964,700    $   545,754     $ 1,033,069     $  782,943
                                              ===========    ===========    ===========     ===========     ==========

Per share-basic ......................        $       .95    $       .94    $       .53     $      1.00     $      .75
                                              ===========    ===========    ===========     ===========     ==========
         DILUTED
         Weighted average
         number of primary
         shares outstanding ..........          1,022,344      1,027,686      1,034,904       1,033,989      1,045,520
                                              ===========    ===========    ===========     ===========     ==========

         Net effect of
         dilutive stock
         options based on
         treasury stock
         method ......................              8,681          2,486          4,348           2,586            285
                                              ===========    ===========    ===========     ===========     ==========

Net income ...........................        $   960,826    $   964,700    $   545,754     $ 1,033,069     $  782,943
                                              ===========    ===========    ===========     ===========     ==========

Per share-diluted ....................        $       .94    $       .94    $       .53     $      1.00     $      .75
                                              ===========    ===========    ===========     ===========     ==========
</TABLE>


52
##### 



1.
    
    I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Erie Family Life Insurance
Company for the year ended December 31, 2005;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)) for the registrant and have:
 a.
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such
disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to
ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its
consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;b.
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls
and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the
period covered by this report based on such evaluation; andc.
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal
control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most
recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to
materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting;
and
 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 registrants board of directors:
 a.
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting, which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; andb.
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting.
 /s/ Philip A. GarciaDate: March 8, 2006
    Philip A. Garcia, Executive Vice President & CFO 97
EXHIBIT 32.3



Certification of Chief Executive Officer 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 on Form 10-K/A of
Duquesne Light Company (the Company) for the period ending December 31, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), Morgan K. OBrien, as Chief Executive Officer of the
Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to his knowledge:



| | (1) | The Report 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 the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



WITNESS the due execution hereof this 24th day of March, 2005.



/s/    MORGAN K.
OBRIENMorgan K. OBrienPresident and 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 required by Section
906, has been provided to Duquesne Light Company and will be retained by Duquesne Light Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
No. 10-7859.

#### Francis Kalani Lii, Petitioner v. United States.

562 U.S. 1162, 131 S. Ct. 973,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 29.

178 L. Ed. 2d 799,

January 10, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 393 Fed. Appx. 498.
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 131 (Thursday, July 9, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Pages 37115-37116]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-18227]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION


Notice of Agreement(s) Filed

    The Commission hereby gives notice of the filing of the following 
agreement(s) under the Shipping Act of 1984. Interested parties can 
review or obtain copies of agreements at the Washington, DC offices of 
the Commission, 800 North Capitol Street, N.W., Room 962. Interested 
parties may submit comments on an agreement to the Secretary, Federal 
Maritime Commission, Washington, DC 20573, within 10 days of the date 
this notice appears in the Federal Register.

    Agreement No.: 202-010424-039.
    Title: The Dominican Republic Agreement.
    Parties:

    NPR, Inc. (d/b/a Navieras)
    Sea-Land Service, Inc.
    Crowley American Transport, Inc.
    A.P. Moller-Maersk Line
    Del Line, LLC
    Seaboard Marine, Ltd.
    Tecmarine Lines, Inc.
    Tropical Shipping and Construction Co., Ltd.


[[Page 37116]]


    Synopsis: The proposed amendment would change Agreement provisions 
related to CY and CFS facilities as well as to the Agreement's voting 
provisions. It would also delete the neutral body policing provisions 
and modify the independent action provisions of the Agreement.

    Agreement No.: 202-011259-015.
    Title: United States/Southern Africa Conference.
    Parties: 

    Lykes Lines Limited, LLC
    Mediterranean Shipping Company S.A.
    Safbank Line, Ltd.
    Wilhelmsen Lines A/S

    Synopsis: The proposed amendment adds language to specify the 
amount of time in which conference members have to vote on a telephone 
poll.

    Agreement No.: 224-201055.
    Title: Puerto Rico Ports Authority Pier A Lease Agreement.
    Parties: 

    The Puerto Rico Ports Authority
    Pan American Grain Mfg. Co., Inc.

    Synopsis: The proposed agreement provides the lessee a long term 
lease of a warehouse on Pier A, a second right of preferential use of 
the berthing and platform area of that pier, as well as of an area 
adjacent to the warehouse, second only to the rights of the Puerto Rico 
Electric Power Authority. The term of the agreement runs through June 
30, 2003, with the possibility of two 5-year extensions.

    Dated: July 6, 1998.
    By Order of the Federal Maritime Commission.
Joseph C. Polking,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-18227 Filed 7-8-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6730-01-M
1 The Honorable Mark W. Bennett, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Northern District of Iowa. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 03-1775

___________ United States of America, * * Appellee, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Northern District of Iowa. Arturo Ruiz-Ahumada, also known as * Arturo Amumada-Ruiz, also known as * [UNPUBLISHED] Arturo Robles, also known as Arturo * James Ruiz, also known as Jose Arturo * Ruiz, * * Appellant.

___________ Submitted: September 25, 2003 Filed: September 30, 2003

___________ Before BYE, BOWMAN, and MELLOY, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Arturo Ruiz-Ahumada pleaded guilty to illegal reentry following deportation, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a) and (b), and the district court 1 sentenced him at the top of the Guidelines range to 87 months imprisonment and 3 years supervised-2- release. On appeal, counsel has moved to withdraw under Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and has filed a brief in which he argues that the district court abused its discretion in sentencing Ruiz-Ahumada at the top of the Guidelines range. In a pro se supplemental brief, Ruiz-Ahumada raises speedy-trial, due process, and ineffective-assistance issues, all in relation to continuances the district court granted before he entered his guilty plea. Counsel’s argument fails, as this court does not review a sentence merely because it has been imposed at the top of a Guidelines range that the defendant does not challenge. See United States v. Woodrum , 959 F.2d 100, 101 (8th Cir. 1992) (per curiam). Further, Ruiz-Ahumada’s guilty plea forecloses the speedy-trial and due process claims he raises in his pro se brief, seeUnited States v. Beck , 250 F.3d 1163, 1166 (8th Cir. 2001) (valid guilty plea waives all nonjurisdictional defects); Cox v. Lockhart , 970 F.2d 448, 453 (8th Cir. 1992) (speedy-trial claim is nonjurisdictional and therefore waived by guilty plea), and his ineffective-assistance claim is not properly before us, see United States v. Martin , 59 F.3d 767, 771 (8th Cir. 1995). Moreover, following our independent review, see Penson v. Ohio , 488 U.S. 75 (1988), we find no nonfrivolous issues. Accordingly, we affirm. We also grant counsel’s motion to withdraw.

______________________________
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 130 (Wednesday, July 8, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 36891]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-18063]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. EL96-53-001]


Public Service Company of New Hampshire; Notice of Filing

July 1, 1998.
    Take notice that on June 15, 1998, Public Service Company of New 
Hampshire tendered for filing its compliance filing in the above-
referenced docket.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest such filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, 
in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 385.214). All such motions 
and protests should be filed on or before July 9, 1998. Protests will 
be considered by the Commission to determine the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a motion to 
intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and 
are available for public inspection.
David P. Boergers,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-18063 Filed 7-7-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M