alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 11

ORIENT-EXPRESS HOTELS LTD. AND SUBSIDIARIES    Statements re Computation of Per Share Earnings  (Reference to common shares includes Class A and Class B shares)

|                                                                                                                                              |  | Year ended December 31,
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- |  | -----------------------
|
|
|Net earnings:                                                                                                                                 |  |                        
|Earnings on common sharesbasic                                                                                                               |  | $                      
|                                                                                                                                              |  |                        
|Shares used to compute basic earnings per common share (weighted average number of shares outstanding)                                        |  |                        
|Shares used to compute diluted earnings per common share (weighted average number of shares outstanding assuming the effect of stock options) |  |                        
|Net earnings per common share:                                                                                                                |  |                        
|Basic                                                                                                                                         |  | $                      
|                                                                                                                                              |  |                        
|Diluted                                                                                                                                       |  | $                      
|                                                                                                                                              |  |                        

75

---

QuickLinks
**Exhibit 4.33**

 

*Federal Supervisory Service forCommunications*

 

**AddendumNo. 2**

 

**toLicense No. 30259 (Account Series A 030161)**

**datedDecember 30, 2003**

 

The line “Start of services’ rendering (not later than)” of theLicensee title-page shall be revised to read as follows:

 

“December 30, 2005”

 
| **Deputy Manager,**                                |       |               |
|----------------------------------------------------|------------|--------------------|
| **Federal Supervisory Service for Communications** | ** ** | **S. A. Malyanov** |

 

April 26, 2005

 

----
EXHIBIT 13.1

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 USC. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

The undersigned, Gordon Nielsen, President and Chief Executive Officer, and Dan Weisbeck, Chief Financial Officer, of Netco Energy Inc., each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 USC. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 
| (1) | the Annual Report on Form 20-F of Netco Energy Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2004 (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 results of operations of Netco Energy Inc. |
|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 
| Dated: July 15, 2005 |   |                   |
|----------------------|--------|------------------------|
|                 |   |                   |
|                 |   |                   |
|                 |   | */s/ Gordon Nielsen*** |   |  
 

 

Gordon Nielsen

 

 

President and Chief Executive Officer

 

 

Netco Energy Inc.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

*/s/ Dan Weisbeck***

 

 
 

 

Dan Weisbeck

 

 

Chief Financial Officer

 

 

Netco Energy Inc.

 

 

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 Netco Energy Inc. and will be retained by Netco Energy Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request. 

 

 

D/ljm/740618.1

 

 

  |
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 97-40178

Summary Calendar

 

DAVID ROBLES,

Petitioner-Appellant,

versus

GARY L. JOHNSON, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT

OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION,

Respondent-Appellee

 

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. C-96-CV-131

 

March 2, 1998

Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges

PER CURIAM:*

David Robles, Texas prisoner # 193550, appeals from the

district court’s dismissal of his petition for a writ of habeas

corpus as abusive pursuant to Rule 9(b) of the Rules Governing

Section 2254 Cases.

Robles argues that the district court erred by dismissing

his petition as an abuse of the writ because he has shown that a
No. 97-40178

-2-

miscarriage of justice would result from the court’s failure to

address the merits of his petition. 

We review a district court’s decision to dismiss a petition

pursuant to Rule 9(b) for abuse of discretion. Hudson v.

Whitley, 979 F.2d 1058, 1062 (5th Cir. 1992). Because Robles

cannot make an “actual innocence” showing, as defined in Sawyer

v. Whitley, 505 U.S. 333, 336 (1992), he fails to show that a

fundamental miscarriage of justice would result from the court’s

failure to address the merits of his petition.

The district court’s judgment dismissing the petition as

abusive pursuant to Rule 9(b) is AFFIRMED.
## Breadcrumb

-  Home 

# Explore Search: Floods

Filters

              - connect_staff_profiles(2)

## By Location

              - alaska(2)
              - arizona(3)
              - arkansas(1)
              - colorado(5)
              - connecticut(1)
              - delaware(1)
              - florida(1)
              - illinois(2)
              - kansas(1)
              - maine(2)
              - maryland(1)
              - massachusetts(7)
              - michigan(1)
              - minnesota(1)
              - missouri(1)
              - montana(2)
              - nebraska(1)
              - new hampshire(1)
              - new jersey(1)
              - new york(6)
              - north carolina(1)
              - north dakota(1)
              - oregon(3)
              - pennsylvania(1)
              - texas(3)
              - utah(1)
              - vermont(1)
              - washington(3)
              - (-)wisconsin(2)

## By Year

              - (-)2024(2)
              - 2023(2)
              - 2022(1)
              - 2021(1)

staff profileFaith A Fitzpatrick

staff profileDavid J Topping, Ph.D.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         December 30, 2024.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on December 19, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage® Contract 1158 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2025-943, K2025-944.                

Sean C. Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2024-31114 Filed 12-27-24; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
06888.0323/16744532.1 

Donald H. Cram 

Tex. State Bar No. 05000300 

dhc@severson.com 

SEVERSON & WERSON 

A Professional Corporation 

One Embarcadero Center, Suite 2600 

San Francisco, California 94111 

Telephone: (415) 398-3344 

Facsimile: (415) 956-0439 

Attorneys for Secured Creditor 

NISSAN MOTOR ACCEPTANCE 

COMPANY LLC 

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

DALLAS DIVISION 

In re Stephanie Morris Nissan LLC 

Debtor. 

_____________________________________

Nissan Motor Acceptance Company LLC,

 Movant, 

v. 

Stephanie Morris Nissan LLC, and Daniel J. 

Sherman, Trustee, 

 Respondents. 

 Case No. 24-30310-mvl 

Chapter 7 

 

 FOR 

RELIEF FROM THE AUTOMATIC STAY 

Case 24-30310-mvl7 Doc 9 Filed 03/30/24 Entered 03/30/24 13:56:33 Desc Main

Document Page 1 of 3
06888.0323/16744532.1 

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE THAT, Nissan Motor Acceptance Company LLC 

NMAC Relief from the Automatic Stay 

pursuant to §§ 362(d)(1) and 362(d)(2) of the Bankruptcy Code and Rule 4001 of the Federal 

preliminary hearing is scheduled for April 

23, 2024 at 1:30 a.m. via WebEx videoconference only The WebEx 

video attendance conference link is: https://us-courts.webex.com/meet/larson . A copy of the 

e found using the following link: 

https://www.txnb.uscourts.gov/judges-info/hearing-dates/judge-larson-hearing-dates . 

 

PURSUANT TO LOCAL BANKRUPTCY RULE 4001-1(b), A RESPONSE IS 

REQUIRED TO THIS MOTION, OR THE ALLEGATIONS IN THE MOTION 

MAY BE DEEMED ADMITTED, AND AN ORDER GRANTING THE RELIEF 

SOUGHT MAY BE ENTERED BY DEFAULT. 

ANY RESPONSE SHALL BE IN WRITING AND FILED WITH THE CLERK 

OF THE UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT AT EARL CABELL 

FEDERAL BUILDING, 1100 COMMERCE St., RM. 1254 DALLAS, TX 75242-

1496 BEFORE CLOSE OF BUSINESS ON APRIL 15, 2024, WHICH IS AT 

LEAST 14 DAYS FROM THE DATE OF SERVICE HEREOF. A COPY SHALL 

BE SERVED UPON COUNSEL FOR THE MOVING PARTY AND ANY 

TRUSTEE OR EXAMINER APPOINTED IN THE CASE. ANY RESPONSE 

SHALL INCLUDE A DETAILED AND COMPREHENSIVE STATEMENT AS 

TO HOW THE MOVANT CAN BE 

STAY IS TO BE CONTINUED. 

DATED: March 29, 2024 SEVERSON & WERSON 

A Professional Corporation

By: /s/ Donald H. Cram

 Donald H. Cram 

Attorneys for Secured Creditor 

NISSAN MOTOR ACCEPTANCE COMPANY LLC

Case 24-30310-mvl7 Doc 9 Filed 03/30/24 Entered 03/30/24 13:56:33 Desc Main

Document Page 2 of 3
06888.0323/16744532.1 

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

 The undersigned hereby certifies that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been 

on the 30th day of March, 2024. 

 The undersigned also hereby certifies that a true and correct copy of the foregoing has been 

served by regular U.S. mail on the debtor at 3815 NW Pkwy., Dallas, TX 75225 on the 30th day of 

March, 2024. 

 

 /s/ Donald H. Cram 

 Donald H. Cram 

 

Case 24-30310-mvl7 Doc 9 Filed 03/30/24 Entered 03/30/24 13:56:33 Desc Main

Document Page 3 of 3
Center of Excellence for Airport Technology (RPD 146)

Contract Funds ($K)

*
# C_2021228EN.01001101.xml

| 14.6.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 228/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

14.6.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 228/11

---

Order of the Court (Sixth Chamber) of 3 March 2021 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Pécsi Törvényszék — Hungary) — FGSZ Földgázszállító Zrt. v Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebbviteli Igazgatósága

(Case C-507/20) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Common system of value added tax (VAT) - Directive 2006/112/EC - Article 90 - Reduction of the taxable amount - Total or partial non-payment of the price - Debt which has become definitively irrecoverable - Limitation period regarding applications for a subsequent reduction in the taxable amount of VAT - Date on which time starts to run)

(2021/C 228/13)

Language of the case: Hungarian

Referring court

Pécsi Törvényszék

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: FGSZ Földgázszállító Zrt.

Defendant: Nemzeti Adó- és Vámhivatal Fellebbviteli Igazgatósága

Operative part of the order

Article 90 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax, read in conjunction with the principles of fiscal neutrality and effectiveness, must be interpreted as meaning that, where a Member State lays down a limitation period after which a taxable person, who has a debt which has become definitively irrecoverable, can no longer assert his right to obtain a reduction in the taxable amount, that limitation period must begin to run not from the date of performance of the payment obligation initially provided for, but from the date on which the debt became definitively irrecoverable.

---

(1)  OJ C 28, 25.1.2021.

---
# C_2019432EN.01007001.xml

| 23.12.2019 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 432/70 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.12.2019

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 432/70

---

Action brought on 4 November 2019 — HA v Commission

(Case T-736/19)

(2019/C 432/80)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: HA (represented by S. Kreicher, lawyer)

Defendant: European Commission

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the General Court should:

| — | admit the present action as procedurally valid; |
| --- | --- |

—

admit the present action as procedurally valid;

| — | declare it to be well founded; |
| --- | --- |

—

declare it to be well founded;

| — | consequently, annul the decision of the Appointing Authority dated 13 August 2019, notified on 24 August 2019, in response to the applicant’s claim of 14 April 2019 (No R/249/19); |
| --- | --- |

—

consequently, annul the decision of the Appointing Authority dated 13 August 2019, notified on 24 August 2019, in response to the applicant’s claim of 14 April 2019 (No R/249/19);

| — | order the European Commission to pay all the costs and expenses of the proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the European Commission to pay all the costs and expenses of the proceedings.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on a single plea in law, alleging infringement of the legal and regulatory provisions applicable and, in particular, Commission Decision C(2007)3195 of 2 July 2007 laying down general implementing provisions for the reimbursement of medical expenses, in so far as the contested decision set a ceiling for reimbursement of EUR 3 100.00 for the rental of equipment for the treatment of sleep apnoea for the period from 1 March 2019 to 29 February 2024, whereas the aforementioned Decision does not set any maximum reimbursable amount in the event of rental for a period of use that is equal to or greater than three months.

---
IN RE: Appeal of the DECISION OF the DISCIPLINARY BOARD NOS. 2018-INT-0348 AND 2018-INT-0347

NO. 2018-OB-1990

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

January 18, 2019

Not considered. See Louisiana Supreme Court Rule XIX, § 11(A).
# C_2020399EN.01002301.xml

| 23.11.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 399/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

23.11.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 399/23

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Hof van beroep te Antwerpen (Belgium) lodged on 5 August 2020 — Openbaar Ministerie, Federale Overheidsdienst Financiën v Profit Europe NV, Gosselin Forwarding Services NV

(Case C-362/20)

(2020/C 399/32)

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Hof van beroep te Antwerpen

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellants: Openbaar Ministerie, Federale Overheidsdienst Financiën

Respondents: Profit Europe NV, Gosselin Forwarding Services NV

Question referred

Are threaded tube or pipe cast fittings, of spheroidal graphite cast iron, from China, subject to anti-dumping duties under Commission Regulation (EU) No 1071/2012 of 14 November 2012 imposing a provisional anti-dumping duty on imports of threaded tube or pipe cast fittings, of malleable cast iron, originating in the People’s Republic of China and Thailand (OJ 2012 L 318, p. 10) and Council Implementing Regulation (EU) No 430/2013 of 13 May 2013 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty and collecting definitively the provisional duty imposed on imports of threaded tube or pipe cast fittings, of malleable cast iron, originating in the People’s Republic of China and Thailand and terminating the proceeding with regard to Indonesia (OJ 2013 L 129, p. 1), given the ruling of the Court of Justice of the European [Union], in its judgment of 12 July 2018 in Joined Cases C-397/17 and C-398/17, that tube or pipe cast fittings of spheroidal graphite cast iron are not tube or pipe cast fittings of malleable cast iron and that tube or pipe cast fittings of spheroidal graphite cast iron fall under a different subheading than tube or pipe cast fittings of malleable cast iron?

---
# C_2020329EN.01001301.xml

| 5.10.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 329/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

5.10.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 329/13

---

Order of the President of the Court of 30 July 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Sąd Rejonowy w Gliwicach — Poland) — D. Spółka Akcyjna v W. Zrt

(Case C-127/20) (1)

(2020/C 329/27)

Language of the case: Polish

The President of the Court has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 209, 22.6.2020.

---
1

The HONORABLE RICHARD H. KYLE, United States District Judge for the

District of Minnesota.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 09-3732

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, * Appeal from the United States

* District Court for the

v. * District of Minnesota.

*

Earl Aniceto Ochoa, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: July 23, 2010

Filed: August 2, 2010

___________

Before LOKEN, MURPHY, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

In this direct criminal appeal, Earl Ochoa challenges the statutory mandatory

minimum sentence the district court1

 imposed following his guilty plea to knowingly

and intentionally conspiring to distribute 50 grams or more of “actual”

methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A), and 846.

Counsel has moved to withdraw, and has filed a brief under Anders v. California, 386
-2-

U.S. 738 (1967), arguing that Ochoa’s sentence is unreasonable and greater than

necessary to accomplish the sentencing goals of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a).

We conclude that the district court lacked authority to impose a sentence below

the statutory minimum because the government had not moved for a departure based

on substantial assistance and Ochoa was not eligible for safety-valve relief. See

United States v. Chacon, 330 F.3d 1065, 1066 (8th Cir. 2003) (only authority to depart

from statutory minimum is in 18 U.S.C. § 3553(e) and (f), which apply only when

government moves for departure based on substantial assistance or defendant qualifies

for safety-valve relief); see also United States v. Gregg, 451 F.3d 930, 937 (8th Cir.

2006), confirming that United States v. Booker, 543 U.S. 220 (2005), does not relate

to statutorily-imposed sentences.

After reviewing the record independently under Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75,

80 (1988), we find no non-frivolous issues. Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s

judgment, and we grant counsel’s motion to withdraw conditioned on counsel

informing Ochoa about the procedures for seeking rehearing from this court and filing

a petition for a writ of certiorari from the Supreme Court of the United States.

______________________________
Jacob Ryan AMBROZ, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D18-2027

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

February 25, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
Barry James WHITE, Appellant, v. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION and Florida Power & Light Company, Appellees.

No. 1D18-3282

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

January 14, 2019 Rehearing Denied January 15, 2019

Barry James White, pro se, Appellant.

Jeffrey Brown and Robert A. Williams, Department of Environmental Protection, Tallahassee, for Appellee Florida Department of Environmental Protection; Eric T. Olsen, Gary V. Perko, and Brooke E. Lewis of Hopping Green & Sams, Tallahassee, for Appellee Florida Power & Light.

Per Curiam.

*657Agreeing that Appellant lacks standing, we grant Appellees' motion to dismiss, and dismiss the appeal.

Makar, Winokur, and Jay, JJ., concur.
Willie D. TRIPLETT v. STATE of Mississippi

2017-CT-00629-COA

Supreme Court of Mississippi.

Filed: December 26, 2018 Closed: March 7, 2019

Motion Desc: Petition for Writ of Certiorari

Certiorari - Denied
Exhibit 32

                  Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350
                 (Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)

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

      In connection with the filing by Trend Mining Company (the "Company") of
the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the period ending September 30, 2004 (the
"Report"), each of the undersigned 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; and

      2.    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of the Company.


                                       /s/ Thomas A. Loucks
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                       Thomas A. Loucks
                                       President and Chief Executive Officer


                                       /s/ John P. Ryan
                                       -----------------------------------------
                                       John P. Ryan
                                       Treasurer