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

MIGRATEC, INC. AND SUBSIDIARY

Computations of Net Loss Per Share

The following table sets forth the computation of basic and diluted loss per
share as calculated in accordance with FASB 128.

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                        For the three months ended
                                                                                March 31,
                                                                          1999              1998
                                                                      ------------      ------------
<S>                                                                   <C>               <C>          
Numerator:
   Numerator for basic and diluted loss per share -
   Net loss before extraordinary item                                 $   (782,808)     $ (1,247,301)

   Extraordinary income                                                         --             5,250
                                                                      ------------      ------------

   Net loss                                                           $   (782,808)     $ (1,242,051)
                                                                      ============      ============

Denominator:
   Denominator for basic loss per share -
   Weighted average shares                                              45,243,109        30,829,925

Effect of dilutive securities:
   Stock options and warrants                                                   --                --
                                                                                --                --
                                                                      ------------      ------------

   Dilutive potential common shares                                             --                --
                                                                      ------------      ------------

   Denominator for diluted earnings per share - adjusted weighted
   average shares and assumed conversions                               45,243,109        30,829,925
                                                                      ============      ============

   Basic loss per share                                               $      (0.02)     $      (0.04)
                                                                      ============      ============
   Diluted loss per share                                             $      (0.02)     $      (0.04)
                                                                      ============      ============
</TABLE>


As the Company incurred a net loss for the three months ended March 31, 1999 and
1998, there were no adjustments for potentially dilutive securities as the
adjustments would have been anti-dilutive.
# C_2010024EN.01003801.xml

| 30.1.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 24/38 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

30.1.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 24/38

---

Reference for a preliminary ruling from the Hoge Raad der Nederlanden (Netherlands) lodged on 25 November 2009 — Stichting de Thuiskopie v Mijndert van der Lee and Others

(Case C-462/09)

2010/C 24/66

Language of the case: Dutch

Referring court

Referring court

Hoge Raad der Nederlanden

Parties to the main proceedings

Parties to the main proceedings

Appellant: Stichting de Thuiskopie

Appellant:

Respondents: Mijndert van der Lee, Hananja van der Lee, Opus Supplies Deutschland GmbH

Respondents:

Questions referred

Questions referred

| 1. | Does Directive 2001/29/EC, (1) in particular Article 5(2)(b) and (5) thereof, provide any assistance in determining who should be regarded under national law as owing the ‘fair compensation’ referred to in Article 5(2)(b)? If so, what assistance does it provide? |
| --- | --- |

1.

Does Directive 2001/29/EC, (1) in particular Article 5(2)(b) and (5) thereof, provide any assistance in determining who should be regarded under national law as owing the ‘fair compensation’ referred to in Article 5(2)(b)? If so, what assistance does it provide?

1

| 2. | In a case of distance selling in which the buyer is established in a different Member State to that of the seller, does Article 5(5) of Directive 2001/29/EC require national law to be interpreted so broadly that a person owing the ‘fair compensation’ referred to in Article 5(2)(b) of the directive who is acting on a commercial basis owes such compensation in at least one of the Member States involved in the distance selling? |
| --- | --- |

2.

In a case of distance selling in which the buyer is established in a different Member State to that of the seller, does Article 5(5) of Directive 2001/29/EC require national law to be interpreted so broadly that a person owing the ‘fair compensation’ referred to in Article 5(2)(b) of the directive who is acting on a commercial basis owes such compensation in at least one of the Member States involved in the distance selling?

---

(1)  Directive 2001/29/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 May 2001 on the harmonisation of certain aspects of copyright and related rights in the information society (OJ 2001 L 167, p. 10)

1

---
----

            COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 1995/2004

of 19 November 2004         

accepting undertakings offered in connection with the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of certain grain oriented electrical sheets and strips of silicon-electrical steel with a width of more than 500 mm originating in the Russian Federation and continuing to make imports of certain grain oriented electrical sheets originating in the Russian Federation subject to registration

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 384/96 of 22 December 1995 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Community (1) (the basic Regulation), and in particular Articles 8, 21 and 22(c) thereof,

After consulting the Advisory Committee,

Whereas:

A.   PROCEDURE

B.   APPRAISAL

1.   Content of the current undertakings

2.   Compliance with the current undertakings

3.   Analysis of conditions for continued acceptance of undertakings

C.   CONCLUSION

1.   Acceptance of undertakings

2.   Disclosure to interested parties

D.   REGISTRATION OF IMPORTS

HAS ADOPTED THIS REGULATION:

Article 1

1.   The undertakings offered by the exporting producers mentioned below, in connection with the anti-dumping proceeding concerning imports of grain oriented cold-rolled sheets and strips of silicon-electrical steel with a width of more than 500 mm originating in the Russian Federation are hereby accepted.

2.   Customs authorities are hereby directed, pursuant to Article 14(5) of Regulation (EC) No 384/96 to continue to take the appropriate steps to register until 20 February 2005 imports into the Community of grain oriented cold-rolled sheets and strips of silicon-electrical steel with a width of more than 500 mm originating in the Russian Federation and falling within CN code 7225 11 00 (sheets of a width of 600 mm or more) and ex 7226 11 00 (sheets of a width of more than 500 mm but less than 600 mm) produced and sold by the companies listed in paragraph 1.

Article 2

This Regulation shall enter into force on the day following that of its publication in the Official Journal of the European Union and shall remain in force until 20 May 2005.

This Regulation shall be binding in its entirety and directly applicable in all Member States.

Done at Brussels, 19 November 2004.

For the Commission

Pascal LAMY            

Member of the Commission

----

(1)OJ L 56, 6.3.1996, p. 1. Regulation as last amended by Regulation (EC) No 461/2004 (OJ L 77, 13.3.2004, p. 12).

(2)OJ L 182, 19.5.2004, p. 5.

(3)OJ L 25, 30.1.2003, p. 7.

(4)OJ C 70, 20.3.2004, p. 15.

(5)OJ L 183, 20.5.2004, p. 10.

(6)OJ L 182, 19.5.2004, p. 1.

----
Daniel P. THOMAS, et al., petitioners, v. COUNTY OF SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA, et al.

No. 16-550.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 9, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeal of California, Third Appellate District denied.
II-00937

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Joyce Hawes <grandoakl @myfairpoint.net>

Thursday, December 2, 2010 9:53 AM

dfadefinitions <dfadefinitions@CFTC.gov>

Re: No loopholes in Dodd-Frank

1) Securities and Exchange Commission/Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Commercial Risk (CFTC RIN

3235-AK65, SEC File Number $7-12-10)

Dear Commissioners Shapiro and Gensler: Don’t let the American Bankers Association (ABA) redefine important terms like

"commercial risk" to keep banks that engage in risky derivatives trading from complying with transparency and business

conduct requirements. Commercial risk should not be expanded to include financial risk. Accepting the ABA argument

would open the door for exemptions for risky hedge funds and insurance companies.

2) Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Position Limits (RIN 3038-AD 17 )

Dear Commissioner Gensler: The CFTC needs to set strong position limits to crack down on the energy and food commodity

speculation that serves no productive purpose. I urge the Commission to define limits that will address not only manipulation,

but also excessive speculation, which will require a stricter approach.

3) U.S. Department of the Treasury, Re: FX Swaps (75 FR 66426 Document Number 2010-27274)

Dear Secretary Geithner: Just say "no" to foreign exchange traders who want to exempt foreign currency derivatives from the

clearing and transparency requirements of the

Dodd-Frank Act. $4 trillion dollars a day is traded in these highly-leveraged swaps and this number may increase to over $10

trillion in a decade. As the head of the Financial

Stability Oversight Board your job is to decrease risk in the system, not encourage off-book trading and opaque markets.

Joyce Hawes

211 Sparrow Hawk Rd

Waltham, VT 5491
### IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA DA 22
- 0400 IN RE THE MARRIAGE OF: MICHELLE M. LARUE,

Petitioner and Appellee,
v. BRANDON L. LARUE,

Respondent and Appellant. ORDER OF MEDIATOR APPOINTMENT

This appeal being subject to M.R.App.P. 7, and the parties having failed to jointly and timely select a mediator under M.R.App.P., 7(4),(c), IT IS ORDERED THAT **Christopher J.**  **Gillette,** whose name appears next on the list of attorneys desiring appointment as mediators for Domestic Relations appeals which is maintained pursuant to M.R.App.P., 7(4)(e), is hereby appointed to conduct the mediation process required by M.R.App.P., 7(5), and IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the time periods set forth in M.R.App.P., 7(5)(d) shall run from the date of this order of appointment. A true copy of this order is being mailed to counsel of record for the parties, or to the parties individually if not represented by counsel, on the date hereof. DATED this August 16, 2 022.

Bowen Greenwood , Clerk of the Supreme Court
c: Erin Melsheimer, Kristofer S Baughman, Rebecca Robyn Swandal, Christopher J. Gillette 08/16/2022

Case Number: DA 22-0400
# C_2009267EN.01008501.xml

| 7.11.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 267/85 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

7.11.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 267/85

---

Action brought on 10 September 2009 — Gowitzke v Europol

(Case F-74/09)

2009/C 267/154

Language of the case: Dutch

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Werner Siegfried Gowitzke (The Hague, The Netherlands) (represented by: D.C. Coppens, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: Europol

Defendant:

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Subject-matter and description of the proceedings

Application for annulment of the decision of Europol of 5 June 2009 rejecting the applicant's claim to have his classification changed to grade 5, step 1

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | annul the decision of Europol rejecting the applicant's claim to have his classification changed to grade 5, step 1; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the decision of Europol rejecting the applicant's claim to have his classification changed to grade 5, step 1;

| — | order the defendant to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the defendant to pay the costs.

---
Jorge MARTINEZ, petitioner, v. UNITED STATES.

No. 16-5115.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 9, 2017.

Petition for rehearing denied.
# C_2009180EN.01003502.xml

| 1.8.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 180/35 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

1.8.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 180/35

---

Action brought on 11 June 2009 — Commission of the European Communities v Portuguese Republic

(Case C-212/09)

2009/C 180/61

Language of the case: Portuguese

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Commission of the European Communities (represented by: G. Braun, M. Teles Romão and P. Guerra e Andrade, Agents)

Applicant:

Defendant: Portuguese Republic

Defendant:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

| — | Declare that, by maintaining the State’s special rights and those of other public bodies or the Portuguese public-sector in GALP Energia, SGPS S.A., the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 56 EC and 43 EC. |
| --- | --- |

—

Declare that, by maintaining the State’s special rights and those of other public bodies or the Portuguese public-sector in GALP Energia, SGPS S.A., the Portuguese Republic has failed to fulfil its obligations under Articles 56 EC and 43 EC.

| — | Order the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the Portuguese Republic to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Under the Portuguese legislation, the State holds golden shares in GALP. The State has the right to appoint the Chairman of the Board of Directors. In matters within its competence, company resolutions are subject to its approval.

Any resolutions which seek to alter the articles of association, authorise the entering into joint contracts between companies, stipulating a controlling company or joint control, or which may in any way endanger the supply of oil, gas or derivatives thereof to the country, are subject to the State’s approval.

The Commission considers that both the State’s right to appoint a director with powers to approve resolutions and its right of veto in significant corporate actions severely restrict direct investment and portfolio investment.

Those special rights of the State constitute State measures since the golden shares are not the result of the normal application of company law.

Secondary Community law does not allow the State special rights in retailers of oil and of petroleum products. GALP has no responsibility for guaranteeing supply. The State sought to make GALP a company whose centre of decision-making is in Portugal. In any event, the Portuguese State has failed to comply with the principle of proportionality since the measures in question are not apt to ensure the attainment of the objectives pursued and go beyond what is necessary in order to attain them.

---
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                   5
<LEGEND>
    (Replace this text with the legend)
</LEGEND>
<CIK>   0000852447
<NAME>                                      EUROMED INC
<MULTIPLIER>                                1
<CURRENCY>                                  $US
       
<S>                                         <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                               3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                           DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                              JUL-1-1997
<PERIOD-END>                                SEP-30-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                             1
<CASH>                                      0
<SECURITIES>                                0
<RECEIVABLES>                               1,500,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                0
<INVENTORY>                                 0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            1,500,000
<PP&E>                                      0
<DEPRECIATION>                              0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              1,500,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       164,652
<BONDS>                                     0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                       0
<PREFERRED>                                 0
<COMMON>                                    23,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  1,312,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                1,500,000
<SALES>                                     0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            0
<CGS>                                       0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               591,359
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                            0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             (591,359)
<INCOME-TAX>                                0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         (591,359)
<DISCONTINUED>                              (1,632,681)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                             0
<CHANGES>                                   0
<NET-INCOME>                                (2,224,040)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                               (0.67)
<EPS-DILUTED>                               (0.67)
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit (d)(75)

FORM OF
# C_2010234EN.01005801.xml

| 28.8.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 234/58 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.8.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 234/58

---

Order of the Civil Service Tribunal (First Chamber) of 22 June 2010 — Marcuccio v Commission

(Case F-78/09) (1)

1

(Staff cases - Officials - Action for damages - Reimbursement of costs - Availability of a parallel remedy - Manifestly inadmissible)

2010/C 234/106

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Luigi Marcuccio (Tricase, Italy) (represented by: G. Cipressa, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: J. Currall and C. Berardis-Kayser, Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

First, application for annulment of the Commission’s decision rejecting the applicant’s application for reimbursement of the costs he incurred in Case T-18/04 and which the defendant was ordered to pay by judgment of 10 June 2008. Secondly, an application for damages.

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | Mr Marcuccio’s action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible. |
| --- | --- |

1.

Mr Marcuccio’s action is dismissed as manifestly inadmissible.

| 2. | The parties are to bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The parties are to bear their own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 312, 19.12.2009, p. 43

1

---
II-Ol081

From:

Sent:

To:

Subject:

Ron Blankenship <ronblankenship 111 @comcast.net>

Thursday, December 2, 2010 8:24 AM

dfadefinitions <dfadefinitions@CFTC.gov>

Re: No loopholes in Dodd-Frank

1) Securities and Exchange Commission/Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Commercial Risk (CFTC RIN

3235-AK65, SEC File Number $7-12-10)

Dear Commissioners Shapiro and Gensler: Don’t let the American Bankers Association (ABA) redefine important terms like

"commercial risk" to keep banks that engage in risky derivatives trading from complying with transparency and business

conduct requirements. Commercial risk should not be expanded to include financial risk. Accepting the ABA argument

would open the door for exemptions for risky hedge funds and insurance companies.

2) Commodities Futures Trading Commission, Re: Position Limits (RIN 3038-AD 17 )

Dear Commissioner Gensler: The CFTC needs to set strong position limits to crack down on the energy and food commodity

speculation that serves no productive purpose. I urge the Commission to define limits that will address not only manipulation,

but also excessive speculation, which will require a stricter approach.

3) U.S. Department of the Treasury, Re: FX Swaps (75 FR 66426 Document Number 2010-27274)

Dear Secretary Geithner: Just say "no" to foreign exchange traders who want to exempt foreign currency derivatives from the

clearing and transparency requirements of the

Dodd-Frank Act. $4 trillion dollars a day is traded in these highly-leveraged swaps and this number may increase to over $10

trillion in a decade. As the head of the Financial

Stability Oversight Board your job is to decrease risk in the system, not encourage off-book trading and opaque markets.

Ron Blankenship

1 Clauss Ct. Apt. 10D

Sacramento, CA 95820
JACOB H., petitioner, v. CALIFORNIA.

No. 16-6416.

Supreme Court of the United States

Jan. 9, 2017.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeal of California, Second Appellate District denied.
AFR meeting with Chairman Gensler 3/ 12/ 12

1. Introductions and agenda review

2. What does Chairman Gensler see as priorities for effective derivatives regulation in the coming months?

3. Issue discussion:

· Swap dealer definition

· Swap execution facilities and RFQs

· Available to trade rule

· Volcker rule

· Speculation and manipulation in commodities markets

4. Next steps
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 1312 Introduced in House (IH)]

111th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 1312

   Recognizing the roles and contributions of America's teachers to 
building and enhancing our Nation's civic, cultural, and economic well-
                                 being.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             April 29, 2010

 Mr. Graves (for himself, Mr. Guthrie, Mr. Clay, Mr. Luetkemeyer, Mr. 
 Arcuri, Mr. Connolly of Virginia, Mr. Simpson, Mr. Al Green of Texas, 
  Mr. Neal of Massachusetts, Ms. Eddie Bernice Johnson of Texas, Mr. 
  Thompson of California, Mr. Thompson of Pennsylvania, Mr. Wilson of 
South Carolina, Mr. Moran of Virginia, Mr. Harper, Mr. Moran of Kansas, 
Mr. Terry, Mr. Burgess, Mrs. McMorris Rodgers, Mr. Blunt, Mr. Skelton, 
  Mr. Castle, Mr. Cleaver, Mr. Gerlach, Mr. Whitfield, Mr. Lee of New 
York, Mr. Petri, Mr. Mica, Mr. Kirk, Mr. Roskam, Mr. Dent, Mr. Ehlers, 
    Mr. Fortenberry, and Mr. Poe of Texas) submitted the following 
 resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Education and Labor

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
   Recognizing the roles and contributions of America's teachers to 
building and enhancing our Nation's civic, cultural, and economic well-
                                 being.

Whereas education and knowledge are the foundation of America's current and 
        future strength;
Whereas teachers and other education staff have earned and deserve the respect 
        of their students and communities for their selfless dedication to 
        community service and the future of our Nation's children;
Whereas the purpose of ``National Teacher Appreciation Week'', held during May 
        3, 2010, through May 7, 2010, is to raise public awareness of the 
        unquantifiable contributions of teachers and to promote greater respect 
        and understanding for the teaching profession; and
Whereas students, schools, communities, and a number of organizations 
        representing educators are hosting teacher appreciation events in 
        recognition of ``National Teacher Appreciation Week'': Now, therefore, 
        be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives thanks and promotes the 
profession of teaching by encouraging students, parents, school 
administrators, and public officials to participate in teacher 
appreciation events during ``National Teacher Appreciation Week''.
                                 <all>
```