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

                                                                    Exhibit 23.2

            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statement on Form S-8 (No. 33-38339) of RTI International Metals, Inc. of our
report dated June 25, 2004 relating to the financial statements of the RMI
Titanium Company Employee Savings and Investment Plan, which appears in this
Form 10-K/A. We also hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the
Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 33-38340) of RTI International Metals,
Inc. of our report dated June 25, 2004 relating to the financial statements of
the RMI Titanium Company Bargaining Unit Employee Savings and Investment Plan,
which appears in this Form 10-K/A. We also hereby consent to the incorporation
by reference in the Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 33-391420) of RTI
International Metals, Inc. of our report dated June 25, 2004 relating to the
financial statements of the RTI International Metals, Inc. Employee Savings and
Investment Plan, which appears in this Form 10-K/A.

June 25, 2004
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF NURESCELL INC. (A DEVELOPMENT STAGE COMPANY) FOR THE
PERIOD FROM MAY 12, 1998 (DATE OF INCEPTION) TO MARCH 31, 1999 AND IS
QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   OTHER
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             MAY-12-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                         125,421
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   87,285
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               220,930
<PP&E>                                          48,981
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (5,881)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 285,639
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           44,665
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         1,308
<OTHER-SE>                                     859,192
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   285,639
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               647,922
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (644,526)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (644,526)
<EPS-BASIC>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
#### Elizabeth M. Ament, Plaintiff, *v.*H. C. Bohack Co., Inc., and Henry Robohm, Defendants.

Supreme Court, Nassau County,

May 29, 1936.

*585
      *Thomas M. Roche,*for the plaintiff.

*James B. Henney,*for the defendant H. C. Bohack Co., Inc.

*J. Russell Sprague,*for the defendant Robohm.

Hooley, J.

This is an action for personal injuries. Defendant Robohm moves for an order dismissing the complaint upon the ground that action has abated due to the death of the plaintiff. The other defendant joins in the motion. The attorney for the plaintiff, claiming that the plaintiff’s death was caused by the injuries which were the basis for this action, makes a cross-motion for an order granting the right to the administrator of the deceased plaintiff to be substituted as plaintiff and granting permission to enlarge the complaint so as to include the cause of action for wrongful death, pursuant to sections 120 and 130 of the Decedent Estate Law.

The case brings up for consideration the intention of the Legislature in enacting chapter 795 of the Laws of 1935, adding new sections 118, 119 and 120 and repealing former sections 118, 119 and 120 of the Decedent Estate Law. Section 118 provides that no cause of action for injury to person or property shall be lost because of the death of the person liable for the injury. Section 119 provides that no cause of action for injury to person or property shall be lost because of the death of the person in whose favor the cause of action existed. Section 120 provides that where an action to recover damages for personal injury has been brought and the injured party dies before verdict, report or decision, and the death is due to the injury, his executor or administrator may enlarge the complaint in such action to include the cause of action for wrongful death.

It is clear from the foregoing that the Legislature intended in the types of action referred to in the foregoing sections to prevent abatement where death resulted. However, said sections did not take effect until September 1, 1935, and applied only to causes of action accruing thereafter. Section 7 of chapter 795 of the Laws of 1934 provides as follows: *“*§ 7. This act shall apply to all causes of action for injury to person or property arising after the effective date hereof. All causes of action arising before this act takes effect shall be governed by existing law.”

*586The plaintiff died on or about March 1,1936. The cause of action accrued February 19, 1934.

It is clear, therefore, that the cause of action herein accrued before the effective date of the statute and is not governed thereby.

The administrator must begin a new action under section 130 of the Decedent Estate Law.

The motion of defendant Bobohm must be granted and the cross-motion denied.
111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5139 

AN ACT 

To provide for the International Organizations Immunities 

Act to be extended to the Office of the High Representative in Bosnia and Herzegovina and the International 

Civilian Office in Kosovo. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 5139 EH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Extending Immunities 

3 to the Office of the High Representative in Bosnia and 

4 Herzegovina and the International Civilian Office in 

5 Kosovo Act of 2010’’. 

6 SEC. 2. AUTHORITY TO EXTEND THE PROVISIONS OF THE 

7 INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS IMMUNI8 TIES ACT TO THE OFFICE OF THE HIGH REP9 RESENTATIVE IN BOSNIA AND HERZEGOVINA 

10 AND THE INTERNATIONAL CIVILIAN OFFICE 

11 IN KOSOVO. 

12 The International Organizations Immunities Act (22 

13 U.S.C. 288 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the 

14 following new section: 

15 ‘‘SEC. 17. The provisions of this title may be ex16 tended to the Office of the High Representative in Bosnia 

17 and Herzegovina (and to its officers and employees) or 

18 the International Civilian Office in Kosovo (and to its offi19 cers and employees) in the same manner, to the same ex20 tent, and subject to the same conditions, as such provi21 sions may be extended to a public international organiza22 tion in which the United States participates pursuant to 

23 any treaty or under the authority of any Act of Congress 

24 authorizing such participation or making an appropriation 

25 for such participation. Any such extension may provide for 

26 the provisions of this title to continue to extend to the 
3 

•HR 5139 EH

1 Office of the High Representative in Bosnia and 

2 Herzegovina (and to its officers and employees) or the 

3 International Civilian Office in Kosovo (and to its officers 

4 and employees) after that Office has been dissolved.’’. 

5 SEC. 3. BUDGET COMPLIANCE. 

6 The budgetary effects of this Act, for the purpose of 

7 complying with the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010, 

8 shall be determined by reference to the latest statement 

9 titled ‘‘Budgetary Effects of PAYGO Legislation’’ for this 

10 Act, submitted for printing in the Congressional Record 

11 by the Chairman of the House Budget Committee, pro12 vided that such statement has been submitted prior to the 

13 vote on passage. 

Passed the House of Representatives May 19, 2010. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 
111TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 5139 

AN ACT 

To provide for the International Organizations Imand the International Civilian Office in Kosovo. High Representative in Bosnia and Herzegovina munities Act to be extended to the Office of the
#### Louis CLARK, Movant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. ED 81001.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

May 6, 2003.

Motions for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied July 3, 2003.

Scott Thompson, St. Louis, MO, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Joel A. Block, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, MO, for respondent.

Before ROBERT G. DOWD, JR., P.J. and MARY K. HOFF, J. and GEORGE W. DRAPER, III, J.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Louis Clark (Movant) appeals from the judgment denying his Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief without an evi-dentiary hearing.

Previously we affirmed Movant’s conviction for first degree murder in violation of Section 565.020 RSMo 1994,1 and second degree murder in violation of Section 565.021. *State v. Clark,*45 S.W.3d 501 (Mo.App. E.D.2001). Following a jury trial, the trial court sentenced Movant to life imprisonment without the possibility of parole for first-degree murder, and twenty years imprisonment for second degree murder, the sentences to run concurrently. After the mandate was issued in his direct appeal, Movant filed a motion for post-conviction relief pursuant to Rule 29.15. This appeal follows the motion court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law denying Movant’s motion without an evidentiary hearing.

Movant raised three points on appeal alleging he received ineffective assistance of counsel in that (1) his trial counsel failed to properly object to, and preserve for appellate review, the State’s use of statutorily inadmissible evidence of a juvenile proceeding under Section 211.271; (2) his trial counsel failed to direct the trial court to Section 211.271, and demonstrate to the court that Movant had been “taken into custody”; and (3) his appellate counsel failed to brief and argue that the State committed a discovery violation at trial concerning the content of a witness’s testimony.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties, the legal file, and the record on appeal, and find the claims of error to be without merit. The motion court’s find*183ings and conclusions are not clearly erroneous. Rule 29.15(k). No error of law appears. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. We affirm the judgment pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).

The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for the order affirming the judgment.

1

. All subsequent statutory citations are to RSMo 1994, unless otherwise noted.
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

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

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THESARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with the Annual Report of Cubic Energy, Inc.(the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the period ending June 30, 2010 asfiled with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,as C.E.O., certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to§ 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements ofsection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

(2) The information contained in the Report fairlypresents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results ofoperations of the Company.

 

Date: October 12, 2010

 
| Signature: | /s/  Calvin A. Wallen, III    |   |
|------------|------------------------------------|--------|
|       | Calvin A. Wallen, III, C.E.O. |   |

 

----
**Exhibit 32.2**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the Annual Report of Implant Sciences Corporation, a Massachusetts corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-K/A  for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2013, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Roger P. Deschenes, Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 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) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2)

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

|  

/s/ Roger P. Deschenes

 

Roger P. Deschenes

 

Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer

Date: October 28, 2013

 

This certification accompanies each report of the Company on Form 10-Q and Form 10-K pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by we for purposes of §18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.

A signed original of this written statement required by §906 has been provided to us and will be retained by us and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or our staff upon request.

  |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    EXHIBIT 11.1


                                  XICOR, INC.

             STATEMENT OF COMPUTATION OF EARNINGS (LOSS) PER SHARE



<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                   YEAR ENDED
                                  ----------------------------------------------
                                  DECEMBER 31,     DECEMBER 31,     DECEMBER 31,
                                      1995            1994             1993
                                      ----            ----             ----
<S>                               <C>              <C>              <C>
Net income (loss)                 $10,036,000      $2.299,000       $(5,817,000)
                                  ===========      ==========       ===========

Weighted average number of
  common shares outstanding
  during the period                18,217,000       18,004,000       17,988,000

Equivalent common shares
  attributed to dilutive
  employee stock options              814,000          360,000               --(1)
                                  -----------      -----------      -----------

Total common and common
  equivalent shares                19,031,000       18,364,000       17,988,000
                                  ===========      ===========      ===========

Earnings (loss) per share         $      0.53      $      0.13      $     (0.32)
                                  ===========      ===========      ===========
</TABLE>



(1)  Common share equivalents have been excluded because they were
     antidilutive.

Fully diluted earnings per share do not differ significantly from primary
earnings per share.
#### STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. MOSES ALLEN JACKSON

No. 7510SC560

(Filed 19 November 1975)

Appeal by defendant from *Brewer, Judge.*Judgment entered 11 April 1975 in Superior Court, Wake County. Heard in the Court of Appeals 17 October 1975. .. .

By indictment proper in form, defendant was charged with the armed robbery of Mark Bradford, operator of a Kwik-Pik Store at 430 Buck Jones Road in the.City of Raleigh. Defendant pled not guilty.

Evidence presented by the State, briefly summarized, tended to show: On 13 March 1975 at approximately 9:50 p.m., Bradford was working alone at the Kwik-Pik Store where he was employed. Two men with ski masks over their faces, one armed with a sawed-off shotgun and the other with a handgun, entered the store and proceeded to rob Bradford. At the direction of the man armed with the shotgun, Bradford placed money from the cash register and the' safe into a heavy canvas bag, after which he was escorted to the restroom. While the robbery was in progress, Officer Branch of the Raleigh Police Department approached the store and parked some 75 feet from the front. He observed someone duck down behind a counter and proceed to the rear of the store; he also observed a man wearing what appeared to be a gold colored sweater and dark trousers follow Bradford to the rear of the store. Branch called for assistance in response to which Officer Kramer proceeded to the area back of the store where- he saw two:men emerge single file from the rear of the building. The. first person out was wearing dark clothing and the second one out was wearing dark pants and a “goldish-mustard” shirt. Just outside the rear of the store, the second subject slipped and fell, discharging his weapon in the process. Kramer fired at the first subject but he escaped. Kramer kept the fallen man covered and found a shotgun approximately 15 inches from him; removal of the ski mask revealed the person to be defendant who had two 12-gauge shotgun shells in his pocket and a straight razor in a bag he was carrying.

Defendant offered no evidence.

*591The jury found defendant guilty of armed robbery and from judgment imposing prison sentence of not less than 20 nor more than 30 years, he appealed.

*Attorney General Edmisten, by Assistant Attorney General Robert P. Gruber, for the State.*

*•Joyner & Howison, by Edward S. Finley, Jr., for defendant appellant.*

BRITT, Judge.

While defendant’s court appointed counsel assigns numerous errors, we find no merit in any of them and no useful purpose would be served in discussing the various assignments. Suffice it to say, we have carefully reviewed the record, with particular reference to the questions argued in the briefs, and conclude that defendant received a fair trial, free from prejudicial error, and the sentence imposed is within the limits allowed by statute.

No error.

Judges Parker and Clark concur.
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.                  

###### Department of Defense

# AGENCY:

Missile Defense Agency, DoD. 

      ( print page 61261)    

# ACTION:

Notice of Membership of the Missile Defense Agency Senior Executive Service Performance Review Board. 

# SUMMARY:

This notice announces the appointment of members to the Missile Defense Agency (MDA) Performance Review Board. The Performance Review Board provides a fair and impartial review of Senior Executive Service (SES) performance appraisals and makes recommendations to the Director, Missile Defense Agency, regarding final performance ratings and performance awards for MDA SES members.

# EFFECTIVE DATE:

October 21, 2005.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Ms. Janice Siemsen, Director, Workforce Management, Missile Defense Agency, 7100 Defense Pentagon, Washington, DC 20301-7100, (703) 697-6538.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

In accordance with 5 U.S.C. 4314(c)(4), the following are the names and titles of MDA career executives appointed to serve as members of the MDA Performance Review Board. Appointees will serve one-year terms, effective upon publication of this notice. 

BG Keith McNamara, USA, Deputy Director, MDA, Chairperson.

Mr. Terry Little, Executive Director, MDA, Member.

Ms. Patricia Sanders, Deputy Director, BMDS Integration, MDA, Member.

Brig Gen Chris Anzalone, USAF, Deputy for Test and Assessment, MDA Member.

Dated: October 17, 2005.

L.M. Bynum,

Alternate OSD Federal Register, Liaison Officer, DoD.

[FR Doc. 05-21114 Filed 10-20-05; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 5001-06-M