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

Computation of Per Share Earnings
(All amounts are expressed in thousands)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>


                                                                           For the Years Ending
                                                                               December 31,
                                                                ------------------------------------------
                                                                     1997           1998           1999
                                                                -----------     ----------     -----------
<S>                                                             <C>           <C>              <C>
BASIC

     Weighted average shares outstanding                              9,320         17,996          21,369
     Contingently issuable shares in business combinations            2,056            626             176
     Weighted average treasury shares                                 -              -                (437)
                                                                -----------     ----------     -----------
     Number of common shares outstanding                             11,376         18,622          21,108
                                                                ===========     ==========     ===========

DILUTED

     Weighted average shares outstanding                              9,320         17,996          21,369
     Contingently issuable shares in business combinations            2,056            626             176
     Weighted average treasury shares                                 -              -                (437)
     Net common shares issuable on exercise of certain
         stock options and warrants (1)                               2,848          2,336           1,432
     Other dilutive securities (2)                                    -              -                 601
                                                                -----------     ----------     -----------
     Number of common shares outstanding                             14,224         20,958          23,141
                                                                ===========     ==========     ===========


Net income                                                      $     5,473     $   12,202     $    16,011

Interest expense, net of tax assuming conversion of
         convertible subordinated notes payable                       -              -                 305
                                                                -----------     ----------     -----------
                                                                $     5,473     $   12,202     $    16,316
                                                                ===========     ==========     ===========
</TABLE>


(1) Net common shares issuable on exercise of certain stock options and warrants
is calculated based on the treasury stock method.

(2) Other dilutive securities are calculated based on the if-converted method.
Order entered July 10, 2013

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05

- 13

- 00328

- CR

CHRISTINA MARIE EMME RT, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the Criminal District Court No. 7

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F

- 1000776

- Y



### O RDER

The Court ORDERS the trial court to make findings of fact regarding whether appellant

has been deprived of the reporter’s record because of ineffective counsel, indigence, or for any

other reason.

 The trial court shall f irst determine whether appellant desires to prosecute the appeal. If the trial court determines that appellant does not desire to prosecute this appeal, it shall make a finding to that effect.

 If the trial court determines that appellant desires to prose cute the appeal, it shall next determine whether appellant is indigent and entitled to proceed without payment of costs for the reporter’s record. If appellant is entitled to proceed without payment of costs, the trial court shall make a finding to that e ffect. Moreover, if appellant is indigent, the trial

court is ORDERED to take such measures as may be necessary to assure effective representation, which may include appointment of new counsel. If the trial court finds appellant is not indigent, it shall determine whether retained counsel has abandoned the appeal. The trial court shall next determine: (1) the name and address of each court reporter who

recorded the proceedings in this cause; (2) the court reporter’s explanation for the delay in filing t he reporter’s record; and (3) the earliest date by which the reporter’s record can

be filed.

We ORDER the trial court to transmit a supplemental record, containing the written

findings of fact, any supporting documentation, and any orders, to this Court within THIRTY

DAYS of the date of this order.

The appeal is ABATED to allow the trial court to comply with this order. It shall be

reinstated thirty days from the date of this order or when the supplemental record is received,

whichever is earlier.

/s/ DAVID EVANS

JUSTICE
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2089 Filed: 05/20/19 Entered: 05/20/19 14:19:26 Page 1 of

4
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2089 Filed: 05/20/19 Entered: 05/20/19 14:19:26 Page 2 of

4
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2089 Filed: 05/20/19 Entered: 05/20/19 14:19:26 Page 3 of

4
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2089 Filed: 05/20/19 Entered: 05/20/19 14:19:26 Page 4 of

4
Case: 19-30088 Doc# 2182 Filed: 05/22/19 Entered: 05/22/19 10:33:14 Page 1 of

1
**Exhibit 32.1**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002     The certification set forth below is being submitted in connection with the QuarterlyReport on Form 10-Q of American Shared Hospital Services for the quarterly period ended June 30,2006 (the “Report”) for the purpose of complying with Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Exchange Act”) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 ofthe United States Code.     Ernest A. Bates, M.D., the Chief Executive Officer and Craig K. Tagawa, the Chief FinancialOfficer of American Shared Hospital Services, each certifies that, to the best of his knowledge:     1. the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934; and     2. the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of American Shared Hospital Services.       /s/ Ernest A. Bates, M.D. Ernest A. Bates, M.D.    Chief Executive Officer         /s/ Craig K. Tagawa Craig K. Tagawa    Chief Financial Officer  
17
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                         621,127
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   54,438
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               676,565
<PP&E>                                      11,015,288
<DEPRECIATION>                               3,823,622
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               7,868,231
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          368,893
<BONDS>                                      5,475,499
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,023,839
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 7,868,231
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,213,827
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               861,866
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             342,794
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  9,167
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              9,167
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     9,167
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<CASH>                                          18,194
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           1,072
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                13,400
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     89,374
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          28,906
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            28,464
<LOANS>                                        308,043
<ALLOWANCE>                                      5,672
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 468,986
<DEPOSITS>                                     428,996
<SHORT-TERM>                                     1,370
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              8,761
<LONG-TERM>                                        210
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         3,577
<OTHER-SE>                                      26,072
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 468,986
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  6,660
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                1,809
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                    87
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 8,556
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               3,735
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,755
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            4,801
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                        0
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  4,282
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,326
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                         902
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       902
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.24
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.24
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.56
<LOANS-NON>                                      1,524
<LOANS-PAST>                                        67
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 5,696
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      107
<RECOVERIES>                                        83
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                5,672
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             5,672
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
#### Ophelia C. Klein, Respondent, v. Corden T. Graham, Appellant, Impleaded with Rolla C. Grant.

Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.

All concurred.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
     The  financial  data  schedule  contains  summary   financial   information
extracted  from the Form 10-Q of Howell  Corporation  for the nine months  ended
September  30,  2000,  and is  qualified  in its  entirety by  reference to such
financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                    1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>               Dec-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                    Sep-30-2000
<CASH>                                 5372
<SECURITIES>                              0
<RECEIVABLES>                         11951
<ALLOWANCES>                             66
<INVENTORY>                              40
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                      19032
<PP&E>                               417037
<DEPRECIATION>                       318644
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                       119914
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                 19202
<BONDS>                               67000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                     0
<PREFERRED>                             690
<COMMON>                               5525
<OTHER-SE>                            26910
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>         119914
<SALES>                               58365
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                      58365
<CGS>                                 27619
<TOTAL-COSTS>                         27619
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                          0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                          0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                     4768
<INCOME-PRETAX>                       23207
<INCOME-TAX>                           8355
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                   14852
<DISCONTINUED>                            0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                           0
<CHANGES>                                 0
<NET-INCOME>                          14852
<EPS-BASIC>                          2.36
<EPS-DILUTED>                          1.90


</TABLE>
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4928 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4928

To prohibit certain closures of Senior Reserve Officers' Training Corps 
                         programs of the Army.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             June 20, 2014

  Mr. Barrow of Georgia (for himself and Mr. Benishek) introduced the 
 following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To prohibit certain closures of Senior Reserve Officers' Training Corps 
                         programs of the Army.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Readying Our Troops for Combat Act 
of 2014'' or the ``ROTC Act of 2014''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITION OF CLOSURES OF SENIOR ROTC PROGRAMS OF THE ARMY.

    During the period beginning on the date of the enactment of this 
Act and ending on July 1, 2020, the Secretary of the Army may not, 
pursuant to Department of Defense Instruction 1215.08, disestablish, or 
initiate the disestablishment of, a Senior Reserve Officers' Training 
Corps program of the Army established pursuant to chapter 103 of title 
10, United States Code.
                                 <all>
```
LOWER LEVEL

Ring Auditorium

Selected Works

From the Collection

Black Box

Coat 

Room

Museum

Store

LEVEL 1 (PLAZA LEVEL) TO SCULPTURE GARDEN

Fountain

Entrance

INDEPENDENCE AVE SW

LEVEL 2

Rotating

Exhibitions

Rotating

Exhibitions

Selected Works

From the Collection

View of the Mall

Exhibitions

Selected Works

From the Collection

LEVEL 3

Rotating

ELEVATOR

ENTRANCE

ESCALATOR

INFORMATION

MUSEUM STORE

RESTROOMS

WHEELCHAIR ACCESS

© 2012 essential media partners

Smithsonian

Hirshhorn Museum and Sculpture Garden
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 4725 Introduced in House (IH)]

113th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 4725

To amend title 38, United States Code, to ensure that all veterans are 
 eligible to participate in hospice care programs of the Secretary of 
                           Veterans Affairs.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 22, 2014

   Mr. Collins of New York introduced the following bill; which was 
             referred to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To amend title 38, United States Code, to ensure that all veterans are 
 eligible to participate in hospice care programs of the Secretary of 
                           Veterans Affairs.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Care for our Heroes Act''.

SEC. 2. DETERMINATION OF ELIGIBILITY FOR HOSPICE CARE.

    (a) In General.--Section 1710 of title 38, United States Code, is 
amended by adding at the end the following new subsection:
    ``(i) Notwithstanding any other provision of law, and in accordance 
with the priorities specified in section 1705(a) of this title, each 
veteran is eligible to participate in a hospice program (or a similar 
program) conducted by the Secretary, regardless of--
            ``(1) the net worth or income of the veteran, spouse of the 
        veteran, or child of the veteran; or
            ``(2) whether the Secretary has otherwise furnished to the 
        veteran any benefit under the laws administered by the 
        Secretary.''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall 
apply with respect to a veteran who seeks to participate in a hospice 
program (or similar program) conducted by the Secretary of Veterans 
Affairs on or after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
#### George W. Ough, Respondent, v. William J. Ford, Appellant, Impleaded, etc.

Order affirmed, without costs.
United States Court of Appeals

For the Seventh Circuit

Chicago, Illinois 60604

March 15, 2012

Before

RICHARD D. CUDAHY, Circuit Judge

TERENCE T. EVANS, Circuit Judge*

JOHN DANIEL TINDER, Circuit Judge

No. 09-3932

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

SERGIO SANDOVAL RAMIREZ,

Defendant-Appellant.

No. 10-2190

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

FRANCISCO OCAMPO-PINEDA,

Defendant-Appellant.

Appeal from the United States 

District Court for the 

Northern District of Illinois, 

Western Division.

No. 09 CR 50023-1

Frederick J. Kapala, 

Judge.

Appeal from the United States 

District Court for the 

Northern District of Illinois, 

Eastern Division.

No. 09 CR 632-1

Virginia M. Kendall, 

Judge.

*

Circuit Judge Evans died on August 10, 2011, and did not participate in the decision of

the Petition for Rehearing, which is being resolved by a quorum of the panel under 28 U.S.C. §

46(d).
Appeal nos. 09-3032, et al.,

No. 10-2689

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

LUIS A. MANDUJANO-GONZALEZ

Defendant-Appellant.

Page Two

Appeal from the United States District

Court for the Northern District of

Illinois, 

Eastern Division.

No. 09 CR 586-1

Amy J. St. Eve,

Judge.

O R D E R

The defendants-appellants filed a petition for rehearing en banc. An answer was

requested and filed. No judge in active service has requested a vote on the petition.

Accordingly, the petition for rehearing en banc is DENIED.

However, the amended opinion in this case initially issued in typescript form on

December 23, 2011, and published on January 6, 2012, is amended as follows: 

In the opinion issued in typescript, after the third sentence on page 11, which

reads “But Reyes Hernandez also emphasizes . . . Id. at 420.” insert as a footnote: 

This court does not overlook the fact that district courts retain substantial

discretion to consider mitigation arguments at sentencing. As this court

made clear in United States v. Reyes-Hernandez, 624 F.3d 405 (7th Cir. 2010),

district courts may consider a fast-track argument, but they are not required to

consider one. This opinion addresses a different question—when is a district

court obliged to comment on a fast-track argument. Nothing in this opinion

precludes a district court judge from considering a mitigation argument.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-620
In Re: JAMES EDWARD DAWKINS, Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus.

(CA-97-171-5-MU, CA-97-172-5-MU) Submitted: December 17, 1998 Decided: January 5, 1999 Before WILKINS, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. James Edward Dawkins, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM:James Edward Dawkins petitioned this court for a writ of mandamus, alleging undue district court delay in issuance of process in his civil action filed in November 1997. The writ of mandamusis a drastic remedy and should be granted only in those extraordinary situations when no other remedy is available. See In re Beard , 811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir. 1987). Because there has been recent significant action in the district court case, including an order directing the United States Marshal to effect service ofprocess, we find the petition to be moot and without merit. Although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, the petition is denied. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the Court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED