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

                       MMI Companies, Inc and Subsidiaries
           Exhibit 11 - Statement re Computation of Per Share Earnings
                      (In thousands, except per share data)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                            Three Months Ended
                                               March 31,
                                             1997        1996
        <S>                                  <C>         <C>
        PRIMARY                                           
                                                          
        Weighted average shares    
        outstanding......................    11,686     9,730
                                                  
        Net  effect of dilutive  stock            
        options based on the treasury       
        stock method using average
        market price.....................       378       406
                                                          
        Weighted average number of                    
        common and common equivalent
        shares...........................    12,064    10,136
                                                  
        Net income.......................     6,707     7,411
                                                          
        Earnings per common and                           
        common equivalent share..........   $   .56   $   .73
                                                          
                                                          
        FULLY DILUTED                                     
                                                          
        Weighted average shares       
        outstanding.....................     11,686     9,730
                                                          
        Net effect of dilutive stock            
        options based on the treasury            
        stock method using ending market
        price, if higher than average....       378       494
        
        Weighted average number of                    
        common and common equivalent 
        shares...........................    12,064    10,224
                                                          
        Net income.......................     6,707     7,411
                                                          
        Earnings per common and                           
        common equivalent share..........  $    .56   $   .72
                                                          
                                                          
</TABLE>
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

Certification PursuantTo 18 U.S.C. 1350,As Adopted Pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

 

In connection with theQuarterly Report of Cyanotech Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q forthe period ended June 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Gerald R. Cysewski, ChiefExecutive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,that:

 

1)                                      TheReport fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) ofthe Securities Exchange Act (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o (d)); and

 

2)                                      Theinformation contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material aspects,the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 
| Date:  | August 12, 2005 |                                           | /s/ | Gerald R.  Cysewski |   |
|--------|----------------------|------------------------------------------------|-----|---------------------|--------|
|   |                 |  Gerald R.  Cysewski                      |
|   |                 | * Chairman  of the Board of Directors,*   |
|   |                 | * President  and Chief Executive Officer* |

 

----
#### Edward D. JONES et al., Appellants, v. CORONADO HOTEL COMPANY et al.

No. 11029.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Eighth Circuit.

Oct. 5, 1937.

H. Chouteau Dyer and J. Raymond Dyer, both of St. Louis, Mo., for appellants.

Rassieur, Long & Yawitz, Joseph H. Grand, David Levinson, and Claude W. McElwee, all of St Louis, Mo., for appellees.

PER CURIAM.

Appeal docketed and dismissed, on motion of appellants, without costs to either party in this court.
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A16A2048. SMITH v. McTAGGART.

The captioned appeal was docketed in this Court on July 12, 2016 pursuant to

a notice of appeal directing that no part of the trial record be omitted from the record

transmitted to this Court. On July 29, 2016, this Court entered an order granting

Appellant’s motion to extend the time for filing an enumeration of errors and brief to

August 16, 2016 to allow additional time for transmission of portions of the trial court

record necessary for consideration of the appeal. On August 11, 2016, Appellant

filed a Motion to Remand the appeal representing to this Court that a trial transcript

necessary for consideration of the appeal cannot be prepared by the court reporter

prior to October 9, 2016, and that a motion to transmit sealed records as part of the

necessary appellate record is pending in the trial court.

Because it appears that portions of the trial court record necessary for

consideration of this appeal have not been prepared or filed in the trial court for

transmission to this Court, this case was prematurely transmitted to this Court. Under

the Georgia Constitution, this Court is required to “dispose of every case at the term

for which it is entered on the court’s docket for hearing or at the next term.” Ga.

Const. of 1983 Art. VI, Sec. IX, Par. II. Appeals must be decided with the

constitutional deadline and cannot be stayed indefinitely pending preparation and

filing of the necessary record in the trial court.

Accordingly, it is ordered that the Appellant’s Motion to Remand is

GRANTED and this case be REMANDED to the trial court for preparation or filing

of the necessary record. Upon preparation and filing of the necessary record in the

trial court, the Superior Court of Newton County, the Superior Court Clerk shall

August 31, 2016
transmit the entire record to this Court for re-docketing. 

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

08/31/2016
Exhibit 3.2

                           State of Delaware

                     Office of the Secretary of State
                                PAGE I




   I, EDWARD J. FREEL, SECRETARY OF STATE OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE, DO HEREBY

CERTIFY THE ATTACHED IS A TRUE AND CORRECT COPY OF THE CERTIFICATE OF

DOMESTICATION OF NON U.S. INCORPORATION OF "SPECTRUM INTERNATIONAL INC.", FILED

IN THIS OFFICE THE FOURTEENTH DAY OF MAY, A.D. 1999, AT 9 O'CLOCK A.M.

   A FILED COPY OF THIS CERTIFICATE HAS BEEN FORWARDED TO THE NEW CASTLE

COUNTY RECORDER OF DEEDS.






                                                 /s/ Edward J. Freel
                                          -------------------------------------
                                            Edward J. Freel, Secretary of State

3043417   8100D

                                                      AUTHENTICATION:   9748501
991194264                                             DATE:            05-17-99


                           Exhibit  3.3  page 1 of 2

<PAGE>

   STATE OF DELAWARE
  SECRETARY OF STATE
DIVISION OF CORPORATIONS
FILED 09:00 AM 05/14/99
  991194264 - 3043417

                          CERTIFICATE OF DOMESTICATION
                                       OF
                              SPECTRUM TRADING INC.

   Spectrum Trading Inc. ("Corporation"). a corporation organized and existing
pursuant to the laws of the Province of British Columbia, Country of Canada does
hereby certify as follows.,

   FIRST: the Corporation was first formed or incorporated on the 21st day of
November, 1990, in the Province of British Columbia,

   SECOND: the name of the Corporation immediately prior to the filing of this
Certificate of Domestication was Spectrum Trading, Inc.

   THIRD: the name of the Corporation pursuant to which it is filing a
Certificate of Incorporation is Spectrum International, Inc

   FOURTH; the principal place of business of the Corporation immediately
prior to the filing of this Certificate of Domestication was the province of
British Columbia, Country of Canada; and

   FIFTH: a Certificate of Incorporation of Spectrum International Inc. is
being filed contemporaneously with this Certificate of Domestication.

   IN WITNESS WHEREOF. the Corporation bas caused this Certificate of
Domestication to be signed by Raj-Mohindcr S. Gurm, its President, who is
authorized to sign this Certificate of Domestication on behalf of the
Corporation, this 8th day of January, 1999.


                                                Spectrum Trading, Inc.

                                                By:   /s/ Raj-Mohinder S. Gurm
                                                     ---------------------------
                                                      Raj-Mohinder S. Gurm
                                                Its:       President


                           Exhibit  3.3  page 2 of 2

<PAGE>
January 15, 2013

JUDGMENT

The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

THOMAS G. SCHURING AND ROSE M. SCHURING, Appellants

NO. 14-12-00250-CV V.

FOSTERS MILL VILLAGE COMMUNITY ASSOCIATION, Appellee

________________________________

This cause, an appeal from the judgment in favor of appellee, Fosters Mill 

Village Community Association, signed January 26, 2012, was heard on the 

transcript of the record. We have inspected the record and find no error in the 

judgment. We order the judgment of the court below AFFIRMED.

We order appellants, Thomas G. Schuring and Rose M. Schuring, jointly and 

severally, to pay all costs incurred in this appeal. 

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 174 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 S. 174

      To amend the Head Start Act to require parental consent for 
             nonemergency intrusive physical examinations.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            January 4, 2007

  Mr. Inhofe introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
  referred to the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
      To amend the Head Start Act to require parental consent for 
             nonemergency intrusive physical examinations.

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

SECTION 1. HEAD START ACT AMENDMENT IMPOSING PARENTAL CONSENT 
              REQUIREMENT FOR NONEMERGENCY INTRUSIVE PHYSICAL 
              EXAMINATIONS.

    The Head Start Act (42 U.S.C. 9831 et seq.) is amended by adding at 
the end the following:

``SEC. 657A. PARENTAL CONSENT REQUIREMENT FOR NONEMERGENCY INTRUSIVE 
              PHYSICAL EXAMINATIONS.

    ``(a) In General.--A Head Start agency shall obtain written 
parental consent before administration of any nonemergency intrusive 
physical examination of a child in connection with participation in a 
program under this subchapter.
    ``(b) Definition.--The term `nonemergency intrusive physical 
examination' means, with respect to a child, a physical examination 
that--
            ``(1) is not immediately necessary to protect the health or 
        safety of the child involved or the health or safety of another 
        individual; and
            ``(2) requires incision or is otherwise invasive, or 
        involves exposure of private body parts.''.
                                 <all>
```
Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida

Opinion filed March 30, 2022.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D21-0643

Lower Tribunal No. F17-18789

________________

Todd Watson,

Appellant,

vs.

The State of Florida, 

Appellee.

An appeal under Florida Rule of Appellate Procedure 9.141(b)(2) from 

the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Miguel M. de la O, Judge.

Lento Law Group, P.A., and Rook Elizabeth Ringer (St. Augustine), for 

appellant. 

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Michael W. Mervine, Chief 

Assistant Attorney General, for appellee.

Before EMAS, MILLER, and BOKOR, JJ. 

PER CURIAM. 
2

Affirmed. See Watson v. State, 308 So. 3d 118 (Fla. 3d DCA 2020); 

Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.240.
<PAGE>


                                                                     Exhibit 11




                          CENTRAL SPRINKLER CORPORATION

                           NET INCOME PER COMMON SHARE


                                              Three                  Six
                                          Months Ended           Months Ended
                                            April 30,              April 30,
                                         1997      1996        1997       1996
                                       -------    -------    -------    -------
                                                (Amounts in thousands,  
                                                   except per share)


Net income                             $ 2,158    $ 1,265    $ 3,457    $ 2,306
                                       =======    =======    =======    =======

Average number of common shares
  outstanding                            3,846      3,793      3,839      3,793

Adjustment to exclude average
  unreleased common shares in ESOP        (609)      (645)      (613)      (649)

Adjustment for assumed conversion
  of stock options                         113        212        121        213
                                       -------    -------    -------    -------

Average number of common shares          3,350      3,360      3,347      3,357
                                       =======    =======    =======    =======

Net Income per common share            $   .64    $   .38    $  1.03    $   .69
                                       =======    =======    =======    =======



                                       17
Not for Publication in West's Federal Reporter Citation Limited Pursuant to 1st Cir. Loc. R. 32.3 

# United Stat es Court of Appeals

For the First C ircuit
No. 03-2649 DENNIS J. SOLOMON, Plaintiff, Appellant,

v. PURITAN CLOTHING, INC., ET AL., Defendants, Appellees.
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS [Hon. George A. O'Toole, Jr., U.S. District Judge ]
Before Selya, Circuit Judge , Stahl, Senior Circuit Judge , and Lynch, Circuit Judge .
Dennis J. Solomon on brief pro se. Scott W. Lang and Lang, Xifaras & Bullaardon brief for appellee Puritan Clothing, Inc. Russell Beck , Carrie J. Fletcher and Epstein Becker & Green on brief for appellee CranBarry, Inc. Nelson G. Apjoh n , Mi chelle Chassereau Jackson and Nutter, McClennen & Fish, LLP on brief for appellees Herbert Mordecai and Eileen Mordecai.
August 13, 2004Per Curiam . After a thorough review of the record and of

the parties' submissions, we affirm, ess entially for the reasons set out in the district court's Memorandumand Order dated July 11, 2001, and its Order dated February 4, 2002. We add that it appears Solomon has forfeited his civil RICO and invasion of privacy claims by failing to provide any developed argument in support of those claims in his appellate brief. We find no abuse of discretion in the district court's refusal to allow Solomon's late-filed motion to a mend, see Maine State Bldg. & Constr. Trades Council v. U. S . Dept. of Labor , 359 F.3d14, 18 (1st Cir. 2004); and we reject his suggestion that Judge O'Toole was required to recuse himself from this matter. See In re Boston's Children First , 244 F.3d 164, 167 (1st Cir. 2001) (recusal required only where facts exist which "an objective, knowledgeable member of the public would find to be a reasonable basis for doubting the judge's impartiality.").

Affirmed. See 1st Cir. R. 27(c).
| Skip to Content*Release Date: December 6, 2007*Release dates |  Coded tables |  Historical dataCurrent release |  Screen reader |  PDF (450 KB)**L.224 Security Credit** |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
Exhibit 32.1




Certifications Pursuant to


Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002


(18 U.S.C. Section 1350)




Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, each of the undersigned officers of Radiant Logistics, Inc. (the "Company") hereby certifies that, to his knowledge, the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended June 30, 2011 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.




Date:  October 7, 2011By:  /s/ Bohn H. CrainBohn H. CrainChief Executive OfficerBy: /s/ Todd E. MacomberTodd E. MacomberChief Financial Officer
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION

PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

(SUBSECTIONS (a) AND (b) OF SECTION 1350, CHAPTER 63 OF TITLE 18, UNITED STATES CODE)

Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18,
United States Code), the undersigned officer of Medco Health Solutions, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the Company), hereby certifies, to such officers knowledge, that:

The Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 30, 2006 (the Report) of the Company fully complies with the requirements
of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                        |  |  |  |        |  |                                                           
|----------------------- |  |  |  | ------ |  | ----------------------------------------------------------
|Date: February 21, 2007 |  |  |  | By:    |  | /s/ JoAnn A. Reed                                         
|                        |  |  |  | Name:  |  | JoAnn A. Reed                                             
|                        |  |  |  | Title: |  | Senior Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial
Officer
#### FUSSELLE v. KELLY.

Supreme Court of Florida.

June Term 1953.

Dismissed without opinion.
Form 10-Q /A-1
                              
                               
               SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
                     Washington, D.C.  20549
                                
                                
      Quarterly Report Pursuant to Section 13 or 15 (d) of
               the Securities Exchange Act of 1934


For the quarter ended                   Commission file number
    June 30, 1996                             0-15715


  MUTUAL BENEFIT/COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES INCOME PARTNERSHIP, L.P.
                  (Exact name of registrant as
             specified in its governing instrument)

Pennsylvania                           05-0417572
(State or other jurisdiction of              (I.R.S. Employer
incorporation or organization)               Identification No.)

520 Broad Street
Newark, New Jersey                            07102
(Address of principal executive)             (Zip Code)

Registrant's telephone number, including area code: (201) 481-7813


     Indicate by a checkmark whether the registrant (1) has filed
all reports to be filed by Section 13 or 15 (d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for  such
shorter  period  that the registrant was required  to  file  such
reports),  and  (2) has been subject to such filing  requirements
for the past 90 days.  Yes  X   No    .


<PAGE>

                   PART II - OTHER INFORMATION

Item 6.  Exhibits and Reports on Form 8-K

     (a)  Exhibits: (27) Financial Data Schedule


                           SIGNATURES

      Pursuant to the requirements of Section 13 or 15(d) of  the
Securities  Exchange Act of 1934, the Registrant has duly  caused
this  report  to  be  signed on its behalf  by  the  undersigned,
thereunto duly authorized.


MUTUAL BENEFIT/COMMERCIAL PROPERTIES
INCOME PARTNERSHIP, L.P.

By:  MB Investment Properties, Inc.
     General Partner

By:   /S/ THOMAS G. MORGAN
     Thomas G. Morgan
     Vice President and Treasurer


By:   /S/ THOMAS G. MORGAN
     Thomas G. Morgan, Principal
     Financial and Accounting Officer


Date:  December 4, 1996
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)

Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of DCT Industrial Trust Inc., a Maryland corporation (the Company), does hereby certify with respect to the Annual Report
of the Company on Form 10-K, as amended, for the period ended December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report) 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.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                     |  |  |  |  |  |                        |  |                                        
|-------------------- |  |  |  |  |  | ---------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------
|                     |  |  |  | 
|                     |  |  | 
|Date: March 28, 2008 |  |  |  |  |  | /s/    STUART B. BROWN
|                     |  |  |  |  |  |                        |  | Stuart B. Brown Chief Financial
Officer
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-18-00080-CR

John S. Young, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE 119TH DISTRICT COURT OF TOM GREEN COUNTY

NO. B-17-0081-SB, THE HONORABLE MARTIN (BROCK) JONES, JUDGE PRESIDING

O R D E R

PER CURIAM

Appellant’s brief on appeal was originally due July 12, 2018. On counsel’s motions, 

the time for filing was extended to October 30, 2018. Appellant’s counsel has now filed a fifth

motion, requesting that the Court extend the time for filing appellant’s brief. We grant the motion 

for extension of time and order appellant to file a brief no later than November 9, 2018. No 

further extension of time will be granted and failure to comply with this order will result in the 

referral of this case to the trial court for a hearing under Rule 38.8(b) of the Texas Rules of 

Appellate Procedure.

It is ordered on November 2, 2018.

Before Justices Puryear, Goodwin, and Bourland

Do Not Publish