alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### JOHN PAUL HELLSTROM AND LINDA HELLSTROM v. KIDDER, PEABODY & COMPANY, INC., AND BRUCE ADAM.

February 11, 1985.

Petition for certification denied.
<PAGE>

                      SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

                            Washington, D.C. 20549



                                   FORM 8-K

                                CURRENT REPORT

    Pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934



      Date of Report (Date of earliest event reported): October 25, 2000



                           CROSS TIMBERS OIL COMPANY
            (Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)



         Delaware                       1-10662                  75-2347769
 (State or other jurisdiction    (Commission File Number)      (IRS Employer
    of incorporation)                                       Identification No.)



     810 Houston Street, Suite 2000, Fort Worth, Texas             76102
     (Address of principal executive offices)                   (Zip Code)



                                (817) 870-2800
             (Registrant's telephone number, including area code)
<PAGE>

Item 5.   Other Events.

Earnings Release for Third Quarter 2000

          On October 25, 2000, the Company issued a press release with respect
to its financial results for the third quarter of 2000, a copy of which is filed
as Exhibit 99.1 hereto.

Common Stock Offering

          On November 17, 2000, the Company announced the sale of six million
shares of its common stock in an underwritten public offering (its "Offering").
The Company will use the proceeds of the Offering to reduce outstanding
indebtedness by approximately $115 million. In connection with the Offering, the
Company entered into an Underwriting Agreement, a copy of which is filed as
Exhibit 1.1 hereto and issued a press release, a copy of which is filed as
Exhibit 99.2 hereto.

Item 7.   Financial Statements and Exhibits.

(c)       Exhibits.

          The following exhibits are filed as part of this Current Report on
          Form 8-K:

          Exhibit Number and Description

          1.1   Underwriting Agreement between the Company and Lehman Brothers
                Inc.

          99.1  Press Release dated October 25, 2000

          99.2  Press Release dated November 17, 2000

                                       2
<PAGE>

                                   SIGNATURES


Pursuant to the requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, the
registrant has duly caused this report to be signed on its behalf by the
undersigned hereunto duly authorized.


                                    CROSS TIMBERS OIL COMPANY


Date: November 20, 2000             By:   LOUIS G. BALDWIN
                                        ----------------------------
                                          Louis G. Baldwin
                                          Executive Vice President and
                                            Chief Financial Officer

                                       3
<PAGE>

                                 EXHIBIT INDEX


      Exhibit Number and Description

1.1   Underwriting Agreement between the Company and Lehman Brothers Inc.

99.1  Press Release dated October 25, 2000

99.2  Press Release dated November 17, 2000

                                       4
#### GAUNT v. PITTAWAY

No. 472P00

Case below: 135 N.C. App. 442

Motion by defendants (Pittaway, Crain, Whitesides, Wing, Coulam and The Nalle Clinic) to dismiss the appeal by plaintiffs (Gaunt and Center for Reproductive Medicine, P.A.) for lack of substantial constitutional question allowed 21 December 2000. Petition by plaintiffs (Gaunt and Center for Reproductive Medicine, P.A.) for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 denied 21 December 2000.
Exhibit
32.1





CERTIFICATION
BY THE PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF


THE
MIDDLEBY CORPORATION


PURSUANT
TO RULE 13A-14(b) UNDER THE EXCHANGE ACT AND


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. 1350)





This
certification is being furnished pursuant to Rule 13a-14(b) under the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the "Exchange Act"), and 18 U.S.C. 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002.





I, Selim
A. Bassoul, Chairman, President and Chief Executive Officer (principal executive
officer) of The Middleby Corporation (the “Registrant”), certify, to the best of
my knowledge, based upon a review of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the
period  ended October 3, 2009 of the Registrant (the “Report”),
that:





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





(2)
            The
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      aspects, the financial `condition and results of operations of the
      Registrant.





Date:  November
12, 2009





/s/ Selim A. BassoulSelim
      A. Bassoul
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-7548

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus ENRICO SALAZAR SANCHEZ, a/k/a Juan Sanchez, a/k/a Carlos Pun, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District ofMaryland, at Baltimore. Deborah K. Chasanow, District Judge. (CR00-36-DKC) Submitted: December 20, 2001 Decided: January 9, 2002 Before LUTTIG, TRAXLER, and GREGORY, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Enrico Salazar Sanchez, Appellant Pro Se. Ranganath Manthripragada, Assistant United States Attorney, Gina Laurie Sims, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Enrico Salazar Sanchez appeals from the district court’s orderdenying Sanchez’s “Motion to Withdraw Unauthorized Enhanced Sentence.” We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. United States v. Sanchez , No. CR00-36-DKC (D. Md. Aug. 14, 2001). 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.

AFFIRMED
<PAGE>
 
                                   EXHIBIT 11

                       TO CYPRUS AMAX MINERALS COMPANY'S
                         QUARTERLY REPORT ON FORM 10-Q
                    FOR THE QUARTER ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1996

                                      -18-
<PAGE>
 
                                   EXHIBIT 11

                  CYPRUS AMAX MINERALS COMPANY & SUBSIDIARIES

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

                       COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS

                      (IN MILLIONS EXCEPT PER SHARE DATA)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                 Three Months                  Nine Months
                                              Ended September 30           Ended September 30
                                              -------------------         --------------------
                                                1996        1995            1996        1995
                                              --------   --------         --------    --------   
<S>                                           <C>        <C>               <C>        <C>
Net Income/(Loss)                             $    14    $   (203)         $   129    $     28
Preferred Stock Dividends                          (5)         (5)             (14)         14
                                              --------   --------         --------    -------- 
 Income/(Loss) Applicable to Common Shares    $     9    $   (208)         $   115    $     14
                                              ========   ========         ========    ========   

Primary:
 Average Common Shares Outstanding               93.2        92.9             93.2        92.9

Fully Diluted:
 Average Common Shares Outstanding               93.2        92.9             93.2        92.9
 Common Stock Equivalents - Options/(1)/           .1          .3               .1          .2
 Conversion of Series A Preferred Stock           9.6         9.6              9.6         9.6
                                              --------   --------         --------    --------   
 Fully Diluted Average Common 
   Shares Outstanding                           102.9       102.8            102.9       102.7
                                              ========   ========         ========    ========   

Earnings/(Loss) per Common Share                  .10       (2.23)            1.23         .15

Fully Diluted Earnings/(Loss) per Share           .13/(2)/  (1.97)/(2)/       1.25/(2)/    .28/(2)/
</TABLE> 

/(1)/  Common stock equivalents are not included in primary earnings per share
       because they are less than   three percent dilutive.

/(2)/  Fully diluted earnings/(loss) per share were anti-dilutive.

                                      -19-
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                          11,759
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                20,378
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     48,564
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                        135,739
<ALLOWANCE>                                      1,775
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 222,575
<DEPOSITS>                                     186,578
<SHORT-TERM>                                    10,725
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              4,918
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           113
<OTHER-SE>                                      20,241
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 222,575
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  5,143
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                1,457
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   448
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 7,048
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               3,045
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,202
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            3,846
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      264
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                  23
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  3,471
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    677
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                         453
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       453
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.04
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.04
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.94
<LOANS-NON>                                      1,844
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 1,524
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                       34
<RECOVERIES>                                        21
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                1,775
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0


</TABLE>
#### Duffy *v.*Morgan.

On an appeal from a justice’s court, it is not proof of the non-residence of the respondent, to show that she could not be found at her place of residence, and it could not be ascertained where she was staying.

January 20, 1849.

Motion to dismiss an appeal from one of the assistant justice’s courts, on the ground that the copy of the affidavit for the appeal was not served on the respondent, within the time limited by section 304 of the code of procedure. The copy was served" on the attorney for the respondent, within that time ; and it was stated in the affidavits of service, that the appellant used great diligence to make the service on the respondent. That he called at the respondent’s place of residence in this city, and could not find her there ; was referred to another house, ivhere it was said she had gone to service, and on calling there, was told they did not know where she was ; and finally that she could not be found within the twenty days.

The Court

held this evidence to be insufficient to show that the respondent was not a resident of the city of New York, and dismissed the appeal.
#### W.J. SCHNEIDER v. CITY OF EAST ORANGE AND ATTORNEY GENERAL OF NEW JERSEY.

March 5, 1985.

Petition for certification granted. (See 196 *N.J.Super.*587)
### In The C ou rt o f A p p ea ls Si x t h Appe l l at e Di st r i c t o f Te x as a t Te x ar ka na

______________________________ No . 0 6- 07 -0 01 78 -C R

______________________________ MEL VI N THOMAS WAL TON, Appe llant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appea l from the 124th J udicial District Court

Gre g g County , Texas Trial Court No. 27295-B

B e f o r e M o r r i s s , C

. J. , C a

rt e r an d M o s e l e y , JJ. Me mor and

um O pin ion

by Chi e f Jus tic e Mo rr issB e c a u s e t h e a c tu a l d

u e d a t e , O c t o b e r

2 7 , 2 0 0 7 , w a s a

S a tu r d ay, W a l t o nh a d

u n t i l M o n d ay, 1 October 29, 2007, to file his notice of a ppeal. SeeT EX . R. A PP . P. 4.1. Whil e it is t rue the Texas Supreme Court interpre ts Rule 26.3 liberally , imply ing a motion 2 for e x tension where a notice of appea l is filed within the fifteen day s immediately following the notice' s due date ( see Ve rburgt v. Dorner , 959 S.W .2d 615, 617 (Tex. 1997)), the Te x as Court of Cr imi na l App e a ls inte rp re ts the ru le str ic tly , r e qu ir inga no tic e of a pp e a l and a motion for extension wi t h i n t h e fifte en-da

y period. Se e Sla ton v . S

tate , 981 S.W .2d 208, 210 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998); Ol iv o v . S tate , 918 S.W .2d 519, 522–26 (Tex. Crim. App. 1996). 2 MEMORANDUM OPI

NI ON Melvin Thomas Walton appeals fr om his conviction on his plea of guilty to the offe nse of forg ery . See T EX . P EN A L C ODE ANN . § 32.21(d) ( Ver non Supp. 2007). The sente nce w as imposed September 27, 2007. Walton filed a notice of appe al Novembe r 1, 2007. Ac c or din g to Rul e 26 .2 , Wa lto n h a d th ir ty da y s a ft e r t he da y se nte nc e wa s im

po se d to fi le a notice of

appea l, or timely

file a motion for ne w trial and the reby extend his time to file a notice of appe al. SeeT EX . R. A PP . P. 26.2(a)( 1), 21.4. Walton's motion for ne w trial w as also filed November 1, 2007, and ther efor e wa s not tim ely . Walton had until October 29, 2007, to file a notice of appe al. No motion for extension of time to file his notice of appea l was filed. SeeT EX . R. A PP . 1 P. 26.3. Henc e, this appea l is unti mely , and we are without jurisdiction t o hear this case. 23

We dismi ss this appeal for want of jurisdiction.

J o s hR

. M o r

r i s s , III Chief J ustice Date Submitted: J anuar y 8, 2008 Date D ecide d: J anuar y 9, 2008 Do No t Pu

bli sh
<PAGE>

                                                                     Exhibit 5.1
                                                                     -----------

                   [LETTERHEAD OF LOCKE LIDDELL & SAPP LLP]

                                October 9, 2000

                                                     Direct Dial: (214) 740-8418
                                              e-mail: lagenecov@lockeliddell.com


InsynQ, Inc.
1101 Broadway Plaza
Tacoma, Washington 98402

          Re:  Post-Effective Amendment No. 2 to Form S-8

Ladies and Gentlemen:

     We have acted as counsel to InsynQ, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the
"Company") in connection with the registration, pursuant to a Post-Effective
Amendment No. 2 to Form S-8 being filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission (the "Registration Statement") under the Securities Act of 1933, as
amended, of the resale of up to 190,000 shares of the Company's Common Stock,
$.001 par value (the "Common Stock"), which have been issued in connection with
that certain Employment Agreement with DJ Johnson (the "Agreement").

     In such capacity we have examined the corporate documents of the Company,
including its Certificate of Incorporation, its By-laws, and resolutions adopted
by its board of directors and committees thereof.  We have also examined the
Registration Statement, together with the exhibits thereto, and such other
documents which we have deemed necessary for the purposes of expressing the
opinion contained herein.  We have relied upon representations made by and
certificates of officers of the Company and public officials with respect to
certain facts material to this opinion.  We have made no independent
investigation regarding such representations and certificates.

     Based upon the foregoing, we are of the opinion that the Common Stock has
been validly issued, and is fully paid and non-assessable.

     We are expressing the opinions above as members of the Bar of the State of
Texas and we express no opinion as to any laws other than the laws of the State
of Texas and, to the extent relevant to the opinions herein, the General
Corporation Law of the State of Delaware.  You should be aware that we are not
admitted to the practice of law in the State of Delaware, and any opinion herein
as to the laws of such state is based solely on the most recent unofficial
compilation of the corporate statutes of the Sate of Delaware available to us.

     We hereby consent to the filing of this opinion as an exhibit to the
Registration Statement on Form S-8.

                               Very truly yours,

                               LOCKE LIDDELL & SAPP LLP


                               By:  /s/ Lisa A. Genecov
                                   --------------------------
                                    Lisa A. Genecov
**EXHIBIT 32****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 on Form 10-K of CEVA, Inc. (the “Company”) for the year endedDecember 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the“Report”), the undersigned, Gideon Wertheizer, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and YanivArieli, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies, that, to the best of hisknowledge:(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 the Company at the dates and for the periodsindicated.This certification will not be deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities ExchangeAct of 1934, or otherwise subject to the liability of that section. This certification will not bedeemed to be incorporated by reference into any filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates itby reference.Date: March 14, 2008       /s/ Gideon Wertheizer     Gideon Wertheizer    Chief Executive Officer         /s/ Yaniv Arieli     Yaniv Arieli    Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 21.1



CEVA, INC.



Subsidiaries



The following are the subsidiaries of CEVA, Inc.











|Name                                          |  | Jurisdiction of Incorporation
|--------------------------------------------- |  | -----------------------------
|                                              |  |                              
|CEVA Limited (Formerly CEVA (NI) Limited)     |  | Northern Ireland             
|CEVA (UK) Limited                             |  | Northern Ireland             
|CEVA Communications Limited                   |  | Republic of Ireland          
|CEVA Design Limited                           |  | Republic of Ireland          
|CEVA Development, Inc.                        |  | California                   
|CEVA Holdings B.V.                            |  | The Netherlands              
|CEVA Inc.                                     |  | Cayman Islands               
|CEVA Ireland Limited                          |  | Republic of Ireland          
|CEVA D.S.P. Limited                           |  | Israel                       
|CEVA Research Limited                         |  | Republic of Ireland          
|CEVA Services Limited                         |  | Republic of Ireland          
|CEVA Software Limited                         |  | Republic of Ireland          
|CEVA Systems LLC (Formerly CEVA Systems Inc.) |  | Delaware                     
|Nihon CEVA K.K.                               |  | Japan                        
|CEVA Technologies Limited                     |  | Republic of Ireland          
|CEVA DSP Technologies LLC                     |  | Delaware                     
|CEVA DSP Technologies Mauritius Inc.          |  | Mauritius                    
|CEVA SARL                                     |  | France                       
|CEVA Technologies, Inc.                       |  | Delaware
EXHIBIT 8.1

AMENDED LIST OF

SIGNIFICANT SUBSIDIARIES OF GOLD FIELDS LIMITED

(AS OF JUNE 30, 2008)

GFI Mining South Africa (Proprietary)
Limited, incorporated in South Africa

GFL Mining Services Limited, incorporated in South Africa

Gold Fields Operations Limited, incorporated in South Africa(1)

GFI Joint Venture Holdings (Pty) Limited, incorporated in South Africa(2)

Gold Fields Orogen Holdings (BVI) Limited, incorporated in the British Virgin Islands

Gold Fields Holdings Company (BVI)
Limited, incorporated in the British Virgin Islands

Gold Fields Ghana Holdings Limited, incorporated in the British Virgin Islands

Gold Fields Ghana Limited, incorporated in Ghana

Abosso Goldfields Limited,
incorporated in Ghana

Gold Fields Australasia Limited, incorporated in the British Virgin Islands

Gold Fields Australia Pty Limited, incorporated in Australia

St. Ives Gold
Mining Company (Pty) Limited, incorporated in Australia

Agnew Gold Mining Company (Pty) Limited, incorporated in Australia

Gold Fields Corona BVI Limited, incorporated in the British Virgin Islands

Gold Fields La Cima S.A., incorporated in Peru

Gold Fields Exploration B.V., incorporated in the Netherlands

Gold Fields Finland O.Y., incorporated in Finland

Gold Fields Artic Platinum
O.Y, incorporated in Finland

Gold Fields Venezuela Holding B.V., incorporated in the Netherlands(3)

Carisma Corporation AVV, incorporated in Aruba(4)

Notes:

|(1) | In fiscal 2007, Western Areas Limited changed its name to Gold Fields Operations Limited.
|--- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|(2) | In fiscal 2007, Barrick Gold South Africa (Pty) Limited changed its name to GFI Joint Venture Holdings (Pty) Limited.
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|(3) | In fiscal 2007, Gold Fields Venezuela Holding B.V. changed its name to Gold Fields Netherlands Services B.V.
|--- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------