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

                                                                    Exhibit 11.1

                       U.S. Restaurant Properties, Inc.
                   Calculation of Net Loss per Common Share
                     (In thousands, except per share data)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                                  Years ended December 31,
                                                                    2000                     1999                     1998
                                                                 ----------               ----------               ----------

<S>                                                              <C>                      <C>                      <C>
Net loss allocable to common stockholders                        $   (7,147)              $   (6,312)              $   (1,185)
                                                                 ==========               ==========               ==========

Weighted average common shares outstanding                           15,404                   14,863                   13,325

Common stock equivalents                                                  -                        -                        -
                                                                 ----------               ----------               ----------

Common shares and common stock equivalents                           15,404                   14,863                   13,325
                                                                 ==========               ==========               ==========

Net loss per common share:

   Basic and diluted                                                $ (0.46)                 $ (0.42)                 $ (0.09)
                                                                 ==========               ==========               ==========


Anti-dilutive common stock equivalents excluded:
  Convertible preferred stock                                    3,453,254                3,453,254                3,453,254
  OP units                                                       1,285,866                1,218,691                1,151,212
  Guaranteed stock                                                 188,264                  100,483                    1,129
  Contingent stock                                                 820,492                  825,000                  125,673
  Stock options                                                          -                   42,428                  163,656
</TABLE>
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. JOSEPH PERKINS.

March 27, 1984.

Petition for certification denied.
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.J. Res. 29 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. J. RES. 29

    Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States 
 regarding the right of all citizens of the United States to a public 
                    education of equal high quality.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 13, 2007

  Mr. Jackson of Illinois introduced the following joint resolution; 
          which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
    Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States 
 regarding the right of all citizens of the United States to a public 
                    education of equal high quality.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled   (two-thirds of each House 
concurring therein), That the following article is proposed as an 
amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be 
valid to all intents and purposes as part of the Constitution when 
ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States:

                              ``Article --

    ``Section 1.  All persons shall enjoy the right to a public 
education of equal high quality.
    ``Section 2.  The Congress shall have power to enforce and 
implement this article by appropriate legislation.''.
                                 <all>
```
422 A.2d 1172

#### Commonwealth v. Shever, Appellant.

Submitted April 12, 1979.

John J. Morgan, for appellant; Robert F. Hawk, Assistant District Attorney, for Commonwealth, appellee.

*640Before VAN der VOORT, SPAETH and WATKINS, JJ.

Judgment of sentence is affirmed.
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1248 

To amend section 10501 of title 49, United States Code, to exclude solid 

waste disposal from the jurisdiction of the Surface Transportation Board. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 28, 2007 

Mr. PALLONE introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To amend section 10501 of title 49, United States Code, 

to exclude solid waste disposal from the jurisdiction of 

the Surface Transportation Board. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Clean Railroads Act 

5 of 2007’’. 

6 SEC. 2. AMENDMENTS TO EXCLUDE SOLID WASTE FACILI7 TIES FROM THE JURISDICTION OF THE 

8 BOARD. 

9 Section 10501 of title 49, United States Code, is 

10 amended— 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with BILLS
2 

•HR 1248 IH

1 (1) by striking ‘‘facilities,’’ in subsection (b)(2) 

2 and inserting ‘‘facilities (except solid waste manage3 ment facilities (as defined in section 1004 of the 

4 Solid Waste Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6903))),’’; and 

5 (2) by striking ‘‘over mass transportation pro6 vided by a local governmental authority.’’ in sub7 section (c)(2) and inserting ‘‘over— 

8 ‘‘(A) mass transportation provided by a 

9 local governmental authority; or 

10 ‘‘(B) the processing or sorting of solid 

11 waste.’’. 

Æ 


sroberts on PROD1PC70 with BILLS
Case: 15-15493 Date Filed: 01/08/2016 Page: 1 of 5 
Case: 15-15493 Date Filed: 01/08/2016 Page: 2 of 5 
Case: 15-15493 Date Filed: 01/08/2016 Page: 3 of 5 
Case: 15-15493 Date Filed: 01/08/2016 Page: 4 of 5 
Case: 15-15493 Date Filed: 01/08/2016 Page: 5 of 5
I 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1212 

To amend the Small Business Act to authorize the Administrator of the 

Small Business Administration to waive the prohibition on duplication 

of certain disaster relief assistance. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 27, 2007 

Mr. MELANCON introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Small Business 

A BILL 

To amend the Small Business Act to authorize the Administrator of the Small Business Administration to waive 

the prohibition on duplication of certain disaster relief 

assistance. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Catastrophic Disaster 

5 Recovery Improvements Act of 2007’’. 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
2 

•HR 1212 IH

1 SEC. 2. WAIVER OF PROHIBITION ON DUPLICATION OF 

2 CERTAIN BENEFITS. 

3 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 7(b) of the Small Busi4 ness Act (15 U.S.C. 636(b)) is amended by inserting im5 mediately after paragraph (3) the following: 

6 ‘‘(4) WAIVER OF PROHIBITION ON DUPLICATION

7 OF CERTAIN BENEFITS.—For any major disaster (as 

8 that term is defined in section 102 of the Robert T. 

9 Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance 

10 Act (42 U.S.C. 5122)), in providing assistance 

11 under paragraph (1) or (2), the Administrator may 

12 waive, in whole or in part, the prohibition on the du13 plication of benefits, including whether damage or 

14 destruction has been compensated for by, credit is 

15 available from, activities are reimbursable through, 

16 or funds have been made available from any other 

17 source.’’. 

18 (b) APPLICABILITY AND RETROACTIVITY FOR VIC19 TIMS OF HURRICANES KATRINA, RITA, AND WILMA.—The 

20 amendment made by this section shall apply to any assist21 ance under section 7(b) of the Small Business Act (15 

22 U.S.C. 636(b)) provided on or after August 29, 2005. 

Æ 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
763 A.2d 356

#### OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL, Petitioner, v. Peter Jacob BELOTT, Jr., Respondent.

No. 624 Disciplinary Docket No. 3.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania.

Oct. 30, 2000.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM:

AND NOW, this 30th day of October, 2000, upon consideration of the recommendation of the Disciplinary Board dated September 28, 2000, it is hereby

ORDERED that Peter Jacob Belott, Jr., is placed on temporary suspension pursuant to Rule 208(f), Pa.R.D.E., until further definitive action by this Court. It is further ORDERED that respondent shall comply with the provisions of Rule 217, Pa.R.D.E.

This Order constitutes an imposition of public discipline within the meaning of Rule 402, Pa.R.D.E., pertaining to confidentiality.
#### O’Brien, Admr., et al., Appellants, *v.*Norwood, Appellee.

(Decided June 24, 1940.)

*Mr. Paul A. O’Brien,*for appellants.

*Mr. J. G. Williams*and *Mr. Robert F. Badgley,*for appellee.

By the Court.

This is an appeal on questions of law and fact from the Common Pleas Court of Hamilton county, Ohio. The action seeks to enjoin the prosecution of another action in the same court to recover possession of certain real estate. The basis upon which the injunction is sought is that the action is a vexatious attempt to relitigate issues that have already been finally determined adversely to the defendant in another action between the same parties.

We deem it unnecessary to determine whether the issues raised in the action sought to he enjoined are *res judicata,*as we are of the opinion that, even assuming such to he the case, the plaintiffs have failed to show a ease for maintaining an independent action to enjoin such other action.

Under our system of pleading, the plaintiffs in this action may assert, as defendants and cross-petitioners in the action sought to he enjoined, all their right based on the former judgment that they could in this independent action.

*270By Section 11315, General Code, it is provided that:

> “The defendant may set forth in his answer as many grounds of defense, counter-claim and set-off as he may have, whether such as heretofore have been denominated legal or equitable, or both. But the several defenses must be consistent with each other, and each must refer in an intelligible manner to the cause of action which it is intended to answer.”

Under the broad sweep of this section, the plaintiffs in this case, may as defendants in the other action, assert their claim of *res judicata*to defeat the cause of action of the plaintiff, and may secure an injunction against future actions as fully and to the same extent as the court would be justified in granting in this action.

For these reasons, we concede that the plaintiffs have failed to establish a case for relief in this action and that the action should be dismissed at the cost of the plaintiffs.

*Action dismissed.*

Hamilton, P. J., Matthews and Ross, JJ., concur.
```

[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 86 (Tuesday, May 23, 1995)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E1098]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

         SALUTING SCHOOL SUPERINTEND- ENT DR. JACK R. ANDERSON

                                 ______

                        HON. BENJAMIN A. GILMAN

                              of new york

                    in the house of representatives

                          Tuesday, May 23, 1995
  Mr. GILMAN. Mr. Speaker, permit me to take this opportunity to bring 
to the attention of our colleagues an outstanding individual who has 
garnered widespread respect and admiration throughout southeastern New 
York.
  Dr. Jack R. Anderson has been superintendent of schools in the East 
Ramapo School District, in Rockland County, NY, since 1977. He has 
brought national, and even international, recognition to the East 
Ramapo School District through his educational vision, his leadership, 
and his strong support for program which had been initiated in his 
community.
  East Ramapo was a culturally and ethnically diverse community when 
Dr. Anderson first arrived. Although that diversity still exists, Dr. 
Anderson has devoted himself to bringing all in the community closer 
together. When he first arrived, all eleven labor unions who do 
business with the East Ramapo School District were without contracts, 
the district was in the midst of austerity budgets, enrollment in the 
schools was declining, the community was factionalized, and the NAACP 
has filed student and staff discrimination charges.
  In a short period of time, Dr. Anderson negotiated contracts, ended 
the labor crisis, reconsolidated and reorganized the schools to more 
accurately reflect population patterns, and resolved all discrimination 
issues with the NAACP.
  Because of his outstanding record of 18 years of service, Dr. Jack 
Anderson was designated as the New York State Superintendent of the 
Year earlier this year by the American Association of School 
Administrators. More recently, he was designated by the same group as 
one of the four top school administrators in the entire Nation.
  Mr. Speaker, I have enjoyed a close working relationship with Dr. 
Anderson for many years. I consider him to be an astute and insightful 
individual, who strongly believes that the education of our young 
people is an investment in the future of our society, and is therefore 
our most important priority.
  Mr. Speaker, I ask all of our colleagues to join with me in saluting 
an outstanding individual, Superintendent Dr. Jack R. Anderson of the 
East Ramapo School District.

                          ____________________
```
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1176 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1176

To provide discretionary authority to an immigration judge to determine 
  that an alien parent of a United States citizen child should not be 
     ordered removed, deported, or excluded from the United States.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 16, 2007

  Mr. Serrano (for himself, Mr. Ackerman, Mr. Towns, and Mr. Nadler) 
 introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on 
                             the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To provide discretionary authority to an immigration judge to determine 
  that an alien parent of a United States citizen child should not be 
     ordered removed, deported, or excluded from the United States.

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

SECTION 1. DISCRETIONARY AUTHORITY WITH RESPECT TO REMOVAL, 
              DEPORTATION, OR EXCLUSION OF PARENTS OF CITIZEN CHILDREN.

    Section 240(c)(4) of the Immigration and Nationality Act (8 U.S.C. 
1229a(c)(4)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
                    ``(D) Discretion of judge in case of citizen 
                child.--In the case of an alien subject to removal, 
                deportation, or exclusion who is the parent of a child 
                who is a citizen of the United States, the immigration 
                judge may exercise discretion to decline to order the 
                alien removed, deported or excluded from the United 
                States if the judge determines that such removal, 
                deportation, or exclusion is clearly against the best 
                interests of the child, except that this subparagraph 
                shall not apply to any alien who the judge determines--
                            ``(i) is described in section 212(a)(3) or 
                        237(a)(4); or
                            ``(ii) has engaged in conduct described in 
                        paragraph (8) or (9) of section 103 of the 
                        Trafficking Victims Protection Act of 2000 (22 
                        U.S.C. 7102).''.
                                 <all>
```
EXHIBIT 99.1

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER  PURSUANT TO  18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,  AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I,
Joseph Rubinfeld, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of SuperGen, Inc.
on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2002 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
and that information contained in such Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of SuperGen, Inc.

| | By:    |  | /s/JOSEPH RUBINFELD                  
| | ------ |  | -------------------------------------
| | Name:  |  | Joseph Rubinfeld                     
| | Title: |  | President and Chief Executive Officer

I,
Edward Jacobs, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report of SuperGen, Inc. on
Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2002 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and
that information contained in such Form 10-Q fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of SuperGen, Inc.

| | By:    |  | /s/EDWARD JACOBS                                  
| | ------ |  | --------------------------------------------------
| | Name:  |  | Edward Jacobs                                     
| | Title: |  | Chief Business Officer and Chief Financial Officer

---

QuickLinks
**EXHIBIT 32.1**

**CERTIFICATION OFCHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICERPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

I,James S.J. Manuso, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adoptedpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that theQuarterly Report of SuperGen, Inc. on Form 10-Q for thequarterly period ended March 31, 2007 fully complies with the requirementsof Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934and that information contained in such Form 10-Q fairly presents inall material respects the financial condition and results of operations ofSuperGen, Inc.

|        | By:      | /s/ JAMES S.J.  MANUSO                |
|--------|----------|---------------------------------------|
|   | Name:    | James S.J. Manuso                     |
|   | Title:   | President and Chief Executive Officer |
|   | * * | *(Principal Executive Officer)*       |

 

I,Michael Molkentin, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adoptedpursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that theQuarterly Report of SuperGen, Inc. on Form 10-Q for thequarterly period ended March 31, 2007 fully complies with the requirementsof Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934and that information contained in such Form 10-Q fairly presents inall material respects the financial condition and results of operations ofSuperGen, Inc.

|        | By:      | /s/ MICHAEL  MOLKENTIN                         |
|--------|----------|------------------------------------------------|
|   | Name:    | Michael Molkentin                              |
|   | Title:   | Chief Financial Officer                        |
|   | * * | *(Principal Financial and Accounting Officer)* |

 

----
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 1199 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 1199

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
       To extend the grant program for drug-endangered children.

    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 ``Drug Endangered Children Act of 
2007''.

SEC. 2. DRUG-ENDANGERED CHILDREN GRANT PROGRAM EXTENDED.

    Section 755(c) of the USA PATRIOT Improvement and Reauthorization 
Act of 2005 (42 U.S.C. 3797cc-2(c)) is amended by striking ``fiscal 
years 2006 and 2007'' and inserting ``fiscal years 2008 and 2009''.

            Passed the House of Representatives September 24, 2007.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
110th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                               H. R. 1199

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

       To extend the grant program for drug-endangered children.
```
News United States Air Force
 BLUE: Khobar TowersPublished June 24, 2016
                        
                        By Staff Sgt. Traci Keller
                        
                        
                        Air Force TV
                
                **FORT GEORGE G. MEADE, Md. (AFNS)** -- Air Force TV has released the latest episode of the Air Force's flagship television program, BLUE.
On June 25, 1996, the U.S. Air Force experienced one of the most horrific attacks in its history. Three Airmen look back on the incident and how it changed them and the Air Force -- forever.
Related link:20 years later: Remembering the attack on Khobar TowersKhobar Towers 



terrorism 



Saudi Arabia 



AFCENT 



BLUE