alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
##### 



EXHIBIT 12.1  STATEMENT RE: COMPUTATION OF RATIO
OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
AND RATIO OF EARNINGS TO COMBINED FIXED CHARGES
 LIBERTY PROPERTY TRUST / LIBERTY PROPERTY LIMITED PARTNERSHIP
(Amounts in thousands except ratio amounts)
 Nine months ended September 30, 2007Earnings before fixed charges:Income before allocation of minority interest
and income from investments in unconsolidated
subsidiaries
    
    $
    119,126Add: Interest expense
    
    
    86,870Depreciation expense on capd interest
    
    
    3,959Amortization of deferred
financing costs
    
    
    3,012Earnings before fixed charges
    
    $
    212,967Fixed charges:Interest expense
    
    $
    86,870Amortization of deferred financing charges
    
    
    3,012Capitalized interest
    
    
    36,566Fixed charges
    
    
    126,448Preferred share distributions
    
    
    Preferred unit distributions
    
    
    11,874Combined fixed charges
    
    $
    138,322Ratio of earnings to fixed charges
    
    
    1.68Ratio of earnings to combined fixed charges
    
    
    1.54
#### Randolph NELSON and Mary L. Nelson, his wife and John Probert and Dolores Probert, his wife, individually and on behalf of a class of all others similarly situated, Appellants, v. WAKULLA COUNTY, Florida, a political subdivision of the State of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D10-0515.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

June 2, 2010.

William C. Owen, Tallahassee, and Douglas S. Lyons, Tallahassee, for Appellants.

No appearance for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

DISMISSED. Fla. R. Civ. P. 1.090(b); *Churchville v. Ocean Grove R.V. Sales, Inc.,*876 So.2d 649 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004); *General Motors Corp. v. Strickland,*913 So.2d 1227 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005).

WOLF, BENTON, and PADOVANO, JJ., concur.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 10.3

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
              SPECIAL SUPPLEMENTAL EXECUTIVE RETIREMENT AGREEMENT
                                    BETWEEN
                     BOSTON EDISON COMPANY (the "Company")
                                      AND
                        THOMAS J. MAY (the "Executive")
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------

     Effective as a sealed instrument under Massachusetts law this 13th day of
March, 1999.

     WHEREAS, the Executive and the Company previously entered into a Key
Executive Benefit Plan Agreement (the "KEBP Plan"); and

     WHEREAS, the Company has adopted the Boston Edison Supplemental Executive
Retirement Plan (the "SERP Plan"); and

     WHEREAS, the Company now wishes to provide the Executive with a benefit
(the "Maximum Benefit")  equal to the greater of the benefits provided under
either the KEBP Plan or the SERP Plan (collectively, the "Plans"), such Maximum
Benefit to be in lieu of any benefits payable under the Plans;

     NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed as follows:

     1.  The Executive shall be entitled to the Maximum Benefit.  The "Maximum
Benefit" shall be the greater of the benefit that would have been payable under
applicable circumstances under either (but not both) the KEBP Plan or the SERP
Plan.  The Maximum Benefit shall be determined by the Company's actuary using
reasonable actuarial assumptions.  Payment of the Maximum Benefit shall be in
full satisfaction of any liability the Company may have had under the Plans.

     2.  The Executive will cooperate with the Company in taking any steps
necessary to implement this Agreement, including the completion of any election
forms and beneficiary designations.

     3.  This Agreement shall not be construed as modifying or amending the
Change In Control Agreement between the Executive and the Company.

     WITNESS OUR SIGNATURES AND SEALS:

THOMAS J. MAY (The "Executive")              WITNESS


     /s/Thomas J. May                       /s/Carol O'Rourke
     ----------------                       -----------------
     (signature)                            (signature)


BOSTON EDISON COMPANY (The "Company")


By:  Paul Jeannette
     --------------
     (print name)

     /s/Paul Jeannette
     -----------------
     (signature)

Title: Compensation Manager
Exhibit 13.2



CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC FINANCIAL REPORT

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350



In
connection with the Annual Report of United Microelectronics Corporation (the Company) on Form 20-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Report), I, Stan Hung, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.§ 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge, that:



| | 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: June 29, 2005



By:

/s/ Stan HungName:

Stan HungTitle:

Chief Financial Officer




|* | A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
|- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                                            1000

<S>                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                JUL-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                    AUG-1-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                     JUL-31-2000
<CASH>                                                 4,739
<SECURITIES>                                           7,754
<RECEIVABLES>                                         14,069
<ALLOWANCES>                                             600
<INVENTORY>                                                0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                      28,876
<PP&E>                                                12,348
<DEPRECIATION>                                         6,309
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                        50,276
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                 14,867
<BONDS>                                                    0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                      0
<PREFERRED>                                                0
<COMMON>                                                 166
<OTHER-SE>                                            34,519
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                          50,276
<SALES>                                               23,673
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                      52,331
<CGS>                                                 10,224
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                         48,354
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                        (612)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         327
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                        54
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                        4,589
<INCOME-TAX>                                           2,080
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                    2,509
<DISCONTINUED>                                             0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                            0
<CHANGES>                                                  0
<NET-INCOME>                                           2,509
<EPS-BASIC>                                              .16
<EPS-DILUTED>                                            .15



</TABLE>
#### EMPIRE OCEAN RESIDENCE REALTY, LLC, etc., et al., Petitioners, v. CDR CRÉANCES, S.A.S., Respondent.

No. 3D09-3183.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Sept. 1, 2010.

Devine, Goodman, Rasco & Wells, and Lawrence D. Goodman, Miami, for petitioners.

Kasowitz, Benson, Torres, & Freidman, Marcos Daniel Jiménez, and Scott B. Cos-grove, Miami, for respondent.

Before RAMIREZ, C.J., GERSTEN, J., and SCHWARTZ, Senior Judge.

*On Motions for Rehearing and Clarification*

PER CURIAM.

On consideration of the respondent’s motion for rehearing and clarification, we deny the motion for rehearing and grant the motion for clarification. The Court withdraws its previous opinion filed April 21, 2010, and substitutes the following opinion:

Empire Ocean Residence Realty, LLC, etc., et al. (collectively “petitioners”) seek certiorari review of a trial court order denying lis pendens bonds. We grant the petition.

*180CDR Créances, S.A.S. (“respondent”) sued the petitioners for fraud, constructive trust, and equitable lien. The respondent recorded notices of lis pendens, not based on duly recorded instruments, on six Miami-Dade County properties. The petitioners moved the trial court either to dissolve the lis pendens or set a lis pendens bond. After an evidentiary hearing, the trial court denied both the request to dissolve the lis pendens and the petitioners’ request for lis pendens bonds. The petitioners seek certiorari review to quash the order denying the lis pendens bonds.

The petitioners assert that the trial court departed from the essential requirements of law by denying lis pendens bonds upon proof of potential damages attributable to the lis pendens. The respondents contend that the trial court did not depart from the essential requirements of law because the petitioners failed to establish damages actually attributable to the lis pendens. We agree with petitioners and grant the petition.

The trial judge has broad discretion to require the proponent of a notice of lis pendens to post a bond when the notice is not based on a duly recorded instrument. *Med. Facilities Dev., Inc. v. Little Arch Creek Props., Inc.,*675 So.2d 915 (Fla.1996). However, the trial court discretion is not unfettered. *Mitchell v. Metro. at Lake Eola, LLC,*947 So.2d 1263, 1264 (Fla. 5th DCA 2007).

The bond proponent must show that damages or injury will likely be suffered from the lis pendens. *Little Arch,*675 So.2d at 918. Further, the bond must bear a reasonable relationship to the amount of damages that may result if the lis pendens is later determined to be unjustified. *Lice a v. Anllo,*691 So.2d 29, 30 (Fla. 3d DCA 1997).

Here, the petitioners showed that they will likely suffer damages from the lis pen-dens. The petitioners also demonstrated the amount of the potential damages on each property. Therefore, the trial court abused its discretion in denying the lis pendens bonds.

Accordingly, we grant the petition to quash the order denying the lis pendens bonds and remand for the trial court to set the amount of the lis pendens bonds.

Petition granted.
# Exhibit23.1

 

 

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENTCERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

 

 

 

 

 

On Stage Entertainment, Inc.

Las Vegas, Nevada 89103

 

 

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference inthe Registration Statement on Forms S-8 (file number 333-56285 and 333-80283)of our report dated March 1, 2002 relating to the consolidated financialstatements of On Stage Entertainment, Inc. appearing in the Company’s AnnualReport on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2001.

 

BDO Seidman, LLP

 

Los Angeles, California

March 30, 2002

 

----
#### STATE of Louisiana v. Trave WILSON.

No. 2009-K-1838.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Dec. 17, 2010.

In re Wilson, Trave; —Defendant; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Orleans, Criminal District *26Court Div. H, No. 475-619; to the Court of Appeal, Fourth Circuit, No. 2009-K-0783.

Denied.
<PAGE>   1
                   COHERENT COMMUNICATIONS SYSTEMS CORPORATION



      NET INCOME PER COMMON SHARE-EXHIBIT 11

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                    QUARTER ENDED
                                                                      MARCH 31,
                                                  ---------------------------------------------------
                                                           1997                        1996
                                                  -----------------------     -----------------------
<S>                                               <C>                         <C>
Net income available for
common stockholders                                           $2,905,000                  $2,118,000
                                                  =======================     =======================

Average common shares outstanding                             15,127,000                  14,733,000

Average common share equivalents:
      Options                                                    383,000                     724,000
                                                  -----------------------     -----------------------

Average number of common and
common share equivalents outstanding                          15,510,000                  15,457,000
                                                  =======================     =======================

Net income per common share                                         0.19                        0.14
                                                  -----------------------     -----------------------
</TABLE>

                                       12
#### STATE ex rel. Alfred SENEGAL v. STATE of Louisiana.

No. 2011-KH-1676.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

April 20, 2012.

In re Senegal, Alfred; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Iberia, 16th Judicial District Court Div. F, No. 06-CR-2085; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KH 10-01004.

Denied. Result correct.
<PAGE>

OWOSSO CORPORATION

EXHIBIT 11
COMPUTATION OF PER SHARE EARNINGS
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                             Three Months Ended                   Six Months Ended
                                                        -----------------------------       -----------------------------
                                                          April 27,         April 28,         April 27,         April 28,
                                                            2003              2002               2003             2002
<S>                                                          <C>               <C>                <C>              <C>
BASIC:

Net income (loss) available
          for common shareholders                       $ (507,000)        $ 4,115,000      $(1,082,000)       $2,225,000
                                                        ==========         ===========      ===========        ==========
Weighted average number
          of common shares outstanding                   5,874,000           5,874,000        5,874,000         5,874,000
                                                        ==========         ===========      ===========        ==========
Basic earnings (loss) per common share                  $    (0.09)        $      0.70      $     (0.18)       $     0.38
                                                        ==========         ===========      ===========        ==========
DILUTED:

Net income (loss) available
          for common shareholders                       $ (507,000)        $ 4,115,000      $(1,082,000)       $2,225,000
                                                        ==========         ===========      ===========        ==========
Weighted average number
          of common shares outstanding                   5,874,000           5,874,000        5,874,000         5,874,000

Dilutive effect of stock options                                 -                   -                -                 -
                                                        ==========         ===========      ===========        ==========
Weighted average number
          of common shares outstanding                   5,874,000           5,874,000        5,874,000         5,874,000
                                                        ==========         ===========      ===========        ==========

Diluted earnings (loss) per common share                $    (0.09)        $      0.70      $     (0.18)       $     0.38
                                                        ==========         ===========      ===========        ==========
</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                      9
<LEGEND>
     THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION DERIVED FROM THE
     ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-KSB AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE
     TO SUCH FINANCIAL INFORMATION.
</LEGEND>

<MULTIPLIER>                               1,000

<S>                                       <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                              YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                        453
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                      4,139
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                 1,148
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                        577
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                          526
<LOANS>                                    40,949
<ALLOWANCE>                                   301
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             53,337
<DEPOSITS>                                 40,587
<SHORT-TERM>                                    0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                           569
<LONG-TERM>                                     0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           0
<PREFERRED>                                     0
<COMMON>                                       77
<OTHER-SE>                                 12,104
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>             53,337
<INTEREST-LOAN>                             3,253
<INTEREST-INVEST>                             422
<INTEREST-OTHER>                              175
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                            3,850
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                          1,984
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          1,987
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                       1,863
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                  10
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                              0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                             1,054
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               958
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                    589
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                 0
<CHANGES>                                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                  589
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   0
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                               3.79
<LOANS-NON>                                   210
<LOANS-PAST>                                    0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                              304
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                  13
<RECOVERIES>                                    0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                             301
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                          301
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                             0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                         0



</TABLE>
#### STATE ex rel. Jason D. THOMAS v. STATE of Louisiana.

No. 2011-KH-0359.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Dec. 2, 2011.

In re Thomas, Jason D.; — Plaintiff; Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Calcasieu, 14th Judicial District Court Div. D, No. 20087-01; to the Court of Appeal, Third Circuit, No. KM 10-01330.

Denied. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8; *State ex rel. Glover v. State,*93-2330 (La.9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189; La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.3; *1171
      *State ex rel. Melinie v. State,*93-1380 (La.1/12/96), 665 So.2d 1172.
#### PENNY REALTY, INC., Nouri Edward Hakim, Jack Ralph Hakim and Joseph Herman Hakim v. SOUTHWEST CAPITAL SERVICES, INC., The Marcil Group, Inc., SALPL, L.L.C., Mike Marcil, Les Gee, Alfred J. Antonini, SLAG, L.L.C., and Shreveport Properties, L.L.C.

No. 2011-CC-0144.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 4, 2011.

In re Hakim, Jack Ralph et al.; Hakim, Joseph Herman; Hakim, Nouri Edward; *480Penny Realty Inc. et al.; —Plaintiff(s); Applying For Supervisory and/or Remedial Writs, Parish of Ouachita, 4th Judicial District Court Div. H, No. 08-0875-C-3; to the Court of Appeal, Second Circuit, No. 46,172-CW.

Denied.
EXHIBIT 32.1



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/A of Sevion Therapeutics, Inc. for the year ended June 30, 2015 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof, the undersigned, David Rector, Chief Executive Officer, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
Section 1350, that:

| | (1) | The Annual 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 Annual Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Sevion Therapeutics, Inc.
| | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------





|Dated: | October 28, 2015 | /s/ David Rector*                    
|------ | ---------------- | -------------------------------------
|       |                  | David Rector                         
|       |                  | President and Chief Executive Officer
|       |                  | (principal executive officer)        



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