alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 11.1



                                         Computation of Earnings Per Share
                                                    (Unaudited)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

                                                         Three Months Ended                  Nine Months Ended
                                                   February 28,     February 29,       February 28,     February 29,
                                                       1997             1996               1997             1996
                                                   --------------   --------------     --------------   --------------
<S>                                                    <C>              <C>                <C>              <C>      
Weighted average number of shares outstanding          3,065,853        2,868,322          2,991,792        2,767,449

Shares deemed outstanding from the assumed
exercise of stock options and warrants                   306,036          220,513            299,211          220,545
                                                   --------------   --------------     --------------   --------------

Total                                                  3,371,889        3,088,835          3,291,003        2,987,994
                                                   ==============   ==============     ==============   ==============

Earnings applicable to common shares             $       138,112  $        90,053    $       407,281  $       186,428
                                                   ==============   ==============     ==============   ==============

Earnings per share of common stock               $          0.04  $          0.03    $          0.12  $          0.06
                                                   ==============   ==============     ==============   ==============


</TABLE>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Linda L. Coutts, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc. and C. R. 

Bard, Inc., et al., 

Defendant. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

MDL Case No. 2:15-md-02641-DGC 

Civil Action No. CV-17-03541-PHX-DGC 

APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL 

To: The clerk of court and all parties of record 

I am admitted or otherwise authorized to practice in this court, and I appear in this case as counsel for: 

Defendants C. R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc. 

Date: November 6, 2017 /s/ Richard B. North, Jr. 

Attorney's signature 

Richard B. North, Jr. (Ga. Bar No. 545599) 

Printed name and bar number 

Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, LLP 

201 17th St., NW, Suite 1700, Atlantic Station, Atlanta, GA 30363 

Address 

richard.north@nelsonmullins.com 

E-mail Address 

(404) 322-6000 

Telephone number

(404 322-6050 

FAX number 

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 8757 Filed 11/09/17 Page 1 of 1
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA 

ARBOR COMPANY, A CALIFORNIA 

LIMITED PARTNERSHIP; ARBOR 

COMPANY, A NEVADA LIMITED 

PARTNERSHIP; DARRELL JAMES 

GUZY, SR.; AND MARCIA 0. GUZY, 

Appellants. 

vs. 

MARY ANN GUZY; AND MARK GUZY, 

Respondents. 

No. 69371 

FILED 

APR 2 6 2016 

ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL 

Cause appearing, appellants' motion for a voluntary dismissal 

of this appeal is granted. This appeal is dismissed. NRAP 42(b). 

It is so ORDERED. 

CLERK OF THE SUPREME COURT 

TRACE K LINDEMAN 

BY: Alif 

cc: Hon. Nathan Tod Young, District Judge 

Lansford Levitt, Settlement Judge 

Bowen Hall 

Guardian Law Group 

Heritage Law Group, PC 

Lemons, Grundy & Eisenberg 

Van Tassel Law Firm 

Douglas County Clerk 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

CLERK'S ORDER 

(0).- 1947 e RP - 1?)1 1I
#### W. S. Stam v. J. M. Stam.

Land — Conveyance—Accepted Warranty — Defect of Title — Eviction—Purchase Money.

A purchaser of land who has accepted a conveyance and has not been evicted under any adverse claim cannot avail himself of a defect of title: in defense of a suit for unpaid purchase money.

*Same*— Exception *to*General Rule.

When the vendor has warranted the title and is insolvent or a nonresident of the state a defect of title may be set up, but the defendant must establish the facts necessary to bring the ease within the exception to the general .rule.

January 21, 1868.

APPEAL PROM DAVIESS CIRCUIT COURT.

Opinion op the Court by

Judge Hardin :

Although as a general rule a purchaser of land, who has accepted a conveyance and has not been evicted under any adverse claim, cannot avail himself of a defect of title even in defense of a suit for unpaid purchase money, yet he may do so when the vendor has warranted the title and is insolvent or a non-resident of the State, but a defendant who seeks on this ground to discharge his liability as a purchaser by setting off that his vendor as warrantee of the title, must establish the facts necessary to bring his case within the exception to the general rule which we have mentioned. In our opinion that has not been done in this case. Thayne, the vendor and defendant in the cross petition, being only contsructively before the court, the material allegations of the cross petition were controverted by the law and it devolved on the appellant the burden of proving not only the alleged defect of title, but the non-residence or insolvency of Thayne and the failure of the plaintiff to reply to the answer did not dispense with the necessity of doing so. We do not regard the answer as presenting a counter claim and set off against the plaintiff, but a cross petition against his assignor, Thayne, incidentally affecting his right to recover as assignee of the note in controversy.

We incline to the opinion moreover that as Denson’s heirs were *222brought before the court and failed to maintain their claim to the thirteen acres of land alleged by the defendant to belong to them, they are concluded by the judgment from again asserting their claim.

*Sweeney & Stewart, for appellant.*

*Lindsey, for appellee.*

Wherefore the judgment is *affirmed.*
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

OF FLORIDA

SECOND DISTRICT

BENJAMIN FREDERICK, )

)

Appellant, )

)

v. ) Case No. 2D17-3945

)

STATE OF FLORIDA, )

)

Appellee. )

___________________________________)

Opinion filed February 21, 2018.

Appeal pursuant to Fla. R. App. P.

9.141(b)(2) from the Circuit Court 

for Polk County; Donald G. Jacobsen, 

Judge.

Benjamin Frederick, pro se.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. 

KHOUZAM, BLACK, and ROTHSTEIN-YOUAKIM, JJ., Concur.
Exhibit
32.2











CERTIFICATON
OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER





Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to


§
906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002





In
connection with the filing with the Securities and Exchange Commission of the
Quarterly Report of Hemagen Diagnostics, Inc. on Form 10-QSB for the period
ending June 30, 2008, the (“Report”), I ,Catherine M. Davidson, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 906 1350, 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.














/s/Catherine M.
Davidson


Catherine
M. Davidson


Financial
Officer


(Principal
Financial Officer)








August
13, 2008




















A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Hemagen Diagnostics, Inc. and will be retained by Hemagen Diagnostics, Inc. and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
#### CARL ROWATTI v. JOHN GONCHAR. JOHN GONCHAR v. THE ZONING BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT OF THE BOROUGH OF NORTHVALE.

April 10, 1984.

Petition for certification granted.
#### Spinning *v.*Rowland.—In error.

Tuesday, *December*12.

IT was necessary, under the statute of 1838, that a petition to the Probate Court for the appointment of commissioners to assign dower, &c., should aver that, previously to its being filed, a demand on the defendant for an assignment of the dower had been made, or show a good reason why such demand had not been made. R. S. 1838, p. 239. — See *Dunn*v. *Loder,*5 Blackf. 446.
#### IN THE MATTER OF THE GUARDIANSHIP OF R.I.S.

September 24, 1984.

Petition for certification denied.
EXHIBIT 99.1

                            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  Quarterly  Report  of  Penn  Octane  Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending January 31, 2003 as filed with the
Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on  the  date  hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned,  Jerome B. Richter, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Ian
T.  Bothwell,  Chief  Financial  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) 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.

                                           /s/  Jerome  B.  Richter
                                      ------------------------------------------
                                      Jerome B. Richter, Chief Executive Officer
                                      March  20,  2003


                                              /s/  Ian  T.  Bothwell
                                      ------------------------------------------
                                      Ian T. Bothwell, Chief Financial Officer
                                      March  20,  2003


<PAGE>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Eileen Schmuck,

Plaintiff,

v.

Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

MDL Case No. 2:15-md-02641-DGC

Civil Action No. CV-16-00267-PHX-DGC

WAIVER OF THE SERVICE OF SUMMONS

To: Lopez McHugh LLP - Newport Beach, CA

(Name of plaintiff’s attorney or unrepresented plaintiff)

I have received your request to waive service of a summons in this action along with a copy of the complaint, two 

copies of this waiver form, and a prepaid means of returning one signed copy of the form to you.

I, or the entity I represent, agree to save the expense of serving a summons and complaint in this case.

I understand that I, or the entity I represent, will keep all defenses or objections to the lawsuit, the court’s 

jurisdiction, and the venue of the action, but that I waive any objections to the absence of a summons or of service.

I also understand that I, or the entity I represent, must file and serve an answer or a motion under Rule 12 within 

60 days from 2/5/2016, the date when this request was sent (or 90 days if it was sent outside the United States). If I fail to 

do so, a default judgment will be entered against me or the entity I represent.

Date: February 10, 2016 /s/ Richard B. North, Jr.

Signature of the attorney or unrepresented party

Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc.

Printed name of party waiving service

of summons

Richard B. North, Jr. (Ga. Bar No. 545599)

Printed Name

Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, LLP

201 17th St., NW, Suite 1700, Atlantic Station, Atlanta, GA 30363

Address

richard.north@nelsonmullins.com

E-mail Address

(404) 322-6155

Telephone number

Duty to Avoid Unnecessary Expenses of Serving a Summons

Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires certain defendants to cooperate in saving unnecessary expenses of serving a 

summons and complaint. A defendant who is located in the United States and who fails to return a signed waiver of service requested by a plaintiff 

located in the United States will be required to pay the expenses of service, unless the defendant shows good cause for the failure. 

“Good cause” does not include a belief that the lawsuit is groundless, or that it has been brought in an improper venue, or that the court has 

no jurisdiction over this matter or over the defendant or the defendant’s property. 

If the waiver is signed and returned, you can still make these and all other defenses and objections, but you cannot object to the absence of 

a summons or of service. 

If you waive service, then you must, within the time specified on the waiver form, serve an answer or a motion under Rule 12 on the 

plaintiff and file a copy with the court. By signing and returning the waiver form, you are allowed more time to respond than if a summons had been 

served.

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 833 Filed 02/17/16 Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Timothy D. Stanley, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

C. R. Bard Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc., 

Defendant. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

MDL Case No. 2:15-md-02641-DGC 

Civil Action No. CV-17-03480-PHX-DGC 

WAIVER OF THE SERVICE OF SUMMONS 

To: Freese & Goss PLLC - Birmingham, AL 

(Name of plaintiff’s attorney or unrepresented plaintiff) 

I have received your request to waive service of a summons in this action along with a copy of the complaint, two 

copies of this waiver form, and a prepaid means of returning one signed copy of the form to you. 

I, or the entity I represent, agree to save the expense of serving a summons and complaint in this case. 

I understand that I, or the entity I represent, will keep all defenses or objections to the lawsuit, the court’s 

jurisdiction, and the venue of the action, but that I waive any objections to the absence of a summons or of service. 

I also understand that I, or the entity I represent, must file and serve an answer or a motion under Rule 12 within 

60 days from 10/26/2017, the date when this request was sent (or 90 days if it was sent outside the United States). If I fail 

to do so, a default judgment will be entered against me or the entity I represent. 

Date: November 6, 2017 /s/ Richard B. North, Jr. 

Signature of the attorney or unrepresented party 

C. R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc.

Printed name of parties waiving service of 

summons 

Richard B. North, Jr. (Ga. Bar No. 545599) 

Printed Name 

Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, LLP 

201 17th St., NW, Suite 1700, Atlantic Station, Atlanta, GA 30363 

Address 

richard.north@nelsonmullins.com 

E-mail Address 

(404) 322-6155 

Telephone number 

Duty to Avoid Unnecessary Expenses of Serving a Summons

Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires certain defendants to cooperate in saving unnecessary expenses of serving a 

summons and complaint. A defendant who is located in the United States and who fails to return a signed waiver of service requested by a plaintiff 

located in the United States will be required to pay the expenses of service, unless the defendant shows good cause for the failure. 

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 8811 Filed 11/10/17 Page 1 of 2
2

“Good cause” does not include a belief that the lawsuit is groundless, or that it has been brought in an improper venue, or that the court has 

no jurisdiction over this matter or over the defendant or the defendant’s property. 

If the waiver is signed and returned, you can still make these and all other defenses and objections, but you cannot object to the absence of 

a summons or of service. 

If you waive service, then you must, within the time specified on the waiver form, serve an answer or a motion under Rule 12 on the 

plaintiff and file a copy with the court. By signing and returning the waiver form, you are allowed more time to respond than if a summons had been 

served.

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 8811 Filed 11/10/17 Page 2 of 2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

David M. Meredith, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc. and C. R. 

Bard, Inc., et al., 

Defendant. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

MDL Case No. 2:15-md-02641-DGC 

Civil Action No. CV-17-03451-PHX-DGC 

APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL 

To: The clerk of court and all parties of record 

I am admitted or otherwise authorized to practice in this court, and I appear in this case as counsel for: 

Defendants C. R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc. 

Date: November 6, 2017 /s/ Richard B. North, Jr. 

Attorney's signature 

Richard B. North, Jr. (Ga. Bar No. 545599) 

Printed name and bar number 

Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, LLP 

201 17th St., NW, Suite 1700, Atlantic Station, Atlanta, GA 30363 

Address 

richard.north@nelsonmullins.com 

E-mail Address 

(404) 322-6000 

Telephone number

(404 322-6050 

FAX number 

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 8647 Filed 11/06/17 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
REGISTRANT'S UNAUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE THREE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER
30, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                         246,083
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                3,831,232
<ALLOWANCES>                                    55,307
<INVENTORY>                                  2,686,388
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             7,235,480
<PP&E>                                         941,745
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,149,711
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               9,250,259
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        5,892,547
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     1,463,387
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,005,401
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 9,250,259
<SALES>                                      7,580,466
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             7,584,298
<CGS>                                        6,041,123
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                7,284,934
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              41,981
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                257,383
<INCOME-TAX>                                    54,251
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            203,132
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   203,132
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .12
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .11
        

</TABLE>
**EXHIBIT 31.2**

** **

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, John C. Garrison, certify that:

 

1. Ihave reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB/A-5of ICOP Digital, Inc.;

 

2. Basedon my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statementsmade, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this annual report;

 

3. Basedon my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this annual report, fairly present in all material respects thefinancial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant asof, and for, the periods presented in this annual report;

 

4. Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I am responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) for the registrant and have:

 

a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision,to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,particularly during the period in which this annual report is being prepared;

 

b. Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this annual report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of theend of the period covered by this annual report based on such evaluation; and

 

c. Disclosed in this annual report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’smost recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonablylikely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and

 

5. Theregistrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our mostrecent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to theregistrant’s auditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board ofdirectors: 

 

a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal controls over financial reporting which arereasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record,process, summarize and report financial information; and

 

b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting.

 
|   |                                         |
|--------|----------------------------------------------|
|   | /s/  JOHN C. GARRISON                        |
|   | John  C. Garrison                            |
|   | *Principal Financial and Accounting Officer* |

 
| Date: July 7,  2005 |   |
|--------------------------|--------|

 

----