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


                                                                    Exhibit 12.1


                         KEY PRODUCTION COMPANY, INC.
        Statement of Computation of Ratios of Earnings to Fixed Charges


                                                        Three Months Ended
                                                          March 31, 2000
                                                        ------------------
Earnings:

  Pretax income                                                      6,649
  Plus: Fixed charges excluding capitalized interest                   923
                                                                     -----
                                                                     7,572
                                                                     =====

Fixed Charges:

  Interest expensed including capitalized interest                   1,132
  Amortization of debt expenses                                         83
                                                                     -----
                                                                     1,215
                                                                     =====

Ratio of earnings to fixed charges                                    6.23
                                                                     =====

                                       1
**EXHIBIT 31.2**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

I, Jeffery W.Sprick, certify that:

1.                I have reviewedthis Annual Report on Form 10-K of Mueller Group, LLC.;

2.                Based on myknowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period(s) covered by this report;

3.                Based on myknowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this report, fairly present in all material respects the financialcondition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, andfor, the periods presented in this report;

4.                The registrant’sother certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

(a)           Designed suchdisclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidatedsubsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularlyduring the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b)          [Reserved]

(c)           Evaluated theeffectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by thisreport based on such evaluation; and

(d)          Disclosed in this reportany change in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting thatoccurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and

5.                The registrant’sother certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (orpersons performing the equivalent functions):

(a)           All significantdeficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adverselyaffect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and

(b)          Anyfraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting.

Date: December 19,2005

|        |   | /s/ JEFFERY W. SPRICK                                   |
|--------|--------|---------------------------------------------------------|
|   |   | Name: Jeffery W. Sprick  Title: Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
##### 



EXHIBIT 12 AMERICAN STANDARD COMPANIES INC.
COMPUTATION OF THE RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
(Dollars in Millions) Six MonthsFor the Years ended December 31,
    
    Ended June 30,1999
    
    2000
    
    2001
    
    2002
    
    2003
    
    2003
    
    2004Income from continuing
operations before income taxes
    
    $
    451.5
    
    
    $
    509.4
    
    
    $
    476.4
    
    
    $
    556.2
    
    
    $
    549.2
    
    
    $
    286.5
    
    
    $
    350.4Equity in net (income) loss of
associated companies net of dividends
received
    
    
    (5.1
    )
    
    
    (8.7
    )
    
    
    (2.8
    )
    
    
    (13.5
    )
    
    
    (14.3
    )
    
    
    (3.5
    )
    
    
    (10.5
    )Amortization of capitalized interest
    
    
    1.8
    
    
    
    1.9
    
    
    
    2.3
    
    
    
    2.3
    
    
    
    2.3
    
    
    
    1.2
    
    
    
    1.2Interest expense
    
    
    187.8
    
    
    
    198.7
    
    
    
    168.7
    
    
    
    129.0
    
    
    
    117.0
    
    
    
    60.3
    
    
    
    57.8Rental expense factor
    
    
    33.9
    
    
    
    49.4
    
    
    
    53.2
    
    
    
    58.6
    
    
    
    37.5
    
    
    
    30.6
    
    
    
    19.3Earnings available for fixed charges
    
    $
    669.9
    
    
    $
    750.7
    
    
    $
    697.8
    
    
    $
    732.6
    
    
    $
    691.7
    
    
    $
    375.1
    
    
    $
    418.2Interest expense
    
    $
    187.8
    
    
    $
    198.7
    
    
    $
    168.7
    
    
    $
    129.0
    
    
    $
    117.0
    
    
    $
    60.3
    
    
    $
    57.8Capitalized interest
    
    
    3.3
    
    
    
    2.0
    
    
    
    4.8
    
    
    
    2.6
    
    
    
    0.9
    
    
    
    0.3
    
    
    
    0.1Rental expense factor
    
    
    33.9
    
    
    
    49.4
    
    
    
    53.2
    
    
    
    58.6
    
    
    
    37.5
    
    
    
    30.6
    
    
    
    19.3Fixed charges
    
    $
    225.0
    
    
    $
    250.1
    
    
    $
    226.7
    
    
    $
    190.2
    
    
    $
    155.4
    
    
    $
    91.2
    
    
    $
    77.2Ratio of earnings to fixed charges (a)
    
    
    3.0
    
    
    
    3.0
    
    
    
    3.1
    
    
    
    3.9
    
    
    
    4.5
    
    
    
    4.1
    
    
    
    5.4
 a)   For the purpose of computing the ratio of earnings to fixed charges, fixed charges consist of interest on debt (including
capitalized interest), amortization of debt discount and expense, and a portion of rentals determined to be representative of
interest. Earnings consist of consolidated net income before income taxes, plus fixed charges other than capitalized interest
but including the amortization thereof, adjusted by the excess or deficiency of dividends over income of entities accounted for
by the equity method.
10644.

#### Central *of*Georgia Railway Co. *v.*Jones, adm’x.

Decided December 9, 1919.

Action for damages; from city court of Houston county— Judge Riley. May 19, 1919.

*R. O. Jordan,*for plaintiff in error.

*Emmett Houser, Thomas S. Felder,*contra.

Broyles, C. J.

1. A general demurrer to a petition is equivalent to a motion to dismiss the petition, and where such a demurrer is filed after the allowance of an amendment to the petition, the sole question raised by the demurrer is as to the sufficiency of the petition as amended. The right so to amend is not thereby questioned. *O’Shields*v. *Ga. Pac. Ry. Co.,*83 *Ga.*621 (10 S. E. 268, 6 L. R. A. 152).

2. A general demurrer to the entire petition after it has been amended is properly overruled if any count of the petition sets out a cause of action. *Hay*v. *Collins,*118 *Ga.*243 (44 S. E. 1002); *Hudson*v. *Hudson,*119 *Ga.*637 (46 S. E. 874).

3. Whether the instant case was an action under the State law or under the Federal “employer’s liability act,” it did not abate upon the death of the plaintiff, but survived to his personal representative.

*(a)*Under the State law it did not abate. Civil Code (1910), §§ 4421, 5617.

(5) Under the Federal “employer’s liability act” as amended April 5, 1910, it did not abate. 36 Stat. 291 (8 Fed. Stat. Ann. (2d ed.) 1378, U. S. Comp. St. § 8665); U. S. Rev. Stat. § 955 (6 Fed. Stat. Ann. (2d ed.) Ill, and cases cited, U. S. Comp. St. § 1592).

4. Under the above rulings and the pleadings in the instant case the court did not err in overruling the general demurrer to the amended petition.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Luke and Bloodworth, J.J.,*concur.
MAYTAG CORPORATION

                               Exhibit 23  

                      Consent of Ernst & Young LLP

                                <PAGE>



                       Consent of Independent Auditors





Shareowners and Board of Directors
Maytag Corporation

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Number
33-8249, Registration Statement Number 33-8248, Registration Statement Number
33-6378, Registration Statement Number 33-22228, and Registration Statement
Number 33-26620 on Forms S-8; and Registration Statement Number 33-35219 on
Form S-3 of Maytag Corporation and in the related Prospectuses of our report
dated February 2, 1999, with respect to the consolidated financial statements
and schedule of Maytag Corporation included in this Annual Report (Form 10-K)
for the year ended December 31, 1998.






                                                             Ernst & Young LLP





                                                             Chicago, Illinois
                                                             March 17, 1999
<PAGE>
10999.

#### WALLS *v.*THE STATE.

The exceptions based upon the testimony of the defendant’s wife as a witness for the State are not ground for a new trial, under the facts of this case. The other evidence demanded the verdict of guilty.

Decided January 27, 1920.

' Accusation of pointing gun; from city court of Leesburg— Judge Martin. September *2,*1919.

In an accusation based upon an affidavit of Sarah Walls, Zach Walls (her husband) was charged with having unlawfully pointed a shotgun at her. The evidence at the trial was as follows: Sarah Walls testified: She was the wife of defendant. On or about “the —day” of December, 1918, the defendant had a gun in his hands. She did not know what he did with it. It was nighttime and she was afraid and ran off. He was cursing and abusing her. Whether he did anything with the gun or not she did not know If he aimed a gun at her she did not know it. He did not shoot at her. This was in Lee county. On cross-examination she testithat she did not want to testify against her husband, that she did not want him convicted. Viney French testified that she was across the street on the night the crime was alleged to have occurred, and saw the defendant point and aim a shotgun at his wife, and that Sarah Walls turned and ran off.

*Lippitt & Burt,*for plaintiff in error.

*J. B. Moyl, solicitor,*contra.

Bloodwokth, J.

The accused was convicted of pointing a gun at his wife. The special grounds of»the motion for a new trial are all based upon the fact that his wife was allowed to testify against him. In an explanatory note to his approval of the amendment to the motion for a new trial, the judge shows that he fully instructed the wife as to her rights under section 1037 of the Penal Code of 1910, and that thereafter she “answered all questions propounded freely and voluntarily, and was in no instance ordered by the court to make answer to any question propounded. On cross-examination by counsel for the accused the witness answered that she did not wish to testify against her husband, and did not want to see him prosecuted. Defendant’s counsel then moved to exclude the testimony of the witness, on the ground that she did not want to swear against- her husband.” Under this qualifying note there is u<~> merit in the amendment to *698the motion for a new trial. If, however, it was error to admit the evidence of the wife, the nncontradicted evidence of the other witness demanded a verdict of guilty.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Broyles, O. J., and Lulce, J., concur.*
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 418

To authorize certain States to prohibit the importation of solid waste from 

other States, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JANUARY 28, 2003

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

Committee on Energy and Commerce 

A BILL

To authorize certain States to prohibit the importation of 

solid waste from other States, and for other purposes.

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 ‘‘Solid Waste Compact 

5 Act’’.

6 SEC. 2. AUTHORITY TO PROHIBIT IMPORTATION OF SOLID 

7 WASTE. 

8 (a) AMENDMENT.—Subtitle D of the Solid Waste 

9 Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6941 et seq.) is amended by add10 ing at the end the following new section: 
2

•HR 418 IH 

1 ‘‘AUTHORITY TO PROHIBIT IMPORTATION OF SOLID

2 WASTE

3 ‘‘SEC. 4011. A State whose State plan has been ap4 proved under section 4007 may prohibit the importation 

5 into that State of solid waste from outside that State.’’. 

6 (b) TABLE OF CONTENTS.—The table of contents for 

7 such subtitle D is amended by adding at the end the fol8 lowing new item:

‘‘Sec. 4011. Authority to prohibit importation of solid waste.’’.

9 SEC. 3. ALTERNATIVE SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL METHODS. 

10 (a) AMENDMENT.—Subtitle A of the Solid Waste 

11 Disposal Act (42 U.S.C. 6901 et seq.) is amended by add12 ing at the end the following new section: 

13 ‘‘ALTERNATIVE SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL METHODS

14 ‘‘SEC. 1009. The Administrator shall, in consultation 

15 with the States and other interested persons, identify in16 novative alternative solid waste disposal methods, and es17 tablish and publish technical guidance regarding the im18 plementation of such methods. Within one year after the 

19 date of the enactment of this section, and from time to 

20 time subsequently as warranted by changing cir21 cumstances, the Administrator shall transmit to the Con22 gress a report summarizing the Administrator’s activities 

23 under this section.’’. 
3

•HR 418 IH 

1 (b) TABLE OF CONTENTS.—The table of contents for 

2 such subtitle A is amended by adding at the end the fol3 lowing new item:

‘‘Sec. 1009. Alternative solid waste disposal methods.’’.

Æ
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

September 24, 2003

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 03-30138

Summary Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

GREGORY NETTER,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Middle District of Louisiana

USDC No. 02-CR-65-1

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

Before SMITH, DeMOSS, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Gregory Netter appeals the sentence imposed following his

guilty-plea conviction for being a felon in possession of a firearm

in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). He argues that the district

court abused its discretion in relying on impermissible factors in

its decision to depart upward due to the inadequacy of Netter’s

criminal history category. The district court did not abuse its

discretion in considering three prior convictions for which Netter

did not receive any criminal history points due to their remoteness
2

in time. See U.S.S.G. § 4A.13(a)(policy statement); United States

v. Harrington, 114 F.3d 517, 520 (5th Cir. 1997). The district

court did not abuse its discretion in considering that Netter had

a pending charge for possession of marijuana at the time that he

committed the instant offense. See U.S.S.G. § 4A1.3(d). The

district court also considered Netter’s history of domestic

violence and his numerous misdemeanor and felony charges which did

not result in convictions. Although we have not addressed the

subject, three other circuits have held that a district court may

rely on conduct underlying dissimilar unadjudicated offenses. See

United States v. Cox, 299 F.3d 143, 147 (2d Cir. 2002); United

States v. Brewster, 127 F.3d 22, 26 (1st Cir. 1997); United States

v. Schweihs, 971 F.2d 1302, 1319-20 (7th Cir. 1992). However,

because the district court’s other reasons were valid and

sufficient to support its upward departure, any error in

consideration of these factors was harmless. Williams v. United

States, 503 U.S. 193, 204 (1992); United States v. Kay, 83 F.3d 98,

101 (5th Cir. 1996).

AFFIRMED.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER>    1

<S>                                           <C>
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                             Dec-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                Jan-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                  Sep-30-2000
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                       6-mos
<CASH>                                            296,943
<SECURITIES>                                            0
<RECEIVABLES>                                       2,641
<ALLOWANCES>                                            0
<INVENTORY>                                             0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  299,584
<PP&E>                                                  0
<DEPRECIATION>                                          0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                    233,768
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                   0
<BONDS>                                                 0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                   0
<PREFERRED>                                             0
<COMMON>                                                0
<OTHER-SE>                                        233,768
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                      233,768
<SALES>                                            59,608
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   74,870
<CGS>                                                   0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      32,500
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   69,899
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                        0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 88,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   222,878
<INCOME-TAX>                                            0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               222,878
<DISCONTINUED>                                          0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                         0
<CHANGES>                                               0
<NET-INCOME>                                      222,878
<EPS-BASIC>                                           0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                           0


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-28-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               FEB-28-1997
<CASH>                                         678,397
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   31,664
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               710,061
<PP&E>                                         191,095
<DEPRECIATION>                                 150,820
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,050,619
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          520,862
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                         21
<COMMON>                                       346,920
<OTHER-SE>                                     182,816
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,050,619
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                2,770,931       
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (2,708,456)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (2,708,456)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (2,708,456)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.08)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.08)
         

</TABLE>
September 8, 2005



                     AGREEMENT REGARDING REGISTRATION RIGHTS
                     ---------------------------------------



     This is to confirm the following agreement, effective September 8, 2005
between Rapidtron, Inc., a Nevada corporation ("RAPIDTRON"), and Ceres Financial
Limited, a BVI company (the "INVESTOR"), regarding that certain Registration
Rights Agreement between Rapidtron and the Investor dated June 21, 2005 as
amended July 29, 2005 (the "REGISTRATION RIGHTS AGREEMENT"):

          That the Company desires to grant to the Investor the registration
          rights set forth in the Registration Rights Agreement with respect to
          the common shares of Rapidtron acquirable upon conversion or exercise,
          respectively, of the convertible note and warrants purchased pursuant
          to:

               1.   the Convertible Note and Warrant Purchase Agreement between
                    Rapidtron and the Investor dated June 21, 2005 (attached as
                    Exhibit A);

               2.   the Convertible Note and Warrant Purchase Agreement between
                    Rapidtron and the Investor dated July 29, 2005 (attached as
                    Exhibit B); and

               3.   the Convertible Note and Warrant Purchase Agreement between
                    Rapidtron and the Investor dated September 8, 2005 (the form
                    of which is attached as Exhibit C).

     IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date
     set forth above.

                                                 RAPIDTRON, INC.

                                                 By
                                                   -----------------------------
                                                 Its
                                                    ----------------------------


                                                 CERES FINANCIAL LIMITED

                                                 By
                                                   -----------------------------
                                                 Its
                                                    ----------------------------