alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
 
                                                                 EXHIBIT 11
                               Polymer Group, Inc.

                        Computation of Earnings Per Share

                                 (In Thousands)

<TABLE> 
<CAPTION> 


                                                                     Fiscal Year
                                                   ------------------------------------------------
                                                       1996            1995             1994
                                                   -------------  ---------------- ----------------
<S>                                                <C>            <C>              <C>        
PRIMARY (LOSS) PER COMMON SHARE
Net (loss) applicable to common stock (A)              $(2,130)       $(28,446)        $(23,919)

Weighted average shares outstanding                     27,688          20,500           20,500

Primary (loss) per common share                      $    (.08)      $   (1.39)       $   (1.17)

(LOSS) PER COMMON SHARE ASSUMING FULL
     DILUTION
Net (loss) applicable to common stock (A)              $(2,130)      $ (28,446)        $(23,919)

Weighted average shares outstanding                     27,688          20,500           20,500

(Loss) per common share assuming full dilution       $    (.08)      $   (1.39)       $   (1.17)

</TABLE> 


(A)  Includes cumulative dividends on redeemable preferred stock of
     approximately $3.0 million, $4.8 million and $1.2 million in 1996, 1995 and
     1994, respectively.

                                      28
Exhibit 32.2





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 for the period ended December 31, 2010 of Dutch Gold Resources, Inc., a Nevada corporation (the “Company”), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Steven Keaveney, 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) or15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and





2. The information contained in this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operation of the Company.





Date: August 31, 2011





/s Tom LeaheyTom Leahey, Chief Financial Officer(principal accounting officer)
### THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13

- 19

- 00080

- CR
Ernesto Rodriguez v. The State of Texas
On Appeal from the 148th District Court of Nueces County , Texas Trial Court Cause No. 16FC

- 1665

- E

JUDGMENT THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered th is cau se on appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be affirmed

. The Court orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED

. We further order this decision certified below for observance. May 7, 2020
The Honorable Richard H. Kyle, United States District Judge for the District of 1 Minnes ota, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable Franklin L . Noel, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of Minnesota.



## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 97-3367

___________ Lazaro D. Borrero, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * District of Minnesota. Terry Mories, Officer; Dennis L. * Benson, Warden of Minnesota * [UNPUBLISHED] Correctional Facility at Stillwater, * * Appellees. *

___________ Submitted: August 12, 1998 Filed: August 18, 1998

___________ Before WOLLMAN, HANSEN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Lazaro B orrero, a Minnesota inmate, appeals from the district court’s adverse 1 grant of summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C § 1983 action. After carefully reviewing the record and the parties’ submissions, we conclude the district court did not err in-2-

granting summary judgment for the reasons stated in the magistrate judge’s report . Accordingly, we affirm the judgment of the district court. See8th Cir. R. 47B. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
#### In the Matter of Alfred R., a Person Alleged to be a Juvenile Delinquent, Appellant.

[861 NYS2d 283]

Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Clark *Y.*Richardson, J.), entered on or about November 9, 2007, which adjudicated appellant a juvenile delinquent, upon his admission that he had committed an act which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of sexual abuse in the second degree, and imposed a conditional discharge for a period of 12 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The court properly denied appellant’s motion to dismiss the petition, made on the ground that he was denied his constitutional right to a speedy trial *(see Matter of Benjamin L.,*92 NY2d 660 [1999]). The presentment agency provided a sufficient excuse for its delay in filing the petition, and appellant was not prejudiced in any manner.

The court providently exercised its discretion when it denied appellant’s request for an adjournment in contemplation of a dismissal, and instead adjudicated him a juvenile delinquent *324and imposed a conditional discharge. Given the gravity of the underlying criminal conduct, which resulted in the pregnancy of a 13-year-old, along with appellant’s poor school performance, the court adopted the least restrictive dispositional alternative consistent with appellant’s needs and the need for protection of the community *(see e.g. Matter of Jonaivy Q.,*286 AD2d 645 [2001]). Concur—Mazzarelli, J.P., Catterson, Moskowitz and Acosta, JJ.
111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2950 

AN ACT 

To direct the Secretary of the Interior to allow for prepayment of repayment contracts between the United States 

and the Uintah Water Conservancy District. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 2950 EH

1 SECTION 1. PREPAYMENT OF CERTAIN REPAYMENT CON2 TRACTS BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES AND 

3 THE UINTAH WATER CONSERVANCY DIS4 TRICT. 

5 The Secretary of the Interior shall allow for prepay6 ment of the repayment contract no. 6–05–01–00143 be7 tween the United States and the Uintah Water Conser8 vancy District dated June 3, 1976, and supplemented and 

9 amended on November 1, 1985, and on December 30, 

10 1992, providing for repayment of municipal and industrial 

11 water delivery facilities for which repayment is provided 

12 pursuant to such contract, under terms and conditions 

13 similar to those used in implementing section 210 of the 

14 Central Utah Project Completion Act (Public Law 102– 

15 575), as amended. The prepayment— 

16 (1) shall result in the United States recovering 

17 the net present value of all repayment streams that 

18 would have been payable to the United States if this 

19 Act was not in effect; 

20 (2) may be provided in several installments to 

21 reflect substantial completion of the delivery facili22 ties being prepaid, and any increase in the repay23 ment obligation resulting from delivery of water in 

24 addition to the water being delivered under this con25 tract as of the date of enactment of this Act; 
3 

•HR 2950 EH

1 (3) shall be adjusted to conform to a final cost 

2 allocation including costs incurred by the Bureau of 

3 Reclamation, but unallocated as of the date of the 

4 enactment of this Act that are allocable to the water 

5 delivered under this contract; 

6 (4) may not be adjusted on the basis of the 

7 type of prepayment financing used by the District; 

8 and 

9 (5) shall be made such that total repayment is 

10 made not later than September 30, 2019. 

Passed the House of Representatives September 29, 

2009. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 
111TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 2950 

AN ACT 

To direct the Secretary of the Interior to allow for 

vancy District. United States and the Uintah Water Conserprepayment of repayment contracts between the
Exhibit 32.1

SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION

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 amended quarterly report of Emergency Filtration
Products, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10 QSB for the quarter ending September
30, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the "Report"), I, Douglas K. Beplate, Principal Executive 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, to the best of my
knowledge and belief:

 (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 result of operations of the Company.


/s/ Douglas K. Beplate
Douglas K. Beplate, Principal Executive Officer

Date: November 14, 2003


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature
that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written
statement 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.
EX-4.4



 Exhibit 4.4 

ISOCKET, INC. 
 NOTICE OF
GRANT OF STOCK PURCHASE RIGHT 
 The Participant has been granted a right to purchase (the “Purchase Right”) certain shares of
Stock (the “Shares”) of isocket, inc. pursuant to the isocket, inc. 2009 equity Incentive Plan (the “Plan”), as follows: 
  

					
	Participant:	  	
                                        

		
	Date of Grant:	  	
                                        

		
	Total Number of Shares:	  	                    , subject to adjustment as provided by the Stock Purchase Agreement.
		
	Purchase Price:	  	$
                                      
		
	Expiration Date:	  	                     (Not later than 30 days after Date of Grant)
		
	Initial Vesting Date:	  	The date one (1) year after [vesting commencement date]
		
	Vested Shares:	  	Except as provided in the Stock Purchase Agreement, the number of Vested Shares (disregarding any resulting fractional share) as of any date is determined by multiplying the Total Number of Shares by the
“Vested Ratio” determined as of such date as follows:
			
	 	  	 	  	Vested Ratio
			
		  	Prior to Initial Vesting Date	  	0
			
		  	On Initial Vesting Date, provided the Participant’s Service has not terminated prior to such date	  	1/4
			
		  	Plus	  	
			
		  	For each additional full month of the Participant’s continuous Service from Initial Vesting Date until the Vested Ratio equals 1/1, an additional	  	1/48

 By their signatures below, the Company and the Participant agree that the Purchase Right and any shares
acquired upon the exercise thereof are governed by this Grant Notice and by the provisions of the Plan and the Stock Purchase Agreement, both of which are attached to and made a part of this document. The Participant acknowledges receipt of copies
of the Plan and the Stock Purchase Agreement, represents that the Participant has read and is familiar with their provisions, and hereby accepts the Purchase Right subject to all of their terms and conditions. 

 

									
	ISOCKET, INC.	 		 	PARTICIPANT
				
	By:	 	  
	 		 	  

		 		 		 	Signature
				
	Its:	 	  
	 		 	  

		 		 		 	Date
				
	Address:	 	2235 California street, #199	 		 	  

		 	Mountain View, CA 94040	 		 	Address
				
		 		 		 	  


  

			
	ATTACHMENTS:	  	2009 Equity Incentive Plan, as amended to the Date of Grant; Stock Purchase Agreement, Exercise Notice, Assignment Separate from Certificate and form of Section 83(b) Election
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                    5
<LEGEND>
                             This schedule contains summary financial
                             information extracted from Form 10-Q for the period
                             ended September 30, 1999 and is qualified in its
                             entirety by reference to such financial statements.

</LEGEND>

<MULTIPLIER>                 1,000

<S>                         <C>
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>            DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>               JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                 SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-TYPE>                9-MOS
<CASH>                            34,995
<SECURITIES>                           0
<RECEIVABLES>                     58,427
<ALLOWANCES>                       2,668
<INVENTORY>                       21,197
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                 121,709
<PP&E>                           312,061
<DEPRECIATION>                   167,041
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                   289,033
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>             56,761
<BONDS>                          150,505
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                  0
<PREFERRED>                            0
<COMMON>                             225
<OTHER-SE>                       (43,369)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>     289,033
<SALES>                          194,755
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                 194,755
<CGS>                            156,905
<TOTAL-COSTS>                    156,905
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                 9,764
<INCOME-PRETAX>                    5,453
<INCOME-TAX>                       1,066
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                4,387
<DISCONTINUED>                         0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                        0
<CHANGES>                              0
<NET-INCOME>                       4,387
<EPS-BASIC>                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                          0





</TABLE>
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Brian E. CAIN & Charles Davis, Defendants-Appellants.

Nos. 10-3223, 11-1202.

United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.

Submitted May 25, 2011.*

Decided May 31, 2011.

John G. McKenzie, Mark T. Earner, Office of the United States Attorney, Rockford, IL, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Carol A. Brook, Office of the Federal Defender Program, Chicago, IL, Gregory N. Dutch, Montie, Bryant & Dutch, Madison, WI, for Defendants-Appellants.

Before RICHARD A. POSNER, Circuit Judge, JOHN L. COFFEY, Circuit Judge, JOEL M. FLAUM, Circuit Judge.

*

 After examining the briefs and the record, we have concluded that oral argument is unnecessary. Thus, the appeal is submitted on the briefs and die record. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2)(C).

ORDER

Brian Cain and Charles Davis appeal them respective convictions and sentences after they both pleaded guilty to possession with intent to distribute crack cocaine, *see*21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) (2006). The district court sentenced Cain to the 120-month mandatory minimum and Davis to a within-Guidelines sentence of 290 months. We consolidated their appeals because both men challenge their sentences only on the ground that the court erred by refusing to apply retroactively the reduced statutory penalties under the Fair Sentencing Act of 2010, Pub.L. No. 111-220,124 Stat. 2372 (2010).

On appeal Cain and Davis contend that the district court erred by refusing to apply the Fair Sentencing Act, which took effect on August 3, 2010 — before both men’s sentencing (Cain’s in September 2010, and Davis’s in January 2011). But application of the Act turns on “the date of the underlying criminal conduct, not the date of sentencing.” *United States v. Fisher,*635 F.3d 336, 340 (7th Cir.2011). *See also United States v. Acoff,*634 F.3d 200, 202 (2d Cir.2011). The Act does not apply retroactively to defendants like Cain and Davis, whose offenses (Cain’s in October 2009, Davis’s in late 2009 through early 2010) predated the Act’s effective date. *United States v. Bell,*624 F.3d 803, 814 (7th Cir.2010). Our sister circuits agree. *United States v. Bullard,*645 F.3d 237, 247-49, 2011 WL 1718894, at *9-*ll (4th Cir.2011); *United States v. Goncalves,*642 F.3d 245, 251-55 (1st Cir.2011); *United States v. Doggins,*633 F.3d 379, 384 (5th Cir.2011); *United States v. Reevey,*631 F.3d 110, 114-15 (3d Cir.2010); *United States v. Diaz,*627 F.3d 930, 931 (2d Cir. 2010); *United States v. Lewis,*625 F.3d 1224, 1228 (10th Cir.2010), *cert. denied,*-U.S.-, 131 S.Ct. 1790, 179 L.Ed.2d 660 (2011); *United States v. Brewer,*624 F.3d 900, 909 n. 7 (8th Cir. 2010), *cert. denied,*—U.S.-, 131 S.Ct. 1805, 179 L.Ed.2d 670 (2011); *United States v. Gomes,*621 F.3d 1343, 1346 (11th *545Cir.2010), *cert. denied,*—U.S.-, 131 S.Ct. 1833, 179 L.Ed.2d 788 (2011); *United States v. Carradine,*621 F.3d 575, 580 (6th Cir.2010), *cert. denied,*—U.S.-, 131 S.Ct. 1706, 179 L.Ed.2d 637 (2011). *See also United States v. Hall,*403 Fed.Appx. 214, 217 (9th Cir.2010) (nonprecedential disposition).

Affirmed.
CHIEF JUSTICE

ROGELIO VALDEZ

JUSTICES

NELDA V. RODRIGUEZ

DORI CONTRERAS GARZA

GINA M. BENAVIDES

GREGORY T. PERKES

NORA L. LONGORIA

CLERK

DORIAN E. RAMIREZ NUECES COUNTY COURTH OUSE

901 LEOPARD, 10TH FL OOR

CORPUS C HRISTI, TEXAS 78401

361

- 888

- 0416 (TEL)

361

- 888

- 0794 (FAX)

HIDALGO COUNTY

ADMINISTRATION BLDG.

100 E. CANO, 5TH FLO OR

EDINBURG, TEXAS 7853 9

956

- 318

- 2405 (TEL)

956

- 318

- 2403 (FAX)

www.txcourts.gov/13thcoa 

# Court of Appeals

Thirteenth District of Texas

February 26, 2015

Hon. Scott P. Jones

Brock Person Guerra Reyna

17339 Redland Rd.

San Antonio, TX 78247

* DELIVERED VIA E

- MAIL *

Hon. Jacqueline M. Stroh

Attorney at Law

10101 Reunion Place, Suite 600

San Antonio, TX 78216

* DELIVERED VIA E

- MAIL * Hon. Moises R. Hernandez

Hernandez Law Firm

P. O. Box 2999

Harlingen, TX 78551

Hon. Roger W. Hughes

Adams & Graham

134 E. Van Buren, Suite 301

P. O. Drawer 1429

Harlingen, TX 78551

* DELIVERED VIA E

- MAIL *

Re: Cause No. 13

- 12

- 00583

- CV

Tr.Ct.No. 2006

- CPC

- 92

- B

Style: IN THE ESTATE OF MARIO GONZALEZ LIRA

Enclosed please find the opinion and judgment issued by the Court on this date.

Very truly yours,

Dorian E. Ramirez, Clerk

DER: ch

Enc.

cc: County Court at Law No. 2

Ho n. Sylvia Perez , Cameron County Clerk (DELIVERED VIA E

- MAIL)

Hon. J. Rolando Olvera Jr. , Presiding Judge, Fifth Administrative Judicial Region

(DELIVERED VIA E

- MAIL)
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 199 (Tuesday, October 17, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Pages 48228-48229]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-22451]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

EXPORT-IMPORT BANK

[Public Notice: 2017-6012]


Agency Information Collection Activities: Comment Request

AGENCY: Export-Import Bank of the United States.

ACTION: Submission for OMB review and comments request.

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

SUMMARY: The Export-Import Bank of the United States (EXIM), as a part 
of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent burden, 
invites the general public and other Federal Agencies to comment on the 
proposed information collection, as required by the Paperwork Reduction 
Act of 1995.
    The collection provides EXIM staff with the information necessary 
to monitor the borrower's payments for exported goods covered under its 
short and medium-term export credit insurance policies. It also alerts 
EXIM staff of defaults, so they can manage the portfolio in an informed 
manner.

DATES: Comments must be received on or before December 18, 2017 to be 
assured of consideration.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be submitted electronically on 
WWW.REGULATIONS.GOV or by mail to Mia Johnson, Export-Import Bank of 
the United States, 811 Vermont Ave. NW., Washington, DC 20571 Form can 
be viewed at https://www.exim.gov/sites/default/files/pub/pending/eib92-29.pdf

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
    Title and Form Number: EIB 92-29 Export-Import Bank Report of 
Premiums Payable for Exporters Only.

[[Page 48229]]

    OMB Number: 3048-0017.
    Type of Review: Regular.
    Need and Use: The ``Report of Premiums Payable for Exporters Only'' 
form is used by exporters to report and pay premiums on insured 
shipments to various foreign buyers under the terms of the policy and 
to certify that premiums have been correctly computed and remitted. 
Individual transactions that an exporter may have with the same foreign 
borrower can be sub-totaled and entered as a single line item for the 
specific month provided the length of payment term is identical. The 
use of sub-totals reduces the administrative burden on the exporter. 
The `Report of Premiums Payable for Exporters Only' is used by the Bank 
to determine the eligibility of the shipment(s) and to calculate the 
premium due to Ex-Im Bank for its support of the shipment(s) under its 
insurance program.
    Affected Public: This form affects entities involved in the export 
of U.S. goods and services.
    Annual Number of Respondents: 2,600.
    Estimated Time per Respondent: 15 minutes.
    Annual Burden Hours: 650 hours.
    Frequency of Reporting or Use: Monthly.

Government Expenses

    Reviewing Time per Year: 1,950 hours.
    Average Wages per Hour: $42.50.
    Average Cost per Year: $82,875.
    Benefits and Overhead: 20%.
    Total Government Cost: $99,450.

Bassam Doughman,
IT Specialist.
[FR Doc. 2017-22451 Filed 10-16-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 6690-01-P