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



Exhibit 12.1
 LodgeNet Interactive Corporation and Subsidiaries
Statement Regarding Computation of Ratios (Unaudited)
 Computation of Coverage of Fixed Charges
 2007
    
    
    2006
    
    
    2005
    
    
    2004
    
    
    2003Net (loss) income
    
    $
    (65,172
    )
    
    $
    1,841
    
    
    $
    (6,959
    )
    
    $
    (20,781
    )
    
    $
    (35,052
    )Add:Provision for income taxes
    
    
    (683
    )
    
    
    299
    
    
    
    450
    
    
    
    421
    
    
    
    459Fixed charges (see below)
    
    
    43,531
    
    
    
    27,470
    
    
    
    31,241
    
    
    
    33,946
    
    
    
    36,393Earnings available to cover
fixed charges
    
    $
    (22,324
    )
    
    $
    29,610
    
    
    $
    24,732
    
    
    $
    13,586
    
    
    $
    1,800Fixed charges (1):Interest
    
    $
    40,950
    
    
    $
    25,730
    
    
    $
    29,351
    
    
    $
    31,891
    
    
    $
    34,239Amortization of debt costs
    
    
    1,731
    
    
    
    1,495
    
    
    
    1,636
    
    
    
    1,734
    
    
    
    1,831Amortization of debt discount
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    82
    
    
    
    104Interest portion of rentals
    
    
    850
    
    
    
    245
    
    
    
    254
    
    
    
    239
    
    
    
    219Total fixed charges
    
    $
    43,531
    
    
    $
    27,470
    
    
    $
    31,241
    
    
    $
    33,946
    
    
    $
    36,393Earnings (deficiency) in the
coverage of fixed charges
    
    $
    (65,855
    )
    
    $
    2,140
    
    
    $
    (6,509
    )
    
    $
    (20,360
    )
    
    $
    (34,593
    )Ratio of earnings to fixed charges
    
    
    
    
    
    
    1.08
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
 
 (1)
    
    Fixed charges consist of interest on all indebtedness, including amortization of debt
issuance expense and capitalized interest, and one-third of rental expense (which is estimated
to represent the interest portion thereof).
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D18-3983

_____________________________

JAMES C. CURRY,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County.

Mark Borello, Judge.

October 25, 2019

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

WOLF, KELSEY, and WINOKUR, JJ., concur.

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________
2

Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Joel Arnold, Assistant Public 

Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
### IN THE TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10

- 13

- 00190

- CR

IN RE CHARLES ROBERT BLAKE

Original Proceeding

MEMORANDUM OPINION

This original proceeding, in which the pro se relator seeks habeas corpus relief in

the form of pretrial bail reduction, is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because this court

lacks original habeas corpus jurisdiction in criminal law matters. 1 Ex parte Hearon , 3

S.W.3d 650, 650 (Tex. App.

— Waco 1999, orig. proceeding); s ee T EX

. G OV ’ T C ODE A NN

. §

22.221(d) (West 2004) (providi ng appellate

- court jurisdiction to issue habeas corpus writ

only in an underlying civil case).

1 The petition for writ of habeas corpus lacks proof of service. A copy of all documents presented to the Court must be served on all parties ( e.g. , the trial court and the district attorney) and must contain proof of service. T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 9.5 , 52.2

. The petition also lacks most of the required contents. Id. 52.3, 52.7. To expedite this matter, we implement Rule of Appellate Procedure 2 to suspend these requirement s

. Id. 2.In re Charles Robert Blake Page 2 REX D. DAVIS Justice

Before Chief Justice Gray, Justice Davis , and Justice Scoggins Petition d ismissed Opinion delivered and filed June 27, 2013 Do not publish [ CR25]
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Jeremy Rayshard STANDIFER, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 09-50820

Summary Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Dec. 21, 2010.

Joseph H. Gay, Jr., Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, San Antonio, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

*869Brian Linn Gibson, Groesbeck, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Jeremy Rayshard Standifer, Seagoville, TX, pro se.

Before DAVIS, SMITH and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

The attorney appointed to represent Jeremy Rayshard Standifer has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with *Anders v. California,*386 U.S. 738, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493 (1967). Standifer has filed a response.

The record is insufficiently developed to allow consideration at this time of Standifer’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel. *See United States v. Higdon,*832 F.2d 312, 313-14 (5th Cir.1987).

Our independent review of the record, counsel’s briefs, and Standifer’s response discloses no nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. *See*5th Cir. R. 42.2. Standifer’s motion to dismiss counsel is DENIED. *See United States v. Wagner,*158 F.3d 901, 902-03 (5th Cir.1998).

*

 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.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          APR-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             AUG-03-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               NOV-01-1997
<CASH>                                       4,112,858
<SECURITIES>                                   140,164
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,782,443
<ALLOWANCES>                                 (250,000)
<INVENTORY>                                  3,669,075
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             9,687,144
<PP&E>                                       2,236,715
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,332,837
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              12,012,571
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        2,599,052
<BONDS>                                      4,750,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       100,941
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                12,012,571
<SALES>                                      3,504,172
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             3,504,172
<CGS>                                        1,534,253
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,534,253
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             4,944,791
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               250,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             107,704
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (3,693,275)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (3,693,275)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (3,693,275)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                    (.23)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.23)
        

</TABLE>
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Augustine PEREZ, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 10-6924.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted: Dec. 16, 2010.

Decided: Dec. 27, 2010.

Augustine Perez, Appellant Pro Se. Ray Burton Fitzgerald, Jr., Office of the United States Attorney, Ronald Mitchell Huber, Assistant United States Attorney, Charlottesville, Virginia, for Appellee.

Before GREGORY, DUNCAN, and DAVIS, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

PER CURIAM:

Augustine Perez seeks to appeal the district court’s order construing his filing as a 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2010) motion and denying relief. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (2006). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2006). When the district court denies *780relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. *Slack v. McDaniel,*529 U.S. 473, 484, 120 S.Ct. 1595, 146 L.Ed.2d 542 (2000); *see Miller-El v. Cockrell,*537 U.S. 322, 336-38, 123 S.Ct. 1029, 154 L.Ed.2d 931 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the motion states a debatable claim of the denial of a constitutional right. *Slack,*529 U.S. at 484-85, 120 S.Ct. 1595. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Perez has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*DISMISSED.*
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1649

To suspend temporarily the duty on a-Isopropyl-a [(N-methyl-Nhomoveratryl)-g-aminopropyl]-3, 4-Dimethoxy-phenylacetonitril-hydrochloride.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

APRIL 2, 1993

Mr. TAUZIN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee

on Ways and Means

A BILL

To suspend temporarily the duty on a-Isopropyl-a [(N-methyl-N-homoveratryl)-g-aminopropyl]-3, 4-Dimethoxyphenylacetonitril-hydrochloride.

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

3 SECTION 1. A-ISOPROPYL-A [(N-METHYL-N-HOMOVER4 ATRYL)-G-AMINOPROPYL]-3, 4-DIMETHOXY5 PHENYLACETONITRIL-HYDROCHLORIDE.

6 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subchapter II of chapter 99 of

7 the Harmonized Tariff Schedule of the United States is

8 amended by inserting in numerical sequence the following

9 new heading:
2

•HR 1649 IH

‘‘ 9902.31.12 a-Isopropyl-a [(Nmethyl-Nhomoveratryl)-gaminopropyl]-3, 4-

Dimethoxy-phenylacetonitril-hydrochloride. (CAS No.

152–11–4) (provided

for in subheading

2926.90.35) .............. Free No change No change On or before

12/31/97 ’’.

1 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—

2 (1) IN GENERAL.—The amendment made by

3 subsection (a) applies with respect to goods entered,

4 or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on

5 or after the 15th day after the date of the enact6 ment of this Act.

7 (2) RETROACTIVE APPLICATION TO CERTAIN

8 ENTRIES.—Notwithstanding section 514 of the Tar9 iff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1514) or any other provi10 sion of law, upon proper request filed with the ap11 propriate customs officer before the 90th day after

12 the date of the enactment of this Act, any entry, or

13 withdrawal from warehouse for consumption, of any

14 goods described in heading 9902.31.12 of the Har15 monized Tariff Schedule of the United States (as

16 added by subsection (a)) that was made—

17 (A) after December 31, 1992; and

18 (B) before the 15th day after the date of

19 the enactment of this Act;
3

•HR 1649 IH

1 shall be liquidated or reliquidated as though such

2 entry or withdrawal occurred on the 15th day after

3 the date of the enactment of this Act.

Æ
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 18-1404

___________________________

United States of America

lllllllllllllllllllllPlaintiff - Appellee

v.

Gabriel Mangum

lllllllllllllllllllllDefendant - Appellant

____________

Appeal from United States District Court 

for the Northern District of Iowa - Cedar Rapids

____________

Submitted: September 4, 2018

Filed: September 10, 2018

[Unpublished]

____________

Before BENTON, SHEPHERD, and STRAS, Circuit Judges.

____________

PER CURIAM.

Gabriel Mangum appeals the Guidelines-range sentence the district court

1

imposed after he pled guilty to an escape charge. Mangum’s counsel has moved to

The Honorable Linda R. Reade, United States District Judge for the Northern 1

District of Iowa.
withdraw and submitted a brief under Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967),

arguing that the sentence wassubstantively unreasonable. Having jurisdiction under

28 U.S.C. § 1291, this court affirms. 

After careful review of the record, this court concludes that the district court

did not impose an unreasonable sentence, as there was no indication that it

overlooked a relevant 18 U.S.C. § 3553(a) factor, or committed a clear error of

judgment in weighing relevant factors. See United States v. David, 682 F.3d 1074,

1077 (8th Cir. 2012) (standard of review); United States v. Wohlman, 651 F.3d 878,

887 (8th Cir. 2011). The sentence was within the Guidelines range. See United

States v. Callaway, 762 F.3d 754, 760 (8th Cir. 2014). This court has independently

reviewed the record pursuant to Penson v. Ohio, 488 U.S. 75 (1988), and finds no

nonfrivolous issues for appeal. 

The judgment is affirmed. Counsel’s motion to withdraw is granted.

______________________________

-2-
exv10w4



 





EXHIBIT 10.4




FORM OF IRREVOCABLE PROXY




     In connection with the purchase of                      shares of common stock of HAPC, Inc., a Delaware
corporation (the “Company”) by I-Flow Corporation, a Delaware corporation (“I-Flow”), pursuant to
the Share Purchase Agreement dated as of October 18, 2007 (the “Agreement”) between I-Flow and the
undersigned, the undersigned hereby irrevocably (to the fullest extent permitted by law) appoints
I-Flow Corporation, Donald M. Earhart and Jack H. Halperin as the sole and exclusive
attorneys-in-fact and proxies of the undersigned, with full power of substitution and
resubstitution, to vote and exercise all voting rights of the undersigned with respect to the
Shares acquired pursuant to the Agreement (the “Shares”), including, without limitation, all voting
rights relating to the Company’s Special Annual Meeting of Stockholders that convened on September
26, 2007 and was adjourned to October 19, 2007, and at any further adjournment thereof. Upon the
execution of this Proxy, any and all prior proxies given by the undersigned with respect to any of
the Shares are hereby revoked and the undersigned agrees not to grant any subsequent proxies with
respect to the voting rights granted by this Proxy until after the Expiration Time (as defined
below).



     This Proxy is irrevocable (to the fullest extent permitted by law) and is coupled with an
interest. As used herein, the term “Expiration Time” shall mean the tenth anniversary of the date
of this Proxy.



     Each of the attorneys-in-fact and proxies named above is hereby authorized and empowered by
the undersigned, at any time prior to the Expiration Time, to act as the undersigned’s
attorney-in-fact and proxy to vote the Shares, and to exercise all voting, consent and similar
rights of the undersigned with respect to the Shares (including, without limitation, the power to
execute and deliver written consents), at every annual, special or adjourned meeting of
stockholders of the Company and in every written consent in lieu of such meeting.



     Any obligation of the undersigned hereunder shall be binding upon the successors, heirs and
legal or personal representatives of the undersigned, and shall survive the death or incapacity of
the undersigned.



     This Proxy shall terminate, and be of no further force and effect, automatically at the
Expiration Time.



	 	 	 	 	 	 
	WITNESS:  


[                    ]	 	BENEFICIAL HOLDER:


[                    ]

 	 
	 	 	By:  	 	 
	 	 	 	Name:  	 	 
	 	 	 	Title:
| 1. | The      Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of the Company for the quarter ended      December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission      (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or      Section 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/ Clark      Wilson                      |   |
|--------|--------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Clark    Wilson                            |   |
|   | President and Chief      Executive Officer |   |
|   | February 12,      2008                     |   |

|   | /s/ Cindy      Hammes        |   |
|--------|------------------------------|--------|
|   | Cindy    Hammes              |   |
|   | Vice      President, Finance |   |
|   | February 12,      2008       |   |

----
SCHEDULE N Export Gross Receipts of the DISC

(Form 1120-DISC) and Related U.S. Persons
Department of the Treasury > See separate instructions.
Internal Revenue Service > _ Attach this schedule to Form 1120-DISC.

OMB No. 1545-0124

1984

Name as shown on Form 1120-DISC

Export gross receipts of the DISC by product
code (See specific instructions)

Product
code

Percent of
export gross receipts

Employer identification number

number

Export Gross Receipts in the 1984 Tax Year (See specific instructions)

1. Export gross

Export

gross receipts of

elated U.S. persons

receipts of
the DISC

2. Related
DISCs

3. All other related
U.S. persons

Section A.—Related U.S. Persons, Except DISCs, in Your Controlled Group

(Attach more copies of this schedule if necessary)

Name Address Identifying number
Section B.—DISCs in Your Controlled Group
Name Address Employer identication no.

For Paperwork Reduction Act Notice, see page 1 of the instructions for Form 1120-DISC.

‘Schedule N (Form 1120-DISC) 1984
**Certification of the Chief Executive Officer** **Exhibit 31.1**
I, Douglas D. Burkett, certify that:
1.  I have reviewed this report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended January 31, 2005 of Zila,Inc.; 2.  Based on my knowledge, this report for the quarter ended January 31, 2005 does not containany untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make thestatements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report; 3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report; 4.  The registrant’s other certifying officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintainingdisclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) forthe registrant and have:
          a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure thatmaterial information 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) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectivenessof the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period coveredby this report based on such evaluation; and
          c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recentfiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely tomaterially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting;and
5.  The registrant’s other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the auditcommittee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):
          a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonablylikely 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 or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal controlsover financial reporting. Date: March 9, 2005 /s/ Douglas D. Burkett, Ph. D.Douglas D. Burkett, Ph. D.Chief Executive Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000828191
<NAME> 88A
<MULTIPLIER> 1

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                         132,191
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  105,172
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               237,363
<PP&E>                                       7,123,321
<DEPRECIATION>                               6,045,396
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,315,288
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           25,004
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,290,284
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,315,288
<SALES>                                        271,361
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               273,892
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  243,270
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 30,622
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             30,622
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    30,622
<EPS-BASIC>                                     3.39
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>