alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
### §8912. Agricultural biosecurity communication center

#### (a) Establishment

The Secretary shall establish a communication center within the Department to—

(1) collect and disseminate information and prepare for an agricultural disease emergency, agroterrorist act, or other threat to agricultural biosecurity; and

(2) coordinate activities described in paragraph (1) among agencies and offices within the Department.

#### (b) Relation to existing DHS communication systems

#### (1) Consistency and coordination

The communication center established under subsection (a) shall, to the maximum extent practicable, share and coordinate the dissemination of timely information with the Department of Homeland Security and other communication systems of appropriate Federal departments and agencies.

#### (2) Avoiding redundancies

Paragraph (1) shall not be construed to impede, conflict with, or duplicate the communications activities performed by the Secretary of Homeland Security under any provision of law.

#### (c) Authorization of appropriations

There are authorized to be appropriated to carry out this section—

(1) such sums as are necessary for each of fiscal years 2008 through 2013; and

(2) $2,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2014 through 2023.

(Pub. L. 110–234, title XIV, §14112, May 22, 2008, 122 Stat. 1455; Pub. L. 110–246, §4(a), title XIV, §14112, June 18, 2008, 122 Stat. 1664, 2217; Pub. L. 113–79, title VII, §7501, Feb. 7, 2014, 128 Stat. 900; Pub. L. 115–334, title VII, §7401, Dec. 20, 2018, 132 Stat. 4817.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Pub. L. 110–234 and Pub. L. 110–246 enacted identical sections. Pub. L. 110–234 was repealed by section 4(a) of Pub. L. 110–246.

#### Amendments

2018—Subsec. (c)(2). Pub. L. 115–334 substituted "2023" for "2018".

2014—Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 113–79 amended subsec. (c) generally. Prior to amendment, text read as follows: "There is authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out this section for each of fiscal years 2008 through 2012."

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date

Enactment of this section and repeal of Pub. L. 110–234 by Pub. L. 110–246 effective May 22, 2008, the date of enactment of Pub. L. 110–234, see section 4 of Pub. L. 110–246, set out as a note under section 8701 of this title.

#### Definition of "Secretary"

"Secretary" as meaning the Secretary of Agriculture, see section 8701 of this title.
```

            PROVIDENT FINANCIAL GROUP, INC. AND SUBSIDIARIES

EXHIBIT 12.1 - COMPUTATION OF RATIOS OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
-----------------------------------------------------------------

                                                                Year Ended December 31,
                                                    -----------------------------------------------
(In Thousands Except Ratios)                           2000      1999      1998      1997      1996
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Earnings:
---------
Net income                                           73,614   150,949   122,427   114,715    80,622
Total provision (benefit) for income taxes           44,331    82,940    65,201    61,049    42,613
Income before income tax provision (benefit)        117,945   233,889   187,628   175,764   123,235
Fixed charges, excluding interest on deposits       207,369   129,583   133,724    93,955    93,213
Fixed charges, including interest on deposits       587,708   398,383   386,769   347,410   307,099
Adjusted earnings, excluding interest on deposits   325,314   363,472   321,352   269,719   216,448
Adjusted earnings, including interest on deposits   705,653   632,272   574,397   523,174   430,334

Fixed Charges:
--------------
Total interest Expense                              587,708   398,383   386,769   347,410   307,099
Interest on deposits                                380,339   268,800   253,045   253,455   213,886
Fixed charges, excluding interest on deposits       207,369   129,583   133,724    93,955    93,213
Fixed charges, including interest on deposits       587,708   398,383   386,769   347,410   307,099

Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges:
-----------------------------------
Excluding interest on deposits                         1.57      2.80      2.40      2.87      2.32
Including interest on deposits                         1.20      1.59      1.49      1.51      1.40
```
1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS 

In re Innovatio IP Ventures, LLC, Patent 

Litigation 

 Case No. 1:11-cv-09308 

Judge James F. Holderman 

Magistrate Judge Sidney Schenkier This Document Relates To: 

1:12-cv-00428 (originally 3:11-cv-00643 

(WDWI)) 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE 

 On this day, Innovatio IP Ventures, LLC, Innovatio Management, LLC and 

Noel B. Whitley (collectively, “Innovatio”) and Best Western Arrowhead Lodge & 

Suites, Best Western Bluffview Inn & Suites, Best Western Bridgeview Motor Inn, Best 

Western Claridge Motor Inn, Best Western Park Oasis Inn, Best Western Plus InnTowner 

Hotel and the Highland Club, Best Western Plus La Crosse, and Best Western Plus Trail 

Lodge Hotel & Suites (collectively “Defendants”) announced to the Court that they have 

settled their respective claims for relief asserted in the above-captioned actions. The 

Court, having considered this request, is of the opinion that their request for dismissal 

should be GRANTED. 

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that all claims and counterclaims by Innovatio 

against Defendants and by Defendants against Innovatio in the above-captioned actions, 

including Case Nos. 1:11-cv-09308 (consolidated) and 1:12-cv-00428 (originally 3:11-

cv-00643 (WDWI)), are dismissed, with prejudice to the re-filing of same. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all attorneys’ fees, costs of court and expenses 

shall be borne by the party incurring the same. 
2 

This is a final judgment as to the parties herein. Because there are no remaining 

claims in Case No. 12-cv-00428, the Court closes this case in its entirety. 

6/9/14 _________________________________ 

James F. Holderman 

United States District Judge
Exhibit
4(a)-3


AMENDMENT
NO. 2




TO





PPL
EMPLOYEE STOCK OWNERSHIP PLAN





WHEREAS, PPL Services Corporation
("PPL") has adopted the PPL Employee Stock Ownership Plan ("Plan") effective
July 1, 2000, on behalf of various affiliated companies; and




WHEREAS, the Plan was amended and
restated effective January 1, 2002 and subsequently amended by Amendment No. 1;
and




WHEREAS, the Company desires to
further amend the Plan;




NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby
amended as follows:




I.             
Effective January 1, 2008, Appendix A is amended to read as
follows:




Appendix
A




Participating
Company




Name
            Effective
      Date1.
            PPL
      Services Corporation
            July
      1, 20002.
            PPL
      Electric Utilities Corporation
            January
      1, 19753.
            PPL
      EnergyPlus, LLC
            July
      14, 19984.
            PPL
      Generation, LLC
            July
      1, 20005.
            PPL
      Brunner Island, LLC
            July
      1, 20006.
            PPL
      Holtwood, LLC
            July
      1, 20007.
            PPL
      Martins Creek, LLC
            July
      1, 20008.
            PPL
      Montour, LLC
            July
      1, 20009.
            PPL
      Susquehanna, LLC
            July
      1, 200010.
            PPLSolutions,
      LLC
            January
      1, 200211.
            PPL
      Telcom, LLC
            February
      5, 200112.
            Lower
      Mount Bethel Energy, LLC
            September
      30, 200213.
            PPL
      Edgewood Energy, LLC
            April
      1, 200314.
            PPL
      Maine, LLC
            April
      1, 200315.
            PPL
      Wallingford Energy, LLC
            April
      1, 200316.
            PPL
      Development Company, LLC
            January
      1, 200617.
            PPL
      Global, LLC
            January
      1, 200618.
            PPL
      Energy Services Group, LLC
            September
      25, 200619.
            PPL
      Interstate Energy Company
            January
      1, 2008 
 
 II.
              Except
      as provided for in this Amendment No. 2, all other provisions of the Plan
      shall remain in full force and effect.
  IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Amendment
No. 2 is executed this _____ day of ________________, 2007.
  
 PPL SERVICES
CORPORATION
 
 By:_______________________________
 Stephen R. Russo
 Vice President-Human Resources &
Services
NOTE: This disposition is nonprecedential.

United States Court of Appeals 

for the Federal Circuit ______________________ 

ACTIVE NETWORK, LLC,

Plaintiff-Appellant

v.

UNITED STATES, BOOZ ALLEN HAMILTON, INC.,

Defendants-Appellees

______________________ 

2017-2135

______________________ 

Appeal from the United States Court of Federal 

Claims in No. 1:16-cv-01071-TCW, Judge Thomas C. 

Wheeler. 

______________________ 

JUDGMENT

______________________ 

ERIC J. MARCOTTE, Vedder Price PC, Washington, DC, 

argued for plaintiff-appellant. Also represented by KELLY 

E. BUROKER, TAMARA DROUBI; DANIEL RUBEN FORMAN,

JAMES G. PEYSTER, Crowell & Moring, LLP, Washington, 

DC.

 MOLLIE LENORE FINNAN, Commercial Litigation 

Branch, Civil Division, United States Department of 

Justice, Washington, DC, argued for defendant-appellee 
 

United States. Also represented by CHAD A. READLER,

ROBERT E. KIRSCHMAN, JR., DOUGLAS K. MICKLE. 

 MARK COLLEY, Arnorld & Porter Kaye Scholer, LLP, 

Washington, DC, argued for defendant-appellee Booz 

Allen Hamilton, Inc. Also represented by AMANDA J.

SHERWOOD, STUART TURNER. 

______________________ 

THIS CAUSE having been heard and considered, it is

ORDERED and ADJUDGED: 

 PER CURIAM (REYNA, BRYSON, and STOLL, Circuit 

Judges).

AFFIRMED. See Fed. Cir. R. 36.

 ENTERED BY ORDER OF THE COURT

 April 9, 2018 /s/ Peter R. Marksteiner 

 Date Peter R. Marksteiner

 Clerk of Court
Order entered October 7, 2013

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-13-00430-CR

DAVID CARL SWINGLE, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 382nd Judicial District Court

Rockwall County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2-06-16

ORDER

The Court REINSTATES the appeal.

On September 12, 2013, we denied appellant’s September 10, 2013 second motion to 

extend time to file his brief and ordered the trial court to make findings. On October 1, 2013, we 

received appellant’s brief, together with an extension motion. Therefore, in the interest of 

expediting the appeal, we VACATE the September 12, 2013 order to the extent it requires the 

trial court to make findings.

We GRANT the October 1, 2013 extension motion and ORDER appellant’s brief filed 

as of the date of this order.
We DENY appellant’s September 25, 2013 pro se motions to dismiss counsel and 

proceed pro se and to extend time to file his brief. See Martinez v. Court of Appeals of Cal., 

Fourth Appellate Dist., 528 U.S. 152 (2000).

/s/ LANA MYERS 

JUSTICE
100 FY 2018 AGENCY FINANCIAL REPORT | U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

SUMMARY OF FINANCIAL STATEMENT AUDIT AND 

MANAGEMENT ASSURANCES

The following tables provide a summarized report on the Department’s financial statement audit and its management 

assurances. For more details, the auditors’ report can be found beginning on page 76 and the Department’s management 

assurances on page 16.

SUMMARY OF FINANCIAL STATEMENT AUDIT

Audit Opinion: Unmodified

Restatement: No

Material Weaknesses Beginning Balance New Resolved Consolidated Ending Balance

Total Material Weaknesses 0 1 0 0 1

SUMMARY OF MANAGEMENT ASSURANCES

Effectiveness of Internal Control over Financial Reporting—Federal Managers’ Financial Integrity Act 

(FMFIA) 2

Statement of Assurance: Unmodified

Material 

Weaknesses Beginning Balance New Resolved Consolidated Reassessed Ending Balance

Total Material 

Weaknesses 0 0 0 0 0 0

The Department had no material weaknesses in the design or operation of the internal control over financial reporting.

Effectiveness of Internal Control over Operations—FMFIA 2 

Statement of Assurance: Unmodified

Material 

Weaknesses Beginning Balance New Resolved Consolidated Reassessed Ending Balance

Total Material 

Weaknesses 0 0 0 0 0 0

Conformance with Financial Management System Requirements—FMFIA 4

Statement of Assurance: The Department systems conform to financial management system requirements.

Nonconformances Beginning Balance New Resolved Consolidated Reassessed Ending Balance

Total 

Nonconformances 0 0 0 0 0 0

Compliance with Federal Financial Management Improvement Act (FFMIA)

Agency Auditor

1. System Requirements No lack of compliance noted No lack of compliance noted

2. Federal Accounting Standards No lack of compliance noted No lack of compliance noted

3. United States Standard General Ledger at Transaction Level No lack of compliance noted No lack of compliance noted
Regulatory Evaluation

Docket No. FAA-2012-0639 Directorate Identifier: 2012-NM-005-AD

If you make changes to the values in the table below, you must ensure the totals update accordingly. If 

they do not, click (or Tab) into and then out of the changed cell.

Estimated Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection, 

replacement)

Do not include oncondition costs here

Costs per Product (e.g., aircraft, engine, 

propeller, appliance)

Work-hours

(include 

access, testing, 

and close-up)

Labor 

cost 

(@$85/h

our)

Parts Cost Total Costs 

(labor + 

parts)

Number of 

U.S. 

Registered

Products

Total Cost 

for U.S. Fleet

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00 $ 0.00

The known number of products in compliance:

Total Costs of compliance for U.S. fleet: $ 0

Costs covered under warranty (if known) $

On-Condition Costs:

Action

(e.g., Inspection, 

replacement)

Work-hours

(include access, 

testing, and closeup)

Labor cost 

(@$85/hour)

Parts Cost Cost per Product

$ 0.00 $0 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

$ 0.00 $ 0.00

Special considerations for Economic Analysis (Use this field to explain anything in the Estimated Costs table 

that was assumed or might not be obvious. This field can also be used to explain warranty costs):
Executive Order 12866:

Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”?

YES* NO 

*Explanation: 

DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:

Is the AD significant? 

YES* NO 

*Explanation: 

Regulatory Flexibility Act:

Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? Explain for 

either a Yes or No answer.

YES NO 

Explanation: 

Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:

This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. Is it appropriate to include specific requirements for 

aircraft operated in Alaska where aviation might be the only mode of transportation?

YES* NO 

*Explanation:
#### § 989.12 AF Form 813, Request for Environmental Impact Analysis.

The Air Force uses AF Form 813 to document the need for environmental analysis or for certain CATEX determinations for proposed actions. The form helps narrow and focus the issues to potential environmental impacts. AF Form 813 must be retained with the EA or EIS to record the focusing of environmental issues.

[64 FR 38129, July 15, 1999, as amended at 66 FR 16868, Mar. 28, 2001]
### §57a. Agreements with cotton associations, etc., in foreign countries to establish cotton standards

The Secretary of Agriculture is authorized to effectuate agreements with cotton associations, cotton exchanges, and other cotton organizations in foreign countries, for (1) the adoption, use, and observance of universal standards of cotton classification, (2) the arbitration or settlement of disputes with respect thereto, and (3) the preparation, distribution, inspection, and protection of the practical forms or copies thereof under such agreements.

(Mar. 4, 1923, ch. 288, §6(b), as added Sept. 21, 1944, ch. 412, title IV, §401(b), 58 Stat. 738.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Section was enacted as subsec. (b) of section 6 of act Mar. 4, 1923, by act Sept. 21, 1944, §401(b). Subsec. (a) of section 6 is classified to sections 56 and 57 of this title.
### §5105. Report

Not later than 2 years after December 20, 2018, the Secretary shall submit to Congress a report describing—

(1) the effectiveness of the State mediation programs receiving matching grants under this chapter;

(2) recommendations for improving the delivery of mediation services to producers;

(3) the steps being taken to ensure that State mediation programs receive timely funding under this chapter; and

(4) the savings to the States as a result of having a mediation program.

(Pub. L. 100–233, title V, §505, Jan. 6, 1988, 101 Stat. 1664; Pub. L. 103–354, title II, §282(d), (f)(1), Oct. 13, 1994, 108 Stat. 3235; Pub. L. 115–334, title V, §5402(b), Dec. 20, 2018, 132 Stat. 4675.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2018—Pub. L. 115–334 amended section generally. Prior to amendment, section required a report related to mediation programs no later than Jan. 1, 1998.

1994—Pub. L. 103–354 in introductory provisions substituted "1998" for "1990", in par. (1) struck out "agricultural loan" before "mediation programs", and in par. (3) substituted "a mediation" for "an agricultural loan mediation".
1315.606-2 Evaluation. ( a ) If the contracting officer determines, upon initial review, that the unsolicited proposal meets all criteria in FAR 15.606-1, the contracting officer will acknowledge receipt of the proposal, coordinate evaluation with the program office, and provide to the submitter an estimated date that evaluation of the proposal is expected to be completed. The contracting officer shall transmit the proposal to the program office for evaluation, marking it in accord with FAR 15.609(d). If the estimated date for completion of the evaluation cannot be met, the submitter should be informed in a timely manner and provided with a revised evaluation completion date.
( b ) The evaluating office shall not reproduce or disseminate the proposal to other offices without the consent of the contracting officer. If the evaluating office requires additional information from the proposer, the evaluator shall request the information through the contracting officer, who will contact the proposer. The evaluator shall not communicate directly with the proposer.
( c ) Evaluators shall notify the contracting officer of their recommendations when the evaluation is complete. Following evaluation, the contracting officer shall proceed in accord with FAR 15.607.
Certification
 Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes  Oxley Act of 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Emerson Radio Corp.;2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material
fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the
circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the
period covered by this report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included
in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of
operations 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
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e)
and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial reporting (as
defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:
     5.
    
    The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and
the audit committee of registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
   Date: August 14, 2008
    /s/  Adrian MaAdrian MaChief Executive Officer
### §7631. Agricultural biotechnology research and development for developing countries

#### (a) Eligible entity

In this section, the term "eligible entity" means—

(A) an institution of higher education that offers a curriculum in agriculture or the biosciences;

(B) a nonprofit organization; or

(C) a consortium of for-profit institutions and agricultural research institutions.

#### (b) Grant program

#### (1) In general

The Secretary (acting through the Foreign Agricultural Service) shall establish and administer a program to make competitive grants to eligible entities to develop agricultural biotechnology for developing countries.

#### (2) Use of funds

Funds provided to an eligible entity under this section may be used for projects that use biotechnology to—

(A) enhance the nutritional content of agricultural products that can be grown in developing countries;

(B) increase the yield and safety of agricultural products that can be grown in developing countries;

(C) increase the yield of agricultural products that are drought- and stress-resistant and that can be grown in developing countries;

(D) extend the growing range of crops that can be grown in developing countries;

(E) enhance the shelf-life of fruits and vegetables grown in developing countries;

(F) develop environmentally sustainable agricultural products that can be grown in developing countries; and

(G) develop vaccines to immunize against life-threatening illnesses and other medications that can be administered by consuming genetically-engineered agricultural products.

#### (c) Authorization of appropriations

There are authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary to carry out this section for each of fiscal years 2002 through 2012.

(Pub. L. 105–185, title IV, §411, as added Pub. L. 107–171, title VII, §7505, May 13, 2002, 116 Stat. 466; amended Pub. L. 110–234, title VII, §7310, May 22, 2008, 122 Stat. 1243; Pub. L. 110–246, §4(a), title VII, §7310, June 18, 2008, 122 Stat. 1664, 2004.)

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Codification

Pub. L. 110–234 and Pub. L. 110–246 made identical amendments to this section. The amendments by Pub. L. 110–234 were repealed by section 4(a) of Pub. L. 110–246.

#### Amendments

2008—Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 110–246, §7310, substituted "2012" for "2007".

#### **Statutory Notes and Related Subsidiaries**

#### Effective Date of 2008 Amendment

Amendment of this section and repeal of Pub. L. 110–234 by Pub. L. 110–246 effective May 22, 2008, the date of enactment of Pub. L. 110–234, see section 4 of Pub. L. 110–246, set out as an Effective Date note under section 8701 of this title.