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

                                                                      EXHIBIT 15



TXU Gas Company:

We have made a review, in accordance with standards established by the American
Institute of Certified Public Accountants, of the unaudited condensed
consolidated interim financial information of TXU Gas Company and subsidiaries
(TXU Gas) for the periods ended March 31, 2001 and 2000, as indicated in our
report dated May 11, 2001; because we did not perform an audit, we expressed no
opinion on that information.

We are aware that our report referred to above, which is included in TXU Gas'
Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2001, is
incorporated by reference in Registration Statements No. 333-43811, 333-85769,
333-85769-01, 333-85769-02, and 333-85769-03 on Form S-3 and Registration
Statement No. 333-43811-01 on Post Effective Amendment No. 1 to Form S-3, of TXU
Gas.

We also are aware that the aforementioned report, pursuant to Rule 436(c) under
the Securities Act of 1933, is not considered a part of the Registration
Statement prepared or certified by an accountant or a report prepared or
certified by an accountant within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of that Act.


Dallas, Texas
May 11, 2001
#### 1414.407 Mistakes in bids.
#### 1436.270-3 Part II—Contract clauses.

For Section I, Contract clause, include any clauses required by law or by the FAR (including subpart 36.5), the DIAR (including subpart 1436.5), and any additional bureau-wide or local clauses expected to be included in any resulting contract which are not included in other sections of the uniform contract format.
**MEMORANDUM**

TO:              The Assistant Secretary for 

                          Special Education and Rehabilitative Services

                    The Assistant Secretary for

                          Elementary and Secondary Education

                    The Assistant Secretary for Career, Technical,

                          and Adult Education  **(**

FROM:The Secretary 

SUBJECT:Delegation of Authority over Certain Appeals Pursuant to Section 432(b) of the General Education Provisions Act 

I.DELEGATION OF AUTHORITY

Under the authority vested in me by section 412 of the Department of Education Organization Act, 20 U.S.C. §3472, I hereby delegate to you, your successor in function, or to anyone serving for you in an acting capacity or officially performing the functions and duties of your position, the authority to take any appropriate action under section 432(b) of the General Education Provisions Act, 20 U.S.C. §1231b-2(b), including, but not limited to, determining whether the final action of a State educational agency taken under an applicable program for which your Principal Office has administrative responsibility as provided by law or by delegation of authority pursuant to law was contrary to Federal law or applicable rules, regulations or guidelines and, if so, issuing an order to the State educational agency prescribing appropriate action to be taken by such agency, as well as issuing interim orders to State educational agencies pending appeal or review.

Unless otherwise noted in future delegations of authority, amendments to the authority cited herein are included within the scope of this delegation.

II.RESERVATIONS

None.

III.REDELEGATION

You may not redelegate this authority.

IV.CERTIFICATION AND EFFECTIVE DATE

This delegation is effective upon certification by the Department's Delegations Control Officer.  I hereby ratify actions within the scope of this delegation taken by you, your predecessors in function, or anyone serving in an acting capacity or officially performing the functions and duties of your position, which involved the exercise of the authorities delegated herein, prior to the date of the certification of this delegation.

____________-s-_______________

      Arne Duncan

OGC Clearance and Date:  Deborah Friendly 5/1/14  

Certified Date:   June 13, 2014

Departmental Delegations Control Officer: Bruce L. Monblatt   

Control Number:   EA/EV/93
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                       2,351,879
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  204,542
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                      55,173,438
<DEPRECIATION>                            (32,181,184)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              32,592,153
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                     36,666,074
<COMMON>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                32,592,153
<SALES>                                     14,855,652
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            15,582,063
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            10,181,277
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              3,808,175
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          1,592,611
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 1,592,611
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
###### Editorial Note on Part 75

#### Editorial Note:

The provisions of this part marked [Statutory Provision] appear in Title III of the Federal Coal Mine Health and Safety Act of 1969.

#### § 75.401-1 Excessive amounts of dust.

The term “excessive amounts of dust” means coal and float coal dust in the air in such amounts as to create the potential of an explosion hazard.
**Event:**A Remembrance Ceremony to be observed by schools prior to Memorial Day sponsored by the *White House Commission on the National Moment of Remembrance*.

**Purpose:**To inform students across the country of the *National Moment of Remembrance* and the importance of honoring those who died for their freedom and encourage the participation of students and their families in this act of national unity at 3 p.m. on Memorial Day.

**When:**Before Memorial Day, at a time designated by the school.  

**Duration:**Ten minutes

**Place:**Either: individual classroom, school auditorium or at school’s flagpole.  

**SCRIPT**

**READER 1:**For 136 years, our Nation has observed a day to honor those who died for our freedom.  It is called Memorial Day and this year it is on Monday, May 31.  Most of us think of Memorial Day as a day of swimming and barbeques, but it’s much more important than that.  The purpose of the original “Decoration Day,” as it was called in 1868, was to decorate the graves of the men who died during the Civil War.  The tradition has been carried through all the wars since.

Today, we have a reminder of why Memorial Day is so important.  Many of us heard that Pat Tillman died late last month.  Corporal Tillman’s story is just one that should make us think.  Pat was a pro-football player with a multi-million dollar contract.  He gave it up to join the Army to serve his country.  Once in the Army, Tillman trained for and became a Ranger, one of the most dangerous Army jobs.

On April 24, Pat Tillman gave his life in Afghanistan defending us from terrorism.  He was killed in action and became a national hero.  The truth is, he was a hero before he was killed, just as all who fight for us are heroes.  They give their lives so that we can enjoy the pool and barbeque and all the other things that we love.

Please pause for a moment on Memorial Day at 3 p.m. to remember our heroes.

**READER 2:**The casualties of war are not only those who died in battle but also the families they left behind.  President Abraham Lincoln, our 16th President, wrote of “...the solemn pride that must be yours to have laid so costly a sacrifice upon the altar of freedom,” in a letter during the Civil War to a mother who lost five sons. 

**READER 3:**And now we are proud to begin our Roll Call of Remembrance, which pays tribute to all those who died in our wars, conflicts and incidents.

****With honor and pride, we remember those who died in the:

****Revolutionary War

War of 1812

Mexican War

Civil War

Spanish-American War

World War I

World War II

Korean War

Vietnam War

Gulf War

Conflicts and Incidents

Peacekeeping Missions

War on Terrorism

**READER 4:**On Memorial Day, for the *National Moment of Remembrance*, wherever you are, at 3 p.m., stop whatever you are doing.  Place your hand over your heart, as a gesture of gratitude and respect, and remember those men and women who died for us.    

Instructions: Each reader should have a card with the instructions on it.

Instructions: As a student reads the name of a war, a bell is rung.  We suggest using 12 student readers.

2
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE Northern District of Illinois − CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 5.1.1

Eastern Division

EOS GmbH Electro Optical Systems

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 1:12−cv−01582

Honorable Joan B. Gottschall

Phenix Systems, et al.

Defendant.

NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRY

This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Thursday, September 19,2013:

 MINUTE entry before Honorable John Z. Lee: Status hearing held on 9/19/13. The

parties report the case has settled. This case is dismissed with prejudice with each party to

bear their own cost and fees. Civil case terminated.Mailed notice(ca, )

ATTENTION: This notice is being sent pursuant to Rule 77(d) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure or Rule 49(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. It was

generated by CM/ECF, the automated docketing system used to maintain the civil and

criminal dockets of this District. If an order or other document is enclosed, please refer to

it for additional information.

For scheduled events, motion practices, recent opinions and other information, visit our

web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov.

Case: 1:12-cv-01582 Document #: 71 Filed: 09/19/13 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:422
October 16 , 2014



### JUDGMENT 

## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

HIRAM BROWN , Appellant
NO. 14

- 12

- 00833

- CR V. NO. 14

- 12

- 00834

- CR

THE STATE OF TEXAS , Appel lee

________________________________ This cause was heard on the transcript of the record of the court below. Having considered the record, this Court holds that there was no error in the judgment. The Court orders the judgment AFFIRMED

.
We further o rder this decision certified below for observance.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE Northern District of Illinois − CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 5.1.1

Eastern Division

Namon Kent

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 1:12−cv−01411

Honorable Ronald A. Guzman

Chase Bank USA, N.A., et al.

Defendant.

NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRY

This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Monday, April 15, 2013:

 MINUTE entry before Honorable Ronald A. Guzman: Chase Bank's motion to

enforce and motion to dismiss [57−1] is entered and continued. On October 11, 2012, the

plaintiff was given leave to file an amended complaint to address a specific issue and, if

necessary, to include any newly discovered facts. The plaintiff's second amended

complaint is 42 pages long and includes fifteen causes of action as well as allegations

against Chase Bank and 39 named "Doe defendants" as well as 60 unnamed Does. The

plaintiff is directed to review the allegations and causes of action in his second amended

complaint and remove any surplusage. Failure to do so may result in sanctions. The

plaintiff's third amended complaint shall be filed no later than May 6, 2013. Status and

motion hearing set for May 9, 2013 at 9:30 a.m. Mailed notice (cjg, )

ATTENTION: This notice is being sent pursuant to Rule 77(d) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure or Rule 49(c) of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure. It was

generated by CM/ECF, the automated docketing system used to maintain the civil and

criminal dockets of this District. If a minute order or other document is enclosed, please

refer to it for additional information.

For scheduled events, motion practices, recent opinions and other information, visit our

web site at www.ilnd.uscourts.gov.

Case: 1:12-cv-01411 Document #: 62 Filed: 04/15/13 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:543
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

)

Plaintiff, )

)

vs. ) No.: 11 CR 750 

) 

SAUL MELERO, )

JASON CORREA, )

Defendant. )

NOTICE OF MOTION

To: Honorable Judge Robert M Dow Jr. Matthew Madden 

219 S. Dearborn Assistant United States Attorney 

Chicago, IL 60604 219 S. Dearborn

Chicago, IL 60604

You are hereby notified that we will appear in the United States District Court, Northern District 

of Illinois, Eastern Division, before the following Judge sitting in his/her stead, at the place and 

time below specified, and ask for a hearing on the MOTION TO VACATE TRIAL DATE 

AND HOLD THIS MATTER IN ABEYANCE.

JUDGE ROOM DATE TIME

Judge Robert M Dow Jr. 1919 JULY 10, 2014 9:15 A.M.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I, Jeanyce Nieves, certify that the above Notice has been e-filed via the courts ECF filing 

system on this 30th day of June, 2014, and that a hand delivered copy of the above and foregoing 

has been delivered to the Honorable Judge Robert M. Dow, Jr.

S/Jeanyce Nieves/June 30, 2014

 JEANYCE NIEVES 

Case: 1:11-cr-00750 Document #: 146 Filed: 06/30/14 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:523
<PAGE>
EXHIBIT 21 - SUBSIDIARIES OF PROVIDENT FINANCIAL


      The  following  table  sets forth all of  Provident  Financial's
subsidiaries as of the date of this report.

                                                         State of
                                                       Jurisdiction
                                       % of Voting    Under the Laws
                                        Securities        of which
                                          Owned          Organized

The Provident Bank                        100                  Ohio
  Provident Commercial Group, Inc.        100                  Ohio
    Provident Auto Leasing Company        100                Delaware
  Provident Securities and Investment
    Company                               100                  Ohio
  PB Realty, Inc.                         100                  Ohio
  Provident Consumer Financial
    Services, Inc.                        100                  Ohio
  Information Leasing Corporation         100                  Ohio
  Procurement Alternatives Corporation    100                  Ohio
The Provident Bank of Kentucky            100                Kentucky
FGBI Acquisition Corp.                    100                Florida
  Provident Bank of Florida               100                Florida
Provident Investment Advisers, Inc.       100                  Ohio
Provident Mortgage Company                100                  Ohio
Provident Capital Trust  I                100                Delaware
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A21A1081. THOMAS LARRY PYBURN v. THE STATE.

Thomas Pyburn was convicted of incest and sentenced to 20 years of

imprisonment. We affirmed his conviction on direct appeal. Pyburn v. State, 301 Ga.

App. 372 (687 SE2d 909) (2009). Pyburn has filed several appeals in this Court.

1

Most recently, the trial court denied Pyburn’s motions for leave to file an out-of-time

appeal and for an evidentiary hearing on his out-of-time appeal. We lack jurisdiction. 

“An out-of-time appeal is a judicial creation that serves as the remedy for a

frustrated right of appeal.” Kilgore v. State, 325 Ga. App. 874, 875 (1) (756 SE2d 9)

(2014) (punctuation omitted). Because Pyburn already has had a direct appeal, he is

not entitled to an out-of-time appeal or an appeal of the denial of his motion for leave

to file an out-of-time appeal. See Richards v. State, 275 Ga. 190, 191 (563 SE2d 856)

1 We transferred to the Supreme Court Case No. A15A2341 (appeal from the

trial court’s denial of his application for out-of-time review by the Sentence Review

Panel) (decided August 26, 2015) and Case No. A15A2342 (appeal from the denial

of his petition for mandamus) decided August 26, 2015). In a single order, the

Supreme Court dismissed Pyburn’s appeal from the denial of mandamus relief and

transferredCase No. A15A2341 back to thisCourt,which we dismissed on December

16, 2015. See Case Nos. S16A0187, S16A0188 (decided November 2, 2015). In

2016, we dismissed Pyburn’s appeal from the denial of his extraordinary motion for

new trial. See Case No. A16A1661 (dismissed June 9, 2016). In Case No. A18A2021

(dismissed July 19, 2018), we dismissed Pyburn’s appeal from the denial of his

mandamus petition seeking to challenge his incest conviction. Also in 2018, we

dismissed Pyburn’s application for discretionary review of a trial court order denying

his motion to set aside judgment. See Case No. A19D0064 (dismissed September 12,

2018).

April 22, 2021
(2002) (“[T]here is no right to directly appeal the denial of a motion for out-of-time

appeal filed by a criminal defendant whose conviction has been affirmed on direct

appeal.”); Jackson v. State, 273 Ga. 320, 320 (540 SE2d 612) (2001) (a defendant “is

not entitled to another bite at the apple by way of a second appeal”). Accordingly, this

appeal is hereby DISMISSED. See Richards, 275 Ga. at 191-192.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

04/22/2021
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                             500
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                2,003,560
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                  1,293,363
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,529,712
<PP&E>                                       1,801,296
<DEPRECIATION>                               (975,084)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               4,754,144
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        3,141,332
<BONDS>                                        375,769
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        11,078
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,205,580
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 4,754,144
<SALES>                                      2,297,708
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             2,297,708
<CGS>                                        1,641,496
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,641,496
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              33,302
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 88,981
<INCOME-TAX>                                    18,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             70,981
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    70,981
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .06
        

</TABLE>
### §10. Same; vacation; grounds; rehearing

(a) In any of the following cases the United States court in and for the district wherein the award was made may make an order vacating the award upon the application of any party to the arbitration—

(1) where the award was procured by corruption, fraud, or undue means;

(2) where there was evident partiality or corruption in the arbitrators, or either of them;

(3) where the arbitrators were guilty of misconduct in refusing to postpone the hearing, upon sufficient cause shown, or in refusing to hear evidence pertinent and material to the controversy; or of any other misbehavior by which the rights of any party have been prejudiced; or

(4) where the arbitrators exceeded their powers, or so imperfectly executed them that a mutual, final, and definite award upon the subject matter submitted was not made.

(b) If an award is vacated and the time within which the agreement required the award to be made has not expired, the court may, in its discretion, direct a rehearing by the arbitrators.

(c) The United States district court for the district wherein an award was made that was issued pursuant to section 580 of title 5 may make an order vacating the award upon the application of a person, other than a party to the arbitration, who is adversely affected or aggrieved by the award, if the use of arbitration or the award is clearly inconsistent with the factors set forth in section 572 of title 5.

(July 30, 1947, ch. 392, 61 Stat. 672; Pub. L. 101–552, §5, Nov. 15, 1990, 104 Stat. 2745; Pub. L. 102–354, §5(b)(4), Aug. 26, 1992, 106 Stat. 946; Pub. L. 107–169, §1, May 7, 2002, 116 Stat. 132.)

#### Derivation

Act Feb. 12, 1925, ch. 213, §10, 43 Stat. 885.

#### **Editorial Notes**

#### Amendments

2002—Subsec. (a)(1) to (4). Pub. L. 107–169, §1(1)–(3), substituted "where" for "Where" and realigned margins in pars. (1) to (4), and substituted a semicolon for period at end in pars. (1) and (2) and "; or" for the period at end in par. (3).

Subsec. (a)(5). Pub. L. 107–169, §1(5), substituted "If an award" for "Where an award", inserted a comma after "expired", and redesignated par. (5) as subsec. (b).

Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 107–169, §1(4), (5), redesignated subsec. (a)(5) as (b). Former subsec. (b) redesignated (c).

Subsec. (c). Pub. L. 107–169, §1(4), redesignated subsec. (b) as (c).

1992—Subsec. (b). Pub. L. 102–354 substituted "section 580" for "section 590" and "section 572" for "section 582".

1990—Pub. L. 101–552 designated existing provisions as subsec. (a), in introductory provisions substituted "In any" for "In either", redesignated former subsecs. (a) to (e) as pars. (1) to (5), respectively, and added subsec. (b) which read as follows: "The United States district court for the district wherein an award was made that was issued pursuant to section 580 of title 5 may make an order vacating the award upon the application of a person, other than a party to the arbitration, who is adversely affected or aggrieved by the award, if the use of arbitration or the award is clearly inconsistent with the factors set forth in section 572 of title 5."