alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1 

DRAFT for discussion at 2nd session 

3/25/2009 

Issue 14 

Proposed Regulatory Language 

Team II: School-based Loan Issues 

Origin: HEOA section 465

Issue: Military Service Cancellation 

Statutory Cite: HEA section 465(a)(3)(A) 

Regulatory Cite: §674.59 

DCL page reference: Page 136 

Summary of Issue: The HEOA eliminates the 50 percent 

limitation on military service cancellations. Borrowers 

who are serving in areas of hostility may now receive 

military service cancellations of up to 100 percent of the 

loan in increments of 15 percent for the first and second 

years of service; 20 percent for the third and fourth years 

of service; and 30 percent for the fifth year of service. 

The cancellation provision applies to NDSL and Perkins 

Loans and the effective date is August 14, 2008. 

Regulatory language: 

Sec. 674.59 Cancellation for military service. 

 (a) Cancellation on a Defense loan. (1) An institution 

shall cancel up to 50 percent of a Defense loan made after 
2 

DRAFT for discussion at 2nd session 

3/25/2009 

April 13, 1970 for the borrower's full-time active service 

starting after June 30, 1970, in the U.S. Army, Navy, Air 

Force, Marine Corps, or Coast Guard. 

 (2) The cancellation rate is 12 1/2 percent of the 

original loan principal, plus the interest on the unpaid 

balance accruing during the year of qualifying service, for 

the first complete year of qualifying service, and for each 

consecutive year of qualifying service. 

 (3) Service for less than a complete year, including 

any fraction of a year beyond a complete year of service, 

does not qualify for military cancellation. 

 (b) Cancellation of an NDSL or Perkins loan. (1) An 

institution shall cancel up to 50 percent of the 

outstanding balance of an NDSL or Perkins loan for active 

duty service that ended before August 14, 2008, as a member 

of the U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, or Coast 

Guard in an area of hostilities that qualifies for special 

pay under section 310 of title 37 of the United States 

Code. 

 (2) The cancellation rate is 12 1/2 percent of the 

original loan principal, plus the interest on the unpaid 

balance accruing during the year of qualifying service, for 

each complete year of qualifying service. 

(c) (1) An institution shall cancel up to 100 percent of 

the outstanding balance of a borrower’s Federal Perkins or 

NDSL loan for a borrower’s full year of active duty service 

that includes August 14, 2008, or begins on or after that 

date, as a member of the U.S. Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine 

Corps, or Coast Guard in an area of hostilities that 

qualifies for special pay under section 310 of title 37 of 

the United States Code.
3 

DRAFT for discussion at 2nd session 

3/25/2009 

(2) The cancellation rate is 15 percent for the first and 

second year of qualifying service, 20 percent for the third 

and fourth year of qualifying service, and 30 percent for 

the fifth year of qualifying service.

 (3d) Service for less than a complete year, including 

any fraction of a year beyond a complete year of service, 

does not qualify for military cancellation.
#### 2815.606 Agency procedures.

The designated point of contact for each contracting activity shall provide for and coordinate receipt, review, evaluation, safeguarding, and final disposition of unsolicited proposals in accordance with FAR subpart 15.6.
```

[Congressional Bills 115th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S.J. Res. 34 Placed on Calendar Senate (PCS)]

<DOC>

                                                        Calendar No. 16
115th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. J. RES. 34

  Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, 
United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Federal Communications 
    Commission relating to ``Protecting the Privacy of Customers of 
           Broadband and Other Telecommunications Services''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 7, 2017

   Mr. Flake (for himself, Mr. Johnson, Mr. Barrasso, Mr. Blunt, Mr. 
 Boozman, Mrs. Capito, Mr. Cochran, Mr. Cornyn, Mr. Cotton, Mr. Cruz, 
Mrs. Fischer, Mr. Hatch, Mr. Heller, Mr. Inhofe, Mr. Lee, Mr. Paul, Mr. 
 Roberts, Mr. Rubio, Mr. Shelby, Mr. Sullivan, Mr. Thune, Mr. Wicker, 
     Mr. Moran, and Mr. McConnell) introduced the following joint 
   resolution; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
                 Commerce, Science, and Transportation

                             March 15, 2017

  Committee discharged, by petition, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 802(c), and 
                         placed on the calendar

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

 
  Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, 
United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Federal Communications 
    Commission relating to ``Protecting the Privacy of Customers of 
           Broadband and Other Telecommunications Services''.

    Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United 
States of America in Congress assembled, That Congress disapproves the 
rule submitted by the Federal Communications Commission relating to 
``Protecting the Privacy of Customers of Broadband and Other 
Telecommunications Services'' (81 Fed. Reg. 87274 (December 2, 2016)), 
and such rule shall have no force or effect.

                                                        Calendar No. 16

115th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                             S. J. RES. 34

_______________________________________________________________________

                            JOINT RESOLUTION

  Providing for congressional disapproval under chapter 8 of title 5, 
United States Code, of the rule submitted by the Federal Communications 
    Commission relating to ``Protecting the Privacy of Customers of 
           Broadband and Other Telecommunications Services''.

_______________________________________________________________________

                             March 15, 2017

  Committee discharged, by petition, pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 802(c), and 
                         placed on the calendar
```
#### MATTESON et al., Appellants, v. MASON, Respondent.

(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, Fourth Department.

November 17, 1903.)

Action by James Matteson and another against Frank Mason.

No opinion. Judgment and order affirmed, with costs.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

                    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the National Advisory Eye Council, February 12, 2021, 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m., National Eye Institute,                           ( print page 8211)                        National Institutes of Health, 6700 Rockledge Drive, Suite 3400, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting) which was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     on January 15, 2021, 86 FR 4104.                

The notice is being amended to change the end of the open session from 11:30 a.m. to 1:30 p.m. The meeting is partially Closed to the public.

Dated: January 28, 2021.

Melanie J. Pantoja,

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2021-02304 Filed 2-3-21; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
III 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. RES. 412 

Expressing the sense of the Senate regarding the 6888th Central Postal 

Directory Battalion and celebrating Black History Month. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 15, 2018 

Mr. MORAN submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Armed Services 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing the sense of the Senate regarding the 6888th 

Central Postal Directory Battalion and celebrating Black 

History Month. 

Whereas, since 1976, the United States has celebrated Black 

History Month each February to seize the opportunity to 

honor the accomplishments of African Americans in every 

area of endeavor throughout the history of the United 

States; 

Whereas the people of the United States honor the 6888th 

Central Postal Directory Battalion (referred to in this 

preamble as the ‘‘6888th’’), which was the first and only 

African-American unit in the Women’s Army Corps to 

deploy overseas during World War II; 

Whereas the 6888th served honorably during World War II 

from January 1945 to March 1946; 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•SRES 412 IS 

Whereas the 6888th trained at Fort Oglethrope, Georgia, and 

deployed overseas to operate in Birmingham, England, 

Rouen, France, and Paris, France; 

Whereas, while in Europe, the 6888th worked around-theclock sorting millions of pieces of mail; 

Whereas a new monument honoring the women of the 6888th 

will be erected in the Buffalo Soldier Memorial Park in 

Fort Leavenworth, Kansas; 

Whereas the monument will— 

(1) feature the commanding officer of the 6888th, 

Lieutenant Colonel Charity Adams Earley; 

(2) list the names of more than 700 soldiers in the 

Women’s Army Corps assigned to the 6888th; and 

(3) celebrate the deeds of and sacrifices made by 

those who served in the 6888th; and 

Whereas Black History Month provides all individuals in the 

United States an opportunity to celebrate the contributions of African Americans, including the remarkable 

service of the 6888th: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) expresses support for— 

3 (A) the monument recognizing the service 

4 of the 6888th Central Postal Directory Bat5 talion; and 

6 (B) the mission of the Buffalo Soldier 

7 Educational and Historical Committee; 

8 (2) during Black History Month and through9 out 2018, encourages all individuals in the United 

10 States to celebrate the history of the United States 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•SRES 412 IS 

1 and the important accomplishments and contribu2 tions of African Americans; and 

3 (3) appreciates the contributions of and sac4 rifices made by the soldiers of the Women’s Army 

5 Corps assigned to the 6888th Central Postal Direc6 tory Battalion during World War II, who served 

7 honorably and are members of the ‘‘Greatest Gen8 eration’’. 

Æ 


lotter on DSKBCFDHB2PROD with BILLS
#### Henry S. Miller v. Harry W. Gantz.

Motion to dismiss appeal granted, with $10 costs, unless the appellant procures the record on appeal and appellant’s points to be served and filed on or before May 1, 1962, with notice of argument for the June 1962 Term of this court, said appeal to be argued or submitted when reached. Concur — Botein, P. J., Rabin, Valente, Stevens and Eager, JJ.
Case: 1:12-cv-05088 Document #: 2 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 1 of 30 PageID #:2
Case: 1:12-cv-05088 Document #: 2 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 2 of 30 PageID #:3
Case: 1:12-cv-05088 Document #: 2 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 3 of 30 PageID #:4
Case: 1:12-cv-05088 Document #: 2 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 4 of 30 PageID #:5
Case: 1:12-cv-05088 Document #: 2 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 5 of 30 PageID #:6
Case: 1:12-cv-05088 Document #: 2 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 6 of 30 PageID #:7
Case: 1:12-cv-05088 Document #: 2 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 7 of 30 PageID #:8
Case: 1:12-cv-05088 Document #: 2 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 8 of 30 PageID #:9
Case: 1:12-cv-05088 Document #: 2 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 9 of 30 PageID #:10
Case: 1:12-cv-05088 Document #: 2 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 10 of 30 PageID #:11
Case: 1:12-cv-05088 Document #: 2 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 11 of 30 PageID #:12
Case: 1:12-cv-05088 Document #: 2 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 12 of 30 PageID #:13
Case: 1:12-cv-05088 Document #: 2 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 13 of 30 PageID #:14
Case: 1:12-cv-05088 Document #: 2 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 14 of 30 PageID #:15
Case: 1:12-cv-05088 Document #: 2 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 15 of 30 PageID #:16
Case: 1:12-cv-05088 Document #: 2 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 16 of 30 PageID #:17
Case: 1:12-cv-05088 Document #: 2 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 17 of 30 PageID #:18
Case: 1:12-cv-05088 Document #: 2 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 18 of 30 PageID #:19
Case: 1:12-cv-05088 Document #: 2 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 19 of 30 PageID #:20
Case: 1:12-cv-05088 Document #: 2 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 20 of 30 PageID #:21
Case: 1:12-cv-05088 Document #: 2 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 21 of 30 PageID #:22
Case: 1:12-cv-05088 Document #: 2 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 22 of 30 PageID #:23
Case: 1:12-cv-05088 Document #: 2 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 23 of 30 PageID #:24
Case: 1:12-cv-05088 Document #: 2 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 24 of 30 PageID #:25
Case: 1:12-cv-05088 Document #: 2 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 25 of 30 PageID #:26
Case: 1:12-cv-05088 Document #: 2 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 26 of 30 PageID #:27
Case: 1:12-cv-05088 Document #: 2 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 27 of 30 PageID #:28
Case: 1:12-cv-05088 Document #: 2 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 28 of 30 PageID #:29
Case: 1:12-cv-05088 Document #: 2 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 29 of 30 PageID #:30
Case: 1:12-cv-05088 Document #: 2 Filed: 07/27/11 Page 30 of 30 PageID #:31
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE Northern District of Illinois − CM/ECF LIVE, Ver 5.0.3

Eastern Division

AF Holdings LLC

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 1:12−cv−05081

Honorable Robert W. Gettleman

John Doe

Defendant.

NOTIFICATION OF DOCKET ENTRY

This docket entry was made by the Clerk on Thursday, December 6, 2012:

 MINUTE entry before Honorable Robert W. Gettleman: Status hearing held on

12/6/2012. Status hearing set for 1/10/2013 at 9:00 a.m. Mailed notice (gds)

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-05081 Document #: 15 Filed: 12/06/12 Page 1 of 1 PageID #:84
u.s. Department of 

Transportation 

Office of the Secretary 

of Transportation 

Subject: Exception to Normal Payout Procedures 

for Subsidized Carriers at Shutdown-Airports 

4v~7) j£&-n~~ ~ From: Dennis J . DeVany 

EAS and Domestic Analysis, X-53 

To: Greg Frazier, S3.6 

Airport Closures 

Memorandum 

Date: May 4. 2011 

Reply OAAMemoNo.2011-31 

to Kevin Schlemmer, X-53 

Attn. Ext. 63176 

of: 

On April 22, 2011, a tornado caused extensive damage to Lambert St. Louis International 

Airport (STL). As a result, STL was closed from late evening on April 22 until April 24. 

Tenants with operations on Concourse C, including Cape Air, had to be relocated to other 

concourses at the airport, and as a result, Cape Air was unable to resume operations until 

April 26. Also due to the closure of STL, Air Choice One operated some its flights 

to/from the Spirit of St. Louis Airport (SUS). 

Due to extensive flooding of the airfield at Cape Girardeau Regional Airport (CGI), 

operations were suspended there until April 29. 

It has been our policy, on a case-by-case basis, to pay the airline its usual subsidy rate 

when airports have been closed on the grounds that the circumstances are beyond the 

carriers' control and that there are only minimal cost savings to the carriers while they 

would lose all of the revenue. (The carriers would only save on fuel and a portion of 

maintenance because they would not be able to return aircraft to lessors or layoff 

personnel). Consistent with that precedent, we request that you to compensate Hyannis 

Air Service, Inc. d/b/a Cape Air (Cape Air) and Multi-Aero, Inc. d/b/a Air Choice One 

(Air Choice One) for flights that could not be operated during the period of April 22-

April 26 due to the STL airport closure or were operated to SUS. 
- 2 -

Flights tolfrom the following subsidized communities are affected (April 22-April 26): 

• Burlington,IA 

• Decatur.IL 

• Cape Girardeau, MO 

• Fort Leonard Wood, MO 

• Kirksville, MO 

• Marion/Herrin, IL 

• Quincy,IL 

In addition, Cape Air's flights to/from Cape Girardeau are also eligible for compensation 

from April 26 through April 29. 

So that you will know whether a cancellation was related to the airports' being closed, we 

have instructed Cape Air and Air Choice One to indicate "Airport Not Operating" on its 

monthly subsidy billings for flights that it could not completed for that reason, and have 

informed them that they will be fully compensated for such cancellations. 

cc: 

Cape Air 

Air Choice One
# C_2016421EN.01000601.xml

| 16.11.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 421/6 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.11.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 421/6

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

15 November 2016

(2016/C 421/05)

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,0765 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 116,55 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4434 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,86638 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,8510 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,0758 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 9,0848 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 27,030 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 309,97 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 4,4245 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,5140 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 3,5307 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,4240 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,4560 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 8,3504 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,5144 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,5202 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 255,15 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 15,2680 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 7,3816 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,5158 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 14 391,32 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 4,6604 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 52,888 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 70,2005 |
| THB | Thai baht | 38,103 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 3,7006 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 22,0328 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 72,9385 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,0765

JPY

Japanese yen

116,55

DKK

Danish krone

7,4434

GBP

Pound sterling

0,86638

SEK

Swedish krona

9,8510

CHF

Swiss franc

1,0758

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

9,0848

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

27,030

HUF

Hungarian forint

309,97

PLN

Polish zloty

4,4245

RON

Romanian leu

4,5140

TRY

Turkish lira

3,5307

AUD

Australian dollar

1,4240

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,4560

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

8,3504

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,5144

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,5202

KRW

South Korean won

1 255,15

ZAR

South African rand

15,2680

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

7,3816

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,5158

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

14 391,32

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

4,6604

PHP

Philippine peso

52,888

RUB

Russian rouble

70,2005

THB

Thai baht

38,103

BRL

Brazilian real

3,7006

MXN

Mexican peso

22,0328

INR

Indian rupee

72,9385

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
#### Abraham Greenfield, Respondent, v. Charles Greenfield et al., Individually and as Executors of Jacob Greenfield, Deceased, Appellants, et al., Defendants. Charles Greenfield et al., as Coexecutors of Jacob Greenfield, Deceased, Appellants, v. Abraham Greenfield, Individually and as Coexecutors of Jacob Greenfield, Deceased, Respondent, et al., Defen*835dants.

Motion by plaintiff-respondent for reargument of appeal will be treated as a motion to amend the decision of this court, dated June 15, 1964, so as to affirm that portion of the amended judgment which dismissed the defendants’ counterclaims and cross claims on the merits. Motion granted. Said decision is amended toy striking out its last two paragraphs, and by substituting therefor the following provision: “Amended judgment, insofar as appealed from, affirmed, without costs. No opinion.” Cross motion by defendants-appellants to amend said decision so as to modify the amended judgment to the extent of preserving their lien, as executors, for the collection of the taxes which the estate may be required to pay. Cross motion denied. Ughetta, Acting P. J., Kleinfeld, Hill, Rabin and Hopkins, JJ., concur.
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATE PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906
OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, Paul R. Flanders, Chief Financial Officer of Carrols Restaurant Group, Inc. (the
Company), hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) | The Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 29, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
Quarterly 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 Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                                                      
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|                                                                                      
|/s/ PAUL R. FLANDERS                                                                  
|Paul R. Flanders Vice President  Chief
Financial Officer and Treasurer August 6, 2008
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

JOSE LOPEZ, by his wife and next best ) Case No. 12 cv 5751

friend, Sandra Cardiel, )

)

Plaintiff, ) Hon. John Robert Blakey

v. )

) Hon. Geraldine Soat Brown

STEVAN VIDLJINOVIC, Star No. 4051, )

et al. ) JURY DEMANDED

)

 )

Defendants. )

DEFENDANT CITY OF CHICAGO’S RULE 56.1(a)(3)

STATEMENT OF UNDISPUTED FACTS

EXHIBIT LIST

Exhibit A: Plaintiff’s Fourth Amended Complaint

Exhibit B: Plaintiff’s Answers to Defendant City of Chicago’s First Set of Interrogatories to 

Plaintiff

Exhibit C: Defendant City’s Answer to Plaintiff’s Fourth Amended Complaint

Exhibit D: Plaintiff’s Initial Rule 26(a)(1) Disclosures

Exhibit E: Letter from Plaintiff’s Counsel

Exhibit F: Report of Mr. Hayden

Exhibit G: Deposition of Philip P. Hayden

Exhibit H: G.O. 02-08

Exhibit I: G.O. 02-08-01A

Exhibit J: G.O. 02-08-02 and G.O. 02-08-02A

Case: 1:12-cv-05751 Document #: 119-1 Filed: 12/30/15 Page 1 of 2 PageID #:1569
Exhibit K: G.O. 02-08-03

Exhibit L: Special Order S03-08

Exhibit M: Special Orders S04-20 and S04-20-02

Exhibit N: Report of Darrell L. Ross

Exhibit O: Report of Frank W. Nagorka

Case: 1:12-cv-05751 Document #: 119-1 Filed: 12/30/15 Page 2 of 2 PageID #:1570