alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 10.15

       First Amendment to Employment Agreement between Citizens First
         Corporation and Barry D. Bray

                        AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

         This AMENDMENT TO THE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT, made and entered into as of
this  10th day of May,  1999,  by and  between  CITIZENS  FIRST  CORPORATION,  a
Kentucky corporation ("Employer"), and Barry Bray, and individual ("Bray").

         Employer and Bray agree to amend  paragraph 5 (five) of the  employment
agreement  entered  into as of the18th day of  December  1998 by and between the
employer  and Bray to adjust  Bray's  annualized  salary  rate from  $63,750  to
$85,000  payable  in  equal  bi-weekly   installments  effective  May  1,  1999.
Additionally,  the Employer's President and Chief Executive Officer shall review
Bray's salary on an annual basis rather than on a quarterly basis. Bray's salary
for any calendar year after 1999 shall be at the annualized rated established by
Employer at the commencement of each such year.

BY:      _________________________
         Mary Cohron, President & CEO

         -------------------------
         Barry Bray
EXHIBIT 32.1





SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION

CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER



I, Robert M. Budd, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the periodic report, to which this Statement is attached, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained in the periodic report to which this Statement is attached, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the registrant.



A signed original of this written statement has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the SEC upon request.







|                       |     |                        
|---------------------- | --- | -----------------------
|Date:  October 3, 2008 | By: | /s/ ROBERT M. BUDD     
|                       |     | Robert M. Budd         
|                       |     | Chief Executive Officer
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

OF TEXAS

NO. WR-63,573-03

EX PARTE VINCENT SCOTT BROOKS, Applicant

ON APPLICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORPUS

CAUSE NO. 02-335-K277 C IN THE 277TH DISTRICT COURT

FROM WILLIAMSON COUNTY

Per curiam.

O R D E R

Applicant was convicted of burglaryof a habitation and aggravated assault and wassentenced

to imprisonment. Applicant filed this application for a writ of habeas corpus in the county of

conviction, and the district clerk forwarded it to this Court. SeeTEX.CODE CRIM. PROC. art. 11.07.

Applicant contends, among other things, that he is actually innocent. He has filed a

document with his application purporting to be an affidavit from the victim recanting her trial

testimony. The trial court finds that the evidence is fabricated, stating as follows:

[I]t is apparent that Applicant and his relatives conspired to produce and submit to

this court a false affidavit. [The authentic] affidavit this court has received from [the

victim] herself makes clear that Applicant did commit the offense for which he was

convicted and that he is not actually innocent. . . . [A]ll of Applicant’s claims are

barred as contained in a subsequent writ application without an exception. [Further,]
2

[t]his type of deception and abuse of the writ process must not be encouraged,

facilitated, perpetuated, or tacitly ignored. Therefore, this court concludes that this

subsequent Application for Writ of Habeas Corpus containing false assertions and

a fraudulent affidavit should constitute an abuse of the writ process, and his

application should be dismissed.

We agree and hold that Applicant has abused the writ and filed a frivolous lawsuit. See Ex

parte Jones, 97 S.W.3d 586 (Tex. Crim. App. 2003); TEX. GOV’T CODE § 498.0045(a-1). Should

Applicant file future habeas applications in this cause, we will not consider the merits of his

applications unless he shows that the factual or legal basis of his grounds was unavailable in a

previously filed application. This application is dismissed.

Copies of this order shall be sent to the Texas Department of Criminal Justice–Correctional

Institutions Division and the Board of Pardons and Paroles.

Filed: January 12, 2022

Do not publish
II 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 815 

To provide health care benefits to veterans with a service-connected disability 

at non-Department of Veterans Affairs medical facilities that receive 

payments under the Medicare program or the TRICARE program. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 8, 2007 

Mr. CRAIG introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs 

A BILL 

To provide health care benefits to veterans with a serviceconnected disability at non-Department of Veterans Affairs medical facilities that receive payments under the 

Medicare program or the TRICARE program. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Veterans Health Care 

5 Empowerment Act of 2007’’. 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
2 

•S 815 IS

1 SEC. 2. HEALTH CARE BENEFITS FOR VETERANS WITH A 

2 SERVICE-CONNECTED DISABILITY AT NON3 DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS MED4 ICAL FACILITIES. 

5 (a) IN GENERAL.—Notwithstanding chapter 17 of 

6 title 38, United States Code, or any other provision of law, 

7 any veteran with a service-connected disability may receive 

8 necessary hospital care or medical services for any condi9 tion at any hospital or medical facility or from any medical 

10 provider eligible to receive payments under— 

11 (1) the Medicare program under title XVIII of 

12 the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395 et seq.); or 

13 (2) the TRICARE program. 

14 (b) COST OF CARE AND SERVICE.—The cost of any 

15 hospital care or medical services provided under this sec16 tion shall be borne by the United States. 

17 (c) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 

18 (1) The term ‘‘hospital care’’ has the meaning 

19 given such term in section 1701(5) of title 38, 

20 United States Code. 

21 (2) The term ‘‘medical services’’ has the mean22 ing given such term in section 1701(6) of title 38, 

23 United States Code. 

24 (3) The term ‘‘service-connected’’ has the 

25 meaning given such term in section 101 of title 38, 

26 United States Code. 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
3 

•S 815 IS

1 (4) The term ‘‘TRICARE program’’ has the 

2 meaning given such term in section 1072(7) of title 

3 10, United States Code. 

4 (d) SUNSET.—This section shall cease to have effect 

5 on September 30, 2009. 

Æ 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
#### In the Matter of Morris Fisch et al., Appellants, v Meir Rabbani et al., Respondents.

[698 NYS2d 888]

—In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR 7510 to confirm an arbitration award dated April 9, 1995, the petitioners appeal, as limited by their brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Shaw, J.), dated September 25, 1998, as denied that branch of their motion which was, in effect, to resettle a judgment of the same court, dated December 5, 1996, entered upon an order confirming the arbitration award, and in their favor in the principal amount of only $111,231.

Ordered that the appeal is dismissed, with costs.

The petitioners’ motion sought, in effect, to resettle substantive portions of a judgment. An order denying a motion to resettle substantive portions of a judgment is not appealable *(see, G.R.K. Realty Corp. v Tischfeld,*264 AD2d 708; *Herzog v Town of Thompson,*251 AD2d 917, 919). Accordingly, the appeal must be dismissed. Bracken, J. P., S. Miller, Thompson and Friedmann, JJ., concur.
s&ohooln am tbs lmttitutians of the #t&e establlshad in the ctnmticls, sad, AS a &w-t of the 

stats’s go%tmm6n +utl policy leaiatained lil part 

frm t-8 and other fund dkmtl.y ftarnlshed by 

the state and in part from intereat on the funds 

reell.%ed kmt the lsnds 5tttmstet¶ by the 8tate 

to the famageamttt of the capafss16nast eourb of 

ihe tounties a.?e thus trnstees f’or 

af the state sahools, . ~. . 4 such 

trustmm their pwerr must be Serlet4 eonsitru8d. 

Thay may neither divest thdYar of the pcwsra 

eaaie~~08 nor aaanm powers not ooaferre&. Cc+ 

rdsslamms' courte &all. 'astaiae such powsrr 

aad $twbdieticm ever all cmmty budao8s as is 

cenfwred by this Constitution ttntl the Iws of 

the state or as may ba herkftar presoribsdo * . . .* 

xxt vhv of th6 fotxtgtahg it 3,s 8w CplttbJl th%t the 

counties are tnwtous for the baafit of the stati @dls 

rrm mWols urd the fW ltuWpt&mt %8uaty of E2l.l 

Teams8 !Frmatse $or th9 Pstmaeta t-Pmdundu,Az'ti~.282+, 

Vmmzm*s Annotated T- StatutM' mqnirad to k pkpercr ~a 

UttAtd &ate8 Uar~.l5amb msr&wml hy mawy art 8U the 

aeh4&llllt the pTop6r pad lega iawrtptlon to be 

' 

Tntatlag that the forego~ hrlly anmfa41 your Inquti-y, ve am 

‘Paprr very truly 

ATTm?cI fa!lrim OF Tas 

By I%/ A&ll Mlll%MR
FI LED U. S . COURT OF AP PE ALS E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT Jul y 2, 2007 T HOM AS K. KAHN CL E RK [ DO NO T P UB L I S H]
I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 06- 16542 N on -A rgum entC al endar

________________________ B I A N os . A 97- 634- 732 & A 97- 634- 733 T H A I S J O S E F I N A D E L G A D O D E T A G L I A F E R R I , A N D R E A C . T A G L I A F E R R I , P e titio n e r s , v ersu s U .S . A T T O RN E Y G E N E R A L , R e s p o n d e n t.

________________________ P e t i t i on f orR e vi e w of

aD e c i s i on of

the B o a r do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls

_________________________ ( Ju l y 2, 2007) B efo re B A R K E T T , W IL S O N , an dP R Y O R , C i rcu i tJu d g es. P E R C U R I A M:2

T hai s D el gado de T agl i af erri (“ D el gado ”) and h erdaug ht erA nd re a T a g lia f e rr i, p r o s e , p e titio n f

o rr e v ie w o f

th e B o ar do f

I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls ( “ B I A ” ) f

i na l or de ra f

f i rm i ng the I m m i gr a t i on Judge ’ s de ni a l of he rc l a i m s f

or as ylum and w i thh ol di ng of re m ov alun der the Im m i grat i on and N at i on al i ty A ct ( “I N A ” ) a n dth e U n ite dN a tio n s C o n v e n tio n A g a in s t T o rtu r e a n dO th e rC ru e l, I n h u m a n , o rD e g r a d in g T r e a tm e n t o rP u n is h m e n t ( “C A T ” )
. O n appe a l , D e l ga do a r gue s tha tthe B I A e rr one ous l yde ni e d he rappl i c a t i on for a sy l um and w i thh ol di ng of re m ov aland thather c re di bl e t es t i m on y e st abl i shes p a s t p e r s e c u tio n b yth e B o liv a r ian C ir c le s a g a in s t h e ra n dh e rf a m ilydu e to b o th he roppos i t i on t o V e ne z ue l a n P r e s i de ntH ugo C ha ve z a nd he rl e a de r s hi p r ol e i n a C atho l i c organi zat i on . D el gado al so ar gu es thatthe B IA erre d i n d enyi ng her p r o t e c t i o n u n d e rCAT. W e r e vi e w de novo the l e ga l de t e rm i na t i ons of the B I A , a nd f

a c tua l f i ndi ngs a r e r e v ie w e du n d e rth e s ub s tan tia l e v id e n c e te s t. D - M u h u m e dv . U .S . A tt’yG e n ., 38 8 F . 3d 81 4, 81 7 (11 th C i r. 20 04 ). U nd erthe subst ant i alevi dence t es t , w e a ff i rm th e B I A ’s f

in d in g s o f

f a c t u n le s s th e e v id e n c e c o m p e ls ac o n tr aryc o n c lu s io n . F a r q u h a r s o n v . U .S . A tt’y . G e n ., 2 4 6 F .3 d1 3 1 7 , 1 3 2 0 ( 1 1 th C ir . 2 0 0 1 )
. B as ed up on re vi ew of the re cord and the bri ef s of the part i es , w e f

i nd that
s ub s tan tia l e v id e n c e s up p o rts th e B I A ’s d e te rm in a tio n th a t D e lg a d o f a ile dto es t abl i sh thatshe w as ent i t l ed t o asy l um . D el gado di d n otes t abl i sh thatshe w as3

qu al i fi ed for a sy l um base d o n p as tpers ec ut i on or a w el l -f ou nd ed fe arof future pe r s e c ut i on. S he w a s a l s o unabl e t o e s t abl i s h he re nt i t l e m e ntt o w i thhol di ng of
r e m o v a l o rC A T r e lie f

. PETI TI O N D EN I ED

.
#### D. A. Ewing, et al., Plaintiffs in Error, v. D. G. Gordon, Defendant in Error.

Writ of error to judgment of Circuit Court for Santa Rosa County.

Writ of error dismissed on motion of counsel for Defendant in error.

T. F. West, for Plaintiff in Error;

J. W. Kehoe and Laird & McGeachey, for Defendant in Error.
§ 1918.103 Head protection. ( a ) The employer shall ensure that each affected employee wears a protective helmet when working in areas where there is a potential for injury to the head from falling objects.
( b ) ( 1 ) The employer must ensure that head protection complies with any of the following consensus standards: ( i ) American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Z89.1-2009, “American National Standard for Industrial Head Protection,” incorporated by reference in § 1918.3;
( ii ) American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Z89.1-2003, “American National Standard for Industrial Head Protection,” incorporated by reference in § 1918.3; or
( iii ) American National Standards Institute (ANSI) Z89.1-1997, “American National Standard for Personnel Protection—Protective Headwear for Industrial Workers—Requirements,” incorporated by reference in § 1918.3.
( 2 ) Head protection devices that the employer demonstrates are at least as effective as head protection devices that are constructed in accordance with one of the above consensus standards will be deemed to be in compliance with the requirements of this section.
( c ) Previously worn protective hats shall be cleaned and disinfected before issuance by the employer to another employee.
[62 FR 40202, July 25, 1997, as amended at 74 FR 46361, Sept. 9, 2009; 77 FR 37600, June 22, 2012]
§ 91.521 Shoulder harness. ( a ) No person may operate a transport category airplane that was type certificated after January 1, 1958, unless it is equipped at each seat at a flight deck station with a combined safety belt and shoulder harness that meets the applicable requirements specified in § 25.785 of this chapter, except that— ( 1 ) Shoulder harnesses and combined safety belt and shoulder harnesses that were approved and installed before March 6, 1980, may continue to be used; and
( 2 ) Safety belt and shoulder harness restraint systems may be designed to the inertia load factors established under the certification basis of the airplane.
( b ) No person may operate a transport category airplane unless it is equipped at each required flight attendant seat in the passenger compartment with a combined safety belt and shoulder harness that meets the applicable requirements specified in § 25.785 of this chapter, except that— ( 1 ) Shoulder harnesses and combined safety belt and shoulder harnesses that were approved and installed before March 6, 1980, may continue to be used; and
( 2 ) Safety belt and shoulder harness restraint systems may be designed to the inertia load factors established under the certification basis of the airplane.
§ 91.1033 Operating information required. ( a ) Each program manager must, for all program operations, provide the following materials, in current and appropriate form, accessible to the pilot at the pilot station, and the pilot must use them— ( 1 ) A cockpit checklist;
( 2 ) For multiengine aircraft or for aircraft with retractable landing gear, an emergency cockpit checklist containing the procedures required by paragraph (c) of this section, as appropriate;
( 3 ) At least one set of pertinent aeronautical charts; and
( 4 ) For IFR operations, at least one set of pertinent navigational en route, terminal area, and instrument approach procedure charts.
( b ) Each cockpit checklist required by paragraph (a)(1) of this section must contain the following procedures: ( 1 ) Before starting engines;
( 2 ) Before takeoff;
( 3 ) Cruise;
( 4 ) Before landing;
( 5 ) After landing; and
( 6 ) Stopping engines.
( c ) Each emergency cockpit checklist required by paragraph (a)(2) of this section must contain the following procedures, as appropriate: ( 1 ) Emergency operation of fuel, hydraulic, electrical, and mechanical systems.
( 2 ) Emergency operation of instruments and controls.
( 3 ) Engine inoperative procedures.
( 4 ) Any other emergency procedures necessary for safety.
Exhibit 23

 

CONSENTS OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos. 333-86722 and 333-130276 of The Laclede Group, Inc., and 333-86722-01 of Laclede Capital Trust I on Form S-3, and in Registration Statement Nos. 333-90248, 333-90252, 333-90254, 333-91432, 333-102835, 333-102836, and 333-131830 of The Laclede Group, Inc. on Form S-8 of our report dated November 28, 2006, relating to the financial statements and financial statement schedule of The Laclede Group, Inc., and management’s report on the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of The Laclede Group, Inc. and Laclede Gas Company for the year ended September 30, 2006. 

We also consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement No. 333-40362 of Laclede Gas Company on Form S-3 of our report dated November 28, 2006, relating to the financial statements and financial statement schedule of Laclede Gas Company and management’s report on the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting, appearing in Exhibit 99.1 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K of The Laclede Group, Inc. and Laclede Gas Company for the year ended September 30, 2006.

 

Deloitte & Touche LLP

St. Louis, Missouri

November 28, 2006
# AGENCY:

 National Aeronautics and Space Administration. 

# ACTION:

 Notice of meeting. 

# SUMMARY:

 In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act, Pub. L. 92-463, as amended, the National Aeronautics and Space Administration announces a NASA Advisory Council, Aero-Space Technology Advisory Committee, Rotorcraft Subcommittee meeting. 

# DATES:

 Tuesday, March 7, 2000, 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.; Wednesday, March 8, 2000, 8:00 a.m. to 2:00 p.m. 

# ADDRESSES:

 National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Langley Research Center, Building 1219, Room 225, Hampton, VA 23681-0001. 

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

 Ms. Sue Zabor, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA 94035, 650/604-2890. 

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

 The meeting will be open to the public up to the seating capacity of the room. Agenda topics for the meeting are as follows:

—Rotorcraft Base Program 

—Rotorcraft Safety Program 

—Rotorcraft Subcommittee Recommendations

It is imperative that the meeting be held on these dates to accommodate the scheduling priorities of the key participants. Visitors will be requested to sign a visitors register. 

Dated: January 12, 2000.

Matthew M. Crouch, 

Advisory Committee Management Officer, National Aeronautics and Space Administration.

[FR Doc. 00-1248 Filed 1-18-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 7510-01-P
exv10w2wc






Exhibit 10.2(c)




Executive Officers of

The Scotts Miracle-Gro Company

who are parties to form of

Employee Confidentiality, Noncompetition,

Nonsolicitation Agreement for employees

participating in The Scotts Company LLC

Amended and Restated Executive Incentive Plan




	 	 	 
	 	 	Date of Employee
	Name and Principal Position	 	Noncompetition, Nonsolicitation
	with The Scotts Miracle-Gro Company	 	Agreement
	 
	Barry W. Sanders, Executive Vice President, North America

	 	April 22, 2005
	 
	 	 
	Vincent C. Brockman, Executive Vice President, General Counsel
and Corporate Secretary and Chief Ethics & Compliance Officer

	 	May 11, 2006
	 
	 	 
	David C. Evans, Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer

	 	May 20, 2006
	 
	 	 
	Denise S. Stump, Executive Vice President, Global Human Resources

	 	August 8, 2006
	 
	 	 
	Mark R. Baker, President and Chief Operating Officer

	 	September 29, 2008
	 
	 	 
	Michael P. Kelty, Executive Vice President

	 	November 13, 2008
Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed October 25 , 2011

.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 11

- 0 0326

- CR

____________ EX PARTE OMAR TORRES

On Appeal from the 248th District Court

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1292812



### M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N
Appellant is charged with the offense of capital murder . The trial court set bond at $700,000 . Appellant filed a pre

- trial application for writ of habeas corpus seeking a bond
reduction. The trial court denied appellant’s application for writ of habeas corpus and this appeal followed. On October 17, 2011, appellant filed a motion to dismiss the appeal
because he was convicte d in cause number 1231114 on August 15, 2011. Appellant ’ s conviction renders the issue of pretrial bond moot. See Ex parte Morgan , 335 S.W.2d 766, 766 (Tex. Crim. App. 1960); Ex parte Bennet , 818 S.W.2d 199, 200 (Tex. App.

— Houston [14th Dist.] 1991, no pet.) (stating that “ where the premise of a habeas corpus application is destroyed by subsequent developments, the legal issues raised
thereunder are rendered moot. ” ).Accordingly, w e dismiss this appeal as moot.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Brown, Boyce, and McCally. Do Not Publish

C Tex. R. App. P

. 47.2(b).
# EUR-Lex - 32000D0274 - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 32000D0274

**2000/274/EC: Commission Decision of 27 March 2000 approving the programme of new olive-tree planting in Greece (notified under document number C(2000) 825) (Only the Greek text is authentic) **

*
Official Journal L 086 , 07/04/2000 P. 0020 - 0020 *

Commission Decision

of 27 March 2000

approving the programme of new olive-tree planting in Greece

(notified under document number C(2000) 825)

(Only the Greek text is authentic)

(2000/274/EC)

THE COMMISSION OF THE EUROPEAN COMMUNITIES,

Having regard to the Treaty establishing the European Community,

Having regard to Council Regulation (EC) No 1638/98 of 20 July 1998 amending Regulation No 136/66/EEC on the establishment of a common organisation of the market in oils and fats(1), and in particular Article 4 thereof,

Having regard to Commission Regulation (EC) No 2366/98 of 30 October 1998 laying down detailed rules for the application of the system of production aid for olive oil for the 1998/1999, 1999/2000 and 2000/2001 marketing years(2), as amended by Regulation (EC) No 1273/1999(3), and in particular Article 4(1) thereof,

Whereas:

(1) Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1638/98 provides that no aid under the common organisation of the market in oils and fats in force from 1 November 2001 may be paid to olive growers in respect of additional olive trees and the relevant areas planted after 1 May 1998 and those not covered by a cultivation declaration at a date to be determined. However, pursuant to the same Article, additional olive trees planted in connection with the conversion of old olive plantations and new plantings on areas covered by programmes approved by the Commission may be taken into account within certain limits to be determined.

(2) Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1638/98 provides for a programme to be approved by the Commission covering 3500 ha in Greece.

(3) The Greek national programme of new plantings forwarded on 24 January 2000 by the Greek authorities to the Commission for approval contains the information specified in Article 4(3) of Regulation (EC) No 2366/98. The programme covers the whole area provided for in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1638/98.

(4) The measures provided for in this Decision are in accordance with the opinion of the Management Committee for Oils and Fats,

HAS ADOPTED THIS DECISION:

Article 1

The Greek national programme for new planting of 3500 hectares of olive groves provided for in Article 4 of Regulation (EC) No 1638/98 is hereby approved.

Article 2

This Decision is addressed to the Hellenic Republic.

Done at Brussels, 27 March 2000.

For the Commission

Franz Fischler

Member of the Commission

(1) OJ L 210, 28.7.1998, p. 32.

(2) OJ L 293, 31.10.1998, p. 50.

(3) OJ L 151, 18.6.1999, p. 12.