alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","provider_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov","author_name":"25005pwpadmin","author_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/author\/25005pwpadmin\/","title":"Notice of Continued Extension of Access Restrictions for the National Courts Building - U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"gETAT7yTX9\"><a href=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/notice-of-continued-extension-of-access-restrictions-for-the-national-courts-building-3\/\">Notice of Continued Extension of Access Restrictions for the National Courts Building<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/notice-of-continued-extension-of-access-restrictions-for-the-national-courts-building-3\/embed\/#?secret=gETAT7yTX9\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Notice of Continued Extension of Access Restrictions for the National Courts Building” — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit\" data-secret=\"gETAT7yTX9\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","description":"The United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and the United States Court of Federal Claims have entered a new joint order extending their prior administrative order of June 26, 2020, concerning access to the National Courts Building complex in Washington, D.C. \u00a0Effective immediately, building access will continue to remain limited to court […]"}
```

[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 127 (Friday, June 30, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 40675]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-16621]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health

National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke; Amended 
Notice of Meeting

    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the 
Neurological Sciences and Disorders B, June 22, 2000, 8 am to June 23, 
2000, 5 pm, Radisson Barcelo Hotel, 2121 P St., NW, Washington, DC 
20037 which was published in the Federal Register on April 26, 2000, 65 
FR 24493.
    The meeting will be held on June 22, 2000, 8 am to 5 pm. The 
meeting is closed to the public.

    Dated: June 20, 2000.
LaVerne Y. Stringfield,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 00-16621 Filed 6-29-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
```
I

103D CONGRESS

2D SESSION H. R. 4451

To terminate the International Space Station Alpha program, and to redirect

the savings therefrom to National Aeronautics and Space Administration

space and civil aviation programs.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MAY 18, 1994

Mr. ROEMER (for himself, Mr. ZIMMER, Mr. PENNY, Mr. RAMSTAD, Mr.

SCHUMER, Mrs. ROUKEMA, Mr. KLEIN, Mr. UPTON, Mr. POMEROY, Mr.

SANDERS, and Mr. MANN) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Science, Space, and Technology

A BILL

To terminate the International Space Station Alpha program,

and to redirect the savings therefrom to National Aeronautics and Space Administration space and civil aviation

programs.

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

3 SECTION 1. FINDINGS.

4 The Congress finds that—

5 (1) the International Space Station Alpha pro6 gram is neither necessary nor affordable to the

7 United States at this time;
2

•HR 4451 IH

1 (2) the presence of this ‘‘mega-project’’ is caus2 ing schedule delays, funding cuts, cost-overruns, and

3 cancellation of other, worthier National Aeronautics

4 and Space Administration programs;

5 (3) the cancellation of the International Space

6 Station Alpha program will require a number of

7 close-down costs in order to end production and buy

8 out certain contracts;

9 (4) current political turmoil in Russia, which is

10 very likely to continue into the foreseeable future,

11 creates grave doubts about the suitability of building

12 a joint project costing tens of billions of dollars to

13 the United States;

14 (5) Russian insistence on continuing some con15 trol over the space station components is unaccept16 able to this country; and

17 (6) in the absence of the International Space

18 Station Alpha program, billions of dollars in Federal

19 obligations will be available for other National Aero20 nautics and Space Administration projects.

21 SEC. 2. TERMINATION OF PROGRAM.

22 No Federal funds may be appropriated or obligated

23 for the International Space Station Alpha program, except

24 for funds necessary to terminate such program.
3

•HR 4451 IH

1 SEC. 3. REDIRECTION OF AMOUNTS SAVED.

2 The amounts appropriated for the Space Station be3 fore the date of enactment of this Act are authorized to

4 be appropriated for expenses necessary for the termination

5 of the program, and the remainder are authorized to be

6 appropriated to proportionately increase the National

7 Aeronautics and Space Administration budget for—

8 (1) civil aviation programs, to ensure that the

9 United States can continue to compete in and lead

10 international markets for the development and pro11 duction of aircraft, meeting the challenge posed by

12 such competitors as the Airbus consortium;

13 (2) other space science, research, and education

14 programs which can further build on the National

15 Aeronautics and Space Administration successes and

16 economic contributions of the past; and

17 (3) other such purposes and programs within

18 the mission of the National Aeronautics and Space

19 Administration.

Æ
###### Editorial Note on Part 1

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 1 appear at 63 FR 54077, Oct. 8, 1998.

#### § 1.1301 Basis and purpose.

The provisions of this subpart implement Subchapter I of the National Environmental Policy Act of 1969, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 4321-4335.
#### § 15.315 Conducted limits.

An unlicensed PCS device that is designed to be connected to the public utility (AC) power line must meet the limits specified in § 15.207.
#### § 101.501 Eligibility.

See § 101.147(n) for licensing of DEMS facilities in the 10.6 GHz band. Applications for new facilities using the 18 GHz band are no longer being accepted. Any entity, other than one precluded by § 101.7, is eligible for authorization to provide 24 GHz Service under this subpart.

[65 FR 59359, Oct. 5, 2000]
No. 11-9323.

#### Wilborn *v.*United States.

C. A. 4th Cir. Certiorari denied.
§ 51-9.202 Accounting of disclosures. ( a ) Except for disclosures made pursuant to paragraphs (a) and (b) of § 51-9.201 of this part, an accurate accounting of each disclosure will be made and retained for five years after the disclosure or for the life of the record, whichever is longer. The accounting will include the date, nature, and purpose of each disclosure, and the name and address of the person or agency to whom the disclosure is made.
( b ) The accounting will be recorded and maintained in any manner the Executive Director determines is satisfactory for the purposes of constructing a listing of all disclosures, and for providing a cross reference to the justification or basis upon which the disclosure was made, including written documentation required when records are released for statistical or law enforcement purposes and any written consents provided by the individual.
( c ) Except for disclosures made to agencies or instrumentalities in law enforcement activities in accordance with § 51-9.201(e)(2) or for disclosures made from systems exempted from this requirement of the Act as outlined in subpart 51-9.6 of this part, the accounting of disclosures will be made available to the individual upon request. Procedures for requesting access to the accounting are outlined in subpart 51-9.3 of this part.
No. 11-5267.

#### Martinez *v.*Villalobos et al.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.
No. 11-9229.

#### Fratus *v.*Lopez, Warden.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
EXHIBIT 13.1

Certification

Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

(Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350,
Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code)

Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002 (subsections (a) and (b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), each of the undersigned officers of Celulosa Arauco y Constitución S.A. (the Company), does hereby certify, to such
officers knowledge, that:

The Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31,
2017 of the Company fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in the Form 20-F fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the Company.

Date: April 23, 2018



/s/    Matías DomeykoName: Matías DomeykoTitle: Chief Executive Officer


Date: April 23, 2018



/s/    Robinson TajmuchName: Robinson TajmuchTitle: Senior Vice-President Comptroller
```

[Congressional Bills 106th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 751 Engrossed in House (EH)]

  1st Session

                               H. R. 751

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

To designate the Federal building and United States courthouse located 
at 504 West Hamilton Street in Allentown, Pennsylvania, as the ``Edward 
        N. Cahn Federal Building and United States Courthouse''.
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
106th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 751

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To designate the Federal building and United States courthouse located 
at 504 West Hamilton Street in Allentown, Pennsylvania, as the ``Edward 
        N. Cahn Federal Building and United States Courthouse''.

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

SECTION 1. DESIGNATION.

    The Federal building and United States courthouse located at 504 
West Hamilton Street in Allentown, Pennsylvania, shall be known and 
designated as the ``Edward N. Cahn Federal Building and United States 
Courthouse''.

SEC. 2. REFERENCES.

    Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, paper, or other 
record of the United States to the Federal building and United States 
courthouse referred to in section 1 shall be deemed to be a reference 
to the ``Edward N. Cahn Federal Building and United States 
Courthouse''.

            Passed the House of Representatives March 23, 1999.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
```
220P11-2

#### State v. Christopher Dennie Ellerbe

Def’s *Pro Se*Motion for PDR (COAP15-830)

Dismissed

Beasley, J.,

recused
#### Phillip L. CAMERON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. MTD PRODUCT INCORPORATED, Defendant—Appellee.

No. 04-1123.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted March 11, 2004.

Decided March 19, 2004.

Phillip L. Cameron, Appellant pro se. Mark Francis McKenna, McKenna & Chiodo, P.C., Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, for Appellee.

Before WIDENER, WILKINSON, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

PER CURIAM.

Phillip L. Cameron appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for judgment by default and dismissing his products liability diversity action as untimely. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. *See Cameron v. MTD Product Inc.,*No. CA-03-75 (N.D.W.Va. Jan. 7, 2004). We dispense with oral argument because the *54facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED*
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","provider_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov","author_name":"25005pwpadmin","author_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/author\/25005pwpadmin\/","title":"21-1749: LEBOLO-WATTS CONSTRUCTORS v. SECRETARY OF THE ARMY [OPINION], Nonprecedential - U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"KIdV8sORu6\"><a href=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/02-18-2022-21-1749-lebolo-watts-constructors-v-secretary-of-the-army-opinion-21-1749-opinion-2-18-2022_1910706\/\">21-1749: LEBOLO-WATTS CONSTRUCTORS v. SECRETARY OF THE ARMY [OPINION], Nonprecedential<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/02-18-2022-21-1749-lebolo-watts-constructors-v-secretary-of-the-army-opinion-21-1749-opinion-2-18-2022_1910706\/embed\/#?secret=KIdV8sORu6\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“21-1749: LEBOLO-WATTS CONSTRUCTORS v. SECRETARY OF THE ARMY [OPINION], Nonprecedential” — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit\" data-secret=\"KIdV8sORu6\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","description":"OPINION Posted: LEBOLO-WATTS CONSTRUCTORS v. SECRETARY OF THE ARMY [OPINION](pdf) Appeal Number: 21-1749 Origin: BCA Nonprecedential To see more opinions and orders, follow this link: Opinions and Orders."}
### CMP-9

Revised: May 3, 2004 

## San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Supplemental Application Form



# Conservation Management Practices: SUGAR BEETS

Farm Name: CMP Plan Years: to

Maximum Crop Acreage:

Fallow Acreage Last Planted in Sugar Beets:

Land Preparation/

Cultivation Select at least one of the following CMPs. Note: 100% of the maximum crop acreage must be covered by the selected CMPs.
Bed/Row Size or Spacing, ac Equipment Change/Tech. Improvements, ac Chemigation/Fertigation, ac Multiple CMPs in Another Category Combined Operations, ac Night Farming, ac Conservation Irrigation, ac Precision Farming (GPS), ac Conservation Tillage, ac Other (approved on a case-by-case basis), ac Please describe the specifics of the practice(s) chosen above:



### Harvest Select at least one of the following CMPs. Note: 100% of the maximum crop acreage must be covered by the selected CMPs.
Equipment Change/Tech. Improvements, ac Shuttle System, ac Multiple CMPs in Another Category Other (approved on a case-by-case basis), ac Please describe the specifics of the practice(s) chosen above:



### Other Select at least one of the following CMPs. Note: 100% of the maximum crop acreage must be covered by the selected CMPs.
Application Efficiencies, ac No Burning, ac Bulk Materials Control Surface Roughening, ac Integrated Pest Management (IPM), ac Transgenic Crops, ac Irrigation Power Units Wind Barrier, ac Multiple CMPs in Another Category Other (approved on a case-by-case basis), ac Please describe the specifics of the practice(s) chosen above: CMP

9
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","provider_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov","author_name":"25005pwpadmin","author_url":"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/author\/25005pwpadmin\/","title":"22-1081: WINET LABS LLC v. MOTOROLA MOBILITY LLC [OPINION], Nonprecedential - U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"A5Ks1sTppJ\"><a href=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/09-12-2022-22-1081-winet-labs-llc-v-motorola-mobility-llc-opinion-22-1081-opinion-9-12-2022_2002421\/\">22-1081: WINET LABS LLC v. MOTOROLA MOBILITY LLC [OPINION], Nonprecedential<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/cafc.uscourts.gov\/09-12-2022-22-1081-winet-labs-llc-v-motorola-mobility-llc-opinion-22-1081-opinion-9-12-2022_2002421\/embed\/#?secret=A5Ks1sTppJ\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“22-1081: WINET LABS LLC v. MOTOROLA MOBILITY LLC [OPINION], Nonprecedential” — U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit\" data-secret=\"A5Ks1sTppJ\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","description":"OPINION Posted: WINET LABS LLC v. MOTOROLA MOBILITY LLC [OPINION](pdf) Appeal Number: 22-1081 Origin: DCT Nonprecedential To see more opinions and orders, follow this link: Opinions and Orders."}
#### § 19.735-101 Purpose.

The regulations in this part prescribe procedures and standards of conduct that are appropriate to the particular functions and activities of the Commission, and are issued by the Commission under authority independent of the uniform Standards of Ethical Conduct for Employees of the Executive Branch at 5 CFR part 2635 or otherwise in accordance with 5 CFR 2635.105(c).
ADEO - 

ARKANSAS 

Department of Environmental Quality 

December 12,2007 

Guy Donaldson, Chief, Air Planning Section 

Mail Code (6PD-L) 

USEPA Region 6 

2445 Ross Avenue 

Suite 1200 

Dallas, Texas 75202-2733 

Dear Mr. Donaldson: 

The Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality is pleased to submit this document in 

response to the requirements found in Sections 110(a)(l) and (2) of the Clean Air Act (CAA). 

We have evaluated our existing State Implementation Plan (SIP) for implementation of the 1997 

&hour ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) to determine if it includes all 

the requirements in Section 110 (a) (I) and (2) of the CAA and is consistent with the guidance 

provided to the Regional Air Division Directors from William T. Hamett, Director, Air Quality 

Policy Division on October 2,2007. We conclude and certify that our SIP does meet these 

requirements. Over the next few months, we will be evaluating the particuIate matter provisions 

of our SIP for consistency with federal requirements,and will provide updates. 

The Section 110 (a) (23 (D) Transport SIP requirements will be addressed in a SIP submission 

following this letter under Governor Mike Beebe's signature. 

If you have any questions concerning this matter, please contact Mike Bates at (501) 682-0750 or 

bates@adeq.state.ar.us. Thank you for your attention to this matter. 

Sincerely, 

Teresa Marks 

Director 

ARKANSAS DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY 

5301 NORTHSHORE DRIVE / NORTH LllTLE ROCK / ARKANSAS 721 1 8-531 7 / f ELEPHONE 501 -682-0744 / FAX 501 -682-0880 

w.adeq.state.osus
FORM 19. Certificate of Compliance with Type-Volume Limitations Form 19

July 2020

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT

CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE WITH TYPE-VOLUME LIMITATIONS

Case Number:

Short Case Caption:

Instructions: When computing a word, line, or page count, you may exclude any 

items listed as exempted under Fed. R. App. P. 5(c), Fed. R. App. P. 21(d), Fed. R. 

App. P. 27(d)(2), Fed. R. App. P. 32(f), or Fed. Cir. R. 32(b)(2).

The foregoing filing complies with the relevant type-volume limitation of the 

Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure and Federal Circuit Rules because it meets 

one of the following:

the filing has been prepared using a proportionally-spaced typeface

and includes __________ words.

the filing has been prepared using a monospaced typeface and includes

__________ lines of text.

the filing contains __________ pages / __________ words / __________

lines of text, which does not exceed the maximum authorized by this

court’s order (ECF No. __________).

Date: _________________ Signature:

Name:
Exhibit








Exhibit 10.23A 
Schedule of Named Executive Officers Party to Change of Control Employment Agreement (BE2-BE3 Version) 
(As of December 31, 2016) 
J. Patrick Faubion