alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
United States Department of Agriculture

Organic Integrity Dashboard – 3/31/2020

A quarterly review of National Organic Program Enforcement activities 

474 Cases in Progress

As of 3/31/2020

53%

12%

11%

6%

8%

7%

3%

Uncertified 

Operations 

Making 

Organic Claims

Surveillance

Fraud

Labelling Error

Pesticide Residue

Prohibited Practice

Prohibited Substance

504 Closed Cases by Outcome

12 Months ending 3/31/2020

4%

54%

4%

25%

10%

3%

Voluntary 

Compliance

Fraudulent Certificates Posted

No Violation

Administrative Actions

Settlement, Civil Penalty, Appeal

Referred for Investigation

2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020

Completed Investigations 129 127 279 260 285 390 360 470 335 413 211

Completed Inquiries 30 197 248 136

New Investigations 194 183 278 215 411 548 508 395 370 374 167

Total Incoming 194 183 278 215 411 548 508 425 567 622 303

Percentage completed 66% 69% 100% 121% 69% 71% 71% 118% 94% 106% 115%

0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

120%

140%

0

100

200

300

400

500

600

700

*

NOTE: NOP is working to make this new dashboard a useful benchmark for the organic community, providing both data and context. The 

categories used in these charts have been modified based on feedback from last quarter’s Dashboard. Open cases are based on allegations, 

complaints and surveillance, and are not in themselves proof or wrongdoing. Administrative Actions are warnings/notices to businesses, often 

uncertified, and are critical in establishing that violators are aware of the rules, to support future enforcement action if needed. 

 

Investigations & Inquiries by Fiscal Year

* Fiscal Year 2020 

numbers as of 

4/13/2020

Percentage Completed

includes cases from 

prior years

 In April, the NOP achieved a significant Farm Bill 

milestone by deploying the electronic organic import 

certificate in the Customs and Border Protection 

Automated Commercial Environment. The 2018 Farm 

Bill called for technological enhancements to improve 

the ability to oversee imported organic products. The 

electronic organic import certificates will provide critical 

organic import data and make it easier to monitor organic imports.

 The organic certificate is being launched first as an optional filing step, not as required. 

The electronic organic import certificate is expected to become required with the publication of the Strengthening Organic 

Enforcement final rule. Organic importers may begin to use the certificate on a voluntary basis at any time. NOP is currently 

communicating with a number of organic importers interested in participating in pilot tests of the import certificates.

For additional details on the National Organic Program visit www.ams.usda.gov/Organic

Organic Import Oversight Tools: Electronic Import Certificates
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION
EXTRACTED FROM THE COMPANY'S CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS FOR THE TWELVE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30,
1997 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.  (IN THOUSANDS EXCEPT PER
SHARE DATA)
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                          82,557
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  930,601
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (38,376)
<INVENTORY>                                     40,414
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,244,663
<PP&E>                                       6,079,351
<DEPRECIATION>                             (2,512,196)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               6,678,292
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,434,524
<BONDS>                                      1,675,162
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        35,572
<OTHER-SE>                                   2,625,191
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 6,678,292
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             5,782,972
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                4,289,614
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               864,005
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                30,116
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             158,083
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                495,142
<INCOME-TAX>                                   198,057
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            283,695
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                 18,481
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   265,214
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.30
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.30
        

</TABLE>
Re: Request for a memo 

 12/16/2011 05:28 PM 

From: RobertJ Wayland/RTP/USEPA/US 

 

To: "Higgins, Cortney" <Cortney_Higgins@omb.eop.gov> 

 

Cc: Bill Maxwell/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA 

From: "Higgins, Cortney" <Cortney_Higgins@omb.eop.gov> 

To: RobertJ Wayland/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA 

Cc: Bill Maxwell/RTP/USEPA/US@EPA 

Date: 12/16/2011 04:49 PM 

Subject: Request for a memo 

Hi Bob, 

Can you send us this memo referenced on page 441 of the redline: 

“The Impact of Emission Averaging Time on the Stringency of an Emission 

Standard” 

 

Thanks, 

Cortney 

 

Short-term_vs_Long-term_Hg_Rates v2.doc
<PAGE>
 
                                  EXHIBIT 15




Gothic Energy Corporation and Subsidiaries
Letter Regarding Unaudited Interim Financial Information


Securities and Exchange Commission
450 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, D.C.  20549

Re:  Gothic Energy Corporation and Subsidiaries
     Registration on Form S-3

We are aware that our report dated August 12, 1997 on our review of the interim
financial information of Gothic Energy Corporation for the period ended June 30,
1997 and included in this Form 10-QSB is incorporated by reference in the
Company's registration statement on Form S-3 (File No. 0-19753).  Pursuant to
Rule 436 (c) under the Securities Act of 1933, this report should not be
considered a part of the registration statement prepared or certified by us
within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of that Act.



COOPERS & LYBRAND, L.L.P.

Tulsa, Oklahoma
August 12, 1997
cc: Hon. Denise L. Gentile, District Judge, Family Court Division 

Michael Doty 

Robinson Law Group 

Eighth District Court Clerk 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 

(0) I947A 2
Dismissed and Memorandum Opinion filed April 14, 2015.

In The 

Fourteenth Court of Appeals 

NO. 14-14-00872-CR

CARLOS ALBERTO BUSTOS, Appellant 

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee 

On Appeal from the 339th District Court 

Harris County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. 1355620 

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N 

Appellant has been charged with aggravated sexual assault. Appellant’s pretrial bond was revoked by written order signed November 5, 2013. On September 

9, 2014, appellant filed a motion requesting that the trial court reduce the new 

$100,000 bond and reinstate his original bail amount or set a “reasonable” bail. 

The trial court denied the motion by a written order signed October 7, 2014. On 

October 20, 2014, appellant filed a notice of appeal. The clerk’s record was filed 

December 3, 2014. 
2

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals recently held that appellate courts lack 

jurisdiction to review an interlocutory appeal from an order denying a motion for 

pretrial bail reduction. See Ragston v. State, 424 S.W.3d 49, 52 (Tex. Crim. App. 

2014) (holding that there is no constitutional or statutory authority granting the 

courts of appeals jurisdiction to hear interlocutory appeals regarding allegedly 

excessive bail or the denial of bail). The Ragston court made it clear that Texas 

Rule of Appellate Procedure 31, which provides the procedures for appeals in 

habeas corpus and bail proceedings, does not grant a right of interlocutory appeal 

from an order denying a pretrial motion for bond reduction. Id. 

Accordingly, we order the appeal dismissed for want of jurisdiction. 

PER CURIAM 

Panel consists of Chief Justice Frost and Justices Jamison and Busby. 

Do Not Publish — Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b).
Exhibit 32.2




CERTIFICATION





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


(Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18, United States Code)





In connection with the Quarterly Report of Orsus Xelent Technologies, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2011, as filed with the Securities Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Hua Chen, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(1)  The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and




(2)  The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Date: August 22, 2011
/s/ Hua ChenHua ChenChief Financial Officer





A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Updated June 17, 2010 

Formal Recommendation by the 

National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) 

to the National Organic Program (NOP)

Date: April 29, 2011

Subject: Tocopherols Sunset

Chair: Tracy Miedema

 

 

The NOSB hereby recommends to the NOP the following: 

Rulemaking Action X

Guidance Statement .

Other

Statement of the Recommendation (Including Recount of Vote): 

To relist: 

Tocopherols—derived from vegetable oil when rosemary extracts are not a 

suitable alternative.

on § 205.605(b) of the National List.

 

Rationale Supporting Recommendation (including consistency with 

OFPA and NOP): 

No new information concerning Tocopherols, with annotation, was discovered 

since the last re-listing of this material, and no public comment was received 

opposing relisting.

NOSB Vote:

Moved: Steve DeMuri Second: Mac Stone

Yes: 14 No: 0 Abstain: 0 Absent: 0 Recusal: 0
National Organic Standards Board 

Handling Committee 

Sunset 2012 Proposed Recommendation 

Tocopherols 

April 29, 2011 

List: 205.605 Nonagricultural (nonorganic) substances allowed as ingredients in or on 

processed products labeled as “organic” or “made with organic (specified ingredients 

or food group(s)).” 

(b) Synthetics allowed 

Committee Summary 

Federal register notice of the sunset of these materials elicited no public comments against relisting. 

Review of the original recommendation, historical documents, and public comments does not 

reveal unacceptable risks to the environment, human, or animal health as a result of the use or 

manufacture of this material. There is no new information contradicting the original 

recommendation which was the basis for the previous NOSB decision to list this material. 

Committee Recommendation(s) 

The handling committee recommends the renewal of the following substance in this use 

category as published in the final rule: 

Tocopherols – derived from vegetable oil when rosemary extracts are not a suitable 

alternative. 

Committee Vote 

Motion: To relist tocopherols on § 205.605(b). 

Motion by: Steve DeMuri Second: Mac Stone 

Yes: 5 No: 0 Absent: 2 Abstain: 0 Recuse: 0
BRIAN J. BRUHMULLER,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D13-5775

_____________________________/

Opinion filed April 13, 2015.

An appeal from the Circuit Court for Bay County.

Elijah Smiley, Judge.

Herman D. Laramore, Public Defender, Marianna, and Luke Newman of Luke 

Newman, P.A., Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Lauren Brudnicki, Assistant Attorney 

General, for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

WOLF, MAKAR, and OSTERHAUS, JJ., CONCUR.
IA 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. J. RES. 64 

Providing for congressional disapproval of the proposed transfer to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern 

Ireland, the Kingdom of Spain, and the Italian Republic of certain 

defense articles and services. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 12, 2019 

Ms. SPANBERGER (for herself, Mr. CICILLINE, Mr. TED LIEU of California, 

Mr. MALINOWSKI, Mr. ENGEL, Mr. DEUTCH, Ms. OMAR, Mr. ALLRED, 

Mr. KEATING, Mr. SHERMAN, Mr. BERA, Mr. CASTRO of Texas, and Mr. 

CONNOLLY) submitted the following joint resolution; which was referred 

to the Committee on Foreign Affairs 

JOINT RESOLUTION 

Providing for congressional disapproval of the proposed 

transfer to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the United 

Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the 

Kingdom of Spain, and the Italian Republic of certain 

defense articles and services. 

1 Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives

2 of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 That the issuance of a manufacturing license, technical 

4 assistance license, or export license with respect to any 

5 of the following proposed agreements or transfers to the 

6 Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, the United Kingdom of Great 


pbinns on DSK79D2C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HJ 64 IH 

1 Britain and Northern Ireland, the Kingdom of Spain, and 

2 the Italian Republic is prohibited: 

3 (1) The transfer of the following defense arti4 cles, including defense services and technical data, 

5 described in license document DDTC–17–094 as 

6 designated by the Department of State pursuant to 

7 the Arms Export Control Act: 

8 (A) Coproduction and manufacture in 

9 Saudi Arabia of Paveway Pre-Amp Circuit Card 

10 Assemblies (CCA), Guidance Electronics As11 sembly (GEA) CCAs, and Control Actuator 

12 System (CAS) CCAs for all Paveway variants. 

13 (B) Coproduction and manufacture in 

14 Saudi Arabia of Paveway II Guidance Elec15 tronics Detector Assemblies (GEDA) and Com16 puter Control Groups (CCG). 

17 (C) The transfer of up to 64,603 addi18 tional kits, partial kits, and full-up-rounds. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSK79D2C42PROD with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>

THIS SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM FINLAY
ENTERPRISES, INC. FORM 10K AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.


</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>                              1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                           FEB-03-2001
<PERIOD-START>                              JAN-30-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                JUL-29-2000
<CASH>                                            4,853
<SECURITIES>                                          0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    37,349
<ALLOWANCES>                                          0
<INVENTORY>                                     309,679
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                390,944
<PP&E>                                          118,134
<DEPRECIATION>                                   43,984
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  582,159
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           237,518
<BONDS>                                         225,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                 0
<PREFERRED>                                           0
<COMMON>                                            104
<OTHER-SE>                                      108,118
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    582,159
<SALES>                                         389,843
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                389,843
<CGS>                                           192,386
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   192,386
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                183,077
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                      0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               14,722
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    (342)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        358
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                (700)
<DISCONTINUED>                                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                       0
<CHANGES>                                             0
<NET-INCOME>                                       (700)
<EPS-BASIC>                                       (0.07)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     (0.07)



</TABLE>
The State of TexasAppellee/s

Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

April 30, 2014

No. 04-14-00274-CR

Perry Ellis MAYFIELD,

Appellant

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee

From the 79th Judicial District Court, Brooks County, Texas

Trial Court No. 11-07-10728-CR

Honorable Richard C. Terrell, Judge Presiding

ORDER

On April 22, 2014, Appellant filed his notice of appeal with this court. On April 28, 2014, 

court reporter Sonia Trevino filed a notice of late reporter’s record. The notice states Appellant has 

not paid, or made arrangements to pay, the fee for preparing the reporter’s record.

Therefore, we ORDER Appellant to provide written proof to this court within ten days of the 

date of this order that the reporter’s record has been requested and either (1) the reporter’s fee has 

been paid or arrangements have been made to pay the reporter’s fee, or (2) Appellant is entitled to 

appeal without paying the reporter’s fee.

If Appellant fails to respond within the time provided, Appellant’s brief will be due within 

thirty days from the date of this order, and the court will only consider those issues or points raised in 

Appellant’s brief that do not require a reporter’s record for a decision. See TEX. R. APP. P. 37.3(c). 

_________________________________

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said court 

on this 30th day of April, 2014.

___________________________________

Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
Exhibit 32.1

Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer



Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.   1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the
undersigned officers of Barra, Inc. (the "Company") each hereby certifies, to the best of his knowledge, that:

(i) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarterly period ended September 30, 2003 (the
"Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

(ii) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated: November 13, 2003



| |     |                    
| | --- | -------------------
| | By: | /s/ Kamal Duggirala

| |                        
| | -----------------------
| |                        
| | Kamal Duggirala        
| | Chief Executive Officer



Dated: November 13, 2003



| |     |                  
| | --- | -----------------
| | By: | /s/ Greg Stockett

| |                        
| | -----------------------
| |                        
| | Greg Stockett          
| | Chief Financial Officer



The foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C.   1350, and is
not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be incorporated by
reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation
language in such filing.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be
retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---

****
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 Defense

###### Department of the Navy

# AGENCY:

Department of the Navy, DoD.

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The inventions listed below are assigned to the United States Government as represented by the Secretary of the Navy and are available for licensing by the Department of the Navy.

The following patents are available for licensing: Patent application 12/650,413: Finite State Machine Architecture for Software Development (a system for developing an application program having functionality that corresponds to a finite state machine model)//U.S. Patent No. 8,238,924: Real-Time Optimization of Allocation of Resources//U.S. Patent No. 7,685,207: Adaptive Web-Based Asset Control System.

# ADDRESSES:

Requests for copies of the patents cited should be directed to Office of Counsel, Naval Surface Warfare Center, Crane Div, Code OOL, Bldg 2, 300 Highway 361, Crane, IN 47522-5001.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Mr. Christopher Monsey, Naval Surface Warfare Center, Crane Div, Code OOL, Bldg 2, 300 Highway 361, Crane, IN 47522-5001, telephone (812) 854-4100.

Authority:35 U.S.C. 207, 37 CFR part 404.

Dated: December 31, 2012.

C. K. Chiappetta,

Lieutenant Commander, Office of the Judge Advocate General, U.S. Navy, Federal Register Liaison Officer.

[FR Doc. 2013-00066 Filed 1-7-13; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3810-FF-P
##### 



EXHIBIT 10.19
 FORM OF RESTRICTED STOCK UNITS AWARD AGREEMENT
WHITE ELECTRONIC DESIGNS CORPORATION
1994 FLEXIBLE STOCK PLAN  (Form of Time Based Award)
  A.
 B.
 C.
  Grant of Units
 Vesting of Units
 Number of RSUs Vested
    
    Vesting Date[___]
    
    [___] Anniversary of Grant Date[___]
    
    [___] Anniversary of Grant Date




---



##### 



Termination of Employment
 Time and Form of Payment
 Nontransferability
 Adjustments
 Delivery of Shares
 2




---



##### 



Securities Act
 Voting and Other Stockholder Related Rights e.g.
 Copy of Plan
 Administration
 Continuation of Employment
 Tax Withholding
 Governing Law
 Amendments
 3




---



##### 



WHITE ELECTRONIC DESIGNS CORPORATIONBy:By: 4