alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
USDA, AMS, S&T, MPO - Microbiological Data Program (MDP) 15 December 2009

Data Dictionary for MDP Salmonella/Peanut Butter Dataset

Column Description

State * State postal code for where sample was collected

Sample Date * Date when sample was collected in YYMMDD format (example: 090209 = February 9, 2009)

Site * Site code for location where sample was collected

Commod * Commodity Code (2-letters) for product collected (PB=Peanut Butter)

Lab * Code for analyzing laboratory (US4=AMS-NSL in Gastonia, NC)

Source ID * Code (A thru Z) to make Sample ID unique (for multiple samples taken at same site). Blank is default.

Lab/Sub ID * Number (1 thru 3) for number of lab/sub samples taken from one source/lot. Most will be just 1.

Sample Origin Code indicating sample origin (1=U.S., 2=import, 3=unknown)

Import Country Code for country of origin (imports only)

Variety Variety/class of commodity

Product Claim Claim made on product, such as "Organic"

Other Claim "Other" claim made on product (not a standard selection)

Facility Type Collection Facility type, such as retail or distribution center

Grower State State postal code for location of sample grower

Packer State State postal code for location of sample packer

Distrib. State State postal code for location of sample distributor

Test Organism Organism tested (Salmonella only for this dataset)

Analytical Method Method/Equipment used for the analysis (Vidas only for this dataset)

Test Result Result/finding for the analysis (all 1,521 analyses were non-detects)

* The State/Sample Date/Site/Commodity/Lab/SourceID/Lab-SubID fields combined make up the unique MDP Sample ID.

The dataset, provided in both MS-Excel spreadsheet and pipe-delimited Text format, holds sample identity information

and associated findings for 1,521 peanut butter samples collected and analyzed for Salmonella as part of a special survey

conducted by MDP from February to September 2009. Note: The MDP 2009 database has NOT been reconciled for

errors/omissions. As such, these data should be considered preliminary.
# C_2012326EN.01020101.xml

| 26.10.2012 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 326/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

26.10.2012

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 326/1

---

PROTOCOL (No 17)

ON DENMARK

THE HIGH CONTRACTING PARTIES,

DESIRING to settle certain particular problems relating to Denmark,

HAVE AGREED upon the following provisions, which shall be annexed to the Treaty on European Union and the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union:

The provisions of Article 14 of the Protocol on the Statute of the European System of Central Banks and of the European Central Bank shall not affect the right of the National Bank of Denmark to carry out its existing tasks concerning those parts of the Kingdom of Denmark which are not part of the Union.

---
United States Court of Appeals

For the Eighth Circuit

___________________________

No. 14-2959

___________________________

Juan Raymundo-Bernabe

lllllllllllllllllllllPetitioner

v.

Eric H. Holder, Jr., Attorney General of the United States

lllllllllllllllllllllRespondent

____________

Petition for Review of an Order of the

 Board of Immigration Appeals

____________

 Submitted: April 13, 2015

Filed: April 16, 2015

[Unpublished]

____________

Before WOLLMAN, MURPHY, and GRUENDER, Circuit Judges. 

____________

PER CURIAM.

Juan Raymundo-Bernabe, a citizen of Guatemala, petitions for review of an

order of the Board of Immigration Appeals upholding an immigration judge’s

decision to deny his application for cancellation of removal. After careful review, we

conclude that Raymundo-Bernabe has not raised a cognizable constitutional or legal

challenge to the decision below, and thus, that we lack jurisdiction to review the
arguments that he has raised in this matter. See Gomez-Perez v. Holder, 569 F.3d

370, 372-73 (8th Cir. 2009) (appeals court generally lacks jurisdiction to review

discretionary denial of cancellation of removal, but may review constitutional claims

or questions of law). Accordingly, we dismiss the petition. 

______________________________

-2-
<PAGE>

                                                                   Exhibit 10.31


October 17, 2000


Domenic Micale
C/o UroMed Corporation
1400 Providence Highway
Norwood, MA 02062


Re:  Salary Benefit
     --------------


Dear Domenic:

        With this letter, UroMed (the "Company") is offering to you a salary
continuation benefit to provide you further protection in the event that the
Company merges with, acquires or is acquired by another company, or engages in
any other activity or transaction which results in the elimination of your
position, for any other reason other than your negligence (each, a "Change
                                                                    ------
Event"). Upon the occurrence of a Change Event, if you are not offered continued
-----
employment in a substantially similar position as currently held by you, within
the greater Boston area, the Company agrees that it will continue to pay you
your then current base salary for a period of six (6) months from the date of
the consummation of the Change Event, in accordance with the Company's then
current payroll practices and net of tax and other required withholding.

        By signing below, you agree that, in consideration of the Company's
commitment to make such continued salary payments to you, in order to facilitate
the Company's transition following a Change Event, if the Company so requests,
you will continue to work for the Company for a period of six (6) months
following the consummation of the Change Event.

        This letter will only apply to any Acquisitions Event occurring prior
to December 31, 2003. In addition, this letter is not intended to create any
commitment on behalf of the Company to continue your employment for any
particular period before or after a Change Event.


                                   Very truly yours,

                                   /s/ Dan Muscatello      October 17, 2000
                                   -------------------     --------------------
                                   Dan Muscatello          Date
                                   President and CEO

Accepted and Agreed:

/s/ Domenic Micale                 October 17, 2000
------------------                 ----------------
Domenic Micale                     Date
ELECTRONIC RECORD /6 75V*

COA # 09-13-00582-CR OFFENSE: SEXUAL ASSAULT

STYLE: semien, william paul COUNTY: Jefferson

COA DISPOSITION: AFFIRM TRIAL COURT: Criminal District Court

DATE: 11/19/2014 Publish: NO TC CASE #: 13-17919

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

STYLE: SEMIEN, WILLIAM PAUL v.

PRO SG Petition

FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW IN CCA IS:

DATE: $//2/*0/5

JUDGE: 7^0 CouU^

CCA#: /* 7SfH

CCA Disposition:

DATE:

JUDGE:

SIGNED:

PUBLISH:

REHEARING IN CCA IS:

JUDGE:

PC:.

DNP:

MOTION FOR

ELECTRONIC RECORD
Exhibit 32.1





Certification required by Rule 13a-14(b) or


Rule 15d-14(b) and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code





In connection with the Quarterly Report of OHA Investment Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2017, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Steven T. Wayne, Chief Executive 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 to my knowledge:





|    |                                                                                                                                  
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|(1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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:May 15, 2017/s/ Steven T. WayneSteven T. WaynePresident and Chief Executive Officer
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-14-00889-CV

ENDURA ADVISORY GROUP, LTD.,

Appellant

v.

Dominic ALTOMARE,

Appellee

From the 131st Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2014-CI-11780

Honorable Martha B. Tanner, Judge Presiding

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE MARION, JUSTICE ANGELINI, AND JUSTICE CHAPA

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the order of the trial court is 

AFFIRMED. It is ORDERED that appellee, Dominic Altomare, recover his costs of this appeal 

from appellant, Endura Advisory Group, Ltd.

SIGNED April 8, 2015.

_____________________________

Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice
#### The People of the State of New York, Appellant, v Jaime Manini, Respondent.

—Order unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: County Court properly dismissed counts 37 and 38 of the indictment. The evidence before the Grand Jury was legally insufficient to establish that defendant, while in California, was in constructive possession of cocaine physically possessed by another person in New York or that defendant was liable as an accessory to the possession of cocaine in New York *(see, People v Jennings,*69 NY2d 103, 115; *People v Patel,*132 AD2d 498, 502, *amended*133 AD2d 38, *lv denied*70 NY2d 935; *People v Ballard,*133 Misc 2d 584, 587-589). (Appeal from Order of Onondaga County Court, Burke, J.—Dismiss Indictment.) Present—Callahan, J. P., Doerr, Boomer, Green and Balio, JJ.
Exhibit 31.2  CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  I, James A. Morris, certify that:  1.   I have reviewed this amended Annual Report (the Report) on Form 10-KSB/A-2 of the small business issuer;  2.   Based on my knowledge, this Report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this Report;  3.   Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this Report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in this Report;  4.   The small business issuers other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the small business issuer and have:  a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under my supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to me by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this Report is being prepared;  b) evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuers disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report my conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this Report based on such evaluation; and  c) disclosed in this Report any change in the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuers most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuers fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting; and  5.   The small business issuers other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuers auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuers board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions);  a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuers ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and  b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting.  Date:7/23/2008By:/s/James A. MorrisJames A. Morris    Secretary and Director
<pre>

EXHIBIT 10.9 1999 AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT OF PATRICIA SPIGNO

AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

THIS AMENDMENT AGREEMENT is made and entered into effective the 1st day of
September 1999, by and between Conectisys, Inc., a Colorado corporation
("CONECTISYS"), ("Employer"), and Patricia A. Spigno ("Employee").

The following amendment to the language of paragraph 2 regarding duties and
paragraph 3 regarding bonus compensation are hereby amended as follows and are
effective retroactively to the initial signing of the Employment Agreement
dated October 2, 1995.

2. Duties.  Employee shall devote his full time and efforts to the business of
Employer, and shall be an officer of Conectisys holding the title of Secretary
& Treasurer.

3. Compensation. Employee shall receive said compensation through an option to
purchase up to a maximum of 500,000 shares of Conectisys Corporation restricted
stock under rule 144 at a cost of Sixty (60%) of the average market value
during the prior 180 days of trading; this option shall remain open for five
(5) years with an option to renew said option for an additional five (5) years.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Amendment to be duly
executed as of the day and year first above written.


Employee: /s/ Patricia A. Spigno
         Patricia  A. Spigno



Employer: /s/ Lawrence Muirhead
         Lawrence Muirhead
         Conectisys Corp.
         Chief Technical Officer



Employer: /s/ Robert A. Spigno
         Robert A. Spigno
         Conectisys Corp.
         President & CEO
<TABLE> <S> <C>


        <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>          5
<LEGEND>
This Schedule contains summary information extracted from The Bureau of National
Affairs,  Inc.  consolidated balance sheet and consolidated  statement of income
for the period  ended  December  31, 1999 and is  qualified  in its  entirety by
reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER>       1,000

<S>                                         <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  Year
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                           DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                       16,200
<SECURITIES>                                  4,120
<RECEIVABLES>                                45,381
<ALLOWANCES>                                  1,451
<INVENTORY>                                   4,707
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             93,997
<PP&E>                                      108,671
<DEPRECIATION>                               72,810
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              322,728
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       161,509
<BONDS>                                      14,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                             0
<PREFERRED>                                       0
<COMMON>                                     11,912
<OTHER-SE>                                   60,291
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                322,728
<SALES>                                     280,897
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            280,897
<CGS>                                       152,166
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               152,166
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            105,425
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                738
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            1,026
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              31,908
<INCOME-TAX>                                 10,898
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          21,010
<DISCONTINUED>                                    0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   0
<CHANGES>                                         0
<NET-INCOME>                                 21,010
<EPS-BASIC>                                  2.58
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  2.58




</TABLE>
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-18-00561-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF L.E.A. and A.G.A., Children

From the 408th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2017-PA-02472

Honorable Charles E. Montemayor, Judge Presiding

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE MARION, JUSTICE ALVAREZ, AND JUSTICE RIOS

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s order is AFFIRMED. 

Appellant is unable to afford payment of court costs; no costs are taxed in this appeal.

Appellate counsel’s motion to withdraw is DENIED. 

SIGNED January 9, 2019.

_____________________________

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice
##### 



EXHIBIT
10.14
 
  
 Re:
    
    Loan by JPMORGAN CHASE BANK, N.A. (successor by merger to Bank
One, NA (Main Office Chicago)) (Lender) to WHITE ELECTRONIC DESIGNS
CORPORATION (Borrower)
       JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. Commercial Banking AZ1-1178 PO Box 71, Phoenix AZ 85001-0071




---



##### 



Sincerely,JPMORGAN CHASE BANK,
N.A., (successor by
merger to BANK ONE, NA, (Main Office Chicago)By:
    
    /s/ Amy JayName:
    
    Amy JayTitle
    
    Vice President
 th
 
 By:
    
    /s/ Hamid R. ShokrgozarName:
    
    Hamid R. ShokrgozarTitle:
    
    President & CEO
 -2-




---



##### 



CONSENT
AND AGREEMENT
 th
 PANELVIEW, INCORPORATED, an oregon corporationBy:
Name:
    
    /s/ Hamid R. Shokrgozar

Hamid R. ShokrgozarTitle:
    
    President & CEOINTERFACE DATA SYSTEMS, INC., an Arizona corporationBy:
    
    /s/ Hamid R. ShokrgozarName:
    
    Hamid R. ShokrgozarTitle:
    
    President & CEOIDS ACQUISITION CORPORATION, an Arizona corporationBy:
    
    /s/ Hamid R. ShokrgozarName:
    
    Hamid R. ShokrgozarTitle:
    
    President & CEOGUARANTORS
NOSB Resolution on Origin of Livestock Rulemaking

October 26, 2018

It has come to the attention of the National Organic Standards Board (NOSB) that the continued 

state of varying interpretations and practices around the Origin of Livestock standards is 

creating market instability for organic producers. The 2015 USDA Origin of Livestock Proposed 

Rule was based on six recommendations from the NOSB between 1994 and 2006. The proposed 

rule responds to findings from the July 2013 USDA Office of Inspector General (OIG) audit 

report on organic milk operations stating that certifying agents were interpreting the origin of 

livestock requirements differently1. Rulemaking is necessary to ensure consistent interpretation 

and enforcement of the standards for origin of livestock and provide industry with additional 

clarity of application of the organic dairy standards. In early 2017 the Origin of Livestock 

Proposed Rule was removed from the Unified Agenda of Regulatory and Deregulatory Actions. 

Support for this rule has been expressed through public comment by the majority of organic 

stakeholders2. Strong federal oversight is essential for creating a fair and level playing field for 

all certified organic operations. Therefore, be it resolved by unanimous vote, the National 

Organic Standards Board—as USDA’s Federal Advisory Board on organic issues and 

representing organic farmers, ranchers, processors, retailers and consumers—urges the 

Secretary to directly issue a final rule for Origin of Livestock that incorporates public 

comments submitted in response to the Proposed Rule (Docket Number AMS-NOP-11-0009).

1 https://www.usda.gov/oig/webdocs/01601-0002-32.pdf

2 https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=AMS-NOP-11-0009
In The Matter Of:

EPA Bristol Bay Public Meeting -- Kokhanok

August 14, 2014

Midnight Sun Court Reporters

511 W. 9th Ave.

Anchorage, AK 99501

Ph. 907-258-7100

Fax 907-276-6727

To open files, click on the desired file type in bookmark on left.

For quick saving or searching multiple files, click attachments tab (or paperclip) on left.

For best viewing/searching, use Adobe Reader/Acrobat ver. 9 or higher

(www.adobe.com).
II 

Calendar No. 295 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1252 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

OCTOBER 17, 2019 

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Homeland Security and 

Governmental Affairs 

NOVEMBER 7, 2019 

Reported by Mr. JOHNSON, without amendment 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 6531 Van Nuys Boulevard in Van Nuys, California, as the ‘‘Marilyn Monroe Post Office’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. MARILYN MONROE POST OFFICE. 

4 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

5 Postal Service located at 6531 Van Nuys Boulevard in 

6 Van Nuys, California, shall be known and designated as 

7 the ‘‘Marilyn Monroe Post Office’’. 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 1252 RS

1 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg2 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

3 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

4 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Marilyn Monroe Post 

5 Office’’. 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS

pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
Calendar No. 295 

116TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 1252 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States PostPost Office’’. in Van Nuys, California, as the ‘‘Marilyn Monroe al Service located at 6531 Van Nuys Boulevard 

NOVEMBER 7, 2019 

Reported without amendment 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
<PAGE>
Exhibit 10.1

Summary of the Company's Bonus Plans under which some of the executive
officers of the Company and certain other personnel of the subsidiaries are
eligible to receive a bonus each year.
     41

<PAGE>

1996 BRENTON BANKS, INC.  BONUS PLANS

For 1996, the Company (Brenton Banks, Inc. and Subsidiaries) has bonus
plans that cover executive officers, line of business managers, subsidiary
presidents, senior managers, market managers, and other key personnel.  The
following chart summarizes the main features of these bonus plans:

Bonus potential (as percent of base pay):
Executive officers                30.00%
Line of business managers and
  subsidiary presidents           30.00%
Market managers                   30.00%
Senior manager and other key
  personnel                       15.00% to 30.00%

Bonus thresholds:
Bonus achievement is tied to a consolidated earnings threshold of
$14,000,000 whereby no bonus will be paid if this earnings threshold is not
achieved.

Bonus criteria:
Once the bonus threshold is achieved, bonus amounts are paid for
achievement of certain pre-established financial and personal goals, the
most significant of which are as follows:
   Consolidated net income
   Subsidiary or line of business net income
   Sales goals
   Growth in loans
   Growth in core deposits
   Fee income generation
   Non-interest income
   Non-interest expense
   Key personal objectives

Bonus achievements:
Bonus amounts are earned ratably based on actual results compared to a
bonus achievement matrix.
     41