alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Page 1 of 2

3.3. EXEMPTIONS TO VIRUS-SERUM-TOXIN ACT

Overview

One of the provisions of the Virus-Serum-Toxin Act (VSTA) is that all biologicals in the U.S.
must be prepared, bartered, sold, or shipped pursuant to an unsuspended and unrevoked license
or permit. The Act does, however, authorize exemptions to the requirement for a license under
certain conditions:

Official USDA Program use

USDA experimental use

Emergency disease situation

For use within valid veterinarian-patient-client relationship
For use in manufacturer’s own animals

Preparation under state license

Certain products prepared solely for export are also exempted from licensure under the Food and
Drug Administration Export Reform and Enhancement Act (see FDA-EREA chapter for more
information.)

USDA Use

Per 9CFR 106.1, the USDA may utilize unlicensed products for official animal disease
eradication or control programs. Likewise, they may use any product on an experimental basis
or in an emergency disease situation. Under most circumstances, however, the USDA uses
products that we have licensed or for which we have issued a permit for distribution and sale.
We work closely with other parts of APHIS and the USDA to ensure that products used in such
programs meet our standards for purity, safety, potency, and efficacy. As our visibility within
the USDA has evolved, we have been increasingly involved in discussions regarding the
products that will be used in program diseases. In recent cases, data obtained from experimental
use by APHIS have been used to support licensure of products for program diseases.

Veterinary Practitioners and Animal Owners

Products prepared by veterinary practitioners for use under a valid veterinary-client-patient
(VCP) relationship or prepared by owners for use in one’s own animals are also exempted from
licensure. The regulations regarding this exemption are found in 9CFR 107.1.



Exemptions to VSTA 2 of 2

The CVB does retain the authority to take action if the exempted products are found to be
worthless, contaminated, dangerous, or harmful. When live products are shipped, we also may
request information regarding the safety of the product and its effect on the environment.

|
| ue

State Licensure

States may issue their own biological product licenses, although at this time, there are no states
that do so. If state licensing programs are deemed to be consistent with the intent of the VSTA,
then products prepared under a state license may be sold in that state without a federally issued
license. A state must apply for an exemption, and the request must include the information
described in 9CFR 107.2 (b)(1-5). The CVB may conduct an on-site evaluation of the state
program at any time.

If an exemption is granted, the state notifies the CVB whenever it issues or terminates a state
license.
115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4294 

AN ACT 

To amend the Financial Stability Act of 2010 to provide 

a criminal penalty for unauthorized disclosures by officers or employees of a Federal agency of certain living 

will and stress test determinations. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

•HR 4294 EH

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Prevention of Private 

3 Information Dissemination Act of 2017’’. 

4 SEC. 2. CRIMINAL PENALTY FOR UNAUTHORIZED DISCLO5 SURES. 

6 Section 165 of the Financial Stability Act of 2010 

7 (12 U.S.C. 5365) is amended by adding at the end the 

8 following: 

9 ‘‘(l) CRIMINAL PENALTY FOR UNAUTHORIZED DIS10 CLOSURES.—Section 552a(i)(1) of title 5, United States 

11 Code, shall apply to a determination made under sub12 section (d) or (i) based on individually identifiable infor13 mation submitted pursuant to the requirements of this 

14 section to the same extent as such section 552a(i)(1) ap15 plies to agency records which contain individually identifi16 able information the disclosure of which is prohibited by 

17 such section 552a or by rules or regulations established 

18 thereunder.’’. 

Passed the House of Representatives June 26, 2018. 

Attest: 

Clerk. 

115TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4294 

AN ACT 

To amend the Financial Stability Act of 2010 to 

minations. agency of certain living will and stress test deterclosures by officers or employees of a Federal provide a criminal penalty for unauthorized dis-
**OFFICE OF**  **THE ATTORNEY**  **GENERAL OF**  **TEXAS AUSTIN** 

8Onor8ble Joe.* 8. Wlmr 

### kr dot oouat Attorlwf 

### Juduad, Tour
mm air: 

### OplrrLorr No.O-7305 il.I aursio1e s son OS8n laiormat Artiole 

### n, **draua u&r**  

### Fi , 

## V.fi aeation34,
date, vhioh rmdrr

%rvvlth la a o **mclti0o rim**  **in th0**  **0** 

### TaMa, upon vhioh vm month, ther or not thr rm 18 objeetioaml 011thsallegedesetld8Qt. Thl9re lml~l Form to
omtlon lr ror l 

### violaand 1~ oonmo~loo vlth the 

### eorglalntot J, D. Uhtte, henla **tiled,** 

### per&r, **in ad**  **to uld**  

### oount~**sourt**

### 4

fb*urnHilton Watkins for a period bf SIX months from date 0f aa 00meti00, t0 w, em aate 0f wp~ch 30, 1946, agu1aet the pace nab 

### dlpfty of the 

### Stebe. Joe Hins Attorney or HlUlbnd county, tabe, ’ j.rticle G637t, Sactiou 34, prorides:

“Any pemon vhow operetor@s, comeralal operator’s, or obbtifer ’ 8 llceaac or & Lvltagprivilege as a nonresident 

### hbr been **obneelleU,,** 

### suepemUad, or retohsdb8) provided 

### fo thisAat,md vao driveruy **motor** vehlole upon the h¶.&hvaysof thin 8tate vhlle rooh lloeaee **or** privilege la caaoelkd, suspended, olr mvoked ir **sollty of**  **a alsdemebnor,**  **bnd U,QOU** OonviOtlon, **rhbll ba**  **pW** lahed 

### bp fine cf not 

### Leo t!uan Pvsnty-fire Dollar8 t&?F), end not more than 

### Five Hundred Dollars<$500), and, la .sddit;o~ tkereto, thcw3 maybe ITIowd **b** aehteacc of ~risoaseat not to 

### axused slz (6f month.” For purpoaeer,of this opinion ve aaaume tbt there &a bosn **otn6~l.iance w:tih**  **bll requirements**  regatiing the complalat. 8ee 0 Ter. Jerfr. 601-60, aeotlonv 22, 4.

‘Au indiotment or lafomatloa eoU8isto of four r niPant PP partsr ) tha 

### cbargw, ( 1) 

### thu caption, \2) the 

### ccawenuement,

) the ocnolualoo , 23 TSX. Jurir 610, Bcctioo 17.

### The laforrtloa quotedruprameet8 the requirement8

of (I), (2), l **rrd (h),**  **hOROe VLO** **d18CU881On Of**  **th88. prt8**  **i8 MOO**  **8Ur ’** **J. A8**  **t0** (3), **th. O&r68**  **1**

**“ fa**  **OhWgif&g the**  **Otf8QM th8**  **8uiiiO1OlM~ Of**  **U lDfora8ttOn**  **i8** terted **by the**  **l ’** **Ub8** lQplio8bl8 to ll lndiotwnt. Under 

### eithermethod 

### of lnrtltutlag a **~roncutlon the**  **defetitint I8**  l ntithd

**to** be **itiOrmSd** of 

### the bBtUre of th8 rCOU88tiOll l @llk8t hir. Th8 IJOll8titUh OhHTI8Rttr Of the OfiOn8I3 8ad OTWJ fa0t O'FQiraU8t&MO8 lM~6888r~ t0 4 o=plIBt* dOlcl'iptloa 

### thereof8hould 

### be alleged;

. . .’ 23 Tex. Jurlo. 619, 

### mctloa 23. Appl~l~ the foregolag tort, it **appear8** that the Charge **j.n the**  

### aforementioned **information meet8**  **those rsquirlmeatr.**  

### It 16, therefore, tb opinion of thir department that the form of the said information 1s **suffioient.**

Trueting that the foregoing fully **answer8 your**  **hues tioas,**  **ve u-e** 
**Your8 very**  **truly ATTOBBEY**  **OBRBRAL OF**  

### TXAB
<PAGE>   1



                                                                      EXHIBIT 23

              CONSENT OF MCNAIR, MCLEMORE, MIDDLEBROOKS & CO., LLP

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement (Form
S-8 No. 333-45775) pertaining to the Wayne Bancorp, Inc. 1990 Employee Incentive
Stock Option Plan and in the related prospectus of our report dated February 20,
1998, on our audits of the consolidated financial statements of Wayne Bancorp,
Inc. and subsidiary as of December 31, 1997 and 1996, and for each of the three
years in the period ended December 31, 1997, which report is incorporated by
reference in the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31,
1997.

                                   /s/ McNair, McLemore, Middlebrooks & Co., LLP
                                   McNair, McLemore, Middlebrooks & Co., LLP



Macon, Georgia
March 23, 1998
## In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02

- 22

- 00118

- CR

K AMBRESHA T HOMAS

, Appellant

V

.

T HE S TATE OF T EXAS §

§

§

§

§ On App eal from the 396th District

Court

of Tarrant County ( 1683896D )

July 14, 2022

Memorandum Opinion by Chief

Justice Sudderth

(nfp)

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that the

appeal should be dismissed. It i s ordered that the appeal is dismissed

.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By /s/ Bonnie Sudderth

Chief Justice Bonnie Sudderth
EXHIBIT 32.2







SECTION 1350 CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002










The undersigned officer of Summit Financial Corporation (the "Company"), hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and in connection with this Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2003 (the "Report), that, to such officers knowledge:





(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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: March 17, 2004
/s/ Blaise B. BettendorfBlaise B. Bettendorf, Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer













The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.





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






Exhibit 10.3


FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE
EXTERRAN CORPORATION
DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN




This First Amendment to the Exterran Corporation Deferred Compensation Plan (the “Plan”) is hereby adopted by Exterran Energy Solutions, L.P. (the “Company”).


W I T N E S S E T H


WHEREAS, the Company previously adopted the Plan for the benefit of eligible employees; 


WHEREAS, Section 9.1 of the Plan permits the Company to amend the Plan at any time; and


WHEREAS, the Company desires to amend the Plan to make Company Restorative Contributions discretionary;


NOW, THEREFORE, the Plan is hereby amended as follows effective August 1, 2016.  


1.Section 3.5 of the Plan is amended to read in its entirety as follows:


3.5    Company Restorative Contributions.  For each Plan Year, the Company may in its sole discretion credit a Participant’s Discretionary Contribution Account with a Company Restorative Contribution.  The amount of the Company Restorative Contribution allocated to a Participant, if any, may equal the matching contribution that would have been allocated to the Participant under the Savings Plan but for the limitations under Code sections 402(g), 401(a)(17), and 415, determined as if the definition of “compensation” under the Savings Plan was the same as the definition of “Compensation” under the Plan and contingent upon the Participant making the maximum permissible Elective Deferral under the terms of the Savings Plan and Code section 402(g).  The Company may further condition allocation of a Company Restorative Contribution on the Participant being an employee of a Participating Company or an Affiliate (x) as of the last day of such Plan Year and (y) as of the date the contribution is credited for such Plan Year.


2.Except as herein amended, the terms of the Plan as in effect immediately preceding the date hereof shall continue in full force and effect.




1





IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has adopted and executed this First Amendment to the Plan this 1st day of August, 2016.


	
				
	 
	Exterran Energy Solutions, L.P.

	 
	 
	 
	 

	 
	/s/ Christine M. Michel
	 

	 
	By:
	Christine M. Michel
	 

	 
	Its:
	Senior Vice President Global Human Resources and Communications
	 








2
LINDA M. FEHLING , Appellant,

v. DAVID K. FEHLING SR. , 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. 1D 16

- 4391

___ __________________________/ Opinion filed November 4, 2016. An appeal from an order of the Circuit Court for Santa Rosa County

. David Rimmer , Judge

. Linda M. Fehling, pro se , Appellant. No appearance for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.
The Court has determ ined that appellant’s notice of appeal failed to invoke its appellate jurisdiction in a timely manner. To be timely, a notice of appeal must
be filed with the appropriate court within 30 days of rendition of the order on appeal. Fla. R. App. P. 9.110(b). M erely mailing the notice or having the notice placed in a post office box within the required time period is not sufficient. Raysor2 v. Raysor , 706 So. 2d 400, 401 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998). Further, the filing of a notice of appeal is jurisdictional. Florida cou rts are required to dismiss an appeal if the
notice is not filed within the applicable time limit. See Miami

- Dade County v.
Peart , 843 So. 2d 363 (Fla. 3d DCA 2003). Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. B.L. THOMAS, WETHERELL, and M.K. THOMAS, J J

. , CONCUR

.
# C_2018455EN.01002901.xml

| 17.12.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 455/29 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.12.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 455/29

---

Action brought on 9 October 2018 — Pharmaceutical Works Polpharma v EMA

(Case T-611/18)

(2018/C 455/38)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Pharmaceutical Works Polpharma S.A. (Starogard Gdański, Poland) (represented by: M. Martens, N. Carbonnelle, lawyers and S. Faircliffe, Solicitor)

Defendant: European Medicines Agency (EMA)

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the EMA’s decision of 30 July 2018 not to validate the applicant’s marketing authorisation application for Dimethyl Fumarate Polpharma, a generic version of Tecfidera; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the EMA’s decision of 30 July 2018 not to validate the applicant’s marketing authorisation application for Dimethyl Fumarate Polpharma, a generic version of Tecfidera;

| — | order the EMA to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

—

order the EMA to pay the costs.

Pleas in law and main arguments

In support of the action, the applicant relies on a single plea in law.

The contested decision refuses to validate the applicant’s marketing authorisation application for Dimethyl Fumarate Polpharma in consideration of the fact that the reference product allegedly benefits from regulatory data protection.

An exception of illegality based on Article 277 TFEU is directed against the decision granting marketing authorisation to the reference medicinal product insofar as it expresses a manifestly erroneous conclusion regarding that product’s difference from Fumaderm for ‘global marketing authorisation’ purposes. Under a single plea in law, the applicant submits that, the exception of illegality being admissible and well-founded, the statement of reasons of the contested decision not to validate the applicant’s application for marketing authorisation is not legally admissible under Article 296 TFEU.

---
#### Robinson, Ferrara & Chun v. Thomason

16385

12/22/94

Affirmed
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                           1,563
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   15,922
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,336
<INVENTORY>                                     13,779
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                31,435
<PP&E>                                          11,659
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,968
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  46,717
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           18,128
<BONDS>                                          4,677
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                         32
<COMMON>                                            93
<OTHER-SE>                                      23,238
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    46,717
<SALES>                                         84,986
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                84,986
<CGS>                                           54,691
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   54,691
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                19,027
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,293
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  9,975
<INCOME-TAX>                                     3,336
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              5,689
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     5,689
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .76
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .76


</TABLE>
# C_2020287EN.01002401.xml

| 31.8.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 287/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

31.8.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 287/24

---

Order of the Court (Seventh Chamber) of 29 April 2020 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Tribunal Arbitral Tributário (Centro de Arbitragem Administrativa — CAAD) — Portugal) — Ramada Storax SA v Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira

(Case C-756/19) (1)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Article 99 of the Rules of Procedure of the Court of Justice - Taxation - Value added tax (VAT) - Directive 2006/112/EC - Articles 90 and 273 - Taxable amount - Reduction - Non-payment - Insolvency of the debtor residing outside the country - Ruling by a court of another Member State declaring debts claimed irrecoverable - Principles of fiscal neutrality and proportionality)

(2020/C 287/35)

Language of the case: Portuguese

Referring court

Tribunal Arbitral Tributário (Centro de Arbitragem Administrativa — CAAD)

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Ramada Storax SA

Defendant: Autoridade Tributária e Aduaneira

Re:

Articles 90 and 273 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax must be interpreted as precluding the legislation of a Member State, pursuant to which the right to a reduction of the value added tax paid and relating to debts deemed irrecoverable following insolvency proceedings is refused to the taxable person where the debts concerned have been declared irrecoverable by a court of another Member State on the basis of the law in force in that Member State.

---

(1)  OJ C 19, 20.1.2020.

---
# C_2021053EN.01001101.xml

| 15.2.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 53/11 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.2.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 53/11

---

Judgment of the Court (Tenth Chamber) of 17 December 2020 — Inpost Paczkomaty sp. z o.o. (C-431/19 P), Inpost S.A. (C-432/19 P) v European Commission, Republic of Poland

(Joined Cases C-431/19 P and C-432/19 P) (1)

(Appeal - State aid - Article 106(2) TFEU - Services of general economic interest (SGEIs) - European Union framework - Application to State aid in the form of public service compensation - Postal sector - Directive 97/67/EC - Article 7 - Compensation of the net costs resulting from universal service obligations - Decision declaring the aid compatible with the internal market)

(2021/C 53/12)

Language of the case: Polish

Parties

Appellants: Inpost Paczkomaty sp. z o.o. (represented by: M. Doktór, radca prawny (C-431/19 P)), Inpost S.A (represented by: W. Knopkiewicz, radca prawny (C-432/19 P))

Other parties to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: D. Recchia, K. Blanck and K Herrmann, acting as Agents), Republic of Poland (represented by: B. Majczyna, acting as Agent)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the appeals; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the appeals;

| 2. | Orders Inpost Paczkomaty sp. z o.o. and Inpost S.A. to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Inpost Paczkomaty sp. z o.o. and Inpost S.A. to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 328, 30.9.2019.

---
```

[Congressional Record Volume 158, Number 112 (Wednesday, July 25, 2012)]
[House]
[Page H5292]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

           By Mr. DANIEL E. LUNGREN of California:
       H.R. 6197.
       Congress has the power to enact this legislation pursuant 
     to the following:
       Article I, Section 4 of the U.S. Constitution, which grants 
     Congress the authority to make laws governing the time, 
     place, and manner of holding Federal elections.
```
##### 



Exhibit 12.1
 NEENAH ENTERPRISES, INC.
NEENAH FOUNDRY COMPANY
RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES
 Reorganized
    
    
    PredecessorFor the Years Ended September 30,2007
    
    
    2006
    
    
    2005
    
    
    2004
    
    
    2003Earnings to fixed charges
calculation (1)Income (loss) from continuing
operations before income taxes
    
    $
    (22,747
    )
    
    $
    25,006
    
    
    $
    18,504
    
    
    $
    7,495
    
    
    $
    (31,411
    )Fixed charges
    
    
    32,695
    
    
    
    34,384
    
    
    
    34,392
    
    
    
    34,392
    
    
    
    48,407$
    9,948
    
    
    $
    59,390
    
    
    $
    52,896
    
    
    $
    41,887
    
    
    $
    16,996Fixed charges:Interest expense
    
    $
    31,700
    
    
    $
    33,410
    
    
    $
    33,419
    
    
    $
    33,392
    
    
    $
    47,445Interest portion of rent expense
    
    
    995
    
    
    
    974
    
    
    
    973
    
    
    
    1,000
    
    
    
    962$
    32,695
    
    
    $
    34,384
    
    
    $
    34,392
    
    
    $
    34,392
    
    
    $
    48,407Ratio of earning to fixed charges
    
    
    N/A
    (2)
    
    
    1.73
    
    
    
    1.54
    
    
    
    1.22
    
    
    
    N/A
    (2)
 
 (1)
    
    For purposes of the computation, the ratio of earnings to fixed charges has been calculated
by dividing (a) income from continuing operations before income taxes plus fixed charges by
(b) fixed charges. Fixed charges are equal to interest expense plus the portion of the rent
expense estimated to represent interest.(2)
    
    Earnings were insufficient to cover fixed charges for the years ended September 30, 2007 and
2003 by $22.7 million and $31.4 million, respectively. 124
Exhibit
      23.1





Consent
      of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm





We
      hereby
      consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on
      Form
      S-8 of ITEC Environmental Group, Inc. (n.k.a. ECO 2 Plastics, Inc.) previously filed on February 2, 2005
      (SEC
      File # 333-122459) of our report dated March 30, 2007 on the consolidated
      financial statements of ECO 2 Plastics, Inc. as of December 31, 2006 and for the years ended December 31, 2006 and 2005.





/s/ Salberg
              & Company, P.A.SALBERG
                & COMPANY, P.A.Boca
                Raton, FloridaMarch
                30, 2007