alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
• REgrJH;.1).67466 a 

OLiVH.U.Jl. • 

SECURITY lf4F6RPvb!cl'let• 

USCIB: 4/73 

13 July 1953 

S:iC.R$1' SECtml'f'Y IlWORMA'l'ION 

MEMORANDUM FOR THE MEMBERS OF USCIBEC: 

Subject: Change to USCIB Directive Number 2. 

Reference: USCIB 4/72 dated 13 July 1953. 

1. Assuming approval of a directive establishing the USCIB 

Intelligence Committee along the lines proposed in the reference, 

attention is invited to the probable need for amendment of paragraph 3 of the previously-approved USCIB Directive Number 2. 

2. In the discussion of the reference it has been brought out 

that there is no intent on the part of USCIBEC that, under the provisions of subparagraph 3b of USCIB Directive Number 2, the Master 

Requirements List be forwarded directly to the Director, NSA, without 

approval by USCIB and the Secretary of Defense. By the same token, 

information requirements may, upon approval of the reference, be forwarded to the Director, NSA, without prior approval of SECDEF, USCIB, 

or USCIBEC. It is considered, therefore, that paragraph 3b of USCIB 

Directive Number 2 is superfluous. This is particularly apparent in 

view of the more definitive provisions of paragraph 11 of USCIB Directive No. 1 and paragraph 11 of the reference. 

3. With regard to the provisions of subparagraph 3c of the 

subject directive, several members of USCIBEC have expressed concern 

over the use of the word "Identify", feeling that it is ill-chosen 

since, in practice, the "Identification" of the conflicts in question 

will normally be made, and properly, by the Director, NSA. The substitution of the word "Consider" has been recommended. 

4. Accordingly, it is proposed, subject to approval of the 

reference, tfiat USCIBEC approve, and recommend to USCIB: 

a. The deletion of subparagraph 3b of USCIB Directive No. 2. 

b. That subparagraph 3c of Directive No. 2 be renumbered 

"3b" and that the first word of the subparagraph be 

changed from "Identify" to "Consider". 

USCIB: 4/73 

aptain, u. • Navy 

ecutive Secretary, USCIB 

SECRET 

Declassified and approved for release by NSA on 04-11-2014 pursuant to E. 0. 1352B 

24
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 10.1


CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation by
reference of our reports dated February 6, 2002 included in this Form 20-F, into
the Company's previously filed Registration Statement File No. 333-7166
pertaining to QIAGEN N.V. 1996 Employee, Director and Consultants Stock Option
Plan. It should be noted that we have not audited any financial statements of
the Company subsequent to December 31, 2001 or performed any audit procedures
subsequent to the date of our report.


ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP


Los Angeles, California
March 29, 2002
•

•

- • ••• =." • -

" -

• • •

.

"• . • , . • .

••

: .

p

• iply: gt .1— ,'..' --.. :1 ' • - ....:...,... s.. ::". .,."4. :

770riptiewmpsonsin

p.,

•

9,"7: • 7

•

THE DEPUTY SECRETARY Or Pg.FIENSE . • wastiirierotial.i.c. • • 1.4"...‘•• ; • ?. • ••

..,•. ' . .

L.;' • t •.:;1•“:-.3.- • • "

„!•:',',."1.-!:.;e:14ty.'..*:::: • 'cob

n • ft.,

_4 ..* - .

. 

•

,. •

;=,--

SUMICT: .•

•

. • - .

abutS riicsiviag assmorambuit of a3 Ampaiii 19614 I Uwe . . Ttr

rind' owed the basis of the study Of ZLD(T requireatents and rzalicis

which the Director of the 

ata 

nal Security Agency is pee* in

response to my niensorandunt of 7 July. 

I completely share your concern about the security of the ,

program. and I have made detailed inutile* on the subject; I find, i however, that there has been no instaace Where informatioa or t

material has been made available to any person except . * strict • ...1 conformance with security rules sad residatioas.

aunderstrad the reasons which led to your memo:each= of

Z3 August and I believe that the following action, should be takenaT

requesting questing Admiral Frost to segrepte out of the Overall z

pieta?* those portions which. u*der a strict interpretation. can be

properly defined as Research, Development, Test sad Zvstuation

matters. I am requesting by copy of this memorandum the Director

of Defense Research and Zagiuesring to take the responsibility for

those elements in cooperatioa with the Director of the Nst!onal

Security Agency. *eluding all present earth satallits vehicle programa

containing =INT packages. The out-put of this study will be pre..

seated as a limited ctsftibutea 6641X to the study being undertaken

at this time by the Joint Creme.

'*. - ' .- .. --:i

--,

- •?f? - t -; ", .......• • o . DEPtirt

. - t •,•:- - - - i'Cf/..E ; .4.,: .:i ,

...

.., . , . . ., .. . .. , : : -...-,-ii.. ... ••-:

•

T.S 7

30PSECRE

SPECIAL HANDLING Aard...br

•

- AtICILIDRANINTIt FOR Till 1:1I1DICR SZCItETAR T Or riF 1 4 .77 ...".:;:„.114.'..-`1/2:771""1

_

-..

' •

..

•

7"1. 711 .

•

"t•:7X: • • •• • r!.4."1•••'.(1.... •

. , . .

- •• - -,..--- ,. .'•

:•••4•-.1.1-...".,.. 47.„,....-tx ........74,,,...,,,,..,:.......„..--. .. - ..--,..),,,,., -,- • , .......•

:- i....c.;,C,-

Ar4 •

rt'1:-.; 5 i.• t. ' it Vf"

4/1! a- 4ity %;,-' ' `.-

40P-SE

C.

-

•--- • • : ..• :74.:..771714.0:47:‘ •Ylts - • .

1

•
First Amendment to the Amended and Restated 2001 Stock Incentive Plan



 EXHIBIT 10.1 
 FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE 
 ZHONE TECHNOLOGIES, INC. AMENDED AND RESTATED 
 2001 STOCK INCENTIVE PLAN 
 This First
Amendment (the “Amendment”) to the Zhone Technologies, Inc. Amended and Restated 2001 Stock Incentive Plan (the “2001 Zhone Plan”), approved by the Board of Directors of Zhone Technologies, Inc. (the
“Company”) on August 7, 2008, amends the 2001 Zhone Plan as follows: 
  

	1.	By substituting the following for Section 4.1: 

 “4.1 The maximum number of Shares that may be made the subject of Options and Awards granted under this Plan shall not exceed (a) 19,218,654, plus, (b) if on January 1 of any year in which this Plan is in effect,
commencing on January 1, 2008 and ending on January 1, 2017, the aggregate number of Shares with respect to which Options or Awards may be granted under the Plan (not including Shares that are subject to outstanding Options or Awards
granted under the Plan) is less than five percent (5%) of the total number of outstanding Shares on such date, an annual increase (determined as of January 1 of each year) in an amount such that the aggregate number of Shares with respect
to which Options or Awards may be granted under the Plan (not including Shares that are subject to outstanding Options or Awards granted under the Plan) is equal to the lesser of (i) five percent (5%) of the total number of outstanding
Shares on such date, (ii) 5,000,000 multiplied by the ratio set by the officers of the Company with respect to the reverse stock split effectuated in 2008, rounded down to the nearest whole number, or (iii) such other number of Shares as
determined by the Board; provided, however, that in the aggregate, not more than one-quarter of the number of allotted Shares may be made the subject of Restricted Stock Awards under Section 10 of the Plan (other than shares of
Restricted Stock made in settlement of Performance Units pursuant to Section 11.2(b)). The Company shall reserve for the purposes of the Plan, out of its authorized but unissued Shares or out of Shares held in the Company’s treasury, or
partly out of each, such number of Shares as shall be determined by the Board. No more than 20,000,000 shares may be subject to Options and Awards granted to any one individual under the terms of the Plan during any one calendar year.”

  

	2.	By adding the following to Section 5.7: 

 “5.7
Cancellation and Regrant of Options. The Committee may with the consent of the affected Optionee cancel any or all outstanding Options and grant in substitution therefor new Options covering the same or a different number of shares of the
Company’s common stock but with an option price based on the Fair Market Value per share of the Company’s common stock on the new grant date.” 
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned, a duly authorized officer of the Company, has caused this First Amendment to be executed on this 16th day of October, 2008. 
  

			
	ZHONE TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
		
	By:	 	/s/ Kirk Misaka
	Name:	 	Kirk Misaka
	Title:	 	Chief Financial Officer
( 

' 

USCIB: 13.2/16 

12 April 1954 

l:fiM)RANQYM FOR TflE lfiMRJiiM QF uscm; 

Subject: 

Reference: 

Clearance for Special Intelligence (J. Patrick Coyne 

and Miss Evelyn Raper). 

USCIB 13.2/14, dated 30 March 1954. 

1. Vote sheet replies to the reference indicate approval by 

all members. Accordingly, USCIB has determined that there exists 

a 11need to know" in the case of Mt-. J. Patrick Coyne and Miss Evelyn 

Raper. 

2. The CIA member has been notified informally of this 

' decision. 

USCIB: 13.2/16 

tain, u. • Navy utive Secretary, USCIB 

C01\'F1'BE1'4TIA.L 

FOAM A7031 SEP 97 

NSN· 1S40-FM~o1-s822 Declassified and approved for release by NSA on 04-25-2014 pursuant to E .0. 1352a 

I 

. --

t
II 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1456 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to improve the way beneficiaries are assigned under the Medicare shared savings program by 

also basing such assignment on primary care services furnished by Federally qualified health centers, rural health clinics, nurse practitioners, 

physician assistants, and clinical nurse specialists. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 22, 2015 

Ms. CANTWELL (for herself, Mr. THUNE, and Mrs. MURRAY) introduced the 

following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to improve 

the way beneficiaries are assigned under the Medicare 

shared savings program by also basing such assignment 

on primary care services furnished by Federally qualified 

health centers, rural health clinics, nurse practitioners, 

physician assistants, and clinical nurse specialists. 

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

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Rural ACO Improve5 ment Act of 2015’’. 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 1456 IS

1 SEC. 2. IMPROVEMENTS TO THE ASSIGNMENT OF BENE2 FICIARIES UNDER THE MEDICARE SHARED 

3 SAVINGS PROGRAM. 

4 Section 1899(c) of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 

5 1395jjj(c)) is amended— 

6 (1) by striking ‘‘utilization of primary’’ and in7 serting ‘‘utilization of— 

8 ‘‘(1) in the case of performance years beginning 

9 on or after April 1, 2012, primary’’; 

10 (2) in paragraph (1), as added by paragraph 

11 (1) of this section, by striking the period at the end 

12 and inserting a semicolon; and 

13 (3) by adding at the end the following new 

14 paragraphs: 

15 ‘‘(2) in the case of performance years beginning 

16 on or after January 1, 2016, primary care services 

17 provided under this title by an ACO professional de18 scribed in subsection (h)(1)(B); and 

19 ‘‘(3) in the case of performance years beginning 

20 on or after January 1, 2016, primary care services 

21 provided under this title by a Federally qualified 

22 health center or rural health clinic (as those terms 

23 are defined in section 1861(aa)), as determined by 

24 the Secretary.’’. 

Æ 


tkelley on DSK3SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
```

                                                                    Exhibit 32.1

                                  CERTIFICATION
                          REQUIRED BY RULE 13A-14(B) OR
                    RULE 15D-14(B) AND 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
          (AS ADOPTED BY SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)

     I, Floyd Warkol,  as Chief Executive Officer of KSW, Inc., (the "Company"),
certify,  pursuant  to 18 U.S.C.  ss.1350  (as  adopted  by  Section  906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002), that to my knowledge:

     (1) the  accompanying  Quarterly  Report on Form 10-Q for the period ending
June 30,  2006 (the  "Report"),  filed  with the U.S.  Securities  and  Exchange
Commission,  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.

Dated:  August 9, 2006

                                            /s/ Floyd Warkol
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Floyd Warkol
                                            Chief Executive Officer
```
#### Francisco, Respondent, vs. Hatch, Appellant.

*December 13, 1904*

February *21, 1905.*

*Affirmance on equal division of court.*

Appeal from a judgment of the circuit court for Sauk 'county: E. Ray Stevens, Circuit Judge.

*Affirmed.*

The decision upon a former appeal in this action is reported in 117 Wis. 242.

The cause was submitted for the appellant on the brief of *B. E. Noyes,*and for the respondent on that of *Dithmar & •Carow*and *Grotophorst, Evans & Thomas.*

The following opinion was filed January 10, 1905:

Oassobay, C. J.

This cause was originally tried at the ■circuit before Mr. Justice Siebecker, now a member of this court. The other members of this court find themselves equally divided on the question of the admission of certain •evidence, and this necessarily results in an affirmance of the judgment.

*By the Court.*— The judgment of the circuit court is affirmed.

Siebecker and Kerwin, JJ., took no part.

Mr. Justice Kerwin having become a member of the court -and taken his seat at the January term, 1905, the appellant moved for a rehearing, urging, among other things, that five justices would be qualified thereon *to*determine the questions involved in the appeal.

For the respondent it was contended that a defeated party cannot secure a reargument in the appellate court merely because there has been a change in the membership of the court, citing *Shreveport v. Holmes,*125 U. S. 694; *People v. New York,*25 Wend. 252; *Mason v. Jones,*3 N. Y. 375; *Stearns*
      *221
      *v. Hemmens,*3 N. Y. Supp. 16; *Peoples v. Evening News Asso.*51 Mich. 11; *Woodbury v.*Dorman, 15 Minn. 341; *Ayer v. Stewart,*16 Minn. 89; *Devereux v.*Devereux, 81 N. C. 12. See, also, *Gibbs v.*Seibt, 118 Wis. 145; *Jacobs v. Queen Ins. Co.*123 Wis. 608.

Tbe motion was denied February 21, 1905, Justices Sie-beoker and Kerwin taking no part in tbe decision.
Exhibit 32.1

                                  CERTIFICATION
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                    AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
                           SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


     The  undersigned  hereby  certify,  pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350, as
adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the
undersigned's  best knowledge and belief, the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the
Geodyne  Institutional/Pension  Energy Income Limited Partnership P-7 ("Issuer")
for the  period  ending  December  31,  2004 as filed  with the  Securities  and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"):

      (a)   fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of
            the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

      Dated this 30th day of March, 2005.

                                    GEODYNE INSTITUTIONAL/PENSION ENERGY INCOME
                                    LIMITED PARTNERSHIP P-7
                                    ("Issuer")

                                    //s// Dennis R. Neill
                                    -----------------------------------
                                    Dennis R. Neill
                                    President (Chief Executive Officer)

                                    //s// Craig D. Loseke
                                    -----------------------------------
                                    Craig D. Loseke
                                    Chief Accounting Officer
                                    (Chief Financial Officer)
Exhibit 15.1

Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm

We consent
to the incorporation by reference in the following Registration Statements:



| | (1) | Registration Statement (Form F-3 No. 333-162052) of QIAGEN N.V., and
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | Registration Statements (Form S-8 Nos. 333-07166, 333-107491, 333-12372, 333-127393 and 333-145171) pertaining to the QIAGEN N.V. 1996 Employee, Director and Consultant
Stock Option Plan, the QIAGEN N.V. Amended and Restated 2005 Stock Plan, the Digene Corporation Amended and Restated Equity Incentive Plan, the Digene Corporation Amended and Restated Omnibus Plan and the Digene Corporation Amended and Restated 1997
Stock Option Plan;
| | --- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

of our reports dated March 16, 2010, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule
of QIAGEN N.V. and Subsidiaries and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting of QIAGEN N.V. and Subsidiaries included in this Annual Report (Form 20-F) for the year ended December 31, 2009.

/s/ Ernst & Young GmbH

Wirtschaftsprüfungsgesellschaft

March 16, 2010

Mannheim, Germany
<PAGE>
 
                                                                      EXHIBIT 21
                                                                                

                SUBSIDIARIES OF AMERICAN DENTAL PARTNERS, INC.


PDHC, Ltd., a Minnesota corporation
Texas Dental Partners, Inc., a Texas corporation
Smileage Dental Care, Inc., a Wisconsin corporation
American Dental Partners of Louisiana, Inc., a Delaware corporation
Soster Dental, Inc., a Pennsylvania corporation
American Dental Partners of Wisconsin, Inc., a Delaware corporation
Apple Park Associates, Inc., a Delaware corporation
Orthocare, Ltd., a Minnesota corporation
Oral Healthcare Corporation, a Delaware corporation
Innovative Practice Concepts, Inc., an Arizona corporation
Family Care Dental Centers, Inc., a Wisconsin corporation
American Dental Professional Services, Inc., a Delaware corporation
American Dental Partners of Virginia, Inc., a Delaware corporation
American Dental Partners of Maryland, Inc., a Delaware corporation
American Dental Partners of Alabama, Inc., an Alabama corporation
# CE2004078EN.01057901.xml

| 27.3.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 78/579 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 78/579

---

(2004/C 78 E/0612)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3542/03

by Caroline Lucas (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(28 November 2003)

Subject:   GMOs

Subject:

Commission document (1) — Information note concerning forthcoming decisions on GMOs and GM food, feed and seed — (Brussels, 13.10.2003), notes on page 5, paragraph 4, that: '23 GM maize varieties are inscribed in national catalogues (French, Dutch and Spanish) and are awaiting inscription into the Common Catalogue of agricultural plant species (Directive 2002/53/EC)'.

1

Would the Commission therefore please state:

| 1. | the name of each variety and which GM line they are each derived from? |
| --- | --- |

1.

the name of each variety and which GM line they are each derived from?

| 2. | the national seed list on which each is currently inscribed? |
| --- | --- |

2.

the national seed list on which each is currently inscribed?

Answer given by Mr Byrne on behalf of the Commission

(20 January 2004)

(20 January 2004)

A table listing the information requested concerning the 23 genetically modified (GM) maize varieties inscribed in national catalogues awaiting inscription into the Common Catalogue of agricultural plant species, as mentioned in Commission document (2), is sent direct to the Honourable Member and to Parliament's Secretariat.

2

---

(1)  SEC(2003)1131.

1

(2)  SEC(2003)1131.

2

---
NATIONAL RECONNAISSANCE OFFICE

14675 Lee Road

Chantilly, VA 20151-1715

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE Release 09-11

Contact: (703) 808-5050 Oct. 14, 2011

NASA, NRO, USAF ESTABLISH STRATEGY 

FOR CERTIFYING NEW EXPENDABLE LAUNCH VEHICLES

WASHINGTON – NASA, the National Reconnaissance Office (NRO) and the 

U.S. Air Force signed an agreement this week to establish clear criteria for 

certification of commercial providers of launch vehicles used for National Security 

Space and civil missions.

The U.S. government is committed to procuring commercial launch services for 

its satellite and robotic missions, including Evolved Expendable Launch Vehicle, 

or EELV, launches. The new entrant launch vehicle certification strategy is the 

latest step in a cooperative effort by the Air Force, NASA and NRO to take 

advantage of new launch capability for the three agencies' missions. 

The agencies previously signed a Letter of Intent in October 2010, signaling their 

collaboration on launch requirements, and a Memorandum of Understanding in 

March, which outlined their plans for future EELV-class launch vehicle 

acquisition, including the need for a coordinated strategy for certification of new 

entrant launch systems.

The basis of the new strategy comes from NASA's existing policy directive for 

launch vehicle risk mitigation. It also recognizes mission-unique requirements 

from each of the three agencies may result in different certification approaches to 

mitigate launch risk. The document provides a common framework and language 

among the agencies for communicating expectations to new launch service 

providers. 

The risk-based certification framework allows the agencies to consider both the 

cost and risk tolerance of the payload and their confidence in the launch vehicle. 

For payloads with higher risk tolerance, the agencies may consider use of launch 

vehicles with a higher risk category rating and provide an opportunity for new 

commercial providers to gain experience launching government payloads. 

Within a given risk category rating, if new entrants have launch vehicles that 

have a more robust demonstrated successful flight history, then the government 
may require less technical evaluation for non-recurring certification of the new 

launch system. This new strategy further enables competition from emerging, 

commercially-developed launch capabilities for future Air Force, NASA, and NRO 

missions.

The NRO is a joint Department of Defense-Intelligence Community organization 

responsible for developing, launching, and operating America’s signals, imagery, 

and communications satellites to meet the needs of our Nation. 

–NRO–
# CE2004078EN.01081702.xml

| 27.3.2004 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | CE 78/817 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.3.2004

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

CE 78/817

---

(2004/C 78 E/0868)

WRITTEN QUESTION E-3507/03

by Paul Lannoye (Verts/ALE) to the Commission

(25 November 2003)

Subject:   Protection of loggerhead turtles in Greece

Subject:

It has been clearly shown that there has been no progress in the development of the Maríne Park on Zakynthos and the measures to protect the loggerhead turtle, negotiated and funded by the Commission, and that they have, on the contrary, met with opposition, both at local level and from the Greek Government.

Can the Commission confirm this information? What was the outcome of the recent on-site inspections carried out by the Commission?

---