alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EX-4.1



 Exhibit 4.1 

STATE OF DELAWARE 
  

			
	CERTIFICATE NO.	 	NUMBER OF SHARES

 JPMORGAN CHASE & CO. 

INCORPORATED UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE 

Authorized                  Shares of
             
 Fixed-to-Floating Rate Non-Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series V,
Par Value $1.00 Per Share 
 This certifies that Computershare Inc, as Depositary, is the owner of
                 shares of Fixed-to-Floating Rate Non-Cumulative Preferred Stock, Series V, par value $1.00 per share, of JPMorgan Chase & Co., a Delaware
corporation (the “Corporation”), fully paid and non-assessable, transferable only upon the books of the Corporation, in person or by attorney, upon surrender of this Certificate properly endorsed. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Corporation has caused this Certificate to be signed by its duly authorized officers this      day
of             ,         . 
  

					
	  
	 		 	  


 The Corporation will furnish, without charge to each stockholder who so requests, the powers, designations, preferences and
relative, participating, optional or other special rights of each class of stock or series thereof and the qualifications, limitations or restrictions of such preferences and/or rights. 







 FOR VALUE RECEIVED,
                     does hereby sell, assign and transfer unto
                     (                ) Shares represented by within
Certificate, and does hereby irrevocably constitute and appoint                      as its attorney to transfer such Shares on the books and records
of the Corporation with full power of substitution in the premises. 
 Dated:             ,
20    . 
  

							
	In presence of:	 		 	Stockholder:	 	
				
	  
	 		 	  
	 	
	Name:	 		 	Name:
#### People v Warren (Tito)

2d Dept: 124 AD3d 699 (Queens)

denied 3/30/17 (Rivera, J.)
H. R. 2744 

One Hundred Sixteenth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE SECOND SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Friday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and twenty 

An Act 

To authorize the Administrator of the United States Agency for International Development to prescribe the manner in which programs of the agency are identified 

overseas, and for other purposes. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘USAID Branding Modernization 

Act’’. 

SEC. 2. AUTHORIZATION FOR BRANDING. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—The Administrator of the United States 

Agency for International Development (referred to in this section 

as ‘‘USAID’’), in coordination with the Secretary of State, as appropriate, and with due consideration for the safety and security of 

implementing partners and beneficiaries, is authorized to prescribe, 

as appropriate, the use of logos or other insignia of the USAID 

Identity, or the use of additional or substitute markings, including 

the United States flag, to appropriately identify, including as 

required by section 641 of the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 

(22 U.S.C. 2401), overseas programs administered by USAID. 

(b) AUDIT.—Not later than 1 year after the date of the enactment of this Act, the Inspector General of USAID shall submit 

to Congress an audit of compliance with relevant branding and 

marking requirements of USAID by implementing partners funded 
H. R. 2744—2 

by USAID, including any requirements prescribed pursuant to the 

authorization under subsection (a). 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
Exhibit 10.3

                        LOI WITH SCIA TO ACQUIRE PROPERTY

                                LETTER OF INTENT

This Letter of Intent is made and entered into as of the 12th day of November,
2005, by and between Green Plains Renewable Energy, Inc. and the Shenandoah
Chamber and Industry Association.

It is the intent of Green Plains Renewable Energy, Inc. to construct an ethanol
plant that will produce in excess of 40,000,000 gallons of fuel grade ethanol
annually. It is the intent of Green Plains Renewable Energy, Inc. to locate the
plant in the North half of Section 25, Township 69 North, Range 40 West of the
5th PM, Fremont County, Iowa.

To accomplish this construction, Green Plains Renewable Energy, Inc. requires
the acquisition of two parcels of land owned by the Shenandoah Chamber and
Industry Association described as follows:

Parcel 1: 6.8 acres, more or less located north and west of the BNSF Railroad in
the Southwest 1/4 of the Northeast 1/4 of Section 25, Township 69 North, Range
40 West of the 5th PM, Fremont County, Iowa.

AND:

Parcel 2: 4.1 acres, more or less located in the Northwest 1/4 of the Northeast
1/4 of Section 25, described as that land south and west of rail spur running
form the BNSF Railroad, north and west to the Eaton Mfg. Plant, and east of land
owned by Alberta A. Bryan, all in Township 69 North, Range 40 West of the 5th
PM, Fremont County, Iowa.

It is agreed by Green Plains Renewable Energy, Inc., and the Shenandoah Chamber
and Industry Association, that within 5 days from the date that Green Plains
Renewable Energy, Inc. successfully completes and closes its anticipated equity
fund drive and secures and closes the debt commitments that it will need to
complete construction of the aforementioned ethanol Plant, the Shenandoah
Chamber and Industry Association, will transfer its ownership in the above
described real estate by Warranty Deed, free from all liens and encumbrances, to
Green Plains Renewable Energy, Inc. for $1.00 and other valuable consideration.

In witness thereof, the parties have executed this Letter of Intent on the day
and date first written above.

/s/ Gary Thien                                      /s/ Gregg Connell
------------------------------------                -------------------------
Green Plains Renewable Energy, Inc.                 Shenandoah Chamber and
By: Gary Thien, Vice President                      Industry Association
                                                    By: Gregg Connell,
                                                    Executive Vice President
/s/ Charles Millburg
-------------------------------------------
Shenandoah Chamber and Industry Association
By: Charles Millburg, President
No. 09-11505.

#### Jermaine S. Doss, Petitioner v. Virginia.

562 U.S. 1055, 131 S. Ct. 628,

178 L. Ed. 2d 456,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 9009.

November 15, 2010.

Petition for rehearing denied.

Former decision, 562 U.S. 884, 131 S. Ct. 211, 178 L. Ed. 2d 127, 2010 U.S. LEXIS 6618.
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 23.3


             Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
                         on Financial Statement Schedule

The Board of Directors and Stockholders
Dynamics Research Corporation:

Under the date of March 26, 2003, we reported on the consolidated statement of
operations of Dynamics Research Corporation and subsidiaries for the period
ended December 31, 2002, and the related statements of changes in stockholders'
equity and comprehensive loss and cash flows. In connection with our audit of
the aforementioned consolidated financial statements, we also audited the
related financial statement schedule. This financial statement schedule is the
responsibility of the company's management. Our responsibility is to express an
opinion on this financial statement schedule based on our audit.

In our opinion, such financial statement schedule, when considered in relation
to the basic consolidated financial statements taken as a whole, presents
fairly, in all material respects, the information set forth therein.


/s/ KPMG LLP

Boston, Massachusetts
March 26, 2003
# C_2013123EN.01001701.xml

| 27.4.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 123/17 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.4.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 123/17

---

Action brought on 14 February 2013 — K-Swiss/OHIM — Künzli SwissSchuh (Trainer with five stripes)

(Case T-85/13)

2013/C 123/28

Language in which the application was lodged: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: K-Swiss, Inc. (California, United States) (represented by: R. Niebel and K. Tasma, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal: Künzli SwissSchuh AG (Windisch, Switzerland)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal:

Form of order sought

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | Annul the Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), dated 30 October 2012 in Case R 174/2011-2; and |
| --- | --- |

—

Annul the Decision of the Second Board of Appeal of the Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs), dated 30 October 2012 in Case R 174/2011-2; and

| — | Order the defendant and, as appropriate, the intervener to bear the coasts of the action. |
| --- | --- |

—

Order the defendant and, as appropriate, the intervener to bear the coasts of the action.

Pleas in law and main arguments

Pleas in law and main arguments

Registered Community trade mark in respect of which a declaration of invalidity has been sought: The figurative mark representing a trainer with five stripes — Community trade mark registration No 4 771 978

Registered Community trade mark in respect of which a declaration of invalidity has been sought:

Proprietor of the Community trade mark: The applicant

Proprietor of the Community trade mark:

Applicant for the declaration of invalidity of the Community trade mark: The other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal

Applicant for the declaration of invalidity of the Community trade mark:

Grounds for the application for a declaration of invalidity: The grounds of the request for a declaration of invalidity were those laid down in Article 52(1)(a) in conjunction with Article 7(1)(b) of Council Regulation No 207/2009

Grounds for the application for a declaration of invalidity:

Decision of the Cancellation Division: Declared the contested Community trade mark invalid

Decision of the Cancellation Division:

Decision of the Board of Appeal: Dismissed the appeal

Decision of the Board of Appeal:

Pleas in law: Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Council Regulation No 207/2009.

Pleas in law:

---
2016-1743.

#### In re Application for Sealing of Records of A.J.

Franklin App. No. 15AP-974, 2016-Ohio-5495.

Kennedy, French, and DeWine, JJ., dissent.
ELECTRONIC RECORD

COA # 03-13-00180-CR OFFENSE: 21.11

Juan David Garza, Jr. v. The State

STYLE: ofTexas COUNTY: Hays

6*7-/5

COA DISPOSITION: AFFIRMED TRIAL COURT: 22nd District Court

DATE: 04/09/15 Publish: NO TC CASE #: CR-08-846

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

Juan David Garza, Jr. v. The State of

STYLE: Texas CCA#:

APPELLANT^ Petition

FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW IN CCA IS:

Wfof?)

DATE: Q fUU^O/r

JUDGE: $fi\CtAA.«C>^ PUBLISH:

fe*7-/r

CCA Disposition:

DATE:

JUDGE:

SIGNED:

REHEARING IN CCA IS:

JUDGE:

PC:_

DNP:

MOTION FOR

ELECTRONIC RECORD
TAKE ON

LATENT

TB

INFECTION

Up to 13 million people in the U.S. have latent tuberculosis (TB) infection.

Latent TB Infection

Latent TB infection means 

TB germs are in the body, but 

not enough to cause sickness 

or spread germs to others

TB Disease

If TB germs become active & 

multiply, latent TB infection 

turns into TB disease and can 

spread to others

1 in 10

Without treatment, 1 in 10 

people with latent TB infection 

will develop TB disease

PEOPLE WHO SHOULD BE TESTED FOR TB INFECTION INCLUDE:

Contacts of 

people with 

TB disease

People who were born in or who 

frequently travel to countries 

where TB disease is common

People with health 

problems that make it 

hard to fight TB disease

HOSPITALS

HOMELESS

SHELTERS

CORRECTIONAL 

FACILITIES

People who spend time in places 

where TB is more common

TREATING LATENT TB INFECTION PREVENTS TB DISEASE

TB SKIN 

TEST

TB BLOOD 

TEST

A skin test or blood test can be 

used to diagnose TB infection 

1 dose

1 time per week

12 weeks

Shorter regimens help 

patients finish treatment 

TO TREAT 

LATENT TB 

INFECTION

$500

TO TREAT

TB DISEASE

$20,000

Treating latent TB 

infection is less costly 

than treating disease

ELIMINATING TB REQUIRES EXPANDING TESTING 

& TREATMENT OF LATENT TB INFECTION. CDC WORKS TO:

Engage Affected Communities 

& Medical Providers

Promote Effective Testing 

& Treatment Options

Think 

Latent TB 

Infection!

Develop New Guidance & Tools

To learn more about latent TB infection: www.cdc.gov/tb

October 2021

326944B
No. 10-6471.

#### Eugene Miller, Petitioner v. John Lewis Marks, Jr., Judge, Circuit Court of West Virginia, 15th Judicial Circuit, et al.

562 U.S. 1042, 131 S. Ct. 626,

2010 U.S. LEXIS 8884.

178 L. Ed. 2d 433,

November 15, 2010.

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pau-peris denied. Petitioner is allowed until December 6, 2010, within which to pay the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) and to submit a petition in compliance with Rule 33.1 of the Rules of this Court.
# Former DLA vice director to be inducted into Hall of Fame 

/ Published July 9, 2015
Fort Belvoir, Virginia,
No. 10-7359.

#### Patricia A. Handley, Petitioner v. Chase Bank USA N.A., et al.

562 U.S. 1133, 131 S. Ct. 977,

178 L. Ed. 2d 745,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 326,

January 10, 2011.

Motion of petitioner for leave to proceed in forma pauperis denied. Petitioner is allowed until January 31, 2011, within which to pay the docketing fee required by Rule 38(a) and to submit a petition in compliance with Rule 33.1 of the Rules of this Court.

Same case below, 387 Fed. Appx. 166.
128

Section C: Recommended Funding Levels, by State

Wyoming

Program Intervention Budgets: 2014

Recommended Annual Investment $8.5 million

Deaths in State Caused by Smoking

Annual average smoking-attributable deaths 800

Youth aged 0-17 projected to die from smoking 12,100

Annual Costs Incurred in State from Smoking

Total medical $258 million

State Revenue from Tobacco Sales and Settlement

FY 2012 tobacco tax revenue $24.8 million

FY 2012 tobacco settlement payment $18.6 million

Total state revenue from tobacco sales and settlement $43.4 million

Percent Tobacco Revenue to Fund at Recommended Level 20%

Annual Total (Millions) Annual Per Capita

Minimum Recommended Minimum Recommended

I. State and Community Interventions 

Multiple social resources working together will 

have the greatest long-term population impact.

$2.9 $3.6 $5.03 $6.25

II. Mass-Reach Health Communication Interventions 

Media interventions work to prevent smoking initiation, 

promote cessation, and shape social norms.

$0.6 $0.9 $1.04 $1.56

III. Cessation Interventions 

Tobacco use treatment is effective and highly cost-effective. $1.9 $2.9 $3.30 $5.03

IV. Surveillance and Evaluation 

Publicly funded programs should be accountable and 

demonstrate effectiveness.

$0.5 $0.7 $0.94 $1.28

V. Infrastructure, Administration, and Management 

Complex, integrated programs require experienced 

staff to provide fiscal management, accountability, 

and coordination.

$0.3 $0.4 $0.47 $0.64

TOTAL $6.2 $8.5 $10.78 $14.76

Note: A justification for each program element and the rationale for the budget estimates are provided in Section A. The funding estimates presented are based on adjustments for changes in population and cost-of-living increases since Best Practices—2007 was published. The actual 

funding required for implementing programs will vary depending on state characteristics, such as prevalence of tobacco use, sociodemographic 

factors, and other factors. See Appendix E for data sources on deaths, costs, revenue, and state-specific factors. 

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention • Office on Smoking and Health

www.cdc.gov/tobacco • tobaccoinfo@cdc.gov • 1 (800) CDC-INFO or 1 (800) 232-4636 

2014
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 126 (Wednesday, July 1, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 35945]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-17422]



[[Page 35945]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR


Request for Proposal to Schedule, Escort, Issue Launch Permits 
to, and Collect Fees From Paddle Craft Users on the Colorado River, 
Within the Security Zone of Hoover Dam.

AGENCY: Bureau of Reclamation, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of solicitation for proposals from qualified parties to 
schedule reservations, escort, issue launch permits to, and collect 
fees from paddle crafts users.

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

SUMMARY: Reclamation is soliciting proposals from qualified parties to 
reserve and schedule 2 paddle craft launches daily, and escort a 
maximum of 15 users at each launch-time to a launch area on the 
Colorado River, in a secured area surrounding Hoover Dam.

ADDRESSES: Interested parties should request copies of the Request for 
Proposal (RFP) from Mr. Jeff Reavis, Outdoor Recreation Planner, 
Environmental Compliance and Realty Group, Bureau of Reclamation, Lower 
Colorado Region, P.O. Box 61470, Boulder City, Nevada 89006-1470, 
Telephone: (702) 293-8428 or FAX (702) 293-8146.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. Jeff Reavis at (702) 293-8428.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Reclamation's Lower Colorado Dams Facilities 
office is supervised by the Area Manager, Mr. Timothy J. Ulrich, and 
encompasses projects administered by Hoover, Davis and Parker Dams and 
appurtenant works.
    A Concession Agreement will be negotiated with the Concessionaire 
selected under this RFP. The Area Manager is the authorizing official 
in this action. Prior to execution of an agreement by the Area Manager, 
the agreement will be reviewed for legal sufficiency and endorsement, 
then signed by the prospective new Concessionaire.

    Dated: June 11, 1998.
John A. Johnson,
Acting Director, Resource Management Office.
[FR Doc. 98-17422 Filed 6-30-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-94-P
**REGULATORY EVALUATION**

**Directorate Identifier:** 2012

- NM

- 154

- AD

**Executive Order 12866:** Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”? YES ( ) explain NO (X) **DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:** Is the AD significant? YES ( ) explain NO (X) **Regulatory Flexibility Act:** Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? YES ( ) explain NO (X) **Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:** This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. I s it appropriate t o include specific requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska, where aviation might be the only mode of transportation? YES ( ) explain NO (X)
# Methods and Key Questions

# Literature

# Abbreviations and Acronyms
# C_2015138EN.01005001.xml

| 27.4.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 138/50 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

27.4.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 138/50

---

Order of the General Court of 24 February 2015 — G-Star Raw v OHIM

(Case T-473/13) (1)

1

((Community trade mark - Opposition - Withdrawal of the application to register the disputed mark - No need to adjudicate))

(2015/C 138/66)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: G-Star Raw CV (Amsterdam, the Netherlands) (represented by: J. van Manen, M. van de Braak and L. Fresco, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: Office for Harmonisation in the Internal Market (Trade Marks and Designs) (represented by: A. Folliard-Monguiral, Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the General Court: PepsiCo, Inc. (New York, United States) (represented by: V. von Bomhard and T. Heitmann, lawyers)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of OHIM intervening before the General Court:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Second Board of Appeal of OHIM of 25 June 2013 (Case R 1586/2012-2), relating to opposition proceedings between G-Star Raw CV and PepsiCo, Inc.

Operative part of the order

Operative part of the order

| 1. | There is no further need to adjudicate on the action. |
| --- | --- |

1.

There is no further need to adjudicate on the action.

| 2. | The applicant and the intervener are to bear their own costs and are each ordered to pay half of the costs incurred by the defendant. |
| --- | --- |

2.

The applicant and the intervener are to bear their own costs and are each ordered to pay half of the costs incurred by the defendant.

---

(1)  OJ C 344, 23.11.2013.

1

---
# Appendix A

Guidance Documents(This page intentionally left blank)
# C_2016027EN.01003502.xml

| 25.1.2016 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 27/35 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

25.1.2016

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 27/35

---

Judgment of the General Court of 26 November 2015 — Spain v Commission

(Case T-461/13) (1)

1

((State aid - Digital television - Aid for the deployment of digital terrestrial television in remote and less-urbanised areas in Spain - Decision declaring aid to be partly compatible and partly incompatible with the internal market - Concept of undertaking - Economic activity - Advantage - Service of general economic interest - Distortion of competition - Article 107(3)(c) TFEU - Duty of diligence - Reasonable period - Legal certainty - Equal treatment - Proportionality - Subsidiarity - Right to information))

(2016/C 027/41)

Language of the case: Spanish

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Kingdom of Spain (represented by: A. Rubio González, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: É. Gippini Fournier, B. Stromsky and P. Němečková, acting as Agents)

Defendant:

Re:

Re:

Application for annulment of Commission Decision 2014/489/EU of 19 June 2013 on State aid SA.28599 [(C 23/2010) (ex NN 36/010, ex CP 163/2009)] implemented by the Kingdom of Spain for the deployment of digital terrestrial television in remote and less-urbanised areas (other than Castilla-La Mancha) (OJ 2014 L 217, p. 52).

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1) | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1)

Dismisses the action;

| 2) | Orders the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs incurred in the main proceedings and those relating to the interim proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

2)

Orders the Kingdom of Spain to pay the costs incurred in the main proceedings and those relating to the interim proceedings.

---

(1)  OJ C 304, 19.10.2013.

1

---
Exhibit 32.1

Section 1350 Certification,

As Adopted
Pursuant To

Section 906 of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Magma Design Automation, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended
November 1, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Rajeev Madhavan, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify to my knowledge, 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) 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 for the periods
presented therein.
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

/s/    RAJEEV
MADHAVANRajeev MadhavanChief Executive OfficerDecember 10, 2009


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.