alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 21
 FERRO CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES
LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES AS OF DECEMBER 31, 2009
 Sovereign Power UnderName Of Subsidiary*
    
    The Laws Of Which OrganizedFerro China Holdings Inc
    
    USAZibo Ferro Performance Materials Company, Limited (70%)
    
    Peoples Republic of ChinaFerro Electronic Materials Inc
    
    USAFerro Finance Corporation
    
    USAFerro Color & Glass Corporation
    
    USAFerro Colores SA de CV
    
    MexicoFerro International Services Inc
    
    USAFerro Pfanstiehl Laboratories, Inc
    
    USAFerro Pfanstiehl (Europe) Ltd
    
    United KingdomFerro Argentina SA
    
    ArgentinaMinera Loma Blanca SA
    
    ArgentinaProcesadora de Boratos Argentinos SA
    
    ArgentinaFerro Corporation (Aust.) Pty. Ltd
    
    AustraliaFerro Enamel do Brasil Industria e Comercio Ltda
    
    BrazilFerro Industrial Products Ltd
    
    CanadaESFEL SA (19%)
    
    EcuadorFerro Holding GmbH
    
    GermanyFerro GmbH
    
    GermanyFerro Magmalor GmbH
    
    GermanyPT Ferro Mas Dinamika (95%)
    
    IndonesiaFerro Japan
K.K.
    
    JapanFerro Far East Ltd
    
    Hong KongFerro Far East Company SDN, BHD
    
    MalaysiaFerro Mexicana SA de CV
    
    MexicoFerro B.V.
    
    The NetherlandsFerro (Belgium) Sprl
    
    BelgiumFC France Acquisition Sarl
    
    FranceFerro Couleurs France SA
    
    FrancePT Ferro Ceramic Colors Indonesia (59%)
    
    IndonesiaPT Ferro Additives Asia (75.4%)
    
    IndonesiaFerro France Sarl
    
    FranceFerro Services Sarl
    
    FranceFerro Arnsberg GmbH iL
    
    GermanyFerro (Italia) SrL
    
    ItalySmaltochimica SpA (40%)
    
    ItalyFerro (Holland) BV
    
    The NetherlandsFerro Investments BV
    
    The NetherlandsFerro Industrias Quimicas (Portugal) Lda
    
    PortugalFerro LLC
    
    RussiaFerro
(Suzhou) Performance Materials Co. Ltd.
    
    Peoples Republic of ChinaFerro Taiwan Ltd
    
    Republic of ChinaDC-Ferro Co., Ltd (50%)
    
    Republic of KoreaFerro Spain SA
    
    SpainGardenia-Quimica SA (36%)
    
    SpainKerajet SA (19.99%)
    
    SpainFerro (Thailand) Co. Ltd
    
    ThailandFerro Cerdec (Thailand) Co. Ltd (49%)
    
    ThailandFerro de Venezuela CA (51%)
    
    VenezuelaFerro (Great Britain) Ltd
    
    United Kingdom
 
 *
    
    Percentages in parentheses indicate Ferros ownership.
No. 11-12.

#### Ann H. Lokuta, Judge, Court of Common Pleas, Eleventh Judicial District, Luzerne County, Pennsylvania, Petitioner v. Judicial Conduct Board of Pennsylvania.

565 U.S. 878, 132 S. Ct. 242,

181 L. Ed. 2d 138,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 5337.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Pennsylvania, Eastern District, denied.

Same case below, 608 Pa. 223, 11 A.3d 427.
<PAGE>


                                                                      Exhibit 23

                      CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statement of
Elgin National Industries, Inc. and Subsidiary Companies on Form S-4 (File No.
333-43523) of our report dated March 6, 1998, on our audits of the consolidated
financial statements and financial statement schedules of Elgin National
Industries, Inc. and Subsidiary Companies as of December 31, 1997, 1996 and
1995, which report is included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K.


/s/ Coopers & Lybrand L.L.P.


Chicago, Illinois
March 27, 1998
Exhibit 10 (ii)

|STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA |  | AMENDMENT TOEMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
|----------------------- |  | --------------------------------
|COUNTY OF MECKLENBURG   |  |                                 

THIS
AMENDMENT, made and entered into effective the 31st day of August 2003, by and between FAMILY DOLLAR STORES, INC., a Delaware corporation (hereinafter referred to as
the "Company"); and R. James Kelly (hereinafter referred to as the "Employee");

W
I T N E S S E T H:

WHEREAS,
the Company and the Employee entered into an Employment Agreement effective December 17, 1996, as amended by Amendments to Employment Agreement effective June 21,
1999, September 2, 2001, and September 1, 2002 (hereinafter referred to as the "Agreement"); and

WHEREAS,
the Company and the Employee desire to amend the Agreement;

NOW,
THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants herein contained, the Company and the Employee agree as follows:







---





2

---



IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement in triplicate, all as of the day and year first above written.

|                                   |  | FAMILY DOLLAR STORES, INC.
|---------------------------------- |  | --------------------------
|Attest                             |  | By                        
|/s/GEORGE R. MAHONEY, JR.Secretary |  |                           
|(Corporate Seal)                   |  |                           
|                                   |  |                           
|Witness:                           |  |                           
|/s/ALICE R. BARRIER                |  |                           

3

---

QuickLinks
July 26, 2023

Dear Tribal Leader:

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), the Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease 

Registry (ATSDR), and American Indian and Alaskan Native (AI/AN) federally recognized tribes share the 

goal of establishing clear policies to further the government-to- government relationship between the 

United States Government and federally recognized AI/AN tribes. Effective consultation results in 

information exchange, mutual understanding, and informed decision-making.

Thank you for your recommendations to improve our policies and practices to better engage with AI/AN 

federally recognized tribes. CDC/ATSDR recognizes our unique relationship with AI/AN federally 

recognized tribes and are committed to fulfilling our critical role in promoting the health and safety of 

AI/AN people.

We will review and incorporate your feedback from the July 12 Tribal Consultation on the Rape 

Prevention Education (RPE) Program to inform the new five-year Rape Prevention Education: Enhancing 

Capacity for Sexual Violence Prevention Across State, Territories, and Tribal Coalitions Through a Health 

Equity Lens (NOFO). We understand the importance of providing timely and clear responses to AI/AN 

federally recognized tribes, and we remain committed to holding open and meaningful engagement on

programs that have significant implications for tribes.

We will provide you with a report summarizing the feedback and next steps by October 20, 2023. 

Sincerely,

Christopher M. Jones, PharmD, DrPH, MPH

Director, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control (NCIPC)

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention
No. 10-10931.

#### Craig Curtis, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 857, 132 S. Ct. 191,

181 L. Ed. 2d 99,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6295.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.

Same case below, 635 F.3d 704.
Official Letterhead of LESO State Coordinator 

Date:

Mr./Ms. (LESO Branch Chief)

Defense Logistics Agency

Law Enforcement Support Office

74 N. Washington Ave 

Battle Creek, MI 49037

RE: State or Territory Point of Contact appointment letter for LESO

Dear Mr./Ms. (LESO Branch Chief)

This letter is to confirm that as the Governor appointed State Coordinator of (state/territory) I 

have appointed (Full Name of State Point of Contact, list all) for the LESO Program. List the 

individuals that will have signature authority where it be full or partial authority to sign 

documents for the state or territory. Add or remove those that are no longer working the 

program as needed. 

(SPOC) Full name 

Agency working for

Full Address

Phone numbers (Work) or (Cell) or both

Email address

Special instructions listed here if needed? i.e. Only correspond with the SPOCs and not the State 

Coordinator.

Sincerely, 

(State Coordinator’s Signature) 

State Coordinator (list state or territory)

CC: If needed
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 133 (Monday, July 13, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 37551]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-18500]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. RP98-311-000]


El Paso Natural Gas Company; Notice of Proposed Changes in FERC 
Gas Tariff

July 7, 1998.
    Take notice that on July 1, 1998, El Paso Natural Gas Company (El 
Paso) tendered for filing as part of its FERC Gas Tariff, Second 
Revised Volume No. 1-A, the following tariff sheets, with an effective 
date of August 1, 1998:

Third Revised Sheet No. 202A
Fourth Revised Sheet No. 202B
Second Revised Sheet No. 206

    El Paso states that the filing is being made in compliance with 
Order No. 587-G issued April 16, 1998 at Docket No. RM96-1-007.
    El Paso states that the tariff sheets are being filed to implement 
Version 1.2 of the Gas Industry Standards Board (GISB) Standards 
accepted by the Commission in Order No. 587-G.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest this filing should 
file a motion to intervene or a protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 20426, 
in accordance with Sections 385.214 and 385.211 of the Commission's 
Rules and Regulations. All such motions or protests must be filed as 
provided in Section 154.210 of the Commission's Regulations. Protests 
will be considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate 
action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to 
the proceedings. Any person wishing to become a party must file a 
motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the 
Commission and are available for public inspection in the Public 
Reference Room.
David P. Boergers,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-18500 Filed 7-10-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
No. 11-5048.

#### Curtis Carroll, Petitioner v. George M. Galaza, Warden.

565 U.S. 887, 132 S. Ct. 263,

181 L. Ed. 2d 153,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 5867.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit denied.

*154Same case below, 414 Fed. Appx. 65.
No. 10-10341.

#### Russell Vernon Reado, Petitioner v. Rick Thaler, Director, Texas Department of Criminal Justice, Correctional Institutions Division.

565 U.S. 834, 132 S. Ct. 136,

181 L. Ed. 2d 56,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 5256.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
Docket Number FAA-2013-0668

 Contacts. With whom outside the FAA has this proposal been discussed? 

Organization Person Contacted Date Response 

National Business Aircraft Association Eli Cotti 1/11/13

Regional Airline Association 1/11/13

Aircraft Owners & Pilots Association Robert Hackman 1/11/13

ATA M Lopez 1/11/13
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


I, Timothy Harrington, the Chief Executive Officer, Secretary, and Chairman of
Able Energy, Inc. (the "Company"), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that to the best of my
knowledge:

(1) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the quarter year ended
December 31, 2002 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section
13 (a) or 15 (d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or
78o(d)); and

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

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



Dated: November 14, 2003



/s/ Timothy Harrington
-------------------------------
Name: Timothy Harrington
Title: Chief Executive Officer, Secretary and Chairman
SECRETARY OF DEFENSE
1000 DEFENSE PENTAGON
WASHINGTON, DC 20301-1000 10/3/20 1%

MEMORANDUM FOR ALL MILITARY PERSONNEL AND DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
EMPLOYEES

SUBJECT: Our Responsibility to Safeguard our Nation

Public service, notably service in the United States Department of Defense (DoD), is a
public trust. That trust is bounded by the Oath of Office we took willingly. The oath is a solemn
and legally enforceable obligation to support and defend our Constitution, keeping faith with our
leadership and carrying out our orders in order to safeguard the American people. As I write this
we have troops in harm’s way, carrying out their orders and putting their lives on the line.

In order to carry out our responsibilities, we are privy to some of the most sensitive and
closely held information in our land. It is a violation of our oath to divulge, in any fashion, non-
public DoD information, classified or unclassified, to anyone without the required security
clearance as well as a specific need to know in performance of their duties. Divulging
information in violation of these precepts places at risk our troops in harm’s way, our intelligence
operations, and our technological advantages over our foes. Our integrity as individuals and as a
Department imparts special responsibility on each of us to protect our secrets. Cavalier neglect of
protecting non-public information, classified or unclassified, or intentional release of information
to unauthorized persons, is a serious matter in this Department. Our duties to office and country
demand we preserve and protect all matters vital to defending the Nation.

We must be vigilant in executing our responsibility to prevent disclosure of any
information not authorized for release outside of the Department of Defense: All hands must be
alert to prevent unauthorized disclosure of non-public information for any reason, whether by
implied acknowledgement or intentional release. Misconduct cannot be tolerated and suspected
or confirmed disclosure must be reported at once.

Protecting non-public information in no way inhibits reporting misconduct to appropriate
officials, including those in the DoD Office of the Inspector General, nor does it restrict one’s
tight to communicate with Congress or run contrary to whistleblower protections enshrined in
law.

We are a Department at war, and the increasingly complex security challenges call for

increased vigilance in protecting our secrets. We must always be mindful of the obligations we
have to each other and the Nation we have sworn to protect.

a YA

ay

ae
No. 11-5761.

#### Rafael Rodriguez, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 921, 132 S. Ct. 346,

181 L. Ed. 2d 217,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 7059.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit denied.

Same case below, 644 F.3d 79 and 437 Fed. Appx. 8.
**DoD 4000.25-2-M**

*DLM 4000.25, Volume 2, November 26, 2019*

*Change 13*

**AP2.2. APPENDIX 2.2**

**TYPE OF PHYSICAL INVENTORY/TRANSACTION HISTORY CODES**

### NUMBER OF CHARACTERS:	One

### TYPE OF CODE:	Alpha/Numeric 

### EXPLANATION:	Used in physical Inventory/transaction history documents to identify the type of Inventory being conducted/requested, or to identify requests for/transmission of custodial balances/transaction history.

### RECORD POSITIONS:  	7

2

**AP2.2-**

AP2.2-3	APPENDIX 2.2
No. 10-11104.

#### In re Alfred W. Trenkler, Petitioner.

565 U.S. 813, 132 S. Ct. 393,

181 L. Ed. 2d 247,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6600.

October 3, 2011.

Petition for writ of habeas corpus denied.

Justice Kagan took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
<PAGE>   1

                                                                      EXHIBIT 12

                               JO-ANN STORES, INC.
                       RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                           FISCAL YEAR ENDED
                                                                           -----------------
                                                JANUARY 27,     FEBRUARY 1,    JANUARY 31,     JANUARY 30,   JANUARY 29,
                                                    1996           1997            1998           1999           2000
                                               ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                                             <C>             <C>            <C>             <C>           <C>
Earnings:
   Income Before Income Taxes                          $ 27.9         $ 39.3          $ 51.1         $ 22.4        $ 41.4
   Interest Expense                                      12.0           10.7             5.9           12.5          26.2
   Portion of occupancy expense
     deemed representative of interest(1)                21.5           22.3            23.5           30.9          34.4
                                               ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Earnings                                         $ 61.4         $ 72.3          $ 80.5         $ 65.8       $ 102.0
                                               ===========================================================================

Fixed Charges
   Interest Expense                                    $ 12.0         $ 10.7          $  5.9         $ 12.5       $  26.2
   Portion of occupancy expense
     deemed representative of interest(1)                21.5           22.3            23.5           30.9          34.4
                                               ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total Fixed Charges                                    $ 33.5         $ 33.0          $ 29.4         $ 43.4       $  60.6
                                               ===========================================================================

Ratio of Earnings to Fixed Charges                       1.8x           2.2x            2.7x           1.5x          1.7x
                                               ===========================================================================

(1) Represents 33% of fixed rental charges
</TABLE>


                                       65
# C_2013171EN.01003502.xml

| 15.6.2013 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 171/35 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

15.6.2013

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 171/35

---

Action brought on 16 April 2013 — Scuola Elementare Maria Montessori v Commission

(Case T-220/13)

2013/C 171/66

Language of the case: Italian

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Scuola Elementare Maria Montessori (Rome, Italy) (represented by: A. Nucara and E. Gambaro, lawyers)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Commission

Defendant:

Pleas in law

Pleas in law

The pleas in law and main arguments are the same as those relied on in Case T-219/13 Ferracci v Commission.

Ferracci

Commission

---
[Federal Register Volume 63, Number 141 (Thursday, July 23, 1998)]
[Notices]
[Page 39561]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 98-19589]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
[Docket No. CP98-654-000]


Mississippi River Transmission Corporation; Notice of Request 
Under Blanket Authorization

July 17, 1998.
    Take notice that on July 6, 1998, Mississippi River Transmission 
Corporation (MRT), 1111 Louisiana Street, Houston, Texas 77002, filed 
in Docket No. CP98-654-000 a request pursuant to Sections 157.205, 
157.212 and 157.216 of the Commission's Regulations under the Natural 
Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205, 157.212 and 157.216) for the abandonment, 
construction and operation of certain facilities in St. Louis, 
Missouri, under MRT's blanket certificate issued in Docket No. CP98-
482-000 pursuant to Section 7 of the Natural Gas Act, all as more fully 
set forth in the request that is on file with the Commission and open 
to public inspection.
    Specifically, MRT proposes to relocate facilities by abandoning a 
6-inch delivery tap and installing and operating a new 4-inch delivery 
tap on MRT's St. Louis Line to serve Laclede Gas, a local distribution 
company in St. Louis, Missouri. MRT states that the total estimated 
volumes to be delivered to these facilities are 5,000 MMBtu annually 
and 15 MMBtu on a peak day. The total estimated cost of the relocation 
is $100,477.
    Any person or the Commission's staff may, within 45 days after 
issuance of the instant notice by the Commission, file pursuant to Rule 
214 of the Commission's Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion to 
intervene or notice of intervention and pursuant to Section 157.205 of 
the Regulations under the Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205) a protest to 
the request. If no protest is filed within the time allowed therefor, 
the proposed activity shall be deemed to be authorized effective the 
day after the time allowed for filing a protest. If a protest is filed 
and not withdrawn within 30 days after the time allowed for filing a 
protest, the instant request shall be treated as an application for 
authorization pursuant to Section 7 of the Natural Gas Act.
David P. Boergers,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 98-19589 Filed 7-22-98; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
Page 1 of 3

Disposition Comments

Docket No: FAA-2014-0176 These comments are in

Directorate ID: 2013-NM-066-AD response to an SNPRM

Originating Office Tracking No.: 2013-0052

Next Step: FRAN SNPRM

 No Comments/Only Supportive Comments Received – If this box is checked, no signatures are 

required.

No Has the referenced service information been revised since the NPRM was issued? If yes,

list latest revision and attach a copy. Note that changes beyond the scope of the previously 

published NPRM will require a new notice. Contact the Directorate focal point for guidance.

Instructions: Summarize all comments by issue (not by commenter) and provide your recommended resolution of 

each issue. All comments relating to the same issue should be discussed together. Do not list all of the issues 

from one commenter together. If changes to the AD are required based on the comments received, explain why and 

describe in detail what change(s) you recommend. Reference FAA-IR-M-8040.1C Chapter 9.

ISSUE 1: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD: 

If NO, we don’t agree because 

ISSUE 2: Select one of the following: 

If other, explain: 

Commenter(s): 

What change to the AD action is requested? 

Why is the change requested or how is it justified? 

Do we agree? 

If YES, we agree because Make the following changes to the AD: 

If PARTIALLY AGREE, we agree with because We disagree with because 

Make the following changes to the AD:
Page 2 of 3

If NO, we don’t agree because 

For additional issues, double-click here
Page 3 of 3

Signature Section

Signature indicates concurrence with this action.

Originating Office Tracking No.: 

ASE Printed Name: Date

Branch Manager Date
No. 10-1202.

#### Chinese Daily News, Inc., Petitioner v. Lynn Wang, et al.

565 U.S. 801, 132 S. Ct. 74,

181 L. Ed. 2d 1,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 6743.

October 3, 2011.

On petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit. Petition for writ of certiorari granted. Judgment vacated, and case remanded to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit for further consideration in light of Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Dukes, 564 U.S. 338, 131 S. Ct. 2541, 180 L. Ed. 2d 374 (2011). Justice Breyer took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.

Same case below, 623 F.3d 743.