alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**Exhibit 31.2****CERTIFICATIONS**I, Glen W. Fausset, President and CFO of First National Bancshares, Inc., certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of First National Bancshares, Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:(e) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls andprocedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relatingto the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by otherswithin those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;**(f) [This paragraph intentionally left blank.]**(g) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation;and(h) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or isreasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions):(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have asignificant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.Date: August 15, 2005   /s/ Glen W. Fausset     Glen W. Fausset, President & CFO
Date: 6 September 2017 **********************

NSN: 8940-01-443-1520 (APIS) * MONOGRAPH M5J

 ********************** 

Item: Apple Pieces in Spiced Sauce

Document: PCR-A-001C, Apple Pieces in Spiced Sauce, Packaged in a Flexible Pouch, Shelf 

Stable

Approximate Caloric Value Per Serving: 150 Component Classification: Secondary

Estimated Shelf Life:

36 months at 80°F

6 months at 100 °F

Item Characteristics

Appearance:

General: Cooked, apple pieces in spiced sauce. Free from core and seed material; 

practically free of peel material.

Apple pieces: Medium golden yellow to light tan color. Minimum of sixty-five percent 

by weight of apple slices not less than 3/4 inch in length and 1/4 inch in thickness.

Sauce: Glossy, translucent light to medium golden color with visible specks of ground 

spices and slightly to moderately thick.

Odor: Moderately sweet and slightly acidic cooked apples with cinnamon.

Flavor: Moderately sweet and slightly acidic cooked apples with cinnamon.

Texture: Slightly firm and tender apple pieces and smooth and moderately thick sauce.

Possible Deteriorative Changes 

Appearance: Slightly dark, tan color; mushy apples. 

Odor: Pungent to sour odor.

Flavor: Bitter or sour flavor.

Texture: Soft to mushy apples; thin to watery sauce.

Unique Examination/Test Procedures

N/A

Special Notes

N/A
Dated: August 2020

PRINT SPECIFICATIONS FOR DLA FORM 1624

EVIDENCE TAG

This tag shall be printed in accordance with Federal Specifications UU-T-81g (1), Type B, Class 2, 15 CSU 

Size No. 8, and as further described below:

a. The paper tags shall be reasonably free from foreign particles or undigested fibers. The 

fiber content shall be 100 percent chemical wood pulp. The tags shall have a minimum wet 

tensile strength of 5 kg per 15 mm in the cross direction of the paper. 

b. Construction: The tags shall have a patch near the center and edge of one end. The patch 

shall be made from 100 percent chemical wood pulp and not less than 0.010 inch in 

thickness. The patch shall have a hole 3/16 inch in diameter and shall not be less than 9/16 

inch in diameter when measured through the center of the hole. The hole shall not be less 

than 3/16 inch from the outside edge of the patch. Tags shall be mildew resistant and shall 

have clipped-corners on the patch end. 

c. Size: 8” x 4”

d. Stock: Manila

e. Stringing: The tag shall be strung with string

f. Ink: Black

g. Printing: Head-to-head

h. Perforation: Perforate on the right-side of the tag, 1-5/16” x 4” (follow sample provided)
No. 11-7840.

#### Erick Hinds, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 1171, 132 S. Ct. 1126,

181 L. Ed. 2d 1004,

2012 U.S. LEXIS 641.

January 17, 2012.

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

Same case below, 435 Fed. Appx. 832.
STATE OF MISSOURI

, )

) Respondent

, )

)

vs. ) No. SD36013
)

JOSEPH THERON WRIGHT

, ) FILED: Febr uary 11, 2020 ) Appellant

. )

APPEAL FR OM THE CIRCUIT COURT OF STODDARD COUNTY

Honorable Robert N. Mayer

, Judge

REVERSED AND REMANDED WITH DIRECTIONS

C onvicted of second

- degree domestic assault, a class D felony, Appellant

received a 12

- year sentence as a § 565 .079 persistent assault offender

, which the

state now concedes as error. 1 Finding no merit to Appellant’s other point, we

reverse and remand for resentencing

.

The persistent

- assault

- offender finding was based on Appellant’s two other

assault convictions, one in 2012, but the other on August 28, 2018

, a week after

the instant offense

. We agree with the parties that this was error ; all findings of

guilt needed to pre

- date the instant offense. § 565.079 .10. We also agree that

proper recourse is to revers e and remand for resentencing within the range of

punishment for a class C felony , three to ten years. 2

1 Statutory citations are RSMo as amended through 2017.

2 Both parties acknowledge the court’s finding that Appellant also was a § 558 .016 persistent felony

offende r based on his 2012 felony assault plea and a 2011 felony drug plea.

### 2 We reject Appellant’s other charge that the trial court “ abused its discretion

or plainly erred ” in overruling Appellant’s objection to an alleged closing

- argument

comment on A ppellant’s failure to testify. P lain error is the applicable standard

g iven the objection’s lack of specificity, and no manifest injustice or miscarriage of

justice appears. 3 See State v. Hawkins , 328 S.W.3d 799, 812

- 14 (Mo.App.

2010).

We reverse and remand solely for resentencing consistent with th is opinion.

DANIEL E. SCOTT, P. J.

– OPINION AUTHOR

J EFFREY W. BATES

, C. J.

– CONCURS

MARY W. SHEFFIELD, J.

– CONCURS

3 We quote the transcript:

[PROSECUTOR]: [The victim] came. She faced her accuser. She faced her

assaulter. Stood on the stand a nd told you what happened. That’ s the evidence in this case. And that’s what happened here. It’s unrefuted. That’ s th e big five dollar word

that lawyers u se to say there’ s nobody saying anything else.

[DEFENSE COUNSEL]: Objec tion, Your Honor. The Defendant’s pled not guilty.

He’ s certainly disputing the victim’ s statements.

[PROSECUTOR]: I’m talking about what’ s in evidence.

THE COURT: All right. The Court will overrule the objection.

Specific objections to arguments or statements of counsel are required to draw the court’s attention to the reason for objection. See State v. Neighbors , 502 S.W.3d 745, 748 (Mo.App. 2016) . Here,

trial counsel’s objection (“ The Defendant’s pled not guilty. He’ s certainly disputing the victim ’ s statements.”) differs from Point 2 on appeal (impermissible comment on a defendant’s right to
remain silent).
No. 11-6841.

#### Carlos A. McGrew, Petitioner v. Cindy Vannoy, et al.

565 U.S. 1118, 132 S. Ct. 1008,

181 L. Ed. 2d 747,

2012 U.S. LEXIS 291.

January 9, 2012.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit denied.
No. 11-7518.

#### Daniel Gonzalez-Garcia, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 1133, 132 S. Ct. 1056,

181 L. Ed. 2d 775,

2012 U.S. LEXIS 139.

January 9, 2012.

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

Same case below, 410 Fed. Appx. 827.
(1) Adjusting Price

Base Skim Milk Price for Class I $7.75 CWT 0.965 $7.48

Advanced Butterfat Pricing Factor $3.0035 LB 3.5 $10.51

Class I Price $17.99

(2) Base Price

Base Skim Milk Price for Class I $8.24 CWT 0.965 $7.95

Advanced Butterfat Pricing Factor $3.0091 LB 3.5 $10.53

Class I Price $18.48

(3) Change from Base Price per CWT (0.49)

(4) Price change per gallon ($0.04)

(Line (3) divide by 11.63 gallons/cwt)

(5) Price change per half gallon ($0.02)

Price change per quart ($0.01)

Price change per pint ($0.01)

Price change per 14-oz pg. ($0.00)

Price change per 12-oz pg. ($0.00)

Price change per 1/3 qt. (10-oz) ($0.00)

Price change per half pint ($0.00)

(6) Price adjustment per gallon (128-oz) ($0.04)

Price adjustment per half gallon (64-oz) ($0.02)

Price adjustment per quart (32-oz) ($0.01)

Price adjustment per pint (16oz) ($0.01)

Price change per 14-oz pg. ($0.00)

Price change per 12-oz pg. ($0.00)

Price adjustment per 1/3 qt. (10-oz) ($0.00)

Price adjustment per half pint (8-oz) ($0.00)

Monthly EPA Calculation for Class I Milk (Clause 52.216-9032)

Based on USDA Announcement of Advanced Prices and Pricing Factors

Effective Date: Feb 4th, 2024
(1) Adjusting Price

Base Skim Milk Price for Class I $15.22 CWT 0.965 $14.6873

Advanced Butterfat Pricing Factor $2.6235 LB 3.5 $9.1823

Class I Price $23.8696

(2) Base Price

Base Skim Milk Price for Class I $15.01 CWT 0.965 $14.4847

Advanced Butterfat Pricing Factor $2.4377 LB 3.5 $8.5320

Class I Price $23.0166

(3) Change from Base Price per CWT $0.8530

(4) Price change per gallon $0.0733

(Line (3) divide by 11.63 gallons/cwt)

(5) Price change per half gallon $0.0367

Price change per quart $0.0183

Price change per pint $0.0092

Price change per 12-oz pg. $0.0066

Price change per 1/3 qt. (10-oz) $0.0055

Price change per half pint $0.0046

(6) Price adjustment per gallon $0.07

Price adjustment per half gallon $0.04

Price adjustment per quart $0.02

Price adjustment per pint $0.01

Price change per 12-oz pg. $0.01

Price adjustment per 1/3 qt. (10-oz) $0.01

Price adjustment per half pint $0.00

**No price adjustment is required if the price change per-gallon, in either direction,

is not equal to or greater than +/-$0.0100 (See paragraph (f)(1) of the clause). 

NOTE: Numbers in brackets are negative or decreases, all others are positives or increases. 

Monthly EPA Calculation for Class I Milk (Clause 52.216-9032)

Based on USDA Announcement of Advanced Prices and Pricing Factors

Effective Date: Aug. 3, 2014
VC #

ESTABLISHMENT # / PLANT CODE (IMSL, USDA, etc.)

12. REMARKS (use additional paper if necessary):

REQUEST FOR VETERINARY LABORATORY TESTING & FOOD SAMPLE RECORD

For use of this form, see AR 40-657; the proponent agency is OTSG.

DA FORM 7539, FEB 2005 APD 9V1.000

1. FROM: 2. POINT OF CONTACT: 3. CONTROL NUMBER:

Name:

Phone:

Station Identification Number:

-

4. TO: VETCOM FADL

VLE

HAWAII

BAHRAIN

KOREA

5. PRODUCER/MANUFACTURER (Name, Address and Phone):

6. REASON FOR SUBMISSION:

Suspected foodborne illness

(contact laboratory prior to submission) Destination monitoring program

Contract compliance

Proximate analysis

Sanitation Audits

Initial

Special

Directed routine

Routine

Suspected foreign material/object

Customer return/complaint

(provide synopsis of incident/problem and local 

inspection results in the Remarks section below).

OTHER (Specify):

7. SAMPLES SELECTED FROM:

DECA MWR PLANT

OTHER: 

Exchange Exchange vendor Prime vendor

Commercial establishment

8. DATE SAMPLE(S) SELECTED: thru

Room temperature

Frozen

Chilled - include 1 temperature pilot per shipping container

10. INSPECTOR'S SIGNATURE 11. ACCOUNTABLE OFFICER'S SIGNATURE

FOR LABORATORY USE ONLY

SHIPPING CARRIER TRACKING NUMBER: LABORATORY REPORT NUMBER: RECEIVED:

PAGE 1 OF 2

CHEMISTRY MICROBIOLOGY

SAMPLE(S) FOR ANALYSIS BY:

RECEIPT TEMPERATURE:

9. SHIPMENT TEMPERATURE CONDITIONS:
SAMPLE NUMBER 1

SAMPLE NUMBER 2

SAMPLE NUMBER 3

SAMPLE NUMBER 4

SAMPLE NUMBER 5

SAMPLE NUMBER 6

BRAND NAME

13. SAMPLE INFORMATION (Complete as much information as is available): LAB REPORT #

DA FORM 7539, FEB 2005

FOR ADDITIONAL SAMPLES, USE ADDITIONAL COPIES OF PAGE 2.

SUBMITTER SAMPLE NUMBER SAMPLE DESCRIPTION

UNIVERSAL PRODUCT CODE (UPC) PRODUCT CODE SAMPLE WEIGHT/VOLUME

QUANTITY SUBMITTED UNIT OF ISSUE TOTAL COST DISPOSITION

SUBMITTER SAMPLE NUMBER SAMPLE DESCRIPTION

UNIVERSAL PRODUCT CODE (UPC) PRODUCT CODE SAMPLE WEIGHT/VOLUME

UNIT OF ISSUE

BRAND NAME

QUANTITY SUBMITTED TOTAL COST DISPOSITION

SUBMITTER SAMPLE NUMBER SAMPLE DESCRIPTION

UNIVERSAL PRODUCT CODE (UPC) PRODUCT CODE SAMPLE WEIGHT/VOLUME

UNIT OF ISSUE

BRAND NAME

QUANTITY SUBMITTED TOTAL COST DISPOSITION

SUBMITTER SAMPLE NUMBER SAMPLE DESCRIPTION

UNIVERSAL PRODUCT CODE (UPC) PRODUCT CODE SAMPLE WEIGHT/VOLUME

UNIT OF ISSUE

BRAND NAME

QUANTITY SUBMITTED TOTAL COST DISPOSITION

SUBMITTER SAMPLE NUMBER SAMPLE DESCRIPTION

UNIVERSAL PRODUCT CODE (UPC) PRODUCT CODE SAMPLE WEIGHT/VOLUME

UNIT OF ISSUE

BRAND NAME

QUANTITY SUBMITTED TOTAL COST DISPOSITION

SUBMITTER SAMPLE NUMBER SAMPLE DESCRIPTION

UNIVERSAL PRODUCT CODE (UPC) PRODUCT CODE SAMPLE WEIGHT/VOLUME

UNIT OF ISSUE

BRAND NAME

QUANTITY SUBMITTED TOTAL COST DISPOSITION

FOR LABORATORY USE ONLY

FOR LABORATORY USE ONLY

FOR LABORATORY USE ONLY

FOR LABORATORY USE ONLY

FOR LABORATORY USE ONLY

FOR LABORATORY USE ONLY

APD 9V1.000

PAGE 2 OF 2
No. 11-7940.

#### Kenneth A. Jones, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 1183, 132 S. Ct. 1155,

181 L. Ed. 2d 1027,

2012 U.S. LEXIS 1040.

January 23, 2012.

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

[Congressional Bills 109th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 46 Introduced in House (IH)]

109th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                 H. R. 46

   To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to repeal the 
   requirement that persons making disbursements for electioneering 
  communications file reports on such disbursements with the Federal 
     Election Commission and the prohibition against the making of 
  disbursements for electioneering communications by corporations and 
              labor organizations, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 4, 2005

   Mr. Bartlett of Maryland introduced the following bill; which was 
           referred to the Committee on House Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To amend the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 to repeal the 
   requirement that persons making disbursements for electioneering 
  communications file reports on such disbursements with the Federal 
     Election Commission and the prohibition against the making of 
  disbursements for electioneering communications by corporations and 
              labor organizations, 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 ``First Amendment Restoration Act''.

SEC. 2. REPEAL OF CERTAIN REQUIREMENTS RELATING TO ELECTIONEERING 
              COMMUNICATIONS.

    (a) Disclosure of Disbursements for Communications.--Section 304(f) 
of the Federal Election Campaign Act of 1971 (2 U.S.C. 434(f)) is 
amended by adding at the end the following new paragraph:
            ``(8) Termination of reporting requirement.--No person 
        shall be required to file any statement under this subsection 
        with respect to any disbursement made on or after November 6, 
        2002.''.
    (b) Prohibition Against Making of Disbursements for Communications 
by Corporations and Labor Organizations.--Section 316 of such Act (2 
U.S.C. 441b) is amended--
            (1) in subsection (b)(2), by striking ``or for any 
        applicable electioneering communication''; and
            (2) by striking subsection (c).
    (c) Treatment of Coordinated Communications as Contributions.--
Section 315(a)(7) of such Act (2 U.S.C. 441b(a)(7)) is amended--
            (1) by striking subparagraph (C); and
            (2) by redesignating subparagraph (D) as subparagraph (C).

SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    The amendments made by this Act shall take effect as if included in 
the enactment of the Bipartisan Campaign Reform Act of 2002.
                                 <all>
```
No. 11-6613.

#### Miguel Rivera, Petitioner v. United States.

565 U.S. 1175, 132 S. Ct. 1139,

181 L. Ed. 2d 1013,

2012 U.S. LEXIS 634.

January 17, 2012.

Petition for rehearing denied.

Former decision, 565 U.S. 1018, 132 S. Ct. 560, 181 L. Ed. 2d 404, 2011 U.S. LEXIS 7998.
Order entered May 6, 2014

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 14
- 00264
- CR
EX PARTE ORLANDO GUT IERREZ On Appeal from the 363rd Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. WX13
- 90023
- W



### O RDER By ord er entered March 6, 2014, the Court set this accelerated appeal for submission on June 2, 2014 and ordered appellant to file his brief by April 18, 2014. By order entered April 23, 2014, the Court granted appellant’s motion for extension and reset the due dates for appellant’s and the State’s briefs. The time to file appellant’s brief was extended to May 2, 2014. Both orders stated that if a party did not submit its brief by the date specified, the appeal would be submitted without that party’s brief. A ppellant did not file his brief by the extended due date. Instead, appellant has filed a May 2, 2014 second motion for extension of time to file appellant’s brief. Appellant’s second motion for extension is DENIED

. We ORDER this appeal submitted withou t appellant’s brief. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 31.1.
/s/ JIM MOSELEY JUSTICE
No. 11-6684.

#### Juan M. Chavez, Petitioner v. Randy Grounds, Warden.

565 U.S. 1082, 132 S. Ct. 820,

181 L. Ed. 2d 531,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 8800.

December 5, 2011.

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

Same case below, 421 Fed. Appx. 704.
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 37 (Thursday, February 26, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 8811]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-4025]



[[Page 8811]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Antitrust Division


Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--American International Recruitment Council

    Notice is hereby given that, on January 27, 2009, pursuant to 
Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 
1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act'') American International 
Recruitment Council (``AIRC'') has filed written notifications 
simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal Trade 
Commission disclosing (1) the name and principal place of business of 
the standards development organization and (2) the nature and scope of 
its standards development activities. The notifications were filed for 
the purpose of invoking the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of 
antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances.
    Pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act, the name and principal place 
of business of the standards development organization is: American 
International Recruitment Council, Cincinnati, OH. The nEtture and 
scope of AIRC's standards development activities are: (i) Develop 
standards of ethical practice pertaining to recruitment of 
international students to American educational institutions, such 
standards to address two constituencies: Educational Institutions and 
Student Recruitment Agents; (ii) develop best practices and training to 
assist overseas student recruitment agents and institutions themselves 
to better serve students seeking admission to American educational 
institutions, and (iii) establish a framework through which 
participating agents can have their practices certified.

Patricia A. Brink,
Deputy Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. E9-4025 Filed 2-25-09; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-11-M
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA

F OURTH D ISTRICT

JOHN D. MARSHALL

, Appellant,

v.

HOLIDAY HUNT RUSSELL PLLC

, Appellee.

No. 4D2023

- 1327

[ February 8, 2024 ]

Appeal from the County Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit,

Broward County; Jackie Powell, Judge; L.T. Case No. COCE

- 22

- 051871.

John D. Marshall, Lighthouse Point, pro se.

Holiday Hunt Russell of Holiday Hunt Russell PLLC, Fort Lauderdale,

for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.

Affirmed

.

L EVINE

, K UNTZ and A RTAU

, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
No. 10-708.

#### First American Financial Corporation, Successor in Interest to The First American Corporation, et al., Petitioners v. Denise P. Edwards.

565 U.S. 1012, 132 S. Ct. 570,

181 L. Ed. 2d 394,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 8065.

November 7, 2011.

Motion of the Solicitor General for leave to participate in oral argument as amicus curiae and for divided argument granted.
(1) Adjusting Price

Base Skim Milk Price for Class I $8.24 CWT 0.965 $7.95

Advanced Butterfat Pricing Factor $3.0091 LB 3.5 $10.53

Class I Price $18.48

(2) Base Price

Base Skim Milk Price for Class I $7.95 CWT 0.965 $7.67

Advanced Butterfat Pricing Factor $3.4526 LB 3.5 $12.08

Class I Price $19.76

(3) Change from Base Price per CWT (1.27)

(4) Price change per gallon ($0.11)

(Line (3) divide by 11.63 gallons/cwt)

(5) Price change per half gallon ($0.05)

Price change per quart ($0.03)

Price change per pint ($0.01)

Price change per 14-oz pg. ($0.01)

Price change per 12-oz pg. ($0.01)

Price change per 1/3 qt. (10-oz) ($0.01)

Price change per half pint ($0.01)

(6) Price adjustment per gallon (128-oz) ($0.11)

Price adjustment per half gallon (64-oz) ($0.05)

Price adjustment per quart (32-oz) ($0.03)

Price adjustment per pint (16oz) ($0.01)

Price change per 14-oz pg. ($0.01)

Price change per 12-oz pg. ($0.01)

Price adjustment per 1/3 qt. (10-oz) ($0.01)

Price adjustment per half pint (8-oz) ($0.01)

Monthly EPA Calculation for Class I Milk (Clause 52.216-9032)

Based on USDA Announcement of Advanced Prices and Pricing Factors

Effective Date: Jan 7th, 2024
No. 11-6975.

#### Danny Allen Westbrook, Petitioner v. Mississippi.

565 U.S. 1097, 132 S. Ct. 854,

181 L. Ed. 2d 557,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 8940.

December 12, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court of Mississippi denied.
No. 11-6345.

#### Rafael Ponce, Petitioner v. California.

565 U.S. 1039, 132 S. Ct. 584,

181 L. Ed. 2d 429,

2011 U.S. LEXIS 8175.

November 14, 2011.

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeal of California, Fourth Appellate District, Division One, denied.