alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
## Breadcrumb

-  Publications 
-  Reports 

#           Simulation analysis of the unconfined aquifer, Raft River geothermal area, Idaho-Utah      

      January 1, 1979    

View Document

This study covers about 1,000 mi2 (2,600 km2 ) of the southern Raft River drainage basin in south-central Idaho and northwest Utah. The main area of interest, approximately 200 mi2 (520 km2 ) of semiarid agricultural and rangeland in the southern Raft River Valley that includes the known Geothermal Resource Area near Bridge, Idaho, was modelled numerically to evaluate the hydrodynamics of the unconfined aquifer. Computed and estimated transmissivity values range from 1,200 feet squared per day (110 meters squared per day) to 73,500 feet squared per day (6,830 meters squared per day). Water budgets, including ground-water recharge and discharge for approximate equilibrium conditions, have been computed by several previous investigators; their estimates of available ground-water recharge range from about 46,000 acre-feet per year (57 cubic hectometers per year) to 100,000 acre-feet per year (123 cubic hectometers per year).

Simulation modeling of equilibrium conditions represented by 1952 water levels suggests: (1) recharge to the water-table aquifer is about 63,000 acre-feet per year (77 cubic hectometers per year); (2) a significant volume of ground water is discharged through evapotranspiration by phreatophytes growing on the valley bottomlands; (3) the major source of recharge may be from upward leakage of water from a deeper, confined reservoir; and (4) the aquifer transmissivity probably does not exceed about 12,000 feet squared per day (3,100 meters squared per day). Additional analysis carried out by simulating transient conditions from 1952 to 1965 strongly suggests that aquifer transmissivity does not exceed about 7,700 feet squared per day (700 meters squared per day). The model was calibrated using slightly modified published pumpage data; it satisfactorily reproduced the historic water-level decline over the period 1952-65.

## Citation Information

### Study Area

### Contact

####               Salt Lake City Main Office          

2329 West Orton CircleWest Valley City, UT84119-2047United States

doleary@usgs.gov

(801) 908-5014

(801) 908-5001

### Explore Search

                  - United States
                  - Raft River geothermal area
                  - Idaho
                  -  Utah

View All **
I 

114TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 4750 

To amend title 10, United States Code, to repeal the prohibition on providing 

adoptive leave to each member of a dual military couple. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MARCH 16, 2016 

Mr. MACARTHUR (for himself and Mr. LANGEVIN) introduced the following 

bill; which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services 

A BILL 

To amend title 10, United States Code, to repeal the prohibition on providing adoptive leave to each member of a 

dual military couple. 

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 ‘‘Adoption Leave for 

5 Military Families Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. REVISION IN DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE POLICIES 

7 REGARDING ADOPTIVE LEAVE FOR DUAL 

8 MILITARY COUPLES. 

9 Section 701(i)(3) of title 10, United States Code, is 

10 amended by striking ‘‘only one such member shall be alVerDate Sep 11 2014 03:46 Mar 17, 2016 Jkt 059200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H4750.IH H4750

SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 4750 IH

1 lowed leave under this subsection’’ and inserting ‘‘one of 

2 the members is allowed up to 21 days of leave under this 

3 subsection and the other member may be allowed up to 

4 14 days of leave under this subsection’’. 

Æ 


SSpencer on DSK4SPTVN1PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 8.1



Trend Micro Subsidiaries



|1. |  | Trend Micro Incorporated
|-- |  | ------------------------

| |  | (Taiwan)
| |  | --------



|2. |  | Trend Micro Inc.
|-- |  | ----------------

| |  | (U.S.A.)
| |  | --------



|3. |  | Trend Korea Inc.
|-- |  | ----------------

| |  | (South Korea)
| |  | -------------



|4. |  | Trend Micro Italy S.r.l.
|-- |  | ------------------------

| |  | (Italy)
| |  | -------



|5. |  | Trend Micro Deutschland Gmbh
|-- |  | ----------------------------

| |  | (Germany)
| |  | ---------



|6. |  | Trend Micro Australia Pty. Ltd.
|-- |  | -------------------------------

| |  | (Australia)
| |  | -----------



|7. |  | Trend Micro do Brasil Ltda.
|-- |  | ---------------------------

| |  | (Brazil)
| |  | --------



|8. |  | Trend Micro France
|-- |  | ------------------

| |  | (France)
| |  | --------



|9. |  | Trend Micro Hong Kong Limited
|-- |  | -----------------------------

| |  | (Hong Kong)
| |  | -----------



|10. |  | Trend Micro (UK) Limited
|--- |  | ------------------------

| |  | (United Kingdom)
| |  | ----------------



|11. |  | Trend Micro Latinoamerica S.A.de C.V.
|--- |  | -------------------------------------

| |  | (Mexico)
| |  | --------



|12. |  | Trend Micro (Shanghai) Inc.
|--- |  | ---------------------------

| |  | (China)
| |  | -------



|13. |  | Trend Micro (NZ) Limited
|--- |  | ------------------------

| |  | (New Zealand)
| |  | -------------



|14. |  | ipTrend Incorporated
|--- |  | --------------------

| |  | (Taiwan)
| |  | --------



|15. |  | Trend Micro Incorporated Sdn.Bhd
|--- |  | --------------------------------

| |  | (Malaysia)
| |  | ----------
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

FORT LAUDERDALE DIVISION

In re: ) Case No.: 19-24331-PDR

)

RALPH LEVI SANDERS. ) Chapter 13

)

 Debtor /

LIMITED NOTICE OF APPEARANCE

PLEASE TAKE NOTICE that the law firm of P. W. KELLY ASSOCIATES, P.A. files this Limited

Notice of Appearance as Appearance Counsel on behalf of Creditor Specialized Loan Servicing LLC as 

servicing agent for The Bank of New York Mellon, f/k/a The Bank of New York, successor in interest to 

JPMorgan Chase Bank, N.A. as Trustee for Bear Stearns Asset Backed Securities Trust 2006-SD2, Asset 

Backed Certificates, Series 2006-SD2, solely for the limited purpose of making court appearances in the 

above-captioned case.

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I CERTIFY that a true copy of this notice was served by Notice of Electronic Filing on all CM/ECF 

registered users and by regular first class U.S. mail to the Debtor and all other parties listed on the attached 

service list, this August 3, 2021.

P. W. KELLY ASSOCIATES, P.A.

 By: /s/ Peter w. Kelly, Esq.

Peter W. Kelly, Esq.

Florida Bar No. 59991

P. W. Kelly Associates, P.A.

P.O. Box 331083

Miami, FL 33233-1083

Phone: (786) 766-0012

E-Mail: pkelly@pwkpa.com

Case 19-24331-PDR Doc 180 Filed 08/03/21 Page 1 of 2
SERVICE LIST

Via CM/ECF:

Robin R. Weiner – ecf@ch13weiner.com

Office of the U.S. Trustee – ustp.region21.mm.ecf@usdoj.gov

All other CM/ECF registered parties

Via Regular U.S. Mail:

Ralph Levi Sanders, Jr.

561 SW 60 Ave.

Plantation, FL 33317

Case 19-24331-PDR Doc 180 Filed 08/03/21 Page 2 of 2
## Breadcrumb

-  Publications 
-  Articles 

#           State of the data: Assessing the FAIRness of USGS data      

      April 26, 2024    

In response to recent shifts towards open science that emphasize transparency, reproducibility, and access to research data, the US Geological Survey (USGS) conducted a study to assess the degree to which USGS data assets meet the FAIR data principles (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable). The USGS designed and applied a methodology for quantitative analysis of FAIR characteristics. A new rubric was derived from a crosswalk of existing FAIR evaluation frameworks and customized for the USGS. The rubric, consisting of 62 yes/no questions, was applied to 392 metadata records of USGS data products published between 1987 and 2022. Results were analyzed to show which FAIR characteristics were most and least present in the metadata and how these scores changed after the implementation of data policy requirements in 2016. Aggregated scores showed specific areas of strength and needed improvements. The greatest increases in FAIR scores over time were for elements that were required by new data policies, especially in the ‘Findable’ category. Based on the results, this paper presents strategies to further improve USGS alignment with FAIR. The suggested strategies are organized in four key areas: USGS data repository characteristics, training and communities of practice, data management policy considerations, and metadata standards, tools, and best practices.

## Citation Information

## Related Content

                  -              Connect           

#### Vivian B Hutchison

##### Senior Data Advisor

Science Analytics and Synthesis (SAS) Program

vhutchison@usgs.gov

303-202-4227

#### Tamar Norkin

##### Data Manager - Biologist

Science Analytics and Synthesis (SAS) Program

tnorkin@usgs.gov

#### Lisa Zolly

##### Data Scientist - Librarian

Science Analytics and Synthesis (SAS) Program

lisa_zolly@usgs.gov

303-202-4157

#### Leslie Hsu

##### Community Coordinator - Physical Scientist

Science Analytics and Synthesis (SAS) Program

lhsu@usgs.gov

## Related Content

#### Vivian B Hutchison

##### Senior Data Advisor

Science Analytics and Synthesis (SAS) Program

vhutchison@usgs.gov

303-202-4227

#### Tamar Norkin

##### Data Manager - Biologist

Science Analytics and Synthesis (SAS) Program

tnorkin@usgs.gov

#### Lisa Zolly

##### Data Scientist - Librarian

Science Analytics and Synthesis (SAS) Program

lisa_zolly@usgs.gov

303-202-4157

#### Leslie Hsu

##### Community Coordinator - Physical Scientist

Science Analytics and Synthesis (SAS) Program

lhsu@usgs.gov

### Contact

####               Science Analytics and Synthesis Program          

W 6th Ave Kipling StLakewood, CO80225United States
Kelvin FRAZIER, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D17-4875

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

December 27, 2017

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 201 (Wednesday, October 16, 1996)]
[Notices]
[Page 53996]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: X96-61016]


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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY

17 CFR Part 420

RIN: 1505-AA53


Office of the Assistant Secretary for Financial Markets; 
Government Securities Act Regulations: Large Position Rules

Correction

    In the correction to rule document 96-23331 published on page 52498 
in the issue of Monday, October 7, 1996, correction 2 to Sec. 420.5 
should be removed. The original date ``March 31, 1997'' is correct and 
should not be replaced with ``March 11, 1997''.

BILLING CODE 1505-01-D
Case 20-13103-MAM Doc 166 Filed 02/02/21 Page 1 of 22
Case 20-13103-MAM Doc 166 Filed 02/02/21 Page 2 of 22
Case 20-13103-MAM Doc 166 Filed 02/02/21 Page 3 of 22
Case 20-13103-MAM Doc 166 Filed 02/02/21 Page 4 of 22
Case 20-13103-MAM Doc 166 Filed 02/02/21 Page 5 of 22
Case 20-13103-MAM Doc 166 Filed 02/02/21 Page 6 of 22
Case 20-13103-MAM Doc 166 Filed 02/02/21 Page 7 of 22
Case 20-13103-MAM Doc 166 Filed 02/02/21 Page 8 of 22
Case 20-13103-MAM Doc 166 Filed 02/02/21 Page 9 of 22
Case 20-13103-MAM Doc 166 Filed 02/02/21 Page 10 of 22
Case 20-13103-MAM Doc 166 Filed 02/02/21 Page 11 of 22
Case 20-13103-MAM Doc 166 Filed 02/02/21 Page 12 of 22
Case 20-13103-MAM Doc 166 Filed 02/02/21 Page 13 of 22
Case 20-13103-MAM Doc 166 Filed 02/02/21 Page 14 of 22
Case 20-13103-MAM Doc 166 Filed 02/02/21 Page 15 of 22
Case 20-13103-MAM Doc 166 Filed 02/02/21 Page 16 of 22
Case 20-13103-MAM Doc 166 Filed 02/02/21 Page 17 of 22
Case 20-13103-MAM Doc 166 Filed 02/02/21 Page 18 of 22
Case 20-13103-MAM Doc 166 Filed 02/02/21 Page 19 of 22
Case 20-13103-MAM Doc 166 Filed 02/02/21 Page 20 of 22
Case 20-13103-MAM Doc 166 Filed 02/02/21 Page 21 of 22
Case 20-13103-MAM Doc 166 Filed 02/02/21 Page 22 of 22
Fill in this information to identify the case:

Debtor name 7701 SW 120th Street LLC

United States Bankruptcy Court for the: SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF

FLORIDA, MIAMI DIVISION

 Check if this is an

Case number (if known): 20-16512-AJC amended filing

Official Form 204

Chapter 11 or Chapter 9 Cases: List of Creditors Who Have the 20 Largest Unsecured Claims and

Are Not Insiders 12/15

A list of creditors holding the 20 largest unsecured claims must be filed in a Chapter 11 or Chapter 9 case. Include claims which

the debtor disputes. Do not include claims by any person or entity who is an insider, as defined in 11 U.S.C. § 101(31). Also, do

not include claims by secured creditors, unless the unsecured claim resulting from inadequate collateral value places the creditor

among the holders of the 20 largest unsecured claims.

Name of creditor and

complete mailing address,

including zip code

Name, telephone number

and email address of

creditor contact

Nature of claim

(for example, trade debts,

bank loans, professional

services, and government

contracts)

Indicate if claim

is contingent,

unliquidated, or

disputed

Amount of claim

If the claim is fully unsecured, fill in only unsecured claim amount. If

claim is partially secured, fill in total claim amount and deduction for

value of collateral or setoff to calculate unsecured claim.

Total claim, if

partially secured

Deduction for value

of collateral or setoff

Unsecured claim

Florida Department

of Revenue

PO Box 6668

Tallahassee, FL

32314-6668

Taxes $0.00

Forethought Life

Insurance Company

Robert Michael

Arena Jr., President

10 W Market St Ste

2300

Indianapolis, IN

46204-2954

Mortgage $680,000.00 $430,127.00 $249,873.00

Internal Revenue

Services

PO Box 7346

Philadelphia, PA

19101-7346

Taxes $0.00

John Aaron

9620 NE 2nd Ave

Ste 203

Miami Shores, FL

33138-2749

Loan to Company $50,000.00

Miami-Dade Tax

Collector

140 W Flagler St Ste

1403

Miami, FL

33130-1561

Property Taxes $11,621.26

Official form 204 Chapter 11 or Chapter 9 Cases: List of Creditors Who Have the 20 Largest Unsecured claims page 1

Software Copyright (c) 2020 CINGroup - www.cincompass.com 

Case 20-16512-AJC Doc 2 Filed 06/15/20 Page 1 of 1
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 01-1499

DAVID L. JOHNSTON, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus LARRY G. MASSANARI, ACTING COMMISSIONER OF SOCIAL SECURITY, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of West Virginia, at Huntington. Joseph Robert Goodwin, District Judge. (CA-00-108-2) Submitted: September 28, 2001 Decided: November 5, 2001 Before WILKINS, WILLIAMS, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Jason E. Huber, FORMAN & CRANE, L.C., Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellant. James A. Winn, Regional Chief Counsel, Region III, Kenneth DiVito, Assistant Regional Counsel, Office of the GeneralCounsel, SOCIAL SECURITY ADMINISTRATION, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania; Charles T. Miller, United States Attorney, Kelly R. Curry, Assistant United States Attorney, Charleston, West Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM:David L. Johnston appeals from the district court’s order upholding the decision of the Commissioner of Social Security to deny Johnston’s application for disability insurance benefits. We have reviewed the record, the briefs, and the district court’s opinion accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. Johnston v. Massanari , No. CA-00-108-2 (S.D.W. Va. Feb. 27, 2001). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
EX-10.23



 



 
 EXHIBIT NO. 10.23 
 January 14, 2012 
 Dawn Landry 
 Via Hand Delivery 
 Dear Dawn: 
 As a valued member of the senior leadership team and per our discussion we are prepared to offer you the following as an addendum to your employment offer accepted on April 25, 2008. 

In the event that your employment is terminated without cause the Company shall pay to you an amount equal to twelve (12) months of your then
current base salary. Any payments made by the Company shall be governed and administered by the Company’s Severance Policy and (a) be subject to appropriate withholdings and deductions, (b) be paid to you in periodic installments in
accordance with the Company’s regular payroll schedule, and (c) be contingent upon you executing a mutually acceptable severance agreement and release. 
 Your employment is at will, and either you or the Company may terminate the employment relationship at any time with or without cause. We ask that you give us at least two (2) weeks’ notice if
you wish to terminate your employment. 
 I look forward to your continuing contributions to the Company. Enclosed are two copies of this
letter. Please sign both copies and return one to me. 
 Sincerely, 
 /s/ Mark K. Knoy 
 Mark Knoy 
 President and Chief Executive Officer 
 American Commercial Lines (ACL) 

 

			
		
	/s/ Dawn R. Landry	 	18 Jan 2012
	Dawn Landry	 	Date

  
  
  

American Commercial Lines Inc.
Order entered June 4, 2019

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-18-01017-CV

LISA HAWKINS, Appellant

V.

MICHAEL JENKINS AND WANDA JENKINS, Appellees

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 4

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. CC-18-01539-D

ORDER

Before us is appellees’ June 3, 2019 motion for extension of time to file their responsive 

appellate brief. Appellees’ motion is hereby GRANTED. Appellees’ brief is due to be filed on 

or before June 19, 2019. Appellant may file a reply brief on or before July 5, 2019.

/s/ DAVID J. SCHENCK 

PRESIDING JUSTICE
David NICKELSON, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 1D17-3024

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

May 9, 2018

David Nickelson, pro se, Appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, and Jason Rodriguez, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee.

Per Curiam.

AFFIRMED.

Osterhaus, Winokur, and M.K. Thomas, JJ., concur.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-1849

HAYWOOD M. CLAYTON; SYLVIA K. CLAYTON,

Plaintiffs - Appellants,

versus

AMERIQUEST MORTGAGE COMPANY,

Defendant - Appellee,

and

LAWRENCE S. MAITIN; MORRIS, SCHNEIDER & PRIOR,

LLC,

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Middle

District of North Carolina, at Durham. N. Carlton Tilley, Jr.,

Chief District Judge. (CA-02-415-1)

Submitted: November 10, 2004 Decided: December 29, 2004

Before WILKINSON, NIEMEYER, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Haywood M. Clayton, Sylvia K. Clayton, Appellants Pro Se. Dena

Beth Langley, Stuart Carlen Gauffreau, NEXSEN PRUET ADAMS
- 2 -

KLEEMEIER, PLLC, Greensboro, North Carolina; Angel R. Gordon,

MORRIS, SCHNEIDER & PRIOR, LLC, Atlanta, Georgia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 3 -

PER CURIAM:

Haywood M. Clayton and Sylvia K. Clayton appeal from the

district court’s orders granting Ameriquest Mortgage Company’s

motion to enforce the settlement agreement between the parties and

denying the Claytons’ motion for reconsideration of that order. We

have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district

court. See Clayton v. Ameriquest Mortgage Co., No. CA-02-415-1

(M.D.N.C. Apr. 5, 2004 & filed June 18, 2004; entered June 21,

2004). In light of this disposition, we deny the Claytons’ motion

for a stay pending appeal. We dispense with oral argument because

the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the

materials before the court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

AFFIRMED
**Exhibit31.1**

**NATHANIELENERGY CORPORATION**

**CERTIFICATION**

I, George A. Cretecos, certify that: 

1. I have reviewed this Form 10-QSB of NathanielEnergy Corporation; 

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not containany untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material factnecessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances underwhich 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 in this report, fairly present in allmaterial respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flowsof the small business issuer as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 

4. The small business issuer’s other certifyingofficer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosurecontrols and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15-(e)) for the small business issuer and have: 

a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures,or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under oursupervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small businessissuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by otherswithin those entities, particularly during the period in which this report isbeing prepared; 

b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the small businessissuer’s disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report ourconclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures,as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation;and 

c) Disclosed in this report any change in the smallbusiness issuer’s internal control over financial reporting that occurredduring the small business issuer’s most recent fiscal quarter (the smallbusiness issuer’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) thathas materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, thesmall business issuer’s internal control over financial reporting; and 

5. The small business issuer’s other certifyingofficer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation ofinternal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuer’s auditorsand the audit committee of the small business issuer’s board of directors (orpersons performing the equivalent functions): 

a) All significant deficiencies and materialweaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reportingwhich are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuer’sability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and 

b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involvesmanagement or other employees who have a significant role in the small businessissue’s internal control over financial reporting. 

Dated: August 11, 2006
|        | By:    | */s/ George A. Cretecos* | * * |
|--------|--------|--------------------------|----------|
|   |   | George A. Cretecos       |
|   |   | Chief Executive Officer  |

 

----
## Breadcrumb

-  Publications 
-  Reports 

#           Some mining districts in northeastern California and northwestern Nevada      

      January 1, 1915    

View Document

Scattered over its sparsely settled and generally arid expanse the State of Nevada contains approximately 200 centers of past or present mining activity. Some of these mining districts, such as the Comstock,1 Eureka,2 Tonopah,3 and Goldfield,4 have added millions to the world's wealth in precious metals and have been given thorough geologic study. Others of less note, including Silver Peak,5 Manhattan,° Bullfrog,? Yerington,8 Searchlights and Jarbidge,9 have been made the subjects of brief reports by Federal geologists.

## Citation Information

### Study Area

### Explore Search

                  - United States
                  - california
                  -  Nevada

View All **