alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 10.1


 


Amendment No. 1 to Employment,


Confidentiality and Noncompetition Agreement


 


This Amendment No. 1 to Employment,
Confidentiality and Noncompetition Agreement (the “Amendment”) is made and
entered into as of December 23, 2008 between MediaDefender, Inc. a
Delaware corporation (the “Company”), and Randy Saaf (“Executive”)


 


RECITALS


 


A.            Pursuant to
that certain Employment, Confidentiality and Noncompetition Agreement dated as
of July 28, 2005 (the “Employment Agreement”), Executive agreed to be employed
by the Company under the terms and conditions set forth therein.


 


B.            The
Parties wish to amend the term of the Employment Agreement to an at-will
arrangement.


 


NOW THEREFORE, the parties agree to amend the Employment Agreement as
follows:


 


1.             Amendment
to Employment Agreement.


 


1.1           Paragraph
5 of the Employment Agreement is hereby amended in its entirety by substituting
the following:


 


5.             Term.  Commencing January 1, 2009, either
Executive or the Company may terminate this Agreement upon five days written
notice.  Upon the effective date of
termination, with respect to the period commencing January 1, 2009 through
such effective date, Executive shall be entitled to receive only the
compensation set forth in Sections 2.1 (as to only the first sentence), 2.3,
2.4 and 2.5 of the Employment Agreement for such period.  Notwithstanding anything to the contrary in
the Employment Agreement or in the Stock Option Agreement between Executive and
ARTISTdirect, Inc., Executive shall have a period of sixty days from the
effective date of termination to exercise all vested stock options issued to
Executive.


 


1.2           Paragraph
6 of the Employment Agreement is hereby deleted in its entirety.


 


2.             Effect
of Amendment.


 


Except as expressly amended hereunder, the Employment Agreement shall
remain in full force and effect.


 

















 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the
date first above written.


 


	
   

  	
  “COMPANY 

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  MediaDefender, Inc.

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  By:

  	
  /s/ DIMITRI VILLARD

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  “EXECUTIVE”
  

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  /s/ RANDY
  SAAF

  
	
   

  	
  Randy Saaf

  



 


2
III 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 395 

Recognizing September 28, 2021, as ‘‘National Voter Registration Day’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

SEPTEMBER 29, 2021 

Ms. KLOBUCHAR (for herself, Mr. BLUNT, Mr. DURBIN, Mrs. CAPITO, Ms. 

CORTEZ MASTO, Mr. WICKER, Mr. BENNET, Mr. VAN HOLLEN, Mrs. 

FEINSTEIN, Mr. MERKLEY, Mr. CARDIN, Mr. BLUMENTHAL, Ms. SMITH, 

Mr. REED, Mr. WYDEN, Mr. COONS, Mr. BOOKER, Ms. BALDWIN, Mrs. 

SHAHEEN, Mr. WARNOCK, Mr. CASEY, Mr. KELLY, Mr. PADILLA, Mr. 

KING, Ms. DUCKWORTH, Mr. BROWN, Mr. MARKEY, Ms. HIRONO, Mr. 

WARNER, Ms. ROSEN, and Mr. HEINRICH) submitted the following resolution; which was considered and agreed to 

RESOLUTION 

Recognizing September 28, 2021, as ‘‘National Voter 

Registration Day’’. 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 

2 (1) recognizes September 28, 2021, as ‘‘Na3 tional Voter Registration Day’’; and 

4 (2) encourages each voting-eligible citizen of the 

5 United States— 

6 (A) to register to vote; 

7 (B) to verify with the appropriate State or 

8 local election official that the name, address, 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•SRES 395 ATS 

1 and other personal information on record is 

2 current; and 

3 (C) to go to the polls on election day and 

4 vote if the voting-eligible citizen would like to 

5 do so. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
Amari Nicholas HAIR, Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, Appellee.

Case No. 5D18-2809

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fifth District.

Decision filed May 21, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

AFFIRMED.
Steven C.A.B. WHITE, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. STATE of Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.:2D19-1818

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 19, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Mandamus is denied.
<PAGE>
                                                                      EXHIBIT 10

                    CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS


We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statement on Forms S-8, No. 33-8300, No. 333-76280, No. 333-76282 and No.
333-85388 of Sulzer Medica Ltd of our report dated April 2, 2002, relating to
the financial statements, which are included in this Annual Report on Form 20-F.


PricewaterhouseCoopers AG



/s/ R. Rausenberger                 /s/ St. Haag
-------------------                 ------------------
R. Rausenberger                     St. Haag



Winterthur, Switzerland, May 17, 2002
Hon. Ii&r .D&m, .JrJr, Coun?y Attorne Jid Wells e

CouuJ Alice, Texas - bpixlfon Ho0v-649

AttsntWiat Bon. Parker Bllsey ,Ro I .Assrs&nt of costs, a$tw placing an adult ~dofamlant au probation in 0 salary county,



### DearSir: :

werefer to Jrourletters in which you ask if costs should be assesred against a defendant who has been placed on probatfon after tionvfctfon in a criminal case fn a salary Couut~$. You have not re- - - ferrea us to any authority which distfnguafshes ,beWeen fee countLeg tid.silarf countf&s concernfng liability. of a convicted defo&ant for o6sts in a ~criminol case andwehaw fOUZ&noWi Therefore this opfnion applies to both such.,oounties,

S&ctlon 

### 31 of Artfcle 781b, V&rnonDsCode of, Criminal. Procedure preadsr

“For the purpesr of ,detenining .when fees are to be paid-to pay officer or office, the placfng .of th,e defez@ant on probation tihall~be considered .a,flual ditiposftfon of that,case, with+ the n~osslty oftwaiting for the’ termination of the period of proba, tfon ,or ‘su~spension Of 8eutencera .Thelauguage. ‘ftir the purpebe of de$errining when’fees are to be paid to any ,offfcer or offfcen makes plain that ,a11 such fees becore due and payable at the t.ire the defendant fs placed on probation so that procass mapissue therefor, Language that is plain Is not subject to constpuctioii. The ,assessrent and collection of costs fs’not affected by placing- the defendant on probitfon.Hen. HomerDean, Jr. - Page 2 (V-&1

sec. 3.l of &%a 781by v. c. co r, vi%es that the febs are te be ?ail te tIF officers at the time the defendant 

### IS placrl en probation even though the case be trfe% in a salary county, Yeurs very truly,. ATTOBl’iEY

O=lUL OFTSXA8

WTW rwb Assistant
# L_2018007EN.01004101.xml

| 12.1.2018 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | L 7/41 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.1.2018

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

L 7/41

---

Corrigendum to Council Regulation (EU) 2017/1509 of 30 August 2017 concerning restrictive measures against the Democratic People's Republic of Korea and repealing Regulation (EC) No 329/2007

(
  Official Journal of the European Union L 224 of 31 August 2017
  )

On page 96, Annex XIII, Part (b) (Legal persons, entities and bodies), entry 23, third column (Location):

for:

‘... SWIFT: DCBK KKPY’,

read:

‘... SWIFT: DCBK KPPY’.

---
PRO HAC VICE APPLICATION & ORDER October 2012

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

 

 Plaintiff(s), 

 v. 

 

 Defendant(s). 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No: _______________

APPLICATION FOR 

ADMISSION OF ATTORNEY 

PRO HAC VICE

(CIVIL LOCAL RULE 11-3) 

I, , an active member in good standing of the bar of 

 , hereby respectfully apply for admission to practice pro hac vice in the 

Northern District of California representing: in the 

above-entitled action. My local co-counsel in this case is __________________________________, an 

attorney who is a member of the bar of this Court in good standing and who maintains an office 

within the State of California. 

MY ADDRESS OF RECORD: LOCAL CO-COUNSEL’S ADDRESS OF RECORD: 

MY TELEPHONE # OF RECORD: LOCAL CO-COUNSEL’S TELEPHONE # OF RECORD: 

 

MY EMAIL ADDRESS OF RECORD: LOCAL CO-COUNSEL’S EMAIL ADDRESS OF RECORD: 

 

I am an active member in good standing of a United States Court or of the highest court of 

another State or the District of Columbia, as indicated above; my bar number is: . 

A true and correct copy of a certificate of good standing or equivalent official document from said 

bar is attached to this application. 

I agree to familiarize myself with, and abide by, the Local Rules of this Court, especially the 

Standards of Professional Conduct for attorneys and the Alternative Dispute Resolution Local Rules. 

I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. 

Dated: 

 APPLICANT 

 

ORDER GRANTING APPLICATION 

 FOR ADMISSION OF ATTORNEY PRO HAC VICE 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT the application of is granted, 

subject to the terms and conditions of Civil L.R. 11-3. All papers filed by the attorney must indicate 

appearance pro hac vice. Service of papers upon, and communication with, local co-counsel 

designated in the application will constitute notice to the party. 

Dated: 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT/MAGISTRATE JUDGE 

Reset Form

Finjan, Inc., 5:17-cv-00072-B

Cisco Systems, Inc.,

Benu Wells

Benu Wells

Benu Wells

New York Ct. of Appeals

Plaintiff, Finjan, Inc.

Lisa Kobialka

Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP

1177 Avenue of the Americas, NY, NY 10036

Kramer Levin Naftalis & Frankel LLP

990 Marsh Road, Menlo Park, CA 94025

(212) 715-9100 (650) 752-1700

bwells@kramerlevin.com lkobialka@kramerlevin.com

NY 4146163

06/05/17

June 6, 2017
AO 94 (Rev. 06/09) Commitment to Another District 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

United States of America 

v. 

Timothy Martin Lewis 

Defendant 

for the 

Northern District of California 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

Case No. 

Charging District's 

Case No. 16MJ02539 

COMMITMENT TO ANOTHER DISTRICT 

The defendant has been ordered to appear in the Central District of California 

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

(if applicable) Duty Magistrate 

No Interpreter Needed 

division. The defendant may need an interpreter for this language: 

The defendant: 0 will retain an attorney. 

IYf is requesting court-appointed counsel. 

The defendant remains in custody after the initial appearance. 

IT IS ORDERED: The United States marshal must transport the defendant, together with a copy of this order, 

to the charging district and deliver the defendant to the United States marshal for that district, or to another officer 

authorized to receive the defendant. The marshal or officer in the charging district should immediately notify the United 

States attorney and the clerk of court for that district of the defendant's arrival so that further proceedings may be 

promptly scheduled. The clerk of this district must promptly transmit the papers and any bail to the charging district. 

Date: 01/06/2017 / 

Printed name and title 

1' 

Case 3:17-mj-70013-MAG Document 5 Filed 01/06/17 Page 1 of 1
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

VICTOR ROSAS,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D17-2586 

[October 19, 2017]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.850 motion from the Circuit Court for 

the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Michael A. Robinson, 

Judge; L.T. Case No. 03-6987CF10A.

Terrence Moons, Jr. of the Law Office of Terrence Moons, Jr., P.A., 

Sunrise, for appellant.

No appearance required for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

TAYLOR, LEVINE and KUNTZ, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

SIX4THREE, LLC, a Delaware limited

liability company,

Plaintiff,

 v.

FACEBOOK, INC., a Delaware corporation,

and DOES 1 through 50, inclusive,

Defendant. /

No. C 17-00359 WHA

ORDER GRANTING

REQUEST TO FILE A

SURREPLY AND

REQUESTING RESPONSE

FROM PLAINTIFF

Facebook objects to Six4Three’s inclusion of seventeen exhibits appended to a reply

declaration in support of its motion to remand and to Six4Three’s use of excessive footnotes in

smaller than 12-point font and more than twenty-eight lines per page in an effort to squeeze new

arguments into its reply in violation of this Court’s formatting requirements. Facebook may

submit a surreply NOT TO EXCEED FIVE PAGES by FEBRUARY 15 AT 2:00 P.M..

Facebook may not use this surreply as an opportunity to restate its arguments in

opposition. Any material in the surreply not directed at new arguments or evidence raised for

the first time on reply will be stricken.
United States District Court

For the Northern District of California

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

2

Additionally, by FEBRUARY 15 AT 2:00 P.M., plaintiff shall state unequivocally whether

it will rely in any way on any federal law to support its claims herein. The response must be

either “yes” or “no.” If the answer is “no,” plaintiff will be bound to that answer and on remand

may not rely on any federal law.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Dated: February 14, 2017. WILLIAM ALSUP

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case 3:17-cv-00405-EMC Document 19 Filed 02/21/17 Page 1 of 6
Case 3:17-cv-00405-EMC Document 19 Filed 02/21/17 Page 2 of 6
Case 3:17-cv-00405-EMC Document 19 Filed 02/21/17 Page 3 of 6
Case 3:17-cv-00405-EMC Document 19 Filed 02/21/17 Page 4 of 6
Case 3:17-cv-00405-EMC Document 19 Filed 02/21/17 Page 5 of 6
2/21/17

U

NITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

IT IS SO ORDERED

Judge Edward M. Chen

Case 3:17-cv-00405-EMC Document 19 Filed 02/21/17 Page 6 of 6
Kenneth George MOORE, Jr., Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Chad CHRONISTER, Sheriff of Hillsborough County, Florida, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D19-0609

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

March 14, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Dismissed.
William PETTY, et al., Appellants, v. The ARBITRAGE FUND, etc., Appellee.

No. 3D18-1441

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Opinion filed February 13, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
William Herbert VILLAR v. STATE

CR-17-0237

Court of Criminal Appeals of Alabama.

March 9, 2018 Reh. denied March 23, 2018

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Affirmed.
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 15** 
**- 2527** 

DOUGLAS E. LITTLE, Personal Representative for the Estate of Theodore B. Gould ,
Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v.
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Commissioner of Internal Revenue John Koskinen; LORETTA E. LYNCH, Attorney General ,
Defendants

- Appellees

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia , at Charlottesville

. Norman K. Moon , Senior District Judge. ( 3:15

- cv

- 00038

- NKM )

Submitted : October 28, 2016 Decided: December 16, 2016

Before WILKINSON and DIAZ , Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Paul M. Donovan, LAROE, WINN, MOERMAN & DONOVAN, Washington, D.C., for Appellant. Caroline D. Ciraolo, Acting Assistant Attorney General, Bridget M. Rowan, Sherra Wong, Tax Division, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding p recedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM:

Douglas E. Little , as personal representative f or the Estate

of Theodore B. Gould, a ppeals from the district court ’ s order
dismissing Gould’s complaint on the basis of sovereign immunity

and res judicata. We have re viewed the record and find no

reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated

by the district court. Gould v. United States , No. 3:15

- cv

- 00038

-
NKM (W.D. Va. Nov. 10, 2015). We dispense with oral argument

because the facts and legal conte ntions are adequately prese nted

in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the

decisional process.

AFFIRMED
Luis G. TAMAYO, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. SUNCOAST CREDIT UNION, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D19-1736

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

June 14, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Certiorari is denied.
<PAGE>   1

                                                                    EXHIBIT 23-A

                                CONSENT OF EXPERT

      I consent to the reference to me under the heading "Item 3. Legal
Proceedings" in the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Meritor Automotive, Inc.
("Meritor") for the year ended September 30, 1999, and to the incorporation by
reference of such reference into Meritor's Registration Statement on Form S-8
(Registration No. 333-35403) pertaining to the Meritor Savings Plan; and
Meritor's Registration Statement on Form S-8 (Registration No. 333-35407)
pertaining to the Meritor 1997 Long-Term Incentives Plan.

                                                /s/ M. Lee Murrah
                                                -----------------
                                                    M. Lee Murrah
                                          Assistant General Counsel of
                                              Meritor Automotive, Inc.

Date:  December 20, 1999
# m8628.docx

EUROPEAN COMMISSION Brussels,10.10.2017 C(2017) 6920 final To the Notifying Parties Subject : Case M. 8628 – ENECO / RENAULT / JEDLIX Commission decision pursuant to Article 6(1)(b) of Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 1 and Article 57 of the Agreement on the European Economic Area 2 Dear Sir or Madam, 1. On 18 September 2017 , the European Commission received notification of a proposed concentration pursuant to Article 4 of the Merger Regulation by which the undertakings Renault Venture Capital S.A.S. (France), belonging to Renault S.A.S. (part of the Renault Group) and Eneco Smart Energy B.V. (the Netherlands), belonging to the Eneco Group N.V. , acquire within the meaning of Article 3(1)(b) and 3(4) of the Merger Regulation joint control over the whole of the undertaking Jedlix B.V. (the Netherlands) by way of a purchase of shares . 3 2. The business activities of the undertakings concerned are: - Renault Venture Capital S.A.S. is an investment branch of Renault S.A.S.. The Renault Group is primarily active in the production, distribution, sale and maintenance of automotive products; - Eneco Smart Energy B.V. focuses on the development of energy related innovations. The Eneco Group is active as a producer and supplier of energy in the Netherlands; - Jedlix B.V. provi des electric vehicle smart charging services . 3. After examination of the notification, the European Commission has concluded that the notified operation falls within the scope of the Merger Regulation and of paragraph 5 ( a ) of the Commission Notice on a simplified procedure for treatment of certain concentrations under Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 . 4 4. For the reasons set out in the Notice on a simplified procedure, the European Commission has decided not to oppose the notified operation and to declare it compatible with the internal market and with the EEA Agreement. This decision is adopted in application of Article 6(1)(b) of the Merger Regulation and Article 57 of the EEA Agreement . For the Commission (Signed) Johannes LAITENBERGER Director - General
(1)
OJ L 24, 29.1.2004, p. 1 ( the ' Merger Regulation ' ). With effect from 1 December 2009, the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union ( ' TFEU ' ) has introduced certain changes, such as the replacement of ' Community ' by ' Union ' and ' common market ' by ' internal market ' . The terminology of the TFEU will be used throughout this decision.
(2) OJ L 1, 3.1.1994, p. 3 ( the ' EEA Agreement ' ).
(3) Publication in the Official Journal of the European Union No C 319 , 26.9 . 2017 , p. 4 .
(4)
OJ C 366, 14.12.2013, p. 5 .
III 

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. RES. 139 

Recognizing the importance of the blueberry industry to the United States 

and designating July 2021 as ‘‘National Blueberry Month’’. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 25, 2021 

Ms. STABENOW (for herself, Mr. WARNOCK, Mr. PETERS, Mr. BOOKER, Mr. 

MENENDEZ, Ms. COLLINS, Ms. CANTWELL, Mr. KING, Mr. MERKLEY, 

Mrs. MURRAY, and Mr. WYDEN) submitted the following resolution; 

which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary 

RESOLUTION 

Recognizing the importance of the blueberry industry to the 

United States and designating July 2021 as ‘‘National 

Blueberry Month’’. 

Whereas blueberries are a native North American fruit, first 

managed and harvested as wild blueberries by the native 

Wabanaki; 

Whereas wild blueberries continue to be managed and harvested in Maine by farmers including the Wabanaki, as 

a native, naturally occurring crop; 

Whereas the pioneering work conducted in New Jersey in the 

early 1900s by Elizabeth White and Dr. Frederick 

Coville, a botanist at the Department of Agriculture, to 

domesticate wild lowbush blueberries resulted in the deVerDate Sep 11 2014 18:28 Mar 26, 2021 Jkt 019200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6300 E:\BILLS\SR139.IS SR139

pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
2 

•SRES 139 IS 

velopment of the hybrid for cultivated highbush blueberries; 

Whereas because of these early efforts, highbush blueberries 

are large, sweet, juicy berries that can be commercially 

produced and shipped; 

Whereas wild blueberries— 

(1) are small and sweet; and 

(2) are not planted, but still grow and are harvested 

where they have naturally occurred for thousands of 

years; 

Whereas the blueberry industry in the United States is an 

important sector of United States agriculture with an annual economic impact of $4,700,000,000; 

Whereas highbush and wild blueberries have a total harvested 

area estimated at more than 140,000 acres and are produced in 48 States by nearly 13,185 farms; 

Whereas blueberry production in the United States has continually increased, with particular growth in the first 2 

decades of the 21st century, to reach a harvest of 

730,000,000 pounds in 2020; 

Whereas blueberries are low in fat and a source of fiber, vitamins, and minerals; 

Whereas blueberries are being studied to examine the role the 

berries may play in promoting good health in areas such 

as cardiovascular health, brain health, exercise, insulin 

response, and gut health; and 

Whereas blueberries are harvested in the United States from 

March through early September, with the harvest reaching its peak in July: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the Senate— 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS
3 

•SRES 139 IS 

1 (1) designates July 2021 as ‘‘National Blue2 berry Month’’; 

3 (2) recognizes the contributions of blueberry 

4 growers in the United States and their families; and 

5 (3) recognizes that purchasing blueberries 

6 grown in the United States supports farmers, jobs, 

7 communities, and the economy of the United States. 

Æ 


pamtmann on DSKBC07HB2PROD with BILLS