alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1996
<CASH>                                            2869
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                      11731
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                          75212
<ALLOWANCE>                                      (660)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   92183
<DEPOSITS>                                       53960
<SHORT-TERM>                                     11500
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                               1600
<LONG-TERM>                                       7083
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            11
<OTHER-SE>                                       18040
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                   92183
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                   5334
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                 1011
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   124
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                  6469
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                                2484
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                3072
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                             3397
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      220
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                 (5)
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                    215
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   1687
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                        1687
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      1088
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.09
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.09
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    8.12
<LOANS-NON>                                        170
<LOANS-PAST>                                       819
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                    177
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                   667
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        7
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                  660
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                               660
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"NASA","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/nasamigrate\/","title":"X-57 Project Creates Paths Toward Electric Aviation","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"Bb8uPtyOeK\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/centers-and-facilities\/armstrong\/x-57-project-creates-paths-toward-electric-aviation-2\/\">X-57 Project Creates Paths Toward Electric Aviation<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/centers-and-facilities\/armstrong\/x-57-project-creates-paths-toward-electric-aviation-2\/embed\/#?secret=Bb8uPtyOeK\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“X-57 Project Creates Paths Toward Electric Aviation” — NASA\" data-secret=\"Bb8uPtyOeK\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/afrc2021-0047-19.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":401}
AO 458 (Rev. 06/09) Appearance of Counsel

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

__________ District of __________

)

)

)

)

)

Plaintiff

v. Case No.

Defendant

APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL

To: The clerk of court and all parties of record

I am admitted or otherwise authorized to practice in this court, and I appear in this case as counsel for:

.

Date:

Attorney’s signature

Printed name and bar number

Address

E-mail address

Telephone number

FAX number

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 8884 Filed 11/28/17 Page 1 of 1
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

Shaw Cowart, L.L.P.

1609 Shoal Creek Blvd., Ste. 100

Austin, Texas 78701

(512) 499-8900

Ethan L. Shaw (TX Bar No. 18140480)

Matthew J. Riley (TX Bar No. 24070500)

Justin W. Fishback (TX Bar No. 24056736)

(Admitted Pro Hac Vice)

1609 Shoal Creek Blvd., Ste. 100

Austin, Texas 78701

elshaw@shawcowart.com 

mriley@shawcowart.com

jfishback@shawcowart.com 

(512) 499-8900 telephone

(512) 320-8906 facsimile

Attorneys for Plaintiff Joseph Yarrington

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

IN RE BARD IVC FILTERS 

PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION

Joseph Yarrington,

 Plaintiff,

v.

C.R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc.

 Defendants.

No. MD-15-02641-PHX-DGC

Civil Action No.: 2-16-CV-00557-DGC

DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL

Plaintiff, Joseph Yarrington, hereby demands a trial by jury as to all issues so triable.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED this 1

st day of March, 2016.

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 922 Filed 03/01/16 Page 1 of 2
-2-

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

SHAW COWART, LLP

By: /s/ Ethan L. Shaw 

 Ethan L. Shaw (TX Bar No. 18140480)

Matthew J. Riley (TX Bar No. 24070500)

Justin W. Fishback (TX Bar No. 24056736)

(Admitted Pro Hac Vice)

1609 Shoal Creek Blvd., Ste. 100

Austin, Texas 78701

(512) 499-8900 telephone

(512) 320-8906 facsimile

elshaw@shawcowart.com 

mriley@shawcowart.com

jfishback@shawcowart.com 

Attorneys for Plaintiff Joseph Yarrington

Certificate of Service 

I hereby certify that on this 1

st day of March, 2016, I electronically transmitted the 

foregoing Demand for Jury Trial to the Clerk’s Office using the CM/ECF System for filing and 

transmittal of a Notice of Electronic Filing to the attorneys who are registered with the Court’s 

electronic filing system.

/s/ Ethan L. Shaw

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 922 Filed 03/01/16 Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                         120,712
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   38,944
<ALLOWANCES>                                    22,403
<INVENTORY>                                     93,107
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               327,484
<PP&E>                                         720,019
<DEPRECIATION>                                 195,839
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 851,664
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        1,453,269
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        10,960
<OTHER-SE>                                   (612,565)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   851,664
<SALES>                                         55,997
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                55,997
<CGS>                                           51,843
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                6,062,759
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              70,209
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (6,058,605)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (6,058,605)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                              (790,000)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (6,848,605)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.41)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.41)


</TABLE>
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

Douglas A. McGhie, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

C. R. Bard Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc., 

Defendant. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

MDL Case No. 2:15-md-02641-DGC 

Civil Action No. CV-17-03485-PHX-DGC 

WAIVER OF THE SERVICE OF SUMMONS 

To: Freese & Goss PLLC - Birmingham, AL 

(Name of plaintiff’s attorney or unrepresented plaintiff) 

I have received your request to waive service of a summons in this action along with a copy of the complaint, two 

copies of this waiver form, and a prepaid means of returning one signed copy of the form to you. 

I, or the entity I represent, agree to save the expense of serving a summons and complaint in this case. 

I understand that I, or the entity I represent, will keep all defenses or objections to the lawsuit, the court’s 

jurisdiction, and the venue of the action, but that I waive any objections to the absence of a summons or of service. 

I also understand that I, or the entity I represent, must file and serve an answer or a motion under Rule 12 within 

60 days from 10/26/2017, the date when this request was sent (or 90 days if it was sent outside the United States). If I fail 

to do so, a default judgment will be entered against me or the entity I represent. 

Date: November 6, 2017 /s/ Richard B. North, Jr. 

Signature of the attorney or unrepresented party 

C. R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc.

Printed name of parties waiving service of 

summons 

Richard B. North, Jr. (Ga. Bar No. 545599) 

Printed Name 

Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, LLP 

201 17th St., NW, Suite 1700, Atlantic Station, Atlanta, GA 30363 

Address 

richard.north@nelsonmullins.com 

E-mail Address 

(404) 322-6155 

Telephone number 

Duty to Avoid Unnecessary Expenses of Serving a Summons

Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires certain defendants to cooperate in saving unnecessary expenses of serving a 

summons and complaint. A defendant who is located in the United States and who fails to return a signed waiver of service requested by a plaintiff 

located in the United States will be required to pay the expenses of service, unless the defendant shows good cause for the failure. 

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 8660 Filed 11/07/17 Page 1 of 2
2

“Good cause” does not include a belief that the lawsuit is groundless, or that it has been brought in an improper venue, or that the court has 

no jurisdiction over this matter or over the defendant or the defendant’s property. 

If the waiver is signed and returned, you can still make these and all other defenses and objections, but you cannot object to the absence of 

a summons or of service. 

If you waive service, then you must, within the time specified on the waiver form, serve an answer or a motion under Rule 12 on the 

plaintiff and file a copy with the court. By signing and returning the waiver form, you are allowed more time to respond than if a summons had been 

served.

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 8660 Filed 11/07/17 Page 2 of 2
#### DANNY DELELLIS v. TRENTON SHOP-RITE.

May 16, 1984.

Petition for certification denied.
F I LED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

April 30, 2010

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

In re:

JAMES E. LARGE; GARY COLLINS;

EMMA LUCILLE MCADAMS;

PATRICIA BERGIE; PETE

CALHOUN,

Petitioners.

No. 10-8023

(D.C. No. 2:05-CV-00270-ABJ)

(D. Wyo.)

ORDER

Before TACHA, BRISCOE, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

Petitioners James E. Large, Gary Collins, Emma Lucille McAdams, Patricia

Bergie, and Pete Calhoun filed a petition for writ of mandamus. The petition

sought an order from this court directing the district court to rule on their claims

of voting-rights violations in Fremont County, Wyoming. On April 7, 2010, we

invited the district court to respond to the petition. 

On April 29, the district court entered an order finding and concluding that

the County’s present election process violated the Voting Rights Act. The court

therefore enjoined defendants from using the existing system and required them to

propose a remedy by June 30. Petitioners have now received the relief they

sought. Accordingly, the mandamus petition is moot and Petitioners’ dismissal

Appellate Case: 10-8023 Document: 01018413208 Date Filed: 04/30/2010 Page: 1 
-2-

motion is GRANTED. The court’s order requiring defendants to respond is

VACATED.

Entered for the Court,

ELISABETH A. SHUMAKER, Clerk

Appellate Case: 10-8023 Document: 01018413208 Date Filed: 04/30/2010 Page: 2
FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

May 7, 2010

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

ANTHONY C. KENNEY, 

 Plaintiff - Appellant, 

v. 

BOARD OF REVIEW OKLAHOMA

SECURITY COMMISSION, 

 Defendant - Appellee.

 

No. 10-5032

(D.C. No. 4:08-CV-00045-CVE-PJC)

ORDER

Before KELLY, TYMKOVICH, and GORSUCH, Circuit Judges.

On March 9, 2010, Plaintiff Anthony Kenney filed a notice of appeal in the District

Court for the Northern District of Oklahoma in Case No. 4:08-CV-00045. 

A review of the district court docket reveals that no order or judgment was entered

by the district court within thirty days of the filing of Plaintiff’s notice of appeal. Moreover,

Plaintiff failed to comply with the provisions of Fed. R. App. P. 3(c) in that he did not

designate in his notice of appeal the district court order or judgment appealed. This court

lacks jurisdiction. 

Appellate Case: 10-5032 Document: 01018417855 Date Filed: 05/07/2010 Page: 1
-2-

The appeal is DISMISSED.

Entered for the Court,

Elisabeth A. Shumaker, Clerk

Kathleen T. Clifford

Attorney - Deputy Clerk

Appellate Case: 10-5032 Document: 01018417855 Date Filed: 05/07/2010 Page: 2
**Exhibit 23.1**

** **

 

Securities andExchange Commission

Washington, DC

 

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

 

We consent tothe incorporation by reference in this Registration Statement of ICOP Digital, Inc.on Form S-8 (No. 333-121219) of our report dated March 11, 2004,except as to notes 1, 7, 10 and 11, which are dated June 21, 2005 appearingin the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB/A3 for the year ended December 31,2004.

 

 
| /s/  Cordovano and Honeck, LLP |   |
|--------------------------------|--------|
|                           |
| Denver,  Colorado              |
| June 30, 2005                  |

 

----
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 32.1

                    Certification of Chief Executive Officer

      In connection with the Quarterly Report of Exchange National Bancshares,
Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2004 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, James E. Smith,
Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify
in accordance with 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of
the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

      (a)   The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

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

Dated: August 9, 2004

                                      /s/ James E. Smith
                                      -------------------------------
                                      James E. Smith
                                      Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive
                                      Officer

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

                                       45
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

David Kidd, 

Plaintiff, 

v. 

C. R. Bard Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc., 

Defendant. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

MDL Case No. 2:15-md-02641-DGC 

Civil Action No. CV-17-03493-PHX-DGC 

WAIVER OF THE SERVICE OF SUMMONS 

To: Freese & Goss PLLC - Birmingham, AL 

(Name of plaintiff’s attorney or unrepresented plaintiff) 

I have received your request to waive service of a summons in this action along with a copy of the complaint, two 

copies of this waiver form, and a prepaid means of returning one signed copy of the form to you. 

I, or the entity I represent, agree to save the expense of serving a summons and complaint in this case. 

I understand that I, or the entity I represent, will keep all defenses or objections to the lawsuit, the court’s 

jurisdiction, and the venue of the action, but that I waive any objections to the absence of a summons or of service. 

I also understand that I, or the entity I represent, must file and serve an answer or a motion under Rule 12 within 

60 days from 10/30/2017, the date when this request was sent (or 90 days if it was sent outside the United States). If I fail 

to do so, a default judgment will be entered against me or the entity I represent. 

Date: November 6, 2017 /s/ Richard B. North, Jr. 

Signature of the attorney or unrepresented party 

C. R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc.

Printed name of parties waiving service of 

summons 

Richard B. North, Jr. (Ga. Bar No. 545599) 

Printed Name 

Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, LLP 

201 17th St., NW, Suite 1700, Atlantic Station, Atlanta, GA 30363 

Address 

richard.north@nelsonmullins.com 

E-mail Address 

(404) 322-6155 

Telephone number 

Duty to Avoid Unnecessary Expenses of Serving a Summons

Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires certain defendants to cooperate in saving unnecessary expenses of serving a 

summons and complaint. A defendant who is located in the United States and who fails to return a signed waiver of service requested by a plaintiff 

located in the United States will be required to pay the expenses of service, unless the defendant shows good cause for the failure. 

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 8644 Filed 11/06/17 Page 1 of 2
2

“Good cause” does not include a belief that the lawsuit is groundless, or that it has been brought in an improper venue, or that the court has 

no jurisdiction over this matter or over the defendant or the defendant’s property. 

If the waiver is signed and returned, you can still make these and all other defenses and objections, but you cannot object to the absence of 

a summons or of service. 

If you waive service, then you must, within the time specified on the waiver form, serve an answer or a motion under Rule 12 on the 

plaintiff and file a copy with the court. By signing and returning the waiver form, you are allowed more time to respond than if a summons had been 

served.

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 8644 Filed 11/06/17 Page 2 of 2
NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

HUMAN RESOURCES

AND EDUCATION (F)

OFFICE OF THE ADMINISTRATOR

GENERAL

COUNSEL (G)

MANAGEMENT

SYSTEMS AND

FACILITIES (J)

SAFETY AND MISSION 

ASSURANCE (Q)

HEADQUARTERS

OPERATIONS (C)

AEROSPACE SAFETY 

ADVISORY PANEL

NASA ADVISORY

COUNCIL

EQUAL OPPORTUNITY

PROGRAMS (E)

LEGISLATIVE 

AFFAIRS (L)

PROGRAM OFFICES

STAFF OFFICES

CHIEF

FINANCIAL OFFICER (B) 

EARTH SCIENCE (Y) SPACE FLIGHT (M)

*JPL is a contractor-op

(see par. 102b

PROCUREMENT (H)

GODDARD SPACE

FLIGHT CENTER

SPACE 

POLICY AND

PLANS (Z)

CENTERS

GEORGE C. MARSHALL

SPACE FLIGHT CENTER

LYNDON B. JOHNSON

SPACE CENTER 

JOHN F. KENNEDY

SPACE CENTER

JOHN C. STENNIS

SPACE CENTER

*JET PR

LABO

LIFE AND MICROGRAVITY 

SCIENCES AND APPLICATIONS 

(U)

Change 37 February 11,1998 2-3
```

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 197 (Friday, October 10, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 61341]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-24176]

=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

OFFICE OF NATIONAL DRUG CONTROL POLICY

Notice of HIDTA Designations

    Heading: Designation of 26 Counties/Cities as High Intensity Drug 
Trafficking Areas.
SUMMARY: The Director of the Office of National Drug Control Policy 
designated 26 additional counties/cities as High Intensity Drug 
Trafficking Areas (HIDTA) pursuant to 21 U.S.C. 1706. The new counties/
cities are (1) Madison and Nelson Counties in Kentucky, Tazewell County 
in Virginia, and Harrison County in West Virginia as part of the 
Appalachia HIDTA; (2) Pasco County in Florida as part of the Central 
Florida HIDTA; (3) Trinity and Siskiyou Counties in California as part 
of the Central Valley California HIDTA; (4) Brazoria County in Texas as 
part of the Houston HIDTA; (5) Rockingham County in New Hampshire as 
part of the New England HIDTA; (6) Chautauqua, Dutchess, Putnam, and 
Rockland Counties in New York as part of the New York/New Jersey HIDTA; 
(7) Ada and Canyon Counties in Idaho, and Malheur County in Oregon as 
part of the Oregon HIDTA; (8) Gallatin County in Montana as part of the 
Rocky Mountain HIDTA; (9) Potter and Randall Counties in Texas as part 
of the Texoma HIDTA; and (10) Berkeley County in West Virginia and the 
Cities of Chesapeake, Hampton, Newport News, Norfolk, Portsmouth, and 
Virginia Beach in Virginia as part of the Washington/Baltimore HIDTA.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Questions regarding this notice should 
be directed to Michael K. Gottlieb, National HIDTA Program Director, 
Office of National Drug Control Policy, Executive Office of the 
President, Washington, DC 20503; (202) 395-4868.

    Dated: September 29, 2014.

    Submitted October 6, 2014.
Daniel Rader,
Deputy General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2014-24176 Filed 10-9-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3280-F5-P
```