alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXHIBIT 12.1



|                                                    |  |                             |       |      |   |      
|--------------------------------------------------- |  | --------------------------- | ----- | ---- | - | -----
|                                                    |  | Three Months EndedMarch 31,
|                                                    |  | 2004                        |       | 2003
|DETERMINATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES |  |                             |       |      |   |      
|Income before provision for income taxes            |  | $                           | 1,606 |      | $ | 4,415
|Fixed charges                                       |  |                             |       |      |   |      
|Amortization of deferred financing costs            |  |                             | 421   |      |   | 270  
|Interest expense                                    |  |                             | 7,449 |      |   | 4,351
|                                                    |  |                             |       |      |   |      
|Earnings before fixed charges                       |  |                             | 9,476 |      |   | 9,036
|Fixed charges                                       |  |                             |       |      |   |      
|Amortization of deferred financing costs            |  |                             | 421   |      |   | 270  
|Interest expense                                    |  |                             | 7,449 |      |   | 4,351
|                                                    |  |                             |       |      |   |      
|Total fixed charges                                 |  | $                           | 7,870 |      | $ | 4,621
|                                                    |  |                             |       |      |   |      
|Ratio of earnings to fixed charges                  |  |                             | 1.20X |      |   | 1.96X
II 

114TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 880 

To expand project eligibility to certain public infrastructure projects under 

chapter 6 of title 23, United States Code. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 26, 2015 

Mr. SCHATZ (for himself, Mr. MARKEY, and Mr. MERKLEY) introduced the 

following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Environment and Public Works 

A BILL 

To expand project eligibility to certain public infrastructure 

projects under chapter 6 of title 23, United States Code. 

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 ‘‘Transit-Oriented De5 velopment Infrastructure Financing Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. INFRASTRUCTURE FINANCE. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Section 601(a)(12) of title 23, 

8 United States Code, is amended— 

9 (1) in subparagraph (C), by striking ‘‘and’’ at 

10 the end; 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 880 IS

1 (2) in subparagraph (D), by striking the period 

2 at the end and inserting ‘‘; and’’; and 

3 (3) by adding at the end the following: 

4 ‘‘(E) a project to improve or construct 

5 public infrastructure that is located within 

6 walking distance of and accessible to a fixed 

7 guideway transit facility, passenger rail station, 

8 intercity bus station, or intermodal facility, in9 cluding transportation, public utility, and cap10 ital projects described in section 5302(3)(G)(v) 

11 of title 49, and related infrastructure that 

12 would promote transit ridership, walkability, or 

13 increased private investment.’’. 

14 (b) ELIGIBLE PROJECT COSTS.—Section 

15 602(a)(5)(B) of title 23, United States Code, is amend16 ed— 

17 (1) by striking ‘‘(B) INTELLIGENT TRANSPOR18 TATION SYSTEM PROJECTS.—In the case’’ and in19 serting the following: 

20 ‘‘(B) EXCEPTIONS.— 

21 ‘‘(i) INTELLIGENT TRANSPORTATION

22 SYSTEMS.—In the case’’; and 

23 (2) by adding at the end the following: 

24 ‘‘(ii) TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOP25 MENT PROJECTS.—In the case of a project 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 880 IS

1 described in section 601(a)(12)(E), eligible 

2 project costs shall be reasonably antici3 pated to be equal to or exceed 

4 $10,000,000.’’. 

Æ 


emcdonald on DSK67QTVN1PROD with BILLS
# In the United States Court of Federal Claims

OFFICE OF SPECIAL MASTERS

No. 19

- 0407 V

UNPUBLISHED

VERONICA SANDERSON

,

Petitioner,

v.

SECRETARY OF HEALTH AND

HUMAN SERVICES,

Respondent. Chief Special Master Corcoran

Filed: April 27, 2020

Special Processing Unit (SPU) ;

Rul ing on Entitlement; Concession;

Causation

- In

- Fact; Influenza (Flu)

Vaccine; Shoulder Injury Related to
Vaccine Administration (SIRVA)

Ronald Craig Homer, Conway, Homer, P.C., Boston, MA , for petitioner.

Debra A. Filteau Begley , U.S. Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for respondent.

RULING ON ENTITLEMENT 1

On March 18, 2019

, Veronica Sanderson filed a petition for compensation under the National Vaccine Injury Compensation Program, 42 U.S.C. §300aa

- 10, et seq

. , 2 (the “Vaccine Act”). Petitioner alleges that she suffered a shoulder injury related to vaccine administration ( “ SIRVA ” ) as a result of receiving the influenza vaccine on October 4,

2016 . Petit ion at 1

. Petiti oner further alleges that she received the vaccination in the
United States, suffered the resi dual effects of her SIRVA for more than six months, and that neither she nor any other party has filed a civil action or received compensation fo r her injury. Id. at ¶ ¶ 26

- 28. The case was assigned to the Special Proc essing Unit of the Office of Special Masters.

1 Because this unpublished ruling contains a reasoned explanation for the action in this case, I am required to post it on the United States Court of Federal Claims' website in accordance with the E

Government Act of 2002. 44 U.S.C. § 3501 note (2012) (Federal Managemen t and Promotion of
Electronic Government Services). This means the ruling will be available to anyone with access to

the internet. In accordance with Vaccine Rule 18(b), Petitioner has 14 days to identify and move to

redact medical or other information, the disclosure of which would constitute an unwarranted invasion of
privacy. If, upon review, I agree that the identified material fits within this definition, I will redact such material from public access.

2 National Childhood Vaccine Injury Act of 19 86, Pub. L. No. 99

- 660, 100 Stat. 3755

. Hereinafter, for ease of citation, all “§” references to the Vaccine Act will be to the pertinent subpara graph of 42 U.S.C. §
300aa (2012 ).2

On April 27, 2020

, R espondent filed his Rule 4(c) report in which he concedes

that P etitioner is entitled to compensa tion in this case. Respondent’s Rule 4(c) Report

at 1. Specifically, R espondent “ concludes that the alleged injury is consistent with SIRVA that was caused by the administration of petitioner’s flu vaccine on October 4,

2016. ” Id. at 6 . Respondent further agrees that “ based on the record as it now stands, petitioner has satisfied all legal prerequisites for compensation under the Vaccine Act. ”

Id.

In view of R espondent’s position and the evidence of record, I find that

P etitioner is entitle d to compensation.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/ Brian H. Corcoran

Brian H. Corcoran

Chief Special Master
exv10w1







Exhibit 10.1




FIRST AMENDMENT TO

AMENDED AND RESTATED EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT




THIS FIRST
AMENDMENT TO AMENDED AND RESTATED EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT (“Amendment”) is made this 14th day
of December, 2011, effective as of the January 1, 2012, by and between PINNACLE ENTERTAINMENT, INC., a Delaware
corporation (the “Company”), and Anthony M. Sanfilippo, an individual (“Executive”), with respect to the following
facts and circumstances:



RECITALS




The Company and Executive entered into an Amended and Restated Employment Agreement dated March 1, 2011 (the
“Agreement”), with Executive having a base salary of Eight Hundred Forty Thousand Dollars ($840,000) per year.



On December 9, 2011, the Compensation Committee of the Board of Directors of the Company increased the Executive’s
base salary to Nine Hundred Thousand Dollars ($900,000) per year, effective January 1, 2012.



The Company and Executive desire to amend the Agreement to reflect Executive’s new salary.



NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises, covenants and agreements set forth herein, the parties
hereto agree as follows:



AMENDMENT




1. Article 3, Section 3.1 of the Agreement (Compensation) is hereby deleted in its entirety and replaced with the
following new Article 3, Section 3.1:




“3.1 Base Salary. In consideration for Executive’s services hereunder, the Company shall pay Executive
an annual base salary at the rate of Nine Hundred Thousand Dollars ($900,000) per year during each of the
years of the Term; payable in accordance with the Company’s regular payroll schedule from time to time (less
any deductions required for Social Security, state, federal and local withholding taxes, and any other
authorized or mandated similar withholdings). Executive shall not receive any compensation for services as a
member of the Company’s Board of Directors.”



2. Except as modified herein, all other terms of the Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. In the
event of a conflict between the terms of the Agreement and this Amendment, the terms of this Amendment shall apply. No
modification may be made to the Agreement or this Amendment except in writing and signed by both the Company and
Executive.



- 1 -





 


1









 








IN WITNESS
WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be duly executed this 14th day of
December, 2011, and effective as of January 1, 2012.



	 	 	 
	EXECUTIVE	 	PINNACLE ENTERTAINMENT, INC.
	 

	 	
	/s/ Anthony M. Sanfilippo

	 	By: /s/ John A. Godfrey                                               
	 

	 	 
	Anthony M. Sanfilippo

	 	John A. Godfrey, Executive Vice President, General
Counsel and Secretary






- 2 -




 


2
|   | 1. | the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Exchange Act; and |
|--------|----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   | 2. | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Prosensa Holding N.V. in liquidatie. |
|--------|----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| /s/ G. Eric Davis                                                                                                                                    |   |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| G. Eric Davis                                                                                                                                        |   |
| Supervisory Director of Prosensa Holding N.V. in liquidatie and Senior Vice President, General Counsel and Secretary of BioMarin Pharmaceutical Inc. |

----
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF DAISYTEK INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION AND SUBSIDIARIES FOR
SIX MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS. THE AMOUNTS BELOW HAVE BEEN
RETROACTIVELY RESTATED TO COMBINE THE ACCOUNTS OF DAISYTEK INTERNATIONAL
CORPORATION WITH THE TAPE COMPANY, INC., WHICH WAS ACQUIRED BY DAISYTEK DURING
JUNE 1998 AND ACCOUNTED FOR AS A POOLING OF INTEREST
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED> 
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1997
<CASH>                                           1,499
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  101,346
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,329
<INVENTORY>                                     68,448
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               171,511
<PP&E>                                          25,536
<DEPRECIATION>                                  12,498
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 190,106
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           79,732
<BONDS>                                         38,097
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           146
<OTHER-SE>                                      76,114
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   190,106
<SALES>                                        372,837
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               372,837
<CGS>                                          332,888
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  332,888
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   846
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               1,246
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 13,087
<INCOME-TAX>                                     4,840
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              8,247
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     8,247
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.57
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.54
        

</TABLE>
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

MICHAEL OSBOURNE,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Appellee.

No. 4D16-1292

[July 20, 2017]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, 

Broward County; Edward H. Merrigan, Judge; L.T. Case No. 14-013288 

CF10A.

Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Gary Lee Caldwell, Assistant 

Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee, and Rachael 

Kaiman, Assistant Attorney General, West Palm Beach, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

GERBER, C.J., DAMOORGIAN and CIKLIN, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
[Federal Register Volume 82, Number 172 (Thursday, September 7, 2017)]
[Notices]
[Page 42306]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2017-18960]


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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration

RIN 0648-XF640


Fisheries of the Exclusive Economic Zone Off Alaska; Alaska 
Groundfish and Halibut Seabird Working Group; Public Meeting

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of public meeting.

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

SUMMARY: NMFS Alaska Groundfish and Halibut Seabird Working Group will 
meet to discuss emerging seabird mitigation technologies and additional 
seabird species that could warrant more attention as bycatch in 
fisheries off Alaska.

DATES: The meeting will be held on September 21, 2017, from 1 p.m. to 5 
p.m., and on September 22, 2017, from 8 a.m. to 11:30 a.m., Alaska 
Daylight Time.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the NMFS Alaska Regional Office 
located at 709 W. 9th St., Room 445C, Juneau, AK. Photo identification 
is required to enter this facility.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Anne Marie Eich, 907-586-7172.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Alaska Groundfish and Halibut Seabird 
Working Group formed as a result of the 2015 biological opinion on 
effects of the Gulf of Alaska and Bering Sea/Aleutian Islands 
groundfish fisheries on short-tailed albatross. The working group is 
tasked with reviewing information for mitigating effects of the 
groundfish fisheries on short-tailed albatross and other seabirds. The 
working group will hold its first in-person meeting in Juneau, AK, on 
September 21 and 22, 2017. Meeting topics include emerging seabird 
mitigation technologies and additional seabird species that could 
warrant more attention as bycatch in fisheries off Alaska. NMFS will 
keep the North Pacific Fishery Management Council (Council) apprised of 
the working group's activities and any resulting recommendations for 
methods to reduce seabird bycatch. Any changes to seabird avoidance 
regulations are expected to follow the standard Council process.

Special Accommodations

    This workshop will be physically accessible to people with 
disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or other 
auxiliary aids should be directed to Anne Marie Eich, 907-586-7172, at 
least 5 working days prior to the meeting date.

    Dated: September 1, 2017.
 Alan D. Risenhoover,
Director, Office of Sustainable Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries 
Service.
[FR Doc. 2017-18960 Filed 9-6-17; 8:45 am]
 BILLING CODE 3510-22-P
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pane l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T CESA R G O M EZ- RI V A S, P et i t i on er , v. E R I C H . H O L D E R , J r ., A tto rn e yG e n e r a l, R e s p o n d e n t. N o. 10- 70197 A ge nc yN o. A 041- 830- 317 ME MOR AN DU M *

O n P e t i t i on f

orR e vi e w of

a n O r de rof

the B o ar do f I m m ig r a tio n A p p e a ls S ubm i tt e d M ay24, 2011 ** B efo re: P R E G E R S O N , T H O M A S , an dP A E Z , C i rcu i tJu d g es. C e s arG om e z - R i va s , ana t i ve a nd c i t i z e n of M e xi c o, pe t i t i ons pr o s e f or re vi ew of the B oard of Im m i grat i on A pp ea l s’ (“ B IA ”) order di sm i ss i ng hi s app ea l f r om an i m m i gr a t i on j udge ’ s r e m ova l or de r . O urj ur i s di c t i on i s gove rne d by 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 5 2 . W e r e v ie w d e n o v o q u e s tio n s o f law , C er ez o v. Mukasey , 512



# FI LED JU N 06 2011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS10- 70197 2 F . 3d 1163, 1166 ( 9th C i r . 2008) , a nd w e de nyi n parta nd di s m i s s i n partthe p e t i t i o n f o rr e v i e w. W e a gree w i th the agency’ s c on clusi on thatG om ez -R i vas’ 20 09 control l ed subst ance offe nse i s notam enabl e t o tre atm entun der the F eder alF i rs tO ff ender A c t, 1 8 U .S .C . § 3 6 0 7 . See de Jesus Melendez v . G on zales , 503 F . 3d 1019, 1 0 2 5 - 2 7 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 7 ) . T he a ge nc ypr ope r l yde t e rm i ne d tha tG om e z - R i va s w a s i ne l i gi bl e f or c a n c e lla tio n o f

r e m o v a l b e c au s e h e h a dp r e v io u s lyr e c e iv e dth a t f o rm o f r e lie f . See 8 U .S .C . § 1 2 2 9 b ( c ) ( 6 ) . In hi s openi ng bri ef

, G om ez -R i vas f

ai l s t o add re ss , and there fore has w ai ved any c hal l enge t o, the agency’ s det erm i nat i on thathi s c on vi ct i on s f or bei ng un der the i nfl uence of a c on trol l ed subst ance i nv ol ved federa l l y- defi ned con trol l ed s ub s tan c e s . Se e M

a r t i n ez–Se rra n o v . I

NS , 94 F . 3d 1256, 1259- 60 ( 9th C i r . 1996) (i ss ues notspec i fi ca l l y r ai se d and ar gu ed i n a party’ s openi ng bri ef ar e dee m ed w ai ved). W e l a c k j ur i s di c t i on t o r e vi e w G om e z - R i va s ’ c ont e nt i on tha thi s 2009 c onvi c t i on w a s nota“ c onvi c t i on” a s de f i ne d i n 8 U . S . C . § 1101( a ) ( 48) be c aus e he f a ile dto e x h au s t th is c la im b e f o r e th e B I A . Se e B a rr o n v . A s h c r o ft , 358 F . 3d 674, 67 7-78 (9th C i r. 20 04 ).10- 70197 3 G o m e z - R iv a s ’ r e m a in in g c o n te n tio n s a r e n o t p e r s u a s iv e . P E T IT IO N F O R R E V IE W D E N IE D i n p art; D IS M IS S E D i n p art.
Document headings vary by document type but may contain
                    the following: the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
the number of the CFR title and the number of each part
                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly
                      related to
the agency docket number / agency internal file number
the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in
                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory
                      Actions See the
                    Document Drafting Handbook
                    for more details.
 Department of Agriculture Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration
 AGENCY: Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA), USDA.
 ACTION: Notice of designation.
 SUMMARY: GIPSA is announcing the designation of the Montana Department of Agriculture (Montana) to provide official services under the United States Grain Standards Act (USGSA), as amended.
 DATES: July 1, 2017.
 ADDRESSES: Jacob Thein, Compliance Officer, USDA, GIPSA, FGIS, QACD, 10383 North Ambassador Drive, Kansas City, MO 64153.
 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jacob Thein, 816-866-2223, 
                        *Jacob.D.Thein@usda.gov*
                         or 
                        *FGIS.QACD@usda.gov*. *Read Applications:*
                         All applications and comments are available for public inspection at the office above during regular business hours (7 CFR 1.27(c)).


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In the April 17, 2017, 
                    **Federal Register**
                     (82 FR 18100), GIPSA requested applications for designation to provide official services in the geographic areas presently serviced by Montana. Applications were due by May 17, 2017. The current official agency, Montana, was the only applicant for designation to provide official services in these areas. As a result, GIPSA did not ask for additional comments. GIPSA evaluated the designation criteria in section 7(f) of the USGSA (7 U.S.C. 79(f)) and determined that Montana is qualified to provide official services in the geographic area specified in the 
                    **Federal Register**
                     on April 17, 2017. This designation to provide official services in the specified area of Montana is effective July 1, 2017, to June 30, 2022. Interested persons may obtain official services by contacting this agency at the following telephone number: Official agency
Headquarters location and telephone
Designation start
Designation endMontana
Great Falls, MT, 406-444-3144
7/1/2017
6/30/2022
 Section 7(f) of the USGSA authorizes the Secretary to designate a qualified applicant to provide official services in a specified area after determining that the applicant is better able than any other applicant to provide such official services (7 U.S.C. 79(f)). Randall D. Jones, Acting Administrator, Grain Inspection, Packers and Stockyards Administration.


[FR Doc. 2017-18634 Filed 9-1-17; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 3410-KD-P