alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 40 (Wednesday, March 1, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 11119]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-5007]



[[Page 11119]]

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

[TA-W-30,468]


Pontiac Weaving Corporation, Cumberland, RI; Notice of Revised 
Determination on Reconsideration

    On February 14, 1995, the Department issued an Affirmative 
Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration for the former 
workers of the subject firm. The notice will soon be published in the 
Federal Register.
    The subject plant ceased operations in September 1994 and all 
production workers were laid off at that time.
    New findings on reconsideration show that Pontiac Weaving 
contracted for a manufacturer who owns a major share of Pontiac Weaving 
Corporation. The manufacturer increased its company imports in 1994 
compared to 1993.

Conclusion

    After careful consideration of the new facts obtained on 
reconsideration, it is concluded that the former workers of the Pontiac 
Weaving Corporation in Cumberland, Rhode Island were adversely affected 
by increased imports of articles that are like or directly competitive 
with those produced at the subject firm.
    In accordance with the provisions of the Act, I make the following 
revised determination for the former workers of the Pontiac Weaving 
Corporation in Cumberland, Rhode Island.

``All workers and former workers of Pontiac Weaving Corporation in 
Cumberland, Rhode Island who became totally or partially separated 
from employment on or after September 21, 1993 are eligible to apply 
for adjustment assistance under Section 223 of the Trade Act of 
1974.''

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 17th day of February 1995.
Victor J. Trunzo,
Program Director, Policy and Reemployment Services, Office of Trade 
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 95-5007 Filed 2-28-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 34 (Tuesday, February 21, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 9676-9677]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-4108]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. CP95-197-000]


Koch Gateway Pipeline Company; Notice of Request Under Blanket 
Authorization

    February 14, 1995.
    Take notice that on February 3, 1995, Koch Gateway Pipeline Company 
(Koch Gateway), P.O. Box 1478, Houston, Texas 77251-1478 filed in 
Docket No. CP95-197-000 a request pursuant to Sections 157.205 and 
157.211 of the Commission's Regulations under the Natural Gas Act (18 
CFR 157.205, 157.211) for authorization to construct and operate 
facilities at an existing meter station site in Calcasieu Parish, 
Louisiana under Koch Gateway's blanket certificate issued in Docket No. 
CP82-430-000 pursuant to Section 7 of the Natural Gas Act, all as more 
fully set forth in the request that is on file with the Commission and 
open to public inspection.
    Koch Gateway proposes to increase natural gas delivery at the 
existing meter station for serving the Firestone plant on behalf of 
Koch Gas Services Company (KGSC). The proposed revisions will increase 
delivery capacity from 2,400 MMBtu to 6,500 MMBtu per day. Koch Gateway 
states it has been authorized to provide this natural gas 
transportation service to Firestone on behalf of KGSC under an April 1, 
1994 transportation agreement.
    Koch Gateway will replace a 2-inch meter with a 3-inch meter and 
will install a flow computer at an existing meter station site on its 
Iowa Field-Cities Service Refinery line near Lake Charles in Calcasieu 
Parish, Louisiana. The delivery tap and meter station construction will 
be aboveground and entirely within the existing pipeline right of way 
on Firestone's plant property. The estimated cost is $9,000. Koch 
Gateway's service provided to KGSC will be interruptible, is within the 
current certificated level, will have no impact on Koch Gateway's 
curtailment plan or affect service to other existing customers.
    Any person or the Commission's staff may, within 45 days after 
issuance of the instant notice by the Commission, file pursuant to Rule 
214 of the Commission's Procedural Rules (18 CFR 385.214) a motion to 
intervene or notice of intervention and pursuant to Section 157.205 of 
the Regulations under the Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.205) a protest to 
the request. If no protest is filed within the time allowed therefor, 
the proposed activity shall be deemed to be authorized effective the 
day after the time allowed for filing a protest. If a protest is filed 
and not withdrawn [[Page 9677]] within 30 days after the time allowed 
for filing a protest, the instant request shall be treated as an 
application for authorization pursuant to Section 7 of the Natural Gas 
Act.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-4108 Filed 2-17-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
Document Headings

                    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.                  

###### International Trade Commission

          - [Investigation No. 731-TA-125 (Fourth Review)]

## Determination

                    On the basis of the record [1]                                          developed in the subject five-year review, the United States International Trade Commission (“Commission”) determines, pursuant to the Tariff Act of 1930, that revocation of the antidumping duty order on Potassium Permanganate from China would be likely to lead to continuation or recurrence of material injury to an industry in the United States within a reasonably foreseeable time.                

## Background

The Commission, pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)), instituted this review on September 1, 2015 (80 FR 52743) and determined on December 7, 2015 that it would conduct an expedited review (80 FR 79097, December 18, 2015).

                    The Commission made this determination pursuant to section 751(c) of the Tariff Act of 1930 (19 U.S.C. 1675(c)). It completed and filed its determination in this review on February 2, 2016.[2]                                          The views of the Commission are contained in USITC Publication 4590 (January 2016), entitled                     *Potassium Permanganate from China: Investigation No. 731-TA-125 (Fourth Review).*

By order of the Commission.

Issued: February 2, 2016.

Lisa R. Barton,

Secretary to the Commission.

# Footnotes

1.                             The record is defined in sec. 207.2(f) of the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (19 CFR 207.2(f)).                    
        Back to Citation      

2.                             The Commission has the authority to toll statutory deadlines during a period when the federal government is closed. Because the Commission was closed on January 25 and 26, 2016 due to inclement weather in Washington, DC, the Commission tolled the statutory deadline in this review by two days.                    
        Back to Citation      

[FR Doc. 2016-02344 Filed 2-5-16; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

July 3, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number USTR-2018-0025-1826

GHL International, Inc:

The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the product exclusion request referenced 

above has been denied. As you are aware, USTR published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 

28710) on June 20, 2018, that announced the Trade Representative’s determination to impose an 

additional duty of 25 percent on certain products from China. On July 11, 2018, the Trade 

Representative published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 32181) which announced that a 

process had been established under which interested persons could request that products falling 

within a covered HTSUS subheading be excluded from the additional duties announced on June 

20.

Your request was reviewed in accordance with the factors and procedures set forth in 

Section B(1) of the July 11 notice. Based on that review, and after careful consideration, your 

request was denied because the request did not contain a sufficient product identification or was 

determined to be non-administrable.

Because USTR will grant exclusion requests on a product specific basis, you may still 

benefit from a product exclusion if a similar product is granted an exclusion. Products for which 

an exclusion has been granted will be periodically announced on the USTR website. Product 

exclusions will become legally effective once published in the Federal Register. 

Sincerely,

Joseph Barloon

General Counsel
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONDENSED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS CONTAINED IN THE COMPANY'S QUARTERLY
REPORT ON FORM 10-QSB FOR THE PERIOD ENDED JUNE 30, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                          566253
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               3490884
<PP&E>                                          347683
<DEPRECIATION>                                   28399
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 3697183
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           922683
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         19432
<OTHER-SE>                                        2340
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   3697183
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  2025101
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (2006464)
<INCOME-TAX>                                      1600
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (2008064)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (2008064)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.10)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.10)


</TABLE>
|Exhibit 32.1


CERTIFICATION PURSUANT
TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                                       SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


In
connection with the Annual Report of Palomar Medical Technologies, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Joseph P. Caruso,
President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and I, Paul S. Weiner, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to our knowledge: (1) the
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934; and (2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in
all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the
Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its Staff upon request.
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

|                                      | 
|------------------------------------- | 
|Dated: March 10, 2005                 | 
|                                      | 
|/s/    Joseph P. Caruso               | 
|Joseph P. Caruso                      | 
|President and Chief Executive Officer | 

|                        | 
|----------------------- | 
|Dated: March 10, 2005   | 
|                        | 
|/s/ Paul S. Weiner      | 
|Paul S. Weiner          | 
|Chief Financial Officer | 

|
|
OFFICIAL NOTICE FROM COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS OF TEXAS 

### P.O. BOX 12308,CAPITOLSTATION, AUSTIN, TEXAS78711 

# OFFICIALBUSINESS r 

# STATEOFTEXAS S« | Eg PENALTY FOR 

## 8/20/2014 PRIVATE USE MOSQUERA, RODRIGO fTr. Ct N<* 2C 

# On this day, the Appellant's Pro Se petition fpi>discretionary review has been refused. 

### Abel Acosta, Clerk RODRIGO MOSQUERA 1514W.OLMOS 

## SANANTONIO,TX 78201 NIXIE•••• ?&; '5-E- 1 cy 

## &S4 ?,

__ 

# 02 1M $ Q0.265 MAILED FROM ZIPC<p@_?|5H>6-13

•&-i'0.B ••/•^•'e'^,i-5'

,CAWBS3B i'B2i RETURN TO SENDER NOT DELIVERABLE AS ADDRESSED UNABLE TD FORWARD 7 8 7 IIZBo 8© a * 2 0 5 3 - 65 Z 7 i -2.1 - 3 S 1 I I I I 1 1 I . !1 I 11 1 11 1(11 I 111 1 I I 11 I III 1 I I ill 1 1 1,iiv^i->-MlVl!-l'M,M!MMMMli-i!»",MnM,,ll!llfl-iTlMi|»iU)-M
## Detailed Single Year Tables

- Individual Provisions
- Level of Monthly Benefits

### **Description of Proposed Provision:						B4.2: Increase the number of years used to calculate benefits for retirees and survivors (but not for disabled workers) from 35 to 40, phased in over the years 2024-2032.**

### Financial Estimates for the OASDI Trust Fund Program

### Summarized Estimates
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

J.T., the father,

Appellant,

v.

DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES,

Appellee.

No. 4D17-2472

[November 7, 2017]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm 

Beach County; Kirk C. Volker, Judge; L.T. Case No. 2016-DP-000134-JM.

Andrew A. Hollness of Law Offices of Andrew A. Holness, P.A., West 

Palm Beach, for appellant.

Meredith K. Hall, Appellate Counsel, Children's Legal Services, 

Bradenton, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed.

GROSS, MAY and KLINGENSMITH, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
Ex-99.2 a)

September 24, 1998


                              MANAGEMENT ASSERTION


                As of and for the period ended June 30, 1998, EMC
                Mortgage Corporation has complied in all material
                respects with the minimum servicing standards set
                forth in the Mortgage Banker's Association of
                America's UNIFORM SINGLE ATTESTATION PROGRAM FOR
                MORTGAGE BANKERS. As of and for this same period,
                EMC Mortgage Corporation had in effect a
                financial institution bond policy in the amount
                of $200,000,000 and an errors and omissions
                policy in the amount of $5,000,000.

                                    /s/ Ralene Ruyle
                                    --------------------------------------------
                                    Ralene Ruyle
                                    Executive Vice President
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 UN I T E D S T AT E S OF AME R I C A, P l ai nt i ff

- A pp el l ee , v. F R A N K L IN E S P IN O -Z A M O R A , a. k. a. F rank l i n Ivan E spi no -Z am ora, D e f

e n d an t - A p p e llan t. N o. 12- 10162 D . C. N o . 2 : 1 1 - c r - 0 0 1 5 8 - J CM ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt

f orthe D i s tr i c tof

N e va da J a m e s C . M a han, D i s tr i c tJudge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d O c t obe r15, 2013 ** B e f o r e : F I S H E R , G O U L D , an dB Y B E E , C ir c u it Ju d g e s . F r a nkl i n E s pi no- Z a m or aappe a l s f r om the di s tr i c tc ourt ’ s j udgm e nta nd chal l enges hi s gui l ty- pl eaconv i ct i on and 1 5-m on th sent ence for bei ng an i l l egal a l i e n i n pos s e s s i on of

af i r e arm , i n vi ol a t i on of

18 U . S . C . §§ 922( g) ( 5) ( A ) a nd



# FI LED OC T 22 2013 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS12- 10162 2 924( a ) ( 2) . P ur s uantt o A n de rs v . Ca lifo rn ia , 386 U . S . 738 ( 1967) , E s pi noZ a m or a ’ s c ouns e l ha s f

i l e d abr i e f

s t a t i ng tha tthe r e a r e no gr ounds f orr e l i e f , a l ong w i th a m ot i on t o w i thd raw as coun se l of re cord. W e have provi ded E spi no -Z am ora the opportuni tyt o f

i l e apr o s e s uppl e m e nt a l br i e f . N o pr o s e s uppl e m e nt a l br i e f or a ns w e r i ng br i e f

ha s be e n f

i l e d. E s p in o - Z a m o r ah a s w a iv e dh is r ig h t to ap p e a l h is c o n v ic tio n a n ds e n te n c e . O uri nde pe nde ntr e vi e w of the r e c or d pur s uantt o P e n s o n v . O h io , 488 U . S . 75, 80 ( 1 9 8 8 ) , d is c lo s e s n o a r g u ab le is s u e a s to th e v a lid ityo f th e w a iv e r . See U

ni ted States v . W

at s on , 5 8 2 F . 3 d9 7 4 , 9 8 6 -8 8 (9 th C i r. 2 0 0 9 ). W e acco rd i n g l y d i sm i ss th e ap p e a l. Se e id . a t988. C o u n sel ’ s m o t i o n t o w i th d raw i s G R A N T E D . DI S MI S S E D.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT
No. 95-6685
THOMAS EDWARD BRUCE, Petitioner - Appellant, versus ELLIS B. WRIGHT, Respondent - Appellee.
Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. B. Waugh Crigler, Magistrate Judge. (CA-93-232-R) Submitted: December 14, 1995 Decided: January 4, 1996 Before ERVIN, Chief Judge, and WIDENER and WILKINS, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Thomas Edward Bruce, Appellant Pro Se. John H. McLees, Jr., OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (1988) petition. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of probable cause to appeal and dismiss the appeal substantially on the reasoning of the district court. Bruce v. Wright , No. CA-93-232-R (W.D. Va. Mar. 30,1995). Two of Appellant's claims involved state evidentiary matters, which are not generally the basis for federal habeas relief. Chance v. Garrison , 537 F.2d 1212, 1215 (4th Cir. 1976). Some of Appellant's claims were not presented to the state court, so those claims are defaulted. Further, the state court found several of Appellant's claims procedurally barred, and he has not shown cause and prejudice or actual innocence to overcome the bar. Murray v. Carrier , 477 U.S. 478 (1986). Finally, Appellant did not establishineffective assistance of counsel warranting habeas relief. Strickland v. Washington , 466 U.S. 668, 694 (1984). 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.

DISMISSED
exhibit10a.htm
















Exhibit 10(a)

















Consent of Ernst & Young LLP, Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm












We consent to the reference to our firm under the caption “Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm” in Post-Effective Amendment No. 42 to the Registration Statement (Form N-4 No. 333-63505) pertaining to Lincoln National Variable Annuity Account H, which is incorporated by reference into Post-Effective Amendment No. 43, and to the use therein of our reports dated (a) April 1, 2011, with respect to the consolidated financial statements of The Lincoln National Life Insurance Company and (b) April 6, 2011, with respect to the financial statements of Lincoln National Variable Annuity Account H.


 


                                     /s/ Ernst & Young LLP


                                           




Philadelphia, Pennsylvania


June 20, 2011