alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 6 (Tuesday, January 10, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2582-2583]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-504]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. RP95-108-000]


Southern Natural Gas Company; Notice of GSR Revised Tariff Sheets

January 4, 1995.
    Take notice that on December 30, 1994, Southern Natural Gas Company 
(Southern) submitted for filing as part of [[Page 2583]] its FERC Gas 
Tariff, Seventh Revised Volume No. 1, the following tariff sheets to 
reflect a change in its FT/FT-NN GSR Surcharge and its Interruptible 
Transportation Rates due to an increase in the FERC interest rate 
effective January 1, 1995:

First Sub. First Alt. Fifteenth Revised Sheet No. 15
First Sub. First Alt. Fifteenth Revised Sheet No. 17
First Sub. First Alt. Ninth Revised Sheet No. 18

    Southern states that copies of the filing were served upon 
Southern's intervening customers and interested state commissions.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 825 North Capitol Street, N.E., Washington, D.C. 
20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules 
of Practice and Procedure. All such motions or protests should be filed 
on or before January 11, 1995. Protests will be considered by the 
Commission in determining the appropriate action to be taken, but will 
not serve to make protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person 
wishing to become a party must file a motion to intervene. Copies of 
Southern's filing are on file with the Commission and are available for 
public inspection.
Linwood A. Watson, Jr.,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-504 Filed 1-9-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
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-2018-0025-2566

Speck Pumps-Pool Products, Inc: 

I am pleased to notify you that the United States Trade Representative has determined to 

grant the above-referenced exclusion request submitted pursuant to the notice published at 83 FR 

32181 (‘July 11 notice’). The exclusion determination is set out in a formal notice which has 

been submitted to Office of the Federal Register for publication (‘the exclusion notice’). A prepublication version of the exclusion notice has been posted on the USTR website, at 

https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/301Investigations/Notice_of_Product_Exclusions.

pdf. 

The scope of the exclusion is governed by the formal HTSUS language in the annex to 

the product exclusion notice, and not by the product descriptions set out in any particular request 

for exclusion. An exclusion in response to your request has been granted by excluding from the 

additional tariffs products covered by a specially drafted description contained in the annex to 

the product exclusion notice. 

In accordance with the July 11 notice, the exclusion applies as of the July 6, 2018 

effective date of the tariff action, and will extend for one year after the exclusion notice is 

published in the Federal Register. As stated in the exclusion notice, U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection will issue additional instructions on entry guidance and implementation

Sincerely,

Joseph Barloon

General Counsel
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

February 19, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-2575

Curtis Instruments, Puerto Rico, 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 concerns a product strategically important or related to 

‘‘Made in China 2025’’ or other Chinese industrial programs.

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,

Stephen P. Vaughn

General Counsel
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

November 19, 2018

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-2536

Reelcraft Industries:

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 failed to show that the imposition of additional duties on 

the particular product would cause severe economic harm to you or other U.S. interests.

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,

Stephen P. Vaughn
#### MRS. R. *G.*SHERRILL and *D. & S.*MOTOR COMPANY v. C. W. ROBERTSON.

(Filed 20 October, 1926.)

Appeal by defendant from *Barnhill, J.,*at March Term, 1926, of Wake. No error.

*R. Pearson Upchurch for plaintiff.*

*B. 0. Beckwith for defendant.*

Pee. CuRiAM.

Tbe plaintiffs instituted this action to recover a

judgment for $164.10. They alleged that Mrs. Sherrill was the owner of a Star sedan which had been damaged by the wrongful and negligent conduct of the defendant’s son; that the defendant had authorized her to have the car repaired by the I). & S. Motor Company at his expense; that the repairs were made and that the cost was the amount sued for. The defendant denied the alleged agreement and contended that he was not liable for the negligence of his son (who was twenty-three years of age) in driving a car owned by a third party. On the trial there was evidence tending to show that his son had been charged in the city court with reckless driving and that upon the defendant’s agreement to pay the damage the judgment against the son was suspended. It is argued that such an agreement should not be enforced because it is contrary to public policy. *Respess v. Spinning Co.,*191 N. C., 809. The defendant, however, expressly denied that he had made any agreement in consideration of a suspended judgment. This question was not presented to the jury, the issues which were answered against the defendant being whether he had agreed to pay for the repairs, and if so the amount he was due. We find

No error.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 38 (Monday, February 27, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 10612]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-4734]



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

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR
[TA-W-30,468]


Pontiac Weaving Corp.; Cumberland, RI; Notice of Affirmative 
Determination Regarding Application for Reconsideration

    On January 13, 1995, one of the petitioners requested 
administrative reconsideration of the Department of Labor's Notice of 
Negative Determination Regarding Eligibility to Apply for Worker 
Adjustment Assistance for workers at the subject firm. The Department's 
Negative Determination was issued on January 6, 1995 and will soon be 
published in the Federal Register.
    New findings show that the parent company of Pontiac Weaving 
increased its imports in 1994.

Conclusion

    After careful review of the application, I conclude that the claim 
is of sufficient weight to justify reconsideration of the Department of 
Labor's prior decision. The application is, therefore, granted.

    Signed at Washington, D.C., this 14th day of February 1995.
Victor J. Trunzo,
Program Manager, Policy and Reemployment Services, Office of Trade 
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 95-4734 Filed 2-24-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
****

**MOTOR MODEL: RE260**

# image1.jpeg

# image2.jpeg

# image3.jpeg

# image4.png

# image5.png
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

January 23, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-3151

Viavi Solutions 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 concerns a product strategically important or related to 

‘‘Made in China 2025’’ or other Chinese industrial programs.

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,

Stephen P. Vaughn

General Counsel
****

**MOTOR MODEL: RF300**

# image1.jpeg

# image2.jpeg

# image3.jpeg

# image4.png

# image5.png
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 52 (Friday, March 17, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 14467]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-6679]



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

NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION


Advisory Committee for Biological Sciences (BIO); Notice of 
Meeting

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-
463, as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the 
following meeting:

    Name: Advisory Committee for Biological Sciences (BIO) (1110).
    Date and Time: April 3, 1995; 8:45 a.m.-6 p.m.; April 4, 1995; 
8:45 a.m.-12 Noon.
    Place: National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Blvd., 
Arlington, VA 22230, Room 1235.
    Type of Meeting: Open.
    Contact Person: Dr. Mary E. Clutter, Assistance Director, 
Biological Sciences, Room 605, National Science Foundation, 4201 
Wilson Blvd., Arlington, VA 22230, Tel No.: (703) 306-1400.
    Minutes: May be obtained from the contact person listed above.
    Purpose of Meeting: The Advisory Committee for BIO provides 
advice, recommendations, and oversight concerning major program 
emphases, directions, and goals for the research-related activities 
of the divisions that make up BIO.
    Agenda: NSF and BIO strategic planning; integration of research 
and education.

    Dated: March 14, 1995.
M. Rebecca Winkler,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 95-6679 Filed 3-16-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

November 19, 2018

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-2530

Reelcraft Industries:

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 concerns a product strategically important or related to 

‘‘Made in China 2025’’ or other Chinese industrial programs.

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,

Stephen P. Vaughn
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

697 CA 11-02503 PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., FAHEY, PERADOTTO, SCONIERS, AND MARTOCHE, JJ.

IN THE MATTER OF CITY OF SYRACUSE, PETITIONER-APPELLANT,

V ORDER

CENTRAL NEW YORK ASSOCIATION OF DELTA KAPPA EPSILON, RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT.

MARY ANNE DOHERTY, CORPORATION COUNSEL, SYRACUSE (THOMAS R. BABILON OF COUNSEL), FOR PETITIONER-APPELLANT.
MENTER, RUDIN & TRIVELPIECE, P.C., SYRACUSE (TERESA M. BENNETT OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT.

Appeal from an order of the Onondaga County Court (Anthony F. Aloi, J.), entered March 14, 2011. The order, insofar as appealed from, denied the motion of petitioner to dismiss the appeal of respondent.
It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs.

Entered: June 8, 2012 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
#### Melvin Earl NOLAN, Movant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. 64193.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

March 22, 1994.

Ellen H. Flottman, Office of the State Public Defender, Columbia, for movant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Joanne E. Beal, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before CRANDALL, P.J., and REINHARD and CRIST, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Movant, Melvin Earl Nolan, appeals from the denial of his Rule 24.035 motion after an evidentiary hearing.

The judgment of the motion court was based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous; no error of law appears. An extended opinion would have no precedential value.

The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
SCWC-11-0001026

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I 

_________________________________________________________________

EDMUND C. OLSON, Trustee of the Edmund C. Olson Trust No. 2,

u/a dated August 21, 1985, Respondent/Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

HAN PHUA, Respondent/Defendant-Appellant

and

ABEL LUI and all persons claiming by, through and under him and

acting in concert with him; Petitioner/Defendant-Appellee

and

DAVID SCHLESINGER; SHELLEY STEPHENS MAHI; 

Respondents/Defendants.

_________________________________________________________________

CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

(CAAP-11-0001026; CIV. NO. 3RC11-1-195K)

ORDER REJECTING APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, Acoba, McKenna, and Pollack, JJ.)

Petitioner/Defendant-Appellee Abel Simeona Lui’s

application for writ of certiorari filed on February 11, 2013, is

hereby rejected. 

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, March 28, 2013.

Abel Simeona Lui, /s/ Mark E. Recktenwald

petitioner, pro se 

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama

Paul Alston & Pamela W. Bunn

for respondent /s/ Simeon R. Acoba, Jr.

/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna

/s/ Richard W. Pollack 

Electronically Filed

Supreme Court

SCWC-11-0001026

28-MAR-2013

02:22 PM
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

February 19, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-2495

Curtis Instruments, 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 concerns a product strategically important or related to 

‘‘Made in China 2025’’ or other Chinese industrial programs.

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,

Stephen P. Vaughn

General Counsel
Exhibit 10.62

[Matrix Pharmaceutical, Inc., Letterhead]

October
25, 1999

Mr.
Michael Casey
Chairman and CEO
Matrix Pharmaceutical, Inc.

Dear
Mike:

The
compensation Committee of the Matrix Pharmaceutical, Inc. Board of Directors has approved an amendment to the terms and conditions of your $500,000 loan outstanding from Matrix
Pharmaceutical, Inc.

The
terms of your loan are hereby amended to provide for full forgiveness of any outstanding loan amount due Matrix Pharmaceutical, Inc. upon receipt of marketing approval from the
FDA for IntraDose. All of the terms and conditions of your loan, including the existing loan forgiveness provisions, remain in full force and effect until such time as Matrix Pharmaceutical, Inc.
receives final, non-contingent approval from the FDA to market IntraDose.

This
action was taken and approved by the compensation Committee of the Matrix Pharmaceutical, Inc. Board of Directors at the October 25, 1999 meeting, the minutes of which
were accepted today by the full Board.

Sincerely,

/s/
J. Stephan Dolezalek Secretary of the Board of Directors
## In the Court of Appeals Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth
No. 02

- 20

- 00056

- CV

I N THE I NTEREST OF J.T., A C HILD § § § § On Appeal from the 323rd District Court of Tarrant County (323

- 108806

- 18) April 30, 2020 Opinion by Chief Justice Sudderth JU DG MENT This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there was error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of the trial
court is reversed and the case is remanded to the trial court for a new trial

. P u rsuant

to the Supreme Co urt of Texas ’ s Misc. Docket No. 20

- 9059, Family Code S ection 263.401(b

- 1)(1)(B)’s requirement that the new trial must commence not later than the 180th day after remand is suspended until 30 days after the Governor’s state of
disa st er due to the COVID

- 19 P andemic has been lifted.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS By _ /s/ Bonnie Sudderth

________________ Chief Justice Bonnie Suddert h
U.S. flagAn official website of the United States government
                    Here's how you know **Official websites use .gov**
                            
                            A **.gov** website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
 **Secure .gov websites use HTTPS**
                            
                            A **lock** (                            
                              A locked padlock                                                      
                            
                            ) or **https://** means you’ve safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.


Menu Agricultural Research Service
						
                    U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
 Poisonous Plant Research: Logan, UT
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    Careers


        


                    IACUC SummariesSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Pacific West Area Logan, Utah Poisonous Plant Research Research





- ARS National Programs
- Search for a scientific manuscript
- Search for a research project
- ARS Software
- Programs and Projects
- Collaborations
- Subjects of Investigation
- Publications
- IACUC Summary
- Bulletin 415

Research Projects Subjects of Investigation at this LocationEach ARS research project has related subjects of investigation.  Listed below are the subjects of investigation currently conducted at this location.
Clicking on a subject of investigation will list the research projects within that  subject of investigation.Subjects of Investigation
                            Beef cattle, live animal
                                Desert and semidesert shrub land and shinnery
                                Goats, meat and mohair
                                Hemp
                                **Mountain grasslands, meadow, and alpine**
                                Sheep, live animal

                    Research Projects within Mountain grasslands, meadow, and alpine
                            item
                                            Developing Mitigation Strategies for Poisonous Plants in Livestock Production Systems


Return to top


Connect with ARS Sign up


ARS Home
                            USDA.gov
                            Plain Writing
                            Policies & Links
                            Civil Rights Statements
                            FOIA
                            Accessibility Statement
                            Privacy Policy
                            Non-Discrimination Statement
                            Quality of Information
                            USA.gov
                            WhiteHouse.gov