alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1 District Judge of the Southern District of Texas, sitting

by designation.

2 Local Rule 47.5 provides: "The publication of opinions

that have no precedential value and merely decide particular cases

on the basis of well-settled principles of law imposes needless

expense on the public and burdens on the legal profession."

Pursuant to that Rule, the court has determined that this opinion

should not be published. UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

for the Fifth Circuit

_____________________________________

No. 94-11046

_____________________________________

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

VERSUS

SOLAH KASSEM ABOU-KASSEM,

Defendant-Appellant.

______________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

(4:87 CR 14 E)

______________________________________________________ August 4, 1995

Before DAVIS, JONES, Circuit Judges, and HINOJOSA 1

, District Judge.

PER CURIAM: 2

Abou-Kassem appeals the dismissal of his § 2255 petition. We

dismiss the appeal as moot.

In November 1987, a jury convicted Abou-Kassem of two counts

of hostage taking, two counts of attempted air piracy, one count of

unlawful possession of a firearm by an illegal alien, and four

counts of using a firearm in a crime of violence. Before trial,

the district court granted Abou-Kassem's request for a competency2

hearing and, following the hearing, declared him mentally competent

to stand trial.

Before sentencing, Abou-Kassem requested another hearing to

assess his mental condition pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §§ 4244 and 4257.

The distr ict court granted his request and determined that AbouKassem suffered from a mental condition requiring tre atment.

Pursuant to § 4244, the district court committed him to a federal

mental fac ility under a provisional sentence of life plus forty

years. Abou-Kassem then filed a § 2255 petition challenging his

provisional sentence. He filed the instant appeal when the

district court denied his petitio n. After Abou-Kassem filed his

notic e of appeal, however, the district court determined that he

was competent to be sentenced and imposed a final sentence. AbouKassem subsequently filed a direct appeal from his final sentence.

Abou-Kassem's provisional sentence was terminated when the

district court issued it s final sentence. Because of the

termination of his provisional sentence, we can no longer grant him

the relief he seeks in his § 2255 petit ion. His appeal of the

district court's denial of his § 2255 petition is therefore moot.

See In re Sullivan Cent. Plaza, I, Ltd.

, 914 F.2d 731, 733-34 (5th

Cir. 1990)("The mootness doctrine is grounded primarily and

originally in the appellate court's inability to fashion relief.").

Accordingly, we dismiss his appeal.

APPEAL DISMISSED.
Exhibit 99



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 Quarterly Report of Aurora Foods Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the
period ended March 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of the Company hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§ 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (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 the Company.
| | --- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



A signed original of this written statement required by §
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.



|                                                                          
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/    DALE F.
MORRISON                                                   
|Dale F. Morrison Chairman of the Board and Interim Chief Executive Officer
|                                                                          



|                                                                         
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/    WILLIAM R.
MCMANAMAN                                              
|William R. McManaman Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer



May 14, 2003
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-2018-0025-2103

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 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,

Stephen P. Vaughn
#### W. M. SANDERS et al., v. MARY P. SANDERS et al.

(Filed 23 September, 1931.)

1. Appeal and Error P lb — Exception to judgment as signed is without merit where verdict supports judgment.

An exception only to the judgment signed is without merit on appeal when the verdict supports the judgment.

S. Appeal and Error P c — Assignments of error must he supported by exceptions duly entered.

Under the requirements of Rule 19 of Practice in the Supreme Court only exceptive assignments of error properly appearing of record are considered, and where no assignments of error appear in the statement of the case on appeal, but only purported assignments are added, after the case has been hied in the Supreme Court, alleging errors appearing on the face of the statement of case on appeal, the case will be dismissed for noncompliance with the rule.

3. Appeal and Error E c — Where record does not comply with Rules of Court the appeal will be dismissed.

Where no summons appears in the record in the case on appeal and there is nothing to show that the term of court was regularly held or that the cause was properly constituted in court the case will be dismissed under Rule 19.

Appeal by defendants from Sinclair, Jat February Term, 1931, of Joi-INSTON.

Civil action to recover on a' promissory note, tried upon tbe following issue:

“In what amount, if any, are the defendants indebted to the plaintiffs ? • Answer: $690.98 with interest.”

Judgment on the verdict for plaintiffs, from which the defendants appeal.

*G. A. Martin for plaintiffs.*

*E. J. Wellons for defendants.*

Stacy, C. J.

The following appears in the agreed statement of case on appeal: “The defendants’ only exception is to the order of the court striking- out the further defense of the defendants and directing a verdict.”

At the close of the case it is stated: “The only exception was to the judgment as signed.” This, of course, is without merit, as the verdict supports the j'udgment.

No assignments of error accompanied the case as certified by the clerk of the Superior Court, but certain purported assignments of error *351baye been added since tbe case was filed here, one of which is to an alleged “error appearing on tbe face of tbe statement of case on appeal.” Only exceptive assignments of error are considered on appeal. Rule 19, Rules of Practice, 200 N. C., 824; *Rawls v. Lupton,*193 N. C., 428, 137 S. E., 175.

Furthermore, tbe transcript is imperfect, in that, no summons appears in tbe record and there is nothing to show that tbe term of court was regularly held or that tbe cause was properly constituted in court. *Jones v. Hoggard,*107 N. C., 349, 12 S. E., 286. In this state of tbe record, tbe appeal must be dismissed for failure to comply with tbe rules. *Hobbs v. Cashwell,*158 N. C., 597, 74 S. E., 23; *Pruitt v. Wood,*199 N. C., 788, 156 S. E., 126.

Appeal dismissed.
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-2018-0025-2043

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
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

May 7, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-2505

Aerus LLC: 

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

_05.09.19.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
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
 Virus and Prion Research: Ames, IA
 close



    Research

                    Research Projects
                                    Publications
                                    Collaborations
                                    News
                People

                    Staff Listing
                                    CareersSearch small
                    Search
            
            ARS Home
                                About ARS
                                Contact Us




ARS Home Midwest Area Ames, Iowa National Animal Disease Center Virus and Prion Research Research





- Arruda, Bailey
- Animal Health (103)

Research Project: **Location:
                            Virus and Prion Research** Project Number: 5030-32000-231-090-T
                        
                        Project Type: Trust Fund Cooperative Agreement Start Date: Jul 11, 2022
                        
                        End Date: Jan 1, 2025 **Objective:**
                        
                        Determine the efficacy of a pan-genotypic influenza A virus  antisense locked nucleic acid oligonucleotide (LNA) as a preventative and therapeutic in swine. **Approach:**
                        
                        Two challenge studies with ~57 pigs per study will be conducted in which an LNA will be administered to swine either daily for three days before exposure (Study A; prevention) or daily starting a day after exposure (Study B; therapeutic) to influenza A virus. The following will be evaluated to determine the effectiveness of the LNA:  Virus shedding via virus isolation/titration/PCR, gross lesions and histologic lesions.


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
[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: 95-4717]



[[Page 10612]]

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

[TA-W-27,593 Cody, WY; TA-W-27,593A Bakersfield, CA]


Marathon Oil Co.; Exploration and Production; Amended 
Certification Regarding Eligibility To Apply for Worker Adjustment 
Assistance

    In accordance with Section 223 of the Trade Act of 1974 (19 U.S.C. 
2273) the Department of Labor issued a Certification of Eligibility to 
Apply for Worker Adjustment Assistance on October 21, 1992, applicable 
to all workers of the subject firm. The certification was published in 
the Federal Register on November 3, 1992 (57 FR 49722).
    At the request of one of the workers and the company, the 
Department reviewed the certification for workers of the subject firm. 
New findings show that worker separations occurred at Bakersfield, 
California.
    Accordingly, the Department is amending the certification to 
properly reflect the correct worker group.
    The intent of the Department's certification is to include all 
workers of Marathon Oil Company, Exploration and Production in Cody, 
Wyoming and in Bakersfield, California who were adversely affected by 
increased imports of crude oil.
    The amended notice applicable to TA-W-27,593 is hereby issued as 
follows:

    ``All workers of Marathon Oil Company, Exploration and 
Production, Cody, Wyoming and Bakersfield, California who became 
totally or partially separated from employment on or after July 29, 
1991 are eligible to apply for adjustment assistance under Section 
223 of the Trade Act of 1974.''

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 14th day of February, 1995.
Victor J. Trunzo,
Program Manager, Policy and Reemployment Services, Office of Trade 
Adjustment Assistance.
[FR Doc. 95-4717 Filed 2-24-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
<PAGE>

Exhibit 32

Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



Each of the undersigned of Sovran Acquisition Limited Partnership (the "Operating Partnership") does hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:



|1) | The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Operating Partnership for the period ended September 30, 2006 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); and
|-- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        
|2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Operating Partnership.                                                                     

Dated:          November 7, 2006

| | / S / Robert J. Attea                          Robert J. Attea
Chairman of the Board
Chief Executive Officer of Sovran Holdings, Inc., the Sole General Partner of the Operating Partnership
| | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| | / S / David L. Rogers                        David L. Rogers
Chief Financial Officer of Sovran Holdings, Inc., the Sole General Partner of the Operating Partnership                        



























- 1 -
| (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. |
|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| Date:      May 8, 2009 | /s/      Ronald S. Saks                                                      |
|------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                   | Ronald      S. Saks                                                          |
|                   | President      and Chief Executive Officer(Principal      Executive Officer) |
|                   |                                                                         |
|                   |                                                                         |
| Date:      May 8, 2009 | /s/      Lawrence E. Dickinson                                               |
|                   | Lawrence      E. Dickinson                                                   |
|                   | Secretary      and Chief Financial Officer                                   |
|                   | (Principal      Financial Officer and PrincipalAccounting      Officer)      |
HTSA 8413.70.20

Solar Powered Submersible Water Pump Kit

(1) Polycrystalline Solar Panel and (1) Direct Current Submersible Pump

The pump is powered exclusively by the solar panel unlike similar submersible pumps which are AC

and plug into an electrical outlet.

Solar panel Dimensions: 515mm x 345mm x 23mm

Solar Panel weight: 2.8kg

Composed of plastic, crystalline silicon and aluminum

Pump dimensions: 126mm x 59mm x 64mm

Pump weight: .7kg

Composed of plastic

HTSA 8413.70.2004

Annual purchases

2016 - 500 Units, Total value: $15,750.00

2017 - 1,500 Units, Total Value: $47,250.00

2018 - 2,000 Units, Total Value: $63,000.00

These solar powered water pump kits are made exclusively in China. We cannot find a source within

the United States or any other country.

We are small business which sells this product on the internet.

An increase in costs of 25% is detrimental to our small business.

I Brandon McMahan certify that the information provided is complete and correct to the best of my

knowledge.