alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
10.2





Exhibit 10.2




Description of the verbal agreement with MVP Biotech.




Duration and Termination: There is no specific duration to our verbal agreement; any party can terminate the agreement at anytime verbally.




Product description and pricing: MVP provided us with a price list that includes all of the products being sold by MVP biotech and 12 levels of discount percentage from wholesale price, which is based on the amount of order units.




Monetary limits: We do not have any set minimum quantity purchase requirements.




Shipping: We are responsible for the product from picking it up from our supplier’s warehouse to the final destination, meaning we will pay all transport fees, taxes, customs and other expenses that might occur.
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-14-00076-CV

In the Interest of D.A., a child §

§

§

§

From the 323rd District Court

of Tarrant County (323-97474J-12)

July 31, 2014

Opinion by Justice Walker

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that 

there was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of 

the trial court is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

By _/s/ Sue Walker ____________________

 Justice Sue Walker
EXHIBIT 32

                           Section 1350 Certification


Pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and
(b) of Section 1350,  Chapter 63 of Title 18,  United States Code),  each of the
undersigned  officers  of LMI  Aerospace,  Inc.,  a  Missouri  corporation  (the
"Company"), does hereby certify that, to the best of their knowledge:

The Quarterly  Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2003 (the
"Form 10-Q") of the Company  fully  complies  with the  requirements  of Section
13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information  contained
in the Form 10-Q  fairly  presents,  in all  material  respects,  the  financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.



Date: November 13, 2003                 /s/ Ronald S. Saks
                                        ---------------------------------------
                                        Ronald S. Saks
                                        Chief Executive Officer and President


Date: November 13, 2003                 /s/ Lawrence E. Dickinson
                                        ---------------------------------------
                                        Lawrence E. Dickinson
                                        Chief Financial Officer and Secretary



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

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

RASHAD CHISHOLM,

Appellant,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellee. §

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 17

- 00258

- CR

Appeal from the

120th District Court

of El Paso County, Texas

(TC# 20120D02440)

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the record and concludes there was no error in the

judgment. We therefore affirm the judgment of the court below. This decisio n shall be certified

below for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 10TH DAY OF JULY, 2019.

YVONNE T. RODRIGUEZ, Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Palafox, JJ.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 48 (Monday, March 13, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13445-13446]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-6052]



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

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT

Office of the Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian Housing
[Docket No. N-95-3870; FR-3798-C-02]


Community Development Block Grant Program for Indian Tribes and 
Alaska Native Villages; Notice of Fund Availability; Correction of 
Application Due Date

AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Public and Indian 
Housing, HUD.

ACTION: Notice of fund availability for fiscal year 1995; correction of 
application due date.

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

SUMMARY: On February 24, 1995 (60 FR 10452), the Department published 
in the Federal Register, a Notice of Fund Availability that announced 
HUD's funding for the Community Development Block Grant Program for 
Indian Tribes and Alaska Native Villages for Fiscal Year 1995. The 
application due date was computed incorrectly and ends on May 14, 1995, 
which is a Sunday afternoon. This incorrect date appears in the 
``DATES'' section, and also appears on page 10464 of the February 24, 
1995 notice in paragraph II.(c).
    The purpose of this document is to correct the application due date 
by extending it until 3 p.m. on Monday, May 15, 1995, in both of the 
places referred to above.

DATES: Applications must be received by the appropriate field office of 
the HUD Office of Native American Programs (ONAP) no later than 3 p.m., 
May 15, 1995. Application materials will be available from each field 
office. General program questions may be directed to the field office 
serving your area or by contacting Dom Nessi, Office of Native American 
Programs, Office of Public and Indian Housing, Department of Housing 
and Urban Development, Room B-133, 451 Seventh Street SW., Washington, 
DC 20410. Telephone (202) [[Page 13446]] 755-0068. The 
Telecommunications Device for the Deaf (TDD) number is (202) 708-0850. 
(These are not toll-free numbers.)

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Accordingly, FR Doc. 95-4451, the Notice of 
Fund Availability for Fiscal Year 1995 for Community Development Block 
Grant Program for Indian Tribes and Alaska Native Villages, published 
in the Federal Register on February 24, 1995 at 60 FR 10452, is 
corrected as follows:
    1. On page 10452, in the first column, in the DATES section, in 
line 5, the date ``May 14, 1995'' is corrected to read ``May 15, 
1995''.
    2. On page 10464, in the first column, in paragraph II.(c), in the 
last line in the column, correct ``May 14, 1995'' to read ``May 15, 
1995''.

    Dated: March 6, 1995.
Camille E. Acevedo,
Assistant General Counsel for Regulations.
[FR Doc. 95-6052 Filed 3-10-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4210-33-P
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 49 (Tuesday, March 14, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 13700]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-6260]



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


DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

U.S. Bureau of Mines, et al.; Notice of Consolidated Decision on 
Applications for Duty-Free Entry of Electron Microscopes

    This is a decision consolidated pursuant to Section 6(c) of the 
Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Materials Importation Act of 1966 
(Pub. L. 89-651, 80 Stat. 897; 15 CFR part 301). Related records can be 
viewed between 8:30 A.M. and 5:00 P.M. in Room 4211, U.S. Department of 
Commerce, 14th and Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C.
    Docket Number: 94-143. Applicant: U.S. Bureau of Mines, Denver, CO 
80225. Instrument: Electron Microscope, Model CM200. Manufacturer: 
Philips, The Netherlands. Intended Use: See notice at 60 FR 442, 
January 4, 1995. Order Date: August 25, 1994.
    Docket Number: 94-147. Applicant: Wayne State University, Detroit, 
MI 48201. Instrument: Electron Microscope, Model JEM-1010. 
Manufacturer: JEOL, Japan. Intended Use: See notice at 60 FR 3394, 
January 17, 1995. Order Date: October 24, 1994.
    Docket Number: 94-152. Applicant: University of Virginia, 
Charlottesvilee, VA 22903. Instrument: Electron Microscope, Model JEM 
2010F. Manufacturer:  JEOL, Japan. Intended Use: See notice at 60 FR 
3394, January 17, 1995. Order Date: June 29, 1994.
    Comments: None received. Decision: Approved. No instrument of 
equivalent scientific value to the foreign instrument, for such 
purposes as these instruments are intended to be used, was being 
manufactured in the United States at the time the instruments were 
ordered. Reasons: Each foreign instrument is a conventional 
transmission electron microscope (CTEM) and is intended for research or 
scientific educational uses requiring a CTEM. We know of no CTEM, or 
any other instrument suited to these purposes, which was being 
manufactured in the United States either at the time of order of each 
instrument or at the time of receipt of application by the U.S. Customs 
Service.


Frank Creel
Director, Statutory Import Programs Staff
[FR Doc. 95-6260 Filed 3-13-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-F
Fifth Season International, Inc.: Exhibit 10.4 - Filed by newsfilecorp.com






Exhibit 10.4

Sale Contract 

Signature Site: Shanghai 

Purchaser (Party A): Shanghai Senhong Metal Co., Ltd. 

Seller (Party B): The Fifth Season (Zhejiang) Trade Co., Ltd.


1. Name, Quantity and Price 


	Name 	Warehouse 	Trademark 	Quantity (ton) 	Unit Price (RMB/ton) 	Amount (RMB) 
	Copper 	Humin Ku 	Jinchuandaban 	119.9145 	57692 	6,918,107.33 
	Copper 	Tieshan Ku 	Jiangtong ISA 	49.267 	57692 	2,842,311.76 
	Copper 	Humin Ku 	Guiye 	130.013 	57692 	7,500,710 
	Total 	 
    	 
    	299.1945 	 
    	17,261,129.09 



2. Delivery Method and Time 

Delivery Method: pay before August 11, 2010 

Delivery Time: collect on August 11, 2010, full payment before
collection 

3. Product Criterion: GB/T467-1997 

4. Inspection Method and Time Limit: Party A shall inspect the
goods before collecting and raise the objection within three days after
delivery.. 

5. Packing Standard: complied with Hu Jin Jiaoge (1999) No. 10
Exhibit (1) 

6. Objection Response Time Limit: Party B shall response to
objection with three days after receiving Party A’s objection, otherwise, the
objection shall be deemed as accepted. 

7. Transportation Fees: Party A is liable for packing and
transportation fees. 

8. Acceptable Scope for Quantity: +/- 0.2%, exceeding part
shall be settled by both parties 

9. Payment Method: cash & spots 

10. Any disputes related to this agreement can be brought to
Hangzhou People’s Court if both parties cannot reach consensus. 




11. Miscellaneous: 

1) This agreement shall be effective after signing of both
parties. 

2) This agreement can be set by facsimile which has the same
effect with the originals. 

3) The aforementioned price includes value added tax. Party B
shall offer the invoice of value added tax. 




(This page is for signature only and has no text.) 

Party A (Buyer): Shanghai Senhong Metal Co., Ltd. 
By:
/sealed/ Shanghai Senhong Metal Co., Ltd. 
Date: August 11, 2010 

Party B (Seller): The Fifth Season (Zhejiang) Trade Co., Ltd

By: /sealed/The Fifth Season (Zhejiang) Trade Co., Ltd 
Date:
August 11, 2010
```

[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 47 (Friday, March 10, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 13209]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-6084]

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

FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION

Notice of Agency Meeting

    Pursuant to the provisions of the ``Government in the Sunshine 
Act'' (5 U.S.C. 552b), notice is hereby given that at 10:13 a.m. on 
Tuesday, March 7, 1995, the Board of Directors of the Federal Deposit 
Insurance Corporation met in closed session to consider matters 
relating to the Corporation's supervisory and corporate activities.
    In calling the meeting, the Board determined, on motion of Vice 
Chairman Andrew C. Hove, Jr., seconded by Director Jonathan L. Fiechter 
(Acting Director, Office of Thrift Supervision), concurred in by 
Director Eugene A. Ludwig (Comptroller of the Currency), and Chairman 
Ricki Tigert Helfer, that Corporation business required its 
consideration of the matters on less than seven days' notice to the 
public; that no earlier notice of the meeting was practicable; that the 
public interest did not require consideration of the matters in a 
meeting open to public observation; and that the matters could be 
considered in a close meeting by authority of subsections (c)(4), 
(c)(6), (c)(8), (c)(9)(A)(ii), (c)(9)(B), and (c)(10) of the 
``Government in the Sunshine Act'' (5 U.S.C. 552b (c)(4), (c)(6), 
(c)(8), (c)(9)(A)(ii), (c)(9)(B), and (c)(10)).
    The meeting was held in the Board Room of the FDIC Building located 
at 550--17th Street, NW., Washington, DC.

    Dated: March 7, 1995.

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
Patti C. Fox,
Acting Deputy Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-6084 Filed 3-8-95; 11:10 am]
BILLING CODE 6714-01-M
```
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                          30,191
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   36,214
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (527)
<INVENTORY>                                      9,962
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               101,298
<PP&E>                                           9,010
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (2,351)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 112,042
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           68,028
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           228
<OTHER-SE>                                      57,258
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   112,042
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               176,214
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  167,390
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 7,204
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               (225)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,845
<INCOME-TAX>                                       729
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,116
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,116
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.06
        

</TABLE>
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-2018-0025-3443

Scosche Industries, 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 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

General Counsel
#### STATE PLANTERS BANK AND TRUST COMPANY v. R. E. WHITEHURST and EDNA E. WHITEHURST.

(Filed 21 October, 1931.)

Appeal and Error A d — Appeal in this case is dismissed as prematui*e.

Where one claiming as a holder in due course of a negotiable instrument by endorsement before maturity from the payee brings action on the note against the payer who claims that the plaintiff was not a holder in due course, and that he had made payment on the note to the payee which had not been credited, *Held:*an appeal will not lie from an order of the court before trial making the payee a party, it appearing that no harm had come to the plaintiff, and the appeal so taken will be dismissed as premature.

*505Appeal by plaintiff from *Devin, J.,*at January-February Term, 1931, of CeayeN.

Civil action to recover on a 30-day, negotiable, promissory note for $2,785, alleged to bave been executed by R. E. Whitehurst to the First National Rank of New Bern, endorsed by Edna E. Whitehurst, duly transferred and endorsed to the plaintiff for a valuable consideration, before maturity and without notice of any defect or equity, constituting the plaintiff a holder thereof in due course.

The defendants answered, alleging that before the note was due a payment of $2,385 was made thereon to the First National Bank of New Bern; that plaintiff was not a holder in due course, and asked that the receiver of the payee bank be made a party to this action, to the end that they might have judgment over in case the plaintiff be awarded judgment on the note in suit.

From an order directing that the receiver of the First National Bank of New Bern be made a party, the plaintiff appeals.

*W. JB. Lee for plaintiff.*

*W. B. R. Guión for defendants.*

Stacy, C. J.

As no harm has come to the plaintiff from the order directing that the receiver of the payee bank be made a party, and none is apparent on the record, the appeal must be dismissed as premature. *Etchison v. McGuire,*147 N. C., 388, 61 S. E., 196; *Joyner v. Fiber Co.,*178 N. C., 634, 101 S. E., 373; *Barbee v. Cannady,*191 N. C., 529, 132 S. E., 572.

The case of *Bank v. Angelo,*193 N. C., 576, 137 S. E., 705, is not unlike the present one in the steps thus far taken.

Appeal dismissed.
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

February 4, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-2811

BOMAG Americas, 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 failed to show that this particular product is available 

only from China.

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
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 50 (Wednesday, March 15, 1995)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 13915]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-6279]



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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

43 CFR Public Land Order 7124

[NM-930-1430-01; NMNM 88049]


Public Land Order No. 7067, Correction; Withdrawal of National 
Forest System Land for Guadalupe Canyon Zoological Botanical Area; New 
Mexico

AGENCY: Bureau of Land Management, Interior.

ACTION: Public land order.

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

SUMMARY: This order will correct an error in the land description in 
Public Land Order No. 7067.

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 15, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Jeanette Espinosa, BLM New Mexico 
State Office, P.O. Box 27115, Santa Fe, New Mexico 87502, 505-438-7597.
    By virtue of the authority vested in the Secretary of the Interior 
by Section 204 of the Federal Land Policy and Management Act of 1976, 
43 U.S.C. 1714 (1988), it is ordered as follows:
    The land description in Public Land Order 7067, 59 FR 35859, July 
14, 1994, is hereby corrected as follows:
    The third column, line 3, which reads ``sec. 24, NE\1/4\NW\1/4\ and 
S\1/2\SE\1/4\;'' is hereby corrected to read ``sec. 24, NE\1/4\SE\1/4\ 
and S\1/2\SE\1/4\;''.

    Dated: March 2, 1995.
Bob Armstrong,
Assistant Secretary of the Interior.
[FR Doc. 95-6279 Filed 3-14-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-FB-P
#### STATE v. DON ANDERSON.

(Filed 29 April, 1931.)

Appeal by defendant from *Oglesby, J.,*at November Term, 1930, of Meckxenbubg.

*Attorney-General Brummitt and Assistant Attorney-General Nash for the State.*

*G. T. Carswell and Joe W. Ervin for defendant.*

Pee Cubiam.

The defendant was indicted for violation of the prohibition laws. The State moved to dismiss the appeal for the reason that the record was not docketed within' the required time. The motion is allowed. *S. v. Farmer,*188 N. C., 243.

Dismissed.
EXHIBIT 32.1

CEO CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)

In
connection with Form 10-Q of POZEN Inc. (the Company), as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, John R. Plachetka, Chief Executive 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 my knowledge:



| | 1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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 2, 2006 |  | /s/ John R. Plachetka      
|                  |  | John R. Plachetka, Pharm.D.
|                  |  | Chief Executive Officer    

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating,
acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version 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.