alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

April 12, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-3738

ECM Industries 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

_04.15.19.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,

Stephen P. Vaughn

General Counsel
Exhibit 31.1



Certification



I, John R. Plachetka, Pharm.D., certify that:



|1. | I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of POZEN Inc.; and
|-- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------



|2. | Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the
circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                      |  |                            
|--------------------- |  | ---------------------------
|Date: November , 2004 |  | /s/ John R. Plachetka      
|                      |  | John R. Plachetka, Pharm.D.
|                      |  | Chief Executive Officer
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 52 (Friday, March 17, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14449-14450]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-6641]



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


DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Importation of Controlled Substances; Notice of Application

    Pursuant to Section 1008 of the Controlled Substances Import and 
Export Act (21 U.S.C. 958(i)), the Attorney General shall, prior to 
issuing a registration under this Section to a bulk manufacturer of a 
controlled substance in Schedule I or II and prior to issuing a 
regulation under Section 1002(a) authorizing the importation of such a 
substance, provide manufacturers holding registrations for the bulk 
manufacture of the substance an opportunity for a hearing.
    Therefore, in accordance with Section 1311.42 of Title 21, Code of 
Federal Regulations (CFR), notice is hereby given that on January 18, 
1995, North Pacific Trading Company, 1505 SE Gideon Street, Portland, 
Oregon 97202, made application to the Drug Enforcement Administration 
to be registered as an importer of Marihuana (7360) a basic class of 
controlled substance in Schedule I.
    This application is exclusively for the importation of marihuana 
seed which [[Page 14450]] will be rendered non-viable and used as bird 
seed.
    Any manufacturer holding, or applying for, registration as a bulk 
manufacturer of this basic class of controlled substance may file 
written comments on or objections to the application described above 
and may, at the same time, file a written request for a hearing on such 
application in accordance with 21 CFR 1301.54 in such form as 
prescribed by 21 CFR 1316.47.
    Any such comments, objections, or requests for a hearing may be 
addressed to the Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion 
Control, Drug Enforcement Administration, United States Department of 
Justice, Washington, DC 20537, Attention: DEA Federal Register 
Representative (CCR), and must be filed no later than (30 days from 
publication).
    This procedure is to be conducted simultaneously with the 
independent of the procedures described in 21 CFR 1311.42 (b), (c), 
(d), (e), and (f). As noted in a previous notice at 40 FR 43745-46 
(September 23, 1975), all applicants for registration to import a basic 
class of any controlled substance in Schedule I or II are and will 
continue to be required to demonstrate to the Deputy Assistant 
Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug Enforcement 
Administration that the requirements for such registration pursuant to 
21 U.S.C. 958(a), 21 U.S.C. 823(a), and 21 CFR 1311.42 (a), (b), (c), 
(d), (e), and (f) are satisfied.

    Dated: March 13, 1995.
Gene R. Haislip,
Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Diversion Control, Drug 
Enforcement Administration.
[FR Doc. 95-6641 Filed 3-16-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-09-M
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

07-16714

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MELVIN JOSEPH SIMMONS, Jr.,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 v.

M. S. EVANS; et al.,

 Defendant,

 

No. 07-16714

D.C. No. CV-06-05608-JW

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of California

James Ware, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted June 15, 2011** 

Before: CANBY, O’SCANNLAIN and FISHER, Circuit Judges.

Melvin Joseph Simmons, Jr., a California state prisoner, appeals pro se from

the district court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action because he

failed to state a claim as to two defendants and failed to serve, or show cause for

non-service, as to a third. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We

FILED

JUL 8 2011

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 07-16714

review de novo a dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A(a) for failure to state a claim,

Resnick v. Hayes, 213 F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000), and for an abuse of discretion

a dismissal for failure to effect service under Rule 4(m) of the Federal Rules of

Civil Procedure, Puett v. Blandford, 912 F.2d 270, 273 (9th Cir. 1990). We may

affirm on any ground supported by the record, Thompson v. Paul, 547 F.3d 1055,

1058-59 (9th Cir. 2008), and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Simmons’s claim concerning the

handling of his grievances because inmates have no protected due process rights in

grievance procedures, see Mann v. Adams, 855 F.2d 639, 640 (9th Cir. 1988)

(order), and Simmons failed to plead facts showing that any defendant acted with

an intent to discriminate against him on the basis of his membership in a protected

class, see Thornton v. City of St. Helens, 425 F.3d 1158, 1166-67 (9th Cir. 2005)

(plaintiff seeking to state claim for violation of equal protection must allege intent

or purpose to discriminate based on membership in protected class).

The district court did not abuse its discretion in dismissing Simmons’s

action without prejudice under Rule 4(m) because Simmons did not serve Newton

and failed to establish good cause for not having done so. See Fed. R. Civ. P.

4(m); see also Boudette v. Barnette, 923 F.2d 754, 755-56 (9th Cir. 1991) (holding

that good cause means, at a minimum, excusable neglect).

Simmons’s remaining contentions are unpersuasive.
3 07-16714

AFFIRMED.
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

January 4, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-2529

ME Global, Inc. d.b.a. ME Elecmetal:

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
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-2018-0025-2800

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

May 7, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-2313

US Breaker, 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

_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
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _

Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A2 2 D0 18 2 . BRENTREZ J ARMYKUS MCPHERSON v . THE STATE.

In 2 01 3

, Bren t rez J arm yk u s M cPh ers o n p l ed gu i l t y t o m u l ti p l e offen s es

,

i n cl u d i n g at t em

pt ed rap e. In J u l y

2 0 2 1, h e fi l ed a m o t io n fo r an o u t -o f-t i m e ap p eal

,

wh i ch t he t ri al co u rt d en ied

. M cPh ers on fi l ed an ap pl i cat io n fo r d i s cret i o n ary rev i ew,

wh i ch we g ra n t e d u n d er OCGA § 5 -6 -3 5 (j) becau s e t h e t ri al co u rt ’ s o rd er was

d i rect l y ap p ea lab l e. See Cas e N o

. A2 2 D0 0 1 9 (Au g

. 19

, 2 0 2 1 ). M cPh ers o n ap p aren t l y

fi led a n o t i ce o f ap p eal i n t h e tri al co u rt o n Au g u st 1 1 , 2 0 21 , b u t t h e reco rd h as n ot

y et b een t ran s m i t t ed t o t hi s Co u rt

.

In No v em b er 2 0 2 1, M cPh ers o n fi l ed a “ M o ti o n t o At t ack J u d gm en t as Nu l l to

Set As i d e Il l eg al G u il t y Pl ea fo r Lack o f J u ri s di ct i o n

. ” It ap p ears th at th e t ri al co u rt

h as n o t ru l ed o n t h at m o t i on

, g i v en t h e p en d en cy o f M cPh ers o n ’ s ap p eal

. H o wev er,

o n N o vem

b er 23

, 2 0 2 1

, t h e t ri al co u rt d i d i s s u e an o rd er d i rect i n g t he cl erk t o s en d

M cPh er s o n a n am en d ed b il l o f co s t s

. M cPh ers o n t h en fi l ed t h i s ap p l i cat i o n fo r

d i s cret i o n ary ap p eal p u rp o rt i ng t o ch al l en ge t h e t ri al co u rt ’s f a il u re t o g ran t h i s

“ M o t i o n t o At t ack J u d g m en t as Nu l l t o Set As i d e Il l eg al Gu il t y Pl ea fo r Lack o f

J u ri s di ct i o n .”

W e are a co u rt “ fo r t h e co rrect i on o f erro rs of l aw m ad e b y th e t ri al co u rt s. . .

. An erro r of l a w h a s as i t s b as i s a s p eci fi c ru l i n g m ad e b y t h e t ri al co urt .” Fel i x v.

S t a t e

, 27 1 G a. 5 3 4

, 5 3 8 (5 2 3 SE2 d 1 ) (1 9 9 9 ). As th e St at e p o i n t s o u t in i t s res p o n s e

b ri ef, t h i s ap p l i cat i o n “ rai s es n o erro r rel at ed t o t h e act u al co n t en t of t h e t ri al co urt ’ s

No v em b er 2 3

, 2 0 2 1 o rd er an d d eal s s ol el y wi t h t h e m eri t s o f a m o t i o n t hat h as n o t

January 06, 2022b een ru l ed o n b y t h e tri al co u rt .” As s u ch

, t h i s ap p l icat io n p res en t s n o t hi n g fo r u s to

rev i ew, an d i t i s h ereb y

DISM ISSED.

C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia

C le r k ’ s O f f i c e

, A t la n t a

,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _

I c e r ti fy t h a t t h e a b o v e i s a t r u e e x t r a c t f r o m

t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

.

W i tn e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d th e s e a l o

f s a i d c o u r t

h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. 01/06/2022
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 96-2402

___________ James R. Fredricks, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * Western District of Missouri. ADM Milling Company, Inc. * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellee. *

___________ Submitted: January 17, 1997 Filed: April 7, 1997

___________ Before FAGG, WOLLMAN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM.
James R. Fredricks brought this action under the Americans wit h Disabil ities Act of 1990 (ADA), 42 U.S.C. §§ 12101-12213, against AD M Milling Co., Inc. (ADM). He asserted that after he underwent total left knee repl acement surgery in 1992, ADM refused to let him resume th e maintenance position he had held since the mid-1970s. The parties agreed to the appointment of a Special Master, whose factual findings would b e final. After a hearing, the Special Master found that Fredricks could no t performthe required functions of his maintenance position withou t violating medical restrictions his treating physician imposed upo n releasing him to return to work. The Special Master further found tha t ADM's decision not to return Fredricks to his

### The Honorable Howard F. Sachs, United States District Judge 1 

### for the Western District of Missouri. -2- prior position was based on those medical restri ctions, and thus concluded th at his ADA claim failed. The district court held that the Specia l 1 Master committed no error of law, and adopted the report. Fredricks timel y appealed. After reviewing the record and the parties' briefs, we agree wi th the district court's conclusion. See Wooten v. Farmland Foods , 58 F.3d 382, 385 (8th Cir. 1995). Accordingly, we affirm. A true copy.
Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
Organization Name:

Note: Representatives submitting on behalf of an organization must enter information below.

Requestor Representative:

PUBLIC VERSION

Section 301 Investigation: China's Acts, Policies, and Practices Related to Technology 

Transfer, Intellectual Property, and Innovation - Form to Request Exclusion of Product

When submitting a product exclusion request using this form, enter the specified 

information in the following fields and explain the basis and rationale for your statements. 

By completing this form, you certify that the information provided is complete and 

correct to the best of your knowledge. 

1. Indicate whether the comment contains business confidential information (BCI), is a public

document, or is a public version of a BCI document.

3.

2. Please provide a complete and detailed description of the product of concern:

4.

5. Requestor's relationship to the product:

CONTINUED BELOW

*

10-digit HTSUS item number* for product you wish to address in this product exclusion request:

Use numerical characters only with no special characters (example: 1023456789). For help in finding 

the HTSUS item number associated with your product, see https://hts.usitc.gov/

1

7.

6. Does this submission in regulations.gov include additional attachments?

Please indicate whether any additional attachment contains business confidential

information (BCI), is a public document, or is a public version of a BCI document.

VERSION 1

Requestor Information

Requestor Name (Last, First):
END 2

8. Is this product, or a comparable product, available from sources in the United States?:

VERSION 1

11. Please provide information in support your request, taking account of the instructions

provided in Section B of the Federal Register notice (note: text entered below can extend

beyond the apparent size of this box).

9. Is this product, or a comparable product, available from sources in third countries?:

10. Please provide the value and quantity (with units) of the Chinese-origin product of concern

that you purchased for each calendar year specified. Limit this figure to the products

purchased by your firm (or by members of your trade association) alone. Please provide

estimates if precise figures are unavailable.

2016 Value:

2015 Value:

2017 Value:

2016 Quantity:

2015 Quantity:

2017 Quantity:

 PUBLIC VERSION

Certification for Business Confidential Treatment 

I, Yi-Wen Yang, President of Mei Ta USA Corporation (EIN 81-1952452), hereby 

certify that disclosure of the information designated as business confidential in the attached 

Comments would endanger trade secrets or profitability, and that the information would not 

customarily be released to the public. 

Dated: September i /, 2018
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

January 4, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-2389

Xylem, 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
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

May 29, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-3519

ECM Industries 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

_5-30-2019.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
3XEOLF'RFXPHQW

380392/87(&29(5&$67,1*35(6685(&217$,1,1*67$,1/(6667((/



3,$==$52%(57

35,&(3803&203$1<

2WKHU

12

3XEOLF9HUVLRQRI%&,
 

<(6

12

 .*

 .*

,03257,1*7+,63$57)520&+,1$&2676

385&+$6,1*5$:0$7(5,$/$1'0$&+,1,1*,7'20(67,&$//<&2676