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

117TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 409 

To amend the Commodity Exchange Act to modify the Commodity Futures 

Trading Commission Customer Protection Fund, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

FEBRUARY 24, 2021 

Mr. GRASSLEY (for himself, Ms. HASSAN, Ms. ERNST, and Ms. BALDWIN) introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry 

A BILL 

To amend the Commodity Exchange Act to modify the Commodity Futures Trading Commission Customer Protection Fund, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION 

4 CUSTOMER PROTECTION FUND. 

5 Section 23(g) of the Commodity Exchange Act (7 

6 U.S.C. 26(g)) is amended— 

7 (1) in paragraph (2)(A), by striking ‘‘(a)’’ and 

8 inserting ‘‘(b)’’; and 

9 (2) in paragraph (3)— 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 409 IS

1 (A) in subparagraph (A), by striking 

2 ‘‘$100,000,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$150,000,000’’; 

3 (B) by redesignating subparagraphs (A) 

4 through (C) as clauses (i) through (iii), respec5 tively, and indenting appropriately; 

6 (C) in the matter preceding clause (i) (as 

7 so redesignated), by striking ‘‘There shall’’ and 

8 inserting the following: 

9 ‘‘(A) IN GENERAL.—There shall’’; 

10 (D) in subparagraph (A)(ii) (as so des11 ignated), by striking ‘‘subparagraph (A)’’ and 

12 inserting ‘‘clause (i)’’; and 

13 (E) by adding at the end the following: 

14 ‘‘(B) SEPARATE ACCOUNT FOR EDUCATION

15 INITIATIVES AND ADMINISTRATIVE EX16 PENSES.— 

17 ‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—Any amounts con18 tained in, deposited into, or credited to the 

19 Fund under subparagraph (A) may be de20 posited into or credited to a separate ac21 count in the Fund described in clause (ii), 

22 unless the balance of the separate account 

23 at the time the amounts are deposited or 

24 credited exceeds $10,000,000. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 409 IS

1 ‘‘(ii) USE OF SEPARATE ACCOUNT.— 

2 The separate account referred to in clause 

3 (i) shall be available to the Commission, 

4 without further appropriation or fiscal year 

5 limitation, for— 

6 ‘‘(I) the purpose described in 

7 subparagraph (B) of paragraph (2); 

8 and 

9 ‘‘(II) the funding of administra10 tive and salary expenses necessary for 

11 personnel to carry out the activities 

12 described in subparagraphs (A) and 

13 (B) of that paragraph. 

14 ‘‘(iii) SUNSET.—The authority to de15 posit amounts into, or credit amounts to, 

16 the separate account referred to in clause 

17 (i) shall expire on October 1, 2021, and 

18 any remaining unobligated balances in that 

19 separate account may be transferred at 

20 any time thereafter to the Fund.’’. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

July 23, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-2366

Quest Technologies dba Crystal Quest:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

20.

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

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

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

determined to be non-administrable.

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

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

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

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

Sincerely,

Joseph Barloon

General Counsel
1999 Decisions

Opinions of the United

States Court of Appeals

for the Third Circuit

1-26-1999

Buehl v. Vaughn

Precedential or Non-Precedential:

Docket 97-1241

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_1999

This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 1999 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova

University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact Benjamin.Carlson@law.villanova.edu.

Recommended Citation

"Buehl v. Vaughn" (1999). 1999 Decisions. Paper 21.

http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_1999/21
 OFFICE OF THE CLERK 

P. DOUGLAS SISK UNITED STATES COURT OF 

APPEALS TELEPHONE 

 CLERK 

FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT215-597-1895 

 21400 UNITED STATES COURTHOUSE

 601 MARKET STREET 

 PHILADELPHIA 19106-1790 

 

 January 26, 1999 

West Publishing Company 

Editorial Dept. 

610 Opperman Drive 

Eagan, MN 55123 

 Re: Beuhl vs. Vaughn. 97-1241 

Dear Publisher: 

 

 Please make the following correction to the Opinion in Beuhl, No. 

 97-1241, filed on January 20, 1999: 

 

 Please change the last sentence in footnote 11 to read: 

 

 As noted below, however, the Supreme Court has expresly reserved 

 decision on the question whether this rationale applies to cases 

where 

 the jury returns inconsistent guilty verdicts, and we have stated 

that 

 logically incompatible guilty verdicts may not stand. See United 

States 

 v. Gross, 961 F.2d 1097, 1106 (3d Cir.), cert. denied, 506 U.S. 965 

 (1992). 

 

 Please italicize "See" "United States v. Gross" and "cert. denied" 

 

 Kindly acknowledge receipt on the enclosed copy of this letter. 

 Very truly yours, 

 P. DOUGLAS SISK, CLERK 

 By: Phyllis Ruffin, Case Manager 

cc: Commerce Clearing House, Inc. 

 U. S. Law Week 

 Lexis 

 David Rudovsky, Esq. 

 Mary M. Killinger, Esq. 

 Hon. John R. Padova
#### Jayne Terry KASSOFF, Petitioner/Appellant, v. Dean Bryan KASSOFF, Respondent/Respondent.

No. 67982.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Three.

April 23, 1996.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied June 4, 1996.

Application to Transfer Denied Aug. 20, 1996.

Theodore S. Sehechter, Michael L. Scheehter, Clayton, for appellant.

Christopher Karlen, St. Louis, for respondent.

Before SMITH, P.J., and GARY M, GAERTNER and RUSSELL, JJ.

*ORDER*

Jayne Terry Kassoff appeals from a judgment in a dissolution action alleging error in the division and valuation of property, the award of child support, the denial of maintenance, the grant of joint custody, and the denial of attorney fees. We affirm.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find the decree is supported by substantial evidence and is not against the weight of the evidence. No error of law appears. A detailed opinion would have no precedential value. We have provided the parties with a memorandum opinion explaining our reasoning. The trial court’s decree is affirmed pursuant to Rule 84.16(b).
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-2018-0025-3658

JLG 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 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
EXHIBIT 32
                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 Salisbury Bancorp, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2004, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, John F.
Perotti, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and I, John F. Foley, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

      (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 result of operations
            of the Company.


/s/  John F. Perotti                               /s/ John F. Foley
----------------------------                       -----------------------------
     John F. Perotti                                   John F. Foley
     Chief Executive Officer                           Chief Financial Officer

May14, 2004.

The foregoing certificate is furnished solely for purposes of complying with
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and for no other purpose
whatsoever. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary set forth herein or in any
of the Company's previous filings under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended,
or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, that might incorporate the
Company's future filings, including this Report on Form 10-Q, in whole or in
part, this Certificate shall not be incorporated by reference into any such
filings.


                                       22
##### 



Exhibit 31.2
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 302 (a) OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT
      a)
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and
procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating
to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others
within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;
 b)
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and
presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls
and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation;
and
 c)
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial
reporting that occurred during the registrants fourth fiscal quarter that has materially
affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over
financial reporting; and
  a)
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal
control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the
registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and
 b)
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a
significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.
  /s/ Phillip J. SmithPhillip J. SmithExecutive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer(Principal Financial Officer)
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-2018-0025-3245

ADH Guardian USA 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
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 49 (Tuesday, March 14, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13733-13734]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-6196]



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


DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperation Research and 
Production Act of 1993--the Durability Validation of Composite NGV Fuel 
Cylinders Program

    Notice is hereby given, that on September 6, 1994, pursuant to 
Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 
1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), Southwest Research 
Institute (``SwRI'') has filed written notification 
[[Page 13734]] simultaneously with the Attorney General and the Federal 
Trade Commission disclosing a change in membership of the Durability 
Validation of Composite NGV Fuel Cylinders Program, and correcting an 
error in the last notice published. The notification was filed for the 
purpose of extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of 
antitrust plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. 
Specifically, Southern California Gas Company, Los Angeles, CA, has 
become a party to the group research project. Further, in the title of 
the August 31, 1994 notice published at 59 FR 45013, the word 
``Valuation'' should read ``Validation''.
    No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned 
activity of the group research project. Membership in the project 
remains open, and SwRI intends to file additional written notification 
disclosing all changes in membership.
    On July 12, 1994, SwRI filed its original notification pursuant to 
Section 6(a) of the Act. The Department of Justice published a notice 
in the Federal Register pursuant to Section 6(b) of the Act on August 
31, 1994, 59 FR 45013.
Constance K. Robinson,
Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 95-6196 Filed 3-13-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-01-M
Exhibit 32



CERTIFICATION



The undersigned certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, that:



(1) The accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the period ended September 30, 2006, 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 accompanying Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                         |                                                                                 
|------------------------ | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|Date:  November 14, 2006 | /s/ Mark N. Schwartz                                                            
|                         | Mark N. Schwartz
Chief Executive Officer                                        
|Date:  November 14, 2006 | /s/ Kellie D. Nelsen                                                            
|                         | Kellie D. Nelsen
Manager of Finance and Accounting (principal financial officer)
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 47 (Friday, March 10, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 13181-13182]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-5949]



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


DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

Advisory Council on Unemployment Compensation; Notice of Meeting

SUMMARY: The Advisory Council on Unemployment Compensation (ACUC) was 
established in accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act on January 24, 1992 (57 FR 4407, Feb. 3, 1992). Public 
Law 102-164, the Emergency Unemployment Compensation Act of 1991, 
mandated the establishment of the Council to evaluate the overall 
unemployment insurance program, including the purpose, goals, counter-
cyclical effectiveness, coverage, benefit adequacy, trust fund 
solvency, funding of State administrative costs, administrative 
efficiency, and other aspects of the program, and to make 
recommendations for improvement.

TIME AND PLACE: The meeting will be held from 8:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. on 
April 5 and from 10:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. on April 6 at the River Place 
Grand Heritage Hotel, 1000 River Place, Detroit, Michigan.

AGENDA: The agenda for the meeting is as follows:
    (1) Federal-State relationships in the unemployment insurance 
system;
    (2) Administrative Funding;
    (3) Appeals; and
    (4) Experience Rating.

PUBLIC PARTICIPATION: The meeting will be open to the public. Seating 
will be [[Page 13182]] available to the public on a first-come, first-
served basis. Seats will be reserved for the media. Individuals with 
disabilities in need of special accommodations should contact the 
Designated Federal Official (DFO), listed below, at least 7 days prior 
to the meeting.

FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION CONTACT:
Esther R. Johnson, DFO, Advisory Council on Unemployment Compensation, 
U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW., Room S-4231, 
Washington, DC 20210. (202) 219-7831. (This is not a toll-free number.)

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 2nd day of March 1995.
Doug Ross,
Assistant Secretary of Labor.
[FR Doc. 95-5949 Filed 3-9-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4510-30-M
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

August 19, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-3757

Alo USA Inc:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

20.

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

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

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

determined to be non-administrable.

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

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

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

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

Sincerely,

Joseph Barloon

General Counsel
#### MRS. MARGARET SKINNER DAVIS v. M. B. BLANKENSHIP and BEN M. BLANKENSHIP and Others, t/dba BLANKENSHIP BROTHERS, and OTIS GOODING, Original Defendants, and EDWARD C. DAVIS, JR., Additional Defendant.

(Filed 21 March, 1956.)

Appeal by the original defendants from *Campbell, J.,*November Term, 1955, of MeCKLENbuRG.

This is a civil action instituted on 13 October, 1954, by Mrs. Margaret Skinner Davis against M. B. Blankenship and Ben M. Blankenship, partners, trading and doing business as Blankenship Brothers, and Otis *694Gooding, to recover damages for injuries sustained in a truck collision on 12 April, 1954, at the intersection of Independence Boulevard, East-way Drive and Commonwealth Avenue in the City of Charlotte, resulting from the alleged negligence of the original defendants.

At the time of the accident the plaintiff was riding in a pick-up truck owned and driven by her son, Edward C. Davis, Jr., which had been traveling in an easterly direction on Independence Boulevard and was making a left turn in a northerly direction at the aforesaid intersection. The tractor-trailer of the original defendants was traveling west on Independence Boulevard.

The original defendants filed an answer denying negligence, pleading contributory negligence and setting up a cross-action against the additional defendant, Edward C. Davis, Jr., who was made an additional party defendant.

The additional defendant filed answer to the cross-action of the original defendants, denying any negligence on his part.

Otis Gooding, one of the original defendants, died intestate in Meck-lenburg County after answer was filed by him and before the trial of the cause. His administrator, Thomas G. Lane, Jr., was duly made a party defendant and adopted as his answer the answer filed by Otis Gooding.

The jury answered the first issue as to the negligence of the original defendants in the affirmative, and the second issue as to the negligence of the additional defendant in the negative; and assessed damages.

From the judgment entered on the verdict the original defendants appeal, assigning error.

*Helms & Mulliss, William H. Bobbitt, Jr., and John D. Hicks for original defendants.*

*Kennedy, Kennedy & Hickman for additional defendant.*

PeR CuRiam.

A careful consideration of the exceptions and assignments of error brought forward and discussed in the appellants’ brief leads us to the conclusion that no error sufficiently prejudicial to justify a new trial has been shown. Hence, in the trial below we find

No error.