alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                          515270
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   574037
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (28344)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                658912
<PP&E>                                        24111982
<DEPRECIATION>                               (2233345)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                24086014
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           685368
<BONDS>                                        6996637
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                    16404009
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  24086014
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               2689130
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  3315234
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 28344
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              513178
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (1167626)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (1167626)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (1167626)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.12)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.12)


</TABLE>
**EXHIBIT 32** **Section 906    Certification**     Certification of Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial    Officer     Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by    Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the    undersigned officers of Interstate Hotels & Resorts,    Inc. (the “Company”) hereby certify that:     (i) the accompanying quarterly report on    Form 10-Q    of the Company for the three months and nine months ended    September 30, 2007 (the “Report”) fully complies    with the requirements of Section 13(a) or    Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange    Act of 1934, as amended;     and     (ii) the information contained in the Report fairly    presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and    results of operations of the Company. /s/  Thomas    F. Hewitt
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

December 28, 2018

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-3365

Quality Engineering Company:

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/12.21.18_Notice_of_Product_E

xclusions.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 the 10-digit HTSUS subheading under which your request was filed. 

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
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 50 (Wednesday, March 15, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 13955]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-6388]



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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

[Docket A(32b1)-1-95


Foreign-Trade Zones Board; Foreign-Trade Zone 84--Houston, Texas; 
Tuboscope Vetco International, Inc., (Steel Tubular Products), Harris 
County, Texas; Request for Modification of Restriction

    A request has been submitted to the Foreign-Trade Zones Board (the 
Board) by the Port of Houston Authority, grantee of FTZ 84, pursuant to 
Sec. 400.32(b)(1) of the Board's regulations for modification of the 
export-only restriction in FTZ Board Order 609 authorizing Subzone 84I 
at the Tuboscope Vetco International, Inc. (Tuboscope) plant in Harris 
County, Texas. It was formally filed on February 8, 1995.
    The FTZ Board approved subzone status for the Tuboscope steel 
tubular products inspection and coating facility in Harris County, 
Texas, in 1992 (Subzone 84I; Board Order 609; 57 FR 57729; 12/7/92). 
The approval was subject to a restriction that allowed the use of zone 
procedures for export activity only.
    Tuboscope is now requesting that the export-only restriction be 
modified so that Customs duties can be deferred while the company 
conducts activity for the domestic market under zone procedures. The 
modified restriction would require the company to elect privileged 
foreign status on all merchandise admitted to the subzone. While the 
change would not result in significant new Customs savings, it would 
allow the company to operate the plant under a single inventory control 
system that meets Customs requirements. The request indicated that the 
use of zone procedures as proposed would help the facility maintain its 
international competitiveness.
    Public comment on the proposal is invited from interested parties. 
Submissions (original and 3 copies) shall be addressed to the Board's 
Executive Secretary at the address below. The closing period for their 
receipt is May 1, 1995.
    A copy of the application and accompanying exhibits will be 
available for public inspection at the following location: Office of 
the Executive Secretary, Foreign-Trade Zones Board, U.S. Department of 
Commerce, Room 3716, 14th and Pennsylvania Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 
20230.

    Dated: March 6, 1995.
John J. Da Ponte, Jr.,
Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-6388 Filed 3-14-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
II 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3969 

To amend the Help America Vote Act of 2002 to explicitly authorize distribution of grant funds to the voting accessibility protection and advocacy 

system of the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands and 

the system serving the American Indian consortium, and for other purposes. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 30, 2022 

Mr. LUJA ́N (for himself, Mr. BLUNT, Ms. KLOBUCHAR, Ms. SMITH, and Mr. 

HEINRICH) introduced the following bill; which was read twice, considered, read the third time, and passed 

A BILL 

To amend the Help America Vote Act of 2002 to explicitly 

authorize distribution of grant funds to the voting accessibility protection and advocacy system of the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands and the system 

serving the American Indian consortium, 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, 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 3969 CPS

1 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

2 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Protection and Advo3 cacy for Voting Access Program Inclusion Act’’ or the 

4 ‘‘PAVA Program Inclusion Act’’. 

5 SEC. 2. AUTHORIZING PAYMENTS TO VOTING ACCESSI6 BILITY PROTECTION AND ADVOCACY SYS7 TEMS SERVING THE COMMONWEALTH OF 

8 THE NORTHERN MARIANA ISLANDS AND THE 

9 AMERICAN INDIAN CONSORTIUM. 

10 (a) RECIPIENTS DEFINED.—Section 291 of the Help 

11 America Vote Act of 2002 (52 U.S.C. 21061) is amend12 ed— 

13 (1) by redesignating subsection (c) as sub14 section (d); and 

15 (2) by inserting after subsection (b) the fol16 lowing new subsection: 

17 ‘‘(c) ELIGIBLE GRANT RECIPIENTS.— 

18 ‘‘(1) DEFINITION OF STATE.—For the purposes 

19 of this section, the term ‘State’ shall have the mean20 ing given such term in section 102 of the Develop21 mental Disabilities Assistance and Bill of Rights Act 

22 of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 15002). 

23 ‘‘(2) AMERICAN INDIAN CONSORTIUM ELIGI24 BLE.—A system serving the American Indian con25 sortium for which funds have been reserved under 

26 section 509(c)(1)(B) of the Rehabilitation Act of 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
3 

•S 3969 CPS

1 1973 (29 U.S.C. 794e(c)(1)(B)) shall be eligible for 

2 payments under subsection (a) in the same manner 

3 as a protection and advocacy system of a State.’’. 

4 (b) GRANT MINIMUMS FOR AMERICAN INDIAN CON5 SORTIUM.—Section 291(b) of such Act (52 U.S.C. 

6 21061(b)) is amended— 

7 (1) by inserting ‘‘(c)(1)(B),’’ after ‘‘as set forth 

8 in subsections’’; and 

9 (2) by striking ‘‘subsections (c)(3)(B) and 

10 (c)(4)(B) of that section shall be not less than 

11 $70,000 and $35,000, respectively.’’ and inserting 

12 the following: ‘‘subsection (c)(3)(B) shall not be less 

13 than $70,000, and the amount of the grants to sys14 tems referred to in subsections (c)(1)(B) and (c)(4) 

15 shall not be less than $35,000.’’. 

16 SEC. 3. EFFECTIVE DATE. 

17 The amendments made by section 2 shall take effect 

18 at the start of the first fiscal year starting after the date 

19 of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with BILLS
#### L. P. MANNING v. HARVEY C. HINES COMPANY.

(Filed 9 October, 1940.)

Appeal by plaintiff from *Hamilton, Special Judge,*at April Term, 1940, of Wayne.

Civil action by ultimate consumer to recover of manufacturer or bottler damages resulting from drinking bottled beverage containing noxious substance.

On 25 June, 1938, tbe plaintiff purchased a bottle of Coca-Cola from a filling station in Lenoir County. It is in evidence that upon drinking tbe Coca-Cola tbe plaintiff found glass in tbe bottle, and was seriously injured as a result thereof.

Plaintiff sought to show that tbe defendant placed tbe Coca-Cola on tbe market and was negligent in bottling it.

From judgment of nonsuit entered at tbe close of plaintiff’s evidence, be appeals, assigning errors.

*George E. Hood and J. Faison Thomson for plaintiff, appellant.*

*Royall, Gosney & Smith for defendant, appellee.*

Pee Oueiam.

Upon tbe record as presented, we cannot say there was error in dismissing tbe action as in case of nonsuit. Tbe judgment will be upheld. *Enloe v. Bottling Co.,*208 N. C., 305, 180 S. E., 582.

Affirmed.
#### Richard D. JASPER, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. WD 49287.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Jan. 31, 1995.

Judith C. LaRose, Office of the State Public Defender Office, Columbia, for appellant.

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

Before HANNA, P.J., and BRECKENRIDGE and SMART, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Appeal from denial of Rule 29.15 motion for post-conviction relief without an eviden-tiary hearing.

Judgment affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          AUG-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-02-2000
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   33,483
<ALLOWANCES>                                       265
<INVENTORY>                                     56,447
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                91,120
<PP&E>                                         111,946
<DEPRECIATION>                                  51,368
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 158,422
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           55,569
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                           31,220
<PREFERRED>                                          5
<COMMON>                                             5
<OTHER-SE>                                   (146,800)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   158,422
<SALES>                                        199,072
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               199,072
<CGS>                                          189,905
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  189,905
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                12,540
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              10,672
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (14,045)
<INCOME-TAX>                                        30
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (14,075)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (14,075)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (3.19)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (3.19)



</TABLE>
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 23

- 1481

UNITED SOURCE ONE, INC. , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v.
DOMINIC FRANK , Defendant

- Appellee

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland , at Baltimore

. James K. Bredar, Chief District Judge. ( 1:22

- cv - 02309

- JKB )

Submitted : March 12, 2024 Decided: March 14, 2024

Before GREGORY , RICHARDSON, and BENJAMIN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed in part, vacated in part, and remanded by un published per curiam opinion

.

ON BRIEF : Steven N. Leitess, Pierce C. Murphy, SILVERMAN, THOMPSON, SLUTKIN & WHITE, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellant. Dominic Frank , Appellee Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 23-1481 Doc: 15 Filed: 03/14/2024 Pg: 1 of 32 PER CURIAM: United Source One, Inc. (“US1”) , appeals the district court’s order denying US1’s motion for default judgment and sua sponte dismissing its complaint. On appeal, US1 solely argues that the district court erred in sua sponte dismissing the complaint without granting leave to amend. Before a district court sua sponte dismisses a complaint, it “ must

. . . afford[] notice and an opportunity to amend the complaint or otherwise respond.” Robertson v. Anderson Mill Elementary Sch

. , 989 F.3d 282, 291 (4th Cir. 2021) (internal quotation marks omitted)

. The district court did not follow this procedure, and the faults it found in the complaint are the type that could conceivably be remedied in an amended complaint. Moreover, had Appellee not been in default and filed his own motion to dismi ss under Fed. R. Civ. P. 12(b)(6), US1 would have been entitled to amend its complaint as a matter of course. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 15(a)(1)(B). Thus, we conclude that the district court erred in dismissing US1’s complaint without granting leave to amend. Accordingly, we affirm the portion of the district court’s order denying US1’s motion for default judgment, * vacate the portion of the order dismissing the complaint, and remand with instructions to allow US1 to file an amended complaint.

* We affirm this portion of the district court’s order because US1 does not challenge it in its opening brief. See Grayson O Co. v. Agadir Int’l, LLC , 856 F.3d 307, 316 (4th Cir. 2017). USCA4 Appeal: 23-1481 Doc: 15 Filed: 03/14/2024 Pg: 2 of 33 We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED IN PART, VACATED IN PART, AND REMANDED USCA4 Appeal: 23-1481 Doc: 15 Filed: 03/14/2024 Pg: 3 of 3
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-2018-0025-2854

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
EXHIBIT 99.1

      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 Rimpac Resources Ltd. (the "Company")
on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2002, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Thomas M. Johnson,
Chief Executive Officer and 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 results of operations of the Company.




/s/ THOMAS M. JOHNSON
-----------------------------------
Thomas M. Johnson,
Chief Executive Officer and
Chief Financial Officer
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-2018-0025-2035

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

November 19, 2018

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-2951

Price Pump Company:

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
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack

, Chief Justice

David F. Viviano,

Chief Justice Pro Tem

Stephen J. Markman

Brian K. Zahra

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

February 1 4 , 2019 

# Order

Clerk February 1 4 , 2019

159 104 ( 27 )

PEOPLE OF THE S TATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

SC: 15 9 104

v COA: 3 44764

Emmet CC: 14

- 003969

- FC

TREVOR JAMES CARRIER

, Defendant

- Appellant

. _________________________________________/

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion of defendant

- appellant to exceed the page

limit for his application for leave to appeal is GRANTED

.