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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM GOTO.COM
INC. FORM 10-Q FOR THE PERIOD ENDED SEPTEMBER 30, 2000 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                          14,598
<SECURITIES>                                    55,898
<RECEIVABLES>                                    4,454
<ALLOWANCES>                                       600
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                92,823
<PP&E>                                          34,665
<DEPRECIATION>                                   7,751
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 472,100
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           25,278
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             5
<OTHER-SE>                                     445,854
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   445,859
<SALES>                                         63,276
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                63,276
<CGS>                                            8,728
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  177,691
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   350
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (96,928)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (96,928)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (96,928)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (2.04)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (2.04)


</TABLE>
#### Kimberly Rieser DUNN, et al., Appellants, v. MAY CENTERS, INC., Respondent.

No. 67930.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Two.

Dec. 26, 1995.

Joseph A. Frank, St. Louis, for appellants.

Eugene K. Buckley, St. Louis, for respondent.

Before CRAHAN, P.J., and CRANDALL and DOWD, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiffs appeal from the judgment entered in accordance with the jury’s verdict in favor of Defendant May Centers, Inc. in their action for personal injuries suffered when Ms. Dunn was struck by a door closing device at Defendant’s shopping center. On appeal, Plaintiffs complain of the trial court’s actions in excusing a juror for cause and in sustaining questions posed to Plaintiffs’ expert on the grounds that they lacked proper foundation and called for speculation. We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find no error of law. An extended opinion would have no prece-dential value. The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).
PUBLIC VERSION
$[*********] [******]

$[*********]

INPUT

20.0

$[*********]

[******]

[******]

0.05

PUBLIC VERSION
Consistent with USTR's Section 301 notice, OMRON Management Center of America, Inc. requests

confidential treatment for the information designated as business confidential in this submission. Such

information consists of information that would not customarily be released to the public, including

business or trade secrets regarding production costs and processes, data on sales, product characteristics

customers, destinations, and other product, sales, and cost-related business secrets. Business confidential

information has been indicated herein by enclosing it in single brackets (“[ ]”). A public version of these

comments is also being filed with all confidential information removed.

OMRON in the US is the only designer of this product and only supplier of this component.

ACCESSORY SWITCH KNOB,ACSWis a molded plastic switch containing an electrical switch, and is

used only for automotive purposes as a switch to fold a seat. It is only used for further assembly of

components which go into domestic automobile production. which is specified by auto manufacturer.

This product is not a target of the US Administration's 301 investigation regarding Intellectual Property

concerns. This is not a concern to IP transfer and impressment. This product contains no IP of interest

related to autonomous vehicle production.

The tariff action ultimately poses a risk of significant damage to OMRON , the domestic

automobile industry, and ultimately the US consumer as an increase in price. Like in the case of similar

approvals for vehicle components at the HTS level, OMRON views this product in the same manner.

Immediate movement of production to a US manufacturer or another country would pose significant

re-tooling costs, significant amounts of time, and approvals pertaining

to consumer automobile safety standards are costly and would take a significant amount of time to

obtain.

OMRON Management Center of America, Inc. believes that CBP can easily exclude the ACCESSORY

SWITCH KNOB,ACSW in question based solely on the product description. The following are draft

CBP exclusion instructions:

"ACCESSORY SWITCH KNOB,ACSW Rectangular switch face with a "Y"-shaped cross section -

Made of plastic resin -PC CLR(Power Seat fold)" Dimensions 34.54mm X17.95mm X 13.00mm."

This information will be contained on the invoice from the supplier

PUBLIC VERSION
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-2018-0025-3652

CW Bearing USA, 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/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
<PAGE>   1
                                                                  EXHIBIT 11 (1)

                          GLOBAL ELECTION SYSTEMS INC.
                         Computation of Per-Share Income
                              Treasury Stock Method

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                    Period Ended    Period Ended
                                                   March 31, 2001  March 31, 2000

                                                     Nine Months    Nine Months
<S>                                                <C>             <C>
Weighted average number of share outstanding          19,923,982      18,550,795
Total common and common equivalent shares             21,350,649      20,017,462

Net Income (Loss) for the period                    $ (5,791,305)   $    862,116

Weighted average number of share outstanding          19,923,982      18,550,795

Earnings per share - basic                          $      (0.29)   $       0.05

Net Income (Loss) for the period                    $ (5,791,305)   $    862,116

Total common and common equivalent shares             21,350,649      20,017,462

Earnings per share - fully diluted                  $      N / A    $   0.04

Earnings per share:
</TABLE>


Basic earnings per share is computed by dividing the net income for the period
by the weighted average number of common shares outstanding for the period.

Fully diluted earnings per share is computed by dividing the net income for the
period by the common and common equivalent shares outstanding for the period.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 32.1

                    CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
                       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 Annual Report of Metretek Technologies, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-K for fiscal year ended December 31, 2005 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, W.
Phillip Marcum, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby
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, as amended; and

     2.   The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
          material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of
          the Company.


Date: March 22, 2006                    /s/ W. Phillip Marcum
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        W. Phillip Marcum
                                        President and
                                            Chief Executive Officer

A signed original 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.
Amendment (this "Amendment")dated August 23, 2002, to a Master Purchase Agreement (the "MPA") dated August10, 1998, by and between M-Systems Inc. ("M-Systems") and Toshiba AmericaElectronics Components, Inc. ("Toshiba").

* *

**WHEREAS,**M-Systems and Toshiba are parties to the MPA; and 

* *

**WHEREAS,**M-Systems and Toshiba wish to agree on certainamendments to the MPA, as set forth in this Amendment

* *

**THEREFORE,**the parties agree as follows:

* *

1.*                 *Definitions. Capitalized terms used herein but otherwise notdefined herein shall have the meanings ascribed to such terms in the MPA.

2.*                 *Section 2 of the MPAshall be deleted and replaced with the following wording:

"2. TERM OFAGREEMENT. This Agreement shall come into force on the Effective Date and willremain in effect until December 31, 2005, unless earlier terminated by eitherparty pursuant to Section 16 "Termination"."

3.*                 *The above changes tothe MPA shall enter into effect as of the date of this Amendment. Other thanthe above changes, the terms of the MPA shall continue to be in full force andeffect and with no further changes.

**INWITNESS HEREOF**, the parties havesigned this Amendment as of the above date:

* *
| **M-SYSTEMS FLASH DISK  PIONEERS LTD.**                   | * *     | **TOSHIBA CORPORATION**                                           |
|-----------------------------------------------------------|--------------|-------------------------------------------------------------------|
| * *                                                  | * *     | * *                                                          |
| * *                                                  | * *     | * *                                                          |
| **BY:      /s/  Dov Moran** | *** *** | **BY:      /s/ M. Muromachi**                 |
| *** ***                                              | *** *** | *** ***                                                      |
| **NAME: Dov Moran**                                       | *** *** | **NAME: Masashi Muromachi**                                       |
| *** ***                                              | *** *** | **Vice President, Memory Division TITLE: Semiconductor  Company** |
| **TITLE: President and CEO**                              | *** *** |
| *** ***                                              | *** *** | *** ***                                                      |
| **DATE: Aug. 22, 2002**                                   | *** *** | **DATE: Aug. 23, 2002**                                           |

* *

**____ 1 ____**
ALD

- 238 NOT PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

___________

No. 11

- 2068

___________

IN RE: LOUIS WATLEY,

Petitioner

____________________________________

On a Petition for Writ of Mandamus fr om the United States District Court for the District of New Jersey (Related to D.N.J. Civ. No. 2

- 10

- cv

- 0 5086)

____________________________________
Submitted Pursuant to Rule 21, Fed. R. App. P.

July 14, 2011 Before: SCIRICA, HARDIMAN and VANASKIE, Circ uit Judges

(Opinion filed: August 1, 2011 )

_________

OPINION

_________

PER CURIAM

Louis Watley seeks a writ of mandamus, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1651, directing

the United States District Court for th e District of New Jersey to rule on his habeas

corpus petition. Subsequent to the filing of this mandamus petition, however, the District

Court dismissed Watley’s habeas petition without prejudice for failure to exhaust state

remedies. 1 Accordingly, to t he extent Watley seeks to have this Court order the District

1 Watley’s appeal of that decision is pending before this Cour t. See CA No. 11

- 2808.2

Court to rule on the habeas petition, his mandamus petition will be denied as moot. See

Blanciak v. Allegheny Ludlum Corp. , 77 F.3d 690, 698

- 99 (3d Cir. 1996) (“ If

developments occur during the course of adjudication that

. . . prevent a court from being

able to grant the requested relief, the case must be dismissed as moot .”). And to the

extent Watley requests that we “declare” as “arbitrary, capricious, and [an] abuse of

power” the District C ourt’s seven

- month delay in adjudicating the habeas petition, that

request is denied; mandamus is not a substitute for an appeal. See In re Chambers Dev.

Co. , 148 F.3d 214, 226 (3d Cir. 1998).
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

September 26, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number USTR-2018-0025-4287

Valmet, 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
**Exhibit 32.2**

**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO**

**18      U.S.C. §1350,**

**AS      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

|   | 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/                Heng Chuk |
|   | Heng                Chuk                                              |
|   | Chief                Financial Officer April                  6, 2007 |

----
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 8 (Thursday, January 12, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 2951]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-772]



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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Department of the Army
Corps of Engineers


Availability of Guidance on Design-Build for Military 
Construction

AGENCY: Army Corps of Engineers, DOD.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Interested individuals may obtain copies of the Design-Build 
Instructions (DBI) For Military Construction, dated 29 October 1994. 
The purpose of the DBI is to serve as a practical guide for U.S. Army 
Corps of Engineers offices to consistently and efficiently plan, 
develop, and execute design-build contracts.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the DBI may be obtained from two sources; printed 
copies (as quantities last) from the Huntsville Division Engineer 
Office (CEHND-ED-ES), P.O. Box 1600, Huntsville, AL 35807-4301; or 
automated copies on the compact disk (CD-ROM), January 1995 issue of 
the Construction Criteria Base (CCB), from the National Institute of 
Building Sciences (NIBS), 1201 L Street, N.W. Suite 400, Washington, 
D.C. 20005-4024, (202) 289-7800, FAX (202) 289-1092. Written 
suggestions for improving the DBI may be submitted before 30 June 1995 
to HQUSACE, ATTN: CEMP-EA, 20 Massachusetts Avenue NW., Washington, 
D.C. 20314-1000.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mr. Daniel W. Duncan, Architectural and Planning Branch, Directorate of 
Military Programs, (202) 272-0437.
Kenneth L. Denton,
Army Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 95-772 Filed 1-11-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3710-92-M
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-2018-0025-3431

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
#### Media Sound, Inc., et al., Appellants, v Maryland Casualty Insurance Company et al., Respondents.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Beatrice Shainswit, J.), entered on or about July 6, 1989, which denied plaintiffs’ motion to vacate a default judgment entered in favor of defendants, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

Although courts favor the determination of actions on the merits *(see, N & J Foods v Shopwell Plaza Corp.,*63 AD2d 899), this will not justify vacating a default judgment where the moving party fails to satisfy the two-prong burden of showing merit to the action and a reasonable excuse for the default *(Eisenstein v Rose,*135 AD2d 369, 370).

Counsel for plaintiffs has failed to set out reasonable excuses for the default or for the 11-month delay in moving to open the default. Moreover, as to the merit of the action, plaintiffs’ conclusory allegations are unclear as to whether the claimed loss stated was covered by the insurance policy in question. Concur—Murphy, P. J., Carro, Milonas and Ellerin, JJ.
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-2018-0025-11484

Trio Engineered Products:

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