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

November 13, 2018

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-3812

Knowles Corporation:

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 and 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 23



               Consent of Independent Certified Public Accountants



We  have  issued  our  reports  dated  February  20,  2003,   accompanying   the
consolidated financial statements and schedules incorporated by reference in the
Annual Report of CareCentric,  Inc. on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31,
2002. We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of said reports in the
Registration  Statements of  CareCentric,  Inc. on Form S-8 (File No.  33-97772,
File No. 333-51869, File No. 333-70811, and File No. 333-68132).

/s/ Grant Thornton LLP

Atlanta, Georgia
March 11, 2003




1594201
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED April 21, 2004 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-41123 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus TIRSO PEREZ-OCANAS, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. M-03-CR-342-1

-------------------- Before JOLLY, JONES, and SMITH, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Tirso Perez-Ocanas appeals the sentence imposed following his guilty plea conviction of being found in the United States after deportation/removal in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. Perez-Ocanas argues that 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) is unconstitutional on its face and as applied to him. He thus contends that his sentence should not exceed the maximum term of imprisonment prescribed in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(a).No. 03-41123 -2-
In Almendarez-Torres v. United States , 523 U.S. 224, 235 (1998), the Supreme Court held that the enhanced penalties in 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) are sentencing provisions, not elements of separate offenses. Perez-Ocanas acknowledges that his argument is foreclosed by Almendarez-Torres , but asserts that the decision has been cast into doubt by Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466, 490 (2000). He seeks to preserve his argument for further review. Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres
. See Apprendi , 530 U.S. at 489-90; United States v. Dabeit , 231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir. 2000). This court must follow Almendarez-Torres “unless and until the Supreme Court itself determines to overrule it.” Dabeit , 231 F.3d at 984 (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). The judgment of the district court is
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-2018-0025-5331

Arrowhead Electrical Products, 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
exv10w2






Exhibit 10.2




Summary of Compensation Program for

Non-Employee Chairman of the Board of Directors

Adopted March 23, 2010



At a meeting of the Board of Directors of Tollgrade Communications, Inc. (the “Company”) held
on March 23, 2010, following the appointment of the non-employee Chairman of the Board and at the
recommendation of the Compensation Committee, the Board of Directors adopted a compensation program
for the Chairman of the Board, comprised of the following elements:





	 	•	 	An annual retainer of $200,000, payable in cash;
	 
	 	•	 	A one-time grant of 50,000 shares of restricted stock under Company’s 2006 Long-Term
Incentive Compensation Plan (the “2006 Plan”), subject to a one-year period of
restriction; and
	 
	 	•	 	A one-time grant of 250,000 stock appreciation rights having a grant price equal to
the fair market value of a share of the Company’s common stock on the date of grant, to
become vested upon the satisfaction of criteria established by the Board.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 53 (Monday, March 20, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 14720]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-6710]



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



DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Southwest Washington Provincial Advisory Committee Meeting

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Southwest Washington Provincial Advisory Committee will 
meet on April 20, 1995 in Kelso, Washington, at the Red Lion Inn, near 
Interstate 5 at Exit No. 39. The meeting will begin at 9 a.m. and 
continue until 4 p.m. Meeting purpose is to orient new Advisory 
Committee members to the President's Northwest Forest Plan and the 
Advisory Committee process. Agenda items to be covered include: (1) 
Introductions of Committee members; (2) context of the Advisory 
Committee, including background on the Forest Plan; (3) mission and 
purpose of the Province Advisory Committee; (4) overview of Federal 
agency missions; (5) Advisory Committee roles; (6) Public Involvement 
strategy; (7) Decision Process and Criteria; (8) Travel Requirements; 
(9) Public Open Forum.

    All Southwest Washington Provincial Advisory Committee meetings are 
open to the public. Interested citizens are encouraged to attend. The 
``open forum'' provides opportunity for the public to bring issues, 
concerns, and discussion topics to the Advisory Committee. The ``open 
forum'' is scheduled near the conclusion of the meeting. Interested 
speakers will need to register at the door. The Committee welcomes the 
public's written comments on committee business at any time.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Direct questions regarding this meeting to Mark Maggiora, Public 
Affairs Officer, at (360) 750-5007, or write Forest Headquarters 
Office, Gifford Pinchot National Forest, 6926 E Fourth Plain Blvd., PO 
Box 8944 Vancouver, WA 98668.

    Dated: March 10, 1995.
Ted C. Stubblefield,
Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 95-6710 Filed 3-17-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 57 (Friday, March 24, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 15610]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-7216]



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


NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

Task Force on the Future of the NSF Supercomputer Centers Program

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-
463, as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the 
following meeting:

    Name: Task Force on the Future of the NSF Supercomputer Centers 
Program (#1982).
    Date and Time: April 6, 1995 1:00-9:00 p.m., April 7, 1995 8:00 
a.m.-4:00 p.m.
    Place: O'Hare Hilton, Chicago, IL (Room to be posted at meeting 
site).
    Type of Meeting: Open.
    Contact Person: Dr. Robert Borchers, Director, Division of 
Advanced Scientific Computing, Directorate for Computer and 
Information Science and Engineering, National Science Foundation, 
4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230, 703/306-1970.
    Minutes: May be obtained from the contact person listed above.
    Meeting Purpose: The objective of the Task Force is to advise 
the NSF on the future of its Supercomputing Centers Program 
considering the changing nature of computing and information science 
and technology. Its scope will be limited to NSF's support for 
advanced computational science. This meeting is to seek advice and 
testimony from representatives of the supercomputer industry, 
academic leaders in High Performance Computing, representative users 
of the NSF Supercomputing Centers and some principal investigators 
of Grand Challenge Projects. The task force will continue its 
discussions on the principles to be used in evaluating the options 
of future programs, and hear reports on visits of members to the 
four existing Supercomputer Centers.
    Agenda:

April 6, 1995--1:00 to 9:00 p.m.

1:00-5:00 Advice and testimony from members of the High Performance 
Computing Community
6:00-9:00 Working Dinner--Subcommittee Meetings

April 7, 1995--8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.

8:00-9:00 Assemble, Continental Breakfast
9:00-12:00 Advice and testimony from members of the High Performance 
Computing Community
12:00-1:00 Working Lunch
1:00-2:00 Advice and testimony (if required)
2:00-4:00 Subcommittee Meetings, trip visit reports.

    Reason for Late Notice: Difficulty in locating suitable meeting 
accommodations.

    Dated: March 20, 1995.

M. Rebecca Winker,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 95-7216 Filed 3-23-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
EXHIBIT 32.2
**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**
In connection with the Quarterly Report of Payless ShoeSource, Inc. (the“Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending October 30, 2004, as filed withthe Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I,Ullrich E. Porzig, Senior Vice President — Chief Financial Officer andTreasurer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, asadopted 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 materialrespects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
Date: December 9, 2004    /s/ Ullrich E. Porzig   Ullrich E. Porzig Senior Vice President, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer (Principal Financial and AccountingOfficer)
33
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 62 (Friday, March 31, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 16764]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-7941]




DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureu of Indian Affairs


Indian Gaming

AGENCY: Bureau of Indian Affairs, Interior.

ACTION: Notice of Approved Tribal/State Compact.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to 25 U.S.C. 2710, of the Indian Gaming Regulatory 
Act of 1988 (Pub. L. 100-497), the Secretary of the Interior shall 
publish, in the Federal Register, notice of approved Tribal/State 
Compacts for the purpose of engaging in Class III (casino) gambling on 
Indian reservations. The Assistant Secretary - Indian Affairs, 
Department of the Interior, through her delegated authority, has 
approved the Tribal/State Gaming Compact between the Suquamish Tribe 
and the State of Washington, which was executed on January 26, 1995.

DATES: This action is effective March 31, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:George T. Skibine, Director, Indian 
Gaming Management Staff, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Washington, DC 
20240, (202) 219-4068.

    Dated: March 17, 1995.
Ada E. Deer,
Assistant Secretary, Indian Affairs.
[FR Doc. 95-7941 Filed 3-30-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-02-P
#### In the Matter of Patrick A. Gaura, Petitioner.

Fourth Department,

October 5,1990

APPEARANCES OF COUNSEL

No appearance for petitioner.

No appearance for respondent.

OPINION OF THE COURT

Per Curiam.

Petitioner seeks an order pursuant to 22 NYCRR 1022.34 (m) approving his application for admission to practice in New York State, notwithstanding the adverse determination of the Character and Fitness Committee of the Eighth Judicial District.

Petitioner submitted his application for admission to practice in May 1988. On June 9, 1990, following a hearing, the Character and Fitness Committee of the Eighth Judicial Dis*47trict approved a report from a subcommittee dated May 25, 1990 recommending denial of the application. For the reasons stated in the subcommittee report, we concur and deny the petition with leave to petitioner to reapply following one year from the date of the order entered on this decision.

Boomer, J. P., Pine, Balio, Lawton and Davis, JJ., concur.

Application for admission denied with leave to reapply after one year.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Luther Sanford, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Browne, J.), rendered July 25, 1986, convicting him of robbery in the first degree, robbery in the third degree, criminal possession of stolen property in the second degree, criminal possession of stolen property in the third degree, criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, assault in the third degree, and resisting arrest, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

*561Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant was adjudicated a second felony offender based upon a 1977 conviction for burglary in the second degree in Tennessee. The defendant contends for the first time on appeal that the elements of the Tennessee statute, pursuant to which he virtually concedes he was validly convicted *(see,*GPL 400.21 [3], [7] [b]), are not sufficiently analogous to any New York statute to justify the determination that the conviction in Tennessee is a predicate felony *(see,*Penal Law § 70.06 [1] [b] [i]; *see also, People v Gonzalez,*61 NY2d 586). Since that claim was not raised before sentencing, it is unpreserved for appellate review *(see, People v Morales,*143 AD2d 949; *People v Alston,*134 AD2d 433). In any event, the elements of the Tennessee statute as it existed until 1989 are the virtual equivalent of the New York State burglary statute *(see,*7 Tenn Code Annot former § 39-3-403; Penal Law §§ 140.20, 140.25 [2]). The adjudication of the defendant as a second felony offender was therefore proper.

We have examined the defendant’s remaining contentions, including the contention that his sentence is excessive, and find them to be without merit *(see, People v Suitte,*90 AD2d 80). Thompson, J. P., Kunzeman, Harwood and Miller, JJ., concur.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Jody Williams, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from (1) an amended judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Clabby, J.), rendered October 2, 1987, revoking a sentence of probation previously imposed by the same court, upon a finding that she had violated a condition thereof, after a hearing, and imposing a sentence of imprisonment upon her previous conviction of attempted robbery in the third degree under indictment No. 4120/86, and (2) a judgment of the same court, also rendered October 2, 1987, convicting her of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the fifth degree, upon her plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the amended judgment and the judgment are affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no meritorious issues *649which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted (see, *Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Paige,*54 AD2d 631; *cf., People v Gonzalez,*47 NY2d 606). Mangano, P. J., Kunzeman, Hooper, Sullivan and O’Brien, JJ., concur.
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-2018-0025-2826

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
<PAGE>   1

                                                                      Exhibit 11



                           STATER BROS. HOLDINGS INC.
                  Calculation of Earnings Per Common Share (In
            thousands, except number of shares and per share amounts)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                Fiscal Years Ended
                                       ------------------------------------
                                         1995         1996(1)        1997
                                       --------      --------      --------
<S>                                    <C>           <C>           <C>     
Net income                             $  6,727      $ 16,011      $ 13,467


Less preferred dividends                      -         4,111         6,166
                                       --------      --------      --------

Net income available
  to common shareholders               $  6,727      $ 11,900      $  7,301
                                       ========      ========      ========

Earnings per common share              $  67.27      $ 165.28      $ 146.02
                                       ========      ========      ========

Average common shares outstanding       100,000        72,000        50,000
                                       ========      ========      ========

Common shares outstanding
  at end of fiscal year                 100,000        50,000        50,000
                                       ========      ========      ========
</TABLE>


(1)  53-Week Fiscal Year





                                       35
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 51 (Thursday, March 16, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 14281]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-6486]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. RM95-6-000]


Alternatives to Traditional Cost-of-Service Ratemaking for 
Natural Gas Pipelines; Notice of Extension of Time

March 10, 1995.
    On March 3, 1995, the Interstate Natural Gas Association of 
America, the America Gas Association, the Associated Gas Distributors, 
the Independent Petroleum Association of America, and the Natural Gas 
Supply Association (Indicated Petitioners) filed a motion for an 
extension of time within which to file comments and responses to 
questions raised in the Commission's Request for Comments issued 
February 8, 1995 (60 FR 8356, February 14, 1995), in the above-docketed 
proceeding. In its motion, Indicated Petitioners states that due to the 
complex nature of the subject matter and the numerous questions raised 
by the Request for Comments and the Staff Paper dealing with market-
based rates, additional time is needed to analyze, prepare, and file 
comments. The motion also states that a modest extension is in the 
public interest and will not unnecessarily delay the proceeding.
    Upon consideration, notice is hereby given that an extension of 
time within which to file comments in this proceeding is granted to and 
including April 25, 1995.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-6486 Filed 3-15-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M