alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-10574

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ALEJANDRO RUIZ,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:12-CR-296-1

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The attorney appointed to represent Alejandro Ruiz has moved for leave 

to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California, 386 

U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Ruiz

has filed two responses. The record is not sufficiently developed to allow us to 

make a fair evaluation of Ruiz’s claims of ineffective assistance of counsel; we 

therefore decline to consider the claims without prejudice to collateral review. 

 

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH 

CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

June 11, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 13-10574 Document: 00513075773 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/11/2015
No. 13-10574

2

See United States v. Isgar, 739 F.3d 829, 841 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 135 S. Ct. 

123 (2014).

We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record 

reflected therein, as well as Ruiz’s responses. We concur with counsel’s 

assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. 

Accordingly, the motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused 

from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See

5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

 Case: 13-10574 Document: 00513075773 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/11/2015
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

September 17, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number USTR-2018-0025-5116

Bergstrom, 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/%2434_Billion_Exclusions_Gr

anted_September.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
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, 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. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

November 23, 2009 

p1116 

Order 

 

November 23, 2009 

139470-1 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 139470-1 

 COA: 290230 & 290231 

Macomb CC: 2007-003927-FH; 

 2007-004856-FH 

ROBERT WRIGHT, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 23, 2009 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded 

that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
S. 4411 

One Hundred Seventeenth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE SECOND SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Monday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and twenty two 

An Act 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 5302 Galveston 

Road in Houston, Texas, as the ‘‘Vanessa Guille ́n Post Office Building’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. VANESSA GUILLE ́ N POST OFFICE BUILDING. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal 

Service located at 5302 Galveston Road in Houston, Texas, shall 

be known and designated as the ‘‘Vanessa Guille ́n Post Office 

Building’’. 

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 

document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference 

to the ‘‘Vanessa Guille ́n Post Office Building’’. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
Exhibit 10.19
 Non-Employee Director Compensation Policy
   
    
    Annual Cash Retainer  An annual cash retainer of $50,000 payable in
advance in two installments on the day of their election and on the six month
anniversary of such date. In the event of appointment during a service year, the
amount shall be prorated by months of service.
    
    Annual Equity Grant  A Restricted Stock Award of 10,000 shares issued on
the date of election or appointment to the Board of Directors the forfeiture
restrictions on which shall lapse on the first anniversary of the date of grant. Such
award shall be authorized and approved annually by the Compensation Committee under
the Companys 2005 Equity Incentive Plan or any subsequent plan and shall be issued
pursuant to a form of Non-Employee Director Restricted Stock Agreement approved by the
Compensation Committee. In the event a Directors service ends during a service year
the forfeiture restrictions shall lapse pro rata for the time of service provided
during the service year.
    
    Committee Chair Retainer  Each chairman of a standing Committee of the
Board of Directors (other than the chairman of the Audit Committee) and any director
appointed as the lead director or similar position shall be paid an annual cash
Committee retainer of $7,500 payable in the same manner as the Annual Cash Retainer.
The chairman of the Audit Committee shall be paid an annual cash Committee retainer of
$15,000 payable in the same manner as the Annual Cash Retainer.
    
    Meeting Attendance Fees  None
    
    Expense Reimbursement  The Company shall reimburse non-employee directors
for their reasonable out-of-pocket expenses incurred in attending any meetings of the
Board of Directors or any of its Committees that are conducted in person.
    
    Annual Physical The Company shall pay or reimburse each non-employee
director and his or her spouse for the cost of an annual physical at a medical
facility to be selected or approved from time to time by the Company.
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 4308 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 4308

  To amend title 38, United States Code, to modify the definition of 
    spouse and surviving spouse to include all individuals lawfully 
                    married, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              May 25, 2022

 Mr. Peters (for himself, Ms. Collins, Ms. Murkowski, and Ms. Hassan) 
introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the 
                     Committee on Veterans' Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend title 38, United States Code, to modify the definition of 
    spouse and surviving spouse to include all individuals lawfully 
                    married, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Veterans Marriage Recognition Act of 
2022''.

SEC. 2. MODIFICATION OF DEFINITION OF SPOUSE AND SURVIVING SPOUSE FOR 
              DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS TO INCLUDE ALL INDIVIDUALS 
              LAWFULLY MARRIED.

    Section 101 of title 38, United States Code, is amended--
            (1) in paragraph (3), by striking ``of the opposite sex who 
        was the spouse of a veteran'' and inserting ``who was lawfully 
        married to a veteran, including a marriage between two persons 
        of the same sex,''; and
            (2) in paragraph (31), by striking ``of the opposite sex''.
                                 <all>
```
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

March 15, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-4965

Apergy ESP Systems, LLC:

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
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 4894 

To amend the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 to reauthorize the 

dairy business innovation initiatives. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 25, 2023 

Mr. VAN ORDEN introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Agriculture 

A BILL 

To amend the Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 to 

reauthorize the dairy business innovation initiatives. 

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

3 SECTION 1. DAIRY BUSINESS INNOVATION INITIATIVES. 

4 Section 12513(i) of the Agriculture Improvement Act 

5 of 2018 (7 U.S.C. 1632d(i)) is amended by striking 

6 ‘‘$20,000,000’’ and inserting ‘‘$36,000,000’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

April 12, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-4230

Apex Sourcing & Manufacturing: 

I am pleased to notify you that the United States Trade Representative has determined to 

grant the above-referenced exclusion request submitted pursuant to the notice published at 83 FR 

32181 (‘July 11 notice’). The exclusion determination is set out in a formal notice which has 

been submitted to Office of the Federal Register for publication (‘the exclusion notice’). A prepublication version of the exclusion notice has been posted on the USTR website, at

https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/301Investigations/Notice_of_Product_Exclusions

_04.15.19.pdf.

The scope of the exclusion is governed by the formal HTSUS language in the annex to 

the product exclusion notice, and not by the product descriptions set out in any particular request 

for exclusion. An exclusion in response to your request has been granted by excluding from the 

additional tariffs products covered by a specially drafted description contained in the annex to 

the product exclusion notice. 

In accordance with the July 11 notice, the exclusion applies as of the July 6, 2018 

effective date of the tariff action, and will extend for one year after the exclusion notice is 

published in the Federal Register. As stated in the exclusion notice, U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection will issue additional instructions on entry guidance and implementation.

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Vaughn

General Counsel
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-2018-0025-3646

Omega Environmental Technologies, 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 concerns a product strategically important or related to 

‘‘Made in China 2025’’ or other Chinese industrial programs.

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
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 52 (Friday, March 17, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 14470-14471]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-6580]



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

POSTAL RATE COMMISSION
[Order No. 1046, and Docket No. A95-5]


Notice and Order Accepting Appeal and Establishing Procedural 
Schedule Under 39 U.S.C. Sec. 404(b)(5)

    Before Commissioners: Edward J. Gleiman, Chairman; W.H. ``Trey'' 
LeBlanc III, Vice-Chairman; George W. Haley; H. Edward Quick, Jr.; 
Wayne A. Schley.

    Issued: March 13, 1995.

Docket Number: A95-5
Name of Affected Post Office: Oak, Nebraska 68964
Name(s) of Petitioner(s): Tom Jensen
Type of Determination: Consolidation
Date of Filing of Appeal Papers: March 3, 1995
Categories of Issues Apparently Raised:
    1. Effect on postal services [39 U.S.C. Sec. 404(b)(2)(C)].
    2. Effect on the community [39 U.S.C. Sec. 404(b)(2)(A)].

    After the Postal Service files the administrative record and the 
Commission reviews it, the Commission may find that there are more 
legal issues than those set forth above. Or, the Commission may find 
that the Postal Service's determination disposes of one or more of 
those issues.
    The Postal Reorganization Act requires that the Commission issue 
its decision within 120 days from the date this appeal was filed (39 
U.S.C. Sec. 404 (b)(5)). In the interest of expedition, in light of the 
120-day decision schedule, the Commission may request the Postal 
Service to submit memoranda of law on any appropriate issue. If 
requested, such memoranda will be due 20 days from the issuance of the 
request and the Postal Service shall serve a copy of its memoranda on 
the petitioners. The [[Page 14471]] Postal Service may incorporate by 
reference in its briefs or motions, any arguments presented in 
memoranda it previously filed in this docket. If necessary, the 
Commission also may ask petitioners or the Postal Service for more 
information.

The Commission Orders

    (a) The Postal Service shall file the record in this appeal by 
March 20, 1995.
    (b) The Secretary of the Postal Rate Commission shall publish this 
Notice and Order and Procedural Schedule in the Federal Register.

    By the Commission.
Margaret P. Crenshaw,
Secretary.

Appendix

March 3, 1995--Filing of Appeal letter
March 13, 1995--Commission Notice and Order of Filing of Appeal
March 28, 1995--Last day of filing of petitions to intervene [see 39 
CFR 3001.111(b)]
April 7, 1995--Petitioners' Participant Statements or Initial Brief 
[see 39 CFR 3001.115 (a) and (b)]
April 27, 1995--Postal Service's Answering Brief [see 39 CFR 
3001.115(c)]
May 12, 1995--Petitioners' Reply Brief should Petitioners choose to 
file one [see 39 CFR 3001.115(d)]
May 19, 1995--Deadline for motions by any party requesting oral 
argument. The Commission will schedule oral argument only when it is a 
necessary addition to the written filings [see 39 CFR 3001.116]
July 1, 1995--Expiration of the Commission's 120-day decisional 
schedule [see 39 U.S.C. 404(b)(5)]

[FR Doc. 95-6580 Filed 3-16-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-FW-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<RESTATED>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                         166,994
<SECURITIES>                                    64,504
<RECEIVABLES>                                4,132,217
<ALLOWANCES>                                   189,862
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             6,176,929
<PP&E>                                      14,079,620
<DEPRECIATION>                               5,165,032
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              19,848,119
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        6,972,901
<BONDS>                                      5,494,549
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        15,221
<OTHER-SE>                                   7,365,448
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                19,848,119
<SALES>                                     25,303,069
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            25,303,069
<CGS>                                       21,007,387
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               21,007,387
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             (721,286)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             923,879
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                831,507
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            831,507
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   831,507
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .11
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .11
        


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the Quarterly Report of SAFER RESIDENCE CORPORATION (the Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended June 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange  Commission  on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I, Jean Blanchard, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,  certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



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



Date: August 22 , 2005

/s/ Jean Blanchard

Jean Blanchard

Principal Executive Officer
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 63 (Monday, April 3, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16872-16873]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-8094]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. EL95-36-000]


Jersey Central Power & Light Company; Notice of Filing

March 28, 1995.
    Take notice that on March 23, 1995, Jersey Central Power & Light 
Company (Jersey Central), filed a Petition for Declaratory Order 
requesting that the Commission declare invalid the New Jersey PURPA 
procedure pursuant to which Jersey Central contracted to purchase 
capacity and energy from the Freehold Cogeneration Associates, L.P. 
(Freehold) project and, further, declare that the contract is unlawful 
and void. The project is proposed as a 100 MW gas-fired cogeneration 
facility to be located in Freehold Township, New Jersey. The Nestle 
Beverage Company would be the steam host.
    Copies of the Petition have been served on Freehold, on C.E. 
Freehold I, Inc., a general partner, on the New Jersey Board of Public 
Utilities, and on [[Page 16873]] the New Jersey Division of Ratepayer 
Advocate.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to protest said filing should 
file a motion to intervene or protest with the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission, 825 North Capitol Street, NE., Washington, DC 
20426, in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules 
of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 and 18 CFR 385.214). All such 
motions or protests should be filed on or before April 21, 1995. 
Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the 
appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make protestants 
parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must 
file a motion to intervene. Copies of this filing are on file with the 
Commission and are available for public inspection.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-8094 Filed 3-31-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M