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

January 23, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-3150

Viavi Solutions 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

General Counsel
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.1

                               JARDEN CORPORATION
                       SUBSIDIARIES OF JARDEN CORPORATION


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                                                 State of
     Company                           Shareholder                                       Incorporation/Organization
     -------                           -----------                                       --------------------------
<S>                                    <C>                                                   <C>
     Alltrista Limited                 Jarden Corporation                                          Canada

     Alltrista Newco Corporation       Jarden Corporation                                          Indiana

     Alltrista Plastics Corporation*   Quoin, LLC                                                  Indiana

     Alltrista Zinc Products, L.P.**   Quoin, LLC (LP 99%)                                         Indiana
                                       Alltrista Newco Corporation (GP 1%)

     Bernardin, Limited                Alltrista Limited                                           Canada

     Desarrollo Industrial Fitec       Lehigh Consumer Products Corporation (99.99%)               Mexico
                                       Jarden Corporation (0.01%)

     Hearthmark, LLC ***               Quoin, LLC                                                 Delaware

     Lehigh Consumer Products
         Corporation                   Jarden Corporation                                       Pennsylvania

     Quoin, LLC                        Jarden Corporation                                         Delaware

     Tilia Direct, Inc.                Jarden Corporation                                         Delaware

     Tilia International, Inc.         Jarden Corporation                                         Delaware

     Tilia, Inc.                       Jarden Corporation                                         Delaware

     Unimark Plastics Limited          Alltrista Plastics Corporation                          United Kingdom
</TABLE>

*      (DBA) Unimark Plastics Company and Alltrista Industrial Plastics Company
**     (DBA) Alltrista Zinc Products Company
***    (DBA) Alltrista Consumer Products Company
##### 



Exhibit 32.1 Certification of CEO and
CFO 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 American Lawyer Media, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2004 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), William
L. Pollak, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Eric F. Lundberg, as
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
to the best of his knowledge, that: (1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and (2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the
Company. /s/ WILLIAM L. POLLAK  
 /s/ ERIC F. LUNDBERG  
 This certification accompanies the Report pursuant to § 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of §18
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 52 (Friday, March 17, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 14478]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-6644]



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


SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

Providence Advisory Council; Public Meeting

    The U.S. Small Business Administration Providence District Advisory 
Council will hold a public meeting on Friday, March 24, 1995 at 8:00 
a.m. at the Providence Marriott, Charles at Orms Streets, Providence, 
Rhode Island 02904 to discuss matters as may be presented by members, 
staff of the U.S. Small Business Administration, or others present.
    For further information, write or call Mr. Joseph P. Loddo, 
District Director, U.S. Small Business Administration, 380 Westminster 
Street, Providence, Rhode Island 02903, (401) 528-4580.

    Dated: March 10, 1995.
Dorothy A. Overal,
Director, Office of Advisory Council.
[FR Doc. 95-6644 Filed 3-16-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-M
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

February 19, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-2452

Curtis Instruments, 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

General Counsel
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-7577

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus LORI D. BLAKELY, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Joseph F. Anderson, Jr., District Judge. (CR-97-678, CA-98-1893-3-17) Submitted: December 17, 1998 Decided: March 2, 1999 Before WILKINS, NIEMEYER, and TRAXLER, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Lori D. Blakely, Appellant Pro Se. John Michael Barton, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: Lori D. Blakely seeks to appeal the district court’s order denying relief on her petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998) and order denying a certificate of appealability on appeal. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s opinions and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning of the district court. See United States v. Blakely , Nos. CR-97-678; CA-98-1893-3-17 (D.S.C. Sept. 9 and 23, 1998). We deny Blakely’s motion expedite as moot. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 17

- 40192 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.

JUAN LUIS MENDEZ

- VALTIERRA ,
Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:16

- CR

- 1481

- 1

Before KING, OWEN, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Juan Luis Mendez

Valtierra 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). Mendez

- Valtierra h a s not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no

* 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 October 24, 2017

Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 17-40192 Document: 00514207729 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/24/2017No. 17

- 40192

2 nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leav e to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR

. R. 42.2. Case: 17-40192 Document: 00514207729 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/24/2017
Exhibit 3.4





AMENDMENT NO. 2


TO THE AMENDED AND RESTATED


BYLAWS OF BLACKROCK, INC.


A Delaware Corporation





In accordance with Section 8.1 of the Amended and Restated Bylaws (the Bylaws) of BlackRock, Inc. (the
Corporation), the following amendments to the Bylaws were unanimously approved by the Corporations Board of Directors at its regular meeting on July 11, 2002:





1.Amendment to Section 3.10(i). Deleting such section in its entirety and replacing it with the following hereby amend section 3.10(i) of the Bylaws:





(i)  any other matter materially affecting the economic interests of a Controlling Stockholder unless such
Controlling Stockholder or an Affiliated Company (as defined in Article TENTH of the Corporations Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation) thereof is a party to agreements pertaining to such matter and directors designated by such
Controlling Stockholder pursuant to the Stockholders Agreement shall have abstained from voting thereon as directors of the Corporation.








Effective as of July 11, 2002
#### Ronald BARNES, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. 54496.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Five.

Sept. 6, 1988.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied Oct. 19, 1988.

Application to Transfer Denied Dec. 13, 1988.

Michael David Burton, St. Louis, for appellant.

William L. Webster, Atty. Gen., William J. Swift, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Movant appeals the denial of his Rule 27.26 motion without an evidentiary hearing. We affirm the motion court’s order as movant has failed to show that the findings, conclusions and judgment were clearly erroneous. Riile 27.26(j). Because it would serve no precedential purpose, we affirm the order without written opinion under Rule 84.16(b).
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A23A0094. FLOYD HARRELL et al. v. BANK OF AMERICA, N. A.

In 2015, after Bank of America, N. A. filed a complaint for declaratory

judgment and petition to remove cloud from title, the trial court entered a final

judgment against Floyd and Diane Harrell and in favor of Bank of America. Several

years later in 2022, the Harrells, appearing pro se, filed a “Motion to Set Aside

Judgment for Fraud and Temporary Restraining Order on Foreclosure Until

Discovery,” which the trial court denied. The Harrells filed a notice of appeal from

the trial court’s order. However, we lack jurisdiction.

Although the Harrells’s motion did not explicitly cite OCGA § 9-11-60 (d),

they sought to set aside the judgment on the basis of fraud, which is one of the

grounds set forth in OCGA § 9-11-60 (d) (2). As a general rule, an appeal from an

order denying a motion to set aside brought under OCGA § 9-11-60 (d) must be

initiated by filing an application for discretionary review. See OCGA § 5-6-35 (a) (8);

Parker v. Robinson, 337 Ga. App. 362, 364 (2) (787 SE2d 317) (2016). “Compliance

with the discretionary appeals procedure is jurisdictional.” Smoak v. Dept. of Human

Resources, 221 Ga. App. 257, 257 (471 SE2d 60) (1996). Because the Harrellsfailed

to follow the requisite discretionary application procedure, we lack jurisdiction to

August 25, 2022
consider this direct appeal, which is hereby DISMISSED. 

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

08/25/2022
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos.
333-11067, 333-15907, 333-17021, Amendment No. 1 to 333-23035, 333-37247,
333-37383, 333-41603, 333-58045, 333-68505, 333-76379, 333-76757, 333-82134,
333-82569, 333-84419, 333-88813, 333-88819, Amendment No. 1 to 333-91621,
333-115693, 333-115694, Amendment No. 1 to 333-120373, 333-139349, and
333-145649 on Form S-3 and Registration Statement Nos. 333-07241, 333-11237,
333-28449, 333-74461, 333-79737, 333-105882, 333-125605, 333-135118, and
333-144214 on Form S-8 of our reports dated February 26, 2009, relating to the
consolidated financial statements (which report expressed an unqualified opinion
on those consolidated financial statements and included explanatory paragraphs
regarding General Growth Properties, Inc.'s ability to continue as a going
concern and General Growth Properties, Inc.'s adoption of Financial Accounting
Standards Board Interpretation No. 48, Accounting for Uncertainty in Income
Taxes) and consolidated financial statement schedule of General Growth
Properties, Inc. and subsidiaries, and the effectiveness of General Growth
Properties, Inc. and subsidiaries' internal control over financial reporting,
appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of General Growth Properties, Inc.
for the year ended December 31, 2008.

/s/ Deloitte & Touche LLP

Chicago, Illinois
February 26, 2009
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

February 19, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-3949

Cummins Allison Corp:

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
EXHIBIT 32.1
                                                                    ------------


    CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


     I, Jerome Mahoney, hereby certify, pursuant to and solely for the purpose
of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

     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.



Date:      August 12, 2008             By: /s/ Jerome Mahoney
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           Jerome Mahoney
                                           President, Chief Executive Officer
                                           and Chief Financial Officer
##### 



Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION FURNISHED 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 Tufco Technologies, Inc. (the
Company) on Form 10-K for the period ended September 30, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the
undersigned Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of the Company hereby
certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | 3. |  | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and                               
| | -- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
| | 4. |  | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
the Company.

|                        |  |                                          
|----------------------- |  | -----------------------------------------
|Date: December 29, 2003 |  | /s/ Michael B. Wheeler                   
|                        |  | Michael B. Wheeler                       
|                        |  | VicePresident and Chief Financial Officer
_______________________________________ __ 

### Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan



## October 27, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice


## 136519 Michael F. Cavanag h Elizabeth A. Weave r Marilyn Kell y Maura D. Corriga n 

## PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, J ustices



## v SC: 136519 COA: 283273 Oakland CC: 2002-182491-FC KENNETH MICHAEL SPARKS, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _________________________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal the April 2, 2008 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, a nd it is DENIED, because the defendant has failed to meet the burden of establishi ng entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).

s1020 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

October 27, 2008

Clerk
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 57 (Friday, March 24, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 15533]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-7165]



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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Forest Service


Wildcat River Advisory Commission; Meeting

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Wildcat River Advisory Commission will meet at the Jackson 
Town Hall in Jackson, New Hampshire, on May 3, 1995. The purpose of the 
meeting is to continue with the development of a Draft River Management 
Plan for administration of the designated Wild and Scenic Wildcat 
River. The Wild and Scenic Rivers Act requires the establishment of an 
advisory commission to advise the Secretary of Agriculture on 
administration of the river. The public is encouraged to attend the 
meeting and may provide written comment on the plan to the 
commissioners c/o the district office.

DATES: The meeting will be held May 3, 1995, at 7:30 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Jackson Town Hall, Route 
16B, Jackson, New Hampshire.
    Send written comments to David Pratt III, Saco Ranger District, 
White Mountain National Forest, 33 Kancamagus Highway, Conway, NH 
03818.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
David Pratt III, Saco Ranger District, (603) 447-5482.

    Dated: March 16, 1995.
Charles J. Myers,
Acting Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 95-7165 Filed 3-23-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M