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

May 7, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number USTR-2018-0025-2918

National Presto 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,

Joseph Barloon

General Counsel
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-2018-0025-2983

Protect Plus, LLC: 

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
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1


               CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT AUDITORS


        We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements (Form S-8 Nos. 33-94026, 33-51234, 33- 75028, 33-77684, 33-57628,
33-80581 and 33-80583) pertaining to the Apria Healthcare Group Inc./Homedco
Group, Inc.'s Stock Incentive Plan, Apria Healthcare Group Inc. Amended and
Restated 1992 Stock Option Plan, 1992 Stock Incentive Plan, 1994 Employee Stock
Purchase Plan, 1991 Nonqualified Stock Option Plan and 1991 Management Stock
Purchase Plan of our report dated March 11, 1998, except for Notes 5, 12 and 14,
as to which the dates are April 2, 1998, April 9, 1998 and April 3, 1998,
respectively, with respect to the consolidated financial statements and schedule
of Apria Healthcare Group Inc. included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the
year ended December 31, 1997.


                                                     ERNST & YOUNG LLP

Orange County, California
April 30, 1998
<PAGE>

                               AMENDMENT TO LEASE


     The Lease dated as of March 16, 1995 between Ragco, a general partnership,
as Landlord and Troy Systems International, Inc., a Delaware corporation,
successor to Pierce Companies, Inc., as Tenant is hereby amended as follows:

     Section 1.05  Lease Term of three (3) years beginning on May 1, 2001 and
                   ending April 30, 2004.

     Section 1.12  Base Rental shall be forty-five cents ($.45) per square foot
                   per month.



AGREED AND ACCEPTED:

Tenant: Troy Systems International, Inc.,    Landlord: Ragco,
        a Delaware Corporation                         a General Partnership

        /s/ Brian P. Dirk                              /s/ John Garrison
        -------------------------                      -------------------------
By:     Brian P. Dirk                        By:       John Garrison

Its:    Vice-President                       Its:      General Partner

Date:   August 24, 2000                      Date:     September 8, 2000
#### STATE v. GEORGE DALTON.

(Filed 24 April, 1929.)

Criminal Law G c — Right to impeach credibility of defendant’s testimony.

TVbere a defendant in a criminal action testifies in his own behalf the credibility of his testimony is subject to impeachment, and it is competent for the State to ask him on cross-examination whether there was then a warrant out for him from the Federal Court, when relating only to his credibility as a witness.

Appeal by defendant from *Shaw, J.,*and a jury, at Fall Term, 1928, of Stoices.

No error.

The bill of indictment charged the defendant with (1) the manufacture of intoxicating liquors; (2) having intoxicating liquors in his possession; (3) having intoxicating liquors in his possession for the purpose of sale. The jury rendered a verdict of guilty “in manner and form as charged in the bill of indictment.”

*Attorney-General Brummitt and, Assistant Attorney-General Nash for the State.*

*W. Reade Johnson for defendant.*

ClaeksoN, J.

The defendant, George Dalton, was a witness in his own behalf. On cross-examination the following question was asked him: “Q. There is a warrant out for you now from the Federal Court against you?” The defendant objected; the objection was overruled and the defendant excepted and assigned error. The defendant answered “Yes, I guess there is.” This is the sole assignment of error in the record.

This matter was thoroughly discussed in *S. v. Maslin,*195 N. C., at p. 540. In that case, on cross-examination, for the purpose of impeachment, the defendant was asked whether he was then under indictment for abstracting and embezzling funds belonging to the Merchants Bank and Trust Company, for the embezzlement of trust funds deposited in the same bank by the Snipes estate, and for receiving into the bank cer*126tain moneys for deposit when he knew the bank was insolyent. His objection to each question was overruled and to each, reserving his exceptions, he gave an affirmative answer. In that ease it was held that the questions were competent.

In the case of *S. v. Wiggins,*171 N. C., 813, the question asked, “If he had not been accused of stealing a certain person’s hogs,” was properly excluded. Note the question was not whether he had been convicted.

A warrant is issued from a court and has to be sworn to. *We*think the evidence competent. *S. v. Jeffreys,*192 N. C., 318.

No error.
MOTOR MODEL: RS360/RS365

VIEW 1 VIEW 2 VIEW 3
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-2018-0025-4824

Enerpac:

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

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

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

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

https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/301Investigations/12.21.18_Notice_of_Product_E

xclusions.pdf.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Protection will issue additional instructions on entry guidance and implementation.

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Vaughn

General Counsel
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 54 (Tuesday, March 21, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 14943]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-6829]



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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Office of the Secretary


Correction of Notice of Findings of Scientific Misconduct

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, HHS.

ACTION: Correction.

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

SUMMARY: A Notice beginning on page 9032 in the issue of February 16, 
1995, entitled ``Findings of Scientific Misconduct'' is hereby 
reprinted in its entirety to correct the name of the university's 
organizational unit referenced in the original printing:
    Aaron Apte, Stanford University: The Division of Research 
Investigations of the Office of Research Integrity (ORI) reviewed an 
investigation conducted by Stanford University into possible scientific 
misconduct on the part of Mr. Aaron Apte, a former technician in the 
Division of Cardiovascular Medicine. Mr. Apte and his research were 
supported by U.S. Public Health Service grants. ORI concluded that Mr. 
Apte fabricated data for research by cutting from a former coworker's 
notebook a scintillation counter printout, pasting it into his own 
notebook, and representing it as his own results from a different 
experiment on the binding of angiotensin to transfected cells. Mr. Apte 
has been debarred from eligibility for and involvement in grants as 
well as other assistance awards and contracts from the Federal 
Government for a period of three years. The fabricated research did not 
appear in any publications.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT: Director, Division of Research 
Investigations, Office of Research Integrity, 301-443-5330.
Lyle W. Bivens,
Director, Office of Research Integrity.
[FR Doc. 95-6829 Filed 3-20-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-17-P
**Exhibit32.2**

 

**STATEMENTOF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

**PURSUANTTO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350**

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report onForm 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2004 (the “Form 10-Q”) ofCardinal Financial Corporation, I, Carl E. Dodson, Executive Vice President andChief Financial Officer, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, asadopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that,to my knowledge:

 

(a)                                  the Form 10-Q fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities ExchangeAct of 1934, as amended; and

 

(b)                                 the information contained in the Form10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the consolidated financialcondition and results of operations of the Company and its subsidiaries as of,and for, the periods presented in the Form 10-Q.

 

 
| Date: November 22, 2004 | /s/ Carl E. Dodson                                    |   |
|------------------------------|-------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|                         | Carl E. Dodson                                        |
|                         | Executive Vice President and Chief  Operating Officer |

 

----
<partyblock><br><br><div align="center"><b><font size="+1">Vitality Chiropractic, P.C., as Assignee of Lynette Grainger, Appellant, <br><br>against<br><br>Countrywide Insurance, Respondent.</font></b></div><br><br><p>Korsunskiy Legal Group, P.C. (Henry Guindi of counsel), for appellant.Jaffe &amp; Koumourdas, LLP (Jean H. Kang of counsel), for respondent.</p><p>Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Queens County (Maureen A. Healy, J.), entered May 22, 2015. The order granted defendant's posttrial motion to toll the accrual of no-fault statutory prejudgment interest based upon plaintiff's delay in the prosecution of the action and held that interest shall accrue from December 18, 2014.</p><p>ORDERED that the order is modified by providing that no-fault statutory prejudgment interest shall accrue from January 23, 2014; as so modified, the order is affirmed, without costs. </p><p>For the reasons stated in <i>Vitality Chiropractic, P.C., as Assignee of Angel Velazquez v Countrywide Ins. </i>(___ Misc 3d ___, 2018 NY Slip Op _____ [appeal No. 2015-2906 Q C], decided herewith), the order is modified by providing that no-fault statutory prejudgment interest shall accrue from January 23, 2014.</p><p>PESCE, P.J., ALIOTTA and ELLIOT, JJ., concur.</p><br>ENTER:<br>Paul Kenny<br>Chief Clerk<br>Decision Date: June 01, 2018<br><br><div align="center"><form method="LINK" action="../../slipidx/at_2_idxtable.shtml"><input type="submit" value="Return to Decision List"></form></div></partyblock>
Exhibit 31.3

CERTIFICATION

I, Sidney Hinton,
certify that:



|1. | I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K/A, Amendment No. 1 of PowerSecure International, Inc.; and
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|2. | Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such
statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report.
|-- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                    |  |  |  |  |  |                                      
|------------------- |  |  |  |  |  | -------------------------------------
|Date: April 7, 2016 |  |  |  |  |  | /s/ SIDNEY HINTON                    
|                    |  |  |  |  |  | Sidney Hinton                        
|                    |  |  |  |  |  | President and Chief Executive Officer
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 54 (Tuesday, March 21, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 15000]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-6921]



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

DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
Office of Thrift Supervision
[AC-19; OTS No. 12609]


American Savings Association, Portsmouth, Ohio; Approval of 
Conversion Application

    Notice is hereby given that on March 15, 1995, the Deputy Assistant 
Director, Corporate Activities, Office of Thrift Supervision, or her 
designee, acting pursuant to delegated authority, approved the 
application of American Savings Association, Portsmouth, Ohio, to 
convert to the stock form of organization. Copies of the application 
are available for inspection at the Information Services Division, 
Office of Thrift Supervision, 1700 G Street, NW., Washington, DC 20552, 
and the Central Regional Office, Office of Thrift Supervision, 111 East 
Wacker Drive, Suite 800, Chicago, Illinois 60601-4360.

    Dated: March 16, 1995.

    By the Office of Thrift Supervision.
Nadine Y. Washington,
Corporate Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-6921 Filed 3-20-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6720-01-M
#### Crump *et al. v.*Farmer.

No. 3034.

December 22, 1922.

Claim. Before Judge Fortson. Banks superior court. December 12, 1921.

*John L.*Perkins, for plaintiffs in error.

*W. H. Kimzey*and *J. J. & Sam.*Kimzey, contra.

Eish, O. J.

This was a statutory claim case wherein a verdict was directed, finding the property subject. Claimant moved ■ for a new trial, solely upon the usual general grounds that the verdict was contrary to law and the evidence and without evidence to support it. A new trial was refused, and the only error assigned is upon such refusal. What purports to be a brief of evidence in the case covers about ten typewritten pages consisting of questions to witnesses, the answers thereto, objections fully set forth to specified evidence in numerous instances, various rulings of the court in respect to the admissibility of evidence, and colloquies between the counsel and the court, and between counsel. There were more than thirty pages of documents preceding what is termed a brief of evidence, and which are referred to therein; which documents consist of several executions, two divorce suits, one or more claim cases, and a suit in equity, etc.; all of which are set forth in detail, and some of which at least may be relevant to the issue on the trial of the present case. *Held,*that as the sole assignment of error necessarily requires a consideration of the brief of evidence, and as no brief thereof, such as is required by law, was prepared and filed in the case, this court will not pass upon such assignment of error. It follows that the judgment of the trial

court is affirmed. *Carlisle*v. *Ray,*133 *Ga.*223 (65 S. E. 408); *American National Insurance Co.*v. *Lee,*145 *Ga.*797 (89 S. E. 836); *Roberts*v. *Rowell,*152 *Ga.*97 (108 S. E. 466); *Jones*v. *Hubbell,*152 *Ga.*496 (110 S. E. 237).

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur.*
<PAGE>

DEARBORN BANCORP, INC.
FORM 10-K (continued)

                                                                    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

      This certification is provided pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, and accompanies the annual
report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2004 (the "Form 10-K") of
Dearborn Bancorp, Inc. (the "Issuer").

      I, Michael J. Ross, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Issuer,
certify that:

      (i)   The Form 10-K fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
            or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C.
            78m(a) or 78o(d)); and

      (ii)  The information contained in the Form 10-K fairly presents, in all
            material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
            of the Issuer.

Dated: March 25, 2005

                                                 /s/ Michael J. Ross
                                          --------------------------------------
                                                   Michael J. Ross
                                          President and Chief Executive Officer,
                                                Dearborn Bancorp, Inc.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 63 (Monday, April 3, 1995)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 16806]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-7748]



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



ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
40 CFR Part 52

[MO-9-1 6878; FRL-5180-7]


Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; State of 
Missouri

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Final rule; correction.

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

SUMMARY: This document corrects the submission date for material 
submitted by the State of Missouri in the final rule published on 
August 24, 1994 which approved revisions to the Missouri State 
Implementation Plan. Missouri submitted administrative amendments to 
rule 10 CSR 10-6.030 which renumber and reorganize sections within that 
rule.

EFFECTIVE DATE: April 3, 1995.

ADDRESSES: Copies of the documents relative to this action are 
available for public inspection during normal business hours at the: 
Environmental Protection Agency, Air Branch, 726 Minnesota Avenue, 
Kansas City, Kansas 66101.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Josh Tapp at (913) 551-7606.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: In FR Doc. 94-20737 in the Federal Register 
of August 24, 1994 (59 FR 43480), the submission date in 
Sec. 52.1320(c)(79) of ``September 20, 1991,'' should have been 
``November 20, 1991.''

List of Subjects in 40 CFR Part 52

    Environmental protection, Air pollution control, Hydrocarbons, 
Incorporation by reference, Intergovernmental relations, Ozone, 
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Volatile organic compounds.

    Dated: March 3, 1995.
William Rice,
Acting Regional Administrator.

Correction of Publication

    Accordingly, the regulations published at 59 FR 43480 on August 24, 
1994, are corrected as follows:


Sec. 52.1320  [Corrected]

    On page 43481, in the second column, in Sec. 52.1320, in paragraph 
(c)(79) introductory text, in the last line, the date ``September 20'' 
is corrected to read ``November 20''.

[FR Doc. 95-7748 Filed 3-31-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P