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

March 15, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-6036

Para Systems, 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
English summary of an agreement



 Exhibit 4.15 

English Summary of Agreement Regarding the State-owned Land Use Rights 

 

			
	Parties	  	Shanghai Zhangjiang Semiconductor Industry Park Co., Ltd. (“Shanghai Zhangjiang”)
		
		  	Spreadtrum Communications (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. (“Spreadtrum Shanghai”)
		
	Date:	  	December 1, 2009

 Major terms: 

 

	 	•	 	 Shanghai Zhangjiang and Spreadtrum Shanghai agree that Shanghai Zhangjiang returns to Spreadtrum Shanghai the payment made by Spreadtrum Shanghai in
connection with the transfer of the land use rights of a piece of land the area of which is approximately 23,225.7 square meters (adjacent to our corporate headquarters in Shanghai, China, the “Land”) pursuant to certain contract
for the Transfer of State-owned Land Use Rights dated January 31, 2007 (the “Contract”). The joint venture established by Spreadtrum Shanghai, Shanghai Zhangjiang and the other two investors for the purpose of developing the
Land (the “Joint Venture”) shall assume all the rights and obligations of Spreadtrum Shanghai under the Contract and the terms and conditions of the Contract shall remain the same. 



 

	 	•	 	 Within seven days after the execution of this agreement, Spreadtrum Shanghai and Shanghai Zhangjiang shall take any actions necessary or advisable to
complete or effect the transfer of the land use rights, if applicable (the “Transfer”). Shanghai Zhangjiang shall at the same time refund RMB46,451,400 (approximately $6,805,168.5) that was already paid by Spreadtrum Shanghai for
obtaining the land use rights of the Land and issue the relevant invoice to Spreadtrum Shanghai. 


  

	 	•	 	 Effective upon the Transfer, Shanghai Zhangjiang shall enter into a new contract for the Transfer of State-owned Land Use Rights with the Joint Venture
and proceed with the land use rights transfer (the “New Contract”). 


  

	 	•	 	 This agreement shall be signed and effective simultaneously with the execution of the New Contract by and between Shanghai Zhangjiang and the Joint
Venture.
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5170 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 5170

 To amend title 40, United States Code, to prohibit the Commission of 
 Fine Arts from exercising authority over non-Federal property in the 
             District of Columbia, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             August 8, 2023

  Ms. Norton introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
               Committee on Oversight and Accountability

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title 40, United States Code, to prohibit the Commission of 
 Fine Arts from exercising authority over non-Federal property in the 
             District of Columbia, 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 ``Commission of Fine Arts District of 
Columbia Home Rule Act''.

SEC. 2. PROHIBITING COMMISSION OF FINE ARTS FROM EXERCISING AUTHORITY 
              OVER NON-FEDERAL PROPERTY IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA.

    (a) Limiting Authority Over Location of Statues, Fountains, and 
Monuments.--Section 9102(a)(1) of title 40, United States Code, is 
amended by striking ``District of Columbia'' and inserting ``District 
of Columbia which are owned by the Federal Government''.
    (b) Clarification of Limitations on Authority.--Section 9102(c) of 
such title is amended to read as follows:
    ``(c) Nonapplication.--The authority of the Commission under this 
section does not apply to any of the following:
            ``(1) The United States Capitol.
            ``(2) Any building of the Library of Congress.
            ``(3) Any building, property, or project which is owned by 
        the District of Columbia.
            ``(4) Any private building, property, or project.''.
                                 <all>
```
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

960 CA 13-00296 PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., PERADOTTO, CARNI, AND LINDLEY, JJ.

NEWBURY PLACE REO II, LLC, PLAINTIFF,

V ORDER
ALI A. ZAHRAN, ALSO KNOWN AS ALI ZAHRAN, DEFENDANT.

------------------------------------------------ ALI A. ZAHRAN, THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT,

V
MICHAEL VISCOME AND LISA M. VISCOME, THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS, ET AL., THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANTS.

DEMARIE & SCHOENBORN, P.C., BUFFALO (JOSEPH DEMARIE OF COUNSEL), FOR THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANTS-APPELLANTS.
MYERS, QUINN & SCHWARTZ, LLP, WILLIAMSVILLE (JAMES I. MYERS OF COUNSEL), FOR THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFF-RESPONDENT.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Erie County (Timothy J. Walker, A.J.), entered September 5, 2012. The order denied the motion of third-party defendants Michael Viscome and Lisa M. Viscome for summary judgment dismissing the third-party complaint against them. It is hereby ORDERED that the order so appealed from is unanimously affirmed without costs for reasons stated at Supreme Court.

Entered: September 27, 2013 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
```
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 65 (Wednesday, April 5, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 17317]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-8253]

[[Page 17317]]

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE

[I.D. 032195A]

Marine Mammals

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Modification no. 2 to scientific research permit no. 789 
(P135C).

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that a request for modification of 
scientific research permit no. 789 submitted by Dr. James H.W. Hain, 
NMFS, NOAA, Northeast Fisheries Science Center, 166 Water Street, Woods 
Hole, MA, 02543-1026, has been granted.

ADDRESSES: The modified permit is available for review by interested 
persons in the following offices by appointment:
    Permits Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, 1315 East-
West Highway, Room 13130, Silver Spring, MD 20910 (301/713-2289);
    Director, Northeast Region, NMFS, One Blackburn Drive, Gloucester, 
MA 01930-2298, (508/281-9150); and
    Director, Southeast Region, NMFS, 9721 Executive Center Drive, N., 
St. Petersburg, FL 33702-2432 (813/893-3141).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On January 20, 1995, notice was published in 
the Federal Register (60 FR 4148) that a modification of permit no. 
789, issued August 24, 1992 (57 FR 39672), and modified January 14, 
1993 (58 FR 6116), had been requested by the above-named individual. 
The requested modification has been granted under the authority of the 
Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended (16 U.S.C. 1361 et 
seq.), the provisions of Sec. 216.33(d) and (e) of the Regulations 
Governing the Taking and Importing of Marine Mammals (50 CFR part 216), 
the Endangered Species Act of 1973 (ESA), as amended (16 U.S.C. 1531 et 
seq.), and the provisions of Sec. 222.25 of the Regulations Governing 
the Taking, Importing, and Exporting of Endangered Species (50 CFR part 
222).
    The modification authorized the holder to take 5 blue whales 
(Balaenoptera musculus), 25 sei whales (Balaenoptera borealis), 25 
killer whales (Orcinus orca), 25 Mesoplodont beaked whales (Mesoplodon 
spp.), 500 saddleback dolphins (Delphinus delphis), 250 Atlantic white-
sided dolphins (Lagenorhynchus albirostris), 100 Risso's dolphins 
(Grampus griseus), 250 harbor porpoise (Phocoena phocoena), 1,000 
harbor seals (Phoca vitulina), and 500 gray seals (Halichoerus grypus) 
annually for photo-identification and observational purposes.
    Issuance of this modification, as required by the ESA, was based on 
a finding that such permit: (1) Was applied for in good faith; (2) will 
not operate to the disadvantage of the endangered species which is the 
subject of this permit; and (3) is consistent with the purposes and 
policies set forth in section 2 of the ESA.

    Dated: March 30, 1995.
Ann D. Terbush,
Chief, Permits & Documentation Division, National Marine Fisheries 
Service.
[FR Doc. 95-8253 Filed 4-4-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F
```
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

May 29, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-5364

Radio Systems Corp:

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

_5-30-2019.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
exv10w29









Exhibit 10.29




Amendment

To

Employment Agreement




WHEREAS, an Employment Agreement effective as of the 12th day of August, 2009 as amended
effective April 1, 2011 (the “Agreement”) was entered into by and between Arcadia Resources, Inc.,
a Nevada corporation (“Employer”) and Matthew R. Middendorf (“Executive”); and



WHEREAS, the Agreement may be amended or modified by written agreement executed by the parties
or their respective successors and legal representatives; and



WHEREAS, the parties now believe it is mutually beneficial to amend a certian provision of the
Agreement through this Amendment (“Amendment”) to reflect an extension of a temporary reduction in
the Executive’s annual base salary.



NOW THEREFORE, Employer and Executive hereby agree, effective as of April 1, 2011, to amend
the Agreement as follows:



1. Subsection (a) of Section 3 (Compensation) of the Agreement is amended hereby to read in its
entirety as follows:




(a) Base Salary. During the Employment Period, the Executive shall receive an annual Base Salary of
$250,000 payable in accordance with the regular payroll practices of Employer. The Executive’s
base salary shall be reviewed annually by Employer, in accordance with Employer’s standard
practices for executives generally, and may be increased, but not decreased, as determined by the
Board of Directors, in their sole discretion, or by any committee of the Board of Directors to
which such authority has been delegated. The parties acknowledge that as an accommodation to the
Employer, Executive agreed effective April 1, 2009, and further agreed effective April 1, 2010 and
April 1, 2011, to temporarily receive a ten percent (10%) reduction in his Base Salary (the
“Reduced Base”). The amount of Executive’s Reduced Base salary is presently $225,000 annually and
shall remain in effect until the Base Salary is restored by the Board of Directors. All severance
payments due to Executive under this Agreement shall be calculated based on Executive’s Base
Salary, not Executive’s Reduced Base.



 


 









 








IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Executive has hereunto set the Executive’s hand and, pursuant to the
authorization of the Board of Directors, Employer has caused this Amendment to be executed in its
name and on its behalf, all as of the day and year first written above following the preamble.



	 	 	 	 	 

	ARCADIA RESOURCES, INC.	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	By:

	 	/s/ Marvin R. Richardson
 

Marvin R. Richardson
	 	 
	 

	 	Title: President and Chief Executive Officer	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	EXECUTIVE	 	 
	 
	 	 	 	 
	/s/ Matthew Middendorf	 	 
	 	 	 
	Matthew Middendorf
#### STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Carlton CARTER, Appellant. Carlton CARTER, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

Nos. 64564, 66188.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Five.

Feb. 28, 1995.

Raymond L. Legg, Office of the State Public Defender, Columbia, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Cheryl A. Caponegro, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before GRIMM, C.J., and CARL R. GAERTNER and REINHARD, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals from his conviction of two counts of offering to commit violence to a corrections officer, § 217.385 RSMo.1994, and from the denial without an evidentiary hearing of his Rule 29.15 motion. We affirm.

*213We have reviewed the record and find the claims of error are without merit. An opinion would have no precedential value nor serve any jurisdictional purpose. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rules 30.25(b) and 84.16(b).
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-7089

BRIAN K. JONES,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

RONALD J. ANGELONE, Director, Virginia Department of Corrections,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Leonie M. Brinkema, District

Judge. (CA-96-1040-AM)

Submitted: January 15, 1998 Decided: January 28, 1998

Before MURNAGHAN and LUTTIG, Circuit Judges, and BUTZNER, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Brian K. Jones, Appellant Pro Se. Hazel Elizabeth Shaffer, Assistant Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Appellant seeks to appeal the district court's order denying

relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 &

Supp. 1997). We have reviewed the record and the district court's

opinion and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal on the reasoning

of the district court. Jones v. Angelone, No. CA-96-1040-AM (E.D.

Va. July 23, 1997). 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
* 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

September 23, 2004

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 04-60472

Summary Calendar

 

DONALD E. SMITH,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

ANDREW GAMBRELL; REX K. JONES;

LINDSAY CARTER; DEWITT ALLRED,

Defendants-Appellees.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Mississippi

USDC No. 2:03-CV-612-R

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

Before EMILIO M. GARZA, DeMOSS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Donald E. Smith, Mississippi prisoner # 31733, appeals the

district court’s dismissal of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint as

untimely. This court reviews for abuse of discretion. Gartrell

v. Gaylor, 981 F.2d 254, 256 (5th Cir. 1993).

Smith’s claims against Andrew Gambrell and Rex Jones arise

from the proceedings leading to and surrounding his indictment,

conviction, and sentence. His allegations of ineffective

assistance and prosecutorial misconduct call into question the
No. 04-60472

-2-

validity of his conviction, and Smith therefore must satisfy the

conditions of Heck v. Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 484-87 (1994),

before he can proceed in a civil rights action. Therefore, the

dismissal of Smith’s claims against Gambrell and Jones is

AFFIRMED, but the judgment is AMENDED to state that the claims

are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE to their being asserted again until

the Heck conditions are met. Johnson v. McElveen, 101 F.3d 423,

424 (5th Cir. 1996). Smith has not challenged the district

court’s conclusion that his claims affecting his eligibility for

immediate release must be raised in habeas, and any such claim is

deemed abandoned. See Brinkmann v. Dallas County Deputy Sheriff

Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir. 1987).

Smith’s claims against Lindsay Carter and Dewitt Allred

arise out of postconviction proceedings in his case. Smith has

not established that the district court abused its discretion in

dismissing these claims as untimely. See Gartrell, 981 F.2d at

256; MISS. CODE ANN. § 15-1-49(1); Hemphill-Weathers v. Farrish,

779 So. 2d 167, 171 (Miss. Ct. App. 2001). The judgment of the

district court is therefore AFFIRMED.
<PAGE>   1


                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.1

SYNAGRO TECHNOLOGIES, INC.

The Company primarily conducts its business through its wholly-owned
subsidiaries as follows:

Synagro Midwest, Inc. (Delaware)
Synagro Southwest, Inc. (Delaware)
Synagro Southeast, Inc. (Delaware)
Synagro Northeast, Inc. (Delaware)
Synagro West, Inc. (Delaware)
Synagro Composting Company of California, Inc. (California) - f/k/a Recyc, Inc.
Synagro of California, Inc. (Arizona) - f/k/a Pima Gro Systems, Inc.
Synagro of Michigan, Inc. (Michigan) f/k/a - National Resource Recovery, Inc.
Synagro of Wisconsin, Inc. (Wisconsin) - f/k/a A&J Cartage, Inc.
Michigan Organic Resources, Inc. (Michigan)
Rehbein, Inc.
Synagro of Texas-CDR, Inc. (Texas) - f/k/a CDR Environmental, Inc.
Synagro of Texas-Vital-Cycle, Inc. (Wisconsin) - f/k/a Vital Cycle, Inc.
Synagro of North Carolina-EWR, Inc. (North Carolina) - f/k/a Environmental
  Waste Recycling, Inc.
Synagro of North Carolina-Amsco, Inc. (North Carolina)-f/k/a AMSCO, Inc.
Synagro of Florida-A&J, Inc. (Florida)-f/k/a A&J Cartage Southeast, Inc.
Synagro of Florida-Anti-Pollution, Inc. (Florida)-f/k/a Anti-Pollution
  Associates, Inc. and D&D Pumping, Inc.
Synagro of Florida - Davis Water, Inc. f/k/a Davis Water Analysis, Inc.
Synagro of Florida - Ecosystems, Inc. f/k/a Ecosystematics, Inc.
Synagro of Mid-Atlantic, Inc. (Delaware)
Residual Technologies, Limited Partnership (Delaware)
Fairhaven Residuals, Limited Partnership (Delaware)
NETCO-Waterbury, Limited Partnership (Delaware)
NETCO-Residuals Management, Limited Partnership (Delaware)
New Haven Residuals, Limited Partnership (Delaware)
New England Treatment Company, Inc. (Rhode Island)
Fairhaven Residual Systems, Inc. (Delaware)
NETCO-Connecticut, Inc. (Connecticut)
NETCO-Residuals Management Systems, Inc. (Delaware)
NETCO-Waterbury Systems, Inc. (Delaware)
New Haven Residuals Systems, Inc. (Delaware)
Residual Technologies Systems, Inc. (Delaware)
Providence Soils, Limited Liability Company (Rhode Island)
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


     In connection with the Quarterly Report of SpeechSwitch, Inc. (the
"COMPANY"), on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2007, as filed with
the Securities Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "REPORT"), the
undersigned, in the capacities and on the date indicated below, I, Bruce R.
Knef, 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.



                                        By: /s/ Bruce R. Knef
                                            -----------------------------
                                            Bruce R. Knef
                                            President
                                            Chief Executive Officer and
                                            Chief Financial Officer



                                            August 14, 2007