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 19, 2018

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-2477

Banner Engineering 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 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
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-2018-0025-3945

Academy, Ltd:

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
_________________________________________ 

 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

September 27, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 130995 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, GOCH PROPERTIES, L.L.C., Justices 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v SC: 130995 

 COA: 269014 
 Wayne CC: 04-438909-CZ

C. VAN BOXELL TRANSPORTATION, 

INC., 

Defendant-Appellee. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the March 24, 2006 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered and, pursuant to MCR 7.302(G)(1), in lieu of 

granting leave to appeal, we REMAND this case to the Wayne Circuit Court for 

reconsideration of plaintiff’s motion to set aside its acceptance of the case evaluation. 

The circuit court erred in holding that it did not have discretion to consider the motion. 

See State Farm Mutual Automobile Ins Co v Galen, 199 Mich App 274 (1993). Nothing 

in CAM Construction v Lake Edgewood Condo Ass’n, 465 Mich 549 (2002), which holds 

that a case is fully settled when both parties accept a case evaluation award, precludes a 

party from filing a motion to set aside a case evaluation award. 

We do not retain jurisdiction. 

d0920 

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. 

September 27, 2006 

 Clerk
#### James Dale ALLEN, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. WD 51933.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

June 18, 1996.

Emmett D. Queener, Asst. Public Defender, Columbia, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., David R. Truman, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before LOWENSTEIN, P.J., and HANNA and SPINDEN, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

James Dale Allen appeals from the denial of his Rule 24.035 motion for postconviction relief after an evidentiary hearing.

Affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Michael D. Queen, certify that:

1.

I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of Universal Capital Management, Inc.;

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;

3.

Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4.

The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15 (e) and 15d-15 (e)) for the registrant and have:

(a)

Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

(b)

Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

(c)

Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and

5.

The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a)

All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

(b)

Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.

Date:  August 13, 2009



/s/ Michael D. Queen

Michael D. Queen,

Principal Executive Officer
FedFirst Financial Corporation 10-Q








EXHIBIT 10.1








AMENDMENT TO THE EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN


ROBERT C. BARRY, JR.,


FIRST FEDERAL SAVINGS BANK AND FEDFIRST FINANCIAL CORPORATION








WHEREAS,Robert C. Barry, Jr. (the “Executive”) entered into an employment agreement with First Federal Savings Bank (the “Bank”) and FedFirst Financial Corporation (the “Company”) effective March 31, 2006 (the “Employment Agreement”); and





WHEREAS , the Board of Directors of the Bank has resolved to amend the Employment Agreement effective April 1, 2010, to reflect an adjustment in the Executive’s annual base salary; and





WHEREAS, the Employment Agreement was further amended to provide that modifications to Executive’s base salary in the future will not require an amendment to the Employment Agreement.





NOW, THEREFORE, the Bank, the Company and the Executive hereby consent to the following:





Effective April 1, 2010, Section 4(a) of the Employment Agreement shall be deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following new Section 4(a):





“The Bank agrees to pay the executive an annual salary of $167,500, payable in accordance with the customary payroll practices of the Bank.   The Executive’s annual salary, as the same may be modified from time to time, is referred to in this Agreement as the “base salary.””








ATTEST:


FIRST FEDERAL SAVINGS BANK/s/ DaCosta Smith III


/s/ John J. LaCarteDaCosta Smith III


John J. LaCarteATTEST:


FEDFIRST FINANCIAL CORPORATION/s/ DaCosta Smith III


/s/ John J. LaCarteDaCosta Smith III


John J. LaCarteATTEST:/s/ DaCosta Smith III


/s/ Robert C. Barry, Jr.DaCosta Smith III


Robert C. Barry, Jr.
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-2018-0025-3393

CW Bearing USA, 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/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
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-2018-0025-4005

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
#### ST. LOUIS COUNTY, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Carol JOHNSON and Carlyn Johnson, Defendants-Appellants.

Nos. 67800 to 67802.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Four.

March 26, 1996.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied April 30, 1996.

Application to Transfer Denied May 28, 1996.

Charles M. Shaw Law Firm, Michael K. Mullen, Clayton, for appellants.

John A. Ross, County Counselor, Jacqui De Laet Skoglund, Asst. County Counselor, St. Louis County, Clayton, for respondent.

Before PUDLOWSKI, P.J., and SIMON and HOFF, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

In this bench tried case, Carol and Carlyn Johnson were each found guilty of violating two St. Louis County municipal ordinances. Each was found guilty of violating St. Louis County, Mo., Code § 1003.165.4(1) (1974), for knowingly and illegally parking motor vehicles on unpaved portions of real property and St. Louis County, Mo., Code § 1003.167.15(2)(a) and (b) (1974), for knowingly failing to maintain their premises free of trash and litter. The court sentenced both Carol Johnson and Carlyn Johnson to each pay a fine of $35.00 for the parking violation and $500.00 for the litter violation, plus court costs. The court thereafter suspended execution of the $500.00 fine imposed for the litter violation, and placed the Johnsons on probation for a period of twenty-four (24) months. The Johnsons appeal the judgments entered on the litter violations.

The judgments are supported by substantial evidence and are not against the weight of the evidence. No error of law appears. An extended opinion would have no prece-dential or jurisprudential value.

Judgments affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.



## United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
2009-1125 (Serial No. 09/134,831)

IN RE RICHARD P. METTKE

Appeal from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, Board of Patent Appeals and Interferences. ON MOTION Before DYK Circuit Judge. ORDER The Acting Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office moves for a 30-day extension of time, until March 11, 2009, to file a brief. Richard P. Mettke
opposes. Upon consideration thereof, IT IS ORDERED THAT: The motion is granted. FOR THE COURT 

## MAR 0 4 2009 /s/ Jan Horbaly Jan Horbaly Clerk Date FILED U.S. COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT cc: Richard P. Mettke Raymond Chen, Esq. s20 MAR 0 4 2009
athionLi CLERK
Exhibit
        32.2
 Ener1,
        Inc.
 500
        West
        Cypress Creek Road-Suite 100
 Ft.
        Lauderdale, Florida, 33309
  May
        23,
        2006
 
 Securities
        and Exchange Commission
 450
        5th
        Street
 NW
        Washington, DC 20549
  Re:
        Certification of Principal Executive Officer Pursuant To 18 U.S.C. Sec. 1350
  Dear
        Ladies and Gentlemen:
  In
        connection with the accompanying Amendment
        No. 1 toAnnual Report on Form 10-KSB of Ener1, Inc., for the year
        ended December 31, 2005, I, Gerard Herlihy, Interim Chief Financial Officer
        of
        Ener1, Inc., hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
        pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:
  1)
              such
                  Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Ener1, Inc., for the year ended
                  December
                  31, 2005, 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 such Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Ener1,
                  Inc.,
                  for the year ended December 31, 2005, fairly presents, in all material
                  respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
                  Ener1, Inc.
  By:
              /s/ Gerard
                HerlihyGerard
                  Herlihy
                Chief Financial Officer,
                (Principal Financial and Accounting Officer
                and Duly Authorized Officer)
 A
        signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
        document authenticating, acknowledging or otherwise adopting the signature
        that
        appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement
        required by Section 906, has been provided to Ener1, Inc. and will be retained
        by Ener1, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
        its
        staff upon request.
  In
        accordance with Item 601 of Regulation S-B, this certification is being
“furnished” as Exhibit 32.1 to Ener1, Inc.‘s annual report and shall not be
        deemed “filed” for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
        (the “Exchange Act”) or otherwise subject to the liabilities of that section,
        nor shall it be deemed incorporated by reference in any filing under the
        Securities Act of 1933 or the Exchange Act, except as expressly set forth
        by
        specific reference in such a filing.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 63 (Monday, April 3, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 16858]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-8057]



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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Department of the Navy


Government Owned Inventions; Availability for Licensing

AGENCY: Department of the Navy, DOD.

ACTION: Notice of availability of invention for licensing.

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

SUMMARY: The invention listed below is assigned to the United States 
Government as represented by the Secretary of the Navy and is available 
for licensing by the Department of the Navy.
    Request for copies of the patent application cited should be 
directed to the Office of Naval Research, ONR 00CC, Ballston Tower One, 
800 North Quincy Street, Arlington, Virginia 22217-5660 and must 
include the application serial number.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Mr. R.J. Erickson, Staff Patent 
Attorney, Office of Naval Research, ONR 00CC, Ballston Tower One, 800 
North Quincy Street, Arlington, Virginia 22217-5660, telephone (703) 
696-4001.
    Patent Application Serial No. 08/080,418: Thermal Insulation of Wet 
Shielded Metal Arc Welds; filed 18 June 1993.

    Dated: March 27, 1995.
M.D. Schetzsle
Lt, JAGC, USNR, Alternate Federal Register Liaison Officer.
[FR Doc. 95-8057 Filed 3-31-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3810-AE-M
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 56 (Thursday, March 23, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 15291]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-7126]



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

FEDERAL MARITIME COMMISSION


Ocean Freight Forwarder License Applicants

    Notice is hereby given that the following applicants have filed 
with the Federal Maritime Commission applications for licenses as ocean 
freight forwarders pursuant to section 19 of the Shipping Act of 1984 
(46 U.S.C. app. 1718 and 46 CFR 510).
    Persons knowing of any reason why any of the following applicants 
should not receive a license are requested to contact the Office of 
Freight Forwarders, Federal Maritime Commission, Washington, DC 20573.

Superior Shipping, Inc., 13910 S.W. 28th Street, North Miami, FL 
33175, Officers: Elena Dieppa, President/Sole Officer
Blue Pacific Services, 100 Oceangate, Suite 788, Long Beach, CA 
90802, Officers: Alex Yang, President, Chuck Yang, Secretary/Vice 
President
World Cargo Corporation, 4408 N.W. 74th Avenue, Miami, FL 33166, 
Officers: Diana Obregon-Bader, President, Liliana Haynes, Vice 
President
All Points Export Incorporated d/b/a Appex, Inc., 3512 N.E. 140th 
Street, Seattle, WA 98125, Officers: Eliza Y. Chan, President, 
Solomon M. Chan, Vice President
Worldwide Cargo Express, Inc. d/b/a Wessco International, 1551 NW 
93rd Avenue, Miami, FL 33172, Officers: Carlos A. Henao, President, 
Astrid Henao, Vice President, Betty Hernandez, Vice President 
Marketing, Astrid Escalona, Treasurer, Carlos F. Henao, Operation's 
Director
LR International, Inc., 801-H Chase Avenue, Elk Grove Village, IL 
60007, Officers: Linda L. Frantz, Frederick G. Frantz, Jr.

    Dated: March 20, 1995.

    By the Federal Maritime Commission.
Joseph C. Polking,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-7126 Filed 3-22-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6730-01-M
Exhibit 10.1





Exhibit 10.1




Description of CIGNA Corporation

Strategic Performance Share Program





The Strategic Performance Share Program (“Program”) is designed to:




	•	 	pay at the median for competitive performance results against stretch targets;
	 
	•	 	incent and reward superior results achieved through sustained long-term financial
discipline and strategic accomplishments that will benefit CIGNA over the long-term, but may
not be reflected in annual results; and
	 
	•	 	provide competitive pay opportunities that allow the company to attract, motivate and
retain executives who will drive competitively superior performance.





Strategic Performance Shares (“SPSs”) have a three-year performance period and are awarded based
upon an individual executive’s long-term incentive target multiplied by an individual performance
factor (ranging from 0-200%). The award is converted to a number of SPSs based on the stock price
at the time of the award.  At the end of the three-year performance period, the People Resources
Committee of CIGNA’s Board of Directors (“PRC”) assesses CIGNA’s results against the goals set at
the beginning of the period to determine the number of SPSs earned and paid out.   The SPSs earned
and actually issued to eligible executives will range from 0-200% of the SPSs awarded at the
beginning of the performance period, and the actual number will depend on the degree to which CIGNA
achieves the goals set at the time of grant.  



No executive can be awarded more than 300,000 performance shares in any year. Upon termination of
employment due to retirement, death or disability, or after a change to an ineligible status, the
disposition of any outstanding awards will be solely at the discretion of the PRC or its designee
in accordance with the provisions of the CIGNA Long-Term Incentive Plan.