alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 8 (Thursday, January 12, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 2959-2960]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-789]



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


DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. EL95-16-000]


Southern California Edison Company; Filing

January 6, 1995.
    Take notice that on January 6, 1995, Southern California Edison 
Company (Edison) filed a Petition For Enforcement pursuant to Section 
210(h) of the Public Utility Regulatory Policies Act of 1978 (PURPA). 
Edison states that the California Public Utilities Commission 
(California Commission) has ordered Edison to sign long-term, fixed-
price contracts with qualifying facilities (QFs) to purchase 686 MW of 
new capacity that will come on line in 1997-99. Edison asserts that 
these new contracts will require payments above its avoided cost and 
will dramatically increase stranded costs in a soon to be restructured 
electric utility industry. Edison requests the Commission to relieve 
Edison and its customers from these California Commission orders which 
it asserts violate both PURPA and this Commission's regulations. 18 CFR 
Part 292.
    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 January 27, 1995. 
Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the 
appropriate action to be taken, but will not serve to make 
[[Page 2960]] 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. 95-789 Filed 1-11-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
Dismissal and Opinion Filed July 1, 2013 

# S

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-12-01474-CV DONAVAN HOWARD, Appellant V. THE BANK OF NEW YORK M ELLON TRUST COMPANY, Appellee On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 3 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. cc-12-03177-C MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Wright and Justices Lang-Miers and Lewis Opinion by Chief Justice Wright The clerk’s record in this case is overdue. By letter da ted April 19, 2013 we informed appellant that the County Clerk had notified the Court that the cl erk’s record had not been filed because appellant had not paid for or made arrangements to pay for the clerk’s record. We directed appellant to file written verification that he had paid for or made arrangements to pay for the clerk’s record or that he had been found en titled to proceed without payment of costs. We cautioned appellant that if he did not file the required documentation within ten days, we might dismiss the appeal without further notice. To date, appellant has not provided the required documentation or otherwise corresponded with the Court regarding the status of the clerk’s record.–2– Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 37.3(b).

121474F.P05 /Carolyn Wright/ CAROLYN WRIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE–3– 

# S

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT
DONAVAN HOWARD, Appellant
No. 05-12-01474-CV V.
THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON TRUST COMPANY, Appellee On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 3, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. cc-12-03177-C. Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Wright. Justices Lang-Miers a nd Lewis participating.
In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED

. It is ORDERED that appellee THE BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON TRUST COMPANY recover its costs of this appeal from a ppellant DONAVAN HOWARD.
Judgment entered July 1, 2013

/Carolyn Wright/ CAROLYN WRIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE
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-2018-0025-4082

Tianhai Electric North America:

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
EXHIBIT 10.2

 

ENDORSEMENT TO 10% SENIOR SECURED CONVERTIBLE NOTE

 

Precision Optics Corporation, Inc.
 New York, New York
 July 6, 2011

 

The 10% Senior Secured Convertible Note dated June 25, 2008 and amended December 11, 2008, June 25, 2010 July 26, 2010, September 15, 2010, October 15, 2010, November 15, 2010, November 30, 2010, December 1, 2010, December 3, 2010 and December 17, 2010, January 10, 2011,  January 24, 2011, February 7, 2011, February 25, 2011, March 11, 2011, March 31, 2011,  April 14, 2011, April 29, 2011, May 13, 2011, June 3, 2011 and June 28, 2011 (the “Note”) of Precision Optics Corporation, Inc., a Massachusetts corporation (the “Company”), payable to the order of Special Situations Private Equity Fund, L.P. (the “Holder”) in an aggregate principal amount of $275,000 and to which the Endorsement is affixed is hereby amended in the following respects:

 

1.                                       The term “Stated Maturity Date” is hereby restated to be “July 20, 2011.”

 

2.                                       Except as expressly amended by this Endorsement, the Note remains in full force and effect and the Company hereby reconfirms its obligations thereunder.

 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Company has caused this Endorsement to be duly executed, and the Holder has caused this Endorsement to be duly accepted, by their respective duly authorized representatives as of the day and year first above written.

 

 

	
 
    	
PRECISION   OPTICS CORPORATION, INC.
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
By
    	
/s/   Joseph N. Forkey
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
Name:   Joseph N. Forkey
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
Title:   Chief Executive Officer
    
	
 
    	
 
    
	
Accepted:
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
SPECIAL   SITUATIONS PRIVATE EQUITY FUND, L.P.
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
By:
    	
/s/   Adam Stettner
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
Name:   Adam Stettner
    	
 
    	
 
    
	
 
    	
Title:   General Partner
<PAGE>   1

                                                                  Exhibit 10.3.3

                         AMENDMENT #2 TO CONTRACT 00117

                      ELECTRONIC LOTTERY TICKET DISPENSERS

1.    Contract 00117 between the Missouri Lottery and Lottery Enterprises Inc.
      shall be renewed for the period of July 1, 1995 through June 30, 1996
      subject for the acceptance of this amendment by the Missouri Lottery.

2.    All other terms and conditions of the contract shall remain in effect,
      except as modified by any other agreements and/or amendments.


/s/ Catherine Winchester                    22 May 95
-------------------------------------       ---------------
Contractor's Authorized Signature           Date


/s/ James R. Scroggins                      6-5-95
-------------------------------------       ---------------
Missouri Lottery Authorized Signature       Date
##### 



EXHIBIT 21.1
 CORPORATE STRUCTURE OF
SYNAGRO TECHNOLOGIES, INC.
 
     
  1
    2
           
 1
    
    Synagro  WWT, Inc. (70%) is the
managing member. The other members are The McKissack Group, Inc. (20%) and Len
Parker Associates, Inc. (10%), both non-affiliated third parties.2
    
    Managing Member is Synagro-WWT, Inc. (30%).
The other members are Synagro Woonsocket, LLC (10%), Synagro South, LLC (30%)
and Environmental Protection & Improvement Company, LLC (30%).




---



##### 



1
  2
            3
  4
 5
 
 1
    
    Members are Synagro  WWT, Inc. (40%)
and Carl D. Jones & Associates, P.C. (60%). Carl D. Jones & Associates, P.C. is
a non-affiliated third party.2
    
    Partnership owned by Synagro Central, LLC
(60%) and Synagro South, LLC (40%).3
    
    General Partner is Synagro Texas, LLC (1%)
and the Limited Partner is Synagro Delaware, LLC (99%).4
    
    General Partner is Synagro of Texas 
CDR, Inc. (1%) and the Limited Partner is Synagro Woonsocket, LLC (99%).5
    
    General Partner is Synagro of Texas 
CDR, Inc. (1%) and the Limited Partners are Synagro of Texas  CDR, Inc.
(9%) and Synagro Woonsocket, LLC (90%).
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-2018-0025-4081

Scosche 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 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
#### CITY OF ARNOLD, Respondent, v. Bulis J. ORR, Appellant.

No. 62555.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

June 22, 1993.

Bulis J. Orr, pro se.

George B. McElroy, Hillsboro, for respondent.

Before AHRENS, P.J., and REINHARD and CRIST, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals from a conviction for failure to yield the right-of-way. We affirm per Rule 30.25(b). The evidence is sufficient to support the verdict, and no error of law appears. No jurisprudential value would be served by an opinion. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information, only.
#### Donald V. MOORE, Jr., Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. 56079.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Three.

July 25, 1989.

Michael Hardcastle, St. Louis, for appellant.

William L. Webster, Atty. Gen., Breck K. Burgess, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

This is an appeal from the trial court’s judgment denying a Rule 24.035 motion without an evidentiary hearing. The trial court’s judgment is based on findings of fact that are not clearly erroneous. No error of law appears.

An opinion would have no precedential value.

The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).
```

[Congressional Bills 117th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 4387 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

<DOC>

117th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                S. 4387

   To provide for the procurement of parts for commercially derived 
                               aircraft.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 13, 2022

 Ms. Duckworth introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
              referred to the Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To provide for the procurement of parts for commercially derived 
                               aircraft.

    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 ``Improving Military Aviation 
Readiness Act of 2022''.

SEC. 2. PROCUREMENT OF PARTS FOR COMMERCIALLY DERIVED AIRCRAFT.

    The Secretary of the Air Force and the Secretary of the Navy 
shall--
            (1) include FAA-certified airworthy used, overhauled, 
        reconditioned, and remanufactured commercial common/dual use 
        parts, except for life limited parts, in supply chain solutions 
        to provide for replacement or increased inventories for all 
        Department of Defense commercial derivative aircraft and 
        engines and aircraft that are based on commercial design; and
            (2) ensure that the acquisition of all follow-on used, 
        overhauled, reconditioned, and remanufactured commercial 
        common/dual use parts under paragraph (1) is conducted on a 
        competitive basis, based on price and quality, and procured 
        only from suppliers who provide FAA-certified parts that 
        possess a FAA Authorized Release Certificate, FAA Form 8130-3 
        Airworthy Approval Tag from certificated repair stations 
        pursuant to part 145 of title 14, Code of Federal Regulations.
                                 <all>
```
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

July 3, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-5884

Hirsch Glass 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.

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
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE
F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Appellate case name: In re Jennifer Elizabeth Timar

Appellate case number: 01

- 1 8

- 00 7 22

- CV

Trial court case number: 201 4

- 4 72 29

Trial court: 246 th District Court of Harris County

R elator

, Jennifer Elizabeth Timar , has filed a petition for writ of mandamus in this

Court

, seek ing relief from the trial court’s temporary orders in a suit affecting the
parent

- child relationship

. On January 8, 2019, we abated the appeal for t he Honorable

Linda Dunson to reconsider the ruling s made the basis of relator’s petition. See T EX

. R.

A PP

. P. 7.2(b) ; see also In re Blevins , 480 S.W.3d 542, 544 (Tex. 2013) (orig. proceeding)

. On January 24, 2019, the real party in interest, Richard Lee Knafelc, notified the Court that a hearing is set in the trial court for February 26, 2019.

Accordingly, no later than March 14, 2019

, the parties are directed to notify the
Clerk of this Court of any action taken on reconsideration of the rulings made the basis of relator’s petition and file any orders regarding reconsideration of those rulings in a supplemental mandamus record

. The Court will then consider a motion to reinstate or dismiss this proceeding, as appropriate.

Th is original proceeding remains abated, treated as a closed case, and removed
from this Court’s active docket.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s Russel l Lloyd

 Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: __ February 12, 2019

___
THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS

13-14-00540-CV

Pangaea Floor Company d/b/a Pangea Floor Coverings and Juan Carlos Cervantes 

a/k/a J.C. Cervantes

v.

Interceramic, Inc.

On Appeal from the

County Court at Law No 1 of Hidalgo County, Texas

Trial Cause No. CL-13-3529-A

JUDGMENT

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on 

appeal, concludes the appeal should be DISMISSED. The Court orders the appeal 

DISMISSED in accordance with its opinion. Costs of the appeal are adjudged against 

appellant.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

January 22, 2015
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-2018-0025-5515

Tianhai Electric North America:

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
Microsoft Word 11.0.6359;


                                                                    Exhibit 99.1


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

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section 1350,  as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, each of the undersigned certifies that:

1)   This periodic report does not fully comply with the requirements of Section
     13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities  Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, in that
     it is  being  filed  with  the  Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  (the
     'Commission")  beyond the time period prescribed by the Commission's  rules
     and forms.

2)   To the best of our knowledge and after reviewing the periodic  report,  the
     information  contained in this  periodic  report  fairly  presents,  in all
     material  respects,  the  financial  condition and results of operations of
     Ridgewood Electric Power Trust II.

Date:  July 15, 2005           /s/ Robert E. Swanson
                             --------------------------------
                             Robert E. Swanson
                             Chief Executive Officer

Date:  July 15, 2005          /s/ Douglas Wilson
                             --------------------------------
                             Douglas Wilson
                             Chief Financial Officer
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 64 (Tuesday, April 4, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 17059]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-8138]



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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE


Public Information Collection Requirement Submitted to OMB for 
Review

ACTION: Notice.

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

    The Department of Defense has submitted to OMB for clearance the 
following proposal for collection of information under the provisions 
of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35).

Title, Applicable Form, and Applicable Control Number: Defense FAR 
Supplement, Part 209, Contractor Qualifications, and related clause at 
252.209; OMB Control No. 0704-0360
Type of Request: Revision of a currently approved collection
Average Burden Hours/Minutes Per Response: 40 hours
Responses Per Respondent: 1
Number of Respondents: 18
Annual Burden Hours: 720
Annual Responses: 18
Needs and Uses: The Defense FAR Supplement, Part 209, prescribes 
policies and procedures for, among other things, avoiding 
organizational conflicts of interest. The information required by this 
requirement will be used by the Government to determine if an actual or 
potential conflict of interest exists, and to determine the best course 
of action to avoid or mitigate such a conflict
Affected Public: Businesses or other for-profit; non-profit 
institutions; small businesses or organizations
Frequency: On occasion
Respondent's Obligation: Required to obtain or retain a benefit
OMB Desk Officer: Mr. Peter N. Weiss. Written comments and 
recommendations on the proposed revision to the information collection 
should be sent to Mr. Weiss at the Office of Management and Budget, 
Desk Officer for DoD, Room 10236, New Executive Office Building, 
Washington, DC 20503
DOD Clearance Officer: Mr. William P. Pearce. Written requests for 
copies of the information collection proposal should be sent to Mr. 
Pearce, WHS/DIOR, 1215 Jefferson Davis Highway, Suite 1204, Arlington, 
VA 22202-4302

    Dated: March 29, 1995.
L.M. Bynum,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 95-8138 Filed 4-3-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5000-04-M