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 29, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-6315

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/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
#### STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Michael VINCENT, Appellant. Michael VINCENT, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

Nos. 58844, 60670.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Four.

March 23, 1993.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied May 3, 1993.

Application to Transfer Denied June 29, 1993.

Deborah B. Wafer, St. Louis, for appellant.

William L. Webster, Atty. Gen., Robert Alan Kelly, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before CARL R. GAERTNER, P.J., and SIMON, KNAUP and CRANE, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals from his convictions of murder in the first degree and armed criminal action. Defendant also appeals from the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion without an evidentiary hearing.

An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only setting forth the facts and reasons for this *500order. The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rules 30.25(b) and 84.16(b).
EXHIBIT 21.1
                  SUBSIDIARIES OF PRIME MEDICAL SERVICES, INC.
                              AS OF MARCH 27, 1997

    EXHIBIT 21.1
    Name of Subsidiary                           State of Incorporation
    -------------------                          --------------------
    Prime Medical Operating, Inc.                Delaware

    Prime Management, Inc.                       Nevada

    Prime Cardiac Rehabilitation Services, Inc.  Delaware

    Prime Diagnostic Services, Inc.              Delaware

    Prime Lithotripsy Services, Inc.             New York

    Prime Kidney Stone Treatment, Inc.           New Jersey

    Prime Diagnostic Corp. of Florida            Delaware

    Prime Lithotripter Operations, Inc.          New York

    Rehab Leasing Corp.                          New York

    Texas Litho, Inc.                            Delaware

    R.R. Litho, Inc.                             Delaware

    Ohio Litho, Inc.                             Delaware

    Alabama Renal Stone Institute, Inc.          Alabama

    Sun Medical Technologies, Inc.               California

    Sun Acquisition, Inc.                        California

    Lithotripters, Inc.                          North Carolina

    FastStart, Inc.                              North Carolina

    National Lithotripters Association, Inc.     North Carolina
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-2018-0025-5115

Enerpac:

The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the product exclusion request referenced 

above has been denied. As you are aware, USTR published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 

28710) on June 20, 2018, that announced the Trade Representative’s determination to impose an 

additional duty of 25 percent on certain products from China. On July 11, 2018, the Trade 

Representative published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 32181) which announced that a 

process had been established under which interested persons could request that products falling 

within a covered HTSUS subheading be excluded from the additional duties announced on June 

20.

Your request was reviewed in accordance with the factors and procedures set forth in 

Section B(1) of the July 11 notice. Based on that review, and after careful consideration, your 

request was denied because the request failed to show that the imposition of additional duties on 

the particular product would cause severe economic harm to you or other U.S. interests.

Because USTR will grant exclusion requests on a product specific basis, you may still 

benefit from a product exclusion if a similar product is granted an exclusion. Products for which 

an exclusion has been granted will be periodically announced on the USTR website. Product

exclusions will become legally effective once published in the Federal Register. 

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Vaughn

General Counsel
EXHIBIT
32.2


CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906


OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002














In
connection with the Annual Report of GeoGlobal Resources Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2007 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Allan J. Kent, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as
adopted pursuant to ss.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
      for the periods presented.

















/s/ Allan
J. Kent


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








Allan J.
Kent


Executive
Vice President and Chief Financial Officer


June 4,
2008
ram8kexh1082.htm


Exhibit 10.8.2



Approved by Stockholders 5/3/10












SECOND AMENDMENT


TO THE


RAM ENERGY RESOURCES, INC.


2006 LONG-TERM INCENTIVE PLAN







This Second Amendment (this “Amendment”) to the RAM Energy Resources, Inc. 2006 Long-Term Incentive Plan (the “Plan”) is approved and adopted by the Board of Directors of RAM Energy Resources, Inc. (the “Company”) this 8th day of March 2010, but shall be effective only upon approval of this Amendment by the holders of the majority of outstanding shares of Common Stock present or represented, and entitled to vote, at a meeting called for such purpose.







The Plan is hereby amended as follows:








	
1.  

	
Section 1.3 of the Plan is deleted in its entirety and the following Section 1.3 substituted therefor:












“Section 1.3 Shares Subject to the Plan.  Subject to the limitations set forth herein, Awards may be made under this plan for a total of 7,400,000 shares of the Company’s common stock, par value $.0001 per share (the “Common Stock”).  A maximum of 2,400,000 shares of Common Stock of the total authorized under this Section 1.3 may be granted as Incentive Stock Options.  The limitation of this Section 1.3 shall be subject to adjustment provisions of Article X.”








	
2.  

	
Sections 4.1(a), (b), (j) and (k) of the Plan are deleted in their entirety and the remaining subsections of Section 4.1 are redesignated as Sections 4.1(a) through (h), accordingly.












*    *    *    *    *    *    *    *    *







In all other respects, the Plan remains unchanged and in full force and effect.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 62 (Friday, March 31, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 16621]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-7972]



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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
[I.D. 030995A]


North Pacific Fishery Management Council; Meetings

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

ACTION: Notice of agenda changes.

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

SUMMARY: An agenda for public meetings of the North Pacific Fishery 
Management Council (Council) and its advisory bodies, which are 
scheduled during the week of April 17, 1995, was published in the 
Federal Register on March 17, 1995, (60 FR 14425). The following change 
is made to the meeting schedule and agenda. All other information 
originally published remains unchanged.
    1. The Scientific and Statistical Committee will begin its meeting 
at 2:00 p.m., on April 17.
    2. The Council's plenary session will begin at 8:00 a.m., on April 
19, and will continue through April 24.
    3. The report on the status of seabirds has been deleted from the 
agenda.
    4. Initial review of a regulatory amendment for electronic 
reporting has been added to the agenda.
    5. A report on pollock trawl mesh studies has been deleted from the 
agenda.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: North Pacific Fishery Management 
Council, P.O. Box 103136, Anchorage, AK 99510; telephone: (907) 271-
2809.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: These meetings are physically accessible to 
people with disabilities. Requests for sign language interpretation or 
other auxiliary aids should be directed to Helen Allen, (907) 271-2809, 
at least 5 working days prior to the meeting date.

    Dated: March 27, 1995.
David S. Crestin,
Acting Director, Office of Fisheries Conservation and Management, 
National Marine Fisheries Service.
[FR Doc. 95-7972 Filed 3-30-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

January 4, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-2304

General Tools:

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
**Exhibit
      31.1**




**CERTIFICATION**




I,
      Michael D. Queen, certify that:




1.  I
      have
      reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q 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 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 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 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:




(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:
                  December 15, 2005
              /s/
                  Michael D. QueenMichael
                  D. QueenPrincipal
                  Executive Officer
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 66 (Thursday, April 6, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17533-17534]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-8407]



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



FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM

Buerge Bancshares, Inc.; Formation of, Acquisition by, or Merger 
of Bank Holding Companies

    The company listed in this notice has applied for the Board's 
approval under section 3 of the Bank Holding Company Act (12 U.S.C. 
1842) and Sec.  225.14 of the Board's Regulation Y (12 CFR 225.14) to 
become a bank holding company or to acquire a bank or bank holding 
company. The factors that are considered in acting on the applications 
are set forth in section 3(c) of the Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)).
    The application is available for immediate inspection at the 
Federal Reserve Bank indicated. Once the application has been accepted 
for processing, it will also be available for inspection at the offices 
of the Board of Governors. Interested persons may express their views 
in writing to the Reserve Bank indicated for that application or to the 
offices of the Board of Governors. Any comment on an 
[[Page 17534]] application that requests a hearing must include a 
statement of why a written presentation would not suffice in lieu of a 
hearing, identifying specifically any questions of fact that are in 
dispute and summarizing the evidence that would be presented at a 
hearing.
    Comments regarding this application must be received not later than 
May 1, 1995.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City (John E. Yorke, Senior Vice 
President) 925 Grand Avenue, Kansas City, Missouri 64198:
    1. Buerge Bancshares, Inc., Joplin, Missouri; to acquire 100 
percent of the voting shares of Peoples State Bank, Claremore, 
Oklahoma.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, March 31, 
1995.
Barbara R. Lowrey,
Associate Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 95-8407 Filed 4-5-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-F
Joinder Agreement



 Exhibit 10(b)(1) 

ANNEX I TO GUARANTY 

Reference is hereby made to the Subsidiary Guaranty (as the same may be amended, restated, supplemented or otherwise modified from time
to time, the “Guaranty”), dated as of January 5, 2010, made by NewStar Financial California, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; NewStar Asset Management LLC, a Delaware limited liability company; and NewStar Loan
Funding, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company (each an “Initial Guarantor”, and together with any additional Subsidiaries which become parties to this Guaranty by executing a Supplement hereto in the form attached hereto as
Annex I, the “Guarantors”), in favor of Fortress Credit Corp., as the Administrative Agent for the benefit of itself and the other Holders (in each case, under and as defined in the Note Agreement). Each capitalized term used
herein and not defined herein shall have the meaning given to it in the Guaranty. 
 By its execution below, the undersigned,
Alameda NS Four Holding, LLC, a Delaware limited liability company, agrees to become, and does hereby become, a Subsidiary Guarantor under the Guaranty and agrees to be bound by such Guaranty as if originally a party thereto. By its execution below,
the undersigned represents and warrants as to itself that all of the representations and warranties contained in Section 1 of the Guaranty are true and correct in all respects as of the date hereof. 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Alameda NS Four Holding, LLC, has executed and delivered this Annex I counterpart to the Guaranty as of this 31st day
of March, 2010. 
  

			
	ALAMEDA NS FOUR HOLDING, LLC
		
	By: 	 	/s/ JOHN J. FRISHKOPF
	Name: John J. Frishkopf
	Title: Manager
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 59 (Tuesday, March 28, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 15912]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-7547]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. RP91-203-054]


Tennessee Gas Pipeline Co.; Notice of Filing Refund Report

March 22, 1995.
    Take notice that on March 20, 1995, Tennessee Gas Pipeline Company 
(Tennessee), filed its report of refunds for the above-referenced 
dockets for the period September 1, 1993 through January 31, 1995.
    Furthermore, in compliance with the Commission's February 25, 1995 
order in Docket No. RP91-203-046, Tennessee states it is making 
revisions to its July 7, 1994 Refund Report which effectuated refunds 
for the period prior to Tennessee's restructuring (February 1, 1992 
through August 31, 1993). Specifically, that order required Tennessee 
to make PTR fuel refunds in cash instead of in-kind, refund National 
Fuel Gas Supply an additional $738,282, plus applicable interest, 
associated with errors on original refund for their T-1 contract, 
correct certain errors in the original refund report associated with 
PTR transportation, and continue to work with customers to the extent 
necessary to further verify their refund calculations. As outlined 
below, Tennessee states it has made PTR fuel refunds in cash, refunded 
National Fuel an additional $750,419 on February 16, 1995, and 
corrected the original refund on October 28, 1994.
    Tennessee states that copies of the refund report have been mailed 
to all affected state regulatory commissions and that customers were 
served with calculations supporting the refunds on the date which the 
refunds were made.
    Any persons desiring to protest said filing should file a protest 
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 825 North Capitol Street 
NE., Washington, DC 20426, in accordance with Rule 211 of the 
Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211). All such 
protests should be filed before March 29, 1995. Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and are 
available for public inspection.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-7547 Filed 3-27-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
#### Mary Lee MONTGOMERY, Petitioner/Respondent, v. DIRECTOR OF REVENUE, STATE OF MISSOURI, Respondent/Appellant.

No. 66512.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

Feb. 28, 1995.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., James A. Chenault, III, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Mo. Dept, of Revenue, Jefferson City, for respondent/appellant.

Mary Lee Montgomery, pro se.

*215REINHARD, Presiding Judge.

The Director of Revenue (Director) appeals the judgment of the circuit court reinstating petitioner’s driving privileges. We vacate and remand.

Petitioner was provided notice from the Director on February 27, 1994, that she was required to post $622 to cover damages arising from a motor vehicle accident and farther indicating that she was subject to suspension for failing to maintain financial responsibility as required by § 308.026, RSMo 1994. Subsequently, petitioner filed a two-count petition in circuit court. Count I sought review of the suspension and Count II, in the alternative, asked for hardship driving privileges. The Director answered by claiming the court lacked subject matter jurisdiction as to Count I since petitioner failed to exhaust the administrative remedies provided by § 303.290.1, RSMo 1994. The Director requested Count I be dismissed, but the Director had no objection to issuance of limited driving privileges under Count II.

On June 18, 1994, an assistant prosecutor confessed petitioner’s petition on the Director’s behalf. The court thereby reinstated petitioner’s driving privileges.

The facts in this case mirror those of our recent case *Oberkirsch v. Director of Revenue,*883 S.W.2d 110 (Mo.App.E.D.1994). Our resolution in *Oberkirsch*is dispositive to the instant case:

> [A] suspension order by the Director for failure to maintain financial responsibility [is] a “contested case” requiring a party to exhaust all administrative remedies before judicial review is appropriate in circuit court. Section 303.290.1 provides the administrative remedy of an administrative hearing for any person aggrieved by orders or acts of the Director. Since petitioner has not requested an administrative hearing as provided in § 303.290.1, her administrative remedies have not been exhausted. Therefore, the court lacked the jurisdiction to reinstate petitioner’s driving privileges. The confession of judgment ... is irrelevant. Subject matter jurisdiction cannot be conferred by waiver or consent.

*Id.*at 111 (citations omitted).

As in *Oberkirsch,*we vacate the order of the circuit court reinstating petitioner’s driving privileges and remand with directions to dismiss Count I of petitioner’s petition.

GARY M. GAERTNER and CRAHAN, JJ., concur.