alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Tanita 3 Year Purchase History

Description Units Cost Units Cost Units 

BC‐533 3,428 BCI 5,048 BCI 3,400 BC‐549 1,600 BCI 400 BCI 800 

BC‐549Plus 664 BCI 400 BCI 400 

BC‐554 2,924 BCI 2,700 BCI 3,148 

BC‐577F 1,200 BCI 3,724 BCI 200 BC‐585F 1,100 BCI 2,500 BCI 1,100 

BC‐585P 100 BCI 900 BCI 0 

BC‐730F 0 BCI 804 BCI 0 

BF‐679F 204 BCI 0 BCI 204 

BF‐679W 2,400 BCI 2,718 BCI 4,614 BF‐680W 2,706 BCI 2,064 BCI 2,916 

BF‐684W 404 BCI 400 BCI 0 

RD‐901 1,400 BCI 1,300 BCI 200 

RD‐901plus 0 BCI 300 BCI 1,400 

RD‐953 0 BCI 300 BCI 800 

UM‐081 4,856 BCI 800 BCI 6,912 

Total 22,986 BCI 24,358 BCI 26,094 

Calendar 2015 Calendar 2016 Calendar 2

Public Version of 3 Year Purchase History (BCI = Business Confidential Information)

10/5/2018
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                           9,250
<SECURITIES>                                    17,808
<RECEIVABLES>                                      617
<ALLOWANCES>                                        77
<INVENTORY>                                        355
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                28,243
<PP&E>                                           2,060
<DEPRECIATION>                                   (970)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  29,480
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,635
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        63,505
<OTHER-SE>                                    (36,001)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    29,480
<SALES>                                          1,426
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 1,426
<CGS>                                            3,516
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    3,516
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                11,752
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                  (96)
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  13
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (12,058)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (12,058)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (12,058)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.29)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.29)


</TABLE>
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-2018-0025-5924

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
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JAN-03-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                 DEC-30-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   JAN-03-1997
<CASH>                                         5,299
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  17,558
<ALLOWANCES>                                   362
<INVENTORY>                                    27,019
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               53,016
<PP&E>                                         23,527
<DEPRECIATION>                                 5,169
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 112,658
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          35,281
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       2
<OTHER-SE>                                     77,375
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   112,658
<SALES>                                        306,844
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               306,844
<CGS>                                          263,197
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  263,197
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               18,151
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               1,177
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (462)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                24,781
<INCOME-TAX>                                   9,535
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            15,246
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   15,246
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  1.01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  1.01
        



</TABLE>
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-2018-0025-3277

ADH Guardian USA LLC: 

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

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

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

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

https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/301Investigations/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
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                       3,358,684
<SECURITIES>                                 8,401,642
<RECEIVABLES>                                3,957,127
<ALLOWANCES>                                   188,599
<INVENTORY>                                  3,588,218
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            19,428,245
<PP&E>                                      18,060,127
<DEPRECIATION>                              10,674,155
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              23,661,533
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        6,919,369
<BONDS>                                      8,537,742
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       208,899
<OTHER-SE>                                  12,934,151
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                23,661,533
<SALES>                                     10,434,366
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            10,434,366
<CGS>                                       11,666,142
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               19,277,805
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             (717,940)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               227,245
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,017,657
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (21,036,543)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (21,036,543)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (21,036,543)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.13)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.13)


</TABLE>
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED DE CEMBER 23, 2014

NO. 03

- 14

- 00751

- CR

Warren Randall Hughes, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

APPEAL FROM 426TH DISTRICT COURT OF BELL COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE JONES , JUSTICES ROSE AND GOODWIN

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION

-- OPINION BY JUSTICE ROSE

This is an appeal from the judgment of conviction entered by the district court. Having reviewed

the record, it appears that the Court lacks jurisdiction over this appeal. Therefore, the Court

dismisses the appeal for want of jurisdiction

. Because appellant is indigent and unable to pay

costs, no adjudication of costs is made.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 63 (Monday, April 3, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 16885]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-8049]



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


DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Information Collections Under Review

    The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) has been sent the 
following collection(s) of information proposals for review under the 
provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35) and 
the Paperwork Reduction Reauthorization Act since the last list was 
published. Entries are grouped into submission categories, with each 
entry containing the following information:

(1) The title of the form/collection;
(2) The agency form number, if any, and the applicable component of the 
Department sponsoring the collection;
(3) Who will be asked or required to respond, as well as a brief 
abstract;
(4) An estimate of the total number of respondents and the amount of 
time estimated for an average respondent to respond;
(5) An estimate of the total public burden (in hours) associated with 
the collection; and,
(6) An indication as to whether Section 3504(h) of Public Law 96-511 
applies.

    Comments and/or suggestions regarding the item(s) contained in this 
notice, especially regarding the estimated public burden and associated 
response time, should be directed to the OMB reviewer, Mr. Jeff Hill on 
(202) 395-7340 AND to the Department of Justice's Clearance Officer, 
Mr. Robert B. Briggs, on (202) 514-4319. If you anticipate commenting 
on a form/collection, but find that time to prepare such comments will 
prevent you from prompt submission, you should notify the OMB reviewer 
AND the Department of Justice Clearance Officer of your intent as soon 
as possible. Written comments regarding the burden estimate or any 
other aspect of the collection may be submitted to the Office of 
Information and Regulatory Affairs, Office of Management and Budget, 
Washington, DC 20503, AND to Mr. Robert B. Briggs, Department of 
Justice Clearance Officer, Systems Policy Staff/Information Resources 
Management/Justice Management Division, Suite 850, WCTR, Washington, DC 
20530.

New Collection

(1) Request for Payment (COPS Revised H-3).
(2) COPS-006 Office of Community Oriented Policing Services, Office of 
the Associate Attorney General, United States Department of Justice.
(3) Primary=State, Local, or Tribal Government. The Request for Payment 
form is to be used by COPS grantees in seeking an advance or 
reimbursement from their grant for the hiring of new police officers.
(4) 48,000 annual respondents at .6 hours per response.
(5) 38,400 annual burden hours.
(6) Not applicable under Section 3504(h) of Public Law 96-511.

    Public comment on this item is encouraged.

    Dated: March 28, 1995.
Robert B. Briggs,
Department Clearance Officer, United States Department of Justice.
[FR Doc. 95-8049 Filed 3-31-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-21-M
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 67 (Friday, April 7, 1995)]
[Sunshine Act Meetings]
[Page 17851]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-8693]



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


Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System

Time and Date: 10:00 a.m., Wednesday, April 12, 1995.

Place: Marriner S. Eccles Federal Reserve Board Building, C Street 
entrance between 20th and 21st Streets, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20551.

Status: Closed.

Matters to be Considered:

    1. Personnel actions (appointments, promotions, assignments, 
reassignments, and salary actions) involving individual Federal 
Reserve System employees.
    2. Any items carried forward from a previously announced 
meeting.

Contact Person for More Information: Mr. Joseph R. Coyne, Assistant to 
the Board; (202) 452-3204. You may call (202) 452-3207, beginning at 
approximately 5 p.m. two business days before this meeting, for a 
recorded announcement of bank and bank holding company applications 
scheduled for the meeting.

    Dated: April 5, 1995.
Jennifer J. Johnson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 95-8693 Filed 4-5-95; 9:57 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 60 (Wednesday, March 29, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 16120-16121]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-7702]



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


DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION

President's Board of Advisors on Historically Black Colleges and 
Universities; Meeting

AGENCY: President's Board of Advisors on Historically Black Colleges 
and Universities, Education.
ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: This notice sets forth the schedule and agenda of the initial 
meeting of the President's Board of Advisors on Historically Black 
Colleges and Universities. This notice also describes the functions of 
the Board. Notice of this meeting is required under Section 10(a)(2) of 
the Federal Advisory Committee Act.

DATE AND TIME: April 11, 1995, from 9:30 a.m. to 4 p.m. and April 12, 
1995, from 9:00 a.m. to 12:00 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Sheraton City Centre Hotel & 
Towers located at 1143 New Hampshire Avenue, NW. Call (202) 708-8667 
for current information.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Nancy Davis, White House Initiative on Historically Black Colleges and 
Universities, U.S. Department of Education, 600 Independence Avenue, 
SW, The Portals Building, Suite 605, Washington, DC 20202-5120. 
Telephone: (202) 708-8667.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The President's Board of Advisors on 
Historically Black Colleges and Universities is established under 
Executive Order 12876 of November 1, 1993. The Board is established to 
advise on the financial stability of Historically Black Colleges and 
Universities, to issue an annual report to the President on HBCU 
participation in Federal programs, and to advise the Secretary of 
Education on increasing the private sector role in strengthening HBCUs.
    The meeting of the Board is open to the public. The meeting will be 
primarily devoted to presentations by agency heads on efforts to 
implement Executive Order 12867.
    Records are kept of all Board proceedings, and are available for 
public inspection at the White House Initiative [[Page 16121]] on 
Historically Black Colleges and Universities located at 1250 Maryland 
Avenue, SW., The Portals Building, Suite 605, Washington, DC 20202, 
from the hours of 8:30 am to 5:00 pm.

    Dated: March 21, 1995.
David A. Longanecker,
Assistant Secretary for Postsecondary Education.
[FR Doc. 95-7702 Filed 3-28-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4000-01-M
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-1304

CURLEE SHERMAN, Plaintiff - Appellant, versus UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, Defendant - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina, at Columbia. Margaret B. Seymour, District Judge. (CA-03-4010-3) Submitted: June 23, 2004 Decided: July 1, 2004 Before NIEMEYER, WILLIAMS, and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges. Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Curlee Sherman, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Curlee Sherman seeks to appeal the district court’s order dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) complaint. The district court referred this case to a magistrate judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) (2000). The magistrate judge recommended that relief be denied and advised Sherman that failure to file timely objections to this recommendation could waive appellate review of a district court order based upon the recommendation. Despite this warning, Sherman failed to object to the magistrate judge’s recommendation. The timely filing of specific objections to a magistrate judge’s recommendation is necessary to preserve appellate review of the substance of that recommendation when the parties have been warned that failure to object will waive appellate review. See Wright v. Collins , 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985); see also Thomas v. Arn , 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Sherman has waived appellate review by failing to file objections after receiving proper notice. Accordingly, we deny leave to proceed in forma pauperis and dismiss the appeal. 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
#### James Michael NEFF, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. WD 49243.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Nov. 1, 1994.

Gary E. Brotherton, Columbia, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Breck K. Burgess, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

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

*ORDER*

*PER CURIAM:*

Defendant appeals from the dismissal of his Rule 24.035 motion for post-conviction relief which was labeled as a Rule 29.07(d) motion.

The judgment of dismissal is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

In re: KAHTAN BAYATI,

Debtor,

______________________________

KAHTAN BAYATI,

Appellant,

v.

WILLIAM MUSHARBASH; et al.,

Appellees. No. 15

- 60073

BAP No. 14

- 1310

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the Ninth Circuit

Bankruptcy Appellate Panel

Kurtz, Dunn, and Taylor, Bankruptcy Judges, Presiding

Submitted April 11, 2017 **

Before: GOULD, CLIFTON, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

Kahtan Bayati appeals pro se from the Bankruptcy Appellate Panel’s

(“BAP”) judgment affirming the bankruptcy court’s order s granting Town Square

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

APR 24 2017

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLER K

U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 15

- 60073

M Properties LLC ’ s motion for relief from the automatic stay and denying Bayati’s

motion for reconsideration. We rev iew de novo the question of mootness. Suter v.

Goedert , 504 F.3d 982, 985 (9th Cir. 2007)

. We dismiss

.

During the pendency of this appeal, t he bankruptcy court entered an order

dismissing Bayati’s bankruptcy case , which Bayati appealed to the BAP. T he BAP

affirmed the bankruptcy court’s dismissal order and B ayati did not appeal the

BAP’ s judgment

. We dismiss this appeal as moot because there is no longer any

case or controversy and we lack power to grant any effective relief. See 11 U.S.C.

§ 362(c) (2)(B); Castaic Partners II, LLC v. Daca

- Castaic, LLC ( In re Castaic

Partners II, LLC

) , 823 F.3d 966, 969 (9th Cir. 2016) ( “In a bankruptcy appeal,

when the underlying bankruptcy case is dismissed and that dismissal is allowed to

become final, there is likely no longer any case or controversy . . . .” ); Armel

Laminates, Inc. v. Lomas & Nettleton Co. ( In re Income Prop. Builders, Inc. ) , 699

F.2d 963, 96 4 (9th Cir. 1982) (“Once the bankruptcy was dis missed, a bankruptcy

court no longer had power to order the stay or to award damages allegedly

attributable to its vacation. A remand by us to the bankruptcy court would

therefore be useless. ”)

.

We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly r aised and argued

in the opening brief. See Padgett v. Wright , 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009)

.

Bayati’s motion “to submit highlights of the oral argument in a short written3 15

- 60073

form” (Docket Entry No. 26) is denied.

DISMISSED

.