alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 4995 

To prohibit certain activities involving kangaroos and kangaroo products, 

and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 27, 2023 

Mr. FITZPATRICK (for himself, Ms. SCHAKOWSKY, Mr. VAN DREW, Ms. 

BARRAGA ́N, Mr. KEAN of New Jersey, and Mr. CARTER of Louisiana) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on the 

Judiciary 

A BILL 

To prohibit certain activities involving kangaroos and 

kangaroo products, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Kangaroo Protection 

5 Act of 2023’’. 

6 SEC. 2. KANGAROOS AND KANGAROO PRODUCTS. 

7 (a) DEFINITIONS.—In this section: 

8 (1) KANGAROO.—The term ‘‘kangaroo’’ means 

9 a dead animal or a part thereof of the species— 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 4995 IH

1 (A) Macropus fuliginosus (commonly 

2 known as the ‘western grey kangaroo’); 

3 (B) Macropus giganteus (commonly known 

4 as the ‘eastern grey kangaroo’); 

5 (C) Osphranter robustus (commonly known 

6 as the ‘common wallaroo’); or 

7 (D) Osphranter rufus (commonly known as 

8 the ‘red kangaroo’). 

9 (2) KANGAROO PRODUCT.—The term ‘‘kan10 garoo product’’ means an item that is composed in 

11 whole or in part of a kangaroo. 

12 (b) UNLAWFUL ACTS.—It is unlawful for any person 

13 to knowingly— 

14 (1) bring into the United States for commercial 

15 purposes, possess with the intent to sell, or sell a 

16 kangaroo; or 

17 (2) introduce or manufacture for introduction 

18 into, sell or offer to sell, trade, advertise, transport, 

19 or distribute in interstate commerce a kangaroo 

20 product. 

21 (c) CRIMINAL PENALTIES.— 

22 (1) IN GENERAL.—Any person who knowingly 

23 violates this section shall be fined not more than 

24 $10,000, or imprisoned for not more than 1 year, or 

25 both. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
3 

•HR 4995 IH

1 (2) SEPARATE OFFENSE.—Each violation of 

2 this section shall be a separate offense and the of3 fense is deemed to have been committed in the dis4 trict in which the defendant may have taken or been 

5 in possession of the kangaroo or kangaroo product. 

6 (d) REGULATIONS.—The Secretary of Commerce, in 

7 consultation with the Attorney General, the Secretary of 

8 Agriculture, and any other agency the Secretary of Com9 merce determines appropriate, shall issue regulations nec10 essary to implement this section. 

11 (e) EFFECTIVE DATE.—Subsections (a), (b), and (c) 

12 shall take effect on the date that is 180 days after the 

13 date of the enactment of this section. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 59 (Tuesday, March 28, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 15911]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-7543]



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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. MG88-5-005]


Koch Gateway Pipeline Co.; Notice of Filing

March 22, 1995.
    Take notice that on March 1, 1995, Koch Gateway Pipeline Company 
(Koch), filed revised standards of conduct to reflect changes required 
by Order Nos. 566 through 566-B.\1\

    \1\Standards of Conduct and Reporting Requirements for 
Transportation and Affiliate Transactions, Order No. 566, 59 FR 
32885 (June 27, 1994), III FERC Stats. & Regs. 30,997 (June 17, 
1994); Order No. 566-A order on rehearing, 59 FR 52896 (October 20, 
1994), 69 FERC 61,044 (October 14 1994); Order No. 566-B, order on 
rehearing, 59 FR 65707, (December 21, 1994); 69 FERC 61,334 
(December 14 1994); appeal docketed sub nom. Conoco, Inc. v. FERC, 
D.C. Cir No. 94-1745 (December 13, 1994).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Koch states that copies of its filing were mailed to all current 
jurisdictional customers, interested governmental bodies and parties on 
the official service list compiled by the Secretary.
    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 or 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211 or 385.214). All such motions to 
intervene or protest should be filed on or before April 6, 1995. 
Protests will be considered by the Commission in determining the 
appropriate action to be taken but will not serve to make 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. 95-7543 Filed 3-27-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
Order entered July 29, 2014

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 13
- 01659
- CR No. 05
- 13
- 01660
- CR CHRISTOPHER ADDISON, Appellant

V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee On Appeal from the 204th Judicial District Court

Dallas Coun ty, Texas Trial Court Cause No s . F06
- 63021
- Q , F12
- 71987
- Q



### O RDER
The Court ORDERS the Dallas County District Clerk to file the clerk’s records in these appeals within FIFTEEN DAYS of the date of this order.
We DIRECT the Clerk to send copies of this order , by electronic transmission, to Gary Fitzsimmons, Dallas County District Clerk, and to counsel for all parties.

/s/ DAVID EVANS JUSTICE
The Honorable Russell G. Clark, United States District Judge 1

for the Western District of Missouri.

___________

No. 96-1005

___________

United States of America, *

 *

Appellee, *

 *

v. * Appeal from the United States

 * District Court for the 

Lewis Coker, also known as David * Western District of Missouri.

L. Coker, also known as Bucky *

Coker, also known as Louis Coker,* [UNPUBLISHED]

 *

Appellant. *

___________

 Submitted: April 29, 1996

 Filed: May 3, 1996

___________

Before McMILLIAN, WOLLMAN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Following his incarceration on a drug charge, Lewis Coker commenced

his term of supervised release; one of the conditions prohibited him from

excessive use of alcohol, and another required him to notify his probation

officer within seventy-two hours of being arrested or questioned by a law

enforcement officer. During his release term, Coker was twice arrested for

driving while intoxicated; Coker failed to notify his probation officer

about his second arrest. The government moved to revoke Coker's supervised

release. After a hearing, at which Coker admitted to violating his

supervised release conditions, the district court revoked Coker's

1

supervised release, and sentenced him to 12 months imprisonment and
-2-

one year of supervised release. On appeal, Coker argues the district court

failed to consider and explicitly state its reason for not permitting him

to participate in a substance abuse treatment program as an alternative to

incarceration. We affirm.

A review of the record shows that the district court revoked Coker's

supervised release and sentenced him to imprisonment because Coker posed

a threat to the public, thus rejecting Coker's plea for treatment as an

alternative to incarceration. As Coker was sentenced within the applicable

Guidelines sentencing range, the district court was not required to

explicitly state the reason for the sentence imposed. See United States

v. Caves, 73 F.3d 823, 825 (8th Cir. 1996) (per curiam). Accordingly, we

conclude the district court did not abuse its discretion by sentencing

Coker to 12 months imprisonment. See United States v. Carr, 66 F.3d 981,

983 (8th Cir. 1995) (standard of review).

Finally, as Coker's counsel filed a brief pursuant to Anders v.

California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), we have reviewed the record from the

revocation hearing and find no nonfrivolous issues. See Penson v. Ohio,

488 U.S. 75, 80 (1988).

The judgment is affirmed.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
Electronically Filed

Intermediate Court of Appeals

CAAP-11-0000653

31-MAR-2014

11:20 AM
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-2018-0025-5958

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
clavis_s1a-ex1012.htm








Exhibit 10.12


 


 


Abstract for the loan agreement with Hyun Sook Choi


 



	
Parties of the an agreement

	
Hyun Sook Choi, Clavis Technologies


	
The date of an agreement

	
2010.03.31


	
The amount of loan

	
\ 50,000,000


	
The date of repayment

	
2011.09.30


	
The interest

	
12% / a year


	
Contents of the contract

	
- Clavis can prepay the loan at any time.


- When Clavis prepays the loan, this agreement will expire.


- If Clavis cannot payback by September 30, 2011, Hyun Sook Choi may ask for loan to be paid in shares of Clavis common stock.
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

February 4, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-3850

II-VI Incorporated:

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
```
[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: 95-7545]

[[Page 15912]]

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

[Docket No. RP95-80-001]

National Fuel Gas Supply Corp.; Notice of Supplemental Compliance 
Filing

March 22, 1995.
    Take notice that on March 16, 1995, National Fuel Gas Supply 
Corporation (National) tendered a supplemental filing to its February 
14, 1995, compliance filing in the above-captioned proceeding.
    National states that this filing proposes to answer all outstanding 
concerns regarding its request for waiver of Section 21 of its FERC Gas 
Tariff, Third Revised Volume No. 1. National states that it requested 
waiver of Section 21 to the extent necessary to recover interest 
accrued between the time it is billed for upstream Account No. 186 and 
191 costs and the time it receives payment from its customers, after 
the Commission authorizes the flow through.
    Any person 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 on or before March 28, 1995. Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceeding. Copies of this filing are on file with the Commission and 
are available for public inspection.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-7545 Filed 3-27-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
```
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.2
                                                     Consent of BDO Seidman, LLP


              CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

MULTIMEDIA GAMES, INC.
AUSTIN, TEXAS

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration
statement of Multimedia Games, Inc., on Form S-8 (File No. 333-23123) of our
report dated December 27, 1999, relating to the consolidated financial
statements and schedule of Multimedia Games, Inc. and subsidiaries appearing in
the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended September 30, 1999.


BDO Seidman, LLP

Houston, Texas
December 29, 1999
Exhibit 32.2



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

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Universal Capital Management, Inc. (the Company) for the quarter ending January 31, 2013 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Michael D. Queen, Principal Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that, to 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 result of operations of the Company.



/s/ Michael D. Queen

Michael D. Queen,

Principal Financial Officer

March 14, 2013
EXHIBIT 31.1
 CERTIFICATIONS OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER
 PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Cole Credit Property Trust II, 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)) and internal control over financial reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules
13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the registrant and have:
     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 (or persons performing the equivalent
functions):
   Cole Credit Property Trust II, Inc.Date:      May 11, 2011
    By:
    /s/ Christopher H. ColeName:
    Christopher H. ColeTitle:
    Chief Executive Officer
and President (Principal
Executive Officer)
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 62 (Friday, March 31, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 16696]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-7985]



[[Page 16696]]

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION


Charlotte/Douglas International Airport, Charlotte, NC; 
Environmental Impact Statement

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), DOT.

ACTION: Notice of Intent.

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

SUMMARY: The Federal Aviation Administration intends to prepare an 
Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) to address environmental and 
related impacts expected to be associated with the expansion of 
Charlotte/Douglas International Airport located at Charlotte, North 
Carolina.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Thomas M. Roberts, Federal Aviation 
Administration, Atlanta Airports District Office, 1701 Columbia Avenue, 
Suite 2-260, College Park, Georgia 30337-2747 (404) 305-7153.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The Federal Aviation Administration will 
prepare an EIS for the proposed project to construct and operate a 
third parallel runway west of the existing runway 18R/36L with 
associated taxiways and other related facilities. The location and 
length of the runway will be determined in conjunction with the Airport 
Master Plan Update (AMP) and Part 150 Noise Compatibility Program (NCP) 
which will be conducted in the same time frame as the EIS except under 
separate contracts. The planning for the third parallel runway will 
require close coordination between the EIS and AMP and NCP contractors.
    The FAA plans to coordinate with Federal, State, and local agencies 
which have jurisdiction by law or special expertise with respect to any 
environmental impacts associated with the proposed project.
    The EIS will also evaluate cumulative impacts anticipated to occur 
as a result of the implementation of other foreseeable future 
improvements at the Charlotte/Douglas International Airport.
    It is anticipated a Request For Qualifications will be advertised 
in April or May of this year for a consultant to prepare the EIS.

Public Scoping: The Federal Aviation Administration will hold a scoping 
meeting to solicit input from Federal, State, and local agencies which 
have jurisdiction by law or have specific expertise with respect to any 
environmental impacts associated with the project. In addition, a 
public scoping meeting will be held and the public may submit written 
comments on the scope of the environmental study to the address 
identified in FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT. A Public Notice issued 
at a later date will provide the date, time, and place of the scoping 
meeting and the period for written comments.

    Issued in Atlanta, Georgia, on March 22, 1995.
Howard M. Robinson,
Manager, Atlanta Airports District Office.
[FR Doc. 95-7985 Filed 3-30-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-13-M
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-2018-0025-3973

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
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-2018-0025-4974

Apergy ESP Systems, LLC:

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