alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 62 (Friday, March 31, 1995)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 16575-16576]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-7970]



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


DEPARTMENT OF THE TREASURY
26 CFR Part 18

[TD 7976]


Certain Elections Under the Deficit Reduction Act of 1984; 
Correction

AGENCY: Internal Revenue Service, Treasury.

ACTION: Correcting amendment.

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

SUMMARY: This document contains a correction to the temporary 
regulations (TD 7976), which were published in the Federal Register on 
Monday, September 10, 1984 (49 FR 35486), relating to the time and 
manner of making certain elections under the Deficit Reduction Act of 
1984.

EFFECTIVE DATE: March 31, 1995.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Cynthia Grigsby, (202) 622-7180 (not a 
toll-free call).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Background

    The temporary regulations that are the subject of this correction 
are under various sections of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 and the 
Deficit Reduction Act of 1984 (98 Stat. 494).

Need for Correction

    As published, TD 7976 contains an error which may prove to be 
misleading and is in need of clarification.

List of Subjects in 26 CFR Part 18

    Income taxes, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.

    Accordingly, 26 CFR part 18 is corrected by making the following 
correcting amendment:

PART 18--TEMPORARY INCOME TAX REGULATIONS UNDER THE SUBCHAPTER S 
REVISION ACT OF 1982

    Paragraph 1. The authority citation for part 18 continues to read 
in part as follows:

    [[Page 16576]] Authority: 26 U.S.C. 7805 * * *.

    Par. 2. Section 18.0 is revised to read as follows:


Sec. 18.0  Effective date of temporary regulations under the Subchapter 
S Revision Act of 1982.

    The temporary regulations provided under Secs. 18.1361-1, 18.1377-
1, 18.1379-1, and 18.1379-2 are effective with respect to taxable years 
beginning after 1982, and the temporary regulations provided under 
Sec. 18.1378-1 are effective with respect to elections made after 
October 19, 1982.
Cynthia E. Grigsby,
Chief, Regulations Unit, Assistant Chief Counsel (Corporate).
[FR Doc. 95-7970 Filed 3-30-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4830-01-P
#### Carlos WHITBY, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. 67205.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

May 23, 1995.

Douglas R. Hoff, Asst. Public Defender, St. Louis, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Traci J. Sanders, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before GRIMM, C.J., REINHARD, P.J., and CRAHAN, J.

PER CURIAM.

Defendant, Carlos Whitby, pleaded guilty in one proceeding to charges raised in two separate causes. In the first cause, Defendant was charged with committing first-degree assault, kidnapping, first-degree robbery, first-degree conspiracy to commit murder and three counts of armed criminal action. In the second cause, Defendant was charged with committing first-degree assault, armed criminal action and unlawful use of a weapon. The court sentenced Defendant to serve a total of thirty years imprisonment on concurrent sentences in the first cause and a total of ten years imprisonment on concurrent sentences in the second cause. The *160court ordered that the sentences imposed in the two causes run consecutively. Defendant timely filed a Rule 24.035 motion and an amended motion to vacate the judgment and sentence, alleging ineffective assistance of counsel. The motion court denied Defendant’s motion without an evidentiary hearing.

We have reviewed the briefs of the parties and the record on appeal and find that the motion court’s judgment is *not*clearly erroneous. An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential value nor would it serve any jurisprudential purpose. The judgment is affirmed in accordance with Rule 84.16(b).
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 58 (Monday, March 27, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 15811]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-7372]



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

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
[CGD8-95-004]


Houston/Galveston Navigation Safety Advisory Committee Meeting

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Houston/Galveston Navigation Safety Advisory Committee 
(HOGANSAC) will meet to discuss waterway improvements, aids to 
navigation, electronic chart systems, and various other navigation 
safety matters affecting the Houston/Galveston area. The meeting will 
be open to the public.

DATES: The meeting will be held from 9 a.m. to approximately 1 p.m. on 
Thursday, May 18, 1995.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held in the conference room of the 
Houston Pilots Office, 8150 South Loop East, Houston, Texas.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
LTJG D. E. Rowlett, Recording Secretary, Commander, Eighth Coast Guard 
District (oan), Room 1211, Hale Boggs Federal Building, 501 Magazine 
Street, New Orleans, LA 70130-3396, telephone (504) 589-6235.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice of this meeting is given pursuant to 
the Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. App. 2 1 et seq. The 
meeting is open to the public. Members of the public may present 
written or oral statements at the meeting.
    The tentative agenda for the meeting will consist of the following 
items:
    (1) ``Dead zones'' in the Vessel Traffic Service Houston's VHF-FM 
radio coverage.
    (2) Various Coast Guard aids to navigation improvement initiatives 
and waterway analysis studies.
    (3) Updates from the U.S. Army Corps on various waterway 
improvement projects.
    (4) Discussion on deployment of NOAA real-time current meters.
    (5) Discussion of Electronic Chart Display and Information Systems.

    Dated: March 8, 1995.
R.C. North,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District.
[FR Doc. 95-7372 Filed 3-24-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-14-M
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 64 (Tuesday, April 4, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 17060]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-8137]



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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE
Office of the Secretary


U.S. Strategic Command Strategic Advisory Group

AGENCY: Department of Defense, USSTRATCOM.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Strategic Advisory Group (SAG) will meet in closed session 
on April 20 and 21, 1995.
    The mission of the SAG is to provide timely advice on scientific, 
technical, and policy-related issues to the Commander in Chief, U.S. 
Strategic Command, during the development of the nation's strategic 
warplans. At this meeting, the SAG will discuss strategic issues that 
relate to the development of the Single Integrated Operational Plan 
(SIOP). Full development of the topics will require discussion of 
information classified TOP SECRET in accordance with Executive Order 
12356, April 2, 1982. Access to this information must be strictly 
limited to personnel having requisite security clearances and specific 
need-to-know. Unauthorized disclosure of the information to be 
discussed at the SAG meeting could have exceptionally grave impact upon 
national defense.
    In accordance with section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee 
Act, Public law 92-463, as amended (5 U.S.C. App. II (1988)), it has 
been determined that this SAG meeting concerns matters listed in 5 
U.S.C. 552b(c)(1) (1988), and that, accordingly, this meeting will be 
closed to the public.

    Dated: March 29, 1995.
L.M. Bynum,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 95-8137 Filed 4-3-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5000-04-M
#### In the Matter of Ronald B. Freeman et al., Petitioners, v Benjamin Ward, as Police Commissioner of the City of New York, et al., Respondents.

Determination of the respondent Police Commissioner of the City of New York, dated April 22, 1988, which imposed a penalty of 30 days’ suspension, including forfeiture of pay, benefits and service time lost as a consequence of the suspension, is unanimously confirmed, the petition denied and the proceeding, commenced pursuant to CPLR article 78 and transferred to this court by order of the Supreme Court, New York County (Michael Dontzin, J.), entered January 20, 1989, dismissed without costs or disbursements.

The Commissioner’s determination that petitioners did knowingly make false statements to their superiors, both at the accident scene and at an official department interview, regarding their chase of a vehicle on April 21, 1987, is supported by substantial evidence. *(300 Gramatan Ave. Assocs. v State Div. of Human Rights,*45 NY2d 176 [1978].)

The testimony of eyewitnesses Vincent Dicio and Peter Barbarito supports respondents’ determination of the petitioners’ guilt of the preferred charges. The Hearing Officer was free to reject petitioners’ testimony and to credit that of the eyewitnesses. Weighing the evidence and choosing between conflicting evidence is solely within the province of the administrative agency. *(Matter of Collins v Codd,*38 NY2d 269, 270-271 [1976].)

The penalty of 30 days’ suspension and loss of corresponding benefits is not so disproportionate to the offense as to be shocking to one’s sense of fairness. *(Matter of Pell v Board of Educ.,*34 NY2d 222, 233 [1974].) Concur—Rosenberger, J. P., Kassal, Ellerin, Smith and Rubin, JJ.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 21.1

                      SUBSIDIARIES OF U.S. CAN CORPORATION
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Name                                     Place Of Organization          Trade Name
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<S>                                      <C>                             <C>
United States Can Company                State Of Delaware, U.S.A.       U.S. Can
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S.C. Europe N.V.                       Netherlands Antilles            N/A
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
U.S.C. Europe Netherlands B.V.           Netherlands                     N/A
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
</TABLE>

NOTE:  U.S.C. Europe Netherlands B.V. has nine foreign subsidiaries engaged in
metal can manufacturing in Europe, and also owns 36.5% of Formametal S.A., an
Argentine metal can manufacturer.
Exhibit 15.2





CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM




We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (File Nos.333-127340 and 333-164696) of our report dated March 27, 2009, with respect to the financial statements of SENSTAR STELLAR LATIN AMERICA, S.A. DE C.V. as of December 31, 2008 and for the two years ended December 31, 2007 and 2008, which appears in this Annual Report on Form 20-F of Magal Security Systems Ltd. for the year ended December 31, 2009.


Mexico, D F
/s/ Salles, Sáinz - Grant Thornton, S. C.April 30, 2010
Salles, Sáinz - Grant Thornton, S. C.
Exhibit 99.1

REPORT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

May 11, 2011

Board of Directors

Killbuck Bancshares, Inc.

We have reviewed the accompanying consolidated balance sheet of Killbuck Bancshares, Inc. and its subsidiary as of March 31, 2011, and
the related consolidated statements of income for the three-month periods ended March 31, 2011 and 2010, and the consolidated statement of changes in stockholders equity for the three-month period ended March 31, 2011 and the
consolidated statements of cash flows for the three-month periods ended March 31, 2011 and 2010. These consolidated financial statements are the responsibility of the Companys management.

We conducted our review in accordance with the standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States). A review of interim financial
information consists principally of applying analytical procedures to financial data and making inquiries of persons responsible for financial and accounting matters. It is substantially less in scope than an audit conducted in accordance with the
standards of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, the objective of which is the expression of an opinion regarding the financial statements taken as a whole. Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion.

Based on our review, we are not aware of any material modifications that should be made to the accompanying financial statements for them to be in
conformity with accounting principles U.S. generally accepted.

We have previously audited, in accordance with the standards of the Public
Company Accounting Oversight Board (United States), the consolidated balance sheet as of December 31, 2010, and the related consolidated statements of income, changes in stockholders' equity, and cash flows for the year then ended (not
presented herein); and in our report dated March 4, 2011 we expressed an unqualified opinion on those consolidated financial statements.



|                        
|------------------------
|/s/ S.R. SNODGRASS, A.C.
|                        
|S.R. Snodgrass, A.C.    
|980 National Road       
|Wheeling, WV 26003      
|Phone: 304-233-5030     
|Facsimile: 304-233-3062
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-2018-0025-5351

Arrowhead Electrical Products, 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 failed to show that this particular product is available 

only from China.

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
renewalincr.htm


Please see attached PDF to Reference this Exhibit 


 


Exhibit 10.2 Renewal Increase Revolving Line of Credit Note, dated June 28, 2011


 


Return to 8K
---

---

Exhibit 15.2

# CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT
REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We consent
to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (File Nos.
333-96929 and 333-127340) of our reports dated June 29, 2008 with respect to the
consolidated financial statements and schedule of Magal Security Systems Ltd.  and the effectivness of internal control over financial reporting of Magal Security Systems Ltd. included in
this Annual Report on Form 20-F for the year ended December 31, 2007 filed with the Security and Exchange Comission.

|                 |                                                             
|---------------- | ------------------------------------------------------------
|
|
|
|
|Tel-Aviv, Israel | /s/ Kost Forer Gabbay & KasiererKOST FORER GABBAY & KASIERER
|June 29, 2008    | A Member of Ernst & Young Global                            
|                 |                                                             



---

---
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-2018-0025-3018

Brooks Instrument 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 did not contain a sufficient product identification or was 

determined to be non-administrable.

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
#### Gerald Carolan et al., Appellants, v Nicholas Mancuso et al., Respondents.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Leonard Cohen, J.), entered on January 25, 1990, unanimously affirmed for the reasons stated by Leonard Cohen, J., without costs and without disbursements. Concur— Kupferman, J. P., Carro, Ellerin and Smith, JJ.
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 5034 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 

2119 Market Square in Christiansted, St. Croix, United States Virgin 

Islands, as the ‘‘Lieutenant General Samuel E. Ebbesen Post Office’’. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 27, 2023 

Ms. PLASKETT introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Oversight and Accountability 

A BILL 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 2119 Market Square in Christiansted, St. 

Croix, United States Virgin Islands, as the ‘‘Lieutenant 

General Samuel E. Ebbesen Post Office’’. 

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

3 SECTION 1. LIEUTENANT GENERAL SAMUEL E. EBBESEN 

4 POST OFFICE. 

5 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

6 Postal Service located at 2119 Market Square in Chris7 tiansted, St. Croix, United States Virgin Islands, shall be 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•HR 5034 IH

1 known and designated as the ‘‘Lieutenant General Samuel 

2 E. Ebbesen Post Office’’. 

3 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg4 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

5 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

6 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Lieutenant General 

7 Samuel E. Ebbesen Post Office’’. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
FILED

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

APRIL 25, 2006

THOMAS K. KAHN

CLERK

 [DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 05-15166

Non-Argument Calendar

________________________

D. C. Docket No. 05-20108-CR-PAS

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

versus 

JOSE MANUEL VAZQUEZ,

a.k.a. Carlos Ernesto Gurri, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_____________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Florida

_____________________

 (April 25, 2006)

Before MARCUS, WILSON and PRYOR, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:
2

Robin J. Farnsworth, appointed counsel for Jose Manuel Vazquez in this

direct criminal appeal, has moved to withdraw from further representation of the

appellant and filed a brief pursuant to Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 87 S,Ct.

1396, 18 L.Ed2d 493 (1967). Our independent review of the entire record reveals

that counsel*s assessment of the relative merit of the appeal is correct. Because

independent examination of the entire record reveals no arguable issues of merit,

counsel*s motion to withdraw is GRANTED, and Vazquez*s conviction and

sentence are AFFIRMED.
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-2018-0025-5357

Kyungshin Lear Sales and Engineering 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 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