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

July 3, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-3246

Speck Pumps-Pool Products, 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.

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
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5200 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 5200

To require a report from the Director of the Secret Service on illicit 
        use of controlled substances at the Executive Residence.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            August 11, 2023

  Mr. Steube introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
To require a report from the Director of the Secret Service on illicit 
        use of controlled substances at the Executive Residence.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Helping Understand Narcotics Traces 
at the Executive Residence Act of 2023'' or as the ``HUNTER Act of 
2023''.

SEC. 2. REPORT ON ILLICIT USE OF CONTROLLED SUBSTANCES IN THE WHITE 
              HOUSE.

    Not later than 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act, 
the Director of the Secret Service shall submit a report to Congress on 
the illicit use of controlled substances present at the White House, 
which shall include--
            (1) steps taken to avoid controlled substances from coming 
        into the White House;
            (2) vulnerabilities where drugs can make its way into the 
        White House;
            (3) a full account of the investigation into the cocaine 
        found at the White House in 2023; and
            (4) recommendations on how Congress can provide oversight 
        or resources to prevent illicit usage of controlled substances 
        in the Executive Branch.
                                 <all>
```
#### STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Mancel L. FRENCH, Defendant, Floyd Trim d/b/a Trim Bonding, Appellant.

No. WD 48159.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

Feb. 1, 1994.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied March 29, 1994.

Application to Transfer Denied May 26, 1994.

F. Randall Waltz, III, Jefferson City, for appellant.

Robert R. Sterner, Pros. Atty., Callaway County, Fulton, for respondent.

Before TURNAGE, P.J., and BRECKENRIDGE and HANNA, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM:

Appeal from the denial of a motion to set aside a bond forfeiture.

The judgment is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
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-2018-0025-5137

Nissan North America, 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 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,

Joseph Barloon

General Counsel
Exhibit 10.6





OPTION AGREEMENT





This Option Agreement evidences the grant of a stock option (the "Option") to purchase shares of common stock, par value $.001 (the "Company Stock"), of Generex Biotechnology Corporation (the "Company") granted to John P. Barratt (the "Optionee") pursuant to the Generex Biotechnology Corporation Amended 2001 Stock Option Plan (the “Plan”), a copy of which is attached to this Option Agreement and incorporated into this Option Agreement by reference.  The Option is subject to the terms, conditions, limitations and restrictions set forth in the Plan, including the following:





a.           The date of grant of the Option is March 25, 2011, and the number of shares of Company Stock that may be purchased upon exercise of the Option is 400,000.





b.           The purchase price (the “Exercise Price”) of Company Stock subject to the Option is $0.282 per share.





c.           The Option shall become exercisable as follows, subject to the terms, conditions, limitations and restrictions set forth in the Plan:  400,000 shares will vest on March 25, 2011.  Only options that have vested may be exercised.





d.           Unless sooner terminated pursuant to the Plan, the Option shall terminate on March 25, 2016.





e.           The Optionee shall pay the Exercise Price for the Option (i) in cash or (ii) by such other method as may be approved by the Compensation Committee of the Company’s Board of Directors.  The Optionee shall pay the amount of any withholding tax due at the time of exercise, as provided in the Plan.





f.           The rights and interests of the Optionee under this Option Agreement may not be sold, assigned, encumbered or otherwise transferred, except, in the event of the death of the Optionee, by will or by the laws of descent and distribution.





g.           Any notice to the Company, including notice of exercise of an Option, shall be addressed to the Company in care of Mark Fletcher at the Company’s principal offices.





IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Option Agreement has been executed on behalf of the Company by a duly authorized officer and by the Optionee effective as of the date of grant of the Option.





GENEREX BIOTECHNOLOGY CORPORATION

ACCEPTED AND AGREED:Per:
/s/ Mark A. Fletcher

/s/  John P. BarrattJohn P. Barratt,OptioneeName:
Mark A. Fletcher,President & CEOPer:
/s/  Stephen FellowsName:
Stephen FellowsActing Chief Financial Officer
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-2018-0025-3374

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
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 7 (Wednesday, January 11, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 2746]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-630]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. RP94-219-000]


Columbia Gulf Transmission Company; Informal Technical Conference

January 5, 1995.
    Take notice that an informal technical conference will be convened 
in this proceeding on January 12, 1995, at 10:00 a.m., at the offices 
of the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, 810 First Street, N.E., 
Washington, D.C.
    Any party, as defined by 18 CFR 385.102(c), or any participant as 
defined by 18 CFR 385.102(b), is invited to attend. Persons wishing to 
become a party must move to intervene and receive intervenor status 
pursuant to the Commission's regulations (18 CFR 385.214).
    For additional information, contact Edith A. Gilmore at (202) 208-
2158 or Hollis J. Alpert at (202) 208-0783.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-630 Filed 1-10-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
II 

117TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 4291 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase the standard 

charitable mileage rate for delivery of meals to elderly, disabled, frail, 

and at-risk individuals. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MAY 24, 2022 

Mr. KING (for himself and Mr. CORNYN) introduced the following bill; which 

was read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL 

To amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to increase 

the standard charitable mileage rate for delivery of meals 

to elderly, disabled, frail, and at-risk individuals. 

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 ‘‘Delivering Elderly 

5 Lunches and Increasing Volunteer Engagement and Reim6 bursements Act of 2022’’ or the ‘‘DELIVER Act of 

7 2022’’. 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 4291 IS

1 SEC. 2. INCREASE IN STANDARD MILEAGE RATE FOR DE2 LIVERY OF MEALS TO ELDERLY, DISABLED, 

3 FRAIL, AND AT-RISK INDIVIDUALS. 

4 (a) IN GENERAL.—Subsection (i) of section 170 of 

5 the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 is amended by adding 

6 at the end the following: ‘‘In the case of use of such an 

7 automobile for the delivery of meals to homebound individ8 uals who are elderly, disabled, frail, or at risk, the mileage 

9 rate used shall be the standard business mileage rate spec10 ified by the Internal Revenue Service for the taxable year 

11 in which such miles are driven.’’. 

12 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendment made by 

13 subsection (a) shall apply to miles driven on or after the 

14 date of the enactment of this Act. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK79L0C42PROD with BILLS
PC
GROUP, INC.

    419
Park Avenue South

    New
York, NY 10016

    


    


    May 5,
2010

    


    Mr. W.
Gray Hudkins

    President
and Chief Executive Officer

    PC Group,
Inc.

    419 Park
Avenue South

    New York,
NY 10016

    


    Re:           Employment
Agreement

    


    Dear
Gray:

    


    In recognition of your agreement to
forego $200,000 of the $300,000 base compensation for fiscal year 2010 to which
you are entitled under your Employment Agreement, dated as of October 1, 2007
(the “Employment Agreement”), between you and PC Group, Inc. (the “Company”),
this letter confirms the Company’s agreement to waive for 2010 the requirement
of Section 2(a) of the Employment Agreement that you devote your “full business
time and energies to the business and affairs of the
Company”.  Instead, during 2010, you agree to devote such business
time and energies to the business and affairs of the Company as the Company and
you shall agree upon, from time to time, as necessary and
appropriate.  In all other respects, the Employment Agreement shall
remain in full force and effect.  This letter is made and executed and
shall be governed by the laws of the State of New York, without regard to the
conflicts of laws principles thereof.

     

    
      
        
        

      

      
        
        

        
          

        

      

      
        
        

      

    

     

    
      
        	
              	

                Sincerely,

              
	 
      	 
      
	 
      	
                PC
      GROUP, INC.

              
	 
      	 
      
	 
      	 
      
	 
      	 
      
	 
      	
                

                  By: 
      /s/ Kathleen
      P.
      Bloch                                     
      

                

              
	 
      	
                Kathleen
      P. Bloch

              
	 
      	
                Vice
      President, Chief Operating Officer 

                and
      Chief Financial Officer

              
	 
      	 
      
	
                AGREED
      AND ACCEPTED:

              	 
      
	 
      	 
      
	 
      	 
      
	 
      	 
      
	
                By: 
      /s/ W.
      Gray
      Hudkins             
      

              	 
      
	
                W.
      Gray Hudkins

              	 
      


      

    

     

    DATE: May
5, 2010
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 66 (Thursday, April 6, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 17614-17615]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-8307]



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


Receipt of Petition for Federal Acknowledgment of Existence as an 
Indian Tribe

    This is published in the exercise of authority delegated by the 
Secretary of the Interior to the Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs by 
209 DM 8.
    Pursuant to 25 CFR 83.9(a) (formerly 25 CFR 54.8(a)) notice is 
hereby given that the Pee Dee Indian Association, Inc., c/o David C. 
Locklear, P.O. Box 557, McColl, South Carolina 29570; has filed a 
petition for acknowledgment by the Secretary of the Interior that the 
group exists as an Indian tribe. The petition was received by the 
Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) on January 30, 1995, and was signed by 
members of the group's governing body.
    This is a notice of receipt of petition and does not constitute 
notice that the petition is under active consideration. Notice of 
active consideration will be sent by mail to the petitioner and other 
interested parties at the appropriate time.
    Under Sec. 83.9(a) (formerly Sec. 54.8(d)) of the Federal 
regulations, interested parties and informed parties may submit factual 
and/or legal arguments in support of or in opposition to the group's 
petition. Any information submitted will be made available on the 
[[Page 17615]] same basis as other information in the BIA's files. Such 
submissions will be provided to the petitioner upon receipt by the BIA. 
The petitioner will be provided an opportunity to respond to such 
submissions prior to a final determination regarding the petitioner's 
status.
    The petition may be examined, by appointment, in the Department of 
the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Branch of Acknowledgment and 
Research, Room 1362-MIB, 1849 C Street, NW., Washington, DC 20240, 
Phone: (202) 208-3592.

    Dated: March 23, 1995.
Ada E. Deer,
Assistant Secretary--Indian Affairs.
[FR Doc. 95-8307 Filed 4-5-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-02-M
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 09-20553

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ELISEO GUZMAN-GALVAN, also known as Eliseo Guzman, also known as

Eliseo Guzman Galvan, also known as Luis Zuniga-Galvan,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 4:09-CR-24-1

Before SMITH, PRADO, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Eliseo GuzmanGalvan has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Guzman-Galvan has not filed a

response. Our independent review of the record and counsel’s brief discloses no

nonfrivolous issue for appeal. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

April 20, 2010

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not *

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

Case: 09-20553 Document: 00511085942 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/20/2010
No. 09-20553

withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein,

and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

2

Case: 09-20553 Document: 00511085942 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/20/2010
<PAGE>
Exhibit 23.3



                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements of
Planet Polymer Technologies, Inc. on Form S-3 (File No. 333-39845) and Form S-8
(No. 333-1042) of our report, which contains an explanatory paragraph relating
to the Corporation's ability to continue as a going concern, dated February 20,
2002 on the financial statements of Planet Polymer Technologies, Inc. as of
December 31, 2001, and for the year then ended, which report is included in this
Annual Report on Form 10-KSB.


                                        J. H. COHN LLP


San Diego, California
March 20, 2002
* Pursuant to 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 99-50295 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus MARIA DIAZ, also known as Maria Luz Lucio De La Cruz, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. EP-98-CR-973-ALL

-------------------- October 19, 1999 Before JONES, SMITH, and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Maria Diaz appeals from her jury conviction for importing a quantity of marijuana and possessing with intent to distribute a quantity of marijuana, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841, 952, and 960. The sole issue raised on appeal is whether the district court erred in allowing the prosecutor to cross examine a defense witness with the fact that she was in jail on a misdemeanor prostitution charge. This court reviews the admission of evidence for abuse ofNo. 99-50295 -2- discretion. United States v. Skipper , 74 F.3d 608, 612 (5th Cir. 1996). Furthermore, even if this court finds an abuse of discretion in the admission or exclusion of evidence, the error is reviewed under the harmless-error doctrine. Id

. Under that doctrine, the court "must affirm evidentiary rulings unless they affect a substantial right of the complaining party." Id . “An error is harmless if the reviewing court is sure, after viewing the entire record, that the error did not influence the jury or had a very slight effect on its verdict.” United States v. Rodriguez , 43 F.3d 117, 123 (5th Cir. 1995). The court has carefully reviewed the record and concludes that the admission of the challenged testimony, whether or not erroneous, was harmless. In light of the overwhelming evidence of Diaz’s guilt, there is not a significant possibility that the challenged testimony would have had a substantial effect on the jury. See United States v. Sanchez-Sotelo , 8 F.3d 202, 210 (5th Cir. 1993).
AFFIRMED.
### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 13

- 10574 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff

- Appellee

v.

ALEJANDRO RUIZ ,
Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:12

- CR

- 296

- 1

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges

. PER CURIAM: *
The attorney appointed to represent Alejandro Ruiz has moved for leave
to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores , 632 F.3d 229 (5th Cir. 2011). Ruiz
has filed two response s

. The re cord is not sufficiently developed to allow us to make a fair evaluation of Ruiz ’s claims of ine ffective assistance of counsel; we
theref ore decline to consider the claims without prejudice to collateral review.

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED June 11, 2015 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 13-10574 Document: 00513075773 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/11/2015No. 13

- 10574

2 See United States v. Isgar , 739 F.3d 829, 841 (5th Cir.), cert. denied , 135 S. Ct.
123 ( 201 4). We have reviewed counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of t he record reflected therein, as well as Ruiz ’s response s . We concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. Accordingly, the motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See
5 TH C IR

. R . 42.2. Case: 13-10574 Document: 00513075773 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/11/2015