alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5                 
<MULTIPLIER>                                   1
<CURRENCY>                                     U.S.
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              JUN-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                                 JUL-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1997
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                1
<CASH>                                         6,083
<SECURITIES>                                   0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  136,434
<ALLOWANCES>                                   15,903
<INVENTORY>                                    208,867
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               449,340
<PP&E>                                         419,287
<DEPRECIATION>                                 378,842
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 501,280
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          1,217,666
<BONDS>                                        45,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       5,531,184
<OTHER-SE>                                     (6,292,570)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   501,280
<SALES>                                        1,288,574
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               1,360,507
<CGS>                                          814,522
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  1,214,133
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               163,600
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             32,637
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (864,384)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (864,384)
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (864,384)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                  (0.17)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.17)
        

</TABLE>
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-2018-0025-2598

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
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 20-0119

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, 

v. 

JOHN LEO STEGER,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and 

good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including October 28, 2020, within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

September 18 2020

09/18/2020

Case Number: DA 20-0119
Exhibit
32.2
















Principal
Financial Officer’s Certification Pursuant To


Section
1350


(furnished,
not filed)














In
connection with the Annual Report of GeoGlobal Resources Inc. (the Company) on
Form 10-KSB/A for the year ending December 31, 2006 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Allan J. Kent, Chief
Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as
adopted pursuant to §906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





1)  The Report fully complies
with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
of 1934; and





2)  The information contained
in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition
and results of operations of the Company.











/s/ Allan J.
Kent








Allan J.
Kent


Chief
Financial Officer


June 3,
2008
Exhibit 10.31




FIFTH AMENDMENT TO EMPLOYMENT AND


NON-COMPETITION AGREEMENT





This Fifth Amendment is made as of the 1st day of July 2011, by and between DAVID M. DeMEDIO (“DeMedio”), and USA TECHNOLOGIES, INC., a Pennsylvania corporation (“USA”).




Background




USA and DeMedio entered into an Employment And Non-Competition Agreement dated April 12, 2005, a First Amendment thereto dated May 11, 2006, a Second Amendment thereto dated March 13, 2007, a Third Amendment thereto dated September 22, 2008, and a Fourth Amendment thereto dated April 14, 2011, and USA has issued a letter to DeMedio dated September 14, 2009 (collectively, the “Employment Agreement”). As more fully set forth herein, the parties desire to amend the Employment Agreement in certain respects.




Agreement




NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the covenants set forth herein, and intending to be legally bound hereby, the parties agree as follows:




1.           Amendment.




A. Subsection (a) of SECTION 2. Compensation and Benefits of the Employment Agreement is hereby deleted and the following new subsection (a) substituted in its place:




1




(a) In consideration of his services rendered, commencing on July 1, 2011, USA shall pay to DeMedio a base salary of $220,000 per year during the Employment Period, subject to any withholding required by law. DeMedio’s base salary may be increased from time to time in the discretion of the Board of Directors.





2.           Modification.  Except as otherwise specifically set forth in Paragraph 1, the Employment Agreement shall not be amended or modified in any respect whatsoever and shall continue in full force and effect.




IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Fifth Amendment as of the day and year first above written.




/s/David M. DeMedioDAVID M. DEMEDIO
 USA TECHNOLOGIES, INC.By:
/s/George R. Jensen, Jr.George R. Jensen, Jr.,Chief Executive Officer
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 18

- 2567

_____________________________
H EATHER N AOMI S TEVENSON , Appellant,

v.

S TATE O F F LORIDA , Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Baker County

. James M. Colaw , Judge

. October 29, 2019

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

. R OBERTS , B ILBREY , and W INOKUR , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________2 Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Megan Long, Assistant Publi c Defender
, Tallahassee, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee
, for Appellee.
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-2018-0025-5306

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
#### STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff/Respondent, v. Wesley HARDEN, Defendant/Appellant.

No. 63589.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

Feb. 14, 1995.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied March 20, 1995.

AppHeation to Transfer Denied April 25, 1995.

Judith C. LaRose, Office of the State Pub-Hc Defender, Columbia, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Fernando Bermudez, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before REINHARD, P.J., and GARY M. GAERTNER and CRAHAN, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals his conviction by a jury of armed criminal action, § 571.015, RSMo 1986. He was sentenced by the court to twelve years imprisonment. We affirm. We have examined the defendant’s points of error and find them to be without merit. An extended opinion would have no precedential value. The parties have been furnished with a memorandum for their information only, setting forth the reasons for this order affirming the judgment pursuant to Rule 30.25(b).
EXHIBIT 32.1
                                                                    ------------

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

In connection with the Quarterly Report of SpeechSwitch, Inc. ("the Company") on
Form 10-QSB/A for the period ended June 30, 2006, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof ("the Report"), I, Bruce R. Knef,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:

1.   The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d)
     of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

2.   The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
     respects the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.




Date: February 7, 2007                 By /s/ Bruce R. Knef
                                          -----------------------------
                                          Bruce R. Knef
                                          President, Chief Executive Officer and
                                          Principal Financial Officer
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

IN THE MATTER

OF J.Z.,

A JUVENILE. §

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 19

- 00049

- CV

Appeal from the

65th District Court

of El Paso County, Texas

(TC# 1601161 )

J U D G M E N T

The Court has considered this cause on the Appellant’s motion to dismiss the appeal and

concludes the motion should be granted and the appeal should be dismissed. We therefore dismiss

the appeal.

It appearing to this Court that Appellant is indigent for purpo ses of appeal, this Court makes

no other order with respect thereto. This decision shall be certified below for observance.

IT IS SO ORDERED THIS 14TH DAY OF AUGUST, 2019.

GINA M. PALAFOX, Justice

Before McClure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Palafox, JJ.
Organization Name:

Note: Representatives submitting on behalf of an organization must enter information below.

Requestor Representative:

Section 301 Investigation: China's Acts, Policies, and Practices Related to Technology 

Transfer, Intellectual Property, and Innovation - Form to Request Exclusion of Product

When submitting a product exclusion request using this form, enter the specified 

information in the following fields and explain the basis and rationale for your statements. 

By completing this form, you certify that the information provided is complete and 

correct to the best of your knowledge. 

1. Indicate whether the comment contains business confidential information (BCI), is a public

document, or is a public version of a BCI document.

3.

2. Please provide a complete and detailed description of the product of concern:

4.

5. Requestor's relationship to the product:

CONTINUED BELOW

*

10-digit HTSUS item number* for product you wish to address in this product exclusion request:

Use numerical characters only with no special characters (example: 1023456789). For help in finding 

the HTSUS item number associated with your product, see https://hts.usitc.gov/

1

7.

6. Does this submission in regulations.gov include additional attachments?

Please indicate whether any additional attachment contains business confidential

information (BCI), is a public document, or is a public version of a BCI document.

VERSION 1

Requestor Information

Requestor Name (Last, First):

Public Version of BCI

SE16, TRENCH BRACE SCREW END

8431100090 Schmidt, Jackie Enerpac Jackie SchmidtImporter Yes Contains BCI
END 2

8. Is this product, or a comparable product, available from sources in the United States?:

VERSION 1

11. Please provide information in support your request, taking account of the instructions

provided in Section B of the Federal Register notice (note: text entered below can extend

beyond the apparent size of this box).

9. Is this product, or a comparable product, available from sources in third countries?:

10. Please provide the value and quantity (with units) of the Chinese-origin product of concern

that you purchased for each calendar year specified. Limit this figure to the products

purchased by your firm (or by members of your trade association) alone. Please provide 

estimates if precise figures are unavailable.

2016 Value:

2015 Value:

2017 Value:

2016 Quantity:

2015 Quantity:

2017 Quantity:

No No BCI BCI BCI BCI BCI BCI

See addendum for additional information.
EXHIBIT 21.1
 
 NAME
    
    INCORPORATIONGLBL Holdings, L.L.C.
    
    LouisianaGIL Holdings, L.L.C
    
    LouisianaGIL Mauritius Holdings, Ltd.
    
    MauritiusGIL Private Services Limited, Mumbai
    
    IndiaGLBL Brasil Oleodutos e Servicos Ltda.
    
    BrazilGlobal Al Rushaid Offshore Company, Ltd. f/k/a Subtec Saudi Arabia Limited
    
    Saudi ArabiaGlobal Asia Pacific Industries, Sdn. Bhd.
    
    MalaysiaGlobal Construction Mauritius Services, Ltd.
    
    MauritiusGlobal Divers and Contractors, L.L.C.
    
    LouisianaGlobal Industries (B)Sdn. Bhd.
    
    BruneiGlobal Industries Asia Pacific Pte, Ltd.
    
    SingaporeGlobal Industries Australia Holding Pty Ltd.
    
    AustraliaGlobal Industries International, L.L.C.
    
    LouisianaGlobal Industries International, L.P.
    
    Cayman IslandsGlobal Industries Mexico Holdings, S. de R.L. de C.V.
    
    MexicoGlobal Industries Offshore (Thailand), Ltd.
    
    ThailandGlobal Industries Offshore Hong Kong Limited
    
    Hong KongGlobal Industries Offshore Labuan Ltd.
    
    LabuanGlobal Industries Offshore Netherlands, BV
    
    The NetherlandsGlobal Industries Offshore Services, S. de R.L. de C.V.
    
    MexicoGlobal Industries Offshore Spain, S.L.
    
    SpainGlobal Industries Offshore, L.L.C.
    
    LouisianaGlobal Industries Services, S. de R.L. de C.V.
    
    MexicoGlobal International Vessels, Ltd.
    
    Cayman IslandsGlobal Movible Offshore, L.L.C.
    
    LouisianaGlobal Offhsore (Malaysia) Sdn. Bhd.
    
    MalaysiaGlobal Offshore International Abu Dhabi LLC
    
    United Arab EmiratesGlobal Offshore International, L.L.C.
    
    LouisianaGlobal Offshore International, Ltd.
    
    Cayman IslandsGlobal Offshore Mexico, S. de R.L. de C.V.
    
    MexicoGlobal Offshore, Pty. Ltd.
    
    AustraliaGlobal Pipelines Plus (Nigeria), Ltd.
    
    NigeriaGlobal Pipelines Plus, L.L.C.
    
    LouisianaGlobal Vessels Mauritius, Ltd.
    
    MauritiusGlobal Vessels Mexico, S. de R.L. de C.V.
    
    MexicoPipelines, L.L.C.
    
    LouisianaPT Global Industries Asia
    
    IndonesiaSubtec Asia Limited
    
    Isle of ManSubtec Marine Services Limited
    
    CyprusSubtec Middle East Limited
    
    DelawareSubtec National, L.L.C.
    
    United Arab EmiratesSubtec Offshore Support, Ltd.
    
    Cyprus
#### STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Kyle T. BABER, Appellant. Kyle T. Reece BABER, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

Nos. 65779, 67491.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

Aug. 29, 1995.

Steven J. Harris, Office of the State Public Defender, Columbia, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Mary Moulton Bryan, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before REINHARD, P.J., and KAROHL and WHITE, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Defendant appeals the judgment entered after his conviction by jury of second degree *130assault. Defendant also appeals the denial, without an evidentiary hearing, of his Rule 29.15 motion. No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. The judgments are affirmed in accordance with Rules 30.25(b) and 84.16(b).
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

May 7, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-2170

Sooriyan Corp:

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

_05.09.19.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
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

September 26, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number USTR-2018-0025-5031

Radio Systems 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 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,

Joseph Barloon

General Counsel
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

**COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,**

**Respondent**

**v.**

**CAMERON ARTHUR HARINARAIN,**

**Petitioner :** 

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**:**

**: No. 159 MM 2014** 

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW **, this 21 st** 

**day of November, 2014, the Petition for Leave to F ile** 

**Petition for Allowance of Appeal Nunc Pro Tunc is** DENIED

**.**