alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 71 (Thursday, April 13, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 18858]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-9121]



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


DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--Unixware Technology Group Inc.

    Notice is hereby given that, on December 12, 1994, pursuant to 
section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 
1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), UnixWare Technology Group 
Inc. (UTG) has filed written notifications simultaneously with the 
Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing changes in 
its membership. The notifications were filed for the purpose of 
extending the Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust 
plaintiffs to actual damages under specified circumstances. 
Specifically, the identities of the new members are: Concurrent 
Computer, Westford, MA; Cray Research Eadan, MI; and Eicon 
Technologies, Montreal, Quebec, CANADA. In addition, Microport has 
discontinued its membership with UTG.
    No other changes have been made in either the membership or planned 
activity of the group research project. Membership remains open, and 
UTG intends to file additional written notification disclosing all 
changes in membership.
    On July 19, 1994, UnixWare Technology Group, Inc., filed its 
original notification pursuant to section 6(a) of the Act. A notice was 
published in the Federal Register pursuant to section 6(b) of the Act 
on March 23, 1995 (60 FR 15305).
Constance K. Robinson,
Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 95-9121 Filed 4-12-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-01-M
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

September 17, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number USTR-2018-0025-5161

Bergstrom, 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/%2434_Billion_Exclusions_Gr

anted_September.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

May 29, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number USTR-2018-0025-6480

OK International, 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,

Joseph Barloon

General Counsel
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-2018-0025-6960

General Motors:

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,

Joseph Barloon

General Counsel
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 October 31, 2012 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

December 14, 2012
EXHIBIT 99.1
                                                                    ------------



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



Each of the undersigned hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as
adopted  pursuant  to  Section  906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that this
Annual  Report  on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2002 fully complies
with  the  requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
of  1934,  as  amended,  and  the  information  contained  in such report fairly
presents,  in  all  material  respects,  the  financial condition and results of
operations  of  the  Company.

This  27  day  of  March,  2003.



/s/  Joseph  W.  Evans
----------------------
Chief  Executive  Officer


/s/  J.  Daniel  Speight
------------------------
Chief  Financial  Officer


A  signed  original  of  this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided  to  Flag  Financial Corporation and will be retained by Flag Financial
Corporation.


<PAGE>
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

September 17, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number USTR-2018-0025-6602

Petroleum Equipment & Services Association: 

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/%2434_Billion_Exclusions_Gr

anted_September.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 72 (Friday, April 14, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 19026]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-9271]



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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
[I.D. 032495D]


Marine Mammals

AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and 
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.

ACTION: Modification no. 1 to scientific research permit no. 887 
(P79H).

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that a request for modification of 
scientific research permit no. 887, submitted by the Institute of 
Marine Sciences, University of California, Santa Cruz, CA 95064 
(principal investigator: Dr. Ronald J. Schusterman), has been granted.

ADDRESSES: The permit, as modified, and related documents are available 
for review upon written request or by appointment, in the following 
offices:
    Permits Division, Office of Protected Resources, NMFS, 1315 East-
West Highway, Room 13130, Silver Spring, MD 20910 (301/713-2289); and
    Director, Southwest Region, NMFS, 501 W. Ocean Boulevard, Suite 
4200, Long Beach, CA 90802-4213 (310/980-4015).

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On January 25, 1995, notice was published in 
the Federal Register (60 FR 4891) that a modification of permit no. 
887, issued March 16, 1994 (59 FR 12266), had been requested by the 
above-named organization. The modification was granted under authority 
of the Marine Mammal Protection Act of 1972, as amended 16 U.S.C. 1361 
et seq.) and, the Regulations Governing the Taking and Importing of 
Marine Mammals (50 CFR part 216).
    The permittee is authorized to retain one beached/stranded 
rehabilitated elephant seal obtained from Sea World (identified as SWC-
MA-94-30B). Experiments to measure the seals' visual sensitivity to 
white light will be conducted.

    Dated: April 10, 1995.
Ann D. Terbush,
Chief, Permits & Documentation Division, National Marine Fisheries 
Service.
[FR Doc. 95-9271 Filed 4-13-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F
Presidential Documents

17981

Federal Register

Vol. 60, No. 68

Monday, April 10, 1995

Title 3—

The President

Proclamation 6782 of April 6, 1995

National Former Prisoner of War Recognition Day, 1995

By the President of the United States of America

A Proclamation

In the centuries since our Nation was founded, our citizens have been

called on time and again to defend the blessings of American democracy.

Although the enemies of freedom have often risen from distant shores,

the valiant men and women who wear our Nation’s uniform have made

freedom’s fight their own. From Europe to the Pacific, Korea to the Persian

Gulf, these Americans and their families have suffered through the darkest

hours of humanity so that the cause of human dignity might endure.

It is in gratitude that we pause each year to recall the courage and to

honor the service of the sons and daughters of America who have been

held as prisoners of war. Few words can express the depth of their sacrifice

or the worthiness of their mission. Often subjected to extreme brutality

in violation of international codes and customs governing their treatment,

many of our people have come home with disabling wounds and injuries.

Too many of our people have not come home at all.

Today, the lives of these extraordinary Americans and the stories of their

indomitable spirits are at the core of our national character. The citizens

of the United States will always remember the proud individuals who traded

their liberty to preserve our own. We will build on the triumphs of democracy

that they have helped to ensure. And in speaking of their bravery, we

will tell our children and grandchildren that though bodies may be imprisoned, hearts can remain ever free.

NOW, THEREFORE, I, WILLIAM J. CLINTON, President of the United States

of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution

and laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim April 9, 1995, as ‘‘National

Former Prisoner of War Recognition Day.’’ I urge State and local officials,

private organizations, and U.S. citizens everywhere to join in honoring the

members of the United States Armed Forces who have been held as prisoners

of war. I call upon all Americans to observe this day with appropriate

ceremonies and activities.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this sixth day of

April, in the year of our Lord nineteen hundred and ninety-five, and of

the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and

[FR Doc. 95–8922

Filed 4-6-95; 3:17 pm]

Billing code 3195–01–P

nineteenth.

œ–
#### Jesse BROWN, Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

No. WD 52038.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

May 21, 1996.

*97Rose M. Wibbenmeyer, Asst. Public Defender, Columbia, for appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Attorney General, John M. Morris, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, for respondent.

Before EDWIN H. SMITH, P.J., and BRECKENRIDGE and ELLIS, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM:

Jesse Brown appeals from the dismissal of his Rule 24.035 motion for postconviction relief based upon the motion being filed out of time.

Judgment affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
## Court of Appeals Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

In re Paris Independent School District, et al.

No. 06

- 21

- 00081

- CV Original Mandamus Proceeding

Memorandum Opinion delivered by Justice Stevens

, Chief Justice Morriss and Justice Burgess participating

.

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find that Relator is not entitled to the relief sought. Therefore, we deny the petition.

RENDERED OCTOBER 1 9 , 2021 BY ORDER OF THE COURT JOSH R. MORRISS, III CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST: Debr a K. Autrey , Clerk
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 55 (Wednesday, March 22, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 15157]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-6975]



[[Page 15157]]

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Office of Surface Mining Reclamation and Enforcement


Information Collection Submitted to the Office of Management and 
Budget for Review Under the Paperwork Reduction Act

    The proposal for the collection of information listed below has 
been submitted to the Office of Management and Budget for approval 
under the provisions of the Paperwork Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. Chapter 
35). Copies of the proposed collection of information, related form and 
explanatory material may be obtained by contacting the Bureau's 
clearance officer at the phone number listed below. Comments and 
suggestions on the requirements should be made directly to the Bureau 
clearance officer and to the Office of Management and Budget, Paperwork 
Reduction Project (1029-0039), Washington, DC 20503, telephone 202-395-
7340.

Title: Underground Mining Permit Applications--Minimum Requirements for 
Reclamation and Operation Plans--30 CFR 784.

OMB Number: 1029-0039.

Abstract: Sections 507(b), 508(a) and 516(b) of Public Law 95-87 
require underground coal mine permit applicants to submit an operations 
and reclamation plan and establish performance standards for the mining 
operation. Information submitted is used by the regulatory authority to 
determine if the applicant can comply with the applicable performance 
and environmental standards in Public Law 95-87.

Bureau Form Number: None.

Frequency: On occasion.

Description of Respondents: Underground Coal Mining Operators.

Estimated Completion Time: 513 hours.

Annual Responses: 100.

Annual Burden Hours: 51,261.

Bureau Clearance Officer: John A. Trelease, (202) 343-1475.

    Dated: January 10, 1995.

Andrew F. DeVito,

Chief, Branch of Environmental and Economic Analysis.

[FR Doc. 95-6975 Filed 3-21-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4310-05-M
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-2018-0025-5223

Bergstrom, 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/%2434_Billion_Exclusions_Gr

anted_September_2019.pdf. 

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 exclusion notice. The scope of the exclusion is governed by the scope of the 10-digit HTSUS 

subheadings and product descriptions in the annex to the product exclusion notice, and not by the 

product descriptions set out in any particular request for exclusion. 

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
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

ALFREDO ROMAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

 v. 

RANDY BLADES, Warden, Sued in their 

individual and official capacity and their 

successors in office; BRIAN 

KINGENSMITH, Sued in their individual 

and official capacity and their successors in 

office, 

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 16-35575 

D.C. No. 1:15-cv-00241-BLW 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Idaho

B. Lynn Winmill, Chief Judge, Presiding

Submitted January 16, 2018**

Before: REINHARDT, TROTT, and HURWITZ, Circuit Judges.

Alfredo Roman, an Idaho state prisoner, appeals pro se from the district 

court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging due process 

 

* 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

JAN 19 2018

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 16-35575 

claims arising from a disciplinary hearing. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. 

§ 1291. We review de novo dismissal under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A. Nordstrom v. 

Ryan, 762 F.3d 903, 908 (9th Cir. 2014). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Roman’s due process claim regarding 

the payment of restitution because Roman failed to allege facts sufficient to show 

that he was not provided with an adequate pre-deprivation hearing under Mathews 

v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319 (1976). See Shinault v. Hawks, 782 F.3d 1053, 1057 

(9th Cir. 2015) (noting that inmate’s account funds are a protected property interest 

and describing the Mathews balancing test to determine “whether a pre-deprivation 

hearing is required and what specific procedures must be employed at that hearing 

given the particularities of the deprivation”).

The district court properly dismissed Roman’s due process claims arising 

from his placement in disciplinary and administrative segregation because Roman 

failed to allege facts sufficient to show a protected liberty interest or an “atypical 

and significant hardship.” Sandin v. Conner, 515 U.S. 472, 483-85 (1995) (a 

prisoner has no protected liberty interest when the sanction imposed neither 

extends the length of his sentence nor imposes an “atypical and significant 

hardship”); Serrano v. Francis, 345 F.3d 1071, 1077-78 (9th Cir. 2003) (due 

process procedural protections “adhere only when the disciplinary action 

implicates a protected liberty interest”).
3 16-35575 

We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued 

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

AFFIRMED.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Tony Hill, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Coffinas, J.), rendered October 3, 1986, convicting him of robbery in the first degree (three counts), and kidnapping in the second degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

We have reviewed the record and agree with the defendant’s assigned counsel that there are no meritorious issues which could be raised on appeal. Counsel’s application for leave to withdraw as counsel is granted *(see, Anders v California,*386 US 738; *People v Paige,*54 AD2d 631; *cf., People v Gonzalez,*47 NY2d 606). Bracken, J. P., Lawrence, Eiber, Harwood and Rosenblatt, JJ., concur.