alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

375 

CA 11-02045 

PRESENT: SCUDDER, P.J., CENTRA, CARNI, LINDLEY, AND MARTOCHE, JJ. 

 

IN THE MATTER OF MARTIN J. SAWMA, 

PETITIONER-APPELLANT, 

V MEMORANDUM AND ORDER

CHRIS COLLINS, COUNTY EXECUTIVE, COUNTY OF 

ERIE, RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT.

 

LAW OFFICE OF MICHAEL KUZMA, BUFFALO (MICHAEL KUZMA OF COUNSEL), FOR

PETITIONER-APPELLANT. 

LIPPES MATHIAS WEXLER FRIEDMAN LLP, BUFFALO (VINCENT M. MIRANDA OF

COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT-RESPONDENT. 

 

Appeal from a judgment (denominated decision and order) of the

Supreme Court, Erie County (Timothy J. Walker, A.J.), entered December

8, 2010 in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78. The judgment

dismissed the petition. 

It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is

unanimously affirmed without costs.

Memorandum: Petitioner appeals from a judgment dismissing his

CPLR article 78 petition that sought disclosure of certain records of

respondent pursuant to the Freedom of Information Law ([FOIL] Public

Officers Law art 6). We agree with Supreme Court that the documents

sought are exempt from disclosure pursuant to Public Officers Law § 87

(2) (g) inasmuch as they are inter-agency or intra-agency materials

that are not statistical or factual tabulations or data, instructions

to staff that affect the public, or final agency policy or

determinations. Respondent met his burden of establishing that the

documents were part of a government decision-making process that

involved the use of consultation, and such predecisional material that

an agency decision-maker uses to arrive at a decision is exempt from

FOIL disclosure (see Matter of Xerox Corp. v Town of Webster, 65 NY2d

131; Matter of Bass Pro, Inc. v Megna, 69 AD3d 1040). In light of our

determination, we need not address the remaining exemptions under FOIL

upon which respondent relies.

Entered: March 16, 2012 Frances E. Cafarell

Clerk of the Court
<PAGE>
 
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.35

International Digital Investors, Inc.
January 15, 1997
Page 1

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

                     INTERNATIONAL DIGITAL INVESTORS, L.P.
                        701 BRICKELL AVENUE, SUITE 2420
                             MIAMI, FLORIDA  33131


                               January 15, 1997


STYLES ON VIDEO, INC.
667 Rancho Conejo Boulevard
Newbury Park, California  91320

Gentlemen:

     Reference is hereby made to that certain Securities Exchange Agreement
dated January 15, 1997 between Styles on Video, Inc. ("SOV"), a Delaware
corporation, and International Digital Investors, L.P. ("IDI"), a Delaware
limited partnership, pursuant to which SOV agreed to exchange 2,943,605 shares
(the "Initial Shares") of its common stock, par value $.001 per share (the
"Common Stock"), for the Series A Warrant held by IDI representing the right to
acquire 3,914,882 shares of Common Stock, and to exchange 1,403,882 shares (the
"Remaining Shares") of Common Stock for such portion of the Series B Warrant
held by IDI equal to the right to acquire 1,867,029 shares of Common Stock.
Reference is further made to the fact that certain holders of SOV warrants (the
"Qualified Warrants"), including IDI, may be entitled to exchange such Qualified
Warrants for a pro rata portion of the Remaining Shares.

     It is our understanding that SOV intends to seek, and expects to receive,
timely shareholder approval to increase the number of authorized but unissued
shares of Common Stock to such number equal to or in excess of the number of
shares of Common Stock underlying SOV's currently outstanding warrants.  The
execution of this Letter Agreement will serve as the acknowledgment by the
undersigned that in the event any holders of Qualified Warrants wish to exercise
such warrants in such amounts as would exceed the number of authorized and
unissued shares of Common Stock, IDI shall return to SOV such percentage of the
Remaining Shares equal to the quotient of (x) the number of Qualified Warrants
exercised divided by (y) the total number of Qualified Warrants.

     This letter may be executed in one or more counterparts.

<PAGE>
 
International Digital Investors, Inc.
January 15, 1997
Page 2

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

     Please indicate your agreement and consent to the foregoing by signing the
enclosed copy of this letter where indicated below and return the same to the
attention of the undersigned on behalf of IDI.


                                  Sincerely,

                                  INTERNATIONAL DIGITAL INVESTORS, L.P.


                                  By:_____________________________________


AGREED TO and ACCEPTED this
____ day of January 1997.


STYLES ON VIDEO, INC.


By:__________________________________
#### William COOPER, Appellant, v. James A. GAMMON, Jerry Hudson, Respondents.

No. WD 51577.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

May 21, 1996.

Motion for Rehearing and/or Transfer to Supreme Court Denied July 2, 1996.

Application to Transfer Denied Aug. 20, 1996.

William Cooper, Moberly, Appellant pro se.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Attorney General, John R. Munich, Keith J. Grady, Assistant Attorneys General, Jefferson City, for Respondents.

*98Before LAURA DENVIR STITH, P. J., and ULRICH and SMART, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM:

William Cooper appeals the trial court’s dismissal of his “petition for judicial review” for failure to state a claim for which relief can be granted. No precedential purpose exists in publishing a written opinion. The order dismissing the petition is affirmed by-summary order. Rule 84.16(b).
2009 Amendment to the Amended and Restated 2005 Long-Term Incentive Plan



 Exhibit 10.2 

2009 AMENDMENT TO THE 

DUKE REALTY CORPORATION 

AMENDED AND RESTATED 2005 LONG-TERM INCENTIVE PLAN 

This Amendment to the Duke Realty Corporation Amended and Restated 2005 Long-Term Incentive Plan (the “Plan”), is hereby
adopted this 29th day of April 2009, by the Executive Compensation Committee (the “Committee”) of the Board of Directors of the Duke Realty Corporation (the “Corporation”). Each capitalized term not otherwise defined herein has
the meaning set forth in the Plan. 
 WHEREAS, on April 29, 2009, the stockholders of the Corporation approved the Plan, in
the form amended and restated by the Board of Directors of the Corporation on January 28, 2009; and 
 WHEREAS, Fidelity
Investments, a significant stockholder of the Corporation, requested an additional amendment to the Plan to require that all equity awards to non-employee directors under the Plan be granted and administered by an independent committee of the Board;
and 
 NOW, THEREFORE, pursuant to the authority reserved to the Committee under Section 16.1 of the Plan, the Plan is
hereby amended, effective as of the date hereof, by adding the following sentence at the end of Section 4.1: 

“Notwithstanding any of the foregoing, grants of Awards to Non-Employee Directors under the Plan shall be made only in accordance
with the terms, conditions and parameters of a plan, program or policy for the compensation of Non-Employee Directors that is approved and administered by a committee of the Board consisting solely of independent directors within the meaning of
Section 303A of the New York Stock Exchange Listed Company Manual and who also qualify as “non-employee directors” (within the meaning of Rule 16b-3 promulgated under the 1934 Act).” 

All other provisions of the Plan, as approved by the stockholders of the Corporation on April 29, 2009, shall remain in full force
and effect. 
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Duke Realty Corporation, by a duly authorized officer, has executed this Amendment to the
Duke Realty Corporation Amended and Restated Long-Term Incentive Plan, this 29th day of April, 2009. 
  

			
	DUKE REALTY CORPORATION
		
	By:	 	/s/ Dennis D. Oklak
		 	Dennis D. Oklak
		 	Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive
		 	Officer
**EXHIBIT 23****CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**     We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in theRegistration Statements on Form S-8 (File Nos. 333-50137,333-90293, 333-56606, 333-89184, 333-102147, 333-105193 and333-106594) and the Registration Statements on Form S-3(File Nos. 333-65035, 333-48540, 333-71958, 333-84914,333-99033, 333-102186, 333-106589, and 333-111818) of our reportdated March 11, 2005, relating to the consolidatedfinancial statements, financial statement schedule,management’s assessment of the effectiveness of internalcontrol over financial reporting and the effectiveness ofinternal control over financial reporting which appears in thisForm 10-K./S/  PRICEWATERHOUSECOOPERS LLPLos Angeles, CaliforniaMarch 16, 2005
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-2018-0025-6472

Academy, Ltd:

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

February 19, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-6033

Dallas Airmotive, 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
<PAGE>


                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.2

                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
                       PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350
                 (SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Murfreesboro Bancorp, Inc. on Form
10-QSB for the period ending March 31, 2003, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission ("the Report"), I, William L. Webb, Senior Vice President
and Chief Financial Officer certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

     (1)  the report fully complies with the requirements of Sections 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.



     May 14, 2003                                  /s/ William L. Webb
     ------------                                  -------------------
         Date                                        William L. Webb
                                                 Chief Financial Officer


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Murfreesboro Bancorp, Inc. and will be retained by Murfreesboro
Bancorp, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its
staff upon request.
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-2018-0025-6847

American Furukawa, 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
EXHIBIT 99.3

CERTIFICATION    Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,  as Enacted Pursuant to  Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the annual report of Enbridge Inc. (the "Corporation") on Form 40-F for the fiscal
year ending December 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Patrick D. Daniel, President & Chief Executive Officer of
the Corporation, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



Dated
at Calgary, Alberta, this 19th day of February, 2009.



---



QuickLinks
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 67 (Friday, April 7, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 17826]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-8559]



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


NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

Advisory Panel for Economics, Decision and Management Sciences; 
Notice of Meeting

    In accordance with the Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-
463, as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the 
following meeting:

    Name: Advisory Panel for Economics, Decision and Management 
Sciences (#1759).
    Dates and Times: April 27-28, 1995
    Place: Room 390 NSF, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA.
    Type of meeting: Closed
    Contact person: Dr. Robin Cantor, Program Director for DRMS, 
Division of Social, Behavioral and Economic Research, National 
Science Foundation, Room 995, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA. 
Telephone: (703) 307-1757.
    Purpose of meeting: To provide advice and recommendations 
concerning proposals submitted to NSF for financial support.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate DRMS proposals as part of the 
selection process for awards.
    Reason for closing: The proposals being reviewed include 
information of a proprietary or confidential nature, including 
technical information, financial data, such as salaries; and 
personal information concerning individuals associated with the 
proposals. These matters are exempt under 5 U.S.C. 552b(c), (4) and 
(6) of the Government in the Sunshine Act.

    Dated: April 3, 1995.
M. Rebecca Winkler,
Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 95-8559 Filed 4-6-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
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-2018-0025-6418

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
$[ ] [ ]

$[ ]

INPUT

.05

80
Consistent with USTR's Section 301 notice, OMRON Management Center of America, Inc. requests

confidential treatment for the information designated as business confidential in this submission. Such

information consists of information that would not customarily be released to the public, including

business or trade secrets regarding production costs and processes, data on sales, product characteristics

customers, destinations, and other product, sales, and cost-related business secrets. Business confidential

information has been indicated herein by enclosing it in single brackets (“[ ]”). A public version of these

comments is also being filed with all confidential information removed.

OMRON Management Center of America, Inc. submits this exclusion request on behalf of our business

unit. OMRON in the US is the only designer of this product and only supplier of this component.

COVER,BASE 1GANG is a plastic switch housing and is used only automotive purposes of containing

the power window switch, which is an OEM-specified dimension. It is only used for further assembly of

components which go into domestic automobile production, which is specified by auto manufacturer.

This product is not a target of the US Administration's 301 investigation regarding Intellectual Property

concerns. This is not a concern to IP transfer and impressment. This product contains no IP of interest

related to autonomous vehicle production.

The tariff action ultimately poses a risk of significant damage to OMRON, the domestic automobile

industry, and ultimately the US consumer as a increase in price. Like in the case of similar approvals for

vehicle components at the HTS level, OMRON views this product in the same manner. Immediate

movement of production to a US manufacturer or another country would pose significant re-tooling

costs, significant amounts of time, and approvals pertaining to consumer automobile safety standards are

costly and would take a significant amount of time to obtain.

OMRON Management Center of America, Inc. believes that CBP can easily exclude the COVER,BASE

1GANG in question based solely on the product description. The following are draft CBP exclusion

instructions:

"COVER,BASE 1GANG; plastic rectangular base with q "W"-shaped connector extending 90 degrees

from the base for POWER WINDOW SWITCH - made of plastic resin PBT G30; dimensions 46.00mm

X 25.00mm X 20.90mm."

This information will be contained on the invoice from the supplier.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-7403 

SALVADOR MICHAEL MARTINEZ,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

JOSEPH M. BROOKS,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. T. S. Ellis, III, District

Judge. (CA-03-1021-1)

Submitted: December 16, 2004 Decided: December 23, 2004

Before MICHAEL, KING, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Salvador Michael Martinez, Appellant Pro Se. Dennis Carl Barghaan,

Jr., Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, Virginia, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Salvador Michael Martinez, a federal prisoner, appeals

the district court’s order denying relief on his petition filed

under 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000). We have reviewed the record and

find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning

of the district court. See Martinez v. Brooks, No. CA-03-1021-1

(E.D. Va. filed July 26, 2004 & entered July 27, 2004). We

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions

are adequately presented in the materials before the court and

argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED