alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### STATE of Missouri, Respondent, v. Lewis McNEAL, Appellant. Lewis McNEAL, Movant-Appellant, v. STATE of Missouri, Respondent.

Nos. 66424, 68207.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division Five.

April 30, 1996.

Robert E. Steele, Jr., Asst. Public Defender, St. Louis, for Appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Attorney General, Jill C. LaHue, Assistant Attorney General, Jefferson City, for Respondent.

Before CRANE, C.J., GEORGE M. FLANIGAN, Senior Judge, and HOFF, J.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Defendant, Lewis McNeal, appeals the judgment entered upon his convictions by a jury of two counts of first degree assault and two counts of armed criminal action. §§ 565.050 and 571.015 RSMo 1986. Defen*140dant was sentenced to consecutive terms of fifteen and seventeen years for the assault convictions and concurrent terms of ten and eleven years for the armed criminal action convictions. The sentences on the armed criminal action convictions were ordered to run concurrently with the sentences for assault.

Defendant also appeals the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion after an evidentiary hearing, but has failed to brief any points relating to the denial of his Rule 29.15 motion on appeal. Where a defendant appeals the denial of a Rule 29.15 motion on appeal, but fails to raise any points relating to the denial of that motion in the brief on appeal, the point is considered abandoned. *State v. Link,*916 S.W.2d 385, 386 n. 1 (Mo.App.E.D.1996); *State v. Nelson,*818 S.W.2d 285, 287 (Mo.App.E.D.1991).

The judgment is supported by substantial evidence and is not against the weight of the evidence. No error of law appears. An extended opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating the principles of law would have no precedential or jurisprudential value. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth the facts and reasons for this order.

Judgment affirmed in accordance with Rules 30.25(b) and 84.16(b).
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM FORT BEND
HOLDING CORP'S 3/31/98 FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          MAR-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                       6,259,939
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                      20,783,775
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                  3,244,221
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                      92,058,573
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                        92,205,137
<LOANS>                                    174,574,561
<ALLOWANCE>                                  1,592,452
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             316,606,546
<DEPOSITS>                                 268,990,525
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                          8,265,259
<LONG-TERM>                                 15,390,223
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        18,996
<OTHER-SE>                                  23,035,587
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>             316,606,546
<INTEREST-LOAN>                             13,549,068
<INTEREST-INVEST>                            8,165,075
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                            21,714,143
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                          11,028,451
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          12,325,833
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        9,388,310
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                   95,980
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                              2,793,009
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              3,113,264
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                   3,113,264
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 2,018,017
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.21
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.94
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.29
<LOANS-NON>                                    528,521
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                               547,012
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                             1,701,008
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                  204,776
<RECOVERIES>                                       240
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                            1,592,452
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                           199,231
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                      1,393,221
        

</TABLE>
Exhibit
32.1
  Certification
of Principal Executive Officer
 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 JayHawk Energy, Inc., (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2009 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Lindsay
E. Gorrill, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 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/
      Lindsay E. GorrillLindsay
      E. Gorrill
                    Principal Executive Officer,
                    President and a Director
                    August 12, 2009
**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 Annual Report of American Bio Medica Corporation (the
      "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ending December 31, 2006 as filed
      with
      the Securities and Exchange Commission on March 29, 2007 (the "Report"), I,
      Stan
      Cipkowski, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
      U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to ss. 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/
              Stan CipkowskiStan
              CipkowskiChief
                Executive Officer
              (Principal
                Executive Officer)
              
              March
                29,
                2007
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-2018-0025-5893

Scosche Industries, 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
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. R. 5289 

To require the Administrator of the Economic Research Service to conduct 

research on consolidation and concentration in the livestock industry, 

and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

AUGUST 25, 2023 

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

Committee on Agriculture 

A BILL 

To require the Administrator of the Economic Research Service to conduct research on consolidation and concentration in the livestock industry, and for other purposes. 

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 ‘‘Livestock Consolida5 tion Research Act of 2023’’. 

6 SEC. 2. LIVESTOCK CONSOLIDATION RESEARCH. 

7 (a) IN GENERAL.—Not later than 1 year after the 

8 date on which each latest Census of Agriculture is made 

9 publicly available, the Administrator of the Economic ReVerDate Sep 11 2014 03:41 Aug 26, 2023 Jkt 039200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\H5289.IH H5289

pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 5289 IH

1 search Service shall publish a report on consolidation and 

2 concentration in the livestock industry, including— 

3 (1) changes in the size and location of ranches, 

4 farms, processing facilities, and packers throughout 

5 the United States; and 

6 (2) the impact of the changes described in para7 graph (1) on farmers, ranchers, and downstream 

8 consumers, including— 

9 (A) financial impacts; 

10 (B) market entry impacts; 

11 (C) access to resources and inputs, includ12 ing processing facilities; and 

13 (D) dietary impacts. 

14 (b) SOURCES OF INFORMATION.—In preparing a re15 port under subsection (a), the Administrator of the Eco16 nomic Research Service shall draw on data available to 

17 the Secretary of Agriculture, including the Census of Agri18 culture, inspection records of the Food Safety and Inspec19 tion Service, and the packing plant data of the Packers 

20 and Stockyards Division of the Agricultural Marketing 

21 Service. 

22 (c) REPORT ORGANIZATION.—The report under sub23 section (a) shall separate information on beef cattle by 

24 cow-calf and fed cattle operations. 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
3 

•HR 5289 IH

1 (d) CONFIDENTIALITY.—A report published under 

2 subsection (a) shall not contain any confidential business 

3 information. 

4 (e) DEFINITION OF LIVESTOCK.—In this section, the 

5 term ‘‘livestock’’ includes beef, dairy, pork, and poultry 

6 production (including broilers, eggs, and turkeys). 

Æ 


pbinns on DSKJLVW7X2PROD with $$_JOB
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

LEROY SHELLEY

,

Defendant Below

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF DELAWARE,

Plaintiff Below

Appellee. § § § No. 1 36, 2017 § § § Court Below

— Superior Court § of the State of Delaware § § Cr. ID 9804001318 (N) § §

Submitted: May 8 , 201 7 Decided: June 21 , 2017

Before STRINE , Chief Justice; VA LIHURA and VAUGHN , Justices.

O R D E R

This 21 st day of June 2017

, upon consideration of the appellant’s opening

brief

, the State’s motion to affirm

, and the record below, it appears to the Court

that:

(1) The appellant, Leroy Shelley , filed this appeal from a Superior Court

order dated March 7, 2017, denying his motion for modification of sentence. The

State has filed a motion to affirm the judgment below on the ground that it is

manifest on the face of Shelley ’s opening brief that his appeal is without merit.

We agree and affirm.2

(2) A Superior Court jury convicted Shelley in November 2007 of

multiple criminal offenses, including first degree robbe ry and kidnapping. 1 The

Superior Court sentenced him to a total period of twenty

- four and a half years at

Level V incarceration, to be suspended after serving eighteen and a half years in

prison for decreasing levels of supervision

. Shelley did not appea l.

(3) Since that time, he has filed several unsuccessful motions for

postconviction relief . In February 201 7

, Shelley filed a motion for modification of

his sentence , arguing that he was illegally sentenced as a habitual offender in

Pennsylvania, that his Delaware sentence should run concurrently with the

sentence he already served in Pennsylvania, that he should receive thirteen months

credit for time served and good time credit, and that he has been rehabilitated. The

Superior Court denied Shelley’s motion because it was untimely under Rule 35(b)

and because his motion stated insufficient grounds for a modification of sentence.

Shelley appealed.

(4) In his opening brief on appeal, Shelley’s only argument for review is

whether the Superior Court erre d in failing to credit him with thirty

- five days that

he served from December 2, 2016 to January 6, 2017, while he was awaiting

extradition from Pennsylvania back to Delaware. However, Shelley did not raise

this claim in the motion he filed in the Superio r Court. We will not consider it for

1 Shelley had been indicted for his crimes in Delaware in 1998, but he was extradited back to Pennsylvania to finish serving a sentence there. The State reind icted Shelley in 2007.3

the first time on appeal. 2 Moreover, having failed to brief the arguments that he

raised below, Shelly has waived any right to further review of those claims. 3

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that the judgment of the Sup erior

Court is AFFIRMED.

BY THE COURT:

/s/ Karen L. Valihura Justice

2 Del. Supr. Ct. R. 8.

3 Murphy v. State , 632 A.2d 1150, 1152 (Del. 1993).
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-2018-0025-5875

Hirsch Glass 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 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
FILED U.S. COURT OF AP P E ALS E LE V EN T HC IRC U IT JANUARY 23, 2008 THOMAS K. KAH

N CLERK

Honora ble K. Micha el Moore, U .S. District Judg e for the Southern District of F lorida, * sitti ngby designation. [ DO NO T P UB L I S H]

I N THE UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E E L E V E N T H C IR C U IT

________________________ N o. 07- 11925

________________________ D . C . D ocketN o. 05 -018 81 -C V -C C -1 L O W E L L U M B A R G E R , P la in tif f
- A p p e lla n t,
v ersu s S T A T E O F G E O R G I A D E P A R T M E N T O F R E V E N U E , D e f e n d a n t- A p p e lle e .

________________________ A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f o rth e N o r th e rn D is tr ic t o f G e o r g ia

_________________________ ( Jan u ar y 23, 2008) B ef ore H U L L and P R Y O R , C i rc ui tJudg es , and M O O R E , D i stri ctJudg e. * P E R C U R I A M:2

A f te rr e v ie w a n d o r a l a r g u m e n t, w e c o n c lu d e th a t A p p e lla n t, L o w e ll U m barger, has notshow n any re vers i bl e e rr or i n the order of the di stri ctcourt d a te d M a r c h 3 0 , 2 0 0 7 . T h u s , w e a f f irm th is o r d e ro f

th e d is tr ic t c o u r t. A FFI R M ED .
CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS



     As independent public accountants, we hereby consent to the incorporation
of our reports included in Liberty Technologies, Inc.'s Form 10-K/A, into the
Company's previously filed Form S-8 Registration Statement (File No. 33- 73070)
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on December 20, 1993, Form S-8
Registration Statement (File No. 33-68744) filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on September 13, 1993, and Form S-8 Registration Statement
(File No. 33-67032) filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on August
12, 1993.


                                        ARTHUR ANDERSEN LLP



   
Philadelphia, Pa.,
   September 15, 1997
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

April 12, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-6995

BorgWarner Emissions Systems: 

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

_04.15.19.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,

Stephen P. Vaughn

General Counsel
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5034 Engrossed in House (EH)]

<DOC>
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 5034

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 2119 Market Square in Christiansted, St. Croix, United States Virgin 
 Islands, as the ``Lieutenant General Samuel E. Ebbesen Post Office''.

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

SECTION 1. LIEUTENANT GENERAL SAMUEL E. EBBESEN POST OFFICE.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 2119 Market Square in Christiansted, St. Croix, United 
States Virgin Islands, shall be known and designated as the 
``Lieutenant General Samuel E. Ebbesen Post Office''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Lieutenant 
General Samuel E. Ebbesen Post Office''.

            Passed the House of Representatives June 3, 2024.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
118th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 5034

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
at 2119 Market Square in Christiansted, St. Croix, United States Virgin 
 Islands, as the ``Lieutenant General Samuel E. Ebbesen Post Office''.
```
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

December 28, 2018

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-6327

CW Bearing USA, 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/12.21.18_Notice_of_Product_E

xclusions.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 the 10-digit HTSUS subheading under which your request was filed. 

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,

Stephen P. Vaughn

General Counsel