alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 73 (Monday, April 17, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 19264]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-9337]



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


DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Advisory Committee for Energy-Related Epidemiologic Research: 
Meeting

    In accordance with section 10(a)(2) of the Federal Advisory 
Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463), the Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention (CDC) announces the following committee meeting.

    Name: Advisory Committee for Energy-Related Epidemiologic 
Research.
    Times and Dates: 9 a.m.-5 p.m., May 4, 1995; 9 a.m.-12 noon, May 
5, 1995.
    Place: Sheraton Suites Hotel, 801 North St. Asaph Street, 
Alexandria, Virginia 22314.
    Status: Open to the public, limited only by the space available. 
The meeting room accommodates approximately 50 people.
    Purpose: This committee is charged with providing advice and 
recommendations to the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS); 
the Assistant Secretary for Health; the Director, CDC; and the 
Administrator, Agency for Toxic Substances and Disease Registry, on 
the establishment of a research agenda and the conduct of a research 
program pertaining to energy-related analytic epidemiologic studies. 
The committee will take into consideration information and proposals 
provided by the Department of Energy (DOE), the Advisory Committee 
for Environment Safety and Health which was established by DOE under 
the guidelines of a Memorandum of Understanding between HHS and DOE, 
and other agencies and organizations, regarding the direction HHS 
should take in establishing the research plan and in the development 
of a research plan.
    Matters To Be Discussed: The committee will discuss working 
group recommendations, environmental data and research methods, the 
research agenda, and public involvement activities. Presentations 
will be made by DOE on the Conference on Epidemiologic Data 
Resources and occupational surveillance plans and progress.
    Agenda items are subject to change as priorities dictate.
    Contact Person for More Information: Nadine Dickerson, Program 
Analyst, Radiation Studies Branch, Division of Environmental Hazards 
and Health Effects, National Center for Environmental Health, CDC, 
4770 Buford Highway NE., Mailstop F-35, Atlanta, Georgia 30341-3724; 
telephone 404/488-7040.

    Dated: April 11, 1995.
Carolyn J. Russell,
Director, Management Analysis and Services Office, Centers for Disease 
Control and Prevention (CDC).
[FR Doc. 95-9337 Filed 4-14-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4163-18-M
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 71 (Thursday, April 13, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 18856]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-9113]



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


DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--Cable Television Laboratories, Inc.

    Notice is hereby given that, on December 30, 1994, pursuant to the 
National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993, 15 U.S.C. 
4301 et seq. (``the Act''), Cable Television Laboratories, Inc. 
(``CableLabs'') and General Instrument Corporation of Delaware (``GI'') 
have filed written notifications simultaneously with the Attorney 
General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing (1) the identities 
of the parties and (2) the nature and objectives of the venture. The 
notifications were filed for the purpose of invoking the Act's 
provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to actual 
damages under specified circumstances. Pursuant to Section 6(b) of the 
Act, the identities of the parties and its general area(s) of planned 
activity are CableLabs, Boulder, CO; and GI, Hatboro, PA.
    The area of planned activity is to conduct certain tests of a 
prototype modem for digital signal transmission on North American cable 
television systems.
Constance K. Robinson,
Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 95-9113 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

May 29, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number USTR-2018-0025-7278

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
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 502 Placed on Calendar Senate (PCS)]

<DOC>

                                                        Calendar No. 29
118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 502

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             March 8, 2023

                                Received

                             March 16, 2023

                          Read the first time

                             March 21, 2023

            Read the second time and placed on the calendar

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To amend title 38, United States Code, to ensure that the Secretary of 
    Veterans Affairs repays members of the Armed Forces for certain 
   contributions made by such members towards Post-9/11 Educational 
                  Assistance, and for other purposes.

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

SECTION 1. REPAYMENT OF MEMBERS OF THE ARMED FORCES FOR CONTRIBUTIONS 
              TOWARD POST-9/11 EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE.

    (a) In General.--Section 3327(f)(3) of title 38, United States 
Code, is amended by striking ``together'' and all that follows through 
``(as applicable),''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) shall 
take effect on August 1, 2023.

SEC. 2. MODIFICATION OF CERTAIN HOUSING LOAN FEES.

    The loan fee table in section 3729(b)(2) of title 38, United States 
Code, is amended by striking ``November 14, 2031'' each place it 
appears and inserting ``November 28, 2031''.

            Passed the House of Representatives March 7, 2023.

            Attest:

                                             CHERYL L. JOHNSON,

                                                                 Clerk.
                                                        Calendar No. 29

118th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                               H. R. 502

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

To amend title 38, United States Code, to ensure that the Secretary of 
    Veterans Affairs repays members of the Armed Forces for certain 
   contributions made by such members towards Post-9/11 Educational 
                  Assistance, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                             March 21, 2023

            Read the second time and placed on the calendar
```
PUBLIC VERSION
$[*********] [******]

$[*********]

INPUT

20.0

$[*********]

[******]

[******]

0.05

PUBLIC VERSION
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 in the US is the only designer of this product and only supplier of this component.

POWER WINDOW SWITCH is a molded plastic switch housing, and is used only for automotive

purposes to contain a window switch. 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 POWER

WINDOW SWITCH in question based solely on the product description. The following are draft CBP

exclusion instructions:

"POWER WINDOW SWITCH rectangular raised molding with two corners notched 45% and two

semi-circle carveouts molded into each side. Plastic case with knob assemblies used for POWER

WINDOW SWITCH (Passenger SW in front).Consist: - 1 Plastic case- 1 window knobs and 1 door

lockout knob with 2 spring and 2 plunger to drive the knob movement;- 1 plastic light guide for light

transmisson. Case dimensions: 113.9mm x 64mm x 45.4mm Knob dimensions (A2 S): 28.73mm

x20.08mm x28.26mm Knob (D/L L): 28.8mm x16mm x35.5mm."

This information will be contained on the invoice from the supplier

PUBLIC VERSION
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-2018-0025-6521

ZANINI 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
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, CLER K

U.S. COURT OF APPEAL S2 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 par ticularities 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

e xtends the len gth 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

W e 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.
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

February 7, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-7234

TI Group Automotive 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
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Jeffrey Stokes, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Queens County (Appelman, J.), rendered August 30, 1988, convicting him of robbery in the first degree and grand larceny in the fourth degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

On November 3, 1987, the defendant stopped the complainant on the street, accused him of robbing his little brother, and ordered the complainant to go home with him to be identified by the boy. Protesting his innocence, the complain*739ant followed the defendant for several blocks, when the defendant stopped, pointed to what appeared to be a handgun at his waist, and demanded his money. The complainant, who knew the defendant by sight and name, reported the incident to the police, identifying the defendant as the perpetrator.

On appeal, the defendant argues that certain remarks made by the prosecutor during summation deprived him of a fair trial, and that his sentence was excessive. The defendant’s contentions are without merit.

The defendant did not object to the remarks in the prosecutor’s summation complained of on appeal, with the result that any issue of law with respect thereto is unpreserved for appellate review *(see,*CPL 470.05 [2]; *People v Nuccie,*57 NY2d 818). In any event, the prosecutor’s remarks were a fair response to defense counsel’s attempt to persuade the jury that the victim should not be believed because he had a criminal record *(see, People v Marks,*6 NY2d 67, *cert denied*362 US 912), and the prosecutor’s exhortation to the jurors to determine the guilt or innocence of the defendant on the basis of the evidence before them, without reference to the complainant’s criminal background, was entirely proper *(cf., People v Ashwal,*39 NY2d 105).

Given the defendant’s repeated display of “total disregard of our laws and the rights of his fellow citizens” *(People v Terry,*117 AD2d 761, 762), we find that the terms of imprisonment imposed were appropriate and should not be disturbed *(see, People v Suitte,*90 AD2d 80), even though they are consecutive to the sentences imposed on his convictions under indictment No. 7901/87 and indictment No. 7925/87.

A supplemental *pro se*brief has been filed which sets forth the arguments of ineffective assistance of trial and appellate counsel. We have thoroughly reviewed these arguments and find them to be without merit *(see, People v Stokes,*162 AD2d 737 [decided herewith]). Mangano, P. J., Kunzeman, Rubin and Balletta, JJ., concur.
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

February 4, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-5733

Kyungshin Lear Sales and Engineering 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 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
#### Harry Charles LAUN, Appellant, v. Paige Renee PATTERSON, Respondent.

No. WD 47049.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

June 1, 1993.

Leslie Ann Schneider, Columbia, for appellant.

*476David L. Knight and Susan Ford Robertson, Knight, Ford, Wright, Atwill Parshall & Baker, Columbia, for respondent.

Before LOWENSTEIN, C.J., and SPINDEN and SMART, JJ.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

Appeal from an order modifying child support pursuant to a decree of dissolution.

Affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).