alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
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-2018-0025-7828

Alps Electric (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,

Stephen P. Vaughn

General Counsel
Exhibit 10.31


 


FORM OF RESTRICTED UNIT
AWARD AGREEMENT


 


This agreement (“Agreement”) entered into as of <<GRANT
DATE>>, by and between Fluor Corporation, a Delaware corporation (“Company”),
and <<NAME>> (“Grantee” or “you”) evidences and confirms the following
Restricted Unit Award by the Committee (as defined in the Plan) under the Fluor Corporation 2000 Restricted Stock Plan
for Non-Employee Directors, as amended (the “Plan”).  Your Restricted Unit Award is made subject to
all the terms and conditions of the Plan, a copy of which is enclosed herewith.


 


Your Restricted Unit Award consists of <<NUMBER>>
Units, which Units shall become earned and payable in cash as the transfer
restrictions on the <<RSS NUMBER>> shares of restricted stock
awarded to you concurrently herewith (the “Restricted Stock”) pursuant to the
Restricted Stock Purchase Agreement by and between you and the Company
lapse.  Your Restricted Unit Award is
subject to the same transfer restrictions and repurchase rights as the
Restricted Stock.  Each Unit shall be
equal in value to the closing price per share at which the common stock of the
Company is sold in the regular way on the New York Stock Exchange on the date
upon which such Unit becomes earned and payable.  The proceeds of this Restricted Unit Award
shall be applied in payment of taxes arising from the lapse of restrictions on
the Restricted Stock and arising from this award (or portion thereof) becoming
earned and payable.  Any remaining
balance of the proceeds shall be remitted to you.


 


This Agreement shall be construed, administered and
enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of Texas.  Except as specifically provided herein, all
capitalized terms shall have the meanings set forth in the Plan.


 


IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed
this Agreement as of the day and year first hereinabove written.


 


	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  FLUOR CORPORATION

  
	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
  by:

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Carlos M. Hernandez

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Chief Legal Officer & Secretary 

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
   

  
	
   

  	
   

  	
  Grantee
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-2018-0025-7258

SYNTRON Material Handling: 

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
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-40258 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus TIMOTHY HORACE, JR., Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 1:97--CR-105-1

- - - - - - - - - - November 11, 1998 Before REAVLEY, WIENER and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: * Timothy Horace, Jr. argues that the district court erred in enhancing his offense level by seven levels based on his codefendant’s discharge of a firearm during the commission of the offense. He further argues that the district court erred in increasing his offense level based on the victim suffering a serious bodily injury within the meaning of U.S.S.G.No. 98-40258 -2- § 2B3.1(b)(3)(B). Horace also argues that the district court erred in refusing to reduce his offense level by two levels for the acceptance of responsibility. We have reviewed the record including the presentence report and have determined that the district court did not clearly err in its factual findings and did not misapply the Sentencing Guidelines in sentencing Horace. There was reliable evidence in the presentence report (PSR) that was adopted by the district court revealing that Horace along with his coconspirators planned to discharge the weapon to frighten the victim. There was also reliable evidence that showed that the discharge of the weapon was reasonably foreseeable to Horace. The district court did not err in making the seven-level adjustment under § 2B3.1(b)(2)(A). See § 1B1.3(a)(1)(A), (B); United States v. Burton , 126 F.3d 666, 678-79 (5th Cir. 1997). There was also reliable evidence that the victim sustained a severe injury which caused him extreme pain and required minor surgery to correct. Therefore, the district court did not err in increasing Horace’s offense level based on the victim’s sustaining a serious bodily injury. See § 1B1.1, comment. (n.1 (j)); United States v. Price , 149 F.3d 352, 354 (5th Cir. 1998). Lastly, the district court did not err in denying Horace a downward adjustment for acceptance of responsibility because Horace failed to truthfully admit in a timely manner his conduct which occurred during the offense. See § 3E1.1, comment.No. 98-40258 -3- (n.1(h)); United States v. Diaz , 39 F.3d 568, 572 (5th Cir. 1994).

AFFIRMED.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                      Exhibit 23

             Consent of Independent Certified Public Accountants
             ---------------------------------------------------

We have issued our reports dated March 18, 1997, accompanying the consolidated
financial statements and schedule included in the Annual Report of Safety 1st,
Inc. and Subsidiaries on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 1996. We
hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of said reports in the
Registration Statements of Safety 1st, Inc. on Form S-8 (File No. 33-79332,
effective May 26, 1994) and on Forms S-3 (File  Nos. 33-78970, effective May
19, 1994 and 33-95656, effective August 21, 1995).


                                         GRANT THORNTON LLP

Boston, Massachusetts
March 18, 1997
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-2018-0025-7200

Clark Material Handling Co:

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

_5-30-2019.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 73 (Monday, April 17, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 19249]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-9322]

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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
[Docket No. CP95-303-000]

CNG Transmission Corp.; Application

April 11, 1995.
    Take notice that on April 5, 1995, CNG Transmission Corporation 
(CNG), 445 West Main Street, Clarksburg, West Virginia 26301, filed in 
Docket No. CP95-303-000 an application pursuant to Section 7(b) of the 
Natural Gas Act, for permission and approval to abandon, in place, 
approximately 20.40 miles of 12-inch pipeline, known as H-197, located 
in Wetzel and Marshall Counties, West Virginia, all as more fully set 
forth in the application on file with the Commission and open to public 
inspection.
    CNG states that line H-197 was constructed in 1946 to serve various 
industrial plants along the Ohio River basin. It is stated that many of 
those plants have closed over the years eliminating the market need for 
that section of H-197. CNG further states that during the ensuing 
decades, corrosion has created a substantial number of leaks in that 
pipeline segment.
    Any person desiring to be heard or to make any protest with 
reference to said application should on or before May 2, 1995, file 
with the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC 20426, a 
motion to intervene or a protest in accordance with the requirements of 
the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.214 or 
385.211) and the Regulations under the Natural Gas Act (18 CFR 157.10). 
All protests filed with the Commission will be considered by it in 
determining the appropriate action to be taken but will not serve to 
make the protestants parties to the proceeding. Any person wishing to 
become a party to a proceeding or to participate as a party in any 
hearing therein must file a motion to intervene in accordance with the 
Commission's Rules.
    Take further notice that, pursuant to the authority contained in 
and subject to the jurisdiction conferred upon the Federal Energy 
Regulatory Commission by Sections 7 and 15 of the Natural Gas Act and 
the Commission's Rules of Practice and Procedure, a hearing will be 
held without further notice before the Commission or its designee on 
this application if no motion to intervene is filed within the time 
required herein, if the Commission on its own review of the matter 
finds that permission and approval for the proposed abandonment are 
required by the public convenience and necessity. If a motion for leave 
to intervene is timely filed, or if the Commission on its own motion 
believes that a formal hearing is required, further notice of such 
hearing will be duly given.
    Under the procedure herein provided for, unless otherwise advised, 
it will be unnecessary for CNG to appear or be represented at the 
hearing.
Lois D. Cashell,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-9322 Filed 4-14-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-M
```
**Exhibit 32.2**

** **

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO**

**18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

** **

** **

Inconnection with the Annual Report of Alamo Group Inc. (the “Company”) on Form10-K for the period ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Dan E.Malone,Executive Vice  President & Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002, that:

-  The Report fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and
-  The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

 

 

| March 14,  2011 | /s/Dan E.  Malone                                                      |   |
|-----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|            | Dan E. Malone

Executive Vice  President & Chief Financial Officer |   |
|            | (Principal  Financial Officer)                                         |   |
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 69 (Tuesday, April 11, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 18404]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-8849]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION


Executive Resources and Performance Review Board; Appointment of 
Members

    As required by the Civil Service Reform Act of 1978 (Pub. L. 95-
454), Chairman Reed E. Hundt appointed executives to the Executive 
Resources and Performance Review Board.

Andrew S. Fishel*
Roy J. Stewart
William E. Kennard
Robert M. Pepper
Kathleen M. Wallman

Federal Communications Commission.
William F. Caton,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-8849 Filed 4-10-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6712-01-M
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5124 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 5124

 To amend title 18, United States Code, to increase the length of the 
  post-employment ban on lobbying by certain former senior executive 
               branch personnel from one year to 2 years.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             August 1, 2023

  Ms. Porter introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To amend title 18, United States Code, to increase the length of the 
  post-employment ban on lobbying by certain former senior executive 
               branch personnel from one year to 2 years.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Restrict Conflicted Lobbying Act''.

SEC. 2. INCREASE IN LENGTH OF POST-EMPLOYMENT BAN ON LOBBYING BY 
              CERTAIN FORMER SENIOR EXECUTIVE BRANCH PERSONNEL.

    (a) Increase in Length of Ban.--Section 207(c) of title 18, United 
States Code, is amended--
            (1) in the heading, by striking ``One-year'' and inserting 
        ``Two-year''; and
            (2) in paragraph (1), by striking ``within 1 year after the 
        termination'' and inserting ``within 2 years after the 
        termination''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by this section shall 
apply with respect to any individual who, on or after the date of the 
enactment of this Act, leaves a position to which subsection (c) of 
section 207 of title 18, United States Code, applies.
                                 <all>
```
<PAGE>
Confidential treatment has been requested for portions of this document. This
copy of the document filed as an Exhibit omits the confidential information
subject to the confidentiality request. Omissions are designated by three
asterisks (***). A complete version of this document has been filed separately
with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.74

                                AMENDMENT NO. 11
                                     TO THE
                    POSTSCRIPT SOFTWARE DEVELOPMENT LICENSE
                            AND SUBLICENSE AGREEMENT
                                     BETWEEN
                           ADOBE SYSTEMS INCORPORATED
                                       AND
                          PEERLESS SYSTEMS CORPORATION

                         EFFECTIVE AS OF: FEB. 9, 2004;

         This Amendment No. 11 (the "Amendment") to the PostScript Software
Development License and Sublicense Agreement dated July 23, 1999, as previously
amended (the "Agreement"), is between Adobe Systems Incorporated, a Delaware
corporation having a place of business at 345 Park Avenue, San Jose, CA 95110
("Adobe") and Peerless Systems Corporation, a Delaware corporation having a
place of business at 2381 Rosecrans Avenue, El Segundo, California 90245
("Peerless").

         WHEREAS, the purpose of this Amendment to the Agreement is to revise
the royalty rates for certain Licensed Systems known as the "Milan Series" of
Seiko Epson printing products (as described below).

         NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree as follows:

1.       The following new Paragraph (v) is hereby added under *** of EXHIBIT O
("Royalty Payments And Other Fees") of the Agreement to read as follows:

         "(v) ***.

<PAGE>

Confidential treatment has been requested for portions of this document. This
copy of the document filed as an Exhibit omits the confidential information
subject to the confidentiality request. Omissions are designated by three
asterisks (***). A complete version of this document has been filed separately
with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

         IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of Adobe and Peerless has executed this
Amendment No. 11 to the PostScript Software Development License and Sublicense
Agreement by its duly authorized officer.

Adobe:                                            Peerless:

ADOBE SYSTEM INCORPORATED                         PEERLESS SYSTEMS CORPORATION

By: /s/ JIM STEPHENS                              By: /s/ WILLIAM NEIL
   -----------------                                 -----------------

Print                                             Print
Name: Jim Stephens                                Name: William Neil

Title: SVP Worldwide Sales and Field Operations   Title: VP Finance & CFO

Date: 2/9/04                                      Date: 1-21-04

                                        2
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

, Justices 

# Order

January 29, 2014

147150

GEORGE BADEEN/ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY

SITUATED and MIDWEST RECOVERY AND

ADJUSTMENT, INC.,

Plaintiffs

- Appellants,

v SC: 147150

COA: 302878

Wayne CC: 10

- 004053

- CZ

PAR, INC., d/b/a PAR NORTH AMERICA,

REMARKETING SOLUTIONS, CENTERONE

FINANCIAL SERVICES, L.L.C., FIRST

NATIONAL REPOSSESSORS, INC.,

MILLENNIUM CAPITAL AND RECOVERY

CORPORATION, RENOVO SERVICES, L.L.C.,

RENAISSANCE RECOVERY SO LUTIONS,

INC., ASR NATIONWIDE, L.L.C., THE M.

DAVIS COMPANY, INC., d/b/a U.S.A.

RECOVERY SOLUTIONS, REPOSSESSORS,

INC., AMERICAN RECOVERY SERVICE, INC.,

DIVERSIFIED VEHICLE SERVICES, INC.,

NATIONAL ASSET RECOVERY CORP.,

CONSUMER FINANCIAL SERVICES, L.L.C.

, TD AUTO FINANACE, L.L.C., TOYOTA MOTOR

CREDIT CORPORATION, NISSAN MOTOR

ACCEPTANCE CORPORATION, SANTANDER

CONSUMER U.S.A., INC., PNC BANK, N.A., BANK

OF AMERICA, N.A., FIFTH THIRD BANK, and

THE HUNTINGTON NATIONAL BANK,

Defendants

- Appellees,

and

MV CONNECT, L.L.C., d/b/a IIA, L.L.C.,

GE MONEY BANK, and MANHEIM RECOVERY

SOLUTIONS,

Defendants.

_________________________________________/I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

January 29, 2014

p0122 2

Clerk On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the April 11, 2013

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered. We direct the Clerk to schedule oral

argument on whether to grant the application or take other action. MCR 7.302(H)(1).

The parties shall submit suppleme ntal briefs within 42 days of the date of this order

addressing whether the defendant forwarding companies engage in “soliciting a claim for

collection” and therefore are “collection agenc[ies]” as defined by MCL 339.901(b). The

parties should not submit m ere restatements of their application papers.