alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 9 (Friday, January 13, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 3274]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-876]



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


NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION

Special Emphasis Panel in Bioengineering and Environmental 
Systems; Meeting

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

    Name: Special Emphasis Panel in Bioengineering and Environmental 
Systems (No. 1189).
    Date and Time: January 31, 1995, 9:00 am-4:00 pm.
    Place: National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Room 
370, Arlington, VA 22230.
    Type of Meeting: Closed.
    Contact Person: Edward H. Bryan, Program Director, Environmental 
Engineering, Division of Bioengineering and Environmental Systems, 
National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 
22230, Telephone: (703) 306-1318.
    Purpose of Meeting: To provide advice and recommendations 
concerning proposals submitted to NSF for financial support.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate 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: January 9, 1995.
Linda Allen-Benton,
Deputy Division Director, HRM.
[FR Doc. 95-876 Filed 1-12-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

LAMARA POGOSIAN,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 10-70115

Agency No. A076-357-417

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted August 8, 2012** 

Before: ALARCÓN, BERZON, and IKUTA, Circuit Judges.

Lamara Pogosian, a native and citizen of Georgia, petitions for review of the

Board of Immigration Appeals’ (“BIA”) order denying her motion to reopen

removal proceedings. We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for

FILED

AUG 14 2012

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 10-70115

an abuse of discretion the BIA’s denial of a motion to reopen. Najmabadi v.

Holder, 597 F.3d 983, 986 (9th Cir. 2010). We deny the petition for review. 

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Pogosian’s motion to reopen

because it considered the record and acted within its broad discretion in

determining that the evidence was insufficient to establish prima facie eligibility

for the relief sought. See Mendez-Gutierrez v. Gonzales, 444 F.3d 1168, 1171 (9th

Cir. 2006) (prima facie eligibility is demonstrated by a showing that there is a

reasonable likelihood that the statutory requirements for relief are met); Nagoulko

v. INS, 333 F.3d 1012, 1018 (9th Cir. 2003) (the country report did not support the

likelihood that circumstances would arise that would lead to the petitioner’s

persecution).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.
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-2018-0025-6451

Advanced Optowave 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 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,

Stephen P. Vaughn

General Counsel
----

----

|  Subsidiary Name    |   | Country/State ofIncorporation/Organization |
|--------------------------|--------|--------------------------------------------|
| KOBB Inc.                |   | United States (Delaware)                   |
| Magal B.V.               |   | Netherlands                                |
| Magal Sisteme S.R.L.     |   | Romania                                    |
| Pranco Limited           |   | Cyprus                                     |
| Senstar Andina S.A.S     |   | Colombia                                   |
| SIS Inc.                 |   | United States (Delaware)                   |
| Senstar Inc.             |   | United States (Delaware)                   |
| Senstar Stellar LA       |   | Mexico                                     |
| Senstar Limited          |   | United Kingdom                             |
| Senstar Corp.            |   | Canada                                     |
| Defcon Technologies S.L. |   | Spain                                      |
| Fidifull Finance B.V.    |   | Netherlands                                |
| Senstar GmbH             |   | Germany                                    |
| JEE Investment A.G.      |   | Switzerland                                |
| E.S.E. Ltd.              |   | Israel                                     |

----

----
ARMED SERVICES BOARD OF CONTRACT APPEALS

Appeals of - )

)

Gilbane Federal )

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

ASBCA Nos. 62833, 62857, 62880

62915, 62911, 62860

62885, 62879, 62878

62914, 62922, 62910

62918, 62884, 62863

62923, 62864, 62865

62912, 62881

)

Under Contract No. W912GB-14-C-0018 )

APPEARANCES FOR THE APPELLANT: Douglas L. Patin, Esq. 

Sarah S. Osborne, Esq. 

Amy E. Garber, Esq.

 Bradley Arant Boult Cummings LLP

 Washington, D.C.

APPEARANCES FOR THE GOVERNMENT: Michael P. Goodman, Esq.

 Engineer Chief Trial Attorney

Pietro O. Mistretta, Esq.

Paul Cheverie, Esq.

Megan J. Tooman, Esq.

 Engineer Trial Attorneys

 U.S. Army Engineer District, Europe

Samuel J. Harrison, Esq.

Engineer Trial Attorney

 U.S. Army Engineer District, Middle East

 Winchester, VA
2 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

 The parties having settled 20 of the claims at issue in these consolidated 

appeals, the following appeals are dismissed with prejudice: 

 ASBCA No. 62833 (Claim No. H-0054) 

 ASBCA No. 62857 (Claim No. H-0059) 

 ASBCA No. 62880 (Claim No. H-0093) 

 ASBCA No. 62915 (Claim No. H-0078) 

ASBCA No. 62911 (Claim No. H-0067) 

 ASBCA No. 62860 (Claim No. H-0068) 

 ASBCA No. 62885 (Claim No. H-0103) 

 ASBCA No. 62879 (Claim No. H-0092) 

 ASBCA No. 62878 (Claim No. H-0090) 

 ASBCA No. 62914 (Claim No. H-0077) 

 ASBCA No. 62922 (Claim No. H-0087) 

ASBCA No. 62910 (Claim No. H-0065) 

 ASBCA No. 62918 (Claim No. H-0081) 

 ASBCA No. 62884 (Claim No. H-0102) 

 ASBCA No. 62863 (Claim No. H-0071) 

 ASBCA No. 62923 (Claim No. H-0088) 

 ASBCA No. 62864 (Claim No. H-0072) 

 ASBCA No. 62865 (Claim No. H-0073) 

 ASBCA No. 62912 (Claim No. H-0075) 

 ASBCA No. 62881 (Claim No. H-0094) 

Dated: March 27, 2024 

DAVID B. STINSON

Administrative Judge 

Armed Services Board 

of Contract Appeals
3

I certify that the foregoing is a true copy of the Order of Dismissal of the Armed 

Services Board of Contract Appeals in ASBCA Nos. 62833, 62857, 62880, 62915, 

62911, 62860, 62885, 62879, 62878, 62914, 62922, 62910, 62918, 62884, 62863, 62923, 

62864, 62865, 62912, 62881, Appeal of Gilbane Federal, rendered in conformance with 

the Board’s Charter.

Dated: March 28, 2024

PAULLA K. GATES-LEWIS

Recorder, Armed Services

Board of Contract Appeals
Exhibit 15.2




            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

     We consent to the incorporation by reference in the following  Registration
     Statements:

          1.   Registration Statement on Form F-3 (File No. 333-9050),

          2.   Registration Statement on Form F-3 (File No. 333-123265), and

          3.   Registration Statement on Form S-8 (File No. 333-127340).

     of our report  dated  February  13, 2005 with  respect to the  consolidated
     financial  statements and schedule of Magal Security Systems Ltd.  included
     in this Annual Report (Form 20-F/A) for the year ended December 31, 2004.




                                            /s/Kost Forer Gabbay and Kasierer
Tel-Aviv, Israel                               KOST FORER GABBAY & KASIERER
September 8, 2005                              A Member of Ernst & Young Global
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-2018-0025-5525

Tianhai Electric North America:

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
CERTIFICATION
      OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND


CHIEF
      FINANCIAL 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 accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of X
      and O
      Cosmetics, Inc. for
      the
      quarter ended July 31, 2006, I certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
      as
      adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to my
      knowledge, that:





|(1) | the
              Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB ofX
              and O Cosmetics, Inc.for
              the quarter ended July 31, 2006 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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB for the
              quarter ended July 31, 2006, fairly presents in all material respects,
              the
              financial condition and results of operations ofX
              and O Cosmetics, Inc.
|--- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------




By:
            /s/
                Glen LandryName:
            Glen
                LandryTitle:
            Principal
                Executive Officer,
              Principal
                Financial Officer and DirectorDate:
            September
                19, 2006
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determ ined that this opinion should not be published and is not prec e dent except under the limit ed circumstances set fo rth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

## FILED October 11, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FIFTH CIRCUIT

_________________ No. 05-61017 (Sum mary Calendar)

_________________ ARMANDO LUNA, Petitioner, versus ALBERTO R GONZALES, U S ATTORNEY GENERAL, Respondent.

Petition for Review from the Board of Immigration Appeals A75 900 744 Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and GARZA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Armando Luna peti

tions fo r review of an order of the Board of Im migration Appeals (BIA) affirming th e immigrat io n judge’s decision to deport him based on his status as an illegal alien and a-2-

1987 contr ol led substance conviction. Luna argues that the doctrine of laches prevents his depor tati on, but we do not reach Luna’s argum ent because his petition for review was not timely filed. A notice of appeal from the BIA must be filed 30 days after the date of the final order of removal. 8 U.S.C. § 1252(b)(1). Luna’s deadline was October 3, 2005; however, we extended the deadline to October 10, 2005, in th e wake of Hurricane Katrina. We posted notice fo r filings to be sent to this Court’s temporary Houston address as the New Orleans courthouse had been vacated. Luna erroneously mailed his notice of appeal to New Orleans. While he mailed it on Septem ber 29, 2005, eleven days in advance of th e new deadline, the notice did not make it s way to the clerk’s of fice until November 7, 2005, and was th e refore f iled lat e. Due to the unique situation created by Hurricane Katrina, both parties were asked to brief the issue of whether Luna’s notice of appeal was timely filed. Luna’s brief does not argue fo r an extension of time, nor does he ask fo r equitable tolling of th e deadline. Instead, he incorrectly asserts–in one footnote in his Statement of Jurisdiction–that his notice of appeal was timely filed because it was mailed before the filing deadline. This argument has
no merit . FE D . R. APP . P. 25(a)(2)(A) (“Filing may be accomplished by mail addressed to the clerk, but filing is not timely unless th e clerk receives the papers wit hin the time fixed fo r filing.”); s ee Thompson v. E.I. DuPont de Nemours & Co., Inc. , 76 F.3d 530, 534 (4th Cir. 1996) (“[T]he unincarcerated lit igant who decides to rely on the vagaries of the mail must suffer the consequences if t he notice of appeal fails to arrive within the applicable time period.”). Since Luna did not brief, even when asked, an equitable argument for his delay in filing due to Hurricane Katrina, he has waived such considerations. S ee Edw ards v. Johnson , 209 F.3d 772,-3-

776 n.1 (5th Cir. 2000) (deeming issue waived when not argued in init ial brief); Justiss Oil Co., Inc.
v. Kerr-McGee Refining Corp. , 75 F.3d. 1057, 1067 (5th Cir. 1996) (waiving issue of not argued in th e body of the brief). Accordingly, Luna’s petition for review is DISMISSED for lack of being timely filed.
Order entered June 2 6 , 2019

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05
- 19
- 00481
- CV DAVID BARNES, Appellant

V. KATHERINE KINSER, JO NATHAN BATES, AND KI NSER & BATES, LLP, Appe llee s

On Appeal from the 116th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. DC
- 18
- 01550
- F



### O RDER Before the Court is appellees’ June 25, 2019 agreed motion for extension of time to file their responsive brief

. We GRANT the motion a nd ORDER the brief be filed no later than July 31, 2019.

/s/ BILL WHITEHILL JUSTICE
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

JUDG MENT

No. 04

- 18

- 00735

- CV

Jos é S. FAJARDO

, Appellant

v.

RAFCO LLC

, Appellee

From the County Court at Law No. 3, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2018CV05195

Honorable Jason Wolff, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE ALVAREZ

, JUSTICE CHAPA , AND JUSTICE RIOS

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED FOR

WANT OF PROSECUTION. Costs of court for this appeal are taxed against Jos é S. Fajardo.

SIGNED December 5, 2018.

_________________________________ Patricia O. Alvarez , Justice
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 63 (Monday, April 3, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 16849]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-8114]



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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
International Trade Administration


President's Export Council: Meeting of the Subcommittee on Export 
Promotion and Support

AGENCY: International Trade Administration, Commerce.

ACTION: Notice of open meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Subcommittee on Export Promotion and Support of the 
President's Export Council will hold an open meeting to discuss topics 
relating to export financing, export assistance for small business, and 
the promotion of Services' exports. The President's Export Council was 
established on December 20, 1973, and reconstituted May 4, 1979 to 
advise the President on matters relating to U.S. export trade. It was 
most recently renewed on September 30, 1993, by Executive Order 12689.

DATES: April 21, 1995, from 9:30 a.m.-2:30 p.m.

ADDRESSES: Main Commerce Building, Room 3407, 14th Street and 
Constitution Avenue, N.W., Washington, D.C. 20230. This program is 
physically accessible to people with disabilities. Requests for sign 
language interpretation or other auxiliary aids should be directed to 
Linda Breslau, President's Export Council, Room 2015B, Washington D.C. 
20230. Seating is limited and will be on a first come, first serve 
basis.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Linda Breslau, President's Export 
Council, Room 2015B, Washington, D.C. 20230.

    Dated: March 29, 1995.
Jane Siegel,
Staff Director and Executive Secretary, President's Export Council.
[FR Doc. 95-8114 Filed 3-31-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DR-P
exv10w6w5







	 	 	 	 	 



Exhibit 10.6.5




[City
Ventures Logo]




March 24, 2020




VIA EMAIL AND OVERNITE EXPRESS




	 	 	 

	Conexant Systems, Inc.

	 	First American Title Insurance Company
	4000 MacArthur Boulevard

	 	5 First American Way
	Newport Beach, CA 92660

	 	Santa Ana, CA 92701
	Attn: Mark Peterson, Esq.

	 	Attn; Patty Beverly






Dear Mr. Peterson and Ms. Beverly:



This letter shall constitute notice pursuant to Section 2 of the Fourth Amendment to Purchase and
Sale Agreement and Joint Escrow Instructions dated March 12, 2010 (the “Fourth Amendment”) between
Conexant Systems, Inc. and City Ventures, LLC, that the Remaining Due Diligence Contingencies (as
defined in the Second Amendment to Purchase and Sale Agreement and Joint Escrow Instructions dated
February 19, 2010) have failed and the Agreement (as defined in the Fourth Amendment) is deemed
terminated in accordance with Paragraph 1 of the Fourth Amendment. Please immediately return the
Deposit (as defined in the Agreement) to City Ventures, LLC.




	 	 	 	 	 
	Very truly yours,





CITY VENTURES, LLC

 	 	 
	By:  	/s/ R. Mark Buckland
 	 	 
	 	R. Mark Buckland 	 	 
	 	President 	 	 
	 



MB/KMK/cm





	cc: 	 	 Manatt Phelps LLP — Attn: Steven L. Edwards, Esq. (via email)

Manatt Phelps LLP — Attn: Adam R. Sails, Esq. (via email)

Mr. Craig Atkins (via email)

Mr. Tony Pauker (via email) 

Mr. Scott Homan (via email)

Ms. April Palmer-Moore (via email)

 Kenneth M. Kaplan, Esq. (via email)
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-2018-0025-4659

Seaboard 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 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