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

May 7, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number USTR-2018-0025-7188

Tenova S.p.A:

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
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-2018-0025-5926

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
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 536 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 536

 To increase the rates of pay under the statutory pay systems and for 
   prevailing rate employees by 8.7 percent, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 26, 2023

Mr. Connolly (for himself, Ms. Spanberger, Mr. Trone, Mr. Sarbanes, Mr. 
    Pocan, Ms. Norton, Ms. Velazquez, Ms. Wexton, Mr. Huffman, Ms. 
    Bonamici, Ms. Moore of Wisconsin, Ms. Sanchez, Mr. Raskin, Ms. 
Stansbury, Mr. Davis of Illinois, Mr. Tonko, Mr. Scott of Virginia, Mr. 
Mfume, Mr. Beyer, Mr. Ruppersberger, Ms. Titus, Ms. Brown, Mr. Kilmer, 
and Mr. Evans) introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
               Committee on Oversight and Accountability

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To increase the rates of pay under the statutory pay systems and for 
   prevailing rate employees by 8.7 percent, 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. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Federal Adjustment of Income Rates 
Act'' or the ``FAIR Act''.

SEC. 2. ADJUSTMENT TO RATES OF PAY.

    (a) Statutory Pay Systems.--For calendar year 2024, the percentage 
adjustment under section 5303 of title 5, United States Code, in the 
rates of basic pay under the statutory pay systems (as defined in 
section 5302 of title 5, United States Code) shall be 4.7 percent.
    (b) Prevailing Rate Employees.--Notwithstanding the wage survey 
requirements under section 5343(b) of title 5, United States Code, for 
fiscal year 2024, the rates of basic pay (as in effect on the last day 
of fiscal year 2023 under section 5343(a) of such title) for prevailing 
rate employees in each wage area and the rates of basic pay under 
sections 5348 and 5349 of such title shall be increased by 4.7 percent.

SEC. 3. ADJUSTMENT TO LOCALITY PAY.

    For calendar year 2024, the percentage adjustment under section 
5304 of title 5, United States Code, shall be an increase of 4.0 
percent.
                                 <all>
```
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Richard Peter Kesick, Appellant.

Judgment unanimously affirmed. Memorandum: We reject defendant’s argument that the evidence of intent is insufficient to support his conviction for burglary in the second degree. Defendant’s intent to commit larceny can be inferred from the circumstances of the entry *(see, People v Woodard,*148 AD2d 997, 998, *Iv denied 14:*NY2d 749; *People v Caraballo,*138 AD2d 725, 726, *Iv denied*71 NY2d 1024). We further conclude that the sentence is not harsh and excessive. (Appeal from judgment of Erie County Court, Drury, J.—burglary, second degree.) Present—Callahan, J. P., Doerr, Boomer, Green and Balio, JJ.
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-2018-0025-6973

Omron Management Center of 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
Amendment No. 4 to Employment Agreement - Robert Charles Mahoney



 Exhibit 10.5 

AMENDMENT NO. 4 TO 

EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT 

WHEREAS, Semiconductor Components Industries, LLC (“Company”) and Robert Charles Mahoney (“Executive”) entered
into an Employment Agreement dated as of July 11, 2006 and as previously amended (“Agreement”); 

WHEREAS, all defined terms used herein shall have the meanings set forth in the Agreement unless specifically
defined herein; 
 WHEREAS, as of February 23, 2010 the Compensation Committee (“Committee”)
of the Board of Directors of ON Semiconductor Corporation considered and approved an increase, effective January 1, 2010, of the maximum target bonus percentage for the Executive from 75% to 80% of his Base Salary during the applicable
Performance Cycle under a bonus Program established and approved by the Committee and/or Board; and 

WHEREAS, the Company and the Executive now wish to amend the Agreement to reflect the increase to the maximum target
bonus percentage to 80% consistent with the Committee’s approvals and make certain related conforming changes to the Agreement. 

NOW, THEREFORE, for mutual consideration the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the Agreement is hereby amended as follows:

 1. Effective January 1, 2010, Section 2(b) of the Agreement related to “Compensation” is hereby amended by replacing such
section in its entirety with the following: 
 “(b) In addition to the Base Salary, during the Employment
Period, the Executive shall be eligible to participate in the bonus program established and approved by the Board (the “Program”) and, pursuant to the Program, the Executive may earn a bonus (the “Bonus”) on an annual or other
performance period basis (a “Performance Cycle”) of up to a maximum target of 80% of Base Salary earned during the applicable Performance Cycle or an additional amount as approved by the Board under the Program and in each case based on
certain performance criteria; provided that the Executive is actively employed by the Company on the date the Bonuses are paid under the Program, except as provided in Section 5(a) herein. The Bonus may be paid annually or more frequently
depending upon the Performance Cycle, as determined by the Board and pursuant to the Program. The Bonus will be specified by the Board, and the Bonus will be reviewed at least annually by the Board.” 

 

 1 








 2. This Agreement shall amend only the provisions of the Agreement as set forth herein. Those provisions of
the Agreement not expressly amended shall be considered in full force and effect. 
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Executive
and the Company have executed this Amendment as of the 24 day of March, 2010. 
  

							
	COMPANY:	 		 	Semiconductor Components Industries, LLC
				
		 		 	By:	 	 /s/ COLLEEN MCKEOWN

		 		 	Name:	 	Colleen McKeown
		 		 	Title::	 	Senior Vice President of Human Resources
			
	EXECUTIVE:	 		 	Robert Charles Mahoney, in his individual capacity
				
		 		 	By:	 	 /s/ ROBERT CHARLES MAHONEY

		 		 	Name:	 	Robert Charles Mahoney
		 		 	Title:	 	Executive Vice President, Sales and Marketing
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000897432
<NAME> INCO HOMES CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1998
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                             712
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     30,238
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  32,006
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      2,340
<COMMON>                                            21
<OTHER-SE>                                     (4,570)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    32,006
<SALES>                                         29,241
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                29,241
<CGS>                                           27,262
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   27,262
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (4,461)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (4,461)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                   (68)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (6,963)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (3.51)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (3.51)



</TABLE>
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-2018-0025-6193

Dallas Airmotive, 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
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-2018-0025-6747

Apex Sourcing & Manufacturing: 

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. 5158 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 5158

     To terminate authorizations for the use of military force and 
declarations of war not later than 10 years after the enactment of such 
        authorizations or declarations, and for other purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             August 4, 2023

  Mr. Schiff (for himself, Ms. Omar, and Mr. Sherman) introduced the 
 following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
     To terminate authorizations for the use of military force and 
declarations of war not later than 10 years after the enactment of such 
        authorizations or declarations, 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. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``Accountability for Endless Wars Act 
of 2023''.

SEC. 2. TERMINATION OF AUTHORIZATIONS FOR USE OF MILITARY FORCE AND 
              DECLARATIONS OF WAR.

    (a) Future Authorizations for Use of Military Force and 
Declarations of War.--Any authorization for the use of military force 
or declaration of war enacted into law on or after the date of the 
enactment of this Act shall terminate on the date that is not later 
than 10 years after the date of the enactment of such authorization or 
declaration, as the case may be.
    (b) Existing Authorizations for Use of Military Force and 
Declarations of War.--Any authorization for the use of military force 
or declaration of war enacted into law before the date of the enactment 
of this Act and in effect as of such date of enactment shall terminate 
on the date that is 180 days after such date of enactment.
                                 <all>
```
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Thomas Holley, Also Known as James Johnson, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from two sentences of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Starkey, J.), both rendered August 9, 1988, the sentences being two concurrent indeterminate terms of 5 to 10 years’ imprisonment and a surcharge of $100 with respect to each indictment, upon his convictions of two counts of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the third degree (one count as to each indictment), after pleas of guilty.

Ordered that the sentences are affirmed.

The mere fact that defendant suffers from acquired immune deficiency syndrome and certain other medical conditions, is *470not, in and of itself, a ground for reducing the otherwise appropriate and bargained-for sentence which was imposed (see, *People v Napolitano,*138 AD2d 414; *People v Parker,*132 AD2d 629; *People v Suitte,*90 AD2d 80; *People v Kazepis,*101 AD2d 816). Any application by the defendant to ameliorate the conditions under which he is incarcerated should be made to the New York State Department of Correctional Services. Mangano, P. J., Kunzeman, Eiber and Balletta, JJ., concur.
#### Henry A. Gallo, Respondent, et al., Plaintiff, v County of Westchester, Appellant.

a negligence action to recover damages for personal injuries, etc., the defendant appeals, as limited by its brief, from so much of an order of the Supreme Court, Westchester County (Gurahian, J.), dated June 10, 1988, as conditionally denied that branch of its motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted by the plaintiff Henry Gallo as barred by the Statute of Limitations.

Ordered that the order is reversed insofar as appealed from, on the law, with costs, that branch of the defendant’s motion which was for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as it is asserted by the plaintiff Henry Gallo is granted, and that branch of the complaint is dismissed.

The record contains no evidence of any affirmative misconduct or misrepresentation on the part of the defendant which can be said to have induced the reasonable reliance of the plaintiff Henry Gallo in failing to timely commence this action *(see, Matter of Pherbo Realty Corp. v Board of Assessors,*104 AD2d 1037; *Elmer v Village of Honeoye Falls,*100 AD2d 734). Contrary to this plaintiff’s contention, the ambiguous lan*585guage contained in the letters confirming the numerous adjournments of the oral examinations to be held pursuant to General Municipal Law §50-h, all of which adjournments were requested by him, cannot be said to constitute the type of written stipulation upon which the First Department relied in *Robinson v City of New York*(24 AD2d 260) in applying the doctrine of equitable estoppel to preclude the defendant city from asserting the Statute of Limitations as a defense. As this court has previously held, estoppel should not lightly be invoked against the State or a subdivision thereof, and will only be so invoked when justified by the facts or when necessary to prevent manifest injustice *(Eden v Board of Trustees,*49 AD2d 277, 283-284). Thompson, J. P., Brown, Fiber and Miller, JJ., concur.
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

September 17, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number USTR-2018-0025-5725

Radio Systems Corp: 

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/%2434_Billion_Exclusions_Gr

anted_September.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
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

October 31, 2005 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh 127545(21) Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, BABASHOLA ABE, Justices Plaintiff-Appellant,

v SC: 127545 COA: 256365 Ingham CC: 96-082140-NZ MICHIGAN STATE UNIVERSITY, Defendant-Appellee.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, th e motion for reconsideration of th is Court's order of July 26, 2005 is considered, and it is DENIED, b ecause it does not appear that the order was entered erroneously.

d1024 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

October 31, 2005

Clerk