alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 5280 Introduced in House (IH)]

<DOC>

118th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 5280

  To amend title 28, United States Code, to provide for the expedited 
  review of actions to which the President is a party, and for other 
                               purposes.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            August 25, 2023

   Mr. Lieu introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend title 28, United States Code, to provide for the expedited 
  review of actions to which the President is a party, 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 ``Expediting Civil Litigation Against 
the Executive Act of 2023''.

SEC. 2. EXPEDITED REVIEW OF ACTIONS TO WHICH THE PRESIDENT IS A PARTY.

    (a) In General.--Chapter 190 of title 28, United States Code, is 
amended by adding at the end the following:
``Sec. 5002. Expedited review of actions to which the President is a 
              party
    ``(a) In General.--With respect to a covered civil action, the 
following shall apply:
            ``(1) The court shall advance on the docket and expedite to 
        the greatest possible extent the disposition of such civil 
        action.
            ``(2) Upon the request of a party, the civil action shall 
        be heard by a three-judge panel pursuant to section 2284.
            ``(3) An appeal may be taken directly to the Supreme Court 
        of the United States from any final judgment in such a civil 
        action, and if it has not previously ruled on the question, the 
        Supreme Court shall accept jurisdiction over the appeal, 
        advance the appeal on the docket, and expedite the appeal to 
        the greatest extent possible.
    ``(b) Definition.--In this section, the term `covered civil action' 
means a civil action in which--
            ``(1)(A) the President has a personal financial interest; 
        or
            ``(B) the President's conduct is alleged to constitute 
        sexual harassment, sexual assault, or other sexual misconduct;
            ``(2) the President is properly joined as a party; and
            ``(3) the complainant has stated a valid claim upon which 
        relief can be granted.''.
    (b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of sections for chapter 190 of 
title 28, United States Code, is amended by inserting after the item 
related to section 5001 the following:

``5002. Expedited review of actions to which the President is a 
                            party.''.
                                 <all>
```
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-2018-0025-6151

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
<PAGE>
 
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1




                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS



The Board of Directors
Styles on Video, Inc.


We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statement on Form S-3 (33-77942) and the Registration Statements on Form S-8 
(33-79138, 33-60830, 33-60832, 33-60834 and 33-60836) of our report dated March
14, 1997 on the consolidated financial statements of Styles on Video, Inc. and
subsidiaries as of and for the year ended December 31, 1996 appearing in the
Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Styles on Video, Inc. for the year ended
December 31, 1996.



                                                /s/ Corbin & Wertz

                                                   CORBIN & WERTZ

Irvine, California
March 27, 1997
#### Willie T. BLAND, et al., Appellants, v. LIBERTY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Respondent.

No. WD 51152.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Western District.

May 21, 1996.

Robert L. Desselle, Desselle Law Office, Independence, for appellants.

Stephanie Warmund, Tracy Vetter, Kansas City, for respondent.

Before EDWIN H. SMITH, P.J., and BRECKENRIDGE and ELLIS, JJ.

*ORDER*

PER CURIAM:

Willie and Alma Bland appeal the judgment of the Jackson County Circuit Court, after a bench trial, wherein they were awarded damages for their partial fire loss under a policy of insurance issued by Liberty Mutual Insurance Company (Liberty Mutual) and denied an award for the insurer’s alleged vexatious refusal to pay. No error of law appears.

An opinion reciting the detailed facts and restating principles of law would have no precedential value. However, the parties have been furnished with a memorandum opinion for their information only, setting forth facts and reasons for this order.

The judgment of the circuit court is affirmed. Rule 84.16(b).
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-2018-0025-6920

United Scope LLC: 

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

_05.09.19.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,

Joseph Barloon

General Counsel
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

January 4, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-6614

Aquaculture Technologies, 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
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

February 19, 2019

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-6357

Dallas Airmotive, Inc:

The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the product exclusion request referenced 

above has been denied. As you are aware, USTR published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 

28710) on June 20, 2018, that announced the Trade Representative’s determination to impose an 

additional duty of 25 percent on certain products from China. On July 11, 2018, the Trade 

Representative published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 32181) which announced that a 

process had been established under which interested persons could request that products falling 

within a covered HTSUS subheading be excluded from the additional duties announced on June 

20.

Your request was reviewed in accordance with the factors and procedures set forth in 

Section B(1) of the July 11 notice. Based on that review, and after careful consideration, your 

request was denied because the request concerns a product strategically important or related to 

‘‘Made in China 2025’’ or other Chinese industrial programs.

Because USTR will grant exclusion requests on a product specific basis, you may still 

benefit from a product exclusion if a similar product is granted an exclusion. Products for which 

an exclusion has been granted will be periodically announced on the USTR website. Product 

exclusions will become legally effective once published in the Federal Register. 

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Vaughn

General Counsel
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 63 (Monday, April 3, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 16879]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-8119]



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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Dental Research; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to Section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), notice is hereby given of the following 
National Institute of Dental Research Special Emphasis Panel (SEP) 
meetings:

    Name of SEP: National Institute of Dental Research Special 
Emphasis Panel--Minority Oral Health Study.
    Dates: May 2-3, 1995.
    Time: 9:00 a.m.
    Place: Marriott Pooks Hill, 5151 Pooks Hill Road, Bethesda, MD 
20814.
    Contact Person: Dr. Philip Washko, Scientific Review 
Administrator, 4500 Center Drive, Natcher Building, room 4AN-38J, 
Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 594-2372.

Purpose/Agenda

    To evaluate and review grant applications and/or contract 
proposals.
    Name of SEP: National Institute of Dental Research Special 
Emphasis Panel--Research on Pulp Biology.
    Dates: June 1-2, 1995.
    Time: 9:00 a.m.
    Place: Marriott Pooks Hill, 5151 Pooks Hill Road, Bethesda, MD 
20814.
    Contact Person: Dr. Philip Washko, Scientific Review 
Administration, 4500 Center Drive, Natcher Building, room 4AN-38J, 
Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 594-2372.

Purpose/Agenda

    To evaluate and review grant applications and/or contract 
proposals.
    Name of SEP: National Institute of Dental Research Special 
Emphasis Panel--Dentist Scientist Award.
    Dates: June 5-6, 1995.
    Time: 9:00 a.m.
    Place: Marriott Pooks Hill, 5151 Pooks Hill Road, Bethesda, MD 
20814.
    Contact Person: Dr. George Hausch, Chief, Review Section, 4500 
Center Drive, Natcher Building, room 4AN-38J, Bethesda, MD 20892, 
(301) 594-2372.

Purpose/Agenda

    To evaluate and review grant applications and/or contract 
proposals.

    The meetings will be closed in accordance with the provision set 
forth in secs. 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5, U.S.C. Applications 
and/or proposals and the discussions could reveal confidential trade 
secrets or commercial property such as patentable material and personal 
information concerning individuals associated with the applications 
and/or proposals, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly 
unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program No. 93.121, Oral 
Diseases and Disorders Research)

    Dated: March 28, 1995.
Susan K. Feldman,
Committee Management Officer, NIH.
[FR Doc. 95-8119 Filed 3-31-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-M
#### D.C.M. Realty Corp., Appellant, v Town of Islip et al., Respondents.

In an action, *inter alia,*for a judgment declaring the zoning laws of the Town of Islip void and unconstitutional as applied to the plaintiffs property, the plaintiff appeals from an order and judgment (one paper), of the Supreme Court, Suffolk County (Doyle, J.), dated July 18, 1988, which, after a nonjury trial, declared the Town of Islip zoning ordinance constitutional as applied to the plaintiffs property and dismissed the complaint.

Ordered that the order and judgment is affirmed, with costs. The plaintiff is the owner of a 38,450-square-foot lot situated on the south side of Suffolk Avenue and bordering the Long Island Rail Road main line track in the Town of Islip, New York. Pursuant to its current zoning classification as "Residence AA”, the property may be improved by a single-family home built on a lot of no less than 20,000 square feet in size.

Sometime after the respondents denied the plaintiffs application for a "change of zone” to a business classification, the plaintiff commenced the instant declaratory judgment action. After a trial, the Supreme Court, Suffolk County, declared the zoning ordinance constitutional finding that the plaintiff failed to prove that the zoning ordinance, as applied to its property, deprived it of the ability to realize a reasonable return or deprived it of all reasonable use for which the property was adapted.

It is well established that in order to prove that an unconstitutional taking has occurred, a landowner must prove that the land cannot yield an economically reasonable return as zoned *(de St. Aubin v Flacke,*68 NY2d 66, 76-77; *Tilles Inv. Co. v Town of Huntington,*137 AD2d 118, 122, *affd*74 NY2d 885). In this case, the plaintiff failed to submit dollars and cents proof to establish beyond a reasonable doubt that the property, as presently zoned, would not yield a reasonable return.

Although the plaintiffs expert testified that the parcel *496would have a market value of about $100,000 if zoned for business use, it is not enough to merely prove that the land would be more valuable under a less restrictive classification *(see, McGowan v Cohalan,*41 NY2d 434, 436; *Tilles Inv. Co. v Town of Huntington, supra).*The plaintiff’s expert also testified that the parcel was worth about $20,000 as undeveloped residential property and was closely situated to other residential AA plots developed with single-family homes having estimated values of between $150,000 and $170,000. Moreover, we note that although the plaintiff acquired the property for about $33,000 in 1971, there is no evidence that the purchase price was an accurate reflection of the fair market value of the property at that time. Kunzeman, J. P., Harwood, Balletta and O’Brien, JJ., concur.
EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES TRADE REPRESENTATIVE

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20508

November 19, 2018

RE: Product Exclusion Request Number: USTR-2018-0025-3718

JLG Industries, Inc:

The purpose of this letter is to inform you that the product exclusion request referenced 

above has been denied. As you are aware, USTR published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 

28710) on June 20, 2018, that announced the Trade Representative’s determination to impose an 

additional duty of 25 percent on certain products from China. On July 11, 2018, the Trade 

Representative published a Federal Register notice (83 FR 32181) which announced that a 

process had been established under which interested persons could request that products falling 

within a covered HTSUS subheading be excluded from the additional duties announced on June 

20. 

Your request was reviewed in accordance with the factors and procedures set forth in 

Section B(1) of the July 11 notice. Based on that review, and after careful consideration, your 

request was denied because the request 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
Exhibit
32.1



CERTIFICATION
PURSUANT TO

18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In
connection with the Annual Report of The Company (the “Company”) on Form 10-K/A for the period ending December 31,
2015 (the “Report”) as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Rupert Ireland, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 USC Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) | The
    Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and                                   
| | --- | ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
| |     |                                                                                                                                                             
| | (2) | The
    information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations
    of the Company.



Dated: June
6, 2016



|By: | /s/
    Wais Asefi                                                                                                                                                                                        | 
|--- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | 
|    | Wais
    Asefi                                                                                                                                                                                            | 
|    | President,
                                         CEO and Director
        Principal
        Executive Officer
        Principal
        Financial Officer
        Principal
        Accounting Officer | 



This
certification accompanies the Report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent
required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemed filed by the Company for purposes of Section 18 of
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER

Appellate case name: Rema Charles v. Dickinson Independent School District, A.C. 

Kantara, and Taylor Marine Construction of Texas, LLC

Appellate case number: 01-20-00215-CV

Trial court case number: 16CV0880

Trial court: 56th District Court of Galveston County

Appellee, A.C. Kantara, has filed a motion to extend time to file his appellee’s brief.

Appellant, Rema Charles, filed her appellant’s brief on March 30, 2020, thereby 

establishing a deadline of April 29, 2020 for the filing of a brief by any appellee. See TEX.

R. APP. P. 38.6(b). Appellee’s motion requests a ninety-day extension of time to file its. 

The motion is granted, in part.

Appellee’s brief of A.C. Kantara is due to be filed no later than June 29, 2020. 

Absent extraordinary circumstances, no further extensions will be granted.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: _____/s/ Evelyn V. Keyes_______

  Acting individually  Acting for the Court

Date: __April 28, 2020___
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-2018-0025-6314

CW Bearing USA, Inc:

I am pleased to notify you that the United States Trade Representative has determined to 

grant the above-referenced exclusion request submitted pursuant to the notice published at 83 FR 

32181 (‘July 11 notice’). The exclusion determination is set out in a formal notice which has 

been submitted to Office of the Federal Register for publication (‘the exclusion notice’). A prepublication version of the exclusion notice has been posted on the USTR website, at 

https://ustr.gov/sites/default/files/enforcement/301Investigations/12.21.18_Notice_of_Product_E

xclusions.pdf.

The scope of the exclusion is governed by the formal HTSUS language in the annex to 

the product exclusion notice, and not by the product descriptions set out in any particular request 

for exclusion. An exclusion in response to your request has been granted by excluding from the 

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

In accordance with the July 11 notice, the exclusion applies as of the July 6, 2018 

effective date of the tariff action, and will extend for one year after the exclusion notice is 

published in the Federal Register. As stated in the exclusion notice, U.S. Customs and Border 

Protection will issue additional instructions on entry guidance and implementation.

Sincerely,

Stephen P. Vaughn

General Counsel