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

Note: Representatives submitting on behalf of an organization must enter information below.

Requestor Representative:

Section 301 Investigation: China's Acts, Policies, and Practices Related to Technology 

Transfer, Intellectual Property, and Innovation - Form to Request Exclusion of Product

When submitting a product exclusion request using this form, enter the specified 

information in the following fields and explain the basis and rationale for your statements. 

By completing this form, you certify that the information provided is complete and 

correct to the best of your knowledge. 

1. Indicate whether the comment contains business confidential information (BCI), is a public

document, or is a public version of a BCI document.

3.

2. Please provide a complete and detailed description of the product of concern:

4.

5. Requestor's relationship to the product:

CONTINUED BELOW

*

10-digit HTSUS item number* for product you wish to address in this product exclusion request:

Use numerical characters only with no special characters (example: 1023456789). For help in finding 

the HTSUS item number associated with your product, see https://hts.usitc.gov/

1

7.

6. Does this submission in regulations.gov include additional attachments?

Please indicate whether any additional attachment contains business confidential

information (BCI), is a public document, or is a public version of a BCI document.

VERSION 1

Requestor Information

Requestor Name (Last, First):

Public Version of BCI

RC2514, 25.8 ton Capacity, 14.25 in Stroke, General Purpose Hydraulic Cylinder; Maximum Operating 

Pressure psi: 10000; Weight Kgs: 17,7; Oil Capacity Advance cm3: 1202; Stroke Ranges mm: 290 - 

379

8412210075 Schmidt, Jackie Enerpac Jackie SchmidtImporter Yes Contains BCI
END 2

8. Is this product, or a comparable product, available from sources in the United States?:

VERSION 1

11. Please provide information in support your request, taking account of the instructions

provided in Section B of the Federal Register notice (note: text entered below can extend

beyond the apparent size of this box).

9. Is this product, or a comparable product, available from sources in third countries?:

10. Please provide the value and quantity (with units) of the Chinese-origin product of concern

that you purchased for each calendar year specified. Limit this figure to the products

purchased by your firm (or by members of your trade association) alone. Please provide 

estimates if precise figures are unavailable.

2016 Value:

2015 Value:

2017 Value:

2016 Quantity:

2015 Quantity:

2017 Quantity:

No No BCI BCI BCI BCI BCI BCI

See addendum for additional information.
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 quarterly report on Form 10-Q of FSP Galleria North Corp.
(the “Company”) for the period ended March 31, 2008as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
“Report”), the undersigned, George J. Carter, President and principal executive
officer of the Company, hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
that, to his knowledge:





(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.











Date:  May
      9, 2008
            /s/ George J.
      Carter
              George
      J. Carter
              President
              (Principal Executive
      Officer)
Exhibit 10.19

EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT

This Employment Agreement is made as of the 30th day of September, 2003 by and between Edward M. Krell (the "Employee"), and Mothers Work, Inc. (the
"Company").

Whereas,
Employee and Company previously entered into an employment agreement (the "Original Employment Agreement") providing for certain terms and conditions, and

Whereas,
on the terms and conditions as outlined in this Employment Agreement, the parties desire to replace the Original Employment Agreement with this Agreement.

Therefore,
in consideration of the mutual premises and promises contained in the Agreement, the parties agree as follows:

Except
in the event of a termination for cause by Company or a resignation by Employee, and except for a termination of employment by Employee or Company in connection with a Change of
Control (as defined herein), in the event that Employee's employment is terminated with the Company, (i) the Company will make the lump sum payment to Employee (less applicable deductions and
withholdings), within fifteen (15) days after the effective date of the event giving rise to such payment, of the gross amount equal to one year of Employee's then salary, and (ii) all
outstanding options that Employee has shall become immediately vested and exercisable. In consideration of and as a condition to receiving the lump sum payment and option vesting, Employee will be
required to sign the Company's then standard release agreement.

1

---



In
the event of a termination of employment falling under this paragraph 3, the Company shall also pay for full outplacement services for Employee, such payment to be made to an
agency selected by Employee, based upon the customary fees charged by nationally rated firms engaged in such services.

2

---



Employee assigns to Company any rights Employee may have in any Confidential Information. Employee shall not disclose any Confidential Information to any third-party or use any
Confidential Information for any purposes other than as authorized by the Company.

3

---



4

---





5

---

IN
WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this instrument the day and year above and below written.

|Mothers Work, Inc. |  | Edward M. Krell   
|------------------ |  | ------------------
|By:                |  | /s/DAN W. MATTHIAS
|Title:             |  | CEO/Chairman      
|Date:              |  | 12/17/03          
|                   |  |                   

6

---

QuickLinks
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v James Kofi Kari Kari, Appellant.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Eugene Nardelli, J.), rendered on August 20, 1987, convicting defendant, upon his plea of guilty, of criminal sale of a controlled substance in the second degree and sentencing him to a prison term of from 4 Vi years to life, is unanimously affirmed.

We are unpersuaded that the sentence imposed was unduly harsh or severe. Taking into account, "among other things, the crime charged, the particular circumstances of the individual before the court and the purpose of a penal sanction”, we perceive no abuse of discretion warranting a reduction in sentence *(People v Farrar,*52 NY2d 302, 305).

Further, defendant was sentenced in accordance with his plea bargain and within statutory guidelines. "Having received the benefit of his bargain, defendant should be bound by its terms” *(People v Felman,*141 AD2d 889, 890, *Iv denied*72 NY2d 918). Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Carro, Rosenberger and Asch, JJ.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Robert Schiavo, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Nassau County (Wexner, J.), rendered January 18, 1989, convicting him of criminal possession of a weapon in the fourth degree, upon his plea of guilty, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed, and the matter is remitted to the County Court, Nassau County, for further proceedings pursuant to CPL 460.50 (5).

The defendant contends on appeal that the information contained in the affidavit of Police Officer Robert Nonnenmacher was insufficient to justify the issuance of a warrant authorizing the search of his home. We disagree.

It is well settled that a search warrant must be supported by a reasonable belief that an offense has been or is being committed, or that evidence of criminality may be found in a certain place *(see, People v Bigelow,*66 NY2d 417; *People v Londono,*148 AD2d 753). At bar, the affidavit in support of the application for the search warrant relayed details of a tape-recorded conversation in which the defendant stated, *inter alia,*"don’t forget my gun because I want to put it in my house”. The officer further averred that the defendant was not licensed to carry or possess a handgun.

Contrary to the defendant’s assertions, we find that the foregoing information was sufficient to furnish probable cause to issue the search warrant *(see, People v Edwards,*69 NY2d 814; *People v*Cassella, 143 AD2d 192; *People v Marinelli,*100 AD2d 597). We further find that the eight-day delay between the tape-recorded conversation and the issuance of the search warrant did not render the information stale *(see, People v Padilla,*132 AD2d 578; *People v Tune,*103 AD2d 990).

We have examined the defendant’s remaining contention and find it to be without merit. Thompson, J. P., Brown, Eiber and Miller, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT
32.1




CERTIFICATION




OF




CHIEF
EXECUTIVE OFFICER




AND




CHIEF
FINANCIAL OFFICER




PURSUANT
TO 18 U.S.C. 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




I,
Richard Man Fai LEE, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q/A of China Premium Lifestyle Enterprise, Inc. for the quarter ended June
30, 2009 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q/A fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of China Premium Lifestyle Enterprise,
Inc.




I, Joseph
Tik Tung WONG, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report on Form
10-Q/A of China Premium Lifestyle Enterprise, Inc. for the quarter ended June
30, 2009 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q/A fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of China Premium Lifestyle Enterprise,
Inc.




May
      28, 2010
                  By:
                  /s/ Richard Man Fai LEERichard
      Man Fai LEEChief
      Executive OfficerMay
      28, 2010
                  By:
                  /s/ Joseph Tik Tung WONGJoseph
      Tik Tung WONGChief
      Financial Officer, Treasurer and
Secretary





This
certification accompanies the Form 10-Q/A to which it relates, is not
deemed filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and is not to be
incorporated by reference into any filing of China Premium Lifestyle Enterprise,
Inc. under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Exchange
Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of the
Form 10-Q/A), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained
in such filing.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

J. D. JORDAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

 v. 

JAY C. HOAG, Founding General Partner, 

Technology Crossover Ventures; et al., 

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 18-15451 

D.C. No. 5:15-cv-01819-EJD 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of California

Edward J. Davila, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted March 12, 2019**

Before: LEAVY, BEA, and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

J.D. Jordan appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment dismissing his 

action alleging a claim under § 16(b) of the Securities Exchange Act. We have 

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo the district court’s 

dismissal under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6), Hebbe v. Pliler, 627 

 

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

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

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

FILED

MAR 19 2019

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 18-15451 

F.3d 338, 341 (9th Cir. 2010), and we affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Jordan’s action because Jordan failed 

to allege facts sufficient to state a plausible claim. See 17 C.F.R. § 240.16b–6(a) 

(“The establishment of . . . a call equivalent position . . . shall be deemed a 

purchase of the underlying security for purposes of section 16(b) of the Act . . . .”),

§ 240.16b–6(b) (disposition of underlying securities due to the exercise of a put 

equivalent position shall be exempt from the operation of § 16(b)); Strom v. United 

States, 641 F.3d 1051, 1060-62 (9th Cir. 2011) (setting forth elements of a § 16(b)

claim; concluding that “unvested securities are acquired, and thus ‘purchased’ 

under § 16(b), when granted”); Hebbe, 627 F.3d at 341-42 (although pro se 

pleadings are construed liberally, a plaintiff must present factual allegations 

sufficient to state a plausible claim for relief).

Appellees’ motion for summary affirmance and sanctions (Docket Entry No. 

10) is denied.

Appellant’s motion for judicial notice (Docket Entry No. 18) is denied.

AFFIRMED.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 76 (Thursday, April 20, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 19749-19750]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-9754]



=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 19750]]

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

Office of the Secretary


Findings of Scientific Misconduct

AGENCY: Office of the Secretary, HHS.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: Notice is hereby given that the Office of Research Integrity 
(ORI) has made final findings of scientific misconduct in the following 
case:
    James T. Kurtzman, M.D., University of California at San Francisco. 
An investigation conducted by the University found that Dr. Kurtzman, a 
former Resident/Fellow in the Department of Obstetrics, Gynecology, and 
Reproductive Sciences, falsified results of research on the kinetics of 
nitric oxide synthase in cells and homogenates of human myometrial 
tissue in pregnant women. Dr. Kurtzman admitted that he had altered 
data in eight experiments that he performed during December 1993 and 
January 1994. Dr. Kurtzman reported that he had conducted the enzyme 
assays and entered the data into a computer-based spreadsheet, but then 
changed the data to generate graphs that would reproduce the type of 
results that he had submitted earlier to the Journal of Clinical 
Investigation. The paper was not published. Dr. Kurtzman executed a 
Voluntary Exclusion and Settlement Agreement in which he has agreed not 
to apply for Federal grant or contract funds and will not serve on PHS 
advisory committees, boards or peer review groups for a three-year 
period beginning March 18, 1995. The voluntary exclusion, however, 
shall not apply to Dr. Kurtzman's future training or practice of 
clinical medicine whether as a resident, fellow, or licensed 
practitioner, as the case may be, unless that practice involves 
federally funded research or the direct receipt of an award for 
federally funded research training.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION, CONTACT: Director, Division of Research 
Investigations, Office of Research Integrity, 301-443-5330.
Lyle W. Bivens,
Director, Office of Research Integrity.
[FR Doc. 95-9754 Filed 4-19-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4160-17-P
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v AJS Merchandising, Inc., Appellant.

Judgment unanimously reversed on the law and new trial granted. Memorandum: Defendants appeal from a judgment convicting them of one count of obscenity in the third degree, stemming from their sale of a videotape entitled "Sex Wish” to a police officer. Defendants were charged in the indictment with illegally promoting material depicting or describing "sexual intercourse, sodomy, masturbation and/or lewd exhibition of genitals.” However, the court charged the jury with respect to the entire definition of obscenity set forth in Penal Law § 235.00 (1), which also includes sexual bestiality, sadism, masochism and excretion. That was error. The People were limited to trying defendants on the charges in the indictment *(see, People v Grega,*72 NY2d 489, 496). Preservation is not required because defendants’ constitutional right to be convicted only of those crimes and upon those theories charged in an indictment is nonwaivable *(People v Rubin,*101 AD2d 71, 77). This error cannot be considered harmless because the videotape depicted sadistic sexual behavior including bondage, torture and execution *(cf., People v Grega, supra,*at 497). We cannot say that there is no reasonable possibility that the error might have contributed to defendants’ conviction *(see, People v Crimmins,*36 NY2d 230, 237). (Appeal from judgment of Niagara County Court, DiFlorio, J.—obscenity, third degree.) Present— Doerr, J. P., Boomer, Green, Pine and Lowery, JJ.
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-2018-0025-6878

BorgWarner Emissions Systems: 

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
#### Jack R. CREWSE, Plaintiff/Appellant, v. Rafael HERNANDEZ, Defendant/Respondent.

No. 57933.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

Jan. 8, 1991.

Donald V. Fraser, Jr., St. Louis, for plaintiff/appellant.

Ray A. Gerritzen, St. Louis, for defendant/respondent.

ORDER

PER CURIAM.

In this vehicular negligence case, plaintiff appeals the jury verdict for defendant.

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

*686The judgment is affirmed in accordance with 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-2018-0025-6181

Nissan North America, Inc:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

20.

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

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

request was denied because the request failed to show that the imposition of additional duties on 

the particular product would cause severe economic harm to you or other U.S. interests.

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

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

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

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

Sincerely,

Joseph Barloon

General Counsel
Exhibit 32.1

 

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. Section 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

 

In connection with the Quarterly Report of **Sydys Coropration** (the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ended **June 30, 2005** as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date here of (the "report"), I, Christopher Schilling, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated this 19th day of August, 2005.

 
/s/ Christopher Schilling 
Christopher Schilling 
Chief Executive Officer
<PAGE>
 
                                 EXHIBIT 23.2



                   CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS


We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registration statements of 
Styles on Video, Inc. on Form S-3 (File No. 33-77942) and Form S-8 (File No. 
33-79138, 33-60830, 33-60832, 33-60834 and 33-60836) of our report, which 
includes an explanatory paragraph concerning substantial doubt about the ability
of Styles on Video, Inc. to continue as a going concern, dated August 28, 1995, 
except for Notes 2 and 17 which are dated March 12, 1996, on our audit of the 
financial statements of Styles on Video, Inc. as of December 31, 1994 and for 
the year then ended, which report is included in this Annual Report on Form 
10-KSB.




/s/Coopers & Lybrand L.L.P.

COOPERS & LYBRAND L.L.P.


Los Angeles, California
March 20, 1997
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





In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Juma Technology, Corp. (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Anthony Fernandez, the
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 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.




/s/ Anthony
      FernandezAnthony
      Fernandez
              Chief
      Financial Officer




August
13, 2010