alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[ logo of WCI STEEL ]
 [ letterhead of Bret W. Wise, Vice President & CFO ]

                                                  December 19, 1996


James V. Stack
5042 Seahouse Avenue
Naples, FL 33940


Dear Jim:

WCI Steel, Inc. hereby offers to pay to you four equal quarterly payments,
commencing February 1, 1997, representing the net present value of amounts
owed you under your Net Worth Appreciation Agreement dated September 1, 1988
and as amended on November 15, 1993 and January 5, 1995 (the "Agreement").
The amount of the quarterly payment of $1,166,893.10 has been computed using
a discount rate of 7.6% and will be paid on each of the first day of February,
May, August, and November 1997, subject to applicable withholding taxes.
By signature below, you agree that the payments described above represent
full satisfaction of all amounts due you by the Company,
The Renco Group, Inc. and any affiliate thereof pursuant to the Agreement
and that the Agreement will terminate upon the final payment on
November 1, 1997.

                                                  Sincerely,

                                              /S/ BRET W. WISE
                                              ----------------
                                                  Bret W. Wise
                                                  Vice President, Finance and
                                                  Chief Financial Officer


        Agreed: /S/ JAMES V. STACK
                ------------------
                    James V. Stack  


[ bottom of letterhead ]
  WCI Steel, Inc., 1040 Pine Avenue, S.E., Warren, Ohio 44483-6528
  (330) 841-8314 / Fax (330) 84l-8387
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-2018-0025-7628

Global Trade Works, 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/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
#### STATE of Missouri, Plaintiff-Respondent, v. Antonio TRAVLUS, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 62166.

Missouri Court of Appeals, Eastern District, Division One.

Aug. 31, 1993.

J. Reuben Rigel, St. Louis, for defendant-appellant.

Jeremiah W. (Jay) Nixon, Atty. Gen., Elizabeth L. Ziegler, Asst. Atty. Gen., Jefferson City, for plaintiff-respondent.

Before CRANDALL, P.J., and REINHARD and CRIST, JJ.

*394
      *ORDER*

PER CURIAM.

Defendant, Antonio Travlus, appeals from a judgment of conviction, after a jury trial, for burglary in the second degree. He was sentenced as a prior, persistent and class X offender to imprisonment for nine years.

No jurisprudential purpose would be served by a written opinion. The judgment of conviction is affirmed. Rule 30.25(b).
EXHIBIT 32.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


         In connection with the Quarterly Report of North Penn Bancorp, Inc.
(the "Company") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2005, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Frederick L. Hickman, President and 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 the Report fairly presents, in
                  all material respects, the financial condition and results of
                  operations of the Company.




Date:         March 29, 2006                     /s/ Frederick L. Hickman
              --------------                     -------------------------------
                                                 Frederick L. Hickman
                                                 President and Chief Executive
                                                 Officer
Exhibit 10.8



Exhibit 10.8




VR HOLDINGS, INC.

CHARTER OF THE GOVERNANCE AND NOMINATING COMMITTEE

Purpose

The purpose of the Governance and Nominating Committee of the Board of Directors is to assist the Board in identifying qualified individuals to become Board members and determining the composition of the Board and its committees.

Membership And Procedures

Membership and Appointment.  The Committee shall consist of not less than three members of the Board, with the exact number being determined by the Board.  The members of the Committee shall be appointed and replaced from time to time by the Board.

Independence.  Each member shall meet the independence requirements of applicable provisions of the federal securities laws and the rules promulgated thereunder and the applicable rules of The Nasdaq Stock Market, the New York Stock Exchange, or any other exchange where the shares of the Company may be listed or quoted for sale.

Authority to Retain Advisers.  In the course of its duties, the Committee shall have sole authority, at the Company’s expense, to engage and terminate search firms, as the Committee deems advisable, to identify director candidates, including the sole authority to approve the search firm’s fees and other retention terms.

Evaluation.  The Committee shall annually review and reassess the adequacy of this Charter and recommend any proposed changes to the Board.

Duties And Responsibilities

The Committee shall:

1.

Evaluate and make recommendations regarding the composition and size of the Board.

2.

Determine the composition of committees of the Board, with consideration of the desires of individual Board members.

3.

Monitor compliance with Board and Board committee membership criteria.

4.

Recommend nominees to the full Board to fill vacancies on the Board.

5.

Investigate suggestions for candidates for membership on the Board and shall recommend prospective directors, as required, to provide an appropriate balance of knowledge, experience and capability on the Board, including stockholder nominations for the Board.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Gerald Evans, Appellant.

Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Richard Carruthers, J.), rendered on or about June 29, 1989, convicting defendant, after a nonjury trial, of burglary in the third degree and attempted burglary in the third degree and sentencing him, as a second felony offender, to concurrent indeterminate terms of imprisonment of from 3 Vi to 7 years and from 2 to 4 years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

*425At approximately 2:30 a.m. in the early morning hours of February 3, 1989, defendant was arrested after being identified by a complaining witness as an individual who had just stolen several rolls of fabric from a clothing manufacturer located at 327 West 37th Street. Defendant was arrested minutes after the crime near the intersection of 36th Street and Ninth Avenue. At that time, defendant was in possession of three rolls of fabric which had been stolen in that area shortly before his arrest.

Defendant contends that the identification testimony presented at trial was too vague to support a conviction. The claim is meritless. Although there was no direct evidence connecting defendant with this crime, testimony of the arresting officer and a worker at a shop adjoining the burglarized one supported the conviction. Further, exclusive and unexplained possession by defendant of the stolen goods shortly after the burglary merits an inference of guilt. *(People v Sierra,*45 NY2d 56, 62; *People v Reisman,*29 NY2d 278, 286.) The record is barren *of*any explanation to rebut the inference that defendant’s possession of the goods was consistent with guilt. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Carro, Rosenberger and Asch, JJ.
#### Ivan Mogull Music Corporation, Respondent-Appellant, v Madison-59th Street Corporation et al., Appellants-Respondents.

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Herman Cahn, J.), entered on or about November 28, 1988, denying defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint and plaintiff’s cross motion to strike defendants’ answer, unanimously modified, on the law, defendants’ motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint granted and, as so modified, the order is otherwise affirmed, with costs.

Plaintiff’s three causes of action allege breach of contract and tortious interference with prospective business relations based upon defendants’ allegedly unreasonable refusal to approve plaintiff’s proposed sub-sublease of 800 square feet of its subleased premises to Lillies of the Field, Inc.

*337Absent privity of contract between plaintiff, a sublessee, and defendants, the prime landlord and its agent, defendants are entitled to summary judgment dismissing the first cause of action for breach of contract. *(See, Allied Control Co. v C. F. A. Graphics,*43 AD2d 678.) Indeed, plaintiff, in its brief, acknowledges that the alleged basis for liability is in tort, not contract. As to the remaining causes of action which plaintiff contends state cognizable claims for racial discrimination and prima facie tort in addition to tortious interference with prospective business relations, such allegations fail to justify an exception to the general rule that breach of contract does not, by itself, give rise to a tort action *(Manley v Pandick Press,*72 AD2d 452, 454, *appeal dismissed*49 NY2d 981). Moreover, plaintiff’s conclusory allegation that defendants’ refusal to consent to Lillies’ sub-sublease was because its principals were black and female is insufficient to defeat defendants’ summary judgment motion which is supported by a detailed affidavit of defendant Collins Tuttle’s senior vice-president stating that the refusal to consent to the sub-subtenancy was based on Lillies’ brief operating history and financial statements and not the sex or race of Lillies’ principals, which were unknown to defendants at the time of their refusal. Moreover, plaintiff, unlike the plaintiffs in *Matter of Merrill v State Div. of Human Rights*(45 AD2d 548) and *Dunn v Fishbein*(123 AD2d 659), does not fall within a zone of interest which the Human Rights Law protects. Finally, any claim for prima facie tort must fall absent a pleading with sufficient particularity of special damages *(Skouras v Brut Prods.,*45 AD2d 646, 648), and any cause of action for tortious interference with prospective business relations must demonstrate that the plaintiff’s sub-sublease with Lillies would have been entered into but for the malicious, fraudulent and deceitful acts of defendants and that defendants had no proper purpose for their refusal to consent to such sub-sublease. *(Williamson, Picket, Gross v 400 Park Ave. Co.,*63 AD2d 880, *affd*47 NY2d 769.) No such showing has been made. Concur— Kupferman, J. P., Ross, Kassal, Ellerin and Wallach, JJ.
EXHIBIT
32





The
following certification is being furnished solely to accompany the Report
pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  § 1350, and is not being filed for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not
to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made
before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation
language in such filing.





Certification
Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002





Pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of
2002, the undersigned officer of Peerless Systems Corporation, a Delaware
corporation (the “Company”), hereby certifies, to such officer’s knowledge,
that:




(i)
              the
      accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the fiscal year
      ended January 31, 2010 (the “Report”) fully complies with the
      requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended;
and
  (ii)
              the
      information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company
      as of, and for, the periods presented in such
  Report.


Dated:
May 3, 2010




/s/
      William R.  NeilWilliam 
      R, NeilChief
      Financial Officer and Acting Chief
                    Executive
      Officer
                    (Principal
      Financial Officer and Acting
                    Principal
      Executive Officer)





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Peerless Systems Corporation and will be retained by Peerless
Systems Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 72 (Friday, April 14, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 19024]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-9273]



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

DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
Foreign-Trade Zones Board
[Order No. 738]


Pursuant to Its Authority Under the Foreign-Trade Zones Act of 
June 18, 1934, as Amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u), the Foreign-Trade Zones 
Board (the Board) Adopts the following Order: Grant of Authority for 
Subzone Status, Gleason Corporation (Gear Production Equipment), 
Rochester, New York

    Whereas, by an Act of Congress approved June 18, 1934, an Act ``To 
provide for the establishment . . . of foreign-trade zones in ports of 
entry of the United States, to expedite and encourage foreign commerce, 
and for other purposes,'' as amended (19 U.S.C. 81a-81u) (the Act), the 
Foreign-Trade Zones Board (the Board) is authorized to grant to 
qualified corporations the privilege of establishing foreign-trade 
zones in or adjacent to U.S. Customs ports of entry;
    Whereas, the Board's regulations (15 CFR Part 400) provide for the 
establishment of special-purpose subzones when existing zone facilities 
cannot serve the specific use involved;
    Whereas, an application from the County of Monroe, New York, 
grantee of Foreign-Trade Zone 141, for authority to establish special-
purpose subzone status at the gear production equipment manufacturing 
plant of the Gleason Corporation in Rochester, New York, was filed by 
the Board on March 28, 1994, and notice inviting public comment was 
given in the Federal Register (FTZ Docket 14-94, 59 FR 17511, 4-13-94); 
and,
    Whereas, the Board has found that the requirements of the FTZ Act 
and Board's regulations are satisfied, and that approval of the 
application is in the public interest;
    Now, Therefore, the Board hereby authorizes the establishment of a 
subzone (Subzone 141D) at the Gleason Corporation plant in Rochester, 
New York, at the location described in the application, subject to the 
FTZ Act and the Board's regulations, including Sec. 400.28.

    Signed at Washington, DC, this 7th day of April 1995.
Susan G. Esserman,
Assistant Secretary of Commerce for Import Administration, Alternate 
Chairman, Foreign-Trade Zones Board.
    Attest: John J. Da Ponte, Jr., Executive Secretary.
[FR Doc. 95-9273 Filed 4-13-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-DS-P
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 76 (Thursday, April 20, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Page 19779]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-9801]



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


DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

Notice Pursuant to the National Cooperative Research and 
Production Act of 1993--Universal Instruments Corporation

    Notice is hereby given that, on January 16, 1995, pursuant to 
Section 6(a) of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 
1993, 15 U.S.C. 4301 et seq. (``the Act''), Universal Instruments 
Corporation has filed written notifications simultaneously with the 
Attorney General and the Federal Trade Commission disclosing (1) the 
identities of the parties and (2) the nature and objectives of the 
venture. The notifications were filed for the purpose of invoking the 
Act's provisions limiting the recovery of antitrust plaintiffs to 
actual damages under specified circumstances. Pursuant to Section 6(b) 
of the Act, the identities of the parties are: Apple Computer Corp., 
Cupertino, CA; Allen-Bradley, Milwaukee, WI; AMD, Incorporated, 
Sunnyvale, CA; Amkor-Anam, Chandler, AZ; AT&T Bell Labs, Allentown, PA; 
Bosch, Ansbach-brodswinden, GERMANY; Bull, Brighton, MA; Cabletron 
Systems, Inc., Rochester, NH; DEK Printing Machines, Ltd., Dorset, 
ENGLAND; Delco Electronics, Kokomo, IN; DOVatron International, 
Binghamton, NY; Eastman Kodak, Rochester, NY; Hadco, Salem, NH; Hewlett 
Packard, Palo Alto, CA; Intel Corporation, Chandler, AZ; LSI Logic, 
Milpitas, CA; Magnetic Marelli, Pavia, ITALY; Motorola, Schaumburg, IL; 
MPM Corporation, Franklin, MA; Plexus Corporation, Neenah, WI; Texas 
Instruments, Dallas, TX; and Universal Instruments Corporation, 
Binghamton, NY.
    The nature and objectives of the joint venture are to investigate 
the problems associated with the attachment of Ball Grid Array (BGA) 
and Flip Chip (DCA) components to printed circuit boards for the 
development of new products in the electronics industry. The two 
technologies to be addressed are the process, component and material 
variables in: (1) BGA attachment with a lead pitch from 0.5-1.5mm with 
eutectic and 10/90 Sn/Pb solder balls; and (2) DCA attachment with a 
lead pitch from 0.18-0.05mm with eutectic and 10/90 Sn/Pb solder bumps.
Constance K. Robinson,
Director of Operations, Antitrust Division.
[FR Doc. 95-9801 Filed 4-19-95; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4410-01-M
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-2018-0025-6348

Diebold Nixdorf Incorporated:

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 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,

Joseph Barloon

General Counsel
[Federal Register Volume 60, Number 71 (Thursday, April 13, 1995)]
[Notices]
[Pages 18858-18859]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 95-9135]



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

[[Page 18859]]


DEPARTMENT OF LABOR


Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration

Work Group on Real Estate Investment; Advisory Council on Employee 
Welfare and Pension Benefits Plan; Notice of Meeting

    Pursuant to the authority contained in Section 512 of the Employee 
Retirement Income Security Act of 1974 (ERISA), 29 U.S.C. 1142, a 
public meeting of the Real Estate Investment Work Group of the Advisory 
Council on Employee Welfare and Pension Benefit Plans will be held on 
May 9, 1995, in room S-3215 A&B, U.S. Department of Labor Building, 
Third and Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210.
    The purpose of the meeting, which will begin at 1:00 p.m. is to 
finalize issues to be examined and to determine witnesses and other 
testimonies to be solicited.
    Members of the public are encouraged to file a written statement 
pertaining to any topic concerning ERISA by submitting 20 copies on or 
before May 1, 1995 to Linda Jackson, Acting Executive Secretary, ERISA 
Advisory Council, U.S. Department of Labor, Suite N-5677, 200 
Constitution Avenue, NW., Washington, DC 20210. Individuals or 
representatives of organizations wishing to address the Advisory 
Council should forward their request to the Executive Secretary or 
telephone (202) 219-8753. Oral presentations will be limited to ten 
minutes, but an extended statement may be submitted for the record.
    Organizations or individuals may also submit statements for the 
record without testifying. Twenty (20) copies of such statements should 
be sent to the Executive Secretary of the Advisory Council at the above 
address. Papers will be accepted and included in the record of the 
meeting if received on or before May 1, 1995.

    Signed at Washington, DC this 7th day of April, 1995.
Olena Berg,

Assistant Secretary, Pension and Welfare Benefits Administration.

[FR Doc. 95-9135 Filed 4-12-95; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4510-29-M
Exhibit 10.5

SEARS HOLDINGS CORPORATION

Director Compensation Program

Effective as of May 4, 2010



| |  |  | Only non-employee directors will be compensated for serving as directors of the Company
| | - |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | Each non-employee director will receive an annual cash retainer of $60,000
| | - |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | The chairperson of the Audit Committee of the Board of Directors will receive an additional annual cash retainer of $10,000
| | - |  | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | No other director will receive additional compensation for Board service
| | - |  | ------------------------------------------------------------------------



| |  |  | All directors will be reimbursed for out-of-pocket expenses incurred to attend meetings of the Board of Directors and committees of the Board of
Directors
| | - |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------