alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
§ 140.15 Equivalents and approved equipment. ( a ) The use of alternate equipment or procedures for those specified in this subchapter may be permitted by an Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection, to the extent and upon conditions as will insure a degree of safety comparable to or greater than that provided by the minimum standards in this subchapter.
( b ) Where equipment in this subchapter is required to be of an approved type, the equipment requires the specific approval of the Commandant. Approvals are published in the Federal Register and COMDTINST M16714.3 (Series) Equipment List, available from Coast Guard Headquarters. Contact Commandant (CG-ENG), Attn: Office of Design and Engineering Standards, U.S. Coast Guard Stop 7509, 2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue SE., Washington, DC 20593-7509.
( c ) Specifications for certain items required to be of an approved type are contained in 46 CFR Parts 160 through 164.
[CGD 78-160, 47 FR 9376, Mar. 4, 1982, as amended at CGD 88-052, 53 FR 25121, July 1, 1988; CGD 96-026, 61 FR 33665, June 28, 1996; USCG-2010-0351, 75 FR 36283, June 25, 2010; USCG-2014-0410, 79 FR 38434, July 7, 2014]
§ 126.29 Supervision and control of dangerous cargo. ( a ) *Authority.* The Captain of the Port is authorized to require that any transaction of handling, storing, stowing, loading, discharging, or transporting the dangerous cargo covered by this subchapter shall be undertaken and continued only under the immediate supervision and control of the Captain of the Port or his duly authorized representative. In case the Captain of the Port exercises such authority, all directions, instructions, and orders of the Captain of the Port or his representative, not inconsistent with this part, with respect to such handling, storing, stowing, loading, discharging, and transporting; with respect to the operation of the waterfront facility; with respect to vessels handling, stowing, loading, or discharging of dangerous cargo at anchorages when the operations are under the immediate control and supervision of the Captain of the Port or his duly authorized representative; with respect to the ingress and egress of persons, articles, and things and to their presence on the waterfront facilty or vessel; and with respect to vessels approaching, moored at, and departing from the waterfront facility, shall be promptly obeyed.
( b ) *Reporting discharge of dangerous liquid commodities into the waters of the United States.* To enhance the safety of the port and to protect vessels, their cargo, and waterfront facilities therein, the discharge into the navigable waters of the United States of petroleum products, petroleum byproducts or other dangerous liquid commodities which may create a hazard or toxic condition in the port area will be immediately reported to the Captain of the Port or District Commander by the owner or master of the vessel from which the discharge occurred, or the owner or operator of a waterfront facility from which the discharge occurred.
[CGFR 69-89, 34 FR 17478, Oct. 29, 1969]
#### Carroll Air Services, Inc., Respondent, v Northland Aviation et al., Appellants.

Submitted August 12, 1996;

decided October 22, 1996

Motion, insofar as it seeks leave to appeal from so much of the Appellate Division order as affirmed Supreme Court’s order denying appellant’s motion for an order staying execution of final judgment, dismissed upon the ground that that portion of the order does not finally determine the action within the meaning of the Constitution; motion for leave to appeal otherwise denied.
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

May 8, 2014

N o. 04

- 13

- 00706

- CV

JUDSON INDEPENDENT SCHOOL DISTRICT

,

Appellant

v.

Maria Hortencia RUIZ

, Appellee

From the 131st Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2012

- CI

- 20399 Honorable Martha B. Tanner, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

Appellant's unopposed first motion to extend time to file reply brief is hereby GRANTED. Time is extended to May 27, 2014.

_________________________________ Catherine Stone, Chief Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 8th day of May, 2014

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
<PAGE>
 
Exhibit 21.1


                  SUBSIDIARIES - MERCURY GENERAL CORPORATION



Mercury Casualty Company (100% owned)
Mercury Insurance Company (100% owned by Mercury Casualty Company)
California General Underwriters Insurance Company, Inc. (100% owned by Mercury
Casualty Company)
California Automobile Insurance Company (100% owned)
Mercury Insurance Company of Georgia (100% owned by California Automobile
Insurance Company)
Mercury Indemnity Company of Georgia (100% owned)
Mercury Insurance Company of Illinois (100% owned)
Mercury Indemnity Company of Illinois (100% owned by Mercury Insurance Company
of Illinois)
American Mercury Insurance Company (100% owned)
Cimarron Insurance Company (100% owned by American Mercury Ins. Company)
American Mercury Lloyds Insurance Company *
AFI Management Company, Inc. (100% owned by American Fidelity Ins. Company) **

*    Controlled by Mercury General Corporation through its attorney-in-fact, AFI
     Management Company, Inc.

**   Attorney-in-fact for American Fidelity Lloyds Insurance Co., whose results
     are consolidated with Mercury General Corporation.
#### TURNER *v.*SEVILLE GIN & WAREHOUSE COMPANY.

While a master must furnish his servant a reasonably safe place in which . to work, and if there are latent defects in machinery, or dangers incident to the employment, unknown to the servant, of which the master knows, or ought to know, he is hound to give the servant warning-in respect thereto, yet where a declaration showed no defect in a machine, *556and that the injury sued for did not occur from any such defect, or from a danger incident to the employment, of which it was the master’s duty to notify the plaintiff, but solely from the negligence of a fellow-servant, it was demurrable.

Submitted July 18, 1906.

Decided February 14, 1907.

Action for damages. Before Judge Martin. Wilcox superior •court. September *25,*1905'. '

*E. E. Williams,*for plaintiff. *Eal Lawson,*for defendant.

Lumpkin, J.

Turner • brought suit against the Seville Gin *&*Warehouse Company, seeking to recover damages for a personal injury. lie alleged, that under the command of the superintendent of the defendant he was throwing on the brushes of one of the gins certain particles of cotton; that the gin was supplied with a sliding or revolving “mote-board,” which was on the opposite side of the gin from him, and of which he did not know, and was not warned, and that it was liable to be pushed against his hand by any person passing. As to the manner in which the injury actually occurred, the petition alleged, that “One Cason, a coemployee, and engaged at work in said ginnery, suddenly, and without warning to petitioner, wrongfully and negligently shoved the said mote-board against the hand of petitioner, causing said mote-board to violently strike the hand of petitioner in such a manner as to bring petitioner’s said hand in contact with the saws of said gin, which were revolving with great velocity, thereby cutting and lacerating petitioner’s right hand and arm,” etc. From this statement it will appear that no latent defect in the machinery was alleged; nor did the injury occur by reason of dangers incident to the employment unknown to the servant and of which the master knew or ought to have known; nor was the “mote-board” pushed against the plaintiff’s hand by a mere passing person. But the petition showed on its face that the injury to the plaintiff occurred solely from the negligence of a coemployee, who wrongfully and negligently shoved the board against his hand. Under the allegations of this petition, there was no error in sustaining the demurrer and dismissing the case. Civil Code, §§3610, 3030; *Crown Cotton Mills*v. *McNally,*133 *Ga.*35.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*All the Justices concur, except Fish, G. J., •absent.*
#### 											REPORT **

#### 											ABOUT **

#### 											COMMISSIONERS **

#### 											MEETINGS **

#### 											HEARINGS **

#### 											LIBRARY **

#### 											NEWS **

#### 											CONTACT US **

				Skip to main navigation 

CEP

Skip Main NavigationSkip To Navigation Content
                -   REPORT  
                -   ABOUT  
                -   COMMISSIONERS  
                -   MEETINGS  
                -   HEARINGS  
                -   LIBRARY  
                -   NEWS  
                -   CONTACT US  

Cep.gov
Meetings

## Meetings

Information on upcoming and past meetings of the Commission.

	                Seventh Meeting - March 13, 2017

	                Sixth Meeting - February 24, 2017

	                Fifth Meeting - January 13, 2017

	                Fourth Meeting - December 12, 2016

	                Third Meeting - November 4, 2016

	                Second Meeting - September 9, 2016

	                First Meeting - July 22, 2016

Skip to top of page

Privacy Policy

		   Privacy Policy		

				   Privacy Policy				

You are about to leave this web site for a destination outside of the Federal Government. You may wish to review each privacy notice since their information collection practices may differ from ours. In addition, our linking to these sites does not constitute an endorsement of any products or services.Click OK if you wish to continue to the web site, otherwise click cancel to return to our site.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation

*Notice is hereby given*                     that the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”) as Receiver for Hume Bank, (“the Receiver”) intends to terminate its receivership for said institution. The FDIC was appointed receiver of Hume Bank on March 7, 2008. The liquidation of the receivership assets has been completed. To the extent permitted by available funds and in accordance with law, the Receiver will be making a final dividend payment to proven creditors.                

Based upon the foregoing, the Receiver has determined that the continued existence of the receivership will serve no useful purpose. Consequently, notice is given that the receivership shall be terminated, to be effective no sooner than thirty days after the date of this Notice. If any person wishes to comment concerning the termination of the receivership, such comment must be made in writing and sent within thirty days of the date of this Notice to: Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, Division of Resolutions and Receiverships, Attention: Receivership Oversight Department 8.1, 1601 Bryan Street, Dallas, TX 75201.

No comments concerning the termination of this receivership will be considered which are not sent within this timeframe.

Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation.
      ( print page 52328)    
Dated: August 17, 2011.

Robert E. Feldman,

Executive Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2011-21324 Filed 8-19-11; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 6714-01-P
###### Editorial Note on Part 149

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 149 appear by USCG-2010-0351, 75 FR 36284, June 25, 2010.

#### § 149.339 What is the requirement for previously approved lifesaving equipment on a deepwater port?

Lifesaving equipment such as lifeboats, liferafts, and PFDs on a deepwater port on January 1, 2004, need not meet the requirements of this subpart until the equipment needs replacing, provided it is periodically tested and maintained and in good operational condition.
Updated MATS RIA for OMB Distribution (Message 2 of 3) RobertJ Wayland to: Cortney_Higgins 11/23/2011 02:39 PM Cc: Bill Maxwell

Cortney -

Attached are the Executive Summary and chapter 5 of the updated RIA.

thanx!

bob

Robert J. Wayland, Ph.D. Leader, Energy Strategies Group U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Air Quality Planning & Standards Sector Policies and Programs Division Mail Code D243-01 RTP, NC 27711

Phone: (919) 541-1045 Cell: (919) 306-2290 Fax: (919) 541-5450

e-mail: wayland.robertj@epa.gov

********************************************************* DRAFT/Deliberative Document -- FOIA Exempt

*********************************************************

Executive SummaryMATS_1123.doc

Chapter 5_HealthWelfareCobenefits_1123.doc
Confidential

02/22/2019 11:19am projectredcap.org

Client Assessment

Meals at Home

Page 1 of 3

Name __________________________ Initial/Final

Record ID

DATE of Client Assessment

Name of Staff that performed Assessment:

(First and Last Name)

Which assessment is this: Initial

Final

Weight (lbs)

(lbs 1 decimal places)

Has your doctor recommended a diet for you to follow? a.Yes

b.No

c. Unsure

What kind of diet? a. Diabetic/ low carb

b. Heart healthy (low sodium, low fat)

c. Regular/Eat balanced

d.Diet to lose weight

e. Other

f. None

If other, what kind

Do you currently take any a. Vitamin replacement

b. Meal Replacement

c.None of the above

If yes, please specify

Have you lost weight in the last 3 months? a.Yes

b.No

c.Unsure

If yes, how many (lbs)

Why did Weight Loss occur? a. Intentional

b. Due to medical conditions

c.Other

If other, please specify

Your appetite is a. Poor

b. Fair

c. Good

d. Excellent

How many meals do you typically eat in a day?
Confidential

Page 2 of 3

02/22/2019 11:19am projectredcap.org

Name __________________________ Initial/Final

If less than 3, why do you not eat more in one day? a. Cannot afford

b. Makes me feel ill

c. No way to get to grocery store

d. Just not hungry

e. Too much trouble to fix

Do you eat alone most of the time? Yes

No

Do you take 3 or more different prescribed or over

the counter drugs a day?

Yes

No

Names of medicine a blood pressure

b. diabetic

c. heart

d. not answered

e. Other

If other, please specify

Are you physically able to shop, cook, or feed

yourself?

a.Yes

b.No

c.Need assistance

I have a. Physical handicap

b. Chewing/swallowing problems

c. Other

How often do you use a cell phone, computer, iPad, or

timesother electronic device each day?

a. 1-3 

b. 4-8 times

c. More than 8 times

d.None

Do you have a standardized size refrigerator? Yes

No

N/A 

I have a. Dorm size refrigerator

b. No freezer

c. Use cooler

d. Have refrigerator but no freezer

e. Other

N/A 

In the last three months, how many unplanned doctor's

visit did you have?

a. 1-3 visits

b. More than 3 visits

c.None

Reasons for doctor's visits a. Routine/Wellnes/Annual

b. For medical condition(diabetes, BP, heart

disease)

c. Other

If other, please specify

Do you also get food from food pantries or other

community resources?

Yes

No

I also receive food assistance sometimes from a. Local food pantries

b. Community provided meals

Do you have any food allergies or food dislikes? Yes

No

N/A 
Confidential

Page 3 of 3

02/22/2019 11:19am projectredcap.org

Name __________________________ Initial/Final

I have these Food allergies that may cause life 

threatening reactions 

a. Shellfish

b. Wheat

c. Nuts

N/A

Medical conditions a. Diabetes, pre-diabetes

b. Heart disease

c. High blood pressure

d. Cancer

e. Overweight/ Obesity

f. None 

Diet Order a. Diabetic

b. Heart Healthy (low fat, low sodium)

c. Weight Loss

d. Weight Gain

e. Regular

Practicing Hospital of PCP a. Eskenazi Health

b. Other

If other, please specify
**EXHIBIT 23.2**

 

**CONSENT OF FORMER INDEPENDENTREGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

 

The Board of Directors

Summa Industries:

 

We consent to the incorporation by reference in the RegistrationStatements on Form S-8 pertaining to the Company’s 1991 Stock Option Plan,filed on April 15, 1993, the 1995 Stock Option Plan, filed on January 31, 1997(No. 333-20835), the amendment to the 1995 Stock Option Plan, filed on December15, 1998 (No. 333-68921), the 1999 Stock Option Plan, filed on December 15,1998 (No. 333-68981), the amendment to the 1999 Stock Option Plan, filed on May3, 2002 (No. 333-87692), the Summa ESOP and 401(k) Stock Option Plan, filed onSeptember 8, 1997 (No. 333-35163), the Calnetics Stock Option Plan, filed onOctober 21, 1997 (No. 333-38415), the Falcon Acquisition Stock Option Plan,filed on December 15, 1998 (No. 333-68983), the Plastron Acquisition StockOption Plan, filed on May 20, 1999 (No. 333-78873), the Plastic Specialties,Inc. Acquisition Stock Option Plan filed on May 3, 2002 (No. 333-87690), ofSumma Industries and subsidiaries of our report dated October 7, 2002 withrespect to the Summa Industries and subsidiaries statements of operations,stockholders’ equity and cash flows for the year ended August 31, 2002 andfinancial statement schedule (Schedule II “Valuation and Qualifying Accounts”)which report appears in the fiscal year 2004 annual report on Form 10-K.

 
| /s/ KPMG LLP            |   |
|-------------------------|--------|
|                    |
| Los Angeles, California |
| November 12, 2004       |

 

----
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except

under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

November 28, 2006

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-60725

Summary Calendar

KHAWAJA MOHAMMAD NAWAZ; NIGHAT NAWAZ; ASIF NAWAZ; 

NAVEEN NAWAZ,

Petitioners,

versus

ALBERTO R. GONZALES, U.S. ATTORNEY GENERAL,

Respondent.

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

Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

BIA No. A79 498 247

BIA No. A79 498 248

BIA No. A79 498 250

BIA No. A79 498 251 

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

Before KING, HIGGINBOTHAM, and GARZA, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Khawaja Nawaz, a native of India and a citizen of Pakistan,

and Nighat, Asif, and Naveen Nawaz, natives and citizens of

Pakistan, petition for review of an order from the Board of

Immigration Appeals (BIA) affirming the immigration judge’s (IJ)

denial of their motion for reconsideration.

The petitioners argue that the IJ erred in determining that

they were removable for overstaying their visas. They contend
No. 05-60725

-2-

that overstay is not a deportable offense under the Immigration

and Nationality Act and that their asylum application, which they

had filed before the expiration of their visas, extended their

authorized period of stay. They further contend that the IJ’s

failure to address their concerns about this issue at their

evidentiary hearing and the IJ’s determination that they were

removable violated their due process rights.

This court has repeatedly held aliens to be deportable for

overstaying their visas. See, e.g., Majd v. Gonzales, 446 F.3d

590, 592 (5th Cir. 2006); Eyoum v. INS, 125 F.3d 889, 890-91 (5th

Cir. 1997). Furthermore, the petitioners have not cited any

statutes or case law in support of their argument that their

filing of an asylum application alone extended their authorized

period of stay. The record does not support the petitioners’ due

process argument, and the IJ did not violate the petitioners’ due

process rights in correctly concluding that the petitioners were

removable.

Accordingly, the petitioners’ petition for review of the

BIA’s order is DENIED. All of the petitioners’ outstanding

motions and petitions are also DENIED.
§ 147.835 Magnolia TLP safety zone. ( a ) *Description.* Magnolia TLP, Garden Banks 783 “A” (GB 783 “A”), located at position 27°12′13.86′′ N, 92°12′09.36′′ W. The area within 500 meters (1640.4 feet) from each point on the structure's outer edge is a safety zone. These coordinates are based upon [NAD 83].
( b ) *Regulation.* No vessel may enter or remain in this safety zone except the following: ( 1 ) An attending vessel;
( 2 ) A vessel under 100 feet in length overall not engaged in towing; or
( 3 ) A vessel authorized by the Commander, Eighth Coast Guard District.
[CGD08-03-040, 69 FR 19934, Apr. 15, 2004]
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 107 (Friday, June 2, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 35318]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-13872]


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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Lake Tahoe Basin Federal Advisory Committee

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: The Lake Tahoe Basin Federal Advisory Committee will hold a 
meeting on June 21, 2000, at the Vahalla Building, Tallac Historic 
Site, Highway 89, South Lake Tahoe, CA. This Committee, established by 
the Secretary of Agriculture on December 15, 1998, (64 FR 2876) is 
chartered to provide advice to the Secretary on implementing the terms 
of the Federal Interagency Partnership on the Lake Tahoe Region and 
other matters raised by the Secretary.

DATES: The meeting will be held June 21, 2000, beginning at 9:00 a.m. 
and ending at 4:30 p.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at Vahalla, Tallac Historic Site, 
Highway 89, South Lake Tahoe, CA.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Maribeth Gustafson or Jeannie 
Stafford, Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit, Forest Service, 870 Emerald 
Bay Road Suite 1, South Lake Tahoe, CA 96150, (530) 573-2642.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The committee will meet jointly with the 
Lake Tahoe Basin Executives Committees. Items to be covered on the 
agenda include: [1] Budget Subcommittee Report; [2] HUD Update; [3] 
Summer Event Update; [4] Washoe Cultural Center; [5] Public Comment; 
and [6] Field Trip to Review Federal Projects. All Lake Tahoe Basin 
Federal Advisory Committee meetings are open to the public. Interested 
citizens are encouraged to attend. Issues may be brought to the 
attention of the attention of the Committee during the open public 
comment period at the meeting or by filing written statements with the 
secretary for the Committee before or after the meeting. Please refer 
any written comments to the Lake Tahoe Basin Management Unit at the 
contact address stated above.

    Dated: May 26, 2000.
Maribeth Gustafson,
Acting Deputy Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 00-13872 Filed 6-1-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
FILED IN COURT OF APPEALS

12th Court of Appeals District

CATHY S. LUSK, CLE

FILE COPY

RE: Case No. 15-0189 DATE: 3/3/2015

COA #: 12-14-00299-CV TC#: 3-41298

STYLE: MICHAEL KENNEDY

v. THE TEXAS COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS, AUSTIN, TEXAS,

ET AL.

A petition for review was filed today in the abovestyled case. Respondent may file either a response, or a

waiver of response. If you file a waiver, the Court will

not grant the petition without first requesting a response.

(Tex. R. App. P. 53.3) There is no fee for a response or a

waiver.

MS. CATHY S. LUSK

CLERK, TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS

1517 WEST FRONT, SUITE 354

TYLER, TX 75702