alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 84 (Wednesday, May 2, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 24313]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-8358]



[[Page 24313]]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES


Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response; 
HHS Public Health Emergency Medical Countermeasures Enterprise 
Implementation Plan for Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear 
Threats

AGENCY: Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and 
Response, Department of Health and Human Services.

ACTION: Notice; correction.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) published a 
document in the Federal Register of April 23, 2007, concerning the HHS 
Public Health Emergency Medical countermeasures Enterprise 
Implementation Plan for Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear 
(CBRN) Threats. The document should have provided additional 
information regarding a public comment period.

Correction

    In the Federal Register of April 23, 2007, in FR Doc. 07-1983, on 
page 20117, in the third column, correct the For Further Information 
Contact section and insert the following caption to read as follows:

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION OR TO SUBMIT COMMENTS PLEASE CONTACT: Dr. Susan 
Coller, Policy Analyst, Office of Public Health Emergency Medical 
Countermeasures, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and 
Response at 330 Independence Ave., SW., Room G640, Washington, DC 
20201, by e-mail at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#6e3e262b232d3d3a3c2f3a2e26263d40292138"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="3c6c7479717f6f686e7d687c74746f127b736a">[email protected]</span></a> or by phone 202-260-1200. Please 
submit comments on the HHS PHEMCE Implementation Plan on or before July 
13, 2007. HHS will not respond to individual comments; however, 
comments received will be compiled and considered to inform HHS 
programs related to the research, development, acquisition, deployment 
and utilization of medical countermeasures for CBRN threats.

    Dated: Apirl 26, 2007.
Brian Kamoie,
Acting Office Director, Office of Policy and Strategic Planning, Office 
of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response, Department of 
Health and Human Services.
 [FR Doc. E7-8358 Filed 5-1-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4150-37-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
Outdoor Water Use 

in the United States 

An American family of four can use 400 gallons 

of water per day, and about 30 percent of that 

is devoted to outdoor uses. More than half of 

that outdoor water is used for watering lawns and 

gardens. Nationwide, landscape irrigation is estimated to account for almost one-third of all residential 

water use, totaling more than 7 billion gallons per 

day. Other residential outdoor uses include washing 

automobiles, maintaining swimming pools, and 

cleaning sidewalks and driveways. 

Water use varies greatly depending on geographic 

location and season, largely as a result of differences 

in climate. Water withdrawals for irrigation and landscaping are highest in the drier regions of the West 

and Southwest, where population growth is often 

greatest. 

Some experts estimate that more than 50 percent of 

commercial and residential irrigation water use goes 

to waste due to evaporation, wind, improper system 

design, or overwatering. Following are some common outdoor water inefficiencies, but there are simple solutions to reduce water waste and produce 

great results: 

● Many people water their lawns too often and for 

too long, oversaturating plants. It’s usually not 

necessary to water grass every day. Instead, test 

your lawn by stepping on a patch of grass; if it 

springs back, it doesn’t need water. 

● Regular maintenance of an irrigation system can 

help ensure that water is distributed evenly on 

the lawn and does not overspray onto paved 

areas. Look for a WaterSense® irrigation partner 

to maintain and audit your system to keep it 

working efficiently. 

● Weather-based irrigation controllers can reduce 

water use by 20 percent compared to conventional equipment, potentially saving nearly 24 

billion gallons per year across the United 

States—approximately equal to more than 7,000 

hoses running non-stop for a year. 

● Soil moisture sensors determine the amount of 

water in the ground available to plants. These 

sensors, when professionally installed and properly maintained, can potentially save a household more than 11,000 gallons of water used for 

irrigation annually. 

WaterSense, a partnership program sponsored by 

the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, seeks to 

help homeowners and businesses improve water 

efficiency and reduce their costs by promoting efficient irrigation technologies such as weather-based 

irrigation controllers and soil moisture sensors. For 

more information, visit <www.epa.gov/watersense>. 

Outdoor Water Use: Landscaping 

Source: The Saving Water 

Partnership “Water Efficient Irrigation 

Study: Final Report.” May 2003 

EPA-832-F-06-005 

(866) WTR-SENS (987-7367) · www.epa.gov/watersense · watersense@epa.gov 

July 2007 Recycled/Recyclable—Printed with Vegetable Oil Based Inks on 100% Process Chlorine Free Recycled Paper.
# C_2015190EN.01000701.xml

| 8.6.2015 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 190/7 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.6.2015

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 190/7

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Conseil d’État (Belgium) lodged on 9 April 2015 — Abdelhafid Bensada Benallal v Belgian State

(Case C-161/15)

(2015/C 190/07)

Language of the case: French

Referring court

Conseil d’État

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Abdelhafid Bensada Benallal

Defendant: Belgian State

Question referred

Does the general principle of European Union Law upholding the rights of the defence, including the right of an individual to be heard by a national authority before any decision is taken by that authority likely adversely to affect that individual’s interests such as a decision ending that individual’s residence authorisation, carry in the legal system of the European Union an equivalent importance to that held by the rules of public policy in the Belgian legal system, and does the principle of equivalence require that a plea can be raised for the first time before the Conseil d’État hearing an appeal in cassation based on breach of the general principle of EU law of the right to a fair hearing as is permitted in the national law for pleas based on public policy?

---
(logo)****CURCIO

+COHEN

 

 

**Report of IndependentRegistered Public Accounting Firm**

 

Managing Member

Park Bridge Lender ServicesLLC

New York, NY

 

 

We have examined management’sassertion, included in the accompanying Management’s Report on Assessment of2016 Compliance by Park Bridge Lender Services LLC with Regulation AB ServicingCriteria (“Management’s Report”), that Park Bridge Lender Services LLC (the“Company”) complied with the servicing criteria set forth in Item 1122(d) ofthe U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s Regulation AB as of and for theyear ended December 31, 2016, excluding those criteria noted as not applicable(N/A) within Exhibit B to Management’s Report. The transactions covered by thisreport are only those transactions processed by the Company in its capacity astrust advisor or operating advisor for the asset backed securities transactions(the “Platform”) identified in Management’s Report. Reference Exhibit A toManagement’s Report for the transactions covered by this examination.Management is responsible for the Company’s compliance with the applicableservicing criteria. Our responsibility is to express an opinion on management’sassertion based on our examination.

 

Our examination was conductedin accordance with attestation standards of the Public Company AccountingOversight Board (United States) and, accordingly, included examining, on a testbasis, evidence about the Company’s compliance with the applicable servicingcriteria and performing such other procedures as we considered necessary in thecircumstances. Our examination included testing of a selected sample of theservicing activities related to the Platform, determining whether the Companyperformed those selected activities in compliance with the applicable servicingcriteria during the specified period. Our procedures were limited to the selectedtransactions and servicing activities performed by the Company during theperiod covered by this report. Our examination was not designed to detectmaterial noncompliance arising from errors that may have occurred prior to orsubsequent to our tests, that may have affected the Company’s servicingactivities during the period covered by this report. We believe that ourexamination provides a reasonable basis for our opinion. Our examination doesnot provide a legal determination on the Company’s compliance with theapplicable servicing criteria.

 

In our opinion, management’sassertion that the Company complied with the aforementioned applicableservicing criteria identified in Exhibit B to Management’s Report with respectto the transactions identified in Exhibit A to Management’s Report as of andfor the year ended December 31, 2016, for the Platform, is fairly stated in allmaterial aspects.

 

 

/s/ Curcio & Cohen, CPA’s,P.C.

 

 

New York, NY

February 2, 2017

 

 

CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTSPC 7 PENN PLAZA, SUITE 1500 NEW YORK NY 10001

TEL: 212 557-9800  FAX:212 557 9819   WEBSITE: WWW.CWCCPAFIRM.COM
No. 50633.

#### Petition 6488-R of John C. Pappas, administrator of the estate of C. Pappas doing business as C. Pappas Co. (Boston).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

An appeal for reappraisement was filed, but action thereon was suspended pending decision in another case involving similar merchandise shipped during 1936. (See *Luigi Vitelli Elvea, Inc.*v. *United States,*9 Cust. Ct. 466, R. D. 4661, affirmed in *United States*v. *Luigi Vitelli Elvea, Inc.,*11 id. 437, R. D. 5941.) Thereafter, said appeal for reappraisement was submitted for decision on a stipulation incorporating the record in the decided case, and final judgment was entered on the basis of export value at prices higher than the entered value. The court was of the opinion that the established facts in the instant case are analogous to those íd Abstracts 49970 and 49986 and held that the observations of the court concerning the nature of the proof, the sufficiency thereof, and the character of the witnesses who appeared in the cited cases were equally applicable to and descriptive of the evidence submitted and of the witnesses who appeared herein. From an examination of the record and a consideration of the facts in the case, it was held that the entry of the merchandise at a less value than that found on final appraisement was without any intention to defraud the revenue of the United States or to conceal or to misrepresent the facts of the case or to deceive the appraiser as to the value of the merchandise. The petition was therefore granted.
Exhibit 31.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

SECTION 302(A) OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT
OF 2002



I, Charley Changmin Yoon, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports
on Form 10-D required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of Hyundai Auto Receivables Trust
2016-A (the “Exchange Act periodic reports”);



2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports,
taken as a whole, do not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the
statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period
covered by this report;



3. Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing
and other information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is included in the Exchange
Act periodic reports;



4. Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statement
required in this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicer
has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing agreement in all material respects; and



5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing
criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria
for asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act
Rules 13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise disclosed in this report. Any material
instances of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.



In giving the certifications above, I have
reasonably relied on information provided to me by the following unaffiliated party: Citibank, N.A.



Date: March 15, 2019



| | By: | /s/ Charley Changmin Yoon                                    
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------
| |     | Name: Charley Changmin Yoon                                  
| |     | Title:  President and Secretary                              
| |     | (senior officer in charge of securitization of the depositor)
Exhibit
10.1
 THIRD AMENDMENT TO SECOND AMENDED AND RESTATED FINANCING AND  SECURITY AGREEMENT
  RECITALS
    AGREEMENTS
  Recitals




---



##### 



Revised Definition
 Financing Documents
 Permitted Uses
 Revolving Credit Expiration Date
 Additional Definitions
 Guarantor
 Guaranty
 Security Agreement
 Revolving Credit Unused Line Fee
 Revolving Credit Unused Line Fee
 Revolving Credit Unused Line Fees Revolving Credit Unused Line
Fee
 Consent
  2




---



##### 



Counterparts
 Representations
     Conditions Precedent
    3




---



##### 



4




---



##### 



Fees and Expenses
 Financing Documents; Governing Law; Etc
 Acknowledgments
  Modifications
 [SIGNATURES APPEAR ON THE FOLLOWING PAGE]
  5




---



##### 



Borrowers:WITNESS/ATTEST:
    
    
    
    ARGAN, INC./s/ Sherolyn Nanson
    
    
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Rainer Bosselmann

Rainer Bosselmann
    
    (Seal)Chairman of the Board and PresidentWITNESS/ATTEST:
    
    
    
    SOUTHERN MARYLAND
CABLE, INC./s/ Sherolyn Nanson
    
    
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Arthur Trudel
    
    (Seal)Arthur TrudelVice President and TreasurerWITNESS/ATTEST:
    
    
    
    VITARICH LABORATORIES, INC./s/ Sherolyn Nanson
    
    
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Arthur Trudel
    
    (Seal)Arthur TrudelVice President and TreasurerWITNESS/ATTEST:
    
    
    
    GEMMA POWER, INC./s/ Sherolyn Nanson
    
    
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Arthur Trudel
    
    (Seal)Arthur TrudelChief Financial OfficerWITNESS/ATTEST:
    
    
    
    GEMMA POWER SYSTEMS
CALIFORNIA, INC./s/ Sherolyn Nanson
    
    
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Arthur Trudel
    
    (Seal)Arthur TrudelChief Financial Officer




---



##### 



WITNESS/ATTEST:
    
    
    
    GEMMA POWER SYSTEMS, LLC/s/ John Gorzkowski
    
    
    
    By:
    
    /s/ William F. Griffin, Jr.

William F. Griffin, Jr. Manager
    
    (Seal)WITNESS/ATTEST:
    
    
    
    GEMMA POWER HARTFORD, LLC/s/ John Gorzkowski
    
    
    
    By:
    
    /s/ William F. Griffin, Jr.

William F. Griffin, Jr. Manager
    
    (Seal)




---



##### 



Lender:WITNESS:
    
    
    
    BANK OF AMERICA, N.A./s/ A.C. Burns
    
    
    
    By:
    
    /s/ Michael J. Radcliffe

Name: Michael J. Radcliffe
    
    (Seal)Title: Senior Vice President




---



##### 



AGREEMENT OF GUARANTOR
   WITNESS/ATTEST:
    
    
    
    GEMMA RENEWABLE POWER, LLC/s/ Michele Suttile
    
    
    
    By:
    
    /s/ William Carter
    
    (SEAL)Michele Suttile
    
    
    
    
    
    William Carter, President




---



##### 



EXHIBIT A
  10
EXHIBIT 32b

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 Twin Disc, Incorporated (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ending December 28,
2007, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission as of the date hereof (the Report), I, Christopher J. Eperjesy, Vice President  Finance, Chief Financial Officer and Treasurer 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, to the best of my knowledge:

|(1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, 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/ CHRISTOPHER J. EPERJESYChristopher J. EperjesyVice President  Finance, Chief FinancialOfficer and Treasurer

February 6, 2008

---
No. 46911.

#### Protests 69750-K, etc., of Butler Bros. et al. (New York).

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
No. 49392.

#### Protest 102700-K of L. Bamberger & Co. (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, P. J.

The collector’s letter and statement of goods remaining in warehouse on the effective date of said trade agreement were admitted in evidence without objection by the Government. Inasmuch as the record showed that the bottles in question were withdrawn from warehouse on or subsequent to the effective date of said trade agreement, the claim at % cent per pound was sustained.
# C_2017006EN.01003302.xml

| 9.1.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 6/33 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.1.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 6/33

---

Judgment of the General Court of 10 November 2016 — Polo Club v EUIPO — Lifestyle Equities (POLO CLUB SAINT-TROPEZ HARAS DE GASSIN)

(Case T-67/15) (1)

1

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for the EU figurative mark POLO CLUB SAINT-TROPEZ HARAS DE GASSIN - Earlier EU figurative marks BEVERLY HILLS POLO CLUB - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 - Production of additional evidence - Discretion conferred by Article 76(2) of Regulation No 207/2009 - Remittal of the case in part to the Opposition Division - Article 64(1) and (2) of Regulation No 207/2009))

(2017/C 006/40)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Polo Club (Gassin, France) (represented by: D. Masson, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented initially by V. Melgar and H. Kunz and subsequently by H. O’Neil, Agents)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Lifestyle Equities CV (Amsterdam, Netherlands) (represented by: D. Russo and V. Wellens, lawyers)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 21 November 2014 (Case R 1882/2013-5), relating to opposition proceedings between Lifestyle Equities and Polo Club.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Polo Club to pay the costs of the present proceedings. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Polo Club to pay the costs of the present proceedings.

---

(1)  OJ C 118, 13.4.2015.

1

---
#### Webb *versus*Flanders.

If a mortgage, (which, was made to secure the performance of a bond,) be assigned, the mortgagee can maintain no action upon it, unless he have also some interest in the bond, for he could have no conditional judgment.

Entry, submitted for decision upon facts reported by a commissioner.

A father conveyed the land to the defendant, his son, taking a bond, (with a mortgage for its performance,) for the maintenance of the father. While these deeds were unrecorded, and before any breach of the bond, the father deeded *176with general warranty to the plaintiff, who had knowledge of the former conveyance.

By the Court.

1st. The plaintiff’s deed, having been taken in fraud of defendant, cannot entitle him to an absolute judgment against the defendant.

2d. The deed to the plaintiff perhaps transferred the mortgage. It was a mortgage to secure performance of a bond. The bond was never assigned to plaintiff. Therefore he can have no conditional judgment. *Nonsuit.*
April 17, 1950

No. 54262.

#### Stetson Glove Co. *v.*United States,

protests 839241-G, 851336-G, 889480-G, 980137-G, and 715700-G.

C. D. 1217. Plaintiff’s application for rehearing denied.
# C_2017038EN.01002901.xml

| 6.2.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 38/29 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.2.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 38/29

---

Judgment of the General Court of 15 December 2016 — Redpur v EUIPO — Redwell Manufaktur (Redpur)

(Case T-227/15) (1)

1

((EU trade mark - Opposition proceedings - Application for EU word mark Redpur - Earlier EU figurative mark redwell INFRAROT HEIZUNGEN - Relative ground for refusal - Likelihood of confusion - Article 8(1)(b) of Regulation No 207/2009))

(2017/C 038/39)

Language of the case: German

Parties

Parties

Applicant: Redpur GmbH (Hayingen, Germany) (represented by: S. Schiller, lawyer)

Applicant:

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: D. Walicka, acting as Agent)

Defendant:

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Redwell Manufaktur GmbH (Rotenturm an der Pinka, Austria) (represented by C. Gassauer-Fleissner, lawyer)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court:

Re:

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the First Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 11 February 2015 (Case R 678/2014-1), relating to opposition proceedings between Redpur and Redwell Manufaktur.

Operative part of the judgment

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the action; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the action;

| 2. | Orders Redpur GmbH to pay the costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Redpur GmbH to pay the costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 236, 20.7.2015.

1

---