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

###### Small Business Administration

          - [Declaration of Disaster #3305; Amendment No. 2] 

In accordance with a notice received from the Federal Emergency Management Agency, dated November 27, 2000, the above-numbered Declaration is hereby amended to include Yavapai County in the State of Arizona as a disaster area due to damages caused by severe storms and flooding which occurred beginning on October 21, 2000 and continuing through November 8, 2000. 

In addition, applications for economic injury loans from small businesses located in the contiguous county of Coconino, Arizona may be filed until the specified date at the previously designated location. All other contiguous counties have been previously declared. 

                    All other information remains the same,                     *i.e.*, the deadline for filing applications for physical damage is December 26, 2000 and for economic injury the deadline is July 27, 2001.                 

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 59002 and 59008) 

Dated: November 28, 2000. 

Herbert L. Mitchell, 

Acting Associate Administrator for Disaster Assistance. 

[FR Doc. 00-30778 Filed 12-1-00; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 8025-01-U
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk's Office, Atlanta, April 25, 2022.

I certify that the above is a true extract from the minutes 

of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court hereto 

affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

Court of Appeals 

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA, April 25, 2022

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order

A22A1128. IN RE ESTATE OF MARCHEL WALKER, SR. .

Upon consideration of the APPELLANT'S motion FOR PERMISSION TO WITHDRAW 

THE APPEAL in the above styled case, it is ordered that the motion be hereby GRANTED, and 

jurisdiction is released back to the trial court upon receipt of this order.
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 233 (Monday, December 4, 2000)]
[Notices]
[Page 75677]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-30859]


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

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

AGENCY HOLDING THE MEETING: Commodity Futures Trading Commission.

TIME AND DATE: 11:00 a.m., Friday, December 29, 2000.

PLACE: 1155 21st St., N.W., Washington, D.C., 9th Floor Conference 
Room.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Surveillance Matters.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Jean A. Webb, 202-418-5100.

Jean A. Webb,
Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 00-30859 Filed 11-30-00; 10:46 am]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-M
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 on Form 10-Q of WNC Housing Tax
Credit  Fund V,  L.P.,  Series  3 (the  "Partnership")  for the  quarters  ended
December  31,  2003 and  September  30 2003 as filed  with  the  Securities  and
Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof  (the  "Report"),  and  pursuant to 18
U.S.C.,  section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002,  I,  Thomas J.  Riha,  Senior  Vice-President  and Chief  Financial
Officer of WNC & Associates,  Inc.,  general partner of the Partnership,  hereby
certify that:

     1.   The Report fully  complies with the  requirements  of section 13(a) or
          15(d) of the  Securities  Exchange  Act of 1934,  except to the extent
          that  such  provisions  require  the  audit  report  of Local  Limited
          Partnership financial statements to refer to the auditing standards of
          the Public Company  Accounting  Oversight Board for the  Partnership's
          annual financial statements and except that the Report is a cumulative
          report  covering each of the quarters  ended December 31 and September
          30, 2003 and

     2.   The  information  contained  in the  Report  fairly  presents,  in all
          material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of
          the Partnership.




/s/Thomas J. Riha
-----------------
Thomas J. Riha
Senior Vice-President and Chief Financial Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc.
October 5, 2009
I

103D CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. R. 1372

To reduce the duty on ceramic statues, statuettes, and handmade flowers

until January 1, 1995.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

MARCH 16, 1993

Mr. SMITH of New Jersey introduced the following bill; which was referred

to the Committee on Ways and Means

A BILL

To reduce the duty on ceramic statues, statuettes, and

handmade flowers until January 1, 1995.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. CERAMIC STATUES, STATUETTES, AND HAND4 MADE FLOWERS.

5 Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized Tar6 iff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting

7 in numerical sequence the following new heading:
2

•HR 1372 IH

‘‘ 9902.69.13 Statues, statuettes, and handmade flowers, of

porcelain or

china, valued at

more than $2.50

each and produced by professional sculptors

or directly from

molds made

from original

models produced

by professional

sculptors (provided for in subheading

6913.10.10) ...... 2.6% No change No change On or before

12/31/94 ’’.

1 SEC. 2. APPLICABILITY.

2 The amendment made by section 1 applies with re3 spect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for

4 consumption, on or after the 15th day after the date of

5 the enactment of this Act.

Æ
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.                  

###### Department of Commerce

###### Bureau of Export Administration

The Regulations and Procedures Technical Advisory Committee will meet on December 12, 2000, 9 a.m., Room 3884, in the Herbert C. Hoover Building, 14th Street between Constitution and Pennsylvania Avenues NW, Washington, DC. The Committee advises the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Export Administration on implementation of the Export Administration Regulations (EAR) and provides for continuing review to update the EAR as needed.

### Agenda

1. Opening remarks by the Chairman.

2. Presentation of papers or comments by the public.

3. Update on pending regulations.

4. Discussion of deemed export rule.

5. Discussion of anti-boycott regulations.

6. Roundtable discussion with Bureau of Export Administration officials.

7. Election of Chair and Vice Chair.

The meeting will be open to the public and a limited number of seats will be available. Reservations are not accepted. To the extent time permits, members of the public may present oral statements to the Committee. Written statements may be submitted at any time before or after the meeting. However, to facilitate distribution of public presentation materials to Committee members, the Committee suggests that presenters forward the public presentation materials, two weeks prior to the meeting date, to the following address: Ms. Lee Ann Carpenter, OSIES/EA/BXA MS: 3876, 14th St. & Constitution Ave. NW, U.S. Department of Commerce, Washington, DC 20230.

For more information or copies of the minutes, contact Lee Ann Carpenter on (202) 482-2583.

Dated: November 20, 2000.

Lee Ann Carpenter,

Committee Liaison Officer.

[FR Doc. 00-30130  Filed 11-24-00; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3510-JT-M
**Exhibit 15.1**

 
|   | *PwC Wirtschaftsprüfung GmbH**Erdbergstraße 200   1030 Vienna   Austria   Tel.: +43 1 501 88 - 0   Fax: +43 1 501 88 - 601   E-mail: office.wien@at.pwc.com   www.pwc.at* |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-208097) of Nabriva Therapeutics AG of our report dated April 28, 2016 relating to the financial statements, which appears in this Annual Report on Form 20-F.

 

Alexandra Rester

Austrian Certified Public Accountant

 

PwC Wirtschaftsprüfung GmbH

 

Vienna, Austria

April 28, 2016

 

Managing Directors: WP/StB Mag. Friedrich Baumgartner, WP/StB Mag. Horst Bernegger, WP/StB Mag. Dr. Christine Catasta, WP/StB Mag. Liane Hirner, WP/StB Mag. Werner

Krumm, WP/StB Mag. Dr. Aslan Milla, WP/StB WP/StB Mag. Peter Pessenlehner, WP/StB Mag. Dr. Anton Pichler, WP/StB Mag. Gerhard Prachner, WP/StB Mag. Birgit Pscheider,

WP/StB Dipl.Kfm.Univ. Dorotea-E. Rebmann, WP/StB Mag. Alexandra Rester, WP/StB Mag. Jürgen Schauer, WP/StB Mag. Ute Unden-Schubert, WP/StB Mag. Günter Wiltschek,

WP/StB Mag. Felix Wirth

Domicile: Vienna; Company Register: FN 88248 b, Commercial Court of Vienna; DVR: 0656071; VAT number: ATU16124600; WT: 800834

PwC refers to the PwC network and/or one or more of its member firms, each of which is a separate legal entity. Please see www.pwc.com/structure for further details.

 

----
#### Allstate Insurance Company, Respondent, v Albert A. Pestar et al., Individually and as Parents and Natural Guardians of Rachel Pestar, an Infant, Appellants.

Order unanimously reversed on the law with costs, motion denied, cross motion granted and judgment declared, in accordance with the following memorandum: Rachel Pestar, an infant, was seriously injured when she dove from a tree stump into a lake owned and maintained by the State. Her parents filed a claim against the State in her behalf and alleged that the State was negligent in permitting swimming and diving in the area, in failing to remove the tree stumps and in not warning of the alleged dangerous condition. The State interposed a counterclaim against the parents seeking contribution on the ground that Rachel’s injuries were caused "in whole or in part by the negligent supervision, negligent encouragement, negligent representations and/or culpable conduct” of her parents. The parents requested that Allstate Insurance Company defend them and pay any judgment against them on the counterclaim under their homeowner’s policy.

Supreme Court erred in granting Allstate’s motion for summary judgment and in denying defendants’ cross motion for summary judgment. Although the policy specifically excludes coverage for bodily injuries sustained by an insured person, such as Rachel, the liability at issue on the State’s counterclaim is not the parents’ liability to Rachel but rather the parents’ potential liability to the State on a claim of *932equitable apportionment. Accordingly, we declare that Allstate has a duty to defend and indemnify the parents with respect to the State’s counterclaim *(see, Graphic Arts Mut. Ins. Co. v Bakers Mut. Ins. Co.,*45 NY2d 551, 557; *Iamele v Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co.,*103 AD2d 1027). We have considered the parents’ remaining argument regarding the alleged untimeliness of the disclaimer and find it without merit. (Appeal from order of Supreme Court, Onondaga County, Miller, J.—declaratory judgment.) Present—Callahan, J. P., Denman, Green, Balio and Davis, JJ.
#### Energy Savings Products, Inc., Respondent, v Robert Milici, Appellant.

In an action to enforce a guarantee of a debt, the defendant appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Di Noto, J.), dated May 24, 1989, which denied his motion to vacate a judgment of the same court, entered September 19, 1988, upon his default in answering.

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion to vacate the judgment is granted, and the judgment is vacated.

In support of the defendant’s motion to vacate his default, sufficient facts were set forth to make out a prima facie showing of a meritorious defense *(see, Tat Sang Kwong v Budge-Wood Laundry Serv.,*97 AD2d 691). The defendant also established a reasonable excuse for his default and therefore it was error for the Supreme Court not to have granted the *416defendant’s motion to vacate his default *(see,*CPLR 5015 [a]). Thompson, J. P., Brown, Balletta, Miller and O’Brien, JJ., concur.
#### GIACONA et al. v. STATE.

No. 20658.

Court of Criminal Appeals of Texas.

Dec. 6, 1939.

Rehearing Denied Jan. 17, 1940.

Jno. R. Francis and P. V. Myers, both of Houston, for appellants.

Lloyd W. Davidson, State’s Atty., of Austin, for the State.

CHRISTIAN, Judge.

The offense is burglary; the punishment, confinement in the penitentiary for eight years.

 One question is presented for review. Appellants based their amended motion for new trial on newly discovered evidence, and attached to said motion the affidavit of a witness whose testimony they claimed to be newly discovered and material. The order of the court overruling the amended motion for new trial recites that evidence was heard thereon. No evidence is brought before this court, either by bill of exception or statement of facts. When the order of the court overruling the motion for new trial recites that evidence was heard it will not be presumed on appeal that the affidavits attached to the motion were considered, or that they were alone considered. Where the record indicates that the court heard evidence on the issue, this court must presume that the court’s action in overruling the motion was correct, and that the trial court acted upon evidence which was sufficient to justify his action. Sykes v. State, 109 Tex.Cr.R. 39, 2 S.W.2d 863. Applying this rule to the instant case, we must presume that the court’s action in overruling the amended motion for new trial was correct.

The judgment is affirmed.

*118PER CURIAM.

The foregoing opinion of the Commission of Appeals has been examined by the Judges of the Court of Criminal Appeals and approved by the Court.

On Motion for Rehearing.

BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

In the motion filed by appellants in this cause, no questions are raised for consideration by the court. It is stated that in the event a rehearing is granted, an additional brief will be filed setting up grounds for a rehearing, but the motion contains no intimation of what these grounds will be. The proper time for the appellants to have filed their brief was before the submission of the motion for rehearing. Nothing is placed before this court for consideration, and the motion is accordingly overruled.
#### A. John STRENG v. James A. JOHNSTON, Warden, U. S. Penitentiary, Alcatraz, California.

No. 9514.

Circuit Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

July 31, 1940.

A. John Strong, in pro. per.

Frank J. Hennessy, U. S. Atty., R. B. McMillan, A. J. Zirpoli, and Joseph Karesh, Asst. U. S. Attys., all of San Francisco, Cal., for appellee.

Before WILBUR, MATHEWS, and HEALY, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Upon consideration of the record and briefs filed, and good cause therefor appearing, ordered order of District Court affirmed, that a decree be filed and entered accordingly, and mandate of this court issue as provided in rule.
#### Stephen J. Cesario, Appellant-Respondent, v Esther L. Cesario, Respondent-Appellant.

Judgment unanimously modified in the exercise of discretion and as modified affirmed without costs, in accordance with the following memorandum: Supreme Court did not abuse its discretion in awarding custody of the minor child of the marriage to plaintiff husband. Although the record reveals that both parties are good and loving parents, in view of defendant’s history of psychological and mental problems, the court’s conclusion that awarding custody to plaintiff husband was in the best interests of the child was reasonable *(see, Eschbach v Eschbach,*56 NY2d 167, 171).

The award of visitation to defendant was excessive, however, as it deprived plaintiff of any significant "quality time” with the child. Under the visitation award, defendant has the child every weekend from Friday after school until Sunday evening as well as one weekday evening each week. Under this visitation schedule, plaintiff prepares the child for school in the morning and spends three evenings a week with her. " ' "Visitation is always to be premised upon a consideration of the best interests of the children” ’ ” *(De Pinto v De Pinto,*98 AD2d 985; *Parker v Ford,*89 AD2d 806, 806-807; *Chirumbolo v Chirumbolo,*75 AD2d 992, 993). In our view, the visitation provisions of the judgment should be modified to grant defendant visitation every other weekend together with the weekday evening, summer vacation and alternate holiday provisions of the judgment. We conclude that such a modification is warranted in the best interests of the child *(cf., Trolf v Trolf,*126 AD2d 544, *lv dismissed*69 NY2d 1038).

The award of child support to defendant also is modified to $25 per week. Since defendant has remarried, the award of maintenance terminates as a matter of law (Domestic Relations Law § 236 [B] [6] [c]) and this issue is therefore moot. (Appeal from judgment of Supreme Court, Oneida County, Ringrose, J. — divorce.) Present — Callahan, J. P., Doerr, Boomer, Pine and Lawton, JJ.
### SAT Report PMN Number: P-12-0181 SAT Date: 2/24/2012 Print Date: 10/3/2012

Related cases : Health related cases: Ecotox related cases: Analogs: 6281-71-6, 4921-82-8.

Concern levels : Type of Concern: Health Eco Comments Level of Concern: 1-2 3

Persistence Bioaccum Toxicity Comments 1 1 2 PMN

Exposure Based Review : Health: Ecotox: N o
Routes of exposure : Health: Dermal Drinking Water Inhalation Ecotox: All releases to water Fate: ; Keywords : Keywords: THYROID; DEVEL; DEVEL NEURO; SENS (UNCERT); ONCO (UNCERT); AQUATOX
Summary of Assessment :

Fate : Fate Summary: P-12-0181 FATE: Solid with MP = 63-67 C (M) log Kow = 3.94 (E) S = 14.2 mg/L at 25 C (E) VP < 1.0E-6 torr at 25 C (E) BP > 400 C (E) H < 1.00E-8 (E) log Koc = 2.13 (E) log Fish BCF = 2.27 (E)log Fish BAF = 1.25 (E) POTW removal (%) = 25 via sorption and biodeg Time for complete ultimate aerobic biodeg = wk-mo Sorption to soils/sediments = strong PBT Potential: P1B1 *CEB FATE: Migration to ground water = slow

Health : Health Summary: N ot absorbed through the skin as the neat material moderate absorption through the skin if in solution ( p che m ), moderate absorption from the lung and GI tract ( p che m ). Concern for thyroid toxicity, developmental toxicity, developmental neurotoxicity, and uncertain concern for oncogenicity based on thio ureas. Uncertain concern for sensitization based on potential reaction with proteins.

Ecotox :
Test Organism Test Type Test End Point Predicted Measured Comments

fish 96-h LC50 0.61 imide SAR daphnid 48-h LC50 0.70 thiourea SAR green algal 96-h EC50 0.11 imide SAR fish

_ chronic value 0.024 imide SAR daphnid

_ chronic value 0.020 thiourea SAR

algal

_ chronic value 0.063 thiourea SAR
Sewage Sludge 3-h EC50

_ Sewage Sludge

_ Chronic Value _

Ecotox Values Comments: Predictions are based on SARs for imides and thioureas; SAR chemical class = imide, thiourea; MW 262; log Kow = 3.94 (EPI); S = 14.2 mg/L (P); p H7; effective concentrations based on 100% active ingredients and mean measured concentrations; hardness <180.0 mg/L as CaCO3; and TOC <2.0 mg/L;

Factors Values Comments Assessment Factor 10 Concentration of Concern ( p pb) 2 imide and thiourea SARs

SARs imides and thioureas SAR Class imide, thiourea Ecotox Category Imides

Ecotox Factors Comments:SAT Chair: L Keifer 564-8916
*OPINION ISSUED AUGUST 16, 2007*

#### EARL W. GROVE JR. VS. DIVISION OF HIGHWAYS

(CC-05-373)

Claimant appeared *pro se.*

Jason C. Workman, Attorney at Law, for respondent.

PER CURIAM:

Claimant brought this action for vehicle damage which occurred when his 1991 Honda Accord struck a hole while he was traveling on Fairview Drive in Berkeley Springs, Morgan County. Fairview Drive is a road maintained by respondent. The Court *26is of the opinion to make an award in this claim for the reasons more fully stated below.

The incident giving rise to this claim at approximatelyl:30 p.m. on August 10, 2005. Fairview Drive is a two-lane highway at the area of the incident involved in this claim. Claimant testified that he was driving on Fairview Drive when he saw the hole. He stated that he had seen the hole previously but had been able to avoid it on other occasions. Mr. Grove stated that he was unable to avoid the hole due to oncoming traffic and that his vehicle struck the hole sustaining damage to two tires and one rim. Mr. Grove stated that the hole was one foot wide and one half inch deep. Claimant’s vehicle sustained damage totaling $262.12.

The position of the respondent is that it did not have actual or constructive notice of the condition on Fairview Drive at the site of the claimant’s accident for the date in question. John Coleman, County Highway Administrator for the respondent in Morgan County, testified that he had no knowledge of any holes on Fairview Drive in Morgantown for the date in question. Mr. Coleman stated that there were no records of either complaints concerning the condition of the road or any maintenance done on this stretch of road prior to claimant’s incident.

The well-established principle of law in West Virginia is that the State is neither an insurer nor a guarantor of the safety of travelers upon its roads. *Adkins*vs. *Sims,*130 W.Va. 645; 46 S.E.2d 81 (1947). In order to hold respondent liable for road defects of this type, a claimant must prove that respondent had actual or constructive notice of the defect and a reasonable time to take corrective action. *Chapman vs. Dept. of Highways,*16 Ct. Cl. 103 (1986).

In the instant case, the Court is of the opinion that respondent had at least constructive notice of the hole which claimant’s vehicle struck and that the hole presented a hazard to the traveling public. The size of the hole and the time of the year in which claimant’s incident occurred leads the Court to conclude that respondent had notice of this hazardous condition and respondent had an adequate amount of time to take corrective action. Thus, the Court finds respondent negligent and claimant may make a recovery for the damage to his vehicle.

In accordance with the findings of fact and conclusions of law stated herein above, the Court is of the opinion to and does make an award to the claimant in this claim in the amount of $262.12.

Award of $262.12.