alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Official Journal C 433/2016

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 433 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5923 November 2016 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 433

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5923 November 2016

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | III   Preparatory Acts |
| | COUNCIL |
| 2016/C 433/01 | Position (EU) No 21/2016 of the Council at first reading with a view to the adoption of a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing specific conditions for fishing for deep-sea stocks in the North-East Atlantic and provisions for fishing in international waters of the North-East Atlantic and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 2347/2002 Adopted by the Council on 18 October 2016 | 1 |
| 2016/C 433/02 | Statement of the Council's reasons: Position (EU) No 21/2016 of the Council at first reading with a view to the adoption of a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing specific conditions for fishing for deep-sea stocks in the North-East Atlantic and provisions for fishing in international waters of the North-East Atlantic and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 2347/2002 | 19 |

Notice No

Contents

page

III   Preparatory Acts

COUNCIL

2016/C 433/01

Position (EU) No 21/2016 of the Council at first reading with a view to the adoption of a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing specific conditions for fishing for deep-sea stocks in the North-East Atlantic and provisions for fishing in international waters of the North-East Atlantic and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 2347/2002 Adopted by the Council on 18 October 2016

1

2016/C 433/02

Statement of the Council's reasons: Position (EU) No 21/2016 of the Council at first reading with a view to the adoption of a Regulation of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing specific conditions for fishing for deep-sea stocks in the North-East Atlantic and provisions for fishing in international waters of the North-East Atlantic and repealing Council Regulation (EC) No 2347/2002

19

---

| EN | |
| --- | --- |

EN
Working Safely in Cold Weather

Winter weather can expose outdoor workers to frostbite, hypothermia, and cold stress, all of which 

can be fatal. It is important to know the wind chill temperature to better prepare and perform the 

work safely. 

Follow these work practices to stay safe in cold weather:

• Know the symptoms of cold stress; reddening skin, tingling, pain, swelling, leg cramps, numbness, 

and blisters.

• Dress properly; wear at least three layers of loose-fitting clothing, insulated gloves and boots, 

and cover your head.

• Monitor your physical condition and that of your coworkers.

• Stay dry and pack extra clothes; moisture can increase heat loss from the body.

• Take frequent breaks in warm, dry areas.

• Drink warm liquids.

For more safety tips, visit OSHA’s Winter Weather page.

OSHA’s On-Site Consultation Program provides no-cost and confidential occupational safety and 

health compliance assistance to small- and medium-sized businesses. Consultation services are 

separate from enforcement and do not result in penalties or citations. The OSHA Training Institute 

Education Centers offer courses for workers, employers, and managers on hazard recognition and 

abatement at convenient locations nationwide.

OSHA alerts are issued on occasion to

draw attention to worker safety and health issues and solutions.

• osha.gov/winterweather • 1-800-321-OSHA (6742) • @OSHA_DOL

OSHA 3982-12 2019
#### Robertson v. Braddick.

Friday, October 10, 1806.(1)

Appeals — Determination at What Term. — An appeal may be determined in a District Court, at the term to which the record is brought up.

Same — Record.—The appellee has a right to bring up the record.

(1)

 Judge Fleming was absent, from the commencement of this term, till the 4th of November, having been prevented from attending by indisposition.

This was an appeal from the District Court of Petersburgh.

Braddick had obtained a , judgment against Robertson on a forthcoming bond, in the County Court of Amelia; from which the latter appealed to the District Court, where, the cause being called in its turn on the docket, the counsel for the appellee opened the record, and moved for an affirmance of the judgment, in which there was no error. The counsel for the appellant objected to the Court’s hearing the cause at that time, alleging that the record had been brought up to that Court only, and by the appellee. But this objection was overruled by the District Court, and on an appeal to this Court, the judgment was affirmed.

Present, Judges Lyons,. Carrington and Tucker.
```

[Congressional Bills 114th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. Res. 317 Agreed to Senate (ATS)]

<DOC>

114th CONGRESS
  1st Session
S. RES. 317

  Commemorating the 20\th\ anniversary of the opening of the American 
                         Visionary Art Museum.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           November 18, 2015

Ms. Mikulski submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 
        the Committee on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions

                            December 9, 2015

             Committee discharged; considered and agreed to

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
  Commemorating the 20\th\ anniversary of the opening of the American 
                         Visionary Art Museum.

Whereas the American Visionary Art Museum in Baltimore, Maryland, opened on 
        November 24, 1995;
Whereas, in 1992, Congress designated the American Visionary Art Museum as the 
        national repository and education center for visionary art;
Whereas the American Visionary Art Museum--

    (1) is the first museum in North America that is wholly dedicated to 
assembling a comprehensive national collection of visionary art;

    (2) perseveres due largely to the leadership of its founder, Rebecca 
Alban Hoffberger, who built the idea of assembling a comprehensive national 
collection of visionary art into an institution;

    (3) encourages art as a means of expression for at-risk youth and other 
individuals who are often overlooked;

    (4) seeks to end the stigma associated with disability by illuminating 
the power to overcome the adversity associated with disability through 
creativity;

    (5) educates, inspires, and entertains over 125,000 visitors each year; 
and

    (6) continues to fulfill its mission to increase awareness of uncommon 
art that is created out of extraordinary circumstances; and

Whereas it is in the best interest of the national welfare and each United 
        States citizen--

    (1) to preserve visionary art; and

    (2) to celebrate visionary art as a unique art form: Now, therefore, be 
it

    Resolved, That the Senate--
            (1) commemorates the 20\th\ anniversary of the opening of 
        the American Visionary Art Museum; and
            (2) reaffirms that visionary art is a rare and valuable 
        national treasure to which individuals in the United States 
        should devote attention, support, and resources to ensure it is 
        collected, preserved, and understood.
                                 <all>
```
#### In the Matter of Daniel Pelli, Appellant, v New York City Loft Board, Respondent.

[774 NYS2d 492]

Determination by respondent (Order No. 2624), dated April 24, 2001, after a hearing, and affirmed in pertinent part by Order No. 2738, dated June 25, 2002, which found that petitioner landlord had harassed his tenants by unreasonably and willfully interfering with the use of their loft, and imposed a fine of $4,500 for five violations of the unreasonable interference rules, unanimously confirmed, the petition denied and the proceeding (transferred to this Court by order of Supreme Court, New York County [Barbara Kapnick, J.], entered October 8, 2002) dismissed, without costs.

The determination was supported by substantial evidence *(Matter of Berenhaus v Ward,*70 NY2d 436, 443-444 [1987]). The record, including inferences and assessment of credibility, provides ample evidence of petitioner’s disregard of his obligations under the narrative statement and plans submitted to support legalization of the interim multiple dwelling loft building, constituting multiple violations of the unreasonable interference provisions of the New York City Loft Board Regulations (29 RCNY 2-01 [h]). Moreover, we note that in another appeal decided herewith regarding this landlord, these tenants and the same premises *(Matter of Byrne v Board of Stds. & Appeals of City of N.Y.,*5 AD3d 261 [2004]), this Court affirmed Supreme Court’s revocation of the premises’ certificate of occupancy based on a record revealing this petitioner landlord’s failure to address a number of conditions he was specifically directed to remedy.

*269We reject petitioner’s contention that he was deprived of due process by the Loft Board’s holding that filing a separate harassment application was not necessary. Such determination was neither irrational nor unreasonable *(see Matter of 902 Assoc. v New York City Loft Bd.,*229 AD2d 351, 352 [1996]), since section 2-01 (h) provides that a harassment finding may be made in conjunction with an unreasonable interference determination.

Nor did the prior settlement in a noncompliance proceeding preclude the tenants from bringing their own application since they had reserved their right to bring a new proceeding in connection with items not completed in the legalization process.

We have considered petitioner’s remaining arguments and find them to be unavailing. Concur—Tom, J.P., Mazzarelli, Ellerin, Lerner and Marlow,. JJ.
#### Den on demise of Dunstan *v.*S. Smithwick.

From Bertie.

\ fieri facias issued against A. and was levied on Ids lands, which were sold by the Sheriff) and conveyed to B, who conveyed them to C ; but before his sale and conveyance to C, lie contracted to sell the lands to A, who actually paid him the purchase money; and th¿s sale and payment were known to C, before he purchased. In ejectment brought by C, A. shall not be permitted to give in evidence his purchase of the land, and payment of the purchase money, and knowledge thereof by C. This is a defence in Equity, but at haw the only ■question is, who has the legal title.

The Defendant being’ seised of the lands in question in right of his wife, a writ of fieri facias was let ied thereon, and his interest in the lands sold by the Sheriff, who conveyed to Robert Reddick, the purchaser, and *60Reddick conveyed to Dunstan, the lessor of the Plaintiff. On the trial, the Defendant offered to prove, that lled-before he sold the lands to Dunstan, had contracted to sell them to him the Defendant, and that he the Defendant had actually paid him the purchase money, and that Dunstan had full knowledge thereof before he purchased from Reddick. The presiding Judge thought this evidence inadmissible upon the trial of an ejectment, in which the only question was,.who had the legal title. A verdict was given for the Plaintiff *•,*and a rule for a new trial being obtained, upon the ground that the evidence offered by the Defendant ought to have been received, the same was sent to this Court.

By the Court.

We concur in opinion with the presiding Judge. It would be a departure from long established principle to go into an examination of equitable claims' upon the trial of an ejectment. • A Court of Law is not the proper Forum for such an examination. If the Defendant be entitled to relief, he will obtain it upon application to the proper Forum, and obtain it at the costs of the lessor of the Plaintiff. Let. the rule be discharged.
**Exhibit 31.1****CERTIFICATION**I, Jeffery Stegenga, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the three months ended March 31, 2007of Tower Automotive, Inc.; 2. Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in lightof the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presentedin this report; 4. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (asdefined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, ismade known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period inwhich this report is being prepared;  (b) Designed such internal control over financial reporting, or caused suchinternal control over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, toprovide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and thepreparation of financial statements for external purposes in accordance with generallyaccepted accounting principles;  (c) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls andprocedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  (d) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reportingthat occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’sfourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, oris reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting; and5. I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financialreporting, to the registrant’s auditors and the audit committee of the registrant’s board ofdirectors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design and oroperation of internalcontrol over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect theregistrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information;and (b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have aa significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.Date: November 6, 2007/s/ Jeffery Stegenga
```

[Congressional Record Volume 154, Number 161 (Friday, October 3, 2008)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E2246]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                   HONORING ROBERT AND DONNA DEPRIEST

                                 ______
                                 

                            HON. JIM COOPER

                              of tennessee

                    in the house of representatives

                        Friday, October 3, 2008

  Mr. COOPER. Madam Speaker, I am honored to select Robert and Donna 
DePriest as the Fifth District of Tennessee's Angels in Adoption 
nominee this year.
  Robert and Donna, and their children, Matthew and Melissa--all of Old 
Hickory, Tennessee--have devoted almost 15 years of their lives to the 
love, care, and support of numerous children from Tennessee's foster 
care system. I greatly admire their service to help provide a home to 
some of the neediest children in our society.
  The DePriests stand out as foster parents because of their commitment 
to medically fragile children--many of whom had a very short life 
expectancy. The devotion and sacrifice this family has made to these 
special children has been truly above and beyond their call of duty. 
Due to the specific needs of these children, the family is often 
required to be specially trained in a variety of medical procedures. 
Though the level of care needed for these special children has 
frequently made it difficult for the DePreists to participate in family 
activities outside the home, they have still remained both willing and 
passionate about continuing to provide homes and care for many children 
in Tennessee.
  The DePriest family has adopted four of the children that they cared 
for over the years. These children are Zachary, 12, Angel, 5, Heaven, 
4, and Savannah, 2.
  I appreciate all that the DePriest family has done, and thank them 
for their service. I hope that the DePriest family will continue to 
love and care for Tennessee's children for many years to come.

                          ____________________
```
[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 206 (Thursday, October 24, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 84941]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-24599]


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

POSTAL SERVICE


Product Change--Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail, and USPS 
Ground Advantage[supreg] Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal Service<SUP>TM</SUP>.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: October 24, 2024.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
October 15, 2024, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a USPS 
Request to Add Priority Mail Express, Priority Mail & USPS Ground 
Advantage[supreg] Contract 475 to Competitive Product List. Documents 
are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. MC2025-79, K2025-77.

Sean C. Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2024-24599 Filed 10-23-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
㪫㪪㪄㪟㪉㪇㪈㪧㪧

Attachment 8 

Page 1/30

   CBI
㪫㪪㪄㪟㪉㪇㪈㪧㪧

   CBI

Attachment 8 

Page 2/30
㪫㪪㪄㪟㪉㪇㪈㪧㪧

   CBI

Attachment 8 

Page 3/30
㪫㪪㪄㪟㪉㪇㪈㪧㪧

   CBI

   CBI

Attachment 8 

Page 4/30
㪫㪪㪄㪟㪉㪇㪈㪧㪧

  CBI

  CBI

Attachment 8 

Page 5/30
㪫㪪㪄㪟㪉㪇㪈㪧㪧

  CBI

  CBI

Attachment 8 

Page 6/30
㪫㪪㪄㪟㪉㪇㪈㪧㪧

Attachment 8 

Page 7/30
㪫㪪㪄㪟㪉㪇㪈㪧㪧

Attachment 8 

Page 8/30
㪫㪪㪄㪟㪉㪇㪈㪧㪧

Attachment 8 

Page 9/30
㪫㪪㪄㪟㪉㪇㪈㪧㪧

Attachment 8 

Page 10/30
㪫㪪㪄㪟㪉㪇㪈㪧㪧

Attachment 8 

Page 11/30
㪫㪪㪄㪟㪉㪇㪈㪧㪧

Attachment 8 

Page 12/30
㪫㪪㪄㪟㪉㪇㪈㪧㪧

Attachment 8 

Page 13/30
㪫㪪㪄㪟㪉㪇㪈㪧㪧

Attachment 8 

Page 14/30
㪫㪪㪄㪟㪉㪇㪈㪧㪧

Attachment 8 

Page 15/30
㪫㪪㪄㪟㪉㪇㪈㪧㪧

Attachment 8 

Page 16/30

   CBI
㪫㪪㪄㪟㪉㪇㪈㪧㪧

Attachment 8 

Page 17/30
㪫㪪㪄㪟㪉㪇㪈㪧㪧

Attachment 8 

Page 18/30
㪫㪪㪄㪟㪉㪇㪈㪧㪧

Attachment 8 

Page 19/30
㪫㪪㪄㪟㪉㪇㪈㪧㪧

  CBI

Attachment 8 

Page 20/30
㪫㪪㪄㪟㪉㪇㪈㪧㪧

  CBI

Attachment 8 

Page 21/30
㪫㪪㪄㪟㪉㪇㪈㪧㪧

Attachment 8 

Page 22/30
㪫㪪㪄㪟㪉㪇㪈㪧㪧

Attachment 8 

Page 23/30
㪫㪪㪄㪟㪉㪇㪈㪧㪧

Attachment 8 

Page 24/30
㪫㪪㪄㪟㪉㪇㪈㪧㪧

  CBI

Attachment 8 

Page 25/30
㪫㪪㪄㪟㪉㪇㪈㪧㪧

  CBI

Attachment 8 

Page 26/30
㪫㪪㪄㪟㪉㪇㪈㪧㪧

Attachment 8 

Page 27/30
㪫㪪㪄㪟㪉㪇㪈㪧㪧

Attachment 8 

Page 28/30
㪫㪪㪄㪟㪉㪇㪈㪧㪧

Attachment 8 

Page 29/30
㪫㪪㪄㪟㪉㪇㪈㪧㪧

Attachment 8 

Page 30/30
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, Kenneth A. Shewer, hereby
certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) | The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Diversified Futures Trust I for the period July 1, 2009 to September 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Quarterly 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 Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Registrant.
| | --- | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                      |  |                                                                                 
|--------------------- |  | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Kenneth A. Shewer
|Name:                 |  | Kenneth A. Shewer                                                               
|Title:                |  | Co-Chief Executive Officer                                                      
|                      |  | (Principal Executive Officer)                                                   
|                      |  | Kenmar Preferred Investments Corp., Managing Owner ofDiversified Futures Trust I
|Date:                 |  | November 12, 2009                                                               



52
COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE

FIRST DISTRICT OF TEXAS AT HOUSTON

ORDER

Appellate case name: Eva Garcia v. Gustavo Gallardo

Appellate case number: 01-22-00029-CV

Trial court case number: 2020-55783

Trial court: 246th District Court of Harris County

Appellant, Eva Garcia, has filed a notice of restricted appeal of the trial court’s default 

judgment in a suit affecting the parent-child relationship. Appellee, Gustavo Gallardo, has filed 

a motion to dismiss the appeal, asserting that appellant failed to comply with the deadline for 

filing a notice of restricted appeal and that appellant timely filed a post-judgment motion. See 

TEX. R. APP. P. 26.1(c), 30. The motion to dismiss the appeal is denied.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: ___________/s/ Julie Countiss__________

Acting individually

Date: April 19, 2022
DENY; and Opinion Filed December 10, 2018.

In The

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-18-01282-CV

IN RE HILLVIEW VILLAGE, LP AND FIRESIDE CUSTOM HOMES, LLC, Relators

Original Proceeding from the 429th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 429-04442-2018

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices Lang-Miers, Fillmore, and Stoddart

Opinion by Justice Stoddart

Before the Court is relators’ petition for writ of mandamus in which they contend the trial 

court clearly abused its discretion by denying relators’ motion to dissolve a writ of garnishment 

and refusing to resolve the issue of ownership of the funds in an expedited hearing under rule of 

civil procedure 664a. To be entitled to mandamus relief, a relator must show both that the trial 

court has clearly abused its discretion and that relator has no adequate appellate remedy. In re 

Prudential Ins. Co., 148 S.W.3d 124, 135–36 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding). Based on the record 

before us, we conclude relators have not shown they are entitled to the relief requested. 

Accordingly, we deny relators’ petition for writ of mandamus. See TEX. R. APP. P. 52.8(a) (the 

court must deny the petition if the court determines relator is not entitled to the relief sought).

181282F.P05

/Craig Stoddart/

CRAIG STODDART

JUSTICE