alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**USFF Band Menu**

                    - USFF Band Home
                    - USFF Band Leadership
                    - Performing Ensembles
                    - Upcoming Schedule
                    - U.S. Navy Fleet Band Auditions
                    - Contact USFF Band

**Concert Bands**

Concerts are the premier events for U.S. Fleet Forces Band. The band has various ensembles that present a wide array of marches, patriotic selections, orchestral transcriptions and modern repertoires. Below are some ensembles that encompass our concert bands.**Four Star Edition:** A contemporary music ensemble that entertains audiences with its refreshing blend of modern hits from a variety of styles that includes top hits, Latin, country, and class rock-and roll. This ensemble engages audiences with diverse, high-energy shows for all ages! 

## Event Logistical Requirements

The logistical requirements for requesting the concert band includes:
                        -  A covered stage or flat, level surface (24'x30') 
                        -  Electrical connectivity for 110-120 volt currents, three 20-amp circuits or equivalent 
                        -  Grounded electrical feeds/generators 
                        -  Proper lighting if it is an outdoor evening engagement 
                        -  Parking as close as possible to the stage, with truck clearance for 14 feet  
                        -  A private changing area for both male and female service members 

 

#####  

##### Navy.mil  |  Navy.com  |  Navy FOIA  |  DoD Accessibility/Section 508  |  No Fear Act  |  Open Government  |  Plain Writing Act USA.gov  |  Veterans Crisis Line  |  VA Vet Center  |  FVAP  |   DoD Safe Helpline  |  Navy SAPR  |  NCIS Tips  |  Privacy Policy  |  Site Map  |  Contact US

###### Commander, U.S. Fleet Forces Command   |   1562 Mitscher Ave., Suite 250   |   Norfolk, Virginia 23551-2487

###### Official U.S. Navy Website
### MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04

- 11

- 00 695

- CR
IN RE Armando ZAPATA Original Mandamus Proceeding 1
PER CURIAM Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice Steven C. Hilbig, Justice
Delivered and Filed: October 5, 2011
PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED On September 20, 2011, relator Armando Zapata filed a petition for writ of mandamus, complaining of the t rial court’s failure to rule on various pro se motions. However, counsel has been appointed to represent relator in the criminal proceeding pending in the trial court for which he is currently confined. A criminal defendant is not entitled to hybrid repr esentation. See
Robinson v. State , 240 S.W.3d 919, 922 (Tex. Crim. App. 2007); Patrick v. State , 906 S.W.2d 481, 498 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995). A trial court has no legal duty to rule on pro se motions or petitions filed with regard to a criminal proceeding in which the defendant is represented by
counsel. See Robinson , 240 S.W.3d at 922. Consequently, the trial court did not abuse its

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 2011

- CR

- 0335 , styled State of Te xas v. Armando Zapata , pending in the 227 th Judicial District Court , Bexar County, Texas, the Honorable Philip Kazen presiding.04

- 11

- 00695

- CR

- 2

- discretion by declining to rule on relator’s pro se motions filed in the criminal proceeding pending in the trial court. Accordingly, the petition for writ of mandamus is denied. T EX

. R.
A PP

. P. 52.8( a).
PER CURIAM
DO NOT PUBLISH
HYNES & HOWES INSURANCE COUNSELORS, INC.
                          Notes to Financial Statements
                           September 30, 1996 and 1995




Note 8. Commissions Payable

        Commissions payable of $81,000 resulted from the sale of the Tanglefoot
        Apartment Complex on March 1, 1993.  (See Notes 4B & 6)  The commission
        is 5% of the sales price of $1,620,000 and is payable to Realty
        Consultants, L.C.  The commission was to be paid on May 1, 1998,
        however, the money became available during the year ended Sepember 30,
        1995, and the commission was paid.
Case 1:07-cv-05712-MHD Document 22-8 Filed 03/26/2008 Page 1 of 9
Case 1:07-cv-05712-MHD Document 22-8 Filed 03/26/2008 Page 2 of 9
Case 1:07-cv-05712-MHD Document 22-8 Filed 03/26/2008 Page 3 of 9
Case 1:07-cv-05712-MHD Document 22-8 Filed 03/26/2008 Page 4 of 9
Case 1:07-cv-05712-MHD Document 22-8 Filed 03/26/2008 Page 5 of 9
Case 1:07-cv-05712-MHD Document 22-8 Filed 03/26/2008 Page 6 of 9
Case 1:07-cv-05712-MHD Document 22-8 Filed 03/26/2008 Page 7 of 9
Case 1:07-cv-05712-MHD Document 22-8 Filed 03/26/2008 Page 8 of 9
Case 1:07-cv-05712-MHD Document 22-8 Filed 03/26/2008 Page 9 of 9
# C_2021277EN.01000201.xml

| 12.7.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 277/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.7.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 277/2

---

Notice of the impending expiry of certain anti-dumping measures

(2021/C 277/02)

1.   As provided for in Article 11(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 8 June 2016 on protection against dumped imports from countries not members of the European Union (1), the Commission gives notice that, unless a review is initiated in accordance with the following procedure, the anti-dumping measures mentioned below will expire on the date mentioned in the table below.

2.   Procedure

Union producers may submit a written request for a review. This request must contain sufficient evidence that the expiry of the measures would be likely to result in a continuation or recurrence of dumping and injury. Should the Commission decide to review the measures concerned, importers, exporters, representatives of the exporting country and Union producers will then be provided with the opportunity to amplify, rebut or comment on the matters set out in the review request.

3.   Time limit

Union producers may submit a written request for a review on the above basis, to reach the European Commission, Directorate-General for Trade (Unit G-1), CHAR 4/39, 1049 Brussels, Belgium (2) at any time from the date of the publication of the present notice but no later than three months before the date mentioned in the table below.

4.   This notice is published in accordance with Article 11(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036.

| Product | Country(ies) of origin or exportation | Measures | Reference | Date of expiry (3) |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Okoumé Plywood | The People’s Republic of China | Anti-dumping duty | Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/648 of 5 April 2017 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of okoumé plywood originating in the People’s Republic of China following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 of the European Parliament and of the Council
  (OJ L 92, 6.4.2017, p. 48) | 7.4.2022 |

Product

Country(ies) of origin or exportation

Measures

Reference

Date of expiry (3)

Okoumé Plywood

The People’s Republic of China

Anti-dumping duty

Commission Implementing Regulation (EU) 2017/648 of 5 April 2017 imposing a definitive anti-dumping duty on imports of okoumé plywood originating in the People’s Republic of China following an expiry review pursuant to Article 11(2) of Regulation (EU) 2016/1036 of the European Parliament and of the Council

(OJ L 92, 6.4.2017, p. 48)

7.4.2022

---

(1)  OJ L 176, 30.6.2016, p. 21.

(2)  TRADE-Defence-Complaints@ec.europa.eu

(3)  The measure expires at midnight (00:00) of the day mentioned in this column.

---
1 Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. 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 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-20681

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

LUIS MORENO,

Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. H-95-CR-142-14

-------------------- July 25, 2002

Before JONES, DUHÉ, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: 1

Luis Moreno appeals from his conviction of drug-tr afficking

and money-laundering conspiracies. Moreno argues that the district

court’s proceedings were void ab initio because the district court

did not make an express, oral, adjudication of guilt or acceptance

of Moreno’s plea agreement. Moreno persistently and mistakenly

relies on Crain v. United States

, 162 U.S. 625 (1896), a case that

was clearly o verruled by G arland v. Washington

, 232 U.S. 642

(1914), with regard to the issue for which Moreno cites it.2

Although the district court did not expressly and precisely state

that the court was accepting the plea and finding the defendant

guilty, the record shows that there could have been no plausible

doubt as to whether Moreno’s plea had been accepted and his guilt

adjudicated. Because Moreno did not object to the alleged error,

his claim is reviewed for plain error, and he has shown none. S ee

United States v. Vonn

, 122 S. Ct. 1043, 1048 (2002). Moreno’s

contention that the district court failed to expressly accept his

plea agreement likewise fails plain-error revie w because Moreno

received the bargained-for dismissal of other counts. See United

States v. Morales-Sosa , 191 F.3d 586, 588 (5th Cir. 1999).

Moreno also contends that his life sentence is improper under

Apprendi v. New Jersey

, 530 U.S. 466 (2000). The Government

contends that Moreno waived his Apprendi contention by waiving his

right to appeal his sentence and that Moreno’s Apprendi contention

is unavailing on its merits. Moreno’s waiver of any appeal of his

sentence is valid. S ee United States v. Robinson

, 187 F. 3d 516,

518 (5th Cir. 1999); United S tates v. Portillo , 18 F.3d 290, 292

( 5th Cir. 1994). Even without it, Moreno’s appeal has no merit.

There was no Apprendi violation in the case. Moreno’s indictment

alleged that he had conspired to possess with intent to distribute

1,000 or more kilograms of marijuana, an offense carrying a

statutory maximum penalty o f life imprisonment. 21 U.S.C. §§

841(b)(1)(A), 846. Moreno’s life sentence was within that range.

See United States v. Keith

, 230 F.3d 784, 787 (5th Cir. 2 000),

cert. denied , 531 U.S. 1182 (2001).3

AFFIRMED.
NO. 07-04-0109-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE SEVENTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

AT AMARILLO

PANEL D

APRIL 20, 2004

______________________________

IN THE INTEREST OF T.R.M. AND H.S.M., CHILDREN

_________________________________

FROM THE 223RD DISTRICT COURT OF GRAY COUNTY;

NO. 31036; HONORABLE LEE WATERS, JUDGE

_______________________________

Before QUINN and REAVIS and CAMPBELL, JJ.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Appellant Shannon Luster, appearing pro se, filed with the District Clerk of Gray

County, in Cause No. 31036 pending in the 223rd District Court of that county, a document

entitled Texas Rule of Civil Procedure 306a(5) Motion. The District Clerk forwarded the

motion to this court, considering that it could be interpreted as a bona fide attempt to

invoke this court’s jurisdiction. See Verburgt v. Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615 (Tex. 1997). While

the motion did not meet the requirements for a notice of appeal, it contained a notation

“Notice of Appeal” at the bottom of each page. The relief requested in the motion was of

a nature to be addressed by the trial court, not an appellate court. The motion did not state
-2-

the date of the judgment or order appealed from or state clearly that appellant desired to

appeal. Tex. R. App. Proc. 25.1(d). Additional information from the District Clerk indicated

that no appealable order of the type referred to in the motion had been entered by the trial

court in that cause number, and further indicated that the trial court had addressed the

relief expressly requested in the motion.

The motion was received by this court on March 11, 2004. By letter dated March

26, 2004, the clerk of this court directed appellant to file, within ten days, a response

stating the date of the judgment or order appealed from and containing the information

required by Rule 25.1(d) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. Appellant was advised

that failure to respond could result in dismissal of the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3.

That date has passed and no response has been received.

All parties have had more than ten days’ notice that dismissal could result from

appellant’s failure to comply with the rules and this court’s orders. Tex. R. App. Proc.

42.3(c). Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed. 

James T. Campbell

 Justice
Exhibit 13.1
 CERTIFICATIONS
  1.
    
    The accompanying Annual Report of the Company on Form 20-F for the period ended March 31,
2010 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and2.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operation of the Company.
 Date:     July 7, 2010
    By:
    /s/ Masahiko GotoName:
    Masahiko GotoTitle:
    President and Representative Director,
Chief Executive OfficerDate:     July 7, 2010
    By:
    /s/ Yoji AokiName:
    Yoji AokiTitle:
    Director, General Manager of
Administration Headquarters,
Chief Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 23
                                       
                                                                               
                                                                               
                                                                               
                                                                               
                                                                               
                                                                               
                                                                               
                                                                               
                         INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT
                                       
                                       
                                       
The Board of Directors
INCSTAR Corporation:


We consent to incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements No. 33-
34055, No. 33-84498, No. 33-32162, and No. 33-32736 on Form S-8 of INCSTAR
Corporation of our report dated January 26, 1996, relating to the consolidated
balance sheets of INCSTAR Corporation and subsidiaries as of December 31, 1995
and 1994, and the related consolidated statement of operations, shareholders'
equity and cash flows and related schedule for each of the years in the three-
year period ended December 31, 1995, which reports appears in the 1995 Annual
Report on Form 10-K of INCSTAR Corporation.







                                                        KPMG Peat Marwick LLP
                                       
                                       
Minneapolis, Minnesota
March 27, 1996
Case 1:07-cv-05338-AKH Document 21 Filed 03/17/2008 Page 1 of 2Case 1:07-cv-05338-AKH Document 21 Filed 03/17/2008 Page 2 of 2
#### *In re*TULLY, Michelle Lee

(MR 20925)

Antioch, IL

Order of the Court:

The motion by Michelle Lee Tully to strike her name from the roll of attorneys licensed to practice law in Illinois pursuant to Supreme Court Rule 762(a) is allowed, effective immediately.
Exhibit 4.1


 


Advisors Asset Management, Inc.

18925 Base Camp Road

Monument, Colorado 80132


November 21, 2019


 


Advisors Disciplined Trust 1989


c/o The Bank of New York Mellon, as Trustee


BNY Atlantic Terminal


2 Hanson Place, 12th Floor


Brooklyn, New York 11217


 


Re:   Advisors Disciplined Trust 1989 (the “Fund”)


Ladies and Gentlemen:


We have examined
the Registration Statement File No. 333-234680 for the above captioned Fund. We hereby consent to the use in the Registration Statement
of the references to Advisors Asset Management, Inc. as evaluator.


You are hereby authorized
to file a copy of this letter with the Securities and Exchange Commission.


 


	 	Very truly yours,
	 	 
	 	Advisors Asset Management, Inc.
	 	 
	 	 
	 	By           /s/ ALEX R. MEITZNER         
	 	Alex R. Meitzner
	 	Senior Vice President
• 

- •. 

:-. 

Tol-lN B.~uc..~ GR; I= F;tk 

le-

(u oo No At h H eN' de It So.V 

AAvALo.AJ T~ltA1.5~+{o.vAL ~eAJH.Il_ 

F+, LVo~+~ 1Tx 7&1D7 

221-0 

fO-~-IS 

(1/ e~_k. ____ _ 

.:5i-d 

(}Gt. 

/Vl~ A eof'1 

7 - ot:tes ~s--A 

oR.. +e 

COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
C OURT OF A PPEALS FOR THE
F IRST D ISTRICT OF T EXAS AT H OUSTON

O RDER

Appellate case name: William Perry v. Vickie Reams Perry

Appellate case number: 01

- 16

- 00156

- CV

Trial court case number: 12

- 05

- 21470

Trial court: County Court at Law of Waller County

Appellant, William Perry, is appealing from a post

- judgment order granting a motion to appoint a receiver. The order was signed on January 21, 2016. Perry filed his notice of appeal on February 17, 2016. On the same date, Perry filed a motion fo r extension of time to file his notice of appeal in case this is an accelerated appeal. This is not an accelerated appeal and thus, the notice of appeal was timely filed. See Nwabuisi v. Mohamadi , No. 04

- 14

- 00363

- CV, 2015 WL 4554332 at *3 (Tex. App.

— San Antonio July 29, 2015, pet. denied) (citing Thor v. Black

, 443 S.W.3d 170, 179 (Tex. App.

— Corpus Christi 2013, no pet.) (holding that orders such as turnover orders appointing receiver are final, appealable orders). We dismiss as moot the motion

for exten sion of time to file the notice of appeal.

It is so ORDERED.

Judge’s signature: /s/ Harvey Brown

 Acting individually

Date: April 5, 2015
Item 5.  Legal Proceedings

None

Item 6.  Increases and Decreases in Outstanding Securities and Indebtedness

    (a)  In the fiscal year, Registrant has not issued any new shares or
         otherwise created additional outstanding securities; neither has it
         reduced outstanding securities by purchase or acquisition of treasury
         shares.  Therefore, there were 11,222,600 shares of Registrant's stock
         outstanding on September 30, 1998.

    (b)  None

    (c)  None

Item 7.  Changes in Securities and Changes in Security for Registered Securities

         None

Item 8.  Defaults upon Senior Securities

         None

Item 9.  Approximate Number of Equity Security Holders

         The approximate number of holders of each class of equity securities of
         Registrant, as of September 30, 1998, is indicated in the following
         table:


           (2)                                   (2)
     TITLE OF CLASS                 NUMBER OF RECORD HOLDERS

     Common Stock,                       Approximately 4,774
     no par value


Item 10. Submission of Matters to a Vote of Security Holders

         On February 3, 1986, Harold L. Luebken was elected a member of the
         Board of Directors and to the office of President.

         On July 12, 1983, Dan B. Davis was elected to the Board of Directors.
##### In this section

              - Codes and standards (5)
              - CRR (10)
              - Events (4)
              - Leadership (8)
              - Wildfire and WUI (16)
              - Planning (11)
              - Data (8)
              - EMS (17)
              - Equipment and technology (17)
              - Fire investigation (6)
              - Funding (5)
              - Hazmat (15)
              - Health and safety (39)
              - Terrorism (4)
              - Training (7)

Infogram

- EMS
- Hazmat
- Health and safety
- Training
Procedural guidelines for special pathogens

Infogram

- EMS
New evidence-based guidelines for prehospital airway management

Infogram

- EMS
- Equipment and technology
- Health and safety
New guidance on emergency medical services use of lights and siren

Infogram

- EMS
- Health and safety
Occupational Safety and Health Administration proposes to expand protections for emergency workers

Infogram

- EMS
- Health and safety
Integrating 911 and 988 services with innovative crisis response systems

Infogram

- EMS
- Health and safety
NHTSA publishes data on ground ambulance crashes

Infogram

- EMS
- Health and safety
NIOSH releases advisory for response to chemical suicide incidents

Infogram

- EMS
New performance measures for pediatric readiness

Infogram

- EMS
- Health and safety
First responder guide for linking people to substance use services

Infogram

- Data
- EMS
- Health and safety
New EMS heattracker helps understand and reduce health risks

Infogram

- EMS
- Hazmat
- Health and safety
- Planning
AskRail for rapid access to rail car hazmat information

Infogram

- EMS
- Health and safety
Real-time heart health monitoring for firefighters

Infogram

- EMS
Autism resources for first responders

Current Issues

- Codes and standards
- CRR
- Data
- EMS
- Equipment and technology
- Events
- Fire investigation
- Funding
- Hazmat
- Health and safety
- Leadership
- Planning
- Terrorism
- Training
- Wildfire and WUI
America Burning: 50 years of fire safety and prevention

Infogram

- EMS
- Hazmat
Reducing first responder occupational exposures to opioids

Current Issues

- EMS
- Health and safety
Increasing the focus on fire and emergency medical services behavioral health

Current Issues

- Codes and standards
- CRR
- Data
- EMS
- Equipment and technology
- Events
- Fire investigation
- Funding
- Hazmat
- Health and safety
- Leadership
- Planning
- Terrorism
- Training
- Wildfire and WUI
EMR - ISAC: Making vital, timely, actionable emergency services sector information easily accessible
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA

No. DA 20-0461

STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee,

v.

NICOLE ABENICIA NOLI,

Defendant and Appellant.

ORDER

Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, 

and good cause appearing,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension 

of time to and including December 8, 2021 within which to prepare, file, 

and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by:

Mike McGrath

Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

November 1 2021

11/01/2021

Case Number: DA 20-0461