Read the given statements and conclusions carefully. Assuming that the information given in the statements is true, even if it appears to be at variance with commonly known facts, decide which of the given conclusions logically follow(s) from the statements.
Statements:

No code is a knuckle.

No eel is a code.

Some codes are bulldozers.

Conclusions:
(I) Some bulldozers are codes.
(II) Some bulldozers are not knuckles.
(III) Some bulldozers are not eels.

Let's analyze the statements:
No code is a knuckle (disjoint sets).

No eel is a code (disjoint sets).

Some codes are bulldozers (intersection between codes and bulldozers).

Now let's evaluate each conclusion:

Conclusion (I): "Some bulldozers are codes." Since "Some codes are bulldozers" is true, its converse "Some bulldozers are codes" must be true. (Follows)

Conclusion (II): "Some bulldozers are not knuckles." The part of bulldozers that overlaps with codes cannot be knuckles because no code is a knuckle. Thus, those specific bulldozers are definitely not knuckles. (Follows)

Conclusion (III): "Some bulldozers are not eels." Similarly, the part of bulldozers that overlaps with codes cannot be eels because no eel is a code. Thus, those specific bulldozers are definitely not eels. (Follows)

Since all three conclusions follow, the correct option is C.