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

not so presented need not be addressed by this court."). Accordingly, we 

ORDER the judgment of conviction AFFIRMED. 2 

Hardesty 

cit.‘ 

, J. 

Douglas 

cc: Hon. Douglas Smith, District Judge 

Spencer M. Judd 

Attorney General/Carson City 

Clark County District Attorney 

Eighth District Court Clerk 

2The fast track statement does not comply with the Nevada Rules of 

Appellate Procedure because the text in the body of the brief is not doublespaced, see NRAP 3C(h)(1); NRAP 32(a)(4), and the fact section does not 

contain any citations to the record, see NRAP 3C(e)(1)(C) and NRAP 

28(e)(1). Counsel for Vazquez is cautioned that the failure to comply with 

the briefing requirements in the future may result in the imposition of 

sanctions. See NRAP 3C(n). 

SUPREME COURT 

OF 

NEVADA 2 

(0) 1947A em.
Order filed January 6, 2022

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 21

- 00589

- CV

____________ SYLVIA COOKE , Appellant

V.
RACHEL BAIER , Appellee

On Appeal from County Court at Law No

. 2

Galveston County, Texas Trial Court Caus e N o. CV

- 0087510



### O R D E R
Appellant’ s brief was due December 30, 202 01

. No brief or motion for
extension of time has been filed.
Unless appellant files a brief with this court on or before February 7, 2022
, the court will dismiss the appeal for want of pr osecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b).

PER CURIAM

Panel Consists of Justices Jewell, Bourliot, and Poissant.
§ 42.41 Stay pending appeal. ( a ) An initial decision is stayed automatically pending disposition of a motion for reconsideration or of an appeal to the Secretary.
( b ) No administrative stay is available following a final decision of the Secretary.
§ 21.4006 False or misleading statements. ( a ) *Payments may not be based on false statements.* Except as provided in this section payments may not be authorized based on a claim where it is found that the school or any person has willfully submitted a false or misleading claim, or that the veteran or eligible person with the complicity of the school or other person has submitted such a claim. A complete report of the facts will be made to the State approving agency, and if in order to the Attorney General of the United States. (Authority: 10 U.S.C. 16136(b); 38 U.S.C. 3034(a), 3241(a), 3323(a), 3690)
( 1 ) Where it is determined prior to payment that a certification or claim is false or misleading, payment will be authorized for only that portion of the claim to which entitlement is established on the basis of other evidence of record.
( 2 ) When the Department of Veterans Affairs discovers that a certification or claim is false after it has released payment, the Department of Veterans Affairs will establish an overpayment for only that portion of the claim to which the claimant was not entitled. (Authority: 10 U.S.C. 16136(b); 38 U.S.C. 3034(a), 3241, 3323(a), 3690)
( b ) *Effect of false statements on subsequent payments.* A claimant's false or misleading statements are not a bar to payments based on further training. (Authority: 10 U.S.C. 16136(b); 38 U.S.C. 3034(a), 3241, 3323(a), 3690)
( c ) *Forfeiture.* The provisions of this section do not apply when forfeiture of all rights has been or may be declared under the provisions of § 21.4007.
(Authority: 38 U.S.C. 6103)
[31 FR 6774, May 6, 1966, as amended at 38 FR 14932, June 7, 1973; 48 FR 37976, Aug. 22, 1983; 74 FR 14666, Mar. 31, 2009]
_______________________________________ __ _____________ _______________ _____________ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

November 16, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh
Elizabeth A. Weaver 133554(158)(159) Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman,
Justices NATIONAL PRIDE AT WORK, INC., a nonprofit organization on beha lf of its Michigan Members, et al

., Plaintiffs-Appellants, SC: 133554 v COA: 265870 Ingham CC: 05-000368-CZ GOVERNOR OF MICHIGAN and CITY OF KALAMAZOO, Defendants-Appellees, and

ATTORNEY GENERAL, Intervening Defendant-Appellee.

On order of the Chief Justice, the motion for temporary admission of Stephen Sanders is GRANTED. The motion by the Michigan Professors of Law for leave to file a brief amicus curiae is considered an d it is GRANTED.

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

November 16, 2007

Clerk
# Official Journal C 446/12 D

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 446 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 5712 December 2014 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 446

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 5712 December 2014

---

| Notice No | Contents | page |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | II   Information |
| | INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES |
| | European Commission |
| 2014/C 446/01 | Common catalogue of varieties of vegetable species — 33rd complete edition | 1 |

Notice No

Contents

page

II   Information

INFORMATION FROM EUROPEAN UNION INSTITUTIONS, BODIES, OFFICES AND AGENCIES

European Commission

2014/C 446/01

Common catalogue of varieties of vegetable species — 33rd complete edition

1

---

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

EN
41888.

#### STRICKLAND v. THONI OIL MAGIC BENZOL GAS STATIONS, INC.

Jordan, Judge.

This was a negligence action brought by an employee against his employer which had exercised its right to reject the provisions of the Workmen’s Compensation Act. The evidence adduced on the trial of this case disclosed that the plaintiff was injured while on duty as an attendant at the defendant’s gasoline service station when one of the defendant’s customers backed his vehicle into the plaintiff while he was servicing another vehicle. A mistrial was declared *648upon the jury being unable to reach a verdict and the defendant moved for a judgment in its favor notwithstanding the mistrial in accordance with its previous motion for a directed verdict. This motion was granted and the appeal is from that judgment. *Held:*

Argued April 4, 1966

Decided April 20, 1966

Rehearing denied May 11, 1966.

*Oze R. Horton,*for appellant.

*Wallace, Wallace & Driebe, Albert B. Wallace, Charles J. Driebe,*for appellee.

While an employer who has exercised his right to reject the provisions of the Workmen’s Compensation Act may not defend a damage suit brought by an employee who would otherwise be subject to the Act on the grounds that the employee was negligent or that the injury was caused by the negligence of a fellow servant or that the employee had assumed the risk of the injury, the burden of proof in such action is still on the plaintiff employee to show that his injuries were proximately caused at least in part by the negligent or other tortious conduct of his employer. *Code Ann.*§ 114-204; *Fulton Bakery, Inc. v. Williams,*37 Ga. App. 780 (141 SE 922).

The evidence in this case did not authorize a finding that the defendant was responsible in any way for the act of its customer in injuring the plaintiff or that it had breached any duty owed to him. A verdict for the defendant was therefore demanded and the judgment of the trial court granting the defendant’s motion for judgment notwithstanding the mistrial was not erroneous for any reasons enumerated.

*Judgment affirmed.*

*Bell, P. J., and Eberhardt, J., concur.*
# Official Journal L 357/15 D

| | ISSN 1725-2555 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 357 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 4915 December 2006 |

ISSN 1725-2555

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 357

English edition

Legislation

Volume 4915 December 2006

---

| Contents | | II   Acts whose publication is not obligatory | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | | Commission |
| | * | Decision No 1/2006 of the EC-EFTA Joint Committee on the simplification of formalities in trade in goods of 25 October 2006 amending the Convention on the simplification of formalities in trade in goods | 1 |

Contents

II   Acts whose publication is not obligatory

page

Commission

*

Decision No 1/2006 of the EC-EFTA Joint Committee on the simplification of formalities in trade in goods of 25 October 2006 amending the Convention on the simplification of formalities in trade in goods

1

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
#### Samuel H. Stone, Respondent, *v.*Samuel W. B. Smith, Appellant.

Appeal from an order of the General Term of the City Court of the city of New York, modifying and affirming an order of the Special Term of said court.

Bushby *&*Berkeley (L. M. Berkeley, of counsel), for appellant.

Stem *&*Singer (William J. Barr, of counsel), for respondent.

*Per Curiam.*

It does not appear from the defendant’s moving affidavit that the court- did not take proof of plaintiff’s claim be*741fore rendering judgment as required by the Code. The defendant, assailing the judgment on the ground of an alleged irregularity, was required to affirmatively establish it by affidavit. The absence of the proof from the judgment-roll does not aid the defendant’s contention, because the proof taken either on a default or on a trial of issues never forms part of the judgment-roll. Nothing appearing to the contrary, we are to assume that the court below performed its duty and took the necessary proof to establish the allegations of the complaint.

Order affirmed, with costs.

Present: Beekman, P. J., Giegerich and O’Gorman, JJ.

Order affirmed, with costs.
###### Editorial Note on Part 3

#### Editorial Note:

Nomenclature changes to part 3 appear at 61 FR 7216, Feb. 27, 1996; 62 FR 35970, July 3, 1997; 62 FR 47532, Sept. 9, 1997; and 67 FR 46868, July 17, 2002.

#### § 3.559 [Reserved]
# Official Journal C 179/2020

| | ISSN 1977-091X |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | C 179 |
| | |
| English edition | Information and Notices | Volume 6328 May 2020 |

ISSN 1977-091X

Official Journal

of the European Union

C 179

English edition

Information and Notices

Volume 6328 May 2020

---

| Contents | page |
| --- | --- |
| | IV   Notices |
| | NOTICES FROM MEMBER STATES |
| 2020/C 179/01 | List of the bilateral investment agreements referred to in Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1219/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing transitional arrangements for bilateral investment agreements between Member States and third countries | 1 |

Contents

page

IV   Notices

NOTICES FROM MEMBER STATES

2020/C 179/01

List of the bilateral investment agreements referred to in Article 4(1) of Regulation (EU) No 1219/2012 of the European Parliament and of the Council establishing transitional arrangements for bilateral investment agreements between Member States and third countries

1

---

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

EN
Exhibit 99.1

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 The Navigators Group, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30,
2002 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Terence N. Deeks, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §
1350, as adopted pursuant to § 960 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



/s/
Terence N. Deeks

Terence
N. Deeks
Chief Executive Officer
August 14, 2002

---

QuickLinks
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000792984
<NAME> RADVA CORP.
<MULTIPLIER> 1000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1995
<CASH>                                              34
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,541
<ALLOWANCES>                                       290
<INVENTORY>                                      1,277
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 2,718
<PP&E>                                           8,069
<DEPRECIATION>                                   4,590
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   7,920
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            4,132
<BONDS>                                          1,415
<COMMON>                                            37
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                       2,336
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     7,920
<SALES>                                          2,562
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 2,741
<CGS>                                            1,981
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    2,654
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  77
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                     16
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                 16
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                        16
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .00
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .00
        

</TABLE>
#### § 4.64 Loss of use of both buttocks.

Loss of use of both buttocks shall be deemed to exist when there is severe damage to muscle Group XVII, bilateral (diagnostic code number 5317) and additional disability rendering it impossible for the disabled person, without assistance, to rise from a seated position and from a stooped position (fingers to toes position) and to maintain postural stability (the pelvis upon head of femur). The assistance may be rendered by the person's own hands or arms, and, in the matter of postural stability, by a special appliance.
Secondary Market Report
January 1999

Secondary Market Prices and Yields
#### Ernest G. Rosenstein, Respondent, *v.*Isaac Cohn, Appellant.

Appeal from a judgment of the Municipal Court of the city of New York, eleventh district, borough of Manhattan.

David E. Grossman, for appellant.

Walter J. Rosenstein, for respondent.

*Per Curiam.*

The complaint, originally for goods sold and delivered, was amended at the trial so as to be for damages through breach of contract.

There was no evidence of delivery, and none of any damage.

The judgment must, therefore, be reversed and a new trial granted, with costs to the appellant to abide the event.

Present: Teuax, P. J., Scott and Dugbo, JJ.

Judgment reversed, and new trial granted, with costs to appellant to abide event.
# Official Journal L 369/2006

| | ISSN 1725-2555 |
| --- | --- |
| Official Journal
  of the European Union | L 369 |
| | |
| English edition | Legislation | Volume 4923 December 2006 |

ISSN 1725-2555

Official Journal

of the European Union

L 369

English edition

Legislation

Volume 4923 December 2006

---

| Contents | | I   Acts whose publication is obligatory | page |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |
| | * | Commission Regulation (EC) No 1898/2006 of 14 December 2006 laying down detailed rules of implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs | 1 |

Contents

I   Acts whose publication is obligatory

page

*

Commission Regulation (EC) No 1898/2006 of 14 December 2006 laying down detailed rules of implementation of Council Regulation (EC) No 510/2006 on the protection of geographical indications and designations of origin for agricultural products and foodstuffs

1

| EN | Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.
  The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk. |
| --- | --- |

EN

Acts whose titles are printed in light type are those relating to day-to-day management of agricultural matters, and are generally valid for a limited period.

The titles of all other Acts are printed in bold type and preceded by an asterisk.
Stor age Ta nk 55 Gallon Drum **pump** Ve nt to scrubber 3 

## PROCESS DIAGRAM

**To te**  **or Drum**  **pump**

**pump**

**55 Gallon**  **Drum pump**  Finished Product 2 1 Sample for Lab analysis Isocyanate

Ingr edients Solvent
#### STILZ v. THE UNITED STATES

November 16, 1925.

[59 C. Cls. 21; 269 U. S. 144]

Judgment was rendered in favor of the United States in the court below. On appeal the judgment was affirmed-, the Supreme Court deciding:

A finding by the Court of Claims that claimant’s patents were not infringed by the Government is a finding of fact and therefore not reexaminable by this court.

Mr. Justice ButleR

delivered the opinion of the Supreme Court
TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL ACTS SERIES 11-118.1 

________________________________________________________________________ 

DEFENSE 

Security of Information 

 Agreement Between the 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 

and JAPAN 

Effected by Exchange of Notes at 

Tokyo January 18, 2011 
 NOTE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE 

 Pursuant to Public Law 89—497, approved July 8, 1966 

(80 Stat. 271; 1 U.S.C. 113)—

“. . .the Treaties and Other International Acts Series issued 

under the authority of the Secretary of State shall be competent 

 evidence . . . of the treaties, international agreements other than 

treaties, and proclamations by the President of such treaties and 

international agreements other than treaties, as the case may be, 

therein contained, in all the courts of law and equity and of maritime 

jurisdiction, and in all the tribunals and public offices of the 

United States, and of the several States, without any further proof 

or authentication thereof.” 
JAPAN 

Defense: Security of Information 

 Agreement effected by exchange of notes at 

 Tokyo January 18, 2011; 

 Entered into force January 18, 2011. 




NOTE: This is an unofficial translation provided by the Government of Japan. When the official English translation becomes available, it will be added to this publication.
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 15**  **- 6955** 

ALTON DOCHERTY, Alton Doc k herty , Petitioner

– Appellant ,
v. DENNIS BUSH , Respondent

- Appellee
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Greenville
. Timothy M. Cain , District Judge. ( 6:14

- cv - 02835

- TMC )

Submitted : October 29, 2015 Decided: November 6, 2015

Before SHEDD and KEENAN , Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Dismissed by un published per curiam opinion
. Alton Docherty, Appellant Pro Se. William Edgar Salter, III, Assistant Attorney General, Donald John Zelenka, Senior Assistant Attorney General, Columbia, South Carolina, for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 PER CURIAM: Alton Docherty seeks to appeal the district court’s order accepting the recommendation of the magistrate judge and denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2012) petition. The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1) (A) (2012)
. A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2012)
. When the district court denies relief on the merits, a prisoner satisfies this standard by demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district court’s assessment of the constitutional claims is debatable or wrong. Slack v. McDaniel , 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); see M iller

- El v. Cockrell , 537 U.S. 322, 336

- 38 (2003). When the district court denies relief on procedural grounds, the prisoner must demonstrate both that the dispositive procedural ruling is debatable, and that the petition states a debatable claim of the d enial of a constitutional right. Slack , 529 U.S. at 484

- 85. We have independently reviewed the record and conclude that Docherty has not made the requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispens e with oral argument because the facts and legal3 contentions are adequately presented in the materials before th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

DISMISSED
#### § 4.21 Application of rating schedule.

In view of the number of atypical instances it is not expected, especially with the more fully described grades of disabilities, that all cases will show all the findings specified. Findings sufficiently characteristic to identify the disease and the disability therefrom, and above all, coordination of rating with impairment of function will, however, be expected in all instances.

[41 FR 11293, Mar. 18, 1976]
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



     In connection with the Quarterly Report of Research Frontiers
Incorporated (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended
September 30, 2007 as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Robert L. Saxe,
Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer 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:

1.   The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
     13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act
     of 1934; 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/ Robert L. Saxe
    Robert L. Saxe
    Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer
    November 9, 2007