alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

GINGER P., Petitioner, vs. THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF CLARK; AND THE HONORABLE CYNTHIA N. GIULIANI, DISTRICTJUDGE, Respondents, and CLARK COUNTY DEPARTMENT OF FAMILY SERVICES;AND C. A., MINOR CHILD, Real Parties in Interest. No. 85002 

# FILE NOV 18 2022

ORDERDENYING PETITIONFOR A WRITOFMANDAMUS ORPROHIBITION This is an original petition for a writ of mandamus or prohibition challenging a district court order denying a request for placement of a minor child. Having considered the petition, the answers, the reply, andthe supportingdocumentation, we are not persuadedthat our extraordinary and discretionary intervention is warranted. Pan v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 120 Nev. 222, 228, 88 P.3d 840, 844 (2004) (observing that the party seeking writ reliefbears the burden ofshowing such reliefis warranted); Smith v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 107 Nev. 674, 677, 679, 818 P.2d 849, 851, 853 (1991) (recognizing that writ relief is an extraordinary remedy and that thiscourt has sole discretion in determining whether to entertain a writ petition).

Nothingin the supportingdocumentsindicatesthat the district court'sfactual findingsregardingthe child'sbest interest,whichisthe main consideration, •were clearly erroneous or arbitrary or capricious. Philip R.
SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) 1947A 

# 22,-

-

# 3(forl, Sr.J.



# Mei-t icc4-0 J. Stiglich , C.J. arraguirre v. Eighth Judicial Dist. Court, 134 Nev. 223, 228-29, 416 P.3d 242, 247-48 (2018) (explainingthat in considering a placement decision in light ofNRS 128.110's familial preference, the main consideration is the child's best interest); see also Ellis v. Carucci, 123 Nev. 145, 152, 161 P.3d 239, 244 (2007) (providing that this court leaves witness credibility determinations to the district court). Additionally, the district court's consideration of petitioner's motion to intervene and be recognized as a person of special interest on the same date as the placement hearing does not warrant our extraordinary relief given that petitioner would not have been permitted to conduct discoveryor serve subpoenas. NRS 432B.457 (permitting a person of special interest to be notified ofplans regarding the child and to testify at placement hearings); see, e.g., NRCP 26 (permittingparties to conduct discovery). Accordingly, we

ORDER the petition DENIED.1

cc: Hon. Cynthia N. Giuliani, District Judge, Family Court Division Rosenblum Allen Law Firm Burger Meyer, LLP Clark County District Attorney/Civil Division Eighth District Court Clerk

1The Honorable Mark Gibbons, Senior Justice, participated in the decision in this matter under a general order ofassignment.

SUPREME COURT

OF NEVADA
(0) 1V47A 2
#### § 1915.94 Servicing multi-piece and single-piece rim wheels.

The requirements applicable to shipyard employment under this section are identical to the requirements set forth at 29 CFR 1910.177 of this chapter.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                          18,839
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                          0
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                              0
<ALLOWANCE>                                          0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 169,702
<DEPOSITS>                                           0
<SHORT-TERM>                                   212,750
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                                  0
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           216
<OTHER-SE>                                    (43,264)
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 169,702
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                      0
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               11,505
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     0
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                11,505
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                                   0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,554
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            8,951
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                        0
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                 69,470
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (60,519)
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                    (60,519)
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (60,519)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (2.80)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (2.80)
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    0.00
<LOANS-NON>                                          0
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                     0
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        0
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                    0
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

JUAN ANTONIO GUTIERREZ

,

Appellant

,

v.

THE STATE OF TEXAS

,

State

. §

§

§

§

§

§

§ No. 08

- 1 8

- 00 194

- C R

Appeal from the

41 st District C ourt

of El Paso C ounty, Texas

(TC# 201 40D030 47 )

O R D E R

The Court GRANTS the Appellant ’ s third m otion for extension of time within which to

file the brief until June 19 , 201 9

. NO FURTHER MOTIONS FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO

F ILE THE APPELLANT ’S BR IEF WILL BE CONSIDERED BY THIS COURT.

It is further ORDERED that the Hon. Veronica Teresa Lerma

, the Appellant ’s attorney,

prepare the Appellant ’s brief and forward the same to this Court on or before June 19 , 2019

.

IT IS SO ORDERED this 15 th day of May , 20 1 9

.

PER CURIAM

Before McCl ure, C.J., Rodriguez, and Palafox , JJ.
Return
      to Main Document




**EXHIBIT
        32.1**
  **EXPRESS
        SYSTEMS, CORPORATIN.**
 **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 Express Systems, Inc. (the “Company”) on
        Form 10-QSB for the period ending September 30, 2006 as filed with the
        Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Randle
        Barrington-Foote, President, CEO, and Director of the Company, certify,
        pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
        Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:
 
 1.
            The
                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 Report fairly presents, in all material
                respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the
                Company.  /s/
        Randle Barrington-Foote
 ________________________
 Randle
        Barrington-Foote
 President,
        CEO, and Director
[Federal Register Volume 65, Number 98 (Friday, May 19, 2000)]
[Proposed Rules]
[Page 31864]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 00-12517]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

40 CFR Part 300

[FRL-6604-7]


National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan; 
National Priorities List

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Proposal to delete releases at the Mid-Atlantic Wood 
Preservers, Inc. Site from the National Priorities List (NPL).

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

SUMMARY: The EPA proposes to delete releases at the Mid-Atlantic Wood 
Preservers, Inc. Site (the Site) from the NPL and requests public 
comment on this action. The NPL constitutes appendix B of 40 CFR part 
300, which is the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution 
Contingency Plan (NCP), which EPA promulgated pursuant to Section 105 
of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and 
Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA), as amended. The EPA has determined that 
no further response pursuant to CERCLA is appropriate.

DATES: Comments concerning this deletion must be received by June 19, 
2000.

ADDRESSES: Comments may be mailed to Matthew T. Mellon, Remedial 
Project Manager, U.S. EPA, Region III, 1650 Arch Street (3HS23), 
Philadelphia, PA 19103-2029.
    Comprehensive information on the Site is available at EPA's Region 
III office and at the local information repository located at the 
Provinces Branch Library, Severn Square Shopping Center, 2624 Annapolis 
Road, Severn, MD, 21144.
    Requests for copies of documents associated with this action should 
be directed to the Region III Docket Office. The address and phone 
number for the Regional Docket Officer is U.S. EPA Region III Public 
Reading Room, 1650 Arch Street, Philadelphia, PA 19103-2029, (215) 814-
3157.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Matthew T. Mellon, Remedial Project 
Manager, U.S. EPA, Region III, 1650 Arch Street (3HS23), Philadelphia, 
PA 19103-2029, (215) 814-3168, or Richard Kuhn, Community Involvement 
Coordinator, U.S. EPA, Region III, 1650 Arch Street (3HS43), 
Philadelphia, PA 19103-2029, (215) 814-3063.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: For additional information, see the Direct 
Final notice which is located in the Rules section of this Federal 
Register.

    Dated: April 5, 2000.
Bradley M. Campbell,
Regional Administrator.
[FR Doc. 00-12517 Filed 5-18-00; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P
#### John F. Pitz, Sr., Respondent, *v.*James J. Munro, as Receiver for Richmond National Bank of New York, Appellant, Impleaded with Another.

Submitted September 27, 1937;

decided October 5, 1937.

Motion for reargument denied, with ten dollars costs and necessary printing disbursements. (See 275 N. Y. 473.)
§ 36.430 Financial assistance. ( a ) *General.* Except as provided in paragraphs (b) and (c) of this section, in providing financial assistance to any of its students, a recipient shall not: ( 1 ) On the basis of sex, provide different amounts or types of such assistance, limit eligibility for such assistance that is of any particular type or source, apply different criteria, or otherwise discriminate;
( 2 ) Through solicitation, listing, approval, provision of facilities, or other services, assist any foundation, trust, agency, organization, or person that provides assistance to any of such recipient's students in a manner that discriminates on the basis of sex; or
( 3 ) Apply any rule or assist in application of any rule concerning eligibility for such assistance that treats persons of one sex differently from persons of the other sex with regard to marital or parental status.
( b ) *Financial aid established by certain legal instruments.* ( 1 ) A recipient may administer or assist in the administration of scholarships, fellowships, or other forms of financial assistance established pursuant to domestic or foreign wills, trusts, bequests, or similar legal instruments or by acts of a foreign government that require that awards be made to members of a particular sex specified therein; *Provided,* that the overall effect of the award of such sex-restricted scholarships, fellowships, and other forms of financial assistance does not discriminate on the basis of sex.
( 2 ) To ensure nondiscriminatory awards of assistance as required in paragraph (b)(1) of this section, recipients shall develop and use procedures under which: ( i ) Students are selected for award of financial assistance on the basis of nondiscriminatory criteria and not on the basis of availability of funds restricted to members of a particular sex;
( ii ) An appropriate sex-restricted scholarship, fellowship, or other form of financial assistance is allocated to each student selected under paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this section; and
( iii ) No student is denied the award for which he or she was selected under paragraph (b)(2)(i) of this section because of the absence of a scholarship, fellowship, or other form of financial assistance designated for a member of that student's sex.
( c ) *Athletic scholarships.* ( 1 ) To the extent that a recipient awards athletic scholarships or grants-in-aid, it must provide reasonable opportunities for such awards for members of each sex in proportion to the number of students of each sex participating in interscholastic or intercollegiate athletics.
( 2 ) A recipient may provide separate athletic scholarships or grants-in-aid for members of each sex as part of separate athletic teams for members of each sex to the extent consistent with this paragraph (c) and § 36.450.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, *v.*Josephine Concannon, Appellant.

Submitted January 4, 1937;

decided January 12, 1937.

*Thomas J. Walsh, District Attorney (Thomas K. Hall*of counsel), for motion.

No one opposed.

Motion granted and appeal dismissed.
###### Editorial Note on [Part 1926](/current/title-29/part-1926?toc=1)

#### Editorial Notes:

1. At [44 FR 8577](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/44-FR-8577), Feb. 9, 1979, and corrected at [44 FR 20940](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/44-FR-20940), Apr. 6, 1979, OSHA reprinted without change the entire text of [29 CFR part 1926](/on/2024-09-19/title-29/part-1926) together with certain General Industry Occupational Safety and Health Standards contained in [29 CFR part 1910](/on/2024-09-19/title-29/part-1910), which have been identified as also applicable to construction work. This republication developed a single set of OSHA regulations for both labor and management forces within the construction industry.

2. Nomenclature changes to part 1926 appear at [84 FR 21597](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/84-FR-21597), May 14, 2019.

#### § 1926.1147 Ethylene oxide.

Note:

The requirements applicable to construction work under this section are identical to those set forth at [§ 1910.1047 of this chapter](/on/2024-09-19/title-29/section-1910.1047).

[[61 FR 31434](https://www.federalregister.gov/citation/61-FR-31434), June 20, 1996]
§ 2400.8 Procedures for statements of disagreement and notification of amendment. ( a ) *Submission of statement of disagreement.* If a final decision concerning an amendment request does not satisfy the requester, then the requester may provide a statement of disagreement that is of reasonable length and sets forth a position regarding the disputed information. This statement of disagreement shall be accepted by OSHRC and included in the relevant personal record. If deemed appropriate, OSHRC may also include a concise statement in the record of its reasons for not making a requested amendment.
( b ) *Notification of amendment and statement of disagreement.* ( 1 ) OSHRC shall inform any person or other agency about an amendment to a personal record, or notation made to the record under paragraph (a) of this section, if that record has been disclosed to the person or agency, the amendment or notation was made pursuant to this part, and an accounting of the disclosure was made pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 552a(c).
( 2 ) When a personal record is disclosed to a person or other agency after a notation under paragraph (a) of this section is made to the record, OSHRC shall clearly note any portion of the record that is disputed and provide a copy of any notation included in the record.
Exhibit 10.39

Oral Agreement to Extend Independent Contactor Agreement



On February 10, 2010, Goldrich Mining Company and Richard R. Walters orally agreed to extend the Independent Contactor Agreement dated June 30, 2003, retroactively to January 1, 2010 for a period until the Company can determine its success in securing financing for its 2010 mining and exploration season.  The parties recognize that the measure to which the Company is successful in its financing will determine the mining and exploration program that the Company may or may not be able to undertake for 2010, and therefore may significantly affect the pricing and terms of a longer term contract. The renewed agreement allows Mr. Walters to defer cash payment for fees and expenses until the Companys financial condition improves, or alternatively, receive some or all of his fees in the form of the Companys common stock.



The agreement was approved by resolution of the board of directors of Goldrich Mining Company dated February 10, 2010.









1
§ 2570.85 Waiver or reduction of civil penalty. ( a ) At any time prior to the expiration of the payment period for the assessed penalty, any person who has committed, or knowingly participated in, a breach or violation, or has been alleged by the Secretary to have so committed or participated, may petition the Secretary to waive or reduce the penalty under this section on the basis that: ( 1 ) The person acted reasonably and in good faith in engaging in the breach or violation; or
( 2 ) The person will not be able to restore all losses to the plan or participant or beneficiary of such plan without severe financial hardship unless such waiver or reduction is granted.
( b ) All petitions for waiver or reduction shall be in writing and contain the following information: ( 1 ) The name of the petitioner(s);
( 2 ) A detailed description of the breach or violation which is the subject of the penalty;
( 3 ) A detailed recitation of the facts which support one, or both, of the bases for waiver or reduction described in § 2570.85(a) of this part, accompanied by underlying documentation supporting such factual allegations;
( 4 ) A declaration, signed and dated by the petitioner(s), in the following form: Under penalty of perjury, I declare that, to the best of my knowledge and belief, the representations made in this petition are true and correct.
( c ) If a petition for waiver or reduction is submitted during the 60 day payment period described in § 2570.84(a) of this part, the payment period for the penalty in question will be tolled pending Departmental consideration of the petition. During such consideration, the applicant is entitled to one conference with the Secretary, but the Secretary, in his or her sole discretion, may schedule or hold additional conferences with the petitioner concerning the factual allegations contained in the petition.
( d ) Based solely on his or her discretion, the Secretary will determine whether to grant such a waiver or reduction. Pursuant to the procedure described in § 2570.83(b), the petitioner will be served with a written determination informing him or her of the Secretary's decision. Such written determination shall briefly state the grounds for the Secretary's decision, and shall be final and non-reviewable. In the case of a determination not to waive, the payment period for the penalty in question, if previously initiated, will resume as of the date of service of the Secretary's written determination.
§ 4231.8 Filing requirements; timing and method of filing. ( a ) *When to file.* Except as provided in paragraph (g) of this section, a notice of a proposed merger or transfer, and, if applicable, a request for a compliance determination or facilitated merger (which may be filed separately or combined), must be filed not less than the following number of days before the proposed effective date of the transaction— ( 1 ) 270 days in the case of a facilitated merger under § 4231.12;
( 2 ) 120 days in the case of a merger (other than a facilitated merger) for which a compliance determination under § 4231.10 is requested, or a transfer; or
( 3 ) 45 days in the case of a merger for which a compliance determination under § 4231.10 is not requested.
( b ) *Method of filing.* PBGC applies the rules in subpart A of part 4000 of this chapter to determine permissible methods of filing with PBGC under this part.
( c ) *Computation of time.* PBGC applies the rules in subpart D of part 4000 of this chapter to compute any time period for filing under this part.
( d ) *Who must file.* The plan sponsors of all plans involved in a merger or transfer, or the duly authorized representative(s) acting on behalf of the plan sponsors, must jointly file the notice required by subpart A of this part, and, if applicable, a request for a facilitated merger under § 4231.12.
( e ) *Where to file.* See § 4000.4 of this chapter for information on where to file.
( f ) *Date of filing.* PBGC applies the rules in subpart C of part 4000 of this chapter to determine the date a submission under this part was filed with PBGC. For purposes of paragraph (a) of this section, the notice, and, if applicable, a request for a compliance determination or facilitated merger, is not considered filed until all of the information required under this part has been submitted.
( g ) *Waiver of timing of notice.* PBGC may waive the timing requirements of paragraph (a) of this section and section 4231(b)(1) of ERISA if— ( 1 ) A plan sponsor demonstrates to the satisfaction of PBGC that failure to complete the merger or transfer in less than the applicable notice period set forth in paragraph (a) of this section will cause harm to participants or beneficiaries of the plans involved in the transaction;
( 2 ) PBGC determines that the transaction complies with the requirements of section 4231 of ERISA; or
( 3 ) PBGC completes its review of the transaction.