alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### FERBER CORPORATION, PLAINTIFF - APPELLANT, v. NORTHERN INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTS, INCORPORATED, AND ALL-RITE PEN, INCORPORATED, DEFENDANTS-RESPONDENTS.

Superior Court of New Jersey Appellate Division

Argued March 10, 1952

Decided March 17, 1952.

*494Before Judges McGeehan, Jayne and Wm. J. Brennan, Jr.

*Mr. William, B. Morrison*argued the cause for appellant *(Messrs.*Morrison, *Lloyd <& Griggs,*attorneys).

*Mr. Jacob Schneider*argued the cause for respondents *(Messrs. Schneider & Schneider,*attorneys).

Per Curiam.

Plaintiff’s complaint was dismissed after trial in the Chancery Division. The trial judge resolved that the evidence was insufficient in its probative force to establish plaintiff’s allegations that defendants wrongfully copied plaintiff’s unpatented ball point pen and fraudulently palmed off their product upon jobbers and the public as plaintiff’s product. We are in accord with his conclusion. Since the only ground urged upon the appeal is that the trial judge erred in reaching this conclusion, the judgment will stand affirmed.
EXHIBIT 32.2








CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


(SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002)








In connection with the Annual Report of PICO Holdings, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K/A (Amendment No. 1)  for the year ended December 31, 2011, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Maxim C. W. Webb, Chief Financial 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 (“Section 906”), that to the best of my knowledge:





(1) The Report fully complies with requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m); and





(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.








Date: March 29, 2012





/s/ Maxim C. W. Webb


Maxim C.W. Webb


Chief Financial Officer
# EUR-Lex - 52002XC0122(05) - EN

Avis juridique important

*|*

# 52002XC0122(05)

**Amendment by France of public service obligations in respect of scheduled air services within France (Text with EEA relevance) **

*
Official Journal C 018 , 22/01/2002 P. 0011 - 0011 *

Amendment by France of public service obligations in respect of scheduled air services within France

(2002/C 18/07)

(Text with EEA relevance)

1. France has decided to alter the public service obligation in respect of scheduled air services between Castres (Mazamet) and Paris (Orly) published in Official Journal of the European Communities C 21 of 26 January 1999 pursuant to Article 4(1)(a) of Council Regulation (EEC) No 2408/92 of 23 July 1992 on access for Community air carriers to intra-Community air routes.

2. The new public service obligation is as follows:

Minimum frequency

The minimum level of service provided must be two round trips per day, morning and evening, from Monday to Friday, excluding public holidays, 220 days a year.

Type of aircraft used and capacity provided

The service must be operated with a pressurised aircraft having a seating capacity of at least 30.

Timetables

Timetables must be such as to enable passengers on business trips during the working week to make the round trip and to spend at least eight hours at their destination, whether Paris (Orly) or Castres (Mazamet).

Slots have been reserved at Paris (Orly) airport for the scheduled Paris (Orly)-Castres (Mazamet) service pursuant to Article 9 of Council Regulation (EEC) No 95/93 on common rules for the allocation of slots at Community airports. Air carriers interested in this route can obtain information about these slots from the Paris airports coordinator.

Flight bookings

Flights must be marketed by means of at least one computerised reservation system.

Continuity of service

Except in cases of force majeure, the number of flights cancelled for reasons directly attributable to the carrier must not exceed 3 % of the number of flights scheduled in any IATA scheduling season. The carrier must give six months' notice before discontinuing these services.

Community carriers are hereby informed that the operation of air services without regard to the abovementioned public service obligation may result in administrative and/or criminal penalties.

3. This public service obligation will replace, with effect from 6 May 2002, the public service obligation in respect of scheduled air services between Castres (Mazamet) and Paris (Orly), published in Official Journal of the European Communities C 21 of 26 January 1999.
## I N T H E C O U R T O F C R I M I N A L A P P E A L S O F T E X A S NO. WR-23,129-10

EX P ARTE TIMMY LYNN D UK E, App licant
ON AP P LICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NO. W91-31292-L (E) IN THE CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT NUMBER F IVE F ROM DALLAS COUNTY
Per curiam . O R D E R Pursuant to the provisi o n s o f Ar t icle 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedur e, the cler k of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habea s corpus. Ex parte Y oung , 418 S.W .2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1 9 6 7 ). Applicant was convicted of the offense of burg lary of a ha bitation and sentenc ed to imprisonment for twenty -five y ear s. Applicant alleg es that he is actua lly innocent based upon newly discovere d evidenc e, his plea
was involuntary , and he rec eived ineffe ctive assistance of counsel in th i s ca s e re s u lting in an involuntary

plea of g uilty
. The habeas recor d has been proper ly forwa rded to this Court by the di strict cler k pursuant t o T E X . R. A P P . P. 73.4(b)( 5). Howeve r, the rec ord has been forwa rded without the trial co u rtenter ing f

indings of f

act a nd conclusions of law reg arding Applicant’s claims and the pa rties have filed an ag ree d motion to rema nd this matter beca

use they “conc ur that there are materia l unresolved issues conce rning the Applicant’s innocenc e and the voluntariness of his pl ea that require the development of

further evidenc e.” T his moti on has also bee n ag ree d to by the trial cour

t. We rema nd this application to the Criminal District Court Number Five of Dallas County to allow the trial judge to complete an evidentiar y investiga t i o n an d enter finding s of fac t and conclusions of law
. This application will be held in abey ance until the trial court has resolved the fac t issues. The issues shall be re s o l v ed wi thin 90 day s of this order
. A supplemental transcr ipt containing all aff idavits and int err og atories or the t ransc ription of t he court repor ter’s notes from any hear ing or deposition, along with the trial court’ s supplemental finding s of fa ct and c onclusions of law, shall be for war ded to this Court withi n 120 day s of the date of this order. Any extensions of time must be re quested by

the trial cour

t and shall be obtaine d from this Court.

Filed: November 15, 2017 Do not publish
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Thursday, September 7, 1995 (111), Para 111.4 Order of Business--Further Consideration of H.R. 2126]
[Page 1310]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.111.4  order of business--further consideration of h.r. 2126

  On motion of Mr. MURTHA, by unanimous consent,
  Ordered, That further consideration of the bill (H.R. 2126) making 
appropriations for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year ending 
September 30, 1996, and for other purposes, in the Committee of the 
Whole, pursuant to House Resolution 205, continue for a period not to 
exceed 5 hours (excluding time consumed by recorded votes and 
proceedings incidential thereto).
```
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h
Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,
J ustices

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.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk February 26, 2010

y0222 

# Order

February 26, 2010

139995

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 139995 COA: 293300 Oakland CC: 2009-008922-AR CHARLES ARTHUR SMELLEY, Jr., Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal the September 18, 2009 order of the Court of Appeals is consider ed, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the question presented s hould be reviewed by this Court.
EXHIBIT 32.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                 SECTIONS 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report of Repro-Med Systems, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending November 30, 2008, as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report"), I,
Andrew I. Sealfon, Chief Executive Officer and Principal Financial 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, to the best of my knowledge
and belief:

         (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 results

Date: January 13, 2009

/s/ Andrew I. Sealfon
Andrew I. Sealfon
Chief Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer
1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN 

SOUTHERN DIVISION 

MICHAEL DORMAN, et al., 

 Plaintiffs, Case No. 15-cv-12552 

 Hon. Matthew F. Leitman 

v. 

TOWNSHIP OF CLINTON 

 Defendant. 

__________________________________________________________________/ 

ORDER ON MOTION HEARING 

 On May 29, 2019, the Court held a hearing on the parties’ cross-motions for 

summary judgment. (See Motions, ECF ## 79, 81.) For the reasons stated on the 

record at the motion hearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows: 

 Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment with respect to Count II of 

their First Amended Complaint (Plaintiffs’ “Facial Equal Terms” 

claim) is TAKEN UNDER ADVISEMENT; 

 Plaintiffs’ motion for summary judgment with respect to Count III of 

their First Amended Complaint (Plaintiffs’ “non-discrimination” claim) 

is DENIED; 

 Defendant’s motion for summary judgment with respect to Count V of 

Plaintiffs’ First Amended Complaint (Plaintiffs’ “appeal from agency 

action” claim) is GRANTED; and 
2 

 Defendant’s motion for summary judgment in all other respects is 

DENIED. 

 s/Matthew F. Leitman 

 MATTHEW F. LEITMAN 

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Dated: May 29, 2019 

 I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon the 

parties and/or counsel of record on May 29, 2019, by electronic means and/or 

ordinary mail. 

 s/Holly A. Monda 

 Case Manager 

 (810) 341-9764
#### Merrill *& a. v.*Jordan *& a.*

An adjudication of bankruptcy against a mortgagor does not devest a state court of jurisdiction of an action against the bankrupt and his assignee to foreclose the mortgage.

In such action the assignee is a necessary party defendant, in order to extinguish the equity of redemption.

Writ of Entry, for land in Columbia, on a mortgage from the defendants, Jordan and wife, to one Parkhurst, and by him assigned to the plaintiffs. Plea in abatement by the other defendant, Covill, as assignee in bankruptcy of Jordan, alleging that as such assignee he is an officer of the U. S. Court for the District of New Hampshire; that that court has, and this court has not, jurisdiction of the cause or of the defendants; and that he is made a *426party to the action solely because he is assignee. The plaintiffs demurred.

*Shurtleff*and *Ray, Drew Jordan,*for the plaintiffs.

*Fletcher*and *Parsons,*for the defendants.

Blodgett, J.

The plaintiffs’ mortgage is apparently a valid lien upon the land embraced in it, both under our laws and the provisions of the bankrupt act, and therefore, in our view, the bankruptcy court cannot interfere with or control the exercise of jurisdiction of an action of foreclosure by this court. *Peck*v. *Jenness,*16 N. H. *516*—8. *C., 7*How. 612. But however this may be, it must be. held in cases like the present, where no action in relation to the property has been taken by the assignee or by the creditors in the bankruptcy court, or by the court itself, that state courts have jurisdiction to make the lien available ; and such, we think, are the authorities generally. *Eyster*v. *Gaff,*91 U. S. 521, 525; *Re Moller,*14 Blatchf. 207; *Cole*v. *Duncan,*58 Ill. 176 ; *Bentley*v. Wells, 61 Ill. 59; *Brown*v. *Gibbons,*87 Iowa 654; *Goodrich*v. *Wilson,*119 Mass. 429 ; *Hatcher*v. *Jones,*53 Ga. 208 ; *Reed*v. *Bullington,*49 Miss. 223; *Whitridge*v. *Taylor,*66 N. C. 273; *Burlingame*v. *Parce,*12 Hun 144.

Nor is Covill improperly made a defendant, because otherwise the foreclosure would be of no effect as to him, and the equity of redemption vested in him by the assignment would not be extinguished.

*Demurrer sustained.*

Allen, J.,' did not sit: the others concurred.
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Wednesday, July 19, 1995 (97), Para 97.13 Recorded Vote]
[Page 1155]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.97.13  recorded vote

  A recorded vote by electronic device was ordered in the Committee of 
the Whole on the foregoing amendment submitted by Mr. PACKARD.

It was decided in the

Yeas

283

affirmative

Nays

138
```
-----Original Message----- 

From: jimwurster@gmail.com [mailto:jimwurster@gmail.com] 

Sent: Sunday, April 25, 2010 7:33 AM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 25, 2010 

I am writing to support the interim final rule under the Paul Wellstone 

and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

(RIN 1210-AB30). 

I support the strong rule that would forbid insurance companies from 

charging higher copayments, deductibles, and other out-of-pocket 

expenses for mental health treatment than they would for other physical 

health care. Thank you for ensuring that mental health care and 

physical health care coverage are included in a single deductible. 

Sincerely, 

James Wurster 

953 Rocklynn Rd 

Springfield, PA 19064
Opinion issued April 3, 2014

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-14-00227-CR

———————————

IN RE THE STATE OF TEXAS, Relator

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION

On March 18, 2014, Relator, The State of Texas, filed a petition for writ of 

mandamus with this Court requesting a jury charge instruction be set aside.

* On 

March 19, 2014, Relator filed a motion to withdraw the petition for writ of 

mandamus. No prior opinion has been issued on Relator’s petition for writ of 

mandamus.

 

*

The underlying case is The State of Texas v. Sean Michael McGuire, cause number 

10-DCR-55,898, pending in the 240th Judicial District Court of Fort Bend County, 

Texas, the Honorable Donald Higginbotham presiding.
2

We grant the motion and dismiss the petition for writ of mandamus.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Bland, and Brown.

Do not publish. TEX. R. APP. P. 47.2(b).
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

September 24, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 133340 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman, MARVIN EARL MCELROY, Justices 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

v SC: 133340 

 COA: 263077 

Roscommon CC: 04-724886-PZ 

MICHIGAN STATE POLICE CRIMINAL 

JUSTICE INFORMATION CENTER, 

Defendant-Appellee. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 25, 2007 

judgment of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not 

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court. 

d0917 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

September 24, 2007 

 Clerk
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2075 Introduced in House (IH)]

104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2075

                   For the relief of Robert L. Quinn.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             July 19, 1995

 Mrs. Thurman introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 
                       Committee on the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
                   For the relief of Robert L. Quinn.
    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. PAYMENT OF CLAIM.

    The Secretary of the Treasury shall pay, out of any money in the 
Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to Robert L. Quinn of Spring Hill, 
Florida, the sum of $1,998. The payment shall be in full satisfaction 
of all unsettled claims against the United States for reimbursement for 
civil service annuity benefits that he was required to repay due to an 
error of the Office of Personnel Management that resulted in an 
overpayment of his benefits during the period beginning August 1, 1986, 
and ending May 31, 1987.

SEC. 2. LIMITATION ON AGENTS AND ATTORNEYS FEES.

    It shall be unlawful for an amount that exceeds 10 percent of the 
sum described in section 1 to be paid to or received by any agent or 
attorney for any service rendered in connection with the benefits 
provided by this Act. Any person who violates this section shall be 
guilty of an infraction and shall be subject to a fine in the amount 
provided in title 18, United States Code.
                                 <all>
```
-----Original Message----- 

From: sarapontious@hotmail.com [mailto:sarapontious@hotmail.com] 

Sent: Sunday, April 25, 2010 3:49 PM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 25, 2010 

I am writing to support the interim final rule under the Paul Wellstone 

and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

(RIN 1210-AB30). 

I support the strong rule that would forbid insurance companies from 

charging higher copayments, deductibles, and other out-of-pocket 

expenses for mental health treatment than they would for other physical 

health care. Thank you for ensuring that mental health care and 

physical health care coverage are included in a single deductible. 

Sincerely, 

Sara Silva 

11 Bearse Ave #3 

Dorchester, MA 02124
Release dates |     Full version (300 KB PDF)Board Actions |     Actions under delegated authority        Applications and reports received:Boston | New York | Philadelphia   | Cleveland | Richmond   | AtlantaChicago | St. Louis | Minneapolis   | Kansas City | Dallas   | San Francisco

# Board Actions

## Actions taken during the week ending November 2, 2013

----

Banking Supervision & Regulation            Market Risk Capital Rule -- requests by BOK Financial Corporation, Tulsa, Oklahoma, and Franklin Resources, Inc., San Mateo, California, to be excluded from the requirements of the Board's market risk capital rule.            -Granted, October 31, 2013            Forms            Forms -- initial Board review to extend with revision the Domestic Finance Company Report of Consolidated Assets and Liabilities (FR 2248).            -Proposed, October 30, 2013            Reserve Bank Services            Federal Reserve Priced Services -- 2014 private sector adjustment factor and fee schedules for priced services and electronic access.            -Approved, October 30, 2013            Enforcement            First Community Bank, Glasgow, Montana -- written agreement dated November 29, 2010, terminated October 25, 2013.            -Announced, October 29, 2013                        United Bank Limited, Karachi, Pakistan, and its New York, New York, Branch -- written agreement with the Federal Reserve Bank of New York.            -Announced, October 31, 2013            
Release dates |     Full version (300 KB PDF)Board Actions |     Actions under delegated authority    Applications and reports received:
H. R. 2066

One Hundred Fourth Congress

of the

United States of America

AT THE SECOND SESSION

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Wednesday,

the third day of January, one thousand nine hundred and ninety-six

An Act

To amend the National School Lunch Act to provide greater flexibility to schools

to meet the Dietary Guidelines for Americans under the school lunch and school

breakfast programs.

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of

the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Healthy Meals for Children

Act’’.

SEC. 2. INCREASED FLEXIBILITY FOR SCHOOLS TO MEET THE DIETARY

GUIDELINES FOR AMERICANS UNDER THE NATIONAL

SCHOOL LUNCH ACT.

Section 9(f)(2) of the National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C.

1758(f)(2)) is amended by striking subparagraph (D) and inserting

the following:

‘‘(D) USE OF ANY REASONABLE APPROACH.—

‘‘(i) IN GENERAL.—A school food service authority may use

any reasonable approach, within guidelines established by the

Secretary in a timely manner, to meet the requirements of

this paragraph, including—

‘‘(I) using the school nutrition meal pattern in effect

for the 1994–1995 school year; and

‘‘(II) using any of the approaches described in subparagraph (C).
H. R. 2066—2

‘‘(ii) NUTRIENT ANALYSIS.—The Secretary may not require

a school to conduct or use a nutrient analysis to meet the

requirements of this paragraph.’’.

Speaker of the House of Representatives.

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
§ 178.507 Standards for plywood drums. ( a ) The identification code for a plywood drum is 1D.
( b ) Construction requirements for plywood drums are as follows: ( 1 ) The wood used must be well-seasoned, commercially dry and free from any defect likely to lessen the effectiveness of the drum for the purpose intended. A material other than plywood, of at least equivalent strength and durability, may be used for the manufacture of the heads.
( 2 ) At least two-ply plywood must be used for the body and at least three-ply plywood for the heads; the plies must be firmly glued together, with their grains crosswise.
( 3 ) The body and heads of the drum and their joints must be of a design appropriate to the capacity of the drum and its intended use.
( 4 ) In order to prevent sifting of the contents, lids must be lined with kraft paper or some other equivalent material which must be securely fastened to the lid and extend to the outside along its full circumference.
( 5 ) Maximum capacity of drum: 250 L (66 gallons).
( 6 ) Maximum net mass: 400 kg (882 pounds).
[Amdt. 178-97, 55 FR 52717, Dec. 21, 1990, as amended at 57 FR 45465, Oct. 1, 1992]