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

[Congressional Bills 103th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 82 Introduced in House (IH)]

103d CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 82

Providing amounts from the contingent fund of the House for expenses of 
    investigations and studies by the Permanent Select Committee on 
  Intelligence in the first session of the One Hundred Third Congress.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           February 16, 1993

Mr. Glickman submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 
                 the Committee on House Administration

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Providing amounts from the contingent fund of the House for expenses of 
    investigations and studies by the Permanent Select Committee on 
  Intelligence in the first session of the One Hundred Third Congress.

    Resolved, That (a) for expenses of investigations and studies by 
the Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence (hereinafter in this 
resolution referred to as the ``Committee''), including expenses for 
provision of assistance for members of professional staff in obtaining 
specialized training under section 202(j) of the Legislative 
Reorganization Act of 1946, there shall be paid out of the contingent 
fund of the House not more than $110,000.
    (b) Not more than $5,000 of the amount specified in subsection (a) 
may be used for specialized training referred to in such subsection.
    Sec. 2. Payments under this resolution shall be made on vouchers 
authorized by the Committee, signed by the Chairman of the Committee, 
and approved by the Committee on House Administration.
    Sec. 3. Amounts shall be available under this resolution for 
investigations and studies carried out during the period beginning at 
noon on January 3, 1993, and ending immediately before noon on January 
3, 1994.
    Sec. 4. Amounts made available under this resolution shall be 
expended in accordance with regulations prescribed by the Committee on 
House Administration.

                                 <all>
```
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Ramon Rivera, Appellant.

[656 NYS2d 894]

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the County Court, Westchester County (Murphy, J.), rendered August 3, 1995, convicting him of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the third degree and criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is modified, on the law, by reversing the conviction of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree, vacating the sentence imposed thereon, and dismissing that count of the indictment; as so modified, the judgment is affirmed.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution *(see, People v Contes,*60 NY2d 620), we find that it was legally sufficient to establish the defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. Moreover, upon the exercise of our factual review power, we are satisfied that the verdict of guilt was not against the weight of the evidence *(see,*CPL 470.15 [5]).

The defendant is correct in his assertion that his conviction of the lesser-inclusory count of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree must be dismissed *(see,*CPL 300.40 [3] [b]; *People v Hammond,*220 AD2d 684).

The defendant’s sentence was neither harsh nor excessive *(see, People v Suitte,*90 AD2d 80).

The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review or without merit. Thompson, J. P., Pizzuto, Joy and Luciano, JJ., concur.
#### Charlie MINCEY, Appellant, v. NATIONAL FIDELITY LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee.

No. 76-2177.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

Dec. 27, 1977.

Rehearing Denied Jan. 30, 1978.

*1223Alfred D. Bieley, Miami, for appellant.

Rentz, McClellan & Haggard, Miami, for appellee.

Before HENDRY, C. J., and PEARSON and HAVERFIELD, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

Plaintiff appeals a summary final judgment for the insurer in this action to determined coverage under a disability insurance policy.

In September, 1974 Charlie Mincey purchased a motor vehicle from Sheehan Buick, Inc. along with credit life insurance issued by National Fidelity Life Insurance Company, defendant appellee. The policy provided coverage in the event the insured became totally disabled due to injury or sickness, and further provided that no benefits were payable for a disability resulting from a “pre-existing condition” defined as:

> “ ‘an illness, an injury, disease or physical condition for which the individual received medical diagnosis or treatment or would have caused a reasonably prudent person to have sought medical diagnosis or treatment within six (6) months preceding the effective date of coverage, provided, however, that disability commencing thereafter resulting from such condition shall be covered.’ ”

In January, 1975 Mincey became totally disabled as a result of hypertensive cardiovascular disease and congestive heart failure, and demanded the benefits under the policy. National Fidelity denied coverage under the pre-existing condition exclusion in that Mincey was diagnosed in 1967 as having heart trouble and had been receiving treatments since then. Thereupon, Mincey filed the instant action seeking a determination of his rights under the policy. Following pretrial discovery, both parties filed motions for summary judgment. After hearing, the trial judge entered judgment for National Fidelity. We affirm.

The undisputed facts as gleaned from the record demonstrate that (1) Mincey had a pre-existing condition (heart problem) for which he had received treatment within six months of the effective date of the policy (September 9, 1974); (2) the pre-existing condition resulted in total disability within less than six months of the effective date of the policy; and (3) the policy very clearly excludes coverage for total disability under such circumstances.

Affirmed.
# C_2023216EN.01001201.xml

| 19.6.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 216/12 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.6.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 216/12

---

Judgment of the Court (Eighth Chamber) of 27 April 2023 — PL v European Commission

(Case C-537/21 P) (1)

(Appeal - Civil service - Officials - Appraisal report - 2017 appraisal period - Errors of law - Distortion of the facts and evidence - Failure to state reasons)

(2023/C 216/15)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Appellant: PL (represented by: N. de Montigny, avocate)

Other party to the proceedings: European Commission (represented by: I. Melo Sampaio and L. Vernier, acting as Agents)

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Dismisses the appeal; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Dismisses the appeal;

| 2. | Orders PL to bear his own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Commission. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders PL to bear his own costs and to pay the costs incurred by the European Commission.

---

(1)  OJ C 64, 7.2.2022.

---
# C_2023216EN.01000501.xml

| 19.6.2023 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 216/5 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

19.6.2023

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 216/5

---

Judgment of the Court (First Chamber) of 4 May 2023 (request for a preliminary ruling from the Administrativen sad — Blagoevgrad — Bulgaria) — MV — 98 v Nachalnik na otdel ‘Operativni deynosti’ — Sofia v Glavna direktsia ‘Fiskalen kontrol’ pri Tsentralno upravlenie na Natsionalna agentsia za prihodite

(Case C-97/21, (1) MV — 98)

(Reference for a preliminary ruling - Value added tax (VAT) - Directive 2006/112/EC - Article 273 - Failure to issue a fiscal cash register receipt - Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union - Article 50 - Principle ne bis in idem - Cumulation of administrative penalties of a criminal nature for the same act - Article 49(3) - Proportionality of penalties - Article 47 - Right to an effective remedy - Scope of judicial review relating to the provisional enforcement of a penalty)

(2023/C 216/05)

Language of the case: Bulgarian

Referring court

Administrativen sad — Blagoevgrad

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: MV — 98

Defendant: Nachalnik na otdel ‘Operativni deynosti’ — Sofia v Glavna direktsia ‘Fiskalen kontrol’ pri Tsentralno upravlenie na Natsionalna agentsia za prihodite

Operative part of the judgment

Article 273 of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax and Article 50 of the Charter of Fundamental Rights of the European Union must be interpreted as precluding national legislation under which a financial penalty and a measure involving sealing of business premises may be imposed on a taxpayer for one and the same offence relating to a tax obligation at the end of separate and autonomous procedures, where those measures are liable to challenge before different courts and where that legislation does not ensure coordination of the procedures enabling the additional disadvantage associated with the cumulation of those measures to be reduced to what is strictly necessary and does not ensure that the severity of all penalties imposed is commensurate with the seriousness of the offence concerned.

---

(1)  OJ C 163, 3.5.2021.

---
#### Allen Eric BUTLER, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee.

No. 69-1083.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.

April 14, 1970.

Rehearing Denied May 6, 1970.

Allen Eric Butler, in pro. per.

Earl Faircloth, Atty. Gen., for appellee.

Before CHARLES CARROLL, BARK-DULL and HENDRY, JJ.

PER CURIAM.

This court, proceeding in the manner outlined and recommended by the Supreme Court of the United States in Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738, 744, 87 S.Ct. 1396, 18 L.Ed.2d 493, having deferred ruling on a motion of the public defender to with*851draw as counsel for the indigent defendant-appellant, and having furnished appellant with a copy of the public defender’s memorandum brief, and having allowed the appellant a reasonable specified time within which to raise any points that he chose in support of his appeal, and the appellant having filed his response thereto, on consideration thereof upon full examination of the proceedings we conclude that the appeal is wholly frivolous. Whereupon, the public defender’s said motion to withdraw is granted, and the order or judgment appealed is hereby affirmed.
```

[Federal Register Volume 79, Number 228 (Wednesday, November 26, 2014)]
[Notices]
[Page 70554]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2014-28003]

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

DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Ocean Energy Management

[Docket No. BOEM-2014-0078; MMAA104000]

Outer Continental Shelf, Alaska OCS Region, Chukchi Sea Planning 
Area, Oil and Gas Lease Sale 193

AGENCY: Bureau of Ocean Energy Management (BOEM), Interior.

ACTION: Notice of Availability of a Second Draft Supplemental 
Environmental Impact Statement and Notice of Public Hearings; 
Correction.

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

SUMMARY: On November 7, 2014, BOEM published a notice in the Federal 
Register (79 FR 66401). BOEM is changing the venue for one of the 
public hearing dates. This notice makes that change.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Public Hearings: Pursuant to the regulations 
implementing the procedural provisions of NEPA, BOEM will hold public 
hearings on the Second Draft SEIS. The hearing scheduled on December 1, 
2014, previously announced to occur at the Loussac Library Complex, 
will be held at a different location. The hearing will instead take 
place at the Crowne Plaza Hotel, 109 W. International Airport Road, 
Anchorage, Alaska.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Michael Routhier, Program Analysis 
Officer and Project Manager, BOEM, Alaska OCS Region, 3801 Centerpoint 
Drive, Suite 500, Anchorage, Alaska 99503-5823 or by telephone at (907) 
334-5200.

    Dated: November 17, 2014.
Walter D. Cruickshank,
Acting Director, Bureau of Ocean Energy Management.
[FR Doc. 2014-28003 Filed 11-25-14; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4310-MR-P
```
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                                                               <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                    YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                             DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                                  DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                                           233,689
<SECURITIES>                                                           0
<RECEIVABLES>                                                          0
<ALLOWANCES>                                                           0
<INVENTORY>                                                            0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                                 233,689
<PP&E>                                                           137,038
<DEPRECIATION>                                                    63,970
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                   313,466
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                          1,547,386
<BONDS>                                                                0
<COMMON>                                                          26,295
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                  0
<PREFERRED>                                                            0
<OTHER-SE>                                                    (1,260,215)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                  (1,233,920)
<SALES>                                                                0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                                       0
<CGS>                                                                  0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                          0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                 840,551
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                                     0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                 (324,886)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                       2,400
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                             (327,286)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                         0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                        0
<CHANGES>                                                              0
<NET-LOSS>                                                      (327,286)
<EPS-BASIC>                                                       (.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                       (.01)



</TABLE>
# C_2020339EN.01002801.xml

| 12.10.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 339/28 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

12.10.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 339/28

---

Action brought on 18 August 2020 — Setarcos Consulting v EUIPO (Blockchain Island)

(Case T-523/20)

(2020/C 339/35)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Setarcos Consulting Ltd. (Sliema, Malta) (represented by: S. Stafylakis, lawyer)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO)

Details of the proceedings before EUIPO

Trade mark at issue: Application for European Union word mark Blockchain Island — Application for registration No 18 027 834

Contested decision: Decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 9 June 2020 in Case R 2806/2019-5

Form of order sought

The applicant claims that the Court should:

| — | annul the contested decision; |
| --- | --- |

—

annul the contested decision;

| — | order EUIPO to pay the costs relating to the proceedings before the Court and the Board of Appeal. |
| --- | --- |

—

order EUIPO to pay the costs relating to the proceedings before the Court and the Board of Appeal.

Plea in law

| — | Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council. |
| --- | --- |

—

Infringement of Article 7(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001 of the European Parliament and of the Council.

---
## L~ r,-F:_ Ui L ~

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

WASHINGTON D

.C . 20460 OFFICE OF PREVENTION, PESTICIDES, AND TOXIC SUBSTANCES 

### SEP 11 2009

Michael A

. Santoro Director Environmental, Health, Safety and Regulatory Affairs 3M Company 3M Center, Building 0236-O1-B-10 St. Paul, MN 55144-1000 

# REC'D SrP 17 200q

RE: EPA Comments on the 3M Phase III Work Plan dated July, 2009 Dear Mr . Santoro, The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is providing its comments on the 3M Phase 3 Work Plan per Section V .E .2.mofthe Memorandumof Understanding (MOU) between EPA and the 3M

Company/Dyneon, LLC, hereinafter referred to as 3M . EPA appreciates, the opportunity to review3M Phase 3 Work Plan. EPAhas carefully reviewed the Work Plan and has a few comments which are included in the attachment . We believe that a conference call should enable us to discuss these remaining issues. We look forward to the discussions which will occur pursuant to the MOUprior to implementing the Work Plan.

.

Attachment illis, Director hemical Control Division

cc: Cathy Fehrenbacher Mail Code 7406M Laurence Libelo Mail Code 7406M EPA Docket No. EPA-HQ-OPPT-2004-0112 

# RECD SEP 17 2 .009

### EPAComments on the 3M Phase 3 Work Plan Phase 3 Sampling Program and Other Activities The work plan states on page 3-1 that no additional surveys of residential water use are planned with 2 miles around the 3M plant. We are aware that 3M is working with Region 4to address this issue and therefore agree that it not be included within this Work Plan. Soil and Sediment EPA questions why surface soil samples for soil and sediments are defined as the 0-12 inch zone on page3-11 . This is inconsistent with previous sampling and with the borings for the wells. If it is necessary to have the full top twelve inches forroot zone information, then the 0- 6" and 6-12" zones can be averaged. It is important for the former analyses to be comparable to the future analyses. V ege tative e_U4 take Study 1 . EPA questions why the concentrations of PFOA in reference soils (-8ng/g) are being used forthe laboratory testing ofplants. The contaminated sludge farmsoil concentration ranges of PFOA should be used as a guide for the laboratory testing as well as the reference concentrations . Off-site soil sampling in the WEEC area west of the 3M plant established that PFOA can be found in off-site soils at levels comparable to on-site sludge farmsoils. (pg. 3-17) 2 . Page 3-19 states that plants grown in the greenhouse will be washed with cold water before analysis. Why do the plants grown in a greenhouse need to be washed since they will not be exposed to the effects ofair deposition, rain, or run-offfromPFOAcontaminated sources? Revision of the SLEA Please clarify whether the vaporization and aerosolization studies planned will consider the potential gas emissions fromheavily contaminated sludge farmsoils for on-site workers. This was not mentioned on pg. 3-21 . It is not clear whether or not all ofthe sludge farmsoils will be eventually capped.
Exhibit 10.29


 


Addendum
Number 4 to the

Convertible Loan Agreement


 


 


“Addendum”


 


of


 


January 8, 2021


 


between


 


NLS Pharmaceutics
AG


Alter Postplatz 2


6370 Stans


Switzerland


“Borrower”


 


and


 


	Alexander Zwyer	 
	  



	 
	 	 
	Switzerland	“Lender”








 


 


(Borrower and Lender
each a “Party”


collectively the “Parties”)


 


 


regarding


extension of maturity date


 






     


    	Addendum	2/3



    

 


WHEREAS 


 


		A.	The Borrower is a stock corporation (Aktiengesellschaft) in accordance with Swiss law with
its registered seat and principal place of business at Stans (company number CHE-447.067.367). The Company has a share capital
of CHF 139’200.00, divided into 6’960’000 registered shares with a nominal value of CHF 0.02 each, which
have been fully paid in.



 


		B.	The Lender and the Borrower entered into a convertible loan agreement dated 21 February 2020, as
amended on 15 September 2020 (“Agreement”). The Lender agreed to make available to the Borrower a convertible
loan in the amount of CHF 150’000 (“Loan Amount”). This Loan Amount was reduced with the amendment dated
15 September 2020 to CHF 100’000.00 (“New Amount”). The Lender granted to the Borrower the New Amount.



 


		C.	The Maturity Date for the repayment of the Convertible Loan together with accrued interest was
set at 31 December 2020 (“Maturity Date”).



 


NOW,
THEREFORE, the Parties agree as follows:


 


Any capitalized terms, if not defined otherwise
in this Addendum, shall have the meaning as set forth in the Agreement.


 


		1.	Open Amount



 


The Parties hereby
confirm that the Convertible Loan has not been repaid to the Lender by the Borrower. 


 


		2.	Extension of Maturity Date



 


The Maturity Date as set forth
in section 4 of the Agreement shall be extended from 31 December 2020 to 31 March 2021.


 


The Parties therefore confirm
that no default interest as set forth in section 2.2 of the Agreement has accrued so far. In any case, the Lender waives any claim
with regard to regular and default interest.


 


		3.	Governing Law and Jurisdiction



 


This Addendum shall be governed
by and construed in accordance with the substantive laws of Switzerland, without reference to principles of conflict of laws or
choice of laws.


 


All disputes arising out of
or in connection with the Addendum, including disputes on its conclusion, binding effect, amendment and termination, shall be resolved
by the ordinary courts in Stans (NW), Switzerland.


 


 


[signature page to follow]


 






     


    	Addendum	3/3



    

 


Borrower


 





NLS Pharmaceutics AG


 


	/s/ Alexander Zwyer	 	/s/ Ronald Hafner
	
        Name: Alexander Zwyer
	 	
        Name: Ronald Hafner

	
        Function: Chief Executive Officer
	 	
        Function: Chairman of the Board




 


 


Lender


 


	/s/ Alexander Zwyer	 
	Alexander Zwyer
Exhibit 23.3
Consent of Cawley, Gillespie & Associates, Inc.
     As independent petroleum engineers, we hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in theregistration statements (No. 33-57348, No. 333-34617, No. 333-66938 and No. 333-117533) on FormsS-8, and the registration statements (No. 33-90296, No. 333-112518 and No. 333-119725) on Forms S-3of Parallel Petroleum Corporation of information from our reserves report dated January 31, 2004and all references to our firm included in or made a part of the annual report on Form 10-K ofParallel Petroleum Corporation for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004.                                       /s/ CAWLEY, GILLESPIE & ASSOCIATES, INC.         
Ft. Worth, Texas
257 La. 176

#### In re Judge Edward A. HAGGERTY, Jr.

No. 51032.

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

Dec. 14, 1970.

In re: Judge Edward A. Haggerty, Jr. applying for remedial writs and writs of certiorari, prohibition and mandamus.

Writ denied. See La.Const. Art. 9, Sec. 4, subd. D.
H. Res. 580

In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

October 7, 1994.

Resolved, That a revised edition of the Rules and Manual

of the House of Representatives for the One Hundred Fourth

Congress be printed as a House document, and that two

thousand additional copies shall be printed and bound for the

use of the House of Representatives, of which seven hundred

copies shall be bound in leather with thumb index and delivered as may be directed by the Parliamentarian of the House

for distribution to officers and Members of Congress.

Attest:

Clerk.