alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<partyblock><br><br><div align="center"><b><font size="+1">Forest Park Acupuncture, P.C., as Assignee of Ibrahim Turay, Respondent,<br><br>against<br><br>MVAIC, Appellant.</font></b></div><br><br><p>Marshall &amp; Marshall, PLLC (Naim M. Peress of counsel), for appellant.Zara Javakov, P.C., for respondent (no brief filed).</p><p>Appeal from an order of the Civil Court of the City of New York, Kings County (Katherine A. Levine, J.), entered May 5, 2014. The order, insofar as appealed from, denied defendant's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.</p><p>ORDERED that the order, insofar as appealed from, is reversed, with $30 costs, and defendant's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is granted.</p><p>In this action by a provider to recover assigned first-party no-fault benefits, defendant Motor Vehicle Accident Indemnification Corporation (sued herein as MVAIC) appeals from so much of an order of the Civil Court as denied defendant's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint.</p><p>Since MVAIC established that there had been no timely filing of a notice to make claim (<i>see</i> Insurance Law ยง 5208 [a]), plaintiff's assignor is not a "covered person" (Insurance Law ยง 5221 [b] [2]). Thus, a condition precedent to plaintiff's right to apply for payment of no-fault benefits from defendant has not been satisfied (<a href="../2009/2009_50041.htm" target="_blank"><i>see M.N.M. Med. Health Care, P.C. v MVAIC</i>, 22 Misc 3d 128</a>[A], 2009 NY Slip Op 50041[U] [App Term, 2d Dept, 2d, 11th &amp; 13th Jud Dists 2009]; <a href="../2007/2007_51607.htm" target="_blank"><i>Bell Air Med. Supply, LLC v MVAIC</i>, 16 Misc 3d 135</a>[A], 2007 NY Slip Op 51607[U] <font color="FF0000">[*2]</font>[App Term, 2d Dept, 2d &amp; 11th Jud Dists 2007]). In opposition to MVAIC's cross motion, plaintiff failed to establish that leave had been obtained to file a late notice of claim or otherwise raise a triable issue of fact (<i>see</i> Insurance Law ยง 5208 [c]). In light of the foregoing, we reach no other issue.</p><p>Accordingly, the order, insofar as appealed from, is reversed and defendant's cross motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint is granted.</p><p>PESCE, P.J., ALIOTTA and ELLIOT, JJ., concur.</p><br><br>ENTER:<br>Paul Kenny<br>Chief Clerk<br>Decision Date: May 25, 2018<br><br><div align="center"><form method="LINK" action="../../slipidx/at_2_idxtable.shtml"><input type="submit" value="Return to Decision List"></form></div></partyblock>
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF DELAWARE

DELAWARE DEPARTMENT OF §

NATURAL RESOURCES AND § No. 459, 2018

ENVIRONMENTAL CONTROL, §

§ Court Below: Superior Court 

Appellee Below, § of the State of Delaware 

Appellant, § 

§ C.A. No. N17A-03-006

v. §

§

FOOD & WATER WATCH, §

§

Appellant Below, §

Appellee. §

Submitted: September 25, 2018

 Decided: December 11, 2018

Before VALIHURA, VAUGHN, and SEITZ, Justices.

O R D E R

(1) Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control 

(“DNREC”) filed this interlocutory appeal from the Superior Court’s August 24, 

2018 memorandum opinion in an administrative appeal from an order of the 

Delaware Environmental Appeals Board (“the Board”).1 The Board’s order of 

March 1, 2017, had dismissed an appeal filed by an environmental interest group, 

Food & Water Watch, for the group’s lack of standing to challenge a joint order

issued by DNREC and the Delaware Department of Agriculture, approving a general 

 

1

2018 WL 4062112 (Del. Super. Ct. Aug. 24, 2018).
2

permit program establishing standards for certain poultry feeding operations. In the 

August 24 memorandum opinion, the Superior Court reversed the Board’s order 

dismissing Food & Water Watch’s appeal and remanded the matter to the Board.2

(2) On September 7, 2018, DNREC filed its application for certification of 

an interlocutory appeal from the Superior Court’s August 24, 2018 memorandum 

opinion reversing the Board’s dismissal of Food & Water Watch’s appeal. DNREC 

conceded that its application was untimely filed under Supreme Court Rule 42(c)(i). 

Food & Water Watch opposed the application. 

(3) By order dated September 24, 2018, the Superior Court denied 

certification of the interlocutory appeal after finding, first, that DNREC had not 

demonstrated good cause to excuse the untimely filing of its application, and second, 

that even if the application had been timely filed, interlocutory review of the August 

24 memorandum opinion was not warranted under the criteria in Rule 42(b).

3

 For 

the reasons stated in the Superior Court’s order of September 24, 2018, the Court 

has determined, in its discretion, that DNREC’s application for interlocutory review 

of the August 24, 2018 memorandum opinion does not meet the requirements of 

Rule 42.

 

2

Id. at *7.

3

2018 WL 4613594 (Del. Super. Ct. Sept. 24, 2018). 
3

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the interlocutory 

appeal is REFUSED. 

BY THE COURT:

/s/ James T. Vaughn, Jr.

Justice
Exhibit 21.1

Subsidiaries of the Registrant



|                                     |  |              |  |         
|------------------------------------ |  | ------------ |  | --------
|SpeedFam-IPEC Corporation            |  | Wholly Owned |  | Direct  
|                                    
|                                    
|                                    
|                                    
|SpeedFam-IPEC Precision, Inc.        |  | Wholly Owned |  | Indirect
|                                    
|                                    
|                                    
|                                    
|SpeedFam-IPEC Limited                |  | Wholly Owned |  | Direct  
|                                    
|                                    
|                                    
|                                    
|SpeedFam-IPEC GmbH                   |  | Wholly Owned |  | Direct  
|                                    
|                                    
|                                    
|                                    
|SpeedFam-IPEC International Services |  | Wholly Owned |  | Indirect
|                                    
|                                    
|                                    
|                                    
|SpeedFam-IPEC Sales, Inc.            |  | Wholly Owned |  | Indirect
|                                    
|                                    
|                                    
|                                    
|SpeedFam-Ipec K.K                    |  | Wholly Owned |  | Indirect
|                                    
|                                    
|                                    
|                                    
|SpeedFam-IPEC Korea Ltd.             |  | Wholly Owned |  | Indirect
|                                    
|                                    
|                                    
|                                    
|SpeedFam-IPEC (S.E.A.) Pte. Ltd.     |  | Wholly Owned |  | Indirect
|                                    
|                                    
|                                    
|                                    
|SpeedFam-IPEC (Malaysia) Sdn.. Bhd   |  | Wholly Owned |  | Indirect
No. 75-6859.

#### Klimko *v.*Virginia Employment Commission.

Sup. Ct. Va. Certiorari denied.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

WESTERN DISTRICT

KEITH BARTELLI,

Petitioner

v.

COURT OF COMMON PLEAS OF 

FOREST COUNTY AND CLERK OF 

COURTS OF FOREST COUNTY,

Respondents

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 108 WM 2018

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 27th day of September, 2018, the Application for Leave to File 

Original Process is GRANTED, and the Petition for Writ of Mandamus and/or 

Extraordinary Relief is DENIED.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Stephen J. Markman, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano 

Richard H. Bernstein

Joan L. Larsen

Kurtis T. Wilder,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, 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.

 October 31, 2017

a1023

Order 

Clerk

October 31, 2017

154306

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 154306

COA: 333078 

Chippewa CC: 15-001815-FH

CHRISTINE MARIE KUCHARCZYK,

Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________/

By order of January 31, 2017, the application for leave to appeal the June 30, 

2016 order of the Court of Appeals was held in abeyance pending the decisions in People 

v Steanhouse (Docket No. 152849) and People v Masroor (Docket Nos. 152946-8). On 

order of the Court, the cases having been decided on July 24, 2017, 500 Mich 453 (2017), 

the application is again considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that 

the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1992 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1992

 To suspend temporarily the duty on certain inflatable air mattresses.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            October 28, 2009

 Ms. Klobuchar introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To suspend temporarily the duty on certain inflatable air mattresses.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. CERTAIN INFLATABLE AIR MATTRESSES.

    (a) In General.--Subchapter II of chapter 99 of the Harmonized 
Tariff Schedule of the United States is amended by inserting in 
numerical sequence the following new heading:

``     9902.01.00      Portable            Free         No change        No change        On or before 12/  ''.
                        inflatable air                                                     31/2011.......
                        mattresses of
                        vinyl, king size,
                        the foregoing
                        with electric
                        pump and not
                        designed for use
                        with a headboard
                        or bed frame
                        (provided for in
                        subheading
                        3926.90.75)......

    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for consumption, on or 
after the 15th day after the date of the enactment of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
---

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 

I, James B. Hersch, hereby 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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Century Petroleum
      Corp. for the quarter ended October 31, 2008 (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 of
      operations of Century Petroleum Corp.                                                                    

Dated: December 15, 2008

| | /s/
      James B. Hersch    
| | -----------------------------
| | James B. Hersch              
| | President and Director       
| | (Principal Executive Officer)
| | Century Petroleum Corp.      

A signed original of this written statement required by Section
906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the
signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this
written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Century
Petroleum Corp. and will be retained by Century Petroleum Corp. and furnished to
the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---
Exhibit 32.1








CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT 0F 2002





In connection with the Amendment No. 2 to the Quarterly Report of Global Gate Property Corp. (the Company") on Form 10-Q/A for the period ended herein as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Gary S. Ohlbaum, President, Chief Executive and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss.1350, as adopted pursuant to ss.906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:


(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 fully presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations or the Company.





Dated: March 28, 2011











By:
/s/Gary S. OhlbaumGary S. Ohlbaum

President, Chief Executive Officer and

Chief Financial Officer
```

[Congressional Bills 111th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2340 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

111th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 2340

 To extend the temporary suspension of duty on 2-Acetylnicotinic acid.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                            October 29, 2009

  Mr. Vitter introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
                  referred to the Committee on Finance

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To extend the temporary suspension of duty on 2-Acetylnicotinic acid.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. 2-ACETYLNICOTINIC ACID.

    (a) In General.--Heading 9902.29.02 of the Harmonized Tariff 
Schedule of the United States (relating to 2-Acetylnicotinic acid) is 
amended by striking ``12/31/2009'' and inserting ``12/31/2011''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendment made by subsection (a) applies 
with respect to goods entered, or withdrawn from warehouse for 
consumption, on or after the 15th day after the date of the enactment 
of this Act.
                                 <all>
```
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Postal Service

## Board Votes to Close March 1, 2012, Meeting

By telephone vote on March 1, 2012, members of the Board of Governors of the United States Postal Service met and voted unanimously to close to public observation its meeting held in Washington, DC, via teleconference. The Board determined that no earlier public notice was possible.

# ITEMS CONSIDERED:

1. Strategic Issues.

2. Financial Matters.

# GENERAL COUNSEL CERTIFICATION:

The General Counsel of the United States Postal Service has certified that the meeting was properly closed under the Government in the Sunshine Act.

# CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION:

Requests for information about the meeting should be addressed to the Secretary of the Board, Julie S. Moore, at (202) 268-4800.

Julie S. Moore,

Secretary.

[FR Doc. 2012-5850 Filed 3-7-12; 11:15 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04-14-00473-CV

ARC PARKLANE, INC. D/B/A PARKLANE WEST HEALTHCARE CENTER,

Appellant

v.

Belen BETTS, Individually, and as Executrix of the Estate of Delbert Betts, Deceased, and 

Shirle Betts, and Dana Gibson,

Appellees

From the 73rd Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2014-CI-10178

Honorable Larry Noll, Judge Presiding

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

Jason Pulliam, Justice

Delivered and Filed: November 25, 2015

JOINT MOTION TO DISMISS GRANTED; DISMISSED

The parties have filed a joint motion to dismiss this interlocutory appeal. We grant the 

motion. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.1(a)(2). The motion does not disclose an agreement regarding the 

assessment of costs; accordingly, all costs of this appeal are assessed against appellant. See TEX.

R. APP. P. 42.1(d) (absent agreement of the parties, costs are taxed against appellant).

PER CURIAM
Exhibit
32.1





Certification of Principal
Executive Officer


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 SRKP 5, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2009
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Richard A. Rappaport, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. ss. 1350, as
adopted pursuant to ss. 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 results of operations of the Company.





/s/ Richard A. RappaportRichard
      A. RappaportPrincipal
      Executive OfficerJuly
      29, 2009
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Lonnie Jones, Appellant.

Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Heller, J.), rendered September 25, 1989, convicting him of attempted robbery in the first degree and assault in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that 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]).

Contrary to the defendant’s contention, the trial court did not improvidently exercise its discretion in limiting defense counsel’s cross-examination of the complainant insofar as counsel failed to establish a good faith basis for his inquiry into extraneous matters *(see, La Beau v People,*34 NY 223; *People v Kass,*25 NY2d 123; *People v Schwartzman,*24 NY2d 241, *remittitur amended*24 NY2d 914, *cert denied*396 US 846). The defendant’s remaining contentions are either unpreserved for appellate review *(see,*CPL 470.05 [2]; *People v*
      *736
      *Medina,*53 NY2d 951; *People v Palemon,*131 AD2d 513; *see also, People v McGee,*152 AD2d 601; *People v Burns,*118 AD2d 864) or without merit, and we decline to address the unpreserved issues in the exercise of our interest of justice jurisdiction. Mangano, P. J., Bracken, Brown and Balletta, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 32.2

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 on Form 10-Q of Chelsea Therapeutics International, Ltd. (the Company) for the period ended September 30, 2010 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on or about the date hereof (the Report), I, J. Nick Riehle, Vice President, Administration and Chief Financial Officer, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 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 results of operations of the Company as of, and for, the
periods presented in the Report.
| | --- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/ J. Nick RiehleJ. Nick RiehleVice President, Administration and Chief Financial OfficerNovember 1, 2010