alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# Neuroleptic Malignant Syndrome

## What is neuroleptic malignant syndrome? 

Neuroleptic malignant syndrome is a life-threatening, neurological disorder most often caused by an adverse reaction to neuroleptic or antipsychotic drugs. Symptoms include:

                    - High fever
                    - Sweating
                    - Unstable blood pressure

                    - Stupor
                    - Muscular rigidity
                    - Autonomic dysfunction

In most cases, the disorder develops within the first two weeks of treatment with the drug; however, the disorder may develop at any time during the therapy period. The syndrome can also occur in people taking anti-Parkinsonism drugs, known as dopaminergics, if those drugs are discontinued abruptly.

Generally, intensive care is needed. The neuroleptic or antipsychotic drug is discontinued, and the fever is treated aggressively. A muscle relaxant may be prescribed. Dopaminergic drugs may be useful. 

Early identification of and treatment for individuals with neuroleptic malignant syndrome improves outcome.

file-medical

## How can I or my loved one help improve care for people with neuroleptic malignant syndrome?

Consider participating in a clinical trial so clinicians and scientists can learn more about neuroleptic malignant syndrome and related disorders. Clinical research uses human volunteers to help researchers learn more about a disorder and perhaps find better ways to safely detect, treat, or prevent disease. 

All types of volunteers are needed—those who are healthy or may have an illness or disease—of all different ages, sexes, races, and ethnicities to ensure that study results apply to as many people as possible, and that treatments will be safe and effective for everyone who will use them. 

For information about participating in clinical research visit NIH Clinical Research Trials and You. Learn about clinical trials currently looking for people with neuroleptic malignant syndrome at Clinicaltrials.gov.
> Where can I find more information about neuroleptic malignant syndrome?
Information may be available from the following resources:

Food and Drug Administration (FDA)

National Institute of Mental Health (NIMH)

National Organization for Rare Disorders (NORD)

book-open
#### Jose Torres, Appellant, v Gamma Taxi Corp. et al., Respondents.

Decided November 27, 2012

Appeal dismissed, without costs, by the Court of Appeals, sua sponte, upon the ground that the order appealed from does not finally determine the action within the meaning of the Constitution.
Exhibit 32.2

# CERTIFICATION PURSUANT
TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In connection with the Annual
Report of The Black & Decker Corporation (the Corporation) on Form 10-K
for the period ended December 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission
on the date hereof (the Report), I, Michael D. Mangan, Chief Financial Officer
of the Corporation, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to
§ 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to my knowledge, 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 fairly presents, in all material
          respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Corporation.

|                                                                                 
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ MICHAEL D. MANGAN
Michael D. Mangan
Chief Financial Officer
February 14, 2006
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

November 25, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

137057 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

Robert P. Young, Jr. PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Stephen J. Markman, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, Justices 

v SC: 137057 

 COA: 277022 

Wayne CC: 06-009117-01

MICHAEL AMBERS, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the June 17, 2008 

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. 

p1117 

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. 

November 25, 2008 

 Clerk
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Josefina Jimenez, Appellant.

Submitted January 28, 2013;

decided February 7, 2013

*1023Motion for assignment of counsel granted and Steven Banks, Esq., The Legal Aid Society, 199 Water Street, New York, NY 10038 assigned as counsel to the appellant on the appeal herein.
United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 98-1240

___________ Rick Lee Grove, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * District of Minnesota Bureau of Prisons; Martha Jordan, * Warden, * [UNPUBLISHED] * Appellees. *

___________ Submitted: February 11, 1998 Filed: February 25, 1998

___________ Before McMILLIAN, LOKEN, and MURPHY, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Rick Lee Grove appeals from a final order of the United States District Court for the Dis trict of Minnesota, summarily dismissing with prejudice Grove & s 28 U.S.C

. § 2241 petition for a writ of habeas corpus . In light of our recent decision in Martin v. Gerlinski , No. 97-2232, 1998 WL 7258 (8th Cir. Jan. 13, 1998), and for the reasons discussed therein, we reverse the judgment of the district court and remand the case to the district court with instructions to refer the case to the Bureau of Prisons to properly consider Grove & s eligibility f or a sentence reduction under 18 U.S.C. § 3621(e)(2)(B). See8th Cir. R. 47A(a).-2-

A true copy.
Attest:
CLERK , U. S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT

.
#### In the Matter of Tiana Arroyo, Appellant, v John Agosta, Respondent.

[977 NYS2d 753]

*921In a child custody and visitation proceeding pursuant to Family Court Act article 6, the petitioner appeals from an order of the Family Court, Nassau County (Stack, J.H.O.), dated July 30, 2012, which, after a hearing, in effect, denied her petition to modify a prior order of the same court dated July 17, 2007, so as to change the school district in which the subject child is registered.

Ordered that the order dated July 30, 2012, is affirmed, with costs.

Modification of an existing court-sanctioned custody or visitation arrangement is permissible only upon a showing that there has been a change in circumstances such that a modification is necessary to ensure the continued best interests and welfare of the child *(see Matter of Ross v Ross,*86 AD3d 615, 616 [2011]; *Matter of Awan v Awan,*63 AD3d 733, 734 [2009]; *Matter of Molinari v Tuthill,*59 AD3d 722 [2009]; Family Ct Act § 652). The decision to conduct an in camera interview to determine the best interests of the child is within the discretion of the hearing court *(see Jean v Jean,*59 AD3d 599 [2009]).

Contrary to the petitioner’s contentions, the Family Court providently exercised its discretion by, in effect, denying her petition to modify the prior order so as to change the school district in which the subject child is registered, as the petitioner failed to show a change in circumstances warranting the modification of the prior order *(see generally Matter of Awan v Awan,*63 AD3d at 734; *Matter of Molinari v Tuthill,*59 AD3d 722 [2009]). Further, it was not an improvident exercise of discretion to, in effect, deny the petition without conducting an in camera interview of the subject child *(see generally Jean v Jean,*59 AD3d 599 [2009]). Mastro, J.E, Lott, Austin and Hinds-Radix, JJ, concur.
CCA # 13-13-00080-CR

STYLE:

JESSE TIRADO LOPEZ v. THE STATE OF

TEXAS

TRIAL COURT:

TRIAL COURTS:

TRIAL COURT JUDGE:

DISPOSITION: Affirmed

DATE: 02-12-15

85th District Court

12-01541-CRF-85

Hon. Jimmy Don Langley

JUSTICE: GregoryT.Perkes PC.

PUBLISH: DNP:

CLKRECORD:

RPT RECORD:

STATE BR:

APPBR:

ZW-/T

OFFENSE: Assault

COUNTY: Brazos

FOR REHEARING IS:

DATE:

JUDGE: Gregory T. Perkes

SUPPCLKRECORD

SUPPRPTRECORD.

SUPPBR

PROSE BR

MOTION

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

A?PELLAh/T^ Petit

FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW IN CCA IS

DATE: ^/7y

ion

JUDGE:

CCA IS:.

JUDGE:

JUx.

MOTION FOR REHEARING IN

ON

CCA# 2 M-/S

Disposition:

DATE:

JUDGE:

SIGNED:.

PUBLISH:

PC:.

DNP:

MOTION FOR STAY OF MANDATE IS:

• ON

JUDGE:
#### BOICZUK v. BALTIMORE & O. R. CO.

District Court, S. D. New York.

Nov. 2, 1944.

John Mithertz, of New York City, for plaintiff.

Robert Schwebel, of New York City, for defendant.

CAFFEY, District Judge.

In this court other judges have heretofore rendered decisions which, as I read them, determine the practice and all law questions presented by the pending motion. I regard it as my duty to follow those decisions and I shall refer to no other.

In the absence of agreement between the parties an oral deposition (such as is sought in this case) must be taken in compliance with the rules. Spaeth v. Warner Bros. Pictures, D.C., 1 F.R.D. 729, 730, second paragraph of the opinion.

Unless deposition of DeLuco be taken by consent on written interrogatories, or counsel arrange otherwise, I think the deposition should be taken at Ogden, Pennsylvania, or at some other point in the county in which Ogden is located that I shall fix if counsel desire and will supply me the information I shall need in order to enable me to make the choice. I feel also that a condition to taking the deposition at or near Ogden is that in advance the plaintiff shall pay the defendant’s counsel his travel expense and a reasonable counsel fee for attending the taking of the deposition. Houghton Mifflin Co. v. Stackpole Sons, D.C., 1 F.R.D. 506, 507, last paragraph; Fairwater Transp. Co. v. Chris-Craft Corp., D.C., 1 F.R.D. 509, 510, at bottom of first column; and Moore v. George A. Hormel & Co., *19D.C., 2 F.R.D. 340, 342, second, third and fourth full paragraphs of first column.

If counsel do not agree on the amount to be paid either for travel expense or for a fee, I will settle the question and insert the necessary figures in the order hereon. Information for my use in deciding the amounts may be sent me in affidavits or in letters from counsel, of which each should serve copies on his opponent.

If the deposition of DeLuco be taken, then by reason of the use of the word “or” in the last full line of the notice, there will be no occasion to take any other deposition under the notice. Even though, however, the plaintiff wish to examine others orally, I think it plain that the identification of those to be called is insufficient. On this account, examination of other witnesses must be denied, with leave to renew the motion in respect thereto when their names or other adequate means of identification can be supplied. Spaeth and Moore cases, supra; Orange County Theatres v. Levy, D.C., 26 F.Supp. 416, 417, last full paragraph of right column; Freeman v. Hotel Waldorf-Astoria Corporation, D.C., 27 F.Supp. 303; and Cohen v. Pennsylvania R. Co., D.C., 30 F.Supp. 419, 420, second and third full paragraphs of left column.

Settle order accordingly on two days’ notice.
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

In connection with theAnnual Report of Minuteman International, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K forthe fiscal year ending December 31, 2003 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Thomas J. Nolan,Chief Financial Officer, Secretary and Treasurer of the Company, certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that based on my knowledge:

 

(1)            The Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934;and 

 

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

 

 
| /s/ Thomas J. Nolan                                               |   |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|
| Thomas J. Nolan                                                   |
| Vice President, Chief  Financial Officer, Secretary and Treasurer |
| March 12, 2004                                               |

 

“The certification provided by the CAO doesnot in anyway alter the responsibilities of the CEO and CFO of MinutemanInternational, Inc. in connection with their certifications provided pursuantto Sections 302 and 906 of The Sarbanes-Oxley Act.”

 

----
**Exhibit
      32.1**





**CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO SECTION 906**


**OF
      THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 (18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)**





In
      connection with the Quarterly Report of BreitBurn Energy Partners L.P (the
      “Partnership”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2008, as filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
      I, Halbert S. Washburn, Co-Chief Executive Officer of BreitBurn GP, LLC, the
      general partner of the Partnership, 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
      Partnership.





/s/
                HALBERT S. WASHBURNHalbert
                S. Washburn*Co-Chief
                Executive Officer of BreitBurn GP,
                LLC*





Dated:
      November 10, 2008
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

GABRIELLA KERTESZ,

Plaintiff

- Appellant,

v.

BOB FERGUSON, Attorney General of

Washington State,

Defendant

- Appellee. No. 20

- 35573

D.C. No. 2:20

- cv

- 00372

- RAJ

MEMORANDUM *

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Western District of Washington

Richard A. Jones, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted June 21, 2021 * *

Before: SILVERMAN , WATFORD, and BENNETT, Circuit Judges.

Gabriella Kertesz appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment

dismissing her 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging that Bob Ferguson, the Attorney

General of Washington State

, violated her civil rights in connection with a state

law that concerns medical consent forms. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36

- 3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2). 

# FILED

JUL 1 2021

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS2 20

- 35573

§ 1291. We review de novo a dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction

.

Colony Cove Props., LLC v. City of Carson , 640 F.3d 948, 955 (9th Cir. 2011).

We affir m.

The district court properly dismissed Kertesz’s action for lack of subject

matter jurisdiction b ecause Kertesz failed to allege facts sufficient to demonstrate

Article III standing. See Arakaki v. Lingle , 477 F.3d 1048, 105 9 (9th Cir. 2007) (to

establish standing, a plaintiff must allege that she “ has suffered concrete injury,

that there is a causal connection between [her] injury and the conduct complained

of, and that the injury will likely be redressed by a favorable decision”); Smel t v.

County of Orange , 447 F.3d 673, 682 (9th Cir. 2006) (“The burden of showing that

there is standing rests on the shoulders of the party asserting it.”)

.

We reject as without merit Kertesz’s contention , set forth in her

supplemental filing

, that the di strict court’s dismissal for lack of subject matter

jurisdiction divested this court of jurisdiction over the appeal.

AFFIRMED.
**Exhibit 23.2**

**CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM**

The Board of Directors and Stockholders of Entech Solar, Inc. and Subsidiaries 

We hereby consentto the use in Registration Statement No. 333-168598, 333-152429, 333-66484, 333-95253. 333-95241 and 333-24693 of Entech Solar, Inc. and Subsidiaries on Form S-8 of our report dated March 31, 2010 (which report expressed an unqualifiedopinion and included an explanatory paragraph relating to Entech Solar, Inc.’s ability to continue as a going concern), appearing in the 2010 Annual Report (Form 10-K) of Entech Solar, Inc. and Subsidiaries for the year ended December 31, 2010.

/s/ Amper, Politzner & Mattia, LLP 

Edison, New Jersey 

March 24, 2011
EXHIBIT 32.1
 Certification of Chief Executive Officer of Concho Resources Inc.
(Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002)
  1)
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2)
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 Date: November 13, 2008
    
    /s/ Timothy A. Leach

Timothy A. LeachDirector, Chairman of the Board of Directors and 

Chief Executive Officer (Principal Executive Officer)
J. Herndon

(7

1 ?-,3P-190 IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA
KEANDRE VALENTINE,

Petitioner, vs. THE EIGHTH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA, IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF CLARK; AND THE HONORABLE JACQUELINE M. BLUTH, DISTRICT JUDGE, Respondents,

and THE STATE OF NEVADA,

Real Party in Interest. ORDER DISMISSING PETITION This is an original petition for a writ of mandamus or prohibition. Petitioner has filed a motion to withdraw his petition. The unopposed motion is granted and this matter is dismissed.

It is so ORDERED. 

# ACI-•t J

. Hardesty

, J. Stiglich No. 84777 

# FILED JUL 0 8 2022 EUZABETHA. BROWN CLERK OF SUPREME COURT By De ..5 pt ir yaek -M-0 6 -" --

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA
(0) I947Acc: Hon. Jacqueline Bluth, District Judge Clark County Public Defender Attorney General/Carson City Clark County District Attorney Eighth District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA (0) I947A 2
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 of VelaTel Global Communications, Inc. ("Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2013
as filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”) on the date hereof (“this Report"),
I Carlos Trujillo, Chief, Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §. 1350, as adopted pursuant to
§. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



(i) this Report fully complies with the requirements
of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



(ii) the information contained
in this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.



|Dated: November 19, 2013 | By: /s/ Carlos Trujillo                 
|------------------------ | ----------------------------------------
|                         | Carlos Trujillo, Chief Financial Officer



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 has been provided to the Company and will be
retained by the Company and furnished to the SEC or its staff upon request.
SCWC-14-0000456

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF HAWAI#I

MICHELE LINCOLN,

 Petitioner/Plaintiff-Appellant-Appellant,

vs.

LAND USE COMMISSION, STATE OF HAWAI#I;

WEST MAUI LAND COMPANY, INC.,

 a domestic profit corporation;

KAHOMA RESIDENTIAL LLC,

 a domestic limited liability company;

 OFFICE OF PLANNING, STATE OF HAWAI#I;

 MAUI PLANNING DEPARTMENT, COUNTY OF MAUI;

WILLIAM SPENCE, Director of Planning

of the County of Maui; and ROUTH BOLOMET,

Respondents/Defendants/Appellees-Appellees.

CERTIORARI TO THE INTERMEDIATE COURT OF APPEALS

(CAAP-14-0000456; CIV. NO. 13-1-0528)

ORDER REJECTING APPLICATION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI

(By: Recktenwald, C.J., Nakayama, McKenna, Pollack, and Wilson, JJ.)

Petitioner/Plaintiff-Appellant-Appellant Michele

Electronically Filed

Supreme Court

SCWC-14-0000456

16-FEB-2016

11:02 AM
Lincoln’s Application for Writ of Certiorari, filed on 

January 6, 2016, is hereby rejected. 

DATED: Honolulu, Hawai#i, February 16, 2016.

Rafael G. Del Castillo

and Lance D. Collins 

for petitioner

James W. Geiger

for respondent West Maui

Land Company, Inc. and

Kahoma Residential LLC

Patricia Ohara and 

Diane Erickson for 

respondent Land Use

Commission, State of

Hawai#i

Bryan C. Yee for respondent

Office of Planning, State of

Hawai#i

Michael J. Hopper for

respondent Maui Planning

Department, County of Maui

and William Spence, Director

of Planning of the County of

Maui

/s/ Mark E. Recktenwald

/s/ Paula A. Nakayama

/s/ Sabrina S. McKenna 

/s/ Richard W. Pollack

/s/ Michael D. Wilson

2
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.                  

###### Department of Agriculture

###### Forest Service

# AGENCY:

USDA Forest Service.

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting.

## Siskiyou Resource Advisory Committee (RAC)

# SUMMARY:

                        The Siskiyou Resource Advisory Committee will meet on                               ( print page 30521)                            Friday, July 31, 2009 to recommend Title II projects for fiscal year 2010 under the reauthorized Secure Rural Schools and Community Self Determination Act, Public Law 110-343. The meeting will be held at Smith River Rancheria (Howonquet Hall Community Center), 101 Indian Court, Smith River, CA 95567. It begins at 9:30 a.m., ends at 4:30 p.m.; the open public comments begin at 11 a.m. and end at 11:30 a.m. Written comments may be submitted prior to the meeting and delivered to Designated Federal Official, Scott Conroy, Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, 3040 Biddle Road, Medford, OR 97504.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest Public Affairs Patty Burel at                         *telephone:*                         (541) 618-2113,                         *e-mail: pburel@fs.fed.us,*                         or USDA Forest Service, Patty Burel, 3040 Biddle Road, Medford, OR 97504.                    

Dated: June 18, 2009.

Scott Conroy,

Forest Supervisor,  Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest.

[FR Doc. E9-14985 Filed 6-25-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 3410-11-M