Bergum , 2009 ND 52, ¶ 8, 764 N.W.2d 178. "We do not give deference to the ALJ's legal conclusions, and questions of law are fully reviewable on appeal." Johnson v. N.D. Workforce Safety & Ins. , 2012 ND 27, ¶ 9, 812 N.W.2d 467. "Regarding review of an agency's factual findings, we have explained we do not make independent findings or substitute our judgment for that of the agency, but determine only whether a reasoning mind reasonably could have determined the findings were proven by the weight of the evidence in the record." N.D. Sec. Comm'r v. Juran & Moody, Inc. , 2000 ND 136, ¶ 23, 613 N.W.2d 503.

[¶ 17] Johnson and Vangsness also argue the catch-all provision in N.D.C.C. § 15.1–12–05(4)(o ) allowing consideration of “[a]ll other relevant factors” is unconstitutionally vague and amounts to an unconstitutional delegation of legislative authority to the Board. It is unclear from Johnson and Vangsness's rambling specifications of error whether these issues have been preserved for review. See Johnson v. N.D. Workforce Safety and Ins., 2012 ND 27, ¶ 20, 812 N.W.2d 467. Furthermore, they cite no relevant case law to support their constitutional arguments. Courts have routinely rejected vagueness challenges to catch-all provisions similar to N.D.C.C. § 15.1–12–05(4)(o ). See, e.g., Posters ‘N’ Things, Ltd. v. United States, 511 U.S. 513, 519, 525, 114 S.Ct. 1747, 128 L.Ed.2d 539 (1994) (statute for determining drug paraphernalia not unconstitutionally vague where statute listed eight objective factors that may be considered “in addition to all other logically relevant factors”); Goins v. Goins, 406 S.W.3d 886, 890 (Mo.2013) (statute authorizing award of attorney fees in domestic relations cases based on consideration of “all relevant factors” not unconstitutionally vague); Pitmon v. State, ––– Nev. ––––, 352 P.3d 655, 660 (Nev.Ct.App.2015) (statute allowing court to consider “any other relevant factor” in sentencing not unconstitutionally vague because “ ‘[l]egislatures cannot create enough sentencing law to match the nuances of

” Bergum, at ¶ 9. Finally, “[w]e do not give deference to the ALJ's legal conclusions, and questions of law are fully reviewable on appeal.” Johnson v. N.D. Workforce Safety & Ins., 2012 ND 27, ¶ 9, 812 N.W.2d 467. III