alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

ORDER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

JENNIFER FORSHEY,

Plaintiff,

v.

SOUND ORAL AND MAXILLOFACIAL

SURGERY PS, et al.,

Defendants.

CASE NO. C06-5335RJB

ORDER GRANTING PLAINTIFF’S

MOTION TO QUASH SUBPOENAS . . .

AND FOR A PROTECTIVE ORDER

PREVENTING DISCOVERY . . . .

This matter comes before the court on the above referenced motion (Dkt. 9). It appears that

the defendant got the cart before the horse and started discovery before the parties had completed

their FRCP 26 conference and before completion of the discovery plan as ordered by the court’s

Minute Order Regarding Initial Disclosures, Joint Status Report and Early Settlement (Dkt. 3). 

Accordingly, plaintiff’s motion should be GRANTED, outstanding discovery should be

quashed, and the court should order that discovery be held in abeyance until the FRCP 26 conference

is completed and the discovery plan is adopted. 

The court is concerned with the tone of the pleadings filed in support of and in opposition to

this motion and the apparent inability of counsel to solve simple discovery matters. A discovery

motion is not an offer of a forum to address the merits of the case, and if counsel is unable to

Case 3:06-cv-05335-RJB Document 28 Filed 07/19/06 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

ORDER

schedule and complete appropriate conferences in a civil and professional manner, they will end up

doing these simple tasks in the presence of the court.

Based on the pleadings of the parties, the court sees no justification for terms to either side;

indeed, this entire issue should have been resolved by calm discussion between counsel without the

involvement of the court.

Counsel are further urged to use the conference call procedure set out in the court’s Minute

Order Regarding Discovery and Depositions (Dkt. 2). 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

The Clerk of the Court is instructed to send uncertified copies of this Order to all counsel of

record and to any party appearing pro se at said party’s last known address.

DATED this 19th day of July, 2006.

ARobert J. Bryan

United States District Judge 

Case 3:06-cv-05335-RJB Document 28 Filed 07/19/06 Page 2 of 2
No. 67639.

Appeal 5100.

#### Organon, Inc. *v.*United States.

C.D. 2303 affirmed January 16, 1963. C.A.D. 812.
Page 1 of 1

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460

OFFICE OF POLICY

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: Transmittal to Docket: Summary of Public Meeting on March 14, 2011, 

regarding the Environmental Protection Agency’s Implementation of 

Executive Order 13563: Improving Regulation and Regulatory Review

FROM: Stuart C. Miles-McLean

Office of Regulatory Policy and Management

TO: Public Docket #EPA-HQ-OA-2011-0156: Improving Regulations: General

As called for by President Obama in Executive Order 13563, "to facilitate the periodic 

review of existing significant regulations," the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) is 

considering "how best to promote retrospective analysis of rules that may be outmoded, 

ineffective, insufficient, or excessively burdensome, and to modify, streamline, expand, or repeal 

them in accordance with what has been learned." 

As part of its retrospective review of regulations, EPA convened public meetings around 

the country to gather input on how we might design the plan we will use to periodically review 

our regulations. This Memo transmits to the docket a summary of the input received from 

stakeholders participating in a public meeting held on March 14, 2011, in Arlington, Virginia.
Swanson. Brian (OST) Dt^P^SP iJOOO -^^^ 5 

From: Robin_Connors@nps.gov '' -.-,.^... 

Sent: Thursday, December 29, 2011 2:44 PM \;'!!''TM I OF 

To: EAS(OST) -^. ^yM'}^^^^^ 

Subject: Answer to Pacific Wings'Petition for Reconsideration --' *Jr ERA I iONS 

P 1^ 30 

I strongly oppose Pacific idlings' petition for reconsider^ation. They 

performed very poorly in providing the Kalaupapa Community with air 

service in the past, and Mal<ani Kai has opened up more opportunities to 

affordably travel between Kalaupapa and Topside Molokai, as well as 

Honolulu. 

Robin Connors 

Archeologist, Cultural Resource Management Kalaupapa National Historical 

Park P.O. Box 2222 Kalaupapa, HI 96742 

Office: 808-567-6384 

Fax: 808-567-6408
| date    | Assets | Liabilities |
|---------|--------|-------------|
| 2000:Q1 | 51.44  | 6.98        |
| 2000:Q2 | 51.36  | 7.13        |
| 2000:Q3 | 52.33  | 7.31        |
| 2000:Q4 | 52.01  | 7.46        |
| 2001:Q1 | 51.96  | 7.5         |
| 2001:Q2 | 53.38  | 7.7         |
| 2001:Q3 | 52.6   | 7.96        |
| 2001:Q4 | 54.28  | 8.08        |
| 2002:Q1 | 55.05  | 8.22        |
| 2002:Q2 | 54.62  | 8.41        |
| 2002:Q3 | 53.75  | 8.63        |
| 2002:Q4 | 54.95  | 8.88        |
| 2003:Q1 | 55.4   | 9.07        |
| 2003:Q2 | 57.69  | 9.46        |
| 2003:Q3 | 58.86  | 9.72        |
| 2003:Q4 | 61.06  | 9.98        |
| 2004:Q1 | 63.75  | 10.18       |
| 2004:Q2 | 64.86  | 10.5        |
| 2004:Q3 | 66.46  | 10.78       |
| 2004:Q4 | 69.15  | 11.15       |
| 2005:Q1 | 70.18  | 11.37       |
| 2005:Q2 | 72.05  | 11.7        |
| 2005:Q3 | 74.04  | 12.05       |
| 2005:Q4 | 75.91  | 12.34       |
| 2006:Q1 | 78.11  | 12.7        |
| 2006:Q2 | 78.62  | 13.05       |
| 2006:Q3 | 80.17  | 13.39       |
| 2006:Q4 | 81.92  | 13.66       |
| 2007:Q1 | 83.17  | 13.84       |
| 2007:Q2 | 84.03  | 14.15       |
| 2007:Q3 | 85.11  | 14.4        |
| 2007:Q4 | 84.69  | 14.61       |
| 2008:Q1 | 82.82  | 14.74       |
| 2008:Q2 | 81.3   | 14.67       |
| 2008:Q3 | 79.22  | 14.81       |
| 2008:Q4 | 75.73  | 14.51       |
| 2009:Q1 | 73.89  | 14.41       |
| 2009:Q2 | 74.3   | 14.38       |
| 2009:Q3 | 75.78  | 14.39       |
| 2009:Q4 | 76.08  | 14.38       |
| 2010:Q1 | 77.1   | 14.28       |
| 2010:Q2 | 76.59  | 14.21       |
| 2010:Q3 | 78.55  | 14.15       |
| 2010:Q4 | 80.12  | 14.17       |
| 2011:Q1 | 81.2   | 14.14       |
| 2011:Q2 | 81.56  | 14.1        |
| 2011:Q3 | 79.74  | 14.05       |
| 2011:Q4 | 81.01  | 14.05       |
| 2012:Q1 | 82.97  | 14.01       |
| 2012:Q2 | 82.93  | 13.96       |
| 2012:Q3 | 84.85  | 14          |
| 2012:Q4 | 85.91  | 13.99       |
| 2013:Q1 | 88.68  | 13.95       |
| 2013:Q2 | 89.92  | 13.96       |
| 2013:Q3 | 92.48  | 14.04       |
| 2013:Q4 | 94.75  | 14.22       |
| 2014:Q1 | 96.49  | 14.21       |
| 2014:Q2 | 98.48  | 14.3        |
| 2014:Q3 | 99.11  | 14.3        |
| 2014:Q4 | 100.9  | 14.37       |
| 2015:Q1 | 102.72 | 14.34       |
| 2015:Q2 | 103.51 | 14.47       |
| 2015:Q3 | 102.62 | 14.54       |
| 2015:Q4 | 104.19 | 14.56       |
| 2016:Q1 | 105.33 | 14.56       |
| 2016:Q2 | 106.83 | 14.69       |
| 2016:Q3 | 108.89 | 14.88       |
| 2016:Q4 | 109.69 | 14.98       |
| 2017:Q1 | 112.13 | 15.03       |
| 2017:Q2 | 114.03 | 15.18       |
| 2017:Q3 | 116.07 | 15.33       |
| 2017:Q4 | 118.95 | 15.54       |
| 2018:Q1 | 120.08 | 15.58       |
| 2018:Q2 | 121.7  | 15.71       |
| 2018:Q3 | 123.72 | 15.88       |
| 2018:Q4 | 120.13 | 16          |
| 2019:Q1 | 125.97 | 16          |
| 2019:Q2 | 128.45 | 16.17       |
| 2019:Q3 | 129.35 | 16.34       |
| 2019:Q4 | 133.28 | 16.51       |
| 2020:Q1 | 127.02 | 16.57       |
| 2020:Q2 | 135.01 | 16.58       |
| 2020:Q3 | 139.62 | 16.84       |
| 2020:Q4 | 148.47 | 17.12       |
| 2021:Q1 | 153.96 | 17.32       |
| 2021:Q2 | 159.97 | 17.66       |
| 2021:Q3 | 162.96 | 17.97       |
| 2021:Q4 | 168.64 | 18.35       |
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT AND DETERMINATION AS 

TO ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF SUPERVISED RELEASE - 1 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 

AT SEATTLE 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

HARCHAND SINGH, 

 Defendant. 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. CR06-199-RSM 

PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT 

AND DETERMINATION AS TO 

ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF 

SUPERVISED RELEASE

INTRODUCTION 

I conducted a hearing on alleged violations of supervised release in this case on July 26, 

2010. The defendant appeared pursuant to a warrant issued in this case. The United States was 

represented by Lisca Borichewski, and defendant was represented by Keith Hall. Also present 

was U.S. Probation Officer Jeffrey Robson. The proceedings were digitally recorded. 

SENTENCE AND PRIOR ACTION 

Defendant was sentenced on February 2, 2007 by the Honorable Ricardo S. Martinez for 

Conspiracy to Smuggle and Transport Aliens and Bringing an Illegal Alien into the United States 

for Financial Gain. He received 15 months of detention and 3 years of supervised release. 

On February 26, 2010, Mr. Singh’s supervision was revoked after he admitted a single 

violation of Reckless Driving and Reckless Endangerment related to alcohol. He was sentenced 

Case 2:06-cr-00199-RSM Document 158 Filed 07/26/10 Page 1 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

PROPOSED FINDINGS OF FACT AND DETERMINATION AS 

TO ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF SUPERVISED RELEASE - 2 

to 1 day of detention and 2 years of supervised release. In addition to the standard conditions of 

supervision, the following special conditions were also ordered; search, abstain from alcohol and 

enter into alcohol treatment as directed, financial disclosure, no new credit, no self employment 

or employment by friends, relatives or associates, and 180 days home confinement with 

electronic monitoring and sobrietor. 

PRESENTLY ALLEGED VIOLATIONS 

In a petition dated June 30, 2010, Senior U.S. Probation Officer Michael S. Larsen alleged 

that defendant violated the following conditions of supervised release: 

1. Failing to comply with the Location Monitoring Program since March 31, 2010 in 

violation of the special condition requiring him to participate in the location monitoring program 

with electronic monitoring for a period of 180 days, with sobrietor, as directed by the probation 

officer. 

FINDINGS FOLLOWING EVIDENTIARY HEARING 

Defendant admitted the above violations, waived any hearing as to whether they occurred, 

and was informed the matter would be set for a disposition hearing September 3, 2010 at 9:30 

a.m. before District Judge Ricardo S. Martinez. 

RECOMMENDED FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS 

Based upon the foregoing, I recommend the court find that defendant has violated the 

conditions of his supervised release as alleged above, and conduct a disposition hearing. 

DATED this 26th day of July, 2010. 

A 

BRIAN A. TSUCHIDA 

United States Magistrate Judge 

Case 2:06-cr-00199-RSM Document 158 Filed 07/26/10 Page 2 of 2
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

Dated this 27th day of October , 2006 AJames P. Donohue

U.S. Magistrate Judge

MINUTE ORDER

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the WESTERN DISTRICT of WASHINGTON

TIMOTHY E. SCOTT,

 Plaintiff,

)

)

)

vs. )

) C06-839 JCC - JPD

NORMAN MALENG, et al.,

 Defendant.

)

)

) ORDER RENOTING

 MOTION

The defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (dkt #23) is hereby RE-NOTED to

Friday, November 3, 2006.

Case 2:06-cv-00839-JCC-JPD Document 33 Filed 10/27/06 Page 1 of 1
1

Law, Nicole

From: Alamjit Mangat <Amangat@fraqmd.org>

Sent: Thursday, June 02, 2016 11:02 AM

To: Law, Nicole

Subject: Engines in FRAQMD

Attachments: removed.txt

Hello Nicole, 

As we discussed over the phone, we currently have 423 registered ag-engines in FRAQMD. Under Rule 3.22 Exemption – 

B.1.e: any compression ignited engine that is exempt under this exemption and is greater than 50 hp falls under Rule 

4.16 – Registration Requirements for Compression Ignition Engines used in Agricultural Operations. Under Rule 4.16 we 

have 423 registered engines. 

To the best of my knowledge we did not have any engines that fall under the “This exemption does not apply to any 

engine used at an agricultural source of air pollution that emits in any 12-month period air emissions greater than or 

equal to 50% of the major source thresholds for regulated air pollutants and/or HAPs” of B.1.e. 

Thank you, 

Alamjit Mangat 

Air Quality Engineer 

Feather River Air Quality Management District 

541 Washington Avenue 

Yuba City, CA 95991 

(530) 634-7659 x 212 

amangat@fraqmd.org

The linked image cannot be displayed. The file may have been moved, renamed, or deleted. 

Verify that the link points to the correct file and location.
1440 Brickyard Road Golden CO 80403 sales: sheath@leptron.com 713.516.8052 www.leptron.com 

# LEPTRON RDASS

– 4 ROTOR HELICOPTER

Key Features

Introducing the ground breaking Leptron RDASS

1000 TM Helicopter. This revolutionary new platform creates a single high performance helicopter airframe with the ability to fly
stabilized HD video . The Leptron patent pending design is derived from thousands of hours of research and development and is
desi gned specifically for industrial use and maximum flight time with a minimum o f down time. The Leptron RDASS TM is the only UAV helicopter on the market today that has been designed from the ground up with a built in autopilot and navigation system that all ows for simple flight and easy use for non

- RC users. The system boasts the ability to be ready to fly
under 5 minutes from an iPad or wireless
remote control . This allows for the ultimate in portability and rapid deployment  Modular: Easily to replace al l elements

 Payload : Carry HD video and FLIR for Live Video

 High Performance: Modular C arbon fiber

chassis and modular electronics (Patent Pending)

 Ultimate mobility : Single Case for RDASS,
Radio, Video LCD, batteries and charger

 Stabilized Video : High Performance gyro
stabilized video for stunning video output

 Harsh Weather: Sealed electronics area and designed for all weather flights

 Full Autopilot : Dual mode 1) Simple Wireless
remote 2) Full laptop and GPS waypoints from

iPad ground station1440 Brickyard Road Golden CO 80403 sales: sheath@leptron.com 713.516.8052 www.leptron.com



# LEPTRON RDASS

– ACCESSORIES

All in 1 Case: The entire system fits into a single case for simple portability in a car or as carry

- on luggage

Stabilized HD Video: Creation of HD videos and pictures is easy and stunning with the GoPro Hero 3. The gyros take all of the shake and
vibration out of the video.

Real Time Video: The daylight LCD allows for
real time video . The system has the option of housing the 2.4 GHz ground station transmitter
and BlueTooth for the iPad Ground station integrated into 1 simple device. Includes an integrated battery for 2 hours of use with low battery voltage protection iPad Ground Station : The ability to fly a GPS based flight plan

. The ability to auto launch, set altitude, timed hovers, and set headings.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26 ORDER - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

JOEL GAMACHE, 

MICHLLE GAMACHE,

Plaintiffs,

v.

OLYMPIC COLLECTION INC.,

Defendant.

Case No. C06-5439 FDB

ORDER OF DISMISSAL FOR

FAILURE TO PROSECUTE

On June 4, 2007, this Court entered an Order to Show Cause directing Plaintiff to respond by

June 18, 2007, and explain (1) why the parties had not complied with the Court’s Minute Order

setting May 8, 2007, as the deadline for filing of a combined joint status report, and (2) why this

action should not be dismissed for failure to prosecute pursuant to Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(2)(b).

The Plaintiff has failed to respond to the Order to Show Cause. Accordingly, pursuant to 

Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(2)(b), this action is DISMISSED, for failure to prosecute.

DATED this 26th day of June, 2007.AFRANKLIN D. BURGESS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:06-cv-05439-FDB Document 10 Filed 06/26/07 Page 1 of 1
# C_2017003EN.01000401.xml

| 6.1.2017 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 3/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

6.1.2017

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 3/4

---

Commission notice on current State aid recovery interest rates and reference/discount rates for 28 Member States applicable as from 1 January 2017

(Published in accordance with Article 10 of Commission Regulation (EC) No 794/2004 of 21 April 2004 (OJ L 140, 30.4.2004, p. 1))

(2017/C 3/05)

Base rates calculated in accordance with the Communication from the Commission on the revision of the method for setting the reference and discount rates (OJ C 14, 19.1.2008, p. 6.). Depending on the use of the reference rate, the appropriate margins have still to be added as defined in this communication. For the discount rate this means that a margin of 100 basispoints has to be added. The Commission Regulation (EC) No 271/2008 of 30 January 2008 amending Regulation (EC) No 794/2004 foresees that, unless otherwise provided for in a specific decision, the recovery rate will also be calculated by adding 100 basispoints to the base rate.

Modified rates are indicated in bold.

Previous table published in OJ C 372, 11.10.2016, p. 5.

| From | To | AT | BE | BG | CY | CZ | DE | DK | EE | EL | ES | FI | FR | HR | HU | IE | IT | LT | LU | LV | MT | NL | PL | PT | RO | SE | SI | SK | UK |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| 1.1.2017 | ... | -0,07 | -0,07 | 0,76 | -0,07 | 0,45 | -0,07 | 0,16 | -0,07 | -0,07 | -0,07 | -0,07 | -0,07 | 1,05 | 0,75 | -0,07 | -0,07 | -0,07 | -0,07 | -0,07 | -0,07 | -0,07 | 1,83 | -0,07 | 1,10 | -0,36 | -0,07 | -0,07 | 0,78 |

From

To

AT

BE

BG

CY

CZ

DE

DK

EE

EL

ES

FI

FR

HR

HU

IE

IT

LT

LU

LV

MT

NL

PL

PT

RO

SE

SI

SK

UK

1.1.2017

...

-0,07

-0,07

-0,07

-0,07

0,76

0,76

-0,07

-0,07

0,45

0,45

-0,07

-0,07

0,16

0,16

-0,07

-0,07

-0,07

-0,07

-0,07

-0,07

-0,07

-0,07

-0,07

-0,07

1,05

1,05

0,75

0,75

-0,07

-0,07

-0,07

-0,07

-0,07

-0,07

-0,07

-0,07

-0,07

-0,07

-0,07

-0,07

-0,07

-0,07

1,83

1,83

-0,07

-0,07

1,10

1,10

-0,36

-0,36

-0,07

-0,07

-0,07

-0,07

0,78

0,78

---
III

Calendar No. 272

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. RES. 93

Designating the week beginning November 23, 1997, and the week beginning

on November 22, 1998, as ‘‘National Family Week’’, and for other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

MAY 23, 1997

Mr. GRASSLEY (for himself, Mr. ABRAHAM, Mr. BURNS, Mr. COVERDELL, Mr.

D’AMATO, Mr. DEWINE, Mr. FAIRCLOTH, Mr. FRIST, Mr. HATCH, Mr.

HELMS, Mr. LUGAR, Mr. NICKLES, Mr. STEVENS, Mr. THURMOND, Mr.

WARNER, Mr. AKAKA, Mr. DURBIN, Mr. KENNEDY, Ms. MOSELEYBRAUN, Mrs. MURRAY, Mr. ROBB, Mr. ROCKEFELLER, Mr. BROWNBACK,

Mr. COATS, Mr. COCHRAN, Mr. CRAIG, Mr. DOMENICI, Mr. GORTON, Mr.

HAGEL, Mr. HUTCHINSON, Mr. KEMPTHORNE, Mr. INHOFE, Mr. MURKOWSKI, Mr. SHELBY, Mr. SPECTER, Mr. BREAUX, Mr. CONRAD, Mrs.

FEINSTEIN, Mr. FORD, Mr. HOLLINGS, Mr. INOUYE, Mr. KOHL, Ms.

LANDRIEU, Mr. LAUTENBERG, Mr. LEVIN, Mr. LIEBERMAN, Mr. MOYNIHAN, Mr. TORRICELLI, Mr. ASHCROFT, Mr. THOMAS, Mr. ENZI, Mr.

REID, and Mr. BRYAN) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

NOVEMBER 6, 1997

Reported by Mr. HATCH, without amendment

NOVEMBER 8, 1997

Considered and agreed to

RESOLUTION

Designating the week beginning November 23, 1997, and the

week beginning on November 22, 1998, as ‘‘National

Family Week’’, and for other purposes.
2

SRES 93 ATS

Whereas the family is the basic strength of any free and orderly society;

Whereas it is appropriate to honor the family unit as essential to the continued well-being of the United States; and

Whereas it is fitting that official recognition be given to the

importance of family loyalties and ties: Now, therefore,

be it

1 Resolved, That the Senate designates the week begin2 ning on November 23, 1997 and the week beginning on

3 November 22, 1998, as ‘‘National Family Week’’. The

4 Senate requests the President to issue a proclamation call5 ing on the people of the United States to observe each

6 week with appropriate ceremonies and activities

Calendar No. 272

105TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. RES. 93

RESOLUTION

Designating the week beginning November 23,

purposes.1998, as ‘‘National Family Week’’, and for other1997, and the week beginning on November 22,

NOVEMBER 6, 1997

Reported without amendment
### Mineral Resources On-Line Spatial Data

Mineral Resources > Online Spatial Data > Geology > by state> Texas 

### Woodbine Formation Woodbine Formation

State Texas Name Woodbine Formation Geologic age Phanerozoic | Mesozoic | Cretaceous-Late [Gulfian] Original map label Kwb Comments NE Texas. Texarkana Sheet (1966) Woodbine

Formation--various interlensing sequence of nonmari ne, brackish-water, and marine beds of sand, clay, sandstone, and shale 350-600 ft thick. Woodbine fos sils include ammonites, gastropods, pelecypods, brachiopods, and foraminifers. Contains volcanic sa nd and tuff, coarse grained, crossbedded, dk green and olive green; fossil plants and a few marine megafos sils; thickness 500 ft, thins eastward. Primary rock type shale Secondary rock type sand Other rock types clay or mud ; limestone ; coal ; tuff Lithologic constituents MajorSedimentary > Clastic > Mixed-clastic > SandstoneMudstone (Tuffaceous) Map references Bureau of Economic Geology, 1992, Geologic Map of Texas:

University of Texas at Austin, Virgil E. Barnes, pr oject supervisor, Hartmann, B.M. and Scranton, D.F., cartography, sca le 1:500,000
Unit references Bureau of Economic Geology, 1966, Texarkana Sheet, Geologic

Atlas of Texas, University of Texas, Bureau of Econ omic Geology, scale 1:250,000. Geographic coverage Cooke - Denton - Fannin - Grayson - Hill - Johnson - Lamar - McLennan - Tarrant Show this information as [ XML ] - [ JSON ] **Page 1**  **of 2**  **Woodbine Formation (TXKwb;0)**

**10/ 21/** **2014 http://mrdata.usgs.gov/geology/state/sgmc** 

**- unit.php?unit=TXKwb%3B0** U.S. Department of the Interior | U.S. Geological Survey URL: http://mrdata.usgs.gov/geology/state/sgmc-unit.php? unit=TXKwb;0 Page Contact Information: Peter Schweitzer **Page 2**  **of 2**  **Woodbine Formation (TXKwb;0)**

**10/ 21/** **2014 http://mrdata.usgs.gov/geology/state/sgmc** 

**- unit.php?unit=TXKwb%3B0**
Exhibit 32


CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO


18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002








The undersigned hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as added by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the undersigned's best knowledge and belief, the quarterly report on Form 10-Q for National Health Investors, Inc. ("Issuer") for the quarter ended March 31, 2014 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"):





|    |                                                                                                                      
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|(a) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

|    |                                                                                                                                                    
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|(b) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Issuer.




Date:May 2, 2014/s/ J. Justin HutchensJ. Justin HutchensPresident, Chief Executive Officer,and DirectorDate:May 2, 2014/s/ Roger R. HopkinsRoger R. HopkinsChief Accounting Officer(Principal Financial Officer and Principal Accounting Officer)