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

[Federal Register Volume 89, Number 249 (Monday, December 30, 2024)]
[Notices]
[Page 106549]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2024-31149]

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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health

Center for Scientific Review; Notice of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 1009 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: Center for Scientific Review Special Emphasis 
Panel; PAR Panel: Fogarty HIV Research Training Program for Low- and 
Middle-Income Country Institutions.
    Date: January 23, 2025.
    Time: 2:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Address: National Institutes of Health, Rockledge II, 6701 
Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892.
    Meeting Format: Virtual Meeting.
    Contact Person: Emily Foley, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, 
Center for Scientific Review, National Institutes of Health, 6701 
Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 402-3016, 
[email protected].

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.306, 
Comparative Medicine; 93.333, Clinical Research, 93.306, 93.333, 
93.337, 93.393-93.396, 93.837-93.844, 93.846-93.878, 93.892, 93.893, 
National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: December 20, 2024.
Miguelina Perez,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2024-31149 Filed 12-27-24; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
```
INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS REPORT ON APPLYING AGREED-UPON PROCEDURES

 

 

To Household Finance Corporation:

We have performed procedures enumerated below in items A. and B. in conjunction with Section 4.11 of the Master Sale and Servicing Agreement, dated June 1, 2000 (the "Agreement").

 

- We have audited, in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States, the consolidated financial statements of Household Finance Corporation (the "Servicer") and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2001, and have issued our report thereon dated January 14, 2002.  We have not audited any financial statements of the Servicer as of any date or for any period subsequent to December 31, 2001, or performed any audit procedures subsequent to the date of our report on those statements.  As part of our audit, we reviewed documents and records relating to the servicing of consumer automobile finance receivables under the Agreement.  In connection with our audit, we noted no exceptions or errors in the records relating to the servicing of consumer automobile finance loans that, in our opinion, generally accepted auditing standards required us to report.
- We have performed the procedure described in the following paragraph, which was agreed to by the management of the Servicer, with respect to Section 4.11 of the Agreement, in conjunction with the servicing of consumer automobile finance receivables owned by Household Automotive Trust V.  This agreed-upon procedure was performed in accordance with standards established by the American Institute of Certified Public Accountants.  The sufficiency of the procedure is solely the responsibility of the Servicer.  Consequently, we make no representation regarding the sufficiency of the procedure described below either for the purpose for which this report has been requested or for any other purpose.

    The procedure and associated findings are as follows:

From the Monthly Servicers Certificates prepared by the Servicer between January, 2001 and December,   2001, we selected the following months and performed the following:

We have compared the mathematical calculation of each amount set forth in the Monthly Servicers Certificates to the Servicers accounting records for the month of February, 2001 for Series 2000-2 and found it to be in the agreement.  Our comparisons were based on records provided to us by the Servicer and the methodology set forth in the Agreement.

With respect to the procedure performed in item B. above, we were not engaged to, and did not, perform an audit, the objective of which would be the expression of an opinion on the Monthly Servicers Certificates described above.  Accordingly, we do not express such an opinion.  Had we been engaged to perform additional procedures, other matters might have come to our attention that would have been reported to you.

This report is intended solely for the information and use of the Servicer and should not be used for any other purpose.

Arthur Andersen LLP

Chicago, Illinois

March 22, 2002
STATE of Louisiana v. Patrick BROWN

No. 2018-KH-0443

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

March 18, 2019

**ON SUPERVISORY WRITS TO THE CRIMINAL DISTRICT COURT, PARISH OF ORLEANS**

PER CURIAM:

Denied. The application was not timely filed in the district court, and applicant *765fails to carry his burden to show that an exception applies. La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8 ; *State ex rel. Glover v. State* , 93-2330 (La. 9/5/95), 660 So.2d 1189.

Applicant has now fully litigated his application for post-conviction relief in state court. Similar to federal habeas relief, *see*28 U.S.C. § 2244, Louisiana post-conviction procedure envisions the filing of a second or successive application only under the narrow circumstances provided in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.4 and within the limitations period as set out in La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.8. Notably, the legislature in 2013 La. Acts 251 amended that article to make the procedural bars against successive filings mandatory. Applicant's claims have now been fully litigated in accord with La.C.Cr.P. art. 930.6, and this denial is final. Hereafter, unless he can show that one of the narrow exceptions authorizing the filing of a successive application applies, applicant has exhausted his right to state collateral review. The district court is ordered to record a minute entry consistent with this per curiam.

HUGHES, J., would grant for an evidentiary hearing.
EXHIBIT
32.1





CERTIFICATION
OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER





Pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002




I, Frank V. Riolo, Chief Executive
Officer of American Casino & Entertainment Properties LLC (the
“Registrant”), certify that to the best of my knowledge, based upon a review of
the quarterly report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2009 of the
Registrant (the “Report”):





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





(2)           The
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects,
the financial condition and results of operations of the
Registrant.





By:
                    /s/
      Frank V. RioloFrank
      V. RioloChief
      Executive OfficerAmerican
      Casino & Entertainment Properties LLCDate:
                    November
      13, 2009





The
foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350
and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure
document.
STATE of Louisiana v. David MILLER

NO. 2018-KP-0490

Supreme Court of Louisiana.

February 18, 2019

Denied.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-20-00553-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF A.Z.F., a Child

From the 408th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2019-CI-08725

Honorable David A. Canales, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE RIOS, JUSTICE WATKINS, AND JUSTICE VALENZUELA

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the judgment of the trial court is 

affirmed. Costs are assessed against appellant.

SIGNED April 6, 2022.

_____________________________

Lori I. Valenzuela, Justice
Exhibit 32.1



Certification required by Rule 13a-14(b) or

Rule 15d-14(b) and Section 906 of

the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of
NGP Capital Resources Company (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, John H. Homier, President and Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 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, as amended; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
| | --- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                |  |                                      
|--------------- |  | -------------------------------------
|August 11, 2005 |  | /s/ John H. Homier                   
|                |  | John H. Homier,                      
|                |  | President and Chief Executive Officer



A signed original of
this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to NGP Capital Resources Company and will be retained by NGP Capital Resources Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
BTXN 060 (rev. 10/19)

UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS

In Re: §

§

§

§

Eagle Trans, Inc. Case No.: 23−42505−elm11

 Chapter No.: 11

Debtor(s)

ORDER DISMISSING CASE

The Debtor(s), having been given notice that this case would be dismissed upon the failure to timely file:

Pay the required filing fee in installments as directed in the Order regarding the

Application to Pay Filing Fee in Installments, or Order denying/revoking the

Application for Waiver of the Chapter 7 Filing Fee.

List of creditors required to be filed with the petition by N.D.TX L.B.R. 1007−1(a)

within 48 hours from the issuance of the Notice of Deficiency

Schedules A/B, D, E/F, G, and H pursuant to Fed. R. Bankr. P. 1007(c) within 14 days

of the filing of the Petition

Declaration for Electronic Filing III(B)(3) within 7 days of the filing of the Petition.

Declaration About an Individual Debtor's Schedules (Official Form 106Dec) within 14

days of the date of the filing of the petition.

Declaration Under Penalty of Perjury for Non−Individual Debtors (Official Form 202)

within 14 days of the date of the filing of the petition.

Statement of Financial Affairs pursuant to Fed. R. Bankr. P. 1007(c) within 14 days of

the filing of the Petition

United States Bankruptcy Judge

Signed September 26, 2023

______________________________________________________________________

The following constitutes the ruling of the court and has the force and effect therein described.

Case 23-42505-elm11 Doc 20 Filed 09/27/23 Entered 09/27/23 08:20:29 Desc

Page 1 of 2
page 2

Plan/Plan Summary pursuant to Fed. R. Bankr. P. 3015 within 14 days of the filing of

the Petition

List of twenty largest unsecured creditors within 48 hours of the date of the filing of

the Petition

Social Security/Tax ID number within 48 hours from the issuance of the Notice of

Deficiency

Form 121 within 48 hours of the date of the Petition

Summary of Assets and Liabilities (Official Form 106Sum/206Sum) within 14 days of

the date of the filing of the Petition

A complete original petition was not filed within 3 days from the issuance of the

Notice of Deficiency

Certificate of completion from an approved credit counseling course completed within

180 days of the date of the filing of the Petition

Copies of employee income records within 14 days of the date of the filing of the

Petition

Statement of Current Monthly Income within 14 days of the date of the filing of the

Petition

Chapter 15 Service List within 14 days of the date of the filing of the Petition

Cash Flow Statement within 7 days of the date of the filing of the Petition

Balance Sheet within 7 days of the date of the filing of the Petition

Statement of Operations within 7 days of the date of the filing of the Petition

All required documents pursuant to 11 U.S.C. § 521 within 45 days of the filing of the

Petition

Other:

ORDERED that this case is DISMISSED; and it is further

ORDERED that this Order shall not be deemed a bar to refiling under 11 U.S.C. §109(g).

# # # End of Order # # #

Case 23-42505-elm11 Doc 20 Filed 09/27/23 Entered 09/27/23 08:20:29 Desc

Page 2 of 2
# C_2021452EN.01002401.xml

| 8.11.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 452/24 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.11.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 452/24

---

Judgment of the General Court of 8 September 2021 — Qx World v EUIPO — Mandelay (EDUCTOR)

(Case T-85/20) (1)

(EU trade mark - Invalidity proceedings - EU word mark EDUCTOR - Earlier non-registered mark EDUCTOR - Article 53(1)(b) of Regulation (EC) No 207/2009 (now Article 60(1)(b) of Regulation (EU) 2017/1001) - Article 8(3) of Regulation No 207/2009 (now Article 8(3) of Regulation 2017/1001) - Article 71(1) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Article 72(1) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Article 95(1) of Regulation 2017/1001 - Article 16(1) of Delegated Regulation (EU) 2018/625 - Article 6bis of the Paris Convention)

(2021/C 452/24)

Language of the case: English

Parties

Applicant: Qx World Kft. (Budapest, Hungary) (represented by: Á. László and A. Cserny, lawyers)

Defendant: European Union Intellectual Property Office (represented by: J. Crespo Carrillo and V. Ruzek, acting as Agents)

Other party to the proceedings before the Board of Appeal of EUIPO, intervener before the General Court: Mandelay Magyarország Kereskedelmi Kft. (Mandelay Kft.) (Szigetszentmiklós, Hungary) (represented by: V. Luszcz, C. Sár and É. Ulviczki, lawyers)

Re:

Action brought against the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of EUIPO of 2 December 2019 (Case R 1311/2019-5), relating to invalidity proceedings between Qx World and Mandelay.

Operative part of the judgment

The Court:

| 1. | Annuls the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 2 December 2019; |
| --- | --- |

1.

Annuls the decision of the Fifth Board of Appeal of the European Union Intellectual Property Office (EUIPO) of 2 December 2019;

| 2. | Orders Qx World Kft., EUIPO and Mandelay Magyarország Kereskedelmi Kft. (Mandelay Kft.) each to bear their own costs. |
| --- | --- |

2.

Orders Qx World Kft., EUIPO and Mandelay Magyarország Kereskedelmi Kft. (Mandelay Kft.) each to bear their own costs.

---

(1)  OJ C 114, 6.4.2020.

---
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





In
connection with the Annual Report of AXM Pharma, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form
10-K/A for the period ending December 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report’), I, Weishi Wang, Chief
Executive Officer of the Company, 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
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 at the dates
and for the periods indicated.





/s/
      Weishi WangWeishi
      Wang,Chief
      Executive Officer





Dated:
January 16, 2009
Ashlee JOHN, Appellant/Petitioner(s), v. Lorenso STIFF, Appellee/Respondent(s).

CASE NO.: 2D18-4922

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District.

February 13, 2019

**DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION**

Appeal is dismissed.
O pinion filed October 26 , 202 3



### In The 

# Eleventh Court of Appeals

__________ No. 11

- 2 2

- 00278

- CV

__________ BRINKERHOFF INSPECTION, INC. D/B/A SMOB , Appellant

V.
FORKLIFT RENTAL & EQUIPMENT, LLC , Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law Midland County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC23932

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N Appellant , Brinkerhoff Inspection, Inc. d/b/a SMOB , filed a notice of appeal
from a default judgment entered against Appellant

. After th is appeal was docketed, the trial court vacated the default judgment. Appellee, Forklift Rental & Equipment, LLC, then filed a motion to dismiss , or alternatively abate, this appeal for lack of disputed issues. In response to the motion, Appellant requested that we abate the appeal

. Out of concern regarding the timing of the trial court’s order vacating the judgment, we did not dismiss the appeal at that time. I nstead, we abated the appeal pursuant to Rule 27.2 of the Texas Rules of Appellate procedure to give the parties2 time to obtain a final, appealable order o r judgment over which this court had jurisdiction

. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 27.2

. In our March 16 abatement order, we explained that , while Appellant had timely filed a notice of appeal, the default judgment from which Appellant originally appeal ed had been vacated by the trial court

. A s a result, we concluded that “[n]o final appealable order currently exist s in this cause.” We informed the parties that

“ [i] f a final, appealable order or judgment has not been entered by September 18, 2023, we may dismiss th is appeal. ” See T EX

. R. A PP

. P. 42.3. Unless specifically authorized by statute, appeals may be taken only from final judgments. Tex. A & M Univ. Sys. v. Koseoglu , 233 S.W.3d 835, 840

– 41 (Tex. 2007); Lehmann v. Har

– Con Corp. , 39 S.W.3d 191 , 195 (Tex. 2001). The judgment that Appellant appeal ed has been vacated . T herefore , no final judgment or appealable order exists in this cause

. See Ray v. Life of Sterling Woods , No. 01

- 22

- 00534

- CV, 2022 WL 16556819, at *1 (Tex. App.

— Houston [1st Dist.] Nov. 1,
2022 , no pet.) (mem. op.) ( no final judgment or appealable order after trial court
vacated judgment from which the a ppellant appealed ) ; M.A. Block Inv. Co . v. Whitten 20AC LLC , No. 05

- 21

- 00009

- CV, 2021 WL 1588997, at *1 (Tex. App.

— Dallas Apr. 23, 2021, no pet.) (mem. op.) ( same )

. B ecause Appellant has not obtained a final, appealable order or judgment as directed by this court in the
March 16 abatement order, we now reinstate the appeal and dismiss it for want of jurisdiction. This appeal is dismissed for want of jurisdiction.

W. B RUCE WILLIAMS
October 26 , 2023 JUSTICE Panel consists of: Bailey, C. J., Trotter, J., and Williams, J.3
DISMISS; and Opinion Filed June 11, 2013.

S

In The

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-13-00055-CV

IN THE INTEREST OF M.E.J, W.D.J, AND T.M.J, CHILDREN

On Appeal from the 255th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DF-07-10155

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices O'Neill, Francis, and Fillmore 

The Court has before it appellant Zoe Michelle Jackman’s May 30, 2013 unopposed 

motion to dismiss appeal. We GRANT the motion and DISMISS the appeal. See TEX. R. APP.

P. 42.1(a).

PER CURIAM

130055F.P05
–2–

Court of Appeals

S

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

IN THE INTEREST OF M.E.J, W.D.J, AND 

T.M.J, CHILDREN

No. 05-13-00055-CV 

On Appeal from the 255th Judicial District 

Court, Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DF-07-10155.

Opinion delivered per curiam. Justices 

O'Neill, Francis and Fillmore sitting for the 

Court.

In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED.

It is ORDERED that appellee William David Jackman recover his costs of this appeal 

from appellant Zoe Michelle Jackman.

Judgment entered this 11th day of June, 2013.

/Michael J. O'Neill/

MICHAEL J. O'NEILL

JUSTICE
<TABLE>
<CAPTION>

   Schedule of Year-To-Date Principal and Interest Distributions
                           to
                  Certificateholders
                                                                              Ending
Class                   Interest             Principal      Losses           Balance
<S>                     <C>                  <C>            <C>              <C>
A1                    63,987,484.88     196,094,213.60         0.00      1,502,133,786.00
A2                     8,436,509.76      34,816,518.75         0.00        188,050,481.25
B                        765,764.72               0.00     1,633.85         15,493,000.00
M1                     3,025,218.91               0.00         0.00         72,299,000.00
M2                     2,492,965.56               0.00         0.00         56,807,000.00
P                              0.00               0.00         0.00                  0.00
RI                             0.00               0.00         0.00                  0.00
RII                            0.00               0.00         0.00                  0.00
X                     19,473,242.56               0.00         0.00          3,377,627.77
</TABLE>