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UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 02-7327

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

JONATHAN WAYNE HADRICK,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of

Maryland, at Baltimore. J. Frederick Motz, District Judge. (CR92-402)

Submitted: November 5, 2002 Decided: November 22, 2002

Before WILKINS and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Jonathan Wayne Hadrick, Appellant Pro Se. Andrew Clayton White,

OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
2

PER CURIAM:

Jonathan Wayne Hadrick appeals the district court’s order

denying his motion filed under Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b), in which he

alleged prosecutorial misconduct in his criminal trial. Hadrick

improperly invoked the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure to

collaterally attack a criminal judgment. United States v. O’Keefe,

169 F.3d 281, 289 (5th Cir. 1999) (citing United States v. Mosavi,

138 F.3d 1365, 1366 (11th Cir. 1998)). Accordingly, we affirm. We

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions

are adequately presented in the materials before the court and

argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

KATHERINE DALLAS and

ALISA JONES,

Plaintiffs,

vs. CASE NO. 5:10cv258/RS-EMT

CALHOUN COUNTY SCHOOL DISTRICT,

Defendant.

___________________________________/

ORDER

The relief requested by Plaintiffs’ Unopposed Motion To Enlarge Discovery

Period And For Extension Of Summary Judgment Deadline (Doc. 32) is granted. All

discovery shall be completed not later than May 11, 2011. Dispositive motions shall be

filed not later than May 26, 2011.

ORDERED on April 12, 2011.

/S/ Richard Smoak 

RICHARD SMOAK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

MICHAEL D. CORN,

Plaintiff,

vs. Case No. 4:10cv466-WS/WCS

WALTER A. MCNEIL, et al.,

Defendants.

 /

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This cause is before me upon referral from the Clerk. In an order filed December

13, 2011, Plaintiff was directed to submit five (5) service copies of his amended

complaint by January 14, 2011. Plaintiff was specifically warned that a recommendation

would be made that this case be dismissed if there was a failure to comply with that

order. Doc. 11. To date, Plaintiff has not complied with that order.

A trial court has inherent power to dismiss a case sua sponte for failure to

prosecute. Link v. Wabash R.R., 370 U.S. 626, 82 S.Ct. 1386, 8 L.Ed.2d 734 (1962). 

Fed. R. Civ. P. 41(b) authorizes a district court to dismiss an action for failure to obey a

court order. Moon v. Newsome, 863 F.2d 835, 838 and cases cited (11th Cir.), cert.
Page 2 of 2

denied, 493 U.S. 863 (1989). Since Plaintiff has failed to comply with an order or to

prosecute this case, this complaint should now be dismissed without prejudice. 

Plaintiff shall have a 14 day period after service of this report and

recommendation in which to file objections. This will also afford Plaintiff a final

opportunity to show good cause for this failure to respond. Plaintiff may do so by filing a

motion for reconsideration which will be referred to me by the Clerk.

It is therefore, respectfully RECOMMENDED that this case be DISMISSED

without prejudice.

IN CHAMBERS at Tallahassee, Florida, on February 2, 2011.

s/ William C. Sherrill, Jr. 

WILLIAM C. SHERRILL, JR.

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

NOTICE TO THE PARTIES

A party may file specific, written objections to the proposed findings and

recommendations within 14 days after being served with a copy of this report and

recommendation. A party may respond to another party's objections within 14 days after being

served with a copy thereof. Failure to file specific objections limits the scope of review of

proposed factual findings and recommendations.

Case No. 4:10cv466-WS/WCS
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 188 (Friday, September 28, 2007)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 55090]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-55517]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

NATIONAL AERONAUTICS AND SPACE ADMINISTRATION

48 CFR Parts 1807 and 1817


Acquisition Planning and Special Contracting Methods

CFR Correction

    In Title 48 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Chapters 15 to 28, 
revised as of October 1, 2006, on page 185, reinstate section 
1807.7201, and on page 204, reinstate section 1817.7300 to read as 
follows:


1807.7201  Definitions.

    Class of contracts means a grouping of acquisitions, either by 
dollar value or by the nature of supplies and services to be acquired.
    Contract opportunity means planned new contract awards exceeding 
$25,000.


1817.7300  Definitions.

    (a) Down-selection. In a phased acquisition, the process of 
selecting contractors for later phases from among the preceding phase 
contractors.
    (b) Phased Acquisition. An incremental acquisition implementation 
comprised of several distinct phases where the realization of program/
project objectives requires a planned, sequential acquisition of each 
phase. The phases may be acquired separately, in combination, or 
through a down-selection strategy.
    (c) Progressive Competition. A type of down-selection strategy for 
a phased acquisition. In this method, a single solicitation is issued 
for all phases of the program. The initial phase contracts are awarded, 
and the contractors for subsequent phases are expected to be chosen 
through a down-selection from among the preceding phase contractors. In 
each phase, progressively fewer contracts are awarded until a single 
contractor is chosen for the final phase. Normally, all down-selections 
are accomplished without issuance of a new, formal solicitation.
[FR Doc. 07-55517 Filed 9-27-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1505-01-D
Appeal Reinstated; Order filed January 31, 2019. 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-17-00874-CV

____________

MONTROSE MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, ET AL., Appellants

V.

1620 HAWTHORNE, LTD., Appellee

On Appeal from the 333rd District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2012-20396

ORDER

On September 24, 2018, appellee filed a motion to extend time to file the brief 

and notified this court that the parties had reached an agreement to settle the issues 

on appeal. On October 2, 2018, this court abated the appeal for 60 days to permit the 

parties an opportunity to file a motion to dismiss the appeal or other dispositive 

motion.
Neither party has filed a motion to dismiss or communicated with this court 

with regard to whether a settlement agreement has been reached. Accordingly the 

appeal is reinstated and appellee’s brief is due on or before March 4, 2019.

PER CURIAM
Order filed October 27 , 2011

.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________
NO. 14

- 11

- 00 711

- CV

____________ OTIS BYRD, JR. , Appellant

V.

DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST COMPANY , Appellee

On Appeal from County Court at Law No. 2

Fort Bend County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 11

- CCV

- 044560



### O R D E R

Appellant = s brief was due October 1 0

, 2011 . No brief or motion for extension of

time has been filed.
Unless appellant submits his brief, and a motion reasonably explaining why the
brief was late, to the Clerk of this Court on or before November 28 , 2011 , the Court will
dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3(b).

PER CURIAM
Page 1 of 2

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

v. Case Nos. 3:09cr82/LAC/CJK

3:12cv232/LAC/CJK

MICHAEL PHILLIP KESSLER

_____________________________/

ORDER

This cause comes on for consideration upon the magistrate judge’s Report and

Recommendation dated September 23, 2014 (doc. 144). Defendant has been furnished a copy of the

Report and Recommendation and has been afforded an opportunity to file objections pursuant to

Title 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1). I have made a de novo determination of the timely

filed objections.

Having considered the Report and Recommendation, and the objections thereto timely filed,

I have determined that the Report and Recommendation should be adopted.

Accordingly, it is now ORDERED as follows:

1. The magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation is adopted and incorporated by

reference in this order.

2. The amended motion to vacate, set aside, or correct sentence (doc. 131) is DENIED.

Case 3:09-cr-00082-LC-CJK Document 146 Filed 10/29/14 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

3. A certificate of appealability is DENIED.

DONE AND ORDERED this 29 day of October, 2014. th

s/L.A. Collier 

LACEY A. COLLIER

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case Nos.: 3:09cr82/LAC/CJK; 3:12cv232/LAC/CJK

Case 3:09-cr-00082-LC-CJK Document 146 Filed 10/29/14 Page 2 of 2
# C_2009069EN.01000101.xml

| 21.3.2009 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 69/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.3.2009

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 69/1

---

(2009/C 69/01)

Last publication of the Court of Justice in the Official Journal of the European Union

Official Journal of the European Union

OJ C 55, 7.3.2009

OJ C 55, 7.3.2009

Past publications

OJ C 44, 21.2.2009

OJ C 32, 7.2.2009

OJ C 19, 24.1.2009

OJ C 6, 10.1.2009

OJ C 327, 20.12.2008

OJ C 313, 6.12.2008

These texts are available on:

| | EUR-Lex: http://eur-lex.europa.eu |
| --- | --- |

EUR-Lex: http://eur-lex.europa.eu

---
# C_2010226EN.01001301.xml

| 21.8.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 226/13 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

21.8.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 226/13

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

20 August 2010

2010/C 226/06

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,2711 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 108,54 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4506 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,81910 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,4761 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,3151 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 7,9640 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 24,803 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 279,40 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,7083 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 3,9810 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,2270 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 1,9282 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,4314 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,3326 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 9,8823 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,8076 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,7274 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 504,63 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 9,3524 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 8,6310 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,2873 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 11 400,52 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 3,9939 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 57,288 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 38,9199 |
| THB | Thai baht | 40,069 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,2386 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 16,2180 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 59,3000 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,2711

JPY

Japanese yen

108,54

DKK

Danish krone

7,4506

GBP

Pound sterling

0,81910

SEK

Swedish krona

9,4761

CHF

Swiss franc

1,3151

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

7,9640

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

24,803

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

279,40

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,7083

PLN

Polish zloty

3,9810

RON

Romanian leu

4,2270

TRY

Turkish lira

1,9282

AUD

Australian dollar

1,4314

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,3326

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

9,8823

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,8076

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,7274

KRW

South Korean won

1 504,63

ZAR

South African rand

9,3524

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

8,6310

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,2873

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

11 400,52

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

3,9939

PHP

Philippine peso

57,288

RUB

Russian rouble

38,9199

THB

Thai baht

40,069

BRL

Brazilian real

2,2386

MXN

Mexican peso

16,2180

INR

Indian rupee

59,3000

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
Page 1 of 2

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

v. CASE NO. 4:10cr25-RH/WCS

ALDO RAY WILSON,

Defendant.

_________________________________/

ORDER FOR DOCKETING OF THE DEFENDANT’S LETTER

The defendant is represented by a court-appointed attorney but has written a

letter directly to the judge dated June 22, 2010. The court’s rules provide that a

request for action by the court must be made by a motion in proper form, not by a

letter. See N.D. Fla. Loc. R. 5.1. And a motion must be filed with the clerk, not

submitted directly to the judge. Further, a person who is represented by an

attorney ordinarily must proceed only through the attorney. 

Accordingly,

IT IS ORDERED:

The clerk must docket the defendant’s letter, but no relief will be granted
Page 2 of 2

Case No: 4:10cr25-RH/WCS

based on it. Any further submission by the defendant must comply with the court’s

rules.

SO ORDERED on June 29, 2010.

s/Robert L. Hinkle 

United States District Judge
Presidential Documents

71197 

Federal Register 

Vol. 72, No. 240 

Friday, December 14, 2007 

Title 3— 

The President 

Proclamation 8211 of December 11, 2007 

Wright Brothers Day, 2007 

By the President of the United States of America 

A Proclamation 

The cause of discovery and exploration is a desire written in the human 

heart. On Wright Brothers Day, we remember the achievement of two young 

brothers on the Outer Banks of North Carolina whose persistence, skill, 

ingenuity, and daring revolutionized the world. 

Orville and Wilbur Wright made the first manned, powered flight on December 17, 1903. Orville experienced the thrill of flight when he felt the first 

lift of the wing of the small wood and canvas aircraft that would travel 

120 feet in 12 seconds. The brothers’ passion and spirit of discovery helped 

define our Nation and paved the way for future generations of innovators 

to launch satellites, orbit the Earth, and travel to the Moon and back. 

Our country is continuing the Wright brothers’ great American journey. 

My Administration is committed to advancing space science, human space 

flight, and space exploration. We will continue to work to expand the 

horizons of human knowledge to ensure that America is at the forefront 

of discovery for decades to come. 

The Congress, by a joint resolution approved December 17, 1963, as amended 

(77 Stat. 402; 36 U.S.C. 143), has designated December 17 of each year 

as ‘‘Wright Brothers Day’’ and has authorized and requested the President 

to issue annually a proclamation inviting the people of the United States 

to observe that day with appropriate ceremonies and activities. 

NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE W. BUSH, President of the United States 

of America, do hereby proclaim December 17, 2007, as Wright Brothers 

Day. 


rmajette on PROD1PC64 with MISCELLANEOUS
71198 Federal Register / Vol. 72, No. 240 / Friday, December 14, 2007 / Presidential Documents 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this eleventh day 

of December, in the year of our Lord two thousand seven, and of the 

Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirtysecond. 

[FR Doc. 07–6073 

Filed 12–13–07; 8:58 am] 

Billing code 3195–01–P 


rmajette on PROD1PC64 with MISCELLANEOUSGWBOLD.EPS</GPH>
FLN (Rev. 4/2004) Deficiency Order Page 1 of 1

 - vs. 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

vs

GERALD PHARIS

Case No. 3:01CR97LAC

ORDER

Your document titled “SEE CRIMINAL LAW REPORTER VOL. 80, NO. 4., OCT. 25,

2006, was referred to the undersigned with the following deficiencies:

The document does not have a Certificate of Service as required by Rule

5(b) and (d) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, showing proper

service.

Your document is not properly captioned for this court. Every paper you

file must have the name of this court, the case style, the case number and

the title of your pleading. The body of your pleading should state the

nature of your request and what you want the court to do for you.

For these reasons, IT IS ORDERED that the document shall be returned. The court will

not consider it until you have corrected the above deficiencies through the filing of a

corrected document.

DONE and ORDERED this 9th day of January, 2007.

s/L.A. Collier

LACEY A. COLLIER

SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:01-cr-00097-LC-MD Document 186 Filed 01/09/07 Page 1 of 1
# C_2010227EN.01000401.xml

| 24.8.2010 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 227/4 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

24.8.2010

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 227/4

---

Euro exchange rates (1)

1

23 August 2010

2010/C 227/04

1 euro =

1 euro =

| | Currency | Exchange rate |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | US dollar | 1,2704 |
| JPY | Japanese yen | 108,23 |
| DKK | Danish krone | 7,4494 |
| GBP | Pound sterling | 0,81690 |
| SEK | Swedish krona | 9,3940 |
| CHF | Swiss franc | 1,3160 |
| ISK | Iceland króna | |
| NOK | Norwegian krone | 7,9030 |
| BGN | Bulgarian lev | 1,9558 |
| CZK | Czech koruna | 24,805 |
| EEK | Estonian kroon | 15,6466 |
| HUF | Hungarian forint | 280,71 |
| LTL | Lithuanian litas | 3,4528 |
| LVL | Latvian lats | 0,7085 |
| PLN | Polish zloty | 3,9904 |
| RON | Romanian leu | 4,2238 |
| TRY | Turkish lira | 1,9336 |
| AUD | Australian dollar | 1,4181 |
| CAD | Canadian dollar | 1,3292 |
| HKD | Hong Kong dollar | 9,8768 |
| NZD | New Zealand dollar | 1,7897 |
| SGD | Singapore dollar | 1,7218 |
| KRW | South Korean won | 1 501,61 |
| ZAR | South African rand | 9,3060 |
| CNY | Chinese yuan renminbi | 8,6391 |
| HRK | Croatian kuna | 7,2770 |
| IDR | Indonesian rupiah | 11 405,42 |
| MYR | Malaysian ringgit | 3,9753 |
| PHP | Philippine peso | 57,226 |
| RUB | Russian rouble | 38,9130 |
| THB | Thai baht | 39,986 |
| BRL | Brazilian real | 2,2280 |
| MXN | Mexican peso | 16,1951 |
| INR | Indian rupee | 59,2900 |

Currency

Exchange rate

USD

US dollar

1,2704

JPY

Japanese yen

108,23

DKK

Danish krone

7,4494

GBP

Pound sterling

0,81690

SEK

Swedish krona

9,3940

CHF

Swiss franc

1,3160

ISK

Iceland króna

NOK

Norwegian krone

7,9030

BGN

Bulgarian lev

1,9558

CZK

Czech koruna

24,805

EEK

Estonian kroon

15,6466

HUF

Hungarian forint

280,71

LTL

Lithuanian litas

3,4528

LVL

Latvian lats

0,7085

PLN

Polish zloty

3,9904

RON

Romanian leu

4,2238

TRY

Turkish lira

1,9336

AUD

Australian dollar

1,4181

CAD

Canadian dollar

1,3292

HKD

Hong Kong dollar

9,8768

NZD

New Zealand dollar

1,7897

SGD

Singapore dollar

1,7218

KRW

South Korean won

1 501,61

ZAR

South African rand

9,3060

CNY

Chinese yuan renminbi

8,6391

HRK

Croatian kuna

7,2770

IDR

Indonesian rupiah

11 405,42

MYR

Malaysian ringgit

3,9753

PHP

Philippine peso

57,226

RUB

Russian rouble

38,9130

THB

Thai baht

39,986

BRL

Brazilian real

2,2280

MXN

Mexican peso

16,1951

INR

Indian rupee

59,2900

---

(1)  Source: reference exchange rate published by the ECB.

1

Source

---
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PANAMA CITY DIVISION

NATHANIEL PAUL BELCHER,

Plaintiff,

vs. CASE NO. 5:10cv253/RS-EMT

MARY N. WILSON, et al,

Defendants.

__________________________________/

ORDER

Before me is the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 10). No

objections have been filed. 

IT IS ORDERED:

1. The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation is approved and

incorporated in this Order.

2. This case is dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§1915(e)(2)(B)(i, ii, iii).

3. The clerk is directed to close the file.

ORDERED on January 5, 2011.

/S/ Richard Smoak 

RICHARD SMOAK

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
# United States Court of Appeals For the First Circuit

No. 23

- 1018 MÓNICA PÉREZ

- PÉREZ, personally and in representation of her minor son AMCP; JOSÉ MANUEL CARABALLO

- NEGRÓN, personally and in

representation of his minor son AMCP; AMCP,

Plaintiffs, Appellants ,

v.

H OSPITAL EPISCOPAL SAN LUCAS, INC., d/b/a Hospital Episcopal San Lucas

- Ponce; DR. MARYROSE CONCEPCIÓN

- GIRÓN; BEAZLEY USA SERVICES, INC., d/b/a Beazley Group; RICHARD DOE; CONJUGAL PARTNERSHIP CONCEPCIÓN

- DOE; A, B AND C CORPORATIONS; UNKNOWN INSURANCE COMPANIES A THROUGH C ,

Defendant s , Appellees,
JOHN DOE 1; JOHN DOE 2; JOHN DOE 3,

Defendants.

ERRATA SHEET
The opinion of this Court issued on August 13 , 2024 is amended

as follows:
On page 14 , line 1 8 , " snuggly " is re placed with " snugly "

.
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 Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. Appendix 2), 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:*                         National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases Special Emphasis Panel, Tularemia Immunology.                     

*Date:*                         November 14, 2007.                    

*Time:*                         11 a.m. to 3 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         National Institutes of Health, Rockledge 6700, 6700B Rockledge Drive, Bethesda, MD 20817. (Telephone Conference Call)                    

*Contact Person:*                         Brenda Lange-Gustafson, Ph.D., Scientific Review Administrator, NIAID, DEA, Scientific Review Program, Room 3122, 6700B Rockledge Drive, MSC-7616, Bethesda, MD 20892-7616, 301-451-3684,                         *bgustafson@niaid.nih.gov*.                    

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.855, Allergy, Immunology, and Transplantation Research; 93.856, Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS).

Dated: October 22, 2007. 

Jennifer Spaeth, 

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 07-5311 Filed 10-25-07; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-M