alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 73, Number 162 (Wednesday, August 20, 2008)]
[Notices]
[Page 49212]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E8-19219]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Child Health and Human Development; Notice 
of Closed Meeting

    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 Child Health and Human 
Development Special Emphasis Panel ``MEMORY T32''.
    Date: September 12, 2008.
    Time: 3 pm to 5 pm.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: The Doubletree Hotel, 1515 Rhode Island Ave, NW., 
Washington, DC 20005.
    Contact Person: Norman Chang, PhD, Scientific Review 
Administrator, Division of Scientific Review, National Institute of 
Child Health and, Human Development, NIH, 6100 Executive Blvd., Room 
5B01, Bethesda, MD 20892, (301) 496-1485, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#73101b121d141d331e121a1f5d1d1a1b5d141c05"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="ccafa4ada2aba28ca1ada5a0e2a2a5a4e2aba3ba">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.864, 
Population Research; 93.865, Research for Mothers and Children; 
93.929, Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research; 93.209, 
Contraception and Infertility Loan Repayment Program, National 
Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: August 12, 2008.
Jennifer Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. E8-19219 Filed 8-19-08; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
---

EXHIBIT 32.2

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

I, Juan Restrepo Gutierrez, hereby 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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Chancery Resources,
      Inc. for the period ended February 28, 2009 (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 Chancery Resources, Inc.                                                                    

Dated: April 20, 2009

| | /s/
      Juan Restrepo Gutierrez                          
| | -----------------------------------------------------------
| | Juan Restrepo Gutierrez                                    
| | Secretary, Treasurer and Chief Financial
      Officer     
| | (Principal Financial Officer and Principal
      Accounting
| | Officer)                                                   
| | Chancery Resources, Inc.                                   

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 required by Section 906, has been provided to Chancery
Resources, Inc. and will be retained by Chancery Resources, Inc. and furnished
to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---
#### STATE ex rel. Robert F. BROWN et ux. v. VERNON PARISH SCHOOL BOARD (Miss Pearle PEACE, Intervener).

No. 1793.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. First Circuit.

Jan. 11, 1938.

Olin D. Moore and J. Reuel Boone, both of Many, for plaintiff.

Edwin M. Fraser, of Many, for defendant.

Woosley & Cavanaugh, of Leesville, f'or intervener.

DORE, Judge.

For the reasons given in State ex rel. Austin L. Temple v. Vernon Parish School Board, Intervention of Miss Pearle Peace, La.App., 178 So. 176, this day decided, the motion to dismiss or remand the case is overruled; and it is ordered that the judgment dismissing the intervention of Miss Pearle Peace is affirmed at her costs; and that the judgment in favor of relator and against the defendant school board is affirmed at the cost of defendant.
#### The People of the State of New York v. Charles Baker.

Motion denied on terms stated in order.
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

January 27, 2020

No. 04

- 18

- 00833

- CV

IN THE INTEREST OF M.A.G. AND Z.A.G., CHILDREN

From the County Court at Law No 2, Webb County, Texa s

Trial Court No. 2017FLI001815 C3

The Honorable Missy Medary, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

Sitting : Luz Elena D. C hapa, Justice

Be th Watkins, Justice

Liza A. Rodrigu ez, Justice

In the underlying case, the Texas Attorney General sued Abelardo G. Gonzalez for child

support. Gonzalez answered and filed a counterclaim against his wife, Ivonne I. Gonzalez,

rai sing issues relating to possession and access. Gonzalez also filed a third

- party action against

Webb County District Judge Jose A. Lopez, Webb County Sheriff’s Department Deputy Ponce

Trevino, City of Laredo Police Department Officer Nicolas Lichtenberger, and City of Laredo

Police Department Officer Robert Garcia. All four third

- party defendants were sued in their

official capacities only.

Gonzalez timely appealed the final judgment. The record and Gonzalez’s brief have been

filed. In his brief, Gonzalez raises issues challenging the orders and judgments disposing of all

the claims and third

- party claims. The Texas Attorney General (Child Support Division) and

Ivonne Gonzalez, pro se, have been apprised of the filing of Gonzalez’s brief, but neither filed an appellee’s brief. However, it appears that the third

- party defendant appellees were not notified

by the clerk of this court of the filing of the record or Gonzalez’s brief.

W e therefore order the appellee’s briefs of Webb County District Judge Jose A. Lopez,

Webb County Sheriff’s Department Deputy Ponce Trevino, City of Laredo Police Department

Officer Nicolas Lichtenberger, and City of Laredo Police Department Officer Robert Garcia due

February 26, 2020

. We further order the clerk of this court to send a copy of appellant’s brief to

counsel for each of the third

- party defendant appellees.

It is so ORDERED on January 27, 2020

.PER CURIAM

ATTESTED TO: _______________________

M IC HAEL A. CRUZ

CLERK OF COURT
#### H. E. Morehouse v. State

No. 24575.

January 11, 1950.

Rehearing Denied (Without Written Opinion) February 22, 1950.

*R. L. Graves,*Brownfield, for appellant.

*George P. Blackburn,*State’s Attorney, Austin, for the state.

*316BEAUCHAMP, Judge.

The appeal is from a conviction for aggravated assault, with $1,000 fine and two years in the county jail.

The transcript fails to show when the term of court began or when it ended and, therefore, we are unable to determine from the record if the case has been properly appealed to this court.

It further appears that the statement of facts was not filed in the court below. The same is in question and answer form and for this additional reason cannot be considered. We find no bills of exception in the record and nothing is presented for our consideration.

Because the transcript fails to show that this court has jurisdiction, the appeal is, on the state’s motion, dismissed.
```

[Congressional Bills 104th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 680 Reported in House (RH)]

                                                 Union Calendar No. 167
104th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 680

                          [Report No. 104-316]

  To extend the time for construction of certain FERC licensed hydro 
                               projects.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 25, 1995

  Mr. Solomon (for himself and Mr. McNulty) introduced the following 
         bill; which was referred to the Committee on Commerce

                            November 7, 1995

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union 
                       and ordered to be printed

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To extend the time for construction of certain FERC licensed hydro 
                               projects.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. EXTENSION.

    Notwithstanding the limitations of section 13 of the Federal Power 
Act, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, upon the request of the 
licensee or licensees for FERC projects numbered 4244 and 10648 (and 
after reasonable notice), is authorized in accordance with the good 
faith, due diligence, and public interest requirements of such section 
13 and the Commission's procedures under such section, to extend the 
time required for commencement of construction for each of such 
projects for up to a maximum of 3 consecutive 2-year periods. This 
section shall take effect for the projects upon the expiration of the 
extension (issued by the Commission under such section 13) of the 
period required for commencement of construction of each such project.
                                     

                                                 Union Calendar No. 167

104th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                               H. R. 680

                          [Report No. 104-316]

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

  To extend the time for construction of certain FERC licensed hydro 
                               projects.

_______________________________________________________________________

                            November 7, 1995

Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union 
                       and ordered to be printed
```
#### Ed B. GILLON, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. A. E. McGINTY, Defendant; G. W. McGinty, Third Opponent-Appellee.

No. 4541.

Court of Appeal of Louisiana. Second Circuit.

June 29, 1935.

J. Rush Wimberly, of Arcadia, for appellant Ed Gillen.

Scarborough & Barham, of Ruston, for appellee G. W. McGinty.

TALIAFERRO, Judge.

Counsel of appellant and appellee, by joint motion filed in this case, request dismissal of the appeal therein.

It is therefore ordered that said appeal be, and same is hereby, dismissed at appellant’s cost.
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Richard Paul MELBOURNE, Defendant—Appellant.

No. 02-30238.

D.C. No. CR-01-00125-SEH.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

*939Submitted March 10, 2003.*

Decided March 19, 2003.

Before CANBY, O’SCANNLAIN and T.G. NELSON, Circuit Judges.

*

 This panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a)(2).

MEMORANDUM **

Richard Paul Melbourne appeals the two-level upward adjustment for obstruction of justice under Section 3C1.1 of the United States Sentencing Guidelines. Melbourne was sentenced to 165 months in prison for second degree murder on an Indian Reservation in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1153 and 1111. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291. Reviewing for clear error, *United States v. Takahashi,*205 F.3d 1161, 1168 (9th Cir. 2000), we affirm.

Melbourne did not dispute the district court’s finding that he used a steel instrument to carve a 40-inch hole near the window of his cell block wall and then stuffing the hole with toilet paper and soap to resemble the removed mortar. Accordingly, because there is evidence that Melbourne attempted to escape, we cannot say that the sentence enhancement was clearly erroneous. *See id.*(affirming the district court’s two-level increase where appellant attempted to escape custody prior to his sentencing hearing).

AFFIRMED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
EX-31 Rule 13a-14(d)/15d-14(d) Certifications

  I, Kristen Ann Cronin, certify that:

  1. I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K/A and all reports on Form 10-D
     required to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report
     on Form 10-K/A of Thornburg Mortgage Securities Trust 2006-2 (the
     "Exchange Act periodic reports");

  2. Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as a
     whole, do not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit
     to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in
     light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not
     misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

  3. Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other
     information required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period
     covered by this report is included in the Exchange Act periodic
     reports;

  4. I am responsible for reviewing the activities performed by the
     servicers and based on my knowledge and the compliance reviews
     conducted in preparing the servicer compliance statements required in
     this report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed
     in the Exchange Act periodic reports, the servicers have fulfilled
     their obligations under the servicing agreements in all material respects;
     and

  5. All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing
     criteria for asset-backed securities and their related attestation
     reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for
     asset-backed securities required to be included in this report in
     accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules
     13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report,
     except as otherwise disclosed in this report.  Any material instances
     of noncompliance described in such reports have been disclosed in
     this report on Form 10-K/A.

     In giving the certifications above, I have reasonably relied on
     information provided to me by the following unaffiliated parties:
     Cenlar, FSB as Sub-Servicer, Colonial National Mortgage f/k/a Colonial
     Savings, F.A., as Servicer, Countrywide Home Loans Servicing LP, as
     Servicer, First Republic Bank as Servicer and Thornburg Mortgage as Named
     Servicer.

     Dated: May 27, 2008


     /s/ Kristen Ann Cronin
     Signature

     Vice President
     (senior officer in charge of the servicing function of the master servicer)
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A25E0003. RHETT v. WILLFORD.

Appellant Andrea Rhett has filed an emergency “motion to stay writ of

possession” with this Court. Upon consideration of that motion, it is hereby

DENIED.

Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office,Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

August 01, 2024

08/01/2024
EX-4.5(k)





 Exhibit 4.5(k) 

Schedule of Omitted Supplements to U.S. Guarantee Agreement 

The supplements to the U.S. guarantee agreement referenced below are substantially identical in all material respects to the Supplement No. 14 dated as
of November 9, 2015 to the U.S. Guarantee dated as of November 17, 2006, as amended and restated as of February 26, 2014, as supplemented (the “U.S. Guarantee Agreement”) and filed as Exhibit 4.5(j) to the Company’s
annual report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2019 (the “Annual Report”), except as to the names of the additional U.S. guarantors listed on the signature pages thereto and
the dates on which such supplements to the U.S. Guarantee Agreement were entered into. These supplements to the U.S. Guarantee Agreement are not being filed as exhibits to the Annual Report in reliance on Instruction 2 to Item 601 of Regulation
S-K. 
 Supplements to the U.S. Guarantee Agreement entered into among HCA Inc., Bank of America, N.A., as
administrative agent, and the following subsidiaries as additional U.S. guarantors, as of the dates indicated: 
  

					
	 Supplement Number
	  	 Date
	  	 Additional U.S. Guarantors

			
	No. 13	  	January 9, 2015	  	 •  Citrus Memorial Hospital, Inc.

 
 •  Citrus Memorial Property
Management, Inc.
  
 •  CHCA
Pearland, L.P
  
 •  Columbia
Healthcare System of Louisiana, Inc.
  

•  HCA Pearland GP, Inc.
  

•  Mountain Division – CVH, LLC

 
 •  Pearland Partner, LLC

 
 •  Primary Health, Inc.

 
 •  Sarah Cannon Research
Institute, LLC
  
 •  SCRI
Holdings, LLC
  
 •  Southpoint,
LLC
  
 •  Vision Consulting
Group LLC
  
 •  Vision
Holdings, LLC
  
 •  WCP
Properties, LLC

			
	No. 15	  	January 10, 2017	  	 •  East Florida – DMC, Inc.

 
 •  H2U Wellness Centers, LLC

 
 •  JPM AA Housing, LLC

 
 •  MediCredit, Inc.

 
 •  Oklahoma Holding Company,
LLC
  
 •  Outpatient Services
Holdings, Inc.
  
 •  Oviedo
Medical Center, LLC
  
 •  SSHR
Holdco, LLC
  
 •  The Outsource
Group, Inc.















					
			
	No. 16	  	January 3, 2018	  	 •  Cy-Fair Medical Center Hospital, LLC

 
 •  Houston NW Manager, LLC

 
 •  Houston – PPH, LLC

 
 •  North Houston – TRMC,
LLC
  
 •  Savannah Health
Services, LLC
  
 •  Sebring
Health Services, LLC
  

•  Southeast Georgia Health Services, LLC

 
 •  Weatherford Health Services,
LLC



  
 2
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

IVAN KILGORE, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

 v. 

ALICE OKOROIKE; et al., 

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 17-15929 

D.C. No. 2:11-cv-01745-TLN-DB 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Troy L. Nunley, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted September 12, 2018**

Before: LEAVY, HAWKINS, and TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.

California state prisoner Ivan Kilgore appeals pro se from the district court’s 

summary judgment in his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging deliberate indifference 

to his serious medical needs. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We 

review de novo, Toguchi v. Chung, 391 F.3d 1051, 1056 (9th Cir. 2004), and we 

 

* 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

SEP 19 2018

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 17-15929 

affirm.

The district court properly granted summary judgment because Kilgore 

failed to raise a genuine dispute of material fact as to whether any defendant was 

deliberately indifferent to Kilgore’s pain following surgery. See id. at 1057-60 

(deliberate indifference is a high legal standard; medical malpractice, negligence, 

or a difference of opinion concerning the course of treatment does not amount to 

deliberate indifference).

The district court did not abuse its discretion by denying Kilgore’s motion 

for leave to amend his complaint to add new claims and defendants after the close 

of discovery. See Serra v. Lappin, 600 F.3d 1191, 1200 (9th Cir. 2010) (setting 

forth standard of review and factors for permitting leave to amend).

The lack of a specific ruling on Kilgore’s request for judicial notice was not 

an abuse of discretion because the requested factual findings from Kilgore’s 

previous action were subject to dispute. See Lee v. City of Los Angeles, 250 F.3d 

668, 689 (9th Cir. 2001) (setting forth standard of review and explaining that a 

court may take judicial notice of matters of public record but may not take judicial 

notice of disputed facts). To the extent the district court failed to take notice of 

facts that were properly the subject of judicial notice, or took notice of disputed 

facts, Kilgore was not prejudiced because the district court properly granted 

summary judgment notwithstanding any such errors. 
3 17-15929 

We do not consider matters not specifically and distinctly raised and argued 

in the opening brief, or arguments and allegations raised for the first time on 

appeal. See Padgett v. Wright, 587 F.3d 983, 985 n.2 (9th Cir. 2009).

AFFIRMED.