alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 74, Number 122 (Friday, June 26, 2009)]
[Notices]
[Page 30590]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E9-15053]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


Eunice Kennedy Shriver 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. App.), 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; Mechanisms of Practice-Induced 
Reaching Improvement after Stroke.
    Date: July 17, 2009.
    Time: 11:30 a.m. to 3:30 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institutes of Health, 6100 Executive Boulevard, 
Room 5B01, Rockville, MD 20852 (Telephone Conference Call).
    Contact Person: Peter Zelazowski, PhD, Scientific Review 
Officer, Division of Scientific Review, Eunice Kennedy Shriver 
National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, NIH, 6100 
Executive Boulevard, Rm. 5B01, Bethesda, MD 20892-7510, 301-435-
6902, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#7000150415025e0a151c110a1f07031b19301e19185e171f06"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="3242574657401c48575e53485d4541595b725c5b5a1c555d44">[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: June 18, 2009.
Jennifer Spaeth,
Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. E9-15053 Filed 6-25-09; 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>
#### Woert *against*Jenkins.

In an action or°f pontiff’s horse jury,imay give the value of the money, therebegrlatamhvanton Santthe de"

THIS was an action of trespass for beating the plaintiff’s mare, by reason whereof she died. The cause was tried at the *Greene*circuit, in *August,*1816, before Mr. Justice *Fan Ness.*The mare was proved to be worth *50 or*60 dollars. The judge charged the jury, that the plaintiff was entitled to recover the value of the mare, and that if they believed, as he did, that the defendant had whipped her to death, it was a case in which, from the wantonness and cruelty of the defendant’s conduct, the *jury*had a right to *give.smart money.*The jury found a verdict for T.5 dollars. . ,

A motion was made to set aside the verdict, for excessive * V damages, and for the misdirection of the judge. The case was submitted *to*the court, without argument.

*Per*Curiam.

This was an action of trespass for maliciously and cruelly whipping the plaintiff’s mare to death. The plaintiff proved the facts charged in the declaration, and with circumstances of great barbarity on the part of the plaintiff. We think the charge of the judge was correct; and we should have been better satisfied with the verdict, if the amount of damages had been greater and more exemplary.

Motion denied.
Exhibit 32.2  Certification of the Principal Accounting Officer 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 periodic report of Market Data Consultants, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended May 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), Wilson Cheung, the Principal Accounting Officer of the Company, hereby certifies, 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. /s/ Wilson CheungPrincipal Accounting Officer Date: July 15, 2008
# table77_q10.1_state
Exhibit 32.1

 CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

        In connection with the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of
Velocity Asset Management, Inc. for the period ended December 31, 2005, I, John
C. Kleinert, President and Chief Executive Officer, hereby certifies pursuant to
18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act of 2002, that:

1.      Such Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the year ended December 31, 2005,
        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 such Annual Report on Form 10-KSB for the
        year ended December 31, 2005, fairly presents, in all material respects,
        the financial condition and results of operations of Velocity Asset
        Management, Inc.


Dated:  March 31, 2006                  /s/ JOHN C. KLEINERT
                                        -------------------------------------
                                        John C. Kleinert, President and
                                        Chief Executive Officer
Case 2:10-cv-03205-JLL-MAH Document 3 Filed 12/03/10 Page 1 of 4 PageID: 33
Case 2:10-cv-03205-JLL-MAH Document 3 Filed 12/03/10 Page 2 of 4 PageID: 34
Case 2:10-cv-03205-JLL-MAH Document 3 Filed 12/03/10 Page 3 of 4 PageID: 35
Case 2:10-cv-03205-JLL-MAH Document 3 Filed 12/03/10 Page 4 of 4 PageID: 36
### IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE Assigned on

Briefs J anuary

3, 2003 K. D. F. , ET AL 

### . v. J. F. Appeal from the Chancery Court for Greene County No. 20010271 Thomas R. Frierson, II, Chancellor

FILED JANUARY 29, 2003 No. E2002-01117-COA-R3-CV
This is a suit by K. D. F. and he r present husband, R. J. F., Jr., seeking to terminate t he parental rights of J. F. as to Z.T.J.F (d.o.b. June 8, 1998), preparatory to Mr. F. adopting the child in a future procee ding. Mr. F. appe als a determination by the T rial Court that his parental rights should be terminated, contending that the statutory grounds for such a determination were no t met. We affir

m. Tenn.R.App. P. 3 Appe al as of Right ; Judgme nt of the Cha

ncery Court Affirm

ed: Cause remanded H OUSTON M. G ODDARD , P.J., delivered the opinion of the court, in which H ERSCHEL P. F RANKS and C HARLES D. S USANO , J R .,JJ., joined. J. Russell Pryor, Greeneville, Tennesse e, for the Appellant, J. F. J. Gregory B owman, Greeneville, Tennessee, for the Appellees, K. D. F. and R. J. F., Jr. MEMORAN

DUM OP

INION
After a review of the record, including the judgment entered by

the Trial Court and the briefs of the parties, we are

of the opi nion that th

is is an ap propria te case for affirmance unde r Rule 10 of this Court. Before concluding, we note that–although not raised by Mr. F.–the Trial Court did not find by clear and convincing evidence that termination of Mr. F. ’s pare

ntal rig hts was in t

he child’ s best interest
. Inste ad, the Co urt found that term ination wa s “clea

rly in the manif

est best interests” of the child.-2-

We believe the words “manifest” and “clea r and convincing” are sy

nonymous as they

relate to the required statutory

measure of proof. However, even if not, we, upon our de novo review, find that the evidence is clear and convincing relative to the best interest of the child. For the foregoing reasons the judg ment of the Trial Court is affirmed and the cause remanded for such further proce edings, if a ny, as may be necessary

and collection of costs below. Costs of appeal are adjudged ag ainst J. F.

_________________________________________ HOUSTON M. GODDARD, PRESIDI NG JUDGE
CLOSED

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

______________________________________

 :

DAVID ANDERSON, : Civil Action No. 11-525 (CCC)

 :

Plaintiff, :

v. :

 : O R D E R

PERTTI TORMALA, ET AL., :

 :

Defendants. :

______________________________________ 

It appearing that it has been reported to the Court that the above-entitled action has been

settled,

IT IS on this the 18 day of November, 2011, th

ORDERED that this action is hereby dismissed without costs and without prejudice to the

right, upon good cause shown within 30 days, to make an application to the Court if the settlement

is not consummated. Failure to consummate the settlement will not result in the reopening of this

matter by the Court to address the merits of the case; rather, if the settlement is not consummated,

the Court will entertain an application solely to enforce the terms of the settlement agreement.

Counsel are on notice that the good cause requirement will be stringently applied, and will require

an affidavit detailing (a) the terms of the settlement agreement; and (b) why settlement could not be

consummated within 30 days. 

ORDERED that the terms of the settlement agreement are incorporated herein by reference

and the Court shall retain jurisdiction over the settlement agreement to enforce its terms. 

 s/ Claire C. Cecchi 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 2:11-cv-00525-CCC-JAD Document 51 Filed 11/18/11 Page 1 of 1 PageID: 337
#### Peter J. Corines, Appellant, v Sentry Life Insurance Co. et al., Respondents.

[821 NYS2d 885]

Order, Supreme Court, New York County (Marilyn Shafer, J.), entered May 31, 2005, which granted defendants’ motions for summary judgment dismissing the complaint, and order, same court and Justice, entered July 27, 2005, which denied plaintiffs motion for summary judgment as moot in light of the prior order, unanimously affirmed, with costs.

Plaintiff, formerly a physician licensed to practice medicine in this state, seeks a judgment declaring his entitlement to disability insurance income benefits under policies issued by defendants. In his applications for benefits, plaintiff stated that he had become totally disabled on June 19, 1998, and as a result had not worked since June 26 of that year. However, during the June 2000 trial of criminal charges against him for aiding and abetting another person in the unlicensed practice of medicine, plaintiff testified that he had performed surgical procedures on July 28, December 4 and December 29, 1998. In connection with federal charges of mail fraud against him for submitting false claims for total disability, a stipulation between plaintiff *444and the government was read into the record in open court on December 1, 2003, in which plaintiff admitted he had performed medical and/or surgical procedures on numerous dates between June 1998 and January 1999.

Dismissal of the complaint herein was warranted by this evidence that plaintiff had continued his medical/surgical practice after claiming he was totally disabled *(see Taterka v Nationwide Mut. Ins. Co.,*91 AD2d 568 [1982], *affd*59 NY2d 743 [1983]). Concur—Saxe, J.E, Marlow, Nardelli, Sweeny and Catterson, JJ.
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

      ( print page 32619)    
Pursuant to section 10(d) of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended (5 U.S.C. App.), 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 contract proposals and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the contract proposals, 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; Pain, Morphine and the Developing Brain: School Age Outcomes.                    

*Date:*                         July 31, 2009.                    

*Time:*                         12 p.m. to 4 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate contract proposals.                    

*Place:*                         National Institutes of Health, 6100 Executive Boulevard, Room 5B01, Rockville, MD 20852, (Telephone Conference Call).                    

*Contact Person:*                         Peter Zelazowski, PhD, Scientific Review Officer, Division of Scientific Review, Eunice Kennedy Shriver National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, NIH, 6100 Executive Boulevard, Rm. 5B01, Bethesda, MD 20892-7510, 301-435-6902,                         *peter.zelazowski@nih.gov*.                    

(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: June 30, 2009.

Jennifer Spaeth,

Director, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. E9-16109 Filed 7-7-09; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
Exhibit 32.1

Certification Pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350)

I, Randolph Gress,
certify that:

1. the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2008 (the Report),
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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 Innophos Holdings, Inc. at the dates and for the periods indicated.

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided Innophos Holdings, Inc. and will be retained by Innophos
Holdings, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

The undersigned expressly disclaims any
obligation to update the foregoing certification except as required by law.

Date: November 4, 2008



/S/ RANDOLPH GRESSRandolph GressChief Executive Officer and Director(Principal Executive Officer)


The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to the requirements of 18
U.S.C. § 1350 and is not being filed as a part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 19 - 0643 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. DANIEL TODD COLLINS ,

Defendant and Appellant
.

ORDER Upon consideration of Appellant’s motion for extension of time, and good cause appearing, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellant is granted an extension of time to and including June 1 , 2020 , within which to prepare, file, and serve Appellant’s opening brief on appeal.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

April 24 2020

04/24/2020

Case Number: DA 19-0643
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW JERSEY

______________________________

:

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, :

:

Plaintiff, : Criminal No. 11-0066 (JAP)

:

v. : MEMORANDUM OPINION

: AND ORDER

GEORGE HOLLEY, :

:

Defendant. :

 :

PISANO, District Judge.

Before the Court is Defendant’s motion to preclude Steven Dudas from testifying at trial. 

Defendant’s motion relates to two statements made by Mr. Dudas that were recorded by his 

lawyer. The first and second statements were inconsistent. The defense alleges, and the Court 

found, that after giving the first statement, Mr. Dudas’ lawyer engaged in misconduct by making 

demands for payment in exchange for Mr. Dudas’ favorable testimony at trial. 

In reviewing the circumstances of Mr. Dudas’ statements, the Court finds that any 

misconduct by Mr. Dudas’ lawyer should not result in precluding Mr. Dudas from testifying as a 

fact witness at trial. The case relied upon by Defendant, Erickson v. Newmar Corp., 87 F.3d 298 

(9th Cir. 1996), involved misconduct by a lawyer for a party to the action and is inapposite to the 

current matter.

If Mr. Dudas gave inconsistent statements about the facts, he is subject to crossexamination; and, if other circumstances would impeach his credibility, counsel will be free to 

explore them during Mr. Dudas’ trial testimony. Accordingly, 
2

IT IS on this 27th day of July, 2012,

ORDERED that Defendant’s motion to preclude Steven Dudas from testifying is 

DENIED.

/s/ JOEL A. PISANO

United States District Judge
TIMOTHY MEANS

,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

,

Appellee

. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D 17

- 0879

__________ ___________________/

Opinion filed July 6, 2017.

An appeal from an order of the Circuit Court for Columbia County

. Leandra G. Johnson , Judge

.

And y Thomas, Public Defender , and Steven L. Seliger, Assistant Public Defender

, Tallahassee

, for Appellant.

Pa mela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee , for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

RAY, BILBREY, and KELSEY, JJ., CONCUR.
Order entered June 7, 2016

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-16-00361-CR

ASHLEY MEGAN CATENA, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 296th Judicial District Court

Collin County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 296-82264-2015

ORDER

Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DIRECT the Clerk to issue the mandate in 

this appeal INSTANTER.

/s/ ROBERT M. FILLMORE

JUSTICE
---

Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

The undersigned, David L. Tousley, hereby certifies, pursuant
to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that

|1. | the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of PediatRx Inc. for
      the period ended May 31, 2011 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 Form 10-Q fairly
      presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of
      operations of PediatRx Inc.                                         

|July 8, 2011 | /s/
      David L. Tousley                                      
|------------ | ----------------------------------------------------------------
|             | David L. Tousley                                                
|             | Secretary, Treasurer, Chief Financial Officer
      and Director
|             | (Principal Financial Officer and                                
|             | Principal Accounting Officer)                                   

---
#### In the Matter of Penelope Tsikitas, Appellant, v Nationwide Insurance Company, Respondent.

[822 NYS2d 464]

In a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 75 to confirm an arbitration award, the petitioner appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (Parga, J.), dated February 16, 2005, which denied the petition and granted the respondent’s cross application to vacate the award.

*929Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the petition is granted, and the cross application is denied.

Unless it violates a strong public policy, is totally irrational, or exceeds a specifically-enumerated limitation on the arbitrators’ powers, an arbitration award may not be vacated (see *Matter of Silverman [Benmor Coats],*61 NY2d 299, 308 [1984]; *Ropal Constr. Corp. v God’s Battalion of Prayer Church,*305 AD2d 577 [2003]; *see also*CPLR § 7511 [b] [1] [iii]; *cf. Matter of Board of Educ. of N. Babylon Union Free School Dist. v North Babylon Teachers’ Org.,*104 AD2d 594, 596-597 [1984]). In assessing whether an arbitration award should be vacated, “[a] court cannot examine the merits of an arbitration award and substitute its judgment for that of the arbitrator simply because it believes its interpretation would be the better one. Indeed, even in circumstances where an arbitrator makes errors of law or fact, courts will not assume the role of overseers to conform the award to their sense of justice” *(Matter of New York State Correctional Officers & Police Benevolent Assn. v State of New York,*94 NY2d 321, 326 [1999]; *see Matter of Town of Haverstraw [Rockland County Patrolmen’s Benevolent Assn.],*65 NY2d 677, 678 [1985]; *Matter of Sprinzen [Nomberg],*46 NY2d 623, 629 [1979]).

Here, there is no claim that the arbitrators’ award violated public policy or exceeded any limit on the arbitrators’ powers, and contrary to the respondent’s contentions, the arbitration award was not irrational (see *Matter of Travis [Masiello],*19 AD3d 1093 [2005]; *Matter of Squillini v State of New York [Off. of Mental Hygiene],*248 AD2d 391 [1998]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court erred in denying the petition to confirm the award and granting the respondent’s cross application to vacate it. Schmidt, J.E, Santucci, Fisher and Covello, JJ., concur.
ACU ACURA
AUD AUDI 
BMW BMW 
BUI BUICK 
CAD CADILLAC 
CHE CHEVROLET 
CHR CHRYSLER 
DAW DAEWOO
DOD DODGE 
EAG EAGLE 
FOR FORD 
GEO GEO
GMC GMC 
HON HONDA 
HUM HUMMER
HYU HYUNDAI
INF INFINITI
ISU ISUZU 
JAG JAGUAR 
JEE JEEP 
KIA KIA 
LAN LAND ROVER
LEX LEXUS 
LIN LINCOLN 
MAS MASERATI
MAY MAYBACH
MAZ MAZDA
MRB MERCEDES-BENZ 
MEC MERCURY 
MEK MERKUR
MIN MINI
MIT MITSUBISHI 
NIS NISSAN 
OLD OLDSMOBILE 
PLY PLYMOUTH 
PON PONTIAC 
POR PORSCHE 
SAA SAAB 
SAT SATURN 
SCI SCION
SUB SUBARU 
SUZ SUZUKI
TOY TOYOTA 
VOK VOLKSWAGEN 
VOV VOLVO 
XXX UNSPECIFIED MAKE