alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsAxions and SN 1987A: Axion trappingIf an axion of mass between about 10(exp -3) eV and 1 eV exists, axion emission would have significantly affected the cooling of the nascent neutron star associated with SN 1987A. For an axion of mass less than about 10(exp -2) eV, axions produced deep inside the neutron star simply stream out; in a previous paper this case has been addressed. Remarkably, for an axion of mass greater than about 10(exp -2) eV axions would, like neutrinos, have a mean-free path that is smaller than the size of a neutron star, and thus would become 'trapped' and radiated from an axion sphere. In this paper the trapping regime is treated by using numerical models of the initial cooling of a hot neutron star that incorporate a leakage approximation scheme for axion-energy transport. The axion opacity is computed due to inverse nucleon-nucleon, axion bremsstrahlung, and numerical models are used to calculate the integrated axion luminosity, the temperature of the axion sphere, and the effect of axion emission on the neutrino bursts detected by the Kamiokande 2 (K2) and Irvine-Michigan-Brookhaven (IMB) water-Cherenkov detectors. The larger the axion mass, the stronger the trapping and the smaller the axion luminosity. The earlier estimate is confirmed and refined of the axion mass above which trapping is so strong that axion emission does not significantly affect the neutrino burst. Based upon the neutrino-burst duration--the most sensitive barometer of axion cooling--it is concluded that for an axion mass of greater than about 0.3 eV, axion emission would not have had a significant effect on the neutrino bursts detected by K2 and IMB. The present work, together with the previous work, strongly suggests that an axion with mass in the interval 10(exp -3) eV to 0.3 eV is excluded by SN 1987A.Document ID19900015565Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeContractor Report (CR)AuthorsBurrows, Adam*(Arizona Univ. Tucson., United States)*Ressell, M. Ted*(Chicago Univ. IL., United States)*Turner, Michael S.*(Chicago Univ. IL., United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateMay 1, 1990Subject CategoryAtomic And Molecular PhysicsReport/Patent NumberNASA-CR-186604FERMILAB-PUB-90/81-ANAS 1.26:186604Accession Number90N24881Funding Number(s)CONTRACT_GRANT: NSF AST-87-14176CONTRACT_GRANT: NASW-1340CONTRACT_GRANT: NSF AST-89-14346Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19900015565.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the

 

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Plaintiff(s)

v. Civil Action No.

Defendant(s)

SUMMONS IN A CIVIL ACTION

To: (Defendant’s name and address)

A lawsuit has been filed against you.

Within 21 days after service of this summons on you (not counting the day you received it) — or 60 days if you

are the United States or a United States agency, or an officer or employee of the United States described in Fed. R. Civ.

P. 12 (a)(2) or (3) — you must serve on the plaintiff an answer to the attached complaint or a motion under Rule 12 of

the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure. The answer or motion must be served on the plaintiff or plaintiff’s attorney,

whose name and address are:

If you fail to respond, judgment by default will be entered against you for the relief demanded in the complaint. 

You also must file your answer or motion with the court.

CLERK OF COURT

Date:

Signature of Clerk or Deputy Clerk

 Southern District of Florida

SERVICE LAMP CORPORATION PROFIT 

SHARING PLAN, Individually and On Behalf of All 

Others Similarly Situated,

CARNIVAL CORPORATION, ARNOLD W. ) 

DONALD, and DAVID BERNSTEIN, 

DAVID BERNSTEIN 

c/o Carnival Corporation 

3655 NW 87th Avenue 

Miami, FL 33178

Jayne A. Goldstein 

Shepherd Finkelman Miller & Shah, LLP 

1625 N. Commerce Parkway, S. 320 

Ft. Lauderdale, Florida 33326 

T: 954-515-0123

Case 1:20-cv-22202-KMM Document 1-5 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/27/2020 Page 1 of 2
AO 440 (Rev. 06/12) Summons in a Civil Action (Page 2)

Civil Action No.

PROOF OF SERVICE

(This section should not be filed with the court unless required by Fed. R. Civ. P. 4 (l))

This summons for (name of individual and title, if any)

was received by me on (date) .

’ I personally served the summons on the individual at (place)

on (date) ; or

’ I left the summons at the individual’s residence or usual place of abode with (name)

, a person of suitable age and discretion who resides there,

on (date) , and mailed a copy to the individual’s last known address; or

’ I served the summons on (name of individual) , who is

 designated by law to accept service of process on behalf of (name of organization)

on (date) ; or

’ I returned the summons unexecuted because ; or

’ Other (specify):

My fees are $ for travel and $ for services, for a total of $ .

I declare under penalty of perjury that this information is true.

Date:

Server’s signature

Printed name and title

Server’s address

Additional information regarding attempted service, etc:

0.00 Print Save As... Reset

Case 1:20-cv-22202-KMM Document 1-5 Entered on FLSD Docket 05/27/2020 Page 2 of 2
Opinion issued August 16 , 2019

In The 

## Court of Appeals For The 

## First District of Texas

———————————— NO. 01
- 19
- 00526
- CV

——————————— IN RE BUENA VISTA LA NDSCAPES LLC , Relator

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION Relator Buena Vista Landscapes LLC filed a petition for writ of mandamus seeking to compel the trial court to withdraw its order granting partial summary judgment in favor of real party in interest Maverick Tube Corporation. 1 We deny relief.

1 The underlying case is Maverick Tube Corporation v. Buena Vista Landscapes LLC , cause number 2016

- 34915, pending in the 133rd District Court of Harris County, Texas, the Honorable Jaclanel McFarland presiding.2

Mandam us is an extraordinary remedy that is available only when the relator demonstrates that the trial court abused its discretion and there is no adequate remedy by appeal. See In re Ford Motor Co. , 165 S.W.3d 315, 317 (Tex. 2005) (orig. proceeding); In re Pru dential Ins. Co. , 148 S.W.3d 124, 135 (Tex. 2004) (orig. proceeding). Relator has not demonstrated that its remedy by appeal is inadequate. Accordingly, we deny the petition. Any pending motions are dismissed as
moot. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Kelly, Hightower, and Countiss.
#### Ten Ten Lincoln Place, Inc., Appellant, v. Consolidated Edison Company of New York, Inc., Respondent.

In an action for judgment declaring that defendant’s service classifications in its filed tariff schedule or rate schedule are discriminatory, violative of the Public Service Law, the common law and the Constitutions of the United States and the State of New York, judgment dismissing the complaint unanimously affirmed, with $10 costs and disbursements. In our opinion the issues presented must he passed upon by the Public Service Commission in the first instance and not by the *courts. (Matter of Leitner*v. *New York Telephone Co.,*277 N. Y. 180; *Purcell*v. *New York Central R. R. Co.,*268 N. Y. 164; *Murray*v. *New York Telephone Co.,*170 App. Div. 17, affd. 226 N. Y. 590; *United States Light & Heat Corp.*v. *Niagara Falls G. & E. L. Co.,*47 F. 2d 567; *People ex rel. Pub. Service Comm.*v. *New York Telephone Co.,*262 App. Div. 440, affd. 287 N. Y. 803; *Pennsylvania R. R. Co.*v. *Puritan Goal Min. Co.,*237 U. S. 121, 131.) Present — Lewis, P. J., Carswell, Johnston, Adel and Sneed, JJ. [190 Mise. 174.] [See *post,*p. 973.]
# Euroopan unionin C 235A/23.

| | ISSN 1725-2490 |
| --- | --- |
| Euroopan unionin
  virallinen lehti | C 235A |
| | |
| Suomenkielinen laitos | Tiedonantoja ja ilmoituksia | 48. vuosikerta23. syyskuu 2005 |

ISSN 1725-2490

Euroopan unionin

virallinen lehti

C 235A

Suomenkielinen laitos

Tiedonantoja ja ilmoituksia

48. vuosikerta23. syyskuu 2005

---

| Ilmoitusnumero | Sisältö | Sivu |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | Oikaisuja |
| | |
| 2005/C 235A/2 | Oikaistaan ilmoitus avoimesta kilpailusta EPSO/AST/7/05 (hallintoavustajat (AST3), alat: Varainhoito/kirjanpito ja hankkeiden/sopimusten hallinnointi). (Euroopan unionin virallinen lehti C 178 A, 20. heinäkuuta 2005) | 3 |

Ilmoitusnumero

Sisältö

Sivu

Oikaisuja

2005/C 235A/2

Oikaistaan ilmoitus avoimesta kilpailusta EPSO/AST/7/05 (hallintoavustajat (AST3), alat: Varainhoito/kirjanpito ja hankkeiden/sopimusten hallinnointi). (Euroopan unionin virallinen lehti C 178 A, 20. heinäkuuta 2005)

Euroopan unionin virallinen lehti

3

| FI | |
| --- | --- |

FI

---

Oikaisuja

23.9.2005

| 23.9.2005 | FI | Euroopan unionin virallinen lehti | CA 235/3 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

FI

Euroopan unionin virallinen lehti

CA 235/3

---

Oikaistaan ilmoitus avoimesta kilpailusta EPSO/AST/7/05 (hallintoavustajat (AST3), alat: Varainhoito/kirjanpito ja hankkeiden/sopimusten hallinnointi).

(
  Euroopan unionin virallinen lehti C 178 A, 20. heinäkuuta 2005
  )

(2005/C 235 A/01)

Sivulla 25, A.II kohdan alakohdassa ”2. Työkokemus”:

korvataan:

| — | A.II kohdan 1 alakohdan i alakohdassa vaaditun tutkinnon suorittamisen jälkeen, |
| --- | --- |

—

A.II kohdan 1 alakohdan i alakohdassa vaaditun tutkinnon suorittamisen jälkeen,

tai

| — | A.II kohdan 1 alakohdan ii alakohdassa vaaditun tutkinnon suorittamisen jälkeen |
| --- | --- |

—

A.II kohdan 1 alakohdan ii alakohdassa vaaditun tutkinnon suorittamisen jälkeen

| — | vähintään viiden vuoden kokopäiväinen työkokemus työtehtäviin liittyvällä alalla.” |
| --- | --- |

—

vähintään viiden vuoden kokopäiväinen työkokemus työtehtäviin liittyvällä alalla.”

seuraavasti:

seuraavasti:

| — | A.II kohdan 1 alakohdan i alakohdassa vaaditun tutkinnon suorittamisen jälkeen, |
| --- | --- |

—

A.II kohdan 1 alakohdan i alakohdassa vaaditun tutkinnon suorittamisen jälkeen,

tai

| — | A.II kohdan 1 alakohdan ii alakohdassa vaadittujen tutkinnon ja sen jälkeisen työkokemuksen suorittamisen jälkeen |
| --- | --- |

—

A.II kohdan 1 alakohdan ii alakohdassa vaadittujen tutkinnon ja sen jälkeisen työkokemuksen suorittamisen jälkeen

vähintään viiden vuoden kokopäiväinen työkokemus työtehtäviin liittyvällä alalla.”

---
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 Quarterly Report of EasyLink Services International
Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the three and nine months ended
April 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the
“Report”), I, Thomas J. Stallings, 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.





/s/ Thomas J. StallingsThomas
      J. StallingsChief
      Executive OfficerJune
      7, 2010
#### § 3425.2 Land use plans.

No lease shall be offered for sale under this subpart unless the lands have been included in a comprehensive land use plan or a land use analysis, as required in § 3420.1-4 of this title. The decision to hold a lease sale shall be consistent with the appropriate comprehensive land use plan or land use analysis.

[44 FR 42615, July 19, 1979, as amended at 47 FR 33141, July 30, 1982]
S. 4791 

One Hundred Seventeenth Congress 

of the 

United States of America 

AT THE SECOND SESSION 

Begun and held at the City of Washington on Monday, 

the third day of January, two thousand and twenty two 

An Act 

To amend section 301 of title 44, United States Code, to establish a term for 

the appointment of the Director of the Government Publishing Office. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. TERM FOR APPOINTMENT OF THE DIRECTOR OF THE 

GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE. 

(a) IN GENERAL.—Section 301 of title 44, United States Code, 

is amended— 

(1) by inserting ‘‘(a)’’ before ‘‘The President’’; and 

(2) by adding at the end the following: 

‘‘(b) The Director shall be appointed for a term of 10 years. 

‘‘(c) An individual appointed to the position of Director, by 

and with the advice and consent of the Senate, may be reappointed 

to that position in accordance with subsections (a) and (b).’’. 

(b) APPLICATION TO INCUMBENT.—If there is an individual 

serving in the position of Director of the Government Publishing 

Office, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, on the 

date of enactment of this Act— 

(1) the amendments made by subsection (a) shall apply 

with respect to the appointment of such individual; and 

(2) the term of the individual for purposes of subsection 

(b) of section 301 of title 44, United States Code, as added 

by subsection (a), shall be considered to have started on the 

date on which the individual assumed the office of Director 

of the Government Publishing Office. 

Speaker of the House of Representatives. 

Vice President of the United States and

President of the Senate.
#### Sadie Estelle Hoffman, as Administratrix, etc., of Charles R. Hoffman, Deceased, and Max S. Grifenhagen, as Sheriff of the County of New York, Respondents, *v.*Columbia-Knickerbocker Trust Company, Appellant.

*Conversion*— *loan — value of bonds*— *action in aid of attachments.*

Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court, entered in the New York county clerk’s office on the 11th day of May, 1914, upon a decision after a trial at Special Term.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. No opinion. Present—Ingraham, P. J., Clarke, Scott, Dowling and Hotchkiss, JJ.; Hotchkiss, J., dissented.

Hotchkiss, J. (dissenting):

The action was for possession of the bonds or in default thereof for the amount of the plaintiff’s debt covered by the attachment. It is not clear to me that, under the circumstances, any possessory action would lie, but if it would, when it appeared that possession could not be had, plaintiffs were entitled to no more than compensation for what they had lost. The respondents say in their brief “ the value of the security is immaterial,” and this seems to have been the theory of the complaint, which contains no allegation of the value of the bonds nor did the court make any finding of such value. Whether there is any presumption to be universally applied that an *individual*is *prima facie*solvent and able to pay his debts, or whether the rule is merely that where a party urges as his defense the insolvency of another it is incumbent on him to prove it *(Walrodv.*Ball, 9 Barb. 271, 276), need not be determined. A diligent search has failed to reveal any case where, in the absence of any evidence whatsoever, a plaintiff upon whom rests the burden to show loss arising out of a transaction incident to corporation bonds has been permitted to recover the par value of such bonds on a *899presumption of value only and without a particle of proof thereof. The record is full of evidence to show that the bonds were never treated by defendant as in fact worth anything like their par value, and defendant offered to prove the price at which the $200,000 of bonds finally remaining in its hands were sold at public auction after due advertisement, but plaintiffs’ counsel said he raised no “ question about that.’’ The action seems to have been brought, tried and decided on the theory that the value of the bonds lost to plaintiffs by reason of defendant’s act was immaterial. This I think was error, because if the defendant’s total loan exceeded the value of all the bonds held by it as collateral at any time, plaintiffs lost nothing by reason of defendant’s surrender of a portion of those bonds from time to time as installments were paid on account of the loan. For the same lack of proof of value plaintiffs failed to show any loss or damage by reason of the disposition of the remaining $200,000 in bonds. The judgment should be reversed and a new trial granted.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

Miami Division

Case Number: 20-22070-CIV-MORENO

WINDY LUCIUS, 

Plaintiff,

vs.

NUSRET HOLDINGS USA LLC,

Defendant.

_________________________________________/

FINAL ORDER OF DISMISSAL AND 

ORDER DENYING ALL PENDING MOTIONS AS MOOT

THIS CAUSE came before the Court upon Notice of Settlement (D.E. 11), filed on June 

22, 2020. It is

ADJUDGED that in light of the parties settling this action, this case is DISMISSED in 

accordance with the settlement agreement. The Court shall retain jurisdiction for six months to 

enforce the terms of the settlement agreement. It is also 

ADJUDGED that all pending motions are DENIED as moot.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 24th of June 2020.

______________________________________

FEDERICO A. MORENO

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Copies furnished to:

Counsel of Record

Case 1:20-cv-22070-FAM Document 12 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/24/2020 Page 1 of 1
[Federal Register Volume 69, Number 159 (Friday, October 8, 2004)]
[Notices]
[Pages 60373-60377]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 04-22690]


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

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary

[Transmittal No. 04-38]


36(b)(1) Arms Sales Notification

AGENCY: Department of Defense, Defense Security Cooperation Agency.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Department of Defense is publishing the unclassified text 
of a section 36(b)(1) arms sales notification. This is published to 
fulfill the requirements of section 155 of Public Law 104-164 dated 21 
July 1996.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Ms. J. Hurd, DSCA/OPS-ADMIN, (703) 
604-6575.
    The following is a copy of a letter to the Speaker of the House of 
Representatives, Transmittal 04-38 with attached transmittal, policy 
justification, and Sensitivity of Technology.

    Dated: October 4, 2004.
L.M. Bynum,
Alternate OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
BILLING CODE 5001-06-M

[[Page 60374]]

[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN08OC04.038


[[Page 60375]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN08OC04.039


[[Page 60376]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN08OC04.040


[[Page 60377]]


[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TN08OC04.041

[FR Doc. 04-22690 Filed 10-7-04; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-C
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Rigoberto AVALOS-CORTEZ, also known as Rigoberto Cortez-Avalos, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 05-40733.

Conference Calendar.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

Decided Feb. 24, 2006.

James Lee Turner, Assistant U.S. Attorney, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

*356Timothy William Crooks, Assistant Federal Public Defender, Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before GARZA, DENNIS, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM: *

Rigoberto Avalos-Cortez appeals his conviction and sentence for illegal reentry after a previous deportation. Avalos-Cortez’s constitutional challenge to 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b) is foreclosed by *Almendarez-Torres v. United States,*523 U.S. 224, 235, 118 S.Ct. 1219, 140 L.Ed.2d 350 (1998). Although Avalos-Cortez contends that *Almendarez-Torres*was incorrectly decided and that a majority of the Supreme Court would overrule *Almendarez-Torres*in light of *Apprendi v. New Jersey,*530 U.S. 466, 120 S.Ct. 2348, 147 L.Ed.2d 435 (2000), we have repeatedly rejected such arguments on the basis that *AlmendarezTorres*remains binding. *See United States v. Garza-Lopez,*410 F.3d 268, 276 (5th Cir.), *cert, denied,*— U.S.-, 126 S.Ct. 298, 163 L.Ed.2d 260 (2005). Avalos-Cortez properly concedes that his argument is foreclosed in light of *Almendarez-Torres*and circuit precedent, but he raises it here to preserve it for further review.

AFFIRMED.

*

 Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.
§ 404.16 What information must I include in my statement of interest? A statement of interest is a preliminary scope of work that must include sufficient information to address all of the eligibility criteria described in §§ 404.6 and 404.7 and the prioritization criteria in § 404.13, as well as any information required by the program announcement. In general, this may include, but is not limited to: ( a ) Name, organization, and contact information, including the identification of any partners that may be involved in the appraisal investigation;
( b ) Location map and description of the areas to be served by the proposed rural water supply project, including: ( 1 ) Geographical scope;
( 2 ) Demographics; and
( 3 ) Existing rural water supply infrastructure, if any;
( c ) Type of assistance being requested through this program as described in § 404.11;
( d ) A general description of the problems, needs, and opportunities that the appraisal investigation is being formulated to address, supported by data or documentation where appropriate. The information provided must also address each of the prioritization criteria in § 404.13;
( e ) A general description of project alternatives that may be considered in the investigation, including: ( 1 ) Water supply management alternatives (e.g., types of infrastructure or facilities to deliver new water supplies), if known;
( 2 ) Water demand management alternatives (e.g., water conservation and other approaches to reduce water consumption), if known; and
( 3 ) Potential sources of water supply.
( f ) A general description of any prior studies on the problems, needs, and water management alternatives at issue; and,
( g ) A general description of existing sources of water supply.
<PAGE>

                                                                    EXHIBIT 99.1


                           [DYNEGY ROSETON LETTERHEAD]


March 25, 2002

Securities and Exchange Commission
Washington, DC 20549

Ladies and Gentlemen:

By letter dated March 25, 2002, addressed to Dynegy Roseton L.L.C., our
independent public accountants, Arthur Andersen LLP, pursuant to the
requirements of Securities and Exchange Commission Release Nos. 33-8070 and
34-45590, represented that their audit of Dynegy Roseton L.L.C. was subject to
Arthur Andersen's quality control systems for U.S. accounting and auditing
practice to provide reasonable assurance that the engagement was conducted in
compliance with professional standards and that there was appropriate continuity
of Arthur Andersen personnel working on the audit and availability of national
office consultation to conduct the relevant portions of the audit.

Sincerely,

/s/ J. Kevin Blodgett

J. Kevin Blodgett, Assistant Secretary