alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsSpace shuttle phase B wind tunnel model and test information. Volume 1: Booster configurationArchived wind tunnel test data are available for flyback booster or other alternative recoverable configurations as well as reusable orbiters studied during initial development (Phase B) of the Space Shuttle. Considerable wind tunnel data was acquired by the competing contractors and the NASA Centers for an extensive variety of configurations with an array of wing and body planforms. All contractor and NASA wind tunnel test data acquired in the Phase B development have been compiled into a database and are available for application to current winged flyback or recoverable booster aerodynamic studies. The Space Shuttle Phase B Wind Tunnel Database is structured by vehicle component and configuration type. Basic components include the booster, the orbiter and the launch vehicle. Booster configuration types include straight and delta wings, canard, cylindrical, retroglide and twin body. Orbiter configuration types include straight and delta wings, lifting body, drop tanks, and double delta wings. Launch configurations include booster and orbiter components in various stacked and tandem combinations. This is Volume 1 (Part 1) of the report -- Booster Configuration.Document ID19880020361Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeContractor Report (CR)AuthorsGlynn, J. L.*(Chrysler Corp. New Orleans, LA, United States)*Poucher, D. E.*(Chrysler Corp. New Orleans, LA, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 5, 2013Publication DateJuly 1, 1988Subject CategoryAerodynamicsReport/Patent NumberNAS 1.26:178414-VOL-1-PT-1DMS-DB-02-VOL-1-PT-1NASA-CR-178414-VOL-1-PT-1Accession Number88N29745Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 506-40-11-08CONTRACT_GRANT: NAS1-18276Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19880020361.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
Exhibit 32.1



Quipp, Inc.



Certification by the Chief Executive Officer

Required by Rule 13a-14(b) under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and 18 U.S.C. Section 1350









I, Michael S. Kady, Chief Executive Officer of Quipp, Inc., a Florida corporation (the Company), hereby certify that, based on my knowledge:



(1)

The Companys annual report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2006 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and



(2)

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





* * *









/ s / MICHAEL S. KADY

Michael S. Kady

Chief Executive Officer



Date:

April 17, 2007
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA EASTERN DISTRICT
DR. RICHARD S. GLICK, D.O., INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED, Petitioners

v.
PROGRESSIVE NORTHERN INSURANCE COMPANY AND MOUNTAIN LAUREL INS., CO., D/B/A PROGRESSIVE INSURANCE CO., Respondents : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : No. 240 EAL 2014 Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court

DR. RICHARD S. GLICK, D.O., INDIVIDUALLY AND ON BEHALF OF ALL OTHERS SIMILARLY SITUATED, Petitioners

v.
PROGRESSIVE NORTHERN INSURANCE COMPANY AND MOUNTAIN LAUREL INS., CO., D/B/A PROGRESSIVE INSURANCE CO., Respondents : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : : No. 241 EAL 2014 Petition for Allowance of Appeal from the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM[240 EAL 2014 and 241 EAL 2014] - 2

AND NOW , this 15th day of October, 2014, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is DENIED and Respondent’s Application for Leave to File Post-Submission Communication is DISMISSED as moot

.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

PENSACOLA DIVISION

CURTIS MATTHEW CAPERS,

Petitioner,

v. Case No. 3:20cv5678-MCR-HTC

RICKY D DIXON,

Respondent.

/

ORDER

This case is before the Court based on the magistrate judge’s Report and

Recommendation, ECF No. 40. The parties have been furnished a copy of the Report 

and Recommendation and have 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 all timely filed objections. 

Having considered the Report and Recommendation, and any objections 

thereto timely filed, I have determined that the Report and Recommendation should 

be adopted. 

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that:

1. The magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 40) is 

adopted and incorporated by reference in this order.

Case 3:20-cv-05678-MCR-HTC Document 42 Filed 04/11/23 Page 1 of 2
Page 2 of 2

Case No. 3:20cv5678-MCR-HTC

2. The habeas petition challenging the conviction in State v. Capers, 2017-

CF-3586, in Escambia County, Florida, ECF Doc. 20, is DENIED without an 

evidentiary hearing.

3. A certificate of appealability is DENIED.

4. The clerk of court is directed to close the file.

DONE AND ORDERED this 11th day of April 2023.

 M. Casey Rodgers

M. CASEY RODGERS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case 3:20-cv-05678-MCR-HTC Document 42 Filed 04/11/23 Page 2 of 2
§ 371.5 Marketing and Regulatory Programs Business Services. ( a ) *General statement.* Marketing and Regulatory Programs Business Services (MRPBS) plans and provides for the agency's human, financial, and physical resources.
( b ) *Deputy Administrator of MRPBS.* The Deputy Administrator of MRPBS is responsible for: ( 1 ) Assisting the Under Secretary for Marketing and Regulatory Programs, and the Administrators of APHIS, the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS), and the Grain Inspection and Packers and Stockyards Administration (GIPSA), and other APHIS, AMS, and GIPSA officials in the planning and formulation of MRP policies, programs, and activities. Providing human resource, certain financial, and management services for AMS, APHIS, and GIPSA.
( 2 ) Planning, formulating and coordinating policies, and directing management support functions for APHIS and designated functions for other MRP agencies, including finance, personnel, and management services.
( 3 ) Conducting administrative reviews and inspections in APHIS to assess the implementation of policies and procedures and to assess the accomplishments of program objectives.
( 4 ) Evaluating and issuing administrative directives.
( 5 ) Serving as APHIS' liaison official with the General Accounting Office and the Office of the Inspector General.
( 6 ) Preparing cooperative agreements, memoranda of understanding, agreements between APHIS and other agencies, and agreements that require the signature of more than one Deputy Administrator or Director.
( 7 ) Directing and coordinating investigations related to APHIS program laws and regulations and coordinating enforcement of program laws and regulations with the Office of the General Counsel.
( 8 ) Supporting and enforcing APHIS program activities, which include: ( i ) Title 7, Code of Federal Regulations, §§ 371.3(b)(2)(i) through (xiv);
( ii ) Title 7, Code of Federal Regulations, §§ 371.4(b)(3)(i) through (xx);
( iii ) The Animal Welfare Act, as amended (7 U.S.C. 2131 through 2159); and
( iv ) The Virus-Serum Toxin Act, as amended (21 U.S.C. 159).
( 9 ) Formulating and recommending employee development and training policies.
( 10 ) Developing, delivering, and administering organizational development, training, recruitment, and employee development programs for MRP agencies.
( 11 ) Providing computer support and related services for APHIS.
#### §§ 3570.258-3570.260 [Reserved]
9.703 Contracting with individual pool

members.

(a) Pool members may submit individual offers, independent of the pool. However, the contracting

officer shall not consider an independent offer by a pool member if that pool member participates in

a competing offer submitted by the pool.

(b) If a pool member submits an individual offer, independent of the pool, the contracting officer

shall consider the pool agreement, along with other factors, in determining whether that pool

member is a responsible prospective contractor under subpart 9.1.

Parent topic: Subpart 9.7 - Defense Production Pools and Research and Development Pools
#### Rose M. Smith, Appellant, v Ralph P. Delcore, Respondent, et al., Defendants.

[814 NYS2d 554]

In an action to recover damages for personal injuries, the plaintiff appeals from an order of the Supreme Court, Nassau County (O’Connell, J.), dated October 3, 2005, which granted the motion of the defendant Ralph E Delcore for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against him on the ground that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d).

Ordered that the order is reversed, on the law, with costs, the motion is denied, and the complaint is reinstated as against defendant Ralph E Delcore.

The defendant Ralph E Delcore (hereinafter the defendant) failed to make a prima facie showing that the plaintiff did not sustain a serious injury within the meaning of Insurance Law § 5102 (d) as a result of the subject motor vehicle accident *(see Toure v Avis Rent A Car Sys.,*98 NY2d 345 [2002]; *Gaddy v Eyler,*79 NY2d 955 [1992]). The affirmed medical report of the defendant’s neurologist conceded the existence of limitations in motion of the plaintiffs lumbar spine. Since the defendant failed to meet his initial burden of establishing a prima facie case, it is unnecessary to consider whether the plaintiffs papers in opposition to the defendant’s motion were sufficient to raise a triable issue of fact *(see Rich-Wing v Baboolal,*18 AD3d 726 [2005]; *Lesane v Tejada,*15 AD3d 358 [2005]; *Coscia v 938 Trading Corp.,*283 AD2d 538 [2001]). Accordingly, the Supreme Court *891erred in granting the defendant’s motion for summary judgment dismissing the complaint insofar as asserted against him. Florio, J.P., Santucci, Mastro, Rivera and Covello, JJ., concur.
EXHIBIT 32.1



July 30, 2010

Securities and Exchange Commission

100 F
Street, NE

Washington, DC 20549



Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, the undersigned officer of Lazard Group LLC (the Registrant) hereby certifies that the
Registrants Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended June 30, 2010 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the
information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.



|                                                      
|------------------------------------------------------
|                                                      
|/s/    Kenneth M. Jacobs                              
|Kenneth M. Jacobs Chairman
and Chief Executive Officer



The
foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
§ 319.75-9 Inspection and phytosanitary certificate of inspection. ( a ) Any fruit, vegetable, or other plant product designated as a regulated article and grown in a country maintaining an official system of inspection for the purpose of determining whether such article is free from injurious plant diseases, injurious insect pests, and other plant pests shall be accompanied by a phytosanitary certificate of inspection from the plant protection service of such country at the time of importation or offer for importation into the United States. Such certificate may cover more than one article and more than one container kept together during shipment and offer for importation.
( b ) Any fruit, vegetable, seed, or other plant product designated as a regulated article which is accompanied by a valid phytosanitary certificate of inspection is subject to inspection by an inspector at the time of importation into the United States for the purpose of determining whether such article is free of injurious plant diseases, injurious insect pests, and other plant pests, and whether such article is otherwise eligible to be imported into the United States.
( c ) Any fruit, vegetable, seed, or other plant product designated as a regulated article and grown in a country not maintaining an official system of inspection for the purpose of determining whether such article is free from injurious plant diseases, or injurious insect pests, and other plant pests shall be inspected by an inspector at the time of importation into the United States for the purpose of determining whether such article is free of such diseases and pests and whether such article is otherwise eligible to be imported into the United States.
[50 FR 8707, Mar. 5, 1985, as amended at 79 FR 19811, Apr. 10, 2014; 83 FR 11866, Mar. 19, 2018]
#### In the Matter of Board of Education of the Palmyra-Macedon Central School District, Respondent, v Palmyra-Macedon Faculty Association, Appellant.

Order unanimously affirmed, with costs. Memorandum: Although we affirm we do not agree with Special Term that arbitration must be stayed because the demand was not served as provided by CPLR 7503 (subd [c]). The requirements of that section are designed to provide a *766method for prompt relief when the parties have agreed to arbitration as a remedy for disputes arising between them and to insure speedy judicial review of the threshold issues of arbitrability if arbitrability is contested. Although appellant, the party demanding arbitration, has failed strictly to comply with the statutory method of serving its demand, the only consequence is to toll the time limit on respondent’s motion to stay arbitration. Since it is undisputed that respondent had actual notice of the demand and an opportunity to judicially review whether arbitration was an appropriate remedy in this case, it can hardly claim the notice was void. The demand does not state the issue to be arbitrated with sufficient particularity, however, and we therefore affirm. The demand requested only arbitration of the rights and benefits due two teachers. Accordingly, it is so broad that the court is not able to rule on the threshold issues of arbitrability *(Matter of Oneonta City School Dist. [Oneonta Teachers Assn.], 59*AD2d 797; *Board of Educ. v Newfane Teachers Assn.,*54 AD2d 1119). We affirm the judgment granting the stay, with leave to appellant to serve, within 10 days of our order herein, a demand which sufficiently states the particulars of the claim sought to be arbitrated. (Appeal from order of Wayne Supreme Court— arbitration.) Present—Simons, J. P., Hancock, Jr., Schnepp, Doerr and Moule, JJ.
#### §§ 3570.81-3570.82 [Reserved]
```

[Congressional Bills 113th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 2600 Referred in Senate (RFS)]

113th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                H. R. 2600

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 27, 2013

Received; read twice and referred to the Committee on Banking, Housing, 
                           and Urban Affairs

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To amend the Interstate Land Sales Full Disclosure Act to clarify how 
                    the Act applies to condominiums.

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

SECTION 1. EXEMPTION FOR RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM UNITS.

    (a) Exemption.--Section 1403 of the Interstate Land Sales Full 
Disclosure Act (15 U.S.C. 1702) is amended--
            (1) in subsection (b)--
                    (A) in paragraph (7)(C), by striking ``or'' at the 
                end;
                    (B) in paragraph (8)(G), by striking the period at 
                the end and inserting ``; or''; and
                    (C) by adding at the end the following:
            ``(9) the sale or lease of a condominium unit that is not 
        exempt under subsection (a).''; and
            (2) by adding at the end the following:
    ``(d) For purposes of subsection (b), the term `condominium unit' 
means a unit of residential or commercial property to be designated for 
separate ownership pursuant to a condominium plan or declaration 
provided that upon conveyance--
            ``(1) the owner of such unit will have sole ownership of 
        the unit and an undivided interest in the common elements 
        appurtenant to the unit; and
            ``(2) the unit will be an improved lot.''.

SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.

    The amendments made by this Act shall take effect 180 days after 
the date of the enactment of this Act.

            Passed the House of Representatives September 26, 2013.

            Attest:

                                                 KAREN L. HAAS,

                                                                 Clerk.
```
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 13-40115

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JUAN PABLO PAZ-GUERRA,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 7:12-CR-1152-1

Before DAVIS, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Juan Pablo PazGuerra has moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with

Anders v. California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d

229 (5th Cir. 2011). Paz-Guerra has not filed a response. We have reviewed

counsel’s brief and the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We

concur with counsel’s assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue

for appellate review. Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

December 17, 2013

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

* 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.

 Case: 13-40115 Document: 00512473783 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/17/2013
No. 13-40115

GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the

APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

2

 Case: 13-40115 Document: 00512473783 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/17/2013
#### § 3550.4 Reviews and appeals.

Whenever RHS makes a decision that is adverse to a participant, RHS will provide the participant with written notice of such adverse decision and the participant's rights to a USDA National Appeals Division hearing in accordance with 7 CFR part 11. Any adverse decision, whether appealable or non-appealable may be reviewed by the next-level RHS supervisor.
13.303 Blanket purchase agreements (BPAs).

13.303-1 General.

13.303-2 Establishment of BPAs.

13.303-3 Preparation of BPAs.

13.303-4 Clauses.

13.303-5 Purchases under BPAs.

13.303-6 Review procedures.

13.303-7 Completion of BPAs.

13.303-8 Optional clause.

Parent topic: Subpart 13.3 - Simplified Acquisition Methods
EXHIBIT 32

Certification of CEO and CFO 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 on Form 10-Q of BlackRock Kelso Capital Corporation (the Company) for the quarter ended September 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report),
James R. Maher, as Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and Frank D. Gordon, as Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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/ James R. Maher 
|Name:               |  | James R. Maher         
|Title:              |  | Chief Executive Officer
|Date:               |  | November 5, 2009       
|                   
|/s/ Frank D. Gordon
|Name:               |  | Frank D. Gordon        
|Title:              |  | Chief Financial Officer
|Date:               |  | November 5, 2009
7.403           General Services Administration assistance and OMB guidance.       (a) When requested by an agency, the General Services Administration (GSA) will assist in rent, lease, or purchase decisions by providing information such as-                                                         (1) Pending price adjustments to Federal Supply Schedule contracts;                                                            (2) Recent or imminent technological developments;                                                            (3) New techniques; and                                                            (4) Industry or market trends.                                                                             (b)                   For additional GSA assistance and guidance, agencies may—                                                         (1)Request information from the GSA FAS National Customer Service Center by phone at 1-800-488-3111 or by email at ncsccustomer.service@gsa.gov; and                                                            (2)See GSA website, Schedule 51 V Hardware Superstore-Equipment Rental, (https://www.gsa.gov/buying-selling/products-services/industrial-products-services/rental-of-industrial-equipment).                                                                             (c)                   For additional OMB guidance, see—                                                         (1)Section 13, Special Guidance for Lease-Purchase Analysis, and paragraph 8.c.(2), Lease-Purchase Analysis, of OMB Circular A-94, Guidelines and Discount Rates for Benefit-Cost Analysis of Federal Programs, (https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/legacy_drupal_files/omb/circulars/A94/a094.pdf); and                                                            (2)Appendix B, Budgetary Treatment of Lease-Purchases and Leases of Capital Assets, of OMB Circular A-11, Preparation, Submission, and Execution of the Budget, (https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/app_b.pdf).    **Parent topic:** Subpart 7.4 - Equipment Acquisition