alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsA design procedure for the handling qualities optimization of the X-29A aircraftA design technique for handling qualities improvement was developed for the X-29A aircraft. As with any new aircraft, the X-29A control law designers were presented with a relatively high degree of uncertainty in their mathematical models. The presence of uncertainties, and the high level of static instability of the X-29A caused the control law designers to stress stability and robustness over handling qualities. During flight test, the mathematical models of the vehicle were validated or corrected to match the vehicle dynamic behavior. The updated models were then used to fine tune the control system to provide fighter-like handling characteristics. A design methodology was developed which works within the existing control system architecture to provide improved handling qualities and acceptable stability with a minimum of cost in both implementation as well as software verification and validation.Document ID19900002437Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsBosworth, John T.*(NASA Hugh L. Dryden Flight Research Facility Edwards, CA, United States)*Cox, Timothy H.*(NASA Hugh L. Dryden Flight Research Facility Edwards, CA, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateSeptember 1, 1989Subject CategoryAircraft Stability And ControlReport/Patent NumberNAS 1.15:4142NASA-TM-4142H-1548AIAA PAPER 89-3428Meeting InformationMeeting: Guidance, Navigation, and Control ConferenceLocation: Boston, MACountry: United StatesStart Date: August 14, 1989End Date: August 16, 1989Accession Number90N11753Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 533-02-51Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19900002437.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
**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO18 U.S.C. Section 1350,AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TOSECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
In connection with the Annual Report of Raphael Industries Ltd. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ended September 30, 2006 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date here of (the "report"), I, Arne Raabe, 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated this 14th day of February, 2007.

BY:
/s/ ARNE RAABE                        Arne  Raabe, Principal Executive Officer **
#### § 1325.5 [Reserved]
#### §§ 1214.131-1214.139 [Reserved]
### -84 -82 -80 -78 -76 -74 -72

34 36 38 40 

## ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲



## ★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲ 

### 500 1000 1500 100 18 12 06 00 06/01 

## NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL 

# Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 01 Jun 07

EDAS Meteorological DataSource★at 38.86 N 77.06 WMeters AGL 

## ★ ■ ■ ■ ■



## ★ ■ ■ ■ ■ 

## ★ ● ● ● ●



## ★ ● ● ● ●
Opinion issued December 3, 2015

In The

Court of Appeals 

For The 

First District of Texas 

————————————

NO. 01-15-00712-CV

———————————

IN RE DIOGU KALU DIOGU II, Relator

Original Proceeding on Petition for Writ of Mandamus

MEMORANDUM OPINION

In this original proceeding, Diogu Kalu Diogu II requests mandamus relief 

from two trial court orders dated July 10, 2014 and June 25, 2015 that awarded 

sanctions against him.1 

We deny the petition for writ of mandamus.

 

1

The underlying case is Diogu Kalu Diogu II v. Yaowapa Ratan-Aporn, cause 

number 13-DCV-204732, pending in the 505th District Court of Fort Bend 

County, Texas, the Honorable David Perwin presiding.
2

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Radack and Justices Massengale and Brown.
# Continuation of National Emergency Regarding the Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction

                    On November 14, 1994, by Executive Order 12938, the President declared a national emergency with respect to the unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States posed by the proliferation of nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons (weapons of mass destruction) and the means of delivering such weapons. On July 28, 1998, the President issued Executive Order 13094 amending Executive Order 12938 to respond more effectively to the worldwide threat of weapons of mass destruction proliferation activities. On June 28, 2005, I issued Executive Order 13382 that,                     *inter alia*, further amended Executive Order 12938 to improve our ability to combat proliferation. Because the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them continues to pose an unusual and extraordinary threat to the national security, foreign policy, and economy of the United States, the national emergency first declared on November 14, 1994, must continue in effect beyond November 14, 2006. In accordance with section 202(d) of the National Emergencies Act (50 U.S.C. 1622(d)), I am continuing for 1 year the national emergency declared in Executive Order 12938, as amended.                

                    This notice shall be published in the                     **Federal Register**                     and transmitted to the Congress.                

[FR Doc. 06-9021

Billing code 3195-01-P
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsAn Overview: NASA LeRC Structures ProgramsA workshop on National Structures Programs was held, jointly sponsored by the AIAA Structures Technical Committee, the University of Virginia's Center for Advanced Computational Technology and NASA. The Objectives of the Workshop were to: provide a forum for discussion of current Government-sponsored programs in the structures area; identify high potential research areas for future aerospace systems; and initiate suitable interaction mechanisms with the managers of structures programs. The presentations covered structures programs at NASA, DOD (AFOSR, ONR, ARO and DARPA), and DOE. This publication is the presentation of the Structures and Acoustics Division of the NASA Lewis Research Center. The Structures and Acoustics Division has its genesis dating back to 1943. It is responsible for NASA research related to rotating structures and structural hot sections of both airbreathing and rocket engines. The work of the division encompasses but is not limited to aeroelasticity, structural life prediction and reliability, fatigue and fracture, mechanical components such as bearings, gears, and seals, and aeroacoustics. These programs are discussed and the names of responsible individuals are provided for future reference.Document ID19980169299Acquisition SourceLegacy CDMSDocument TypeReprint (Version printed in journal)AuthorsZaretsky, Erwin V.*(NASA Lewis Research Center Cleveland, OH United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateMarch 1, 1998Subject CategoryStructural MechanicsReport/Patent NumberNASA/TM-1998-206237E-10975NAS 1.15:206237Meeting InformationMeeting: Government-Sponsored Programs in the Structures AreaLocation: Kissimmee, FLCountry: United StatesStart Date: April 6, 1997Sponsors:American Inst. of Architects Foundation,NASA Lewis Research Center,Virginia Univ.Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 523-22-13Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19980169299.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
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the audited
consolidated financial statements of Splitrock Services, Inc. for the year ended
December 31, 1999 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such
financial statements included in the Company's Form 10-K for the year ended
December 31, 1999.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                              JAN-1-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1999
<CASH>                                          92,593
<SECURITIES>                                     5,441
<RECEIVABLES>                                   12,695
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,403
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               145,947
<PP&E>                                         156,591
<DEPRECIATION>                                  32,220
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 301,286
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           69,149
<BONDS>                                        258,387
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            57
<OTHER-SE>                                    (45,241)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   301,286
<SALES>                                         89,556
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                89,556
<CGS>                                          119,302
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  168,010
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              32,581
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (103,321)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (103,321)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (103,321)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
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.                  

###### National Science Foundation

      ( print page 62300)    
In accordance with Federal Advisory Committee Act (Pub. L. 92-463, as amended), the National Science Foundation announces the following meeting:

*Name:*                         Advisory Committee for Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences (#1171).                    

*Date/Time:*                         November 16, 2006; 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. November 17, 2006; 8:30 a.m. to 1 p.m.                    

*Place:*                         Holiday Inn Arlington Hotel, 4610 North Fairfax Drive, Arlington, VA 22230 (Clarendon Banquet Room).                    

*Type of Meeting:*                         Open.                    

*Contact Person:*                         Mr. Tyrone Jordan, Office of the Assistant Director, Directorate for Social, Behavioral, and Economic Sciences, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Room 905, Arlington, VA 22230, 703-292-8741.                    

*Summary Minutes:*                         May be obtained from contact person listed above.                    

*Purpose of Meeting:*                         To provide advice and recommendations to the National Science Foundation on major goals and policies pertaining to Social, Behavioral and Economic Sciences Directorate programs and activities.                    

*Agenda:**November 16, 2006*, Meeting for New Advisory Committee Members. Introduction of New Advisory Committee Members and Staff, Review of Minutes, and Directorate Updates. Human and Social Dynamics (HSD) Priority Area Update. Division of Behavioral and Cognitive Sciences (BCS) COV.                    

*November 17, 2006,*                         IPAMM. Cyberinfrastructure. Identification of Agenda Items for Next Meeting.                    

Dated: October 19, 2006.

Susanne Bolton,

Committee Management Officer.

[FR Doc. 06-8841 Filed 10-23-06; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7555-01-M
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

federal Aviation Administration

(4910-13-PI

=r".'_~Cf'>

O'fHN{; S'"MOO'

14erR Part 39

IDocket No. FAA-2009-0763; Directorate Identifier 2007-NM-301-AD; Amendme

IloilO 2-010-0H I

39-*****; AD  -** -**]

RIN 2120-AA64

Airworthiness Directives; Fokker Services B.V. Model F.28 Mark 0070 and 0100

Airplanes

~mAl.£""

.

'1-0_ '"

m

;-V;OI ';y-

,-

,.~/

AGENCY: Federal Aviation Administration (FAA), Department of Transportation /

(DOT).

ACTION: Final rule. A0:',hr :....,' "

I'AU

SUMMARY: We are adopting a new ai"volthiness directive (AD) for the products list I 7...J-::... Vel

K\lll'11~(; .~\""I~)l

above. This AD results from mandatory continuing airworthiness illfonl1atioll (MeAl)

originated by an aviation authority of another country to identify and correct an unsafe

condition on an aviation product. The MeAl describes the unsafe condition as:

\vhich can cause a (partly) blocked operation of the elevator system in the n0n11al

The unsafe condition is wear and tear, and corrosion of the backlash remover mcchanis

Excessive wear and tear orthe backlash remover mechanism has been

found several times on Goodrich Part Number (PIN) 23400-3B and PIN

23400-7 elevator booster control units (BCU), while COiTosionhas been

found on some components in other BCU. The wear and tear may result in

a (partly) blocked operation of the elevator system in the !lonnal

(hydraulic) mode, while any corrosion may result in deteriorated elevator

control when the BCU is in MANUAL mode.

* * * * * * *

I~III'''.%IG

D."TU

O(rTl~GsnlllO,

'~,n~,.s.Stt.

,"

"""n!<li S""OOt

'''m.•••...• ''''

~
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 Yak Communications Inc. (the Company) Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A for the six months ended December 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report),
I, Charles Zwebner, Chief Executive Officer and President 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, to the best of my knowledge:

(1). The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) 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.



|                     |  |     |  |                          
|-------------------- |  | --- |  | -------------------------
|Date: April 21, 2006 |  | By: |  | /s/ Charles Zwebner      
|                     |  |     |  | Charles Zwebner          
|                     |  |     |  | Chief Executive Officer &
|                     |  |     |  | President
Motion Granted in Part and Order filed September 6, 2018 

In The

Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________

NO. 14-18-00710-CV

NO. 14-18-00753-CV

____________

SUZANNE SONDRUP RON, Appellant

V.

AVISHAI RON, ET AL, Appellee

On Appeal from the 125th District Court

Harris County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. 2017-19071

ORDER

Appellant has filed an unopposed motion to consolidate appeal number 14-

18-00753-CV into appeal number 14-18-00710-CV because both are interlocutory 

appeals from orders granting temporary injunctions. Tex. Civ. Prac. & Rem. Code 

Ann. § 51.014(a)(4). We grant the motion in part and order as follows:

1. Each appeal will remain open.

2. Any document meant to be filed in both appeals must bear both appeal 
numbers.

3. Absent a request otherwise from the parties, any brief filed must apply 

to both appeals and is subject to the word limits in Texas Rule of Appellate 

Procedure 9.4(i)(2). For example, appellant shall file a single brief that bears both 

appeal numbers, addresses both orders on appeal, and does not exceed 15,000 words.

4. The parties have notified the court that there is no reporter’s record in 

appeal number 14-18-00710-CV. The court reporter has notified the court that the 

parties have not requested the reporter’s record in 14-18-00753-CV. As we stated in 

our letter dated August 29, 2018, appellant must provide proof by September 13, 

2018, that she has paid for or arranged to pay for the reporter’s record in appeal

number 14-18-00753-CV.

5. Appellant’s brief in both appeals will be due either 20 days after the 

reporter’s record is filed in 14-18-00753-CV, or on a date set by the court in a further 

order.

6. The appeals will be submitted to and considered by the same panel.

PER CURIAM
Coos,

No. 5067.

#### Murielle Theriault *v.*Donald Theriault.

Submitted October 3, 1962.

Decided November 30, 1962.

*Harry Weistrop*for the plaintiff, furnished no brief.

*Arnold P. Hanson*for the defendant, furnished no brief.

Kenison, C. J.

The defendant objected to the motion to reopen the divorce proceedings and the petition for rehearing on the grounds that the pleadings were not verified by affidavit as required by rule of court; the evidence sought to be introduced was not new evidence; and that the allegations in the petition for rehearing as to the paternity of the child were contrary to the plaintiff’s allegations in her prior petition for legal separation.

“In this state it is provided by rule of court that no motion *327grounded upon facts that do not appear in the record or papers on file in the case, or that are not agreed to in writing, will be heard by the court, either in support of or in opposition to the motion, unless the facts are verified by affidavit.” *Goodwin*v. *Blanchard,*73 N. H. 550, 551; Rule 45 of the Rules of the Superior Court, 99 N. H. Appendix, *p.*614. While this rule is well established and of ancient lineage, it does not preclude the court from hearing a motion or petition involving an issue of fact upon oral testimony of witnesses or statement of counsel. *Goodwin*v. *Blanchard, supra; Blodgett*v. *Park,*76 N. H. 435, 438; *Pike*v. *Scribner,*101 N. H. 314, 316. While the plaintiff’s pleadings to reopen, and rehear the matter were not verified by affidavit, it does not appear that the Court’s denial of the motion and petition was based on this procedural ground. *Huey*v. *Company,*81 N. H. 103; *Morin v. Insurance Co.,*85 N. H. 471; *Carpenter*v. *Carpenter,*78 N. H. 440.

The plaintiff’s motion and petition to reopen and rehear the divorce proceedings did not allege new evidence which was not available to the plaintiff at the time of the original hearing. Insofar as the motion and petition cast doubt on the paternity of the child, it is clear that this was certainly evidence within the knowledge of the plaintiff which if true could have been alleged in the previous petition. The Court stated that custody of the child would not be awarded to the mother in any event even if a rehearing were to be granted. In this situation we can find no error in the Court’s ruling. *Pollini*v. *Pollini,*103 N. H. 183; *Fortuna*v. *Fortuna,*103 N. H. 547. *Cf. Kennard*v. *Kennard,*87 N. H. 320.

The absence of a brief from the appealing party makes it difficult to ascertain the specific basis upon which the plaintiff claims that the Court committed error *(Kibbee*v. *Kibbee,*99 N. H. 215-216) but we have considered the whole case in the light of the record and exhibits before us and find no error or abuse of discretion in the Court’s denial of the motion to reopen and the petition to rehear these divorce proceedings. *Powell*v. *Powell,*97 N. H. 301, 303; *Pollini*v. *Pollini, supra;*Grimes, Pitfalls in Domestic Relations Proceedings, 1 N. H. Bar J. (No. 4) 15 (1959).

*Exceptions overruled.*

All concurred.