alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsEfficiency and Regulation of Commercial Low Power DC/DC Converter Modules at Low TemperaturesDC/DC converters that are capable of operating at cryogenic temperatures are anticipated to play an important role in the power systems of future NASA deep space missions. Design of these converters to survive cryogenic temperatures will improve the power system performance, and reduce development and launch costs. At the NASA Glenn Research Center Low Temperature Electronics Laboratory, several commercial off-the-shelf dc/dc converter modules were evaluated for their low temperature performance. Various parameters were investigated as a function of temperature, in the range of 20 C to -190 C. Data pertaining to the efficiency and voltage regulation of the tested converters is presented and discussed.Document ID20000081672Acquisition SourceGlenn Research CenterDocument TypePreprint (Draft being sent to journal)AuthorsElbuluk, Malik E.*(Akron Univ. Akron, OH United States)*Gerber, Scott*(DYNACS Engineering Co., Inc. Brook Park, OH United States)*Hammoud, Ahmad*(DYNACS Engineering Co., Inc. Brook Park, OH United States)*Patterson, Richard L.*(NASA Glenn Research Center Cleveland, OH United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 7, 2013Publication DateJuly 1, 2000Subject CategoryElectronics And Electrical EngineeringReport/Patent NumberNASA/TM-2000-210251AIAA Paper 2000-2800E-12371NAS 1.15:210251Meeting InformationMeeting: Intersociety Energy Conversion EngineeringLocation: Las Vegas, NVCountry: United StatesStart Date: July 24, 2000End Date: July 28, 2000Sponsors:American Inst. of Aeronautics and AstronauticsFunding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 632-6A-1HCONTRACT_GRANT: NAS3-98008Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightPublic Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType20000081672.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
```

[Congressional Bills 118th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H.R. 8641 Engrossed in House (EH)]

<DOC>
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
118th CONGRESS
  2d Session
                                H. R. 8641

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
  at 401 Main Street in Brawley, California, as the ``Walter Francis 
                 Ulloa Memorial Post Office Building''.

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

SECTION 1. WALTER FRANCIS ULLOA MEMORIAL POST OFFICE BUILDING.

    (a) Designation.--The facility of the United States Postal Service 
located at 401 Main Street in Brawley, California, shall be known and 
designated as the ``Walter Francis Ulloa Memorial Post Office 
Building''.
    (b) References.--Any reference in a law, map, regulation, document, 
paper, or other record of the United States to the facility referred to 
in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference to the ``Walter 
Francis Ulloa Memorial Post Office Building''.

            Passed the House of Representatives December 4, 2024.

            Attest:

                                                                 Clerk.
118th CONGRESS

  2d Session

                               H. R. 8641

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located 
  at 401 Main Street in Brawley, California, as the ``Walter Francis 
                 Ulloa Memorial Post Office Building''.
```
EXHIBIT 32





TIRE INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL SOLUTIONS INC.





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 Annual Report of Tire International Environmental Solutions Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Antonio Care, as Principal Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





(1)
The 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.








Date: March 30, 2010
By:
/s/ Antonio CareName:
Antonio CareTitle:
Principal Executive Officer




A signed original of this written statement required by Section 1350 of Title 18 of the United States Code has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.





The foregoing certification is being furnished as an exhibit to the Report pursuant to Item 601(b)(32) of Regulation S-K and Section 1350 of Title 18 of the United States Code and, accordingly, is not being filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission as part of the Report and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company under the Securities Act of 1933 or the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (whether made before or after the date of the Report, irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in such filing.)
Order filed December 9 , 2014.

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

NO. 14

- 13

- 00370

- CR

EARNEST DEMONE HEBER T, Appellant

V.
THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee
On Appeal from the 248th District Court

Harris County, Texas T rial Court Cause No. 1364909



### ORDER

This appeal has been pending for over a year. When the appeal was filed,

a ppellant was not represented by appellate counsel. Appellant ’ s brief was originally due July 23, 2013

. When the brief was not filed after appel lant was granted two extensions of time to obtain funds to retain an attorney, the court abated the appeal and requested that the trial court make a determination about whether appellant was entitled to appointed counsel. After a hearing, the trial court
d etermined appellant is not indigent. On December 17, 2013, we reinstated the appeal and ordered appellant to file a brief on or before January 21, 2014. Appellant then requested and was granted two extensions of time until May 27,2014, with a notation tha t no further extensions would be granted absent

exceptional circumstances. No brief was filed.
On July 24, 2014, the court again abated the appeal and requested the trial court to make findings about whether appellant had effectively abandoned the appeal by failing to make arrangements to file a brief, as set out in Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure 38.8(b). On August 15, 2014, a record of the second abatement hearing was filed. At that hearing, retained counsel, Tom Zakes
, appeared for appellant

. Counsel informed the court that he believed he could file the brief by November 15, 2014. Accordingly, we reinstated the appeal and set appellant’s brief due Monday, November 17, 2014. No brief was filed. On November 18, 2014, the court notified appellant that the brief was past due.

On December 5, 2014, counsel filed a motion for extension of time to file appellant’s brief, asserting that this was the first motion to extend time to file the
brief. While the December 5 motion is counsel’s first extension request, we note that appellant was granted numerous extensions of time before counsel was retained, and retained counsel was granted 90 days to file the brief after he made an appearance in this case. We GRANT the motion, but issue the following order:

W e order To m Zakes to file a brief with the clerk of this c ourt on or before December 31, 2014

. No further extensions will be granted absent exceptional
circumstances. If counsel does not timely file appellant’s brief as ordered, t he c ourt
may issue an order abating the appeal and directing the trial court to conduct a hearing to determine the reason for the failure to file the brief.

PER CURIAM

Panel consists of Chief Justice Frost and Justices Boyce and McCally.
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

March 7, 2018

No. 04

- 17

- 00467

- CV

Erasmo CANTU and Eugenia Cantu

,

Appellants

v.

FALCON INTERNATIONAL BANK

,

Appellee

From the 365th Judicial District Court, Maverick County, Texas

Trial Court No. 11

- 08

- 26743

- MCVAJA

Honorable Amado J. Abascal, III, Judge Presiding



### O R D E R

Sitting: Sandee Bryan Marion , Chief Justice

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

The appellants ’ motion for extension of time to file reply brief is hereby GRANTED.

Time is extended to March 16, 2018.

It is so ORDERED on March 7, 2018.

PER CURIAM

ATTESTED TO:

___________________ ________________

KEITH E. HOTTLE

, Clerk of Court
I 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. R. 8272 

To prohibit the Secretary of Transportation from conditioning the receipt 

of Federal financial assistance on reducing the dimensions of a runway, 

an apron, or a taxiway of certain airports, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 7, 2024 

Mr. HUIZENGA introduced the following bill; which was referred to the 

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure 

A BILL 

To prohibit the Secretary of Transportation from conditioning the receipt of Federal financial assistance on 

reducing the dimensions of a runway, an apron, or a 

taxiway of certain airports, and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Runway Integrity and 

5 Military Readiness Act of 2024’’. 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
2 

•HR 8272 IH

1 SEC. 2. PROHIBITION ON CERTAIN RUNWAY LENGTH RE2 QUIREMENTS. 

3 Notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Sec4 retary of Transportation may not require an airport to 

5 shorten the length or width of the runway, apron, or taxi6 way of the airport as a condition for the receipt of Federal 

7 financial assistance if the airport directly supports a base 

8 of the United States Air Force or the Air National Guard 

9 at the airport, regardless of the stationing of military air10 craft. 

Æ 


kjohnson on DSK7ZCZBW3PROD with $$_JOB
**UN PUBLISHED** 

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 14** 
**- 6168** 

COLECO TAYLOR BEST , Plaintiff

- Appellant ,

v.

TRAVIS R. SPARKS; MATT MILLER; CHUCK ARNOLD; AARON CANTWELL; JERIMEE HOOKER; DEPUTY HOWELL; CHRIS WORTH; MICHAEL DAWSON; BRIAN DAWSON; CHARLES SHAEFFER ,
Defendants

- Appellees

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina , at Raleigh

. Louise W. Flanagan , District Judge. ( 5:13

- ct

- 03140

- FL )

Submitted : March 27 , 2014 Decided: April 1, 2014

Before MOTZ , Circuit Judge , and HAMILTON and DAVIS, Senior Circuit Judges

.

Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

.

Coleco Taylor Best, Appellant Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this ci rcuit.2 PER CURIAM:
Coleco Taylor Best appeals the district court ’ s order
dismissing as frivolous his civil rights complaint. We have
reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly,
we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Best v.
Sparks , No. 5:13

- ct

- 03140

- FL (E.D.N.C. Jan. 8, 2014). We
dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal
contentions are adequately presented in the materials before

th is court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
(V.D. 99)

#### T. D. Downing Co., a/c United China & Glass Co. *v.*United States

Entry No. 2649.

(Decided February 27, 1959)

*Philip Stein*for the plaintiff.

*George Cochran Doub,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Oliver, Chief Judge:

This matter is before me on remand from proceedings decided by the third division of this court in *T. D. Downing Co., a/c United China & Glass Co.*v. *United States,*38 Cust. Ct. *424398, Abstract 60449, and it has been submitted for decision on a written stipulation, reading as follows:

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between counsel for the respective parties hereto, subject to the approval of the Court, as to the merchandise covered by the Remand of Protest enumerated on the attached Schedule “A”, that, at the time of exportation to the United States, the price at which such or similar merchandise was freely offered for sale to all purchasers in the principal market of the country from which exported in the usual wholesale quantity and in the ordinary course of trade for export to the United States including costs of containers and covering of whatever nature and all other costs, charges and expenses incident to placing the merchandise ready for shipment to the United States was the appraised value less additions made to meet the advances by the Appraiser in similar cases covering the non-dutiable so-called (E.O.B.) charges for inland freight, insurance premium, storage, hauling and lighterage added by the importer on entry.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that there was no higher foreign value for merchandise such or similar to the merchandise herein at the time of exportation thereof.

> IT IS FURTHER STIPULATED AND AGREED that the Remand of Protest, enumerated herein, may be deemed submitted for decision on the foregoing stipulation.

On the agreed facts, I find export value, as that value is defined in section 402(d) of the Tariff Act of 1930, to be the proper basis for appraisement of the merchandise in question, and I hold such dutiable value therefor to be the appraised value, less additions made to meet the advances by the appraiser in similar cases covering the non-dutiable so-called (F.O.B.) charges for inland freight, insurance premium, storage, hauling, and lighterage added by the importer on entry.

Judgment will be rendered accordingly.
#### UNITED STATES, Appellee v CECIL V. JOHNSTON, Private E-2, U. S. Army, Appellant

9 USCMA 87, 25 CMR 349

No. 11,122

Decided March 28, 1958

*Captain John F. Christensen*and *First Lieutenant Frank J. Lane, Jr.,*were on the brief for Appellant, Accused.

*Lieutenant Colonel John G. Lee*and *First Lieutenant Avram G. Hammer*were on the brief for Appellee, United States.

Opinion of the Court

Robert E. Quinn, Chief Judge:

The Government concedes that the post-trial review is inadequate and misleading. See United States v Lee, 8 USCMA 709, 25 CMR 213. The decision of the board of review is reversed and the record of trial is returned to The Judge Advocate General of the Army for reference to a competent convening authority for further proceedings in accordance with Articles 61 and 64, Uniform Code of Military Justice, 10 USC §§ 861, 864. United States v Dow, 8 USCMA 734, 25 CMR 238.

Judge Ferguson concurs.

Latimer, Judge

(dissenting):

I dissent for the reasons expressed in my separate opinion in United States v Lee, 8 USCMA 709, 25 CMR 213.
No. 41865.

Suit *4203.*

#### *International Graphite & Electrode Corp.*v. *United States.*

C. D. 38 reversed.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA 

) 

BARBARA JEAN KONE, ) 

) 

Plaintiff, ) 

) 

v. ) 

) 

Civil Action No. 11-0054 (RJL) 

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA, et al., ) 

) 

Defendants. ) 

) 

ORDER 

For the reasons stated in the accompanying Memorandum Opinion, it is hereby 

ORDERED that defendant District of Columbia Public Schools' motion to dismiss [Dkt. 

#10] is GRANTED; and it is 

FURTHER ORDERED that the complaint and this civil action are DISMISSED. 

This is a final appealable Order. See Fed. R. App. P. 4(a). 

SO ORDERED. 

DA;~~ 

~/ 31> I" 

(ZA 

United 

RIJHA~ States District Judge
No. 64975.

#### Inter Maritime Fwdg. Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 60/4042 (New York).

Opinion by

Wilson, J.

The protest was dismissed.
<pre>
EXHIBIT 32.1

CERTIFICATIONS OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND
CHIEF FINANCIAL 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 annual report on Form 10-KSB of RPM Technologies, Inc.
(the "Company") for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2004 (the "Report"),
the undersigned hereby certify in their capacities as Chief Executive Officer
and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, respectively, 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, 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: May 18, 2005                                   By:       /s/ Randy Zych
                                                        ---------------------
                                                                   Randy Zych
                                                      Chief Executive Officer
                                                 (principal executive officer)


Date: May 18, 2005                                    By:     /s/ David Lade
                                                         -------------------
                                                                  David Lade
                                                     Chief Financial Officer
                                               (principal financial officer)


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other
document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signatures
that appear in typed form within the electronic version of this written
statement required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and will be
retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission
or its staff upon request.
_____________

No. 95-2953SI

_____________

Marcia Prew, *

*

Appellant, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the Southern

* District of Iowa.

Shirley S. Chater, Commissioner *

of Social Security, * [UNPUBLISHED]

*

Appellee. *

_____________

Submitted: May 1, 1996

 Filed: May 7, 1996

_____________

Before FAGG, BOWMAN, and HANSEN, Circuit Judges.

_____________

PER CURIAM.

Marcia Prew appeals the district court's order upholding the

Commissioner's denial of disability insurance benefits. For the reasons

discussed below, we affirm.

We conclude the Commissioner's decision that Prew could perform her

past relevant work is supported by substantial evidence on the record as

a whole. See Robinson v. Sullivan, 956 F.2d 836, 838 (8th Cir. 1992)

(standard of review). The Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) properly

discounted the 1992 and 1993 statements of the treating physicians because

those statements contained vocational opinions or were unsupported by

medical records contemporaneous to Prew's last insured date. See Nelson

v. Sullivan, 946 F.2d 1314, 1316-17 (8th Cir. 1991) (per curiam) (medical

testimony is not conclusive on the ultimate issue of disability); Jones v.

Chater, 65 F.3d 102, 104 (8th Cir. 1995) (where impairment onset date is
-2-

critical, retrospective medical opinions alone are usually not sufficient).

Further, the ALJ correctly used the criteria listed in Polaski v. Heckler,

739 F.2d 1320 (8th Cir. 1984), in assessing Prew's credibility. Finally,

the ALJ posed a proper hypothetical question to the vocational expert based

on Prew's credible limitations. See Starr v. Sullivan, 981 F.2d 1006, 1008

(8th Cir. 1992) (vocational expert's response to hypothetical question

provides substantial evidence where hypothetical question sets forth with

reasonable precision the claimant's impairments); Rappoport v. Sullivan,

942 F.2d 1320, 1323 (8th Cir. 1991) (hypothetical question need only

include claimant's limitations found credible).

We thus affirm.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 60 (Thursday, March 29, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 14789]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: E7-5761]


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

DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY

Federal Energy Regulatory Commission

[Docket No. OR07-7-001]


Tesoro Refining and Marketing Company, Complainant v. Calnev Pipe 
Line, L.L.C., Respondent; Notice of Complaint Amendment

March 23, 2007.
    Take notice that on March 16, 2007, Tesoro Refining and Marketing 
Company hereby amends its Complaint dated January 30, 2007 to challenge 
grandfathered rates in the event that the Commission concludes that 
Calnev's rates are grandfathered.
    Any person desiring to intervene or to protest this filing must 
file in accordance with Rules 211 and 214 of the Commission's Rules of 
Practice and Procedure (18 CFR 385.211, 385.214). Protests will be 
considered by the Commission in determining the appropriate action to 
be taken, but will not serve to make protestants parties to the 
proceeding. Any person wishing to become a party must file a notice of 
intervention or motion to intervene, as appropriate. The Respondent's 
answer and all interventions, or protests must be filed on or before 
the comment date. The Respondent's answer, motions to intervene, and 
protests must be served on the Complainants.
    The Commission encourages electronic submission of protests and 
interventions in lieu of paper using the ``eFiling'' link at http://www.ferc.gov. Persons unable to file electronically should submit an 
original and 14 copies of the protest or intervention to the Federal 
Energy Regulatory Commission, 888 First Street, NE., Washington, DC 
20426.
    This filing is accessible online at http://www.ferc.gov, using the 
``eLibrary'' link and is available for review in the Commission's 
Public Reference Room in Washington, DC. There is an ``eSubscription'' 
link on the Web site that enables subscribers to receive e-mail 
notification when a document is added to a subscribed docket(s). For 
assistance with any FERC Online service, please e-mail 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#8acccfd8c9c5e4e6e3e4efd9fffafae5f8fecaeceff8e9a4ede5fc"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="f6b0b3a4b5b9989a9f9893a5838686998482b690938495d8919980">[email protected]</span></a>, or call (866) 208-3676 (toll free). For 
TTY, call (202) 502-8659.
    Comment Date: 5 p.m. eastern time on April 5, 2007.

Philis J. Posey,
Acting Secretary.
[FR Doc. E7-5761 Filed 3-28-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6717-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
No. 52351.

protests 486871-G, etc. (New York).

#### H. H. Schmidt Glove Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Tilson, J.

It was stipulated that the merchandise is the same in all material respects as the gloves which were the subject of *United States*v. *Julius Kayser & Co.*(33 C. C. P. A. 179, C. A. D. 333). The claim at 50 percent ad valorem under paragraph 915, plus any additional duty applicable under paragraph 924, was therefore sustained.
Electronically Filed Intermediate Court of Appeals CAAP-11-0000525 17-JUL-2013 08:37 AM