alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
News United States Air Force
 QRIP-equipped CAF F-35s set the stage for future Crowd-Sourced Flight Data platform integrationPublished Nov. 27, 2022
                        
                        By 1st Lt Lindsey Heflin
                        
                        
                        53rd Wing
                **EGLIN AIR FORCE BASE, Fla. (AFNS) --**
                In March 2022, the first set of U.S. Air Force operational aircraft were equipped with the Quick Reaction Instrumentation Package, or QRIP, enabling the first Combat Air Forces contribution to Crowd-Sourced Flight Data, or CSFD.
The 59th Test and Evaluation Squadron partnered with the **Test Resource Management Center** to leverage advances in technology and invent QRIP.
Instrumentation packages like QRIP are traditionally reserved for integration on test aircraft, designed to collect data strictly for test and evaluation purposes. These devices have historically been too large, cumbersome and expensive to consider for operational aircraft integration until now.
The QRIP is roughly the size of a football with the capacity to record almost a terabyte of data per flight. Applying this technology to CAF aircraft significantly boosts the amount of CSFD available to developers within minutes versus the traditional weeks or months to access the data. Ultimately, the QRIP informs operational data sets while improving mission data reprogramming, data products and software development.
“QRIP captures data that is currently not being recorded, or being discarded at the cutting room floor, and makes it available and accessible at the speed of relevance,” said Lt. Col. Nathan Malafa, 59th Test and Evaluation Squadron commander. “Big data analytics, machine learning, and artificial intelligence do the heavy lifting to sift through this data and highlight where action needs to be taken.”
Nineteen CAF jets have been modified with QRIP to date, with several taking part in exercises outside of the continental United States. The CSFD gathered thus far has accelerated reprogramming changes, highlighted software deficiencies, enabled rapid debriefs, and provided data products previously unavailable to pilots and intelligence officers.
“This is the power of edge-node computing, and we’ve now demonstrated it to great effect by watching video from OCONUS sorties minutes after the data is ingested over 6,000 miles away,” Malafa said. “The implications of this are only limited by our imagination.”
While this technology is currently only implemented within the **F-35** fleet, the intent is to expand to all fielded U.S. Air Force fighter variants, as well as other platforms.
“The more data we can collect from the Air Force’s diverse portfolio puts the crowd in CSFD and amplifies data sets we can use to gain competitive advantage against our adversaries and competitors,” Malafa said.FS 



USAF 



AF 



Air Force 



Air Combat Command 



F-35 Lightning II 



59th Test and Evaluation Squadron 



Test Resource Management Center 



Quick Reaction Instrumentation Package 



Eglin AFB 



Combat Air Forces 



Crowd-Sourced Flight Data
#### Moses A. McNaughton v. Charles E. McLean et al.

*Execution*— Time *of sale thereunder*— Unseasonable *hour.*

An execution sale made in the evening, between 9 and 10 o’clock, and after most of the members of an association interested therein had left the place of sale, is void, at least as to persons having knowledge of the facts.

*Mandamus.*

Submitted October 31, 1888.

Denied January 11, 1889.

*251Eelator applied for *mandamus*to compel respondent, as financial secretary of the Laboring Men's Building & Sayings Association, to transfer to relator certain shares of stock in said association bid off by him at an execution sale. The facts are stated in the opinion.

*James W. Blakely,*tor relator.

*Dwight D. Boot,*for respondents.

Sheravood, C. J.

The relator, as executor of the will of Mary E. McNaughton, brought suit before a justice in the city of Jackson by attachment against Charles A. Turner, and recovered a judgment for $239.37, and $5 costs. Turner had some stock in the above-mentioned building and savings association, and the attachment Avas served by a levy upon the same, four shares of which wore taken upon the execution issued upon the judgment, and sold on March 27, 1888, to McNaughton, the executor, for the sum of $104; it being the amount of money paid on said shares, and interest to the time of sale, less one dollar for transfer fees, charged by the association for entering transfer, when purchases of stock Avere made by parties not members.

Eelator alleges that he has paid or tendered all assessments upon the shares of stock he purchased upon the sale, and has demanded of the association a transfer of the stock to him upon its books after shoAving to its officers the evidences of his title thereto, and requested the proper certificate showing such transfer, but with such demand and request the association and its officers refuse to comply, and he prays for a *mandamus*requiring them to do so.

Eespondents make answer to the petition of relator, and among other things say that the sale under which relator claims to be the owner of said stock was made by *252the officer holding the execution in the hall of the association, in the evening, between 9 and 10 o’clock, after a meeting had been held, and after all the members but three had left and gone away; and they aver that such sale was void, and conferred no rights upon the relator respecting the stock. *Carnrick v. Myers,*14 Barb. 9.

The sale made by an officer under an execution at such an hour, and under such circumstances, was void, at least as to the parties having knowledge of the facts, and in this case they had such knowledge. In New York the statute requires that the sale shall be made between 9 o’clock in the forenoon and the setting of the sun, but, independently of any statute, we think that'a public sale of property ordered by court, at such an unseasonable hour, ought not to be sustained. It would subject the debtor’s property 'in a large majority of cases to great sacrifice, and must be held against public policy and void.

The writ will be denied, with costs to respondents.

The other Justices concurred.
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 177 (Tuesday, September 14, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 55833]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-22914]


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

SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION

[Disaster Declaration <greek-i>12303 and <greek-i>12304]


Tennessee Disaster <greek-i>TN-00042

AGENCY: U.S. Small Business Administration.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This is a notice of an Administrative declaration of a 
disaster for the State of Tennessee dated 09/07/2010.
    Incident: Severe Storms and Flooding.
    Incident Period: 08/16/2010.

DATES: Effective Date: 09/07/2010.
    Physical Loan Application Deadline Date: 11/08/2010.
    Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date: 06/07/2011.

ADDRESSES: Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business 
Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport 
Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: A. Escobar, Office of Disaster 
Assistance, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street, SW., 
Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Notice is hereby given that as a result of 
the Administrator's disaster declaration, applications for disaster 
loans may be filed at the address listed above or other locally 
announced locations.
    The following areas have been determined to be adversely affected 
by the disaster:

Primary Counties: Putnam.
Contiguous Counties:
    Tennessee: Cumberland, Dekalb, Fentress, Jackson, Overton, Smith, 
White.

    The Interest Rates are:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                Percent
------------------------------------------------------------------------
For Physical Damage:
  Homeowners With Credit Available Elsewhere.................      5.000
  Homeowners Without Credit Available Elsewhere..............      2.500
  Businesses With Credit Available Elsewhere.................      6.000
  Businesses Without Credit Available Elsewhere..............      4.000
  Non-Profit Organizations With Credit Available Elsewhere...      3.625
  Non-Profit Organizations Without Credit Available Elsewhere      3.000
For Economic Injury:
  Businesses & Small Agricultural Cooperatives Without Credit      4.000
   Available Elsewhere.......................................
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Non-Profit Organizations Without Credit Available Elsewhere 3.000.
    The number assigned to this disaster for physical damage is 12303 B 
and for economic injury is 123040.
    The States which received an EIDL Declaration <greek-i> are 
Tennessee.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Numbers 59002 and 59008)

    Dated: September 7, 2010.
Karen G. Mills,
Administrator.
[FR Doc. 2010-22914 Filed 9-13-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8025-01-P
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 Annual Report of Aristocrat Group Corp. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K /A Amendment No. 2 for the year ended July 31, 2013 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Robert Federowicz, Sole Director, Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial 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 aspects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.  Date:  April 8, 2014  /s/ Robert FederowiczRobert FederowiczSole Director and CEO(Principal Executive, Accounting andFinancial Officer)
```

[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 80 (Monday, May 15, 1995)]
[House]
[Page H4934]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

                                 RECESS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 12 of rule I, the Chair 
declares the House in recess subject to the call of the Chair.
  Accordingly (at 5 o'clock and 2 minutes p.m.), the House adjourned 
subject to the call of the Chair.

                          ____________________
```
<PAGE>

                                                                Exhibit 32.1

                           CERTIFICATION PURSUANT
                            TO SECTION 906 OF THE
                         SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         In connection with the quarterly report of Engineered Support
Systems, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended July 31,
2004 (the "Report"), I, Gerald E. Daniels, Vice Chairman and Chief Executive
Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 that:

         (1)      The Report complies with Sections 13(a) and 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.


Date:  September 14, 2004
     ------------------------------


By:   /s/ Gerald A. Potthoff
     ------------------------------
      Gerald A. Potthoff
      Vice Chairman, Chief
      Executive Officer and President


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Engineered Support Systems, Inc. and will be retained by
Engineered Support Systems, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and
Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION

I, Patrick Cunningham, certify that:

1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Manning & Napier, Inc.;

2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary
to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash
flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

4. The registrants other certifying
officer and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:

a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our
supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b. Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our
conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

c. Disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent fiscal quarter (the registrants
fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and

5. The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over
financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrants
ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that
involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.



/S/    PATRICK CUNNINGHAMPatrick CunninghamChief Executive Officer(principal executive officer)


Date: March 27, 2012
### M A N D A T E

TO THE 117TH DISTRICT COURT of NUECES COUNTY, GREETINGS:

Before our Court of Appeals for the Thirteenth District of Texas, on the 16th day of

October, 2014, the cause upon appeal to revise or reverse your judgment between

Rudy Siller, Appellant,

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee.

CAUSE NO. 13-14-00129-CR (Tr.Ct.No. 13-CR-2853-B)

was determined; and therein our said Court made its order in these words:

THE THIRTEENTH COURT OF APPEALS, having considered this cause on

appeal, concludes that the judgment of the trial court should be AFFIRMED. The Court

orders the judgment of the trial court AFFIRMED.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.

      

WHEREFORE, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court of Appeals

for the Thirteenth District of Texas, in this behalf, and in all things have it duly

recognized, obeyed and executed.

WITNESS, the Hon. Rogelio Valdez, Chief Justice of our Court of Appeals, with the seal

thereof affixed, at the City of Edinburg, Texas this 6th day of January, 2015.

Dorian E. Ramirez, CLERK
#### Israel Fearing *versus*Horatio N. Clawson.

August Term 1828.

If an infant defendant who is arrested, does not appear to the action, nor take any notice of the arrest; upon motion of the plaintiff, and on notice to the infant, the court will appoint a nominal guardian, *ad litem,*for him in order to prevent the proceedings from being afterwards set aside.

*Mr. W. Price,*in behalf of the plaintiff in this case, made an application for the appointment of a guardian *ad litem*to the defendant, an infant, who had been arrested, but had not appeared, nor taken any notice *[of*the arrest. He read an affidavit setting forth, that the action was brought for *necessaries*furnished to the infant.

The plaintiff, he said, could not safely take a default against the defendant, because, as laches cannot be imputed to an infant, he might, after the default, cause the same to be set aside; on the application of his guardian. From the books of practice, and the decisions of our courts, it appears, that the guardian named need not be a real person to appear and make defence; but a rule may be entered for the appointment of a nominal guardian merely. [2 *Sell. Prac.*68. 2 *Arch. Prac.*145. 6 *Cowen's R.*50. ]

*Per Curiam.*

Were it not for the authorities cited, we should incline to the opinion, that in bailable actions, the guardian to be appointed should be some *real*person to appear and protect the rights of the infant. But it seems from the books, that a mere *nominal*guardian may be named in cases where the infant neglects to appear. The rule does not seem to be well founded, and this court will hereafter establish some general regulation to establish its practice upon the subject.

In the present instance, let a rule be entered for the appointment of a nominal guardian *ad litem,*for the infant ¡defendant, upon the plaintiff’s giving him due notice of the rule, that he may have an apportunity to come in and name a guardian for himself.

[ W. S. Sears *atty. for plff.]*
AUSTIN. April 11, 1966

Honorable Sylvester Lewie Opinion No. (C-652) County Attoiney Lampasai5

County Lampseas, Texas 

### Re: Disposition of fine and court ~* ~... coed pala my a aefendant after being placed on probation under the terms of Article 42.13, Code of Criminal Procedure, 1966. Dear Mr. Lewis:

You have **r8qU8Et8d an**  opinion of this office con-

~. ~.~. cernlng the,followmg quear;lon:

,JVhsn a defendant ha6 been placed on probation in accordance with the terms of Article 

### 42.13, Code of 

### CriminalProcedure of Texas, 1966, commonly referred to a8 the Mlrdemeanor Probation Law, and at the direction of the Court ha8 paid a fine and court costs, will these have to be returned to the defendant upon the completion of his probationary period or will the county retain such funds. The new Code of Criminal Procedure is silent with regard to the question you have presented UII. We do note, however, LUId8rthe provisions of Article 42.13, Section 5 (b) (S),

that one of $he terms which may be included in a miadem8anor probation, reada a8 follows:

"Pay his fine, if the court so orders and, If on: be asseaued, in one or several,sums,

. . e There is no spklfic provision in the Mlsdemanor Probation Law requiring 

### a defendant to pay court costs but the general court cost provisions of the code which apply to alltiddmsamr cases would be applicable in a probation 

### c(Lae, and a defendant granted probation would be liable for the costs under those statute8 If the payment of coats wa6 ordered by the court 

### a8 on8 of the term6 of the probation, and said defendant would not be entitled to have the costs returned~

to him after completing his probation. We further note that in order for a defendant to receive probation under,the term of the Mlademeanor Probation
-3158-

### HonorableSylvesterLewis,page 2 (c-652)



### Law he 

### must first apply to the court for suchprobation. In otherwords, he,mustask that he be placed upon probation. It is our opinion that becausea defendantmust ask for probation,by so doinghe necessarilyagrees to accept the term8 of the probation,which are in accord with Section5 

### (b) (8) 

### of Article 42.13, and agrees to pay the fine and costs of court if the court so orders. Thereforehe is not entitledto have the fine and costs of court returnedto h1m when he completeshis probationary period,and saidmoney shallbe retainedby the county. SUMMARY L---e--

r When a defendantis grantedprobationunder

Article 42.13, C.C.P.,and.18 ordered to pay a fin8 and Court cost8 and do8e pay 881118, upon the completionof hle probationary period he is not entitledto receivethe money back but rather said hum shallbe retainedby the county. Yours very truly, WAGGONERCARR AttorneyGeneral of Texas

SK/lb APPROVED OPINIONCOMMITTEE W. V. Geppert,Chairmen HowardRender CharlesSwarmer GilbertPena JohnBanks APPROVEDF'OR

THE ATTORNEYGENERAL BY: T. B. Wright

-3159-
exhibit_10-13.htm










Exhibit 10.13


 


Schedule of Omitted Documents


of EZTrader, Inc.


 


Each of the following lenders, listed in the table below, has entered into Convertible Loan Agreement between such lender and the Company, dated October 29, 2013. These agreements have not been filed as an exhibit pursuant to Instruction 2 of Item 601 of Regulation S-K; these documents are substantially identical in all material respects to Exhibit 10.9 to this Registration Statement on Form 10, except as noted below:





	
Lender

	 	
Loan amount

	 	 	
Shares

	 	 	
Warrants

	 	 	
Exercise price

	 	 	
Total Shares

	 	 	
Intrest Rate

	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 
	
KOR - VC limited

	 	$	275,460	 	 	 	1,443,862	 	 	 	144,386	 	 	 	0.19078	 	 	 	1,588,248	 	 	 	10	%
	
ABC S.R.L

	 	$	206,595	 	 	 	1,082,897	 	 	 	108,290	 	 	 	0.19078	 	 	 	1,191,187	 	 	 	10	%
	
Alesandro Balbo

	 	$	55,092	 	 	 	288,772	 	 	 	28,877	 	 	 	0.19078	 	 	 	317,649	 	 	 	10	%
	
Maurizio Valfre

	 	$	55,092	 	 	 	288,772	 	 	 	28,877	 	 	 	0.19078	 	 	 	317,649	 	 	 	10	%
	
ASGARD S.R.L

	 	$	68,865	 	 	 	360,996	 	 	 	36,097	 	 	 	0.19078	 	 	 	397,093	 	 	 	10	%
	
Oigroig S.L.R

	 	$	68,865	 	 	 	360,966	 	 	 	36,097	 	 	 	0.19078	 	 	 	397,063	 	 	 	10	%
	
Finanderea S.P.A

	 	$	413,190	 	 	 	2,165,793	 	 	 	216,579	 	 	 	0.19078	 	 	 	2,382,372	 	 	 	10	%
	
FRABE S.L.R

	 	$	247,914	 	 	 	1,299,476	 	 	 	129,948	 	 	 	0.19078	 	 	 	1,429,424	 	 	 	10	%
	  	 	$	1,391,073	 	 	 	7,291,534	 	 	 	729,151	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	8,020,685