alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### OCEAN PINES, LTD. v. BOROUGH OF POINT PLEASANT.

February 27, 1987.

Petition for certification granted. (See 213 *N.J.Super.*351)
- Explore NASA’s History
- NASA History Office
- Publications and Resources   - NASA History Series
  - News and Notes
  - Aeronautics and Space Report of the President
  - Oral Histories
  - Research Resources
- NASA Archives

# 							The Wind and Beyond						

						A Documentary Journey into the History of Aerodynamics in America					

The airplane ranks as one of history’s most ingenious and phenomenal inventions. It has surely been one of the most world-changing. How ideas about aerodynamics first came together and how the science and technology evolved to forge the airplane into the revolutionary machine that it became is the epic story told in this multivolume work, *The Wind and Beyond: A Documentary Journey into the History of Aerodynamics in America*.

*The Wind and Beyond* is an award-winning reference work, drawing together the historical documents that spell out the advancements in aviation technology and aerodynamics throughout the twentieth century.

**NASA SP-4409**

## 				Download the e-Books			

## Volume I: The Ascent of the Airplane

Volume I is an account of the invention of the airplane and creation of the aeronautical research establishment in the United States. Edited by James R. Hansen with D. Bryan Taylor, Jeremy Kinney, and J. Lawrence Lee. PDF (4.7 MB)

## Volume II: Reinventing the Airplane

Volume II explores the airplane design revolution of the 1920s and 1930s and the quest for improved airfoils. Edited by James R. Hansen with Jeremy Kinney, D. Bryan Taylor, Molly Prickett, and J. Lawrence Lee. PDF (5.9 MB)

## Volume III: Other Paths, Other Flyways

Volume III explores the aerodynamics of airships, flying boats, and rotary-wing aircraft. Edited by James R. Hansen and Jeremy R. Kinney with D. Bryan Taylor, Molly F. Prickett, and J. Lawrence Lee. PDF (16.6 MB)

## More History Publications

Explore related titles in NASA's History Series.

				All NASA History Publications                			

NASA's First A: Aeronautics from 1958–2008NACA to NASA to NowNASA's First 50 Years: Historical PerspectivesExploring the Unknown
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT EDWARD M. MITCHELL, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v. TOTAL ACTION AGAINST POVERTY/HEAD START, No. 98-2546 Defendant-Appellee, and CAROLYN D. HOPPER; CLEO C. SIMS, Defendants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. James C. Turk, District Judge. (CA-96-787-R) Submitted: March 23, 1999 Decided: April 20, 1999 Before WILKINS, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges.

_________________________________________________________________ Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

_________________________________________________________________ COUNSEL Bettina C. Altizer, Jack Vernon Altizer, ALTIZER & ALTIZER,P.C., Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellant. Jonathan Rogers, JONATHAN ROGERS, P.C., Roanoke, Virginia, for Appellee.

_________________________________________________________________Unpublished opinions are not binding pr ecedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).

_________________________________________________________________ OPINION PER CURIAM:Edward M. Mitchell appeals the district court's order granting summary judgment in favor of Total Action Against Poverty/Head Start in Mitchell's employment discrimination action. We have reviewed the record and the district court's opinion and find no reversible error. Mitchell argues that the district court erred in applying the "rigid" framework of McDonnell-Douglas Corp. v. Green , 411 U.S. 792 (1973), and requiring that he show he was repl aced by someone not within the protected class. Instead, to satisfy this prong of the test he suggests that he had to establish only that he was discharged under circumstances raising an inference of illegal discrimination. See, e.g. , Texas Dep't of Community Affairs v. Burdine , 450 U.S. 248, 253 (1981). We need not resolve whether the district court applied the wrong standard as Mitchell fails to make out a prima facie case evenunder the standard he articulates. He fails to raise an inference of illegal discrimination and he also fails to show that he was performing his duties in a satisfactory manner.Mitchell also argues that his retaliatory discharge claim was dismissed in error. We disagree. Because Mitchell fails to show that he was performing his duties in a satisfactory manner, he cannot show that but for the protected conduct, he would not have been terminated. See Dwyer v. Smith , 867 F.2d 184, 190-91 (4th Cir. 1989). Thus, the district court did not err in dismissing the claim. Accordingly, weaffirm the decision of the district court. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presentedin the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process. AFFIRMED 2
# Sitemap

## January 19, 2019

- Home
- Sitemap
- 2019
- 01
- January 19, 2019

            - NASA’s Campaign to Return to the Moon with Global Partners
            - January 2019: The Next Full Moon is the Snow Moon
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. MELVIN VASQUEZ MORALES.

February 6, 1987.

Petition for certification denied.
EX-4.42





 Exhibit 4.42 

July 1, 2019 
 To: Xiamen Qu Plus Plus Technology Development
Co., Ltd. (the “VIE Entity”) 
 To Whom It May Concern: 

To ensure the cash flow requirements of the VIE Entity’s operations are met and/or to set off any loss accrued during such operations, the undersigned,
Qudian Inc. (the “Company”), is obligated and hereby undertakes to provide unlimited financial support to the VIE Entity, to the extent permissible under the applicable laws and regulations of the PRC and the Cayman Islands, whether
or not any such operational loss is actually incurred. The form of financial support shall include, but not limited to, extension of cash, entrusted loans and borrowings. The Company will not request repayment of the loans or borrowings if the VIE
Entity or its shareholders do not have sufficient funds or are unable to repay. 
 The undersigned agrees and acknowledges such undertaking shall be
irrevocable and continuously valid from the date hereof until the date on which all of the equity interests of the VIE Entity have been acquired directly or indirectly by the Company or its designated representative (individual or legal person).

 Please confirm receipt of this letter by returning a signed copy of this letter to the undersigned. 

 

	
	Qudian Inc.
	
	 /s/ Min Luo

	Name: Min Luo
	Title:      Authorized Signatory
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS 

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-15-00422-CR 

MISTI ANN HARGISS APPELLANT

V. 

THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE

---------- 

FROM THE 432ND DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY 

TRIAL COURT NO. 1330997D 

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

MEMORANDUM OPINION1 AND JUDGMENT

---------- 

 We have considered appellant’s “Motion To Dismiss Appeal.” The motion 

complies with rule 42.2(a) of the rules of appellate procedure. Tex. R. App. P.

42.2(a). No decision of this court having been delivered before we received this 

motion, we grant the motion and dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P.

42.2(a), 43.2(f). 

 1See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4. 
2

PER CURIAM 

PANEL: LIVINGSTON, C.J.; DAUPHINOT and GARDNER, JJ. 

DO NOT PUBLISH 

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b) 

DELIVERED: April 7, 2016
H. Res. 116 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

February 14, 2017. 

Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall 

be in order to consider in the House any joint resolution 

specified in section 2 of this resolution. All points of order 

against consideration of each such joint resolution are waived. 

Each such joint resolution shall be considered as read. All 

points of order against provisions in each such joint resolution are waived. The previous question shall be considered as 

ordered on each such joint resolution and on any amendment 

thereto to final passage without intervening motion except: 

(1) one hour of debate equally divided and controlled by the 

chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on 

Education and the Workforce; and (2) one motion to recommit. 

SEC. 2. The joint resolutions referred to in the first section of this resolution are as follows: 

(a) The joint resolution (H.J. Res. 66) disapproving the 

rule submitted by the Department of Labor relating to sav-
2 

•HRES 116 EH 

ings arrangements established by States for non-governmental employees. 

(b) The joint resolution (H.J. Res. 67) disapproving the 

rule submitted by the Department of Labor relating to savings arrangements established by qualified State political subdivisions for non-governmental employees. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
<PAGE>   1
                                                                  EXHIBIT 10.141
                                   DEMAND NOTE

$250,000.00                                                  New York, New York
                                                             June 7, 1999

        FOR VALUE RECEIVED, the undersigned, Wilshire Technologies, Inc. a
California corporation (hereinafter referred to as "Borrower"), hereby
unconditionally PROMISES TO PAY to the order to TRILON DOMINION PARTNERS, LLC, a
Delaware limited liability company ("Lender"), at 245 Park Avenue, 28th Floor,
New York, NY 10167, or at such other place as the holder of this Demand Note may
designate from time to time in writing, in lawful money of the United States of
America and in immediately available funds, the principal amount of Two Hundred
Fifty Thousand and 00/100, DOLLARS ($250,000.00), together with interest on the
unpaid principal amount of this Demand Note outstanding from time to time from
the date hereof, at a rate per annum equal to the Prime rate of interest of 8.5%
plus 3.0%, or the highest rate permitted by law, whichever shall be less.

        The principal amount of the indebtedness evidenced hereby shall be
payable on demand. Interest thereon shall be paid when principal is paid from
the date hereof until such principal amount is paid in full at such interest
rate as specified above. Following failure to pay on demand, Borrower agrees to
pay interest on any overdue payment of principal at a rate per annum equal to
the stated interest rate plus 5%, or the highest rate permitted by law,
whichever shall be less. All interest calculations shall be computed on the
basis of a 360 day year.

        Demand, presentment, protest and notice of nonpayment and protest are
hereby waived by Borrower.

        Borrower shall have no right to make any off-set against or deduct from
any payment due under this Demand Note.

        Principal and interest may be prepaid at any time without penalty.

        This Demand Note may not be changed orally, but only by an agreement in
writing and signed by the party against whom enforcement of such change is
sought.

        All covenants of Borrower in this Demand Note and all rights of the
holder under this Demand Note shall bind Borrower and its successors and
assigns, and all such covenants and rights shall inure to the benefit of the
holder of this Demand Note and its successors and assigns.

        This Demand Note has been delivered and accepted at New York, New York
and shall be interpreted, governed by, and construed in accordance with, the
laws of the State of New York.


                                         Wilshire Technologies, Inc.


                                         By: /s/ Kathleen E. Terry
                                             -----------------------------
                                             Name:  Kathleen E. Terry
                                             Title: Chief Financial Officer
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM DATA RACE,
INC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AS OF AND FOR THE SIX MONTHS ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1997,
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                           5,233
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      666
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                        882
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 6,781
<PP&E>                                           4,066
<DEPRECIATION>                                   2,398
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   8,491
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,106
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                      5,372
<COMMON>                                        29,342
<OTHER-SE>                                    (28,328)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     8,491
<SALES>                                          2,728
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 2,728
<CGS>                                            2,184
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    7,988
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (5,181)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (5,181)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (5,181)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (1.00)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (1.00)
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                                     5
<LEGEND>
     This  schedule  contains  summary  financial   information  extracted  from
Financial  Statements  for the 6 months ended June 30, 1998, and is qualified in
its entirety by reference to such form 10QSB for six months ended June 30, 1998.
<MULTIPLIER>                                                         1
<PERIOD-START>                                             APR-01-1998
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                                    3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                                          27,182
<SECURITIES>                                                     8,680
<RECEIVABLES>                                                   26,435
<ALLOWANCES>                                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                                     88,620    
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                               164,612   
<PP&E>                                                          86,715    
<DEPRECIATION>                                                  62,775   
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                                 491,552   
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                           75,468   
<BONDS>                                                              0
<COMMON>                                                           120     
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                                0
<PREFERRED>                                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                                     413,884 
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                                   491,552  
<SALES>                                                         93,123  
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                               103,296   
<CGS>                                                           33,433   
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                                   73,641   
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                     0   
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                               1,141      
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                                 28,514  
<INCOME-TAX>                                                     1,600
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                                  0 
<DISCONTINUED>                                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                      0
<CHANGES>                                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                                    26,914
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                                      .02  
<EPS-DILUTED>                                                      .02  

</TABLE>
# C o u rt o f

A p p ea ls

o f t h e S t a te o f

G eo rg ia

ATLANTA,_

_ _ __ _ _ __ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ __ _

Th e Co u rt

o f Ap p ea l s h er eb y p a s s es t h e f

o ll owi n g o r der :

A2 2 A1 53 2 . MARI O R. SULLI VAN v . THE STATE.

In 2 0 1 5

, M ari o R. Su l l iv an p l ead ed gu i l ty t o b u rg l ary , ar m e d r obbery

, an d o t h er

cri m es

. In M ay 2 0 2 2

, h e fi l ed a m o t i o n in w h i ch h e e s s e n t i al l y s ou g h t to q u as h t h e

i n d i ct m en t

. Th e t ri al co u r t d e n i ed Su l l i v an ’ s m o ti on , an d h e fi led t h i s ap p eal

. 1 W e

l ack ju ri s d i ct i o n

. A ch al l en g e t o t he v al i d i t y o f a n i n d ict m en t i s a ch al len g e to a cri m i n al

co n vi ct i o n

. See Jo n es v. St at e , 2 9 0 G a. Ap p

. 49 0

, 49 4 (2 ) (6 5 9 SE2 d 8 75 ) (2 0 0 8 ).

Ou r Su p rem e Co u rt h as m ad e cl ear t h at a m o t i o n s ee k i n g t o ch al l en g e an al l eg ed l y

i n v al i d o r v o i d ju d g m en t o f co n v i ct i o n “ i s n o t o n e o f t h e es tab l i s h ed p ro ced u res fo r

ch al l en g i n g t h e v al id i t y of a ju d g m en t i n a cri m i n al cas e” an d t h at an ap peal fro m t h e

d en ial o f s u ch a m o t i on i s s u b ject t o d i s m i s sal

. See Ro ber t s v. S t a t e , 2 8 6 Ga. 5 3 2

, 5 3 2

(6 9 0 SE2 d 1 5 0 ) (2 0 1 0); H a rp er v. S t a t e , 2 8 6 G a. 21 6

, 21 8 (2 ) (6 8 6 SE2 d 7 86 ) (2 0 0 9 ).

1 W e recen t l y d i sm i s s ed Su l l iv an ’ s ap p eal fro m t h e d en i al of h i s m o t i o n fo r an

o u t -o f-t i m e ap p eal . See Cas e No . A2 2 A0 6 2 2 (M ay 2 3 , 2 0 2 2 ). June 03, 2022Th u s, Su l l i v an i s no t au t h ori zed t o co ll at eral l y at t ack h i s co n v i ct i o n i n t h is m an n er,

an d t h is ap p eal i s h ereb y

DISM ISSED.

C o u r t o f A p p e a l s o f t h e S t a t e o

f G e o r g ia

C le r k ’ s O f f i c e

, A t la n t a

,

_

_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ I c e r t i f y th a t t h e a b o v e i s a t r u e e x t r a c t f r o m

t h e m i n u t e s o

f t h e C o u r t o

f A p p e a l s o f G e o r g i a

.

W i tn e s s m y s i g n a t u r e a n d t h e s e a l o

f s a i d c o u r t

h e r e t o a f f i x e d t h e d a y a n d y e a r l a s t a b o v e w r i t t e n

.

, C l e r k

. 06/03/2022
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      205
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   205
<PP&E>                                          41,409
<DEPRECIATION>                                  40,462
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   1,152
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                               69
<BONDS>                                             62
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                       1,021
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     1,152
<SALES>                                            369
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                   369
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      130
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    99
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   6
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    134
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                134
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       134
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .01


</TABLE>
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

, Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano

, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster , Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

April 28, 2014

s0421 

# Order

Clerk April 28, 2014

148477

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 148477

COA: 317255

Lake CC: 12

- 005013

- FH;

12

- 005014

- FH

PAUL DEAN BURNS, JR.,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the November 15, 2013

order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not

persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-2095

JAMES P. MIXON, JR., Plaintiff - Appellant, versus RUSSELL E. BOOKER, JR., Division of Vital Records; CHERYL S. ANDREWS, Division of Vital Records; DEBORAH LITTLE, Division of Vital Records; HELEN SWORDOUT, Division of Vital Records, Defendants - Appellees. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Henry C. Morgan, Jr., District Judge. (CA-98-22-2) Submitted: September 30, 1998 Decided: October 14, 1998 Before ERVIN, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. James P. Mixon, Jr., Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).2 PER CURIAM: James P. Mixon, Jr., appeals the district court’s order denying in forma pauperis status in his civil action. The denial of in forma pauperis status is an immediately appealable order. See Roberts v. United States District Court , 339 U.S. 844, 845 (1950). We have reviewed the record and the district court’s order and find no abuse of discretion. We therefore affirm the order. Mixon v. Booker , No. CA-98-22-2 (E.D. Va. July 22, 1998). We dispense withoral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED