alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 03-2130

JOHN ROLANDO TIFFANY,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

COMMISSIONER OF INTERNAL REVENUE,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States Tax Court. (Tax Ct. No. 03-2921)

Submitted: February 27, 2004 Decided: March 22, 2004

Before NIEMEYER, GREGORY, and SHEDD, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

John Rolando Tiffany, Appellant Pro Se. Eileen J. O’Connor,

Assistant Attorney General, Bruce Raleigh Ellisen, Janet A.

Bradley, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for

Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

John Rolando Tiffany appeals from the tax court’s orders

dismissing his petition for redetermination of his liability for

income taxes and additions to tax for the years 1997 to 2000, and

denying his motion to vacate the dismissal order. We have reviewed

the record and the tax court’s orders and find no reversible error.

Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the tax court. See

Tiffany v. Comm’r of Internal Revenue, Tax Ct. No. 03-2921

(U.S.T.C. May 16, 2003 & July 16, 2003). Additionally, we deny

Tiffany’s motion for a stay of proceedings and deny the

Commissioner’s motion for sanctions. We dispense with oral

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
|                                                         |   | Three      Months ended March 31, |        |
|--------------------------------------------------------------|--------|-----------------------------------|-------------|
|                                                         |   | 2008                              |        |   | 2007 |   |
|                                                         |   |                              |        |   |   |   |
| Computation      of loss per common share:                   |   |                              |        |   |   |   |
|                                                         |   |                              |        |   |   |   |
|         Net loss applicable to common  shares |   | $                                 | (747,579    | ) |   | $ | (1,345,887 | ) |
|                                                         |   |                              |        |   |   |   |   |   |
|         Weighted average number of common shares   |   |                              | 107,173,549 |   |   |   | 104,289,473 |   |
|                                                         |   |                              |        |   |   |   |   |   |
|         Net income (loss) per common share         |   | $                                 | (0.01       | ) |   | $ | (0.01 | ) |
|                                                         |   |                              |        |   |   |   |   |   |
|                                                         |   |                              |        |   |   |   |   |   |
| Computation      of income ( loss ) per common               |   |                              |        |   |   |   |   |   |
|         share assuming full dilution**             |   |                              |        |   |   |   |   |   |
|                                                         |   |                              |        |   |   |   |   |   |
|                                                         |   |                              |        |   |   |   |   |   |
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   YEAR
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1999
<CASH>                                         374,518
<SECURITIES>                                   900,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                  422,590
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     28,500
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             1,741,504
<PP&E>                                          27,316
<DEPRECIATION>                                  27,316
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,788,716
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          470,983
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        10,473
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,307,260
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,788,716
<SALES>                                      1,272,419
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,280,528
<CGS>                                        1,019,495
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  330,641
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               4,554
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (74,162)
<INCOME-TAX>                                       300
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (74,462)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (74,462)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (0.008)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  (0.008)


</TABLE>
2 min read

# Space Station Crew Lands, Wrapping Up 166 Days in Space

### NASA

Sep 10, 2013

RELEASE13-281

            -   
            -   
            -   
            -   

Expedition 36 crew members Chris Cassidy of NASA and Pavel Vinogradov and Alexander Misurkin of the Russian Federal Space Agency have returned to Earth from the International Space Station, landing safely in Kazakhstan at 10:58 p.m. EDT Tuesday (8:58 a.m. Sept. 11 Kazakh time).

Cassidy, Vinogradov and Misurkin, who launched to the station March 29, spent 166 days in space. They completed 2,656 orbits of Earth and traveled more than 70 million miles. Vinogradov conducted one spacewalk, bringing his career total to seven spacewalks with an accumulated time of 38 hours, 25 minutes. Misurkin conducted three spacewalks for a total of 20 hours, 1 minute. Cassidy conducted three spacewalks, bringing his career total to six with an accumulated time of 31 hours, 14 minutes.

During their time aboard the orbiting laboratory, the crew members saw the arrival of the European ATV-4cargo spacecraft, the Japanese HTV-4 cargo spacecraft and two Russian Progress resupply spacecraft. The trio also worked on hundreds of research experiments and science investigations that will have benefits for future human spaceflight and life on Earth.

Vinogradov now has logged 547 days in space on three spaceflights. This puts him 10th on the all-time endurance list. Cassidy has accumulated 182 days in space on his two spaceflights. This was Misurkin’s first flight, for a total of 166 days.

For information on the International Space Station, visit:

**https://www.nasa.gov/station**

-end- 

Joshua BuckHeadquarters, Washington202-358-1100jbuck@nasa.govJosh ByerlyJohnson Space Center, Houston281-483-5111josh.byerly@nasa.gov
Court of Appeals

of the State of Georgia

ATLANTA,____________________

The Court of Appeals hereby passes the following order:

A21A1070. THERIAN WIMBUSH et al. v. THE STATE.

In 2017, Therian Wimbush was convicted of three counts of cruelty to children

in the first degree and sentenced to 30 years to serve 20 years. We affirmed her

convictions in 2018. Wimbush v. State, 345 Ga. App. 54 (812 SE2d 489) (2018). On

December 4, 2020, Wimbush filed a “Joint Amended Notice of Appeal,” stating that

both she and Ricardo Wimbush seek to appeal the trial court’s December 4, 2014

order denying their demand for speedy trial.

1 Because we have already reviewed that

order, we lack jurisdiction to do so again.

We rejected Wimbush’s challenge to the same trial court order in her prior

appeal, Wimbush, supra, 345 Ga. App. at 61-66 (2), thus the current appeal is barred

by the law of the case. See Ross v. State, 310 Ga. App. 326, 327 (713 SE2d 438)

(2011) (“[A]ny issue that wasraised and resolved in an earlier appeal is the law of the

case and is binding on this Court . . . .”) (punctuation omitted); see also Jackson v.

State, 273 Ga. 320, 320 (540 SE2d 612) (2001) (a party “is not entitled to another bite

at the apple by way of a second appeal”). Consequently, this appeal is hereby

DISMISSED for lack of jurisdiction.

1 The order on appeal names only Therian Wimbush as a defendant. Ricardo

Wimbush is neither an attorney nor a party to the instant appeal, thus he may not file

an appeal on behalf of Therian Wimbush.

April 08, 2021
Court of Appeals of the State of Georgia

Clerk’s Office, Atlanta,____________________

I certify that the above is a true extract from

the minutes of the Court of Appeals of Georgia.

Witness my signature and the seal of said court

hereto affixed the day and year last above written.

, Clerk.

04/08/2021
# X-59 Roll Out Ceremony

NASA Administrator Robert Pearce speaks on stage just before the unveiling of the agency’s X-59 quiet supersonic research aircraft at a January 12, 2024 event at Lockheed Martin Skunk Works in Palmdale, California. The X-59 is the centerpiece of NASA’s Quesst mission, which seeks to solve one of the major barriers to supersonic flight over land, currently banned in the United States, by making sonic booms quieter.

                    -  Facebook PinterestX
-  LinkedIn Emailhttps://www.nasa.gov/image-detail/x-59-roll-out-ceremony-5/Copy URL to clipboard>DownloadShareTags- Aeronautics
- Quesst
TakenJanuary 12, 2024Image CreditLockheed Martin / Garry TiceSize6717x4480pxThe National Aeronautics and Space Administration
NASA explores the unknown in air and space, innovates for the benefit of humanity, and inspires the world through discovery.
- About NASA's Mission
Join Us- Home
- News & Events
- Multimedia
- NASA+
- Missions
- Humans in Space
- Earth & Climate
- The Solar System
- The Universe
- Science
- Aeronautics
- Technology
- Learning Resources
- About NASA
- NASA en Español
Follow NASA-   
-   
-   
-   
- 
- More NASA Social Accounts
- NASA Newsletters
- Sitemap
- For Media
- Privacy Policy
- FOIA
- No FEAR Act
- Office of the IGBudget & Annual Reports
Agency Financial Reports
Contact NASA
Accessibility
-  									Page Last Updated:								  								Jan 24, 2024								 
-  									Page Editor:								  									Jim Banke								 
-  								Responsible NASA Official:							  								Abigail Bowman
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

November 1, 2006 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

131424 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 131424 

 COA: 269207 

Saginaw CC: 03-022663-FJ 

DERRICK DARNELL ROBERSON, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 4, 2006 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. 

p1025 

I, Corbin R. Davis, 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. 

November 1, 2006 

 Clerk
32.1 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350)

In connection with the Quarterly Report of OCTuS, Inc. (the Company), on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ending March 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, John Belden, Chief Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. § 1350), that to my knowledge:

(1) The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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



/s/  John Belden
     --------------------
John Belden
Chief Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer

May 13, 2004
EXHIBIT 31.1
 Certification
 Pursuant to Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
      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)
    
    Designed such internal controls over financial reporting, or caused such internal control
over financial reporting to be designed under our supervision, to provide reasonable
assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial
statements for external purposes in accordance with generally accepted accounting
principles;
 c)
    
    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
 d)
    
    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 that has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal
control over financial reporting; and
  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.
 Date:  August 9, 2010
    /s/ Don M. BaileyDon M. BaileyChief Executive Officer
#### Budd *v.*Wilkinson.

*Tuesday, May*26.

In a suit against the maker of a promissory note, the declaration averred that the note was payable to *E. R.*Day, and that *E. R. Day*assigned it to the plaintiff. *Held,*that the omission of *Day's*Christian name did not render the averment objectionable.

ERROR to the *Floyd*Circuit Court.

Sullivan, J.

Debt. The declaration states that the defendant, *Wilkinson,*made his promissory note payable to *E. R. Day,*and that *E. R. Day,*before the payment thereof, assigned the note to the plaintiff. The declaration did not set forth the Christian name of *Day.*General demurrer, and judgment for the defendant.

This judgment must be reversed. The proper Christian and surnames of *parties*to a suit 'should be stated with *265certainty in the record, as has been repeatedly decided; but we are aware of no case, in which it has been held that this principle applies to the names of persons *not parties.*A note payable to partners may be assigned by them in the partnership name, and in a suit by the assignee against the maker, it is not necessary to disclose the names of the persons composing the firm. *Cochran*v. Scott, 3 Wend. *229.*— Childress v. Emory, 8 Wheat. *669.*—Stout v. *Hicks, Nov.*term, 1838. There are reasons for identifying the parties to a suit, which do not apply to third persons. We think the Court erred in sustaining the demurrer.

*R. Crawford,*for the plaintiff.

*H. P. Thornton,*for the defendant.

*Per Curiam.*

The judgment is reversed with costs. Cause remanded, &c.
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. DENNIS E. PRYOR.

February 6, 1987.

Petition for certification denied.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                             269
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                           7,200
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (7,200)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                     269
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          594,071
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    151,000
<COMMON>                                    21,966,577
<OTHER-SE>                                (22,711,379)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                       269
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     0
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    3,197
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              10,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (13,197)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (13,197)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (13,197)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (.00)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.00)


</TABLE>
**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 Galtech Semiconductor Materials, Inc., and subsidiaries (the “Company”) on Form 10-KSB for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Edward Bloom, Secretary/Treasurer and Director of the Company certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of our knowledge and belief:

 

|   | (1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of |
|--------|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

 

|   | (2) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, |
|--------|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

the financial condition and result of operations of the Company.

 

 

|   | Date: 02/27/2007 | By: /s/ *Edward Bloom* |
|--------|------------------|------------------------|

|   | Edward Bloom |
|--------|--------------|

|   | Secretary/Treasurer and Director |
|--------|----------------------------------|

 

 

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement 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.
Dismissed and Opinion Filed February 5, 2015 

# S

In The 

## Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas
No. 05-14-01057-CV JUANA MEDRANO, Appellant V. STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 3 Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC-13-01905-C



### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Wright, Justi ce Lang-Miers, and Justice Stoddart Opinion by Chief Justice Wright The clerk’s record in this case is over due. By letter dated September 19, 2014, we informed appellant that the cler k’s record had not been filed b ecause appellant had not paid for or made arrangements to pay for the clerk’s reco rd. We directed appellant to file written verification that she had paid for or made arrange ments to pay for the clerk’s record or that she had been found entitled to proceed without payment of costs. We cautioned appellant that if she did not file the required documentation within te n days, we might dismi ss the appeal without further notice. To date, the clerk’s record ha s not been filed, appellant has not provided the required documentation, nor has she otherwise corre sponded with the Court regarding the status of the clerk’s record or this appeal.–2– Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 37.3(b).

141057F.P05 /Carolyn Wright/ CAROLYN WRIGHT CHIEF JUSTICE–3– 

# S

Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas JUDGMENT
JUANA MEDRANO, Appellant
No. 05-14-01057-CV V.
STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY, Appellee On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 3, Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC-13-01905-C. Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Wright. Justices Lang-Miers and Stoddart participating. In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, this appeal is DISMISSED

. It is ORDERED that appellee STATE FARM MUTUAL AUTOMOBILE INSURANCE COMPANY recover its costs of this appeal from appellant JUANA MEDRANO.
Judgment entered February 5, 2015.
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 204 (Friday, October 22, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 65305]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-26913]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

CONSUMER PRODUCT SAFETY COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meeting

TIME AND DATE: Wednesday, October 27, 2010; 10 a.m.-11 a.m.

PLACE: Hearing Room 420, Bethesda Towers, 4330 East West Highway, 
Bethesda, Maryland.

STATUS: Closed to the Public.

Matter To Be Considered

Compliance Status Report

    The Commission staff will brief the Commission on the status of 
compliance matters.
    For a recorded message containing the latest agenda information, 
call (301) 504-7948.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Todd A. Stevenson, Office of the 
Secretary, U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, 4330 East West 
Highway, Bethesda, MD 20814, (301) 504-7923.

    Dated: October 19, 2010.
Todd A. Stevenson,
Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2010-26913 Filed 10-20-10; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6355-01-P