alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
2 min read

# Quantum Rydberg Radar for Surface, Topography, and Vegetation

### Loura Hall

Apr 06, 2023

Article

            -   
            -   
            -   
            -   

Quantum Rydberg Radar for Surface, Topography, and Vegetation

**Darmindra Arumugam** NASA Jet Propulsion 

This proposal advances the Quantum Rydberg Radar (QRR) receiver architecture to utilize a combination of signals of opportunity (SoOp) and non-opportunistic (NO) science signaling (jointly termed SONO) in a broad array of applications covering NASA Surface, Topography, and Vegetation (STV) science objectives. In particular, STV science applications addressed are Solid Earth (SE), Land Surface Hydrology (LSH), Vegetation Structure (VS), and the Cryosphere (CS). The Quantum Rydberg Radar technology provides the promise of ultra-broad-spectrum radar polarimetric measurement capability covering the ‘radio window’ (I-to-K band, or 0.1-22 GHz) on a single compact detector/sensor.

Rydberg receivers in QRR utilize quantum states and energy levels of excited Rydberg atoms for sensing – alkali atoms placed in a vapor cell that are excited optically to Rydberg states, where radio-waves impinging alters the resonant state of the atoms. This approach exploits the sensitivity of the high-lying Rydberg states to RF/microwave fields. Within one vapor cell, accurate measurements of a RF-fields over a frequency range from 10 MHz to >500 GHz are possible. Rydberg atoms are atoms with one or more electrons excited to a very high principal quantum number, n. These Rydberg atoms have large dipole moments (scale as n squared). The sensitivity and ultra-broadband nature make these promising for next generation radars and radiometers. Rydberg receivers are dynamically tunable post-launch. 

Numerous key advances in modeling and systems have been made during the NIAC Phase I, to include the first known Rydberg measurement of satellite signals (via a Rubidium preparation, Rb-85, 5S1/2-5P1/2-35D3/2 to measure XM satellite signals).

In this NIAC Phase II proposal, we advance QRR to address key upcoming NASA needs for STV mission in the 2030’s (surface, topography, and vegetation) – which addresses science applications in solid earth, land surface hydrology, vegetation structure, and the cryosphere. The Phase II effort addresses key remaining experimental, modeling/simulations, and technology demonstrations to advance this important technology in preparations for a high-altitude balloon demonstration and a future space validation.

**2023 Phase I Selection**

## Discover More NIAC Topics

Space Technology Mission Directorate

NASA Innovative Advanced Concepts

NIAC Funded Studies

About NIAC
EXHIBIT 32.2

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 Quarterly Report of Thornburg Mortgage, Inc. (the Company) on
Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Clarence G. Simmons, III, Senior Executive Vice President and Chief 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 respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
|--- | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                                                                  
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Clarence G. Simmons, III                                                                      
|Clarence G. Simmons, III Senior Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer June 18, 2008
[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________ No. 15

- 10395

________________________ D.C. Docket No. 1 :11

- cr
- 20613

- JLK

- 2

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee,

versus

VLADIMIR LOUISSANT , Defendant

- Appellant.

________________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida

________________________ (July 28, 2016 ) Case: 15-10395 Date Filed: 07/28/2016 Page: 1 of 32 Before WILSON and JULIE CARNES , Circuit Judges, and WOOD , ∗ District Judge

. PER CURIAM: Vladimir Louissant ple a d ed guilty to possession of a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence resulting in death , in violation of 18 U.S.C . § 924 (c )(1) (A) , (j)(1 )

. The district court sentenced him to life imprisonment. Louissant now appeals that sentence

. He argues that his sentence should be vacated because the
district court violated 18 U.S.C. § 3553(c)(1) by not stating a reason for imposing
life imprisonment

. We review de novo a defendant’s § 3553(c)(1) challenge, “even if the
defendant did not object below.” United States v. Bonilla , 463 F.3d 1176, 1181 (11th Cir. 2006); see also United States v. Parks , ___ F.3d ___, ___ , No. 15

- 11618, s lip op
. at 9

– 12 (11th Cir. May 20, 2016). Under § 3553(c)(1), when a defendant is subject to a United States Sentencing Guidelines (Guidelines) range that “exceeds 24 months,” the district court must “state in open court . . . the reason for imposing a sentence at a particular point within the range.” See 18 U.S.C. § 3553(c)(1). Here, Louissant’s Guidelines range wa s 360 months to life

— a range that triggers § 3553(c)(1) ’s requirement th at the court state its reason for choosing the

∗ Honorable Lisa Godbey Wood , United States District Chief Judge , for the South ern District of Georgia , sitting by designation.

Case: 15-10395 Date Filed: 07/28/2016 Page: 2 of 33 particular point within the range at wh ich it has imposed the sentence

. However, during Louissant’s se ntencing proceedings, the district court “offered no reason for the life sentence it elected to impose.” See United States v. Williams , 438 F.3d 1272, 1274 (11th Cir. 2006) (per curiam)

. Accordingly, the district court failed to comply with § 3553(c)(1), and we must therefore vacate and remand for resentencing

. 1 See Parks , slip op. at 14.
VACATED AND REMANDED.

1 Louissant also argues that his case should be reassigned on remand. We disagree. “Reassignment is an extraordinary order” that is not warranted here. See United States v. Shaygan , 652 F.3d 1297, 1318 (11th Cir. 2011) (internal quotation mark omitted)

.

Case: 15-10395 Date Filed: 07/28/2016 Page: 3 of 3
BOSTON FINANCIAL TAX CREDIT FUND VII, A LIMITED PARTNERSHIP

                                 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 Quarterly Report of Boston Financial Tax Credit Fund VII
(the "Fund") on Form 10-QSB for the period ending June 30, 2003 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, the Principal, hereby certifies 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
     respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Fund.



                                             /s/ Jenny Netzer
                                             Jenny Netzer
                                             Executive Vice President
                                             MMA Financial, LLC

                                             Date:  February 12, 2004










A signed original of this written statement required by section 906 has been
provided to the Fund and will be retained by the Fund and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Document

LIMITED WAIVER OF BASE SALARY AGREEMENT
This Limited Waiver of Base Salary Agreement (this “Agreement”) is entered into as of this 25th day of March 2020 by and between Liquidity Services, Inc. (the “Corporation”), and the undersigned executive officer of the Corporation (the “Executive”).
WHEREAS, the Corporation is taking numerous proactive steps to mitigate the negative financial and operational impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic;
WHEREAS, these business contingency plans include, among other steps, implementing remote and virtual work plans, cancelling non-essential travel and spending, reducing the pay of employees, shortening work weeks, and furloughs; 
WHEREAS, the undersigned Executive and the Corporation have entered into an Executive Employment Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the undersigned Executive has voluntarily agreed to allow the Corporation to reduce his prorated monthly base salary by Fifty Percent (50%) for the period of time from April 1, 2020 to April 30, 2020 (the “Covered Period”).
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Corporation and the Executive agree to the following:
1.  Term. This Agreement shall be in force and effective throughout the Covered Period.
2.  Reduced Base Salary During the Covered Period. The Executive hereby voluntarily agrees to the Corporation reducing his prorated monthly base salary by Fifty Percent (50%) for the Covered Period.  Such a reduction shall not be deemed a breach of Executive’s Executive Employment Agreement.  Executive and the Corporation further agree that the foregoing does not lower base salary for any other purpose under Executive’s Executive Employment Agreement with the Corporation, including, without limitation, the calculation of any severance payment in the event of a termination.
3.  Miscellaneous. To the extent not subject to federal law, this Agreement will be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of Maryland. This Agreement shall bind and inure to the benefit of the parties and each of their respective affiliates, legal representatives, heirs, successors, and assigns. This Agreement is not intended to amend or otherwise change or modify the terms of Executive’s Executive Employment Agreement with the Corporation except as expressly set forth herein.  
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Corporation and the Executive have executed this Agreement as of the date first written above.








																					
							
	EXECUTIVE				LIQUIDITY SERVICES, INC.		
							
	/s/John Daunt
						
	

Name: John Daunt       __________________
				By:		/s/ William P. Angrick, III

				



		 William P. Angrick, III
 Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

August 4, 2010

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

JAMES SABATINO,

 Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

WARDEN BLAKE DAVIS, ADX,

 Respondent - Appellee.

No. 10-1118

(D.C. No. 1:09-CV-02420-LTB-BNB)

ORDER

The captioned appeal is dismissed for lack of prosecution pursuant to 10th Cir. R.

42.1.

A copy of this order shall stand as and for the mandate of this court.

Entered for the Court,

ELISABETH A. SHUMAKER, Clerk

Appellate Case: 10-1118 Document: 01018471479 Date Filed: 08/04/2010 Page: 1
2 min read

# NASA Television to Air Russian Spacewalk at International Space Station

### NASA

May 24, 2019

MEDIA ADVISORYM19-042

            -   
            -   
            -   
            -   

**Credits: NASA**

**Editor’s note:** This advisory was updated May 27 to correct the color of the stripes on the spacesuits each will wear.

Two veteran Russian cosmonauts will venture outside the International Space Station for a spacewalk Wednesday, May 29, to retrieve science experiments and conduct maintenance on the orbiting laboratory. Live coverage of the activity will air on NASA Television and the agency’s website.

Expedition 59 Commander Oleg Kononenko and Flight Engineer Alexey Ovchinin are scheduled to open the hatch to the Pirs docking compartment airlock at 11:44 a.m. EDT on May 29 for a spacewalk expected to last 6.5 hours. Live coverage of the spacewalk will begin at 11:15 a.m.

Kononenko, who will be designated extravehicular crew member 1 (EV1), in the suit with red stripes, and Ovchinin, who will be EV2, in the suit with blue stripes, will install handrails on the Russian segment of the complex, retrieve science experiments from the Poisk module’s hull, and conduct maintenance work. The spacewalk will be the 217th in support of station assembly, maintenance and upgrades and the fourth outside the station this year.

This will be the fifth spacewalk in Kononenko’s career and the first for Ovchinin, who will become station commander next month. Kononenko is scheduled to return to Earth June 24, with crewmates Anne McClain of NASA and David Saint-Jacques of the Canadian Space Agency, wrapping up a six-and-a-half-month mission living and working in space.

Keep up with the International Space Station and its research and crew at:

-end-

Stephanie Schierholz​Headquarters, Washington202-358-1100stephanie.schierholz@nasa.gov

Gary JordanJohnson Space Center, Houston281-483-5111gary.j.jordan@nasa.gov
F I LED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

April 13, 2010

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff ! Appellee,

v.

JUAN AYALA!GONZALEZ,

Defendant ! Appellant.

No. 09-4210

(D.C. Nos. 1:08-CV-00146-DS

& 1:06-CR-00118-DS-3)

ORDER

The captioned appeal is dismissed for lack of prosecution pursuant to 

10th Cir. R. 42.1.

A copy of this order shall stand as and for the mandate of this court.

Entered for the Court,

ELISABETH A. SHUMAKER, Clerk

Appellate Case: 09-4210 Document: 01018401583 Date Filed: 04/13/2010 Page: 1
H. Res. 509 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

September 8, 2017. 

Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall 

be in order to take from the Speaker’s table the bill (H.R. 

601) to enhance the transparency and accelerate the impact 

of assistance provided under the Foreign Assistance Act of 

1961 to promote quality basic education in developing countries, to better enable such countries to achieve universal access to quality basic education and improved learning outcomes, to eliminate duplication and waste, and for other purposes, with the Senate amendment to the House amendment 

to the Senate amendment thereto, and to consider in the 

House, without intervention of any point of order, a motion 

offered by the chair of the Committee on Appropriations or 

his designee that the House concur in the Senate amendment 

to the House amendment to the Senate amendment. The 

Senate amendment and the motion shall be considered as 

read. The motion shall be debatable for one hour equally divided and controlled by the chair and ranking minority member of the Committee on Appropriations. The previous ques-
2 

•HRES 509 EH 

tion shall be considered as ordered on the motion to adoption 

without intervening motion. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
#### WELMARK HEALTHCARE CENTER, INC., ETC., ET AL. v. TOWNSHIP OF CHESTER BOARD OF ADJUSTMENT, ET AL.

January 21, 1987.

Petition for certification denied.
CHRIS DANIEL

HARRIS COUNTY DISTRICT CLERK

1201 Franklin P.O. Box 4651 Houston, Texas 77210-4651

 CORRECTION LETTER - MOTION FOR NEW TRIAL

November 13, 2015

DEBORAH SUMMERS

ATTORNEY OF RECORD

11210 STEEPLECREST, SUITE 120

HOUSTON, TEXAS 77065

Defendant’s Name: JUAN ROJAS

Cause No: 1448037

Court: 185TH DISTRICT COURT

Please note the following appeal updates on the above mentioned cause:

Notice of Appeal Filed Date: 10/07/2015

Sentence Imposed Date: 10/07/2015

Court of Appeals Assignment: First Court of Appeals 

Appeal Attorney of Record: DEBORAH SUMMERS

Motion for New Trial 11/03/2015

Sincerely,

/s/ N. Salinas

Criminal Post Trial Deputy

CC: Devon Anderson

 District Attorney

 Appellate Division

 Harris County, Texas

 KATHLEEN POWERS (DELIVERED VIA E-MAIL)

 

This is your notice to inform any and all substitute reporters in this cause.

 FILED IN 1st COURT OF APPEALS HOUSTON, TEXAS 11/13/2015 9:42:38 AM CHRISTOPHER A. PRINE Clerk
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### National Science Foundation

# AGENCY:

National Science Foundation.

# ACTION:

Notice of permits issued under the Antarctic Conservation of 1978, Public Law 95-541.

# SUMMARY:

The National Science Foundation (NSF) is required to publish notice of permits issued under the Antarctic Conservation Act of 1978. This is the required notice.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Nadene G. Kennedy, Permit Office, Office of Polar Programs, Rm. 755, National Science Foundation, 4201 Wilson Boulevard, Arlington, VA 22230.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    On September 20, 2010, the National Science Foundation published a notice in the                     **Federal Register**                     of permit application received. A permit was issued on October 12, 2010 to:                

Paul Ponganis, Permit No. 2011-016.

Nadene G. Kennedy,

Permit Officer.

[FR Doc. 2010-27464 Filed 10-29-10; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7555-01-P
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. ROBERT MCQUAID.

December 16, 1986.

Petition for certification denied.
Exhibit (10)-x


                        BAUSCH & LOMB INCORPORATED

                     LTI DEFERRED COMPENSATION PLAN

                             Amendment No. 2


     Pursuant to Section 12, the Plan is amended, effective
     February 29, 2000, as follows:

     Section 8(d) is amended by adding to the end thereof
     the following new paragraph:


          A participant may make a change in the form of
          payment from the form previously elected to any
          other form permitted under the Plan at any time up
          to 24 months prior to the date payments commence.
          Any change elected within 24 months of a
          participant's payment commencement date shall be
          disregarded.



Dated _______________         Bausch & Lomb Incorporated



                              By_____________________



                              Title____________________
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.2
 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and2.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 STERLING BANCSHARES, INC.Dated: August 5, 2005
    By:
    /s/Stephen C. RaffaeleStephen C. RaffaeleExecutive Vice President
And Chief Financial Officer
Sterling Bancshares, Inc.
#### The State *v.*Wimple.

An indictment for an assault and battery need not allege that the person beaten was late of the county, or that the offence was to his damage.

ERROR to the *Jennings*Circuit Court.

Perkins, J.

Indictment for an assault and battery. Indictment quashed.

We are not informed of the objection to this indictment. The attorney of the defendant below on whose motion it was quashed, has adopted the censurable practice — censurable because it delays the business of the Court by imposing upon it the additional labours of counsel — of permitting the record to be submitted to us unaccompanied by any thing directing our attention to the question to be examined, and without referring us to authorities upon it.

The record shows that the indictment was found at a regular term of the *Jennings*Circuit Court, by a competent number of qualified grand jurors duly sworn as such, who *215upon their oath presented, “That *Simeon Wimple,*on the eighteenth day of *June*eighteen hundred and forty-four, at the county of *Jennings*aforesaid, with force and arms, did make an assault upon the body of one *De Witt Clinton Dean,*and him the said *De Witt Clinton Dean*did then and there beat, strike, and wound, in a rude, angry, and insolent manner, and other wrongs and injuries to him the said *De Witt Clinton Dean*then and there did, contrary to the form of the statute, &c., and against the peace,” &c.

*A. A. Hammond*and *J. H. Bradley,*for the state.

This indictment very nearly conforms to approved precedents in such cases, except in the omission of the words “ late of said county,” and the averment that the heating and wounding were to *Dean’s*damage. We do not see the materiality of either of the parts omitted. By our law, a person who strikes another in a rude, insolent, or angry manner, is liable to indictment in the county in which the act is committed, whether the person struck were late of said county, or were damaged, or not. An indictment bringing a case within the law must be good.

*Per Curiam.*

The judgment is reversed with costs. Cause remanded, &c.