alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# NASA Associate Administrator Jim Free, NASA Administrator Bill Nelson, and NASA Deputy Administrator Pam Melroy at NASA’s 2024 Day of Remembrance

From left to right, NASA Associate Administrator Jim Free, NASA Administrator Bill Nelson and NASA Deputy Administrator Pam Melroy are seen during a wreath laying ceremony, as a part of NASA's Day of Remembrance, Thursday, Jan. 25, 2024, at Arlington National Cemetery in Arlington, Va. The wreaths were laid in memory of those men and women who lost their lives in the quest for space exploration.

                    -  Facebook PinterestX
-  LinkedIn Emailhttps://www.nasa.gov/image-detail/53487504388-99d1d843e8-k/Copy URL to clipboard>DownloadShareImage CreditNASA/Keegan BarberSize2048x1365pxNational 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:								  								Feb 12, 2024								 
-  									Page Editor:								  									Dacia Massengill								 
-  								Responsible NASA Official:							  								Abigail Bowman
**Exhibit      32.2**

**CERTIFICATION      PURSUANT TO**

**18      U.S.C. 1350**

|   | (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                Registrant as of the dates and for the periods expressed in the                report. |
|--------|-----|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   |                                                                            |                          |
|--------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-------------------------------|
|        |                                                                                 | /s/              B.S.P. Marra |
|   | B.              S. P. Marra                                                     |
|   | Chief              Financial Officer (Principal Financial              Officer) |

----
Exhibit 32.1



SECTION 906 CERTIFICATIONCEO



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Plains Exploration & Production Company (the Company) on Form 10-Q/A for the period ending June 30, 2003 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, James C. Flores, Chief Executive 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:



To the best of my knowledge, after
reasonable investigation:



| | (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.
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Dated: March 10, 2004.



/s/ James C. FloresJames C. Flores Chief Executive
Officer




The foregoing certification is
being furnished solely pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and is not being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.



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 required by Section 906, has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or
its staff upon request.
#### W. M. Wibb *v.*Nancy Spellman et al.

Pleadings — Parties to Cross-Petition.

Where an appellant makes himself a party to a cross-petition by answering it, though the petition be filed in one county before a change of venue is granted transferring the cause to another county, he cannot claim a failure of service.

Jurisdiction over Estates — Executors and Administrators — Change of Venue.

A petition is filed in one county, and afterward- a change of venue is granted to another; *held*that the latter court would have jurisdiction over an intestate’s estate, though letters of administration were granted by the former County Court.

APPEAL EROM TRIMBLE CIRCUIT COURT.

*Harlan,*for Appellant.

*Rodman,*for Appellee.

June 1, 1867.

Opinion oe the Court by

Judge Robertson:

The appellant, Wibb, made himself a party to the cross-petition of Mitchell and wife by answering it, and that petition having been filed in the Trimble Circuit Court before the change of venue to Oldham, the latter had jurisdiction over the question of settlement and distribution of the intestate Wibb’s estate although administration had been granted in Trimble.

And, as the appellant, Wibb, was a distributee, Mitchell and wife in the same category had a right to seek such relief even in a suit for canceling as fraudulent a bill of sale by the intestate to the appellant of his slaves.

Without intimating whether the cancellation of the bill of sale was authorized by the facts we are of the opinion that the judgment to that effect was premature, the intestate’s administrator being a necessary party to that issue on the cross-petition and never having been made a party to it.

Nor this error alone the judgment is reversed and the cause remanded for further proceedings.

Record condemned for want of index comprehensible, and for want of intelligible order.
In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02-23-00100-CV

WAYMON HARTWELL A/K/A SCOTT 

HARTWELL, Appellant

V.

THE FUNDWORKS, LLC, Appellee

§

§

§

§

On Appeal from County Court at

Law No. 2

of Denton County (CV-2021-03523)

January 4, 2024

Memorandum Opinion by Justice 

Bassel

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there 

was error in the trial court’s February 14, 2023 order. It is ordered that the fee 

provision spanning pages 5 and 6 of trial court’s order is modified to read:

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Receiver’s fee is conditionally set 

at 25% of the funds collected during the receivership, subject to the

Defendant’s written agreement or later determination of reasonableness 

based on written agreement of the Defendant or proof of the work

performed and the results obtained. The court-approved fee will be 

taxed as costs against the Defendant, and the Receiver may collect that 

fee from the Defendant in addition to the amount collected to satisfy the 

judgment.
It is further ordered that the page-6 provision regarding recovery of costs is 

modified to read:

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Receiver must provide an 

accounting or receipts of any reasonable and necessary expenses, 

including those for storage of any property seized, to the court. Courtapproved expenses will be taxed as costs against the Defendant, and the

Receiver may collect those expenses from the Defendant in addition to 

the amount collected to satisfy the judgment. 

We affirm the trial court’s order as modified.

It is further ordered that Appellant Waymon Hartwell a/k/a Scott Hartwell

shall pay all costs of this appeal, for which let execution issue.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS 

By /s/ Dabney Bassel 

 Justice Dabney Bassel
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1877 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

108th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1877

  To amend the Food Security Act of 1985 to improve the enrollment of 
  cropland into the conservation reserve program through the farmable 
                           wetlands program.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           November 18, 2003

  Mr. Roberts introduced the following bill; which was read twice and 
    referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
  To amend the Food Security Act of 1985 to improve the enrollment of 
  cropland into the conservation reserve program through the farmable 
                           wetlands program.

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

SECTION 1. FARMABLE WETLANDS PROGRAM.

    (a) Inclusion of Playas.--Section 1231(h)(2)(A)(i) of the Food 
Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3831(h)(2)(A)(i)) is amended by 
inserting after ``section 1222(b)(1)(A)'' the following: ``and a playa 
(regardless of whether the playa is listed on a map described in 
subparagraph (B))''.
    (b) Maximum Size of Wetland.--Section 1231(h)(2)(D)(i)(I) of the 
Food Security Act of 1985 (16 U.S.C. 3831(h)(2)(D)(i)(I)) is amended--
            (1) by striking ``10 contiguous acres'' and inserting ``40 
        contiguous acres''; and
            (2) by striking ``5 acres'' and inserting ``20 acres''.
                                 <all>
```
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 208 (Thursday, October 28, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 66377]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-27254]


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

EXPORT-IMPORT BANK OF THE U.S.

[Public Notice 2010-0046]


Agency Information Collection Activities: Final Collection; 
Comment Request

AGENCY: Export-Import Bank of the U.S.

ACTION: Submission for OMB Review and Comments Request.

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

    Form Title: Application for Short Term Letter of Credit Export 
Credit Insurance Policy.
SUMMARY: The Export-Import Bank of the United States (Ex-Im Bank), as a 
part of its continuing effort to reduce paperwork and respondent 
burden, invites the general public and other Federal Agencies to 
comment on the proposed information collection, as required by the 
Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
    The Application for Short Term Letter of Credit Export Credit 
Insurance Policy will be used to determine the eligibility of the 
applicant and the transaction for Export Import Bank assistance under 
its insurance program. Export Import Bank customers will be able to 
submit this form on paper or electronically.
    The Export Import Bank has made changes to incorporate new 
information in the Certification and Notice sections of this form to 
clarify and expand to encompass broader anti-corruption certifications. 
In the Certification and Notice sections we rewrote some of the 
language for clarification, we corrected references to the debarment 
list, and we added references to the OFAC and the EPLS system.

DATES: Comments should be received on or before November 29, 2010 to be 
assured of consideration.

ADDRESSES: Comments maybe submitted electronically on http://www.regulations.gov or by mail to Office of Information and Regulatory 
Affairs, 725 17th Street, NW., Washington, DC 20038 attn: OMB 3048-
0009.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
    Titles and Form Number: EIB 92-34 Application for Short Term Letter 
of Credit Export Credit Insurance Policy.
    OMB Number: 3048-0009.
    Type of Review: Regular.
    Need and Use: The Application for Short Term Letter of Credit 
Export Credit Insurance Policy will be used to determine the 
eligibility of the applicant and the transaction for Export Import Bank 
assistance under its insurance program.

Sharon A. Whitt,
Agency Clearance Officer.
[FR Doc. 2010-27254 Filed 10-27-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6690-01-P
**Exhibit 32**

 

CERTIFICATIONS UNDER 18 U.S.C. § 1350  

The undersigned certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the preceding Annual Report on Form 10-K fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information contained therein fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Pacific Financial Corporation.

 

 

| /s/ Dennis A. Long                                               |   | /s/ Denise Portmann                                  |
|------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|------------------------------------------------------|
| Dennis A. LongPresident andChief Executive OfficerMarch 13, 2007 |   | Denise PortmannChief Financial OfficerMarch 13, 2007 |
<PAGE>
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1

INDEPENDENT AUDITORS' CONSENT

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statements No.
333-91059 and No. 333-43742 on Form S-8 and Registration Statement No. 333-63316
on Form S-3 of Next Level Communications, Inc. and subsidiary (a majority-owned
subsidiary of Motorola, Inc.) of our report dated April 15, 2003, which report
expresses an unqualified opinion and includes an explanatory paragraph relating
to the Company's ability to continue as a going concern, appearing in this
Annual Report on Form 10-K of Next Level Communications, Inc. and subsidiary (a
majority-owned subsidiary of Motorola, Inc.) for the year ended
December 31, 2002.



/s/ Deloitte & Touche, LLP
--------------------------
San Francisco, California
April 15, 2003
FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

March 24, 2010

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

 

LAYBE TORRES,

 Plaintiff - Appellant, 

v. 

CHRIS SANCHEZ; MICHAEL

VIGIL; DENISE SOTO; LIZA

SULLIVAN; JOSEPH SALAZAR, 

 Defendants - Appellees.

No. 10-2059

 (D.C. No. 1:08-CV-00462-WJ-CG)

ORDER

Before LUCERO, HARTZ, and TYMKOVICH, Circuit Judges.

The court orders that this appeal be dismissed as untimely. 

Mr. Torres’s notice of appeal was due within 30 days of the entry of the

district court’s July 21, 2009 judgment - on or before August 20, 2009. See Fed.

R. App. P. 4(a)(1)(A) and 28 U.S.C. § 2107 (a) (notice of appeal due within 30

days). It was not filed until March 16, 2010. No timely motion for an extension

of time was filed in the district court. See Fed. R. App P. 4 (a)(5) and 28 U.S.C. §

2107 (c) (motion for extension of time must be filed within 30 days after the

prescribed time for filing the notice of appeal). This court cannot extend the

Appellate Case: 10-2059 Document: 01018390321 Date Filed: 03/24/2010 Page: 1 
2

time for filing a notice of appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 4 (a)(5) and Alva v. Teen

Help, 469 F.3d 946, 950 (10th Cir. 2006) (court of appeals lacks authority to find

excusable neglect and extend the time for filing notice of appeal; only the district

court may do so). 

Because the notice of appeal was untimely, this court lacks jurisdiction to

consider this appeal. Bowles v. Russell, 551 U.S. 205 (2007). 

APPEAL DISMISSED. 

Entered for the Court

ELISABETH SHUMAKER, Clerk of Court

by:

Christine Van Coney

Counsel to the Clerk

Appellate Case: 10-2059 Document: 01018390321 Date Filed: 03/24/2010 Page: 2
#### Hough and Others *v.*Doyle.

By the statute of 1831, a bill of foreclosure, &c. (the mortgage-debt being payable by instalments) would not lie, until the day of payment of the last instalment was past.

A decree in chancery cannot be rendered against an infant defendant without proof, though the answer, filed by his guardian *ad litem,*admit the bill to be true.

ERROR to the *Jefferson*Circuit Court.

Dewey, J.

At the *September*term, 1833, of the *Jefferson*Circuit Court, *Doyle*brought a bill in equity against the plaintiffs in error, the heirs at law of *Orson E. Hough.*The bill states that, on the 25th of *October,*1831, *Orson E. Hough*was indebted to the complainant in the sum-of 375 dollars, for which he executed three promissory notes of that date for 125 dollars each, payable in one, two, and three years, with interest; that to secure the payment of the notes, he executed a mortgage of the same date to the complainant of certain premises, which mortgage is referred to as an exhibit and made a part of the bill, but which does not appear in the record; that the mortgagor died in 1832, leaving the defendants below his heirs at law, who were all minors; and that the first two notes were due. The prayer of the bill was, that the defendants might be decreed to pay the two notes which were due; or in default thereof, that the mortgaged premises might be decreed to be sold, &c. The defendants having been summoned, a guardian *ad litem*was appointed for them, and answered the bill in their behalf admitting it to be true. The Court, without hearing any evidence whatever, decreed that the defendants should pay the complainant 288 dollars, the amount of the first two notes, in ten days, or that in default thereof, the mortgaged premises should be •sold to satisfy that sum and the costs. And a commissioner was appointed to carry the decree into effect.

This decree must be reversed. The law in force when the mortgage was given, and the decree was rendered, did not authorize the bringing a bill to foreclose the equity of redemption^ and for a sale of the mortgaged premises, until after the day of payment of the last instalment of the mortgage-money was past. R. S. 1831, p. 244. The bill was *301prematurely brought. It shows upon its face that the last instalment was not payable when the suit was commenced.

*O. H. Smith*and *T. L. Sullivan,*for the plaintiffs.

It was erroneous, too, to decree against infants upon the admission in their answer that the bill was true. Infants cannot bind themselves by such an admission. Coop. PI. 324. There should have been proof adduced in the same manner as if the' bill had been denied.

Other errors in the proceedings might be pointed out but it is unnecessary.

*Per Curiam.*

The decree is reversed with costs. Cause remanded, &c.
#### ELSBETH SOINE, ET AL. v. JEFFREY SOFFER, M.D., ET AL.

January 28, 1987.

Petition for certification denied.
**EXHIBIT32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATIONOF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

 

Pursuant to the requirements set forth inRule 13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “ExchangeAct”), and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code (18U.S.C. §1350), the undersigned, Gordon Link, Senior Vice President and ChiefFinancial Officer of Tapestry Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the “Company”) doeshereby certify, to his knowledge, that:

 

(a)           theQuarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ended March 29, 2006of the Company to which this certification is attached (the “Report”) fullycomplies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theExchange Act, and

 

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

 

Date: May 10, 2006

 
|       | /s/ GORDON  LINK                                      |       |
|------------|-------------------------------------------------------|------------|
| ** ** | **Gordon Link**                                       | ** ** |
| ** ** | **Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer** | ** ** |

 

A signed original of this written statement required bySection 906 has been provided to Tapestry Pharmaceuticals, Inc. andwill be retained by Tapestry Pharmaceuticals, Inc. and furnished to theSecurities and Exchange Commission (SEC) or its staff upon request. Thiscertification “accompanies” the Form 10-Q to which it relates, is not deemedfiled with the SEC and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filingof the Company under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the SecuritiesExchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of theForm 10-Q), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained insuch filing.

 

----
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

EMILIANO LOPEZ,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 v.

EDMUND G. BROWN, Jr., Governor of

California; et al.,

 Defendants - Appellees.

No. 12-17830

D.C. No. 1:12-cv-01065-LJO-GSA

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of California

Lawrence J. O’Neill, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted December 17, 2013** 

Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and GRABER, Circuit Judges.

California state prisoner Emiliano Lopez appeals pro se from the district

court’s judgment dismissing his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action alleging federal

constitutional violations in connection with his parole hearing. We have

FILED

JAN 02 2014

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review de novo a district court’s

dismissal under 28 U.S.C. §§ 1915A and 1915(e)(2)(B) (ii). Resnick v. Hayes, 213

F.3d 443, 447 (9th Cir. 2000); Barren v. Harrington, 152 F.3d 1193, 1194 (9th Cir.

1998) (order). We reverse and remand.

The district court entered a judgment of dismissal of Lopez’s action because

his claims sounded in habeas and could entitle him to earlier release. However,

success in this action would not necessarily demonstrate the invalidity of his

continued confinement and, therefore, Lopez’s claims are not barred under Heck v.

Humphrey, 512 U.S. 477, 483-87 (1994). See Wilkinson v. Dotson, 544 U.S. 74,

81-82 (2005) (prisoner may challenge procedures used in parole hearing under

§ 1983, provided he does not seek “immediate or speedier release”). Accordingly,

we reverse and remand for further proceedings.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

2 12-17830