alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
UNITED STATES BANKRUPTCY APPELLATE PANEL

OF THE TENTH CIRCUIT

—————————————————

IN RE CONRAD ALAN FULLER and 

CLAUDIA FAYE FULLER, also known 

as Claudia Magana,

 Debtors.

__________________________________

CREDIT ONE BANK, NA,

 Appellant,

 v.

CONRAD ALAN FULLER and 

CLAUDIA FAYE FULLER,

 Appellees. 

BAP No. UT-10-052

Bankr. No. 07-21723 

Chapter 7 

ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

August 12, 2010 

—————————————————

On July 28, 2010, this Court entered a Order to Show Cause Why Appeal Should 

Not be Considered for Dismissal as Untimely (“Order”), requiring the Appellant to do the 

following, or the appeal would be dismissed:

File the Court a memorandum of law providing a legal explanation as to why 

the appeal should not be dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

The deadline has expired without any response to the Order.

Accordingly, it is HEREBY ORDERED that this appeal is DISMISSED for failure 

to prosecute. Fed. R. Bankr. P. 8001(a); 10th Cir. BAP L.R. 8018-4(c).

BAP Appeal No. 10-52 Docket No. 5-1 Filed: 08/12/2010 Page: 1 of 2
2

For the Panel: 

Blaine F. Bates, Clerk of Court

By:

Gregory Wright

Deputy Clerk

BAP Appeal No. 10-52 Docket No. 5-1 Filed: 08/12/2010 Page: 2 of 2
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Terry Eugene CURETON, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 02-4116.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted Aug. 26, 2003.

Decided Sept. 11, 2003.

William E. Loose, Asheville, North Carolina, for Appellant. Gretchen C.F. Shappert, Office of the United States Attorney, Charlotte, North Carolina, for Appellee.

Before WIDENER, WILKINSON, and NIEMEYER, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished PER CURIAM opinion.

OPINION

PER CURIAM.

Terry Cureton appeals his conviction and 324-month sentence for one count of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute cocaine base, a violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 (2000), and two counts of possession with intent to distribute cocaine base, violations of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) (2000). Finding no error, we affirm.

First, Cureton claims that the district court erred in presenting a redacted indictment to the jury. The redacted indictment removed charges pertaining only to co-defendants, and left the charges pertaining to Cureton. Cureton did not object to the redaction, and therefore this court’s review is for plain error. *United States v. Olano,*507 U.S. 725, 725-32, 113 S.Ct. 1770, 123 L.Ed.2d 508 (1993) (discussing plain error standard). We conclude the district court did not err in redacting the indictment. *United States v. Miller,*471 U.S. 130, 136, 105 S.Ct. 1811, 85 L.Ed.2d 99 (1985). Even if the court did err, the error did not affect Cureton’s substantial rights. *Id.*at 140, 105 S.Ct. 1811.

Second, Cureton asserts that the district court erred in submitting to the jury a verdict form that did not require it to find the drug quantity directly attributable to him. As Cureton did not object to the verdict form, we review for plain error. We conclude that the district court did not err in using a verdict form that required the jury to find the drug quantity attributable to the conspiracy instead of Cureton individually. *See United States v. Munoz,*324 F.3d 987, 991 (8th Cir.2003); *United States v. Turner,*319 F.3d 716, 722-23 (5th Cir.), *cert. denied,*— U.S. —, 123 S.Ct. 1939, 155 L.Ed.2d 857 (2003); *Derman v. United States,*298 F.3d 34, 42-43 (1st Cir.), *cert. denied,*537 U.S. 1048, 123 S.Ct. 636, 154 L.Ed.2d 522 (2002).

Third, Cureton challenges the district court’s application, pursuant to USSG *286§ 2Dl.l(b)(l), of a two-level enhancement to his offense level for possession of a weapon during the offense. This Court reviews the district court’s factual findings for clear error. *United States v. Daughtrey,*874 F.2d 213, 217 (4th Cir.1989). Based on the evidence adduced at trial, we conclude the district court did not clearly err.

Finally, Cureton challenges the district court’s calculation of his base offense level. We review for clear error. *Id.*In light of the trial testimony, we find no error in the district court’s conclusion.

For the reasons above, we affirm Cure-ton’s conviction and sentence. 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.*
Recommendation: 

NASA Advisory Council Recommendation 

Embracing the President's Export Control Reform 

2012-02-09 (SC-03) 

The Council recommends that NASA even more fully embrace and support the ongoing 

President's Export Control Reform (ECR) effort. To ensure that open scientific and 

international collaboration is enable to the maximum extent possible, the Council further 

recommends that NASA convene a discussion with the academic and non-profit community on 

the effects of current export control restrictions on international research and research projects 

that include foreign nationals. 

Major Reasons for the Recommendation: 

In carrying out its role as the preeminent space agency in the world, NASA engages in foreign 

collaborations in many of its programs, projects, and missions. Mutual exchanges of 

knowledge and know-how in civil space technologies are an important part of these cooperative 

efforts. Additionally, NASA science is carried out in universities, field centers, non-profits, 

and other organizations where foreign students and researchers· are engaged in order to make 

these organizations and NASA the best they can be. These critical interactions have been 

adversely effected and in some cases completely inhibited by the current export control regime. 

Consequences of No Action on the Recommendation: 

NASA will spend more money, have less robust programs, and miss important leadership 

opportunities. 

NASA Response: 

NASA concurs with the recommendation. NASA fully supports the President's Export Control 

Reform (ECR) effort, and will continue to participate actively in ECR activities targeted 

towards rationalizing and streamlining the export control lists, pursuing connectivity to the 

single licensing database (USXPORTS), contributing to relevant Federal regulatory revisions, 

and participating in interagency discussions. 

NASA Export Control Program officials also participate in pre-proposal and proposal 

conferences attended by universities and research consortia for all NASA Research 

Announcements (NRA) and Announcement of Opportunity (AO) efforts. Additionally, NASA 

is working to fulfill the recommendation to convene a discussion with the academic and nonprofit community on the effects of export controls on international research by seeking to 

partner with the Universities Space Research Association (USRA) in conducting a workshop 

with university and non-profit communities. The contemplated workshop, to occur within the 

next six to 12 months, would feature speakers from the U.S. Government's export control 

regulatory agencies, as well as practitioners and representatives from the university and nonprofit sectors, for an open discussion and exchange of experiences, perspectives, and regulatory 

compliance guidance. 

Enclosure
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 on Form 10-Q of WNC CALIFORNIA HOUSING TAX CREDITS III, L.P. (the “Partnership”) for the quarter ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), and pursuant to 18 U.S.C., section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, Melanie R. Wenk , Vice President-Chief Financial Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc., general partner of the Partnership, hereby certify 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 result of operations of the Partnership.








/s/MELANIE R. WENK


Melanie R. Wenk


Vice President-Chief Financial Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc.





Date: February 9, 2011
#### GREGORY J. CARTER v. ATLANTIC CITY ELECTRIC CO.

June 21, 1978.

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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
UNAUDITED BALANCE SHEET AS OF OCTOBER 28, 2000, AUDITED BALANCE SHEET AS OF
JANUARY 29, 2000 AND UNAUDITED STATEMENTS OF OPERATIONS AND CASH FLOWS FOR THE
QUARTERLY PERIODS ENDED OCTOBER 28, 2000 AND OCTOBER 30, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH QUARTERLY REPORT FOR THE QUARTERLY PERIOD
ENDED OCTOBER 28, 2000.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-29-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-29-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-28-2000
<CASH>                                           1,999
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     13,317
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                17,650
<PP&E>                                          27,345
<DEPRECIATION>                                  18,260
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  26,735
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           11,600
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        98,693
<OTHER-SE>                                   (103,509)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    26,735
<SALES>                                          9,802
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 9,802
<CGS>                                            6,229
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    5,781
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   128
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 1,500
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  95
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (3,931)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (3,931)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (3,931)
<EPS-BASIC>                                     (0.56)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0


</TABLE>
EXHIBIT 32



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 Pacific Land and Coffee Corporation  (the "Company") on Form  10-KSB for the  period  ending  March 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof  (the "Report"),  I, Tyrus C. Young, 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 and 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/ Tyrus C. Young

By: Tyrus C. Young

Chief Financial  Officer

June 27, 2008
Tracking Number: 2010-02-05 (EPOC-Ol) 


Public Engagement Not a "Mission Requirement" 


NASA Advisory Council Recommendation: 

The Council recommends that representatives ofthe NASA Communications and Education 

Offices be included in reviews during all phases ofdevelopment to ensure that missions serve 

NASA's educational and public outreach goals. 

Major Reasons for the Recommendation: 

NASA is an organization of engineers and scientists who do not necessarily understand the 

importance of public outreach. Public Affairs continues to fight a needless battle to include 

public access and interaction as a requirement for every NASA mission. Engineers have 

always resisted including cameras and crew time as a priority mission requirement, as both 

require the expenditure ofscarce resources. Public access to missions should always be a 

priority requirement that is built into the design of any mission. 

NASA Response: 

The Agency concurs with the recommendation that the Office ofEducation and the Office of 

Communications be represented at the initiation of new NASA programs. We recognize that 

there is a need to be more proactive in the public engagement aspect ofNASA's mission 

development and execution. There is a desire among the Agency's professional 

communicators to initiate a cultural transition from one that treats public engagement and 

educations as an "after-event" activity to one that recognizes, up front, the value of planning for 

and dedicating resources to communication efforts to complement the technical and scientific 

objectives ofmission development. This further aligns with administrative directives for more 

open Government and with Congressional interest to improve opportunities for public 

engagement. 

Over a number of years, public opinion research has revealed that, while NASA enjoys broad 

support from the American people, public understanding of specific Agency activities is 

minimal. Progress in improving this situation can be improved by adopting the NAC's 

recommendation to consider public engagement as a priority or "Levell Requirement" in the 

development, management, and execution ofindividual projects and programs. 

The Office ofEducation and the Office ofCommunications will work through their respective 

coordinating cornmittees to develop appropriate guiding NASA policy and program 

management directives to ensure these activities are institutionalized to the broadest extent 

possible. 

Enclosure
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 32.2

             CERTIFICATION OF PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER

            Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as created by Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of Books-A-Million, Inc.
(the "Company") hereby certifies, to the best of such officer's knowledge, that:

            (i) the accompanying Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q/A of the Company
      for the quarterly period ended October 30, 2004 (the "Report") fully
      complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as
      applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

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

      Dated: April 28, 2005                /s/ Sandra B. Cochran
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           Sandra B. Cochran
                                           President and Chief Executive Officer

            The foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany
the Report pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, and is not being filed for
purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and
is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether
made before or after the date hereof, regardless of the general incorporation
language in such filing.

                                       32
EXHIBIT 99.2

                        ST.GEORGE BANK LIMITED (SERVICER)
                       OFFICER'S CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE

         The  undersigned,  a duly authorized  representative  of St.George Bank
Limited,  as  Servicer  ("St.George  Bank" or the  "Servicer"),  pursuant to the
agreement  between  Perpetual  Trustees  Consolidated  Limited,  St.George  Bank
Limited  and  Crusade  Management  Limited,  dated as of  March  25,  2003  (the
"Agreement"), does hereby certify that:

                  1.       Capitalized  terms  used  but  not  defined  in  this
                           Officer's  Certificate have their respective meanings
                           set  forth  in  the  Agreement,  unless  the  context
                           requires otherwise or unless otherwise defined in the
                           Officer's Certificate.

                  2.       As of the date hereof, St.George Bank is the Servicer
                           of Crusade Global Trust No. 2 of 2001.

                  3.       This Officer's  Certificate is delivered  pursuant to
                           the Agreement.

                  4.       A review of the activities of the Servicer during the
                           calendar  year ended  September  30,  2003 and of its
                           performance under the pooling and servicing agreement
                           or similar agreements was made under my supervision.

                  5.       Based on such review,  to my knowledge,  the Servicer
                           has fulfilled its  obligations  under the pooling and
                           servicing agreement or similar agreements relating to
                           the Trust  (including  the  Master  Trust  Deed dated
                           March 14,  1998,  The  Crusade  Euro Trust  Servicing
                           Agreement dated March 19, 1998 and the  Supplementary
                           Terms Notice  dated  September  11, 2001)  throughout
                           such  calendar  year  and,  except  as set  forth  in
                           paragraph 6 below.

                  6.       The following is a description  of any  exceptions to
                           paragraph 5 above:- No significant  deficiencies were
                           detected.


     IN WITNESS  WHEREOF,  the  undersigned,  a duly  authorized  officer of the
Servicer,  has duly executed this Officer's  Certificate this 24th day of March,
2004.


                                                     ST.GEORGE BANK LIMITED
                                                     as Servicer


                                                     /S/  G.M. BARTLETT
                                                     ---------------------------
                                                     Name:   G.M. Bartlett
                                                     Title:  Group Executive
##### 



Exhibit 32 CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350 In connection with the report of Spectre Gaming, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-QSB for the
period ended March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the Report), I, Russell C. Mix, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, and I Brian D. Niebur,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify to the best of our knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.
§ 1350, 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/ Russell C. Mix Russell C. Mix
Chief Executive Officer
May 12, 2005 /s/ Brian D. Niebur Brian D. Niebur
Chief Financial Officer
May 12, 2005 32
#### J. P. Gracy et al. *v.*Jas. M. Crow.

Judgment — 'Diligence—'Law and Facts — Jury.

Diligence is a question of law to be applied by the court; the facts to be applied by the jury.

APPEAL PROM CALDWELL CIRCUIT COURT.

February 6, 1867.

Opinion op the Court by

Judge Robertson :

There was not only prudence but more than ordinary diligence in bringing the suit in Caldwell instead' of Hopkins county, because the next term of the Hopkins Circuit Court being only a few days before that of the Caldwell Circuit Court, and the defendant to the action being then in Caldwell, there was more probability of a judgment at the first term than there might have been on the contingency of a timely service in Hopkins.

The judgment was in fact apparently obtained as early as it could have been by the utmost diligence. And, according to the weight of the proof, there was no negligence in issuing execution, and it is altogether probable that, had the execution been sent to the sheriff sooner than it was, the return of *“no property*" would have been the same.

Wherefore, although diligence is a question of law to be adjudged by the court, the facts to be applied by the jury did not *541authorize the peremptory instruction to find for the defendant. ■The judgment is, therefore, reversed, and the cause remanded for a new trial.

*James &*Hewlitt, for Appellant.

Judge Peters did not sit in this case.
# Aldrin Looks Back at Tranquility Base

On July 20, 1969, the America's Apollo 11 landed on the moon, making history as the first humans set foot on another world. Lunar Module pilot Buzz Aldrin was photographed during the Apollo 11 extravehicular activity on the moon by mission commander Neil Armstrong. Aldrin had just deployed the Early Apollo Scientific Experiments Package. In the for

Read More

                    -  Facebook PinterestX
-  LinkedIn Emailhttps://www.nasa.gov/image-detail/aldrin-looks-back-tranquility-base/Copy URL to clipboard>DownloadShareSize1041x1089pxNational 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:								  								Mar 18, 2023								 
-  									Page Editor:								   
-  								Responsible NASA Official:							  								Abigail Bowman