alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
IN GENERAL TERM, 1871.

#### John Hedrick, Appellant, *v.*Henry Kramer.

Appeal from Rand, Judge.

*Costs*— Rule *as to, in Superior Court.*

The rule as to costs under Section 337, of the Code, applies as well to actions begun, and determined in the Superior Court.

*Spalir*4" *Baity,*for defendant.

*Woollen Sf Ruddell,*for appellee.

Blair, J.

This was a suit commenced in this Court to • recover on a breach of warrants in the sale, or exchange of personal property.

*113There was a trial at Special Term, and the plaintiff recovered a verdict, and judgment for thirty dollars.

The defendant then moved to tax the costs to the plaintiff, which motion the Court sustained. To this the plaintiff excepted; and this is the only error presented in the case.

It is urged that the 397th Section of the Code (2 G. & H., p. 227,) which provides that in actions commenced in “ the Circuit Court, or Common Pleas, if the plaintiff recover less than fifty dollars exclusive of costs, he shall pay costs, &c.,” does not apply to this Court, for the reason, that at the time of the passage of that Act this Court was not organized, and the Act establishing it contains no express provisions extending the provisions of the Section cited to the Superior Court.

It is true the Act organizing this Court does not in express terms extend the above provision to this Court. It was evidently the intention of the Section cited, that actions where the recovery would be less than fifty dollars should be brought in Justices’ courts, and the Act organizing this Court was evidently hot intended to change that rule. This Court was organized to transact that class of litigation which was crowding the dockets of the Circuit, and Common Pleas Courts, and not to relieve the dockets of Justices of the Peace. The whole context of'the Act establishing this Court shows that it was the intention of the Legislature that the same rule as to costs should apply in this Court that prevail in the Circuit and Common Pleas Courts. This is in accordance with the rule of construction announced by Chief Justice Marshall.

*“*The spirit as well as the letter of a statute must be respected, and where the whole context of the law demonstrates a particular intent in the Legislature to effect a certain object, some degree of implication may be called in to aid the intent.” *Derousseau et al*v. *The United*States, 6 Cranch, 307.

The judgment in Special Term is affirmed.
NASA Advisory Council Ad Hoc Task Force on 

Science, Technology, Engineering 

and Mathematics (STEM) Education 

AGENDA 

August 28, 2018 

9:30 am – 2:30 pm PDT 

NASA Ames Research Center/Virtual Meeting 

Webex and Call In Information Below 

9:30 Introduction to Meeting B. Girten 

9:35 Opening Remarks by Chair A. Kennedy 

9:45 Introductions of New Task Force Members B. Girten 

10:00 Office of STEM Engagement Update M. Kincaid/K.Brown 

Transition, Fiscal Climate & Strategy 

Education Business Service Assessment 

Significant Milestones 

10:45 Break All 

11:00 Update on STEM Education Advisory Panel & 5 Year Plan B. Girten 

11:15 Evaluation and Performance R. LaSalvia 

11:30 Lunch All 

12:30 Discuss Findings and Recommendations Members 

2:15 Finalize Findings and Recommendations Members 

2:30 Adjourn Meeting B. Girten 

844–467–6272 or toll access number 720–259–6462, and then the participant passcode: 634012 followed by the # sign. 

WebEx the link is https://nasa.webex.com/, the meeting number is 993 201 922 and the password is NAC2018$
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 Annual Report of UNR Holdings, Inc. (formerly known as Promotora Valle Hermoso, Inc.) (the "Company") on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Iuriy Vladimirovich Shevchenko, 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 to the best of 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 result of operations of the Company.




/s/ Iuriy Vladimirovich ShevchenkoIuriy Vladimirovich Shevchenko, Chief Financial OfficerApril 13, 2010
I 

108TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 1791 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 17, 2004 

Referred to the Committee on Resources 

AN ACT 

To amend the Lease Lot Conveyance Act of 2002 to provide 

that the amounts received by the United States under 

that Act shall be deposited in the reclamation fund, 

and for other purposes. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

S 1791 RFH 

1 SECTION 1. LEASE LOT CONVEYANCE. 

2 Section 4(b) of the Lease Lot Conveyance Act of 

3 2002 (116 Stat. 2879) is amended— 

4 (1) by striking ‘‘As consideration’’ and inserting 

5 the following: 

6 ‘‘(1) IN GENERAL.—As consideration’’; and 

7 (2) by adding at the end the following: 

8 ‘‘(2) USE.—Amounts received under paragraph 

9 (1) shall be— 

10 ‘‘(A) deposited by the Secretary, on behalf 

11 of the Rio Grande Project, in the reclamation 

12 fund established under the first section of the 

13 Act of June 17, 1902 (43 U.S.C. 391); and 

14 ‘‘(B) made immediately available to the Ir15 rigation Districts, to be credited in accordance 

16 with section 4(I) of the Act of December 5, 

17 1924 (43 U.S.C. 501).’’. 

Passed the Senate September 15, 2004. 

Attest: EMILY J. REYNOLDS, 

Secretary.
FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

August 25, 2010

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

TIMOTHY HATTEN,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

ISAAC FREEBORN; MARNE BOYLE;

A. MERRITT; B. GREENWOOD; J.P.

YOUNG; RUSSELL DeGROOTE; DR.

JOHN DOE; B. CINK; E. REICHERT;

KEN EVERHART; GREGORY

KIZZIAH,

 Defendants - Appellees. 

No. 10-1205

(D.C. No. 1:09-CV-02729-CMA-MJW)

ORDER

Before TACHA, GORSUCH, and HOLMES, Circuit Judges.

This appeal is before the court based on a show cause order questioning appellate

jurisdiction and directing the parties to obtain a district court order either containing a final

judgment under Fed. R. Civ. P. 54(b) as to the March 17, 2010 Order appealed by Plaintiff

Timothy Hatten or explicitly resolving Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment claims against the

remaining eight Defendants. See Stockman’s Water Company, LLC v. Vaca Partners, L.P.,

425 F.3d 1263, 1265 (10th Cir. 2005); Lewis v. B. F. Goodrich Co., 850 F.2d 641, 645-46

(10th Cir. 1988). 

Appellate Case: 10-1205 Document: 01018483951 Date Filed: 08/25/2010 Page: 1 
2

This court lacks jurisdiction. The parties did not move in the district court for a Rule

54(b) certification and did not file anything in this court explaining their failure to do so.

Plaintiff’s Eighth Amendment claims against several Defendants remain unresolved in the

district court. Consequently, the March 17, 2010 Order and the April 26, 2010 Order

appealed by Plaintiff are interlocutory and not immediately appealable under 28 U.S.C.

§ 1291 or under any recognized exception to the final judgment rule. 

The appeal is DISMISSED for lack of appellate jurisdiction. 

Entered for the Court,

Elisabeth A. Shumaker, Clerk

Kathleen T. Clifford

Attorney - Deputy Clerk

Appellate Case: 10-1205 Document: 01018483951 Date Filed: 08/25/2010 Page: 2
## This page has permanently moved.

### If redirect does not occur in 5 seconds, click the following link: https://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/station/research/experiments/explorer/Investigation.html?#id=1710
FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

April 23, 2010

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

DOUGLAS LEE CRAWFORD,

 Petitioner - Appellant,

v.

THE ADAMS COUNTY COMBINED

COURT JUSTICE CENTER,

 Respondent - Appellee. 

No. 10-1122

(D.C. No. 1:09-CV-3025-ZLW)

ORDER

Before MURPHY, HARTZ, and GORSUCH, Circuit Judges.

The district court dismissed the state habeas application of Douglas Lee Crawford

on February 12, 2010 and entered a separate judgment that same day. Any notice of

appeal from that order and judgment was due within 30 days thereof. Fed. R. App. P.

4(a)(1)(A). The notice of appeal therefore had to be filed no later than March 15, 2010,

by operation of Fed. R. Civ. P. 6(a)(3) and Fed. R. App. P. 26(a)(3). In this instance, the

notice of appeal was not filed until March 25, 2010. By Mr. Crawford’s own admission

in his certificate of service, he did not even place the notice of appeal into the prison mail

system until March 23, 2010.

Appellate Case: 10-1122 Document: 01018408651 Date Filed: 04/23/2010 Page: 1 
2

Mr. Crawford was given the opportunity to show cause why his attempted appeal

should not be dismissed as untimely. He responded with a “Response to Court Order of

March 30, 2010 ” and a “Memorandum.”

Mr. Crawford does not contest the operative facts set out above. He principally

argues his tardiness in filing should be excused because he was given erroneous advice as

to the filing deadline by inmates at the prison library. He asserts three different inmates

told him that the deadline for the notice of appeal was 45 days, rather than 30. He also

cites to Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6), which sets out the conditions under which a district court

may reopen the time within which a notice of appeal can be filed. 

As to Fed. R. App. P. 4(a)(6), Mr. Crawford does not allege the requisite criteria

for reopening the time period for an appeal stated in that rule and in any event, no motion

seeking that relief was ever filed in the district court. 

 With regard to the erroneous advice he was provided by other inmates, although

this court construes a pro se litigant’s pleadings liberally, “an appellant’s pro se status

does not excuse the obligation of any litigant to comply with the fundamental

requirements of the Federal Rules of Civil and Appellate Procedure.” Ogden v. San Juan

County, 32 F.3d 452, 455 (10th Cir. 1994). Further, the United States Supreme Court has

held that in proceedings such as this, the failure to file a timely notice of appeal deprives

the circuit court of appellate jurisdiction and the appeal must be dismissed. Bowles v.

Russell, 127 S. Ct. 2360 (2007). 

Appellate Case: 10-1122 Document: 01018408651 Date Filed: 04/23/2010 Page: 2 
3

For the foregoing reasons, this appeal must be and accordingly is dismissed.

Entered for the Court,

ELISABETH A. SHUMAKER

Clerk of Court

by:

Douglas E. Cressler

Chief Deputy Clerk

Appellate Case: 10-1122 Document: 01018408651 Date Filed: 04/23/2010 Page: 3
# Peter Coen

Quesst Integration Manager

Peter Coen serves as the mission integration manager for NASA’s Quesst mission.  His primary responsibility in this role is to ensure that the X-59 aircraft development, in-flight acoustic validation, and community test elements stay on track toward delivering on NASA’s critical commitment to provide quiet supersonic overflight response data to the FAA and the International Civil Aviation Organization.

In his previous position, Coen was the manager for the Commercial Supersonic Technology project in NASA’s Aeronautics Research Mission Directorate, where he led a team from the four Aeronautics research centers in the development of tools and technologies for a new generation of quiet and efficient supersonic civil transport aircraft.

Coen’s NASA career spans four decades. He has studied technology integration in practical designs for many different types of aircraft and has made technical and management contributions to all of NASA’s supersonics-related programs during the past 30 years. As project manager, he led these efforts for 12 years.

Coen has received numerous honors and awards including two NASA Outstanding Leadership Medals. He is an associate fellow of the American Institute of Aeronautics and Astronautics.

Coen earned a Bachelor of Science in Aerospace Engineering from The Polytechnic Institute of New York and a Master of Science in Aeronautical Engineering from George Washington University.

## 					Downloads				

## Peter Coen

Jul 14, 2023

PDF (151.49 KB)

## AERONAUTICS RESEARCH MISSION DIRECTORATE LEADERSHIP

				See All                			

Bob Pearce
Associate Administrator

Carol Carroll
Deputy Associate Administrator

Jon Montgomery
Deputy Associate Administrator for Policy

Barbara Esker
Deputy Associate Administrator for Programs (Acting) / Assistant Deputy Associate Administrator for Missions
EXHIBIT 99.1


                           CERTIFICATIONS 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 Tribeworks, Inc. (the "Company") on
Form 10-KSB for the period ending September 30, 2002, as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Duncan
Kennedy, 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:

         (1) The Report fully complies with the  requirements  of section
         13(a) 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.


Dated:  December 31, 2002

                     /s/ DUNCAN J. KENNEDY
                     -------------------------
                     By: Duncan Kennedy
                     Chief Executive Officer
#### Porter and Another *v.*Meriam.—In error.

*Tuesday, May*21.

*PORTER*and another obtained a judgment against *Meriam*in the *Martin*Circuit Court. A *fieri facias*issued on the judgment directed to the sheriff of *Orange*county, and was there levied on the defendant’s goods. *Meriam*filed a bill in chancery in the Circuit Court of *Orange*county showing these facts, and praying that the proceedings on the execution might be enjoined, &c. Held, that the Court in which the bill was filed had no jurisdiction of the cause.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
CONSOLIDATED BALANCE SHEET AND CONSOLIDATED STATEMENTS OF INCOME FILED AS PART
OF SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK> 0000892533
<NAME> HAGGAR CORP
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                           5,936
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   48,490
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,243
<INVENTORY>                                     96,186
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               166,441
<PP&E>                                         140,379
<DEPRECIATION>                                  79,718
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 258,975
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           77,272
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           857
<OTHER-SE>                                     159,969
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   258,975
<SALES>                                        312,272
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               312,272
<CGS>                                          209,627
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   94,118
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (1,224)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,865
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  6,886
<INCOME-TAX>                                     2,673
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              4,213
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     4,213
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.56<F1>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.56<F1>
<FN>
<F1>THE EARNINGS PER SHARE INFORMATION HAS BEEN PREPARED IN ACCORDANCE WITH SFAS
NO. 128 AND BASIC AND DILUTED EARNINGS PER SHARE HAVE BEEN ENTERED IN PLACE OF
PRIMARY AND FULLY DILUTED RESPECTIVELY.
</FN>


</TABLE>
#### Allen *v.*Hardesty.—In error.

*A.*SUED *H.*before a justice of the peace and recovered judgment for 83 dollars. *H.*appealed to the Circuit Court; and judgment was there rendered against him for 29 dollars. *Held,*that *H.,*in consequence of the amount of the judgment of the justice being thus reduced, was entitled to a judgment for the costs in the Circuit Court and for those before the justice. R. S. 1843, pp. 891, 2.
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 207 (Wednesday, October 27, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 66089]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-27165]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL-9218-1]


Clean Air Act Advisory Committee; Notice of Charter Renewal

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of Charter Renewal.

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

    The charter for the Environmental Protection Agency's Clean Air Act 
Advisory Committee (CAAAC) will be renewed for an additional two-year 
period, as a necessary committee which is in the public interest, in 
accordance with the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act 
(FACA), 5 U.S.C. App. 2. The purpose of CAAAC is to provide advice and 
recommendations to the EPA Administrator on issues associated with 
policy and other issues associated with implementation of the Clean Air 
Act.
    It is determined that CAAAC is in the public interest in connection 
with the performance of duties imposed on the Agency by law.
    Inquiries may be directed to Pat Childers, CAAAC Designated Federal 
Officer, U.S. EPA, Mail Code 6102A, 1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW., 
Washington, DC 20460, or by e-mail <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#9af9f2f3f6feffe8e9b4eafbeedaffeafbb4fdf5ec"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="7d1e15141119180f0e530d1c093d180d1c531a120b">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Dated: July 9, 2010.
Gina McCarthy,
Principal Deputy Assistant Administrator, Office of Air and Radiation.
[FR Doc. 2010-27165 Filed 10-26-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
### IN THE

TENTH COURT OF APPEALS

No. 10

- 16

- 00441

- CR

IN RE NELSON PARNELL , JR.

Original Proceeding

ORDER REQUESTING A RESPONSE

Nelson Parnell, Jr.’s petition for writ of mandamus was filed on December 23, 2016

.

The Court requests a response from the other parties to the proceeding. See T EX

. R. A PP

.

P. 52.8(b). Any response shall be filed with the Clerk of this Court no later than 2 1 days

from the date of this order.

PER CURIAM

Before Chie f Justice Gray,

Justice Davis, and

Justice Scoggins

Response requested

Order issued and filed January 11, 2017
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 207 (Wednesday, October 27, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Page 66074]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-27329]


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

COMMODITY FUTURES TRADING COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Meetings

TIME AND DATE: 11 a.m., Friday, November 5, 2010.

PLACE: 1155 21st St., NW., Washington, DC, 9th Floor Commission 
Conference Room.

STATUS: Closed.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: Surveillance and Enforcement Matters.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Sauntia S. Warfield, 202-418-5084.

Sauntia S. Warfield,
Assistant Secretary of the Commission.
[FR Doc. 2010-27329 Filed 10-25-10; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6351-01-P
**Exhibit 31.1****CERTIFICATIONS**I, Paul S. Shipman, certify that:1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10–Q of Redhook Ale Brewery, Incorporated; 2. Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of thecircumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the periodcovered by this report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included inthis report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results ofoperations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in thisreport; 4. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a–15(e) and15d–15(e)) for the registrant and we have: (a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controlsand procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material informationrelating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us byothers within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is beingprepared;  (b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls and procedures andpresented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controlsand procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on suchevaluation; and  (c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter (theregistrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materiallyaffected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal controlover financial reporting; and5. The registrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors and theaudit committee of the registrant’s board of directors (or persons performing the equivalentfunctions); (a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation ofinternal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affectthe 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 whohave a significant role in the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting.Date: November 13, 2007         BY: /s/ Paul S. Shipman             Paul S. Shipman      *            Chief Executive Officer*      *            and Chairman of the Board*