alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**EXHIBIT 31.01**
CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER PURSUANT TO RULE 13a-14(a)/15d-14(a)
I, Henry Linsert, Jr., certify that:
1.  I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Martek Biosciences Corporation;
2.  Based on my knowledge, this quarterly report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in lightof the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to theperiod covered by this quarterly report;
3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information includedin this quarterly report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presentedin this quarterly report;
4.  The registrant’s other certifying officer 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 have:
 a)  designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosurecontrols and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that materialinformation relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is madeknown to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in whichthis quarterly report is being prepared;  b)  [Paragraph reserved pursuant to SEC Release 33-8238];  c)  evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosure controls andprocedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of thedisclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this reportbased on such evaluations; and  d)  disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting that occurred during the registrant’s most recent fiscal quarter(the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that hasmaterially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting; and
5.  The registrant’s other certifying officer 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 oroperation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely toadversely affect the registrant’s ability to record, process, summarize and reportfinancial information; and  b)  any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or otheremployees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internal control overfinancial reporting.
Date: June 9, 2005
By /s/ Henry Linsert, Jr.      
Henry Linsert, Jr.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 21 - 0 381 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. CLAYTON DOUGLAS KIRN,

Defendant and Appellant .

**G RANT**  Pursuant to authority granted under Mont. R. App. P. 26(1), the Appellant is given an extension of time until February 27 , 2023 , to prepare, file, and serve the Appellant’s reply brief. No further extensions will be granted.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

January 27 2023

01/27/2023

Case Number: DA 21-0381
FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

April 26, 2010

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

JESUS ADOLFO 

TINAJERO-PORRAS,

Defendant - Appellant.

No. 09-6292

(D.C. Nos. 09-CV-00473-R and 

06-CR-00115-R-1) 

(W.D. Okla.)

ORDER 

DENYING CERTIFICATE OF APPEALABILITY

Before KELLY, McKAY, and LUCERO, Circuit Judges.

Defendant-Appellant Jesus Tinajero-Porras, a federal inmate appearing pro

se, seeks to appeal from the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion

to vacate, set aside, or correct his sentence. Because Mr. Tinajero-Porras has not

made “a substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right,” 28 U.S.C.

§ 2253(c)(2), we deny his request for a certificate of appealability (“COA”) and

dismiss the appeal. Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 483-84 (2000).

A jury convicted Mr. Tinajero-Porras on drug charges arising out of a

conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute five kilograms or more of cocaine

and 1,000 kilograms or more of marijuana and he was sentenced to 30 years’

Appellate Case: 09-6292 Document: 01018409031 Date Filed: 04/26/2010 Page: 1 
- 2 -

imprisonment. United States v. Tinajero-Porras, 275 F. App’x. 794, 795 (10th

Cir. 2008). In his § 2255 motion, he primarily argued that he received ineffective

assistance of counsel. On appeal, he argues that counsel was ineffective based on

failing to object, argue, and preserve the following points: (1) the four-point

enhancement for being a leader/organizer lacks a factual basis, (2) the drug

quantities used were in error, (3) there was no evidence he laundered money, (4)

the two-point enhancement for a firearm was not supported by the evidence, and

(5) cumulative error. He also objects to the district court’s practice of striking his

reply brief because it was not timely filed within 11 days. 1 R. 230. 

To obtain a COA, Mr. Tinajero-Porrras must show “that jurists of reason

could disagree with the district court’s resolution of his constitutional claims or

that jurists could conclude the issues presented are adequate to deserve

encouragement to proceed further.” Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322, 327

(2003). To establish ineffective assistance of counsel, Mr. Tinajero-Porras was

required to prove deficient performance and prejudice. Strickland v. Washington,

466 U.S. 668, 687 (1984). Having reviewed the pleadings including the

government’s responses and the Pre-Sentence Report, 1 R. 94-156, 181-204, and

the district court’s resolution of Mr. Tinajero-Porras’ claims, we are satisfied that

he cannot meet this standard. 1 R. 165-71, 207-09, 230 (noting that the result

would not be altered even had the court considered the reply brief). 

Appellate Case: 09-6292 Document: 01018409031 Date Filed: 04/26/2010 Page: 2 
- 3 -

We deny a COA and DISMISS the appeal. 

Entered for the Court

Paul J. Kelly, Jr.

Circuit Judge

Appellate Case: 09-6292 Document: 01018409031 Date Filed: 04/26/2010 Page: 3
# Sitemap

## December 01, 2004

- Home
- Sitemap
- 2004
- 12
- December 01, 2004

            - December 2004 – Huygens Probe Released
#### Hopkins *v.*Myers and Others.—On appeal.

HOPKINS filed a bill in chancery praying, *inter*alia, for an injunction to stay proceedings in an action of'ejectment which was then pending, and which was brought on .the demise of *Samuel Hannah*for a town-lot,

The bill states that *Hugh Hannah*sold to *James Myers*the lot in question, giving him a bond conditioned *to*make a deed for the lot on payment of the purchase-money; that said *James*having taken possession of the lot under the purchase and made valuable improvements thereon, sold the same to the complainant, and agreed to assign to him said title-bond, the consideration of the latter sale to be paid in certain notes; that said *James*afterwards, to deceive his creditors, assigned, without objection by the complainant, said bond to *George Myers*who agreed, on the delivery to him of said notes, to assign the bond to the complainant; that the complainant tendered the notes to *George Myers,*who failed to perform his promise; and that said *George,*who had combined with said *James*and *Hugh*and *Samuel Hannah*to cheat the complainant, delivered up the bond to the *Hannahs,*they having notice of the complainant’s equity.

The bill further states that said *Hugh,*before his execution of said bond, had, without consideration and to defraud his creditors, mortgaged said lot to said *Samuel;*and that the latter, at a sale under a decree of foreclosure of the mortgage, purchased the lot for the former, paying nothing therefor.

*Held,*that no sufficient ground' for the injunction was shown by the bill.
EXHIBIT 99.1


                            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 Annual Report of BPK Resources, Inc. (the
"Company") on Form 10-KSB/A (Amendment No. 1) for the period ended December 31,
2002, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof
(the "Report"), I, John B. Connally, III , 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)
               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.


                                         BPK RESOURCES, INC.



                                         By:  /s/ John B. Connally, III
                                             ----------------------------
                                              John B. Connally, III
                                              Chief Executive Officer

                                         Date:  April 12, 2004
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
registrant's unaudited consolidated financial statements for the six month
period ended September 30, 2000 and is qualified in its entirety by reference to
those financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CURRENCY>                      U.S. Dollars

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                                  JAN-1-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                   SEP-30-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                          1
<CASH>                                           1,178,548
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    1,767,400
<ALLOWANCES>                                             0
<INVENTORY>                                      1,155,782
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 4,542,785
<PP&E>                                             305,365
<DEPRECIATION>                                           0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   6,347,687
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            2,669,602
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                         21,892
<COMMON>                                            21,209
<OTHER-SE>                                       3,634,984
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     6,347,687
<SALES>                                          6,669,798
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 6,669,798
<CGS>                                            3,062,511
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    3,062,511
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    71,742
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                       0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (819,764)
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (819,764)
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (819,764)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          (0.51)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        (0.51)


</TABLE>
#### Alcott *v.*The State.

An indictment, under the statute of 1838 respecting crime and punishment, against a person for defrauding the revenue by selling clocks without a license, should allege that such person made the vending of clocks his business or occupation.

ERROR to the *Wayne*Circuit Court.

Dewey, J.

This was an indictment found at the fall term 1843 of the *Wayne*Circuit Court, charging that the plaintiff in error, not having any license or authority to vend clocks within the county of *Wayne,*did, in that county, unlawfully sell and vend to a certain person three brass clocks, for the sum of twenty dollars each, whereby the revenue of the county was diminished and defrauded to the amount of twenty-five dollars, against the statute, &c. A motion to quash the indictment having been overruled, the defendant was convicted under the plea of not guilty, and sentenced accordingly.

At the time the indictment was found, there was no law which expressly made it penal to sell clocks without a license. *7But by the revenue act of 1841, the vendors of wooden, brass, or composition docks, were required to procure license to vend those articles,- which license was subject to a county tax of not less than twenty, nor more than fifty dollars. Laws of 1841, p. 41. In the succeeding .year, the tax was increased to a sum of not less than seventy-five, nor more than one hundred dollars. Laws of 1842, p. 149. These provisions, we think, were designed to apply to those persons only who made the vending of clocks a business or occupation, and do not include occasional sales made by other persons, as their interest or convenience might require. It is impossible to believe that the legislature intended that no owner of a clock whatever should be allowed to sell it, without a license procured at an expense, perhaps, of five times the value of the clock.

*C. H. Test,*for the plaintiff. *A.*A. *Hammond,*for the state.

By the act respecting crime and punishment, in force when the indictment was found, it was provided that any and all unlawful acts, committed by any person, whereby the revenue for state or county purposes should be diminished, should be deemed a fraud against the revenue; and the person guilty of such act should, upon conviction thereof, be fined in any sum not exceeding five hundred dollars. R. S.

1838, p. 216. To bring a person within this provision fox-selling clocks without license, it must appear that he was bound to procure a license, or in other words that he made vending clocks his busixxess or occupation; otherwise the act of selling without license was lawful, and could not have been a fraud upon the revenue. The indictment before us does not contain the necessaxy averment, and is therefore too defective to support the conviction of the defendant.

*Per Curiam.*

The judgment is x-evei’sed. Cause remanded, &c.
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 Thornburg Mortgage, Inc. (the Company) on
Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Larry A. Goldstone, 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) 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/ Larry A. Goldstone 
|Larry A. Goldstone     
|Chief Executive Officer
|August 25, 2008
FILED

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

April 8, 2010

Elisabeth A. Shumaker

Clerk of Court

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

AMERICAN REPUBLIC

INSURANCE COMPANY, an Iowa

corporation,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

GREAT-WEST LIFE & ANNUITY

INSURANCE COMPANY, a Colorado

corporation,

Defendant - Appellee.

No. 10-1087

(D.C. No. 1:09-CV-02857-REB-MEH)

ORDER

The appellant’s motion to dismiss is GRANTED. See Fed. R. App. P.

42(b).

Entered for the Court

ELISABETH A. SHUMAKER, Clerk

Ellen Rich Reiter

Deputy Clerk/Jurisdictional Attorney

Appellate Case: 10-1087 Document: 01018399315 Date Filed: 04/08/2010 Page: 1
NASA Advisory Council Recommendation 

Use of Secondary Payloads for Technology Demos 

2011-01-04 (TIC-OI) 

Recommendation: The Council recommends that NASA encourage the use of secondary 

payloads (where feasible) on future NASA and commercial missions as an important capability 

for testing, validating, and demonstrating new technologies and scientific payloads in the coming 

years. 

Major Reasons for the Recommendation: The Council discussed the underutilization of 

NASA and commercial expendable launch vehicles (ELV's) and reusable launch vehicles 

(RLV's) launch capacities for secondary flight payloads for technology validation and 

demonstrations. The Council believes that NASA should encourage missions with additional 

)Jayload capacity to make it available for research. Secondary payloads are vital for testing and 

proving many technology capabilities, especially in times of constrained budgets and resources. 

Consequences of No Action on the Recommendation: Missed opportunity to utilize an 

underused resource for technology demonstrations. Many transformative technologies that could 

be validated as a secondary payload would remain at a lower Technology Readiness Level (TRL) 

level and may not advance for use on later NASA missions. 

NASA Response: NASA concurs with the recommendation and agrees that use ofsecondary 

and/or hosted payloads would allow for more technologies to efficiently advance to a higher 

technical readiness level. 

As the Office ofthe ChiefTechnologist (OCT) identifies technology payloads ready for flight 

demonstration, the office will work with the Science Mission Directorate and the Space 

Operations Mission Directorate, as well as with the United States Air Force's Space Test 

Program, to identifY appropriate launch vehicles and spacecraft platforms to accommodate these 

payloads. This may include either Government or commercial launch vehicles (including 

OCT/Flight Opportunities Program-sponsored commercial suborbital reusable launch vehicles 

and parabolic flight services), or accommodation on other NASA or commercial spacecraft 

platforms. 

Enclosure 3
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED AUGUST 20, 2024

NO. 03-22-00400-CV

Leo Graves d/b/a Graves Tire Service, Appellant

v.

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality, Appellee

APPEAL FROM THE 200TH DISTRICT COURT OF TRAVIS COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE BYRNE, JUSTICES TRIANA AND SMITH

AFFIRMED -- OPINION BY JUSTICE SMITH

This is an appeal from the denial of a petition for bill of review seeking to overturn a final 

judgment signed by the district court on June 23, 2022. Having reviewed the record and the 

parties’ arguments, the Court holds that there was no reversible error in the district court’s

denial. Therefore, the Court affirms the district court’s denial. The appellant shall pay all costs 

relating to this appeal, both in this Court and in the court below.
# Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility Lead Edward Gonzales

"I was labeled a troublemaker. Teachers wouldn't help me. My career counselor said I would do amazing work at a car wash and that's what I should consider doing and not to continue my education. But I didn't listen." — Edward Gonzales, Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility Lead, Goddard Space Flight Center

Read More

                    -  Facebook PinterestX
-  LinkedIn Emailhttps://www.nasa.gov/image-detail/diversity-equity-inclusion-accessibility-lead-edward-gonzales/Copy URL to clipboard>DownloadShareTags- Hispanic Heritage Month
- Native American Heritage Month
Size1041x655pxThe National Aeronautics and Space Administration
NASA explores the unknown in air and space, innovates for the benefit of humanity, and inspires the world through discovery.
- About NASA's Mission
Join Us- Home
- News & Events
- Multimedia
- NASA+
- Missions
- Humans in Space
- Earth & Climate
- The Solar System
- The Universe
- Science
- Aeronautics
- Technology
- Learning Resources
- About NASA
- NASA en Español
Follow NASA-   
-   
-   
-   
- 
- More NASA Social Accounts
- NASA Newsletters
- Sitemap
- For Media
- Privacy Policy
- FOIA
- No FEAR Act
- Office of the IGBudget & Annual Reports
Agency Financial Reports
Contact NASA
Accessibility
-  									Page Last Updated:								  								Apr 25, 2023								 
-  									Page Editor:								  									Michelle Zajac								 
-  								Responsible NASA Official:							  								Abigail Bowman
EXHIBIT 32

CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

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 ManTech International Corporation (the Company) Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2008 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), we, George J. Pedersen, Chairman of the Board and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
and Kevin M. Phillips, 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, as amended; and
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



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

Date: August 1, 2008



|       |  |                                                               
|------ |  | --------------------------------------------------------------
|By:    |  | /s/ GEORGE J. PEDERSEN                                        
|Name:  |  | George J. Pedersen                                            
|Title: |  | Chairman of the Board of Directors and Chief Executive Officer



|       |  |                        
|------ |  | -----------------------
|By:    |  | /s/ KEVIN M. PHILLIPS  
|Name:  |  | Kevin M. Phillips      
|Title: |  | Chief Financial Officer



32