alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1663 Enrolled Bill (ENR)]

        S.1663

                       One Hundred Eighth Congress

                                 of the

                        United States of America

                          AT THE SECOND SESSION

          Begun and held at the City of Washington on Tuesday,
           the twentieth day of January, two thousand and four

                                 An Act

 
        To replace certain Coastal Barrier Resources System maps.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. REPLACEMENT OF CERTAIN COASTAL BARRIER RESOURCES SYSTEM 
MAPS.
    (a) In General.--The 2 maps subtitled ``NC-07P'', relating to the 
Coastal Barrier Resources System unit designated as Coastal Barrier 
Resources System Cape Fear Unit NC-07P, that are included in the set of 
maps entitled ``Coastal Barrier Resources System'' and referred to in 
section 4(a) of the Coastal Barrier Resources Act (16 U.S.C. 3503(a)), 
are hereby replaced by 2 other maps relating to those units entitled 
``Coastal Barrier Resources System Cape Fear Unit, NC-07P'' and dated 
May 5, 2004.
    (b) Availability.--The Secretary of the Interior shall keep the 
maps referred to in subsection (a) on file and available for inspection 
in accordance with the provisions of section 4(b) of the Coastal 
Barrier Resources Act (16 U.S.C. 3503(b)).

                               Speaker of the House of Representatives.

                            Vice President of the United States and    
                                               President of the Senate.
```
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.

mtniteb ~tate~ ~ourt of ~peaI~

for tbe jfeberaI ([ireuit

INTELLECT WIRELESS, INC.,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

HTC CORPORATION AND HTC AMERICA, INC.,

Defendants-Appellees.

2012-1658

Appeal from the United States District Court for the

Northern District of Illinois in case no. 09-CV-2945, Judge

William T. Hart.

ON MOTION

ORDER

Intellect Wireless, Inc. moves to substitute Meredith

Martin Addy as principal counsel. Paul K. Vickrey will

remain as of counsel for Intellect Wireless, Inc.

Upon consideration thereof,

IT Is ORDERED THAT:

Case: 12-1658 Document: 14 Page: 1 Filed: 11/07/2012
INTELLECT WIRELESS, INC. V. HTC CORPORATION 2

The motion is granted. Meredith Martin Addy and

Paul K. Vickrey should promptly file new entries of appearance.

FOR THE COURT

/s/ Jan Horbaly

Jan Horbaly

Clerk

s21

Case: 12-1658 Document: 14 Page: 2 Filed: 11/07/2012
NASA	
  EducaBon

Program	
  EvaluaBon

Requirements for Awardees

Patricia	
  Moore Shaffer

EvaluaEon Manager

NASA Office of EducaEon

September 22, 2015
On the	
  Immediate	
  Horizon

•	 New FY2017 API focused on ensuring that	
  

independent	
  evaluaEons are conducted and

reported by awardees

•	 New agency strategic plan in place by FY2018,

with ECC-­‐level planning in FY2016 for new	

performance goals and outcome-focused APIs

beginning this fall

2
FY2017 ExpectaBons for Awardees

• Performance	
  data supporEng NASA Annual

Performance Indicators and program/project-­‐

specific metrics

•	 Use	
  of independent	
  evaluaBon	
  to assess

outcomes and demonstrate progress toward

achieving program/project	
  objecEves

3
Awardee EvaluaBon: Approach

•	 Strengthen evaluaBon requirements across all

program solicitaEons, including use of

independent	
  evaluators

•	 Offer technical	
  assistance to awardees

supporEng evaluaEon planning during

applicaEon and post-­‐award phases

•	 Require reporBng on evaluaEon acEviEes,

including submission and/or public posEng of

evaluaEon reports

4
Recent AcBons

•	 MUREP MIRO: New awardee requirement	
  to

submit	
  evaluaEon plan in advance for review

•	 Internal SEAP CompeBBon: Awardees

required to submit	
  an acEvity-­‐specific logic

model and evaluaEon plan in advance for

review	
  

5
6	
  

Success	
  Story
7	
  

Success Story: CP4SMPVC+	
  
How do students think	
  about space

exploraBon?	
  

Finding:

exploraBon from	
  the	
  perspecBve	
  of	
  the	
  Solar	
  System,

while	
  younger	
  children seemed to view	
  it	
  from	
  Earth

orbit.

Older	
  respondents	
  appeared to view	
  space	
  

hGp://informalscience.org/images/evaluaEon/2015-­‐02-­‐24_BridgingEarthAndMarsProgramFrontEndReport.pdf 8
FY2015 CP4SMPVC+	
  CompeBBon

• Enhanced evaluaEon requirements include:

– Use of independent	
  evaluator

– Minimum 8% of project	
  budget	
  dedicated to

evaluaEon

9
Awardee EvaluaBon: Phased Rollout

FY2015 -­‐Begin to adjust	
  solicitaEon requirements

-­‐IniEate awardee guidance/training

FY2016 -­‐ConEnue adjustment	
  of solicitaEon

requirements and awardee guidance/training

across porDolio

-­‐Begin review of awardee evaluaEon plans

-­‐Begin collecEon and review of awardee

evaluaEon reports

FY2017 -­‐Full implementaEon expected

10
Other Updates

•	 Space Grant: Independent	
  report	
  pending on

recommendaEons for improvement	
  of

performance measurement	
  and proposed

evaluaEon plan to assess naEonal program

11
Visit NASA	
  EducaBon Performance

Assessment

hDp://www.nasa.gov/offices/educaBon/performance/	
  

12
No. 62.

#### William Williams and others, plaintiffs in error, *vs.*Ezekiel Hollis and others, executors, &c. defendant in error.

[1.] Action for use and occupation, cannot be sustained if defendant claims title adversely to plaintiff.

[2.] Declaration cannot be amended, when the amendment proposed requires a total change in the. structure of the declaration setting out a different cause of action.

Assumpsit, in Marion Superior Court. Tried before Judge Worrell, August Term, 1855.

This was an action brought by the heirs of Thomas Williams against the executors of Thomas Hollis, for the use and occupation of a tract of land. The plaintiff showed by hi» own proof, that Thomas Hollis was a purchaser at Sheriff’s sale; and consequently, held adversely to plaintiff's. Defendants demurred to the evidence and moved for a non-suit, on the ground that this action would not lie under those facts. Plaintiff’s Counsel resisted the motion, and at the same time, proposed to add a count charging a forcible entry of the premises ; or else, to change the declaration so as to make the case an action of trespass, or in some way to make the pleadings fit the case proven. The Court refused to allow the amendments, sustained the demurrer and dismissed the case. These decisions are assigned as error.

Stubbs & Hill, for plaintiffs in error.

Blandeord & Oraweord, for defendants in error.

*By the Court.*

McDonald, J.

delivering the opinion.

[1.] The action for use and occupation will not lie, where *314the defendants claim title adversely to the plaintiffs. Such a claim is inconsistent with the pretence that they occupy the' premises as tenants of plaintiffs. The defendants in this case held the land adversely, and the relation of landlord and tenant could not be implied, and the action cannot be sustained.

[2.] The Court below decided correctly in disallowing the amendment. Neither the practice of the Courts nor the Statutes, in relation to amendments, as liberal as they arej. would admit of it. The declaration is a perfect one, and requires no amendment. If it had 'been defective in form or substance, the plaintiffs might have amended it as a matter of right, but the difficulty was not that the declaration was defective, but that the action would not lie. The action was not wrongly entitled. All the allegations in the declaration show that it was correct in that respect. The proposition was, to-change the entire structure of the declaration, and to allow the party to file a new declaration, giving a new aspect to the case throughout, setting forth a new cause of action. It. could not be done.

Judgment of Court affirmed.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This  schedule  contains  summary  financial   information  extracted  from  the
Company's  unaudited  financial  statements for the quarter ended  June 30, 1998
and is qualified in its entirety by reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                         0000892160
<NAME>                        Derma Sciences, Inc.

       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                                  JAN-1-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                           1,627,402
<SECURITIES>                                             0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      742,499
<ALLOWANCES>                                       (30,000)
<INVENTORY>                                        587,772
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 6,766,559
<PP&E>                                             122,557
<DEPRECIATION>                                           0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   7,292,802
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            1,921,382
<BONDS>                                                  0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                    0
<PREFERRED>                                         50,708
<COMMON>                                            45,705
<OTHER-SE>                                       5,275,007
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     7,292,802
<SALES>                                          3,666,709
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 3,666,709
<CGS>                                              440,601
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                      440,601
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                         0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                         0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                  30,318
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   (716,823)
<INCOME-TAX>                                             0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               (716,823)
<DISCONTINUED>                                           0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                          0
<CHANGES>                                                0
<NET-INCOME>                                      (716,823)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        (0.16)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        (0.16)
        


</TABLE>
IV 

115TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 335 

Supporting the goals and ideals of National Purple Heart Recognition Day. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 17, 2017 

Mr. WALZ (for himself, Mr. MAST, Mr. THOMPSON of California, Mr. JONES, 

Mr. SEAN PATRICK MALONEY of New York, Mr. RYAN of Ohio, Mr. 

EVANS, Ms. KUSTER of New Hampshire, Mr. FRANKS of Arizona, Ms. 

ESTY of Connecticut, Mr. PETERS, Ms. BROWNLEY of California, and 

Mr. PANETTA) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 

the Committee on Armed Services 

RESOLUTION 

Supporting the goals and ideals of National Purple Heart 

Recognition Day. 

Whereas, on August 7, 1782, during the Revolutionary War, 

General George Washington established what is now 

known as the Purple Heart Medal when he issued an 

order establishing the Badge of Military Merit; 

Whereas the Badge of Military Merit was designed in the 

shape of a heart in purple cloth or silk; 

Whereas, while the award of the Badge of Military Merit 

ceased with the end of the Revolutionary War, the Purple 

Heart Medal was authorized in 1932 as the official successor decoration to the Badge of Military Merit; 


lotter on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
2 

•HRES 335 IH 

Whereas the Purple Heart Medal is the oldest United States 

military decoration in present use; 

Whereas the Purple Heart Medal is awarded in the name of 

the President of the United States to recognize members 

of the Armed Forces who are killed or wounded in action 

against an enemy of the United States or are killed or 

wounded while held as prisoners of war; 

Whereas the Purple Heart Medal has been awarded to more 

than 1,800,000 recipients; and 

Whereas August 7, 2017, is an appropriate day to celebrate 

as National Purple Heart Recognition Day: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) supports the goals and ideals of National 

3 Purple Heart Recognition Day; and 

4 (2) encourages all people of the United 

5 States— 

6 (A) to learn about the history of the Pur7 ple Heart Medal; 

8 (B) to honor recipients of the Purple 

9 Heart Medal; and 

10 (C) to conduct appropriate ceremonies, ac11 tivities, and programs to demonstrate support 

12 for people who have been awarded the Purple 

13 Heart Medal. 

Æ 


lotter on DSK5VPTVN1PROD with BILLS
# Sitemap

## September 11, 2011

- Home
- Sitemap
- 2011
- 09
- September 11, 2011

            - Titan Flyby (T-78) – Sept. 12, 2011
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 98-558
In Re: BRETT C. KIMBERLIN, Petitioner.
On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. (CA-97-1687-AW) Submitted: July 21, 1998 Decided: August 12, 1998 Before ERVIN and WILKINS, Circuit Judges, and HALL, Senior Circuit Judge. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Brett C. Kimberlin, Petitioner Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).1 See In re Beard , 811 F.2d 818, 826 (4th Cir. 1987). 2 See In re First Fed. Sav. & Loan Ass’n, 860 F.2d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 1988). 2 PER CURIAM: Brett C. Kimberlin filed this petition for a writ of mandamus seeking to compel the district court to grant his habeas petition challenging revocation of his parole under 28 U.S.C.A. § 2254 (West 1994 & Supp. 1998). The granting of a writ of mandamus is a drastic remedy to be used in extraordinary circumstances. 1 A petitioner must show that he has a clear right to the relief sought, that the respondent has a clear duty to perform the act requested by petitioner, and that there is no other adequate remedy available. 2Kimberlin has failed to make the requisite showing for such extraordinary relief. Subsequent to Kimberlin filing this petition andmandamus, the district court denied his § 2254 petition and Kimberlin noted a timely appeal from that order. Accordingly, though we grant Kimberlin’s motion to proceed in forma pauperis, we deny his petition for a writ of mandamus. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented inthe materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED
# NASA’s VIPER Gets Its Head and Neck

A team of engineers lifts the mast into place atop of NASA’s VIPER robotic Moon rover in a clean room at NASA’s Johnson Space Center in Houston.

Read More

                    -  Facebook PinterestX
-  LinkedIn Emailhttps://www.nasa.gov/image-detail/jsc2024e013783orig/Copy URL to clipboard>DownloadShareTakenFebruary 12, 2024Image CreditNASA/Helen Arase VargasSize5300x6625pxThe 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 16, 2024								 
-  									Page Editor:								  									Monika Luabeya								 
-  								Responsible NASA Official:							  								Abigail Bowman
#### Herndon *v.*Woodward et al.

Sale of Land — Contract Rescinded — Rents — Interest.

Where the contract for the sale of a house and lot was rescinded by agreement of the parties, the rents of the estate sold are to' be regarded as equivalent to the interest on the price to be paid for same.

APPEAL EROM CLARK; CIRCUIT COURT.

September 29, 1866.

Opinion oe the Court by

Judge Peters :

The contract for the sale of the house and’ lot by Herndon to Eubank was rescinded by the agreement of the parties, and in such cases the general rule as recognized by this court is, that the rents of the estate sold are to be regarded as equivalent to the interest on the price to be paid for the same; that rule was adhered to by the circuit judge in adjusting and settling the mutual claims of the parties for rents and interest.

According to the evidence the property was as valuable, and would have brought as much in the market when the contract of sale was rescinded, as when it was made; and no reason is shown for departing from the well-established equitable rule in this case.

Whether appellant should be adjudged to pay to the Wood-wards or to the other creditors of Eubank the balance he was found to be indebted to Eubank could not prejudice him; he was only interested in having the amount he was indebted correctly ascertained and fixed, and when paid, that his liability should cease; this we think the judgment has accomplished and as appellant is not prejudiced thereby, he cannot complain.

We think the evidence leaves no room for doubt that the money borrowed by Eubank of Judge Simpson was, applied toward paying for the drugs and not for the house, and that the judgment was as favorable to the Woodwards as they had any right to ask it.

Wherefore, the judgment on the original and cross-appeal is affirmed.
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA

FOURTH DISTRICT

JD RESTORATION INC,

Appellant,

v.

UNIVERSAL PROPERTY & CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY,

Appellee.

No. 4D17-2415

[May 16, 2018]

Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit, Palm 

Beach County; Jeffrey Dana Gillen, Judge; L.T. Case No. 

502016CA011733XXXXMB.

Gray Proctor of Fox & Loquasto, P.A., Richmond, Virginia, and 

Mordechai L. Breier of Consumer Law Office, P.A., North Miami Beach, for 

appellant.

Sara M. Sandler and John P. Joy of Walton Lantaff Schroder & Carson, 

Fort Lauderdale, for appellee.

PER CURIAM.

Affirmed. See Quiroga v. Citizens Prop. Ins. Corp., 34 So. 3d 101 (Fla. 

3d DCA 2010). 

DAMOORGIAN, FORST and KLINGENSMITH, JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
## In The Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

No. 07 - 16 - 00109 - CR TIMOTHY LOVINGTON, A PPELLANT V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, APPELLEE On Appeal from the 137th District Court Lubbock County, Texas Trial Court No. 2015 - 407 , 978, Honorable John J. "Trey" McClendon III, Presiding 

### June 7 , 2016 ABATEMENT AND REMAND Before QUINN, C.J., and CAMPBELL and HANCOCK, JJ. Appellant Timothy Lovington appeals his conviction for evading arrest using a motor vehicle . The appellate record was originally due on March 28, 2016. The clerk’s record was filed on March 23, 2016. On March 28, 2016, the court reporter moved for an extension of time to file the reporter’s record on the grounds that she was unable to complete the record due to her case load. The motion was granted, and the deadline was moved to April 27, 2016 . Thereafter, the reporter once again moved for an extension . We granted the motion , b ut advised the reporter that no further extensions2

would be granted . The dea dline to file the reporter’s record was extended to May 27, 2016. The reporter has now requested a third extension to file the reporter’s record. Accordingly, we deny the request for an extension of time to file the reporter’s record , abate the appeal , and remand the cause to the 137th District Court of Lubbock County (trial court) for further proceedings. Upon remand, the trial court shall immediately determine, through h earing or otherwise , when the reporter’s record can reasonably be transcribed into written form and filed in a manner that does not further delay the prosecution of this appeal or have the practical effect of depriving the appellant of his right to appeal. The trial court shall 1) execute findings of fact and conclusions of law addressing the foregoing issue and 2) cause to be developed a supplemental clerk’s record containing its findings of fact and conclusions of law and all orders it may issue as a re sult of its resolution of the foregoing inquiry. Additionally, the trial court shall then cause the supplemental clerk’s record to be filed with the C lerk of this C ourt on or before July 7 , 2016 . Should further time be needed by the trial court to perform these tasks, t hen same must be requested before July 7 , 2016 . It is so ordered. Per Curiam Do not publish.
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 March 31, 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: May 6, 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                                       



29
1 The Honorable Lawrence L. Piersol, Un ited States District Judge for the District of South Dakota, adopting the report and recommendations of the Honorable John E. Simko, United States Magistrate Judge for the District of South Dakota. 2 The Honorable Irvin N. Hoyt, Chief Judge, United States Bankruptcy Court for the District of South Dakota. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 07-1176

___________ Teresa J. Feucht, * * Appellant, * * Appeal from the United States v. * District Court for the * District of South Dakota. Leeann Pierce, Chapter 7 Trustee, * * [UNPUBLISHED] Appellee. *

___________ Submitted: May 16, 2008 Filed: June 3, 2008

___________ Before MURPHY, COLLOTON, and SHEPHERD, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Chapter 7 debtor Teresa Feucht appeals from the district court’s 1 decision affirming the bankruptcy court’s 2exemption order in favor of trustee Leeann Pierce. Upon review of the bankruptcy court’s factua l findings for clear e rror, and its legal-2- conclusions de novo, see In re Foust , 52 F.3d 766, 768 (8th Cir. 1995), we find no basis for reversal. Accordingly, we affirm. See 8th Cir. R. 47B

______________________________