alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
- Humans in Space
- Why Go to Space
- Astronauts   - Astronauts Home
  - Active Astronauts
  - Management Astronauts
  - Former Astronauts
  - Astronaut Candidates
  - Partner Astronauts
  - Become an Astronaut
  - Spacesuits
- Living in Space
- Commercial Space
- More   - Destinations
  - Spaceships and Rockets
  - News and Events
  - Multimedia  :envihab
Environment and Habitat
Active Mission
About
				Mission Overview                			
Experience
				Take a Virtual Tour                			
FAQs
				Frequently Asked Questions                			
:envihab (from the words ‘Environment’ and ‘Habitat’) is a state of the art research facility operated by the Institute for Aerospace Medicine at the German Space Agency (DLR). NASA researchers use the facility to study how continuous and intermittent centrifugation (or spinning) could help counter the physiological effects of microgravity.

Location
Cologne, Germany
Environment
Bed Rest Study
Hazards
Gravity
Mission Length
Up to 70 Days  Featured StoryOne Small Step ... Without Ever Leaving Bed
Heather Archuletta has taken “one small step” to support NASA’s Moon to Mars exploration approach – only, she never got...
Read the Story  Explore More
Stay up-to-date with the latest :envihab content from NASA.
One Small Step ... Without Ever Leaving Bed							5 min read						
Heather Archuletta has taken “one small step” to support NASA’s Moon to Mars exploration approach – only, she never got...
ArticleLying in Bed for the Sake of Science: NASA Co-Sponsors Bed Rest Study in Germany							4 min read						
Twelve volunteers will arrive this week at the German Space Agency’s (DLR) Institute of Aerospace Medicine’s :envihab facility to lie in...
Article  Media10 Images  Keep ExploringDiscover More Topics From NASA
Humans In Space

Artemis

Astronauts Home

Space Station Research and Technology
    The 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 03, 2024								 
-  									Page Editor:								  									Nathan Cranford								 
-  								Responsible NASA Official:							  								Abigail Bowman
**Exhibit 23.1**

 

## **Consentof Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm**

##  

TheBoard of Directors

AetherSystems, Inc.:

 

Weconsent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements (Nos.333-91369, 333-52220 and 333-52222) on Form S-8 and the registration statements(Nos. 333-48898, 333-64264, and 333-74428) on Form S-3 of Aether Systems, Inc.of our reports dated March 15, 2005 relating to the consolidated balance sheetsof Aether Systems, Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2003 and 2004, andthe related consolidated statements of operations and other comprehensive loss,stockholders’ equity, and cash flows for each of the years in the three-yearperiod ended December 31, 2004.

 

 
| /s/  KPMG LLP        |   |
|----------------------|--------|
|                 |
|                 |
| Baltimore,  Maryland |
| March  15, 2005      |

 

----
II 

108TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION S. 1995

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to repeal the MA Regional 

Plan Stabilization Fund. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

DECEMBER 9, 2003

Mr. DASCHLE (for Mr. FEINGOLD) introduced the following bill; which was 

read twice and referred to the Committee on Finance 

A BILL

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to repeal 

the MA Regional Plan Stabilization Fund.

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

3 SECTION 1. REPEAL OF MA REGIONAL PLAN STABILIZA4 TION FUND. 

5 (a) PURPOSE OF SECTION.—The purpose of this sec6 tion is to reduce the Federal budget deficit and to more 

7 efficiently use taxpayer dollars in health care spending. 

8 (b) REPEAL OF MA REGIONAL PLAN STABILIZATION

9 FUND.—Section 1858 of the Social Security Act, as added 
2

•S 1995 IS 

1 by section 221(c) of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Im2 provement, and Modernization Act of 2003, is amended—

3 (1) by striking subsection (e); 

4 (2) by redesignating subsections (f), (g), and 

5 (h) as subsections (e), (f), and (g), respectively; and 

6 (3) in subsection (e), as so redesignated, by 

7 striking ‘‘subject to subsection (e),’’. 

8 (c) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section 1851(i)(2) 

9 of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1395w–21(i)(2)), as 

10 amended by section 221(d)(5) of the Medicare Prescrip11 tion Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003, 

12 is amended by striking ‘‘1858(h)’’ and inserting 

13 ‘‘1858(g)’’. 

14 (d) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by 

15 this section shall take effect as if included in the enact16 ment of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, 

17 and Modernization Act of 2003.

Æ
National Aeronautics and Space Administration

The Mission:

Space shuttle Discovery’s

S T

to the assembly and maintenance 

of the International Space Statio

The seven-member crew will deliver 

the Multi-Purpose Logistics Module 

Leonardo, containing life support 

and science racks, as well as the 

Colbert treadmill. A Lightweight 

Multi-Purpose Experiment

Support Structure Carrier

or LMC, also will be delivered 

to the space station.

S T S-128 is Discovery’s 37t

mission, the 128th space shuttle 

flight, and the 30th mission to 

the station.

The Crew:

Commander Rick Sturckow wil

lead the  T S-128 mission, an

Kevin Ford will serve as pilot. 

Mission Specialists are Patrick

Forrester, Jose Hernandez, John

“Danny” Olivas, Nicole Stott, a

European Space Agency astronau

Christer Fuglesang. 

During the mission, Stott will transfer

to the space station to replace Tim 

Kopra as Expedition 20 flight engineer.

Kopra will return home aboard 

Discovery.

www.nasa.gov SP-2009-08-081-KSC
1 Filed 12/18/13 P. v. Adger CA3 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED

California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
THIRD APPELLATE DISTRICT (Sacramento)

----

THE PEOPLE, Plaintiff and Respondent,

v. ANTWAN LEE ADGER, SR., Defendant and Appellant. C074029 (Super. Ct. No. 13F00558)

Appointed counsel for de fendant Antwan Lee Adger, Sr., asked this court to
review the record to dete rmine whether there are any arguable issues on appeal. ( People v. Wende (1979) 25 Cal.3d 436 ( Wende ).) Finding no arguable error that would result in a disposition more favorable to defendant, we affirm the judgment. We provide the following brief descripti on of the facts and procedural history of the case. (See People v. Kelly (2006) 40 Cal.4th 106, 110, 124.) On January 23, 2013, defe ndant fled from a police offi cer’s marked car in the vehicle he was driving. The police office r activated the car’s light and siren.
Defendant drove 85 to 90 miles an hour on the freeway, over 60 miles an hour in a residential neighborhood, ran se veral red lights, and collided with a parked vehicle. Defendant then ran from the police into Ca thy Soto’s house, wher e he forced her to stay inside and be quiet so th e police would not find him.2 Defendant pled no contest to felony ev ading an officer (Veh. Code, § 2800.2, subd. (a)) and false imprisonment (Pen. Code, § 236), and admitted a prior strike. The trial court sentenced defendant to serve a stip ulated term of five years four months in state prison, imposed various fines and fees, and awarded 141 days’ presentence custody credit (71 actual and 70 conduct). Defendant appeals. His request for a ce rtificate of probable cause was denied. We appointed counsel to represent de fendant on appeal. Counsel filed an opening brief that sets forth the facts of the case and requests this court to review the
record and determine whether there ar e any arguable issues on appeal. ( Wende , supra , 25 Cal.3d 436.) Defendant was advised by counsel of the right to file a supplemental brief within 30 days of the date of filing of the opening brief. More than 30 days elapsed, and we received no communication from defendant. There is a mathematical error in the abstract of judg ment that incorrectly shows 1 40 rather than 141 days of presentence custody credit. We order a correction to the abstract. Having undertaken an examination of the entire record, we find no other arguable error that would result in a di sposition more favorable to defendant.
DISPOSITION The judgment is affirmed. The trial c ourt is directed to prepare a corrected abstract of judgment reflecting an award of 141 days of presente nce custody credit and to forward a certified copy to the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation.

HOCH , J.

We concur:

HULL , Acting P. J.

DUARTE , J.
[Federal Register Volume 75, Number 212 (Wednesday, November 3, 2010)]
[Notices]
[Pages 67748-67749]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2010-27684]


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

FEDERAL RESERVE SYSTEM


Formations of, Acquisitions by, and Mergers of Bank Holding 
Companies

    The companies listed in this notice have applied to the Board for 
approval, pursuant to the Bank Holding Company Act of 1956 (12 U.S.C. 
1841 et seq.) (BHC Act), Regulation Y (12 CFR Part 225), and all other 
applicable statutes and regulations to become a bank holding company 
and/or to acquire the assets or the ownership of, control of, or the 
power to vote shares of a bank or bank holding company and all of the 
banks and nonbanking companies owned by the bank holding company, 
including the companies listed below.
    The applications listed below, as well as other related filings 
required by the Board, are available for immediate inspection at the 
Federal Reserve Bank indicated. The application also will be available 
for inspection at the offices of the Board of Governors. Interested 
persons may express their views in writing on the standards enumerated 
in the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1842(c)). If the proposal also involves the 
acquisition of a nonbanking company, the review also includes whether 
the acquisition of the nonbanking company complies with the standards 
in section 4 of the BHC Act (12 U.S.C. 1843). Unless otherwise

[[Page 67749]]

noted, nonbanking activities will be conducted throughout the United 
States.
    Unless otherwise noted, comments regarding each of these 
applications must be received at the Reserve Bank indicated or the 
offices of the Board of Governors not later than November 26, 2010.
    A. Federal Reserve Bank of Chicago (Colette A. Fried, Assistant 
Vice President) 230 South LaSalle Street, Chicago, Illinois 60690-1414:
    1. Peoples Bancorp, Inc., Prairie du Chien, Wisconsin; to acquire 
100 percent of the voting shares of Woodhouse & Bartley Bank, 
Bloomington, Wisconsin.
    B. Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City (Dennis Denney, Assistant 
Vice President) 1 Memorial Drive, Kansas City, Missouri 64198-0001:
    1. Exchange Bancorp of Missouri, Inc., Fayette, Missouri; to become 
a bank holding company by acquiring 100 percent of the voting shares of 
Exchange Bank of Missouri, Fayette, Missouri.

    Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, October 28, 
2010.
Robert deV. Frierson,
Deputy Secretary of the Board.
[FR Doc. 2010-27684 Filed 11-2-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6210-01-P
Filed 2/3/09 by Clerk of Supreme Court

IN THE SUPREME COURT

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

2009 ND 4

Terry Lee Pribyl, Petitioner and Appellant

v.

State of North Dakota, Respondent and Appellee

No. 20080185

Appeal from the District Court of Burleigh County, South Central Judicial District, the Honorable Donald L. Jorgensen, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Per Curiam.

Steven Balaban (argued), 418 E. Rosser Ave., Ste. 102, Bismarck, ND 58501- 4046, for petitioner and appellant.

Lloyd C. Suhr (argued), Assistant State’s Attorney, Courthouse, 514 E. Thayer Ave., Bismarck, ND 58501, for respondent and appellee.

Pribyl v. State

No. 20080185

Per Curiam.

[¶1]Terry Pribyl (“Pribyl”) appeals from a district court order denying his application for post-conviction relief.

[¶2]On September 19, 2005, Pribyl was charged with corruption of a minor.  An attorney represented Pribyl.  Initially, Pribyl pled not guilty.  The district court held a change of plea hearing on March 15, 2006, and Pribyl pled guilty.  On July 21, 2006, the district court sentenced Pribyl to a term of five years with all five years suspended for three years.

[¶3]On February 19, 2008, Pribyl, acting pro se, filed an application for post- conviction relief asserting he received ineffective assistance of counsel.  The district court appointed new counsel to represent Pribyl.  The district court held a post- conviction relief hearing on June 18, 2008.  The district court determined Pribyl received effective assistance of counsel; therefore, it denied Pribyl’s petition for post- conviction relief.  Pribyl appeals.

[¶4]On appeal, Pribyl asserts the district court improperly denied his petition for post-conviction relief on the grounds of ineffective assistance of counsel, because:  his counsel did not conduct a sufficient investigation; his counsel did not communicate all of the information of the case to him; he maintained his innocence to his counsel, yet his counsel advised him to plead guilty; and his counsel did not properly advise him on the issue of his previous conviction.  We summarily affirm under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(2).

[¶5]Gerald W. VandeWalle, C.J.

Carol Ronning Kapsner

Mary Muehlen Maring

Daniel J. Crothers

Dale V. Sandstrom
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 Credit Fund IiI, L.P. (the  "Partnership") for the period ended June
30, 2009 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  and 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 and Chief Financial Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc.
October 9, 2009
##### 



1.
    
    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Laurel Capital Group, Inc. (the
Registrant);
 2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact
or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the
circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period
covered by this report;
 3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in
this 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 presented in this
report;
 4.
    
    The Registrants other certifying officers and I are responsible for establishing and
maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and
15d-15(e)) for the Registrant and have:
 a.
    
    Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material
information relating to the Registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is
made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in
which this report is being prepared;b.
    
    Evaluated the effectiveness of the Registrants disclosure controls and
procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report
based on such evaluation; andc.
    
    Disclosed in this report any change in the Registrants internal control over
financial 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 has
materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the Registrants
internal control over financial reporting;
 5.
    
    The Registrants other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the Registrants auditors and the
audit committee of Registrants board of directors (or persons performing
the equivalent functions):
 a.
    
    All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation
of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely
affect the Registrants ability to record, process, summarize and report financial
information; andb.
    
    Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees
who have a significant role in the Registrants internal controls over financial
reporting.
 May 15, 2006/s/ Edwin R. MausEdwin R. MausPresident and Chief Executive Officer
DISMISS; and Opinion Filed December 31, 2013.

S

In The

Court of Appeals

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

No. 05-13-01058-CV

SHARON D. LEWIS AND ALL OTHER OCCUPANTS 

OF 608 MULBERRY LANE, DESOTO, TEXAS 75115, Appellants

V.

AH4R1 TX DFW, LLC, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 3

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. CC-13-01305-C

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Before Justices O’Neill, Myers, and Brown 

Opinion by Justice O’Neill

In a letter dated December 10, 2013, the Court questioned its jurisdiction over this appeal

in a forcible detainer action. Specifically, it appears the appeal is moot because appellee now has 

possession of the property. We instructed appellants to file, within ten days, a letter brief 

explaining how this Court has jurisdiction. We cautioned appellants that failure to file a letter 

brief within the time requested would result in dismissal of the appeal without further notice. As 

of today’s date, appellants have not filed a jurisdictional brief.

A case becomes moot if, at any stage during the proceedings, a controversy ceases to 

exist between the parties. See Williams v. Lara, 52 S.W.3d 171, 184 (Tex. 2001). The purpose 

of a forcible detainer action is to obtain immediate possession of property. See Scott v. Hewitt, 

127 Tex. 31, 35, 90 S.W.2d 816, 818-19 (1936). A judgment of possession in a forcible detainer 
–2–

action determines the right to immediate possession and is not intended to be a final 

determination of whether the eviction is wrongful. See Marshall v. Housing Auth. of the City of 

San Antonio, 198 S.W.3d 782, 787 (Tex. 2006).

In their unopposed motion to release the funds held as bond,

1 appellants informed the 

Court that appellee is now in possession of the property. The issue of possession is no longer in

controversy. Accordingly we dismiss the appeal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(a).

131058F.P05

 1 In an order dated August 19, 2013, the Court granted appellants’ unopposed motion.

/Michael J. O'Neill/

MICHAEL J. O’NEILL

JUSTICE
–3–

Court of Appeals

S

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas

JUDGMENT

SHARON D. LEWIS AND ALL OTHER 

OCCUPANTS OF 608 MULBERRY 

LANE, DESOTO, TEXAS 75115, 

Appellants

No. 05-13-01058-CV V.

AH4R1 TX DFW, LLC, Appellee

On Appeal from the County Court 

at Law No. 3, Dallas County, Texas.

Trial Court Cause No. CC-13-01305-C.

Opinion delivered by Justice O’Neill. 

Justices Myers and Brown, participating.

In accordance with this Court’s opinion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED.

It is ORDERED that appellee, AH4R1 TX DFW, LLC, recover its costs of this appeal 

from appellants, SHARON D. LEWIS AND ALL OTHER OCCUPANTS OF 608 MULBERRY 

LANE, DESOTO, TEXAS 75115.

Judgment entered this 31st day of December, 2013.

/Michael J. O'Neill/

MICHAEL J. O'NEILL

JUSTICE
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1997
<CASH>                                       3,519,627
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                5,447,208
<ALLOWANCES>                                   258,000
<INVENTORY>                                  5,733,053
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            15,288,857
<PP&E>                                       4,227,729
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              28,283,565
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                        6,344,125
<BONDS>                                      3,762,655
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                       21,561,209
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                     (3,453)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                28,283,565
<SALES>                                     16,167,741
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            16,167,741
<CGS>                                        9,171,169
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                9,171,169
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             7,994,824
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             271,249
<INCOME-PRETAX>                            (3,623,573)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                        (3,623,573)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (3,623,573)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.75)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.75)
        

</TABLE>
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



I, Michael Silton, Chief Executive Officer of Rainmaker Systems, Inc. (the
Company), certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge:



(1) the Report of the Company on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (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/ Michael Silton     
|Michael Silton         
|Chief Executive Officer
|March 22, 2004