alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
John C. Stennis

Space Center

Contact Us

NASA Stennis Space Center

Don Beckmeyer

Strategic Business Development

228.688.3788

don.h.beckmeyer@nasa.gov

www.nasa.gov/stennis

45 miles east of New Orleans, LA

40 miles west of Gulfport, MS

National Aeronautics and

Space Administration

Geographical

Location

Cryogenic Propellant Systems

• Storage, transfer and distribution

• Six 100,000 gallon LOX Barges

• Three 240,000 gallon LH Barges

• Barges available for conversion to

 other propellants

High Pressure Industrial Water

• 330,000 gallons per minute

• 66 million gallon reservoir storage capacity

High Pressure Gas Facility

• Storage and distribution

• Nitrogen, Helium, Hydrogen, Air

Acoustic Buffer Zone

• Stennis Space Center is surrounded by

 125,000 acre noise buffer zone

• Enables uninterrupted testing without

 disturbing the surrounding communities

Waterway Transportation

• 7-1/2 mile canal system connects SSC to the

 Gulf of Mexico and connected waterways

• Used for delivery of propellants and allows

 barge transportation of large stages

Manufacturing & Assembly

• 800,000+ SF available industrial space

• Co-located with test facilities

Additional Support

• Laboratories

- Environmental

- Gas and Material Analysis

- Measurement Standards and Calibration

• Shops

- Machine, weld, carpenter, paint,

 electrical

- Valve, component

 cleaning, rework

Test Support

Infrastructure

AMERICA’S

LARGEST

ROCKET ENGINE TEST COMPLEX

Map data ©2015 Google
ROCKET STAGES

Up to 11M lb thrust (designed)

Up to 3M lb thrust (current)

LIQUID ENGINE SYSTEMS

Up to 1.5M lb thrust (designed)

Up to 650K lb thrust (current)

COMPONENTS

Injectors, preburners, turbopumps, nozzles, etc.

Up to 1.2M lb thrust (designed)

SIMULATED ALTITUDE

Passive and active 60,000 ft to 100,000 ft

TEST ARTICLE ORIENTATION

Vertical Test Positions

Horizontal Test Positions

PROPELLANTS: FUELS AND OXIDIZERS

Liquid Hydrogen (LH)

Hydrocarbon Fuels

• Liquid Methane (LCH-4)

• Hydrocarbon (RP-1)

• Jet Propellant (JP-8, Jet “A”, etc.)

• Isopropyl Alcohol (IPA)

Oxidizers

• Liquid Oxygen (LOX)

• Concentrated Hydrogen Peroxide (H2O2)

PROPELLANT RUN TANKS

Up to 9,300 psig

Extended Duration Run Time Available

PRESSURANT GAS

Up to 15,000 psig

• Gaseous Nitrogen

• Gaseous Helium

• High Pressure Air

• Gaseous Hydrogen

DATA, INSTRUMENTATION AND VIDEO

Program Logic Controllers (PLC) Control and Operation

Up to 592 Channels Low-Speed Data Per Test Cell

Up To 64 Channels High-Speed Data Per Test Cell

Data Channels “Re-Configurable” Between Test Cells

High Speed Video Available

8 TEST STANDS/ 13 TEST POSITIONS

Stennis Space Center

NASA’s Primary Rocket Propulsion Test Center

SSC has many unique test facilities, 

capabilities, advanced technologies 

and supporting infrastructure 

which provides world-class testing 

services for commercial, government 

agencies and academia.

At NASA’s Stennis Space Center we 

are excited about the future of Space 

Flight, leveraging over 50 years of 

experience and capabilities to ensure 

your success.

“

— Center Director Rick Gilbrech

”
<PAGE>   1
                                                                   Exhibit 10(E)

                                 VF CORPORATION
         DISCRETIONARY MANAGEMENT INCENTIVE COMPENSATION PLAN - ANNUAL

A.   BASIC POLICY

     1.   Each year, the Board of Directors approves the performance goals for
          the Corporation, its domestic subsidiaries and the foreign components
          of the International Division. When the goals are attained, officers
          and key employees Corporate-wide are entitled to be considered for
          bonus payments that are recommended by management and presented to the
          Board for approval. Notwithstanding the foregoing, commencing with
          bonus awards payable in 1995 with respect to fiscal 1994 performance,
          persons who are designated as "executive officers" of the Corporation
          for purposes of and pursuant to Rule 16a-1(f) of the Securities
          Exchange Act of 1934 as of the end of the preceding fiscal year shall
          not be eligible for bonus consideration under the Plan.

     2.   Since Corporate goals (such as EPS) and Division Goals (such as
          Pre-tax Income) are separate and distinct, a Division that achieves
          its goal is eligible for bonus consideration even if the Corporate
          goal is not achieved.

B.   PERFORMANCE/REWARD RELATIONSHIPS

     1.   The Plan establishes a minimum level of performance to receive a bonus
          award. Conversely, a maximum level bonus payout is prescribed for
          achieving performances that are far above competitive levels.

     2.   The Plan is discretionary and the Board of Directors may make
          discretionary awards even if the minimum established performance level
          has not been achieved.

     3.   Determination of a bonus award is contingent upon the level of
          performance attained and the upward or downward variation from the
          Target Bonus.
EXHIBIT 32.1





CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADDED BY

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the Quarterly Report of Northwest Bancorporation, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2007
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Randall L. Fewel, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.ss. 1350, as added by ss. 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (a) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (b) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company as of and for
the period covered by the Report.
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------









By /s/ Randall L.
FewelRandall L. Fewel, President and Chief Executive Officer




Date: May 14,
2007
#### Biggs *v.*Evans.

*Friday, November*29.

Debt on a promissory note. Plea, the general issue. The defendant proved that the note had been given in consideration of the payee’s assignment to him of his right to certain fees, but he did not show they had not been collected. *Held,*that the proof was not sufficient to defeat the suit.

ERROR to the *Lawrence*Circuit Court.

*C. P.*Hester, for the plaintiff.

*G. G.*Dunn, for the defendant.

Sullivan, J.

— Debt on a promissory note commenced before a justice of the peace. Plea, the general issue, sworn to. Judgment in the Circuit Court for the defendant.

The proof was, that the note was given by the defendant to one Stickney, the plaintiff’s assignor, in consideration that the latter had assigned to the former his right to certain fees on the docket of *William*Blair, a justice of the peace, a list of which is contained in the bill of exceptions. The indorsement of the note by *Stickney,*and the possession of it by the plaintiff, were also proved. The right of *Stickney*to the fees sold was net denied; and there ’was no evidence to show' that they had not been collected by the defendant.

On those facts, the Court erred in giving judgment for the defendant. It devolved upon the latter to show that the fees had not been collected, and that they had not been collected without fault on his part. Whether they were collected or not does not appear. There was no evidence to that point. The *onus*lay upon the defendant, and the proof, if any existed, was, manifestly, within his reach. The defendant cannot avoid the note, and retain the fees for which it was given.

*Per Curiam.*

— The judgment is reversed with costs. Cause remanded, &c.
3. ORDER NO.

11. BUSINESS CLASSIFICATION (Check appropriate box(es))

a. PURCHASE

Reference Your

ORDER FOR SUPPLIES OR SERVICES

IMPORTANT: Mark all packages and papers with contract and/or order numbers.

1. DATE OF ORDER 6. SHIP TO:

4. REQUISITION/REFERENCE NO.

2. CONTRACT NO. (if any)

5. ISSUING OFFICE (Address correspondence to) b. STREET ADDRESS

f. SHIP VIA

7. TO:

a. NAME OF CONTRACTOR

b. COMPANY NAME

c. STREET ADDRESS

d. CITY e. STATE f. ZIP CODE

c. CITY d. STATE e. ZIP CODE

8. TYPE OF ORDER

9. ACCOUNTING AND APPROPRIATION DATA

a. NAME OF CONSIGNEE

PAGE OF PAGES

Please furnish the following on the

terms and conditions specified on 

both sides of this order and on the 

attached sheet, if any, including 

delivery as indicated.

12. F.O.B. POINT

a. SMALL b. OTHER THAN SMALL c. DISADVANTAGED

f. SERVICE-DISABLED

VETERAN-OWNED

e. HUBZone

13. PLACE OF

a. INSPECTION b. ACCEPTANCE

15. DELIVER TO F.O.B POINT

ON OR BEFORE (Date)

16. DISCOUNT TERMS

17. SCHEDULE (See reverse for rejections)

14. GOVERNMENT B/L NO.

ITEM NO.

(a)

SUPPLIES OR SERVICES

(b)

QUANTITY

ORDERED

(c)

UNIT

(d)

UNIT

PRICE

(e)

AMOUNT

(f)

QUANTITY

ACCEPTED

(g)

18. SHIPPING POINT 19. GROSS SHIPPING WEIGHT 20. INVOICE NO.

21. MAIL INVOICE TO:

a. NAME

b. STREET ADDRESS (or P.O. Box)

c. CITY e. ZIP CODE

22. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA 23. NAME (Typed)

BY (Signature)

d. STATE

17(h)

TOT.

(Cont.

pages)

17(i)

GRAND

TOTAL

AUTHORIZED FOR LOCAL REPRODUCTION

Previous edition not usable

OPTIONAL FORM 347 (REV. 2/2012)

Prescribed by GSA/FAR 48 CFR 53.213 (f)

SEE BILLING

INSTRUCTIONS

 ON

REVERSE

TITLE: CONTRACTING/ORDERING OFFICER

1

12/02/2020 80AFRC21D0003

80AFRC21F0023 4200752956

NASA

Armstrong Flight Research Center 

P.O. Box 273, M/S 4811-140 

Edwards CA 93523-0273

VIRGIN GALACTIC LLC

166 N ROADRUNNER PKWY STE 1C

LAS CRUCES NM 88011-3003

X

See Continuation Sheet If Applicable

X

Destination Destination Net 30 days

$50,000.00

Andrea Basham

b. DELIVERY - Except for billing

instructions on the reverse, this

delivery order is subject to 

instructions contained on this side 

only of this form and isissued 

subject to the terms and conditions 

of the above-numbered contract.

10. REQUISITIONING OFFICE

g. WOMEN-OWNED SMALL BUSINESS (WOSB)

ELIGIBLE UNDER THE WOSB PROGRAM

h. EDWOSB

d. WOMEN-OWNED

See Continuation Sheet If Applicable

2

$50,000.00

https://www.nssc.nasa.gov/vendorpayment

NSSC-AccountsPayable@nasa.gov
(A)

ITEM NO.

(F)

AMOUNT

(B)

SUPPLIES/SERVICES

(C)

QUANTITY

(D)

UNIT

(E)

UNIT PRICE

CONTINUATION SHEET

REFERENCE NO. OF DOCUMENT BEING CONTINUED Page

NAME OF OFFEROR OR CONTRACTOR

OPTIONAL FORM 336 (4-86)

Sponsored by GSA FAR (48 CFR) 53.110

of

80AFRC21D0003 / 80AFRC21F0023

VIRGIN GALACTIC LLC

2 2

This task order is to obligate the minimum

guaranteed amount. This amount is to be

adjusted based upon the initial task order

negotiations.

0001 Virgin Galactic IDIQ-3 Minimum Order $50,000.00

Obligated Amount $50,000.00

Purchase Requisition: 4200752956 Fund:

SPTX22021D Appropriation: 8021/220131

Amount: $50,000.00
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. PATRICIA BANCROFT.

June 19, 1984.

Petition for certification denied.
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) 

Small Business Innovation Research (SBIR) Ignite Solicitation 

 

FIRM INFORMATION

Firm Name

UEI 

Entities doing business with the federal government will use a Unique Entity Identifier (UEI). If your entity is 

registered in SAM.gov today, your UEI has already been assigned and is viewable in SAM.gov. For more 

information on UEI, go to https://sam.gov/content/duns-uei.

EIN/Tax ID

CAGE Code

DUNS + 4 

Address

City State ZIP + 4

Phone

Company Website
#### Frances Moxey *v.*A. L. Day et al.

'.Partition of Land— Limitation — Presumption as to Deed — Innocent Purchasers.

After an acquiescence of twenty-eight years in a partition of land; and each party taking and controlling the portion assigned him, and after innocent parties have become involved in the title, it will be presumed that the parties made deeds to each other.

Execution Sale — Sheriff’s Deed.

The legal title must be presumed to be in the appellant from the partition and her possession thereunder; it follows that it passed by the execution sale and sheriff’s deed.

APPEALED PROM HICKMAN CIRCUIT COURT.

January 6, 1867.

Opinion op ti-ie Court by

Judge Williams:

There can be no question of fifteen years’ limitation between these parties in this case because the execution sale under which appellees claim was on August 6, 1846, and this suit was begun November 24, 1860; consequently a period of only fourteen years, three months, and eighteen days had elapsed after the execution sale Until suit brought.

In .the year 1832 the heirs-at-law of J. W. Semple, deceased, by a friendly proceeding and consent decree of the Hickman Circuit Court had a partition of some 5,500 acres of land which had descended to them from said decedent.

In this partition the land in contest was assigned to appellant who was then Mrs. Garner. She entered on the land assigned her soon afterward.

Jenkins having obtained judgment and execution against her had the land levied on and sold August 6, 1846. November 2, 1847, the sheriff conveyed the land by deed to Watson, to whom Jenkins had transferred his bond; it has been sold and conveyed ■several times since by regular deeds down to appellees, who, and those under whom they claim, have had possession by actual occupancy since soon after the execution sale.

*75There was no order for the commissioner appointed to make the partition between Semple’s heirs to make deeds to the respective parties, and it may be fairly presumed the parties done this among themselves, especially as the proceedings indicate that •all were adults, and after an acquiescence of twenty-eight years in the partition and each party taking and controlling the portion so assigned, and after innocent parties have become involved in such title this presumption cannot be rebutted by the deed of September 7, 1860, which Mrs. Mosey obtained from a commissioner appointed on her motion to make a deed in a case which had gone from the docket twenty-eight years.

As the legal title must be presumed to be in her from the partition and her possession thereunder, it follows that it passed by the execution sale and sheriff’s deed, and this all appearing from her evidence, the court properly gave a peremptory instruction to find against her.

There are some other minor questions presented, but nothing substantial; at least, no available error is perceived in them.

Wherefore, the judgment is affirmed.
#### George Wallace *v.*Commonwealth.

Bill of Exceptions Must Contain All the Instructions Given by the Court.

It is not stated in any of the numerous bills of exceptions that any or either of them contain all the instructions given by the court to the-jury; we cannot, therefore, consider alleged errors in the instructions or in refusing to instruct the jury on this appeal.

Error in Admitting Evidence Cured.

The court- cannot exclude evidence until lie knows what it is, and if not competent the error is obviated by withdrawing it from the consideration of the jury.

APPEAL FROM GRAVES CIRCUIT COURT.

October 10, 1866.

Opinion of tub Court by

Judge Peters:

It is not stated in any of the numerous bills of exceptions that any or either of them contain all the instructions given by the court to the jury, nor is there any statement in the record *which*
      *317
      *authorizes us to conclude*that all the instructions given on the trial are contained in the bills of exceptions. We cannot, therefore, according to section 335, Civil Code, consider alleged errors in instructing or in refusing to instruct the jury on this'appeal.

There was some evidence conducing to prove that Thomasson and the appellant were together on the night of the homicide. Lamb proves that he told appellant that Thomasson said he, Thomasson, and appellant did the killing, and he replied that he and Thomasson were together that night, and in connection with that evidence we are not prepared to say that the testimony of Primer and McFarland was improperly admitted. The answers of the Kinneys to the interrogatories propounded to them by the prosecution'were excluded as evidence from the jury, and if the court below erred in permitting the answers to be given, the error was obviated by withdrawing them from the consideration, but it is not perceived how the court could have properly excluded their evidence until he knew what it would be.

As to the alleged errors in reference to giving and refusing instructions they are already disposed of.

If the court below erred in refusing to continue the case on motion of appellant, and in not preventing the attorney of the •Commonwealth from indulging in the course of argument to the jury indulged in by him, they are errors for which this court ■cannot reverse the judgment. Section 334, Criminal Code.

These are matters which the Legislature has left to the sound •discretion of the circuit judges on the very reasonable presumption, doubtless, that they will always so exercise it as to secure ■and protect the accused in their legal and just rights, awarding .to them continuances when proper grounds are made out, and restraining attorneys for the Commonwealth within the bounds of legitimate and fair discussion when they should offer to transcend them.

Wherefore, perceiving no error in the proceedings which can be '■deemed available for a reversal, the judgment must be affirmed.
EXHIBIT 31-2

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

     In  connection  with the  Quarterly  Report on Form 10-Q of WNC  California
Housing Tax Credits III, L.P. (the  "Partnership") for the period ended June 30,
2004 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,  Thomas  J.  Riha,  Chief
Financial  Officer of WNC &  Associates,  Inc.,  general  partner of the general
partner of the  Partnership,  hereby  certify  that  hereby  certify  that to 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
     Partnership.




/s/THOMAS J. RIHA
-----------------
Thomas J. Riha
Chief Financial Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc.

October 25, 2004
Third District Court of Appeal

State of Florida 

Opinion filed November 29, 2023.

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

________________

No. 3D23-0481

Lower Tribunal No. AHCA 22-FH1885

________________

A.B.,

Appellant,

vs.

State of Florida, Agency for Health Care Administration,

Appellee.

An Appeal from the State of Florida, Agency for Health Care 

Administration.

A.B., in proper person.

Eleanor H. Sills, Senior Attorney (Tallahassee), for appellee.

Before EMAS, GORDO and BOKOR, JJ. 

PER CURIAM. 
2

Affirmed. See V.T. v. Liberty Dental Plan of Fla., Inc., 338 So. 3d 989, 

990 (Fla. 3d DCA 2022) (the failure to raise an issue in the initial brief waives 

the issue on appeal); K.A. v. Sunshine Health Plan, Inc., 360 So. 3d 1247, 

1247 (Fla. 1st DCA 2023) (citing V.T. and affirming hearing officer’s final 

order where appellant’s “initial brief fails to identify or argue how the hearing 

officer committed legal error,” thereby “waiving any claim for error”); Doe v. 

Baptist Primary Care, Inc., 177 So. 3d 669, 673 (Fla. 1st DCA 2015) (“An 

appellant who presents no argument as to why a trial court’s ruling is 

incorrect on an issue has abandoned the issue”).
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**Certification Pursuant to Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18 of the United States Code**

In connection with the periodic report of FindWhat.com, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K/A for the period ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the “Report”), I, Craig A. Pisaris-Henderson, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code, 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. 

This Certification has not been, and shall not be deemed, “filed” with the Securities and Exchange Commission.

| /s/ Craig    A. Pisaris-Henderson                                                         |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                                                                                           |
| Craig A.    Pisaris-Henderson, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer    FindWhat.com, Inc. |

 

Date: May 2, 2005 

----
www.nasa.gov

GATEWAY TO SCIENCE CENTER, BISMARCK

Engaging Rural and Tribal Families in North 

Dakota with NASA Space Tech

Elisabeth H Demke 

2/1/22 - 1/31/23

The NASA-themed Family Night at Edwin Loe 

Elementary was full of joy - and a record-breaking 

audience of more than 600. 

Credits: Gateway to Science

The project will provide underserved elementary 

students and their families in rural and tribal 

communities in central North Dakota with relevant and 

engaging NASA assets to inspire them to explore 

STEM together. The need for family engagement in 

STEM will be addressed by co-developing and 

delivering NASA STEM learning experiences in two 

low-resourced communities. These learning 

experiences will align with the theme of “Space Tech. 

Technology Drives Exploration”; a collaboration with 

University of North Dakota’s Human Spaceflight 

Laboratory will engage students and families with 

practitioners and promote real-world understanding. 

Objectives are to increase student and parent/caregiver 

engagement with NASA’s mission and programs, and 

parent/caregiver interest and confidence in pursuing 

STEM learning opportunities for the family. Project 

results and resources will be disseminated through 

local STEM learning networks.

List of Partners:

• University of North Dakota

• North Dakota Space Grant Consortium

• North Dakota STEM Ecosystem

The material contained in this document is based upon 

work supported by a NASA grant or cooperative 

agreement award #80NSSC22K0435, under the Teams 

Engaging Affiliated Museums and Informal Institutions 

(TEAM II) activity of NASA’s Next Gen STEM Project.

Explore TEAM II Products 

https://www.nasa.gov/learning-resources/search/
#### TRIANGLE INDUSTRIES, INC. v. PALO ALTO PROPERTIES CORP.

July 12, 1984.

Petition for certification denied.
#### STATE OF NEW JERSEY v. LAWRENCE BRUNSON.

September 5, 1984.

Petition for certification granted.
#### DOWEL ASSOCIATES v. CARO BAG, INC. AND BAG BAZAAR, INC.

May 8, 1984.

Petition for certification denied.
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.1
 CERTIFICATION OF PERIODIC REPORT,
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  1.
    
    The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and2.
    
    The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.
 /s/  Harvey A. WagnerHarvey A. WagnerPresident and Chief Executive Officer
(Principal Executive Officer)