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

The First Uncrewed Integrated Flight Test of NASA’s 

Orion Spacecraft and Space launch System Rocket

1 LAUNCH (11/16/22) 

SLS and Orion lift off 

from pad 39B at 

Kennedy Space Center.

2 JETTISON ROCKET 

 BOOSTERS, FAIRINGS, AND 

 LAUNCH ABORT SYSTEM 

3 CORE STAGE MAIN 

 ENGINE CUT OFF 

With separation.

4 PERIGEE RAISE 

 MANEUVER 

5 EARTH ORBIT 

Systems check with solar panel 

adjustments.

6 TRANS LUNAR 

INJECTION (TLI) BURN

Maneuver lasts for 

approximately 20 minutes.

7 INTERIM CRYOGENIC

 PROPULSION STAGE (ICPS) 

 SEPARATION AND DISPOSAL 

 ICPS commits Orion to Moon at TLI.

8 OUTBOUND TRAJECTORY

 CORRECTION BURNS 

As necessary adjust trajectory for 

lunar flyby to Distant Retrograde 

Orbit (DRO).

9 OUTBOUND 

 POWERED FLYBY 

105.5 miles from the Moon; targets 

DRO insertion.

10 LUNAR ORBIT INSERTION 

Enter Distant 

Retrograde Orbit.

11 DISTANT RETROGRADE ORBIT 

Perform a half revolution

(6 day duration) in the orbit 43,730 

miles from the surface of the Moon.

12 DRO DEPARTURE 

Leave DRO and start return to 

Earth.

13 RETURN POWERED FLYBY 

RPF burn prep and return 

coast to Earth initiated. Closest approach in middle of burn, 81 miles. 

14 RETURN TRANSIT 

 Return Trajectory Correction 

burns as necessary to 

aim for Earth’s atmosphere.

15 CREW MODULE SEPARATION

 FROM SERVICE MODULE 

16 ENTRY INTERFACE 

Enter Earth’s atmosphere. 

17 SPLASHDOWN (12/11/22) 

Pacific Ocean landing within view 

of the U.S. Navy recovery ship.

1 2 3

17

16

6

7

5

10

11

A

A B C

B

C

9

8

13

12

14

15

CUBESATS DEPLOY

ICPS deploys 10 

CubeSats total

Why the 

Moon?

Artemis I 

Launches to 

the Moon

Mission Path 

Overview

Ride Along 

with NASA

Artemis I 

Farther & 

Faster 

Click the red 

video icons to 

watch a video!

4

The Artemis I mission 

lasted just over 25 days. The 

Orion Spacecraft traveled 1.4 million 

miles and when it re-entered the 

Earth’s atmosphere it reached speeds 

up to 24,581 mph! The mission 

concluded with Splashdown in the 

Pacific Ocean on Dec. 11, 2022.

Artemis I Launch Date

NOVEMBER 16, 2022
NASA STEM Resources

NASA’s Artemis mission will land the first woman and first person of color on 

the Moon! Using new technologies, NASA will explore regions of the Moon 

never visited before and establish a long-term human presence on the Moon. 

Get involved by experiencing these NASA STEM Resources and Join Artemis!

https://stem.nasa.gov/artemis/

BUILD IT

Space Launch 

System: Block 1

Activity

First Woman 

Camp Experience

Activities

Artemis Camp 

Experience

Activities

READ IT

You Are Going First Woman 

Graphic Novels

Moonkin, Campos 

& Friends Comics

RESEARCH IT

All About the 

Moon

I Am Artemis Artemis I STEM 

Learning Pathway
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 7
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<DEBT-HELD-FOR-SALE>                           308,547
<DEBT-CARRYING-VALUE>                          358,275
<DEBT-MARKET-VALUE>                            452,523
<EQUITIES>                                      10,194
<MORTGAGE>                                           0
<REAL-ESTATE>                                        0
<TOTAL-INVEST>                                 677,074
<CASH>                                          29,288
<RECOVER-REINSURE>                                   0
<DEFERRED-ACQUISITION>                         271,318
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,017,852
<POLICY-LOSSES>                                535,558
<UNEARNED-PREMIUMS>                             35,562
<POLICY-OTHER>                                  40,286
<POLICY-HOLDER-FUNDS>                                0
<NOTES-PAYABLE>                                 29,000
<COMMON>                                        57,508
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                     247,022
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,017,852
<PREMIUMS>                                     219,917
<INVESTMENT-INCOME>                             41,686
<INVESTMENT-GAINS>                                 229
<OTHER-INCOME>                                      30
<BENEFITS>                                     124,384
<UNDERWRITING-AMORTIZATION>                     17,480
<UNDERWRITING-OTHER>                            60,312
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 59,686
<INCOME-TAX>                                    20,901
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             38,785
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    38,785
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     2.22
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     2.22
<RESERVE-OPEN>                                  37,473
<PROVISION-CURRENT>                             49,537
<PROVISION-PRIOR>                              (1,924)
<PAYMENTS-CURRENT>                              21,135
<PAYMENTS-PRIOR>                                23,665
<RESERVE-CLOSE>                                 40,286
<CUMULATIVE-DEFICIENCY>                        (1,924)
        

</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
consolidated balance sheet of Phillips Gas Company as of September 30, 1996,
and the related consolidated statement of operations for the nine-month
period ended September 30, 1996, and is qualified in its entirety by
reference to such financial statements.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                          65,242
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  167,839
<ALLOWANCES>                                       905
<INVENTORY>                                      7,315
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               244,743
<PP&E>                                       1,913,339
<DEPRECIATION>                               1,053,308
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               1,179,309
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          237,538
<BONDS>                                        340,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                    345,000
<COMMON>                                       142,917
<OTHER-SE>                                      89,624
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 1,179,309
<SALES>                                      1,128,419
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,184,436
<CGS>                                        1,026,194<F1>
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,026,194
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                              18,200
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                128,933
<INCOME-TAX>                                    50,381
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             78,552
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    78,552
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0<F2>
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0<F2>
<FN>
<F1>Gas purchases + Operating expenses + Depreciation.
<F2>Income per share of common stock has been omitted because all common
    stock is owned by Phillips Petroleum Company.
</FN>
        


</TABLE>
#### STATE v. HOOKER

No. 516P01

Case below: 145 N.C. App. 504

Petition by defendant for discretionary review pursuant to G.S. 7A-31 denied 8 November 2001.
Exhibit 32.1

Certification of Chief Executive Officer

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as created by
Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of CV Therapeutics, Inc. (the Company) hereby certifies, to such officers knowledge, that:

(i) the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007, (the Report)
fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

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



|                         |  |  |  |                                    |  |                                                    
|------------------------ |  |  |  | ---------------------------------- |  | ---------------------------------------------------
|Dated: February 28, 2008 |  |  |  | /S/    LOUIS G. LANGE, M.D.,
PH.D.
|                         |  |  |  |                                    |  | Louis G. Lange, M.D., Ph.D. Chief Executive Officer
#### J. D. Allen et al *v.*James B. Upton.

Depositions — Exceptions to — Waiver.

After exceptions to depositions have been sustained, the depositions withdrawn, and then by agreement of the parties, the plaintiff is permitted to read the depositions upon the trial of the cause, the objections are thereby waived, and cannot be available for reversal in the Court of Appeals.

Evidence — Irrelevant and Incompetent.

Though it be competent to prove by a witness what the laws of Congress are, and Government rights, if irrelevant and not pertinent to the issue, such evidence should be rejected on objection to same.

APPEAL PROM WARREN CIRCUIT COURT.

October 6, 1868.

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Peters:

A careful examination of this record bas resulted in the conclusion that there is no substantial error in it available to appellants for a reversal.

Bowman was a defendant to the action, had a direct interest in behalf of himself in the issue and was therefore incompetent, *Sec. 670 Giv. Go.*

The law of the case in the instructions submitted to the jury by the court, was properly expounded, or perhaps it might with more propriety be said, that the law as submitted in the instructions to the jury was at least as favorable to appellants as they had a right to ask it, and they are not prejudiced thereby.

After exceptions to the deposition of Absalom Upton had been sustained by the court, the exceptions were withdrawn, and by agreement of the parties the plaintiff below was permitted to read the deposition of said Upton on the trial, so that whatever objections there might have been to the deposition, they were waived, and cannot be available now in this court for reversal.

As to the objection made to Hobson’s evidence, he stated what the army regulations were in relation to substitutes, with which he stated he was familiar, and from his connection with the army he must have been, and no sufficient reason is shown, and none *572is perceived why be was not competent to prove them, and besides be read tbe orders on tbe subject agreeing witb bis statement, wbicb were read without objection; it is true after they were read appellants excepted to them as incompetent; but that was not sufficient, tbe objection should have been made when tbe orders were offeffred, as has been repeatedly held by this court.

*Harney, for appellant.*

Rodman, *for appellee.*

Tbe objection of plaintiff to tbe interrogatories propounded by appellants to Hobson were properly sustained by tbe court for even if it were competent to prove by tbe witness what tbe Government bad a right to do and thereby prove what a law of Congress is by tbe witness, tbe evidence was irrelevant and not? pertinent to tbe issue, and was properly rejected on that account.

Upon the subject of tbe verdict being contrary to tbe evidence it need only to be said that tbe evidence was conflicting and if it did not preponderate on -the side of tbe verdict; tbe finding of tbe .jury cannot be regarded as palpably against tbe evidence, and this court has no power to interpose.

No error is perceived prejudicial to 'appellants.

Wherefore, tbe judgment is *affirmed.*
**EXHIBIT 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, David C. Owen, certify that:

 

1. Ihave reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of ICOP Digital, Inc.;

 

2. Basedon my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue statement of amaterial fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statementsmade, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this annual report;

 

3. Basedon my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial informationincluded in this annual report, fairly present in all material respects thefinancial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant asof, and for, the periods presented in this annual report;

 

4. Theregistrant’s other certifying officer and I am responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange ActRules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e) for the registrant and have:

 

a. Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or causedsuch disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision,to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including itsconsolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,particularly during the period in which this annual report is being prepared;

 

b. Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this annual report our conclusionsabout the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of theend of the period covered by this annual report based on such evaluation; and

 

c. Disclosed in this annual report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’smost recent fiscal quarter that has materially affected, or is reasonablylikely to materially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financialreporting; and

 

5. Theregistrant’s other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on our most recentevaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’sauditors and the audit committee of registrant’s board of directors: 

 

a. All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal controls over financial reporting which arereasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant’s ability to record,process, summarize and report financial information; and

 

b. Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management orother employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting.

 
|                |                                    |
|---------------------|-----------------------------------------|
|                | /s/  DAVID C. OWEN                      |
|                | David  C. Owen                          |
|                | *President and Chief Executive Officer* |
|                | * *                                |
| Date: April 4, 2005 | * *                                |

 

----
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Brian Sloan,

Plaintiff,

v.

C. R. Bard Inc. and Bard Peripheral 

Vascular, Inc.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

MDL Case No. 2:15-md-02641-DGC

Civil Action No. CV-17-03592-PHX-DGC

WAIVER OF THE SERVICE OF SUMMONS

To: Marc J Bern & Partners LLP

(Name of plaintiff’s attorney or unrepresented plaintiff)

I have received your request to waive service of a summons in this action along with a copy of the complaint, two 

copies of this waiver form, and a prepaid means of returning one signed copy of the form to you.

I, or the entity I represent, agree to save the expense of serving a summons and complaint in this case.

I understand that I, or the entity I represent, will keep all defenses or objections to the lawsuit, the court’s 

jurisdiction, and the venue of the action, but that I waive any objections to the absence of a summons or of service.

I also understand that I, or the entity I represent, must file and serve an answer or a motion under Rule 12 within 

60 days from 10/13/2017, the date when this request was sent (or 90 days if it was sent outside the United States). If I fail 

to do so, a default judgment will be entered against me or the entity I represent.

Date: October 18, 2017 /s/ Richard B. North, Jr.

Signature of the attorney or unrepresented party

C. R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Peripheral

Vascular, Inc.

Printed name of parties waiving service of 

summons

Richard B. North, Jr. (Ga. Bar No. 545599)

Printed Name

Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough, LLP

201 17th St., NW, Suite 1700, Atlantic Station, Atlanta, GA 30363

Address

richard.north@nelsonmullins.com

E-mail Address

(404) 322-6155

Telephone number

Duty to Avoid Unnecessary Expenses of Serving a Summons

Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure requires certain defendants to cooperate in saving unnecessary expenses of serving a 

summons and complaint. A defendant who is located in the United States and who fails to return a signed waiver of service requested by a plaintiff 

located in the United States will be required to pay the expenses of service, unless the defendant shows good cause for the failure. 

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 8212 Filed 10/18/17 Page 1 of 2
2

“Good cause” does not include a belief that the lawsuit is groundless, or that it has been brought in an improper venue, or that the court has 

no jurisdiction over this matter or over the defendant or the defendant’s property. 

If the waiver is signed and returned, you can still make these and all other defenses and objections, but you cannot object to the absence of 

a summons or of service. 

If you waive service, then you must, within the time specified on the waiver form, serve an answer or a motion under Rule 12 on the 

plaintiff and file a copy with the court. By signing and returning the waiver form, you are allowed more time to respond than if a summons had been 

served.

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 8212 Filed 10/18/17 Page 2 of 2
#### Conaway and Another *v.*Hays.

*Thursday, June*6.

Suit against *Daniel Conavay,*junior, and *Daniel Conway,*senior. The defendants pleaded separately as follows: *Daniel Conaway,*junior, against whom the plaintiff hath declared by the name of *Daniel Conavay,*junior, says he is called by the name of *Daniel Conaway,*junior, &c. *Daniel Con-away,*senior, against whom the plaintiff hath declared by the name *oí Daniel Conway,*senior, says he is called by the name of *Daniel Conaway,*senior, &c. *Held,*that the first plea was a nullity. *Held,*also, that the second plea might have been replied to by alleging that the defendant, *Daniel Conaway,*senior, was called and known as well by the name of *Daniel Conway,*senior, as by the name of *Daniel Conaway,*senior, &e.

ERROR to the *Dearborn*Circuit Court.

Blackford, *J.'*

— Hays brought an action of debt against *Daniel*Conavay, junior, and *Daniel*Conway, senior. The defendants pleaded separately in abatement as follows:

*Daniel*Conaway, junior, against whom the plaintiff hath declared by the name of *Daniel*Conavay, junior, comes and *160says he is named and called by the name of *Daniel*Conaway, junior, &c.

*J. Ryman*and *P. L.*Spooner, for the plaintiffs.

*D.*Macy, for the defendant.

*Daniel*Conaway, senior, against whom the plaintiff hath declared by the name of *Daniel*Conway, senior, comes and says that he is named and called by the name of *Daniel*Conaway, senior, &c.

Replication, that the said *Daniel*Conaway, junior, who is sued by the name of *Daniel*Conway, junior, is as well known by the name of *Daniel*Conway, junior, as by the name of *Daniel*Conaway, junior, &c.

Verdict and judgment for the plaintiff. _

The first plea is frivolous. The merely using a *v*instead of a *w*in spelling *Conaway's*name,.is too slight a-mistake to deserve notice. That plea may be considered a nullity.

The second plea might have been replied to by alleging that the'defendant, *Daniel*Conaway, senior, was called and known as well by the name of *Daniel*Conway, senior, as by the name of *Daniel*Conaway, senior, &c. The issue on the second plea would then have been, not how -the defendant spelled his name, but how he was called and known.' If it appear, in such cases, that the names have the same sound, there is no misnomer, however differently they may be spelled. *Tibbets*v. Kiah, 2 New Hamp. Rep. 557.

The replication in this case is a nullity, it not being applicable to either of the pleas, and there was therefore no issue for the jury to try.

*Per Curiam.*

— The judgment is reversed with costs. Cause remanded, &c.
```

[Congressional Bills 108th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 2057 Referred in House (RFH)]

  2d Session
                                S. 2057

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             March 4, 2004

              Referred to the Committee on Armed Services

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
To require the Secretary of Defense to reimburse members of the United 
States Armed Forces for certain transportation expenses incurred by the 
  members in connection with leave under the Central Command Rest and 
 Recuperation Leave Program before the program was expanded to include 
                            domestic travel.

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

SECTION 1. REIMBURSEMENT OF CERTAIN TRANSPORTATION COSTS INCURRED BY 
              MEMBERS OF THE UNITED STATES ARMED FORCES ON REST AND 
              RECUPERATION LEAVE.

    The Secretary of Defense shall reimburse a member of the United 
States Armed Forces for transportation expenses incurred by such member 
for one round trip by such member between two locations within the 
United States in connection with leave taken under the Central Command 
Rest and Recuperation Leave Program during the period beginning on 
September 25, 2003, and ending on December 18, 2003.

            Passed the Senate March 3, 2004.

            Attest:

                                             EMILY J. REYNOLDS,

                                                             Secretary.
```
Apollo Moon Landing 

th 

50 Anniversary Flying Capsule 

Instructions 

• Cut out the cone and 3 

streamers below 

• Tape the two sides of 

the cone together 

• Tape the streamers to 

the specified areas on 

the cone 

• Measure and cut 3 

pieces of 24 inch 

thread 

• Tape thread on the 

inside of the cone 

opposite the streamers 

• Tie a knot connecting 

the 3 th read so that 

the drogue hangs 

evenly 

• Grasp the knot and fly 

the Apollo capsule 

through the air (or use 

as a kite tail)! 

 

Assembled 

Capsule 

Overlapping Join Tab 

AEROKATS and ROVER Education Network NNX16AB95A 

https://www.globe.gov/web/aren-project