alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
**IMAGIN
MOLECULAR CORPORATION**
 **(Formerly
Known As)**
 **Cipher
Holding Corporation**
 
 
 EXHIBIT
32.1
 
 Certification
Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
 
 In
connection with the quarterly report of Cipher Multimedia, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-QSB for the quarter ended June 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Patrick Rooney, President, Chief
Executive Officer and Chairman of the Board of the Company, certify, pursuant to
section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my knowledge: (1) the
quarterly report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and (2) the information contained in the
quarterly report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and results of operations of the Company.
 
 
 Date:
August 22, 2005
 
 /s/ Corey
Conn
 Chief
Executive Officer, Director
 
 A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley
Act has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon
request.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Reginald Mathis,

Plaintiff,

v.

Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc. and C. R. 

Bard, Inc., et al.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

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

Civil Action No. CV-17-04302-PHX-DGC

APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL

To: The clerk of court and all parties of record

I am admitted or otherwise authorized to practice in this court, and I appear in this case as counsel for:

Defendants C. R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc.

Date: December 8, 2017 /s/ Richard B. North, Jr.

Attorney's signature

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

Printed name and bar number

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) 322-6000

Telephone number

(404 322-6050

FAX number

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 9367 Filed 12/15/17 Page 1 of 1
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE 

DISTRICT OF ARIZONA

Thelma Mae Ward,

Plaintiff,

v.

Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc. and C. R. 

Bard, Inc., et al.,

Defendant.

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

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

Civil Action No. CV-17-04619-PHX-DGC

APPEARANCE OF COUNSEL

To: The clerk of court and all parties of record

I am admitted or otherwise authorized to practice in this court, and I appear in this case as counsel for:

Defendants C. R. Bard, Inc. and Bard Peripheral Vascular, Inc.

Date: December 20, 2017 /s/ Richard B. North, Jr.

Attorney's signature

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

Printed name and bar number

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) 322-6000

Telephone number

(404 322-6050

FAX number

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 9522 Filed 12/29/17 Page 1 of 1
#### J. A. J. Thomas et al *v.*J. Gentry, Admr.

Appeal and Error — Objections to Affidavit.

It is too late to object to the sufficiency of an affidavit, when no objections were made on the trial to filing the reply to which it was attached, nor motion made to strike it from the files.

Res Judicata — Plea in Bar.

Where the records of a former suit shows that the action was dismissed for want of service, it cannot be pleaded in bar to a subsequent action in another jurisdiction.

Foreign Administrator — Bond as Required by Act of February 28, 1834, Second Section.

The failure of a foreign administrator to execute a covenant to the Commonwealth, as prescribed under the Acts, February 28, 18/54, second section, is a fatal error, though the objection not made in the court below.

APPEAL FROM DAVIESS CIRCUIT COURT.

February 4, 1870.

Opinion of the Court by

Judge Peters:

The authentication of the grant of administration to appellee on the estate of Robert Montgomery, the payee in the note¿ is sufficient under the *18th section, chapter 85 Revised Statutes 1 vol. page 4-68,*and. the appellant’s exception was therefore properly overruled.

The affidavit attached to the reply is regarded as sufficient and if it were not, a demurrer would not reach the objection, and the record does neither show that the objection was made to filing the reply, nor motion made after it was filed to strike it from the files. It is therefore, to late to object to the sufficiency of the affidavit and the objection can not be now available.

The record of the proceedings in the court of common pleas, in Indiana, shows that the action was dismissed as to appellants because process was not served. on them, and the order of dismissal can not be regarded as a judgment in bar of this action.

But under the second section of the act approved 28th February, *5731854, before a judgment shall be rendered in favor of a foreign administrator against a citizen of Kentucky, a covenant shall be executed, by a sufficient surety to the commonwealth to the effect that the plaintiff, to the extent of money that come to him *"in the*action” will pay any debt due by said decedent to any resident of Kentucky who shall within three years thereafter commence an action on said covenant for his use to establish and collect such debt. *1 Sta. Revised Statutes page 513.*

*Taylor, for appellants.*

In this case no such bond was executed; the statute seems imperative, and no judgment should have been rendered; the intimation in *Wayland vs. Porterfield, ext. 1 Metc. 638,*that it did not appear that the objection was made in the court below before or after judgment is a mere *obiter,*this question was not there decided.

The failure therefore, *to*execute the covenant required by the statute supra is a fatal error. "Wherefore the judgment is *reversed,*and the cause is remanded with directions for the court below to order the covenant prescribed to be executed, and upon failure by the plaintiff to do so to set aside the judgment and dismiss the petition.
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"Mark A. Garcia","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/markagarcia\/","title":"The Moon begins setting below Earth’s horizon","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"BPqS3DAENe\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-article\/the-moon-begins-setting-below-earths-horizon\/\">The Moon begins setting below Earth’s horizon<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-article\/the-moon-begins-setting-below-earths-horizon\/embed\/#?secret=BPqS3DAENe\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“The Moon begins setting below Earth’s horizon” — NASA\" data-secret=\"BPqS3DAENe\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/07\/iss069e029100.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":400}
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF BUDGET GROUP, INC. FOR THE NINE-MONTH PERIOD ENDED
SEPTEMBER 30, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<RESTATED>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                          49,919
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  373,750
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0<F1>
<INVENTORY>                                  3,275,229
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                             3,698,398
<PP&E>                                         215,676
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0<F2>
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               5,147,636
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          589,032
<BONDS>                                      3,603,050
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          291,385
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           372
<OTHER-SE>                                     663,797
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 5,147,636
<SALES>                                      1,776,265
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,776,265
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,556,479
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             150,800
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 68,986
<INCOME-TAX>                                    28,574
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             26,193
<DISCONTINUED>                                   4,243
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    30,436
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.72
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.72
<FN>
<F1>RECEIVABLES ARE REPORTED NET OF ALLOWANCES FOR DOUBTFUL ACCOUNTS ON THE
BALANCE SHEET
<F2>PROPERTY, PLANT & EQUIPMENT IS REPORTED NET OF ACCUMULATED DEPRECIATION ON
THE BALANCE SHEET
</FN>


</TABLE>
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE DISTRICT OF ARIZONA 

IN RE: BARD IVC FILTERS 

PRODUCTS LIABILITY LITIGATION

This Document Pertains to: 

Joanna Darwactor v. C.R. Bard, et al. 

Case No.: CV15-2308-PHX DGC 

Case No. MDL-15-02641-PHX-DGC 

ORDER 

 Pending before the Court is Plaintiff’s Motion to Withdraw and Substitute Counsel. Doc. 

9619. 

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiff’s motion to withdraw and substitute counsel 

(Doc. 9619) is granted. Julia Reed Zaic and the firm of HEAVISIDE REED ZAIC are hereby 

withdrawn as counsel of record in this action and David P. Matthews and the firm of 

MATTHEWS & ASSOCIATES, and Richard M. Freese and Calle M. Mendenhall of the firm of 

FREESE & GOSS, PLLC, are hereby substituted as the above captioned Plaintiff’s counsel of 

record. 

 Dated this 12th day of January, 2018. 

Case 2:15-md-02641-DGC Document 9622 Filed 01/12/18 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                       3,585,000
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               96,009,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                     164,577,000
<DEPRECIATION>                            (17,148,000)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             247,479,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        96,000
<OTHER-SE>                                 124,656,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               247,479,000
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            12,320,000
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                7,904,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               482,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           3,863,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      0
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 3,917,000
<EPS-BASIC>                                        .41
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .41


</TABLE>
IN THE SUPREME COURT

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA

2021 ND 66

State of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee

v.

Arnold Nudah Rennie, Defendant and Appellant

No. 20200307

Appeal from the District Court of Burleigh County, South Central Judicial 

District, the Honorable Thomas J. Schneider, Judge.

AFFIRMED.

Per Curiam.

Julie A. Lawyer, Burleigh County State’s Attorney, Bismarck, ND, for plaintiff 

and appellee.

Kiara C. Kraus-Parr, Grand Forks, ND, for defendant and appellant.

FILED 

IN THE OFFICE OF THE 

CLERK OF SUPREME COURT 

APRIL 14, 2021 

STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA
1

State v. Rennie

No. 20200307

Per Curiam.

[¶1] Arnold Rennie appeals from a criminal judgment entered after a jury 

found him guilty of gross sexual imposition and corruption of a minor. 

[¶2] On appeal, Rennie argues the district court abused its discretion when it 

denied his motion to dismiss based on alleged Rule 16, N.D.R.Crim.P.,

discovery violations by the State. We conclude the district court did not abuse 

its discretion in denying Rennie’s motion to dismiss. We summarily affirm

under N.D.R.App.P. 35.1(a)(4).

[¶3] Jon J. Jensen, C.J. 

Gerald W. VandeWalle 

Daniel J. Crothers 

Lisa Fair McEvers 

Jerod E. Tufte
EXHIBIT 32.1

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


     In connection with this amended Annual Report of Advanced Recycling
Sciences, Inc., on Form 10-KSB/A for the year ended December 31, 2002 as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), the undersigned, Ehrenfried Liebich, Principal Executive Officer
of the Company, certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to ss. 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

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

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



Date: May 31, 2006                /S/ Ehrenfried Liebich
                                  ---------------------------------------
                                  Ehrenfried Liebich,
                                  Principal Executive Officer
#### Billy J. WILLIAMS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. The INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF MACHINISTS AND AEROSPACE WORKERS, etc. et al., Defendants-Ap-pellees.

No. 78-1711.

United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.

March 14, 1980.

Roger D. Haagenson, Fort Lauderdale, Fla., for plaintiff-appellant.

Manners & Amoon, George H. Tucker, Miami, Fla., Plato E. Papps, Gen. Counsel, International Assn, of Machinists, Washington, D. C., for Internat’l Assoc. of Machinists & Aerospace Workers.

Steel, Hector & Davis, John M. Barkett, William B. Killian, Miami, Fla., for National Airlines.

Before TUTTLE, BROWN and TATE, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:

Affirmed on the basis of the district court’s findings of fact and conclusions of law. 484 F.Supp. 917 (S.D.Fla.1978).
### Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h Marilyn Kell y Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathawa y Mary Beth Kell y Brian K. Zahra,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk April 25, 2011

y0418 

# Order

April 25, 2011

141812

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 141812 COA: 297423 Ingham CC: 04-000899-FC WILLIE LEE SIMS, JR., Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the A ugust 3, 2010 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, a nd it is DENIED, because the defendant has

failed to meet the burden of establishi ng entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).
**Exhibit 31.1**

 

**CERTIFICATION**

 

I, Anthony DiSandro, ChiefExecutive Officer of PSB Bancorp, Inc., certify that:

 

1.  I have reviewedthis quarterly report on Form 10-Q of PSB Bancorp, Inc.;

 

2.  Based on myknowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material factor omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, inlight of the circumstances under which such statements were made, notmisleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

 

3.  Based on my knowledge,the financial statements, and other financial information included in thisreport, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition,results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, theperiods presented in this report;

 

4.  The registrant’sother certifying officer(s) and I am responsible for establishing andmaintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and15d-15(e) and we 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 report is being prepared;

 

(b)  Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant’s disclosurecontrols and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about theeffectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of theperiod covered by this report based on such evaluation; and

 

(c)  Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant’sinternal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant’smost recent fiscal quarter (the registrant’s fourth fiscal quarter in the caseof an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonable likely tomaterially affect, the registrant’s internal control over financial reporting;and

 

5.  The registrant’s othercertifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluationof internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant’s auditors andthe audit committee of registrant’s board of directors (or persons performingthe equivalent function):

 

1

----

 

(a)  All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in thedesign or operation of internal control 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 managementor other employees who have a significant role in the registrant’s internalcontrol over financial reporting.

 

Date:  May 16, 2005

 
|   | /s/ Anthony DiSandro    |
|--------|-------------------------|
|   | Anthony DiSandro        |
|   | Chief Executive Officer |

 

2

----
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

TIMOTHY MARTIN DUKE,

Petitioner

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 761 MAL 2017

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Unpublished Memorandum and 

Order of the Superior Court at No. 

2093 MDA 2016 entered on October 

24, 2017, affirming the Judgment of 

Sentence of the York County Court of 

Common Pleas at No. CP-67-CR0007563-2015 entered on November 

22, 2016

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW, this 16th day of May, 2018, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

GRANTED. Further, the ruling of the Superior Court is VACATED and the case is 

REMANDED to the trial court for a reconsideration in light of this Court’s decision in 

Commonwealth v. Romero, 37 EAP 2016, ___ A.3d ___, 2018 WL 1960611 (Pa. 2018). 

DECIDED: May 16, 2018
{"version":"1.0","provider_name":"NASA","provider_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov","author_name":"NASA","author_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/author\/nasamigrate\/","title":"Seeing the World With a Drone","type":"rich","width":600,"height":338,"html":"<blockquote class=\"wp-embedded-content\" data-secret=\"5EoIt719pr\"><a href=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-detail\/seeing-world-with-drone-2\/\">Seeing the World With a Drone<\/a><\/blockquote><iframe sandbox=\"allow-scripts\" security=\"restricted\" src=\"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/image-detail\/seeing-world-with-drone-2\/embed\/#?secret=5EoIt719pr\" width=\"600\" height=\"338\" title=\"“Seeing the World With a Drone” — NASA\" data-secret=\"5EoIt719pr\" frameborder=\"0\" marginwidth=\"0\" marginheight=\"0\" scrolling=\"no\" class=\"wp-embedded-content\"><\/iframe><script>\n\/*! This file is auto-generated *\/\n!function(d,l){\"use strict\";l.querySelector&&d.addEventListener&&\"undefined\"!=typeof URL&&(d.wp=d.wp||{},d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage||(d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage=function(e){var t=e.data;if((t||t.secret||t.message||t.value)&&!\/[^a-zA-Z0-9]\/.test(t.secret)){for(var s,r,n,a=l.querySelectorAll('iframe[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),o=l.querySelectorAll('blockquote[data-secret=\"'+t.secret+'\"]'),c=new RegExp(\"^https?:$\",\"i\"),i=0;i<o.length;i++)o[i].style.display=\"none\";for(i=0;i<a.length;i++)s=a[i],e.source===s.contentWindow&&(s.removeAttribute(\"style\"),\"height\"===t.message?(1e3<(r=parseInt(t.value,10))?r=1e3:~~r<200&&(r=200),s.height=r):\"link\"===t.message&&(r=new URL(s.getAttribute(\"src\")),n=new URL(t.value),c.test(n.protocol))&&n.host===r.host&&l.activeElement===s&&(d.top.location.href=t.value))}},d.addEventListener(\"message\",d.wp.receiveEmbedMessage,!1),l.addEventListener(\"DOMContentLoaded\",function(){for(var e,t,s=l.querySelectorAll(\"iframe.wp-embedded-content\"),r=0;r<s.length;r++)(t=(e=s[r]).getAttribute(\"data-secret\"))||(t=Math.random().toString(36).substring(2,12),e.src+=\"#?secret=\"+t,e.setAttribute(\"data-secret\",t)),e.contentWindow.postMessage({message:\"ready\",secret:t},\"*\")},!1)))}(window,document);\n<\/script>\n","thumbnail_url":"https:\/\/www.nasa.gov\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/03\/tcl-4_reno-50-iotd.jpg?w=600","thumbnail_width":600,"thumbnail_height":401}