alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<CIK> 0001036070
<NAME> VIRGINIA FINANCIAL CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                              JAN-1-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                          16,353
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 6,175
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     63,193
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          64,362
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            63,619
<LOANS>                                        275,205
<ALLOWANCE>                                      3,193
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 434,628
<DEPOSITS>                                     374,396
<SHORT-TERM>                                    11,970
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              1,721
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        20,000
<OTHER-SE>                                      26,541
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 434,628
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 11,586
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                3,539
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   145
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                15,270
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               6,505
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               6,752
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            8,518
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      411
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                  42
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  5,991
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  4,746
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       4,746
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     3,307
<EPS-BASIC>                                     0.83
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.83
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                       0
<LOANS-NON>                                      1,038
<LOANS-PAST>                                       401
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 3,212
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      469
<RECOVERIES>                                        39
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                3,193
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             2,952
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                            241




</TABLE>
From: ftdks@cableone.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:52:14 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Keith Schroeder

Wisner, NE 68791
|     |                                                                                                                       |
|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| (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. |

|        |
|--------|
|        |  |  |
| Date:  | August 1, 2014 | /s/Kent M. Adams |
|   |   | Kent M. Adams |
|   |   | President, Director and Chief Executive Officer |
|   |   |   |
| Date:  | August 1, 2014 | /s/James A. Duensing |
|   |   | James A. Duensing |
|   |   | Executive Vice President and Chief FinancialOfficer |
From: m_odom42@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:49:02 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

melanie odom

White Bluff, TN 37187
From: mrsesposito7@hotmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:33:21 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Kelly Seppy

Philadelphia, PA 19145
Here's how you know
 **Official websites use .mil** .mil
 **Secure .mil websites use HTTPS** lock () https://


Skip to main content (Press Enter).
 Toggle navigation
            
            U.S. Central Command
                CENTCOM
        Search
                    Search CENTCOM:
                        Search
                Search CENTCOM:
                    Search
    Home

    ABOUT US
    
        COMMAND PRIORITIES

    LEADERSHIP

    COMPONENT COMMANDS

    HISTORY

    POSTURE STATEMENT

    CENTCOM AOR
    
        CENTCOM COALITION

    OPERATIONS AND EXERCISES
    
        USMTM

    CIVILIAN CASUALTY REPORT

    CONTACT
    
        OPERATIONAL CONTRACT SUPPORT

    COMMUNITY RELATIONS

    THEATRE MEDICAL CLEARANCE

    INNOVATION VENDOR PORTAL

    MILITARY MEMBER INNOVATION PORTAL

    MEDIA
    
        SOCIAL MEDIA

    NEWS ARTICLES

    PRESS RELEASES

    STATEMENTS

    IMAGERY

    VIDEOS

    TRANSCRIPTS

    VISITORS AND PERSONNEL
    
        FAMILY CENTER

    FAMILY READINESS

    CENTCOM WEBMAIL

    SOCIAL MEDIA SECURITY

    ACCOUNTABILITY

    EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS

    USCENTCOM UNCLASSIFIED REGULATIONS

    FOIA LIBRARY

    INNOVATION OASIS

    WELCOME GUIDE  Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesCommunity RelationsOtherPreviousCommanders
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Share
  
 Small () Medium () Full Size (0.7 MB)
 
 NAVCENT
 Photo Gallery
 About UsCommand PrioritiesLeadershipComponent
   CommandsHistoryPosture Statement
   Area of
   ResponsibilityCENTCOM Coalition
   Operations And
   ExercisesOperation Inherent
   ResolveResolute Support
   MediaSocial MediaNews ArticlesPress ReleasesVideo And Imagery
   Visitors And
   PersonnelFamily ReadinessCENTCOM WebmailSocial MediaSecurityAccountabilityEmergency
   Preparedness
   ContactCommunity Relations
                    Stay Connected
                
                Privacy & Security  Inspector General  FOIA  Privacy Act
            

Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil
From: flo613@comcast.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Women"s Preventive Health

Date: Thursday, August 11, 2011 5:12:40 PM

To the Department of Health and Human Services:

The United States of America cares for the plight of women around the

world in helping them receive basic health care, including family health

services. Can we do less for the women citizens of our own country? I

join with the American Association of University Women (AAUW) in asking

you to accept the recommendations of the Institute of Medicine, pertaining

to coverage of preventive care under the new health care law, and to

reject any exemptions for “religious employers.” These preventive services

are a critical element of the new law and would provide countless women

better access to necessary health care. 

"Religious refusal” exemptions unjustly deny women access to

contraceptive services, while others, driven by an ideological distaste for

all contraceptive services, are pushing the government to make

exemptions even larger. Indeed, some groups are pushing for the

exemption to apply to religiously-run health providers, so hospitals with

religious affiliations would be exempt from the coverage requirement, even

though they employ people of all faiths and ideologies. If granted, this

larger exemption would deny access to thousands of women just because

of where they work.

I urge you to ensure women have access to quality preventive care by

accepting IOM’s recommendations and rejecting the proposed religious

refusal exemption provisions.
From: eagleeye451@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:24:00 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Kevin Sellke

Gaylord, MI 49735
No. 430, Misc.

No. 445, Misc.

No. 541, Misc.

No. 608, Misc.

#### McDowell *v.*United States, La Rose *v.*Tahash, Warden, Lipscomb *v.*United States, Thomas *v.*Heritage, Warden,

*ante,*p. 927;

*ante,*p.114;

*ante,*p. 928; and

*ante,*p. 907. Petitions for rehearing denied.
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 18

- 3266

_____________________________
W ILLIAM G RAMMER , Appellant,

v.

S TATE OF F LORIDA , Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County

. Steven B. Whittington , Judge

. October 21, 2019

P ER C URIAM

.
A FFIRMED

. W OLF , K ELSEY , and W INOKUR , JJ., concur

.

_____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________2 William Grammer, pro se
, Appellant.
Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Benjamin Hoffman, Assistant Attorney General, Tallahassee
, for A ppellee.
EXHIBIT 21

                 LIST OF SUBSIDIARIES OF WARRANTECH CORPORATION


1.  WARRANTECH CONSUMER PRODUCT SERVICES, INC.
        a Connecticut corporation

2.  WCPS OF FLORIDA, INC.
        a Florida corporation

3.  WARRANTECH AUTOMOTIVE, INC.
        a Connecticut corporation

4.  WARRANTECH AUTOMOTIVE OF CALIFORNIA, INC.
        a California corporation

5.  WARRANTECH AUTOMOTIVE RISK PURCHASING GROUP, INC.
        a Michigan corporation

6.  WARRANTECH AUTOMOTIVE OF FLORIDA, INC.
        a Florida corporation

7.  WARRANTECH DIRECT, INC.
        a Texas corporation

8.  WARRANTECH (UK) LIMITED
        a company incorporated in England

9.  WARRANTECH INTERNATIONAL, INC.
        a Delaware corporation

10. WCPS OF CANADA, INC.
        a Connecticut corporation

11. WARRANTECH AUTOMOTIVE OF CANADA, INC.
        a Connecticut corporation

12. WARRANTECH EUROPE PLC
        a company incorporated in England

13. WARRANTECH ADDITIVE, INC.
        a Texas corporation

14. WARRANTECH HOME SERVICE COMPANY
        a Connecticut corporation

15. WARRANTECH CARIBBEAN LTD
        a company incorporated in the Cayman Islands

16. WARRANTECH HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY
        a Florida corporation
<PAGE>

17. REPAIRMASTER CANADA, INC.
        a company incorporated in Canada

18. WCPS DIRECT, INC.
        a Texas corporation

19. WHSC DIRECT, INC.
        a Texas corporation

20. WARRANTECH HOME ASSURANCE COMPANY
        a Connecticut corporation

21. WARRANTECH INTERNATIONAL de CHILE
        a Company incorporated in Chile

22. VEMECO, INC.
        a Connecticut corporation
<PAGE>
                                                                     EXHIBIT 23A

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS

We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference of our
report dated February 9, 2004, except with respect to Note
U, as to which the date is February 17, 2004, relating to the
financial statements of BellSouth Corporation, which appears
in this Form 10-K, in the following Registration Statements:

- Form S-3 (File No. 333-105708)

- Form S-3 (File No. 333-67084)

- Form S-8 (File No. 33-38264)

- Form S-8 (File No. 333-31600)

- Form S-8 (File No. 333-105709)

- Form S-8 (File No. 333-105710)

- Form S-8 (File No. 333-75660)

/s/ PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP
Atlanta, Georgia
February 24, 2004
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1422 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1422

 To provide for the expedited payment of certain benefits for a public 
 safety officer who was killed or suffered a catastrophic injury as a 
direct and proximate result of a personal injury sustained in the line 
of duty in connection with the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                           September 13, 2001

   Mrs. Clinton (for herself, Mr. Schumer, Mr. Leahy, Mr. Hatch, Mr. 
 Specter, Mr. Biden, Mr. Warner, Mr. Sarbanes, Mr. Allen, Mr. Daschle, 
  Mr. Nickles, Ms. Mikulski, Mr. Inhofe, and Mr. Byrd) introduced the 
 following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee on 
                             the Judiciary

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To provide for the expedited payment of certain benefits for a public 
 safety officer who was killed or suffered a catastrophic injury as a 
direct and proximate result of a personal injury sustained in the line 
of duty in connection with the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001.

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

SECTION 1. EXPEDITED PAYMENT FOR HEROIC PUBLIC SAFETY OFFICERS.

    Notwithstanding the limitations of subsection (b) of section 1201 
or the provisions of subsections (c), (d), and (e) of such section or 
section 1202 of title I of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets 
Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3796, 3796a), upon certification by a public 
agency that a public safety officer employed by such agency was killed 
or suffered a catastrophic injury as a direct and proximate result of a 
personal injury sustained in the line of duty as described in section 
1201(a) of such Act in connection with the rescue or recovery efforts 
related to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the Director of 
the Bureau of Justice Assistance shall pay to qualified beneficiaries, 
not later than 30 days after receipt of such certification, benefits 
described under subpart 1 of part L of such Act (42 U.S.C. 3796 et 
seq.).

SEC. 2. DEFINITIONS.

    For purposes of this Act, the terms ``catastrophic injury'', 
``public agency'', and ``public safety officer'', have the same 
meanings given such terms in section 1204 of title I of the Omnibus 
Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968 (42 U.S.C. 3796b).
                                 <all>
```
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 In
connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-KSB of Presidential Realty
Corporation (the Company) for the period ending December 31, 2007, as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report),
I, Jeffrey F. Joseph, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant
to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of 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 the results of operations of the Company. Presidential
  Realty CorporationBy:
/s/   JEFFREY
  F. JOSEPHJeffrey F. JosephChief Executive OfficerDate: March
  25, 2008
#### Elvira Vick, as Administratrix, etc., Appellant, v. The New York Central and Hudson River Railroad Company, Respondent.

Order affirmed Opinion by Bradley, J.