alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
                        CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS
 
    We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statement
(Form S-8, No. 33-58570) pertaining to the 1983 Incentive Stock Option Plan of
ODS Networks, Inc. and the 1987 Incentive Stock Option Plan of ODS Networks,
Inc., the Registration Statement (Form S-8, No. 33-34476) pertaining to the 1995
Stock Option Plan of ODS Networks, Inc., the Registration Statement (Form S-8,
No. 33-34484) pertaining to the 1995 Non-employee Director Stock Option Plan of
ODS Networks, Inc., the Registration Statement (Form S-8, No. 33-42927)
pertaining to the 1997 Employee Stock Purchase Plan of ODS Networks, Inc., the
Registration Statement (Form S-8, No. 33-80898) pertaining to the ODS 401(k)
Savings Plan of ODS Networks, Inc. and the Registration Statement (Form S-8, No.
333-53813) pertaining to the Essential Communication Corporation 1996 Stock
Option Plan of our report dated January 22, 1999, of ODS Networks, Inc. included
in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31, 1998.
 
    Our audits also included the financial statement schedule of ODS Networks,
Inc. listed in Item 14(a)2. This schedule is the responsibility of the Company's
management. Our responsibility is to express an opinion based on our audits. In
our opinion, the financial statement schedule referred to above, when considered
in relation to the basic financial statements taken as a whole, presents fairly
in all material respects the information set forth therein.
 
                                          ERNST & YOUNG LLP
 
Dallas, Texas
 
March 26, 1999
| **Loans and Allowance for Loan Losses (Unfunded Commitment) (Details) (USD $)In Millions, unless otherwise specified** |        |        | 3 Months Ended |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|--------|--------|----------------|
||
| **Unfunded Commitments [Line Items]**                                                                                  |   |   |           |
| Expected usage percentage of remaining unfunded commitments                                                            |   |   | 10.00%         |
| Reserve for unfunded commitments                                                                                       | $ 0.5  | $ 0.6  |           |

| X                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                           |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| - Definition
Expected usage percentage of unfunded commitments to lend.
+ References
No definition available.
+ Details**Name:**cob_LoansAndLeasesReceivableUnfundedCommitmentsExpectedUsagePercentage**Namespace Prefix:**cob_**Data Type:**num:percentItemType**Balance Type:**na**Period Type:**duration |
| X                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                 |
|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| - Definition
The amount of reserve for unfunded commitments for which the entity is obligated, to lend.
+ References
No definition available.
+ Details**Name:**cob_LoansAndLeasesReceivableUnfundedCommitmentsReserve**Namespace Prefix:**cob_**Data Type:**xbrli:monetaryItemType**Balance Type:**credit**Period Type:**instant |
| X                                                                                                                                                        |
|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| - Details**Name:**cob_UnfundedCommitmentsLineItems**Namespace Prefix:**cob_**Data Type:**xbrli:stringItemType**Balance Type:**na**Period Type:**duration |
No. 122, Misc.

#### Moore *v.*New York.

Court of Appeals of New York. Certiorari denied.
From: Sister Maria Gemma, OP

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: RIN 1210-AB44 Mandatory Birth Control

Date: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 11:07:40 AM

To Whom it May Concern,

I object in the strongest of terms to mandating birth control with no co-pays under

the Affordable Care Act.

Birth control is already widely available to all women, subsidized largely by

taxpayers. Demanding that we further subsidize other people's birth control by

increasing our insurance premiums in these days when families are struggling just to

make ends meet is an outrage. 

The mandate violates my conscience and that of millions of Americans who oppose

birth control on moral and religious grounds. 

It is undisputed that one of the operations of contraceptives is to render the

endometrium hostile to implantation, so that if fertilization occurs, the newly

conceived child may be lost to an early abortion. I also strongly object to the

inclusion of free sterilization as well as abortifacient pills like ella, which can work

weeks after a person's biological beginning to cause an abortion.

And what of Catholic employers and others who oppose birth control, but are now

going to be forced to participate in these plans and/or offer it to their employees?

This flies in the face of the conscience protections that Americans have historically

enjoyed.

The conscience provisions attached to the rule are so narrowly crafted that they

would appear to force Catholic institutions to make free birth control and sterilization

available in health plans, or cease hiring and providing services to non-Catholics. 

It is incomprehensible that such a mandate is being forced upon the people of the

United States.

It is no secret that Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion chain in America, is

behind this mandate, and will reap huge financial benefits from it at a time when

citizens in the United States are working on both the state and federal levels to

defund the abortion giant. 

The majority of Americans are pro-life and we do not want our tax dollars and

insurance premiums supporting the nation's largest abortion chain.

It is imperative that you give credence to my personal objection along with those of

millions of other Americans who do not want to be forced to pay for and provide

medication, devices, and procedures that do not treat or prevent any disease or

illness, but distort and render inoperable a healthy reproductive system. This rule is

unjust, untenable, and un-American--and it should be stricken.

Sincerely,

Sister Maria Gemma, OP
Ann Arbor, Michigan
From: marileeluna@verizon.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:15:38 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,

Marilee Luna

Southlake, TX 76092
From: dtimothy@ctsmarchitects.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:21:26 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,

Dwayne Timothy

Birmingham, AL 35226
exhibit448ett20151109vit







 1   Exhibit 4.48                                 Amendment No. 1 to the Storage Contract   No. 2011-13 dated 29-09-2011         Between         Euro Tank Terminal B.V.          And      Vitol SA     





 







 2   THIS AMENDMENT AGREEMENT NO. 1 is made on this 9th day of November 2015       BETWEEN      1. Euro Tank Terminal B.V., a company incorporated under the laws of the Netherlands with a   registered office at PO Box 1000, 3180 AA Rozenburg, The Netherlands (“the Company”); and      AND      2. Vitol SA, a company incorporated under the laws of Switzerland with a registered office at 28   Boulevard du Pont d’Arve 28, 1205 Geneva, Switzerland(“the Client”)      together “the Parties” and individually “the Party”.      WHEREAS      (A) The Company and Client are parties to a Storage Contract No. 2011-13 dated 29-09-2011 (“Storage   Contract”).       (B) For good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged,   the Company and the Client now wish to further amend the Storage Contract in accordance with this   Amendment Agreement No. 1.           NOW THEREFORE it is agreed as follows:      1. The Company and the Client agree to extend the duration from 31 December 2016 to 30 September   2019.      2. Save to the extent as amended by this Amendment Agreement No. 1, all terms and conditions of the   Storage Contract shall remain in full force and effect. This Amendment Agreement No. 1 may be   executed in counterparts.       3. Clauses 23 and 24 of the Storage Contract shall apply mutatis mutandis to this Amendment   Agreement No. 1 as if references therein to the Storage Contract were to this Amendment   Agreement No. 1.      4. Capitalised terms not otherwise defined in this Amendment Agreement No. 1 have the same   meaning as in the Storage Contract.        





 







 3   IN WITNESS WHEREOF the Client and the Company have caused this Amendment Agreement No. 1 to be   executed by their duly authorized representatives, as of the date first above written.            Eurotank Tank Terminal B.V.                      /s/ Jack de Moel   Name: Jack de Moel   Position: Director   Date: 09 November 2015   Place: Rotterdam   Vitol SA                     /s/ David Fransen   Name: David Fransen   Position: Managing Director   Date: 09 November 2015   Place: Geneva
From: Sherilynlnt@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:27:59 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,

Sherilyn Thompson

Sullivan, IN 47882
EXHIBIT 32.1



inTEST CORPORATION



In connection with the Quarterly Report of inTEST Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Robert E. Matthiessen, President and 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:
(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 16, 2005

/s/ Robert E. Matthiessen
Robert E. Matthiessen
President and Chief Executive Officer
# Επίσημη Εφημερίδα C 152/9 Ιο

| | ISSN 1725-2415 |
| --- | --- |
| Επίσημη Εφημερίδα
  της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης | C 152 |
| | |
| Έκδοση στην ελληνική γλώσσα | Ανακοινώσεις και Πληροφορίες | 47ό έτος9 Ιουνίου 2004 |

ISSN 1725-2415

Επίσημη Εφημερίδα

της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης

C 152

Έκδοση στην ελληνική γλώσσα

Ανακοινώσεις και Πληροφορίες

47ό έτος9 Ιουνίου 2004

---

| Ανακοίνωση αριθ | Περιεχόμενα | Σελίδα |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | I   Ανακοινώσεις |
| | Επιτροπή |
| 2004/C 152/1 | Ισοτιμίες του ευρώ | 1 |

Ανακοίνωση αριθ

Περιεχόμενα

Σελίδα

I   Ανακοινώσεις

Επιτροπή

2004/C 152/1

Ισοτιμίες του ευρώ

1

| EL | |
| --- | --- |

EL

---

I Ανακοινώσεις

Επιτροπή

| 9.6.2004 | EL | Επίσημη Εφημερίδα της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης | C 152/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.6.2004

EL

Επίσημη Εφημερίδα της Ευρωπαϊκής Ένωσης

C 152/1

---

Ισοτιμίες του ευρώ (1)

8 Ιουνίου 2004

(2004/C 152/01)

1 ευρώ=

| | Nομισματική μονάδα | Ισοτιμία |
| --- | --- | --- |
| USD | δολάριο ΗΠΑ | 1,2294 |
| JPY | ιαπωνικό γιεν | 135,08 |
| DKK | δανική κορόνα | 7,4349 |
| GBP | λίρα στερλίνα | 0,66840 |
| SEK | σουηδική κορόνα | 9,1040 |
| CHF | ελβετικό φράγκο | 1,5229 |
| ISK | ισλανδική κορόνα | 87,36 |
| NOK | νορβηγική κορόνα | 8,1885 |
| BGN | βουλγαρικό λεβ | 1,9558 |
| CYP | κυπριακή λίρα | 0,58300 |
| CZK | τσεχική κορόνα | 31,243 |
| EEK | εσθονική κορόνα | 15,6466 |
| HUF | ουγγρικό φιορίνι | 251,15 |
| LTL | λιθουανικό λίτας | 3,4527 |
| LVL | λεττονικό λατ | 0,6623 |
| MTL | μαλτέζικη λίρα | 0,4263 |
| PLN | πολωνικό ζλότι | 4,5957 |
| ROL | ρουμανικό λέι | 40 758 |
| SIT | σλοβενικό τόλαρ | 239,1500 |
| SKK | σλοβακική κορόνα | 39,870 |
| TRL | τουρκική λίρα | 1 811 841 |
| AUD | αυστραλιανό δολάριο | 1,7507 |
| CAD | καναδικό δολάριο | 1,6520 |
| HKD | δολάριο Χονγκ Κονγκ | 9,5838 |
| NZD | νεοζηλανδικό δολάριο | 1,9568 |
| SGD | δολάριο Σιγκαπούρης | 2,0990 |
| KRW | νοτιοκορεατικό γουόν | 1 423,46 |
| ZAR | νοτιοαφρικανικό ραντ | 8,0262 |

Nομισματική μονάδα

Ισοτιμία

USD

δολάριο ΗΠΑ

1,2294

JPY

ιαπωνικό γιεν

135,08

DKK

δανική κορόνα

7,4349

GBP

λίρα στερλίνα

0,66840

SEK

σουηδική κορόνα

9,1040

CHF

ελβετικό φράγκο

1,5229

ISK

ισλανδική κορόνα

87,36

NOK

νορβηγική κορόνα

8,1885

BGN

βουλγαρικό λεβ

1,9558

CYP

κυπριακή λίρα

0,58300

CZK

τσεχική κορόνα

31,243

EEK

εσθονική κορόνα

15,6466

HUF

ουγγρικό φιορίνι

251,15

LTL

λιθουανικό λίτας

3,4527

LVL

λεττονικό λατ

0,6623

MTL

μαλτέζικη λίρα

0,4263

PLN

πολωνικό ζλότι

4,5957

ROL

ρουμανικό λέι

40 758

SIT

σλοβενικό τόλαρ

239,1500

SKK

σλοβακική κορόνα

39,870

TRL

τουρκική λίρα

1 811 841

AUD

αυστραλιανό δολάριο

1,7507

CAD

καναδικό δολάριο

1,6520

HKD

δολάριο Χονγκ Κονγκ

9,5838

NZD

νεοζηλανδικό δολάριο

1,9568

SGD

δολάριο Σιγκαπούρης

2,0990

KRW

νοτιοκορεατικό γουόν

1 423,46

ZAR

νοτιοαφρικανικό ραντ

8,0262

---

(1)

Πηγή: Ισοτιμίες αναφοράς που δημοσιεύονται από την Ευρωπαϊκή Κεντρική Τράπεζα.

---
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



The undersigned, Brian J. Martin,
Chairman of the Board of Directors, President and Chief Executive Officer of the managing general partner, Prudential-Bache Properties, Inc. (the Managing General Partner), of Prudential-Bache/Watson & Taylor, Ltd.-2 (the
Partnership), hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| | (1) | The Partnerships Annual Report on Form 10-K for the period ending December 31, 2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Annual
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 Annual Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Partnership.
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



|                                                                                                                                      
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|/s/ Brian J. Martin                                                                                                                   
|Brian J. Martin Chairman of the Board of Directors, President andChief Executive Officer of the Managing GeneralPartner March 30, 2005
From: llsutton@comcast.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:32:29 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,

Leslie Sutton

, 37934-1642