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

     
     <ARTICLE>                                                             6
     <LEGEND>
     THIS SCHEDULE  CONTAINS SUMMARY  FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED FROM THE
     FINANCIAL STATEMENTS INCLUDED IN THE MICROCAP LIQUIDATING TRUST'S QUARTERLY
     REPORT  ON FORM  10-Q  FOR THE  PERIOD  ENDED  SEPTEMBER  30,  1998  AND IS
     QUALIFIED  IN ITS  ENTIRETY  BY  REFERENCE  TO SUCH  FINANCIAL  STATEMENTS.
     </LEGEND>
            
     <S>  <C> <PERIOD-TYPE> 9-MOS <FISCAL-YEAR-END>  DEC-31-1998  <PERIOD-START>
          JAN-1-1998 <PERIOD-END>  SEP-30-1998  <INVESTMENTS-AT-COST>  1,937,500
          <INVESTMENTS-AT-VALUE>  998,438  <RECEIVABLES> 67,392 <ASSETS-OTHER> 0
          <OTHER-ITEMS-ASSETS>      3,621,688      <TOTAL-ASSETS>      4,687,518
          <PAYABLE-FOR-SECURITIES>       0       <SENIOR-LONG-TERM-DEBT>       0
          <OTHER-ITEMS-LIABILITIES>    352,183    <TOTAL-LIABILITIES>    352,183
          <SENIOR-EQUITY>  0  <PAID-IN-CAPITAL-COMMON>  0  <SHARES-COMMON-STOCK>
          2,427,281 <SHARES-COMMON-PRIOR> 2,427,281  <ACCUMULATED-NII-CURRENT> 0
          <OVERDISTRIBUTION-NII>       0        <ACCUMULATED-NET-GAINS>        0
          <OVERDISTRIBUTION-GAINS>    0    <ACCUM-APPREC-OR-DEPREC>    (939,062)
          <NET-ASSETS> 4,335,335  <DIVIDEND-INCOME> 0 <INTEREST-INCOME>  209,823
          <OTHER-INCOME> 198,113 <EXPENSES-NET> 559,448  <NET-INVESTMENT-INCOME>
          (151,512) <REALIZED-GAINS-CURRENT> (240,000) <APPREC-INCREASE-CURRENT>
          (384,062)    <NET-CHANGE-FROM-OPS>    (775,574)    <EQUALIZATION>    0
          <DISTRIBUTIONS-OF-INCOME>       0      <DISTRIBUTIONS-OF-GAINS>      0
          <DISTRIBUTIONS-OTHER>     1,820,461      <NUMBER-OF-SHARES-SOLD>     0
          <NUMBER-OF-SHARES-REDEEMED>        0       <SHARES-REINVESTED>       0
          <NET-CHANGE-IN-ASSETS>    (2,596,035)     <ACCUMULATED-NII-PRIOR>    0
          <ACCUMULATED-GAINS-PRIOR>       0       <OVERDISTRIB-NII-PRIOR>      0
          <OVERDIST-NET-GAINS-PRIOR>       0       <GROSS-ADVISORY-FEES>       0
          <INTEREST-EXPENSE> 0 <GROSS-EXPENSE> 0 <AVERAGE-NET-ASSETS>  5,633,353
          <PER-SHARE-NAV-BEGIN>        2.855       <PER-SHARE-NII>        (.062)
          <PER-SHARE-GAIN-APPREC>       (.257)       <PER-SHARE-DIVIDEND>      0
          <PER-SHARE-DISTRIBUTIONS>       (.75)      <RETURNS-OF-CAPITAL>      0
          <PER-SHARE-NAV-END>  1.786 <EXPENSE-RATIO> 0  <AVG-DEBT-OUTSTANDING> 0
          <AVG-DEBT-PER-SHARE> 0         

     
</TABLE>
From: s.p.brown@comcast.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:19:36 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,

Stephen Brown

Denver, CO 80202
Exhibit
32




CERTIFICATIONS
PURSUANT TO


18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002




In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Matech Corp. (the Company”) on Form 10-Q
for the period ending June 30, 2009, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof, I, Robert M. Bernstein, Chief Executive Officer,
President, and Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18
U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §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: 
August 18, 2009






/s/ Robert M.
Bernstein


Robert M.
Bernstein,


Chief
Executive Officer, President, and


Chief
Financial Officer
From: leonghil@aol.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:45:41 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,

may leong

Hilton Head Island, SC 29928
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

STATE OF FLORIDA

_____________________________

No. 1D18-4792

_____________________________

ROBERT ULM,

Petitioner,

v.

FLORIDA COMMISSION ON 

OFFENDER REVIEW,

Respondent.

_____________________________

Petition for Writ of Certiorari—Original Jurisdiction.

February 5, 2019

PER CURIAM.

Because Petitioner has not shown irreparable harm, we 

dismiss the petition for writ of certiorari for lack of jurisdiction. 

See Bailey v. State, 245 So. 3d 1015 (Fla. 1st DCA 2018). 

WOLF, LEWIS, and WETHERELL, JJ., concur.
2

_____________________________

Not final until disposition of any timely and 

authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 

9.331.

_____________________________

Robert Ulm, pro se, Petitioner.

Rana Wallace, General Counsel, Florida Commission on Offender 

Review, Tallahassee, for Respondent.
Exhibit
32





CERTIFICATIONS
PURSUANT TO


18
U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS
ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
connection with the Quarterly Report of Material Technologies, Inc. (the
Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2008 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof, I, Robert M. Bernstein,
Chief Executive Officer, President, and Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to §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:
August 3, 2009




/s/
Robert M.
Bernstein


Robert M.
Bernstein,


Chief
Executive Officer, President, and


Chief
Financial Officer
EXHIBIT 31.1



CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER



I, Douglas A. Lindgren, certify that:



1. I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Excelsior Private Equity Fund II, Inc.;



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



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



4. The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act
Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:



a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
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 disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and



c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most
recent fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; and



5. The registrants other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed,
based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrants auditors and the audit committee of the registrants board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):



a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably 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 or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over financial reporting.



Date: March 16, 2005



|                                            
|--------------------------------------------
|/s/ Douglas A. Lindgren                     
|Douglas A. Lindgren, Chief Executive Officer
From: dccjcc@sbcglobal.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:51:14 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. Personal responsibility should be encouraged rather than discouraged - and that

personal responsibility should not be transferred to others who hold opposing views.

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,

Judith Cook

Gurnee, IL 60031
Materials Not Included in

Airworthiness Directive (AD) Docket

Docket Number: FAA- 2012-0111

Directorate Identifier: 2011NM089AD

A330-32-3240, R01 --- 5/4/11

A330-32-3240 --- 12/8/10

A340-32-4281 --- 12/8/10

A340-32-5096 --- 12/8/10

MID 54500, I1 --- 8/30/05

MESS-DOWTY A33/34-32-285 --- 7/9/10

MESS-DOWTY A34/56C-32-117 --- 7/9/10

MESS-DOWTY A34/56M-32-46 --- 7/9/10

Name/Description of Item(s) Not Included in FDMS Docket and Maintained in the 

Supplemental AD Docket

MAY BE VIEWED AT: Federal Aviation Administration

Transport Airplane Directorate

Rules Docket

1601 Lind Ave. SW.,

Renton, WA 98057

425.227.1221

DURING THE HOURS OF: 9 a.m. and 3 p.m., Monday through Friday,

except Federal holidays.

Form Date: 03/05/2008
From: fairman@suddenlink.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:42:04 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,

fairon spears

Henderson, TX 75652
From: thecretan@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:39:46 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,

Donald W. Edwards

Tucson, AZ 85742
## COURT OF APPEALS

SANDEE BRYAN MARION

CHIEF JUSTICE

KAREN ANGELINI

MARIALYN BARNARD

REBECA C. MARTINEZ

PATRICIA O. ALVAREZ

LUZ ELENA D. CHAPA

JASON PULLIAM

JUSTICES FOURTH COURT OF APPE ALS DISTRICT

CADENA

- REEVES JUSTICE CENTE R

300 DOLOROSA, SUIT E 3200

SAN ANTONIO, TEXAS 7 8205

- 3037

WWW.TXCOURTS.GOV/4TH COA.ASPX KEITH E. HOTTLE

CLERK OF COURT

TELEPHONE

(210) 335

- 2635

FACSIMILE NO.

(210) 335

- 2762

August 5, 2015

Matthew Tepper

700 Jeffrey Way, Suite 100

Round Rock, TX 78665

* DELIVE RED VIA E

- MAIL * David Goad

1154 Rivertree Drive

New Braunfels, TX 78130

RE: Court of Appeals Number: 04

- 14

- 00497

- CV

Trial Court Case Number: 12

- 1923

- CV

Style: David C. Goad v

. The County of Guadalupe, Texas

Dear Counsel:

The above cause has been set for formal submission ON BRIEFS ONLY before this

Court on Tuesday, September 8, 2015

, before a panel consisting of Justice Rebeca C. Martinez,

Justice Patricia O. Alvarez, and Justice Luz Elena D. Chapa

.

Very truly yours,

KEITH E. HOTTLE, CLERK

____________________________ Cynthia A. Martinez

Deputy Clerk, Ext. 53853