alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Hillsborough,

Nov. 4, 1913.

#### Boston & Maine Railroad *& a. v.*Daniel J. Gallagher *& a.*

Bill in Equity, to enjoin the defendants from entering the station and grounds of the plaintiff railroad, in Manchester, to solicit the carriage of baggage for passengers. The defendants demurred. The essential facts are the same as in *Hedding*v. *Gallagher,*72 N. H. 377. Transferred without ruling from the May term, 1911, of the superior court by *Plummer,*J.

*Branch & Branch,*for the plaintiffs.

*James A. Broderick,*for the defendants.

Peaslee, J.

A majority of the court being of the opinion that the decision in *Hedding*v. *Gallagher,*72 N. H. 377, should stand, there is no occasioh to further consider the questions discussed therein.

*589A defence now made for the first time is that a decree for the plaintiffs will deprive the defendants of the rights guaranteed to them under the fourteenth amendment to the constitution of the United States. No argument in support of this proposition has been furnished, and the authorities are decisive against it. *Slaughter-house Cases,*16 Wall. 36.

*Demurrer overruled.*

All concurred.
#            

# CATERPILLAR FINANCIAL SERVICES CORPORATION

POWERNOTES (R)

With Maturities of 9 months or more from Date of Issue

Registration No.  333-109182

Filed Pursuant to Rule 424 (b) (3)

PRICING SUPPLEMENT NO.  518                                                                   Trade Date:  12/13/04

(To Prospectus Supplement dated November 6, 2003 &

  Prospectus dated October 15,2003)                                                              Issue Date:   12/16/04

The Date of this Pricing SupplementDecember 13, 2004

SUBJECT TO REDEMPTION OR REPAYMENT

 CUSIP                                                                                                                                   Date and terms of redemption or

     or       Stated                                                                   Interest                                       repayment (includingany

Common  Interest                      Price to  Discounts &        Payment     Survivors                  applicable regular or special

  Code      Rate (1)   Maturity  Public (2) Commissions       Frequency       Option  Yes/No     record dates)

14911QXP1  4.50%          12/15/13        100%                1.55%              Semi-Annually              YES         NO                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                       

                                                                                                                                                                                                                       

Principal                                                                                 1st Payment             Day         

Amount                  Proceeds                  Dealer                           Date                   Count

$2,793,000.00         $2,749,708.50         ABN AMRO Inc.        06/15/05               30/360    

Original Issue DiscountNote:                                                                          Total Amount of OID:

____  Yes                X   No                                                                                  N/A

The interest rates on the PowerNotes (R) may be changed by Caterpillar Financial Services Corporation from time to time, but any such change will not affect the interest rate on any PowerNotes (R) offered prior to the effective date of the change.  Prior to the date of this Pricing Supplement, $259.137 mm principal amount of the PowerNotes (R) were sold at interest rates then in effect.  Subsequent offerings of PowerNotes (R) will be made under the Prospectus Supplement and Prospectus dated October 15,2003.

Expressed as a percentage of aggregate principal amount.  Actual Price to Public may be less, and will be determined by prevailing market prices at the time of purchase as set forth in the confirmation sheet.
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 23.1


            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

The Board of Directors
Nastech Pharmaceutical Company Inc.:


We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements (No.
333-16507 and No. 333-45264) on Forms S-2, (No. 333-44035, No. 333-59472, No.
333-62800, No. 333-72742, No. 333-108845, No. 333-111324 and No. 333-119429) on
Forms S-3 and (No. 333-28785, No. 333-46214, No. 333-49514, No. 333-92206, No.
333-92222 and No. 333-118206) on Forms S-8 of Nastech Pharmaceutical Company
Inc. of our reports dated February 18, 2005, with respect to the consolidated
balance sheets of Nastech Pharmaceutical Company Inc. as of December 31, 2004
and 2003, and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders'
equity and comprehensive loss, and cash flows for each of the years in the
three-year period ended December 31, 2004 and management's assessment of the
effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of December 31,
2004 and the effectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as of
December 31, 2004, which reports appear in the December 31, 2004, annual report
on Form 10-K/A of Nastech Pharmaceutical Company Inc.


/s/ KPMG LLP
------------

Seattle, Washington
April 25, 2005
Exhibit 32.2





Certification of Chief Financial Officer


Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002




Solely for the purpose of complying with 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, the undersigned Chief Financial Officer of Alliance Pharmaceutical Corp. (the “Company”), hereby certify, based on my knowledge, that the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Company for the year ended June 30, 2009 (the “Report”) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities and Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.




Date: May 21, 2010






By:
/s/ B. Jack DeFrancoB. Jack DeFrancoChief Financial Officer


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Alliance Pharmaceutical Corp. and will be retained by Alliance Pharmaceutical Corp. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Beacon Process Map 

Receive & Store 

raw materials

Mix Material 

as per recipe

Bake

Material

Weigh ingredients 

& record all data on 

mixing data form

Dispense 

Material into 

crucibles

Setup & 

operation of 

equipment

Batch

Analysis

Fail

Pass

Final Re-size

Material

Package & 

palletize Ship ScreenMaterial

Store

for shipment

Prelim Re-size

Material

Particle 

Size 

Analyzer

Re-screen
From: plockard527@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:31:26 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,

Peter Lockard

Fredericksburg, VA 22407
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title:Introduction to defense acquisition management.**
 
Editions: 010203050607080910
 
SuDoc Number:
Item Number:
CGP systemNumber:
 
September 27, 2018
CATERPILLAR FINANCIAL SERVICES CORPORATION

POWERNOTES (SM)

With Maturities of 9 months or more from Date of Issue

 

Registration No. 333-35460

Filed Pursuant to Rule 424 (b) (2)

PRICING SUPPLEMENT NO. 078				Trade Date: 05/17/01
(To Prospectus Supplement & Prospectus dated

September 8, 2000)						Issue Date: 05/22/01
The Date of this Pricing Supplement May 17, 2001
SUBJECT TO REDEMPTION OR REPAYMENT

CUSIP									Date and terms of redemption or

or	Stated				 Interest			repayment (including any

Common	Interest		 Price to	 Discounts & Payment	Survivors		applicable regular or special

Code	Rate (1)	Maturity	Public (2)	Commissions Frequency	 Option	Yes/No	record dates)

14911QDF5 5.5%	05/15/05	100%	 1.0% Semi-Annually	 YES	 NO	

 

 

Original Issue Discount Note:					Total Amount of OID:

____ Yes	 X No						N/A

 

 
- The interest rates on the PowerNotes (SM) may be changed by Caterpillar Financial Services Corporation from time to time, but any such change will not affect the interest rate on any PowerNotes (SM) offered prior to the effective date of the change.
- Expressed as a percentage of aggregate principal amount. Actual Price to Public may be less, and will be determined by prevailing market prices at the time of purchase as set forth in the confirmation sheet.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                                   5
<LEGEND>
THIS  SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  FINANCIAL   INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM  THE
CONSOLIDATED  CONDENSED FINANCIAL  STATEMENTS FILED WITH NOVAMED'S SEPTEMBER 30,
2000  QUARTERLY  REPORT ON FORM  10-QSB  AND IS  QUALIFIED  IN ITS  ENTIRETY  BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<CIK>                                                0001036478
<NAME>                                               NOVAMED, INC.
<MULTIPLIER>                                         1
<CURRENCY>                                           U.S. Dollars

<S>                                                <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                        3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                    DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                                         SEP-30-2000
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                               0
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        186,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          477,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     663,000
<PP&E>                                               56,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                       743,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                723,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             16,000
<OTHER-SE>                                           4,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                         743,000
<SALES>                                              245,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                     245,000
<CGS>                                                116,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        333,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     8,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                      (80,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  (80,000)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                         (80,000)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          (0.01)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        (0.01)


</TABLE>
From: lesliebaab@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 2:20:50 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 Baab

Columbus, OH 43229
From: Prenosils@sillydan.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:03:42 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,

Patricia Prenosil

Ferndale, WA 98248
From: slsk1@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:06:39 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,

Sharon Schory

Wills Point, TX 75169
|        |
|--------|
|        |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
| Coupon | Interest | Maturity | Callable | Survivor's Option | Price | CUSIP |   |
| 2.300% | Semi-Annual(†††) | 4/15/2022 | No | Yes § | 100.00 | 14912HRR3 |   |

|                         |
|-------------------------|
|                         |  |  |
| (†††) | First Payment date 10/15/2015 |   |
|                    |   |
[Civ. No. 10754.

First Appellate District, Division Two.

March 21, 1938.]

#### In the Matter of the Estate of JAMES FRAZER, Deceased. JOHN de MATTOS, Appellant, v. J. C. McGOVERN, Administrator, etc., Respondent.

Russell P. Tyler for Appellant.

Ross & Ross and A. H. McGovern for Respondent.

NOURSE, P. J.

This is a companion case to *de Mattos*v. *McGovern,*this day decided *(ante,*p. 429 [77 Pac. (2d) 522]). To the petition for final distribution de Mattos filed objections and a prayer to the probate court to specifically enforce the oral agreement alleged in the complaint in the former action.  He did not file any claim against the estate and made this his first appearance in the probate proceeding long after the time for filing had expired. The appellant concedes that his pleading states no cause other than one for specific performance of the alleged agreement, and states that he knows of no rule of law which would require him to sue for a money judgment in lieu of enforcing his rights under the agreement. In *Morrison*v. Land, 169 Cal. 580, 586 [147 Pac. 259], it is said: “it is elemen*435tary that where, as here, the primary right of a party is *legal*in its nature, as distinguished from *equitable,*and one for which the law affords some remedy, as here damages by way of compensation for breach of contract, a proper exercise of the equitable jurisdiction will not give equitable relief in any ease where the legal remedy is full and adequate and does complete justice”. Since the probate court has no *primary*jurisdiction in equity it is powerless to grant equitable relief where the party has, through his fault alone, failed to pursue the legal remedy afforded him.

For these reasons, and for the reasons given in the companion ease, the order is affirmed.

Sturtevant, J., and Spence, J., concurred.