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

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-2000
<CASH>                                     170,298,120
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                               78,385,216
<ALLOWANCES>                               (2,080,873)
<INVENTORY>                                  6,285,466
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           283,926,115
<PP&E>                                     336,660,061
<DEPRECIATION>                            (68,588,848)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                           2,493,261,344
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      130,240,242
<BONDS>                                  1,468,934,845
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                      486,746,129
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        93,138
<OTHER-SE>                                 209,835,216
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>             2,493,261,344
<SALES>                                     11,525,376
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           234,022,216
<CGS>                                       22,554,964
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              220,413,265
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                           (4,981,561)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                          66,139,573
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (67,805,719)
<INCOME-TAX>                              (18,941,525)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       (48,864,194)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                           (20,387,134)
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (69,251,328)
<EPS-BASIC>                                       1.90
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.90


</TABLE>
#            

# CATERPILLAR FINANCIAL SERVICES CORPORATION

$2,000,000,000

# CAT FINANCIAL POWERINVESTMENTSM

# VARIABLE DENOMINATION FLOATING RATE DEMAND NOTES

Registration No.  333-114075

Filed Pursuant to Rule 424 (b) (3)

PRICING SUPPLEMENT NO.  2    

  (To Prospectus dated October 20, 2005)                                                                                    

The Date of this Pricing SupplementNovember 9, 2005

 

                The Cat Financial PowerInvestmentSM Variable Denomination Floating Rate Demand Notes (the “Notes”) bearinterest at a floating rate per annum determined by the Cat Financial PowerInvestment Committee, or its designee, on a weekly basis to be effective on the following Monday. Currently, the interest rates payable on the Notes vary based on the principal amount of theNotes that an investor owns.

                The current Registration Statement for the Notes (No. 333-114075) was declared effective on October 26, 2005. As of November 7, 2005,the interest rates on the Notes were as follows:

Principal Amount of Notes                 Interest Rate Per Annum

Owned by an Investor

$0-$4,999.99                                          3.66%                Yield

                                                              3.60%                Rate

$5,000-$49,999.99                  3.92%               Yield

                                                              3.85%                Rate

$50,000 and above                     4.17%                Yield

                                                              4.10%                Rate

****
From: mdotto1@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:55:30 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,

Myles Dotto

Westwood, NJ 07675
---

---

EXHIBIT 23.9

CONSENT OF Somekh Chaikin CPAs (ISR), INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANT

We have issued our report dated
February 24, 2005 for the financial statements of Hod Hasharon Sports Center Limited for
the year ended December 31, 2004. We consent to the incorporation by reference in the
Registration Statement Form S-8 (File No. 333-61895 and File No. 333-55970), of our report
dated February 24, 2005 with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Ampal
 American Israel Corporation incorporated by reference in the Annual Report (Form
10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2004.

Tel Aviv, Israel March 13,
2005



---

---



CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT
PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS

We have issued our report dated
February 27, 2003 for the financial statements of Hod Hasharon Sport Center Ltd. for the
year ended December 31, 2002. We consent to the incorporation by reference in the
Registration Statement Form S-8 (File No. 333-61895 and File No. 333-55970), of our report
dated February 27, 2003 with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Ampal
 American Israel Corporation incorporated by reference in the Annual Report (Form
10-K) for the year ended December 31, 2004.

|Tel-Aviv, Israel
March 13, 2005 | KOST FORER GABBAY & KASIERER
A Member of Ernst & Young Global
|------------------------------- | -------------------------------------------------------------



---

---
No. 94, Misc.

#### Holland *v.*New York.

Court of Appeals of New York. Certiorari denied.
From: LeeKoerber@USAChristian.org

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:15:17 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,

Lee Koerber

Ivanhoe, MN 56142
From: fbnurnberg@hotmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:48:25 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,

Fred B. Nurnberg

Morgantown, PA 19543
From: Janice Dlugosz

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Date: Thursday, August 11, 2011 1:35:21 AM

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

to accept the recommendations of the Institute of Medicine as pertain 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.

While AAUW believes that “religious refusal” exemptions unjustly deny women

access to contraceptive services, 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.
```

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1218 Placed on Calendar Senate (PCS)]

                                                        Calendar No. 98
107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1218

 To extend the authorities of the Iran and Libya Sanctions Act of 1996 
                              until 2006.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                              July 23 2001

    Mr. Sarbanes, from the Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban 
Affairs, reported the following original bill; which was read twice and 
                         placed on the calendar

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
 To extend the authorities of the Iran and Libya Sanctions Act of 1996 
                              until 2006.

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

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

    This Act may be cited as the ``ILSA Extension Act of 2001''.

SEC. 2. EXTENSION OF IRAN AND LIBYA SANCTIONS ACT OF 1996.

    Section 13(b) of the Iran and Libya Sanctions Act of 1996 (50 
U.S.C. 1701 note; Public Law 104-172) is amended by striking ``5 
years'' and inserting ``10 years''.

SEC. 3. IMPOSITION OF SANCTIONS WITH RESPECT TO LIBYA.

    (a) In General.--Section 5(b)(2) of the Iran and Libya Sanctions 
Act of 1996 (50 U.S.C. 1701 note; 110 Stat. 1543) is amended by 
striking ``$40,000,000'' each place it appears and inserting 
``$20,000,000''.
    (b) Effective Date.--The amendments made by subsection (a) shall 
apply to investments made on or after June 13, 2001.

SEC. 4. REVISED DEFINITION OF INVESTMENT.

    Section 14(9) of the Iran and Libya Sanctions Act of 1996 (50 
U.S.C. 1701 note; 110 Stat. 1549) is amended by adding at the end the 
following new sentence: ``For purposes of this paragraph, an amendment 
or other modification that is made, on or after June 13, 2001, to an 
agreement or contract shall be treated as the entry of an agreement or 
contract.''.

                                                        Calendar No. 98

107th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                                S. 1218

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 To extend the authorities of the Iran and Libya Sanctions Act of 1996 
                              until 2006.

_______________________________________________________________________

                             July 23, 2001

                 Read twice and placed on the calendar
```
From: BobStevens@RacineFed.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:59:58 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,

Bob Stevens

Racine, WI 53402
From: jfoster10@san.rr.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 2:00:47 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,

Jean Foster

San Diego, CA 92122
No. 576, Misc.

#### Kaganovitch *v.*Wilkins, Warden.

C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari denied.
### D ISTRICT 

### C OURT 

### O F 

### A PPEAL 

### O F 

### T HE 

### S TATE 

### O F 

### F LORIDA
F OURTH D ISTRICT

JAVIER JIMENEZ

- JIMENEZ , Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA , Appellee

.

No. 4D 23

- 1463

[ August 24, 2023 ]

Appeal of order denying rule 3.800 motion from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, Okeechobee County ; Laurie E. Buchanan

, Judge; L.T. Case No. 2010CF000203C

.

Javier Jimenez

- Jimenez

, Daytona Beach , pro se.

No appearance for appellee.

P ER C URIAM

.
Affirmed

.

W ARNER , G ROSS an d G ERBER , JJ., concur.

* * *

Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.
EXHIBIT 32.2

                            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  Quarterly  Report on Form 10-Q of WNC Housing Tax
Credit  Fund VI,  L.P.,  Series 5 (the  "Partnership")  for the  quarters  ended
December  31,  2006,  September 30, 2006  and June  30,  2006 as filed  with the
Securities  and  Exchange  Commission  on the date  hereof (the  "Report"),  and
pursuant to 18 U.S.C.,  section 1350, as adopted  pursuant to section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  I, Wilfred N.  Cooper,  Jr.,  President  and Chief
Executive Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc., general partner of the Partnership,
hereby certify that:

     1.   The Report fully  complies with the  requirements  of section 13(a) or
          15(d) of the  Securities  Exchange  Act of 1934,  except to the extent
          that  such  provisions  require  the  audit  report  of Local  Limited
          Partnership financial statements to refer to the auditing standards of
          the Public Company  Accounting  Oversight Board for the  Partnership's
          annual financial statements and except that the Report is a cumulative
          report  covering each of the quarters ended December 31,  September 30
          and June 30, 2006 and

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



/s/Thomas J. Riha
-----------------
Thomas J. Riha
Senior Vice-President and Chief Financial Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc.
May 16, 2008