alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1.
    
    I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required
to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of Principal
Life Income Fundings Trust 2008-018 (the Exchange Act periodic reports);2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as whole, do
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, all of the distribution, servicing and other information
required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is
included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;4.
    
    Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statement(s) required in this
report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act
periodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing
agreement(s) in all material respects; and5.
    
    All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for
asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of
compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included
in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules
13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise
disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in such
reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.
   /s/ Dwight N. Soethout

Dwight N. SoethoutVice President  Principal Life Insurance Company
From: rsw010223@austin.rr.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:52:10 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,

Rosemary Wilson

Austin, TX 78748
No. 69613.

#### Amerex Distributing Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 62/5980,etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Rao, C.J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of spark plugs similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Lodge Spark Plug Co.*v. *United States*(49 Cust. Ct. 158, C.D. 2379), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
From: Gayle@USAChristian.org

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:19:53 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,

Gayle Koerber

Ivanhoe, MN 56142
Exhibit 11

                             WASTE INDUSTRIES, INC.
                       COMPUTATION RE: EARNINGS PER SHARE

                                                        Pro forma (1)
                                                      Three Months Ended
                                                            March 31,

                                                     1998            1999
                                                     ----            ----

Net income                                      $  2,353,751    $  2,851,606
                                                ============    ============

Weighted average number of common shares
  issued and outstanding - Basic                  12,651,701      13,501,905

Incremental shares under
  stock option plans                                 385,980         357,608
                                                ------------    ------------

Weighted average shares outstanding - Diluted     13,037,681      13,859,513
                                                ------------    ------------

Basic earnings per share                        $       0.19    $       0.21
                                                ============    ============

Diluted earnings per share                      $       0.18    $       0.21
                                                ============    ============

(1) Pro forma basic and diluted earnings per share computations are based on the
weighted-average common stock outstanding and include the dilutive effect of
stock options using the treasury stock method. Common stock outstanding used to
compute the weighted-average shares was retroactively adjusted for the
acquisition of entities under common control during the quarter ended March 31,
1998, and for the merger with entities under the pooling of interest method
during 1998.


                                       14
No. P66/143. —

#### Abraham & Straus, a Division of Federated Department Stores, Inc., et al. *v.*United States, protests 64/3583, etc. (New York).

*792Nao, C.J.

In accordance with, stipulation of counsel that the items of merchandise marked “A” covered by the foregoing protests consist of knives similar in all material respects to those the subject of *National Carloading Corp.*v. *United States*(54 Cust. Ct. 178, C.D. 2529), and that the items of merchandise marked “B” are similar in all material respects to those the subject of C.D. 2529, *supra,*except that said knives are with handles other than nickel, silver or steel, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
|        |
|--------|
|        |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|   | Title of Each Class of |   | Maximum Aggregate |   | Amount of |   |
|   | Securities Offered |   | Offering Price(1) |   | Registration Fee(2) |   |
|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
|   | 2.000% PowerNotes®  Due March 15, 2020 |   | $1,633,000 |   | $189.27 |   |
|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
|   | TOTAL |   |   |   | $189.27 |   |
|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |

|     |                                    |
|-----|------------------------------------|
| (1) | Excludes accrued interest, if any. |

|     |                                                                             |
|-----|-----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| (2) | Calculated in accordance with Rule 457(r) under the Securities Act of 1933. |

|        |
|--------|
|        |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |  |
|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
|   | CUSIP |   | Aggregate | Selling |   | Gross |   | Net | Coupon |   | Coupon | Coupon | Maturity | 1st Coupon |   | 1st | Survivor's | Product |   |   |
|   | Number |   | Principal | Price |   | Concession |   | Proceeds | Type |   | Rate | Frequency | Date | Date |   | Coupon | Option | Ranking |   |   |
|   |   |   | Amount |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   | Amount |   |   |   |   |
|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
|   | 14912HTA8 |   | $1,633,000.00 | 100% |   | 0.825% |   | $1,619,527.75 | Fixed |   | 2.000% | Semi- | 03/15/2020 | 09/15/2017 |   | $9.94 | Yes | Senior Unsecured |   |   |
|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   | Annual |   |   |   |   |   | Notes |   |   |
|   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
Case No. 10,176.

#### NEWMAN v. DAVIS.

[2 Cranch, C. C. 16.] 1

Circuit Court, District of Columbia.

Dec. Term. 1810.

Actions — Trespass Vi et Armis for Assaulting Plaintiff’s Slave.

Trespass vi et armis will lie for assaulting and shooting the plaintiff’s slave, without a per quod servitium amisit.

Trespass vi et armis for assaulting and shooting the plaintiff’s slave. Motion in arrest of judgment, that trespass vi et armis does not lie. It ought to be a special action upon the case; the damages being consequential only.

1

 [Reported by Hon. William Cranch. Chief Judge.]

But THE COURT

(THRUSTON, Circuit Judge,

doubting) overruled the motion.
EXHIBIT 32.2


                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER
            PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

     The undersigned, being the Senior Vice President, Principal Financial
Officer and a Director of GFSI, Inc., a Delaware corporation (the
"Registrant"), hereby certifies that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q (the
"Quarterly Report") of the Registrant for the period ended October 1, 2005,
which accompanies this certification, fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. ss.78m(a)) and
that the information contained in the Quarterly Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
Registrant.

Date: November 9, 2005



/s/ J. Craig Peterson
----------------------------------------
J. Craig Peterson
Senior Vice President, Principal Financial
Officer and a Director
From: collisonfam@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:24:54 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,

Susan Collison

Otsego, MI 49078
#### Martha E. Egbert, Appellant, *v.*George Barrie et al., Doing Business under the Firm Name of George Barrie & Son, Respondents.

*Egbert*v. *Barrie,*145 App. Div. 918, affirmed.

(Argued December 10, 1912;

decided December 31, 1912.)

Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered *662June 20, 1911, affirming a judgment in favor of defendants entered upon a dismissal of the complaint by the court at a Trial Term in an action to recover for an alleged breach of contract.

*Oscar B. Bergstrom*for appellant.

*Herbert Goldmark*for respondents.

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur : Cullen, Ch. J., Gray, Werner, Willard Bartlett, Hiscock, Chase and Collin, JJ.
From: jerrystone@cableone.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 2:41:27 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,

Jerry Stone

Roswell, NM 88201
From: lfkchanning@msn.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 2:23:23 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,

Lynn Kosak-Channing

Annapolis, MD 21401
The Honorable Carol E. Jackson, United States District Judge for the Eastern 1 District of Missouri. 

## United States Court of Appeals FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________ No. 98-2309

___________ Ernest Sam Kojo-Kwarteng, * * Appellant, * * v. * Appeal from the United States * District Court for the Washington University; Washington * Eastern District of Missouri. University Police Department; Denise * Doner; Robert Browning; Otha * [UNPUBLISHED] Overholt, * * Appellees. *

___________ Submitted: December 7, 1998 Filed: December 16, 1998

___________ Before McMILLIAN, RICHARD S. ARNOLD, and MORRIS SHEPPARD ARNOLD, Circuit Judges.

___________ PER CURIAM. Ernest Sam Kojo-Kwarteng appeals from the final judgment entered in th e District Court for the Eastern District of Missouri granting summary judgment i n

1 favor-2-

of his former employer, Washington University, in Kwarteng & s employmen t discrimination suit. Upon a thorough review of the record and the parties & briefs, we conclud e that the grant of summary judgment was warranted. Accordingly, th e judgment of the district court is affirmed. See 8th Cir. R. 47B. A true copy. Attest: CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.
Exhibit 32.1

                                AEROCENTURY CORP.

                    Certification of Chief Executive Officer
                  pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted
            pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002


In connection with this quarterly report of AeroCentury Corp. (the "Company") on
Form 10-QSB for the period ended March 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the "Report"), I, Neal D. Crispin, Chief Executive Officer
of the Company, hereby certify as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of
Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the United States Code, that to the best
of my knowledge:

              (1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section
              13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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 at the dates and for the periods
              indicated.

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 AeroCentury Corp. and will be
retained by AeroCentury Corp. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.

This Certification has not been, and shall not be deemed, "filed" with the
Securities and Exchange Commission.


Date: May 13, 2004                  /s/ Neal D. Crispin
                                    --------------------------
                                    Neal D. Crispin
                                    Chief Executive Officer