alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 12.1
 CERTIFICATION
  1.
    
    I have reviewed this annual report on Form 20-F of MS&AD Insurance Group Holdings, 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 company as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;4.
    
    The companys other certifying officer 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 company 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 company, 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)
    
    [omitted in accordance with the guidance of SEC Release 33-8760];c)
    
    evaluated the effectiveness of the company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; andd)
    
    disclosed in this report any change in the companys internal control over
financial reporting that occurred during the period covered by the annual report that
has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the companys
internal control over financial reporting; and
 5.
    
    The companys other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent
evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the companys auditors and the
audit committee of the company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 companys ability to record, process, summarize and report financial
information; andb)
    
    any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees
who have a significant role in the companys internal control over financial reporting.
  By:
    /s/ Toshiaki EgashiraName:
    Toshiaki EgashiraTitle:
    President and Chief Executive Officer
H. Res. 1517 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

September 29, 2008. 

Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it shall 

be in order to take from the Speaker’s table the bill (H.R. 

3997) to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to provide earnings assistance and tax relief to members of the uniformed services, volunteer firefighters, and Peace Corps volunteers, and for other purposes, with the Senate amendment 

to the House amendment to the Senate amendment thereto, 

and to consider in the House, without intervention of any 

point of order, a motion offered by the chairman of the Committee on Financial Services or his designee that the House 

concur in the Senate amendment to the House amendment to 

the Senate amendment with the amendment printed in the 

report of the Committee on Rules accompanying this resolution. The Senate amendment and the motion shall be considered as read. The motion shall be debatable for three hours 

equally divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking 

minority member of the Committee on Financial Services. 
2 

•HRES 1517 EH 

The previous question shall be considered as ordered on the 

motion to final adoption without intervening motion. 

SEC. 2. During consideration of the motion to concur 

pursuant to this resolution, notwithstanding the operation of 

the previous question, the Chair may postpone further consideration of such motion to such time as may be designated by 

the Speaker. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
**RB** IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA No. DA 1 9 - 0489 STATE OF MONTANA,

Plaintiff and Appellee, v. KYLE W. NELSON ,

Defendant and Appellant.

**ORDER** Upon consideration of Appellee’s motion for a 6 0 - day extension of time, and good cause appearing therefor, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Appellee is granted an extension of time to and including Novem

ber 2 3 , 2020 , within which to prepare, serve, and file the State’s response .

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

September 17 2020

09/17/2020

Case Number: DA 19-0489
II

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 1083

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to exclude clinical social

worker services from coverage under the medicare skilled nursing facility

prospective payment system.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JUNE 21, 2001

Ms. MIKULSKI (for herself, Mr. BINGAMAN, Mrs. MURRAY, and Mr. INOUYE)

introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the

Committee on Finance

A BILL

To amend title XVIII of the Social Security Act to exclude

clinical social worker services from coverage under the

medicare skilled nursing facility prospective payment system.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Clinical Social Work

5 Medicare Equity Act of 2001’’.
2

•S 1083 IS

1 SEC. 2. EXCLUDING CLINICAL SOCIAL WORKER SERVICES

2 FROM COVERAGE UNDER THE MEDICARE

3 SKILLED NURSING FACILITY PROSPECTIVE

4 PAYMENT SYSTEM.

5 (a) EXCLUSION OF CLINICAL SOCIAL WORKER SERV6 ICES.—

7 (1) IN GENERAL.—Section 1888(e)(2)(A)(ii) of

8 the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.

9 1395yy(e)(2)(A)(ii)) is amended by inserting ‘‘clin10 ical social worker services,’’ after ‘‘qualified psychol11 ogist services,’’.

12 (2) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—Section

13 1861(hh)(2) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1395x(hh)(2))

14 is amended by striking ‘‘and other than services fur15 nished to an inpatient of a skilled nursing facility

16 which the facility is required to provide as a require17 ment for participation’’.

18 (b) EFFECTIVE DATE.—The amendments made by

19 this section apply with respect to services furnished on or

20 after January 1, 2002.

Æ
<PAGE>

                                                                      Exhibit 23

               CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS



We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on
Form S-8 [Nos. 333-02567, 333-44119 and 333-86616] pertaining to the 1995
Employee Stock Option Plan and the 1994 Stock Option Plan for Independent
Directors, all as amended, and in the related Prospectus of Cover-All
Technologies Inc. and subsidiary of our report dated March 16, 2006, with
respect to the 2005, 2004 and 2003 consolidated financial statements and
schedule of Cover-All Technologies Inc. and subsidiary included in its Annual
Report [Form 10-K] for the year ended December 31, 2005.





                                        MOORE STEPHENS, P. C.
                                        Certified Public Accountants.

New York, New York
March 29, 2006
## In T he Court of Appeals Seventh District of Texas at Amarillo

No. 07 - 22 - 00006 - CV BIANCA M . WOODS , A PPELLANT V. THE STATE OF TEXAS , APPELLEE On Appeal from the County Court at Law No . 1

Travis County, Texas Trial Court No . C - 1 - CV

- 20 - 001267 , Honorable Todd T. Wong , Presiding 

### Ju ly 1 , 2022 MEMORANDUM OPINION Before QUINN, C.J., and PARKER and DOSS, JJ. Appellant Bianca M . Woods, proceeding pro se, appeals from the trial court’s Final Summary Judgment

. 1 Woods’ s brief was originally due March 21, 2022, but was not filed. We subsequently granted Woods three extensions to file a brief. By letter of May 23, 2022, we notified Woods that the appeal was subject to dismissal for want of prosecution,

1 Originally appealed to the Third Court of Appeals, th is appeal was transferred to this Court by the Texas Supreme Court pursuant to its docket equalizations efforts. See T EX . G OV ’ T C ODE A NN . § 73.001.2

without further notice, if a brief was not received by June 20. To date, Woods has not filed a brief nor had any further communication with this Court. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of prosecution. See T EX . R. A PP . P. 38.8(a)(1), 42.3(b). Per Curiam
# 

# CATERPILLAR FINANCIAL SERVICES CORPORATION

POWERNOTES (SM)

With Maturities of 9 months or more from Date of Issue

Registration No.  333-97047

Filed Pursuant to Rule 424 (b) (3)

PRICING SUPPLEMENT NO.  342                                                                   Trade Date:  09/29/03

(To Prospectus Supplement dated August 15, 2002 &

  Prospectus dated August  8,2002)                                                                Issue Date:   10/02/03

The Date of this Pricing SupplementSeptember  29, 2003

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)

14911QQF1   3.2%           04/15/08           100%              0.9%                  Quarterly                       YES          NO                

                          

Principal                                                                                 1st Payment             Day         

Amount                  Proceeds                  Dealer                           Date                   Count

$879,000.00            $871,089.00            ABN AMROInc.        01/15/04                              30/360    

Original Issue DiscountNote:                                                                          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.  Prior to the date of this Pricing Supplement, $287.546 mm principal amount of the PowerNotes (SM) were sold at interest rates then in effect.  Subsequent offerings of PowerNotes (SM) will be made under the Prospectus Supplement and Prospectus dated August 8,2002.

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.
From: drfrbeaty@aol.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 2:02:30 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,

Frank Beaty

Burlington, IA 52601
From: hgraham2@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 2:17:17 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,

vickie graham

Monticello, UT 84535
Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

January 11, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor,
Chief Justice

134670 Michael F. Cavanagh
Elizabeth A. Weaver LATIF Z. ORAM a/k/a RANDY Z. ORAM, Marilyn Kelly Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant/ Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr. Counter-Plaintiff-Appellant, Stephen J. Markman,
Justices and

O.B. PROPERITES LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, Plaintiff/Counter-Defendant/ Counter-Plaintiff/Third-Party Defendant,

and

O. B. PROPERTIES and JAM SOUND SPECIALIST, INC., Plaintiffs/Counter-Defendants/ Counter-Plaintiffs/Third-Party Plaintiffs,

v SC: 134670 COA: 267077 Oakland CC: 2002-039499-CK JOHN ORAM and GARY ORAM, Defendants/Counter-Plaintiffs/ Counter-Defendants-Appellees,

and

INTERNATIONAL OUTDOOR, INC., VISION PROPERTIES, INC., DISCOUNT PAGING COMPANY, INC., and FUTURE VISION PROPERTIES, LLC, Third-Party Defendants,

and

ARMAND VELARDO, S. HADDAD, and BRADLEY LAMBERT, Intervening Plaintiffs,

and_______________________________________ __ 2

HARRY CENDROWSKI, Intervening Plaintiff-Appellee.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the applicati on for leave to appeal the May 22, 2007 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered. We direct the Clerk to schedule oral argument on whether to grant the application or take ot her peremptory action. MCR 7.302(G)(1). At oral argument, the par ties shall address whet her the circuit court properly imposed the sanction of dismissal with prejudice and wh ether the dismissal
order was a “verdict” as defined in MCR 2. 403(O)(4) for purposes of ordering case evaluation sanctions. The partie s may file supplemental briefs within 42 days of the date of this order, but they shou ld not submit mere restatements of their application papers.

s0108 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

January 11, 2008

Clerk
MANDATE

THE STATE OF TEXAS

TO THE 406TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF WEBB COUNTY, GREETINGS:

Before our Court of Appeals for the Fourth District of Texas on November 19, 2014, the cause upon appeal to 

revise or reverse your judgment between

Jose Luis Ramos, Appellant

V.

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company, Appellee

No. 04-14-00572-CV and Tr. Ct. No. 2013CVQ001953 D4

was determined, and therein our said Court of Appeals made its order in these words:

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s 

judgment is SET ASIDE WITHOUT REGARD TO THE MERITS and the 

case is REMANDED to the trial court for rendition of judgment in accordance 

with the parties’ agreement. 

We ORDER that appellee, State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance 

Company, recover its costs of this appeal from appellant, Jose Luis Ramos.

WHEREFORE, WE COMMAND YOU to observe the order of our said Court of Appeals for the Fourth 

District of Texas, in this behalf and in all things have the order duly recognized, obeyed, and executed.

WITNESS the Hon. Catherine Stone, Chief Justice of the Court of Appeals for the Fourth District of Texas, 

with the seal of the Court affixed and the City of San Antonio on January 28, 2015.

KEITH E. HOTTLE, CLERK

____________________________

Cynthia A. Martinez

Deputy Clerk, Ext. 3853
BILL OF COSTS

TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, FOURTH DISTRICT, AT SAN ANTONIO

No. 04-14-00572-CV

Jose Luis Ramos

v.

State Farm Mutual Automobile Insurance Company

(NO. 2013CVQ001953 D4 IN 406TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF WEBB COUNTY)

TYPE OF FEE CHARGES PAID BY

MOTION FEE

MOTION FEE

REPORTER'S RECORD

REPORTER'S RECORD

CLERK'S RECORD

FILING

INDIGENT

SUPREME COURT CHAPTER 51 

FEE

STATEWIDE EFILING FEE

$10.00

$10.00

$120.00

$224.00

$138.00

$100.00

$25.00

$50.00

$20.00

E-PAID

E-PAID

PAID

PAID

PAID

E-PAID

E-PAID

E-PAID

E-PAID

DAVID TOLER

DAVID TOWLER

DAVID TOWLER

DAVID D. TOWLER

DAVID TOWLER

DAVID TOWLER

DAVID TOWLER

DAVID TOWLER

Balance of costs owing to the Fourth Court of Appeals, San Antonio, Texas: 0.00

Court costs in this cause shall be paid as per the Judgment issued by this Court.

I, KEITH E. HOTTLE, CLERK OF THE FOURTH COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF 

TEXAS, do hereby certify that the above and foregoing is a true and correct copy of the cost bill of 

THE COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS, showing the charges and 

payments, in the above numbered and styled cause, as the same appears of record in this office.

IN TESTIMONY WHEREOF, witness my hand and the Seal of the COURT OF APPEALS for 

the Fourth District of Texas, this January 28, 2015.

KEITH E. HOTTLE, CLERK

____________________________

Cynthia A. Martinez

Deputy Clerk, Ext. 3853
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 quarter ended December 31, 2010 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, Melanie R. Wenk, Vice President - Chief Financial 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; 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/MELANIE R. WENK


Melanie R. Wenk


Vice President-Chief Financial Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc.





Date: February 14, 2011
## F IRST 

## D ISTRICT 

## C OURT OF 

## A PPEAL 

## S TATE OF 

## F LORIDA

_____________________________
No. 1D 19

- 1035

_____________________________
L AURA M ICHELLE H OLLOMON , Appellant,

v.

S TATE OF F LORIDA , Appellee.

_____________________________

On appeal from the Circuit Court for Walton County

. Kelvin C. Wells , Judge

. September 20, 2019

P ER C URIAM

. Finding no abuse of discretion in the trial court’s restituti on order, we affirm. See Tolbert v. State , 268 So. 3d 947, 948

- 49 (Fla. 1st DCA 20 1 9) (recognizing that a restitution order is reviewed on appeal for an abuse of discretion and that there must be a causal connection between a defendant’s offenses and the restitution).

A FFIRMED

.
L EWIS , B.L. T HOMAS , and O STERHAUS , JJ., concur

.2 _____________________________ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331

.

_____________________________

Andy Thomas, Public Defender, Lori A. Willner, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee
, for Appellant.

Ashley Moody, Attorney General, and Jennifer J. Moore and Damaris E. Reynolds, Assistant Attorneys General, Tallahassee
, for Appellee.