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

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF PAMECO CORPORATION FOR THE QUARTER ENDED MAY 31, 2000,
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          FEB-28-2001
<PERIOD-START>                             MAR-01-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAY-31-2000
<CASH>                                             116
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   75,879
<ALLOWANCES>                                     6,366
<INVENTORY>                                    119,662
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               192,531
<PP&E>                                          28,493
<DEPRECIATION>                                 (14,271)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 253,677
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           99,843
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     25,027
<COMMON>                                            92
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   253,677
<SALES>                                        125,414
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               125,414
<CGS>                                           96,683
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  129,383
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   316
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,236
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 (8,224)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             (8,224)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    (8,224)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (0.89)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.39)


</TABLE>
From: Lloyd@LMGarden.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:31:36 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,

Lloyd Long

Cicero, IN 46034
From: mtnladee@verizon.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:13:42 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,

Marilea Reese

Victorville, CA 92392
No. 68371.

protests 63/10652, etc. (Los Angeles).

#### Burn-Strauss, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Lord, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of cocktail Hibachis similar in all material respects to the Mini Bachis the subject of Abstract 67238, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
From: s_rhoe@hotmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:56:44 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,

stephanie rhoe

Raleigh, NC 27610
No. 65113.

#### Beer Stern Import Corp. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 258659-K, etc. (New York).

*325Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the issue is the same in all material respects as that the subject of *United States*v. *Steinberg Bros.*(47 C.C.P.A. 47, C.A.D. 727), and the record showing that the merchandise consists of nylon ribbons similar in use to fabrics with fast edges, wholly or in chief value of silk, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
From: nmi2000@gte.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:57:02 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,

Patrick Kelly

Rialto, CA 92377
No. 466, Misc.

#### Myles *v.*California.

Supreme Court of California. Certiorari denied.
_______________________________________ __ Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan

July 20, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice
133462 Michael F. Cavanagh Elizabeth A. Weaver Marilyn Kelly Maura D. Corrigan Robert P. Young, Jr.

_____________ _______________ ____________ Stephen J. Markman, Justices IN RE EGBERT R. SMITH TRUST.

_____________ _______________ ____________
GLEN PHILLIPS and DALE PHILLIPS, Petitioners-Appellees,

v SC: 133462 COA: 269549 Sanilac PC: 81-021856-TT BETTY HOMER, Successor Trustee, Respondent-Appellant.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, th e application for leave to a ppeal the February 15, 2007 judgment of the Court of Appeals is consid ered, and it is GRANTED. The parties shall include among the issues to be briefed wheth er a right of first refusal is revocable once the holder of the righ t receives notice of a third party’ s offer and whether the petitioners are entitled to summary disposition and specific performance of the right of first refusal, as the Court of Appeals held.

The Real Property Section of the State Bar of Michigan is invited to file a brief amicus curiae. Other persons or groups interested in the determination of the issues presented in this case may move the Court for permission to file briefs amicus curiae.

s0717 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.

July 20, 2007

Clerk
IV 

House Calendar No. 270 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 1488 

[Report No. 110–875] 

Providing for consideration of the Senate amendment to the bill (H.R. 2638) 

making appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security for 

the fiscal year ending September 30, 2008, and for other purposes. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 24 (legislative day, SEPTEMBER 23), 2008 

Mr. MCGOVERN, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed 

RESOLUTION 

Providing for consideration of the Senate amendment to the 

bill (H.R. 2638) making appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security for the fiscal year ending 

September 30, 2008, and for other purposes. 

1 Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it 

2 shall be in order to take from the Speaker’s table the bill 

3 (H.R. 2638) making appropriations for the Department 

4 of Homeland Security for the fiscal year ending September 

5 30, 2008, and for other purposes, with the Senate amend6 ment thereto, and to consider in the House, without interVerDate Aug 31 2005 04:15 Sep 24, 2008 Jkt 069200 PO 00000 Frm 00001 Fmt 6652 Sfmt 6201 E:\BILLS\HR1488.RH HR1488

jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
2 

•HRES 1488 RH 

1 vention of any point of order except those arising under 

2 clause 10 of rule XXI, a motion offered by the chairman 

3 of the Committee on Appropriations or his designee that 

4 the House concur in the Senate amendment with the 

5 amendment printed in the report of the Committee on 

6 Rules accompanying this resolution. The Senate amend7 ment and the motion shall be considered as read. The mo8 tion shall be debatable for one hour equally divided and 

9 controlled by the chairman and ranking minority member 

10 of the Committee on Appropriations. The previous ques11 tion shall be considered as ordered on the motion to final 

12 adoption without intervening motion. 

13 SEC. 2. During consideration of the motion to concur 

14 pursuant to this resolution, notwithstanding the operation 

15 of the previous question, the Chair may postpone further 

16 consideration of such motion to such time as may be des17 ignated by the Speaker. 

18 SEC. 3. The chairman of the Committee on Appro19 priations shall insert in the daily issue of the Congres20 sional Record dated September 24, 2008, such material 

21 as he may deem explanatory of the motion. 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS

jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
House Calendar No. 270 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 1488 

[Report No. 110–875] 

RESOLUTION 

Providing for consideration of the Senate amendand for other purposes. for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2008, tions for the Department of Homeland Security ment to the bill (H.R. 2638) making appropriaSEPTEMBER 24 (legislative day, SEPTEMBER 23), 2008 

Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 

printed 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE GFSI,
INC. FORM 10-Q AS OF JANUARY 2, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUL-03-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JUN-28-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-02-1998
<CASH>                                             607
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   31,869
<ALLOWANCES>                                       636
<INVENTORY>                                     33,861
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                67,214
<PP&E>                                          35,906
<DEPRECIATION>                                  15,238
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  96,967
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           25,336
<BONDS>                                        183,000
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   (113,255)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    96,967
<SALES>                                        116,903
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               116,903
<CGS>                                           66,287
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   92,473
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    29
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               9,974
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 14,427
<INCOME-TAX>                                     5,918
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              8,509
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     8,509
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        

</TABLE>
From: MITZISCHULTZ2000@YAHOO.COM

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:32:41 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,

MITZI JONES

Spring, TX 77379
catm_Ex10_1


		
			Exhibit 10.1
		

		
			
		

		
			Cardtronics, Inc. 
		

		
			2016 Annual Bonus Pool Allocation Plan
		

		
			 
		

		
			The stockholders of Cardtronics, Inc. (the “Company”) have approved the Second Amended and Restated 2007 Stock Incentive Plan (the “Plan”).  The principal objectives of the Plan were to provide a means through which the Company can: (i) attract able persons to serve as employees or directors of the Company; and (ii) provide such individuals with incentive and reward opportunities designed to enhance the long term profitable growth of the Company and its Affiliates.  In furtherance of those objectives, the Compensation Committee (the “Committee”) has adopted by resolution the following 2016 Annual Bonus Pool Allocation Plan (this “Pool Plan”) consistent with the Plan to provide funding of and limits to awards granted to certain participants of the 2016 Annual Executive Cash Incentive Plan (the “AECIP”). This Pool Plan is not intended to provide additional compensation to participants but simply to ensure incentives paid to certain participants are qualified performance-based compensation under Code Section 162(m).
		

		
			All capitalized terms used herein that are not otherwise defined shall have the meanings ascribed to such terms in the Plan.    Members of the Company’s executive leadership team that are designated in Exhibit “A” of this Pool Plan are the participants. 
		

		
			I.Performance Metrics 
		

		
			This Pool Plan rewards the achievement of a key performance metric that is critical to the Company’s continued success as follows:
		

		
			A.   Adjusted EBITA:  Defined as Adjusted EBITDA less depreciation expenses as adjusted for non-controlling interests, both of which are reported in the Company’s 10-K for the 2016 fiscal year as adjusted in accordance with the AECIP. 
		

		
			 
		

		
			II.Calculation of Earned Incentives
		

		
			A.   The calculation of incentive funding under this Pool Plan shall not infer or otherwise guarantee any participant’s right to an incentive award for 2016.  Rather, this Pool Plan provides only the funding for the participants awards which will be determined by the results of the AECIP per the terms and conditions of the AECIP.
		

		
			III.Effective Date
		

		
			This Pool Plan is effective as of January 1, 2016. Pool Plan funding will be based on audited financial results for the Company’s fiscal year ended December 31, 2016.
From: Kay Weeks

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: All women need health care, including contraceptive guidance!

Date: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 7:10:24 PM

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 health care.

Kay Weeks

3582 Church Road

Ellicott City, MD 21043