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

<PAGE>
 
<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1998
<CASH>                                          11,740
<SECURITIES>                                     7,099
<RECEIVABLES>                                   16,396
<ALLOWANCES>                                     (751)
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                37,111
<PP&E>                                          11,970
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  57,595
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           10,198
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      46,934
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    57,595
<SALES>                                         20,737
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                20,737
<CGS>                                            9,033
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   19,268
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 (366)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  1,835
<INCOME-TAX>                                       790
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,045
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,045
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                      .10
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .09
        

</TABLE>
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,

 Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Elizabeth A. Weaver

Maura D. Corrigan

Robert P. Young, Jr.

Stephen J. Markman

Diane M. Hathaway, Justices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court. 

 _________________________________________ 

 Clerk

August 6, 2009 

l0720 

Order 

 

August 6, 2009 

137157 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v SC: 137157 

 COA: 284617 

Wayne CC: 06-008315-FC 

BRION McCONNELL, 

 Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the July 9, 2008 order of 

the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that 

the question presented should be reviewed by this Court.
-84 -82 -80 -78 -76 -74 -72

 36

 38

 40

 42

★

▲

▲

▲

▲

★ ▲ ▲ ▲ ▲

 500

 1000

 1500

 100

18 12 06 00

07/15

NOAA HYSPLIT MODEL

 Backward trajectory ending at 2300 UTC 15 Jul 07

 EDAS Meteorological Data

Source

★ at 39.56 N 76.20 W Meters AGL
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 27 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 27

 To institute a Pay-As-You-Go rule in the House of Representatives for 
                          the 110th Congress.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                            January 4, 2007

 Mr. Spratt submitted the following resolution; which was referred to 
the Committee on Rules, and in addition to the Committee on the Budget, 
for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case 
for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of 
                        the committee concerned

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 To institute a Pay-As-You-Go rule in the House of Representatives for 
                          the 110th Congress.

    Resolved,  That it shall not be in order to consider any bill, 
joint resolution, amendment, or conference report if the provisions of 
such measure affecting direct spending and revenues have the net effect 
of increasing the deficit or reducing the surplus for either the period 
comprising the current fiscal year and the five fiscal years beginning 
with the fiscal year that ends in the following calendar year or the 
period comprising the current fiscal year and the ten fiscal years 
beginning with the fiscal year that ends in the following calendar 
year. The effect of such measure on the deficit or surplus shall be 
determined on the basis of estimates made by the Committee on the 
Budget relative to--
            (1) the most recent baseline estimates supplied by the 
        Congressional Budget Office consistent with section 257 of the 
        Balanced Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985 used 
        in considering a concurrent resolution on the budget; or
            (2) after the beginning of a new calendar year and before 
        consideration of a concurrent resolution on the budget, the 
        most recent baseline estimates supplied by the Congressional 
        Budget Office consistent with section 257 of the Balanced 
        Budget and Emergency Deficit Control Act of 1985.
                                 <all>
```
From: dandl.h@att.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:08:28 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,

Douglas Hemphill

Saint Louis, MO 63128
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
This Schedule contains summary financial summary financial information extracted
from Form 10-Q for the fiscal quarter ended January 25, 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-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JAN-25-1998
<CASH>                                             524
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   32,795
<ALLOWANCES>                                     1,070
<INVENTORY>                                     39,434
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                82,822
<PP&E>                                          81,250
<DEPRECIATION>                                  19,906
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 180,837
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           34,964
<BONDS>                                        128,172
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,110
<OTHER-SE>                                       6,800
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   180,837
<SALES>                                        136,674
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               136,674
<CGS>                                          108,077
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  108,077
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   108
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               6,003
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,780
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,168
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              1,612
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,612
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
        


</TABLE>
No. 68407.

protest 63/4019.

#### Allied Display Materials, Inc. *v.*United States,

Protest abandoned February 10, 1964.

(Not published.) Plaintiff’s application for rehearing granted.
From: elizabethdmeister@msn.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:33:41 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,

Elizabeth Meister

Tampa, FL 33626
# 

# 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.  354                                                                   Trade Date:  10/27/03

(To Prospectus Supplement dated August 15, 2002 &

  Prospectus dated August  8,2002)                                                                Issue Date:   10/30/03

The Date of this Pricing SupplementOctober 27, 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)

14911QQT1   5.00%         10/15/12           100%              1.05%                  Quarterly                     YES            YES             Callable at 100% beginning 10/15/05

                                                                                                                                                                                                                       and quarterly thereafter.  

                       

                          

Principal                                                                                 1st Payment             Day         

Amount                  Proceeds                  Dealer                           Date                   Count

$9,211,000.00         $9,114,284.50         ABN AMRO Inc.        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, $315.991 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: emccauley@cinci.rr.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:11:48 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,

Edward McCauley

Hamilton, OH 45011
United States Department of Agriculture

MILK

MILK

MILK

Wake up and fuel up to help your day take off!

U.S. Department of Agriculture • Food and Nutrition Service • March 2014

FNS-467-A • USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.

http://teamnutrition.usda.gov
From: lee_free@hotmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:16:52 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 Freedman

Torrington, CT 06790
<PAGE>                             



ADDENDUM To Executive Employment Agreement Between Residential Financial
         Services, Inc. and Larry S. Sazant on November 1997

This Addendum to the Executive Employment Agreement is entered into by and
between Residential Financial Services, Inc., and Larry S. Sazant, an
individual ("Mr. Sazant") on this 1st day of July 1998.

Whereas the parties hereto previously executed an Executive employment
Agreement effective November 14, 1997; and

Whereas the parties desire to amend the said agreement;

Now, Therefore in consideration of the mutual promises contained herein, the
Corporation and Mr. Sazant agree as follows:

1. That in addition to the compensation set forth in paragraph 4 that Mr.
Sazant shall receive as additional compensation, 10% of the gross commissions
earned by the Corporation for commercial loans by Mr. Sazant.

(A) That in respect to other commissions generated by the Commercial Loan
division of the Corporation, it is agreed that Mr. Sazant shall receive a
commission equal to the difference between any commission paid to any loan
officer or loan consultant and the sum of 50% of the total commission paid by
the Corporation.

E.g. Loan of $100,000 and commission paid to loan officer is $4000.00 being 40%
of the commission of 10% on the overall transaction; Mr. Sazant is entitled to
$1000.00 Total commission not to exceed 50% in relation to commission of Mr.
Sazant.

Should the commission paid to the loan officer be 50% or more then no
commission is to be earned by Mr. Sazant

2. That said compensation shall be paid by the Corporation to Mr. Sazant within
10 days of payment to the corporation of its compensation.

All of the terms and conditions of the Employment Agreement except as modified
herein shall remain in full force and effect.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this addendum as of the date
first above written.

BY: Larry S. Sazant              Residential Financial Services, Inc.,

/s/ Larry S. Sazant              By: /s/ Bruce Lazarus
------------------------------      ----------------------------------
                                     Its Pres
                                        ------------------------------
From: Denise Jantes

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Religious Employer

Date: Saturday, August 13, 2011 1:41:38 AM

To whom this may concern,

The current definition of religious employer does not provide true conscience protection for those

committed to preserving life. Health care plans should not be forced to violate the moral and religious

convictions of providers or employees in order to participate in the health care system. Requiring such

an unacceptable demand threatens both universal access to health care and religious freedom of

conscience.

Sincerely,

Irma Jantes

Sent from my iPhone
H. Res. 223

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

May 14, 2007.

Whereas the death of a loved one is a devastating experience, 

and the murder of a loved one is exceptionally difficult; 

Whereas the friends and families of murder victims cope with 

grief through a variety of support services, including 

counseling, crisis intervention, professional referrals, and 

assistance in dealing with the criminal justice system; 

and 

Whereas the designation of a National Day of Remembrance 

For Murder Victims on September 25th of each year provides an opportunity for the people of the United States 

to honor the memories of murder victims and to recognize the impact on surviving family members: Now, therefore, be it 

Resolved, That the House of Representatives—

(1) supports the goals and ideals of a National Day 

of Remembrance for Murder Victims; and 
2

•HRES 223 EH 

(2) recognizes the significant benefits of the organizations that provide services to the loved ones of murder 

victims. 

Attest:

Clerk.