alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
# 

# 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.  340                                                                   Trade Date:  09/22/03

(To Prospectus Supplement dated August 15, 2002 &

  Prospectus dated August  8,2002)                                                                Issue Date:   09/25/03

The Date of this Pricing SupplementSeptember 22, 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)

14911QQD6   5.1%          09/15/14           100%              1.45%                   Quarterly                    YES          YES               Callable at 100% beginning 09/15/05

                                                                                                                                                                                                                       and quarterly thereafter.  

                       

                          

Principal                                                                                 1st Payment             Day         

Amount                  Proceeds                  Dealer                           Date                   Count

$4,556,000.00         $4,489,938.00         ABN AMRO Inc.        12/15/03                               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, $279.814 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.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                       2,727,552
<SECURITIES>                                 1,450,000
<RECEIVABLES>                               39,233,573
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            46,954,881
<PP&E>                                         620,226
<DEPRECIATION>                                 231,675
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              64,605,830
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       37,563,014
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     34,625
<COMMON>                                        85,093
<OTHER-SE>                                    (34,622)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                64,605,830
<SALES>                                      8,596,154
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             8,596,154
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                9,147,585
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               305,889
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                60,000
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             176,020
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (551,431)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (845,520)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                               (1,050,120)
<EPS-BASIC>                                          0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0



</TABLE>
From: endlessrussells@salida.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 2:27:36 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,

Dean Russell

Salida, CO 81201
From: monroemason@juno.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:44:44 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,

Larry Mason

Mount Juliet, TN 37122
**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 Annual Report of Bergio International, Inc(the “*Company*”), on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2017 as filed with the Securities Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “*Report”*), the undersigned, in the capacities and on the dates indicated below, each hereby certify, pursuant to and solely for the purpose of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of their knowledge:

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 results of operations of the Company.

By:  /s/ Berge Abajian

Berge Abajian

Principal Financial Officer

 

 

April 24, 2018

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Bergio International, Inc. and will be retained by Bergio International, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
#### In the Matter of Myroslawa Prystay, Respondent, v John G. Avildsen, Appellant.

[632 NYS2d 570]

—Order, Family *338Court, New York County (Leah Marks, J.), entered on or about May 19, 1994, which rejected respondent’s objections to the decision and order of the Hearing Examiner dated March 25, 1994, which, *inter alia,*ordered respondent to pay $1,750 monthly for support of the subject out-of-wedlock child, all medical and dental expenses for the child, all expenses for the child’s attendance at private school, all summer expenses including camp to a maximum of $3,500 per summer, all post-secondary education expenses, if appropriate, retroactive support in the amount of $117,250, and petitioner’s attorney’s fees of $19,125, unanimously modified, on the law and the facts, to the extent of granting respondent’s objection to that portion of the Hearing Examiner’s order requiring him to pay for the child’s private boarding school and to set up a fund of $40,000 to pay for the child’s post-secondary schooling, and otherwise affirmed, without costs, and the matter remanded to the Family Court for further proceedings consistent herewith.

Respondent’s arguments that Family Court lacked personal jurisdiction over him because neither party is a New York State resident and respondent was never served with a petition were properly rejected. This action was initiated by respondent in the New York County Supreme Court in which petitioner’s properly pleaded counterclaim for additional child support was properly transferred to the Family Court *(see, Avildsen v Prystay,*204 AD2d 154).

In determining that $1,750 per month constitutes an appropriate award for the support of the out-of-wedlock child, the Hearing Examiner properly applied the formula set forth in the Child Support Standards Act (Family Ct Act § 413) and properly took into consideration the factors set forth in subdivision (1) (f) thereof in awarding support in excess of the amount attributable to the first $80,000 of combined parental income *(see, Matter of Cassano v Cassano,*85 NY2d 649; *Matter of Donna R. v Robert P.,*209 AD2d 623). However, the Hearing Examiner abused his discretion under Family Court Act § 413 (1) (c) (7) in ordering respondent to pay the tuition and costs of the child’s private school education upon the ground that this would enable the child to distance himself from this "never-ending litigation” *(Matter of Cassano v Cassano,*203 AD2d 563, *affd*85 NY2d 649, *supra).*This simply does not constitute the type of evidence that would justify the award and the record is devoid of any pertinent evidence as to the child’s educational aptitude and needs which might support the award. Similarly, it was improper at this juncture for the Hearing Examiner to order respondent to set up a college fund for the child.

*339We have considered respondent’s remaining contentions and find them to be without merit. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Ross, Asch and Nardelli, JJ.
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

                    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the Population Sciences and Epidemiology Integrated Review Group Reproductive, Perinatal and Pediatric Health Study Section, October 12, 2023, 9:00 a.m. to October 13, 2023, 8:00 p.m., Cambria Hotel College Park, 8321 Baltimore Avenue, College Park, MD, 20740 which was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     on September 18, 2023, 2023-20104, 88 FR 63969.                

This meeting is being amended to change the location from Cambria Hotel College Park, 8321 Baltimore Avenue, College Park, MD 20740 to Sheraton Rockville Hotel, 920 King Farm Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20850. The meeting is closed to the public.

Dated: September 21, 2023.

Melanie J. Pantoja,

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2023-20896 Filed 9-25-23; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
Exhibit 32.1



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



I, Mark Bradley, Chief Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer of Players Network, a Nevada corporation (the "Company"), certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



(1) The report on Form 10-Q of Players Network. (the "Registrant") for the quarter ended June 30, 2012 (the "Report") which this statement accompanies fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and



(2) Information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.





Date: August 20, 2012



/s/ Mark Bradley

Name: Mark Bradley

Title: Chief Executive Officer

Principal Executive Officer and Principal

Financial Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 04-6574

MICHAEL R. JOHNSON,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

EDDIE L. PEARSON, Chief Warden; JANE DOE

CLINCKSCALES; RUFUS FLEMING, Regional

Director,

Defendants - Appellants,

and

GIVENS, Records Office Manager; HOUSTON

SHIFLETT, Unit Manager; AVON QUIERO; JANE DOE

STEM,

Defendants.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Norfolk. Raymond A. Jackson, District

Judge. (CA-02-219-2)

Submitted: October 29, 2004 Decided: January 28, 2005

Before NIEMEYER and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior

Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.
- 2 -

Noelle Leigh Shaw-Bell, OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA,

Richmond, Virginia, for Appellants. Michael R. Johnson, Appellee

Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 3 -

PER CURIAM:

Appellants have filed an appeal of the district court’s

order denying their motion for summary judgment based on qualified

immunity in this 42 U.S.C. § 1983 (2000) action. It is well

established that a district court’s denial of a claim of qualified

immunity is an appealable final decision within the meaning of 29

U.S.C. § 1291 (2000), notwithstanding the absence of a final

judgment. Renn v. Garrison, 100 F.3d 344, 349 (4th Cir. 1996)

(quoting Mitchell v. Forsyth, 472 U.S. 511, 530 (1985)). We review

the district court’s denial of a defense of qualified immunity de

novo. Hodge v. Jones, 31 F.3d 157, 163 (4th Cir. 1994). 

We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error.

Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district

court. See Johnson v. Pearson, No. CA-02-219-2 (E.D. Va. Mar. 2,

2004). We deny Johnson’s motions for sanctions and to dismiss the

appeal for failure to prosecute. We express no view as to whether

Johnson will ultimately be able to establish the objective and

subjective elements of his ETS claim. We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
Document headings vary by document type but may contain
                    the following: the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
the number of the CFR title and the number of each part
                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly
                      related to
the agency docket number / agency internal file number
the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in
                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory
                      Actions See the
                    Document Drafting Handbook
                    for more details.
 Federal Communications Commission [FR ID 173776]
 The following item was adopted by the Commission on September 18, 2023 and deleted from the list of items scheduled for consideration at the Thursday, September 21, 2023, Open Meeting. The item was previously listed in the Commission's Sunshine Notice on Thursday, September 14, 2023. 4
MEDIA
TITLE: Updating Obsolete TV Broadcasting Rules (MB Docket No. 22-227)SUMMARY: The Commission will consider a Report and Order which would amend Part 73 of the Commission's Rules to update Television and Class A Television Broadcast Station Rules as well as certain rules applicable to all broadcast stations. This would ensure the FCC's rules better reflect the current broadcast TV operating environment including changes related to major developments like the transition from analog to digital-only operations and the post-incentive auction transition to a smaller television band with fewer channels.
 Federal Communications Commission. Dated: September 19, 2023. Marlene Dortch, Secretary.


[FR Doc. 2023-20842 Filed 9-25-23; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 6712-01-P
<TABLE> <S> <C>













<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER>                                         1

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-2000
<CASH>                                       3,150,532
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                         538,624
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                             7,787,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                 17,712,343
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                     87,845,212
<ALLOWANCE>                                    988,475
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             121,672,083
<DEPOSITS>                                 107,606,356
<SHORT-TERM>                                 2,154,809
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                            810,452
<LONG-TERM>                                     21,022
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       297,248
<OTHER-SE>                                  10,782,196
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>             121,672,083
<INTEREST-LOAN>                              1,810,520
<INTEREST-INVEST>                              258,948
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                24,034
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                             2,093,502
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                           1,058,544
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           1,087,981
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                        1,005,521
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                   39,000
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                885,100
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                358,540
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                     358,540
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   271,302
<EPS-BASIC>                                     1.01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    3.85
<LOANS-NON>                                    291,000
<LOANS-PAST>                                   118,000
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                               895,952
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                   10,280
<RECOVERIES>                                    63,803
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                              988,475
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                           919,981
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                         68,494





</TABLE>