alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1.
    
    I have reviewed this report on Form 10-K and all reports on Form 10-D required
to be filed in respect of the period covered by this report on Form 10-K of Principal
Life Income Fundings Trust 2008-036 (the Exchange Act periodic reports);2.
    
    Based on my knowledge, the Exchange Act periodic reports, taken as whole, do
not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact
necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such
statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;3.
    
    Based on my knowledge, all of the distribution, servicing and other information
required to be provided under Form 10-D for the period covered by this report is
included in the Exchange Act periodic reports;4.
    
    Based on my knowledge and the servicer compliance statement(s) required in this
report under Item 1123 of Regulation AB, and except as disclosed in the Exchange Act
periodic reports, the servicer has fulfilled its obligations under the servicing
agreement(s) in all material respects; and5.
    
    All of the reports on assessment of compliance with servicing criteria for
asset-backed securities and their related attestation reports on assessment of
compliance with servicing criteria for asset-backed securities required to be included
in this report in accordance with Item 1122 of Regulation AB and Exchange Act Rules
13a-18 and 15d-18 have been included as an exhibit to this report, except as otherwise
disclosed in this report. Any material instances of noncompliance described in such
reports have been disclosed in this report on Form 10-K.
   /s/ Dwight N. SoethoutDwight N. SoethoutVice President  Principal Life Insurance Company
No. P67/66.

#### Soderhamn Machine Mfg. Co. *v.*United States,

protests 65/8394-17525 and 65/8395-17526 (New Orleans).

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of Cambio de-barkers and parts thereof similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Soderhamn Machine Mfg. Co.*v. *United States*(54 Cust. Ct. 269, Abstract 69205), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Final Listing of Questionnaire Files for Steam Electric Rulemaking Record

Plant ID 02422

Removed 

from Public 

(Non-CBI) 

Docket1

Copyright 

Flag2

File Name Description

x 02422\02422_Checklist.XLS EPA Technical Review Checklist Workbook

02422\02422_Completeness_Checklist.xls EPA Completeness Review Checklist

02422\02422_HardcopyLog.doc EPA log of hardcopy documents submitted

x 02422\02422_Part A.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 02422\02422_Part E.xls Plant submitted survey file

x 02422\02422_Part H.xls Plant submitted survey file

02422\Certification Statement Plant ID 02422.pdf Plant certification statement

x 02422\Supplemental Documents\02422_Part A A5-2 Map-1.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

02422\Supplemental Documents\02422_Part A A5-2 Map-2.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

02422\Supplemental Documents\02422_Part A A5-2 Map-3.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

02422\Supplemental Documents\02422_Part A A5-2 Map-4.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

02422\Supplemental Documents\02422_Part A A5-2 Map-5.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 02422\Supplemental Documents\02422_Part A A5-3 WB-1.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 02422\Supplemental Documents\02422_Part A A5-3 WB-2.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

x 02422\Supplemental Documents\02422_Part A A5-3 WB-3.pdf Plant submitted supplemental files to the survey

2

 Copyright documents are available from the docket. 

1

 Final reviewed survey responses are located in the Steam Electric Technical Questionnaire Database .
**Exhibit 32.1**

**CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

**PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO**

**SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with this Annual Report (the “Report”) of Forbes Energy Services Ltd. filed on Form 10-K (the“Company”) for the year ended December 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, John E. Crisp, Chief Executive Officer and President of the Company, certify,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to my knowledge, 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 results of operations of the Company. 

 

Date:March 29, 2011 

 
Ex. 32.1– Page 1
Order entered July 15, 2013

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-13-00401-CV

JOANN ADELE BROOKS, Appellant

V.

PAUL HEDLEY BATCHELOR, Appellee

On Appeal from the Probate Court No. 2

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. PR10-1373-2

ORDER

The Court GRANTS appellee’s request to extend time to file his brief and ORDERS that 

appellee’s brief be filed within thirty days of the date of this order.

/s/ ELIZABETH LANG-MIERS 

JUSTICE
From: cdavis@cbpp.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:08:31 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,

Colleen Davis

Troy, NY 12180
From: pcollins@concordassociates.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:30:44 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. Just as some people and organizations have the freedom to choose to have

abortions or provide free contraceptives and sterilization, we should have the same choice NOT to

provide these things if it affects our conscience.

Thank you for making a stand with all Americans for freedom and the right to make decisions based on

conscience. It is a freedom and right we should never let go.

Sincerely,

Patricia Collins

Morgantown, IN 46160
From: SteSue@aol.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:51:54 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Steve & Sue Cummings

Livermore, CO 80536
```

[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 182 (Thursday, September 21, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 65210]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-20428]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

[Release No. 34-98410; File No. SR-MIAX-2023-22]

Self-Regulatory Organizations; Miami International Securities 
Exchange, LLC; Notice of Withdrawal of a Proposed Rule Change To Amend 
Exchange Rule 404, Series of Option Contracts Open for Trading, To 
Implement a Low Priced Stock Strike Price Interval Program

September 15, 2023.
    On June 5, 2023, Miami International Securities Exchange, LLC 
(``MIAX'' or ``Exchange'') filed with the Securities and Exchange 
Commission (``Commission''), pursuant to section 19(b)(1) of the 
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (``Act'') \1\ and Rule 19b-4 
thereunder,\2\ a proposed rule change to amend Exchange Rule 404, 
Series of Option Contracts Open for Trading. Specifically, the Exchange 
proposed to adopt Interpretations and Policies .12 to Rule 404 to 
implement a new strike interval program for stocks that are priced less 
than $2.50 and have open interest equal to or greater than 1,000 
contracts. The proposed rule change was published for comment in the 
Federal Register on June 22, 2023.\3\ On August 4, 2023, pursuant to 
section 19(b)(2) of the Act,\4\ the Commission designated a longer 
period within which to approve the proposed rule change, disapprove the 
proposed rule change, or institute proceedings to determine whether to 
disapprove the proposed rule change.\5\ On September 14, 2023, the 
Exchange withdrew the proposed rule change (MIAX-2023-22).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

    \1\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(1).
    \2\ 17 CFR 240.19b-4.
    \3\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 97733 (June 15, 
2023), 88 FR 40887. Comments on the proposed rule change are 
available at: https://www.sec.gov/comments/sr-miax-2023-22/srmiax202322.htm.
    \4\ 15 U.S.C. 78s(b)(2).
    \5\ See Securities Exchange Act Release No. 98058, 88 FR 54361 
(August 10, 2023). The Commission designated September 20, 2023 as 
the date by which the Commission shall approve or disapprove, or 
institute proceedings to determine whether to disapprove, the 
proposed rule change.
    \6\ 17 CFR 200.30-3(a)(12).

    For the Commission, by the Division of Trading and Markets, 
pursuant to delegated authority.\6\
J. Matthew DeLesDernier,
Deputy Secretary.
[FR Doc. 2023-20428 Filed 9-20-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 8011-01-P
```
From: liss_girl58@hotmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:40:53 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Elissa Pickar

Backus, MN 56435
From: charis535@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:12:16 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,

Louise Mundell

Peoria, AZ 85383
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 1414 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  2d Session
H. RES. 1414

    Congratulating the United States Olympians of the 2008 Beijing 
                               Olympics.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                           September 8, 2008

 Mr. Poe submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 
              Committee on Oversight and Government Reform

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
    Congratulating the United States Olympians of the 2008 Beijing 
                               Olympics.

Whereas the United States participants of the 2008 Beijing Olympics honored the 
        Nation through their dedication and patriotism;
Whereas the United States Olympians achieved great success for the Nation and 
        individually;
Whereas Sudanese refugee Lopez Lomong was chosen by his fellow United States 
        Olympians to be the United States Flag Bearer at the opening ceremony;
Whereas the United States had the most athletes participating in the Olympics;
Whereas Michael Phelps set a new Olympic record winning 8 gold medals;
Whereas the United States women's soccer team won its third consecutive gold 
        medal;
Whereas the United States women's basketball team won its fourth consecutive 
        gold medal;
Whereas the United States men's basketball team won the gold medal;
Whereas the United States men's indoor volleyball team won the gold medal;
Whereas Dara Torres won 3 silver medals and set a world record as the oldest 
        Olympian at the age of 41;
Whereas Kerri Walsh and Misty May-Treanor won the gold medal in women's beach 
        volleyball;
Whereas Todd Rogers and Phil Dalhausser won the gold medal in men's beach 
        volleyball;
Whereas the United States won 110 Olympic Medals; and
Whereas the United States won the most Olympic Medals at the Beijing Olympics: 
        Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved, That the House of Representatives honors the heroic 
efforts of all the United States Olympians and their accomplishments at 
the 2008 Beijing Olympics.
                                 <all>
```
Dismissed and Opinion Filed November 12, 2014 

In The 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-14-00518-CR 

No. 05-14-00519-CR 

No. 05-14-00520-CR 

MICHAEL WAYNE CAMPBELL JR, Appellant 

V. 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee 

On Appeal from the 204th Judicial District Court 

Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause Nos. F12-31211-Q, F12-31218-Q, F12-31219-Q 

MEMORANDUM OPINION 

Before Chief Justice Wright and Justices Myers and Brown 

Appellant has filed a motion to dismiss the appeals. Appellant’s counsel has approved 

the motion. The Court GRANTS the motion and ORDERS that the appeals be DISMISSED

and this decision be certified below for observance. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.2(a). 

PER CURIAM 

Do Not Publish 

TEX. R. APP. P. 47 

140518F.U05 
S 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

JUDGMENT 

MICHAEL WAYNE CAMPBELL JR, 

Appellant 

No. 05-14-00518-CR V. 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee 

 On Appeal from the 204th Judicial District 

Court, Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. F12-31211-Q. 

Opinion delivered per curiam before Chief 

Justice Wright and Justices Myers and 

Brown. 

 Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS the appeal. 

Judgment entered November 12, 2014 
S 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

JUDGMENT 

MICHAEL WAYNE CAMPBELL JR, 

Appellant 

No. 05-14-00519-CR V. 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee 

 On Appeal from the 204th Judicial District 

Court, Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. F12-31218-Q. 

Opinion delivered per curiam before Chief 

Justice Wright and Justices Myers and 

Brown. 

 Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS the appeal. 

Judgment entered November 12, 2014 
S 

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

JUDGMENT 

MICHAEL WAYNE CAMPBELL JR, 

Appellant 

No. 05-14-00520-CR V. 

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee 

 On Appeal from the 204th Judicial District 

Court, Dallas County, Texas 

Trial Court Cause No. F12-31219-Q. 

Opinion delivered per curiam before Chief 

Justice Wright and Justices Myers and 

Brown. 

 Based on the Court’s opinion of this date, we DISMISS the appeal. 

Judgment entered November 12, 2014