alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
June 20 , 2013



### JUDGMENT 

## The Fourteenth Court of Appeals

STEPHEN N. RINER AND KEVINE L. RINER , Appellant s
NO. 14

- 12

- 00339

- CV V.

THE CITY OF HUNTERS CREEK AND TH E PLANNING & ZONING COMMISSION OF THE CI TY OF HUNTERS CREEK, SPECIFICALLY, BILL DALTON, NANCY PARKS, TOD DIMITRY, ALLISON GOWER AND DAVID CHILDERS , Appellee s

________________________________ This cause, an appeal from the judgment sign ed March 15, 2012 in favor of appellee s , t he City of Hunters Creek and t he Planning & Zoning Commission of
t he City of Hunters Creek, specifically, Bill Dalton, Nancy Parks, Tod Dimitry
, Allison Gower and David Childers, was heard on the transcript of the record. We have inspected the record and find no error in the judgment. We order the judgment of the court below AFFIRMED

. We order appellant s Stephen N. Riner and Kevine L. Riner jo intly and severally to pay all costs incurred in this appeal.

We further order this decision certified below for observance.
From: sanet-allen@usa.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:13:18 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,

Susanna Allen

San Rafael, CA 94901
Exhibit 12.1


























RATIOS OF EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES





Our historical ratios of earnings to fixed charges and preferred stock dividends for the periods indicated are set forth in the table below. As of March 31, 2011, we had 25,000 shares of preferred stock outstanding, all of which were issued on January 9, 2009. No shares of our Series A Preferred Stock, or any other class of preferred stock, were outstanding prior to January 9, 2009, and we did not pay preferred stock dividends during these prior periods. Consequently, the ratios of earnings to fixed charges and preferred dividends are the same as theratios of earnings to fixed charges for the periods prior to January 9, 2009. The following table sets forth our consolidated ratios of earnings to fixed charges for the periods presented:





For the yearsIn thousands of dollars
20111
2010
2009
2008
2007
2006Ratios of earnings to fixed chargesIncluding interest on deposits2
1.98
1.86
1.85
1.58
1.46
1.51Excluding interest on deposits3
3.47
2.91
2.98
2.81
2.78
3.15a  Net income
12,747
12,116
13,042
14,034
13,101
12,295b  Income taxes
4,262
4,078
4,547
5,621
5,265
4,862c  Interest expense on deposits
10,394
10,297
11,872
23,000
29,745
25,804d  Interest expense on borrowings
4,810
6,374
7,044
10,669
10,140
7,785e  Rent expenses
152
198
225
203
197
188f  Dividends on preferred stock
1,923
1,923
1,635
-
-
-





1Information for 2011 is based on results for the three months ended March 31, 2011 that have been annualized to provide a parallel comparison to previous years. Actual results for 2011 may vary based upon the Company’s performance for the remainder of the year.


2(a+b+c+d+e+f)/(c+d+e+f)


3(a+b+d+e+f)/(d+e+f)
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE  CONTAINS SUMMARY  FINANCIAL  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED FROM WILLCOX &
GIBBS,  INC. FORM 10-Q FOR THE PERIOD ENDED  SEPTEMBER 30, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED
IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                                                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                               9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                                     DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                          SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                                      1,328
<SECURITIES>                                                    0
<RECEIVABLES>                                              34,702
<ALLOWANCES>                                                4,890
<INVENTORY>                                                45,737
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                           86,884
<PP&E>                                                      5,237
<DEPRECIATION>                                              1,001
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                            134,527
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                      46,092
<BONDS>                                                    84,578
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                           0
<PREFERRED>                                                     0
<COMMON>                                                   11,874
<OTHER-SE>                                               (10,203)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                              134,527
<SALES>                                                   132,937
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                          132,937
<CGS>                                                      90,869
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                              90,869
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                                0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                              561
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                          9,445
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                           (6,794)
<INCOME-TAX>                                                 (11)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                       (6,783)
<DISCONTINUED>                                                  0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                                 0
<CHANGES>                                                       0
<NET-INCOME>                                              (6,783)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                              (6.81)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                              (6.81)
        

</TABLE>
No. 325.

#### John *v.*Tribune Company.

*Sidney Z. Karasik*for petitioner.

*Howard Ellis, Don H. Reuben*and *John E. Angle*for respondent.

Supreme Court of Illinois. Certiorari denied.
From: wmortlock.djc@comcast.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:39:08 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,

Walt Mortlock

Atlanta, GA 30311
From: kchapman@elkhartisd.org

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 2:01:48 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,

Kay Chapman

Elkhart, TX 75839
From: markloftin@juno.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:05:12 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,

Mark Loftin

Dyersburg, TN 38024
From: kodell@vvm.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:47:10 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,

Nancy Odell

Salado, TX 76571
From: tan.nguyen@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:05:05 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,

Tan Nguyen

Elk Grove, CA 95757
From: michaelaprile@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:39:43 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,

Michael Aprile

Elizabethton, TN 37643
Record of Ex Parte Contacts

Docket No. FAA
- 2011
- 0733 Directorate Identifier: 2010
- NE - 36
- AD With whom outside the FAA has this AD action been discussed (i.e., Design Approval Holder, manufacturer, ATA, NBAA, RAA, AOPA, ALPA, G AMA, etc)? (You might need to submit a separate record to the Rules Docket. The AD Manual defines “ Ex Parte Contacts .”) ORGANIZATION PERSON CONTACTED DATE RESPONSE ATA Jo 

### e White (email) 11/10/2010 No response.

Other/Additional Information:
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

In connection with the Annual Report of Destiny Minerals Inc.(the "Company") on Form 10-K for the year ended March 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date here of (the "report"), I, Emad Petro, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer 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, 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 this Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

Dated this 26thday of June, 2009.



| | EMAD PETRO                                         
| | ---------------------------------------------------
| | Emad Petro,                                        
| | Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer















A signed original of these written statements required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging, or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement required by Section 906, has been provided to Aden Solutions Inc. and will be retained by Aden Solutions Inc.  and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---