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

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1998
<CASH>                                           7,295
<SECURITIES>                                     2,508
<RECEIVABLES>                                   37,643
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                56,074
<PP&E>                                           9,315
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  78,287
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           70,725
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          4
<COMMON>                                           377
<OTHER-SE>                                    (70,309)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    78,287
<SALES>                                        166,569
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               166,569
<CGS>                                          172,696
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  172,696
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (4,581)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             (4,954)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (10,708)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (10,708)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (10,708)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.28)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.28)
        

</TABLE>
Before the Second Division,

July 12, 1957

No. 61038.

protest 310078-K (New York).

#### Electrolux Corp. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of parts of electric floor polishers similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 59814, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
From: tom_elaine@frontier.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 6:10:03 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,

Carol Gillespie

Bothell, WA 98011
Exhibit 34.1
 Report of Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm
 
  




---



##### 




    
    With respect to servicing criterion 1122(d)(2)(i), certain payments on pool assets were not
deposited into the appropriate custodial bank accounts and related bank clearing accounts
within two business days of receipt.
 
    
    With respect to servicing criterion 1122(d)(2)(vii)(B), certain reconciliations were not
prepared within 30 calendar days of the bank statement cut-off date.
 
    
    With respect to servicing criterion 1122(d)(3)(i)(A), in certain instances investor reports
were not delivered to other transaction parties in accordance with the timeframes set forth in
the transaction agreements.
<PAGE>

                                                                    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 Quarterly Report of Remington Oil and Gas
Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2003, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, James A. Watt, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. sec.1350, as adopted pursuant to sec.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 the Report fairly presents, in all
     material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
     Company.

     This certification is made solely for the purpose of U.S.C. Section 1350,
and not for any other purpose.

                                                   /s/ JAMES A. WATT
                                          --------------------------------------
                                                      James A. Watt
                                          President and Chief Executive Officer

August 8, 2003

     A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has
been provided to Remington Oil and Gas Corporation and will be retained by
Remington Oil and Gas Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange
Commission or its staff upon request.
No. 60990.

protest 306878-K/8795 (Chicago).

#### W. C. Sullivan & Co. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

The protest was dismissed.
From: pjprewitt@frontiernet.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 6:50:36 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,

John Prewitt

Spring Creek, NV 89815
From: jlongo4@nycap.rr.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:43:14 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

As an epmloyer, 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.

As an employer, we will restrict how many people we will be hiring as a result of ObamaCare's imposing

mandates.

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,

Joseph Longo

Schenectady, NY 12304
No. 68418.

protest 63/2379 (New York).

#### Alexanders Dept. Stores, Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Richardson, J.

It was stipulated that the principles herein are similar in all material respects to those involved in *United States*v. *Browne Vintners Co., Inc.*(34 CCPA 112, C.A.D. 351), and that the ease reported by the inspector as manifested, not found, was not in fact received by the importer. In accordance with stipulation of counsel and following the decision cited, it was held that duty is not assessable upon the ease of merchandise, which was reported by the inspector as manifested, not found. The protest was sustained to this extent.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 32.1

                CERTIFICATION Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350

The undersigned officer of ALLIED HEALTHCARE PRODUCTS, INC. (the "Company"),
hereby certifies, to such officer's knowledge, that the Company's Quarterly
Report on Form 10-Q for the Company's fiscal quarter ended December 31, 2005
(the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of the Company.

                                   /s/ Earl R. Refsland
                                   ---------------------
                                          Earl R. Refsland
                                          President & Chief Executive Officer
February 6, 2006
EXHIBIT 32.1

                            CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                                 18 U.S.C. 1350,
                             AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO
                  SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

In  connection  with the  Annual  Report  of  KRYPTIC  ENTERTAINMENT  INC.  (the
"Company")  on Form 10-K for the period ended March 31, 2009,  as filed with the
Securities and Exchange  Commission on the date hereof (the  "Report"),  I, John
Lagourgue,  Chief  Executive  Officer of the  Company,  certify,  pursuant to 18
U.S.C.  1350, as adopted  pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of
2002, that:

The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

The  information  contained  in the  Report  fairly  presents,  in all  material
respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


                                         /s/ John Lagourgue
                                         ---------------------------------------
Date: June 1, 2009                       John Lagourgue
                                         President, CEO and Director
                                         (Principal Executive Officer)
From: maplecampus@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:32:53 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,

Scott Goltl

Wichita, KS 67235
Exhibit 99.4




Certification of Chief Financial Officer
 Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350
 and Rule 13a-14(b) or Rule 15d-14(b)
 
 
 
 My name is Rizalyn Cabrillas and I am the Chief Financial Officer and Secretary Treasurer of Eaglecrest Resources, Inc. (the “Company”).
 
 I hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 as adopted by Section 906 of the Sarbanes–Oxley Act of 2002 that to the best of my knowledge and belief:
 
 (1)
the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended January 31, 2010, filed with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission on xxxxxxxxx (“Report”), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 as amended; and
 
 (2)
the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of the operations of Eaglecrest Resources, Inc. as of, and for, the periods presented in the Report.
  RIZALYN CABRILLAS
 Rizalyn Cabrillas
 Chief Financial Officer and
 Secretary Treasurer
 Eaglecrest Resources, Inc.
 
 Date:  April 26, 2010
UN PUBLISHED
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 22
- 6738

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee ,

v. MARK JAY ALLEN, a/k/a Justin Mark Allen , Defendant

- Appellant

.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of South Carolina , at Spartanburg

. Timothy M. Cain, District Judge. ( 7:97

- cr - 00480

- TMC

- 1 )

Submitted : February 21, 2023 Decided: February 23, 2023

Before NIEMEYER and DIAZ , Circuit Judges , and MOTZ, Senior Circuit Judge

.
Affirmed by un published per curiam opinion

. Mark Jay Allen , Appellant Pro Se

. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. USCA4 Appeal: 22-6738 Doc: 7 Filed: 02/23/2023 Pg: 1 of 22 PER CURIAM: Mark Jay Allen appeals the district court’s o rder denying his motion for compassionate release. We have reviewed the record on appeal and conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying relief. See United States v. Kibble , 992 F.3d 326, 329 (4th Cir.) (providing standard), cert. denied , 142 S. Ct. 383 (2021). Accordingly, we affirm. United States v. Allen , No. 7:97

- cr - 00480

- TMC

- 1 (D.S.C. June 3, 2022) . We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before t his court and argument would not aid the decisional process.
AFFIRMED USCA4 Appeal: 22-6738 Doc: 7 Filed: 02/23/2023 Pg: 2 of 2
| **Fair Value Measurements  (Details 3) (Level 2, USD $)In Millions, unless otherwise specified** | Mar. 31, 2014 | Dec. 31, 2013 |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|---------------|---------------|
| Level 2                                                                                          |          |          |
| **Fair Value, Assets and Liabilities Measured on Recurring and Nonrecurring Basis**              |          |          |
| Fair value of impaired loans                                                                     | $ 75          | $ 81          |

| X                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| - Definition
The fair value of impaired loans.
+ References
No definition available.
+ Details**Name:**cfsc_FairValueOfImpairedLoans**Namespace Prefix:**cfsc_**Data Type:**xbrli:monetaryItemType**Balance Type:**debit**Period Type:**instant |
| X                                                                                                                                                                                                                 |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| - Details**Name:**us-gaap_FairValueAssetsAndLiabilitiesMeasuredOnRecurringAndNonrecurringBasisLineItems**Namespace Prefix:**us-gaap_**Data Type:**xbrli:stringItemType**Balance Type:**na**Period Type:**duration |
IV 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 1481 

Recognizing the 100th anniversary of the Christian Science Monitor 

newspaper. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

SEPTEMBER 23, 2008 

Mr. SMITH of Texas (for himself, Mr. CAPUANO, Mr. TOM DAVIS of Virginia, 

Mr. GOODLATTE, Mr. KILDEE, Mr. DREIER, Mr. HOYER, Mr. SHAYS, 

Mr. FRANK of Massachusetts, Mr. NEAL of Massachusetts, Mr. BERMAN, 

Mr. CALVERT, Mr. LEWIS of California, Mr. INGLIS of South Carolina, 

Mr. SHIMKUS, Mr. HOEKSTRA, Mr. SHADEGG, Mr. CARTER, Mr. 

HINOJOSA, Mr. BRADY of Texas, Mr. CULBERSON, Mr. WOLF, Mr. 

COHEN, Mr. YOUNG of Alaska, Mr. ROHRABACHER, Mr. COBLE, Mr. 

PETRI, Mr. MCKEON, Mr. DAVIS of Kentucky, Mr. PORTER, Mr. TIM

MURPHY of Pennsylvania, Mr. GOODE, Mr. DOOLITTLE, Mr. DUNCAN, 

Mr. DAVID DAVIS of Tennessee, Mr. WHITFIELD of Kentucky, Mr. FERGUSON, Mr. RADANOVICH, Mr. KING of Iowa, Mr. WEINER, Mr. CANNON, 

Mr. PICKERING, Mr. MORAN of Virginia, Mr. REHBERG, Mr. CONAWAY, 

Mr. MARCHANT, Mr. POE, Mr. BURGESS, Mr. RODRIGUEZ, Mr. MCCAUL

of Texas, Mr. GONZALEZ, Mr. SERRANO, and Mr. REYES) submitted the 

following resolution; which was referred to the Committee on Oversight 

and Government Reform 

RESOLUTION 

Recognizing the 100th anniversary of the Christian Science 

Monitor newspaper. 

Whereas on November 25, 1908, the 1st edition of the Christian Science Monitor newspaper was printed in Boston’s 

Back Bay; 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
2 

•HRES 1481 IH 

Whereas just over 100 days before the Monitor’s 1st print, 

its founder, Mary Baker Eddy, then 87 years old, told officers of her church to ‘‘start a daily newspaper at once’’; 

Whereas Mrs. Eddy wanted the Monitor to blaze a path of 

unselfish service through journalism; 

Whereas Mrs. Eddy, who had been the subject of inaccurate 

stories in the press, set as the Monitor’s mission ‘‘to injure no man, but to bless all mankind’’; 

Whereas Mrs. Eddy followed the 1st editor’s request that the 

Monitor ‘‘cover the daily activities of the entire world’’ 

and ‘‘appeal to good men and women everywhere who are 

interested in the betterment of all human conditions’’; 

Whereas the Monitor’s focus was never local or denominational; 

Whereas the Monitor is distributed to readers in all 50 States 

in print and online and has worldwide respect for its 

international news coverage; 

Whereas Mrs. Eddy became the 1st American woman to 

launch a successful, general interest newspaper; 

Whereas the Monitor has been honored with numerous major 

awards including 7 Pulitzer Prizes for excellence in journalism; and 

Whereas since 1966 the Monitor has sponsored 3,600 Washington newsmaker breakfasts, whose guests have included 

countless cabinet officers and congressional leaders, 4 

presidents, and 5 vice presidents: Now, therefore, be it 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
3 

•HRES 1481 IH 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives recog2 nizes the 100th anniversary of the Christian Science Mon3 itor newspaper. 

Æ 


jbell on PROD1PC69 with BILLS
No. 63343.

protest 330997-K (New York).

#### Charles Orlando Co. *v.*United States,

*338Opinion by

Donlon, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of condimento similar in all material respects to that the subject of *Paolo Alonge, Inc.*v. *United States*(38 Cust. Ct. 351, C.D. 1886), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.