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

<PAGE>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JUN-30-2001
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-02-2000
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-2000
<CASH>                                          42,250
<SECURITIES>                                       284
<RECEIVABLES>                                   27,206
<ALLOWANCES>                                     2,689
<INVENTORY>                                     10,890
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                95,783
<PP&E>                                          29,167
<DEPRECIATION>                                  16,153
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 109,874
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           20,208
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           646
<OTHER-SE>                                      87,550
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   109,874
<SALES>                                         51,351
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                51,351
<CGS>                                           17,788
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   19,469
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                13,316
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 153
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 19,014
<INCOME-TAX>                                     3,463
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                             15,551
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                    15,551
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.24
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.22


</TABLE>
From: mary alice dudas-kolb

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: RIN 1210-AB44 Mandatory Birth Control

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 7:22:35 PM

To Whom it May Concern,

I object in the strongest of terms to mandating birth control with no co-pays under

the Affordable Care Act.

Birth control is already widely available to all women, subsidized largely by

taxpayers. Demanding that we further subsidize other people's birth control by

increasing our insurance premiums in these days when families are struggling just to

make ends meet is an outrage. 

The mandate violates my conscience and that of millions of Americans who oppose

birth control on moral and religious grounds. 

It is undisputed that one of the operations of contraceptives is to render the

endometrium hostile to implantation, so that if fertilization occurs, the newly

conceived child may be lost to an early abortion. I also strongly object to the

inclusion of free sterilization as well as abortifacient pills like ella, which can work

weeks after a person's biological beginning to cause an abortion.

And what of Catholic employers and others who oppose birth control, but are now

going to be forced to participate in these plans and/or offer it to their employees?

This flies in the face of the conscience protections that Americans have historically

enjoyed.

The conscience provisions attached to the rule are so narrowly crafted that they

would appear to force Catholic institutions to make free birth control and sterilization

available in health plans, or cease hiring and providing services to non-Catholics. 

It is incomprehensible that such a mandate is being forced upon the people of the

United States.

It is no secret that Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion chain in America, is

behind this mandate, and will reap huge financial benefits from it at a time when

citizens in the United States are working on both the state and federal levels to

defund the abortion giant. 

The majority of Americans are pro-life and we do not want our tax dollars and

insurance premiums supporting the nation's largest abortion chain.

It is imperative that you give credence to my personal objection along with those of

millions of other Americans who do not want to be forced to pay for and provide

medication, devices, and procedures that do not treat or prevent any disease or

illness, but distort and render inoperable a healthy reproductive system. This rule is

unjust, untenable, and un-American--and it should be stricken.

Sincerely,

mary alice dudas-kolb
buffalo, New York
Exhibit 31.1  CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002  I, John S. Chidester, Chief Executive Officer and Chief Financial Officer of Town and Country Appraisal Service, Inc. (the "Company"), certify that:  1. I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-K of Town and Country Appraisal Service, Inc.;  2. Based on my knowledge, this report does 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, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;  4. I am responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the registrant and have:  a) Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;  b) Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and  c) Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and  5. I, as the certifying officer have disclosed, based on my most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):  a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and  b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting.   Date: February 5, 2010 By: /s/ John S. Chidester John S. Chidester  Chief Executive Officer/Chief Financial Officer
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

JUDGMENT

No. 04-15-00492-CR

George MUNOZ, Jr.,

Appellant

v.

The STATE of Texas,

Appellee

From the 226th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2015CR5575

Honorable Sid L. Harle, Judge Presiding

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE MARION, JUSTICE MARTINEZ, AND JUSTICE CHAPA

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s judgment is 

AFFIRMED.

SIGNED January 4, 2017.

_____________________________

Rebeca C. Martinez, Justice
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 Protecwerx Inc. (the "Company") on Form
10-K for the year ended January 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission (the "Report"), the undersigned, in the capacities and on
the dates indicated below, hereby certifies pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,
as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to my
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.





Dated:May
1, 2009




By: /s/
Darrin Zinger


Darrin
Zinger


Director, Chief
Executive Officer, Chief Financial Officer, Principal Accounting Officer,
Secretary and Treasurer
From: janice.sengupta@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:57:01 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today that you ensure women have access to full health care services, including all

contraceptives and sterilization procedures under their private health insurance. I strongly oppose the

government forcing the religious views of groups such as Family Research Council on private insurance

coverage.

The Government has no right to dictate to women what types of treatment they and their doctors

choose to protect health.

Please protect our basic freedoms and principles, including separation of church and state.

Sincerely,

Janice Sengupta

Colorado Springs, CO 80917
From: jimf@shreve.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:54:30 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,

James Featherston

Homer, LA 71040
EXHIBIT 13.1

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 on Form 20-F of Safe Bulkers, Inc. (the Company) for
the fiscal year ending December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), the undersigned officer
of the Company certifies 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 the Report
fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
of operations of the Company as of, and for, the periods presented in the
report.

The foregoing
certification is provided solely for purposes of complying with the provisions
of Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and is not intended to be
used or relied upon for any other purpose.

|                     |                                     
|-------------------- | ------------------------------------
|Date: March
 4, 2011 |                                     
|                     | /s/ POLYS HAJIOANNOU                
|                     |                                     
|                     | Polys Hajioannou                    
|                     | Chairman and Chief Executive Officer
|                     | (Principal Executive Officer)       

Exhibit 13.1

---
From: dominamyrick@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 6:46:46 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,

Katie Crowell-Myrick

Richmond, VA 23235
From: medport@firebin.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:37:28 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

health insurance.

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

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

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

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

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

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Marie Davenport

Lynnwood, WA 98037
**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 Quarterly Report of Integrated Circuit Systems, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 27,2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Justine F. Lien, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that: 

 

(1) TheReport 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 operationsof the Company. 

 

/s/    JUSTINE F. LIEN

Justine F. Lien

Vice President and Chief Financial Officer 

November 11, 2003
From: marci@mediadimensions.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 2:45:11 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,

Marcia Towle

Lutherville Timonium, MD 21093
<PAGE>
                                                                   Exhibit 10.82
                     [Letterhead of PanAmSat Corporation]

September 27, 2002

Mr. Joseph Wright
President & CEO
PanAmSat Corporation
20 Westport Road
Wilton, CT  06897

Dear Joe,

As you know, your August 20, 2001 employment offer letter from Hughes included
a provision for a transaction bonus of a minimum of $1M, to incentivize you to
increase the value of PanAmSat to a prospective buyer.  In October of 2001 we
entered into an agreement to merge Hughes, including a predetermined value for
PanAmSat, with EchoStar.  When this merger occurs, or if the merger fails to
receive regulatory approval and PanAmSat is sold individually to EchoStar, the
Change in Control definition in your employment letter will be met, triggering
your transaction bonus.  In recognition of the fact that we have negated your
ability to influence the purchase price and earn a transaction bonus greater
than the minimum guaranteed, and in light of the fact that it will require
diligent effort on your part to ensure there are no material adverse changes at
PanAmSat which could prevent this merger or sale from being completed, the
Compensation Committee has amended your transaction bonus to be $1.5M.

This transaction bonus will be payable 50% at the close of the EchoStar/Hughes
merger or individual sale of PanAmSat to EchoStar and 50% on the first one-year
anniversary of the close of the merger or sale.  Should your employment be
involuntarily terminated after the close of the EchoStar/Hughes merger or the
EchoStar purchase of PanAmSat, but before the one-year anniversary for any
reason other than for Cause (as defined in your employment letter), the second
transaction bonus payment will be accelerated and paid to you within five
business days after the effective date of your termination.

Sincerely,

/s/ Jack A. Shaw
------------------------
Jack Shaw
Chairman of the Board of Directors
Of PanAmSat Corporation