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

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
UNAUDITED CONSOLIDATED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED
SEPTEMBER 30, 1996, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1996
<CASH>                                      11,205,000
<SECURITIES>                                 9,227,000
<RECEIVABLES>                              111,320,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                           159,334,000
<PP&E>                                      21,901,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             238,266,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                      162,943,000
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       239,000
<OTHER-SE>                                  72,020,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               238,266,000
<SALES>                                    436,577,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                           438,357,000
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                              500,339,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             7,837,000
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                           6,573,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           (76,392,000)
<INCOME-TAX>                                   516,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                              1,864,000
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                              (75,044,000)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (3.15)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (3.15)
        

</TABLE>
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 23.1


            CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT REGISTERED PUBLIC ACCOUNTING FIRM

The Board of Directors
Nastech Pharmaceutical Company Inc.:


We consent to incorporation by reference in the registration statements
(No. 333-16507 and No. 333-45264) on Form S-2, (No. 333-44035, No. 333-59472,
No. 333-62800, No. 333-72742, No. 333-108845, No. 333-111324 and No. 333-119429)
on Forms S-3 and (No. 333-28785, No. 333-46214, No. 333-49514, No. 333-92206,
No. 333-92222 and No. 333-118206) on Forms S-8 of Nastech Pharmaceutical Company
Inc. and subsidiary of our reports dated February 18, 2005, with respect to the
consolidated balance sheets of Nastech Pharmaceutical Company Inc. and
subsidiary as of December 31, 2004 and 2003, and the related consolidated
statements of operations, stockholders' equity and comprehensive loss, and cash
flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31, 2004 and
management's assessment of the effectiveness of internal control over financial
reporting as of December 31, 2004 and the effectiveness of internal control over
financial reporting as of December 31, 2004, which reports appear in the
December 31, 2004, annual report on Form 10-K of Nastech Pharmaceutical Company
Inc.


/s/ KPMG LLP
------------

Seattle, Washington
March 1, 2005
~ ---

.`

., ~ tinuwy Owl 1'rotitictioiis 

### 4200 James Ray Drive Suite 161 Grand Forks, ND 58202 Tel: 701-738-4825 matt(iD skyskopes. com 17 August 2015 U.S. Department of Transportation Docket Ma.nagement System 1200 New Jersey Ave S.E. Washington, D.C. Re: Amendment to Snowy Owl Productions, LLC ExemptionNo. 11752 Regulatory Docket No. FAA-2015-0947 Dear Sir orMadam: Snowy Owl Productions, LLC ("Snowy Owl") requests an amendment to FAA Exemption No. 11752, Docket No. FAA-2015 -0947 for the purpose of changing section 2 page 3 under Conditions and Limitations. We respectfully request that FAA permit Snowy Owl to conduct Closed Set Motion Picture and Television Filming and submit the attached Motion Picture and Television Flight Operation Manual. If we can provide any additional information to assist your understanding or review of this document, please do not hesitate to contact us at 701-738-4825 or via email at matt@skyskopes.com . Thank you.

Very respectfully,

Matt Dunlevy President and CEO
**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 Outback Steakhouse, Inc. (the “Company”)
on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended March 31, 2005 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Robert S. Merritt,
Senior Vice President 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 the Report fairly presents, in all material
      respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the
      Company.
 
 
 
 Date:  May
      9, 2005
    
    
    /s/
      Robert S. MerrittRobert
      S. MerrittSenior
      Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
From: drew0500@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:38:13 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,

Andrew Maitland

Merced, CA 95341
**Final Listing of Questionnaire Files for Steam Electric Rulemaking Record**

**Plant ID 02422**  **Removed from Public**  **(Non-CBI) Docket**  **1 Copyright** 

**Flag 2**  **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

2Copyright documents are available from the docket. 1Final reviewed survey responses are located in the Steam Electric Technical Questionnaire Database

.
From: gkt1016s@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:47:00 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,

Gary Tannahill

Spring, TX 77381
From: tlctwinceders@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 7:46:21 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,

Teresa Gartin

Port Orchard, WA 98366
From: az56co@frontiernet.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:25:45 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,

Alice Franco-Anderson

Heber, AZ 85928
H. Res. 46

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

January 10, 2007.

Resolved, That the following named Members and Delegate be, and are hereby, elected to the following standing 

committees of the House of Representatives: 

COMMITTEE ON ARMED SERVICES: Mr. Spratt, Mr. 

Ortiz, Mr. Taylor of Mississippi, Mr. Abercrombie, Mr. Meehan, Mr. Reyes, Mr. Snyder, Mr. Smith of Washington, Ms. 

Loretta Sanchez of California, Mr. McIntyre, Mrs. Tauscher, 

Mr. Brady of Pennsylvania, Mr. Andrews, Mrs. Davis of California, Mr. Langevin, Mr. Larsen of Washington, Mr. Cooper, Mr. Marshall, Ms. Bordallo, Mr. Udall of Colorado, Mr. 

Boren, Mr. Ellsworth, Ms. Boyda of Kansas, Mr. Patrick 

Murphy of Pennsylvania, Mr. Johnson of Georgia, Ms. SheaPorter, Mr. Courtney, Mr. Loebsack, Mrs. Gillibrand, Mr. 

Sestak, Ms. Giffords, and Ms. Castor. 

COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR: Mr. Kildee, 

Mr. Payne, Mr. Andrews, Mr. Scott of Virginia, Ms. Woolsey, 

Mr. Hinojosa, Mrs. McCarthy of New York, Mr. Tierney, Mr. 

Kucinich, Mr. Wu, Mr. Holt, Mrs. Davis of California, Mr. 
2

•HRES 46 EH 

Davis of Illinois, Mr. Grijalva, Mr. Bishop of New York, Ms. 

Linda T. Sa ́nchez of California, Mr. Sarbanes, Mr. Sestak, 

Mr. Loebsack, Ms. Hirono, Mr. Altmire, Mr. Yarmuth, Mr. 

Hare, Ms. Clarke, Mr. Courtney, and Ms. Shea-Porter 

Attest:

Clerk.
From: mikkiq9@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 8:02:39 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,

Mary-Margaret Qualheim

Spanaway, WA 98387
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

MARC ANTHONY LOWELL ENDSLEY, 

AKA Marc Endsley, 

Plaintiff-Appellant, 

and 

DARYL CARRUTHERS; TIMOTHY 

McWHORTER, 

Plaintiffs, 

 v. 

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, 

Defendant-Appellee.

No. 21-55202 

D.C. No. 2:14-cv-03091-UA-SS 

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Central District of California

Philip S. Gutierrez, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted February 15, 2022**

Before: FERNANDEZ, TASHIMA, and FRIEDLAND, Circuit Judges.

* This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent 

except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.

** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision 

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

FILED

FEB 24 2022

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2 21-55202 

Marc Anthony Lowell Endsley appeals pro se from the district court’s order

rejecting his habeas petition on the basis of a vexatious litigant order. We have 

jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291. We review for an abuse of discretion the 

district court’s application of a vexatious litigant pre-filing order. Moy v. United 

States, 906 F.2d 467, 469 (9th Cir. 1990). We affirm. 

The district court did not abuse its discretion by rejecting Endsley’s habeas

petition because the proposed filing was within the scope of the district court’s prefiling order and Endsley failed to comply with the order. See West v. Procunier, 

452 F.2d 645, 646 (9th Cir. 1971) (concluding that an order refusing to authorize 

filing of complaint was a “proper exercise of the district court’s authority to 

effectuate compliance with its earlier order”).

To the extent that Endsley now seeks to challenge the scope of the pre-filing 

order, that issue has been previously litigated and decided. See Rebel Oil Co., Inc. 

v. Atl. Richfield Co., 146 F.3d 1088, 1093 (9th Cir. 1998) (“Under the doctrine of 

‘law of the case,’ a court is generally precluded from reconsidering an issue that 

has already been decided by the same court, or a higher court in the identical 

case.”).

AFFIRMED.
From: vasile.marchis@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:51:53 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,

Vasile Marchis

Murrieta, CA 92563