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


<ARTICLE>                     5
<LEGEND>
This schedule contains summary financial information extracted from the
Osteotech, Inc. and Subsidiaries Consolidated Balance Sheet as of June 30, 1998
and the Condensed Consolidated Statement of Operations for the six months ended
June 30, 1999 and is qualified in its entirety by references to such financials
statement.
</LEGEND>

<S>                                            <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                              DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                   JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                         12,009,000
<SECURITIES>                                   3,760,000
<RECEIVABLES>                                  14,886,000
<ALLOWANCES>                                   134,000
<INVENTORY>                                    3,415,000
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               40,997,000
<PP&E>                                         37,449,000
<DEPRECIATION>                                 12,385,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 71,699,000
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          7,497,000
<BONDS>                                        0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                          0
<PREFERRED>                                    0
<COMMON>                                       140,000
<OTHER-SE>                                     63,109,000
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   71,699,000
<SALES>                                        1,464,000
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               38,408,000
<CGS>                                          846,000
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  27,973,000
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             46,000
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                10,863,000
<INCOME-TAX>                                   4,361,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            6,502,000
<DISCONTINUED>                                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                0
<CHANGES>                                      0
<NET-INCOME>                                   6,502,000
<EPS-BASIC>                                    .47
<EPS-DILUTED>                                  .44



</TABLE>
From: wasc@ptd.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:40:31 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

health insurance.

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

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

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

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

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

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Janet wascavage

Frackville, PA 17931
From: kim.townsend70@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 9:47:33 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,

Kimberly Townsend

Wheelersburg, OH 45694
From: tialila@sbcglobal.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 7:07:04 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,

Dalila Murphy

, 79761-1923
simply introductions — SPI has (and will continue to have) several ongolr.g EPA

applications (Title V and PSD) for facilities in California. It’s been my

experience that a face—to—face introduction often helps in future

coordination.

Beyond that, here’s a bullet—list agenda for Wednesday:

SF1 Anderson Facility:

Discussion regarding the PSD review process and tiinejjne

Tailoring Rule impacts

Delegation Agreement for PSD authority — minor discussion only... I’d like to

share some conversations of recent with Shasta County

If there’s time, there are two oth’er EPA folks that ‘ve talked to severatimes on the phone and would like to meet — Laura Yannayon and 4anny

Aquitania. If Manny had a minute, there are just a few questions I would ask

him while there.., specific to SF1 Loyalton, PM/VOC limits and potentially

proceeding with the additional public comment period to complete tnat PSD.Will see you at 10:30 tomorrow. Thanks again for making time.

Dave
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 01-10285 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus MELITON BONILLA-CASTANEDA, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:00-CR-282-ALL-X

- - - - - - - - - - October 29, 2001 Before WIENER, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Meliton Bonilla-Castaneda (Bonilla) appeals the 71-month sentence imposed following his plea of guilty to a charge of being found in the United States after deportation, a violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1326. He contends that the felony conviction that resulted in his increased sentence under 8 U.S.C. § 1326(b)(2) was an element of the offense that should have been charged in the indictment. Bonilla acknowledges that his argument is foreclosed by the Supreme Court’s decision in Almendarez-Torres v. United States ,No. 01-10285 -2- 523 U.S. 224 (1998), but he seeks to preserve the issue for Supreme Court review in light of the decision in Apprendi v. New Jersey , 530 U.S. 466 (2000). Apprendi did not overrule Almendarez-Torres
. See Apprendi , 530 U.S. at 489-90; United States v. Dabeit , 231 F.3d 979, 984 (5th Cir. 2000), cert. denied , 121 S. Ct. 1214 (2001). Bonilla’s argument is foreclosed. The judgment of the district court is
AFFIRMED. The Government has moved for a summary affirmance or dismissal of the appeal. The motion is GRANTED to the extent that the Government requests an affirmance.
From: relivingeveryday@hotmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:32:57 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,

Joyce Wheeler

Fort Wayne, IN 46807
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

**CERTIFICATION OF**

**J. ROE BUCKLEY / EXECUTIVE VICE PRESIDENT AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER**

**OF MEWBOURNE DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION**

**PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. § 1350**

I, J. Roe Buckley, Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer of Mewbourne Development Corporation, Managing General Partner ofMewbourne Energy Partners 08-A, L.P. (the “Registrant”), hereby certify that the accompanying report on Form 10-K, for the annual period ended December 31, 2009 and filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereofpursuant to Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (the “Report”) by the Registrant fully complies with the requirements of that section. 

I further certify that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Registrant.
No. P66/13.

protest 325228-K (New York).

#### C. A. Reed & Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protest consists of cup-making machines similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Gallagher & Ascher Company*v. *United States*(53 Cust. Ct. 290, Abstract 68823), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
From: beavers_paul@hotmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 6:26:34 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,

Paul Beavers

Cincinnati, OH 45223
From: thebadaraccos@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 8:45:10 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,

Steven Badaracco

Elkton, MD 21921
No. 58689.

protest 226601-K (Los Angeles).

#### New York Merchandise Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Wilson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of glass bead Christmas tree ornaments similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Walco Bead Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(29 Cust. Ct. 62, C. D. 1445), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

October 13, 2020

No. 04-20-00273-CV

THE HELPFUL COMPUTER GUY, LLC,

Appellant

v.

Christina WHIPPLE,

Appellee

From the County Court at Law No. 3, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2016CV05563

Honorable J Frank Davis, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

Appellant's brief was originally due September 11, 2020. Appellant was granted a first 

extension to October 2, 2020. On October 9, 2020, appellant filed an unopposed motion for an 

extension to October 16, 2020.

Appellant's Unopposed Second Motion to Extend Briefing Deadline is GRANTED.

Appellant is ORDERED to file its brief no later than October 16, 2020.

_________________________________

Sandee Bryan Marion, Chief Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 13th day of October, 2020.

___________________________________

Michael A. Cruz, 

Clerk of Court
From: Bolsterde@aol.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 8:46:50 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,

Donald Bolster

Sugar Grove, NC 28679
LDC Operators with >25,000 tonne CO2e Emissions Population Served Revenue Cost of Compliance Ratio1439,000237,000 46,186,000$ 6,507$ 0.01%3183,926454,0005320,00067209,48782,500 929,961,000$ 6,507$ 0.001%9429,000,000$ 6,507$ 0.002%1062,800111213141516171819Those highlighted meet the criteria: >25,000 tonne CO2e/yr AND <50,000 customers served
No. 63798.

protest 59/11588 (New York).

#### D. J. Ambrosio *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Richardson, J.

In accordance with rule 5(b) of the rules of this court, as amended, the protest was dismissed for lack of prosecution.