alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
-----Original Message----- 

From: sk8er@zeninternet.com [mailto:sk8er@zeninternet.com] 

Sent: Thursday, April 29, 2010 1:36 PM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 29, 2010 

I am writing to support the interim final rule under the Paul Wellstone 

and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

(RIN 1210-AB30). 

I support the strong rule that would forbid insurance companies from 

charging higher copayments, deductibles, and other out-of-pocket 

expenses for mental health treatment than they would for other physical 

health care. Thank you for ensuring that mental health care and 

physical health care coverage are included in a single deductible. 

It's all about health care, and there should be no separating mental 

and physical health issues into separate pay categories. 

Sincerely, 

Dorothy Carpenter 

21411 18th St E 

Lake Tapps, WA 98391
§ 179.220-23 Test of tanks. ( a ) Each inner container or compartment must be tested hydrostatically to the pressure specified in § 179.221-1. The temperature of the pressurizing medium must not exceed 100 °F. during the test. The container must hold the prescribed pressure for at least 10 minutes without leakage or evidence of distress. Safety relief devices must not be in place when the test is made.
( b ) The inner container must be pressure tested before installation within the outer shell. Items which, because of assembly sequence, must be welded to inner container after its installation within outer shell must have their attachment welds thoroughly inspected by a nondestructive dye penetrant method or its equivalent.
( c ) Pressure testing of outer shell is not a specification requirement.
[Amdt. 179-9, 36 FR 21343, Nov. 6, 1971]
From: Dan W. Bridges [mailto:danwbridges@comcast.net] 

Sent: Thursday, May 07, 2009 11:45 AM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Health coverage

Please eliminate the cost of medicare. I cannot afford the payment.
§ 242.211 Replacement of certificates. ( a ) A railroad shall have a system for the prompt replacement of lost, stolen or mutilated certificates at no cost to conductors. That system shall be reasonably accessible to certified conductors in need of a replacement certificate or temporary replacement certificate.
( b ) At a minimum, a temporary replacement certificate must identify the person to whom it is being issued (including the person's name, identification number and year of birth); indicate the date of issuance; and be authorized by a designated supervisor. Temporary replacement certificates may be delivered electronically and are valid for a period no greater than 30 days.
* Pursuant to Local Rule 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 Local Rule 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

_____________________ No. 95-31128 Summary Calendar

_____________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v. JEROME GAMBINO, Defendant-Appellant.

_________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Louisiana

(92-CR-368-E)

_________________________________________________________________ June 24, 1996 Before KING, JOLLY, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Jerome Gambino appeals from the district court’s denial of his motion for return of property pursuant to F ED . R. C RIM . P. 41(e). He argues that he was twice put in jeopardy for the same offense. We have reviewed the record and the briefs of the parties and find no error in the decision of the district court. United States v. Gambino , No. 92-CR-368 E (E.D. La. Oct. 12,2

1995). Further, the district court did not abuse its discretion in denying Gambino’s motion without conducting an evidentiary hearing. See Dickens v. Lewis , 750 F.2d 1251, 1255 (5th Cir. 1984). Accordingly, the district court’s order denying Gambino’s motion for return of property is AFFIRMED.
From: Gary Upah [mailto:gupah@jobboardnetwork.com] 

Sent: Tuesday, July 07, 2015 12:15 PM

To: EBSA, E-ORI - EBSA

Subject: RIN 1210-AB32 rule

This proposed rule must be stopped. The government has no business being involved in the 

management of our retirement plans as it can’t even manage the one we’ve charged them with- Social 

Security!

Thanks!

Gary

Gary Upah

drake4240@gmail.com
-----Original Message----- 

From: katiez.campbell@gmail.com [mailto:katiez.campbell@gmail.com] 

Sent: Sunday, April 25, 2010 5:16 PM 

To: EBSA, E-OHPSCA - EBSA 

Subject: Comment in support of RIN 1210-AB30 

April 25, 2010 

I am writing to support the interim final rule under the Paul Wellstone 

and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

(RIN 1210-AB30). 

I support the strong rule that would forbid insurance companies from 

charging higher copayments, deductibles, and other out-of-pocket 

expenses for mental health treatment than they would for other physical 

health care. Thank you for ensuring that mental health care and 

physical health care coverage are included in a single deductible. 

Sincerely, 

Katie Farrar 

253 Hwy 184 East 

Toccoa, GA 30577
<PAGE>
                                  CLARCOR INC.
                EXHIBIT 11 -- COMPUTATIONS OF PER SHARE EARNINGS
                   FOR THE FIVE YEARS ENDED NOVEMBER 30, 1995
                             (DOLLARS IN THOUSANDS)

<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                       FISCAL YEARS ENDED NOVEMBER 30,
                                                  -------------------------------------------------------------------------
AVERAGE SHARES OUTSTANDING                            1995           1994           1993           1992           1991
------------------------------------------------  -------------  -------------  -------------  -------------  -------------
<S>        <C>                                    <C>            <C>            <C>            <C>            <C>
1.         Average number of shares
            outstanding.........................     14,800,872     14,813,925     14,837,741     14,972,639     14,873,282
2.         Net additional shares resulting from
            assumed exercise of stock
            options*............................        316,630        225,599        213,725        230,202        253,518
                                                  -------------  -------------  -------------  -------------  -------------
3.         Adjusted average shares outstanding
            for fully diluted computation (1
            plus 2).............................     15,117,502     15,039,524     15,051,466     15,202,841     15,126,800
                                                  -------------  -------------  -------------  -------------  -------------
                                                  -------------  -------------  -------------  -------------  -------------
Earnings per share of common
 stock:
           Primary..............................
                                                      $1.48          $1.43          $1.16          $0.94          $1.26
                                                  -------------  -------------  -------------  -------------  -------------
                                                  -------------  -------------  -------------  -------------  -------------
           Assuming full dilution...............
                                                      $1.45          $1.41          $1.15          $0.93          $1.24
                                                  -------------  -------------  -------------  -------------  -------------
                                                  -------------  -------------  -------------  -------------  -------------
<FN>
------------------------
*    Assumes  proceeds from exercise of stock  options used to purchase treasury
     shares at the greater  of the year-end or  the average market price  during
     the period.
</TABLE>
§ 26.103 What enforcement actions apply in FHWA and FTA programs? The provisions of this section apply to enforcement actions under FHWA and FTA programs: ( a ) *Noncompliance complaints.* Any person who believes that a recipient has failed to comply with its obligations under this part may file a written complaint with the concerned operating administration's Office of Civil Rights. If you want to file a complaint, you must do so no later than 180 days after the date of the alleged violation or the date on which you learned of a continuing course of conduct in violation of this part. In response to your written request, the Office of Civil Rights may extend the time for filing in the interest of justice, specifying in writing the reason for so doing. The Office of Civil Rights may protect the confidentiality of your identity as provided in § 26.109(b). Complaints under this part are limited to allegations of violation of the provisions of this part.
( b ) *Compliance reviews.* The concerned operating administration may review the recipient's compliance with this part at any time, including reviews of paperwork and on-site reviews, as appropriate. The Office of Civil Rights may direct the operating administration to initiate a compliance review based on complaints received.
( c ) *Reasonable cause notice.* If it appears, from the investigation of a complaint or the results of a compliance review, that you, as a recipient, are in noncompliance with this part, the appropriate DOT office promptly sends you, return receipt requested, a written notice advising you that there is reasonable cause to find you in noncompliance. The notice states the reasons for this finding and directs you to reply within 30 days concerning whether you wish to begin conciliation.
( d ) *Conciliation.* ( 1 ) If you request conciliation, the appropriate DOT office shall pursue conciliation for at least 30, but not more than 120, days from the date of your request. The appropriate DOT office may extend the conciliation period for up to 30 days for good cause, consistent with applicable statutes.
( 2 ) If you and the appropriate DOT office sign a conciliation agreement, then the matter is regarded as closed and you are regarded as complying. The conciliation agreement sets forth the measures you have taken or will take to ensure compliance. While a conciliation agreement is in effect, you remain eligible for FHWA or FTA financial assistance.
( 3 ) The concerned operating administration shall monitor your implementation of the conciliation agreement and ensure that its terms are complied with. If you fail to carry out the terms of a conciliation agreement, you are in noncompliance.
( 4 ) If you do not request conciliation, or a conciliation agreement is not signed within the time provided in paragraph (d)(1) of this section, then enforcement proceedings begin.
( e ) *Enforcement actions.* ( 1 ) Enforcement actions are taken as provided in this subpart.
( 2 ) Applicable findings in enforcement proceedings are binding on all DOT offices.
[64 FR 5126, Feb. 2, 1999, as amended at 89 FR 24979, Apr. 9, 2024]
```

[Journal of the House of Representatives, 1995]
[Tuesday, October 17, 1995 (129), Para 129.40 Deletions of Sponsors from Public Bills and Resolutions]
[Page 1535]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]

para.129.40  deletions of sponsors from public bills and resolutions

  Under clause 4 of rule XXII, sponsors were deleted from public bills 
and resolutions as follows:

       H.R. 2066: Mr. Miller of California.

```
Docket: EBSA-2009-0010 

The Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008 

Comment On: EBSA-2009-0010-0409 

Interim Final Rules Under the Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction 

Equity Act of 2008 

Document: EBSA-2009-0010-DRAFT-0692 

Comment on FR Doc # 2010-2167 

Submitter Information 

Name: Randall Robert Lyle 

Address: 

4230 Gardendale St 

suite 502 

San Antonio, TX, 78229 

Email: rlyle@randallrlylephd.com 

Phone: 210-593-9725 

Organization: Randall R Lyle PhD 

General Comment 

I am very supportive of most of the provisions of the interim final rules under the Paul Wellstone and 

Pete Domenici Mental Health Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008. These rules address many of the 

inequities in health insurance coverage of mental health care when compared to medical/surgical care 

that I have observed in the course of my mental health practice. 

However, in my opinion, two areas have not been sufficiently clarified. I am quite concerned that unless 

these points are more clearly specified in the final regulations, loopholes will remain that will permit 

widespread violation of the legislative intent of the Paul Wellstone and Pete Domenici Mental Health 

Parity and Addiction Equity Act of 2008: 

1. In my opinion, the interim final rules do not define clearly enough the rules regulating the 

comprehensive scope of services parity between mental health/substance abuse services and 

medical/surgical services. Given the language of the Act and the positions already taken by the 

Departments in the interim final regulations, I request that the Final Rules clarify that benefits for 

MH/SUD must be comparable in scope to the benefits provided in medical/surgical care both across and 

within each classification. Unless parity in scope of services is required in the final regulations, the 

intent of the Act will not be achieved. 

2. I strongly support the application of parity requirements to both QTLs and NQTLs as being consistent 

with the Act and allowing for broad application of the parity requirement with regard to treatment 

limitations. However, in order to implement the intent of the Act, the regulations must specify more 

clearly that any NQTLs that are applied by plans must be comparable for MH/SUD and medical surgical 

benefits, and that any NQTLs for MH/SUD must be no more restrictive than NQTLs that are predominant 

across the broad range of medical/surgical benefits.Thank you, 

PUBLIC SUBMISSION 

As of: May 03, 2010 

Received: May 03, 2010 

Status: DoNotPost 

Tracking No. 80ae59db 

Comments Due: May 03, 2010

Submission Type: Web

Page 1 of 2

https://fdms.erulemaking.net/fdms-web-agency/component/submitterInfoCoverPage?Call=P... 5/3/2010
Page 2 of 2

https://fdms.erulemaking.net/fdms-web-agency/component/submitterInfoCoverPage?Call=P... 5/3/2010
Amendment to the 1992 Plan, effective as of January 26, 2006



 Exhibit 10.4.8 
 AMENDMENT TO THE ANNTAYLOR STORES CORPORATION 
 1992 STOCK OPTION AND RESTRICTED STOCK AND UNIT AWARD PLAN

 The AnnTaylor Stores Corporation 1992 Stock Option and Restricted Stock and Unit Award Plan (the “Plan”) is hereby amended
effective as of January 26, 2006 (the “Effective Date”) with respect to all Options, Restricted Shares and Restricted Units (as defined in the Plan) granted pursuant to the Plan, including grants outstanding before the Effective Date,
as set forth below. 
 1. The last two sentences of Section 6(i)(2) of the Plan are hereby amended and restated in their entirety to
read as follows: 
 “Following the Acceleration Event, the Committee may provide for the cancellation of all Options then outstanding.
Upon such cancellation, the Corporation shall make, in exchange for each such Option, a payment either in (i) cash; (ii) shares of the successor entity; or (iii) some combination of cash or shares thereof, at the discretion of the
Committee, and in each case in an amount per share subject to such Option equal to the difference between the per share exercise price of such Option and the Fair Market Value of a share of Common Stock on the date during the prior sixty-day period
that produces the highest Fair Market Value.” 
 2. The second paragraph of Section 8 of the Plan is hereby amended and restated in
its entirety to read as follows: 
 “Unless otherwise prohibited by the Committee or by applicable law, a Grantee may
satisfy any such withholding tax obligation by any of the following methods, or by a combination of such methods: (a) tendering a cash payment; (b) authorizing the Corporation to withhold from the shares of Common Stock otherwise issuable
to such Grantee (or, in the case of a Restricted Stock Award, from the shares with respect to which the restrictions shall have lapsed) shares having an aggregate Fair Market Value, determined as of the date the withholding tax obligation arises,
less than or equal to the amount of the total withholding tax obligation; (c) delivering to the Corporation previously acquired shares of Common Stock (none of which shares may be subject to any claim, lien, security interest, community
property right or other right of spouses or present or former family members, pledge, option, voting agreement or other restriction or encumbrance of any nature 








 
whatsoever) having an aggregate Fair Market Value, determined as of the date the withholding tax obligation arises, less than or equal to the amount of the
total withholding tax obligation; or (d) authorizing the Committee to withhold from the payment of a Restricted Stock Unit with respect to which the Restricted Period has lapsed an amount less than or equal to the amount of the total
withholding tax obligation. A Grantee’s election to pay his or her withholding tax obligation (in whole or in part) by the method described in clause (b) hereof is irrevocable once it is made and may be disapproved by the Committee.”

 Except as set forth above, the Plan is hereby ratified and affirmed in all respects.
[Crim. No. 537.

Fourth Dist.

June 16, 1941.]

#### THE PEOPLE, Respondent, v. ROY BESOYAN et al., Appellants.

No appearance for Appellants.

Earl Warren, Attorney-General, and Burdette J. Daniels, Deputy Attorney-General, for Respondent.

BARNARD, P. J.

The clerk’s transcript on this appeal was filed in this court on October 28, 1940.  No reporter’s transcript or briefs have been filed and no appearance has been made in this court for the defendants. The matter was regularly placed on the calendar on June 10, 1941, at which time the respondent moved to affirm the judgment under section 1253 of the Penal Code. At that time the respondent presented and filed proof that the court reporter had died, with an affidavit to the effect that the reporter’s shorthand notes in connection with the trial of this action had never been transcribed. There was also presented and filed the affidavit of a deputy attorney-general identifying and setting forth a copy of a letter he had received from the district attorney of Kern County, in which letter it was stated that on June 5, 1941, an attorney who represented the defendants at the trial informed the district attorney that he had aban*395doned the appeal. The record before us is sufficient to justify the granting of the motion.

The judgment is affirmed.

Marks, J., and Griffin, J., concurred.
§ 1544.217 Law enforcement personnel. ( a ) The following applies to operations at airports within the United States that are not required to hold a security program under part 1542 of this chapter. ( 1 ) For operations described in § 1544.101(a) each aircraft operator must provide for law enforcement personnel meeting the qualifications and standards specified in §§ 1542.215 and 1542.217 of this chapter.
( 2 ) For operations under a partial program under § 1544.101(b) and (c), a twelve-five program under § 1544.101(d) and (e), a private charter program under § 1544.101(f), or a full all-cargo program under § 1544.101(h) and (i), each aircraft operator must— ( i ) Arrange for law enforcement personnel meeting the qualifications and standards specified in § 1542.217 of this chapter to be available to respond to an incident; and
( ii ) Provide its employees, including crewmembers, current information regarding procedures for obtaining law enforcement assistance at that airport.
( b ) The following applies to operations at airports required to hold security programs under part 1542 of this chapter. For operations under a partial program under § 1544.101(b) and (c), a twelve-five program under § 1544.101(d) and (e), a private charter program under § 1544.101(f), or a full all-cargo program under § 1544.101(h) and (i), each aircraft operator must— ( 1 ) Arrange with TSA and the airport operator, as appropriate, for law enforcement personnel meeting the qualifications and standards specified in § 1542.217 of this chapter to be available to respond to incidents, and
( 2 ) Provide its employees, including crewmembers, current information regarding procedures for obtaining law enforcement assistance at that airport.
[67 FR 8364, Feb. 22, 2002, as amended at 71 FR 30510, May 26, 2006]
#### George W. Farnam and another, *Appellants, v.*Hall F. Baldwin and another, *Respondents.*

Judgment affirmed,' with costs. Opinion by

Pratt, J.;

Dykman, J., not sitting.
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 170 (Tuesday, September 4, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 50653]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-4298]


-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Forest Service


Siuslaw Resource Advisory Committee

AGENCY: Forest Service, USDA.

ACTION: 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------N
otice of meeting.

SUMMARY: The Siuslaw Resource Advisory Committee will meet in 
Corvallis, OR. The purpose of the meeting is to Review RAC FY08 
Business, Elect Chairperson, Set FY08 Overhead Rate, Information Share, 
Public Forum and 2008 Project Review/Recommendations.

DATES: The meeting will be held September 21, 2007 beginning at 9:30 
a.m.

ADDRESSES: The meeting will be held at the Siuslaw National Forest 
Supervisor's Office, 4077 SW Research Way, Corvallis, Oregon.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Linda Stanley, Community Development 
Specialist, Siuslaw National Forest, 541/928-7085 or write to Forest 
Supervisor, Siuslaw National Forest, 4077 SW Research Way, Corvallis, 
OR 97339.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: A public input period will begin before 2008 
project review.

    Dated: August 28, 2007.
Chip Weber,
Acting Forest Supervisor.
[FR Doc. 07-4298 Filed 8-31-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-11-M
### T E X A S C O U R T O F A P P E A L S , T H I R D D I S T R I C T , A T A U S T I N

NO. 03-13-00020- CV
Agbolade Od utayo, Appellan t

v. Richards Mem orial Hospi tal, et al., Appellees

F ROM TH E DISTRI CT COURT O F MI LAM CO UNTY, 20TH JUDICI AL DISTRICT NO. CV32,0 75, H ONO RAB LE JAN P . P ATTERSON, JUDGE P RESIDING

O R D E R
P ER CURIAM

Appellant’s brief was due on May 1, 2013. Appellant ’s at t empts to elec tronically file motions for extension of time we re re j ected on May 20 and J une 17, and appellant has not made any further attempts. Appe l lant is here by order ed to file a brief, along with a motion for extension of time that fully con forms with the rules of appellate proce dure and our local rules g overning elec tronic fill ing no later than Aug ust 26, 2013. No furthe r extensions will be g rante d, and a f ailure to c omply

with this order will result in the dismissal of the appea l. I t is ordere d Aug ust 8, 2013.

Be fore J ustices Pury ear , Rose and Goodwin