alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
From: Debbie [mailto:debbiedeloach@ltdkate.com] 

Sent: Thursday, October 14, 2010 1:20 PM 

To: EBSA, E-ORI - EBSA 

Subject: RFI regarding lifetime options retirement plans

I am opposed to government confiscation of individual's retirement accounts in any form, IRA's, 

401K's, or whatever form. The government should not touch the money that American taxpayers 

have saved for their own retirement. The government is not qualified to manage any type of 

monetary fund. This is a free country and people have the right to manage their own money. 

 

American taxpayers have been taken advantage of by the government by government's wasteful 

spending and then expectation of the people to pay for it. There is no option for American 

taxpayers to vote on what government spends money on. Therefore, government spends 

wastefully since there is no one with logic making the decision on spending. The government has 

no understanding of only spending money it has available. With the current national debt, it is 

obvious that the government doesn't know how to manage expenses nor income. Private 

companies know how to manage spending and income, otherwise they would be out of business. 

The government has no incentive to manage money properly or profitably. 

 

NO to Lifetime Income Options for Retirement Plans!
#### Christian F. Ammon, Appellant, v. Augustus A. Frank, Respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. Opinion by Pratt, J.; Barnard, P. J., not sitting.
#### Franklin P. Dudgeon, Plaintiff, v. Thomas H. Smith and others, Defendants.

— Order modified as directed in opinion and affirmed as modified, without costs of appeal. Opinion by

Daniels, J.
From: Bonnie Peirce

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Regarding new mandates in preventative health services

Date: Monday, August 08, 2011 5:31:42 PM

Please reconsider the language and meaning of "religious employer" in the new

mandates concerning preventative health services to be covered by insurance plans.

The definition is so narrow that its applicability negates most religious employers

within the US. It really lacks true conscience protection. We must protect our

religious freedom. It is what makes us the United States from our very birth of a

nation.

Sincerely, 

David and Bonnie Peirce
No. 273, Misc.

#### Peterson *v.*New York.

Court of Appeals of New York. Certiorari denied.
COURT OF APPEALS

EIGHTH DISTRICT OF TEXAS

EL PASO, TEXAS

THE STATE OF TEXAS,

Appellant,

v.

IVAN GABALDON,

Appellee.

§

§

§

§

§

No. 08-21-00216-CR

Appeal from the

210th Judicial District Court

of El Paso County, Texas

(TC# 20210D02909)

CONCURRING OPINION

I write separately to acknowledge that on the other side of the constitutional violation over 

which we affirm Gabaldon’s freedom lies the life of another man. Regrettably, the State’s 

misconduct has robbed the community, most especially Mr. Flores’s loved ones, of the process of 

determining the truth about what happened on February 22, 2021.

On appeal, the standard of review—the legal parameters within which we must assess the 

trial court’s decision in this case—is whether the trial court abused its discretion in ruling as it 

did.[1] By law, the trial court has discretion to dismiss an indictment with prejudice in cases of 

egregious prosecutorial misconduct.[2] And when supported by the record, as it is in this case, we 

[1] See State v. Frye, 897 S.W.2d 324, 330 (Tex. Crim. App. 1995). [2] State v. Terrazas, 962 S.W.2d 38, 40 (Tex. Crim. App. 1998).
2

must defer to the trial court’s determination of the facts and its assessment of the State’s 

credibility.[3]

This ruling has broad implications on promoting the integrity of the justice system itself. 

The primary duty of a prosecutor, as an arm of law enforcement, is “not to convict, but to see that 

justice is done.”[4] If we were to allow the State’s misconduct here, what would keep other 

prosecutors from using the same tactics to force lengthy continuances by similarly violating

individuals’ constitutional rights when the State finds itself unprepared and unwilling to move 

forward?

Dismissing a case with prejudice is a drastic measure. However, in this case, due to the 

very nature of the constitutional violation—a due process violation in retaliation for an invocation 

of the right to a speedy trial—dismissal without prejudice would give the State exactly what it 

wanted and more. The State could move forward with an indictment on a capital murder charge or 

any lesser included offense at the prosecutor’s discretion and do so with the benefit of even more 

time. In this case, we simply cannot fashion a remedy that “neutralize[s] the taint of the 

constitutional violation at issue”[5] short of turning back the clock. As we do not have that power, 

I concur with the majority. 

LISA J. SOTO, Justice

February 7, 2023

Before Rodriguez, C.J., Soto, J., and Marion, C.J. (Ret.)

Marion, C.J. (Ret.) (sitting by assignment)

(Publish)

[3] Neal v. State, 150 S.W.3d 169, 174–75 (Tex. Crim. App. 2004). [4] TEX. CODE CRIM. PROC. ANN. art. 2.01 (titled “Duties of district attorneys”).

[5] State v. Hill, 558 S.W.3d 280, 287 (Tex. App.—Dallas 2018, no pet.); see also Frye, 897 S.W.2d at 330.
## In the

Court of Appeals

Second Appellate District of Texas

at Fort Worth

No. 02

- 18

- 00034

- CR



### C HAD 

### A. I SAACS



### , Appellant

V



### .

T HE 

### S TATE OF 

### T EXAS §

§

§

§

§ On Appeal from the 432nd District

Court

of Tarrant Coun ty (1519428R)

October 4, 2018

Opinion by Justice Birdwell

(nfp)

JUDGMENT

This court has considered the record on appeal in this case and holds that there

was no error in the trial court’s judgment. It is ordered that the judgment of the trial

court is affirmed.

SECOND DISTRICT COURT OF APPEALS

By

__ /s/ Wade Birdwell

__________________ Justice Wade Birdwell
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 173 (Friday, September 8, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 62097]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-19406]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute on Drug Abuse; Amended Notice of Meeting

    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the National 
Advisory Council on Drug Abuse, September 12, 2023, 10:30 a.m. to 
September 12, 2023, 05:00 p.m., National Institutes of Health, 
Neuroscience Center, 6001 Executive Boulevard, Rockville, MD 20852 
which was published in the Federal Register on August 21, 2023, FR Doc 
2023-17889, 88 FR 56847.
    This notice is being amended to change the open session start time 
from 12:45 p.m. to 1:00 p.m. The open session will now be held from 
1:00 p.m. to 5:00 p.m. on September 12, 2023. The meeting is partially 
closed to the public.

    Dated: September 1, 2023.
Tyeshia M. Roberson-Curtis,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2023-19406 Filed 9-7-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
From: Amy Couture

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Thank you for supporting birth control access for all women

Date: Wednesday, August 03, 2011 1:16:26 PM

Dear Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of Health & Human Services,

I commend the Department of Health & Human Services' landmark decision requiring health insurers to

cover the full cost of contraception, with no co-pay, beginning in August 2012.

This policy places a much-needed importance on women's health that is too-often not a priority in

health care policy. Birth control is a critical part of preventive care, and making contraception available

to all women, regardless of their insurance or ability to pay for it, will significantly reduce long-term

health care costs associated with unplanned pregnancies.

Thank you for prioritizing women's basic health care needs.

Sincerely,

Amy Couture

3807 Genessee

kansas City, MO 64111
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER>   1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          OCT-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1998
<CASH>                                             915
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    2,813
<ALLOWANCES>                                       289
<INVENTORY>                                      4,241
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 8,282
<PP&E>                                           7,811
<DEPRECIATION>                                   7,444
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   8,807
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            6,887
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        20,087
<OTHER-SE>                                    (18,167)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     8,807
<SALES>                                         18,573
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                18,573
<CGS>                                           12,738
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    8,287
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                 1,722
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   142
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               (195)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (4,369)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   (4,369)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.81)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.81)
        

</TABLE>
**Exhibit 12.3**

 

**PACCAR and Subsidiaries**

 

**COMPUTATION OF RATIO OF EARNINGSTO FIXED CHARGES**

 

**PURSUANT TO SEC REPORTINGREQUIREMENTS**

(Millions of Dollars)

 
| ** **                                                | ** ** | **Year ended December 31** | ** **  |
|-----------------------------------------------------------|------------|---------------------------------|-------------|
| ** **                                                | ** ** | **2005**                        | ** **  | **2004** | ** ** | **2003** | ** ** | **2002** | ** ** | **2001** | ** ** |
|                                                      |       |                            |        |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
| FIXED  CHARGES                                            |       |                            |        |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
| Interest  expense – PACCAR and subsidiaries (1) | ** ** | **$**                           | **187.8**   |   | $ | 134.3 |   | $ | 137.1 |   | $ | 162.8 |   | $ | 216.9 |   |
| Portion of  rentals deemed interest                       | ** ** | **18.0**                        |        | 14.4 |   | 12.9 |   | 12.7 |   | 13.5 |   |
|                                                      |       |                            |        |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
| TOTAL FIXED  CHARGES                                      | ** ** | **$**                           | **205.8**   |   | $ | 148.7 |   | $ | 150.0 |   | $ | 175.5 |   | $ | 230.4 |   |
|                                                      |       |                            |        |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
| EARNINGS                                                  |       |                            |        |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
| Income  before taxes – PACCAR and Subsidiaries (2)   | ** ** | **$**                           | **1,773.6** |   | $ | 1,368.2 |   | $ | 805.5 |   | $ | 574.1 |   | $ | 255.3 |   |
| FIXED  CHARGES                                            | ** ** | **205.8**                       |        | 148.7 |   | 150.0 |   | 175.5 |   | 230.4 |   |
|                                                      |       |                            |        |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
| EARNINGS AS  DEFINED                                      | ** ** | **$**                           | **1,979.4** |   | $ | 1,516.9 |   | $ | 955.5 |   | $ | 749.6 |   | $ | 485.7 |   |
|                                                      |       |                            |        |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |   |
| RATIO OF  EARNINGS TO FIXED CHARGES                       | ** ** | **9.62**                        | **x**       | 10.20 | x | 6.37 | x | 4.27 | x | 2.11 | x |

 

----

(1)                                  Exclusive ofinterest paid to PACCAR.

 

(2)                                  Includesbefore-tax earnings of wholly-owned subsidiaries.

 

1

----
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Small Business Administration

          - [Disaster Declaration #18118 and #18119; Florida Disaster Number FL-00192]

# AGENCY:

Small Business Administration.

# ACTION:

Amendment 1.

# SUMMARY:

This is an amendment of the Presidential declaration of a major disaster for the State of Florida (FEMA-4734-DR), dated 08/31/2023.

*Incident:*                         Hurricane Idalia.                    

*Incident Period:*                         08/27/2023 and continuing.                    

# DATES:

Issued on 09/03/2023.

*Physical Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         10/30/2023.                    

*Economic Injury (EIDL) Loan Application Deadline Date:*                         05/31/2024.                    

# ADDRESSES:

Submit completed loan applications to: U.S. Small Business Administration, Processing and Disbursement Center, 14925 Kingsport Road, Fort Worth, TX 76155.

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: 

A. Escobar, Office of Disaster Recovery & Resilience, U.S. Small Business Administration, 409 3rd Street SW, Suite 6050, Washington, DC 20416, (202) 205-6734.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The notice of the President's major disaster declaration for the State of Florida, dated 08/31/2023, is hereby amended to include the following areas as adversely affected by the disaster:

*Primary Counties (Physical Damage and Economic Injury Loans):*                     Columbia, Gilchrist, Hernando, Jefferson, Madison, Pasco, Pinellas.                

*Contiguous Counties (Economic Injury Loans Only):*

Florida: Baker, Hillsborough, Leon, Polk, Union, Wakulla.

Georgia: Brooks, Clinch, Thomas.

All other information in the original declaration remains unchanged.

(Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance Number 59008)

Francisco Sánchez, Jr.,

Associate Administrator, Office of Disaster Recovery & Resilience.

[FR Doc. 2023-19401 Filed 9-7-23; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 8026-09-P
USS Hopper, Joint Coalition Forces Rescue Pakistani Fishermen
 By Commander, U.S. Naval Forces Central Command , 5th Fleet Public Affairs
  
 USS HOPPER, Arabian Sea (May 20, 2011) — Guided-missile destroyer USS Hopper (DDG 70) assisted the crew of Pakistani flagged fishing vessel Al Sohail May 18. Al Sohail was adrift with no communications and little food or water after having lost power. Unable to send a distress transmission, the crew attempted to rig a sail out of rugs. On May 17, an Australian aircraft assigned to Combined Maritime Forces’ (CMF) Coalition Task Force (CTF) 151 spotted the vessel as its crew signaled their distress. The Australian aircraft dropped food and water, and reported Al Sohail’s position to CMF headquarters, co-located with U.S. 5th Fleet. 5th Fleet’s CTF 50, under the command of the USS Enterprise Carrier Strike Group (ENTSG), directed Hopper to render assistance to the Al Sohail. ENTSG’s meteorology and oceanography team made drift calculations based on the sea state, current and winds to assist Hopper in locating the drifting vessel. Hopper located Al Sohail and arrived at its location around sunset, May 18. Hopper sent a small boat to assist Al Sohail, and provided them with additional food and water, minor medical assistance and engineering support to attempt to repair its engines overnight. It was determined that Al Sohail’s engines could not be repaired by Hopper’s crew. Working through 5th Fleet and CMF, a Pakistani naval vessel was contacted and requested to assist. The Pakistani frigate PNS Tariq (F 181) arrived on scene and took charge of the assistance efforts late in the evening, May 19. Hopper is on a routine deployment and is conducting Maritime Security Operations in the U.S. 5th Fleet area of operations. For more news from Commander, U.S. Naval Forces Central Command/5th Fleet, visit http://www.navy.mil/local/cusnc/.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE  CONTAINS  SUMMARY  INFORMATION  EXTRACTED  FROM FORM 10-Q FOR THE
QUARTERLY  PERIOD  ENDED  JUNE 30,  1999 AND IS  QUALIFIED  IN ITS  ENTIRETY  BY
REFERENCE TO SUCH FORM 10-Q.
</LEGEND>

<CIK>                                        0001035418
<NAME>                                       TELEHUB COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
<MULTIPLIER>                                           1
<CURRENCY>                                       dollars

<S>                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 6-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                            DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                               JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                                 JUN-30-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                    1.000
<CASH>                                        13,745,787
<SECURITIES>                                           0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  9,654,378
<ALLOWANCES>                                   1,764,724
<INVENTORY>                                            0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                              26,247,187
<PP&E>                                        25,738,236
<DEPRECIATION>                                 6,621,760
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                50,699,782
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                         15,404,449
<BONDS>                                       75,451,173
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                  0
<PREFERRED>                                        3,500
<COMMON>                                          13,056
<OTHER-SE>                                   (50,138,864)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  50,699,782
<SALES>                                                0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                              13,008,598
<CGS>                                                  0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                 16,285,689
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                              18,677,990
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             8,661,614
<INCOME-PRETAX>                              (30,616,695)
<INCOME-TAX>                                           0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          (30,616,695)
<DISCONTINUED>                                         0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                        0
<CHANGES>                                              0
<NET-INCOME>                                 (30,616,695)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (2.36)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      (2.36)





</TABLE>
GRANT MICHAEL CAMADINE

,

Appellant,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA

,

Appellee

. IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D 15

- 2848

_ ____________________________/

Opinion filed November 3, 2015.

An appeal from an order of the Circuit Court for Duval County

. Mark J. Borello , Judge

.

Nancy A. Daniels, Publi c Defender, and Steven L. Seliger, Assistant Public

Defender, Tallahassee , for Ap pellant.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Tallahassee , for Appellee.

PER CURIAM.

AFFIRMED.

ROBERTS, C.J., BENTON and KELSEY, JJ., CONCUR.
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 04-2054

KOKOU MAGBEDE TOUGNON, Petitioner, versus ALBERTO R. GONZALES, Attorney General, Respondent.
On Petition for Review of an Order of the Board of Immigration Appeals. (A95-263-499) Submitted: April 27, 2005 Decided: May 12, 2005 Before NIEMEYER, MICHAEL, and MOTZ, Circuit Judges. Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion. Randall L. Johnson, JOHNSON & ASSOCIATES, P.C., Arlington, Virginia, for Petitioner. Peter D. Keisler, Assistant Attorney General, James A. Hunolt, Senior Litigation Counsel, Julia A. Jones, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, Washington, D.C., for Respondent. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Kokou Magbede Tougnon, a native and citizen of Togo, petitions for review of an order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (Board) affirming without opinion the Immigration Judge’s (IJ) denial of his applications for asylum, withholding of removal, and protection under the Convention Against Torture. To obtain reversal of a determination denying eligibility for relief, an alien “must show that the evidence he presented was so compelling that no reasonable factfinder could fail to find the requisite fear of persecution.” INS v. Elias-Zacarias , 502 U.S. 478, 483-84 (1992). We have reviewed the evidence of record and conclude that Tougnon fails to show that the evidence compels a contrary result. Having failed to qualify for asylum, Tougnon cannot meet the higher standard to qualify for withholding of removal. Chen v. INS , 195 F.3d 198, 205 (4th Cir. 1999); INS v. Cardoza-Fonseca , 480 U.S. 421, 430 (1987). We also uphold the IJ’s finding that Tougnon failed to establish eligibility for protection under the Convention Against Torture. See 8 C.F.R. § 1208.16(c)(2) (2004). Finally, we reject Tougnon’s claim that he was denied due process by the Board’s use of its summary affirmance procedure to affirm the decision of the IJ. See Blanco de Belbruno v. Ashcroft , 362 F.3d 272, 280-83 (4th Cir. 2004).- 3 - Accordingly, we grant leave to proceed on appeal in forma pauperis and deny the petition for review. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

PETITION DENIED