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

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1112 Introduced in Senate (IS)]

107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1112

   To provide Federal Perkins Loan cancellation for public defenders.

_______________________________________________________________________

                   IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

                             June 27, 2001

Mr. Durbin (for himself, Mr. Chafee, Mrs. Feinstein, Mr. Bingaman, Mr. 
Akaka, Mr. Kerry, Mr. Sarbanes, Mr. Johnson, and Mr. Inouye) introduced 
the following bill; which was read twice and referred to the Committee 
               on Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 A BILL

 
   To provide Federal Perkins Loan cancellation for public defenders.

    Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the 
United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. FEDERAL PERKINS LOAN CANCELLATION FOR PUBLIC DEFENDERS.

    (a) Findings.--Congress makes the following findings:
            (1) The Department of Education has issued clarifications 
        that prosecuting attorneys are among the class of law 
        enforcement officers eligible for benefits under the Federal 
        Perkins Loan cancellation program.
            (2) Like prosecutors, public defenders also meet all the 
        eligibility requirements of the Federal Perkins Loan 
        cancellation program as set forth in Federal regulations.
            (3) Public defenders are law enforcement officers who play 
        an integral role in our Nation's adversarial legal process. 
        Public defenders fill the Supreme Court mandated role requiring 
        that counsel be appointed for the accused, by representing the 
        interests of criminally accused indigent persons.
            (4) In order to encourage highly qualified attorneys to 
        serve as public defenders, public defenders should be included 
        with prosecutors among the class of law enforcement officers 
        eligible to receive benefits under the Federal Perkins Loan 
        cancellation program.
    (b) Amendment.--Section 465(a)(2)(F) of the Higher Education Act of 
1965 (20 U.S.C. 1087ee(a)(2)(F)) is amended by inserting ``, or as a 
full-time public defender for service to a local or State government, 
or to the Federal Government (directly or by a contract with a private, 
nonprofit organization)'' after ``agencies''.
    (c) Effective Date.--The amendment made by this section shall apply 
to--
            (1) loans made under part E of title IV of the Higher 
        Education Act of 1965, whether made before, on, or after the 
        date of enactment of this Act; and
            (2) service as a public defender that is provided on or 
        after the date of enactment of this Act.
    (d) Construction.--Nothing in this section or the amendment made by 
this section shall be construed to authorize the refunding of any 
repayment of a loan.
                                 <all>
```
08/09/2010 

Office ofConsumer Infonnation and Insurance Oversight 


Department ofHealth and Human Services 


Attention: OCIIO-9991-IFC 


P.O. Box 8016 


Baltimore, MD 21244-1850 


Re: Interim Final Rule for Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Coverage Relating to 


Status as a Grandfathered Health Plan Under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act 


Below are my comments regarding the Interim Final Rule for Group Health Plans and Health 


Insurance Coverage Relating to Status as a Grandfathered Health Plan Under the Patient 


Protection ru.!d~ A~2rdable<Care Act (PPACA). 


I believe that every effort should be made to increase the number of individuals covered by 


PPACA, especially as ofJanuary 1, 2014 when most ofthe refonn components (Insurance 


Exchanges, Subsidies, Tax Credits, etc.) come into play . 


. The average consumer has a broad definition of "benefits." Consumers view their health plan 

beyond the covered benefits, cost sharing, and the contribution levels associated with the plan. 

It is my opinion that the Rule may still result in some confusion to the marketplace in its 

application. For example, if an employer raised the copayment level beyond the maximum in one 

area (i.e. outpatient services) but retained the copayment level for primary care doctor visits, 

does that mean a loss of grandfather status? Clarity will be critical both for the employer and the ~ 

employee. . 

Even by the most optimistic estimates, a substantial portion ofthe employee population will 


remain outside the PPACA as ofJanuary 2014 based on the current rules. While I understand the 


difficulty involved in making change, creating another large SUb-population of excluded 


individuals will only add to costs, increase confusion, and mitigate the potential impact ofthe 


legislation. 


The Rule needs to be clear, reasonable, and with no ambiguities involved in detennining whether 

~a group healtli plan is''lrlor'otiP'-The oeciSions "the federal government fuakes'today·will -- -- ­

detennine the outcomes for tomorrow. We may need to make some difficult decisions to create, 

a sustainable health care system that will support a growing economy in the future. That means 

getting as many citizens across the country participating at the beginning to make it work and 

delivering on its promises to retain their support. 

Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this regulation. 

Dr. Don Barnett
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                           9,845
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                   742
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     46,003
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          29,060
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            29,860
<LOANS>                                        171,477
<ALLOWANCE>                                      3,039
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 263,607
<DEPOSITS>                                     223,489
<SHORT-TERM>                                     8,391
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              1,737
<LONG-TERM>                                      4,278
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         2,667
<OTHER-SE>                                      23,045
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 263,607
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                 16,145
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                4,443
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                   214
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                20,802
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               8,898
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               9,410
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                           11,392
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      932
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                  25
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  7,946
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  3,821
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       2,848
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     2,848
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     1.02
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     1.01
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.62
<LOANS-NON>                                        480
<LOANS-PAST>                                       319
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 2,756
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      806
<RECOVERIES>                                       157
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                3,039
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             3,039
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                            508
        

</TABLE>
Here's how you know
 **Official websites use .mil** .mil
 **Secure .mil websites use HTTPS** lock () https://


Skip to main content (Press Enter).
 Toggle navigation
            
            U.S. Central Command
                CENTCOM
        Search
                    Search CENTCOM:
                        Search
                Search CENTCOM:
                    Search
    Home

    ABOUT US
    
        COMMAND PRIORITIES

    LEADERSHIP

    COMPONENT COMMANDS

    HISTORY

    POSTURE STATEMENT

    CENTCOM AOR
    
        CENTCOM COALITION

    OPERATIONS AND EXERCISES
    
        USMTM

    CIVILIAN CASUALTY REPORT

    CONTACT
    
        OPERATIONAL CONTRACT SUPPORT

    COMMUNITY RELATIONS

    THEATRE MEDICAL CLEARANCE

    INNOVATION VENDOR PORTAL

    MILITARY MEMBER INNOVATION PORTAL

    MEDIA
    
        SOCIAL MEDIA

    NEWS ARTICLES

    PRESS RELEASES

    STATEMENTS

    IMAGERY

    VIDEOS

    TRANSCRIPTS

    VISITORS AND PERSONNEL
    
        FAMILY CENTER

    FAMILY READINESS

    CENTCOM WEBMAIL

    SOCIAL MEDIA SECURITY

    ACCOUNTABILITY

    EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS

    USCENTCOM UNCLASSIFIED REGULATIONS

    FOIA LIBRARY

    INNOVATION OASIS

    WELCOME GUIDE  Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesCommunity RelationsOtherPreviousCommanders
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Share
  
 Small () Medium () Full Size (0.34 MB)
 
 3rd Brigade Convoy convoy live-fire Greywolf n 3ABCT 1st Cavalry 215th BSB readiness Kuwait
 Photo Gallery
 About UsCommand PrioritiesLeadershipComponent
   CommandsHistoryPosture Statement
   Area of
   ResponsibilityCENTCOM Coalition
   Operations And
   ExercisesOperation Inherent
   ResolveResolute Support
   MediaSocial MediaNews ArticlesPress ReleasesVideo And Imagery
   Visitors And
   PersonnelFamily ReadinessCENTCOM WebmailSocial MediaSecurityAccountabilityEmergency
   Preparedness
   ContactCommunity Relations
                    Stay Connected
                
                Privacy & Security  Inspector General  FOIA  Privacy Act
            

Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil
PUBLIC SUBMISSION

Received: December 11, 2017

Status: Pending_Post

Tracking No. 1k1-90am-kb1j

Comments Due: December 11, 2017

Submission Type: Web

Docket: EBSA-2015-0017

Claims Procedure for Plans Providing Disability Benefits; Extension of Applicability

Date

Comment On: EBSA-2015-0017-0291

Claims Procedure: Plans Providing Disability Benefits

Document: EBSA-2015-0017-DRAFT-0438

Comment on FR Doc # 2017-22082

Submitter Information

Name: Charles March

Address:

492 Blackstrap Rd.

Falmouth, ME, 04105

Email: cmarch@iwlcadvocate.com

Phone: 207-874-4771, X 118

General Comment

I am writing in support of the Final Rule - Claims Procedure for Plans providing 

disability benefits.

I am an attorney in Maine with many clients who are suffering from loss of income 

due to disabling conditions that entitle them to disability benefits from Employersponsored group LTD plans.

The claims administrators, generally insurance companies operating for-profit 

companies have used a host of administrative techniques to deny valid claims that 

meet the terms of the plans and deny Claimants full and fair review of benefit denials.

For example,

- currently it is rare for a claim denying LTD insurer to furnish plan rules, guidelines 

and protocols or standards used in denying the claim,
-currently it is common if not the rule that insurers administering claims will secure 

medical consultant file reviews to bolster APPEAL denials after the Claimant has 

appealed her claim. Insurers then, ALMOST NEVER allow the claimant a fair 

opportunity to respond.

For cases where a deferential review is used by the reviewing federal court, these 

tactics are often fatal for the Claimant.

It is critical for the DOL to implement the Final Rule.
From: E Meredith Young

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

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

Date: Tuesday, August 02, 2011 8:07:40 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,

E Meredith Young

701 Summit Ave A-105

Philadelphia, PA 19128
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 169 (Friday, September 1, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 60495]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-19106]


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

INTERNATIONAL TRADE COMMISSION

[USITC SE-23-042]


Sunshine Act Meetings

Agency Holding the Meeting:  United States International Trade 
Commission.

TIME AND DATE: September 8, 2023 at 11:00 a.m.

PLACE: Room 101, 500 E Street SW, Washington, DC 20436, Telephone: 
(202) 205-2000.

STATUS: Open to the public.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: 
    1. Agendas for future meetings: none.
    2. Minutes.
    3. Ratification List.
    4. Commission vote on Inv. Nos. 701-TA-570 and 731-TA-1346 (Review) 
(Aluminum Foil from China). The Commission currently is scheduled to 
complete and file its determinations and views of the Commission on 
September 19, 2023.
    5. Commission vote on Inv. Nos. 701-TA-693 and 731-TA-1629-1640 
(Preliminary) (Mattresses from Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Burma, 
India, Indonesia, Italy, Kosovo, Mexico, Philippines, Poland, Slovenia, 
Spain, and Taiwan). The Commission currently is scheduled to complete 
and file its determinations on September 11, 2023; views of the 
Commission currently are scheduled to be completed and filed on 
September 18, 2023.
    6. Outstanding action jackets: none.

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFORMATION: Sharon Bellamy, Acting Supervisory 
Hearings and Information Officer, 202-205-2000.
    The Commission is holding the meeting under the Government in the 
Sunshine Act, 5 U.S.C. 552(b). In accordance with Commission policy, 
subject matter listed above, not disposed of at the scheduled meeting, 
may be carried over to the agenda of the following meeting.

    By order of the Commission.

    Issued: August 30, 2023.
Sharon Bellamy,
Acting Supervisory Hearings and Information Officer.
[FR Doc. 2023-19106 Filed 8-30-23; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 7020-02-P
#### Frank C. MITCHELL v. TRAWLER RACER, INC.

Civ. A. No. 57-752.

United States District Court D. Massachusetts.

Oct. 31, 1958.

Morris D. Katz, Boston, Mass., for plaintiff.

James A. Whipple, Boston, Mass., for defendant.

WYZANSKI, District Judge.

In this case I made a statement in my charge to the jury which I believe ought to be supported by a brief memorandum.

In effect I said that the plaintiff could not recover unless the slime had been on the rail long enough for the shipowner to be chargeable with knowledge of it. No one would doubt that this was a correct charge with respect to the negligence count, but it might be argued that the charge was inappropriate with respect to the unseaworthiness count. If *435such an argument should be made, there are two independent answers.

First, there should have been a directed verdict for the defendant on the unseaworthiness count. If there were slime on the rail, it was put there by an associate and joint venturer of the plaintiff and not by a stranger or by anyone acting for the defendant. If Sailor A and his wife go on board, and each of them has a right to be there, but they are engaging in a frolic of their own, not intended for the profit or advantage of the shipowner, say, for example, that they are munching taffy, and the wife drops the taffy on the deck, and the sailor slips on it, the sailor, if he is injured, is not entitled to collect damages from the shipowner. In short, absolute as is the liability for unseaworthiness, it does not subject the shipowner to liability from articles deposited on the ship by a co-adventurer of the plaintiff.

Second, even if it were true that in some cases a shipowner may be liable on the theory of unseaworthiness for injuries attributed to articles deposited on the ship by one who at the time of the deposit was acting as an associate and joint adventurer of the plaintiff, such possibility of liability does not arise *instanter*following the deposit. A reasonable period of time must elapse to allow the defendant shipowner to discover the deposit. Cases which appear to sustain a shipowner’s liability for accidents due to foreign substances deposited upon the deck without the shipowner’s knowledge or even his opportunity to know are in every instance, so far as this Court is aware, cases where the deposit was made either by a stranger or by a person who at the time he made the deposit was acting either by virtue of agency or independent contract on behalf of the shipowner. Such authorities are irrelevant where the deposit was made by a person who (regardless of his formal employment payments) was at the time of the deposit the agent for and only for the plaintiff.
From: kwolgemuth@palawyers1.com [mailto:kwolgemuth@palawyers1.com] 

Sent: Tuesday, October 24, 2017 9:38 AM

To: EBSA, E-ORI - EBSA

Subject: Delay of ERISA regulations; RIN 1210-AB39

Dear DOL: My firm is against delaying the new ERISA regulations. The proposed changes 

attempt to make a very poor procedural process more fair to individuals who are disabled. 

The DOL has already reviewed the concerns made by the insurance companies and the rule 

making process has been completed. The DOL has carefully reviewed the cost of the new 

regulations and has determined that the cost would be minimal to the insurance industry 

yet provide much needed changes to the procedural hurdles that face individuals requesting 

disability benefits. Any further delay will only harm those people who need the DOL's help. 

Kirk L. Wolgemuth, Wolgemuth & Levinson, Law Offices.
From: R Ludwig

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

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

Date: Tuesday, August 02, 2011 4:40:16 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,

R Ludwig

617 3rd Ave W

Seattle, WA 98119
## Breadcrumb

-  Justice.gov 
-  Executive Office for Immigration Review 
-  Access EOIR 
-  Virtual Law Library 
-  Agency Decisions 

MENU                            Virtual Law Library                          
                        -  Agency Decisions 
                        -  Amicus Invitations 
                        -  Country Conditions Research 
                        -  Temporary Protected Status (TPS) 
                        -  Immigration Law Advisor (ILA) 
                        -  Library FAQ 
                        -  Federal Register 

# Agency Decisions

                      -  Facebook 
                      -  X 
                      -  LinkedIn 
                      -  Email 

8 Code of Federal Regulations | Immigration and Nationality Act 

----

                          - AG/BIA Precedent Decisions
                          - OCAHO Decisions  
                          - Cumulative Indexes to Agency Decisions  
                          - I & N Volume 27  
                          - Alphabetical Listing of AG/BIA Decisions  
                          - Charts  |  Other Administrative Decisions .

----

Subscribe for Email Updates when AG/BIA precedent decisions are published

## AG/BIA Precedent Decisions

 

## OCAHO Published Decisions

 

## Cumulative Indexes to Agency Decisions

Cumulative Index AG/BIA Volumes 26 - 27 (ID #3766 - #3984) (PDF) (Note: : The indexes to Volumes 16 - 25 and 26 – 27 are searchable. Use the Adobe "find" feature.)

Cumulative Index AG/BIA Volume 16 - 25 (ID# 2526 to 3765) (PDF)

Cumulative Index AG/BIA Volumes 1 - 15

(Note: Due to the large file size of the index, it has been broken into two files to facilitate easier downloads.)
                          - Topics A - E  (size: 5MB) (PDF)
                          - Topics F - Z  (size: 4MB) (PDF)

**Cumulative Topical Index of Published and Indexed Decisions Volumes 1-20 **(PDF)

 

##  I & N Volume 27 Supplemental Information

 

## Alphabetical Listing of AG / BIA Decisions

Volume 8 - Current

 

## Charts

BIA Headnote Interim Decision Chart

Note: This document compiles headnotes from BIA precedent cases published in volumes 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, and 27 of the Administrative Decisions under the Immigration and Nationality Laws of the United States, organized by topic.  It currently includes headnotes from all BIA cases published from *Matter of Esposito*(March 30, 1995) through *Matter of L-E-A-* (May 24, 2017).

Disclaimer: This document is provided for informational purposes only as a convenience to the public.  It is not intended as a comprehensive source for preparing an appeal, or for citation in legal briefs, and does not represent an official publication of EOIR.

 

## Other Administrative Decisions

DHS/AAO/INS Decisions