alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
From: mprint@att.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:12:55 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,

Darren Morrison

Lamar, MO 64759
Amendment to Demand Loan and Security Agreement



 Exhibit 10(b) 
  
 February 26, 2004 
  

International Electronics, Inc. 
 427 Turnpike Street 
 Canton, Massachusetts 02021 
 Attn: John Waldstein, President and Treasurer 
  
 Gentlemen: 
  
 Reference is made to our Demand Loan and Security Agreement Accounts Receivable and Inventory dated February 28, 1997, together with all amendments and
additions thereto (hereinafter called the “Agreement”). Notwithstanding the provisions of the Agreement, it is agreed, effective immediately, that the Agreement shall be amended as follows: 
  
 Section 14(m) of the Agreement is hereby stricken in its entirety and the
following new Section 14(m) substituted therfor: 
  
 “(m) (Minimum Net Earnings) permit the net after tax earnings of Borrower for any year to be less than Ten Thousand ($10,000.00) Dollars.” 
  
 Kindly note that the alterations contained herein do not in any way alter, release or change any other sections contained in
the Agreement. 
  
 Please acknowledge your agreement to the
foregoing by signing the enclosed copy of this letter and returning the same to the undersigned. 
  

			
	 Very truly yours,

	
	 EASTERN BANK

		
	 By:
	 	 /s/ Alan Roberts


	 	 	 Alan Roberts, Vice President



  

			
	 UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED TO:

	
	 INTERNATIONAL ELECTRONICS, INC.

		
	 By:
	 	 /s/ John Waldstein


	 	 	 John Waldstein, President and Treasurer
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 (6.23 MB)
 
 RC23
 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
From: jkinas@me.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:24:16 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,

Judith Kinas

Reston, VA 20194
To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Thank you for supporting full-cost contraception

Date: Tuesday, August 02, 2011 6:19:03 PM

Dear Kathleen Sebelius, Secretary of Health & Human Services,

Thank you and your colleagues at the Department of Health & Human Services for your landmark

decision requiring health insurers to cover the full cost of contraception, with no co-pay, beginning in

August 2012.

When I was prescribed birth control pills for heavy menstrual bleeding some years ago, the only reason

my health care provider covered the cost was that the pills were prescribed for a reason OTHER than

contraception! The hypocrisy still stuns me.

Birth control is a critical part of women's preventive care, as other industrialized nations have long

realized. Free contraception means many fewer unplanned pregnancies, as well as the risks associated

with them.

Thank you for making women's basic health care needs a right and a priority.

Sincerely,

A. Ellis
From: rkdemott@comcast.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Support Access to Preventive Care and Contraception!

Date: Monday, August 15, 2011 4:55:04 PM

I join with the American Association of University Women (AAUW) in asking you to

accept the recommendations of the Institute of Medicine as pertain to coverage of

preventive care under the new health care law, and to reject any exemptions for

“religious employers.” These preventive services are a critical element of the new law

and would provide countless women better access to necessary health care.

While AAUW believes that “religious refusal” exemptions unjustly deny women access

to contraceptive services, others, driven by an ideological distaste for all contraceptive

services, are pushing the government to make exemptions even larger. Indeed, some

groups are pushing for the exemption to apply to religiously-run health providers, so

hospitals with religious affiliations would be exempt from the coverage requirement,

even though they employ people of all faiths and ideologies. If granted, this larger

exemption would deny access to thousands of women just because of where they work.

I urge you to ensure women have access to quality preventive care by accepting IOM’s

recommendations and rejecting the proposed religious refusal exemption provisions.
From: jnjclarke@gwi.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:04:46 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,

James Clarke

Sanford, ME 04073
To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 11:50:35 AM

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,

Josephine Franco

, 12182
From: pwhite4116@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:17:30 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,

Peter White

Minnetonka, MN 55345
WARNING: THE EDGAR SYSTEM ENCOUNTERED ERROR(S) WHILE PROCESSING THIS SCHEDULE.

<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                     5

<S>                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 12-mos
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>             Dec-31-1996
<PERIOD-END>                  Dec-31-1996
<CASH>                        1,022,064
<SECURITIES>                  0
<RECEIVABLES>                 95,119
<ALLOWANCES>                  0
<INVENTORY>                   0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>              6,292,587
<PP&E>                        0
<DEPRECIATION>                0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                6,292,587
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>         963,373
<BONDS>                       0
<COMMON>                      0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>         0
<PREFERRED>                   0
<OTHER-SE>                    5,329,214
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>  6,292,587
<SALES>                       0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>              2,284,162
<CGS>                         0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                 0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>              879,774
<GAIN-PROVISION>              383,193
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>            0
<INCOME-PRETAX>               1,787,581
<INCOME-TAX>                  0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>           1,787,581
<DISCONTINUED>                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>               0
<CHANGES>                     0
<NET-INCOME>                  1,787,581
<EPS-PRIMARY>                 113.32
<EPS-DILUTED>                 113.32


</TABLE>
Skip To Main Content

| Contact us |  Help                       |
|---------------------------------------------------------------|

          - Home
          - About
          - ADR
          - ADR Archives
          - Resources
          - Contact

| Home > **ADR Archives** ADR Archives
2018 ADR

2017 ADR

2016 ADR

2015 ADR

2014 ADR

2013 ADR

2012 ADR

2011 ADR

2010 ADR2009 ADR2008 ADR2007 ADR2006 ADR2005 ADR2004 ADR2003 ADR            note: The 2003-2009 ADRs are provided as zip files |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

----

HRSAHHSViewers & PlayersFreedom of Information ActPrivacy PolicyDisclaimersAccessibility
<PAGE>   1
        Exhibit 11 Statement Regarding Computation of Earnings per Share

                   AMERICAN RESIDENTIAL INVESTMENT TRUST, INC.
              Statement Regarding Computation of Earnings per Share
                  (Dollars in thousands, except per share data)


<TABLE>
<CAPTION>
                                                                            For the period from
                                                                             February 11, 1997
                                           For the Three Months         (commencement of operations)
                                         Ended September 30, 1997        through September 30, 1997
                                                    ------                         ------
<S>                                      <C>                            <C>   
Net income                                          $  519                         $1,103
                                                    ------                         ------
Average number of shares outstanding                 1,614                          1,614
Net effect of dilutive stock options-                                       
Based on treasury stock method using                                        
Average market price                                    53                             53
                                                    ------                         ------
Total average shares                                 1,667                          1,667
                                                    ------                         ------
Net income per share                                $ 0.31                         $ 0.66
                                                    ------                         ------
</TABLE>
### IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEVADA

LEE DAVID HUSTEAD, Appellant, No. 70156

VS. 

### MARJORIE L. HUSTEAD, Respondent. 

# FILED
APR 2 7 2016

TRACIE K. LINDE.MAN CLERK OF SUPREME COURT BY DEPUTY CLERfr



### ORDER DISMISSING APPEAL This is a pro se appeal from a hearing purportedly held on March 10, 2016, in a divorce action. Second Judicial District Court, Family Court Division, Washoe County; Cynthia Lu, Judge.

Our preliminary review of the docketing statement and the documents submitted to this court pursuant to NRAP 3(g) reveals a potential jurisdictional defect. Specifically, it appears that the notice of appeal was prematurely filed, before the entry of a final written judgment, and is therefore of no effect. See NRAP 4(a)(1); Rust v. Clark Cty. School District, 103 Nev. 686, 747 P.2d 1380 (1987). To the extent appellant seeks to appeal from the order striking a request for submission entered February 24, 2016, the order is not appealable. See NRAP 3A(b). This court has jurisdiction to consider an appeal only when the appeal is authorized by statute or court rule. Taylor Constr. Co. v. Hilton Hotels, 100 Nev. 207, 678 P.2d 1152 (1984). No statute or court rule permits an

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA
(0) 1947A 4409. to-132appeal from an order striking a request for submission. Accordingly, we

conclude that we lack jurisdiction, and we

ORDER this appeal DISMISSED.



# C hzit_ Cherry

cc: Hon. Cynthia Lu, District Judge, Family Court Division Lee David Hustead Surratt Law Practice, PC Washoe District Court Clerk

SUPREME COURT OF NEVADA 2 (0) 1947A 4)Dget(7
<tt3-/S"

ELECTRONIC RECORD

COA # 02-13-00244-CR

Michael Amos v. The State of

STYLE: Texas

COA DISPOSITION: AFFIRM

OFFENSE: 42.09

COUNTY: Tarrant

TRIAL COURT: Criminal District Court No. 4

DATE: 07/02/2015 Publish: YES TC CASE #: 1322040R

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS

STYLE: Michael Amos v. The State of Texas

APPELLANT*^ Petition

FOR DISCRETIONARY REVIEW IN CCA IS:

7&FU5<fi>

DATE:

JUDGE:

CCA#: <m-/5"

CCA Disposition:

DATE:

JUDGE:

SIGNED:

PUBLISH:

REHEARING IN CCA IS:

JUDGE:

PC:_

DNP:

MOTION FOR

ELECTRONIC RECORD
No. 168.

#### Bonsall et al. *v.*Humble Oil & Refining Co.

*Robert McHale*for petitioners.

C. A. 5th Cir. Certiorari denied.