alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
From: Martha Bunce

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Date: Thursday, August 11, 2011 12:00:53 PM

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

you to accept the recommendations of the Institute of Medicine pertaining 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.

AAUW believes that “religious refusal” exemptions unjustly deny women

access to contraceptive services; however, 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: mick and gina robinson

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Contraception for all.

Date: Thursday, August 11, 2011 1:41:36 AM

To Whom It May Concern:

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.

There should be no religious exemptions of any type to the recommendations of the Institue of

Medicine. Sound medicine is not and should not be limited by religious ideology.

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.

Very truly yours,

Mick Robinson
This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent *

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision **

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).

NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

CLAY FIELDS,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

 v.

SALT RIVER PIMA-MARICOPA

INDIAN COMMUNITY,

 Defendant - Appellee.

No. 09-16814

D.C. No. 2:09-cv-00309-SRB

MEMORANDUM*

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the District of Arizona

Susan R. Bolton, District Judge, Presiding

Submitted May 10, 2010** 

San Francisco, California

Before: REINHARDT, W. FLETCHER and N.R. SMITH, Circuit Judges.

“Indian tribes have long been recognized as possessing the common-law

immunity from suit traditionally enjoyed by sovereign powers.” Santa Clara

FILED

MAY 19 2010

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
2

Pueblo v. Martinez, 436 U.S. 49, 58 (1978). In practice, this means that “suits

against [Indian tribes] under the Indian Civil Rights Act (“ICRA”) are barred

by . . . sovereign immunity from suit.” Id. at 59. Here, Fields directly sued the

Salt River Pima-Maricopa Community for a violation of the ICRA. The suit is

barred by sovereign immunity.

Congress has created jurisdiction for only one type of claim under the ICRA:

habeas corpus challenges to detention. “Congress, aware of the intrusive effect of

federal judicial review upon tribal self-government, intended to create only a

limited mechanism for [review under the ICRA], namely, that provided for

expressly in § 1303 [the provision of the ICRA providing for habeas relief].” 

Santa Clara Pueblo, 436 U.S. at 70. Here, Fields did not bring a claim for habeas

relief under § 1303 of the ICRA. Thus, Fields’s claim is not authorized under the

ICRA, and federal courts do not have jurisdiction to review it. We are not

persuaded by Fields’s arguments regarding Dry Creek Lodge, Inc. v. Arapahoe and

Shoshone Tribes, 623 F.2d 682 (10th Cir. 1980). Dry Creek is inconsistent with

Supreme Court and Ninth Circuit precedent.

AFFIRMED.
Page | of 1

KEC-1B0 591-10

LEGAL PROCESSING DIVIS
PI Ss ION
PUBLICATION & REGULATIONS ee of: ae ar sont
. eceived: August 15,
Status: Posted

PUBLIC SUBMISSION Posted: August 31, 2011

Tracking No, 80ce17dd
‘Comments Due: September 30, 2011
Submission Type: Web

Docket: IRS-2010-0017
Requirement for Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Issuers to Provide Coverage of
Preventive Services under the PatientProtection and Affordable Care Act

Comment On: IRS-2010-0017-0038
Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Issuers Relating to Coverage of Preventive Services
under Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act: Amendment

Document: IRS-2010-0017-0081
Comment on FR Doc # 2011-19684

Submitter Information

Name: Rick Bligh
Address:
13021 58th Ave NE
Marysville, WA, 98271
Email: rick.bligh@gmail.com
Phone: 360.651.8913
Submitter's Representative: Rick Larson, WA-2

General Comment

Improving women's access to birth control is positive in so many ways. A woman who can plan
when to have a family is able to participate in society more fully. Allowing women to space their
pregnancies contributes to healthy childbearing. And ultimately, fewer unintended pregnancies
can reduce the need for abortion.

http://fdms.erulemaking.net/fdms-web-agency/component/contentstreamer?objectlId=0900... 8/31/2011
From: Barbara Dota

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: RIN 1210-AB44 Mandatory Birth Control

Date: Tuesday, August 16, 2011 11:27:57 AM

To Whom it May Concern,

I object in the strongest of terms to mandating birth control with no co-pays under

the Affordable Care Act.

Birth control is already widely available to all women, subsidized largely by

taxpayers. Demanding that we further subsidize other people's birth control by

increasing our insurance premiums in these days when families are struggling just to

make ends meet is an outrage. 

The mandate violates my conscience and that of millions of Americans who oppose

birth control on moral and religious grounds. 

It is undisputed that one of the operations of contraceptives is to render the

endometrium hostile to implantation, so that if fertilization occurs, the newly

conceived child may be lost to an early abortion. I also strongly object to the

inclusion of free sterilization as well as abortifacient pills like ella, which can work

weeks after a person's biological beginning to cause an abortion.

And what of Catholic employers and others who oppose birth control, but are now

going to be forced to participate in these plans and/or offer it to their employees?

This flies in the face of the conscience protections that Americans have historically

enjoyed.

The conscience provisions attached to the rule are so narrowly crafted that they

would appear to force Catholic institutions to make free birth control and sterilization

available in health plans, or cease hiring and providing services to non-Catholics. 

It is incomprehensible that such a mandate is being forced upon the people of the

United States.

It is no secret that Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion chain in America, is

behind this mandate, and will reap huge financial benefits from it at a time when

citizens in the United States are working on both the state and federal levels to

defund the abortion giant. 

The majority of Americans are pro-life and we do not want our tax dollars and

insurance premiums supporting the nation's largest abortion chain.

It is imperative that you give credence to my personal objection along with those of

millions of other Americans who do not want to be forced to pay for and provide

medication, devices, and procedures that do not treat or prevent any disease or

illness, but distort and render inoperable a healthy reproductive system. This rule is

unjust, untenable, and un-American--and it should be stricken.

Sincerely,

Barbara Dota
Shelton, Connecticut
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.                  

###### Postal Service

# AGENCY:

                        Postal ServiceTM.                    

# ACTION:

Notice.

# SUMMARY:

The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

# DATES:

*Date of required notice:*                         August 31, 2023.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Sean Robinson, 202-268-8405.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The United States Postal Service® hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on August 23, 2023, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a                     *USPS Request to Add Priority Mail & USPS Ground Advantage® Contract 40 to Competitive Product List.*                     Documents are available at                     *www.prc.gov,*                     Docket Nos. MC2023-248, CP2023-251.                

Sean Robinson,

Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.

[FR Doc. 2023-18787 Filed 8-30-23; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
Page 1 of 1

LEGAL PROCESSING DIVISION BECTBEUA 10 Aug 2 4 2010

PUBLICATION & REGULATIONS .
BRANCH

As of: August 23, 2010

PUBLIC Status: Posted

Posted: August 23, 2010

SUBMISSION Comments Oue: August 16, 2010

Submission Type: Web

Docket: IRS-2010-0010

Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Coverage Rules Relating to Status as a Grandfathered

Health Plan Under the Patient Protection and Afforable Care Act

Comment On: IRS-2010-0010-0001

Group Health Plans and Health Insurance Coverage: Interim Final Rules for Relating to Status as

a Grandfathered Health Plan under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act

Document: IRS-2010-0010-0317
Comment on FR Doc # 2010-14488

Submitter Information

Name: Lance Emil Sikorski
Address:
12798 E. 800th Ave
Robinson, IL, 62454
Email: driance@earthlink.net
Phone: 618-544-3666
Submitter's Representative: Dick Durbin
Government Agency Type: Federal
Government Agency: HHS

General Comment

attached

Attachments

IRS-2010-0010-0317.1: Comment on FR Doc # 2010-14488

http://fdms.erulemaking net/fdms-web-agency/component/submitterInfoCoverPage?Call-...

8/23/2010


August 10, 2010

Office of Consumer Information and Insurance Oversight
Department of Health and Human Services

Attention: OCHO-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

As a consumer I wish to take this opportunity to formally comment on
the interim final rule regarding health plans and “grandfather” status (Document ID IRS-2010-
0010-0001).

I believe the consumer protections included as part of the new health care law are vitally
important and should be extended to as many people as possible. Accordingly, every effort
should be made to increase the number of individuals covered by the Patient Protection and
Affordable Care Act (PPACA) via the above regulations. The triggers or conditions that would
extend these protections to consumers under currently existing “grandfathered” plans should not
be weakened or reduced in any way. I specifically support the position and detailed comments
offered by the American Chiropractic Association with respect to the implementation of these
regulations.

It is also my opinion that by ‘grandfathering’ in only certain plans you would be showing
favoritism for what could be construed as big business. Since we currently have an
administration that is more ‘pro little person’ this would not be a wise decision from a political
standpoint. This law should be fully implemented and not have loopholes for only certain
corporations to slip through.

Thank you ,

Lance Sikorski
From: Cheryl Spooner

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Proposed Definition of religious employer

Date: Friday, August 12, 2011 7:19:39 PM

Dear Sir/Madame:

I know that you have a busy agenda, so I do not try to inundate you with

messages. However, the current issue on the table concerning religious employers is

a grave issue to me.

I start not with my own opinion, but with the words of Abraham Lincoln, "Four score

and seven years ago our fathers brought forth, upon this continent, a new nation,

conceived in Liberty, and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created

equal."

Liberty was never perceived by Lincoln as something that was to be used to run

over others. He himself was a very religious man and would never, under any

circumstances, have thought it o.k. to grant to some the "right" to destroy the

future men and women of our country. He was grieved over the idea of a war

that divided our country and that sought to enslave and/or kill innocent men and

women just because of the color of their skin.

How is it that we have ever come to the point that we have again divided our

country over the idea that it is all right to kill just because children (DNA: human)

cannot be seen by the naked eye, cannot speak up for themselves, and cannot

vote. Yet those very children are the very citizens that will be tomorrow's voters,

teachers, doctors, and workers in all the variegated ways that America provides

hope to people from all nations. 

To strike further at our roots, I quote the last words of that speech, "...that we here

highly resolve that these dead shall not have died in vain; that this nation shall have

a new birth of freedom; and that this government of the people, by the people, for

the people, shall not perish from the earth." This government was never set up to

force death upon any people, let alone upon the innocent unborn. It is a

government of the people, not of the elite. It is a government that was set up to

welcome those seeking a place where their religious beliefs can be practiced without

a government that insists in squashing them.

I urge you, please, to consider that every citizen has the right to follow his religious

beliefs. Churches, other organizations, and individuals that believe that birth control

and abortion are intrinsically wrong have the right to believe that and to refuse

health services of that kind from insurance organizations. They have the right to

hire only those that are in agreement with their respect for life positions.

Thank you so much for listening,

Cheryl Spooner
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 (3.4 MB)
 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
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 172 (Thursday, September 7, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 61630]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-19217]


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

POSTAL SERVICE


Product Change--Priority Mail, First-Class Package Service & 
Parcel Select Negotiated Service Agreement

AGENCY: Postal Service<SUP>TM</SUP>.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: The Postal Service gives notice of filing a request with the 
Postal Regulatory Commission to add a domestic shipping services 
contract to the list of Negotiated Service Agreements in the Mail 
Classification Schedule's Competitive Products List.

DATES: Date of required notice: September 7, 2023.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Sean C. Robinson, 202-268-8405.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The United States Postal Service[supreg] 
hereby gives notice that, pursuant to 39 U.S.C. 3642 and 3632(b)(3), on 
August 31, 2023, it filed with the Postal Regulatory Commission a 
Request of the United States Postal Service to Add Priority Mail, 
First-Class Package Service & Parcel Select Contract 41 to Competitive 
Product List. Documents are available at www.prc.gov, Docket Nos. 
MC2023-255, CP2023-258.

Sean C. Robinson,
Attorney, Corporate and Postal Business Law.
[FR Doc. 2023-19217 Filed 9-6-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 7710-12-P
From: pat bereczki

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Access to Preventive Care and Contraception

Date: Saturday, August 13, 2011 11:21:09 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.

Sincerely,

Patricia Bereczki
Order entered April 10, 2020

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-19-01329-CV

ZIA UL-HAQ SHEIKH, Appellant

V.

JANE DOE, Appellee

On Appeal from the 298th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. DC-18-08987

ORDER

Before the Court are appellant’s April 6, 2020 motion to seal portions of 

appellant’s opening brief, appellee’s April 7, 2020 response, and appellant’s April 

8, 2020 reply letter. 

We note the clerk’s record, due to be filed March 12, 2020, has not yet been 

filed, and appellant’s opening brief, filed April 1, 2020, has been deemed deficient. 

Accordingly, because appellant’s brief has been deemed deficient, we DENY as 
premature appellant’s motion. To avoid confusion with any corrected brief

appellant may file, we STRIKE the April 1st brief.

Because the appeal cannot proceed without the clerk’s record, we ORDER 

Dallas County District Clerk Felicia Pitre to file the clerk’s record no later than 

April 20, 2020. The clerk’s record shall be filed in accordance with our order of 

March 2, 2020. 

Appellant’s corrected brief shall be filed within thirty days of the filing of 

the clerk’s record. 

We DIRECT the Clerk of the Court to send a copy of this order to Ms. Pitre 

and the parties.

/s/ KEN MOLBERG 

JUSTICE