alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
#### Thomas H. Robbins, Appellant, v. George W. Brown and others, Respondents.

Order affirmed, with cost6 and disbursements. Opinion by Barnard, P. J.
From: Lanna Ultican

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Preventive Services

Date: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 6:17:31 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.

Thank you

Lanna Ultican
From: Teresa Jaeger

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Support access to preventive care and contraception

Date: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 11:27:25 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.
Exhibit 32.1




CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF


THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In connection with the filing of the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of South Jersey Gas Company (the “Company”) for the period ended September 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Edward J. Graham, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:





(1)           The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or Section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and





(2)           The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.








/s/ Edward J. GrahamName:  Edward J. GrahamTitle:  Chief Executive OfficerNovember 8, 2010
#### In the Matter of the Petition of the Keystone State Construction Company, Appellant, for a Writ of Certiorari against John Williams, as Commissioner of Labor of the State of New York, Respondent.

*Matter of Keystone State Construction Co. v. Williams,*155 App. Div. —, affirmed.

(Submitted February 27, 1913;

decided March 18, 1913.)

Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the third judicial department, entered January 21, 1913, which reversed an order of Special Term denying a motion to quash a writ of certiorari and to vacate a stay and granted said motion.

The certiorari was issued to review the proceedings of the commissioner of labor in determining the prevailing rate of wages in the locality where petitioner was engaged upon a municipal contract.

*768
      *Wilbur L. Ball*for appellant.

*Thomas Carmody, Attorney-General (James A. Parsons*of counsel), for respondent.

■ Order affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Werner, Willard Bartlett, Hiscock, Chase, Collin and Hogan, JJ.
From: Vicki Olenick

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: RIN 1210-AB44 Mandatory Birth Control

Date: Thursday, August 04, 2011 10:10:15 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,

Vicki Olenick
Chesapeake, Virginia
Exhibit 32.1


                CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,
                       AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906
                        OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

         In connection with the Annual Report on Form 10-K of Presidential
Realty Corporation (the "Company") for the period ending December 31, 2003, as
filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
"Report"), I, Jeffrey F. Joseph, Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

    (1) the Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934: and

    (2) the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
respects, the financial condition and the results of operations of the Company.


                                    Presidential Realty Corporation

                                    By: /S/  JEFFREY F. JOSEPH
                                        -------------------------
                                        Jeffrey F. Joseph
                                        Chief Executive Officer

Date: March 23, 2004
REV HOLDINGSLLC AND SUBSIDIARIES

Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,ASADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF2002

In connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q ofREV Holdings LLC (the "Company") for theperiod ended September 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities andExchange Commission on the date hereof (the"Report"), I, Todd J. Slotkin, ChiefFinancial Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C.Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-OxleyAct of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

(1) The Reportfully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of theSecurities Exchange Act of 1934; and

(2) The informationcontained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.

/s/    Todd J.Slotkin                                    ToddJ. SlotkinChief Financial OfficerNovember 14,2005

----
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 (1.29 MB)
 
 USS Dwight D. Eisenhower; CVN 69; OFRP; CG 56 group-sail
 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: Ellen Vopicka

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Women"s right to quality preventive care

Date: Thursday, August 11, 2011 9:27:35 AM

 I urge the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to adopt the

Institute of Medicine’s (IOM) recommendations that women’s preventive

health care be completely covered by any new health insurance plans under

the new health care reform law.

 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 that all women have access to quality preventive care by

accepting IOM’s recommendations and rejecting the proposed religious

refusal exemption provisions.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THE SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS OF GENERAL INSTRUMENT CORPORATION FOR THE NINE MONTHS ENDED SEPTEMBER
30, 1998 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL
STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                         116,037
<SECURITIES>                                     4,081
<RECEIVABLES>                                  319,204
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (3,449)
<INVENTORY>                                    261,488
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               847,754
<PP&E>                                         505,270
<DEPRECIATION>                               (272,566)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,115,274
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          433,920
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                            1,734
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                   1,611,120
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,115,274
<SALES>                                      1,423,621
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                             1,423,621
<CGS>                                        1,036,649
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                1,036,649
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 125
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 19,498
<INCOME-TAX>                                  (10,018)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              9,480
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     9,480
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.06
        

</TABLE>
From: LWINK10@aol.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Reg: Coverage of Preventive Care/Religious Refusal

Date: Thursday, August 11, 2011 1:38:40 PM

My religious beliefs may differ from religious health care providers. Yet -- they can

refuse my request for services based on THEIR religious beliefs?? What if they

believe the bible is against organ transplants??? Yet science shows the treatment to

be effective. 

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 religiouslyrun 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.
[Federal Register Volume 72, Number 179 (Monday, September 17, 2007)]
[Notices]
[Page 52866]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 07-4591]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE

Office of the Secretary


Base Closure and Realignment

AGENCY: Office of Economic Adjustment, Department of Defense.

ACTION: Notice.

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

SUMMARY: This Notice is provided pursuant to section 2905(b)(7)(B)(ii) 
of the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990. It provides a 
partial list of military installations closing or realigning pursuant 
to the 2005 Defense Base Closure and Realignment (BRAC) Report. It also 
provides a corresponding listing of a successor Local Redevelopment 
Authority (LRA) for Fort Monroe, Virginia recognized by the Secretary 
of Defense, acting through the Department of Defense Office of Economic 
Adjustment (OEA), as well as the point of contact, address, and 
telephone number for the successor LRA for this installation. 
Representatives of state and local governments, homeless providers, and 
other parties interested in the redevelopment of the installation 
should contact the person or organization listed. The following 
information will also be published simultaneously in a newspaper of 
general circulation in the area of the installation. There will be 
additional Notices providing this same information about LRAs for other 
closing or realigning installations where surplus government property 
is available as those LRAs are recognized by the OEA.

EFFECTIVE DATE: September 17, 2007.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Director, Office of Economic 
Adjustment, Office of the Secretary of Defense, 400 Army Navy, Suite 
200, Arlington, VA 22202-4704, (703) 604-6020.

Local Redevelopment Authorities (LRAs) for Closing and Realigning 
Military Installations

Virginia

    Installation Name: Fort Monroe.
    LRA Name: Fort Monroe Federal Area Development Authority, successor 
to Federal Area Development Authority.
    Point of Contact: Nicole M. Rovner, Deputy Secretary of Natural 
Resources, Department of Natural Resources, Commonwealth of Virginia.
    Address: P.O. Box 1475, Richmond, VA 23218.
    Phone: (804) 786-0044.

    Dated: September 10, 2007.
L.M. Bynum,
OSD Federal Register Liaison Officer, Department of Defense.
[FR Doc. 07-4591 Filed 9-14-07; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 5001-06-M
From: Michael W. Evans

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Please preserve access to women"s healthcare

Date: Wednesday, August 10, 2011 10:07:28 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,

Michael W Evans
Order Granting Appellee’s Second Unopposed Motion

**IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF MONTANA INGE and MARK CAHILL, RANDY**  **an d KERIN GAYNER, WILLIAM**  **an d NANNETTE REED, and**  **IRVING ERICKSON ,** 

Petitioners and Appellants,

v. **CITY OF COLUMBIA FALLS, COLUMBIA FALLS BOARD OF**  **ADJUSTMENT ,** 

Respondents and Appellees, **CNS PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT, LLC, a Montana Limited Liability**  **Company ,**  Respondent. **C au**  **se No . DA** 
**- 22** 
**- 0395**  **ORDER**

Upon consideration of Appellees’ mo tion for ex tension to file the response brief, and good cause appearing, Appellees are granted an e xtension of

t ime until November 30, 2022, to prepare, file, and serve the response brief.

Electronically signed by: Mike McGrath Chief Justice, Montana Supreme Court

November 18 2022

11/18/2022

Case Number: DA 22-0395
**EXHIBIT 32**

**CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C.SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OFTHE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

In connection with the report of CommScope, Inc.(the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2006 asfiled with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the“Report”), each of the undersigned officers of the Company hereby certifies,pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(1)   The Report fully complies with therequirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of1934; and

(2)   The information contained in theReport fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition andresults of operations of the Company.
| By:    | /s/ FRANK M. DRENDEL                                 |   |
|--------|------------------------------------------------------|--------|
|   | Frank M. Drendel                                     |
|   | Chairman and Chief Executive Officer                 |
|   |                                                 |
| Date:  | November 2,  2006                                    |
|   |                                                 |
|   |                                                 |
| By:    | /s/ JEARLD L. LEONHARDT                              |   |
|   | Jearld L. Leonhardt                                  |
|   | Executive Vice President and Chief Financial Officer |
|   |                                                 |
| Date:  | November 2,  2006                                    |

 

----