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

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: religious exemptions - health care law

Date: Thursday, August 11, 2011 8:10:34 AM

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. Previous weakening by exemptions has led to women being unable

to obtain legal medical assistance and to fill legal prescriptions. That is not

equal protection under the law and, thus, is intolerable.

Thank you.

--
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                          15,349
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                 7,425
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                     72,494
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                          52,921
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                            52,957
<LOANS>                                        275,296
<ALLOWANCE>                                      3,190
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 431,672
<DEPOSITS>                                     373,865
<SHORT-TERM>                                     9,400
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                              2,217
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                        20,000
<OTHER-SE>                                      26,190
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                 431,672
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                  5,799
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                1,782
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                    41
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                 7,622
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                               3,270
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               3,399
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                            4,223
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                      149
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                  2,912
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  2,430
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                       2,430
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     1,689
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.42
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.42
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.35
<LOANS-NON>                                      1,784
<LOANS-PAST>                                       271
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                 3,212
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      191
<RECOVERIES>                                        20
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                3,190
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                             3,190
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        



</TABLE>
Exhibit 10.13

 



MINES   MANAGEMENT,INC. Bill of Sale of Equipment State of Montana County: Uncoln IN   CONSIDERATION OF the sum of $4151000.00 U.S. Dollars,the receipt of which Is   acknowledged, Mines Management,Inc.of 905 W Riverside,Suite 311,Spokane,Washington   99201(the 'Seller') DOES HEREBY SEL AND TRANSFER to Amalgamated Mining Inc.   of 9 15 37 Ave NW,Edmonton, AB T6E 6V9, Canada (the 'Purchaser'),the   following equipment (the 'Equipment'): Year Description ISandvik Underground   Bolter Drill Make Serial# Model Sandvik Rebolt S-126XL 2007 L07B4183 The   Seller warrants that {1} the Seller is the legal owner of the Equipment;{2)   the Equipment is free from all liens and encumbrances;and (3) the Seller has   full right and authority to sell and transfer the equipment. The Equipment is   being sold in 'as is' condition and the Seller e>Cpressly disclaims all   warranties,whether expressed or implied,including but not limited to any   Implied warranty of merchantability or fitness for a particular purpose. Further,the   Seller disclaims any warranty as to the condition of the Equipment. The   Seller does not assume,or authorize any other person to assume on the behalf   of the Seller,any liability In connection with the sale of the Equipment. The   Seller's above disclaim of warranty does not, In any way, affect the terms of   any applicable warranties from the manufacturer of the Equipment. The   Purchaser has been given the opportunity to inspect the Equipment or to have   it Inspected and the Purchaser hereby accepts the Equipment in its existing   condition. The Purchaser is responsible for shipping charges and assumes   allrisk of loss or damage during transit from the Montanore Project site near   Libby,Montana. This Bill of Sale will be construed in accordance with and governed   by the laws of the State of Montana. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the parties have   executed this Bill of Sale on October 21, 2015. -... ' .. '",.. By:   i'J.-Data: 1 /..;tt Jt S: ..... aY:->.. · Date: Oc\\ '· Mines   Mala8emlr\tllnc. (Seller) Amalgamated Mining Inc. (Buyer)
Michigan Supreme Court Lansing, Michigan

Marilyn Kelly,
Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanag h
Elizabeth A. Weave r

Maura D. Corriga n Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markma n Diane M. Hathaway,
J ustices

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

_______________________________________ __ Clerk January 27, 2010

0120 

# Order

January 27, 2010

139755

HUDIE LANGSTON, Plaintiff-Appellant,

v SC: 139755 COA: 291873 WCAC: 08-000235 GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION, Defendant-Appellee.

________________ _______________ __________/

On order of the Court, the application fo r leave to appeal the September 10, 2009 order of the Court of Appeals is consider ed, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

H ATHAWAY 

### , J., would remand this case to the Court of Appeals for consideration as on leave granted.
Exhibit 10.4
 SELECT MEDICAL HOLDINGS CORPORATION
RESTRICTED STOCK AWARD AGREEMENT UNDER THE
2005 EQUITY INCENTIVE PLAN FOR NON-EMPLOYEE DIRECTORS
 Agreement Effective Date SELECT MEDICAL HOLDINGS CORPORATION Company JAMES S. ELY, III Participant
 Plan
  Stock
   Award of Restricted Stock 5,000 Restricted
Stock
 Vesting Schedule
 Cumulative Shares ofVesting Dates
    
    Restricted Stock VestedAugust 11, 2011
    
    
    1,000August 11, 2012
    
    
    2,000August 11, 2013
    
    
    3,000August 11, 2014
    
    
    4,000August 11, 2015
    
    
    5,000




---



##### 



Section 5 Restricted Period
 Transferability
 Forfeiture of Restricted Stock
 Acceleration of Vesting Upon Change of Control
 Plan Governing
 Miscellaneous
   2




---



##### 



SELECT MEDICAL HOLDINGS CORPORATIONBy:
    /s/  Robert A. OrtenzioName:
    Robert A. OrtenzioTitle:
    Chief Executive OfficerPARTICIPANT:/s/  James S. Ely, IIIJames S. Ely, III  3
No. 599.

#### Freed *v.*New York.

*Sidney*G■, *Sparrow*for petitioner.

*Frank D. O’Connor*and *Benj. J. Jacobson*for respondent.

Court of Special Sessions of City of New York, Second Judicial Department. Certiorari denied.
From: egoodgame@comcast.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:09:28 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,

Edward Goodgame

Atlanta, GA 30328
Exhibit 23.1


              CONSENT OF ERNST & YOUNG LLP, INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS



       We consent to the  incorporation by reference in this Annual Report (Form
10-K) of Boole & Babbage, Inc. of our report dated October 24, 1997, included in
the 1997 Annual Report to Stockholders of Boole & Babbage, Inc.

       Our audits also  included  the  financial  statement  schedule of Boole &
Babbage,  Inc. listed in Item 14(a). This schedule is the  responsibility of the
Company's  management.  Our responsibility is to express an opinion based on our
audits. In our opinion, the financial statement schedule referred to above, when
considered  in  relation  to the basic  financial  statements  taken as a whole,
presents fairly in all material respects the information set forth therein.

       We also consent to the  incorporation  by  reference in the  Registration
Statements (Form S-8 Nos. 33-13837, 33-39248, 33-65145,  333-32341, 33-79782 and
333-02723)  pertaining  to the  1986  Incentive  Stock  Option  Plan,  the  1986
Supplemental  Stock Option Plan,  the Employee  Stock  Purchase  Plan,  the 1993
Nonemployee Directors' Stock Option Plan and the 1995 Stock Option Plan of Boole
& Babbage,  Inc. of our report  dated  October  24,  1997,  with  respect to the
consolidated  financial  statements  incorporated  herein by reference,  and our
report  included  in the  preceding  paragraph  with  respect  to the  financial
statement  schedule  included  in this  Annual  Report  (Form  10-K)  of Boole &
Babbage, Inc.








\Ernst & Young LLP\

San Jose, California
December 22, 1997

                                       17
From: Melissa Scoggins

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Religious Refusal Exemptions

Date: Tuesday, August 30, 2011 3:03:55 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.

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.
No. 481, Misc.

#### Jacobs *v.*Cunningham, Penitentiary

Superintendent. Supreme Court of Appeals of Virginia. Certiorari denied.
From: lpruittvt@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:28:05 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,

Dykes Pruitt

Shelburne, VT 05482
---

EXHIBIT 23.2

CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ENGINEERS

We refer to our report of February 6, 2008, Appraisal Report as
of December 31, 2007 on Certain Properties owned by TransGlobe Energy
Corporation (the Company) in Canada, Egypt and Yemen (the Report).

We hereby consent to references to our name in the Companys
Annual Report on Form 40-F for the fiscal year ended December 31, 2007 to be
filed with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. We also confirm that we have read
the Companys Annual Information Form for the fiscal year ended December 31,
2007 dated March 24, 2008 and that we have no reason to believe that there are
any misrepresentations in the information contained in it that was derived from
the Report or that is within our knowledge as a result of the services we
performed in connection with such Report.

Sincerely,

DeGolyer and MacNaughton Canada Limited

/s/ Colin OuttrimName       Colin P. Outtrim
Title:        Senior Vice President

Calgary, Alberta, Canada March 24, 2008

---
From: Margaret

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: A woman should have rights!

Date: Thursday, August 11, 2011 2:37:46 PM

Dear Sirs

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. Do remember that

our government separates church and state. Do not allow religious views to limit a woman's healthcare

choices at any healthcare location.

Regards,

Margaret L. De Rose
EXHIBIT 31.2

302
CERTIFICATION FOR FORM 10-Q

CERTIFICATIONS

|I, Raymond E. Verlinde, certify that:
|-------------------------------------
|                                     
|1.                                   
|                                     
|2.                                   
|                                     
|3.                                   
|                                     
|4.                                   
|                                     
|                                     
|                                     
|                                     
|                                     
|                                     
|                                     
|5.                                   
|                                     
|                                     
|                                     
|                                     

|Date:  November 15, 2004 |                                                                   
|------------------------ | ------------------------------------------------------------------
|                         |                                                                   
|                         |                                                                   
|                         | /s/ Raymond E. Verlinde                                           
|                         |                                                                   
|                         | Raymond E. Verlinde                                               
|                         | Senior Executive Vice President and Chief
  Administrative Officer
From: pboer@sbcglobal.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:19:11 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,

Paul Boer

Edmond, OK 73013