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

[Congressional Bills 107th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[S. 1029 Engrossed in Senate (ES)]

  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
  
107th CONGRESS
  1st Session
                                S. 1029

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

 
    To clarify the authority of the Department of Housing and Urban 
Development with respect to the use of fees during fiscal year 2001 for 
                   the manufactured housing program.

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

SECTION 1. MANUFACTURED HOUSING.

    (a) Availability of Fees.--Notwithstanding section 620(e)(2) of the 
National Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of 
1974 (42 U.S.C. 5419(e)(2)), any fees collected under that Act, 
including any fees collected before the date of enactment of the 
American Homeownership and Economic Opportunity Act of 2000 (12 U.S.C. 
1701 note) and remaining unobligated on the date of enactment of this 
Act, shall be available for expenditure to offset the expenses incurred 
by the Secretary under the National Manufactured Housing Construction 
and Safety Standards Act of 1974 (42 U.S.C. 5401 et seq.), otherwise in 
accordance with section 620 of that Act.
    (b) Duration.--The authority for the use of fees provided for in 
subsection (a) shall remain in effect during the period beginning in 
fiscal year 2001 and ending on the effective date of the first 
appropriations Act referred to in section 620(e)(2) of the National 
Manufactured Housing Construction and Safety Standards Act of 1974 (42 
U.S.C. 5419(e)(2)) that is enacted with respect to a fiscal year after 
fiscal year 2001.

            Passed the Senate June 13, 2001.

            Attest:

                                                             Secretary.
107th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                                S. 1029

_______________________________________________________________________

                                 AN ACT

    To clarify the authority of the Department of Housing and Urban 
Development with respect to the use of fees during fiscal year 2001 for 
                   the manufactured housing program.
```
| **Change in Executive Officers and Board of Directors**            | 12 Months Ended                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
||
| **Change in Executive Officers And Board Of Directors [Abstract]** |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                               |
| Change in Executive Officers and Board of Directors                | Change in Executive Officers and Board of DirectorsOn December 31, 2012 David Lavoie, Chief Risk Officer of FNB, retired.  Upon his retirement, the title of the position was changed to Chief Credit Officer and Neil Machovec has been named to the position at FNB, effective February 5, 2013. |

| X                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| - Definition
Change In Directors And Executive Officers Disclosure [Text Block]
+ References
No definition available.
+ Details**Name:**fnbn_ChangeInDirectorsAndExecutiveOfficersDisclosureTextBlock**Namespace Prefix:**fnbn_**Data Type:**nonnum:textBlockItemType**Balance Type:**na**Period Type:**duration |
| X                                                                                                                                                                                  |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| - Details**Name:**fnbn_ChangeInExecutiveOfficersAndBoardOfDirectorsAbstract**Namespace Prefix:**fnbn_**Data Type:**xbrli:stringItemType**Balance Type:**na**Period Type:**duration |
From: lwaddell@dtrtn.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:07:48 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,

Lance Waddell

Greeneville, TN 37743
From: Debbi Steele

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: I support access to Preventative Care and Contraception

Date: Thursday, August 18, 2011 6:16:48 PM

Thank you so much for your recommendations to make preventative

care/contraception free to all women. This is truly a huge step forward. 

I am proud to be a member of AAUW which supports this measure. I am troubled to

learn a possible religious refusal exemption. Religious refusal provisions allow the decision

makers at "religious employers" to determine what sort of contraception, if any, their female employees

will have access to. If the existing religious refusal exemption is expanded, it would create a broad

definition for "religious employers," and could impact all employees at some schools, hospitals,

charities, and elsewhere -- even if the employee does not share the faith of their employer.

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,

Debbi Steele

Member Port Townsend

American Assoc of University Women

1103 V Street

Port Townsend, WA 98368

360 379 2949
From: TPG60@YAHOO.COM

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 11:54:42 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,

THOMAS GEIGER

Philadelphia, PA 19136
No. 201.

#### Draper et al. *v.*Washington et al.

Certiorari, 370 U. S. 935, to the Supreme Court of Washington. The motion for the appointment of counsel is granted and it is ordered that *Charles F. Luce, Esquire,*of Portland, Oregon, a member of the Bar of this Court, be, and he is hereby, appointed to serve as counsel for the petitioners in this case.
From: michaelkoeth@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:02:45 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,

Michael Koeth

Weimar, TX 78962
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

      Pursuant to 18 U.S.C.ss.1350, as adopted pursuant toss.906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, the undersigned officer of John Hancock Financial
Services, Inc. (the "Company"), hereby certifies, to his knowledge, that:

      (1) the Company's Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December
31, 2004, (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
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 as of and for the periods presented in the Report.


Dated: March 16, 2005               /s/  JOHN D. DESPREZ, III
                                    -------------------------
                                    Name: John D. DesPrez III
                                    Title: President and Chief Executive Officer
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-21-00534-CR

Matthew Glenn Hopkins, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE 424TH DISTRICT COURT OF BURNET COUNTY 

NO. 49873, THE HONORABLE EVAN C. STUBBS, JUDGE PRESIDING

O R D E R

PER CURIAM

Appellant’s brief on appeal was originally due March 11, 2022. On counsel’s 

motion, the time for filing was extended to May 11, 2022. Appellant’s counsel has now filed a 

third motion, advising the Court that counsel requested a supplemental clerk’s record from the 

district clerk’s office on July 25, 2022, and asking that the Court extend the time for filing 

appellant’s brief until 30 days from the date the record is filed.

We grant the motion for extension of time and order appellant to file a brief no 

later than 30 days from the date the supplemental clerk’s record is filed. Further extensions of 

time are strongly discouraged and will be granted only upon a showing of good cause. Failure to 

comply with this order will result in the referral of this case to the trial court for a hearing under 
2

Rule 38.8(b) of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. Alternatively, counsel may be required 

to show cause why he should not be held in contempt of court.

It is ordered on August 19, 2022.

Before Chief Justice Byrne, Justices Triana and Smith

Do Not Publish
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.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

Pursuant to section 1009 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.

The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), title 5 U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

*Name of Committee:*                         National Institute of General Medical Sciences Special Emphasis Panel; Review of Support for Research Excellence (SuRE) Program (R16).                    

*Date:*                         November 13-14, 2023.                    

*Time:*                         9:30 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.                    

*Agenda:*                         To review and evaluate grant applications.                    

*Place:*                         National Institutes of Health, National Institute of General Medical Sciences, Natcher Building, 45 Center Drive, Bethesda, Maryland 20892 (Virtual Meeting).                    

*Contact Person:*                         Lee Warren Slice, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer, Office of Scientific Review, National Institute of General Medical Sciences, National Institutes of Health, 45 Center Drive, Room 3AN12, Bethesda, Maryland 20892, 301-435-0807,                         *slicelw@mail.nih.gov.*

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program No. 93.859, Biomedical Research and Research Training, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

Dated: August 31, 2023.

Miguelina Perez,

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2023-19257 Filed 9-6-23; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
NotesFAQContact Us

Collection

Thesaurus
AdvancedSearch Tips

Collection

Thesaurus
BrowseThesaurus

 Download full text

**ERIC Number:**

**Record Type:**

**Publication Date:**

**Pages:**

**Abstractor:**

**ISBN:**

**ISSN:**

**EISSN:**

Community CollegesEconomic OpportunitiesEducational EconomicsEmployment PatternsFederal State RelationshipGovernment School RelationshipMeasures (Individuals)Program ImplementationState GovernmentState ProgramsTwo Year College StudentsTwo Year CollegesUnemployment Insurance

**Publication Type:**

**Education Level:**

**Audience:**

**Language:**

**Sponsor:**

**Authoring Institution:**

**Identifiers - Laws, Policies, & Programs:**

**Grant or Contract Numbers:**

PrivacyCopyrightContact UsSelection PolicyAPI
JournalsNon-JournalsDownloadSubmitMultimediaWidget
Court of Appeals

Sixth Appellate District of Texas

J U D G M E N T

Gary Wayne Sutton, Appellant

No. 06-23-00083-CR v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

Appeal from the 12th District Court of 

Walker County, Texas (Tr. Ct. No. 30308). 

Memorandum Opinion delivered by Chief 

Justice Stevens, Justice van Cleef and 

Justice Rambin participating. 

As stated in the Court’s opinion of this date, we find that the appeal should be dismissed 

for want of jurisdiction. Therefore, we dismiss the appeal.

We note that the appellant, Gary Wayne Sutton, has adequately indicated his inability to 

pay costs of appeal. Therefore, we waive payment of costs.

RENDERED JUNE 9, 2023

BY ORDER OF THE COURT

SCOTT E. STEVENS

CHIEF JUSTICE

ATTEST:

Debra K. Autrey, Clerk
NotesFAQContact Us

Collection

Thesaurus
AdvancedSearch Tips

Collection

Thesaurus
BrowseThesaurus

 Download full text

**ERIC Number:**

**Record Type:**

**Publication Date:**

**Pages:**

**Abstractor:**

**ISBN:**

**ISSN:**

**EISSN:**

Beginning ReadingClassroom EnvironmentDay CareEarly InterventionEducational QualityEmergent LiteracyHigh Risk StudentsLiterature ReviewsPreschool ChildrenPreschool EducationReading ResearchReading Skills

**Publication Type:**

**Education Level:**

**Audience:**

**Language:**

**Sponsor:**

**Authoring Institution:**

**Grant or Contract Numbers:**

PrivacyCopyrightContact UsSelection PolicyAPI
JournalsNon-JournalsDownloadSubmitMultimediaWidget
No. 149, Misc.

#### Draper *v.*Rhay, Penitentiary Superintendent.

Supreme Court of Washington. Certiorari denied.
From: Christine Olson

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

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

Date: Wednesday, August 03, 2011 11:43:51 AM

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,

Christine Olson

5 Anna Court

Chico, CA 95928
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.                  

###### Department of Transportation

###### Federal Highway Administration

          - [Docket No. FHWA-2023-0026]

# AGENCY:

Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), DOT.

# ACTION:

Notice; withdrawal.

# SUMMARY:

                        The FHWA is withdrawing the notice, “Agency Information Collection Activities: Request for Comments for a New Information Collection,” published in the                         **Federal Register**                         on August 31, 2023.                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

Spencer Stevens, 202-366-6221, Office of Planning, Environment and Realty Federal Highway Administration, Department of Transportation, 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE, Washington, DC 20590.

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    The FHWA is withdrawing the notice published in the                     **Federal Register**                     on August 31, 2023 at 88 FR 60260 (FR Number 2023-18838).                

Issued on: September 7, 2023.

Jazmyne Lewis,

Information Collection Officer.

[FR Doc. 2023-19697 Filed 9-14-23; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4910-22-P