alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
No. 391.

#### United States *v.*Tobin.

*Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Miller, Beatrice Rosenberg*and *Sidney M. Glazer*for the United States. *Thomas E. Dewey, Everett I. Willis, Lino A. Graglia*and *Sidney Goldstein*for respondent.

United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice White took no part in the consideration or decision of this petition.
From: Lisa Seitz

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Cc: Twinkerbell91@yahoo.com

Subject: Urgent action alert from a concerned citizen....

Date: Thursday, August 25, 2011 11:09:16 AM

August 25, 2011

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 Catholic hospitals 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, a concerned citizen
CATERPILLAR FINANCIAL SERVICES CORPORATION

POWERNOTES (SM)

With Maturities of 9 months or more from Date of Issue

 

Registration No. 333-35460

Filed Pursuant to Rule 424 (b) (2)

PRICING SUPPLEMENT NO. 068				Trade Date: 04/18/01
(To Prospectus Supplement & Prospectus dated

September 8, 2000)						Issue Date: 05/01/01
The Date of this Pricing Supplement April 18, 2001
SUBJECT TO REDEMPTION OR REPAYMENT

CUSIP									Date and terms of redemption or

or	Stated				 Interest			repayment (including any

Common	Interest		 Price to	 Discounts & Payment	Survivors applicable regular or special

Code	Rate (1)	Maturity	Public (2) Commissions Frequency	 Option	Yes/No	record dates)

14911QCV1 5.45% 05/15/04	100%	 0.625% Semi-Annually	 YES	 NO	

 

 

Original Issue Discount Note:					Total Amount of OID:

____ Yes	 X No						N/A

 

 
- The interest rates on the PowerNotes (SM) may be changed by Caterpillar Financial Services Corporation from time to time, but any such change will not affect the interest rate on any PowerNotes (SM) offered prior to the effective date of the change.
- Expressed as a percentage of aggregate principal amount. Actual Price to Public may be less, and will be determined by prevailing market prices at the time of purchase as set forth in the confirmation sheet.
From: MJT1234@comcast.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:02:55 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

I am writing today to ask in the strongest way possible that you rescind the unjust and coercive

mandate that all "contraceptives" and sterilization procedures be covered by private health insurance

with no co-pay to patients. If you do not reverse course I ask you to expand conscience protections for

any organizations that provide individual and group insurance and have moral or religious objections. I

strongly oppose the government forcing free insurance coverage on Americans especially for drugs and

devices that I oppose because some of these can cause an abortion (such as ella and Plan B).

I also ask you to reconsider your definition of religious employer and offer an authentic conscience

protection for any organization and business that has moral or religious objection to providing such

insurance to their employees. This legal mandate clearly violates the spirit of conscience laws which

prohibit government discrimination against those who object to various health services on moral or

religious grounds. The definition of "religious employer" in the regulation is so narrow as to only include

churches, but will still mean that a host of businesses and organizations that have conscience objections

will be required to choose between either violating their conscience or not being able to offer employees

health insurance.

Please protect the conscience rights of insurers, providers and people like me who object to being

forced by the federal government to offer or subsidize contraceptives and sterilization services, especially

when some of these drugs can take the life of early unborn children. No Americans should be forced by

the federal government to essentially subsidize services they object to. I again urge you in the strongest

way possible to reverse course and remove contraceptives and sterilizations from the list of mandatory

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Michael Tirpak

Toms River, NJ 08755
#### Isaac Sommers and another, Appellants, v. Oliver H. Brigham, Respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs. Opinion by

Learned, P. J.
From: rdeh471@verizon.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:56:37 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,

Rita Helwig

Northumberland, PA 17857
Exhibit 32.2





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, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Elizabeth Delgado, Chief Financial 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 CorporationBy:
/s/ Elizabeth DelgadoElizabeth DelgadoChief Financial Officer





Date: March 31, 2011
H. Res. 1296 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

July 24, 2008. 

Whereas millions of American children and youth represent 

the hopes and future of our Nation; 

Whereas numerous individuals, children’s organizations, and 

youth-serving organizations that work with children and 

youth collaborate to provide invaluable services to enrich 

and better the lives of the young; 

Whereas heightening awareness of and increasing support for 

organizations that provide access to healthcare, social 

services, education, the arts, sports, and other services 

will assist in the development of character and the future 

success of our Nation’s youth; 

Whereas the President issued a proclamation on May 30, 

2008, proclaiming June 1, 2008 as National Child’s Day 

to demonstrate a commitment to our youth; 

Whereas September is a time when parents, families, teachers, school administrators, and communities in general 

increase their focus on children and youth nationwide as 

the school year begins; 

Whereas September is a time for the people of the United 

States as a whole to highlight and be mindful of the 

needs of children and youth; 
2 

•HRES 1296 EH 

Whereas private corporations and businesses have joined with 

hundreds of national and local charitable organizations 

throughout the Nation in support of a month-long focus 

on children and youth; and 

Whereas designating September as National Child Awareness 

Month would recognize that a long-term commitment to 

children and youth is in the public interest, and will encourage widespread support for the charities and organizations that seek to provide a better future for the children and youth of the United States: Now, therefore, be 

it 

Resolved, That the House of Representatives supports 

the designation of a National Child Awareness Month to promote awareness of children’s charities and youth-serving organizations across the United States and recognizes their efforts on behalf of children and youth as a critical contribution 

to the future of our Nation. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
From: vt@tashinsure.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:21:48 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,

Vahram Tashjian

Monrovia, CA 91016
```

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 77 (Thursday, April 21, 2011)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 22295]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: C1-2011-6539]

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

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Animal and Plant Health Inspection

9 CFR Part 145

[Docket No. APHIS-2009-0031]
RIN 0579-AD21

National Poultry Improvement Plan and Auxiliary Provisions

Correction

    In rule document 2011-6539 appearing on pages 15791-15798 in the 
issue of Tuesday, March 22, 2011, make the following corrections:

Sec.  145.52  [Corrected]

    On page 15794, in the first column, immediately following the text 
of Sec.  145.52, add the following asterisks:
* * * * *
[FR Doc. C1-2011-6539 Filed 4-20-11; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 1505-01-D
```
From: melvinmurray@hotmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:47:40 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,

Melvin Murray

Dallas, TX 75228
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 1368 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                         July 24, 2008.
    Resolved, That section 803 of the Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, 
and Modernization Act of 2003 shall not apply during the remainder of the 110th 
Congress.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
No. 119.

#### Murray et al. *v.*Curlett et al., constituting the Board of School Commissioners of Baltimore City.

*Leonard J. Kerpelman*for petitioners.

*Francis B. Burch*and *Philip Z. Altfeld*for respondents.

*Thomas B. Finan,*Attorney General of Maryland, and *James P. Garland*and *Robert F. Sweeney,*Assistant Attorneys General, for the State of Maryland, as *amicus curiae,*in opposition.

Court of Appeals of Maryland. Certiorari granted.
##### 



EXHIBIT
32.1   WRITTEN STATEMENT OF CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002
  (a)
    
    the Annual Report pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934 of the Company for the period ended June 25, 2005 filed on the date hereof with the
Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of
Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and(b)
    
    information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.
 /s/ Stanislas Vilgrain
    
    Chief Executive Officer
    
    September 22, 2005Stanislas Vilgrain/s/ Yuyun Tristan Kuo

Yuyun Tristan Kuo
    
    Vice President of Finance, Treasurer
And Corporate Secretary (Principal
Financial And Accounting Official)
    
    September 22, 2005
##### 



CERTIFICATE OF
PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER
OF
DOBSON COMMUNICATIONS CORPORATION
  a.
    
    fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and thatb.
    
    the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition of the Company
at June 30, 2006, and the results of the Companys operations for the three and six months ended June 30, 2006.
 August 9, 2006
    /s/ STEVEN P. DUSSEKSteven P. DussekChief Executive Officer
and principal executive officer
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 97-41464 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus CHRISTOPHER SHANE CHAPMAN, Defendant-Appellant.

- - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas USDC No. 1:97-CR-54-ALL

- - - - - - - - - - October 28, 1998 Before POLITZ, Chief Judge, and WIENER and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Court-appointed counsel for Christopher Shane Chapman has filed a motion and brief as required by Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Our independent review of the brief, Chapman’s briefs and motion in response, and the record discloses no nonfrivolous issue. Accordingly, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. See 5 TH C IR . R. 42.2.
#### In the Matter of the Probate of the Last Will of Peter Huestis, deceased

Decree of the surrogate of Otsego oounty, affirmed, with th®' respondents costs, payable out of tue estate. Opinion by Hardin, P. J.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE> 
<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               MAR-31-1999
<CASH>                                               2
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                          0
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                         59,934
<ALLOWANCE>                                          0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  60,820
<DEPOSITS>                                           0
<SHORT-TERM>                                         0
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                                 22
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                     30,250
<COMMON>                                        30,250
<OTHER-SE>                                         298
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                  60,820
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                    961
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                    0
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                     7
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                   968
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                                   0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                              968
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                        0
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                     64
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    904
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                         904
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       904
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     7.01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     7.01
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    7.15
<LOANS-NON>                                          0
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                     0
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                        0
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                    0
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                              0
        

</TABLE>