alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 179 (Monday, September 18, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 63969]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-20061]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Nursing Research; Notice of Closed Meetings

    Pursuant to section 1009 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended, notice is hereby given of the following meetings.
    The meetings 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 Nursing Research 
Special Emphasis Panel; Conflicting Application Review of NRRC 
Meeting.
    Date: October 10, 2023.
    Time: 1:00 p.m. to 3:00 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institute of Nursing Research, 6701 Democracy 
Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).
    Contact Person: Joshua Wolff, Ph.D., Scientific Review Officer/
Social & Behavioral Scientist, Scientific Review Branch, National 
Institute of Nursing Research, 6701 Democracy Boulevard, Bethesda, 
MD 20892, 301-793-5758, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#e0aa8f93889581ce978f8c8686a08e8988ce878f96"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="2d67425e45584c035a42414b4b6d434445034a425b">[email protected]</span></a>.

    Name of Committee: National Institute of Nursing Research 
Special Emphasis Panel; NINR T32 Training Grant Applications Review 
Meeting.
    Date: October 26, 2023.
    Time: 10:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institute of Nursing Research, 6701 Democracy 
Boulevard, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).
    Contact Person: Nisan Bhattacharyya, Ph.D., Scientific Review 
Officer, Scientific Review Branch, National Institute of Nursing 
Research, 6701 Democracy Boulevard, Room 720, Bethesda, MD 20892, 
301-435-6979, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#26484f55474808444e47525247454e47545f5f4766484f4e08414950"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="d2bcbba1b3bcfcb0bab3a6a6b3b1bab3a0ababb392bcbbbafcb5bda4">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.361, 
Nursing Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: September 12, 2023.
Victoria E. Townsend,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2023-20061 Filed 9-15-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
**MICROMUSE INC.**

**Exhibit 32**

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

Each of the undersigned herebycertifies, for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, in his capacity as an officer of Micromuse Inc. (the “Company”), that, to his knowledge: 

          (a) the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of the Company for the fiscal quarter ended  June 30, 2003, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the“Report”), fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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

Dated: August 13, 2003

|   | By:    | /s/ LLOYD A. CARNEY                                                           |
|--------|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |   |                                                                               |
|   |   | **Lloyd A. Carney*Chairman and Chief Executive Officer***                     |
|   |   |                                                                          |
|   |   |                                                                          |
|   | By:    | /s/ MICHAEL L. LUETKEMEYER                                                    |
|   |   |                                                                               |
|   |   | **Michael L. Luetkemeyer*Senior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer*** |

Thiscertification is not deemed to be “filed” for purposes of section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, or otherwise subject to the liability of that section.  This certification is not deemed to be incorporated by reference intoany filing under the Securities Act of 1933 or Securities Exchange Act of 1934, except to the extent that the Company specifically incorporates it by reference.
From: Elizabeth Kruck

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: HHS Recommendations for Women"s Preventive Health

Date: Thursday, August 11, 2011 11:39:31 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.

Elizabeth Kruck

P.O. Box 27

Genoa, WI 54632

608-689-2222
Exhibit 23.2 Consent of Independent
Registered Public Accounting Firm We
consent to the use of our report dated, February 24, 2005 with respect to the consolidated
balance sheet of Lightstone Member LLC and Subsidiaries (the Company)
as of December 31, 2004, and the related consolidated statements of operations,
members capital, and cash flows for the period from September 10, 2004 (date of
inception) to December 31, 2004, in Presidential Realty Corporations Annual Report
on Form 10-KSB, expected to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission and
be effective on or about March 31, 2005. The Schonbraun McCann
Group LLC Roseland, New JerseyMarch
30, 2005
From: kathleeninman1@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:17:10 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,

Kathleen Inman

Simi Valley, CA 93065
From: Grace Ordos

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: RIN 1210-AB44 Mandatory Birth Control

Date: Monday, August 22, 2011 7:55:10 PM

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,

Grace Ordos
Olympia, Washington
From: bnbwhitlow@comcast.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:48:38 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,

Robert Whitlow

Coupeville, WA 98239
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 Quarterly Report of ALCO, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-KSB for the period ended December 31, 2007 (the "Report"), I, Colman Au, 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: 1) The Report fully complies with the requirement 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 Company's financial position and results of operations.  /S/ Colman AuColman Au, Chief Financial Officer March 29, 2008
#### Rachael Russell, Appellant, v. Ephraim L. Holmes, Respondent.

Order affirmed, with ten dollers costs and disbursements, which are to he applied as payment on plaintiff’s judgment. Opinion by

Follett, J.
From: bpiquette@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:55:54 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,

William Piquette

La Junta, CO 81050
<Page>


                                   EXHIBIT 2.1

                       CERTIFICATE OF OWNERSHIP AND MERGER

                                     MERGING

                                 INTRUSION INC.

                                      INTO

                               INTRUSION.COM, INC.


                  Intrusion.com, Inc., a corporation organized and existing
under the laws of the State of Delaware (the "CORPORATION"), under and in
accordance with Section 253 of the General Corporation Law of the State of
Delaware (the "DGCL"), does hereby certify:

                  FIRST: That the Corporation was incorporated pursuant to the
DGCL on August 30, 1995 under the name of "Optical Data Systems, Inc."

                  SECOND: That the Corporation owns 100% of the outstanding
shares of each class of capital stock of Intrusion, Inc., which was incorporated
pursuant to the DGCL on October 22, 2001 ("SUBSIDIARY").

                  THIRD: That the Board of Directors of the Corporation (the
"BOARD") has, pursuant to resolutions duly adopted at a meeting of the Board
dated October 17 , 2001 and filed with the minutes of the Board, authorized and
approved the merger of Subsidiary with and into the Corporation (the "MERGER").
Such resolutions have not been modified or rescinded and are in full force and
effect on the date hereof. A true and correct copy of such resolutions are
attached hereto as EXHIBIT A.

                  FIFTH: That the Corporation shall be the surviving corporation
in the Merger (the "SURVIVING CORPORATION").

                  SIXTH: That the Merger shall be effective on November 1, 2001
at 8:00 a.m., Eastern Standard Time.

                  SEVENTH: That the Certificate of Incorporation of the
Corporation, as amended and in effect on the date hereof, shall be the
Certificate of Incorporation of the Surviving Corporation; provided, however,
that at the effective time of the Merger, Article One of the Certificate of
Incorporation of the Surviving Corporation shall be amended in its entirety to
read as follows: "The name of the corporation is Intrusion Inc."

<Page>


                  IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has executed this
Certificate of Ownership and Merger on behalf of the Corporation on October 23,
2001.



                                           INTRUSION.COM, INC.



                                           /s/ Timothy W. Kinnear
                                           -------------------------------------
                                           Timothy W. Kinnear
                                           President and Chief Executive Officer
From: jegan@Forequipmentleasing.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:52:53 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,

Jamie Egan

Raleigh, NC 27609
From: ercv@verizon.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:17:10 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,

Emily Volz

Silver Spring, MD 20910