alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<PAGE>
                                                                    Exhibit 32.1

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

     In connection with the Quarterly Report of Select Medical Corporation (the
"Company") on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended September 30, 2005 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I,
Robert A. Ortenzio, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company,
certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906
of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

(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 position and results of operations of the Company.

Date: November 14, 2005


                                        /s/ Robert A. Ortenzio
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        Robert A. Ortenzio
                                        President and Chief Executive Officer
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

December 16, 2004

Charles R. Fulbruge III

Clerk

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 04-40469

Conference Calendar

 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus

ROGELIO DE LA CRUZ-GONZALEZ,

Defendant-Appellant.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 5:03-CR-1644-ALL

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

Before KING, Chief Judge, and DeMOSS and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

Rogelio de la Cruz-Gonzalez has appealed his guilty-plea

conviction of attempting to enter the United States illegally

following deportation. De la Cruz-Gonzalez contends that the

“felony” and “aggravated felony” provisions of 8 U.S.C.

§ 1326(b)(1) and (2) are unconstitutional in light of Apprendi v.

New Jersey, 530 U.S. 466 (2000). De la Cruz-Gonzalez contends

also that his sentence was imposed illegally in light of Blakely

v. Washington, 124 S. Ct. 2531 (2004). He concedes that these
No. 04-40469

-2-

arguments are foreclosed. See Almendarez-Torres v. United

States, 523 U.S. 224 (1998); United States v. Pineiro, 377 F.3d

464, 465–66 (5th Cir. 2004), petition for cert. filed (U.S. July

14, 2004) (No. 04-5263); United States v. Dabeit, 231 F.3d 979,

984 (5th Cir. 2000). He asserts that Almendarez-Torres has been

called into doubt by Apprendi and Blakely. He seeks to preserve

the issues for possible Supreme Court review. 

De la Cruz-Gonzalez contends, and the Government concedes,

that the judgment recites incorrectly that de la Cruz-Gonzalez

was convicted of illegal reentry following deportation, instead

of an attempt to commit that offense. The case must be remanded

to the district court so that the judgment may be reformed to

reflect the correct offense of conviction. See United States v.

Powell, 354 F.3d 362, 371-72 (5th Cir. 2003); FED. R. CRIM. P. 36.

AFFIRMED and REMANDED.
From: cherylruffa@verizon.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:00:50 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,

cheryl ruffa

Laurel, MD 20723
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.                  

###### Commission on Civil Rights

# AGENCY:

United States Commission on Civil Rights.

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting.

# SUMMARY:

In accordance with the Government in Sunshine Act (5 U.S.C. 552b), the Commission on Civil Rights is holding a meeting to discuss the Commission's business for the month of September.

# DATES:

Friday, September 22, 2023, 10 a.m. EST.

# ADDRESSES:

                        Meeting to take place virtually and is open to the public via livestream on the Commission's YouTube page:                         *https://www.youtube.com/​user/​USCCR/​videos.*

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Angelia Rorison: 202-376-8371;                         *publicaffairs@usccr.gov.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

                    This business meeting is open to the public. Computer assisted real-time transcription (CART) will be provided. The web link to access CART (in English) on September 22, 2023, is                     *https://www.streamtext.net/​player?​event=​USCCR.*                     Please note that CART is text-only translation that occurs in real time during the meeting and is not an exact transcript.                

## Meeting Agenda

I. Approval of Agenda

II. Business Meeting

III. Discussion and Vote on 2024 USCCR Business Meeting Calendar

IV. Presentation by the Texas Advisory Committee Chair on Interim Report, Mental Healthcare in the Texas Juvenile Justice System

V. Management and Operations
    - Staff Director's Report

VI. Adjourn Meeting

Dated: September 13, 2023.

Angelia Rorison,

USCCR Media and Communications Director.

[FR Doc. 2023-20237 Filed 9-14-23; 4:15 pm]

BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
From: keith@leitch.tv

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:02:07 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,

Keith Leitch

Santa Rosa, CA 95404
From: dfox@friendlycity.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:11:06 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,

DEbbie Fox

Tifton, GA 31794
<PAGE>
 
                                                                      Exhibit 21

                     SUBSIDIARIES OF METROMAIL CORPORATION
                            AS OF DECEMBER 31, 1997
                                        


Subsidiary                                     Jurisdiction of Incorporation
----------                                     -----------------------------

Atlantes Corporation                           Colorado
Customer Insight Company                       Delaware
International Communication & Data plc         United Kingdom
ICD Marketing Services Group Limited           United Kingdom
ICD Marketing Services Limited                 United Kingdom
Lombard Information Resources Incorporated     Delaware
Marketing Information Technologies, Inc.       Delaware
Saxe, Inc.                                     New York

As of December 31, 1997, Metromail Corporation's other subsidiaries, considered
in the aggregate as a single subsidiary, would not constitute a significant
subsidiary as defined in Rule 1-02(w) of Regulation S-X.
10/19/2015 E15 Approved for 2016 Fiat Chrysler Models | Energy

http://energy.agwired.com/2015/08/26/e15­approved­for­2016­fiat­chrysler­models/?pk_campaign=feed&pk_kwd=e15­approved­for­2016­fiat­chrysler­models... 1/1

Comments are closed.

E15 Approved for 2016 Fiat Chrysler Models

Posted on August 26, 2015 by Cindy Zimmerman

Fiat Chrysler Automobiles (FCA) had approved the use of E15 (15

percent ethanol and 85 percent gasoline) in its model year 2016 Chrysler/Fiat, Jeep, Dodge and Ram vehicles.

According to the new owners manuals for the vehicles, “Non­Flex Fuel Vehicles (FFV) are compatible with

gasoline containing up to 15% ethanol (E15).” The decision means that FCA joins General Motors and Ford in

covering E15 in its warranty statements. GM started covering E15 with its MY 2012 vehicles, while Ford

joined a year later with its MY 2013 vehicles. More than 12 percent of the vehicles sold so far in the United

States in 2015 have been FCA vehicles.

“FCA’s decision to join GM and Ford provides clear evidence that the tide on E15 has turned,” said Renewable

Fuels Association president and CEO Bob Dinneen. “FCA customers will be afforded a benefit that will likely

lower their weekly motor fuel bill: the freedom to choose what fuel to put into their vehicles.”

RFA has been concerned about FCA’s reluctance to embrace E15 for the past three years, and Dinneen

specifically called on Chrysler to approve E15 during his State of the Industry address at this year’s National

Ethanol Conference.

Facebook Twitter 1 Email Print

Posted in automotive, Car Makers, E15, Ethanol, Ethanol News, RFA

   
#### Emily M. Goodrich, Respondent, v. George W. Goodrich and William J. Goodrich, Appellants.

Judgment modified as indicated in the opinion, and as modified affirmed, with costs to the respondent. Judgment to be settled by Bradley, J. Opinion by

Bradley, J.;

Haight, J., not sitting.
#### Ralph S. Baldwin, an Infant, by Winfield H. Baldwin, His Guardian ad Litem, Appellant, *v.*The Locomobile Company of America, Respondent.

*Baldwin*v. *Locomobile Co. of*America, 147 App. Div. 901, reversed.

(Argued April 1, 1912;

decided April 30, 1912.)

Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the second judicial department, entered November 17, 1911, affirming a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon a dismissal of the complaint by the court at a Trial Term in an ■ action to recover for personal injuries alleged to have been sustained by plaintiff through the negligence of defendant.

*Henry M. Eater, George F. Elliott*and *Jay S. Jones*for appellant.

*Stephen Van Wyck*for respondent.

Judgment reversed and new trial granted, costs to abide event, on the ground that the question of plaintiff’s contributory negligence was one of fact to be determined by the jury; no opinion.

Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Cray, Haight, Vann, Werner, Willard Bartlett and Chase, JJ.
From: janetgchapman@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

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

Janet Chapman

Wilmington, NC 28409
From: whollysocks@aol.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:45:50 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,

Jacqueline Gallagher

Mahopac, NY 10541
No. 866,

October Term, 1961.

#### In re Clawans,

370 U. S. 905.

Petition for rehearing denied.

Mr. Justice Brennan took no part in the consideration or decision of this application.
Here's how you know
 **Official websites use .mil** .mil
 **Secure .mil websites use HTTPS** lock () https://


Skip to main content (Press Enter).
 Toggle navigation
            
            U.S. Central Command
                CENTCOM
        Search
                    Search CENTCOM:
                        Search
                Search CENTCOM:
                    Search
    Home

    ABOUT US
    
        COMMAND PRIORITIES

    LEADERSHIP

    COMPONENT COMMANDS

    HISTORY

    POSTURE STATEMENT

    CENTCOM AOR
    
        CENTCOM COALITION

    OPERATIONS AND EXERCISES
    
        USMTM

    CIVILIAN CASUALTY REPORT

    CONTACT
    
        OPERATIONAL CONTRACT SUPPORT

    COMMUNITY RELATIONS

    THEATRE MEDICAL CLEARANCE

    INNOVATION VENDOR PORTAL

    MILITARY MEMBER INNOVATION PORTAL

    MEDIA
    
        SOCIAL MEDIA

    NEWS ARTICLES

    PRESS RELEASES

    STATEMENTS

    IMAGERY

    VIDEOS

    TRANSCRIPTS

    VISITORS AND PERSONNEL
    
        FAMILY CENTER

    FAMILY READINESS

    CENTCOM WEBMAIL

    SOCIAL MEDIA SECURITY

    ACCOUNTABILITY

    EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS

    USCENTCOM UNCLASSIFIED REGULATIONS

    FOIA LIBRARY

    INNOVATION OASIS

    WELCOME GUIDE  Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesCommunity RelationsOtherPreviousCommanders
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Share
  
 Small () Medium () Full Size (5.18 MB)
 Photo Gallery
 About UsCommand PrioritiesLeadershipComponent
   CommandsHistoryPosture Statement
   Area of
   ResponsibilityCENTCOM Coalition
   Operations And
   ExercisesOperation Inherent
   ResolveResolute Support
   MediaSocial MediaNews ArticlesPress ReleasesVideo And Imagery
   Visitors And
   PersonnelFamily ReadinessCENTCOM WebmailSocial MediaSecurityAccountabilityEmergency
   Preparedness
   ContactCommunity Relations
                    Stay Connected
                
                Privacy & Security  Inspector General  FOIA  Privacy Act
            

Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil