alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
From: taussig2001@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:40:57 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,

Mark Taussig

Manhattan, KS 66502
No. 161.

#### Connecticut Committee Against Pay TV et al. *v.*Federal Communications Commission et al.

*Marcus Cohn*for petitioners.

*Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Loevinger, Irwin A. Seibel, Max D. Paglin, Daniel R. Ohlbaum*and *Ruth V. Reel*for the Federal Communications Commission, and *Harold David Cohen*and *W. Theodore Pierson*for RKO General Phonevision Co., respondents.

United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Certiorari denied.
Exhibit 32.2





CERTIFICATION


OF


CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER


AND


CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER


PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. 1350,


AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





I,  Jeffrey B. Guldner, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Arizona Public Service Company for the quarter ended March 31, 2022 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Arizona Public Service Company.





Date:      May 4, 2022





/s/  Jeffrey B. GuldnerJeffrey B. GuldnerChairman of the Board, President and Chief Executive Officer





I, Theodore N. Geisler, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Arizona Public Service Company for the quarter ended March 31, 2022 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that information contained in such Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of Arizona Public Service Company.





Date:     May 4, 2022





/s/ Theodore N. GeislerTheodore N. GeislerSenior Vice President and Chief Financial Officer
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING 

MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED 

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL 

OF FLORIDA 

SECOND DISTRICT 

JOHN GARY BUTLER, ) 

 ) 

 Appellant, ) 

 ) 

v. ) Case No. 2D14-2561 

 ) 

CYNTHIA PRINE, ) 

 ) 

 Appellee. ) 

 ) 

Opinion filed February 20, 2015. 

Appeal from the Circuit Court for Pinellas 

County; Linda R. Allan, Judge. 

Tori A. Butler of Alderuccio & Butler, LLC, 

Naples, for Appellant. 

Kathryn Marie Welsh of KM Welsh, P.A., 

Largo, for Appellee. 

PER CURIAM. 

 John Gary Butler appeals a "supplemental final judgment" that was 

entered in a postdissolution proceeding that resolved several postjudgment motions and 

petitions that had been filed on his behalf, as well as on behalf of his former wife, 

Cynthia Prine. Mr. Butler raises several issues concerning the trial court's findings, 

rulings, and awards that are set forth in the supplemental final judgment. We affirm in 

all respects without discussion except for $93,202.26 in attorney's fees that was 
- 2 - 

awarded to Ms. Prine. The evidence presented to the trial court justified a fee award of 

some amount in this case. However, we are unconvinced that the trial court adequately 

considered the reasonableness and necessity of all of the legal work underlying these 

fees. Accordingly, we reverse only the award of attorney's fees and remand that matter 

to permit the trial court to reconsider the award. On remand, the court is authorized to 

receive evidence in addition to the evidence in this record. 

 Affirmed in part, reversed in part, and remanded. 

ALTENBERND, MORRIS, and SLEET, JJ., Concur.
NOTE: This order is nonprecedential.



## United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit 2009-1374 TIVO, INC., Plaintiff-Appellee,
v. ECHOSTAR CORPORATION, ECHOSTAR DBS CORPORATION, ECHOSTAR TECHNOLOGIES CORPORATION, ECHOSPHERE LIMITED LIABILITY CORPORATION,

ECHOSTAR SATELLITE LLC, and DISH NETWORK CORPORATION,

Defendants-Appellants. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas

in case no. 04-CV-00001, Judge David Folsom.

ON MOTION Before BRYSON Circuit Judge. ORDER The appellants submit a motion for a stay, pending appeal, of the order of the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Texas (1) holding the appellants in contempt of its previous injunction, (2) enjoining the appellants, and (3) requiring that the appellants take certain steps in light of its contempt holdings. The appellants also request a temporary stay, pending disposition of the motion. Upon consideration thereof, IT IS ORDERED THAT:TiVo Inc. is directed to respond to the motion no later than noon on June

10, 2009. The district courts order is temporarily stayed, pending this court's receipt of the response and the courts consideration of the papers submitted. FOR THE COURT
JUN -3 2009 /s/ Jan Horbaly Date

cc: Donald R. Dunner, Esq. Morgan Chu, Esq. Jan Horbaly Clerk UAtinlatalts pop UIT
JUN 0 3 2009 s8 rilthond CLERK

2009-1374 - 2 -
No. 529, Misc.

#### Placona *v.*United States.

Petitioner *pro se.*

*Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Miller, Beatrice Rosenberg*and *Robert G. Maysack*for the United States.

United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. Certiorari denied.
From: epreach@aol.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:54:24 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,

Emmett Murphy

Newport News, VA 23608
From: jremilla@comcast.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:30:32 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,

Amy Remillard

Ypsilanti, MI 48197
#### Frank D. Wright, Respondent, v. William D. Andrews and another, Appellants.

Judgment affirmed. Opinion by

Haight, J.
#### Catharine Draper, Respondent, v. The Delaware and Hudson Canal Company, Appellant.

Judgment reversed, new trial.granted, costs to abide event. Opinion by Learned, P. J.
<PAGE>

                                                                      Exhibit 32

                                  Certification
            Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002
        (Subsections (a) and (b) of Section 1350, Chapter 63 of Title 18,
                               United States Code)

Pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (subsections (a) and
(b) of section 1350, chapter 63 of title 18, United States Code), each of the
undersigned officers of Excelsior Private Equity Fund II, Inc. (the "Company"),
does hereby certify, to such officer's knowledge, that:

The Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarter ended April 30, 2004 (the
"Form 10-Q") of the Company fully complies with the requirements of Section 13
(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and the information
contained in the Form 10-Q fairly presents, in all material respects, the
financial condition and results of operations of the Company.


Date: June 14, 2004                         /s/ Douglas A. Lindgren
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Name: Douglas A. Lindgren
                                            Title: Chief Executive Officer


Date: June 14, 2004                         /s/ Robert F. Aufenanger
                                            ------------------------------------
                                            Name: Robert F. Aufenanger
                                            Title: Treasurer

A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
* 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.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 98-41118

Conference Calendar

 

WILLIAM PEÑA,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

UNKNOWN QUACKENBUSH, Dr., ET AL.,

Defendants-Appellees.

- - - - - - - - - -

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. G-97-CV-620

- - - - - - - - - -

April 19, 1999

Before JONES, SMITH, and DUHÉ, Circuit Judges. 

PER CURIAM:*

William Peña, Texas inmate # 619877, appeals the district

court’s dismissal as frivolous of his 42 U.S.C. § 1983 complaint. 

Peña contended in the district court that he was treated

unnecessarily with drugs for a mental illness when his condition

required treatment only for epileptic seizures. Peña contended

that his condition deteriorated as a result of the drug treatment

and eventually required hospitalization for dehydration.
No. 98-41118

-2-

We have reviewed the record and Peña’s brief and affirm the

decision of the district court under 28 U.S.C. § 1915A for

essentially the reasons stated by the district court. See Peña

v. Quackenbush et al., No. G-97-620 (S.D. Tex. Jul. 20, 1998). 

Peña contends for the first time in this court that the

defendants forcibly administered psychotropic drugs. Peña’s

allegation involves factual issues, which were capable of

resolution by the district court, and which cannot rise to the

level of plain error. See United States v. Vital, 68 F.3d 114,

119 (5th Cir. 1995); Gabel v. Lynaugh, 835 F.2d 124, 125 (5th

Cir. 1988)(“Generally speaking, we are a court of errors and

appeals; and the trial court cannot have erred as to matters

which were not presented to it.”). Accordingly, the decision of

the district court is AFFIRMED.

AFFIRMED.
**Exhibit 23.1**Consent of Independent Registered Public Accounting FirmThe Board of DirectorsLNB Bancorp, Inc.:We consent to the incorporation by reference in the registrationstatementsNo. 33-64034No. 333-125288,No. 333-115385,and No. 333-53210on Form S-8 andNo. 333-43441 andNo. 333-58414 onForm S-3 of LNBBancorp, Inc. of our reports dated March 13, 2006, withrespect to the consolidated balance sheets of LNB Bancorp, Inc.and subsidiaries as of December 31, 2005 and 2004, and therelated consolidated statements of income, shareholders’equity and cash flows for each of the years in the three-yearperiod ended December 31, 2005, management’sassessment of the effectiveness of internal control overfinancial reporting as of December 31, 2005 and theeffectiveness of internal control over financial reporting as ofDecember 31, 2005, which reports appear in theDecember 31, 2005 annual report onForm 10-K of LNBBancorp, Inc.
From: eddie.vinson@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:01:49 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.

If you have any morals, protecting unborn children, and any conscience at all you will reverse course.

Sincerely,

Elliott Vinson, Jr.

Murfreesboro, NC 27855
<PAGE>   1
                                                                    EXHIBIT 23.1
                                                                    PAGE 1 OF 1



                              ACCOUNTANTS' CONSENT





The Board of Directors
Global Natural Resources Inc.:




           We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements (No. 33-62106 on Form S-8 and No.  33-31537 on Form S-8) of our
report dated February 27, 1996, relating to the consolidated balance sheets of
Global Natural Resources Inc. and subsidiaries as of December 31, 1995 and 1994
and the related consolidated statements of operations, stockholders' equity and
cash flows for each of the years in the three-year period ended December 31,
1995, which report appears in the December 31, 1995 annual report on Form 10-K
of Global Natural Resources Inc.   Our report refers to changes in methods of
accounting for impairments of long-lived assets and for certain investments.



                                                  KPMG Peat Marwick LLP

Houston, Texas
March 25, 1996
## SUPREME COURT OF THE STATE OF NEW YORK 

## Appellate Division, Fourth Judicial Department

**62 CA 15-00640**  PRESENT: SMITH, J.P., CARNI, LINDLEY, AND DEJOSEPH, JJ.

PAUL E. GILLETTE AND KIM A. GILLETTE, PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS,

V ORDER
ESTATE OF IVAN H. ENSTROM, DECEASED, BY ELIZABETH P. ENSTROM, AS EXECUTOR, DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. (APPEAL NO. 1.)

THE LAW FIRM OF JANICE M. IATI, P.C., ROCHESTER (JANICE M. IATI OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
CANNON & VANALLEN, LLP, GENESEO (SCOTT D. CANNON OF COUNSEL), FOR PLAINTIFFS-RESPONDENTS.

Appeal from an order of the Supreme Court, Livingston County (Dennis S. Cohen, A.J.), entered July 8, 2014. The order granted plaintiffs’ motion for partial summary judgment.
Now, upon reading and filing the stipulation of discontinuance signed by the attorneys for the parties on December 7 and 21, 2015,
It is hereby ORDERED that said appeal is unanimously dismissed without costs upon stipulation.

Entered: February 5, 2016 Frances E. Cafarell Clerk of the Court
From: adam@weseejesusministries.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:10:49 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.

Mr. President stay out of people's bedrooms. Instead of giving condoms to young people. Why don't we

teach them to not have sex with everyone or anyone until they are married. 

Sincerely,

Adam LiVecchi

Little Ferry, NJ 07643
No. 477.

#### City of Philadelphia *v.*Cohen.

*Mortimer B. Wolf, David Berger*and *Shirley Fingerhood*for petitioner.

*John L. Freeman*for respondent.

*Leo A. Larkin, Stanley Buchsbaum*and *Morris L. Heath*for the City of New York, as *amicus curiae,*in support of the petition.

Court of Appeals of New York. Certiorari denied.