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

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:10:59 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,

McKay Murdock

Saint George, UT 84770
From: dtrim888@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:40:05 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,

Dick Trim

Shawnee, OK 74804
No. 228.

#### Freedman et al. *v.*Philadelphia Terminals Auction Co.

*David Berger*and *Walter Stein*for petitioners. *C. Brewster Rhoads*and *Thomas N. O’Neill, Jr.*for respondent.

C. A. 3d Cir. Certiorari denied.

Mr. Justice Black is of the opinion that certiorari should be granted.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
The schedule contains summary financial information extracted from Dean
Witter Cornerstone Fund III and is qualified in its entirety by reference
to such financial instruments.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1995
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1995
<CASH>                                      42,294,365
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  284,136
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                     0
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              48,156,795<F1>
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<COMMON>                                             0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<OTHER-SE>                                           0
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                48,156,795<F2>
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            16,882,940<F3>
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                        0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                             5,851,246
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             11,031,694
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                         11,031,694
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                11,031,694
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                        0
<EPS-DILUTED>                                        0
<FN>
<F1>In addition to cash and receivables, total assets include net unrealized
gain on open contracts of $5,578,294.
<F2>Liabilities include redemptions payable of $639,349, accrued management
fees of $158,630 and common administrative expenses payable of $222,036.
<F3>Total revenue includes realized trading revenue of $14,260,042, net
change in unrealized of ($561,437) and interest income of $2,061,461.
</FN>
        

</TABLE>
From: jandcbate@hotmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:55:09 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,

Jordan Bate

Farmington, UT 84025
To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 11:48:03 AM

To Whom It May Concern:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

health insurance.

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

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

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

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

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

preventive services.

Sincerely,

eileen schnell

Metairie, LA 70005
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Justice

###### Office of Justice Programs

          - [OJP (BJA) Docket No. 1816]

# AGENCY:

Office of Justice Programs (OJP), Bureau of Justice Assistance (BJA).

# ACTION:

Notice of meeting.

# SUMMARY:

This is an announcement of a meeting (via WebEx/conference call-in) of the Public Safety Officer Medal of Valor Review Board to cover a range of issues of importance to the Board, to include but not limited to: Membership/terms; Board Bylaws; program marketing and outreach.

# DATES:

November 15, 2023, 1:00 p.m. to 2:00 p.m. EST.

# ADDRESSES:

                        This meeting will be held virtually using web conferencing technology. The public may hear the proceedings of this virtual meeting/conference call by registering at last                               ( print page 63131)                            seven (7) days in advance with Gregory Joy (contact information below).                    

# FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:

                        Gregory Joy, Policy Advisor, Bureau of Justice Assistance, Office of Justice Programs, by telephone at (202) 514-1369, or by email at                         *Gregory.joy@usdoj.gov.*

# SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

The Public Safety Officer Medal of Valor Review Board carries out those advisory functions specified in 42 U.S.C. 15202. Pursuant to 42 U.S.C. 15201, the President of the United States is authorized to award the Public Safety Officer Medal of Valor, the highest national award for valor by a public safety officer.

This virtual meeting/conference call is open to the public to participate remotely. For security purposes, members of the public who wish to participate must register at least seven (7) days in advance of the meeting/conference call by contacting Mr. Joy.

Access to the virtual meeting/conference call will not be allowed without prior registration. Please submit any comments or written statements for consideration by the Review Board in writing at least seven (7) days in advance of the meeting date.

Gregory Joy,

Policy Advisor/Designated Federal Officer, Bureau of Justice Assistance.

[FR Doc. 2023-19917 Filed 9-13-23; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4410-18-P
From: stan@daylightvideos.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:47:23 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,

Stanley McInturf

Roseville, CA 95747
II

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 1388

To make election day a Federal holiday.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

AUGUST 3, 2001

Ms. LANDRIEU introduced the following bill; which was read twice and

referred to the Committee on the Judiciary

A BILL

To make election day a Federal holiday.

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,

3 SECTION 1. FINDINGS.

4 Congress finds that—

5 (1) democracy is an invaluable birthright of

6 American citizens and each generation must sustain

7 and improve the democratic process for its succes8 sors;

9 (2) the Federal Government must actively cre10 ate and enforce laws that protect the voting rights

11 of all Americans, and further create an equal oppor-
2

•S 1388 IS

1 tunity for all Americans to participate in the voting

2 process;

3 (3) the Federal Government should encourage

4 the value of the right to vote;

5 (4) 22.6 percent of Americans who do not vote

6 in elections give the reasoning that they are too busy

7 and have a conflicting work or school schedule;

8 (5) the creation of a legal public holiday on

9 election day will increase the availability of poll

10 workers and suitable polling places; and

11 (6) the creation of a legal public holiday on

12 election day might make voting easier for some

13 workers and increase voter participation by the

14 American public.

15 SEC. 2. ESTABLISHMENT OF ELECTION DAY IN FEDERAL

16 ELECTION YEARS AS A LEGAL PUBLIC HOLI17 DAY.

18 Section 6103(a) of title 5, United States Code, is

19 amended by inserting immediately below the item relating

20 to Veterans Day the following:

21 ‘‘Election Day, the Tuesday next after the first Mon22 day in November in each even-numbered year.’’.

Æ
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 18-10756

Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

HARLAN R. HILL,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Northern District of Texas

USDC No. 3:16-CR-266-1

Before HIGGINBOTHAM, SMITH, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

The Federal Public Defender appointed to represent Harlan R. Hill has 

moved for leave to withdraw and has filed a brief in accordance with Anders v. 

California, 386 U.S. 738 (1967), and United States v. Flores, 632 F.3d 229 (5th 

Cir. 2011). Hill has not filed a response. We have reviewed counsel’s brief and 

the relevant portions of the record reflected therein. We concur with counsel’s 

assessment that the appeal presents no nonfrivolous issue for appellate review. 

 

* 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

April 18, 2019

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 18-10756 Document: 00514922874 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/18/2019
No. 18-10756

2

Accordingly, counsel’s motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is 

excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED. 

See 5TH CIR. R. 42.2.

 Case: 18-10756 Document: 00514922874 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/18/2019
EXHIBIT 32.1



inTEST CORPORATION



In connection with the Quarterly Report of inTEST Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2005 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Robert E. Matthiessen, 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 condition and result of operations of the Company.
Date:	November 14, 2005

/s/ Robert E. Matthiessen
Robert E. Matthiessen
President and Chief Executive Officer
No. 351, Misc.

#### Indiviglio *v.*United States.

*Carl L. Shipley, Thomas*

*A. Ziebarth*and *Samuel Resnicoff*for petitioner.

*Solicitor General Cox, Acting Assistant Attorney General Guilfoyle*and *John G. Laughlin, Jr.*for the United States.

Court of Claims. Certiorari denied.
# U.S. Military and Kuwait Armed Forces Collaborate in Exercise Eager Defender 24

/ Published Jan. 29, 2024
Kuwait City, Kuwait, 
The Kuwait Naval Force, Kuwait Coast Guard, U.S Naval Forces Central Command (NAVCENT), and U.S. Marine Corps Forces Central Command (MARCENT) have joined forces in Exercise Eager Defender 24, a bilateral maritime drill aimed at strengthening mutual interoperability and capabilities. This exercise, led by Task Force 51/5th Marine Expeditionary Brigade (TF 51/5), taking place in Kuwait and the North Arabian Gulf from January 28 to February 7, showcases the commitment of both nations to regional security and readiness.Under the umbrella of Exercise Eager Defender, U.S. Marines, Sailors and Soldiers are participating alongside their Kuwaiti counterparts in joint training. The exercise focuses on enhancing various aspects, including maritime security, visit, board, search and seizure (VBSS), harbor security, unmanned systems operations, small unit naval infantry tactics, and joint command and control operations, culminating with a combined multinational amphibious assault. Through collaborative training, participating forces will acquire the necessary skills to effectively address regional security threats and increase interoperability between both militaries.Exercise Eager Defender serves as a testament to the enduring partnership between the United States and Kuwait. It demonstrates the commitment of both nations to reinforcing partnerships and interoperability in the U.S. Central Command (CENTCOM) area of responsibility. This exercise is one of several annual joint exercises where the U.S. military collaborates with partner nations, ensuring high levels of readiness for crisis and contingency."Exercise Eager Defender highlights our shared commitment to regional security and the preservation of peace," said Brig. Gen. Matthew Reid, Commanding General of TF 51/5. "By working together, the Kuwait Armed Forces and U.S. military are strengthening our capabilities and preparedness. This exercise is a testament to the enduring partnership between our nations."Exercise Eager Defender reaffirms the strong bond between the Kuwait Armed Forces and the U.S. military. By fostering cooperation and mutual understanding, this exercise further enhances the ability of both nations to respond effectively to security challenges in the region.