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

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:27:05 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,

Donna Moss

Hudsonville, MI 49426
No. 447.

#### Valley Morris Plan, formerly Stockton Morris Plan Co., *v.*Commissioner of Internal Revenue.

*Harold J. Willis*for petitioner.

*Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Oberdorfer*and *Joseph Kovner*for respondent.

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
#### In the Matter of the Estate of JACOB H. DEYO, Deceased.

*Decree of surrogate on final account*— when *it will not he opened to correct am error**

September 3, 1883, an executor applied to a surrogate to vacate a decree made upon bis final accounting in September, 1874, in order to correct an alleged* error against tbe executor amounting to $380.02.

*B.eld,*that considering tbe lapse of time, the smallness of tbe amount involved, and tbe inconclusive character of tbe evidence as to tbe existence of tbe error tbe surrogate properly refused to reopen tbe decree.

Appeal from an order made by the surrogate of Ulster county, denying an application to have a decree reopened.

*A. T.*Clearwater, for Jonathan Deyo, one of the executors, appellant.

*Lewis Hasbrouelc,*for John Titus, Jr., one of the executors, and Jacob H. Deyo, a legatee, respondents.

Landon, J.:

The surrogate made his decree upon final accounting September 9,1814.' This is an appeal from an order made by the surrogate September 3, 1883, nine years afterwards, refusing to vacate the final decree and reopen the settlement to the end that an alleged error against the appealing executor to the amount of $280.02 be corrected. *We*think the order should be affirmed. The lapse of time, the smallness of the amount, the inconclusive evidence of the existence of the alleged error, convince us that the surrogate wisely exercised his discretion in refusing to reopen the decree.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and printing disbursements»

Book.es, J.:

I concur in this opinion. After the lapse of nine years from the entering of the decree, it should not be opened except upon the clearest evidence of mistake. Such evidence is not, as I think, before us. The presumption in favor of the record is not here answered, save by a suspicion as to its correctness. That will not be*held to be sufficient, even after a brief period of time and muck *513less when brought forward after a delay greater than that which would bar an ordinary action on account.

Learned, R. J., concurred.

Order affirmed, with ten dollars costs and printing disbursements.
No. 436, Misc.

#### Marshall *v.*Maroney, Correctional Superintendent.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. Certiorari denied.
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsApplied Operations Research: Operator's AssistantNASA operates high value critical equipment (HVCE) that requires trouble shooting, periodic maintenance and continued monitoring by Operations staff. The complexity HVCE and information required to maintain and trouble shoot HVCE to assure continued mission success as paper is voluminous. Training on new HVCE is commensurate with the need for equipment maintenance. LaRC Research Directorate has undertaken a proactive research to support Operations staff by initiation of the development and prototyping an electronic computer based portable maintenance aid (Operator's Assistant). This research established a goal with multiple objectives and a working prototype was developed. The research identified affordable solutions; constraints; demonstrated use of commercial off the shelf software; use of the US Coast Guard maintenance solution; NASA Procedure Representation Language; and the identification of computer system strategies; where these demonstrations and capabilities support the Operator, and maintenance. The results revealed validation against measures of effectiveness and overall proved a substantial training and capability sustainment tool. The research indicated that the OA could be deployed operationally at the LaRC Compressor Station with an expectation of satisfactorily results and to obtain additional lessons learned prior to deployment at other LaRC Research Directorate Facilities. The research revealed projected cost and time savings.Document ID20160001626Acquisition SourceLangley Research CenterDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsCole, Stuart K.*(NASA Langley Research Center Hampton, VA, United States)*Date AcquiredFebruary 5, 2016Publication DateDecember 1, 2015Subject CategoryGround Support Systems And Facilities (Space)Report/Patent NumberNF1676L-23112L-20639NASA/TM-2015-218995Funding Number(s)WBS: WBS 342466.02.03.01.07Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType20160001626.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
**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**

I, J. Michael French., President and Chief Executive Officer of Marina Biotech, Inc. (“Marina Biotech”), certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual Report of Marina Biotech on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010 fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities ExchangeAct of 1934, as amended, and that information contained in the Annual Report on Form 10-K fairly presents in all material respects the financial condition and results of operations of Marina Biotech. 

Date:March 23, 2011 

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

This certification accompanies each periodic report pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and shall not, except to the extent required by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, be deemedfiled by Marina Biotech for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
From: Rich.Viel@tbcspokane.org

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:27:16 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,

Rich Viel

Spokane, WA 99208
From: charlotte.livengood@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:25:22 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,

Charlotte Livengood

Arlington, TX 76006
No. 54.

#### White Motor Co. *v.*United States.

*Sigmund Timberg*on the motion for Serta Associates, Inc., et al.

*John Bodner, Jr.*on the motion for Sandura Company.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Ohio. (Probable jurisdiction noted, 369 U. S. 858). The motions of Serta Associates, Inc., et al. and Sandura Company for leave to file briefs, as *amid curiae,*are granted.
No. 366, Misc.

#### Corey et al. *v.*United States.

Petitioners *pro se.*

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

C. A. 9th Cir. Certiorari denied.
EXHIBIT 31.2

                   CERTIFICATION OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER
           PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002


I, Michael Schumacher, certify that:

1.  I have reviewed this annual report on Form 10-KSB of Marwich II, Ltd.

2.  Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to
make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such
statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by
this annual report;

3.  Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this annual report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report;

4.  The registrant's other certifying officers and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-14 and 15d-14) for the registrant and have:

    a)  designed such disclosure controls and procedures to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities,
particularly during the period in which this annual report is being
prepared;

    b)  evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls
and procedures as of a date within 90 days prior to the filing date of this
annual report (the "Evaluation Date"); and

    c)  presented in this annual report our conclusions about the
effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures based on our
evaluation as of the Evaluation Date.

5.  The registrant's other certifying officers and I have disclosed, based on
our most recent evaluation, to the registrant's auditors and the audit
committee of registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the
equivalent functions):

    a)  all significant deficiencies in the design or operation of internal
controls which could adversely affect the registrant's ability to record,
process, summarize and report financial data and have identified for the
registrant's auditors any material weaknesses in internal controls; and

    b)  any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal controls;
and

6.  The registrant's other certifying officers and I have indicated in this
annual report whether there were significant changes in internal controls
or in other factors that could significantly affect internal controls
subsequent to the date of our most recent evaluation, including any corrective
actions with regard to significant deficiencies and material weaknesses.

Date: November 15, 2004


/s/ Michael Schumacher
Michael Schumacher
President, Treasurer, and Chief Financial Officer
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 05-7502 

TERENCE MELVIN,

Petitioner - Appellant,

versus

PAGE TRUE, Warden,

Respondent - Appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Gerald Bruce Lee, District

Judge. (CA-04-852)

Submitted: February 23, 2006 Decided: March 2, 2006

Before WIDENER, NIEMEYER, and KING, Circuit Judges.

Dismissed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Terence Melvin, Appellant Pro Se. Leah Ann Darron, Assistant

Attorney General, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

See Local Rule 36(c).
- 2 -

PER CURIAM:

Terence Melvin seeks to appeal the district court’s order

denying relief on his petition filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (2000).

The order is not appealable unless a circuit justice or judge

issues a certificate of appealability. 28 U.S.C. § 2253(c)(1)

(2000). A certificate of appealability will not issue absent “a

substantial showing of the denial of a constitutional right.” 28

U.S.C. § 2253(c)(2) (2000). A prisoner satisfies this standard by

demonstrating that reasonable jurists would find that the district

court’s assessment of his constitutional claims is debatable and

that any dispositive procedural rulings by the district court are

also debatable or wrong. See Miller-El v. Cockrell, 537 U.S. 322,

336 (2003); Slack v. McDaniel, 529 U.S. 473, 484 (2000); Rose v.

Lee, 252 F.3d 676, 683 (4th Cir. 2001). We have independently

reviewed the record and conclude that Melvin has not made the

requisite showing. Accordingly, we deny a certificate of

appealability and dismiss the appeal. We dispense with oral

argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately

presented in the materials before the court and argument would not

aid the decisional process. 

DISMISSED
SUMMARY OF EMISSIONS TEST DATA

Table : 1

Plant : Hanson Brick, Mineral Wells, TX

Location : Kiln #2 Exhaust

Operator : T. Armstrong, L. Whicher

Test Date : 17-Aug-10

Repetition : 1 2 3

STACK GAS

Temperature, F 241.4 237.3 238.6

Velocity, fps 42.73 42.10 42.29

Volume Flow, acfm 17129.1 16876.6 16953.3

 scfm 11695.1 11595.5 11681.2

 scfh 701705 695731 700872

Moisture, % 6.99% 6.95% 6.52%

CO2, % 1.50 2.00 2.00

O2, % 17.73 17.59 17.90

SAMPLE

Start Time, hrs:min 7:55 AM 9:26 AM 10:57 AM

Finish Time, hrs:min 9:00 AM 10:30 AM 12:01 PM

Sample Volume, scf 37.656 35.661 35.858

Isokinetic Ratio, % 102.7637 98.15525 97.97357

HYDROGEN FLUORIDE

Sample Weight, mg (<0.143) (<0.158) (<0.147)

Concentration, ppm (<0.162) (<0.188) (<0.174)

Concentration, ppm @ 7% O2 (<0.712) (<0.790) (<0.807)

Emissions, lbs/hr (<0.0059) (<0.0065) (<0.006)

Emissions, gr/hr (<2.68) (<3.08) (<2.87)

CHLORINE

Sample Weight, mg (<0.12) (<0.11) (<0.10)

Concentration, ppm (<0.074) (<0.075) (<0.065)

Concentration, ppm @ 7% O2 (<0.326) (<0.316) (<0.300)

Emissions, lbs/hr (<0.0048) (<0.0048) (<0.0042)

Emissions, gr/hr (<2.18) (<2.19) (<0.190)

HYDROGEN CHLORIDE

Sample Weight, mg 0.84 2.06 0.82

Concentration, ppm 0.517244 1.346851 0.530199

Concentration, ppm @ 7% O2 2.268043 5.655962 2.456587

Emissions, lbs/hr 0.034392 0.088791 0.035211

Emissions, gr/hr 15.59727 40.2679 15.96892
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Amendment as of the day and year firstabove written.In the Presence of:     /s/ Kristofer K. Spreen   /s/ Daniel E. Klimas     (Signature of First Witness)   Daniel E. Klimas     /s/ Daniel C. Urban (Signature of Second Witness)   “Employee”    LNB BANCORP, INC.     /s/ Kristofer K. Spreen By: /s/ James R. Herrick     (Signature of First Witness)   James R. Herrick, Chairman of the Board     /s/ Daniel C. Urban      (Signature of Second Witness)           THE LORAIN NATIONAL BANK     /s/ Kristofer K. Spreen By /s/ James R. Herrick     (Signature of First Witness)   James R. Herrick, Chairman of the Board     /s/ Daniel C. Urban    “Employer” (Signature of Second Witness)    
-2-
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 181 (Wednesday, September 20, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 64910]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-20336]


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

ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY

[FRL 11397-01-OA]


Farm, Ranch, and Rural Communities Advisory Committee (FRRCC); 
Notice of Public Meeting

AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency (EPA).

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

SUMMARY: Pursuant to the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), notice 
is hereby given that the next meeting of the Farm, Ranch, and Rural 
Communities Advisory Committee (FRRCC) will be held virtually on 
September 28, 2023. Due to unforeseen administrative circumstances, EPA 
is announcing this meeting with less than 15 calendar days public 
notice. The FRRCC provides independent policy advice, information, and 
recommendations to the Administrator on a range of environmental issues 
and policies that are of importance to agriculture and rural 
communities.

DATES: This meeting will be held virtually Thursday, September 28, 
2023, from approximately 10 a.m. to 4 p.m. ET. This meeting will take 
place virtually. To register and receive information on how to listen 
to the meeting and to provide comments, please visit: www.epa.gov/faca/frrcc. Attendees must register online to receive instructions for 
virtual attendance.

ADDRESSES: Virtual attendance will be via Zoom. The link to register 
for the meeting can be found on the FRRCC web page, www.epa.gov/faca/frrcc.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Venus Welch-White, Designated Federal 
Officer (DFO), at <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#eaacb8b8a9a9aa8f9a8bc48d859c"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="8ec8dcdccdcdceebfeefa0e9e1f8">[email protected]</span></a> or 202-566-2369. General information 
regarding the FRRCC can be found on the EPA website at: www.epa.gov/faca/frrcc.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 
    Meetings of the FRRCC are open to the public. An agenda will be 
posted at www.epa.gov/faca/frrcc.
    Access and Accommodations: For information on access or services 
for individuals with disabilities, please visit: www.epa.gov/faca/frrcc.

Rodney Snyder,
Senior Advisor for Agriculture, U.S. EPA.
[FR Doc. 2023-20336 Filed 9-19-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 6560-50-P


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