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

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:50:05 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,

Patricia Clinefelter

Fallbrook, CA 92028
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 on Form 10-Q of WNC Housing Tax
Credit  Fund  VI,  L.P.,  Series 5 (the  "Partnership")  for the  quarter  ended
December 31, 2007 as filed with the  Securities  and Exchange  Commission on the
date hereof (the "Report"),  and pursuant to 18 U.S.C., section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, Wilfred N. Cooper,
Jr.,  President and Chief Executive Officer of WNC & Associates,  Inc.,  general
partner of the Partnership, hereby certify that:

     1.   The Report fully  complies with the  requirements  of section 13(a) or
          15(d) of the  Securities  Exchange  Act of 1934,  except to the extent
          that  such  provisions  require  the  audit  report  of Local  Limited
          Partnership financial statements to refer to the auditing standards of
          the Public Company  Accounting  Oversight Board for the  Partnership's
          annual financial statements and

     2.   The  information  contained  in the  Report  fairly  presents,  in all
          material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of
          the Partnership.




/s/Wilfred N. Cooper, Jr.
-------------------------
Wilfred N. Cooper, Jr
President and Chief Executive Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc.
May 16, 2008
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 on Form 10-Q of WNC Housing Tax Credit Fund VI, L.P., Series 5 (the “Partnership”) for the quarter ended September 30, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), and pursuant to 18 U.S.C., section 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, I, Wilfred N. Cooper, Jr., President and Chief Executive Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc., general partner of the Partnership, hereby certify 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 Partnership.











/s/WILFRED N. COOPER, JR.


Wilfred N. Cooper, Jr.


President and Chief Executive Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc.





Date: January 28, 2011
* This order and judgment is not binding precedent, except under the doctrines of

law of the case, res judicata, and collateral estoppel. This court generally disfavors the

citation of orders and judgments; nevertheless, an order and judgment may be cited under

the terms and conditions of 10th Cir. R. 36.3.

F I L E D

United States Court of Appeals

Tenth Circuit

SEP 29 1998

PATRICK FISHER

Clerk

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

TENTH CIRCUIT

STANTON S. HOLT,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

v.

LARRY E. BENGTSON, District Court

Judge; CHRIS BIGGS, County Attorney,

Junction City, Kansas; THE STATE OF

KANSAS, Geary County, Kansas,

Defendants-Appellees.

No. 98-3138

(D.C. No. 98-CV-3072-GTV)

(District of Kansas)

ORDER AND JUDGMENT*

Before PORFILIO, KELLY, and HENRY, Circuit Judges.

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel has determined

unanimously that oral argument would not materially assist the determination of this

appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a); 10th Cir. R. 34.1.9. The case is therefore ordered

submitted without oral argument.
- 2 -

This is an appeal from the dismissal of a pro se civil rights complaint for failure to

state a claim for which relief can be granted. Within this appeal, Mr. Holt has also filed a

document entitled “60-801 Writ of Mandamus” seeking a refund by the district court of

his partial filing fee because his complaint was dismissed. 

Congress clearly contemplated such a result because it provided no statutory

authority for such a refund. Under the express terms of the Prison Litigation Reform Act,

the prisoner is required to pay all installments of a deferred fee until it is paid in full. No

exception was made for a dismissed suit. See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(b)(2). The “Writ of

Mandamus” petition is therefore DENIED. 

Further, our review indicates the district court committed no error and this appeal

is frivolous. See Hall v. Bellmon, 935 F.2d 1106, 1109 (10th Cir. 1991). This holding

will constitute a “prior occasion” under 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). The judgment of the

district court is AFFIRMED for the reasons stated in its order of March 13, 1998. The

mandate shall issue forthwith. 

ENTERED FOR THE COURT

John C. Porfilio

Circuit Judge
Exhibit






Exhibit 10.1


Director Compensation Summary
We currently pay our non-management directors an annual retainer of $240,000 per year, $120,000 of which is paid in cash and $120,000 of which is paid in restricted stock. A director may elect to receive his or her entire annual retainer (plus the additional annual retainer amounts described below) in restricted stock.


Restricted stock vests on the day immediately prior to the first annual general meeting of shareholders at which directors are elected following the grant of the stock. However, if, prior to such vesting date, either (i) a change in control (as defined in the Assured Guaranty Ltd. 2004 Long-Term Incentive Plan, as amended) of Assured Guaranty Ltd. occurs before the director terminates service on the Board or (ii) the director terminates service on the Board as a result of such director’s death or disability, then the restricted stock will vest on the date of such change in control or the date of the director’s termination of service, whichever is applicable. Grants of restricted stock receive cash dividends and have voting rights. 


Our Share Ownership Guidelines require that each director own the greater of (i) at least 25,000 Common Shares or (ii) Common Shares with a market value of at least three times the maximum cash portion of the annual director retainer (which is currently 3 x $120,000 = $360,000), before being permitted to dispose of any shares acquired as compensation from the Company. Once a director has reached the Share Ownership Guideline, for so long as he or she serves on the Board, such director may not dispose of any Common Shares if such disposition would cause the director to be below the Share Ownership Guideline. Vested restricted stock, vested restricted stock units (i.e., units for which Common Shares will be received by a director six months after termination of such director’s service on the Board), and purchased shares will all count toward the Stock Ownership Guideline.


In addition to the annual retainer described above:
		
	•
	The Chairman of the Board receives an additional $125,000 annual retainer


		
	•
	The Chairman of each of the Audit Committee, the Compensation Committee, the Finance Committee, the Nominating and Governance Committee, and the Risk Oversight Committee, unless also the Chairman of the Board, receives an additional $30,000 annual retainer


		
	•
	Members, other than the chairman of the committee or the Chairman of the Board, of each of the Audit Committee, the Compensation Committee, the Finance Committee, the Nominating and Governance Committee and the Risk Oversight Committee receive an additional $15,000 annual retainer.




Members of the Executive Committee do not receive any additional compensation.


The Company generally will not pay a fee for attendance at board or committee meetings, although the Chairman of the Board has the discretion to pay attendance fees of $2,000 for extraordinary or special meetings.
EXHIBIT 31.1

CERTIFICATION

 

          I, Robert E. Matthiessen, certify that: 

          1.    I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-Q of inTEST Corporation; 

          2.    Based on my knowledge, this 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 report; 

          3.    Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this 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 report; 

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

        (a)  Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, 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 report is being prepared; 

        (b)  [Paragraph omitted pursuant to SEC Release Nos. 33-8238 and 34-47986]; 

        (c)  Evaluated the effectiveness of the registrant's disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report based on such evaluation; and 

        (d)  Disclosed in this report any change in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the registrant's most recent fiscal quarter (the registrant's fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the registrant's internal control over financial reporting; and 

          5.    The registrant's other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the registrant's auditors and the audit committee of the registrant's board of directors: 

        (a)  All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the registrant's ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and 

        (b)  Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the registrant's internal control over financial reporting. 

Date: November 10, 2006/s/ Robert E. Matthiessen
II

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION S. 1113

To amend section 1562 of title 38, United States Code, to increase the

amount of Medal of Honor Roll special pension, to provide for an annual

adjustment in the amount of that special pension, and for other purposes.

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

JUNE 27, 2001

Mr. SPECTER introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred

to the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs

A BILL

To amend section 1562 of title 38, United States Code,

to increase the amount of Medal of Honor Roll special

pension, to provide for an annual adjustment in the

amount of that special pension, and for other purposes.

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

3 SECTION 1. INCREASE AND ANNUAL ADJUSTMENT OF

4 MEDAL OF HONOR ROLL SPECIAL PENSION.

5 (a) INCREASE IN AMOUNT.—Subsection (a) of section

6 1562 of title 38, United States Code, is amended by strik7 ing ‘‘$600’’ and inserting ‘‘$1,000, as adjusted from time

8 to time under subsection (e),’’.
2

•S 1113 IS

1 (b) ANNUAL ADJUSTMENT.—That section is further

2 amended by adding at the end the following:

3 ‘‘(e) Effective as of December 1 each year, the Sec4 retary shall increase the amount of monthly special pen5 sion payable under subsection (a) as of November 30 of

6 such year by the same percentage that benefit amounts

7 payable under title II of the Social Security Act (42

8 U.S.C. 401 et seq.) are increased effective December 1 of

9 such year as a result of a determination under section

10 215(i) of that Act (42 U.S.C. 415(i)).’’.

11 (c) EFFECTIVE DATE.—(1) Except as provided in

12 paragraph (2), the amendments made by this section shall

13 take effect on the date of the enactment of this Act, and

14 shall apply with respect to months that begin on or after

15 that date.

16 (2) The Secretary of Veterans Affairs shall not make

17 any adjustment under subsection (e) of section 1562 of

18 title 38, United States Code, as added by subsection (b)

19 of this section, in 2001.

Æ
#### Walter S. West, Appellant, v. Edwin R. Livermore, Respondent.

Order reversed, without costs, and motion to amend allowed, on payment of costs, up to the time of application to be adjusted.
# ~ 1?c^l[^«- t © s T ' a.s5» n -'^•^^ a ;» ' ; CAR L LEVI N

MICHIGAN '
RuSset t SeNAT

t Qmc t 8UII.OIN « WASHINQTOH , O C Z0S16-220 2 .- 1 • ,(ao2t!j*-ea2 t 

### Novembe r

17,200 9 

# lanitc dState s Senat e WASHINGTON , D C 20510-220 J CQMMinseS : ARME D 3ERyiCE $ COVERNMENtA t APFAm S SMAUaUSIt4Ed $ INTELLIQENC E



### Ms
. Heide hShahmorad i Actin g Deputy Assistan t

Secretaty fo

r Governmenta l Affairs , U.S
. Departmen t

o f Transportatio n 120 0 Nevi ' Jerse y Avenue , S B Washington , D C 2059 0 Dea r Ms
. Shalimoradi : o 

## o -t- i

< • 1. ;



### I a mwritin g regardin g th e U.S
. Departmen t o f Transportation' s (DOT ) selectio n o f SkyWes t Airline s t o servic e th e Houghto n Count y Memoria l Airport , a

n Essential Ai r

Servic e (EAS) ' airpor t Enclose di s awebmai l that I receive dfromaconstituen t wh o i s concerne dabou t

th e chang 0 ir

i airliri e service ; I woul dappreciat e arespons e t o th e concern s raise dan da n exptaKiati€>rio

f hop : th e U.$ j DO T reache dit s decisio n o n thi s particular airline
. Your

respons e can ijf

e directe dt o m

y aide , Elizabeth Reed , at

m y Escanab aoffic e liste dbelow
. Thank yo u for you r tim e i n thi s matter
. Sincerely ,

^^- ^ 

### Car l Levi n CL/er Enclosur e

DETROI T 47 7 MOjjOA N AvBNu i Sui n IM * Dtmon , M l A832

t (313l1Hi-e020 : ESCANAB A Sun t a-t0 3 I9<M I ?»9-<»B ! GRAN D RAPID * FiOiftAi
. BVILOIH

Q SUT172 0 11 0 MICHIDA H StMlT , N.W ; aiMM>nAr«<

. MI4990 3 l9l<MSa>3>I I STAT E OmCE S LANSIN Q \ 3 4 Wei TALKQA M STBEft T LANSINO , M I ai m (617l37r-l60 « SA<3(NA W • ROO M 402
. Si n NORTH V/A&WNatONAVENU i SAOWAW , M l 4gB6 > (988 1 *54-448 4 TRAVEBS B CIT Y torCMsSTRsc r TnAVEhS EClTV , Mt

4064 4 1331 1 947-95S 9 WAflRE N 36SQ O I/A N Oy t AvENU I IIVAKHIN , M I 4«l9j | (UelS73-914 9cf_emai l agenc y



### Regarding : agenc y

' Agency : Departmen t o f Tran^pbrtafioi t
I a m writing.t o as k

ypu rasaistenb e i n reversin g th e USDO T decfelo n t o replac e Mesab a Airline s a s th e carrie ra t Houghto n CduntyAirpOf b Ou rseivic e wil l b e degrade d froi n thre e flight s dow n t o tw o flight s dail y We wil l hav

a t o flyt o Chica| 6 t o mak e connection s - wh o want s th e hassl e i n Chicago ? Minneapoli s ( 8 a n easyairpor

t to ge t aroun d Irt;e3p#'ail ywit h a tigh t connectiort

. I recentl ygo t stuc k

oyernig W ir i Minneapoli s whe n I misse d a Mesat) ^ connection , bu t Northwest/peit a pu t m e u p i n a hote l literall yfive minute s fro m th e airpor t ( I time d iti) ; Ca n yo u se e tha t eve rhappenin g i n Chicagp?-''- • ••'-^•'••>''::-^>^;''•-:-;^''; ; •- : :::-'---^":-''•' • \ n addittOri , w

e cEinno t redee m bu rNorthwest/pei W frequen t flye rlinilee ou t of ou rloca l airppr t anymore . W e wil l have t o trave l a cc^siderabl t distanc e t o som e aifpor t that IS stil l service d b yNorthwest/Delta * Whyshoul d w e t) e inconVenlehce d In d flhanclali yhur t b ythiCdecisiPn ? An d i f we i d o trave l sornewher i t o us e those ; mites , th e benisu9i^t:H©tjghtonGbu^ I awai t you rrespons e as to you raetk>n o n thi s issue

.
Order entered April 25, 2013

In The

Court of Appeals 

Fifth District of Texas at Dallas 

No. 05-13-00215-CR

JAMIE MANGRAM, Appellant

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 204th Judicial District Court

Dallas County, Texas

Trial Court Cause No. F-0713817-Q

ORDER

The Court ORDERS the trial court to make findings of fact regarding whether appellant 

has been deprived of the clerk’s and reporter’s records because of ineffective counsel, indigence, 

or for any other reason.

• The trial court shall first determine whether appellant desires to prosecute the appeal. If 

the trial court determines that appellant does not desire to prosecute this appeal, it shall 

make a finding to that effect.

• If the trial court determines that appellant desires to prosecute the appeal, it shall next 

determine whether appellant is indigent and entitled to proceed without payment of costs 

for the clerk’s and reporter’s records. If appellant is entitled to proceed without payment 

of costs, the trial court shall make a finding to that effect. Moreover, if appellant is 

indigent, the trial court is ORDERED to take such measures as may be necessary to 

assure effective representation, which may include appointment of new counsel. If the 

trial court finds appellant is not indigent, it shall determine whether retained counsel has 

abandoned the appeal.
• The trial court shall next determine: (1) the name and address of each court reporter who 

recorded the proceedings in this cause; (2) the court reporter’s explanation for the delay 

in filing the reporter’s record; and (3) the earliest date by which the reporter’s record can 

be filed. 

• The trial court shall next determine the date by which the clerk’s record will be filed.

We ORDER the trial court to transmit a supplemental record, containing the written 

findings of fact, any supporting documentation, and any orders, to this Court within THIRTY 

DAYS of the date of this order.

The appeal is ABATED to allow the trial court to comply with this order. It shall be 

reinstated thirty days from the date of this order or when the supplemental record is received, 

whichever is earlier.

/s/ LANA MYERS 

JUSTICE
From: karlerm@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:34:03 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,

Karl Ermatinger

West Olive, MI 49460