alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
From: bettyjm@knology.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:54:55 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,

Betty J. Maurer

Montgomery, AL 36109
| **Derivative Accounting - Outstanding Gross Notional Amounts Outstanding (Details)** | 12 Months Ended |
|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|-----------------|
||
| **Outstanding gross notional amount of derivatives**                                 |            |   |
| Power (in MWh) | MWh                                                                 | 583,000         | 1,314,000 |
| Gas (in bcf) | Bcf                                                                   | 240             | 194 |

| X                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                   |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| - Definition
Nominal energy measure used to calculate payments on a derivative instrument.
+ References
No definition available.
+ Details**Name:**us-gaap_DerivativeNonmonetaryNotionalAmountEnergyMeasure**Namespace Prefix:**us-gaap_**Data Type:**num:energyItemType**Balance Type:**na**Period Type:**duration |
| X                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                    |
|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| - Definition
Nominal volume used to calculate payments on a derivative instrument.
+ References
No definition available.
+ Details**Name:**us-gaap_DerivativeNonmonetaryNotionalAmountVolume**Namespace Prefix:**us-gaap_**Data Type:**num:volumeItemType**Balance Type:**na**Period Type:**duration |
| X                                                                                                                                                                                                             |
|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| - References
No definition available.
+ Details**Name:**us-gaap_NotionalAmountOfDerivativesAbstract**Namespace Prefix:**us-gaap_**Data Type:**xbrli:stringItemType**Balance Type:**na**Period Type:**duration |
From: john tighe

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: RIN 1210-AB44 Mandatory Birth Control

Date: Monday, August 15, 2011 5:52:04 PM

To Whom it May Concern,

I object in the strongest of terms to mandating birth control with no co-pays under

the Affordable Care Act.

Birth control is already widely available to all women, subsidized largely by

taxpayers. Demanding that we further subsidize other people's birth control by

increasing our insurance premiums in these days when families are struggling just to

make ends meet is an outrage. 

The mandate violates my conscience and that of millions of Americans who oppose

birth control on moral and religious grounds. 

It is undisputed that one of the operations of contraceptives is to render the

endometrium hostile to implantation, so that if fertilization occurs, the newly

conceived child may be lost to an early abortion. I also strongly object to the

inclusion of free sterilization as well as abortifacient pills like ella, which can work

weeks after a person's biological beginning to cause an abortion.

And what of Catholic employers and others who oppose birth control, but are now

going to be forced to participate in these plans and/or offer it to their employees?

This flies in the face of the conscience protections that Americans have historically

enjoyed.

The conscience provisions attached to the rule are so narrowly crafted that they

would appear to force Catholic institutions to make free birth control and sterilization

available in health plans, or cease hiring and providing services to non-Catholics. 

It is incomprehensible that such a mandate is being forced upon the people of the

United States.

It is no secret that Planned Parenthood, the largest abortion chain in America, is

behind this mandate, and will reap huge financial benefits from it at a time when

citizens in the United States are working on both the state and federal levels to

defund the abortion giant. 

The majority of Americans are pro-life and we do not want our tax dollars and

insurance premiums supporting the nation's largest abortion chain.

It is imperative that you give credence to my personal objection along with those of

millions of other Americans who do not want to be forced to pay for and provide

medication, devices, and procedures that do not treat or prevent any disease or

illness, but distort and render inoperable a healthy reproductive system. This rule is

unjust, untenable, and un-American--and it should be stricken.

Sincerely,

john tighe
levittown, New York
EXHIBIT 32.2



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 Annual Report of AE Biofuels, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ending December 31, 2008, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the  Report ), I, Scott A. Janssen, Chief Financial 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 and Exchange Act of 1934; and



(2) The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



By: /s/ Scott A. Janssen

Scott A. Janssen

Chief Financial Officer



Date: May 15, 2009
From: wbordeaux@frontier.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

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

To Kathryn Sebelius:

There is no justification for the Federal government's Health and Human Services office to mandate how

insurance companies offer healthcare coverage. That must be a free marketplace decision. But, of

course, many mandates directed at the insurance provisions have already been put in place, well before

Obamacare was voted into law. However, the precedent set must at some point be stopped, and the

IOM's decision to mandate contraceptive coverage under the guise of "health care for women" is

another chilling step in the wrong direction.

Pregnancy is not an illness. A healthy pregnancy should be the only concern, and the ease of ending an

unborn baby's life should never be considered a "health decision."

Since there was no voice for the prolife decision on your IOM committee, I can assume that my voice

will also be disregarded. You have overstepped by minimizing your role to protect life and health and

maximizing an agenda of death for the unborn. There are many social consequences for your agenda,

and we already see the outcomes of devaluing life daily in our newspapers.

I also ask you to redefine "religious employer" to be more inclusive than just churches and offer an

authentic conscience protection for any organization or business that has moral or religious objection to

providing such insurance to their employees. You are violating the conscience laws which prohibit

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

grounds.

It's not too late for you to reverse such destructive and intrusive social policies coming out of the office

you "serve." My friends and neighbors do not support your obvious agenda, and, before God and the

people of this nation, neither should you.

Sincerely,

Linda Bordeaux

Sincerely,

Linda Bordeaux

Roanoke, IN 46783
<page>				       EXHIBIT 32.01


CERTIFICATION OF PRESIDENT 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 Annual Report of Morgan Stanley
Cornerstone Fund III L.P. (the ?Partnership?) on Form 10-K for the
period ended December 31, 2007, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the ?Report?), I, Walter
Davis, President of Demeter Management Corporation, the general
partner of the Partnership, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act
of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:
(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
results of operations of the Partnership.








By:	  /s/	Walter Davis

Name:		Walter Davis
Title:	President

Date:		March 28, 2008
From: rentrekin@comcast.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:18:49 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.

Sincerely,

Rusty Entrekin

Kennesaw, GA 30144
From: jane@homesbymaher.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:21:09 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,

Jane Maher

New Bern, NC 28564
Exhibit
32.2




Certification
of Chief Financial Officer 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 Annual Report of Cover-All Technologies Inc., a Delaware
corporation (the “Company”), on Form 10-K for the period ended December 31, 2008
as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the
“Report”), I, Ann F. Massey, Chief Financial Officer (principal financial
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, to my
knowledge:




(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 results of operations of the Company.




Date: March
30, 2009
  /s/ Ann F.
Massey
 Name: Ann
F. Massey
 Title: Chief
Financial Officer
#### Timothy Kearney, Appellant, *v.*Charles F. Seymour, Respondent.

*Kearney*v. *Seymour,*143 App. Div. 928, affirmed.

(Submitted February 14, 1913;

decided March 11, 1913.)

Appeal from a judgment of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered March 10, 1911, affirming a judgment in favor of defendant entered upon a verdict in an action to recover for personal injuries alleged to have been sustained by plaintiff through the negligence of defendant, his employer.

*Moses Feltenstein*for appellant.

*Abram I. Elkus, Carlisle J. Gleason*and *John de R. Storey*for respondent.

Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Gray, Willard Bartlett, Chase, Cuddeback and Hogan, JJ. Not sitting: Miller, J.
No. 365, Misc.

#### Garcia *v.*Heritage, Warden.

Petitioner *pro se.*

*Solicitor General Cox, Assistant Attorney General Marshall, Harold H. Greene*and *Isabel L. Blair*for respondent.

Supreme Court of Puerto Rico. Certiorari denied.
From: jweeks@taylorbigred.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:42:07 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

health insurance.

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

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

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

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

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

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Jeffrey Weeks

Ackerman, MS 39735
|   |   |
|--------|--------|

**Filed      Pursuant To Rule 433, Registration No. 333-124310**
** **

| **For                the Period: 5/29/2007 to                6/4/2007** |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| **Coupon** | **Interest**                       | **Maturity** | **Callable**     | **Survivor's****Option** | **Price****1** | **Yield****2** | **Moody's** | **S&P** | **CUSIP** |
|------------|------------------------------------|--------------|------------------|--------------------------|----------------|----------------|-------------|-------------|-----------|
| 5.000%     | Monthly(†)                   | 6/15/09      | NO               | YES§           | 100.00         | 5.052%         | A2          | A           | 14912HDG2 |
| 5.400%     | Semi-Annual(†††) | 6/15/14      | 6/15/09***  | YES§           | 100.00         | 5.399%         | A2          | A           | 14912HDH0 |
| 5.750%     | Monthly(†)                   | 6/15/22      | 6/15/10*    | YES§           | 100.00         | 5.819%         | A2          | A           | 14912HDJ6 |
| 5.900%     | Semi-Annual(†††) | 6/15/27      | 6/15/11***  | YES§           | 100.00         | 5.899%         | A2          | A           | 14912HDK3 |

*All      offerings are subject to prior sale.*

|   |   |
|--------|--------|

**Filed      Pursuant To Rule 433, Registration No. 333-124310**
** **

| **For                the Period: 5/29/2007 to                6/4/2007** |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| **Coupon** | **Interest**                       | **Maturity** | **Callable**     | **Survivor's****Option** | **Price****1** | **Yield****2** | **Moody's** | **S&P** | **CUSIP** |
|------------|------------------------------------|--------------|------------------|--------------------------|----------------|----------------|-------------|-------------|-----------|
| 5.000%     | Monthly(†)                   | 6/15/09      | NO               | YES§           | 100.00         | 5.052%         | A2          | A           | 14912HDG2 |
| 5.400%     | Semi-Annual(†††) | 6/15/14      | 6/15/09***  | YES§           | 100.00         | 5.399%         | A2          | A           | 14912HDH0 |
| 5.750%     | Monthly(†)                   | 6/15/22      | 6/15/10*    | YES§           | 100.00         | 5.819%         | A2          | A           | 14912HDJ6 |
| 5.900%     | Semi-Annual(†††) | 6/15/27      | 6/15/11***  | YES§           | 100.00         | 5.899%         | A2          | A           | 14912HDK3 |

*All      offerings are subject to prior sale.*