alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
From: johngalt2@verizon.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: johngalt2@verizon.net

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:26:05 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

AS AN ECONOMIST, I challenge the silliness of your 'no copay' directive! THERE IS NO SUCH THING

AS A FREE BENEFIT, and making the copay zero you reduce ANY sense of value to it or any reason to

take care of what is GIVEN FREE! Why put pills in a 'safe place' if more are available at no charge?

Why not give them to friends?

At any time this is a foolish move, in current economic circumstances it is totally IDIOTIC!

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,

Steven Sass

Baltimore, MD 21209
NO. 12-08-00204-CV

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS

TWELFTH COURT OF APPEALS DISTRICT

TYLER, TEXAS

GARY JIM WILKINSON, § APPEAL FROM THE 173RD

APPELLANT

V. § JUDICIAL DISTRICT COURT OF

RONNY BROWNLOW, SHERIFF,

HENDERSON COUNTY, TEXAS,

APPELLEE § HENDERSON COUNTY, TEXAS

 

MEMORANDUM OPINION

PER CURIAM

This pro se in forma pauperis appeal is being dismissed for failure to comply with the Texas

Rules of Appellate Procedure. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c). The judgment in this case was signed

on May 2, 2008. On May 12, 2008, Appellant filed a notice of appeal that failed to contain the

information required by Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure 9.5 and 25.1(e), i.e., a certificate of

service showing service on all parties to the trial court’s judgment.

On May 20, 2008, Appellant was notified pursuant to Texas Rule of Appellate Procedure

37.1 that the notice of appeal was defective for failure to comply with Rules 9.5 and 25.1(e). He was

further notified that unless he filed an amended notice of appeal on or before June 19, 2008, the

appeal would be referred to the court for dismissal. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c). The deadline for

filing an amended notice of appeal has passed, and Appellant failed to respond to our notice or

correct his defective notice of appeal. Accordingly, the appeal is dismissed for failure to comply

with the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. See TEX. R. APP. P. 42.3(c); Feist v. Berg, No.

12-04-00004-CV, 2004 WL 252785, at *1 (Tex. App.–Tyler Feb. 11, 2004, pet. denied); Feist v.
2

Hubert, No. 12-03-00442-CV, 2004 WL 252285, at *1 (Tex. App.–Tyler Feb. 11, 2004, pet. denied).

Opinion delivered June 30, 2008.

Panel consisted of Worthen, C.J., Griffith, J., and Hoyle, J.

(PUBLISH)
From: forerunner76@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:11:57 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,

Kenneth Brooks

Fort Mill, SC 29715
From: Mimimeans@aol.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:56:31 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,

Martha G. Means

Louisville, KY 40220
From: juanitalp@hotmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:59:12 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,

Juanita Parrott

Jellico, TN 37762
EXHIBIT 21

                           Subsidiaries of Registrant




Subsidiary                                  Jurisdiction of Organization

Immucor Medizinische Diagnostik GmbH        Federal Republic of Germany

Immucor Italia S.r.l.                       Italy

Immucor Portugal, Lda.                      Portugal

Gamma Biologicals, Inc.                     United States (Texas)

Gamma Biologicals International, Inc.       United States Virgin Islands

Gamma Biologicals B.V.                      Netherlands

Dominion Biologicals Limited                Canada

Immucor, S.L.                               Spain

Immucor Acquisitions Inc. S.A.              Belgium

Immucor Belgium S.A.                        Belgium

Immucor France s.a.r.l.                     France

Immucor Trading Company                     Barbados

BCA Acquisition Company                     United States (Georgia)


The Company owns 100% of the outstanding stock of each of the above.
Exhibit32.2

REV HOLDINGS LLC AND SUBSIDIARIES

CERTIFICATIONPURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350, AS ADOPTED PURSUANTTO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF2002

In connection with the QuarterlyReport on Form 10-Q of REV Holdings LLC (the"Company") for the period ended March 31,2004, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the datehereof (the "Report"), I, Todd J. Slotkin,Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby certify, pursuant to 18U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of theSarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to the best of my knowledge:

|            |                                                                                                                      |
|------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
| (1)   | The Report fully complies with the requirements ofSection 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 ofoperations of the Company. |

/s/ Todd J.Slotkin              

Todd J. SlotkinChief Financial OfficerMay 17,2004

----
Before the Second Division,

July 22, 1959

No. 63271.

protest 258077-K (New York).

#### Morey Machinery Company, Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Bao, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of speed control devices the same in all material respects as those the subject of *Vandegrift Forwarding Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(39 Cust. Ct. 114, C.D. 1915), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Exhibit 31-2
                                 CERTIFICATIONS

I, Thomas J. Riha, certify that:

1.   I have  reviewed  this  quarterly  report on Form 10-Q of WNC  HOUSING  TAX
     CREDIT FUND VI, SERIES 5, L.P. ;

2.   Based on my knowledge,  this  quarterly  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 quarterly report;

3.   Based on my  knowledge,  the  financial  statements,  and  other  financial
     information  included  in this  quarterly  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
     quarterly 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 we
     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  quarterly  report is being
     prepared;

(b)  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

(c)  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 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(s) and I have disclosed, based on
     our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to
     the  registrant's  independent  registered  accounting  firm and the  audit
     committee of the registrant's board of directors (or persons performing the
     equivalent functions):

(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 in 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: May 16, 2008




/s/ Thomas J. Riha
------------------

Senior Vice-President - Chief Financial Officer of WNC & Associates, Inc.
SOUTH COAST AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT

(Adopted January 9, 1976)(Amended January 5, 1990)

RULE 203. PERMIT TO OPERATE

(a) A person shall not operate or use any equipment, the use of which may cause the issuance of 

air contaminants, or the use of which may reduce or control the issuance of air contaminants, 

without first obtaining a written permit to operate from the Executive Officer or except as 

provided in Rule 202. 

(b) The equipment shall not be operated contrary to the conditions specified in the permit to 

operate.
BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS OF THE COUNTY OF ALLEN ^^ ^ 

October 19, 2010 

LINDA K. BLOOM 

BILL BROWN 

NELSON PETERS 

The Honorable Ray LaHood 

Secretary 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

400 7"" St., SW 

Washington, D.C. 20590 

Dear Secretary LaHood: 

u j 

I am writing to offer my strong support to the Fort Wayne-Allen County Airport Authority's application 

for the Small Community Air Service Development Program (Docket OST-2010-0124). The Authority is 

taking a novel and unique approach toward encouraging competitive activity and cost reduction among 

passenger air service providers at the Fort Wayne International Airport (FWA). 

Economic development is essential to Northeastern Indiana, and community leaders in the region have 

been working aggressively to create a business climate that supports growth, and a vibrant airport is a key 

component to the overall success of our efforts. The geography of the Fort Wayne market presents a 

difficult challenge for passenger service development at FWA. 

Traditionally airports have sought to bring in low-cost carriers or sell their passenger service providers on 

additional destinations. As the airline industry continues to consolidate, the opportunities to "sell** the 

airiines on expanding their air service to smaller airports are increasingly difficult. The Authority's 

solution to this problem is unique and is a credit to their focus on developing appropriate market research 

and identifying creative applications for the air service development challenge. 

Through the implementation of a shared use platform, multiple airlines will be able to use a common 

point to issue tickets, change reservations, and otherwise process their individual passengers. By 

removing the need for individual points of access, costs will be reduced, since there will be common data 

lines and singular equipment, and the airport will realize an increase in flexibility since all airlines will be 

able to utilize all gates. Additionally, lead time for new services will be reduced, technological barriers 

removed, and physical expansion needs revised, all of which will serve to make operations at FWA more 

cost effective and attractive. 

Once again, I would like to express my strong support for this application and urge you to give it every 

possible consideration. Thank you. 

ida K. Bloom 

Allen County Commissioner 

Room 200 City-County Bldg. I E. Main St. . Fort Wayne, In 46802-1893 • Phone:(260)449-7555 • TDD: (260) 449-7881 • FAX: (260) 449-7568 

commissioncrs@co.alien.in.us • ww^v.co.allen.in.us
Here's how you know
 **Official websites use .mil** .mil
 **Secure .mil websites use HTTPS** lock () https://


Skip to main content (Press Enter).
 Toggle navigation
            
            U.S. Central Command
                CENTCOM
        Search
                    Search CENTCOM:
                        Search
                Search CENTCOM:
                    Search
    Home

    ABOUT US
    
        COMMAND PRIORITIES

    LEADERSHIP

    COMPONENT COMMANDS

    HISTORY

    POSTURE STATEMENT

    CENTCOM AOR
    
        CENTCOM COALITION

    OPERATIONS AND EXERCISES
    
        USMTM

    CIVILIAN CASUALTY REPORT

    CONTACT
    
        OPERATIONAL CONTRACT SUPPORT

    COMMUNITY RELATIONS

    THEATRE MEDICAL CLEARANCE

    INNOVATION VENDOR PORTAL

    MILITARY MEMBER INNOVATION PORTAL

    MEDIA
    
        SOCIAL MEDIA

    NEWS ARTICLES

    PRESS RELEASES

    STATEMENTS

    IMAGERY

    VIDEOS

    TRANSCRIPTS

    VISITORS AND PERSONNEL
    
        FAMILY CENTER

    FAMILY READINESS

    CENTCOM WEBMAIL

    SOCIAL MEDIA SECURITY

    ACCOUNTABILITY

    EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS

    USCENTCOM UNCLASSIFIED REGULATIONS

    FOIA LIBRARY

    INNOVATION OASIS

    WELCOME GUIDE  Search
 Search
 All Images All ImagesCommunity RelationsOtherPreviousCommanders
 Upload Date Upload DatePhoto DateTitle
  Share
  
 Small () Medium () Full Size (2.63 MB)
 
 CENTCOM National Guard Texas National Guard Texas Army National Guard National Guard Bureau State Partnership Program Texas Military Department Texas Egypt Arab Republic of Egypt Major General Tracy R. Norris
 Photo Gallery
 About UsCommand PrioritiesLeadershipComponent
   CommandsHistoryPosture Statement
   Area of
   ResponsibilityCENTCOM Coalition
   Operations And
   ExercisesOperation Inherent
   ResolveResolute Support
   MediaSocial MediaNews ArticlesPress ReleasesVideo And Imagery
   Visitors And
   PersonnelFamily ReadinessCENTCOM WebmailSocial MediaSecurityAccountabilityEmergency
   Preparedness
   ContactCommunity Relations
                    Stay Connected
                
                Privacy & Security  Inspector General  FOIA  Privacy Act
            

Hosted by Defense Media Activity - WEB.mil
From: Warviv@aol.co

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:48:12 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,

Warren Vivian

Sunland, CA 91040