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

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 2:58:33 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,

Tamera Ray

Chino, CA 91710
No. 118, Misc.

#### Jackson *v.*Illinois.

Supreme Court of Illinois. Certiorari denied.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

 FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

QIQUAN LI,

 Petitioner,

 v.

ERIC H. HOLDER, Jr., Attorney General,

 Respondent.

No. 12-72147

Agency No. A096-057-789

MEMORANDUM*

On Petition for Review of an Order of the

Board of Immigration Appeals

Submitted December 17, 2013** 

Before: GOODWIN, WALLACE, and GRABER, Circuit Judges. 

Qiquan Li, a native and citizen of China, petitions for review of the Board of

Immigration Appeals’ order dismissing his appeal from an immigration judge’s

decision denying his motion to reopen removal proceedings conducted in absentia. 

We have jurisdiction under 8 U.S.C. § 1252. We review for abuse of discretion the

FILED

DEC 18 2013

MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK

U.S. COURT OF APPEALS

 * This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent

except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.

 ** The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision

without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
denial of a motion to reopen, Avagyan v. Holder, 646 F.3d 672, 678 (9th Cir.

2011), and we deny the petition for review.

The agency did not abuse its discretion in denying Li’s motion to reopen as

untimely where it was filed over six years after the date of his order of removal,

see 8 C.F.R. § 1003.23(b)(4)(ii), and Li failed to show the due diligence required

for equitable tolling of the filing deadline, see Avagyan, 646 F.3d at 679-80

(equitable tolling is available to a petitioner who establishes deception, fraud or

error, and exercised due diligence in discovering such circumstances).

In his opening brief, Li fails to raise, and therefore has waived, any

challenge regarding lack of notice of his hearing. See Rizk v. Holder, 629 F.3d

1083, 1091 n.3 (9th Cir. 2011) (a petitioner waives an issue by failing to raise it in

the opening brief).

PETITION FOR REVIEW DENIED.

2 12-72147
No. 63279.

protest 58/25283 (New York).

#### The Oil Well Engineering Co., Ltd. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Wilson, J.

Tbe protest was dismissed.
From: RLM42@aol.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:57:40 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). Why

should I have to bear the cost of something I consider morally wrong, like abortion?

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,

Roger Metcalf

Gresham, OR 97080
From: rgemmel@verizon.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 2:58:10 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,

Ricki Gemmel

Lexington Park, MD 20653
Exhibit








AMTECH SYSTEMS, INC.
Key Terms for Robert Hass Employment
(Restoration to June 30, 2012 Level)
	
		
	Effective Date
	April 1, 2016

	Salary
	$170,000, based on a 5-day week.  Flexible work week of 3-5 days/week, with salary paid on a prorate basis.

	Car Allowance
	$7,000 per year

	Vacation Accrual
	daily accrual based on actual days worked each period and 3 weeks/year

	401(k) Match
	same as other employees, except paid as additional compensation.

	Change in control agreement
	 Comparable to one prior to July 2013
      - 1 year salary
      - prorated incentive compensation
      - full vesting of options & restricted stock

	Paid holidays, sick days, bereavement days, family leave
	Based on company policies

	

Group Medical and Group Insurance
	Same as other employees

	Group Dental, Life and Disability Insurance
	Same as other employees

	Group Disability Insurance
	Same as other employees

	Cafeteria 125 Plan and Health Savings Account
	Same as other employees

	Eligible for bonuses, stock options, and restricted stock in amounts
	To be determined by the company

	Expense reimbursement
	Same as company’s policy

	Severance 
	Determined by company, but no less than the company’s past practice for middle managers

	Employment at will of employer.


	 






AGREED TO:
Date: March 10, 2016    By:   /s/ Robert T. Hass                 
Name: Robert T. Hass


Date: March 10, 2016    By:   /s/ Fokko Pentinga               
Name: Fokko Pentinga
Title:    Chief Executive Officer
No. 68368.

protests 314211-K and 323725-K (New York).

#### Max Mayer *&*Co., Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that tbe issue is tbe same in all material respects as that tbe subject of *United States*v. *Steinberg Bros.*(47 CCPA 47, C.A.D. 727), and tbe record showing that tbe merchandise consists of nylon gloves and mittens similar in use to silk gloves and mittens, tbe claim of tbe plaintiff was sustained.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Errol Williams, Appellant.

[632 NYS2d 662]

—Appeal by the defendant from a judgment of the Supreme Court, Kings County (Goldberg, J.), rendered April 19, 1993, convicting him of murder in the second degree, upon a jury verdict, and imposing sentence.

Ordered that the judgment is affirmed.

The defendant shot and killed one of the owners of a social club in Brooklyn in retaliation for having been barred from the club. On appeal, the defendant argues that the admission into evidence of the identification testimony of a prosecution witness in violation of a ruling by the court suppressing such testimony requires reversal of his conviction.

The People gave the defendant notice pursuant to CPL 710.30, *inter alia,*that an unnamed party, who was later revealed to be the witness in question, had identified him during a station-house showup and that he would be identifying the defendant at trial. In response, the defendant moved to suppress the identification testimony on the ground that it was the product of an unduly suggestive identification procedure. When the People failed to respond to the defendant’s motion, the court directed that a *Wade*hearing be held. (We note that the People never argued that the witness’s identification was merely confirmatory despite evidence to support such an argument *[see, People v Rodriguez,*79 NY2d 445].) When the People were unable to produce the witness at the hearing, the court suppressed his identification testimony. However, despite the court’s ruling, the witness, over the objection of defense counsel, identified the defendant at trial as the person whom he had seen fleeing the scene of the crime with a gun in his hand immediately after the shooting. The admission into evidence of this testimony was error.

However, at trial, the People presented the testimony of an eyewitness to the shooting who had worked at and frequented the social club. She had known the defendant since 1989 and had seen him three to four times a week at the club. At the time of the shooting, she was making a telephone call in the *711club. From a distance of 10 feet away, she saw the defendant enter the club with a machine gun in his hands, taunt the victim, and shoot him multiple times in the head and body before fleeing. She had also witnessed several other confrontations between the defendant and the club’s owners and described the defendant’s violent reaction to being barred from the club. In addition, the People presented the testimony of one of the owners of the club that also chronicled the confrontations between the defendant and the club’s owners. In light of this overwhelming evidence of guilt, the error in admitting the suppressed identification testimony was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt *(see, People v Fluitt,*80 NY2d 949; *People v Manson,*176 AD2d 294). Balletta, J. P., Thompson, Ritter and Florio, JJ, concur.
<PAGE>
                                                                    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

I, Philip C. Ranker, Chief Financial Officer of Nastech Pharmaceutical Company
Inc. ("Nastech"), certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Annual
Report of Nastech on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2005 fully
complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities
Exchange Act 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 Nastech.

Date:  March 15, 2006

                                                By:      /s/ Philip C. Ranker
                                                         --------------------
                                                Name:    Philip C. Ranker
                                                Title:   Chief Financial Officer


A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been
provided to Nastech and will be retained by Nastech and furnished to the
Securities 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 deemed filed by Nastech for purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
IV 

110TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION H. RES. 1403 

Recognizing the 65th anniversary of the Bolton Act of 1943, creating the 

Cadet Nurse Corps. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JULY 31, 2008 

Mr. LATOURETTE (for himself, Mrs. JONES of Ohio, Mr. REGULA, Mrs. 

LOWEY, and Mr. HOBSON) submitted the following resolution; which was 

referred to the Committee on Energy and Commerce 

RESOLUTION 

Recognizing the 65th anniversary of the Bolton Act of 1943, 

creating the Cadet Nurse Corps. 

Whereas the Bolton Act of 1943, introduced by Congresswoman Frances Payne Bolton, created the Cadet Nurse 

Corps that provided Federal funds to and facilitated the 

training of nearly 125,000 nurses during World War II, 

greatly increasing the wartime supply of nurses and care 

for American citizens on both the home and war fronts; 

Whereas the Cadet Nurse Corps introduced by the Bolton 

Act significantly improved post-World War II nursing 

education, replacing the apprenticeship-type training approach in nursing schools with an academic approach and 

encouraging nurses to study related areas of public 

health, pediatrics, psychiatric care, and convalescent care; 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

2 

•HRES 1403 IH 

Whereas the Bolton Act improved educational, housing, and 

library facilities throughout the United States; 

Whereas the Bolton Act further benefitted the nursing field 

by prompting attention and Federal financial aid to graduate nursing degrees; 

Whereas the Bolton Act contributed to the integration of 

Black women into the nursing field by requiring all-White 

schools to admit African-Americans; 

Whereas the Bolton Act encouraged minorities, who now 

comprise 25 percent of the nursing population, to pursue 

careers in the nursing field; and 

Whereas the Bolton Act passed unanimously by Congress and 

became law on July 1, 1943: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) honors the 65th anniversary of the Bolton 

3 Act facilitating the training and careers of nurses; 

4 (2) recognizes the profound importance of the 

5 Bolton Act to nursing; and 

6 (3) encourages the recognition of Frances 

7 Payne Bolton’s introduction of the Bolton Act. 

Æ 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS
No. 618.

#### Securities and Exchange Commission *v.*Capital Gains Research Bureau, Inc., et al.

*Solicitor General Cox, Stephen J. Poliak, Peter A. Dammann, David Ferber*and *Walter P. North*for petitioner.

*Leo C. Fennelly*for respondents.

C. A. 2d Cir. Certiorari granted.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 23.2

                         CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT AUDITORS

         We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statement Form S-3 (No. 33-18243) and related Primary Prospectus pertaining to
the registration of 4,143,750 shares and an Alternate Prospectus pertaining to
the registration of 243,750 shares of Questron Technology, Inc. common stock, in
the Registration Statement on Form S-3 (No. 33-84222) and related Prospectus
pertaining to the registration of 214,044 shares of Questron Technology, Inc.
common stock, in the Registration Statement on Form S-3 (No. 33-63555) and
related Prospectus pertaining to the registration of 601,744 shares of Questron
Technology, Inc. common stock, in the Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No.
33-87628) pertaining to the registration of 75,667 shares of Questron
Technology, Inc. common stock issuable pursuant to the various stock option
plans of Questron Technology, Inc., in the Registration Statement on Form S-3
(No. 333-07049) and related Prospectus pertaining to the registration of 107,000
shares of Questron Technology, Inc. common stock, in the Registration Statement
on Form S-3 (No. 333-40835) and related Prospectus pertaining to the
registration of 125,912 shares of Questron Technology, Inc. common stock, in the
Registration Statement on Form S-8 (No. 333-42983) pertaining to the
registration of 60,000 shares of Questron Technology, Inc. common stock issuable
upon the exercise of options granted pursuant to a stock option grant agreement
made in connection with an acquisition, of our report dated February 24, 1998
with respect to the consolidated financial statements of Questron Technology,
Inc. included in the Annual Report (Form 10-K) for the year ended December 31,
1999.


                                     MOORE STEPHENS, P.C.
                                     Certified Public Accountants


New York, New York
March 29, 2000
From: asharbino@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 2:23:54 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,

angela sharbino

Lewisville, TX 75067
<PAGE>

                                                                      Exhibit 23

               CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT CERTIFIED PUBLIC ACCOUNTANTS



We consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration Statements on
Form S-8 [Nos. 333-02567, 333-44119 and 333-86616] pertaining to the 1995
Employee Stock Option Plan and the 1994 Stock Option Plan for Independent
Directors, all as amended, and in the related Prospectus of Cover-All
Technologies Inc. and subsidiary of our report dated March 11, 2005, with
respect to the 2004, 2003 and 2002 consolidated financial statements and
schedule of Cover-All Technologies Inc. and subsidiary included in its Annual
Report [Form 10-K] for the year ended December 31, 2004.





                                        MOORE STEPHENS, P. C.
                                        Certified Public Accountants.

New York, New York
March 24, 2005
304(m) CBI REPLACEMENT PAGE EPA-HQ- OW-20 10 - 0824 DCN CBM00 653 THE FOLLOWING HAS BEEN REMOVED BECAUSE IT CONTAINS CONFIDENTIAL BUSINESS INFORMATION (CBI) PER 40 CFR PART 2, SUBPART B.
#### In the Matter of the Application of Eugene R. Pommer, Respondent, for a Peremptory Writ of Mandamus against Henry S. Thompson, as Commissioner of Water Supply, Gas and Electricity of the City of New York, Appellant.

*Matter of Pommer*v. Thompson, *153*App. Div. 898, affirmed.

(Argued January 6, 1913;

decided January 21, 1913.)

Appeal from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered November 15, 1912, which affirmed an order of Special Term granting a motion for a peremptory writ of mandamus to compel the defendant to permit an inspection of the records of his office.

*Archibald R. Watson, Corporation Counsel (Clarence L. Barber*and *Terence Farley*of counsel), for appellant.

*J. Brownson Ker*and *Edward S. Brownson, Jr.,*for respondent.

Order affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Cullen, Ch. J., Werner, Hiscock, Chase, Collin and Hogan, JJ. Absent: Willard Bartlett, J.