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

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 2:01:09 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,

Ann Bueche-Stanger

Halifax, VA 24558
EX-35.1
(logo) imfb
       IndyMac
       Federal Bank


REG AB 1123 Statement of Compliance


I am an authorized officer for IndyMac Federal Bank, FSB the servicer for the
transactions listed on the attached schedule and I certify:

a) A review of IndyMac Federal Bank's activities and of its performance under
   the applicable servicing agreement has been made under my supervision during
   the calendar year 2008.
b) To the best of my knowledge, based on such review, IndyMac Federal Bank has
   fulfilled all of its obligations under the agreement in all material respects
   throughout the reporting period.


By: /s/ Robert M. Abramian
Robert M. Abramian
First Vice President
Home Loan Servicing
Investor Reporting
Indymac Federal Bank, FSB


By: /s/ Bart Vincent
Bart Vincent
SVP, CFO-Home Loan Servicing
HLS Financing
IndyMac Federal Bank, FSB


Prepared for: Wells Fargo Bank
Date:         February 27, 2009
Ref:          See attached "Exhibit A"


(page)


Exhibit A

4193 BCAP 2008-IND1 2/13/08
4211 BCAP 2008-IND2 4/15/08
From: mavelasco7@hotmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:35:16 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

health insurance.

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

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

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

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

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

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Alicia Velasco

Crown Point, IN 46307
CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT 0F 2002

     In connection with the Quarterly Report of Material Technologies, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2002, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Robert M. Bernstein, Chief Executive Officer, President and Principle Accounting 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 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 Company.

\s\          Robert M. BersteinRobert M. BernsteinChief Executive Officer and President

August 14, 2002

----
#### James J. O’Dea, Administrator, etc., Respondent, v. James A. Norcross and another, Appellants.

Judgment and order reversed, new trial granted, costs to abide event. Opinion by

Bockes, J.
No. P69/3.

protests 60/22727 and 60/18098 (New York).

#### Marmax Trading Corp. *v.*United States,

Watson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of plastic cases or containers similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Marmax Trading Corp.*v. *United States*(58 Cust. Ct. 255, C.D. 2955), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
No. 63772.

protest 59/25423 (New York).

#### Frederik Lunning, Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of vases in mineral colors similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 62694, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
f8k122812a1ex10xxix_cactus.htm



Exhibit 10.29


 




             , 2011


 


Actinium Pharmaceuticals, Inc.


 


Attention: Dragan Cicic, M.D.


By Fax transmission to 610-910-3463


 


Re:           Waiver of Registration Rights


 


Gentlemen:


 


Reference is made to that certain Registration Rights Agreement by and among Actinium Pharmaceuticals, Inc. (the “Company”), Actinium Pharmaceuticals, Ltd., Actinium Holdings Limited (“AHL” and formerly named General Atlantic Investments Limited) and certain stockholders of the Company, dated June 30, 2000 (the “Rights Agreement”). Capitalized terms used and not otherwise defined herein shall have the meanings ascribed to such terms in the Rights Agreement. The Company intends to sell up to 26,568,266 shares of Series E Convertible Preferred Stock (the “New Securities”) pursuant to a draft Series E Preferred Stock Purchase Agreement (the “Purchase Agreement”) by and among the Company and the Purchasers identified on Exhibit A thereto (the “Sale”).


 


Waiver of Registration Rights


 


In order to induce the Purchasers to Purchase the New Securities in connection with the Sale, AHL hereby waives and agrees that it will not exercise at any time, any and all rights that it has in accordance with Articles 3, 4 or 5 of the Rights Agreement.


 




	 	
Very truly yours,

	 
	 	 	 
	 	
ACTINIUM HOLDINGS LIMITED

	 
	 	 	 	 
	 	
By: 

	 	 







 


Accepted and agreed as of the date written above:


 


ACTINIUM PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.


 



	
By: 

	/s/ Dragan Cicic
From: hronpatti@bellsouth.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:09:17 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 Humphrey

Owens Cross Roads, AL 35763
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS OF PEOPLE'S COMMUNITY CAPITAL CORPORATION FOR THE SIX MONTH
PERIOD ENDED JUNE 30, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH
FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                       1,587,955
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                           3,223
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                             3,360,000
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                 10,819,057
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                               0
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                                 0
<LOANS>                                     26,541,747
<ALLOWANCE>                                    350,000
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                              44,546,514
<DEPOSITS>                                  33,997,026
<SHORT-TERM>                                 1,000,600
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                             67,771
<LONG-TERM>                                          0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                         9,982
<OTHER-SE>                                   9,471,135
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>              44,546,514
<INTEREST-LOAN>                              1,086,150
<INTEREST-INVEST>                               92,774
<INTEREST-OTHER>                               255,878
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                             1,434,802
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                             464,979
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             472,079
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                          962,723
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                   65,706
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                807,368
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                236,282
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                     236,282
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                   146,089
<EPS-BASIC>                                      .15
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .14
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    5.32
<LOANS-NON>                                          0
<LOANS-PAST>                                         0
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                      0
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                               285,000
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                      706
<RECOVERIES>                                         0
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                              350,000
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                                 0
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                        350,000


</TABLE>
MAURICE NOBLE,

Petitioner,

v.

STATE OF FLORIDA,

Respondent.

___________________________/

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO 

FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND 

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED

CASE NO. 1D14-3980

Opinion filed January 7, 2015.

Petition for Writ of Mandamus -- Original Jurisdiction.

Maurice Noble, pro se, Petitioner.

Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General and Trisha Meggs Pate, Assistant Attorney

General, Tallahassee, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM.

DENIED. See Munn v. Fla. Parole Comm’n, 807 So. 2d 733 (Fla. 1st DCA 

2002) (holding that where the trial court has recently taken action on a pending 

pleading, mandamus relief was not warranted).

BENTON, CLARK, and SWANSON, JJ., CONCUR.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<MULTIPLIER>                  1,000
       
<S>                           <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                 3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                    JAN-1-2000
<PERIOD-START>                       JAN-3-1999
<PERIOD-END>                         APR-3-1999
<CASH>                                    3,240
<SECURITIES>                                  0
<RECEIVABLES>                            82,449
<ALLOWANCES>                             18,639
<INVENTORY>                              80,291
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                        154,925
<PP&E>                                   22,848
<DEPRECIATION>                            6,296
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                          280,905
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                    22,926
<BONDS>                                       0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                         0
<PREFERRED>                                   0
<COMMON>                                     68
<OTHER-SE>                              129,075
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>            280,905
<SALES>                                  98,286
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                         98,286
<CGS>                                    66,288
<TOTAL-COSTS>                            17,997
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                            826
<LOSS-PROVISION>                              0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                        4,302
<INCOME-PRETAX>                           8,873
<INCOME-TAX>                              3,726
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                       5,147
<DISCONTINUED>                                0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                               0
<CHANGES>                                     0
<NET-INCOME>                              5,147
<EPS-PRIMARY>                              0.76
<EPS-DILUTED>                              0.76
        

</TABLE>
**REGULATORY EVALUATION**

**Directorate Identifier:** 2011

- NM

- 1 20

- AD

**Executive Order 12866:** Could the AD be considered a “significant regulatory action”? YES ( ) explain NO (X) **DOT Regulatory Policies and Procedures:** Is the AD significant? YES ( ) explain NO (X) **Regulatory Flexibility Act:** Will the AD have a significant economic impact on a substantial number of small entities? YES ( ) explain NO (X) **Intrastate Aviation in Alaska:** This AD could affect intrastate aviation in Alaska. I s it appropriate t o include specific requirements for aircraft operated in Alaska, where aviation might be the only mode of transportation? YES ( ) explain NO (X)
No. 64505.

#### National Carloading Corp. *v.*United States,

protest 721125-G (New York).

Opinion by

Richardson, J.

In accordance with rule 5(b) of the rules of this court, as amended, the protest was dismissed for lack of prosecution.
Exhibit 23.1

                        CONSENT OF DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

We consent to the incorporation by reference in Registration Statement Nos.
32-92053, 33-2171, 33-17848 (Post-Effective Amendment No. 1), 33-33803,
33-33807, 33-39323, 33-36911, 33-45176, 33-45231, 33-45233, 33-56952, 33-58708,
33-72158, 033-55265 (Post-Effective Amendment No. 1), 033-60379, 033-63547,
333-11639, 333-15923, 333-29099, 333-70459, 333-74371, and 333-34726 of 3Com
Corporation on Form S-8 of our report dated June 26, 2000 (August 11, 2000 as to
Note 21), appearing in this Annual Report on Form 10-K of 3Com Corporation for
the year ended June 2, 2000.


DELOITTE & TOUCHE LLP

San Jose, California
August 11, 2000
IV

107TH CONGRESS

1ST SESSION H. RES. 272

Waiving points of order against the conference report to accompany the

bill (H.R. 2311) making appropriations for energy and water development

for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2002, and for other purposes.

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

OCTOBER 31 (legislative day, OCTOBER 30), 2001

Mr. SESSIONS, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed

RESOLUTION

Waiving points of order against the conference report to

accompany the bill (H.R. 2311) making appropriations

for energy and water development for the fiscal year

ending September 30, 2002, and for other purposes.

1 Resolved, That upon adoption of this resolution it

2 shall be in order to consider the conference report to ac3 company the bill (H.R. 2311) making appropriations for

4 energy and water development for the fiscal year ending

5 September 30, 2002, and for other purposes. All points

6 of order against the conference report and against its con-
2

HRES 272 RH

1 sideration are waived. The conference report shall be con2 sidered as read.

Æ
Before the Second Division,

February 6, 1959

No. 62731.

#### Dr. S. Jackson et al. *v.*United States,

protests 58/13788, etc. (Baltimore).

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of sutures, composed of synthetic materials not made by an artificial process from cellulose, a cellulose hydrate, a compound of cellulose, or a mixture containing any of the foregoing; that it is not a textile material; and that it is similar in use to sutures, composed of catgut or manufactures of catgut, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained, by virtue of the similitude provision of paragraph 1559.
# Publicatieblad C 57A/17 f

| | ISSN 1977-0995 |
| --- | --- |
| Publicatieblad
  van de Europese Unie | C 57A |
| | |
| Uitgave in de Nederlandse taal | Mededelingen en bekendmakingen | 58e jaargang17 februari 2015 |

ISSN 1977-0995

Publicatieblad

van de Europese Unie

C 57A

Uitgave in de Nederlandse taal

Mededelingen en bekendmakingen

58e jaargang17 februari 2015

---

| Nummer | Inhoud | Bladzijde |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | Rectificaties |
| 2015/C 057A/01 | Rectificatie van de aankondiging van een algemeen vergelijkend onderzoek EPSO/AST-SC/03/15 — Secretariaatsmedewerkers/kantoormedewerkers (SC1 en SC2) op de volgende vakgebieden: 1. Administratieve ondersteuning; 2. Financiële ondersteuning; 3. Secretariaat ( PB C 3 A van 8.1.2015 ) | 1 |

Nummer

Inhoud

Bladzijde

Rectificaties

2015/C 057A/01

Rectificatie van de aankondiging van een algemeen vergelijkend onderzoek EPSO/AST-SC/03/15 — Secretariaatsmedewerkers/kantoormedewerkers (SC1 en SC2) op de volgende vakgebieden: 1. Administratieve ondersteuning; 2. Financiële ondersteuning; 3. Secretariaat ( PB C 3 A van 8.1.2015 )

( PB C 3 A van 8.1.2015 )

1

---

| NL | |
| --- | --- |

NL

---

Rectificaties

| 17.2.2015 | NL | Publicatieblad van de Europese Unie | CA 57/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

17.2.2015

NL

Publicatieblad van de Europese Unie

CA 57/1

---

Rectificatie van de aankondiging van een algemeen vergelijkend onderzoek EPSO/AST-SC/03/15 — Secretariaatsmedewerkers/kantoormedewerkers (SC1 en SC2) op de volgende vakgebieden: 1. Administratieve ondersteuning; 2. Financiële ondersteuning; 3. Secretariaat

(
  Publicatieblad van de Europese Unie C 3 A van 8 januari 2015
  )

(2015/C 057 A/01)

Bladzijde 2, titel I, punt 3:

| in plaats van: | „Uiterste datum (validering inbegrepen): 10 februari 2015 om 12 uur ’s middags, (Belgische tijd)”, |
| --- | --- |

in plaats van:

„Uiterste datum (validering inbegrepen): 10 februari 2015 om 12 uur ’s middags, (Belgische tijd)”,

| te lezen: | „Uiterste datum (validering inbegrepen): 17 februari 2015 om 12 uur ’s middags (Belgische tijd)”. |
| --- | --- |

te lezen:

„Uiterste datum (validering inbegrepen): 17 februari 2015 om 12 uur ’s middags (Belgische tijd)”.

---
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA 

MIDDLE DISTRICT 

IN RE: CONSOLIDATED REPORTS AND 

RETURN BY THE TAX CLAIMS BUREAU 

OF NORTHUMBERLAND COUNTY OF 

PROPERTIES EXPOSED FOR 

SCHEDULED SALE SEPTEMBER 19, 

2012 UNDER THE REAL ESTATE TAX 

SALE LAW OF JULY 7, 1947, ACT 

NUMBER 542 

PETITION OF: SHARI NEFF 

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

No. 141 MAL 2016 

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from 

the Order of the Commonwealth Court 

ORDER 

PER CURIAM 

AND NOW, this 12th day of July, 2016, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal is 

DENIED.
No. 59686.

#### V. W. Davis et al. *v.*United States,

protests 124209-K, etc. (Duluth).

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that certain items of the merchandise are similar in all material respects to the Western white spruce lumber the subject of *C. J. Tower & Sons*v. *United States*(31 Cust. Ct. 13, C. D. 1538), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained as to said items.