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

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:03:14 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,

Clarissa Flemming

Savannah, GA 31405
No. 111.

#### Ferguson, Attorney General of Kansas, et al. *v.*Skrupa, doing business as Credit Advisors.

*William M. Ferguson,*Attorney General of Kansas, for appellants. *Lawrence Weigand*for appellee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Kansas. Probable jurisdiction noted.
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





Eran
Gronich   the Chief Accounting  Officer,
Secretary  and Director of The Mobile Star Corp , certifies, under the
standards set forth and solely for the purposes of 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted
pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that, to his
knowledge, the Annual Report on Form 10-K of the Registrant for the fiscal year
ended December 31, 2009, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a)
or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and information contained in
that Form 10-K fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial
condition and  results of operations of the Registrant.





(1) The
Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and





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




Date:
      March 16, 2010
            The
      Mobile Star Corp .By:
            /s/Eran GronichName:Eran
      Gronich
              Title:    Chief Accounting
       Officer,
  Secretary  and  Director





A signed
original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
the Registrant and will be retained by the Registrant and furnished to the
Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Order filed February 26, 2019

In The 

## Fourteenth Court of Appeals

____________ NO. 14

- 19

- 00070

- CV

____________ KYEKYEKU OPOKU

- PONG , Appellant

V. PRISCILLA BOAHEMAA, Appellee

On Appeal from the Co unty Civil C our t at Law No

. 2

Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1105370



### O R D E R

This is an appeal from a judgment signed December 17, 2018. The notice of appeal was due January 16, 2019. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.1. Appellant, however,
filed the notice of appeal on January 25, 2019, a date within 15 days of the due date for the notice of appeal. A motion for extension of time is necessarily implied when the perfecting instrument is filed within 15 days of its due date

. Verburgt v. Dorner, 959 S.W.2d 615, 617 (Tex. 1997). Appellant did not file a motion to extend time to file the notice of appeal. While an extension may be implied, appellant is stillobligated to come forward with a reasonable explanation to support the late filing.

See Miller v. Greenpark Surgery Center Assocs., Ltd. , 974 S.W.2d 805, 808 (Tex. App.

— Houston [14th Dist.] 1998, no pet.). Accordingly, we ORDER appellant to file a proper motion to extend time to file the notice of appeal on or before 10 da ys after the date of this order. See Tex. R. App. P. 26.3;10.5(b). If appellant does not comply with this order, we will dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.3.

PER CURIAM
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>                      5
<PERIOD-TYPE>                  year
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>              jun-30-1997
<PERIOD-END>                   jun-30-1997
<CASH>                         38,877
<SECURITIES>                   868,570
<RECEIVABLES>                  79,539
<ALLOWANCES>                   0
<INVENTORY>                    0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>               572,844
<PP&E>                         0
<DEPRECIATION>                 0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                 1,600,488
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>          6,760
<BONDS>                        0
<COMMON>                       8,092,136
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>          0
<PREFERRED>                    0
<OTHER-SE>                     1,594,728
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>   1,600,488
<SALES>                        0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>               157,200
<CGS>                          0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                  0
<OTHER-EXPENSES>               141,176
<LOSS-PROVISION>               0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>             78,734
<INCOME-PRETAX>                94,758
<INCOME-TAX>                   94,758
<INCOME-CONTINUING>            0
<DISCONTINUED>                 0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                0
<CHANGES>                      0
<NET-INCOME>                   94,758
<EPS-PRIMARY>                  $.011
<EPS-DILUTED>                  $.011

</TABLE>
No. 60989.

protests 38958-K, etc. (Philadelphia).

#### F. W. Woolworth Co. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the items marked “A” consist of figures or articles, composed wholly or in chief value of papier máché, the same in all material respects as those the subject of Abstract 56975, the claim at 25 percent under paragraph 1403 as manufactures of papier máché was sustained. The items marked “B,” stipulated to consist of articles, composed wholly or in chief value of wood, the same as those involved in said Abstract 56975, were held dutiable at *33Vs*percent under paragraph 412 as manufactures wholly or in chief value of wood, not specially provided for, as claimed.
BEFORE THE SECOND DIVISION,

February 6, 1967

No. P67/30.

No. P67/31.

#### Victor England Agencies et al. *v.*United States,

protests 61/2418, etc. (Los Angeles).

#### Amthor & Co. and Thornley & Pitt et al. *v.*United States,

protests 63/1560, etc. (San Francisco).

Bao, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of hanging paper similar in all material respects to that the subject of *Victor England*Agencies, *Inc.*v. *United States*(50 Cust. Ct. 83, C.D. 2394), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
EXHIBIT 32.1



inTEST CORPORATION



In connection with the Quarterly Report of inTEST Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Robert E. Matthiessen, President and Chief Executive 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.
Date:	November 15, 2004

/s/ Robert E. Matthiessen
Robert E. Matthiessen
President and Chief Executive Officer
From: john@lehenbauer.us

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:11:15 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

It is with great concern that I write today, asking 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,

John Lehenbauer

Perry, GA 31069
<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

     In connection with the Quarterly Report of Orbit/FR, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ending September 30, 2005 as filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Dave
Lubbe, 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 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.

November 14, 2005


/s/ Dave Lubbe
-------------------------------------
Dave Lubbe
Chief Financial Officer


                                                                              22
From: jl.ley09@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 2:18:33 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,

Jody Ley

Sioux Falls, SD 57106
Exhibit 32.1 CERTIFICATION Pursuant to
the requirement set forth in Rule 13a-14(b) of the Securities Exchange Act of
1934, as amended, or Exchange Act, and Section 1350 of Chapter 63 of Title 18
of the United States Code (18 U.S.C. ss.1350), James P. Panek, Chief Executive
Officer of VaxGen, Inc. (the Company,
and Matthew J. Pfeffer, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, each hereby
certify that, to the best of their knowledge: 1.
The
 Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2006,
 to which this Certification is attached as Exhibit 32.1, or the Report, fully complies with the
 requirements of section 13(a) or section 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act
 of 1934, and2.
The
 information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
 respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company. In Witness
Whereof, the undersigned have set their hands hereto as of the 29th
day of August, 2007. /s/ James P. Panek
/s/ Matthew J. PfefferChief Executive Officer
Chief Financial Officer This certification accompanies
the Form 10-Q to which it relates, is not deemed filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing
of VaxGen, Inc. under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities
Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (whether made before or after the date of the
Form 10-Q), irrespective of any general incorporation language contained in
such filing. End of Filing 1
```

[Federal Register Volume 77, Number 240 (Thursday, December 13, 2012)]
[Notices]
[Pages 74265-74266]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2012-30125]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

[Public Notice 8114]

In the Matter of the Designation of Movement for Unity and Jihad 
in West Africa; Also Known as Movement for Oneness and Jihad in West 
Africa; Also Known as Unity Movement for Jihad in West Africa; Also 
Known as Jamat Tawhid Wal Jihad Fi Garbi Afriqqiya; Also Known as 
Tawhid Wal Jihad in West Africa; Also Known as MUJWA; Also Known as 
MUJAO; Also Known as TWJWA as a Specially Designated Global Terrorist 
Pursuant to Section 1(b) of Executive Order 13224, as Amended

    Acting under the authority of and in accordance with section 1(b) 
of Executive Order 13224 of September 23, 2001, as amended by Executive 
Order 13268 of July 2, 2002, and Executive Order 13284 of January 23, 
2003, I hereby determine that the entity known as Movement for Unity 
and Jihad in West Africa, also known as Movement

[[Page 74266]]

for Oneness and Jihad in West Africa, also known as Unity Movement for 
Jihad in West Africa, also known as Jamat Tawhid Wal Jihad Fi Garbi 
Afriqqiya, also known as Tawhid Wal Jihad in West Africa, also known as 
MUJWA, also known as MUJAO, also known TWJWA, committed, or poses a 
significant risk of committing, acts of terrorism that threaten the 
security of U.S. nationals or the national security, foreign policy, or 
economy of the United States.
    Consistent with the determination in section 10 of Executive Order 
13224 that ``prior notice to persons determined to be subject to the 
Order who might have a constitutional presence in the United States 
would render ineffectual the blocking and other measures authorized in 
the Order because of the ability to transfer funds instantaneously,'' I 
determine that no prior notice needs to be provided to any person 
subject to this determination who might have a constitutional presence 
in the United States, because to do so would render ineffectual the 
measures authorized in the Order.
    This notice shall be published in the Federal Register.

     Dated: December 4, 2012.
Hillary Rodham Clinton,
Secretary of State.
[FR Doc. 2012-30125 Filed 12-12-12; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4710-10-P
```
OFFICER
CERTIFICATE
  March
6, 2009
  Merril
Lynch Mortgage Trust
 Commercial
Mortgage Pass-Through Certificates
 Series
2008-C1
 Pooling
and Servicing Agreement
   Pursuant
to the requirements of that certain Pooling and Servicing Agreement (the
"Agreement"), it is hereby certified that on behalf of Midland Loan Services,
Inc. (the "Servicer"), (i) a review of the Servicer's activities during the
calendar year 2008 (the "Reporting Period") and of its performance under the
Agreement has been made under the undersigned officer's supervision; (ii) to the
best of the undersigned officer's knowledge, based on such review, the Servicer
has fulfilled all of its obligations under the Agreement in all material
respects throughout the Reporting Period; and (iii) the Servicer has not
received any notice during the Reporting Period regarding qualification, or
challenging the status, of any REMIC formed pursuant to the Agreement from the
IRS or any other governmental agency or body.
 
 
 MIDLAND
      LOAN SERVICES, INC./S/
      Steven W. SmithSteven
      W. SmithPresident
      and Chief Operating Officer
No. P66/166. —

No. P66/167. —

No. P66/168. —

No. P66/169. —

#### China Dry Goods Co. and Frank P. Dow Co., Inc. *v.*United States, protests 330184-K and 59/25667 (San Francisco). United China & Glass Company *v.*United States, protests 58/715, etc. (Houston). Ucagco, Inc. *v.*United States, protests 63/937, 59/ 15773, and 60/16355 (Boston). New York Merchandise Co., Inc. *v.*United States, protest 64/20170 (Portland, Oreg.).

Landis, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of cups and saucers similar in all material respects to those the subject of *W. Kay Comp*any, *Inc.*v. *United States*(53 Cust. Ct. 130, C.D. 2484), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02-14-00439-CR

SALVADOR VILLAGOMEZ APPELLANT

V.

THE STATE OF TEXAS STATE

----------

FROM THE 432ND DISTRICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY

TRIAL COURT NO. 1339038W

----------

MEMORANDUM OPINION1

----------

On October 17, 2014, the trial court revoked Appellant Salvador 

Villagomez’s community supervision, adjudicated his guilt for robbery causing 

bodily injury, and sentenced him to six years’ confinement in the Institutional 

Division of the Texas Department of Criminal Justice. On the same day, the trial 

court entered its certification of defendant’s right to appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 

 1

See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.
2

25.2(a)(2). The certification states that “the defendant has waived the right to 

appeal.” 

On October 23, 2014, Appellant filed a pro se notice of appeal. On 

October 27, 2014, we notified Appellant that the certification indicating that he 

had waived the right to appeal had been filed in this court and that this appeal 

could be dismissed unless he or any party desiring to continue the appeal filed a 

response on or before November 6, 2014, showing grounds for continuing the 

appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 25.2(d), 44.3. No response has been filed. 

Because the trial court’s certification affirmatively shows that Appellant has 

waived the right to appeal, we dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 43.2(f); 

Hill v. State, 929 S.W.2d 607, 609 (Tex. App.—Waco 1996, no pet.).

PER CURIAM

PANEL: GABRIEL, J.; LIVINGSTON, C.J.; and DAUPHINOT, J. 

DO NOT PUBLISH

Tex. R. App. P. 47.2(b)

DELIVERED: December 18, 2014
No. 162, Misc.

#### Smith *v.*Pennsylvania.

Supreme Court of Pennsylvania. Certiorari denied.
From: Anne Reiser

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: RIN 1210-AB44 Mandatory Birth Control

Date: Wednesday, August 03, 2011 10:47:41 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,

Anne Reiser
East Williston, New York