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

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:17:28 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,

Margaret Monroe

Woodland, CA 95695
No. 67079.

protests 59/14590-15615, etc. (New Orleans).

#### Biddle Purchasing Co. et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Oliver, C.J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise and issues are similar in all material respects to those involved in *Falcon Sales Company*and *J. J. Murphy & Co.*v. *United States*(47 Cust. Ct. 129, C.D. 2292), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
Exhibit 35.1
 Servicer Compliance Statement
      /s/ John F. RemondiJohn F. RemondiVice Chairman and Chief Financial OfficerSallie Mae, Inc.




---



##### 



Exhibit 35.1
 Appendix A
 Trust Name:
    
    Date of Issuance:SLM Student Loan Trust 2006-1
    
    January 26, 2006SLM Student Loan Trust 2006-2
    
    February 23, 2006SLM Student Loan Trust 2006-3
    
    March 9, 2006SLM Student Loan Trust 2006-4
    
    April 20, 2006SLM Student Loan Trust 2006-5
    
    June 21, 2006SLM Student Loan Trust 2006-6
    
    July 20, 2006SLM Student Loan Trust 2006-7
    
    August 10, 2006SLM Student Loan Trust 2006-8
    
    September 14, 2006SLM Student Loan Trust 2006-9
    
    October 12, 2006SLM Student Loan Trust 2006-10
    
    November 30, 2006SLM Private Credit Student Loan Trust 2006-A
    
    April 6, 2006SLM Private Credit Student Loan Trust 2006-B
    
    June 8, 2006SLM Private Credit Student Loan Trust 2006-C
    
    September 28, 2006SLM Student Loan Trust 2007-1
    
    January 25, 2007SLM Student Loan Trust 2007-2
    
    February 22, 2007SLM Student Loan Trust 2007-3
    
    March 15, 2007SLM Student Loan Trust 2007-4
    
    April 5, 2007SLM Student Loan Trust 2007-5
    
    July 19, 2007SLM Student Loan Trust 2007-6
    
    October 23, 2007SLM Student Loan Trust 2007-7
    
    November 8, 2007SLM Student Loan Trust 2007-8
    
    December 6, 2007SLM Private Credit Student Loan Trust 2007-A
    
    March 29, 2007SLM Student Loan Trust 2008-1
    
    January 17, 2008SLM Student Loan Trust 2008-2
    
    February 7, 2008SLM Student Loan Trust 2008-3
    
    February 28, 2008SLM Student Loan Trust 2008-6
    
    June 12, 2008SLM Student Loan Trust 2008-7
    
    July 2, 2008SLM Student Loan Trust 2008-8
    
    August 5, 2008SLM Student Loan Trust 2008-9
    
    August 28, 2008
**Exhibit 32.2**

** **

**Certification Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350,As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

In connection with theAnnual Report on Form 10-K for the period ended May 31, 2005 (the “Report”) ofImmucor, Inc. (the “Registrant”), as filed with the Securities and ExchangeCommission on the date hereof, I certify, to the best of my knowledge, that:

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

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

 
| July 31, 2006 |   | /s/ Patrick D. Waddy            |
|---------------|--------|---------------------------------|
|          |   | Patrick D. Waddy                |
|          |   | Interim Chief Financial Officer |

 

----
Before the Second Division,

November 19, 1964

No. 68897.

#### Travers Tool Co. *v.*United States,

protest 58/22006 (New York).

*316Opinion by

La whence, J.

In accordance with Stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of steel bandsaws similar in all material respects to those the subject of *J. E. Bernard, & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(50 Cust. Ct. 41, C.D. 2386), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
From: cerichard@aol.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:52:45 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,

Charles Richard

Dimondale, MI 48821
Opinion issued February 21 , 2013

In The 

## Court of Appeals For The 

## First District of Texas

———————————— NO. 01
- 12
- 0 104 5
- CR

——————————— WILLIE CLARKE , Appellant V. THE STATE OF TEXAS, Appellee

On Appeal from the 179 th District Court Harris County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. 1364752

MEMORANDUM OPINION Appellant, Willie Clark , pleaded guilty to the felony offense of obtaining a controlled substance by misrepresentation or fraud with intent to obtain a2 controlled substance that was not medically necessary for the appellant

. 1 The trial court found appellant guilty, and, in accordance with the terms of appellant’s plea agreement with the State, sentenced appellant to confinement for three years. Appellant has filed a pro se notice of appeal. We dismiss the appeal. In a plea

- bargained case, a defendant may only appeal those matters that were raised by written motion fi led and ruled on before trial or after obtaining the trial court’s permission to appeal. T EX
. C ODE C RIM
. P ROC
. A NN . art. 44.02 (West 2006); T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 25.2(a)(2). An appeal must be dismissed if a certification showing that the defendant has the righ t of appeal has not been made part of the record. T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 25.2(d). Here, the trial court’s certification is included in the record on appeal. See id

. The trial court’s certification states that this is a plea

- bargained case and the defendant has no right of appeal. See T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 25.2(a)(2). The record supports the trial court’s certification. See Dears v. State , 154 S.W.3d 610, 615 (Tex. Crim. App. 2005). Because appellant has no right of appeal, we must dismiss this appeal. See Chavez v . State , 183 S.W.3d 675, 680 (Tex. Crim. App. 2006) (“A court of appeals, while having jurisdiction to ascertain whether an appellant who plea

- bargained is permitted to appeal by Rule 25.2(a)(2), must

1 See T EX
. H EALTH & S AFETY C ODE A NN . § 481.129(a

- 1), (d

- 1)(2 ) (West Supp. 2012 ).3 dismiss a prohibited appeal without further action, reg ardless of the basis for the appeal.”). Accordingly, we dismiss thi s appeal for want of jurisdiction. We dismiss all pending motions as moot

. PER CURIAM Panel consists of Justices Keyes, Sharp, and Huddle.
Do not publish. T EX
. R. A PP
. P. 47.2( b).
From: sixstewies@verizon.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:52:57 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,

Terri Steward

Fountainville, PA 18923
Amendment to 2008 Equity Incentive Plan



 Exhibit 10.1(1) 

AMENDMENT TO 
 BRIGHT HORIZONS FAMILY SOLUTIONS INC. 
 2008 EQUITY INCENTIVE PLAN

 Pursuant to Section 9 of the Bright Horizons Family Solutions Inc. 2008 Equity Incentive Plan (as amended, the “Plan”), the
Board of Directors of Bright Horizons Family Solutions Inc. hereby amends the Plan, effective as of the date hereof, as follows: 
  

	 	1.	Section 4(a) is amended in its entirety to read: 

 “(a) Number of Shares. In addition to shares available to be issued in respect of the Continuation Options described in Section 4(b), a maximum of 5,500,000 shares of Common
Stock may be delivered in satisfaction of Awards under the Plan. The number of shares of Common Stock delivered in satisfaction of Awards shall, for purposes of the preceding sentence, be determined net of any shares of Common Stock permitted to be
withheld by the Company in payment of the exercise price with respect thereto.”
### Notes on the geology of uranium

By: Montis Ruhl KlepperDonald Gray Wyant

                            https://doi.org/10.3133/b1046F

#### Links

-                                                                                                                             Document:                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  **Report**                                                                                                     (pdf)                                                                                                                                     
- Download citation as:  RIS                         |                         Dublin                            Core

#### Abstract

Part or all of this report is presented in Portable Document Format                        (PDF). For best results viewing and printing PDF documents, it is recommended that you download                        the documents to your computer and open them with Adobe Reader. PDF documents opened from your                        browser may not display or print as intended. Download the latest version of Adobe Reader, free of charge. More information                        about viewing, downloading, and printing report files can be found at the common download problems FAQ.
H. Res. 290 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

May 7, 2007. 

Whereas in 1978 the Colorado Senior Sports Development 

Council (CSSDC) began hosting athletic competitions for 

individuals 50 years of age and older; 

Whereas the city of Greeley, Colorado, worked with CSSDC 

to bring this popular athletic competition and social opportunity to the Rocky Mountain region; 

Whereas the Rocky Mountain Senior Games originated as a 

1-day event featuring swimming, basketball, and track 

and field; 

Whereas the Rocky Mountain Senior Games now features a 

variety of sports and recreational activities during the 

week-long competition, including archery, badminton, 

basketball, billiards, bowling, cycling, golf, horseshoes, 

dancing, pickleball, race walking, racquetball, running, 

shuffleboard, swimming, table tennis, tennis, track and 

field, triathlon, trap and skeet shooting, and weight lifting; 

Whereas the Rocky Mountain Senior Games encourages athletes of all abilities to participate in the competition by 

creating age categories with 5-year increments; 
2 

•HRES 290 EH 

Whereas the competition is also divided into male and female 

divisions, as well as mixed divisions in several doubles 

events; 

Whereas athletes who qualify at the State level are eligible 

to compete at the biennial National Senior Games; 

Whereas Colorado is always well represented at the National 

Senior Games by athletes who pay their own expenses to 

attend and compete, such as the 640 Colorado athletes 

who have already qualified for the 2007 National Senior 

Games in Louisville, Kentucky; 

Whereas participants in the Rocky Mountain Senior Games 

experience the friendly fellowship, comradery, and exhilaration of competition, as well as the enjoyment of associated social events; 

Whereas participants in the Rocky Mountain Senior Games 

experience highly beneficial effects on both their physical 

and mental health, leading to the ultimate goal of the 

Games of promoting ‘‘Fitness as a Lifestyle’’; 

Whereas volunteers and event coordinators of all ages make 

the week’s events possible; and 

Whereas the 30th annual Rocky Mountain Senior Games will 

be held from June 6–10, 2007: Now, therefore, be it 

Resolved, That the House of Representatives honors the 

contributions of the Rocky Mountain Senior Games on its 
3 

•HRES 290 EH 

30th anniversary for significantly improving the health and 

well-being of older Americans. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
H. Res. 1392 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

September 27, 2008. 

Whereas life insurance is an essential part of a sound financial plan; 

Whereas life insurance provides financial security for families 

by helping surviving members meet immediate and longterm financial obligations and objectives in the event of 

a premature death in their family; 

Whereas approximately 68,000,000 United States citizens 

lack the adequate level of life insurance coverage needed 

to ensure a secure financial future for their loved ones; 

Whereas life insurance products protect against the uncertainties of life by enabling individuals and families to 

manage the financial risks of premature death, disability, 

and long-term care; 

Whereas individuals, families, and businesses can benefit 

from professional insurance and financial planning advice, including an assessment of their life insurance 

needs; and 

Whereas numerous groups supporting life insurance have designated September 2008 as ‘‘National Life Insurance 

Awareness Month’’ as a means to encourage consumers 

to— 

(1) become more aware of their life insurance needs; 
2 

•HRES 1392 EH 

(2) seek professional advice regarding life insurance; 

and 

(3) take the actions necessary to achieve financial 

security for their loved ones: Now, therefore, be it 

Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

(1) supports the goals and ideals of ‘‘National Life 

Insurance Awareness Month’’; and 

(2) calls on the Federal Government, States, localities, schools, nonprofit organizations, businesses, and 

the citizens of the United States to observe the month 

with appropriate programs and activities. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
zen-ex104_462.htm



Exhibit 10.4

Amended and Restated Non-Employee Director Compensation Policy

All members of the Board of Directors (the “Board”) of Zendesk, Inc. (the “Company”) that are not employees of the Company or its subsidiaries shall be paid the compensation in this Amended and Restated Non-Employee Director Compensation Policy (the “Policy”) for services as a director. 

Service Retainers 

Annual Retainer for Board Membership: $30,000.

Additional Retainers for Committee Membership:

 


	
Audit Committee Chair:
	
  
	
$
	
15,000
	
  

	
 
	
 







	
Audit Committee

 member (non-Chair):
	
  
	
$
	
7,500
	
  

	
 
	
 

	
Compensation Committee Chair:
	
  
	
$
	
10,000
	
  

	
 
	
 

	
Compensation Committee member (non-Chair):
	
  
	
$
	
5,000
	
  

	
 
	
 

	
Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee Chair:
	
  
	
$
	
10,000
	
  

	
 
	
 

	
Nominating and Corporate Governance Committee member (non-Chair):
	
  
	
$
	
5,000
	
  






All directors eligible to receive compensation under the Policy shall have the option to elect to receive their retainers in the form of restricted stock units with a fair market value equal to the value of the retainer to be paid during such period in lieu of cash. Each such director shall make such election for each year for which they are eligible to receive compensation under the Policy prior to the commencement of such year or within 30 days of such director’s initial appointment to the Board. For directors making the election to receive their retainers in restricted stock units, one quarter of the total annual retainer shall be granted on each of February 15, May 15, August 15, and November 15 (or if such day is not a business day, the next business day following such date). The restricted stock units shall be fully-vested upon grant.

Annual Compensation

Annual Equity Grants: Each non-employee director shall receive an annual equity grant of restricted stock units under the Company’s 2014 Stock Option and Incentive Plan (the “2014 Plan”) having a fair market value of $150,000. The restricted stock units shall vest in full on the anniversary of the date of grant, subject to such director’s continued service as a director through the vesting date. The restricted stock units shall vest in full upon the closing of a Sale Event (as defined in the 2014 Plan). All subsequent annual equity grants shall be made to non-employee directors that are elected/re-elected at the Company’s annual meeting of stockholders on the date of such annual meeting of stockholders. 

The fair market value of the grant of restricted stock units under this Policy shall be equal to the average closing price of the Company’s common stock over the 30 trading days prior to the date of grant.  All equity grants under this Policy will be made automatically in accordance with the terms of this Policy and the 2014 Plan, without the need for any additional corporate action by the Board or the Compensation Committee of the Board.

Expenses

The Company will reimburse all reasonable out-of-pocket expenses incurred by non-employee directors, in attending meetings of the Board or any committee.
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 Digital Insight Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-Q for the period ended September 30, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date
hereof (the Report), I, Elizabeth S.C.S. Murray, 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), as applicable, 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 operation of the Company.



|/s/ ELIZABETH S.C.S. MURRAY                                      
|-----------------------------------------------------------------
|Elizabeth S.C.S. Murray Chief Financial Officer November 13, 2003



The foregoing
certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 and is not being filed as part of this report or as a separate disclosure document.