alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 186 (Wednesday, September 27, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 66462]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-20978]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases; Notice of 
Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 1009 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended, notice is hereby given of the following meeting.
    The meeting will be closed to the public in accordance with the 
provisions set forth in sections 552b(c)(4) and 552b(c)(6), Title 5 
U.S.C., as amended. The grant applications and the discussions could 
disclose confidential trade secrets or commercial property such as 
patentable material, and personal information concerning individuals 
associated with the grant applications, the disclosure of which would 
constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: Allergy, Immunology, and Transplantation 
Research Committee.
    Date: October 17-18, 2023.
    Time: 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, 
National Institutes of Health, 5601 Fishers Lane, Room 3G51A, 
Rockville, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).
    Contact Person: Thomas F. Conway, Ph.D., Scientific Review 
Officer, Scientific Review Program, Division of Extramural 
Activities, National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, 
National Institutes of Health, 5601 Fishers Lane, Room 3G51A, 
Bethesda, MD 20892, 240-507-9685, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#e2968a8d8f8391cc818d8c95839ba28c8b8acc858d94"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="64100c0b0905174a070b0a13051d240a0d0c4a030b12">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.855, 
Allergy, Immunology, and Transplantation Research; 93.856, 
Microbiology and Infectious Diseases Research, National Institutes 
of Health, HHS)

    Dated: September 21, 2023.
Tyeshia M. Roberson-Curtis,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2023-20978 Filed 9-26-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
From: hgraham2@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 2:17:29 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,

bobby graham

Monticello, UT 84535
ex101.htm


EXHIBIT 10.1


 


EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT AMENDMENT


 


This Employment Agreement Amendment is entered into by and between Vidaroo Corp. and Thomas Moreland effective as of January 1, 2013 and remain in effect through December 31, 2015.


 



	
1.  

	
Mr. Moreland is the current Chief Financial Officer, Secretary and Treasurer of Vidaroo based on an employment agreement dated as of September 22, 2008 with subsequent amendments dated November 10, 2009 and May 16, 2012.  Effective with this Amendment he will also assume the responsibilities of Chief Executive Officer and be appointed as Chairman of the Board.







 



	
2.  

	
In consideration for these additional duties, Mr. Moreland’s current Stock Options under his previous agreements shall all fully vest and he will be awarded an additional 6,000,000 that will vest ratably over the term of this agreement.  All new and previously issued Stock Options shall be Exercisable at Fair Market Value at the time of the execution of this agreement.  Fair Market Value shall be defined as the average closing price of Vidaroo’s Common Stock for the 30 calendar days prior to the execution of this agreement, as further indicated in separately executed Vidaroo Corporation Non-Statutory Stock Option Agreement.







 



	
3.  

	
Section 7(b)(i) of the Employment Agreement shall be revised to allow for a severance payment of 12 months subject to the same termination provisions in the original agreement.














	

Vidaroo Corp.

	 	 	 	 
	 	 	 	 	 	 
	By:	 	 	 	 	 
	 	
Mark Argenti, Outgoing CEO and

	 	 	
Thomas Moreland, Incoming

	 
	 	
Chairman of the Board 

	 	 	
CEO and Chairman
No. 59691.

#### Rivoli Scarf & Novelty Co. and Surface Freight Corp. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 221630-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of silk scarves or squares similar in all material respects to those the subject of *United States*v. *The Specialty House, Inc., Bryant & Heffernan, Inc., et al.*(42 C. C. P. A. 136, C. A. D. 585), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Robert P. Young, Jr., Chief Justice

Michael F. Cavanagh

Stephen J. Markman

Mary Beth Kelly

Brian K. Zahra

Bridget M. McCormack

David F. Viviano, Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

 March 26, 2014

h0319

Order 

Clerk

March 26, 2014

147751

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee,

v SC: 147751

COA: 312020

Berrien CC: 2012-015106-FH

JEFFREY GENE MILLER, 2012-015107-FH

Defendant-Appellant.

____________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the May 28, 2013 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because we are not persuaded 

that the questions presented should be reviewed by this Court.

CAVANAGH, J., would remand this case to the Court of Appeals for consideration 

as on leave granted.
Before the First Division,

December 1, 1965

No. 69646.

#### T. Cohn, Inc., and Inter-Maritime Fwdg. & Co. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 60/5919, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of miniature motors similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 66961, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 182 (Thursday, September 21, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 65181]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-20420]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke; Notice 
of Closed Meeting

    Pursuant to section 1009 of the Federal Advisory Committee Act, as 
amended, notice is hereby given of a meeting of the Board of Scientific 
Counselors, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke.
    The meeting will be closed to the public as indicated below in 
accordance with the provisions set forth in section 552b(c)(6), title 5 
U.S.C., as amended for the review, discussion, and evaluation of 
individual intramural programs and projects conducted by the National 
Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke, including consideration 
of personnel qualifications and performance, and the competence of 
individual investigators, the disclosure of which would constitute a 
clearly unwarranted invasion of personal privacy.

    Name of Committee: Board of Scientific Counselors, National 
Institute of Neurological Disorders and Stroke.
    Date: October 17, 2023.
    Time: 2:00 p.m. to 5:30 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate personnel qualifications and 
performance, and competence of individual investigators.
    Place: Porter Neuroscience Research Center, Building 35A, 35 
Convent Drive, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).
    Date: October 23-24, 2023.
    Time: October 23, 2023, 8:30 a.m. to 9:00 p.m.; October 24, 
2023, 9:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate personnel qualifications and 
performance, and competence of individual investigators.
    Place: The Bethesdan Hotel, 8120 Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, 
Maryland 20814 (Hybrid Meeting).
    Contact Person: Jeffrey S. Diamond, Ph.D., Scientific Director, 
c/o Caren Collins, National Institute of Neurological Disorders and 
Stroke, NIH, Building 35, Room GF-149, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-435-
1896, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#99fdf0f8f4f6f7fdf3d9f7f0f7fdeab7f7f0f1b7fef6ef"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="fc98959d9193929896bc929592988fd2929594d29b938a">[email protected]</span></a>; <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#f3909c9f9f9a9d809092b39d9a9d9780dd9d9a9bdd949c85"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="e4878b88888d8a978785a48a8d8a8097ca8a8d8cca838b92">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.853, 
Clinical Research Related to Neurological Disorders; 93.854, 
Biological Basis Research in the Neurosciences, National Institutes 
of Health, HHS)

    Dated: September 15, 2023.
Tyeshia M. Roberson-Curtis,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2023-20420 Filed 9-20-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4140-01-P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
From: smoke1983@afo.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:18:35 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,

Janis B. Early

Tallahassee, FL 32317
(V.D. 138)

#### R. W. Smith Thrifty Equipment Co. *v.*United States

(Decided August 24, 1967)

*Lawrence é Tuttle*for the plaintiffs.

*Carl Eartiley,*Acting Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Foed, Judge:

This matter is before me on remand from classification proceedings decided by this court in *R. W. Smith*and *Thrifty Equipment Co.*v. *United States,*55 Cust. Ct. 216, C.D. 2578, wherein *860the matter was remanded to a single judge sitting in reappraisement. It has been submitted on a written stipulation reading as follows:

IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by and between the parties hereto, subject to the approval of the court, as follows:

1. That the submission of this case be set aside and that the record in this case as previously made be expunged.

2. That the merchandise the subject of the entitled protest consists of D-6 and D-8 Track Link Assemblies exported from England on or about January 1956.

3. That this stipulation is limited to the D-6 and D-8 Track Link Assemblies, that as so limited the merchandise and the issues are the same in all material respects as those involved in *The Thrifty Equipment Co*., *T. D. Downing Co.*v. *United*States, Reap. Dec. 10674, and that the record in the cited case may be incorporated in the record herein.

4. That during the period in question D-6 Track Link Assembly was freely offered for sale to all purchasers for home consumption in the principal markets of England, in the ordinary course of trade, at £64.0.0, net packed, and D-8 Track Link Assembly was freely offered for sale to all purchasers for home consumption in the principal markets of England, in the ordinary course of trade, at £160.0.0, net packed, said prices not varying with the quantities purchased.

5. That such or similar merchandise was not freely offered for sale to all purchasers for exportation to the United States during the period in question.

6. That the protest may be submitted upon this stipulation, the same being limited to the D-6 and D-8 Track Link Assemblies, and abandoned in all other respects.

Upon the agreed facts, I find and hold that foreign value as that value is defined in section 402(c), Tariff Act of 1930, is the proper basis for the determination of the value of the involved merchandise and that said values are:

> D-6 Track Link Assembly £64, net packed

> D-8 Track Link Assembly £160, net packed

As to all other items of merchandise, the remand of protest having been abandoned, is dismissed.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
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 Annual Report of Atlas Resources Public #18-2009 (B) L.P. (the “Partnership”) on Form 10-K/A for the year ended December 31, 2013 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Sean P. McGrath, Chief Financial Officer of the General Partner, 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 Partnership. |
|-----|----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

|                                                |
|------------------------------------------------|
| /s/ SEAN P. MCGRATH                            |
| Sean P. McGrath                                |
| Chief Financial Officer of the General Partner |
| August 14, 2014                                |
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 17-1676

In Re: GIUSEPPE PILEGGI,

Petitioner.

On Petition for Writ of Mandamus. 

(3:06-cr-00151-RJC-1; 3:14-cv-00159-RJC)

Submitted: September 7, 2017 Decided: September 14, 2017

Before DUNCAN and WYNN, Circuit Judges, and HAMILTON, Senior Circuit Judge.

Petition denied by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Giuseppe Pileggi, Petitioner Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Giuseppe Pileggi petitions for a writ of mandamus, alleging that the district court 

has unduly delayed in acting on his Fed. R. Crim. P. 41(g) motion and 28 U.S.C. § 2255 

(2012) motion. He seeks an order from this court directing the district court to act. Our 

review of the district court’s docket reveals that the district court denied Pileggi’s Rule 

41(g) motion without prejudice by order entered July 26, 2017, and dismissed his § 2255 

motion by order entered September 1, 2017. Accordingly, because the district court has 

recently decided Pileggi’s motions, we deny the mandamus petition as moot. We 

dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately 

presented in the materials before this court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process. 

PETITION DENIED
From: Newsom, Doug

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Accept recommendations of the Institute of Medicine on preventive care for women.

Date: Thursday, August 11, 2011 10:21:45 AM

As a long-time member of the American Association of University Women (AAUW), I am one of many

in asking you to accept the recommendations of the Institute of Medicine as pertain to coverage of

preventive care under the new health care law, and to reject any exemptions for “religious employers.”

These preventive services are a critical element of the new law and would provide countless women

better access to necessary health care. There is too much abuse possible to women who go into

emergency especially only to get turned down because of “religion.”

While AAUW believes that “religious refusal” exemptions unjustly deny women access to contraceptive

services, others, driven by an ideological distaste for all contraceptive services, are pushing the

government to make exemptions even larger. Indeed, some groups are pushing for the exemption to

apply to religiously-run health providers, so hospitals with religious affiliations would be exempt from

the coverage requirement, even though they employ people of all faiths and ideologies. If granted, this

larger exemption would deny access to thousands of women just because of where they work.

I urge you to ensure women have access to quality preventive care by accepting IOM’s

recommendations and rejecting the proposed religious refusal exemption provisions.
## COURT OF APPEALS

SECOND DISTRICT OF TEXAS

FORT WORTH

NO. 02

- 15

- 00171

- CV

ANTHONY E. GILL APPELLANT

V.

CSL PLASMA, INC. APPELLEE

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

FROM THE 141ST DISTR ICT COURT OF TARRANT COUNTY

TRIAL COURT NO. 141

- 274975

- 14

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



### MEMORAN DUM OPINION 1 

### AND JUDGMENT

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

We have considered “Appellant’ s Motion To Withdraw Appeal

, ” which is

unopposed. It is the court ’ s opinion that the motion should be granted; therefore,

we dismiss the appeal. See Tex. R. App. P. 42.1(a)(1), 43.2(f)

.

/s/ Sue Walker

SUE WALKER

JUSTICE

PANEL: WALKER, MEIER, and GABRIEL, JJ

.

1 See Tex. R. App. P. 47.4.2

DELIVERED: July 16, 2015
To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:03:45 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,

Alexi Bobodzhanov

Kirkland, WA 98034