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

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:16:38 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,

Imogene Zimmerman

Valley Farms, AZ 85291
No. 61010.

protest 300381-K/14814 (New Orleans).

#### United China & Glass Co. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with oral stipulation of counsel that the mugs, item 2185, consist of decorated earthenware, valued at over $2 per dozen pieces, that said item is tableware, and that, if presently before the examiner for examination, he would so advisorily classify them, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained as to said item.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5         
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE FORM
10-K ANNUAL REPORT FOR THE YEAR ENDED DECEMBER 31, 1997, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS
ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   12-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             JAN-01-1997
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1997
<CASH>                                           8,158      
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                  108,263
<ALLOWANCES>                                   (6,298)
<INVENTORY>                                      5,603
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               124,318
<PP&E>                                         115,650
<DEPRECIATION>                                (61,276)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 489,169
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           56,765
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           231
<OTHER-SE>                                     359,056
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   489,169
<SALES>                                              0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               328,387
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  324,836
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                               (1,226)
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                 4,965
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               2,761
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                (2,949)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     1,084
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                            (4,033)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                      (4,488)
<NET-INCOME>                                   (8,521)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                   (0.38)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.38)
                    

</TABLE>
From: bebe-lunsford@sbcglobal.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:52:55 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,

Bebe Lunsford

Houston, TX 77082
; 

V.S.P•pO<It»tnl o11ron<porlall0l1 

O't ce ol lt.e SK.rcto:JtyOf IIO"'l!():)~•,:,t"((l\ 

Chief. Documentary Services Div. 

Department of Transportation 

Washington. D.C. 20590 

DES!GNATlON OF AGENT FOR 

SERVICE OF NOTICE. PROCESS. ORDERS 

DECISIONS AND REQUIREMENTS 

ATTENTION: DOCKET SECTION. C-55 

Aerovias de Integraci6n Regional, AIRES S.A. d/b/a LAN Colombia 

(Name of Company. please print) 

office at 

. having its principal 

(Address) Bo oo..f4 ~ Colo m b il} 

he reb:· designotes. pun;uant to >ection -16103 ofTitle -19 of the U.S. Code ( f(lmterly 'ection lOOSe h) of the F~deral A\ iation Act 

of 1958. ;:~~amended! the pen>on named lll!!(lw ns it~ Agent upo11 whom service of ull notict>.'i :mc.l proce~~.· und ;~It onk'n. decision,_ 

and requirements of the Depm1ment ol' Tran\portation ma)' be made ror and on bebalr of :;aid earner. hereby canceling all pre\'inu~ 

designation' of;~gent~ nmde by it to the DOT. 

Robert E. Cohn 

Patrick R. Rizzi 

Name of Agent------------------------------------------~------------------------

Hogan Lovells US LLP 

555 13th Street, MW 

Washington, DC 20004 

(Please Print) 

(tel) 202-637-4999 (Cohn) 

robert.cohn@hoganlovells.com 

Address ---------------------------------------

The Agent so designated has written his name and also his initials in the following space: 

Name 

IN WITNESS WHEREOF~croviu de Integraoi6n Rogional, Atruts s.A. d/b/a. LAN Cololl\bia has caused the!.e 

(Name of Company) 

presents to be signed in its name by _ _:::::f'::::::...!O::::!...!.I.!.:YY'l:....:..!::t;:::.......~G"'-~ _:::OJ::;:' ..::'_:G==:-_:.:O:::::.....~R...:>..!...bt.~.--_______ • President 

(Please Print) 

of said company. and to be allested under its corporate seal by 

(Secretary, or other Title) 

olfJ - on this __ ]_,__ __ day or ..:...J ;:H..) 0 A R "I • lA! /}. 01 ?:;' 

L-1-i-rJ co/om Oi 4 

(Name of Company) 

I 

OST F 1010,5 (1-95)
November 24, 1964

No. 68908.

Appeal 5190.

#### United States *v.*J. J. Boll et al.

— A.R.D. 179. Appeal dismissed on September 23, 1964.
IV 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 188 

Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on Ways and Means 

in the One Hundred Tenth Congress. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

FEBRUARY 16, 2007 

Mr. RANGEL (for himself and Mr. MCCRERY) submitted the following 

resolution; which was referred to the Committee on House Administration 

RESOLUTION 

Providing amounts for the expenses of the Committee on 

Ways and Means in the One Hundred Tenth Congress. 

1 Resolved, 

2 SECTION 1. AMOUNTS FOR COMMITTEE EXPENSES. 

3 For the expenses of the Committee on Ways and 

4 Means (hereafter in this resolution referred to as the 

5 ‘‘Committee’’), including the expenses of all staff salaries, 

6 there shall be paid, out of the applicable accounts of the 

7 House of Representatives for committee salaries and ex8 penses, not more than $20,059,513.60 for the One Hun9 dred Tenth Congress. 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
2 

•HRES 188 IH 

1 SEC. 2. SESSION LIMITATIONS. 

2 Of the amount specified in section 1— 

3 (1) not more than $9,785,128.60 shall be avail4 able for expenses incurred during the period begin5 ning at noon on January 3, 2007, and ending imme6 diately before noon on January 3, 2008; and 

7 (2) not more than $10,274,385.00 shall be 

8 available for expenses incurred during the period be9 ginning at noon on January 3, 2008, and ending im10 mediately before noon on January 3, 2009. 

11 SEC. 3. VOUCHERS. 

12 Payments under this resolution shall be made on 

13 vouchers authorized by the Committee, signed by the 

14 Chairman of the Committee, and approved in the manner 

15 directed by the Committee on House Administration. 

16 SEC. 4. REGULATIONS. 

17 Amounts made available under this resolution shall 

18 be expended in accordance with regulations prescribed by 

19 the Committee on House Administration. 

Æ 


ycherry on PROD1PC64 with BILLS
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 22-1897

MAJOR FLEMING,

 Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

SHAWN T. RIVARD, Virginia State Police; VINCE J. MACANO, Virginia State 

Police; VIRGINIA STATE POLICE AVIATION UNITS,

 Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of Virginia, at 

Richmond. John A. Gibney, Jr., Senior District Judge. (3:22-cv-00210-JAG)

Submitted: April 20, 2023 Decided: April 24, 2023

Before KING and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges, and FLOYD, Senior Circuit Judge.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Major Fleming, Appellant Pro Se. Amy Elizabeth Hensley, OFFICE OF THE 

ATTORNEY GENERAL OF VIRGINIA, Richmond, Virginia, for Appellees.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

USCA4 Appeal: 22-1897 Doc: 13 Filed: 04/24/2023 Pg: 1 of 2
2

PER CURIAM:

Major Fleming appeals the district court’s order dismissing Fleming’s 42 U.S.C. 

§ 1983 complaint. On appeal, we confine our review to the issues raised in the informal 

brief. See 4th Cir. R. 34(b). Because Fleming’s informal brief does not challenge the basis 

for the district court’s disposition, he has forfeited appellate review of the court’s order. 

See Jackson v. Lightsey, 775 F.3d 170, 177 (4th Cir. 2014) (“The informal brief is an 

important document; under Fourth Circuit rules, our review is limited to issues preserved 

in that brief.”). Accordingly, we affirm the district court’s judgment. We deny Fleming’s 

motion to seal. 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.

AFFIRMED

USCA4 Appeal: 22-1897 Doc: 13 Filed: 04/24/2023 Pg: 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>



        <S> <C>


<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM THE
BALANCE SHEET, THE STATEMENT OF OPERATIONS, AND THE STATEMENT OF CASH FLOWS
AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             JUL-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<CASH>                                             100
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                        0
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                   100
<PP&E>                                               0
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                               2,829,022
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                                0
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                     4,493,541
<OTHER-SE>                                  (1,664,519)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                 2,829,022
<SALES>                                          3,750
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 3,750
<CGS>                                                0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  247,348
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (243,598)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (243,598)
<EPS-BASIC>                                    (0.02)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (0.02)



</TABLE>
From: graystone1911@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:07:14 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,

Gerald Liebsch

Conroe, TX 77304
From: del.gwen.groen@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:10:59 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,

Del Groen

Greeley, CO 80634
Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER  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 PanAmSat Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended June 30, 2005 as filed
with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Joseph R. Wright, 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 to my knowledge:



|Date: August 9, 2005 |  | /s/JOSEPH R. WRIGHTJoseph R. Wright Chief Executive
Officer
|-------------------- |  | -----------------------------------------------------------

---



QuickLinks
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 185 (Tuesday, September 26, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 66014]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-20748]


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

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND HUMAN SERVICES

National Institutes of Health


National Institute on Aging; 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: National Institute on Aging Special Emphasis 
Panel; AD Research Centers.
    Date: November 17, 2023.
    Time: 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.
    Agenda: To review and evaluate grant applications.
    Place: National Institute on Aging, Gateway Building, 7201 
Wisconsin Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20892 (Virtual Meeting).
    Contact Person: Maurizio Grimaldi, M.D., Ph.D., Scientific 
Review Officer, Scientific Review Branch, National Institutes of 
Health, National Institute on Aging, 7201 Wisconsin Avenue, RM: 
2W200, Bethesda, MD 20892, 301-496-9374, <a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#6a070b1f1803100305440d1803070b060e032a040302440d051c"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="533e3226213a293a3c7d34213a3e323f373a133d3a3b7d343c25">[email protected]</span></a>.

(Catalogue of Federal Domestic Assistance Program Nos. 93.866, Aging 
Research, National Institutes of Health, HHS)

    Dated: September 20, 2023.
Miguelina Perez,
Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.
[FR Doc. 2023-20748 Filed 9-25-23; 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>
## I N T H E C O U R T O F C R I M I N A L A P P E A L S O F T E X A S NO. WR-90,510-01

EX P ARTE DANE EDWARD WEATHERF ORD, Applicant

ON AP P LICATION FOR A WRIT OF HABEAS CORP US CAUSE NO. 1482268-A IN THE 262ND DISTRICT COURT

F ROM HARRIS COUNTY

Per curiam . O P I N I O N Pursuant to the provisi o n s o f Ar t icle 11.07 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedur e, the cler k of the trial court transmitted to this Court this application for a writ of habea s corpus. Ex parte Y oung , 418 S.W .2d 824, 826 (Tex. Crim. App. 1967). Applicant was convicted of sex u al assault of a child and sentenc ed to fiftee n y ear s’ imprisonment. The First Court of Appea ls af fi rm ed his conviction. W

eatherford v. State , No. 01-16-01016-CR (Tex. App. — Houston [1 Dist.] Aug ust st 7, 2018) (not desig nated for publicatio n ). T h i s C ourt ref used Applicant’s pro se petition for discretionar

y revie w on Dec ember

5, 2018. Applicant contends that he wa s denied the oppor tunity to f ile a motion for rehe aring of the ref usal of his petition for discretionar y revie w, beca

use he did not rec eive timely notification that his2

petition had been ref

used. This Court’s rec ords indicate that althoug h Applicant timely notified this Court of a cha ng e of addre ss, the notification of the ref usal of his pe tition for discretionar y revie w

was err oneously sent to his former addre ss. Applicant did not rec eive that notification until afte r the deadline f or filing a motion for re hear ing ha d passed. We find, there fore , that Applicant is entitled to the opportunity to file an out-of-time motion for rehe aring from this Court’s ref usal of his petition for discretionar y revie w of the judgme nt of the First Court of Appea ls in Cause No. 01-16-01016- CR that aff irmed his conviction in Cause No. 01- 16-01016-CR from the 262nd District Court of Har ris County

. Applicant shall file his motion for rehe aring with this C ourt within 15 day s of the date on which this Court’s mandate issues.

Deliver ed: Novembe r 6, 2019 Do not publish