alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ORDER

Page - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

TYRONE WASHINGTON,

Plaintiff,

v.

WASHINGTON STATE DEPT. OF

CORRECTIONS, et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. C05-5630RBL

ORDER GRANTING

APPLICATION TO PROCEED IN

FORMA PAUPERIS AND

DIRECTING INSTITUTION TO

CALCULATE, COLLECT, AND

FORWARD PAYMENTS

The Court, having reviewed plaintiff's application to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 1), does

hereby find and ORDER. 

(1) Plaintiff’s declaration indicates he is unable to afford the court’s filing fee or give security

therefor. Accordingly, plaintiff’s application to proceed as a pauper is GRANTED. As set forth below,

an initial partial filing fee will be collected, and plaintiff is required to make monthly payments of

20 percent of the preceding months income credited to his/her account until the full amount of the

filing fee is satisfied.

(2) Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915 and plaintiff’s approved application to proceed in forma

pauperis, the agency having custody of the above named plaintiff is directed to calculate an initial partial

filing fee equal to 20 percent of greater of -- the average monthly deposits to the prisoner’s account or the

average monthly balance in the prisoner’s account for the 6-month period immediately preceding the date

of this Order. The initial partial filing fee should be forwarded to the court clerk as soon as practicable.

Case 3:05-cv-05630-RBL Document 3 Filed 09/26/2005 Page 1 of 2

Washington v. Washington State Department of Corrections et al Doc. 3

Dockets.Justia.com
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ORDER

Page - 2

Subsequently, if the prisoner’s account exceeds $10.00, each month the agency is directed to

collect and forward payments equal to 20 percent of the prisoner’s preceding month’s income credited to

the prisoner’s account. In the event that the monthly payment would reduce the prisoner’s account below

$10.00, the agency should collect and forward only that amount which would reduce the prisoner’s

account to the $10.00 level. Please note that this $10.00 limit does not apply to the initial partial filing fee

described above. Finally, the monthly payments should be collected and forwarded to the court until the

entire filing fee ($250.00) for this matter has been paid.

(3) The Clerk is directed to send plaintiff a copy of this Order and the General Order, and a copy

of this Order along with a copy of plaintiff’s Acknowledgment and Authorization portion of the IFP

application to the attention of the inmate account manager (IFP account manager) at the Washington State

Department of Corrections.

DATED this 26th day of September, 2005.

 /s/ J. Kelley Arnold____________ J. Kelley Arnold

United States Magistrate Judge

Case 3:05-cv-05630-RBL Document 3 Filed 09/26/2005 Page 2 of 2
From: mjtcountry@mvtvwireless.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 7:26:34 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,

Joan Winter

Marshall, MN 56258
From: argia@safelink.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:45:16 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

health insurance.

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

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

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

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

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

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Monica Uberuaga

Homedale, ID 83628
112

63

Austin

Rufus

Biggs

Boardman

Arlington

Wasco

Moro

Cecil

Olex

Grass

Valley

Ione

Lexington

Kent

Heppner

Condon

Shaniko

Mayville

Hardman

Antelope

Fossil

La Grande

Ukiah

Dale

Spray

Monument

Kimberly Hamilton

Mitchell

Long Creek

Fox

Prineville

Sumpter

Dayville

Bates

Mount

Vernon

Post

Prairie City

John

Day

Canyon City

Unity

Paulina

Izee

Seneca

Brothers

Silvies

Heppner

Junction

Clarno

Service

Creek

Richmond

Beech Creek

Logdell

Suplee

Millican

Morgan

Ruggs

Maryhill

Austin

Rufus

Biggs

Boardman

Arlington

Wasco

Moro

Cecil

Olex

Grass

Valley

Ione

Lexington

Kent

Heppner

Condon

Shaniko

Mayville

Hardman

Antelope

Fossil

La Grande

Ukiah

Dale

Spray

Monument

Kimberly Hamilton

Mitchell

Long Creek

Fox

Prineville

Sumpter

Dayville

Bates

Mount

Vernon

Post

Prairie City

John

Day

Canyon City

Unity

Paulina

Izee

Seneca

Brothers

Silvies

Heppner

Junction

Clarno

Service

Creek

Richmond

Beech Creek

Logdell

Suplee

Millican

Morgan

Ruggs

Maryhill

SHERMAN COUNTY

GILLIAM COUNTY

 WASCO COUNTY

JEFFERSON COUNTY

WHEELER COUNTY

CROOK COUNTY

MORROW COUNTY

GRANT COUNTY

UMITILLA COUNION CO

GRANT CO

BAKER CO

GRANT COUNTY

HARNEY COUNTY

WASHINGTON

OREGON

84

395

395

395

26

26

26

26

20

97

97

207

244

402

380

207

218

218

293

206

206

19

19

27

19

74

7

River

Columbia

John

Day

River

John

Fork

Fork

Middle

North

Fork

Day

River

South

North

Fork

Deschutes River

10 0 10 20 Kilometers

10 0 10 20 Miles

W

N

E

S

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

Bureau of Land Management

PRINEVILLE DISTRICT

John Day Basin

Resource Management Plan

Draft Environmental Impact Statement

2008

No warranty is made by the Bureau of Land Management as to the accuracy, 

reliability, or completeness of these data for individual or aggregate use with other 

data. Original data were compiled from various sources. This information may not 

meet National Map Accuracy Standards. This product was developed through 

digital means and may be updated without notification.

M07-09-01:2-27-08

Locatable

 High

 Moderate

 Low

LEGEND

Planning Area Boundary

Administered Land

 Bureau of Land Management

 Forest Service

 John Day Fossil Beds

 National Monument

 Other Federal

 State

 Private or Other

OREGON

84

84 5

5

101

101

395

395

395

199

26

26

26

20

97 197

97

20

95

26

30

Coos Bay

Florence

Newport

Portland The

Dalles

Albany

Bend

Salem

Tillamook

Eugene

Madras

Roseburg

Medford

Lakeview

Burns

Vale

Pendleton

Baker

City

Klamath

Falls

Grants Pass

Astoria

PA

C I F I C

O

C

E

A

N

Prineville 

District

John Day Basin

Planning

Area

John Day Basin

Planning

Prineville

John

Day

Map 21: Locatable Mineral Potential
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

Pursuant To 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, As Adopted Pursuant

To Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act Of 2002

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, the undersigned officer of Intelsat Corporation (the Company) hereby certifies that to
such officers knowledge, the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three months ended June 30, 2010 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the
Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                      |  |  |  |  |  |                                          
|--------------------- |  |  |  |  |  | -----------------------------------------
|Date: August 10, 2010 |  |  |  |  |  | /S/ MICHAEL
MCDONNELL                    
|                      |  |  |  |  |  | Michael McDonnell
Chief Financial Officer

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 and is not being filed as part of the Report or
as a separate disclosure document.
# Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

September 13, 2016

No. 04

- 16

- 00105

- CV

IN THE INTEREST OF A.M.W., A CHILD

,

From the 57th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 1995EM501946

The Honorable Nick Catoe, Jr., Ju dge Presiding



### O R D E R

Appellee’s motion for extension of time to file its brief is GRANTED. Appellee’s brief is

due on September 26, 2016

.

_________________________________ Karen Angelini, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said

court on this 13th day of September, 2016

.

___________________________________ Keith E. Hottle

Clerk of Court
Storage

D4 / D5

Storage

Intermediates

S

Fina

Storage

Recovered D4 D5

Storage

Wastewater

Reactor

Polymerization

Reactor

Polymerization

R

D

Purification

Final Polymer

Abatement

D4 / D5

Storm water Solid Waste

Fugitive

5 6 7

4 3

1 

Block Flow Diagram: Processor of D4/D5 with on & o

Treatment

Wastewater

To Off-site POTW

To OfWastMana

FIGURE 5

BLOCK FLOW DIAGRAM TEMPLATE FOR PROCESSORS OF D4 OR D5 

WITH ON-SITE AND OFF-SITE WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANTS

Silicones Environmental, Health and Safety Council
Processor of D4 / D5

Production Year 2010 Throughput D4 Throughput D5 

Stream No Description Lbs D4/ Lbs Final Polymer Lbs D5/ Lbs Final Polymer 

1 D4/D5 Raw Material Consumed2 Final Polymer Produced3 Point Source Air Emissions4 Fugtive Air Emissions5 Treated Industrial Waste Water Discharge to Off-site POTW6 Storm Water Discharge to Surface Waters7 Solid Waste Disposal to Off-site Waste Management

Material balance based upon actual normal production rates, normal operating conditions, and accepted engineering practices

Storage

D4 / D5

Storage

Intermediates

Storage

Final Polymer

Storage

Recovered D4 D5

Storage

Wastewater

Reactor

Polymerization

Reactor

Polymerization

Recovery

D4 / D5

Purification

Final Polymer

Abatement

D4 / D5

Storm water Solid Waste

Fugitive

5 6 7

4 3

1 

Block Flow Diagram: Processor of D4/D5 with on & off site W

Treatment

Wastewater

To Off-site POTW

To Off-site Waste Management

 Figure DE-2
# Uradni list C 122A/16.

| | ISSN 1977-1045 |
| --- | --- |
| Uradni list
  Evropske unije | C 122A |
| | |
| Slovenska izdaja | Informacije in objave | Zvezek 5816. april 2015 |

ISSN 1977-1045

Uradni list

Evropske unije

C 122A

Slovenska izdaja

Informacije in objave

Zvezek 5816. april 2015

---

| Obvestilo št. | Vsebina | Stran |
| --- | --- | --- |
| | Popravki |
| 2015/C 122A/01 | Popravek razpisa javnih natečajev – Upravni uslužbenci (AD 5/AD 7), specializirani za pravne raziskave – EPSO/AD/295/15 – Pravniki, ki so pravno izobrazbo pridobili v Bolgariji (BG) – EPSO/AD/296/15 – Pravniki, ki so pravno izobrazbo pridobili v Nemčiji (DE) – EPSO/AD/297/15 – Pravniki, ki so pravno izobrazbo pridobili na Hrvaškem (HR) – EPSO/AD/298/15 – Pravniki, ki so pravno izobrazbo pridobili na Irskem (IE) – EPSO/AD/299/15 – Pravniki, ki so pravno izobrazbo pridobili v Litvi (LT) – EPSO/AD/300/15 – Pravniki, ki so pravno izobrazbo pridobili na Slovaškem (SK) — ( UL C 68 A, 26.2.2015 ) | 1 |

Obvestilo št.

Vsebina

Stran

Popravki

2015/C 122A/01

Popravek razpisa javnih natečajev – Upravni uslužbenci (AD 5/AD 7), specializirani za pravne raziskave – EPSO/AD/295/15 – Pravniki, ki so pravno izobrazbo pridobili v Bolgariji (BG) – EPSO/AD/296/15 – Pravniki, ki so pravno izobrazbo pridobili v Nemčiji (DE) – EPSO/AD/297/15 – Pravniki, ki so pravno izobrazbo pridobili na Hrvaškem (HR) – EPSO/AD/298/15 – Pravniki, ki so pravno izobrazbo pridobili na Irskem (IE) – EPSO/AD/299/15 – Pravniki, ki so pravno izobrazbo pridobili v Litvi (LT) – EPSO/AD/300/15 – Pravniki, ki so pravno izobrazbo pridobili na Slovaškem (SK) — ( UL C 68 A, 26.2.2015 )

( UL C 68 A, 26.2.2015 )

1

---

| SL | |
| --- | --- |

SL

---

Popravki

| 16.4.2015 | SL | Uradni list Evropske unije | CA 122/1 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

16.4.2015

SL

Uradni list Evropske unije

CA 122/1

---

Popravek razpisa javnih natečajev – Upravni uslužbenci (AD 5/AD 7), specializirani za pravne raziskave – EPSO/AD/295/15 – Pravniki, ki so pravno izobrazbo pridobili v Bolgariji (BG) – EPSO/AD/296/15 – Pravniki, ki so pravno izobrazbo pridobili v Nemčiji (DE) – EPSO/AD/297/15 – Pravniki, ki so pravno izobrazbo pridobili na Hrvaškem (HR) – EPSO/AD/298/15 – Pravniki, ki so pravno izobrazbo pridobili na Irskem (IE) – EPSO/AD/299/15 – Pravniki, ki so pravno izobrazbo pridobili v Litvi (LT) – EPSO/AD/300/15 – Pravniki, ki so pravno izobrazbo pridobili na Slovaškem (SK)

(
  Uradni list Evropske unije C 68 A z dne 26. februarja 2015
  )

(2015/C 122 A/01)

Stran 2, oddelek I, točka 3:

besedilo:

„Rok (vključno s potrditvijo): 31. marec 2015 do 12h (opoldne) po bruseljskem času.“

se glasi:

„Rok (vključno s potrditvijo): 9. aprila 2015 do 12h (opoldne) po bruseljskem času.“

---
Exhibit 10.1




 









 








Lease Agreement


Party A: Sihui City, Dasha Town, Economic Industrial Development Co., Ltd.


Party B: Zhao Qing Neng Cheng Import & Export Co., Ltd.







In order to develop economy, Party A and Party B have friendly negotiation with each other and sign the lease contract as follows:








		1.	
The subject matter and scope of the lease







 


Party A will lease its property to Party B for Office use.


 


Property's address: Suite 303, Building No. 1 (Yi Jing Building), Xinxu Guanghai East Road, Dasha Town, Sihui City, 


Guangdong province.


 








		2.	
The term of lease







 


The term of lease is the completion time of Party B's new office.


 




  



		3.	
The rent and payment method







 



		a.	
Rent: RMB 10,000 per year







 



		b.	
Payment method: Within 3 days after signing the contract, Party B shall pay 10,000 RMB to Party A. Party B shall pay the rent on January 1st each year.







 




  



		4.	
The responsibilities of the parties







 



		a.	
Party A shall assist Party B in handling formalities such as water use and power installation, and all the expenses shall be in charge of Party B.







 



		b.	
If Party B needs to change it, it must start with the approval of Party A.







 



		c.	
The land and the original building compensation belong to Party A if national key project construction or other need to levy the land.







 



		d.	
During the lease period, Party B has only the right to use, cannot transfer, and only for the use as office.







 


 


 











 


 



		e.	
Party B must pay attention to safety and keep good property; if there is a safety accident, Party B shall solve it by itself, which has nothing to do with Party A.







 



		f.	
After the expiration of the lease, all real estate is owned by Party A.













		5.	
This contract is made in three copies, one each of Party A and Party B. And Dasha town economic management office also need to take a copy of the contract as the preservation. This contract comes into force on the date of signing, and hopes that both Party A and B will abide by it.






















Party A:/s/ Sihui City Dasha Town Economic Industrial Development Co., Ltd.












Party B: /s/ Zhao Qing Neng Cheng Import & Export Co., Ltd.












Date: April 15, 2015
From: stansullivan52@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:45:29 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,

Stan Sullivan

Timmonsville, SC 29161
Exhibit
      32.1





CERTIFICATION
      Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350





The
      undersigned officer of ALLIED HEALTHCARE PRODUCTS, INC. (the "Company"), hereby
      certifies, to such officer's knowledge, that the Company's Quarterly Report
      on
      Form 10-Q for the Company’s fiscal quarter ended September 30, 2008 (the
      "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the
      Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report
      fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results
      of operations of the Company.





/s/
                Earl R. RefslandEarl
                R. RefslandPresident
                & Chief Executive OfficerNovember
                7, 2008
Mutual Termination Agreement
  
 This mutual termination agreement is made and entered into this 8thday of January, 2013, by and between Cellceutix Corporation and Hyman and Ethel Schwartz, (“Schwartz”) Series A Convertible Preferred Subscriber.  
  
  
 WHERAS the Company and (“Schwartz “) entered into a Subscription Agreement on May 8, 2012 for the Company to sell and for (“Schwartz “)   to  purchase Series A Convertible Preferred Shares (the “Series A Preferred”) of Cellceutix Corporation   (CTIX) (the "Company") which are convertible into Common Shares of the Company,  in a transaction exempt from the registration requirements of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”) for an aggregate of $1,000,000 to be funded in tranches over the period of one year.  To date an aggregate of $400,000 was funded, and the Company issued an aggregate of 848,084 common shares and 848,084 common stock purchase warrants.  
  
 Whereas, Company and (“Schwartz “)    desire to mutually terminate the subscription for the remaining $600,000 subscription agreement.  
  
 Now therefore, for valuable consideration, the receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, the Company and Schwartz agree to:
  
 1. Mutually terminate the agreement referenced herein.  
  
 2. Mutually release each other of any claims or liabilities of any kind or nature.
  
 This mutual termination is made effective as of the date first written above.
  
 	 Cellceutix Corporation   
	  
	 Hyman Schwartz and Ethel Schwartz
	  

	  
	  
	  
	  

	 By:
	 /s/ Leo Ehrlich
	  
	 By:
	 /s/ Hyman Schwartz
 /s/ Ethel Schwartz
	  

	  
	 Leo Ehrlich, CEO
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that

this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit 

## FILED October 5, 2006 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 06-20074 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus GREGORY HOLDEN, also known as Doug, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 4:05-CR-231-2

-------------------- Before JONES, Chief Judge, and SMITH and STEWART, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Appealing the Judgment in a Criminal Case, Gregory Holden raises arguments that are foreclosed by United States v. Robinson , 119 F.3d 1205, 1208, 1215 (5th Cir. 1997), which held that in Hobbs Act prosecutions based on local activities that affect interstate commerce, the Government need not prove that the effect of an individual defendant’s conduct was substantial so long as the regulated activity, in the aggregate, could reasonably be thought to substantially affect interstateNo. 06-20074 -2- commerce. The Government’s motion for summary affirmance is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.