alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
From: ireland_3@hotmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:15:56 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,

Carol Schofield

Wilmington, DE 19803
From: d_s_wood@tx.rr.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 2:51:00 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,

Debora Wood

The Colony, TX 75056
1 

### Sutton, Lisa

From: Mastro, Donna
Sent: Monday, May 25, 2015 7:06 AM

To: Brachtl, Megan; Sutton, Lisa; Johansen, Amy Subject: FW: SSM SIP Call Final Rule

Attachments: McCabe letter to air directors final SSM SI P call 05-22-15.pdf; SSM SIP final rule_Fact Sheet.pdf

Delaware

Donna L. Mastro - EPA Region III – ORC - Air Branch Chief - (215) 814-2777

From: Esher, Diana

Sent: Friday, May 22, 2015 2:09 PM

To: Mirzakhalili, Ali (DNREC); ronald.amirikian@state.de.us

Cc: Arnold, David; Johansen, Amy; Mastro, Donna; Fernandez, Cristina Subject: SSM SIP Call Final Rule



### I’m writing to inform you that earlier t oday, the Administrator signed a final action to ensure states have in place air pollution rules that appl y to sources at all times, includi ng periods of startup, shutdown, or malfunction (SSM).

EPA is calling for 36 states, including your state, to make changes to their State Implementation Plans (SIPs), to protect public health and ensure consistency with th e Clean Air Act and EPA’s current SSM Policy. In response to this action, your state will need to correct specific SSM provisions in your state plan as indicated in

the final action.

The Clean Air Act allows a maximum of 18 months from the issuance of the final action to submit a SIP revision. Therefore your revised SIP subm ission is due to EPA by November 22, 2016.

For your information, here is the link to the pre-p ublication version of the final action signed today. http://www.epa.gov/airquality/ur banair/sipstatus/emissions.html SSM provisions for Delaware are addr essed in final action’s prepublicat ion version, under section IX, at subsection D. 1 (p. 453).

I have also attached a copy of a no tification letter signed by Acting Assistant Administrator Janet McCabe and a copy of the SSM Fact Sheet for your information.

We will continue to work closely with you to ensure this SIP revision process is as effi cient as possible. Please let me know if your have any questions.

Diana Esher Director, Air Prot ection Division EPA Region 3

215-814-2706 esher.diana@epa.gov
### TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

JUDGMENT RENDERED AU GUST 31, 20115

NO. 03

- 15

- 00550

- CV

In re Estate of Miguel Alonso Hernandez, Deceased

APPEAL FROM COUNTY COURT AT LAW NO. 1 OF HAYS COUNTY

BEFORE CHIEF JUSTICE ROSE, JUSTICES PEM BERTON AND FIELD

DISMISSED FOR WANT OF JURISDICTION

-- OPINION BY CHIEF JUSTICE ROSE

This is an appeal from the order signed by the tr i a l court on October 22, 2003. Having reviewed

t he record , it appears that the C ourt lacks jurisdiction over the appeal. Therefore, the C ourt

dismisses the appeal for want of jurisdiction. The appellant s shall pay all costs relating to this

appeal, both in this Court and the court below.
No. 61494.

#### W. C. Sullivan & Co. *v.*United States,

protest 309882-K/8758 (Chicago).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

Since there was nothing before the court tending in any way to overcome the presumption of correctness which attaches to the classification by the collector, the protest was overruled.
From: bunnyhop07@juno.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:23:31 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,

Jada Hop

Grandville, MI 49418
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 186 (Wednesday, September 27, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 66449]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-21162]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

FEDERAL MINE SAFETY AND HEALTH REVIEW COMMISSION


Sunshine Act Notice

TIME AND DATE: 10:00 a.m., Tuesday, October 10, 2023.

PLACE: The Richard V. Backley Hearing Room, Room 511, 1331 Pennsylvania 
Avenue NW, Suite 504 North, Washington, DC 20004 (enter from F Street 
entrance).

STATUS: Open.

MATTERS TO BE CONSIDERED: The Commission will hear oral argument in the 
matter Thomas v. CalPortland Co., Docket Nos. WEST 2018-0402-DM and 
WEST 2019-0205. (Issues include whether the Judge erred in ruling that 
the miner had established that the operator had discriminated against 
him under section 105(c)(3) of the Mine Act.)
    Any person attending this oral argument who requires special 
accessibility features and/or auxiliary aids, such as sign language 
interpreters, must inform the Commission in advance of those needs. 
Subject to 29 CFR 2706.150(a)(3) and Sec.  2706.160(d).

CONTACT PERSON FOR MORE INFO: Emogene Johnson (202) 434-9935/(202) 708-
9300 for TDD Relay/1-800-877-8339 for toll free.

PHONE NUMBER FOR LISTENING TO MEETING: 1 (866) 236-7472, Passcode: 678-
100.
    Authority: 5 U.S.C. 552b.

    Dated: September 22, 2023.
Sarah L. Stewart,
Deputy General Counsel.
[FR Doc. 2023-21162 Filed 9-25-23; 11:15 am]
BILLING CODE 6735-01-P
From: leealton@cox.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: leealton@cox.net

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:51:53 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 many 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,

Stuart Alton

Scottsdale, AZ 85255
Final Listing of Questionnaire Files for Steam Electric Rulemaking Record

Plant ID 07086

Removed 

from Public 

(Non-CBI) 

Docket1

Copyright 

Flag2File Name3

Description

x 07086\07086_Checklist.xls EPA Technical Review Checklist Workbook

07086\07086_Completeness_Checklist.xls EPA Completeness Review Checklist

x 07086\07086_PartA.xls Plant submitted survey file

07086\Certification Statement Plant ID_07086.pdf Plant certification statement

1

 Final reviewed survey responses are located in the Steam Electric Technical Questionnaire Database . 

2

 Copyright documents are available from the docket. 

3

 No hardcopy log is included for this plant as no hardcopy materials were received.
Before the Second Division,

August 30, 1966

No. P66/209. —

#### National Silver Co. *v.*United States, protests 62/19112, etc. (Galveston).

Kao, C.J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of knives similar in all material respects to those the subject of *National Carloading Corp.*v. *United States*(54 Cust. Ct. 178, C.D. 2529), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
EXHIBIT 32





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 Caterpillar Financial Services Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-Q for the period ended March 31, 2015 , as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the undersigned hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of our knowledge:





|    |                                                                                                                      
|--- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|(1) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

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




Date:May 1, 2015/s/Kent M. AdamsKent M. AdamsPresident, Director and Chief Executive OfficerDate:May 1, 2015/s/James A. DuensingJames A. DuensingExecutive Vice President and Chief FinancialOfficer








A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to the Company and will be retained by the Company and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
Before the Second Division,

March 31, 1966

No. P66/11.

protests 58/8718, etc. (New York).

#### G. Joannou Cycle Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of horns similar *895in all material respects to those the subject of *G. Joannou Cycle Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(46 Cust. Ct. 172, C.D. 2253), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
No. 62210.

#### Quon Quon Company *v.*United States,

protest 226516-K (Los Angeles).

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of chairs in chief value of peel or cane similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Calif-Asia Co., Ltd.*v. *United States*(39 C. C. P. A. 133, C. A. D. 475), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
<TABLE> <S> <C>


<ARTICLE>                     5
<CIK>                         0001037330                         
<NAME>                        ICON CMT CORP
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                    9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                   JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                     SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                           10,026
<SECURITIES>                          0
<RECEIVABLES>                    12,449
<ALLOWANCES>                        523
<INVENTORY>                         851
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                 26,931
<PP&E>                           17,337
<DEPRECIATION>                    3,288
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                   41,088
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>            17,502
<BONDS>                               0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                 0
<PREFERRED>                           0             
<COMMON>                             16                
<OTHER-SE>                       23,442                      
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>     41,088
<SALES>                          58,989
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                 58,989
<CGS>                            45,937
<TOTAL-COSTS>                    45,937
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                 31,832
<LOSS-PROVISION>                      0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                   68
<INCOME-PRETAX>                 (18,293)
<INCOME-TAX>                          0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                   0
<DISCONTINUED>                        0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                       0
<CHANGES>                             0
<NET-INCOME>                    (18,293)
<EPS-PRIMARY>                     (1.28)
<EPS-DILUTED>                     (1.28)
        

</TABLE>
No. 61529.

#### The Best Foods, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 301913-K (New York).

Opinion by

Donlon, J.

Plaintiff having raised no objection, the motion was granted on the ground that the protest was prematurely filed.
No. 66007.

#### Herbert A. H. Behrens, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 60/17671, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

It was stipulated that the principles herein are similar in all material respects to those involved in *United States*v. *Browne Vintners Co., Inc.*(34 C.C.P.A. 112, C.A.D. 351) and that the cases of merchandise, reported by the inspector as manifested, not found, were not in fact received by the importers. In accordance with stipulation of counsel and following the decision cited, it was held that duty is not assessable upon the cases of merchandise, which were reported by the inspector as manifested, not found. The protests were sustained to this extent.
#### The People of the State of New York, Respondent, v Marlon Dillard, Appellant.

[632 NYS2d 76]

—Judgment, Supreme Court, New York County (Joan Sudolnik, J.), rendered June 9, 1993, convicting defendant, after a jury trial, of murder in the second degree (two counts) and attempted murder in the second degree, and sentencing him to concurrent terms of 25 years to life (twice) and *81h*to 25 years, respectively, unanimously affirmed.

The prosecutor provided a good-faith foundation for her cross-examination of defendant concerning certain admissions he made to certain persons he denied knowing when, at sidebar, she identified a rebuttal witness who knew defendant as the source of the information *(People v Alamo,*23 NY2d 630, *cert denied*396 US 879). While some of the questions asked may have exceeded their proper purpose of testing credibility, in view of the overwhelming evidence of defendant’s guilt, including his distinctive appearance and the recovery of his fingerprint from the crime scene, any error in this regard was harmless *(see, People v Crimmins,*36 NY2d 230). Concur—Ellerin, J. P., Wallach, Ross, Asch and Mazzarelli, JJ.
UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-2372

MAJOR FORTSON, a/k/a Major Lee Fortson,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

BENICO H. GONZALES; FANNY A. GONZALES,

Defendants – Appellees,

and

RANDY A. SKINNER,

Trustee.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of 

South Carolina, at Anderson. Timothy M. Cain, District Judge. 

(8:12-cv-00404-TMC)

Submitted: March 28, 2013 Decided: April 1, 2013

Before NIEMEYER, KING, and KEENAN, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Major Fortson, Appellant Pro Se. Benico H. Gonzales, Fanny A. 

Gonzales, Appellees Pro Se.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.
2

PER CURIAM:

Major Fortson appeals the district court’s order 

adopting the magistrate judge’s recommendation to deny Fortson’s 

motion for judgment and to dismiss his appeal from the 

bankruptcy court’s order denying his motion to reopen. We have 

reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, 

although we grant leave to proceed in forma pauperis, we affirm 

for the reasons stated by the district court. Fortson v. 

Gonzales, No. 8:12-cv-00404-TMC (D.S.C. Oct. 23, 2012). 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
IV 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 458 

Supporting the goals and ideals of National Fishing and Boating Week. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 5, 2007 

Mr. PUTNAM submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 

Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure, and in addition to the 

Committee on Natural Resources, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions 

as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned 

RESOLUTION 

Supporting the goals and ideals of National Fishing and 

Boating Week. 

Whereas recreational boating and fishing are among this 

country’s favorite pastimes; 

Whereas each year, more than 50,000,000 Americans enjoy 

these activities; 

Whereas after years of steady growth, recreational boating 

and fishing participation rates have leveled off and declined in some States; 

Whereas stewardship of natural resources is based on valuing 

natural resources, and avid boaters and anglers are 

among those who most value the aquatic environment; 


bajohnson on PRODPC60 with BILLS
2 

•HRES 458 IH 

Whereas anglers and boaters greatly contribute to aquatic 

conservation efforts; 

Whereas the Congress passed the Sportfishing and Boating 

Safety Act of 1998 (subtitle D of title VII of Public Law 

105–178), requiring the Secretary of the Interior to implement a national outreach and communication plan to 

address participation issues associated with recreational 

fishing and boating; and 

Whereas National Fishing and Boating Week will be the 

week of June 2 through 10: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) supports the goals and ideals of National 

3 Fishing and Boating Week; and 

4 (2) urges the people of the United States to 

5 recognize such a week as an opportunity to learn 

6 more about boating. 

Æ 


bajohnson on PRODPC60 with BILLS