alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
Exhibit 5 

USCA Case #11-1131 Document #1330427 Filed: 09/19/2011 Page 1 of 6
USCA Case #11-1131 Document #1330427 Filed: 09/19/2011 Page 2 of 6
USCA Case #11-1131 Document #1330427 Filed: 09/19/2011 Page 3 of 6
USCA Case #11-1131 Document #1330427 Filed: 09/19/2011 Page 4 of 6
USCA Case #11-1131 Document #1330427 Filed: 09/19/2011 Page 5 of 6
USCA Case #11-1131 Document #1330427 Filed: 09/19/2011 Page 6 of 6
```

[Federal Register Volume 76, Number 169 (Wednesday, August 31, 2011)]
[Notices]
[Page 54196]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2011-22425]

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

COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS

Sunshine Act Notice

AGENCY: United States Commission on Civil Rights.

ACTION: Notice of meeting.

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

DATE AND TIME: Friday, September 9, 2011; 9:30 a.m. EDT.

PLACE: 624 Ninth Street, NW., Room 540, Washington, DC 20425.

Meeting Agenda

    This meeting is open to the public.

I. Approval of Agenda.
II. Approval of the August 12, 2011 Meeting Minutes.
III. Program Planning:
     Approval of Age Discrimination briefing report.
     Approval of the 2012 Enforcement Report Project Outline 
and Discovery Plan.
IV. Management and Operations:
     Staff Director's report.
     Discussion of the 2013 Budget.
     Discussion of the use of Commissioner Letterhead.
     Discussion of the 2012 Meeting Calendar.
V. State Advisory Committee Issues:
     Re-chartering the California SAC.
     Re-chartering the Georgia SAC.
VI. Adjourn.

CONTACT PERSON FOR FURTHER INFORMATION: Lenore Ostrowsky, Acting Chief, 
Public Affairs Unit (202) 376-8591.
    Hearing-impaired persons who will attend the meeting and require 
the services of a sign language interpreter should contact Pamela 
Dunston at (202) 376-8105 or at signlanguage@usccr.gov at least seven 
business days before the scheduled date of the meeting.

Kimberly A. Tolhurst,
Senior Attorney-Advisor.
[FR Doc. 2011-22425 Filed 8-29-11; 4:15 pm]
BILLING CODE 6335-01-P
```
* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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 5TH CIR. R. 47.5.4.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

 

No. 00-31351

Conference Calendar

 

GARY POCHE,

Plaintiff-Appellant,

versus

STATE OF LOUISIANA; ORLEANS PARISH DISTRICT 

ATTORNEY'S OFFICE; HARRY F. CONNICK,

Defendants-Appellees.

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

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Eastern District of Louisiana

USDC No. 00-CV-1364-D

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

October 26, 2001

Before WIENER, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Gary Poche, Louisiana inmate number 120409, appeals the

district court's judgment dismissing his civil rights complaint

as frivolous and for failure to state a claim. See 28 U.S.C.

§ 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) & (ii). Poche argues that he should have been

provided with a free copy of his criminal records under the state

public records law. This argument does not involve a

constitutional question. "Under ordinary circumstances . . . an

indigent does not have a federally-protected right to a free copy

of his transcript or other court records merely to search for
No. 00-31351

-2-

possible error in order to file a petition for collateral relief

at some future date." Colbert v. Beto, 439 F.2d 1130, 1131 (5th

Cir. 1971). 

Although Poche mentions the denial-of-due-process and

denial-of-access-to-the-courts claims he raised in the district

court, Poche has not briefed either of those claims on appeal. 

Issues which are not briefed on appeal are waived. Brinkmann v.

Dallas County Deputy Sheriff Abner, 813 F.2d 744, 748 (5th Cir.

1987). 

Poche also argues that District Attorney Connick is not

immune from suit under the Eleventh Amendment. The district

court did not consider whether District Attorney Connick is

immune from suit in determining that Poche had failed to state a

cognizable constitutional claim. 

Because the appeal is frivolous, it is DISMISSED. See

Howard v. King, 707 F.2d 215, 220 (5th Cir. 1983); 5th Cir.

R. 42.2. The dismissal of the instant appeal as frivolous and

the dismissal of the complaint as frivolous and for failure to

state a claim by the district court each count as a strike for

purposes of 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). Poche now has two strikes. See

Adepegba v. Hammons, 103 F.3d 383, 387-88 (5th Cir. 1996). We

caution Poche that once he accumulates three strikes, he will not

be permitted to proceed in forma pauperis in any civil action or

appeal filed while he is incarcerated or detained in any facility

unless he is under imminent danger of serious physical injury. 

See 28 U.S.C. § 1915(g). 

APPEAL DISMISSED; SANCTION WARNING ISSUED.
From: sekaedwards@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:54:26 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,

kathleen Edwards

Tucson, AZ 85718
03 01

08

16

11

30

35

28 27

05

11

26

34

14

31

33 36

27

20

15

22

13

18

08 07

26

09

14 13

32

18

31

06

28

25

33

06

09

15 17

30

25

35 36

04 05

16

21

25 29

32

04

24

28

12

17

01

36

21 19

03

12

29

32

26

20

02

22

27

35

10

31

10

29 30

23 19

34

34

02

07

23

33

24

22 19 20 21 23 24 19 20 24 20 21 22 21 22 23

25

22

02 01

14 16

21

32

28

06

22

05 05

10 08

22

28

27

14 18 17

32

26

05

28 26

06

29

29

04 03 03

11

15

22

25

34

35

04

09

12 07

13

23 24

35

33

17 17

26

02 03

09

20 21

27

31

07 08

23

28

33

18 16

34

16

15

28

30 29

01 03 05

10

15

32 34

08

20

29 27 28

04

13 16

35 36

27

32

10

21

30

34

09

27

33 33

11 12 08

17 15

24

27

31

10

20

30

31 32

36 32 34

19

29

21 19

36 33

20

25

04

09

29

33 34

John Day 

Basin 

Planning Area

Map Area

Prineville 

District

O R E G O N

Kimberly

Bend

John Day

* Note: Access to some areas listed as open may

require landowner permission to cross private lands

1 0 1 2 3 Miles

1 0 1 2 3 Kilometers

Map 14C Errata: Alternative 3 Travel 

Management - Rudio Mountain

R 26 E R 27 E R 28 E

R 28 E

T

11

S

T

12

S

T

10

S

T

12

S

Bureau of Land Management

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 and may

be updated without notification. 

PRINEVILLE DISTRICT

John Day Basin

Resource Management Plan

Draft Environmental Impact Statement

2008

R 27 E

 LEGEND

Seasonal Availability(Corrections)

Omitted Information

Transportation

Interim Road

Interim Road-Needs Rehabilitation

Open Road Seasonally

Open Road Seasonally- Needs Rehabilitation

Closed Road

Closed Road - Stream Function

Proposed New Road; Proposed New Road

County Road

State Highway

US Highway

Forest Service Primary Route

Forest Service Secondary Route

Private Road - Closed to public use or unknown

Administered Land

Bureau of Land Management

Private or Other

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

R 26 E

Last Modified Date: 1/6/2009 8:32:25 AM

T

10

S

T

11

S
From: rloudon@integrity.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 7:25:05 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,

Robert Loudon

Birmingham, AL 35242
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 355 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                           May 7, 2007.
Whereas the United States is a Pacific nation;
Whereas the East-West Center, as established by the United States Congress in 
        1960, contributes to a peaceful, prosperous, and just Asia Pacific 
        community by conducting cooperative research, education, and dialogue 
        programs on critical issues of common concern to the Asia Pacific region 
        and the United States;
Whereas the Pacific Islands Conference of Leaders was created in 1980 at the 
        East-West Center, which sponsors and supports this regional institution 
        through its Pacific Islands Development Program;
Whereas the Pacific Islands Conference of Leaders is the most broadly-based 
        regional cooperation institution in the Pacific, including 20 leaders 
        from both independent Pacific island nations and other Pacific 
        governments;
Whereas for the first the time in its history, through the cooperation of the 
        East-West Center, the Department of State, and Congress, the Pacific 
        Islands Conference of Leaders is convening May 7, 2007, through May 9, 
        2007, in Washington, D.C.;
Whereas the United States has maintained deep and enduring relations with the 
        peoples of the Pacific islands during times of peace and war and is 
        linked to the Pacific not only through geography but also through common 
        interest and values;
Whereas the governments of the Pacific Islands Region are key partners with the 
        United States in combating terrorism in all its forms;
Whereas the United States and the Pacific island nations can enhance their 
        cooperation in many other areas, including mutually beneficial trade and 
        economic relationships, tourism, environmental protection, maintenance 
        of fisheries, and other maritime resources, addressing climate change, 
        democracy and good governance, and combating the spread of infectious 
        diseases; and
Whereas there are increasing numbers of Americans of Pacific islander ancestry 
        making myriad contributions to America's dynamism and diversity: Now, 
        therefore, be it
    Resolved,  That the House of Representatives--
            (1) recognizes and welcomes the leaders of the Pacific Islands to 
        Washington, D.C.; and
            (2) commends the East-West Center for hosting the Pacific Islands 
        Conference of Leaders.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-30685

GLOBAL ENTERPRISES OF BAKER, L.L.C.,

Plaintiff - Appellant,

v.

CITY OF BAKER; MIKE KNAPS, Chief; CECIL DANIELS, Lieutenant;

WEST FELICIANA PARISH SHERIFF’S OFFICE; J. AUSTIN DANIEL,

Sheriff; ZACHARY POLICE DEPARTMENT; DAVID COURTNEY, Chief,

Defendants - Appellees.

Appeal from the United States District Court 

for the Middle District of Louisiana

USDC No. 3:10-CV-797

Before STEWART, Chief Judge, and DAVIS and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

In 2009, Defendants-Appellees conducted an undercover sting operation

at a hotel owned by Plaintiff-Appellant Global Enterprises of Baker, L.L.C.

(“Baker”). The police officers conducting the operation paid for their hotel rooms

and did not cause any property damage to the hotel. Baker filed suit against

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

February 6, 2013

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Pursuant to 5TH CIR. 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 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

 Case: 12-30685 Document: 00512137301 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/06/2013
No. 12-30685

Defendants-Appellees under 42 U.S.C. Section 1983 and La. C.C. art. 2315,

alleging violations of Fourteenth Amendment liberty and property interests.

Defendants-Appellees moved for summary judgment against Baker, which

the district court granted after finding Baker had not established any violations

of its liberty or property interests. Baker appealed.

After reviewing the record, the applicable statutory and case law, and the

district court’s summary judgment and reasoning, we AFFIRM the district

court’s judgment and adopt its analysis in full. 

2

 Case: 12-30685 Document: 00512137301 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/06/2013
From: willis@wpcphoto.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:56:44 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,

Willis campbell

Hilo, HI 96720
EXHIBIT 32.1



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 Cemtrex, Inc. (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended September 30, 2013, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, Saagar Govil, 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 the best of
my knowledge and belief:



(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 result of operations of the Company.



|/s/ Saagar Govil                | 
|------------------------------- | 
|                                | 
|Saagar Govil                    | 
|Chief Executive Officer         | 
|and Principal Executive Officer | 



September 26, 2014



A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906, or other document authenticating, acknowledging,
or otherwise adopting the signature that appears in typed form within the electronic version of this written statement 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.
To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:23:58 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,

David Wilcox

New Berlin, WI 53151
From: lindamath@aol.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:59:53 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 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,

Linda Johnson

Morrow, OH 45152
No. 60184.

protests 165434-K/3142, etc. (Chicago).

#### J. E. Bernard & Company, Inc. *v.*United States,

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 plaintiff was sustained.