alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
From: rstabley7@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:53:49 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,

Russ Stabley

, 33308-2430
No. 58663.

protests 228389-K, etc. (New York).

#### Dodge & Olcott, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

*254Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of camphor oil the same in all material respects as that the subject of *Orbis Products Corp.*v. *United States*30 Cust. Ct. 244, C. D. 1527), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
No. 62237.

#### C. A. Andres & Co. *v.*United States,

protest 314063-K (New York).

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

At the trial, it was agreed that the provisions of the statute and customs regulations pertaining to the assessment of duty at the reduced rate upon leather, imported to be used in the manufacture of footwear, had been complied with in connection with 5,727 skins of the shipment in issue. The claim of the plaintiff was sustained as to said 5,727 skins.
DuPont Performance Elastomers 

LaPlace, Louisiana 

Back End Process 

Emission Souces 

Source Description 

Number 

1700-25 East Wash Belt Dryer 

1700-26 West Wash Belt Dryer 

1700-27 East Hot Dryer Exhaust 

1700-28 West Hot Dryer Exhaust 

1700-45 No. 1 East Dryer Cooling Compartment 

1700-46 No. 1 West Dryer Cooling Compartment 

1700-47 No. 2 East Dryer Cooling Compartment 

1700-48 No. 2 West Dryer Cooling Compartment 

1700-53 Stripped Emulsion Storage Tank No. 1 

1700-54 Stripped Emulsion Storage Tank No. 2 

1700-55 Stripped Emulsion Storage Tank No. 3 

1700-67 Stripped Emulsion Storage Tank No. 4 

1700-68 Stripped Emulsion Storage Tank No. 5 

1700-69 Stripped Emulsion Storage Tank No. 9 

1700-70 Stripped Emulsion Storage Tank No. 11 

1700-71 Stripped Emulsion Storage Tank No. 12 

1700-72 Stripped Emulsion Storage Tank No. 15 

1700-73 Stripped Emulsion Storage Tank No. 16 
BACKEND SOURCES 

TITLE V PERMIT CONDITIONS
No. 98-10876 -1-

* 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. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-10876 Conference Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus TONY PEÑA MENDOZA, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 6:97-CR-81-2

-------------------- February 16, 2000 Before EMILIO M. GARZA, BENAVIDES, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: * Court-appointed counsel for Tony Peña Mendoza moves to withdraw as appellate counsel and has filed a brief as required by Anders v. California , 386 U.S. 738 (1967). Although Mendoza was informed by the Clerk’s Office that he was entitled to file a response to counsel’s Anders brief, he has not filed a response. Our independent review of the brief and the record discloses no nonfrivolous issues in this direct appeal. Accordingly, the motion for leave to withdraw is GRANTED, counsel is excused from further responsibilities herein, and the APPEAL IS DISMISSED.No. 98-10876 -2- 5th Cir. R. 42.2.
No. 66020.

#### W. T. Grant Co. and Micro Moisture Controls, Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 58/12376 and 58/5416 (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, C.J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of sponges similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 61191, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
No. P67/69.

No. P67/70.

#### Robert Bosch Corp. and P. W. Bellingall, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 62/15765, etc. (San Francisco).

#### Bruce Duncan Co., Inc., a/c Jack McAfee Imports, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 65/14242, etc. (Los Angeles).

Rao, C.J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of spark plugs not dedicated to use in automobiles similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Lodge Spark Plug*Co. v. *United States*(49 Cust. Ct. 158, C.D. 2379), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
Exhibit 11
Coopers & Lybrand


                       Consent of Independent Accountants



To the Trustees of Scudder Variable Life Investment Portfolio:



We consent to the incorporation by reference in Post-Effective Amendment No. 22
to the Registration Statement of Scudder Variable Life Investment Portfolio on
Form N-1A, of our report dated February 7, 1997 on our audit of the financial
statements and financial highlights of Scudder Variable Life Investment Fund,
which report is included in the Annual Report to Shareholders for the period
ended December 31, 1996 which is incorporated by reference in the Post-Effective
Amendment to the Registration Statement.



We also consent to the reference to our Firm under the caption, "Experts."


                                                   /s/Coopers & Lybrand L.L.P.
                                                   ---------------------------
Boston, Massachusetts                                 Coopers & Lybrand L.L.P.
April 25, 1997
_________________________________________ 

 

 

Order Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan 

September 24, 2007 Clifford W. Taylor,

 Chief Justice 

134121 Michael F. Cavanagh 

Elizabeth A. Weaver 

Marilyn Kelly 

Maura D. Corrigan 

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

Robert P. Young, Jr. 

Stephen J. Markman,

 Justices 

v SC: 134121 

 COA: 273296 

Wayne CC: 91-013675 

KEITH DESHAWN GUTHRIE, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

_________________________________________/ 

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the April 25, 2007 order 

of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has 

failed to meet the burden of establishing entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D). 

s0917 

I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the 

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

September 24, 2007 

 Clerk
From: cspenniman@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:33:18 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,

Craig Penniman

Gresham, OR 97080
No. 65161.

#### D. P. Harris Hardward & Mfg. Co. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 296079-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise and issues herein are similar in all material respects to those the subject of *United States*v. *Schmidt Pritchard & Co. et al.*(47 C.C.P.A. 152, C.A.D. 750), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
#### Paul L. GLOVER, Petitioner-Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 98-4021.

United States Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit.

Submitted Feb. 8, 2001.

Decided March 13, 2001.

Before MANTON, KANNE, and DIANE P. WOOD, Circuit Judges.

ORDER

The Supreme Court having reversed the judgment of this Court and remanded this case for reconsideration in light of its opinion in *Glover v. United States,*531 U.S. 198, 121 S.Ct. 696, 148 L.Ed.2d 604 (2001); it is hereby ORDERED that this case is the District Court for further proceedings consistent with the aforesaid Supreme Court opinion.

Because of the possibility of mootness, the District Court should expedite its reconsideration.
Before the Second Division,

July 29, 1958

No. 62223.

#### Salzman & Klinger, Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 388-K (A), etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that certain items of the merchandise are the same in all material respects as those the subject of *E. C. Carter & Son, Inc.*v. *United States*(38 Cust. Ct. 368, C. D. 1889), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
| Name of Entity                            | Relationship to Us                                                                                                                 | Jurisdiction of Incorporation    |
|------------------------------------------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|----------------------------------|
| Organic Region Group Limited                   | 100% owned by the Company                                                                                                          | British Virgin Islands           |
| Zhuhai Organic Region Modern Agriculture Ltd.  | 100% owned by Organic Region                                                                                                       | People’s Republic of China |
| Guangzhou Organic Region Agriculture Ltd.      | 100% owned by Organic Region                                                                                                       | People’s Republic of China |
| Fuji Sunrise International Enterprises Limited | 100% owned by Organic Region                                                                                                       | British Virgin Islands           |
| Southern International Develop Limited         | 100% owned by Organic Region                                                                                                       | British Virgin Islands           |
| HK Organic Region Limited                      | 100% owned by Organic Region                                                                                                       | Hong Kong                        |
| Guangzhou Greenland Co., Ltd.                  | 100% owned by the Company’s chief executive officer and treated as a variable interest entity controlled by the Company | People’s Republic of China |
**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 this Amendment No. 1 of the Annual Report of Forbes Energy Services Ltd. filed on Form 10-K/A (the“Company”) for the year ended December 31, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, John E. Crisp, Chief Executive Officer and President 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: 

(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 operationsof the Company. 

 

Date: April 29, 2010
From: jblanco2k3@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

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

Jo Ann Blanco

Houston, TX 77009
**Incorporation by Reference Do**  **cket ID No. EPA -**  **HQ -**  **OAR -**  **201 1**  **- 0028** 

**December 16, 2011** The contents of the following docket s are hereb y incorporated b y reference into and are considered to be included in, contained in and to have been placed in Docket EPA - HQ - OAR 2011 - 0028 ( Proposed Confidentiality Determinations for 8 Subparts ): 1) EPA - HQ - OAR - 200 9 - 0924 ( Confidential ity Determinations for Data Required Under the Mandatory

Greenhouse Gas Reporting Rule ) Accessing dockets: Publicly available docket materials are available either electronicall y through www.regulations.gov or in hard cop y at EPA’s Docket Center, Public Reading Room , EPA West Building, Room 3334, 1301 Constitution Avenue, NW , Washington, DC 20004. This Docket Facility is open from 8:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m., Monday through Friday , excluding legal holidays. The telephone number for the Public Reading Room is (202) 566 - 1 744, and the telephone number for the Air Docket is (202) 566 - 1742.
Before ti-ie Third Division,

August 30, 1966

No. P66/210. —

#### W. Kay Co., Inc. *v.*United States, protests 65/25617, 65/25618, and 65/25623 (New York).

Landis, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of cups and saucers similar in all material respects to those the subject of *W. Kay Com*pany, *Inc.*v. *United States*(53 Cust. Ct. 130, C.D. 2484), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 9
<MULTIPLIER> 1000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                            6788
<INT-BEARING-DEPOSITS>                               0
<FED-FUNDS-SOLD>                                     0
<TRADING-ASSETS>                                     0
<INVESTMENTS-HELD-FOR-SALE>                      52793
<INVESTMENTS-CARRYING>                           27139
<INVESTMENTS-MARKET>                             26947
<LOANS>                                         169832
<ALLOWANCE>                                       1786
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  263422
<DEPOSITS>                                      205770
<SHORT-TERM>                                      2402
<LIABILITIES-OTHER>                               1341
<LONG-TERM>                                      30535
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           659
<OTHER-SE>                                       22715
<TOTAL-LIABILITIES-AND-EQUITY>                  263422
<INTEREST-LOAN>                                   7052
<INTEREST-INVEST>                                 2261
<INTEREST-OTHER>                                    96
<INTEREST-TOTAL>                                  9409
<INTEREST-DEPOSIT>                                3475
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                4286
<INTEREST-INCOME-NET>                             5123
<LOAN-LOSSES>                                       99
<SECURITIES-GAINS>                                   0
<EXPENSE-OTHER>                                   3762
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   1949
<INCOME-PRE-EXTRAORDINARY>                        1949
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                      1549
<EPS-BASIC>                                      .61
<EPS-DILUTED>                                      .61
<YIELD-ACTUAL>                                    4.44
<LOANS-NON>                                        129
<LOANS-PAST>                                      1136
<LOANS-TROUBLED>                                     0
<LOANS-PROBLEM>                                   2436
<ALLOWANCE-OPEN>                                  1743
<CHARGE-OFFS>                                       92
<RECOVERIES>                                        36
<ALLOWANCE-CLOSE>                                 1786
<ALLOWANCE-DOMESTIC>                              1786
<ALLOWANCE-FOREIGN>                                  0
<ALLOWANCE-UNALLOCATED>                            645


</TABLE>
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsDecision Manifold Approximation for Physics-Based SimulationsWith the recent surge of success in big-data driven deep learning problems, many of these frameworks focus on the notion of architecture design and utilizing massive databases. However, in some scenarios massive sets of data may be difficult, and in some cases infeasible, to acquire. In this paper we discuss a trajectory-based framework that quickly learns the underlying decision manifold of binary simulation classifications while judiciously selecting exploratory target states to minimize the number of required simulations. Furthermore, we draw particular attention to the simulation prediction application idealized to the case where failures in simulations can be predicted and avoided, providing machine intelligence to novice analysts. We demonstrate this framework in various forms of simulations and discuss its efficacy.Document ID20160003613Acquisition SourceLangley Research CenterDocument TypeTechnical Memorandum (TM)AuthorsWong, Jay Ming*(Massachusetts Univ. Amherst, MA, United States)*Samareh, Jamshid A.*(NASA Langley Research Center Hampton, VA, United States)*Date AcquiredMarch 22, 2016Publication DateJanuary 1, 2016Subject CategoryCybernetics, Artificial Intelligence And RoboticsReport/Patent NumberNASA/TM-2016-219004L-20657NF1676L-23423Funding Number(s)WBS: WBS 388496.04.01.02Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightPublic Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType20160003613.pdfSTIcloud_downloadcontent_copyvisibilityRelated RecordsThere are no records associated with this record.visibility_offNo Preview Available
 No Fear Act | Freedom of Information Act | Office of the Inspector General | Agency Financial ReportsNASA Web Privacy Policy and Important Notices | NASA Guidelines for Quality of InformationDisclaimers, Copyright, Terms of Use | Accessibility | NASA OCIO | USA.gov | NASA.govContact Us | Site MapSTI LogoNASA Official: JoAnne R. Calhoun Site Curator: STI Compliance and Distribution Services Last Modified: September 12, 2024
**Exhibit
      32.2**





CERTIFICATION
      PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350


AS
      ADOPTED PURSUANT TO


SECTION
      906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002





In
      connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-QSB of Sunrise Energy
      Resources, Inc. (the “Company”) for the period ended September 30, 2006 as filed
      with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”),
      I, Roman Livson, Chief Financial 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:





(1) The
      Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of
      the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; 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:
            February 6, 2007


By:
            /s/
                Roman LivsonRoman
                LivsonChief
                Financial Officer