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

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:11:38 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

health insurance.

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

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

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

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

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

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Jane Bobitt

Cleveland, MS 38732
From: louiseya@comline.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:28:12 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,

Louise Allard

Laguna Woods, CA 92637
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE>             5
<MULTIPLIER>        1,000

<S>                                     <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                                  6-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                        DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                           JAN-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                             JUN-30-1999
<CASH>                                         21,814
<SECURITIES>                                   25,314
<RECEIVABLES>                                 355,095
<ALLOWANCES>                                  (1,427)
<INVENTORY>                                        0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               51,343
<PP&E>                                         12,772
<DEPRECIATION>                                (1,152)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                417,973
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          20,034
<BONDS>                                       277,834
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               0
<PREFERRED>                                    12,000
<COMMON>                                      125,610
<OTHER-SE>                                   (22,615)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                  417,973
<SALES>                                             0
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               17,232
<CGS>                                               0
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                   4,562
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                    0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                   47
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                             11,985
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                   638
<INCOME-TAX>                                        0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               638
<DISCONTINUED>                                      0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                     0
<CHANGES>                                           0
<NET-INCOME>                                      638
<EPS-BASIC>                                    0.06
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    0.06



</TABLE>
H. Res. 253

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

March 19, 2007.

Resolved, That the following named Member be, and is 

hereby, elected to the following standing committee of the 

House of Representatives: 

COMMITTEE ON THE BUDGET: Ms. Moore of Wisconsin. 

Attest:

Clerk.
Before the First Division,

March 31, 1966

No. P66/5.

protest 63/1227 (Los Angeles).

No. P66/6.

protests 63/20514(D) and 63/7862(C) (New York).

#### Polk’s Model Craft Hobbies, Inc. *v.*United States, Polks Model Craft Hobbies, Inc. *v.*United States,

Oliver, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of miniature motors similar in all material respects to those the subject of *James G. Wiley Co., a/c Ungar Electric Tools, Inc.*v. *United States*(49 Cust. Ct. 199, Abstract 66961), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
_______________________________________ __ 

### Michigan Supreme Court 

# Order

Lansing, Michigan



## September 9, 2008 Clifford W. Taylor, Chief Justice


## 135915 Michael F. Cavanag h Elizabeth A. Weave r Marilyn Kell y Maura D. Corriga n 

## PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN, Plaintiff-Appellee, Robert P. Young, Jr. Stephen J. Markman, J ustices



## v SC: 135915 COA: 281975 Wayne CC: 03-003196-03 LEO DENNIS GLOVER, Defendant-Appellant.

________________ _________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the January 24, 2008 order of the Court of Appeals is considered, and it is DENIED, because the defendant has failed to meet the burden of establishi ng entitlement to relief under MCR 6.508(D).

p0828 I, Corbin R. Davis, Clerk of the Mi chigan Supreme Cour t, certify that the foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

September 9, 2008

Clerk
From: nkiefer@rochester.rr.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:59:42 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,

Nora Kiefer

Pittsford, NY 14534
#### Eduardo Francisco SILVA-TORO; Marlene Silva, Petitioners v. IMMIGRATION AND NATURALIZATION SERVICE, Respondent

No. 00-71556.

I&NS Nos. [ AXX-XXX-XXX ], [ AXX-XXX-XXX ].

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Submitted June 11, 2001.*

Decided June 27, 2001.

*558Before O’SCANNLAIN, SILVERMAN, and GOULD, Circuit Judges.

*

 The panel unanimously finds this case suitable for decision without oral argument. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 34(a). Accordingly, Silva-Toro’s motion for oral argument is denied.

MEMORANDUM **

Eduardo Silva-Toro and Marlene Silva, citizens of Peru, petition for review of the final order of the Board of Immigration Appeals (“BIA”), which denied their petitions for asylum and withholding of deportation. Silva-Toro also appeals the denial of his petition for voluntary departure. The facts and prior proceedings are known to the parties; they are not restated herein except as necessary.

I

Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s decision that Silva-Toro is statutorily ineligible for asylum, because the record indicates that he assisted in the persecution of others in a particular social group. No refugee will receive asylum if he “ordered, incited, assisted, or otherwise participated in the persecution of any member on account of race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion.” 8 C.F.R. § 208.13(e)(2)(i)(E) (2000). *See Laipenieks v. INS,*750 F.2d 1427, 1431 (9th Cir.1985) (In deportation case, culpability is not limited to those who persecute others with their own hands).

II

Substantial evidence supports the BIA’s finding that Silva is ineligible for asylum, because her fear of future persecution is based on her marriage to SilvaToro, and not on a cognizable ground for asylum. One has a well-founded fear of persecution if, upon returning to her country of nationality, she would be persecuted on account of her race, religion, nationality, membership in a particular social group, or political opinion. 8 C.F.R. § 208.13(b)(2)(i)(A) (2000). Fear of purely personal retribution is not a cognizable basis for asylum. *Grava v. INS,*205 F.3d 1177, 1181 (9th Cir.2000).

III

The BIA did not abuse its discretion in denying Silva-Toro the privilege of voluntary departure given the record of his participation in the persecution of others. *See Cheo v. INS,*162 F.3d 1227, 1230 (9th Cir.1998).

PETITION DENIED.

**

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 32.2

                CERTIFICATION Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 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 March 31, 2006 (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/ Daniel C. Dunn
                                        ----------------------------------------
                                        Daniel C. Dunn
                                        Vice President, Chief Financial
                                        Officer & Secretary

May 3, 2006
From: pastormaz@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 1:46:01 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,

Miguel & Rosa Zayas

Beaverton, OR 97007
From: jkmimi245@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:39:35 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,

Jacqueline Kruger

Florham Park, NJ 07932
From: sue-taylor@comcast.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:45:57 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,

Sue Taylor

Camino, CA 95709
WELLS FARGO BANK,
      NATIONAL ASSOCIATION Logo
            Commercial Mortgage -
      Servicing
            MAC
      A0357-030P.O. Box 4036,
      Concord, Ca 945241320 Willow
      Pass Rd., Suite 300Concord, CA
      94520800
      986-9711








ANNUAL
STATEMENT AS TO COMPLIANCE
 OFFICER’S
CERTIFICATE
 
 
 
 
 Re:
                Merrill
      Lynch Mortgage Investors, Inc., Commercial Mortgage Pass-Through
      Certificates, Series 2008-C1 issued pursuant to the Pooling and Servicing
      Agreement (the“Pooling
      and Servicing Agreement”), dated as of June 1, 2008, by and among
      Merrill Lynch Mortgage Investors Inc., as depositor (the “Companion
      LoanDepositor”) and the other parties thereto (the“Companion
      LoanTransaction”)
 
 
 On behalf
of  Wells Fargo Bank, National Association, as master servicer (the
“Master
Servicer’) under that certain pooling and servicing agreement, dated as
of February 1, 2008 (the “Lead Servicing
Agreement”), by and among Morgan Stanley Capital I Inc, as depositor,
Wells Fargo Bank, National Association as Master Servicer, and the other parties
thereto, relating to Morgan Stanley Capital I Inc., Commercial Pass-through
Certificates Series 2008-TOP29, I certify to the Companion Loan Depositor that
(i) a review of the activities of the Master Servicer during the preceding
calendar year  and of its performance under the Lead Servicing
Agreement has been made under my supervision and (ii) to the best of my
knowledge, based on such review, the Master Servicer has fulfilled all its
obligations with respect to the servicing of the Apple Hotel Portfolio Companion
Loan as defined in the Pooling and Servicing Agreement (which is serviced under
the Lead Servicing Agreement but part of the trust securing the Companion Loan
Transaction) in all material respects throughout such
year.
 Wells
Fargo Bank, National Association,
 as
Master Servicer
 
 
 
 Briggs A.
Hawley
 Vice
President
 
 March 13,
2009
From: shayekim@aol.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 6:13:18 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,

Kim McCallum

Conifer, CO 80433