alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
From: mgwolfe64@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

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

Michael Wolfe

, 24065-4542
DETENTION ORDER 

18 U.S.C. § 3142(i) 

Page 1 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 

AT SEATTLE 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff, 

 v. 

LAKHWINDER JOHAL, 

 Defendant. 

NO. CR05-334-RSL 

DETENTION ORDER 

Offenses charged: 

Count 1: Conspiracy to Distribute Cocaine and Marijuana, in violation of 21 

U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 841(b)(1)(B) and 846 

Count 5: Bulk Cash Smuggling, in violation of 31 U.S.C. § 5332(a)(1) and 18 

U.S.C. § 2n of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1153, 2231(a)(1) and 2241(a)(2) 

Date of Detention Hearing: November 27, 2012. 

The Court, having conducted a detention hearing pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f), and 

based upon the factual findings and statement of reasons for detention hereafter set forth, finds: 

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DETENTION

1. Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3142(e), there is a rebuttable presumption that 

defendant is a flight risk and a danger to the community based on the nature of the pending 

charges. 
DETENTION ORDER 

18 U.S.C. § 3142(i) 

Page 2 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

JAMES P. DONOHUE 

United States Magistrate Judge 

2. Defendant has stipulated to detention due to extradiction, but reserves the right 

to contest his continued detention if there is a change in circumstances. 

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED: 

(1) Defendant shall be detained and shall be committed to the custody of the 

Attorney General for confinement in a correction facility separate, to the extent 

practicable, from persons awaiting or serving sentences or being held in custody 

pending appeal; 

(2) Defendant shall be afforded reasonable opportunity for private consultation with 

counsel; 

(3) On order of a court of the United States or on request of an attorney for the 

government, the person in charge of the corrections facility in which defendant 

is confined shall deliver the defendant to a United States Marshal for the 

purpose of an appearance in connection with a court proceeding; and 

(4) The Clerk shall direct copies of this Order to counsel for the United States, to 

counsel for the defendant, to the United States Marshal, and to the United States 

Pretrial Services Officer. 

DATED this 28th day of November, 2012. 

A
NASA LogoNTRSNTRS - NASA Technical Reports ServerSearchmore_vertCollectionsAboutNewsHelpLogin Back to ResultsCalculations of Diffuser Flows with an Anisotropic K-Epsilon ModelA newly developed anisotropic K-epsilon model is applied to calculate three axisymmetric diffuser flows with or without separation. The new model uses a quadratic stress-strain relation and satisfies the realizability conditions, i.e., it ensures both the positivity of the turbulent normal stresses and the Schwarz' inequality between any fluctuating velocities. Calculations are carried out with a finite-element method. A second-order accurate, bounded convection scheme and sufficiently fine grids are used to ensure numerical credibility of the solutions. The standard K-epsilon model is also used in order to highlight the performance of the new model. Comparison with the experimental data shows that the anisotropic K-epsilon model performs consistently better than does the standard K-epsilon model in all of the three test cases.Document ID19960011371Acquisition SourceHeadquartersDocument TypeConference PaperAuthorsZhu, J.*(NASA Lewis Research Center Cleveland, OH, United States)*Shih, T.-H.*(NASA Lewis Research Center Cleveland, OH, United States)*Date AcquiredSeptember 6, 2013Publication DateOctober 1, 1995Subject CategoryFluid Mechanics And Heat TransferReport/Patent NumberE-9988NASA-CR-198418NIPS-96-07528CMOTT-95-4ICOMP-95-21NAS 1.26:198418Meeting InformationMeeting: International Symposium on Engineering Turbulence Modeling and MeasurementsLocation: CreteCountry: GreeceStart Date: May 27, 1996End Date: May 29, 1996Accession Number96N17807Funding Number(s)PROJECT: RTOP 505-90-5KCONTRACT_GRANT: NCC3-370Distribution LimitsPublicCopyrightWork of the US Gov. Public Use Permitted.Available DownloadsNameType19960011371.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. §1350,**

**As Adopted Pursuant to**

**Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

In connection with the Quarterly Report of InfoTech USA, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-Q for the three months ended December 31, 2006, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, J. Robert Patterson, Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, Treasurer, Secretary and Director of the Company, certify, to the best of my knowledge, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §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 operations of the Company. |
|--------|-----|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

 

|   | /s/ J. Robert Patterson                                                                        |
|--------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   | J. Robert Patterson, Vice President, Chief FinancialOfficer, Treasurer, Secretary and Director |
|   |                                                                                           |
|   | Date:  February 14, 2007                                                             |
From: teesplace@frontier.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:25:17 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,

Theresa Lussi

Pagosa Springs, CO 81147
P.1 

OAR Box 1830 

Prepped by Ollie Stewart 

Document Number: 

100) IV-C-66 

Docket Number: 

A-87-11 

Printed 11/13/2008 7:20:56 AM Sheet 100 of 232 
P.2 

>S o. VXITV ? 

UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY 

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460 

*

wt° - FEE .- i486 

OFFICE OF 

AIR AND RADIATION 

Honorable D. French Slaughter 

House of Representatives 

Washington, D. C. 20515 

Dear Mr. Slaughter: 

This in response to your January 26, 1988, letter relaying 

the concerns of Mr. Arthur E. Hish, your constituent, regarding 

EPA's regulatory proposal to require onboard canisters on new 

vehicles to control refueling emissions. To assist you with 

your response, I have enclosed a copy of our proposal for your 

review. Section E (pages 31177-31182) explains EPA's overall 

rationale for proposing onboard controls. If you would like 

further details of our analysis, please contact Mr. Philip 

Carlson of the Standards Development and Support Branch of the 

Emission Control Technology Division, 2565 Plymouth Road, Ann 

Arbor, MI 48105 (FTS 374-8270 or Commercial (313) 668-4270). 

Thank you for your letter. We will place the letter from 

Mr. Hish in our public docket and fully consider his comments 

in the next phase of our rulemaking process. 

Sincerely yours, 

Richard D. Wilson 

Director, Office of Mobile Sources 

Enclosure 

cc: Docket A-87-11
From: ljones5809@aol.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 9:14:55 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 Jones

Raleigh, NC 27612
From: happywhistler1@windstream.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 10:02:50 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,

Jim Bryant

Harrison, AR 72601
From: hipalm2004@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:57:27 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,

Patty Myers

Fort Worth, TX 76107
From: smspiegel8@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:22:36 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,

MIchelle Spiegel

Mountville, PA 17554
SERVED NOVEMBER 1, 2011 

OERARTMENTOF 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION 'riAN'SPORTATiON 

OFFJCE OF HEARINGS ' ••''H'KE!' QPERATiONS 

WASHINGTON, DC 

iOi! t-nv - 2 p u: j s 

JN THE MATTER OF 

SKYWEST AIRLINES 

FAA DOCKET NO. [TO BE ASSIGNED] 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

FDMS NO. FAA-20! 1-0782 

NOTICE OF ASSIGNMENT OF PROCEEDING 

This proceeding (heretofore designated as Case No. 201ONM060081) has been assigned 

to Adrriinistrative Law Judge Richard C. Goodwin. All future pleadings and other 

communications regarding this proceeding shall be served on the Judge, the FAA Hearing 

Docket, and the other persons on the attached Service List. 

Attachment - Service List 

. ,--Ro1ifieXY35er 

Chief Administrative LawJudge 
FDMS No. FAA-2011 -0782 

(Civil Penalty Action) 

SERVICE LIST 

ORIGINAL & ONE COPY 

Federal Aviation Administration 

800 Independence Avenue, S.W. 

Washington, DC 20591 

Attention: Hearing Docket Clerk, AGC-430 

Wilbur Wright Building—Suite 2W1000' 

ONE COPY 

Todd C. Emerson, Respondent's Counsel 

Director - Government and Legal Affairs 

SkyWest Airlines 

444 South River Road 

St. George, UT 84790 

TEL: 435-634-3530 

FAX: 435-634-3505 

Kyle E. Lomazow, Complainant's Counsel 

Attorney, Office of Regional Counsel 

Northwest Mountain Region, ANM-7 

Federal Aviation Administration 

1601 Lind Avenue, S.W. 

Renton, WA 98057 

TEL: 425-227-1847 

FAX: 425-227-1007 

The Honorable Richard C. Goodwin, Administrative Law Judge 

Office of Hearings, M-20 

U.S. Department of Transportation 

1200 New Jersey Avenue, S.E. 

Washington, DC 20590 

TEL: 202-366-2139 Attorney-Advisor 

202-366-5121 Legal Assistant 

FAX: 202-366-7536 

' Service was by U.S. Mail. For service in person or by expedited courier, use the following address". Federal 

Aviation AdniinisU-alion, 600 Independence Avenue, S.W., Wilbur Wright Building—Suite 2Wi000, Wasliington, 

DC 20591; Attention: Hearing Deckel Clerk, AGC-430. 

- 2 -
No. 59244.

protests 170874-K, etc. (St. Albans).

#### C. A. Emery & Company *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of beef similar in all material respects to that the subject of *Swift & Company et al.*v. *United States*(33 Cust. Ct. 212, C. D. 1655), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.