alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
From: ckc1152@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 6:58:06 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

health insurance.

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

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

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

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

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

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Carol Chin

,
From: puknbear@msn.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:09:25 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,

Paul & Robin Mueller

Papillion, NE 68046
From: tim_z32@hotmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:25:56 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

health insurance.

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

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

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

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

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

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Tim Widdowson

Marcus Hook, PA 19061
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 446 Introduced in House (IH)]

110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 446

Honoring the life and accomplishments of Astronaut Walter Marty Schirra 
               and expressing condolences on his passing.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                              May 24, 2007

 Mr. Bilbray (for himself, Mr. Calvert, Mr. Udall of Colorado, and Mr. 
  Issa) submitted the following resolution; which was referred to the 
                  Committee on Science and Technology

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
Honoring the life and accomplishments of Astronaut Walter Marty Schirra 
               and expressing condolences on his passing.

Whereas Walter Schirra was born on March 12, 1923, in Hackensack, New Jersey;
Whereas as an exchange pilot with the 154th Fighter Bomber Squadron during the 
        Korean War, he flew 90 combat missions in F-84E jets and was credited 
        with downing at least one MIG fighter;
Whereas on October 3, 1962, Walter Schirra became the fifth person to fly in 
        space when he piloted Mercury 8 (Sigma 7) on a six-orbit mission lasting 
        9 hours, 13 minutes and 11 seconds;
Whereas on December 15, 1965, Walter Schirra piloted Gemini 6A in what was the 
        first attempted rendezvous by two manned spacecraft in earth orbit;
Whereas on October 11, 1968, he concluded his third and final mission when he 
        was launched as commander of Apollo 7, the first manned Apollo mission, 
        making Commander Schirra the only astronaut to fly aboard Mercury, 
        Gemini and Apollo spacecrafts;
Whereas Commander Schirra was the recipient of many distinguished awards, 
        including three distinguished flying crosses, two air medals, two NASA 
        Distinguished Services Medals and induction into the National Aviation 
        Hall of Fame;
Whereas after he retired to San Diego in 1984, Wally dedicated much of his later 
        years to working with children on connecting them to the amazing 
        possibilities that a career on space exploration could provide, and as a 
        tireless advocate for discovery, Wally was an inspirational figure for 
        countless San Diegans; and
Whereas Commander Schirra was an exemplary resident of the State of California 
        where he resided in La Jolla until the time of his death on May 2, 2007: 
        Now, therefore, be it
    Resolved,  That the House of Representatives--
            (1) honors the life and accomplishments of Astronaut Walter 
        Marty Schirra and expresses condolences on his passing; and
            (2) recognizes the profound importance of Astronaut 
        Schirra's record as a pioneer in space exploration and long-
        time contributor to NASA's mission as a catalyst to space 
        exploration and scientific advancement in the United States.
                                 <all>
```
01 

02

03

04

05

06

07

08

09

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

DETENTION ORDER 15.13

18 U.S.C. § 3142(i) Rev. 1/91

PAGE 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v. 

MICHAEL PLEICH,

Defendant.

____________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. CR05-231-JCC

DETENTION ORDER 

Offenses charged:

Count 31: Felon in possession of ammunition in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1).

Count 32: Felon in possession of firearm in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1).

Date of Detention Hearing: November 4, 2005.

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) Defendant is is viewed as a flight risk because of the following:

(a) dual citizenship between Canada and the United States; 

(b) a history of failure to appear on multiple occasions;

(c) he is currently unemployed;

(d) no strong family ties to the Western District of Washington; and

Case 2:05-cr-00231-JCC Document 613 Filed 11/07/05 Page 1 of 2
01 

02

03

04

05

06

07

08

09

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

DETENTION ORDER 15.13

18 U.S.C. § 3142(i) Rev. 1/91

PAGE 2

(e) alcohol abuse problems.

(2) Defendant is viewed as a risk of danger due to the nature of the instant offense

and his criminal-background history.

(3) There appear to be no conditions or combination of conditions that will

reasonably assure the defendant’s appearance at future Court hearings and that will address the

danger to other persons or the community.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED:

(1) Defendant shall be detained pending trial and 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 7th day of November, 2005.

AJAMES P. DONOHUE

United States Magistrate Judge 

Case 2:05-cr-00231-JCC Document 613 Filed 11/07/05 Page 2 of 2
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0001037115
<NAME> ORBIT/FR INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> U.S. DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             APR-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               JUN-30-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                      1
<CASH>                                          10,277
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                    4,293
<ALLOWANCES>                                       491
<INVENTORY>                                      2,214
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                20,231
<PP&E>                                           1,136
<DEPRECIATION>                                   1,520
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  22,628
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                            8,401
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                               61
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                             0
<OTHER-SE>                                      14,166
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    22,268
<SALES>                                          2,816
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                 2,816
<CGS>                                            2,423
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    2,423
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  (705)
<INCOME-TAX>                                     (246)
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              (459)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     (459)
<EPS-BASIC>                                      (.08)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                    (.08)


</TABLE>
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM PACIFIC
SUNWEAR OF CALIFORNIA, INC.'S FORM 10-Q FOR THE QUARTERLY PERIOD ENDED NOVEMBER
1, 1998, AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO SUCH FORM 10-Q.
</LEGEND>
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-31-1999
<PERIOD-START>                             AUG-03-1998
<PERIOD-END>                               NOV-01-1998
<CASH>                                      10,885,055
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                1,661,913
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                 49,487,931
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                            69,478,102
<PP&E>                                      89,265,955
<DEPRECIATION>                             (24,585,673)
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                             144,569,225
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                       18,714,811
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                       210,704
<OTHER-SE>                                 117,528,207
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>               144,569,225
<SALES>                                     91,778,786
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                            91,778,786
<CGS>                                       59,142,689
<TOTAL-COSTS>                               19,422,592
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                            (237,146)
<INCOME-PRETAX>                             13,450,651
<INCOME-TAX>                                 5,313,000
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                          8,137,651
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                 8,137,651
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.39
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.38
        

</TABLE>
#### UNITED STATES of America; John Ashcroft, Plaintiffs-Appellees, v. Douglas Alan JARVIS, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 01-6821.

United States Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit.

Submitted June 20, 2001.

Decided June 28, 2001.

Douglas Alan Jarvis, pro se.

Laura Marie Everhart, Assistant United States Attorney, Norfolk, VA, for appellees.

Before WIDENER, LUTTIG, and WILLIAMS, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM.

Douglas Alan Jarvis appeals the district court’s order denying his “Motion to Reconsider Transfer Order,” construed as a motion for reconsideration of the district court’s order construing his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (1994) petition as a 28 U.S.C.A. § 2255 (West Supp.2000) motion, and dismissing it without prejudice as successive. We have reviewed the record and the district court’s order and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm on the reasoning of the district court. *See United States v. Jarvis,*Nos. CR-91-70 N; CA-91-235-2 (E.D.Va. Apr. 27, 2001). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

*AFFIRMED.*
<PAGE>
Exhibit 99.2

                           CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
                 SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002,
                             18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350

     In connection with the Quarterly Report of Alkermes, Inc. (the "Company")
on Form 10-Q for the period ending June 30, 2002 as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), I, James M. Frates,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, 18 U.S.C. section 1350 that, to my knowledge:

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

     2. The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and result of operations of the
Company.

                                        /s/ James M. Frates
                                        James M. Frates
                                        Chief Financial Officer
                                        August 14, 2002
EXHIBIT 32.1

                            SECTION 906 CERTIFICATION



<PAGE>



                                  Exhibit 32.1



                  CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL 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 the  accompanying  annual  report on Form  10-K of  Bedrock
Energy,  Inc.  for the year ended  December  31,  2009,  I, W.  Edward  Nichols,
President, Chief Executive Officer, Secretary,  Chairman and Principal Executive
Officer of Bedrock Energy,  Inc.,  hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C.  Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the  Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002, to
my knowledge, that:

a)   such annual report on Form 10-K of Bedrock Energy,  Inc. for the year ended
     December 31, 2009, fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
     15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and

b)   the  information  contained  in such annual  report on Form 10-K of Bedrock
     Energy, Inc. for the year ended December 31, 2009, fairly presents,  in all
     material  respects,  the  financial  condition and results of operations of
     Bedrock Energy, Inc.


Date:  March 29, 2010


                                          /s/ W. Edward Nichols
                                              -----------------
                                              W. Edward Nichols, President
                                              Chief Executive Officer.
                                              Secretary and Chairman
                                             (Principal Executive Officer)

This  certification  accompanies  the  Report  pursuant  to  Section  906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002 and shall not,  except to the extent required by the
Sarbanes-Oxley  Act of 2002,  be deemed  filed by the  Company  for  purposes of
Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended.
#### Larry R. JAMES, Petitioner, v. DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY, Respondent.

No. 00-3321.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

April 6, 2001.

Before RADER, SCHALL, and LINN, Circuit Judges.

JUDGMENT

PER CURIAM.

This CAUSE having been heard and considered it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED:

AFFIRMED. *See*Fed. Cir. R. 36.
From: jhd31356@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 7:40:52 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,

Janice Dixon

Providence, UT 84332