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

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 6:55:20 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,

Susan Hite

Wilmington, NC 28405
To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 7:51:10 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,

Neil O'Sullivan

Asheville, NC 28803
T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pane l una ni m ous l yc onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l ar g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T UN I T E D S T AT E S OF AME R I C A, P l ai nt i ff

- A pp el l ee , v. JO S E L U IS R E Y N A -R O B L E S , a. k . a. Jo se R eyn a-R o b l es, D e f

e n d an t - A p p e llan t. N o. 10- 10093 D . C. N o . 4 : 0 9 - c r - 0 2 5 4 6 - RCC ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt

f orthe D i s tr i c tof

A r i z ona R ane rC . C ol l i ns , D i s tr i c tJudge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d June 15, 2011 ** B efo re: C A N B Y , O ’ S C A N N L A IN , an dF IS H E R , C i rcu i tJu d g es. J os e L ui s R e y na - R obl e s appe a l s f r om the s e nt e nc e of

13 m onths a nd one d a yim p o s e df

o llo w in g h is g u ilty - p le ac o n v ic tio n f o rr e e n trya f

te rd e p o rta tio n , in vi ol a t i on of

8 U . S . C . § 1326. W e ha ve j ur i s di c t i on unde r28 U . S . C . § 1291, a nd 

# FI LED JU N 24 2011 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS10- 10093 2 w e a f f irm . R e y n a - R o b le s c o n te n d s th a t h is s e n te n c e is s ub s tan tiv e lyu n r e a s o n ab le because he s ho ul d h ave been grant ed a departure or vari ance base d o n cul tural a s s i mi l a t i o n . I n l i g h to f th e t o t a l i tyo f

th e c i r c u ms t an c e s a n dth e 1 8 U . S. C. § 3 5 5 3 ( a ) f

a c to r s , R e y n a - R o b le s ’s s e n te n c e w ith in th e G u id e lin e s r an g e is s ub s tan tiv e lyr e a s o n ab le . See G al l v. U ni ted States , 5 5 2 U .S . 3 8 , 5 1 ( 2 0 0 7 ) . AF F I RME D.
From: mathis1689@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 6:31:36 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,

Mike Mathis

Cabot, AR 72023
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

ORDER OF DISMISSAL 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

 

J.C.,

Plaintiff,

v.

SOCIETY OF JESUS, OREGON

PROVINCE,

Defendant.

NO. C05-1662 JLR

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

The court having been notified of the settlement of this matter and it appearing that no

issue remains for the court’s determination,

IT IS ORDERED that this action and all claims asserted herein are DISMISSED with

prejudice and without costs to any party.

In the event settlement is not perfected, any party may move to reopen the case,

provided such motion is filed within 60 days of the date of this order. Any trial date and

pretrial dates previously set are hereby VACATED. 

DATED this 21st day of November, 2006.

AJAMES L. ROBART

United States District Judge 

Case 2:05-cv-01662-JLR Document 177 Filed 11/21/06 Page 1 of 1
ORDER DENYING MOTION TO PRODUCE INDEMNITY BOND; - 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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

ALLAH, a/k/a EDWIN R. COSTON,

Petitioner,

v.

KAREN BRUNSON,

Defendant.

CASE NO. C05-1480 MJP

ORDER DENYING MOTION TO 

PRODUCE INDEMNITY BOND;

DENYING MOTION TO 

VACATE/VOID JUDGMENT

THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Petitioner’s Motion to Produce Indemnity 

Bond and Motion to Vacate/Void Judgment. (Dkt. Nos. 105, 106.) Having reviewed the 

Motions and the related record, the Court DENIES both Motions. Because this case has been 

closed for fourteen years (see Dkt. No. 14), the Court is not in possession of Petitioner’s 

indemnity bond, and because Petitioner cannot amend his Petition for a Writ of Habeas Corpus 

or file a new Petition in this closed case, these Motions are not properly before the Court and 

both Motions are DENIED. 
DENYING MOTION TO VACATE/VOID JUDGMENT - 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

Marsha J. Pechman

Senior United States District Judge

The clerk is ordered to provide copies of this order to Petitioner and all counsel.

Dated April 10, 2020.

A
From: camillabarrett02@hotmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 2:25:20 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,

Camilla Barrett

Edmonds, WA 98026
| 1.   | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and |
|----------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2.   | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the consolidated financial condition of the Company as of the dates presented and the consolidated result of operations of the Company for the periods presented. |
|----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| By:    | /s/John Baumbauer                                                     |
|--------|-----------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |                                                                  |
| Name:  | John Baumbauer                                                        |
|   |                                                                  |
| Title: | Principal Executive Officer, Principal Financial Officer and Director |
|   |                                                                  |
| Date:  | July 22, 2009                                                         |
Exhibit



Exhibit 10.38



AMENDMENT NO. 1
TO
EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT
THIS AMENDMENT NO. 1 TO EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT (this “Amendment”) dated as of November 14, 2017 (the “Amendment Effective Date”), by and between Peter D. Aquino (“Executive”) and Internap Corporation, a Delaware corporation (the “Company,” and together with Executive, each, a “Party”, and collectively, the “Parties”).  
WHEREAS, the Parties entered into an Employment Agreement, dated September 12, 2016 (the “Agreement”); and
WHEREAS, the Executive and the Company wish to amend a certain provision of the Agreement as set forth herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the Executive and the Company hereby agree as follows:
1.    Section 1.1 of the Agreement is deleted in its entirety and replaced with the following:
Employment. Company agrees to employ Executive and Executive hereby accepts such employment with the Company upon the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement, for the three-year period (the “Employment Period”) beginning on September 19, 2016 (“Start Date”) and ending on September 19, 2019, unless earlier terminated by either party pursuant to ARTICLE II of this Agreement. At least ninety (90) days prior to the expiration of the Employment Period, the parties shall begin negotiations in good faith to renew this Agreement for a designated period of time. If this Agreement is renewed in accordance with this Section, each renewal period shall be included in the definition of “Employment Period” for purposes of this Agreement. If this Agreement is not renewed in accordance with this Section, (i) Executive’s employment shall terminate, and (ii) this Agreement shall no longer be in effect; provided, however, that the restrictive covenants and all post-termination obligations contained in this Agreement shall survive termination of this Agreement.
2.    Except to the extent expressly modified or amended by this Amendment, all terms and provisions of the Agreement shall continue in full force and effect and shall remain enforceable and binding in accordance with their respective terms. 
3.    This Amendment may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which together shall be deemed to be one and the same agreement. A signed copy of this Amendment delivered by facsimile, e-mail or other means of electronic transmission shall be deemed to have the same legal effect as delivery of an original signed copy of this Amendment.













IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Amendment as of the Amendment Effective Date.




COMPANY:


INTERNAP CORPORATION






/s/ Daniel C. Stanzione
Name: Daniel C. Stanzione
Title:  Chairman of the Board of Directors








EXECUTIVE:






/s/ Peter D. Aquino
Peter D. Aquino




















Signature Page to Amendment No. 1 to Employment Agreement
From: jpere@familylife.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:53:25 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,

Joe Pere'

Roland, AR 72135
Case 2:02-cv-01683-TSZ-MAT Document 174-6 Filed 09/20/04 Page 1 of 2
Case 2:02-cv-01683-TSZ-MAT Document 174-6 Filed 09/20/04 Page 2 of 2
From: aldridgebrian@sbcglobal.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 7:36:46 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,

Brian Aldridge

Wheaton, IL 60187
Document headings vary by document type but may contain
                    the following: the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document
the number of the CFR title and the number of each part
                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly
                      related to
the agency docket number / agency internal file number
the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in
                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory
                      Actions See the
                    Document Drafting Handbook
                    for more details.
 Department of Health and Human Services Health Resources and Services Administration
 AGENCY: Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA), Department of Health and Human Services.
 ACTION: Notice of supplemental award.
 SUMMARY: In fiscal year (FY) 2023, HRSA will provide supplemental funds to continue to provide technical assistance to pediatric primary care providers nationwide to connect them with Pediatric Mental Health Care Access (PMHCA) programs in their areas and to increase their capacity to provide pediatric mental and behavioral health care services.
 FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Lauren Ramos, Director, Division of Maternal and Child Health Workforce Development, Maternal and Child Health Bureau, Health Resources and Services Administration, at 
                        *LRamos@hrsa.gov*
                         and 301-443-6091.


SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:  *Intended Recipient of the Award:*
                     The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP), as the sole recipient under HRSA-23-074. *Amount of Non-Competitive Award:*
                     One award for $2,000,000. Supplemental funding for similar activities may be considered in FYs 2024 and 2025, subject to availability of funding for the activity and satisfactory performance of the recipient. *Project Period:*
                     September 30, 2023, to September 29, 2024. *CFDA Number:*
                     93.110. *Award Instrument:*
                     Supplement for Services. *Authority:*42 U.S.C. 254c-19 (§ 330M of the Public Health Service Act), as amended by Section 11005 of the Bipartisan Safer Communities Act (Pub. L. 117-159)). Table 1—Recipients and Award Amounts
Grant No.
Award recipient name
City, state
Award amountU04MC31627
American Academy of Pediatrics
Itasca, IL
$2,000,000
 *Justification:*
                     Congress provided additional appropriations for the PMHCA program in FY 2022 that have allowed existing PMHCA projects to enhance workforce capacity to address the growing behavioral health needs among children and adolescents. This supplemental funding will support continued expansion of the reach and capacity of PMHCA programs in providing training and tele-consult support to pediatric primary care providers. Carole Johnson, Administrator.


[FR Doc. 2023-21485 Filed 9-28-23; 8:45 am] BILLING CODE 4165-15-P