alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
From: davidp1164@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: davidp1164@yahoo.com

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 6:04:33 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,

David Paliotta

East Syracuse, NY 13057
From: shhhoop@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:21:50 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,

Michele Hooper

Mandeville, LA 70470
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title: Motorvehicle use map. Evanston-Mt. View Ranger District, Uinta-Wasatch-CacheNational Forest, Utah**
 
2015 | 2016| 2018
 
SuDoc Number:A 13.28:UI 5/16/
Item Number:0080-G (online)
CGP systemNumber: 000962166
 
July 17, 2018
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

27

28 ORDER - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

THOMAS A. WEBER, 

Plaintiff,

v.

TIME WARNER, INC., et al.,

Defendants.

Case No. C05-1706L

ORDER REGARDING PLAINTIFF’S

REQUEST FOR AN ORDER

REGARDING INITIAL DISCLOSURES

This matter comes before the Court on “Plaintiff’s Request for an Order Regarding Initial

Disclosures, Joint Status Report & Early Settlement.” (Dkt. #43). United States Magistrate

Judge Monica J. Benton issued an order in this case regarding initial disclosures, joint status

report, and early settlement on October 17, 2005; the order included deadlines for the parties to

follow. (Dkt. #4, the “Order”). The parties have not filed a joint status report as required by the

Order. Accordingly, the parties are ORDERED to comply with the requirements in the Order,

including filing a joint status report, by January 6, 2006. Failure to file a joint status report by 

Case 2:05-cv-01706-RSL Document 44 Filed 12/21/05 Page 1 of 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

27

28 ORDER - 2

that date may result in the imposition of sanctions. 

DATED this 21st day of December, 2005.

A

Robert S. Lasnik

United States District Judge

Case 2:05-cv-01706-RSL Document 44 Filed 12/21/05 Page 2 of 2
IV 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 503 

Commending the Middle East Investment Initiative. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

JUNE 20, 2007 

Mr. BAIRD (for himself and Mr. SHAYS) submitted the following resolution; 

which was referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs 

RESOLUTION 

Commending the Middle East Investment Initiative. 

Whereas economic development enhances peace, security, and 

prosperity in the Palestinian areas of Gaza and the West 

Bank and is essential to the well-being of people throughout the Middle East and the prospects for regional peace; 

Whereas small- and medium-sized enterprises (SMEs) make 

up 90 percent of the registered Palestinian businesses; 

Whereas the MEII has instituted anti-terrorism procedures to 

ensure that beneficiaries are not connected with terror 

groups or acts of terror; 

Whereas studies suggest that creation of a loan guarantee facility of sufficient scale could increase employment by 

400 percent for small enterprises and 240 percent for 

medium enterprises; 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
2 

•HRES 503 IH 

Whereas the Middle East Investment Initiative (MEII) is a 

loan guarantee program created to increase access to financing, technical assistance, and market information for 

Palestinian entrepreneurs; 

Whereas the MEII is a 501(c)(3) non-profit corporation supported by an international public private partnership including Palestinian, American, and European partners; 

Whereas the MEII was established by the Aspen Institute’s 

Middle East Strategy Group working with the Palestinian 

Investment Fund and the Overseas Private Investment 

Corporation; 

Whereas the MEII is working with the West Bank and Gaza 

Political Risk Insurance Project (a project under the 

Clinton Global Initiative) and the British Based Portland 

Trust; and 

Whereas the Palestinian Investment Fund has committed 

$50,000,000 in guarantee funds while the Overseas Private Investment Corporation is providing $110,000,000 

in guarantee funds: Now, therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That the House of Representatives— 

2 (1) commends the MEII and its contributors 

3 for their vision and initiative; 

4 (2) believes that improved economic activity can 

5 help bring about regional stability and peace; 

6 (3) encourages the active participation and con7 tributions of individuals, public and private institu8 tions, and foreign governments in supporting the 

9 MEII; and 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
3 

•HRES 503 IH 

1 (4) pledges support for the MEII and other ef2 forts to stimulate the economy of the Palestinian 

3 people. 

Æ 


rwilkins on PROD1PC63 with BILLS
(R.D. 11524)

#### Samuel Shapiro & Co., Inc. *v.*United States

Entry No. 7911.

(Decided May 23, 1968)

*Sharp, Solter <& Hutchison*for the plaintiff.

*Edwin L. Weisl, Jr.,*Assistant Attorney General, for the defendant.

Rao, Chief Judge:

This appeal for reappraisement has been submitted for decision upon the following stipulation:

> _ IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED by the undersigned, subject to the approval of the Court:

> 1. That the subject merchandise consists of hardboard exported froan Sweden as to which the Secretary of the Treasury issued a finding of dumping, published in 89 TD 197, TD 53567, made pursuant to the Antidumping Act of 1921 (19 U.S.C., 160, et seq.).

> 2. That pursuant to Section 168 of said Antidumping Act, the appraiser reported the purchase price (Sec. 162) and the foreign market value (Sec. 164) as to the merchandise listed on Schedule A attached hereto and made a part hereof.

> 3. That pursuant to Sections 500 and 402 of the Tariff Act of 1930 as amended, the appraiser appraised all of the merchandise in the appeals for appraisement enumerated on Schedule A for regular duty purposes.

> 4. That the plaintiff duly filed appeals for reappraisement as to the values referred to in the above paragraphs Nos. 2 and 3.

> 5. That at the time relevant herein the purchase price and the foreign market value under the said Antidumping Act are as specified in the aforesaid Schedule A attached hereto.

> 6. That as to all other items of merchandise not identified on Schedule A, the appraiser’s reports of purchase price and of foreign market value are correct.

> 7. That the appraiser’s findings of value under the provisions of Section 402 of the Tariff Act of 1930 as amended, are correct.

> 8. That said appeals are submitted for decision upon this stipulation and said Schedule A.

Upon the agreed facts, I find foreign market value, as defined in section 164 of the Antidumping Act of 1921 (19 U.S.C. §164), for the merchandise described in schedule A, annexed to this decision and made a part hereof, and the purchase price thereof, within section 162 of said act (19 U.S.C. § 162), to be as indicated in said schedule. As to all other items of merchandise not identified in schedule A, I *871find tlie foreign market values and purchase prices to be as reported by the appraiser. In all other respects, the values of all merchandise are as returned by the appraiser.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
From: surftheword@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:05:52 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,

bob morton

Ventura, CA 93001
July 18, 1958

No. 62189.

Suit 4939.

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

C. D. 1902 reversed May 23, 1958. C. A. D. 683.
D.Dixon

GIS/Data Service Specialist

01/19/2011

35

12 8 7 8 9 10 11

31 32 33 34 35 36 31

3

33 34 36 31 32

6 2 1

3

4 5 2 1 6

7

6 5 4

10 11 12 7

10

9

9

8

7 8

7

11 12

18 13

13

14

14

15

15

16

16

17

17

18

18

23 24 19

23 24

22

22

21

21

19 20

19 20

25 30 26

26 25

27

27

29 28 30

30 29 28

35 36 31

36

31

35

34

34

33 32

31 32 33

6 2 1

1 6 3

2 3

4

4

5

5 6

7

10 11 12 9

Asotin Creek

Wenatchee Creek

WICKIUP CG

WENATCHEE

GUARD

STATION RC

CABIN SADDLE CG INDIAN

TOM TH

CLOVERLAND SP

South George Project Planning Area - Inventory of Potential Wilderness Areas

H-2

1 0.5 0 1 Miles

LEGEND

South George Project Planning Area

Washington State Fish and Wildlife

Pomeroy Ranger District

Inventoried Roadless Area (IRA)

Wenaha-Tucannon Wilderness

Past Harvest

Recreation Feature

Forest Roads

Map H-2: Removal of Past Timber Harvest Area

Depicts Pomeroy Ranger District's

past harvest and Inventoried Roadless Areas.

Past harvest areas where logging and

roads are evident will be removed from

further examination per (FSH 1909.12 71.11(9)).

 ́

This product is reproduced from geospatial information prepared by the U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Forest Service. GIS data and product accuracy may vary. They may be: developed from

sources of differing accuracy, interpretation, incomplete while being created or revised, etc.

Using GIS products for purposes other than those for which they were created may yield inaccurate

or misleading results. The Forest Service reserves the right ot correct, update, modify, or replace GIS

products without notification. For more information contact the Umatilla National Forest Supervisors Office.

D.Dixon

GIS/Data Service Specialist

06/03/2011

4300

4304

4400
From: bevan@hardingfele.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:02:09 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,

Bevan Wulfenstein

Provo, UT 84604
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
       
<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   3-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          SEP-30-1997
<PERIOD-START>                             OCT-01-1996
<PERIOD-END>                               DEC-31-1996
<CASH>                                          15,169
<SECURITIES>                                     7,173
<RECEIVABLES>                                   23,466
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     12,334
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                 2,476
<PP&E>                                           5,067
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  65,685
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           21,513
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                           140
<OTHER-SE>                                      44,032
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    65,685
<SALES>                                         36,188
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                                36,188
<CGS>                                           31,503
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    4,675
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                   156
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                   0
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                    166
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                                  0
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                       166
<EPS-PRIMARY>                                     0.01
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.01
        

</TABLE>
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

27

28 Page 1 ORDER- [C05-5629FDB]

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

THOMAS C. WEST,

Plaintiff,

vs.

JO ANNE B. BARNHART,

Commissioner of Social Security,

Defendant

Civil No. C05-5629FDB

ORDER

 Based on the stipulation of the parties, it is hereby ORDERED that the above-captioned

case be reversed and remanded for further administrative proceedings, including the following: the

administrative law judge (ALJ) will re-evaluate the medical source evidence, in particular, the

opinions of Dr. Colkitt, Dr. Neims, Dr. Velmer, and Dr. Lewis; re-evaluate Plaintiff's credibility;

re-evaluate Plaintiff's residual functional capacity; and, if warranted by the expanded record,

obtain supplemental vocational expert testimony. 

Case 3:05-cv-05629-FDB Document 19 Filed 03/20/06 Page 1 of 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

27

28 Page 2 ORDER- [C05-5629FDB]

This remand is pursuant to sentence four of 42 U.S.C. § 405(g). Upon proper

presentation, this Court will consider Plaintiff's application for costs and attorney's fees under 28

U.S.C. § 2412(d) and 42 U.S.C. § 406(b).

 DATED this 20th day of March 2006. A FRANKLIN D. BURGESS

 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Recommended for Entry:

/s/ J. Kelley Arnold____________________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

Presented by:

s/ Thomas M. Elsberry 

THOMAS M. ELSBERRY WSB # 26456

Special Assistant U.S. Attorney

Attorney for Defendant

701 Fifth Ave, Ste 2900, M/S 901

Phone: 206-615-2112

Fax: 206-615-2531

thomas.elsberry@ssa.gov

Case 3:05-cv-05629-FDB Document 19 Filed 03/20/06 Page 2 of 2
From: kjmiller11@msn.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:33:31 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,

Kendall Miller

King George, VA 22485