alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
resignation.htm




Silberstein Ungar, PLLC
CPAs and Business Advisors
phone (248) 203-0080
fax (248) 281-0940
30600 Telegraph Road, Suite 2175
Bingham Farms, MI 48025
www.sucpas.com

 January 4, 2013

Via Email
Audit Committee
Ecology Coatings, Inc.
24663 Mound Road
Warren, MI 48091

Due to the Company's inability to pay us to perform the audit, which will prevent its SEC
filings form being timely, we are resigning as your independent auditor, effective
immediately. Should you cash flow issues be solved in the future, we are open to
returning as your independent auditor.

The Company is required to file a timely 8-K to report our resignation, and we should
review the 8-K prior to its filing. We will provide you with a letter to attach to it as an
exhibit after we have reviewed the 8-K.

Sincerely,

Silberstein Ungar, PLLC


/s/Joel Ungar
Case 3:05-cv-05740-RBL Document 6 Filed 11/15/05 Page 1 of 2
Case 3:05-cv-05740-RBL Document 6 Filed 11/15/05 Page 2 of 2
From: teresa_11465@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:41:37 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,

Diep Nguyen

San Jose, CA 95111
Presidential Documents

Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 186 / Wednesday, September 27, 2023 / Presidential Documents 66671 

Presidential Determination No. 2023–11 of September 15, 2023 

Presidential Determination and Certification With Respect to 

the Child Soldiers Prevention Act of 2008 

Memorandum for the Secretary of State 

Pursuant to section 404 of the Child Soldiers Prevention Act of 2008 (22 

U.S.C. 2370c–1) (CSPA), I hereby: 

Determine that it is in the national interest of the United States to waive 

the application of the prohibition in section 404(a) of the CSPA with respect 

to Egypt; to waive in part the application of the prohibition in section 

404(a) of the CSPA with respect to Turkey to allow for the provision of 

International Military Education and Training (IMET) and Peacekeeping Operations (PKO) assistance, the issuance of direct commercial sales (DCS) licenses, and support provided pursuant to 10 U.S.C. 331 and 10 U.S.C. 

333, to the extent that the CSPA would restrict such assistance or support; 

to waive in part the application of the prohibition in section 404(a) of 

the CSPA with respect to Libya and Somalia to allow for the provision 

of IMET and PKO assistance and support provided pursuant to 10 U.S.C. 

331 and 10 U.S.C. 333, to the extent that the CSPA would restrict such 

assistance or support; to waive in part the application of the prohibition 

in section 404(a) of the CSPA with respect to the Democratic Republic 

of the Congo to allow for the provision of IMET and PKO assistance and 

the issuance of DCS licenses in connection with the reexport of transport 

aircraft, to the extent that the CSPA would restrict such assistance; to waive 

in part the application of the prohibition in section 404(a) of the CSPA 

with respect to the Central African Republic and Yemen to allow for the 

provision of IMET and PKO assistance, to the extent that the CSPA would 

restrict such assistance; and to waive the application of the prohibition 

in section 404(a) of the CSPA to allow for the issuance of DCS licenses 

related to other United States Government assistance for the above countries 

and, with respect to the Russian Federation, solely for the issuance of 

DCS licenses in connection with the International Space Station; and 

Certify that the governments of the above countries are taking effective 

and continuing steps to address the problem of child soldiers. 

Accordingly, I hereby waive such applications of section 404(a) of the CSPA. 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PRESDOC-O1
66672 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 186 / Wednesday, September 27, 2023 / Presidential Documents 

You are authorized and directed to submit this determination and certification to the Congress, along with the Memorandum of Justification, and 

to publish this determination in the Federal Register. 

THE WHITE HOUSE, 

Washington, September 15, 2023 

[FR Doc. 2023–21374 

Filed 9–26–23; 11:15 am] 

Billing code 4710–10–P 


ddrumheller on DSK120RN23PROD with PRESDOC-O1BIDEN.EPS</GPH>
From: chelseyeliza@hotmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 2:35:08 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 unborn children. No Americans should be forced by the

federal government to essentially subsidize services to which they object. 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,

Chelsey McNeil

Grayslake, IL 60030
OFFICERS

Arlanda Williams - LA

President

Stephanie Lynch – LA 

1

st Vice President

Thomas Coley, Jr. – AL

2

nd Vice President –

(Interim)

Andrea Harrison - MD

Treasurer 

Kenneth Burkhalter

Executive Secretary

REGIONAL DIRECTORS

NORTH

Helen L. Holton – MD 

SOUTH

Roderick Woullard – MS

MIDWESTERN

Frank Stewart – IL

WESTERN

Grady Prestage – TX 

GENERAL COUNSEL

Patrick O. Jefferson

PARLIAMENTARIAN

Krystal L James – TX 

PRESIDENTS EMERITUS

Robert Steele - IL

Immediate Past President

Shelia Smoot - AL

Deborah Sims – IL

Thomas “TC” Coley - AL

Joe Fuller - LA

James W. Scarborough -LA

Bobbie Steele – IL

Roy Brooks – TX

Edna Bell – MI

Earline W. Parmon – NC

Donald M. Aytch, Ph.D –LA

Thelma J. Moore – CA

Hilda Pemberton – MD

Reginald Eaves - GA

Webster J. Guillory – CA

Chuck Williams – GA

Harold Hayden – MI

Edward McIntyre – GA

July 22, 2011

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Water Docket

1200 Pennsylvania Avenue, NW

Washington, DC 20460

ATTN: Docket ID No. EPA-HQ-OW-2008-0667

Dear Administrator Jackson:

On behalf of the National Association of Black County Officials, we write 

today in regards to EPA pending proposed “cooling water intake structure” 

rule under 316(b) of the Clean Water Act. We believe the proposed rule 

will have unwarranted negative economic and energy effects on our cities 

and states. 

The proposed rule would require most electric utility and some 

manufacturing facilities that use cooling water to meet an array of new 

technology, study, monitoring and reporting requirements, even though the 

facilities have been permitted to comply with for more than three decades 

under the watchful eye of our state’s environmental regulatory agency.

EPA must modify the proposed rule to ensure that any new requirements 

imposed on a facility are necessary, feasible and will produce benefits that 

are at least commensurate with, if not greater than cost and ideally will 

produce the maximum benefits of the options available. 

Our nation is still suffering from the effects of the current recession. We 

have lost jobs and income that put our citizens, companies, state and local 

governments in financial distress. Especially in such a climate the 

economy is in the EPA needs to ensure that any new regulations are 

thoroughly necessary and produce maximum benefits to each facility to 

which the regulations apply. The proposed 316(b) rule does not meet this 

standard.

Sincerely,

Arlanda J. Williams

Arlanda J. Williams

President

National Association of Black County Officials

1090 Vermont Avenue, NW Suite 1290 Washington, DC 20005

202-350-6696 - p 202-350-6699 - f 

www.blackcountyofficials.com
Before the First Division,

December 4, 1963

No. 68146.

#### Alfred Dronge Music Corp. *v.*United States,

protests 61/7116, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, C.J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of chord organs and parts thereof similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Excelsior Accordions, Inc.*v. *United States*(48 Cust. Ct. 148, C.D. 2328), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
Stipulation Regarding Case Schedule - 1 Talmadge Law Group PLLC 

 18010 Southcenter Parkway 

 Tukwila, Washington 98188-4630 

 (206) 574-6661 (206) 575-1397 Fax 

Magistrate Judge Karen Strombom 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE 

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 

AT TACOMA 

Kevin Wehmeyer, et al., 

 Plaintiffs, 

v. 

Kitsap County, 

 Defendant. 

 

NO. 3:05-CV-05627 KLS 

STIPULATION AND ORDER 

REGARDING CASE 

SCHEDULE 

 

 On September 22, 2005, the Court issued a minute order regarding initial disclosures, 

joint status report and early settlement. The Court scheduled the deadline for a FRCP 26(f) 

conference for December 7, 2005, required the parties to exchange initial disclosures pursuant to 

FRCP 26(a)(1) by December 14, 2005, and mandated a combined joint status report and 

discovery plan as required by FRCP 26(f) and Local Rule 16 by December 21, 2005. 

 The parties have filed cross-motions for summary judgment which are scheduled for 

consideration by the Court on or about December 16, 2005. The motions are likely to be 

dispositive of the issues in the case. 

 The plaintiffs and defendant Kitsap County hereby stipulate through counsel that these 

Case 3:05-cv-05627-KLS Document 15 Filed 12/13/05 Page 1 of 3
Stipulation Regarding Case Schedule - 2 Talmadge Law Group PLLC 

 18010 Southcenter Parkway 

 Tukwila, Washington 98188-4630 

 (206) 574-6661 (206) 575-1397 Fax 

early scheduling dates are unnecessary in light of the pending motions for summary judgment. 

The parties respectfully request that the Court accept this stipulation and enter an order staying 

the scheduling dates set forth in its minute order of September 22, 2005. 

 DATED this 12th day of December, 2005. 

 

__(original signed) (original signed)______________

Philip A. Bacus, WSBA #31446 Philip A. Talmadge, WSBA #6973 

Deputy Prosecuting Attorney Anne E. Melley, WSBA #22937 

614 Division Street, MS-35A Talmadge Law Group PLLC 

Port Orchard, WA 98366 18010 Southcenter Parkway 

(360) 337-7217 Tukwila, WA 98188-4630 

Attorney for Defendant (206) 574-6661 

 Attorneys for Plaintiffs 

 The dates in the September 22, 2005 are STAYED pending this Court’s disposition of the 

parties motions for summary judgment. 

 DONE 13th day of December, 2005. 

A

Karen L. Strombom 

United States Magistrate Judge 

 

 

Case 3:05-cv-05627-KLS Document 15 Filed 12/13/05 Page 2 of 3
Stipulation Regarding Case Schedule - 3 Talmadge Law Group PLLC 

 18010 Southcenter Parkway 

 Tukwila, Washington 98188-4630 

 (206) 574-6661 (206) 575-1397 Fax 

 

Case 3:05-cv-05627-KLS Document 15 Filed 12/13/05 Page 3 of 3
From: hisunset@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 7:32:01 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

health insurance.

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

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

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

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

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

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Sheila Moersch

San Antonio, TX 78251
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff—Appellee, v. Jose RUIZ-CAMARENA, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 05-50061.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit.

Argued and Submitted July 11, 2005.

Decided July 28, 2005.

Ronald L. Cheng, Esq., Los Angeles, CA, Brett A. Sagel, Santa Ana, CA, for Plaintiff-Appellee.

Davina Chen, Los Angeles, CA, for Defendant-Appellant.

Before: FARRIS, D.W. NELSON, and 'TALLMAN, Circuit Judges.

MEMORANDUM *

Jose Ruiz-Camarena, a native and citizen of Mexico, appeals the district court’s order revoking his supervised release and sentencing him to prison for twelve months for violating its terms. On appeal, appellant challenges the validity of his underlying sentence, contending that the district court exceeded its authority when it revoked appellant’s probation because it was without authority to impose a term of supervised release in the first place. We dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction.

*United States v. Simmons*makes clear that an underlying conviction may not be collaterally attacked on direct appeal from a district court order revoking probation, emphasizing that “a court should consider the petition for probation revocation as if the underlying conviction was unquestioned.” 812 F.2d 561, 563 (9th Cir.1987). *581In so doing, *Simmons*also establishes that the district court necessarily had jurisdiction to consider a petition for revocation of probation as long as the underlying conviction has not been set aside. Id (citing *United States v. Francischine,*512 F.2d 827, 828-29 (5th Cir.1975)). The same holds true for Ruiz-Camarena’s challenge to the validity of his underlying sentence. *United States v. Gerace,*997 F.2d *1293,*1295 (9th Cir.1993) (dismissing appellant’s contention, in the context of a direct appeal from a probation revocation order, that the original sentencing court lacked authority to impose the modified sentence that it did, holding that “[a]n appeal challenging a probation revocation proceeding is not the proper avenue through which to attack the validity of the original sentence”) (citing *Simmons,*812 F.2d at 563). The proper method of challenging RuizCamarena’s underlying sentence is not on direct appeal from a probation revocation order, but on collateral review of the underlying sentence under 28 U.S.C. § 2255. Appellant’s collateral challenge to his sentence is therefore not cognizable on this appeal. *Gerace,*997 F.2d at 1295.

DISMISSED.

*

 This disposition is not appropriate for publication and may not be cited to or by the courts of this circuit except as provided by Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3.
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 46 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                      January 10, 2007.
    Resolved,  That the following named Members and Delegate be, and are hereby, 
elected to the following standing committees of the House of Representatives:
    Committee on Armed Services: Mr. Spratt, Mr. Ortiz, Mr. Taylor of 
Mississippi, Mr. Abercrombie, Mr. Meehan, Mr. Reyes, Mr. Snyder, Mr. Smith of 
Washington, Ms. Loretta Sanchez of California, Mr. McIntyre, Mrs. Tauscher, Mr. 
Brady of Pennsylvania, Mr. Andrews, Mrs. Davis of California, Mr. Langevin, Mr. 
Larsen of Washington, Mr. Cooper, Mr. Marshall, Ms. Bordallo, Mr. Udall of 
Colorado, Mr. Boren, Mr. Ellsworth, Ms. Boyda of Kansas, Mr. Patrick Murphy of 
Pennsylvania, Mr. Johnson of Georgia, Ms. Shea-Porter, Mr. Courtney, Mr. 
Loebsack, Mrs. Gillibrand, Mr. Sestak, Ms. Giffords, and Ms. Castor.
    Committee on Education and Labor: Mr. Kildee, Mr. Payne, Mr. Andrews, Mr. 
Scott of Virginia, Ms. Woolsey, Mr. Hinojosa, Mrs. McCarthy of New York, Mr. 
Tierney, Mr. Kucinich, Mr. Wu, Mr. Holt, Mrs. Davis of California, Mr. Davis of 
Illinois, Mr. Grijalva, Mr. Bishop of New York, Ms. Linda T. Sanchez of 
California, Mr. Sarbanes, Mr. Sestak, Mr. Loebsack, Ms. Hirono, Mr. Altmire, Mr. 
Yarmuth, Mr. Hare, Ms. Clarke, Mr. Courtney, and Ms. Shea-Porter.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
From: jkavanagh21@hotmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:53:15 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,

Jenny Kavanagh

Montrose, CO 81401