alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
From: susanam.hernandez@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:30:25 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,

Susan Hernandez

La Verne, CA 91750
Exhibit No. 32.1


HPC Acquisitions, Inc.
 File No.  000-53248





Certification 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 Annual Report of HPC Acquisitions, Inc. (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2009 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Craig S. Laughlin, Chief Executive and Financial Officer of the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:





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





(2)
the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.









Dated: March 3, 2010

By: /s/ Craig S. LaughlinCraig S. LaughlinChief Executive andChief Financial Officer










A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to HPC Acquisitions, Inc. and will be retained by HPC Acquisitions, Inc. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
(R.D. 11530)

#### Alaska Steel Co. Geo. S. Bush & Co., Inc. *v.*United States

Entry No. 4921.

(Decided May 23, 1968)

*Glad <£ Tuttle*for the plaintiffs.

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

*877LaNdis, Judge:

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

> IT IS HEREBY STIPULATED AND AGREED, by and between the parties hereto, subject to the approval of the court, as follows:

> 1. That the appeal for reappraisement set forth in Schedule “A” hereto attached and made a part hereof covers merchandise entered or withdrawn from Customs warehouse for consumption after the effective date of the Customs Simplification Act of 1956, and was therefore appraised under Section 402(b) of the Simplification Act of 1956, Public Law 927, 84th Congress, 2nd Session; said merchandise not being identified in the final list published in T.D. 54521.

> 2._ That as to the merchandise marked “A” in green ink and initialed GKY by Commodity Specialist G. K. Yamauchi, at the time of exportation to the United States, the prices at which such or similar merchandise was freely sold or offered for sale in the principal markets of Japan, in the usual wholesale quantities and in the ordinary course of trade, for exportation to the United States, were at the invoiced unit values, net packed, or plus packing where packing is listed separately on the invoices as not being included in the entered unit values.

3. That the appeal for reappraisement set forth in Schedule “A”, is submitted on this stipulation.

Accepting this stipulation as a statement of facts, I find and hold that export value, as defined in section 402(b) of the Tariff Act of 1930, as amended by the Customs Simplification Act of 1956 (T.D. 54165), is the proper basis for determining value of the merchandise marked with the letter “A” and with the initials of the commodity specialist on the invoices covered by the entry in this reappraisement, and that such value is the invoice unit value, net packed, or plus packing if the packing is listed separately on the invoices as not being included in the entered unit value.

In all other respects and as to all other merchandise, this appeal for reappraisement is dismissed.

Judgment will be entered accordingly.
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

Page - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

WILLIAM D. BURKETT,

Petitioner,

v.

MAGGIE MILLER-STOUT,

Respondent.

Case No. C05-5612FDB

ORDER GRANTING I.F.P.

 APPLICATION

Petitioner's application for leave to proceed in forma pauperis is GRANTED. Petitioner does not

appear to have funds available to afford the $5.00 filing fee.

The Clerk is directed to mail a copy of this Order to petitioner.

DATED this 28th day of September, 2005.

_/s/ J. Kelley Arnold_______ J. Kelley Arnold

United States Magistrate Judge 

Case 3:05-cv-05612-FDB Document 4 Filed 09/28/2005 Page 1 of 1

Burkett v. Miller-Stout Doc. 4

Dockets.Justia.com
##### 



EXHIBIT 99.2

CERTIFICATION 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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of SPARTA, Inc. (the
Company) for the period ended June 29, 2003, as filed with the Securities and
Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, David E. Schreiman,
Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section
1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002,
that:



| | (1) |  | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or
15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and                               
| | --- |  | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
|
| | (2) |  | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all
material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of
the Company.

August 11, 2003

/s/ David E. Schreiman
David E. Schreiman
Chief Financial Officer
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

JOHN HENRY DAVIS, )

)

Petitioner, ) Case No. C05-1741-TDM-JPD

)

v. )

)

)

DOUG WADDINGTON, ) ORDER DISMISSING § 2254 

) PETITION WITHOUT PREJUDICE

Respondent. )

____________________________________)

The Court, having reviewed petitioner’s writ of habeas corpus petition pursuant to 28 U.S.C.

§ 2254, the Report and Recommendation of the Honorable James P. Donohue, United States

Magistrate Judge, and the balance of the record, does hereby find and ORDER:

(1) The Court adopts the Report and Recommendation.

(2) Petitioner’s § 2254 petition (Dkt. Nos. 1 and 6) is DENIED, and this action is

DISMISSED without prejudice. 

(3) Petitioner’s motion (Dkt. Nos. 16 and 18) for appointment of counsel is DENIED as

moot.

(4) The Clerk is directed to send a copy of this Order to petitioner and to Magistrate Judge

James P. Donohue.

DATED this 16th day of June, 2006.

A

RICARDO S. MARTINEZ

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 

Case 2:05-cv-01741-RSM Document 22 Filed 06/16/06 Page 1 of 1
<TABLE> <S> <C>



<ARTICLE> 5
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                            DEC-31-1998
<PERIOD-START>                               JAN-01-1998
<PERIOD-END>                                 SEP-30-1998
<CASH>                                            36,721
<SECURITIES>                                           0
<RECEIVABLES>                                      8,424
<ALLOWANCES>                                           0
<INVENTORY>                                       17,901
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                  78,377
<PP&E>                                           615,915
<DEPRECIATION>                                   120,629
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                   627,888
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                             65,283
<BONDS>                                           39,224
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                  0
<PREFERRED>                                            0
<COMMON>                                             749
<OTHER-SE>                                       512,787
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                     627,888
<SALES>                                          998,492
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               1,007,165
<CGS>                                            390,125
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                    838,654
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                       0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                       0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 1,070
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                  110,576
<INCOME-TAX>                                      39,255
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                               71,321
<DISCONTINUED>                                         0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                        0
<CHANGES>                                          4,880
<NET-INCOME>                                      66,441
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.90
<EPS-DILUTED>                                       0.88


</TABLE>
From: gm28gil@ptd.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 8:15:32 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,

Mary Gilbert

Lititz, PA 17543
#### In the Matter of the Claim of Saundra Joyner, Appellant. John E. Sweeney, as Commissioner of Labor, Respondent.

[632 NYS2d 328]

—Appeal from a decision of the Unemployment Insurance Appeal Board, filed May 23, 1994, which, *inter alia,*ruled that claimant was ineligible to receive unemployment insurance benefits because she did not file a valid original claim for benefits.

Claimant applied for unemployment insurance benefits after the cessation of her alleged employment as an accountant’s assistant. Although claimant was initially awarded benefits, she was subsequently deemed ineligible on the basis that her employment was not bona fide. Upon review of the record, we find that substantial evidence supports the Board’s decision. Claimant listed her daughter’s address as her employer’s address on the claim form and was unable to provide any information as to her employer’s telephone number, current address or clientele. In addition, although given the opportunity, claimant failed to produce any witnesses at the hearing who could substantiate her alleged employment. There is also substantial evidence to support the Board’s conclusion that the overpayments claimant received were recoverable and that she *919made willful false statements. In view of the foregoing, we find no reason to disturb the Board’s decision.

Cardona, P. J., Mercure, White, Yesawich Jr. and Spain, JJ., concur. Ordered that the decision is affirmed, without costs.
<PAGE>

                                                                    Exhibit 99.1

               CERTIFICATION 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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of BJ's Wholesale
Club, Inc. (the "Company") for the period ended November 2, 2002 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, Michael T. Wedge, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby
certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

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

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

Dated: December 17, 2002                    /s/ MICHAEL T. WEDGE
       ------------------                   -----------------------
                                            Michael T. Wedge
                                            Chief Executive Officer





               CERTIFICATION 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 Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of BJ's Wholesale
Club, Inc. (the "Company") for the period ended November 2, 2002 as filed with
the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), the
undersigned, Frank D. Forward, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, hereby
certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, that:

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

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

Dated: December 17, 2002                    /s/ FRANK D. FORWARD
       ------------------                   --------------------------
                                            Frank D. Forward
                                            Chief Financial Officer
Exhibit 32.2

CERTIFICATION BY CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER

Pursuant To 18 U.s.c. Section 1350, As Adopted Pursuant

To Section 906 Of The Sarbanes-oxley Act Of 2002

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, the undersigned officer of Intelsat Corporation (the Company) hereby certifies that to such officers knowledge, the Companys Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for
the quarter ended June 30, 2007 (the Report) fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 and that the information contained in the Report fairly
presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.



|                     |  |                        
|-------------------- |  | -----------------------
|                     | 
|Date: August 9, 2007 |  | /s/ JEFFREY FREIMARK   
|                     |  | Jeffrey Freimark       
|                     |  | Chief Financial Officer

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350 and is not
being filed as part of the Report or as a separate disclosure document.
### OKLAHOMA Area Designations for the 2008 Ozone National Ambient Air Quality Standards

The table below identifies the areas and associated counties or parts of counties in Oklahoma that EPA intends to designate as nonattainment for the 200 8 ozone national ambient ai r quality standards (2008 NAAQS). In accordance with section 107(d) of th e Clean Air Act, EPA must designate an area

“nonattainment” if it is violati ng the 2008 ozone NAAQS or if it is co ntributing to a violation of the 2008 ozone NAAQS in a nearby area. The techni cal analyses supporting the boundaries for the

individual nonattainment areas are provided below.

Intended Nonattainment Areas in Oklahoma

Area Oklahoma’s Recommended

Nonattainment Counties EPA’s Intended

Nonattainment Counties

None None None

Governor Henry submitted an ozone designati on recommendation letter to Acting Regional

Administrator Starfield on Marc h 9, 2009, recommending no counties be designated nonattainment for the 2008 ozone NAAQS, based on data for the pe riod from 2006 – 2008. An updated recommendation letter, based on monitoring data from 2008 – 2010, was submitted to Regional Administrator Armendariz by Governor Fallin on October 11, 2011. Th is letter recommended that all counties in Oklahoma be designated as “attainment” for the 2008 ozone NAAQS.

EPA also received an ozone designation recommenda tion letter from Cherokee Nation Environmental Programs Administrator Tom Elki ns on February 13, 2009. Administra tor Elkins did not make a recommendation, but instead reported that the Cher okee Nation is in attainment with the 2008 ozone NAAQS.

EPA intends to designate all counties and tribal territories in Oklahoma as “unclassifiable/attainment” for the 2008 ozone NAAQS. There are no ambient air qua lity monitors within the state of Oklahoma with design values that indicate a violation of the 2008 ozone NAAQS , and there are no nonattainment

areas or intended nonattainment areas that border the state of Oklahoma. The nearest nonattainment

areas are Dallas-Fort Worth in Texas and Denver in Colorado.
Exhibit -3.(i)
 
 RESTATED
 ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION
 OF
 CREDEX CORPORATION
 
 The undersigned subscriber to these Restated Articles of Incorporation, a natural person competent to contract, hereby forms a corporation under the laws of the State of Florida.
 
 ARTICLE I.  NAME
 
 The name of the corporation shall be CREDEX CORPORATION.
 
 ARTICLE II.  NATURE OF BUSINESS
 
 This corporation may engage or transact in any or all lawful activities or business permitted under the laws of the United States, the State of Florida or any other state, country, territory, or nation.
 
 ARTICLE III.  CAPITAL STOCK and CORPORATE ADDRESS
 
 The maximum number of shares of stock that this corporation is authorized to have outstanding at any one time is 100,000,000 shares of common stock having a par value of $.001 per share.
 
 The street address of the registered office of the corporation shall be 454 Treemont Drive, Orange City, FL 32763.  The name of the initial registered agent of the corporation at that address is RICHARD R. COOK. The mailing address of the Corporation shall be 454 Treemont Drive, Orange City, FL  32763.
 
 
 ARTICLE IV.  TERM OF EXISTENCE
 
 This corporation is to exist perpetually.
 
 ARTICLE V.  DIRECTORS
 
 This corporation shall have four directors initially, whose names and addresses are:
 
 Denise Leonardo, 9266 Keating Drive, Palm Beach Gardens, FL  32014
 Julie Ann Goodwin, 232 Trickey Pond Road, Naples, ME 04055
 Steven G. Salmond, 3290 Van Buren Ave., Apt, 30, Ogden, UT 84403
 Janine Weller, 415 Macopin Road, West Milford, NJ 07480
 
 ARTICLE VI.  OFFICERS
 
 The officers of the corporation shall be elected by the Directors.  Until new officers are elected the following  will serve as officers of the corporation:
 
 Denise Leonardo
PresidentSteven G. Salmond
Secretary & Treasurer
 
 
 
 ARTICLE VII.  INCORPORATOR
 
 The name and street address of the Incorporator to these Articles of Incorporation is:
 
 James H. Bashaw, 505 E. New York, Suite 8, DeLand, FL  32724
 
 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the undersigned has hereunto set his hand and seal on this __28th_ day of September, 2010.
 
 (SEAL)
/s/ Steven G. SalmondState of Florida  )

County of Volusia )
Steven G. Salmond
 
 The foregoing instrument was acknowledged before me this 28th day of September, 2010, by Steven G. Salmond, who is personally known to me and who did take an oath.
 
 Notary
/s/ Melissa A. BrunoTitle
Notary SignatureDD619181
Melissa A. BrunoSerial Number
Notary Name PrintedCommission expires:
 
 12/22/10
 ACCEPTANCE BY REGISTERED AGENT
 CREDEX CORPORAITON
 
 Having been named Resident Agent and to accept Service of Process for the above named corporation at the place designated in these Articles of Incorporation, I hereby accept the appointment as Registered Agent and agree to act in this capacity, I further agree to comply with the provisions of all statutes relating to the proper and complete performance of my duties, and I am familiar with and accept the obligations of my position as Registered Agent.
 
 Resident Agent/s/ Richard R. CookRICHARD R. COOK
No. P67/86.

#### Globe Importing Co. and Durst Industries, Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 65/15185 and 66/2408 (New York).

Ford, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise covered by the foregoing protests consists of brass strainers similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Davies, Turner & Company*v. *United States*(55 Cust. Ct. 488, Abstract 69651), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
No. 68924.

#### Robert E. Landweer & Co., Inc., and Nordby Supply Company *v.*United States,

protest 63/9435 (Seattle).

Opinion by

Nichols, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of plastic gill net floats similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Robert R. Landweer & Co.*and *Seattle Marine & Fishing Supply Co.*v. *United States*(47 Cust. Ct. 35, C.D. 2276), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.