alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
From: tugboat56@sbcglobal.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 9:03:39 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,

Cheryl Woolley

Houston, TX 77088
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**STATEMENT OF CHIEF FINANCIAL OFFICER OF**

**COLLINS & AIKMAN FLOORCOVERINGS, INC.**

**PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE**

**SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF2002**

 

Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant toSection 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, and in connection with the Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q of Collins & Aikman Floorcoverings, Inc. (the “Company”) for the period ended October 29, 2005, as filed with theSecurities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), the undersigned, Leonard F. Ferro, Chief Financial Officer of the Company, certifies 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, thefinancial condition and results of operations of the Company.
DEPARTMENT of ENVIRONMENT and NATURAL RESOURCES FORM 2

Minerals & Mining Program 

2050 West Main, Suite #1, Rapid City, SD 57702-2493 

Telephone: 605-773-4201, FAX: 605-394-5317 

APPLICATION FOR PERMIT TO DRILL 

Type of work: Type of well: 

 Drill New Well Reenter Well Drill Directional Well Oil Well Gas Well Injection 

 Other: _____________________________________________ Other: _______________________________________ 

Name and Address of Operator: Telephone: 

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Name and Address of Surface Owner: 

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Name and Address of Drilling Contractor and Rig Number: 

Surface Location of well: Qtr-Qtr, Sec, Twp, Rge, County, feet from nearest lines of section, and latitude and longitude (if available): 

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

If Directional, top of pay and bottom hole location from nearest lines of section: 

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Acres in Spacing (Drilling) Unit: Description of Spacing Unit: 

Well Name and Number: Elevation: Field and Pool, or Wildcat: Proposed Depth and Formation: 

Size of Hole: Size of Casing: Weight per Foot: Depth: Cementing Program (amount, type, yield, additives) Top of Cement: 

FOR OFFICE USE ONLY

Approved By: ____________________________________ Title: ______________________________________________________ 

Permit No.: ____________________ API No.: ________________________ Date Issued: _______________________________ 

Conditions, if any, on attached page. 

1) 

2) 

3) 

4)

proposed work). Use additional page(s) if appropriate. 

I hereby certify that the foregoing as to any work or operation performed is a true and correct report of such work or operation. 

____________________________ ______________________________ _______________________ ___________

 Signature Name (Print) Title Date 

Describe Proposed Operations (Clearly state all pertinent details, and give pertinent dates, including estimated date of starting any 

Pit Liner Specifications:
Fourth Court of Appeals

San Antonio, Texas

March 14, 2022

No. 04-22-00072-CV

JMI CONTRACTORS, LLC,

Appellant

v.

Jose Manuel MEDELLIN,

Appellee

From the 285th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2018-CI-05983

Honorable Aaron Haas, Judge Presiding

O R D E R

The reporter’s record was originally due March 10, 2022, but it was not filed. On March 

10, 2022, the court reporter filed a notification of late record, stating the reporter’s record was 

not filed because appellant had failed to pay or make arrangements to pay the court reporter’s fee 

for preparing the record and appellant was not entitled to appeal without paying the fee. 

 We therefore ORDER appellant provide written proof to this court showing either (1) 

the reporter’s fee has been paid or arrangements have been made to pay the reporter’s fee; or (2) 

appellant is entitled to appeal without paying the reporter’s fee by March 24, 2022. If appellant 

fails to respond within the time provided, appellant’s brief will be due within thirty (30) days 

from the date of this order, and the court will consider only those issues or points raised in 

appellant’s brief that do not require a reporter’s record for a decision. See TEX. R. APP. P.

37.3(c).

_________________________________

Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of the said 

court on this 14th day of March, 2022.

___________________________________

MICHAEL A. CRUZ, Clerk of Court
From: swede7474@aol.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 7:00:15 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

It is wrong to force insurance companies to provide free contraceptives and sterilization. It is wrong to

force businesses who have a moral objection to participate and have to pay for abortions and other

procedures that are abhorrent to them.

Whatever happened to the spirit of conscience laws to protect against this sort of incursion into

businesses and their practices. Ever since abortion was legalized in this country, there has been conflict

over this issue. In recent years and with more and more science to prove the viability of the infant in

the womb, the opinion of many Americans is that abortion is wrong. People of faith believe it is a sin

and they should not be forced by government to provide abortions or aid in the destruction of human

life in this way.

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,

Dorothy Swanson

West Columbia, SC 29170
No. 60496.

#### Cavaliero & Company *v.*United States,

protest 275877-K (New York).

Opinion by

Ford, J.

An examination of the official papers disclosing no reason for disturbing the presumptively correct classification of the merchandise made by the collector, the protest was overruled.
From: hefferson@cox.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 7:35:56 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

health insurance.

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

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

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

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

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

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Howard Efferson

Baton Rouge, LA 70818
From: k.winton75@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 2:29:42 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,

Aundra Winton

Medina, OH 44256
From: peghol@att.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 7:02:33 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,

Peggy Holbrook

Milan, TN 38358
PUBLIC LAW 114–32—JULY 20, 2015 129 STAT. 431 

LEGISLATIVE HISTORY—H.R. 728: 

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Vol. 161 (2015): 

June 15, considered and passed House. 

July 8, considered and passed Senate. 

Æ 

Public Law 114–32 

114th Congress 

An Act 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service located at 7050 Highway 

BB in Cedar Hill, Missouri, as the ‘‘Sergeant First Class William B. Woods, 

Jr. Post Office’’. 

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of 

the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

SECTION 1. SERGEANT FIRST CLASS WILLIAM B. WOODS, JR. POST 

OFFICE. 

(a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States Postal 

Service located at 7050 Highway BB in Cedar Hill, Missouri, shall 

be known and designated as the ‘‘Sergeant First Class William 

B. Woods, Jr. Post Office’’. 

(b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, regulation, 

document, paper, or other record of the United States to the facility 

referred to in subsection (a) shall be deemed to be a reference 

to the ‘‘Sergeant First Class William B. Woods, Jr. Post Office’’. 

Approved July 20, 2015. 

July 20, 2015 

[H.R. 728] 


dkrause on DSKHT7XVN1PROD with PUBLAWS
IV 

110TH CONGRESS 

1ST SESSION H. RES. 442 

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that a National Youth 

Sports Week should be established. 

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

MAY 24, 2007 

Mr. MCINTYRE (for himself, Mr. ADERHOLT, Mr. SHIMKUS, Mr. CUMMINGS, 

Mr. BISHOP of Georgia, Mr. HULSHOF, Mr. BOREN, Mr. CRAMER, Ms. 

CARSON, Ms. WATERS, Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas, Mr. LINCOLN DIAZBALART of Florida, Mr. CHANDLER, Mr. MCGOVERN, Mr. ETHERIDGE, 

and Mr. DOYLE) submitted the following resolution; which was referred 

to the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform 

RESOLUTION 

Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that 

a National Youth Sports Week should be established. 

Whereas about 42 million children participate in organized 

sports each year; 

Whereas children participating in organized sports tend to 

perform better in school, develop excellent interpersonal 

skills, and lead healthier lives; 

Whereas organized youth sports help children increase their 

self-esteem, develop an appreciation of health and fitness, 

and become leaders within the community; 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS

2 

•HRES 442 IH 

Whereas organized youth sports provide for regular physical 

activity and help combat increasing rates of childhood 

obesity; 

Whereas the Congressional Caucus on Youth Sports was created, with great help and support from the Citizenship 

Through Sports Alliance, Positive Coaching Alliance, and 

National Recreation and Park Association, to restore the 

focus in youth sports on the child’s experience and character development; 

Whereas far too many children quit participating in youth 

sports at a young age, many telling coaches and parents, 

‘‘It just wasn’t fun anymore’’; 

Whereas the National Recreation and Park Association has 

designated July as Parks and Recreation Month; 

Whereas many youth sports organizations gather at local 

parks and recreation facilities across the country; and 

Whereas designating the fourth week in July as National 

Youth Sports Week would raise awareness of the important physical and emotional benefits of participating in 

youth sports and the need to promote sportsmanship 

among players, parents, coaches, and officials: Now, 

therefore, be it 

1 Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Rep2 resentatives that a National Youth Sports Week should 

3 be established to promote awareness of the importance of 

4 youth sports and the need to restore the focus in youth 

5 sports on the child’s experience and character develop6 ment. 

Æ 

mstockstill on PROD1PC66 with BILLS
(R.D. 11483)

#### Parsons & Whittemore, Inc. *v.*United States

Entry No. M-3534.

*774(Decided January 30, 1968)

*Sharp, Bolter & 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 from 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 values referred to in the above paragraphs Nos. 2 and 3.

> 5. _ That at the times 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 find the 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: paulbr@ymail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 6:40:37 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,

Paul Brinkman

Washington, DC 20026