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

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 7:45:03 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,

Peter Jensen

, 90065-4707
No. 61533.

#### Derby Foods, Inc. *v.*United States,

protest 302930-K (A) (New York).

Opinion by

Donlon, J.

The protest was dismissed.
From: wareagle87@charter.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 9:13:38 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,

Wayne Hampton

Spring Hill, TN 37174
##### 



EXHIBIT 32.2 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 of Remington Oil and Gas Corporation (the Company)
on Form 10-Q for the period ending March 31, 2005, as filed with the Securities and Exchange
Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Frank T. Smith Jr., Senior Vice President/Finance
(Principal Financial Officer) of the Company, certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. §1350, as adopted
pursuant to §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. This certification is made solely for the purpose of 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, and not for any
other purpose. /s/ Frank T. Smith Jr.Frank T. Smith Jr.Senior Vice President/Finance(Principal Financial Officer)April 28, 2005
 A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to
Remington Oil and Gas Corporation and will be retained by Remington Oil and Gas Corporation and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
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 of Continuance – 1

Lopez-Bueno, et al/CR05-332JLR

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

700 Stewart Street, Suite 5220

Seattle, Washington 98101-1271

(206) 553-7970

Judge Robart

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, )

) NO. CR05-332JLR

Plaintiff, )

)

v. )

)

DAVID LOPEZ-BUENO, ) ORDER CONTINUING JOSÉ LOPEZ-BUENO, and ) TRIAL DATE AND PRETRIAL

MIGUEL CISNEROS, ) MOTIONS DATE

)

Defendants. ) 

 _________________________________)

THIS MATTER comes before the Court on a motion by the defendants and the

United States to continue the trial date and the pretrial motions cut-off date. Having

considered the entirety of the record and files herein, the Court finds that failure to grant

a continuance would likely result in a miscarriage of justice. The case is unusual and

complex. The defendants were originally charged with 14 other defendants in 

CR05-281JLR, but a separate Indictment was returned on September 8, 2005. All of the

defendants are in custody and Spanish-speaking. The evidence in this case is derived

from a larger investigation, and includes a large number of intercepted telephone

conversations in Spanish, and over 300 pages of reports from federal agents and state

officers. Several pretrial motions have been filed and are pending.

It is unreasonable to expect adequate preparation for trial before the current trial

date, scheduled in CR05-281JLR, of September 17, 2005. The Court further finds that

Case 2:05-cr-00332-JLR Document 29 Filed 10/03/05 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 of Continuance – 2

Lopez-Bueno, et al/CR05-332JLR

UNITED STATES ATTORNEY

700 Stewart Street, Suite 5220

Seattle, Washington 98101-1271

(206) 553-7970

the interests of the public and the defendants in a speedy trial in this case are outweighed

by the ends of justice. 

IT IS NOW, THEREFORE, ORDERED that trial in this matter be continued to 

October 17, 2005, and that the time between the date of this Order and the new trial date

be excludable time under the Speedy Trial Act pursuant to Title 18, United States Code,

Sections 3161(h)(8)(A), 3161(h)(8)(B)(i), and 3161(h)(8)(B)(ii). 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that pre-trial motions shall be filed on or before 

September 21, 2005.

 Dated this 3rd day of October, 2005

A JAMES L. ROBART

United States District Judge

Presented by:

s/Douglas B. Whalley 

DOUGLAS B. WHALLEY

Assistant United States Attorney

United States Attorney's Office 

601 Union Street, Suite 5100 

Seattle, WA 98101-3903

(206) 553-4882, Fax: (206) 553-4440

E-mail: douglas.whalley@usdoj.gov

Washington State Bar #4625

s/ Susan M. Roe 

SUSAN M. ROE

Assistant United States Attorney

United States Attorney's Office 

601 Union Street, Suite 5100 

Seattle, WA 98101-3903

(206) 553-1077, Fax: (206) 553-4440

E-mail: susan.roe@usdoj.gov

Washington State Bar #1300

Case 2:05-cr-00332-JLR Document 29 Filed 10/03/05 Page 2 of 2
From: barbrollins@atlanticbb.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 8:34:37 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,

Barb Rollins

Aiken, SC 29803
From: utzmom@aol.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 6:34:56 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,

Fern Utz

Hicksville, OH 43526
From: jlmartin0261@hotmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 8:43:49 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,

Lillian Martin

Leola, PA 17540
EXHIBIT 32.1
 
 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 annual report of American Power Corporation (the “Company”) on Form 10-K for the year ended September 30, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the “Report”), I, Alvaro Valencia, Chief Executive Officer and President of the Company, certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 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 result of operations of the Company.
 
 /s/ Alvaro ValenciaAlvaro ValenciaChief Executive Officer and President
 
 Date: January 13, 2011
  A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to American Power Corporation and will be retained by American Power Corporation and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.
 
 The forgoing certification is being furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to § 18 U.S.C. Section 1350. It is not being filed for purposes of Section 18 of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, and is not to be incorporated by reference into any filing of the Company, whether made before or after the date hereof, regardless of any general incorporation language in such filing.
From: tarnhold@carrollsweb.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 6:48:45 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,

Teri Arnhold

Ellsworth, KS 67439
From: ml123@nts-online.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:57:31 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,

Michael Ladd

Wichita Falls, TX 76309
11 TH C OURT OF A PPEALS

E ASTLAND

, T EXAS

J UDGMENT

D. Clay Holcomb et al

. , * From the 118 th District Court

of Martin County

Trial Court No. 6905

.

Vs. No. 11

- 16

- 00215

- CV * August 3

, 2017

Endeavor Energy Resources, L.P.

, * Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion

(Panel consists of: Wright, C.J.,

Willson, J., and Bailey, J.)

This court has considered the parties’ joint motion to dismiss this appeal

and concludes that the motion should be granted. Therefore, in accordance with

this court’s opinion, the appeal is dismissed. The costs incurred by reason of

this appeal are taxed against the party incurring same.
No. 63327.

protests 25151-K, etc. (New York).

#### Park & Tilford Import Corp. *v.*United States,

*334Opinion by

Richardson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise and issues are similar in all material respects to those involved in *United States*v. *R. C. Williams & Co., Inc.*(40 C.C.P.A. 130, C.A.D. 508), and *Austin, Nichols & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(22 Cust. Ct. 33, C.D. 1155), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
No. 58218.

protests 200869-K, etc. (Pembina).

#### F. C. Mackay *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of frozen beef lungs similar in all material respects to those the subject of *A. N. Deringer, Inc., et al.*v. *United States*(32 Cust. Ct. 41, C. D. 1578), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
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

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

for the WESTERN DISTRICT of WASHINGTON

CATHERINE A. SULLIVAN,

 Plaintiff,

 vs.

)

)

)

)

) C05-1857 JLR

JO ANNE B. BARNHART, Commissioner

of Social Security,

 

 Defendant.

)

)

) MINUTE ORDER

)

)

)

This action has been reassigned to the Honorable James L. Robart, United

States District Judge. All future documents filed in this case must bear the cause

number C05-1857 JLR and bear the Judge’s name in the upper right hand corner of the

document.

It appearing from the files and records herein that this is an appropriate

proceeding to refer to a full-time United States Magistrate Judge for the purposes

hereinafter set forth, pursuant to Local Rule MJR 4(A)(4) and as authorized by

Mathews, Secretary of HEW vs Weber, 432 US 261 (1976), now therefore,

Pursuant to the General Order entered by the Chief Judge on 30 April 2004, IT

IS ORDERED that the above entitled action is hereby referred to the Honorable James

P. Donohue, United States Magistrate Judge, who is directed and empowered to review

Case 2:05-cv-01857-JLR Document 4 Filed 11/21/05 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

Dated this 21st day of November, 2005

Bruce Rifkin, Clerk of Court

 /S/ PETER H. VOELKER

Peter H. Voelker, Deputy Clerk

the administrative record, and to submit proposed findings and conclusions, and

recommended disposition. The procedure for review of those recommendations shall

be in accordance with FRCP 72(b) and with Local Rule MJR 4(c).

Case 2:05-cv-01857-JLR Document 4 Filed 11/21/05 Page 2 of 2