alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
H. Res. 1323 

In the House of Representatives, U. S., 

July 15, 2008. 

Whereas, on June 3, 2008, the Arizona State University Sun 

Devils won the 2008 NCAA Women’s College World Series with a resounding 11 to 0 defeat over the Texas 

A&M Aggies; 

Whereas this win marked the first national title for Arizona 

State University in softball; 

Whereas the Arizona State University Sun Devils set a record 

for the highest margin of victory during a championship 

game in the NCAA Women’s College World Series history; 

Whereas the Arizona State University women’s softball team 

won an impressive 66 games this season and went 56 to 

5 during the season and went 10 for 10 in the post season under the leadership of Coach Clint Myers; 

Whereas super slugger Kaitlin Cochran set a new, NCAA single-season record by drawing 29 intentional walks; 

Whereas pitcher Katie Burkhart earned Most Valuable Player honors in the Women’s College World Series with 53 

strikeouts and a perfect record of 5 wins to 0 losses; 

Whereas the Arizona State University coaching staff, comprised of Head Coach Clint Meyers and Assistant Coaches Kirsten Voak and Robert Wager, was named the 
2 

•HRES 1323 EH 

NFCA’s NCAA Division I National Coaching Staff of the 

Year; 

Whereas 6 players, were named to the Louisville Slugger/ 

NFCA All-Pacific Region Team; 

Whereas 5 of those 6 players, Katie Burkhart, Mindy Cowles, 

Krista Donnenwirth, Kaitlin Cochran, and Jackie 

Vasquez, advanced to earn Louisville Slugger/NFCA AllAmerica honors; 

Whereas the Arizona State University softball team earned 

the enthusiastic support of students, faculty, alumni, and 

Sun Devils fans across the country during their national 

championship season; and 

Whereas the Arizona State University softball team is an inspiration to student athletes in Arizona and across the 

United States: Now, therefore, be it 

Resolved, That the United States House of Representatives— 

(1) commends the Arizona State University softball 

team for their victory in the 2008 Women’s College 

World Series; 

(2) recognizes the achievements of the players, 

coaches, students, and staff whose hard work and dedication helped the Arizona State University Sun Devils 

win the championship; and 

(3) directs the Clerk of the House of Representatives to transmit a copy of this resolution to Arizona 

State University President Michael Crow, softball Coach 
3 

•HRES 1323 EH 

Clint Myers, and Athletic Director Lisa Love for appropriate display. 

Attest: 

Clerk.
From: whitacrellc@hotmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 12:06:03 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,

william whitacre

Sutherland, VA 23885
11 TH COURT OF APPEALS

EASTLAND

, TEXAS

JUDGMENT

Ex parte Douglas Clinton Siddle

, * Original Habeas Corpus Proceeding

No. 11

- 1 9

- 00 16 3

- CR * June 6, 2019

* Per Curiam Memorandum Opinion

(Panel consists of: Bailey, C.J.

, Stretcher , J., and Wright, S.C.J.,

sitting by assignment)

(Willson, J., not participating)

This court has considered Douglas Clinton Siddle’s application for writ of

habeas corpus and concludes that the application for writ of habeas corpus should

be dismissed for want of jurisdiction . Therefore, in accordance with this court’s

opinion, the application for habeas corpus is dismissed.
CERTIFICATIONS OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER AND PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT 

Exhibit 32.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO 

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 

(18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350) 

In connection with the Annual Report of Santos Resource Corp., a Nevada corporation (the "Company"), on Form 10-K for the year ended February 28, 2010, as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Report"), Richard Pierce, President and Treasurer (Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer) of the Company, does hereby certify, pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (18 U.S.C. Section 1350), that to his knowledge: 

(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. 

| Date: May 28, 2010
 
/s/ Richard Pierce
 
 
Richard		Pierce		President and Treasurer 		(Principal Executive Officer and Principal Financial Officer)
 

[A signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to Santos Resource Corp. and will be retained by Santos Resource Corp. and furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.] |
|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
From: melindamp@hotmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 6:36:06 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,

Melinda Prior

Washington, UT 84780
No. 62766.

#### S. S. Kresge Co. *v.*United States,

protest 302748-K (New York).

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of aquarium sea moss similar in all material respects to that the subject of *Westchester Aquarium Supply Co.*v. *United States*(36 Cust. Ct. 146, C.D. 1767), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

MEMORANDUM OPINION

No. 04

- 15

- 00556

- CV

IN RE David Allan EDWARDS

Original Mandamus Proceeding 1

PER CURIAM

Sitting: Karen Angelini, Justice

Marialyn Barnard, Justice

Patricia O. Alvarez, Justice

Delivered and Filed: September 16, 2015

PETITION FOR WRIT OF MANDAMUS DENIED

On September 3, 2015, relator David Allan Edwards filed a pro se petition for writ of

mandamus complaining of the trial court’s failure to rule on various motions in the underlying

civil proceeding. The court has considered relator’s petition for writ of mandamus and is of the

opinion that relator is not entitled to the relief sought. Accordingly, the petition for writ of

mandamus is denied. See T EX

. R. A PP

. P . 52.8(a).

PER CURIAM

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No. 12

- 02

- 0185

- CVA, styled David Allan Edwards v. County Court of

Commissioners of Atascosa County, Texas , pending in the 81st Judicial District Court, Atascosa County, Texas, the

Honorable Thomas F. Lee presiding.
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:  February 3, 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.
* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined

that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR . R. 47.5.4. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 98-10265 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee,

versus ANTHONY WAYNE ELROD, Defendant-Appellant.

-------------------- Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 3:97-CV-903-G & 3:93-CR-377-1-G

-------------------- January 14, 2000 Before KING, Chief Judge, and SMITH and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Anthony Wayne Elrod, federal prisoner # 24994-077, appeals the district court’s denial of his 28 U.S.C. § 2255 motion. He argues that (1) he was coerced into entering a guilty plea by threats, made in bad faith and without probable cause, to indict his then-spouse; and (2) that the district court abused its discretion by not holding an evidentiary hearing with respect to this issue. A district court may deny a § 2255 motion without conductingNo. 98-10265 -2-

a hearing only "if the motion, files, and records of the case conclusively show that the prisoner is entitled to no relief." United States v. Bartholomew , 974 F.2d 39, 41 (5th Cir. 1992). This court reviews a district court's denial of an evidentiary hearing for abuse of discretion. Id

. We conclude, based upon our review of the parties’ briefs and the record, that the record does not conclusively show that the Government had probable cause to indict Elrod’s then-wife. United States v. Nuckols , 606 F.2d 566, 569-70 (5th Cir. 1979); United States v. Diaz , 733 F.2d 371, 375 (5th Cir. 1984). The district court’s judgment is therefore VACATED, and this case is REMANDED to the district court for an evidentiary hearing to develop the facts relating to Elrod’s claim that he was coerced into entering a guilty plea by threats, made in bad faith and without probable cause, to indict his then-spouse. If the district court finds that the government’s threat to indict Elrod’s spouse was made in bad faith and without probable cause, it may still determine that this threat was not the motivating factor in Elrod’s decision to plead guilty. VACATED AND REMANDED.
From: vrwright4510@att.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:24:56 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,

Rosalea Wright

Trenton, MO 64683
Michigan Supreme Court

Lansing, Michigan

Bridget M. McCormack

, Chief Justice

Brian K. Zahra

David F. Viviano

Richard H. Bernstein

Elizabeth T. Clement

Megan K. Cavanagh

Elizabeth M. Welch,

Justices

I, Larry S. Royster, Clerk of the Michigan Supreme Court, certify that the

foregoing is a true and complete copy of the order entered at the direction of the Court.

March 26, 2021

s0323 

# Order

Clerk March 26, 2021

161631

PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF MICHIGAN,

Plaintiff

- Appellee,

v SC: 161631

COA: 352710

Lenawee CC: 18

- 018865

- FH

SETH PATRICK DECK,

Defendant

- Appellant.

_________________________________________/

On order of the Court, the application for leave to appeal the March 24 , 2020 order

of the Court of Appeals is considered and, it appearing to this Court that the case of

People v Davis (Docket No. 160775) is pending on appeal before this Court and that the

decision in that case may resolve an issue raised in the present application for leave to

appeal, we ORDER that the application be held in ABEYANCE pending the decision in

that case.
From: anniesunde@comcast.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 7:43:45 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.

Ann C Sunde

Sincerely,

ann sunde

Minneapolis, MN 55441
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 ORDER - 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT TACOMA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

ZACHARY MIRABACK,

Defendant.

Case No. CR05-5704FDB

ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT’S

MOTION FOR NOTICE OF INTENT

TO USE EVIDENCE

Before the court is the motion of Defendant Zachary Miraback requesting that the

Government provide notice of evidence it intends to produce at trial which may be subject to

suppression. The Government contends that, by letter dated October 19, 2005, it provided all

appropriate notice and discovery to the defense. Defendant’s motion did not include a Rule 16(i)

certification that the parties met, but were unable to resolve this discovery issue. 

The court expects the parties to act in conformity with their discovery obligations and to

meet to resolve any discovery issues prior to bringing them to the court’s attention. Additionally, the

court has nothing before it to indicate that the Government’s notice of October 19, 2005 was

deficient.

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 ORDER - 2

IT IS ORDERED:

(1) Defendant’s motion for notice of the Government’s intent to use evidence (Dkt.#22)

is DENIED at this time.

DATED this 25th day of October, 2005.

AFRANKLIN D. BURGESS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
From: couponls@msn.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 6:17:45 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,

philip smith

Gilmer, TX 75644