alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
From: ochoana66@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:45:03 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,

Ana Gutierrez

Chino, CA 91710
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 Global Smart Energy, Inc. (the "Company")on Form  10-K for the period ending December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange  Commission  on  the date hereof(the "Report"),  Lyle  J  Mortensen, Chief  Executive Officer, and Gerry Shirren, Chief Financial  Officer of the Company, respectively,  do  certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section  1350,  as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to his and her 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 results of operations of the Company.





Dated: March 31, 2011





/s/ Lyle J Mortensen


-----------------------


By: Lyle J Mortensen


Its: Chief Executive Officer








/s/ Gerry Shirren


-----------------


By: Gerry Shirren


Its: Chief Financial Officer
From: wbillyh@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:20:27 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 Hill

Jonesboro, GA 30238
From: douglas_crose@dslextreme.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 7:42:32 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,

Douglas Crose

Santa Ana, CA 92701
**Exhibit 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION BY PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER**

**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 accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-K of Mistras Group, Inc. (the Company) for the year ended May 31, 2011, I, Francis T. Joyce, Principal Financial and Accounting Officer, hereby certify pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, to the best of my knowledge and belief, that:

 

(1) such Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended May 31, 2011, fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended; and

 

(2) the information contained in such Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended May 31, 2011, fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.

 

The foregoing certification is being furnished solely to accompany such Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended May 31, 2011, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, and 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.

 
| Date:   August 12, 2011 | /s/    FRANCIS T. JOYCE                                                                         |
|------------------------------|---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|                         | FRANCIS T. JOYCE   Executive Vice President, Chief Financial Officer, and Treasurer   (Principal Financial Officer) |

 

----
Bepore the Third Division,

September 27, 1966

No. P66/234. —

#### United China & Glass Co. *v.*United States, protests 58/23121, etc. (Houston).

Landis, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the items of merchandise marked “T” covered by the foregoing protests consist of cups and saucers similar in all material respects to those the subject of *W. Kay*Company, *Inc.*v. *United States*(53 Cust. Ct. 130, C.D. 2484), and that the items of merchandise marked “D” covered by the foregoing protests consist of cups and saucers similar in all material respects to those the subject of *United States*v. *The Baltimore & Ohio R.R. Co. a/c United China & Glass Company*(47 CCPA 1, C.A.D. 719), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
From: ryanbomberger@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 10:16:05 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,

Ryan Bomberger

Alpharetta, GA 30004
From: rcyoung39@gmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 8:11:38 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,

Rose Young

Saint Paul, MN 55124
[if !vml]>[endif]>

[if !vml]>[endif]>

You have reached the FederalDepository Library Program Electronic Collection (FDLP/EC) Archive. Thisarchive assures ongoing access to publications in the FDLP/EC. Access topublications in the archive is available through GPO's suite of cataloging andlocator services, including the Catalog of U.S. Government Publications(CGP).  Archived copies of publications are retrieved in the event thatpublications are no longer available from the original publishing agency site. 
**Title: Afully nonmetallic gas turbine engine enabled by additive manufacturing**
 
Parts: OneTwoThree
 
SuDoc Number:NAS 1.15:2015-218748 | -218749 | -218892
Item Number:0830-D (online)
CGP systemNumber: 000955786
 
July 18, 2018
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 W.D. OF WASHINGTON AT TACOMA

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v.

GUY PARISI,

Defendants.

Case No. CR05-323RBL

INITIAL ORDER RE:

ALLEGATIONS OF

VIOLATION OF

CONDITIONS OF

SUPERVISION

THIS MATTER comes on for an initial hearing on the Petition of the United States Pretrial

Services Office alleging that the defendant has violated the conditions of supervision.

The plaintiff appears through Assistant United States Attorney, Doug Hill. 

The defendant appears personally and represented by counsel, Tom Campbell. 

The U.S. Pretrial Services Office has filed a petition alleging violations of the terms and

conditions of supervision, and the defendant has been advised of the allegation(s).

The court finds probable cause with regard to the allegation(s) and schedules a hearing on the

 petition to be held at the time and date below set forth before Judge Mary Alice Theiler:

Date of hearing: October 28, 2005

Time of hearing: 2:00pm

 IT IS ORDERED that the defendant:

( ) Be released on an appearance bond, subject to the terms and conditions set forth thereon.

(X) Be detained for failing to show that he/she will not flee or pose a danger to any other person

 or the community pursuant to CrR 32.1(a)(1), and CrR 46(c), to be delivered as ordered

 by the court for further proceedings.

The clerks shall direct copies of this order to counsel for the United States, to counsel for the

defendant, the United States Marshal and to the United States Probation Office and/or Pretrial Services

Office.

October 26, 2005.

__s/ Karen L. Strombom 

Karen L. Strombom, U.S. Magistrate Judge

Case 2:05-cr-00323-RSL Document 15 Filed 10/26/05 Page 1 of 1
Before the Second Division,

January 26, 1956

No. 59689.

#### Freedman & Slater, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 173978-K (A), etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Rao, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise is similar in all material respects to the paper coverings containing phonograph records the subject of *United States*v. *Radio Corp. of America, RCA*
      *332
      *Victor Division*(41 C. C. P. A. 137, C. A. D. 541), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
#### In the Matter of Pablo C., a Person Alleged to be a Juvenile Delinquent, Appellant.

[631 NYS2d 854]

—Order of disposition, Family Court, Bronx County (Marjory Fields, J.), entered November 5, 1993, which adjudicated respondent a juvenile delinquent upon a fact-finding that he committed an act which, if committed by an adult, would constitute the crime of criminal possession of a controlled substance in the seventh degree, and placed him on probation for 12 months, unanimously affirmed, without costs.

The hearing court correctly denied respondent’s motion to suppress the glass pipe with cocaine residue found in his possession on the ground that exigent circumstances justified the warrantless entry by the police into respondent’s apartment *(see, People v Mitchell,*39 NY2d 173, 177, *cert denied*426 US 953). The evidence at the suppression hearing was that police officers, responding to a radio report of shots fired, were met by at least six witnesses at the indicated apartment building, who directed them to the sixth floor, where a neighbor told them that the shots came from respondent’s apartment. Respondent eventually answered after numerous knocks on the door, but refused to open the door stating that his parents were not home. Meanwhile, two officers on the roof saw a man fleeing the apartment by way of a fire escape who, when apprehended, although found to be unarmed, refused to answer any questions. According to procedure, the police contacted the Emergency Services Unit to break down the door. After an hour, the Unit arrived and broke down the door, whereupon the police seized respondent and another youth, and discovered the glass *236pipe sticking out of respondent’s boot. Contrary to respondent’s contention, police concerns that someone in the apartment might be injured or otherwise in danger were reasonable and did not abate during the two-hour period that the police were at the scene but unable to enter the apartment. Concur—Sullivan, J. P., Rosenberger, Wallach, Ross and Tom, JJ.
From: hough_20@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:30:54 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,

Brandon Hough

Hebron, IN 46341
From: petite.tina@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 8:45:55 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,

Tina Araujo

Weirsdale, FL 32195