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

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 8:42:52 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,

chris mccormick

, 60044-2715
No. 68929.

#### Amity Fabric, Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

protests 62/13185, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Kao, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of waterproof cotton cloth similar in all material respects to that the subject of *Amity Fabrics, Inc.*v. *United States*(51 Cust. Ct. 97, C.D. 2416), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
No. 66520.

#### Engis Equipment Co. *v.*United States,

protest 60/4091-11182 (Chicago).

Opinion by

Lawrence, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of talyrond apparatus and equipment similar in all material respects to those the subject of Abstract 64440, the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
From: rmtswt@aol.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:44:47 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,

Richard Thorne

Redmond, OR 97756
Before the Third Division,

September 20, 1960

No. 64558.

#### The Electro Motive Mfg. Co. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 59/29959, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of ceramic bases similar in all material respects to those the subject of *John S. Faunce, Philadelphia, Inc.*v. *Unites States*(42 Cust. Ct. 196, C.D. 2085), the claim of the plaintiffs 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 OF AMERICA

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

 

GILDERSLEEVE,

Plaintiff(s),

v.

SOUTHEAST TOWING, et al.,

 Defendant(s).

 Case No. C05-1716P

 MINUTE ORDER

The following minute order is made by the direction of the court, the Honorable Marsha J.

Pechman:

At the request of counsel, an extension of time to file the joint status report is granted. The

report will be due on February 9, 2006. All other FRCP 26-related dates are adjusted accordingly.

Failure to adhere to these deadlines may result in sanctions, up to and including dismissal of this

action.

Filed this 6th day of January, 2006.

BRUCE RIFKIN, Clerk

By /s Mary Duett

Deputy Clerk

Case 2:05-cv-01716-MJP Document 4 Filed 01/06/06 Page 1 of 1
**UN PUBLISHED** 
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

**No. 10**  **- 667**  **0**

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

– Appell ee ,

v.
DOUGLAS WALTER CHILDS , Defendant

– Appell ant
.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Weste rn District of Nor th Carolina , at As heville

. Martin K. Reidinger , District Judge. ( 1 : 95

- c r - 000 20

- M R

- 1 )

Submitted : January 19, 2011 Decided: February 22 , 2011

Before N IEMEYER, MOTZ, and DAVIS , Circuit Judges.

Affirm e d by un published per curiam opinion

.
Douglas Walter Childs , Appellant Pro Se
. Jerry Wayne Miller, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Asheville , North Carolina , for Appellee.
Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.2 P ER CURIAM: Douglas Walter Childs ap peals the district court ’s order denying Childs’ motion for reconsideration of the district court’s order denying his petition for a writ of error coram nobis and motion for appointment of counsel . We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. United States v. Childs , No. 1:95

- cr - 00020

- MR

- 1 (W.D.N.C. Apr. 13, 2010) . We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materi als before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
From: mickley@praisemail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 6:28:26 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,

Sally Mickley

Lynden, WA 98264
01 

02

03

04

05

06

07

08

09

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

DETENTION ORDER 15.13

18 U.S.C. § 3142(i) Rev. 1/91

PAGE 1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

AT SEATTLE

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff,

v. 

SAMUEL L. DUGAN,

Defendant.

____________________________________

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

)

Case No. 05-483M

DETENTION ORDER 

Offense charged:

Count 1: Possession With Intent to Distribute Cocaine Base in violation of 21 U.S.C. §

841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(B).

Date of Detention Hearing: May 8, 2006.

The Court, having conducted a detention hearing pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 3142(f), and

based upon the factual findings and statement of reasons for detention hereafter set forth, finds:

FINDINGS OF FACT AND STATEMENT OF REASONS FOR DETENTION

Defendant is presently in State custody, and has stipulated to detention in this matter,

reserving the right to contest his continued detention if there are new facts or circumstances to

be considered.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED:

(1) Defendant shall be detained pending trial and committed to the custody of the

Attorney General for confinement in a correction facility separate, to the extent

practicable, from persons awaiting or serving sentences or being held in custody

Case 2:05-mj-00483-JPD Document 9 Filed 05/08/06 Page 1 of 2
01 

02

03

04

05

06

07

08

09

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

DETENTION ORDER 15.13

18 U.S.C. § 3142(i) Rev. 1/91

PAGE 2

pending appeal;

(2) Defendant shall be afforded reasonable opportunity for private consultation with

counsel;

(3) On order of a court of the United States or on request of an attorney for the

government, the person in charge of the corrections facility in which defendant

is confined shall deliver the defendant to a United States Marshal for the purpose

of an appearance in connection with a court proceeding; and

(4) The Clerk shall direct copies of this Order to counsel for the United States, to

counsel for the defendant, to the United States Marshal, and to the United States

Pretrial Services Officer.

DATED this 8th day of May, 2006.

AJAMES P. DONOHUE

United States Magistrate Judge 

Case 2:05-mj-00483-JPD Document 9 Filed 05/08/06 Page 2 of 2
Exhibit 31.2



CERTIFICATION



I, Sheri Knope, certify that:



I have reviewed this quarterly report on Form 10-QSB/A of Luxemburg Bancshares, Inc.;

Based on my knowledge, this report does not contain any untrue statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this report;

Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial information included in this report, fairly present in all material respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this report;

The small business issuers other certifying officer(s) and I are responsible for establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) for the small business issuer and have:

a)

Designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that material information relating to the small business issuer, including its consolidated subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly during the period in which this report is being prepared;

b)

Evaluated the effectiveness of the small business issuers disclosure controls and procedures and presented in this report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this report on such evaluation; and

c)

Disclosed in this report any change in the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting that occurred during the small business issuers most recent fiscal quarter (the small business issuers fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially affect, the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting; and

The small business issuers other certifying officer(s) and I have disclosed, based on our most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the small business issuers auditors and the audit committee of the small business issuers board of directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions):

(a) All significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably likely to adversely affect the small business issuers ability to record, process, summarize and report financial information; and

(b) Any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other employees who have a significant role in the small business issuers internal control over financial reporting.



Date:March 1, 2005



/s/ Sheri Knope

Sheri Knope

Chief Financial Officer
No. 63342.

protests 250997-K, etc. (New York).

#### Paramount Import Co., Inc., et al. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Donlon, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of mother-of-pearl disks similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Paramount Import Export Co. et al.*v. *United States*(45 C.C.P.A. 82, C.A.D. 677), the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
From: usnretdoc@hotmail.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 7:54:46 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,

Norman Hughes

Sulphur Springs, AR 72768
### DISMISS; Opinion filed August 31, 2012

In The 

## (Court of Apprats giftIiElistrirt of üJrxai at Dallas

No. 05-10-01260-CV DANIEL GOMEZ, Appellant

V. THUNDERBIRD APARTMENTS, Appellee On Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 3

Dallas County, Texas Trial Court Cause No. CC-10-03922-C 

### MEMORANDUM OPINION Before Chief Justice Wright and Justices Francis and Lang-Miers

Opinion By Chief Justice Wright By letter dated March 26, 2012, the Court informed appellant that his brief was past due. We directed appellant to file a brief with an extension motion within ten days and cautioned him that failure to do so would result in dismissal of his appeal. As of today's date, appellant has not filed a brief. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal. See 

### TEX. R. APP. P. 38.8(a)(1) & 42.3(b).

101260F.P05

## Tourt uiAppeats 7 

## iriftll District of 0

. .exas at Dallas

JUDGMENT DANIEL GOMEZ, Appellant Appeal from the County Court at Law No. 3 of Dallas County, Texas. (Tr.Ct.No. CC-10- No. 05-10-01260-CV V. 03922-C). Opinion delivered by Chief Justice Wright, THUNDERBIRD APARTMENTS, Appellee Justices Francis and Lang-Miers, participating. Based on the Court's opinion of this date, the appeal is DISMISSED. It is ORDERED that appellee, Thunderbird Apartments, recover its costs of the appeal from appellant, Daniel Gomez. Judgment entered August 31, 2012.
Exhibit 10.3




---



##### 




    
    upon a merger or consolidation of the Company or a change of control in the Company
as such terms are used or defined in the Plans, all equity awards held by the
non-employee directors of the Company, whether or not vested, shall vest immediately
prior to the effective date of such merger, consolidation or change in control (and the
non-employee directors will be provided a reasonable opportunity, if required, to
exercise such equity awards prior to the effective date) notwithstanding anything to
the contrary contained in the agreements covering the equity awards; and
 
    
    any and all retainers or other fees paid or payable to any non-employee director
prior to the effective date of any such merger, consolidation or change in control of
the Company shall be deemed earned by such non-employee director as of such effective
date notwithstanding the fact that all or any part of such retainer or other fee has
been paid to such non-employee director in advance of some period of service to the
Company; and
 
    
    to the extent that consent is required to allow you to effect a Net Exercise of any
stock option awarded to you, if any, the Board hereby grants consent for such Net
Exercise and you agree that, if and when you determine to exercise any of the options
held by you, you will exercise your stock options on a Net Exercise basis.
  Very truly yours,
OSTEOTECH, INC.By:Sam Owusu-Akyaw, President and CEO 
 Signed:
  -2-
From: paulaoas@juno.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:31:41 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,

Paula Oas

Laurel, MD 20708