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

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 2:56:39 PM

To Whom It May Concern:

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

health insurance.

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

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

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

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

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

preventive services.

Sincerely,

Sister Donna L. Brodman, O.P.

Stamford, CT 06902
Case 2:05-cv-01817-JLR Document 1 Filed 11/02/05 Page 1 of 6
Case 2:05-cv-01817-JLR Document 1 Filed 11/02/05 Page 2 of 6
Case 2:05-cv-01817-JLR Document 1 Filed 11/02/05 Page 3 of 6
Case 2:05-cv-01817-JLR Document 1 Filed 11/02/05 Page 4 of 6
Case 2:05-cv-01817-JLR Document 1 Filed 11/02/05 Page 5 of 6
Case 2:05-cv-01817-JLR Document 1 Filed 11/02/05 Page 6 of 6
**EXHIBIT
      15**





**AWARENESS
      LETTER**





To
      the
      Board of Directors and Shareholders of


Mediware
      Information Systems, Inc.





We
      have
      reviewed, in accordance with standards established by the Public Company
      Accounting Oversight Board (United States) the unaudited interim condensed
      consolidated financial statements of Mediware Information Systems, Inc. and
      subsidiaries as of December 31, 2006 and for the three- and six-month periods
      ended December 31, 2006 and 2005 as indicated in our review report dated January
      26, 2007. Because we did not perform an audit, we expressed no opinion on those
      financial statements.





We
      are
      aware that our review report, which is included in your Quarterly Report on
      Form 10-Q for the quarter ended December 31, 2006, is incorporated by
      reference in the Registration Statements on Form S-8 (No. 333-07591,
      No. 333-83016, No. 333-119503, No. 333-123496 and No.
      333-130576).





We
      are
      also aware that our review report, pursuant to Rule 436(c) under the
      Securities Act of 1933 (the "Act"), is not considered a part of the Registration
      Statement prepared or certified by an accountant or a report prepared or
      certified by an accountant within the meaning of Sections 7 and 11 of the
      Act and the accountants’ Section 11 liability does not extend to such
      report.








Eisner
      LLP


New
      York,
      New York


January
      26, 2007
From: wilsonwblaisdell@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 9:50:37 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,

Wilson Blaisdell

Toledo, OH 43614
From: cpwiese@yahoo.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 8:06:21 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,

Craig Wiese

Charlottesville, VA 22902
#### Loie D. FRAINE, Claimant-Appellant, v. Anthony J. PRINCIPI, Secretary of Veterans Affairs, Respondent-Appellee.

No. 01-7049.

United States Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit.

May 23, 2001.

ON MOTION

*ORDER*

Upon consideration of the joint motion to dismiss the appeal,

IT IS ORDERED THAT:

(1) The motion is granted.

(2) Each side shall bear its own costs.
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<ARTICLE> 5
<CIK> 0000874787
<NAME> PHYAMERICA PHYSICIAN GROUP, INC.
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000
<CURRENCY> US DOLLARS

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          DEC-31-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               SEP-30-1999
<EXCHANGE-RATE>                                    1.0
<CASH>                                           1,046
<SECURITIES>                                         0
<RECEIVABLES>                                   53,325
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                          0
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                                64,569
<PP&E>                                           6,828
<DEPRECIATION>                                       0
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                  98,659
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                          140,533
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          4
<COMMON>                                           380
<OTHER-SE>                                    (86,338)
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                    98,659
<SALES>                                        179,913
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               179,913
<CGS>                                          189,824
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  189,824
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                     0
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                               9,356
<INCOME-PRETAX>                               (22,271)
<INCOME-TAX>                                         0
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                           (22,271)
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                  (22,271)
<EPS-BASIC>                                   (0.59)
<EPS-DILUTED>                                   (0.59)


</TABLE>
Case 2:05-cv-01575-RSL Document 14-4 Filed 02/22/2007 Page 1 of 3
Case 2:05-cv-01575-RSL Document 14-4 Filed 02/22/2007 Page 2 of 3
Case 2:05-cv-01575-RSL Document 14-4 Filed 02/22/2007 Page 3 of 3
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 602 Reported in House (RH)]

                                                 House Calendar No. 103
110th CONGRESS
  1st Session
H. RES. 602

                          [Report No. 110-293]

 Providing for consideration of the conference report to accompany the 
     bill (H.R. 2272) to invest in innovation through research and 
 development, and to improve the competitiveness of the United States.

_______________________________________________________________________

                    IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                             August 1, 2007

    Ms. Sutton, from the Committee on Rules, reported the following 
resolution; which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be 
                                printed

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 
 Providing for consideration of the conference report to accompany the 
     bill (H.R. 2272) to invest in innovation through research and 
 development, and to improve the competitiveness of the United States.

    Resolved,  That upon adoption of this resolution it shall be in 
order to consider the conference report to accompany the bill (H.R. 
2272) to invest in innovation through research and development, and to 
improve the competitiveness of the United States. All points of order 
against the conference report and against its consideration are waived. 
The conference report shall be considered as read.
                                                 House Calendar No. 103

110th CONGRESS

  1st Session

                              H. RES. 602

                          [Report No. 110-293]

_______________________________________________________________________

                               RESOLUTION

 Providing for consideration of the conference report to accompany the 
     bill (H.R. 2272) to invest in innovation through research and 
 development, and to improve the competitiveness of the United States.

_______________________________________________________________________

                             August 1, 2007

        Referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed
```
No. 64574.

#### Filetta Fish, a/c W. J. Byrnes v. United States,

protests 59/13247, 59/18881, and 59/23392 (San Francisco).

Opinion by

Wilson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of fish similar in all material respects to the fish blocks the subject of The *Lee Herrmann Co., a/c The Coldwater Seafood Corp*v. *United States*(43 Cust. Ct. 49, C.D. 2101), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
From: k.Sholly@mchsi.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 9:11:54 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,

Kevin Sholly

Clear Lake, IA 50428
UNMANNED AERlAL SOLUTlONS, INC. 

### Blue-Chip Unmanned Aerial Solutions, Inc

. Attn : Clint P

. Stevens 1965 South Beech St. Wichita, KS 67207 316-305-5498 clint. stevens@bluechipuas.com May 12, 2015

U.S. Department ofTransportation Docket Operations 1200 New Jersey Ave ., SE Washington, DC 20590 

### Re: Request to amend and allow for Blue-Chip UAS, Inc. 

### the ability to utilize additional sUAS platforms under the same direction as provided within exemption #11172, docket# FAA-2014-0787-0009, approved February 10,2015. Dear Sir/Madam, Dear Sir or Madam; Blue-Chip Unmanned Aerial Solutions, Inc

. (Blue-Chip UAS) was issued an exemption under Section 333 ofthe " FAA Modernization and Reform act of 20 12 " (the " Reform Act" ) numbered 11172 (the Exemption) for the purpose of conducting UAS operations within the oil and gas, agriculture, wildlife and aerial photography industries. Blue-Chip UAS , herby requests an amendment to the Exemption to allow an additional type of "Multi-Rotor Wing " unmanned aircraft system (UAS) to be operated in full compliance with the conditions set forth within the Exemption

. Blue-Chip UAS , requests permission to operate the following UAS based on their type, size, weight, and speed under the same terms and conditions contained within the Exemption and provided by the parameters set forth in regards to capabilities and limitations identified within the Flight Operations Manual and Maintenance Manual attached as provided

.Model Altus X-4 Altus X-8**~** Size Multi-Rotor 4

.5ft Span Multi-Rotor 4ft Span Weight 28lbs 49lbs Speed
<27mph
<27mph Blue-Chip UAS , respectfully requests the same finding from the FAA as provided to Aerial Mob, LLC as to their amended exemption numbered ll066A, docket ID FAA-2014-0353 , dated February 2, 2015. As indicated, the FAA found the amendment request was not precedent setting, that good cause exists for not publishing a summary ofthe petition in the Federal Register and that any delay in acting on the petition would be detrimental to the organization

. Thank you for your time in regards to this petition and please direct any correspondence to Mr. Clint Stevens

.

Clint P. Stevens ChiefOperations Officer & Co-Founder Blue-Chip UAS , Inc

. 316-305-5498 clint. stevens@bluechipuas.com

cc: Robert Pappas KieraJones John Barbagallo
From: katiecarroll@live.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:30:50 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,

Kathleen Rawlins

Lilburn, GA 30047
No. 68104.

#### Sterling Merchandise Co. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 59/20106, etc. (New York).

*254Opinion by

Rao, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of paper needle holders the same in all material respects as those the subject of Abstract 63099, the claim of the plaintiffs was sustained.
From: sboeg51@aol.com

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 9:59:25 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,

Stephen Boerger

Harrison, OH 45030