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

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 4:30:16 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,

Robert Bole

Stockton, CA 95212
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 03-7624

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff - Appellee, versus CLEVELAND NELSON, Defendant - Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, at Fayetteville. Malcolm J. Howard, District Judge. (CR-94-57) Submitted: April 21, 2004 Decided: May 28, 2004 Before NIEMEYER, LUTTIG, and MICHAEL, Circuit Judges. Vacated and remanded in part; authorization denied in part by unpublished per curiam opinion. Cleveland Nelson, Appellant Pro Se. Jane J. Jackson, Assistant United States Attorney, Raleigh, North Carolina, for Appellee. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit. See Local Rule 36(c).- 2 - PER CURIAM: Cleveland Nelson, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order denying his motion for reconsideration of its order denying relief on his motion filed under 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (2000). Because Nelson’s motion, styled as a Fed. R. Civ. P. 60(b) motion, directly attacked his conviction and sentence rather than any alleged defect in the collateral review process, it amounted to a successive § 2255 motion that the district court lacked jurisdiction to consider. See United States v. Winestock , 340 F.3d 200, 207 (4th Cir.), cert. denied124 S. Ct. 496 (2003). We accordingly vacate the order denying the Rule 60(b) motion and remand to the district court with instructions to dismiss the motion. In accordance with Winestock , we construe Nelson’s notice of appeal and informal brief on appeal as an application to file a successive § 2255 mo tion. See id. at 208. In order to obtain authorization to file a successive § 2255 motion, a movant must assert claims based on e ither: (1) a new rule of constitutional law, previously unavailable, made retroactive by the Supreme Court to cases on collateral review; or (2) newly discovered evidence sufficient to establish that no reasonable factfinder would have found the movant guilty. See 28 U.S.C. § 2244(b)(2) (2000). Nelson does not satisfy either of these conditions. Accordingly,- 3 - we deny Nelson’s implicit application for leave to file a second § 2255 motion. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

VACATED AND REMANDED IN PART;

AUTHORIZATION DENIED IN PART
```

[Congressional Bills 110th Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
[H. Res. 667 Engrossed in House (EH)]

                In the House of Representatives, U. S.,

                                                    September 20, 2007.
    Resolved, That the following named Members be, and are hereby, elected to 
the following standing committees of the House of Representatives:
    Committee on Armed Services: Mr. Langevin.
    Committee on Homeland Security: Mr. Pascrell.
    Committee on Science and Technology: Ms. Richardson (to rank immediately 
after Mr. McNerney).
    Committee on Small Business: Mr. Higgins and Ms. Hirono.
    Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure: Ms. Richardson.
            Attest:

                                                                          Clerk.
```
TEXAS COURT OF APPEALS, THIRD DISTRICT, AT AUSTIN

NO. 03-14-00691-CR

David Eugene Weir, Appellant

v.

The State of Texas, Appellee

FROM THE DISTRICT COURT OF MILAM COUNTY, 20TH JUDICIAL DISTRICT

NO. CR24, 432, HONORABLE JOHN YOUNGBLOOD, JUDGE PRESIDING

M E M O R A N D U M O P I N I O N

Appellant David Eugene Weir seeks to appeal a judgment of conviction for

unauthorized use of a motor vehicle. See Tex. Penal Code § 31.07. The trial court has certified that

(1) this is a plea-bargain case and Weir has no right of appeal, and (2) Weir has waived the right of

appeal. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal for want of jurisdiction. See Tex. R. App. P.

25.2(a)(2), (d).

____________________________________

Scott K. Field, Justice

Before Justices Puryear, Pemberton, and Field

Dismissed for Want of Jurisdiction

Filed: November 20, 2014

Do Not Publish
# Fourth Court of Appeals

**San Antonio, Texas**

JUDGMENT

No. 04

- 20

- 00479

- CV

Mark HEALY, M.D.

, Appellant

v.

Orinda MOWAT

- CUDD

, Appellee

From the 285th Judicial District Court, Bexar County, Texas

Trial Court No. 2020

- CI

- 05971

Honorable Laura Salinas, Judge Presiding

BEFORE JUSTICE CHAPA

, JUSTICE WATKINS , AND JUSTICE RODRIGUEZ

In accordance with this court’s opinion of this date, the trial court’s Order Denying Defendant Mark Healy, M.D.’s Motion to Dismiss is AFFIRMED. We ORDER appellant Ma rk Healy, M.D. to pay the costs of this appeal.

SIGNED February 17, 2021.

_____________________________ Beth Watkins, Justice
[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 189 (Monday, October 2, 2023)]
[Notices]
[Page 67868]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-21736]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF VETERANS AFFAIRS


Voluntary Service National Advisory Committee, Notice of Meeting

    The Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) gives notice under the 
Federal Advisory Committee Act, 5 U.S.C. ch. 10, that the Executive 
Committee of the VA Voluntary Service (VAVS) National Advisory 
Committee (Committee) will meet on October 26-27, 2023 at the Veterans 
of Foreign Wars Washington Office located at 200 Maryland Avenue NE, 
Washington, DC 20002. The meeting sessions will begin and end as 
follows:

------------------------------------------------------------------------
                Date(s)                              Time(s)
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Thursday, October 26, 2023.............  9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Eastern
                                          Standard Time (EST).
Friday, October 27, 2023...............  9:00 a.m. to 12:30 p.m. EST.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

    The meeting sessions are open to the public.
    The Committee advises the Secretary, through the Under Secretary 
for Health, on the coordination and promotion of volunteer activities 
and strategic partnerships within VA health care facilities on matters 
related to volunteerism. The Committee is also comprised of 56 major 
Veteran, civic and service organizations. The Executive Committee 
consists of 20 representatives from the Committee member organizations.
    Agenda topics will include the Committee goals and objectives; 
review of minutes from the April 26, 2023 meeting; an update on VA 
Center for Development and Civic Engagement activities; Veterans Health 
Administration update and journey to become a High Reliability 
Organization; subcommittee reports; review of standard operating 
procedures; review of fiscal year 2023 organization data; 2024 annual 
the Committee meeting plans; and any new business.
    The public may submit written statements for the Committee's review 
to Sabrina C. Clark, Ph.D., Designated Federal Officer, VA Center for 
Development and Civic Engagement (15CDCE), Department of Veterans 
Affairs, 810 Vermont Avenue NW, Washington, DC 20420, or email at 
<a href="/cdn-cgi/l/email-protection#3f6c5e5d4d56515e117c535e4d547f495e11585049"><span class="__cf_email__" data-cfemail="a3f0c2c1d1cacdc28de0cfc2d1c8e3d5c28dc4ccd5">[email protected]</span></a>. Any member of the public wishing to attend the 
meeting or seeking additional information should contact Dr. Clark at 
202-536-8603.

    Dated: September 27, 2023.
Jelessa M. Burney,
Federal Advisory Committee Management Officer.
[FR Doc. 2023-21736 Filed 9-29-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE P


</pre><script data-cfasync="false" src="/cdn-cgi/scripts/5c5dd728/cloudflare-static/email-decode.min.js"></script></body>
</html>
No. 69270.

#### Sims-Worms, Inc. *v.*United States,

protests 63/22753 and 64/1025 (Los Angeles).

*419Opinion by

Rao, 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 plaintiff was sustained.
| 1.   | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and |
|----------------|--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

| 2.   | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the consolidated financial condition of the Company as of the dates presented and the consolidated result of operations of the Company for the periods presented. |
|----------------|------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|

|   By: |   /s/ Lauren Notar                                               |
|-----------------|----------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|  Name:     |  Lauren Notar                                                         |
|  Title:    |  Principal Executive Officer,Principal Financial Officer and Director |
|  Date:     |  February 15, 2011                                                    |
Case No. 6,617.

#### HINE v. WAHL.

[Decree by GRESHAM. District Judge, sustaining the validity of reissued letters patent No. 4,372 of patent No. 73.425. This patent was granted January 14, 1868, to N. W. Green, •and was reissued May 9, 1871. No opinion delivered. Decree reported in 4 Trans. Rec. 1882, p. 321G, clerk’s office United States supreme court, and affirmed by divided supreme •court, without opinions, December 18. 1882.]

[Cited in Green v. French, 11 Fed. 591, and Andrews v. Eames, 15 Fed. 110. For other cases involving the same patent, see note to Andrews v. Denslow, Case No. 372.]
**EXHIBIT 32.2**

 

**CERTIFICATION OF PRINCIPAL FINANCIAL OFFICER PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SECTION 1350,**

**AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002**

 

I, Weiting Feng, Chief Financial Officer of Golden Matrix Group, Inc. (the "Company"), certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350 adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:

 

| (1)    | the accompanying Annual Report on Form 10-KT/A of the Company for the year ended January 31, 2020 (the "Report") fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 (15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)); and |
|--------|-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------|
|   |                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                  |
| (2)    | the information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company.                                                                                                  |

 

 

| Date: July 14, 2020 | By:    | */s/ Weiting Feng*      |   |
|---------------------|--------|-------------------------|--------|
|                |   | Chief Financial Officer |   |
From: pstraughndds@comcast.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 5:44:58 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,

Paul Straughn

Franklin, TN 37067
-1- 

### STATE OF MICHIGAN

COURT OF APPEALS

MARY FREE BED REHABILITATION HOSPITAL, BRONSON HEALTH CARE GROUP INC, and YU JU CHEN,

Plaintiffs-Appellees, UNPUBLISHED December 22, 2015

v

FARMERS INSURANCE GROUP OF COMPANIES, a/k/a FARMERS GROUP, INC., and MID-CENTURY INSURANCE COMPANY,

Defendants,

and No. 321328
Kent Circuit Court
LC No. 13-002433-NF

ILLINOIS FARMERS INSURANCE COMPANY

Defendant-Appellant.

Before: M ARKEY , P.J., and M URPHY and S TEPHENS , JJ.

M ARKEY
, J. ( concurring ).

I concur in result only.

/s/ Jane E. Markey
Exhibit 32.1

DIGIMARC CORPORATION

CERTIFICATION

In connection with the Annual Report of Digimarc
Corporation (the Company) on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2010 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (the Report), I, Bruce Davis, Chief Executive Officer of the Company, hereby certify
as of the date hereof, solely for purposes of Title 18, Chapter 63, Section 1350 of the U.S. Code, that to the best of my knowledge:



| | 1. | The Report fully complies with the requirements of Section 13(a) or 15(d), as applicable, 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 at the dates and for
the periods indicated.
| | -- | -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

This Certification has not been, and shall not be deemed, filed with the
Securities and Exchange Commission.

Date: March 3, 2011



|    |  |                        
|--- |  | -----------------------
|By: |  | /S/ BRUCE DAVIS        
|    |  | Bruce Davis            
|    |  | Chief Executive Officer
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING 

SECOND MOTION FOR EXTENSION 

OF TIME TO FILE ANSWER 

 C06-0153-MJP-MAT 

1 ERROR! AUTOTEXT ENTRY NOT DEFINED.

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

U. S. DISTRICT COURT JUDGE MARSHA J. PECHMAN 

MAGISTRATE JUDGE MARY ALICE THEILER 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

WESTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON 

AT SEATTLE 

GARY M. THOMAS, 

 Petitioner, 

 v. 

KEN QUINN, 

Respondent. 

NO. C06-0153-MJP-MAT 

[PROPOSED] ORDER 

GRANTING SECOND MOTION 

FOR EXTENSION OF TIME TO 

FILE ANSWER 

 Respondent, Ken Quinn, having filed a Motion for Extension of Time to File Answer, 

and the Court being fully advised and having examined the files herein; 

 NOW THEREFORE, it is hereby 

 ORDERED that Respondent’s Second Motion for Extension of Time to File Answer 

in this matter be and the same is hereby granted. 

 DATED this 7th day of July, 2006. 

 

 

 s/ Mary Alice Theiler 

 United States Magistrate Judge 

Submitted by: 

ROB MCKENNA 

Attorney General 

/s/ Donna H. Mullen 

DONNA H. MULLEN, WSBA #23542 

Assistant Attorney General 

Case 2:06-cv-00153-MJP Document 17 Filed 07/07/06 Page 1 of 2
[PROPOSED] ORDER GRANTING 

SECOND MOTION FOR EXTENSION 

OF TIME TO FILE ANSWER 

 C06-0153-MJP-MAT 

2 ERROR! AUTOTEXT ENTRY NOT DEFINED.

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

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE 

 I hereby certify that, I caused to be electronically filed the foregoing document with 

the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system and mailed by United States Postal Service 

the document to the following non CM/ECF participants: 

GARY M. THOMAS DOC #127649 

MONROE CORRECTIONAL COMPLEX 

WASHINGTON STATE REFORMATORY 

PO BOX 777 

MONROE WA 98272-0777 

 EXECUTED this 15th day of July, 2006 at Olympia, WA. 

 _/s/Darlene Jacobs______________ 

 DARLENE JACOBS 

Case 2:06-cv-00153-MJP Document 17 Filed 07/07/06 Page 2 of 2
Document Headings

                    Document headings vary by document type but may contain                    the following:                  
                -                       the agency or agencies that issued and signed a document                    
                -                       the number of the CFR title and the number of each part                      the document amends, proposes to amend, or is directly                      related to                    
                -                       the agency docket number / agency internal file number                    
                -                       the RIN which identifies each regulatory action listed in                      the Unified Agenda of Federal Regulatory and Deregulatory                      Actions                    

                    See the                                          Document Drafting Handbook                                        for more details.                  

###### Department of Health and Human Services

###### National Institutes of Health

                    Notice is hereby given of a change in the meeting of the National Institute on Drug Abuse Special Emphasis Panel, October 31, 2023, 12:00 p.m. to October 31, 2023, 2:00 p.m., National Institute on Drug Abuse, 301 North Stonestreet Avenue, Bethesda, MD 20892 which was published in the                     **Federal Register**                     on September 25, 2023, FR Doc 2023-20693, 88-FR 65696.                

This notice is being amended to change the agenda from reviewing and evaluating grant applications to reviewing and evaluating contract proposals. The meeting date, time and location will remain the same. The meeting is closed to the public.

Dated: September 26, 2023.

Tyeshia M. Roberson-Curtis, 

Program Analyst, Office of Federal Advisory Committee Policy.

[FR Doc. 2023-21645 Filed 9-29-23; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4140-01-P
From: mjoan@citlink.net

To: E-OHPSCA2713.EBSA

Subject: Comment: RIN 1210-AB44

Date: Wednesday, September 07, 2011 3:21:11 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,

Joan Larson

Westwood, CA 96137
No. 57419.

#### The Delaware, Lackawanna and Western Railroad Company *v.*United States,

protest 200664-K (New York).

Opinion by

Ekwall, J.

An examination of the record and of the applicable statutes failing to disclose any basis for reversing or modifying the collector’s decision, which was presumptively correct, the protest was overruled.